transferred, by his letters patent, the convent of St. Julien, with all
its appurtenances, which had by that time considerably increased, to the
great hospital of the city, called the Magdalen. The prior of the latter
establishment was enjoined to take charge of the nuns, and to visit them
daily, for the purpose of recommending the soul of the king to their
prayers, in commemoration of the great benefits bestowed by him upon the
monastery. Even down to the time of the revolution, this custom was to a
certain degree maintained. The priest on duty during the week was bound
to pronounce daily, with a loud voice, at the close of the evening
service, "_Ames dévotes priez pour Charles V. Roi de France, et pour nos
autres bienfaiteurs_;" and this was followed by the one hundred and
twenty-ninth psalm, and an appropriate prayer. The same ceremony was at
the same time performed by one of the nuns, among the females.
After the union of the convent of St. Julien to the Magdalen, the
superior of the hospital was in the habit of keeping a monk at the
priory, as a superintendant over the religious duties of the occupants
and temporal possessions of the foundation; and this state of things
continued till 1600, when, upon the destruction of the abbey upon Mont
Ste Catherine, the friars of the latter establishment obtained from the
hospital the cession of the deserted monastery, and occupied it for
sixty-seven years. They then also in their turn resigned it, and it fell
into the hands of the Carthusians of Gaillon, who, uniting with their
brethren of the same order at Rouen, formed a very opulent community,
and resided here till the period when all monastic institutions ceased
throughout France.
Architecturally considered, the chapel is a building of great
interest.[78] A more pure, or more perfect specimen of the Norman æra,
is perhaps no where to be found. Without spire or tower, and divided
into three parts of unequal length and height, the nave, the choir, and
the circular apsis, it resembles one of the meanest of our parish
churches in England. In its design, it is externally quite regular,
being divided throughout its whole length, into small compartments, by a
row of shallow buttresses, which rise from the ground to the eaves of
the roof, without any partition into splays. Those on the south side,
(see _plate forty-two_) are all, except the most eastern, still in their
primeval state; but a buttress of a subsequent, though not very recent,
date, has been built up against almost every one of the original
buttresses on the north side, by way of support to the edifice. Each
division contains a single narrow circular-headed window; beneath which
is a plain moulding, continued uninterruptedly over the buttresses as
well as the wall. Another plain moulding runs nearly on a level with the
tops of the windows, and takes the same circular form; but it is
confined to the spaces between the buttresses. There are no others.--The
entrance was by circular-headed doors, at the west end and south side,
both of them very plain; but particularly the latter. The few ornaments
of the western are as perfect and as sharp, as if the whole were the
work of yesterday. This part of the church has, however, been exposed to
considerable injury, owing to its having joined the conventual
buildings.
[Illustration: Plate 43. CHAPEL OF THE HOSPITAL OF ST. JULIEN, NEAR
ROUEN.
_Interior. Choir and part of the Nave._]
The interior of the chapel, however degraded from its original purpose,
continues, like the exterior, almost perfect; but it is much more rich,
uniting to the common ornaments of Norman architecture capitals of great
labor. The ceiling is covered with paintings of scriptural subjects,
which still remain. This discrepance of style between the outside of the
building and the inside, might lead to a suspicion that they had been
erected at different times; but there really seems to be no sufficient
ground for such an opinion. Those who attempt to decide upon the dates
of Norman edifices, judging from the character of their ornaments, or
the comparative profusion of their decorations, will do well to reflect,
that almost every building contains in itself a medley of what is
barbarous and classical, while no two can well vary more in the quantity
of their ornaments, than the two abbatial churches of Caen; and yet they
were both of them, beyond dispute, productions of the self-same æra.--It
deserves remark likewise, that two theories of directly opposite
tendency, both of them perhaps equally plausible, have been started upon
this point. The partisans of one of these maintain, that the Normans, on
their arrival in the more southern parts of Europe, found highly
ornamented buildings, and, being themselves altogether ignorant of art,
were content with copying what already existed; so that their progress
in art was in a retrograde direction, from a classical style, to one
comparatively barbarous. On the other hand, it is averred, that these
reputed savages really imported with them the kind of architecture now
generally known by their name; and, in proportion as they improved in
wealth, luxury, and refinement, drew nearer and nearer to the Roman
model, either by dint of their own observations, or by the importation
of Italian artists. The balance of probability appears at the first
glance to incline in favor of the latter of these opinions, as most
consonant to the general march of human affairs. Perhaps, however, upon
a more attentive consideration, the former may appear nearer to the
truth: it is certain, that the style in architecture, which immediately
succeeded what is commonly called Norman, is still farther removed from
the Roman or the Greek; and it is equally certain, that the Norman
itself has different characters in different parts of Europe. That of
England varies to a certain degree from what is seen in Normandy: the
latter still more so from the German, and the German from that of the
south of France; while, in the north of Italy, and in Sicily, it is
again found with features unlike those of other countries, and equally
unlike those of each other. In all, the discrepancies most probably
arise from the styles peculiar to the several nations, previously to the
irruptions of the northern hordes. The subject is, at all events,
deserving of investigation and reflection.
NOTES:
[73] Vol. V. p. 370.
[74] _Concilia Normannica_, II. p. 72.
[75] _Ibidem_, p. 239.
[76] _Ibidem_, p. 545.
[77] _Ibidem_, I. p. 175.
[78] The greater part of what follows is borrowed from _Turner's Tour in
Normandy_, I. p. 128.
PLATES XLIV.--XLVI.
CHURCH OF LÉRY.
[Illustration: Plate 44. CHURCH OF LÉRY, NEAR PONT-DE-L'ARCHE.
_General view looking south east._]
It is not in the vicinity of Rouen, nor indeed in any portion of the
district formerly known under the denomination of _Upper Normandy_, that
the curious traveller must seek for the most interesting remains of
early ecclesiastical architecture in the province. The village churches,
throughout this portion of the duchy, are for the most part small and
insignificant, and of comparatively modern erection; while, in the
vicinity of Caen, and indeed in the whole of the departments of Calvados
and of La Manche, a large proportion of them are unquestionably
referable to the times of Norman dominion, and exhibit some of the
purest specimens of real Norman art. The solution of this question must
in all probability be sought for in the political state of the province;
and no more obvious answer seems to present itself, than is afforded by
a reference to the local character of its two great divisions, of which,
Upper Normandy, consisting greatly of a border country, exposed to the
continual ravages of warfare from its more powerful neighbor, with
difficulty preserved such of its public buildings as were defended by
the walls of the fortresses; and often gladly compounded for the secure
existence of these, by the sacrifice of the harvest, the cottage, and
the parochial church.
Yet, even here, some of the ecclesiastical buildings have escaped the
hand of time and violence; and among these, few, if any, more completely
than that of Léry, a village situated upon the right bank of the Eure,
at a distance of about two miles from Pont de l'Arche, and nearly the
same from Louviers.
Léry gives its name to the adjoining _commune_; and it may reasonably be
inferred, that it was in former times a place of more importance, than
would be imagined from its present appearance. The ingenious and
estimable M. Langlois, of Rouen, in a work[79] which he commenced upon
the antiquities of Normandy, and in which he has figured the west front
of this church, tells us, that but a few years since, Léry could boast
of several specimens of domestic architecture of unusual size and
embellishment. Of one of these, an engraving has lately been given by M.
Willemin, in his exquisite _Monumens Inédits de la France_. It was known
by the name of the Palace of Queen Blanche; and if, by the Blanche in
question, is to be understood the Princess of Navarre, consort of Philip
VI. who died in 1350, there is nothing in the exterior of the building
to prevent its being ascribed to that æra. It was entered by a flat
door-way, under a wide, pointed, crocketed arch; the transom-stone
enriched with a trefoil-headed moulding; and the whole portal surmounted
with a balustrade of quatrefoils. But, unfortunately, nothing more can
now be said of the building, than is supplied by the plate in question.
It had, in its earlier time, repeatedly suffered from the effects of
fire; and a similar calamity completed its ruin, during the month of
June, 1814. The lower part of the walls and the gothic portal are all
that are left standing, to attest the original size and magnificence of
the palace.
The church of Léry is referred by M. Langlois to the æra of the
Carlovingian dynasty, a period that extended from the middle of the
seventh century, to the concluding years of the tenth. Its claim to so
extraordinarily high a degree of antiquity, is founded, in his opinion,
upon the resemblance borne by the columns and capitals of the west
front, particularly those of the windows, to the same parts in the crypt
of the abbey of St. Denis, generally supposed to be the joint work of
Pepin and of Charlemagne. But these latter decidedly partake more of the
character of the classical model,[80] while every member throughout the
whole front of Léry, (_see plate forty-five_) may find a parallel in
other Norman churches; or, if an exception is to be made to so sweeping
an assertion, it can only be in favor of the second and largest moulding
in the archivolt of the portal, which is very peculiar. The two lateral
pointed windows are obviously an introduction of a subsequent period;
and a doubt may likewise perhaps be entertained with regard to the
buttresses. This front is small indeed, but elegant: it is more richly
ornamented than that of the chapel in the castle at Caen;[81] and,
though less so than that of the abbey church of St. Georges de
Bocherville, yet can it scarcely be said to be inferior in beauty. A
recent tourist[82] has remarked, with much apparent probability, that
the churches of St. Georges and of Léry may, from the general conformity
in the style of both, reasonably be regarded as of nearly the same
æra,--the time of the Norman conquest; and he goes on to add that,
through these, the English antiquary may be enabled to fix the date to a
specimen of ancient architecture in his own country, more splendid than
either,--the church of Castle-Rising,[83] in Norfolk, whose west front
is so much on the same plan, that it can scarcely have been erected at a
very different period.
The church of Léry (_see plate forty-four_) is built in the form of a
cross, having in the centre a short square tower, to which has been
attached, in modern times, a wretched wooden spire. This Mr. Cotman has
very judiciously omitted, as adding nothing to the interest of the
plate, and merely tending to deform what is otherwise seen in nearly the
same state in which it left the hands of the original builders. The
corbel-table, observable immediately under the top of the tower, and in
some parts of the choir and transepts, exhibits the same description of
monsters, as in the church of St. Paul at Rouen, of the Holy Trinity at
Caen, and other Norman religious buildings.--Two peculiarities attending
upon the exterior of the church are, that the east end is flat, and that
the transepts are altogether without buttresses.
[Illustration: Plate 45. CHURCH OF LÉRY, NEAR PONT-DE-L'ARCHE.
_West Front._]
[Illustration: Plate 46. CHURCH OF LÉRY, NEAR PONT-DE-L'ARCHE.
_Interior._]
In the interior (_plate forty-six_) it is impossible not to be struck
with the extraordinary simplicity and solidity of the whole. The only
aim of the architect appears to have been to erect an edifice that
should last for ever. A double row of pillars and arches separates the
nave into three parts of unequal width; and another arch, of greater
span, divides it from the chancel. The arches are in every instance
devoid of mouldings; the capitals are altogether without ornamental
sculpture of any description; and the pillars are even unsupported by
bases. Indeed, the pillars are nothing more than rounded piers; and they
are not less remarkable for their proportions, than for their
simplicity, their diameter being equal to full two-thirds of their
height. Hence it is scarcely possible not to entertain the suspicion
that the floor may have been raised; but there is nothing in the
appearance of the church to justify such an idea. It is scarcely
necessary to mention, that the figures of saints placed upon brackets
against the spandrils of the arches, are all modern. Their execution is
wretched; and its imperfection is rendered but the more apparent, by
their having been painted in imitation of living nature. The
string-course, which runs immediately above their heads, is placed in a
very uncommon situation. It is composed of the nail-head ornament, in
itself a sufficient proof of its antiquity; and also, as is observed by
Mr. Cotman, of such rarity in Normandy, that he does not recollect to
have met with another instance of it.
The windows of the church of Léry were formerly filled with painted
glass, representing very curious subjects, taken from the life of St.
Louis; but every vestige of the kind has now disappeared. From the
church-yard, which stands upon a considerable elevation, immediately
above the banks of the Eure, are seen, upon an opposite hill beyond the
river, the ruins of the once celebrated convent, known by the name of
the _Priory of the Two Lovers_.
NOTES:
[79] _Recueil de quelques vues de sites et Monumens de la France,
spécialement de Normandie, et des divers Costumes des Habitans de cette
Province._--Of this work, the first number, containing eight plates,
appeared in Rouen, in 1816; but, unfortunately, it did not meet with
sufficient encouragement to be ever followed by a second.
[80] See _Howlett's Plan and Views of the Abbey Royal of St. Denis_,
plate 6.
[81] See plate 48.
[82] _Turner's Tour in Normandy_, I. p. 188.
[83] _Cotman's Architectural Antiquities of Norfolk_, plate 35.
PLATE XLVII.
CHURCH OF COLOMBY.
[Illustration: Plate 47. ELEVATIONS OF THE CHURCH OF COLOMBY NEAR
VALOGNES.]
The church of Colomby, to use the language of M. de Gerville, is one of
the last of the religious edifices built by those powerful barons, whose
sway extended equally over Normandy and England. No records, indeed, are
left either as to the actual time of its erection, or the name of its
founder. With respect, however, to the former, the style of the
architecture is sufficiently decisive; and there is as little cause for
hesitation in referring its origin to a nobleman allied to the family of
the Conqueror.
Baldwin de Brionis, or de Molis, who accompanied that monarch in his
expedition against England, and was afterwards married to his niece, was
rewarded by him for his services, with the barony of Okehampton, where
he resided, as well as with the custody of the county of Devon, and the
government of Exeter castle, in fee. The earldom of the same county,
together with a grant of the Isle of Wight, was conferred by Henry I.
upon the son of Baldwin, Richard de Redvers; and, either in the same or
the following generation, this powerful family obtained a still farther
accession to its riches and honors, in the possession of Néhou, a
considerable portion of the barony of St. Sauveur le Vicomte, which
Néel, Viscount of the Cotentin, had forfeited in 1047. The domain of
Néhou included a collegiate church; and one of the prebends of this was
attached to the second portion of the church of Colomby.
It appears from three inquiries instituted at different times by the
bishops of Coutances, with a view to ascertain the value of the livings
in their diocese, that, in the years 1255, 1666, and 1737, Colomby was
under two separate ministers; one of them nominated by the lord, the
other by the abbey of Montbourg.[84]
Almost all the noblemen of the family of Redvers, who, after the
conquest of England, commonly assumed the additional name of Vernon,
were distinguished by the baptismal appellation of Baldwin, William, or
Richard. The first of the Richards laid the foundation of the monastery
of Montbourg. He died there in 1107, after having enriched his rising
convent with numerous donations, and, among others, with the second
portion of Colomby. Baldwin, his son and successor, confirmed the
donations: he took arms against King Stephen, and was forced by that
monarch to flee from England in 1136; shortly after which time he
completed the abbey begun by his father, and caused it to be dedicated
in 1152: three years subsequently, he died. A second Richard, who
succeeded him in his honors, as Earl of Devonshire and Lord of Néhou,
died in 1162; and a third of the same name, in 1184. This last, not
content with merely confirming the donations made by his ancestors to
Montbourg, materially increased them: he also added to the collegiate
church of Néhou, a fifth prebend, which he conferred upon one of the
ministers of Colomby; and it was by him, according to the opinion of M.
de Gerville, that the church, the subject of the present article, was
built.
A few years only elapsed after the decease of this chieftain, before
Normandy became re-united to the crown of France; and one of the first
acts of Philip-Augustus, who then sat upon the throne, was to register
the fiefs of his new province, their several possessors, and the service
owed by each. This took place in the year 1207; and Néhou, which was
bound to furnish the monarch with five horse-soldiers, was at that time
in the possession of Richard of Vernon, a nobleman of whom no notice is
to be found in the genealogy of the lords of the Isle of Wight. The
register records the fact in the following terms:--"Ric. de Vernon tenet
baroniam de Neahou per servicium quimque militum. Guillelmus de Vernon
tenet inde duo feoda et dimidium."--
The church of Colomby is in perfect preservation, unspoiled and
undefaced by modern alterations or additions, saving only that of a
porch at the western extremity. For simplicity and uniformity it cannot
be surpassed; nor can any building be better qualified to afford a
specimen of the religious architecture of the times. Though destitute
both of transept and aisles, the tower is central: the east end
terminates in a flat wall. The columns within are clustered and light;
formed of stone, which unites, in an eminent degree, the advantage of
great strength with that of yielding easily to the chisel, and which is
dug from the quarries of Yvetot, near Valognes. The same quarries also
furnished the principal part of the stone employed in the construction
of the cathedral of Coutances. The plate exhibits at C. the elevation of
the south side of the church; to which have been added, for the more
complete understanding of the subject,
A. _The west front._
B. _East end._
D. _South door-way to the chancel._
E. _A single window._
NOTES:
[84] The words used upon this subject in the Inquisition of 1255, made
by Jean d'Essey, then bishop of Coutances, are as follows:--"Eccliæ de
Colombeo patronus Abbas Montisburgi pro medietate et percipit duas
garbas de portione sua. Rector percipit terciam cum altalagio. Gulielmus
de Rivers patronus pro alia medietate. Rector percipit omnia."--The two
following inquisitions state in express terms, that the first portion
was under the patronage of the lord.
PLATE XLVIII.
CHAPEL IN THE CASTLE AT CAEN.
The Castle at Caen was built by William the Conqueror, whose son, Henry
I. though commonly reputed its founder, in reality confined himself to
raising the walls and adding the keep, which latter was levelled with
the ground, by virtue of a decree of the National Convention, dated 6th
August, 1793. By the same decree, it was still farther enacted, that the
castle itself should be demolished; but the wisdom of the
representatives of the sovereign people failed in this, as in many other
instances, by not duly appreciating the difficulties attendant upon the
execution of their edict: these proved to be so great, that the workmen
were compelled to desist, when comparatively but little progress had
been made in the work of destruction.
It is expressly stated in the _Norman Chronicle_, that a castle, though
of smaller size, previously existed upon the same spot. In opposition,
however, to this assertion, we are told by Robert Wace, that at the time
when Henry I. of France, in his expedition against the Conqueror, in
1054, advanced with his army as far as the banks of the Seville, he
traversed the town of Caen without resistance: "it being _sans chastel_,
and the Duke not having yet surrounded it with walls." But may not this
apparent contradiction be reconciled, by admitting that the words of the
historian are only to be taken in a comparative sense? It is possible,
that Wace intended to convey no farther meaning than that the town was
not then fortified, as in his time; and such a supposition would cause
every difficulty to vanish.
The Castle, as early as the eleventh century, was placed under the
superintendance of a constable; and the office was, in 1106, made
hereditary in the family of Robert Fitz-Hamon, Lord of Creuly, by whom,
and his heirs, it continued to be held till the closing year of the same
century. Under the reign of the last of the Norman Dukes, the keep had a
governor of its own, distinct from that of the castle; and he was
dignified with the title of _Constable of the Tower of Caen_; but, upon
the reduction of the province by Philip-Augustus, Caen itself, together
with the castle and its dungeon, was all committed to the charge of a
single officer, denominated the _Captain_. Such also appears to have
continued the case, except during the reign of Louis XI. when one
Raymond d'Argeau is recorded to have been the _Garde particulier du
Donjon_. The timid policy of a suspicious prince might naturally suggest
the idea of greater safety, in not allowing the power over so important
a fortress to be vested in any single hand.
[Illustration: Plate 48. CHAPEL IN THE CASTLE AT CAEN.]
The Castle at Caen was the place on which the different lordships,
attached to the dignity of Viscount of Caen, directly or indirectly,
depended. Almost all of them were held upon the condition of some annual
contribution, consisting either of arrows, or quivers, or bows, or
swords, or cuirasses, or other description of ancient armor. In time of
war, the vassals of these different lords were likewise bound to mount
guard at the castle; but most of the parishes purchased an exemption
from this service, by means of a pecuniary payment. Thus it is upon
record that, in the year 1383, the parish of Méry compounded for
fifty-six livres annually, and that of Cléville for thirty-two livres
ten sols. By the tenure of others among the dependencies of the
bailiwick, it was stipulated, according to M. de Bourgueville, that they
should supply the castle with provisions, in the event of war.