Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 5.djvu/104

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

Notices of New Publications.


A History of the Architecture of the Abbey Church of St. Alban, with especial reference to the Norman Structures. By J. C. and C. A. Buckler. Longman and Co. 1847. 8vo.

The abbey church of St. Alban is undoubtedly one of the most remarkable of the ecclesiastical buildings of ancient times now remaining in this country; it may be regarded as one of the few monuments which connect the Christian history of England with the period immediately succeeding the decay of Roman dominion; while in its constructive features it bears a closer resemblance to Roman art than any other edifice in the kingdom. The origin of this peculiarity is evident: when the Saxon founder of the church began his work in the eighth century, the ruins of Roman Verulam afforded an ample supply of materials, and this source was not exhausted when at the close of the tenth century preparations were made to rebuild the original structure. Although that work was delayed from various causes until after the Norman Conquest, the authority of Matthew Paris establishes the fact that the church was built "of the stones and tiles of the ancient city of Verulam;" and thus the building was in a great measure designed to suit the peculiar qualities of those materials;" at one and the same time it may be supposed that the work of demolition on the south side of the Ver, and that of rebuilding on the consecrated spot on the opposite side, were seen in rapid progress, the structures rising with almost as much activity into form on the one hand, as those on the other were sinking into shapeless fragments; and it is not surprising that a mode of construction thus rendered familiar to the workmen should have been adopted by them in the re-employment of the materials."

In the present work the Messrs. Buckler have examined this subject with most praiseworthy accuracy, and their observations are illustrated by numerous engravings which shew the peculiar construction of the foundations and the more ancient parts of the church, all of which tend to prove that "a Roman, not a Norman model" was before the architect.

The resemblance of the masonry and mode of construction to Roman work is very striking, and, as the history of the actual structure is fortunately preserved to us, there can be no doubt whatever that it was raised from the foundations subsequently to the Norman Conquest. The light which