By Author [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Title [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Language
all Classics books content using ISYS

Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ]

Look for this book on Amazon

We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month
fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: Mediaeval Church Vaulting
Author: Ward, Clarence
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
Copyright Status: Not copyrighted in the United States. If you live elsewhere check the laws of your country before downloading this ebook. See comments about copyright issues at end of book.

*** Start of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "Mediaeval Church Vaulting" ***

This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.

                       MEDIAEVAL CHURCH VAULTING


                       MEDIAEVAL CHURCH VAULTING


                             CLARENCE WARD


                      PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS
                       LONDON: HUMPHREY MILFORD
                        OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

                          Copyright, 1915, by
                      PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS

                       Published November, 1915

                               To A. M.



The student of Mediaeval architecture, especially of the Gothic era,
finds perhaps its strongest appeal in the peculiar structural character
which it possesses. Greek architecture, even at its best, strongly
reflects a preceding art of building in wood. Roman architecture, when
it does not closely follow its Greek prototype, often depends upon a
mere revetment or surface treatment for its effects, and the Renaissance
builders in general followed this lead. Only in the Middle Ages was the
structure truly allowed to furnish its own decoration, and the
decoration itself made structural. And by far the greatest single
problem of construction was that of vaulting. A knowledge of vaulting
is, therefore, essential for the thorough student of Mediaeval
architecture. On the vaulting system depend in a large measure the shape
of piers and buttresses, the size and form of windows and arches, and a
host of decorative mouldings and details which form the complex whole of
Mediaeval construction.

Inheriting from Early Christian times a church of well-established plan,
the builders of the eleventh to the sixteenth centuries set themselves
the problem of substituting for the wooden roof of this Early Christian
Basilica a covering of masonry which would resist the conflagrations
that were among the most destructive forces of the Middle Ages. It is
with these efforts that the following pages are to deal. It has been my
purpose to classify and to discuss in a systematic manner what has been
gathered from authorities here and abroad and from a study of the
monuments themselves.

Especial emphasis has been laid upon the connection between the vaulting
and lighting problem. Some vaults, such as those of six-part and
five-part form, are shown to have probably derived this form from the
clerestory, while other vaults of nave, apse, and ambulatory are proved
to be very closely related to the position of the windows beneath them.
In the discussion of Romanesque vaulting, a number of churches are
suggested as forming a “School of the Loire,” in addition to the schools
which are generally listed. Suggestions are made regarding the form of
the centering employed in Perigord, and there is a somewhat extended
account of the purpose served by the triforia of Auvergne. In dealing
with ribbed vaults the use of caryatid figures for the support of the
ribs, the non-essential character of the wall rib, the origin and
development of six-part vaulting, and the types of chevet vaults are
subjects especially treated. But these and other novelties are all
subordinate to the real purpose of the work, which is to give in a
compact and systematic form a thorough résumé of all the principal forms
of vaulting employed in the middle ages. For the sake of this systematic
treatment the different portions of the church, nave and aisles, choir
and transepts, apse and ambulatory have been taken up in separate
chapters, though in each case there has been an effort to keep as
closely as possible to the chronological sequence of the monuments. This
matter of chronology has, in fact, led to an effort to date as
accurately as possible all the buildings mentioned. For this purpose the
author has consulted many authorities and in the case of doubtful
monuments has arrived at the dates given only after an analysis of the
various claims advanced.

The illustrations are in large measure from photographs taken by the
author or purchased in Europe. The following, however, are from
publications, Figs. 31, 34 and 39 from Gurlitt, _Baukunst in Frankreich_
(J. Bleyl Nacht, Dresden); Fig. 12 from Baum, _Romanische Baukunst in
Frankreich_ (Julius Hoffmann, Stuttgart); Fig. 38, from Bond, _Gothic
Architecture in England_ (Batsford, London), and Fig. 63 from Moore,
_The Mediaeval Church Architecture of England_ (Macmillan, New York).
The drawings are largely based upon plates in Dehio and Von Bezold,
_Kirchliche Baukunst des Abendlandes_ (Cotta, Stuttgart), supplemented
by the author’s own notes. Of course, only a limited number of
illustrations were possible and for this reason less well known
examples, and those not previously published, were in most cases chosen.
To make it possible for the reader to supplement the illustrative
material references are made in the footnotes to publications in which
reproductions of many of the churches mentioned may be found. The books
chosen for reference have, where possible, been those easily accessible
to the student.

The principal literary sources for the work are listed in the
bibliography, though many works not mentioned were also consulted. Among
the sources which proved most useful are the works of Choisy, Enlart,
Lasteyrie, Rivoira, Porter and Moore, all of which are especially
recommended to the student of vaulting. For personal assistance in the
preparation and subsequent reading of the work, the author is much
indebted to Professor Howard Crosby Butler and Professor Frank Jewett
Mather, Jr., of Princeton University, but especially to Professor Allan
Marquand of Princeton, under whose inspiration and encouragement the
work was undertaken.


New Brunswick, New Jersey.

October, 1915.


    CHAPTER I. NAVE AND AISLE VAULTS               1


    CHAPTER III. APSE VAULTS                      124

    CHAPTER IV. AMBULATORY VAULTS                 158



During the Romanesque period, or roughly speaking, from the beginning of
the eleventh to the middle of the twelfth century, three chief forms of
vaulting were employed over the naves and aisles of church edifices. The
first of these was the dome, the second the tunnel vault, and the third,
groined vaulting. With the development of the ribbed vault, all three
gave way to this new method of construction, and the Gothic era was


The dome was employed in two rather distinct ways according to the form
of pendentives used for its support. Thus a number of churches continue
the tradition of the spherical pendentive, while in others some form of
squinch or trumpet arch is found. Both methods are of early origin,
dating back, in fact, to the Roman era preceding the reign of Justinian
(483-565) and consequently earlier than the Byzantine architecture of
which they are so conspicuous a feature. Rivoira[1] has shown the
existence of numerous spherical pendentives of the second century A.D.
or even earlier, and Lasteyrie[2] has added to these a small cupola at
Beurey-Beauguay (Côte-d’Or) in France dating from the second or third
century. But even if this method were known at an early date it was not
until the Byzantine era that it obtained a wide-spread and extensive
usage. During the sixth century it became the principal method of
vaulting throughout the Roman Empire, and, as such, had a considerable
influence upon Carolingian architecture of the ninth and tenth
centuries. This is true even in France, for traces of pendentives were
found in 1870 during a restoration of the church of
Germigny-des-Prés,[3] a fact of particular interest because it is in
France that the principal Romanesque examples of this method are to be


As for the squinch, it may possibly be of Persian origin, but the
earliest examples thus far known in Persia are to be found in the
palaces of Firouz Abad and Sarvistan, which probably date from the
Sassanian period between A.D. 226 and 641, and are therefore of later
date than the Roman examples of the first and second centuries to be
found in the Palace of the Caesars at Rome and the Villa Adriana at
Tivoli (cir. A.D. 138). Whatever its origin, the squinch in its various
forms, simple cross lintel,[4] cross arch, trumpet arch, niche head,
etc., was employed prior to and during the Byzantine period along with
the spherical pendentive. In fact a trumpet arch of domed up character
is found in the Baptistery of the cathedral of Naples[5] which dates
from the fifth century, while the niche head or half dome type, very
commonly employed in Romanesque architecture, has a sixth century
prototype in the church of San Vitale at Ravenna,[6] as well as many
earlier examples such as those in the Domus Augustana (cir. A.D. 83),[7]
or the Thermae of Caracalla (212-216)[8] at Rome. Other types of
squinches occasionally appear but they are generally referable to one of
the above mentioned forms.


By far the most important group of Romanesque churches employing the
dome on spherical pendentives, is situated in that portion of France
extending around the city of Périgueux, and constitutes what is known as
the architectural school of Perigord. Since Périgueux was a trading post
on the route from Venice to the west, it must have felt a good deal of
Byzantine influence, and it is the general theory that to this influence
is due the almost universal employment of the dome on pendentives in the
churches of this school. While this may well be the case, it is
nevertheless to be remarked that the dome as a method of vaulting seems
to have been the only importation, its construction in Perigord
differing in almost every particular from that of the Byzantine period.
This might even seem to indicate that the Perigord type of dome was not
imported, but actually indigenous to this part of France, a theory which
has lately been advanced by no less an authority than Lasteyrie.[9] But
in any case, the points of difference in construction between the domes
of Byzantine architecture and those of the school of Perigord are of
more importance in this discussion of vaulting, than is the question of
their origin.


[Illustration: FIG. 1.--PÉRIGUEUX, CATHEDRAL.]

These differences have been so admirably summed up by Lasteyrie[10] that
a translation of his summary with a few additions will perhaps give the
best possible account of them. They are grouped under six chief heads
which may all be studied by using the cathedral of Saint Front at
Périgueux (Figs. 1 and 2) as a model. First, the French pendentives are
borne on pointed instead of semicircular arches; second, the surface of
the pendentive at Saint Front rises from the intrados rather than from
the extrados of the voussoirs; third, the diagonal profile of the French
pendentive is a complex curve[11] instead of a quarter circle; fourth,
the oldest French pendentives have their masonry in horizontal courses
while the Byzantine frequently have their courses more or less normal to
the curve; fifth the springing of the domes of Saint Front is some
distance back from the circle formed by the pendentives, the diameter of
the dome being thus greater than its impost,[12] while in Byzantine
models, the two correspond; and sixth and last, the domes of Saint Front
are slightly pointed and, for that matter, all the French domes are at
least semicircular, while the Byzantine domes are generally of segmental
section. The explanation of all these differences lies in the material
employed, for the domes of Perigord are of stone, those of Byzantine
architecture are of brick or some other light material. The pointed arch
having less thrust than that of semicircular section was better suited
for stone construction, a fact which explains the pointed section of
many French domes whose outward thrusts were thereby greatly reduced.
Moreover, while the light Byzantine material made possible a dome
without centering constructed after the manner of the Egyptian
“voute-par-tranches,”[13] the heavy stone of the French vault made a
centering absolutely necessary, a fact which explains the setting back
of the dome from the curve of the pendentives so that the ledge thus
formed might serve to support the wooden centering employed.[14] It
explains also the horizontal courses since these allowed a greater
amount of the weight of each course to be borne by the one beneath it,
thus reducing the pressure and making possible a centering of
comparative lightness. But these were not the only results of the
employment of stone. Since the domes of Perigord are much heavier than
the Byzantine domes and exert much more outward thrust it was essential
for them to have very firm supports. Perhaps it is with this in view
that the churches of this school are for the greater part without side
aisles, their outer walls with heavy applied and transverse arches
providing suitable support for the domes. Even when aisles exist, they
are merely deep wall arches forming transverse tunnel vaults rising
from the level of the imposts of the transverse arches of the nave and,
with them, furnishing the support for the triangular pendentives. This
is the arrangement in the cathedral of Saint Front at Périgueux (Fig.
1), the only church in France of this particular type.[15]


One advantage in the employment of the dome of stone lay in the fact
that it might be faced on both the exterior and the interior, or covered
directly by tiles without the use of a bonnet of wood and copper, or a
roof of wood and tile, so frequently seen in Byzantine work. It is
doubtful whether the earliest French domes were treated in this way,
however, for indications would seem to point to the original employment
of a wooden roof over the domes of the cathedral of Saint Front.[16]
Nevertheless, these domes have since been restored with an exterior
stone facing (Fig. 2), and a similar treatment is to be seen at Cahors
cathedral, and over

[Illustration: FIG. 2.--PÉRIGUEUX, CATHEDRAL.]

the crossing of Angoulême. In these domes the drum is first built up in
a slightly ramping wall, to offset the outward thrust of the vault, and
the dome itself is crowned by a lantern toward which it has an upward
curve, rendering the exterior steep enough to shed water readily. At
Angoulême the domes of the nave are entirely concealed by a gable roof,
perhaps in the early manner of the school. Still another type of dome
covering appears at Saint Étienne in Périgueux,[17] where the curve of
the dome does not show on the exterior, but where the drum is first
carried up around the haunch, and then surmounted by a flattened conical
roof of tile, which rests directly upon the vault beneath.


It has already been noted that the employment of the dome on pendentives
over square bays led to the construction of churches with a broad nave
without side aisles. Among the earliest of these are the church of Saint
Astier (Dordogne), (founded about 1010 but so mutilated as to show
little of its original construction),[18] and Saint Avit-Sénieur
(Dordogne) (cir. 1117), originally with three domes which were replaced
by domed up Anjou vaults in the thirteenth century.[19] The best of the
earlier examples remaining for critical study are, first, the cathedral
of Saint Pierre at Angoulême, whose western bay was constructed between
1100-1125,--the remaining three being but slightly later--and second,
the church of Saint Étienne at Périgueux, originally with four domes,
two of which were destroyed in the religious wars of the sixteenth
century. Of the two which remain the more recent must be earlier than
1163, and the other would seem from its appearance to be about
contemporary with that of the west bay of Angoulême.[20] These two with
the cathedral of Saint Front (after 1120) furnish three excellent
examples of the school, to which a large number of other churches might
be added as illustrating some minor differences in plan or
elevation.[21] The cathedral of Angoulême (Figs. 3 and 4) is
characteristic of the school. Deep wall, and heavy transverse arches
supply substantial impost for the domes. The piers of the western bay
are of simple rectangular plan like those of Saint Avit-Sénieur and
Saint Étienne at Périgueux, while those to the east are of a later
compound type with transverse arches and wall-arches in two orders
instead of the single order of the earlier bay. Except over the
crossing, where there is a high circular drum forming a lantern, the
domes are not pierced with windows around their base. This is due to the
fact that they are covered on the exterior by a wooden roof.[22] It is
more usual to find four small windows at the base of each dome as in
Périgueux, Saint Front (Fig. 1).[23] The use of stone in the
construction of the domes explains the small number of these windows
compared to that in Byzantine architecture,[24] since the stability of
the vault would be threatened by too many openings. Besides this, the
fact that the churches of Perigord have no aisles, properly speaking,
permitted sufficient light to enter through windows in the side walls.
In fact it seems quite possible that the windows in the domes of the
Perigord churches were used to afford resting places for the frame work
of the centering even more than for light, a fact which would also seem
to be true of the four recesses left in the masonry just above the
cornice of the domes of Angoulême cathedral (Fig. 4).

[Illustration: FIG. 3.--ANGOULÊME, CATHEDRAL.]


In support of this theory it is possible to point out that if long cross
beams were used in building these domes, it would be difficult if not
impossible to remove them after the dome was finished. If, however, as
at Angoulême, small spaces were left in the masonry it would be possible
to tilt a beam bevelled at each end and resting on the ledge of the dome
and thus remove it without cutting. Still another argument in favor of
this theory is the fact that the open spaces to north and south are
above the level of the ledge, which would seem to indicate that they
were planned to receive the end of a cross beam at right angles to, and
above the one running lengthwise. Of course, when windows took the place
of these small recesses the removal of the beam could be made through
them. There remain, however, a number of churches in which there are
neither windows nor recesses, but in most of these the ledge of the dome
is itself wide enough to support a beam which could be removed without
striking the vault surface.

[Illustration: FIG. 4.--ANGOULÊME, CATHEDRAL.]

As for the choirs of the churches of this school, they were occasionally
domed as at Saint Front[25] (Fig. 1), but were more often covered by a
tunnel vault terminating in the half dome of the apse. The eastern
portion of the choir of Saint Front (Fig. 1) and the choir of Angoulême
(Fig. 4) illustrate this latter arrangement.


Although very frequently used over the crossing of Romanesque churches,
the dome on squinches is seldom found over the bays of the nave. There
is in fact no distinct school in which this method is employed and the
examples of its use are widely scattered. The principal one is, perhaps,
the cathedral of Notre Dame at Le Puy (Haute-Loire), which dates from
the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Unlike the domed churches of
Perigord it is of basilical plan with side aisles. The nave is in six
bays with broad arches opening into the aisles and a triforium arcade
above them. Across the nave are transverse arches separating the bays.
The four toward the east are semicircular, the remaining two are pointed
in elevation. These arches rise from imposts nearly or quite as low as
those of the nave arcade, and walls are built upon them to the level of
the string-course above the triforium. Six rectangular bays,--or seven
including the crossing,--of practically square plan are thus formed and
each is covered with a dome. In the western bays,--which are at least a
century later than those at the east end and therefore more advanced in
structure,--a clerestory wall is erected with a single window in its
north and south walls, and openings corresponding to windows from one
bay to the next above the transverse arches, to secure a good
distribution of light (Fig. 5). Across the upper corners of these four
walls and rising from the same level as the window heads, are arches
with half domed triangular niches beneath them, converting the square
into an octagon and furnishing the impost for the domes.[26] These are
octagonal in elevation as well as plan and are laid up in flat panels,
or gores, which meet at the crown (Fig. 6). It is a type of dome
admirably suited to its impost since it presents none of the awkward
appearances of a circular dome on an octagonal base.[27] It is also very
practical from a structural standpoint. Since the gores are flat, the
stone cutting is far less elaborate than in a hemispherical dome, and
the gored dome has the further advantage of great flexibility since it
may be flattened or raised at the crown, placed over a square bay or one
with any number of sides, and made equilateral or with gores of
different widths, all with great facility. Furthermore, when the naves
are of reasonable width, as in most churches with side aisles, the
thrust of the dome is very slight and its downward pressure is not

[Illustration: FIG. 5.--LE PUY, CATHEDRAL.]

[Illustration: FIG. 6.--LE PUY, CATHEDRAL.]

But with all its structural advantages, a system like that at Le Puy was
not a satisfactory solution of nave vaulting. The transverse arches were
necessarily so far below the surface of the dome that the continuity of
the nave as a whole was destroyed, and the appearance was rather that
of a series of lantern towers or crossings juxtaposed than of a single
homogeneous vault.

The side aisles of Le Puy are of less importance than the nave, though
the fact that some of their bays were vaulted, or revaulted, at nearly
every period of mediaeval architecture makes them interesting for a
study of consecutive methods. In the bays to the east the vaults are
groined on stilted, round headed transverse arches in the early
Romanesque manner, while the succeeding bays have pointed transverse
arches with groined vaults closely resembling those of the school of
Bourgogne, and the bays nearest the west end have ribbed vaults, in one
case with the early heavy-torus rib, in another with the light rib of
pointed section of a late Gothic rebuilding.

[Illustration: FIG. 7.--POITIERS, SAINT HILAIRE.]

Although not the basis of a school of Romanesque architecture, the
cathedral of Le Puy was not without its influence. This is especially
apparent in the large church of Saint Hilaire at Poitiers (Figs. 7, and
8), which was constructed with very broad nave and aisles,--both
covered with wooden roofs,--after a disastrous fire of 1018, and
dedicated in 1059. In 1130 the vaulting of this church was undertaken,
the result being a most unusual edifice. As the nave was too broad to be
easily covered by a vault of single span, it was subdivided by lofty and
slender piers and arches into a central portion consisting of square
bays,[28] and narrow rectangular bays forming veritable inner aisles on
either side. These narrow bays were covered with groined vaults directly
above the original clerestory windows which thus continued to light the
newly formed nave. Domes were then placed over the square central bays
as had been done at Le Puy, but instead of the niche-head-squinch and
the practically equilateral octagonal dome, small conical trumpet arches
were employed at Saint Hilaire, and the gores of the dome rising from
these were much narrower than the four remaining panels. This gives the
dome rather the character of a cloistered vault with its corners cut off
than of a dome properly speaking. Since the clerestory is below the
level of the transverse arches upon which the domes of Saint Hilaire are
built, the interior has a loftier and less broken appearance than that
of Notre Dame-du-Puy. But even so the effect is not remarkably pleasing.

The side aisles of Saint Hilaire (Fig. 8) are quite as interesting in
their vaulting as the nave. A single broad aisle on either side, which
apparently opened into the nave through lofty arches rising almost to
the clerestory, and which probably had transverse arches with ramping
walls carrying half gable roofs, was altered when it was determined to
vault the church. In doing this, two arches with a solid wall above were
placed under each of the original arches of the nave arcade, a slender
column built up in the center of each of the original bays, and upon the
pseudo-double side aisles thus formed, compound groined vaults were
constructed in a manner best understood from the photograph (Fig. 8).

Except for those just mentioned there are but few Romanesque
churches,--outside of Italy and Sicily,--in which the nave is covered by
a series of domes.[29] But because of the powerful Byzantine influence,
these latter

[Illustration: FIG. 8.--POITIERS, SAINT HILAIRE.]

countries contain a large number of churches of semi-Byzantine,
semi-Romanesque character, some of which are as late as the thirteenth
century.[30] Most of these are so distinctly Byzantine that they do not
properly fall within the province of this book, in spite of their late
date; but others, like the cathedral of Molfetta,[31] have a vaulting
system quite closely allied to the Romanesque.[32] In this particular
cathedral, a nave of three square bays is covered by three domes, one
on flattened spherical pendentives, the others on niche-head-squinches.
Two of them rise from drums and unlike their Byzantine prototypes, they
are all of stone.[33] Moreover, the side aisles are covered with half
tunnel vaults on full transverse arches, the crown of the vaults
together with the nave walls above them acting as admirable buttresses
for the domes. A system not quite so logical exists in the aisles of the
church of San Sabino at Canosa (1100), where there are full tunnel
vaults which do not serve so adequately as buttresses.


[Illustration: FIG. 9.--LOCHES, SAINT OURS.]

Although not vaulted with domes, the church of Saint Ours at Loches in
France (Indre-et-Loire) (Figs. 9 and 10) has a close connection with
such churches as those of Perigord and Notre Dame-du-Puy. This
collegiate church was probably constructed a little before 1168, and
originally consisted of a nave divided into square bays by transverse
arches of pointed

[Illustration: FIG. 10.--LOCHES, SAINT OURS.]

elevation and side aisles which have now disappeared. Each nave bay is
converted from a square into an octagon by flat triangular pendentives
on very small trumpet arches. But instead of domes, the builders of
Saint Ours substituted a hollow octagonal pyramid of stone over each
bay. Such a system, while presenting the same aesthetic objection as
that of Le Puy, had greater structural advantages. The pyramids could be
built entirely without centering, and exerted almost no outward thrust,
while the stones of which they were constructed could be faced on the
exterior (Fig. 9) as well as the interior, and the steep roof thus
formed provided adequate drainage for the rain and snow of the


If the dome played but a small part in Romanesque architecture, such was
not the case with the tunnel vault. Almost as old as civilization
itself, this method of vaulting had been employed to a greater or less
extent in every age from the Egyptian period to that of the Carolingian
Empire. It is natural, therefore, to find it the principal method in use
during the entire Romanesque era. Nor is it necessary to trace its
history back to Persian or Armenian sources. The builders of the
eleventh and subsequent centuries had plenty of examples nearer at hand.
Roman vaults, some of them of stone, were still in a good state of
preservation in many parts of the western world, and almost every
country or province possessed examples dating from Carolingian days.[35]
It is not the use of this roofing system, therefore, but the skill with
which it was adapted to the naves and aisles of churches of basilical
plan, that furnishes the most interesting features in the study of
Romanesque tunnel vaulting. In fact, so distinct are the combinations
and methods employed in different regions, that they constitute
veritable architectural schools which may be classified and separately


The four major schools lie in France and center around the ancient
provinces of Provence, Poitou, Auvergne, and Bourgogne, whence they
derive their names. All four are comprised in practically the same
period,--namely, the eleventh and part, at least, of the twelfth
centuries,--and it would be impossible to arrange them in any
chronological order. But from its resemblance to the Roman monuments in
the midst of which it grew and the fact that it had comparatively little
structural influence upon the other schools, Provence will be the first
to be considered.


The cities of Arles and Nîmes had been important Roman provincial
centers. Moreover, they still retained, and to this day possess, a large
number of Roman monuments whose influence upon the Romanesque churches
of the eleventh and twelfth centuries is plainly apparent. Thus vaults
which carry directly the tiles of the roof, single aisled churches
resembling the little Nymphaeum, or so-called temple of Diana at Nîmes,
the employment of flat pilasters in place of the more usual applied
shafts of curved section, and a host of minor details all reflecting
classic usage are marked characteristics of this school.


When considered from the point of view of vaulting, the churches of
Provence fall into five distinct groups. The first, illustrated by the
chapel of Saint Gabriel near Tarascon (Bouches-du-Rhône),[37] is
composed of churches with no side aisles. These are covered with tunnel
vaults of semicircular or pointed section, with or without transverse
arches and carrying directly the tiles of the roof. The supporting walls
are frequently strengthened by a series of interior applied arches in
one or more orders thickening the wall at the impost of the vault.
Outside of this interior buttressing, which has already been seen in
Perigord, the churches of this type are of little structural interest.


In the remaining groups, side aisles are always present and these have
four distinct vaulting systems. In the first, tunnel vaults are employed
throughout the edifice. Saint Nazaire[38] (after 1090), the former
cathedral of Carcassonne (Aude), though somewhat removed from the center
of the school, illustrates this system. Both nave and aisle vaults rise
from the same impost level. The vault of the nave is slightly pointed,
those of the aisles are semicircular, and both have transverse arches.
It is a simple and practical method of construction, since the aisle
vaults furnish admirable abutment for that of the nave, and all three
are covered by a gable roof of masonry resting directly upon the vault
crowns. Its one great fault is the absence of direct light in the nave,
a condition which introduces the problem of lighting a tunnel-vaulted


This problem was second only to that of constructing the vaults
themselves and, furthermore, it had much to do with the forms which
these assumed and even with the plan of the church. When there were no
side aisles, windows were cut directly through the outer walls, but to
introduce a clerestory above an aisle arcade involved a number of
structural difficulties. The side aisle vaults no longer aided in
supporting that of the nave, and in fact exerted an inward pressure at a
point below its impost where such pressure was most difficult to offset.
At the same time, the outward thrust of the central tunnel vault was
increased in proportion to its elevation from the ground. The simplest
method of meeting these difficulties was to increase the thickness of
the clerestory walls, or add simple salient buttresses and trust to good
construction to offset the increased thrusts. This was the method
adopted by most of the Romanesque builders.[39] It was only in the
school of Bourgogne, and under its influence, that the problem received
a better solution--which will later be discussed at length--and not
until the Transitional and Gothic periods that it was completely solved
by dispensing entirely with the tunnel vaults.

While its chief effect was upon vaulting, the lighting problems
frequently affected the plan of the church as well. When the nave was
without direct light, the aisles were almost always narrowed to permit
light to enter from windows in their outer wall. Double aisles were
practically impossible,[40] unless the inner aisles had triforium
galleries supplied with windows.[41]

Nor did the problem of lighting enter merely into the construction of
simple tunnel vaulted churches. It was involved with that of all kinds
of vaulting throughout the entire Romanesque and Gothic periods.
Transverse tunnel vaults like those of Tournus, groined vaults like
those of Vézelay, the development of the Gothic chevet from the half
domed apse, and the systems of ribbed vaulting which are frequently
found in the crossings, aisles, and ambulatories of Gothic churches, all
are closely related to the lighting problem.


Returning to Provence, it will be recalled that Saint Nazaire at
Carcassonne was described as a typical example of the second class of
churches of this school, entirely tunnel vaulted, with narrow side
aisles whose lateral windows afford the only light with which the nave
is supplied. There are, however, a few churches, vaulted like Saint
Nazaire, in which the builders introduced a clerestory. Among these is
the abbey church of Saint Guilhem-du-Désert (Hérault) (rebuilt at the
end of the eleventh century).[42] Here the clerestory is of considerable
height, the heads of the windows lying beneath the imposts of the tunnel
vaults, a fact which renders this church one of the most developed of
the school. Yet this development lies merely in the presence of the
windows, and not in any structural advances which made their presence
possible. It was because of the excellent masonry of the heavy walls and
piers, that the Provence builders dared to attempt this innovation. The
vaults themselves are no lighter than before and still carry the entire
weight of the roof. In fact, the whole system is one of inert stability,
analogous to Roman construction, and exhibits little if any advance
toward the elasticity and balanced thrusts which were to characterize
Gothic architecture.


The churches in the third Provence group differ from those in the second
only in having half tunnel vaults in the side aisles, but this
difference is sufficient to change to some extent the character and
methods of construction. In the simple churches of this type where there
is no clerestory as, for example, in the western portion of the little
church of Saint Honorat, belonging to the monastery of the
Isle-de-Lérins (Alpes-Maritimes),[43] the half tunnel vault of the
aisles furnishes better abutment for that of the nave than the full
tunnel vaults of the second type, and at the same time permits loftier
arches to be constructed in the nave arcades, giving a better
distribution of light without raising the imposts of any of the vaults.

When, however, a clerestory is added, as in Saint Trophime at Arles
(first half of the twelfth century), the inward pressure of the aisle
vaults is even more severe than in Saint Guilhem-du-Désert and at the
same awkward place, so that the only structural advantage at Arles lies
in the added height of the nave arches. It is a noticeable feature of
Saint Trophime that the aisles have full, instead of half arches[44]
used transversely beneath the vaults, very probably because the former
exerted less inward thrust, and could also be weighed down by a solid
wall which increased the rigidity of the structure by tying the pier of
the nave arcade to the outer wall, and strengthened the clerestory for
the support of the high vault. The system has already been noted in the
cathedral of Molfetta,[45] and will be found repeated either in the
triforia or aisles of a number of Romanesque churches of different


The employment of a three-quarters tunnel vault over the aisles renders
the fourth group of Provence churches a cross between the second and
third. Like them it contains examples with and without a clerestory. Of
these the cathedral at Vaison (Vaucluse)[47] (twelfth century)
illustrates the former, and the abbey church of Silvacane
(Bouches-du-Rhône) (second half of the twelfth century)[48] the latter
form. The advantage of the three-quarter type lies in the fact that it
exerts less thrust against the inner wall than does the half tunnel and
still makes possible loftier arches in the nave arcade compared to the
height of the aisle vault than does the full tunnel vault. But these
slight advantages are offset by its ugly appearance, and it was never in
any sense popular.


The system of the fifth type of the school of Provence is that of a
tunnel vaulted nave with side aisles covered by transverse tunnel
vaults. This method is, however, so different from the other four and
was so widely extended,--largely through Cistercian influence--that it
can hardly be said to be inherent in any one school, but rather to
constitute an individual group of churches which will be separately

From the foregoing discussion of the entire school, it will be seen that
the builders of Provence produced very little that was original in vault
construction. It was not a school of progress, but rather one of
conservative adherence to the Roman tradition of the province around
which it centered. Its most progressive feature was, perhaps, the
preference it displayed for the pointed tunnel vault,[49] and this may
be explained by the fact that the vault in Provence generally carries
directly the tiles of the roof and less masonry was necessary to carry a
pointed vault up into a gable than would have been the case with one of
semicircular section. One further preference, which shows the structural
sense of the Provence builders, is that for transverse arches under the
vaults, which not only make possible lighter masonry in the vaults
themselves, but also lessen the centering necessary for their


Such methods of vaulting as those just described are not confined to
Provence. In Poitou, for example, there is a group of churches with
half-tunnel vaults in their side aisles. Some of these, like Saint
Eutrope at Saintes (Charente-Inférieure)[50] (eleventh century) and
Aigues-Vives (Loir-et-Cher),[51] have corresponding half arches,
others, like Parthenay-le-Vieux (Deux-Sèvres),[52] (cir. 1129) have full
transverse arches beneath these vaults. Moreover, in Auvergne the
triforium is regularly covered with a half tunnel vault buttressing the
tunnel vault of the nave, and in a few instances, as at Culhat
(Puy-de-Dôme),[53] the side aisles are in one story with similar
vaulting. There are also many instances outside of Provence in which the
aisles have full tunnel vaults. Between Auvergne and Bourgogne there is
an example in the abbey church at Souvigny (Allier) (eleventh century)
(Fig. 11), and such a system may quite possibly have been employed in
the aisles of Cluny[54] and in those of the choir of Saint
Benoît-sur-Loire (Loiret)[55] (second half of the eleventh century).
Even in England it occurs in the Tower Chapel at London[56] (begun
1078), and is also found in Poitou at Melle (Deux-Sèvres), Saint
Pierre[57] (early twelfth century), where the vaults are pointed, and at
Lesterps (Charente),[58] where they are of semicircular section. The
three-quarter tunnel vault also is not confined to Provence for it
appears as far north as Saint Genou (Indre) in the eleventh century.

The foregoing examples serve only to indicate that such systems as these
which are inherently simple in construction came, very naturally, to be
widely employed during the Romanesque era. Where they originated it is
impossible to say, but the fact that they are so elementary in principle
and often vary in some of their structural characteristics[59] may
indicate that they were developed independently and contemporaneously in
various localities.


The next three schools of Romanesque architecture have one feature in
common, namely, the employment of groined vaults over the side aisles.
But the form which these assume and their relations to the tunnel vaults
of the nave differ sufficiently to distinguish the churches of Poitou,
Auvergne and Bourgogne from one another.

[Illustration: FIG. 11.--SOUVIGNY, ABBEY CHURCH.]


The chronology of the churches of Poitou is somewhat obscure, but the
vaulting principles of the school were well developed early in the
eleventh century, to which period a number of the existing churches
belong. Their naves are tunnel vaulted and without a clerestory, the
light entering through windows in the outer walls of the aisles, which
are narrow and high and covered with groined vaults rising from the
imposts of the arches opening into the nave. The entire church has a
single-gabled exterior roof of wood and tile, its rafters supported near
their centers by a wall above the nave arcade, and thus not resting
directly upon the extrades of the vaults.[60] Certain minor structural
differences make it possible to divide the churches of Poitou into two

The first is composed of the earlier churches, of which Saint
Savin-sur-Gartempe (Vienne) (begun cir. 1023) is the best and perhaps
the only existing example. In it, both nave and aisle vaults are without
transverse arches. All the vaults are semicircular in section, and those
of the aisles[61] have their transverse surfaces continuous with the
soffits of the nave arches.[62] This gives them the flattened groins so
characteristic of Roman architecture. Such a system as this required an
extensive wooden centering, and it is not surprising that the builders
of Poitou soon introduced transverse arches beneath the vaults,--perhaps
through the influence of Lombardy, where they were in use as early as
the tenth century[63]--thus producing a group of churches which form the
second type of the school.

Notre Dame-la-Grande at Poitiers (Vienne) (early twelfth century), is an
early example of this class. Transverse arches are employed throughout
the church, not only strengthening the vaults but making it possible to
save centering by using the same form for each successive bay and at the
same time reducing to some extent the thickness of the web by thus
breaking it up into smaller units.[64]

Toward the second half of the twelfth century the system was still
further improved by the introduction of pointed arches and vaults in
both nave and aisles, as for example in the abbey church of Cunault
(Maine-et-Loire). The flattened type of groin has here been abandoned,
though the vaults are not of domed-up type. Such doming is to be found
in Poitou, however, in Saint Pierre at Chauvigny (Vienne),[65] probably
with the intention of saving centering, as in Byzantine architecture.
But even though the builders of Poitou made some progress in vaulting,
they never attempted to solve the associated problem of getting direct
light in the nave. Hence such progress was but slight from the earliest
to the latest churches of the school.[66]



One of the distinguishing features of the typical churches of Auvergne
is the presence of a second story or triforium gallery above the side
aisles. To account for its presence a number of theories have been
advanced. That such galleries were not intended for congregational
purposes, at least in the early churches of the school, is evident from
the fact that they are but dimly lighted and accessible only by narrow
staircases in dark corners. They may have been used for storerooms or
treasuries for relics brought by pilgrims,--a possibility which is
strengthened by the fact that they ceased to be built in the thirteenth
century when the era of the Crusades was past,[67]--or they may have
been useful places from which to defend the church, corresponding in
this respect to the room frequently found in the second story of
Romanesque towers.[68] But whatever their use, they would seem, in
Auvergne, at least, to have originated on purely structural grounds.

The expedient of dividing the openings from the nave of the church to
the aisles into two stages, with the evident intention of thus reducing
the height of the piers and even of making lighter piers possible, was
employed in a number of churches both earlier and later than those in
Auvergne. It may even be in part the explanation of the double colonnade
in the Lateran Baptistery, and the upper stories in the chapel at
Aachen, and the abbey churches at Essen, Nymwegen, and elsewhere. In any
case, it explains the system of two stories of arches in the Carolingian
church of Saint Michael at Fulda (818-822),[69] and in the early
Romanesque churches of Vignory (Haute-Marne)[70] (eleventh century),
Montiérender, (Haute-Marne)[71] (early eleventh century), and
Chatel-Montagne (Allier)[72] (early twelfth century), and probably also
in Saint Pierre at Jumièges (Seine-Inférieure)[73] (cir. 940).[74]

A significant fact in connecting these churches which are wooden roofed,
with the vaulted churches of Auvergne, lies in their geographical
distribution. While the earliest examples such as Fulda lie in the
Carolingian region, the latter examples, Jumièges, Vignory and
Montiérender lie but slightly north of Auvergne, while Chatel-Montagne
is actually in this province.[75] What is more natural to suppose, then,
than that the vaulted churches of Auvergne were based upon these earlier
churches, and that the nave arcade in two stages was retained even when
both aisles and nave were covered with vaults? Furthermore, it would
then be perfectly natural that the builders should have built these
vaults in two stories corresponding to the two stages of arches, since
they would have promptly recognized the great advantage gained by this
system, which stiffened the interior and exterior walls for the added
weight which the high vaults brought to bear upon them, without injuring
to any extent the appearance of the church.[76] This seems all the more
plausible when the fact is considered that the churches of Auvergne
generally have broader aisles than those of Poitou or Provence. This may
also have been a heritage from the early churches with two-storied
arcades and wooden roofs just mentioned,[77] and in any case it further
explains the system of aisle vaults in two stories. For, while the
vaults of narrow aisles might be raised a considerable distance from the
ground without danger from excessive thrusts, in wide aisles they would
have exerted such thrusts and pressures on piers and walls as to have
rendered their support most difficult, particularly when they carried
directly the tiles of the roof as in Auvergne.


As to the actual vaulting system of the Auvergnate churches, it is as
follows. In the nave, heavy tunnel vaults resembling those of Provence
in that they usually carried the roof.[78] Otherwise the churches are
more like those of Poitou in the form of the piers, the almost universal
absence of a clerestory, and the employment of vaults of semicircular
section with transverse arches, as in the early churches of the second
class in that school. In the triforium, the builders realized the
advantage gained by the use of a half tunnel vault as an offset to the
nave thrusts and as a means of best filling the space beneath a single
gable roof,[79] and this is therefore the universal method. At times
this vault is borne on full semicircular transverse arches,[80] and at
others on those which follow its curve.[81] In the side aisles, groined
vaults were employed because they were the only kind which could be
built without cutting into either the triforium or the side wall
windows. In form they closely resemble those of Poitou and were provided
with transverse arches.


The church of Notre Dame-du-Port at Clermont-Ferrand (Puy-de-Dôme)[82]
(Fig. 12) (cir. 1100) has the Auvergnate characteristics just described.
Its great fault lies in the darkness of the interior, a darkness more
pronounced than that of the churches of Provence or Poitou because of
the width and lowness of the aisles with the consequent distance of the
lateral windows from the nave and the fact that they cannot be cut very
high above the floor. The windows of the triforium are also small,[83]
and their light is almost entirely confined to the gallery by its floor
and by the smallness of the arches opening into the nave. This fault was
remedied in the choir, where the light was most needed, by doing away
with the triforium, and placing a clerestory beneath the half dome of
the apse.[84] As a further improvement a lantern was placed over the


In certain churches of the school like Saint Sernin at Toulouse (nave
twelfth century), the triforium was increased in size, perhaps in order
that it might be used for congregational purposes, but more probably
because larger windows were absolutely necessary in this portion of the
church for the sake of the lighting. This theory is strengthened by the
fact that Saint Sernin has double side aisles and the lateral windows
are therefore too far away to light the nave. These added aisles are
covered with vaults of regular Auvergnate character, even to the extent
of half tunnel vaults beneath their roofs, and the remainder of the
church corresponds to the structural standards of the school.[86]


Although it might seem from the foregoing pages that the builders of
Auvergne were very backward in structural technique, there are a number
of churches in the school which have a clerestory in the nave. Among
them is Saint Étienne at Nevers (Nièvre)[87] (end of the eleventh
century),[88] in which the clerestory is obtained by raising the wall
above the triforium arches just high enough to permit the introduction
of comparatively small windows with their heads rising above the impost
of the vaults.[89] The principle is the same as that in Provence, and no
structural innovation is involved. The builders merely relied upon heavy
piers and walls and salient buttresses to bear the added thrust which
the tunnel vaults, thus raised, produced. That their reliance was not
especially well founded is proved by the numerous cracks in the masonry.


The introduction of a clerestory in tunnel-vaulted churches was not yet
scientifically accomplished, and it remained for the school of Bourgogne
to find the best possible solution of the problem. But this solution
would seem to have been reached only after some intermediate steps had
been taken which may, perhaps, be traced in a number of eleventh century
churches. Two of these lie slightly to the north of Poitou and Auvergne
and strongly reflect the influence of these neighboring schools. These
churches, together with others in the same general region, may perhaps
be said to constitute a school of Romanesque architecture, which might
properly be termed the School of the Loire.

The first of these is the small church of Saint Genou (Indre).[90] It is
a combination of the types of Auvergne and Poitou except that the tunnel
vault of its choir is raised on a clerestory wall pierced with good
sized windows. Its aisles are in only one story, and, instead of being
groined, are covered by three-quarter tunnel vaults perhaps showing the
influence of such Provence churches as those of Silvacane and Vaison.
The whole system shows an advance in structural skill in several
particulars. In the first place the aisles are built low, and with
columnar piers close together, thus insuring the support of a heavy
triforium wall. This wall is lightened in appearance but not
structurally weakened, by a wall arcade opposite the vaults and roofs of
the aisles, and is sufficiently thick at the clerestory level to be
pierced with window openings and still afford an excellent impost for
the tunnel vault. This, in turn, is built of light material like the
vaults of Poitou. With exterior salient buttresses, the system is
complete. Its only important drawbacks are the closeness of the
supporting piers and the necessity of keeping the whole choir rather low
to avoid excessive thrusts.

The second church lies between Saint Genou and the school of Bourgogne.
It is the abbey church of Saint Benoît-sur-Loire (Loiret), begun in 1062
and possessing a choir, transepts, and porch, dating from the second
half of the eleventh century. Its choir (Fig. 13) closely resembles that
of Saint Genou in every particular, except that the aisles have full
tunnel vaults and the church as a whole is larger with a much more lofty
nave of greater span.[91] Such a system as that of Saint Genou and Saint
Benoît is produced by the extension of the elevation so frequently seen
in the apses of the churches of Poitou and Auvergne to embrace the sides
of the choir as well. The columnar piers and small arches used are like
those in the apse rather than like those in the remainder of the church.
The builders seem, however, to have failed to realize that walls which
would support the half dome of the apse would not necessarily prove
sufficiently strong to resist the thrusts of a tunnel vault. In fact, in
spite of its apparent advance, the vault of the choir of Saint Benoît
was only prevented from falling by the addition of transverse arches
and flying-buttresses at a date subsequent to the completion of the
church, and the vault of the nave of Cluny, which was quite possibly
similar, actually fell in 1125.[92] It remained for the twelfth century
builders of Bourgogne to take the final steps which were to carry the
system of tunnel vaulted naves with direct light to its highest



It is most unfortunate for a study of the school of Bourgogne that the
mother church at Cluny (Saône-et-Loire) should have been almost totally
destroyed in the French Revolution. This great church was begun in 1089
and must have been finished in 1125, for the nave vaults fell in that
year and were rebuilt before the final consecration in IIVO. What its
original vaulting system was is difficult to say. Reber[93] says that it
was probably vaulted like the churches of Auvergne with inner aisles in
two stories, but Rivoira[94] states that both the nave and aisles had
tunnel vaults on transverse pointed arches. The exterior view,[95] and
the model which fortunately remains, would correspond with either
arrangement.[96] The important facts to note are that the nave had a
clerestory, and that the nave vault was strengthened on the exterior by
carrying up the clerestory walls to exert a downward pressure at its
haunch, a most important structural advance over the exterior wall of
Saint Benoît-sur-Loire.[97]

[Illustration: FIG. 14.--PARAY-LE-MONIAL, ABBEY CHURCH.]

The developed system of Bourgogne may be seen to advantage in the abbey
church of Paray-le-Monial (Saône-et-Loire) (Figs. 14, 15), which dates
from the early twelfth century and is thus only slightly later than
Cluny itself. Its nave is wider and loftier than any yet seen in which a
tunnel vault was used, though not equal in size to that at Cluny, which
was thirty-two feet wide and ninety-eight feet high. All the structural
arches are pointed, but those used for windows, doors and decoration are
still round headed.[98] The clerestory, while it has only moderately
large windows, is so high above the ground as to render the support of
the vaults above it exceptionally difficult. This difficulty was
overcome, first by giving the vault a pointed section and thus reducing
the thrust; second, by building as light a web as possible and covering
it with a wooden roof; third, by using tie-rods of wood or metal,
running along near the impost of the vault in the thickness of the
walls, thus to a certain extent concentrating the pressure upon the
piers; and, finally, as has already been stated, by carrying the
exterior walls of the church to a point considerably above the window
heads (Fig. 15), thus obtaining a downward pressure which offsets the
outward thrusts.

[Illustration: FIG. 15.--PARAY-LE-MONIAL, ABBEY CHURCH.]

The side aisles of the school of Bourgogne are also worthy of mention.
They are usually covered with groined vaults, in many cases of slightly
domical form. Whether this method came directly from Lombardy where
there exist early examples of its use, or whether it came in through the
influence of Poitou and Auvergne which had come into close contact with
Carolingian architecture, is an open question. It seems quite likely,
however, that, since the Byzantine builders developed this type and
transmitted it to the Carolingian builders of the Rhine valley, it
should have passed from there into France and spread over the three
northern-central schools as it did over Lombardy. Regardless of its
origin, it became the standard type in all the important churches of the
Cluniac region. Occasionally, as at Souvigny (Allier) (possibly eleventh
century), the enclosing arches are of stilted round headed form, a type
which is also found as far north as Vézelay (Yonne) La Madeleine (after
1140) (Fig. 16). Neither of these churches, however, is near the center
of the school,[99] and the pointed structural arch as used in the abbey
church of Paray-le-Monial (Fig. 14) is the common form.

The system employed in Bourgogne marks the highest development attained
in the use of a tunnel vault running the length of the nave. In the
Ile-de-France a few instances might be cited[100] in which a system like
one of those already described was used, and the same is true of certain
Romanesque churches outside of France, but in none of them is any new
structural method introduced. The tunnel vault was even used
occasionally as late as the thirteenth century,[101] but the examples
are generally small and insignificant.


Besides the methods which have just been described and which were so
localized as to form veritable Romanesque schools, there remain a number
of churches falling into two groups in which transverse tunnel vaults
replace those running longitudinally either in the nave or aisles. The
first and smaller group contains those in which such vaults were used
over the nave. Of these, the most important example is Saint Philibert
at Tournus

[Illustration: FIG. 16.--VÉZELAY, LA MADELEINE.]

(Saône-et-Loire),[102] a church of considerable size and of early date
(dedicated 1019). Cylindrical piers and transverse arches divide the
nave into rectangular bays each of which is covered by a transverse
tunnel vault with a window in the clerestory wall at either end.
Excellent light is thus obtained and the thrusts of the vaults admirably
counteract one another. In fact, the system is so logical that it is
surprising that it gave rise to so few imitators.[103] The explanation
may perhaps lie in the lack of apparent continuity in the vault, a fault
which this method shares with that of Le Puy. As to its origin, it may
go back to such Persian monuments as Tag-Eivan, or to Syrian copies of
Sassanian work with the substitution of stone for brick as Choisy
suggests,[104] though it is not unreasonable to think that the builders
of Tournus originated the system since it involved no unknown structural
principles. The aisles of Saint Philibert furnish one of the rather rare
examples of the employment of interpenetrating vaults.[105]


The second group is much larger and more widespread, and comprises all
the churches employing transverse tunnel vaults over the side aisles.
The examples belonging to the school of Perigord have already been
discussed,[106] and mention has been made of the fact that there are
possibly enough of such churches in Provence alone to constitute a fifth
type in that school.[107] But the system is too widespread to be
attributed to any one province. It is undoubtedly a product of Roman and
very early mediaeval architecture, for it is to be seen in such
buildings as the Basilica of Maxentius at Rome, and in a modified,
ramping form at Aachen.[108] Its structural advantage lies in the large
space which the tunnel vault affords for windows in the outer wall thus
lighting both the nave and aisles. Among the many examples are the
parish church of Chatillon-sur-Seine (Côte-d’Or)[109] of the twelfth
century, the abbey churches of Hauterive (Savoie), Ronceray[110]
(vaulted in 1115), Bénévent-l’Abbaye (Creuse),[111] and the cathedral of
Lescar (Basses-Pyrénées),--in which, however, the vaults are an addition
to a primitive construction.[112] In the church at Fontenay
(Côte-d’Or)[113] (before the middle of the twelfth century) concealed
flying buttresses appear over the transverse arches between the aisle
bays, thus aiding in securing a more even abutment for the continuous
thrust of the tunnel vault of the nave. A few churches like
Cavaillon,[114] and the cathedral of Orange (Vaucluse),[115] have
tunnel vaults over rectangular bays flanking the nave but not connected
by arches to form side aisles.

The vaulting of the ambulatory gallery of Mantes cathedral, of the
aisles of Fountains Abbey in England, and possibly the original vaults
of the aisles of Saint Remi at Reims[116] were also transverse tunnel
vaults. These latter churches differ from the ones previously mentioned,
however, in that they are not tunnel vaulted in the nave and, moreover,
are constructed with a clerestory so that the side aisle vaults do not
serve the purpose outlined in the account of tunnel vaulted churches in
the preceding paragraph.


This brings the discussion of the standard methods of tunnel vaulting to
a close, but there remain two curious churches in which cross-ribs were
added beneath the surface of simple tunnel vaults. One of these is at
Lusignan (Vienne),[117] and the other at Javarzay (Deux-Sèvres). Both
date from about 1120 to 1140 though the ribs may be a later addition to
give the appearance of ribbed vaulting which was introduced at about
this time.


Although usually confined to the side aisle bays, there are a few
Romanesque churches in which the builders of the eleventh and twelfth
centuries placed groined vaulting over the nave. The scarcity of such
examples is due primarily to the difficulty of meeting the severe
outward thrusts of a groined vault raised over bays of considerable span
and at a point high above the ground. In the side aisles where the
vaults were comparatively low, the exterior wall could be thickened by
salient buttresses, and the piers strengthened by the weight of the wall
above in a manner to offset the thrust, but in the nave the problem was
more complicated. The builders had not yet invented the flying buttress.
Hence, when they attempted groined vaults at all, they blundered along
trusting that the inert mass of their walls and such timid buttresses as
could be erected above the nave piers would provide sufficient offset
for the thrusts even though these were now concentrated at four main
points in each bay. Naturally the vaults frequently gave way and had to
be reconstructed. In spite of these difficulties, the advantage of the
groined vault in providing a clerestory whose windows might rise as high
as the crown of the vault itself led to its occasional use.


The vaults thus employed were of two rather distinct classes, those over
rectangular nave bays which were usually but little domed up, and those
over square bays which were generally distinctly domed in the Byzantine
manner. Of the first type perhaps the best known example is the
Burgundian church of La Madeleine at Vézelay (Yonne), (Fig. 17)

[Illustration: FIG. 17.--VÉZELAY, LA MADELEINE.]

in 1104. Its nave is divided into a series of rectangular bays by
transverse arches of semicircular section, and over each bay is placed a
groined vault very slightly domed at the crown. To insure the stability
of these vaults, the builders relied on the weight of the walls, which
were carried up somewhat above the window heads, and on simple salient
buttresses. To these exterior supports were added interior arches half
imbedded in the walls above the clerestory windows (Fig. 17), furnishing
one of the earliest examples of the use of wall ribs or formerets. The
web of the vault does not, however, follow their extrados, but gradually
breaks away from it toward the crown, with the apparent object of thus
concentrating even more pressure upon the piers by stilting the wall
line of the vault surface.[118] Even these precautions were not deemed
sufficient, so iron tie-rods were employed, but these rusted and
broke,[119] the vaults settled badly,[120] and if it had not been for
the addition of exterior flying buttresses, which had meanwhile come
into general use, the vaults would most certainly have fallen. Although
not a structural success, Vézelay did prove of advantage in turning the
builders away from the tunnel vault,--and this, too, in Bourgogne where
it had been most highly developed,--to a new type which presented
problems whose solution was to lead to Gothic architecture. Vézelay was,
however, but little imitated in the Romanesque era, perhaps because of
the almost contemporary development of the ribbed vault in Lombardy,
Normandy, and the Ile-de-France. A few churches, such as Anzy-le-Duc
(Saône-et-Loire)[121] did employ groined vaults over the nave but on a
smaller scale and frequently with more pronounced doming.

A more important and independent group of groined vaulted churches is to
be found in Normandy. In this school, the churches were usually covered
with wooden roofs though the aisles were occasionally groined. But there
are three churches in which the choir also has groined vaults. These
are, La Trinité or the Abbaye-aux-Dames at Caen (Calvados) (cir. 1066),
Saint Nicolas at Caen (cir. 1080), and Saint Georges-de-Boscherville at
Saint Martin-de-Boscherville (Seine-Inférieure) (late eleventh and early
twelfth century). The choir of the third of these churches, though later
in date than the others, is more primitive in type, for it is covered by
interpenetrating vaults, in which, however, the deep lunettes above the
windows rise so nearly to the crown that the result resembles groined
rather than tunnel vaulting.

In both the other examples true groined vaulting is used, but at La
Trinité it is in practically square bays, and carried by walls running
down to the ground,[122] making it easier of construction than that at
Saint Nicolas[123] where the bays are rectangular and the choir has true
side aisles. This church is similar in structural principles to La
Madeleine at Vézelay--except that the wall ribs are omitted,--and these
two churches may be said to represent the highest point reached by
groined vaulting with practically flat crowns during the Romanesque

Other examples might be cited, ranging from such an unusual church as
Saint Loup-de-Naud (Seine-et-Marne) in the Ile-de-France,--which is of
uncertain date,[124]--to churches as late as the thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries, among which are Severac-le-Château (Aveyron) and
Saint Pons-de-Mauchiens (Hérault).[125] Occasionally, also, groined
vaults were used in the crypt as at Saintes (Charente-Inférieure),[126]
even when tunnel vaults were used in the upper part of the church, a
peculiarity explained by the fact that underground it was easy to
dispose of the thrusts which could not so readily be offset in the nave.

The question of the origin of the method has frequently arisen and a
number of writers, including Choisy,[127] suggest the East as a possible
cradle of the style because of the numerous churches in Palestine thus
vaulted, but Rivoira[128] shows rather conclusively that it was the
Cluny influence which carried the method to the East rather than the
reverse, a theory strengthened by the fact that the earliest example
there, which is the church of Saint Anne at Jerusalem,[129] would seem
to be after rather than before the beginning of the twelfth
century.[130] Moreover it is quite reasonable to attribute the
development of this advanced type of vault to the builders of Bourgogne
themselves, for they were surely progressive enough to have taken such a


Churches with groined vaults over square nave bays are much more
numerous than those with rectangular bays, just described. The most
important of these belong to the school of the Rhenish Provinces, which
had, perhaps, clung to Byzantine and Carolingian traditions in this
respect. As a rule the large churches of this school were originally
planned for vaulting only in the side aisles.[131] These were usually
divided into square bays by round headed transverse arches, and then
each bay covered by a more or less domed up groined vault, which, from
its size and form, might be erected with comparatively little
centering.[132] There was no triforium gallery, but a wall with blank
arches took its place beneath the clerestory windows. In many of the
churches[133] shafts were carried up on the inner face of alternate nave
piers, probably to support the cross beams of the roof, or possibly to
carry transverse arches, but not to carry vaulting.

By the early twelfth century, after numerous fires had played havoc with
the churches, the Rhenish builders seem to have at last made an effort
to replace the wooden roofs with vaults. In doing this, they sought a
form of vault which would exert as little as possible of outward thrust
and thus be stable at the considerable height at which it must be
placed. The Lombard builders had by this time developed the domed up
cross-ribbed vault, but, as has been admirably shown by Porter,[134] the
ribs which they employed had for their sole purpose the saving of wooden
centering, since the masonry of the vault proper was heavy enough to
stand without their aid. It was natural then for the Rhenish builders,
who copied their neighbors in Lombardy in many particulars,[135] to look
to them for a method of vault construction, which they found in domed up
vaults like those of Rivolta-d’Adda (1088-1099) or Sant’Ambrogio at
Milan (cir. 1098). These the Rhenish builders chose as models, but
being plentifully supplied with wood for centering, it would seem as if
they purposely did not adopt the diagonal ribs, but built groined vaults
of simple domed up type, placing them over square nave bays each
corresponding to two aisle bays in the true Lombard manner. This system
may be seen to advantage in the cathedral of Speyer[136] (probably
vaulted cir. 1137-1140). With extremely heavy walls like those of the
Rhenish churches, and with good masonry for their construction, such
vaults proved comparatively safe even over naves of such a span as that
of Speyer which is almost fifty feet in width.

This account of the Rhenish school completes the discussion of groined
vaulting as applied to the naves and choirs of Romanesque churches. The
heavy walls and the general excellence of masonry construction which
they required, together with the necessity for large interior piers, did
not render them popular or widely used.


That the use of groined vaults was far more extensive in the aisles than
in the naves of Romanesque churches has already been shown by the
examples cited from the schools of Poitou, Auvergne, Bourgogne, and
elsewhere. To these should be added a number of churches, chiefly of the
schools of Lombardy and Normandy, which have groined aisles in
combination with rib vaulted or wooden roofed naves. In Lombardy, where
the naves are ribbed, this combination has been admirably explained by
Porter[137] in connection with the use of wood for centering. Thus he
shows that groined vaults, provided that they were sufficiently domed
up, could be built over the small bays of the aisles and triforia with
almost no wooden framework, but that when such vaults were attempted in
the nave the bays were so large as to require a considerable amount of
centering beneath the vault, and therefore the builders substituted
permanent diagonal arches of very heavy character.

The Norman groined aisles are, however, of a different sort, for they
either have level crowns or are but slightly domed up in type.[138] The
abbey church of Jumièges (Seine-Inférieure) (1040-1067) is among the
earliest examples of this construction and is the only Norman church
with groined vaults in both the aisles and triforium.[139] La Trinité at
Caen[140] and the abbey church of Lessay (Manche)[141] are also Norman
churches with groined aisles, in both cases with level crowns. In La
Trinité, as in the early churches of Poitou, the bays are not even
separated by transverse arches.[142] In Saint Étienne at Caen, and in
the choir of the cathedral of Gloucester, the aisles are vaulted in both
stories like those of Auvergne, the lower groined, the triforia with
half tunnel vaults, but it seems very probable that these latter were
added only when vaulting took the place of the wooden roof in the
central portions of the church.[143]

Curious instances of the persistence of groined vaulting are to be seen
in the triforia of such transitional churches as Saint Germer-de-Fly
(Oise)[144] and Vézelay, where the remaining portions of the church have
ribbed vaults. For this persistence an explanation is later


An unusual form of aisle vault appears at Creully (Calvados)[146]
(twelfth century), where the aisles are covered with a half tunnel vault
intersected toward the outer wall by lunettes, which thus convert it
into a semi-groined vault. Its obvious advantage lies in the combination
of inward pressure, which it exerts in support of the nave vaults, with
the added window space which it affords without increasing the height of
the exterior walls.


The introduction of ribs beneath the diagonal intersections of groined
vaulting gradually brought about a revolution in Mediaeval building, and
transformed the massiveness of Romanesque construction into the light
and graceful architecture of the Gothic era. Much has been written in an
effort to discover the origin of the new system. It is not, however, the
intention here to add to the number of theories advanced, except in an
incidental manner, but rather to classify the various forms of ribbed
vaulting as applied to naves, choirs, and aisles of the churches
following immediately after those of the Romanesque period which have
just been described. As a geographical basis is no longer practical for
such a classification, because of the widespread distribution of the new
method of construction, a structural basis will be substituted, and the
vaults will be divided into two major groups according as they were used
over square or rectangular nave bays, and then subdivided according to
their minor characteristics.


Lombardy affords the first examples of ribbed vaults over nave bays of
square plan. According to Rivoira[147] the earliest are in the church of
Santa Maria e San Sigismondo at Rivolta d’Adda[148] (before 1099),
though this was closely followed by the more important church of Sant
Ambrogio at Milan (between 1088-1128) (Fig. 18), which furnishes an
admirable example of the Lombard type. Its nave is divided into four
great square bays, each corresponding to two bays in the side aisles.
(Plate I-a.) Of these the eastern bay is treated as a crossing and
covered by a dome above a lantern on squinches, but the remaining three
have four-part domed up vaults with heavy ribs of square section, used
not only transversely and along the walls but also diagonally, thus
forming a complete system or skeleton of arches beneath the vault
surface in the manner of true Gothic architecture. But there are many
reasons to believe with Porter[149] that the builders of Lombardy
employed these ribs purely as a permanent centering of masonry,--which
was less expensive than a temporary centering of wood in a country where
the latter material was very scarce,--and that they failed to appreciate
the fact that such ribs made possible a great reduction in the weight of
the panels, or web. of the vault, and in other ways could be made to aid
in reducing and concentrating its pressures. The masonry of the vault is
still excessively

[Illustration: PLATE I]

[Illustration: FIG. 18.--MILAN, SANT’ AMBROGIO.]

thick,--between sixteen and twenty inches,--and would stand equally well
were the ribs removed. Moreover its thrust is so great that the builders
dared not raise its imposts sufficiently high to admit of a clerestory
beneath the formerets, and instead of rendering possible a lighter
construction as Gothic vaults were destined to do, these vaults of
Saint’ Ambrogio required for their support a wall forty inches thick and
ramping walls above the transverse arches of the triforium together with
interior tie-rods and wooden chains in the masonry[150] to offset their
severe outward thrust. All these facts show that the Lombard vaults are
still fundamentally Romanesque in type. Even in San Michele at Pavia
(early twelfth century), where the system was a little more developed,
in that a small clerestory was introduced, the principles were still the
same as in Milan. As a matter of fact, the Lombard builders never made
any further advance in the handling of ribbed vaults, and even went
backward rather than forward. For the builders found that groined vaults
of domed up type could be built so lightly as to require but little
centering, and a return to this simple form was made in such churches
as San Lanfranco at Pavia.[151] Later on, in the thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries, French methods of ribbed vaulting were introduced,
but throughout the whole period of Lombard supremacy the tendency was to
avoid vaulting entirely, and when adopted, it was of the heavy character
just described.


The Lombard churches are important in the present connection, however,
because of the method in which they are divided into vaulting bays. They
furnish the earliest examples of the system of alternate light and heavy
supports,--employed according to Cattaneo[152] as early as 985 in the
three original bays of SS. Felice e Fortunato at Vicenza. This system of
piers with alternate transverse arches produces one square[153] bay in
the nave to two square bays in the side aisles, and it occurs not only
in vaulted churches but also in others in which a wooden roof rests upon
these transverse supports.[154] Its advantage in the vaulted churches is
particularly important, however, and of a two-fold character. In the
first place, it renders the four enclosing arches uniform, and it makes
them as nearly as possible of equal span with the diagonals.[155] And in
the second, it saves a considerable amount of centering by rendering
possible the construction of a vault covering a space corresponding to
two rectangular bays on four instead of seven ribs.[156]

Outside of Lombardy, the four-part cross-ribbed vault over square nave
bays was but seldom employed in churches with side aisles also divided
into square compartments. It appears, however, in the cathedral of Le
Mans, (Sarthe) (middle of the twelfth century), where it would seem to
be due to the influence of the neighboring single aisled churches of
Anjou,--which are later discussed,--and it was frequently used in
reconstructing the vaults of the Rhenish school. In the Gothic period
also, the system occasionally appears in a modified form, and naturally
enough these revivals occur where Norman and Rhenish Romanesque had
caused the principles of Lombard architecture to be strongly entrenched.
Thus the church of Saint Legerius at Gebweiler[157] (cir. 1182-1200)
furnishes a Rhenish, and the choir of Boxgrove Priory church (cir.
1235), an English application of this method. In the latter, the vaults
are no longer highly domed up, and are therefore far removed from their
Lombard prototypes, only the general division of the church reflecting
this influence.


More important by far, are the churches without side aisles but with
naves in square bays with four part cross-ribbed vaults. This method is
to be seen in the cathedral of Fréjus (Var),[158] which is considered by
Porter[159] to exhibit the earliest extant ribbed nave vaults in France.
These are distinctly of Lombard type, and would seem to show a strong
Lombard influence entering France from the south. It may possibly be
that this same influence followed the route taken earlier by the dome on
pendentives, and thus gave rise to the domed up ribbed vault so common
in the churches of Anjou.[160] Of these latter, the cathedral of Saint
Maurice at Angers (Maine-et-Loire) (Fig. 19), presents perhaps the best
existing example. Its nave vaults which date from as early as 1150[161]
are among the largest and finest in France, having a span of some
fifty-six feet. As in Lombardy, the crown is highly domed up while to
facilitate the construction of the web of the vault with the least
possible centering, pointed diagonals and enclosing arches are employed.
By this means the entire vault was constructed on the ribs with no
centering at all for the lower courses, and a simple _cerce_, a device
consisting of two curved boards sliding along each other, for those
near the crown. At the same time the outward thrusts were greatly
reduced by the pointed section of the vault.



Since the Anjou churches possessed naves of wide span, it is not
surprising to find that their builders soon added ridge ribs beneath the
vault. That these were not mere cover-joints to conceal an irregular
intersection of the masonry, as Choisy suggests,[162] would seem to be
proved by the fact that the courses meet in a straight line at the ridge
in by far the greater number of Anjou churches in which they are
employed,--for example in La Couture at Le Mans (Fig. 20),
Airaines,[163] and numerous churches with small torus ribs, as well as
by the fact that such ridge ribs are sometimes omitted even when the
masonry is laid up in courses of equal width and therefore
interpenetrating at the ridge, as in Avesnières (Mayenne)[164] near
Laval. If not, however, primarily a cover-joint, these ribs did at least
possess both a structural and decorative quality. In the first place
they helped to keep the keystone of the diagonals rigidly fixed during
the building process, and furthermore, they gave an absolutely straight
line to the vault crown which was always difficult to adjust,
particularly in a vault of large size. One of the best and earliest
examples of the employment of such ribs appears in the nave of Notre
Dame-de-la-Couture at Le Mans (Fig. 20) which dates from about 1200, and
a later example is afforded by the church of Saint-Avit-Sénieur
(Dordogne),[165] where the vaults are of the thirteenth century and
replace an original series of domes on pendentives of true Perigord


In all of the Anjou vaults thus far discussed, the ribs are of
comparatively heavy section and placed entirely beneath the vault
surface, but there was to be a decided change in the thirteenth
century. It has already been noted that domed up vaults could be erected
almost without centering and exerted little if any pressure upon the
ribs beneath them. Realizing this, the builders of Anjou soon began to
reduce the size of the ribs until they became little more than torus
mouldings running along the groin and ridge of the vault. As an actual
fact, however, these torus mouldings were carved upon a sunken rib flush
with the surface of the panel, which, if it no longer furnished a
support for the vault, at least formed a sort of permanent centering
dividing the surface to be vaulted into distinct severies and marking
the line of their intersection in an absolutely correct curve. Such
vaults are closely allied to those of groined type, the ribs playing
practically the same part as those of brick in Roman concrete vaulting.
Since, however, in the Anjou system the ribs always were merely a
permanent centering which could easily be removed without destroying the
vault, a sunken centering was quite as efficient in serving the purpose
of vault division while the torus afforded a certain amount of surface

Of this typical Anjou construction, there are numerous examples. At
Poitiers, in the church of Sainte Radegonde the ribs are of reduced size
but not quite flush with the vault surface and the same is true at
Saint-Hilaire--Saint-Florent near Saumur (Marne-et-Loire),[166] while
the choir and transept of Angers cathedral (Fig. 19), and the later bays
of the cathedral of Poitiers furnish examples of the standard type.
After a short period of experiment, the builders of Anjou became very
skillful in the construction of these ribs and vaults and frequently
employed them over bays of unusual plan and elevation as, for example,
in the chapel north of the choir aisle in Saint Serge at Angers (Fig.

An instance of the influence of Anjou construction upon the neighboring
territory, as well as of the relationship between this Gothic style and
the Romanesque school of Perigord, may perhaps be seen in the Old
Cathedral of Salamanca in Spain.[167] Here the three western bays of the
nave are covered with ordinary domes but with diagonal ribs beneath
them, while the two remaining bays have regular domed up Anjou vaults.
The date of this cathedral, cir. 1120-1178, may, perhaps, explain this
peculiar combination as being due to an Anjou-Gothic influence
displacing one of Perigord-Romanesque, in much the same manner as such
an influence displaced the Perigord-Romanesque architecture of western


[Illustration: FIG. 21.--ANGERS, SAINT SERGE.]

Besides its use in Lombardy and Anjou, the square nave bay with four
part cross-ribbed vaults, was employed to some extent in other parts of
Europe throughout the Gothic period.[168] Some of these are churches
without side aisles, but aisles are more commonly found, divided into
rectangular bays corresponding in number to those of the nave. Of the
single naved churches, San Francesco at Assisi,[169] is a good example.
Although dating from 1236-1259, its vault ribs are still heavy and
almost square in section, as if derived from Lombard prototypes. But
they differ in being of pointed section and in not giving to the vaults
a domed up crown. In this they would seem to be examples of French
influence upon Lombard tradition.


An early church with square nave bays and ribbed vaults over rectangular
bays in the side aisles (Plate I-b), is to be found at Bury (Oise)

[Illustration: FIG. 22.--BURY, CHURCH.]

22). It probably dates from about 1125, and is an important monument of
the Transitional period. Its nave vaults are quite highly domed and in
this respect seem somewhat Lombard, but their pointed arches and awkward
construction indicate an effort on the part of the builders toward
reducing this doming and a dawning consciousness of the value of the
pointed arch in the construction of ribbed vaults. This is further shown
in the side aisles. Because of the rectangular shape of the bays, the
problem was presented of getting three sets of ribs of different span to
rise to the same or practically the same height. Not being thoroughly
familiar with the flexibility of the pointed rib, the builders at Bury
were naturally somewhat clumsy in its use. Thus, the diagonals were made
segmental in elevation to lower them to the level of the pier arches,
while masonry was piled on the crown of the transverse ribs, or their
voussoirs widened, to bring them up to the level of the vault
panel.[170] A few such experimental steps as these at Bury, were all
that were necessary to give the builders a mastery of the use of the
pointed arch in ribbed vaulting.


[Illustration: FIG. 23.--BURY, CHURCH.]

But there is another feature of the side aisle vaults which is worthy of
note before turning to the more developed churches which resemble Bury
in their arrangement of vaulting bays. This is the use of small caryatid
figures which appear at the springing of the diagonal ribs (Fig.
23).[171] These would seem to serve a purely decorative purpose, perhaps
to distract attention from the great size of the ribs behind them, or to
give an apparent lightness to the vault itself by seemingly placing its
burden upon such insignificant shoulders, or more probably still, the
figures served to break the transition from shaft to rib by concealing
the impost of the latter. Whatever their explanation, other examples
besides those at Bury are to be seen. Of these, the angels--now badly
mutilated--at the base of the ribs in the narthex of Saint Ours at
Loches (Indre-et-Loire) (Fig. 24)[172] are especially interesting, and
perhaps account for the tiny figures employed at the springing of the
ridge ribs in a number of churches in Anjou, such as Angers, Saint Serge
(Fig. 21), as well as for the larger figures in the apse of Notre
Dame-de-la-Couture at Le Mans (Fig. 20).[173] It may even be through the
influence of such figures as these that grotesques were used to support
the small shafts in the arcade of the triforium passage in the cathedral
of Nevers (Nièvre) (Fig. 25).

[Illustration: FIG. 24.--LOCHES, SAINT OURS.]


[Illustration: FIG. 25.--NEVERS, CATHEDRAL.]

Returning to the churches later in date than Bury but vaulted on the
same plan, it will be found that there are but few examples in France,
an interesting fact for which an explanation will later be
attempted.[174] The lower story of the Sainte Chapelle at Paris (cir.
1250) furnishes one of the rare examples, but here the nave and aisles
are of the same height and so do not exactly resemble the system at
Bury. Because of their narrowness, the side aisle vaults of the Sainte
Chapelle did not furnish proper abutment for those of the nave, and the
builders found it necessary to add tie-rods and even transverse half
arches forming veritable interior flying buttresses at about half the
height of the transverse ribs. This is, however, a most unusual

It was in Italy more than elsewhere that the method of square nave and
rectangular aisle bays was adopted. Many of the largest churches of the
Gothic period in that country were thus constructed. Among these, Santa
Maria Novella at Florence (end of the thirteenth and beginning of the
fourteenth centuries) has nave bays which are practically square, while
the cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore (fourteenth century) in the same
city is a much larger church more strictly following the type.[175] This
vast edifice presented such a vaulting problem that the builders did not
hesitate to resort to the use of iron tie-rods to counteract the
thrusts,--a subterfuge common enough in Italian architecture, of which
the church of the Frari at Venice (after 1250) presents an exaggerated


Several factors enter into the lack of popularity of the vaulting system
just described especially in the more northern countries, but the
fundamental one would seem to be the difficulty of properly lighting
churches thus covered. If an examination be made of the churches with a
single broad nave and no aisles it will be seen that in Italy, where a
comparatively small proportion of window space was necessary, the
builders were content with a single window in each nave bay as for
example, in San Francesco at Assisi. In France, on the other hand, the
light thus admitted would have proved inadequate, and in such churches
as the cathedral of Angers (Fig. 19) and Sainte Radegonde at Poitiers
two windows were introduced under each wall rib. This is, however, an
awkward arrangement because these windows do not properly fill the wall
space, and though this is better accomplished by adding a circular
window above the upright pair as was done in La Couture at Le Mans (Fig.
20), still the effect even then is not satisfactory and much solid wall
which might be utilized for windows is wasted. Moreover, in a church
with side aisles, the clerestory arrangement was still more troublesome
since important structural difficulties were involved. To raise a great
four part vault high above the aisles in order to obtain a large
clerestory was no easy task because of the excessive thrust which such a
vault exercised at its four points of support. In Italy, where the
amount of light required was not great, a very low clerestory with
small, circular windows, one to each bay, was all that was essential,
and so in such churches as Santa Maria Novella and the cathedral at
Florence the nave vault was placed at a point only slightly above the
vaults of the aisles, and its thrusts offset by simple ramping walls
beneath the side aisle roofs. Such a church in France would have been
inadequately lighted, and even if a greater structural skill permitted
the French to erect loftier clerestories than those in Italy, there
remained the difficulty of arranging the windows to get the maximum of
light and the best appearance. A single opening occupying the entire
space beneath the wall rib would have been all head and no jamb. One
upright window would have admitted too little light for a large nave,
and two windows near together not only left a great deal of wall space
unused but were most awkwardly placed in churches where one nave bay
corresponded to two bays in the aisles as in Le Mans cathedral,[176]
because they were not on an axis with the arches of the nave arcade. On
the other hand, if placed on this axis, the resulting windows were
necessarily of small size like those in such Rhenish churches as the
cathedral of Speyer where a second stage of windows has been added one
in the center above each lower pair in a far from satisfactory manner
since it brings a window above the intermediate pier.


In view of these facts it is at least a reasonable assumption that the
lighting problem had much to do with the discarding by the French
builders of the simple square four-part nave vault. As a matter of fact,
however, they did not exactly discard it, but evolved from it a vault in
six cells, which, while it still retained the old division of the nave
into square bays, each corresponding to two bays in the aisle, at the
same time permitted the uniform treatment of these in elevation and made
possible larger windows,--one to each aisle bay,--symmetrically placed
and, in the course of time filling the entire space beneath the wall
ribs. This six-part ribbed vaulting would seem to have originated early
in the twelfth century, in the French province of Normandy. This
province has already been mentioned as the center of a Romanesque
school, which extended over the greater part of England after the
conquest of 1066, and reached its height during the reign of Duke
William, the Conqueror (1035-1087), when a vast number of churches were
constructed, many of them of large size. These were in general wooden
roofed throughout, though, occasionally, as has been shown,[177] groined
vaults were used in the choir or aisles, or both. Toward the beginning
of the twelfth century, however, the Norman builders determined to vault
the naves of a number of these churches, among them the two abbeys at
Caen, and the result of this determination was the evolution of the true
and false six-part vault.

Like the Rhine provinces, Normandy had always been strongly influenced
by the methods of building developed in Lombardy. Whether this was due
to the presence in Normandy of such men as Lanfranc,--who was born in
Pavia in 1005 and became successively prior of Bec (1045-1066), abbot of
Saint Étienne at Caen (1066), and archbishop of Canterbury (1070-1089),
and who may have kept Normandy closely in touch with Lombardy,--or
whether there were other more powerful influences, it is impossible to
state, but in any event the architectural analogies between the two
schools are striking. This is especially true of the type of shafted
pier most frequently found in Normandy, and of the alternate system of
light and heavy supports, which, while it does not characterize all the
churches of the school, is found in many of them. Thus when the Norman
builders determined to vault their great churches at Caen, one would
naturally expect to find them turning to Lombardy for a method of vault
construction, especially since Sant’ Ambrogio at Milan had been
successfully completed at least a quarter of a century before their
determination was made. And in fact this is probably what they did. But
there were certain differences in structure between the churches of the
two schools which made it impossible for the Norman builders to adopt
unchanged, the heavy square, domed-up, cross-ribbed vaults of Lombardy.
The first of these differences lay in the fact that the Norman churches
were originally built for wooden roofs,--which may even have been in
place, in many cases, when the vaults were begun,--while the Lombard
churches were planned from the ground for their vaulting. The second
difference was, that the Norman interior system possessed a clerestory
window of considerable size centered above each of the arches opening
into the side aisles,--that is two in each wall of what would be a
square nave bay,--while the Lombard churches either had no clerestory at
all, as at Sant’ Ambrogio, or one in which the windows were small and
there was no attempt to center them as in San Michele at Pavia.

It was natural that the Norman builders should have preferred to
preserve their interior and exterior elevations as nearly as possible as
they were when only a wooden roof was used, both to avoid the expense
which would be involved in reconstruction and to preserve the large
clerestory so essential in a northern country. To vault these churches
and at the same time save this clerestory would seem to have been the
problem, therefore, which the builders set themselves to solve. That
they attempted to use the four-part vault in its solution will be seen
from an examination of the seven vaulted churches[178] still remaining
in which the old system of square nave bays is found, for in four of
these a variant of four-part ribbed vaulting was employed while in the
other three a new method was developed out of the four-part type.

A study of the two abbeys at Caen will illustrate this. Of the two,
Saint Étienne or the Abbaye-aux-Hommes (cir. 1064-1066) would seem to be
the earlier as far as its vaulting is concerned and this would seem to
date from about 1135. In its nave (Fig. 26) the alternate system of
supports is employed, though all the piers are of almost the same
section with a single shaft carried up the inner face. The aisles are in
two stories and there is a clerestory with a single window in each bay.
The nave was originally covered with a wooden roof. With this elevation
existing before the church was vaulted it is quite possible to account
for the form which this vaulting assumed. The first step must have been
to divide the nave into square bays by transverse arches,--assuming that
these were not already in place. The springing of these arches must
naturally have been governed by that of those which opened into the
crossing, and the level of their crowns, by the wooden timbering of the
roofs,--which may well have been in place when the vaults were built.
The result was that these transverse arches had to rise from a point as
low as the clerestory string-course and could only be a slightly stilted
semicircle in elevation. If the

[Illustration: FIG. 26.--CAEN, SAINT ÉTIENNE.]

bays thus constituted were to be covered by four-part vaults of Lombard
type, the next step would have been to erect diagonals of semicircular
section thus doming up the vault at the crown, but at Caen such
diagonals would have rendered necessary an entire change in the
timbering of the roof because their intersection would have risen above
the level of the trusses. Hence segmental diagonals were substituted.
Upon this skeleton of ribs, it would have been quite possible to place a
four-part vault, but the wall intersection of its panels would have cut
off the heads of the clerestory windows. Several methods could have been
used to avoid this. In the first place the severies could have been so
shaped as to cut the walls in a curve above the window, but this would
have given a flattened form to the panel and rendered it most difficult
both to construct and to support when in place. A second expedient would
have been to reduce the size of the windows but this, besides cutting
off most necessary light would have utterly destroyed the splendid
proportions between the horizontal divisions of the Norman interior. A
third method would have been to move the windows toward the intermediate
pier, but this would have destroyed the axis line of the aisle,
triforium, and window arches, and was wisely rejected. Lastly the
imposts of the ribs could have been raised, but even this would have
introduced enormous structural changes: first, because it would have
rendered necessary a change in the timbering, or else raising the entire
roof of the church; second, because it would have placed the new impost
out of level with the crossing arches; third, because it would have
greatly increased the thrust of the vault, already most difficult to
meet because of the segmental form of the diagonals and the lack of
extensive knowledge of buttressing principles on the part of the Norman

To avoid all these difficulties and still retain the windows, a new
method of vaulting was evolved. An intermediate transverse arch was
added meeting the diagonals at their intersection, and above the
triangular window cells thus formed, separate vault panels were
constructed (Fig. 26). The line of the window heads was thus left
undisturbed and the six-part vault created (Plate I-c).


Of course, the foregoing suggestion that the six-part vault was evolved
from four-part vaulting is largely conjectural, but an examination of
other churches in Normandy would seem to show that the Norman builders
almost always preferred to use the simple four-part vault in a slightly
modified form whenever it was possible to do so and still retain the
clerestory windows, rather than to employ the developed six-part type.
This modified four-part vault may properly be termed false or
pseudo-sex-partite. That it was not a mere prototype of the more
developed six-part form would seem to be shown by the fact that it was
built in churches both contemporary with, and subsequent to those with
true six-part vaults.

A good example of pseudo-sexpartite vaulting, for comparison with that
of Saint Étienne (Fig. 26), is afforded by La Trinité or the
Abbaye-aux-Dames at Caen (Fig. 27). It would seem probable that the
upper portions of this church were extensively rebuilt at the time when
vaulting was added. In this rebuilding, concealed flying-buttresses were
constructed beneath the side-aisle roofs, and these, together with the
solid wall which

[Illustration: FIG. 27.--CAEN, LA TRINITÉ.]

replaces the open triforium gallery of Saint Étienne, made it possible
to raise the level of the transverse arches of the vaulting to a point
considerably above the clerestory string-course. Furthermore, since the
wooden outer roof was probably built after the vaults, it was possible
to use diagonals whose crowns were higher than those of the transverse
arches, and still place them beneath the roof trusses. With such a
skeleton of ribs as a basis, the builders proceeded to erect a four-part
vault over each nave bay, or, in other words, enclosing two side aisle
arches. Because of the higher impost of the vault ribs, the wall
intersection of the vault cells easily cleared the window heads.[179]
Curiously enough, however, the builders connected the intermediate piers
with a transverse arch having a flat wall built upon it to the level of
the crown of the longitudinal vault cells (Fig. 27). There would seem to
be several explanations of this innovation. In the first place the pier
system of La Trinité is regular, not alternate, and a greater symmetry
was obtained by having corresponding transverse arches connecting each
pair of opposite piers. Moreover such arches had been used before 1114
in the church of Saint Georges at Boscherville, and quite possibly
elsewhere as well,[180] beneath a simple wooden roof, thus tying
together the lofty clerestory walls. In the second place, such arches
had already been introduced at Saint Étienne, though for a different
reason, as has been shown, and must have proved of value in keeping the
keystone of the diagonals rigidly fixed, besides having become a
characteristic of what was perhaps the major church of the school; and
in the third place, such an arch with its wall above aided materially
both in carrying a portion of the weight of the vault to the alternate
piers and in affording permanent centering, which was needed in Normandy
even more than in Lombardy because the Norman vault crown was never more
than slightly domed up.

Once introduced, this pseudo-sexpartite vault was not restricted to La
Trinité but was, as has been said, employed in no less than four of the
seven square-bayed Norman churches. At Ouistreham (Calvados)[181]
(vaulted cir. 1160), the impost was raised as in La Trinité and pointed
transverse arches were used, thus increasing the curve of the diagonals
and improving the stability of the vault. More interesting still,
however, are the two churches of Bernières-sur-Mer,[182] and Saint
Gabriel (Calvados)[183] (both vaulted cir. 1150), for in them the
builders have clung so tenaciously to the pseudo form in preference to
the true that they have actually moved the windows of each bay toward
the intermediate pier in order to use this method without raising the
imposts. The latter is particularly interesting because of the extreme
flatness of its diagonals for which the intermediate transverse arches
must certainly have proved an added support.

The preference of the Norman builders for this pseudo-sexpartite vault,
even to the extent of moving the windows out of center to make its use
possible, may find a further explanation than any yet given in the
simplicity of its construction. A comparison of one window severy of
Saint Étienne (Fig. 26) with one at La Trinité (Fig. 27) will illustrate
this point. In the former the surface of the vault is warped on either
side of the window, while in the latter, the stone courses run almost
directly back to the wall, so that the line of intersection is
approximately the projection of one-half of the diagonal rib. Of course
this second surface was far easier to calculate geometrically and could
be put in place by less skillful builders than the warped surface
required. It had, however, the fault of being in ill accord with the
curve of the window head, but, on the other hand, it possessed the
structural advantage of distributing the thrust of the vault over a
large amount of exterior wall. This might seem a fault rather than an
advantage, were it not that in such a primitive system as that of
Normandy, thickness of wall was the greatest factor in abutment and
thrusts which were widely distributed were thus more easily met than
those which were concentrated within narrow perpendicular limits.[184]
The advantage of the warped system in thus concentrating the thrusts
was, in fact, realized only when inert stability which forms the keynote
of Norman work gave way to the carefully balanced thrusts and
counter-thrusts of Gothic architecture.

The little church of Le Petit Quévilly (Seine-Inférieure)[185] (cir.
1156) would seem at first to disprove this Norman preference for
pseudo-sexpartite vaults. The imposts of its arches are sufficiently
high to permit of such a type, yet the real six-part vault was employed.
The explanation of this would seem to lie in the geographical situation
of the church, for it is not in Calvados, like the other examples, but
in Seine Inférieure near Rouen, or in other words on the border of the
Ile-de-France, where the six-part vault had been adopted with enthusiasm
and used as early as 1140, or some fifteen years previous to the
building of Petit-Quévilly, in the large abbey church of Saint Denis.

It is also difficult to explain the use of the true form in the seventh
of the vaulted churches, which is that of Creully (Calvados),[186] but
the fact that it has the same low imposts as Saint Étienne at Caen
combined with the evident purpose of the builders to keep the windows in
the center of the bays may perhaps furnish an explanation of its
appearance here.


The true six-part vault, as used in Saint Étienne, was far from being
perfect. In the first place, it possessed a number of inherent
structural faults. These lie chiefly in the unequal distribution of
thrusts, and the unequal size of the panels into which the vault is
divided. From an aesthetic point of view, two other faults might be
added: first, the decrease in the apparent length of the nave, due to
the fact that it was divided into a few large bays, instead of twice as
many smaller ones; and second, the fact that the crowns of the vault
cells above the windows do not run out perpendicularly from the
clerestory wall but at an awkward angle, thus greatly injuring the
symmetry of the bays. Yet in spite of these drawbacks, which were common
to all six-part vaulting, this system had a long period of popularity.
There are, however, certain structural weaknesses in these early Norman
vaults which were largely due to lack of experience on the part of the
builders, and not to the form of the vaults themselves. Wall ribs were,
for example, omitted, and the diagonals were made of segmental section,
thus rendering unnecessarily severe the thrusts of the vaults. Moreover,
such a church as St. Étienne was not planned from the ground for
vaulting and the piers had not the proper arrangement of shafts. Last of
all, the intermediate arches were of a rather ugly, stilted character,
possibly so constructed with an eye to a better distribution of light,
but in any event presenting an awkward appearance. All these faults were
gradually overcome in the Transitional and Early Gothic churches of the


That it should have been this province which favored the six-part system
is most curious, for at a date almost contemporary with St. Étienne at
Caen, ribbed vaults of rectangular plan had probably been constructed
over the naves of Saint Étienne at Beauvais and the abbey church at
Saint Germer-de-Fly (Oise) (cir. 1130-40). That this method was
abandoned in most of the remaining Transitional churches would seem to
have been due to the fact that the vaults of Saint Étienne at Beauvais
fell in, and those of Saint Germer did not prove very secure.[187] Such
builders as the Abbot Suger of Saint Denis, therefore, may very
naturally have looked to Normandy for a method of vaulting, since the
vaults of Saint Étienne at Caen had at least remained in place.

Whatever the cause of its introduction into the Ile-de-France may have
been, the six-part system was used at Saint Denis (Seine) (1140-1144)
and soon became the favorite method throughout the neighboring region.
Unfortunately Saint Denis and two other important churches of the
Transition, the cathedrals of Senlis (Oise) (cir. 1150) and Noyon (Oise)
(cir. 1140), which would undoubtedly have illustrated the progress in
six-part vaulting, no longer have their original vaults, and the
cathedral of Sens (Yonne) (1140-1168) (Fig. 28) remains as perhaps the
most important example of the early developed type.[188] Its vaults show
the great advance made in construction since the completion of Saint
Étienne at Caen. The diagonals are semicircular instead of segmental
arches, and the transverse ribs are pointed and all of similar curve,
giving a more symmetrical appearance and greatly reducing the thrusts.
Furthermore the piers are profiled from the ground according to the load
which they are to carry, and, last of all, a highly stilted wall rib is
added over each clerestory window, completing the skeleton of the vault
and making possible a larger expanse of glass and more satisfactory
illumination for the interior. Of course, the use of the flying
buttress, which had been introduced a short time before Sens was built,
contributed enormously to the advancement of vault construction and in
large measure explains such an improved form of vaulting as this is. In
fact, a heavy clerestory wall was no longer essential to the support of
the vault and it was only the fact that a large expanse of glass was not
safe from the pressure of the wind, which prevented the clerestory
windows from occupying the entire

[Illustration: FIG. 28.--SENS, CATHEDRAL.]

space beneath the formeret. With the invention of tracery, what little
wall remained, was to disappear. A further advance is shown in the
decidedly stilted form of the wall ribs, which (Fig. 28) concentrate all
the thrust of the vault upon a very narrow strip of exterior wall where
it was admirably met by the flying-buttress.[189] In fact, the system at
Sens might be considered perfected were it not for the unnecessary size
of the ribs, especially those running transversely. It remained for the
builders of the cathedral of Notre Dame at Paris (begun 1163) to reduce
all the ribs to the same size, and for the builders of the cathedral of
Bourges (Cher) (begun 1172), still further to reduce all but the
transverse arches and to employ the vault upon a scale even greater than
that of Paris. In fact, Bourges marks the high water mark of this system
of vaulting and by the beginning of the thirteenth century it was in
general, entirely given up[190] in favor of the four-part cross-ribbed
vault of rectangular plan, which regained its supremacy in the
Ile-de-France after the introduction of the flying-buttress with the
protection which this afforded against such a catastrophe as that which
probably befell Saint Étienne at Beauvais.

Although employed to a much greater extent in France[191] than
elsewhere, almost every country in Europe possesses a number of churches
with six-part vaults. Thus William of Sens introduced the system into
England, where it appears in Canterbury cathedral choir (1175) and later
in Lincoln transept[192] (cir. 1215). Italy possesses many examples,
among them the large churches of San Francesco at Bologna (cir. 1240),
the Certosa of Pavia (1396), and the small church of Corneto-Tarquinia
(Roma)[193] where the vault curiously enough appears over two bays of
rectangular plan which divide what would otherwise be practically a
single square nave bay.[194] Examples in other countries might be cited,
but in no case would they differ materially from the French prototypes.


The fact that six-part vaulting declined rapidly in favor toward the
beginning of the thirteenth century, and thus before the era of
complicated vaults had begun, probably explains the few variants from
the standard type. Of these, the simplest consists in the addition of a
ridge rib along the longitudinal vault crown. This appears in one bay of
the choir of Lincoln cathedral[195] (Fig. 35), where the crown line is
horizontal, and in the great transept of the same church where it rises
and falls in accordance with the doming up of the central keystone. The
small church of Saint Jacques at Reims (Marne) (1183) (Fig. 29) presents
a still better example of this irregular ridge rib. The vault of Saint
Jacques would seem from its general appearance to be based upon Anjou
models and it is not surprising to find its possible prototype in the
church of La Trinité at Angers (Fig. 30). The reason for the employment
of the extra rib is probably twofold: first, to lessen the size of the
transverse panels; and second, to render the arrangement of the ribs and
severies more symmetrical. In England, it is quite possible that it
served as a cover-joint as well, but in France this would not seem to
hold true, at least in La Trinité, where the stone courses are laid with
as much care as those in the simple four-part vaults of Angers cathedral
(see Fig. 19).

[Illustration: FIG. 29.--REIMS, SAINT JACQUES.]

La Trinité at Angers (Fig. 30) is also an important variant of the
six-part vault because the impost of its intermediate rib is raised to a
considerably higher level than that of the principal transverse arches
and the intermediate rib itself is highly stilted. This would seem
further evidence that the six-part vault was evolved from the four-part
vault in an effort to make the arrangement of the windows more
symmetrical in a single nave bay corresponding to two bays in the
aisles;[196] for if La Trinité with its series of side chapels, two to
each nave bay, had been vaulted in the usual Anjou style and the windows
left as they now stand on the axis of each chapel arch, their heads
would either have been cut by the wall line of a four-part vault or
would have appeared awkwardly placed beneath it. The addition of an
intermediate transverse arch and the conversion of the vault into
sexpartite form restored the symmetry of piers, arches, and windows. In
order, however, to obtain as much light as possible and to produce the
effect of square nave bays, these intermediate transverse ribs were
stilted and their imposts raised. Nor was this stilting confined to
Anjou. It appears a number of times elsewhere often in churches where
the ridge rib was not employed for example, in the cathedrals of Bremen
and Limburg[197] in Germany, and in those of Ribe,[198] and Viborg in

[Illustration: FIG. 30.--ANGERS, LA TRINITÉ.]

The church of the Certosa of Pavia in Italy (1396) has six-part vaults
of similar type but presents a curious arrangement of square nave bays
corresponding to rectangular bays in the side aisles (Plate I-d).[200]
The intermediate transverse arches, therefore, rise from corbels above
the crowns of the side aisle arches, a fact which explains their higher
imposts. Why such a vault should have been used can again be explained
by the desire to obtain the best possible arrangement of windows.
Five-part vaults had already been used in the aisles of the Certosa to
get square flanking chapels, and it was natural that the builders should
have wished to have a clerestory window corresponding to each exterior
bay of the church. The fact that square nave and rectangular aisle bays
were used at all would seem to have been due to the Italian fondness for
this system which caused the least possible obstruction of the church
interior by piers. The only curious feature is, therefore, the use of
the six-part, instead of the more natural four-part, vault.

A somewhat similar arrangement with the substitution of two four-part
vaults for the six-part vaults of Pavia is to be seen in the cathedral
of Magdeburg,[201] where the same combination of nave and aisle bays
occurs. The builders, like those of Pavia, first subdivided the outer
longitudinal cells of the side aisle vaults by a half rib in order to
obtain two windows instead of one, which would necessarily be of rather
clumsy shape or of small size were it placed below the long, low wall
rib of a simple rectangular four-part vault. Then to make the nave bays
and clerestory windows correspond to those of the aisles in exterior
elevation, as well as to obtain better window space, they constructed
two rectangular four-part vaults over each square nave bay with their
intermediate transverse rib resting on corbels above the aisle arches
(Plate I-e).


There is one more important variant of the six-part vault which is
especially interesting and unusual. It appears in the church of Saint
Quiriace at Provins (Seine-et-Marne) (cir. 1160) (Fig. 31)[202] and

[Illustration: FIG. 31.--PROVINS, SAINT QUIRIACE.]

consists in a division of the nave into great square bays each
corresponding, not to two, but to three square bays in the side aisle
(Plate I-f). The divisions thus formed are covered by what is really an
eight-part vault, which is precisely like six-part vaulting except that
there are three instead of two window cells in either side of each bay.
Needless to say the immense size of the transverse triangular severies
thus created presented a structural problem of much difficulty, and it
is not surprising that such a vault was but seldom imitated,[203]
particularly as the great discrepancy in the size of the vault cells and
the awkward angles formed by their crowns give a decidedly unpleasant
appearance. Nevertheless, there is one instance, at least, in which this
system was not only imitated but transformed into a ten-part vault. This
was at Boppart, Germany,[204] where the thirteenth century church has
vaults with four window cells and but a single pair of diagonals. To
break up the two remaining triangular severies, added surface ribs were
introduced (Plate I-g).


While the builders of Normandy were developing the sexpartite system
just discussed, those of the Ile-de-France were experimenting with the
simple four-part cross-ribbed vault of rectangular plan (Plate I-h). As
in Normandy, the earliest churches of the province were in the main
wooden roofed basilicas like the Basse-Oeuvre at Beauvais. When groined
vaults first appeared in the Romanesque period, they were generally
employed only in the side aisles, as at Morienval,[205] and if one may
judge from these vaults, which have unfortunately been rebuilt, they
were of slightly domed up section somewhat like those of Lombardy and
the Rhenish provinces. Toward the beginning of the twelfth century,
however, when the central power had been greatly strengthened under
Louis VI. (1108-1137), there began a marked architectural advance which
was destined to render this backward province the most important of all
in the development of Gothic architecture. One of the earliest churches
to mark this advance was Saint Étienne at Beauvais (probably early
twelfth century) (Fig. 32), which, if one may judge from the form of the
piers and the ribbed vault of the side aisles,[206] was planned from the
foundation for vaulting throughout. Unfortunately the original vaults of
the nave, if such existed, are no longer in position for they either
gave way from lack of support, a natural supposition since they had no
other abutment than the weight of the clerestory walls, or else they
were so injured by the fire of 1180 that it was necessary to replace
them by the existing vaults of the late twelfth century. These, while
they do not make up for the loss of their predecessors, are nevertheless
important because of their early date. They are antedated, however, by a
number of very important churches which still retain, in part at least,
their original vaulting.



The first of these is the English cathedral of Durham. The date of its
vaults is still the subject of a decided controversy, but whether they
were built between 1093 and 1133 as Bond,[207] Rivoira,[208] and
Moore[209] believe, or are later than those of Saint Denis, which is the
claim of Lasteyrie,[210] they are of sufficiently early date to be
important in a

[Illustration: FIG. 33.--DURHAM, CATHEDRAL.]

discussion of rectangular four-part vaulting. Those over the nave (Fig.
33) are especially interesting and furnish a unique variant of the
standard type. It was the apparent intention of the builders to roof the
nave with wood and for this purpose heavy transverse arches were
constructed between the alternate piers. When vaulting was determined
upon, the nave was therefore already divided into square bays each
containing two clerestory windows on a side. To vault these bays the
builders might naturally have been expected to adopt the Lombard system
of simple four-part vaults, but here in Durham, as in Saint Étienne at
Caen, the impost level of the transverse arches was so low that a
four-part vault would have made impossible the retention of the windows
already in position above each nave arch. As these were absolutely
essential in the north of England for lighting purposes, and also most
important in preserving the symmetry of the bays, a change either in
their size or position would have proved impractical. The six-part vault
was the Norman method of solving a similar problem. But the builders of
Durham invented a new system, made up of two rectangular cross-ribbed
vaults in each bay, their intermediate supports afforded by corbels, and
their alternate transverse arches omitted (Plate I-i). This omission of
the intermediate rib gives a very unusual character to the vault but it
preserves the alternate system with square nave bays so popular in
Norman work, and at the same time has a great advantage over the
six-part vault in that the transverse crown line of the window cells is
perpendicular to the outer wall. The panels are therefore more
symmetrical in elevation and the thrusts are more evenly distributed
from pier to pier. The large central severy, however, afforded a
difficult surface both for construction and support, and it is not
surprising that the system was not repeated. As in the early ribbed
vaults at Caen, wall ribs were not employed at Durham, and the abutment
was provided only by flat pilasters and concealed flying buttresses,
some of full and some of half arched form.[211]


That the rectangular four-part system of vaulting was developed in
Normandy, as well as in England and the Ile-de-France, and very possibly
independently of both, is proved by the early twelfth century abbey
church of Lessay (Manche) (cir. 1130).[212] If the vaults of Lessay are
an independent development it is hardly possible to see in them anything
else than another effort to vault a church with square nave bays and yet
provide the best possible vaulting to fit above the windows. A glance at
the choir[213] will show that the alternate system was here employed
just as in Saint Étienne at Caen, yet the builders introduced two
four-part vaults instead of one of six-part type in each bay.[214] The
transverse arches are still semicircular and the vault is somewhat
rudimentary. The system as a whole may be considered as a fourth
method[215] of the Norman builders to preserve their clerestory intact
and still vault their churches. A slight advance is shown in the vaults
at Pontorson (Manche) (middle of twelfth century). This is, however, a
small church without side aisles and its vaults are in almost square
bays with pointed transverse arches and considerably domed up at the
crown. Wall ribs are still lacking as at Durham and Lessay.


The abbey church of Saint Germer-de-Fly (Oise) (cir. 1140), which still
retains its original vaults in the choir and two eastern bays of the
nave, presents another and perhaps more important example of rectangular
four-part cross-ribbed vaulting. Its structural arches are of pointed
section, and the piers and walls are strengthened by concealed
flying-buttresses beneath the wooden roof of the triforium.[216] These
are similar to those which have already been noted in La Trinité at Caen
and in the nave of Durham,[217] but the vaults are superior in
construction to those at Durham and are also provided with transverse
arches between each rectangular bay. With the aid of this concealed
buttress and the retention of the heavy Romanesque walls and small
openings the vaults of Saint Germer were kept from falling, and it was
doubtless this fact which led to the extension of the four-part system
until it rivaled and at length became more popular than the six-part
vaulting imported from Normandy and used at exactly the same period in
the church of Saint Denis. A number of elementary features still
remained at St. Germer, however. The transverse arches are but slightly
pointed in section, the ribs are unusually heavy, and the diagonals of
the choir bay are supported upon corbels[218] showing that the shaft
arrangement was not yet in accord with the ribs to be carried.

A gradual development of the flying-buttress, and of the compound pier,
a reduction in the size of the ribs,[219] and many other structural
refinements rapidly followed one another in the period subsequent to the
construction of Saint Germer and led to the perfection of rectangular
four-part vaulting. The cathedral of Soissons (Aisne) (cir. 1212 on)
(Fig. 67), for example, shows a considerable structural advance over
Saint Germer. Its ribs are more decidedly pointed though still somewhat
heavy and there is no hesitation in raising the impost of the vault far
above the clerestory string-course, since its thrusts are easily met by
exterior flying-buttresses.


It is in the cathedral of Amiens (beg. 1218) (Fig. 69), however, that
the four-part vault reaches its most daring if not its most perfect
form. Here the builders constructed a vault similar to that of Soissons,
but rising over one hundred and forty feet from the pavement. Its ribs
are perfectly proportioned and finely moulded and the buttress system is
completely developed. One awkward feature does, however, appear in the
fact that the builders, perhaps, in order to concentrate the thrusts of
the vaults upon the narrowest possible strip of outer wall, have made
the wall intersection of the window severies follow an irregular curve
which does not correspond to that of the wall rib in the portion from
the impost to a point near the haunch. In spite of this defect, the
cathedral of Amiens may well be considered as marking the highest
development of rectangular ribbed vaulting. A study of other Gothic
churches will disclose few, if any, improvements, either in appearance
or construction, and many of the finest closely resemble this


Such a study will, however, show a decided difference in the elevation
of the transverse ribs and consequent shape of the vaults, which is
worthy of some notice. If, for example, a triangle be inscribed beneath
a number of these transverse arches, it will be found that the angles
inside its base vary from about fifty degrees in Saint Germer-de-Fly,
Rouen cathedral and Beverley Minster;[220] to fifty-five degrees in
Soissons, Amiens, Salisbury, and Milan cathedrals, and Westminster
Abbey; and even to sixty degrees in the cathedrals of Cologne and Reims.
Moreover there is a great difference in the curve of these same
transverse ribs. Those in Saint Germer, Beverley, and Rouen closely
approach a semicircle, those in Amiens and Salisbury are much more
pointed, but made up of two arcs without, however, a long radius with
the resulting flattened appearance to be noted at Cologne and Reims and
more decidedly at Milan. All this would seem to indicate that the
elevation of these ribbed vaults,--and this is true of six-part and
complex vaults as well,--was largely a matter of individual taste with a
tendency to favor the form used at Amiens. The reason for the employment
of very sharp curves like those of Reims, Cologne and Milan, was
doubtless due to the appreciation on the part of the builders of the
fact that such curves greatly reduced the outward thrusts, rather than
to any idea of beauty of appearance to be gained, for in this they are
perhaps inferior to the less pointed examples.


[Illustration: FIG. 34.--ALBI, CATHEDRAL.]

The use of rectangular four-part ribbed vaulting was not confined to
churches with side aisles, but appears also in those with a single broad
nave. It is the method employed in the Sainte Chapelle at Paris (fin.
1248), where there are simple salient buttresses, and there is a
splendid example in the Cathedral of Albi (Tarn) (begun 1282) (Fig. 34),
where the nave has a very wide span and is flanked by chapels in two
stories between heavy pier buttresses which are thus enclosed in the
church in a truly Byzantine manner. In the smaller church of Saint
Nicholas at Toulouse these buttress chapels are in but one story and the
bays are more nearly square in plan, a compromise between the square and
rectangular systems which appears on an even larger scale in the
cathedral of Saint Bertrand-des-Comminges (Haute-Garonne) (cir. 1304).
As far as construction is concerned these vaults over a single broad
nave offer no advance over those in churches with side aisles, not even
requiring a scientific system of flying buttresses to offset their
outward thrust. Their only importance lies in the very broad space
sometimes covered by them.[221]


The simple forms of ribbed vaulting just discussed were the ones most
frequently in use during the best Gothic period. But among certain
builders, there was a tendency even in the thirteenth century to
introduce additional ribs into the vaults, a custom which later gave
rise to a vast number of complicated vaulting systems especially in
England, Spain and Germany. Even to enumerate these would be almost
impossible and a description of each is out of the question, hence only
those combinations which were frequently employed, or which gave rise to
new types, will be discussed.


Naturally enough the ridge rib was the first to be added to those
already constituting the four-part vault (Plate I-j). But the vaults
thus formed should be divided into two groups. The first most frequently
found in France and already discussed in connection with the churches of
Anjou,[222] is that in which the surface of each severy has a curved
crown and the rib follows this curve, with the object, probably, both of
subdividing the large rectangular bays, of marking with absolute
exactness the crown line, and of aiding in rigidly fixing the central
keystone, or even in the case of a six-part vault, of giving the same
apparent division to the transverse severies as is found in those
running longitudinally.

Though very similar to this first type, the second, which was developed
and most used in England, is different, in that the ridge line is here

[Illustration: FIG. 35.--LINCOLN, CATHEDRAL.]

perfectly horizontal, and the main purpose of the rib is to mark this
horizontal line with absolute exactness and to give, what Bond terms a
spine,[223] to the vault skeleton. In the earliest example in England,
the transept aisle of Ripon cathedral (cir. 1170),[224] the ribs are so
small as to be purely decorative. This leaves the choir of Lincoln
cathedral (begun 1192) (Fig. 35) as the first English example of
importance in which a true ridge rib appears. It is not yet absolutely
horizontal since there is a slight curve to each severy. Its presence
would seem to be due to the peculiar form of the vault, in which the
ribs enclosing the window cells do not meet at a common point of
intersection but at two points somewhat distant from each other along
the ridge line where each pair is abutted by a single rib running to the
nearest impost on the opposite wall (Plate I-l). This arrangement, which
was probably planned to increase the amount of centering in the large
transverse panels and thus render their construction easier,[225] gives
an extra keystone in each bay and it is quite possible that the ridge
rib was introduced in order to unite these intersections and fix them in
a straight line. It does not appear in the window cells where it would
of course have been at an awkward angle with the outer walls.

Once introduced into English architecture the ridge rib was destined to
play a most important part in its development. In the first place, it
provided an easy method of assuring an absolutely level and straight
ridge line and was thus especially welcome to English builders, who had
been trained in the construction of vaults which were never more than
slightly and often not at all domed up, and who were, besides, rather
inferior masons, and not particularly skillful in making their masonry
courses intersect in a perfect manner. In the second place, it furnished
admirable abutment for tiercerons or intermediate ribs,[226] which were
perhaps suggested by such a vault as Lincoln choir as being valuable
additions to the rib skeleton and were thereafter very generally used to
provide more permanent centering and to further reduce the size of the
vault panels.

It is, however, notable that a longitudinal ridge rib appears added to
simple four-part vaults without the introduction of tiercerons or
transverse ridge ribs at a comparatively early date in Worcester
cathedral choir (after 1224),[227] Westminster Abbey choir (1245-1260),
and Gloucester cathedral nave (1245), and that it is used in France in a
number of churches where there are no tiercerons.[228] In such cases it
serves the primary purpose of clearly marking the ridge line, which is
especially difficult to adjust in vaults with level crowns. That it was
the longitudinal effect thus produced which was desired is evidenced by
the fact that except when there were tiercerons in the longitudinal
cells, the transverse ridge rib was rarely added to such vaults (Plate
I-k). Among the very few examples are the cathedral of Tulle (Corrèze)
(twelfth century) and the fifteenth century chapel of the château at
Blois, both of them in France.[229]


The introduction of a ridge rib was only the first step in the
development of multiple rib vaulting. It was not long before the
builders, especially in England, began to add intermediate ribs or
tiercerons between the transverse arches and the diagonals. These may
possibly have been inspired by the extra ribs in the choir of Lincoln
cathedral (Fig. 35 and Plate I-l), but whatever their origin they became
a common feature of later Gothic and gave rise to what may be termed
tierceron vaulting. In the transverse vault severies, which in England
were really sections of a tunnel vault because of the level crown line,
these ribs acted largely as added centering and as decorative features.
But when used in the window cells they served another purpose as well
for they enabled the builders to convert the ordinary “ploughshare”
curve of the vaulting conoid into a series of flat panels which could be
constructed with much less difficulty as far as the laying of the
masonry courses was concerned.

Sometimes the tiercerons are used in both the transverse and the
longitudinal severies and sometimes only in one of them. Their number
also varies greatly, though of course they are always in pairs. Lincoln
cathedral presbytery (cir. 1266-1280) (Fig. 36) affords an example of a
single pair in each of the large transverse severies with none in the
window cells (Plate I-m), while Chester cathedral chapter-house (first
half of the thirteenth century), and Worcester cathedral nave (cir.
1350-1377) (Fig. 89) are rare examples of the opposite arrangement
(Plate I-n).[230] To support such tiercerons as these at their crown, a
transverse ridge rib was added to the construction, sometimes as in
Chester chapter-house (Plate I-n), Lincoln nave (before 1233),[231] and
Ely presbytery (1235-1252),[232] running out only to the new keystone
(Plate I-o) and thus playing a purely structural rôle, but often
extending to the window head (Plate I-p) as in Lichfield cathedral south
transept (cir. 1220) and choir (fourteenth century). These portions of
Lichfield, together with the nave of Lincoln and the presbytery of Ely
cathedral, are also important as showing the employment of a single
pair of tiercerons in each of the four panels of the vaulting bays
(Plate I-p). This system is slightly varied in the naves of Lichfield
and Hereford (Plate I-q-r), where the true transverse arch is omitted
between the bays, but these vaults like those of Durham are merely
variants of the more standard types.[233]

[Illustration: FIG. 36.--LINCOLN, CATHEDRAL.]

The introduction of a single pair of tiercerons in each major panel was
soon followed, especially in the window cells where the surface was
warped, by the use of two (Plate I-s) and even of three such pairs
(Plate I-t). Two are found in Hereford cathedral south transept (cir.
1400),[234] and in the choir of Saint Mary Redcliffe at Bristol
(fifteenth century),[235] while three appear at Exeter (between
1280-1350) (Fig. 37). This last may well be said to mark the highest
point in tierceron vaulting,[236] and it must be acknowledged that the
decorative effect produced is most pleasing. Placed as they are over
comparatively low naves, these vaults harmonize in an admirable manner
with the clustered piers, moulded archivolts, and substantial walls
provided for their support, and carry to the crown of the vault that
wealth of moulding which lends so much of grace and charm to the English
Gothic of the Decorated period. Were such vaults used above the lofty
naves of Amiens or Beauvais, they would doubtless appear oppressively
heavy but the lowness and solidity of English construction entirely
dispels such a feeling. Of course, tiercerons are not essential members
of the vaulting system and perhaps they were better omitted altogether,
but that their usage can be vindicated from an aesthetic standpoint is
proved by such vaults as those at Exeter.

[Illustration: FIG. 37.--EXETER, CATHEDRAL.]


Tierceron vaulting did not, however, mark the limit to which the English
Gothic builders were to carry their passion for added ribs and complex
design, and it was not long before short connecting ribs known as
liernes were added to the tierceron vaults. These may have been
introduced by the builders from a feeling that the tiercerons did not
have sufficient abutment, as Bond suggests,[237] but it is more
reasonable to suppose that they are the result of a striving for still
more complex vaulting forms and still more decorative patterns in vault

The combinations in lierne vaulting are of course without number and
only a few can be discussed. The simplest is that known as the star
vault (Plate I-u) in which there is a single pair of tiercerons in each
of the four main vault panels with short liernes connecting the points
of their intersection with the ridge ribs, with a point in the same
plane on each of the diagonals. A simple example occurs at Oxford in the
Proscholium[238] and one of the same general type but much elaborated,
in the choir of Oxford cathedral.[239]

It is almost impossible to classify the remaining lierne vaults under
separate heads, though there are certain characteristics which belong to
one group and not to another. For example, some, like those of the nave
of Saint Mary Redcliffe at Bristol[240] have no ridge rib, others have a
single rib like that found in tierceron vaulting. These last might again
be classified according to the number and arrangement of their liernes.
Thus in Ely cathedral choir[241] (beg. 1322) and Norwich nave (vaults
cir. 1470)[242] there are but few liernes, while in Winchester cathedral
nave (cir. 1394-1460) there is a much larger number. Still other lierne
vaults have more than one ridge rib. Of these, the choir (1337-1357),
and Lady chapel of Gloucester cathedral (cir. 1457-1489), and the nave
of Tewkesbury Abbey (Fig. 38)[243] are representative and varied
examples. All have three ridge ribs which is the standard number.


In these last three churches, however, as well as in Winchester nave and
in numerous other examples not cited, there is a still more decided
change in the form of the vault than that brought about by the use of
liernes or added ridge ribs. This lies in the fact that the window cells
no longer rise to the full height of the vault, so that the entire
system is practically a reversion to the Romanesque tunnel vault pierced
on either side with lunettes, in other words, to the interpenetrating
vault. The ribs merely form a permanent centering, and generally no
attempt is made to concentrate the pressure on a narrow strip of
wall,[244] or to make use of flying-buttresses.[245] Except for the
decoration which they afford, the ribs have little structural value
though they do make possible lighter masonry in the web than would be
possible in a continuous tunnel vault.

[Illustration: FIG. 38.--TEWKESBURY, ABBEY CHURCH.]

The height of the window cells in such vaults was not at all fixed
though it was quite frequently determined by the intersection of two
ribs running diagonally from each side of the window to the second
impost on the opposite wall of the church.[246] Such window cells as
these naturally left a large central space along the crown of the vault,
which was usually decorated by extra lierne and ridge ribs.


Not content with the liernes as a decoration, an innovation appears in
Tewkesbury choir,[247] Saint George’s Chapel at Windsor[248] and
elsewhere, which consists in the application of raised mouldings forming
tracery patterns on the few open spaces left between the ribs of complex
lierne vaults. It is as if the tracery of a window were applied to a
background of stone, with ribs taking the place of mullions. The
patterns are usually trefoils or quatrefoils, but other forms, as, for
example, the cross shaped flowers in the fan vaults at Peterborough
(Fig. 39) also occur.

The natural consequence of such added mouldings and ribs as those just
described was to bring about the total sacrifice of the structural
principles of ribbed vaulting to those which were purely decorative, and
it is not surprising that such a vault as that of the choir of Wells
cathedral (1329-1363),[249] in which the ribs have but the slightest
claim to structural purpose should be found even at its early date as an
example of this decadent stage in English vaulting.


But the addition of multiple ribs lead not only to such debased vaulting
as that at Wells. It must have played a large part in the creation of
the distinctly novel construction known as fan vaulting. For in a vault
with many tiercerons, as for example, that at Exeter (Fig. 37), or
Hereford south transept,[250] the combined surfaces between the ribs is
a cross between half of a hollow sided pyramid and a cone. This is true
because, like most of the English churches, the wall rib is not highly
stilted to concentrate pressures on a narrow strip of outer wall, or to
leave a more pointed window head as in France, but it and the tiercerons
and diagonals have much the same curvature. It was natural, therefore,
that the English

[Illustration: FIG. 39.--PETERBOROUGH, CATHEDRAL.]

builders should have conceived the idea of making all the ribs of just
the same curvature but of different length according to their several
positions. This they did in Sherborne Abbey nave (vaulted
1475-1504).[251] Here the builders very logically used the shortest rib
as a measure and connected the points at corresponding distances from
the imposts on each rib with liernes. A central space was thus left,
which at Sherborne was covered by prolonging a number of the radiants
and adding a tracery of liernes and mouldings. The vault as thus
constituted is not yet of pure fan type. It was first necessary to
replace the ring of straight liernes by those of curved plan and to add
one ring above another at the various points of intersection of the
tiercerons and transverse ridge ribs, until practically the entire space
to the vault crown was filled. Thus, in certain of the fan vaults of
Peterborough (second half of the fifteenth century) (Fig. 39), there are
three such rings leaving but a small diamond shaped central space which
is largely filled by the keystone of the bay.[252] Others down the side
aisles where the bays are smaller have but a single ring and a much
larger central space. In vaults of the Peterborough type, the radiants
are continued through this central panel in a decorative way, but in the
cloister at Gloucester (before 1412) (Fig. 40), this portion of the
vault is left entirely flat and decorated with tracery patterns in
raised mouldings such as are usually found in window heads. The conoids,
also, are covered with tracery rather than continuous ribs and the term
“Fan-Tracery Vaults” might properly be used to distinguish them from the
more common type.[253]


In the matter of construction, fan vaulting differs from any preceding
method. Its ribs are all of precisely the same curvature, their length
being determined by the position which they occupy, and they are no
longer supporting but rather decorative members. The lower portions of
some of the vaults still resemble true ribbed vaulting in that the
tas-de-charge is used, and also in the fact that the ribs still rise in
a single long voussoir from their imposts to the first horizontal ring.
But from this point to the crown, the ribs and mouldings are merely
carved in relief upon the jointed masonry, which they therefore in no
way support. In some fan vaults, as, for example, in Islip’s chapel in
Westminster Abbey,[254] and in Gloucester cathedral cloister (Fig. 40),
the rib is even carved upon the vault masonry for its entire length.

The one structural advantage which the fan vault afforded lay in the
fact that it could be built up of practically horizontal courses in a
manner to exert very little outward thrust; while the substitution of
curved, for straight liernes did away with the awkward angular
intersections characteristic of lierne vaulting. Altogether, it is both
a clever and beautiful type of vaulting well suited to the builders of
the Perpendicular Gothic period, with their fondness for intricate
decorative rather than structural problems.


Because of its late development, fan vaulting was not extensively used
to cover an entire church. Nevertheless, King’s College Chapel at
Cambridge (vaulted between 1512 and 1515),[255] and Bath Abbey (cir.
1500-1540),[256] furnish two excellent examples, to which might be added
Henry VII’s Chapel at Westminster (cir. 1500-1520).[257] The latter is
essentially of fan type, though the fans are in combination with a
system of transverse arches and pendants best understood from the
photograph and drawing just cited. The vaults in the foregoing churches,
do however exhibit minor differences. For example, the transverse arches
are practically concealed in the vaults of the naves at Sherborne, and
Bath and in the east aisle of Peterborough, while they are prominent in
Henry VII’s and King’s College chapels. Moreover, in a number of fan
vaults as well as in others of different type, pendant voussoirs or
keystones are employed. These are supported by some clever building
trick and beautifully carved either as lanterns or reliquaries,--like
those of Oxford cathedral choir,[258]--or decorated with rich floral,
heraldic, or other designs. Thus they play a rôle which is largely
decorative, though one which also marks a very clever building


The vaults thus far discussed have been largely those of England, but
some of the types with added ribs, most highly developed in that country
were not without Continental examples. In France, for instance, ridge
ribs, besides being used in vaults of the domed up Anjou type already
described, are also found marking level ridges like those of the
standard English vaults. The nave of the abbey church of Souvigny
(Allier) (late fifteenth century), the north transept of the cathedral
of LeMans (before 1430), and the chapel of the Maison de Jacques Coeur
at Bourges (middle of fifteenth century) afford excellent examples of
the use of the longitudinal without the transverse ridge rib, while the
chapel of the château of Blois, and the cathedral of Tulle (Corrèze),
have already been cited as rare instances in which both were employed in
vaults with level crowns. That the French builders were even more
impressed with the decorative possibilities which these ribs afforded
than were those of England is perhaps shown by the fact that, whereas in
England this rib has carved decoration[260] only rarely as in the nave
of Lichfield cathedral it is carved in no less than three of the French
examples cited, the chief among these being Souvigny, in which a deeply
cut foliate design decorates both sides of the rib throughout its entire
length. In Spain also there is a notable example of the decoration of
both a longitudinal and transverse ridge rib in the form of a knotted
rope or scourge in the cathedral of Vizeu.[261]

Tiercerons as well as ridge ribs were freely used on the continent
though usually not at a very early date. Fine examples are to be seen in
France in such churches as those of Brou (Ain) (1506-1536), and Saint
Nicolas-du-Port (Meurthe-et-Moselle) (cir. 1505).[262] Both of these are
also of interest because their vaults still retain the domed up crown
characteristic of French construction, and because of this the builders,
to avoid the awkward rise and fall of continuous ridge ribs, have
brought these out only far enough to meet the pair of tiercerons in each
severy. Many other examples of tierceron vaulting could be cited both in
France and elsewhere, but they would add nothing of importance from a
structural standpoint.

As for lierne vaults, they, too, appear on the Continent especially in
Germany and Spain. The choir of Freiburg cathedral (second half of
fifteenth century) (Fig. 72), and the church of the Holy Cross at
Gmund,[263] show two German types, both of which resemble English vaults
which have already been discussed. In Spain, the new cathedral at
Salamanca[264] (begun 1513), the cathedral at Segovia (begun 1525),[265]
and many other churches might be cited, while in France the church of
Mézières (begun 1499),[266] and Switzerland the cathedral of Bern (cir.
1421-1598)[267] show the extent of the style, sometimes with sharply
defined domed up bays as in Mézières and sometimes a continuous vault
like that of Bern. Finally in some instances, as, for example, the
Stadkirche of Wimpfen[268] the liernes are curved giving a still more
complicated character to the vault.

Fan vaulting was unused[269] outside of Great Britain, but there are
many instances of the employment of extensively decorated vaults,
including those with pendants of somewhat English character. Among the
latter are Saint Pierre at Caen and Saint Eustache at Paris
(1532-1637),[270] while pendants of especially exaggerated type are to
be seen in the vault of one of the chapels off the south side aisle of

[Illustration: FIG. 41.--NOYON, CATHEDRAL, CHAPEL.]

cathedral (Fig. 41). A tendency to decorate the panels is also
noticeable in a number of late French vaults, as for example that of the
chapel of Saint Jacques at Cléry (Loiret) (probably after 1485) (Fig.
42), where each of the larger divisions of a complicated lierne and
tierceron vault is decorated by a wallet and staff or a scourge in low
relief. At Rue (Somme), in the chapel of Saint Esprit,[271] there is a
somewhat similar vault with heraldic devices and floral ornament on the
panels. But even more notable are the angels in the round which have
been added for decorative purposes in four of the severies of the vaults
in one bay of the side aisle of the north transept (sixteenth century)
in Senlis (Oise) cathedral (Fig. 43). The final stage in elaborate
vaulting, is perhaps, to be seen in such a vault as that of the Chapelle
de la Vièrge at La Ferté-Bernard (Sarthe)[272] which dates from
1535-1544. Here the panels are merely portions of a flat ceiling
resting upon a series of arches arranged like ribs, but carrying a
tracery framework upon which the elaborately decorated ceiling with its
mouldings and stalactite pendants is made to rest.



There now remain for consideration before closing this chapter, the
ribbed vaults of the aisles and triforia of Gothic churches. Very
naturally the general development of ribbed vaulting in the aisles
closely parallels that in the nave. In by far the larger number of
churches, the side aisle bays are square and covered with simple
four-part cross-ribbed vaults. As in the case of the nave, those of
early date have many clumsy features. Thus in the aisles of Saint
Étienne at Beauvais (Fig. 44)--which, fortunately, retain a few bays of
their primitive vaults dating from about 1125--the diagonals are heavy
(cir. 20-25 cm. thick)[273] and either square with simple bevelled edges
or of single torus section. No wall rib is found and the transverse
arches, besides being very thick, are of round-headed form, highly
stilted to bring them up to approximately the general vault level. The
vault itself is slightly domed up at the crown and besides the


[Illustration: FIG. 44.--BEAUVAIS, SAINT ÉTIENNE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 45.--SENS, CATHEDRAL.]

primitive characteristics just enumerated, its panels are composed of
small stones roughly joined and in very uneven courses, while the ribs
themselves are built up of short voussoirs, which are not combined at
their springing in the familiar tas-de-charge of more developed Gothic
work. The cathedral of Sens presents in its side aisles (Fig. 45), which
date from the twelfth century[274] a slightly different system. The
transverse arches are still heavy and semicircular but they are not
stilted. The diagonals rise from corner corbels--a fact which may prove
that the aisles were originally planned for groined vaulting and thus no
provision made for the cross-ribs,--and they are also semicircular, thus
giving the vault a decidedly domed up character. This makes these vaults
at Sens very similar to Lombard work and it would seem as though their
builders had the same object of saving centering by the use of ribs as
obtained in Lombardy. There is one apparent advance over those at
Beauvais in the presence of a wall rib, but this is of too wide a span
to fit under its severy, and it would seem to have been designed to mark
the wall intersection of groined rather than ribbed vaulting.

The early aisle vaults in England are generally similar to those at
Beauvais, with even less doming or none at all. The earliest would seem
to be those in Peterborough, Durham and the north nave aisle of
Gloucester cathedrals, all dating, apparently, from before 1140.
Although similar to those in Saint Étienne at Beauvais they differ in
the comparative lowness of their transverse arches, which are but
slightly stilted, and in the correspondingly reduced curve of the
diagonals, which are less than semicircles and thus do not raise the
crown of the vault. The explanation of this may very possibly be found
in the desire of the builders to avoid cutting into the level of the
triforium floor, especially at Peterborough, where this is a true
gallery, and also in their familiarity with the flat crowned groined
vault, which they had previously used in crypts and elsewhere. The form
of the diagonals is in any case displeasing, as they spring from the
shafts at an awkward angle and, furthermore, render the thrusts of the
vault excessive.[275]

Many structural refinements were, of course, necessary before these
crude vaults gave rise to the fully developed type, but these
refinements followed in general the same order as those in the larger
nave vaults. First came the introduction of the pointed arch and its use
for the transverse and longitudinal ribs in place of the semicircular
type. This change may be seen in such early vaults as those of Noyon
cathedral (cir. 1150) where pointed arches are used throughout. The
noticeable feature here is the great size of the transverse ribs
compared to that of the diagonals. This same feature continues to appear
in a gradually lessening degree in many of the churches of the
transitional period, and even in the developed Gothic of the thirteenth
century, as, for example, in Bourges and Amiens cathedrals. This may,
perhaps, be explained by the function of this transverse arch which was
not merely a centering for the vault panel, but carried a considerable
amount of the weight of the exterior buttress piers and wall pilasters
which were connected above the aisle roofs by the arch of the flying
buttress. These heavy transverse ribs also aided materially in bracing
the nave piers and tying them to the outer walls. Sometimes, as in the
beautiful aisles of Rouen cathedral, all the ribs are of the same
section, but whether they were all the same or not, such vaults as those
at Rouen and Amiens set the standard for developed Gothic side aisles.



Other methods, however, were employed. Perhaps the chief among these is
the five-part vault, in which the triangular severy nearest the outer
wall in a four-part vault is subdivided by a half rib running to the
main vault crown (Fig. 46). The advantage of such a system lies in the
fact that it permits a more pleasing arrangement of windows in the outer
wall, especially in bays of rectangular plan, like those in the Certosa
at Pavia and Magdeburg cathedral already discussed, where the windows
would otherwise fit but awkwardly beneath the broad low wall rib. The
same system was also used in aisles with practically square bays, as,
for example, in the cathedral of Coutances (Fig. 82), in Saint Urbain
at Troyes and in many English churches.[276] Here, too, the explanation
is to be found in the window arrangement, especially in the English and
Norman Gothic examples, where these windows are of the slender lancet
type, which could not be satisfactorily placed beneath the comparatively
low wall rib of a square four-part vault.


With the introduction of ridge ribs, tiercerons, and liernes, the side
aisles show the same changes as those which took place in the nave.
Simple ridge ribs appear, for example, in Lichfield cathedral, liernes
at Worcester, while tierceron vaults could be cited in great number. Fan
vaults, too, were used in the aisles, and have already been discussed in
connection with those of the nave. Reconstructions sometimes produced an
unusual vaulting system like that of Beauvais cathedral (cir. 1284),
where transverse arches with tracery spandrels were added across each
original aisle bay, giving the vault a pseudo-sexpartite character. True
six-part vaulting was by its very nature ill-suited for use in the
aisles and is very rarely found. There is an example, however, in
Magdeburg cathedral.[277] A desire for novelty also seems to have been
the cause of unusual vaults, such as those of Bristol cathedral choir
aisles,[278] in which low transverse tracery arches separate the bays
and carry a system of ribs which subdivide each bay into two rectangular
four-part vaults running lengthwise of the aisle.


Although similar in plan to the side aisles, the triforia were apt to be
a little later in being given ribbed vaults. In the abbey church of
Saint Germer-de-Fly (Oise) (cir. 1140) and in the choir of La Madeleine
at Vézelay (Yonne) (cir. 1160 or 1170), for example, the triforium is
not only left with groined vaults but is also constructed with
round-headed arches, although both the ribbed vault and pointed arch are
used in the aisles. This peculiarity may be due to the fact that groined
vaults were easier and cheaper to construct over a low space like the
gallery than a ribbed vault would have been, because they involved less
careful stone cutting than was required for the ribs. Moreover, since
the chief object of the transitional builders in using the ribbed vault
would seem to have been to save centering, their object would not have
been especially well served in the triforia, which were kept low to
avoid detracting from the clerestory and therefore required but little
centering compared to that which would have been needed for groined
vaults in the side aisles. Another system with possibly a similar reason
for its use appears in Mantes (Seine-et-Oise) cathedral (end of twelfth
century), where the aisles are ribbed and surmounted by a triforium with
transverse tunnel vaults, a most exceptional arrangement.

[Illustration: FIG. 47.--SENLIS, CATHEDRAL.]

It was only when the triforium began to play a larger rôle in the church
plan, when it was perhaps used for congregational purposes, that its
vaulting began to develop like that of the aisles. Thus in the cathedral
of Senlis (Oise) (cir. 1150) (Fig. 47), the triforium though

[Illustration: FIG. 48.--LAON, CATHEDRAL.]

low, is a veritable second story above the side aisles with its own good
sized windows. Its vaults are still of rather primitive ribbed type. The
transverse arches, though pointed, are heavy, and to avoid the flattened
curve which the diagonals would otherwise have, the vault is given a
domed up crown. The cathedral of Laon (Aisne) (cir. 1170) (Fig. 48)
possesses a triforium of slightly greater height but still retaining
excessively heavy ribs and domed up vaults. The triforia of the naves of
Noyon (Oise) cathedral (cir. 1150-1180) and of Notre Dame at
Chalons-sur-Marne (Marne) (1157-1183) show a gradual reduction in the
size of these ribs, all of which finally become of practically equal
section in the triforium of the cathedral of Notre Dame at Paris (beg.
1163), where the doming up of the crown also disappears to a large
extent and where the gallery itself is nearly as lofty as the side
aisles. After the beginning of the thirteenth century, triforia rapidly
decline in popularity and are but rarely found except in Normandy, where
there are beautiful examples in such churches as Saint Étienne at Caen
choir rebuilt in the first quarter of the thirteenth century. Owing to
its early decline in popularity, the triforium never presents those
complex vaulting systems of the late Gothic period which have been
described as appearing in the nave and aisles.


In closing this chapter brief mention should be made of the series of
churches in which the aisle vaults are nearly or quite as high as those
of the nave, which they therefore aid in supporting. Among the numerous
examples of such churches, the cathedral of Poitiers (Vienne) (cir. 1160
and thirteenth century) illustrates the type in which the vaults of the
aisles are slightly lower than those of the nave, while Saint Serge at
Angers has all the vaults at exactly the same level. Both are of Anjou
type but this is due only to their geographical situation, for the
system was widely extended.[279] In Germany there is a fine early
example in Saint Elizabeth at Marburg (cir. 1235),[280] with vaulting of
simple Gothic character, while the church of the Holy Cross at
Gmund[281] is covered with vaulting of complex lierne type. Except for
the change in interior elevation which the system brought about and the
fact that it removed the necessity for flying-buttresses, it did not
show any special progress along structural lines. It must be
acknowledged that the churches thus constructed possess a most pleasing
effect of spaciousness in their interior elevation, though this is
offset by the lack of direct light in the nave. A final example of a
church similar to those mentioned above but with a new vaulting system
is afforded by Saint Florentin at Amboise (Indre-et-Loire)
(fifteenth-sixteenth century). Its aisles are very narrow and are
covered by transverse tunnel vaults in much the same manner as a number
of Romanesque churches already discussed, except that the nave is here
roofed with a ribbed vault. It is but a variant of the standard vaulting
types described in this chapter.




Because of the close resemblance in plan and structure between them, the
transept was vaulted like the nave in by far the larger number of
instances. Thus in the Romanesque schools, where the nave was tunnel
vaulted, similar vaults were generally placed above the transept as
well. They were, moreover, well suited to this position, especially
where there were no transept aisles, for the outer walls running down to
the ground afforded them excellent support and also provided space for
windows of considerable size. It is not surprising, therefore, to find
the tunnel-vaulted transept the standard in Romanesque church
architecture, an example appearing even as far north as Jedburgh Abbey
in Scotland, although this was a church of the Norman school in which
the nave was probably originally roofed with wood.[282] Even in the
school of Perigord, where the naves are domed, the transept is
frequently covered with a tunnel vault as, for example, in the churches
of Souillac (Lot), Tremolac (Dordogne), and Vieux Mareuil (Dordogne), in
the cathedral of Angoulême, and perhaps originally in the cathedral of
Saint Front at Périgueux.[283] Occasionally, however, other forms
displace the tunnel vault in transept construction.

One of these appears in the abbey church of Cluny (Saône-et-Loire)
(early twelfth century). Here the bays of the transept, corresponding to
the side aisles of the church are tunnel vaulted, but beyond these,
there are two projecting bays, the inner one square and covered by an
octagonal dome on trumpet squinches, the outer covered with a tunnel
vault at a lower level[284] than that over the two bays adjoining the
crossing. Above the dome rises an octagonal tower and spire, and the
whole composition of this bay shows that it was intended to be a
flanking tower like those to be seen at Angoulême, Tréguier
(Côtes-du-Nord), and Exeter cathedrals. For such a tower, a dome is more
suitable than a tunnel vault, because it exerts less outward thrust.
This is also better distributed.


A more original method of transept vaulting is to be seen in certain
churches of the school of Auvergne, among them Notre Dame-du-Port at
Clermont-Ferrand (Puy-de-Dôme) (eleventh and twelfth century) (Figs. 49,
50) and Saint Étienne at Nevers (Nièvre) (cir. 1097).[285] Here each arm
of the transept is divided into two distinct vaulting bays by a
transverse arch continuing the line of the outer wall of the church. All
the projecting portion is then covered by a tunnel vault, while that bay
which corresponds to a continuation of the side aisles is covered by a
half tunnel vault, its axis at right angles to the transept proper and
rising from above the crown of the intermediate transverse arch to the
springing of the crossing dome (Figs. 49-50). Such a vault has much to
commend it, for it is most logical in affording excellent abutment for
the dome, and at the same time it receives abutment from the tunnel
vault of the outer transept bay. Curiously enough, one church of the
school, namely that at Orcival (Puy-de-Dôme) (twelfth century),[286]
while following the main lines laid down by the vaults just described,
differs from them in having full tunnel vaults instead of half tunnels
abutting the dome. This is a less satisfactory form in that these vault
have to be excessively high in order to bring their thrusts to the
proper level, but they do possess the advantage of providing excellent
window space above the transept roofs.




With the introduction of ribbed vaulting, examples of six-part vaults,
four-part vaults of rectangular and square plan and many forms of
complicated vaulting are to be found in the transept exactly as they
have been in the nave. Only those vaults which are unusual in character
will therefore be discussed. Of these the most important is the
five-part rectangular vault sometimes used as a termination of the
transept arm. From its appearance in Normandy, and its evident relation
to sexpartite vaulting, this method may be assumed to have arisen there.
The Abbaye-aux-Dames at Caen (early twelfth century) affords an example
of such a vault. It was evidently employed to subdivide the end walls
into bays similar to those in the remainder of the church, and thus
provide a uniform elevation and window arrangement throughout the
edifice. In spite of its uniformity the arrangement is an awkward one,
for it brings a pier directly in the center of the transept wall where
it would be more natural to find a door. The five-part vault did not,
therefore, become a general method of transept termination, though there
is a very fine example of its survival in the church of Saint Urbain at
Troyes (Aube) (cir. 1262-1300). It may even be that the desire for a
regular elevation of the bays led to the subdivision of the transept by
a row of central piers, such as those in the large church at Saint
Nicolas-du-Port (Meurthe-et-Moselle) (sixteenth century)[287] and in a
number of smaller examples, some of them of earlier date.[288]


Such a vault as that just described was, in a way, a sort of square
chevet.[289] It was built to provide a better arrangement of windows in
the terminal wall than would be possible beneath the transverse cell of
a regular four-or six-part vault. Nor was its use confined to the
transept for it is found with a varying number of cells at the end of
the nave and choir as well. Such Norman churches as Saint Georges at
Saint Martin-de-Boscherville (Fig. 51), Saint Étienne at Caen and Saint
Cross at Winchester (choir cir. 1135-1189) are examples of this,[290]
while the vaults of the transepts of Limburg Cathedral[291] (1235) and
that of the chapter house at Boscherville (Fig. 52) resemble a chevet
even more closely in that all but one of their severies are subdivided.
When the ribs all rise from the same level, the appearance of such a
vault is pleasing, but when,--as in the nave of Boscherville (Fig.
51),[292]--the intermediate ribs are shortened,



the effect is very unsatisfactory, though this shortening of the ribs
probably had a structural advantage in preventing the light from being
partly cut off, or the windows partly concealed by the radiants and the
masonry above them.


The vaulting of the transept naturally differs from that in the nave
when the former is given a semicircular termination. In Romanesque
transepts of this type, the vaults are in the form either of simple half
domes, or of tunnel vaults ending in such domes, according as the
transept arms are lengthened or left merely in the form of apses. Many
churches of both these types, but usually of small size, are to be found
in southern France,[293] while others appear in Italy and still others
in the north of Europe,[294] where such a church as that of Rolduc
(Belgium) was considered by its builders as built in a Lombard manner,
“scemate longo-bardico,”[295] indicating that the semicircular transept
was thought, at least, to be of Lombard origin. The most highly
developed transepts of this tunnel-vaulted, half-domed type are probably
those in the church of Saint Mary of the Capitol at Cologne, where a
groin-vaulted ambulatory is found around each transept apse. Somewhat
similar in plan are the transepts of Tournai cathedral in Belgium
(between cir. 1110-1170) (Fig. 53), except that here the surrounding
aisle is very narrow, and, more important still, the half dome is
replaced by a clumsy chevet vault with very heavy ribs, their haunches
raised to support a series of ramping and contracting tunnel vaults.
This construction is very similar to the framework of such a dome as
that of the Baptistery at Florence. Nor is it without advantages, since
it greatly reduces the vault thrusts and therefore renders unnecessary
the use of flying-buttresses,[296] and at the same time permits the
windows to rise above the level of its impost. The next semicircular
transept of importance is that of Noyon cathedral

[Illustration: FIG. 53.--TOURNAI, CATHEDRAL.]

(cir. 1140),[297] where there is a developed chevet of what will later
be called the buttressing ribbed type.[298] More developed still is the
south transept of Soissons cathedral (1176-1207), which possesses an
ambulatory in two stories with three bays of trapezoidal four-part
ribbed vaults corresponding to each principal vaulting bay. The transept
proper is covered by a rectangular vault[299] and a broken-ribbed chevet
with very broad window cells. Other examples of semicircular transepts
could be cited, both of the Romanesque and Gothic periods,[300] but
either they do not present any vaulting forms not already discussed or
they will be described in connection with the apse proper. That the plan
had a long lease of life, if not a very extensive usage, is shown by the
fact that it appears in such seventeenth century churches as that of the
Lycée Corneille at Rouen (beg. cir. 1614),[301] and is found in
numerous Renaissance churches in which the vaulting returns to the
earlier tunnel and half-dome forms.[302]


As the transept developed in importance aisles were added, sometimes
merely along the east walls, but often along the west as well,[303] and
even across the ends, especially in churches where such tribunes
provided for a continuation of the triforium gallery.[304] In such
transepts the side aisles are vaulted just as those belonging to naves
of a corresponding period, and therefore require no discussion here.
More important are the chapels which open off of the transept, usually
from the eastern wall. In general these consist of a semicircular apse
either with or without one or more preceding bays. During the Romanesque
period such chapels were generally covered with a half dome sometimes
preceded by a tunnel vault as in Saint Georges-de-Boscherville, while
after the introduction of ribbed vaults, these and the chevet replace
the tunnel vaults and half domes in their respective positions.
Sometimes the chapels are square, especially in Cistercian churches.
They are then covered either with tunnel vaults, as in Kirkstall Abbey,
or with ribbed vaults in the Gothic period. Usually all these radiating
chapels are but one story in height, but in the cathedral of Laon, two
beautiful chapels more than a semicircle in plan and two stories in
height appear, one at the east end of both the north and south aisles of
the transept (Fig. 54). These chapels are vaulted with seven-part
chevets, and form, with the aisles and tribunes preceding them,
veritable churches inside of the cathedral. Chapels of similar
character, but practically a full circle in plan and vaulted with a
double chevet, are also to be seen in the two lower, stories of the
transept of Soissons cathedral. They open off of the aisles and
galleries through three slender arches, and the view into them from the
transept proper affords one of the finest examples of Gothic



The intersection of the nave and transept was usually treated by the
Romanesque builders as a distinctive vaulting bay. Occasionally, in the
tunnel-vaulted churches, the builders allowed the vault of nave and
transept to intersect and form a groined vault at the crossing, as, for
example, in Saint Étienne at Beaugency (after 1050) (Loiret)[305] and in
the church of Boisney (Eure).[306] Groined vaults are also found in this
position in certain churches, like those of the Rhenish provinces, where
similar vaults are used in the nave. But as a general rule, the crossing
of the Romanesque church is covered by a dome resting on spherical
pendentives or squinches, either unraised or else placed on a drum,
which thus forms a lantern with windows to light the church interior.
There is no necessity for an extended discussion of raised and unraised
domes, since as far as construction is concerned they differ only in the
fact that when raised on a lantern they are somewhat more difficult to
support because the vaults of choir, nave, and transept no longer serve
as buttressing members. The custom, however, of erecting a tower even
above the raised domes offset to a large extent the thrusts which they

Sometimes these Romanesque crossing domes are of circular plan and
supported on spherical pendentives. These are common in the school of
Perigord, where examples are afforded by the cathedral of Périgueux
(Fig. 1) or the abbey church of Solignac.[307] But the use of such domes
on spherical pendentives was not confined to Perigord. They are found in
Poitou and Les Charentes, in the Southwest, and even in Limousin.[308]
One of the best examples, and one in which there is a circular drum
below the dome, appears in the church of Le Dorat (cir. middle twelfth
century) (Haute-Vienne).[309] Very occasionally, also, the flat
triangular pendentive is used, as in Notre Dame at Chauvigny


The use of a lantern tower with windows opening into the church below
its roof was destined to give rise to a number of interesting vaults.
That such towers existed in France as early as the sixth century, is
proved by the texts of Gregory of Tours and Fortunatus, in which such
lanterns are mentioned as existing over the churches of Saint Martin at
Tours, the cathedrals of Clermont-Ferrand, Narbonne, and Paris, as well
as at Bordeaux and Nantes,[311] while Rivoira’s contention[312] that the
church of San Salvatore or del Crocifisso at Spoleto dates from the
fourth century, if correct, would give an earlier though isolated
Italian example of such a feature. Whatever its origin, such a lantern
was a particularly pleasing feature of church construction, especially
in Romanesque churches, which were without direct light in the nave and
thus received a much needed addition to their interior illumination. It
is not surprising, therefore, to find many of the more daring Romanesque
builders including this central feature even in crossings with domes, as
has already been noted. As a rule the pendentives were introduced
beneath the wall of the clerestory drum which was therefore either of
octagonal or circular plan. The examples of such lanterns are too
numerous to cite though certain of them are worthy of some remark. In
Auvergne, for example, in Notre Dame-du-Port at Clermont-Ferrand (Figs.
49, 50), at Orcival (Puy-de-Dôme),[313] Saint Nectaire
(Puy-de-Dôme),[314] and elsewhere the system of transept and crossing
vaulting already described[315] made possible the introduction of
windows in either the east or west walls of the central towers, or both,
though rarely in those to the north or the south, where there were half
or full tunnel vaults to abut the dome. In two churches of Central
France, those at Bénévent-l’Abbaye (Creuse)[316] and Le Dorat (Haute
Vienne),[317] the lanterns are especially beautiful. They are covered
with domes raised on a drum supported upon spherical pendentives. In
such churches, where there is no direct light in the nave, the lantern
adds much to the appearance of an otherwise oppressively dark interior.


Another lantern of interest is to be seen in southern France in the
cathedral of Notre Dame-des-Doms at Avignon (probably cir. middle of
twelfth century).[318] Here the transepts are narrower than the nave and
in order to make the crossing square, a series of four arches has been
thrown across between the spandrels of the nave and choir arches, Over
the square thus formed is an octagonal lantern on squinches which in
turn supports a circular dome with the unusual feature of a series of
flat pilaster-like ribs along its-under surface. Such ribs are, of
course, largely decorative and correspond to those found in the apses of
many neighboring churches.[319] True ribbed domes were also used as a
means of covering the crossing,[320] and this is but natural in view of
the fact that such domes were quite frequently employed over circular
churches, as for example Saint Sepulchre at Cambridge, and the Templar’s
Chapel at Laon (Fig. 55),[321] while half domes of similar character
appear over many apses of the Transitional period.[322]

[Illustration: FIG. 55.--LAON, CHURCH OF THE TEMPLARS.]


Similar domes to that just described at Avignon are quite common in
Spain, where for that matter the lantern itself had a very remarkable
development. Thus in the cathedral of Zamora (consecrated 1144) there is
a dome with sixteen ribs. It is not of perfectly simple type, however,
for the masonry between the ribs is curved slightly outward, giving it
the form of a lobed dome.[323] The lobes are comparatively small, but
otherwise not unlike such larger ones as those in SS. Sergius and
Bacchus at Constantinople (cir. 527) and the Serapeum of the Villa
Adriana at Tivoli (125-135). As far as construction is concerned this
arrangement made it possible to lay up the masonry between the ribs with
little or no centering, so that once the ribs were in place, the task of
completing the dome was a comparatively simple one. Unlike the “Gothic
dome” which is later discussed, the thrusts were not materially
decreased by the lobed plan and in its essentials the dome thus formed
was precisely like the simple type. From the point of view of appearance
these Spanish lanterns are certainly very beautiful. Usually pierced
with windows in twelve out of the sixteen bays, and sometimes, as at
Salamanca, with a few windows in the lower of the two stages forming the
drum, they admit a great quantity of light to the very heart of the
church where its presence is most needed. Moreover, the spherical
pendentives from which the lanterns rise are more pleasing than the
squinches generally found in France.


Because of its resemblance to such ribbed domes as those just described
it may be well to discuss here what may be called a “Gothic dome” if
such a term be permissible. This is, in other words, the familiar chevet
vault extended to cover a space of circular or octagonal plan. One of
these vaults of circular plan and with eight ribs appears over the
crossing of Saint Nicolas at Blois (Fig. 56). Unlike the ribbed dome,
its masonry courses are not horizontal and concentric with the impost
line, but practically at right angles to it, thus giving wall arches
whose crowns are nearly as high as the central keystone itself. Each
window cell is thus precisely like one-quarter of a four-part
cross-ribbed vault. It was this form of double chevet vault which was
frequently used as late as the Renaissance period in Italy, where it
appears in such works as the Pazzi chapel at Florence (cir. 1420) (Fig.
57) and elsewhere though without

[Illustration: FIG. 56.--BLOIS, SAINT NICHOLAS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 57.--FLORENCE, PAZZI CHAPEL.]

[Illustration: FIG. 58.--WORMS, CATHEDRAL.]

any wall rib. These “Gothic domes” were frequently polygonal as well as
circular. Thus in the cathedral of Worms (Fig. 58) there is an octagonal
lantern, on squinches, surmounted by a vault with eight cells of
decidedly domical type, the whole being only slightly different from a
lobed dome. A more developed double chevet, dating from the second half
of the fifteenth century, appears over the crossing of the cathedral of
Evreux (Eure),[324] where there is also a complete system of ribs.[325]
The form of the pendentives is that of flat triangles, and they are
decorated with elaborate designs in flamboyant tracery. Similar flat
triangles but with a series of mouldings at the top, are used to support
the octagonal lantern of Coutances cathedral (Fig. 59), perhaps the most
beautiful in France, and apparently dating from the second half of the
thirteenth century. Its vault is in sixteen cells, two to each lantern
wall, and each containing a lofty window, the whole clerestory rising
above a lower stage of coupled arches with a narrow passage behind them.

[Illustration: FIG. 59.--COUTANCES, CATHEDRAL.]

A crossing vault of similar character, but with a change in the
arrangement of the ribs, which form an eight-pointed star around a
central octagonal opening, is to be seen in the cathedral of Saragossa
in Spain (after 1500),[326] while the final stage in such vaulting, in
which the ribs become merely a framework beneath a flat ceiling, but
nevertheless a framework of elaborate and beautiful design, may be seen
over the crossing of the cathedral of Burgos (finished 1568).[327]


There now remain for discussion lantern towers of square plan. This was
the form almost universally employed in Normandy, England, and churches
which came under Norman influence, especially in the earlier Gothic
period. During the Romanesque epoch such lanterns were wooden roofed.
But with the introduction of the ribbed vault, an eight-part vault was
devised for this crossing, whose severies were precisely like those
above the windows in six-part vaulting, from which, in fact, this new
type probably developed.

Most of the towers originally wooden roofed have since been vaulted, and
it is therefore difficult to judge of their original character. Their
imposing interior appearance, however, may be judged from the ruins of
the abbey church of Jumièges (1040-1067). It would seem, from the places
for beam ends left in the wall, that such lanterns as this were
generally roofed with a flat ceiling above the first stage of openings,
the second series probably forming a belfry. It is natural, therefore,
when vaulting comes in, to find it placed at the level of the former
flat ceiling with only the lower openings used as windows, leaving the
walls above to offset the thrusts of the vault by their downward
pressure. A somewhat rudimentary vault of this eight-part character may
be seen in Saint Georges-de-Boscherville,[328] in which the wall arches
are omitted and all the ribs made to spring from corbels. This, of
course, is because the Norman Romanesque crossings were not originally
planned for vaulting. A little later, wall ribs were regularly used, and
in Saint Yved at Braisne (consecrated 1215)[329] the four major ribs
have their supports running all the way to the floor, while in the
cathedral of Laon (after 1165) (Fig. 60) even the eight wall ribs which
rise from the corners of the tower are similarly carried down. Of course
the intermediate ribs necessarily rise from corbels, but in the
developed crossings of this type such corbels are placed as near as
possible to the crowns of the four great arches of the nave, choir, and
transepts. Similar lanterns are to be seen in the church of Notre Dame
at Cluny, and in Saint Maclou at Rouen (lantern cir. 1511),[330] where,
however, ridge ribs are added in each of the eight cells.

Notwithstanding the examples cited, the use of a lantern is not common
in developed Gothic architecture. This is perhaps due to the fact that
the rapidly increasing size of the clerestory made such an addition to
the lighting equipment unnecessary, though it is more probable that the
great height of many of the churches rendered the construction of a
tower over the crossing a dangerous undertaking. Even in the less lofty
churches of England, where a central tower is almost invariably found,
the latter is frequently closed from below by a vault.


[Illustration: FIG. 60.--LAON, CATHEDRAL.]

Where there is no lantern, the vault of the crossing is generally a
continuation of that of the nave or transepts. It is, therefore, often
of simple four-part cross-ribbed type, with or without a domed up
crown.[331] Certain of the Gothic builders, however, even in the early
thirteenth century, realized the advantage to be gained by subdividing
the cells of the crossing vault with ridge ribs. Hence in the abbey
church of Fossanova (consecrated in 1208),[332] as well as in those at
Casamari and Arbona[333] in Italy, and in many churches of France,[334]
especially those of Anjou type,[335] transverse and longitudinal ridge
ribs were used and in most instances the vault was considerably domed
up. In Amiens cathedral (cir. 1265) the crossing vault, nearly forty
feet square and about one hundred and forty feet from the ground, was
further subdivided by a single pair of tiercerons in each of the major
severies, and the eight central panels thus formed were raised at the
crown to reduce the thrusts of the vault as well as the amount of
centering necessary for its construction. After its introduction at
Amiens this form of crossing was quite extensively employed, sometimes
with its ridge ribs running completely across the bay, as for example,
in Auxerre cathedral, sometimes running only to the keystone of the
tiercerons, as in Bayonne and Troyes cathedrals or Saint Euverte at

With the use of many added ribs in other portions of the church, came a
corresponding elaboration in the vaults of the crossing. Thus many
examples might be cited of lierne and tierceron vaulting in all degrees
of complexity, especially in England,[336] while fan vaulting is to be
seen in the abbey church of Bath (cir. 1500-1590),[337] and pendant
vaults of elaborate character in Saint Étienne-du-Mont at Paris
(probably cir. 1550-1600). Occasionally also the transept is subdivided
by a central row of piers in which case the vault of the crossing is in
two bays.[338] It is unnecessary, however, to discuss at length these
exceptional crossing types since they do not differ structurally from
the vaulting systems already described in connection with the nave.



The traditional method of terminating the church edifice at the end
reserved for the clergy was by means of a semicircular or polygonal
apse, and this method, which was of Roman origin, continued to be
followed in the majority of Romanesque and Gothic churches. Such apses
gave to the interior of the edifice a more dignified appearance than was
possible with a flat east wall, by avoiding the abrupt termination which
the latter produced and by emphasizing the central point in the
sanctuary, which was occupied by the high altar in most of the mediaeval


Once adopted from Roman architecture as a standard part of the church
plan, the construction of the apse was naturally based upon Roman
models, and since these were always vaulted with a half dome of masonry,
similar half domes were employed by the Christian builders of the early
mediaeval period. During the Romanesque era, these half domes were
almost always of stone laid in horizontal courses, supported by
substantial walls of semicircular or polygonal plan. They opened
directly into a transept or a tunnel-vaulted choir. The earliest of
these half domes were of semicircular elevation, but the pointed form
made its appearance in the late eleventh or early twelfth century in
many churches. In both forms, the principles of construction are the


It is a characteristic of the half dome that it exerts a large amount of
downward pressure and but little outward thrust, particularly if it be
of pointed section. For this reason, such a vault requires a firm
support but only a slight amount of buttressing. As long, therefore, as
the half dome rested directly upon comparatively low exterior walls, it
had plenty of support, and it was even possible to pierce the walls with
windows without endangering its stability. But with the increase in
height of the more developed Romanesque churches and the introduction of
ambulatories, it became difficult to light the sanctuary and still
retain the half dome.

Two methods were evolved for overcoming this difficulty. The first,
which may be seen in the abbey church at Cunault (Maine-et-Loire)
(second half of twelfth century),[339] consisted in the construction of
a lofty ambulatory opening into the apse through arches rising to the
impost of the half dome, or even slightly above it, and resting upon
piers of as slender proportions as possible, so that, although the
sanctuary was deprived of all direct light, a certain amount was
obtained from windows in the outer wall of the ambulatory or from the
radiating chapels, while, at the same time, the vault of this ambulatory
aided in the support of the apse and vice versa. Such a system, though
structurally correct, was not entirely satisfactory. The sanctuary and
choir were the portions of the church most in need of lighting, since
they contained the altar and the seats for the monks or clergy by whom
the services were chanted, and indirect light was bound to be

The second method, which may be seen in the church of Saint Savin
(Vienne) (eleventh century),[340] consisted in reducing the height of
the ambulatory, even when this involved making it lower than the side
aisles, and then placing a clerestory above the ambulatory arches
beneath the springing of the half dome. This may be considered as the
best type of apsidal termination developed during the purely Romanesque
period. It was only when the half dome was discarded that a satisfactory
solution was finally reached in the development of the chevet vault.
There were, however, two important series of ribbed half domes, the
second of which, at least, may have had some bearing upon the evolution
of the chevet type.


The first series lies largely in southern France in the Romanesque
school of Provence. Here there are a certain number of churches, among
them the chapel of Saint Honorat in Les Alyscamps at Arles
(Bouches-du-Rhône) (eleventh century?), in which the surface of the half
dome is broken out at regular intervals into a number of flat,
pilaster-like, radiating strips, forming a part of the actual masonry of
the vault. These divide the half dome in much the same manner as true
Gothic ribs, but they do not support it in any way and seem to have been
used for the decoration which such a change in the surface of the vault
produced.[341] As a general rule, these ribs radiate from a point
slightly back from the crown of the apse arch and often from a raised
masonry ring as in the chapel just cited. They vary, however, both in
number, thickness and width, some being comparatively thick and widening
out from the central keystone as in the cathedral of Notre Dame-des-Doms
at Avignon (Vaucluse), others being but slightly salient and of the same
width throughout like those in Saint Honorat at Arles.

Much larger in number and extent is the second series of churches with
rib-vaulted apses, though they are in general of later date than those
in Provence. Their radiants have a certain structural character, for
they are independent of the vault surface and were doubtless erected in
most cases as a permanent centering to aid in the construction of the
half dome. They do not, however, aid to any extent in its support, for
the courses of masonry in the vaults are still horizontal and concentric
with the curve of the apse, and the completed half domes would therefore
stand just as well were the ribs removed. It may be that they were
introduced in order to make the apse correspond more closely in
appearance with the ribbed vault which had in many cases been introduced
in the naves of the churches in which the ribbed half domes are found.
In any event, they mark a stage in apse vaulting between the simple half
dome and the developed chevet, which is worthy of careful consideration.
Most of these vaults date from the second quarter of the twelfth century
and are to be found within the zone of influence of the Ile-de-France,
though occasionally an example is found at a long distance from this
center as in the case of Sant’ Abondio at Como,[342] Santa Maria di
Castello at Corneto-Tarquinia in Italy,[343] and such churches as that
of the Monasterio de la Oliva (Navarra) in Spain,[344] (1198). The
number of ribs varies considerably, though two is most common
particularly in the smaller churches and chapels.[345] Of these, the
church at Morienval (Oise) (Fig. 77) furnishes a good, though recently
reconstructed, example, while Saint Georges-de-Boscherville (Fig. 61)
may be cited as possessing a large apse of similar character.

The important thing in a comparison of these two vaults is the
difference in the lighting of the completed apse. At Boscherville, it
was a simple matter to pierce the exterior wall with windows, in this
case in two stages, and still keep their crowns practically below the
level of the impost of the half dome, since the latter rested directly
upon the outer walls. But at Morienval there was an ambulatory, and in
order to get a clerestory above its arches, the windows had to be cut
into the curved surface of the half dome itself, with the result that
they were so deep as to prove of only limited usefulness. Other examples
could be cited where this same attempt is made to obtain sufficiently
large windows by shoving their heads into the half dome,[346] while at
Beaulieu (Corrèze)[347] the windows lie entirely above the impost.

Besides the ribbed half dome just described, there is still another type
to be seen in the Lady chapel of the church of Saint Martin-des-Champs
at Paris (Fig. 65). Its plan is a trefoil and the vault is made up of a
series of segments of domes with salient ribs marking their
intersections. As far as construction is concerned, there is really no
change from that of the more common half dome, for the courses of
masonry are still horizontal and the ribs merely serve as centering and
as a means of subdividing the surface to be vaulted and clearly marking
the lines of intersection. The vault would stand equally well were the
ribs removed and is, in structural character, very similar to the celled
domes of the Villa Adriana at Tivoli and of S.S. Sergius and Bacchus at



Another form of apse vault of which there would seem to be a number of
examples prior to the introduction of ribbed vaulting may perhaps be
termed the “groined half dome.” It is a vault resembling a segmental
dome except that the segments do not run down to a common impost, but
form a series of window cells not unlike those of a groined vault but
not running all the way to the vault crown. The earliest of these vaults
appears to be that in the crypt of Saint Laurent at Grenoble (Isère)
(sixth century).[348] Rivoira has shown[349] that Roman prototypes of
this form can be found in the so-called “Temple di Siepe” (second
century) at Rome, the vestibule of the Villa Adriana at Tivoli (125-135)
and elsewhere. There are also a number of Romanesque examples. Of these,
one is in the chapel off the south transept of Saint Nicholas at Caen
(1080-1093),[350] while another is to be found in Saint Andrew’s chapel
at Canterbury cathedral (cir. 1110).[351] These vaults closely resemble
the true Gothic chevet which was soon to follow them, and they might
seem to be its prototypes were it not for the fact that their
construction is of an entirely different character. All are built of
small stone or rubble and were undoubtedly laid up on a wooden centering
with no particular regard for the direction in which the masonry courses
ran, or possibly with these courses like those in a half dome. The
construction was thus a combination of half dome and groined vaulting
and not at all of the ribbed type. That they may, however, have been of
influence in the development of the true chevet will be later suggested.


A final type of rather primitive vaulting which was subsequent to the
introduction of ribbed vaulting but would seem to be prior to the use or
at least to the extensive knowledge of the chevet, consisted in the
employment of a simple four-part vault over the semicircle of the apse
(Plate II-a).[352] The result was an awkward kind of chevet vault which
is worthy of consideration as perhaps having a part in the development
of the true Gothic form. It might properly be called a four-part
cross-ribbed apse vault.

[Illustration: PLATE II]


By the middle of the twelfth century, all the methods of apse vaulting
thus far described, were abandoned[353] in favor of the ribbed Gothic
chevet[354] which was then developed. In this new vault the masonry
courses are no longer horizontal and concentric but run in a generally
perpendicular direction from a series of radiating ribs, which have a
common keystone, to a wall rib or a curved line of intersection above
the heads of a series of apse windows in whole or in part above the
level of the impost of the radiants. In other words, the chevet vault
consists of a series of triangular severies, each essentially like one
quarter of a four-part cross-ribbed vault.

The evolution of this developed chevet from the earlier types of apse
vaulting already discussed is difficult to trace and in fact it seems
most reasonable to imagine that it was a spontaneous transformation
which did not require any intermediate steps. It has, for instance, been
pointed out that the greatest problem of the apse builder was to place a
clerestory of good sized windows above the ambulatory arcade or at least
as high as possible in the apse wall and at the same time to keep the
pressures and thrusts of his vault at the lowest possible point. Imagine
then a builder with this in mind starting to construct a ribbed half
dome with windows rising above its impost. Suppose that the radiating
ribs were first constructed and the space to be vaulted thus divided
into triangular compartments. Now assume that the builder was familiar
with the four-part cross-ribbed vault--a reasonable assumption since
everything seems to point to an earlier date for such vaults than for
the ribbed chevet. Would he not be prompt to see that a series of
clerestory windows could be built around the apse precisely like those
along the walls of nave or choir and each triangular space thus formed,
be covered by one quarter of four-part vault? Is not this especially
reasonable in view of the fact that there existed groined vaults of just
this type,[355] exactly as there existed groined prototypes out of which
sprang the simple four-part cross-ribbed vault? Furthermore, if the
peculiar four-part apse vaults described as sometimes employed in
transitional churches are any or all of them earlier than the earliest
of the true chevets, would it not seem as if the builders were bent upon
using quadripartite vaulting of some form, even over the apse, in order
to obtain a clerestory? Whatever the true process of evolution may have
been, it is at least possible that the above explanations are correct
and that the chevet vault developed directly from the difficulty of
placing windows beneath the ribbed half dome. If such was the case
another type of vault would seem to have owed its origin in large part
to the lighting problem.


Once introduced, four types of chevet vault were gradually established,
not counting the variation which each of them underwent. For convenience
these will be called the radiating-ribbed type, the broken-ribbed type,
the buttressing-ribbed type, and finally the diagonal or cross-ribbed
type. Each will be considered in turn and an effort made to trace their
consecutive development.

The chronology of these vaults is very difficult to determine. In fact,
it is probably safe to assume that the earliest example, if there were
not a number of these vaults simultaneously constructed, has
disappeared. In any event, it would seem that the vault must have been
first used somewhere between 1130 and 1150 as there are several existing
examples which date from this period. If these cannot be arranged in any
certain order, they may at least, be used to show the form of the early


Perhaps the most primitive, in appearance at least, is that above the
transept of Tournai cathedral (Fig. 53) in which, as has been
noted,[356] the extrados of each rib is built up until it forms a flat
sloping upper surface, each cell of the vault proper rising from the
ramps thus formed. Next to this vault at Tournai, and as a matter of
fact, probably of earlier date though of more developed type are the two
chevet vaults of Largny (Aisne) (cir. 1140).[357] and Azy-Bonneil
(Aisne),[358]--which are three-celled,--and the one in the lower story
of the chapel of the Bishop’s palace at Laon (cir. 1137-1147) (Fig. 62)
with five cells. The latter shows their general characteristics. There
are no wall ribs and the round-headed windows are only partly raised
above the impost of the radiants while there abut against the keystone
of the apsidal arch (Plate II-b). It will be noticed also that this arch
is greatly thickened to resist the pressure of these ribs, and at
Tournai is preceded by a tunnel-vaulted bay to make this resistance even
more secure.[359]


But much more important than these smaller chevet vaults, are those of a
number of large churches, also belonging to the second quarter of the
twelfth century. Of these, Saint Germer-de-Fly[360] (Fig. 63) has been
most prominently brought to notice through Mr. Moore’s work on Gothic
architecture. It is doubly of interest because it possesses chevet
vaults of two distinct stages in the development of this new form. Thus
in the original radiating chapels opening off the ambulatory,[361]
three-part chevet vaults of the type described in the previous
paragraph were employed, with this advance, namely the introduction of
stilted, round-headed wall ribs. The vaults are still highly domed at
the crown and it would seem very reasonable to suppose that they were
completed before the vault of the great apse was begun.


This latter shows an advance in construction beyond that hitherto seen.
In the first place, the entire window is placed above the level of the
impost of the radiants with a consequent raising of the vault surface
above the windows and a great reduction in its domed-up character. The
line of intersection of the vault cell with the apse wall, which is
marked by a slightly pointed, stilted wall rib, resting upon slender
shafts rising from the clerestory string-course, is almost perpendicular
from the impost of the radiants to a point about at their haunch. Thus
the lower portion of the masonry panel is really a flat wall resting
upon the ribs. The object of the builders in thus constructing their
vault panels would seem to have been twofold, first to get a large space
of pleasing shape for clerestory windows and secondly to aid in
overcoming the thrusts of the radiating ribs. The first is perhaps the
less important of the two, for the windows in the early chevets very
rarely occupy all the space beneath the wall intersection. The second,
however, furnishes a much better explanation of this form of panel. And
this explanation would seem to lie, not so much in the fact that the
stilted wall rib concentrated the thrust along a narrow strip of
exterior wall where it could be met by exterior buttresses[362] but
rather in the fact that the weight of such a flat wall, rising
perpendicularly above the radiating rib, practically offset all of their
outward thrusts by its downward pressure while the little which remained
was taken care of by the thick walls characteristic of church
construction in the Transitional period. Thus it is possible to account
for the almost total lack of exterior abutment in such apses as this at
Saint Germer-de-Fly, where only the slenderest of shafts are found along
the exterior wall serving far more for decoration than for
abutment.[363] That the stilting was not done primarily to concentrate
the thrusts is further shown by the fact that in many of the later
Gothic churches which were built long after the flying-buttress was
perfected there is no attempt to stilt the wall rib, but the masonry of
the vault is actually curved outward from the very springing of the
radiants, which are raised to the impost of the window heads to give the
vault this form.[364]

The highly stilted wall intersection with the consequent elevation of
the clerestory window and flattening of the lower part of the vault cell
constitutes the great structural advance in the chevet of Saint Germer.
The employment of the wall rib, however, introduces an important matter
for discussion. To be sure this is not by any means the first example of
its use, for formerets may be found even in groined vaults, but it is
one of the early examples on a large scale and may serve to introduce
the question as to the part which these ribs played in Gothic


It has generally been maintained that the wall ribs were integral and
important members of a true ribbed vault and that they actually aided in
the support of the masonry panels. There are, however, a number of
reasons for believing that this is not entirely so but that these ribs
were comparatively unimportant as far as their relation to the vaults
was concerned and were of much more importance, in the first place as
cover joints, in the second as window heads, and in the third as
relieving arches in the clerestory wall. Two important facts lend
strength to the theory that the wall rib was not as a rule a supporting
member. The first of these lies in the fact that it was quite frequently
omitted even from vaults of the true Gothic form, and the second, in the
fact that, when present, there are perhaps as many cases in which the
curve of the vault fails to follow that of the rib as there are of the
reverse condition. In fact, it is a question whether in the majority of
cases the vault panel actually rests upon or even cuts into the face of
the formeret. Take, for example, a number of chevet vaults[365] and
examine them in this respect. At Saint Germer (Fig. 63) the wall rib is
largely a relieving arch in the clerestory wall which is made much
thinner beneath it; and while the curve of the chevet cells follows in
general that of the arch, it does not exactly correspond with it. In the
large chevet vault of Saint Remi at Reims (Fig. 64), and in many other
vaults not over the apse, especially in the English churches and those
in which a group of clerestory windows is found in each bay, no wall rib
is used, showing that such a rib was not at all necessary as far as the
construction and support of the vault was concerned. Moreover, in many
of the churches in which a wall rib is used along the exact line of the
vault surface, it is too small to act as a supporting member and would
seem to be merely a cover-joint to hide the intersection of the vault
surface with the clerestory wall.[366] Finally and most important of all
are the cases in which this rib is used primarily as a window head. In
some of these, as for example in the apse of La Madeleine at Vézelay,
and those of the cathedrals of Soissons (Fig. 67) and Chartres (Fig.
68), the curve of the vault corresponds with this window-head arch, but
in many other apses such as those of Bourges cathedral (Fig. 76), of
Saint Étienne at Caen (Fig. 70), and of the Sainte Chapelle at Saint
Germer, the builders without hesitation curved their vault surface away
from the line of the window-head which would otherwise be the natural
wall rib.[367] Although from the preceding facts, it would seem evident
that the wall rib was not an essential structural member of the Gothic
vaulting system it may have been of advantage in many instances for
holding a temporary wooden centering during the construction of the
vault panels.

[Illustration: FIG. 64.--REIMS, SAINT REMI.]


Returning again to the radiating-ribbed chevet, especially that of Saint
Germer-de-Fly (Fig. 63), it is important to note the one great weakness
which this vault possesses. It lies in the position of the radiating
ribs which abut the apsidal arch at its crown, in other words at a point
not at all suited to meet the pressures which are thus brought to bear
against it. A rather heavy arch between the apse and the remaining bay
of the choir, though no heavier than those in the vaulted bays of the
nave, aids in resisting the pressure but nevertheless such a vault is
not strictly logical from a structural standpoint. It is not as well
buttressed, for example, as the ribbed half dome of Saint Georges at
Boscherville (Fig. 61), or the transept chevet at Tournai (Fig. 53), in
which a tunnel vaulted bay precedes the arch against whose crown the
radiants are brought to bear.

It is not surprising that this vault was but little used in subsequent
Gothic architecture. It is possible, however, to cite a few examples,
among them the cathedrals of Séez (Orne) (end of the thirteenth
century), Cambrai (Nord) (cir. 1250), and Dinan (Côtes-du-Nord) (end of
the thirteenth century), the cathedral of Saint Sauveur at Bruges
(Belgium) (probably thirteenth century), and the abbey church of Moissac
(Tarn) (probably fourteenth century). There is also a peculiar form in
which the ribs are narrowed toward the crown, in Santa Maria sopra
Minerva at Rome (after 1285). Two other slight variants of the type, one
in the church of Saint Pierre-le-Guillard at Bourges and the other in
the cathedral of Moulins are later discussed.


After that of Saint Germer-de-Fly, perhaps the next important chevet is
that of Saint Martin-des-Champs at Paris (Fig. 65), which dates from
about 1140-1150 and may possibly be the earliest of what will be termed
broken-ribbed chevets. On the exterior, this apse closely resembles
Saint Germer with no flying-buttresses and only very light exterior
buttress-shafts. In the interior, however, there is a marked difference
between the two, for the apse of Saint Martin-des-Champs is so
constructed as to include not merely the bays actually on the curve, but
one rectangular bay of the choir as well. The builders thus set
themselves the problem of constructing a chevet vault with seven cells,
over a space greater than a semicircle. If they had made all the
radiants of such a vault meet at the crown of the transverse arch, there
would have been a great disparity in the length of the ribs and a very
awkward shape to the separate vault cells. To avoid this, and to do away
with the pressure of the radiants at the crown of the apsidal arch, the
builders moved the keystone of the radiating ribs back from this crown
to a point where all of them become nearly equal in length. And since
the bay with parallel sides was of practically the same size as
four[368] of those making up the apse proper, the keystone fell very
nearly on the transverse line between the two piers marking the eastern
end of this bay (Plate II-c). In none of the chevets of this type did it
fall directly at the center of such a line, however, and it is this fact
that differentiates the chevet vaults of broken-ribbed character from
the slightly later and more developed buttressing-ribbed type. A vault
like that at Saint Martin-des-Champs, marks an advance over that at
Saint Germer in that the two western ribs furnish admirable abutment for
the keystone of the vault, and the added choir bay gives a more spacious
appearance to this portion of the church.


There is another example of this broken-ribbed chevet in Paris, in the
church of Saint Germain-des-Pres (cir. 1163), while still others may be

[Illustration: FIG. 66.--VÉZELAY, LA MADELEINE.]

seen in Saint Quiriace at Provins (cir. 1160) (Fig. 31) and in La
Madeleine at Vézelay (cir. 1140-1180) (Fig. 66). The latter is of
especial interest because it shows some peculiar makeshifts in the
matter of construction. Here the choir would seem to have been
originally designed to consist of two rectangular bays with four-part
vaults and an apse of five sides probably with a chevet like that at
Saint Germer.[369] But by the time the western bay of the choir had been
built up to the clerestory, it would seem as if a new idea of a
seven-part chevet had come in, perhaps from Paris, and the next bay was
subdivided so as to give seven equal sides to the new vault. Then to
make all the bays of the same scale, the west bay was also subdivided,
but this necessarily at the clerestory level, and covered with a
six-part vault. This left nine bays for the chevet and as only seven
were to be actually included beneath the radiants, a narrow rectangular
four-part vault was used over that toward the choir. There now remained
an apse in all respects like those of Saint Martin-des-Champs and of
Saint Germain-des-Pres and it was similarly vaulted with a broken-ribbed
vault whose keystone does not lie quite upon the transverse line between
the first two piers of the apse proper. The chevet built upon these
radiants differs, however, from those in Paris and at Saint Germer in
having a decidedly domed up character. In other words, the windows do
not rise more than half the distance from the impost of the radiants to
their keystone.[370]


This type of chevet as developed at Paris and Vézelay played a large
part in subsequent architecture, for out of it would seem to have sprung
what will be for convenience termed the buttressing-ribbed chevet. Among
the more important early chevets of this type are those over the apses
of Noyon[371] transepts, of Saint Remi at Reims (Fig. 64), of Saint Leu
d’Esserent (Oise), and of the cathedrals of Sens, Canterbury, Noyon, and
others, all probably completed before 1180. Although differing in a
number of details, these apses have certain features in common. They all
include beneath the chevet the preceding bay of the church, and all have
the same arrangement of ribs which are so placed that the two springing
from the piers next beyond the apsidal arch on either side form a
transverse arch against whose crown all the others abut (Plate II-d).
The object of this arrangement evidently lay in the desire of the
builders to construct a distinct transverse arch between the curve of
the apse and the rectangular bay included in the chevet and at the same
time to employ the two ribs beyond those forming the arch, as
buttresses, to offset the thrust of the remaining radiants. Thus when
the rectangular bay was larger than those around the curve, as for
example in the choir of Soissons cathedral (Fig. 67), the buttressing
ribs were longer than the remainder of those forming the vault. This
made the bay containing these two ribs precisely like one-half of a
six-part vault, and as this method of vaulting was commonly used in the
nave and choir of these churches this chevet was a very

[Illustration: FIG. 67.--SOISSONS, CATHEDRAL.]

logical continuation of such a vault. But the builders do not seem to
have realized immediately the aesthetic advantage in so planning their
churches that such chevet vaults should come next to a six-part vault.
At Sens (Fig. 28), however, the perfected use of this new chevet is
shown for it is placed directly beyond a six-part bay and its two
buttressing ribs are the counterparts of the two diagonals of the
sexpartite vault. Once the advantage of such an arrangement was grasped,
the churches were in many cases planned to provide for an even number of
six-part bays in the choir followed by a chevet which carries the same
system into the apse of the church. Thus in the cathedrals of Paris and
Bourges, and probably originally in that of Soissons, as well as in
other churches with six-part vaulting, this chevet became the standard
form of eastern termination and the bay preceding the apse was made
sexpartite so that the completed church would be uniform
throughout.[372] Moreover the apsidal bays of the later chevets, as for
example that at Soissons (Fig. 67) were frequently so planned that the
radiants from the piers next beyond the ribs forming the transverse arch
containing the keystone, were exact extensions of the buttressing ribs.
In other words, except for the subdivision of the eastern bay into three
window cells, the chevet corresponded to a true six-part vault inscribed
in the space formed by the last bay of the choir and the polygonal-sided

Notwithstanding the fact that the buttressing-ribbed chevet was
primarily suited to churches with six-part vaulting, it was by no means
confined to these for it is found in a large number which were from the
beginning planned for four-part vaults. Among these is the cathedral of
Rouen, in which the chevet is of distinctly six-part type with a
full-sized choir bay included beneath the vault,[373] and the cathedral
of Reims in which all the bays of the chevet are of practically the same
size, as in the early churches which gave rise to this form of apse
vault. Reims is thus an example of the perseverance of the design of a
seven-sided chevet including one bay with parallel walls and yet of the
same size as those forming the curve.[374]

But while pleasing in appearance when used in combination with six-part
choir vaults, the chevet with buttressing ribs was not so satisfactory
in churches with four-part cross-ribbed vaulting of rectangular plan. A
reference to the vault of Soissons cathedral (Fig. 67)[375] will
illustrate the faults of such a combination. These lie largely in the
three-part vaulted bay. In the first place, though its window cells are
practically the same width as those in the remainder of the choir, their
crown lines run out at an awkward angle,[376] instead of being
practically perpendicular to the outer walls as in the remaining bays of
the apse and all those of four-part type. Secondly, the great,
triangular, transverse severy is much larger than any of the others in
the church and is thus unpleasing when contrasted with them, besides
being more difficult to construct because of its larger size. It is not
surprising to find, therefore, that a fourth form of chevet was
developed and used extensively in churches with four-part vaulting.
This chevet, which will be termed diagonal-ribbed, is perhaps the most
important distinct type developed in Gothic architecture.


[Illustration: FIG. 68.--CHARTRES, CATHEDRAL.]

It has already been noted that there were a number of early apses
covered with an elementary kind of chevet which was formed by the use of
two diagonal ribs over the semicircle of the apse in exactly the same
manner as similar ribs were used in rectangular four-part vaulting. Such
a vault as this may have been the prototype of the slightly more
developed form to be seen in the radiating chapels of the cathedral of
Noyon (before 1167)[377] and in the chapel at the end of one aisle of
Notre Dame at Étampes (Seine-et-Oise) (cir. 1160). This latter has one
extra rib added in what would have been the eastern bay of such a
four-part apse vault subdividing it into two window cells and thus
producing a four-celled chevet[378] (Plate II-e). It is exactly this
principle, applied on a larger scale and with a further subdivision of
this outer bay, which may be seen in such chevets as those of Chartres
cathedral (Fig. 68) and Saint Étienne at Caen (first quarter of
thirteenth century) (Fig. 70).[379] Of these, the one at Chartres has
the more primitive character, for all of its seven bays are on the curve
of a semicircle and thus none of the choir proper is included beneath
the chevet (Plate II-f). As a result of this increased number of bays,
the intersection of the two diagonal ribs which form the first two
radiants on each side, lies at a point comparatively near the keystone
of the apsidal arch. This gives a certain uniformity to the size and
character of the bays, but the vault is not yet perfect, for the ribs
are still noticeably different in length, and more important than this
the crowns of the window cells are at an awkward angle with the exterior
wall. These faults are, however, much less marked in Saint Étienne,
where the apse is greater than a semicircle--though even this chevet is
not of the perfected diagonal-ribbed type, since it has no wall ribs
and, moreover, is used over an apse of semicircular instead of polygonal
plan like those of the developed Gothic period. An example of the
perfected vault may be seen, however, above the apse of Amiens cathedral
(Fig. 69). Here there are but five bays of the chevet along the curve of
the apse proper, the remaining two being continuations of the choir
walls (Plate II-g). The diagonal ribs which determine the position of
the keystone are therefore precisely such ribs as those in the remainder
of the chevet except that the bay in which they lie is of smaller size
than those preceding it and thus forms a gradual transition to the still
smaller bays comprising the apse proper. As a result of this arrangement
of ribs at Amiens, the keystone of the vault is so placed that it not
only renders all the radiants of practically equal length but also makes
the crown lines of each window cell so nearly perpendicular to the wall
as to give a most symmetrical effect to the entire vault. Such a chevet
constitutes the finest method of apse vaulting developed in Gothic
architecture and in fact may well be considered the most perfect type
conceivable, at least from the point of view of appearance. It loses a
little in structural character through the fact that the first ribs do
not abut the four eastern radiants at as firm an angle as in the
previous chevet type,[380] but the advantage gained in the more
symmetrical character of the vaulting severies makes up in large degree
for this possible fault.


[Illustration: FIG. 69.--AMIENS, CATHEDRAL.]

Nevertheless it may have been a feeling on the part of the builders that
there was a lack of abutment to the west of the keystone which led to
the introduction of one or more short ribs at this point in a number of
chevets of various dates throughout the Gothic era. Thus in the apse of
Saint Étienne at Caen (Fig. 70),[381] of Saint Trophîme at Arles, and of
the cathedral of Notre Dame at Mantes, a single rib runs out from the
keystone of the chevet to that of the apsidal arch. (Plate II-h). Nor
was this rib a continuation of a ridge rib in the choir, for in the
instances just cited no such rib was employed. One is to be seen in a
number of churches, among them such widely separated examples as San
Saturnino at Pamplona,[382] Westminster Abbey,[383] and Saint Alpin at
Chalons-sur-Marne.[384] All of these churches have diagonal-ribbed
chevets, but there are instances of a short rib running to the apsidal
arch even where the vault is of the buttressing ribbed type, as for
example in the cathedral of Barcelona,[385] where it would seem to have
been used to subdivide the great triangular transverse cell of the vault
even more than to provide further apparent abutment for the other
radiants (Plate II-i). Even in chevets of the first type with ribs
radiating from the keystone of the apsidal arch, a rib is occasionally
added in the bay preceding this vault, as for example in Saint
Pierre-le-Guillard at Bourges (fifteenth century vaulting), where this
short rib runs out only to the crown of the six-part vault with which
the last bay of the choir is covered (Plate II-j). Occasionally, too, a
church like the cathedral of Moulins (Allier) (1468-1508), with a ridge
rib the length of the choir, is terminated by a chevet with radiating
ribs which thus receive apparent abutment at their keystone (Plate

[Illustration: FIG. 70.--CAEN, SAINT ÉTIENNE.]

A similar purpose of providing apparent abutment would seem to account
for the unusual form of the chevets of Bayeux cathedral (thirteenth
century), and Sant’ Antonio at Padua (after 1232) in which all the
radiants which ordinarily stop at the keystone are carried through
against the face of the apsidal arch. At Bayeux there are two such ribs
(Plate II-l)[386] and at Padua, three (Plate II-m). The latter is also
exceptionally interesting in the form of its chevet which is really a
combination of the diagonal and the buttressing ribbed type.

Although there are occasional instances like the one at Barcelona, in
which the transverse severy of a buttressing ribbed chevet is subdivided
only by a ridge rib, it is far more common to find a more extensive
subdivision of this bay when such subdivision was undertaken at all.
Moreover, it is an interesting fact that many of the elaborated chevet
vaults--for it may be noted here that the apse vault was elaborated just
as were those in the remainder of the church edifice--are fundamentally
based upon the simple chevet with buttressing ribs.

Of these vaults with added ribs, perhaps the simplest are those in which
the western bay is subdivided by the introduction of a ridge rib running
about half way to the crown of the apsidal arch and there met by two
tiercerons rising from the imposts of this same arch (Plate II-n). A
good example appears in the cathedral of Bayonne (Basses-Pyrénées)
(after 1213), and another in that of Saint Quentin (Aisne) (commenced
1257), while the same subdivision of this severy in combination with
other subdivided cells is to be seen in the Marien-kirche at Stargarde
(Germany) (fourteenth century) (Plate IV-d).

A second and unusual division of this severy appears in the cathedral of
Saint Jean at Perpignan (Pyrénées-Orientales) (1324-1509),[387] where
the customary three-part bay containing the buttressing ribs also
contains two diagonals precisely like those in a four-part vault (Plate
II-o). A similar arrangement, with the addition of a ridge rib (Plate
II-p), may be seen in the church of Saint Jean at Ambert (Puy-de-Dôme)
(fifteenth and sixteenth centuries). Such subdivisions as these last two
quite evidently had for their object not merely a reduction in the size
of the spaces to be vaulted but also an effort to retain the
buttressing-ribbed type of chevet and still obtain a window cell which
would not have the warped surface characteristic of this form.

[Illustration: FIG. 71.--CHALONS-SUR-MARNE (NEAR), NOTRE

A still more elaborate subdivision of the rectangular vaulting bay
appears in the chevet of Notre Dame-de-l’Épine near Chalons-sur-Marne
(1419-1459) (Fig. 71), where this bay contains no diagonals at all but
is divided by a series of tiercerons and short ridge ribs in a manner
best understood from the plan (Plate II-q). But it is the subdivision of
the window cells of the apse proper which is of especial interest at
l’Épine, for the method here employed was very widely extended in the
later Gothic period. It consists in the introduction into each of these
cells of a short ridge rib running from the central keystone to a point
about half way to the window crowns where it is met by two tiercerons
which rise from the impost of the principal ribs of the chevet on either
side of the window. The apparent object of the system is to so subdivide
the vault surface as to break up its compound or ploughshare curves and
substitute smaller panels whose surfaces are simpler to construct
exactly as in the similar nave vaults previously described. This purpose
does not show to advantage at l’Épine, where the awkward adjustment
between the vault panels and the window heads would seem to indicate
that the apse was originally designed for a simple form of chevet with
no added ribs. Better examples could be cited, among them Saint Severin
at Paris. Such an arrangement of window cells as that in these vaults
practically converts the chevet into a ribbed half dome pierced with
lunettes which do not rise to its crown. This may clearly be seen from a
study of the apse of Saint Jacques at Antwerp (probably sixteenth
century), where the vault is unusual in the omission of all the true
radiating ribs (Plate II-r). As a matter of fact such ribs were no
longer of value since they did not mark the intersection of two vault
panels but merely lay along a surface which is almost precisely like a
section of a half dome. The tiercerons are still important since they
mark the intersection of the window lunettes and carry the weight of the
vault down to the piers. They are therefore retained. Thus, while the
absence of radiants in Saint Jacques might seem to make this vault
structurally less correct than that of l’Épine in reality such is not
the case.

Once it became the custom to introduce extra ribs into the chevet, this
portion of the church underwent the same treatment as the vault of the
nave or choir. Thus in England, to cite only extreme cases of
elaboration, the later Gothic produced such vaults as those of
Tewkesbury Abbey (between 1325 and 1350),[388] in France, such pendant
types as that of Saint Pierre at Caen (probably early sixteenth
century), and in Germany such a choir and apse as that of Freiburg
cathedral (late fifteenth century) (Fig. 72).[389] The last named is
especially interesting as showing the low point reached in rib vaulting
for its ribs have almost no function as supporting members, some of them
being actually free from the vault panels and are merely used to form a
decorative pattern upon a vault which would stand equally well were they
entirely removed. Such chevets are, in many cases, clever examples of
stone cutting and decorative design but they are lacking in fundamental
structural character.


[Illustration: FIG. 72.--FREIBURG, CATHEDRAL.]

Thus far the discussion of chevets has been distinctly from a structural
point of view, but there remain certain other differences between these
vaults which are worthy of remark. In the first place, there is the
matter of the number of cells comprised in the chevet. The standard
during the best Gothic period was seven, though five was a frequent
number and quite often nine are found (Plate II-s), as for example, in
the apse of San Francesco at Bologna, Saint Martin at Ypres, Belgium,
and that of Béziers (Hérault), cathedral (1215-1300).[390] In the
smaller churches and in the radiating chapels there are frequently
three. Moreover, when the apse has a central pier,[391] there are an
even number of bays and thus four and six-celled chevets are employed.
That in Saint Pierre at Caen, for example, has four bays all on the
curve, and that in Notre Dame at Caudebec-en-Caux (Seine-Inférieure)
(fifteenth and sixteenth centuries) (Plate II-t) has only two bays thus
placed, a fact which gives an angular character to the apse which is far
from pleasing.[392] As for the chevets with six cells, they are of very
infrequent occurrence, though one is to be seen in Saint Pierre at
Auxerre (Plate II-u). A chevet with the unusual number of eleven cells
is to be seen in the church of La Chapelle-sur-Crécy (thirteenth
century).[393] In construction, this chevet is similar to one bay of
such an eight-part vault as that at Provins, Saint Quiriace[394] with
its easternmost cell divided into five parts.


An interesting question arises in this connection as to why the central
pier was employed in the mediaeval church. It is not common, yet it
occurs frequently enough and over a sufficient space of time to prove
that it did not lack a certain amount of popularity. Thus an apse with
such a pier is to be seen in the early Romanesque church of Vignory
(Haute-Marne) (consecrated cir. 1050-1052), where it is covered by a
half dome, and again at Morienval (Oise) (Fig. 77), where there are ribs
beneath a similar vault.[395] Throughout the Gothic period, this plan of
apse surmounted by a chevet occurs in an even larger number of examples
and toward the close of the period becomes quite popular. Leaving out of
consideration the origin of the employment of a central eastern pier,
which would seem most difficult to ascertain, it is at least interesting
to note the effect which a chevet with a central rib presents when
compared with the more usual type. If, for example, the apse of Saint
Pierre at Auxerre be compared with that of the cathedral of Reims, the
advantage and disadvantage of the two methods from the point of view of
appearance may be seen. The most displeasing feature of the apse of
Reims lies in the fact that its central arch and window, being seen in
their full width, seem disproportionately wide in comparison with those
on either side, while at Auxerre there is no window shown in its full
width with the result that the transition is apparently more gradual
from the ends to the center of the apse. On the other hand, the apse of
Reims permits the addition of a lady chapel with an arch on the major
axis of the church.[396] Altogether it is largely a question of personal
preference which would seem to have guided the builders, combined,
perhaps, with some considerations based upon the size of the apsidal
curve and as to how many divisions would give the most pleasing form to
the apsidal arches. As far as the actual construction of the chevet is
concerned, the plan with a central pier made no essential difference,
except possibly in the vaulting of the ambulatory which is discussed in
the next chapter.


Another interesting, though minor feature of chevet vaulting, lies in
the form of the masonry panels and the position of the imposts of the
radiating ribs. The position of the latter varies considerably, though
it corresponds in general with the impost level of the transverse arches
in the nave or choir of the church. In the best period this was
generally somewhat above the sill line of the clerestory windows, but in
some of the early churches like Saint Germer (Fig. 63), Saint Quiriace
at Provins (Fig. 31), and the cathedral of Bourges (Fig. 76), it is
below this line, while in a number of later churches, among them Saint
Urbain at Troyes (Aube) (1262-1329) (Fig. 73), it is as high as that of
the arches forming the window heads. This last chevet is also important
as showing a tendency to do away with the flat wall forming the lower
portion of each panel and starting the outward curve of the masonry
directly from the extrados of the ribs. Although this detracts somewhat
from the beauty of the vault by making the curve of its cells too
abrupt, it does prevent large portions of the windows from being
concealed and therefore gives a more uniform effect to the
clerestory.[397] Such an arrangement of the window cells is to be found
even earlier in the chevet of Bayeux cathedral (early thirteenth
century), where the rib rises from the clerestory string-course but is
kept close against the wall to the impost of the window arches so that
the effect produced is much like that at Saint Urbain.


[Illustration: FIG. 73.--TROYES, SAINT URBAIN.]

Another feature of chevet vaulting which varies greatly throughout its
history, is the comparative height of the crown of the wall rib, or line
of intersection, and that of the main keystone; in other words, of the
doming up of the vault panels. In this, there is a very wide divergence
all through the Transitional and Gothic periods. Thus among the early
chevets it will be noted that in some the doming is slight though
noticeable, as at Saint Germer (Fig. 63), in others it is very
pronounced, as at Vézelay (Fig. 66), while in others the crown of the
cells actually curves downward toward the central keystone. This is an
exceptional type, of which there is an example in Saint Remi at Reims
(Fig. 64). Naturally enough, the

[Illustration: FIG. 74.--ANGERS, CATHEDRAL.]

vault which is most highly domed up exerts the least outward thrust and
is thus most easily supported. It is not surprising, therefore, to find
this form a favorite where large windows were not required in the apse
or where there was no ambulatory or but a low one. This may perhaps
explain its use in the south of France in the cathedral of Béziers
(Hérault), as well as its popularity throughout Italy, where it may be
seen on an exceptionally large scale in the cathedral of Milan. Certain
of these domed up chevets may also be attributed to the type of nave
vault developed in the locality in which they are found, as, for
example, the chevet of Angers cathedral (Fig. 74), which is very highly
domed, with the small torus ribs of the region forming the radiants
beneath it. As a matter of fact, such a chevet as this differs from a
ribbed-lobed-dome only in having its masonry courses running at right
angles to the supporting walls. Its pressures are almost all downward
with but little outward thrust though the arrangement of the masonry
courses and the shape of the vault cells serves to concentrate both
thrusts and pressures upon the ribs and piers instead of along the whole
curve of the outer walls, thus rendering perfectly safe the introduction
of large windows.[398]


[Illustration: FIG. 75.--AUXERRE, CATHEDRAL.]

Still another interesting characteristic of certain chevet vaults is the
presence of openings from one cell to the next in the lower portion of
the panels between them. The simplest of these are to be seen in the
cathedral of Auxerre (choir finished 1234) (Fig. 75), and it seems very
reasonable from their square shape, comparatively small size, and their
position at the beginning of the curve of the vault cells to assume that
they were intended to hold wooden beams, used, quite possibly, as
supports for scaffolding or centering for the rest of the vault.
Whatever their use, they may be the prototypes of such larger openings
as those in the cathedral of Bourges (after 1215) (Fig. 76), which may
not only have been used in a similar manner but which, from their
circular shape and moulded character, supply a certain amount of
decoration to this part of the vault and even serve in a slight degree
to distribute the light from its windows over a larger area.[399] An
even greater amount of decoration is obtained by the use of tracery in
the similar openings in the cathedral of Orleans (begun 1630), which are
of larger size and of a generally triangular shape.[400] The final
development of such tracery panels may be seen in the Brunnenkapelle of
Magdeburg cathedral (fourteenth century)[401] where the apse vault
proper becomes practically a flat ceiling the entire space between it
and each of the ribs being filled with tracery.

[Illustration: FIG. 76.--BOURGES, CATHEDRAL.]




It is not the province of this essay to enter into a discussion of the
origin of the ambulatory and its introduction into the church plan.[402]
It is sufficient to note that a passage around a semicircular apse
appears even in Roman times in the imperial tribune of the so-called
stadium of Domitian on the Palatine at Rome which dates from the second
century A.D.,[403] and that a similar passage was added around the apse
of San Giovanni in Laterano by Pope Sergius II (844-845).[404]

Such ambulatories were mere service galleries, not directly connected
with the apse and in fact shut off from it by a solid wall, but when
once adopted as a feature of the church plan, the ambulatory rapidly
became an aisle around the apse corresponding in all respects to that
which flanked the rectangular nave or choir.[405] It was natural,
therefore, that this added aisle should have been vaulted and such is
the case in the two earliest ambulatories of any size which still exist,
namely, those in Santo Stefano at Verona (end of tenth century) and the
cathedral of Ivrea (973-1001 or 1002),[406] while the early ambulatories
in France, like those of Saint Martin at Tours (end of eleventh century)
and the cathedral of Clermont-Ferrand, which have unfortunately been
destroyed, were doubtless also vaulted.


That the form which such vaulting assumes owes its origin to that of the
concentric aisles in earlier buildings of circular plan would seem a
most natural supposition since the problems in the two cases were
precisely alike. As a matter of fact, a comparison shows that all or
nearly all the methods of vaulting developed in the Roman or Byzantine
period for the aisles of circular buildings were tried by the Romanesque
builders when they added an ambulatory to the semicircular apses of
their churches.


The principal Roman type would seem to have been the annular tunnel
vault. An excellent example is to be seen in the amphitheatre at Nîmes
in which the builders have even employed transverse arches of stone
beneath the vault of brick.[407] Similar in character, though later in
date and without transverse arches, is the fourth century annular vault
of Santa Costanza in Rome. It is not surprising, therefore, to find the
annular tunnel vault in a number of the earliest Romanesque ambulatories
as, for example, at Ivrea and in the lower story of Santo Stefano at
Verona, both dating from the close of the tenth century, and somewhat
later at Vignory in France and in the gallery of the Tower chapel in
London.[408] The annular tunnel vault never became in any sense a
popular form, however, probably because it necessitated an impost above
the level of the apsidal arches and exerted a continuous thrust
throughout its whole extent. It is more often to be found in crypts, as
in Saint Wipertus near Quedlinburg (936)[409] and in Chartres cathedral
(1020-1028)[410] where there were no structural problems of support, or
else with its imposts lowered and cut by lunettes into an
interpenetrating form which is really an elementary groined vault and is
later discussed.


Besides these annular vaults, there are a few examples of ambulatories
with half tunnel vaults which may owe their origin to the desire of the
builders to keep the outer impost of the vaults as low as possible and
still raise the inner line above the apsidal arcade.[411] In any event
such an ambulatory is occasionally found in churches where the aisles
also are half-tunneled, as, for example, in the abbey church of
Montmajour (cir. 1015-1018)[412] and in the twelfth century church of
Saintes.[413] Though this type of vault apparently has no pre-Romanesque
prototype, it is perhaps possible that the concentric aisle of the
circular church of Rieux-Merinville (Aude) (eleventh century)[414]
affords an earlier example of its use over a space of similar plan.
There is also an interesting use of a half-tunnel vaulted triforium
above the ambulatory and abutting the half dome of the apse which opens
into it through five arches, in the church of Loctudy (Finistère)
twelfth century.[415]

There are, however, circular buildings of the Byzantine and Carolingian
periods with vaulted aisles which may well have furnished the prototypes
for other methods of ambulatory vaulting which the Romanesque builders
employed. One of these is the Royal Chapel at Aachen (796-804), in which
the aisles are two stories high with the lower story covered by groined
vaults of alternately square and rectangular plan with no transverse
arches separating the bays.[416]


Although there appear to be no Romanesque churches with ambulatories of
exactly this type, there are a number which are composed of triangular
sections of an annular vault alternating with groined bays of
practically square plan. One of these is the upper ambulatory of Santo
Stefano (end of tenth century) at Verona, while a similar arrangement
may be seen in the concentric aisle of the crypt of Saint Bénigne at
Dijon (Côte d’Or) (1002-1018).[417] Moreover, the type at Aachen of
alternate square and triangular groined bays, is to be seen at Paris
with the addition of transverse arches between the bays, in Saint Martin
des Champs (cir. 1136) and at Gloucester in the beautiful ambulatory of
the cathedral (1089-1100). Furthermore, this alternation of square and
triangular bays was of quite frequent occurrence in the ribbed vaulted
ambulatories later described.


The gallery of the Palatine chapel at Aachen is covered in still another
manner by a series of ramping tunnel vaults alternately triangular and
square in plan and springing from a series of transverse arches.
Although never exactly copied in ambulatory vaulting, a similar system
in which ramping groined vaults displace the simple tunnel form appears
in the gallery of the north transept of San Fedele at Como (twelfth
century)[418] while the system of ramping the vault had still another
application in the trapezoidal groined vaults of San Tommaso at
Almeno-San-Salvatore,[419] the evident object being to get a slant above
the vaults suitable for an exterior roof which might rest directly upon
them. But if ramping tunnel vaults were not used over the ambulatory,
there are at least two instances of the employment of expanding
transverse tunnel vaults in this position and these may well be products
of the Aachen type. The ambulatory at Vertheuil[420] affords an example
dating from about the middle of the twelfth century, which must soon
have been followed by the gallery of the cathedral of Notre Dame at
Mantes (beg. in 1160?).[421] Here the vaults are similar, but on a much
larger scale, and with quite different transverse supports consisting of
lintels, each resting upon two columns placed between the apsidal piers
and the outer walls.[422]


All of the ambulatory types thus far described were but occasionally
used in the Romanesque period. Far more common, and in fact the standard
form, is that of simple four-part groined vaults over bays of
trapezoidal plan. Here again the plan at least has a Byzantine prototype
in the church of San Vitale at Ravenna where the concentric aisle is
divided into trapezoids, though these in turn are cut by the radiating
niches of the central nave and the groined vaults employed are therefore
of irregular form.

Even without any prototypes, however, this arrangement of bays is a
direct outcome of the use of an annular tunnel vault intersected by
lunettes or transverse tunnels opposite the apsidal arches. Such vaults
may in fact be seen at a comparatively early date in the churches of
Bois-Sainte-Marie (Saône-et-Loire) (twelfth century), Champagne
(Ardèche), and Preuilly-sur-Claise (Indre-et-Loire), and in a reversed
sense at Saint Savin (Vienne) (cir. 1020-1040) where there is an early
instance of a simple annular vault cut by expanding transverse tunnel
vaults whose intrados at the smaller end corresponds to that of the
apsidal arches but whose crowns rise higher than that of the vault which
they intersect. There are no transverse arches and yet the vault is
really composed of a series of trapezoidal bays. The ambulatory of Saint
Sernin at Toulouse (choir consecrated 1096) shows this same system in
its fully developed form. There are still no transverse arches, but the
vault is no longer interpenetrating but fully groined, yet with
practically level crowns, so that it still has the general form of
intersecting tunnel vaults.

It was far more common, however, for the Romanesque builders to separate
their trapezoidal bays by transverse arches, though their use would seem
to have been optional rather than to indicate a more developed
architectural type, since they are found at an early date in the
ambulatory of Saint Philibert at Tournus (Saône-et-Loire) (1009-1019),
where the form of the vault would otherwise be of interpenetrating type.
It is, in fact, less developed than that at Saint Sernin, the transverse
panels being considerably lower than the concentric portion of the vault
thus forming simple lunettes above the window heads. In such a vault,
the transverse arches are structurally valuable only in so far as they
make possible the erection of the vault in sections and consequently
serve as permanent centering and as a stiffening member between the
apsidal piers and the outer walls. In the fully developed vaults with
transverse arches, like those at Paray-le-Monial these arches serve
still another purpose. Here it is evident that the vault was laid up in
sections, for each bay is domed up at the crown and the transverse arch
not only carries a little of the weight of the vault but also conceals
what would otherwise be an awkward intersection line between one bay and
the next. With this doming up of the vault crown and the use of pointed
transverse arches to replace the awkward stilted form, the vault of
Paray-le-Monial marks the highest point possible before the introduction
of the diagonal rib in the Transitional and Gothic periods.


It has already been stated that it is not the purpose of this paper to
discuss the origin of ribbed vaulting. In fact, it is rather the
intention to accept the conclusions of Mr. Porter in his “Construction
of Lombard and Gothic Vaults” that this innovation arose from the
necessity for providing a centering where wood was not to be easily
obtained or where the shape of the bays or their position in the church
made a permanent centering of stone or brick far superior to, and easier
of construction than, a similar centering in wood.[423] Accordingly the
fact that some of the earliest ribbed vaults appear over the ambulatory
is readily explained by the trapezoidal shape of the vaulting bays, for
which a wooden centering would have been especially difficult to


Of these rib-vaulted ambulatories, the earliest which has come down to
us would seem to be that of the little church of Morienval (Figs. 77,
78, 79), which probably dates from about 1120-1130. A study of this
ambulatory shows most clearly the gradual changes and adjustments which
mark the development of perfected rib vaulting from its groined
prototype. In size this is an insignificant work and yet historically
most important. Perhaps its first noticeable feature lies in the use of
slightly pointed apsidal arches (Fig. 77), showing that the builders
grasped in at least a

[Illustration: FIG. 77.--MORIENVAL, CHURCH.]

rudimentary way the advantage to be gained in thus bringing these arches
up to a point where they would be nearly, at least, on a level with the
crown of a semicircular formeret. The use of these formerets or wall
arches is a second advance in this vault at Morienval, and though these
are unnecessarily heavy and in two orders (Fig. 78) they do reduce the
width of the vaulting bays and furthermore they clearly define the wall
line of the panels and may even have aided in the support of the wooden
centering or _cerce_ on which the severies were laid up. They do not
apparently support the actual masonry of the cell, which, as is clearly
shown in the southwest bay, does not follow the curve of the
formeret.[424] The transverse arches (Fig. 78) show little structural
advance, for they are still round headed. They are however highly
stilted yet in addition to this the builders have found it necessary to
pile their crowns with masonry in the manner already described in
connection with the vaults at Bury.[425] It is in the use and

[Illustration: FIG. 78.--MORIENVAL, CHURCH.]

[Illustration: FIG. 79.--MORIENVAL, CHURCH.]

arrangement of the diagonals (Fig. 79) that the chief interest in this
early ambulatory lies. If not unknown in bays of rectangular plan, this
was probably a first attempt to apply these intersecting ribs to bays of
trapezoidal shape, a problem especially difficult when these bays had
two curved sides. The ambulatory was so narrow and the wall piers with
the two wall arches extended so far into its width that the space
actually to be covered was of such a plan that ribs directly from the
one pier to that diagonally opposite would have intersected almost
against the crown of the apsidal arch. To avoid this awkward
arrangement, and make the panels of more equal size, the builders either
timidly broke the line of the rib, as in the second bay from the
southwest (Fig. 79), or curved the ribs slightly away from the crown of
the apse arches as in the northwest bay. Whether the builders were
actually experimenting here at Morienval with the position of the
diagonals and whether this little work of the early twelfth century had
any influence upon later ambulatory vaulting may be an open question,
yet it is a fact that the later ambulatories with ribbed vaults over
trapezoidal bays show three distinct types in the arrangement of the
diagonals according as these are left straight in plan, or curved, or
broken to bring their crowns to a better point in relation to the crown
line of the enclosing arches.


Of the three types, the one with straight diagonals (Plate III-a) is
perhaps most seldom seen, probably because of the awkward place at which
its vault crown falls. It does appear, however, in the cathedral of
Aversa near Naples[426], where the heaviness of the ribs would seem to
denote an early date.[427] There are a few later examples elsewhere,

[Illustration: PLATE III]

them the cathedrals of Langres (Haute-Marne) (end of twelfth century)
(Fig. 80) and Milan (beg. 1386), while a similar system with one or more
added ribs in the outer severy is to be seen at Pontoise (Seine-et-Oise)
S. Maclou (Plate III-h), in the cathedral of Rouen (Plate III-d), and in
Saint Remi at Reims (Fig. 83), which are later described.

[Illustration: FIG. 80.--LANGRES, CATHEDRAL.]


A little more common, perhaps, are the ambulatories with diagonal ribs
of curved plan (Plate III-b). The earliest existing example subsequent
to Morienval would seem to be that of the abbey church at Saint
Germer-de-Fly (cir. 1130-1150).[428] Its ribs correspond in general to
the curve of the groins which would be produced by the intersection of
a transverse with an annular tunnel vault. Such ribs are naturally
difficult to construct because of their curvature in plan as well as in
elevation and as a result they are but seldom found, though an example
on a large scale appears in Bourges cathedral (Plate IV-a).


The solution of the problem of covering a trapezoidal bay with ribbed
vaults lay in the employment of the broken rib, or in other words, in
the selection of a point of intersection from which four half arches
were extended to the supporting piers (Plate III-c). This system, which
was very possibly first employed at Saint Denis (1140-1144),[429] became
the standard throughout the best Gothic period wherever trapezoidal bays
were used, though there was a certain amount of variance in the position
of the keystone. At Saint Denis, and in the great majority of the best
Gothic churches it lies practically on the line of a curve through the
crowns of the apsidal arches and concentric with that of the apse,[430]
but in some instances, notably at Sens cathedral[431] and in the
ambulatory of Canterbury[432] which was directly influenced by the
first-named church, the point of intersection was moved outward to a
point where the line from this crown to the transverse arch is
practically perpendicular to the latter. The result is an equalizing in
length of the four half ribs, but this is accomplished only at a
considerable sacrifice in appearance.[433]


The actual construction of ambulatory vaulting followed much the same
course as that of vaults in the remainder of the church and especially
those in the side aisles. Thus in the cathedral of Langres (Fig. 80),
which dates from the close of the twelfth century and is somewhat south
of the center of architectural development in the Transitional period,
the ambulatory presents a number of rudimentary characteristics. In
fact, judging from the awkward manner in which the diagonals rise from


imposts, the exceptionally large size of the transverse arches, and the
lowness of those opening into the apse, it would seem as though this
aisle had been planned for domed up groined vaulting of the Bourgogne
type, already seen at Paray-le-Monial, and that ribbed vaulting came in
before the completion of the ambulatory and was therefore substituted.
In any event, these straight diagonals and low apsidal arches combined
with the heavy transverse arches and the decidedly domed up character of
the vaults themselves produce a much more primitive appearance than is
to be seen further north in the contemporary vaults of Saint
Leu-d’Esserent (Fig. 81). In the latter, the builders have stilted the
apsidal and transverse arches, thus greatly reducing the doming of the
vaults. They have also provided an impost for the diagonals which are
themselves of the broken type, and in fact the form of the vaults is
practically perfected except in the matter of the transverse arches.
These are still much heavier than the diagonals, a feature which
continues to be manifest though in a less marked degree in many of the
ambulatory vaults even of the thirteenth century. They correspond in
this respect to side aisle vaulting.[434] Only occasionally, as in the
splendid inner ambulatory of Le Mans cathedral (1218-1254), were the
ribs all made of the same size. This advance combined with its height
and general character may perhaps entitle the ambulatory of Le Mans to
rank as the finest in Gothic architecture and the high water mark of the
trapezoidal four-part broken ribbed vault.


If there was one fault in the broken ribbed type of ambulatory vault
just described, it lay in the form of its intersection with the outer
wall. For example, if the ambulatory was comparatively low or the
apsidal arches of wide span, this intersection became either segmental
or semicircular or, at best a very low pointed curve, under which it was
most difficult to arrange the exterior windows and still produce a
pleasing interior effect. Thus in the ambulatory of Sens cathedral,[435]
the two round headed windows do not fill the space beneath the wall rib
and are in fact awkwardly placed beneath it, while in the ambulatory of
Trinity chapel in Canterbury cathedral,[436] where the vaults are but
slightly domed, the arrangement is even less pleasing. Of course when
these arches opened into radiating chapels, their shape did not make so
much difference since their supporting piers ran all the way to the
floor and therefore gave a fairly good proportion to the arch. But if
the entire space beneath them were occupied by a window extending only
part way to the floor, it would be largely head and very little jamb and
thus of displeasing proportions. Even in the ambulatory clerestory of Le
Mans, where the transverse and diagonal ribs are all of very pointed
section, the window is too broad for its height. It would seem,
therefore, to have been with an eye to a more pleasing arrangement of
the windows beneath these trapezoidal vaults, that many of the mediaeval
builders subdivided the outer severy of extra ribs running out from the
central keystone. This made possible two or more windows in the outer
wall of each bay. Thus in the alternate bays of the ambulatory of Rouen
cathedral (Plate III-d), where there are no radiating chapels, a single
rib is added in the outer panel making the vault of five-part form, so
that the heads of the two slender windows of the bay are

[Illustration: FIG. 82.--COUTANCES, CATHEDRAL.]

each situated in a separate cell. This same arrangement is
characteristic of a number of other ambulatories, including the lofty
inner one at Coutances cathedral (Fig. 82, and Plate III-e),[437] where
the windows are limited in height by the elevation and would be of
awkward shape were they not arranged in pairs under separate vault
cells.[438] Nor did the mediaeval builders restrict themselves to a
single added rib in this outer severy of the vault. In the ambulatory
gallery of Saint Remi at Reims (Fig. 83) there is an excellent example
of the subdivision of this panel into three window cells and in the
church of Saint Germain and the cathedral at Auxerre (Fig. 84 and Plate
III-f) there are excellent examples of a similar method, applied both in
bays with exterior windows and in those which open into a radiating
chapel. In the latter instance, the lofty and slender shafts between
this chapel and the ambulatory with their many radiating ribs and arches
give a charming appearance of grace and lightness to the design.

[Illustration: FIG. 83.--REIMS, SAINT REMI.]


In all the churches thus far discussed, and, in fact, in the majority of
those constructed during the Gothic period, the radiating chapels are
separated from the rest of the ambulatory by arches directly across
their entrances. But quite frequently these chapels, particularly when
they were comparatively shallow, as in the cathedral of Chartres (Plate
III-g), or

[Illustration: FIG. 84.--AUXERRE, CATHEDRAL.]

even when comparatively deep as at Saint Denis[439] and Saint Maclou at
Pontoise (Plate III-h), were treated as part of the ambulatory and an
added rib was introduced in vaulting them exactly in the manner
described in connection with the trapezoidal bays of Rouen and
Coutances. Furthermore, as the chapels were increased in size, more than
one extra rib was added in the severy of the trapezoidal vault which
embraced them so that there were, sometimes, two such ribs, as in the
cathedral of Tournai (1240-1260) (Fig. 85).[440] Occasionally, also, as
in the cathedral of Saint Quentin (after 1230) (Plate III-i), similar
bays and vaults occur, with the addition of large radiating chapels
opening off of the more shallow curves of the ambulatory bays,
suggesting a combination of the Tournai type with that of Auxerre (Plate
III-f). In some of the larger and deeper chapels there were even four
added ribs as, for example, in the cathedral

[Illustration: FIG. 85.--TOURNAI, CATHEDRAL.]

[Illustration: FIG. 86.--BAYONNE, CATHEDRAL.]

of Bayonne (Fig. 86), where the ambulatory is further noteworthy because
the builders, in an attempt to equalize the vaulting severies, have
moved the keystones of the diagonals almost out to a point on the line
of the outer walls. As a matter of fact, it was moved out to such a
point in a number of instances (Plate III-j), as, for example, in
Soissons cathedral[441] where it becomes the keystone of an arch
directly across the entrance of the chapel as well as being the center
for all the ribs both of this chapel and the ambulatory. Each
trapezoidal bay is thus divided not into four but into three triangular
panels, the chapel itself being covered by a fully developed five-part
chevet vault for which the two ribs of the ambulatory bay act as
buttresses. A similar but more logical vault appears in the ambulatory
and two eastern chapels of Pamplona cathedral (begun 1397) (Plate
III-k). This is a church with an axial eastern pier, and its radiating
chapels are arranged so as to form perfect hexagons with the bays of the
ambulatory. The keystone is then moved out, as at Soissons, to the crown
of the chapel arch where it lies in the exact center of each hexagonal
bay and thus produces a perfectly symmetrical vault.


Although the trapezoidal bay and its variants has been the only one thus
far considered in the discussion of ribbed vaulted ambulatories, it was
not by any means universally employed. The alternation of square and
triangular bays, which had been used as early as the Carolingian period
in the royal chapel at Aachen, and in the tenth century at Verona, in
groined vaulted ambulatories, also played a considerable rôle after the
use of ribs became general. This system afforded a number of structural
advantages, the chief one being, of course, that the major bays were
square or nearly so, and therefore presented no structural problems not
already solved in other portions of the church, while the triangular
divisions were of comparatively small size and could be covered in the
same manner as in the Romanesque period, with three-part groined vaults,
provided the builders wished to avoid attempting ribbed vaults over

Two general plans are noticeable in the use of this alternate ambulatory
system. In the first, which appears at an early date in Saint Martin of
Étampes (1165), Saint Remi at Reims (1170-1181), and Notre Dame

[Illustration: FIG. 87.--REIMS, SAINT REMI.]

at Chalons-sur-Marne (end of twelfth century), the square bays alternate
with two triangular bays or, in other words, the ambulatory is first
divided into trapezoids by transverse arches and these in turn
subdivided into a square and two triangles. This system may be
understood from the plan of Saint Remi (Plate III-l) and the interior
view of the same church (Fig. 87). Its most noticeable feature is the
lack of ribs in the triangular bays, these remaining of simple
Romanesque groined type. Exactly the same arrangement appears at
Chalons-sur-Marne, except that here the arches into the apse correspond
to the flat sides of a polygon, while those opening into the chapels are
on a curve in order that the exterior wall of the triforium above them
may be a semicircle.[442] In both these churches, the radiating chapels
occupy all the space included beneath each group of three outer arches
in a manner similar to that described in connection with the cathedral
of Auxerre, but in Saint Martin at Étampes, the chapel is limited in
width to the span of the central arch, making possible a window in the
exterior wall of each of the triangular bays. A very similar arrangement
appears in the outer ambulatory of Bourges cathedral (cir. 1195-1215)
(Plate IV-a), except that here the chapels are so narrow as to give a
reversed trapezoidal character to what would otherwise be a square bay
like that at Étampes and Saint Remi. Even though the triangular severies
are thus increased in size, the builders have left their vaults

The second system of alternating square and triangular bays may be seen
in the outer ambulatory of the cathedral of Le Mans (Plate IV-b) and in
both ambulatories of the cathedral at Toledo (1227-seventeenth
century).[443] It is the familiar early mediaeval system of a single
triangular bay between two squares with the addition of ribs beneath the
vaults in all the bays. The chief effect of this system upon the
construction was to subdivide the outer line of the ambulatory into
twice as many parts as there were in the apse. This created a certain
difficulty in the adjustment of the buttresses, for the lack of any
transverse arch directly across the ambulatory from the apsidal piers to
the outer walls made necessary the subdivision of the flying-buttresses
into two parts. This subdivision must have added considerably to the
expense and difficulty of construction, though this was somewhat offset
by the reduced size of the buttress piers and their position in the
thickness of the chapel walls, where they in no way interfered with the
introduction of windows directly in the outer walls of the triangular
ambulatory bays. Though not extensively employed, this vaulting system
which is to be seen at Le Mans shared with all others the tendency of
the late Gothic period to add extra ribs to those forming the real
framework of the vaults. Such added ribs are to be seen in Saint
Willibrord at Wesel and Saint Lorenz at Nürnberg. Similar also to the

[Illustration: PLATE IV]

Le Mans type, but with the entire omission of the transverse arches
between the triangular and trapezoidal bays, is the system at Saint
Pierre-sur-Dives (Calvados)[444] which is thus like the outer ambulatory
of Coutances cathedral (Plate III-e), except that the chapels are not
included beneath the ambulatory vault and the portions containing the
three half ribs are more in proportion to the larger cross ribbed


Another method of ambulatory vaulting in the Gothic period consisted in
the subdivision of the apsidal aisles into triangles by adding
intermediate supports between each pier forming the outside corners of
trapezoidal bays. This method, never had a wide popularity. It was used
at a comparatively early date and on a large scale in the cathedral of
Notre Dame at Paris (begun 1163) (Plate IV-c), where the triangular bays
have no ribs beneath their masonry. It appears with the addition of
three half ribs or even a still greater number, in a number of late
Gothic churches, especially in Germany,[445] and was also used at Saint
Eustache (1532-1637)[446] and Saint Severin[447] in Paris, whose
builders may very probably have been influenced by the cathedral church
of Notre Dame. In Notre Dame, where there are two ambulatories the
doubling of the piers did not do away with the possibility of a central
eastern chapel or window in the exterior wall. But in most cases, where
there is but one aisle, as, for example, in the Marienkirche at
Stargarde (end of fourteenth century) (Plate IV-d) or the old cathedral
of Heidelberg,[448] an axial pier prevents this arrangement. Perhaps to
avoid this the builders of Saint Steven at Nymwegen and of the cathedral
at Brandenburg left the eastern bay trapezoidal so that there might be a
central Lady chapel. At Kolin[449] where there is an axial pier in the
apse a central chapel off the ambulatory naturally follows.


As has been noted, the late Gothic passion for multiple ribs affected
the ambulatory as it did the remainder of the church, and vaults of most
complex character are to be found especially in certain German churches.
Of these, Güben (Plate IV-e) and the cathedral of Freiburg (second half
of the fifteenth century) (Fig. 88) are among the most elaborate.[450]
In them, the structural purpose of the rib is totally subordinated to
decorative principles and to a desire on the part of the builders to
show their knowledge of the intricate problems of stereotomy. With such
vaults as these, marking the decline of Gothic architecture, it is not
surprising that there was such a complete reaction in vault construction
on the part of the succeeding Renaissance builders.

[Illustration: FIG. 88.--FREIBURG, CATHEDRAL.]

With this discussion of the ambulatory, the study of mediaeval church
vaulting is practically complete, but a few paragraphs should be added
to give a short account of some unusual eastern terminations and a brief
reference to the radiating chapels. Both of these, while presenting no
great structural accomplishments, at least show the skill of the
builders in meeting any and all requirements imposed by the plan.


Of the eastern terminations, a number are especially interesting. One is
in the church of Saint Yved at Braisne (Aisne) (1180-1216) (Plate IV-f),
where there is no ambulatory and yet two chapels have been so arranged
with their axes at an angle of forty-five degrees to that of the choir
aisle as to form a veritable series of four radiating chapels, two on
either side of the principal apse. To cover the triangular bays
immediately preceding these chapels, a two-part vault corresponding to
one of the diagonal halves of a simple four-part vault, is employed,
while the chapel itself is covered with a three-part chevet whose crown
is abutted by the half rib of the preceding bay.[451] Occasionally, too,
a similar arrangement of chapels is found even where there is an
ambulatory as in the church of Saint Nicaise at Reims (now destroyed)
and at Upsala. Another termination of interest is that in the church of
Vigan (Lot)[452] (fifteenth century) where the apse with its chevet
vault is west of the transept, into which it opens through its farthest
bay while from the transept itself open five small chapels, a unique

A third eastern termination of especial interest is that of the church
of the Jacobins at Toulouse (Haute-Garonne) (Fig. 89 and Plate IV-g).
Here there is a row of central piers the length of the church and the
apse embraces the double nave thus formed. This apse the builders have
subdivided into a series of triangular bays by arches springing from a
pier at the center of its diameter. Each of these is again subdivided
like the triangular ambulatory bays of Le Mans cathedral. This completes
a vault of very beautiful character. It is not, however, an original
product in Toulouse, for the crypt of Canterbury cathedral (1175-1184)
affords a similar vault of earlier date and others on a circular plan
may be seen in a number of English Chapter Houses.



As for the radiating chapels, they were added to the ambulatory with the
evident purpose of affording more space for altars especially in the
great pilgrimage churches.[453] At the beginning of the eleventh
century, three such chapels had already been built off the ambulatory of
Saint Martin at Tours and only slightly later in date are those in La
Couture at Le Mans followed by those of a great number of churches of
the eleventh and twelfth centuries.[454] Nor are such chapels found only
in churches with ambulatories. They frequently open directly off the
apse, sometimes being merely recesses in the thickness of the outer
wall[455] but more often extending beyond it.[456] Ordinarily, however,
churches with radiating chapels have an ambulatory as well; but even so,
there are occasional examples of chapels lying entirely within the
thickness of the exterior wall[457] in which cases they are merely
half-domed niches.

Whenever these radiating chapels are found there is considerable
variance both in their number and ground plan. Sometimes there is but
one,[458] sometimes two,[459] in the majority of cases three,[460] very
seldom four,[461] but frequently five.[462] In plan, the chapels are
generally semicircular with or without one or more preceding rectangular
bays.[463] Naturally they are vaulted exactly in the manner used for the
principal apse of the church or the minor apses of the transept at the
time the chapels were built. The usual Romanesque form is the simple
half dome like that in Saint Nicolas at Blois, which is especially
interesting because it still retains its painted decoration. As the
ribbed half dome came in in apse vaulting it appeared in a number of
radiating chapels, at Domont and Saint Martin of Étampes, for example,
but the usual Gothic form was the chevet vault which corresponds exactly
with that over the major apse, except when it is combined with the
ambulatory vault in the manner already described,[464] or is of
square,[465] circular, polygonal, or irregular plan.[466] In such cases
the vaulting is adapted to the plan without any great structural changes
from the types found in the remainder of the church. The cathedral of
Auxerre (Fig. 84 and Plate III-f), for example, shows the use of a
ten-part vault over a square chapel, while Saint Germain also at Auxerre
and Saint Remi at Reims (Fig. 87 Plate III-l) have chapels of almost
circular plan covered with a vault which is virtually a double Gothic
chevet like that of the transept chapels of Soissons and Laon cathedrals
already described.[467]


This bibliography contains in large measure only titles referred to in
the text. For further references see bibliography in Porter, Medieval
Architecture. The abbreviations listed in the first column are those
used in the notes.

  Baum              Julius Baum

Romanesque Architecture in France

  Baudot and        A. de Baudot and A.
    Perrault-Dabot    Perrault-Dabot

Archives de la Commission des Monuments Historiques

  Bond              Francis Bond

  Gothic Architecture in England

  Borrmann and      Richard Borrmann und Joseph Neuwirth

Geschichte der Baukunst. 2 vols.

  Bumpus            T. Francis Bumpus

A Guide to Gothic Architecture

  Butler            Howard Crosby Butler

Abbeys of Scotland

  Cattaneo          Raphael Cattaneo

l’Architecture en Italie du VIe au XIe Siècle

  Caumont           Arcis de Caumont

Abecedaire ou Rudiment d’Archaeologie

  Choisy            Auguste Choisy

Histoire de l’Architecture. 2 vols.

  Cummings          Charles A. Cummings

A History of Architecture in Italy. 2 vols.

  C. M. H.

Archives de la Commission des Monuments Historique. 1855-72

  Dartein           Fernand de Dartein

Etude sur l’Architecture Lombarde et sur les
origines de l’Architecture Romano-Byzantine. 2 vols.

  Dehio and von     G. Dehio und G. von Bezold

Die kirchliche Baukunst des Abendlandes. 2 vols., text and 360 plates

  Enlart            Camille Enlart

Manuel d’Archaeologie Française. 2 vols.

  Gosset            Alphonse Gosset

Les Coupoles d’Orient et d’Occident

  Gaudet            Julien Gaudet

Elements et Theorie de l’Architecture

  Gurlitt           Cornelius Gurlitt

Die Baukunst Frankreichs. 8 vols.

  Madrazo-Gurlitt   D. Pedro de Madrazo
                      (Spanish text)
                    Cornelius Gurlitt
                      (German text)

Die Baukunst Spaniens

  Gwilt             Joseph Gwilt, F.S.A. F.R.S.A.

An Encyclopaedia of Architecture. Revised by
Wyatt Angelicus van Sandau Papworth

  Hamlin            A. D. F. Hamlin

A Text-book of the History of Architecture

  Hartung           Hugo Hartung

Motive der Mittelalterlichen Baukunst in Deutschland

  Isabelle          Charles Edouard Isabelle

Les Edifices circulaires et les Domes

  Joseph            D. Joseph

Geschichte der Architektur Italiens

  Kugler            Franz Theodor Kugler

Geschichte der Baukunst

  Lasteyrie         R. de Lasteyrie

l’Architecture Religieuse en France a l’Epoque
Romane. Ses origines, son developpement

  Lenoir            Albert Lenoir

Architecture Monastique in Collection des Documents
inedits sur Histoire de France

  Lefevre-Pontalis  Eugène Lefevre-Pontalis

l’Architecture Religieuse dans l’Ancien Diocèse
de Soissons au XIe et au XIIe Siècle

  Lubke             Wilhelm Lubke

Outlines of the History of Art. 2 vols. Edited
and revised by Russell Sturgis

  M. H.

Archives de la Commission des Monuments Historique

  Michel            André Michel

Histoire de l’Art depuis les premiers temps
Chrétiens jusqu’á nos jours. Published
under direction of André Michel by a number
of collaborators

  Moore             Charles Herbert Moore

Development and Character of Gothic Architecture
                    Charles Herbert Moore

Mediaeval Church Architecture of England
                    Charles Herbert Moore

Character of Renaissance Architecture

  Mothes            Oscar Mothes

Die Baukunst des Mittelalters in Italien

  Nesfield          W. Eden Nesfield

Specimens of Medieaval Architecture. Drawings

  Osten             Friedrich Osten

Die Bauwerke in der Lombardei vom 7ten bis zum 14ten Jahrhundert

  Porter            Arthur Kingsley Porter

Mediaeval Architecture. Its Origins and Development. 2 vols.

                    Arthur Kingsley Porter

The Construction of Lombard and Gothic Vaults

  Prior             Edward Schröder Prior

The Cathedral Builders in England

  Prioux            Stanislas Prioux

Monographie de St. Yved de Braine

  Pugin             Augustus Pugin

Specimens of the Architecture of Normandy.
New Edition edited by Richard Phené Spiers

  Ramée             Daniel Ramée

Histoire Générale de l’Architecture. 3 vols.

  Reber             Franz von Reber

History of Mediaeval Art

  Revoil            Henry Revoil

Architecture du Midi de la France

  Rickman           Thomas Rickman

Gothic Architecture, or An Attempt to Discriminate
the Styles of Architecture in England
from the Conquest to the Reformation

  Rivoira           G. Teresio Rivoira

Lombardie Architecture, translated by G. McN. Rushforth

  Ross              Frederick Ross

The Ruined Abbeys of Britain

  Ruprich-Robert    V. Ruprich-Robert

L’Architecture Normande aux XIe et XIIe
Siècles. En Normandie et en Angleterre

  Sharpe            Edmund Sharpe

The Seven Periods of English Architecture

  Simpson           F. M. Simpson

A History of Architectural Development. 3 vols.

  Strange           Edward F. Strange

The Cathedral Church of Worcester. A description
of the Fabin and a brief history of the Episcopal See

  Street            Geo. Edmund Street

Gothic Architecture in Spain

  Sturgis           Russell Sturgis

A History of Architecture

  Uhde              Constantin Uhde

Baudenkmaeler in Grossbrittannien. 2 vols. Plates

                    Constantin Uhde

Baudenkmaeler in Spanien und Portugal

  Viollet-de-Duc    Eugène Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc

Dictionnaire Raisonné de l’Architecture Française
du XIe au XVIe Siècle. 10 vols.

  Willis            R. Willis

On the construction of the vaults of the
Middle Ages (in the Transactions of the
Royal Institute of British Architects, Vol. I, Part II).


Abbreviations.--Ch., Church; Cath., Cathedral; Ab. Ch., Abbey Church; N.
D., Notre Dame; S. M., Santa Maria, Saint Mary, etc.

Aachen--Royal Chapel, 26, 36, 160, 161, 176.

Agliate--Ch., 16 note 35.

Aigues-Vives--Ch., 21.

Airaines--Ch., 48 note 160, 161, 49.

Aisles--vaults of, 96 _et seq._

Albi--Ch., 80, 81 note 221, 143 note 35, Fig. 34.

Almeno-San-Salvatore--San Tommaso, 161.

Alternate Supports--system of, 47.

Ambert--Saint Jean, 148.

Ambroise--Saint Florentin, 104.

Ambulatory--vaulting of, 158 _et seq._

---- origin of vaulting of, 159.

---- with annular tunnel vaults, 161.

---- with half tunnel vaults, 160.

---- with transverse tunnel vaults, 161.

---- with groined vaulted trapezoidal bays, 162.

---- with ribbed vaults, 163 _et seq._

---- with vaults with added ribs, 171.

---- with multiple ribbed vaults, 181.

Amiens--Cath., 79, 80, 86, 100, 123, 137 note 29, 145, Fig. 69.

Anclam--Ch., 182 note 50.

Angers--Cath. Saint Maurice, 48, 51 57, 123 note 54, 155, Figs. 19, 74.

---- La Trinité, 70, 71, Fig. 30.

---- Saint Serge, 51, 55, 104, Fig. 21.

Angoulême--Cath. of Saint Pierre, 5, 6, 7, 8, 105, 106, Figs. 3, 4.

Anjou--Churches of, 49 _et seq._

Antwerp--Saint Jacques, 150.

Anzy-le-Duc--Ch., 39.

Apse--vaults of, 124 _et seq._

---- vaulted with half domes, 124.

---- with ribbed half-domes, 125.

---- with “groined” half-domes, 128.

---- with four-part ribbed vaults, 129.

---- with a central pier, 152.

Arbona--Ch., 122.


---- Saint Trophime, 20, 146, 180 note 44.

---- Saint Honorat in Les Alyscamps, 125, 126.

---- Saint Jean-de-Moustier, 126 note 3.

Assisi--San Francesco, 52, 57.

Auvergne--School of, 16, 25 _et seq._

Auxerre--Cath., 123, 142 note 34, 152, 156, 173, 174, 178, 184, Figs. 75, 84.

---- Saint Germain, 173, 184.

---- Saint Pierre, 152.

Aversa--Cath., 166.

Avesnières--Ch., 49.

Avignon--chapel of the Pont Saint-Benezet, 99 note 275.

---- Cath. N. D. des Doms, 115, 126.

Azy--Chapel, 34 note 101, 132.

Barcelona--Cath., 104 note 279, 147, 148.

Barletta--Cath., 26 note 74.

Bath--Ab. Ch., 92, 123.

Bayeux--Cath., 122 note 53, 148, 153.

---- Seminaire, Chapel of, 148 note 48.

Bayonne--Cath., 123, 148, 176, Fig. 86.

Beaugency--Saint Étienne, 113.

Beaulieu--Ab. Ch., 127.

Beauvais--Basse-Oeuvre, 74.

---- Cath., 69 note 190, 86, 101, Fig. 46.

---- Saint Étienne, 67, 69, 74, 96, 99, Figs. 32, 44.

---- Saint Lucien, 110 note 15.

Beeskow--Ch., 180 note 44.

Belem--Ab. Ch., 104 note 279.

Bénévent-l’Abbaye--Ch., 36, 115.

Bernay--Ch., 42 note 138.

Berne--Minster, 85 note 233, 94.

Bernières-sur-Mer--Ch., 64.

Berzy-le-Sec.--Ch., 127 note 7.

Beurey-Beauguay--Ch., 1.

Beverley--Minster, 79.

Béziers--Cath., 151, 155.

Blois--Château, chapel, 83, 93.

---- Saint Nicolas, 117, 184, Fig. 56.

---- Cath. Saint Louis, 145 note 41.

Boisney--Ch., 113.

Bois-Sainte-Marie--Ch., 162.

Bologna--San Francesco, 69, 142 note 34, 151.

---- San Petronio, 57 note 175.

Bonnes--Ch., 127 note 7.

Boppart--Ch., 74.

Bordeaux, Cath., 114.

---- Saint Michel, 123 note 54.

Boscherville--See Saint Martin-de-Boscherville.

Bourges--Cath., 68, 137, 142, 153, 156, 169, 178, Fig. 76.

---- Maison de Jacques Coeur, 93.

---- Saint Pierre-le-Guillard, 72 note 200, 138, 147.

Bourgogne--School of, 11, 16, 18, 26 note 77, 31 _et seq._

Boxgrove--Priory Ch., 48.

Bragny-en-Charollais--Ch., 39 note 121.

Braisne--Saint Yved, 121, 182.

Brandenburg--Cath., 180.

Brantôme--Ch., 48 note 160.

Brauveiller--Ch., 42 note 136.

Breda--Groote Kerk, 172 note 36.

Bremen--Cath., 71.

Brescia--Duomo Vecchio, 161 note 16.

Breslau--Heiligekreuze, 111 note 16.

Bristol--Cath., 101.
  _Berkeley Chapel_, p. 95, note 272.

---- Saint Mary Redcliffe, 85, 87.

Bruges--Cath. Saint Sauveur, 138, 172 note 36.

Brunembert--Ch., 108 note 7.

Bruyères--Ch., 127 note 7.

Burgos--Cath., 120, 172 note 36.

Bury--Ch., 52, 54, 164, Figs. 22, 23.

Caen--Abbaye-aux-Dames, see La Trinité.

---- Abbaye-aux-Hommes, see Saint Étienne.

---- La Trinité, 39, 40, 43, 59, 60, 62, 64, 65, 78, 107, Fig. 27.

---- Saint Étienne, 43, 59, 60, 62, 63, 65, 66, 76, 77, 103,
     108, 135 note 25, 137, 144, 145, 146, Figs. 26, 70.

---- Saint Nicolas, 39, 129.

---- Saint Pierre, 94, 150, 151.

Cahors--Cath., 5, 6 note 21, 7 note 23.

Cambrai--Cath., 138.

Cambridge--King’s College chapel, 91 note 252, 92.

---- Saint Sepulchre, 116.

Canosa--San Sabino, 13 note 30, 14.

Canterbury--Cath., 69, 129, 141, 169, 183.

---- _Trinity Chapel_, 171.

Carcassonne--Saint Nazaire, 17, 19, 157 note 61.

Caryatid Supports--for ribs, 54.

Casamari--Ch., 69 note 194, 122.

Caudebec-en-Caux, N.D., 152.

Cavaillon--Ch., 36.

Centering--of Perigord domes, 7.


Cerisy-la-Forêt--Ch., 64 note 180, 112 note 23.

Chalons-sur-Marne--N.D., 103, 177, also note 41.

---- Notre Dame-de-l’Épine (near), 149, Fig. 71.

---- Saint Alpin, 147.

Champagne--Ch., 12 note 29, 27 note 78, 162.

Chapelle-sur-Crécy, La--Ch., 152.

Chapels--transept, vaults of, 112.

Chartres--Cath., 137, 144, 145, 159, 173, Fig. 68.

Chateauneuf--Ch., 29 note 87.

Chatel-Montagne--Ch., 26, 29 note 87, and note 89.

Chatillon-sur-Seine--Ch., 36.

Chaumont--Ch., 104 note 279.

Chauvigny--N.D., 114.

---- Saint Pierre, 25.

Chelles--Ch. 127 note 7.

Chester--Cath., 84.

Chevets--110, 131 _et seq._

---- square, 108.

---- radiating-ribbed, 132, 137.

---- broken-ribbed, 138.

---- buttressing-ribbed, 141.

---- diagonal-ribbed, 144.

---- with added ribs, 146.

---- impost level of vault ribs, 153.

---- shape of cells in, 154.

---- with pierced panels, 156.

Chichester--Cath., 65 note 184.

Clermont-Ferrand--Cath., 114, 158.

---- Notre Dame-du-Port, 27, also note 80, 106, 115, Fig. 49, 50.

Cléry--Ch., 178 note 42.

---- Chapel of Saint Jacques, 95, Fig. 42.

Cluny--Ab. Ch., 31, 33, 40, 105.

---- N.D., 121.

Cologne--Cath., 122 note 50.

---- Saint Mary of the Capitol, 110.

---- Saint Maurice, 42 note 136, 79, 80.

Como--Sant’ Abondio, 126, 127 note 7.

---- San Fedele, 161.

Constantinople--SS. Sergius and Bacchus, 117, 128.

Corneto-Tarquinia--Ch., 69, 127.

Coutances--Cath., 101, 119, 172, 174, also note 39, 180, Figs. 59, 82.

Creully--Ch., 43, 66.

Crossing--vaults of, 113 _et seq._

---- towers over, 114 _et seq._

---- rib-vaulted, 122.

Culhat--Ch., 20 note 46, 22.

Cunault--Ch., 24, 125.

Cyprus, 5 note 15.

Dijon--Notre Dame, 69 note 191.

---- Saint Bénigne, 161.

Dinan--Cath., 138.

Dol--Cath., 122 note 53.

Domes--on spherical pendentives, 1, 2.

---- on squinches, 2, 8, 9.

---- comparison of Perigord and Byzantine, 3.

---- exterior roofing of, in Perigord, 5.

---- centering of, in Perigord, 7.

---- gored, 9.

---- ribbed, 115.

---- lobed, 116.

---- “Gothic,” or Double Chevets, 117.

Domont--Ch., 78 note 217, 184.

Dorat, Le--Ch., 114, 115.

Durham--Cath., 69 note 102, 75, 76, 77, 78, 85, 99, Fig. 33.

Eastern Terminations--Exceptional, 182.

Ely--Cath., 84, 87.

Épinal--Ch., 108 note 7.

l’Épine--in Notre Dame-de-l’Épine.

Erfurt--Frankiskanerkirche, 72 note 201.

Essen--Ch., 26.

Étampes--N.D., 144.

---- Saint Gilles, 122 note 53.

---- Saint Martin, 127 note 7, 176, 178, 184.

Evreux--Cath., 119.

Exeter--Cath., 85, 86, 89, 106, Fig. 37.

Farges--Ch., 33 note 98.

Ferté-Bernard--Chapelle de la Vièrge, 95.

Firouz Abad--palace, 2.

Florence--Baptistery, 110.

---- Cath. S. M. del Fiore, 57, 58, 127 note 5.

---- S. M. Novella, 57, 58, 122 note 50
  _Pazzi Chapel_, 117, Fig. 57.

Fontenay--Ch., 36.

Fontevrault--Ch., 4 note 12, 6 note 21.

Fontfroide--Ch., 20 note 43.

Fontgombault--Ch., 30 note 91.

Forest--l’Abbaye--Ch., 129 note 14.


Fossanova--Ab. Ch., 122.

Fountains Abbey--37.

Freiberg-in-Sachsen--Cath., 94 note 263, 104 note 279.

Freiburg--Cath., 94, 150, 181, Figs. 72, 88.

Fréjus--Cath., 48.

Fulda--Saint Michael, 26.

Gebweiler Saint Legerius, 48.

Gelnhausen--Saint Marien, 119 note 44.

Gensac--Ch., 6 note 21, 7 note 22.

Germigny-des-Prés--Ch., 2, 16 note 35.

Gerona--Cath., 81 note 221.

Gloucester--Cath., 43, 82, 87, 99, 161.
  _Lady Chapel_, 87.
  _Cloister_, 91, 92, Fig. 40.

Gmund--Ch. of Holy Cross, 94, 104.

Gonesse--Ch., 172 note 36.

Gourdon--Ch., 39 note 121.

Gregory of Tours--114.

Grenoble--Saint Laurent, 16 note 35, 129.

Güben--Ch., 181.

Guebviller--Ch., 42 note 136.

Hauterive--Ch., 36.

Heidelberg--Old Cath., 180.

---- Peterskirche, 104 note 279.

Hereford--Cath., 85, 89.

Hieroskypos--Ch., 5 note 15, 8 note 25.

Ile-de-France--Transitional Chs. of, 66, 67.

Issoire--Saint Paul, 20 note 46, 106 note 4.

---- Saint Austremoine, 27 note 82.

Ivrea--Cath., 158, 159.

Javarzay--Ch., 37.

Jedburgh--Ab. Ch., 105.

Jerusalem--Saint Anne, 40.

Jouaignes--Chapel, 34 note 101.

Jumèges--Ab. Ch., 26 note 76, 43, 121.
  Saint Pierre, 26.

Kaschau--Ch., 182 note 50.

Keisheim--Ch., 180 note 44.

Kirkstall--Ab. Ch., 112.

Kolin--Ch. 180.

Laach--Ch., 41 notes 131, 132.

Laffaux--Ch., 127 note 7.

Lagny--Ch., 174 note 39, 182 note 50.

Landshut--Saint Martin, 104 note 279.


Langres--Cath., 168, 169, Fig. 80.

Lantern Towers--114.

---- with Eight-Part Vaults, 120.

Laon--Cath., 69 note 191, 103, 112, 121, 184, Figs. 48, 54, 60.

---- Church of the templars, 116. Fig. 55.
  _Bishops Palace, Chapel of_, 133, Fig. 62.

Largny--Ch., 132.

Larnaca--Ch., 5 note 15.

Laval--La Trinité, 48 note 160.

Lérins--La Trinité, 110 note 12.

---- Saint Honorat, 17 note 38, 19.

Lescar--Cath., 36.

Lessay--Ch., 43, 77.

Lesterps--Ch., 22.

Lichfield--Cath., 84, also note 232, 93, 101.

Lighting--of tunnel-vaulted churches, 18.

---- in naves with square bays, 57.

---- of half domed apses, 124.

Limburg--Cath., 71, 108.

Limoges--Saint Martial, 27 note 81, 29 note 87.

Lincoln--Cath., 65 note 184, 69, also note 192, 72 note 200,
     82, 83, 84, 101, note 276, Figs. 35, 36.

Linköping--Cath., 104 note 279.

Lisseweghe--Ch. 182 note 50.

Loches--Saint Ours, 14, 15, 55, Figs. 9, 10, 24.

Loctudy--Ch. 160.

Loire--School of, 29 _et seq._


---- School of, 26 note 77, 42, 44 _et seq._

London--Tower Chapel, 22, 159.

Louis VI--74.

Lübeck--Saint Jakob, 182 note 50.

Lucheux--Ch., 48 note 160, 161.

Ludinghausen--Ch., 182 note 50.

Lusignan--Ch., 37.

Magdeburg--Cath., 72, 100, 101, 172 note 36.

---- _Brunnenkapelle_, 157.

Mainz--Cath., 41 note 133.

---- Saint Stephen, 104 note 279.

Malmo--Ch., 174 note 39.

Mans, Le--Cath., 47, 93, 171, 178, 180, 182.

---- La Couture, 48 note 160, 49, 50, 55, 57, 151 note 52, 183, Fig. 20.

---- N.D. du Pré, 64 note 180.

Mantes--Cath., 37, 69 note 191, 102, 146, 161.

Marburg--Saint Elizabeth, 104, 111 note 16.

Marseilles--La Major, 115 note 37.

Meaux--Cath., 26 note 74.

Mehun-sur-Yevre--Ch., 184 note 65.

Melle--Saint Pierre, 22, 24 note 60.

Mézières--Ch., 94.

Milan--Cath., 79, 80, 155, 168.

---- Sant’ Ambrogio, 16 note 35, 41, 44, 46, 59, 60, 78 note 217, Fig. 18.

---- San Babila, 24 note 63.

---- Sant’ Eustorgio, 24 note 63.

---- San Nazzaro, 52 note 169.

Minden--Cath., 104 note 279.

Moissac--Ab. Ch., 138.

Molfetta--Cath., 13 also note 30, 20.

Mollèges--Saint Thomas, 17 note 37.

Monasterio de la Oliva--Ch., 127.

Montagne--Ch. 116 note 39.

Montiérender--Ch., 26.

Montmajour--Ch., 17 note 37, 127 note 7, 160.

Mont Saint Vincent--Ch., 35 note 103.

Morienval--Ch., 74, 78 note 219, 127, 152, 163, 166
     note 26, 168, Figs. 77, 78, 79.

Moulins--Cath., 138, 147.

Nantes--Cath., 114.

Nantille--N.D., 116 note 39.

Naples--Cath. _Baptistry_, 2.

Narbonne--Cath., 114.

Naves--vaults of, 1 _et seq._

---- and aisles of equal height, 104.

---- vaulted with domes on squinches, 8.

---- without side aisles, 48.

Nesle--Ch., 72 note 200.

Neubourg--Ch., 152 note 54, 178 note 42.

Neufchâtel--Ch., 111 note 19.

Nevers--Cath., 55, Fig. 25.

---- Saint Étienne, 18 note 39, 29, 106, 125 note 2.


---- amphitheatre, 159.

---- Nymphaeum, 17.

---- temple of Diana, 17, 126 note 3.


---- School of, 26 note 77, 42.

Norwich--Cath., 87, 184 note 65.

Notre Dame-de-l’Épine--Ch., 149, 150, Fig. 71.

Nouaille--Ch., 22 note 58.

Noyon--Cath., 67, 78 note 217, 99, 103, 110, 136 note 28, 141, 144.
  _Chapel of_, 94, Fig. 41.

Nürnberg--Saint Lorenz, 178.

Nymwegen--Ch., 26, 180.

Omonville-la-Rogue--Ch., 108 note 9.

Oppenheim--Ch., 182 note 50.

Orange--Cath., 37.

Orcival--Ch., 107, 115, 184 note 60.

Orleans--Saint Euverte, 123.

Ouistreham--Ch., 64.

Oxford--Cath., 87, 93.

---- Christ Church staircase, 91 note 253.

---- Proscholium, 87.

---- Schools, 86 note 236.

Paderborn--Cath., 104 note 279, 111 note 16.

Padua--Sant’ Antonio, 13 note 30, 148, 151 note 52.


Palognieu--Ch., 35 note 103.

Pamplona--Cath., 176.

---- San Saturnino, 146.

Paray-le-Monial--Ch., 32, 34, 163, 170, Figs. 14, 15.

Paris--Cath. N.D., 68, 103, 114, 122 note 50, 142, 180.

---- Sainte Chapelle, 56, 80, 104 note 279.

---- Saint Étiennne-du-Mont, 123.

---- Saint Eustache, 94, 180.

---- Saint Germain-des-Pres., 139, 141.

---- Saint Martin-des-Champs, 127, 135 note 25, 136 note 28,
     138, 139, 141, 161, Fig. 65.

---- Saint Severin, 150, 180.

Parthenay-le-Vieux--Notre Dame, 20 note 46, 22.

Pavia--Certosa, 69, 72, 100.

---- San Lanfranco, 47.

---- San Michele, 46, 58 note 176, 60.

---- San Teodoro, 57 note 175.



---- domes on spherical, 1.

Perigord--school of, 2, 6, 7, 51.


---- Cath. of Saint Front, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 36
     note 108, 105, 114, Figs. 1, 2.

---- Saint Étienne, 6, 7.

Peristeroma--Ch., 5 note 15, 8 note 25.

Perpignan--Cath. Saint Jean, 148.

Perugia--Cath., 104 note 279.

Peterborough--Cath., 89, 90, 91, 92, 99, Fig. 39.

Petit Quévilly, Le--Ch., 65, 66.

Pirna--Hauptkirche, 150 note 51.

Poitiers--Cath., 48 note 160, 51, 104.

---- Notre Dame-la-Grande, 24, 125 note 1.

---- Saint Hilaire, 11, 12, 36 note 105, 112 note 22, 125 note 1, Figs. 7, 8.

---- Sainte Radegonde, 48 note 160, 51, 57.


---- School of, 16, 23 _et seq._

Pontaubert--Ch., 39 note 121.

Pontoise--Saint Maclou, 168, 174.

Pontorson--Ch., 77.

Prenzlau--Marienkirche, 104 note 279.

Preuilly-sur-Claise--Ch., 162.

Provence--School of, 16, 17 _et seq._, 125.

Provins--Saint Quiriace, 72, 140, 152, 153, Fig. 31.

Puiseaux--Ch., 108 note 9.

Puy, Le--Cath. of Notre Dame, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 35, Figs. 5, 6.

Quedlinburg--Saint Wipertus (near), 159.

Querqueville--Ch., 110 note 13.

Quimperlé-Sainte Croix, 159 note 7.

Radiating Chapels--Vaulting of, 183.

Ravenna--Palace of Theodoric, 24 note 63.

---- San Vitale, 2, 162.

Reims--Cath., 79, 80, 143, 152, 153.

---- Saint Jacques, 69, Fig. 29.

---- Saint Nicaise, 182.

---- Saint Remi, 37, 112 note 23, 135 note 25, 136,
     141, 143 note 36, 154, 168, 173, 176, 177, 178, 184, Figs. 64, 83, 87.

Rhenish Provinces--School of, 26 note 77, 41.

Ribe--Cath., 71.

Ribs--transverse, function of, 99.

---- use of wall, in Gothic ribbed vaulting, 136.

---- ridge, in Anjou, 49.

---- impost level in chevet vaults, 153.

Rieux-Merinville--Ch., 160.

Ripon--Cath., 82.

Rivolta-d’Adda--Ch., 41, 44, 58 note 176.

Roberval--Ch., 108 note 7.

Rochester--Cath., 26 note 74, 69 note 192.

Rolduc--Ch., 110.

Rome--Basilica of Maxentius, 36, 78 note 217.

---- Domus Augustana, 2.

---- Lateran Baptistry, 25.

---- Palace of the Caesars, 2.

---- Santa Costanza, 159.

---- San Giovanni in Laterano, 158.

---- S. M. sopra Minerva, 138.

---- Stadium of Domitian, 158, 159 note 6.

---- Temple di Siepe, 129.

---- Thermae of Caracalla, 2.

Ronceray--Ch., 36.

Rosheim--Ch., 42 note 136.

Rouen--Cath., 26 note 74, 79, 100, 143, 171, 174.

---- Lycée Corneille, 111.

---- Saint Maclou, 121.

Rue--Chapel of Saint Esprit, 95.

Rys--Ch., 108 note 9.

Saint Aignan--Ch., 54 note 171.

Saint Astier--Ch., 6.

Saint Avit-Sénieur--Ch., 6, 50.

Saint Barnabas--Ch., 5 note 15.

Saint Benoît sur Loire--Ch.,
18 note 39, 22, 30, 125 note 2, Fig. 13.

Saint Bertrand-des-Comminges--Ch., 81.

Saint Denis--Ab. Ch., 66, 67, 75, 78, 169, 174.

Saint Dié--42 note 136.

Saint Gabriel--Ch., 64.

Saint Genou--Ch., 18 note 39, 22, 30.

Saint Germer-de-Fly--Ch., 43, 67, 78, 79, 101, 133,
     135, 136, 137, 138, 140, 141, 153, 154, 168, Fig. 63.
  _Sainte Chapelle_, 137.

Saint Gilles--Ch., 99 note 275.

Saint Guilhem-du-Désert--Ch., 19, 20.

Saint Hilaire--Saint Florent.--Ch., 51.

Saint Jean-au-Bois--Ch., 108 note 7.

Saint Jouin-de-Marnes--Ch., 22 note 58.

Saint Leu d’Esserent--Ch., 54 note 170, 141, 170, Fig. 81.

Saint Loup-de-Naud--Ch., 25 note 66, 40.

Saint Martin-de-Boscherville--Saint Georges, 39, 64,
     108, 112, also note 23, 121, 127, 138, Figs. 51-61.
  _Chapter-house,_ 108, Fig. 52.

Saint Martin-de-Londres--Ch., 17 note 37, 110 note 12.

Saint Nectaire--Ch., 27 note 82, 106 note 4, 115.

Saint Nicholas-du-Port--Ch., 94, 108, 123 note 57.

Saint Paul-Trois-Châteaux--Ch., 20 note 44, 21 note 49.

Saint Pierre-de-Redes--Ch., 17 note 37, 127 note 7.

Saint Pierre-sur-Dives--Ch., 180.

Saint Pons-de-Mauchiens--Ch., 40.

Saint Quentin--Cath., 148, 174.

Saint Saturnin--Ch., 27 note 79, 106 note 4.

Saint Savin-sur-Gartempe--Ch., 24, 125, 162.

Saint Vincent-des-Prés--Ch., 33 note 98.

Saintes--Saint Eutrope, 21, 36 note 105, 40, 160.

Salamanca--Old Cath., 51, 55 note 173, 117 note 42.--New Cath., 94, 117.

Salisbury--Cath., 79, 101 note 276.

San Galgano--Ch., 69 note 194.

San Martino--Ch., 69 note 194.

Santiago-de-Compostella--Ch., 29 note 86, 55 note 172.

Saragossa--Cath., 120.

Sarvistan--palace, 2.

Saumur--Saint Pierre, 116 note 39.

Schlestadt--Ch., 42 note 136.

Séez--Cath., 138.

Segovia--Cath., 94.

Semur-en-Auxois--N. D., 143 note 35.

Senlis--Cath., 67, 102, 141 note 33, Fig. 47.
  _Chapel of_, 95, Fig. 43.

Sens--Cath., 67, 98, 122 note 50, 141, 142, 169, 171, Figs. 28, 45.

Severac-le-Châteaux--Ch., 40.

Sherborne--Ab. Ch., 90, 92.

Silvacane--Ch., 20, 30.

Simiane--Château, 116 note 40.

Soest--S. M. zur Wiese, 104 note 279.

Soissons--Cath., 78, 79, 111, 112, 122 note 50,
     135 note 25, 136 note 28, 137, 141, 142, 143, 176, 184, Fig. 67.

Solignac--Ch., 6 note 21, 7 note 22, 114.

Souillac--Ch., 6 note 21, 105.

Southwell--Minster, 101 note 276.

Souvigny--Ch., 18 note 40, 22, 34, 93.

Speyer--Cath., 41 note 133, 42, 58.

Spoleto--San Salvatore or del Crocifisso, 114.

Squinches--domes on, 2.

Stargarde--Marien-kirche, 148, 180.

---- Johanniskirche, 180 note 44.

Stendal--S.M., 104 note 279.

Strassburg--Cath., 178 note 42.


Tarascon--Saint Gabriel, 17.

Tewkesbury--Ab. Ch., 87, 89, 150, 178 note 42, Fig. 38.

Thor--Ch., 127 note 7.

Tivoli--Villa Adriana, 2, 117, 128, 129.

Toledo--Cath., 178.

Torcy--Ch., 127 note 7.

Toro--Ch., 117 note 42.

Toul--Saint Gengoulf, 182 note 50.

Toulon-sur-Arroux--Ch., 39 note 121.

Toulouse--Jacobins, 182, Fig. 89.

---- Saint Nicholas, 81.

---- Saint Sernin, 18 note 41, 20 note 46,
     28, 29, 112 note 23, 125 note 2, 162.

Tour--Ch., 108 note 9.

Tournai--Cath., 110, 133, 138, 169 note 29, 174, Figs. 53, 85.

Tournus--Saint Philibert, 34, 36, 162.

Tours--Saint Martin, 29 note 87, 114, 158, 183.

Trani--S. M. Immacolata, 13 note 30 and 32.

---- S. M. dei Martiri (near), 13 notes 30 and 32.

Transepts--Vaults of, 105, _et seq._

---- semicircular vaults of, 110.

---- with tunnel vaults, 105.

---- with five-part vaults, 107.

Tréguier--Cath., 106.

Tremolac--Ch., 105.

Treptow--Ch., 180 note 44.

Trier--Liebfrauenkirche, 182 note 50.

Triforium--Origin and use, in Auvergne, 25.

---- vaults of, 101.

Troyes--Cath., 123, 143 note 35.

---- Saint Urbain, 101, 108, 153, Fig. 73.

Tulle--Cath., 83, 93.

Upsala--Ch., 182.

Utrecht--Cath., 174 note 39.

Vaison--Cath., 20, 30.

Valentigny--Ch., 108 note 7.

Vauciennes--Ch., 108 note 7.

Vaults and Vaulting--tunnel, 16.

---- transverse over nave, 34.

---- transverse over aisles, 36.

---- Romanesque schools of tunnel-vaulted churches, 16.

---- tunnel with cross ribs, 37.

---- apse, 124 _et seq._

---- pyramidal, 14.

---- groined, naves with, 37.

---- with Added Ribs--Outside of England, 93.

---- Fan Vaulting, 89.

---- ribbed, 43.

---- of side aisles, 96.

---- Tracery Vaults, 89.

---- Sexpartite, 58 _et seq._

---- Pseudo-sexpartite, 62.

---- Eight-part, 72.

---- with Added Ribs, 81.

---- Tierceron Vaulting, 84.

---- Lierne Vaulting, 87.

---- Interpenetrating multiple ribbed, 88.

---- Five-part, 100, 107.

---- of triforia, 101.

---- of transept, 105.

Vauxrezis--Ch., 127 note 7.

Vendeuvre--Ch., 108 note 7.

Venice--Cath. San Marco, 13 note 30.

---- Frari, 57.

---- SS. Giovanni e Paolo, 57 note 175.

Verberie--Ch., 108 note 7.

Verona--Cath., 57 note 175.

---- Santo Stefano, 158, 159, 160, 166 note 26.

Vertheuil--Ch., 161.

Vézelay--La Madeleine, 34, 38, 39, 40, 43, 101,
     137, 140, 154, Figs. 16, 17, 66.

Viborg--Cath., 71.

Vicenza--SS. Felice e Fortunato, 24 note 63, 47.

Vieil-Arcy--Ch., 127 note 8.

Vieux Mareuil--Ch., 105.

Vigan--Ch., 182.

Vignory--Ch., 26, 152, 159.

Villemagne--Saint Gregoire, 64 note 180.

Villeneuve-le-Comte--Ch., 182 note 50.

Vizeu--Cath., 93.

Voulton--Ch., 74 note 203.


Wells--Cath., 89.

Wesel--Saint Willibrord, 178.

Westminster--Ab. Ch., 79, 83, 147.
  _Islip’s Chapel_, 92.
  _Henry VII’s Chapel_, 92.

William of Sens--69.

Wimpfen--Stadkirche, 94.

Winchester--Cath., 87, 88, 104 note 279, 112 note 23.

---- Saint Cross, 108.

Windsor--Saint George’s Chapel, 89.

Worcester--Cath., 65 note 184, 83, 84, 101.

Worms--Cath., 119, 127 note 5, Fig. 58.

---- Liebfrauen kirche, 180 note 44.

Xanten--Ch., 182 note 50.

Ypres--Saint Martin, 151.

Zamora--Cath., 116, 117 note 42.


 [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,

 [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.

 [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 entirely _above_ the 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

 [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.

 [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

 [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.

 [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.

 [147] Rivoira, I, p. 225.

 [148] Rivoira, I, p. 224, Figs. 330, 331.

 [149] Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vault.

 [150] Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, p. 22.

 [151] Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, p. 23.

 [152] See Cattaneo, p. 227.

 [153] The word square is used to denote bays which are approximately
 as well as actually equilateral.

 [154] See list in Enlart, I, p. 264 note 2 and note 3. Examples of
 transverse arches of earlier date exist in Syrian and Early Christian
 architecture, but not with a regular alternate system.

 [155] This was especially important to the Lombard builders, who
 always preferred the semicircular arch, which could thus be employed
 for all six ribs of the vault and would cause the crown to be domed
 up just high enough to permit the construction of the entire vault
 by means of a simple centering from rib to rib. See Porter, Cons. of
 Lombard and Gothic Vaults.

 [156] See Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults.

 [157] Illustrated in M. H.

 [158] Illustrated in Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, Fig.

 [159] See Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, p. 13.

 [160] Examples include: Laval (Mayenne), La Trinité; LeMans (Sarthe),
 La Couture; Poitiers (Vienne), Cath. (portion); Poitiers, Sainte
 Radegonde; Brantôme (Dordogne), Ch.; Lucheux (Somme), Ch.; Airaines
 (Somme), Notre Dame.

 [161] They are, perhaps, the earliest of the Anjou group. Enlart (Vol.
 I, pp. 435, note 1 and 445, note 1) gives an earlier date for Lucheux
 and Airaines, but the appearance of their vaults does not seem to bear
 out this assertion.

 [162] See Choisy, II, p. 277 and p. 276, Fig. 8--A. B. C.

 [163] Enlart, I, p. 437, Fig. 205.

 [164] Enlart, I, p. 444, Fig. 210. See also p. 446, note 1.

 [165] Lasteyrie, p. 474, Fig. 490.

 [166] Ill. in Bond, p. 328, Fig. 4.

 [167] See Street, p. 80, and Fig. 7, opp. same.

 [168] Examples could be cited in Belgium, Holland, Norway, Spain,
 etc., in fact, wherever Lombard, Rhenish or Anjou influence was strong.

 [169] See also Milan, S. Nazzaro. Cummings, I, p. 116.

 [170] Similar building-up of the arches may be seen in the nave at
 Bury (Fig. 22), and in the narthex of St. Leu d’Esserent (Oise). See
 Moore, p. 68 and p. 69, Fig. 24.

 [171] Very interesting examples occur also at Saint Aignan
 (Loire-et-Cher), Ch.

 [172] Similar angels are found in the porch of Santiago-de-Compostella
 illustrated in Uhde, Baudenkmaeler in Spainen und Portugal; also in
 Madrazo-Gurlitt, pl. 166. These latter are Angels of Judgment, forming
 part of the sculptural scheme of the three portals.

 [173] Similar figures also appear at Salamanca, in the old cathedral.
 See Street, p. 80 and Fig. opp. p. 80. Uhde, _op. cit._, Fig. 119, p.

 [174] See p. 57.

 [175] Other examples include: Bologna, San Petronio, ill. in Joseph,
 p. 172, Fig. 132; Verona, Cath. See Bond, p. 321; Pavia, San Teodoro
 (1150-1180), see Bond, p. 321; Venice, SS. Giovanni e Paolo, Cummings,
 II. p. 192.

 [176] See also Rivolta d’Adda--Rivoira, I. p 234, Fig. 331; Pavia, S.
 Michele, Porter, I, ill. 104, opp. p. 204.

 [177] See pp. 39 and 42.

 [178] Omitting for the present the cathedral of Durham.

 [179] These windows like others of the Norman school are actually
 to one side of the center of the bay but not far enough to make the
 difference apparent. In fact, they would seem to have been moved over
 for the purpose of making them appear in the center since the inward
 curve of the diagonal, which lies on one side of them only, would make
 them appear to be out of center were they placed on the axis of the

 [180] Enlart gives several examples, though not in churches with
 a regular pier system. Among these are: Cerisy-la-Forêt (Manche),
 Enlart, I, p. 261, Fig. 97; Le Mans, N. D. du Pré (original state);
 Villemagne (Hérault), Saint Gregoire (ruined), see Enlart, I, p. 264,
 note 2.

 [181] Illustrated in Ruprich-Robert, pl. LXXIX.

 [182] Ruprich-Robert, pl. LXXVIII.

 [183] Ruprich-Robert, pl. LXXXI.

 [184] In England, where thick walls are an important factor in vault
 support even at a comparatively late date, this same form of vaulting
 conoid is frequently found, for example in Chichester, Cath. (ill. in
 Moore, Mediaeval Church Architecture of England, p. 110, Fig. 91),
 Worcester, Cath. choir, (ill. in Moore, Mediaeval Church Architecture
 of England, pl. XX), Lincoln, Cath., E. Transept (see Moore, Mediaeval
 Church Architecture of England, p. 116), etc.

 [185] Ruprich-Robert, pl. LXXXVIII.

 [186] Ruprich-Robert, pl. LXXXVII.

 [187] Flying-buttresses had to be added not long after their
 construction, to keep them from falling.

 [188] Even these vaults have suffered from reconstruction in the
 thirteenth century.

 [189] See Moore, p. 130 et seq. for discussion of this point.

 [190] A later instance does appear and this, too, on a very large
 scale in the rebuilt choir vaults of Beauvais cathedral (1284), but
 the six-part vaults of this church are entirely due to the subdivision
 of four-part rectangular vaults in order to obtain greater stability.

 [191] Among the more important examples not mentioned are: Laon
 (Aisne), Cath.; Mantes (Seine-et-Oise), Cath.; Dijon (Côte-d’Or),
 Notre Dame, etc.

 [192] Other examples are: Lincoln, Cath. choir; (Fig. 35) Durham,
 Cath. east transept; Rochester, Cath. presbytery, (Moore, Mediaeval
 Church Architecture of England, pl. XVIII), etc.

 [193] Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, Figs. 58-60.

 [194] Other Italian examples are: Casamari, Ch.; San Galgano, Ch.; San
 Martino, Ch.; etc.

 [195] This bay was rebuilt (cir. 1237-1239) after the fall of the
 tower and is, therefore, later than the transept (cir. 1200).

 [196] In La Trinité there are no side aisles, but a series of chapels
 constitutes virtually the same arrangement.

 [197] Lubke, I, p. 440, Fig. 313.

 [198] Sturgis, II, p. 435, Fig. 382.

 [199] Sturgis, II, p. 439, Fig. 386.

 [200] See also one bay of Lincoln choir (Fig. 35) rebuilt cir. 1239,
 also Bourges, S. Pierre-le-Guillard, early thirteenth century, vaults
 rebuilt on original lines in the fifteenth century. Nesle (Somme)
 Ch. also has this vaulting form according to Moore, Mediaeval Church
 Architecture of England, p. 114, note 1.

 [201] See also Erfurt, Frankiskanerkirche.

 [202] Gurlitt, pl. 83.

 [203] Ex. Voulton (Seine-et-Marne), Ch. Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, I,
 pl. 62.

 [204] Bumpus, illustration opp. p. 92.

 [205] Ill. in Moore, p. 51.

 [206] See p. 96 and Fig. 44.

 [207] Bond, p. 643.

 [208] Rivoira, II, pp. 235-243.

 [209] Moore, Mediaeval Church Architecture of England, p. 25.

 [210] Lasteyrie, p. 497, note 1.

 [211] Bond, p. 370.

 [212] Bond, pp. 315 and 319.

 [213] Bond, p. 319.

 [214] The system, moreover, is complete with a transverse arch which
 might seem to indicate that it was later than that at Durham.

 [215] The other three are, the sexpartite and pseudo-sexpartite vaults
 and the irregular four-part method employed at Durham.

 [216] Moore, p. 80, Fig. 32.

 [217] Whether these concealed buttresses were first used in Normandy
 or the Ile-de-France is an open question, but in either case their
 origin would seem to be traceable to such prototypes as the ramping
 walls above the transverse aisle arches of such Lombard churches as
 Sant’ Ambrogio at Milan and perhaps even to Roman monuments like the
 basilica of Maxentius at Rome. The really important question is to
 learn when these concealed buttresses were first raised above the
 aisle roofs to constitute true flying-buttresses. This would seem to
 have taken place in the Ile-de-France, perhaps at Domont as Porter
 suggests (Porter, II, pp. 91-92), or at Noyon towards the middle of
 the twelfth century.

 [218] Ill. in Moore, p. 76.

 [219] An example of the heavy ribs used in early work may be seen at
 Morienval, Fig. 77.

 [220] These and the following churches are chosen at random merely for
 the purposes of comparison.

 [221] For example in the cathedral of Albi, where the nave is sixty
 feet in width, and in that of Gerona (Spain), where it is over seventy.

 [222] See pp. 49 and 70.

 [223] See Bond, p. 336.

 [224] See Bond, p. 335.

 [225] See Bond, p. 336.

 [226] As a matter of fact these in their turn help to support the
 ridge rib.

 [227] See Street, p. 78 for a drawing (from Wilde) of this vault
 before its restoration.

 [228] See p. 93 for examples.

 [229] So far as the writer knows there are no examples of the simple
 transverse ridge rib in England, where one would naturally expect to
 find it used.

 [230] Moreover the tiercerons at Worcester would seem to have been an
 afterthought. See Moore, Mediaeval Church Architecture of England, p.

 [231] Illustrated in Bond, p. 327.

 [232] Illustrated in Bond, p. 327. See also Lichfield’s Cath. nave for
 similar transverse rib.

 [233] Not without their influence, however, as a number of late
 churches could be cited in which there is no true transverse rib,
 as for example the minster at Berne (Switzerland), (illustrated in
 Michel, III, p. 52, Fig. 31).

 [234] See Bond, p. 333.

 [235] Dehio and von Bezold, II, p. 234, Fig. 1.

 [236] A larger number of tiercerons is frequently found but not in
 vaults without liernes, except in very rare instances such as Oxford
 Schools Tower, where there are three pairs of tiercerons in each
 severy. Plan in Bond, p. 324-8.

 [237] Bond, p. 340.

 [238] Illustrated in Bond, p. 329.

 [239] Illustrated in Bond, p. 331.

 [240] Michel, III, p. 27, Fig. 17.

 [241] Illustrated in Bond, p. 329.

 [242] Illustrated in Bond, p. 330.

 [243] See also illustration in Bond, p. 332.

 [244] See illustration of Gloucester choir in Bond, p. 334.

 [245] See illustration in Bond, opp. p. 132.

 [246] See illustration of Tewkesbury nave, Wells choir (Bond, p. 332)
 and Gloucester choir (Bond, p. 334).

 [247] Illustrated in Bond, p. 330.

 [248] Illustrated in Bond, p. 332.

 [249] Illustrated in Bond, p. 332.

 [250] Illustrated in Bond, p. 333.

 [251] Illustrated in Bond, p. 333.

 [252] See also Cambridge, King’s College chapel, illustrated in Bond,
 p. 333.

 [253] See also Oxford, Christ Church staircase, illustrated in Bond,
 p. 348.

 [254] Illustrated in Willis, p. 50.

 [255] Illustrated in Bond, p. 333.

 [256] The vaults are modern but the church was planned to have this

 [257] Illustrated in Bond, opp. p. 348, also Willis, pl. III, opp. p.

 [258] Illustrated in Bond, p. 297. See also Oxford, Divinity School,
 illustrated in Bond, p. 331 and Henry VII’s Chapel, illustrated in
 Bond, opp. p. 348.

 [259] For an extended discussion of English vaulting see Bond, English
 Church Architecture, Vol. I, Chap. V, pp. 279-384.

 [260] The diagonals of many vaults in France and Spain and especially
 in England had been decorated with carving, particularly in the early
 Gothic period.

 [261] Illustrated in Michel, IV, p. 858.

 [262] Enlart, I, Fig. 318, opp. p. 558.

 [263] Lubke, I, p. 540, Fig. 373. See also Freiberg-i-Sachsen, Cath.
 (Hartung, I, pl. 5).

 [264] Plan in Street, pl. IV, opp. p. 104.

 [265] Plan in Street, pl. XII, opp. p. 194.

 [266] Michel, III, p. 10, Fig. 4.

 [267] Michel, III, p. 52, Fig. 31.

 [268] Hartung, II, pl. 114.

 [269] So far as the writer is aware.

 [270] Michel, IV, p. 567, Fig. 376.

 [271] Enlart, I, pp. 598-599, Fig. 323.

 [272] Enlart, I, pp. 676-677, Fig. 345. See also Bristol cathedral,
 Berkeley Chapel (cir. 1340) illustrated in Bond, p. 329.

 [273] See Dehio and von Bezold, II, p. 82.

 [274] Perhaps as early as between 1124-1140 when there was a
 reconstruction of the cathedral. The character of their construction
 certainly would not be inconsistent with such a date.

 [275] Ribs rising in a somewhat similar manner are to be found in the
 south of France, in the crypt of the church of Saint Gilles (Gard.)
 (Ill. in Lasteyrie, p. 263, Fig. 253) or the chapel of the Pont
 Saint-Benezet at Avignon (Vaucluse), where they mark the intersection
 of two flattened tunnel vaults.

 [276] Lincoln, Cath. nave aisle. Plan in Bond, pp. 308-9; Salisbury,
 Cath.; Southwell, Minster.

 [277] Hartung, I, pl. 16.

 [278] Illustrated in Bond, p. 329.

 [279] Examples include: Linköping, Cath.; Paderborn, Cath.; Minden,
 Cath.; Mainz, S. Stephen; Landshut, Saint Martin; Prenzlau,
 Marienkirche; Heidelberg, Peterskirche; Paris, Sainte Chapelle
 (lower church); Chaumont, Ch.; Perugia, Cath.; Winchester, Cath.
 (Lady chapel); Belem (Portugal) Ab. Ch.; Barcelona, Cath.;
 Freiberg-i-Sachsen, Cath. (1494-1501); Hartung, I, pl. 5; Soest, Sta
 Maria zur Wiese, Hartung, I, pl. 49; Stendal, S. Maria (cir. 1450),
 Hartung, II, pl. 69.

 [280] Hartung, III, pl. 126.

 [281] Illustration in Lubke, I, p. 540, Fig. 373.

 [282] See Butler, p. 78.

 [283] See Lasteyrie, p. 480 and notes 1-2.

 [284] From its elevation, this would seem to have been added later.

 [285] Other examples include: Issoire, Saint Paul, and the churches at
 Saint Saturnin and Saint Nectaire (Puy-de-Dôme).

 [286] Illustrated in Lasteyrie, p. 445, Fig. 463.

 [287] Illustrated in Enlart, I, Fig. 318, opp. p. 588.

 [288] Saint Jean-au-Bois (Oise) (twelfth century); Épinal (Vosges)
 (thirteenth century); Valentigny and Vendeuvre (Aube); Roberval,
 Vauciennes, and Verberie (Oise); Brunembert (Pas-de-Calais); etc.

 [289] See p. 131, note 16 for explanation of the use of the word

 [290] See also Tour (Calvados), Ch. Illustrated in Dehio and von
 Bezold, II, p. 187. Rys (Calvados), Ch. Baudot and Perrault-Dabot II,
 pl. 12; Omonville-la-Rogue, Ch. Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, II, pl. 46;
 Puiseaux (Loiret), Ch. Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, III, pl. 28.

 [291] Hartung, III, pl. 134.

 [292] There is a similar vault in the transept.

 [293] Among them: Lérins, Chapelle de la Trinité. Illustrated in
 Revoil I, pl. 1; St. Martin-de-Londres, Ch. Revoil, I, pl. XXXIII.

 [294] For example: Querqueville (Manche).

 [295] See Lasteyrie, p. 530.

 [296] An earlier transept with similar vaulting may have existed in
 church of St. Lucien at Beauvais (1090-1109), but this church was
 unfortunately destroyed during the Revolution. See Enlart, I, p. 480,
 note 3.

 [297] Similar transepts at Breslau, Heiligekreuze; Paderborn, Cath.;
 Marburg, St. Elizabeth.

 [298] The development and construction of chevet vaults is discussed
 in Chapter III.

 [299] Apparently later than the chevet.

 [300] See Enlart, I, p. 490 note 3 and Lasteyrie, pp. 285 and 522 for
 lists. Also Neufchâtel (Seine Inférieure) fifteenth century. Porter,
 II, p. 95.

 [301] Plan in Gurlitt, p. 22.

 [302] See Enlart, I, p. 480 note 3 and Lasteyrie, pp. 285 and 522 for
 further examples.

 [303] In rare instances, as in Saint Hilaire at Poitiers, there are
 aisles along the west wall only, but this is due to a rebuilding of
 the church.

 [304] Toulouse, Saint Sernin; Reims, Saint Remi (originally)
 (see Lasteyrie, p. 282); Winchester, Cath. (1079-1093) (Rivoira,
 II, p. 205). Tribunes are also to be seen in churches without a
 triforium gallery along the transept walls as for example in Saint
 Georges-de-Boscherville, Cerisy-la-Forêt (1030-1066), etc. See list in
 Enlart, I, p. 236, note 1.

 [305] See Lasteyrie, p. 539 and Enlart, I, p. 265, note 1.

 [306] See Ruprich-Robert, II, p. 3.

 [307] Lasteyrie, p. 271, Fig. 264.

 [308] For other examples see Lasteyrie, p. 335, notes 3-4-5.

 [309] Lasteyrie, p. 336, Fig. 359.

 [310] See Lasteyrie, p. 270.

 [311] See Enlart, I, pp. 123, 124.

 [312] See Rivoira, II, pp. 27, 29.

 [313] Lasteyrie, p. 445, Fig. 463.

 [314] Lasteyrie, p. 316, Fig. 338.

 [315] See p. 106.

 [316] Lasteyrie, p. 249, Fig. 239.

 [317] Lasteyrie, p. 336, Fig. 359.

 [318] See also Marseilles,--La Major.

 [319] See p. 124.

 [320] Either with or without a lantern beneath them. Examples:
 Montagne (Gironde); Nantille, Notre Dame; Saumur, St. Pierre. See
 Michel, II, p. 108 and Lasteyrie, p. 479.

 [321] See also such other buildings as the Château de Simiane
 (Basses-Alpes) (apparently twelfth century). Illustrated in Revoil,
 III, pl. VIII.

 [322] See p. 125.

 [323] Similar domes may be seen in the old cathedral of Salamanca
 (finished before 1178). (Moore, Character of Renaissance Architecture,
 p. 57, Fig. 28.) [Street, (Fig. 7, op. p. 80) shows this dome as
 having flat severies, and does not mention the fact that they
 are curved, as he takes pains to do in regard to Zamora]; and
 the collegiate church at Toro (begun cir. 1160-1170, finished in
 thirteenth century), (Michel, II, p. 108, Fig. 76). It is difficult to
 tell from the photograph whether this last example has the lobed vault

 [324] Illustrated in Simpson, II, p. 104.

 [325] There is an earlier and somewhat similar crossing vault in the
 church of S. Marien at Gelnhausen (1225-on) Hartung, III, pl. 145.

 [326] Michel, IV, p. 829, Fig. 546.

 [327] Michel, IV, p. 828, Fig. 545.

 [328] It is possible that this vault is of wood.

 [329] Simpson, II, Fig. 68, opp. p. 104.

 [330] Simpson, II, Fig. 69, opp. p. 164.

 [331] Examples are furnished by: Florence, S. M. Novella; Sens, Cath.
 (Fig. 28); Paris, N. D.; Soissons, Cath.; Cologne, Cath.; to cite but
 a few churches.

 [332] Cummings, II, p. 141, Fig. 330.

 [333] Cummings, II, p. 149, Fig. 335.

 [334] For example in Dol, Cath.; Étampes, Saint Gilles; Bayeux, Cath.,

 [335] For example in Angers, Cath. (Fig. 19); Bordeaux, Saint Michel,

 [336] Numerous illustrations may be found in Bond, Gothic Architecture
 in England and English Church Architecture.

 [337] Most of the vaulting is modern but built as originally planned.

 [338] An example of this arrangement may be seen at Saint
 Nicolas-du-Port (Meurthe-et-Moselle). Enlart, Fig. 318, opp. p. 588.

 [339] See also Poitiers, Saint Hilaire (Fig. 7) and Notre
 Dame-la-Grande, etc.

 [340] See also Toulouse, Saint Sernin; Saint Benoît-sur-Loire (Fig.
 13); and Nevers, St. Étienne, etc.

 [341] They may have been inspired by the salient arches of such a
 tunnel vault as that in the Temple of Diana at Nîmes, and in any event
 would seem to owe their origin to classic prototypes and to be largely
 decorative, a theory which is strengthened by the appearance of such a
 vault as that in the little church of Saint Jean-de-Moustier, at Arles
 (probably of the ninth century) (Revoil, I, pl. XVI), where these
 radiants very closely resemble Corinthian pilasters.

 [342] Dartein, pl. 76.

 [343] Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, Fig. 62. There
 are also a number of churches of the more developed period in which
 somewhat similar ribbed half domes are found, though these are
 frequently laid up in flat gores over polygonal apses. Examples
 include: Worms, Cath.; west apse, see Fig. 58; Florence, Cath. east
 and transept apses.

 [344] Madrazo-Gurlitt, pl. 178.

 [345] Examples include Berzy-le-Sec and Laffaux (Aisne); Chelles
 (Oise) and Bonnes (Vienne) all dating cir. 1140-1150; Bruyères,
 and Vauxrezis (Aisne) probably of about the same date, and Torcy
 (Aisne) dating from the second half of the twelfth century; Étampes,
 St. Martin, radiating chapel. All of these are illustrated in
 Lefevre-Pontalis. Examples with three ribs include Thor (Vaucluse)
 and Saint Pierre-de-Reddes (Hérault), both illustrated in Revoil.
 Example with four ribs, Como, Sant’ Abondio. Example with five ribs,
 Montmajour (Bouches-du-Rhône), Ab. Ch. Revoil, II, pl. XXXI. For
 further examples, see Porter, II, p. 78.

 [346] For instance, at Vieil-Arcy, Ch. (Lefevre-Pontalis, pl. XLV),
 where there are no ribs beneath the half dome; and in the last five
 churches with two ribs listed in the preceding note.

 [347] Lasteyrie, p. 450, Fig. 470.

 [348] Rivoira, II, p. 38, Fig. 399.

 [349] Rivoira, II, pp. 39-40.

 [350] Rivoira, II, p. 93.

 [351] Moore, Mediaeval Church Architecture of England, p. 15, Fig. 11.

 [352] Forest-l’Abbaye (Somme) (plan in Enlart, I, p. 447, Fig. 211)
 furnishes one example of this and others are listed in Enlart, I, p.
 447 and note 2 at the foot of that page.

 [353] There are occasionally to be found some late examples showing
 the survival of the half dome as an apse vault, but these are
 exceptional after cir. 1150, until the Renaissance period.

 [354] The word chevet is used here and elsewhere as referring to
 the ribbed vaulting developed and applied to the apse of the Gothic

 [355] See p. 128, 129.

 [356] See p. 110.

 [357] Lefevre-Pontalis, pl. XXIX.

 [358] Lefevre-Pontalis, pl. LI.

 [359] At Laon the remaining bays of the chapel are groined and if
 their vaults are original, this presents one of the few examples of a
 church completely groined and especially of one with the combination
 of groined vault and ribbed chevet.

 [360] Moore, Mediaeval Church Architecture of England, pl. 1, opp. p.
 19. Variously dated 1130-1150.

 [361] Illustrated in Moore, pp. 72 and 73, Figs. 26, 27.

 [362] See Moore, p. 130, et seq., and Porter, II, p. 80.

 [363] See also the apses of Saint Étienne at Caen, of Saint
 Martin-des-Champs at Paris and of Soissons cathedral transept.
 Other churches were probably originally designed without the
 flying-buttresses, among them Saint Remi at Reims. See Porter, II, p.
 209 (from Lefevre-Pontalis).

 [364] This type of vault is later discussed. See p. 153.

 [365] The chevet vault is chosen for this discussion merely because
 the photographs are handy for reference. Similar vaults could,
 however, be found in all the other portions of the church.

 [366] For example, in Soissons transept. In certain other examples,
 the formeret does not follow the vault curve. See Paris, St.
 Martin-des-Champs (Fig. 65), Noyon transept, etc.

 [367] A vault of similar character may be noted in the name of Amiens
 and numerous other instances could be cited outside of the chevet

 [368] The eastern bay in this particular church was widened to give a
 broad opening into the Lady chapel.

 [369] It may be noted that La Madeleine also resembles St. Germer in
 having a groined triforium.

 [370] Vaults with just such doming were to be used side by side with
 those with higher window cells, as is later shown.

 [371] Unfortunately the vaults of Sens and Noyon have been rebuilt
 though apparently in the original manner, while those of Senlis, which
 would have been of much value, have been reconstructed in a later

 [372] Examples include: Bologna, San Francesco; Auxerre Cath. (planned
 for six-part type of vaults), etc.

 [373] Other examples not mentioned include Albi (Tarn) cath.; Troyes
 (Aube) cath.; Semur-en-Auxois (Côte-d’or), Notre Dame.

 [374] It is possible that it owes this arrangement to the church of
 Saint Remi (Fig. 64).

 [375] Although not originally planned for four-part vaults in the
 choir, its present arrangement illustrates the combination referred to.

 [376] This is not a noticeable fault with sexpartite choir vaulting
 since the crowns of all the window cells form similar angles.

 [377] Porter, II, p. 83, Fig. 176.

 [378] In referring to chevet vaults, the terms three-celled,
 four-celled, etc., refer to the number of window panels or severies,
 while the terms four-part, five-part, etc., refer to the total number
 of severies in the vault, generally one more than the number of window

 [379] See also the five-part chevet in the cathedral of Saint Louis at
 Blois (Loire-et-Cher) which is, however, of much later date.

 [380] This may explain the fact that the buttressing rib type of
 chevet persisted side by side with this fourth form.

 [381] In St. Étienne this rib would seem to be an addition to the
 original chevet.

 [382] Street, pl. XXV. op. p. 408.

 [383] Bond, p. 63.

 [384] This church has a rather exceptional chevet in that it is
 considerably more than a semicircle in plan.

 [385] Plan in Street, pl. XVI, opp. p. 306.

 [386] The double apse of the Chapel of the Seminaire at Bayeux
 (thirteenth century) (Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, II, pl. 44) has two
 chevets of similar character.

 [387] Plan in Caumont, p. 590.

 [388] See the illustration in Bond, p. 165.

 [389] See also Pirna, Hauptkirche (1502-1546), Hartung, I, pl. 57.

 [390] See also Le Mans, Notre Dame-de-la-Couture: Padua, Sant’ Antonio.

 [391] And sometimes in churches where this arrangement is not found.

 [392] See also Neubourg (Eure). Plan in Enlart, I, Fig. 317.

 [393] Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, I, pl. 46.

 [394] See Fig. 31.

 [395] The vault has been recently reconstructed along original lines.

 [396] A feature which certainly enhances the present appearance of the
 cathedral, though it is quite possible that the builders originally
 intended to shut off this vista by a high reredos behind the altar.

 [397] Compare for example the chevet of Reims with that of Saint

 [398] Needless to say, no flying-buttresses are necessary with such a
 vault as the thrusts are easily absorbed by the piers.

 [399] Similar openings are to be seen in the apse of Saint Nazaire at

 [400] For other examples showing the employment of this feature even
 in the Renaissance see Enlart, I, p. 506, note 2.

 [401] Hartung, I, pl. 15.

 [402] For a discussion of this point see E. Gall’s series of articles
 on the ambulatory in Monatschefte fur Kunstwissenschaft, beginning
 with the fifth volume, 1912, pp. 134-149.

 [403] See Rivoira I, p. 184.

 [404] Now destroyed. See Rivoira I, p. 184.

 [405] Some examples of the walled off ambulatory are found, however.
 See Enlart, I, p. 234, note 5.

 [406] See Rivoira, I, p. 183, for dates of Santo Stefano and Ivrea.

 [407] An annular tunnel vault also covered the passage around the
 tribune of the so-called stadium of Domitian already mentioned. See
 Rivoira, I, p. 184.

 [408] For other examples, see Enlart, I, p. 266, note 6. A similar
 vault is sometimes found in the aisles of circular churches, as for
 example in Ste. Croix at Quimperlé (eleventh century). Baudot and
 Perrault-Dabot, II, pl. 5.

 [409] See Rivoira, II, p. 289.

 [410] At intervals this vault is cut by lunettes or groined bays but
 it is fundamentally an annular tunnel vault.

 [411] Exactly as has been suggested in regard to similar side aisle

 [412] See Enlart, I, p. 266, note 6.

 [413] Enlart, I, p. 34, Fig. 14.

 [414] Revoil, I, pl. XLVIII.

 [415] Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, II, pl. 25.

 [416] Rivoira, II, p. 270, Fig. 718.

 [417] See Rivoira, II, p. 8. See also the Duomo Vecchio at Brescia
 (Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, Fig. 49).

 [418] Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, Fig. 53.

 [419] Porter, Cons. of Lombard and Gothic Vaults, Fig. 52.

 [420] Enlart, I, p. 273, Fig. 105.

 [421] The date of this cathedral is uncertain and the exceptional
 character of its triforium leads to the suspicion that it may not now
 retain its original arrangement, though the writer has no proof of
 this suggestion.

 [422] In some instances these lintels have been cut through with an
 arch running up into the surface of the vault between the bays.

 [423] Previous to Porter there had been suggestions of this origin
 of the ribbed vault in Choisy’s work and in Rivoira’s Lombardic
 architecture, but their studies had been largely confined to vaults
 whose ribs were sunken into the masonry panels.

 [424] See discussion of this point on p. 136.

 [425] See p. 53, 54.

 [426] Plan in Rivoira, I, p. 222, Fig. 327.

 [427] If Signor Rivoira is correct in his attribution of this
 ambulatory to the third quarter of the eleventh century (Rivoira, I,
 pp. 222, 223), it affords not only an extremely early example of the
 straight ribbed type but an instance of a ribbed vaulted ambulatory
 of large size antedating that at Morienval by half a century. I am
 not prepared to accept this early date. The general elevation of the
 piers and ribs, the geographical situation of the church, the lack
 of any similarly vaulted ambulatories in the fifty years following
 its construction and the very form of the vaults, which may easily
 have once been of the groined type to be seen in the gallery of Santo
 Stefano at Verona with ribs added at a later date or reconstruction
 (note lower imposts of diagonal ribs and expanding soffits of
 transverse arches like those at Verona) together with many other
 details a discussion of which the limits of this paper forbids, make
 it seem most improbable that this ambulatory dates from 1049-1078.
 As a matter of fact, the date is of little importance in the present
 connection, since it is the type of vault employed with which this
 study is largely concerned.

 [428] Plan and interior view in Moore, pp. 72, 73, Figs. 26, 27.

 [429] Plan in Moore, p. 83, Fig. 34.

 [430] This may be plainly seen at the cathedral of Tournai (Fig. 85).

 [431] Moore, Mediaeval Church Architecture of England, p. 96, Fig. 82
 and pl. XV, opp. p. 104.

 [432] Crypt illustrated in Moore, Mediaeval Church Architecture of
 England, p. 94, Fig. 80, Trinity chapel, p. 103 Fig. 86 and pi. XIV.
 opp. same page.

 [433] See Moore, Mediaeval Church Architecture of England, pp. 94-95.

 [434] See p. 99 for theory regarding this.

 [435] Moore, Mediaeval Church Architecture of England, pl. XV, opp. p.

 [436] Moore, Mediaeval Church Architecture of England, pl. XIV, opp.
 p. 103.

 [437] Ambulatories vaulted in a similar manner appear in Saint Sauveur
 at Bruges, the Groote Kerk at Breda, the cathedral of Burgos, the
 church at Gonesse (Seine-et-Oise) (plan in Enlart, I, p. 486, Fig.
 233) etc. Also, in Magdeburg Cath. (Hartung I, pl. 16), there is an
 instance in which the intermediate rib is shortened evidently to admit
 the greatest possible amount of light.

 [438] This is also a church employing the lancet type of window common
 in Normandy and England and the subdivision of the ambulatory thus
 made possible windows of general lancet shape. Furthermore, it carried
 the subdivision of the triforium arcade into the clerestory above.
 (For a large photograph of this ambulatory see Gurlitt, pl. 84).

 [439] Plan in Moore, p. 83, Fig. 34.

 [440] Similar vaults appear at Coutances Cath., outer ambulatory,
 Utrecht Cath. (ridge ribs added), Malmo, Ch., and Lagny, Ab. Ch.
 (illustrated in Lenoir, part II, p. 207).

 [441] Plan in Enlart, I, p. 505, Fig. 244.

 [442] Violet-le-Duc (Vol. IV, pp. 75-77) calls attention to the
 architectural refinements in this church, mentioning the use of arches
 flattened on their inner face and curved on the outer between the apse
 and triforium. It is also interesting to note that here as in Saint
 Remi the vault of the triforium differs from that of the ambulatory
 proper. The arrangement at Saint Remi has been described, that at
 Chalons consists of a simple four-part vault of trapezoidal form with
 outer and inner sides curved.

 [443] Examples at Strassburg, Cath., Neubourg (Eure), ch. (irregular
 type of ch. with central pier and triangular apse. See plan in Enlart,
 I, p. 590, Fig. 317) and Tewkesbury Abbey (here even the triangular
 bays open into chapels). See also Cléry (Loiret) (fifteenth century)
 (plan in Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, III, pl. 60).

 [444] Plan in Caumont, p. 396.

 [445] Examples not mentioned include, Beeskow; Keisheim; Stargarde,
 Johanniskirche (slightly elaborated); Treptow (considerably
 elaborated); Worms, Liebfrauenkirche; Arles, Saint Trophime, etc.

 [446] Plan in Gaudet, III, p. 247, Fig. 1108.

 [447] Plan in Gaudet, III, p. 240, Fig. 1104.

 [448] These two churches not only show the vault with simple added
 ribs but the last named is most interesting as showing an ambulatory
 equal in height to the apse, a most unusual arrangement.

 [449] This church also presents certain changes in the arrangement of
 the ribs but these are unimportant.

 [450] See also Kuttenberg.

 [451] A similar plan on a smaller scale and with only two side chapels
 occurs at Ville-neuve-le-Comte (Seine-et-Marne) (plan in Enlart, I, p.
 485, Fig. 232) and the same arrangement in churches with central plan
 appears at Trier in the Liebfrauenkirche while other examples include
 Lisseweghe; Toul, Saint Gengoulf; Xant; Oppenheim; Ludinghausen;
 Anclam; Lübeck, Saint Jakob; Lagny (Seine-et-Marne) (illustrated in
 Lenoir, Part II, p. 207) and Kaschau (Hungary) (illustrated in Lenoir,
 Part II, p. 208). See also Enlart, I, p. 485, note 2.

 [452] Baudot and Perrault-Dabot, V, pl. 79.

 [453] Such chapels were frequently omitted all through both the
 Romanesque and Gothic periods even in churches with an ambulatory and
 were not therefore established parts of the church plan. For examples
 of such chapels see Enlart, I, p. 228 note 2 and p. 485 note 3 and
 Lasteyrie, p. 297.

 [454] For discussion of prototypes see Lasteyrie, pp. 187, 188.

 [455] For examples see Lasteyrie, p. 301 and Enlart, I, p. 231, note 4.

 [456] For examples see Lasteyrie, p. 301 and Enlart, I, p. 486, note 1.

 [457] See Enlart, I, p. 231, note 2.

 [458] For examples see Lasteyrie, p. 297, and Enlart I, p. 233, note 1
 and p. 486, note 3.

 [459] For examples see Lasteyrie, p. 297, and Enlart, I, p. 233, note

 [460] For examples see Lasteyrie, p. 297, and Enlart, I, p. 233, note

 [461] Orcival (Lasteyrie, p. 297, Fig. 458).

 [462] For examples see Enlart, I, p. 233, note 3.

 [463] Rather rare in the Romanesque period. For examples see Enlart,
 I, p. 232.

 [464] See page 173 _et seq._

 [465] For examples of square chapels see Enlart, I, p. 231, note 2 and
 p. 487, note 7.

 [466] For example, the chapels with other chapels added to them toward
 the east at Norwich cath. and Mehun-sur-Yevre (Cher) see Enlart, I, p.
 234, note 4.

 [467] See p. 112.

*** End of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "Mediaeval Church Vaulting" ***

Doctrine Publishing Corporation provides digitized public domain materials.
Public domain books belong to the public and we are merely their custodians.
This effort is time consuming and expensive, so in order to keep providing
this resource, we have taken steps to prevent abuse by commercial parties,
including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Doctrine Publishing
Corporation's ISYS search for use by individuals, and we request that you
use these files for personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort
to Doctrine Publishing's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a
large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the use of
public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Keep it legal -  Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for
ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just because
we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States,
that the work is also in the public domain for users in other countries.
Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we
can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of any specific book is
allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Doctrine Publishing
ISYS search  means it can be used in any manner anywhere in the world.
Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About ISYS® Search Software
Established in 1988, ISYS Search Software is a global supplier of enterprise
search solutions for business and government.  The company's award-winning
software suite offers a broad range of search, navigation and discovery
solutions for desktop search, intranet search, SharePoint search and embedded
search applications.  ISYS has been deployed by thousands of organizations
operating in a variety of industries, including government, legal, law
enforcement, financial services, healthcare and recruitment.