form. This lingering love for the old forms was, doubtless, owing to the necessary employment of Saxon workmen, who naturally still clung to their national style; but in large buildings, where foreign architects and workmen would be employed, the new style would be exhibited in its purity.
Canterbury, St. Albans, Rochester, and Ely were built in the reign of the Conqueror, but of these Canterbury is the most interesting, as it so fully illustrates the history of architecture in this kingdom. There was a Saxon cathedral on the spot at the time of the Conquest, but having been destroyed by fire, it was rebuilt on an enlarged scale by the Norman archbishop, Lanfranc, in 1070; but, within about twenty years, this church was pulled down by his successor, as not being large enough, and another erected on a more magnificent scale. This was again partially destroyed by fire, and was again rebuilt in 1175, and the following years. The history of the fire, and the subsequent rebuilding, has been minutely given by Gervase, a monk of Canterbury, who was an eye-witness of the whole; and his account is peculiarly valuable, as it enables us to compare the style of the remains of the old building with that erected under his own eyes; and we are by this means enabled to point out the differences between the early and the late Norman buildings. His narrative is clear and interesting, and his description of the present building wonderfully correct.
St. Albans' Abbey was built in the reign of the Conqueror, and in the construction of the building the materials of the Roman city of Veralam were freely used; so that a great part of it is built of Roman bricks. The following cathedrals also were built in the Norman period, and still retain portions of the original work:—Lincoln, Rochester, Ely, Worcester, Gloucester, Durham, Norwich, Winchester, Peterborough, and Oxford. Castles were erected in various parts of the kingdom, to restrain the rebellious people, who could ill brook the tyranny of of the Conqueror.
1-Norwich Castle.
Of these the Tower of London is one of the most important, and the chapel in the "White Tower" is one of the best examples (dated 1081) we possess of early Norman, though, from its situation in a Military building, it has less of ornament than might otherwise have been expected. Of Norman castles, the chief parts which remain are the keeps or principal towers, and these have in general one prevailing character. They are square masses, not having much height in proportion to their breadth, and merely relieved at the angles by slightly projecting turrets.
2.— Hedingham Castle, Essex.
The windows are in general comparatively small, and the walls exceedingly thick—sometimes, as at Carlisle, reaching to sixteen feet. Norwich (1), from its immense size, is an excellent sample of this kind of tower, and Castle Hedingham (2) is another.
Of the houses of this period many yet exist, though not in an entire state; and of these some fine specimens are found in Lincoln,[1] where they are said to have belonged to the Jews, but whose riches at that time only led to their destruction.
Many rich and magnificent examples of monastic buildings of this date occur in various parts of the kingdom.
Norman architecture may be divided into three periods—viz., Early, Middle, or fully-developed, and Transition; the first extending from the Conquest, or a few years previous, to the end of the reign of Henry I., 1135; the second from the commencement of Stephen to nearly the end of Henry XI., 1180; after which date the Transition commences, and the style gradually loses its characteristics until it merges in the succeeding, or Early English style of the thirteenth century. Of the first period, the chapel in the Tower of London has been already mentioned as an example; the second includes most of our rich Norman buildings; and of the third, the Temple Church is a good specimen.
The great characteristics of Norman architecture are solidity and strength. Walls of an enormous thickness, huge masses of masonry for piers, windows comparatively small, and a profusion of peculiar ornament, seem to be essential to the full development of the style; and there is
- ↑ See Hudson Turner's "Domestic Archittcture."
