FOOTNOTES:[1]Rivoira I, p. 29, et seq.; also Lasteyrie, p. 272, et seq.[2]Lasteyrie, p. 274, and Fig. 268.[3]Lasteyrie, p. 270.[4]Early ex., Umm es-Zeitun illustrated in Rivoira, I, p. 35, Fig. 51.[5]Rivoira, I, p. 193, Fig. 273.[6]Rivoira, I, p. 57, Fig. 82.[7]Rivoira, I, p. 33, Fig. 46.[8]Rivoira, I, p. 35, Fig. 50.[9]Lasteyrie, p. 465 et seq.[10]Lasteyrie, p. 470.[11]Lasteyrie, p. 472, Fig. 489.[12]Exception to this at Fontevrault, see Reber, p. 358.[13]See Choisy, I, p. 20.[14]See Fig. 4.[15]Other examples, all in Cyprus:1) Peristeroma. 2) Hieroskypos. 3) Saint Barnabas. 4) Larnaca. Enlart, I, p. 210, and p. 286, note 3.[16]Lasteyrie, pp. 473, 474.[17]Lasteyrie, Figs. 491 and 498. Also cathedral of Cahors (original state) Fig. 495.[18]See Lasteyrie, p. 473 and Enlart, I, p. 211, note 1.[19]Lasteyrie, p. 474, Fig. 490.[20]See Lasteyrie, p. 475.[21]Among them, Cahors (Lot) Cath. (consecrated 1119); Souillac (Lot) Ch., Plan, Lasteyrie, Fig. 493; Fontevrault (Maine et Loire) Ab. Ch., Plan, Lasteyrie, Fig. 494; Gensac (Charente) Ch. (wooden roof over dome), Plan, Lasteyrie, Fig. 356. Section Lasteyrie, Fig. 496; Solignac (Haute-Vienne) Ch., (consecrated 1143).[22]See also Gensac, Lasteyrie, Fig. 496, and Solignac, Fig. 264.[23]Also Cahors Cath.,—Périgueux Saint Étienne, etc.[24]See comparison of Périgueux, Saint Front, and Venice, San Marco in Lasteyrie, p. 470, Fig. 486 and p. 471, Fig. 487.[25]Also Peristeroma (Cyprus), Enlart, I, p. 210 and p. 286, note 3; Hieroskypos (Cyprus), Enlart, I, p. 210 and p. 286.[26]The clerestory is omitted in the earlier bays and the crossing has peculiar vaulting described in a later chapter.[27]See Rivoira, I, p. 35, Fig. 51 and Lasteyrie, p. 267, Fig. 259 for examples of this awkward type.[28]See Fig. 7. There is one rectangular bay at the end of the transept aisles and this is covered by an interpenetrating vault at the level of the transverse nave arches.[29]In France, at Champagne (Ardèche), there is a church vaulted in a manner similar to Le Puy, but it is doubtful whether such a method was the original intention of the builders, since each dome is placed over two rectangular nave bays. Enlart, I, pp. 289-291. Plan, Fig. 120. This is, however, a most interesting church for the domes are very segmental in section, are supported upon squinches and have transverse arches through their centers. There is also no clerestory and, in fact, the entire church is of the standard Auvergne type except for the vaults. A reference to the drawings in Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, Vol. V, pl. 27, will show this peculiar system.[30]Among these may be cited: Venice, San Marco, reconstructed 1052 or 1071, dedicated Dec. 8, 1094, but added to and decorated in the twelfth century and later. Canosa, San Sabino (1101). Trani, Santa Maria Immacolata (twelfth century). Santa Maria dei Martiri (near Trani) (also twelfth century). Molfetta, Cathedral (late twelfth and early thirteenth century). Padua, Sant’ Antonio (thirteenth century) Byzantine-Gothic type, numerous Sicilian churches, etc.[31]Plan, in Cummings, II, p. 18, Fig. 248. Interior in Michel, I, p. 542, Fig. 273.[32]Similar churches: Trani, Santa Maria Immacolata, plan in Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 354. Santa Maria dei Martiri, Ch.[33]Rarely the case in Byzantine architecture.[34]Choisy (Choisy, II, p. 201) thus accounts for the vaults, which would then be variants of Perigord domes, but the plan and supports of the pyramids suggest the influence of Le Puy.[35]Examples in France: Grenoble, Saint Laurent (crypt of the seventh or eighth century), Germigny, des-Prés (ninth century), etc. Examples in Italy: Milan, Sant’ Ambrogio (choir of the ninth century), Agliate, etc.[36]For illustrations of Romanesque churches and vaults, the reader is advised to consult Lasteyrie, Dehio and von Bezold, and Enlart.[37]See also Montmajour (Bouches-du-Rhône); Saint Martin-de-Londres (Hérault); Saint Pierre-de-Redes (Hérault); Mollèges (Bouches-du-Rhône), Saint Thomas. See Reber, pp. 337, Figs. 201-202.[38]Also Lérins (Alpes-Maritimes), Saint Honorat (portion).[39]Early examples: Saint Genou, choir (end of eleventh century), Saint Benoît-sur-Loire, choir (begun 1602), Nevers, Saint Étienne.[40]The double-aisled abbey church of Souvigny, which has a clerestory, might be cited as an exception to this statement, but judging from the narrowness of its inner aisles(Fig. 19)it would appear as if its nave had originally been deprived of direct light, and that the present clerestory must have been introduced with or without a vault above it, either before or at the time when the outer aisles were added. If so, it would not prove an exception to the rule. The present nave vault is an addition of a late Gothic period.[41]As in Saint Sernin at Toulouse.[42]Reber, p. 341, Fig. 205a, and Lasteyrie, p. 413, Fig. 431.[43]Reber, p. 342, Fig. 260a. See also, Abbaye de Fontfroide, Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, V, pl. 41.[44]Found also in St. Paul-Trois-Châteaux, Lasteyrie, p. 412, Fig. 429.[45]See pp. 13, 14.[46]Exs., Issoire (Puy-de-Dôme), Saint Paul, see Enlart, I, p. 269, Fig. 102, or Choisy II, p. 209. Toulouse (Haute-Garonne), Saint Sernin, see Choisy, II, p. 212. Culhat (Puy-de-Dôme), Ch. Lasteyrie, p. 250, Fig. 241. Parthenay-le-Vieux (Deux-Sèvres), Notre Dame, ill. in Choisy, I, p. 205, etc.[47]Enlart, I, p. 267, Fig. 100 and Lasteyrie, p. 413, Fig. 430.The clerestory at Vaison is hardly worthy of the name, for its windows are cut entirelyabovethe imposts of the vault, which is of pointed section, and therefore does not acquire thickness so rapidly as to render the windows too deep to admit a reasonable amount of light. The construction of such a clerestory consists merely in taking advantage of the pointed form of vaulting without presenting structural advances. Its windows are necessarily small and deep set and the system is not a satisfactory solution of the lighting problem.[48]Revoil, II, pl. XVIII.[49]Semicircular vaults were sometimes used, however. Example, Saint Paul-Trois Châteaux (Drome), Cath. (first half of the twelfth century), Lasteyrie, p. 412, Fig. 429, etc.[50]Choisy, II, p. 206, Fig. 14.[51]Enlart, I, p. 268, Fig. 101.[52]Choisy, II, p. 205, Fig. 13.[53]Lasteyrie, p. 250, Fig. 241.[54]See statement to that effect in Rivoira, II, p. 106.[55]See Dehio and von Bezold, p. 260.[56]Ruprich-Robert, p. 8, Fig. 45, and Reber, Fig. 235.[57]Lasteyrie, p. 455, Fig. 473.[58]Lasteyrie, p. 456, Fig. 474, also Saint Jouin-de-Marnes (Deux-Sèvres), Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, II, pl. 32, and Nouaille (Vienne), Ch., Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, II, pl. 37.[59]For example, the aisle vaults seldom carry the tile of the roofs outside of Provence and Auvergne.[60]This arrangement is general in the school and may be understood by referring to the illustration of Melle, Saint Pierre, Lasteyrie, p. 455, Fig. 473. A number of churches which are exceptions to this rule have already been noted under Provence (see pp. 21, 22).[61]See Lasteyrie, p. 454, Fig. 471.[62]The three western bays of the church are early twelfth century and have transverse arches.[63]Rivoira (Rivoira, I, p. 97) says that such arches were used beneath groined vaults as early as the eighth century in the palace of Theodoric at Ravenna, and gives as tenth century examples (p. 176) the aisles of Sant’ Eustorgio at Milan and the nave and aisles of S.S. Felice e Fortunato, at Vicenza, and as examples of the early eleventh century, the nave and aisles of San Babila, also at Milan.[64]It is a question whether the transverse arches actually carried much or any of the weight of the vault. (See discussion of this point as regards crypts in Porter, Construction of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, pp. 17-18.) They did, however, strengthen the church by tying together the piers and walls besides saving centering as above stated.[65]Lasteyrie, p. 455, Fig. 472.[66]The influence of the Poitou system was quite extensive, however, as is shown by the little church of Saint Loup-de-Naud (Seine-et-Marne) (eleventh and twelfth centuries), Choisy, II, p. 207, Fig. 15.[67]See Choisy, II, p. 210. The great objection to this is that they are not found in the neighboring provinces, in which much the same reason for having them must have existed.[68]See Lasteyrie, pp. 388-391, for account of the latter.[69]Rivoira, II, p. 283, Fig. 727.[70]Michel I, p. 444, Fig. 208.[71]Enlart I, p. 255, Fig. 94.[72]Lasteyrie, p. 330, Fig. 354.[73]Rivoira, II, p. 47, Fig. 410.[74]Other examples showing extent of the method are, Barletta cathedral in Italy, and Rochester Cathedral (twelfth century) in England, while Rouen and Meaux cathedrals furnish Gothic instances. See also Enlart, I, p. 257, note 1.[75]It is also worthy of note as showing the architectural influence of Lombardy and the Rhenish provinces upon Auvergne, that Chatel-Montagne has the alternate system of supports, a Lombard-Rhenish-Norman characteristic rarely found outside of these schools.[76]This would also explain the elevation and vaulting of the aisles of Jumièges-Abbey church, which are unlike those of the other churches of Normandy and yet not truly Lombard in type. See p. 43.[77]It is also characteristic of the churches of Normandy, Bourgogne and the Rhenish provinces, all more or less strongly Lombard.[78]An exception to this is to be seen in the church of Champagne (Ardèche), see note 29.[79]See section of Saint Saturnin (Puy-de-Dôme), Lasteyrie, p. 437, Fig. 454.[80]Clermont-Ferrand (Puy-de-Dôme), Notre Dame-du-Port, Choisy, II, p. 230, Fig. 30.[81]Example, Limoges (Haute-Vienne), Saint Martial, Lasteyrie, p. 251, Fig. 242.[82]See also Issoire (Puy-de-Dôme), Saint Austremoine (early twelfth century), Michel, I, p. 461, Fig. 218. Saint Nectaire (Puy-de-Dôme) (eleventh century).[83]Partly because the half tunnel vault in this part of the church required a strong and continuous impost.[84]Already seen in Poitou.[85]See discussion of this form of crossing on p. 106[86]Saint Sernin served as a model for the Spanish church of Santiago-de-Compostella (eleventh and twelfth centuries), which shows the extended influence of Auvergne.[87]Other examples are: Chatel-Montagne (Allier), Ch., Chateauneuf (Saône-et-Loire), Ch. Choisy, II, p. 245, Limoges (Haute-Vienne), Saint Martial, (destroyed, see Enlart, I, p. 256, note 5), without windows according to Lasteyrie (see Lasteyrie, p. 251, Fig. 242), Tours (Indre-et-Loire), Saint Martin (probable system).[88]Illustrated in Baum, p. 154.[89]See also Chatel-Montagne (Allier), Ch., Lasteyrie, p. 330, Fig. 354.[90]Lasteyrie, p. 338, Fig. 360.[91]The church of Fontgombault (Indre) (Baum, p. 265) is a similar church, but of later date (consecrated 1141), which might be classed as belonging to the “Loire school.”[92]See Lasteyrie, p. 424.[93]Reber, p. 351.[94]Rivoira, II, p. 106.[95]Rivoira, II, p. 106, Fig. 490.[96]The plan as given in Guadet, p. 265, Fig. 1127, shows groined vaults in both aisles, and the portion of the church remaining would make it seem probable that it originally had groined aisles in one story, but the matter is of little importance here.[97]Lasteyrie is of the opinion that these walls were raised to make it possible to place straight wooden beams across the church above the vaults (see Lasteyrie, p. 340, and also Choisy, II, p. 162, Fig. C.), but even if this were one reason, they also materially aided by their downward pressure, in offsetting the outward thrust.[98]Pointed nave arcade arches were used as early as the eleventh century in Bourgogne in such churches as Farges and Saint Vincent-des-Prés (Saône-et-Loire); see Lasteyrie, p. 428.[99]These lie along the line between Bourgogne and Auvergne, and the influence of the latter school may account for the preference shown in them for round headed arches.[100]See Enlart, I, p. 275.[101]Azy (Aisne), Chapel. Jouaignes (Aisne), Chapel. See Enlart, I, p. 445, note 1.[102]Enlart, I, p. 270, Fig. 103, and Porter, I, p. 278.[103]A few examples are found, among them: Mont Saint Vincent (Saône-et-Loire) Ch. (eleventh century), see Enlart, I, p. 272, and Lasteyrie, p. 248; Palognieu (Loire) Ch. (twelfth century), Enlart, I, p. 272, and Michel, I, p. 475; see also Enlart, I, p. 272, for other examples.[104]Choisy, II, p. 198.[105]“See also Saintes (Charente-Inférieure) Saint Eutrope (Crypt of the twelfth century restored in the thirteenth), Enlart, I, p. 294, Fig. 120 bis; Poitiers, Saint Hilaire (aisles added in the nave), Choisy, II, p. 199, Fig. 9.[106]See p. 5.[107]See p. 21.[108]This was also the original method of vaulting in the aisles of the wooden roofed basilica church of Saint Front at Périgueux (cir. 988-991), according to Rivoira, II, p. 113.[109]Enlart, I, p. 271, Fig. 104, and Michel, I, p. 475, Fig. 236.[110]Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 258.[111]Lasteyrie, p. 249, Fig. 239.[112]See Lasteyrie, p. 248, and note 3.[113]Section in Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 529.[114]Borrmann and Neuwirth, II, p. 163.[115]Enlart, I, p. 239.[116]According to Reber (p. 367), but according to Rivoira (Vol. II, p. 117) they were originally wooden roofed.[117]Lasteyrie, p. 261, Fig. 251.[118]Common to many transitional vaulting systems. See Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, pp. 12-14.[119]Viollet-le-Duc, IV, p. 26.[120]This can be seen by a glance at the transverse arches as shown in Fig. 17.[121]See Lasteyrie, p. 427. Other examples are: Pontaubert (Yonne) Ch., Enlart, I, p. 277, Figs. 109-110; Gourdon (Saône-et-Loire) Ch., Lasteyrie, p. 255, Fig. 246; Toulon-sur-Arroux (Saône-et-Loire) Ch. Bragny-en-Charollais (Saône-et-Loire) Ch.[122]The side aisles of La Trinité are shut off from the choir and covered with tunnel vaults, a method which is sometimes found in this school. See Ruprich-Robert, I, p. 61.[123]Bond, p. 293.[124]See Lasteyrie, p. 540.[125]See Enlart, I, p. 445, note 2.[126]Choisy, II, p. 206, Fig. 14.[127]See Choisy, II, pp. 220-222.[128]See Rivoira, II, p. 122.[129]Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 414.[130]See Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 415.[131]The abbey church of Laach (begun in 1093 but work neglected somewhat until its resumption in 1112) is an exception, having been planned from the ground for vaulting. This is not of domed-up type, but seems to have been inspired directly by that of Vézelay. See Rivoira, II, pp. 330-331 and Fig. 781.[132]See Laach, Abbey Ch. south aisle in Rivoira, II, p. 328, Fig. 777.[133]Mainz, Speyer, etc.[134]See Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults.[135]Alternate piers, eaves-galleries, etc.[136]See also Cologne, Saint Maurice (before 1144) Lasteyrie, p. 518; Brauveiller; Guebviller; Rosheim; Schlestadt; Saint Die. See Enlart, I, p. 279, note 2.[137]Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, pp. 20-21.[138]See aisles of Bernay (Eure), Abbey Ch., Ruprich-Robert, I, p. 61.[139]Although this arrangement would seem to reflect Lombard influence, the form of the triforia and of the vaults is much more like those of Auvergne.[140]Illustrated in Bond, p. 293.[141]Illustrated in Bond, p. 293.[142]See also the aisles of Bernay choir in Ruprich-Robert, I, p. 61.[143]In St. Étienne at least. Gloucester cathedral may or may not have been vaulted before the transformation of its interior from Romanesque to Perpendicular Gothic.[144]See Fig. 63.[145]See p. 101, 102.[146]Ruprich-Robert, pl. LXXXVII.
FOOTNOTES:
[1]Rivoira I, p. 29, et seq.; also Lasteyrie, p. 272, et seq.
[1]Rivoira I, p. 29, et seq.; also Lasteyrie, p. 272, et seq.
[2]Lasteyrie, p. 274, and Fig. 268.
[2]Lasteyrie, p. 274, and Fig. 268.
[3]Lasteyrie, p. 270.
[3]Lasteyrie, p. 270.
[4]Early ex., Umm es-Zeitun illustrated in Rivoira, I, p. 35, Fig. 51.
[4]Early ex., Umm es-Zeitun illustrated in Rivoira, I, p. 35, Fig. 51.
[5]Rivoira, I, p. 193, Fig. 273.
[5]Rivoira, I, p. 193, Fig. 273.
[6]Rivoira, I, p. 57, Fig. 82.
[6]Rivoira, I, p. 57, Fig. 82.
[7]Rivoira, I, p. 33, Fig. 46.
[7]Rivoira, I, p. 33, Fig. 46.
[8]Rivoira, I, p. 35, Fig. 50.
[8]Rivoira, I, p. 35, Fig. 50.
[9]Lasteyrie, p. 465 et seq.
[9]Lasteyrie, p. 465 et seq.
[10]Lasteyrie, p. 470.
[10]Lasteyrie, p. 470.
[11]Lasteyrie, p. 472, Fig. 489.
[11]Lasteyrie, p. 472, Fig. 489.
[12]Exception to this at Fontevrault, see Reber, p. 358.
[12]Exception to this at Fontevrault, see Reber, p. 358.
[13]See Choisy, I, p. 20.
[13]See Choisy, I, p. 20.
[14]See Fig. 4.
[14]See Fig. 4.
[15]Other examples, all in Cyprus:1) Peristeroma. 2) Hieroskypos. 3) Saint Barnabas. 4) Larnaca. Enlart, I, p. 210, and p. 286, note 3.
[15]Other examples, all in Cyprus:
1) Peristeroma. 2) Hieroskypos. 3) Saint Barnabas. 4) Larnaca. Enlart, I, p. 210, and p. 286, note 3.
[16]Lasteyrie, pp. 473, 474.
[16]Lasteyrie, pp. 473, 474.
[17]Lasteyrie, Figs. 491 and 498. Also cathedral of Cahors (original state) Fig. 495.
[17]Lasteyrie, Figs. 491 and 498. Also cathedral of Cahors (original state) Fig. 495.
[18]See Lasteyrie, p. 473 and Enlart, I, p. 211, note 1.
[18]See Lasteyrie, p. 473 and Enlart, I, p. 211, note 1.
[19]Lasteyrie, p. 474, Fig. 490.
[19]Lasteyrie, p. 474, Fig. 490.
[20]See Lasteyrie, p. 475.
[20]See Lasteyrie, p. 475.
[21]Among them, Cahors (Lot) Cath. (consecrated 1119); Souillac (Lot) Ch., Plan, Lasteyrie, Fig. 493; Fontevrault (Maine et Loire) Ab. Ch., Plan, Lasteyrie, Fig. 494; Gensac (Charente) Ch. (wooden roof over dome), Plan, Lasteyrie, Fig. 356. Section Lasteyrie, Fig. 496; Solignac (Haute-Vienne) Ch., (consecrated 1143).
[21]Among them, Cahors (Lot) Cath. (consecrated 1119); Souillac (Lot) Ch., Plan, Lasteyrie, Fig. 493; Fontevrault (Maine et Loire) Ab. Ch., Plan, Lasteyrie, Fig. 494; Gensac (Charente) Ch. (wooden roof over dome), Plan, Lasteyrie, Fig. 356. Section Lasteyrie, Fig. 496; Solignac (Haute-Vienne) Ch., (consecrated 1143).
[22]See also Gensac, Lasteyrie, Fig. 496, and Solignac, Fig. 264.
[22]See also Gensac, Lasteyrie, Fig. 496, and Solignac, Fig. 264.
[23]Also Cahors Cath.,—Périgueux Saint Étienne, etc.
[23]Also Cahors Cath.,—Périgueux Saint Étienne, etc.
[24]See comparison of Périgueux, Saint Front, and Venice, San Marco in Lasteyrie, p. 470, Fig. 486 and p. 471, Fig. 487.
[24]See comparison of Périgueux, Saint Front, and Venice, San Marco in Lasteyrie, p. 470, Fig. 486 and p. 471, Fig. 487.
[25]Also Peristeroma (Cyprus), Enlart, I, p. 210 and p. 286, note 3; Hieroskypos (Cyprus), Enlart, I, p. 210 and p. 286.
[25]Also Peristeroma (Cyprus), Enlart, I, p. 210 and p. 286, note 3; Hieroskypos (Cyprus), Enlart, I, p. 210 and p. 286.
[26]The clerestory is omitted in the earlier bays and the crossing has peculiar vaulting described in a later chapter.
[26]The clerestory is omitted in the earlier bays and the crossing has peculiar vaulting described in a later chapter.
[27]See Rivoira, I, p. 35, Fig. 51 and Lasteyrie, p. 267, Fig. 259 for examples of this awkward type.
[27]See Rivoira, I, p. 35, Fig. 51 and Lasteyrie, p. 267, Fig. 259 for examples of this awkward type.
[28]See Fig. 7. There is one rectangular bay at the end of the transept aisles and this is covered by an interpenetrating vault at the level of the transverse nave arches.
[28]See Fig. 7. There is one rectangular bay at the end of the transept aisles and this is covered by an interpenetrating vault at the level of the transverse nave arches.
[29]In France, at Champagne (Ardèche), there is a church vaulted in a manner similar to Le Puy, but it is doubtful whether such a method was the original intention of the builders, since each dome is placed over two rectangular nave bays. Enlart, I, pp. 289-291. Plan, Fig. 120. This is, however, a most interesting church for the domes are very segmental in section, are supported upon squinches and have transverse arches through their centers. There is also no clerestory and, in fact, the entire church is of the standard Auvergne type except for the vaults. A reference to the drawings in Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, Vol. V, pl. 27, will show this peculiar system.
[29]In France, at Champagne (Ardèche), there is a church vaulted in a manner similar to Le Puy, but it is doubtful whether such a method was the original intention of the builders, since each dome is placed over two rectangular nave bays. Enlart, I, pp. 289-291. Plan, Fig. 120. This is, however, a most interesting church for the domes are very segmental in section, are supported upon squinches and have transverse arches through their centers. There is also no clerestory and, in fact, the entire church is of the standard Auvergne type except for the vaults. A reference to the drawings in Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, Vol. V, pl. 27, will show this peculiar system.
[30]Among these may be cited: Venice, San Marco, reconstructed 1052 or 1071, dedicated Dec. 8, 1094, but added to and decorated in the twelfth century and later. Canosa, San Sabino (1101). Trani, Santa Maria Immacolata (twelfth century). Santa Maria dei Martiri (near Trani) (also twelfth century). Molfetta, Cathedral (late twelfth and early thirteenth century). Padua, Sant’ Antonio (thirteenth century) Byzantine-Gothic type, numerous Sicilian churches, etc.
[30]Among these may be cited: Venice, San Marco, reconstructed 1052 or 1071, dedicated Dec. 8, 1094, but added to and decorated in the twelfth century and later. Canosa, San Sabino (1101). Trani, Santa Maria Immacolata (twelfth century). Santa Maria dei Martiri (near Trani) (also twelfth century). Molfetta, Cathedral (late twelfth and early thirteenth century). Padua, Sant’ Antonio (thirteenth century) Byzantine-Gothic type, numerous Sicilian churches, etc.
[31]Plan, in Cummings, II, p. 18, Fig. 248. Interior in Michel, I, p. 542, Fig. 273.
[31]Plan, in Cummings, II, p. 18, Fig. 248. Interior in Michel, I, p. 542, Fig. 273.
[32]Similar churches: Trani, Santa Maria Immacolata, plan in Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 354. Santa Maria dei Martiri, Ch.
[32]Similar churches: Trani, Santa Maria Immacolata, plan in Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 354. Santa Maria dei Martiri, Ch.
[33]Rarely the case in Byzantine architecture.
[33]Rarely the case in Byzantine architecture.
[34]Choisy (Choisy, II, p. 201) thus accounts for the vaults, which would then be variants of Perigord domes, but the plan and supports of the pyramids suggest the influence of Le Puy.
[34]Choisy (Choisy, II, p. 201) thus accounts for the vaults, which would then be variants of Perigord domes, but the plan and supports of the pyramids suggest the influence of Le Puy.
[35]Examples in France: Grenoble, Saint Laurent (crypt of the seventh or eighth century), Germigny, des-Prés (ninth century), etc. Examples in Italy: Milan, Sant’ Ambrogio (choir of the ninth century), Agliate, etc.
[35]Examples in France: Grenoble, Saint Laurent (crypt of the seventh or eighth century), Germigny, des-Prés (ninth century), etc. Examples in Italy: Milan, Sant’ Ambrogio (choir of the ninth century), Agliate, etc.
[36]For illustrations of Romanesque churches and vaults, the reader is advised to consult Lasteyrie, Dehio and von Bezold, and Enlart.
[36]For illustrations of Romanesque churches and vaults, the reader is advised to consult Lasteyrie, Dehio and von Bezold, and Enlart.
[37]See also Montmajour (Bouches-du-Rhône); Saint Martin-de-Londres (Hérault); Saint Pierre-de-Redes (Hérault); Mollèges (Bouches-du-Rhône), Saint Thomas. See Reber, pp. 337, Figs. 201-202.
[37]See also Montmajour (Bouches-du-Rhône); Saint Martin-de-Londres (Hérault); Saint Pierre-de-Redes (Hérault); Mollèges (Bouches-du-Rhône), Saint Thomas. See Reber, pp. 337, Figs. 201-202.
[38]Also Lérins (Alpes-Maritimes), Saint Honorat (portion).
[38]Also Lérins (Alpes-Maritimes), Saint Honorat (portion).
[39]Early examples: Saint Genou, choir (end of eleventh century), Saint Benoît-sur-Loire, choir (begun 1602), Nevers, Saint Étienne.
[39]Early examples: Saint Genou, choir (end of eleventh century), Saint Benoît-sur-Loire, choir (begun 1602), Nevers, Saint Étienne.
[40]The double-aisled abbey church of Souvigny, which has a clerestory, might be cited as an exception to this statement, but judging from the narrowness of its inner aisles(Fig. 19)it would appear as if its nave had originally been deprived of direct light, and that the present clerestory must have been introduced with or without a vault above it, either before or at the time when the outer aisles were added. If so, it would not prove an exception to the rule. The present nave vault is an addition of a late Gothic period.
[40]The double-aisled abbey church of Souvigny, which has a clerestory, might be cited as an exception to this statement, but judging from the narrowness of its inner aisles(Fig. 19)it would appear as if its nave had originally been deprived of direct light, and that the present clerestory must have been introduced with or without a vault above it, either before or at the time when the outer aisles were added. If so, it would not prove an exception to the rule. The present nave vault is an addition of a late Gothic period.
[41]As in Saint Sernin at Toulouse.
[41]As in Saint Sernin at Toulouse.
[42]Reber, p. 341, Fig. 205a, and Lasteyrie, p. 413, Fig. 431.
[42]Reber, p. 341, Fig. 205a, and Lasteyrie, p. 413, Fig. 431.
[43]Reber, p. 342, Fig. 260a. See also, Abbaye de Fontfroide, Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, V, pl. 41.
[43]Reber, p. 342, Fig. 260a. See also, Abbaye de Fontfroide, Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, V, pl. 41.
[44]Found also in St. Paul-Trois-Châteaux, Lasteyrie, p. 412, Fig. 429.
[44]Found also in St. Paul-Trois-Châteaux, Lasteyrie, p. 412, Fig. 429.
[45]See pp. 13, 14.
[45]See pp. 13, 14.
[46]Exs., Issoire (Puy-de-Dôme), Saint Paul, see Enlart, I, p. 269, Fig. 102, or Choisy II, p. 209. Toulouse (Haute-Garonne), Saint Sernin, see Choisy, II, p. 212. Culhat (Puy-de-Dôme), Ch. Lasteyrie, p. 250, Fig. 241. Parthenay-le-Vieux (Deux-Sèvres), Notre Dame, ill. in Choisy, I, p. 205, etc.
[46]Exs., Issoire (Puy-de-Dôme), Saint Paul, see Enlart, I, p. 269, Fig. 102, or Choisy II, p. 209. Toulouse (Haute-Garonne), Saint Sernin, see Choisy, II, p. 212. Culhat (Puy-de-Dôme), Ch. Lasteyrie, p. 250, Fig. 241. Parthenay-le-Vieux (Deux-Sèvres), Notre Dame, ill. in Choisy, I, p. 205, etc.
[47]Enlart, I, p. 267, Fig. 100 and Lasteyrie, p. 413, Fig. 430.The clerestory at Vaison is hardly worthy of the name, for its windows are cut entirelyabovethe imposts of the vault, which is of pointed section, and therefore does not acquire thickness so rapidly as to render the windows too deep to admit a reasonable amount of light. The construction of such a clerestory consists merely in taking advantage of the pointed form of vaulting without presenting structural advances. Its windows are necessarily small and deep set and the system is not a satisfactory solution of the lighting problem.
[47]Enlart, I, p. 267, Fig. 100 and Lasteyrie, p. 413, Fig. 430.
The clerestory at Vaison is hardly worthy of the name, for its windows are cut entirelyabovethe imposts of the vault, which is of pointed section, and therefore does not acquire thickness so rapidly as to render the windows too deep to admit a reasonable amount of light. The construction of such a clerestory consists merely in taking advantage of the pointed form of vaulting without presenting structural advances. Its windows are necessarily small and deep set and the system is not a satisfactory solution of the lighting problem.
[48]Revoil, II, pl. XVIII.
[48]Revoil, II, pl. XVIII.
[49]Semicircular vaults were sometimes used, however. Example, Saint Paul-Trois Châteaux (Drome), Cath. (first half of the twelfth century), Lasteyrie, p. 412, Fig. 429, etc.
[49]Semicircular vaults were sometimes used, however. Example, Saint Paul-Trois Châteaux (Drome), Cath. (first half of the twelfth century), Lasteyrie, p. 412, Fig. 429, etc.
[50]Choisy, II, p. 206, Fig. 14.
[50]Choisy, II, p. 206, Fig. 14.
[51]Enlart, I, p. 268, Fig. 101.
[51]Enlart, I, p. 268, Fig. 101.
[52]Choisy, II, p. 205, Fig. 13.
[52]Choisy, II, p. 205, Fig. 13.
[53]Lasteyrie, p. 250, Fig. 241.
[53]Lasteyrie, p. 250, Fig. 241.
[54]See statement to that effect in Rivoira, II, p. 106.
[54]See statement to that effect in Rivoira, II, p. 106.
[55]See Dehio and von Bezold, p. 260.
[55]See Dehio and von Bezold, p. 260.
[56]Ruprich-Robert, p. 8, Fig. 45, and Reber, Fig. 235.
[56]Ruprich-Robert, p. 8, Fig. 45, and Reber, Fig. 235.
[57]Lasteyrie, p. 455, Fig. 473.
[57]Lasteyrie, p. 455, Fig. 473.
[58]Lasteyrie, p. 456, Fig. 474, also Saint Jouin-de-Marnes (Deux-Sèvres), Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, II, pl. 32, and Nouaille (Vienne), Ch., Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, II, pl. 37.
[58]Lasteyrie, p. 456, Fig. 474, also Saint Jouin-de-Marnes (Deux-Sèvres), Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, II, pl. 32, and Nouaille (Vienne), Ch., Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, II, pl. 37.
[59]For example, the aisle vaults seldom carry the tile of the roofs outside of Provence and Auvergne.
[59]For example, the aisle vaults seldom carry the tile of the roofs outside of Provence and Auvergne.
[60]This arrangement is general in the school and may be understood by referring to the illustration of Melle, Saint Pierre, Lasteyrie, p. 455, Fig. 473. A number of churches which are exceptions to this rule have already been noted under Provence (see pp. 21, 22).
[60]This arrangement is general in the school and may be understood by referring to the illustration of Melle, Saint Pierre, Lasteyrie, p. 455, Fig. 473. A number of churches which are exceptions to this rule have already been noted under Provence (see pp. 21, 22).
[61]See Lasteyrie, p. 454, Fig. 471.
[61]See Lasteyrie, p. 454, Fig. 471.
[62]The three western bays of the church are early twelfth century and have transverse arches.
[62]The three western bays of the church are early twelfth century and have transverse arches.
[63]Rivoira (Rivoira, I, p. 97) says that such arches were used beneath groined vaults as early as the eighth century in the palace of Theodoric at Ravenna, and gives as tenth century examples (p. 176) the aisles of Sant’ Eustorgio at Milan and the nave and aisles of S.S. Felice e Fortunato, at Vicenza, and as examples of the early eleventh century, the nave and aisles of San Babila, also at Milan.
[63]Rivoira (Rivoira, I, p. 97) says that such arches were used beneath groined vaults as early as the eighth century in the palace of Theodoric at Ravenna, and gives as tenth century examples (p. 176) the aisles of Sant’ Eustorgio at Milan and the nave and aisles of S.S. Felice e Fortunato, at Vicenza, and as examples of the early eleventh century, the nave and aisles of San Babila, also at Milan.
[64]It is a question whether the transverse arches actually carried much or any of the weight of the vault. (See discussion of this point as regards crypts in Porter, Construction of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, pp. 17-18.) They did, however, strengthen the church by tying together the piers and walls besides saving centering as above stated.
[64]It is a question whether the transverse arches actually carried much or any of the weight of the vault. (See discussion of this point as regards crypts in Porter, Construction of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, pp. 17-18.) They did, however, strengthen the church by tying together the piers and walls besides saving centering as above stated.
[65]Lasteyrie, p. 455, Fig. 472.
[65]Lasteyrie, p. 455, Fig. 472.
[66]The influence of the Poitou system was quite extensive, however, as is shown by the little church of Saint Loup-de-Naud (Seine-et-Marne) (eleventh and twelfth centuries), Choisy, II, p. 207, Fig. 15.
[66]The influence of the Poitou system was quite extensive, however, as is shown by the little church of Saint Loup-de-Naud (Seine-et-Marne) (eleventh and twelfth centuries), Choisy, II, p. 207, Fig. 15.
[67]See Choisy, II, p. 210. The great objection to this is that they are not found in the neighboring provinces, in which much the same reason for having them must have existed.
[67]See Choisy, II, p. 210. The great objection to this is that they are not found in the neighboring provinces, in which much the same reason for having them must have existed.
[68]See Lasteyrie, pp. 388-391, for account of the latter.
[68]See Lasteyrie, pp. 388-391, for account of the latter.
[69]Rivoira, II, p. 283, Fig. 727.
[69]Rivoira, II, p. 283, Fig. 727.
[70]Michel I, p. 444, Fig. 208.
[70]Michel I, p. 444, Fig. 208.
[71]Enlart I, p. 255, Fig. 94.
[71]Enlart I, p. 255, Fig. 94.
[72]Lasteyrie, p. 330, Fig. 354.
[72]Lasteyrie, p. 330, Fig. 354.
[73]Rivoira, II, p. 47, Fig. 410.
[73]Rivoira, II, p. 47, Fig. 410.
[74]Other examples showing extent of the method are, Barletta cathedral in Italy, and Rochester Cathedral (twelfth century) in England, while Rouen and Meaux cathedrals furnish Gothic instances. See also Enlart, I, p. 257, note 1.
[74]Other examples showing extent of the method are, Barletta cathedral in Italy, and Rochester Cathedral (twelfth century) in England, while Rouen and Meaux cathedrals furnish Gothic instances. See also Enlart, I, p. 257, note 1.
[75]It is also worthy of note as showing the architectural influence of Lombardy and the Rhenish provinces upon Auvergne, that Chatel-Montagne has the alternate system of supports, a Lombard-Rhenish-Norman characteristic rarely found outside of these schools.
[75]It is also worthy of note as showing the architectural influence of Lombardy and the Rhenish provinces upon Auvergne, that Chatel-Montagne has the alternate system of supports, a Lombard-Rhenish-Norman characteristic rarely found outside of these schools.
[76]This would also explain the elevation and vaulting of the aisles of Jumièges-Abbey church, which are unlike those of the other churches of Normandy and yet not truly Lombard in type. See p. 43.
[76]This would also explain the elevation and vaulting of the aisles of Jumièges-Abbey church, which are unlike those of the other churches of Normandy and yet not truly Lombard in type. See p. 43.
[77]It is also characteristic of the churches of Normandy, Bourgogne and the Rhenish provinces, all more or less strongly Lombard.
[77]It is also characteristic of the churches of Normandy, Bourgogne and the Rhenish provinces, all more or less strongly Lombard.
[78]An exception to this is to be seen in the church of Champagne (Ardèche), see note 29.
[78]An exception to this is to be seen in the church of Champagne (Ardèche), see note 29.
[79]See section of Saint Saturnin (Puy-de-Dôme), Lasteyrie, p. 437, Fig. 454.
[79]See section of Saint Saturnin (Puy-de-Dôme), Lasteyrie, p. 437, Fig. 454.
[80]Clermont-Ferrand (Puy-de-Dôme), Notre Dame-du-Port, Choisy, II, p. 230, Fig. 30.
[80]Clermont-Ferrand (Puy-de-Dôme), Notre Dame-du-Port, Choisy, II, p. 230, Fig. 30.
[81]Example, Limoges (Haute-Vienne), Saint Martial, Lasteyrie, p. 251, Fig. 242.
[81]Example, Limoges (Haute-Vienne), Saint Martial, Lasteyrie, p. 251, Fig. 242.
[82]See also Issoire (Puy-de-Dôme), Saint Austremoine (early twelfth century), Michel, I, p. 461, Fig. 218. Saint Nectaire (Puy-de-Dôme) (eleventh century).
[82]See also Issoire (Puy-de-Dôme), Saint Austremoine (early twelfth century), Michel, I, p. 461, Fig. 218. Saint Nectaire (Puy-de-Dôme) (eleventh century).
[83]Partly because the half tunnel vault in this part of the church required a strong and continuous impost.
[83]Partly because the half tunnel vault in this part of the church required a strong and continuous impost.
[84]Already seen in Poitou.
[84]Already seen in Poitou.
[85]See discussion of this form of crossing on p. 106
[85]See discussion of this form of crossing on p. 106
[86]Saint Sernin served as a model for the Spanish church of Santiago-de-Compostella (eleventh and twelfth centuries), which shows the extended influence of Auvergne.
[86]Saint Sernin served as a model for the Spanish church of Santiago-de-Compostella (eleventh and twelfth centuries), which shows the extended influence of Auvergne.
[87]Other examples are: Chatel-Montagne (Allier), Ch., Chateauneuf (Saône-et-Loire), Ch. Choisy, II, p. 245, Limoges (Haute-Vienne), Saint Martial, (destroyed, see Enlart, I, p. 256, note 5), without windows according to Lasteyrie (see Lasteyrie, p. 251, Fig. 242), Tours (Indre-et-Loire), Saint Martin (probable system).
[87]Other examples are: Chatel-Montagne (Allier), Ch., Chateauneuf (Saône-et-Loire), Ch. Choisy, II, p. 245, Limoges (Haute-Vienne), Saint Martial, (destroyed, see Enlart, I, p. 256, note 5), without windows according to Lasteyrie (see Lasteyrie, p. 251, Fig. 242), Tours (Indre-et-Loire), Saint Martin (probable system).
[88]Illustrated in Baum, p. 154.
[88]Illustrated in Baum, p. 154.
[89]See also Chatel-Montagne (Allier), Ch., Lasteyrie, p. 330, Fig. 354.
[89]See also Chatel-Montagne (Allier), Ch., Lasteyrie, p. 330, Fig. 354.
[90]Lasteyrie, p. 338, Fig. 360.
[90]Lasteyrie, p. 338, Fig. 360.
[91]The church of Fontgombault (Indre) (Baum, p. 265) is a similar church, but of later date (consecrated 1141), which might be classed as belonging to the “Loire school.”
[91]The church of Fontgombault (Indre) (Baum, p. 265) is a similar church, but of later date (consecrated 1141), which might be classed as belonging to the “Loire school.”
[92]See Lasteyrie, p. 424.
[92]See Lasteyrie, p. 424.
[93]Reber, p. 351.
[93]Reber, p. 351.
[94]Rivoira, II, p. 106.
[94]Rivoira, II, p. 106.
[95]Rivoira, II, p. 106, Fig. 490.
[95]Rivoira, II, p. 106, Fig. 490.
[96]The plan as given in Guadet, p. 265, Fig. 1127, shows groined vaults in both aisles, and the portion of the church remaining would make it seem probable that it originally had groined aisles in one story, but the matter is of little importance here.
[96]The plan as given in Guadet, p. 265, Fig. 1127, shows groined vaults in both aisles, and the portion of the church remaining would make it seem probable that it originally had groined aisles in one story, but the matter is of little importance here.
[97]Lasteyrie is of the opinion that these walls were raised to make it possible to place straight wooden beams across the church above the vaults (see Lasteyrie, p. 340, and also Choisy, II, p. 162, Fig. C.), but even if this were one reason, they also materially aided by their downward pressure, in offsetting the outward thrust.
[97]Lasteyrie is of the opinion that these walls were raised to make it possible to place straight wooden beams across the church above the vaults (see Lasteyrie, p. 340, and also Choisy, II, p. 162, Fig. C.), but even if this were one reason, they also materially aided by their downward pressure, in offsetting the outward thrust.
[98]Pointed nave arcade arches were used as early as the eleventh century in Bourgogne in such churches as Farges and Saint Vincent-des-Prés (Saône-et-Loire); see Lasteyrie, p. 428.
[98]Pointed nave arcade arches were used as early as the eleventh century in Bourgogne in such churches as Farges and Saint Vincent-des-Prés (Saône-et-Loire); see Lasteyrie, p. 428.
[99]These lie along the line between Bourgogne and Auvergne, and the influence of the latter school may account for the preference shown in them for round headed arches.
[99]These lie along the line between Bourgogne and Auvergne, and the influence of the latter school may account for the preference shown in them for round headed arches.
[100]See Enlart, I, p. 275.
[100]See Enlart, I, p. 275.
[101]Azy (Aisne), Chapel. Jouaignes (Aisne), Chapel. See Enlart, I, p. 445, note 1.
[101]Azy (Aisne), Chapel. Jouaignes (Aisne), Chapel. See Enlart, I, p. 445, note 1.
[102]Enlart, I, p. 270, Fig. 103, and Porter, I, p. 278.
[102]Enlart, I, p. 270, Fig. 103, and Porter, I, p. 278.
[103]A few examples are found, among them: Mont Saint Vincent (Saône-et-Loire) Ch. (eleventh century), see Enlart, I, p. 272, and Lasteyrie, p. 248; Palognieu (Loire) Ch. (twelfth century), Enlart, I, p. 272, and Michel, I, p. 475; see also Enlart, I, p. 272, for other examples.
[103]A few examples are found, among them: Mont Saint Vincent (Saône-et-Loire) Ch. (eleventh century), see Enlart, I, p. 272, and Lasteyrie, p. 248; Palognieu (Loire) Ch. (twelfth century), Enlart, I, p. 272, and Michel, I, p. 475; see also Enlart, I, p. 272, for other examples.
[104]Choisy, II, p. 198.
[104]Choisy, II, p. 198.
[105]“See also Saintes (Charente-Inférieure) Saint Eutrope (Crypt of the twelfth century restored in the thirteenth), Enlart, I, p. 294, Fig. 120 bis; Poitiers, Saint Hilaire (aisles added in the nave), Choisy, II, p. 199, Fig. 9.
[105]“See also Saintes (Charente-Inférieure) Saint Eutrope (Crypt of the twelfth century restored in the thirteenth), Enlart, I, p. 294, Fig. 120 bis; Poitiers, Saint Hilaire (aisles added in the nave), Choisy, II, p. 199, Fig. 9.
[106]See p. 5.
[106]See p. 5.
[107]See p. 21.
[107]See p. 21.
[108]This was also the original method of vaulting in the aisles of the wooden roofed basilica church of Saint Front at Périgueux (cir. 988-991), according to Rivoira, II, p. 113.
[108]This was also the original method of vaulting in the aisles of the wooden roofed basilica church of Saint Front at Périgueux (cir. 988-991), according to Rivoira, II, p. 113.
[109]Enlart, I, p. 271, Fig. 104, and Michel, I, p. 475, Fig. 236.
[109]Enlart, I, p. 271, Fig. 104, and Michel, I, p. 475, Fig. 236.
[110]Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 258.
[110]Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 258.
[111]Lasteyrie, p. 249, Fig. 239.
[111]Lasteyrie, p. 249, Fig. 239.
[112]See Lasteyrie, p. 248, and note 3.
[112]See Lasteyrie, p. 248, and note 3.
[113]Section in Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 529.
[113]Section in Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 529.
[114]Borrmann and Neuwirth, II, p. 163.
[114]Borrmann and Neuwirth, II, p. 163.
[115]Enlart, I, p. 239.
[115]Enlart, I, p. 239.
[116]According to Reber (p. 367), but according to Rivoira (Vol. II, p. 117) they were originally wooden roofed.
[116]According to Reber (p. 367), but according to Rivoira (Vol. II, p. 117) they were originally wooden roofed.
[117]Lasteyrie, p. 261, Fig. 251.
[117]Lasteyrie, p. 261, Fig. 251.
[118]Common to many transitional vaulting systems. See Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, pp. 12-14.
[118]Common to many transitional vaulting systems. See Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, pp. 12-14.
[119]Viollet-le-Duc, IV, p. 26.
[119]Viollet-le-Duc, IV, p. 26.
[120]This can be seen by a glance at the transverse arches as shown in Fig. 17.
[120]This can be seen by a glance at the transverse arches as shown in Fig. 17.
[121]See Lasteyrie, p. 427. Other examples are: Pontaubert (Yonne) Ch., Enlart, I, p. 277, Figs. 109-110; Gourdon (Saône-et-Loire) Ch., Lasteyrie, p. 255, Fig. 246; Toulon-sur-Arroux (Saône-et-Loire) Ch. Bragny-en-Charollais (Saône-et-Loire) Ch.
[121]See Lasteyrie, p. 427. Other examples are: Pontaubert (Yonne) Ch., Enlart, I, p. 277, Figs. 109-110; Gourdon (Saône-et-Loire) Ch., Lasteyrie, p. 255, Fig. 246; Toulon-sur-Arroux (Saône-et-Loire) Ch. Bragny-en-Charollais (Saône-et-Loire) Ch.
[122]The side aisles of La Trinité are shut off from the choir and covered with tunnel vaults, a method which is sometimes found in this school. See Ruprich-Robert, I, p. 61.
[122]The side aisles of La Trinité are shut off from the choir and covered with tunnel vaults, a method which is sometimes found in this school. See Ruprich-Robert, I, p. 61.
[123]Bond, p. 293.
[123]Bond, p. 293.
[124]See Lasteyrie, p. 540.
[124]See Lasteyrie, p. 540.
[125]See Enlart, I, p. 445, note 2.
[125]See Enlart, I, p. 445, note 2.
[126]Choisy, II, p. 206, Fig. 14.
[126]Choisy, II, p. 206, Fig. 14.
[127]See Choisy, II, pp. 220-222.
[127]See Choisy, II, pp. 220-222.
[128]See Rivoira, II, p. 122.
[128]See Rivoira, II, p. 122.
[129]Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 414.
[129]Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 414.
[130]See Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 415.
[130]See Dehio and von Bezold, I, p. 415.
[131]The abbey church of Laach (begun in 1093 but work neglected somewhat until its resumption in 1112) is an exception, having been planned from the ground for vaulting. This is not of domed-up type, but seems to have been inspired directly by that of Vézelay. See Rivoira, II, pp. 330-331 and Fig. 781.
[131]The abbey church of Laach (begun in 1093 but work neglected somewhat until its resumption in 1112) is an exception, having been planned from the ground for vaulting. This is not of domed-up type, but seems to have been inspired directly by that of Vézelay. See Rivoira, II, pp. 330-331 and Fig. 781.
[132]See Laach, Abbey Ch. south aisle in Rivoira, II, p. 328, Fig. 777.
[132]See Laach, Abbey Ch. south aisle in Rivoira, II, p. 328, Fig. 777.
[133]Mainz, Speyer, etc.
[133]Mainz, Speyer, etc.
[134]See Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults.
[134]See Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults.
[135]Alternate piers, eaves-galleries, etc.
[135]Alternate piers, eaves-galleries, etc.
[136]See also Cologne, Saint Maurice (before 1144) Lasteyrie, p. 518; Brauveiller; Guebviller; Rosheim; Schlestadt; Saint Die. See Enlart, I, p. 279, note 2.
[136]See also Cologne, Saint Maurice (before 1144) Lasteyrie, p. 518; Brauveiller; Guebviller; Rosheim; Schlestadt; Saint Die. See Enlart, I, p. 279, note 2.
[137]Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, pp. 20-21.
[137]Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, pp. 20-21.
[138]See aisles of Bernay (Eure), Abbey Ch., Ruprich-Robert, I, p. 61.
[138]See aisles of Bernay (Eure), Abbey Ch., Ruprich-Robert, I, p. 61.
[139]Although this arrangement would seem to reflect Lombard influence, the form of the triforia and of the vaults is much more like those of Auvergne.
[139]Although this arrangement would seem to reflect Lombard influence, the form of the triforia and of the vaults is much more like those of Auvergne.
[140]Illustrated in Bond, p. 293.
[140]Illustrated in Bond, p. 293.
[141]Illustrated in Bond, p. 293.
[141]Illustrated in Bond, p. 293.
[142]See also the aisles of Bernay choir in Ruprich-Robert, I, p. 61.
[142]See also the aisles of Bernay choir in Ruprich-Robert, I, p. 61.
[143]In St. Étienne at least. Gloucester cathedral may or may not have been vaulted before the transformation of its interior from Romanesque to Perpendicular Gothic.
[143]In St. Étienne at least. Gloucester cathedral may or may not have been vaulted before the transformation of its interior from Romanesque to Perpendicular Gothic.
[144]See Fig. 63.
[144]See Fig. 63.
[145]See p. 101, 102.
[145]See p. 101, 102.
[146]Ruprich-Robert, pl. LXXXVII.
[146]Ruprich-Robert, pl. LXXXVII.