![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Moslems are editing Wikipedia pages and adding misleading information. Please remove islamic influence section. Gothic architecture wasn't influence by moslems.
I edited this England, under her independent Norman kings, had large domains in France. and made it this England, under Angevin kings was in personnal union with large domains in France.
Here are my reasons:
Matthieu 11:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Please remove "JOHN IS THE COOLEST..." from the article please.
Cherokee40 01:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC)Cherokee40
ij Removed the stuff about Gothic architecture being dark -- One of Suger's goals was that it NOT be dark -- hence the windows. The gothic church was supposed to transport people to a more holy realm. One of the points of flying butresses was to allow the churches to be lighter, with more open space, and more windows in the walls -- not to be dark and heavy. And I don't EVEn know what to say about the gargoyles. JHK
Dark should perhaps be replaced by rudeness, severity, intensity or something along those lines. I'm new to this, but am quite sure that a valuable contibution to this page would be the works of John Ruskin, who wrote extensively on the definition of gothic architecture. Someone should add this, it is he who describes it as rude and severe changefull and amongst the highest in architecture. sorry for the bad grammar.
Alans22
19:50, 15 August 2007 (UTC)ABS
-- Amandajm 08:11, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Can we please put a timeframe here? I'm arguing with my wife over whether Gothic came before or after Romanesque Architecture
I'll put back that part about Gothic revival, which waas good, but that stuff I just cut was plain silly. Or at least very badly written. JHK
After I removed the statement that the cathedral in Zagreb was the most eastern Gothic cathedral, Wetman posted this on my talk page:
Hi! Give us some clues about Gothic east of Zagreb: monuments and dates would be a start. Not any easy subject I know. jump in at the deep end! Welcome!
So made a quick search and found a few Gothic cathedrals east of Zagreb. Not too many for sure (and I'll try to find more later) but certainly enough to prove that the Zagreb cathedral is not the easternmost.
City Longitude Gothic cathedral Built Zagreb 15.6 E
Vienna 16.2 E St. Stephen's Cathedral 1359-1433 Bratislava 17.1 E St. Martin's Concathedral 13th C-1452 Gdańsk 18.6 E St. Mary's Concathedral 1379-1496 Kraków 19.6 E Wawel Cathedral began 1320
Note that these are only the biggest cites with most impressive cathedrals but one could list many more. Anyway, thanks to Wetman for encouragement! Kpalion
It has been argued (most recently by architectural historian Dan Cruickshank in "Britains Best Buildings") that Durham Cathedral, as well as being a superb example of Romanesque architecture, also contains the first evidence of Gothic design.
The nave contains pointed traverses and pointed arches while flying buttresses are concealed over the aisles - the main elements of Gothic, 20 years before this style was seen elsewhere in Europe.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.153.219.170 ( talk • contribs) .
In consideration of the above comment re: Durham Cathedral, would anyone object to updating the page to reflect this? If there is doubt over the earliest examples this should be stated, otherwise the authority of the text is compromised.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.189.234.178 ( talk • contribs) .
An anonymous user made this recent addition to the opening paragraph:
I was hoping someone could integrate this into the main body of the article, in some way. I don't really understand what's being said here, but it should not be in the opening paragraph (a summary) unless it is expanded in the main body. Stbalbach 20:36, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Formatting that encases the framed table of contents in text, in just the way a framed map or image is enclosed within the text, is now available: {{TOCleft}} in the HTML does the job.
Blank space opposite the ToC, besides being unsightly and distracting, suggests that there is a major break in the continuity of the text, which may not be the case. Blanks in page layout are voids and they have meanings to the experienced reader. The space betweeen paragraphs marks a brief pause between separate blocks of thought. A deeper space, in a well-printed text, signifies a more complete shift in thought: note the spaces that separate sub-headings in Wikipedia articles.
A handful of thoughtless and aggressive Wikipedians revert the "TOCleft" format at will. A particularly aggressive de-formatter is User:Ed g2s
The reader may want to compare versions at the Page history. -- Wetman 20:18, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
I'm not taking sides here, but just want to point out some things. There is a major break in the continuity, see the Wikipedia style guidelines on how to write a good lead section and the purpose of the lead section. It's an abstract of the article contents, not a part of the main text, it's a summary. However it's a user-defined variable to see the TOC or not, and I think stylistic issues should be left to article contributors. Blank spaces can be nicely filled with images, and by reducing the number of section headings and thus length of the TOC. As well with small screens, blank spaces are not such a problem, for example on my laptop screen this article has a very minor amount of blank space since the image fills most of it. Stbalbach 21:01, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
To describe Ely cathedral as a gothic cathedral is misleading. From the outside, and from inside the long nave, the primacy of style is Romanesque. From the crossing, with its famous octogon, to the east end are a mixture of Early English and decorated gothic. Ely's Norman nave wasn't reworked like both those of Winchester or Canterbury to approximate the later fashionable gothic style. Cathedrals of England - Alec Clifton-Taylor & An Outline of European Architecture - Nikolaus Pevsner
Gothic architecture in England seems to have lost non-domestic information: does anyone know when such info was vandalised, or does it need re-written? ... dave souza 18:14, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Lund Cathedral, included here in the list of notable Gothic structures, is rather known to be of Romanesque architectural style. I don't think it should be present in this list. Please see the article ( Lund Cathedral) for pictures and details. Atilim Gunes Baydin 13:52, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Someone obviously pulled a prank here, but I'm only a casual wikipedia user so I'll let someone more dedicated correct it.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.17.86.52 ( talk • contribs) .
The end of building of St. Vitus Cathedral is in XX century. So we must say the cathedral is partialy neogothic structure. On the picture we see the main part of the tower which is evidently medieval but the top of the tower is baroque architecture. I think we should remove this picture because it can make false imagination of the gothic structures. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.136.151.181 ( talk • contribs) .
hello, i am doing an extra credit report for school and i need three characteristics for gothic architecture. i found that the 3 characteristics were very faint i couldnt quite understand what they were. i know that they talk about pointed ahrches and and gothic cathedrals could be highley decorated. but i could still not find out the third characteristic, i was hoing someone could say in another post or edit the page so it might be a little more understandible.( 209.247.21.203 21:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)) and also i am very very new so please HELP!( 209.247.21.203 21:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC))
I see that the Italian churches are listed here. They would usually be characterized as 'medieval' rather than Gothic. But there is no category more encompassing category 'medieval'. What to do? Brosi 20:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering what people think of the brick gothic section in this article? To me it seems like it’s given undue prominence (lovely though the photo is!). I’ve checked a few of the main reference works on Architecture/western architecture/Gothic (Pevsner, Banister Fletcher 20th ed., Watkins, Frankl -index only) and in none of them does the term brick gothic appear, all I can find are a few very brief references to particular gothic buildings being made out of brick.
It would be silly to get rid of it but I think it would be better treated as a style of a particular area in a similar way to, for example, Rayonnant, Decorated or Mudejar gothic. Seeing as though there is also an article devoted to brick gothic I think we could safely do away with the photo from the gothic architecture article but keep the text (there aren’t individual photos for each of the other gothic styles mentioned, most of which command a number of pages each in the books I mentioned). I hope this isn’t too controversial, but the article does give a distorted view of what is generally understood to be gothic architecture. I’d really like to hear what people think before I go ahead though! Thanks -- Ivanivanovich 01:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm about to get stuck into this article and expand it. I don't think it's the right place to list the stylistic periods of different countries.
I've done a bit of a search, and find no article on French Gothic, and likewise, no article on English Gothic. There are three articles dealing with the phases of English Gothic and containing mainly info drawn from Britanica. However, the headings Early English etc are only relevant if you know exactly what you are looking for, or have visited this page first and followed the links.
The proposal is to create several brand new pages and transfer that info which pertains most directly to the country, and fill it out with more detail-
-- Amandajm 13:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
-- Amandajm 05:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
It's looking like a huge improvement already! I agree that this isn't the place for lists of the different styles in different countries, it would be better to have a couple of paragraphs which briefly explain how gothic architecture developed differently across Europe instead. Ivanivanovich 10:25, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
At the risk of offending the person who wrote it, I have removed something that I strongly disagree with, that the intention of the Gothic cathedral is to compare the greatness of God with the smallness and (I can't remember whether it said useless or worthless) nature of humanity. No. That's not what it is about.
The facade impresses with grandeur, and overwhelms, yes. Christ sits in Majesty or Judgement at the door, along with the terrors of hell and often the ten wise and foolish Bridesmaids. Anyone who enters is reminded to repent and humble themselves.
But once through the door, the effect is not to oppress the sinner with their smallness and uselessness; the aim is to raise the sinner with a knowledge of salvation. The reason that people, tourists as well as worshippers, go to cathedrals (Canterbury, has hundreds of paying visitors every day), is not because they feel useless and small, but because the cathedral has the power to inspire, to uplift, to refresh and to heal. By the very nature of the building, a great number of people experience this whether they are believers or not.
It is probable that not all architects realised this function, and either by accident or design, built oppressive buildings. But on the whole, the vastness itself does not oppress, (unless one has agrophobia I suppose). The long naves of England say "walk this way!", the sky-high vaults of France demand "Look up!" the wide aisles of Germany say "Wander!", the clearly defined progression of Italian gothic churches invites "Come forward!" while the complexity of Spanish cathedrals impels one should "Explore!" While I recognise that not everybody has the same experience, I think these are in general the sorts of reasons why cathedrals are still highly valued and are still meeting needs that are in no way associated with participating in the formal services.
-- Amandajm 02:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
The equilateral arch is not, as specified in the article, of altitude (height) equal to its
width. Please see:
.
The altitude is .
(See also:
Equilateral_triangle)
Flip purr 19:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I have just seen the problem with that anonymous editor that is deleting once and again a sentence about Spanish Gothic. I think that the problem is not the truth or not of one sentence or the "alternative", but the excessive generalization that is stated in the seven sentences that talk about "Spanish Gothic cathedrals".
First of all the paragraph lacks of a chronological and stylistic differentiation, that IS important to understand the variety of styles of what is not only "Spanish Gothic", all in one, but "Spanish High Gothic" or the later "Levantino Gothic" and " Isabelline Gothic" to say only three clear examples differenciated by their chronology and, of course, by their shape, spatial concepts and ornamentation. They cannot be analised in the same sentence as a whole. (Not talking about Mudejar Gothic, that goes in parallel with the other styles, and that could be considered a hybrid style). This hasn`t got to be necessarely much longer, but much clearer.
I hope this helps.-- Garcilaso 09:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Amandajm 10:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Someone who is not registered and who uses a number of different computers keeps changing this section, without comprehending what the actual purpose of the section is.
If you are that person, PLEASE READ THIS!
There is a heading that says
under the heading it has subheadings:-
Under these subheadings the distinguishing characteristics of each region are compared. If you do not know what this word means, please look up "compare" and "comparison" in your Spanish/English dictionary, because this is something you do not seem to be understanding.
The comparisons are partly a matter of appearance. It is the way the buildings are designed to look. So:-
For example:- the interior space of the nave and chancel at Barcelona is actually more than a metre higher than the nave of Winchester. But it doesn't look as high, because it is wider. On the other hand, the nave of Winchester is very steeply pointed and gives the impression of tremendous height. When you see it, it would be easy to believe it is the highest vault in England, but it is not as high as many others, including the wooden ceiling on the Romanesque cathedral at Ely.
These churches are surpassed by Beauvais, Amiens and Cologne by about 20 metres. In other words the interiors of some Gothic churches are nearly twice as high as Barcelona, Winchester etc etc.
Now this is clear, please stop changing the comparative statements. Just accept that by comparison with an English, French, or German Gothic church, the main internal space of a Spanish cathedral appear short and wide, rather than long and narrow or very tall.
So, please
Do go and write new articles about individual Spanish Cathedrals. Also- Get yourself a sign-n name, so that even when you change computers, you are identified as a particular individual. Serious editors do not like dealing with people who are just a string of different nubers. We cannot converse with you. And every time you edit, leave an explanation in the "Edit Summary" box. You are not a new editor any more, so you should be begunning to find your way around these things.
Amandajm 10:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations to the editors on a great article, beautifully illustrated. Any thoughts of taking it to FA? PiCo 12:25, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
The second paragraph of the first section reads "Originating in the pants of a million Kingsland High School girls what can i say beside GOD DAMN!! 12th century France and lasting into the 16th century."
I can't find the "edit" link for the first section, so I can't fix it myself. Someone please fix this vandalism.
128.193.141.160 20:39, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
This is my first time editing and couldn't find the "Edit Summary" box I was supposed to make a comment in. I simply changed the incorrect spelling of the first reference - Jean Bony author of "French Gothic Architecture Twelfth and Thirteenth Century". The name was incorrectly spelt Boney. I know the correct spelling because I work for his widow and have seen this book on her bookcase. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billsylv ( talk • contribs) 20:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Why no photo of Westminster Abbey which is one of the most famous, if not the most famous gothic building in the world? Signsolid ( talk) 03:43, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Even though Gothic architecture has had diverse developments in different countries, there should be a section about its general historical development, from the early experiences at Suger's Saint Denis (and Durham??) and early development in Northen France, then its adoption in Europe as a whole (with many French architects being employed as far as Cyprus), on to its fragmentation into various national styles.
For example, some parallels can be drawn between the English and French styles:
Cvereb ( talk) 22:41, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
We have a article length limitation here, because if it gets too big, it won't load on some browsers, so we have to be content with an article, not a full-length book. Which is what it would take, if I attempt to explain all the relationships you are suggesting. Amandajm ( talk) 09:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
The reason for removing the section is that the editor had added the info without actually reading the content of other parts of the section to see what it is about.
The section is specifically about the way in which Gothic cathedrals differ from region to region. It attempts to encapsulate how the buildings look different from each other, and might be recognised stylistically.
The deleted section was a brief summary of Gothic architecture in Portugal, stating the number, location and types of significant buildings. This is all interesting, but it isn't the topic of the section, and it belongs in the main article on Gothic architectuure in Portugal. This article does not attempt to contain details of the location of all the hundreds of Gothic buildings spread across Europe.
Amandajm ( talk) 11:37, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
I added the section on Portugal by the following reasons: Portuguese buildings as their own interpretations of gothic style and one of them represents an tottally indigenous developments of that style, that for it self means a regional difference.A huge regional difference which exists only in Portugal and in is former empire (Brazil, Angola,Mozambique), I first wrote a short description of the Manueline portuguese style but it was almost imediatelly deleted, because of that and for people see for them selves that a portuguese style exists I listed the three ,architecturaly speaking, simbolyc Portuguese buildings for interested people know that and get more information if desired, starting for the Portuguese gothic architecture page (which is not refered on modifications,why 'portuguese architecture' and not 'portuguese gothic architecture' a specialized page?. Portugal at XII to XVI centuries was already an independent country with borders well established (more or less the actual borders)and total sovereignity. Gained is independence from Castille at 1147, recognized by the Pope about 40 years later, so Portugal was not and is not CASTILLE or SPAIN. As politics, architecture was a competition and afirmation field between both iberian dominant countries and they didn´t copied each other since for most of the time they were at war or disputing something. Inspiration for portuguese building come from two different origins (mostly), from France and England (a close ally), and from local devellopments of style. The portuguese style adopts the tall construction style of England with simple, but elegant decoration without paintings. The manueline style which is more exuberant don´t copied any spanish examples since the intention was comemorate the portuguese maritime achievements at XV and XVI centuries being Spain at that time a fiercely competitor and frequently an enemy (see about tordesillas treaty - the end of dispute about Americas!). Before remove any reference about Portugal take a close reading on the pages about Batalha and specially Jerónimos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.193.39.133 ( talk) 09:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Dear Mr.FSouza (or if you are a Brazilian citizen: Caro FSousa) First of all: Thank you very much for your comment. I apreciated your comment on descripton I made above and I see you have vast acknowlegement on this matter, far vaster than mine, my interest is more as admirer of that construction style. Nevertheless, I think (some people should agree, others disagree, everybody has that right!), that regional differences between Portuguese (specially Manueline) and other European gothic architecture tendencies is enough to justify an independent entry on the list of regional tendencies, even if only serves the purpose of calling attention for his existence. It must be taken into account that late portuguese gothic is not a simple minor adaptation of other styles, that might be true for some examples (I think Alcobaça is the most evident case, but is not late gothic), but style diverges from others and evolves on is own way (even if incorporates some foreign elements), since construction of Batalha monastery until construction of Jerónimos monastery, that could be seen at Tomar with several buildings from that period. Joining together Spain and Portugal not appears to be a good idea as explained above, because politics affected architecture, and the typical styles from Spain and Portugal diverged from each other by rule (but, of course, some buildings are very similar, the inspiration sources were the same). Another reason for appearence should be the widespread of style troughout former portuguese empire, even there evolved with local adaptations, like happened at India (Goa). With my cumpliments (or compliments, i´m not sure!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.136.129.1 ( talk) 15:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Amandajm ( talk) 18:01, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
The Gothic style of church architecture was also viewed as being the "French" style.
This unreferenced sentence was added to the end of a paragraph discussing a specificically French reference to the architecturte as being of the "Goths". If it relates to the French view, then that is unclear. If the writer intended to relate the sentence to the English view, then it needed to be placed in a different paragraph, linked to the material there, and properly referenced. Also, the time period at which the architecture was regarded as "French" needs to be defined. The rest of the section has references that are associated with historic views of Gothic architecture. Amandajm ( talk) 13:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
This edit of 25 June 2007 added the section on materials. The section is very similar to http://www.aquinas-multimedia.com/stjoseph/architecture.html but that web page has a date of May 2008 - checking the wayback machine for example, the version of 27 May 2007 does not include the same material so it would appear that the website failed to attribute wikipedia rather than the other way around. -- Matilda talk 23:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Could we please have more attention to shop architecture, modest-sized domestic architecture?
and less exclusive focus on cathedrals and castles?
Thanks, Dogru144 ( talk) 18:48, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
What Are The 3 Examples Of Gothic Architecture? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.160.227.237 ( talk) 06:08, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
okok pls read gothic lolita RILY RAWKS YO! LUV GOTHIC LOLITA♥ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raspberry56 ( talk • contribs) 14:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
See Talk:Medieval art#the term "Gothic". Srnec ( talk) 06:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
An editor added the following about Hungary. The sections about different regions deal briefly with differences in style. There is no room here for histories. A short stylistic description of Gothic in Eastern Europe would be useful. I'll do it.
When I went looking for another article to drop this into, I found no article on Medieval architecture in Hungary, and no other generic article. It's been very roughly translated, with all the verbs wrong.
The most important spreader of the Gothic art i9n Hungary was the order of the Cistercians, wich style has influence even in the royal chapel of Esztergom.
Buda will be the city were the court will be located, and there will be built the church of Nagyboldogasszony (Holy Mary) and the church of Saint Nicholas [1]. The most significative gothic constructions will be also the benedictine church of Sopron, and many castles and village chapels.
The King Louis I of Hungary was the one that ordered the construction of the royal chapel in Buda in the XIV century, and also the construction of the palaces of Visegrád and Diósgyőr. However, the gothic architecture reached it's climax during the reign of Sigismund of Hungary in the early XV century, when was built the modern Palace of Buda, and the fortresses of Siklós, Csesznek, Gyula and Kisnána.
Later, in the XV century the City of Buda was modified by the King Matthias Corvinus, and the gothic art was conyugated with the traces propper of the Renaissance, creating nex combinations that are still visible in the streets of the district of the Palace of Buda [2].
Amandajm ( talk) 07:12, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
References
The picture is quite impressive, in itself. However, it is more pertinent to the St Trophime article than the general one, because, as stated in the text, ribbed vaulting came into use during the Romanesque period, It was one of the features of Gothic architecture that was already well established. I have a plan for using that pic somewhere else. Amandajm ( talk) 01:14, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
That makes sense. It would probably be more at home on the Romanesque page, I can't remember if I posted it there or not... DuendeThumb ( talk) 18:41, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello,
Removal of reliable external links is not at just one persons discretion. Be respectful of other individual's contributions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GothicArchitect ( talk • contribs) 06:58, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
I agree that there needs to be mutual respect for other's contributions which is why it is far-fetched for you to label the external resource as laden with errors. Depending on the literature referenced, some of the contributions made on this page could be viewed as erroneous as well. Therefore, it boils down to opinion for some matters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GothicArchitect ( talk • contribs) 23:57, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Firstly Here's the list of characteristics. With some of the Characteristics it is very hard to go wrong. With others, there are errors
Secondly
The section Origins of Gothic Architecture attributes the development of Gothic architecture solely to the influence of Islamic architecture. It cites Christopher Wren (late 1600s) and then mentions the influence of Islamic architecture on his design for St Paul's Cathedral (which you really must know isn't Gothic, and is hardly relevant).
Quote:"Many of the churches and related buildings erected in Europe and Spain during this time were based on the Saracen model, a model that stemmed from the imagination and innovation of the vast Arabian empire."
This is utter nonsense! The model of churches had developed over a period of about 800 years by the time the first Gothic churches were built! That model stemmed from the imagination and innovation of the vast Roman Empire, if you don't mind!
An uninformed reader would be given the impression that the Islamic style and Islamic ornament had simply been lifted straight out of the Middle east, or Moorish Spain, and applied to European churches. This is far from the reality of the situation.
What happened was more like this:
Some of the examples given under the different regions
the photos
Please do not keep linking a half-developed website with lots of errors to Wkipedia! Go and do a great deal more work on it first, and please do try to remember that Gothic architecture was the product of a over thousand years of Christianity.
Amandajm ( talk) 06:19, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Amandajm.
And as expected from Grand Tutnum - that was indeed lot of work. :). I would go point by point and would agree almost to everything literatim. But by the end, I failed to find those errors in Article. It took me a while to realize, that it is an analysis of quality of an external link. (well I see I overlooked your last sentence Amandajm).
What makes me most crazy is when gothic revival buildings are shown as examples of gothic (here or elsewhere). Or here the - Bamberg_Cathedral (when I saw it firstly years ago, I couldn't believe that such an awesome romanesque structure might have exist and might have survived. Awesome - yes absolutely, gothic - not.) Colored (marble or paintings)? - Well it was only relatively recently, that I realized that it might have been often, in some parts and it might have been beautiful too. In those parts of Europe, I am living in, this is not the case, here everything in gothic is lofty, elegant and sober one. The case of origin too.
Just for some of the subjective judgments - as it is just an external site, it can be forgiven, if its author use a bit more subjective point of view in terms of beauty such as "influence on its beautiful and intricate designs" (as long as it would be clear, that it is judgment of particular - skilled - person, not an authoritative description). Reo + 08:52, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
In the third paragraph of the section Majesty, it should be Ripon Cathedral, not Ripon Catherdal; also, in the same paragraph façade appears as facade thrice. -- 200.92.154.121 ( talk) 01:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
The article Gothic architecture renders adequate attention to French Gothic and rather overemphasizes English ecclesiastic buildings. The section on Gothic in the Holy Roman Empire however, fails to even mention the distinct Brabantian Gothic and its samples such as Saint Rumbold's Cathedral in Mechelen (the earliest sample of this style), the Cathedral of Our Lady in Antwerp, Saint John's Cathedral in 's-Hertogenbosch, St. Michael and St. Gudula Cathedral in Brussels, the Basilica of Saint Martin (aka of Our Lady) in Halle, and numerous other noteworthy buildings such as the Brussels City Hall. In fact, though its churches often have a single western tower, Brabantian Gothic is in several ways closer to French than to German Gothic while the length of the transept might even remind of English Gothic - with also some own characteristics it should have its own section.
The English language Wikipedia systematically forgot about Brabantine Gothic: not only is its own article a mere stub (compare nl:Brabantse gotiek, fr:Gothique brabançon or it:Gotico brabantino) and still manages to erroneously reverse a characteristical difference about the transept, it was not even linked to those other language Wikipedias and 'Brabantian Gothic' was not yet a redirect to it. The style is once again nearly utterly absent from the article Architecture of cathedrals, basilicas and abbey churches (the rather atypically twin towered Saints Michael & Gudula Cathedral is mentioned).
Understandably, this being an English language encyclopedia may cause showing great detail about English architecture; this must not allow oversight of an equally important Gothic style where only the region lacks size.
▲
SomeHuman 2011-07-09 13:37-16:45 (UTC)
Since we don't have a good overview of the exterior of Reims cathedral, I suggest a set for the reknowned Notre-Dame de Paris. MathKnight 18:25, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
It contains the three major aspects of Gothic architecture:
I think it is suitable to replace the current leading set of Reims. MathKnight 20:23, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Amandajm ( talk) 23:37, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Amandajm ( talk) 01:51, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
As the section Other Gothic buildings touches upon the subject of civic Gothic architecture and examples of cities rich in such, would anyone mind if I were to insert a few sentences here with hanseatic examples from the Baltic Sea region? There are several interesting, well-preserved medieval towns there, sharing common features in Gothic architecture. Thankful for any input. Ciao, Yakikaki ( talk) 22:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
The gallery at the bottom of the article, what does it add? It seems to me mostly an odd assortment of three pictures without any explanation. I suggest that either something more encyclopaedic is added, or it is removed. Any ideas? Yakikaki ( talk) 20:48, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:09, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
I believe this article is in serious need of some cleanup and editing.
I'll try to fix some of this. I welcome assistance and comments.
Cordially, SiefkinDR ( talk) 09:25, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Dear Vami IV and other editors: Thanks very much for your edits and improvements. The article is certainly getting better, but I think there are a few more things we need to do.
These are my suggestions to bring the article to a more manageable size and more into Wikipedia style. Further ideas and suggestions very welcome. SiefkinDR ( talk) 09:47, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
I have responses to make. To begin, many of your comments stem from the fact that you created (better) duplicates of existing sections. – Vami _IV† 08:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
X – Vami _IV† 08:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Your further ideas and suggestions are very welcome.
Best regards, SiefkinDR ( talk) 12:56, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
This section shall be maintained as an archive for revisions containing material useful for other sections. – Vami _IV† 08:37, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The statement that the Gothic rib vault was derived from Islamic architecture is made as if it's a proven fact, but in fact it's highly questionable. The Gothic rib vault is entirely different in its form and function than the "rib vaults" under the domes in Spain, which are decorative. Unlike the Gothic rib vaults, they don't have any structural function. It should be made clear that this is a theory, not a proven fact, unless there's some better evidence. Cordially, SiefkinDR ( talk) 18:01, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
The article on Aachen says that it has iron rods to take side thrust. Sainte-Chapelle is very similar. They both are much taller and narrower than preceding structures, with narrow buttresses and no ambulatory. I don't believe that Sainte-Chapelle is stable without tension elements inside the dome, as implied by this article. David R. Ingham 21:27, 31 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Ransford Ingham ( talk • contribs)
This shows an iron rod in the Notre Dome transept. https://abload.de/img/screenshot144wvkqh.png David R. Ingham 22:32, 31 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Ransford Ingham ( talk • contribs)
The French Wikipedia article on Sainte-Chapelle, [ [5]], says that, because there was no room to put flying buttresses, chains were used to take the side thrust of the vault (but I can't these in pictures). Water hammer bloomeries and melting of iron, to speed smelting, began to be used in Europe at around this time, so this may have been the first period in which iron was used as a structural material in buildings. David R. Ingham 01:46, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
This states that there are metal elements, though I can't make out what sort they are: http://www.visual-arts-cork.com/architecture/sainte-chapelle.htm If no one else has any information to add, I will make a simple change in a day or two, so that at least it won't continue to be misleading. David R. Ingham 04:07, 6 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Ransford Ingham ( talk • contribs)
Amandajm: recently deleted the paragraph of the lead giving the characteristics of Gothic architecture, saying it was "Completely wrong", but not giving any explanation or other reason. Could you please explain what you think is wrong? Cordially, SiefkinDR ( talk) 09:55, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
OK.
I'm back and I'm pissed off.
I went on sabbatical from Wikipedia about 5 years back, because of ongoing, gender based harrassment.
This harrassment of females became so serious on Wikipedia in the last five years, that one, younger female was even interviewed by the BBC about it.
Yes. So Wikipedia, as the result of harrassment, lost one of the prime contributors to articles on architecture for the last five years.
Does it matter? Can the rest of you all rush in to fill the space?
The answer, unfortunately, is a resounding no.
Some less experienced contributor fiddled, in a no-doubt well-meaning way, with the introduction to this article.
The result has been that every student for several years who has done a You Tube presentation on Gothic architecture has given the primary features as ribs, and fling buttresses.
Well, that rules out thousands of smaller Gothic structures that have neither.
Until I just deleted most of the section, the pointed arch appeared in the intro only as an also feature!
I suppose that I will fix it. No-one else has fixed it in years.
Amandajm ( talk) 22:23, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
Please move influence section to the top between "name" and "history" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:1118:A3E:7E16:29C:C0F5:8273 ( talk) 18:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
In every architecture related articles "Influence" Section appers at the top. Then come history and elements of that architecture. One should first know what influenced that architecture and its origin. This is the pattern that all books and academic articles, journals related to architecture follow — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:1118:A3E:7E16:29C:C0F5:8273 ( talk) 19:56, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Contents
1 Definition 2 Scope 3 History 3.1 Origins 3.2 Politics 3.3 Religion 4 Characteristics 4.1 Walls 4.2 Buttresses 4.3 Arches and openings 4.4 Arcades 4.5 Piers 4.6 Columns 4.7 Vaults and roofs 5 Ecclesiastical architecture 5.1 Plan 5.2 Section 5.3 Church and cathedral east ends 5.4 Church and cathedral façades and external decoration 5.5 Church towers 5.6 Portals 5.7 Interiors 5.8 Other structures 5.9 Decoration 5.10 Transitional style and the continued use of Romanesque forms 6 Romanesque castles, houses and other buildings 7 Romanesque Revival 8 Notes 9 See also 10 References 11 Further reading 12 External links
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Moslems are editing Wikipedia pages and adding misleading information. Please remove islamic influence section. Gothic architecture wasn't influence by moslems.
I edited this England, under her independent Norman kings, had large domains in France. and made it this England, under Angevin kings was in personnal union with large domains in France.
Here are my reasons:
Matthieu 11:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Please remove "JOHN IS THE COOLEST..." from the article please.
Cherokee40 01:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC)Cherokee40
ij Removed the stuff about Gothic architecture being dark -- One of Suger's goals was that it NOT be dark -- hence the windows. The gothic church was supposed to transport people to a more holy realm. One of the points of flying butresses was to allow the churches to be lighter, with more open space, and more windows in the walls -- not to be dark and heavy. And I don't EVEn know what to say about the gargoyles. JHK
Dark should perhaps be replaced by rudeness, severity, intensity or something along those lines. I'm new to this, but am quite sure that a valuable contibution to this page would be the works of John Ruskin, who wrote extensively on the definition of gothic architecture. Someone should add this, it is he who describes it as rude and severe changefull and amongst the highest in architecture. sorry for the bad grammar.
Alans22
19:50, 15 August 2007 (UTC)ABS
-- Amandajm 08:11, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Can we please put a timeframe here? I'm arguing with my wife over whether Gothic came before or after Romanesque Architecture
I'll put back that part about Gothic revival, which waas good, but that stuff I just cut was plain silly. Or at least very badly written. JHK
After I removed the statement that the cathedral in Zagreb was the most eastern Gothic cathedral, Wetman posted this on my talk page:
Hi! Give us some clues about Gothic east of Zagreb: monuments and dates would be a start. Not any easy subject I know. jump in at the deep end! Welcome!
So made a quick search and found a few Gothic cathedrals east of Zagreb. Not too many for sure (and I'll try to find more later) but certainly enough to prove that the Zagreb cathedral is not the easternmost.
City Longitude Gothic cathedral Built Zagreb 15.6 E
Vienna 16.2 E St. Stephen's Cathedral 1359-1433 Bratislava 17.1 E St. Martin's Concathedral 13th C-1452 Gdańsk 18.6 E St. Mary's Concathedral 1379-1496 Kraków 19.6 E Wawel Cathedral began 1320
Note that these are only the biggest cites with most impressive cathedrals but one could list many more. Anyway, thanks to Wetman for encouragement! Kpalion
It has been argued (most recently by architectural historian Dan Cruickshank in "Britains Best Buildings") that Durham Cathedral, as well as being a superb example of Romanesque architecture, also contains the first evidence of Gothic design.
The nave contains pointed traverses and pointed arches while flying buttresses are concealed over the aisles - the main elements of Gothic, 20 years before this style was seen elsewhere in Europe.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.153.219.170 ( talk • contribs) .
In consideration of the above comment re: Durham Cathedral, would anyone object to updating the page to reflect this? If there is doubt over the earliest examples this should be stated, otherwise the authority of the text is compromised.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.189.234.178 ( talk • contribs) .
An anonymous user made this recent addition to the opening paragraph:
I was hoping someone could integrate this into the main body of the article, in some way. I don't really understand what's being said here, but it should not be in the opening paragraph (a summary) unless it is expanded in the main body. Stbalbach 20:36, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Formatting that encases the framed table of contents in text, in just the way a framed map or image is enclosed within the text, is now available: {{TOCleft}} in the HTML does the job.
Blank space opposite the ToC, besides being unsightly and distracting, suggests that there is a major break in the continuity of the text, which may not be the case. Blanks in page layout are voids and they have meanings to the experienced reader. The space betweeen paragraphs marks a brief pause between separate blocks of thought. A deeper space, in a well-printed text, signifies a more complete shift in thought: note the spaces that separate sub-headings in Wikipedia articles.
A handful of thoughtless and aggressive Wikipedians revert the "TOCleft" format at will. A particularly aggressive de-formatter is User:Ed g2s
The reader may want to compare versions at the Page history. -- Wetman 20:18, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
I'm not taking sides here, but just want to point out some things. There is a major break in the continuity, see the Wikipedia style guidelines on how to write a good lead section and the purpose of the lead section. It's an abstract of the article contents, not a part of the main text, it's a summary. However it's a user-defined variable to see the TOC or not, and I think stylistic issues should be left to article contributors. Blank spaces can be nicely filled with images, and by reducing the number of section headings and thus length of the TOC. As well with small screens, blank spaces are not such a problem, for example on my laptop screen this article has a very minor amount of blank space since the image fills most of it. Stbalbach 21:01, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
To describe Ely cathedral as a gothic cathedral is misleading. From the outside, and from inside the long nave, the primacy of style is Romanesque. From the crossing, with its famous octogon, to the east end are a mixture of Early English and decorated gothic. Ely's Norman nave wasn't reworked like both those of Winchester or Canterbury to approximate the later fashionable gothic style. Cathedrals of England - Alec Clifton-Taylor & An Outline of European Architecture - Nikolaus Pevsner
Gothic architecture in England seems to have lost non-domestic information: does anyone know when such info was vandalised, or does it need re-written? ... dave souza 18:14, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Lund Cathedral, included here in the list of notable Gothic structures, is rather known to be of Romanesque architectural style. I don't think it should be present in this list. Please see the article ( Lund Cathedral) for pictures and details. Atilim Gunes Baydin 13:52, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Someone obviously pulled a prank here, but I'm only a casual wikipedia user so I'll let someone more dedicated correct it.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.17.86.52 ( talk • contribs) .
The end of building of St. Vitus Cathedral is in XX century. So we must say the cathedral is partialy neogothic structure. On the picture we see the main part of the tower which is evidently medieval but the top of the tower is baroque architecture. I think we should remove this picture because it can make false imagination of the gothic structures. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.136.151.181 ( talk • contribs) .
hello, i am doing an extra credit report for school and i need three characteristics for gothic architecture. i found that the 3 characteristics were very faint i couldnt quite understand what they were. i know that they talk about pointed ahrches and and gothic cathedrals could be highley decorated. but i could still not find out the third characteristic, i was hoing someone could say in another post or edit the page so it might be a little more understandible.( 209.247.21.203 21:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)) and also i am very very new so please HELP!( 209.247.21.203 21:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC))
I see that the Italian churches are listed here. They would usually be characterized as 'medieval' rather than Gothic. But there is no category more encompassing category 'medieval'. What to do? Brosi 20:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering what people think of the brick gothic section in this article? To me it seems like it’s given undue prominence (lovely though the photo is!). I’ve checked a few of the main reference works on Architecture/western architecture/Gothic (Pevsner, Banister Fletcher 20th ed., Watkins, Frankl -index only) and in none of them does the term brick gothic appear, all I can find are a few very brief references to particular gothic buildings being made out of brick.
It would be silly to get rid of it but I think it would be better treated as a style of a particular area in a similar way to, for example, Rayonnant, Decorated or Mudejar gothic. Seeing as though there is also an article devoted to brick gothic I think we could safely do away with the photo from the gothic architecture article but keep the text (there aren’t individual photos for each of the other gothic styles mentioned, most of which command a number of pages each in the books I mentioned). I hope this isn’t too controversial, but the article does give a distorted view of what is generally understood to be gothic architecture. I’d really like to hear what people think before I go ahead though! Thanks -- Ivanivanovich 01:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm about to get stuck into this article and expand it. I don't think it's the right place to list the stylistic periods of different countries.
I've done a bit of a search, and find no article on French Gothic, and likewise, no article on English Gothic. There are three articles dealing with the phases of English Gothic and containing mainly info drawn from Britanica. However, the headings Early English etc are only relevant if you know exactly what you are looking for, or have visited this page first and followed the links.
The proposal is to create several brand new pages and transfer that info which pertains most directly to the country, and fill it out with more detail-
-- Amandajm 13:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
-- Amandajm 05:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
It's looking like a huge improvement already! I agree that this isn't the place for lists of the different styles in different countries, it would be better to have a couple of paragraphs which briefly explain how gothic architecture developed differently across Europe instead. Ivanivanovich 10:25, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
At the risk of offending the person who wrote it, I have removed something that I strongly disagree with, that the intention of the Gothic cathedral is to compare the greatness of God with the smallness and (I can't remember whether it said useless or worthless) nature of humanity. No. That's not what it is about.
The facade impresses with grandeur, and overwhelms, yes. Christ sits in Majesty or Judgement at the door, along with the terrors of hell and often the ten wise and foolish Bridesmaids. Anyone who enters is reminded to repent and humble themselves.
But once through the door, the effect is not to oppress the sinner with their smallness and uselessness; the aim is to raise the sinner with a knowledge of salvation. The reason that people, tourists as well as worshippers, go to cathedrals (Canterbury, has hundreds of paying visitors every day), is not because they feel useless and small, but because the cathedral has the power to inspire, to uplift, to refresh and to heal. By the very nature of the building, a great number of people experience this whether they are believers or not.
It is probable that not all architects realised this function, and either by accident or design, built oppressive buildings. But on the whole, the vastness itself does not oppress, (unless one has agrophobia I suppose). The long naves of England say "walk this way!", the sky-high vaults of France demand "Look up!" the wide aisles of Germany say "Wander!", the clearly defined progression of Italian gothic churches invites "Come forward!" while the complexity of Spanish cathedrals impels one should "Explore!" While I recognise that not everybody has the same experience, I think these are in general the sorts of reasons why cathedrals are still highly valued and are still meeting needs that are in no way associated with participating in the formal services.
-- Amandajm 02:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
The equilateral arch is not, as specified in the article, of altitude (height) equal to its
width. Please see:
.
The altitude is .
(See also:
Equilateral_triangle)
Flip purr 19:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I have just seen the problem with that anonymous editor that is deleting once and again a sentence about Spanish Gothic. I think that the problem is not the truth or not of one sentence or the "alternative", but the excessive generalization that is stated in the seven sentences that talk about "Spanish Gothic cathedrals".
First of all the paragraph lacks of a chronological and stylistic differentiation, that IS important to understand the variety of styles of what is not only "Spanish Gothic", all in one, but "Spanish High Gothic" or the later "Levantino Gothic" and " Isabelline Gothic" to say only three clear examples differenciated by their chronology and, of course, by their shape, spatial concepts and ornamentation. They cannot be analised in the same sentence as a whole. (Not talking about Mudejar Gothic, that goes in parallel with the other styles, and that could be considered a hybrid style). This hasn`t got to be necessarely much longer, but much clearer.
I hope this helps.-- Garcilaso 09:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Amandajm 10:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Someone who is not registered and who uses a number of different computers keeps changing this section, without comprehending what the actual purpose of the section is.
If you are that person, PLEASE READ THIS!
There is a heading that says
under the heading it has subheadings:-
Under these subheadings the distinguishing characteristics of each region are compared. If you do not know what this word means, please look up "compare" and "comparison" in your Spanish/English dictionary, because this is something you do not seem to be understanding.
The comparisons are partly a matter of appearance. It is the way the buildings are designed to look. So:-
For example:- the interior space of the nave and chancel at Barcelona is actually more than a metre higher than the nave of Winchester. But it doesn't look as high, because it is wider. On the other hand, the nave of Winchester is very steeply pointed and gives the impression of tremendous height. When you see it, it would be easy to believe it is the highest vault in England, but it is not as high as many others, including the wooden ceiling on the Romanesque cathedral at Ely.
These churches are surpassed by Beauvais, Amiens and Cologne by about 20 metres. In other words the interiors of some Gothic churches are nearly twice as high as Barcelona, Winchester etc etc.
Now this is clear, please stop changing the comparative statements. Just accept that by comparison with an English, French, or German Gothic church, the main internal space of a Spanish cathedral appear short and wide, rather than long and narrow or very tall.
So, please
Do go and write new articles about individual Spanish Cathedrals. Also- Get yourself a sign-n name, so that even when you change computers, you are identified as a particular individual. Serious editors do not like dealing with people who are just a string of different nubers. We cannot converse with you. And every time you edit, leave an explanation in the "Edit Summary" box. You are not a new editor any more, so you should be begunning to find your way around these things.
Amandajm 10:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations to the editors on a great article, beautifully illustrated. Any thoughts of taking it to FA? PiCo 12:25, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
The second paragraph of the first section reads "Originating in the pants of a million Kingsland High School girls what can i say beside GOD DAMN!! 12th century France and lasting into the 16th century."
I can't find the "edit" link for the first section, so I can't fix it myself. Someone please fix this vandalism.
128.193.141.160 20:39, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
This is my first time editing and couldn't find the "Edit Summary" box I was supposed to make a comment in. I simply changed the incorrect spelling of the first reference - Jean Bony author of "French Gothic Architecture Twelfth and Thirteenth Century". The name was incorrectly spelt Boney. I know the correct spelling because I work for his widow and have seen this book on her bookcase. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billsylv ( talk • contribs) 20:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Why no photo of Westminster Abbey which is one of the most famous, if not the most famous gothic building in the world? Signsolid ( talk) 03:43, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Even though Gothic architecture has had diverse developments in different countries, there should be a section about its general historical development, from the early experiences at Suger's Saint Denis (and Durham??) and early development in Northen France, then its adoption in Europe as a whole (with many French architects being employed as far as Cyprus), on to its fragmentation into various national styles.
For example, some parallels can be drawn between the English and French styles:
Cvereb ( talk) 22:41, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
We have a article length limitation here, because if it gets too big, it won't load on some browsers, so we have to be content with an article, not a full-length book. Which is what it would take, if I attempt to explain all the relationships you are suggesting. Amandajm ( talk) 09:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
The reason for removing the section is that the editor had added the info without actually reading the content of other parts of the section to see what it is about.
The section is specifically about the way in which Gothic cathedrals differ from region to region. It attempts to encapsulate how the buildings look different from each other, and might be recognised stylistically.
The deleted section was a brief summary of Gothic architecture in Portugal, stating the number, location and types of significant buildings. This is all interesting, but it isn't the topic of the section, and it belongs in the main article on Gothic architectuure in Portugal. This article does not attempt to contain details of the location of all the hundreds of Gothic buildings spread across Europe.
Amandajm ( talk) 11:37, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
I added the section on Portugal by the following reasons: Portuguese buildings as their own interpretations of gothic style and one of them represents an tottally indigenous developments of that style, that for it self means a regional difference.A huge regional difference which exists only in Portugal and in is former empire (Brazil, Angola,Mozambique), I first wrote a short description of the Manueline portuguese style but it was almost imediatelly deleted, because of that and for people see for them selves that a portuguese style exists I listed the three ,architecturaly speaking, simbolyc Portuguese buildings for interested people know that and get more information if desired, starting for the Portuguese gothic architecture page (which is not refered on modifications,why 'portuguese architecture' and not 'portuguese gothic architecture' a specialized page?. Portugal at XII to XVI centuries was already an independent country with borders well established (more or less the actual borders)and total sovereignity. Gained is independence from Castille at 1147, recognized by the Pope about 40 years later, so Portugal was not and is not CASTILLE or SPAIN. As politics, architecture was a competition and afirmation field between both iberian dominant countries and they didn´t copied each other since for most of the time they were at war or disputing something. Inspiration for portuguese building come from two different origins (mostly), from France and England (a close ally), and from local devellopments of style. The portuguese style adopts the tall construction style of England with simple, but elegant decoration without paintings. The manueline style which is more exuberant don´t copied any spanish examples since the intention was comemorate the portuguese maritime achievements at XV and XVI centuries being Spain at that time a fiercely competitor and frequently an enemy (see about tordesillas treaty - the end of dispute about Americas!). Before remove any reference about Portugal take a close reading on the pages about Batalha and specially Jerónimos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.193.39.133 ( talk) 09:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Dear Mr.FSouza (or if you are a Brazilian citizen: Caro FSousa) First of all: Thank you very much for your comment. I apreciated your comment on descripton I made above and I see you have vast acknowlegement on this matter, far vaster than mine, my interest is more as admirer of that construction style. Nevertheless, I think (some people should agree, others disagree, everybody has that right!), that regional differences between Portuguese (specially Manueline) and other European gothic architecture tendencies is enough to justify an independent entry on the list of regional tendencies, even if only serves the purpose of calling attention for his existence. It must be taken into account that late portuguese gothic is not a simple minor adaptation of other styles, that might be true for some examples (I think Alcobaça is the most evident case, but is not late gothic), but style diverges from others and evolves on is own way (even if incorporates some foreign elements), since construction of Batalha monastery until construction of Jerónimos monastery, that could be seen at Tomar with several buildings from that period. Joining together Spain and Portugal not appears to be a good idea as explained above, because politics affected architecture, and the typical styles from Spain and Portugal diverged from each other by rule (but, of course, some buildings are very similar, the inspiration sources were the same). Another reason for appearence should be the widespread of style troughout former portuguese empire, even there evolved with local adaptations, like happened at India (Goa). With my cumpliments (or compliments, i´m not sure!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.136.129.1 ( talk) 15:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Amandajm ( talk) 18:01, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
The Gothic style of church architecture was also viewed as being the "French" style.
This unreferenced sentence was added to the end of a paragraph discussing a specificically French reference to the architecturte as being of the "Goths". If it relates to the French view, then that is unclear. If the writer intended to relate the sentence to the English view, then it needed to be placed in a different paragraph, linked to the material there, and properly referenced. Also, the time period at which the architecture was regarded as "French" needs to be defined. The rest of the section has references that are associated with historic views of Gothic architecture. Amandajm ( talk) 13:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
This edit of 25 June 2007 added the section on materials. The section is very similar to http://www.aquinas-multimedia.com/stjoseph/architecture.html but that web page has a date of May 2008 - checking the wayback machine for example, the version of 27 May 2007 does not include the same material so it would appear that the website failed to attribute wikipedia rather than the other way around. -- Matilda talk 23:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Could we please have more attention to shop architecture, modest-sized domestic architecture?
and less exclusive focus on cathedrals and castles?
Thanks, Dogru144 ( talk) 18:48, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
What Are The 3 Examples Of Gothic Architecture? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.160.227.237 ( talk) 06:08, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
okok pls read gothic lolita RILY RAWKS YO! LUV GOTHIC LOLITA♥ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raspberry56 ( talk • contribs) 14:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
See Talk:Medieval art#the term "Gothic". Srnec ( talk) 06:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
An editor added the following about Hungary. The sections about different regions deal briefly with differences in style. There is no room here for histories. A short stylistic description of Gothic in Eastern Europe would be useful. I'll do it.
When I went looking for another article to drop this into, I found no article on Medieval architecture in Hungary, and no other generic article. It's been very roughly translated, with all the verbs wrong.
The most important spreader of the Gothic art i9n Hungary was the order of the Cistercians, wich style has influence even in the royal chapel of Esztergom.
Buda will be the city were the court will be located, and there will be built the church of Nagyboldogasszony (Holy Mary) and the church of Saint Nicholas [1]. The most significative gothic constructions will be also the benedictine church of Sopron, and many castles and village chapels.
The King Louis I of Hungary was the one that ordered the construction of the royal chapel in Buda in the XIV century, and also the construction of the palaces of Visegrád and Diósgyőr. However, the gothic architecture reached it's climax during the reign of Sigismund of Hungary in the early XV century, when was built the modern Palace of Buda, and the fortresses of Siklós, Csesznek, Gyula and Kisnána.
Later, in the XV century the City of Buda was modified by the King Matthias Corvinus, and the gothic art was conyugated with the traces propper of the Renaissance, creating nex combinations that are still visible in the streets of the district of the Palace of Buda [2].
Amandajm ( talk) 07:12, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
References
The picture is quite impressive, in itself. However, it is more pertinent to the St Trophime article than the general one, because, as stated in the text, ribbed vaulting came into use during the Romanesque period, It was one of the features of Gothic architecture that was already well established. I have a plan for using that pic somewhere else. Amandajm ( talk) 01:14, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
That makes sense. It would probably be more at home on the Romanesque page, I can't remember if I posted it there or not... DuendeThumb ( talk) 18:41, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello,
Removal of reliable external links is not at just one persons discretion. Be respectful of other individual's contributions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GothicArchitect ( talk • contribs) 06:58, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
I agree that there needs to be mutual respect for other's contributions which is why it is far-fetched for you to label the external resource as laden with errors. Depending on the literature referenced, some of the contributions made on this page could be viewed as erroneous as well. Therefore, it boils down to opinion for some matters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GothicArchitect ( talk • contribs) 23:57, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Firstly Here's the list of characteristics. With some of the Characteristics it is very hard to go wrong. With others, there are errors
Secondly
The section Origins of Gothic Architecture attributes the development of Gothic architecture solely to the influence of Islamic architecture. It cites Christopher Wren (late 1600s) and then mentions the influence of Islamic architecture on his design for St Paul's Cathedral (which you really must know isn't Gothic, and is hardly relevant).
Quote:"Many of the churches and related buildings erected in Europe and Spain during this time were based on the Saracen model, a model that stemmed from the imagination and innovation of the vast Arabian empire."
This is utter nonsense! The model of churches had developed over a period of about 800 years by the time the first Gothic churches were built! That model stemmed from the imagination and innovation of the vast Roman Empire, if you don't mind!
An uninformed reader would be given the impression that the Islamic style and Islamic ornament had simply been lifted straight out of the Middle east, or Moorish Spain, and applied to European churches. This is far from the reality of the situation.
What happened was more like this:
Some of the examples given under the different regions
the photos
Please do not keep linking a half-developed website with lots of errors to Wkipedia! Go and do a great deal more work on it first, and please do try to remember that Gothic architecture was the product of a over thousand years of Christianity.
Amandajm ( talk) 06:19, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Amandajm.
And as expected from Grand Tutnum - that was indeed lot of work. :). I would go point by point and would agree almost to everything literatim. But by the end, I failed to find those errors in Article. It took me a while to realize, that it is an analysis of quality of an external link. (well I see I overlooked your last sentence Amandajm).
What makes me most crazy is when gothic revival buildings are shown as examples of gothic (here or elsewhere). Or here the - Bamberg_Cathedral (when I saw it firstly years ago, I couldn't believe that such an awesome romanesque structure might have exist and might have survived. Awesome - yes absolutely, gothic - not.) Colored (marble or paintings)? - Well it was only relatively recently, that I realized that it might have been often, in some parts and it might have been beautiful too. In those parts of Europe, I am living in, this is not the case, here everything in gothic is lofty, elegant and sober one. The case of origin too.
Just for some of the subjective judgments - as it is just an external site, it can be forgiven, if its author use a bit more subjective point of view in terms of beauty such as "influence on its beautiful and intricate designs" (as long as it would be clear, that it is judgment of particular - skilled - person, not an authoritative description). Reo + 08:52, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
In the third paragraph of the section Majesty, it should be Ripon Cathedral, not Ripon Catherdal; also, in the same paragraph façade appears as facade thrice. -- 200.92.154.121 ( talk) 01:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
The article Gothic architecture renders adequate attention to French Gothic and rather overemphasizes English ecclesiastic buildings. The section on Gothic in the Holy Roman Empire however, fails to even mention the distinct Brabantian Gothic and its samples such as Saint Rumbold's Cathedral in Mechelen (the earliest sample of this style), the Cathedral of Our Lady in Antwerp, Saint John's Cathedral in 's-Hertogenbosch, St. Michael and St. Gudula Cathedral in Brussels, the Basilica of Saint Martin (aka of Our Lady) in Halle, and numerous other noteworthy buildings such as the Brussels City Hall. In fact, though its churches often have a single western tower, Brabantian Gothic is in several ways closer to French than to German Gothic while the length of the transept might even remind of English Gothic - with also some own characteristics it should have its own section.
The English language Wikipedia systematically forgot about Brabantine Gothic: not only is its own article a mere stub (compare nl:Brabantse gotiek, fr:Gothique brabançon or it:Gotico brabantino) and still manages to erroneously reverse a characteristical difference about the transept, it was not even linked to those other language Wikipedias and 'Brabantian Gothic' was not yet a redirect to it. The style is once again nearly utterly absent from the article Architecture of cathedrals, basilicas and abbey churches (the rather atypically twin towered Saints Michael & Gudula Cathedral is mentioned).
Understandably, this being an English language encyclopedia may cause showing great detail about English architecture; this must not allow oversight of an equally important Gothic style where only the region lacks size.
▲
SomeHuman 2011-07-09 13:37-16:45 (UTC)
Since we don't have a good overview of the exterior of Reims cathedral, I suggest a set for the reknowned Notre-Dame de Paris. MathKnight 18:25, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
It contains the three major aspects of Gothic architecture:
I think it is suitable to replace the current leading set of Reims. MathKnight 20:23, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Amandajm ( talk) 23:37, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Amandajm ( talk) 01:51, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
As the section Other Gothic buildings touches upon the subject of civic Gothic architecture and examples of cities rich in such, would anyone mind if I were to insert a few sentences here with hanseatic examples from the Baltic Sea region? There are several interesting, well-preserved medieval towns there, sharing common features in Gothic architecture. Thankful for any input. Ciao, Yakikaki ( talk) 22:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
The gallery at the bottom of the article, what does it add? It seems to me mostly an odd assortment of three pictures without any explanation. I suggest that either something more encyclopaedic is added, or it is removed. Any ideas? Yakikaki ( talk) 20:48, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:09, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
I believe this article is in serious need of some cleanup and editing.
I'll try to fix some of this. I welcome assistance and comments.
Cordially, SiefkinDR ( talk) 09:25, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Dear Vami IV and other editors: Thanks very much for your edits and improvements. The article is certainly getting better, but I think there are a few more things we need to do.
These are my suggestions to bring the article to a more manageable size and more into Wikipedia style. Further ideas and suggestions very welcome. SiefkinDR ( talk) 09:47, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
I have responses to make. To begin, many of your comments stem from the fact that you created (better) duplicates of existing sections. – Vami _IV† 08:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
X – Vami _IV† 08:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Your further ideas and suggestions are very welcome.
Best regards, SiefkinDR ( talk) 12:56, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
This section shall be maintained as an archive for revisions containing material useful for other sections. – Vami _IV† 08:37, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The statement that the Gothic rib vault was derived from Islamic architecture is made as if it's a proven fact, but in fact it's highly questionable. The Gothic rib vault is entirely different in its form and function than the "rib vaults" under the domes in Spain, which are decorative. Unlike the Gothic rib vaults, they don't have any structural function. It should be made clear that this is a theory, not a proven fact, unless there's some better evidence. Cordially, SiefkinDR ( talk) 18:01, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
The article on Aachen says that it has iron rods to take side thrust. Sainte-Chapelle is very similar. They both are much taller and narrower than preceding structures, with narrow buttresses and no ambulatory. I don't believe that Sainte-Chapelle is stable without tension elements inside the dome, as implied by this article. David R. Ingham 21:27, 31 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Ransford Ingham ( talk • contribs)
This shows an iron rod in the Notre Dome transept. https://abload.de/img/screenshot144wvkqh.png David R. Ingham 22:32, 31 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Ransford Ingham ( talk • contribs)
The French Wikipedia article on Sainte-Chapelle, [ [5]], says that, because there was no room to put flying buttresses, chains were used to take the side thrust of the vault (but I can't these in pictures). Water hammer bloomeries and melting of iron, to speed smelting, began to be used in Europe at around this time, so this may have been the first period in which iron was used as a structural material in buildings. David R. Ingham 01:46, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
This states that there are metal elements, though I can't make out what sort they are: http://www.visual-arts-cork.com/architecture/sainte-chapelle.htm If no one else has any information to add, I will make a simple change in a day or two, so that at least it won't continue to be misleading. David R. Ingham 04:07, 6 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Ransford Ingham ( talk • contribs)
Amandajm: recently deleted the paragraph of the lead giving the characteristics of Gothic architecture, saying it was "Completely wrong", but not giving any explanation or other reason. Could you please explain what you think is wrong? Cordially, SiefkinDR ( talk) 09:55, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
OK.
I'm back and I'm pissed off.
I went on sabbatical from Wikipedia about 5 years back, because of ongoing, gender based harrassment.
This harrassment of females became so serious on Wikipedia in the last five years, that one, younger female was even interviewed by the BBC about it.
Yes. So Wikipedia, as the result of harrassment, lost one of the prime contributors to articles on architecture for the last five years.
Does it matter? Can the rest of you all rush in to fill the space?
The answer, unfortunately, is a resounding no.
Some less experienced contributor fiddled, in a no-doubt well-meaning way, with the introduction to this article.
The result has been that every student for several years who has done a You Tube presentation on Gothic architecture has given the primary features as ribs, and fling buttresses.
Well, that rules out thousands of smaller Gothic structures that have neither.
Until I just deleted most of the section, the pointed arch appeared in the intro only as an also feature!
I suppose that I will fix it. No-one else has fixed it in years.
Amandajm ( talk) 22:23, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
Please move influence section to the top between "name" and "history" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:1118:A3E:7E16:29C:C0F5:8273 ( talk) 18:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
In every architecture related articles "Influence" Section appers at the top. Then come history and elements of that architecture. One should first know what influenced that architecture and its origin. This is the pattern that all books and academic articles, journals related to architecture follow — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:1118:A3E:7E16:29C:C0F5:8273 ( talk) 19:56, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Contents
1 Definition 2 Scope 3 History 3.1 Origins 3.2 Politics 3.3 Religion 4 Characteristics 4.1 Walls 4.2 Buttresses 4.3 Arches and openings 4.4 Arcades 4.5 Piers 4.6 Columns 4.7 Vaults and roofs 5 Ecclesiastical architecture 5.1 Plan 5.2 Section 5.3 Church and cathedral east ends 5.4 Church and cathedral façades and external decoration 5.5 Church towers 5.6 Portals 5.7 Interiors 5.8 Other structures 5.9 Decoration 5.10 Transitional style and the continued use of Romanesque forms 6 Romanesque castles, houses and other buildings 7 Romanesque Revival 8 Notes 9 See also 10 References 11 Further reading 12 External links