<h3><SPAN name="chap_23"></SPAN>CHAPTER XXIII.</h3>
<h5>THE EDGE AND FILLET.</h5>
<p><span class="scs">I</span>. <span class="sc">The</span> decoration of the angle by various forms of chamfer
and bead, as above described, is the quietest method we can
employ; too quiet, when great energy is to be given to the
moulding, and impossible, when, instead of a bold angle, we
have to deal with a small projecting edge, like <i>c</i> in <SPAN href="#fig_51">Fig. LI.</SPAN>
In such cases we may employ a decoration, far ruder and easier
in its simplest conditions than the bead, far more effective
when not used in too great profusion; and of which the complete
developments are the source of mouldings at once the
most picturesque and most serviceable which the Gothic
builders invented.</p>
<p><span class="scs">II</span>. The gunwales of the Venetian heavy barges being
liable to somewhat rough collision with each other, and with
the walls of the streets, are generally protected by a piece of
timber, which projects in the form of the fillet, <i>a</i>, <SPAN href="#fig_51">Fig. LI.</SPAN>;
but which, like all other fillets, may, if we so choose, be considered
as composed of two angles or edges, which the natural
and most wholesome love of the Venetian boatmen for ornament,
otherwise strikingly evidenced by their painted sails
and glittering flag-vanes, will not suffer to remain wholly
undecorated. The rough service of these timbers, however,
will not admit of rich ornament, and the boatbuilder usually
contents himself with cutting a series of notches in each edge,
one series alternating with the other, as represented at 1,
<SPAN href="#plate_9">Plate IX.</SPAN></p>
<p><span class="scs">III</span>. In that simple ornament, not as confined to Venetian
boats, but as representative of a general human instinct to
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page268"></SPAN>268</span>
hack at an edge, demonstrated by all school-boys and all idle
possessors of penknives or other cutting instruments on both
sides of the Atlantic;—in that rude Venetian gunwale, I say, is
the germ of all the ornament which has touched, with its rich
successions of angular shadow, the portals and archivolts of nearly
every early building of importance, from the North Cape to
the Straits of Messina. Nor are the modifications of the first
suggestion intricate. All that is generic in their character may
be seen on <SPAN href="#plate_9">Plate IX.</SPAN> at a glance.</p>
<table class="nobctr" style="clear: both; " summary="Illustration">
<tr>
<td class="caption1">IX.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="figcenter">
<SPAN name="plate_9"><ANTIMG src="images/img268.jpg" width-obs="406" height-obs="650" alt="EDGE DECORATION." title="EDGE DECORATION." /></SPAN></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="caption">EDGE DECORATION.</td>
</tr>
</table>
<p><span class="scs">IV</span>. Taking a piece of stone instead of timber, and enlarging
the notches, until they meet each other, we have the
condition 2, which is a moulding from the tomb of the Doge
Andrea Dandolo, in St. Mark’s. Now, considering this moulding
as composed of two decorated edges, each edge will be
reduced, by the meeting of the notches, to a series of four-sided
pyramids (as marked off by the dotted lines), which, the notches
here being shallow, will be shallow pyramids; but by deepening
the notches, we get them as at 3, with a profile <i>a</i>, more or
less steep. This moulding I shall always call “the plain dogtooth;”
it is used in profusion in the Venetian and Veronese
Gothic, generally set with its front to the spectator, as here at
3; but its effect may be much varied by placing it obliquely
(4, and profile as at <i>b</i>); or with one side horizontal (5, and profile
<i>c</i>). Of these three conditions, 3 and 5 are exactly the same
in reality, only differently placed; but in 4 the pyramid is
obtuse, and the inclination of its base variable, the upper side
of it being always kept vertical. It is comparatively rare. Of
the three, the last, 5, is far the most brilliant in effect, giving
in the distance a zigzag form to the high light on it, and a full
sharp shadow below. The use of this shadow is sufficiently
seen by fig. 7 in this plate (the arch on the left, the number
beneath it), in which these levelled dogteeth, with a small interval
between each, are employed to set off by their vigor the
delicacy of floral ornament above. This arch is the side of a
niche from the tomb of Can Signorio della Scala, at Verona;
and the value, as well as the distant expression of its dogtooth,
may be seen by referring to Prout’s beautiful drawing of this
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page269"></SPAN>269</span>
tomb in his “Sketches in France and Italy.” I have before
observed that this artist never fails of seizing the true and leading
expression of whatever he touches: he has made this ornament
the leading feature of the niche, expressing it, as in
distance it is only expressible, by a zigzag.</p>
<p><span class="scs">V</span>. The reader may perhaps be surprised at my speaking
so highly of this drawing, if he take the pains to compare
Prout’s symbolism of the work on the niche with the facts as
they stand here in <SPAN href="#plate_9">Plate IX.</SPAN> But the truth is that Prout has
rendered the effect of the monument on the mind of the passer-by;—the
effect it was intended to have on every man who
turned the corner of the street beneath it: and in this sense
there is actually more truth and likeness<SPAN name="FnAnchor_74" href="#Footnote_74"><span class="sp">74</span></SPAN> in Prout’s translation
than in my fac-simile, made diligently by peering into the
details from a ladder. I do not say that all the symbolism in
Prout’s Sketch is the best possible; but it is the best which any
architectural draughtsman has yet invented; and in its application
to special subjects it always shows curious internal evidence
that the sketch has been made on the spot, and that the artist
tried to draw what he saw, not to invent an attractive subject.
I shall notice other instances of this hereafter.</p>
<p><span class="scs">VI</span>. The dogtooth, employed in this simple form, is, however,
rather a foil for other ornament, than itself a satisfactory
or generally available decoration. It is, however, easy to enrich
it as we choose: taking up its simple form at 3, and describing
the arcs marked by the dotted lines upon its sides, and cutting
a small triangular cavity between them, we shall leave its ridges
somewhat rudely representative of four leaves, as at 8, which is
the section and front view of one of the Venetian stone cornices
described above, <SPAN href="#chap_14">Chap. XIV.</SPAN>, <span class="scs">IV</span>., the figure 8 being here put
in the hollow of the gutter. The dogtooth is put on the outer
lower truncation, and is actually in position as fig. 5; but
being always looked up to, is to the spectator as 3, and always
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page270"></SPAN>270</span>
rich and effective. The dogteeth are perhaps most frequently
expanded to the width of fig. 9.</p>
<p><span class="scs">VII</span>. As in nearly all other ornaments previously described,
so in this,—we have only to deepen the Italian cutting, and we
shall get the Northern type. If we make the original pyramid
somewhat steeper, and instead of lightly incising, cut it through,
so as to have the leaves held only by their points to the base,
we shall have the English dogtooth; somewhat vulgar in its
piquancy, when compared with French mouldings of a similar
kind.<SPAN name="FnAnchor_75" href="#Footnote_75"><span class="sp">75</span></SPAN> It occurs, I think, on one house in Venice, in the
Campo St. Polo; but the ordinary moulding, with light incisions,
is frequent in archivolts and architraves, as well as in the
roof cornices.</p>
<p><span class="scs">VIII</span>. This being the simplest treatment of the pyramid,
fig. 10, from the refectory of Wenlock Abbey, is an example
of the simplest decoration of the recesses or inward angles
between the pyramids; that is to say, of a simple hacked edge
like one of those in fig. 2, the <i>cuts</i> being taken up and decorated
instead of the <i>points</i>. Each is worked into a small trefoiled
arch, with an incision round it to mark its outline, and another
slight incision above, expressing the angle of the first cutting.
I said that the teeth in fig. 7 had in distance the effect of a zigzag:
in fig. 10 this zigzag effect is seized upon and developed,
but with the easiest and roughest work; the angular incision
being a mere limiting line, like that described in <span class="scs">IX</span>. of the
last chapter. But hence the farther steps to every condition of
Norman ornament are self evident. I do not say that all of
them arose from development of the dogtooth in this manner,
many being quite independent inventions and uses of zigzag
lines; still, they may all be referred to this simple type as their
root and representative, that is to say, the mere hack of the
Venetian gunwale, with a limiting line following the resultant
zigzag.</p>
<p><span class="scs">IX</span>. Fig. 11 is a singular and much more artificial condition,
cast in brick, from the church of the Frari, and given
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page271"></SPAN>271</span>
here only for future reference. Fig. 12, resulting from a fillet
with the cuts on each of its edges interrupted by a bar, is a
frequent Venetian moulding, and of great value; but the plain
or leaved dogteeth have been the favorites, and that to such a
degree, that even the Renaissance architects took them up;
and the best bit of Renaissance design in Venice, the side of
the Ducal Palace next the Bridge of Sighs, owes great part of
its splendor to its foundation, faced with large flat dogteeth,
each about a foot wide in the base, with their points truncated,
and alternating with cavities which are their own negatives or
casts.</p>
<p><span class="scs">X</span>. One other form of the dogtooth is of great importance
in northern architecture, that produced by oblique cuts
slightly curved, as in the margin, <SPAN href="#fig_56">Fig. LVI.</SPAN> It is susceptible
of the most fantastic and endless decoration; each of the resulting
leaves being, in the early porches of Rouen and Lisieux,
hollowed out and worked into branching tracery: and at
Bourges, for distant effect, worked into plain leaves, or bold
bony processes with knobs at the points, and near the spectator,
into crouching demons and broad winged owls, and other
fancies and intricacies, innumerable and inexpressible.</p>
<table style="float: right; width: auto;" summary="Illustration">
<tr>
<td class="caption1">Fig. LVI.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="figright2">
<SPAN name="fig_56"><ANTIMG src="images/img271.jpg" width-obs="110" height-obs="316" alt="Fig. LVI." title="Fig. LVI." /></SPAN></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p><span class="scs">XI</span>. Thus much is enough to be noted respecting edge
decoration. We were next to consider the fillet.
Professor Willis has noticed an ornament, which
he has called the Venetian dentil, “as the most
universal ornament in its own district that ever I
met with;” but has not noticed the reason for its
frequency. It is nevertheless highly interesting.</p>
<p>The whole early architecture of Venice is
architecture of incrustation: this has not been
enough noticed in its peculiar relation to that of
the rest of Italy. There is, indeed, much incrusted
architecture throughout Italy, in elaborate
ecclesiastical work, but there is more which is
frankly of brick, or thoroughly of stone. But the Venetian
habitually incrusted his work with <span class="correction" title="changed from 'macre'">nacre</span>; he built his houses,
even the meanest, as if he had been a shell-fish,—roughly inside,
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page272"></SPAN>272</span>
mother-of-pearl on the surface: he was content, perforce,
to gather the clay of the Brenta banks, and bake it into brick
for his substance of wall; but he overlaid it with the wealth
of ocean, with the most precious foreign marbles. You might
fancy early Venice one wilderness of brick, which a petrifying
sea had beaten upon till it coated it with marble: at first a
dark city—washed white by the sea foam. And I told you
before that it was also a city of shafts and arches, and that its
dwellings were raised upon continuous arcades, among which
the sea waves wandered. Hence the thoughts of its builders
were early and constantly directed to the incrustation of
arches.</p>
<table style="float: left; width: auto;" summary="Illustration">
<tr>
<td class="caption1">Fig. LVII.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="figleft2">
<SPAN name="fig_57"><ANTIMG src="images/img272.jpg" width-obs="300" height-obs="191" alt="Fig. LVII." title="Fig. LVII." /></SPAN></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p><span class="scs">XII</span>. In <SPAN href="#fig_57">Fig. LVII.</SPAN> I have given two of these Byzantine
stilted arches: the one on the right, <i>a</i>, as they now too often
appear, in its bare brickwork; that on the left, with its alabaster
covering, literally marble defensive armor, riveted
together in pieces, which follow the contours of the building.
Now, on the wall, these pieces are mere flat slabs cut to the
arch outline; but under the
soffit of the arch the marble
mail is curved, often cut
singularly thin, like bent
tiles, and fitted together so
that the pieces would sustain
each other even without
rivets. It is of course desirable
that this thin sub-arch
of marble should project enough to sustain the facing of
the wall; and the reader will see, in <SPAN href="#fig_57">Fig. LVII.</SPAN>, that its edge
forms a kind of narrow band round the arch (<i>b</i>), a band which
the least enrichment would render a valuable decorative feature.
Now this band is, of course, if the soffit-pieces project
a little beyond the face of the wall-pieces, a mere fillet, like the
wooden gunwale in <SPAN href="#plate_9">Plate IX.</SPAN>; and the question is, how to
enrich it most wisely. It might easily have been dogtoothed,
but the Byzantine architects had not invented the dogtooth,
and would not have used it here, if they had; for the dogtooth
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page273"></SPAN>273</span>
cannot be employed alone, especially on so principal an angle
as this of the main arches, without giving to the whole building
a peculiar look, which I can <span class="correction" title="changed from 'no'">not</span> otherwise describe than as
being to the eye, exactly what untempered acid is to the
tongue. The mere dogtooth is an <i>acid</i> moulding, and can
only be used in certain mingling with others, to give them
piquancy; never alone. What, then, will be the next easiest
method of giving interest to the fillet?</p>
<table style="float: right; width: auto;" summary="Illustration">
<tr>
<td class="caption1">Fig. LVIII.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="figright2">
<SPAN name="fig_58"><ANTIMG src="images/img273.jpg" width-obs="160" height-obs="429" alt="Fig. LVIII." title="Fig. LVIII." /></SPAN></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p><span class="scs">XIII</span>. Simply to make the incisions square instead of sharp,
and to leave equal intervals of the square edge between them.
<SPAN href="#fig_58">Fig. LVIII.</SPAN> is one of the curved pieces of arch armor, with its
edge thus treated; one side only being done at the bottom, to
show the simplicity and ease of the work. This ornament
gives force and interest to the edge of the arch, without in the
least diminishing its quietness. Nothing
was ever, nor could be ever invented, fitter
for its purpose, or more easily cut. From
the arch it therefore found its way into
every position where the edge of a piece of
stone projected, and became, from its constancy
of occurrence in the latest Gothic
as well as the earliest Byzantine, most truly
deserving of the name of the “Venetian
Dentil.” Its complete intention is now,
however, only to be seen in the pictures of
Gentile Bellini and Vittor Carpaccio; for,
like most of the rest of the mouldings of
Venetian buildings, it was always either
gilded or painted—often both, gold being
laid on the faces of the dentils, and their
recesses colored alternately red and blue.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XIV</span>. Observe, however, that the reason
above given for the <i>universality</i> of
this ornament was by no means the reason of its <i>invention</i>.
The Venetian dentil is a particular application (consequent on
the incrusted character of Venetian architecture) of the general
idea of dentil, which had been originally given by the
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page274"></SPAN>274</span>
Greeks, and realised both by them and by the Byzantines in
many laborious forms, long before there was need of them for
arch armor; and the lower half of <SPAN href="#plate_9">Plate IX.</SPAN> will give some
idea of the conditions which occur in the Romanesque of
Venice, distinctly derived from the classical dentil; and of the
gradual transition to the more convenient and simple type, the
running-hand dentil, which afterwards became the characteristic
of Venetian Gothic. No. 13<SPAN name="FnAnchor_76" href="#Footnote_76"><span class="sp">76</span></SPAN> is the common dentiled
cornice, which occurs repeatedly in St. Mark’s; and, as late as
the thirteenth century, a reduplication of it, forming the abaci
of the capitals of the Piazzetta shafts. Fig. 15 is perhaps an
earlier type; perhaps only one of more careless workmanship,
from a Byzantine ruin in the Rio di Ca’ Foscari: and it is
interesting to compare it with fig. 14 from the Cathedral of
Vienne, in South France. Fig. 17, from St. Mark’s, and 18,
from the apse of Murano, are two very early examples in which
the future true Venetian dentil is already developed in method
of execution, though the object is still only to imitate the
classical one; and a rude imitation of the bead is joined with
it in fig. 17. No. 16 indicates two examples of experimental
forms: the uppermost from the tomb of Mastino della Scala,
at Verona; the lower from a door in Venice, I believe, of the
thirteenth century: 19 is a more frequent arrangement, chiefly
found in cast brick, and connecting the dentils with the dogteeth:
20 is a form introduced richly in the later Gothic, but
of rare occurrence until the latter half of the thirteenth century.
I shall call it the <i>gabled</i> dentil. It is found in the
greatest profusion in sepulchral Gothic, associated with several
slight variations from the usual dentil type, of which No. 21,
from the tomb of Pietro Cornaro, may serve as an example.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XV</span>. All the forms given in <SPAN href="#plate_9">Plate IX.</SPAN> are of not unfrequent
occurrence: varying much in size and depth, according
to the expression of the work in which they occur; generally
increasing in size in late work (the earliest dentils are seldom
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page275"></SPAN>275</span>
more than an inch or an inch and a half long: the fully
developed dentil of the later Gothic is often as much as four
or five in length, by one and a half in breadth); but they are
all somewhat rare, compared to the true or armor dentil,
above described. On the other hand, there are one or two
unique conditions, which will be noted in the buildings where
they occur.<SPAN name="FnAnchor_77" href="#Footnote_77"><span class="sp">77</span></SPAN> The Ducal Palace furnishes three anomalies in
the arch, dogtooth, and dentil: it has a hyperbolic arch, as
noted above, <SPAN href="#chap_10">Chap. X.</SPAN>, <span class="scs">XV</span>.; it has a double-fanged dogtooth
in the rings of the spiral shafts on its angles; and,
finally, it has a dentil with concave sides, of which the section
and two of the blocks, real size, are given in <SPAN href="#plate_14">Plate XIV.</SPAN> The
labor of obtaining this difficult profile has, however, been
thrown away; for the effect of the dentil at ten feet distance
is exactly the same as that of the usual form: and the reader
may consider the dogtooth and dentil in that plate as fairly
representing the common use of them in the Venetian Gothic.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XVI</span>. I am aware of no other form of fillet decoration
requiring notice: in the Northern Gothic, the fillet is employed
chiefly to give severity or flatness to mouldings supposed
to be too much rounded, and is therefore generally
plain. It is itself an ugly moulding, and, when thus employed,
is merely a foil for others, of which, however, it at last
usurped the place, and became one of the most painful features
in the debased Gothic both of Italy and the North.</p>
<hr class="foot" />
<div class="note">
<p><SPAN name="Footnote_74" href="#FnAnchor_74"><span class="fn">74</span></SPAN> I do not here speak of artistical merits, but the play of the light among
the lower shafts is also singularly beautiful in this sketch of Prout’s, and
the character of the wild and broken leaves, half dead, on the stone of the
foreground.</p>
<p><SPAN name="Footnote_75" href="#FnAnchor_75"><span class="fn">75</span></SPAN> Vide the “Seven Lamps,” p. 122.</p>
<p><SPAN name="Footnote_76" href="#FnAnchor_76"><span class="fn">76</span></SPAN> The sections of all the mouldings are given on the right of each; the
part which is constantly solid being shaded, and that which is cut into
dentils left.</p>
<p><SPAN name="Footnote_77" href="#FnAnchor_77"><span class="fn">77</span></SPAN> As, however, we shall not probably be led either to Bergamo or
Bologna, I may mention here a curiously rich use of the dentil, entirely
covering the foliation and tracery of a niche on the outside of the duomo
of Bergamo; and a roll, entirely incrusted, as the handle of a mace often
is with nails, with massy dogteeth or nail-heads, on the door of the Pepoli
palace of Bologna.</p>
</div>
<hr class="art" />
<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page276"></SPAN>276</span></p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />