<h3><SPAN name="chap_28"></SPAN>CHAPTER XXVIII.</h3>
<h5>THE ARCHIVOLT AND APERTURE.</h5>
<table class="nobctr" style="clear: both; " summary="Illustration">
<tr>
<td class="caption1">XIX.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="figcenter">
<SPAN name="plate_19" id="plate_19"><ANTIMG src="images/img333.jpg" width-obs="650" height-obs="414" alt="ARCHIVOLT DECORATION." title="ARCHIVOLT DECORATION." /></SPAN></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="caption">ARCHIVOLT DECORATION.<br/>
<span class="f80">AT VERONA.</span></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p><span class="scs">I</span>. <span class="sc">If</span> the windows and doors of some of our best northern
Gothic buildings were built up, and the ornament of their
archivolts concealed, there would often remain little but masses
of dead wall and unsightly buttress; the whole vitality of the
building consisting in the graceful proportions or rich mouldings
of its apertures. It is not so in the south, where, frequently,
the aperture is a mere dark spot on the variegated
wall; but there the column, with its horizontal or curved
architrave, assumes an importance of another kind, equally
dependent upon the methods of lintel and archivolt decoration.
These, though in their richness of minor variety they defy all
exemplification, may be very broadly generalized.</p>
<p>Of the mere lintel, indeed, there is no specific decoration,
nor can be; it has no organism to direct its ornament, and
therefore may receive any kind and degree of ornament, according
to its position. In a Greek temple, it has meagre horizontal
lines; in a Romanesque church, it becomes a row of
upright niches, with an apostle in each; and may become anything
else at the architect’s will. But the arch head has a natural
organism, which separates its ornament into distinct families,
broadly <span class="correction" title="comma changed to period">definable.</span></p>
<p><span class="scs">II</span>. In speaking of the arch-line and arch masonry, we
considered the arch to be cut straight through the wall; so
that, if half built, it would have the appearance at <i>a</i>, <SPAN href="#fig_69">Fig.
LXIX.</SPAN> But in the chapter on Form of Apertures, we found
that the side of the arch, or jamb of the aperture, might often
require to be bevelled, so as to give the section <i>b</i>, <SPAN href="#fig_69">Fig. LXIX.</SPAN>
It is easily conceivable that when two ranges of voussoirs were
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page334"></SPAN>334</span>
used, one over another, it would be easier to leave those beneath,
of a smaller diameter, than to bevel them to accurate
junction with those outside. Whether influenced
by this facility, or by decorative instinct,
the early northern builders often
substitute for the bevel the third condition,
<i>c</i>, of <SPAN href="#fig_69">Fig. LXIX.</SPAN>; so that, of the three
forms in that figure, <i>a</i> belongs principally
to the south, <i>c</i> to the north, and <i>b</i> indifferently
to both.</p>
<table style="float: left; width: auto;" summary="Illustration">
<tr>
<td class="caption1">Fig. LXIX.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="figleft2">
<SPAN name="fig_69"><ANTIMG src="images/img334.jpg" width-obs="130" height-obs="400" alt="Fig. LXIX." title="Fig. LXIX." /></SPAN></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p><span class="scs">III</span>. If the arch in the northern building
be very deep, its depth will probably be attained
by a succession of steps, like that in
<i>c</i>; and the richest results of northern archivolt
decoration are entirely based on the
aggregation of the ornament of these several
steps; while those of the south are only the
complete finish and perfection of the ornament
of one. In this ornament of the single
arch, the points for general note are very few.</p>
<p><span class="scs">IV</span>. It was, in the first instance, derived from the classical
architrave,<SPAN name="FnAnchor_91" href="#Footnote_91"><span class="sp">91</span></SPAN> and the early Romanesque arches are nothing but
such an architrave, bent round. The horizontal lines of the
latter become semicircular, but their importance and value remain
exactly the same; their continuity is preserved across all
the voussoirs, and the joints and functions of the latter are
studiously concealed. As the builders get accustomed to the
arch, and love it better, they cease to be ashamed of its structure:
the voussoirs begin to show themselves confidently, and
fight for precedence with the architrave lines; and there is an
entanglement of the two structures, in consequence, like the
circular and radiating lines of a cobweb, until at last the architrave
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page335"></SPAN>335</span>
lines get worsted, and driven away outside of the voussoirs;
being permitted to stay at all only on condition of their
dressing themselves in medi�val costume, as in the plate opposite.</p>
<p><span class="scs">V</span>. In other cases, however, before the entire discomfiture
of the architrave, a treaty of peace is signed between the adverse
parties on these terms: That the architrave shall entirely
dismiss its inner three meagre lines, and leave the space
of them to the voussoirs, to display themselves after their
manner; but that, in return for this concession, the architrave
shall have leave to expand the small cornice which usually
terminates it (the reader had better look at the original form
in that of the Erechtheum, in the middle of the Elgin room of
the British Museum) into bolder prominence, and even to put
brackets under it, as if it were a roof cornice, and thus mark
with a bold shadow the terminal line of the voussoirs. This
condition is seen in the arch from St. Pietro of Pistoja, <SPAN href="#plate_13">Plate
XIII.</SPAN>, above.</p>
<p><span class="scs">VI</span>. If the Gothic spirit of the building be thoroughly
determined, and victorious, the architrave cornice is compelled
to relinquish its classical form, and take the profile of a
Gothic cornice or dripstone; while, in other cases, as in much
of the Gothic of Verona, it is forced to disappear altogether.
But the voussoirs then concede, on the other hand, so much
of their dignity as to receive a running ornament of foliage or
animals, like a classical frieze, and continuous round the arch.
In fact, the contest between the adversaries may be seen running
through all the early architecture of Italy: success inclining
sometimes to the one, sometimes to the other, and
various kinds of truce or reconciliation being effected between
them: sometimes merely formal, sometimes honest and affectionate,
but with no regular succession in time. The greatest
victory of the voussoir is to annihilate the cornice, and receive
an ornament of its own outline, and entirely limited
by its own joints: and yet this may be seen in the very early
apse of Murano.</p>
<p><span class="scs">VII</span>. The most usual condition, however, is that unity of
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page336"></SPAN>336</span>
the two members above described, <span class="scs">V</span>., and which may be
generally represented by the archivolt section
<i>a</i>, <SPAN href="#fig_70">Fig. LXX.</SPAN>; and from this descend
a family of Gothic archivolts of the highest
importance. For the cornice, thus attached
to the arch, suffers exactly the same
changes as the level cornice, or capital; receives,
in due time, its elaborate ogee profile
and leaf ornaments, like Fig. 8 or 9 of
<SPAN href="#plate_15">Plate XV.</SPAN>; and, when the shaft loses its
shape, and is lost in the later Gothic jamb,
the archivolt has influence enough to introduce
this ogee profile in the jamb also,
through the banded impost: and we immediately find ourselves
involved in deep successions of ogee mouldings in sides
of doors and windows, which never would have been thought
of, but for the obstinate resistance of the classical architrave
to the attempts of the voussoir at its degradation or banishment.</p>
<table style="float: left; width: auto;" summary="Illustration">
<tr>
<td class="caption1">Fig. LXX.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="figleft2">
<SPAN name="fig_70"><ANTIMG src="images/img336.jpg" width-obs="150" height-obs="254" alt="Fig. LXX." title="Fig. LXX." /></SPAN></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p><span class="scs">VIII</span>. This, then, will be the first great head under which
we shall in future find it convenient to arrange a large number
of archivolt decorations. It is the distinctively Southern
and Byzantine form, and typically represented by the section
<i>a</i>, of <SPAN href="#fig_70">Fig. LXX.</SPAN>; and it is susceptible of almost every species
of surface ornament, respecting which only this general law
may be asserted: that, while the outside or vertical surface
may properly be decorated, and yet the soffit or under surface
left plain, the soffit is never to be decorated, and the outer
surface left plain. Much beautiful sculpture is, in the best
Byzantine buildings, half lost by being put under soffits; but
the eye is led to discover it, and even to demand it, by the
rich chasing of the outside of the voussoirs. It would have
been an hypocrisy to carve them externally only. But there
is not the smallest excuse for carving the soffit, and not the
outside; for, in that case, we approach the building under the
idea of its being perfectly plain; we do not look for the soffit
decoration, and, of course, do not see it: or, if we do, it is
merely to regret that it should not be in a better place. In
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page337"></SPAN>337</span>
the Renaissance architects, it may, perhaps, for once, be considered
a merit, that they put their bad decoration systematically
in the places where we should least expect it, and can
seldomest see it:—Approaching the Scuola di San Rocco, you
probably will regret the extreme plainness and barrenness of
the window traceries; but, if you will go very close to the
wall beneath the windows, you may, on sunny days, discover a
quantity of panel decorations which the ingenious architect has
concealed under the soffits.</p>
<p>The custom of decorating the arch soffit with panelling is a
Roman application of the Greek roof ornament, which, whatever
its intrinsic merit (compare <SPAN href="#chap_29">Chap. XXIX.</SPAN> <span class="scs">IV</span>.), may
rationally be applied to waggon vaults, as of St. Peter’s, and
to arch soffits under which one walks. But the Renaissance
architects had not wit enough to reflect that people usually do
not walk through windows.</p>
<p><span class="scs">IX</span>. So far, then, of the Southern archivolt: In <SPAN href="#fig_69">Fig.
LXIX.</SPAN>, above, it will be remembered that <i>c</i> represents the
simplest form of the Northern. In the farther development
of this, which we have next to consider, the voussoirs, in consequence
of their own negligence or over-confidence, sustain a
total and irrecoverable defeat. That archivolt is in its earliest
conditions perfectly pure and undecorated,—the simplest and
rudest of Gothic forms. Necessarily, when it falls on the pier,
and meets that of the opposite arch, the entire section of
masonry is in the shape of a cross, and is carried by the crosslet
shaft, which we above stated to be distinctive of Northern
design. I am more at a loss to account for the sudden and
fixed development of this type of archivolt than for any other
architectural transition with which I am acquainted. But
there it is, pure and firmly established, as early as the building
of St. Michele of Pavia; and we have thenceforward only to
observe what comes of it.</p>
<p><span class="scs">X</span>. We find it first, as I said, perfectly barren; cornice
and architrave altogether ignored, the existence of such things
practically denied, and a plain, deep-cut recess with a single
mighty shadow occupying their place. The voussoirs, thinking
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page338"></SPAN>338</span>
their great adversary utterly defeated, are at no trouble
to show themselves; visible enough in both the upper and
under archivolts, they are content to wait the time when, as
might have been hoped, they should receive a new decoration
peculiar to themselves.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XI</span>. In this state of paralysis, or expectation, their flank
is turned by an insidious chamfer. The edges of the two great
blank archivolts are felt to be painfully conspicuous; all the
four are at once beaded or chamfered, as at <i>b</i>, <SPAN href="#fig_70">Fig. LXX.</SPAN>; a
rich group of deep lines, running concentrically with the arch,
is the result on the instant, and the fate of the voussoirs is
sealed. They surrender at once without a struggle, and unconditionally;
the chamfers deepen and multiply themselves, cover
the soffit, ally themselves with other forms resulting from
grouped shafts or traceries, and settle into the inextricable richness
of the fully developed Gothic jamb and arch; farther
complicated in the end by the addition of niches to their
recesses, as above described.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XII</span>. The voussoirs, in despair, go over to the classical
camp, in hope of receiving some help or tolerance from their
former enemies. They receive it indeed: but as traitors should,
to their own eternal dishonor. They are sharply chiselled at
the joints, or rusticated, or cut into masks and satyrs’ heads,
and so set forth and pilloried in the various detestable forms of
which the simplest is given above in <SPAN href="#plate_13">Plate XIII.</SPAN> (on the left);
and others may be seen in nearly every large building in London,
more especially in the bridges; and, as if in pure spite at
the treatment they had received from the archivolt, they are
now not content with vigorously showing their lateral joints,
but shape themselves into right-angled steps at their heads,
cutting to pieces their limiting line, which otherwise would
have had sympathy with that of the arch, and fitting themselves
to their new friend, the Renaissance Ruled Copy-book wall.
It had been better they had died ten times over, in their own
ancient cause, than thus prolonged their existence.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XIII</span>. We bid them farewell in their dishonor, to return
to our victorious chamfer. It had not, we said, obtained so
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page339"></SPAN>339</span>
easy a conquest, unless by the help of certain forms of the
grouped shaft. The chamfer was quite enough to decorate
the archivolts, if there were no more than two; but if, as
above noticed in <span class="scs">III</span>., the archivolt was very deep, and composed
of a succession of such steps, the multitude of chamferings
were felt to be weak and insipid, and instead of dealing
with the outside edges of the archivolts, the group was softened
by introducing solid shafts in their dark inner angles.
This, the manliest and best condition of the early northern
jamb and archivolt, is represented in section at fig. 12 of <SPAN href="#plate_2">Plate
II.</SPAN>; and its simplest aspect in <SPAN href="#plate_5">Plate V.</SPAN>, from the Broletto of
Como,—an interesting example, because there the voussoirs
being in the midst of their above-described southern contest
with the architrave, were better prepared for the flank attack
upon them by the shaft and chamfer, and make a noble resistance,
with the help of color, in which even the shaft itself
gets slightly worsted, and cut across in several places, like
General Zach’s column at Marengo.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XIV.</span> The shaft, however, rapidly rallies, and brings up its
own peculiar decorations to its aid; and the intermediate archivolts
receive running or panelled ornaments, also, until we reach
the exquisitely rich conditions of our own Norman archivolts,
and of the parallel Lombardic designs, such as the entrance of
the Duomo, and of San Fermo, at Verona. This change,
however, occupies little time, and takes place principally in
doorways, owing to the greater thickness of wall, and depth of
archivolt; so that we find the rich shafted succession of ornament,
in the doorway and window aperture, associated with the
earliest and rudest double archivolt, in the nave arches, at St.
Michele of Pavia. The nave arches, therefore, are most
usually treated by the chamfer, and the voussoirs are there
defeated much sooner than by the shafted arrangements, which
they resist, as we saw, in the south by color; and even in the
north, though forced out of their own shape, they take that of
birds’ or monsters’ heads, which for some time peck and pinch
the rolls of the archivolt to their hearts’ content; while the
Norman zigzag ornament allies itself with them, each zigzag
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page340"></SPAN>340</span>
often restraining itself amicably between the joints of each
voussoir in the ruder work, and even in the highly finished
arches, distinctly presenting a concentric or sunlike arrangement
of lines; so much so, as to prompt the conjecture, above
stated, <SPAN href="#chap_20">Chap. XX.</SPAN> <span class="scs">XXVI</span>., that all such ornaments were intended
to be typical of light issuing from the orb of the arch.
I doubt the intention, but acknowledge the resemblance;
which perhaps goes far to account for the never-failing delightfulness
of this zigzag decoration. The diminution of the zigzag,
as it gradually shares the defeat of the voussoir, and is at
last overwhelmed by the complicated, railroad-like fluency of
the later Gothic mouldings, is to me one of the saddest sights
in the drama of architecture.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XV</span>. One farther circumstance is deserving of especial note
in <SPAN href="#plate_5">Plate V.</SPAN>, the greater depth of the voussoirs at the top of
the arch. This has been above alluded to as a feature of good
construction, <SPAN href="#chap_11">Chap. XI.</SPAN>, <span class="scs">III</span>.; it is to be noted now as one
still more valuable in decoration: for when we arrive at the
deep succession of concentric archivolts, with which northern
portals, and many of the associated windows, are headed, we
immediately find a difficulty in reconciling the outer curve
with the inner. If, as is sometimes the case, the width of the
group of archivolts be twice or three times that of the inner
aperture, the inner arch may be distinctly pointed, and the
outer one, if drawn with concentric arcs, approximate very
nearly to a round arch. This is actually the case in the later
Gothic of Verona; the outer line of the archivolt having a
hardly perceptible point, and every inner arch of course forming
the point more distinctly, till the innermost becomes a
lancet. By far the nobler method, however, is that of the
pure early Italian Gothic; to make every outer arch a <i>magnified
fac-simile</i> of the innermost one, every arc including the
same number of degrees, but degrees of a larger circle. The
result is the condition represented in <SPAN href="#plate_5">Plate V.</SPAN>, often found in
far bolder development; exquisitely springy and elastic in its
expression, and entirely free from the heaviness and monotony
of the deep northern archivolts.</p>
<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page341"></SPAN>341</span></p>
<p><span class="scs">XVI.</span> We have not spoken of the intermediate form, <i>b</i>, of
<SPAN href="#fig_69">Fig. LXIX.</SPAN> (which its convenience for admission of light has
rendered common in nearly all architectures), because it has
no transitions peculiar to itself: in the north it sometimes
shares the fate of the outer architrave, and is channelled into
longitudinal mouldings; sometimes remains smooth and massy,
as in military architecture, or in the simpler forms of domestic
and ecclesiastical. In Italy it receives surface decoration like
the architrave, but has, perhaps, something of peculiar expression
in being placed between the tracery of the window within,
and its shafts and tabernacle work without, as in the Duomo
of Florence: in this position it is always kept smooth in surface,
and inlaid (or painted) with delicate arabesques; while
the tracery and the tabernacle work are richly sculptured.
The example of its treatment by colored voussoirs, given in
<SPAN href="#plate_19">Plate XIX.</SPAN>, may be useful to the reader as a kind of central
expression of the aperture decoration of the pure Italian
Gothic;—aperture decoration proper; applying no shaft work
to the jambs, but leaving the bevelled opening unenriched;
using on the outer archivolt the voussoirs and concentric
architrave in reconcilement (the latter having, however, some
connection with the Norman zigzag); and beneath them, the
pure Italian two-pieced and mid-cusped arch, with rich cusp
decoration. It is a Veronese arch, probably of the thirteenth
century, and finished with extreme care; the red portions are
all in brick, delicately cast: and the most remarkable feature
of the whole is the small piece of brick inlaid on the angle of
each stone voussoir, with a most just feeling, which every
artist will at once understand, that the color ought not to be
let go all at once.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XVII.</span> We have traced the various conditions of treatment
in the archivolt alone; but, except in what has been said of
the peculiar expression of the voussoirs, we might throughout
have spoken in the same terms of the jamb. Even a parallel
to the expression of the voussoir may be found in the Lombardic
and Norman divisions of the shafts, by zigzags and
other transverse ornamentation, which in the end are all swept
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page342"></SPAN>342</span>
away by the canaliculated mouldings. Then, in the recesses
of these and of the archivolts alike, the niche and statue decoration
develops itself; and the vaulted and cavernous apertures
are covered with incrustations of fretwork, and with every
various application of foliage to their fantastic mouldings.</p>
<p><span class="scs">XVIII</span>. I have kept the inquiry into the proper ornament
of the archivolt wholly free from all confusion with the questions
of beauty in tracery; for, in fact, all tracery is a mere
multiplication and entanglement of small archivolts, and its
cusp ornament is a minor condition of that proper to the spandril.
It does not reach its completely defined form until the
jamb and archivolt have been divided into longitudinal mouldings;
and then the tracery is formed by the innermost group
of the shafts or fillets, bent into whatever forms or foliations
the designer may choose; but this with a delicacy of adaptation
which I rather choose to illustrate by particular examples,
of which we shall meet with many in the course of our inquiry,
than to delay the reader by specifying here. As for the conditions
of beauty in the disposition of the tracery bars, I see
no hope of dealing with the subject fairly but by devoting, if
I can find time, a separate essay to it—which, in itself, need
not be long, but would involve, before it could be completed,
the examination of the whole mass of materials lately collected
by the indefatigable industry of the English architects who
have devoted their special attention to this subject, and which
are of the highest value as illustrating the chronological succession
or mechanical structure of tracery, but which, in most
cases, touch on their �sthetic merits incidentally only. Of
works of this kind, by far the best I have met with is Mr.
Edmund Sharpe’s, on Decorated Windows, which seems to me,
as far as a cursory glance can enable me to judge, to exhaust
the subject as respects English Gothic; and which may be
recommended to the readers who are interested in the subject,
as containing a clear and masterly enunciation of the general
principles by which the design of tracery has been regulated,
from its first development to its final degradation.</p>
<hr class="foot" />
<div class="note">
<p><SPAN name="Footnote_91" href="#FnAnchor_91"><span class="fn">91</span></SPAN> The architrave is properly the horizontal piece of stone laid across the
tops of the pillars in Greek buildings, and commonly marked with horizontal
lines, obtained by slight projections of its surface, while it is protected
above in the richer orders, by a small cornice.</p>
</div>
<hr class="art" />
<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page343"></SPAN>343</span></p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />