The Saxons have left us strong and almost eternal proofs of their skill in masonry; but I believe there is little or nothing to be found, the work of their hands, besides Ecclesiastical Buildings and
Castles. It is true, the latter were habitations, but for the rich and powerful alone; the dwellings of the mass of the community were too frail to reach our days.
The Danes appear to have done little more than plunder and destroy. The Normans, more politic, imitated the Saxons, and left us Churches and Castellated Mansions; but still we are without domestic architecture. All these facts tend to prove, that our Cities, and even London, consisted almost wholly of wooden or framed houses plastered. Why it was so, is a problem not easily resolved; for, supposing the antient Briton ignorant of masonry before the country was invaded, the Romans immediately introduced the cutting and sculpturing of stone, such cement as we cannot now equal, and the use of bricks. Perhaps, however, the uncertain tenure of all property discouraged the Farmer and Citizen from erecting solid mansions; indeed, they were all soldiers and vassals, and their houses probably were erected by their various masters at the least possible expence. This argument may apply to the time anterior to the Norman invasion; but it will not do after London increased, and the people were made more independent. When property became secure, the houses were certainly slight and combustible; and hence the tremendous fires which have been recorded between the time of William the Conqueror and 1666.
Stone was, I presume, almost exclusively used for Palaces and the mansions of the richest Citizens; but that is readily accounted for: Stone requires no great deal of preparation; the facing received the labours of the Sculptor or Mason, but the monstrous thick wall was filled with fragments from the chissel, or rough pebbles. Besides, pillars, mouldings, and fret-work, arose without difficulty from soft stone. Could those embellishments have been produced in brick without infinite trouble? and, would they ever have looked well when joined with mortar? Is it not then plain that the noble ideas of our Princes, Nobles, and other rich men who lavished vast sums on their structures, required Stone to embody them; and that, had it been common, Brick would certainly have been rejected by them? The total disuse of brick by the rich deprived the less fortunate Citizen of its advantages. The revival or introduction of any manufacture demands encouragement from the powerful; if that is withheld, who will attempt them merely on disinterested motives? Parsimony in the great revived the art of Brick-making. When a Prince found the price of labour increase, and wished to build, he first stripped the design of his architect of ornament: thus stripped, a plain surface might be composed of any hard substance; Brick naturally occurred, and bricks were made. Still the mass of the people had them not. The
affluent used them both in London and in the country; but the unhappy publick, fascinated with their Wood and Plaster, at last saw one fatal flame destroy all their frail tenements at one blow. The year 1666 expelled wooden buildings from our Metropolis; and from that year Brick reigned with undiminished sway, has crept beyond all reasonable limits, and even aspired to compose Churches and Chapels.
The next object in this difficult article will be the attempt to trace different æras in Domestic Architecture. Unfortunately the fire alluded to has nearly deprived us of a possibility of so doing in London: the most antient specimen there I should suppose to be the ecclesiastical lodgings appendant to Westminster Abbey in Dean's-yard. I confess, they are not strictly in point; but I have ventured to mention them, as probably somewhat resembling those of the laity. Their date is previous to 1386, as Abbot Litlington, who built them, died in that year. It will be found that the windows are small and pointed: in this particular they differ from those erected at the same period by Richard II. adjoining the West side of Westminster-hall. Litlington's lodgings are of stone; but the latter is of brick, and perhaps one of the oldest specimens of that material in England, and certainly so in London. Part of it was recently taken down to widen the street, but enough remains to convince
us œconomy prevailed in a very considerable degree at the date of its erection. From the time of Richard II. to that of Henry VIII. brick edifices were erected at intervals. In the reign of Henry VII. the pointed style became so expensive, through the introduction of excessive ornament, that its declination might readily be foreseen: accordingly the rich had recourse to brick; and when Henry VIII. dissolved religious houses, the pious had no motive to continue the use of splendid architecture in erecting or supporting Churches and Abbeys.
But I would not be understood to mean that the mansions of men of fortune were uniformly built of brick after Richard II. had introduced the use of it in London: there is at least one proof to the contrary now remaining, in the house of Sir John Crosby, erected soon after 1466. The reader, on referring to a view of that magnificent building inserted in the third volume of "Londinium Redivivum," p. 565, will find Sir John to have excelled the Monarch in his ideas of grandeur; and perceive, besides, that pointed windows with rich mullions were by no means confined to churches and ecclesiastical lodgings; and the roof will convince him that pendents pierced and flattened arches were not first introduced in the reign of Henry VIII.
The old gateway of St. James's Palace is a good specimen of brick architecture of that reign.
Somerset-house, built in the reign of Edward VI. was an awkward imitation of the Grecian style; and the intercolumniations in several instances were filled with appropriate niches: but the remainder of those of the front had the old English angular window, with mullions of the same figure; the wings were more correct; that part of the Palace which faced the Thames resembled the style of St. James's before Inigo Jones altered it[364:A].