CHAPTER VI

CHURCHES AND CATHEDRALS OF THE TWELFTH AND THIRTEENTH CENTURIES

The study of mediæval architecture is one of the most fascinating of

pursuits, but it is one beset with difficulties. The obscurity in

which the origin of our great monuments is buried is profound and

often impenetrable.

A fertile cause of error is the confusion which in many cases has

arisen between the dates of foundation and of consecration. Very often

a church was built and afterwards considerably modified, rather than

actually reconstructed, on the same consecrated site.

Lightning was the most frequent cause of the destruction, total or

partial, of mediæval churches. Striking the steeple, the tower, or the

roof, it fired the timber superstructure of the nave. This in itself

would not have been an irreparable disaster; but as the timbers gave

way the calcined beams charred the piers, and so prepared the downfall

of the whole building, which was then either restored or reconstructed

in the fashion of the day. Hence, whether we base our deductions upon

more or less trustworthy records or upon contemporary readings of

existing data, the result is too often a confusion among vanished

monuments, or a contradiction between the buildings as they now exist

and the historic records which relate to them.

[Illustration: 32. CATHEDRAL OF LAON. PLAN]

[Illustration: 33. CATHEDRAL OF LAON. INTERIOR OF THE NAVE]

Nothing is easier for interested theorists than to post-or ante-date

the structure of a building. They have nothing to fear from the

testimony of writers, and, with very few exceptions, it is difficult

to assign a precise date to the construction of great churches and

cathedrals or to point with certainty to their architects. The

obscurity of these great artists is perhaps to be accounted for by

the fact that they were ecclesiastics. As such the honour of their

achievements belonged not to the individual, but to the corporate

body, the _order_ of which they were members, and members moreover who

had, in most cases, taken the vow of humility.

Modern science, architectural and archæological, has failed to throw

much positive light on this subject. It contents itself for the most

part with ingenious hypotheses and learned deductions which leave

us still in doubt as to precise dates. But we shall at least find

some sort of foothold in a careful architectural survey of buildings

themselves. This should be, of course, supplemented by study of

historic records, and such a study will convince us that art in the

Middle Ages, as in all epochs, obeyed the immutable laws of filiation

and transformation. We shall follow the artist step by step, observing

his research, his hesitation, his errors, and even his corrections.

These are trustworthy documents in which to study the origin of a

building and to note its successive transformations, which latter were

far more frequent than total reconstructions. For it was not until the

beginning of the thirteenth century that great cathedral churches in

any considerable numbers were conceived and continuously executed.[9]

[9] It is possible, if not easy, to trace the architectural

development of the Middle Ages in a good many cathedrals and

churches of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. We have, however,

confined ourselves, for the purposes of our present synthesis, to

the churches and cathedrals of the royal domain, and more especially

of the Ile-de-France, not only because they served as models for the

architects of their day, but because they illustrate in a remarkable

degree the various transitions we desire to study.

[Illustration: 34. CATHEDRAL OF LAON. MAIN FAÇADE]

The great abbey churches founded towards the close of the twelfth

century in the royal domain, but continued and finished in the early

years of the thirteenth, still preserved a more ancient tradition.

Laon, which is derived from Noyon and from the south transept of

Soissons, consists of a nave with transepts, and of two-storied side

aisles vaulted upon intersecting arches, above which, as at Soissons,

rise flying buttresses, which meet the thrust of the main vault.

This arrangement of the side aisles proves the continuity of the

Norman formulæ, just as the method of construction adopted in the main

vault demonstrates the persistent influence of the dome.[10]

[10] See chap. i., "The Influence of the Cupola on Gothic

Architecture."

The admirably constructed main vault is square on plan, each square

containing two transverse compartments, after the Angevin method as

derived from the Aquitainian dome. Here we find indications that,

if the builders of the Church of Laon had fully assimilated this

method, their minds were nevertheless not altogether at rest as to

the functions of the flying buttress. This was, of course, essential

to the piers which received the united thrust of both transverse

and diagonal arches. But it was far from logical to reinforce the

intermediate piers supporting nothing but the auxiliary transverse

arches by abutments identical with those of the main piers.

The illogicality so striking at Laon is absent from Noyon. There,

on the contrary, the architects--of the original construction--had

emphasised the functions of the main piers by buttresses of greater

projection and solidity than those accorded to the secondary piers.

[Illustration: 35. CATHEDRAL OF LAON. THE EAST END]

[Illustration: 36. CATHEDRAL OF LAON. SECTION OF THE NAVE]

Notre Dame de Paris was begun towards the close of the twelfth

century, and finished, save for the chapels, in the first half of

the thirteenth. As at Laon, the Norman tradition is observed in the

arrangement of the upper galleries of the side aisles, while the

influence of the dome is again to be traced in the sex-partite

groining. The same illogical system of abutments obtains as at Laon.

This vast building, consisting of a nave and double side aisles of

equal height sweeping round the semi-circular choir, seems to be one

of the first five-aisled cathedrals; its grandiose arrangement, the

boldness of its combinations, and the perfection of its detail mark

the considerable progress made by the architects of the Ile-de-France.

[Illustration: 37. NOTRE DAME DE PARIS. PLAN]

The method of construction here adopted has a peculiar significance.

The upper internal galleries, vaulted on diagonal arches, and raised

considerably above the level of the second side aisle, the boldness of

the flying buttress, which at one span embraces the two side aisles

and forms the abutments of the main vault--alike prove that the

architects of Notre Dame de Paris had adopted the newly discovered

systems even to excess, and were applying them with unparalleled skill

and ingenuity.

[Illustration: 38. NOTRE DAME DE PARIS. SECTION OF THE NAVE]

The Norman tradition which had obtained in the Ile-de-France

passed away in the first years of the thirteenth century. At

Châlons-sur-Marne the nave is flanked by two-storied side aisles. But

the upper gallery, vaulted and greatly reduced in size, shows that the

conventional arrangement was fast dying out.

The influence of the dome was longer lived, as is shown in the

construction of vaults at this period. We may still trace it at

Langres in the domed form of the vaults, which, in spite of their

rectangular plan, seem to be a reduced copy of the Angevin naves.

[Illustration: 39. NOTRE DAME DE PARIS. FLYING BUTTRESSES AND SOUTH

TOWER]

The naves of Sens and of Bourges are also vaulted in square

compartments. The thrust of the vaults is carried by the diagonal

arches to each alternate pier, the intermediate one receiving only the

auxiliary transverse arch already fully described. Yet here again the

exterior flying buttresses are all of equal solidity in spite of the

varying strain. This arrangement, prudent if illogical, shows once

more with what distrust architects had adopted that system of exterior

abutment, the characteristic of which is a detached arch exposed to

all the vicissitudes of weather, and yet responsible for the stability

of the whole edifice.

The Cathedral of Sens marks a new phase of development by its

suppression of the upper gallery over the side aisles. These are now

vaulted and covered by a lean-to roof; a flying buttress of single

span receives the thrust of the main vault. The building is perfectly

solid; its construction shows research, though it is as illogical as

that of Laon or of Paris; for the exterior flying buttresses are all

of equal strength, and so fail to proclaim their true functions, the

interior thrusts varying considerably.

[Illustration: 40. SENS CATHEDRAL. PLAN OF A BAY. VAULT IN SQUARE

COMPARTMENTS OF TWO BAYS]

[Illustration: 41. SENS CATHEDRAL. SECTION OF A BAY OF THE NAVE]

[Illustration: 42. SENS CATHEDRAL. INTERIOR VIEW OF LATERAL BAYS]

The arrangement at Bourges, which appears to have been mainly built,

if not actually finished, in the first half of the thirteenth

century, differs from that of Sens. The structure is one of five

aisles, and in plan recalls Notre Dame de Paris, but the details are

very dissimilar. The inner side aisles no longer support a gallery,

nor are they of equal height with the outer aisles; they are raised

so as to afford space for lighting (see Fig. 43). The main vault is

sex-partite planned on squares; but the same illogicality exists

here which we have already pointed out, and in connection with which

we will risk appearing somewhat insistent, in the hope of directing

special attention to it. It is more glaring here than elsewhere, the

flying buttresses themselves being of exaggerated dimensions and of

double span, embracing the two side aisles.

[Illustration: 43. BOURGES CATHEDRAL. SECTION OF THE NAVE]

Both at Bourges and Sens the space between the summit of the

archivolts and the bases of the upper windows, known as the frieze,

or, in modern parlance, the triforium, becomes a purely decorative

feature. It consists of a narrow arcaded corridor, occupying in the

interior of the building that portion of the wall space which in the

exterior has been appropriated by the lean-to roof of the side aisles.

At Sens there is merely a single gallery; at Bourges it becomes

double, through the stepped arrangement of the side aisles (see Fig.

43), a variation in which we may trace an ingenious blending of the

systems of Anjou and Poitiers with those of the Ile-de-France.

Gothic Architecture · 第 6 / 13 章