Despite written evidence for the procedures of medieval cathedral design, the process of using geometry for specific details as John James has presented it is a likely approximation. It is likely in that the geometry explains the measures of the building as well as fits within the habits of mind and cosmologies of the period. Despite the contractual methods of “mobile crews, inadequate long term supervision, and ad hoc solutions,” the master masons and social organization maintained a unity within the cathedral.
That medieval cosmology and medieval geometry are co-extensive is well established within medieval scholarship, and John James draws upon names such as Panofsky in establishing the relevance of his geometrical explanations of Chartres cathedral.
For instance: “Seeing the world as polarities, and yet as being one underneath the differences, they saw ambivalence as the fundamental manifestation of the Creation. To every black there was a white, to every meaning could be found its antithesis, and in architecture as in philosophy they strove to reach beyond the poles to that calm centre which is God. In Scholasticism this approach of reconciling the irreconcilable was "perfected into a fine art that determined the form of academic instruction, the ritual of the public disputationes de quoilibet and above all the process of argumentation in the Scholastic writings themselves. Every topic had. to be formulated" in a particular manner. "Needless to say, this principle was bound to form a mental habit no less decisive and all-embracing than that of unconditional clarification."46 46. Panofsky, 1957, p.67-8. P.147”
Furthermore from John James: “This habit was reflected in geometry no less than in philosophy. Our view of unconditional clarity tends to simplify things, to ride over the differences to find the common laws that underly them all, and so to reduce the multiplicity of life to its basic common factors. Theirs gloried in multiplicity as part of the Divine Order. They abhorred sameness or uniformity which denies the principle of manifestation. In geometry we must therefore expect to find a number of constructions, not just one, each flowing over one another, yet locked together at a few essential points which thereby express the most sacred locations in the building. p.148”
The connection between philosophy, theology, and architecture is emphasised by the work of John James. The lack of written evidence that theology and architecture held importance for each other left a tenuous connection between the two within medieval scholarship. To what extent should medieval architecture be interpreted within a theological framework was open to debate within medieval scholarship. John James presents a thesis that medieval architecture should be fully interpreted within a theological framework, and nothing existed outside of a theological understanding including “mobile crews, inadequate long term supervision, and ad hoc solutions”.
Geometry & Templates
Geometry is co-extensive with medieval theology in that both disciplines sought order in the cosmos. The former did so by returning to the point of origin within the geometric construction, the latter did so by the resolution of opposites. Both sought to bring disparate conditions together into one reconciled whole.
- Every item must be related to another.
- Thrusts are visualized as an axis running through the centre of the piers.
- All complexities in proportions stem from attempts to resolve the gap between the linear two dimensional quality of geometrical lines, and the three dimensional thickness of architectural elements.
- New templates are cut for each stone and architectural element; standardising elements like windows did not occur until the fourteenth century.
- The master masons used a square and dividers.
- The proportions of each relate to the geometric needs of each without being mixed up together.
- Separation of parts, geometry, and proportions enhances the clarity of the whole.
The principles of construction that could be quoted from the work by John James are as follows:
1. Work evenly over the entire site, even if that means only laying one or two stone courses.
2. Continue the patterns previously existing.
3. If the templates were not created new, the elements would not: 1. Fit what was previously constructed, and 2. Would not require dedication from the individual stone mason. (Which shows how important it was for each element in the building to be derived from, and to be integral with the total all-encompassing geometric system.)
4. As each change in coursing height takes three times as much labour to rebate and adjust on site as it does in the quarry, mouldings and ashlar were coursed to standard height. On the other hand carved work like capitals and cornices were probably roughed in at the quarry to be finished in a site shop, so they could be transported without risking damage to their delicate edges p.84
5. Their carvers do not seem to have believed they were unusually endowed men doing a special job, but craftsmen who in their skill could turn their hands to anything. They probably had the natural unselfconsciousness only to be found today in traditional peasant communities like the Balinese or the Tuaregs. Naturally it was only the most skilful among them who could turn out a John or a Queen of Sheba but when he was not carving figures he would have been as busy on work demanding almost as much skill if not as much feeling or imagination. The carving of capitals and crocketed cornices requires the same care and experience. The complex organic forms of torus moulds with their parabolic curves bending round the columns are just as hard to finish perfectly as drapery, though they may require less patience. The men of this period do not seem to have specialised. They kept their horizons open and remained aware. So while some of Bronze's men were carving the heads his Lobelia gang was building the nave ribs and their bosses. p.232