We have written the name _Gorizia_; but we have written it with fear

and trembling. For we have now reached a city where we have three

names to choose from. Shall we say _Görz_, _Gorizia_, or _Gorici_? All

three names will be found carefully displayed side by side in public

notices. One is tempted, by the analogy of a crowd of Slavonic names

in other places, to suggest _Goritaz_ instead of any of them. But

_Gorici_ is the Slavonic form as by law established, and to that rule

both natives and visitors may do well to bow. In any case there is

little doubt that on this spot of many names we have reached a place

which, though Italian in geography, though for ages German in

allegiance, was in truth Slavonic in origin. A charter of Otto the

Third speaks of "una villa quæ Sclavonica lingua vocatur Gorizia."

This is the earliest certain mention of the place. There is indeed a

document which tells us how in the year 949 Bishop John of Trieste was

borne down by many troubles, and how one source of his troubles was a

heavy debt to David the Jew of Gorizia. But wise men reject the

document which asserts this piece of episcopal mismanagement. And the

way in which the place is spoken of in the eleventh century does not

sound as if it could have been a spot whose wealth could have drawn

Jews thither in the tenth. In any case the Slavonic _villa_ grew into

a town and a county of the Empire, and late in the fifteenth century

the Counts of Gorizia became the same persons as the Archdukes of

Austria. But long after the beginning of that union, the distinction

between Austria and Gorizia was still strongly drawn. How much Gorizia

still thought of itself, how much its prince still thought of himself

in his local character, is made plain by the most prominent feature of

the chief building of the place. Over the gateway of the castle is an

inscription recording repairs done in the year 1660 by the reigning

Count Leopold. That Count bore higher titles, and he does not fail to

record them on the stone; but they are recorded in an almost

incidental way. Letters boldly cut, letters which catch the eye at

some distance, proclaim that the work was done by LEOPOLDUS COMES

GORITIÆ. Go near, and you may literally read between the lines, in

smaller letters and abbreviated words, that this Count Leopold

happened to be also Emperor of the Romans, King of Germany, Hungary,

and Bohemia, Archduke of Austria, and--in his own eyes at least--Duke

of Burgundy. But here at Gorizia he reigned and built directly as

Count of Gorizia, and he proclaimed himself primarily by his local

title. In an inscription such things could be done; heraldry hardly

admitted of any such ingenious devices. The bird of Cæsar must bear

the hereditary shield of the prince who has been chosen to the

imperial office, and on that hereditary shield the bearings of the

Gorizian county cannot displace those of duchies and kingdoms. While

therefore the legend proclaims the doer of the repairs of 1660 as

before all things a hereditary local count, the shield proclaims him

as before all things a Roman Emperor-elect. Yet one may believe that

most of those who pass under the imperial bird over the gateway deem

him all one with his bastard likeness over the tobacco-shops. Some may

even fail to see that, among the many hereditary bearings of the

elective Cæsar, the lion of the Austrian duchy keeps his proper place.

That lion is so apt to pass out of sight, men are so ready to cry

"Austria" when they see the eagle of Rome, so little ready to cry

"Austria" when they see Austria's own bearing, that it may be kind to

point out one place where his form and his occasional destiny may best

be studied. The true Austrian beast is plainly to be seen on the walls

of the _Schlachtkapelle_ near Sempach, and his presence there is

explained by the legend, thrilling to the federal and democratic mind,

"Das Panier von Oestreich ist gefangen, und ist nach Uri gekommen."

The eagle of Rome over the gateway, in a place where in these regions

we look almost mechanically for the lion of Saint Mark, reminds us yet

again that we have passed from the subject into the neighbour lands of

Venice. And various inscriptions, public and private, bring no less

clearly home to our minds that we are in a land of more than one

tongue. Of the three names of the town, that by which we have hitherto

spoken of it, that which it bears in the earliest trustworthy charter,

that which differs by one letter only from its more ordinary Latin

shape as seen over the gate, is also the name which the traveller will

most frequently hear in its streets and will see universally written

over its shops. As far as one can see at a glance, German is at _Görz_

the tongue of hôtels, _cafés_, public departments of all kinds.

Italian is the tongue of the citizens of _Gorizia_ whose shops are

sheltered by its street arcades. Slavonic, we conceive, will some day

be the tongue of the little children who, in all the joy of a state of

nature, as naked as any other mammals, creep, as merrily though more

slowly than the lizards, over the grass and stones of the castle-hill

of _Gorici_. Anyhow Gorizia is, like Palermo of old, the city of the

threefold tongue. But the place itself is, considering its history, a

little disappointing. Nothing indeed is lacking in the way of

position. Mountains on all sides, except where the rich plain of the

swift Isonzo stretches away to the sea, fence in the city, without

hemming it close in as in a prison. One hill is crowned by the castle,

whence we look out on another crowned by the long white line of the

Franciscan convent, suggesting memories of the banished king who was

the last to receive the consecrating oil of Rheims. Houses, churches,

villages, are thickly scattered over the plain and the hill sides. The

vines and the mulberry-trees, the food of the silkworm whose endless

cocoons choke up the market-place, witness to the richness of the

land. But there is a strange lack of buildings of any importance in

this capital of an ancient county, this resort which boasts itself as

the "Nizza Austriaca," the "Oesterreichische Nizza"--in such formulæ

the third tongue of the spot is not called into play. A Nizza without

any Mediterranean may seem as strange as the Rialto which we saw at

Udine without any Grand Canal. But Gorizia as a modern town is not

striking. Its best features are the old arcades in some of its streets

and markets. Such arcades must be bad indeed to be wholly

unsatisfactory, and some of those at Gorizia are very fairly done. But

there is no grand church, no grand municipal palace; the castle itself

is not what on such a site it ought to be. The castle is the kernel of

the whole place. Gorizia is not a hill-town, nor can we call it a

river-town. There is the castle on the hill, and the town seems to

have gathered at its foot. The castle soars so commandingly over the

country round that we wish here, as at Udine, that there was something

better to soar than the ugly barrack which forms its uppermost stage.

There are indeed better things within Count Leopold's gateway. The

outer court is laid out in streets, and contains several houses with

architectural features. One, bearing date 1475, with respectable

columns and round arches below, and with windows of the Venetian type

above, might pass for a very humble following, not of the palaces of

Venice or Udine, but of the far nobler pile which is in store for us

at Ragusa. A small church too strikes us, with its windows projecting

like oriels, one of them indeed rising from the ground. This last,

when we enter, proves to be the smallest of side-chapels set on this

fashion. In some cities such a small eccentricity would hardly deserve

any notice; but at Gorizia we learn to become thankful for rather

small mercies.

In the lower town what little interest there is gathers round the

pieces of street arcades; the churches go for next to nothing. Yet

Gorizia ranks as an ecclesiastical metropolis, and it has its

metropolitan church no less than Canterbury or Lyons. Nor is this

merely one of those arrangements of the present century which have

stripped Mainz and Trier of their immemorial dignity, and which have

given us archbishops of such unexpected places as Munich and

Freiburg-im-Breisgau. The style of Archbishop of Gorizia is at least

several generations older than the style of Emperor of Austria. The

church of Gorizia rose to metropolitan rank, at the same time as the

church of Udine, when the patriarchate of Aquileia came to an end, and

its province was divided between the two new metropolitans thus called

into being. But the seat of the modern primacy is hardly worthy of a

simple bishopric. There is nothing in the building of any antiquity

but a choir, German rather than Italian, and of no great antiquity

either. The rest of the church is of a gaudy _Renaissance_; yet it

deserves some notice from the boldness of its construction. It is

designed, within and without, of two stories: that is, the upper

gallery is an essential part of the building. The principle is the

same as in Saint Agnes and Saint Laurence at Rome, and as in German

churches like the Great Minster at Zürich; but the feeling is quite

different. Still, if a church is to be built in a _Renaissance_ style

and to receive two sets of worshippers, one over the heads of the

other, it must be allowed that the object is thoroughly attained in

the metropolitan church of Gorizia, and its architect is entitled to

the credit of having successfully grappled with the problem

immediately set before him.

Gorizia then can hardly claim, on the ground either of its history or

its buildings, to rank among cities of the first, or even of the

second class. Its natural position far surpasses all that has been

done in it, and all that has been built in it. But there is no spot on

which men have lived for eight or nine hundred years which does not

teach us something, and Gorizia has its lessons as well as other

places. It would hardly be worth making a journey thither from any

distant point to see Gorizia only; but the place should be seen by any

one whose course takes him through the lands at the head of the

Hadriatic. Udine, Cividale, and Gorizia are places which have in some

sort partitioned among them the position of fallen Aquileia. From the

children, we might perhaps say the rebellious children, we must go on

to the ancient mother.

AQUILEIA.

1875--1881.

We have already, in our course through the lands at the head of the

Hadriatic, had need constantly to refer to the fallen city which once

was the acknowledged head of those lands, the city whose fame began as

a great Roman colony, the bulwark of Italy at her north-eastern

corner, and which lived on, after the fall of its first greatness, in

the character of the nominal head alike of a considerable temporal

power and of an ecclesiastical power whose position and history were

altogether unique. We have noticed that, while the cities of this

region rise and fall, still even those which fall are not wholly swept

away. Aquileia has always lived, though, since the days of Attila, the

life of the actual city of Aquileia has been a very feeble one indeed.

But though Aquileia, as a city, practically perished in the fifth

century, yet it continued till the eighteenth to give its name to a

power of some kind. Its temporal position passed to Forum Julii, and

Udine succeeded to the position alike of Forum Julii and of Aquileia.

But the patriarchs grew into temporal princes, and their style

continued to be taken from Aquileia, and not from Forum Julii or

Udine. On the ecclesiastical side, the patriarchal title itself arose

out of a theological and a local schism. And, while the bishops of

Aquileia thus rose to the same nominal rank as those of Constantinople

and Alexandria, they had, as the result of the same chain of events,

to see--at least, if they had gone on living at Aquileia they would

have seen--a rival power of the same rank spring up, at their own

gates, in the form of the patriarchs of Grado. This last was surely

the greatest anomaly in all ecclesiastical geography. He who is not

familiar with the Italian ecclesiastical map may be surprised to find

Fiesole a separate bishopric from Florence. Even he who is familiar

with such matters may still be surprised to find Monreale a separate

archbishopric from Palermo. But even this last real anomaly seems a

small matter, compared with the arrangement which placed one patriarch

at Aquileia itself, and another almost within a stone's throw at

Aquileia's port of Grado. At every step we have lighted on something

to suggest the thought of the ancient capital of the Venetian

borderland; we have now to look at what is left of the fallen city

itself. Setting aside the actual seats of Imperial power, Rome Old and

New, Milan, Trier, and Ravenna, few cities stand out more

conspicuously than Aquileia both in general and in ecclesiastical

history. The stronghold by which Rome first secured her power over the

borderland of Illyria and Cisalpine Gaul--the city which grew under

the fostering hand of Augustus into one of the great cities of the

Empire--the city whose overthrow by Attila was one of the causes of

the birth of Venice--might have claimed for itself no mean place in

history, even if it had never become one of the special seats of

ecclesiastical rule and ecclesiastical controversy. To see such a city

sunk to a mean village, to trace out the remains of its ancient

greatness and splendour, is indeed a worthy work for the historical

traveller.

But how shall the traveller find his way to Aquileia? Let us confess

to a certain degree of pious fraud in our notices of Treviso, Udine,

and Gorizia. We have, for the general purposes of the series,

conceived the traveller as starting from Venice, while in truth those

notices contained the impressions of journeys made the other way, with

Trieste as their starting-point. The mask must be thrown off, if only

because the journey to Aquileia always calls up the memory of an

earlier visit to Aquileia when it was also from Trieste that another

traveller set forth. We have before us a record of travel from Trieste

to Aquileia, in which the pilgrim, finding himself on the road "in a

capital barouche behind two excellent horses," tells us that "the

idea of thus visiting a church city, which seemed a mere existence of

the past, had something so singular and inappropriate as to seem an

ecclesiastical joke. When at the octroi," he continues, "our driver

gave out his destination, the whole arrangement produced the same

effect in my mind as if Saint Augustine had asked me to have a bottle

of soda-water, or Saint Jerome to procure for him a third-class

ticket." Without professing altogether to throw ourselves into

enthusiasm of this kind, the ecclesiastical history of the city, its

long line of patriarchs, schismatical and orthodox, is of itself

enough to give Aquileia a high place among the cities of the earth.

But why Aquileia should be called "a church city" as if it were Wells

or Lichfield or Saint David's, cities to which that name would very

well apply--why going thither should seem an "ecclesiastical

joke"--why Saint Augustine, if he were still on earth, should be

debarred from the use of soda-water--why Saint Jerome should be

condemned to a third-class ticket, while his modern admirer goes in a

capital barouche behind two excellent horses--all these are mysteries

into which it would not do for the profane to peer too narrowly. But

the traveller from whom we quote was one in whose mind the first sight

of Spalato called up no memory of Diocletian, but who wandered off

from the organizer of the Roman power to an ecclesiastical squabble

in which the British Solomon was a chief actor. We quote his own

words. As he first saw the mighty bell-tower, he asks, "What were our

thoughts? What but of poor Mark Antony de Dominis?"

Our ecclesiastical traveller who went straight from Trieste to

Aquileia in the barouche with the excellent horses made his pilgrimage

before the railway was opened. As it is, the more modern inquirer is

more likely to take the train to Monfalcone--perhaps humbly, like

Saint Jerome, by the third class, perhaps otherwise, according to

circumstances. He will pass through a land of specially stony hills

coming down near to the sea, but leaving ever and anon, in the most

utter contrast, green marshy places between the stones and the water.

Some may find an interest in passing by Miramar, the dwelling of the

Maximilian who perished in Mexico; some may prefer to speculate about

Antenor, and to wonder where he found the nine mouths of Timavus. But

it is still possible to go by the same path as our predecessor, and

that antiquated course has something to be said for it. The road from

Trieste to Aquileia is, for some while at least, not rich in specially

striking objects, but it passes over lofty ground whence the traveller

will better understand the geography of the Hadriatic, and will come

in for some glimpses of the inland parts of this region of many

tongues. For here it is not quite enough to say that native Italian

and Slave and official German all meet side by side. We are not far

off from the march-land of two forms of the Slavonic speech; the

tongue of Rome too is represented at no great distance by another of

its children, distinct from the more classic speech of Italy. We

remember that the Vlach, the Rouman, the Latin-speaking remnant of the

East, has settled or has lingered at not very distant points. We are

tempted to fancy--wrongly, it may be--that some of them must almost

come within the distant landscape. One thing is certain; bearers far

more strange of the Roman name, though no speakers of the Roman

tongue, are there in special abundance. Those whom sixteenth century

Acts of Parliament spoke of as "outlandish persons calling themselves

Egyptians," though they certainly now at least no more call themselves

Egyptians than Englishmen ever called themselves Saxons, are there as

a distinct element in the land. The traveller who comes on the right

day may come in for a gipsy fair at Duino; he may hear philologers

whose studies have lain that way talking to them in their own branch

of the common Aryan tongue. He himself meanwhile, driven to look at

their outsides only, perhaps thinks that after all gipsies do not look

so very different from other ragged people. Certainly if he chances

to be making his way, as it is possible that he may be, from Dalmatia

and Montenegro, he will miss, both among the gipsies and the other

inhabitants of the land, the picturesque costumes to which he has

become used further south. Duino itself, a very small haven, but which

once believed that it could rival Trieste, will, to the antiquary at

least, be more interesting than its gipsy visitors. A castle on rocks,

overhanging the sea--a castle, so to speak, in two parts, one of which

contains a tower which claims a Roman date, while the other is said to

have sheltered Dante--will reward the traveller who still keeps to the

barouche and the horses on his journey to the "church city," instead

of making use of the swifter means which modern skill has provided for

him.

* * * * *

At last, by whichever road he goes, the traveller finds himself at the

little town of Monfalcone, and there he who comes by the railway must

now look for the capital barouche and the excellent horses, or such

substitutes for them as Monfalcone can supply. A small castle frowns

on the hill above the station, but the town contains nothing but an

utterly worthless _duomo_ and some street arcades, to remind us once

more that, if we are under the political rule of the Apostolic King,

we are on soil which is Italian in history and in architecture. After

a railway journey which has mainly skirted the sea, perhaps even after

a journey over the hills during a great part of which we have looked

down on the sea, we are a little surprised at finding that the road

which leads us to what once was a great haven takes us wholly inland.

We pass through a flat and richly cultivated country, broken here and

there by a village with its campanile, till two Corinthian columns

catch the eye in front of a modern building, which otherwise might be

passed by without notice. Those two columns, standing forsaken, away

from their fellows, mark that we have reached Monastero; in the days

before Attila we should have reached Aquileia. We are now within the

circuit of the ancient colony. But mediæval Aquileia was shut up

within far narrower limits; modern Aquileia is shut up within narrower

limits still. Within the courtyard of the building which is fronted by

the two columns, we find a large collection, a kind of outdoor museum,

of scraps of architecture and sculpture, the fragments of the great

city that once was. We go on, and gradually our approach to the centre

is marked by further fragments of columns lying here and there, as at

Rome or Ravenna. A little farther, and we are in modern Aquileia,

"città Aquileia," as it still proudly calls itself in the official

description, which, as usual, proclaims to the traveller the name of

the place where he is, and in what administrative division of the

"Imperial and Royal" dominions he finds himself.

Sketches from the Subject and Neighbour Lands of Venice · 第 3 / 21 段