I dined at Chaillot, and returned in the evening to view the

illuminations. These long continued straight lines are admirably adapted

to display crowds and illuminations. From the Barrière de l’Étoile, at

the extremity of the Champs Elysées, to the palace of the Tuilleries,

all was one continued blaze. The _lampions_, used on these occasions,

give a very strong light; they are pots of tallow, about two inches

deep, and six in diameter, with a wick of hemp about one inch thick:

they were disposed in festoons along the great avenue of the Elysian

fields, and in pyramids in the gardens. On entering the Place Louis XV.

the view was superb; on the right were the Chambre des Deputés, the dome

of the Invalides, and at some distance, rising alone against the dark

sky, the star of the Legion of Honour. Before us was the Tuilleries and

its gardens, and the temple which had been erected for the purpose round

the basin of water. The terraces presented a single row of illumination

along the cornice, exhibiting the crowds which peopled them. On the left

were the Garde Meuble and the Admiralty. At first, before daylight was

entirely lost, the illumination of the dome of the Invalides being

redder than the twilight, gave a silvery look to the building, which had

a peculiar and a very beautiful effect. The portico of the Chambre des

Deputés had the steps covered with lampions, and green candelabras

(either formed by green lamps or by a transparency,) between the

columns. The result was, that the columns were seen dark against the

illuminated inside of the portico, without any cutting lines or strong

contrasts, but with a sort of tenderness of tint, which gave to them the

appearance of semi-transparency. Something of the same sort was

exhibited in the Garde Meuble, but less beautifully. The perpendicular

lines of the architecture were no where illuminated. Taken singly, none

of these objects are equal to some of the best illuminations exhibited

in London: but taking the whole together, nothing we have had, or can

have, can be compared with it. On entering the gardens of the

Tuilleries, the first object was the great basin, which was encircled by

lampions on the edge of the water, and thickly surrounded by people, who

were shewn to great advantage by the disposition of the lights, and all

their varied colouring was reflected in the water. As we approached the

Tuilleries, the temple erected round the smaller basin increased in

consequence, and hid the palace, which was not highly illuminated. The

open part of the gardens was terminated by a colonnade of lampions, and

from this point the effect produced by the light thrown on the company

on the terrace, from the line of lampions disposed on its cornice was

very brilliant and beautiful. These exhibitions have been concluded with

a review in the Champs de Mars. There is a raised slope round this

place, made by the sovereign people themselves for their own

convenience, which gives one a fine opportunity of seeing what passes,

and also shews off the spectators to great advantage. The king rode

twice round the plain in an open carriage, accompanied by the duchesses

of Angoulême and Berri, and the troops saluted him with _vive le roi!_

On Wednesday the playhouses were opened gratis, but I did not go to see

what sort of a scene was produced. A Parisian crowd seems in general

very tractable; but the efficient cause of good order is in the

soldiers, who are seen everywhere. This habitual submission to the

military does not appear very favourable to public liberty; and in

estimating the chance of a permanently free constitution in France, it

is not enough to consider merely the conduct of the rulers, or the

sentiments of the leaders of different parties; the manners and habits

of the people form an important item. This acquiescence in the

interference of the military in every concern may, I suppose, be traced

to the ancient government; and we may perhaps attribute to it, in some

measure, their ready submission to the despotism of Napoleon. The

principle of liberty is not very strong in this country, but I think it

exists, and is taking root. The friends of liberty have learned

moderation, and that is a valuable lesson. They would be well pleased

now with a constitution as free as that of England, with which twenty

years ago they were not satisfied. Perhaps they are hardly yet convinced

that a constitution can have no strength, and consequently no value,

without the habitual attachment of the people. Let us hope that the

present will last long enough to create such a habit. It has doubtless

many defects in theory, and more in practice; but it may be better

suited to the actual state of France than a more perfect system, and it

will form a foundation on which they may stand to attain their further

objects, without any violent revolution, an event which almost

invariably leads to despotism.

I have concerned myself very little with politics, but it does not

appear to me that the French are in general at all sulky after their

defeat. “What could we do against all Europe?” They have no affection

for the Bourbons: it is not in human nature that they should; but they

would be very unwilling to do any thing to excite a fresh war. “Ah

monsieur, la France était si florissante, tout allait si bien avant

l’expedition à Moscou.” “C’etait un grand homme, il a fait beaucoup de

belles choses, mais son ambition a gâté tout, il nous a tous

perdus.”—These are sentiments you hear everywhere. They ask me what is

thought of Bonaparte in England. I tell them that he is considered as a

man of great talents, but that his immoderate ambition rendered his

existence dangerous to every country in Europe. For the most part they

perfectly agree with me; but after all, I am persuaded they regret him.

The dazzling splendor which he spread around the throne of France, his

personal activity, his firm and vigorous administration, and the

employment of his revenues to public purposes, gratified the

imagination, and form altogether a striking contrast with the present

sovereign. Yet I believe Louis is not disliked, and his personal

character has certainly made him friends since his return. All this

seems perfectly natural; and if we except in favour of England, a

somewhat deeper feeling of national honour, and a higher sense of

liberty, it is what might take place in any country of Europe, without

injury to the character of the people. They did not dislike the

Bourbons, but after twenty-five years of absence, it is not wonderful

that they did not feel much attachment to them. Neither did they much

like Napoleon, but they were pleased with the military glory which the

nation attained under his auspices. At last they were alienated and

disgusted with the mad expedition to Moscow, the enormous waste of human

life consequent upon it, and the severe conscription to supply that

waste; and received the Bourbons with pleasure. After a time, the

changes actually introduced excited an apprehension that further and

more important changes were in contemplation, affecting the individual

interests of almost every class in the community. Alarmed at this, they

rejoiced at the return of Napoleon, merely as a means of putting down a

government from whose progress they dreaded much personal evil.

Independently of submission to the military, the habitual dependence of

the people on the government to accomplish every object of public

utility, is unfavourable to their liberty. Whatever is of advantage to

more persons than one, is to be done by the sovereign, or not at all;

and even when an individual is to profit from it, it is a chance if he

will do any thing for himself, if he think the government ought to do it

for him. The French themselves tell a story to ridicule this propensity,

of which they are very sensible. A soldier had enriched himself with

plunder, but his shoes were full of holes, and his feet blistered in

consequence. “Why do you not buy yourself a pair of shoes?” said one of

his comrades. “Ah non, c’est le roi qui doit faire cela.” Perhaps for

“roi” you should read “empereur,” but that is of little consequence.

LETTER VIII.

JOURNEY TO LYON.

_Lyon, July 1, 1816._

I HAVE at last left Paris, after having staid longer than I intended,

though by no means long enough to learn all that might have been

acquired by a continued residence. I took my place for Troyes in the

cabriolet of the diligence, but found it so small that I could not sit

upright, and therefore changed to the inside, where I had plenty of

room, for the carriage was calculated for nine, and we were only four.

We left Paris at three o’clock in the afternoon, and the first part of

the ride was tolerably pleasant, but in the morning I found myself in

one of those wide naked common fields, of which I have so often

complained. At Troyes the whole visible horizon is chalk, but there is

shade about the town, and a promenade ornamented with large trees all

round it, with the Seine running at the bottom.

Champaine is famous for its wine; the country about Chartres for corn.

After hearing this, one is rather surprised to see almost the whole of

the first province a corn country, and the latter city exclusively

surrounded by vineyards; yet such is the fact. Champaine is almost all

chalk, a soil very unfavourable to vines. According to Cuvier, one part

of it is a complete chalky desert. A similar barrenness of soil has

given to another district the name of Lousy Champaine. The wine seems to

be grown on the hills which form the edge of the Paris basin.

We observed in passing along, numerous traces of the campaign of 1814.

Houses and villages destroyed, and the inhabitants restoring a bit of

roof or a floor, as the one or the other was most necessary for their

immediate accommodation, and leaving the rest to be gradually renewed,

as they should find themselves able to effect it.

One of my companions had been an officer under Napoleon, and another,

perhaps a serjeant, or corporal, but he seemed an observing man. Neither

of them appeared to have any affection for their general, but the

officer in particular was very bitter against him. He had been torn by

him from all his domestic comforts, and had not been long enough in the

army to cease to think about the privations it required. Both had been

wounded, but not very severely, and both wished for peace. This the

French think they shall have, if the English will let them be quiet; but

it is difficult to persuade them that there is any correspondent wish on

our part; and quite impossible to convince them that Napoleon’s return

from Elba was not favoured by the English government. This is very

extravagant no doubt, but not more so than the belief in England that

the French wish for war. One universal cry rises from every part of

France, _peace! peace!_ This may perhaps be in some degree the

consequence of having suffered by unsuccessful war; but the wish is not

for the moment the less earnest or sincere. Returning strength may

recall their ambition. In all nations the consciousness of power seems

to produce the desire to exert it, so far at least as to make their

neighbours feel it; and it would be unreasonable to expect that France

should prove an exception.

Our journey to Troyes occupied twenty-four hours. I did little that

evening. The next morning I walked round the ramparts and made a few

memoranda. Monday was unfortunately a _jour de fête_, which I had not

anticipated, and I was sadly disturbed in my sketches and observations

by the services and by the crowds of people. The first view of the

buildings at Troyes rather discontented me, but since I have left it I

begin to think more highly of its architecture, and to regret that I did

not spend more time there. The cathedral of course was my first object,

and I endeavoured to ascertain the precise date of its architecture, but

without success. I was told indeed that the chapels of the choir are

older than the rest of the building, that the choir is eight hundred

years old, that the nave was built twenty-five years later, and the

front last of all. I was pleased with this traditionary account, because

the architecture announces the same order in the erections, though not

precisely at these epochs. The windows of the chapels, narrow, pointed,

and without any sort of internal ornament, may perhaps indicate a

building of the middle or latter end of the twelfth century. I insert

these guesses at dates, because they tell in themselves several things

of the style of building, and are of importance in judging of the

historical evidence which I may hereafter be able to obtain; but if I

were now to give to the early architecture of France all the attention

it deserves, it would be some years before I went to Italy. The choir

has roses in the windows, but the piers are slender to excess, and they

are consequently much crippled. It must be decidedly posterior to the

cathedral of Rheims and Amiens, and perhaps to the choir at Beauvais.

The earliest date would be therefore the latter part of the thirteenth

century, and it may class very well with the nave of St. Denis, built by

Matthieu de Vendôme in 1281. In the improved architecture of that period

there is usually a capital all round the pier, at the springing of the

arches, which open from the body of the building into the side aisles.

The capitals of the small shafts are sometimes smaller (in height) than

the general capital, (perhaps this indicates a difference of date) but

at Troyes they have disappeared altogether. Every column and every

shaft, still has its capital; but the longer ones are not divided into

two heights with a capital to each. The capitals which remain are

smaller in proportion, and the pillars more slender than in the earlier

Gothic. If the nave was built only twenty-five years later, a great

change had taken place in a very short interval. The roses of the

windows are entirely gone, and the heads filled up with rather a

complicated tracery; the mullions both of the windows, and of the

divisions of the arches of the gallery, have lost their capitals; the

ribs of the vaulting continue quite simple, and the intermediate spaces

are much arched upon them. This must be considered as an example of the

third style of French Gothic, and is the most important instance I have

seen. The rose windows at the ends of the transepts have a perpendicular

pillar of masonry running up the middle, to support them; a precaution

dictated by the same necessity as the upright mullions of our

perpendicular style, when the parts became very light and the windows

very extensive. The effect is by no means pleasing. That of the north

transept is inserted in a square externally. I cannot venture to assign

a date for these novelties, but both of them are characteristic in the

history of the art. The earliest rose windows were complete detached

circles; those which succeeded are more or less united with accessories,

forming a pointed window. The peculiarities at Troyes are posterior to

both these.

The western front is of the last style of Gothic, and is a rich and

beautiful specimen. Two towers were designed, but one only is built, and

this is so singular, that I am induced to think it an old tower, of

which the lower part has been entirely covered with work of the latter

part of the fifteenth century, and the upper touched up and altered

towards the latter part of the sixteenth, or beginning of the

seventeenth. This last is abundantly denoted by the ornaments, and by

little but the ornaments. In the earlier parts the little arches of the

decorations terminate in a trefoil, and some of the mouldings pass over

the others in the manner I have already described, as belonging to the

fourth style of Gothic. In the second French Gothic, the crenated

ornament occurs abundantly in the circular parts of the windows. In the

third it is found at the heads of the divisions of the windows, and

among the leaves of the tracery. In both these it is always on the edge

of the opening, and close to the glass; in the fourth it occurs among

the mouldings, and lies over some of the interior ones; it is even

repeated two or three times in the same opening, and becomes singularly

varied in its forms. One opening at Troyes has it as in _fig. 1_,

another exhibits it as in _fig. 2_, or as in _fig. 3_,

[Illustration: _Fig. 1._]

[Illustration: _Fig. 2._]

[Illustration: _Fig. 3_]

becoming a sort of scroll, enriched with foliage; lastly, and this also

may be seen in a church at Troyes, it inclines forwards from the face of

the work, instead of lying parallel to it.

Two other churches at Troyes attracted my attention, that of the

Madelaine and St. Urban. The former has the shape of a Greek cross in a

square, the angles being filled up with double aisles. The windows are

narrow and unornamented; one, two, or three together; in the last case

the middle is the largest. Externally, they exhibit the triangular

ornament, but this has been cut away from a great many of them. There

are neither galleries nor two stories of aisles, and the ‘_rond point_’

is of a late Gothic, neither curious nor beautiful; so that we lose the

character usually offered by that part in ascertaining the date. The

groining of the vault is oblique. Across the opening of the choir is a

beautiful arched screen, somewhat less complicated than at Chartres, and

of less delicate workmanship, but still very rich, and well executed.

One of the statues contained in it, and apparently of the same date, is

very fine; but most of these have been destroyed, and one or two are

supplied in painted wood. We may still distinguish that the old work has

been painted. The church of St. Urban is perhaps of the end of the

thirteenth century, or beginning of the fourteenth; it is small, but

very beautiful inside and out. The tracery of the windows is in roses,

not in leaves. The aisles are not continued to the ‘_rond point_,’ but

there is a sort of gallery which is opened into windows, forming a

continuation of the upper windows. The south and north portals offer the

peculiarity of arches supported on detached columns, but these columns

have a rib down each side, and are without capitals. I consider them as

posterior to the body of the building, with which they do not well

unite, or rather the outer half of the portico does not correspond well

with the part which joins the church, and here perhaps the addition took

place, in the fifteenth century.

I left Troyes in the evening, but I fancied I could distinguish that we

did not leave the chalk till about Bar sur Seine. In the morning I found

myself in a deep valley, broken by limestone rocks, and bright little

streams bursting out by the road side, and hurrying down into the Seine,

which seemed here about as large as the river Lee at Ware. Woods are

scattered about, but in small proportion, and not enough to prevent an

appearance of nakedness. After some time we left the valley, and again

entered a wide common field, but much more hilly than those to which I

have lately been accustomed, and here and there with a spot of wood. At

last we descended through a forest, to the little village of Val Suzon.

It is situated in a very deep valley, to which I can think of no nearer

resemblance than Dovedale, but the rocks are less bold, and the hills

less steep and high; still however, it is a fine romantic hollow, too

uniformly covered with brush-wood, which, as is the case in most of the

French forests, is preserved merely for fuel; and deficient in trees.

Deep and narrow ravines opening into this valley, seemed a suitable

resort for wolves, but it was not a time of year, or of day, to see any

of these animals. The botany for the first time differed essentially

from that of England. Crossing again a range of hills, we soon arrived

at Dijon, which is situated at a little distance from their base.

The cathedral of St. Benigne, at Dijon, has been called a very fine

building, and Millin speaks of it as a very ancient one. I therefore was

in great haste to visit it, but was very much disappointed. It is

indeed, of the thirteenth century, and perhaps later in style than in

date, but small, poor, and deficient in expression. An older church was

crushed by the fall of a lofty central tower in 1271, and the present

edifice was completed in 1291. Its want of effect is perhaps partly

owing to the unstained glass, and to the whitewash. Till the period of

the French revolution, an ancient domical temple existed behind the

choir of this church. It was composed of two circular peristyles, one

above the other, and is said to have been erected _A. D._ 173, under

Marcus Aurelius, in honour of Jupiter, Mars, and Saturn. In later times

it was consecrated to the Virgin. Near the cathedral are two other

churches, one of which is now a stable, and the other the office of

weights and measures. The porch of the first is pretty good. In another

part of the town there is also a group of three churches.

[Illustration:

J. Hawksworth. Sculp.

CAPITAL OF COLUMNS IN THE PORCH OF NOTRE DAME AT DIJON

_London. Published by J & A Arch. Cornhill. March 1^{st}. 1828._]

The principal is that of St. Michel, which is said to have been built,

or rebuilt in 1030, and restored in 1338. But in 1497 it threatened

ruin, and the parish repaired it, and added the present choir. Here the

windows are very long and narrow. Some are united in pairs, with a rose

over them, but not included in any common arch. At the ends of the

transept the rose windows and the openings below them are filled with

tracery. The aisles are high and well lighted, but the general effect is

heavy and displeasing. The western portal is the most singular part of

the edifice. The architect was Hugues Sambin, a native of Dijon, who is

said to have been the friend and pupil of M. Angelo Buonarotti. The

porch is a return to the first Gothic style of shafts and statues; the

latter indeed have been destroyed in the storms of the revolution,

except those in the soffites of the arches, where angels are represented

with wings and fiddles, and these are very little damaged. Many parts

are ornamented with Arabesques, and some of the capitals have the Gothic

trefoil topsy-turvy. The arches are semicircular, and are surmounted by

an entablature in a continued line. It seems, that on the first

introduction of Italian Architecture, the first period of the

_renaissance_, as everybody here calls it, the great lines of the

construction were better preserved than they were afterwards. I met a

gentleman who contended that this porch was copied from a Roman arch of

triumph, and presented all the characters of one, though there is in

fact no resemblance. The ease with which a Frenchman seems to utter all

that comes into his head, without any fear of ridicule, ought, one would

think, to give him an opportunity of speedily correcting his errors, but

for some reason or other this does not take place. The middle of the

porch has a little cupola. Over the porch, the five orders of

architecture, disposed in all ways, are heaped over one another, “as

if,” said a blacksmith, in whose shop I sheltered myself from a shower

of rain, “they had got hold of Vignola, and determined to execute all he

had described.” This remark was the more just, as the orders really

resemble those of Vignola. It would do well for a front to St. Eustache,

at Paris. The two other churches of this group are no longer used as

places of worship, and the outsides did not incite me to be at the

trouble of examining them within.

But the church at Dijon most worthy of attention is that of Nôtre Dame.

It was built, according to Agencourt, by St. Louis; and probably

therefore, in the first half of the thirteenth century; and there are

many circumstances which put one in mind of the church at Mantes,

attributed likewise to that monarch; but we have no account of its

consecration before 1334.

Letters of an Architect, From France, Italy, and Greece. Volume 1 [of 2] · 第 12 / 47 段