This section is from the book "Interior Decoration: Its Principles And Practice", by Frank Alvah Parsons. Also available from Amazon: Interior Decoration: Its Principles and Practice.
AS it was in France so was it in England. The Renaissance was an affected style. This was also true of the Gothic in England, although the Gothic was indigenous to France. The Renaissance was a natural outcome of geographical position and of social evolution in Italy. The English adopted the Renaissance as a new and interesting means of expressing national ideas. They adopted the forms rather than the ideas for which they stood, and, as is always the case, these forms were at first copied, and later modified, into what may be styled the English expression of Italian ideas. The development of these forms in England, however, was considerable, although neither so complete nor so distinctive as those in France under the inspiration of Francis I.
In order to make a simple comparison between these two national types that we may the more clearly understand the fundamental qualities of the English form, it is well to consider first some of the elements concerned in their development.
In the first place, the life of the people of any country is the greatest factor in the evolution of its art. It is their daily activities that determine the needs of the time, and these needs are satisfied by the normal production of such objects as are essential. These objects accordingly represent the art of the nation.
Up to the last quarter of the fifteenth century the English people may be said to have developed rugged, solid, individual but primitive expressions of their social ideal. This is partly due to the geographical isolation of Great Britain. By its position it is cut off from other types of life with which it might have, under different circumstances, commingled. It is also due, in part, to the fact that the national mind had given its attention to political rather than social development. But, most of all, it may be attributed to the mixed qualities which we call the English temperament. Perhaps we can perceive something of this temperamental aggregate by noticing for a moment the strains of influence which are fused together in the comprehensive term "the British nation."
This people is Celtic in origin, and while perhaps little of the Celtic quality remains in England, much of the feeling is still present in the quality of the Irish mind, and no doubt hereditary strains are clearly traceable to this origin even in the English. Before the beginning of the Christian era the Romans had invaded the British Islands. By the beginning of the fourth century England was practically under their domination, and to this day appear inerasable marks of the power of that mighty nation.
The early Britons mingled with and absorbed many of the Roman traditions, particularly in political and social life, which remain as mountain-top traits in English modern life. In the first place, English law is based somewhat upon Roman law. Much of jurisprudence, political organization, and desire for territorial expansion, as well as substantial, formal, warlike measures, are of Roman origin. These elemental factors have produced qualities of solidity, strength, formality, conservatism and fearlessness, which are fundamentals in the English character and are clearly discernible in their art.
Before the eighth century Roman power had gradually declined, and the invasion of the Anglo-Saxons with their traditions of somewhat barbaric domesticity brought into the language, social forms and domestic relationships, the Teutonic qualities which are perceptible in the domestic ideals of English life. The amalgamation of the Anglo-Saxons and the added domestic ideas of the Danes furnished a remarkable complement to the formal imperialism of the Roman time.
The tendency toward democratic equality, the inclination for comfort and moderation, and the distinctly non-monarchic viewpoint of these Anglo-Saxon invaders were also strong factors in the rapid development of the home idea in England after the beginning of the eighth century. But this was interrupted and greatly modified by the invasion of the Norman French under William the Conqueror about the middle of the eleventh century. Very different was this ideal from the crude democratic social ideal of the two previous centuries. With William the Conqueror came the feudal system, with all its military power, caste system and monarchic principles. He laid the foundation for the absolute monarchy which reached its height under Henry VIII at the beginning of the sixteenth century.
Brief mention of these different races has been made here to stimulate an inquiry regarding the different phases of the English periods in order that it may be kept in mind that the British people are the most mixed, comprehensive and varied in experience of all nations. In consequence of this complexity, they have perhaps more ideas to express and less definitely formulated traditions in one style of expression. Their ideas have been less thoroughly worked out than those of nations which have had one ideal from time immemorial, and have expressed it in traditional forms that grew more and more insistent until the climax was reached, when decadence set in and resulted in the destruction of the original idea.
The second factor which has influenced in a large degree English art expression is their peculiar political viewpoint. In no country has there been so decided a conflict between supreme monarchic power and democratic ideals as in the national history of this remarkable people. One has only to remember the Magna Charta and the steps which led to it, all that followed its acceptance, the climax of absolutism under Henry VIII, the peculiar strategic ideal of Elizabeth, the ups and downs of the Stuart dynasty, the peculiar outcome of the Dutch regime under William and Mary, the vicissitudes of the Georges, and the remarkable constitutional monarchy under Victoria, to see how difficult it is to consider the English periods as expressing monarchic ideas alone. In France the period of Francis I or Louis XIV or Louis XV was dominated supremely by the monarch and his associates. The corresponding English periods, while somewhat under the direction of the monarch, owed their origin to national ideas rather than to monarchic whims.
 
Continue to: