108561 N84 LONDON, SATURDAY, JANUARY 2, 1875. CONTENTS. - N° 53. the Committee agree only in negatives. They are -The Serres Scandal, 5-New Year Folk-Lore, 6-Last New Year's Day-The New Year Odes of the Laureates-Chaucer QUERIES: -Episcopal Biography, 8 - Tortosa - Printers' Devils-Schomberg's Dukedom - "The Clan Maclean"- REPLIES:-Oscar, 10-Catullus: "Hoc ut dixit," &c. - or it would never have been yielded, with scarcely Too much personal matter has been introduced "Sanadon," 11-Tied=Bound-Osbern, Bishop of Exeter, with a classic building. Now, without going so 12-John Bunyan, a Gipsy-Family Records, &c., Engraved on Coins-The Grand Jury-Tunstead, Norfolk, 13-William de Redvers-Talent and Tact-" Incompleteness"-"Thou goest thine," &c. - Fictitious Marriages-"Put up with it" -Newby-Auna-Standard Weights and Measures-Iron in Oak-Count Von der Mark-Inscription on Gold Ring-The De la Vache Family, 14- William Forsyth, 1791-The Salic Law-"Virgin"-Clock Striking-The Early English Con- traction for Jesus, 15-"God save the mark," &c. -Double Christian Names-English Translations - "Sinople," 16- Dante and his Translators-Movable Figures in Books- Marriages in Lent-The Marriage of the Adriatic and the After five years of deliberation, and the expen- diture of large sums upon drawings and experi- mental models, the Committee who have been entrusted with the "completion" of St. Paul's have been compelled by the almost unanimous verdict of public opinion to repudiate their own work, and to postpone indefinitely all further far as to defend the selection of Mr. Burges, I contend that this argument is beside the question, for the simple reason that the Committee had none but Gothic architects to choose from. The old classic school was so completely dead before the Gothic revival, that at the present time all our architects, who are architects, belong, either by education or by long practice, to the Gothic school. So completely is this the case, that the few classic or quasi-classic buildings of merit which have been erected of late years have all been the work of men who would be classed as Gothic architects. It was surely more important that the Committee should obtain a good architect than a classic Mr. Burges's published designs, although they have certainly hastened, have not been the made up of men of little knowledge and no pre-church itself, that position became untenable. vious experience of such work, but whose local Before the work can be resumed with any chance When we are going to alter an ancient building, * At once symptoms and consequences of this have been the continual changes, and the constant doing and during the late controversy it has been not a little obscured. First, there has been the strange doctrine, very generally received, if not openly expressed, that St. Paul's being a classic and postReformation building, is not of the same historical importance, or entitled to the same respect, as are the Gothic and pre-Reformation cathedrals. But the truth is exactly the other way; for deplorable as would be the loss of any one of our mediæval cathedrals, it would be less than that of St. Paul's. They are many; it stands alone. architect were at work in the designing of St. Paul's. Wren's intentions are in a manner historical only so far as he carried them out; and even if we had perfect data to work upon, which we have not in any one case, to set up now as his what he was prevented from setting up in his own time would be a kind of historical forgery. If we want to know Wren's own ideal of a cathedral, we can find it in the model just named; but in the existing building we have, or rather had before the alterations, what is much more important, namely, Wren's formulation, if I may use the word, of the then prevailing opinions on the subject. The mediæval plan is just as characteristic of St. Paul's as the dome is. The history of a building in use is not confined to the period of its erection, but is progressive; and if not deliberately falsified, as unfortunately has been lately very much the fashion, is itself the record of its own life. This it is which gives such a living interest to our old churches; and if we value it, as most of us at least pretend to do, it behoves us not only to preserve but to continue it. If work has now to be done, let it not be what we fancy might, could, would, should, or ought to have been done two, three, four or five centuries ago, but that which will best serve our purpose and satisfy our taste and sense of propriety now at this present time. In short, we must treat our buildings as our mediæval ancestors did theirs, but with this one important difference. They, except in rare instances, entirely disregarded past history; we, who have learned its value, ought to be most careful to preserve it. Thus, in the case of St. Paul's, or any building not needing structural repairs, we may alter what is there just so far as is necessary to fit it to our own uses; we may add what is not there to any extent we please, so long as what we introduce is good of itself and appropriate to its position; but we must not take anything away if it can possibly be retained. Next there has been a cloud of misunderstandings about the intentions of the architect: not the least of these has been the extraordinary assumption that where any record, even by hearsay, exists of the architect ever having had any idea on any matter which differs from what is found in the existing building, then such record, and not the executed work, is to be taken as representing the architect's matured judgment on that matter. One would have thought that the existence of any such sketch, model, or report, so far from justifying any alteration in the fabric to agree with it, is a proof that the idea embodied in it was carefully considered and deliberately rejected by Wren. Yet, on the strength of an old story, which, if true, proves no more than that he thought the organ too large, we have heard the destruction of his screen defended as being in accordance with his own wishes; and quite recently, on the authority of an old sketch, a less important, but perfectly unnecessary, alteration has been made in the steps at the west end.* Nay, further, because Wren is known to have searched for some blocks of marble, which he failed to obtain, it has even been argued that the just-abandoned scheme for marbling the interior was in accordance with the intentions of the architect. Though how it was discovered that he "intended" to inspire himself from "the best artists and architects of the sixteenth century," as Mr. Burges was directed to do, is more than I know. And, lastly, because the extant model, commonly called Wren's first design, shows a smaller dome as well as the large one, Mr. Fergusson proposes to carry out Wren's intentions by pulling down the choir which he built and building a second dome on its site. It is great pity Wren his will is is not allowed to speak for himself. Surely what he did is, so far as it is itself concerned, tolerably safe evidence as to his intentions. a But other influences besides the intention of the * It has been said that these steps were not Wren's; but the only authority for the statement I have heard of is the existence of the above-mentioned sketch. I do not know whether the door under the steps at the side is original, but if it is, it is quite enough to account for the change in the plan. By an oversight, the steps are drawn as they now are in the printed plan showing the arrangement of the church proposed by Mr. Somers Clarke and myself. (2.) Now let us look at the matter from the practical point of view. Wren was, as has been said, compelled by the public opinion of his time to adopt a mediæval plan. That he did so against nothing to the point. Having accepted it, there is every cause for believing that he endeavoured to interpret it in the best possible manner. The most notable feature of this plan is the choir entirely fenced off from the rest of the church, and fitted up for services intended to be confined to it, thus differing altogether from the parish chancel, which is intended to be used with the rest of the church, and is separated from it only by open screen-work. The most important alterations hitherto carried out at St. Paul's have had their origin in an attempt to substitute the latter arrangement for the former. By the abolition of the organ-screen, and the removal of all the old fittings, the eastern limb of the building has been made into a sort of enormous chancel, and the whole plan made to resemble as nearly as possible that of an overgrown village church. This has been done, no doubt, with the very best intentions; and, if the desired result had been obtained, and the usefulness and convenience of the building much increased thereby, that might have justified the great liberties which have been taken with the original plan. But the church as altered is as awkward and ill-contrived as could well be, and, in fact, only suitable for those Roman Catholic services where it is not thought important that the congregation should hear or see what is going on, they being guided to their own share of it by the ringing of a bell. The chancel, professedly reserved for the clergy and choir, is vastly too large for the ordinary numbers, and its long narrow form does not give facilities for the convenient and effective massing and control of the very large bodies of singers and instrumentalists which have occasionally to be accommodated. This chancel only communicates with the people's part of the church through a comparatively narrow arch, and that is partly blocked up by the organ, the position of which, between the choir and the people, is almost the worst which could have been chosen. The altar too is remote and insignificant, being visible to but a small proportion of the congregation, and over 150 feet away even from the nearest of them. And all those who are in the chancel, numbering perhaps nearly a thousand, are behind the pulpit, and except it may be a few at the west end, are beyond the range of any preacher. Now, methinks, it was scarcely worth while to destroy Wren's screen and choir to produce this state of things. The old arrangement was good of its kind, and at least had history on its side:-but it is urged that it only made use of one, and that not the larger part of the building, and that the remainder ought not to be wasted. True; but it was surely possible to use one division without destroying the other. The impossibility of satisfactorily uniting them ought to have been seen at the beginning, and now that at great cost its futility has been demonstrated by actual experiment, the attempt ought to be abandoned at once and for ever. Let Wren's choir be replaced in its old state as near as is now possible, let his screen and the organ over it be re-erected, and then let us do our best to turn to account the other division of the church. If the dome-area, nave, and transepts are to be used for public worship, they must be furnished for public worship. They must have their own altar, pulpit, choir accommodation and organ. Into the details of this arrangement I shall not now enter, having already discussed them at length in a pamphlet which may be read by any one who * What shall be done with St. Paul's? Remarks and wishes to follow the subject up. But I will just point out that this furnishing of the part of the church, which Wren left empty, besides meeting our wants best, is a matter of addition only, and therefore, as we saw just now when looking at the matter historically, cannot possibly do any harm, and may add very greatly to the value of the building. Although, for myself, I regard the precedent of mediæval church arrangement as practically valuable only so far as it may suggest to us the best ways of meeting the requirements of our own time, yet as there are many who attach a much greater importance to it, it may be well to show that such authority as precedent gives is entirely in favour of the treatment I am advocating. We are so accustomed to seeing our cathedral naves empty and unfurnished that we have quite overlooked the fact that they were not always so. The old churches with enclosed choirs were never without altars for public services in the naves. Sometimes there were side altars under the roodlofts, but often much greater importance was given to the nave altar, and it stood centrally against its own reredos, somewhat westward of the choir screen. Unfortunately we have but one example of this reredos remaining, which is at St. Alban's ;† but there is documentary evidence of its existence at Canterbury and Durham, and good cause may be shown for believing that it also existed in other important churches, as York, Winchester, and Westminster. At Durham we also know how the singers were accommodated, and that there was a special organ for the service at this altar. We are not to suppose that these altars were removed upon any polemical grounds:-the plain fact is that the naves were stripped of their furniture because they had ceased to be used. And now that we again want to use them, our proper course is to furnish them again, and not to hack and hew Suggestions as to the Alterations made and proposed to be made. London: J. Hodges, Bedford Street, 1874. + This reredos at St. Alban's is generally confounded with the choir screen; and I do not think the former existence of a real choir screen east of it has ever been pointed out. Three facts combine to prove it: First, the existing screen is so adorned on its east side that it is evident there were never stalls against it. Secondly, the original floor level, just east of the screen, is some inches lower than it is found to be still farther east, in what really was the choir. Thirdly, the stalls having extended through the tower space, there would have been too many of them if they had reached westward so far as the present screen. the western screen at St. Alban's, whilst elsewhere it is always the eastern which remains, to the fact that the choir of St. Alban's was demolished, and a parish church formed in its place; but in the other churches the eastern screen was wanted as a boundary to the choir, the use of which continued. I am glad to say an altar once more stands in the nave of St. Alban's; and a temporary one, similarly placed, is said to have been set up at York recently. May it become permanent ! We owe the retention of |