b wed 
and fculptured faints, the fretted roof, the cluftering pillar, 
but above all, the pointed arch. And as plainnefs and folidity 
conftitute the leading features in the Saxon and Norman build- 
ings, fo, on the other hand, the Gothic archite€ture is diftinguifhed 
by the lightnefs of its work, the boldnefs of its elevations, and the 
profufion of its ornaments. So that the Saxon bears fome fimili- 
tude as it. were to the Tufcan order; the Norman to the Doric 
and Jonic ; and the Gothic to the Corinthian and Compofite. 
3. In our enquiries into the origin of the Gothic ftyle, we 
meet with not lefs genius and fancy than has been difcovered by 
the writers on the origin of the Grecian orders, but a much 
greater diverfity of fentiment, there being not lefs than five 
different opinions held with regard. to the rife of this f{pecies of 
architeQure: either that it was introduced from the eaft by the 
Crufaders, and fhould therefore be ca.'zd Saracenic; or borrowed 
from the Moors in Spain, and fhould therefore be ftyled Moorefque ; 
or derived from the ancient cuftom of worfhipping in groves, 
where the eye being long accuftomed to contemplate the arches 
formed by the branches of the trees that fhaded their altars, it 
was natural, when covered buildings fucceded to thefe groves of 
worfhip, that men fhould endeavour to introduce fome fimilitude 
between them and thofe places in which they had been accuf- 
tomed fo long to perform their religious ceremonies; and that ac- 
cordingly we find not only the arches formed by the branches 
exa@tly imitated by the pointed arch, but the ftems of the 
trees as accurately reprefented by the flender and cluftering 
pillars. The elegance, ingenuity, and plaufibility of this opinion 
have 
