In England, on the other hand, in spite of the quarrels of the nobles and the rival claimants to the throne, the middle class were steadily growing wealthy and powerful. The wool trade was bringing a great deal of money into the country, and the result is still seen not only in the number and size of Perpendicular churches that were built, but in the immense output of stained glass that took place. The fifteenth century, indeed, was by far the most prolific period in the history of English stained glass, and, in spite of four hundred years of destruction, vast quantities of it still remain. [Sidenote: General characteristics of the English style.] The general characteristics which distinguish the English style in glass in the Third Period--the "Perpendicular" style--are as follows:-- (1) The type of canopy. (2) The increased amount of white in figure and canopy work, with the delicate and accomplished use of silver stain. (3) The more advanced style of drawing. (4) The abandonment of natural form in ornament. (5) The supersession of all other forms of grisaille ornament by regular quarries. (6) The material used. * * * * * [Sidenote: The canopy.] (1) _The Type of Canopy._--Although in the fifteenth, as in the fourteenth century, figures were occasionally placed directly on a background of white quarries, as may be seen at York, in the clerestory of St. Martin's-le-Grand, and in the transepts of the Minster, the fifteenth century artists showed no signs of wishing to abandon the canopy. It was a curious freak of fate that imposed the canopy upon stained-glass designers and made it a _sine quâ non_ for two hundred years. It has certain obvious advantages, it is true. It conveniently filled the head of the light, and its upright lines and pinnacles repeated those of the surrounding architecture and made the window part of it; but the imitation of a stone niche in glass is hard to justify on abstract grounds, and it is difficult now to understand the enthusiasm which, as soon as it was introduced, made its adoption so universal that, with few exceptions, the artists of the day seemed unable to conceive of a single figure or a set of subject panels otherwise than surmounted by a bewildering mass of crockets and pinnacles. It is true that in the hands of mediæval craftsmen, in England at least, there was no attempt, as there was later, at literal imitation of stone-work; the canopy was rather ornament with an architectural motif, and as such possessed beauty; but I cannot help thinking that if they had never adopted it they would have evolved some other ornamental form which, while serving the same purposes, would have been more strictly in accordance with the rules of sound art, and might have given more room for the play of individual fancy. [Illustration: PLATE XL SMALL FIGURES IN WHITE AND STAIN, FROM ALL SAINTS', NORTH STREET, YORK Fifteenth Century]