>96 ITALIAN ARCHITECTURE. Part II. much as a combination of external d.gnity with limited dimensions in lAan, and was attained by the arrangement adopted. As will be observed, the pointed arch, as in the tower at Gaeta (Woodcut jSTo. 817), is used in the basement, but above this round arches with balusters for jdllars such as we should call Saxon, though their age here may be the 12th century. Among the little bits of Orien- talism that crop up here and there all over the province, one of the 827. Baptistery, Mont mOSt plcasmg IS the little tOmb 828. PlanofBaptis- St. Aiigelo. c T) J J. rA /i-iii tery, Mont St. Scale 50 ft. to 1 in. ot bohemund at Canosa (1111). Angelo. scale It is charming to find in Italy an '" ' " "^' Eastern kubr with its dome, erected to contain the remains of a Christian king. Though elegant, however, the dome is not fitted to the square as it would have been in more expe- rienced hands, and the whole design is some- what badly put together. Its bronze doors are among its chief est orna- ments, and are elegant, though inferior to nume- rous examples of the same class in the churches of the province. Many other examples of Byzantine domical forms might be quoted as existing in Southern (From Schultz.) Jt^ly. It is not, llOW- ever, so niucli in the forms as in the details that the Eastern influence is felt, and that no less in the churches which retain the basilican form of Ravenna than in those which assume the domical form of Constantinople. The buildings of the Southern Province cannot certainly compete with those of the Northern either in size or in daring mechanical construction, but in detail they are frequently more beautiful, while their forms are more national and less constrained. Their great interest, however, in the eyes of the student, consists in their forming a link between the Eastern and Western worlds, and thus joining together two styles which we have hitherto been too much in the habit of considering as possessing no point of contact. 829. Tomb of Bolieimnul at Canosa.
