File:Medieval architecture, its origins and development, with lists of monuments and bibliographies (1912) (14803943843).jpg

Identifier: medievalarchitec01port (find matches)
Title: Medieval architecture, its origins and development, with lists of monuments and bibliographies
Year: 1912 (1910s)
Authors: Porter, Arthur Kingsley, 1883-1933
Subjects: Architecture, Medieval Architecture, Medieval Architecture
Publisher: New Haven, Yale University Press
Contributing Library: University of Connecticut Libraries
Digitizing Sponsor: University of Connecticut Libraries

View Book Page: Book Viewer
About This Book: Catalog Entry
View All Images: All Images From Book
Click here to view book online to see this illustration in context in a browseable online version of this book.

Text Appearing Before Image:
Europe, from Spain to the He de France and Flanders.I believe, however, that Jumieges is the earliest example ofthe use of these engaged shafts, and, considering the internationalfame and importance of the abbey, I do not hesitate to regardall other examples as thence derived. The extraordinary popu-larity of so fortuitous and illogical an idea is most astonishing,and of all the forms produced by medieval architecture, thereis none which has more puzzled the archaeologists. The mostplausible explanation yet advanced sees in these shafts merelya decorative feature. Their use increased the effect of rhythmgiven by the alternate piers; they served to mark the bays inter-nally, and to accentuate the vertical lines, thus giving scale inheight and length to the building; they appeared to offer sup-port for the tie-beams of an open timber roof; and finally theybound together the three stories of arcade, triforium, and clear-story, otherwise little related in composition. This theory, if 256
Text Appearing After Image:
III. 1^9. —Abbaye-aux-Ilommes of Caen. Interior of Nave THE SYSTEM there is little positive evidence to support it, is, on the other hand,entirely po8sil)le. The engaged shaft certainly did answer thepurposes claimed for it. Yet, in medieval art, entiiely newfeatures were never evolved in this way, purely for decorativeeffect. Such an invention out of whole cloth would be contraryto all the tendencies of the time and an event absolutely withoutparallel. It seems far more probable that these advantagesshoidd have caused the engaged shafts to be retained after theyhad originated in some other way, than that they should havesuggested their invention. The alternative explanation, although it has gained wideacceptance, and has been advocated by Mr. Moore, seems tome to be on its face improbable, and is supported by no seriousevidence. This theory considers the engaged shafts as showinga vague, undefined intention on the part of the builders whocommenced the construction to vault the edif

Note About Images