upon an edifice of an early date, whose groundp lan is preserved." p. 139. Churches of large dimensions with apsidal terminations are not common in England, and the specimens we have are we think confined to structures of Norman date, or pointed structures raised on a Norman foundation, with the exception always of Westminster Abbey, which has a polygonal apse, and which shews that the architect of that truly magnificent and scientific pile had been alive to the difficulty which has struck our author in his examination of this almost universal termination of churches, whether Gothic or Romanesque in France. We now advert to another of our author's observations on a description of windows sometimes met with in early churches, in which mullions without tracery are found. The author, referring to the French flamboyant, worked without foliation, observes that the curved line requires foliation, as essential; and when, on the contrary, geometrical tracery is used, the want of foliation he considers is never felt, except as rendering the design somewhat plainer. This peculiarity he brings forward to shew, that in one case the circular are, in the other the point or angle, is the decided characteristic. "This may perhaps account for the difficulty of composing a beautiful window by the mere crossing of mullions without foliation, or by making the mullions of a window of two lights branch into the architrave, the heads of the lights and space above being left plain. Such a composition involves neither one principle nor the other. I grant it is occasionally found in gothic buildings, as in Lichfield chapter-house, Bakewell church, Wells cathedral, &c.; but it requires much enrichment to render it even tolerable, and, at the best we cannot help wishing some other form had been adopted. A large window, however, of this sort is exceed ingly well treated in Checkley church in Staffordshire; the crossings of the mullions are covered by roses of stone work, which quite compensate for the want of foliation." p. 177. We refer to this, not that we disagree with Mr. Petit's observations, which are just, but as shewing how carefully the architects of our gothic churches, studied the effect of any new they felt the bad effects of this description of window, and discarded the design at once. A feature observable in Exeter cathedral, and only possessed by one other church we believe in England, which is the formation of transepts in the lower story of the tower, appears not to be uncommon on the Continent. In particular, "the outside of the cathedral of Geneva is well known from its two massive unequal towers; they Lyons Ca form transepts;" and " thedral has four low towers, two of them flank the west front-the other two are more massive, and form transepts." The remarks on the propriety of the architecture and forms of new churches, a subject which at present occupies much attention, in various quarters, and which since the general spoliation and destruction at the reformation, has never been so attentively studied as at present, are just and orthodox. The Gothic style is preferred to the Italian; the author's reasons for the preference are sound and judicious, founded alone on the superior merits of the architecture. The plan of the church is a very important consideration, not alone for the sake of accommodation and convenience, but, unless this more important part of the design is attentively studied and judiciously devised, the superstructure will never be an object of admiration, whatever ornament may be given to the elevation. We entirely agree with Mr. Petit, in his preference of the cathedral plan for new churches. "The cross church offers this advantage to the designer, that a tower of almost any dimensions, low or lofty, is suitable; if it be not raised beyond what might serve as a partial clerestory, it still has a venerable and picturesque appearance." The plan which he would adopt for his churches, (the Cruciform) is sanctioned not only by good feeling, but by taste, by convenience, and by the practice of the Church in her happiest days, and what in these times will be valued higher than any other consideration, by economy. He brings forward a very happy example in favour of his preference of "I will notice one of the simplest and most roughly built country churches I have ever seen; which does not exhibit sufficient detail to mark its style or probable date, and has scarce the elevation of an ordinary cottage. Yet, in this humble church (Daix near Dijon,) we recognize the pyramidical form; the spreading ground plan; the different heights of wall justly proportioned to each other; the bold and strong buttress; and a proper relation between nave, tower, and chancel, maintained as correctly and beautifully as in any cathedral. Though you might almost place your hand upon the roof, yet the slope of the gable and position of the tower, give it that aspiring tendency which prevents you from feel. ing that it is defective in its height; in fact, if the walls were higher the form of the building would be much injured. The exterior, unpretending as it is in design, and rude in the extreme as to workmanship, presents nothing mean or unworthy; no part of it appears unduly contracted, every dimension completely satisfies the eye." p. 32. The following remarks on Gothic architecture are acute and accurate, and such as one, possessed of a thorough knowledge of its best features, might be expected to make. "The aim of the Gothic architect seems to have been, to combine the greatest boldness and lightness of construction with a sense both of correct equilibrium and perfect security: the artist who astonishes the spectator without giving him this impression, has not obtained a legitimate triumph, nor, I may say, has he constructed a building suitable to the purposes of devotion; in which neither perplexity nor astonishment at human ingenuity ought to be the feeling forced upon the mind. I cannot, therefore, wholly approve of the enormous pendents of the Tudor architecture; ingenious as may be their construction, yet, inasmuch as their equilibrium appears to depend upon the mere tenacity of material, they betray a lapse from purity of design. In a rerfect Gothic edifice every part will seem adequately and properly sustained; no artifice will be used to conceal or disguise the channels, if I may so express myself, by which the weight of the whole building is conducted to those points where it is to be met by sufficient means of support." P. 6. With equal truth the author shews why churches, built of other descriptions of architecture, do not possess the merit which he gives to the pointed "Why is it that an Italianising church is unpleasing? Not simply because its details differ from those of a Perpendicular or Decorated one-for those also differ in many respects from each other, and from the earlier styles; but because they do not suggest the same ideas of proper and scientific arrangement; we do not read from them the same lessons of order, taste, and harmony; rich as their effect may be at a distance, when we draw near, the charm vanishes, the eye falls upon a miserable display of wasted labour, and the mind dwells with pain upon the professed abandonment of those principles by which alone art can be advanced, or preserved from falling into decay.” P. 23. On the subject of timber roofs Mr. Petit observes, that many of our English wooden roofs are very beautiful, and, without question, possess the great advantage of convenience, "for the architect, recurring to his first principles, and treating his materials according to their proper nature, did not think it necessary to arrange his frame-work of wood in the same manner with one of stone." In this respect our author agrees with the opinion of Mr. Pugin on the same question; but it is not remarkable that two attentive observers of construction should coincide in idea. Pinnacles are always favourite objects with modern architects; however low their estimate may be, and however naked the church they build, they generally contrive to bedeck their design with some of these appendages, displaying the same vulgar taste as a country wench who had, for the first time in her life, received a present of a profusion of ribbons. The professional architect would do well to follow the sound advice given in the following passage: Although it may be that pinnacles are nowhere absolutely necessary, so that the conditions of a stable equilibrium would be imperfect without them, yet they should not be introduced except when they appear to assist by their weight (in however small a degree) the strength of the edifice." P. 10. It is pleasing to see that one who has had so much experience in Gothic architecture in France, in Italy, and Germany, should, after viewing edifices of vast magnitude and uncommon grandeur, structures, too, in whose upon an edifice of an early date, whose groundp lan is preserved." p. 139. Churches of large dimensions with apsidal terminations are not common in England, and the specimens we have are we think confined to structures of Norman date, or pointed structures raised on a Norman foundation, with the exception always of Westminster Abbey, which has a polygonal apse, and which shews that the architect of that truly magnificent and scientific pile had been alive to the difficulty which has struck our author in his examination of this almost universal termination of churches, whether Gothic or Romanesque in France. We now advert to another of our author's observations on a description of windows sometimes met with in early churches, in which mullions without tracery are found. The author, referring to the French flamboyant, worked without foliation, observes that the curved line requires foliation, as essential; and when, on the contrary, geometrical tracery is used, the want of foliation he considers is never felt, except as rendering the design somewhat plainer. This peculiarity he brings forward to shew, that in one case the circular are, in the other the point or angle, is the decided characteristic. "This may perhaps account for the difficulty of composing a beautiful window by the mere crossing of mullions without foliation, or by making the mullions of a window of two lights branch into the architrave, the heads of the lights and space above being left plain. Such a composition involves neither one principle nor the other. I grant it is occasionally found in gothic buildings, as in Lichfield chapter-house, Bakewell church, Wells cathedral, &c.; but it requires much enrichment to render it even tolerable, and, at the best we cannot help wishing some other form had been adopted. Å large window, however, of this sort is exceedingly well treated in Checkley church in Staffordshire; the crossings of the mullions are covered by roses of stone work, which quite compensate for the want of foliation." p. 177. We refer to this, not that we disagree with Mr. Petit's observations, which are just, but as shewing how carefully the architects of our gothic churches, studied the effect of any new they felt the bad effects of this description of window, and discarded the design at once. A feature observable in Exeter cathedral, and only possessed by one other church we believe in England, which is the formation of transepts in the lower story of the tower, appears not to be uncommon on the Continent. In particular, "the outside of the cathedral of Geneva is well known from its two massive unequal towers; they Lyons Ca form transepts ;" and thedral has four low towers, two of them flank the west front-the other two are more massive, and form transepts." The remarks on the propriety of the architecture and forms of new churches, a subject which at present occupies much attention, in various quarters, and which since the general spoliation and destruction at the reformation, has never been so attentively studied as at present, are just and orthodox. The Gothic style is preferred to the Italian; the author's reasons for the preference are sound and judicious, founded alone on the superior merits of the architecture. The plan of the church is a very important consideration, not alone for the sake of accommodation and convenience, but, unless this more important part of the design is attentively studied and judiciously devised, the superstructure will never be an object of admiration, whatever ornament may be given to the elevation. We entirely agree with Mr. Petit, in his preference of the cathedral plan for new churches. "The cross church offers this advantage to the designer, that a tower of almost any dimensions, low or lofty, is suitable; if it be not raised beyond what might serve as a partial clerestory, it still has a venerable and picturesque appearance." The plan which he would adopt for his churches, (the Cruciform) is sanctioned not only by good feeling, but by taste, by convenience, and by the practice of the Church in her happiest days, and what in these times will be valued higher than any other consideration, by economy. He brings forward a very happy example in favour of his preference of "I will notice one of the simplest and most roughly built country churches I have ever seen; which does not exhibit sufficient detail to mark its style or probable date, and has scarce the elevation of an ordinary cottage. Yet, in this humble church (Daix near Dijon,) we recognize the pyramidical form; the spreading ground plan; the different heights of wall justly proportioned to each other; the bold and strong buttress; and a proper relation between nave, tower, and chancel, maintained as correctly and beautifully as in any cathedral. Though you might almost place your hand upon the roof, yet the slope of the gable and position of the tower, give it that aspiring tendency which prevents you from feel. ing that it is defective in its height; in fact, if the walls were higher the form of the building would be much injured. The exterior, unpretending as it is in design, and rude in the extreme as to workmanship, presents nothing mean or unworthy; no part of it appears unduly contracted, every dimension completely satisfies the eye." p. 32. The following remarks on Gothic architecture are acute and accurate, and such as one, possessed of a thorough knowledge of its best features, might be expected to make. "The aim of the Gothic architect seems to have been, to combine the greatest boldness and lightness of construction with a sense both of correct equilibrium and perfect security: the artist who astonishes the spectator without giving him this impression, has not obtained a legitimate triumph, nor, I may say, has he constructed a building suitable to the purposes of devotion; in which neither perplexity nor astonishment at human ingenuity ought to be the feeling forced upon the mind. I cannot, therefore, wholly approve of the enormous pendents of the Tudor architecture; ingenious as may be their construction, yet, inasmuch as their equilibrium appears to depend upon the mere tenacity of material, they betray a lapse from purity of design. In a rerfect Gothic edifice every part will seem adequately and properly sustained; no artifice will be used to conceal or disguise the channels, if I may so express myself, by which the weight of the whole building is conducted to those points where it is to be met by sufficient means of support." P. 6. With equal truth the author shews why churches, built of other descriptions of architecture, do not possess the merit which he gives to the pointed "Why is it that an Italianising church is unpleasing? Not simply because its details differ from those of a Perpendicular or Decorated one-for those also differ in many respects from each other, and from the earlier styles; but because they do not suggest the same ideas of proper and scientific arrangement; we do not read from them the same lessons of order, taste, and harmony; rich as their effect may be at a distance, when we draw near, the charm vanishes, the eye falls upon a miserable display of wasted labour, and the mind dwells with pain upon the professed abandonment of those principles by which alone art can be advanced, or preserved from falling into decay." P. 23. On the subject of timber roofs Mr. Petit observes, that many of our English wooden roofs are very beautiful, and, without question, possess the great advantage of convenience, "for the architect, recurring to his first principles, and treating his materials according to their proper nature, did not think it necessary to arrange his frame-work of wood in the same manner with one of stone." In this respect our author agrees with the opinion of Mr. Pugin on the same question; but it is not remarkable that two attentive observers of construction should coincide in idea. Pinnacles are always favourite objects with modern architects; however low their estimate may be, and however naked the church they build, they generally contrive to bedeck their design with some of these appendages, displaying the same vulgar taste as a country wench who had, for the first time in her life, received a present of a profusion of ribbons. The professional architect would do well follow the sound advice given in the following passage: to "Although it may be that pinnacles are nowhere absolutely necessary, so that the conditions of a stable equilibrium would be imperfect without them, yet they should not be introduced except when they appear to assist by their weight (in however small a degree) the strength of the edifice." P. 10. It is pleasing to see that one who has had so much experience in Gothic architecture in France, in Italy, and Germany, should, after viewing edifices of vast magnitude and uncommon grandeur, structures, too, in whose whether in the form of the fanatic destroyer, or the affected improver, has never fallen, should turn to the less vast and strikingly beautiful edifices of his own country, and pass on them so eloquent a compliment as the following: "The country that can shew such an entire work as the Cathedral of Salisbury; such a group of spires as that of Lichfield; such towers as those belonging to York, Gloucester, Canterbury, Lincoln; such a composition as the octagonal centre of Ely; that can enumerate, in its churches of a second rank, the steeples of Newark, Grantham, Lowth, Coventry, and the towers of Doncaster, Wrexham, Boston, Cirencester, Taunton - and these not patterns of numberless others: and that presents a series of village and parish churches, the most venerable and beautiful of any which districts of similar extent, wherever they may be taken, can exhibit, must not be pronounced to occupy a low station among those countries which have contributed their share to the advancement of Gothic architecture." P. 82. The defects in the construction of new churches are not more to be de precated than the evils which have fallen upon old ones, whenever they have been subjected to the destructive propensities of modern architects. "Alas for the building which falls into the hands of an ignorant or presumptuous restorer! I do not speak under the in |