K Aprit 26, 1872. THE BUILDING NEWS. 333 — so much good in the restored reredos of Westminster that it was to be hoped it would have some influence on the series of somewhat wild erections which were being scattered among our cathedrals throughout the land. The screen at Durham was a work apparently composed entirely, except where the altar and} probably the retable were fixed, of niches, with their buttresses and canopies, the same design being, apparently, repeated throughout the whole length. The absence of figures must be very detrimental to the design. The author next came to the wonderful series of altar screens—reaching up nearly, or quite, to the groining of the roof—which occurred at Winchester, S. Albans, S. Mary Overy, and Christ Church, Hants. Christ Church was par- tially an exception, but the others have lost the whole of their sculpture, and no more melancholy monument of superstition could be conceived than one of these noble piles standing meaningless, with every niche a void, which formerly proclaimed to every one who entered the ever-open portal the his- tery of his salvation. However, dumb as they now were, these reredoses taught no mean architectural lessons. Elaborate—perhaps with the sculpture as elaborate as a work of architecture could be— they nevertheless were perfectly quiet in the com- position. The canopies and figures ranged them- selves in perfect order, and the perpendicular lines were perfectly distinct. Those at Winchester and S. Albans had clearly-marked centres and wings, the latter being prevented from becoming mono- tonous by the centre of the three lines of canopies being kept slightly back; or the composition might be said to consist of four lines of canopies and niches, separating three unequal bays, of which those at the side contain the doors and slightly recessed statues, and the middle bay the niches grouped around the plain crosses, on which once, doubtless, overlaying as it were the whole design, appeared a crucifix. Beneath this stood the even richer range of small statues which, at S. Albans at any rate, formed a sort of retable, and marked in a special way the position of the altar itself. The S. Mary Overy (Southwark) example was in general design less subtle, but it was difficult, in the absence of the sculpture, exactly to appreciate the wide central niche. At South Kensington Museum was a large example of a Spanish reredos, of less substantial character than those before described, but studded all over with colour and sculpture, and re- presenting the history of S. George. Immediately above the table occurred panels with the history of the Passion of Our Lord, now arranged in wrong order, and having a blank in the middle. Those who had visited Flanders and Germany would not fail to remember the very striking triptyches with which the altars were constantly adorned in those countries. While they were essentially sculptu- resque rather than architectural, the subjects were duly subordinated to the general design, although, when looked at with care, they would be found to possess surpassing vigour and energy of expression. The sculptors appeared to have been representing that which their faith enabled them to realise with all the vividness of actual spectators. They were troubled with no archeological details. The Scribes and Pharisees, the judges and magistrates, the sol- aliers, and, above all, the villains, were the very men by whom they were daily surrounded. and they have thereby produced realisations as striking and as true as all realism in art was false. There were two large triptyches at the South Kensington Museum, and many of the smaller form, which were, however, designed on much the same principles as those in- tended for private use. Before leaving the subject of Medixval examples of reredoses, the author drew one or two conclusions. Firstly, that though not otherwise than numerous of their kind, they failed to give us absolute precedent for the high altar of an ordinary parish church, which happened to be the problem we were most frequently called on to solve. Cathedral reredoses, of which we were not without examples, probably, at present, did not fall much in our way; while side altars, to which class most of our examples had to be referred, scarcely met all the difficulties of the more ordinary moderncase. Only one chief reredos of a parish church occurred in the illustrations—viz., that of Eastbourne Church. It consisted at present of only three detached pieces, a centre niche with low ogee arch and square head, and two doors at the ends very similar in outline leading to an eastern vestry built under the large window. This in itself was so peculiar, and the example so imperfect, that but little could be learnt from it. reserving, therefore, the parish church for future consideration, we might pick up to assist therein two general principles, and these were that reredoses were works of architecture combined with sculpture or painting, and not works of architecture alone. Excepting, perhaps, the arcades of the nine altars
at Durham, which at least admit of painting, all
other specimens were absolutely imperfect without
the painting or sculpture, as the case may be. And
next we had that which, viewed in the light of mo-
dern designs, was a most startling proposition—that
gables are not necessary: nay, should not be intro-
duced into reredoses. They were used in common
with buttresses, pinnacles, crockets, pendents, and
finials to make up the canopies of niches, but by
themselves, bounding the design or giving outline to
any of the more important divisions, they did not
occur. The compositions were square and horizontal.
Since the Renaissance there has been a continuous
decline in the art treatment of reredoses. The altar-
piece of Fiesole, supposed to have been executed about
1490, from the subordination of the architecture to
the sculpture, or rather the happy combination of
the two together, appears to be entitled to a very
high rank as a work of art, although one might
perhaps wish that the side figures were not quite so
large in proportion to the central group. In later
examples the action of the sculpture becomes more
dramatic, and the architecture more coarse, and the
relationship of the one to the other is neglected,
until the wonderful combinations of clouds, angels,
and cherubims, which we meet with abroad, were
reached, and eventually the, if possible, more pitiful
playing with skylights and reflected lights, and the
real dolls in real silk and lace, of which it behoves
us not here to speak more particularly. In this
country things have since the Reformation taken a
different direction. There may occasionally have been
others who, like the sculptors of the wooden reredos
from Deane Church, Northamptonshire, have striven
to give something of Christian symbolism to the sur-
roundings of the altar. Ordinarily, however, where
allis not positive neglect, we are treated to coarse
columns, entablature and pediment, with, in very
favoured instances, that most gloomy of decorations
the oil painting of the period. It is seldom of ap-
propriate subject, and generally is the gift of some
nobleman who brought it from Italy, and then,
perhaps because he did not know what to do with
it, gave it to the church. The matter is not infre-
quently helped out with such symbols as a mitre, the
arms of the see or other heraldic device, the whole
being crowned by the lion and unicorn. In conti-
nental churches the tabernacle appears always to
form a prominent feature in the centre of the reredos
in modern Gothic examples. This is to be regretted,
as it gives great temptation to introduce a spire,
and completely spoils the retable or space im-
mediately over the altar, in which the interest
of the ancient reredoses seems to centre. Nearly
all questions connected with reredoses present
themselves in different aspects to the architect
who is instructed to insert this feature in an ancient
church from those in which they appear when a new
building is in contemplation. In churches of cathe-
dral scale we are not without precedents, if only
they had been more closely studied, if not absolutely
imitated. In the ordinary parish church, however,
we have seen that we have little or no guidance, nay
more, considerable difficulties are thrown in our way.
We want the recognised number of steps, and that
which we consider the proper height of altar and the
shelf or super-altar, and then we find ourselves very
frequently nearly up to the sill of the east window,
with no plain surface to treat; so up go our three
gabled sentry-boxes, built up in front of the window
(which, if we are at all conscientious, we don’t
mutilate but only hide), we fillin the gables with as
much symbolism as we are allowed, and console our-
selves that we have put up the most conspicuous object
in the church. Butthen, unfortunately, that great
east window, which is certainly original, won't let
our reredos be seen; it pours all the light in from be-
hind, and so our detail is lost; and, perhaps, we
becin to have some feeling that it is not quite all that
the original architect intended. Where we have to
deal with a modern church, founded on the old type,
our ease is worse, for the places where the side
lichts of the chancel ought to come are occupied with
vestries, organ-chambers, and the like, and we have
nearly all the light from the east behind the reredos.
The architect who is able to fix for himself the level
of the sills and the size of his east window, and can
thus secure exactly the space which he requires for
a retable over the altar, is in a fortunate position.
If he breaks the space with architectural features
it requires great care to combine them with the
painting or sculpture, and if he sacrifices the ree-
tangular system of composition, he takes on him-
self the responsibility which has, unfortunately, been
but too readily assumed in most modern work of de-
parting from the ancient tradition. It isa large
question, too large to enter on now at length,
whether an architect is justified in omitting the e
window altogether in cases where it can be obtained.
Light which falls in every one’s eyes is, as a ques-
tion of lighting, undesirable, and it is necessarily bad for the altar and its surroundings to be seen against an overpowering light. At the same time, the omission of an east window is strong-minded, and would probably, in a majority of cases, be so un- popular as to be impossible to carry into execution. Mr. Ridge said he knew of but one old example, the beautiful little Early Church of S. Contest, near Caen. He acknowledged to feeling sympathy with those who have ignored one very universal tradition by putting a centre pier in the east wall. It takes off much of the awkwardness of east lighting, and when the windows are high it leaves little to be desired. §. Columba’s is an instance of this ar- rangement. Under any circumstances side chancel lights are absolutely unnecessary, and must be obtained from clerestories if the sides are necessarily blocked up by buildings, and the more east window there is the more side lights are necessary. A big west window is not to be depended on for the display of a reredos; the light comes too straight to give shadow. It must be remem- bered that sculpture and painting sufficiently small not to destroy the scale of the building have to be rendered visible, or at least distinguishable at a great distance. Colour is probably necessary as an assist- ance in this respect. In large examples it is neces- sary for the altar and its reredos to stand out a con- siderable distance from the east wall. according to the precedent of nearly all our cathedrals, in order that it may not be overpowered by the great height of wall above it. In the same way, except in the smallest cases, the altar stands on the cord of an apse. As to the question of the subjects specially fitted for in- troduction into reredoses, Mr. Ridge stated his feeling to be that first of all the great fact which the sacra- ment of the altar symbolises—namely, the sacrifice of the death of Christ, is primarily to be set forth, and in connection with it, if possible, the Resurrection and Ascension as usually expressed by the figure of our Saviour in majesty. This scheme may, where cir- cumstances permit, be indefinitely enlarged by the in- troduction to any extent of the incidents of thesacred history, the whole being borne witness to, as at S. Mary Overy, by the angelic host and the four evangelistic beasts. The placing a large central figure in imme- diate proximity to the altar is liable to suggest to most minds aclaim on its part to be the object of worship. It should, therefore, be avoided. The use of placing a representation of the institution of the Lord’s Supper as the chief subject of a reredos is also strongly to be reprehended as a substitution of the sacrament itself in the place of the thing signified. A short discussion ensued, in which Messrs. Doll- mann, Rhodes, Stannus, Clarkson, and Boyes took part, and the usual vote of thanks having been given to the reader of the paper, the meeting terminated. ————»—__—_ MODERN ARCHITECTURE.* is competitions for the Foreign Office, the Na- tional Gallery, and the Courts of Law, have caused a great expenditure of money and of time, without apparently one good practical result. As exhibitions of wild studentship, they made a great impression on the public mind, and doubt and dis- content thus took the place of confidence and hope. Everything about them was delusive and absurd. The judges were ignorant (of course), or even worse, by dilettante inexperience. The competing draughtsmen were certainly shrewd speculators in this judicial incapacity and want of skill; and the wondering public were ignorant, inexperienced, and inartistic altogether. Thus we have had our times of tribulation. And now to have got well rid of all our vain expectations from this Law Courts’ compe- tition, is, perhaps, the greatest satisfaction that the present state of the business can afford. Let us, then, consider the design that has been accepted by the authorities, and of which the architectural and illustrated newspapers give us very detailed plans and views. The frontage towards the Strand is some 500ft. long, which is about the length of S. Paul’s, and of others of our larger cathedrals. In the design of the elevation there was, consequently, no difficulty on the score of dimensions. The rooms are not of any special importance, and there is no apparen reason why the front should not have been treated The roof, how- ever, is broken into fourteen distinct compartments,
in a simple and dignified manner.
- From the Quarterly Review, April, 1872.
