Marcu 29, 1872. THE BUILDING NEWS. 261
ARCHITECTURAL ASSOCIATION.
T the usual fortnightly meeting on Friday even-
ing last, Mr. Rowland Plumbe, President, in
the chair, Messrs. W. B. Duncan and A. EB. North-
cote were elected members. A cordial yote of thanks
was passed to Messrs. Banks and Barry, the archi-
tects of the new buildings at Burlington House, for
their kindness in allowing the members of the As-
sociation to visit the works on a recent occasion ;
the vote also included the name of Mr. Ruddle, the
clerk of the works, who conducted the members over
the works. A letter was read from Mr. T. Roger
Smith (who had been appointed to represent the As-
sociation on the Committee of Selection for Archi-
tectural Designs in the approaching International
Exhibition of 1872), stating that very few designs
had been seat in for exhibition by the Members of
the Association.
Mr. G. H. Biron, Vice-President, then read a
paper on
CHRISTIAN ICONOGRAPHY,
Last session the author read a paper before the
Association on ‘‘Symbolism as applied to Architec-
ture, and its Influence on Plan and Arrangement.”
His subject on the present occasion was the corollary
of the former subject, and he was the more anxious
to treat of it, because he thought that at no other
period of the revival of Christian art in this country
could there have been a better time than now to
attempt to make some slight stand against that
liberty in art which, however glorious it might be
in theory (of entire freedom in its national, civil,
or domestic capacity) must, when it became the
handmaid of religion, be trammelled by certain regu-
lations, conditions, and traditions to fit it as the ex-
ponent of that which was fixed, changeless, and
divine. Without faith, art, if it enjoyed an arti-
ficial existence, was a base mockery of its better
self; and though the revival of Christian architec-
ture was a glorious fact, and principles timidly put
forth thirty years ago were now accepted and even
developed to their fullest extent, much still re-
mained to be done in the sister arts of painting and
sculpture, It was of the greatest importance that
all those who were or who might be engaged in the
practice of ecclesiastical architecture should study
iconography in all its branches; they would be
better church architects for the study, and would
never regret the time spent onit. Mr. Birch next
briefly traced the history of iconographical art from
the first attempts in the third and fourth centuries
of the Christian era, and from even earlier examples,
as seen in the Catacombs, remarking that in M.
Didron’s incomparable work on Christian icono-
graphy, all the changes and vicissitudes of the art
were carefully noted from their commencement, and
traced to their final development or total extinction.
The two great points on which Mr. Birch wished to
insist were :—Firstly, the employment of art to teach
as well as to decorate or adorn; and, secondly, the
application of such decoration to the various parts
of a church with a special and peculiar significance
to such parts and their uses. He wanted also to
draw attention to the constant abuse of both these
fundamental principles in modern ecclesiastical art,
and to demonstrate a few of the errors which have
been perpetrated in our times in some of our finest
ecclesiastical buildings, which were being absolutely
ruined by the fearful amount of ignorance and mis-
chievous incapacity betrayed by those to whom was
entrusted the care of them, and with whom he was
obliged to couple their professional advisers in such
acts. It was good to restore a church reverently,
and care for every stone, and treat it (as it really
was) as a documentary evidence of the greatest im-
portance—a page of history in itself; to rebuild
the shattered buttress and the crumbling wall; to
replace cross and pinnacle, and repair what devouring
time or sacrilegicus hands have defaced: no time,
no trouble, should be begrudged by architects in
rendering themselves able to undertake such a work
of restoration properly. But how often did it happen
that he to whom the work of restoring or raising
the substantial fabric of walls, arches, and columns
had been entrusted had not cared, or had felt himself
perhaps incompetent to deal with the question of in-
ternal decoration—of imagery, glass, or wall decora-
tion—and had either shirked the question entirely,
or had contented himself with just approving some
scheme submitted to him, emanating from some
eminent ‘ art-firm”—a scheme which perhaps had
neither beginning nor end, but was chaotic and con-
fused, as well as being (which was more often the
case) entirely incorrect. There were some honour-
able instances of “art-firms” in which individual
members had made this subject their peculiar study ;
but from their position they were often unable to carry
out a proper scheme. Two very important obstacles
stood in the way; pleasing their customers first—for
there was no subject more governed by individual
caprice than this—and, secondly, the inadequate sum
placed at their disposal. A reredos was erected, a
stained glass window inserted, or some mural decora-
tion attempted, with which the architect expressed
himself ‘‘much pleased,” because they were all, if
moderately successful, important helps to make his
building attractive in the eyes of the general public.
As time went on, a new incumbent or some member
of the congregation was desirous of doing something
more in the shape of decoration, say a new window.
No one’s glass was better than Mr. B.’s, and to
Mr. B. they went. The new window was fin-
ished; Mr. B. had dealt with it as a window
only; perhaps he had never been to the church
beforehand, and was utterly regardless of his brother
artist’s work, except so far as endeavouring to cut
him out and throw his window completely into the
shade—a very right and proper spirit ‘‘in trade.”
Mr. B. in his turn was superseded by Mr. C., and
again was the same thing repeated, and so on through
the alphabet, until the workers in stained glass were
exhausted, and the result was chaos—a chaos of
styles, subjects, and tones; parables, scenes from
the life of Christ, miracles, saints, angels, kings,
Christian virtues and graces, legends, and plain
grisaille, all mixed up together here, there, and
everywhere in inextricable confusion, the same sub-
jects being often many times repeated in the same
church. Horrible as this was in new churches, in old
churches it was little less than profanation. In very
many old churches there remained fragments of
Stained glass, half-obliterated frescoes, or mutilated
Sculpture, indicating subjects . formerly — repre-
Sented on the walls and windows—all of which
fragments, with a knowledge of iconography and
reference to documentary evidence existing in old
wills, charters, deeds of gift, churchwardens’ ac-
counts, &c., might once more easily be connected and
incorporated into a scheme for decoration which,
instead of flouting those precious relics of the past,
would make them intelligible, and convey the lessons
they were originally intended to teach. Mr. Birch
next proceeded to enforce his thesis that ‘‘ religious
art—i.e., art employed in the service of religion—
should teach as well as decorate.” The instruction
and edification of the faithful were the primary
objects the Early Church had in view in thus adopt-
ing the system of employing the fine arts in the
decoration of churches, It was to this principle that
we owed the glorious series of windows at Chartres,
Bourges, and Troyes, and our own Fairford, where
a definite scheme was thoroughly followed. We were
also indebted to it for the thousands of statues and
carved subjects decorating the exteriors of Chartres,
Rheims, Amiens, Paris, Wells. Croyland, &c. While
contending for the adoption of iconographical schemes
of decoration and instruction in modern churches,
he did not wish it to be inferred that an
archaic style of drawing should be adopted in modern
work. He was not contending for the style, but for
the subjects. As art had advanced in the power of
delineating the human figure, it would be an
absurdity to recur to the more forcible but anatomi-
cally incorrect figures of an earlier age. What he
maintained we should copy was the power of expres-
sion, the deep religious thought and devotional
principles that guided the artists of those times.
Crude and ill drawn as we might consider their
productions, yet in their very crudity how vastly
superior were they to some modern work! Passing
to the second head of his subject—viz., “‘ The appli-
cation of decoration to the various parts of a church
with a special and peculiar significance to such parts
and their uses,” the author said that in designing a
church it was highly important to follow some
definite arrangement in the decoration as well as in the
planning of the building, so that if through want of
furdsit should be found to be impossible to complete
the whole scheme at once, yet,from time to time some-
thing might be done as the money was forthcoming,
until at last the whole stood revealed, finished perfect
from the hands of the architect; the framework of
walls and roofs and arches and gables filled in, not
with fifty different ideas, but with one great indi-
visible whole, embracing all stained glass, sculpture
fresco, reredos, font—each of them part of one great
scheme, and yet each bearing that peculiar signifi-
cance fitting it to the uses which it either symbo-
lised or was applied to. Chartres Cathedral was cited
and described in detail as affording the most perfect
instance of an iconographical scheme left to us; but
instances were afforded by other large cathedrals in
France, and in England we had a most beautiful
example in Wells Cathedral. With this exception,
and the ruined part of Croyland, we had no such
stupendous facades, bristling with statues and
encrusted with figure subjects, as were to be found
in France; but the little we had was as carefully
worked out as in the glorious fronts of Amiens,
Paris, Chartres, Rheims, Rouen, or Strasbourg. Mr. Birch next proceeded to enumerate the subjects which should be placed in the various parts of the interior of a church. The subject generally depicted in the great west window is our Lord in Judgment, seated on the white throne and surrounded by the four beasts of the Apocalypse, encircled by the heavenly hierarchy. §. Michael stands as the angel of the Resurrection ; on the right hand the just, om the left the accursed, and below, the dead rising from their graves. This was the most general subject for the west end, and in the Greek Church there were special directions given how this should be repre- sented. ‘The manuscript of Panselinos was particu— larly explicit on this point. The font was invariably at the west end, and there were one or two subjects which ought to be represented by it or on it—sucle as the Passage of the Red Sea, and the Ark floating on the waters. The font at Hildesheim was particu- larly rich in iconography. In the decorations of the chancel the leading feature was the altar and reredos. A multiplicity of crosses should be avoided; there should be but one. In several very fine modern churches the Crucifixion had been put in this place unadvisedly, as Mr. Birch considered. But more fre- quent use should be made of types and anti-types. For the Blessed Sacrament there were Melchisidec’s offering and Abel’s more perfect sacrifice; Abraham offering up Isaac on Mount Moriah ; the Israelites ga- thering manna in the Wilderness. Of the Crucifixion there were the brazen serpent, the Passover, Moses strik- ing the rock. The Incarnation, represented by the An- nunciation, was shadowed forth in the burning busi and Gideon’s fleece; the Resurrection by Jonah’s deliverance ; the Ascension by Elijah’s fiery chariot. All these were subjects suitable, in combination with: one another, for the east end of a church. For the nave and aisles there were the Gospels and the various scenes and parables from the life of Our Lord, the beatitudes or acts of mercy, or scenes from the life of the particular saint to whom the church was dedi- cated. In the two main divisions of the church, nave and chancel, it was well to keep to certain sub- jects, appropriate to each: in the chancel the Heavenly Host on the upper part of the walls and ceiling, and below, the Incarnation and Redemption, Passion and Resurrection, Ascension, and final triumph of Our Lord; in the nave, the practicable part of religion, and the lessons to be derived from the New Testament. In the beautiful roof at Ely, it was seen how perfectly the late Mr. L’Estrange understood this subject of iconography, though Mr. Gambier Parry painted nearly if not all the subjects. Mr. L’Estrange’s sudden death was an irreparable loss to Christian art in this country. Mr. Parry’s own church, near Gloucester, was another example of an iconographical scheme perfectly worked out and superbly finished. In concluding his paper Mr. Birch condemned the utter absence of regard to the two leading principles laid down in his paper, in most of our modern attempts at church decoration, citing the metropolitan Cathedral of Canterbury and Westminster Abbey as examples, and strongly pro- testing against the Vandalism of simply turning God’s house into an historical statue gallery. He ridiculed the Chaucer window, and implied that we might just as reasonably have a Pickwick window. A discussion ensued, in which Messrs. G. R. Red- grave, H. C. Boyes, S. F. Clarkson, the Chairman, and others, took part, and Mr. Birch having briefly replied to the usual vote of thanks, the proceedings terminated. ag THE HOUSE OF COMMONS ON THE NEW LAW COURTS. Fripay, Marcu 22np.
R. C. BENTINCK rose to ask the Chancellor of
the Exchequer whether thefinally settled designs for the new building of the Courts of Justice were identical in all material particulars with those ex- hibited in the Library of the House in the month of July last, and to move that, in the opinion of the House, the designs prepared by Mr. Street for the new building of the Courts of Justice were unsatis- factory, and ought not to be executed. For many years it had been considered that, ingsmuch as the House of Commons voted money for the erection of large public buildings, they should have some voice as to the selection of the plans. He did not hesitate to affirm that when the eye of the House had been removed from those plans they invariably met with disaster; and such had certainly been the case in this instance. For a year or two the matter had slept, and it was not till the Session before last that his right hon. friend the member for East Sustex called attention to the plans, when the First Com- missioner stated that the foundations were being proceeded with, but gave no hint as to what archi-
