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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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.
[Illustration: FIG. 33. SAN MINIATO.]
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, 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 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 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 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.