Chapter M: Caesari Augusti F. Cos. L. Caesari (2)

The Roman and Byzantine influences were naturally strongest where the ancient remains and Eastern ornaments were most frequently met with. As we retire from the Mediterranean northwards and westwards the Roman buildings become less numerous and the signs of Byzantine commerce diminish. In those various countries different styles were naturally developed. These are divided by Viollet-le-Duc into the schools of Toulouse, Poitou, Auvergne, Burgundy, &c., all having distinct characteristics in plans, elevations, form of towers, ornament, sculpture, and every detail. Of these various schools the Burgundian was, during the twelfth century, in advance of all the others, not only in the size and magnificence of its buildings, but also as regards progress in design--efforts being there made to free the ornaments from the conventional and stereotyped patterns of classic art.

Viollet-le-Duc endeavours to account for this advancement in Burgundian architecture by the suggestion that it possibly arose from the study of the paintings of Byzantine MSS., which were numerous in the monasteries, and therefore more frequently under the eyes of the monks than the purely architectural forms of buildings. These paintings preserve considerable freedom of treatment both as regards natural expression in the features and dramatic action in the figure, and are much less bound and fixed by traditional and conventional rules than the architectural forms and ornament.

The artist monks of the Burgundian convents were thus led to look to nature as their model in sculpture, and their attention was gradually turned to natural objects as their guide in the representation of foliage, as well as figures. This process, in course of time, opened the way for an entire departure from ancient precedent, and led to the wonderful development of the natural school of the Royal Domain, which took place in the end of the twelfth and beginning of the thirteenth centuries.

At the head of the Burgundian school stood the great Benedictine Abbey of Cluny. (_See ante_, p. 20). The church of this Abbey was the largest building of its time, although unfortunately not one stone of it now remains upon another. Cluny had numerous dependencies and offshoots which were all animated with the same spirit, and spread a taste for richness and magnificence in architecture, wherever they were planted.

But the period we are now considering was one of awakening and expansion, not only in the direction of architectural art, but also in every department of intellectual and religious development. It is not therefore to be wondered at that all men were not actuated by the same feeling of admiration for splendid buildings and paintings. Many of the religious rather sympathised with the severity of the old ascetics. It appeared to these reformers that all this sumptuous and splendid mode of life was not in accordance with the fundamental principles of their religion, and they longed to return to the simplicity of the primitive church.

Amongst those who raised their voices most strenuously in this behalf, was the great St Bernard, who even went the length of separating from the Clunisians, and devoted his energy to the encouragement of the new order of the Cistertians, which was destined to play an important part in the future history of the Church and its architecture. Of the severe rules of this order, those relating to the erection of buildings, were amongst the most stringent. These were required to be of the simplest form, and to be entirely free from ornament and decoration of every kind. At first this maxim was strictly adhered to in all the buildings of the Cistertians, which are therefore of the baldest possible description, as the numerous examples hereafter illustrated in Provence and elsewhere show. But this very severity of style seems to have had great influence in clearing the way for the introduction of a new and more natural art, by sweeping away the last remains of the ancient traditional forms, and leaving the course clear for the invention of novel ornamentation derived from natural objects. This may be regarded as the second phase of Provençal art. The first comprised all those primitive structures, the style of which was founded on Roman or classic design. But this second phase discarded all such ornament, and retained only the structural elements which had up to this time been developed. These of course included the use of the pointed arch, which is always employed in the vaulting and all the important structural features, while the round form is frequently retained in the minor arches. Of this bare but vigorous style no finer example can be cited than the Abbey of Thoronet (to be afterwards described), but the whole country abounds (as we shall find) with examples, both large and small, of this reformed or second period of Provençal architecture. After a time the Cistertian strictness was gradually relaxed. The more ornate style of the Clunisians was found to be more in accordance with the feelings and taste of the times; and the Cistertians ultimately came to vie with them in the beauty and richness of their edifices. But, as above pointed out, the traditional Roman and Byzantine elements were entirely banished, and a new and natural system of ornament adopted.

Up to the date which we have now reached the progress of the great monastic centres of Burgundy and the cities of the South had been in advance of that of the Royal Domain, and the Northern provinces generally. But from the end of the twelfth century many circumstances combined to reverse that position. The country of the Franks had become settled--the restless spirit of that people, which had found expression in the Crusades, had exhausted itself; the idea of the one great and holy Roman Empire had passed away, and the various countries of modern Europe were gradually consolidating themselves and forming separate nationalities.

The Feudal system, which tended to break up all general authority, was gradually being subjected to the growing power of a central supreme ruler. Trade and commerce were reviving. The towns and corporations which had grown up under the fostering care of the monasteries, or under the shadow of the great castles of the nobility, were now assuming a more prominent and independent position. They perseveringly pressed their claims on their superiors, whether lay or ecclesiastical, and were by slow degrees obtaining charters and liberties. The Bishops whose sees were connected with the towns encouraged the citizens in this course, with the view of strengthening their own power and importance, so as to enable them to keep pace with and if possible overcome the great influence of their rivals the monasteries. This growth of the popular element in the towns naturally led to the employment of laymen in connection with the designing and execution of the works of the cathedral and other ecclesiastical edifices attached to the various sees.

The monks, who had hitherto been the sole possessors of the requisite knowledge and practical skill, had by their schools, and by the guilds of tradesmen which they had encouraged, sown the seeds which were now springing up in a form they had not looked for, and producing a crop of lay artists, who were soon to leave their old masters behind. The monastic system of carrying on everything according to rule had long held architecture in bondage. Under the new impulse all conventional rules were abandoned, and the artists trusted to the inspiration of nature for their guidance. Hence it followed that whether in planning, in construction, or in ormamentation, the forms so long reverently followed by the architects of the monasteries, were speedily dropped by the lay artists of the towns, and a new art sprung up with the most marvellous rapidity. To the new school of artists nothing which would naturally and logically suit their requirements came amiss. The round arch was the traditional form of the ecclesiastics, but, the lay architects of the North finding (as the builders of the South had long previously done) that the pointed arch was more flexible and amenable to their requirements, forthwith adopted it. This enabled them to overcome what had hitherto been the great difficulty with the round arch, viz., to erect intersecting vaults over spaces of any form, whether square or oblong, and at the same time to keep the apex of all the vaults at any desired height. The transverse arches and the wall arches being thus pointed, soon led in the most natural manner to the window arches within the latter being also made of a pointed shape, so as to conform to the outline of the wall arch, and by an easy transition the pointed arch was soon adopted for all the wall openings as the most flexible, and most in accordance with the spirit of the new style.

In like manner the old conventional forms of decoration, derived from Byzantine carvings and MSS. or from Roman remains, were entirely abandoned, and inspiration in decorative design was sought in the natural flowers and plants of the soil.

The intellectual development, no less than the artistic, of this great period of revival was boldly represented in its architecture. The timid forms of traditional construction were soon left behind, and scientific methods were introduced. The clumsy mode of sustaining the central vault by the half vault of the side aisles was superseded by the bold and beautiful form of the flying buttress, loaded with pinnacles where needed to secure stability. This scientific invention enabled the architects to dispense with heavy walls and to bring the whole pressure of the vaults on to points, where they were discharged by the flying buttresses. The side walls were only required as enclosing screens, not as supports, so that there was free scope and every inducement for the expansion of the windows, which rapidly progressed till the whole building became, in striking contrast to the dark and gloomy structures of the monastic regime, an edifice of marvellous lightness and elegance, illuminated from floor to vault with walls of glowing glass.

The rapid and extensive development of the Gothic style of the North is one of the most remarkable facts in the history of architecture. Within the century following the first appearance of the style in the pointed vaulting of the abbey church of St Denis, erected under the Abbé Suger in 1144, this style reached its highest point. During that period it found expression in most of the great cathedrals of the North of France, such as Paris, Chartres, Sens, Amiens, Beauvais, &c. This occurred contemporaneously with the long and brilliant reign of Philip Augustus, under whom the royal power became consolidated, and the royal domain extended to an extraordinary degree.

As the royal domain extended, its Gothic architecture extended with it, and even passed beyond it, and produced a striking effect on the provinces, such as Provence, not yet absorbed into the kingdom of France. Of this we shall meet with several remarkable examples, as in the cathedrals of Carcassonne and Narbonne, where the designs are pure Northern Gothic, and were furnished by a northern architect. But these and similar structures always strike one as having the appearance of exotics; they are evidently imported plants, not native to the soil. There are also, as we shall see, many other buildings in the South in which some of the features only of the Gothic style are adopted, and which exhibit various attempts to ingraft its details on the native art. But even this is not successful, the buildings having neither the lightness and elegance of the Gothic, nor the massive grandeur of the native style.

In later times, when Provence and a great part of the Riviera had passed into the kingdom of France, its period of vigour and independence had faded away, and its architecture only presents a picture of the various foreign influences under which it lay. This is seen in the examples of the flamboyant work of the French, and in the Italian Gothic introduced by the Genoese, who were long masters of the Riviera. All other architecture, however, soon yielded to the revival of the classic style, which here, amongst so many Roman relics, found a congenial soil.

The great development of Gothic architecture in the North was not limited to churches and other ecclesiastical structures, but extended to every species of building. For it is one of the leading characteristics of Gothic, that it is available for every variety of architectural requirement. It is a free and natural style, not subject to the arbitrary rules of monastic or academic systems, but ready to apply itself in the simplest and most direct manner to all human wants in the way of building. The Gothic lay architects therefore naturally directed their skill to the proper development of Domestic and Castellated Architecture, as well as Ecclesiastical and Monastic. Of the former, many most interesting examples are to be seen in the Southern towns; and of the castellated architecture, we shall meet with not only such splendid examples as the Pope’s Palace at Avignon, and the great castles of Villeneuve and Beaucaire; but we shall also have an opportunity of examining, at Carcassonne and Aigues Mortes, the towns which possess probably the completest and best preserved specimens, now extant, of the military architecture of the Middle Ages.

That kind of architecture was, as was natural, especially in the South, to a considerable extent founded on that of the Romans. This will be more fully explained and illustrated, when we come to treat of the fortifications of Carcassonne, which are partly Roman or of Roman foundation. In the North the early fortresses consisted of earthen mounds, protected by palisades and ditches. Such were the defences of the native Gauls, which Cæsar found so boldly defended. To these succeeded the strong towers of masonry, of which the Norman keep is the well known type. Stone-built towers of that description gradually superseded the wooden fort set upon the top of an earthen “motte” or mound which formed the central stronghold of the earlier fortresses. Masonry then, step by step, took the place of wood in the defences; first, as we have seen, in the keep, and then in the enclosing walls. As the science of attack improved, the latter were made stronger, and were further fortified by the construction in connection with them of numerous strong towers. These were generally round in the North and square in the South. The means of active defence were chiefly from the parapet. At first the parapets of the walls and towers were armed in time of war with wooden enclosures, called “hoards” or “brétêches,” projected on short wooden beams. These enabled the defenders to overlook and protect the base of the works, which were then the weak points of the fortifications, and were liable to attack by sapping or mining. The assailants carried out this kind of assault by rolling up their sappers to the walls in “cats” or “sows” (small wagons strongly constructed and defended on the top with bags of wool and wet hides), which could only be destroyed by great stones and beams, hurled down from the projecting “hoards” above. The sockets for this wooden armature of the walls still exists unaltered in the thirteenth century fortifications of Carcassonne and Aigues Mortes. By degrees the wooden hoards were abandoned, being found liable to destruction by the fire balls or “Greek fire,” which the crusaders had learned the use of in the East. Parapets of masonry were then substituted for them, projected on bold stone corbels, which left intervals between the parapet and the face of the wall, called” machicolations,” through which the defenders could rain missiles on the assailants. In the fourteenth century these corbelled parapets are amongst the most prominent and picturesque features of the castles and fortifications of the period. In course of time the stone parapets were further improved and heightened into several storys, the lower ones being covered, and the upper forming an open crenellated walk. In the fifteenth century this system reached its height, and produced in the lofty towers and walls, crowned with their numerous boldly overhanging works, some of the most magnificent works of the military architecture of the Middle Ages. We shall have occasion to refer to the various systems of defence adopted in the different castles and towns to be visited, when attention will also be drawn to the differences of the systems adopted in the North and South. We shall also find a remarkable application of castellated features in the churches of the South, where, after the twelfth century, almost every ecclesiastical structure is carefully fortified. This produces in the churches of the South one of their most striking peculiarities, and gives them, instead of the light and gracefully aspiring character of the Northern Gothic structures, a reflection of the grim and stern aspect of the feudal castle. The peculiar church architecture just referred to, no doubt derived its origin from the constant state of alarm and disturbance in which the Southern provinces were kept by the Albigensian wars, and the attacks of the Moors and Corsairs by sea and land. Some place of refuge and defence was required by the harassed inhabitants, who naturally fled to the church and fortified themselves therein. Frequently the cathedrals were comprised within the precincts of the Bishop’s Palace, which was fortified like a feudal castle. The cathedral being the largest building was eagerly seized upon as an important part of the fortifications, and even when the design was in Northern Gothic, had externally at least to adopt many of the defensive features of the South. Of this remarkable illustrations occur at Narbonne, Béziers, and Fréjus.

We have now rapidly sketched the various steps by which Roman architecture was gradually transformed, from being in its decorative features an imitation of the classic trabeated style, into an embodiment of the true principles of arcuated or genuine stone construction, as exhibited in the fully developed Gothic of the thirteenth century. We have seen that this was by no means a simple process, and that it was only accomplished by the ordeal of the destructive though purifying dissolution of the Dark Ages, whence the true spirit of Roman construction emerged, cleared to a great extent of the extraneous elements with which it had been so long encrusted. But although the true features of arcuated architecture now slowly began to be developed, they were both aided and retarded by the surviving relics of Roman art which existed in the West, as well as by the influence of the classic taste which continued to prevail, although in a modified and expanded condition, in the East. The country through which we are about to travel is remarkably favourable for the study of the effects of these various influences. We have already seen how rich it is in genuine Roman structures. In our further progress we shall note how these examples served as models for the revival of the architecture; for so closely were the ancient designs frequently followed that the new structures were almost complete resuscitations of the style of the Lower Empire.

We shall also have many opportunities of observing the influence of the modified classic art imported from Byzantium. Thence came the dome which forms one of the most important elements in the mediæval architecture of Aquitaine and the South, as well as numerous details and ornaments which served as the foundation or motive for much of the architectural decoration of the West, especially in Provence. How strongly these influences produced their impress on the architecture of the region we are to traverse, will be apparent; and it will probably be agreed by all that although the art of Provence was thereby advanced at first, the chief tendency of these classic reminiscences was to encourage an adherence to traditional forms, which prevented such a free growth and development as was afterwards displayed in the Northern districts, where the classic elements were less abundant. But in one respect at least the architecture of Provence deserves our gratitude and admiration, for, amidst all its classic surroundings, it boldly adopted and adhered to the true principle of arcuated construction, and introduced the use of the pointed arch. Although in its earlier stages this important feature was accompanied and encumbered with the revived details of Roman work, still, as we shall see, in its later phase, it entirely and completely discarded them; and in the twelfth century, under the guidance of the Cistertians, Provence produced a simple and natural style of arcuated architecture in which every feature is regulated by strict adherence to the genuine principles of stone construction. Of this simple but strong and impressive style we shall meet with many fine examples.

Up to this time the Provençal architects had led the way, but the period had now arrived when their principles were to be taken up and carried out with the boldness and energy of the Northern kingdom of France, then in its youthful prime. The lay architects of the North, seizing on the Provençal principle of the pointed arch, which they at once perceived to be so flexible and easy of application to every requirement, soon developed from it the magnificent system of the perfected Gothic of the thirteenth century. This was at once felt and acknowledged on all hands to be an immense step in advance of anything hitherto attempted in the West, and was speedily allowed to overshadow, and finally to supersede all other varieties of mediæval development. Of this result numerous illustrations will occur in the course of our journey; but we shall also observe how tenaciously the original forms of construction and plan were adhered to in the South, even after the Northern Gothic had been accepted as supreme in all minor details.

VI.

Having now glanced rapidly at the general history and various phases of the architecture of Provence during the Middle Ages, we shall recommence our journey at Lyons, and visit the various places on our route southwards to Marseilles, and thence westwards and eastwards along the Riviera, where architectural subjects are to be found, giving a more detailed account of each in its turn, and specially noting those of the

MEDIÆVAL PERIOD.

At LYONS the traveller is at once introduced to the local style in the Church of the Ainay, which however is much modernised and restored. Some portions of the walls may be as old as the tenth century, but the consecration of the existing building (barring subsequent restorations) took place in 1107. The four granite columns of the choir are possibly antique.

The church has the Basilican form, with central nave and side aisles. The square lantern over the crossing, which forms a dwarf tower externally and cupola internally, is peculiar to this part of the country. The square tower at the west end (Fig. 35) with its successive stages of small windows, has a far-off resemblance to the ancient brick campaniles of Italy--a resemblance which we shall find more strikingly illustrated in more Southern examples. The peculiar incrustations in red and other coloured stones, which have a pleasing and Eastern effect, are a feature of common occurrence in the churches of the Auvergnat, not far distant from Lyons towards the south-west. The pointed doorways are modern, but are reproductions of a restoration of the twelfth century.

The cathedral is a fine specimen of the mixed style of this part of the country, the choir being partly Romanesque of the end of the twelfth century. The flat arcades of the interior (Fig. 36), composed of large trefoiled arches, resting on fluted pilasters, are very characteristic of the Burgundian style. The idea of these pilasters is derived from those of the Roman gates at Autun. In the cathedral there as well as at Tournus, and other towns of Upper Burgundy, such pilasters are of frequent use. The form of the clerestory windows seems to have been borrowed from these arcades. The choir has an apse, but no aisle running round it, as invariably happens in the North. Externally it presents a curious gallery with twisted shafts and inlaid coloured stones, like those of the Ainay. The towers at the transepts are a remarkable feature. The nave is Nothern Gothic work of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries,--but the vaulting is sexpartite, a form entirely abandoned in the North at that date. Some of the carving on the west front is very vigorous and fine, recalling the splendid work on the portals of the north and south transepts of Rouen.

Altogether this building presents in the choir and transepts a singular mixture of the styles of Upper Burgundy, with those of the Rhine on the East, and Auvergne on the West; while the nave is an example of a transplanted design of Nothern Gothic.

In descending the Rhone the valley soon narrows, and we pass into the gorges amongst the mountains. On one of the rocky heights which jut out into the valley, the ancient spires of Vienne, and the summit of Mont Pipet, crowned with its Roman citadel, stand boldly out against the sky.

The town occupies a strong position and commands the pass, hence it was occupied as a fortress by the Allobroges from early times. Afterwards an important city under the Romans (as already mentioned in Part IV.), it continued so during the Middle Ages. But it suffered severely from the attacks of invaders, being first ravaged by the Lombards, and afterwards by the Saracens.

In the ninth century Boson, King of Burgundy and Provence, made Vienne his capital. After the fall of that kingdom, the city declined, and became the possession of the Dukes of Albon, who governed under the title of Dauphins of Viennois, till 1349, when Humbert II. ceded the country to the King of France.

The towers of the two most ancient churches, viz., St André-le-bas and St Pierre (Figs. 37 and 38), are very fine examples of the campanile-like designs of the South, and strikingly resemble that of the Ainay at Lyons. The former is ornamented with the arcading so characteristic of the churches of the Rhine and Lombardy, some of the miniature arches resting on corbels carved with grotesque heads. The tower of St Pierre has the large trilobed arch, also common in the region to the eastward.

St Pierre is very ancient and shews masonry constructed somewhat after the Roman manner, with courses of brickwork dividing the rubble. The west entrance is preceded by a porch or narthex in an early style.

St André-le-bas was the chapel of the Duke of Burgundy. This church has a single nave (in the style of the south-west provinces), with groined vaulting and heavy buttresses, but the interior has been completely restored. An inscription fixes its date as 1142. There are also some remains of a fine cloister adjoining.

The cathedral of St Maurice is, like that of Lyons, a mixture of different styles, and has few of the merits of any. It was begun in the eleventh century, and not completed till the sixteenth. The plan is that of a basilica with an apse at the east end of the choir. There are a central nave and side aisles, but the latter stop at their eastern extremity with square ends, and are not continued round the central apse. The eight eastmost pillars of the nave belong to the twelfth century, and are partly decorated with fluted pilasters in the style of Upper Burgundy. The caps are “historied,” or carved with

figures after the Romanesque style; while the arches are pointed and ornamented with billet mouldings. Above and below the triforium gallery is a course of red stone containing sculptures of all sorts of subjects, like the inlaid work of Auvergne. The vaulting is of the fourteenth century. In the sixteenth century the proportions of the cathedral were found defective, the building being considered too short for its length, and several bays were then added to the west end in the florid Northern style of the period. The west portal (Fig. 39), with its richly carved tracery and sculpture, standing as it does at the top of a lofty flight of steps, rendered necessary by the slope of the ground to the westward, must have been a fine example of its style before the statues and carving, which so profusely adorned it, were destroyed during the wars of religion, by the Baron des Adrets, in 1562. The cathedral is 300 feet long by 100 feet wide, but, owing to the mixed character of its design, it is somewhat heavy in effect.

A remarkable example of a double round tower of Renaissance art (Fig. 40) stands close to the ancient Forum, and several specimens of antique houses of all ages are to be seen in the busy and picturesque streets.

The next town of importance reached is VALENCE, which, however, is not very rich in architectural subjects. The cathedral (St Apollinaire) is of the twelfthcentury, and shews some special features indicative of the influence of the style of Auvergne, such as an arcade on the outside of the nave, with alternate round and straight sided arches. The caps of the nave piers are very Corinthian in character, and the roof is a tunnel vault. The apse is round, and is strengthened with buttresses in the form of small shafts, a feature very common in Auvergne. But this and the other churches have all been reconstructed in Renaissance times. The Maison-des-Têtes (Fig. 41), near the Place des Clercs is a well preserved and telling specimen of a florid domestic façade of 1534.

In descending the Rhone the traveller cannot fail to notice that the precipitous mountains which bound the plain on the west side of the river are frequently crowned with the shattered remains of mediæval castles. Of these one of the most striking is the CASTLE OF CRUSSOL (Fig. 42) opposite Valence. This great castle, now reduced to a mere fragmentary heap of ruins, was formerly the stronghold of the family of Crussol, Ducs d’Uzès. It forms a fine feature in the landscape, and commands a splendid view of the course of the Rhone and the valley of the Isère, with the Alps to the eastward. But it is now so ruined that a closer inspection is somewhat disappointing to the architect.

A few miles lower down the very interesting ruins of the MONASTERY OF CRUAS are seen on the same side of the river. This may be conveniently reached by the railway on that side, or from Montélimar. The latter course forms a beautiful drive, without taking the traveller going south far from his direct line. Crossing the Rhone by the bridge of boats not far from the station, the ruins of what once was the powerful castle of Rochemaur meet the view, crowning the rocky height in front, and extending great walls of enceinte down to the village at the base. The detached tower forming the keep, which could only be approached by a draw-bridge, now stands a shattered ruin on its isolated peak.

A drive of a few miles along a level road, above which on the left rise great masses of basaltic rock forming fantastic figures not unlike the ruins we have just passed, brings us to the village of CRUAS, where we discover two architectural subjects of some importance. On the hill above the village stand the ruins of the ancient monastery, now greatly dilapidated, and having the space between the walls choked up with the steep and irregular streets of a small town.

The monastic buildings have almost entirely disappeared, the materials having doubtless served for the construction of the shabby houses which now occupy their place. Some portions of the enclosing walls, however, still survive, together with one very interesting edifice, which remains

tolerably entire. This is the ancient chapel of the abbey, originally a building of the twelfth century, but which in the fourteenth century was engulphed by the enclosing walls and fortifications then erected, and heightened so as to be converted into a keep (Fig. 43). The interior has, however, been preserved untouched, and shews the simple style of the Cistertians of the twelfth century (Fig. 44). The plan consists of a single nave with plain pilasters set against the side walls, from which spring the flat transverse arches which strengthen the _round_ tunnel vault. The east end is terminated with a semi-circular apse roofed with a spherical dome, and ornamented with the small arcaded pattern so common at that period. On the left or northern side wall arches are introduced, as if for a side aisle, but there is no appearance of any aisles ever having existed. The plain round arched west doorway still exists, and the line of the original gable above it is distinctly observable in the masonry (_see_ Fig. 43).

The keep built round and over the church is of remarkable design. Large round buttresses have been added at the outer angles, with square buttresses at the sides, and both are carried up so as to receive the arches which support the parapet on the top. These arches spring from bold corbels projecting from the buttresses, and are set well forward from the face of the walls, so as to leave a space between the main wall and the parapet. This space forms a long opening or machicolation, by means of which the base of the walls could be defended against hostile operations. We shall see by and by that this is the same form of machicolation as was adopted in the Pope’s Palace at Avignon, and elsewhere in the South.

The parapet is crenellated, and, from the beam holes still visible in the walls, we may infer that it was provided with wooden hoardings for defence.

The church in the village at the base of the hill (Fig. 45) has also some points of special interest. It is of early twelfth century design, and has a vaulted subterranean crypt with numerous sculptured caps. The upper church has a square tower at the west end, and a transept with three circular apses opening out of it to the east,--the central apse forming the choir, and the side apses lateral chapels. Over the crossing rises an octagonal lantern, containing a dome crowned with a smaller circular lantern. The

whole composition and style of ornamentation strongly recall the architecture of the Rhineland and Lombardy. The thin strips of pilasters on the apses and lantern, with small arcade-enrichment between, together with the general form of the lantern, strikingly recall the churches of Bonn and Cologne. The western tower again is similar to those we have left behind at Vienne and Lyons. This church, like many others we shall encounter, illustrates what has above been stated as to the universality of the one style which prevailed over the “Empire,” before it was broken up into separate nationalities.

Soon after leaving Montélimar with its frowning citadel, in which there are some ancient Romanesque details, and a great tower of the fourteenth century called the “Tour de Narbonne,” we observe on the opposite side of the Rhone the picturesque town of VIVIERS, clustering on a pyramidal rock, and appropriately crowned with the cathedral and spire. The church is of the fourteenth century, a single nave without aisles. It is said that the crowded and narrow streets contain some old houses, but the place is apparently more picturesque than architectural.

We now approach the country in which the peculiar elements of the Provençal style become distinctly apparent. About four miles north-east from Pierrelatte, the ancient town of Garde Adhémar may be seen towering aloft on the crest of a bold promontory about 500 feet high. This town contains a Romanesque church with an eastern and western apse, after the German fashion, a rather remarkable feature here, but showing, like the ornaments already referred to, an influence from the Rhine. The side aisles are vaulted with quarter-circle arches, and the exterior is finished with a small belfry and steeple.

About six miles to the south-east of Pierrelatte lies the village of ST PAUL-TROIS-CHÂTEAUX, where another very remarkable church is found. The town was of some importance from Roman times downward, and retained its bishop’s see till the Revolution. Several fine Roman sculptures have been found in the locality, and are preserved in the Calvet museum at Avignon; and a few remains of Roman structures and columns are still to be seen. But the most interesting edifice in the town is the ancient cathedral of the twelfth century. As this is the first building we have met with which is characteristically Provençal in style, so it is also one which preserves in a very distinct and marked manner the traditional Roman

features of that style. The annexed geometric view of one of the exterior bays (Fig. 46.) shews how close is the imitation in the Provençal architecture of the twelfth century of that of the Roman structures which no doubt then existed on the spot. The pilasters, crowned with their complete entablature of architrave, frieze, and cornice, and filled in with an intermediate arcade, might be part of a Roman amphitheatre (such as those at Nimes and Arles); and indeed it is supposed that traces of an ancient amphitheatre have been discovered at St Paul. Every detail might belong to the Lower Empire. The ornaments of the cornice are directly imitated from the modillions and leaf enrichments of Roman work; and the egg and dart, and other classic details are freely used throughout. The interior ornament is equally Roman in design. The east end is terminated with an apse, which has eight fluted columns. The two side aisles are covered with half wagon vaults, and the nave, which is unusually high, with a simple tunnel vault.

This locality brings us for the first time into contact with a tradition of which we shall find many traces in various parts of Provence, viz., that the Gospel was introduced into this country by the family of Lazarus, and some other contemporaries of Christ, who had been driven hither by persecution. At St Paul the story goes that the first bishop was the blind man whose sight was restored, and who assumed the name of Restitutus.

About three miles from St Paul may be seen the monument of this saint, said to be of very ancient and curious construction. It is partly built into the church, and is ornamented with a remarkable frieze, containing a rude representation of the last supper.

The station of La Croisière is the nearest to a very remarkable specimen of mediæval construction, the PONT ST ESPRIT. This celebrated bridge was planned and begun in 1265 by Jean de Tensanges, the abbot of the order of Cluny, in the district of St Savourin du Port, which belonged to the abbey. It was thirty years in building, but we have proof that the work was well planned and skilfully executed, in the fact that it subsists till the present day. The length of the bridge is about 3000 feet, and the width of the roadway is 16 feet. There are twenty-two arches, all semi-circular in form, and constructed with carefully wrought courses of arch stones, forming separate rings set together side by side, but not bonded into one another. This mode of construction was probably borrowed from the bridge of St Bénezet at Avignon, which again derived it from the Roman Pont du Gard. Over the piers are smaller arched openings to allow the water of the high floods of the Rhone to pass freely through. Like the Pont St Bénezet at Avignon the Pont St Esprit does not run straight across the river, but is bent at an obtuse angle against the current so as to resist its pressure. The bridge was fortified at both ends by castles erected by the suzerains on the opposite sides of the river. These remained till the seventeenth century, when one of them was brought into connection with the citadel of the town constructed by Louis XIII. This was the last bridge erected by the “Frères hospitaliers pontifes” (of whom we shall hear more at Avignon). After the thirteenth century neither Communes nor Nobles found it necessary to apply to the monks for their aid as architects and engineers. By that time the lay architects had superseded them, in the manner above described (Part V.)

Passing next close under the rocky heights crowned with the picturesque ruins of the castles of Montdragon and Mornas, the massive wall of the theatre of Orange rising high above the plain arrests the eye.

A little further on the ramparts and gates of the small walled town of COURTHÉZON are visible close to the railway; soon after passing which, the bold outline of the great Palace of the Popes discovers itself to view towering on its rock above the town of AVIGNON.

On nearer approach, the city walls and gates, surmounted with bold corbels and machicolations, and the numerous towers and spires of the churches, unite to give a striking first impression of the city. As it is _chef-lieu_ of the department of Vaucluse, and the See of an Archbishop, Avignon is a town of some business and prominence. The traveller will here find better accommodation than he generally meets with in the country towns. This may therefore be regarded as a good place to establish one’s headquarters for a few days, both for the purpose of seeing the very splendid monuments of the town, and also as a convenient centre from which excursions may be made to the interesting Provençal churches of early date, which abound in the vicinity.

Although Avignon was an important Roman colony, it has already been remarked how barren it is in Roman remains. After the fall of Rome, it passed successively through the hands of the Burgundians, the Franks, and the Visigoths: it was twice taken by the Saracens (730 and 737), and twice delivered by Charles Martel. Afterwards it became part of the Kingdom of Arles, and subsequently capital of the Marquisate of Provence.

In the twelfth century the community declared itself a free and independent city, and erected new walls and fortifications. Avignon ranged herself on the side of the Albigenses; and, as previously mentioned, she was besieged and taken, and in 1251 became subject to the Count of Provence.

In 1308 an event happened which had a very important bearing on the subsequent history of the city. Pope Clement V., finding his position in Italy insecure amidst the dreadful factions which rent that country, judged it prudent to retire to Avignon, where he would be under the protection (if also under the power) of the King of France. Avignon thereafter continued for more than a century the Holy See, and during that time seven Pontiffs and two Anti-Popes reigned in this new Rome.

As already narrated, Pope Clement VI. purchased the suzerainty of Avignon and the control of the Venaissin from Jeanne, the Queen of Naples and Countess of Provence, in 1348. Successive Popes used every exertion to render the place secure, and especially built themselves, on the Rocher-des-Doms, the immense Palace, which still forms the most prominent feature of the town. The walls and fortifications were begun in 1349, and finished in 1368.

When the Popes returned to Rome, Avignon was governed for them by a Legate, who was displaced in favour of the Republic in 1797.

The Palace of the Popes is well situated for defence. It stands on the top of an abrupt rock, round the base of which, on the north, sweeps the deep and rapid current of the Rhone. The rock is perpendicular all round the east and south sides, and is thus cut off from the town; while on the west, where alone the site is approachable, the access is steep, and is protected by the lofty and menacing walls of the Palace (_see_ Plan, Fig. 49).

The Church of Notre Dame des Doms (A) occupies the summit of the rock, and is of much older date than the Pope’s Palace. The porch of this church (Fig. 47) is extremely interesting as an example of Provençal architecture so strikingly ancient in character as to have been long held to be a classic structure of the Lower Empire. It exactly resembles a Roman design in its general idea, forming, as it were, a compartment of a classic edifice, with a fluted Corinthian column at each side, and an arched doorway or opening between. On the columns rests an entablature, and the whole is crowned with a triangular pediment. The Corinthian capitals, the cornices with egg and leaf enrichments, the mouldings, imposts, &c., are all strikingly Roman in character. The inner doorway to the church is similar. Mérimée points out that the size of the stones used in this porch does not correspond with Roman work, being smaller than Roman large work and larger than Roman small work. Also that the stones of which the columns are composed are

wrought with tails bonded into the wall (alternating right and left), which he regards as contrary to classic practice. The bull’s-eye of the tympanum is also not Roman, but might be an addition. It is probable that the sides of the porch were originally open.

The date of this porch has been the subject of much discussion; but it seems most likely that it belongs to the early part of the eleventh century. It was at that date that architecture began slowly to revive; and this is probably one of the first efforts. Designers would then naturally fall back on the classic forms, of which examples were abundant around them. There are many instances in which the early mediæval architecture can be traced to Roman structures found in their vicinity. We have already met with one striking example at St Paul-trois-Châteaux; and it was previously shewn how the gates of Autun influenced the architecture of a large district, in which pilasters, copied from those of the Porte d’Arroux, are universally used instead of round shafts. We shall also presently see how the dome-topped campaniles of Provence are also copied from Roman monuments, such as that at St Remy; and how in almost all the churches throughout Provence Roman columns, caps, cornices, mouldings, and enrichments are freely imitated. But these imitations are generally incomplete, and invariably contain defects or omissions, which shew that they are imperfect copies, and not real Roman work. Such imperfections affect the details rather than the general style. In the instance before us, it is stated that the cornice of the antique part of the tower above the porch is copied exactly from that of the attic of the Arch at Orange.

The interior of Notre Dame des Doms is an example of an early Provençal church, but not a very favourable one, as it has been frequently altered and added to. The choir is of 1671, and the lateral chapels are of the fourteenth century, while Renaissance balconies in marble have been added in front of the gallery, over the side aisles.

In the choir is a remarkable chair of the twelfth century, in white marble, which was the seat of the Pope; and the tomb of John XXII. (Fig. 48), in one of the side chapels, is a fine specimen of the imported Northern Gothic style.

The tower, partly destroyed in the fifteenth century, was repaired in 1430; and the colossal statue of the Virgin was added in 1859.

The walls of the interior were once decorated with frescoes by Simone Memmi, but they are now almost obliterated; and the interior is so dark, that the few fragments remaining cannot be seen.

MONUMENT OF POPE JOHN XXII.]

Originally the church consisted of a single nave, without aisles, vaulted with a pointed barrel-vault, strengthened with transverse ribs and internal buttresses, being, as above explained, one of the arrangements common in Provence. The east end terminated with an apse, the bay in front of which is vaulted in a remarkable manner. A dome is frequently introduced in this position; but in the present instance, owing to the width of the bay being small compared to the width of the church, a square space on which to raise the dome could not readily be obtained. To

accomplish this, successive arches are thrown across between the transverse ribs, rising with the curve of the latter and advancing over one another, till the central space becomes a square, on which a lantern, with eight Roman-looking columns, is raised and supports an octagonal dome above.

In the twelfth century the rock, on the summit of which stands the Church of Notre Dame des Doms, was covered with habitations and gardens, which were dominated by the ancient castles of the Podestà and the Bishop. Pope Clement V., on his first arrival at Avignon, occupied the Convent of the Dominicans; and John XXII., in 1316, lived in the building which existed in his day where the Pope’s Palace now stands. In 1336 Benedict XII. demolished what his predecessors had erected, and rebuilt the northern part of the existing Palace (Plan, Fig. 49--from Viollet-le-Duc’s _Dictionnaire_), being the side next the Cathedral, on a grand scale, from plans by the architect Pierre Obreri. His works terminated at the “Tour de Trouillas,” or the great donjon (B) at the N.-E. angle, and is marked by another immense tower (B) at the west end of the range, called the “Tour de la Gache.”

The south face (E) of the northern courtyard, and the southern walls of enceinte were constructed under Pope Clement VI. It was also he who acquired the suzerainty of Avignon and the Comtat Venaissin from Queen Jeanne in 1347.

The southern front of the palace was completed by Pope Innocent VI., including the great Chapel, or Consistorial Hall (G), a building about 170 feet long by 50 feet wide, roofed with pointed and groined vaulting. The great tower (H) adjoining to the south contains the sacristy, &c. Urban V. levelled the space which forms the _Cour d’honneur_ (D), excavating the platform out of the solid rock. Owing to the slope of the ground, this court is about one story lower than the older northern court.

The same pontiff further erected the east wing, and added the seventh tower, called the Tour des Anges. Gregory XI. left Avignon and returned to Rome in 1376.

Avignon was thus occupied by the Popes from 1316 to 1376, or sixty years, during which time there reigned six Popes. They were all Southern Frenchmen, a circumstance which probably had considerable influence on the style of the architecture, which is undoubtedly quite that of Provence, and has small affinity with the style then in use in Italy, notwithstanding that the name of the architect Obreri sounds somewhat Italian. The construction, mouldings, vaults, and defences, are all in the style of Southern French work, and do not recall Italian features. The only Italian details are the paintings on the vaults and ceilings, said to have been executed by Giotto and Simone Memmi. Of these there are unfortunately only a few fragments left. The vault of the great Consistorial Hall was completely painted, but the building having been cut up into several floors in order to convert it into barracks (in which occupation it still remains), the faded and damaged condition of the paintings can well be conceived.

The Anti-Popes Clement VII. and Benedict XIII. occupied Avignon from 1379 to 1403. The latter was besieged in the palace by General Boucicaut in 1398. The Pope fled, but the palace did not capitulate till 1411. The buildings suffered severely from fires which occurred in 1378 and 1413.

The principal entrance to the palace is on the west side, and opens from an esplanade which commands the surroundings, and was formerly divided into several baileys or courts, with walls, towers and gates. The entrance gateway was defended with two portcullises, with folding gates and double machicolations. It had originally an advanced work in front, which was replaced in the seventeenth century by a crenellated wall. The appearance of the building, whether it be regarded externally or from the courtyard, is grand and imposing from its vastness and height. The towers and walls are, even in their present crippled condition, most commanding from their magnitude, the former being about 150 feet in height, while the walls rise to about 100 feet. On entering the great courtyard (D), evidence presents itself of the difference in level between it and the older northern court (C), in the rugged foundation on which the south front of the latter stands, the rock having been cut down, as above mentioned, to the level of the lower court. The frowning machicolations of that side, which look somewhat out of place in a _Cour d’honneur_, are explained when we remember that under Pope Benedict XII. this formed the exterior of the south face of the palace, before the south courtyard was added by Clement VI. and Innocent VI.

The most striking feature of the architectural details of the palace is the machicolations of the parapet. These consist in long grooves opening between the inside of the parapet and the external face of the walls, the parapet being carried on pointed arches thrown between buttresses which project at intervals (_see_ Fig. 47). This form of machicolation (which we have already observed at Cruas) is much used in the southern provinces, perhaps from the prevalence of such works in the churches, most of which were fortified, and where the buttresses which existed for other reasons, were found convenient, and were thus utilized. These long machicolations have the advantage of allowing beams, and other lengthy missiles to be thrown down on assailants; but the frequently recurring broad buttresses or wall spaces, which have no defence immediately over them, are a drawback.