Cassell's History of England, Vol. 1 (of 8): From the Roman Invasion to the Wars of the RosesAnonymous
History
Cassell's History of England, Vol. 1 (of 8): From the Roman Invasion to the Wars of the Roses
Anonymous
Great Britain -- History
The Normans were essentially a building people, and no building seems
to have been good enough for them, if they had the means of erecting
a better. Hence we see a continued change--a constant pulling down
and rebuilding on a larger scale, and to this must be ascribed the
disappearance of the buildings which had been erected before the
Conquest. It is chiefly in remote places, which were too poor to enlarge
their churches, that we still find remains of the original Saxon work. In
many of the smaller churches, which were erected soon after the Conquest,
the Saxon ideas still linger; the towers have the same proportions, and
the same general appearance prevails, but the workmanship is better;
the baluster disappears, and is replaced by a shaft, and the capitals
assume more of the Norman form. This lingering love for the old form
was, doubtless, owing to the necessary employment of Saxon workmen, who
naturally still clung to their national style; but in large buildings,
where foreign architects and workmen would be employed, the new style
would be exhibited in its purity.
Canterbury, St. Albans, Rochester, and Ely were built in the reign of
the Conqueror, but of these Canterbury is the most interesting, as it so
fully illustrates the history of architecture in this kingdom. There was
a Saxon cathedral on the spot at the time of the Conquest, but having
been destroyed by fire, it was rebuilt on an enlarged scale by the Norman
archbishop, Lanfranc, in 1070; but, within about twenty years, this
church was pulled down by his successor, as not being large enough, and
another erected on a more magnificent scale. This was again partially
destroyed by fire, and was again rebuilt in 1175 and the following
years. The history of the fire, and the subsequent rebuilding, has been
minutely given by Gervase, a monk of Canterbury, who was an eye-witness
of the whole; and his account is peculiarly valuable, as it enables
us to compare the style of the remains of the old building with that
erected under his own eyes; and we are by this means enabled to point
out the differences between the early and the late Norman buildings. His
narrative is clear and interesting, and his description of the present
building wonderfully correct.
[Illustration: THE CHAPEL IN THE WHITE TOWER, TOWER OF LONDON.]
St. Albans Abbey was built in the reign of the Conqueror, and in the
construction of the building the materials of the Roman city of Verulam
were freely used; so that a great part of it is built of Roman bricks.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account