FRENCH ARCHITECTURE. 1 — I. I
N the fifth century, a. d., at the period when the Merovingian invasions passed the barrier of the Rhine and spread over our land, Gaul had accepted Roman rule. Her manners, institutions, architecture, everything had become Romanized; the process of assimilation had been rapid and thorough.
Then followed an era of violence, plunder and murder, during which it seemed as though every trace of the ancient civilization would disappear forever. Several centuries elapsed; the Carlovingian occupation made the yoke still heavier, and yet there was a foreshadowing of better days when, by the side of more orderly institutions, the arts might once more flourish.
In the tenth century, an awakening did, in fact, take place in the centre and south, in those provinces of ancient Gaul which had remained most unshackled; a sort of Renaissance began; it extended to the provinces of the north, which were under direct subjection to the Franks of Neustria and Austrasia. There it underwent modifications at the hands of a race, which was still barbarous, but which was preparing for new destinies, as soon as it should be touched by southern civilization.
A school of architecture soon sprang up there, full of vigor, originality and productiveness. Though inspired at the outset by the Romanesque Renaissance, it afterwards abandoned this lead and flowered out magnificently. For three centuries it flourished, then, after a final transformation, disappeared rapidly and forever, leaving no trace of its passage. Art immediately entered upon a directly opposite path, and no tradition of the former school survived; on the contrary, succeeding generations, yielding to the violent reaction which set in, disowned the past or viewed it with mere scorn.
It would be difficult to find in the history of architecture another example of an end so extraordinary, a disappearance so complete. Usually, the architecture of a people is co-existent with the people itself, following its destinies and moving slowly downward from its zenith, through a period of decadence often centuries in length. Certainly extraordinary circumstances must have been required to terminate a vigorous and fruitful art so summarily, and replace it at once by another in striking contrast to itself. What were these circumstances is the question which we propose to discuss here.
In fact, to put this query is to ask how the Roman and Gaulish civilization was superceded for a time by feudalism, and why the latter, in its turn, was overthrown by the monarchical organization of France. It is, likewise, to demand how the Gallo-Roman people, rendered powerless at first by the invasions of the petty tribes of the North, so recovered its energies as to participate in the grandest events of our history and finally became the French nation. In reality these various questions all revolve themselves into one, for the social institutions, manners and architecture of a nation are closely related to its ethnological beginnings and to one another; they are only different forms of the outward manifestation of the nation’s soul.
It might seem strange that, in this sketch of French architecture, we should digress to such an extent as to attempt to indicate broadly the sources of the French race, and the development and successive transformations of French institutions and social conditions. The above preliminary remarks will serve as our excuse, if, indeed, the truth be recognized that the architectural achievement of a people does not constitute an isolated fact, that it is not like a meteor which appears, speeds through space, and disappears as a solitary existence;
but that it is fixed by a thousand deep roots in the soil from which it has sprung, that is to say, in the very existence of the people itself.
I. — CIVIL SOCIETY FROM THE FIFTH TO THE TWELFTH
CENTURY.
On the downfall of Roman supremacy in the West, two races, broadly speaking, confronted each other in what is now France: the Gallo-Romans, who were spread over the entire land; and the Franks, Germanic tribes, which arrived in suc
cessive invasions and sought to establish themselves, but were pushed farther and farther by new bands, until at last they occupied largely the regions north of the Loire and, to a certain extent, though always precariously, the country to the south of this stream.
When the Roman government retired, powerless before the invasions of the barbarian hordes, and finally abandoned Gaul to itself, the only bequests of the ancient civilization to the new which survived the general dissolution, were the municipal system and the religious institutions.
The barbarians brought with them nothing resembling a regular social condition, and nothing which enabled them to reconstruct the administrative plan of the conquered country.
However, as it is impossible for men to live in a state of complete isolation, even the barbarians necessarily possessed a more or less imperfect conception of a social state — a conception which might or might not be suited to take root definitively on Gaulish soil, and which they were destined to develop sooner or later. They did, in fact, found in the midst of the conquered population, though as it were outside of it, the regime which became feudalism.
Thus we find in Gaul at this time two totally dissimilar races: the one an ancient race, retaining from its former civilization a municipal organization and firmly fixed religious institutions; the other, not yet out of barbarism, but engaged in creating and organizing the feudal regime. Such are the heterogeneous and even hostile elements which the invasions had opposed to each other, and which were doomed to contend against each other until, after centuries of struggle, they should be fused into a national unity.
The Germanic tribes which successively invaded the different parts of Europe were originally composed of two classes of members: one, sedentary and supported by the toil of their coloni and slaves, remained at home, and were the ancestors of the present inhabitants of Germany; the others were grouped around a military chief and lived by constant expeditions abroad, which were often carried to distant lands and ended either in defeat or the final expatriation of the adventurers. Like the Saxons of olden times, the Goths and Burgundi, the Franks who conquered Gaul were warfaring bands, who gradually became settled inhabitants while preserving their own customs and traditions.
In the Germanic band no man was engaged except of his own will. In this we find an early expression of the character of absolute independence which is the distinctive mark of the Germanic races. “ The warrior chose his chief and his companions, and undertook nothing except by an act of his own will. Besides, in the bosom of the warfaring band, the inequality was not great between the chiefs and their men; there was nothing more than the natural inequality of strength, skill or courage; an inequality which afterward becomes fruitful, and which produces sooner or later immense results, but which, at the outset of society, displays itself only within very narrow limits. Although the chief had the largest share of the booty, although he possessed more horses and more arms, he was not so superior in riches to his companions as to be able to dispose of them without their consent; each warrior entered the association with his strength and his courage, differing very little from the others, and at liberty to leave it whenever he pleased. ” 2
Here, then, are the characteristic features of the society of the German warfaring band: no spirit of discipline; absolute and voluntary devotion to the person of the chief; complete individual independence; no necessity of a bond or political organization. As decisions had to be formed in common, since they were purely voluntary in all circumstances, the freemen
1 From the French of P. Planat, in Planat’s ʼʼEncylopédie de l’Architecture et de la Construction ”
2 Guizot. “Histoire de la Civilization en Europe ” and “ Histoire de la Civiliza
tion en France. ” On the history of the formation of the French social polity the following authors should also be consulted; Augustin Thierry. “ Lettres sur l’ Histoire de France ”; Mignet. Etudes Historiques ” and to some extent Michelet, in his Precis rather than in his great Histoire. We shall draw constantly from these various sources, The passages cited in this chapter are quoted from them.
N the fifth century, a. d., at the period when the Merovingian invasions passed the barrier of the Rhine and spread over our land, Gaul had accepted Roman rule. Her manners, institutions, architecture, everything had become Romanized; the process of assimilation had been rapid and thorough.
Then followed an era of violence, plunder and murder, during which it seemed as though every trace of the ancient civilization would disappear forever. Several centuries elapsed; the Carlovingian occupation made the yoke still heavier, and yet there was a foreshadowing of better days when, by the side of more orderly institutions, the arts might once more flourish.
In the tenth century, an awakening did, in fact, take place in the centre and south, in those provinces of ancient Gaul which had remained most unshackled; a sort of Renaissance began; it extended to the provinces of the north, which were under direct subjection to the Franks of Neustria and Austrasia. There it underwent modifications at the hands of a race, which was still barbarous, but which was preparing for new destinies, as soon as it should be touched by southern civilization.
A school of architecture soon sprang up there, full of vigor, originality and productiveness. Though inspired at the outset by the Romanesque Renaissance, it afterwards abandoned this lead and flowered out magnificently. For three centuries it flourished, then, after a final transformation, disappeared rapidly and forever, leaving no trace of its passage. Art immediately entered upon a directly opposite path, and no tradition of the former school survived; on the contrary, succeeding generations, yielding to the violent reaction which set in, disowned the past or viewed it with mere scorn.
It would be difficult to find in the history of architecture another example of an end so extraordinary, a disappearance so complete. Usually, the architecture of a people is co-existent with the people itself, following its destinies and moving slowly downward from its zenith, through a period of decadence often centuries in length. Certainly extraordinary circumstances must have been required to terminate a vigorous and fruitful art so summarily, and replace it at once by another in striking contrast to itself. What were these circumstances is the question which we propose to discuss here.
In fact, to put this query is to ask how the Roman and Gaulish civilization was superceded for a time by feudalism, and why the latter, in its turn, was overthrown by the monarchical organization of France. It is, likewise, to demand how the Gallo-Roman people, rendered powerless at first by the invasions of the petty tribes of the North, so recovered its energies as to participate in the grandest events of our history and finally became the French nation. In reality these various questions all revolve themselves into one, for the social institutions, manners and architecture of a nation are closely related to its ethnological beginnings and to one another; they are only different forms of the outward manifestation of the nation’s soul.
It might seem strange that, in this sketch of French architecture, we should digress to such an extent as to attempt to indicate broadly the sources of the French race, and the development and successive transformations of French institutions and social conditions. The above preliminary remarks will serve as our excuse, if, indeed, the truth be recognized that the architectural achievement of a people does not constitute an isolated fact, that it is not like a meteor which appears, speeds through space, and disappears as a solitary existence;
but that it is fixed by a thousand deep roots in the soil from which it has sprung, that is to say, in the very existence of the people itself.
I. — CIVIL SOCIETY FROM THE FIFTH TO THE TWELFTH
CENTURY.
On the downfall of Roman supremacy in the West, two races, broadly speaking, confronted each other in what is now France: the Gallo-Romans, who were spread over the entire land; and the Franks, Germanic tribes, which arrived in suc
cessive invasions and sought to establish themselves, but were pushed farther and farther by new bands, until at last they occupied largely the regions north of the Loire and, to a certain extent, though always precariously, the country to the south of this stream.
When the Roman government retired, powerless before the invasions of the barbarian hordes, and finally abandoned Gaul to itself, the only bequests of the ancient civilization to the new which survived the general dissolution, were the municipal system and the religious institutions.
The barbarians brought with them nothing resembling a regular social condition, and nothing which enabled them to reconstruct the administrative plan of the conquered country.
However, as it is impossible for men to live in a state of complete isolation, even the barbarians necessarily possessed a more or less imperfect conception of a social state — a conception which might or might not be suited to take root definitively on Gaulish soil, and which they were destined to develop sooner or later. They did, in fact, found in the midst of the conquered population, though as it were outside of it, the regime which became feudalism.
Thus we find in Gaul at this time two totally dissimilar races: the one an ancient race, retaining from its former civilization a municipal organization and firmly fixed religious institutions; the other, not yet out of barbarism, but engaged in creating and organizing the feudal regime. Such are the heterogeneous and even hostile elements which the invasions had opposed to each other, and which were doomed to contend against each other until, after centuries of struggle, they should be fused into a national unity.
The Germanic tribes which successively invaded the different parts of Europe were originally composed of two classes of members: one, sedentary and supported by the toil of their coloni and slaves, remained at home, and were the ancestors of the present inhabitants of Germany; the others were grouped around a military chief and lived by constant expeditions abroad, which were often carried to distant lands and ended either in defeat or the final expatriation of the adventurers. Like the Saxons of olden times, the Goths and Burgundi, the Franks who conquered Gaul were warfaring bands, who gradually became settled inhabitants while preserving their own customs and traditions.
In the Germanic band no man was engaged except of his own will. In this we find an early expression of the character of absolute independence which is the distinctive mark of the Germanic races. “ The warrior chose his chief and his companions, and undertook nothing except by an act of his own will. Besides, in the bosom of the warfaring band, the inequality was not great between the chiefs and their men; there was nothing more than the natural inequality of strength, skill or courage; an inequality which afterward becomes fruitful, and which produces sooner or later immense results, but which, at the outset of society, displays itself only within very narrow limits. Although the chief had the largest share of the booty, although he possessed more horses and more arms, he was not so superior in riches to his companions as to be able to dispose of them without their consent; each warrior entered the association with his strength and his courage, differing very little from the others, and at liberty to leave it whenever he pleased. ” 2
Here, then, are the characteristic features of the society of the German warfaring band: no spirit of discipline; absolute and voluntary devotion to the person of the chief; complete individual independence; no necessity of a bond or political organization. As decisions had to be formed in common, since they were purely voluntary in all circumstances, the freemen
1 From the French of P. Planat, in Planat’s ʼʼEncylopédie de l’Architecture et de la Construction ”
2 Guizot. “Histoire de la Civilization en Europe ” and “ Histoire de la Civiliza
tion en France. ” On the history of the formation of the French social polity the following authors should also be consulted; Augustin Thierry. “ Lettres sur l’ Histoire de France ”; Mignet. Etudes Historiques ” and to some extent Michelet, in his Precis rather than in his great Histoire. We shall draw constantly from these various sources, The passages cited in this chapter are quoted from them.