The Queen's Cross, Northampton*

date ; and accounted for the massive solidity of their character , as compared with the north , by the supposition that they were originally built in tbe mass , as they now appear , but were intended to be worked into clustered columns , as those on the north , at some future period—a plan frequently adopted , as he said , by the masons of this day . I ventured to dissent from this

op inion at the time , and founded my dissent upon the fact that the jointing of the masonry offered unmistakable proofs that no such intention existed ; for if the masons had afterwards ivorked these piers into clustered columns , like those on the north , many pieces would necessarily have dropped out , and the whole mass would have" 6 een considerably injured , in consequence of the manner in

which the stonework was jointed . The jointing of stonework , then , it is evident , should always occupy a prominent position in the consideration -of architectural restorations , and should be well considered by all Avho venture to give an opinion upon these subjects . Another argument which Mr . Roberts advances iu

support of the opinion that the Cross at Northampton has been sadly tampered with , is the appearance of newness of some parts of the structure . Now , much of the newness to Avhich he refers will be found on examination to be merely the effect of the use of the " drag , " as it is called , during the execution of the restorations ; and , although I regret very much the removal thereby of tbe quiet-toued tints of the lichens , yet I cannot admit that

it affoi-ds any evidence of the destruction of any part of the original structure under consideration . On examination of the sections of the mouldings before -us , we cannot but be struck , I think , with the beauty and purity of their forms and character . Still there are indications of deterioration in one or two parts , but they are of such a nature that the eye of the uninitiated Avould

scarcely detect them . I refer to the bead moulding in the panels of . the buttresses of the lower story . The deviation from truth connected with this member enabled us to discover precisely where restorations had beeu effected . Wherever neAV work has been introduced we find a classical character given to the quirk of the bead , in lieu of the Gothiclike that of the oriinal

, g . Leaving now the critical consideration of my subject , I think all will agree that such monuments of art as the one under consideration are , doubtless , capable of exercising a poiverful influence over the intellectual faculties , and an inexpressible charm over the feelings of almost every passer-by ; but how much more so when vieAved by the eye of a cultivated mind , —a mind so cultivated as to

be capable of appreciating their beauties , —and when contemplated with those feelings of devotion and veneration Avhich the motive that dictated their creation is calculated to arouse ! Entertaining these views , I venture to express a hope that such monuments may be increased in number ; and , no doubt , Ave shall all be anxious to learn ivho ivas the architect of the memorable one under consideration .

Mr . Britton , when speaking of Eleanor ' s Crosses , says , "I have unsuccessfully endeavoured to ascertain who was the architect and sculptor of these structures ; what orders Avere issued from the monarch on the occasion ; what were tho expenses , & c . " "Vertue and Walpole conjecture that they were designed by Peter Cavallini , a Roman sculptor , brought from Rome either by Abbot Edward

Ware or the First ; but this is controverted by Pilkington . Mr . Hartshorne , in his "Memorials of Northampton , " informs us that John de Bello , or de la Bataille , Avas the architect of the Crosses at Northampton , Stony Stratford , Woburn , Dunstable , and St . Albans ; and that Alexander of Abingdon and William of Ireland were loyed in the statuesHe does nothowever

emp .. , , inform , us from whence he gathered this information . Whoever might be the architect and sculptor , certain it is that they have bequeathed to us a work almost ¦ without a riva '

Mr . Hartshorne is poetically eulogistic of the monuments of Edward and Eleanor in Westminster Abbey —Qy . Where is the monument of Edward referred to by Mr . Hartshorne ?]—and also of those of Eleanor ' s Crosses . " These monuments , " he says , " display a physiognomy entirely unmarked by any of those disagreeable features peculiar to the countenances of the

haughty and vicious : there is nothing but dignity ancl thought , yet thought mingled with earnestness and penetration , depicted in the face of the monarch : nothing but serenity and gentleness of soul beams in the soft and resigned expression of his consort . This same feelingof gracefulness and repose is observable in all of Eleanor ' s statues , aud was unquestionably the faithful reflection of

their reality . " " They are graceful in their draperies , and replete with dignity aud classical beauty . " Moreover , he says , " The features of all these figures are precisely the same , and bear undisputable marks of coming- from the same chisel . This remarkable resemblance Avas evidently the result of all of them being sculptured by the same artist . " I fully agree with this description in

general ; but I can scai-cely corroborate the rev . gentlemen's statement Avith respect to the features of the statues on our Cross , for they are all so terribly mutilated . Nothing , perhaps , can exceed the beauty of the drapery of these figures ; but I cannot but think that the draiving of some parts of the figures is somewhat defective . This , however , may be tbe result of the truth and

practical application of Mr . Hartshorne ' s theory ; viz ., " that each sculptor worked Avith the idea of personification , and that all his efforts had a ' realistic' tendency . " Before I conclude , allow me to offer a few

observations on the doubts Avhich havo often been raissd as to the manner in which the Cross at Northampton Avas terminated . Mr . Hartshorne in his paper read at the meeting of the Archffiological Society , to which I have referred , when speaking of this subject , says , " that an entry in the accounts leads me to suppose it was finished by a figure , most likely that of the Virgin , as William de Ireland was

paid £ 6 3 s . 4 d . on one occasion for making five images for the Cross at Northampton . Therefore it is evident that a figure of some kind ivas imposed above the four of the queen now remaining . " If a fifth figure ivas made for the Cross at Northampton , where could it Avell have been placed but on the summit of the structure . It appears to me that the inference drawn bMr . Hartshorne from

y the fact to which be referred is a very legitimate one , ancl probably the only one that can be drawn with propriety . In the survey just made , Mr . Irvine' and I have examined very carefully the broken pedestal now forming the termination . The upper part or shaft of this pedestal is undoubtedly modern ; ancl , in fact , we know it to have

been placed there at the time of the restoration by Mr . Blore . The bottom part or base of this pedestal is , hoAVever , unquestionably part of the original ; and , if a base to a pedestal can be shown to have existed , and proved to be original , that a pedestal existed is the natural inference ; and , if a pedestal existed , it is as natural to infer , and with equal probabilitythat the pedestal was

sur-, mounted by a figure ; and that the fifth figure , for which money was unboubtedly advanced , was the figure required and which probably formed the termination to this beautiful structure .

Before the restoration by Mr . Blore , the Cross at Northampton Avas terminated by a stone Maltese cross ; but this Avas known to be no part of the original , and therefore Avas very properly removed . I mention this to remove an impression which appears to pervade the minds of many , viz ., that the structure ivas originally terminated by a crossand that it was an act of spoliation to remove

, it . This cross was in Mr . Whiting's yard for many years , but is UOAV the solemn but silent indicator of the spot , in the garden of the late W . Harris , Esq ., where his lady fell when summoned by death to leave this lower world . A desire has often been expressed to see the summit