Skip to main content

Full text of "Ancient stained and painted glass"

See other formats

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 
to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 
publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is 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 Google Book 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 Google'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. 

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ 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 Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http : //books . google . com/ 




by Google 


by Google 


by Google 


by Google 

The Cambridge Manuals of Science and 



by Google 


Honiroii: fetter lane, e.g. 
C. F. CLAY, Manager 


emntucfflj: loo, PRINCES STREET 

IBetlin: A. ASHER AND CO. 

leip>ifl: F. A. BROCKHAUS 

i^eto liorfc : G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS 

Bombas ant Calcutta: MACMILLAN AND CO. Ltd. 

All rights reserved 


by Google 


by Google' 

Our Lady and the Divine Child (Harlow) 








Cambridge : 
at the University Pres; 

New York: 

G P. Piitfiam's Sons 



1 J 






s. ,. ,^y 




i 4 
t i 

CambriHgr : 


With the exception of the coat of arms at 
the foot, the design on the title page is a 
reproduction of one used by the earliest knotvn 
Cambridge printer, John Siberch, 152 1 


by Google 


THESE pages make no pretence to give an ex- 
haustive account of their subject, but only to 
supply sufficient data to ground an intelligent appre- 
ciation of such remains of stained and painted glass 
older than 1700 as are still to be found in ancient 

In the introductory chapter I have shortly de- 
scribed the matter with which we have to deal — 
in particular, its fragmentary condition and the 
historical causes which have produced that condition. 
Also, I touch upon the subject of the connection 
between glass-painting and the other arts ancillary 
to architecture with special reference to their common 
objects and use. 

The styles, which may be taken, roughly, to 
synchronize with those into which English archi- 
tecture from the 11th century onwards is usually 
divided, are then briefly described, and I have, in 
the concluding chapter, ventured to say a few words 
upon latter-day treatment of old glass, and to make 
some suggestions which may, I hope, be found helpful 

25732GL °'^' ""' by Google 


towards, not only the preservation, but also a reason- 
able use, of what is left 

Several of the illustrations are taken from the 
county of Essex, which is generally supposed to be 
below the average in remains of old painted glass, 
and I may add that it would not be difficult to 
illustrate all the styles in painted glass by fine speci- 
mens from Essex alone. This fe^t affords reasonable 
justification for the inference that there is, in every 
county in England, an open book about old painted 
glass which only needs a little editing — ix. copying 
and arranging the copies in some feirly accessible 
place — to make it of the greatest possible value to 
students and craftsmen, and to the public at large. 

F. s! E. 

Walthamstow, Essex, 
Christmas, 1912. 


by Google 



I. Introductory 1 


III. The Decorated Style (1272—1377) ... 49 

IV. The Perpendicular Style (1377—1547) . ' 72 

V. Renaissance (1547—1603) 102 

VI. The Seventeenth Century and After .115 

VII. Heraldry in Glass 130 

VIII. Last Words 145 

Aids to Further Study 152 

Index 155 


by Google 


Our Lady and the Divine Child. Harlow 


Fragment of border and quarry. Roydon 

The Ascension. Le Mans .... 

Martyrdom of St Gervasius. Le Mans 

Our Lady enthroned. Le Mans 

The Money-changers. Le Mans 

Figure and canopy (fragment). Wilton 

White window. Westwell .... 

Trellis window. Merton College, Oxford . 

St Eldward, K. and 0. Stapleford Abbots 

St Edmund, Bp. and C. Abbess Roding 

Head of our Lady. Kingsdown 

Perpendicular quarries .... 

Symbol of St Mark. Netteswell 

Louis II of Anjou. Le Mans 

Arms of Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou. Ockholt 

Our Lady visiting St Elizabeth. Great Ilford 

Joab slaying Amasa. Great Ilford .... 

Arms of William Cecil, Lord Burghley. Great Pamdon 

Arms of Wollaye. Latton .... 

The adoration of the Shepherds. Lambourne (from Baden) 

Arms of France (ancient). Selling .... 

Punning device on quarry 

Arms of Norreys and Beaufort. Ockholt . 
Arms of Sir John Gresham. (Jreat Ilford 
Merchant's mark of Sir John Gresham. Great Ilford 
Gresham badge. Great Ilfonl 





























by Google 


Note. — The Le Mans examples are from Hucher's Book on Le 
Mans Cathedral, those at Wilton, Westwell, Merton College, 
Kingsdown and Selling are from Winston's Styles in Ancient 
Glctss Painting^ the arms at Ockholt are from Lysons' Magna 
Britannia — Berkshire^ and the remainder are from drawings by 
the writer, some of which are in the Victoria and Albert Museum, 
South Kensington. 

Thanks are due to the Catholic Publishing Co., Ltd. and to the 
Editor of The Catholic Fireside for the loan of blocks of some of 
the illustrations. 


by Google 


by Google 



The initial diflSculty in the way of acquiring 
a correct notion of the value and use of stained 
and painted glass is the fact that the old coloured 
windows — our only trustworthy guides — have come 
down to our time in so fragmentary a state. Take, 
with one or two exceptions, any old parish church in 
England : very seldom is all the old glass left, even 
in a single window. Here is a figure of a saint, there 
the symbol of an evangelist ; in one window is a 
mutilated border and, in another, are a few quarries 
with designs of leafage, small animals or birds, or 

As illustrative of this state of things with regard 
to parish churches, we may mention the 13th century 
glass in the south chancel window at Chetwode 
church, Bucks. ; the medallion representing Henry H's 
penance for his part in the murder of St Thomas of 
Canterbury, formerly at RoUright church, Oxfordshire, 
and now in the Bodleian Library, Oxford ; the history 

E. 1 


by Google 


of St Laurence in fifty panels in the east window of 
Ludlow church ; the Jesse window in the Cordwainers* 
chapel and the pilgrims receiving St Edward's ring 
from St John in the Fletchers* chapel, both in the 
same church, and the very fragmentary glass — ^a 
few loose pieces only — at Knowle church, Warwick- 

The case of Knowle deserves attention, for it is 
an excellent illustration of the extent to which, since 
the 17th century, ancient glass has disappeared from 
our churches. When Sir William Dugdale, herald 
and antiquary, visited this church in 1640, he found 
three, painted windows which had been set up by 
Thomas Dabridgecourt, Sir William Wigston and one 
Aylesbury, also, in the tracery, seven shields of arms 
borne by angels. By 1793 all that was left of the 
windows was a fragment of an inscription — ^these 
words only, "p bono statu orate" — ^and a few frag- 
ments of saints and kneeling figures, while, of the 
heraldry, there remained only two shields. To-day 
we shall look in vain in the windows of Knowle 
church (which was restored in 1860) for the smallest 
fragment of this old glass, although it is true that 
a few scraps of it are kept in a box at the church. 

To these we may add Shrewsbury church with its 
great 14th century Jesse window and the splendid Per- 
pendicular church at Cirencester, where, in St John's 
chapel, is some 15th century glass. 


by Google 

Fragment of border and quarry (Roydon) 



In the remains of conventual churches we can 
hardly expect much old glass, for they were, for the 
most part, dismantled of their furniture and fittings 
at the Dissolution of the Religious Houses. Such of 
them, however, as still possess old glass tell the same 
tale as the parish churches. At the Benedictine 
Abbey church. Great Malvern, there is some 15th 
century glass in the aisles representing the life of 
Our Lord, the acts of St Wulstan of Worcester and 
figures of the four great Doctors of the Church and 
also those of Prince Arthur and Sir Reginald Bray. 
In St Anne's chapel there, also, we may see a picture 
of the Last Judgment and one of the Creation, while 
at Little Malvern Priory church, there is some glass 
of Edward IV's time in the east window. The Cis- 
tercian Abbey church of Merevale in Warwickshire 
can boast only a few fragments. In the magnificent 
nave — almost all that is left — of the mitred Abbey of 
Waltham Holy Cross, Essex, not a scrap of the old 
windows is left, though, perhaps, we ought to claim 
the well-known perpendicular glass in the east window 
at St Margaret's, Westminster, as belonging to Wal- 
tham Abbey, for it was there, by gift of Henry VIII, 
or possibly, Henry VII, for a few years. 

From Westminster Abbey the ancient glass has 
all but disappeared. The clerestory windows of 
Henry VII's chapel, the glass in which set the pattern 
for that in King's College chapel, Cambridge, now 


by Google 


contain only some fragments which were formerly in 
the Lady chapel ; in the west windows of the aisles 
are other remains and, in the Jerusalem Chamber, 
are fragments of early 13th century glass. 

At Tewkesbury a little 14th century glass is left, 

and, at Dunster Priory church in Somersetshire, 

there are, among other fragments, a pilgrim's hat 

with escallop-shells, and a crown, all that are left of 

a head of St James of Compostella and the figure of 

la king, which were complete in 1808. There is, also, 

( at Dunster a quarry decorated with a pastoral staff 

^and a scroll bearing the words, "W. Donesteere 

r Abbas de Cliva," a reference to William Seylake, 

I Abbot of Cleeve in 1420. 

I In the 18th century the glass of the great east 
window — a tree of Jesse— was still in situ, but by 
I 1808 only a few fragments of it were left In 1808, 
_ too, the arms of Luttrell were in a window of the 
I north aisle of Dunster church, but they are no longer 

In the college chapels at Oxford and at Cambridge, 
the loss and destruction of old glass have been, 
perhaps, as considerable as in the parish churches. 
At Oxford, the I7th century windows of University 
College chapel, painted by Abraham van Linge, 
shortly before the Civil War, have survived, and at 
Balliol, there are, in the side windows of the chapel, 
fragments of 16th century glass from the old chapel 


by Google 


which was destroyed in 1856, while other pieces — 
arms of benefactors — of 14th century date, are in the 
windows of the lower Library. Here, in some cases, 
while the shields of arms have been preserved, the 
inscriptions under them have been destroyed, highly 
illustrative of the carelessness with which painted 
glass was formerly treated. Merton, in the side 
windows of its chapel, can shew the oldest glass in 
Oxford, that given, in 1283, by Henry de Maunsfield, 
who subsequently became Chancellor of the Uni- 

In the Library of the same college is some old 
glass which bears testimony, in the "Agnus Dei" 
(the Holy Lamb), often repeated, to the former dedi- 
cation to St John the Baptist 

In the chapel at Queen's College there is some 
early 16th century glass, which, with the exception of 
that in the two western windows on each side, was 
restored and repainted by the younger Van linge in 
the 17th century and again much restored by one 
of the Prices in 1717. William of Wykeham's New 
College retains its original 14th century windows in 
the ante-chapel, except in the west window, where is 
the well-known painting of the Nativity by Thomas 
Jervais, from Sir Joshua Reynolds's cartoons. 

The windows in the chapel proper at New College 
contain good 17th century Flemish glass, though 
those on the south side were largely repaired and 


by Google 


repainted by William Price in mid-eighteenth century. 
Lincoln College chapel, consecrated in 1631, contains 
foreign glass of the 16th century, while the chapel of 
All Souls has much of the original 15th century 
glazing left, amongst which are portraits of John of 
Gaunt, Archbishop Chichele the Founder, and of 
Henry V and Henry VI. 

Magdalen College, in the ante-chapel, has some 
17th century glass and, at the west end, is a large 
window, the Last Jvdgment^ of the same period, which 
was, to a great extent, repainted in 1794. In Trinity 
College chapel there is no old glass, but in the 
Library is a figure of St Thomas of Canterbury and 
other fragments. 

If we add to this list the windows in the chapel at 
Wadham College, we shall have a fairly accurate 
idea of the old glass in Oxford Colleges which has 
survived the ill-treatment to which painted glass has 
been subjected from the end of the reign of Henry VIII 
to, almost, the present day. The Wadham chapel 
windows are contemporary with the foundation of 
the college (1613) and were all painted by the Flemish 
artist. Van Linge the elder. 

At Cambridge, the condition of the old picture- 
windows is, on the whole, much the same, although 
there, in King's College chapel, we find an instance 
of the whole of the ancient glass having been pre- 
served to the present day. In the chapel at King's 


by Google 


the twenty-four side windows and the east window 
are filled with glass made and set up in the reign of 
Henry VIII, which is designed to shew forth pictorially 
the Christian scheme of religion — " the story of the 
old lawe and of the new lawe," as it is expressed in 
the contract for the making of the windows — in much 
the same way as the windows at Fairford church to 
which we shall presently come. There is, however, 
a variation in treatment ; for, whereas, at Fairford 
the tale of our Lord's earthly life and of the events 
which led up to it are grouped together in the 
eastern half of the church and the history of His 
Church is in the western part, at King's College 
chapel there is no such sharp division. In other 
respects, however, the scheme is the same at King's 
as at Fairford : in particular, the east and west 
windows at both have similar subjects, though it 
should be noted that the glass in the west window at 
King's is not ancient, having been given in 1879 by 
a former Fellow of the College. In the side-chapels 
of King's College chapel are also, besides more 16th 
century glass, some figures — Apostles and Prophets, 
King David and Bishops — of early 15th century date 
brought from elsewhere ; perhaps, Ramsey Abbey 
after its dissolution. 

In the chapel (built 1632) at Peterhouse, where, 
it is on record, the Puritan visitors defaced six angels 
which they found in the windows — the east window 


by Google 


is 17th century work, a Crucijiooion, mainly copied 
from Rubens' picture of the same subject at Antwerp. 
At Trinity College, in one of the oriel windows of the 
Hall is a 15th century figure of Richard, Duke of 
Gloucester (afterwards Richard III) and there is 
much 17th century, and later, collegiate heraldry in 
the other windows. 

If we turn to the Cathedrals — taking a few of 
them only — they tell, for the most part, the same 
story of destruction and neglect At Canterbury, of 
all the painted glass with which every window was 
filled, we see to-day only, in the great west window, 
fragments from other pai*ts of the cathedral, among 
them the arms of Richard II ; in the end wall of the 
north transept pictures of Edward IV and his Queen, 
their daughters, the two Princes murdered in the 
Tower of London, and a headless figure of St Thomas 
which was broken by Richard Culmer — " Blue Dick," 
the Canterbury fanatic — ^in Commonwealth days. In 
the south transept is some glass of the Perpendicular 
period, and, in the north choir aisle, between the 
transepts, is ancient glass, probably set up shortly 
after 1220. This last-mentioned glass and that of 
about the same date, in the windows of the Trinity 
chapel and the Corona, which represent the miracles 
of St Thomas of Canterbury, are the most interesting 
in the cathedral. In the north-eastern transept, also, 
are fragments from the windows of the north choir aisle. 


by Google 


Of all the English cathedrals York has fared the 
best with regard to preservation of its old glass. 
Every window in the nave and aisles, except four, 
retains its ancient glazing. The earliest in point of 
date is that of the first half of the 13th century in 
the windows of the north clerestory. The famous 
"five sisters" window in the main north transept 
has preserved its original early English glazing. The 
glass in the aisle- windows ranges from early 14th 
century to the reign of Henry VI, and one window 
of the choir — the easternmost on the south side — 
contains 16th century glass brought from the church 
of St Nicholas at Rouen. The perpendicular ghiss 
of the great east window representing stories from 
the Old Testament and of the Last Judgment with 
figures of the Heavenly Hierarchy and of the Saints, 
is the original glazing, as is, also, that of the 14th 
century in the west window of the nave. 

At Rochester all the ancient glass disappeared 
during the religious changes of the 16th century, at 
St Albans is a little 14th century heraldry of great 
interest and Chichester cannot shew even fragments 
of the old window-glazing. Winchester retains more, 
though none of the earliest period. In the west nave 
window is about the oldest glass in the cathedral, 
perhaps of the time of Bishop Edingdon (1346 — 1366) 
who built the west end. In its present state, how- 
ever, this glass is very fragmentary, and is, no doubt. 


by Google 


made up of remains of several windows. In the 
aisles and clerestories we find late perpendicular 
glass, and the glazing of the east window of the 
choir, except the three figures in the top tier, which 
are modern, may be dated about 1525. An interesting 
feature of this window are five shields shewing Bishop 
Fox's arms, impaling those of the Sees which he 
successively held — Exeter, Bath, Wells, Durham 
and Winchester — ^and his motto, Est Deo gratia. In 
the Lady chapel, also, are remains of old glass con- 
temporary with their perpendicular settings. 

It is commonly alleged, as the reason for the 
poverty of Salisbury cathedral in the matter of old 
glass, that the architect Wyatt, who worked his will 
on the old church from 1782 to 1791, broke down an 
enormous quantity of the ancient window-glazing and 
threw it by cart-loads into the city ditch. Probably 
he did, and it is, no doubt, also true, as is usually said, 
that Bishop Jewell, in Elizabethan days, removed much 
of the old glasa It may, nevertheless, be doubted 
whether these iconoclasts acted very differently from 
other men of their respective times, though they may 
have been rather more thorough in their methods 
than others, and, after all, there are ancient cathe- 
drals and many other great churches with which 
Wyatt had nothing to do, with even slighter remains 
of old painted glass than Salisbury. A few scraps, 
however, were left, for, in 1830, the three west 


by Google 


windows of the nave and aisles were filled with 
fragments of various dates from all parts of the 
cathedral — a proceeding almost as reprehensible as 
Wyatt's doings. In the great west window are some 
Early English medallions and fragments of a Jesse 
window of the first half of the 13th century, of a 
Crucifixion and some perpendicular and renaissance 
glass said to have been brought from Rouen. At the 
bottom of the three lights is a row of shields bearing 
the arms of England, France, Provence, the Earl of 
Cornwall, Clare and Bigod. In the west windows of 
the aisle are remains of 13th century borders and 
other patterns and, curiously enough, in the head of 
the south aisle west window, are the arms (dated 
1562) of Bishop Jewell, to whom the destruction of 
so much of the old glass at Salisbury is attributed. 
In the upper lights of the east window of the south 
transept is some Early English glass. 

At Oxford cathedral, in the Latin chapel, are 
three complete 14th century windows, and there is 
an interesting piece of work in the window at the 
west end of the north aisle of the nave painted by 
the younger Van Linge — Jonah and his gourd. In 
the south choir aisle is a reminiscence of the dissolu- 
tion of the monastic houses in a 17th century window 
containing a portrait of Robert King, last Abbot of 
Osney and first Bishop of Oxford, with the Abbey in 
the background, while, in the east window of the 


by Google 


soath transept, is some 14th century glass, notably 
a panel of the murder of St Thomas of Canterbury, 
the saint, as is often the case, being headless. 

Exeter possesses, as things go, a fair amount of 
old glass. In the great east window is some early 
14th century glass, much of which was in the window 
which preceded the present one, itself as old as 1390 
or thereabouts. The survivals from the older window 
seem to be SS. Margaret, Catherine, Mary Magdalen, 
Peter, Paul and Andrew ; the others — SS. Sidwell, 
Helena, Michael, Margaret, Catherine, Edward and 
Edmund, and Abraham, Moses and Isaiah — being 
contemporary with the existing window. In the 
central bay of the north clerestory are four headless 
figures of the Early Decorated period, while in the 
Magdalen and Gabriel chapels is some 16th century 
glass. At Wells there is, probably, more old glass 
than ill most of the English cathedrals. In the west 
window of the nave are figures of King Ina and 
Bishop Ralph of Shrewsbury of the Perpendicular 
period and renaissance panels representing the life 
of St John the Baptist, brought from Rouen and 
Cologne in 1670. The great east window and the 
two clerestory windows of the choir adjoining it are 
ancient (about 1340). In the east window is A stem 
of Jesse and also, in the tracery, a picture of the 
Last Judgment, which is continued in the tracery of 
the clerestory windows. In the lower lights of the 


by Google 


easternmost window of the north clerestory are 
figure and canopy subjects, one of them St George. 
In St Catherine's chapel and the south choir aisle 
are many fragments, while the windows of the Lady 
chapel are filled with glass of various dates. The 
east window of this chapel was restored by Willement 
and contains two tiers of figures under canopies, in 
the tracery above being angels holding shields with 
the Instruments of the Passion. Other traceries shew 
an evangelist's symbol and heads of patriarchs and 
saints. In the Chapter Hou&e are fragments, among 
them the arms of England ancient (Le. the lilies of 
France in the first and fourth quarters and th^^ 
English lions in the second and third) and those of 
Mortimer. In the Vicars' chapel are the arms of 
Bishop Bubwith (1407— 1424)— three chaplets of 
holly leaves. 

These examples of the present-day condition of 
ancient painted glass in some old English cathedrals, 
churches and chapels will suffice not only to shew 
how comparatively little of the old glass is left in 
any one building, but to demonstrate the difficulty 
of appreciating what has been lost or destroyed. 

Time was when these and similar fragments were 
but minute parts of an ordered arrangement for 
admitting light through coloured media into the 
building which they adorned, an arrangement which 
was itself a part only of a great scheme comprising 


by Google 


the whole building and everything belonging to it, 
its architecture, its wall-paintings and its coloured 
and gilded pillars and arches, and the wood-work of 
roof and doors and screens. All being so richly 
coloured and gilt, why should the windows be ex- 
cepted ? They were not : the broken border seen 
to-day ran round the whole window, the saint's figure 
was part of a small picture set in the midst of a 
trellis of vine shoots, oak-sprigs or ivy-leaves. The 
evangelist's symbol, to-day probably broken, was one 
of four — the winged man of St Matthew, the winged 
lion of St Mark, the winged ox of St Luke and the 
eagle of St John — which filled the tracery lights 
where now we see the one solitary symbol. All the 
windows were wholly stained and painted, thus con- 
tributing to the total effect — the harmony which 
resulted from the unity of effort of mason, wood- 
carver, painter and worker in glass. 

In a sense, however, this decorative or artistic 
effect was but an accident, though one which invari- 
ably resulted from the mediaeval craftsman's work. 
Primarily, the idea underlying all this unified beauty 
in old buildings was usefulness— the notion of means 
to an end. Craftsmen of the Middle Ages knew 
nothing of art for art's sake : their object was to 
produce something useful and fitting to the end in 
view. If their work was beautiful it was so because 
it answered that end and according to the degree in 


by Google 


which it did so. Now the end to be kept in view 
in all work connected with a church was, to the 
mediaeval mind, instruction — the driving home, as 
it were, through the senses, of the Church's message. 
As paintings on walls and pillars (such as we may see 
to-day in many churches, notably the 13th century 
church of Our Lady and St Laurence at Trier and 
St Albans' Abbey church) shewed, to learned and 
unlearned alike, the story of the Church's life 
through the centuries, so painted windows did the 

It follows, therefore, that any enquiry into the 
origin and history of stained and painted gla^, if 
exhaustively carried out, must embrace very much 
more than that one subject It branches out into 
every craft that is concerned with the history of 
buildings of all sorts — of cathedrals and parish and 
collegiate churches, of monastic houses, colleges, 
castles and palaces, moot-halls and manor-houses, 
for in all of these glass painting was used, in con- 
junction with the other crafts and arts, to minister 
to the ends for which such buildings were set up. 

This notion of unity of endeavour and its results 
being always borne in mind, we may with advantage 
turn to the classical example — as it may be called — 
of the use to which painted windows were put in old 
days — the church of Fairford in Gloucestershire, where 
every window retains its ancient painted glass. Even 


by Google 


at Fairford, however, we must bear in mind that 
owing to the destruction of much of the old internal 
colour — wall-paintings and such-like — we cannot cor- 
rectly estimate the original colour eflfect of the old 
glass. But, although the harmony which resulted 
from painted wall-spaces between the coloured win- 
dows is lost, the subject scheme of the Fairford 
windows can still be worked out and we can see what 
was the teaching end for which they were adapted. 

The plan of Fairford church is a nave with north 
and south aisles, chancel and central tower. The east 
end of each aisle forms a chapel. Our Lady's chapel 
on the north and the chapel of the Blessed Sacrament 
on the south. These chapels are separated from the 
aisles, of which they respectively form part, and from 
the chancel, by carved wooden screens, and the 
chancel-screen across the nave may be treated as 
connecting together the western screens of the chapels, 
so that the whole church may be said to be divided by 
screens into two parts, an eastern and a western. The 
significance of this arrangement in connection with 
the subjects depicted in the windows we shall presently 

Since Fairford church — ^as we see it to-day — dates 
from the last decade of the 15th century, we should 
expect to find its windows wide and lofty, and so they 
are. In the north aisle there are five windows of 
four lights each, and in the Lady chapel are three 


by Google 


windows, two on the north of four lights each and 
one in the east wall of five lights. In the chancel is 
a great east window of five lights divided into two 
tiers, and one window of three lights in the south 
wall, while the chapel of the Blessed Sacrament has 
the same window arrangement as the north aisle 
chapel. In the south aisle there are four windows 
only of the same size as those in the north aisle, an 
arrangement rendered necessary by the south door 
occupying the space which one window would have 
filled. Besides all these, there are eight windows of 
three lights each — four on either side — ^in the cleres- 
tory, and a large window flanked by two smaller ones 
in the west wall. 

What are the subjects portrayed in these twenty- 
seven spacious wall-openings and of what practical 
use were they intended to be ? Their main purpose 
was to give a pictorial representation of Christian 
theology. In that part of the church which is east- 
ward of the dividing line of screens, are set forth in 
picture- windows the facts, as taught by the Church, 
on which Christianity rests, and, in the western part 
of the church are what may be called the inferences 
to be drawn fi"om those facts, viz. the Apostles' Creed, 
the Church's teaching as symbolised by her ancient 
doctors, the Church's life as shewn forth by her saints 
and martyrs, and the final Judgment, the consumma- 
tion of all things temporal. 


by Google 


It would be impossible within the limits at our 
disposal to attempt a detailed account of the subjects 
of these windows. Speaking generally, the Lady 
chapel and the nave window immediately outside it 
on the west, set forth the story of Our Lord's birth, 
of the events which preceded it, and of His early 
years, beginning with the Temptation of Eve, Moses 
at the Burning Bush, Gideon and the Fleece, and the 
Qvjeen of Sheha offering gifts to Solomon, Old Testa- 
ment types of the Annunciation, the Conception oj 
Our Lord, His Incarnation and the Adoration of 
the three Kings respectively. 

The last picture in the Lady chapel represents 
Our Lord as a child teaching the Doctors in the 
Temple, while the lower half of the great east window 
in the chancel takes up the story of the closing scenes 
of His earthly life — His triumphal entry into Jeru- 
salem, His Agony in the Garden, the judgmsnt of 
Pontius Pilate, and Our Lords Scourging at the 
Pillar. Above these is the picture of the Crucifixion 
which occupies the full breadth of the window. In 
the south window of the chancel are three lights 
shewing the taking doum from the Cross, the En- 
tombment and Owr Lord preaching to the Spirits in 

In the Blessed Sacrament chapel the centre 
light of the east window is devoted to the Trams- 
figuration of Our Lord as a type of the miracle of 



by Google 


Transubstantiation, while the other windows shew the 
Resurrection and the principal events of Our Lord's 
subsequent life on earth, ending with His Ascension 
into Heaven. This long list of Christian facts, as we 
have called them, ends with the Descent of the Holy 
Ghost upon the Apostles. 

Now for the inferences from these facts. In the 
first three windows of the south aisle — counting from 
the east — ^are the twelve Apostles, four in each 
window, and each one bearing a scroll containing 
a part of the Apostles' CreeA This is in accordance 
with ecclesiastical tradition, which teaches that, before 
the Apostles separated for their missionary labours, 
they composed this creed, each contributing a portion. 
St Peter, bearing a scroll with the inscription, "Credo 
in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, Creatorem coeli et 
terrsB," begins the series and St Matthias ends it 
with the closing words of the creed "Et vitam seter- 

To balance and complement this apostolical com- 
pany we find opposite to them, in the north aisle, 
figures of the twelve Old Testament prophets, be- 
ginning with Jeremiah, whose scroll contains the 
words, "Patrem invocabitis qui fecit et condidit 
coelos," opposite to St Peter, and ending with Abdias 
(Obadiah), opposite to St Matthias, with the words 
"Et erit regnum Domini." So far the Creed. 

There remain the westernmost windows of the 


by Google 


aisles. These contain, on the south, the four great 
Doctors of the Church — SS. Jerome, Gregory, Ambrose 
and Augustine of Hippo — and, on the north, opposite 
to them the four evangelists ; thus completing what 
may be called the direct teaching of the Church. 

Next, going aloft to the clerestory, we see results 
of that teaching symbolised by figures, on the south 
side, of saints and martyrs — Dorothy, Sebastian, 
Agnes, Margaret, a Bishop, perhaps St Thomas of 
Canterbury, an Emperor and two Kings, a Pope and 
two Cardinals, and, opposite to them — opposite in 
the moral order as well as in actual position — ^are 
twelve figures of persecutors, Annas and Caiaphas 
with Judas, Herod, Diocletian and others. 

Last of all, we turn to the western wall of the 
church, where, in the centre, is a great window of 
seven long lights, divided, like the east window, by 
a transom. 

In the upper part Our Lord, as final judge of all, 
sits enthroned, surrounded by the Heavenly Hierarchy 
in circles — Angels, Cherubim and Seraphim and the 
twelve Apostles. On the right hand of the Great 
Judge is a lily and, on a scroll above His shoulder, 
the word " Misericordia," while, on His left, is a 
sword, and a scroll inscribed " Justitia" — the lily of 
mercy and the sword of justice. Before Him kneel 
Our Lady and St John the Baptist as suppliants for 
worldlings, while the orb of the world, glowing as 


by Google 


with fire and its buildings crumbling into ruin, is 
beneath His feet 

In the lower half of this window is the result of 
the Last Judgment, St Michael dividing the lost souls 
from the saved. On his right is the Paradise of the 
Blessed, on his left the eternal home of the con- 
demned ones, and, around his feet, are the dead 
arising from their graves. On either side of this great 
picture is a smaller window — the northern one shewing 
the Judgment of Solomon, and that on the south the 
Judgment of David upon the Amalekite who slew 
Saul, both types of the final Doom between them. 

The essential fact to bear in mind is that this 
arrangement in painted glass at Fairford is the great 
surviving example in the British Isles of what, in 
more or less varied form, we might have seen in 
every church, great and small, in mediaeval Europe. 
Small churches would compress the series, larger 
ones would amplify it, and its arrangement might be 
varied, but, certainly, in the western world, the plan 
was universal from the 12th century onwards. The 
windows of the eastern end of the church set forth 
the tale of the Gospel, the nave shewed the prophets 
and Apostles, and the west window reminded folk as 
they left church of the last scene of all — the Great 

The fragmentary state of old ipainted glass seems 
to be due to several causes of which fanatical violence 


by Google 


is, probably, the least It has long been the fashion 
to throw the blame very largely upon the Puritans, 
and, more particularly, upon CromwelVs soldiers. 
There is, no doubt, a mea^iure of justice in this view, 
for there are instances on record of smashing of 
picture-windows in Commonwealth days both by 
fanatical civilians and by Parliamentary soldiers. 
Examples of the one we have in Blue Dick's rage 
against the painted windows at Canterbury and the 
fanatic Dowsing's window-smashing in the course of 
a journey, undertaken for the purpose, through parts 
of East Anglia, and of the other in the destruction of 
painted glass in Winchester cathedral and other 
great churches by the Commonwealth soldiery. But 
these, and similar, outbreaks were more or less 
isolated acts of violence and it is certain that they 
could not account for the disappearance of the greater 
part of the ancient glass throughout England. Neither 
is there reason to believe that Queen Elizabeth's 
Ordinance for the destruction of superstitious painted 
windows in churches was generally obeyed. 

Here and there we come across instances of the 
intentional breaking of the old windows by church 
authorities — as at Long Melford, SuflTolk, where the 
churchwardens' accounts shew a payment of Il«. to 
"Fyrmyer the Glasyer of Sudburye for defacing of 
the sentences and imagerie in the glasse wyndowes " 
— but such cases are rare. 


by Google 


What actually happened in Elizabeth's days was, 
probably; consistent with what we are told by William 
Harrison, himself a country clergyman, Rector of 
Badwinter in Essex. He was the author of A 
Description of Englcmd, prefixed to Holinshed's 
Chronicle, published in 1577, and he tells us, in his 
Description, that " As for churches themselves, belles 
and times of morning and evening pmier remain as in 
time past, saving that all images, shrines, tabernacles, 
rood loftes and monuments of idolatrie are removed, 
taken down and defaced : Onlie the stories in glasse 
windowes excepted, which, for want of sufficient 
store of new stufie, and by reason of extreame charge 
that should grow by the alteration of the same into 
white panes throughout the realme, are not altogether 
abolished in most places at once, but by little and 
little sufiered to decaie that white glass may be set 
up in their roomes." 

Neglect, therefore, more than violence, was the 
enemy of the old glass through Tudor and Stuart 
days, and we may safely conclude that that fitctor, 
with the restoring zeal — often ill-instructed — of the 
last century and a half, are together responsible for 
the deplorable state to-day of ancient painted glass 
in England. 


by Google 



From the middle of the 7th century, when 
Benedict Biscop brought glass-workers from Gaul to 
glaze the windows of his stone churches at Wearmouth 
and Jarrow, glass, in buildings of the larger kind, 
was increasingly used in England in lieu of the horn 
laminae and oiled cloth theretofore employed to close 
window openings. The exact date when plain glass 
— itself of varied hues — began to give way to glass 
intentionally coloured and arranged in patterns we 
do not know, but, from the remains which exist in 
continental churches, we may infer that the glass 
which filled the small, round-headed windows of the 
churches set up in England in late Anglo-Saxon and 
early Nonnan times was coloured, and did not, 
materially, differ in structure and colour from that 
of the later Norman and Early English periods which 
immediately followed them. 

It is likely that accidental varieties in colour, 
arising from the crudeness of the methods of glass 
manufacture, originated the idea of applying colour 


by Google 


to glass, and it is easy to see how the idea, oDce 
formed, led to ordered arrangements of pieces of glass, 
diversely coloured, and how they, in time, resulted in 
the geometrical patterns and picture panels of the 
late Norman and Early English styles. It is probable, 
too, that the art of glass-mosaic had a part in the 
early development of the coloured window. 

Glass wall-mosaics for interior decoration were in 
use in the East as early as the 6th century, and what 
more likely than that the glazier would think of 
utilising the small pieces of glass used by the mosaic 
worker for the purposes of his own craft ? It must 
have been quite the obvious thing to set the pieces 
of glass in stucco or cement of some kind and the 
idea of the soft lead binding, grooved on both sides, 
would speedily follow. Indeed, it is said that alabaster 
was used in the great church of Santa Sophia, Con- 
stantinople, for glass setting. 

A point to remember is that binding of some sort 
was a necessity for early glaziers, for glass in those 
days was made only in small pieces, none of them 
large enough to fill any but the smallest window, and 
we can well understand how this necessary support, 
as patterns became more intricate, was made to 
follow the outlines of the design and grew into an 
integral part of it. Indeed, we may say that the lead 
binding of a painted window, besides holding together 
the pieces of glass of which the window is formed. 


by Google 


serves the same end as the black outline to figures 
and other objects which is an invariable feature of 
the miniatures and scroll-work in illuminated manu- 
scripts of the Middle Ages. 

This decorative as well as useful oflBce of lead 
binding is in no style more conspicuous than in that 
of the earliest painted window-glass of which we have 
any first-hand knowledge — ^that of the 11th, 12th and 
13th centuries. Especially is this noticeable in the 
geometrical and floral pattern windows of those 

The exactitude with which the lead binding 
follows the intricacies of the small patterns is largely 
productive of the sparkling jewel-like effect which is 
characteristic of early glass. 

The panels, once in the Sainte Chapelle, Paris, 
and now in the Victoria and Albert Museum, South 
Kensington, shew this quality very well. 

It is often said that the oldest painted windows 
in England are those in the Corona and Trinity 
chapel at Canterbury cathedral. Undoubtedly they 
belong to the style which we are considering and we 
may assume that the great lancets in which they are 
set, and which were finished by 1171, were originally 
filled with painted glass. The subject, however, of the 
present windows, the story of the miracles wrought 
by the intercession of St Thomas of Canterbury — 
which is shewn in a large number of medallions — 


by Google 


suggests a later date for them than one so near the 
time of his martyrdom, and we shall not be far wrong 
if we fix that date shortly after 1220, in which year 
the body of the saint was translated from the old 
shrine in the crypt to the new one in the Trinity 
chapel behind the High altar. Earlier than 1220 
these windows cannot well be, for, in one of them, 
is a representation of the new shrine set up in that 
year, and it may well be that they are later in the 
13th century even than 1220. 

The huge "five sisters" lancets at York, too, are 
sometimes brought forward as rivals to the Canter- 
bury windows in the matter of age. They, however, 
are made of white glass, with, comparatively, little 
colour in their borders, a style which came in rather 
later than the medallion style. 

On the whole it is not easy to locate the oldest 
piece of painted glass in the British Isles and it is 
quite possible that it may be found in some of the 
fragmentary glass which, from time to time, has been 
brought from the continent — ^from France in par- 
ticular — ^and leaded up in the windows of out-of-the- 
way rural churches. One may, indeed, though with 
diffidence, suggest that the four panels in the centre 
light of the east window at Rivenhall church, Essex, 
which were formerly in the apse of the church at 
Ch^nu in France, may be older than any of the 
original windows now existing in our churches. The 


by Google 

The Ascension (Le Mans) 


by Google 


pronounced Byzantine character of these medallions, 
which represent our Lord in glory, His Entombment, 
the Blessed Virgin Mary with Our Lord, and the 
Annunciation, inclines one to think that they are 
much earlier in date than the Canterbury windows. 

However the question may stand as to our own 
country, it is certain that for a sight of the oldest 
extant painted glass we must turn to France, whence 
the art of glass-painting came to England. In the 
cathedral at Le Mans we find what we seek in one 
of two windows which are the sole survivors of the 
windows of the earlier church, which was devastated 
by fire in 1134 and again in 1136. This window, 
representing the Ascension^ shows twelve figures, 
easily identified as the Apostles, looking up\^ards, 
besides the Blessed Virgin Mary — ^the central figure 
in the lower tier — who, according to the constant 
tradition of the Church, was present at the Ascension. 
The ascending figure of our Lord is absent, either 
because it was left to the imagination, or, as is more 
likely, because the upper part of the window has been 
lost Judging by similar extant compositions of the 
12th century, we should expect to find Our Lord's 
figure surrounded by angels above those of the 
Apostles. The date of this Ascermon window is 
probably as early as the episcopate of Bishop Hoel 
(1081 — 97), who is known to have glazed the windows 
of Le Mans cathedral, and a great French authority, 


by Google 


M. Hucher, suggests the year 1090. From the fieicile 
character of the drawing, especially as evidenced by 
the pose of the figures, we should judge that the 
artist was an adept in the execution of sacred 
pictures according to the ancient rules of Greek 
Christian art. Perhaps the next painted glass in 
point of age may be taken to be some of that in the 
Abbey church of St Denis in France, the windows 
of which were filled with coloured glass by Abbot 
Suger in the middle of the 12th century. 

It is necessary to bear in mind that there are 
two kinds of coloured windows generally recognised 
— ^pot-metal and enamel-painted The pot-metal 
window is the original and the only kind usually 
made until the middle of the 16th century, when the 
use of enamel-colours for glass-painting came into 
fashion. Pot-metal is the name given to glass which 
is coloured in the course of manufacture — in the 
crucible or pot — ^and which comes to the hands of 
the glass-painter in the form of small sheets of 
coloured glass, some blue, others green and so forth. 
From these sheets are cut pieces of glass as required 
by the artist's design; say, from. a sheet of ruby a 
piece to represent a mantle, from a sheet of blue 
a piece for sky, a clear white, or, in early times, a 
pink and sometimes brown piece for head, arms and 

When the design has, in this way, been made up, 


by Google 


the artist paints, with an opaque pigment called 
brown enamel, though it used to be purplish-grey 
and the French call it black (not to be confounded 
with enamel colours proper), upon the pieces of pot- 
metal the details of his design — the features, hair, 
hands, arms and feet of the figures and the folds 
of their garments and such-like. With the brown 
enamel he also puts in the shadows, using the pig- 
ment either thickly or thinly according to the density 
required. Thus, the only painting done by the artist 
is with brown enamel, the colour of the design being 
supplied by the pot-metaL This painting done, the 
pieces of glass are placed in the kiln, the heat of 
which makes the surface of the pot-metal to fuse 
just enough to cause the artist's work in brown 
enamel to be absorbed into and become part of, 
itself. When the baking is done, the pieces of pot- 
metal are handed over to the glazier, who binds 
them up, according to the artist's design, with grooved 
lead binding and the window is ready for fixing. 

This, ignoring minor technicalities, is the story of 
the making of every coloured window (with a few 
exceptions) from the earliest times to the 16th cen- 
tury, and it is the way in which nearly all coloured 
windows have been made since the revival of the 
ancient method in modern times. 

A word as to enamel-painting on glass for window 
purposes. As the pot-metal process probably grew 


by Google 


out of wall-mosaic, so the enamel process may have 
developed from painting on porcelain, and it is pos- 
sible that, if the use of enamel glass-colour had been 
known in the far-away days when the notion .of 
coloured windows arose, the pot-metal window would 
never have been. This would have been a mis- 
fortune, for enamel-colours lack the brilliancy of 

Enamel-painting is simply painting on sheets of 
white glass with prepared colours in the same way 
as one paints in oil or water-colour. Each colour — 
local colour, shadows and outline — is applied with 
the brush, a great contrast to pot-metal work, in 
which the local colour is supplied by the glass itself. 
When the picture or design is finished, the sheet is 
placed in the kiln and the work is completed in the 
same way as a pot-metal window. As enamel glass- 
colours were not invented till the 16th century, it is 
obvious that we shall not be concerned with enamel- 
painting until we reach that period 

It may be of interest to note that a kind of glass- 
painting, distinct both from pot-metal and enamel, 
has, from time to time, been in use, a process which 
has its advantage where extreme permanency is 
not desired. That process is painting on glass with 
colours ground in varnish, preferably amber varnish. 
This plan enables one to use every tint and every 
combination of tint, provided that they are transparent. 


by Google 


for the local colours ; it is applicable both to pot- 
metal and to sheet-glass and the troublesome and 
risky process of baking in the kiln is dispensed 
w|th. The eflfect of the baking, in the case of ordi- 
nary glass-colour, is to fix the colour to the glass, 
an effect which is attained, in varnish painting, by 
the amber medium, which, locking up, as it were, 
the colours in itself, adheres firmly to the glass. 
The writer can say from experience, that permanency, 
extending over many years, can be obtained by this 
system of varnish-painting on glass, and that the 
colours so treated become so well fixed and hard 
as to resist the action of a metal scraper. It may, 
therefore, be a question whether the process might 
not be adopted in cases where expense is a fe^^tor 
to be reckoned with — ^for varnish painting is cheaper 
than kiln-baked work — especially where painted 
windows are required for temporary churches or 
for domestic buildings. The process has also the 
sanction of antiquity, for Vasari tells us that it was 
used by old Flemish painters with success, and we 
know that the great artist Magister PavXuSy painted 
some windows in this medium for the Friars Minor 
at Venice and that copies of them were set up at the 
Franciscan Friary at Treviso. 

To return to the style which we have under con- 
sideration — the late Norman and Early English — all 
pot-metal work, of course. The earliest windows in 


by Google 


this style are made entirely of coloured glass, for it 
was not until later that white glass (really greenish- 
blue) decorated with patterns in brown enamel came 
into use. These early coloured windows, which follow 
immediately in point of date that very old glass of 
which the Ascension at Le Mans is an example, are 
of four kinds : 

Medallion windows, 

Figures with or without canopies, 

Jesse windows. 

Coloured patterns. 

The oldest medallion windows, those of the 12th 
century, ought, perhaps, to be placed in a class by 
themselves. They mark the transition from the 
Byzantine Ascension type to the more ornate medal- 
lion vnndows, such as those at Canterbury and the 
Sainte Chapelle, Paris. This transitional glass is 
very rare, and we may take, as typical of the class, 
a window at Le Mans cathedral which represents 
the story of SS. Gervasius and Protasius. In the 
Ascension type of window the divisional lines were 
rectangular, while in the later medallion style they 
were, on the whole, curvilinear. The SS. Gervasius 
and Protasius window shews both types. Of the centre 
panels some are square, others are circular, the top 
one is vesica-like and those at the sides are recti- 
linear. We also see, in the small spaces between the 





circular and square panels, the beginnings of those 
floral fillings-in which constitute so marked a charac- 
teristic of the later medallion windows. All these 
features are shewn in our illustration — three panels, 
originally in the fourth tier from the top of the 
window, representing the martyrdom of St Gervasius. 
Part of the border of the centre panel, as the illus- 
tration indicates, has been cut off in the setting, 
perhaps in modern times. While upon the subject 
of this transitional glass one is tempted to suggest 
that the Rivenhall panels may be of the same style. 

As time went on, medallions became less square 
and more curved in their main lines. For as good 
an early example as can be found, we may turn 
again to Le Mans and take one of the long lancets 
(13th century) which set forth the life of Our Lady. 
Our illustration shews the top panel of this window 
— Our Lady crowned and enthroned in the midst of 
flowers and holding them in her hands, a composition 
which, as M. Hucher remarks, recalls that passage 
of the Golden Legend : " Nazareth means a flower ; 
as St Bernard has said, Mary, herself a flower, wished 
to be bom of a flower, in a flower and at the time of 

Here we have square and round panels set, not 
one over the other, as in the 12th century, but in 
different lines of verticality, thus producing greater 
variety of outline and giving occasion for extension of 


by Google 






the flora] fillings-in and for the introduction of more 
elaboration in the backgrounds. In the base of this 
lancfet is an interesting feature. The donors of the 
window, the guild of money-changers of Le Mans, 

Oar Lady enthroned (Le Mans) 

are seen at their work. Here a money-changer is 
testing a coin, there one weighs money in a balance, 
and above these, we see others doing business with 
customers from whom they seem to be receiving 


by Google 


some goblets and handing over long purses ap- 
parently full of money in return. 

The Money-changers (Le Mans) 

This is an early example of a practice, common in 
all periods, whereby those at whose expense a work 
of sacred art had been made, were commemorated 


by Google 


in the work itsel£ In altar-pieces, wall-paintings 
and painted windows we see the same practice. 
Beginning, as at Le Mans and Chartres (where some 
thirty different guilds gave windows), with pictures 
of donors doing their usual work, the system had, 
by the 15th century, developed into an incorporation 
of the donor into the story portrayed. He or she 
would be represented in an attitude of devotion, as 
if actually in the presence of the holy persons shewn 
in the picture, and, sometimes, as in the act of being 
introduced by a patron-saint to their notice. Shields 
of donors* arms, too, would be placed beneath their 
figures, as in a 15th century canopy- window at St L6. 
In the renaissance glass pictures of the 16th and I7th 
centuries this custom was carried so far as to make 
the picture subservient to the donors, whose figures 
are painted disproportionately large. Interesting 
examples of this decadent practice may be seen at 
the church of Montfort L'Amaury near Paris, where 
carefully painted portraits of donors — kneeling in 
prayer, it is true — fill the foregrounds of the pictures. 
Perhaps an extreme instance is the 16th century 
Jesse window at St Stephen's church, Beauvais, in 
which portraits of reigning kings are introduced as 
blossoms on the genealogical tree. Onwards from 
the early part of the 16th century inscriptions, with 
or without coats of arms, were often substituted for 
the figures of donors. This practice is illustrated 


by Google 


by the little panels from Baden now in the south 
window of the chancel at Lambourne, Essex and by 
the four fragmentary windows, survivors of many, 
one of which bears the words, " Thys wendow made 
be the good man Thomas Francys 1526" — at South 
Mymms, Middlesex. As the object of all these forms 
of commemoration of donors was to remind posterity 
to offer prayers for their souls^ none of them occur 
in England from the days of Philip and Mary to the 
revival of Catholicism in the 19th century. 

The 13th century medallions became gradually 
more and more complex in design, the square panels 
disappearing and the circular ones becoming quatre- 
foiled, while background patterns became yet more 
elaborate. Another example from Le Mans — the 
adoration of the three kings — shews this very well. 
At Tours cathedral, also, are very similar designs 
made up of vertical rows of quatre-foils in the centre 
with side-rows of semi-circles. In all these later 
medallion windows should be noted the closeness 
of the lead binding and consequent smallness of the 
pieces of glass which, together, help to produce the 
jewel-like effect to which we have before referred. 
Also, it should be remembered that, in this style the 
panels are set in iron bars, indicated in the illus- 
trations by thick black lines. 

The St Thomas windows at Canterbury may be 
taken as typical of the fully developed medallion 


by Google 


style, and they afford the best, and very available 
examples in England for study of 13th century glass 
of this character. Their panels are of all possible 
shapes and their fillings-in and borders are very 
elaborate. They and the glass from the Sainte 
Chapelle in the Victoria and Albert Museum will 
amply satisfy a desire for first-hand knowledge of 
late medallion windows. 

Speaking generally, the use of coloured, to the 
exclusion of white, glass is characteristic of the early 
medallion style. Necessary contrasts were obtained 
by using light colours on dark, as e.g. light-coloured 
figures on a dark background or vice versd, and 
when, as in the case of the Canterbury windows, 
white or very light glass is extensively used, it is a 
sign of late work. 

It is obvious that 13th century medallion windows 
would have a tendency to exclude light Little or 
no white glass and much lead binding would, to- 
gether, ensure this. While the dim light thus caused 
is agreeable enough at the floor-level of a great 
church, we need, as a corrective, brighter light from 

Therefore it was that the clerestory windows in 
the 13th century were usually, but not always — ^as 
witness the clerestory medallion windows in the choir 
at Tours cathedral — glazed in a totally different style 
from the main windows. The idea being to admit light. 


by Google 


single figurod of great size — often under low canopies 
— the make of which would allow of the use of large 

Fragment of figure and canopy. Wilton. (13th century) 

pieces of glass, were inserted in the clerestory ; in 


by Google 


each window, as a rule, one figure, bui sometimes 
two, one above the other. At Canterbury, in the 
clerestory of the Trinity chapel, were such figures 
as these representing the Old Testament ancestors 
of Our Lord; but they are gone. Similar figures, 
however, noticeable for richness of colour in their 
dress and in backgrounds and borders, may be seen 
in the clerestories of many continental churches ; in 
particular, at the cathedrals of Chartres, Rheims, 
and Bourges. Such figures were, in this style, some- 
times placed elsewhere than in the clerestory. Several 
of them, each under a small low-crowned canopy — 
both figure and canopy being richly coloured — ^would, 
one above the other, fill a tall lancet To this class 
also belong figures without canopies on white or 
coloured grounds, of which the gigantic St Chris- 
topher (30 ft high) at Strasburg cathedral may be 
taken as an example. 

While in France the medallion type continued in 
use long after the single large lancet had given place 
to the muUioned and traceried window — as witness 
the Sainte Chapelle in Paris, built by St Louis in 
1248 — in England it was given up when muUioned 
windows were introduced. Then came the white 
windows, so-called, though they were not without 
colour here and there, especially in the borders. 
The finest specimen in England is the Five sisters 
window at York cathedral, five great lancets, with 


by Google 


clustered mulllons between them, occupying the 
whole width of the end wall of the north transept 
At Salisbury cathedral are five, unhappily, mutilated, 
windows of the same class, though earlier in date 
than the Five sisters, as is partly evidenced by the 
greater quantity of colour in the borders. 

At Westwell church, in Kent, is an interesting 
example of a small white window, made up of quarries 
(panes) decorated in brown enamel set in a white and 
coloured border. Bits of colour, too, are scattered 
about the quarries. Sometimes such coloured pieces 
are developed into panels containing pictures or 
shields of arms, as in the east window of Chetwode 
church, Bucks. In connection with these white win- 
dows we may notice, in late specimens, the beginning 
of a practice, which became common in the Decorated 
period, of placing a row of figures under low canopies 
(like the Wilton example) horizontally across the 
lower half of a window. 

Thirteenth century Jesse windows might, perhaps, 
be classed as medallions, for they are designed upon 
similar principles. In both kinds we have small 
pictures or single figures in panels the subjects of 
which have relation one to another. In the case 
of the Jesse, however, the panels are visibly con- 
nected by branches of a tree, the stock of which 
springs from the side of a recumbent human figure 
in the base of the design. A Jesse window then, is 


by Google 

White window (Westwell) 


by Google 


simply a genealogical tree, in the form in which 
family pedigrees have been drawn from very early 
times, shewing the earthly descent of Our Lord, as 
set forth in St Matthew's Gospel, from Jesse, the 
father of King David, through the Patriarchs and 
the Kings of Judah. The number of such ancestors 
varies with the size of the window and the period ; 
in the early Je%»e at Chartres cathedral there are 
four only, all kings, while, in later examples, there 
are as many as fifty. In 13th century Jesses the 
figures are seated, holding the branches of the tree 
with both hands, while, in the latest examples (16th 
century), they are, usually, half-length figures issuing 
from flowers. Most of the continental cathedrals, 
notably Chartres and Beauvais, can shew 13th cen- 
tury Jesse windows or fragments of them, and in 
England, besides remains of Jesses of the same 
period at Canterbury, York, and elsewhere, there 
are many panels, more than is generally supposed, 
which have once been parts of such windows, scat- 
tered up and down the country in out-of-the-way 
churches. An example is the central of the three 
lancets already referred to at Westwell church, Kent, 
which contains fragments of panels shewing pictures 
in the life of Our Lord, a distinct variety of the 
Jesse window, and it may, perhaps, be the case that 
the Rivenhall panels belonged to the same type. 
Jesses are usually, or have originally been, in eastern 


by Google 


chancel windows or in north or south walls of tran- 
septs, and very often, as at Westwell, in a central 
lancet flanked by white windows. 

As to the coloured-pattern windows, such as we 
see at St Denis, they are rare, and, as is the case 
with the mixed white and colour pattern, which 
grew out of them, there are no known examples in 
England. The predominant colours in the Early 
English period were red and blue, the red or ruby 
very streaky and the blue sapphire-like in colour, 
either very deep or very light The yellow was cold 
and greenish in tone, very unlike the bright hue of 
the yellow stain introduced in the 14th century. For 
flesh tints pink, or even brown, glass was used. The 
glass itself was thick, and, also, uneven, a circum- 
stance to which it owed some, at least, of its sparkle. 

The 11th, 12th and 13th century figures, like all 
well-designed figures intended to be viewed from a 
much lower level than their own, were dispropor- 
tionately tall, and, of some of them, those of the 
later period, may be characterised as stiff in drawing; 
nothing can be better than the easy pose and swing 
of the earlier ones: as witness the figures in the 
Ascension at Le Mans. 

One feature of the glass of this period should be 
noted: the floral ornaments are purely classical in 
design. This fact, illustrating, as it does, the great 
doctrine of evolution as applied to the arts, shews that 


by Google 


the early glass-painters had received the artistic tra- 
ditions of ancient Rome and Greece and proves that 
glass-painting, in those early days when first we hear 
of it, was no parvenu, but had legitimately developed 
along the same lines as the other decorative crafts 
from the works of the great artists of antiquity. 
We shall see better the significance of this matter 
of orderly development when we come to the 16th 


THE DECORATED STYLE (1272 — 1377) 

The story of painted glass, in so far as it has 
developed along legitimate lines, has been a con- 
tinuous one. There is no moment at which we can 
say that one style has ended and another has begun : 
change is gradual, the leading features of the one 
style fading imperceptibly into those of its successor. 
This is in the nature of things : the lives and daily 
work of those craftsmen who have lived in the last 
days of a style survive the date at which it is 
commonly said to end. They go on using glass of 
much the same texture and tone, their colours and 

B. 4 


by Google 


methods of work change little, but all the time the 
tendency is towards yariation, mainly in details. In 
this slow fashion the Early English style melted into 
the Decorated, till, at last, we get the late 14th 
century window with its masses of white and yellow 
glass contrasting with great splashes of colour — 
figures, shields or picture panels — scattered about its 

Although we could easily assign any such window 
to its proper style, and, with equal certainty, tell 
the approximate date of a 13th century medallion 
window, we should find the task of tracing the steps 
which led from the earlier to the later window a 
long and intricate one. The laws which govern the 
evolution of the works of man, like those which deal 
with natural phenomena, are, for the most part, slow 
and gradual in operation : the cataclysmic has little 
share in progress. 

The earliest of the many influences which brought 
about the change of style from Early English to 
Decorated work seems to have been a tendency to 
naturalism in the drawing of flowers and leaves. At 
first sight, there is but little difference between the 
border of the white window at Westwell and that 
at Roydon shewn in our first chapter. A second 
glance, however, shews that the coloured orna- 
ments (features of both designs) vary considerably 
in treatment. The Westwell design is stiff" and 


by Google 


conventional while the other, especially the stalk, is 

So gradual indeed was the change, that it was not 
until the first decade of the 14th century was nearing 
its end that any readily noticeable difierence in style 
was apparent About that time two causes — one 
the result of orderly development and the other of 
an accidental discovery — combined to produce dis- 
tinct variation from the Early English type. First, 
the naturalistic school developed rapidly : exact 
copies of foliage — oak, ivy, vine, maple — ^took the 
place of the conventional leaves, modelled on classical 
examples, of the Early English period. Nor did 
naturalism stop here, for the leaves were made to 
spring from tendrils and branches issuing from a 
central stock. The fruits, too, were shewn — acorns, 
ivy-berries or grapes. Foliage such as this was made 
to run over the white glass the leads of which were 
arranged in geometrical form — reminiscent of the 
Early English period. To complete the naturalistic 
idea, bands of double lines — sometimes patterned 
and coloured yellow — followed the course of the 
leads, so that the branches of the tree or vine seemed 
to run in and out of a trellis, a circumstance which 
has given name to such windows — trellis windows. 
Very complete examples are in the side windows 
at Merton College chapel, Oxford. We may here 
notice the unfortunate treatment which many trellis 



by Google 


windows — notably at Exeter cathedral — have received 
from would-be restorers. Either from ignorance of 
the original character of trellis windows or from 
disinclination to the trouble necessary to restore 
them properly, when broken or fragmentary, their 
irregular-shaped quarries have been cut up into 
pieces, all of one shape and size, and leaded up so 
as to form a window of lozenge-shaped quarries. 
Sometimes, indeed, they have been mixed up with 
quarries originally lozenge shaped, decorated with 
conventional designs, of a later date. Of this sort 
of muddle our frontispiece affords a specimen. 

Though slow and orderly change is the ordinary 
law of development for the arts, it happens at times, 
though comparatively rarely, that rapid change in 
style or workmanship is brought about by an un- 
expected event Such an event was the discovery, 
in the early years of the 14th century, of the fitct 
that chloride of silver will impart to white glass, 
when heated in the kiln, a brilliant yellow stain, 
varying in tone, according to treatment, from bright 
lemon to deep orange. The value of this discovery 
can best be gauged by taking one's stand before 
a large 14th or 15th century window and trying 
to understand how it would look if all the yellow 
were banished from the canopies, floral ornaments, 
pedestals, monograms, shields and so forth which 
form the background to its main features. At once 


by Google 


Trellis Window (Merton College, Oxford) 


by Google 


we see that the result would be hardness and cold- 
ness, and we come to understand that it was the 
discovery of the yellow stain — whereby an artist 
was enabled to impart warmth to his outline designs 
on white glass — which made these great windows, 
mainly composed of white glass, so pleasant to the 
eya For, although yellow glass coloured in the 
crucible — pot-metal — was in everyday use centuries 
before the yellow stain was discovered, it could only 
be used — ^like all pot-metal glass — by cutting from 
the sheet pieces of the size required and fixing them 
with lead binding into their places in the design. 
Try to appreciate the loss of light and increase of 
the appearance of weight which would result from 
the substitution of pot-metal yellow, with its leaden 
binding, for every bit of yellow stain on white glass 
in such a window as we have supposed The result 
would, probably, be an approximation to an Early 
English mosaic-window. 

The yellow stain came just at the right time, for 
architects were making the divisions between lancet 
windows ever narrower, thus, in effect, throwing 
several windows into one, and, as a natural con- 
sequence, creating a demand for a lighter and 
brighter style of coloured glass than had hitherto 
been the fashion. To this demand the glass-painter 
responded with his white backgrounds made up of 
quarries decorated with delicately painted designs 


by Google 


in brown enamel, heightened with yellow stain, 
which, while they admitted a sufficiency of light, at 
the same time mellowed it and served also to throw 
into relief the masses of colour in which the stories 
that the windows told were enshrined. 

These stories were, as a rule, strictly in accordance 
with the scheme to which we referred in the firet 
chapter, and with the position in the church of the 
windows in which they were placed. In the early 
years of the style they would be in panels set in a 
background of white glass heightened with yellow, 
while single figure subjects — such as Apostles, Pro- 
phets and Saints — ^would be under canopies, mostly 
white and yellow, though often partly coloured. The 
figures themselves would form distinct masses of 
bright colour, and when, as was usually the case, 
they stood side by side — one in each light — ^they 
formed a belt of colour right across the main lights 
of the window. Hence, such windows as these are 
called hdt windows. Often, as in the aisle windows 
at York, we find, in this style, two belts of figures 
under canopies with small coloured panels, in the 
centres of the white glass intervals, containing either 
shields of arms or small ornamental designs. In the 
case of one belt only the coloured panels are seldom 
found and the whole background is white and yellow. 
Another kind of arrangement common all through 
the Decorated period, was that of small figures under 


by Google 


canopies^ one above another, the white and yellow 
pf the canopies making a set-oflf to the bright colour 
of the figures. 

In small windows, such as north and south chancel- 
lights, we find the whole space taken up by a single 
figure under a canopy, with small pictures, often of 
the donors of the windows, beneath the tese upon 
which the figure stands. Sometimes, the base was 
a grassy mound picked out with flowers, as in the 
St Edward at Stapleford Abbots, or, more usually, 
a black and white chequered pavement, but there 
were no pedestals until quite the end of the style, 
when it was passing into the Perpendicular period. 

An important factor in the formation of the 
Decorated style was the extent to which, by the 
beginning of the 14th century, the use of tracery 
in the upper parts of windows had developed. All 
through the style the space occupied by tracery, in 
the case of large windows, continued to increase, so 
that we often find nearly one-half of a late Decorated 
window taken up by tracery. The task of the glass- 
painter was to fill tracery lights in a way that would 
harmonise with the glass of the main lights. This 
he did by making his tracery-glass white and yellow 
when the lower lights were either wholly of that 
kind or when there was but one belt of bright colour 
across theuL When, however, there were two colour 
belts the tracery lights also were coloured, thus 


by Google 


£^^hZ^^hPI^^ jP^H 


^^^^^^^^BL.\v^^^^^^^^^Hl^ ^^^^^fl 




St Edward, E. and C. (Stapleford Abbots). 

Digiiiz'ed byVjOOQlC 


preserving a balance between the upper and lower 
parts of the window. An interesting point to be 
noted in this connection is that we, sometimes, find 
Early English glass in the tracery over glass of the 
Decorated period in the lower lights. In such cases 
the stonework of the window is Early English, and, 
the original glass of the same period in the lower 
lights having been broken, or, for some reason re- 
moved, Decorated glass has been inserted in its 
place. This kind of thing happened at all transitional 
periods. A curious example is the east-window at 
Sheering church near Harlow where the very elabo- 
rate late Decorated tracery (about 1370) is filled 
with contemporary glass representing the coronation 
in heaven of the Blessed Virgin Mary, while, in the 
lower lights, we find glass of quite recent date. 
Another instance is the five-light perpendicular east- 
window at Dyserth' church, Flintshire, in which the 
tracery is filled with mid-1 5th century glass, while 
in the main lights is a 16th century Jesse-tree. 

The gradual elaboration and heightening of the 
upper parts of all architectural features — ^window- 
traceries, canopies and tabernacle-work in general — 
in the Decorated period, is responsible, too, for a 
similar change in the canopies over figures in painted 
windows. The tendency (often, in this style, carried 
to great excess) is always towards disproportionate 
height of the canopy relative to that of the figure 


by Google 


beneath it Another featnre of the canopy-window, 
which becomes noticeable as the Decorated style 
advances, is the practice of making the lower of two 
belts of figures and canopies subordinate to the 
upper one, so that, while the lower canopies are feirly 
low, the upper ones range aloft into a central tower 
and spire, with which side-pinnacles, springing from 
the pillars of the canopy, are connected by flying 
buttresses. Both spires and pinnacles are usually 
on a coloured ground. While, in early Decorated 
work the crockets and finials of the pinnacles and 
spires are stifi* and formal in design, they develop 
later into graceful leaf-like forms. This was in sym- 
pathy with contemporary architecture and is another 
proof of the close connection which subsisted, during 
the Gothic period, between architecture and its 
ancillary crafts. 

Figu/re and ecmopy-windows (a term usually 
confined to windows with high lower lights contain- 
ing figures under very lofty canopies) were, speaking 
generally, although there was no positive rule, placed 
at the ends of buUdings and high up, while the side 
windows were filled with white and yeUow pattern 
glass, either alone or with belts of canopies or panels. 
Similarly, great variety of practice exists — no doubt 
expense was an important factor — with regard to 
the relative amount and distribution through the 
building of white and yellow pattern and coloured 


by Google 


glass. In some cases, especially in small rural churches, 
all the windows, except, perhaps, the east-window, 
would be fiUed with white and yellow glass alone. 
An interesting example is Bradwell, near Witham, 
where much fragmentary original glass remains in 
situu Another instance is the east window of the north 
aisle at Homchurch in Essex, where the monotony of 
the white pattern quarries is broken by a picture of 
the Crucifixion in the middle one of the three main 
lights and by a shield of arms, surrounded by a 
narrow circular border, with ruby fillings-in between 
the shield and the border, in each of the side-lights. 
An opportunity for colour is found, also, in the border 
running round the three lights, which consists of 
yeUow lions* fewjes on a white pattern ground alter- 
nating with pieces of plain blue glass. In the tracery, 
which is whoUy white and yellow, is a picture of 
St Edward, King and Confessor, who belongs, in a 
special sense, from his connection with Havering- 
atte-Bower, to Homchurch and its neighbourhood. 
The arms in the shields are those of Deincourt and 
the window, no doubt, commemorates the foundation 
of a chantry by a member of that family at Hom- 
church. We may safely assume that the chantry 
altar stood beneath the window and that the east 
end of the aisle was partitioned off by screens to 
form a chantry chapel, a very common custom, 
and, in most cases, a reasonable one, for such an 


by Google 


arrangement usually means that the founder of the 
chantry has built, or rebuilt, the aisle at his own 

A kind of treatment, which may, perhaps, be 
called the triptychy appears later in the Decorated 
period in England, although it is found much earlier 
on the continent The principal subject, under a 
great csmopy, occupies the three centre lights and 
smaller pictures, under canopies, are in the side- 
lights. The pinnacles of the canopies are on coloured 
grounds and, above them, is a white and yellow back- 
ground reaching up to the tracery, the glass in which 
is coloured. 

Jesse windows — ^which may be said to be the 
earliest form of design extending over the whole 
window — ^in this style have their main lights bordered 
and, running over the white and yellow patterns with 
which they are filled, and often extending to the 
tracery, is the vine, from which, at intervals, spring 
branches arranged to fi*ame the oval panels in which 
are the figures of the genealogical chart 

Decorated wheel windows — a type which de- 
veloped from the earlier Rose windows, from which 
also it seems likely that the idea of elaborate tracery 
in the heads of lancets arose — usually contain one 
or more pictures or shields of arms in their centre 
or eye, while the radiating lights, or spokes of the 
wheel, contain patterns on coloured grounds with or 


by Google 


without borders. The east- window at Merton College, 
Oxford, is of this sort, the eye being filled with heraldry 
and ornamental patterns on a coloured ground. 

As time went on and the methods used in glass 
manufEtcture slowly improved, the texture and char- 
acter of the glass changed. It became thinner and 
its surface more regular, a change which was not 
wholly advantageous, for it is certain that much of 
the brilliance of very old glass is due to the varied 
angles, caused by unevenness of surface, at which 
light is transmitted through it To improvements 
in manufacture also were, probably, due the gradual 
reduction in thickness of the coat of colour on ruby 
glass. Unlike other glass colours, ruby has always 
been applied as a surface colour, flashed on — ^as the 
phrase goes — to the glass, and the thickness of the 
coat of colour is found, by comparison of ruby glass 
of difierent periods, to vary as much as ^ of an inch 
in the Early English period as against ^ of an inch 
in the 16th century. The streakiness, too, a marked 
feature of very early ruby glass, tends to disappear 
during the Decorated period and other colours tend 
to vary. In particular, although there is a great 
deal of very dark-blue Decorated glass — dark, that 
is, on close inspection, though brilliant enough when 
viewed from a distance and in a mass — ^a very 
beautiful light-blue, light-violet, cobalt, one might 
approximately call it, came into use in this period. 


by Google 


A good example of this light-blue is the border 
round the little picture of Our Lady and the Divine 
Child in our frontispiece and of a dark-blue, of 
Decorated style, in the diapered backgrounds to some 
of the figures in the Sheering tracery. 

Pot-metal yellow gets deeper in tone, passing, 
sometimes, through orange to a green-brown yellow 
— not always quite pleasant to the eye when seen 
in a lump, as witness the fragmentary canopies at 
North Weald churcL 

Another change of this sort to note in the Deco- 
rated period is the tendency of white glass towards a 
slight green tone, the result, to some extent, of its 
being thinner. White glass, too, definitely took the 
place of the pink, sometimes brown, of the Early 
English style for flesh tints. Its coldness was re- 
lieved by applying yellow stain for the hair and 
beards of figures, and when white was used for 
draperies, the surfece was varied and warmed by 
yellow edgings, ornamental bands or fioral orna- 
ments, as in the mitre and chasuble of the little 
figure of St Edmund of Canterbury at Abbess 

The white quarries in which the coloured figures 
and panels were set, call for a word. These were 
either all of one uniform lozenge shape and size or 
of such varied shapes and sizes as the geometrical 
patterns into which they were formed determined. 


by Google 


Of the geometrical type with their running trellis 
patterns we have already spoken. As to the lozenge 
quarries, the designs on them, outlined with brown 
enamel, and, after 1410 or thereabouts, usually 
heightened with yellow stain, varied extensively. 
Sometimes they were floral designs, like the maple- 
leaf at Roydon, or birds, as the bird playing on bells 
in Upper Hardres church, Kent, or feimily badges, 
monograms of benefetctors and such-like. Some, 
too, had bands on the upper sides, either plain or 
patterned and with or without yellow stain. Early 
in the style we find quarry designs set off by cross- 
hatching on the ground behind them as in the Early 
English period (see the Westwell window), but this 
plan was gradually replaced by the use of the yeUow 
stain for shading and obtaining contrasts. 

Diapering of this period invites notice. A diaper 
is a flat pattern on a white or coloured ground, and 
diapering was used extensively in all the decorative 
arts and crafts during the Middle Ages. As limited 
to painted glass — ^pot-metal work — the diaper always 
consists of brown enamel applied to the glass in one 
of two ways. The earlier plan, which prevailed until 
late in the Decorated period, was to cover the glass 
with a fairly thick layer of brown enamel, and then, 
with a stick, knife or other convenient instrument, 
remove so much of the enamel as was necessary to 
form the patterh. In this way ornamental borders 


by Google 




to garments were picked out, and background pat- 
terns, like that immediately behind the figures in the 

St Edmund, Bp and C. (Abbess Boding) 

frontispiece, were formed. The other, and later, 
method, which has, since its introduction, been used 


by Google 


side by side with the earlier one, as convenience 
might dictate, is simply to paint with a brush, in 
the ordinary way, the (Uaper pattern in outline. It 
is obvious that either plan has advantage over the 
other for certain kinds of work, and it is sometimes 
hard to tell by which method a diaper has been 
applied Particularly is this so in the case of large 
leaf patterns, such as those on the ruby and blue 
grounds behind the figures at Sheering. 

A typical feature of the Decorated style is the 
pose of the figures : they are simple and severe in 
drawing, the outlines becoming thinner as the style 
progresses, their draperies are loose, wide and flow- 
ing, and they are, usually, in constrained positions, 
seeming to rest on one leg. A good example is the 
St Edward at Stapleford Abbots. In early Deco- 
rated work facial features are treated much as in 
the Early English period : the iris of the eye is not 
distinguished from the pupil and the mouth consists 
of three curved dashes side by side, as in the heads 
of Our Lady at Kingsdown and All Saints' church, 
Stamford. Later on, however, the drawing of features 
became more natural : first, as in a head at Worfield 
church, Shropshire, and in another in the south aisle 
of the choir at York cathedral (both illustrated by 
Winston), the lips were drawn in outline, and, sub- 
sequently, we find both lips and the iris indicated, 
a development very well shewn in the tracery figures 


by Google 




at Sheering. No very great change from the pre- 
ceding style in the painting of hair is noticeable, 

Head of Our Lady (Eingsdown) 

although men's hair and beards get more flowing 
as the style advances, while women's hair remains 



by Google 


long and smooth and that of angels is usually drawn 
in thick, crisp curls. Decorated borders must not 
be forgotten. The most common type is a yellow 
running stalk and leaf on a coloured ground : some- 
times — as at Merton CoUege, where the stalk is green 
on a ruby ground — the stalk and leaf are of different 
colours. A less usual border is made up of small 
figures and canopies, one above another, such as we 
see in the nave of York cathedral Variety is some- 
times given to the running floral border by little 
grotesque creatures climbing up the stalk or sitting 
on the branches. Heraldry often supplied material 
for borders — small shields of arms, merchants' marks 
or badges. The fragments of border in the west, 
formerly in the east, window at Netteswell church, 
Essex — ostrich feathers, alternately blue and ruby, 
stuck through scrolls — are remains of a heraldic border 
which probably had some reference to Thomas of 
Woodstock, Earl of Gloucester and Essex, fifth son 
of Edward III, who generally lived at Pleshy Castle, 
some ten miles from NettesweU. These borders, 
which sometimes had an inner margin of white glass, 
and always an outer one next the stone, usually, as 
in the window at Hornchurch, and the west window 
at Snodland, Kent, ran round the head of the light, 
following the line of the foils, which often enclosed 
a rose, marguerite or other small fiowen If there 
were a border along the bottom of the window — 


by Google 


and often there was not, for the space would be 
taken up by the base of a figure-stand or by a 
lettered scroll — it would be of a diflerent pattern, 
usually large squares containing conventional floral 
ornaments stained yellow on a white ground alter- 
nating with oblong pieces of coloured glass. The 
Merton College window and the frontispiece illus- 
trate this practice. 

The 14th and 16th centuries saw the heyday of 
heraldry ; it was then very real, both as science and 
art, and, as a result of such reality, heraldic repre- 
sentations had then a simplicity and dignity which 
those of subsequent centuries lacked. In the 14th 
century we see no crests, elaborate mantlings or 
grotesquely shaped shields, only shields of the heater 
type, upon which were painted, in plain, bold style, 
a single coat of arms, a husband's arms impaling 
those of his wife, or at most, and very rarely, two 
or three quarterings. The two shields in the Horn- 
church window are good types, though these are 
painted only in brown enamel and yellow, the shield 
at Westonbirt church, Gloucestershire, is another, 
and yet others are the four shields in a window of 
the north aisle of the nave at St Albans Abbey, 
containing the arms of Edward III, Edward the Black 
Prince, Lionel, Duke of Clarence, and John of Gaunt; 
in North Ockendon church the arms of England 
(ancient), Warrenne, Pointz and Beauchamp, and at 


by Google 


Arkesden church Fitzalan quartering Warrenne for 
Thomas Fitzalan or Arundel, successively Bishop of 
Ely, Archbishop of York, and, in 1396, Archbishop 
of Canterbury. 

As guides to the subjects represented, figures 
often bore scrolls inscribed with names — 8c8: Petrus, 
8c8 Edva/rdvs, M{ary) Cleophe and so forth — ^and, 
sometimes, the names would be written round the 
outer edge of a saint's nimbus or, oftener, on a broad 
scroll beneath his feet At times too, such scrolls 
would be drawn across the sides of canopies and 
would bear verses from the Psalter, as in the picture 
of St Edmund at Abbess Roding. Inscriptions up to 
about 1340 were in Lombardic characters, a variation 
of Roman letters, but, after that time, they are 
usually in Gothic or black letter, although Lombardic 
letters continued in use for a long time. Owing to 
the fact that Roman letters, in the long run, again 
came into use in Europe and so continued to the 
present day, it has come about that most people 
find it easier to read a pre-fourteenth century in- 
scription than one of the two following centuries. 

The simplest and earliest form of decoration in 
tracery lights was the small coloured circlet enclosing 
an ornament — such as a rose — painted in outline 
with brown enamel on white glass. This style, in its 
richest and most elaborate form, is found in the 
large foiled circles of early Decorated tracery. In 


by Google 


such an example the centre of the light is filled with 
a shield of arms or a complicated floral design in 
colour, which touches the cusps, while within the 
foils are scroll-like leaves in outline, heightened with 
yellow on white glass. A very beautiful example of 
such a circular ornament is the design in the west 
window at Netteswell, which was, no doubt, taken 
from a tracery-light The centre is light olive, deli- 
cately diapered and the narrow outer border is 
probably meant to be ruby, but each of its four 
parts are of different tints of bluish and reddish 
purple, an interesting result, it may be surmised, 
of defective firing of the glass. Nevertheless the 
effect is very good As Decorated tracery progressed, 
its openings got higher and gave opportunity for 
figure-subjects which were, usually, white and yellow 
on coloured grounds and sometimes under canopies. 
The Sheering window may again be referred to for 
an unspoilt example of a piece of such figure-tracery 
and as shewing, too, the most usual kind of border 
for tracery-lights — the beaded type with an outer 
margin of white glass. 

The bonnet-like crown of the Early English period 
grew, in the Decorated style, into the familiar circlet 
with floral decorations, such as that on the head of 
Our Lady at Kingsdown, and this, as the style ad- 
vanced, passed into the more elaborate types seen 
on the heads of the two central throned figures at 


by Google 


Sheering. Similarly, the low-triangular episcopal 
mitre, like those worn by St Birinus and his conse- 
crator Pope St Honorius in the Early English glass 
at Dorchester church, Oxfordshire, became, in later 
Decorated work, the higher and rounder shape worn 
by St Edmund at Abbess Roding. 



Coloured glass of the Perpendicular period, like 
the stone-work in which it was set, grew, by a 
perfectly natural process, from the style which 
preceded it. As Decorated tracery, having attained, 
in its flowing lines, such flexibility of appearance as 
to border on weakness, called for a corrective — ^found 
in the gradual verticalising of its principal lines — so 
painted glass of the same period passed through a 
similar phase. The flowing vine and ivy tendrils, 
and the natural leaves and berries of the Decorated 
period, which harmonised so well with their con- 
temporary architecture, would have struck a dis- 
cordant note if set in the midst of the severe lines 
of Perpendicular tracery. So we find that, as the 14th 
century passed into the 15th, the regular and hard 
lines of lozenge-shaped quarries took the place of the 


by Google 


flowing geometrical patterns of the trellis windows, 
and the natural leaves of ash, maple, ivy and so 
forth, made way for conventional floral ornaments. 
This, be it noted, was quite legitimate develop- 
ment — ^a merely corrective process called for by a 
tendency to excess of flexibility — ^and, in no sense, 
a going-back upon, or departure from, the essential 
principles of Gothic art. 

This strengthening tendency in design was ac- 
companied by a gradual change in colour and 
technique : tints became softer and less intense, and 
fecial outlines and features were drawn with finer 
lines and greater finish. The practice, begun, as we 
have seen, in the Decorated period, of indicating the 
iris of the eye as distinct from the pupil and of 
modelling both lips by fine wavy lines, became the 
rule. Great attention, too, was paid to shading of 
the jEewje, which was done by extremely fine hair-like 
lines of a wavy character, much like the shading 
used for indicating mountains and water in a steel- 
engraved map. 

The reduction in tone of coloured Perpendicular 
glass was not wholly, nor perhaps so much due to 
actual lightening of colour in the process of manu- 
facture, as to greater breadth of treatment and an 
increase in the proportion of white glass. 

Speaking generally, coloured glass was used in 
larger pieces than in the preceding styles, a &ct 


by Google 




which, even alone^ would effect an apparent reduc- 
tion in intensity of colour. Added to this, there was 

Perpendicular Quarry 

a decided and progressive increase in the use of 
yellow stain in the white glass : we no longer find. 


by Google 




as we did in the Decorated period, pot-metal colours 
used in the canopies, except for the little windows in 



Perpendicular Quarry 

towers and groining and backgrounds of canopies, 
but all is stained yellow. The rectangular quarries, 


by Google 


too, in which the coloured pictures — figures and 
canopies or panels — ^are set, have more yellow than 
before ; they are often edged with yellow and the 
little designs painted on them — flowers, birds, mono- 
grams, badges or what not — ^are sometimes entirely 
stained, instead of being merely shaded, with yellow. 
In connection with colour, it is to be noted that 
the Perpendicular period saw the full development 
of a practice which had been introduced early in the 
14th century (though, for a long time, little used), 
whereby the glass-painter's list of colours was greatly 
increased — namely, the making of pot-metal glass in 
two layers of different colours. This was eflTected by 
dipping the blow-pipe into glass, first of one colour 
and then of another, the resulting bubble being, 
of course, one colour within and another without 
When opened out the bubble became a double sheet 
of one colour imposed on the other. By this process 
many tints of green could be got by combining 
different shades of blue and yellow, a long range 
of purples, from deep violet to pink, would result 
from combinations of reds and blues of varied in- 
tensity, and different degrees of orange could be got 
by coating red with yellow. The glass produced by 
this plan of increasing colour-range in pot-metal 
work is called by the French verve dovbUj and it 
is to France that we must turn for the best examples 
of it The central east windows at the church of 


by Google 


Eymoutiers, near Limoges, which contain many-hued 
canopy lights of late 15th century work, are instances 
in point, and the fine and elaborate canopy-window, 
the gift of Jacques Coeur, Treasurer of France in the 
days of Charles VII, at Bourges cathedral is another. 
As might be expected, glass-painters were not always 
content with two layers in verre doublS, and, in their 
eagerness for new tints, they would fuse together into 
one sheet five or six layers of different colours. It 
seems possible that this practice may have contri- 
buted towards the development of the idea of 
painting in enamel colours, which became a recog- 
nised system in the 16th century. 

Another feature, the beginnings of which are to 
be found in the Decorated period, developed rapidly 
in the early years of the 15th century — the practice 
of stipple shading. Such shading — in drapery and 
so forth — as had been employed in the earlier styles 
had been either smear shading, that is a wash 
varying in depth with the degree of opacity required, 
of brown enamel, or cross-hatching with the same 
pigment. The difference between the new plan, the 
stipple and the old one, the smear, was in the 
method of application. Instead of a broad wash 
applied with the side of the brush, the painter put 
in his shadows by continuous dabs with the point 
of the tool, so that, really, they were made up of 
minute dots running one into the other. Obviously 


by Google 


very much finer and wider gradations of tone could 
be produced by the stipple than by the smear, and 
we can quite understand how the increased use of 
stipple shading, combined with greater variatioii in 
outline, had much to do with the higher finish and 
air of refinement characteristic of Perpendicular 
work. Thus, while Perpendicular glass lost in in- 
tensity of colour it gained in culture. 

At the same time the tendency to warmth of tone 
produced by finer shadow gradation and the con- 
sequent increase of verisimilitude of subject, were 
not without a bad effSect, in the long run, upon 
the art of the glass-painter. They led, at last, to 
forgetfulness of essential limits and of the proper 
use of painted windows and to attempts, which led 
to the temporary ruin of the art, to paint pictures 
on glass in the same way as one paints pictures on 
canvas or paper, thus changing the very nature of 
a painted window by making it a mere screen upon 
which to show pictures instead of a coloured and 
decorated medium for the admission of light 

The figure avid canopy subject, common in the 
Decorated period, may be called the typical style 
of Perpendicular times. The constructional features 
of the canopies are in accord with contemporary 
architecture : the flat-fronted Decorated canopy 
makes way for the Perpendicular one with pro- 
jecting fi-ont ; and, while the canopies of this style 


by Google 


are of the same general character as those of the 
Decorated period, they are more varied in form and 
never run to the high pointed spire characteristic 
of the Decorated type. A noticeable point with 
regard to Perpendicular canopies is that, when there 
is one figure only in a main light, the whole space, 
except that covered by the figure, is taken up by the 
canopy, the pillars supporting it and the pedestal 
upon which the figure stands. A good idea of this 
sort of arrangement may be got from a study of two 
of the main lights of an aisle window at Fairford. 
This window contains figures of the four great 
Doctors of the Church, SS. Jerome, Gregory the 
Great, Ambrose and Augustine of Hippo, the two 
selected for study being SS. Ambrose and Augustine. 
The whole surface of each light is white glass 
heightened with yellow stain, except the groining 
of one of the canopies and the curtains behind the 
figures, all of which are red, and the copes (blue) 
and the tunicles (green) of the figures. The 
canopies, it will be noticed, which reach to the top 
of the lights and have pendants, difier in detail : 
that over St Ambrose is three-sided and more 
elaborate than St Augustine's, which is two-sided 
and broader in treatment of detail than its fellow. 
The figures, like all those in the aisle windows at 
Fairford, stand on pedestals, three-sided, decorated 
with foliage work about the stems and bearing. 


by Google 


round the base, the name of the saint represented 
In the tracery lights are figures of St Apollonia, St 
James and an angeL 

Sometimes Perpendicular canopy subjects have 
small figures of donors kneeling in prayer round the 
base of the pedestal. A fine example of this is to be 
seen at St L6, Normandy, in a lofty Early French 
lancet window of four lights which was evidently 
reglazed in the 15th century. The canopies, white 
and yellow upon coloured grounds, reach to the tops 
of the lights and are unusually lofty for Perpendicular 
work, a circumstance due to the early character of 
the stonework. The two centre figures only are 
upon pedestals, the others standing on pavement in 
the Decorated style, but they are all alike in that the 
pictures below the figures rest upon moulded bases. 
Under the first figure is a picture of Our Lady 
seated with the Divine Child on her lap, and the 
others have figures of donors kneeling upon tes- 
selated pavements which form the upper parts of the 
moulded bases. Upon the fronts of these bases are 
shields of arms, heater-shape, and three other shields^ 
supported by angels — the centre one, bearing the arms 
of France (modem, i.e. three lilies only on a blue field) 
— in the spandrels between the heads of the lights. 

In windows divided by transoms each tier of lights 
is treated separately ; each light has its own figure 
and canopy on its pedestal or pavement over a picture 


by Google 


panel or shield of arms, as the ease may be. Often, 
however, each main light of a window — sometimes 
very lofty — ^has a series of figures and canopies 
one above the other. Such windows are arranged 
upon the same general plan as the Decorated hdt 
windows, but the canopies are loftier and the figures 
stand on pedestals, which grow, as it were, out of the 

In the Sainte Chapelle at Riom, in Auvergne, 
are seven fine four-light windows which illustrate 
this type. In one pair of lights we see the Apostles, 
with scrolls bearing sentences from the Creed (as at 
Fairford), standing on pedestals in front of curtains 
hanging in loops. In the canopy-tops are small 
niches, containing figures, probably of donors, 
which inin upwards into another tier of pedestals, 
figures and canopies, and so on to the tops of the 
lights. Below the Apostles are canopies over figures 
of saints on pedestals, each of whom is presenting 
a kneeling figure — ^a donor, no doubt — ^to Our Lord, 
who is seated oh His mother's knee under the first 
of the row of canopies. In this style, which is less 
conunon in the later years of the Perpendicular 
period than in its beginning, we sometimes find 
coloured picture-panels without canopies or pedes- 
tals, divided horizontally by panelled tabernacle work. 

In all these— figures and canopies and panelled 
arrangements — the tracery lights shew either small 


by Google 


figures of saints, sometimes under canopies like many 
of those in the Fairford windows, or symbols of the 
Evangelists as at Netteswell, or shields of donors' 
arms or those of the emperor, a king, or other 
eminent person of the day. A favourite tracery 
filling was an angel, perhaps playing on a musical 
instrument, or in an attitude of adoration, or maybe 
supporting a shield of arms. 

On the continent, especially in Germany, Switzer- 
land and Northern Italy, round quarries, set close 
together in rows, are, at this period, often found in 
lieu of rectangular quarries, as backgrounds for 
figures, and canopies and panels. The round quar- 
ries are, at first, about four inches in diameter with 
the bull's eye very well defined and with narrow rims. 
Afterwards they got larger, ultimately as wide as six 
inches, and the bull's eye became hardly noticeable. 

The earlier type made a simple and effective 
window, especially, as was usually the case, when 
the surface was broken by little stars in circles 
made by inserting coloured glass in some of the 
interstices between the quarries. Bound glass win- 
dows were bordered, the early ones with coloured 
designs and the later mostly with white and yellow 
only. Excellent examples of round glass are to 
be seen in the church of St Mary of the Capitol, 
Cologne, where there are several three-lighted 
windows with coloured subjects set in round quarriea 


by Google 

Symbol of St Mark (Netteswell) 



by Google 


Ill some, the coloured subject is in the centre 
light only, while in others it extends to the side 

A principal note of the Perpendicular period is 
variety in arrangement Sometimes a centre light 
has a larger picture — ^figure and canopy or panel — 
than the other lights, sometimes such a central 
subject stands alone in the midst of a window 
otherwise made up entirely of white and yellow 
glass, or, as at West Wickham church, Kent, we see 
a single figure on a bracket without either canopy 
or background other than the white and yellow 
quarries. Towards the end of the style, a single 
subject, extended over the whole window and with- 
out canopy or architectural work, is often found. 
In other cases, the lower lights comprise several 
distinct subjects or figures, all under one large 
canopy, as in the east window of Winchester cathe- 
dral — ^an early example. A variation of the single 
figure on a bracket type is the design, often met 
with, of Our Lord on the Cross in a centre light 
with Our Lady and St John, standing on brackets 
in the adjoining lights, on either side. 

We find, too, as in the preceding styles, windows 
wholly of white and yellow pattern glass except for 
the borders and variously — more usually, perhaps, 
circular — shaped panels containing shields of arms, 
crests, badges, or monograms often enclosed by a 


by Google 


wreath, all of which are coloured A fine, bold example 
of such a design, a crest within a wreath, is to be 
seen in the staircase-window at No. 3 Crosby Square, 
Bishopsgate, an old house now, and for many years 
past divided into offices, but formerly residential 
The crest is a hawk jessed and belled painted in 
brown and yellow on white glass, within a green and 
ruby foliaged wreath. 

A peculiarity of the later Perpendicular wheel- 
windows is the concentration of the coloured glass 
in circular bands towards the outer edge of the 
window and in the eye, leaving a broad circle of 
white glass between the two masses of colour. 

The Jesse design of the earlier part of the 
Perpendicular period (of which the east windows at 
Gloucester cathedral and Winchester College chapel 
are good examples) differs little from the Decorated 
type. The figures, sometimes standing and at others 
seated, usually bear their symbols and have their 
names on scrolls. The vine runs over the whole 
window and its leaves are white and yellow, though 
warmth is given, in some instances, by colouring 
the ovals and in others by making the ground of 
the lights red and blue alternately. In the later 
examples the vine is more branched and has more 
leaves, the ground is usually coloured and the figures 
either stand on the branches or issue, as demi- 
figures, from large blossoms. The colouring of the 


by Google 


leaves, too, is more varied, being often in pot-metal 
colour. Sometimes the vine is spread only over the 
two or three centre lights leaving the side-lights for 
other subjects. 

An almost perfect "Jesse," which is dated 
Mcocccxxxiii, is in the chancel window at Uan- 
rhaiadr, Denbighshire. This window has features 
both of the earlier and later types. The figures in 
the centre light are full-length and standing, while 
those in the side-lights are all demi-figures issuing 
from blossoms. On the whole, however, the work 
points to a late date in the Perpendicular period, 
and there seems little reason for the suggestion, 
which has been made, that the date on the glass is 
incorrect It is true that the costumes of the 
figures are earlier than the days of Henry VIII, 
but this may well be accounted for upon the sup- 
position that, either the painter copied from earlier 
sources or worked in the style in which he was 
brought up. Changes in style are slow, and when 
we remember the predominantly Gk>thic character 
of the Fairford glass and that (though in a less 
degree) in King's College chapel, Cambridge — the 
one executed only about thirty years earlier than 
the date given for the Llanrhaiadr window and the 
other almost contemporary with it — ^we need not 
reject 1533 as the date for this Jesse on the ground 
of a difference between the costume of the figures 


by Google 


in the glass and that of folk of Tudor times. A 
curious circumstance, which may have a bearing 
upon the question as to the true date of this glass, 
is that the original inscription upon the scroll over 
the head of King David — "Orate pro bono statu 
Roberti Jonnes, clerici qui hoc lumen vitrari fecit'* — 
which, upon close inspection, can be made out, has 
been altered to " Misericordias Domini in setemum 
cantabo. R J." The explanation, probably, is that 
the same Robert Jones — ^perhaps he was the parson 
of Llanrhaiadr — who set up the window in 1533 and 
who caused the erased inscription to be written, in 
after years, most likely in the days of Edward VI, 
out of deference to the then prevailing notions, had 
the inscription altered to the form in which it is 
to-day and added thereto his initials — " R J." Such 
alteration of inscriptions on sepulchral monuments, 
brasses especially, was not at all uncommon in the 
troublous days of Edward VI, although it is believed 
that this Llanrhaiadr example is a unique instance 
of erasure of an inscription on glass and the writing 
of another in its place. When it was desired to 
change an inscription on glass, the piece of glass 
itself would, as a rule, be taken out of its setting 
and another piece inserted. 

We have refeiTcd to the practice of placing 
figures of donors in painted windows. The origin 
of this custom seems to have been two-fold, first to 


by Google 


indicate the personal devotion of the giver of the 
window, and secondly by calling him to the recol- 
lection of others, to claim a place in their prayers, 
for his good estate, if alive, and for his soul's weal 
were he dead The same idea, no doubt, prompted 
the painting of coat-armour in church windows, for 
we find, in early window heraldry, that the arms 
depicted were always those of benefactors to the 
church or of very high folk — ^the king or a great 
local lord — whose arms, being well-known, might 
serve to indicate a date. As the 15th century went 
on, the tendency was to increase the size and im- 
portance of the figures of donors. This we may see 
by comparing the little donors in the base of a 
Decorated window with, say, the large and very 
beautiful figures in the early 15th century Rose- 
window in the north transept of Le Mans cathedral 
There are seven principal figures of donors at Le 
Mans, all of persons contemporary with the building 
of the north transept and most of them known to 
have contributed largely to its cost. They represent 
Louis II of Anjou, King of Sicily and Count of 
Maine, who died in 1417, his wife Yolande of 
Aragon, his mother Mary of Brittany, and his son 
Louis III of Anjou, or, possibly, his second son, " the 
good king Ren6 " ; Louis, the Bastard of Maine ; 
Peter of Savoisy, Bishop of Le Mans (1385—1398) ; 
and Cardinal Filastre, Cathedral Dean of Rheims 


by Google 

Louis II of Anjou (Le Mans) 


by Google 


(1411 — 1428), a great lover of art and letters and 
a generous contributor to the cathedral of Le Mans. 
Besides these are figures of unknown canons, donors, 
no doubt 

This window at Le Mans, the stonework of which 
is a fine specimen of Flamboyant architecture, is in 
two main divisions — ^a great rose above and long 
lancets below, the two connected by elaborate flame- 
like tracery. In the eye of the rose are symbols 
of the four Evangelists — the winged man, the winged 
lion, the winged ox and the eagle, in its upper part 
is the coronation of Our Lady in Heaven and, in the 
lower half, the Last Judgment The rose is com- 
pleted by the orders of the celestial Hierarchy, 
angels waving censers or playing on musical in- 
struments and so forth. In the lancets are the 
thirteen Apostles, each holding his proper symbol 
and, except St Paul, with a scroll inscribed with 
a sentence of the Creed. Their canopies, some of 
which have small figures of saints round their tops, 
are three-sided with pendants. Below the Apostles 
are saints — SS. Louis IX, Ren^ and an unknown 
bishop — ^and the donors to whom we have re- 

This immense window, which contains 124 com- 
partments, illustrates three principal characteristics 
of the Perpendicular style — ^reduction of intensity, 
as compared with Decorated work, in the coloured 


by Google 


parts, increased use of white and yellow glass and 
elaboration of pattern work. Indeed, it may be said 
to be a white and yellow window heightened with 
colour ; for colour is, in the main, confined to parts 
of the drapery, the curtain backgrounds of the 
figures, the nimbi and smaller fillings-in of the 

A good idea of the preponderance of white and 
yellow glass in Perpendicular work may be got from 
the panel of Louis II of Anjou, which we illustrate. 
All is white and yellow except the curtain, which 
is green with violet medallions, its top border and 
side doublings being white and yellow, the sword- 
scabbard, which is red, and the field upon which 
the Angevin fleurs-de-lis are painted, which is, of 
course, blue. 

These figures of donors are of great interest, for, 
apart from the feet that they are thought by some 
to be portraits — a doubtful supposition — they illus- 
trate the history of France in the 15th century, 
contemporary costume and, by the heraldry — fine, 
bold designs — on shield and surcoat, they shew the 
alliances of the great French houses of those days. 
Observe that none of these figures are identified by 
their names : their coats-of-arms were sufficient for 
that purpose in the 15th century, for everybody 
understood heraldry. 

We notice a novel use of the yellow stain in this 


by Google 


window — for touching up the high-lights of the face, 
such as the tip of the nose, the chin and the eye- 
brows. Finish is shewn principaUy in the com- 
paratively minute diaper work in the head-dresses 
of the female figures, in the crowns, in the curtain 
patterns, and in the words of the prayers inscribed 
in the open books. 

It is to the Perpendicular period that we must 
look for the earliest existing examples of painted 
glass in dwelling-houses and other secular buildings, 
for, although there can be no doubt but that painted 
windows were to be found in domestic buildings long 
before that time, and, probably, from the earliest 
period to which painting on glass can be referred, 
there are few or no remains older than the latter 
part of the 14th century to be seen to-day. Evidence 
of domestic use of painted windows in the reign of 
Edward III may be found in Chaucer's writings. 
In the " Book of the Duchesse," speaking of his own 
house, he says (line 321) : 

"Sooth to seyn, my chambre was 
Fill wel depeynted and with glas 
Were al the windowes wel y-glased, 
Fill clere, and nat an hole y-crased, 
That to beholde hit was gret joye. 
For hooly al the stone of Troye 
Was in the glasing y-wroght thus." 

We may, therefore, safely assume that picture 


by Google 


windows were to be found, in plenty, in the houses 
of well-to-do folk in mid- 14th century days, and, if 
so, that they had long been common in the castles 
of the greater nobility and in the guild-halls of 
London and other towns. Figures representing 
ancestoi-s or historical personages, such as the nine 
— ^two intended for Earls of Mercia and seven for 
Earls of Chester — ^in 14th century armour, originally 
at Brereton Hall, Cheshire, and afterwards removed 
to Aston Hall, Birmingham (although these par- 
ticular figures were not painted until the 16th 
century), or those formerly at Warwick Castle and 
Arundel Castle, would be set up in the great hall 
of a castle or manor-house, while smaller figures 
of Our Lady and the Saints, under canopies or in 
panels, would be placed in the windows of chapels or 

Later in the style we fijid that heraldry has 
largely taken the place of figures for the windows 
of secular buildings, although there are many re- 
corded instances of figure subjects of late date, such 
as those of the Fettiplace family at Childrey, Berks., 
set up in 1526. The usual style of heraldic glazing 
for the great hall of a manor-house was an adapta- 
tion of the hdt system of canopies. A large, boldly 
designed shield, with helmet, crest and mantling, 
and, if appropriate, supporters and cr9wn or coronet, 
was set in the centre of each lancet, forming a belt 


by Google 


across the window. All the heraldry was properly 
coloured and the white and yellow backgrounds 
usuaUy consisted of alternate diagonal rows of 
rectangular quarries decorated with some small 
device — a family badge, monogram of husband and 
wife, or such-like — ^and white glass on which was 
painted the family motto. Our illustration — ^the 
arms of Henry VI and his wife Margaret of Anjou 
in the hall at Ockholt, Berks.— is a good example, 
painted about 1450, of this kind of domestic painted 

Towards the end of the reign of Henry VI shields 
became very varied in shape, and they usually shew 
the lance-rest, a piece cut out of the dexter side of 
the shield just below its top comer. The old plain 
shield, the widened heater shape, was, however, 
always in use, and offcen shields, when without 
helmet and crest, were encircled by wreaths, made 
of leaves, an entwined branch, with foliage or a 
scroll turned round a stick. 

An illustration of the system upon which quarry- 
ornaments were designed is afforded by some quarries 
at Faulkbourne HaU, near Witham. They are 
decorated with a design made up of two family 
badges — the Stafford knot and the black-laced belt 
of Fortescue — and may be assumed to commemorate 
the marriage, probably about 1520, of Henry For- 
tescue, then lord of the manor of Faulkbourne, with 


by Google 

Arms of Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou (Ookholt) 


by Google 


Elisabeth Stafford. This old house, too, can shew 
an unusual use of painted glass, but one quite in the 
spirit of the Middle Ages, which deemed nothing too 
lowly for decoration. The upper part of a large 
window in the kitchen shews quarries upon which 
are painted, in brown enamel heightened with yellow, 
cooking utensils and various articles of food. 

One may wonder what became of all the painted 
glass, of which there must have been an enormous 
quantity, in the monastic houses after the Dissolu- 
tion in Tudor days. In the first place, no doubt, the 
old windows were, in most cases, taken down before 
the destruction of the buildings and sold ; but how 
did the purchasers dispose of them ? The price paid 
for the old stuff was usually absurdly low, as we 
know from several entries in the surveys of the 
religious houses made by the officials of the Court 
of Augmentations. One instance may suffice : two 
windows of the abbey of Kirkby Belers, Leicester- 
shire, containing 160 square feet of glass, which 
would, probably, have cost to make, in the 15th 
century, not less than £160 (present-day currency), 
was sold for £1 6«. Sd. (equal to £13 6«. 8d of our 
day), and 120 feet of painted glass in the choir 
fetched £1. As there is very little old glass in 
England to-day which can reasonably be supposed 
to have come from the dissolved religious houses, 
we can only assume that the purchasers exported 


by Google 


it to the continent If this assumption be correct, 
the interesting question arises as to how far the 
sudden throwing upon the continental market of 
so vast a quantity of painted glass may have been 
responsible for the state of things in France described 
by Bernard Palissy, himself a glass-painter. He tells 
us that, in the later years of the 16th century, painted 
glass was so little esteemed in France that it was 
hawked about the country by dealers in old clothes 
and such like refuse. In any event, it is difficult to 
account, otherwise, for the almost total disappearance 
of the painted windows removed from the churches, 
chapter-houses and other parts of old English monas- 
tic houses after their dissolution. 

Although throughout the Middle Ages there were 
native glass-painters in England — probably as many 
as of any other craft, wood-carvers, wall-painters, 
or what not — ^yet it seems likely that most of the 
designs and patterns used by English artists came 
from the continent. We see in English village 
churches general designs similar to, and often even 
patterns in diapers, borders and quarry ornaments 
identical with those found in continental cathedrals. 
For example, the large floral pattern behind St Peter 
in the north transept window at Le Mans cathedral 
is the same as that used for the backgrounds of all 
the figures in the tracery at Sheering. It would be 
strange, indeed, when we consider the close relationship 

B. 7 


by Google 


which existed between the British Isles and the 
mainland all through the Middle Ages — the con- 
stant passing to and fro of merchant, craftsman and 
ecclesiastic, bringing, not only the news of the day, 
but French and German songs and music, archi- 
tectural ideas, fashions in clothes and illuminated 
books — strange it would be if notions, and even 
identical patterns, prevalent on the continent in 
the matter of painted glass had not come over with 
the rest 

Such a copying of continental methods and 
designs had always been, but, as the Perpendicular 
period neared its end, considerable numbers of 
foreign glass-painters, mainly Flemish, came over 
to, and settled in, England. They were encouraged 
by Henry VII and his son Henry VIII, and there 
can be little doubt but that the glass-painters called, 
in contemporary documents, "the king's painters," 
were, though not all of them Flemings, associated 
together under Flemish direction and that they used 
Flemish, German or Dutch designs in their work. 

While upon the subject of foreign designs, we 
may say a word or two with regard to that much 
discussed piece of glass-painting — the east window 
at St Margaret's church, Westminster. It represents 
tJie Crvxdfixian of Ov/r Lord, with the two thieves 
on either side. Above are angels holding the in- 
struments of the Passion, and, in the side-lights, are 


by Google 


kneeling figures the identity of which is, by no 
means, clear, although they are commonly said to 
be Henry VH and his Queen, Elizabeth of York. 
Above the male kneeling figure is St George and 
over the saint is a red rose with a white one in 
pretence upon it, while above the lady we see St 
Catherine and the arms of Aragon — ^a golden pome- 
granate in a green field. 

The story usually told is that this window was 
intended as a present from the magistrates of Dort 
to Henry VH, and that pictures of that king and 
of his queen were sent to Dort for the purpose of 
securing accuracy in the kneeling figures ; that, before 
the window was finished, Henry VH died, and, when 
it arrived in England, it was given, or sold, by 
Henry VHI to the canons of Waltham Holy Cross, 
who placed it in their church. After the Disso- 
lution, the story goes on to say, the window was 
removed by the king to New Hall, near Boreham, 
and that, after divers vicissitudes, it was ultimately 
purchased by the parishioners of St Margaret's, 

Clearly, as the window stands, the kneeling 
figures cannot be meant for Henry VII and Eliza- 
beth of York. The lady might be, and probably 
is, Catherine of Aragon with her patroness St 
Catherine and her paternal coat-of-arms. As to the 
male figure, the most likely supposition seems to be 



by Google 


that it is intended for Henry VIIL Some have 
suggested Prince Arthur, his brother, Catherine's 
first husband, but it is hardly likely that Henry 
VIII would have set up the window in his chapel 
at New Hall — a favourite residence of his — had this 
been so. Perhaps the true tale may be that the 
window was, originally, intended to contain figures 
of Henry VII and Elizabeth, but that the plan was, 
after that king's death, altered by the substitution 
for them of Henry VIII and Catherine ; or, again, 
even a more Ukely story seems to be that the window 
is not the one intended by the Dort folk for Henry 
VII, but another window altogether, simply a gift to 
the canons at Waltham Abbey by Henry VIII, who, 
in his early days, was a constant visitor there. The 
probability of this last suggestion is increased by 
the fact that the window is distinctly late in style, 
highly developed as to its light and shade, and may 
well have been painted about 1525. 

A noteworthy feature of Perpendicular work is 
the growth of naturalism in landscape backgrounds 
of picture panels. In early examples such scenes 
are mostly painted on white glass heightened with 
yellow, the sky being pot-metal blue, or red and 
blue alternately and often diapered. Later on, 
distances are more naturally drawn on light blue 
glass and carefully shaded with yellow, while the 
sky, which is shaded to suggest clouds, is often 


by Google 


dark blue above and light blue below. A similar 
tendency appears in the drawing of figures — they 
are rather short than tall, perhaps the result of 
putting them under canopies — which have lost the 
constrained attitudes of the Decorated period and 
assume an easy and natural pose. 

Borders round white and yellow quarries are, in 
the earlier years of the style, much the same as 
those of the Decorated period, usually alternate 
pieces of white and yellow and coloured glass with 
designs on them in brown enamel, but as time went 
on. Perpendicular borders got narrower, and, in very 
late examples, there are none. 

Lettering •was very much in evidence in Per- 
pendicular work, long explanatory extracts from 
the Vulgate, or, oftener, the Biblia Pauperum, 
being frequently written on panels above or 
below a picture. Examples are the two side west 
end windows at Fairford. Small letters are still 
black-letter, but capitals are Lombardic and are 
sometimes stained yellow and cross-hatched with 
small leaves in them— a tendency towards illumina- 


by Google 



RENAISSANCE (1547—1603) 

Although we have taken the middle of the 16th 
century as the date for commencement of the Renais- 
sance period, we must not forget that, even from the 
beginning of the second half of the 15th century on 
the continent, though not until later in England, the 
influence of classical models can be traced in archi- 
tecture and its auxiliary crafts. In glass-painting 
we have prospective signs of change in that tendency 
to naturalism which we noticed in Perpendicular 
figure drawing, in the introduction of classical details 
in the canopies of the later part of the period — 
e.g. in the windows at King's College, Cambridge, in 
the more exact drawing and shading of landscapes 
and in the lights and shades of drapery. But, so 
long as glass-painters worked along the old Gothic 
lines — using pot-metal colours, yellow stain and 
brown enamel only — these tendencies were not 
overpoweringly apparent, and it is a fact that the 
closing years of the Perpendicular period, the first 


by Google 


half of the 16th century, saw the perfection, so far 
as breadth, harmony and contrast of colour and the 
play of light and shade are concerned, of the art of 
glass-painting. The painter on glass had, as far as 
we can see to-day, attained to his highest plane by 
about the year 1535, after which his work began 
to lose effectiveness through his fruitless attempt 
to carry contrasts of light and shade beyond all 
reasonable limits by the use of deeper, and ever 
deeper, masses of brown enamel. The result was 
loss of transparency and an appearance of weight 
and opacity. It is, of course, impossible to say how 
the art would have developed had the old system 
of work been adhered to and had the glass-painter 
resisted the temptation to over-do contrasting effects. 
What actually happened was that, just when the 
art was losing its essential features — simplicity and 
transparency — ^a new force came into play, which, by 
encouraging facility of execution, helped the craft 
down the road to ruin. 

This was. the discovery, or, at least, the coming 
into general use — ^for it is very doubtful by whom or 
when the discovery was made — of enamel colours, 
whereby the painter was, at a stroke, freed from the 
limitations imposed upon him by the old pot-metal 
system. Instead of the laborious process of cutting 
Ms local colours, as it were, out of sheets of pot- 
metal, he applied them, like ordinary paint, in a 


by Google 


fluid state, with a brush, on white glass. The number 
of pieces of glass to form the window being inde- 
pendent of the number and size of its coloured parts, 
the whole composition could be painted on a single 
sheet of glass and much lead-work thereby saved. 
All that can, with certainty, be said about the in- 
vention of enamel-painting on glass is that it came 
into general use about the middle of the 16th century 
and succeeded, during the ensuing hundred and 
fifty years, in largely superseding the pot-metal 

A consequence of the use of enamel colours was 
disregard for lead-work as an adjunct to design. 
In pot-metal work the lead must follow the outline 
of every separate bit of colour, but not necessarily 
so in enamel work, for any number of different 
colours can be painted on the same piece of glass. 
As the enamel painter would naturally wish his 
picture to be as little broken up as possible, the 
tendency was to use large sheets of glass varying 
in shape with the painter's convenience, so that, in 
a Renaissance glass-painting, we usually find the lead 
lines running all over the composition with very 
little regard to the outlines of the subjects depicted, 
and, in some cases, the window is made up of large 
squares of glass of almost uniform size. In small 
pictures, the whole painting would be on a single 
sheet of glass. 


by Google 


Enamel glass-painting is seen at its best in small 
compositions, which, in effect, means that it is 
better adapted for dwelling houses than for large 
public buildings. The beautiful little circular me- 
dallions — scenes from Biblical history or classical 
tales, heraldry and such-like — which form a distinct 
type of Renaissance glass-painting, illustrate this. 
They are painted in various shades of brown running 
into red, flesh tints are properly indicated, the yellow 
stain is freely used and bits of bright colour are 
sometimes here and there introduced The medallion 
is surrounded with a border in brown enamel — ^a 
running rose branch, perhaps, with heraldic roses, 
yellow centred, at intervals. Several such medallions, 
one over the other, would be leaded-up in each light, 
with a border — architectural or heraldic, and coloured 
— and floral fiUings-in, in much the same style, except 
for the difference in amount of lead-work, as that 
in which the Norman and Early English medallion 
windows were arranged. 

An interesting, though incomplete, series of such 
little pictures may be seen in the south window of 
the chapel of the Hospital of Our Lady and St 
Thomas of Kent at Great Ilford. As the stonework 
of the window is Decorated Gothic, of course these 
Renaissance panels are out-of-place where they are, 
but they have been there for many years, probably 
since the 17th century, and are conveniently placed 


by Google 




for study. Three are figure subjects, Our Lady 
visiting St Elizabeth^ Joah slaying Amasa, and 
what looks like Lot warned by an angel to leave 

Our Lady visiting St Elizabeth 

his Iioitse, and the remainder are coats-of-arms, in- 
cluding the shield of the Emperor Charles V. 


by Google 




These medallions, one of which is dated 1577, are 
unequal in design and finish and that of Our Lady 

Joab slaying Amasa (Great Ilford) 

and St Elizabeth is much faded. The Joab and 
Amasa is, however, a very beautiful piece of work. 


by Google 


the flesh shading is highly finished and the land- 
scape background — a mediaeval city with water and 
mountains — ^is delicately painted and reminiscent of 
the old Flemish painters. The heraldry, too, is good, 
bold work in the German style, and has a few touches 
of red. Special interest attaches to these panels, 
because they shew us the sort of picture glass with 
which the windows of domestic buildings of the 
Renaissance period were glazed, and for which that 
style is adapted. As fe.r as it is possible to discover, 
the Ilford medallions seem likely to have come either 
from Sir John Gresham's house in Lombard Street, 
London — ^the sign of The Grasshopper — or from old 
Gresham House in Bishopsgate, the London residence 
of Sir Thomas Gresham, when it was dismantled prior 
to demolition. 

Interesting examples of Renaissance domestic 
glass in brown and yellow are to be seen at the 
Chateau of Chantilly — 44 panels with stories of the 
loves of Cupid and Psyche. The composition and 
drawing are almost perfect, but they are spoilt by 
the arrangement of the lead-work, which, instead 
of defining the outlines, tends to confuse them. 
These paintings are by a Fleming, Cocxyen, and are 
dated 1542. 

Is it too much to hope that architects may, in 
time, come to adopt this brown and yellow medal- 
lion style for the windows of the many Renaissance 


by Google 


buildings which are set up to-day in our cities instead 
of the meaningless patterns, usually Vart rKmveau, 
in lead-work and white glass — the only recommenda- 
tion of which is cheapness — which they commonly 
affect ? 

As confirmatory of our idea about the proper 
use of this style, we may refer to the churches of 
St Nicholas and St Pantaloon at Troyes in Champagne, 
which are entirely glazed with it. Seen upon a large 
scale, afi in these churches, the style is distinctly 
disappointing and we realise that brown and yellow 
alone will not do for the windows of large buildings. 
Decided colour in masses is necessary to give strength 
to big transparent designs. 

As it is obvious, having regard to the religious 
troubles of the 16th century, that we cannot expect 
to find native glass-painting in England for church 
purposes during the second half of that century, we 
must look abroad for examples. At Montmorency 
church, near Paris, is a fine series of Renaissance 
windows dated 1523 — 63. We notice the absence of 
borders, which, indeed, tended to disappear in late 
Perpendicular work, and, also, the importance of the 
figures of donors relative to the subject matters of 
the windows. Rather more than one-half of the lower 
liglits are given up to kneeling figures of the donors, 
the Constable Anne de Montmorency, his wife and 
children. To take one as a sample of the rest: in 


by Google 


the upper half of the central lower light is the Good 
Shepherd with the Holy Lamb and, on either hand, 
in the side-lights are Our Lady and St John. Below 
these are the Constable kneeling at a prayer desk, 
St Anne his Patroness, standing by. Behind him are 
his five sons — kneeling figures in armour with sur 
coats of arms, one of them helmeted and the others 
having their helmets on the ground. In the tracery 
lights are, in the centre, the Montmorency arms — 
16 blue eaglets on a gold gix)und — supported by 
angels, above the shield a typical Renaissance feature, 
a cherub's bead, and, on either side, a mailed hand 
grasping a sword entwined with a scroll bearing the 
words " nos apia " in Roman letters. 

Interesting, as well for workmanship as for subject 
— the story of the world from its creation to the 
Sacrifice upon the Cross — is a window in the Lady 
chapel at the church of St Mary Magdalen, Troyes. 
In 25 pictures the painter sets forth the tale, which 
begins in the lowest tier of panels. First, in four panels, 
the world, as a rotating ball, is being fashioned by God 
the Father, who, in cope and triple tiara, stands by 
its side. In each panel the globe is represented in a 
more finished form, until, in the fourth, it appears 
complete. Then follow Adam and Eve in the garden, 
their fall and its consequences, the Old Testament 
stories, Abraham's sacrifice, the Israelites in the 
desert, the lifted-up serpent and the rest. The 


by Google 


Annunciation, Our Lady's visit to St Elizabeth, the 
Nativity and the visit of the three kings continue 
the story, which is finished, in the topmost tracery 
light, with Our Lord on the cross between the two 
thieves, St Mary Magdalen embracing the cross and 
our Lady and St John on either side. Below them, 
in the tracery, are pictures of the betrayal of Our 
Lord and His entombment, and, in the smaller 
lights, angels and bishops. From the small, crumpled 
drapery folds one gathers that this window is Flemish 
and its date is about the middle of the 16th century. 
A remarkable feature is the stonework of its tracery 
which runs into the form of a large fleur-de-lis, in the 
central leaf of which is the Crucifixion. 

As to Renaissance Jesse windows, the general 
design of this type of window, necessarily remained 
the same as in previous styles, the principal variations 
being in the treatment of the vine, the branches and 
leaves of which became more natural, and in the 
figures of kings, which were often portraits, easily 
recognisable, of contemporary princes, in some 
cases, no doubt, donors. The Jesse in St Stephen's 
church, Beauvais, is, perhaps, the best known example 
of this practice : there we see portraits, among others, 
of the Emperor Charles V (1516— 56), Francis I (died 
1547), and his successor Henry II (died 1559). 
Although, on the whole, so natural in treatment — 
as witness, in particular, the great lily in the tracery 


by Google 


from which Our Lady, holding the Divine Child, 
springs — the huge blossoms from which the half- 
length figures of kings issue are conventional in 
the extreme. Coloured backgrounds for Jesse8 being 
then in fetshion, that at Beauvais is blue. 

At Sens cathedral is a brilliant Jesse window, with 
red background, which contains a feature not always 
understood — a donkey on one of the branches. 
Grotesque as it may seem to the modem mind, the 
presence of this creature is quite in accord with 
Catholic tradition, which has always honoured the 
animal which carried the Founder of Christianity 
in triumph into Jerusalem. In the cathedral at 
Caudebec is a Jesse in which the figures are full- 
length, a return to the earlier type. At Rouen, in 
the churches of St Maclou and St Vincent are Jesse 
windows with white branches on blue grounds, and, 
in St Vincent's is, also, an interesting variant of the 
Jesse type ; the vine springs from St Anne, mother of 
Our Lady, instead of from Jesse. 

Another curious use of the genealogical tree is 
seen in the wine-press type of window. Instead of 
Jesse at the foot of the window is Our Lord's Body 
bruised in the wine-press, whence His Blood falls 
into a chalice. From His breast, or, sometimes, from 
the chalice, springs the vine, which bears, not Our 
Lord's ancestors, but those bom of His teaching — 
His spiritual descendants, as it were — the Apostles 


by Google 


and saints. The best known example is the window 
I)ainted by Linard Gonthier in Troyes cathedral, in 
which the vine springs from Our Lord's breast and 
from its flowers issue the Apostles. This window is 
dated 1625, but, having regard to the excellence of 
its colour scheme and its workmanship — quite equal 
to the best 16th century work — we mention it here. 
There is also a fine wine-press window in the church 
of St ;^tienne du Mont at Paris, one of twelve enamel- 
painted panels by Robert Pinaigrier one of the best 
known 16th century glass-painters. Its vine bears 
figures, like so many of the Jesse windows of that 
day, intended to represent reigning sovereign&---the 
pope, the emperor, the kings of France and England 
and bishops and cardinals. At the church of St 
Faith, Conches, may be seen another style of wine- 
press window. Our Lord Himself is crushing grapes 
in the press, the flowing juice from which takes the 
place of His blood in the more usual composition. 

We have, already, referred to the tendency, notice- 
able in the Perpendicular style, for figures of donors to 
usurpan unduly important position in picture- windows. 
One of the best illustrations of this bad custom is the 
painting — ^the descent of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost 
— in one of the many 16th century windows in the 
church at Montfort L'Amaury, near Versailles. The 
window has two long lights and the lower part of 
each light — ^fuUy a quarter of the whole — is occupied 


by Google 


by a kneeling figure of a donor. The subject repre- 
sented is quite subordinated to the donors. Our 
Lady and the Apostles, though well drawn and 
grouped, take quite a second place, and, owing largely 
to the sharpness of the perspective, they seem to be 
disappearing into the background. This window is 
a good example of Renaissance work and it makes 
us realise how far we have travelled from the 
Decorated period. Leaving out of consideration the 
moral aspect of the donor's question, we find no 
borders, no foliated tracery, no bold single figures 
under canopies, no trellissed or quarried background 
and no repose. Instead we have classical architecture 
— the waggon head vault resting on pillars and 
entablature of Roman composite style, — the sharp 
perspective, the distance seen between the pillars, all 
typical of the Renaissance and all excellent in their 
proper setting — an easel picture or tapestry, or, 
perhaps, a wall of a classical building. As glass- 
paintings, the Montfort L'Amaury windows are 

As we have already noticed, the 16th century 
saw a great increase in the use of painted glass for 
secular purposes. In England, the splendid palaces 
which were then set up by the Tudor kings and 
by the new nobility (who rivalled their sovereigns 
in extravagant magnificence)— Whitehall, Hampton 
Court, New Hall, Audley End, Wanstead and 


by Google 


Somerset House, and the lesser dwellings which were 
erected up and down the country by knight and 
squire — Shipton Hall and Benthall Hall, Shropshire, 
Lake House, Wilts., and Barlborough Hall, Derby- 
shire, among many others — the windows of all must, 
originally, have been glazed either with quarries and 
heraldry in the old manner or with brown and yellow 
picture panels like those at Ilford. 

For window painting on a large scale in secular 
buildings during this period we must, however, again 
turn to the continent, especially France, where among 
many other examples, we find at Troyes, in the 
eight windows of the great hall of the Library, 32 
panels, painted by Linard Gonthier, depicting all 
that happened at Troyes when Henry IV of France 
visited that city in 1595 and the coat-armour of most 
of those who there and then foregathered 



As we might suppose, from the terms. of Queen 
Elizabeth's Ordinance requiring plain glass to be sub- 
stituted for coloured glass in churches and for the 
destruction of all glass-paintings of a superstitious 



by Google 


character, little or do picture glass for religious 
purposes was painted in England during her reign 
or for some years after. The craft of the glass- 
painter did not, however, wholly languish during 
that period, for it is certain that the demand for 
heraldic glass progressively increased from mid- 
16th century days to the end of the 17th century. 
And not only for secular buildings, for it became 
the fashion to substitute for the devotional subjects 
combined with heraldry, which had filled the windows 
of chantry chapels, the coats-of-arms, usually ela- 
borately quartered, of the new femilies which had 
obtained possession of the lands of the dissolved 
religious houses, chantries and guilds. 

Many illustrations of this custom might be given. 
At Great Pamdon, in the chancel, is a mutilated 
shield, very well painted on white glass in enamel 
colours, shewing the arms of William Cecil, first Lord 
Burghley, and his second wife Margaret, daughter 
of Sir Anthony Cooke, of Gidea Hall, Romford, to 
whom he was married in 1546. The shield has been 
reloaded in modem times, with the result that the 
quarterings, of which there are twelve, are in 
hopelessly wrong order, and fragments from other 
windows have been mixed up with the heraldry. 
Lord Burghley did not die until 1598, and we may 
safely assign the date of this glass to the closing 
years of the 16th century. 


by Google 

Arms of William Cecil, Lord Burghley (Great Parndon) 


by Google 


A very pretty bit of heraldry in enamel colours, 
also illoBtratiye of the practice with regard to 
chantry chapels to which we have alluded, is the 
shield (there are three others relating to him) of 
Emanuel Wollaye at Latton church, near Harlow. 
The arrangement of the design is simple, the charges 
are well spaced and the diapering of the white glass 
— the flanches and the woolsacks — ^is refined and 
delicate. The woolsacks — of course, a pun on the 
name — are on a green field and the wolves — ^another 
pun, perhaps — are blue on white. This Wollaye 
shield and its fellows are now leaded into plain 
white glass quarries in the east window of what 
was, formerly, the chapel of the Holy Trinity and 
Our Lady on the north side of the chancel, but is 
now used as the vestry, and there can be little 
doubt but that they occupy the place formerly held 
by a religious picture and the coat-of-arms of the 
founder of a chantry in Latton church. 

Uffington church, Lincolnshire, can shew another 
case of this sort in the arms of TroUope impaling 
Sheffield in the north window of the north chancel 

Towards the end of the reign of James I, however, 
a revival of glass-painting for church windows set in 
in England and it cannot be said that it has ever, 
since that time, except in Commonwealth days, en- 
tirely ceased in the land, although 18th, and the 


by Google 

Arms of WoUaye (Latton) 


by Google 


greater part of 19th, century picture- windows are 
very poor things judged from the standpoint of the 
use painted glass is intended to serve. Archbishops 
Abbot and Laud, differing as they did in ideas of 
theology and church government, both helped forward 
this revival by patronage of Flemish glass-painters, 
who again began to settle and work in England. 
The best known of them were Baptista Sutton and 
the two Van Linges, Bernard and Abi*aham, many 
specimens of whose work, signed and dated, may 
be seen to-day — especially in Oxford Colleges. At 
Wadham College chapel, built in 1613— an interesting 
example of Jacobean Gothic — ^the windows are con- 
temporary with the building, and the east window, 
soft and rich in tone, is by the elder Van Linge, and 
is, often, said to be his finest known work. The 
chapel windows at University College, set up in the 
reign of Charles I, are by the younger Van Linge,. 
who also painted the windows (except the two 
westernmost on either side) of the chapel at Queen's 
College. One specimen of his work, too, has been 
left by modem restorers in a window at the West end 
of the north nave-aisle of the cathedral at Oxford — 
a picture of Jonah and the gourd. 

During the 17th century the iignre cmd canopy 
design continued in use, the details — often coloured 
— of the canopies being either classical or classicised 
Gothic of the style affected by Sir Christopher Wren 


by Google 


in his restorations of Gothic buildings. But the most 
usual type for large windows was a picture extending 
over all the lower lights and, often, into the tracery, 
set in an architectural framework of the style which 
we noticed at Montfort L'Amaury. Sometimes, 
figures of donors were beneath the picture. Most 
of the work of the Van Linges at Oxford is of this 
character, with landscape backgrounds and much 
blue and rich olive green in the colour scheme. The 
windows at Lincoln's Inn chapel, London, saved by 
Archbishop Laud from destruction as superstitious 
and idolatrous, are either by one of the Van Linges 
or by a painter of their school They are, for the 
most part, figures under canopies with donors' arms 
at foot, and are extremely rich in colour. In the 
west window are considerable remains of its original 
glass, among them the arms of Sir William Noy, the 
unpopular attorney-general of Charles I. 

The tendency in the painting of flesh was to 
colour it naturally ; lips and cheeks were tinted 
red, the iris of the eye blue and the eye-ball was 
shaded Inscriptions were in Roman characters, 
and initial letters were often ornamental and stained 

When the war between Charles I and the Parlia- 
ment broke out, the Van Linges left England, but 
English painters, trained in their studios, seem to 
have carried on their methods of work. Henry 


by Google 


Giles, of York, who, in 1687, finished some of the 
uncompleted work of the younger Van Linge at 
University College chapel, is believed to have been 
one of their pupils. The east window of this chapel 
— the Nativity — ^is entirely Giles* work, and may be 
taken as an illustration of the extent to which the 
technical part of glass-painting had, in his time, 
deteriorated. For, so badly must the enamels have 
been prepared, that they have almost completely 
perished, leaving the pot-metal colours and yellow 
stain intact. 

A great defect — want of clearness in the lights — 
is noticeable in enamel glass-painting all through 
this period and, indeed, down to modem times. The 
main cause — one easily got rid of— seems to be the 
custom of laying a thin coat of white enamel paint 
over the back of the window. It is this practice, 
based apparently on the utterly erroneous idea that 
the proper office of window glass is, not to admit 
light, but to form a screen on which to paint a 
picture, which produces that peculiar effect, observ- 
able in all enamel-painted glass, suggestive of the 
idea that the window is made of porcelain. 

To Flemish influence may, perhaps, be due the 
existence of other English glass-painters of this 
century, although it may well be that there had 
been no break in the succession of the English 
schools of glass-painting, so far as heraldry and 


by Google 


similar decorative work were concerned, even during 
the Commonwealth, 

Besides heraldry, there was a fashion in the 17th 
century for portraits of eminent persons — kings, 
pious founders and so forth — to be painted on glass 
within small circles or wreaths. At Magdalen and 
Wadham Colleges, Oxford, are such little pictures 
of Charles I and his queen, and at Brasenose and 
St John's are similar paintings of their founders. 
At Harlow church, also, in the north transept window, 
in which is much good heraldic glass, principally of 
Tudor date, are portraits of Charles I and his grand- 
daughter, Queen Anne, the king's picture being curious 
in that it shews a celestial crown by the side of his 
head. Such portraits as these are to be found, also, in 
private dwellings, a good example being a head with 
heraldry at Northill, Bedfordshire, which is signed 
by the painter, "J. Oliver £ 1664." 

On the continent the old devotional subjects 
continued to furnish material for the glass-painter. 
A very favourite style was an extension of the use 
of bright colour to the small medallions to which we 
referred in the last chapter, combined with greater 
variety in their, shapes and surroundings. Often they 
were oblong, set in a frame of classical architecture 
with figures of saints at the sides and small sacred 
pictures and arms of donors at the top and bottom. 
Several of these would be set, one over the other, in 


by Google 


a single light, with Renaissance borders and fiUings-in 
of white and yellow glass. The borders were usually 
grotesque Renaissance in design — a mixture of vases, 
scrolls, wreaths, fauns, satyrs and so forth. The little 
pictures themselves were painted in enamel colours 
on a single piece of glass, but the architectural 
coloured setting was usually pot-metal shaded with 
brown. At Lambourne church, in the chancel, are 
five such little pictures, brought in the 1 8th century 
from Baden, which convey an excellent idea of this 
style, though they are without their white and yellow 
borders and settings. Each picturfe was the gift of 
a separate donor, whose name, office and arms are set 
forth at the foot of the panel. One of them we illus- 
trate — The adoration of the Shepherds. The whole 
is painted in enamel except the entablature and the 
bases of the pillars, which are ruby. Notice the 
candle held by St Joseph, its halo like a palm-leaf fan, 
the sheep on the floor by the cradle and the quaint 
child-figure of Our Lady standing by St Anne, for, 
by a curious combination of two stages of the history, 
which is common in German art, the Virgin is i*epre- 
sented as still a little maid, while St Anne holds in her 
arms the Divine Child already bora of her. Observe, 
too, above St Anne the seated figure of the donor — 
as one supposes it to be — Herr Melchior Abeltin, in his 
robes of office. Though delicate in workmanship 
and rich in colour, these panels offend against all 


by Google 

The Adoration of the Shepherds (Lambourne) 

Digitized by 



rules of the art of glass-painting. They are too small, 
when viewed from below, to be effective as helps to 
devotion and the colours of the pictures, owing to 
the absence of dividing lead-lines, run too much 
together to give the effect of the old mosaic windows. 
The glass-painters of the Renaissance, by their neg- 
lect, or ineffective use, of lead-binding for outlines 
demonstrate its value for that purpose. 

For domestic buildings in Renaissance style — ^for 
hall and staircase windows, top-lights in dwelling 
rooms and such-like — enamel-painted shields, set in 
scroll-work, are very effective and appropriate, and 
there are plenty of good specimens of l7th century 
work left to serve as models. At the old Pyed Bull 
Inn at Islington, long ago destroyed, where, says 
tradition, Sir Walter Raleigh at one time lived, were 
several 16th and 17th century heraldic glass panels, 
among them the arms of Sir Francis Drake and 
those of Raleigh himself. Above Raleigh's shield 
was a tobacco-plant with sea-lions, while below were 
parrots, a grey one and a green, all emblematical, 
perhaps, of Raleigh's world-wanderings and of his 
fondness for tobacco. 

There is a very elaborate piece of heraldry of the 
early part of the 17th century at Noke Hill church, 
near Romford — it was brought from elsewhere — 
shewing the quartered shield, with helmet, crest 
and mantling and the Garter, of Francis Manners, 
sixth Earl of Rutland. 


by Google 


An interesting, though not uncommon, instance 
of the survival of a feature of one style in work of 
a subsequent, and essentially different style, is to 
be found, in the north chancel window at Ilford 
Hospital chapel, in a small quartered shield of 
Dennis set within a boldly drawn wreath — o, contrast 
to the rest of the design — suggestive of the Per- 
pendicular styla In the wreath, however, is an 
incongruity, for, whereas its main feature is a purple 
chaplet, the clasps, white and yellow glass, are 
decorated with grotesque Renaissance patterns in- 
stead of the simple floral design — such as a rose 
or marguerite — of Perpendicular days. In the 
tracery of this window is a typical example, dated 
1631, of I7th century heraldic painting, clearly 
English work — the arms of Ward, with three quar- 
terings and two small side shields, and helmet, crest 
and mantling, — ^all set amidst fruit and flowers in 
a light blue ground. Among the panels, already 
described, in the south chancel window of this 
chapel is a pretty piece of heraldic painting, prob- 
ably French, of the I7th century. The field of 
the shield is cobalt blue and the leaves and fruit 
around it are naturally coloured — ^green, purple and 
yellow: a pastoral staff, without a mitre, behind 
the shield indicates that the arms are those of an 

By the end of the 17th century, glass-painting 


by Google 


had nearly reached its lowest point, and, after the 
traditions of the Van Linge school had died out, 
there is very little in its records worthy of notice 
until the revival of the art about the middle of the 
19th century. Of that revival and of the progres- 
sively excellent work which has followed it, we do 
not propose, now, to speak, beyond observing that 
the success of modem glass-painters in their craft 
seems to be in proportion to the study which they 
have given to pre- 16th century glass, to the fidelity 
with which they have adhered to ancient methods 
and models and to the extent to which they have 
imbibed the spirit which animated the workers of 
Gothic times. 

Nevertheless, a few words upon 18th century 
glass-painting may not be out of place. At the 
beginning of the century the Price family were 
known as glass-painters. There were two brothers, 
William and Joshua, and Joshua's son William. 
Joshua produced good work in the Van Linge style, 
the best known of his paintings being the east 
window at St Andrew's, Holbom, which represents 
the Last Supper and the Resurrection. With the 
excellencies — ^the richness of colour, the careful 
drawing and composition — of the Van Linge sdiool, 
this picture has the defects of the same school, 
especially the heavy and overworked shading. It 
is, however, by a long way, the best piece of work 


by Google 


done prior to the modern revival. The other Prices 
did nothing that will bear comparison with Joshua's 
work. In 1702 the elder William painted, almost 
entirely in enamel, the east window at Merton 
College chapel, and his nephew and namesake, in 
1740, restored the 17th century windows on the 
north side of New College chapel. The Van Linge 
windows in Queen's College chapel were, also, re- 
stored by the Prices in 1717. 

William Peckitt of York succeeded to the connec- 
tion of the younger William Price, and he did a great 
deal of work in his day. There is a large window 
by him, designed by Cipriani — the British Minerva 
presenting Newton oddly enough to George III — in 
the library at Trinity College, Cambridge. There is 
very little pot-metal glass in this painting and the 
enamel colours are hatched in the style of the oil- 

A piece of glass-painting — much discussed by the 
savants of tiie day, Horace Walpole among them — 
is the west window at New College chapel, Oxford. 
It was painted (as already mentioned) by Thomas 
Jervais (died 1801) from designs by Sir Joshua 
Reynolds, and represents, in the upper part, the 
Nativity and, below, l^e theological virtues. Faith, 
Hope and Charity, and the four cardinal virtues, 
Prudence, Justice, Fortitude and Temperance. It 
is executed entirely in enamel colours. 


by Google 




That branch of glass-painting which longest 
resisted deterioration was heraldic work. One 
reason for this was the reserve imposed upon the 
painter by the rules of heraldry : he could not go 
beyond the four colours commonly used in the 
science — gvles (red), azure (blue), vert (green) and 
purpure (purple), and the metals or (gold or yellow) 
and argent (silver or white). Black, of course, he 
had, but as for the little-used colours, tenn6 (orange) 
and sanguine (blood red), I count them as varieties 
of yellow and red respectively. In the use of the 
allowed colours he was bound, too, by rule : colour 
must not be placed on colour or metal on metal, but 
colour on metal and vice versd. It is true that this 
rule was not always observed in continental heraldry, 
some authorities going so £str as to deny its existence, 
and we have, in the arms of the Kings of Jerusalem 
(gold crosses in a silver field), a notable instance of 
such non-observance, but, on the whole, the rule has 
always held in practice. 


by Google 


Then, again, by the very nature of heraldic art — 
the shewing of objects, mostly very simple in design, 
on a flat ground — shading was barred, and we know 
that one of the most potent causes of the ultimate 
ruin of heraldic painting in general was the attempt 
to represent, by elaborate shading, charges on a 
shield as they are in nature. 

Whether the origin of heraldry was the need for 
a means of recognition of a fighting man when his 
fece was concealed by a closed head-piece, or whether 
it was derived from ancient Aryan customs or has 
some connection with fetish worship, it is certain 
that it began to take form, as an ordered system, 
about the time when closed helmets came into use. 
Thus the head-man, the lord around whose person 
the folk of a manor or district would rally in fight, 
would be recognised by the charges on his shield 
and banner, and his sons, and often his brothers 
and other relations, would adopt a similar design 
with diflerences. So, by long &miliar use, a general 
recognition of the whole family by a certain heraldic 
device would spring up. 

By some such process the means of recognition 
in war came to serve the same end in general social 
life, and what more reasonable than the idea that, 
when a man died, a sight of his shield in window or 
on monument would remind men of good will to say' 
a prayer for his soul ? 



by Google 


Besides this memorial aspect of the science it 
ultimately came about, as the result of disuse of 
defensive armour, that the value of heraldry, as a 
means of distinguishing one &mily from another, 
became its only raison d'itre, and it developed into 
a complicated science the main object of which was 
the registi-ation of family alliances. Thus arose the 
practice of quartering, which, beginning vnth the 
inclusion of the arms of huslmnd and wife, side by 
side, in the same shield, grew at last to the much- 
divided shield, with, perhaps, as many as 50 or more 
quarterings, of Elizabethan times. 

There is but little heraldry in glass to be found 
in the Early English style. Some pattern windows 
have shields, but they are more like ornamented 
divisions of the window than separate designs, as 
witness the shields of Clare, England and France 
(ancient, semSe qf lilies) in the east vnndow at Selling 
church, Kent. The heraldry of the day was simple 
— ^a shield, seldom containing more than two colours 
in the field, with a single charge, such as a cross or 
a lion — and its simplicity was reflected in such coat- 
armour as we find in Early English glass. The 
shields are large, of the earlier heater shape — i.e. the 
sides curve inwards continuously from their tops— 
and one coat only is in each shield, for quartering 
had not been invented. 

As the Decorated period developed, shields got 


by Google 

Arms of France (ancient), Selling 


by Google 


smaller and narrower and changed slightly in shape : 
the upper parts of their sides became parallel, at 
right angles to the top lines. Such shields, still 
without helmet or other accessories, we find in the 
upper parts of lower lights, set in white ornamented 
quarries. Often they are surrounded by narrow 
circular borders, made up of small roses or rings 
and dots, with coloured fillings-in between the 
shields and borders. The charges are always few 
and simple and boldly drawn, and sometimes, as in 
the Homchurch chantry window, they are painted 
in brown and yellow only, without reference to their 
proper heraldic colours. Quartered shields, though 
never with more than four quarters, appear in this 
period, but they are not so common as impaled 
shields, i.e. shields divided vertically into two equal 
parts for husband and wife. 

The usual arrangement is, say, a three-lighted 
window, with a picture-panel, or figure and canopy, 
in the central light, the husband's arms alone in the 
dexter light and those of the husband and wife 
impaled in the sinister. Shields were, in early 
Decorated work, seldom diapered, but after a time 
diapering was sparingly applied to the ordinaries — 
bends, chevrons, chiefs and so forth — and, in the 
later years of the style, we find the whole richly 

When shields occur in tracery they are often 


by Google 


hung by the guige, or shield belt, from a branch 
or a rosette, and, in large tracery lights, they are 
set between leaves, within narrow borders, running 
into the foils, like the Berkeley shield at Westonbirt 
church. Impaled shields were, and are, used for 
ecclesiastical and other official arms — the official 
arms in the dexter half of the shield and the family 
coat in the sinister. Sometimes, however, connec- 
tion with an office is indicated by a charge from the 
official arms being placed outside the shield con- 
taining the family arms, but within the composition, 
say, between the shield and a circular border running 
round it. An interesting example of this practice 
is the quartered shield in a window at Arkesden 
church, near Saflron Walden, of Thomas of Arundel 
or Fitzalan, successively Bishop of Ely, Archbishop 
of York and Archbishop of Canterbury. The arms 
of Fitzalan, a lion rcmvpant gold in a red fidd, are 
in the first and fourth quarters, and cheeky (like a 
chess-board) gold and hluey for Warrenne, are in the 
second and third quarters — a true quartered coat. 
The shield is set between three crowns to indicate 
the bishop's occupancy of the See of Ely — the arms 
of which are three croivna in a red field — a circum- 
stance which enables us to fix the date of this piece 
of glass between 1374, when Thomas became Bishop 
of Ely, and 1388, when he was translated to York, 
Another quartered coat of this period is at Little 


by Google 


Chesterford — the first and fourth quarters simply 
a blue and gold pattern representing a fur called by 
heralds vair, and in the second and third quarters 
a fes8 between six crosses patonce — aU gold in a red 
field, for Beauchamp of Hache. 

In the Decorated period, family badges — ^such as 
the bear and ragged staff of Warwick, the Percy 
crescent, the Hungerford sickle, the Dacre knot and 
so forth — begin to appear in painted glass, often 
on lozenge-shaped quarries. Also, we find rebuses, 
punning allusions to surnames, like Abbot Ramryge's 
device at St Albans, a ram with a collar inscribed 
ryge, or Abbot Kirton's at Peterborough, a hirh on 
a tun or barrel, or Archbishop Islip's name in a 
quarry ornament, which we illustrate. 

Speaking generally, and without reference to a 
few particular cases, arms were borne, prior to the 
middle of the 15th century, only by the land-holding 
classes — the origin, in this instance, being military — 
and by great ecclesiastics. Rich merchants, how- 
ever, needed something analogous to coat-armour, 
and so it became a custom for them to make dis- 
tinctive devices for themselves by combining their 
initials with a cross and a triangle, and, often, with 
other objects, affcer the style of Sir John Gresham's 
mark, to which we refer later. These devices were 
called merchants' marks, and they are found, in 
plenty, used for all decorative purposes, carved in 


by Google 

Punning device on quarry 


by Google 


wood or stone or painted on glass, from the 14th 
century onwards. In the poem Pierce the Plough- 
man's Creed (1394) — not by William Langland, 
though often attributed to him — mention is made 
of these marks in the description of a Dominican 
church : 

"Wide wyndowes y- wrought 
Y-wryten fal thikke, 
Shynen with shapen sheldes, 
To shewen aboute, 
With merkes of merchauntes 
Ymedeled betwene 
Mo than twentie and two 
Twyse ynoumbbred." 

Perpendicular heraldry was a gradual develop- 
ment, mainly in increased richness of detail, from 
that of the Decorated period. At first, there was 
but little diflFerence between the styles, but gradually 
diapering assumed more complicated patterns, and 
charges were drawn in bolder outline, with more 
attention to detail and, often, in grotesque shapes. 
Quarterings increased in number and full achieve- 
ments became the fashion — ^helmets with mantling 
and crests, coronets, supporters and mottoes were 
added to the shield. The shield itself, too, tended 
to variety in shape, until, towards the end of the 
style, it is found in almost every conceivable form, 
a circumstance which paved the way for the floriated, 


by Google 

Arms of Norreys and Beaufort (Ockholt) 


by Google 


and quite non-heraldic, shields of the Renaissance 
and subsequent periods. 

The complete achievement first appears in glass 
in England about 1450, but earlier abroad. Fine 
examples of this type are the arms in the Hall 
windows at Ockholt, already referred to. We illus- 
trate two of these lights, shewing the arms of Norreys, 
probably of Sir Edward Norreys — ^and those of 
Beaufort — ^most likely that Edmund Beaufort, Duke 
of Somerset, who was beheaded at Tewkesbury in 
1471. The plain shield, squarer in shape than the 
Decorated type, was still, however, used, in lower 
lights surrounded by border and coloured fiUings-in 
and, later, by fiowered wreaths, in panels below 
figure and canopy subjects, and in tracery lights 
supported by angels or hung by the guige. Punning 
allusions, too, were common, as in the wreath of 
peach leaves and fruit (each peach charged with the 
letter 4) round the shield of Sir John Pech^ (1622) 
in Lullingstone church, Kent. 

Large tracery lights often had shields in their 
centres, with scrolls inscribed with mottoes on the 
quarries. An instance is the shield of Cardinal 
Beaufort (died 1447) in a quatre-foiled tracery 
compartment of one of the refectory windows at 
the Hospital of St Cross, near Winchester. The 
shield is ensigned with a cardinal's hat, the cords 
and tassels of which mingle with the quarries, 


by Google 


mottoed " A honeur et lyesse," in the two side and 
bottom foils. 

Perhaps the most prominent of the uses to which 

Arms of Sir John Gresham (Great Uford) 

heraldry was put in the glass of this period was 
decoration of the surcoats of armoured figures, as 


a by-Google 




the donors at Le Mans, and, less commonly, of 
women's dresses and ecclesiastical vestments. Bor- 
ders, too, were, as in the Decorated period, often 

Merchant's mark of Sir John Gresham (Great Ilford) 

heraldic, made up of badges, charges from a shield, 
ostrich feathera, monograms and so forth, alternating 


by Google 


with coloured glass^ and the custom of using brown 
enamel heightened with yellow stain alone, without 
other colour, was increasingly prevalent. 

With the 16th century came signs of the Renais- 
sance, and, by 1540 or thereabouts, Gothic had 
largely given place to classical forms for shields and . 
accessories, and we get such monstrosities — ^from 
the heraldic point of view — ^as the panel at Ilford 
hospital shewing the arms of Sir John Gresham, Et. 
(di^ 1555), and the oval-shaped shield, or car- 
touche, on which his merchant's mark is painted. 
The quarries decorated with the Gresham badge — 
a grasshopper — are fair specimens of the poor kind 
of thing which the ornamented quarry had become. 
The letters I and M in the mouths of the grasshoppers 
stand for John and Mary — Sir John Gresham and 
Mary his wife. 

After 1700 heraldic ^ass-painting rapidly de- 
teriorated and soon became the wretched travesty 
of heraldic decoration — enamel painted on thin, 
clear glass — which we often meet with in 18th cen- 
tury churches, and we can hardly say that the re- 
vival of glass-painting in modem times has, as yet, 
restored heraldry in glass to anything approaching 
its ancient standard. 


by Google 


by Google 




We have already referred to the fragmentary 
state of the greater part of the old painted 
glass which has survived to our time& Tliere is 
abundant evidence — ^a large volume could be filled 
with it — ^that, since the 16th century, destruction 
here and abstraction there of the ancient painted 
windows have been continuous. Take one or two 

St Martin's church, Stamford, is a very museum 
of old heraldic glass, and we might, at first sight, 
conclude that here, at least, the windows have been 
carefully preserved. In the east window are more 
than forty shields of arms — episcopal sees, York 
and Lincoln, the abbey of Peterborough, the Prior 
of Durham, old baronial femilies, Marmion, Grey, 
Comyn and others. But enquiry would bring out 
the fact that the greater part of this bmve show was 
brought to St Martin's from other churches — among 
others, Snape, Yorkshire, and Tattershall, Lincoln- 
shire — in 1754 by Brownlow Cecil, Earl of Exeter, 
whose object seems to have been to give an air 

B. 10 


by Google 


of baronial splendour to the church in which his 
ancestors lay buried. The spirit in which these 
removals were carried out may be judged of, if a 
writer in the Gentleman's Magazine (1821, Part ii, 
p. 307) is to be trusted, from the fitct that, after the 
painted glass had been removed from the choir of 
Tattershall church, the window openings there were 
left unglazed for fifty years, although the earl had 
promised to replace the old stuff with plain glass. 
The 18th centuiy Earl of Exeter did no worse than 
many have done before and since his time, and it was 
certainly a fortunate accident that he set up his 
spoils in a parish church instead of in a private 

To come nearer to our own times. When William 
Flower, Norroy king-at-arms, visited Rochford church, 
Essex, in the days of Edward VI or Elizabeth, he 
noted, in some of the church windows, among other 
ancient heraldry, the arms of Bohun. This Bohun 
coat was of peculiar interest as being the only 
memorial, left at Rochford of the builder of the 
14th century church which preceded the present 
Perpendicular structure. The Bohun who built the 
old church was either William de Bohun, Earl of 
Northampton (died 1360), third son of Humphrey, 
Earl of Hereford and Essex, or his son Humphrey, 
Lord Constable of England (died 1372). It is certain 
that the Bohun coat — the mere monetary value of 


by Google 


which was very considerable — together with frag- 
ments of figures and canopies, scroll work and 
inscriptions, were in the east window of Rochford 
church when its restoration was taken in hand in 
1862, and that, during that restoration, it was re- 
moved and has never been replaced. This is only 
one of many similar cases known to the writer, and, 
although it may be freely admitted that better ideas 
about, and a juster appreciation of, ancient painted 
glass are gaining ground over the country, yet there 
are, unhappily, still many — often people of influence 
and authority — who have not attained to correct 
views on the subject, and it cannot be said that 
the old painted glass in our churches is, speaking 
generally, so safe and secure from destruction or 
removal as one would like it to be. 

The truth is that there is no eflFective authority 
to protect it Legally speaking, the property in 
painted windows is in the churchwardens as repre- 
sentatives of the parishioners; but, if they are 
neither so well instructed as to be interested in them 
nor so scrupulous in duty as to preserve them, no 
one else can interfere — or, at least, is at all likely 
to do so — if the windows are destroyed or taken 
away. Then it often happens that the only old 
painted glass left in the church is in an aisle or side 
chapel belonging to a private person, usually as 
appurtenant to his house, and the churchwardens 



by Google 


eannot legally interfere with it, even by way of 
needful repair. The powers of the churchwardens, 
also, so far as they do extend, are subject to control 
by the bishop, whose fieiculty is necessary to the 
removal of painted glass from the church windows, 
and it is to be feared that a fie^culty, in some cases, 
rather fietcilitates the destruction or loss of old glass 
than its preservation. For, when the mass of broken 
lead and small, dirty, lichen-covered pieces of glass, 
which together make up an old painted window — 
perhaps an Early English medallion of priceless value 
— ^has been taken, quite legally, under a fiwulty, from 
its setting and thrown on the ground amidst a heap 
of broken stonework and brick rubbish, of what use 
does it seem to be ? And is the ordinary man very 
blameworthy if he takes small pains to preserve it 
or if he jumps at an oflTer, often made in such cir- 
cumstances, to exchange it for modem glass ? 

What is the remedy for this unsatisfactory state 
of things ? Clearly the appointment of local autho- 
rities — not the District Councils or any existing 
body — whose sole duty should be the care and pre- 
servation of all historical monuments older than 
1700, including painted glass, within their districts. 
The area of jurisdiction of such authorities might 
very well be the Hundreds — ancient county divisions, 
the convenience of which for administrative purposes 
is not always recognised as it deserves to be — ^and 


by Google 


they might, perhaps, be constituted somewhat like 
this. A council of twelve for each Hundred, six 
members of which should be elected by the District 
Councils within the Hundred, three elected by the 
clergy of the deanery or deaneries within it, two 
nominated by the council of the principal archaeo- 
logical society of the county, and one by His Majesty's 
Office of Works. 

For such a scheme to be workable, it would be 
necessary that the control of these local councils — 
call them Ancient Monuments Councils — over their 
subject-matter should be absolute, so that nothing, 
not even repair (except, of course, such as might be 
xirgently required to save a monument of antiquity 
from immediate injury), could be done to an ancient 
monument without the consent of the council, 
signified in writing under its seal. Statutory pro- 
vision for the safe-guarding of all public and private 
rights would, it is assumed, be made. 

To fiBkcilitate the work of the councils, especially 
to enable them to maintain such actions and pro- 
secutions as might at times be necessary, each 
Hundred Council should, by statute, be created a 
corporation, with perpetual existence and a common 
seal and with capacity to sue and be sued. The 
members of the councils should be unpaid, though 
it would, probably, be necessary to provide them 
with paid secretaries, for the work in each Hundred, 


by Google 


if properly done, would take up the whole time of 
one man. The necessary funds for the work of the 
Hundred Councils might be provided partly by the 
County and District Councils and partly by Ex- 
chequer grant and voluntary contribution. Whether 
there should be an appeal from the decisions of the 
Hundred Councils to, say, the Office of Works, may 
be a matter for consideration. 

A very necessary work, without which the coun- 
cils would be of little use, needs immediate attention 
— ^the scheduling of the monuments to be placed 
under their care. In the case of painted glass, the 
schedules ought, if they are to be eflFective for 
purposes of reference and identification, to be sup- 
plemented by tracings of every piece of old glass, 
however fi-agmentary, included in the schedule. 
From the tracings, carefully finished and coloured 
traced copies should be made, the copies should be 
mounted and kept in portfolios at the office of each 
Hundred Council and the original tracings should 
be deposited in the Record Office. So far as other 
monuments (except brasses, of which rubbings would 
be taken) are concerned, they should be photo- 
graphed, but photography is of little use for copying 
glass in detail. 

The powers of the councils should be wide, and 
they should have unlimited discretion to deal with 
schemes for bringing into usefulness broken or 


by Google 


fragmentary glass. Too often such glass^ from which 
it is usually possible, if it be stiU in situ, for an 
expert to build up something very like the window 
of which it originally formed a pa^t, is taken from 
its setting, leaded up with other fragments into a 
confused mass — ^a jumble window — ^and inserted in 
some out-of-the-way place, perhaps, in a tower win- 
dow or a side window of the chanceL How much 
better would it be to make a new window around 
the old pieces — taking care to distinguish them, say, 
by gilding or painting their leads — than, by the 
jumble-system, to destroy their usefulness for ever? 
The Hundred Councils would go into all such 
. questions and evolve plans for dealing with them. 
Some progress, fortunately, is being made to- 
wards these good ends by the Historical Monuments 
Commission, whose work comprises the scheduling 
of all monuments of antiquity older than 1700. 
Hertfordshire and Bucks the Commission has already 
dealt with and the schedules of their antiquities, 
including painted glass, have been published. These 
county schedules, as they appear, when supplemented 
by such tracings and copies as we have suggested, 
would form the basis for the work of the Hundred 


zed by Google 



Some who have looked through this little book 
may like to go further in the study of old painted 
glass. To them I would say, the best books on the 
subject are the nearest ancient cathedral and the 
old parish churches round about your own neigh- 
bourhood, wherever it may be. For it is a thing to 
be remembered, and one not always recognized, that, 
despite neglect and destruction, ample materials for 
first-hand study of old glass are still to be found 
through the length and breadth of England. You 
may see, in the average country church, glass of 
the same quality, design, and workmanship as in 
the cathedral; the same craftsman did both. The 
difference is in quantity and size of window: for, 
while the destroyer may have been at work in both 
cathedral and parish church since the 16th century, 
it is likely that a larger quantity of old glass will be 
found to have survived in the cathedral than in 
the parish church, though the latter may still shew 
enough painted glass of pre-18th century date to 
satisfy the reasonable needs of the student 


by Google 


As, however, books have their uses as guides to 
practical work, we may mention a few which cannot 
be consulted without profit and to which the writer 
gladly acknowledges his own indebtedness. First, 
the four folio volumes of Mr N. H. J. Westlake's 
History of Design in Painted Glass (1881-94); 
next, Winston's Styles in Ancient Glass-painting, 
two volumes (Parker, Oxford, 1847), the standard 
books on our subject for English readers ; then 
Windows, a Book dbovt Stained and Painted Glass, 
by L. F. Day (Batsford, 1909), the late Rev. J. J. 
Joyce's Monograph on the Fairford Windows 
(Arundel Society, 1872), and, for the chapel windows 
of King's College, Cambridge, the short Guide by Dr 
M. R James, now Provost of the College (Cambridge 
University Press, 1899). On continental glass we 
have, for Le Mans cathedral, Vitrav^ peints de la 
Cathedral du Mans, by M. E. Hucher (Paris and Le 
Mans, 1865) ; for Bourges cathedral, Monographie 
de la Cathedral de Bourges, by Fathers Martin 
and Cahier (1841) ; and for general books on glass- 
painting, from the French point of view, Le Vieil's 
L'Art de la Peinture sur Verre et de la Vitrerie 
(Paris, 1774), Essai historiqm et descriptif sur la 
Peinture sur Verre, by E. H. Langlois (Rouen, 1832), 
and Lasteyrie's Histoire de la Peinture sur Verre 
(2 vols., Paris, 1857). 

An excellent sketch of old painted glass in the 


by Google 


cathedrals and great churches of northern and 
central France is Stained Glass Tov/rs in France^ 
by C. H. Sherrill (John Lane, 1908) — a book which 
indicates in its author a fine enthusiasm for ancient 
glass ; and a standard German book is Dr Gessert's 
Geschichte der Glasmalerei (Stnttgdirt, 1839; English 
translation, 1851). 


by Google 


Abbess Boding, Cburoh, 63 

Abraham, 13 

Adoration of the Shepherds, 124 

Agnes, St, 21 

Agony in the Garden, oar Lord's, 

All Souls' College, Oxford, 7 
Ambrose, St, 21, 79 
Andrew, St, 13 
Angels, 2, 8, 14, 21, 82, 90 
Annas, High Priest, 21 
Anne, St, 110, 112, 124 
Anne, Queen, portrait of, 123 
Apollonia, St, 80 
Apostles, 20, 81, 90, 114 
Aragon, arms of, 99 
Arkesden, Church, 70, 135 
Arthur, Prince, 4, 100 
Arundel, Thomas of. Archbishop, 

arms of, 135 
Ascension, our Lord's, 20 
Ascension window (Le Mans), 

Aston Hall, 93 
Augustine of Hippo, St, 21, 79 

Baden, glass from, 41, 124 
Badges, 64, 68, 136, 142, 143 
Balliol College, Oxford, 5 
Beauchamp, arms of, 69, 136 
Beaufort, arms of, 140 
Beauvais, Cathedral, 47 

Beauvais, St Stephen's, 40, 111 
Belt windows, 55, 81 
Berkeley, arms of, 135 
Biblia Pauperum, extracts from, 

Bigod, arms of, 12 
Bisoop, Benedict, 25 
Black Prince, arms of, 69 
Blue Dick (Bichard Culmer), 9, 

Bohun, arms of, 146-7 
Borders, 1, 12, 15, 60, 68, 82, 

101, 109, 134, 142 
Bourges Cathedral, 44, 77, 153 
Bracket design, 84 
Bradwell Church, 60 
Brasenose College, Oxford, 123 
Bray, Sir Reginald, 4 
Brereton Hall, 93 
British Isles, oldest glass in, 28 
Bubwith, Bishop, arms of, 14 
Burghley, Lord, arms of, 116 

Caiaphas, High Priest, 21 
Cambridge Colleges, old glass in, 

Canopies, 43, 76, 78-9, 80, 90, 

Canterbury Cathedral, 9, 23, 27, 

Cathedrals, English, 9-14 
Catherine, St, 13, 99 


by Google 



Catherine of Aragon, 100 
Caudebeo Cathedral, 112 
Chantilly, Ch&teau of, 108 
Charges, heraldic, 134, 188 
Charles Y, Emperor, 106 (arms), 

111 (portrait) 
Charles 1, portraits of, 128 
Chartres Cathedral, 40, 44, 47 
Ch6na Church, 28 
Chetwode Church, 1 
Chichele, Archbishop, 7 
Chichester Cathedral, 10 
Childrey Manor House, 98 
Christopher, Bt, 44 
Cirencester Church, 2 
Clare, arms of, 12, 132 
Clarence, Duke of, arms, 69 
Clerestories, glass in, 4, 42 
Cooxyen, glass painter, 108 
Cologne, St Mary of the Capitol, 

Colours, 48 (Early English), 62-8 
(Decorated), 73-7 (Perpen- 
dicular) , 102-4 (Renaissance) 
Comyn, arms of, 145 
Conches, St Faith's, 118 
Conventual Churches, andent, 

4, 5, 96 
Cornwall, Earl of, arms, 12 
Creation, pictures of, 4, 110 
Cross, taking down from the, 

Crowns, 71 
Crucifixion, 9, 12, 19 

Dacre, badge of, 136 
David, Judgment of, 22 
Dennis, arms of, 127 
Diapering, 64r-6, 134, 138 
Diocletian, 21 

Doctors of the Church, figures of, 
4, 21, 79 

Donors, 38-41, 80, 81, 87-90, 91, 

98, 109, 113, 121, 124 
Dorchester Church, 72 
Dorothy, St, 21 
Dowsing, fanatic, 23 
Drake, Sir Francis, arms of, 126 
Dunster Priory, 5 
Durham, Prior of, arms, 145 
Dyserth Church, 58 

Edmund, St, 13, 63 
Edward, St, 13, 56, 60, 66 
Edward in, arms of, 69 
Edward IV, portrait of, 9 
Elizabeth, St, 106 
Elizabeth of Tork, 99 
Elizabeth, Queen, ordinance of, 

23, 115 
Ely, See of, arms, 135 
Enamel painting, 32, 103, 116, 

118, 122, 126, 129 
England, arms of, 12, 14, 21, 69, 

Entombment, our Lord's, 19 
Evangelists' symbols, 14, 15, 82, 

Eve, temptation of, 19 
Exeter Cathedral, 13 
Eymoutiers Church, 77 

Fairford Church, 8, 16-22, 79, 

82, 86, 101, 153 
Faulkbourne Hall, 94 
Figure and canopy subjects, 14, 

48, 45, 55, 58-9, 78, 120 
Filastre, Cardinal, figure of, 88 
Fitzalan, arms of, 70, 135 
Flemish glass painting, 98, 111, 

120, 122 
Fox, Bishop, arms of, 11 
Fragmentary state of old glass, 

1, 14, 22-4, 145, 150-1 


by Google 



France, arms of, 12, 182 
Francis I, portrait of, 111 

Gkorge, St, 14, 99 
Qervasias, St, 35 
Qideon and the fleece, 19 
Giles, Henry, glass painter, 

Glass, old, destruction of, 2, 5, 

6, 8, 9-11, 162 
Glass painting, deterioration of, 

78, 103, lU, 122, 125-6, 128 
revival of, 32, 118, 143 
Glazing, coloured, origin and 

development of, 25, 26, 49, 

51, 102 
Gloucester Cathedral, 85 
Good Shepherd, 110 
Gonthier, Linard, glass painter, 

113, 115 
Grasshoppers (Gresham badge), 

Great Ilford, Hospital Chapel, 

105, 127, 143 
Great Pamdon Church, 116 
Gregory, St, 21, 79 
Gresham, Sir John, 108, 136, 

138, 143 
Gresham, Mary, 143 
Gresham, Sir Thomas, 108 
Grev, arms of, 145 
Guilds, as donors, 38 

Harlow Church, 63, 123 
Harrison, William, Elizabethan 

author dted, 24 
Helena, St, 13 
Henry U of England, 1 
Henry TL of France, 111 
Henry V, 7 
Henry VI, 7, 94 
Henry VII, 99 

Henry VIII, 100 

Heraldry in old glass, 2, 5, 9, 10, 
11, 12, 14, 40, 46, 60, 68-9, 
80, 86, 88, 91, 93, 108, 110, 
116, 121, 123, 126-7, 130- 
143, 132 (Early English), 
132-6 (Decorated), 138—43 
(Perpendicular), 143 (Be- 
naissance and after) 

Herod, Emg, 21 

Historical monuments, Royal 
Commission on, 151 

Holbom, St Andrew's Church, 

Holy Ghost, descent of, 20, 113 

Holy Lamb, 110 

Homchurch Church, 60, .68-9 

Hungerford, badge of, 136 

Impalement, heraldic, 135 

Ina, King, 13 

Inscriptions on old glass, 2, 5, 6, 

70, 121 
Isaii^, Prophet, 13 
Islington, Pyed Bull Inn, 126 
Islip, rebus of, 126 

James, St, 5, 80 

Jerome, St, 21, 79 

Jerusalem, our Lord's entry into, 

kings of, arms, 130 
Jervais, Thomas, glass painter, 

Jesse windows, 2, 5, 12, 13, 35, 

40, 45-7, 68,61,85-6, 111-12 
Jewell, Bishop, arms of, 12 
John, St, Baptist, 13, 21 
John, St, Evangelist, 84, 110, 

John of Gaunt, 7 (portrait), 69 



by Google 



Joseph, St, 124 

Jndas, 21 

Jumble windows, 151 

King, Bishop, arms of, 12 
King's College, Cambridge, 4, 7, 

8, 86, 102, 153 
Eingsdown Church, 66, 71 
Kirkby Belers Abbey, 96 
Eirton, Abbot, rebus of, 136 
Knowle Church, 2 

Lady, our, 21, 30,36, 68, 63, 66, 

71, 80, 84, 90, 106, 110, 111, 

114, 124 
Lamboume Church, 41, 124 
Last Judgment, 4, 7, 10, 13, 21, 90 
Last Supper, 128 
Latton Church, 118 
Laurence, St, 21 
Lead binding, 26, 104, 126 
Le Mans Cathedral, 30, 35, 36, 

41, 48, 88, 90, 97, 153 
Lettering, 70, 101 
Limbo, our Lord's preaching in, 

Lincoln College Chapel, Oxford, 7 
Lincoln, See of, arms, 145 
Lincoln's Inn Chapel, London, 

Little Chesterford Church, 136 
Llanrhaiadr Church, 86 
Long Melford Church, 23 
Lord, our, events of His life, 19, 

20, 30, 47, 81, 84, 98, 111 
Louis, St, 90 
Louis II of Anjou, 88, 91 
Louis III of Anjou, 88 
Louis, Bastard of Maine, 88 
Ludlow Church, 2 
LuUingstone Church, 140 
Luttrell, arms of, 5 

Magdalen College, Oxford, 7, 123 
Malvern, Great, Abbey, 4 
Malvern, Little, Priory, 4 
Margaret, St, 13, 21 
Margaret of Anjou, 94 
Marmion, arms of, 145 
Mary of Brittany, 88 
Mary Magdalen, St, 13, 111 
Matthias, St, 20 
Medallions, 35 (Early English), 

105-8, 123-6 (Renaissance) 
Mediaeval crafts, unity of, 15-17 
Merchants' marks, 68, 136, 143 
Merevale Abbey, 4 
Merton College, Oxford, 6, 61, 

62, 68, 69, 129 
Michael, St, 13, 22 
Mitres, 72 

Monograms, 64, 142 
Montfort L'Amaury Church, 40, 

113, 121 
Montmorency Church, 109 
Montmorency, Constable Anne 

de, 109-10 
Monuments, ancient, protection 

of, 147-61 
Moses, 13, 19 

Nativity, painting of, 6, 129 
Netteswell Church, 71, 82 
New College, Oxford, 6, 129 
New Hall, Boreham, 99, 100 
Noke Hill Church, 126 
Norreys, arms of, 140 
North Ockendon Church, 69 
North Weald Church, 63 
NorthiU, 123 
Noy, Sir William, arms of, 140 

Obadiah, Prophet, 20 
Ockholt Hall, 94, 140 
Oliver, J., glass painter, 123 


by Google 



Oxford Cathedral, 12, 120 
Oxford Colleges, 5, 120 

Painted glass, books on, 153-4 
Parish churches, old glass in, 1, 2 
Passion, instruments of, 14, 98 
Pattern glass, coloured, 48 
Paul, St, 13 

Pech^, Sir John, arms of, 140 
Peckitt, William, glass painter, 

Percy, badge of, 136 
Peter, St, 13, 20 
Peter de Savoisy, Bishop, 88 
Peterborough Abbey, arms of, 146 
Peterhouse, Cambridge, 8 
Pilate, Judgment of, 19 

Pinaigrier, Robert, glass painter, 

Pointz, arms of, 69 

Portraits in painted glass, 123 

Pot-metal, 31, 63, 76 

Preservation of old glass, sug- 
' gestions for, 147-61 

Price family, glass painters, 

Protasius, St, 35 

Provence, arms of, 12 

Punning, heraldic, 140 

Puritans, damage to old glass by, 

Quarries, ornamented, 1, 3, 6, 
63, 72, 76, 136, 143 

Quarterings, heraldic, 132, 134, 
135, 136, 138 

Queen's College, Oxford, 6, 120, 

Baleigh, Sir Walter, arms of, 126 
Balph of Shrewsbury, Bishop, 13 
Bamryge, Abbot, rebus of, 136 
Bamsey Abbey, 8 

Bebuses, 136 
Ben^ of Anjou, 88 
Besurrection, our Lord's, 20, 128 
Bheims Cathedral, 44 
Bichard III, 9 
Blom (Ste Chapelle), 81 
Bivenhall Church, 28, 36, 47 
Boohester Cathedral, 10 
Bochford Church, 146 
BoUright Church, 1 
Bose windows, 61, 90 
Bouen, churches at, 112 
Bound glass, 82 
Boydon Church, 60, 64 
Buby glass, 62 
Butland, Earl of, arms, 126 

Salisbury Cathedral, 11, 46 

Scourging, our Lord's, 19 

Scrolls, 70 

Sebastian, St, 21 

Secular buildings, painted glass 

in, 92-6, 126 
Selling Church, 132 
Sens Cathedral, 112 
Seylake, Abbot, device of, 6 
Sheba, Queen of, and Solomon, 19 
Sheering Church, 68, 63, 66, 67, 

71, 72, 97 
Sheffield family, arms of, 118 
Shields, shape of, 132-4, 138, 

140, 143 
Shrewsbury Church, 2 
Smear shading, 77 
Snape Church, 146 
Snodland Church, 68 
Solomon, Judgment of, 22 
South Mymms, 41 
St Albans Cathedral, 10, 69 
Stamford (All Saints'), 66 
Stamford (St Martin's), 145 
Stapleford Abbots, 66, 66 


by Google 



St Cross, Hospital of, 140 

St Denis, Abbey, Paris, 31, 48 

Ste Chapelle, Paris, 27, 42, 44 

St Etienne du Mont, Paris, 113 

Stipple shading, 77 

St John's College, Oxford, 123 

St Ii6, 80 

Strasbnrg Cathedral, 44 

Styles, see Contents 

Subjects, arrangement of, 8, 14- 

Surooats, heraldic, 141-2 
Sutton, Baptista, glass painter, 


TattershaU Church, 145, 146 
Technique. 31, 64-6, 73, 76, 77, 

78, 91, 100. 103, 121, 131 
Tewkesbury, Abbey, 6 
Thomas, St, of Canterbury, 1, 7, 

9, 13, 21, 27 
Tours Cathedral, 41, 42 
Tracery lights, 2, 56, 70, 81,134-^5 
Transfiguration, our Lord's, 19 
Trellis windows, 51 
Trinity College, Cambridge, 9, 129 
Trinity College, Oxford, 7 
Triptych style, 61 
Trollope, arms of, 118 
Troyes Cathedral, 113 
Troyes, Churches at, 109, 110 
Troyes, Library, 115 

Uffington Church, 118 
Universities, old glass at, 5-9 
University College, Oxford, 5, 

120, 122 
Upper Hardres Church, 64 

Van Linge the elder, glass painter, 
120-1 ' 

Van Linge the younger, glass 

painter, 120-1, 122 
Varnish painting on glass, 33 
Verre double, 76 
Victoria and Albert Miasenm, old 

glass at, 27, 42 
Vulgate, extracts from, 101 

Wadham College, Oxford, 7, 120, 

Waltham Holy Cross, Abbey, 4, 

Ward, arms of, 127 
Warrenne, arms of, 69, 70, 135 
Warwick, badge of, 136 
Wells Cathedral, 13 
Westminster Abbey, 4 
Westminster, St Margaret's 

Church, 4, 98-100 
Westonbirt Church, 69, 135 
Westwell Church, 45, 47, 48, 

50, 64 
West Wickham Church, 84 
Wheel windows, 61, 85 
White windows, 44, 50 
Wilton Church, 45 
Winchester Cathedral, 10. 23 
Winchester College Chapel, 85 
Windows, painted, legal rights 

in, 147-8 
painted, loss of, 145, 147 
Wine-press windows, 112-13 
Wollaye, arms of, 118 
Worfield Church, 66 
Wulstan, St, 4 

Yellow stain, 48, 52-4, 63, 64, 

74, 91, 143 
Tolande of Aragon, 88 
York Cathedral, 10, 28, 44, 66, 68 
York, See of, arms, 146 



Oigitized by VjOOyiC 





Published by the Cambridge University Press 


P. GILES. Litt.D. 

Master of Emmanuel College 


A. C. SEWARD, M.A., F.R.S. 

Professor of Botany in the University of Cambridse 


Ancient Assyria. By Rev. C. H. W. Johns. Litt.D. 

Ancient Babylonia. By Rev. C. H. W. Johns, Litt.D. 

A History of Civilization in Palestine. By Prof. R. A. S. 

Macalister, M.A., F.S.A. 
China and the Manchus. By Prof. H. A. Giles. LL.D. 
The Civilization of Ancient Mexico. By Lewis Spence. 
The Vikings. By Prof. Allen Mawer, M.A. 
New Zealand. By the Hon. Sir Robert Stout, K.C.M.G.. LL.D.. 

and J. Logan Stout. LL.B. (N.Z.). 
The Ground Plan of the English Parish Church. By A. 

Hamilton Thompson. M.A.. F.S.A. 
The Historical Growth of the English Parish Church. By A. 

Hamilton Thompson, M.A., F.S.A. 
Brasses. By J. S. M. Ward. B.A.. F.R.Hist.S. 
Ancient Stained and Painted Glass. By F. S. Eden. 


The Early Religious Poetry of the Hebrews. By the Rev. 

E. G. King. D.D. 
The Early Religious Poetry of Persia. By the Rev. Prof. J. 

Hope Moulton, D.D., D.Theol. (Berlin). 

Jigitized by VjjOOQIC 


The History of the English Bible. By the Rev. John Brown* 

English Dialects from the Eighth Century to the Present Day. 

By W. W. Skeat. Litt.D.. D.C.L.. F.B.A. 
King Arthur in History and Legend. By Prof. W. Lewis 

Jones, M.A. 
The Icelandic Sagas. By W. A. Craigie. LL.D. 
Greek Tragedy. By J. T. Sheppard. M.A. 
The Ballad in Literature. By T. F. Henderson. 
Goethe and the Twentieth Century. By Prof. J. G. Robertson, 

M.A.. Ph.D. 
The Troubadours. By the Rev. H. J. Cha3rtor, M.A. 


The Idea of God in Elarly Religions. By Dr F. B. Jevons. 

Comparative Religion. By Dr F. B. Jevons. 

The Moral Life and Moral Worth. By Prof. Sorley, Litt.D. 

The Elnglish Puritans. By the Rev. John Brown, D.D. 

An Historical Account of the Rise and Development of Presby- 

terianism in Scotland. By the Rt Hon. the Lord Balfour 

of Burleigh. K.T.. G.C.M.G. 
Methodism. By Rev. H. B. Workman, D.Lit 


Life in the Medieval University. By R. S. Rait, M.A. 


Cash and Credit. By D. A. Barker, l.C.S. 


The Administration of Justice in Criminal Matters (in England 
and Wales). By G. Glover Alexander. M.A.. LL.M. 


The Coming of Evolution. By Prof. J. W. Judd. C.B., F.R.S. 
Heredity in the Light of Recent Research. By L. Doncaster, 

Primitive Animals. By Geoffrey Smith, M.A. 
The Individual in the Animal Kingdom. By J. S. Huxley, B.A. 
Life in the Sea. By James Johnstone, B.Sc. 
The Migration of Birds. By T. A. Coward. 
Spiders. By C. Warburton, M.A. 
House Flies. By C. G. Hewitt, D.Sc. 
Earthworms and their Allies. By F. E. Beddard, F.R.S. 


by Google 


The Wanderings of Peoples. By Dr A. C-Haddon. F.R.S. 
Prehistoric Man. By Dt W. L. H. Duckworth. 


Rocks and their Origins. By Prof. Grenville A. J. Cole. 
The Work of Rain and Rivers. By T. G. Bonney, Sc.D. 
The Natural History of Coal. By Dr E. A. Newell Arber. 
The Natural History of Clay. By Alfred B. Searle. 
The Origin of Elarthquakes. By C. Davison, ScD., F.G.S. 


Plant-Animals : a Study in S)rmbiosis. By Prof. F. W. Keeble. 
Plant-Life on Land. By Prof. F. O. Bower. ScD.. F.R.S. 
Links with the Past in the Plant-World. By Prof. A. C Seward. 


The Earth. By Prof. J. H. Poynting, F.R.S. 

The Atmosphere. By A. J. Berry. M.A. 

The Physical Basis of Music. By A. Wood. M.A. 


An Introduction to Experimental Psychology. By Dr C. S. 

The Psychology of Insanity. By Bernard Hart, M.D. 


The Modem Locomotive. By C. Edgar Allen. A.M.I.Mech.E. 

The Modern Warship. By E. L. Attwood. 

Aerial Locomotion. By EL H. Harper. M.A.. and Allan E; 

Ferguson. B.Sc. 
Electricity in Locomotion. By A. G. Whyte, B.Sc. 
The Story of a Loaf of Bread. By Prof. T. B. Wood, M.A. 
Brewing. By A. Chaston Chapman. J*. I. C. 


The Aryans. By Prof. M. Winternitz. 

The Peoples of India. By J. D. Anderson. 

Prehistoric Britain. By L. McL. Mann. 

The Balkan Peoples. By J. D. Bourchier. 

The Evolution of Japan. By Prof. J. H. Longford. 


by Google 


The West Indies. By Sir Daniel Morns, K.C.M.G. 

The Royal Navy. By John Ley land. 

Gypsies. By John Sampson. 

English Monasteries. By A. H. Thompson, M.A. 

A Grammar of Heraldry. By W. H. St John Hope. Litt.D. 

Celtic Art. By Joseph Anderson. LL.D. 


The Book. By H. G. Aldis, M.A. 

Pantomime. By D. L. Murray. 

Folk Song and Dance. By Miss Neal and F. Kitson. 


The Moral and Political Ideas of Plato. By Mrs A. M. Adam. 
The Beautiful. By Vernon Lee. 


The Theory of Money. By D. A. Barker. 
Women's Work. By Miss Constance Smith. 


German School Education. By Prof. K. H. Breul. Litt.D. 
The Old Grammar Schools. By Prof. Foster Watson. 


Beyond the Atom. By Prof. J. Cox. 

The Sun. By Prof. R. A. Sampson. 

Wireless Telegraphy. By C. L. Fortescue, M.A* 

Rontgen Rays. By Prof. W. H. Bragg. F.R.S. 


Bees and Wasps. By O. H. Latter, M.A. 

The Life-story of Insects. By Prof. G. H. Carpenter. 

The Wanderings of Animals. By H. F. Gadow, M.A., F.R.S. 


Submerged Forests. By Clement Reid, F.R.S. 
Coast Erosion. By Prof. T. J. Jehu. 


Coal Mining. By T. C. Cantrill. 
Leather. By Prof. H. R. Procter. 

Cambridge University Press 

C. F. Clay, Manager 

London : Fetter Lane, E.G. 

Edinburgh: 100, Princes Street 


by Google 


by Google 


by Google 


by Google 



by Google 



3 9015 03169 9203 !i 

MAY 6 1943 

UNIV. OF Mien. 

d by Google