Drew the indolent monarch, when airing he’d go.”
“Chivalry,” wrote M. le Marquis de Varenne, “the exercises of which were
the image of war, rendered horsemanship a new art always indispensable
in the education of the nobility; and _chevalier_ soon became synonymous
with a man of good birth.” “The Book of Facts,” by the “Bon Chevalier
Messire Jean le Maingre, called _Baucicaut_, Marshal of France,” written
in the beginning of the fifteenth century, enumerates the exercises
which a youth aspiring to the title of a gentleman had to
undergo:--“They endeavoured to leap (_sailler_) upon a charger, fully
armed; _item_, leaped, without placing the foot in the stirrup, on a
charger in all its armour; _item_, leaped from the ground a-straddle on
to the shoulders of a tall man on a large horse, seizing the man by the
sleeve with one hand, without other assistance; _item_, placing one hand
on the saddle-bow of a large charger, and the other near the ears,
taking him by the mane, and from the level ground jumping to the other
side (_côté_) of the charger.”
The Chevalier Bayard, while yet page to the Duke of Savoy, and only
seventeen years of age, performed, as his historian relates, wonders in
the meadows of Ainay, at Lyons, before King Charles VIII., “in leaping
on his charger,” and by his management of it creating a favourable
impression of his merits. This will suffice to show the estimation in
which horsemanship was held. No one was regarded as a valiant knight
until he had proved his prowess in jousts and tournaments (Fig. 74) in
the rank of squire. Although his functions were essentially those of
serving, a squire, who ranked higher than a page, was to the knight
rather an auxiliary and a companion than a servant. It was his duty to
carry the arms of the knight, to take charge of his table, his house,
and his horses. On the field of battle he remained in his rear, ready to
defend him, to lift him up if he were overthrown, and to provide him,
when necessary, with another horse or other arms. He guarded the
prisoners captured by the knight, and occasionally fought for him at his
side.
The principal sign distinguishing knights from squires consisted in the
material of which their spurs were made--of gold for the former, of
silver for the latter. It is well known that, at the disastrous battle
of Courtray, the Flemings collected after the action, from the slain,
four thousand pairs of gold spurs; consequently, four thousand knights
of the army of Philip the Fair had fallen.
[Illustration: Fig. 74.--A Knight entering the Lists. (From a Miniature
in the “Tournois du Roi René.”)]
In order to _win his spurs_ (of gold)--an expression become
proverbial--it was indispensable that one who aspired to the honour
should perform some valiant deed, proving him worthy of being “dubbed,”
or armed as a knight. The ceremony of admission commenced by presenting
the spurs; and whosoever conferred the order of chivalry, were he king
or prince, condescended to put on and fasten the spurs for the
recipient. In pursuance of the same principle, when a knight, having
committed a fault or any cowardly act, had incurred blame or correction,
it was by deprivation of, or by changing his spurs, that his degradation
commenced. For a slight offence a herald substituted silver spurs for
those of gold, which lowered a knight to the grade of squire. But in a
case of “forfeiture,” as it was termed, an executioner or a cook cut off
the straps of his spurs, or they were struck off on a dunghill with an
axe: infamy was the future portion of him who had been subjected to that
public disgrace.
The privilege of wearing spurs was regarded as a mark of independence
and authority; so that when a noble tendered faith and homage to his
sovereign, he was obliged to take off his spurs in token of vassalage.
In 816, ere chivalry had been instituted, an assembly of lords and
bishops prohibited ecclesiastics from adopting the profane fashion of
wearing spurs then prevailing among the higher classes of the clergy.
The use of the spur appears to date from the most ancient times. The
origin of the word has been much disputed. From the time of Louis le
Débonnaire it was called _spuors_, which has become _sporen_ in Germany,
_sperane_ in Italian, _spur_ in English, _éperon_ in French. The Latins
called it _calcar_ (which originally signified cock’s spur), doubtless
from the form first given to the spur. That form has strangely varied
during centuries. The oldest known shape is that of the spur found in
the tomb of Queen Brunehaut, who died in 613, and which is simply like a
skewer. This seems to have long continued to be the form; but, from the
commencement of the thirteenth to the end of the sixteenth century, the
spur is seen in the form of a rose, or of a star with a turning rowel,
and was mostly fashioned in a very rich and delicate manner. At the
period when horses were clad in steel or leather, the spurs were
necessarily very long, in order to reach the animal’s flanks (Figs. 75
and 76). The spurs of Godfrey of Bouillon, which have been preserved
(their authenticity is more or less questionable), are in that style. In
the reign of Charles VII. the young nobles wore, rather for show than
for use, spurs the rowel of which was as large as the hand, and fixed at
the end of a metal stem half a foot long.
If, therefore, from time immemorial every mounted horse “felt the spur,”
there was at least a period when every sort of spur could not be
indiscriminately applied to the flanks of each individual of the equine
race. “There are,” says Brunetto Latini, a writer of the thirteenth
century, in his “Treasury of all Things”--a sort of encyclopædia of the
age--“there are horses of several kinds: chargers, or tall horses, for
the combat, whence the expression, ‘mounting the high horse;’ others,
for gentle exercise, use palfreys, which were also called amblers and
hackneys; others employ pack-horses, _courtants_ (cropped horses), to
carry a load (_somme_).” _Somme_ here signifies a burden, and this,
which we now call baggage, consisted of spare arms and hauberk, which a
knight was careful to take with him when he went to the wars. Mares and
_bât_-horses (horses carrying the _bât_, or load) were reserved for
agriculture and other field-purposes; and it was clearly on that account
that a knight was not allowed to ride them. To make a knight ride upon a
mare was, like the loss of his spurs, one of the most degrading
punishments that could be inflicted on him, and thenceforth “any one who
regarded his own honour would no more have touched that disgraced knight
than a shaven idiot (leper).”
[Illustration: Fig. 75.--German Spur.]
[Illustration: Fig. 76.--Italian Spur.]
[Illustration: Fig. 77.--A Knight armed and mounted for War. (Museum of
Artillery, Paris.)]
The horses of French knights were without ears or mane; those of the
Germans without tails. According to Carrion-Nisas, the armour of the
horse, and the style in which it was caparisoned, were the cause of
these mutilations. We have elsewhere remarked that if the men were cased
in steel their horses were not less heavily cuirassed (Fig. 77). The
entire armour and appointments of a horse were called the harness; the
plates of steel or leather (for leather also was often used) were called
_bardes_. We find enumerated, not only the articles of which the harness
consisted--_chanfrein_, _nasal_, _flancois_, &c.--but examples are cited
to denote the sumptuousness of this equipment of the horse. We need not,
however, dwell longer here on this subject, that refers more properly to
the manufacture of arms; but a few words must be said regarding the
saddle, which is, if we may use the expression, an implement of
horsemanship, and not a part of the armour.
The use of saddles seems to have been unknown in early times, and never
to have been introduced among certain nations which, by the way, were
most famous in the art of training the horse and making him serviceable.
The Thessalonians and the Numidians rode on the bare back, without
saddle or stirrups; seated firmly on the horse simply by the pressure of
the knees and the calf of the legs; a position which is still that of
the boldest riders in the East and in Africa. Hippocrates has ascribed
the common and severe diseases of the hips and legs which afflicted the
Scythians to the rider’s want of support on horseback. Galen makes the
same remark regarding the Roman legions, who only introduced the use of
a saddle about the year 340 of the Christian era. The Gauls and Franks
used neither saddles nor stirrups; but when steel armour was adopted, it
would have been impossible for knights to preserve an equilibrium
without the aid of a saddle, or to sustain the slightest shock to which
they were exposed, as armour rendered them in a manner rigid, or with
little flexibility on their large horses.
They therefore had recourse to a high, or rather a deep, saddle, closely
adhering to the thighs and loins, with large stirrups serving as
supports to the feet. The several parts of the armour being splendidly
ornamented, it followed that the saddles, which also were exposed to
view, were no more neglected than other ornaments of the animal.
Engraved and chased, they were also gilt and painted, and thus, with the
shield, helped to distinguish, by the “devices” they bore, the armed
warrior completely cased in his steel covering (Figs. 78 to 81).
As to stirrups, of which there certainly is no trace among the Greeks or
the Romans, it may be said they were coeval with the invention of
saddles. They made their appearance in the earliest days of the
Merovingian dynasty; and if we accept the German etymology which the
learned have offered (_streben_, to support one’s self), the name and
the object was introduced by the Franks into Gaul. However that may be,
they were no longer dispensed with, especially in war, and when the
weight of armour rendered their use necessary. They were of course very
large, very massive, and very clumsy in the days of chivalry. When they
diminished in size and weight they were wrought with more care, and
became objects of art, charged with ingenious ornaments, and embellished
with engraving, chasing, and gilding.
[Illustration: Figs. 78 and 79.--Tournament Saddles, ornamented with
Paintings, taken from the Armoury Real, Madrid. Sixteenth Century.
(Communicated by M. Ach. Jubinal.)]
In accordance with the opinion held by M. de la Varenne, we have already
ascribed the disuse of private carriages to the contempt with which the
Franks regarded a mode of conveyance deemed by them to be effeminate.
But, following the same author, we must observe that a reason might
also be discovered in the wretched condition into which, after the
decline of the Romans, those magnificent roads formed by them in all
their conquered provinces had fallen. In towns, moreover, the streets,
narrow, crooked, and with no regular direction, were very frequently so
many holes and quagmires. Philip Augustus I. had some of the streets of
Paris paved in that _lutèce_[13] which already, at the time of the Roman
conquest, had deserved the significant epithet of _miry_. The princes
and the nobles who, as Molière humorously makes Mascarilla say, feared
“to leave the impression of their shoes in mud,” and could not without
difficulty drive about the towns in carriages, consequently had recourse
to the horse or the mule. The ladies made use of them also; but very
frequently, if not carried in litters, they rode on a pillion behind the
horseman.
[Illustration: Fig. 80.--The Caparison of the Horse of Isabel the
Catholic. (Communicated by M. Ach. Jubinal.)]
In the thirteenth century chariots reappeared; but the fashion did not
long prevail, for Philip the Fair discouraged them, in one of the
clauses of his sumptuary ordinance of 1294, by declaring that “no
citizen may have a chariot.”
The litter continued to be held in repute for processions; but queens
frequently rode on horseback. Isabel of Bavaria rode on a beautiful
palfrey, with her ladies and her maids also on horseback, on the
occasion of her entering Paris to espouse Charles VI. And when Mary of
England, who went to be married to Louis XII., made her entry into
Abbeville, she also, as Robert de la Marck relates, was mounted on a
palfrey, as were most of her ladies, “and the remainder in chariots; and
the king, riding a large, prancing bay horse, came to receive his bride,
with all the gentlemen of his household and of his guard on horseback.”
The meeting of Henry VIII. and Francis I. in the camp of the Field of
the Cloth of Gold, presented the most beautiful display that had ever
been seen of caparisoned horses, decorated and furnished with
unprecedented richness (Fig. 82).
[Illustration: Fig. 81.--Saddle-cloth. Sixteenth Century.]
Charles V., in consequence of frequent attacks of gout, was soon
compelled to renounce riding. When he went into the country, or on a
journey, he was generally followed by a litter and a chair. Mules bore
the litter, in which he could recline, while bearers carried the chair,
which was
[Illustration: ENTRANCE OF THE QUEEN ISABEAU OF BAVARIA INTO PARIS.
From a Miniature in Froissart’s Chronicles, National Library, Paris.]
provided with a movable back; its four uprights could be fitted with a
sort of canopy of canvas or leather.
In 1457 the ambassadors of Ladislaus V., King of Hungary, presented to
Marie of Anjou, Queen of France, a chariot which excited the admiration
of the whole court and the inhabitants of Paris, “because,” as the
historian of the times says, “it was _branlant_ (suspended), and very
rich.”
[Illustration: Fig. 82.--Henry VIII. in the Camp of the Field of the
Cloth of Gold (1520). From the Bas-reliefs of the Hôtel of the Bourg
Herolde at Rouen.]
It is difficult to reconcile the inference to be drawn from the
ordinance of Philip the Fair with the assertion of many historians, that
coaches first appeared in France only in the time of Francis I. The
point is still doubtful. Nevertheless, one may suppose historians to
mean that coaches, instead of being the only vehicles employed in Paris
in the time of Francis I., were but chariots of a grander and more
gorgeous description than any seen before that time. But we know for
certain that, during the Middle Ages, the horse and the mule were
generally ridden by everybody, by citizens and by nobles, by women and
by men. The horse-blocks fixed in the streets--too narrow evidently, if
not for one carriage, at least for two to pass each other--and the rings
fastened on doors sufficiently denote that it was so. The mule was
especially ridden by sedate men, such as magistrates and doctors, who
had to “amble” through the towns. “To take care of the mule,” a
proverbial expression signifying to wait impatiently, is derived from
the custom of lawyers’ servants remaining in the court of the Palace to
take charge of the riding-horses or mules belonging to their masters.
According to Sauval, the two first coaches seen in Paris, and which
called forth the wonder of the people, belonged, one to Queen Claude,
the first wife of Francis I.; and the other to Diana of Poitiers, his
mistress.
[Illustration: Fig. 83.--Sedan-chair of Charles V. (Armoury Real,
Madrid.)]
The fashion was soon followed; so much so, that even where the sumptuary
laws were still regarded as efficient, we find parliament entreating
Charles IX. to prohibit the circulation of coaches (_coches_) through
the town. The magistrates continued, until the commencement of the
seventeenth century, to attend at the courts of justice on their mules.
Christopher of Thou, father of the celebrated historian, and first
President of Parliament, was the first who came thither in his carriage;
but only because he suffered from gout, for his wife continued to ride
on horseback, seated pillion-fashion behind a servant.
Henry IV. had only one carriage. “I shall be unable to go and see you,”
he one day wrote to Sully, “for my wife uses my coach (_coche_).” These
coaches were neither elegant nor convenient. For doors they were
provided with leathern aprons, which were drawn or opened for entrance
or exit, with similar curtains to protect against the rain or the sun.
Marshal Bassompierre, in the time of Louis XIII., had a glass coach made
for him, which was regarded as a real marvel: it originated the impulse
which has led to the productive era of modern coach-building.
Formerly there were in Paris, as appears from numerous documents,
several corporations representing the saddler’s trade. First came the
_selliers-bourreliers_, and the _selliers-lormiers-carrossiers_. The
privileges of the first secured to them specially the manufacture of
saddles and harness (collars and other articles for draught). The second
made also carriages, bridles, reins, &c. Another very ancient
corporation was that of the _lormiers-éperonniers_--“artisans,” says the
Glossary of Jean de Garlande, “whom the military nobles greatly
patronised, because they manufactured silvered and gilt spurs, metal
breastplates for their horses, and well-executed bits.” There were also
_chapuissiers_, who made saddle-bows and pack-frames for the beasts of
burden, which were mostly manufactured of alder-wood.
The _blazenniers_ and _cuireurs_ then covered with leather the packs and
the saddles prepared by the _chapuissiers_; and, finally,
saddle-painters were employed to ornament them, either in compliance
with fashion, which has always been omnipotent in France, or according
to the laws of heraldry, when intended for men of rank for purposes of
state or war.
[Illustration: Fig. 84.--Banner of the Corporation of the Saddlers of
Tonnerre.]
GOLD AND SILVER WORK.
Its Antiquity.--The Trésor de Guarrazar.--The Merovingian and
Carlovingian Periods.--Ecclesiastical Jewellery.--Pre-eminence of
the Byzantine Goldsmiths.--Progress of the Art consequent on the
Crusades.--The Gold and Enamels of Limoges.--Jewellery ceases to be
restricted to Purposes of Religion.--Transparent Enamels.--Jean of
Pisa, Agnolo of Sienna, Ghiberti.--Great Painters and Sculptors
from the Goldsmiths’ Workshops.--Benvenuto Cellini.--The Goldsmiths
of Paris.
In the remarks upon furniture, we were compelled to trespass on the
domain which we now again approach; for, having to trace the history of
secular and religious luxury, we cannot but frequently encounter the
goldsmiths and their splendid works. It will thus happen more than once
that we shall have to indicate briefly certain important facts already
described, in some details, in preceding chapters.
It is known that in old times, even the most remote, the goldsmith’s art
flourished. There is scarcely any ancient narrative which does not
allude to jewels; and every day the discovery of precious objects, found
in ruins and in tombs, still attests the high state of perfection the
art of gold and silver work had attained among races long since extinct.
The Gauls, when under Roman dominion, applied themselves successfully to
the business of the gold-worker. We may again say that the triumph of
the Christian religion, under Constantine the Great, while encouraging
the interior decoration of places of worship, added a fresh impulse to
the development of this beautiful art.
The popes succeeding St. Sylvester (who had stimulated the liberality of
Constantine) continued to accumulate, in the churches at Rome, the most
costly and massive articles of gold-work. Symmachus (498 to 514) alone,
according to a calculation made by Seroux d’Agincourt, enriched the
treasures of the basilicas to the amount of 130 pounds weight of gold,
and 1,700 of silver, forming the material of objects most finely
wrought. It was from the very court of the Greek emperors that the
examples of this magnificence were derived; for we hear St. John
Chrysostom exclaiming, “All our admiration is at present reserved for
the goldsmiths and the weavers;” and it is well known that in
consequence of his bold indiscretion in rebuking the extravagance of the
Empress Eudoxia, this eloquent Father of the Church expiated in exile
and persecutions his ardent zeal and his sincerity.
[Illustration: Fig. 85.--Gallic Bracelet, from a Cabinet of Antiquities.
(Imp. Library, Paris.)]
The brilliant specimens of the gold-work of the Visigoths, which, in
1858, were exhumed in the field of Guarrazar, near Toledo, and which
have been obtained for the Cluny Museum, throw a new light on the
monuments of that period. Far from indicating any original style, they
afford further proof that the barbarians who came from the North became
subjected, in the arts, to Byzantine influence. The most remarkable, not
only in its dimensions and extreme richness, but in the peculiarity of
its ornaments, is a votive crown, intended to be hung, according to the
custom of those times, in a sacred place--that of Recesvinthe, who
reigned over the Goths of Spain from 653 to 672. It is composed of a
large fillet, jointed, and formed of a double plate of the finest gold.
Thirty uncut sapphires and as many pearls, regularly alternating,
arranged in three rows and in quincunxes,[14] are seen on its exterior
circle. Chased ornaments occupy the spaces between the stones. The
votive crown of King Suintila, which we here reproduce (Fig. 86), is
fully as rich, and about thirty years older.
[Illustration: GOLD CROSSES OF A KING OF THE GOTHS.
Found at Guarrazar. Seventh Century. (Museum of the Hotel Cluny) (Taken
from the work of M. Ferdinand de Lasteyrie.)]
It is of massive gold, ornamented with sapphires and pearls arranged in
rose-pattern, and set off by two borders similarly set with delicate
stones. But the originality of this precious gem consists in the letters
hanging as pendants from its lower border. These letters, open-worked,
are filled with small pieces of red glass set in gold; their combination
presents the following inscription:--“_Suintilanus Rex offeret_”
(offering of the King Suintila). Each of them is suspended from the
fillet by a chain with double links, sustaining a pendant of violet
sapphire, pear-shaped. Finally, the crown is suspended by four chains
attached to a circular top of rock-crystal.
[Illustration: Fig. 86.--Votive Crown of Suintila, King of the Visigoths
from 621 to 631. (Armoury Real, Madrid.)]
“Five of the crowns so fortunately discovered at Guarrazar,” says M. de
Lasteyrie, “have crosses. These, attached by a chain to the same
circular top, were evidently intended to remain suspended across the
circle of the crown.” The cross belonging to the crown of Recesvinthe is
by far the richest; eight large pearls and six sapphires, all mounted in
open-work, adorn the front. The four other crosses are of the form which
in heraldry is called _croix patée_; but they differ in size and in the
ornaments with which they are enriched.
We have already stated that the kings and grandees of the Merovingian
period displayed in their plate and in some of their state-furniture a
richness of gold-work the profuseness of which was ordinarily opposed to
good taste. We have seen at his work the celebrated Saint Eloi,
bishop-goldsmith; and we have mentioned not only his remarkable
productions, but also the enduring influence he exercised over a whole
historical period of art. Finally, we have observed that
Charlemagne--whose object seems to have been not only to imitate
Constantine, but to surpass him--endowed the churches magnificently with
works of art, without prejudice to the numberless splendours which his
palaces contained.
[Illustration: Fig. 87.--The Sword of Charlemagne. Preserved in the
Imperial Treasury at Vienna.]