m, the other
grafted on, the old Roman stock. The first is the Roman art itself,
prolonged in a languid and degraded condition, and becoming at last a
mere formal system, centered at the feet of Eastern empire, and thence
generally called Byzantine. The other is the barbarous and incipient
art of the Gothic nations, more or less coloured by Roman or Byzantine
influence, and gradually increasing in life and power.
Generally speaking, the Byzantine art, although manifesting itself
only in perpetual repetitions, becoming every day more cold and
formal, yet preserved reminiscences of design originally noble, and
traditions of execution originally perfect.
Generally speaking, the Gothic art, although becoming every day more
powerful, presented the most ludicrous experiments of infantile
imagination, and the most rude efforts of untaught manipulation.
Hence, if any superior mind arose in Byzantine art, it had before it
models which suggested or recorded a perfection they did not
themselves possess; and the superiority of the individual mind would
probably be shown in a more sincere and living treatment of the
subjects ordained for repetition by the canons of the schools.
In the art of the Goth, the choice of subject was unlimited, and the
style of design so remote from all perfection, as not always even to
point out clearly the direction in which advance could be made. The
strongest minds which appear in that art are therefore generally
manifested by redundance of imagination, and sudden refinement of
touch, whether of pencil or chisel, together with unexpected starts of
effort or flashes of knowledge in accidental directions, gradually
forming various national styles.
Of these comparatively independent branches of art, the greatest is,
as far as I know, the French sculpture of the thirteenth century. No
words can give any idea of the magnificent redundance of its
imaginative power, or of the perpetual beauty of even its smallest
incidental designs. But this very richness of sculptural invention
prevented the French from cultivating their powers of painting, except
in illumination (of which art they were the acknowledged masters), and
in glass-painting. Their exquisite gift of fretting their stone-work
with inexhaustible wealth of sculpture, prevented their feeling the
need of figure-design on coloured surfaces.
The style of architecture prevalent in Italy at the same period,
presented, on the contrary, large bla
|