In general, an architectural influence was apparent in Plain Mosaic design, particularly among the assem-blage from Meaux, which dates to the third quarter of the 13th century (see M.73/74, M.75, M.76/77 and M.78 in Figs 10.10–10.13). Some pieces might be compared to the tracery for rose windows (for example, the corner piece of roundel M.76; Harrison and Barker 1987, 134–51). The influence of architecture on other crafts is a feature of Gothic design, and not particular to Plain Mosaic tiling. Rose window patterns, for example, are also known on slip decorated tiles of c.1255 at Westminster chapter house (Binski 1995, 29, pls 28–33). Hints of an association between stone work-ing and tile makwork-ing in the north might suggest that this was partly a consequence of the close links between craftsmen working in different materials at this period.
Few direct stylistic parallels were found to northern Plain Mosaic. Contemporary workshops making mosa-ic tiling existed in southern England (for example Norton 1986a; Medway mosaic) but this material did not compare closely with that from the north in either style or manufacturing characteristics. The closest parallel was of much later date, at Warden Abbey, Bedfordshire (Baker 1982; 1987; 1993). This early 14th-century paving included several areas with simi-larities to Plain Mosaic, particularly to the M.65 roundel, which might be seen as the signature arrange-ment of the tile group (see Chapter 10), and the arcad-ing patterns of some of the Meaux roundels.
Outside the British Isles, the closest stylistic paral-lels to the Plain Mosaic M.65 roundel was found among material from Germany (for example, Kier
1970, pls 162–221; Landgraf 1993, 104–7, figs 58–61). Perhaps the closest similarity was with the flooring at the Cistercian house of Eberbach (Landgraf 1993, 83, fig 55). Wheel arrangements of shaped tiles, with concentric bands of triangular tiles forming a type of sun motif, were popular at the sites of a variety of different monastic denominations in south and west Germany. The suggested date for the ceramic exam-ples of these roundels was the first third or second quarter of the 13th century, but examples in stone were dated to the 12th century.
Comparable material from France was identified and discussed by Christopher Norton (1984a; 1986b).
Again, no exact parallels to Plain Mosaic were found but some of the assemblages had similar shapes or, occasionally, a similar arrangement. The most direct parallels were with Mosaic 36 (from the Cistercian nunnery of Maubisson, Val d’Oise, Norton 1986b, 278, fig 20; from Saint-Ouen, Rouen, Norton 1984a, 62, pl 9; 1986a, 231 and pl 105; and in opus sectile in the crypt of Rouen cathedral, pl 5, p.60). Also there were tiles of lozenge and star shapes, similar to S.110 and S.170, from La Sauve Majeure Abbey, Gironde (Norton 1984a, 62, pl 8). Technological parallels between English Plain Mosaic and material in France have also been noted at St-Pierre-sur-Dives, Calvados, where the unusual method of decoration termed reverse inlay was extensively used (Knight and Keen 1977, 72). This technique – and variants of it – was occasionally used on Plain Mosaic tiles (see Chapter 10 and Fig 10.19). The dating evidence available at present suggests broad contemporaneity with Plain Mosaic in northern England.
Pavements of earlier date that can be compared directly with the layout of Plain Mosaic flooring were found in other materials. Although the interlace of the great circular designs of some Italian Cosmatesque pave-ments was absent in Plain Mosaic, there were the same blocks of repetitive geometric shapes and the same large roundels flanked by four smaller circular arrangements (Glass 1980, 25–39; Guidobaldi 1984). The dating of Cosmatesque paving is problematic. The floors are gen-erally thought to be of the 12th or 13th centuries but the closest dating evidence for specific floors tends to be of later rather than earlier date.
Closer stylistic similarities can be found between Plain Mosaic and antique opus sectile floors and tapes-tries. The arrangements of some rectangular blocks of Plain Mosaic shapes replicate Byzantine opus sectile paving exactly (Fig 2.8). The opus sectile floor of c.1070 in the abbey of Monte Cassino included roundels with satellite circles, blocks of zigzag, trellis, chequers, lozenges and triangles of opposing colours, all of which are seen in Plain Mosaic.
The most detailed interpretation of the significance of non-figurative mosaic paving of this type has been made by Richard Foster (1991) in relation to the Cosmatesque floor of c.1269 in Westminster Abbey.
This floor is a rare example of such work in England.
Fig 2.8: Opus sectile pavement at the abbey of Monte Cassino, c.1070 (from Foster 1991; reproduced by permission of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library)
Fig 2.9: Plan of the Oberpleis floor and detail. The inscription on the tiles of the satellite circles in the inset is reproduced on p.18, with missing sections in brackets. (H. Merian, Schnütgen Museum). Reproduced by permission of Rheinisches Bildarchiv Köln
Foster suggested that the Westminster pavement was a theological representation of the world, incorporating contemporary interests in astronomy, geometry and numerology. In 12th-century England these interests had been stimulated by renewed access to the works of the ancient Greek writers via Spain, southern Italy, Antioch and the Arab world (discussed for example by Southern 1986, 85–90). For Foster, the Westminster pavement was designed as a contemplative aid in which the medieval observer would find a multitude of cos-mological meanings – the pavement was literally a world view. The evidence cited to support this inter-pretation of the Westminster floor included the pave-ment’s inscription, its geometrical configuration, the medieval symbolism of quadrature and its location in the sanctuary of the abbey.
Supporting Foster’s interpretation of the Westminster floor is a relatively little known inscribed ceramic pavement found during restoration work at the parish church of Oberpleis, near Siegburg in the Rhineland in 1974 (Schmitz-Ehmke 1975, 120–3;
Joliet 1979). The layout of this floor was similar to that of opus sectile and Plain Mosaic, with blocks of repeat-ing geometric shapes and a large roundel, set in a square frame, with four small circles in each of the spandrels (Fig 2.9). The pavement included an inscription. That of the small satellite circles has been read as shown above (missing parts in brackets).
The letters in the centre of the satellite circles – ADAM – are Hebrew for Earth, and were sometimes written at the points of the compass in the Middle Ages.
Further inscribed tiles in successive rings listed the ele-ments, seasons and temperaments and the physical states. Inscribed tiles in the large central roundel were not understood. The pavement was thought to date to a building phase of c.1220–30 and was therefore of similar date to Plain Mosaic in north-east Britain.
Similarities in the style and configuration of opus sec-tile and Cosmatesque work, Plain Mosaic flooring and the Oberpleis pavement, might suggest that Plain Mosaic pavements were also an expression of the rela-tionship between man and the cosmos. This would indicate local knowledge of continental and Byzantine learning. It is, however, difficult to say how specifically the themes discussed by Foster in relation to Westminster, and indicated by the inscription at Oberpleis, were also expressed in Plain Mosaic.
Inscribed tiles from Meaux of designs 1.19–1.24 were thought to belong to the Plain Mosaic series but were relatively late in date in this tradition (after c.1250) and have not yet been understood. The interpretation of Plain Mosaic flooring as representing a contemporary world view therefore rests upon the layout of the tiles.
Clearly this layout could be interpreted in a more gen-eralised way. Circular and other repeating geometric patterns might, for example, be seen as universal expressions of continuity and eternity, while abstract, non-figurative designs and closely fitting geometric shapes might often be used to suggest the order, grandeur and solemnity of the universe. The use of sim-ple shapes to make apparently comsim-plex arrangements can promote meditation in many different contexts and it is the case that very different cultural traditions have adopted such symbolisms. Strictures on decoration were, for instance, a feature of both Islamic and Cistercian law, both perhaps inspired by the same wish for an environment that would promote prayer and contemplation. Broad stylistic parallels can be seen in some of the continuous repeating patterns of Islamic wall tiles and Plain Mosaic arrangements. Examples from such a variety of settings show the wide appeal of designs formed from repetitive geometric shapes.
How far the layout of Plain Mosaic floors had any liturgical significance also remains uncertain. Particular arrangements were found in particular areas of the churches. The repeating chevron arrangement in the presbytery at Byland may have been intended as a sub-dued setting for the spiritual glory of the high altar (Fig 2.3). Roundels and panels of repeating patterns may have marked the entrances and spaces around chapels.
It was notable that the roundels were by far the most worn tiles at Byland (see Figs 2.1 and 2.2), as if they were the most used areas during services. There was nothing to suggest that extra wear on the roundel tiles was a result of differences in their manufacture or fir-ing. The tiling in the passage ways or areas used by monks moving around the church were often divided into ‘lanes’, with single lines of tiles of a different arrangement used to divide up the overall pattern (sometimes the same arrangements as those used in step risers). The divisions of the paving into lanes in the aisles may have been a practical decision in a build-ing devoted to ceremonial activities which, much of the time, would have been performed in near darkness.
One explanation for the absence of these lanes or divider lines in the north presbytery aisle at Byland is that this part of the church was less well used – the monks entering the church either from the cloister or the night stairs, both on the south side.