This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
08:55, 10 April 2007 Charles Matthews (Talk | contribs) m (lk)
23:37, 10 February 2007 70.252.75.220 (Talk)
16:43, 10 February 2007 SiGarb (Talk | contribs) (reinstated sentence about "simple, austere" style and "aspiring heavenward" (it is a religious building style, after all!))
13:47, 10 February 2007 87.217.116.167 (Talk) (→Characteristics of the style)
16:43, 27 January 2007 MinxBastet (Talk | contribs) m (Deleted an obvious prank sentence ("sam iz so so kool lad!!!") from the end of the second paragraph.)
19:00, 24 January 2007 86.1.23.113 (Talk)
16:27, 17 January 2007 Kyle the bot (Talk | contribs) m (robot Adding: de:Early English)
06:45, 8 January 2007 Euchiasmus (Talk | contribs) m (RETF Typos: stucturally → structurally, using AWB)
05:34, 15 December 2006 Mais oui! (Talk | contribs) (cat, link)
00:17, 19 November 2006 Jreferee (Talk | contribs) m (Added/modified link for existing text to direct link to proper destination)
22:30, 6 November 2006 Euchiasmus (Talk | contribs) m (RETF Typos: charateristic → characteristic, using AWB)
17:38, 24 October 2006 Giano II (Talk | contribs) (link to lancet window)
11:45, 15 September 2006 Thruston (Talk | contribs) m (fix link)
15:43, 12 July 2006 164.36.38.240 (Talk) (Durham)
15:37, 27 June 2006 Kummi (Talk | contribs) m (iw fi)
23:33, 4 May 2006 Amandajm (Talk | contribs) m (→Characteristics of the style)
23:33, 2 May 2006 Bhoeble (Talk | contribs) m
07:43, 25 April 2006 Amandajm (Talk | contribs)
11:50, 8 March 2006 Haukurth (Talk | contribs) m (Pywikipedia-assisted fixes of common spelling errors.)
19:22, 14 January 2006 Ham (Talk | contribs) m (Category:Gothic architecture)
11:40, 13 January 2006 SiGarb (Talk | contribs) (added interior pic; removed untypical Wells pic; added further info & wikilinks)
23:35, 12 January 2006 Mitsukai (Talk | contribs) (→Characteristics of the style - disambiguation link repair (You can help!))
23:29, 12 January 2006 Mitsukai (Talk | contribs) (→Characteristics of the style - disambiguation link repair (You can help!))
22:12, 12 January 2006 SiGarb (Talk | contribs) (combined with Early English (architecture))
16:42, 12 January 2006 Mitsukai (Talk | contribs) m
16:29, 12 January 2006 Mitsukai (Talk | contribs) (disambiguation link repair (You can help!))
14:47, 8 November 2005 DanielCD (Talk | contribs) m
09:09, 8 November 2005 Kjkolb (Talk | contribs) (created)
The pic of Bath Abbey had in its caption just a single word of description- "restored".
I've removed it for a couple of reasons.
1. Every single one of these buildings has been restored/conserved, so it is redundant to mention it in this case.
2. While the term "conserved" is generally applied to the preservation, superficial repair, cleaning and protection of monuments, the word "restored" is often applied in the most extreme sense of "put back" eg. The spire of Chichester Cathedral which fell in 1860 was "restored".
So, in the case of Bath Abbey we are looking at a vault that has been repaired and cleaned. If indeed it has been completely replaced, then the approximate date should be stated.
It is hard to get an idea about the different periods of Engish Gothic architecture (Early English, Decorated (Geometric / Curvilinear), Perpendicular) without a few relevant and enlightening pictures... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cvereb (talk • contribs) 22:45, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The illus. of "Westminster Hall in the Palace of Westminster, London as drawn by Thomas Rowlandson and Augustus Pugin for Ackermann's Microcosm of London (1808-11)," as its page carefully states, is called "early 18th century" in the caption. I haven't been encouraged to read the article. Is it really this bad? --Wetman (talk) 17:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No other reference to why Early English nomenclature became Lancet Gothic, little extra online. All my hard copies call it EE (although most are conservative academically). Any more info? Fremsley (talk) 23:09, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll see what I can find. Amandajm (talk) 03:40, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Within a tick of sighting the article, I see the need for info and pic English Gothic building which is not a church or somesuch but something more everyday[edit]
I have just modified one external link on English Gothic architecture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
The body of this article previously commenced with the following definitive statement, and I recommend that it is put back.
There has been some discussion among scholars of English Gothic as to how (and whether) the periods should be defined. There are those who prefer to see it as a continuum and simply use dates rather than style names.
So if we are going to identify specific styles and name them, then knowing who came up with those names is useful. And needs to be at the top of the body of text.
"The designation of styles in English Gothic architecture follow conventional labels given them by the antiquary Thomas Rickman, who coined the terms in his Attempt to Discriminate the Style of Architecture in England (1812–15). Historians sometimes refer to the styles as "periods", e.g. "Perpendicular period" in much the same way as an historical era may be referred to as the "Tudor period". The various styles are seen at their most fully developed in the cathedrals, abbey churches and collegiate buildings. It is, however, a distinctive characteristic of the cathedrals of England that all but one of them, Salisbury Cathedral, show great stylistic diversity and have building dates that typically range over 400 years.
Early English (c. 1180–1275)
Decorated (c. 1275–1380)
Perpendicular (c. 1380–1520)"
I'd maybe add a "traditional" as 2nd word, but otherwise, yes. This article needs more and better sources. Siefkin, we really shouldn't be using a 100 year-old book. If you haven't got decent detailed sources that are more recent, I suggest that you leave it alone. And you should give a proper link, and page numbers. Johnbod (talk) 02:03, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments, Amandajm and Johnbod, I appreciate all the good work that you've done on the article since 2008. I'll be adding more citations, particularly more recent ones. It's a bit of a challenge right now, with all the libraries, museums and bookstores closed, and the need for a permit to walk outside, but I think I can find what I need. I particularly would like to add more images, so readers can see what the article is talking about. This article currently has the fewest images, I think, of any article on an architectural style, and I think this can be improved. Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 10:29, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The traditional designation of styles in English Gothic etc etc" is a good suggestion, John.
Concerning the 100 year old text, some of those older books can be very accurate in terms of description. What you have to watch is that opinions as to the value of various aspects of the cathedral may have changed, and also, the state of the building itself may have changed.
So Alec Clifton Taylor, writing mid 20th century, loathes Victorian stained glass and is rude about it at every possible opportunity. I am not sure how far his aesthetic prejusdices go.
Watch out for instances where a writer shows obvious preference for a particular style and comments that "The glorious richness of the Flowing Decorated deteriorated into the stilted and repetitious formality of the Perpendicular."'. The facts are there, but they need to be sifted from the opinions.
On the other hand, direct quotations can be useful in describing a building, to get at the real significance, or character..
Saying that the west front of of Peterborough cathedral has three large arches and a perpendicular porch tells the reader absolutely nothing. Nobody reading that would realise that it is "unique" in the true sense of the word, and "overwhelmingly majestic".
Another point about older sources. Sometimes the state of the building has changed. This is likely to affect Victorian fittings (the screen from Hereford now in the V&A,) more than the Medieval fabric which one hopes has been maintained from the 19th century to the present day.
Putting together a successful gallery takes a lot of effort. If it is going to look good, you need to do a lot of sifting to find images that go together nicely. The pictorial material in the article was, as you point out lacking. It was probably done at a time when far fewer pictures were available.
For the lead, if you decide on a group of pictures, then they ought to look like a set. Not just three good pictures.
Likewise, a gallery becomes very awkward if some pics are landscape and others portrait format. That pic of Salisbury, for exampl, is indeed Salisbury, but has noting to o with the text beneath it, and needs replacing.
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. The galleries are works in progress. As for terms, "unique" is OK, but an article should never say "overwhelmingly majestic", even if it's true. It's not a neutral or verifiable term. Cordially SiefkinDR (talk) 10:42, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the point is, that is wher the quote comes in. You cannot say that the west front of Peterborough is "overwhelmingly majestic", but a great numbers of writers of art history texts have said something simliar, and you can quote them, directly.
When you do it, then you need to cite the name of the person who said it,
As in- Alec Clifton-Taylor describes the west front of Peterborough cathedral as "one of the most dramatic conceptions in Medieval architecture." (Alec Clifton-Taylor "The Cathedrals of England" p.84)
Flying buttresses support the choir vault of Lichfield Cathedral (1195-1340)
SiefkinDR (talk), every one of these pics is problematic, and none of them should be in this section of the article. The do not illustrate Early English Gothic.
I gave you some visual clues as to what to look for, but it has been deleted.
1. Too much Norman. The only part that is relevant is the vault. Find a suitable picture.
2. There are pictures from the North East of the building which reveal the fact that Salisbury is your prime example of the exterior of an Early English Cathedral. It is so significant that if you fail to show the exterior of Salisbury from the east, in this section of the article, then it would be like failing to mention Abbaye Saint-Denis is and article about French Gothic. Do I make the point?
And don't describe it as having EE nave and transepts. It is THE Early English exterior, with addition of toer and west front.
3. Hereford cathedral. Look at the picture. If the windows are traceried, then you are looking at the wrong end. Find the picture that I sent you.
The crucial matter here is to use your eyes, and the knowledge that you are gaining from your research. If you put in that photo, then you leave me sadly shaking my head over the fact that you are not recognising the stylistic differences.
4. Canterbury- the east end interior only. Nothing' in this picture, which is plainly late Gothic.
5. Lichfield. Once again, your eyes should tell you that nothing in this photo is EE. The picture was taken by a photographer taking mostly pics of the Chapter House, which is subject of a grant to repair it. This part of the cathedral is adjacent to the chapter house (which appears as a sliver down the side of the photo). The photo is entire irrelavant.
6. The Gallery lacks a good picture of the interior of Wells. Given its enormous historical importance to the developing style, It cannot be ignored.
7. Neither can the west front of Peterborough.
The basic rule is- if you are looking for Early English, then look for Lancet Gothic.
Thanks for your suggestions. I'm not wedded to any of these pictures, I was just trying to have images of buildings from the period. Please add what you think is better. Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 16:49, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Don't give me that nonsense!
In each case you have found a picture which was not representative of the period.
I posted several appropriate pics on this page. But they have been deleted, along with the adivice. But they are still here in the history.
Allowing pics to remain thatt are wrong is seriously misleading. ....Humph!
The designation of styles in English Gothic architecture follow conventional labels given them by the antiquary Thomas Rickman, who coined the terms in his Attempt to Discriminate the Style of Architecture in England (1812–15). Historians sometimes refer to the styles as "periods", e.g. "Perpendicular period" in much the same way as an historical era may be referred to as the "Tudor period". The various styles are seen at their most fully developed in the cathedrals, abbey churches and collegiate buildings. It is, however, a distinctive characteristic of the cathedrals of England that all but one of them, Salisbury Cathedral, show great stylistic diversity and have building dates that typically range over 400 years.
Early English (c. 1180–1275)
Decorated (c. 1275–1380)
Perpendicular (c. 1380–1520)
I returned this section, having explained exactly why it needs to be in the article, further up this page.
I have added the word "traditional" as suggested by Johnbod.
The exact source of these definitions is available to us, and ought to be stated as Thomas Rickman. Amandajm (talk) 14:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I just edited a bit (not realizing it hasd just come back), combining the the bit that was left at the bottom. How's that? The lead could still be a bit longer. As we don't have an article on Perpendicular Gothic perhaps one of you could do that? Johnbod (talk) 15:01, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's good. Except the list and dates is dubby-dup. I'll remove that bit. Amandajm (talk) 18:35, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The areches do fall within the time frme. However, nothing about them is of Decorated Gothic design. They are essentially a piece of skilful engineering.
Re the west front (don't use the French word Facade for something that in England is called a "west front" and is nota facade i.e. west fronts are generally very revealing of the form of the building that lies behind. It isn't a "mask" stuck on the front.
NOTE: when you go to Wikimedia Commons to collect pictures, you will find that some well-meaning and ignorant person has labelled every side of every building as a "facade". This might encourage you to thik it was done ith real knowledge and is the right term. They were told about six years ago not to do it, but they did. So you will find the entire side of a Gothic cathedral, with all its lumps and bumps, labelled as a "facade" - North facade, instead of simply "north side", which is correct.
Picture no 1. York Minster West front. That is Flowing Decorated. Picture number 1 should be the east end of Lincoln Cathedral. NOTE: East end of Licoln Cathedral, specifically.Not a sideways view with the tower.
It goes 1. East end Lincoln 2. west front Exeter 3 west front York.
Lincoln Cathedral (1185-1311)
Nave and transept of Salisbury Cathedral, without tower (1220-1258)
Transept of Westminster Abbey
Whitby Abbey
Rievaulx Abbey
The Galilee Porch of Ely Cathedral
Nave and transept of Wells Cathedral (1225-120)
West front of Peterborough Cathedral
South transept of York Cathedral
1. Canterbury Cathedral - choir and Corona Chapel
2. Wells Cathedral- 1175-1260 Now don't stuff around saying saying "nave and transept". What you are looking at here is an Early English building that was continued as it was first designed. Only the additions are in a later style.
3. Salisbury Cathedral- I have told you this before- Don't say "nave and transept" It is an entirely Early Englis building except' for the two additions.
Hello! This is to let editors know that the featured picture File:The Cloisters at Gloucester Cathedral.jpg, which is used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for December 18, 2020. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2020-12-18. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:54, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I revised the first sentence giving the dates of the period to comply with the Wikipedia manual of style. Technical terms for periods should not be used in place of dates in the first sentence of the lead. The reader should not have to go to two links to understand the very first sentence of the article. Thanks for your understanding. Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 16:06, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SiefkinDR: The "Middle Ages" is a perfectly common expression and the manual of style does not preclude usage of this term. The main reason for reverting your incorrect dates is that your dates are incorrect. What source supports the assertion that Gothic architecture in England ceased in the 1550s as your wording from the late 12th until the mid-16th century? This is quite wrong, and you should undo your change (again). GPinkerton (talk) 16:23, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid I don't see what is 'contradictory". "Middle Ages" is too broad a term. I'm using Edmund Sharpe's "Seven Periods" as a source, as described in Freeman's "English Church Architecture of the Middle Ages." He puts the periods of English architecture from Lancet in 1190 until the end of Rectilinear, in 1550. The current text doesn't say that English Gothic "ceased" in 1550, it says it no longer flourished. This is certainly open to discussion. What dates do you think would be more accurate and what is your source? Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 12:51, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A section on Gothic survival would be useful to cover the conservative twilight. I'm not sure England was so exceptional in having this as the text currently suggests. Johnbod (talk) 13:03, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Johnbod, the British Isles (more than England) was exceptional, but the text should say "17th century" and not "16th century". The 16th century was the golden age of Gothic all over Europe, so the sentence should definitely change. GPinkerton (talk) 16:02, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is very little in the article currently to justify dragging the 17th century into it, apart from some completions of university schemes (which would be one place to add on the Gothic survival). By the time you get to Wren, it is surely conscious revival, & should be added to in that currently very short section. Johnbod (talk) 02:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Johnbod, I don't agree; Wren's contributions are paradigmatic survival rather than revival. Revival per se isn't usually considered to come in until the latter 18th century. Convocation House is survival, but its vault is probably revival, at least according to the usual schemes. GPinkerton (talk) 03:52, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well he certainly did Tom Tower to fit in, but it was not a natural style for him, & he had to work it up. I see we say "Wren made a case for working in a Late Gothic style—that it "ought to be Gothick to agree with the Founders worke"[1]—a style that had not been seen in a prominent building for a hundred and fifty years, making Tom Tower a lonely precursor." - perhaps you have something to say on that! Johnbod (talk) 04:06, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Johnbod, so what if it's not what he's known for? It's beside the point. Ultimately, the fact remains that people (including but not limited to Wren) were still putting up Gothic buildings in England in the English Gothic tradition well into the 17th century.
Associated with the Middle Ages in Europe and lasting until the early 17th century, Gothic is the architecture of the pointed arch, the rib vault, the flying buttress, window tracery, pinnacles and spires. Walls are reduced to a minimum by large arcades and there is an emphasis on verticality. Gothic was most commonly used in church architecture during this period, but also in collegiate architecture, notably at Oxford and Cambridge. – RIBA website
I thought that might get you going. Did I say anything about what Wren "is known for"? RIBA say lasting until the early 17th century, ie well before Wren, but covering numerous college schemes, mostly completing the work of decades, several mentioned in the article. Got any new Gothic big houses after 1600? Johnbod (talk) 17:22, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Johnbod, Auckland Castle not big enough? GPinkerton (talk) 22:50, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]St Michael and All Angels', Arthuret: a Jacobean-period Gothic church (after 1607)]]
Ok, but that's a clergy house, if on a grand scale. Anything lay? Johnbod (talk) 12:44, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Johnbod, Water Eaton or Steane Park big enough? Why does it matter? There were dozens of churches and secular buildings. "Mostly the work of decades" is hardly accurate either. Trinity Great Court was started only in the very late 16th century, Tom Quad was ordered by Wolsey, Wadham College and Lincoln College were mostly built ab initio, with new chapels. The Bodleian Library was built wholly in the 17th century. The prince-bishop of Durham's palace is in any case not exactly a parsonage either. GPinkerton (talk) 18:20, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Johnbod Only the chapel at Water Eaton seems to be Gothic; I can't see it in the house. Steane park is similar, no? I'd still like to see a Gothic gentry house after 1600. You seem to think I'm supporting the passage I threw up for your delectation. Johnbod (talk) 18:30, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Johnbod, the house at Water Eaton is not the original, but a late Victorian "restoration". It was Gothic enough for John Henry Parker when he was writing his ABC of Gothic in the 1880s. GPinkerton (talk) 18:40, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SiefkinDR, the dates cited in the article, surely. Surely you can see that Edmund Sharpe, having lived and died more than 150 years ago, and his quaint, amateur, and long-superseded classification of "periods", is very far from the best source. Architectural history has progressed since its first early 19th-century beginnings. Already, up-to-date sources in the article describe a longer span, and the lead of the article already explains that Sharpe arbitrarily and wrongly excluded buildings built after the beginning of the reign of Henry VIII. Stylistic periodisations are Early English or First Pointed (late 12th–late 13th centuries), Decorated Gothic or Second Pointed (late 13th–late 14th centuries), and Perpendicular Gothic or Third Pointed (14th–17th centuries).[2][3] Before the latest wave of changes, the lead sentence said "in the Late Middle Ages and Early Modern Period", which, as you'll agree, is more accurate than "Middle Ages" and does not incorrectly exclude several centuries of Gothic architecture for no good reason. GPinkerton (talk) 15:59, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I don't agree. "Late Middle Ages" and "Early Modern Period" don't mean anything at all to me or most people. You need to give a more specific dates. The beginning is clear, but what would you want to put for the end? Mid 17th century?
You could put end of the 17th, but that's really, really late. The examples given in the article are much earlier, and the lead is supposed to be a summary of the article. SiefkinDR (talk) 18:16, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SiefkinDR, what makes you say it's really really late? Many more specific dates are given in the next sentences of the leads. Indeed, dates are far from the most important point, since the page's subject is about English Gothic architecture, which is a geographic style and not a chronology. GPinkerton (talk) 01:24, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but again I don't agree with you. The lead, especially the first paragraph, is a concise summary of the contents of the article, "Middle Ages" is too vague. According to the article, the origin of the style was the late 12th century, and the end was the completion of King's College, finished in 1539, so "mid-sixteenth century" is being generous but accurately summarizes the article.SiefkinDR (talk) 10:53, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SiefkinDR, the end was the completion of King's College, finished in 1539. Where are you reading this? The article doesn't seem to say anything of that kind. Neither should it, since it is not at all correct. GPinkerton (talk) 22:52, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
^Schurr, Marc Carel (2010), Bork, Robert E. (ed.), "art and architecture: Gothic", The Oxford Dictionary of the Middle Ages, Oxford University Press, doi:10.1093/acref/9780198662624.001.0001, ISBN978-0-19-866262-4, retrieved 2020-04-09, Early to High Gothic and Early English (c.1130–c.1240) Rayonnant Gothic and Decorated Style (c.1240–c.1350) Late Gothic: flamboyant and perpendicular (c.1350–c.1500)
^Curl, James Stevens; Wilson, Susan, eds. (2015), "Gothic", A Dictionary of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (3rd ed.), Oxford University Press, doi:10.1093/acref/9780199674985.001.0001, ISBN978-0-19-967498-5, retrieved 2020-04-09, First Pointed (Early English) was used from the end of C12 to the end of C13, though most of its characteristics were present in the lower part of the chevet of the Abbey Church of St-Denis, near Paris (c.1135–44). ... Once First Pointed evolved with Geometrical tracery it became known as Middle Pointed. Second-Pointed work of C14 saw an ever-increasing invention in bar-tracery of the Curvilinear, Flowing, and Reticulated types, ... culminating in the Flamboyant style (from c.1375) of the Continent. Second Pointed was relatively short-lived in England, and was superseded by Perp[endicular] (or Third Pointed) from c.1332, although the two styles overlapped for some time.
The last work mentioned in the artlcle is Kings College, Oxford. The lead is a summary of the article. If that needs correcting, please correct it. Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 08:50, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SiefkinDR, I'm sorry I don't understand. No such place is mentioned in the article and there is no such thing as "Kings College, Oxford"! GPinkerton (talk) 11:18, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I was writing in haste. I meant King's College, Cambridge, finished in 1544. SiefkinDR (talk) 15:45, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SiefkinDR Well it's certainly not true that it's the latest building in the article. GPinkerton (talk) 18:20, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's also not true that the building was completed in 1544, I'm not sure you're getting that from. GPinkerton (talk) 19:57, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Examples needed of 17th century English Gothic[edit]
According to the Wikipedia article on King's College Chapel, Cambridge "The Chapel was built in phases by a succession of kings of England from 1446 to 1515, a period which spanned the Wars of the Roses and three subsequent decades. The Chapel's large stained glass windows were not completed until 1531, and its early Renaissance rood screen was erected in 1532–36."
Since the article now says that English Gothic lasted through the mid-17th century, the section of the article on perpendicular needs to give some examples to illustrate that, and there probably should be at least one an example mentioned in the lead. Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 10:36, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The first two sentences are just awful now - it says the style "flourished" until the mid-17th century, which is downright misleading, as is the bit about church architecture - it needs to be rephrased to say this is what has survived best, not what the style was "used most prominently" for. Johnbod (talk) 11:05, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Johnbod, go ahead and remove the "flourished", but I don't think we need to adopt the language of "survived". Survived what? Buildings just continued to be built; there's no death, survival, and resurrection needed in the first sentence; that's all aestheticist anachronism. There does need to be a verb though, so pick one. GPinkerton (talk) 12:27, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You mistake my point - it says "The style was most prominently used in the construction of cathedrals and churches" - this is misleading because almost all the 10,000s of secular buildings in the style have vanished, whereas most cathedrals and churches (and a good deal of clerical or semi-clerical architecture that is not actually churches) has survived. So survived destruction, that's what. Johnbod (talk) 12:55, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Johnbod, I agree. I have long argued that such a focus is improper. GPinkerton (talk) 04:32, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Johnbod. Survived is more appropriate. I think there are more notable examples of Renaissance than new Gothic construction in the 17th century. Another possibility is "endured", which might be even more appropriate. Cordially SiefkinDR (talk) 10:07, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is this article restricted in scope to buildings in modern England, the medieval Kingdom of England, ones built by English architects, or ones built in "English" Gothic style? The article is not clear and appears to included various definitions and incorporates buildings not in either modern England or mediaeval England. GPinkerton (talk) 12:37, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The article is about Gothic architecture in England, as the title says.SiefkinDR (talk) 12:53, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
England and Wales, I'd say. There's a mention of Melrose in Scotland, which should probably come out, and a pic of Wrexham, which is ok. Anything else? Johnbod (talk) 13:14, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Johnbod, I was thinking of, say, Londonderry Cathedral. Gothic, English architect. (17th century.) I stopped myself putting in an image of Tintagel. I wonder if this page even has the right title. GPinkerton (talk) 14:12, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Did you all see that the article received almost five thousand page views on December 18, thanks to the featured picture of the Gloucester Cathedral cloister on the Wikipedia main page? (It didn't hurt that the caption mentioned that three of the Harry Potter films used the cloister as a backdrop). Good work, Gothic architectural team! SiefkinDR (talk) 13:22, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
And just after I added all those illustrations too; it was rather dry beforehand. Now all that's needed is some more text on the architects and buildings themselves, and fewer lists. GPinkerton (talk) 14:17, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, though the picture that was selected has been there since March. You recently reduced it in size. But I agree with you that now we need more about architecture and fewer lists. We can't include every Gothic building in England. Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 21:18, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The images in the new galleries are too small and hard to see, with too much wasted white space between them. You shouldn’t have to enlarge every image to really see it. we can do better than this.SiefkinDR (talk) 07:05, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article's sub-section on Decorated Gothic juxtaposes the "geometric" and the "curvilinear" styles. Here it might be helpful to clarify if "curvilinear" is - in this context - synonymous to "flowing", as the term "Flowing Decorated Gothic" also seems to be in use, e.g. in the introductory section of the article on Carlisle Cathedral.92.79.101.164 (talk) 11:31, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
.svg){kind=small}
The entirety of Salisbury Cathedral (1220-1258)
Hereford Cathedral (1079-1250)
Canterbury Cathedral. (rebuilt in Gothic style beginning 1174)
Flying buttresses support the choir vault of Lichfield Cathedral (1195-1340)
.JPG)
