The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Architecture of Provence and the Riviera, by David MacGibbon.

BY

DAVID MACGIBBON

AUTHOR OF “THE CASTELLATED AND DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE OF SCOTLAND.”

EDINBURGH: DAVID DOUGLAS
1888.

[All rights reserved.]

PREFACE.

HAVING been called on, a few years ago, to make frequent journeys between this country and the Riviera, the author was greatly impressed with the extraordinary variety and abundance of the ancient architectural monuments of Provence. This country was found to contain not only special styles of Mediæval Art peculiar to itself, but likewise an epitome of all the styles which have prevailed in Southern Europe from the time of the Romans. It proved to be especially prolific in examples of Roman Art from the age of Augustus till the fall of the Empire. It also comprises a valuable series of buildings illustrative of the transition from Classic to Mediæval times. These are succeeded by a rich and florid development of Romanesque, accompanied by a plain style which existed parallel with it—both being peculiar to this locality. The remains of the Castellated Architecture are also especially grand and well preserved; while the picturesque towns, monasteries, and other structures of the Riviera have a peculiar charm and attraction of their own.{vi}

These Architectural treasures being comparatively unknown, it is believed that a popular work bringing their leading features into notice will be not unacceptable to all lovers of architecture as well as to the numerous visitors to the south of France, and may be of use in directing attention to a most interesting department which has hitherto been to a great extent overlooked.

A proper history of Provence has unfortunately not yet been written. A short account, derived from various sources, of the state of the country from early times and during the Middle Ages is therefore prefixed to the description of the Monuments, so as to explain the historical conditions under which the Architecture of Provence was developed, and to show its connection with that of other countries and times.

The author has to acknowledge the valuable aid he has received from the excellent notes on the Architecture of the country by Prosper Mérimée in his “Voyage dans les Midi de la France” (1835),—a work which, even at the early date of its publication, anticipated many of the results more recently arrived at.

The comprehensive and invaluable “Dictionnaire Raisonné” of Viollet-le-Duc has also been of much service, and is frequently referred to.

Most of the illustrations are from drawings and measurements made by the author on the spot, and these generally bear his initials. But where thought advisable for fuller illustration some of the drawings are taken from photo{vii}graphs; from Henry Révoil’s beautiful work on the “Architecture Romane du Midi de la France” (1873); and a few from other sources as mentioned in the text.

Special thanks are due to Professor Baldwin Brown for his kindness in revising the proof sheets, and for the valuable suggestions he has made.

ERRATA.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

The Architecture of South of France comparatively little known, 1; contrast of North and South in climate, buildings, &c., 3; Provence a very ancient and independent State, 4; and scene of important historical events, 5.

Colonised by Phœnicians, 1100 B.C.—Greek culture introduced, 7; occupied by the Romans about 100 B.C., 8; became their favourite province, 9; overrun by Visigoths in fourth century, 10; Roman and Greek colonies were in cities, and the revived government also municipal, 11; the Church the chief instrument of organised government, 12; monasteries established, 13; anarchic condition from fifth to eighth century, 14; invasion of Saracens, 15; attempt to establish a “Holy Roman Empire,” 16; revival under Charlemagne, 18; growth of the monasteries, Cluny, 20; Citeaux, 22; the Crusades, 23; effects of the above on Architecture, 24.

Fall of the Empire in fifth century. Kings of Provence from sixth to tenth century, 26; Kingdom of Arles, 27; Raymond Béranger becomes Count of Provence, 11, 12; independence of cities attacked, 27; Albigensian crusade, 28; in 1245 Charles of Anjou becomes Count of Provence, 29; Queen Joan; 1480, King René dies and Provence becomes part of France, 30.

The Architecture of Provence naturally divided into a Classic and a Mediæval period—which best considered separately, 32; the {x}Roman period, 33; Paris, Autun, capricious preservation of Classic monuments, 34; Lyons, Vienne, 35; Temple of Augustus and Livia, remains of Forum, 37; the pyramid, 38; Vienne restored, 39; Orange, 40; the theatre, 42; triumphal arch, 45; other triumphal arches at Cavaillon, 47; St Remy, 48; mausoleum at St Remy, 50; Arles, history, 51; amphitheatre, 52; mode of protecting spectators in ditto, 54; obelisk, Place d’Hommes, Tour de la Trouille, 56; Alyscamps, 57; sculpture in museum, 59; Nimes, history, 64; amphitheatre, 65; Maison Carrée, 68; statue of Venus, 71; Nymphæum, 72; Tour Magne, 73; Roman gates, 74; Pont du Gard, 76; the “Camargue” and the “Crau,” 77; St Chamas, Roman bridge at, 77; Vernégue, temple at, 78; paucity of classic remains at Marseilles and Narbonne, 79; Pomponiana, 80; Le Luc, 80; Fréjus, history, 80; gate of Gaul, amphitheatre, theatre, aqueduct, 82; Via Aurelia, 83; aqueduct of Clausonne, Antibes, Vence, 84; Cemenelum, 86; Turbia, 87.

Transition from Classic to Mediæval Architecture, 90; principles of Greco-Italian design, trabeate as opposed to the arch, 91; gradual introduction and development of the latter, 92; trabeate features dropped, 93; early Christian architecture a continuation of that of Rome, 94; the basilica, 95; the baptistery, 96; San Vitale, 96; Byzantine edifices, the dome, 97; St Mark’s, Syrian churches, 98; early churches in the West—Romanesque varieties, 99; attempts to vault—San Miniato, 100; Notre Dame du Pré, Le Mans; form of vaulting in Provence, 102; in Aquitaine, 103; St Front, Perigueux, 104; the dome and single nave characteristic of the South, 105; varieties of style, influence of Roman remains, 105; powerful in Provence, 106; shewn in campaniles, baptisteries, and especially sculpture, 107; supposed Byzantine influence—the pointed arch, 107; used for simplicity of construction, 108; Burgundian style, imitative of nature, 109; the severe style of the Cistertians, 110; the second style of Provençal art; the two periods described, 111; growth of lay element, 112; traditional ecclesiastical forms abandoned and new natural forms adopted, 113; Northern Gothic developed, 114; Gothic applicable to all requirements, 115; domestic and castellated Architecture, 116; origin and growth of the latter, 117; peculiarities in the South, 118; recapitulation, 119; place of Provençal Architecture, 120.

Description of Mediæval buildings—Lyons, the Ainay, 121; the {xi}cathedral, 122; Vienne, St André-le-Bas, and St Pierre, 124; cathedral, 126; ancient houses, 127; Valence, Maison des Fêtes, 127; castle of Crussol, monastery of Cruas, 128; church of Cruas, 132; Montélimar, Viviers—commencement of Provençal examples, St Paul-trois-châteaux, 134; St Restitut, Pont St Esprit, 136; Courthézon, Avignon, 137; history, 138; Notre Dame des Doms, 139; imitation of Roman work, 141; palace of the Popes, 143; history, 144; description of, 145; walls of town, 148; gates, 151; Pont St Bénezet, 151; tower of Villeneuve, 154; castle of St André, 155; gatehouse, 156; curtains, 161; guard rooms on walls, 162; church of Villeneuve, 163; churches of Avignon, the Beffroi, abbey of St Ruf, Priory of St Veran, 164; Vaison, 165; Carpentras, Venasque, Pernes, Le Thor, Cavaillon, 167; Le clocher de Molléges, 168; Tarascon, history, Ste Marthe, 168; castle, 170; houses, gateway, 172; Beaucaire castle, 173; triangular keep, 176; oratory, 178; Les Baux, 179; the town—the bas-reliefs, 180; account of the family, 181; St Gabriel, 182; Arles, St Trophime, 183; includes examples of all periods of Provençal Architecture—the Cistertian nave, 184; the west portal, 187; the cloisters, 188; the Alyscamps, St Honorat, 191; prosperity of Arles after union to France—Renaissance palaces, 192; Mont-Majour, Hermitage, 194; church, 196; cloister, 199; chapel of Ste Croix, 199; the keep, 203; St Gilles, Abbey church, 204; interrupted by Albigensian crusade, 205; portal, 206; sources of Provençal art, 210; Les Saintes Maries, 212; Marseilles, St Victor, 213; Aix-en-Provence, St Sauveur, 217; cloisters, 219; “Les Villes Mortes du Golfe de Lyon,” 220; Montpellier, Maguelonne, 222; Béziers, 222; St Nazaire, 224; Fountain, 227; house in town, 228; Puisalicon, St Pierre de Reddes, St Martin de Londres, 229; Narbonne, history, 230; cathedral, 231; its fortifications, 232; Archbishop’s palace, 233; the keep, 234; St Paul, the Lagunes, the Pyrenees, Perpignan, 235; the castellet, cathedral, 236; citadel, &c., Elne, 239; cathedral, 240; the unfinished chevet, the campanile, 241; the cloisters, 244; Carcassonne, 244; history, 245; towers of the Visigoths, 246; the porte Narbonnaise—the barbican and its defences, 252; the walls and towers, 254; St Nazaire, 257; Aigues Mortes, 260; Canal, 261; walls and gateways, 264; Porte de Nimes, 266; Tour de Constance, 268; Tour Carbonnière, 269.

Eastwards from Marseilles—Toulon, 270; Hyères, 271; castle, 272; St Paul, 273; examples of Cistertian style, 274; Cannet, 275; abbey of Thoronet, 276; the cloisters, 278; remarkable details, 280; chapter house, 281; St Maximin, 282; Fréjus, cathedral and Bishop’s palace, 281; fortified, 289; baptistery, 291; “Pantheon” at Riez, 293; the cloisters, Fréjus, 296; Brass {xii}lamp, 298; doorways in town, 299; district of Les Maures, how to visit, 300; St Tropez, fish market, 301; Grimaud, castle, 302; La Garde Freinet, St Raphaël, the Esterelle mountains, 304; Napoule, 305; St Peyré, Mont St Cassien, 307; Cannes, 308; history, Tour du Chevalier, 310; St Anne, 314; Notre Dame d’Espérance, 317; Iles de Lérins, 319; St Honorat, cloisters, 320; Ste Trinité, 320; St Sauveur, 323; castle of St Honorat, 324; style of lower cloister, 330; style of upper cloister, 334; additions, 340; Ste Marguérite, 343; Vallauris, 344; Le Cannet, 347; Mougins, Notre Dame des Vie, 348; Auribeau, 350; Grasse, 351; cathedral, 353; keep tower, 354; Renaissance, 357; l’Oratoire, 357; St Césaire, 359; château de Tournon, 363; Montauroux and Callian, 364; Le Bar, 366; Gourdon, 367; Tourettes, 369; Antibes, 371; two keep towers, 373; Cagnes, castle, 376; castle of Villeneuve-Loubet, 378; history, 381; tower of La Trinité, 382; Biot, 387; St Paul-du-Var, 392; approach to, 393; Architecture of shops and houses, 395; staircase, 397; gateway, 398; church, 400; remarkable keep-tower, 401; Vence, 407; cathedral, 409; keep towers, 411; column, 413; commandery of St Martin, 414; destruction of the Templars, 417; Nice, history, 418; Cimiès Cross, 421; castle of St André, 422; Villefranche, Eza, 422; La Turbie, 428; gateways, 430; Monaco, 432; history, 433; Ducal Palace, 434; Roquebrune, 437; Mentone, 438; Gorbio, Ste Agnes, Castellar, 441; boundary of Provençal Architecture, 441; Ventimiglia, 445; Dolce Aqua, 445; Pigna, 448; San Remo, 449; Taggia, 450; Bussana, Oneglia, &c., 451; Albenga, 452; Genoa, 455.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

THE beautiful buildings of the North of France are as well known to all English lovers of architecture as many of the edifices of our own country, and every one is more or less acquainted with them.

The various styles which have prevailed there—whether Gothic or Renaissance, Ecclesiastical, Castellated or Domestic—have all been fully illustrated and rendered familiar by numerous admirable works, both French and English. Besides, being so near our own shores, and lying as it does, between England and Paris, this part of the country is easily accessible, and is much visited by English tourists and students of architecture.

The various styles of Northern France, too, have many points of resemblance to those on this side of the channel; and there thus exists a feeling of sympathy between the two which renders the study of both, and a comparison of their similarities and differences, particularly interesting to the English observer.

All these circumstances have contributed to make the great cathedrals of Amiens, Beauvais, Rouen, Rheims, and Chartres familiar and attractive; while the picturesque towns of Northern France, with their quaint half-timbered houses, and the no less picturesque costumes of the inhabitants,{2} are constantly brought before us in the charming representations of our artists.

The ancient castles of Normandy and Northern France, such as the Châteaux d’Arques, Gaillard, and Falaise, are as closely connected with English as French history; and as the dwellings of our Plantaganet Kings, and the scene of many important events in their lives, they claim even more attention at our hands than they have yet received.

But the South of France is a comparatively unknown country. It is much less frequented by our countrymen than the North, and its buildings and scenery rarely form the subject of our artists’ paintings. It is indeed true that a very large number of English people winter in the Riviera or at Pau; but these visitors are all desirous to perform their migration at a single flight, and to move, as by a magic spell, unconscious of the horrors of the middle passage, from the gloom of the dreary winter of England to the bright sunshine and lovely landscape of the South. That this should be the case is perhaps scarcely to be wondered at, so many of the visitors being themselves delicate or in company with invalids. But for their own sakes it is much to be regretted, as they thus pass through a great deal of fine and novel scenery without observing it, and catch but a passing glimpse of some of the most ancient and interesting cities, churches, and castles in Europe. It must, however, be confessed that the intervening district between the North and South is not a pleasant region in mid-winter. Between Lyons and Marseilles the cold is frequently very intense, and the whole valley of the Rhone suffers from the fierce and bitter “mistral” which sweeps down it from the region of the Cevennes Mountains on the north-west. To enjoy a tour in the valley of the Rhone on the way out to the Riviera one must start earlier than usual, so as to make the{3} October weather available, or delay till the return journey in spring.

The Englishman travelling southwards for the first time is chiefly struck with the entire change in the aspect of the scenery, the vegetation, the style of the buildings, the colour of the soil and hills, the brilliant sunshine, and the clear blue sky, which everywhere meet the view in descending the Rhone. This is especially the case in going south by the night train from Paris. Soon after leaving Lyons daylight commences, when the traveller awakes to find himself in a new zone. All the surroundings are transformed: instead of the sombre sun and foggy atmosphere of the North, he enjoys the bright light and breathes the clear air of the South, and finds around him, instead of bare trees and frozen herbage, vineyards and gardens still rich with the lovely tinted foliage of autumn.

The buildings in these gardens and fields particularly strike the eye of the architect. They are so unlike what he has been accustomed to, and left behind only a few hours ago. The houses of timber-framed work, with their steep roofs covered with slates or flat tiles, and the snug homesteads of England and the North of France, have entirely vanished; and in their stead only small square or oblong erections are to be seen scattered here and there through the fields, with plastered and tinted walls, and covered with tiled roofs of the ribbed Italian pattern, all laid at flat slopes, and generally having one side of the roof much longer than the other.

At Avignon the change of aspect is even more complete. “On arriving at Avignon,” says Prosper Mérimée, “it appeared to me that I had left France behind. Landing from the steamboat I had not been prepared by a gradual transition for the novelty of the spectacle which presented itself; the language, the costumes, the aspect of the{4} country, everything appears strange to one coming from the centre of France. I believed myself in the middle of a Spanish town. The crenellated walls, the towers furnished with machicolations, the country covered with olives and plants of a tropical vegetation, recalled Valencia, &c.”

Not less great than the differences in climate and in the aspects of nature, are those of the arts of the North and South; and these diversities in nature and art, although now all embraced within the compass of one great and united country, are indications of the political differences which, in former times, existed between the various portions of it. The growth of France as a kingdom has been slow and gradual. Not to refer to changes which have occurred in our own times to modify the extent of her surface, it should be remembered that Provence was no part of France till the fifteenth century. It was not till 1481, in the time of Louis XI., that Provence passed under the rule of the King of France.

During the earlier and more important epochs of the architectural revolutions in that province, it formed an independent State, and was in advance, in art and literature, of its northern neighbours. In considering the history of its architecture, it is important that this should be kept clearly in view. We shall see, as we glance rapidly over the history of the Southern provinces, that, in most respects, the development of the civilisation of the South differs from that of the Northern kingdom, and that the growth of the architecture naturally follows the progress of the respective countries. The art of the South, although it reached maturity earlier than that of the North, was also the first to decay; and, as the Northern Franks spread their arms over the South, and bit by bit got possession of the land, so their noble and vigorous style of architecture accompanied them, and, to a great extent, superseded the{5} older and more finished, but less expansive, styles of the southern provinces.

But the country we are dealing with has a history which extends back for hundreds of years before the names of Gaul or France were heard of. This region has in all ages formed a centre for the reception of the culture and arts of the various nations of the Mediterranean, and from which these have again been radiated to the remoter countries of the West. Its reminiscences thus carry us back to the dawn of history, some three thousand years ago, when we find the coast in the hands of the Phœnician navigators, by whose commercial and naval activity it could not fail to be greatly influenced. To the Phœnicians succeeded the Greeks, who colonised the country, and infused into it that spirit of Grecian culture and art of which it was long the home. The Romans next took possession of the land, and, under their dominion, it became a favourite province, and was lavishly enriched with the productions of the magnificent architecture of the Empire.

Amidst the horrors of the barbarian irruptions which followed the fall of the Empire, this fortunate province succeeded in maintaining some relics of Roman civilisation; and when the dawn began to appear after the terrible night of the Dark Ages, it was amongst the first to show signs of life and revival. In the South, song and literature, encouraged by contact with the Saracens of Spain, sprang up and flourished ere, in the North, the struggle for existence had produced a settled condition in the land. Here too the Christian Church took an early and firm hold, and has left interesting traces of its sacred edifices of very early date. It was here also that the primitive monastic societies of the West preserved the learning and enlightenment whereby the nations were subsequently revived and illumined. During the Middle Ages we shall likewise find{6} that this remarkable region still retained its distinctive attitude as a centre of artistic and commercial energy between the East and the West. It occupied in this respect, during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, a very remarkable position, and was at that time the scene of action of some of the chief political and religious movements in the West of Europe.

While connected as a fief with the “Holy Roman Empire,” it was also in close proximity to the growing power of France on the north, and to Spain and Italy on the south. For a time indeed it was under the suzerainty of Aragon, and was thus brought into contact with the science and arts of the Moors in Spain. From Italy again it received an impulse from the energy of the growing Republics of that country; while it also felt only too terribly and effectively the sway and power of the Pope. At the same time it became the chief entrepôt of the growing traffic from the East, and the highway by which the artistic and other products of the Levant were dispersed through France and the North of Europe.

The importance of this region was at that period immense, but in course of time it gradually diminished, until at length the tide of influence became reversed. The increasing power of France overshadowed the South, and the policy and arts of the North gradually encroached upon and finally absorbed it.

Having to investigate the architecture of a region so rich in historic and artistic records, it may be well, before considering its monuments in detail, to glance a little more fully at the historic conditions under which the various styles we shall meet with were produced and developed. We shall thus be the better able to understand and appreciate their place and significance in connection with the growth of the architecture.{7}

II.

THE history of the littoral of the Mediterranean goes back to the earliest dawn of maritime enterprise.

The coast was visited by the Phœnicians, those first and adventurous merchants and navigators of the Levant, who pushed their commerce even as far as the shores of distant Britain. Carthage was one of the Tyrian Colonies, and so also was Cadiz, founded about 1100 B.C.

The Phœnicians established many cities and ports on the coast, such as Illiberris, Narbonne, and Marseilles, and carried on a considerable trade with them. Some of these have entirely perished, while in the remainder only a few traces have been found of their Phœnician origin.

The next navigators who explored the Riviera were the Greek colonists from Phocæa, itself a Grecian colony on the coast of Asia Minor, the inhabitants of which were forced to leave their country by the invasion of the Persians under Cyrus.

These adventurers, after establishing themselves in Corsica, spread to other parts of the coast. They settled about 600 B.C., by treaty with the natives, at Massilia or Marseilles. Owing to its fine rock-sheltered harbour, and from its proximity to the mouth of the Rhone, which then formed the highway to the extensive and populous country lying to the northwards, this colony soon grew into a flourishing seaport. In course of time the Massiliotes became{8} rich, and acquired extensive lands around their town. They also spread their canvas over the neighbouring seas, and established numerous colonies all along the coast, such as Narbonne, Antibes, Nice, Monaco, &c.

The Phocæans brought with them from their native home, and introduced wherever they went, their Greek tongue, together with their Grecian culture and love of Art.

The government of their towns was founded on the pattern of that of Phocæa, the people choosing a council of 600, a committee of whom formed the executive.

They had also schools and colleges for the teaching of grammar and letters, and the encouragement of science and art.

The language, civilisation, and culture of the whole of the Massiliote towns were thus entirely Greek, and gave a Grecian character to the first enlightenment of Southern Gaul; a circumstance which left a distinct trace in the artistic style of the country, even under the Empire, just as in Sicily and southern Italy, the settlement of the Greek colonists in those countries produced a similar result.

The Massiliotes, being rivals of the Carthaginians as merchants and navigators, naturally took part with the Romans in their Punic wars, furnished them with ships, and became their allies.

In 154 B.C. the Ligurian tribes of South Gaul rose against the Massiliote colonies, and the latter in their turn applied to their Roman allies for assistance. This formed the first introduction of the Roman Legions into Gaul. Other disputes with the native tribes arose, and in 123 B.C. C. Sextus Calvinus completed the subjugation of the Salyes, and founded the first Roman settlement in transalpine Gaul at Aquae Sextiae (now Aix), where he had found the warm springs attractive.{9}

The road from Italy into Gaul by the sea-coast was thus secured, and a way opened for further conquest.

In 118 B.C. Q. Fabius Maximus and C. Domitius Ahenobarbus defeated the Avernes and Allobroges, and became masters of the Southern Celts. A Roman colony was then established at Narbo Martius (Narbonne), to secure the country and protect the road into Spain.

During the civil war Massilia espoused the cause of Pompey, a course which led to the town being besieged and taken by Caesar. Massilia was then Romanized and lost her colonies, but she still retained her letters and arts, and her schools continued to flourish under the Empire.

By the year 50 B.C. the whole of Gaul had been subdued by Julius Caesar. Colonies were established by him and his successors at Arles, Orange, Vienne, and all the important Gallic towns, and the country was thus brought under Roman rule and influence. Traces of the gradual passage from Greek to Roman culture are to be found in the monuments of the earlier centuries of the Christian era. This is observable in the change from the Greek to the Latin language, the Greek names assuming a Latin form and being inscribed in Roman characters.

Under Rome the towns of Gaul were adorned with the profusion of splendid public buildings universal throughout the Empire, every town being provided with its Forum and Temples, its Theatre, Amphitheatre, Baths, Aqueducts and Triumphal Arches. The style of architecture adopted was naturally that of the Romans, but in many buildings and sculptures of the early centuries, a strong Greek feeling may be detected. This is also the case at Pompeii, in Southern Italy, which was likewise originally a Greek colony.

During the second and third centuries, South Gaul gradually became entirely Romanized, and was the favourite province of the Empire, with the seat of the prefect at{10} Trèves. In the first brilliant period of the Empire, her extensive conquests added to her strength, both in supplying men for her armies, and wealth for the embellishment of her cities. Hence the magnificent display of public buildings then erected everywhere throughout the Roman world. But it also tended to her enervation through luxury and superfluity. This gradually encouraged the growing corruption of the Empire, and caused continually fresh demands on the provinces to feed the central craving and consumption—while with luxury the strength of Rome relaxed, and she became unable in return to extend to the provinces the support they required.

This weakness went on, gradually increasing, till in the fifth century the country fell an easy prey to the hordes of Barbarians who then poured in upon it. In the fourth century the Visigoths had burst over Southern Gaul, and settled in the fertile plains between the Pyrenees and the Garonne. That part of the country being well peopled and civilised, and the conquerors comparatively small in number, they were in course of time, to a great extent, absorbed into the general population. The civilisation and polity of the Romans thus continued to preserve a comparatively uninterrupted course in the south-west of Gaul.

It is a peculiarity of all the Greek and Roman colonies, as compared with those of modern times, that they were established in cities. In the cities were centred all the life and movement of the ancient world. The land of course had to be cultivated, but that was done by bands of slaves led out from the towns. The open country was uninhabited, and except within a short distance from the towns, lay waste and uncultivated. The form of government exercised in the various states, was founded on that of the towns. The supreme power of Rome herself, with all her wide-spread command, was but an extended muni{11}cipal authority, and every town was in this respect a repetition of the capital on a small scale. As the conquests of Rome extended, this form of government was found inadequate to the control of the numerous nations finally comprised under Roman sway.

The Empire, with its stronger grasp and centralised control, with its multitude of functionaries, all appointed by and in constant relation with a central will, alone enabled the existence of Rome to be continued for some centuries.

But when the Empire also finally decayed and fell, the old municipal principle again came to the front. As the colonies had been founded in cities, so when the Imperial system gave way, the city again asserted itself; and in Southern Gaul, where the barbarians had been civilised, municipal authority prevailed, and each town became an independent little State—the natural tendency of these municipalities being to detach themselves, and to watch jealously the proceedings of their neighbours.

This municipal principle is a leading characteristic of the Middle Ages in Italy and Southern Gaul, and distinguishes these countries from the Northern provinces. Traces of it are still very apparent in Italy and Provence, and contribute greatly to the picturesque character of these provinces. There even yet the soil is to a great extent cultivated by peasants, who dwell together in crumbling old cities perched on the tops of hills, and surrounded with ancient walls. Daily the men, women, and mules descend to their labour in the fields, till the evening, when they may be met toiling up the steep and rocky paths to a well-earned rest in their ancestral town.

While in the Southern provinces the Empire was thus dying from exhaustion, and the little isolated municipal states of the towns remained the only representatives of{12} civil government left in the land, in Northern Gaul the invasions of the barbarians were much more frequent and numerous, so that almost every trace of Roman civilization was obliterated. But in the midst of all this decay and destruction of general government a new organising and centralising power was arising, in the form of the Christian Church. After passing through the fiery trials of the first three centuries Christianity had been adopted by Constantine in A.D. 313; and by the end of the fourth century the church had become an extensive and united institution, with a well organised hierarchy of clergy, revenues of its own, and provincial, national, and general councils. The vigour of the administration of the church system was conspicuous in the general laxity, and the control of affairs naturally fell into the hands of the ecclesiastical authorities—the priests and bishops. Their jurisdiction was officially recognised, and under the codes of Theodosius and Justinian the control of municipal affairs was remitted to the clergy and bishops, who were thus for a time in their respective cities the representatives of government and order.

From the date of Constantine till the overthrow of society, Barbarism, Paganism, and Christianity went on side by side. While civilisation remained the schools continued, Christians of antique learning and Pagan students discussed together the same problems of philosophy, and the Fathers endeavoured to reconcile them with Christianity. But as successive waves of Barbarians rushed over the land, drowning all before them, almost every semblance of learning was swept away. Hence arose a desire on the part of learned men to retire from the anarchy and insecurity of the conditions around them to some safe retreat, where they might converse on and study in peace those high problems which occupied their minds.{13} These societies, in the natural course of events, were by degrees converted into monasteries. The celebrity of the Eastern ascetics and devotees had penetrated to Western Europe, but the solitary form of religious observance did not at first meet with much encouragement there. Societies of recluses were then, however, also common in the East, and the Eastern monastery was the form adopted by the Western recluses as their model. But monasteries were not at this time religious societies, nor were the monks in Holy orders. They were simply associations of laymen who wished to retire from the confusion and turmoil into which all civil government was thrown, and find peace for study and quiet for contemplation. Such was the famous monastery of the Lérins, founded early in the fifth century by St Honorat, on an island off the coast near Cannes, which soon became the most celebrated school of learning and piety in Southern Gaul, and was as great a blessing to the countries of the Mediterranean as the similar colony of St Columba at Iona was to the North of Britain.

It is easy, however, to fancy how, in the midst of the strife and unrest of the fifth and sixth centuries, such societies tended to become religious, and thus obtain protection from the Church. This they were finally compelled to do, although at the sacrifice of their liberty, by placing themselves under the authority of the bishops, where alone they could find rest and safety. For the Barbarians, many of whom were already Christians, stood in awe of the Church, and the Church strove to secure her ascendancy by maintaining the independence of the spiritual power, and the incapacity of the temporal powers to interfere with it; a doctrine which afterwards led to the terrible struggle for supremacy between the temporal and spiritual powers, represented on the one hand by the{14} Emperor, and on the other by the Pope, a struggle which lasted so long, and involved so many cities in the horrors of the factions of the Guelphs and Ghibellines.

During the fearful reign of anarchy and destruction which prevailed in the sixth and seventh centuries, when all security for life and property had disappeared, and the armed hand of the Barbarian bore down all rule and order before it, the authority of the Bishops likewise gave way. Their Sees were invaded by Goths and Franks, who assumed their titles and drew their revenues. The fate of the monasteries was similar. The invaders seized the seats of the abbots, and the recluses were dispersed. Everywhere nothing but decay and disintegration prevailed. No wonder then, that monuments of this period are rare; the marvel is that any human structures should have survived the shock of universal ruin and destruction. Only a few of the more massive Roman monuments, built as if to last for ever, were able to withstand the tornado. The small and modest Christian edifices have been almost entirely swept away; but fortunately a few rare vestiges have been preserved within our district, sufficient to indicate the nature of the early Christian Architecture under the Empire.

By the eighth century the Barbarian invaders of Gaul had become somewhat settled in their new possessions, and had abandoned their original wandering mode of life. A certain nominal supremacy had always been accorded to the Merovingian Kings of the Franks, but the royal power, together with the title, had now passed into the stronger and more active hands of the Carlovingians, under whom it grew into a distinct royal authority.

At this time a new danger from an unexpected quarter threatened the slowly reviving prospects of the West, and seems for the moment to have had the effect of uniting{15} all the otherwise discordant elements for the purpose of resistance to the common foe. This was the invasion of the Saracens from the South. These warlike zealots had, after over-running and destroying the Roman civilisation of Northern Africa, passed over into Spain, and in 719 they crossed the Pyrenees and invaded Southern Gaul. The old Roman cities were at that time in a comparatively settled and prosperous condition, when their tranquility was thus rudely interrupted. The whole country was devastated by the Saracen invaders, the towns were besieged, and in most cases taken and destroyed. We shall find, as we proceed, that there is scarcely one which does not bear the mark of the destructive hand of the Saracen. The overwhelming flood was, however, at length stemmed by Charles Martel in 732 at Tours, when the Moors were completely defeated and driven back beyond the Pyrenees. This great victory gave repose for a time; and thinking men being weary of the long night of Anarchy which had so long oppressed them, began to look round for some principle by which rule and order might again be restored. Any durable and fixed system would be better than the fluctuation and uncertainty so long experienced. After so many changes and so much diversity of government, the principle of unity naturally presented itself to men’s minds. The tyranny of the Empire was forgotten under the more crushing oppressions of all kinds which had since had to be submitted to; while its unity and strength were remembered, and people began to long for what now appeared to be “the good old times” of the Empire. It was agreed that the only satisfactory form of government was one which, like the Empire, should include the whole Roman world. This was considered to be in accordance with the nature of things. As there is one God, so there should be one Emperor to represent Him on earth as{16} temporal ruler, and one Pope to represent Him in matters spiritual as the head of the Church. And by a remarkable coincidence this idea came to be realised about A.D. 800, in the person of Charlemagne, who extended his sway over nearly the whole of Western Europe. What rendered possible at that time the apparent fulfilment of the dream of universal temporal and spiritual government, was the fact that during Charlemagne’s time these two powers recognised that they could be of considerable service to one another, and were consequently on very friendly terms. As Charlemagne was now the supreme temporal Emperor, so the Bishop of Rome had also fully established his supremacy in the Church. This had been brought about by various fortunate circumstances—by his occupying the See of the great city whose name was still a power, and where the Bishop held the old municipal authority and rule which had there been less disturbed by the invasions of the Barbarians than elsewhere; by his importance as a suzerain, being a very extensive proprietor in Italy and Gaul; and by means of the influence of missionaries sent direct from Rome by the Pope to Britain and Germany, where the converts, being thus brought into immediate connection with Rome, naturally gave their support to the Pope as head of the Church.

The Papal sanction had now become usual, and was considered necessary by Kings, to their establishment on the throne—especially in Germany, where Papal supremacy so fully reigned. But while the King required the Pope’s countenance, the Pope also was most desirous to obtain the aid of the temporal power, in order to overthrow the authority of the Lombards in the North of Italy, and to obtain possession of the Exarchate.

Their requirements thus fitted in with one another, so{17} that at the coronation of Charlemagne as Emperor by Pope Leo, in the year 800, the supremacy and unity of the two heads of affairs, in matters spiritual and temporal, seemed to be complete, and the Holy Roman Empire to be established on a secure and permanent basis.

After the time of Charlemagne, however, great disruptions of his empire ensued; but the idea of a central power took root, and although not developed according to the original conception, it led in time to the formation of the various nations which now occupy the different countries of Western Europe.

The idea of an universal Holy Empire deserves special attention in connection with Architecture. The same causes as led to this conception would also prevail with regard to the art, and especially the style of Architecture to be followed in the Empire. This we shall find there is reason to believe was the case, and that up to this time, and even till the tenth century, the churches were apparently erected in one traditional style, more or less followed in the whole of the Western Empire; whereas after the above date the architecture diverges into various national varieties in the different countries into which Europe was then sub-divided.

Under Charlemagne a wonderful revival took place in Letters, Arts, Schools, and Religion—the first dawn after the long night of anarchy. In Italy, Provence, and Aquitaine, where the towns had preserved something of the Roman municipal rule, and of the manners, letters, and arts of the Empire, Literature and Art began slowly to improve and revive. The relics of Roman culture which they possessed, together with the constant intercourse of the dwellers in the towns with one another, and the circumstance that here, as in Italy, the Nobles as well as the Burghers dwelt within the walls, all helped to bring about{18} a more speedy revival in the South than in the North, where the Nobles dwelt apart in their isolated castles. The reminiscences of Roman luxury, and the warm and voluptuous climate, while they tended to enervate and weaken, tended also to the growth of music, song and literature. National poets arose, the predecessors of the Troubadours, who became so prominent in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.

This enlightenment, combined with the nascent chivalry of the eleventh century, which introduced the worship of Woman with gallantry and the Courts of Love, formed a striking contrast to the rigid asceticism of the Burgundians, and competed strongly with the expansion of the Monastic institutions. It was the same spirit of freedom and progress which in the following century excited the suspicion and hatred of the clergy, and gave rise to the dreadful scenes of massacre amongst the Albigenses of Aquitaine, and the horrors of the Inquisition.

Architecture naturally participated in the general advancement and showed symptoms of new life. From the ninth century evidences exist of this revival in the monuments still to be found in these countries.

Charlemagne’s relations with the East were of a friendly character, and he is said to have sent to Byzantium for men of learning and science. Amongst these were no doubt Architects and Sculptors, who would thus bring with them the elements of the Byzantine influence so distinctly manifested in the early churches of the Rhineland.

The revival of the Holy Roman Empire under Charlemagne, although it paved the way for the new life which was to follow, was not in itself that new life. Up to this time the shadow of old Rome was still upon the nations. The Goths wondered at, and envied the great central government of the Empire, and strove to imitate and{19} revive its power in their own persons; and for this purpose they caused the Roman Laws to be collated, and they endeavoured to administer them. This too, as we have seen, was Charlemagne’s idea. But the new life of the modern world did not look back to Rome as its model. It was glad to borrow from Rome all the laws and culture it could make available, but its central idea is not that of universal empire, but of separate and independent kingdoms. Hence the long struggle in the North between the Austrasians, who strove to impose upon the provinces their missi and officials from a central head, and the Neustrians, whose Germanic instincts of individual freedom led them to contend for the independence and liberty of action of the hereditary rulers of the various provinces—the principle which in the end prevailed and determined the condition of modern European countries.

The dream of an universal spiritual and temporal Empire was only an attempt to raise the ghost of old Rome, but the new principle now being developed of independent kingdoms marks the birth of the new modern life.

The revival of the eleventh century was further greatly aided by the Church, both secular and regular. The bishops and clergy being the best educated class in the community, were the frequent advisers of those in authority, thus leading to the proper position of the Church being recognised and maintained. The monasteries also underwent the same spirit of revival and reformation. Of this the history of the Abbeys of Cluny and Citeaux form a remarkable illustration. The Abbey of Cluny was founded about 909 A.D. by Guillaume le Pieux, duc d’Aquitaine, but Odon, the second Abbot, was the real creator of the house. He introduced the idea of subordination and order amongst monasteries, i.e., that there should be one head Abbey, with numerous others subordinate to, and depend{20}ent on it. This plan was also adopted by the House of Citeaux (the Cistercians), founded about 1100, and others. The monasteries were, however, as yet all subject to the rule of St Benedict—different orders had not hitherto been introduced, only different controlling centres. Such control and superintendence were at this time only too much needed, all discipline having been lost in the midst of the general disorder. As has already been observed, many of the abbeys had become mere castles in the hands of lay abbots, and were filled with armed men. In other cases the clerical abbots acted as lay proprietors, and commanded troops, and mixed in the quarrels of the nobles.

The Abbé Maïeul governed Cluny for the forty years preceding 994, during which time a large number of monasteries from every part of Europe, extending from Ravenna and Pavia in Italy to Tours in France, and including the ancient monastery of St Honorat de Lérins in Provence, adopted the rule of Cluny and became subject to its authority. Under this reformed rule monastic institutions began to assume a great importance and to exercise much influence in Western Europe. In the midst of disorder they were the only representatives of a well regulated government, and in fact produced the model from which modern society and order sprung. Cluny now began to feel its power, and to long for independence from the authority of the Bishops, desiring to hold from the See of Rome alone.

Abbot Hugues and his friend Hildebrand (afterwards Gregory VII.) both contended strongly for the independence of the spiritual power—a struggle ending with the final victory of the Pope over the Emperor Henry IV.

Hugues, like the other superiors of the monastic institutions, such as the Abbé Suger and St Bernard, took part in all the great affairs of the time (eleventh cen{21}tury). The Abbé of Cluny was invited by William the Conqueror to regulate the religious affairs of England. In Hugues’ time the dominion of Cluny extended over 314 monasteries. The Abbot-General thus became the equal of any temporal prince, and owed his allegiance only to the Pope. He struck his own coinage, and he appointed abbots to all his subject monasteries, of whom he occasionally called together a Council.

In the eleventh century the monastery, besides being a model of centralised organisation, was the only place of repose for intellectual minds. The monks also resuscitated the culture of the soil-establishing small convents, or Obédiences, in remote and neglected territories, where they cleared the ground, drained the marshes, enclosed fields, and planted vineyards. They also constructed roads and established bridges and ferries. Trades of all kinds were likewise practised and encouraged in the monasteries, and the arts of the gold and silver smith, the glazier and glass painter, the illuminator, and the carver were specially subjects of the monks’ attention. The houses of the inhabitants who carried on these trades clustered round the walls and increased in number with the importance of the monastery. The workmen consisted of tanners, weavers, curriers, and drapers, who manufactured the produce of the live stock of the abbey. Where there were mines on the property, the necessary labourers were employed; and all the ordinary trades, such as those of bakers, butchers, shoemakers, smiths, &c., were needed and supported. Schools were established, and the education of all provided for. The sick were attended to, and all travellers were welcomed and entertained.

It was natural that the monasteries, well regulated as they were, and encouraging all kinds of industries, should speedily grow rich. But it would be difficult to{22} imagine how wealth could have been better made available for the benefit of the community at that time, and under the conditions then existing, than it was in the hands of the Benedictines.

The history of the Cistercian monasteries is similar to that of the Clunisiens. In the end of the eleventh century some monks of Molesmes, whose monastery had fallen into the greatest laxity, obtained from the Papal Legate permission to found an Abbey on rules of great strictness. Twenty monks established themselves in the forest of Citeaux, in the diocese of Châlon, on a desert territory surrendered to them by the Viscount of Beaune. The monks built an Oratory and established Rules—one of which was that they should live by the work of their hands. These monks were soon afterwards joined by St Bernard and his companions, when the rule of Citeaux took a great start. In less than twenty-five years after these twenty men began their labours in the marshy forest by reclaiming and cultivating a small patch of ground, they were represented by 60,000 Cistercian monks spread over every part of Europe. They were called in by feudal lords from all countries to clear the land, to establish industries, to rear flocks and herds, to drain the marshes, and cultivate the soil. In a short time Citeaux ruled over the incredible number of 2000 houses of both sexes, each house possessing 5 or 6 granges.

Nothing can better illustrate the immense strides made in the West during the eleventh century than the great development of these establishments, and no part of the progress then made had greater influence on Architecture. It is from this time that we may date the revival of our art, after the almost total extinction of the Dark Ages. It is evident that the very large number of new monasteries and churches now required would have a great effect in stimulating the growth of Architecture. The position of{23} this and every other art was at that time necessarily in the hands of the monks, who alone had sufficient knowledge for the designing and decorating of any building. Under the monastic influence, however, the designs naturally became subject to rule and tradition, and tended to assume fixed forms, although these varied somewhat under the regulations of the different orders, and in different localities.

Another remarkable phenomenon, which was both an indication of the new life and religions awakening of the epoch, and had also a very powerful effect in increasing these movements, was the Crusades. The same enthusiasm which prompted thousands to devote their lives to a holy and useful existence in the cloister, stirred up in others through the eloquence of Peter the Hermit and St Bernard, a resolve to sacrifice everything to the righteous endeavour to rescue the places sanctified by the great events in our Saviour’s Life from the hands of the Infidels. Amongst the innumerable multitudes who joined in the Crusades, and visited the East, there must have been many who were able to appreciate the splendid architecture and decoration of Santa Sophia and the other great churches and buildings of the Levant; and these travellers would bring back with them fresh ideas which they would endeavour to import into the structures of the West. Besides, the eyes of all were opened and their minds enlarged by contact with the culture and refinement of the Eastern empire, where the ancient Greek and Roman civilisation had continued uninterruptedly during the centuries of darkness and barbarism which had well nigh obliterated them in the West. They also saw at Constantinople the great mart where the commerce between the East and West was concentrated, and became acquainted with the rich fabrics and beautiful art of Persia and India.{24}

The transport of men and materials to the East, for the prosecution of the war, likewise gave a great impulse to navigation and maritime enterprise, while contact with the Saracens (then an enlightened and scientific people) taught valuable lessons to the soldiers of the cross. They especially acquired from them many improvements in the art of the attack and defence of fortifications, and in the construction of military engines, the results of which the Western nobles were not slow to avail themselves of in the great castles which they erected on their return from the Holy Land. The buildings of the Holy places themselves were naturally adopted as models, and the circular churches of the West are probably mostly imitations (although sometimes remote ones) of the church of the Holy Sepulchre (which was itself rebuilt by the Crusaders). It will be further pointed out in dealing with the history of the Architecture how the ancient Greco-Roman art had been preserved in Syria, and the direct influence it had on the Architecture of the West.

Such being the general condition of affairs, and their bearing on the art of the West of Europe up to the twelfth century, let us now look a little more closely at the progress of events in the province with which we are specially concerned.

III.

A RAPID glance at the political history of the country will further show the extraordinary condition of fluctuation and uncertainty which existed during the dismal period which followed the overthrow of the Roman rule, as well as the gradual growth of the new state of things under which the great revival of the twelfth century occurred. We shall also observe how the early renewal of civilisation in the South, aided as it was by the preservation of some relics of old Roman culture, ultimately yielded to the more vigorous life and growth of the new political system of the North.

We have seen that Aquitaine was occupied by the Visigoths in the fourth century, while Provence was still held by the Burgundians and Gallo-Romans.

In 425 Aetius made a final stand for the Roman cause, but was defeated by Theodoric, King of the Visigoths, and the last vestige of the Empire was swept away. These two powers of the South afterwards united their forces against Attila, their common foe, and drove back the Huns in 451. In 480 Arles was captured by Euric for the Visigoths, who thus became masters of Provence. In the sixth century the Franks extended their arms southwards, and under Clovis, and Gundibald, King of the Burgundians, defeated the Visigoths at Bouglé in 507.

In 511 Theodoric, King of the Ostrogoths in North Italy, defeated the army of Clovis while engaged in the siege of Arles, and thus preserved the Mediterranean{26} coast to Italy. But Provence was resigned in 536 by his successor Witiges to Theodoric, King of the Franks, who had overthrown the Burgundian Kingdom.

At the death of Clothair I. in 561, Provence was divided between his sons, Sigebert, King of Austrasia obtaining Marseilles, and Gontran of Burgundy, Arles. Under subsequent kings Provence was again reunited and again divided.

In 719 the Saracens crossed the Pyrenees and took possession of Languedoc. They subsequently united with Maurontis, the Byzantine governor of Marseilles, for the purpose of driving out the Franks, but were defeated by Charles Martel, who thus united Aquitaine and Provence to the Frank kingdom.

These Southern provinces, which, as already mentioned, were governed by municipal and ecclesiastical organisations, were too weak either to resist the inroads of the Saracens, or to defend themselves against the more vigorous discipline of the North.

At the division of the Carlovingian empire, after the death of Charlemagne in 843, Provence fell to Lothaire, along with Burgundy. In 863 it was seized by Charles the Bald, and in 879 his brother-in-law Boson, governor of Vienne, was elected King by the synod of Montale, and Provence was thus converted into a separate monarchy.

In 932 Hugo obtained the Italian kingdom, and ceded Provence to Rudolph II., who united the two Burgundies under the name of the Kingdom of Arles. This kingdom existed as a name till 1032; but Provence had in the meantime been governed by Princes whose power continually increased, till, from being appointed Governors, they became hereditary holders of the fief. Of these Princes there were several in the tenth century, who reigned under the titles of Boson I. and II., William I. (who drove{27} out the Moorish pirates from the Fraxinet in 968) (as will be referred to in the sequel), Rothbold, William II., &c.

In 1112 Raymond Béranger, Count of Barcelona, of the house of Aragon, married the heiress of Provence, and obtained possession of the country. But Raymond of St Gilles, Count of Toulouse, one of the great leaders of the first crusade in 1096, claimed a part; and in 1130 possession of Provence was disputed between his son and Raymond des Baux, of whose family we shall hear more by-and-bye. In 1181 Raymond Béranger, who had been invested in Provence by his brother Alphonso I. of Aragon, died, and the fief reverted to Alphonso I. and II. till 1196.

In 1209 an attempt was made by Raymond Béranger, fourth Count of Provence, to destroy the independence of the cities. These had all along preserved their municipal freedom and Roman form of self-government. The governing body was elected by the citizens, the chief magistrate being originally nominated by the Byzantine Emperor, but latterly the office became vested in certain families, or was held by the bishop. In the twelfth century reforms were attempted in this as in everything else, and the citizens followed in their reforms the example of the Italian Republics, and chose a chief magistrate for life with the title of Podestà. To this officer was entrusted the command of the troops, and his chief duty was to maintain order in the town amongst the different factions which were incessantly at war with one another. The power of the Podestàs was thus considerable, and the Count found much difficulty in subduing them. The Albigenses of Avignon capitulated in 1226; and Nice, Grasse, Toulon, and Marseilles were also subsequently overcome.

The strength of the free towns had been shaken shortly before this by the terrible crusade against the Albigenses of Aquitaine. The tenets of the Christian Church in this{28} province had always differed somewhat from those of Rome, and the jealousy of the ecclesiastics had been excited by the freedom of the life and language of this comparatively enlightened region. The Pope having now completely established the principle of the supremacy of the See of Rome, could not endure the idea of any want of conformity to his rule; and he accordingly encouraged the Romanists of the North to make war on these rebellious heretics. The enthusiasm of the Crusaders against the Holy Land had now worn off; but a crusade against the Heretics of Aquitaine had the charm of novelty, combined with the advantages of easiness of access, and the probability of abundance of booty. The crusades against the Albigenses were led by Count Simon de Montfort, who attacked and, after encountering in most cases a gallant and determined defence, destroyed the towns, and massacred the inhabitants. At Béziers alone, which fell after a protracted siege, the Abbot of Citeaux, in reporting to Innocent III., expressed regret that he had only been able to slay 20,000 heretics; but it is believed that no less than 60,000 were destroyed in that indiscriminate massacre.

The horrors of war were followed by the tortures of the Inquisition, and in the holy hands of St Dominic and his order all dissent was either exterminated or driven into other lands, there to sow the seeds which should some day spring up as a crop, which no Papal sickle could cut down.

Raymond VII., Count of Toulouse, having espoused the cause of his people, suffered with them and was compelled to do penance and to surrender, by a definite treaty with Queen Blanche in 1229, all his possessions in the Kingdom of France to her husband Louis VIII., and all in the Kingdom of Arles to the Pope’s Legate. Only a small portion was allowed him for life, and he was re{29}quired to do penance by service in the Holy Land. The Pope, however, declined to accept of the Kingdom of Arles on account of its burdensomeness owing to famines. He therefore handed it over to Queen Blanche, who entrusted the administration of it to the Seneschal of the castle of Beaucaire. It was afterwards formed into the Principality of Orange and the Countship of the Venaissin.

In 1243 Raymond VII. of Toulouse was finally obliged to yield up everything to King Louis IX. The suzerainty of ancient Aquitaine was thus acquired by the Crown of France, but Provence, east of the Rhone, still retained its independence.

In 1245 the latter passed into the family of Anjou by the marriage of Charles of Anjou, brother of St Louis, with Beatrice, heiress of Provence. The towns thought this a favourable opportunity for making an effort to recover their freedom, and accordingly Arles, Avignon, and Marseilles joined in a league against Charles. Arles and Avignon submitted on his return from the East in 1251; but Marseilles, which had resisted Raymond Béranger, resolved to maintain its Republican freedom. Four years later, however, it was compelled to submit, when its fortifications were razed. In 1262 the town again rebelled, but was blockaded and reduced by famine. The ancient liberties of Marseilles were preserved, but Charles substituted in this and the other towns an officer of his own instead of the electoral Podestà. He afterwards acquired Ventimiglia and the Maritime Alps. Charles next carried his arms into Italy, and in 1266 he drove out Manfred, and took possession of the two Sicilies. He died in 1285, and left Anjou, Provence and Naples to Charles II., whose son Robert (in 1309) left a troubled heritage to his grand-daughter Joan of Naples. In 1343 Joan’s husband, Andrew of Naples, having been murdered, and Joan being suspected{30} of complicity in the deed, her husband’s brother, Louis of Hungary, attacked and took Naples in 1347. Joan fled to Provence, and being desirous to raise money in order to recover Naples, and also wishing to be acquitted of all connection with the crime of her husband’s murder, she sold Avignon, where the Popes were then resident, to Clement VI., and obtained his acquittal.

Provence had long enjoyed a popular government with representatives in the three houses of the Clergy, Nobles, and Commons, who had control over the national purse. Queen Joan attempted to cut down these powers, and appointed an Italian as Grand Seneschal. But the nation revolted against this interference with its ancient constitution, and Louis of Anjou pressing his claim on the province, supported by an army, Joan, in order to escape from her difficulties, had to adopt him as her heir. He succeeded to the Countship in 1382, but he and his son Louis II. (1384), and grandson Louis III. (1417) were all unsuccessful in their claims on Naples. Louis III. was succeeded in 1434 by his brother René, the well known poet and painter King, who had also claims on the throne of Aragon. He died in 1480, leaving one daughter, Margaret, married to Henry VI. of England.

René bequeathed Provence to his nephew, Charles III. of Maine, who soon after died, making Louis XI. of France his heir.

Provence thus became at length part of the kingdom of France. But the Emperor of Germany still continued his claim of suzerainty upon it, in which he was supported by the Constable, Charles of Bourbon. In pursuance of that claim, Charles V. of Spain invaded Provence in 1536, but without success. The country continued to be{31} frequently attacked in the subsequent wars between France and Spain, but has remained part of France since the days of Louis XI.

The boundary of the province on the east remained from that time till our own day, the river Var. It was a frontier badly fortified, and ever open to attack; and we shall see what efforts were made by Francis I. to render it secure against the attempts of his enemy of Spain. In 1861 the boundary between France and Italy was extended eastwards, as far as a ravine spanned by the “Pont St Louis,” a short way beyond Mentone, thus including Nice and Mentone, formerly part of Savoy, within the French territory.

In treating of the architecture of this part of the country, we shall find that it bears in its architecture unmistakable signs of its former Italian allegiance.

IV.

THE foregoing Sketch of the history of this region shews that its architecture must belong to two entirely distinct epochs—the Roman period and the Mediæval period. It is proposed in the following description of the various edifices to treat of these two periods separately,—taking up first the buildings of the Roman period in regular sequence as they are met with in descending the Rhone from Lyons, and in the various localities along the Riviera, both west and east of Marseilles. Having thus exhausted the Roman monuments in the province, we shall return to Lyons, and repeat the journey southwards to Marseilles, and thence westwards and eastwards along the coast, taking note of the more important of the many remarkable Mediæval structures in which these localities abound.

This method will, we believe, be found to be much more satisfactory than any attempt to deal with the architecture in chronological order. That plan would be very confusing, the reader having under it to be constantly transferring himself from one region to another. By the system adopted he will at least always know where he is, and the situation of the buildings will thus be fixed in the mind. The disadvantage of this method admittedly is that structures of all the Mediæval periods are described together as they occur in each locality; but it is hoped that this disadvantage will be to some extent overcome by the{33} introduction to the Mediæval period, in which the historic sequence and development of the architecture of the country in the Middle Ages is considered.

Following the above arrangement we shall now proceed with the description of the buildings, commencing with

THE ROMAN PERIOD.

In the North of France there are few remains of Roman buildings. This probably arises from two causes:—1st, Because before the fifth century Roman civilisation had not advanced so far in Northern as in Southern Gaul, and consequently the towns were not adorned with the same profusion of magnificent edifices;—and, 2nd, Because the Northern division suffered far more destruction than the Southern, from the invasions of the Barbarians.

At Paris some Roman vaults, parts of a Palace or Baths, are still preserved in the grounds of the Musée Cluny.

Autun is celebrated for its two fine Roman gateways, one of which (the Porte d’Arroux) is decorated with Corinthian, and the other (the Porte St André) with Ionic pilasters, features which afterwards produced a strong influence on the Mediæval Architecture of the province of Burgundy.

Autun also possesses remains of two buildings called Roman Temples, a splendid pavement of mosaic, a fine collection of statuettes, bronzes and inscriptions,—all bearing testimony to the importance of the town in Roman times. But we must pass these by without further notice, as our district lies south of Lyons.

In exploring the remains of Roman Architecture in Southern Gaul, one cannot help being struck with the extraordinary and capricious manner in which they have been preserved,—small towns like Orange and Nimes{34} being full of Roman work, and important Roman cities like Marseilles and Narbonne having nothing left but the fragments collected in their Museums.

Avignon, the ancient Avenio, was, before the Roman occupation, one of the most important cities of the tribe of the Cavares; and under Imperial rule was no doubt adorned with splendid Temples, Amphitheatre, Theatres, and other public buildings like those of which the remains are still to be seen at Arles and Nimes. But of all such structures there is practically not a fragment now left at Avignon.

A large number of Roman antiquities from that town and vicinity have, however, been collected in the Musée Calvet, so called after the physician who founded it by bequeathing in 1810 his fine private collection to the city. The museum contains some good Greek sculpture, and a large number of coins, medals, and bronzes.

At Lyons there are a few subterranean remains of aqueducts, but no Roman Architecture.

Some time after leaving Lyons, the railway, which follows the course of the Rhone, enters a narrow pass amongst the mountains, where there is little room for more than the river and the road between the precipitous and rocky banks. The scenery is very grand, and the prospect is especially fine at a bend of the river where the ancient town of Vienne, rising high upon a bold promontory surmounted by its ruined castle, bursts upon the view.

The town itself is most interesting. Vienne was the ancient city and capital of the Alobroges before the time of Cæsar. Under the Romans it attained great splendour. Cæsar embellished and fortified it, and Augustus and Tiberius bestowed favours on it. It was also the seat of a Prætor, and had a Senate and Council, five legions, and a celebrated school. The city increased to such an{35} extent that it became necessary to extend it on the other side of the Rhone. Vienne was divided into three towns:—Vienne the strong, containing the citadel; Vienne the rich, the town proper; and Vienne the beautiful, on the right side of the Rhone (now called St Colombe), where many fine works of art have been found. During the later Empire Vienne continued to be a place of great importance, not unfrequently the residence of the Emperors, and played a prominent part in the numerous revolutions of the times.

It was also the cradle of Christianity in the West, which, as tradition relates, was there founded by St Paul on his way into Spain. The Archbishops of Vienne became for a time Primates of Gaul.

But it was soon to encounter the usual series of disasters which overtook the Roman towns of Southern Gaul, being conquered by the Burgundians in 438, ravaged by the Lombards in 558, and destroyed by the Saracens in 737.

Boson, King of the new Kingdom of Burgundy and Provence, made Vienne his capital. But the second Kingdom of Burgundy perished in anarchy, and Vienne became the capital of a feudal province ruled by a suzerain called the Dauphin of the Viennois.

The town stands on the western slope of a hill facing the river, with two steep heights above it, viz., that of Salonica, crowned with the ruins of a Mediæval Castle, and the Mont Pipet, whose summit is surrounded with an enclosing wall and towers, which occupy the position of, and may have formed the citadel for, the Roman garrison, but the buildings have been altered in later times.

Vienne possesses several interesting Roman relics, the most important of which is the temple dedicated to Augustus and Livia (Fig. 1).

It was formerly converted into a church, and shockingly disfigured. The columns surrounding the cella were blocked up with common masonry, and, as if this was not Barbarism enough, the fluting of the columns was scraped off to make them flush with the line of the enclosing wall. The edifice has now been carefully and judiciously restored; and as a complete specimen of a temple of the Romans in Gaul is only surpassed by the “Maison Carrée” at Nimes. It is about 80 feet long by 50 feet wide. In front are six Corinthian columns, crowned with entablature and pediment, and on each side six detached columns with two pilasters in rear attached to the cella. The whole is placed on a stylobate, to which twelve steps ascend in front. The temple stood in a Forum, some of{37} the pavement of which has been recently uncovered, and the foundations of the colonnade which surrounded it laid bare.

A large number of antique relics are here collected—amongst others, portions of shafts, and bases of columns of gigantic size, which must have belonged to a building of immense proportions. The admirably preserved and well known group of two children struggling for the possession of a bird is one of the finest objects in the collection,{38} which also includes many interesting fragments of sculpture and architecture. Vienne possessed at least one ancient theatre, some relics of which still exist in the ranges of steps forming the seats of the auditorium.

Remains of underground aqueducts and Roman ways are also to be seen in the neighbourhood. Of the arcade of the ancient Forum there now only remain two arches and part of a vault (Fig. 2). The Corinthian columns are half buried in the soil, and the entablature has been heightened with a mediæval upper storey, but the colossal proportions of the original building are still very striking. Near this are some massive sub-structures and a portion of an immense staircase, the stones of which still fit as well as the day they were built.

A little way south of the town, and on the level ground near the river, stands a remarkable though unfinished monument called the “needle” or “pyramid” (Fig. 3). The upper part consists of a tall and partly hollow square pyramid. The base is pierced with four arches, each flanked with two engaged columns, the capitals of which are only roughly blocked out. The Romans were in the habit of building thus, and executing the sculpture afterwards. The masonry is beautifully jointed and put together without cement; but the blocks have been cramped with iron, and the holes made for the purpose of extracting these cramps are unfortunately only too apparent here, as in so{39} many other Roman edifices. There is no inscription or other indication of the purpose for which this monument was erected, but it has most probably been commemorative, and the name of Alexander Severus has been generally connected with it. Prosper Mérimée is of this opinion, and adds that “the interruption of the work might be explained by one of the revolutions so frequent in the Empire, which made men forget or denounce the memory of the person to whom divine honours had previously been paid.”

The existing remains show that Vienne must have been a town of great importance and splendour in Roman times. An attempt has been made by an architect of the district to exhibit in a drawing an illustration of what Vienne was like in the days of its glory, of which a reproduction is given in Fig. 4. This restoration, although to a great extent imaginary, at least serves to give some idea of the splendour of a Roman city.{40}

The next Roman edifices of importance in descending the Rhone are found at Orange, the ancient Arausio, the capital of the Cavares. It was taken by Cæsar, and became an important Roman colony. On approaching the town by the railway, one is struck by the appearance of an immense pile of building which rears itself high above all the other structures of the place, but is at too great a distance to allow its features to be distinguished. On closer inspection this turns out to be the proscenium wall of the famous Theatre of Orange. Everyone is acquainted with the general outline of the Roman amphitheatre, but the form of the theatre is probably not generally so well known. The seats were arranged in a similar manner to those of the amphitheatre, and were almost invariably cut out of the side of a hill, but they extended only round a semicircle. These constituted the auditorium, the diameter of the semicircle opposite them being occupied with a high wall which enclosed the theatre and formed the scena, in front of which was the stage where the actors appeared. This wall or scena was generally elaborately adorned with architectural features, including a profusion of marble columns with their entablatures, niches with statues, &c. Dressing-rooms and other apartments for the actors were either within the scena, or in spaces at the ends.

The theatre of Orange corresponds with this description. The seats, rising in tiers, are hollowed out of a hill side, and where natural support was awanting, at either end, it was supplied by building walls and vaults in continuation of the rock-cut seats. The proscenium wall (Fig. 5) is of great size, and is a splendid specimen of Roman construction, being 335 feet long by about 112 feet high, and is built with large carefully fitted blocks without cement. This example is valuable, as the proscenium portions of{41}

ancient theatres are generally destroyed and the materials removed. Externally the wall of the scena presents a very simple appearance, but has an imposing effect from its size. The ground floor is designed with a series of arches having pilasters between them. There is a large central entrance, and two smaller side doors arranged symmetrically, and all square-headed. These probably corresponded with the internal entrances, the central one being known as the Royal doorway, because the principal actor, called the king, entered by it. The first floor is quite plain; the next floor has an arcade surmounted with an entablature, above which is a row of large corbels, the use of which is doubtful. Above these is a great gutter, then another row of corbels, and the summit is crowned with a projecting cornice. The six corbels at each end of the upper row are pierced, as if to form sockets to receive the feet of poles from which a velarium or great awning might be stretched over the theatre (as was the case at the Colosseum in Rome and other similar structures), but if so intended they could never have been used for that purpose, owing to the projection of the upper cornice. Prosper Mérimée thinks that the highest portion of the wall above the level of the upper corbel course has been an addition or early restoration, which has rendered the lower range of corbels useless, as well as the upper ones, owing to a change of plan and the introduction of a wooden roof, instead of a velarium, for the protection of the actors. At either end of the proscenium great blocks of buildings contained staircases, halls, dressing-rooms for the actors, places for the machinery, &c.

The interior of the scena (Fig. 6) was decorated with three storeys of columns of polished granite and white marble, now entirely broken down, but of which a large quantity of fragments is still visible, along with various carvings{43}

and other works. These are collected in the proscenium, and form an interesting exhibition, giving some idea of the former richness of the decoration. The upper part of the scena carried the roof above referred to. The beams were embedded in the solid masonry, and projected over the proscenium, the apertures formed in the walls to receive them being distinctly visible. This roof has evidently been one source of the destruction of the building, as the calcined and blackened appearance of the upper part of the walls shews that it has suffered from a great fire, the materials for which could only have been furnished by a wooden roof over the proscenium.

The sketch (Fig. 6) shews some of the ranges of seats cut out of the rock,—those at the bottom being in a fair state of preservation; and also some of the built portion of one of the wings which united the great proscenium to the part of the auditorium cut out of the hill behind.

In the Middle Ages this theatre, as often happened with the massive buildings of the Romans, was converted into a fortification, and formed an outwork of the castle erected by the Duke of Orange on the summit of the hill above. But so solid is its construction, being composed after the Roman manner of building, of great blocks carefully fitted together without cement, that it has been able to endure for at least 1500 years, almost without change, all the destructive influences both of man and the elements.

Immediately adjoining the theatre on the west was a hippodrome, the outline of which is quite discernible from the high ground above. It seems to have run nearly the whole length of the present town, and remains of it may be traced at intervals among the houses. The length and comparative narrowness of the structure shew that it was intended for horse and chariot races, and not for{45} gladiatorial combats and similar spectacles. Of this immense building almost the only architectural features now remaining are a large arch across one of the streets, locally, but erroneously, called a triumphal gate, and some portions of an arcade incorporated with the modern houses.

Almost everywhere in Orange antique fragments are to be found, and several statues and mosaics have been discovered.

But by far the finest relic in an artistic point of view is the well known Triumphal Arch (Fig. 7). It stands at the northern entrance to the town, and, considering the hard usage it has received, it is in a wonderfully good state of preservation. The arch is about 70 feet long and 70 feet in height. Such a massive building was too tempting as a fortress to be passed over in the Middle Ages, and we accordingly find it used for that purpose by Raymond des Baux, who played an important part in this country in the thirteenth century. The northern façade is best preserved. The structure, as was usual in large monuments of this nature, is pierced with a principal central arch and two smaller side arches, and is adorned with four attached Corinthian columns between the arches supporting an entablature with a central pediment. The east flank has also four similar columns placed very close together. The archivolts and frieze are enriched with sculptured figures, and the spaces over the side arches contain trophies of arms. The upper panel over the central arch is filled with a large bas-relief full of figures, but it is hard to say what scene is represented. The shields are ornamented with crescent-like forms, and on one of them the name of “Mario” can still be read, while diverse names were formerly legible on others.{46}

Many are the theories and disputations to which these words and ornaments have given rise, but nothing positive has been made out with regard either to the date or origin of the Arch. It has been ascribed to Tiberius, and its date fixed A.D. 21. But its style and ornament forbid this conclusion.{47}

Mérimée thinks that the great analogy of style between the various Triumphal Arches of Provence, viz., those at Orange, St Remy, and Carpentras (to be afterwards referred to), renders probable the hypothesis which supposes them to have been erected at the same epoch and for the celebration of the same event, viz., the victories of Marcus Aurelius in Germany. The profusion of the ornament, the form of the arms, and the incorrect and pretentious character of these monuments agree well with the architecture of the second century. Mérimée also draws attention to the maritime trophies at Orange, and points out how picturesquely the rostra of the ships, the masts, oars, &c., are grouped. He believes these probably refer to naval conflicts on the Danube.

Mr Ruskin also points to the execution of the sculpture of this arch as a good example of sketching in sculpture; the shields and other arms and ornaments being surrounded with a deeply cut line, which defines their outline clearly as an artist would do with his pencil in sketching them. He considers such objects as unworthy of any more elaborate treatment.

The work of restoration has been executed with great care and success. The west side has been almost rebuilt, but with plain stone, applied merely for the purpose of preserving the rest. No attempt has been made to imitate the old work, and what remains of the ancient structure is not scraped and polished up, as so often happens in French restorations, whereby the value of the monument as an example of ancient art is entirely destroyed.

Not very far from Orange, as above mentioned, another Triumphal Arch is found at Carpentras. It is much simpler in design than that at Orange, having only one arch supported by fluted pilasters with composite caps. The whole of the upper parts above the arch are destroyed.{48} Some sculptures still survive on the ends, representing captives chained to trophies. The very bold projection of the bas-reliefs is remarkable, and also the fact that in the sculpture distant objects are marked with a sunk line round them. This style of emphasising shadows and outlines, and also the method of doing so by means of holes drilled round objects is common in the sculpture of the lower Empire.

Part of another single arch, apparently also an arch of triumph, has been preserved at Cavaillon, but it is very sadly mutilated, and has been restored at an ancient period, when stones carved with ornaments, mouldings, and enrichments have been all mixed up in the masonry.

At St Remy (which is easily accessible by railway from Tarascon) there are also the ruins of a triumphal arch, together with a well-preserved and most interesting mausoleum (Fig. 8).

These monuments are the sole surviving remains of the Gallo-Roman town of Glanum Livii, a flourishing colony under the Romans, surrounded with walls and adorned with temples, aqueducts, and public buildings, of which some faint traces only now exist. The chief employment of the inhabitants was to supply stones from quarries in the neighbourhood for the buildings in Arles and elsewhere. The town was destroyed by the Goths in 480.

The triumphal arch has only one opening, which is rather low in proportion, and is flanked by fluted pillars of which the caps are gone. On each side of the arch are well sculptured bas-reliefs representing captives in chains accompanied by women. The flanks have niches, but no statues remain.

Mérimée admires the archivolt of the archway, which he calls a garland of fruit and flowers sculptured with the same perfection of imitation, with the same taste and{49}

variety of details, as is observed in the Gothic period. The arch is about 40 feet long by 18½ feet wide and 25 feet to the under side of the vault.

The mausoleum stands a few yards from the arch. The main part is square, the lower portion forming a pedestal set upon a base, which measures about 22 feet each way, and the upper portion being an open story with four Corinthian engaged columns at the angles. The whole is crowned with a circular top composed of ten Corinthian pillars, the entablature of which supports a cupola originally covered with palm leaf scales. The height of the monument is about 60 feet. The podium is ornamented with fine bas-reliefs, which Mérimée describes as representing—(South) a hunt; (East) a Battle of Amazons; (West) the death of Patrocles; (North) a Cavalry engagement. The figures of the upper storys are also richly carved. Under the dome stand two draped statues. The following inscription is engraved on the architrave of the north side:

Sextus, Lucius, Marcus, Julii, Curaverunt fieri parentibus suis—(Sextus, Lucius, Marcus, of the Julii, have caused this monument to be constructed to the memory of their relatives).

Various dates are assigned by different authors to these monuments; but probably Mérimée is right in considering the arch at least of about the same date as that of Orange.

This mausoleum and similar monuments, as will be hereafter noticed, have evidently had a considerable influence on the forms of the early Mediæval church steeples of Provence.

Arles.—We have now arrived at the capital of Roman Gaul—the famous city of Arelate or Arles. It is supposed to have been founded by the Greeks from Massilia as a trading centre, and had become an important town before{51} the time of Cæsar. The situation occupied was a very advantageous one, being at the point of the Delta of the Rhone, where the bifurcation of the river commences. The town is also supposed to have been in communication with an interior navigable Lagoon in the time of the Romans, so that commodities could be conveyed by water with great facility in all directions. Arles thus formed a valuable mercantile centre. The population is believed to have reached 100,000. Here Cæsar had the galleys constructed which he required for the siege of Massilia. After taking that town he sent Tiberius to establish a colony at Arles. With Constantine Arles was a favourite city, and he made it the capital of Gaul. The town was at that time divided by the river into two sections, a part being on each side. These Constantine united by a bridge of boats. An abundant water supply was brought by aqueducts from the mountains, and conducted across the river by means of syphon pipes of lead, several of which have been found with the name of the maker stamped upon them, and are now to be seen in the Museum.

Ausonius calls Arles the “Gallula Roma Arelas,” and praises its hospitable ports, which received the riches of the Roman world, and spread them in turn to the cities of Gaul and Aquitania. So important a city could not escape the successive attacks of the Goths, Franks, and Saracens. By these invaders her splendid edifices were all nearly destroyed, as was entirely the fate of those at Avenio and Massilia. But Arles was not quite so unfortunate as the last named cities, and still possesses some imposing though sadly ruined remnants of her former greatness.

Of the existing remains by far the most important is the Amphitheatre. The walls forming the complete circuit and a large part of the seats of the interior are still{52} preserved. The exterior (Fig. 9), according to the usual design of this class of erections, consists of two arcades superimposed on one another—the arches being separated by attached columns.

In this instance the arches are sixty in number on each story. The attached columns of the lower arcade are square pilasters with Doric capitals, and those of the upper range are round and of the Corinthian order.

The design may possibly have originally included an attic story; but this, if it ever existed, which seems to be doubtful, as not a single stone of it has been found, has entirely disappeared.

Mérimée points out that the mouldings and enrichments of the remainder are all carefully finished, which would not likely have been the case had the building not been carried up to its full height, as the Romans were in the habit of executing all that class of carved work after{53} their buildings were completed—the stones for the ornament being only roughly blocked out at first. We shall meet with a quantity of this preparatory work in the Amphitheatre of Nimes, where it has been left unfinished.

The Amphitheatre of Arles, as was to be expected in the capital, is the largest building of its class in Gaul. It is built after the Roman manner, with enormous blocks of carefully cut stone set without cement, and the staircases, passages, &c., are strongly vaulted.

The plan, as is usual in Roman Amphitheatres, is that of an ellipse, its longitudinal axis measuring 459 feet, and its transverse axis 341 feet. The seats, which were arranged in forty-three rows (Fig. 10), provided accommodation for 26,000 spectators. There are four principal entrances, at the North, South, East, and West, and eight other smaller doorways.

Originally this amphitheatre was probably built by Caligula or Hadrian. In the Middle Ages it was trans{54}formed into a fortress, and became the stronghold of some chief, or the citadel of the inhabitants. Four towers were at that time erected on the top of the building—three of which still remain.

The amphitheatre is said to have been restored by Charles Martel after his victories over the Saracens; and some ancient stones have certainly been used to repair the podium or barrier between the arena and the auditorium (as may still be seen).

Mérimée discusses the question, how were the spectators in this and similar buildings protected from the wild beasts which fought with one another or with gladiators by a podium such as this, not exceeding 8 or 10 feet in height?

Had the podium been high enough to afford safety, it would have prevented a large part of the audience, especially in the back rows, from seeing what passed on their side of the arena; an inconvenience which would certainly never have been endured; and his idea is, that lions or similar animals which could spring must have been confined with chains or in cages, and that only animals which do not leap, such as wild boars, might be freely baited in the open arena.

The “Château des Arenes,” as the amphitheatre was called, was almost entirely invaded and choked up with the houses of the poorer inhabitants till 1825, when it was resolved to clear out the building,—a work which required six years for its accomplishment. The structure is now in course of “Restoration.”

Besides the amphitheatre Arles also possesses some remains of its Roman Theatre. These are, however, extremely scanty, consisting chiefly of the north and south entrance doorways, and two lofty marble pillars with Corinthian caps (Fig. 11). The latter formed part of the ornamentation of the scena, and, when considered{55} along with the great wall of the scena at Orange, may help to give some idea of the generally gorgeous aspect of that feature of the Roman Theatre when perfect. The plan of the orchestra, and a few rows of ruined seats, can still be discerned.

A large number of marble fragments, composed of portions of columns, capitals, entablatures, &c., have been collected in the precincts of the theatre, and impress the spectator with a sense both of the great magnificence of the building when complete, and of the terrible and long continued series of disasters to which it has owed a demolition so complete. It should, however, not be omitted to mention that it was first dismantled by the Bishops, who carried off its marbles to decorate their churches.

The remains of three parallel walls, with a space between them, under the level of the proscenium, have{56} given rise to various theories as to their use. The most likely view seems to be that the apertures were used for lowering the curtain into before the performances began, as was then the custom, instead of raising it, as is done in modern times. The theatre is supposed to have been seated for 16,000 spectators. Several fine sculptures, now in the museum of Arles or the Louvre, have been dug out of the ruins of this structure.

Arles possesses the only ancient Obelisk in Gaul. It stands in the “place,” opposite the entrance to the cathedral, and is set on the backs of four lions, raised upon a pedestal. It was elevated to this eminence in 1676, after having lain for long in the bed of the river. The shaft is of grey granite, 47 feet high, but it is not of an elegant form, and tapers too rapidly towards the summit. It originally formed the spina of a Roman circus, where it was found in 1389.

In the front wall of the Hôtel du Nord (in the Place d’hommes) are inserted the fragments of two Roman granite columns with Corinthian caps, and part of a pediment (Fig. 12). But unfortunately the traveller, while enjoying the hospitality of the patron of the “Nord,” and sleeping with his head perhaps within a few feet of these remains, cannot have the satisfaction of imagining himself a dweller in a real Roman edifice, as it is evident that they are not in their original position, but have been brought from a distance at some remote time and set up here.

There are a few remnants, close to the river, of a building said to be the Palace of Constantine, including a brick tower called “La tour de la Trouille.” This is a palace which has had many and varied occupants—passing from its Roman masters down to the Kings of the Ostrogoths and Visigoths, the Kings of the Franks, and{57} the Kings of Arles, the “Holy Roman Emperors” (when they came here to be crowned Kings of Arles), and the Counts of Provence.

In Roman times there was a space to the east of the town used as a cemetery, and called the Elysii Campi, or Champs Elysées, now the “Alyscamps.” This necropolis was by tradition supposed to have been specially consecrated by our Saviour himself, and consequently became a very favourite place of burial. Princes and dignitaries of Church and State desired to rest here. Bodies committed to the river (along with the suitable burial fees){58} were sure to reach the Alyscamps. It was celebrated by the poets Dante and Ariosto, and became of world-wide fame. Chapels and churches were erected in the vicinity, there being no less than nineteen at one time. But the translation of the body of St Trophime, A.D. 1152, from the Alyscamps to the cathedral of Arles, seemed to take away the prestige of the former, and from that time it gradually decayed.

During its palmy days in the early centuries, this cemetery had become greatly enriched with splendid monuments and sarcophagi, partly heathen and partly Christian, but all designed and executed after the Roman or Grecian manner. At the Renaissance these ancient classic monuments were specially prized and admired, and many of them{59} were removed. Sarcophagi were distributed as specimens of early Christian art to Rome, Lyons, and other towns; the place was gradually deserted and destroyed, and the monuments were finally turned to common and ignominious uses such as cattle troughs and bridges over the ditches in the fields. Now the few remaining tombs have been collected and placed on each side of the road leading to the chapel of St Honorat (Fig. 13), where they produce from their position and their classic forms a striking resemblance to the burial places of the Romans, which lined the wayside at the entrances to their cities, such as the Appian way at Rome, and the approach to Pompeii.

A large number of the finest sarcophagi have fortunately been preserved in the Arles museum. Some of them certainly belong to Pagan times, but most of them are of later date. Many are adorned with bas-reliefs, representing the hunt of the Stag or Wild Boar, Apollo and the Muses, and other classic and allegorical subjects.{60}

A museum has been established in the disused Gothic Church of St Anne, in which some fine examples of classic sculpture are preserved. Besides the Pagan sarcophagi above referred to it contains some Roman or rather Greek sculptures of considerable purity and beauty; the Grecian descent and culture of the country being distinctly observable in these monuments—just as the same Greek feeling prevails in the paintings and sculpture of Pompeii. The fragment of a statue of a female dancer (Fig. 14) is particularly graceful in pose and in the execution of the drapery. The sarcophagus (Fig. 15), with an inscription and two well carved festoons, is called the Tomb of Cornelia. Fig. 16 shews a finely carved oak wreath and vase on the monument to the “good Goddess,” and a beautifully sculptured though mutilated bust of the Empress Livia. Fig. 17 represents a fragment of very spirited carving of foliage said to be from the frieze of the Arc de Triomph, an amphora and a Corinthian capital.

Christian monuments. That in Fig. 18, representing scenes from the life of our Saviour, exhibits figures carved in the Roman manner, and wearing the Roman costume, but degraded in style,—evidently the work of the Low Empire. Christ occupies the central compartment, and four wide arches contain figure subjects,—those on the extreme right and left representing the Magdalene and Pilate, while the{63} two central compartments contain saints bearing palm branches.

The arcade on this sarcophagus is supported on pillars with composite caps and bases, and shafts ornamented with flutings and twists, similar in character to the shafts of the early mediæval cloisters. The archivolt is a veritable architrave with leaf enrichment carried round the arch, and filled in with a scallop shell. It thus forms a distinct and instructive example of the manner in which the late Romans dispensed with the straight architrave, and adopted the arch springing directly from the caps of the columns, as will be more fully explained further on. It will then be shewn how this monument illustrates the transition from the leading features of the Greek trabeated style to those of fully developed Roman Architecture, and also the mode in which Roman art was continued into Christian times.{64}

Most of the early Christian sarcophagi are carved with Biblical subjects symbolical of the new birth, the great Sacrifice, the Resurrection, the Last Judgment, &c., such as the creation of Adam and Eve, Moses striking the rock or raising the serpent, Jonah and the whale, Daniel and the lions, the parables and miracles of our Lord, &c. These form as interesting a series of early Christian sculptures, combined with late Roman features, as is anywhere to be found.

On the east side of the town are the remains of some parts of the Roman walls, built in their usual massive manner. These consist of portions of the gate of the town, by which the Aurelian way entered, flanked by ruined round towers.

Nimes (Nemausus). Situated at no great distance from Arles, and at the base of the hills which bound the plain of the Rhone, Nimes formed the capital of the Volces Arecomiques (or inhabitants of the flat country). In B.C. 121 it submitted voluntarily to Rome, and a few years B.C. Augustus planted a colony there. Being enriched with baths, &c., by Agrippa, Nimes soon became an{65} important town surrounded with walls and towers, and provided with all the usual public buildings. It had reached the height of prosperity when it was ravaged by the Vandals in 407. In 472 it fell under the power of the Visigoths, who established themselves in the town, and made the amphitheatre their fortress. After suffering the usual course of sieges and destruction by the Saracens and Franks, Nimes early declared itself a Republic. In 1185 it came under the suzerainty of the Count of Toulouse, in which condition it continued to flourish till it finally passed to France under Louis VIII., along with the other domains of the Count of Toulouse after the Albigensian wars.

Although Nimes was a comparatively obscure town in the days of the Empire, the remains of its Roman monuments are the finest in Southern Gaul. The Amphitheatre (Fig. 19) is not quite so large as that at Arles, nor is the interior (Fig. 20) so well preserved, but the exterior is more{66} complete. It measures 437 feet by 332 feet, with thirty-two rows of seats which contained about 20,000 spectators. The amphitheatre is now well seen, owing to the removal of the paltry buildings which had invaded it both within and without. Like all such Roman works it is constructed with the most massive materials, built without cement, and all bound together with solid stone lintels and arches. Fig. 21, a view in the corridor on the first floor, gives some idea of the colossal strength of the masonry. But these great stone lintels, massive as they are, indicate a vicious form of construction, many of them being cracked and shattered by the weight of the arches resting upon them. The exterior is of the usual design of such edifices having two arcades superimposed one on the other, with upright pilasters, or engaged columns, between the arcades supporting horizontal entablatures. Each arcade has sixty arches. The pilasters of the ground tier are square, and have no base, while the engaged columns of the upper tier are round and of the Doric order; above the latter is the attic, partly demolished, but still containing 120 bold consoles with holes to receive the masts which supported the velarium or awning.

There are four principal entrances at the four cardinal points; that of the North ornamented with a cornice resting on two bulls’ fore quarters. Similar ornamental bulls were introduced in the Temple which stood where the Cathedral is now built, and on the fine gate of Augustus of this city. Some therefore think it a kind of coat of arms given by the Emperors to the town. Others imagine that these features were adopted in order to flatter the Emperor Augustus, some bulls’ heads having been sculptured on the house in which he was born. A few sculptures are still visible on the amphitheatre, including two gladiators, and the Roman wolf.

A very large part of the ornament is left in block, only{67} the western division being finished, the carving of the remainder never having been completed. The podium surrounding the arena is low, as at Arles, thus confirming Mérimée’s views as to the provisions which required to be adopted for the safety of the audience.

The interior has been greatly restored, so as to make it available for a large modern audience, and the amphitheatre is now used, amongst other exhibitions, for the annual branding of the young bulls of the Camargue, which, from the lively description of it given by Alexandre Dumas, seems to be a stirring spectacle, not unworthy of this classic arena.

In ancient times the lowest or first series of seats was set apart for the senators; the second series for the knights; the third for plebeians; and the top rows for the slaves. The last being the most quarrelsome it was considered desirable to endeavour to prevent squabbling by marking off each person’s seat. This was effected by means of lines cut in the stone, some of which are still visible in situ.

Some years ago there existed in the first precincts divisions similar to those of boxes in modern theatres.

The celebrated Maison Carrée at Nimes (Fig. 22) is probably the purest piece of Roman work to be found north of the Alps, and cannot fail strongly to impress the beholder, especially if he here sees for the first time a genuine Roman temple. The design doubtless owes much of its beauty and purity to the Grecian spirit of the locality. The building is small, being only about 80 feet by 40 feet. The portico, with its ten Corinthian columns, and enriched pediment, is very fine; but the effect of the flank view, in which the columns attached to the cella are visible, is not so satisfactory. The temple is surrounded by thirty columns in all, including those of the portico, which stand free, and the engaged columns of the flanks and rear. This is what is called the pseudo-peripteral plan—the true peripteral temple having the columns detached so as to form an ambulatory all round the cella. The former is the arrangement usual in Roman temples, which, according to Fergusson, never follow the genuine peripteral type. It is,{69}

however, worthy of note, that the Plan of this building with its deep porch is rather Italo-Etruscan than Greek, and thus adheres to the traditional type observed by the Romans.

The cornice is perhaps rather over-enriched and is indicative of a late date, when classic art was in decadence; but the frieze is beautifully designed, and the style as a whole is remarkably pure and elegant.

Various ingenious attempts have been made to decipher the letters of the bronze inscription (which were originally fixed on the frieze of the portico), by means of the holes formed by the bolts which attached them to the stone work. The reading which seems most probable from its agreeing with the style of the building, indicates that it was dedicated to two nobles distinguished with the title of “princes of youth.” It is as follows:—

M. CAESARI AUGUSTI F. COS. L. CAESARI
AUGUSTI F. COS. DESIGNATO PRINCIPIBUS JUVENTUTIS.

This inscription necessarily places the Temple in the age of the Antonines, since the only princes known to whom the above names and title of Principes Juventutis will apply, after the sons of Agrippa, were Marcus Aurelius, and Lucius Verus, adopted sons of Antoninus Pius.

From excavations around the edifice it has been ascertained that the Temple formed a centre from which colonnades extended on either hand. It thus probably stood at the end of a Forum, the colonnades around which enclosed shops and places of business or pleasure. This edifice has passed through many vicissitudes; and it is marvellous how it has survived all the various uses or abuses to which it has been subject. It was naturally in the course of events first changed from a Pagan Temple into a Christian Church; in the eleventh century it formed the council chamber of the municipal body; and at a later time{71} it was degraded into a stable, when the flutings of the columns were grated off to allow carts to pass between them. It then became attached to an Augustinian Convent, and was used as a mausoleum and place of burial. More recently it was occupied as the Hall of meeting of the revolutionary tribunal, and still later as a corn market. Now it has been put in good order, and contains the local museum of antiquities. This Museum comprises some good sculpture, especially a fine statue of Venus (Fig. 23), and numerous antiquarian fragments,—many for want of room being ranged round an enclosure in the open air. Portions of Roman mosaics and foundations of an earlier Roman building have been discovered under the soil of the Maison Carrée, thus shewing that it has been erected at a later period than the first occupation of the site by the Romans.

According to Mérimée the style accords with the time of the Antonines, when the decadence had begun, and when richness and multiplicity of details replaced the simple majesty of the first century. He also points out various{72} irregularities in the structure which would never have been tolerated in the earlier period,—such as, that the columns are not equally spaced, that there is an unequal number of modillions on the opposite sides, that the caps are too low, and the shafts of the columns too long (being 10¼ diameters in height). But notwithstanding these defects the Maison Carrée is a building of which Nimes and France may well be proud.

The Nymphæum or Temple of the Nymphs at Nimes (Fig. 24), with its accompanying fountain, is another charming and quite unique structure. The fountain bursts forth in great abundance at the base of a hill called Mont Cavalier. It is enclosed in a space which was formerly a Roman Bath, and is then led away through wide open {73}conduits or canals, all lined with stone and faced with pilasters. The whole is situated in a pretty public garden to which the fountain gives a special character. In this garden too, are found the ruins of the above temple, formerly called of Diana, which, however, is now supposed to have been a Nymphæum, or Temple dedicated to the Nymphs, and forming part of the Baths. The interior contains twelve niches of good design, and the roof was constructed with large stone arches or transverse ribs, between which the space was filled in with a plain waggon vault or flags of stone. This kind of vaulting was also adopted, as will be further explained afterwards, in the construction of the early Christian churches of Syria, and had undoubtedly great influence on the design of the first vaulted churches of Provence. The Nymphæum now contains a museum of busts and statues. This temple is shewn, by an inscription, to have been built along with the Baths in the time of Augustus. The variety and elegance of its details are further evidence of the Grecian taste of the people of the district. The aqueduct from the Pont du Gard terminated in a reservoir near this point.

The Tour Magne (Fig. 25), on the top of the hill above the Fountain of the Nymphs, is a Roman building, the object of which has given rise to much discussion, without any definite conclusion being arrived at. It seems, however, most likely to have been a mausoleum. The plan is octagonal, and the walls are built with rough ashlar. The structure is hollow, and from 90 to 100 feet high. It was attached to the walls of Augustus, and in later times was converted into a fortress by the Count of Toulouse. The general resemblance of the design of this monument to that of Augustus at La Turbie, which we shall meet with further on, is very striking.

Two of the Roman gates of Nimes remain. The{74} Porte d’Auguste, founded B.C. 16, has a double arch for vehicles, and two side openings for foot passengers flanked by two towers. Like the Roman gates of Autun these two towers contained stairs leading to the walls, and formed posts of observation. The other gate, the Porte de France, lies to the west of the amphitheatre, and has one wide archway.

Pont du Gard (Fig. 26). This magnificent specimen of Roman engineering is situated at a distance of about 13 miles N.E. from Nimes, on the way to Avignon, and can now be reached by rail. It formed part of an aqueduct (partly in tunnel and partly in open canal) of about 25 miles in length, which brought an ample supply of water to Nimes. This work is said to have been built by M. Agrippa, son-in-law of Augustus, 19 years B.C. It has thus for 1900 years defied all the attacks of man, both barbarian and civilised, as well as the elements, to which so many other Roman monuments have succumbed, and still stands almost as perfect as at first. The arcades abut at either end on the slope of the hills at the base of which flows the river Gardon. The aqueduct measures 160 feet in height, and 882 feet in length on the top. It is composed of three stages, all built with enormous blocks of stone placed together without cement, and presents probably the most stupendous example of the solidity of Roman workmanship in Gaul. But it is roughly and irregularly constructed, as if utility alone had been considered, and no regard paid to beauty; the arches are unequal in span, and the structure itself is bent in its length. The arches are constructed, those of the two upper arcades with three, and those of the lower arcade with four distinct courses in the breadth of the structure. These courses are composed of stones of immense size, placed side by side, but not otherwise joined together. Above the upper tier lies the conduit for the water, 5 feet high, and 2 feet wide, covered over with immense flags, which even the Goths seem to have despaired of being able to destroy. The conduit is lined with strong Roman cement, which still remains sound and good. The projecting blocks observed on the flanks and under the arches were intended to receive scaffolding for the execution of repairs, should{77} these ever be required in a work so simple and substantial. “What a grand faith,” exclaims Mérimée, “must the constructors of this aqueduct have had in the eternal duration of the Roman Empire, when they made provision for repairing this gigantic and enduring work!” The bridge placed alongside the lower arches is of modern construction, having been erected in 1743.

Leaving Arles for Marseilles we traverse a country as bare and uninteresting as an African desert. To the right, on the western side of the Rhone, lies the great plain of the Camargue, the delta of the river, composed of mingled salt mud and stagnant pools, the result of the contest between the waters of the Rhone and the sea; the former constantly pouring down immense volumes of débris, and the latter, obeying the impulse of the wind, as constantly driving it back upon the land. But the railway, keeping on the eastern side of the river, runs through a different but not less remarkable plain called the “Crau.” This consists of an immense accumulation of shingle, composed of water-worn and rounded stones of all sizes—the fabled scene of the fight of Hercules with the Ligurians, when Jupiter rained down these stones to provide the hero with ammunition. This extensive plain was a barren wilderness until a system of irrigation was introduced by the construction of the Canal de Craponne, whereby the water of the Durance is brought down for its fertilisation. Having at last crossed the Crau we arrive at St Chamas, where the eye is relieved by the bright and peaceful prospect over the Etang de Berre, an extensive branch of the Mediterranean almost entirely surrounded with land. St Chamas is a quaint old town, with some of its houses hollowed out of the rock and traces of ancient ramparts. About half-a-mile distant may be seen an interesting Roman Bridge{78} called the Pont Flavia. It is constructed with the usual solid masonry, and spans the river Touloubre with one arch, which is abutted by the rocky banks. The entrance at either end to the roadway over the bridge is through an arch, decorated with Corinthian columns and entablature. These archways are well preserved and are illustrated in Fergusson’s “Handbook of Architecture.” The columns are surmounted with lions, and the frieze bears an inscription shewing that the structure was erected by one of the Flavii.

Some distance north from this, on the slope of the chain of the Vernégues, which divides the valley of the Durance from that of the Rhone, are to be found the relics of a small Corinthian temple, originally preceded with a peristyle of four columns in front, and pilasters of return on each side, of which, however, only one single pillar now survives. This was doubtless the site of the ancient Ernaginum.

In early Christian times this temple seems to have been converted into a church, and a circular-headed window opened in the wall of the cella. A chapel dedicated to St Césaire was in the tenth century erected against the north wall, with a door into the main church, now built up. The temple is well illustrated in Texier and Pullan’s “Byzantine Architecture,” and is said to be “full of the sentiment of pure Greek art.” The carving of the capital, as shewn in Texier’s drawing, is in the best style. “The proportions of the entire column, which are excellent,” says Texier “and the foliage of the capital, which seems to have been inspired by that of the monument to Lysicrates, prove that this little building, concealed amongst the mountains of Provence, was the work of a Greek artist of the colony of Massilia.”

It has already been pointed out how capriciously the{79} Roman remains have been preserved in Southern Gaul. While a small provincial town like Nimes possesses so many splendid examples, the great and ancient cities of Marseilles and Narbonne have scarcely a single relic of their Greek or Roman civilisation left. At Marseilles some fragments of walls with an archway and some subterranean vaults under the Church of St Sauveur are the only remains of the splendid edifices which no doubt once adorned this ancient and important city.

All along the coast between the Rhone and the Pyrenees, many towns existed and flourished under the Empire, but there is now scarcely a fragment of Roman work to be found in the whole province.

Leaving therefore for the present this south-western district, we shall now follow the great Aurelian way which conducted from Spain and Gaul eastward into Italy. This road passes through the celebrated Riviera, the favourite winter resort of the delicate from every country in Europe, and even from America. It consists of a narrow strip of land between the lower spurs of the Alps and the sea; but this level strip is frequently interrupted by branches or roots sent down from the mountains which run out as Capes into the Mediterranean, enclosing in their arms beautifully sheltered sunny bays, each having a town or village of its own. The Roman road clung to the mountains, the engineers finding it easier to span with bridges the higher rugged ravines of the torrents than the broad channels of the rivers near their mouths, where the shingly and shifting foundation was found insecure. Of the towns and stations which existed along this route in Roman times, some vestiges may still be traced.

Toulon, now the great naval arsenal of France in the Mediterranean (formerly Telo Martius), contains no Roman{80} buildings; but some miles to the eastward, on the road by the coast leading to Hyères, the ruins of an ancient Roman town called Pomponiana have been discovered and partly excavated—exposing to view portions of the walls of houses, vaults, walls of enceinte, frescoes, fragments of sculpture, aqueducts, baths, &c. The wall of a quay presents the peculiarity of being built above a basement formed of large cubes of stone, superimposed, but not united with cement, which seems to be of Cyclopean work.

Moving eastward we pass Le Luc (Forum Voconii) in the middle of the fertile “garden of Provence,” where one Roman sculpture of a boar hunt has been preserved; and following the course of the river Argens, with the rocky mountains of Les Maures on the right we arrive at Fréjus, an important sea-port in Roman times, and then known as Julii Forum.

This town is supposed to have been first occupied by the Phœnicians, and afterwards by the Greek colonists. It was enlarged and improved by Julius Cæsar and Augustus. It then possessed a valuable harbour at the mouth of the river Argens, to which Augustus sent the fleet of galleys which he took from Anthony at the battle of Actium; but the sediment of the river has now silted up the harbour, and formed a flat plain of about a mile in breadth between the ancient port and the sea. The protecting walls of the harbour, with a solid obelisk at the end, which no doubt marked the entrance, still remain, but are now high and dry on the plain. Adjoining these are the walls of a strong fort or castellum for the protection of the port, built with Roman masonry of small sized cubic stones. The “Porte dorée,” is an archway close to the railway, built with similar masonry, divided with courses of brick work, now greatly restored and renewed. It is{81}

supposed to have been the gate between the port and the town. Some ruins of the baths have been discovered adjoining this. Considerable remains of the ancient Roman city walls, enclosing five times the extent of the present town, still remain. Close to the railway station relics of the “gate of Gaul,” and other Roman works are observable. Following these from the railway station towards the left, the ruins of the Roman Amphitheatre (Fig. 27), through which the public road passes by a picturesque archway, are soon reached. The interior is fairly preserved, together with the arches which sustained the seats, staircases, &c., but the exterior walls and arcades (if the building ever had an ornamental exterior, which is doubtful) are now completely awanting. The Amphitheatre is 375 ft. long by 273 ft. wide. The east side rests on the slope of a hill, so that little building was required in that position, but the west side of the structure is raised from the level plain.

Continuing round the old walls of the town to the eastward, we find in a garden the ruins of a Roman Theatre. The dimensions of this building, which was of small size compared to those we have met with at Orange and Arles, are quite traceable, but the scena is gone all but the foundations, and only some walls and ruined arches of the auditorium remain above ground.

A little further round the walls, traces are observed of the great aqueduct which brought the water of the river Siagnolles to Fréjus from a distance of above 20 miles. On turning the north-east angle of the walls, the ruined piers of the aqueduct are seen stretching across the plain. At the above point the conduit is in a canal owing to the height of the ground. On reaching the main road leading from Fréjus to the eastwards, the aqueduct takes a sudden bend to the east, and follows the road for a considerable{83} distance. At this bend was an entrance gate of the town, called the gate of Rome, a portion of which still exists. From here a branch canal took the water to the port. In its long course the aqueduct is sometimes in cutting, and sometimes carried on lofty piers and arches 87 feet wide. Those near the town (Fig. 28) are amongst the finest specimens, but some portions in the more remote valleys also still retain their arches, and at one place the aqueduct is carried in two parallel canals on separate arches.

Between Fréjus and Cannes, the Roman Via Aurelia passes inland through the chain of the Esterelle mountains, whence the Romans obtained much of the granite and porphyry found in their monuments. At Cannes and neighbourhood there are a few Roman relics. A bridge over one of the small streams which descend from the{84} hills through the town is said (but this is doubtful) to be of Roman origin. A delightful walk of an hour from Cannes over the hills leads by Vallauris to Clausonne, where the well preserved remains of the Roman aqueduct (Fig. 29) which conveyed the water supply to Antibes are still to be seen.

At Antibes, the ancient Roman Antipolis, there are no Roman remains; but according to M. Lenthéric, a stone has been found here with a Greek inscription, giving proof of the ancient worship of the Hellenes in this region in the fifth century B.C.

At Vence, the ancient Ventium, a town some seven miles inland, a number of Roman inscriptions are built into the wall of the Cathedral, and two granite columns are preserved, which are supposed to have been anciently{85}

Crossing the wide and dangerous channel of the Var (formerly the boundary between France and Savoy) we arrive at Nice.

Nice (or Nizza), although now the most important town on the Riviera, possesses no ancient buildings. In Roman times Cemenelum (now Cimièz), the chief city of the Maritime Alps, stood on a lofty site about three miles up the river Paglione from the modern town. This ancient city has almost entirely disappeared, its only relics being the ruins of a small amphitheatre (Figs. 30 and 31), through the centre of which the public road now passes, and some excavated hypocausts in the garden of a villa adjoining. The amphitheatre measures 214 feet long by 178 feet wide, and it has been calculated that it was capable of containing about 8000 spectators. The form of the arena and the slope of the first series of seats can{87} be distinctly seen, but otherwise the building is a complete ruin. A few of the perforated corbels for the support of the poles which carried the velarium may, however, be still observed on the exterior. But the want of architectural features is to some extent compensated by the grandeur of the views obtained from the walls, comprising the whole of the coast from Bordighera on the east, to the Cap d’Antibes on the west. Proceeding in that direction, a drive along the magnificent Cornice-road soon brings us to the ancient boundary between Gaul and Italy at

La Turbie (Turbia or Trophæa), a small town stand{88}ing on an inland pass formed by a notch in the mountains, which here rise in great precipices directly from the sea. On this neck a trophy was built in commemoration of the victories of Augustus over the Alpine tribes. The monument (Fig. 32) has been of great size, and is built with large blocks of stone. It probably stood on a square base, on which was erected the great circular mass above. It was adorned with statues, and a colossal figure of the emperor crowned the top. The design would thus resemble a great many of the splendid mausoleums erected about that time in Italy. As above noticed this edifice bears a strong likeness to the Tour Magne at Nimes. The massive Roman work is still traceable in the lower parts filled in with rubble between. Fragments of an inscription have been found in the ruins commemorating the triumphs of the divine Emperor and High Priest Augustus. In mediæval times this monument was, as usual, converted into a fortress, as the work of the upper part still shews. It is executed in inferior masonry, and the cornice is Italian in character. The fortress was blown up by Marshal de Villars in the seventeenth century. The gateways of the town (see Part VI.) and other structures have been built with massive stones from the ruins of the trophy, which, as so often happens, has been used as a convenient quarry.

A splendid view of the coast is obtained from the summit, including Monaco, Monte Carlo, Mentone, and point after point to the eastward leading into Italy. But though we now stand on the borders of Italy, we should still have far to travel through the land ere we encountered such a fine series of Roman structures as those we have just been contemplating. Not till we reach Verona, or Rome itself, are monuments to be found comparable with the amphitheatres of Arles and Nimes, or the theatre of{89} Orange; and there is probably no temple even in Rome so complete and striking in its unity and spirit as the Maison Carrée at Nimes. But our way lies not across this border. We must now turn back and follow in the later edifices the course of Roman Art after the Fall of the Empire, and the growth and development of the new styles which sprung from it.

THE transition from the architecture of Rome to that of mediæval times forms one of the most interesting and instructive epochs in our art. The whole history of Roman art is that of a transition from the external trabeated style, with its horizontal entablature, which was common to the early races of Greece and Italy, to the complete development of the internal arched architecture, which was the final outcome of Roman constructional forms.

The leading features of that Italo-Greek architecture contain a reminiscence or survival of the primitive elements of wooden construction, from which they were doubtless traditionally derived, although in the course of time their origin had been lost sight of. Thus the upright pillars with their flutings are idealised descendants of the Egyptian column, which again represents a bundle of reeds tied together. The horizontal entablature is derived from the beams laid across the heads of the pillars, in accordance with the earliest and most natural mode of wooden construction. The pediment is the evident continuation (both in place and time) of the couples and ties of a wooden roof of the simplest and most primitive design; while the side cornice represents the projection of the eaves, and the triglyphs and modillions are the imitative survivals of the ends of the cross beams or ties and the sloping rafters of the wooden roof. For centuries this trabeated principle prevailed in Rome;{91} but together with it there existed a disturbing element, which at first appeared to be small and insignificant, but which nevertheless contained the elements of the greatest revolutions in architecture which the world has yet seen. That little feature was the arch, the distinguishing principle of true stone construction—the seed containing the germ from which, through Roman cultivation, have sprung all the great families of mediæval architecture, whether Byzantine, Gothic, or Saracenic.

The earlier architecture of the Romans was doubtless chiefly derived from that of the Etruscans, who, like the Greeks, followed the trabeated principle. This origin is distinctly traceable in the plans of the Roman temples, which are never truly peripteral, or surrounded with a detached colonnade, like those of the Greeks, but have a deep portico at one end only, in front of the cella. Of this arrangement we have seen a beautiful example in the Maison Carrée at Nimes. But the Central Italians must have early received some impressions from the Hellenic art of Magna Grecia, and the way would thus be opened for the introduction at a later period of the finer developments of Greek architecture which were so universally followed during the Empire. Meanwhile the arch, the antagonistic element to the trabeated principle, was gradually progressing; and from its primitive obscure use in substructures, conduits, and similar engineering situations, it had forced itself into notice above ground, and had gained recognition in the elevations as a proper architectural element. Hence arose the combination, so conspicuous in the architecture of the Romans, of trabeated features, such as pilasters and entablatures, with the arched method of construction which they had adopted from an early period, and of which they ultimately shewed themselves such masters. The amphitheatres and the triumphal{92} arches of the empire well illustrate this mixture of arched construction, as shewn in the round-headed wall openings, combined with trabeated decoration, in the form of horizontal entablatures supported on engaged columns or pilasters. This mixed style long prevailed, and examples of it are to be found in every part of the Roman world. But in later times, when purity of taste had begun to decay, the Romans gradually gave fuller scope to their noble constructive powers, and allowed them to find a worthier expression in their designs. This took place chiefly in their engineering works, such as the Pont du Gard, and in their interior architecture, as, for instance, in the great halls of the Baths of Diocletian and Caracalla, the Basilica of Constantine (or Maxentius) and other similar works, in some of which immense intersecting vaults were successfully executed. The simple barrel or tunnel vault is of very ancient origin, and was adopted by the Romans from the earliest times. They also freely employed round intersecting vaults for covering spaces of all sizes up to the great examples above referred to. But the most astonishing feat of the Romans in connection with vault construction is their adoption and application of the dome. In the Pantheon at Rome we have an example of that species of vault introduced at once in its perfect form in the largest example in the world. The portico of this temple belongs to the age of Augustus, and it is therefore thought by many that the rotunda and dome are of the same date. It is very remarkable that no smaller Roman domes of earlier date are to be found, and that this style should, as it were, be born in perfect manhood without having passed through the stages of infancy and growth. These no doubt existed, although we have as yet been unable to trace them. Possibly, as{93} Professor Baldwin Brown suggests, the dome is of eastern origin, and its enlarged construction may have been worked out in some of the Hellenistic cities, such as Alexandria, where the earlier examples have now perished.

Along with the introduction of the above new and splendid development of vaulting in their interiors, the Romans still adhered in the decoration of their exteriors to the Italo-Grecian portico, with its entablature and pediment. It was not till the time of the Lower Empire that these elements came to be modified and slowly abandoned. The stages by which the trabeated forms were by degrees stripped off can, however, be distinctly traced. The arches and vaults employed in the baths, tombs, &c., no doubt conduced to that result. In these the arch became the important feature internally, and naturally in course of time it assumed a more prominent position externally also. Archivolts, or curved architraves running round the arches, such as were in common use in buildings like the Colosseum, had gradually intruded themselves amongst the Greek pilasters and entablatures of the exterior elevations; while in later edifices, such as the palace of Diocletian at Spalatro, the straight architrave was omitted, and only the arched one retained. The early Christian sarcophagi shew the same important step. In these a common design consists of an arcade containing the figure of an apostle in each arch, and these arches or archivolts spring directly from the caps of the columns, without any straight architrave being employed. Of this a good example has been given above, page 63.

In all transitional styles it is difficult, and indeed scarcely possible, to draw the line where one style terminates and another begins. This is especially difficult in connection with the passage from Roman to mediæval{94} architecture. The latter was in fact for centuries not a different style but simply a continuation of that of the Empire.

After the adoption of Christianity the purposes to which the Christian buildings were applied was certainly very different from that of their prototypes, but the architecture was the same. The circular domed edifices raised by the Romans as mausoleums were imitated by the Christians in their circular baptisteries; while the style of construction employed in the great basilica or pillared hall lighted by a clerestory, was exactly copied in the nave or large vessel of the Christian Church. The continuity of style is complete; there is no break. The same Corinthian or Ionic pillars, the same entablatures, the same roofs and vault are used in both. So close is the resemblance between the Christian circular baptisteries (several of which we shall meet with in Provence) and Roman circular monuments, that the former are generally regarded as Roman temples converted to Christian uses. The early churches are usually called basilicas, and have hitherto been supposed to be derived from the Roman basilica. But Professor Baldwin Brown, in his recent interesting and learned work “From Schola to Cathedral,” endeavours to prove that this is not the case. The basilica had no doubt the form of a pillared hall with central and side aisles, the former lit by a clerestory, but it had no apse, or if there was one it did not occupy the prominent position of that feature in the early churches. The origin of the apse, which was an essential feature in all churches, containing as it did the seat of the Bishops in the centre and those of the presbyters on either side, is attributed by Professor Baldwin Brown to the memorial cellae erected by Pagans and Christians alike in the cemeteries. These often assumed a domed or apsidal{95} form, and were much resorted to on saints’ natal days, for commemorative festivals and religious ceremonies, held in the cemeteries above the spot where the martyr’s bones reposed in the catacomb below. At a later time, when these relics had been transferred to crypts below the altars of the churches, the apse was a feature naturally introduced to complete the resemblance to the original tomb. As regards the nave, the scholae or halls of meeting of private societies are regarded by Professor Baldwin Brown as the principal model of the early church. Under the emperors the Christians were allowed to form burial guilds, and these, like other guilds, had their scholae. The schola often had an apse containing the seat of the president; and the above author is of opinion that the large churches built after the conversion of Constantine are rather enlarged scholae than copies of basilicas.

However this may be, the type of the early Christian church or basilica presented to view an elongated hall with two or four rows of pillars, dividing it into three or five aisles, with a lofty triumphal arch at the end of the central nave, leading into a wide open space raised some steps higher than the nave, and in which stood the altar. Beyond this was the invariable apse with its semi-domed ceiling adorned with mosaics, and containing, elevated by a few steps above the floor, the throne of the Bishop, and the seats of the Presbyters. The whole building was covered with an open wooden roof.

Some of these early churches have been preserved or restored in Rome—such as San Paolo fuori le Mura, Sta Maria Maggiore and San Clemente.

There is every reason to believe that the above was the usual form of early churches in the West. At Ravenna, which was the principal city in Italy during the Lower{96} Empire, being the seat of the Exarch, the representative of the Emperor in the West, there are fine examples of the various kinds of early Christian religious edifices, dating from the fifth to the seventh century. The great Church or Basilica, used for the assembly of the whole congregation, is represented in St Apollinare Nuovo. It has the usual row of columns on either side of the nave, separating it from the side aisles, and supporting a flat upper wall splendidly decorated with mosaics, the whole being ornamented with Roman details. The upper portion of the wall is pierced with clerestory windows, and at the east end is the great apse.

The Baptistery or Ceremonial Church is as usual octagonal and is domed. Here also the walls are covered with fine mosaics.

Another extremely interesting building at Ravenna is the church of San Vitale. This edifice (whether designed as a monument or as a church is uncertain) is octagonal and domed, very much after the style of the temple of Minerva Medica and similar Roman structures.

San Vitale has a special interest from its having formed the model adopted by Charlemagne for the church which he erected at Aix-la-Chapelle, to serve also as his own mausoleum. It thus constitutes an example of a Roman design reproduced in Ravenna, under the late Empire, as a Christian structure, and again serving as a model for a mediæval mausoleum as late as the eighth century. This shows distinctly the continuity of Roman design and its direct influence on the art of later times.

The above three edifices at Ravenna present fully developed examples of the three chief buildings required in connection with the church services up to the ninth century, viz., the church, the baptistery, and the mausoleum. As we proceed we shall meet with proofs that the same classes{97} of edifices were in use and were carried out in a similar manner in other parts of the Western Empire. The circular or octagonal baptistery is of frequent occurrence in Southern Gaul. Examples of circular churches are also not awanting, but there is every ground for believing that the basilican form of church, like that of St Apollinare, was the plan most generally adopted in Western Europe.

At Ravenna, an early circular tower or campanile, generally similar to the square ones at Rome and elsewhere, still exists. This is a feature the origin of which has not yet been accurately determined. The prevailing opinion, however, now is that these towers were at first erected as places of observation and defence, being in that respect somewhat similar in their conception to the round towers of Ireland. As in San Vitale, one form of a Roman octagonal-domed building is followed, so at San Lorenzo in Milan another design of a somewhat similar character is carried out, showing that the basilican form, although general, was not universal.

In consequence of the destruction caused by the invasions of the Barbarians, by fire or otherwise, very few edifices now exist in Western Europe of the time between Justinian and Charlemagne. During all that time of disaster in the West, the Eastern Empire still maintained itself in splendour, and gave encouragement to architecture and the fine arts. From an early time the Byzantine architects showed a preference for the dome over the intersecting vault, and it is possible to follow in the still existing edifices, the mode in which the domical form of roof was gradually worked out, until in the great church of Sta. Sophia, erected under Justinian, in the sixth century, the largest and noblest building of the style was successfully completed.

In the details of the style of the Lower Empire, as{98} practised in the East, there is considerable evidence of Greek taste. The sharp thistle-like sculpture of the foliage is designed in a manner not unlike that of the Corinthian capitals of the Choragic Monument of Lysicrates at Athens. The Byzantines also excelled in flat and delicate carving, such as that generally executed in ivory or fine wood, and in ornamental metal work and jewellery. When the West began to revive, this Byzantine art naturally produced some influence on it. A very remarkable example of this occurs in the church of St Mark’s at Venice, erected about A.D. 950, which in every feature—in plan, in distribution of parts, in the use of the dome, and in its mosaic decorations,—is a distinct importation from Constantinople.

But the art of the East was destined to produce, at a later period, a much stronger effect, as we shall afterwards see, in Provence and Aquitaine. Besides the domical structures of Constantinople, another series of Christian buildings which had a great influence on Western architecture exists in the East. A large number of churches have been brought to light in Syria by the work of Count Melchior de Vogüé. These correspond in general features with the early churches of the West. They comprise a central nave and side aisles, separated by rows of piers, with nave arches thrown longitudinally between them. The nave is also crossed transversely with arches cast between the piers, and these are abutted by arches thrown over the side aisles. The latter, in order to resist the thrust of the central arch, require to be placed at a considerable height. The side aisles are thus rendered unnecessarily lofty, and are therefore divided into two storys with a floor which forms a gallery. The nave piers and their transverse arches are placed pretty close together in order to carry the great flag stones of which the roof is frequently composed, and which are supported upon them. Although the{99} roof is in some cases flat, the general system of construction of these Syrian churches is very similar to what is found in the oldest churches of Southern Gaul; and which, as already mentioned, was also used in the Nymphæum at Nimes. There can be little doubt but that the Syrian structures were carefully studied by the numerous monks who visited the East in the eleventh century, while Palestine was in the hands of the Crusaders, and that they were thereby helped forward in the enterprise which was then absorbing the attention of the Western architects, viz., how to roof their churches with stone vaults.

Hitherto the Western basilicas had been roofed with timber. A few examples of these early basilicas have escaped the universal destruction, and serve to indicate what the other churches which existed before the eleventh century were like.

The Basse Œuvre at Beauvais is a well known specimen. It has a row of square piers on each side of the nave, separating it from the side aisles and carrying, on round arches, the upper walls containing the windows of the clerestory—the whole being covered in with a wooden roof. It was probably terminated to the east with a semicircular apse, and at the west with a narthex or porch.

These early churches were no doubt all of very simple construction, the only ornaments being the marble columns and carved work which in some localities were available from Roman buildings. Where these existed the style adopted naturally followed the Roman forms, but in districts where they were absent the style gradually passed into the Romanesque, under the influence of the new elements imported by the Northern invaders. We have seen how Charlemagne attempted to follow a Roman structure in his great church at Aix, and that is a distinct indication of the general tendency. The chief object at{100} this period of transition was to produce an effective internal design, the exterior being invariably very simple. In this also the system by which Roman architecture had been developed continued to be carried out.

When the new political conditions of the different divisions of Europe had become somewhat settled, these principles were worked out separately and independently in each country and province, and produced a great variety of styles, all comprehended under the general title of Romanesque. They were in reality all derived from ancient Roman architecture, but by their very variety they indicate the new spirit which was now beginning to express itself.

As above mentioned the great desideratum in the eleventh century was a simple form of stone roof. The earlier wooden roof had been found so liable to destruction by fire, that great efforts were now made to provide a fire-proof covering.

At San Miniato, near Florence, there still stands a very fine basilica of the beginning of the eleventh century, which shews one method in which this was attempted to be done, and which recalls the mode of construction of the Syrian Churches above referred to.

San Miniato is divided into three long bays in its length by circular stone arches, springing from clustered piers, thrown across the nave, each bay being again subdivided by three longitudinal archivolts resting on simple pillars.

The above great transverse arches do not, as in the Syrian examples, carry the roof, which is in this instance of wood, and is thus not quite fireproof; but even if the timbers were destroyed by fire, the three transverse arches would tend to bind the structure all together, and prevent further ruin.{101}

In the church of Notre Dame du Pré at Le Mans in the north-west of France, there is another example of a similar form of roof, constructed in the middle of the eleventh century.

In Provence the system of vaulting generally adopted was of a more complete character, derived in all probability, as already mentioned, from the Roman system (as used in the Nymphæum at Nimes), and perhaps also aided by the examples of the vaulted churches seen by the Crusaders in Syria. When the revival of the eleventh century took place, the Provençal churches were usually erected on the basilican plan, which doubtless was the traditional one. These churches are small, but they generally embrace a central nave with two side aisles, each terminated to the eastward with an apse. The roof is almost invariably composed of a pointed barrel or tunnel vault, with strengthening transverse ribs springing from the caps of pilasters carried up from the nave piers, as for instance in St Trophime at Arles.

The side aisles are also arched, each with one half of a pointed vault thrown against the upper part of the nave wall, so as to abut the central vault. The roof consists of tiles laid directly on the extrados of the arches, after the Roman manner, so that there is here nothing liable to suffer from fire. There is, however, it will be noticed, one remarkable divergence from the Roman model, in which the vaults and arches are always round. In Provence they are invariably pointed. This form of vault, as mentioned by Mérimée, Fergusson, and others, was adopted, not from choice but as a necessity, or at least a convenience of construction. The pointed form was found to have several advantages over the round. It was easier of construction, a matter of great consequence in those rude times; it exerted less thrust on the side walls,{103} and was therefore more stable; and it fitted better the slope of the tiled roof covering.

It is evident that the roof of the side aisles, in order properly to abut the central vault, had to be carried up to a considerable height. This height being more than was necessary in the aisles, is sometimes divided into two storys, the upper one forming a gallery—an arrangement which was frequently adopted in Lombardy and the Rhineland, and also, as we have seen, in the Syrian churches above referred to. One great objection to the Provençal system of vaulting is that the churches are very dark—a clerestory being obviously impossible consistently with safety. Numerous expedients were adopted to provide more light, such as by introducing windows in the gables, and by heightening the side walls so as to admit of a small clerestory over the roof of the aisles. But the latter was found to be a very unsafe course, and at the best only clerestory windows of very small size could be introduced, so that the long barrel vaults still remained dark and gloomy.

In Aquitaine an entirely different system of vaulting was accidentally introduced, and threatened at one time to spread itself over the whole of Southern Gaul. The story of the importation of this style, and the various modifications arising out of it, is somewhat strange and remarkable. Owing to the pirates who infested the Straits of Gibraltar, the trade from the Levant with the West of France and Britain, was carried on by means of caravans, which conveyed the goods across the country, from the Mediterranean to the Bay of Biscay. The goods landed at Marseilles or Narbonne were thus carried by Limoges to La Rochelle and Nantes, where they were again shipped for the North of France and Britain. The town of Perigueux, situated in the centre of Aquitaine, at that time probably{104} the richest country in Gaul, became the head-quarters of the Venetian merchants, by whom this traffic was chiefly carried on. These Venetians, as they had in the tenth century imported the plan and decorations of St Mark’s at Venice, from the East, so they soon afterwards resolved to carry the same model with them into Aquitaine. At Perigueux they erected a church exactly after the plan of St Mark’s, being in the form of a Greek cross, crowned with one dome over the central crossing, and four domes over the four arms of the cross. The general idea of this church of St Front at Perigueux is undoubtedly borrowed from St Mark’s, but the execution seems to have been entrusted to a native artist; for, although the conception is Eastern, the style of workmanship, is that of the locality. In the original the arches and domes are spherical, while here they are polygonal and pointed, which we have seen was the Provençal system of construction. The pendentives which fill up the angles under the domes are rudely executed in horizontal corbelling, not dressed as portions of a spherical vault, as they would have been by a scientific Eastern architect.

The church of St Front at Perigueux had great influence on the subsequent architecture of Aquitaine and the West of France. The plan of St Mark’s was not followed in other examples, the old traditional basilican plan being preferred and adhered to; but the dome raised upon pendentives, as introduced at St Front, became the common form of vaulting in Aquitaine and the West of France in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. In the churches thus constructed the side aisles are frequently omitted, and the building consists of a single hall, roofed with a series of domes resting on transverse arches, which are abutted with large internal buttresses. We thus find in Aquitaine and the South generally two important{105} derivations from St Front, viz., 1st, the domed system of vaulting, and 2nd, the single or aisleless nave,—the latter being sometimes vaulted with domes and sometimes with groined arches. As late as the thirteenth century the influence of the dome made itself felt in the churches of Aquitaine, Poitou, and Anjou; while the influence of the plan of the single aisleless nave continued to be prominent in the churches of Languedoc long after the dome was abandoned, and even after the Gothic of the North had invaded the Southern provinces.

It thus happens that early churches such as the Cathedrals at Toulouse (Fig. 34) and Fréjus (see Part VI.) present a mixture of these ideas, being sometimes found designed on the plan of the aisleless hall, but at the same time roofed with groined vaulting. The buttresses in all these single nave churches are frequently internal, and form deep recesses, which are utilised as side chapels.

At a distance from Perigueux as a centre, domes are sometimes used, as is the case, for instance, in Auvergne, but in Provence the dome is generally limited to the space over the crossing.

In the latter locality the Byzantine influence exhibits itself in a different direction, being chiefly confined to details and subordinate features. But here another factor comes into play. The presence of the Roman monuments still existing in Provence has evidently tended to impress a Roman character on the architecture of the district. So strikingly indeed does some of the Provençal architecture resemble Roman work, both in general design and detail, that it has frequently been maintained that it is actually the work of the Lower Empire.

The style of Provence in the twelfth century differs on this account considerably from that of the other Romanesque styles. The revival which took place all{106} over Europe in the eleventh and twelfth centuries occurred in Provence also, but the result there was somewhat peculiar, the effect of the Roman remains being to produce in many of the features of Provençal architecture a closer resemblance to the Romanesque style of Rome and Italy than to that of the Rhineland and the North.

The towers and campaniles of Provence also either correspond in design with those of Italy or are imitated from Roman monuments in the country.

The circular baptisteries, of which a good many{107} examples survive, are like those in Rome, constructed with columns and caps from ancient buildings, or are wrought in imitation of them.

Sculpture also abounds in Provence, being inspired by the abundant remains of ancient work in this favoured province of the Empire. Along with the imitations of Roman work, there is also, as already remarked, a considerable infusion of Byzantine influence. This, according to Viollet-le-Duc, may be observed in the polygonal form of the apses; in the polygonal cupolas supported on a series of corbelled pendentives; in the flat arcades employed to decorate the walls; in the mouldings with small projection and numerous members; in the flat and delicate ornament; and in the sharp and toothed carving of the foliage. Other writers, however, are of opinion that too much weight has been attributed to the influence of Byzantine art, and that almost all the above elements may be accounted for by the Roman traditions of the locality. It is doubtful in how far the Roman buildings which survived in Provence and the imported classic taste of Byzantium were beneficial to the arts in that country. They no doubt gave an impetus and motive which would otherwise have been awanting, and thus assisted the Provençals in making the early start they did in the revival of their architecture. But on the other hand they acted prejudicially to that revival, in impressing on it the stamp of the classic trabeated style, which in their absence it would have escaped, and might probably have been developed in the freer and more natural manner which occurred at a later date in the North.

The early use of the pointed arch in the vaulting of the Provençal churches is another striking feature of the architecture of the district. Much has been written about{108} the origin of the pointed arch and the date of its introduction into Western Europe. In the North of France its first use occurred in the twelfth century, and it was at one time maintained that the Provençal churches, from their having pointed vaults, must necessarily be later than that date. There is now, however, no question as to the greater antiquity of many of the Southern buildings, thus proving that the use of the pointed arch was adopted in the South considerably earlier than in the North.

We have already seen that that form of arch was first used in Provence as a constructional expedient, and not from any preference for the pointed form. The original idea may possibly have been derived from the Moors in Spain, amongst whom the pointed arch was common from early times, and was employed as a decorative feature. In Provence its use was limited to the vaulting, the round arch being preferred for all the ornamental parts of the architecture, and it continued to be so employed till the thirteenth century. It is a striking circumstance, observes Mérimée, that at the moment when the round arch was entirely abandoned in the North the pointed arch experienced the same disgrace in the South. In the North the pointed arch became the decorative form, when in the South the round arch was preferred. The position of the pointed arch is thus completely reversed in the North and in the South. The greater part of the vaulted constructions of the thirteenth century in the South are exclusively round, the advancement in skill, both in execution and in the use of materials, having rendered that form more generally available. Numerous examples of this employment of the round arch will be found in the following pages.

The Roman and Byzantine influences were naturally strongest where the ancient remains and Eastern ornaments were most frequently met with. As we retire{109} 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.{110}

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{111} 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{112} 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{113} 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 intro{114}duced. 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{115} 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{116} 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{117} 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,{118} 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{119} 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{120} 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.{121}

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,{122} 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{123} 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{124} 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.{125}

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{126}

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{127} 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,{128} 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{129} 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{130}

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{132} 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{133}

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.{134}

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{135}

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,{136} 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{137} 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{138} 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,{139} 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{140}

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 four{142}teenth 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.

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{143}

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{145} 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,{146} 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{147} wall spaces, which have no defence immediately over them, are a drawback.

In the North these long grooves are very rarely used; a continuous series of machicolations between bold corbels being the form almost invariably preferred. At Avignon the towers were crowned with the latter kind of defences, as the relics of the broken corbels still shew.

The Cour d’honneur communicates freely with every part of the structure. To the right, on entering, is observed the arcade which contains the great staircase leading in two flights to the principal apartments on the first floor. Two posterns open from this courtyard, and these are carefully masked in the re-entering angles by buttresses, and defended with a portcullis. A staircase also leads to the upper courtyard.

The most ancient part of the palace is the Tour de Trouillas, at the north-east angle, an immense mass which towers above all the other works and formed the Keep.

The Pope’s apartments in the time of Urban V. were on the first floor of the buildings surrounding the Cour d’honneur. From the landing of the great staircase, which gave access to the principal apartments, passages were carried round the building in the thickness of the wall next the courtyard. These were carefully constructed and finished with pointed and groined vaults. They communicated with the various rooms, and also with several staircases which connected the different floors, and led to the defences on the roof. The apartments of the south court were also joined to those of the north court by these passages. The great kitchen was situated on the first floor of the building next the keep. It has a high pyramidal vault, which gives it a mysterious look, and perhaps led to its being long regarded as the chamber of torture and hall of execution of the Inquisitors. The banqueting hall was{148} in the north court, near the kitchen and the keep. The smaller tower (M) in the centre of the east flank (now called the Salle de la Justice) contains in two floors some admirable paintings of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, which are in a fair state of preservation.

The entire building is of the most massive masonry—the whole of the basement being vaulted and constructed so as to defy destruction.

Commencing with the great keep at the north-east angle, and proceeding round the palace by the west, south, and east, the towers occur in the following order:—north-east—Tour de Trouillas; north-west—Tour de la Gache, followed by the Tour de St Jean, Tour de St Laurent, Tour de la Cloche, Tour des Anges, Tour d’Estrapade.

One circumstance specially noticeable about the design of the palace of the Popes is the entire absence of effort after symmetry in the elevations, such as is generally aimed at in the case of the large palaces or halls of the late Gothic and Renaissance periods. Here the various blocks of building are simply placed where they are required, and the different levels and irregularities of the ground are made available in the most natural and convenient manner, with the result that the effect is delightfully varied and impressive from every point of view, and at every turning.[A]

The rock on the north side is almost perpendicular, but here also the access had a defence called the Tour St Martin, which is now removed. From this point slopes led down to the gate of the châtelet which protected the bridge over the Rhone.

The walls, with their gateways, which still encircle Avignon, were erected between 1348 and 1364 during the{149} residence of the Popes in the city. These walls (Fig. 50.)) do not represent a very important defensive work, even for the time when erected; they are neither sufficiently high nor are the towers of suitable construction for a really strong enceinte. They are rather an outwork in front of the palace, which was itself a citadel of impregnable strength.

At Avignon, as in the South generally, and also in Italy the towers are square, and they are constructed with the side next the town left open, so that in case of being taken by an enemy they could not be held against the inhabitants. They are not built, as the towers on the walls of enceinte of the great castles were, of size and strength enough to stand an independent siege.

The large square towers occur at pretty wide intervals, and intermediate smaller turrets are occasionally introduced to{150} strengthen the curtains between them. These are composed of two plain buttresses with a pointed arch thrown across between them near the parapet, behind which there is a long machicolation on the same principle as those of the Palace.

At the base of the wall, and between these buttresses, a bold slope or talus is introduced, with the double object of thickening the wall at a point where it might be attacked by sap, and also to intercept any stone balls or other projectiles thrown from the machicolation, and cause them to ricochet obliquely against “cats” or other engines brought up to assail the wall. The talus would of course be designed in every case of such a slope as might be best suited for defence, according to the nature of the lower part of the fortifications, whether a ditch or a rocky escarpment. The walls of Avignon were entirely surrounded with a wet ditch above 20 yards wide, and 15 feet deep below the crest of the counter-scarp. The ditch was supplied with water from the Rhone, the Sorgue, and branches of the Durance. Of the two last rivers the former joins the Rhone above and the latter below Avignon. The bottom of the ditch was paved to enable the sludge to be cleaned out. The ditches have now been completely filled up, and the spaces outside the walls converted into a public promenade.

The towers, as above remarked, are for the most part of the square form generally adopted in the South, as distinguished from the round form which was usually employed in the North. The latter was considered safer, from its not presenting, like the square towers, any flat surface unprotected by the adjoining curtains against which miners could operate in comparative safety.

The parapet is carried on very bold corbels of four and five courses in height, with pointed arches between them. The corbels at the angles being set diagonally,{151} have a rather greater projection than those at right angles to the wall, and have therefore an additional course in the height. The arches adjoining the angles would naturally be wider than those on the faces, but to obviate this the corbels next the angle ones are slightly inclined towards them, so as to equalise the width of the openings. This is the general rule in all square towers of this description.

The gates of the town are simple arched passages passing through square towers, being a type of gateway of frequent occurrence in the South. They are not protected with flanking towers or angle turrets, such as are invariably employed for greater security in the North. The gate-towers were defended with châtelets on the outer side of the fosse. Of these, the “Porte St Lazare” on the north-east side of the town is the best preserved. This had a forework attached to the gateway which protected the drawbridge. The latter descended on a landing which formed a detached square barbican, fortified with a parapet and angle turrets, and surrounded with a ditch. From this outwork another drawbridge in one of the sides, and therefore at right angles to the main gateway, gave access to the exterior roadway. This gateway was destroyed by an inundation of the Durance in 1358, and was reconstructed in 1364 by Pierre Obreri, the architect of the Papal Palace.

The gateways of Provence, such as those of Orange and Marseilles, were usually similar in design to those of Avignon. At Carpentras and Aigues Mortes examples still exist of gateways pierced in square towers without flanking towers or turrets.

Pont St Bénezet.—The two opposite banks of the Rhone were generally in ancient times in the hands of different superiors. Thus, in the fourteenth century, while the Comtat Venaissin on the east belonged to the Popes,{152} the opposite side of the river formed part of the kingdom of France. In order to protect the different domains castles were erected at both ends of the bridge which connected them.

The bridge of St Bénezet (Fig. 51), which united Provence with the west side of the Rhone opposite Avignon, is said to have been built by Petit Benôit, a shepherd of the Vivarais, who believed himself inspired with a mission to carry out this great project. Benôit became the chief of a society of “hospitaliers,” instituted in the twelfth century for the purpose of building bridges, establishing ferries, and assisting travellers. He had{153} already constructed a bridge at Maupas, when in 1178 he instigated the great undertaking of bridging the Rhone opposite Avignon. This he began in 1178 and finished in 1188. The bridge was almost 1000 yards long, and the roadway is about 16 feet wide including the parapets. Like the Pont St Esprit it forms an obtuse angle against the stream, and the centre rests on a flat island in the middle of the river. There were 18 arches in all, including those on the island. The piers are of a long low form, and their sharp beaks project a considerable way up and down the river beyond the bridge, giving the whole, as seen from the heights of the Rocher des Doms, very much the appearance of a bridge of boats. The alternate piers seem to have had recesses for allowing vehicles to pass, and all had archways above the level of the beaks to allow the passage of the flood waters of the Rhone which are sometimes excessive. The arches are slightly elliptical, or egg-shaped, which renders them stronger at the apex than the semicircle would be. They are constructed with four rings of arch stones in the width of the bridge, formed with carefully cut voussoirs—each ring being separate from, but placed close alongside of, the others. This idea was probably derived from the system adopted in the Roman Pont du Gard (as above explained), which is not far distant.

The bridge was cut for defensive purposes in 1395, during the siege of Avignon. It was probably thereafter imperfectly repaired, and in 1602 three of the arches fell; in 1633 two other arches gave way, and in 1670 two more. It is now reduced to the three arches adjoining the châtelet on the side next the town.

On the pier nearest the land still stands a picturesque chapel dedicated to St Nicholas (Fig. 51). The floor of this chapel being on the level of the top of the pier was{154} considerably below that of the roadway of the bridge; but the building was so contrived that passengers on the bridge could see down through an arcade into the interior. Access to the chapel was provided by steps corbelled out on one side of the bridge. At a later period the structure has been raised and modernised.

The passage of the bridge was defended on the right bank by the Tower of Villeneuve, (Fig. 52), erected in 1307 by Philippe le Bel, under his architect Rodolphe de Meruel.

Like most of the work of this period, the walls are{155} faced with stones square-dressed, but with the surface left rough. The tower is finished with the usual bold corbelling, machicolations, and angle bartizans, and is surmounted by a lofty watch-turret. It will be observed that the style of this French tower is that of the North, and differs materially from the towers of Avignon above described.

In order more completely to protect this part of his domains, Philip constructed, in the end of the thirteenth century, the important fortress of St André, immediately{156} opposite Avignon, and close to the small town of Villeneuve-lez-Avignon. This citadel enclosed a large space occupying the summit of a rocky hill, and comprised numerous buildings, including a monastery. The extent of the fortress may be conceived, when it is noticed that enclosed within the walls, in different parts of the large space of vacant ground, may still be seen a convent, with its gardens, and a small town. A portion of the more ancient buildings still survives in the form of a small oratory (Fig. 53) of the twelfth century, with polygonal apse, having a circular arcade, and a cornice containing modillions after the classic manner. This great castle had but one gate, which opened to the southwards, on the only accessible side of the site. That gateway (Fig. 54) is a splendid specimen of military architecture, having a vaulted archway 13 feet in width, with finely moulded jambs and arches (Fig. 56). On either side is a large round tower, crowned with a machicolated parapet (Fig. 55). The vaulted passage through the gatehouse was defended at each end with a portcullis and folding gates. The apartments in the towers with round fronts, are large and finely vaulted with pointed groins, and the floors are all paved. The platform on the top is also of pavement resting on the vault below. The whole building is thus put out of danger from fire.

Over the central gateway, and above the towers, rises a large square turret, which was also vaulted and flagged on the top, and provided with a machicolated parapet. This platform, as well as those over the towers, were thus well adapted to receive the large catapults, mangonels, and other military engines in use in the fourteenth century. The diagonal walls which fill up the angles next the walls of enceinte contained staircases, &c., and are set at an angle so as to present a front against assailants approaching from the flanks. The round wells of the staircases{160} were continued above the roof with round enclosures, which were visible above the parapet in the form of crenellated turrets.

The rooms in the gatehouse are well finished in ashlar work, and have ornamental chimneys, of which Fig. 57 is a specimen. That over the entrance gateway contained{161} the apparatus for working the portcullis. These chambers have been used as political prisons at various times; and the unfortunate occupants have relieved their weary hours by carving all kinds of memoranda on the walls and floor, amongst which religious symbols and pictures mingle with armorial bearings, initials, and scraps of verse. These carvings are often well executed, and they form a very interesting, although melancholy exhibition.

Some remains of the outer barbican which protected the approach to the gateway may still be observed.

The walls of enceinte of St André present some inter{162}esting and picturesque details. The great round tower at the south-west angle (Fig. 57) and the plain curtains adjoining it are very characteristic of the period, and have more of a Northern than a Southern aspect.

The interior of the walls, with their parapets and parapet walks, are in good preservation, and form fine illustrations of these features. In the long stretch of the north wall, in which there are no towers to protect the parapet walks or to contain guard-rooms or posts for reliefs of sentries, small chambers were formed at intervals for that purpose on the top of the wall (Figs. 59, 60). These now present a very quaint appearance, and are suggestive of many a cold and weary watch. They were only large enough to hold half-a-dozen men, but they constituted points which guarded the circulation on the “chemins de rondes.” They were provided with a fire{163}place and loops to the exterior, and had little spy-holes looking along the parapet walks. The latter are widened towards the interior of the walls with corbelling, and follow the slope of the ground, with steps at intervals.

There are several interesting architectural relics in the town of Villeneuve. The church, a Gothic edifice of the fourteenth century, is designed on the Southern plan of a wide hall, but is executed with Gothic details,{164} and pointed vaulting. The tower at the east end (Fig. 61) is a good specimen of the massive fortified type of church towers so common in the South.

From the ramparts of the castle the ruins of the “Chartreuse du Val de Bénédiction” are seen in the valley beneath. This monastery was founded in 1356 by Pope Innocent VI., who was buried there, and over whose grave a splendid monument in the style of the Northern Gothic was erected. After being sadly neglected and abused for many years, it has now been removed to the chapel of the hospital.

The Churches of Avignon are mostly on the Southern plan of a single wide nave with internal buttresses containing chapels between them, while the ornamental features are almost all derived from Northern Gothic. They are all of the fourteenth century, and that of St Pierre has an elaborate Gothic front in the flamboyant style practised in the North in the sixteenth century.

The “beffroi” of the ancient Hôtel-de-Ville, the emblem of the city’s independence, built in 1354, still exists, but is so surrounded with buildings as not to be properly visible.

In the vicinity of Avignon, or at least more easily got at from there than any other comfortable resting-place, are many most interesting examples of early Provençal architecture. In the immediate neighbourhood are the ruins of the Abbey of St Ruf—situated about one mile to the southward. The church has a good apse, and is partly fortified. Two miles to the north-east of the town are found the remains of the Priory of St Véran, founded 1140, and still containing some traces of early paintings. Both are figured by Révoil.

At a greater distance from Avignon many more very primitive and picturesque illustrations of early Provençal{165} architecture are to be met with. Of these several may be visited together as they lie in the same easterly direction, such as Carpentras, Pernes, and Le Thor.

Vaison is also a place of considerable architectural interest, but it is somewhat remote from Avignon, and may be best reached from Orange. In the days of the Empire the town of Vaison, which was of great antiquity, stood on the plain of the river Ouvèze, where the soil still abounds in relics of Roman sculpture, tiles, mosaics, hypocausts, and other works. Some good statues have also been found and conveyed to the museum at Avignon. The cathedral was originally founded at an early period in the same low situation, but the town being exposed to frequent assaults, the inhabitants found it necessary in the twelfth century to remove their houses to a securer site on the hill above. The two divisions of the town are united by a Roman bridge of one span of over sixty feet, which is built, with the usual solidity, across the Ouvèze.

Connected with the old town are two very ancient churches, St Quinin, and the cathedral, which have survived the many attacks of the Barbarians, and the final demolition of the town by the Count of Toulouse in the twelfth century. These churches are illustrated by Révoil, and shew in all their details a close adherence to Roman design. St Quinin is so very Roman in many of its features that it has been frequently supposed to belong to the sixth century, but from the ascertained dates of many parallel instances it is now regarded as a remarkable example of the mode in which the builders of the eleventh century copied the ornament of the Roman works they saw around them, while they at the same time added features of their own invention. Thus the caps are mainly Corinthian in design, but have some figures mixed with the acanthus leaves, in the{166} manner of the Romance “storied” carvings, the foliage being well executed after an existing pattern, and the figures rudely cut according to the original design of the period.

The plan of St Quinin is very remarkable, the apse being triangular externally, and semi-circular, or rather triapsal, internally. The vaults are of the usual pointed wagon form.

The cathedral is a church with central nave and side aisles, terminated with three apses. The central one is semi-circular in the interior, but is enclosed in a square envelope on the exterior. The latter is an addition made at a period subsequent to the original construction, and may have been in connection with defence; an arrangement of which we shall find similar examples at Fréjus and elsewhere. The central nave is roofed with a pointed wagon vault, and the side aisles with truncated wagon vaults, having a long curve towards the outer wall, and a short one towards the nave, and thus acting as flying buttresses against the latter. The cloister and tower, or campanile, are noteworthy; and a very rare feature is here found in the original bishop’s throne, which is preserved in the centre of the apse, as at Torcello and other primitive churches. From historical data, it seems most probable that this cathedral existed in its present state before the destruction of the town in 1160; and as the square envelope of the apse and the vaulting are probably a restoration of a still earlier structure, it seems likely that the oldest portions belong to the previous century.

After the destruction of the Gallo-Roman town, the bishop built himself a castle on the summit of the hill on which the new town was erected. The chapel of the castle served as his cathedral till the fifteenth century, when the existing church of the new town was constructed in lieu{167} of the chapel, which was found too small for the growing population.

The excursion to Carpentras may be made by rail, and from that point the ancient architectural remains at Pernes and Venasque may be easily reached. At Carpentras, besides the Roman arch already described, the church of St Siffrein and the Gothic gateways of the town are well worth visiting.

Venasque contains a very ancient baptistery covered with a dome, and ornamented with marble columns and classic capitals. The whole structure is believed to belong to the Roman period.

At Pernes there is a church partly Romanesque and partly Gothic, with a cupola over the choir supported on pendentives, and a crypt of the eleventh century.

Le Thor, a small village about 12 miles east from Avignon on the road to Aix, contains, in the church of Ste-Marie-au-lac, a most interesting example of the mixture of Roman and Romanesque features in Provençal architecture. The nave consists of a single hall roofed with a tunnel vault, strengthened with transverse ribs, except the bay next the apse, which is covered with an octagonal dome, formerly surmounted by a belfry. The west façade and porch are very fine, and bear a striking resemblance in style to Notre Dame des Doms and St Gabriel.

Cavaillon, besides its Roman remains, contains an interesting early church. It consists of a single nave finished with an apse, which is semi-circular within and hexagonal externally.

The original side aisles have been converted into chapels, and the pointed tunnel vault is carried on great piers, with twisted or fluted shafts in the angles towards the top (as at Aix and Arles).{168}

Amidst the marshes, about half way between Cavaillon and St Remy, is found the small church of Molléges, formerly the chapel of a Cistertian monastery. The belfry of this church (Fig. 62) is cited by Viollet-le-Duc as a striking example of the influence of Roman monuments, such as that at St Remy, on the design of some of the Provençal steeples. It is certainly remarkable that this telling illustration should occur so near the original (see p. 49).

In approaching Tarascon, we again observe the opposite banks of the Rhone occupied by two castles representing the dominating powers on either side. The massive rock on the right bank, crowned with high crenellated walls and lofty keep, is the royal castle of Beaucaire; and the lower but more solid looking pile close to the left bank of the Rhone is the castle said to have been finished and occupied by King René of Provence.

The history of Tarascon is similar to that of the other towns on the Rhone. Originally a market, established by the Greek colonists of Marseilles, it was converted into a Roman settlement, and retained some of its municipal institutions and liberties under the suzerainty of the Counts of Provence, till they were gradually lost under the feudal system. The church of St Martha, originally built in the twelfth century, on the ruins of a Roman temple, was{169}

reconstructed in the fourteenth century, and is of the usual Southern plan with Gothic details.

The south porch of the twelfth century church however still exists, and is a very beautiful example of the Provençal style (Fig. 63). In general character it corresponds with the finer instances we shall meet with at Arles and St Gilles, although on a reduced scale. The round and octagonal nook shafts have caps partly copied from the Corinthian, and partly carved with Romanesque figures. The numerous fine mouldings of the arch contain a curious mixture of Roman and Mediæval ornaments, in the classic egg combined with the Gothic dog-tooth enrichments. The small arcade above, with alternate fluted pilasters and round shafts, all finished with enriched caps resting on a cornice supported on carved heads, have an advanced Romanesque character.

This church is dedicated to Martha, the sister of Mary, who along with Lazarus and other primitive saints, are traditionally supposed to have converted the south of Gaul to Christianity. Martha is said to have endeared herself to the people of Tarascon, by delivering the town from the power of a hideous dragon, which feat is celebrated annually by an extraordinary procession, in which the Tarasque (a pantomimic dragon) makes a great figure, followed by representatives of all the members of the holy family, and attended by multitudes of people.

The Castle of Tarascon (Fig. 64) stands on a rock which rises but little above the level of the river. Begun by Louis II. of Provence in the fourteenth century, it was finished by King René in the fifteenth. It is now a prison, so that the interior is not easily accessible.

There is here a curious mixture of the Southern square tower with the Northern round form, while the smaller details are all of the Northern Gothic style. The general{171}

effect is fine, although somewhat heavy, and the details of the entrance gateway, with its separate drawbridges for carriages and foot passengers, and its ornamental parapet and corbels are particularly noteworthy.

Tarascon has some good bits of architecture in its narrow but somewhat picturesque streets,—the winding stair and projecting turret being very effectively treated in one instance (Fig. 65). The gateway of the town (Fig. 66) on the east is also simple but good, and quite Northern in style, having two round towers flanking the entrance archway.{173}

Beaucaire.—Crossing the bridge of boats from the castle of King René, the bare limestone rock surmounted by the Castle of Beaucaire meets the view (Fig. 68). This castle was anciently a possession of the Counts of Toulouse. During the Albigensian crusade it was besieged by Simon de Montfort, and an interesting account of the siege operations by himself still exists. While engaged in the siege he was attacked and defeated by Raymond VII. (1216). Although now a complete ruin internally, the walls exist all round and shew the great extent of the fortress (Fig. 67). The outer enceinte, and its long approach by wide flights of stairs from the west, can still be traced, as also the outline of the outer and inner bailey. The gateway of the latter, in a fragmentary state, still survives. The immense strength of the fortalice is distinctly apparent, owing to the height and steepness of the naked rock on which it stands (Fig. 69).

is the remarkable donjon which rises high above the walls. This tower (Fig. 70) is of the very unusual form of a triangle in plan; that shape having probably been adopted in order to fit a projecting spur of the rock. The basement floor (not accessible) was doubtless entered from a trap door in the floor above. It has no openings to the outside. The stair{175}

to the first floor is straight and is carried up in the thickness of the wall. The first floor forms a triangular hall with groined vault of peculiar form, has a fireplace in one angle, and is lighted with small loops. From this floor the staircase is carried up as a wheel in the south angle of the walls. The top floor has a segmental vault which carries the flat stone roof. This is formed of stone flags all overlapped and laid in regular courses, each slightly higher than the others as they rise towards the centre.

The staircase turret stands independently upon this platform, and has a sloping stone roof. The parapet is very perfect, and is, as usual, projected on bold corbels (Fig. 71). Owing to the sharp angles of the plan, the inclination of the corbels near the angles towards one another (in order to keep the arches over them as equal as possible) is much greater than usual—more marked than that, for instance, of the corbels at Avignon (above{177}

referred to, p. 150). The corbels at the angles which are right angles have the usual additional courses in the height. A bold ovolo moulding runs round beneath the corbel-course, the object of which is to keep the inner face of the machicolation well clear of the front of the wall, so that stone balls or other missiles thrown down would run no risk of being diverted from their course by striking any of the projections of the rough-faced masonry with which the tower is built. The parapet is provided with large embrasures, and the merlons or spaces between are pierced with loops of the crossed shape adopted in the fourteenth century.

The parapet wall partly carried on corbels is seen winding round the summit of the wall of enceinte (see Fig. 71), with steps where the heights vary; and in the south-east angle of the inner courtyard adjoining the ruined gateway from the outer to the inner courtyard, there still stands the very interesting twelfth century chapel of the castle.

This oratory is generally similar in design to the one within the castle at Villeneuve (ante, Fig. 52). The doorway at the west end is round-arched, and contains details which are remarkably characteristic of Provence, the purely Roman egg and leaf enrichments being mixed with dogtooth and other ornaments of Romanesque design. The small square tower which crowns the west gable is peculiar, being more in the style of the belfries further North and East, than those of the South.

From Tarascon a branch railway runs to St Remy (the Roman ruins at which have already been described), and from that point the strange old town of Les Baux may be reached.

Les Baux.—This ancient but decayed fortress is one of the most picturesque and remarkable objects in the{179} district. It is situated on the top of a rocky height (Fig. 72), not far from where the Alpines begin to rise from the plain of the Rhone, over which it has a commanding and extensive prospect. Formerly a considerable fortified town, it is now deserted, save by a few wanderers and beggars, and presents the melancholy appearance of an abandoned city, of which the empty houses are fast falling into ruin. This, however, as we shall hereafter notice, is by no means a solitary example of a Southern town overtaken by a similar fate. But Les Baux has this striking peculiarity to distinguish it, that it is a city not built, but excavated out of the rock. It is not uncommon to find houses cut in the rock in several parts of France, where a dry and soft formation renders such an operation suitable, and, as is well known, rock-hewn temples, tombs, and other buildings abound in Egypt, Syria, and the East. Possibly some of the great chiefs of the family of Les Baux (who were distinguished Crusaders) may have adopted the idea from examples they saw in the Holy Land.

The town is now almost a heap of ruins, although some façades of good Renaissance design still adorn the silent streets.

The castle, which covered a large part of the site, had walls composed of solid rock, the superfluous material{180} being cut away both on the inside and outside. In some cases the rock, which is a soft limestone, and decays by exposure, has given way quicker on one side than another, with the result that large masses of “wall” have fallen either flat on the ground, or in solid blocks down the cliffs. In other instances towers have toppled against towers, like trees cut at the foot, producing a most confused and overturned appearance, as if the result of siege or earthquake.

With respect to the architecture, says Mérimée, “The exceptional situation of the town of Les Baux has given rise to a style which scarcely furnishes any indications of the ancient epochs of its history; however, I have seen nothing which appeared to be older than the twelfth century. A church in fair condition seems to be of the epoch of transition. In the right aisle are seen a cornice and transverse arch enriched with dog-tooth and zig-zag ornaments. The rest of the church has been repaired in the fifteenth century, and several very elegant chapels have been added to it.” This church is illustrated by Révoil.

On the south side of the town a bas-relief of three large figures and part of a Latin inscription, carved to a great scale on the face of the rock, have given rise to some extraordinary theories. The figures are called Les Trois Maries or Tremaié. Many observers regard them as Roman, and suppose that they represent Marius (the conqueror of this district, about 100 B.C.), his wife Julia, and a Syrian prophetess or sorceress called Martha, who accompanied the great leader and foretold his victories. But M. Lenthéric, in his interesting work on the Villes Mortes de la Méditerranée, already referred to, takes an entirely different view. He contends that these figures represent Lazarus and the two Marys; and considers the existence of the church dedicated to the “Saintes Maries” (which we shall reach by and bye), together with the above{181} figures and inscription, and the traditions of the country, sufficient proof that the family of Lazarus and their companions were really the first missionaries of Christianity in Southern Gaul.

There is another large inscription and two more figures on another rock, but they are too much decayed to be accurately interpreted.

There seems to be no doubt that a town has existed here from the time of the Romans, although no Roman architecture can now be detected. In mediæval times it was the home of the famous family of Les Baux, whose history (written by Jules Canonge) comprises much of that of Provence from the tenth to the fifteenth century.

In the tenth century Les Baux was already one of the largest towns of the country, and was for long the seat of a famous Court of Love. In the thirteenth century the “Seigneurs des Baux” possessed seventy-nine free burghs. They were amongst the most powerful and boldest barons of the land, and acquired great titles and possessions, being in turn the Princes of Orange, the Counts of Provence, Kings of Arles and Vienne, and Emperors of Constantinople. They commanded fleets and armies, and became podestàs of the free towns. They also distinguished themselves as Crusaders, and joined Charles of Anjou in his conquest of Naples. In following the history of this distinguished race one gets a more lively and impressive idea of the life and manners of those stirring mediæval times in Provence than can easily be found elsewhere.

But the family lost their prestige when Barral des Baux, podestà of the free town of Arles, betrayed the republic to Charles of Anjou. Les Baux from this time declined, and the castle was finally dismantled by the Duke of Guise; the town was abandoned and the fine mansions fell into decay, a process which is still in progress,{182} both by the action of nature and at the hands of the peasantry of the neighbourhood. Les Baux may be got at either from Fontvieille (famous for its quarries of “Arles stone”), to which there is a railway from Arles, or from Tarascon, in either case driving to Paradou (six kilometres from Fontvieille, and sixteen from Tarascon), or from St Remy.

A few miles from Tarascon, on the road to Arles, the ancient church of St Gabriel rises amidst the ruins of the still more ancient Roman city of Ernaginum. A large number of tombs, similar to those we shall presently{183} meet with at the Alyscamps near Arles, but of the plainest form, are here found along with fragments of inscriptions, statues, and other antique relics. The church of St Gabriel, like so many others in Provence, comprises in its design a mixture of classic and Romanesque features. The west front (Fig. 73) is one of the finest of its kind. The entrance doorway, with its fluted column, its imitated Corinthian capitals, and high pitched pediment full of classic enrichments, might easily pass for a structure of the Lower Empire. The bas-reliefs represent the creation and the visit of the angel Gabriel to the Virgin,—the personages being identified by their names inscribed beside them. The upper part of the front exhibits a great archivolt springing from imposts on each side of the portal, above which is a straight cornice supporting a second pointed archivolt. The latter contains a small circular window richly ornamented with classic leaves and other enrichments, and having the symbols of the four evangelists placed around it. The church has a single nave, covered with a pointed tunnel vault. The buttresses are more pronounced than usual, which may indicate a transition towards the later Provençal style, and seem to point to the date of the building being late in the twelfth century, notwithstanding its very classic features.

A short journey now brings us to Arles, the ancient capital of the province, and one of the chief architectural centres of our district, both as regards classic and mediæval art.

The principal mediæval edifice of Arles is the church of St Trophime, the patron saint. It is a large and important structure, containing specimens of all the peculiarities of Provençal architecture on a complete and extensive scale. The nave of the church was erected in the twelfth century, and is quite distinct in character{184} from the beautiful western porch and the splendid cloisters which belong to the older and more ornate period of Provençal architecture. The choir and apse were rebuilt in 1430 in the Northern style. The nave (Fig. 74), like that of all the Southern churches of the same age is very simple internally. This is the first fine example we have met with of the second period of Provençal architecture—in which the plain and rigid Cistertian style superseded the earlier and richer architecture of which we have observed so many remarkable specimens. Thus the piers (Fig. 74) are merely square blocks of masonry, with flat projections or pilasters on each face, carried up to receive the small mouldings or imposts from which spring the wall arches on each side of the nave (between it and the side aisles), and the transverse arches, which strengthen the pointed barrel vault of the central nave. The latter consist of two rings, the inner arch springing from the main pier, and the side orders from fluted classic-looking columns introduced in the angles of the main piers to receive them. The side aisles are very narrow and lofty, and are roofed with one half of a pointed vault thrown as an abutment against the upper part of the nave wall. The nave windows are flanked by twisted columns with Romanesque caps. The pointed arches, resting on four strong piers, which carry the central tower, are seen at the crossing of the church, with a lofty plain wall forming the lower part of the tower, resting upon them. This partially cuts off the view of the choir from the nave, and indicates that the vault of the original church was much lower than that of the existing nave, the roof of which is nearly twice the height of the arches of the crossing. The latter, forming the support of the tower, could not be removed when the nave was rebuilt and enlarged. The tower (Fig. 11) rises high above the roof{185}

of the church. It extends to three full storys and an attic crowned with a pointed roof having a very flat slope. The two lower storys have the arcaded Romanesque ornament so common in Lombardy and Germany, while the upper story shews three Corinthian pilasters on each side. The tower is heavy, but recalls the general effect of the Italian campanile, and corresponds in style with the earlier work of the portal and cloisters.

The elaborate and beautiful western portal (Fig. 75) is fortunately well preserved. It has the appearance of having been added in front of the plainer wall of the nave, and is thus generally stated to be of more recent construction than the nave, but we believe that the portal is much more likely to be part of an older building, which has been preserved in the re-construction of the nave. Portals being generally highly ornamental features, were frequently so preserved. We have met with good examples of this at Notre Dame des Doms and at Tarascon, and others will occur as we proceed. The central arch is almost insensibly pointed; but whether intentionally or accidentally it is difficult to say,—most likely the latter, from its being so indistinct. This porch is probably an imitation on a small scale of the much grander one of St Gilles (to be referred to immediately). The engaged pillars, with their carved caps and bases so strongly akin both to classic and Romanesque work, stand on a high stylobate approached by a wide flight of steps. The space between the pillars is formed into a series of niches, bordered on each side with an enriched pilaster and filled with the figure of an apostle or an early saint. The sculpture of these figures, although Roman in general character, shews a leaning towards Byzantine design, especially in the rich carving of the jewels and ornaments on the dresses. The tympanum over the central doorway, which is divided into two openings with a central shaft, contains the figure of Christ in glory surrounded with the emblems of the four evangelists, and in the soffit of the arch are two tiers of half length adoring angels. On the lintel are sculptured the twelve apostles seated; while the frieze on the right hand of Christ contains the just, clothed and received by Abraham, and that on the left the unjust, represented as naked and being dragged by a demon with a chain{188} backwards through flames. The leaf, egg, and other enrichments are quite classic, while the modillions supporting the cornice of the gablet over the porch have the usual Romanesque character. This porch strikes one at a glance as being of a totally different style from the body of the church. The latter belongs, as already mentioned, to the reformed Cistertian style of the twelfth century, while the former is in the older and more florid Provençal style of Romanesque, although probably earlier in the same century.

But the most delightful structure connected with this very interesting church is the cloisters. The oldest portions of these belong to the commencement of the twelfth century. The four arcades enclosing the cloister garth are complete. That adjoining the church wall (the north side) is the oldest, while the eastern side (represented in the sketch Fig. 76) is not much later in date. The other two sides are Gothic restorations of the thirteenth century.

The two first galleries are splendid specimens of the florid style of Provençal art. They are constructed with piers of considerable size and solidity, which occur at the angles and at regular intervals, the intermediate spaces being filled with round arches resting on coupled columns.

The roof is covered with a barrel vault, built with carefully wrought arch stones, and strengthened with boldly moulded transverse ribs thrown between the solid piers and consoles on the inner wall. The latter and the string course between them are about two feet higher than the cornice on the side of the arcade from which the vault springs, thus giving an awkward shape to the transverse ribs. This arrangement probably arose from the original construction of the roof, which was composed of tiles laid on the outside of the vault, and formed a “lean-to” against the church, like that of the cloisters{189}

of Mont-Majour, to be treated of presently. In the thirteenth century, when the two other sides of the cloister were restored, the outer wall was raised so as to convert the sloping roof into a level promenade, furnished with stone seats along the parapet.

The angle piers are so designed as to receive the springing of three transverse ribs—one at right angles across each of the adjoining galleries, and one diagonally under the line of the junction of the two barrel vaults. The intermediate piers are strengthened with an external buttress in the shape of a square classic-looking pilaster, fluted and provided with a capital imitated from the Corinthian. The piers are all adorned with sculptured figures of large size. Those in the original work are well preserved, having been cut in the solid, while the statues in the two Gothic arcades, which were executed in separate stones, have been removed and destroyed. The coupled columns and caps are all executed in grey marble, and the latter are amongst the finest examples of the “storied” carving of the period, every cap containing a subject from sacred history. The wall of the church next the north cloister contains a beautiful Romanesque arcade, with fluted pilasters (Fig. 76.))

The Gothic parts of the cloister have piers alternating with coupled columns, and the details have evidently (as sometimes occurs) been executed so as to correspond in design with the older work. Of the bas-reliefs on the piers the best are the most ancient. The same general remarks on the style apply here as in the case of the porch; there being a great mixture of classic and Romanesque influence in both.

In this great structure we thus find an epitome of Provençal art. The cloisters and porch, representing the richly decorated Provençal form of Romanesque; the nave,{191} the plain reformed style of the Cistertians; while the choir exhibits the weak sort of Northern Gothic imported in the fifteenth century, which is entirely without interest beside the more impressive examples of genuine Provençal architecture. It will be observed that in the main structural features the pointed arch is employed, while in the portal, cloisters and windows the round arch is used.

At the “Alyscamps,” the famous cemetery of Arles (described in Part IV.), several remains of the numerous churches and chapels formerly connected with it may still be seen. The church of St Honorat is the most important. It is of very ancient foundation, but has been frequently repaired and restored. The west doorway, with its zigzag{192} and other enrichments, is evidently of the twelfth century. The tower or “clocher” (Fig. 77) also appears to be of that date, and bears the usual character of Provençal Romanesque. The dome which covers it is, however, a somewhat unusual feature.

A few other ancient churches are to be seen at Arles, but they are all much decayed or altered.

The churches of Notre Dame la Majeure and Ste Magdeleine, are very ancient foundations, but there is little of the old work left. St Césaire is also ancient, but is converted into private houses, and there are only scraps of the original structure remaining.

After being united to France, and thus delivered from the incessant struggles maintained in earlier times between the Bishops, the Podestàs and the counts of Provence, Arles exhibited numerous signs of growing prosperity. The union with an established power seems to have imparted a considerable impulse to the prosperity of Provence, which began to revive under a settled government; and Arles, as the chief town, naturally benefited greatly from the improvement. Indications of this amelioration are met with at every turn in the narrow streets, which abound in fine examples of Renaissance work. The early picturesque style of French Renaissance, so usual in Anjou and on the banks of the Loire, is of frequent occurrence here. Of the above tendency Fig. 78 may be taken as an example, shewing by the striking arrangement of the staircase in the courtyard, how picturesque this style may be made when suitably and naturally treated. We may also observe in the midst of the abundant ruins of the ancient Roman architecture of this city, numerous palaces in the classic style of the sixteenth century; the revival of which the ancient works had lived to witness, and probably had also helped to forward with suggestions for their design.{193}

The buildings of this period in Arles are particularly rich in tabernacles or niches at the corners of the streets, filled with the image of a saint, before which hangs a{194} lamp. These are not uncommon in most continental towns, but here some of them are very finely designed and add much to the generally quaint and striking character of the houses.

Of the Renaissance buildings of Arles the Hôtel de Ville is worthy of observation. The Tour de l’Horloge (1550), is a good specimen, and the vaulting and general effect of the pillared hall and staircase are fine (1675).

About three miles from Arles stand the ruins of the great monastic establishment of Mont-majour, which comprise a most interesting series of structures, illustrative of Provençal architecture in all its stages, from the primitive rock-hewn hermitage of St Trophime to the fully developed church of the Cistertian style, concluding with a rich and luxurious edifice of the time of the Renaissance.

This monastery is situated on a rocky hill which rises out of the flat plain of the Rhone, and which, in Roman times, was undoubtedly an island surrounded by the waters of the river. Near the base of the south-east side of the rock, a cave is said to have formed the hermitage of St Trophime, the patron saint of Arles (Fig. 79). To preserve and consecrate this hermitage it was converted into a chapel, and enclosed with an arcade (the inner one) cut in the rock. To this again at a later time an outer wall has been added so as to form a chapel, dedicated to St{195} Peter, on the exterior of the cave. Beyond the east end of the chapel there are three additional rude chambers hollowed out of rock. One of these, which is nearly filled with a great stone seat, is called the confessional of St Trophime. At the west end there is a space forming a kind of entrance porch or narthex.

The ancient chapel or hermitage is entirely excavated in the rock, and has a seat left along the inner side, which being continued round the east end forms a step up to the choir. This chapel may be of a very early date, but it is impossible to fix its age from the total absence of architectural features.

The outer chapel (Fig. 80) is not of so great antiquity, but the ornament of the caps and form of the tunnel{196} vault belong to the earliest period of the Provençal style—probably the ninth or tenth century. The exterior is seen at the bottom of Fig. 85.

The monastery was erected on the upper part of the rock, and was surrounded like a feudal castle with a fortified wall of enceinte. It was also protected by a keep or citadel, such as frequently occurs in these Southern monasteries, exposed as they were to attack on all hands.

The church of the monastery of Mont-Majour is an example of the severe style of the twelfth century, and likewise of the aisle-less plan of the Southern provinces. This church was founded in 1016, and was conceived on a very large scale, but little seems to have been done during the following hundred years, the most of the work being in the style of the twelfth century. It consists of an upper church and a lower church or very large crypt. The latter extends under a large part of the space occupied by the upper church, and, like it, is in the form of a Latin cross. The nave of the church is very short, owing to the works having been stopped for want of funds to complete it on the extensive scale on which it was originally projected. The crypt is all vaulted with circular arches, and is extremely dark, the only light admitted being what can penetrate into it from the small windows in the apse.

The arrangement of the choir of the crypt is peculiar. The altar stands in the centre, and round it runs a wall with five wide arches opening on a gallery which follows round the apse, and from which chapels radiate in the various faces of the octagon. The chief altar is thus visible from almost any part of the choir.

The upper church forms one great hall with a transept and apse, and is roofed with pointed tunnel vaults strengthened with transverse ribs, but is entirely without ornament.{197}

It has, however, an effect of simple grandeur and spaciousness owing to its size; but from the shortness of the nave, there is a want of due proportion in the various parts. The choir, as is usual in Cistertian churches of this date, is very short, the apse beginning almost at the transept.

The whole building is solidly constructed with good ashlar work. The west doorway is round arched, and is surmounted with a large pointed window from which the principal light in the church is obtained. The exterior is as unornamental as the interior. The east end (Fig. 81) is finished with a polygonal apse, the windows of which in the upper church are simple round arches springing from shafts recessed in the jambs. The exterior of the apse of the crypt is peculiar, owing to the form of the{199} segmental depressed arches, enclosing deep recesses, at the inner end of which are the small windows of the crypt. The depressed form of arch was probably adopted owing to the want of height and the desire to admit as much light as possible. The same segmental form is also employed in the cloister arcades. The apse has been heightened at a late period and the interior made circular. An enriched Gothic chapel has been added to the north transept in the fourteenth century, and extensive Gothic buildings, now in a state of total ruin (see Figs. 81, 82) have been extended to the south of the church.

The Abbey of Mont-Majour contains a cloister (Fig. 82) with the same style of ornament and sculpture, but much simpler in design than that of St Trophime. The cloister walk is covered with a plain barrel vault constructed with carefully wrought stones, strengthened with transverse ribs resting on “storied” consoles built into the wall. The arcade is formed with segmental arches springing from solid piers, and fluted pillars, with the simplest cornice. Each large arch is filled in with three small round ones, springing from light shafts with elaborately carved caps. The buttresses are fluted like those of St Trophime. The original lean-to roof, covered with stone flags and provided with large rude gargoyles and corbels, is here preserved, and shews what that at Arles was like when first constructed. The cloister here, as at St Trophime, is in the original Provençal style, and is probably a relic of an older series of structures which existed before the present church was erected in the second Provençal style of the twelfth century.

A remarkable specimen of a plan more common in the East than the West occurs in the chapel of Ste Croix (Fig. 83), which seems to have been the mortuary chapel of the monks. The main building consists of four apses arranged in the form of a Greek cross, and crowned over the{200}

crossing with a square dome. This is preceded by a square porch with simple barrel vault, separated by a door from the chapel. The whole aspect (Fig. 84) and arrangements of the edifice have a strange and foreign appearance, and recall the architecture of the East. At the same time the high triangular pediments of the exterior, and the cornices, egg mouldings, modillions, and the simple circular arch of the doorway, are all features characteristic of the late Empire; while the ornamental cresting and other details are illustrative of the Eastern character impressed on Roman work at Byzantium, and thence transported into Western Europe. In the porch is an inscription attributing the foundation to Charlemagne, but Mérimée clearly proves that this is a forgery, and that the date of the building is 1019. The chapel is only lighted with three small windows, which open upon a little enclosure where numerous shallow graves have been excavated in the rock. A door in the south apse also opens into this graveyard, so that the bodies might be carried into it from the chapel after the service had been performed. Several similar graves are cut in the rock in front of the porch. These excavations are all very{201}

small, some no more than 3 feet long, and do not appear ever to have been occupied. Mérimée is of opinion that in order to give their shrine as much appearance of antiquity and sanctity as possible, and especially to enable it to compete with the very successful cemetery of the Alyscamps at Arles, the monks had not only put up the fabricated inscription above referred to, but had also caused these trenches to be cut in the rock to represent the graves of martyrs.{202}

We have already seen that this monastery was fortified and surrounded with walls. But it was chiefly strengthened with a great donjon, such as the abbots, who were also great feudal lords, frequently constructed for their own security, and that of the monks and their treasures, in case of extremity. This keep (Fig. 85) was erected in 1369 by Pons de l’Orme. It is very substantially built with square-dressed stones, the surface being left rough or bossy, as was the custom at that time. The building (Fig. 86) is a simple parallelogram, 48 feet by 32 feet, with a slight projection at one angle to contain the staircase.{204} The doorway gives direct access to the ground floor, which is vaulted with a pointed tunnel vault, ornamented with ribs springing from corbels (see section). A cellar occupies part of a lower story, which also contains a well. The vault over the ground floor may possibly have formed a separate dark loft or store, for storage of provisions, &c. The lower portion of this floor has one window only. The hall, or chief living room, was on the first floor. It is provided with fire-places and cupboards, and is lighted by two windows on one side, furnished with stone seats. The height of the tower from the basement to the parapet is about 80 feet, and the top forms a platform supported on a pointed arch. The space between the lower and upper vaults was divided into three floors, with wooden beams and joisting. The corbels for these still remain, but all the woodwork is destroyed. The platform on the top is surrounded with a parapet supported on bold corbels. At the angles the parapet is rounded off, so as to give the effect of projecting angle bartizans.

From the corbels seen on the exterior of the south side of the tower, at the first floor level, it seems probable that some kind of wooden platform was constructed between the keep and the outer wall, from which the passage between them, which formed a principal access to the abbey, might be vigorously defended. One cannot help being struck with the peculiarly military aspect of the tower, and its strange proximity to the more sacred structures of the abbey.

The ruins of some Gothic erections and of the sumptuous edifice, begun by the Benedictine monks of the eighteenth century, but interrupted by the breaking out of the Revolution, are visible in Fig. 81.

A short run by rail westward from Arles takes to the ancient town and abbey church of St Gilles.{205} This church, which is unfortunately but a fragment, possesses the finest portal in Provence, in the same style as that of St Trophime at Arles. The town stands on the branch of the Rhone called Le Petit-Rhône, which bounds the delta on the west. It bore originally the name of Vallis Flaviana, and is supposed to stand near the site of an ancient Roman city. An abbey was founded here by St Ægidius (or St Gilles) in the sixth century, around which the town gradually clustered.

St Gilles was the chief priory of the Knights of St John of Jerusalem, and became a place of such importance that the Count of Toulouse took one of his titles from it, being also called the Count of St Gilles. It was here that Raymond VI., Count of Toulouse, in 1209, did penance for the murder of the Papal legate, Pierre de Castelnau, and for the part he took on the side of the Albigenses.

The church of St Gilles was designed on a grand scale, befitting the condition of the place at the time, but seems never to have been completed, the works having been interrupted and destroyed during the crusades of the Northern Franks against the Albigenses of the South. These wars formed a sort of sequel to, or continuation of the invasions of the barbarians. The South of Gaul, having preserved much of its Roman civilisation and municipal institutions, had become sooner settled, and had more quickly revived from anarchy than the North. This led to an independent intellectual and religious development, which did not conform to the ideas of religious unity then prevalent. Crusades against the Infidels in Syria and Africa had now become somewhat stale and unprofitable; but a crusade against the rich provinces of the South had great attractions, and was heartily supported by the restless and unsettled people of the North. Hence arose (as already pointed out) the long and cruel war in Aquitaine{206} and Languedoc—the Crusaders being led by Simon de Montfort, and the people of the South by the Count of Toulouse.

In these disastrous and bloody campaigns the whole country suffered terribly. The towns were besieged and sacked, and the buildings destroyed. Amongst others, St Gilles dates its decline from the devastation then inflicted on it, and from which it never recovered.

The following inscription, said to be copied from an older one now lost, occurs on the wall near where the ancient cloister stood:—“Anno Domini, 1116, hoc templum Sancti Egidii ædificare cepit mense Aprili feria 2^A in Octava Paschae.”

The church of St Gilles was thus begun in 1116 by Alphonse Jourdain, son of Raymond IV. of Toulouse. There still remains a portion of a subterranean church, which formed the substructure of the intended great building above, and which dates from the first half of the twelfth century. It is well lighted, and divided into two with a row of columns supporting two low cross vaults, ornamented with dog-tooth enrichments.

In the midst of the outline of the greater works, which can still be traced, rises the existing small church, which has all the appearance of a temporary erection. It is in a late style and of small importance architecturally, but it marks the decline of the wealth and prosperity of the town from its state at the time when the great church was founded.

The really great and valuable work, however, at St Gilles is the splendid triple portal (Fig. 87), which is by far the largest and richest example of Provençal decoration. Every part of the surface is covered with work, either sculptured with figures or enriched with ornament, and although the remainder of the building{207}

is incomplete, every detail of the portal is finished in the minutest manner. At the top of a wide flight of steps rises an elevation consisting of six pillars (five plain and one fluted) with capitals closely imitated from the Corinthian model. The bases are of unequal height,{209} shewing that the shafts have been possibly borrowed from an ancient source. The columns sustain an architrave, frieze, and cornice, which, however, are interrupted by the round arches of the three doorways. The arches of the two side entrances rest on the two end pillars, while that of the central doorway, which is wide and is divided into two openings by a central pilaster, springs from two smaller columns set upon pedestals, and also provided with Corinthian caps. On the bases of the columns of the lateral doors (Fig. 88) bas-reliefs represent David as shepherd and conqueror of Goliath. The shafts supporting the lintels of the doors rest, as was generally the case in Romanesque designs, on lions. The abbot, sitting in the gate to render justice, was placed between these lions; hence Charters given by him are sometimes dated “inter leones.”

A stylobate of the height of the pedestals is continued along behind the principal columns, on which rests a series of pilasters dividing the background into recesses or niches containing large statues of the apostles. The figures are executed with some freedom after the Roman manner, and have not such a mediæval aspect as those of Arles. There is, however, evidence of Byzantine influence in the thin folds of the drapery, and the jewels and embroidered ornaments carved upon the dresses. The pedestals, architrave, cornice, and arch mouldings are enriched with Roman leaf and egg and bead ornaments, mixed with fanciful Romanesque carvings of heads of animals &c., in the modillions. The frieze is covered with sculptures in bas-relief of Scripture subjects. The central tympanum contains the figure of Christ in glory surrounded by the emblems of the four Evangelists—that of the north doorway the Virgin and Child in the centre, with the adoration of the Magi on one side, and{210} the annunciation of the birth of Christ to the shepherds on the other. In the south doorway is represented the crucifixion. This portal was probably completed before the breaking out of the Albigensian conflict, about 1150.

The portals of St Gilles and Arles are the most splendid productions of Provençal art. They stand almost alone as portals amongst the Romanesque work of the period, which has given rise to the impression that they are importations from a distance rather than a natural sequence from simpler preceding forms out of which they might have grown.

It has been above pointed out that in Syria many churches were built in the early centuries of the Christian era in which the Greco-Roman style was perpetuated and received new developments. Many of these churches exist between Antioch and Aleppo, in which the general design and details of mouldings are very similar to those of the Provençal portals, the only difference being that in the Syrian examples there are no statues, as all such images were forbidden in the East. That country was taken by the Crusaders in 1098, and remained, as the kingdom of Antioch, under Western government till 1268. The seaports of Provence being the natural centres of communication between the Frank kingdoms of the East and West, it seemed natural that some new and foreign ideas should be imported there. Hence it is maintained by some that Syrian models had considerable influence on the architecture of Provence, and that it is to that connection that much of the art expressed in the portals of St Gilles and Arles is due. There is, however, really no necessity to go so far afield for the models on which Provençal art in general, and these portals in particular, were based. We have had several striking opportunities of observing how closely the Roman examples were{211} followed in Provençal architecture; while innumerable instances of the Romanesque spirit which pervaded it before and during the twelfth century, might be adduced from the many beautiful cloisters (similar in style to those of St Trophime and Mont-majour) which abound all over the South of France. These have been preserved, while the churches have in many cases been enlarged and reconstructed in the later and plainer Provençal style. One of the most prominent elements in the older style is the figure sculpture, and there can be no question but that the idea of the statues was derived from the remains of ancient art so plentifully scattered throughout the country. Statues being entirely prohibited by the Eastern iconoclasts, that element can have had no connection with the East, although the treatment of the ornament may be to some extent influenced by Byzantine feeling.

The trade between the Levant and the West of the Mediterranean was considerable, and included all kinds of artistic articles, such as furniture, ornamental boxes, dypticks, wooden cases for manuscripts, and carved ivory and goldsmith’s work. These were all covered with exquisite carvings, which, no doubt, served as models to the Western nations, and from which they acquired a taste for the special kind of sculpture known as Byzantine.

It is from the above sources that the complete and elaborate Provençal art displayed in the portals of St Trophime and St Gilles sprang. Viollet-le-Duc remarks of it that it is rich and striking, but gives the idea of an art either fixed by traditional maxims or in its decadence. He states further, that it only succeeded in producing a curious mixture of diverse imitations of other styles. The originality and vigour of the Northern art was entirely awanting. The former style was satisfied with the imitation of works already done, while the latter borrowed from{212} anterior art only the general idea, and created for itself a new development. As already pointed out, the presence of the Roman remains acted on Provençal architecture both favourably and prejudicially; in the first place, by stimulating it into a kind of early classic revival, and in the second place, by thus preventing the free and healthy development of a natural and untramelled style, such as took place in the North. But, so far as the Romanesque style is concerned, that of Provence is probably quite as interesting and instructive as any other. The connection with the art of Rome is continued almost without a break, while the conversion of “Roman” into “Romanesque” is carried out with a refinement and completeness which is not to be found elsewhere, and to which the later Northern styles are considerably indebted, especially in the matter of sculpture.

St Gilles is the most convenient point from which to visit the solitary and now desolate town of Les Saintes Maries. Situated near the mouth of the Petit-Rhône it was formerly a place of some distinction. Here landed, according to tradition, corroborated by the investigations of Lenthéric, Mary Jacobi, sister of the Blessed Virgin, Mary Salome, Mother of the Apostles James (the Greater) and John, their servant Sarah, Lazarus, Martha, Mary Magdalene, and St Maximin (who had received his sight by the word of Christ), having all been driven from Jerusalem by persecution. Mary Jacobi and Mary Salome remained here, and were here buried, whence the name and fame of the town and the crowds of pilgrims who at one time frequented it.

The church (Fig. 89) is a very remarkable one. It was built in the twelfth century on the site of one destroyed by the Saracens, and consists of the usual single nave, having seven bays in its length, roofed with a pointed barrel vault, and finished with an eastern apse.{213} Externally the whole building is surmounted with a crenellated and machicolated parapet, and presents the appearance of a strong fortification, with a keep tower rising above the eastern end. The latter includes the apse, which comprises three chapels, one over the other. The lowest, or crypt, contains the tomb of Sarah; the middle apse forms the choir of the church; while above this there rises a third chapel in the tower above the roof, containing the relics of the “Saintes Maries.” Rudely sculptured lions adorn the south entrance door, and in the nave there is a well, to supply water to the congregation, who would likewise form the garrison in case of siege. This remarkable structure may be regarded as a typical example of the defensive style so much practised in the South-West of France.

Marseilles.—Few relics are preserved in this ancient city of its Roman or mediæval structures; of the latter the most remarkable is the church of St Victor. We have here an instance of the partial adoption of the Gothic style in the South, and an attempt to combine Gothic details with Southern structural features. This curious church, which stands near the ancient port, is all that remains of the once extensive buildings of the famous monastery founded in the fifth century by St Cassien. Some portions of the primitive masonry are still to be seen in{214}

the crypt. The buildings were several times destroyed by the Saracens, but they were finally rebuilt in their existing form about the year 1350 by Pope Urban V. (formerly abbot of this monastery), who also caused to be erected the great square towers and crenellated parapets which give the building externally the appearance of a fortress (Fig. 90). Some relics of the early Romanesque work are still visible in the entrance porch. The general design of the interior (Fig. 91) is that of a basilica, with central nave and side aisles, the former roofed with a pointed tunnel vault strengthened with transverse ribs, and originally without a clerestory, although openings have more recently been cut in the vault. These general dispositions are common in Provençal architecture. But the details of the nave piers, with their numerous small shafts and foliated caps and bases are all borrowed from the{215} Gothic of the North; while the tomb erected in the west-most bay of the south aisle (Fig. 92) is a completely Northern design.

The fortification of the exterior is a feature of almost universal occurrence in the churches of the South, as has been already noticed, and we shall meet with other instances. This peculiar characteristic probably dates from the time of the crusades against the Albigenses in the{216} twelfth and thirteenth centuries, when the inhabitants were glad to adopt every means in their power to obtain protection, and had to turn even their churches, which were not sacred in the eyes of their assailants, into fortresses for their defence.

The frequent attacks of the Saracens may also have had some influence in producing this style of exterior in the churches near the sea-coast.{217}

Aix-en-Provence, which is easily reached from Marseilles by a delightful railway route through the mountains, retains few marks of its distinction as the first settlement of the Romans in Gaul. A few Roman walls and pillars from the temple of Apollo, together with some fragments in the Museum, are all that Aix can shew of the original Aquæ Sextiæ. But the ancient church of St Sauveur and its octagonal baptistery exhibit the Roman influence, extending down to a comparatively late date. The baptistery is of the sixth century, but the upper portion has been restored in the style of the eighteenth century, and has thus completely lost its proper character. It is{218} octagonal on plan, with eight monolithic granite columns taken from the ancient temple of Apollo set in the angles.

The church of St Sauveur was erected in 1103, and is supposed to have been built on part of the cella of the temple of Apollo. It now forms the south aisle of the enlarged cathedral erected in the fifteenth century. But{219}

this old church (according to Mérimée) is itself a restoration of a still more ancient building, of which some remains are yet preserved in the western portal (Fig. 93), the architecture of which strongly recalls that of Notre Dame des Doms at Avignon. Here we have the same fluted Corinthian columns and cornice with Roman enrichments, and arched opening between. The small engaged columns with twisted and fluted shafts and straight arched lintel are, however, restorations of the twelfth century. To that date also belongs the interior (Fig. 94), with its pointed tunnel vault strengthened at intervals with transverse arches. The arches which carry the dome over the original central compartment are round. The dome itself is octagonal, the angles being filled with arched pendentives. The piers are simple pilasters, with small classic-{220}like pillars introduced in the angles near the top, to carry the springing of the transverse arches. This was a common arrangement in Provençal churches, as, for instance, at St Trophime, Arles. The cloister of St Sauveur (Fig. 95) is a fine specimen of the twelfth century erections of that description, so numerous in this part of France. It is built in white marble, and enriched with a great variety of the Romanesque or Lombardic sculpture which distinguished the work of the Northern races. The shafts are particularly remarkable from the great variety of their forms and ornament. Some are octagonal, while others are twisted and fluted, and some are actually knotted together, and nearly all are covered with carved ornamentation. In these and similar works we have very palpable examples of the innovations on the older traditional forms for which the twelfth century is so much noted. Of the later church, the carved Gothic west doors (executed 1503), containing figures of theological virtues, prophets, &c., mingled with Gothic canopies and traceries, are worthy of careful inspection.

In his exhaustive work, entitled “Les Villes Mortes du Golfe de Lyon,” Mons. C. Lenthéric gives a full and interesting account of the ancient towns of Southern Gaul between the Rhone and the Pyrenees. Their origin and fall are shewn to be both attributable to causes arising from the natural configuration of the coast. The land in this locality is flat, and the beach shallow and sandy, while at the same time it is exposed to the full force of the violent storms raised by the east winds which sweep over it from the Mediterranean. The rivers{221} emptying into this shallow sea bring down large quantities of sand and mud, which, being driven back by the tides and storms, have in the course of ages formed bars or long lines of sandy dunes at some distance from the land. Within these sand banks are thus enclosed long lagunes, similar to the shallow sea, bounded by the well known Lido, in the midst of which Venice stands.

These lagunes formed convenient and safe harbours for the early Phœnicians and other navigators, and were suitable in depth for the size of the craft then in use. But gradually the floods of the rivers brought down more deposits, and even in Roman times threatened to block up the passages through the lagunes to the open sea. It was only by building a strong wall for the purpose of forcing the river Aude to keep in a certain channel, so that when in flood it might scour out the passage, and by the erection of beacons in the lagune to mark the navigable course, that the Roman port of Narbonne could be kept open. In 1320 a great flood destroyed the retaining wall and changed the course of the river, after which the ruin of Narbonne as a seaport was complete. The town is now 8 miles from the sea, and is connected with “la Robine” branch of the Canal du Midi, which unites the Mediterranean with the Bay of Biscay. A similar process to that at Narbonne has contributed to the ruin of several other ancient towns in this province,—a district which has also suffered more severely than any other at the hands of the Saracens. Forming as it does the easiest access from Spain into Provence, it necessarily lay open to constant attack. Besides, the Moors, although driven across the Pyrenees, were still masters of the sea, and as corsairs or pirates they scoured the Mediterranean for many centuries after the time of C. Martel, attacking and plundering the smaller towns all round the coast,{222} and in some instances fortifying themselves on land in strong places whence they could issue to plunder the more inland country. Such was their establishment at the Grand Fraxinet, in the mountainous district lying to the east of Toulon, which is still known as the “chaine des Maures.”

We shall have occasion to observe some architectural effects resulting from their invasions, particularly how the inhabitants were forced to seek refuge on the rocky heights, and to build their towns on the top of almost inaccessible mountains. The Moors have also left traces of their presence both in the general design and details of several of the edifices of the Western Riviera.

Proceeding westwards from Marseilles by rail and passing St Gilles, we reach Montpellier, the architecture of which is chiefly modern. The ancient church of Maguelonne, situated on the outer boundary of the lagunes, may however, be visited from here. It was fortified and not unlike that of the Stes. Maries. Omitting for the present the wonderful town of Aigues-Mortes, to which we shall again return, we continue our journey amongst the lagunes, past the crowded modern seaport of Cette, and the ancient town of Agde, with its dark church crowned with frowning fortifications, and at last reach Béziers, a place whose architecture claims our attention.

Béziers is an ancient Roman town, which has still a few relics in the shape of Roman walls, but no classic buildings of any importance. It stands upon a steep hill with almost perpendicular faces towards the river Orbe, which flows round its base. The town was strongly fortified, and held a prominent place as a fortress in the Middle Ages. Large masses of these fortifications are still observable to the right of the terrace at the west{223}

end of the cathedral (Fig. 96), now crowned with a large block of building occupied as a House of Detention.

The spacious main street of the town ascends the hill from the south-east, and presents on either hand indications of the chief industry of the place in the immense and cavernous-looking cellars filled with innumerable barrels of alcohol, which, being in many cases too numerous for the cellars to contain, encumber the street in great piles. The effect of a street composed of these great vaulted caves is unique and remarkable.

The Cathedral of St Nazaire stands on the summit of the hill. It was surrounded with a fortified enceinte, and, forming the chief citadel of the town, it was strongly built and designed for defence. The transept is the oldest portion, dating from the twelfth century. The southern angle buttresses are crowned with a parapet, pierced with flanking loop-holes, angled so as to send missiles in every direction. The cornice of these parapets is remarkable, and presents a good illustration of the Oriental or Saracenic influence above referred to (Fig. 97). The south transept commands the cloister, the walls of which were crenellated.

Béziers suffered more, perhaps, than any other place during the Albigensian Crusades. On one occasion, when the town was taken, every human being was put to the sword, to the number, it is said, of 60,000 souls. The buildings and defences were in great measure destroyed, and the cathedral was partly rebuilt and re-fortified in the fourteenth century.

The west end commands the walls which crown the escarpments above the Orbe, and is strongly defended{225} with two crenellated towers, and by a wide arched machicolation surmounting the west doorway and Rose window above it (Fig. 96). An embrasured parapet is placed above this, and three ornamental corbels jut out from the face of the wall, to enable the defenders to approach the parapet and man it. These corbels are, however, not joined to the parapet, although they divide the long arched machicolation into four smaller ones. The embrasures and machicolations are all provided (as usual in fourteenth and fifteenth century work) with bold beads or mouldings, to prevent arrows and bolts from ricocheting within the parapet.

The eastern apse was also rebuilt in the beginning of the fourteenth century. Here also (Fig. 98) wide machicolations are formed by arches thrown across between the buttresses, while the parapet above is finished with an open arcaded balustrade, which, in an ecclesiastical building, is more appropriate than an ordinary crenellation, and serves the same purpose equally well. These defences protect the large windows below from being taken by escalade, while, for still further security, the windows themselves are completely covered with strong ornamental iron grilles.{226}

The interior (Fig. 99) exhibits a fine instance of Gothic design engrafted on the Southern ground plan.

The choir is a simple wide hall, terminated with an apse of the full width, and containing nine bays; while the groined and ribbed vaulting, and all the details of the windows, arches, and shafts, with their ornamentation, is entirely Gothic. The lower part has been finished at a much later period with Renaissance woodwork. In the manner in which the apse vaulting is carried out there is a strong reminiscence of the domical form; while the upright wall above the vaulting, with its circular eye at the junction of apse and choir, is a feature which recalls many Provençal examples.

The cloisters are situated to the south of the church, and are in good preservation. Their design is completely Northern, of the somewhat cold style of the fifteenth cen{228}tury. The arcade is open, and without tracery, with large buttresses between, carried up with pinnacles above the balustrade. The fountain in the centre of the cloister-garth is simple but effective (Fig. 100).

The view of the town and cathedral from the river (Fig. 98) is very fine. The great mass of the cathedral is seen towering above the huge remains of the ancient fortifications; while in the foreground the Orbe is dammed up, and forms the motive power of a number of picturesque mills in the form of towers. An ancient bridge spans the river lower down.

Near the cathedral is a house of the fifteenth or sixteenth century, with a quaint bow window (Fig. 101). The{229} great corbels over the window to the left have no doubt been for the purpose of supporting some kind of balcony in connection with the defence of the entrance doorway below.

In the district we are now traversing many interesting examples still exist of the ancient Provençal style similar to those already illustrated.

At Puisalicon, near Béziers, there occurs a remarkable specimen of a campanile, with three tiers of arched openings, like those of Italy (see Fergusson’s Handbook).

At St Pierre de Reddes, near Bedarieux, the ancient church consists of a long nave with barrel vault, strengthened with transverse ribs, which spring from a series of double columns, of which the arrangement is evidently borrowed from the Antique (Fig. 102).

St Martin de Londres (Herault) may also be mentioned as having a tri-apsal east end, while the exterior is ornamented with the arcaded pattern so common on the Rhine and in Lombardy.{230}

Narbonne.—When the Romans, B.C. 118, became masters of Southern Gaul, they established, under the leadership of an enthusiastic young patrician called Licinius Crassus, a colony in the ancient Phœnician port, dedicating it to Mars, and giving it the name of Narbo Martius. A principal object of this colony was to secure the road into Spain. After a time the first foundation became weak, and, B.C. 45, a new colony was led out from Rome by Tiberius Claudius Nero. Narbo Martius was then capital of the Roman province of Gallia Narbonensis, which extended from the Alps to the Pyrenees.

Under the Empire, there arose in this favoured colony, on the banks of the Atax or Aude, a complete image on a small scale of Imperial Rome, with its curia, duumvirs, consuls, pretors, questors, etc., and it was adorned with a Forum, Temples, Markets, Baths, and Amphitheatre.

Of these fine Roman edifices not one remains. Such of them as escaped the devastations of the Goths and Saracens are said to have been demolished by Richelieu, that the materials might be used in the construction of the new fortifications of the town erected by him. The engineer of these works seems to have had more reverence for ancient art than his princely master, for he collected all the sculptured fragments, and built them into the walls where they could easily be seen. The fortifications thus formed a kind of open air museum of ancient sculptures and inscriptions; but they have now, in their turn, been removed to make room for the expansion of the town. The Roman monuments, however, have been preserved, and are placed in the mediæval Episcopal Palace, which has been partly converted into a museum.

The important architectural works which still exist are all concentrated round the Cathedral of St Just (Fig. 103).{231} As at Béziers, the Cathedral formed part of the fortifications of the Archbishop’s Palace. It is one of those designs in Northern Gothic which look as if transplanted into Southern soil. The whole character of the buildings is Northern. Whether we regard the steep roofs and gables, the sub-divided forms of the vaulting, the sections of the mouldings, the character of the cloisters, the shape of the windows, the dispositions of the plan, or the defensive arrangements, the whole design appertains to the style of the Royal Domain.

M. Viollet-le-Duc shews the very close resemblance between the plans of St Just and those of the Cathedrals of Limoges and Clermont, in Auvergne. These he regards as the three most splendid and remarkably similar examples of the Gothic of the fourteenth century, and he thinks that{232} they have probably all been designed by the same man. The Cathedral of Narbonne is distinguished by the beauty and skill of its construction. In the fourteenth century the Gothic architects had arrived at great perfection in the art of building. The various forces in connection with the vaulting had become perfectly understood, and here the architect has endeavoured to shew how accurately he could calculate them. All the mouldings are carefully profiled, and the penetrations and junctions admirably managed; but sculpture is almost entirely dispensed with, even the caps of the columns having no foliage.

As a piece of architectural engineering the building is perfect, and has stood without a flaw; but it rather wants interest owing to the absence of ornamentation. It was begun on a great scale, but, owing to want of funds, only the choir has been erected. The vault is nearly as high as those of Beauvais and Cologne. The absence of decoration in the building itself is, to some extent, compensated by the richness and beauty of the tombs and monuments inserted between the piers of the choir. That of Archbishop Pierre de la Jugée is specially rich in sculpture, and still retains some fine painting.

Like most of the churches in the South, St Just is fortified, and, along with the Archbishop’s Palace, formed the citadel of the city, and occupied the site of the Roman Forum. The fortifications consist in a double tier of crenellations, which take the place of the usual balustrades over the chapels, and are continued round the apse, with arched passages which rest on piers brought up from the chapels of the “rond point,” and are crowned with turrets which, as well as the connecting bridges, are all provided with crenellated parapets. These airy provisions for defence give an unusual and very singular appearance to the exterior of the apse (see view, Fig. 103).{233}

In the twelfth century Narbonne was a place of great importance, but, owing to the silting up of the harbour in the fourteenth century, its commerce and revenues were greatly diminished.

The Archbishop’s Palace was an immense castle, somewhat after the type of the Pope’s Palace at Avignon. The ancient city of Narbonne preserved, till the twelfth century, much of its Roman municipal administration—the Commune having councillors with the title of probi homines, afterwards changed to that of consuls, who not only carried on the internal affairs of the city, but negotiated treaties with Genoa, Pisa, and other powers. As invariably happened, however, these rights were encroached upon by the feudal superiors. At Narbonne the Archbishop claimed the superiority, and in 1212 he declared himself Duke, and received the homage of the Count, who was the lay superior. These different powers in the town were naturally in a state of constant warfare, and, in accordance with the usage of the times, the Archbishop resolved to fortify himself within a castle of strength and dignity commensurate with his importance as Primate of Gaul—a title assumed by the prelate who was in office in 1096. A few portions of the palace of the twelfth century remain, but it has nearly all given way to works erected at later periods. The building is now converted into the Hôtel de Ville and Museum; and, in order to carry out the alterations required, together with the new works (which were executed under the superintendence of Viollet-le-Duc) some of the old buildings and foundations had to be cleared out. This new work occupies the central space between the two old towers (see Fig. 103). The architect had thus an excellent opportunity of ascertaining the exact form and arrangement of the ancient palace, and of preparing the plan of it given in his “Dictionnaire.{234}”

At the south-east angle stands the great tower or keep (to the left in the view), commanding the canal and the “place,” and overtopping the tower of the Count, which stood opposite to it. This tower was built by Archbishop Gilles Ascelin in 1318, and forms an independent redoubt. It is four storys in height. The basement is circular internally, and, as usual, has no openings to the exterior, being only reached from the floor above by an aperture in the vault. The first floor is octagonal internally and vaulted. It is intended for defence, and is provided with passages in the thickness of the walls, from which diverging loopholes command the exterior in all directions. The third floor is square internally, and has been the living room, being furnished with windows on three sides and a fireplace, and had a wooden ceiling. The top story is also square, and is covered with a pointed vault. It has three windows, and chambers in the wall provided with loops for defence. The construction of the roof and angle turrets is somewhat remarkable. The central platform of the roof is some feet lower than the parapet walk, and is connected with it by a series of steps rising along each side. The angle turrets are three storys in height, and access is obtained to the different stages, 1st, from the platform roof; 2nd, from the parapet walk; and 3rd, by steps up from the latter to the parapet on the top of the turrets. The tower was fortified on its three angles next the outside, with the above formidable turrets, which were probably further armed with some kind of wooden machicolations in time of danger. The fourth angle, next the inner courtyard, contained the staircase with a watch turret carried up above it.

The other portions of the palace comprised an immense hall, and the numerous living apartments of the archbishop and his retainers. The entrance was by a long open passage{235} well defended from high walls on either side. Within the fortified enclosure were also the cloisters and chapter house. These are of a somewhat late and cold design, dating from 1375. The roof, which is flat, formed an agreeable promenade within the walls.

The Church of St Paul, beyond the canal, is an example of the mixture of the Gothic and Southern styles. The piers are light and lofty, and exhibit a Gothic character mixed with souvenirs of the heavier preceding style, in the small and few windows, the “historied” caps, &c.

On the way between Narbonne and Perpignan ample opportunity is afforded, as the railway runs along between the lengthy lagunes and through the dreary salt marshes, of observing the process of silting up which has here been in progress for centuries, and which has had such a marked influence in changing the character of the country, and in affecting the fortunes of the various cities which formerly flourished on the prosperous banks of these inland seas, now so desolate and pestiferous.

After passing the lagunes we reach the wide and fertile plain of Roussillon, where the process of silting up has long been completed, and where fruitful gardens now take the place of marshy wastes. Here too the snow-capped Pyrenees, surmounted by the lofty peak of Mont Canigou, come into view, bounding the prospect to the south, and pointing to the vicinity of the Spanish frontier. The language and architecture of the province also emphasise its Spanish character.

Perpignan, which stands near the rapid river Tet, has many points which distinguish it from the towns we have just passed further north. A prominent feature of the architecture, doubtless Moorish in origin, is the enormous size of the voussoirs of the arches. In one{236} old building, called the Bourse, the voussoirs of the circular arch of the doorway are quite 6 feet in length. Numerous fragments of this peculiar style, and of walls built with the herring-bone work characteristic of the country, are to be met with in the town, but there are no really good and complete specimens. Some of the interior courtyards, with their wooden balconies, are very foreign looking and picturesque examples of the Spanish influence.

The castellet (Fig. 104) which defends the gate of the city close to the river, has quite a different aspect from that of French castellated work. It is entirely built in brickwork, even the great corbels of the parapet being of that material. This small castle was erected by Charles V., and formed the original gateway of the town. It consists of two nearly round towers, with projecting circular turrets on their faces, and a double curtain wall between, through which the double gates no doubt formerly passed. The structure is surmounted with an octagonal tower, having a boldly overhanging parapet, which recalls the military architecture of the North of Italy, as exhibited in buildings such as the Badia at Florence and the Castle of Ferrara. The inner archway with its enormous voussoirs still exists. The gateway now in use adjoins the castellet on the east side (on the left in the sketch), and is provided with a drawbridge. This was probably erected when the system of fortification was altered, and the outer works shewn in the sketch and containing embrasures for cannons were erected.

In the Cathedral of St Jean (Fig. 105) we have a very characteristic example of the Southern style. It consists, as usual, of one great hall or nave, without side aisles, and with a series of lofty chapels, between the buttresses, which are thus enclosed within the building.

The apse is similar in character to that at Béziers. The vaulting of this part was completed under Charles V., and indicates its late date by its interpenetrating ribs. There is almost no ornament, the architects of the time giving their attention chiefly to the scientific construction of their edifices. St Jean was founded by Sancho II., King of Majorca, in 1324. This was long before Roussillon came under the direct influence of France, which only took place under Louis XI. The style of the building is thus not affected by the importation of the style of the North, as at Narbonne, except as regards the vaulting, which is of a much later period. Some relics of a more ancient Church of St Jean (le Vieux) adjoin the cathedral, and contain some interesting Romanesque work. St Jacques (thirteenth century) has a remarkable tower, and the ruins of the Dominican convent and church contain good cloisters, two sides being Romanesque, and the others fourteenth century work, with caps bearing shields, etc.

The citadel, which occupies the site of the castle of the kings of Minorca is now a powerful fortress, a la Vauban. It contains the ruins of an ancient church with a doorway, the voussoirs of which are large, and composed of alternate red and white stone in the style of Catalonia.

A very interesting and agreeable excursion may be made from Perpignan to Elne, a few miles further south.

Elne, in Roussillon, stands on a height in the midst of the great plain which extends to the base of the Pyrenees near the frontier of Spain, and is a town of great antiquity. It was in ancient times a seaport, but is now separated from the sea by a wide and level expanse of country.{240}

Elne, or as it was anciently called, Illiberris, was a Celtic city before it was frequented by the Phœnicians as one of their ports. The first Phœnician colony was destroyed before we have any detailed history of the country. It was rebuilt by the Illiberians, and again ruined. Once more restored by Constantine the Great, it continued, so long as its connection with the sea lasted, an opulent and populous place. But when, through the silting up of the water-way, it ceased to be a seaport, its prosperity departed, and the town has gradually declined, till it is now reduced to a mere village perched on the top of a rock. Constantine gave it the title of Castrum Helenæ, whence its present name is derived.

In 1285 and 1474 Elne was again besieged and destroyed. These events helped to hasten its decay, and finally its Bishop’s See, which had existed from the fifth century, was removed to Perpignan in 1602. Some portions of the ancient walls, built with the herring-bone work so common in this district, have not yet entirely crumbled away, and the town is still entered through a pointed gateway (Fig. 106) built with white marble, the passage through which is provided with a portcullis groove.

The ancient church occupies the highest part of the rocky site. It is very plain externally and shews the marks of many alterations. The cathedral had been twice built in the plain, but was destroyed by the Saracens. This led the Bishop Béranger in 1019 to transfer it to its present securer site within the walls of the castle. The existing structure is of the twelfth century. The masonry is roughly built, partly with herring-bone work, and in some cases the arches of the windows are distinguished with dark-coloured stones. The interior is divided into a nave and two aisles, the tunnel vault{241} of the nave being pointed and strengthened with round transverse ribs. The side aisles are vaulted with a half arch thrown against the walls of the nave like a continuous flying buttress. The vaults next the west end have, however, been reconstructed with cross ribs, a restoration probably of the fourteenth century. The whole of the work is of the simplest character and almost without ornament.

At the east end (Fig. 107) the ancient apse with its circular arcade is visible, rising above the foundations of a larger choir which was begun in the sixteenth century, but still stands unfinished, the works having evidently been interrupted before they had reached the height of 10 feet from the ground. The new choir is designed on the plan of a Northern “chevet” or apsidal east end, with radiating chapels. The campanile is noteworthy as a design of that class of edifices closely imitated from those of Italy.{242}

But the most truly attractive and remarkable part of the antiquities of Elne is the beautiful cloister (Fig. 108), which, fortunately, is still complete and in fine preservation. Each side of the enclosure has, besides the angle piers, three intermediate square piers, the spaces between them being each divided into a triple arcade, supported on coupled columns, the shafts of which are ornamented with all kinds of twists and foliated decoration. The whole is executed in white marble, and finished with great delicacy, forming the richest example remaining of this class of cloister, of which so many fine specimens occur in the South. The work is of various periods, from the twelfth to the fourteenth century. The oldest portions exhibit, in their ornament, a strong Byzantine feeling, which the artists of the later periods have endeavoured to imitate in the portions of the cloisters subsequently built. The shafts and caps of the later columns are as richly carved as the older ones, but they are covered with ornament of a much less conventional character, and more in the style of the natural foliage universally employed in the North in the fourteenth century. To a later period also belong the groined and ribbed vaults with which the cloister is roofed, and the corbels in the walls from which the ribs spring and which are formed as panels containing figure subjects finely executed. The doorway from the cloister into the church is pointed, and has voussoirs of white and red marble alternating—a style of decoration very usual in the South, and which may perhaps be the result of the proximity to the Moors in Spain.

Several interesting bas-reliefs and other ancient fragments have been preserved by being built into the walls.

Carcassonne.—An architectural description of the edifices of Provence and the Riviera would be incomplete without some account of the two most perfect examples of{244}

Mediæval castellated architecture which still exist in the towns of Carcassonne and Aigues Mortes. These are, from their excellent state of preservation, quite unique, and far surpass in extent and interest the remains of the fortifications of any of the other cities of Western Europe.

The town of Carcassonne is situated on the river Aude, which is spanned by two bridges, one of them dating from 1184. The portion on the left or north bank was a “bastide,” or detached town, laid out in the time of St Louis; the streets being all drawn at right angles, as was usual in the towns then erected on new sites. Such were the numerous villes-neuves constructed by Edward III. in the South-west of France, and which he endowed with certain privileges, in order to induce men to settle in them, and thus increase the population and strength of the country.

The ancient cité of Carcassonne stands on the summit of a hill on the right bank of the river. It is still surrounded by its double wall of enceinte, studded with round and square towers, and dominated by the masses of the ancient castle, which rise boldly above the steep and rocky hillside, and present a sight as novel and picturesque as can well be imagined (Fig. 109). The site is naturally a strong one, and was doubtless occupied from a very{246} early period as a primitive fortress. It afterwards became a Roman town, and was surrounded by the Romans with walls.

The Visigoths, who were absorbed into the native population and continued the Roman civilisation, rebuilt the walls, some of which still survive, apparently on the Roman foundations and after the Roman manner. The Roman system of fortification consisted in erecting two walls to form an outer and inner face, the space between which was filled up with earth and stones. The level of the ground on the inside of the fortress was kept much higher than that on the exterior, and a broad parapet walk, easily accessible from the interior level, ran round the top of the wall, and was protected towards the outside with a parapet.

At Carcassonne the more ancient parts of the curtains are composed of two walls built with small cubic masonry, alternating with courses of thin bricks (Fig. 110), the central space being, however, filled, not with earth, but with rubble masonry and mortar. The level of the ground is much higher next the town than towards the exterior.

Some of the towers of the Visigoths still remain, and rise considerably above the curtains. These, like the towers of the Romans, are circular to the exterior and square next the city, on which side they are also open, both for the purpose of admitting of munitions being easily hoisted up to them from below, and also to render them useless in the hands of an enemy as against the town. Externally they are furnished with embrasures at the top, which were provided with a swinging wooden shutter for defence, to support the pivots of which stone hooks are inserted at the eaves. The top is covered with a pointed roof (see Fig. 110).

a pit or gap in the parapet walk where it adjoined them, so that each tower might form a separate post, and be defended independently. The lower part of the walls, being below the interior level of the ground, was peculiarly liable to be attacked by mining and battering, against which the defenders could make no direct resistance. The besiegers, as they knocked out parts of the wall, supported the superstructure in a temporary manner with wooden props, and when they had completed their mining operations, they set fire to the props, and the wall above fell and formed a breach.

Like the Roman permanent camps, these fortified cities had a castle or citadel, which was almost invariably placed on the highest point of the site, and adjoined the enceinte so as to command and defend the town, and, at the same time, be in a position to receive supplies and reinforcements from without. Within the castle, again, was a still further security in the donjon, or redoubt, which was detached from the other works, and often had a ditch and an enclosing wall, or chemise, of its own, and could be held after all the other defences had succumbed. Such walls as those of the Visigoths at Carcassonne were sufficient to resist the means of attack employed from the fifth to the eleventh century. At that period of revival a great improvement took place all round, and there can be no doubt that the early Crusaders learned much in the East with regard to the science of attack and defence of strongholds. In the eleventh and twelfth centuries, towers like those of the Normans were erected, which depended for their security on the natural strength of the site, and the great height and thickness of the walls—their height protecting them against assault by scaling, and their mass and position against the mine and battering ram. They were further strengthened with outer walls and ditches.{249}

A very interesting description, illustrative of the manner of carrying on and resisting siege operations, is quoted by Viollet-le-Duc from a report rendered by Guillaume des Ormes, Seneschal of Carcassonne, to Queen Blanche, on the raising of the siege of that town by Trenceval in 1240. The report details how the besiegers and defenders battered one another with mongonneaux; how they mined and countermined; how part of the wall was sapped, and a breach formed, inside of which the defenders raised a wooden bretêche, crowned with hoards, and armed with archers.

On St Louis’ return from his first crusade, he was desirous to strengthen his position in the newly-acquired dominions of the Count of Toulouse. He, therefore, resolved to make a strong citadel of Carcassonne. For this purpose the houses in the suburbs were cleared away, and a new town, or bastide, was established, as above mentioned, for the ejected inhabitants on the opposite side of the river, where the new town now stands.

Under King Louis the outer enceinte of Carcassonne was rebuilt (Fig. 111). Between this and the inner wall of enceinte a space is left, called the “lices,” in which troops can circulate, and patrols and sentries move in safety. The ground of the “lices” is nearly on the same level as the present parapet of the outer wall, while the wall is about thirty feet above the soil outside. The towers are built with an open side next the “lices,” so that, even if taken by the enemy, they could not be held by him against the inner walls. St Louis also erected an immense barbican, or round redoubt, at the base of the hill, between Carcassonne and the Aude, so as to command the river, and allow of sorties being made on the level ground adjoining it.

till his death in 1285, his operations being chiefly on the east and south sides.

There are two principal gateways in the walls, the Porte de l’Aude and the Porte Narbonnaise (Fig. 112), both strongly defended with towers and other works. There are also six posterns, all placed in angles so as to be masked by the towers, and generally several feet above the level of the ground. These were useful for relieving sentries, and for the movement of troops in the “lices.” Opposite some of the posterns the outer walls are provided with large barbicans (Fig. 113), in which soldiers might be concentrated for sorties. As above mentioned, the great circular barbican at the base of the hill was also employed for this purpose. Nothing could give a better idea of the multiplicity and complication of the means of defence then employed than the mode of connection between this barbican and the castle. The rampart or passage which led to the castle above was especially well fortified. It was steep, and the ascent was interrupted with several cross walls with doors, approached by steps which were all commanded from the walls and curtains above, and from a great tower at the top, all armed with bretêches or hoards. Towards the upper end the passage turned to the right, and was flanked by the defences above. A small gate was then reached, within which the passage doubled back again to the left, and was stopped by another gate, beyond which it entered a narrow covered way of three storys in height, each commanding the one below by means of machicolations or apertures in the floor, so that, if the first floor was gained, the assailant found himself in a trap, and was battered from above. If all these defences were surmounted, the besieger was only the length of the “lices,” and had still above him the lofty walls and towers of the castle, and the strongly-fortified{253}

postern, with its movable bridge, double machicolations, loop-holes, portcullis, and gates. Even within this, the entrance to the castle was impeded by a sloping and turning passage, furnished with numerous doors, and rising for twenty-three feet before the level of the courtyard was reached.

Such defences were almost impregnable, and are a good illustration of the intricacy of the fortifications adopted at that period. At a later time such contrivances were found to be a mistake, as they impeded the movements of the garrison. They proved a weakness rather than a strength by preventing men from being moved rapidly to a critical point at the required time. The leading idea, at this period, was to render every point of the defences independent of the rest. Each tower is, therefore, a separate fort; the castle and barbican are independent of the city walls, and could hold out although the town was in the hands of the enemy; and within the castle there are two independent towers or donjons, which might still form a refuge for the garrison for some time after the castle was taken.

The lofty square tower (see Fig. 110), which was crowned with a bretêche, was carried up to a sufficient height to dominate the town and the whole surrounding country. This structure and some of the adjoining walls date from the twelfth century. The other buildings on the north side of the castle are of the time of St Louis. The inner enceinte of the castle with its towers and gates built by Philippe le Hardi (the latter part of the thirteenth century) are splendid examples of the military works of the period.

The walls of the towers surrounding the town are built with solid masonry in regular courses, with the face left rough. The lower part of the curtains is pierced with the long loops, sometimes 11 or 12 feet in{255} length, then in use, and the top was fortified with hoardings or projecting wooden galleries, from the floor of which the defenders could drop stones and other missiles on the assailants, so as to keep them off from the base and prevent mining. All the walls and towers were furnished with these hoardings. The square holes in which the beams were inserted for carrying the galleries are still visible both in the outer and inner walls (Figs. 110-113).

The towers are placed at suitable intervals to enable the curtains to be defended from them by lateral fire, and some of them are strengthened with a projecting beak to prevent the sappers from approaching when the angle could not be well commanded from the adjoining parapets, as is the case in the tower at the N.W. angle of the walls seen in Fig. 111. One large square tower (shown in Fig. 111) called the “Tour de l’Evêque” joins the outer and inner enceintes together by bridging over the space between them. It has thus complete control over the lices both from apertures in the vault, and from the hoardings which were projected on the flanks. This tower derives additional interest from having been used by Viollet-le-Duc as his studio while superintending the work of restoration, and it contains a number of fine plaster casts prepared by him.

The parapet walk of the inner wall runs all round the battlements. In some cases it is interrupted by the towers (Fig. 114), and passes through them; in other cases it is carried round the exterior of the towers on the side next the town,—the former towers being posts for guards and sentinels, and the latter being intended to serve as independent posts for defence. Access to the walls is provided by good open stairs on the side next the town, as shewn in Fig. 114, which represents the interior of the walls at the same place, as Fig. 113 shews the exterior.{256}

The ramparts of Carcassonne have been to a large extent restored within recent years; but still remain untouched on the eastern side (see Fig. 112), where houses have been erected against the inner and upon the top of the outer walls, so as to convert the “lices” into a street. On this side the walls of the town are separated from the surrounding land, which here is rather high, by a wide and deep ditch. The high ground beyond the ditch was originally fortified with a large round tower (now destroyed) which is supposed to have communicated with the town by a subterranean passage.

Above the old houses on the walls are seen rising the great towers of the Porte Narbonnaise, each strengthened with a salient beak. Between these towers is the gateway. It had no drawbridge, but was defended in front by a great chain, a wide machicolation, a portcullis, and folding gates. In the centre of the vault over the archway there was a large opening, and the inner gateway was strengthened with a wide machicolation, a second portcullis, and a second gate. Besides these the towers were of course provided with their hoardings and a bretêche projected over the gateway. The great angle tower, called the “Trésau,” and a large angle bartizan further protected the approach of the gateway, as seen in the sketch.

Such were the fortifications of Carcassonne, the chief frontier fortress on the side of Aragon, and there can be little doubt that against the means of attack then employed, they were practically impregnable.

The ancient Church of St Nazaire at Carcassonne may be taken as an example of the ruder form which the Romanesque style assumed in a district not far removed from Provence. It occupies the highest point of the height on which stands the ancient fortified cité of Carcassonne.{258}

The church is placed near the walls of the city, and the west end is elevated and fortified so as to form part of the defences. The entrance to the nave is by a twelfth century doorway in the north aisle. The building consists of two portions, which form a striking contrast with one another (Fig. 115); the nave of the eleventh century, and the Romanesque choir of the fourteenth, the former of a massive and gloomy design, the latter of the lightest and most elegant Gothic.

The older portion consists of a central nave and two side aisles, separated by enormous piers, which are alternately plain cylinders and squares with an engaged column on each face. The bases of the piers vary greatly in form—none of them being of Roman design, but all set upon a great square block. The caps of the cylindrical piers differ considerably, but consist of large mouldings, with corbels and billet ornaments. The pier arches are circular, and the aisles lofty, and vaulted with round arches. Rising from the caps of the cylindrical piers are short columns, the caps of which carry the pointed transverse ribs of the tunnel vault of the nave, which is also pointed, and probably belongs to the twelfth century. The caps of these short columns, and of the attached shafts of the square piers, are all very large and bold, and seem to be founded on Roman designs.

The light Gothic work of the choir, with its tall slender shafts, and walls composed almost entirely of mullions and stained glass, forms a brilliant termination to the vista of the ponderous nave. It belongs to a much later period than the latter, having been erected by Bishop Pierre de Rochefort, 1320-30. It is a palpable instance of the extension of the Gothic style of the Royal Domain along with that of the Royal Power, having been erected shortly after Carcassonne was united to France.{260}

Viollet-le-Duc considers this choir one of the most instructive instances of the scientific method of construction adopted by the Gothic architects of the fourteenth century; and he points out that the architect has endeavoured to keep up the idea of the ancient nave in the new work by preserving in the choir the plan of the nave piers—those of the central compartments being square, with attached shafts, while the others are round on plan.

We shall now return to Aigues Mortes, which, it will be remembered, was reserved for consideration along with Carcassonne.

Aigues Mortes is another town of the age of St Louis and his son Philip the Bold, the fortifications of which have, by great good fortune, been preserved almost untouched since the date of their erection. This probably arises from the fact that Aigues Mortes presents one of the most striking instances of the “villes mortes,” whose history is so feelingly depicted by M. Lenthéric. It stands in the midst of the lagunes and marshes which here cover a large extent of country connected with the delta of the Rhone. The origin of the town dates from the time of St Louis. At that period the Kingdom of France had not as yet extended to the Mediterranean, but King Louis, being a devoted Crusader, was very desirous that his country should possess a port on that sea, from which his armies might embark in their expeditions against the Infidels. This there was some difficulty in obtaining, the harbours on the coast being almost wholly subject to the Count of Béziers or the Count of Provence. It happened, however, that a small portion of the sea-coast, including a lagune and a navigable canal, which belonged to the ancient and wealthy Abbey of Psalmodi was available, and this King Louis secured from the monks in the year 1248, in exchange for other lands near Sommière. At{261}

this place there existed an ancient tower, called the “Tour de Matafère,” said to be of the time of Charlemagne, who had bestowed it on the abbey.

The Tower of Matafère was rebuilt by St Louis, and renamed the “Tour de Constance” (Fig. 116). It is of great size, and was designed to form the citadel of the projected town of Aigues Mortes. It has frequently been supposed that, in the time of St Louis, this tower was washed by the waters of the Mediterranean, and that the sea, which is now some miles distant, has receded since then. But M. Lenthéric shews most distinctly that this is a complete mistake, and that the coast line was, in the thirteenth century, precisely where it now is. At that time, however, the town was surrounded with the waters of an inland lagune, through the shallows and marshes connected with which a canal had to be kept open for access to the sea, as was formerly the case at Narbonne, and still is in the lagune of Venice. The canal by which St Louis embarked on his crusades was called the Canal Viel. It was about five miles in length from the town to the opening in the sand dunes, called the “Grau Louis,” where it debouched into the sea. Since that time the canal from the town to the sea has three times changed its course. For about a century after the time of St Louis this port was greatly frequented by merchants from Genoa, but it has long been little used, and all the commerce of Aigues Mortes has now died away.

The walls of Aigues Mortes were traced out by St Louis, but the superstructure was executed by his son, Philip the Bold. The latter in 1272 took possession of the country of Toulouse and arranged with the Genoese Boccanera to construct the walls of Aigues Mortes for a sum equal to 88,500 francs. The town is laid out as a regular parallelogram with streets at right angles,{263}

like the bastide of Carcassonne on the north side of the Aude. The walls are built with solid masonry, having the natural surface left rough or bossy. Fifteen towers surround the city and strengthen the curtains at the angles and on the flanks. There are nine gates, two principal ones, and the others smaller.

Being only a fortification of the second order the defences of Aigues Mortes are not nearly of so complete a type as those of the important fortress of Carcassonne. The towers are generally round, though some of them, following the Southern fashion, are square and project only slightly (Fig. 117). The gateways pass directly through the square towers, which, as we have seen at Avignon, was a decidedly Southern custom; and none of the circular towers have strengthening beaks. The towers are so placed with reference to the walls that some of them, as at Carcassonne, interrupt the parapet walk, while in others it is carried round the outside of the inner face of the tower, and is supported on large mouldings which form a continuous corbelling. This is shewn in the view of one of the towers above a gateway taken from within the walls (Fig. 118). The stairs giving access to the walls and the interior of the loopholes are also seen in this view.

The walls of the town, which are about 30 feet high, are all provided with a crenellated parapet, having long loops in the merlons between the embrasures. The wall heads have also been defended with wooden hoardings, the holes for the beams which carried them being very distinctly visible all round the fortress. The lower part of the wall is perforated with very long narrow slits. The interior recesses connected with these are formed with wide splays like window bays, and are provided with stone seats for the defenders (see Fig. 118). Probably the great{265}

length of the loops was to enable bowmen to operate both while standing on the floor and on the seats, or even on temporary wooden platforms at different heights, and also to aim their arrows either high or low. The open staircases leading to the walls are carried up on the side next the town in the same way as those of Carcassonne.

In approaching the town from the north the Porte de Nimes (Fig. 119) is first seen in front, while a long vista of the northern wall with its towers stretches to the left, and the Tour de Constance terminates the view to the right. This gateway has as usual a large strengthening round tower on each side, containing guardrooms, &c., and is so arranged as to form an independent post.

Till the fourteenth century, gateways of this description were defended with folding gates, portcullis, machicolations (or apertures in the vault over the entrance passages), and with bretêches or hoardings projecting over the entrance, pierced with single, double, or even triple tiers of loopholes from which to attack the assailants. But there were as yet no drawbridges. At the Porte de Nimes evidences may be observed of a drawbridge, wrought with long balanced beams or levers passing through the wall, having been used; but it has evidently been introduced at a later time.

The walls of Aigues Mortes were entirely surrounded with a wet ditch (a few indications of which still remain), but it has for the most part been filled up and converted into a promenade. The ditch would be crossed with moveable wooden bridges which could be easily removed or destroyed.

A projecting stone balcony is corbelled out from one of the round towers of the Porte de Nimes. This was no doubt a station from which audience could be given to heralds or others wishing to communicate with the{267}

town without the necessity of opening any of the gates or other defences. The fortifications present on plan a right angled parallelogram about 600 yards from east to west, by 150 yards from north to south, with a curved portion cut out of the north-west angle. At this point stands the donjon, or Tour de Constance (see Fig. 116), built by St Louis, as above mentioned, on the site of the ancient Tour de Matafère in order to form the citadel of the town. This tower is of the simplest possible design, being a plain cylinder about 70 feet in diameter, with a talus or slope near the base. It is about 100 feet high, and was no doubt originally crowned with overhanging hoardings, and when fully equipped would present an appearance not unlike the well known great Keep of Couci Castle.

The Tour de Constance was surrounded with a special ditch, and was connected with the town walls by means of narrow wooden gangways, which could be easily removed. The top has been altered in the sixteenth century, and made into a platform, and provided with a parapet suitable for guns. Above the circular staircase in the thickness of the wall the watch turret rises to a considerable height, and is crowned with the iron grille which for long contained the fire which illumined the canal, and served as a beacon to the ships.

Simple as is the exterior of this keep, its interior is full of interest and beauty. The walls, as high as the first floor, are 20 feet in thickness. The basement contains the storage and has a well in the centre, over which an eye in the vaults above allows water to be raised to every floor.

The entrance door is on the first floor on the side next the town, and there is also a postern on this floor on the side next the country. From the landing at the former, a staircase leads to the second floor, and is so{269} contrived that the lower part is completely overlooked and commanded from the upper part. At the landing where the staircase gives access to the great apartment on the upper floor, a beautifully arched and groined lobby is constructed, and is decorated with Gothic shafts and enriched caps.

The great hall on the first floor is vaulted in one span, with large pointed ribs springing from finely-carved caps. On the level of the floor there are recesses in the thick walls, giving access to long loops which descend far below the floor, so as to enable the defenders to shoot down as close as possible to the base of the tower. The postern is also seen from the inside (although now built up externally), with its portcullis (or rather a modern imitation) in situ. The interior is lit only by the narrow loop-holes, and is, therefore, very dark. A gallery runs round in the thickness of the upper part of the walls of the hall, with windows looking into the apartment from which it might be watched and commanded. Between the recess of one of the loops and the postern a fireplace is introduced, with an oven in the wall behind it. The hearth is covered with a boldly projecting hood, supported on two brackets carved with foliage. The angles of the hood have ornamental crockets, and the hood itself is carved in imitation of tiles. The whole work is massive and yet fine, and specially recalls, both in construction and ornament, the style of Couci. It has evidently been the work of a Northern architect brought with him by King Louis.

About two miles to the north of Aigues Mortes stands the “Tour Carbonnière,” which formed an outpost of the town. It was erected at the same time as the fortifications, and was placed so as to command the approach, which was only practicable by one course through the marshes and canals. It is a good example of a detached{270} thirteenth century tower, and in style strongly resembles that of Villeneuve, at the west end of the bridge of St Bénezet, at Avignon.

We shall now return to Marseilles, and strike eastwards by the Mediterranean Railway, along the Riviera.

For a considerable distance no architectural remains of importance are met with. The line passes through a rocky and mountainous country, the bare summits of the lofty peaks contrasting strongly with the rich verdure and luxuriant growth of the valleys below them, in which the subtropical vegetation of the Riviera now begins to shew itself.

After penetrating a mountain range by tunnel, the seacoast is reached, and some lovely bays are passed before sighting the lofty peaks of the mountains, each crowned with its fort, which surround and protect Toulon, the great arsenal of France on the Mediterranean. Architecturally there is little of interest in the town, but the harbour with its narrow antique quay, lined with houses fronting the basin, which is crowded with the peculiarly rigged trading vessels of the district, is well worthy of a visit. It recalls in some respects the Riva de’ Schiavoni at Venice, with its bustle and varied interest.

The railway to Hyères branches off the main line at La Pauline Station. Just before reaching this, the ancient and picturesque town of La Garde is passed. Its houses are clustered on the slope of a basaltic rock, the summit of which is crowned with the ruins of an ancient castle, and a church. The aspect of this old place forms a good introduction to the picturesque and decayed character{271} of the numerous ancient towns to be met with all along the Riviera.

Hyères is the first reached in travelling eastwards of the great health resorts of the Riviera. It stands on the southern slope of a hill facing the sea, which is visible at a distance of about three miles off. The rocky summit of the hill is crowned with the ruins of an ancient castle, from which the steep and narrow streets of the old town radiate downwards. The town was formerly surrounded with walls, which have now been removed, and the space converted into a wide promenade, on which flourish the palms, oranges, and other tropical plants for which Hyères is famous. The modern houses and hotels are also situated on this fair terrace, while some remains of the gateways connected with the old ramparts are still preserved. Hyères stands high above the level of the sea and the plain which extends between it and the foot of the hill. It thus commands an extensive view to the south and south-west over the peninsula of Giens, and the Mediterranean dotted with the groups of Islands named after it, “les Iles d’Hyères.”

There is nothing remarkable in the history of Hyères. In Roman times a fortress existed here called Castrum Aræarum.

In the thirteenth century the place was held by the Count of Fos, who was dispossessed by Charles of Anjou. Thereafter the castle and town passed through the usual assaults and changes, and during the sixteenth century was in possession of the Catholics and Protestants in turn.

The enceinte of the castle (Fig. 120) is well preserved, many of the towers which strengthen it being almost entire. These are for the most part square and lofty, and have thus quite a Southern aspect. The original crenellations still exist, together with the holes for the short beams which{272} carried the wooden hoardings for defence at the summit. The openings are generally long narrow slits, but in the eastern angle tower three small pointed windows occur. The keep is almost entirely demolished. It occupied the summit of the rock, and from its ruins a commanding and extensive prospect is obtained. The walls are probably not older than the thirteenth century. Within the enceinte the ground is laid out as a private vineyard.

In the middle of the old town stands the picturesque church of St Paul, approached from a terrace commanding a beautiful view seawards, by a wide staircase crowned with a corbelled tower. It is originally of the twelfth century, but has been altered. The walls of the east end have had to be brought up from a considerable depth, owing to the great slope of the ground, and the lower part of the buttresses shew work like that of the thirteenth century, but{273} the upper part is later. Internally the church has four bays and an apse—all late—the caps of the piers being of Renaissance work. The central nave and aisles are all groined. A wide chapel crosses the building at the west end, and is surmounted with a plain square tower (Fig. 121) of the type of the Italian campanile, of which numerous specimens are to be met with at Grasse and elsewhere along the Riviera. The upper round arched doorway, with its immense voussoirs, indicates a style of work of which several examples are to be met with in the town, and which is doubtless of Moorish or Spanish origin.

The Hôtel de Ville, on the place Massillon in the old town, occupies the chapel of a Commandery of the Templars. It has been much altered and renovated, but with its picturesque round tower at one side it has a good deal of character. A few portions of old houses present some good fragments of Mediæval Architecture here and there.

The main line of railway between Toulon and Fréjus makes a great curve inland, so as to pass through the level and fertile valley lying between the detached and rugged district of “Les Maures” on the south, and the Alpines on the north. Half way along this valley is the station of Le Luc, about six miles to the northward of which stands a structure of great interest to the student of Architecture.

We have already explained the ascetic sentiments which actuated the early Cistertians in the construction of their buildings. Without some knowledge of the principles of these primitive reformers it would be difficult to understand the origin and meaning of much of the architecture of Provence. In the midst of the usually ornate structures of the country, we come occasionally on some important and remarkable churches, which, from the plainness and simplicity of their style, present a complete contrast to the former. Such are the three early daughters of Citeaux erected during the twelfth century at Senanque, Silvacanne, and Thoronet. The churches of these monasteries are all remarkably similar in design, and carry out to the letter the plainness and absence of decoration required by St Bernard.

Of this Thoronet is a striking example. This abbey is situated in a retired rural valley, about six miles north from Le Luc Station. On leaving the station, the road, after passing a large monastery with its chapel and{275} cypresses, ascends by a steep footpath the hill on which stands the ancient town of Cannet (Fig. 122) still partly surrounded with its mediæval walls. A delightful walk of two or three miles through a narrow and rocky valley clad with olives leads to the village of Thoronet, two miles beyond which the monastery is reached. It stands concealed by olive groves on the western slope of a narrow valley, through which flows a small stream, a tributary of the Argens. The church, with its plain apse and little spire, first meets the view, followed, on near approach, by the ruinous but extensive buildings of the monastery which disappear amongst foliage down the slope of the hillside. The public road now runs through the upper part of the enclosure of the abbey, and close along the south side of the church; while part of the monastic buildings to the west are occupied as a tavern or farmhouse.

The Monastery of Thoronet was founded in the beginning of the twelfth century, on ground granted by Raymond de Béranger, Count of Provence, to the monks of Citeaux, and continued to be occupied by that order till their property was secularised and sold at the Revolution. The plan is that usual in Cistertian buildings of the period. The church has a nave, with central and side aisles, crossed at the east end by a large transept, from which, in the centre, a short choir having a circular apse, and two smaller chapels with altars in each transept, extend towards the east. At Thoronet the choir and chapels have apsidal terminations, but in some Cistertian churches the east end is square. Nothing could exceed the unadorned nature of the design, both externally and internally. The west end (Fig. 123) shews the principal entrance, which is a plain round-headed doorway, without even a moulding. The tall windows and the round one in this gable are treated equally simply. These, and a round{277}

window over the apse, give the principal light in the church, which, like the other Southern churches vaulted on the same principle, has no clerestory. There is an alcove for a tomb in the exterior of the wall of the south aisle, but it is now empty. The interior (Fig. 124) presents, as it were, the bare skeleton of the other churches of Provence which we have already considered, without any of their ornamentation. The piers of the nave are simply portions of a side wall set on square slabs as a base, with a plain break to sustain the inner member of the nave arch. Above these rises the perfectly plain, pointed, barrel vault, strengthened with simple square-cut transverse arches, which spring from round attached vaulting shafts, resting on the plainest possible corbels, and having caps of a very simple form.

The vault of the central nave is buttressed by half vaults in the side aisles, which are of the same design.

The tiles of the roof, both of the central nave and the side aisles, rest directly on the outside of the vaults without any wooden construction. This, as we have seen, is the usual arrangement in the churches of Provence, such as Notre Dame des Doms, Avignon, and St Trophime, Arles.

The cloister, and some of the monastic buildings adjoining, are well preserved. A similar simplicity reigns throughout these. The cloister consists, as usual, of four arcades enclosing a garth on the north side of the church. The arcade next the nave is on a higher level than the other three, owing to the slope of the hill, and is only one story high, there being no rooms on this side for an upper gallery to give access to. The other three sides of the cloister had originally an upper floor, with open arches next the garth, and an open timber roof. These galleries gave access to the dormitory and other apartments on the upper floor. The arcades of the cloisters (Fig. 125) are of a very{279}

simple form, consisting of plain round arches in the wall, filled in with a single solid shaft supporting two smaller round arches, and a circular eye above. The arches are absolutely without mouldings. The caps and bases of the central shafts (Fig. 126) are of very simple design—a small leaf or uncarved set-off being all that is allowed to cover the passage from round to square, and any such enrichments are most elementary, both in design and execution. It will, however, be observed that these primitive ornaments, although simple, are original. They show no trace of Roman traditions, which, as formerly pointed out, were entirely renounced by the Cistertians in their reformed{281} Provençal art. These very elementary forms are thus the prototypes of the new and natural style of ornamentation above referred to in Part V. as having been introduced by the Cistertian Order. The small arches rest on an impost formed of a plain string course, which, together with the plain splay of the base, are cut off at the outer face of the wall, and do not return round it. This mode of cutting off strings, etc., is of frequent occurrence in buildings of this type.

The cloister walks are covered with plain, pointed, tunnel vaults, strengthened at intervals with square transverse ribs resting on plain corbels, which are inserted in a string course, formed of a simple ovolo.

At the intersection of the cloister walks the pointed vaults meet, and the junction is covered with a pair of square diagonal ribs intersecting one another in the angle.

Opening from the north side of the cloister is a hexagonal chamber, which served as the lavatory of the monks. It projects into the garth from the arcade (see Fig. 125), and has five windows, three of which are plain round-headed openings, and the two others are each finished with two small arches and a circular eye like those of the cloisters. A double doorway gives access from the cloister walk. The basin or vase for washing, which formerly stood in the centre, now lies broken in the garden.

The chapter-house opens into the eastern side of the cloisters by a doorway with a pointed arch, and two side windows, with three openings in each. These openings were for the purpose of enabling the monks in the cloister to hear what passed in the chapter-house. The latter is vaulted with groined-pointed vaults—the ribs being square with bead on angles, supported by two short and dumpy pillars, with spurred bases and remarkable caps, somewhat more ornamental than the others. In the east wing, over{282} the chapter-house, the dormitory still exists, roofed with a wide barrel vault, strengthened with transverse ribs.

From the simple design of the cloister it is apparent how completely the Cistertians renounced the fine shafts and delicate carving of the cloisters of the early Provençal type like those of Aix, with their light wooden roofs, and gave preference to vaults, as being more enduring, while at the same time they rejected all sculpture and ornament. Although simple and plain to a degree, there is a unity of purpose and an originality of character in this new and vigorous style which commands respect if not admiration.

Senanque, Silvacanne, and Thoronet were all built in the severe style of the first fervour of the Cistertians early in the twelfth century. By the end of the century this first enthusiasm became an affectation of simplicity and was gradually tempered by the preponderating influence of the Clunisiens, who were more in harmony with the spirit of the times than the rigid Cistertians,—the general tendency of the age being to great richness in architecture.

At a later period the monastery of Thoronet seems to have been enclosed with walls, within which the grounds were laid out with taste and elegance. Few examples of this refinement have escaped destruction; but a fountain, with its basin set in an alcove in the outer wall, still survives (Fig. 127), and serves to refresh the traveller on the dusty highway which now passes through the pleasure gardens of the monks.

At St Maximin, which lies considerably to the west of Thoronet and is most conveniently approached by the railway between Aix and Carnoulles by Brignoles, there exists a church of a totally different character. It is said to be the most perfect specimen in Provence of a building in the pure Gothic style. The design has evidently been imported directly from the{283}

North, and is precisely such an edifice as one would expect to meet with in the Ile de France. Its presence here therefore strikes one with surprise, and with a sense of incongruity with its surroundings. This church was begun towards the end of the thirteenth century by Charles of Anjou, but was not finished till the close of the fifteenth{284}

century. The plan shews a central nave with side aisles, each terminated to the east with an apse. There is no transept. The vaults are pointed and simple in form. The central vault (Fig. 128) is lofty, being about 90 feet to the apex. When complete the aspect of the church must have been extremely light and fairy-like. The lofty windows of the clerestory and apse, which are all pointed, fill up with their traceries nearly the whole visible space, the masonry being reduced to its smallest limits. The same idea was carried out in the side aisles, where the windows were originally brought down almost to the pavement. When these windows were all filled with stained glass, as{285} they are believed to have been (although it is now completely gone), the effect must have been very fine, and all the more splendid from the remarkable contrast it would present to the usually somewhat dark and gloomy character of Southern churches. Side chapels have now been added, and the aisle windows shut up by them; and it is stated that the structure is generally very much destroyed. Unfortunately the west façade has never been completed.

From Le Luc the railway follows the course of the wide and fertile valley of the River Argens to Fréjus, the ancient Roman Forum Julii, so rich, as we have already seen, in Roman remains; and its Mediæval buildings will be found to be not less interesting.

The Cathedral of Fréjus, erected probably in the twelfth century, is a prominent example of the adoption in Provence of the “single-hall” style of church, which (as explained in Part V.) was so universal in the south and west of France. The original church (Fig. 129) consists of{286}

a nave of three divisions or bays, each covered with round intersecting vaults, strengthened with large square groins, and terminated at the east end with a circular apse, the whole extending to 120 feet in length by 28 feet in width. The vaults spring from piers, which are really large internal buttresses, with recesses between them 7 feet deep (Fig. 130). The north side wall has, however, been cut out, and a side aisle added at a later date, with still later chapels beyond. The string courses, caps, etc., are all of the same simple forms employed in so many buildings of the period. Nothing could be plainer or more devoid of ornament than{288}

this massive and impressive edifice. The exterior of the cathedral has undergone many changes. The Bishop’s Palace adjoins it on the south, and covers a large part of the south wall. The whole series of buildings connected with the cathedral, have at one time been enclosed with a strong wall, built in regular courses, left rough on the surface. Some portions of this work are visible in the{289} outer wall next the street at the west end. There, intermingled with a great deal of modern addition and alteration, may still be traced the remains of two windows (Fig. 131) of the twelfth or early thirteenth century, with circular arches springing from carved caps. In the jambs of one of these windows the caps still surmount projecting shafts standing on corbels, but they have disappeared from the other. The details are given in Fig. 133. Several of the original small windows of the basement, however, remain unaltered. They have the circular heads and the deeply splayed external ingoing of the period.

The east end of the cathedral (Fig. 132) is very remarkable. The apse, which is circular within, is only slightly rounded externally, and is carried up to a considerable height as a tower of defence, and armed with an embattled parapet at the top, supported on bold corbels with machicolations between them.

Fréjus Cathedral is thus another instance of the numerous fortified churches so characteristic of the South, and formed part of the general fortified enclosure which protected the Bishop’s Palace and the other ecclesiastical buildings connected with the see. Adjoining the apse considerable remains of the ancient Bishop’s Palace may still be traced, shewing (amidst modern alterations) work similar to that of the west end, and containing coupled pointed windows and doors with round arches. The enclosing and fortifying of the precincts seem to have been carried out at a time subsequent to the erection of the cathedral. This explains the peculiar form of the tower over the apse, and likewise the manner in which the ancient baptistery is enclosed in a similar mural envelope. The work was probably executed, to judge from the style, early in the thirteenth century. In that{290}

century too the tower at the west end of the church seems to have been erected over what was probably the original narthex or anti-church. Internally the lower portions are executed in the style of the Gothic of the North,{291} and the heavy tower above (Fig. 133) may possibly be of the same date. The coloured tiles, which give the spire a special character, are no doubt much more modern. We also find here other examples of work of different kinds and various periods. Of these the ancient baptistery (Fig. 134) is a structure of great interest. It stands at the west end of what seems to have been originally, although now covered in, a small open court, such as generally existed in front of the western entrances to the early churches. The plan of the baptistery is octagonal, being the same as that adopted for the primitive baptisteries in Italy. Octagonal or circular edifices such as this are frequently called Roman temples; but, although they very closely resemble Roman work, they are found, on an examination of the details, to be only imitated from classic design, and are clearly of Christian origin.

At Fréjus, the baptistery is ornamented with a granite monolithic column in each of its eight angles, provided with caps of white marble. The caps and bases (Fig. 134) are varied in design, and are all closely imitated from the Corinthian, although none of them are exactly after that pattern. The massive fragment of stone, moulded on the front, which is placed over each, is probably a survival or reminiscence of the entablature which was always thought necessary in classic times. The upper portion, which was most likely an octagonal dome in the original building, is now modernised. The plan shews an attempt to make the floor as square as possible, by means of four deep niches introduced in the four angles. The central font is peculiar in form, and stands on a fragment of an ancient column.

In connection with this baptistery it may be interesting here to call attention to the fact that a monument in the same style, but superior in size and design, still exists at{292}

Riez, an ancient Roman colony instituted under the patronage of Augustus, some distance to the north-west of Draguinon. The original town was built on the plain watered by the river Colastre (a tributary of the Verdon), but the inhabitants have long abandoned the low ground, and the houses now stand an the slope of the Mont Saint-Maximin above. In the deserted plain are to be found four Corinthian columns of grey granite from the Esterel with caps, bases, and architraves of marble. These, according to Texier and Pullan, formed the façade of a prostyle temple.

The numerous fragments of pottery and mosaics which are constantly dug up, and a large quantity of portions of columns and architraves built into the modern walls, shew that the Roman works here were at one time considerable.{294}

In the chapel of St Maxime six Roman columns have been utilized. But the most remarkable monument of the place is the so-called “Temple” or “Pantheon.” This consists externally of a plain square structure, 37 feet each way, but internally it is octagonal in plan (Fig. 135), with four deep niches in the sides opposite the angles of the square. Within the octagon are eight columns standing detached, so as to form an aisle all round, while they support an octagonal drum (Fig. 136), roofed over with a dome. The aisle is vaulted, with an irregular form, composed of about three-fourths of a pointed arch. The columns are ancient, but they have evidently been removed from their original position, being unequal in the length of the shafts, and the size and design of the capitals, and have no doubt been collected from various sources. Texier{295}

and Pullan believe that this was an ancient Roman structure converted to Christian uses in the sixth century; but excavations in the floor have revealed the remains of a large baptismal basin, similar to the original Italian ones, thus leaving no doubt as to the primitive destination of the structure. The pointed arch over the aisle is also a sign of its belonging to post-Roman times. It is certainly one of the most interesting of the early Christian edifices in Provence.

Returning to Fréjus, we observe that the cloisters, which are on the north side of the small court or lobby adjoining the baptistery, were erected at a somewhat later date than the tower, in a style strongly recalling the Italian-Gothic of Florence and Genoa, which we here meet with for the first time in our eastward progress (Fig. 137). The arcades of the cloisters are plain, and rest on coupled columns, with caps carved in the style of the Italian-Gothic of the fifteenth century, the whole being carefully and elegantly executed in white marble; and, though now sadly built up and mutilated, they still possess a wonderfully picturesque and charming effect. The coupled columns were evidently not intended to support vaulting, but to carry the unique and effective wooden roof (Fig. 138), part of which still exists, but is so greatly decayed that it has to be supported with rough props and wedges. At a still later period the entrance front of the cathedral has been altered and finished in its present ungainly form (Fig. 133). The floor of the cathedral, owing to the slope of the ground, is several feet below the present level outside, and has to be approached by descending steps. Originally the entrance to the narthex was no doubt on the level of the cathedral floor. The outside level has apparently, however, been heightened before the present entrance doorway was built, as it{297}

conforms to the level of the “place” on the south of the church. The late Gothic style of this doorway, in which Renaissance details are mixed with Gothic forms, belongs to the sixteenth century. The wall adjoining has been rebuilt and heightened at the same date, and an attempt has been made to bring the whole façade into a symmetrically balanced design, in accordance with one of the leading principles of the classic style then beginning to be revived. The wooden doors are beautifully carved with Scripture subjects mingled with Gothic details.

This building is a specimen of the imperfect and fragmentary manner in which the Northern Gothic style was employed in Provence. We have here also an example (and we shall meet with more frequent instances as we proceed eastwards) of the spread of the Italian-Gothic style beyond its ordinarily understood boundary. But as all the country between Genoa and Toulon was for long either under the sway of Genoa or of the Grimaldi of Monaco, it is only natural to find traces of Italian taste in the Riviera, which indeed is in all respects far more Italian than French.

Fig. 139 shews an ancient lamp of brass work suspended in the centre of the cathedral.

The houses in the town of Fréjus possess many quaint bits of architectural detail, amongst which the woodwork{299} of the old doorways may be specially mentioned (Fig. 140). Similar telling and original specimens of wood and iron work, it may be remarked, are not uncommon throughout the Riviera.

St Raphaël, a small town a few miles to the eastward, now forms the port of Fréjus. The mountainous district of “Les Maures,” which lies along the coast between Toulon{300} and Fréjus, may either be visited from Hyères on the west (by diligence), or from St Raphaël on the east (by steamer). The latter mode forms a long but very pleasant day’s excursion. A small trading steamer leaves St Raphaël on certain days (mentioned in the “Indicateur”) at 8.30 a.m., and reaches St Tropez about 10.15, after a pleasant voyage round the headlands between the Gulf of Fréjus and that of Grimaud. St Tropez occupies the site of the ancient Heraclea Caccabaria, an important naval station in Roman times. The town has several times been destroyed by the Saracens and Corsairs, who in the ninth century took possession of the whole of the detached chain of mountains still called after them by the name of “Les Maures.” The sheltered gulf of Grimaud formed a fine harbour for their ships, and the port St Tropez was then a place from which a considerable trade was carried on with the African coast. In the later centuries it suffered the usual disturbances under Charles of Anjou, and in the wars of Religion.

The town still possesses some trade, and there is a fair number of coasting vessels in the harbour, to which, with their large brown sails, they give a peculiar and pleasing effect (Fig. 141). Some of the houses shew signs of having seen better days, but the whole place{301} has a somewhat decayed and crumbling appearance. The town is surmounted by a castle, which was constructed in 1793, on the top of the hill to the south. It is surrounded with high walls loopholed for musketry and strengthened with bastions. The traffic in fish seems to be considerable, and is carried on in a dark vaulted market place, where the fish are exposed for sale, and where they are kept cooler than in the open air. The entrance to this fishy cave is somewhat picturesque (Fig. 142).

A daily omnibus runs from St Tropez to Cogolin at the upper end of the Gulf of Grimaud, forming a very pretty drive of an hour and a quarter. At Cogolin the road to Hyères branches off to the left, and that to Le Luc to the right. A daily diligence runs each way between Cogolin and Le Luc. There is time, after the arrival of the omnibus from St Tropez, to walk on to Grimaud and wait for the diligence there. In crossing the plain the towering ruins of the castle, crowning a lofty pyramidal hill, are seen rising about two miles off, and give promise of a splendid subject. From the base of the hill (Fig. 143) the white houses of the town clustering round the grey walls of the castle have a commanding appearance, and even when seen close they form some fine and picturesque combinations. But from an architectural point of view the castle is disappointing, being reduced to a mere skeleton of two towers, connected by a ruined wall of enceinte (Fig. 144). It was built in the fifteenth century by Italian architects for the Grimaldi, to whom this{303} country then belonged, and it was occupied till the middle of last century.

Many of the houses of the town are new, but there are also some very old and picturesque streets, bordered with rude arcades. The church, though modernised, has retained its old tunnel vault, with transverse ribs, and simple Provençal mouldings. It has also a semi-circular apse, and a round arched door, with very deep voussoirs, like that of Hyères—possibly a survival of the art of the Moors.

The diligence passes here at 2 P.M., and reaches Le Luc about 4.30, after a very fine drive through a mountainous country, covered with noble old forest trees. These consist chiefly of chestnuts and cork oaks, which have{304} grown to a great size, the latter furnishing the materials for the chief industry of the country. The road consists of a long hill up to the Col or pass, on which stands La Garde Freinet, and then a long descent down to the plain of the Argens. La Garde Freinet is a small town occupying the site of the famous Fraxinet, or chief citadel of the Moors, which gave its name to all their other settlements in Provence. The Moors took possession of this lofty district in the ninth century, and from it, as a secure centre, they made their predatory descents on the surrounding fertile plains. But in 973, after a severe struggle, they were driven out by a combination of the Christian inhabitants of Provence.

The ancient Fraxinet stood on the summit of a perpendicular rock to the north of the village; but there are almost no vestiges left of the fortress, save a square cistern for water. The town, as seen from the descent on the north side, with its background of precipitous rocks and the deep wooded valley in front, presents one of the most striking and remarkable pictures in this singular locality. The drive down to Le Luc is delightful; the pine woods and rocky glens recalling the peculiar scenery characteristic of our Scottish Highlands.

After passing St Raphaël, the railway has to cut its way through the rocky promontories which here terminate the Esterel range, and jut boldly out into the Mediterranean. In alternate tunnels and viaducts it sweeps round the Cap Roux, passing, on its way, the lovely bay of Agay, and the wonderfully coloured rock masses of the red porphyritic mountains, which contrast so admirably with the rich green pine woods filling the ravines which furrow the hillsides. These mountains were quarried by the Romans, and furnished them with supplies of red and blue porphyry for the adornment of their buildings. They are{305}

still worked, and yield a considerable quantity of hard materials used for street paving. On rounding the point of the Cap Roux, the wide and beautiful bay of Cannes opens to view, with its long range of white villas, backed by the dark pine-covered hills, beyond which the snowy peaks of the Basses Alpes are visible in the distance. The prominent mass of the Mont du Chevalier marks the centre, while the picture is bounded on the left by the valley of the Siagne, and on the right by the Iles de Lérins, with the Castle of St Honorat rising boldly from the sea on the furthest point. In the hollow of the bay, near the mouth of the Siagne, and commanding a fine view of Cannes, stands the ancient Castle of Napoule (Fig. 145), where some fragments of old work still survive; but a new château occupies the principal portion of the old site. Two of the original square towers are in fair{306} preservation, and, together with the chapel and crenellated walls, form an interesting group (Fig. 146). The style seems to have been partly that of the castellated buildings of Italy, with V-shaped merlons between the embrasures, while the voussoirs of the arches are of the deep form observed at Grimaud and Hyères.

Napoule is supposed to have been a Roman port, having a depôt for grain connected with it. The castle was built by the Counts of Villeneuve in the fourteenth century. It belonged to that branch of the family called Villeneuve Franc, and afterwards to the family of Montgrand.

Close to Napoule rises the conical hill of St Peyré, on the top of which are the scanty ruins of a castle and a chapel with an apse. At the base of the hill, and close to the public road, may be seen the remains of another apsidal chapel. Beyond this various branches of the Siagne are crossed, when a small conical hill crowned with{307}

wood rises abruptly on the left, to which the distant towers of Grasse and Mougin, with the mountains beyond, form a background. This hill is the Mont St Cassien, where a famous hermitage existed, and where a great popular festival is still held annually on the 23rd of July. An entrenched post was formed here under the Romans, for the defence{308} of the Aurelian Way. On this spot was also erected a Temple of Venus surrounded with a sacred grove called the Ara Luci (hence the modern Arluc, a small town in the vicinity). In the seventh century this heathen temple was demolished by the religious of the Lérins, and a convent erected instead, which, in its turn, was destroyed by the Saracens. A chapel with an open arcaded porch now marks the spot (Fig. 147), which, surrounded as it is with ancient cypresses and pines, is one of the best designed structures of the kind in the district. Small open-air chapels or shrines of this description, with arcaded porches, are very common all over the Riviera, and often form very pleasing objects in the landscape, occupying, as they frequently do, somewhat prominent sites. They are almost invariably in a late Renaissance style of architecture.

Cannes is the one of the health resorts which has perhaps made the greatest progress within the last fifty years, having developed from the small fishing village which Lord Brougham found it in 1831, when he erected the first English villa, into a town of fine residences and splendid hotels extending for about four miles along the coast, and rising on the wooded hills, or nestling in the sheltered ravines which seam their flanks.

Like most of the towns on the Riviera, Cannes owed its first existence to a rocky eminence in the middle of a bay, forming at once a naturally sheltered harbour and a suitable site for a fortification for its defence (Fig. 148). It is therefore probably a place of very ancient origin, and was in all likelihood the primitive Ligurian settlement of Ægitna, where the Roman Consul Quintus Opimius obtained a victory over the Ligurian tribes B.C. 155. The town was then handed over to the Massiliotes, the allies of the Romans, and went by the name of Castrum{309}

Massiliorum during the Middle Ages. Sometime before the tenth century it became a fief of the powerful Abbey of the Lérins, to which the whole of the adjacent country had gradually become subject. The ecclesiastical suzerain was represented on the mainland by a “chevalier,” who occupied the castle of Cannes, which crowned the rock above referred to, and was surrounded with walls. On the slopes of the castle hill and round the harbour at its base were erected the houses of the ancient town, and in the same position still stand the dwellings of the native population, approached by steep and narrow alleys (Fig. 149).

The summit of the hill is crowned with the only buildings in Cannes having any claim to antiquity. These consist of the “Tour du Chevalier,” the ancient Church of St Anne (formerly the chapel of the castle), and the more modern parish church of the seventeenth century, the whole being surrounded with the remains of walls, towers, and bastions of various periods, enclosing open spaces and courtyards, and presenting a very varied and picturesque ensemble.

The “Tour du Chevalier” (Fig. 150) is a structure of peculiar interest, being the first we have met with of a series of similar towers which, we shall find as we proceed, were erected in the eleventh and twelfth centuries for the defence of the towns and churches of this district. These towers are generally, like that at Cannes, square on plan (Fig. 151), and have walls built with courses of square dressed stones, having the faces left rough. The ground floor is vaulted, and is entered only from the first floor by an aperture in the vault. The entrance doorway to the tower is on the first floor, at a considerable height above the ground; being so placed for security and being only approachable by a moveable ladder. The projecting step{311}

to receive the top of the ladder is visible in the Tour du Chevalier, beneath the entrance door. The latter has a straight lintel recessed within a plain round arched opening. From the first floor level a stone stair corbelled out from the interior of the wall and running round the sides of the apartments led to the upper floors, which were originally formed of timber, although now vaulted with flat arches of more recent construction, probably of the sixteenth century. The roof was no doubt flat and was provided with a crenellated parapet, projected on corbels with machicolations between them. This parapet was only destroyed some years ago, when the tower was struck by lightning. The openings for light are small square apertures in the masonry without splay or ornament. They have no internal bay, but are mere oblong holes passing through the walls. These holes might almost be supposed to have been used for projecting beams through, on which to rest wooden hoardings for defence, but there are no doors for access to such works. According to the Abbé Allier, in his History of the “Iles{314} de Lérins,” this tower was begun in 1073 by the Abbé Aldebert II., partly on Roman substructures. The parapet was, however, not completed till 1395 by the Abbé Jean de Thornafort. This tower and the other similar towers of this district (of which more hereafter) occupied in their design an intermediate position between the keeps of the North, such as that of Montmajour, and the lofty towers of the Italian cities, of which those of Sienna and Verona are well known examples. The courtyard of the castle was enclosed with walls fortified with towers, of which some portions still remain, but the enceinte has been greatly altered in later times, and converted into bastions with platforms for guns, and parapets loopholed for musketry. This was probably done during the Spanish wars of the sixteenth century. Within the walls there were no doubt buildings for the residence of the Chevalier and the garrison, the tower being only used for watching, and as a keep or last resort in case of siege. Of the original structures the only one besides the tower now remaining is the church of St Anne, which, according to the Abbé Allier, was erected towards the end of the twelfth century. This church forms an example of the simple style of Cistertian architecture, which, as already remarked, was largely adopted in Provence—especially, as we shall see, in many of the smaller churches. In these we find the Cistertian plainness combined with the plan of a simple nave without aisles, terminated with an apse at the east end.

The Church of St Anne (Fig. 152), although erected in connection with the castle, also served originally as the Town Church. It is of the same simple type as Thoronet, but on a much smaller scale. The plan (Fig. 153) consists of one long nave, 87 feet in length by 20 feet wide, with a round apse at the east end; and it has no aisles{315}

or transept. The walls are perfectly plain, both internally and externally, and the roof is constructed with a pointed vault, strengthened with square transverse ribs, which spring from simple pilasters in the wall. The cornice between the wall head and the arch consists of the same plain ovalo moulding as at Thoronet, and the part of it forming the impost of the transverse ribs is “cut off” at the sides, like the impost of the cloister arches at that abbey. Some of these imposts, adjoining the central door, have a few rude and scarcely intelligible carvings on them—apparently{316}

of human heads. The apse is semi-circular, with a very short choir raised one step, and covered with a semi-dome as at Thoronet, but there is no round window above the choir arch. The original doorway (Fig. 154) enters from the north side, where, probably, the outer bailey of the castle was situated. It is composed of a simple outer and inner round arch, forming one nook. The impost is a plain cavetto, the portion supporting the inner arch being “cut off” at the sides. The doorway is 5 feet wide; but, in later times, this was found too large, and it has been partly built up and reduced. It was probably placed near the centre of the church, and made of the above width for the convenience of the town’s people. There is a door{317} in the west bay of the chapel, placed on a high level, which may have been used for access from the castle to a gallery or upper floor, such as was frequently introduced in similar castle chapels.

At a comparatively recent date the walls of the chapel have been raised (Fig. 155), and the top of its vault used to form a platform for guns, to aid in the defence of the town and castle.

The existing parish Church of Notre Dame d’Espérance occupies a prominent position on the Mont du Chevalier. It is a heavy building of the eighteenth century. The only redeeming feature it possesses is the west doorway (Fig. 156), which is a good example of the Renaissance work of the seventeenth century. The tower at the north-east angle of the church (seen in the above view) has been{318} raised in comparatively recent times on the substructure of one of the original towers of the castle. The lower portion with its round archway is certainly ancient. The upper part, which is now the clock tower of the town, forms a prominent and telling feature in all the views of Cannes.

In the bay, opposite Cannes, lie the two Iles de Lérins, dedicated respectively to Ste Marguérite and St Honorat.

Architecturally speaking, the Island of St Honorat possesses the most interesting series of buildings in the Riviera, combining, as it does, some features of the architecture of every period and style of Provençal art, whether Ecclesiastical or Civil.

This island, which is the outer and smaller of the two, held, for some centuries, an important and honourable position in the West of Europe. It was originally occupied as a post by the Romans, the materials of whose buildings, in the form of broken bricks, etc., are scattered over the soil. We shall also find that some Roman columns have been preserved and utilised in the castle, while numerous Latin inscriptions may be seen built into the walls of the modern cloisters. In the fifth century the island seems to have been deserted when St Honorat retired to it, and there founded a monastery, which was destined to become famous. It constituted for long the chief repository of all the learning and education which remained in Southern Gaul; and, like Iona, became a centre from which missionaries issued to enlighten the surrounding countries, and spread religion amongst the Barbarians. Besides many other celebrities, St Patrick, the patron saint of Ireland, is said to have been educated here.

A monastery was erected in the centre of the little island, which is only about half-a-mile in length. Some remains of a church of the eleventh century were still extant in 1836, when Mérimée visited the island. It was a simple basilica, having a nave of six bays, covered with a pointed barrel vault, and side aisles with abutting vaults, like Thoronet.

But, in 1876, these remains were swept away, and a new church erected in the Provençal style, but without{320} any special features. The only ancient portion now remaining is the cloister (Fig. 157), built in the simple Cistertian style, with a circular vault, strengthened with transverse ribs. The side next the cloister garth is enclosed with a wall, in which only small openings or windows are perforated—not the usual wide arcade.

Of the antique structures of the island an extremely interesting example still survives in the chapel of the Ste Trinité (Fig. 158), situated at the eastern point of the island, opposite the islet of Ferreol. It is very peculiar in design, and is undoubtedly one of the earliest buildings in Provence.

The plan (Fig. 159) shews a nave of two bays, having one transverse arch supported on simple columns, with rude caps of the same section as the string courses or imposts of the arches, beyond which is a triapsal choir, crowned with a small and rudely-formed dome. The apses have their semi-domed vaults fairly well constructed, but the central dome is not raised from any definite pendentives,{321}

but as best it could be done by the workmen of the time out of a lower dome which fills in the angles between the apses.

The original exterior (Figs. 160 and 161) is extremely plain, the quoins and doorway with its square lintel being constructed with large stones, probably derived from a Roman building (Fig. 162). The upper part of the walls was raised by the Spaniards, in the sixteenth century, to form a platform for guns. The earlier form of the western gable is visible in Fig. 160.

We have evidently, in this primitive structure, a rude attempt to imitate the triapsal and domical forms originally used in the early Christian architecture of the cemeteries at Rome, and afterwards more fully developed in the East.{323} Viollet-le-Duc attributes its erection to the seventh or eighth century.

Of the seven chapels which once extended round the island, and formed the object of many pilgrimages, those of Ste Trinité (just described), and St Sauveur near the centre of the north side, alone survive. The latter (Fig. 163) is octagonal on plan, with niches on each of the sides, and a larger central one, forming an apse opposite the door. This apse alone is visible on the outside. The chapel is unfortunately greatly modernised.

In course of time the monastery naturally became rich, and formed a tempting bait to the Corsairs of the Mediterranean, whether Saracen or Christian, who attacked and plundered it several times. It is said that on the occasion of one of these descents in 725 St Porchaire{324} and five hundred monks were massacred. A restored chapel to the south of the convent still bears the name of that martyr.

To provide a safe place of retreat in case of similar attacks in future it was resolved to erect a keep or castle on a promontory of rock which juts out into the sea at the south side of the island. Here a perpetual look-out could be kept over the sea from the watch-tower on the summit, and notice of danger given by ringing the bell (the belfry for which still exists) in time to enable the monks to take refuge with their valuables within the keep. The castle is stated to have been begun about 1073 by the Abbé Aldebert II., partly on Roman substructions and partly on the rock, and the chapel was consecrated in 1088 (see “Les Iles de Lérins,” by the Abbé Allier.) In fifteen years the second floor was commenced, and in 1190 the tower was finished. Having been frequently sacked and destroyed there is some difficulty in making out the original plan. Besides, containing as it does, an open cloister, it differs so greatly otherwise{325}

from the feudal castles of the time, that their plans give little aid in deciphering that of the monastic keep. It seems, however, to have been originally (Fig. 164) an oblong building measuring 85 feet from east to west, and 58 feet from north to south, with a wing projecting to the southwards. This block was divided into two portions by a central wall running north and south, and contained in the eastern division an open cloister, formerly three, though now reduced to two storys in height, and in the western division the refectory, dormitory, and other apartments. To the east a small projection or tower contained on the{326} first floor the lavatory and latrines, and at the top was carried up as a watch-tower above the parapet, and{327}

surmounted by the belfry for the alarm bell. The space at the north end of the cloister is (as we shall presently see) a

later extension of the original keep. The entrance door is in the north wall (Fig. 165), several feet above the level of the ground. It has a square lintel, with a round saving arch over it, and the door was strengthened with a sliding bar. A narrow passage at right angles, furnished with a second door, leads by a few steps up to the level of the principal floor and opens on the cloister. This is the most striking and remarkable part of the castle. It is 40 feet long by 27 feet wide, and is surrounded with a vaulted gallery (Fig. 166), supported on six columns—three on each side—leaving open to the sky a central space of 19 feet by 10 feet. The first view of this cloister is most impressive. The ancient appearance of the granite columns, with their quaint caps and bases, surmounted by bold pointed arches, above which rises an upper and lighter arcade; the rich colour of the walls; the sombre effect of the dark arcades contrasted with the bright light of the open central court; and the unusual character of the structure, all combine to produce a powerful and lasting effect on the mind. Nor does a closer inspection diminish the interest. Some of the pillars are found to be genuine Roman ones, brought from some ancient building, and here utilised in a very matter-of-fact though telling manner. The columns being generally too short, some of them have been pieced up with the yellow limestone of the district, while others have been elevated on bases of extra height. Three of the ancient shafts are of granite, one of red marble, and the remaining two of limestone. On one of the former (that at the south-west angle) can be read part of an inscription in honour of Constantine. This shaft has the appearance of having been long exposed in the open air, and many of the letters are worn away, so that some parts of the inscription are difficult to decipher. The following is the rendering of the{329}

Another interesting point connected with these pillars is the form and decoration of their capitals and bases (Figs. 167 and 167^a). At first sight they look very rude and primitive, but on careful examination they are seen to possess certain characteristics which belong to a comparatively late period, thus raising a suspicion as to their antiquity, which the evidently late vaulting of the cloister tends to confirm. One is therefore somewhat puzzled how to regard them, and what date to assign to them. But a comparison of the caps and bases of St Honorat with those of the cloister of Thoronet at once removes all difficulty. Original and quaint as both are, they are evidently (with the exception of some which are later,{332} and will be afterwards referred to) the product of the same style and period. The Abbé Allier informs us that in 1295 the Abbot Gancelme de Mayreris did much work in the interior of the tower, and in 1315 a general chapter granted certain fines in order to raise funds for its completion. To this period probably belongs the first construction of the cloister. But in 1400 the monastery was attacked by Genoese pirates, commanded by one Salageri, who took the castle by assault, imprisoned the monks, and pillaged the monastery. These Corsairs kept possession of the castle for about a year, and were only got rid of by a general muster of the nobility of Provence, with their retainers. The invaders probably greatly destroyed the building; for we learn that after 1400 the cloisters, “L’Escalier tournant,” and other works were commenced, and carried on by one Gastolius de Grasse, who died in 1422. These facts indicate two periods of considerable operations at the castle, one in the beginning of the fourteenth and the other of the fifteenth century. Some of the caps (such as A, D, and E), which so strikingly resemble those of the cloisters of Thoronet, probably belong to the first of these periods; while others (like B) have been executed in imitation of them, but contain details which are undoubtedly of the period of the later work. The capital (B) and most of the bases are clearly of the fifteenth century; the style of the ogee and other mouldings, and the foliage of the griffes or claws at the angles and on the cap B, being of a late character. The form of the vaulting (Fig. 168), with its thin groins all dying away to one sharp point at the springing, and without caps or corbels to rest on, also corresponds with that date. The cloister arches are pointed, but have no mouldings. It was in 1394, shortly before the second of the above periods, that the body of St Honorat was{333}

brought to the island from Forcalquier. Altogether, at this time the monastery seems to have been in great activity, and extensive works appear to have been then carried out at the castle. The portion adjoining the north side of the cloister was at that time extended, so as to form a projection to the northward, containing the “Escalier tournant” above mentioned. The elliptical arch of the doorway to this wheel-stair (see Fig. 166) is evidently a late work, and a wide joint or crack in the masonry, shewing the point from which the extension northward took place, can be distinctly seen in the exterior of the east wall (Fig. 169), where it extends from top to bottom of the castle. The style of the masonry of this portion is also smoother than the original work, which is left rough or “bossy” on the surface. The object of this addition has probably been to provide a space for a guard-room near the entrance to the castle with a wide staircase, and a broad platform on the roof for defensive purposes. Beneath the cloister is a large cistern or tank, stated by the Abbé Allier to have been constructed by Gastolius de Grasse early in the fifteenth century; it contains a supply of good water. A steep stair opposite the entrance door leads down to some small cellars, arranged in two storys (Fig. 170), under a portion only of the western part of the tower.

Ascending the “Escalier tournant,” the steps of which are four feet long, we arrive at the upper cloister (Fig. 171). This contains a gallery all round, with a parapet next the open court, on which stand twelve octagonal columns supporting as many pointed arches (Fig. 172). The whole is built in fine white marble, and the design is in the Italian-Gothic style, somewhat similar to that of the cloister arches at Fréjus. Some of the shafts and caps are evidently restorations in imitation of older ones (Fig. 173).

could be traced on one side of this cloister, two members of that house having been Abbots commendatory of the Lérins. This probably marks the date of the restoration—fifteenth century—but the original pillars seem to be at least a century older. Some of the tiles of the floor, which are of a plain red colour and square, still remain. Although the cloister is now roofed in over the first floor, the section (see Fig. 170) indicates that there was formerly a third story. The corbels in the wall to support the beams of the roof are distinctly visible. The roof may have formed a platform{337} nearly on the level of the battlements. The two upper floors were not vaulted, but arches were thrown across at the four angles (see Fig. 172) against the outer wall so as to strengthen and steady the whole structure. On the first floor (Fig. 171) the northern addition forms a recess, covered with a plain circular vault, and lighted by a wide window provided with stone seats. The east projection also forms a recess with a small window and a locker in the wall. This was probably the sacristy, as it adjoins the chapel in the south wing.

The southern wing or projection seems to be of the same date as the original castle, and to have formed part{338}

of it. On the ground floor it is covered with a plain semicircular tunnel vault similar in construction to that of the northern projection, but there is no indication on the exterior of there having been any extension of the masonry, such as above indicated at the northern end.

The first floor of the south wing contains the chapel, 25 feet by 26 feet with a groined vault about 28 feet high (see Fig. 170). The ribs are large and of a square section, and rest on plain corbels in the angles, the construction of the whole being very simple. The windows are small and have the same recesses deeply splayed towards the outside, as occur in the old part of the east wall in the upper cloister, and which indicate an early date.

The chapel was probably part of the original design, and was restored in the fourteenth century. We read that in 1342, the Abbot Geoffrey had the “choir” constructed in Toulon. This no doubt refers to a wooden gallery or{340} stalls, which were then fitted up, but have now entirely disappeared.

The western portion of the castle was divided in the centre by a wall running east and west. The northern division seems to have contained the kitchen, and the other half the original refectory. The stone sink still exists in the kitchen window to the north. The windows looking to the west are small and high, the sill being stepped up. The upper floors in this wing would contain the dormitories, being provided with fireplaces and garderobes in the walls. But this part of the building was much altered in the seventeenth or eighteenth centuries, and Mérimée mentions that when he visited the Island in 1834, the place was divided up into small rooms with plaster partitions, and, he adds, “some of the chambers are still painted in the style of the eighteenth century, several of the panels over the doors representing shepherds and shepherdesses in the style of Van Loo, decorations one would scarcely look for amongst the monks.”

At a period subsequent to the original erection of the castle, the angle contained between the southern projection and the main building was enclosed with a wall and added to the structure. The walls of this addition are much thinner than the old ones, being only about 4 feet, while those of the original castle are from 8 to 10 feet thick. That this portion is an addition is evident from the style of the masonry of the old southern wall, which is visible in the interior of the extension, and corresponds with the rough ashlar of the exterior walls generally (see Fig. 174, right side).

The principal floor of this addition, entering off the lower cloister, was used as the refectory (Fig. 174). It is 47 feet long by 16 feet wide, and is roofed with a round tunnel vault strengthened with transverse ribs. This structure must belong to a comparatively late period—probably the fifteenth century—but it is noteworthy that{341} the old Provençal style of tunnel vaulting, strengthened with transverse ribs, having a simple ovalo for the string course or impost, and “cut off” corbels, is still maintained.

The custom of reading to the monks during meals by one of their number was evidently observed here, from the semi-circular recess or pulpit, raised a few steps above the floor, which is formed in the wall at the north-east angle.

The basement of this addition may have been used as cellars and stores, and was reached by a wheel stair in the thickness of the wall. The upper floor (now destroyed) was the library, which contained a large number of valuable MSS., now dispersed and lost.

At the restoration of the fifteenth century, the top of the castle on the sides next the land (Figs. 165 and 169) was{342} crowned with a stone parapet projected on bold corbels, with wide machicolations or apertures for defence between them.

In 1524, and again in 1536, the castle was attacked and taken by the Spaniards, who, on the latter occasion, were commanded by the famous Genoese Captain Andrea Doria, on the part of Charles V. Some additional buildings were added by the Spaniards to render the castle more defensible according to the ideas of the sixteenth century. A narrow gangway only 4 to 5 feet wide was built, by which alone access could be obtained to the entrance doorway; and this was defended by a double doorway at its outer end, where also it could only be reached by a narrow stair placed at right angles. To the north of this was a ditch and drawbridge. An outer wall seems also to have enclosed the castle on the west side, and some additional buildings were erected at the south-west angle, but these have now almost entirely crumbled away.

This ancient ruin, so interesting historically and architecturally, is not less so artistically. Whether we regard the venerable aspect of the antique cloister or the rich golden colour of the exterior, contrasting so beautifully with the dark-green of the pines and the deep blue of the southern sea and sky, nothing could be more charming or delightful.

After the above dates the castle seems to have been garrisoned by the Crown of France, and was frequently taken and retaken by the Spaniards and the French. It was at this period that the Chapel of Ste Trinité was heightened, and fortified with two cannons; while, at the same time, other batteries were erected at different points round the island.

Meanwhile the monastery had dwindled away, but the monks still retained their suzerainty over Cannes, Vallauris, Napoule, and other villages on the mainland.{343} Finally, in 1788, the number of monks had become reduced to four, when, on the request of the Bishop of Grasse, the monastery was secularised. Thereafter the island has several times changed hands, and now it is occupied by a body of Cistertian Monks, who cultivate the soil and superintend an orphanage.

The adjoining island of Ste Marguérite has but little interest architecturally. The fort, which is built on the precipitous rock on the north side of the island, facing the Croisette point at the eastern extremity of the bay of Cannes, was erected by Richelieu. Scarcely finished, it was attacked and taken by the Spaniards in 1635, who enlarged it, and after being recovered by the French, was repaired by Vauban. The view of the castle from the Croisette is picturesque and pleasing (Fig. 175); but the only point worth inspecting close at hand is the prison in which the “man with the iron mask” was confined by Louis XIV. for seventeen years. The extreme thickness of the walls (above 12 feet), the window defended{344} by three successive gratings in the depth of the wall, the double doors covered with iron studs and secured with iron bars, give some idea of the importance of that mysterious prisoner.

In the environs of Cannes there are numerous delightful walks and excursions amongst the olives and vines of the valleys, or by footpaths over the pine-clad hills. One of the most favourite of these is to the town of Vallauris, famous for its fine pottery ware. It may be reached by a road through a rocky valley, which branches off the main road to Antibes, at Golfe Juan, or by a footpath, forming a pleasant walk of some four miles across the hills, past the wayside chapel of St Antoine, which crowns the “col” between the two valleys. From this point a splendid view is obtained over Vallauris and its surrounding hills, above which, in the distance, rise the snowy peaks of the Maritime Alps. At Vallauris there still exists an interesting architectural relic, being the original chapel of the summer palace of the Abbot of the Lérins. This residence, situated as it is amongst the hills some way inland from the sea, enjoys in summer a more temperate climate than the Island of St Honorat, which is said to be the hottest place in Provence. The property was acquired by the monastery in 1042, under a charter of Aldebert, Bishop of Antibes, and here the abbots built their seignorial castle. The chapel probably dates from the thirteenth century. The remainder of the palace was demolished in the end of the fourteenth century by a famous brigand, Raymond de Turenne, who devastated the whole coast of Provence. In the beginning of the sixteenth century one of the monks of the Lérins, Régnier de Lascaris, rebuilt the town on a regular plan, with good streets placed at right angles, presenting a very striking contrast to the network of{345}

narrow tortuous lanes which form the usual streets of Provençal towns. The houses were constructed for the accommodation of the workmen employed at the celebrated potteries of the valley, which were well known even in Roman times, and are still of world-wide fame. The palace was probably rebuilt about the same time, and possesses some picturesque features (Fig. 176). The chapel is (Fig. 177) like that of Cannes, a simple nave,{346}

31 feet long by 16 feet wide, with round apse about 10 feet deep. It is roofed in two bays (Fig. 178), with a pointed barrel-vault, having one square transverse rib in the centre, supported by a simple pilaster on each side, with a string course at the wall-head, and impost “cut off,” all as at the Mont du Chevalier. The apse is round, and has a pointed semi-dome instead of a round one, as at the latter. The windows are small and pointed, and have the deep external splay so common in all these buildings. There are two doors, also pointed, one of which enters at the south side from the castle court, and the other at the west end from the outside.{347} The pointed arches in the doors and windows probably indicate a somewhat later date than the round ones of the “Mont du Chevalier.”

A wide boulevard has recently been constructed, leading from the centre of Cannes straight northwards for a distance of about two miles, through the only ground near the town which is at all level, to the village of Le Cannet. Here an ancient machicolated tower (Fig. 179), called the “Maison du brigand” (now crowned with a{348}

peaceful photographer’s studio), contrasts strangely with the new houses rapidly rising around it, along the recently constructed and improved roads; but on the higher ground some of the more antique houses and narrow lanes are still preserved near the quaint old church of Notre Dame des Anges (Fig. 180). Le Cannet forms an agreeable promenade from Cannes; and it is well worth while to continue the walk or drive northwards for about two miles through the magnificent groves of olives which here clothe the valley, as far as the base of the hill, on the summit of which stands the ancient town of Mougins. Whether viewed from below, or from the hill above on the right close by the ancient and picturesque church of Notre Dame de Vie (Fig. 181), the effect of the old town crowning its rocky and olive-clad height is always striking. The climb up the steep and many-stepped mule path to the habitations on the summit is no small task, but the labour is well repaid by the splendid{349}

views thence obtained in all directions, especially towards Grasse, and by the picturesque vistas which meet the eye at every turn in the ancient narrow streets. One of the original gateways of the town (Fig. 182) is still preserved, with its machicolated parapet and the grooves for the portcullis behind its plain pointed arch. It is supposed that Mougins is the Mons Ægitna to which the native tribes retired, and where they fortified themselves after being driven from Cannes (or Ægitna) by the Romans. In returning to Cannes, the route may be delightfully varied by a walk over the hills, past Notre Dame de Vie, and along the footpath beside the aqueduct, which brings the water supply from the sources of the Siagne (some twenty miles off by road, but double the distance measured round the windings of the canal) to Cannes and Antibes.{350}

Castellaras, about a couple of miles north from Mougins, is another splendid point of view. An ancient castle here occupies the summit of a hill, and is partly surrounded with its old wall of enceinte, but the most of the buildings connected with it are modern.

The most important place, however, lying a few miles inland from Cannes, is Grasse, an ancient town of some celebrity, and still a place of considerable business and movement. It lies about ten miles north from Cannes, and may be approached by several roads or by railway. One road goes to the westward, by the plain of Laval and the valley of the Siagne, passing through the little town of Pégomas, and within a short distance of Auribeau (Fig. 183), an ancient city perched on the crest of a lofty hill. From this point the road steadily ascends, till, after a long climb, Grasse, which stands about 1000 feet above the sea, comes into view, its houses clustering round the old cathedral, and rising in the form of an amphitheatre (Fig. 184), tier over tier up the hillside on which it is built. From the height at which the town stands, the view over the luxuriant lower ground between it and Cannes is very commanding and delightful, the whole of the valley being laid out as gardens for the cultivation of{351} the roses, violets, and other sweet scented flowers, from which the perfumes for which Grasse is famous are distilled.

From an early time Grasse was an industrious and commercial town. It thus became rich, and its wealth brought upon it frequent attacks from the Saracens while they had their headquarters at the Great Fraxinet. Early in the twelfth century the inhabitants followed the example of the Italian towns with which they had commerce by constituting themselves a free republic. Their consuls formed treaties with Pisa and Genoa, and unfortunately the town got mixed up with Italian politics and the disputes of the Guelphs and Ghibellines. This led to the usual unhappy result of dividing the people into violent factions, and enabled Raymond Béranger, Count of Provence, in 1226, under{352} pretext of aiding the Guelph party, to render himself master of the town. In the sixteenth century Grasse shared the unhappy fate of the rest of this part of France, when Francis I. found himself unable to defend it against Charles V., and therefore laid the whole country waste. The town also suffered greatly during the religious wars of the seventeenth century.

The most important building in Grasse is the cathedral. It is the first church we have seen, on our way eastwards, which represents a type essentially different from that of Provence, and markedly akin to the architecture of Italy—a characteristic which we shall find more and more strongly developed in our progress along the Riviera. The plan (Fig. 185), like that of most of the churches of Italy, consists of a central nave and side aisles, all originally terminated with eastern apses, the{354}

existing choir, which is square, being a late addition. The character of the exterior is essentially Italian (Fig. 186), being similar in its forms and ornament to the churches of Pisa and Genoa, with which towns, as above-mentioned, Grasse had commercial relations. The arcaded ornament at the eaves is very Lombardic, and the doorways of the west front and north side (Fig. 187) are of the ordinary Italian design of the thirteenth century, with low pitched roof. The tall and simple square campanile is also Italian in conception. The design of the interior (Fig. 188) is somewhat remarkable, the massive circular piers with their cushion caps having more of the character of a Northern than of a Southern edifice. They remind one, however, of those of Carcassonne. The solid square groins of the vault, springing from very simple corbels, are of a usual Provençal form—such, for instance, as those of Fréjus Cathedral. Close to the cathedral stands one of the square towers (Fig. 189), similar to that of the Mont du Chevalier at Cannes, which we have noticed as being common in the towns of this{355}

province. It is built with the usual rough-faced ashlar work, but its other distinctive features are now lost, the interior being occupied as dwelling-rooms. This tower adjoins the ancient Bishop’s Palace, now the Municipal Buildings. Near this—and, indeed, scattered everywhere through the narrow and busy streets of Grasse—are{357}

to be seen many fragments of the massive architecture of its ancient palaces. These are easily distinguished from their being built with the same rough-faced, solid masonry as the tower; and they often still retain a door or window of pointed form, recalling the older palaces occasionally found in the similar crowded lanes of Genoa. There are also some examples in Grasse of the great houses of the merchant princes of the Renaissance period, so distinctive of the Italian cities. The picturesque staircase of one of these is still preserved (Fig. 190). This building stands at the east end of one of the charming open “places,” surrounded with arcades, planted with trees, and enlivened with fountains, in which Grasse abounds, and which form such attractive subjects for the artist. In one of the narrow streets stands the Church of the “Oratoire,” (Fig. 191), the strikingly Italian façade of which at once arrests attention. It is evidently a building of the fifteenth century, and is exactly such a design as may be found in any of the cities of Northern{358} Italy. The annexed sketch (Fig. 192) of one of the caps of the main piers is suggestive, and corresponds with similar details of the same period in Italy.

From Grasse several very interesting excursions may be made, and a number of ancient buildings investigated. A very fine, although a long day’s expedition, is the drive{359} to St Césaire and Callian. The former is reached by a side road, which branches off the main road to Draguignon, about six miles west of Grasse, and after a climb of three miles further up amongst the mountains finally arrives at St Césaire, beyond which all progress westwards is stopped on the crest of the great cliffs which hem in the gorge of the Siagne.

It is therefore necessary to return to the main road, itself sufficiently winding and romantic, along which a further course of eight to nine miles conducts to Montauroux and Callian. The{360} whole journey there and back to Grasse thus extends to about thirty-seven miles, but can easily be accomplished in one day with a pair of the hardy ponies of the country.

The main road from Grasse descends by numerous wide loops towards the valley, and skirts the lofty mountains on the right, where several picturesque looking villages are seen clustering on the hillsides.

At Tignet the ruins of an ancient commandery of the templars are passed, but there is nothing of architectural interest sufficient to detain the traveller till St Césaire, amongst its remote and snow-clad hills, is reached.

The town of St Césaire is charmingly situated about nine miles west from Grasse. It stands on the edge of a lofty precipice overlooking the valley of the Siagne, which is here full of remarkable scenery and interesting grottoes and fountains, forming a romantic region, from which starts the aqueduct which supplies fresh water to Cannes and Antibes. St Césaire possesses still some remains of its ancient walls and gates (Fig. 193), some quaint pieces of carving{361} over doorways etc. (Fig. 194). But its most interesting feature architecturally, is the ancient church which stands in its quiet churchyard outside the town, relieved against a background of snowy mountains (Fig. 195). It is similar in its Cistertian simplicity to those of Cannes and Vallauris, and differs only in having, instead of plain pilasters, rounded vaulting shafts, with simple caps and bases (Fig. 196), the former very similar to those of Thoronet. The church is 45 feet long by 20 wide (Fig. 197), divided into three bays, with apse 9 feet deep to the eastward. As at Vallauris there are two doors, one at the west end and one in the south side, the latter pointed externally and round internally. The windows have round arches, with the usual deep external splay, at the inner edge of which the opening is narrowed by two half roll mouldings, probably with a view to prevent draughts in this lofty and exposed region. For the same reason there are only three very small windows, two on the south side and one in the apse.

This church probably dates from the early part of the thirteenth century. Both the exterior and the interior are well preserved. The walls have been heightened at a later date, but why is not clear. As the alteration does not affect the interior, it has probably been done to make the slope of the roof harmonise with the west front, which has been altered and a belfry added.

As in all the churches of the style, the tiles of the roof rest directly on the outside of the arches.

The main road, from the point where the branch to St Césaire leaves it, continues westwards and descends with many wide and bold sweeps till it reaches the Siagne, which it crosses at Les Veyans, and again ascends the steep and wooded valley on the opposite side. Soon the rugged ruins of the castle of Tournon (Fig. 198) are seen frowning over the pass from their rocky eminence, which can only be reached after a hard climb through the thick wood and thorny heath which clothe the hillside. But that trouble is rewarded by the discovery of a rude and remarkable edifice. This consists of a Keep of semi-circular form{364} built on the edge of a precipice which forms the diameter of the circle, and has apparently been considered a sufficient defence of the structure on that side. A semi-circular lofty wall of enceinte surrounds the keep on the side next the hill. The entrance gateway was doubtless in this wall where there is now a ruinous gap. The building is reduced to bare and shattered walls, so that its interior arrangements cannot be determined, but it must have been a very singular and unique structure.

Near the highest point of the road, in continuing westwards, the village of La Colle-Noire stands across the way, and in olden times stopped all passage by means of gates in its walls. Beyond this, an open country rich in vines and olives is traversed, from which another long ascent leads to the town of Montauroux, standing on a promontory, crowned with the ruins of the Fort St Barthélemy, destroyed in 1592. A wide curve of the road,{365} round a fine amphitheatre of terraced lands, leads from Montauroux to Callian, another little town perched on the hillside, and commanded by the immense ruins of an old castle (Fig. 199), which like all the others in the province, was sacked in 1792, and of which only the shattered shell remains. It would appear from the mullioned windows and round tower, to have been built in the fifteenth century, and has evidently been altered in the seventeenth, by the insertion of numerous large oblong openings. In the sixteenth century this pile was inhabited by Jean de Grasse.

From Grasse another excursion of surpassing interest, not only on account of the magnificent natural scenery passed through, but also from the variety of the architectural remains, may be made to the eastward leading by Le Bar and Vence to Cagnes, where the Paris, Lyons, and Mediterranean Railway is reached. The whole distance is about twenty-five miles. The first place of note arrived at after leaving Grasse is Le Bar, about six miles to the eastward. It stands on a platform at a considerable height and enjoys a fine view to the southwards. The church, not remarkable otherwise, has a Roman inscription built into the tower, and a fine Italian Gothic doorway (Fig. 200) in the south side. This doorway, with its twisted nook shafts and arch mouldings, plain caps, and enclosing notched weather table, might have been found in almost any part of Italy. Wooden doors covered, like this one of Le Bar, with elaborate carvings, are a feature of common occurrence in every part of the province, and are often of much interest and beauty. The church contains two remarkable Mediæval paintings which were thought worthy of notice at the great Exhibition of Paris, to which they had been sent. The town is still dominated by the relics of a great castle of the Middle Ages, of which some towers remain, but it is now greatly ruined and shorn of its grandeur. Some of the old walls of the town also still survive, and give this quaint old place, perched as it is on the steep slope of the hill, an unusual and striking aspect.

From Le Bar the main road descends in wide curves towards the valley of the river Loup, but long before reaching the bottom of the gorge the eye is attracted by the unusual appearance of towers and pinnacles rising from the summit of a lofty pyramidal mountain to the northwards (Fig. 201). These distant peaks are found on nearer approach to be the edifices of the town of Gourdon,{367} an eyrie built for security from the assaults of the Corsairs on this inaccessible and naturally fortified eminence.

A post road, branching off the main road at Le Bar, passes, after many windings and ascents round the rocky sides of the opposite cliffs, within a short distance of Gourdon; but for those who intend going on to Vence, the latter course is too great a deviation from the route. Their only way of reaching Gourdon is by the steep and stony footpath which is seen rising to it in innumerable zig-zags from near the bridge over the Loup.

It is a splendid ascent, although a somewhat arduous one, and affords a lovely series of views; but it may{368} be questioned whether one is sufficiently rewarded by the specimens of architecture which he finds in Gourdon. It is now a melancholy and deserted village, occupied apparently only by a few women and children. Some of the houses are picturesque in their grouping, like those in Fig. 202, but there is nothing fine about the place except the magnificent view to the south, east, and west from the terrace in front of the old church. One very large building seems to swamp all the rest of the little town. This is a great château (Fig. 203), built by the family of Lombard in the style of the seventeenth century, and which, we believe, is still occupied in summer, when the cool breezes of this elevated pinnacle form a grateful change from the heat of the plains.

From the point where the main road crosses the Loup, a delightful excursion may be made up the gorge amongst the mountains, as far as a famous waterfall called the “Saut du Loup.”

The road now gradually ascends the northern side of the valley of the Loup, which is seen flowing at some distance below on the right through a richly cultivated plain. In some of the cuttings by which the road is carried round the rocks, numerous oyster and other fossil shells may be observed, characteristic of the tertiary limestone which here occurs of great thickness, and forms the immense cliffs which at some parts of the coast overhang the Mediterranean.

On approaching Tourettes the road sweeps round the abrupt side of a gorge where the rock is hollowed out into caverns, some of which are occupied as houses and stores. From this point a fine view is obtained of the grey old town of Tourettes, with its crumbling walls and houses{370} rising from the margin of precipitous rocks of the same sad dusty colour. There seems to be nothing of special interest in the town, but outside the walls on the north side there is a wide open “place,” on which stand the Hôtel de Ville and the church of the fourteenth century. The latter is a specimen built on the plan of the simple hall without aisles. In this instance it is vaulted with groined arches (Fig. 204), the ribs having the unusual form of a plain bead, and springing from small primitive looking corbels, such as are common in Provençal churches.

A few miles’ further drive through fine mountain scenery brings us to the ancient city of Vence (described further on), whence the railway station of Vence-Cagnes is about six miles distant.

We shall now return to Cannes and follow the route eastwards along the coast of the Mediterranean. This takes us first by the fine sheltered roadstead of Golfe Jouan to the city of Antibes, which stands upon a rocky peninsula jutting out into the sea, and enclosing a sheltered bay and harbour, defended on the opposite point by a great star-shaped fortification called the Fort Carré, erected by Vauban. The town itself is surrounded with walls, and strongly fortified in the style of the seventeenth century, of which it is a good and little altered specimen. The views of the town from the sea coast are charming (Fig. 206). Surrounded on the land side with its great stone ravelins and bastions, and protected on the south by its rocky seaboard, with the snowy peaks of the Maritime Alps forming a background, and the bright blue of the Mediterranean in the foreground, a finer picture can hardly be imagined.

The town of Antibes is of very ancient origin. According to M. Lenthéric, a sacred stone of the Phœnicians has here been found, with a Greek inscription, giving proof of the ancient worship of the Hellenes having been observed in this locality in the fifth century B.C. This town was also an important station under the Romans. In very early Christian times it became the see of a bishop,{372}

but being greatly exposed to the attacks of the Saracen Corsairs, from whom it suffered severely, the see was in 1243 removed for security to Grasse. There were originally four bishoprics in this part of the Riviera, viz.:—Nice, Antibes (afterwards Grasse), Vence, and Fréjus. The whole are now comprised in the two dioceses of Nice and Fréjus.

As a frontier town Antibes was necessarily much damaged during the wars between Francis I. and Charles V., being frequently attacked and pillaged. Its ancient buildings have thus been almost entirely demolished, either by the direct effects of war or in the construction of the fortifications, so that scarcely a trace of Roman occupation remains, save in some tombs, inscriptions, and urns which have been dug up. The oldest existing structures stand on the highest point of the rock facing the sea. Here we find some parts of the cathedral of the thirteenth century, and two towers in the style of those of the Mont du Chevalier at Cannes. The church is very simple in design, and seems to have been originally similar to that of Vence, but it has been greatly altered and a new front added in the seventeenth century (Fig. 207). The two towers at Antibes are of peculiar interest. At Cannes there is only one tower or keep, which was attached to the castle of the Chevalier. At Antibes one of the towers (Fig. 208) is in connection with an old palace (now a barrack), which doubtless occupies the site of the ancient castle, being on the summit of the rock, and suitably placed for keeping a look-out seawards. The other tower is close to the cathedral (Fig. 207), and is still connected with it by a covered way on the first floor. It seems probable that the first was the keep of the temporal Commandant and the other that of the spiritual Lord. The frequent incursions of the Corsairs would render such a place of security desirable in{374}

connection with the cathedral, and would also enable the bishop to be independent of the temporal power. Both keeps are constructed in the same manner as that of the Mont du Chevalier with rough faced ashlar blocks, and in both the entrance doorway is on the first floor. That of the castle (Fig. 208) is recessed under a plain round arch, and has a moulded step to receive the ladder or moveable stair by which it was approached. There are also two corbels, one on each side of the doorway, as if for the purpose of carrying a pent house roof. The stair is carried up round the inside of the walls and supported{375} on corbels as at Cannes. The castle tower has in modern times been lowered and covered with a sloping roof. The bishop’s tower is now used as the belfry of the church, and has had large round headed openings cut in it near the top to let out the sound of the bells.

On the left of this tower in the sketch (Fig. 207) may be observed some remains of similar workmanship in the masonry, which indicate the position of another ancient structure above which a modern house has been erected. Some fragments of ancient walls, and a gateway with two large round towers, may be observed on the eastern side{376} of the Rue Aubernon, and these, together with the arcades on the opposite side, and the double row of trees which line the boulevard, form a striking and picturesque promenade. These walls doubtless enclosed the ancient cité, and the Rue Aubernon occupies the position of the original ditch. The fortifications of the existing town extend a long way beyond this ancient boundary.

In passing along the coast eastwards from Antibes a fine view is obtained on the right over the sea towards Nice, while on the other hand glimpses occur between the olive groves and up the valleys to the mountains beyond. The first of these openings, the valley of the Brague, shews the interesting old town of Biot in the distance, set as usual on a rocky height. A little further on the tower of the castle of Villeneuve-Loubet rises above the river Loup, and immediately thereafter the town of Cagnes bursts suddenly upon the view. This town consists as usual of a series of houses clustering in terraces round the sides of a detached and precipitous hill, crowned with an ancient castle on its summit. The station of Vence-Cagnes is easily reached by railway either from the direction of Nice or Cannes, and from it several pleasant excursions may be made to the places above referred to, which have just been passed, and also to the ancient towns of St Paul-du-Var and Vence, already mentioned.

Cagnes is a place of some industry, being the point of export for the products of the valleys of the Loup, the Malvan, and the Cagne. On leaving the railway station and approaching the town, the lower part of the hill on which it stands is seen to be richly clad with the dark green foliage of the orange trees, enlivened with their golden fruit, planted in stone-built terraces rising steeply one over the other up to the walls of the town.{377}

Entering at the south end of the hill a steep and narrow street leads straight up to the top at the north end, where stands the old castle of the Grimaldis (Fig. 209). This is evidently an ancient structure, having the bold machicolated parapet of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. But it has been greatly altered in the seventeenth century, when large windows have been opened in the walls, the machicolations being in numerous places cut away to receive them (Fig. 210); while at the entrance front a wide outer staircase with double ramp and marble balustrade has been introduced leading up to a principal entrance doorway on the first floor. From this access is obtained to a small inner courtyard surrounded with Renaissance columns forming a staircase and corridor above of two storys in height,{378} which, adorned as it is with beautiful plants by the present proprietor, has a peculiarly pleasing effect. Some of the apartments are finely decorated. That of the “Belle Cheminée” has a sculptured marble fireplace and a ceiling painted with the fall of Phaeton, said to be by Carlowe. From the platform lying to the north of the château a magnificent view is obtained to the northward up the valley of the Malvan towards St Paul and Vence, and the lofty precipices of St Jeannot beyond, backed to the right with the snowy ridges of the distant Alps.

The nearest place of prominence from Cagnes is the Castle of Villeneuve-Loubet—about two miles to the north-west. This castle has been modernised and nearly rebuilt, but enough of the original work remains to render{379} a visit very interesting. On nearing it, the edifice (Fig. 211) is seen to consist of a central castle strengthened with four towers at the angles, and surmounted by a lofty, quaint, and Moorish-looking watch-tower, the whole being enclosed with a strong wall of enceinte, defended with round towers at the angles (Fig. 212), provided with large port-holes for guns, and separated from the surrounding county by a deep ditch. The entrance gateway consists of an iron grating, guarded by two round towers, and furnished with a drawbridge over the moat. The round towers and walls of enceinte are by no means modern; they probably belong to the sixteenth century, but they have been shorn of their proud battlements, and thus present a very squat and subdued appearance.

The central castle is in part much more ancient, but also for the most part greatly altered and modernised. The{380}

original plan was probably not dissimilar to the existing one, comprising a central courtyard with buildings surrounding it. The exterior walls are modern, but those of the interior of the courtyard are partly ancient, although altered. They are built with the rough-faced ashlar of the thirteenth century, and contain some decayed coats of arms on which may still be traced the lances of the Villeneuves and the star of Les Baux. Externally, the east face (Fig. 212) presents two noteworthy features in the apse of the chapel and the tall watch-tower. The chapel,{381} although now converted into apartments, still retains the outlines and buttresses of an apse which seems to belong to the fifteenth century. The watch-tower is one of the most perfect examples of those characteristic features of the Maritime Alps. It is of the same nature as the keep towers we have met with at Cannes, Grasse, and Antibes, having the same rough ashlar facing, but instead of being square on plan like them, it has the eastern side projected in the form of a sharp angle (like the tower of La Trinité in the same locality, to be described immediately, and of which a plan is given). The access to the top is by a narrow wheel-stair on the side next the quadrangle. The important point about the tower is that it preserves its battlemented top almost unaltered. It is carried up to the height of about 90 feet, and near the summit has several courses of a dark-coloured stone, which give it a Moorish or Italian character. These may at one time have been enriched with carving, of which one fancies some traces may still be observed, but they are so completely weather-worn that no forms can be distinguished. The level platform on the top is defended with a simple crenellated parapet without machicolations. From this lofty station a wide outlook could be kept over sea and land.

This castle and tower belonged in the thirteenth century to Romée de Villeneuve, the chief of that powerful family and the guardian of Beatrix, daughter of Raymond Béranger IV., the last of the Counts of Provence of that line. It was through the marriage with the heiress Beatrix that Charles of Anjou, the brother of St Louis, succeeded to the title and estates of the Count of Provence. The estate was sold at a later period to the Lascares of Ventimiglia, and is now the property of the Count of la Panisse-Pacy. In 1538{382} this castle entertained an illustrious guest in the person of Francis I., who stayed here while Pope Paul III. carried on negotiations between him and Charles V. The latter had landed at Villefranche in order to meet the French king; but so great was the antipathy and distrust of the two monarchs for each other, that they could not be brought to encounter a personal interview. These negotiations ended in the signature, by Francis in the Castle of Villeneuve-Loubet, of the Treaty of Nice (See “The Maritime Alps and their Sea Board.”)

From the top of Romée de Villeneuve’s tower another similar tower is observed rising above the pine wood about a mile up the valley to the north-west. To reach it we descend from the castle so as to gain the bridge across the Loup, and in doing so the steep streets of the old town of Villeneuve, terraced in tiers on the slope of the{383}

hill, are traversed, and the old church on its fine platform is passed on the left. The road up the valley is easy and agreeable, but the ascent of the conical hill, the summit of which is crowned with the tower of La Trinité, is no light work. From a distance this tower looks like a lofty pedestal erected to support the colossal statue of the Virgin and child which now surmounts it. But on closer inspection it is found to be{384} a remarkable example of a keep, defended with that accumulation of obstacles with which the old builders used to block up the access to their strongholds. After the steep hillside has been climbed, one finds himself at the base of the pointed rock on which the keep is set (Fig. 213). From here a sloping path leads up to the ruins of the chapel, of which only the vestiges of wall shewn in the sketch (Fig. 214), mingled with the scattered fragments of the font and other relics, now remain.

The ruins of a strong gateway in the outer walls which closed the access are passed just before reaching the chapel, and a lower bastioned terrace is continued round the northern part of the eminence at this level.

From the chapel, when one turns his eyes upwards to the tower (as in Fig. 214), he discovers such a series of winding stairs interrupted at frequent intervals with walls and gateways as must certainly have rendered a hostile approach in that direction impracticable, while perpendicular rocks and lofty walls made the access equally hopeless on the other sides. Besides this, on the side next the hill, which was perhaps the least invulnerable point, stands the keep (Fig. 215), strengthened with a projecting beak of similar form to that of the tower of Romée de Villeneuve. The lower story is original, and contained the doorway at the level of the top of the rock. This inaccessible point, on which there is a small platform, was probably reached by a rude stair cut in the rock (as indicated on the plan) and was defended with outworks, the approach to which was overlooked from the upper platform. The doorway, it will be observed, is placed on the opposite side of the tower from the platform, at a point where the foothold is narrow, and the door therefore all the more secure.

The upper portion of the tower dates from 1863, when, as the following inscription, which is carved on a marble{385} slab let into the wall, announces, the old tower was reconstructed by the Comte and Comtesse de la Panisse-Pacy, and dedicated to the blessed Virgin:—

The tower alone has been restored in the manner shewn by the sketches; all the other portions remain undisturbed in their ruins. The rooms in the tower are only 10 ft. 6 in. long by 7 ft. wide, and there is no indication of any other habitation connected with the fort.

The place has all the appearance of a typical robber’s stronghold, and, as James V. said of a similar Scottish keep, “He that built it was a thief in his heart.” According to tradition, La Trinité was originally a keep of the Templars. That order had extensive possessions in this part of Provence, and they may have erected this tower as a post for watching and giving notice of the approach of an enemy. After the suppression of the order La Trinité passed into the possession of the Mathurins or Redfriars. They were also called the Order of the Trinity, and their special duty was to succour prisoners. The name of the tower may possibly have been derived from them. The chapel is 29 ft. long by 14 ft. wide, and the raised step at the east end is still traceable. The{386}

walls have been about 8 ft. 6 in. high to the plain ovalo forming the string course from which sprung the semi-circular barrel vault of the roof. From the upper platform of the fortress a splendid view is obtained (Fig. 215), especially to the northwards, comprising St Paul-du-Var in the middle distance, and Vence backed by the towering precipices of St Jeannet. Beneath these stood the powerful Commandery of the Templars at St Martin (to be afterwards described), from which a signal at their watch-tower of La Trinité would be easily observed.{387}

From La Trinité a rough footpath leads across the pine-clad hills to Biot, a distance of about two and a half miles as the crow flies, but about an hour’s walk over the heath-covered heights, and through the deep ravines which have to be traversed. Some extensive quarries are passed on the way at Les Aspres. After a hot tramp over these rocky and barren hills, it is refreshing to reach the fertile and cultivated valley of the Brague{388} with its steep and terraced banks richly clad with olive and orange trees. A very steep descent leads to the bottom of the valley, from which the walls and towers of Biot are seen rising on the crest of the hill above (Fig. 216). This is one of the most primitive old towns in the district. A very circuitous post road has now been constructed up to it, but the old accesses by long flights of wide steps, on which the peasants and their mules are constantly ascending and descending, are still preserved, and are in their way amongst the most picturesque streets in the Riviera. Climbing patiently up flight after flight, and winding round the narrow streets, we at length reach the highest point, on which stands the church. The following inscription is carved in the interior wall:—“Hanc Ecclesiam consecravit Illus, primus et reveredismus Inxpo P.D.D. Isnædus D. Grassa Episcopus Grassen,

thus shewing that the church was consecrated by the bishop of Grasse at the above date. Some of the work corresponds with that period, e.g., the doorway in the west end (Fig. 217). But the south doorway (Fig. 217) has an earlier character. The exterior is all altered, and the interior has also been modernised in a very extraordinary manner, but some traces of the original building are still observable. Biot belonged to the Templars in 1247, and afterwards to the knights of Malta. In 1470 the bishop of Grasse brought hither forty-eight Genoese families, probably to help to re-people the town after the plague or some destructive assault of the Corsairs. This was evidently the occasion on which the bishop re-consecrated the church, which then no doubt required to{389}

be to a great extent rebuilt. But some of it bears the signs of having been erected at an earlier date by the Templars. The plan (Fig. 218) is very unusual. A simple oblong divided into three aisles with three terminal apses such as we see here is common enough, but the plain round columns which separated the nave and aisles are very uncommon. The bases and caps are of a simple and early character (Fig. 219). The pillars are too light to have been intended to carry vaulting, and the original church would thus seem to have had a row of plain arches on each side, with perhaps a clerestory wall above supporting a wooden roof. The building would thus have originally the characteristics of a primitive basilica, somewhat like San Miniato at Florence (Fig. 33, p. 101). But this design has now been ingeniously altered and destroyed, and the whole character of the interior degraded from being one of the most interesting churches of Provence into a commonplace Renaissance chapel. By means of stucco the old round pillars have been converted on the side next the nave into flat{390}

pilasters which are carried up and finished with Ionic caps, supporting an entablature which runs along each side of the church above the old arches. A groined vault in plaster springing from the top of the cornice is{391}

thrown across the nave. The old pillars with their caps and bases have, however, been allowed to remain unchanged on the side next the aisles, where their archaic forms contrast strikingly with the modern plaster work on the other side. An attempt has been made to Italianise the apse also, but the pilasters and entablature fit lamely into the old apse. A wide flight of steps at the west end leads down from the doorway into the church, and has a rather peculiar effect. This no doubt arose from the irregularity of the site. To the west of the church lies the public place, surrounded with plain{392} houses, all arcaded on the ground floor, and presenting a pleasing example of that picturesque feature of the towns of the Riviera. A walk of about three miles through the olive gardens of the valley of the Brague leads to the Antibes Railway station. Biot may of course be visited directly from the latter; there is a good carriage road.

One of the most delightful excursions from Cagnes is that to St Paul-du-Var, and Vence, two of the most interesting old towns of the Riviera. The distance to St Paul is from three to four miles, and to Vence two to three miles further. This may be accomplished either by driving or on foot. A carriage may be hired near the Cagnes Railway Station. The route in driving goes by a rather circuituous road round the west side of the valley of the Malvan, passing within a short distance of the castle of Villeneuve-Loubet. The most direct road is either along the base of the hill on which Cagnes stands, or through the town. For the pedestrian the latter is by far the most agreeable. Starting from the terrace of the old castle (already described), a rough footpath is followed along the ridge which separates the valley of the Malvan from that of the Cagne, and affords a delightful prospect of both. The rich colour of the russet leaves of the forest trees, mingled with the dark green of the pines and the grey tint of the olives, gives a special charm to the walk. Looking northwards the towns of La Gaude and St Jeannet stand out prominently on their rocky heights against the lofty and precipitous mountains immediately behind them; while in the distance the white peaks of the Maritime Alps close the valley of the Var. To the south there is a splendid view of Cagnes with the Mediterranean on the horizon. After half an hour’s walk the footpath joins the main road{393}

opposite St Paul, and near the point where the mule path branches off to descend to the Malvan, before again ascending by a rough and steep track to the town. From the main road a fine view is obtained of St Paul (Fig. 220), surrounded with its massive walls, and standing on a detached promontory, with steep terraced slopes descending to the river. Other pleasing and varied prospects of the town and valley occur at intervals amongst the ancient olives in following the above footpath (Fig. 221). About half way up the path on the side next the town an outwork on a detached peak is passed, then a ruined fortification bars the road, and finally the ancient gateway and barbican, and the cemetery just outside the walls, are reached, and the main street of the town, which is but a narrow lane, is before us. The architectural interest of the place is at once apparent. On every hand are evidences of genuine ancient and{394}

unaltered work. The doorways (Fig. 222) are of old and varied forms, almost every one having a panelled lintel, supported by corbels, many of the former containing carved shields and ornaments, and the latter being enriched with leaves and scrolls. Most of these doorways are of the beginning of the sixteenth century, and indicate early Renaissance work. Others again are carved and moulded with the double curvature of the late Gothic style, and a few shew marks of a simpler and earlier design (Figs. 223 and 224). The windows also contain many specimens of Gothic shafts and mullions, but they are much more altered than the doorways. Even the ancient woodwork of the latter is in many instances retained, and the unpainted oak or walnut give, in addition to the picturesque and fanciful designs, a rich and antique character. One of the most interesting points connected with the main, and almost the only street in the town, is the preservation of its{395}

ancient shops. At almost every step one meets with the wide arch which contained both the door and window of the shop, the former being cut down to the door step, while the latter had the stonework built so as to form a sill about 2 feet high, on which the goods were exhibited. These sills are sometimes projected and moulded on the edge. At St Paul many of the shop fronts are now built up, but several are still in use (Fig. 223), and when piled up with their complex store of vegetables and fruits, mixed with the quaint and richly coloured jars of the country, present very tempting subjects for the artist. The street floor{396}

of the houses adjoining the north gateway (Fig. 226) is amongst the oldest and least altered examples. Numerous narrow lanes branch off the main street and descend by steps and arcades to the roads which run round the walls. In other cases arches are thrown across the street, and picturesque effects are thus produced (Figs. 225 and 227). Most of the buildings in the main street date from the time of Francis I. After the destructive invasion of Provence by Charles V., Francis found that his frontier in this quarter was insufficiently protected, and employed an engineer from Arles called Mandon to inspect the locality and fix on the best site for a fortress. Mandon chose the isolated hill on which stood the ancient town of St Paul as the best suited for this purpose; and it was accordingly fortified and surrounded with the walls and bastions which still subsist almost in their entirety. St Paul was thus raised into a place of some importance and security, and became the residence of a governor and several families of distinction. This no doubt led to the improvement of the architecture of which we have seen so many examples. Of the town houses of the governor and nobility some specimens still remain—one well preserved mansion of a somewhat later period is seen in{397} sketch, Fig 225, and relics of others are also to be found, though in a sadly degraded and dilapidated state.

In the Maison Suraire (formerly Du Port), remains of ancient magnificence still exist in two richly decorated mantelpieces, of which Fig. 228 is one.

The original staircase of this house is also still in use; its richly-carved and ornamental balustrade of marble (Fig. 229) forming a strange contrast with its present humble position as an access to peasants’ houses. The mode of junction of the pedestals at the turn of the staircase by placing a boldly cut lion rampant between them is novel and effective.

This house stands in the very diminutive and only little “place” in the town, where also is the fountain, and whence branches off the way to the church, which stands on the highest point of the site. The main street, and all the side alleys, are but continuations of the mule paths of the country, interrupted here and there with steps, and all too narrow to admit a cart or carriage of any kind. They are thus often so completely swept by the loads of firewood and brushwood on the mules’ backs, that passengers have to seek shelter in the recesses of the doorways. The walks{398} round the walls are in part wider, and the small gardens of the houses sloping down to them, with the dark foliage and golden fruit of their orange groves, form a fine foreground to the lovely prospects visible in every direction.

The gateway (Fig. 230) at the entrance to the town from the north has an older character than the fortifications of Mandon. This gateway seems to have formed the ancient entrance through a square tower placed for defence on the neck of land which joins the promontory to the mainland. It presents the same character as the square gate towers of Avignon, having a plain pointed archway{399} and portcullis groove on the exterior, defended by a machicolated parapet above, the interior of the tower being left open towards the town, so that, if captured, it could not be turned to account against it (see Fig. 226).

This tower has been incorporated by Mandon in his works, and is strengthened externally by a bastion with another portcullis, and a narrow passage commanded from above.{400}

But St Paul possesses memorials of a much older time even than this fourteenth century tower, in the ancient church and keep which crown the summit of its rocky site. The church is a small but remarkable monument. Externally the west front (Fig. 231) shews a central portion of plain ashlar work, with a simple pointed doorway, and a small pointed window above. There are also some corbels remaining, which probably supported the wall plate of the lean-to roof of an outer porch or narthex. The adjoining walls at the sides, and above the corbels, are all evidently much more modern than the central portion. The lofty square tower attached to this front appears, from an inscription it bears, to have been erected in the seventeenth century. On entering the building, the lowness of the{401} central nave (Fig. 232), and the extreme simplicity of its construction and vaulting, are seen to correspond with the style of the central part of the exterior. The plain character of the whole recalls the work of the early Cistertian school. The church has probably been originally a simple nave, like Fréjus on a small scale. The aisles appear to have been added afterwards, the side walls having been cut through to give access to them (see Plan, Fig. 233). But so devoid is the building of ornament or features whereby a date may be determined, that the aisles may possibly have been original, although altered at a later date. The vaulting of the aisles, with its rounded or octagonal ribs, is certainly of more recent date than the plain intersecting vault without ribs of the central nave.

Close to the church stands a very interesting example of the tower-built keeps of the Maritime Alps (Fig. 234). It is similar in general character to those of the Mont{402}

du Chevalier, Grasse, and Antibes, but has some peculiar and remarkable features of its own. The original masonry is of the usual rough-faced kind, but it has been repaired in several places with work of a smoother description. The top has evidently been modernised, and is covered with a tile roof instead of the proper crenellated parapet. Windows of an antique character are provided to light the apartments on the upper floors, instead of mere square holes in the wall like those of the Tour du Chevalier. Indeed, this keep seems to have been more of a habitation than the others we have met with, and was apparently connected with an ancient building of the same description of masonry, a few remains of which are visible to the left in the sketch. But the most remarkable features about this tower are the entrances and their defences. The lowest doorway is on the first floor level.{403}

It is semi-circular and is now built up. This doorway seems to have given access only to a guardroom on the first floor, from which the vaulted basement would be entered in the usual manner by an aperture in the floor. At the level of the doorway there was evidently a wooden platform projected outside of the door, from which a wooden overhanging stair led up to the chief entrance to the principal apart{404}ments of the keep on the floor above. The stone-work shews a projecting ledge at the line of junction of the wooden stair with the wall. The corbels, which supported a level platform above this stair, still remain, and it will be observed that there is no corbel opposite the place where the stair would pass through, as no floor would be required at that point.

The two string courses on the next floor were no doubt inserted, one for the purpose of carrying the struts of a sloping roof, and the other to cover the junction of the roof with the stone-work. Although partly cut away, these strings are yet fairly preserved. The sloping roof{405}

would cover the wooden gallery or hoarding which, we have seen, protected the principal doorways and staircase.

The outer approaches to this keep were thus most carefully defended. An assailant, who managed by scaling ladders to get up to the first floor or guardroom level and overpower the guard, would find no access from the interior to the upper floors. To reach these he would have to climb a steep stair, enclosed within a wooden casing with trapdoor shut, and would thus be exposed to attack with all kinds of missiles from the platform above, where the defenders stood within the shelter of their projecting hoarding or gallery.{407}

A somewhat similar wooden balcony for the defence of the doorway existed at Preston Tower in Scotland, but so far as we have observed, that of St Paul is quite unique in the Riviera. The refinement shewn, both in the defensive features and in the windows of this tower, indicate a somewhat later date than those of Cannes or Antibes. The defensive works here correspond with the{408} hoardings so common in France in the thirteenth century, such as those at Carcassonne and Aigues Mortes.

Vence.—A walk of about three miles along a good road gradually ascends from St Paul to Vence on either side of the Malvan Valley. That on the eastern side is the nearer, if the direct old mule path is taken about a mile from Vence, instead of the carefully engineered but winding modern roadway. Should the visit be made in December or January, a fine opportunity will probably present itself of witnessing the olive harvest on the way. Large sheets are spread out into which the ripe blackberries are showered down by shaking the branches. Men, women, and children all unite to expedite the work, and help to gather up the fruit which may have dropped upon the ground.

The road on the western side of the valley is more winding than the other, in consequence of a great gorge in the rocky mountain side having to be compassed and crossed. The descent to the point, where bridging it is practicable, also adds to the length and steepness of the ascent to the town. But the rugged way is interesting, the rocks being full of natural caves, evidently the result of the waves of a previous geological epoch. The town consists of two distinct parts—the old town enclosed within a circular or oval enceinte (now represented by a line of houses), and a circle of houses built outside the ancient ramparts. The position of the latter is now occupied by a wide street or boulevard running all round between the old and new divisions. One or two ancient gateways (similar to that of Mougins, Fig. 182) are still preserved, but they are small and unimportant. In the narrow streets specimens of old shop fronts, like those of St Paul, may be detected here and there, and in the newer part of the town some fair Renaissance designs are observable in the houses, that of the Hôtel de Ville being the finest.{409}

Vence is a very ancient city. It was the Ventium of Roman times, of which period numerous inscriptions and relics are preserved and built into the northern wall of the cathedral. In mediæval times Vence was originally the see of a bishop, but was afterwards joined to that of Fréjus. The town suffered the usual casualties from the attacks of the Saracens and assaults during the wars of{410}

religion. The cathedral, which is evidently very old, is supposed to have been rebuilt after the destruction of the original one by the Saracens in the ninth or tenth centuries. Owing to the simplicity of its style internally{411} (Fig. 235), it has a most archaic appearance. Unfortunately, the exterior cannot be well seen in consequence of the chapels, houses, &c., which are built against it. Originally the church has consisted (Fig. 236) of a central nave 18 ft. 6 in. wide, with two side aisles each about 10 ft. wide. The chapels shewn projecting beyond the aisles are comparatively modern, and are lighted from the roof. The nave piers are (as regards design) simply portions of the side walls left standing, while the remainder is omitted so as to form round arched openings into the aisles. The side aisles are carried (as was often done) to a sufficient height to abut the central vault of the nave, and are divided into two storys—the upper story being a gallery—an arrangement very common in Lombardy and Germany. A more total absence of anything like ornament can scarcely be conceived. This plainness, taken in conjunction with the somewhat similar work at St Paul’s, seems to indicate that the design here owes its origin to the reign of the early Cistertian principles in the twelfth century. The choir and the tower at the north-east angle (Fig. 237) are evidently of a more recent date. The choir, with its circular apsidal termination, internally, converted into a square east end externally, is somewhat remarkable. It may be observed that the eastern termination of the churches of Antibes and St Paul are also square externally. There is a certain Italian character about the east end of Vence Cathedral with its single very small pointed window and its cornice enriched with modillions. The impost of the eastern door (Fig. 236) is also quite Italian, and judging from the style of this part of the church, it probably belongs to the thirteenth century.

The campanile adjoining the church likewise recalls those of the Italian cities. At Vence, as at Antibes, there are two such towers or keeps for defence, one being{412}

attached to the church, while the other was formerly connected with the castle, and now with the Hôtel de Ville (see Fig. 242). The ground floor of the former tower enters from the church, and forms a chapel where are deposited two very finely carved Gothic doors, which no doubt once served as the doors to the church. The font (Fig. 238) stands in a small chapel at the west end. Its design is peculiar and striking, and it is said to be very ancient. Adjoining the cathedral on the north are some ruinous remnants of the bishop’s palace, now converted into other uses (Fig. 239). In the “place” at the east end of the cathedral (see Fig. 237) stands a granite column raised on a pedestal, and said to have been the gift of the city of Massilia to her sister of Vence. In the same place some picturesque fragments of old houses are still preserved (Fig. 240), the late Gothic doorway on the right being given on a larger scale in Fig. 241.

There are several small “places” in the old town all containing a few relics of olden times. The tower of the Consuls (for Vence, like the other towns in the province, had her consuls and an independent government), has already been mentioned, and is shewn in Fig. 242, adjoining a gateway leading into a “place” with a fountain on one side, and{414} the Hôtel de Ville on the other. This tower is of the same style of masonry as those we have met with in other towns, but it is now cut up into shops and houses, and has lost its primitive features.

From the wide terrace in front of the Hôtel de Ville, a magnificent view is obtained of the mountains to the northwards. At the base of their lofty precipices the ruins of the Commandery of St Martin may be observed. It seems to be a very short way off, but is found to be a good half hour’s walk and a stiff climb. However, the trouble is repaid, for the view presented, when the lofty point on which the Commandery stands is attained, is magnificent, extending over Vence, St Paul, and Cagnes to the sea, and embracing the whole coast from the Cap d’Antibes to the headlands beyond Nice. The Commandery itself is a shapeless ruin (Fig. 243). The eastern wall and the great gateway, with its wide machicolation in the style of the Pope’s palace, are the only parts sufficiently entire to{415}

give any indication of the nature of the buildings, which from these seem rather to have resembled a castle than a monastery. This was the chief house of the Templars in the district, and overlooked numerous and extensive lands with which the order was enriched. The tower of La Trinité, as already mentioned, formed one of the outlying{417} forts of the Templars, and is well seen from the Commandery. When violent hands were laid upon the order by Philip the Fair, Hugorian was Master of St Martin-les-Vence. He was seized in 1308, and carried off to prison in Tarascon. This country was then under the dominion of Charles II. of Naples and Duke of Provence, whom Philip had persuaded to join in the destruction of the Templars. But in Provence the greater number of the Knights were allowed to escape, only forty-eight in all being captured. Their lands were chiefly bestowed on the Knights Hospitallers, who thus acquired great possessions in this part of Provence.

A short railway journey conducts from Vence-Cagnes to Nice, across the Var, the “dyke” or wall which keeps the floods of this impetuous river within bounds being one of the most notable of French Engineering Works. The existing town of Nice is almost entirely modern. The streets, with their rows of shops and lines of trees, look like a small piece of Paris transported to the south. The wide promenade des Anglais by the shore, however, commands a prospect which nothing in Paris can match. The old town, with its narrow streets crowded round the port, is of ancient origin, being one of the original Phocæan colonies, and in the modern “Nice” may still be recognised its original Greek name of Nike (victory). But it became a place of secondary importance under the Romans, who made Cemenelum, an ancient town of the Ligurians on the hill which overlooks Nice from the north, the chief city of{419} the Maritime Alps, to which Nice acted merely as the port. Being so near the frontier, both Cemenelum and Nice were exposed to attack on all hands, and suffered severely from the invasions of the Barbarians. In 578 the Lombards destroyed the strong city of Cemenelum or Cimiès, an event which, to some extent, restored the ancient importance of Nice. In 617 Nice joined the other towns of the coast in a league to free themselves from the Frankish kings. The town was frequently attacked by the Saracens, and more than once taken and destroyed. But after the Moors were driven from the Great Fraxinet in 975, the inhabitants of the town were comparatively free from their inroads. Although Nice stoutly defended her independence, she was, like the other towns of Provence, forced to yield to the Counts of Provence, who rebuilt the Castle both as a defence and menace to the inhabitants. Charles of Anjou was greatly indebted to Nice for ships to enable him to carry out his designs upon Naples. The incessant struggles between the powerful Nobles in the neighbourhood, the Grimaldi of Monaco, the Lascaris of Tende, and the Dorias of Dolce Aqua devastated the land, and brought famine and plague in their train. In the wars which followed the death of Queen Jeanne, the Niçois took the side of Ladislaus of Hungary, and called in the Count of Savoy to aid them against the King of Naples. Under the protection of Savoy, Nice soon regained her prosperity. The Counts of that house strengthened the Castle by every means in their power, and for this purpose the ancient Cathedral and Bishop’s Palace were removed.

In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries Nice was exposed to damage from the armies both of the French and the Emperor, and suffered severely—so much so that the merest fragment is all that remains of the ancient castle{420}

which gallantly withstood so many sieges, and not a single ancient building is preserved.

The environs of Nice, although full of natural beauties, are remarkably destitute of architectural interest. The few Roman relics at Cemenelum have already been described. Near these is an old convent, where from the churchyard a fine view of the lofty and rugged banks of the valley of the Paillon (which runs through Nice) may be obtained. In the Parvis in front stands a remarkable cross (Fig. 244), bearing the image of the crucified seraph who appeared to St Francis of Assisi. The cross bears a quatrefoil on each of its three upper points, with the figure of a Bishop and a Monk carved in the side quatrefoils, and that of the emblematic Pelican on her nest feeding her young in the top quatrefoil. The cross is supported on a twisted{422} marble shaft, some 9 or 10 feet high, having a composite capital, containing a shield bearing the arms of the founder. An inscription runs along the abacus, in which 1477 is legible. This date quite corresponds with the character of the design.

Descending by a steep mule path from the height of Cimiès to the valley of the Paillon past some great monasteries, or similar establishments, including that of St Pons, all surrounded with walls and studded with cypresses, we reach the high road. Following this road for three miles up the valley brings us in view of the Castle of St André, the sketch of which (Fig. 245) gives some idea of the nature of the scenery. Passing through the village of St André, and penetrating a short way further up the gorge of the torrent of the same name, Falicon is reached, famous for its grotto and natural bridge. The view looking back upon St André (Fig. 246) is strikingly picturesque.

From Nice the railway proceeds eastwards by a long tunnel under the ridge, formerly dominated by the old Castle, on emerging from which we find ourselves in one of the most charming scenes in the Riviera, the land-locked bay of Villefranche. On the margin of this sheltered and beautiful arm of the sea stands the old “Free-town,” surrounded with fortifications, and reflected in the quiet waters, on which, too, there are generally afloat one or two majestic representatives of foreign fleets. Between this and Monaco the railway passes along the narrow strip of shore which lies between the sea and the lofty precipices of tertiary limestone which here tower above it. At one of the sharp turns round the rocks, a first distant glimpse is caught of the old town and Castle of Eza (Fig. 247), set like an eyrie on the summit of its bare and lofty pyramidal peak. There is a railway station at the base of the mountain, and one feels tempted to alight and scale{423}

the height, the buildings look so enticingly picturesque. But it is no easy task; there is scarcely any track for part of the way, and when visible, the path is rough and full of running stones, as well as steep and winding. One is glad to take a rest occasionally, and enjoy the various fine views of the town on its lofty pinnacle, and the extensive seaboard visible from this elevation. Fig. 248 gives some idea of the character of one of these prospects. When at last the ascent is scaled, the result, as regards the architecture, is, it must be confessed, on the whole rather disappointing. The entrance gateway to the town is interesting from the remarkable and strong way in which its defences are{425}

arranged. The outer approach (Fig. 249) is by a passage faced by a cannon port-hole. From this access a gate at right angles leads to a second narrow enclosed passage commanded by a machicolated tower, through which a winding and ascending vaulted way conducts into the town (Fig. 250.)) The view of the interior of this gateway is very picturesque (Fig. 251.)) The town itself consists of a few narrow tortuous lanes bordered by decaying houses, chiefly tenanted by donkeys, pigs, and poultry. On the{427} top of the bare rock, and approached by great steps cut in the solid limestone, a few scanty and unintelligible fragments of the castle are yet visible, but the greater portion has been entirely swept away.

Eza was the Arisium of Antonine’s Itinerary, and it formed, like Gourdon, during mediæval times, a pretty secure retreat from the assaults of the Corsairs. The castle was, however, demolished by the Turks under Barbarossa in 1543. The arcaded tower house, and the door{428} lintel, shewn in Figs. 252 and 253, were the only objects of architectural interest discoverable in the place.

Between Eza and Monaco the railway continues to run along the base of the immense cliffs which overhang the sea, or through the frequent tunnels which penetrate them. One station short of Monaco we arrive at that for La Turbie; from which, by a very steep and zig-zag path, one may ascend the bare and nearly vertical hill above the railway, whence a pleasant walk of a mile or two through the pine forest leads to the town of La Turbie. This elevated situation is, however, more easily approached by a long well-paved but steep mule-path from Monaco. The{429}

monument to Augustus, which here marks the limit between Gaul and Italy, has already been described (ante, p. 87). This monument has provided a quarry, out of which the more important buildings of the town have been constructed. This is apparent from the great size of the stones used in the erection of the outer gateway to the{430}

south (Fig. 254.)) Passing through this archway, an inner encircling street is entered, from which another picturesque and pointed gateway (Fig. 255) gives access to the centre of the town. There is also a third gateway of pointed form, with a long machicolation over it at the eastern entrance (Fig. 256), and some further fragments of the olden time are to be seen in the streets (Fig. 257). The great trophy of Augustus, from which the place derives its name, was converted in mediæval{431}

times into a fortress, when the upper part has been rebuilt. The double tier of pointed arcade-ornaments (Fig. 32), which formed the support of the parapet, have quite an Italian character. They remind one of the similar ornament on Grasse{432} Cathedral. This tower was blown up by Marshal Villars at the end of the seventeenth century.

In descending by the steep and well-paved footpath from La Turbie to Monaco, delightful glimpses are obtained from amongst the luxuriant olives and citrons of the latter town on its isolated rock. Most of the towns on the sea-board have a prominent rock for their site, but that on which Monaco is built is the most detached and sea-girt of them all. It is of considerable height, and has perpendicular faces on all sides. On three sides these plunge sheer down into the sea, and on the fourth or northern side of the peninsula the precipitous rock is only joined to the mainland by a narrow strip of low-lying sandy beach. On the inaccessible platform above these precipices stands the ancient town, surrounded with its walls and bastions, and giving shelter and protection to the quiet harbour on its eastern flank. Of all these features we have a commanding prospect as we descend from the heights of the Cornice road, which passes by La Turbie.{433}

The history or traditions of Monaco extend further back than those of most of the localities of the Riviera. It derives its name from Hercules, who is supposed to have touched here on his way into Spain, and to have gained a great victory over the native tribes. Hence the name of Portus Herculis, by which the place was known in the early centuries of our era. This was afterwards changed to Portus Herculis Monœci, and finally into Monaco. The rocky fortress subsequently fell into the hands of the Saracens, who are said to have been expelled from it in the tenth century by the same Grimoald or Grimaldi who dislodged the Moors from the Grand Fraxinet, and whose successors became the Princes of Monaco.

In the eleventh century the place seems to have been abandoned, and in 1162 the Emperor Frederick I. presented it to the Republic of Genoa, who took possession, and rebuilt the fortifications in 1215. During the struggles of the Italian Republics, and the wars of the Guelphs and Ghibellines, Monaco several times changed hands, but was most frequently in the pos{434}session of the Grimaldi, and sometimes became the shelter of bands of pirates who scoured the Mediterranean. The Grimaldi sided with the French in the Italian wars of Charles VIII. and Louis XII., and through the influence of the latter became the governors of the whole of the Western Riviera.

During the struggle between France and Spain in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Monaco was alternately under the protection of each. The boundaries of the principality then included Mentone and Roquebrune, but in 1848 Mentone declared itself a free town. Since the annexation of the county of Nice by France, the principality, which is about three miles long by about half a mile wide, is entirely surrounded by the French Canton of “Menton.”

A comparatively easy drive to the town has now been made up the east side of the rock, but the original approach was by a steep flight of steps, carefully defended with strongly fortified gates, and commanded by the battlements above (see sketch, Fig. 258). The existing works at this point are evidently of the seventeenth century. The north side, which overlooks the mainland, was fortified with a large circular bastion at the western angle (Fig. 259), and a square one at the eastern angle. The former still retains some of the large corbels which carried the original parapet of the fifteenth century; but the bastions have been heightened and made suitable for artillery at a later date. On arriving at the top of the entrance to the town, a wide open staircase ascends to the front of the Ducal Palace (Fig. 258). This edifice is a picturesque assemblage of buildings of several dates, chiefly of the Renaissance period. Some of the old towers retain their forked battlements, a form common in the North of Italy. The whole place is vast and palatial, and from its lofty site and splendid background, composed of a rugged mountain called the Tête de{435}

Chien, has a noble and impressive appearance. The courtyard of the palace is also a fine though somewhat peculiar specimen of Italian design, the fresco paintings on the walls giving it a rich and southern aspect.

The town consists of three parallel streets, and contains some good bits of old work. A large new church in the early Romanesque or Provençal style of architecture has recently been erected. The old church contained specimens of capitals, and other details very similar to those of the lower arcade in the Castle of St Honorat. The gardens of the palace, which extend round the western side of the rock, where every chink and crevice is filled with fig trees, aloes, pears, and palms, form a delightful promenade; and the views from the walls towards Monte Carlo and Mentone,{437}

with the mountain ranges behind them, are most charming. Only a few miles off (about an hour’s walk) the remark remarkable town of Roquebrune is seen embosomed in orange groves on the slope of the mountain. The ascent from{438} the railway station is by a steep and narrow path, which penetrates into the town by a long vaulted and stepped passage, the entrance to which is through a small arched gateway, defended by a wide overhanging machicolation (Fig. 260). The church of St Margaret is then reached, in which the old font (Fig. 261) is worthy of note. The peculiarity of this town arises from the huge masses of rock which stand up amongst the houses, and at a short distance present the appearance of a great castle. These give the town its name, and one of them, larger than the rest, is actually crowned with the remains of the ancient fortress of the Lascaris (Fig. 262), which, however, is now but an empty shell. One or two open “places” amongst the great rocks form beautiful terraces, commanding fine and extensive prospects.

The railway, after leaving Roquebrune, sweeps round the Cap Martin, and enters the bay of Mentone, which is only about four miles off. This town, like all the others on the coast, had its castle on the summit of a promontory which juts out into the sea, and divides the coast into two portions, called the eastern and western bays. The Counts of Ventimiglia and the Genoese had, at different times, possession of the town and castle, but it was for the most part an appanage of Monaco, and followed its fortunes. In 1848 the inhabitants formed themselves into a free Republic, and enjoyed autonomy for thirteen years, after which Mentone became the “chef lieu” of a French Canton. The town was at one time surrounded with walls, which rose straight up from the sea. It thus completely occupied{439}

the narrow strip of land between the shore and the hill on which the castle stood, and barred the way along the coast. The eastern gate of the town, and the “Long Street,” which is also a very narrow one, leading through it, still remain, but a new and wider roadway, which forms part of the Cornice Road, has been constructed along the back of the houses in the eastern bay, and now encloses the harbour on the side next the town. An old square tower at the extreme point of the promontory is one of the few relics of the fortifications of the town. Above the “Long Street” the houses are built in terraces, rising rapidly tier above tier on the hillsides, and approached by long flights of steps and narrow vaulted lanes. In the midst of these stand the churches, buildings of the seventeenth century, of clumsy character. The towers and spires, however, form a picturesque group (Fig. 263); and{440} along with the houses, as seen from the harbour, together with the magnificent background of lofty and partly snow-clad mountains which shelter Mentone on the north, they compose a splendid picture.

The old castle which formerly crowned the summit, has been entirely demolished, and its site is occupied as a cemetery, from which very fine views are obtained both of the coast line and of the mountains on the north. Numerous narrow valleys and gorges run up from the sea towards the mountains, forming beautiful and interesting promenades and excursions, but there is little to attract the student of architecture.

At Gorbio, beautifully situated about five miles from{441} Mentone to the west, and some distance up a charming valley, there are an old church with a dark nave, and the remains of a castle of the Lascaris. The houses here are united by arches thrown across the narrow streets, an arrangement very common in this district, and supposed to be for the purpose of resisting to some extent the effect of earthquakes.

Ste Agnès, not far from Gorbio, is also a favourite excursion. It is a lofty and beautiful spot, with the remains of an old castle said to be of Saracenic origin.

The ascent to Castellar forms another delightful walk of about an hour and a-half, giving a fine idea of the richness of the valleys of Mentone in lemons, in the growth of which they excel every place north of Palermo. The town of Castellar is of some extent, and its situation on a “col” at the top of a steep ascent is fine, but there is no architecture of importance. It is clumsily built, and has been at one time surrounded with walls, which now form the exterior of houses. Some remains of ditches and towers—one of the latter being converted into the belfry of the church—also still exist.

About a mile eastwards from Mentone the Cornice Road crosses by the bold arch of the Pont St Louis the ravine which now forms the boundary between France and Italy. Since 1861 the limits of France have been extended considerably further eastwards than in ancient times, when La Turbie marked the boundary of Gaul. In the course of our journey we have observed that as we approach the frontier, the towns possess a good deal of the Italian character, and that both historically and architecturally they have much in common with Italy. The architectural styles of France and Italy were observed to overlap each other in the district we have just examined. But when we pass the modern boundary of France at the Pont St Louis, we may{442}

be said to have left nearly all trace of French and Provençal architecture behind, and in our further progress eastwards we shall meet with almost nothing which is not entirely Italian in style. We shall therefore in concluding our journey give only a rapid sketch of some of the more important buildings between Mentone and Genoa.

The railway eastwards from Mentone follows the coast line, and cuts through some lofty rocks at the mouth of the{444}

torrent of St Louis, famous from containing the caves in which have been discovered human remains, associated with the bones of extinct animals, such as the mammoth, the great bear, the elk, &c.

through a tunnel, on emerging from which the frontier town of Ventimiglia is seen towering above the plain of the river Roya. It stands on a bold rocky headland, defended on one side by the sea, and on the other by the river. Like all border towns, its possession was constantly disputed by the neighbouring suzerains, and it endured many sieges, but was generally under the authority of the town of Genoa. The streets are narrow and tortuous,{448} and have the usual picturesque staircases and arches. The porch of the cathedral seen in the sketch (Fig. 264) is old, and is decidedly Italian in character, but the rest of the front is modern. The interior again (Fig. 265) might be a Provençal Cistertian design, such as that of Thoronet.

Two miles eastwards from Ventimiglia, the valley of the Nervia opens to the left. An easy and agreeable walk of about five miles up the valley leads to the very quaint old town of Dolce Aqua. On the way we pass through the decaying but picturesque town of Campo Rosso with an open “place” lined with arcaded footways.

The most ancient part of Dolce Aqua lies on the left side of the river, which is crossed by an old bridge of one span, having the roadway stepped up on each side, and showing traces of old fortifications. Above this the houses rise in tiers, forming a dense and confused labyrinth of narrow lanes and dark tunnels—many of the former{449}

crossed by strengthening arches thrown between the houses on each side (Fig. 266). Dominating the whole stand the proud ruins of the castle of the Dorias (Fig. 267), a family famous in the history of Genoa and the Riviera. It is a building of a late date (seventeenth century), and has been defended with great bastions mounted with cannons (Fig. 268), surrounded with walls, and provided with a drawbridge. The castle has evidently contained large and sumptuous apartments, but the interior is now reduced to total ruin. The town has also been provided with fortifications, of which one tower near the river has been appropriated and heightened into a church steeple (Fig. 268). The castle has been abandoned since the wars of 1748, and the descendants of the Dorias now occupy a mansion, situated under the walls, in which there is a finely carved chimney piece, and an interesting collection of family portraits. The town of Pigna, about ten miles further up the valley,{450} is said to contain a good church of the fifteenth century, with pointed arches, and a fine painting of the sixteenth century.

Passing the ancient republic of Bordighera, with its arcaded streets and splendid palm gardens, we soon reach San Remo. This ancient town, originally independent, came ultimately, like the rest of the Riviera, under the authority of Genoa. It consists as usual of one principal street along the narrow strip of ground between the base{451}

of the hill on which the old town stands and the sea. The town consists of the ordinary pile of terraced houses with narrow tortuous streets and steep flights of steps leading up to them. There is here an extraordinary profusion of the arches, of which we have met with examples elsewhere, thrown across the narrow streets, in order to strengthen the houses against the shocks of earthquake to which this region is liable. These features sometime produce, together{452} with the stairs and tall houses, extraordinary combinations and effects (Figs. 269 and 270).

The cathedral of San Siro, which stands detached in a small “place,” has some good Italian features still preserved,—amongst which are the north and south doorways (Fig. 271), the remainder having been greatly modernised and spoiled.

In the main street there are some fair specimens of Renaissance palaces, somewhat in the style of those of Genoa.

From the railway station of Arma di Taggia, some miles east of San Remo, an expedition may be made about five miles up the valley to the exquisitely quaint old town of Taggia. It concentrates in itself all the various remarkable features of the towns of the Riviera in its arcaded streets and vaulted footpaths, narrow lanes crossed with arches, and approached by steep stairs and dark tunnels; and these features are here all combined in so profuse and picturesque a manner as to present an epitome of those of all the rest. In the midst of these striking general{453}

effects, so captivating to the artist, it is difficult, however, to pick out anything which may be regarded as really good architecture. Fig. 272 gives some idea of the picturesqueness of the arcaded streets and gateways, while Figs. 273 and 274 give a few good architectural details. The first (Fig. 273) might, from its style, be the lintel of any fifteenth century house in Genoa (a splendid example of a similar style of doorway at Genoa being shown in Fig. 281), and the other (Fig. 274) is a Renaissance doorway in black marble ornamented with raised arabesques. Close to the town is the monastery of San Cristofero, where the ancient cloister and tower (Fig. 275) are good specimens of early Italian work. The vaulting of{455}

the cloister is late, the original roof being probably of timber. The tower is a good Italian campanile, with string courses of the arcaded ornament so common in Lombardy and the Rhineland.

We are now in the centre of the district which suffered so severely from the earthquakes of 1887. Bussana is passed on the right in returning to the railway. The towns of Porto Maurizio (which stands on a solitary rock), Oneglia, and Diano Marina, all names too well known in connection with the above catastrophe, are reached in succession before arriving at Alassio, the furthest east of the health resorts of the Riviera. The tower of the church here (Fig. 276) has the usual form of the Italian campanile.

A few miles further east bring us to Albenga, which is, architecturally speaking, the most interesting town on this part of the coast. It lies in a hollow near the mouth of the river Acosia, and is defended from the cold winds of the North by an amphitheatre of lofty, snow-clad mountains. The general view of the town from the{457}

railway station (Fig. 278) shews the peculiar preponderance of square towers for which it is remarkable. On closer inspection these are found to be no less surprising than when seen from a distance. They are generally quite plain and are built of brick. The view of the west end of the church (Fig. 277) shews four of these towers crowded close together, exhibiting examples of several different designs. That over the north entrance to the church has a strong resemblance to the campaniles of Lombardy, such as that of Mantua, and is thoroughly Italian in every detail, while the plain square towers adjoining recall similar examples at Bologna and elsewhere in Italy. That again at the east end of the church, which has the figure of the lion at its base (Fig. 279), with its plain brick shaft, its triple arcaded top, and fork-shaped battlements, is almost identical with those of Verona. The church has originally been an Italian design of the thirteenth century. Although now much altered and spoiled it has evidently had the same arcaded ornament at the eaves as we have observed at Grasse, San Remo, and elsewhere. The doorways also correspond in style with the above churches. To the north of the church is a very interesting baptistery, which reminds one of those of Fréjus and Aix. It is of octagonal form, 28 feet long by 26 feet wide, with a vault supported on Corinthian-like pillars, and has a very ancient but dismal and neglected appearance. One of the windows is filled with stone tracery of a Byzantine or Moorish character.

In moving eastwards we pass in succession Ceriale, with its fortifications, and Loano with its great monasteries, Verezzi with one good campanile, and Flnalmarino with two. From the latter a view is obtained of Finalborgo in the distance (about two miles off), where there are evidently the remains of a fine castellated structure. At{459}

Noli there is an ancient entrance tower with an archway through it. Savona retains its fortifications of the Vauban School, and Verazze the shattered ruins of an old castle.

It is not intended to attempt to describe the architecture of Genoa. That has already formed the subject of special works, and would require a volume to itself. Only, in closing this account of the architecture of the Riviera, one{462} or two examples from Genoa are given, in order to make more distinct the analogies to which attention has been drawn between the architecture of a large part of the Riviera and that of the famous Republic, as well as the style of Italy generally. Thus the side doorway of the cathedral exhibits, in a remarkable manner, the same imitation of Roman architecture (see Vignette on title page, and Heading p. 25), modified by the introduction of Romanesque or Teutonic ornament, which we observed at St Gilles, Arles, and other churches of Provence. This doorway is part of the original building of the eleventh century, although the greater part of the cathedral was restored about 1300.

The façade of San Matteo, on which are engraved so many inscriptions in honour of the various distinguished members of the family of Doria and that of San Stefano, shew the arcaded caves, and the inlaid moulding under the cornice which exist at Grasse, San Remo, Ventimiglia, &c. The doorways of these churches have the same flat porch, with small projection, and plain pointed gable, and the same sort of arch and shafts as several of the examples we have met with in the Riviera. San Matteo dates from 1278. The cloister (Fig. 280) which adjoins that church is of the beginning of the fourteenth century, and contains the monuments of the Dorias, which have been brought here from the suppressed church of Santa Dominica. The cloisters of San Matteo, and also those of{463} San Lorenzo, present shafts and caps in the same Italian style as we have observed extended as far westwards as the cloisters at Fréjus, and the upper cloister of the castle of St Honorat. The sculptured lintel in the Piazza San Matteo (Fig. 281), exhibiting the combat of St George and the Dragon, although more elaborate, is similar in style to the lintel of the house at Taggia (Fig. 273); while the campaniles and arcades of other churches in Genoa (Figs. 282 and 283) recall the Italian style, of which we have met with so many examples in Provence.

INDEX.

Aegitna, 308.
Aigues Mortes, 206.
Aix-en-Provence, 217.
Alassio, 454.
Albenga, 456.
Albigensian Crusades, 27.
Antibes, 84, 371.
Arles, 50, 183.
Autun, 33.
Aurelian Way, 79.
Auribeau, 380.
Avignon, 3, 34, 137.

Barbarians, Invasions of, 14.
Beaucaire, 173.
Béziers, 222.
Biot, 387.
Burgundy, Style of, 109.
Bussana, 456.
Byzantine Architecture, 97.

Cagnes, 376.
Callian, 364.
Camargue, The, 77.
Cannes, 83, 308.
Cannet, 275.
Carcassonne, 243.
Carpentras, 47, 167.
Castellar, 441.
Castellaras, 350.
Castellated Architecture, 116.
Cavaillon, 48, 167.
Cemenelum (Cimiès), 86, 421.
Ceriale, 458.
Charlemagne, Revival under, 17.
Chartreuse du Val de Bénédiction, 164.
Christian Buildings, Early, 95.
Church, Early Organisation of, 12;
Revival of, 19.
Cistertian Architecture, 110, 274.
Citeaux, Monks of, 22.
Clausonne, 84.
Cluny, Abbey of, 19.
Cogolin, 302.
Courthézon, 137.
Crau, The, 77.
Cruas, 128.
Crusades, 23.
Crussol, 128.

Dolce Aqua, 448.
Dome, The use of, 105.

Elne, 239.
Esterel, 304.
Eza, 424.

Feudal System, 112.
Finalborgo, 458.
Finalmarino, 458.
France, Northern Architecture, 1.
” Southern ”, 3.
Fraxinet, le Grand, 304.
Fréjus, 80, 285.

Garde Adhémar, 134.
Gaul, Southern, History, 5, 9.
Genoa, 461.
Gorbio, 440.
Gothic, Northern, 114.
Gourdon, 366.
Grasse, 350.
Greek and Roman Colonies—in Towns—10.
Grimaud, 302.
Holy Roman Empires, 15.

Hyères, 270.

Iles de Lérins, 319.

La Garde Freinet, 304.
Lagunes, The, 221, 235.
La Trinité, Tower of, 382.
La Turbie, 87, 428.
Le Bar, 365.
Le Cannet, 347.
Le Luc, 80.
Le Thor, 167.
Les Baux, 178.
Les Maures, 299.
Les Saintes Maries, 212.
Loano, 458.
Lyons, 34, 121.

Marseilles, 79, 213.
Mediterranean, Littoral of—History, 7.
Mentone, 440.
Molléges, 168.
Monaco, 432.
Monasteries, Origin of, 12.
” Growth of, 19.
Mont Majour, 194.
Mont St Cassien, 307.
Mougins, 348.
Municipalities of the Middle Ages, 11.
Musée Calvert, 34.

Napoule, 305.
Narbonne, 230.
Nice, 86, 418.
Nimes, 64.
Noli, 461.
Notre Dame de Vie, 349.
” ” du Pré, Le Mans, 102.

Oneglia, 456.
Orange, 40.

Pernes, 167.
Perpignan, 235.
Phocæans in Gaul, 7.
Phœnicians do., 7.
Pigna, 449.
Pointed Arch, 107, 113.
Pomponiana, 80.
Pont du Gard, 76.
” St Bénezet, 151.
” St Esprit, 136.
Porto Maurizio, 456.
Provence, History of, 25.
” passed to France, 30.
Provençal Architecture, 105, 118, 211.
Puisalicon, 229.

Ravenna, 96.
Riez, 292.
Riviera, The, 79.
Roman Architecture, Early, 90.
” ” The Arch in, 91.
Roman Architecture, Continued under Christianity, 94.
Roman Architecture, Remains in Provence, 33.
Roquebrune, 437.

Ste Agnès, 441.
St André, Castle of, 155, 421.
” Césaire, 359.
” Chamas, 77.
” Front, Perigueux, 104.
” Gabriel, 182.
” Gilles, 204.
” Honorat, Castle of, 323.
” ” Island of, 319.
” Mark’s, Venice, 98.
Ste Marguérite (Lérins), 343.
St Martin de Londres, 229.
” ” les Vences, 418.
” Maximin, 282.
” Paul-Trois-Châteaux, 134.
” ” -du-Var, 392.
” Peyré, 306.
” Pierre de Reddes, 229.
” Raphäel, 299.
” Remy, 48.
” Ruf, 164.
” Sauveur (Lérins), 323.
Ste Trinité (Lérins), 320.
St Tropez, 300.
” Veran, 164.
San Miniato, 100.
” Remo, 450.
Saracens, Invasion of, 15.
Saut du Loup, 369.
Savona, 461.
Sculpture in Provence, 107.
Single-nave Churches, 105.
Syrian Churches, 98, 210.

Taggia, 452.
Tarascon, 168.
Thoronet, 274.
Toulon, 79.
Tourettes, 369.
Tournon, 363.

Vaison, 165.
Valence, 127.
Vallauris, 344.
Vaulting, Introduction of, 100.
” in Provence, 102.
Vaulting in Aquitaine, 103.
Venasque, 167.
Vence, 84, 408.
Ventimiglia, 442.
Verazze, 461.
Verezze, 458.
Vernégues, 78.
Vienne, 34, 124.
Villeneuve, Town of, 154.
” Church, 163.
Villeneuve-Loubet, 378.
Villes Mortes, 220.
Visigoths, 10.
Viviers, 134.

With about 1000 Illustrations of Ground Plans, Sections, Views, Elevations, and Details. In 2 Volumes. Royal 8vo. Four Guineas nett.

“One of the most important and complete books on Scottish architecture that has ever been compiled. Its value to the architect, the archæologist, and the student of styles is at once apparent. It consists almost exclusively of what may be called illustrated architectural facts, well digested and arranged, and constituting a monument of patient research, capable draughtsmanship, and of well sustained effort, which do the authors infinite credit.”—Scotsman.

“Their descriptions are good, and their arguments always worth attention and generally convincing.... The plans ... are clear and good, and by themselves make the book a most valuable addition to the library of any man who wishes to study and understand the defensive architecture of the Middle Ages. The book has another value in that it preserves a record of so many buildings in the state they are now. Many are neglected and daily falling more and more into ruin.”—Athenæum.

“No one acquainted with the history of Great Britain can take up this neatly-bound volume ... without being at once struck by its careful completeness and extreme archæological interest, while all students of architectural style will welcome the work specially for its technical thoroughness.”—Building News.

“The authors merit the thanks of all architectural readers, professional and amateur, for the production of a very well studied and illustrated hand-book of a most interesting class of ancient buildings.”—The Builder.

“Careful observation and accurate description appear to specially characterise this work.”—British Architect.

“In its complete form the merits of the work are more apparent, and we have no hesitation in saying that we consider it to be far superior to any of the preceding books on the subject.”—The Architect.

“The best authority upon the architecture of Scottish Castles yet issued.”—Dundee Advertiser.

“To the intelligent readers of all classes, we can cordially recommend it as a very interesting and suggestive book.”—Daily Free Press, Aberdeen.

“Messrs. MacGibbon and Ross now show in sketches of ground plans and elevations such a series of domestic structures as not only indicates the gradual progress of Scottish architecture from times comparatively rude, but permits the development to be traced in such a way as determines the stages of progress or ‘Periods’ into which its history may be naturally divided.”—Glasgow Herald.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ARCHITECTURE OF PROVENCE AND THE RIVIERA ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

Printed by George Waterston & Sons
FOR
DAVID DOUGLAS, EDINBURGH.

LONDON	·	HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO.
CAMBRIDGE	·	MACMILLAN AND BOWES.
GLASGOW	·	JAMES MACLEHOSE AND SONS.