the extent of each of which may be distinguished by the small crosses
above.
PLATE XII.
CHURCH OF GRÂVILLE.
(END OF THE NORTH TRANSEPT.)
[Illustration: Plate 12. CHURCH OF GRÂVILLE.]
The church of Grâville, like that of St. Georges de Bocherville, though
now parochial, was, before the revolution, monastic, being attached to
the priory of the same name, beautifully situated on an eminence near
the mouth of the Seine, at the distance of half a league from Havre de
Grâce. The origin of this monastery is referred, in the _Neustria
Pia_[10], to about the year 1100; but nothing is known with certainty
respecting it till 1203, when Walter, Archbishop of Rouen, confirmed, by
his approbation, the foundation of regular canons established here by
William Malet, lord of the village, which is called in the Latin of
those times, _Girardi Villa_, or _Geraldi Villa_. The modern name of
Grâville is supposed to be an abbreviation of these. The canons thus
fixed here, had been brought from St. Barbe in Auge, and were endowed by
the founder with all the lands he possessed in Normandy and England. By
subsequent deeds, one of them dated as late as the end of the fifteenth
century, different members of the same family continued their donations
to the priory. The last mentioned was Louis Malet, admiral of France,
whose name is also to be found among the benefactors to Rouen cathedral,
as having given a great bell of six hundred and sixty-six pounds weight,
which, previously to the revolution, hung in the central tower.
William Malet, the founder of Grâville, was one of the Norman chieftains
who fought under the Conqueror at the battle of Hastings[11]; and he is
said to have been selected by his prince, on that occasion, to take
charge of the body of Harold, and see it decently interred. Writers,
however, are not agreed upon this point: Knighton, on the authority of
Giraldus Cambrensis, asserts that, though Harold fell in the battle, he
was not slain; but, escaping, retired to a cell near St. John's church,
in Chester, and died there an anchoret, as was owned by himself in his
last confession, when he lay dying; in memory whereof, they shewed his
tomb when Knighton wrote. Rapin, on the other hand, in his _History of
England_ observes, that an ancient manuscript in the Cottonian library,
relates, "that the king's body was hard to be known, by reason of its
being covered with wounds; but that, it was at last discovered by one
who had been his mistress, by means of certain private marks, known only
to herself; whereupon the duke sent the body to his mother without
ransom, though she is said to have offered him its weight in gold."
Nearly the same story is told in the _Gesta Gulielmi Ductis_[12],
written by William, archdeacon of Lisieux, a contemporary author.
Ordericus Vitalis[13] mentions William Malet two years afterwards, as
commanding the Conqueror's forces in York, when besieged by the Danes
and a large body of confederates, under the command of Edgar Atheling
and other chieftains; and we find that his son, Robert, received from
the same king, the honor of Eye, in Suffolk, together with two hundred
and twenty-one lordships in the same county; and many others in
Hampshire, Essex, Lincoln, Nottingham, and York. This Robert held the
office of great chamberlain of England, in the beginning of the reign of
Henry I; but, only in the second year of it, he attached himself to the
cause of Robert Curthose, for which he was disinherited and banished.
With him appears to have ended the greatness of the family, in England.
The church of Grâville was dedicated to St. Honorina, a virgin martyr,
whose relics were preserved there in the times anterior to the Norman
invasion; but were then transported to Conflans upon the Marne. Peter de
Natalibus, copious as he is in his Hagiology, has no notice of Honorina,
whose influence was nevertheless most extraordinary in releasing
prisoners from fetters; and whose altars were accordingly hung round
with an abundance of chains and instruments of torture. The author of
the _Neustria Pia_, who attests many of her miracles of this
description, relates, that her sanctity extended even to the horse which
she rode, insomuch, that, when the body of the beast was thrown, after
its death, as carrion to the dogs, they all refused to touch it; and the
monks, in commemoration of the miracle, employed the skin for a covering
to the church door, where it remained till the middle of the seventeenth
century.
Except towards the west end, which is in ruins, and has quite lost the
portal and towers that flanked it, the church of Grâville still
continues tolerably entire: in its style and general outline, but
particularly in its central tower and spire, it bears a considerable
resemblance to that of St. Georges de Bocherville. Architecturally
regarded, however, it is very inferior to that noble edifice; but the
end of the north transept, selected for the subject of the present
plate, will, in point of interest, scarcely yield to any other building
in Normandy. The row of sculptures immediately above the windows, is
probably unique: among them is the Sagittary, very distinctly portrayed;
and near him, an animal, probably designed for a horse, whose tail ends
in a decided fleur-de-lys, while he holds in his mouth what appears
intended to represent another. The figure of the Sagittary is also
repeated upon one of the capitals of the nave, which are altogether of
the same style of art, as the most barbarous at St. Georges, and not
less fanciful. The interlaced arches, with flat surfaces, that inclose
the windows immediately beneath the sculptures, may be matched by
similar rows in the exterior of the abbey church of St. Stephen, at
Caen, and on the end of the north transept of Norwich cathedral. It
appears likewise, from Mr. Carter's work on _Early English
Architecture_, (_plate 23_) that others, resembling them, line the
lowest story of the east end of Tickencote church, in Rutlandshire. This
circumstance is the rather mentioned here, as that able antiquary
regards the church as a specimen of true Saxon architecture; whereas it
may safely be affirmed, that there is no part of it, as figured by him,
but may be exactly paralleled from Normandy. The same may also be said
of almost every individual instance that he has produced as
illustrations of the style in use among our Saxon progenitors. In
Grâville, a series of similar arches is continued along the west side of
the north transept; and, judging from the general appearance of the
church, it may be believed that it is of a prior date to any of the
others just mentioned.
A considerable portion of the monastic buildings is still remaining; but
they are comparatively modern.--A lithographic plate of this monastery
was published at Paris, by Bourgeois, in 1818.
NOTES:
[10] P. 861.
[11] _Bankes' Extinct Peerage_, I. p. 126.
[12] _Duchesne, Scriptores Normanni_, p. 204.
[13] Ibid. p. 512.
PLATE XIII.
CASTLE OF ST. SAUVEUR LE VICOMTE.[14]
The origin of the castle, here figured, is coeval with the establishment
of the Normans, in the province which now bears their name. The
inventory of the ancient barony of St. Sauveur, shews that, in 912, the
year when Charles the Simple ceded Normandy to Rollo, the new duke
granted this great lordship, under the common obligations of feudal
tenure, to Richard, one of the principal chieftains who had attended him
from Norway. In 913, Richard founded in his castle a chapel, which, in
the following year, was dedicated to the Holy Trinity, by Herbert,
Bishop of Coutances. Many of the descendants of Richard bore the name of
Néel; and it was upon the first of those so called, that Duke William
Longue Epée conferred the title of viscount, about the year 938. In 998,
Richard, the second of that name, established in his castle of St.
Sauveur, with the sanction of Hugh, Bishop of Coutances, a collegiate
church, consisting of four prebends. At the beginning of the reign of
William the Conqueror, Néel de St. Sauveur took up arms against the
disputed title of that sovereign, in consequence of which, his lands
were confiscated, and he himself compelled to seek an asylum in
Brittany. This is supposed to have happened in 1047; but the anger of
the offended duke was short-lived; for the very next year, there is an
account of William's restoring to Néel the lordship of St. Sauveur, "in
consideration of the services he had rendered him." The same lenity,
however, was not shewn with regard to Néel's lordship of Nehou; for this
was permanently alienated, and was granted to the family of Riviers, or
Redvers, who, some years afterwards, became powerful in England, where
they had a grant of the Isle of Wight, in fee, and were created, by
Henry I. Earls of Devonshire. The collegiate church, founded in the
castle of St. Sauveur during the preceding century, was suppressed in
1048, on account of some umbrage taken by the chieftain at the conduct
of the canons; and he established, in their room, a convent of
Benedictines, whose successors, removing without the precincts of the
fortress, erected the abbey, the subject of the following plate.
[Illustration: Plate 13. CASTLE OF ST. SAUVEUR LE VICOMTE.]
The name of St. Sauveur is to be found in the list of officers who
accompanied the Conqueror to England; and the records of those times
also preserve the remembrance of one Néel, who was slain at Cardiff, in
1078. The troops, however, of the Côtentin, were at the conquest,
commanded by Robert, Count of Mortain, half-brother to the duke, who,
most probably, was indebted to this near degree of relationship for so
proud a mark of distinction. The family of Néel did not retain much
longer possession of St. Sauveur: the lord of the castle died in 1092,
leaving only a daughter, named Lætitia, who married Jourdain Taisson, or
Tesson, and brought to him these possessions as her dowry. After the
expiration of about a century, a similar event deprived the Taissons of
St. Sauveur. Jane, the last of that family, formed an alliance with the
Harcourts, and with them the lordship remained till the middle of the
fourteenth century, when the domains of Géoffroy d'Harcourt were
confiscated for felony, and the castle would have passed into the hands
of a new master, had not the successes of our sovereign, Edward III.
interfered, and stopped the effects of the confiscation.
History, from this time forward, speaks more decidedly as to the
strength of the fortress: at the time of the battle of Poitiers,
Géoffroy d'Harcourt maintained himself here, at the head of a numerous
garrison, composed of troops from England and Navarre, and, not only
bade defiance to the superior force of the French generals, but extended
his ravages over the whole of Lower Normandy. The abbey of Lessay, and
cathedral of Coutances, particularly suffered from his attacks. To the
latter, he had actually laid siege, when a detachment sent against him,
by the regent and the states of the kingdom, obliged him to turn his
attention homeward; and his forces were defeated, and himself slain. The
castle, on this occasion, afforded safe shelter to the fugitives; and,
in consequence of Harcourt's death, passing into the hands of the King
of England, was, by him, supplied with a garrison of four hundred men,
under the command of Jehan Lisle, and was almost immediately afterwards
bestowed, by Edward, upon Sir John Chandos, as a reward for his eminent
services. The fortifications, under the care of this able captain,
underwent a thorough repair in the year 1360; and it is believed that,
upon this occasion, the keep was principally, if not altogether,
rebuilt; the same broad square tower, which is now standing, and is the
principal feature in the ruins. The labor thus bestowed upon St.
Sauveur, rendered it one of the principal posts of the duchy. Rymer, by
whom it is repeatedly mentioned, expressly states, that our countrymen
maintained in it a numerous garrison, who, after the battle of Auray,
lorded it without restraint over the neighboring parts, and were guilty
of such excesses, that, in 1374, Charles V. then King of France, was
induced to send against them a powerful armament, both by sea and land,
under Sir John of Vienne, admiral of the kingdom, assisted by all the
barons and knights of Brittany and Normandy. St. Sauveur was, at that
time, in the hands of Sir Aleyne Boxhull, to whom Edward had given it,
after the death of Sir John Chandos; but he, himself, was then in
England; and, according to Froissart[15], he had left there as governor
a squire, called Carenton, or Katrington, with Sir Thomas Cornet, John
de Burgh, and the three brothers Maulevriers, with whom there might be
about six score companions, all armed, and ready for defence. This
handful of men made a long and obstinate resistance, which, at length,
terminated in a truce for six weeks, accompanied with a stipulation,
that, unless previously relieved, the fortress should be surrendered
upon a certain day of July, 1375. The time came; no relief arrived; and
the French took possession of St. Sauveur; though not without many
remonstrances on the part of the besieged, who contended, that the
treaty of Bruges, which had been signed in the interim by the two
sovereigns, and had established a general truce, ought also to have the
effect of superseding all partial treaties.
Mention is made, upon this occasion, of a considerable sum of money,
which was to be paid to the garrison, upon their evacuating the castle.
The fact, though unnoticed by Froissart and Holinshed, could not but
have been notorious; for it appears, that John of Vienne assembled the
three states of the province at Bayeux, for the purpose of raising the
money; and Rymer tells us, that the papal legates were appointed by the
respective parties, as depositaries, both of the money and the castle,
till all the stipulations should be fulfilled. In this circumstance, we
find an explanation of the death of Katrington, on which Holinshed
dwells at considerable length, giving a most curious and interesting
account of the circumstances attending it[16]. Sir John Anneslie, who
had married the niece of Sir John Chandos, and, on that account, claimed
the inheritance of St. Sauveur, with the lands appertaining to the
castle, charged Katrington with treason, in the matter of the surrender;
and, after considerable difficulties, prevailed upon King Richard II in
the third year of his reign, to suffer the point to be established by
single combat. The event of the contest was considered to make good the
charge. According to Holinshed, Katrington, who was a very strong man,
while his adversary was much the contrary, was so grievously wounded in
the fight, that he died the following day. Dugdale and Fabian, however,
state, that he was dragged to Tyburn, and there hanged for his treason.
The King of France, upon recovering possession of St. Sauveur, conferred
the lordship upon Bureau de la Riviere, his chamberlain: from him, it
passed, in 1392, into the hands of John Charles, Lord of Evry, who still
held it in 1417, when our King Henry once more brought it under the sway
of the English sceptre. During the succeeding unfortunate reign, this
castle shared, in 1450, the fate of all the other British possessions in
Normandy; and, like most of the rest, it offered but a feeble resistance
to the victorious arms of France. A few days' siege was sufficient to
induce its garrison, of two hundred men, to surrender, what the
contemporary historians admit to have been one of the finest and
strongest places in the duchy. St. Sauveur, from this time, is no longer
celebrated in history, as a fortress; nor, indeed, does it even appear
to be mentioned as such, except in the Memoirs of Marshal de Matignon,
where a demand is stated to have been made for thirty men to garrison
it. In all probability, the change produced in the art of warfare, by
the introduction of cannon, caused it silently to pass into
insignificance, and then gradually to sink into its present wretched
state of dilapidation. Towards the close of the seventeenth century, an
hospital was established within its walls; and the same still subsists,
but in great poverty, in consequence of the funds having been alienated,
or lost, during the revolution.
Of the ancient fortifications of the castle, the greater part exists,
either entire, or sufficiently so to be traced. The most important of
all, the keep, is perfect in its exterior, but has been so completely
gutted within, that the original situation of the floors and beams is
not to be discovered without difficulty. The two ballia likewise remain:
the larger, which defended the keep; the lesser, in the form of a
crescent, designed to oppose the approach of an enemy on the side of the
town. Towards the north, the small river, the Ouve, formed a natural
defence. On the south, are still to be seen two gates, of which, that
leading to the dungeon was considerably the stronger. It was defended by
the works, commonly employed from the fourteenth to the sixteenth
century, for the protection of the entrances to fortresses; and, under
it, there yet remain, on either side, freestone seats, designed for the
guard, capable of containing from fifteen to twenty persons. The rest
of the outworks, which were many, have now disappeared; but people are
still living in the town, who remember to have seen the fosses filled
with water. At present they are obliterated; and their site is occupied
by houses and gardens.
The following is a list of the lords of St. Sauveur, from the year 1450,
to the revolution.--Charles VII. when first he wrested the castle from
the English, conferred it, together with its extensive domain, upon
Andrew de Villequier, and his heirs male; and it remained in this family
till 1536, when, from default of such heirs, it reverted to the crown,
and was kept in the hands of Francis I. and his successors, till 1572.
At that time Charles IX. granted it to Christopher de Bassompierre, from
whom it passed to Francis de Bassompierre, Marshal of France. In 1612,
it again returned to the throne, then filled by Mary of Medicis, widow
of Henry IV. whose son, Louis XIII. alienated it in 1620, to John
Phélipeaux de Villesavey, and he held it till 1631. After him, the
families of De la Guiche and Géran were, for thirty-eight years,
possessors of St. Sauveur. At the expiration of this term, the lordship
became once more incorporated in the royal domain, till Louis XIV. in
1698, conferred it upon his natural son, the Count of Toulouse, whose
son, Louis Jean Marie de Bourbon, Duc de Penthievre, succeeded to it, by
inheritance, in 1727. He shortly after gave it, in part of her portion,
to his daughter, who married Louis Philippe Joseph d'Orleans, Duc de
Chartres; and it thenceforward continued in the possession of the
Orleans family, till the period of the revolution.
NOTES:
[14] The author has to express his acknowledgments, and he begs to do it
in the strongest terms, to the kindness of M. de Gerville of Valognes,
for very many communications towards the furtherance of this work; but
particularly for those relating to the church and abbey of St. Sauveur
le Vicomte, which have been so copious, that little has been necessary,
but to translate them into English.
[15] _Johnes' Translation_, octavo edit. IV. p. 268.
[16] Quarto edit. II. p. 726.
PLATE XIV.
ABBEY CHURCH OF ST. SAUVEUR LE VICOMTE.
(NORTH-EAST VIEW.)
[Illustration: Plate 14. ABBEY CHURCH OF ST. SAUVEUR LE VICOMTE.]
The remains of the abbey of St. Sauveur le Vicomte, are situated within
a very short distance of the castle of the same name, in the department
of La Manche, near the western extremity of Normandy, about eighteen
miles south of Valognes, and fifty north of Coutances. The addition of
the term _Vicomte_, to the appellation of this domain, may have been
owing to a two-fold cause;--to denote the importance of its possessor,
and to distinguish the monastery from other religious establishments in
the duchy, also dedicated to the Holy Savior, especially from the
nunnery of St. Sauveur, at Evreux.
It has been necessary, under the preceding article, briefly to allude to
the establishment of this convent, which took its rise from the
collegiate church, founded in the year 998, in the castle of St.
Sauveur, by Richard Néel, the second viscount; a foundation, which, only
fifty years afterwards, was suppressed, and replaced by a society of
Benedictines from Jumieges. Changes of this description were by no means
unfrequent in those unsettled times: indeed, regarding the character of
the chieftains and the clergy, it is rather matter of surprise, that
they did not occur more commonly; and greater astonishment may be
entertained at the Viscount of St. Sauveur having suffered a body of
men, naturally imperious, and necessarily guided by interests different
from his own, to remain about a century under his roof, than to find him
afterwards removing them to the spot which they subsequently continued
to occupy. The original charter, granted by Néel to the monks from
Jumieges, is preserved among the documents in the _Gallia Christiana_.
His brother, Roger, is said to have superintended the erection of the
new monastery, in which pious task, he was assisted by Lætitia, his
niece, sole heiress of Néel, and now married to Jourdain Taisson, who
had, in her right, become lord of St. Sauveur. This Jourdain, with his
wife, and their three sons, was present at the dedication of the church;
so that the building of it may safely be referred to the early part of
the twelfth century. M. de Gerville, upon the authority of the Memoirs
of the Harcourt Family, states, that some of these latter also assisted
in the construction; and yet he is unwilling to admit that any portion
of it was erected in the following century, when the Harcourts became
possessed of the domain. He contends, that "the whole style of the
building indicates a period approaching the year 1100; at which time the
struggle existed between the pointed and the semi-circular
architecture." Setting aside the long-contested question concerning the
date of the introduction of the pointed arch, I cannot help, for my own
part, suspecting, that the Lady-Chapel was a subsequent erection, and,
probably, of the æra of the Harcourts. Its narrow trefoil-headed windows
above, and the plainer ones below, seem decisively to indicate such a
period; and the deep buttresses afford another, not less positive, mark.
The lower part of this portion of the church, exhibits an architectural
peculiarity deserving of notice: the wall is considerably widest, where
it unites with the ground; after which, it gradually decreases in size,
by successive tiers, for a few feet upwards, and then it rises
perpendicularly.
What remains of the western portal, is of the earlier style. It was
entered by a semi-circular arch, bordered by a fillet of the nail-head
moulding. In the nave, the lower arches, with the columns and their
capitals, as well as the false row of arches in the triforium, are
wholly Norman; while the windows of the clerestory and their
accompanying ornaments, are as completely gothic. The transepts and the
choir shew a similar medley.