LETTER X.

To pursue this subject a few steps farther, Jamieson, who is as excellent in points of etymology as Johnson is deficient, quotes, in his Scottish Dictionary, an instance where the identical expression,meselle-houses, is used in old English;

"...tomeselle-housesof that same rond,Thre thousand mark unto ther spense he fond."R. BRUNNE, p. 136.

"...tomeselle-housesof that same rond,

Thre thousand mark unto ther spense he fond."

R. BRUNNE, p. 136.

The Norfolk farmers and dairy-maids tell us to this day ofmeasly pork: in Scotch, a leper is called amesel; and, among the Swedes, the word for measles is one nearly similar in sound,mäss-ling. The French academy, however, have refused to admitmeselleto the honor of a place in their language, because it was obsolete or vulgar in the time of Louis XIIIth. The word is expressive, and no better one has supplied its place; and we may suppose that it was introduced by the Norman conquerors, and that it properly belongs to the Gothic tongues, in the whole of which the root is to be found more or less modified. Instances of this kind, and they are many, serve as additional proofs, if proofs indeed were needed, of the common origin of the Neustrian Normans, of the Lowland Scots, and of the Saxon and Belgian tribes, who peopled our eastern shores of England.

The priory continued to be appropriated to its original purpose till 1366, when Charles Vth united it to the hospital, called the Magdalen, at Rouen, upon condition that a mass should be celebrated there daily for the repose of his soul. In the year 1600, on the destruction of the abbey upon Mont Ste. Catherine, the monks ofthat establishment were allowed to fix themselves at St. Julien; but they resigned it, after a period of sixty-seven years, to the Carthusians of Gaillon, who, incorporating themselves with their brethren of the same order at Rouen, formed a very opulent community. The monastery, previously occupied by the latter, was known by the poetical appellation ofla Rose de Notre Dame: indeed, it is thus termed in the charter of its foundation, dated 1384. But the situation was unhealthy, and the new comers had therefore little difficulty in persuading its occupants to remove to the convent of St. Julien, which they inhabited conjointly till the revolution. At a very short period before that event, they had rebuilt the whole of the priory with such splendor, that it was one of the most magnificent in the neighborhood. But the edifice, which had then been scarcely raised, was soon afterwards levelled with the ground. The foundations alone attest the former extent of the buildings; and the park, now in a state of utter neglect, their original importance.

Rouen, as I have observed, is scantily ornamented with remains ofrealNorman architecture; for, even at the risk of a bull, we must deny that title to the Norman edifices of the pointed style. Its vicinity, however, furnishes a greater number of specimens, among which the churched ofLéry, ofPavilly, and ofYainville, are all of them deserving of a visit from the diligent antiquary.

Léry is a village adjoining Pont-de-l'Arche: its church is cruciform, having in the centre a low, massy, square tower, surmounted by a modern spire. A row of plain Norman arches, intended only for ornament, runsround the tower near the base, and over them on each side is a single round-headed window. All the other windows of the building are of the same construction, and this renders it probable that the east end, in which there is also one of these windows, is really coeval with the rest of the church; though, contrary to the usual plan of the Norman churches, it is terminated by a straight wall instead of a semi-circular apsis. The west front contains a rich Norman door-way, surmounted by three windows of the same style, adjoining each other, with a triple row of the chevron-ornament above them. The interior wears the appearance of remote antiquity: the arches are without mouldings, the pillars without bases, and the capitals are destitute of all ornamental sculpture. In fact, these portions are nothing but rounded piers; and so obviously was mere solid strength the aim of the architect, that their diameter is fully equal to two-thirds of their height. A double row of pillars and arches separates the nave into three parts, of unequal width; and another arch of greater span, though equally plain, divides it from the chancel. In St. Julien, we observe a most simple exterior, accompanied by an interior of comparatively an ornamented style: here the case is exactly the reverse; but in neither instance does there appear any reason to doubt that the whole of the building is coeval. We shall be driven, therefore, to admit, that any inferences respecting the æra of architecture drawn merely from the comparative richness of the style, must be considered of little weight, and that, even in those days, a great deal depended upon the fancy of the patron or architect. Of the real time of the erectionof the church at Léry, there is no certain knowledge. Topographers, however minute in other matters, seem in general to have considered it beneath their dignity to record the dates of parish-churches; though, as connected with the history of the arts, such information is exceedingly valuable. Lauglois, who has given a figure of the western front of this at Léry, refers it without any hesitation to the time of the Carlovingian dynasty. But this opinion is merely grounded on the resemblance of some of its capitals to those of the pillars in the crypt at St. Denis; the best judges doubt whether there is a single architectural line in that crypt, which can fairly be referred to the reign of Charlemagne. Hence such a proof is entitled to little attention; and On studying the style of the whole, and its conformity with the more magnificent front of St. Georges de Bocherville, it would seem most reasonable to regard them both as of nearly the same æra, the time of the Norman Conquest. We may through them be enabled to fix the date to a specimen of ancient architecture in our own country, more splendid than these, the Church of Castle Rising, whose west front is so much on the same plan, that it can scarcely have been erected at a very different period.

Pavilly has considerably more to recommend it, as the "magni nominis umbra" than either of the others; it having been the seat of an abbey founded about the year 668, and named after Saint Austreberte, who first presided over it. Here, too, we have the advantage of being able to ascertain with greater precision the date of the building, which, in the archives of the Chartreux atRouen[70], is stated to have been constructed about the conclusion of the eleventh century. The remains of the monastery are not considerable: they consist of little more than a ruined wall, containing three circular arches, evidently very ancient from their simplicity and the style of their masonry, and some pillars with capitals differing in ornament from any others I recollect, but imitations of the Grecian, or rather attempts to improve upon it. The inside of the parish-church is more interesting than the ruins of the abbey. It is characterised, as you will observe in the annexed sketch, by massy square piers, to each side of which are attached several small clustered columns, intended merely for ornament. One of them is fluted, the work, probably, of some subsequent time; and another, on the same pier, is truncated, to afford a pedestal for the statue of a saint. The capitals are without sculpture.

Interior of the Church at Pavilly

The church at Yainville differs materially from either of the others: its square low central tower is of far greater base than that of Léry: the transept parts of the cross have been demolished; and, beyond the tower, to the east, is only an addition that looks more like an apsis than a choir, a small semi-circular building with a roof of a peculiarly high pitch, like those of the stone-roofed chapels in Ireland, which, I trust, I shall be able hereafter to convince you were undoubtedly of Norman origin. But the most curious feature in this building is, that one of the buttresses is pierced with a narrow lancet window; a decisive proof, that the Normans regarded theirbuttresses as constituent parts of the edifice at its original construction, and that they did not add them at a subsequent time, or design them to afford support, in the event of any unexpected failure of strength. Indeed, what are usually called Norman buttresses, such as we find at Yainville, and at the lazar-house at St. Julien, have so very small a projection, that they seem much more designed to add ornament or variety than for any useful purpose.—Yainville is a parish adjoining Jumieges, and was formerly dependent upon the celebrated abbey there, which will furnish ample materials for a future letter.

Footnotes:

[63]Taillepied, Antiquités de Rouen, p. 77.

[64]Vol. II. part V. p. 8.

[65]Seroux d'Agincourt, Historie de la Décadence de l'Art; plate 10,Sculpture, fig. 4-7.

[66]Du Moulin, Histoire Générale de Normandie,p. 236.

[67]Duchesne, Scriptores Normanni, p. 558.

[68]Histoire de l'Abbaye de St. Ouen, p. 188.

[69]Farin, Histoire de Rouen, V. p. 121

[70]Description de la Haute Normandie, II. p. 268.

(Rouen, June, 1818.)

In passing from the true Norman architecture, characterised "by the circular arch, round-headed doors and windows, massive pillars with a kind of regular base and capital, and thick walls without any very prominent buttresses",[71]to those edifices which display the pointed style, I shall enter into a more extensive field, and one where the difficulty no longer lies in discovering, but in selecting objects for observation and description.

The style which an ingenious author of our own country has designated asearly English[72], is by no means uncommon in Normandy. In both countries, the circular style became modified intoGothic, by the same gradations; though, in Normandy, each gradation took place at an earlier period than amongst us. The style in question forms the connecting link between edifices of the highest antiquity, and those of the richest pointed architecture; combined in some instances principally with the peculiarities of the former, in others with the character of the latter: generally speaking, it assimilates itself to both. The simplicity of the principal lines betray its analogy to its predecessors; whilst the form of the arch equally displays the approach of greater beauty and perfection.

Of this æra, the cathedral[73]of Rouen is unquestionably the most interesting building; and it is so spacious, so grand, so noble, so elegant, so rich, and so varied, that, as the Italians say of Raphael, "ammirar non si può che non s'onori."—By an exordium like this, I am aware that an expectation will be raised, which it will be difficult for the powers of description to gratify; but I have still felt that it was due to the edifice, to speak of it as I am sure it deserves, and rather to subject myself to the charge of want of ability in describing, than of want of feeling in the appreciation of excellence.

The west front opens upon a spaciousparvis, to which it exposes a width of one hundred and seventy feet, consisting of a centre, flanked by two towers of very dissimilar form and architecture, though of nearly equal height. Between these is seen the spire, which rises from the intersection of the cross, and which, from this point of view, appears to pierce the clouds; and these masses so combine themselves together, that the entire edifice assumes a pyramidical outline. The French, who, without any real affection for ancient architecture, are often extravagant in their praises, regard this spire as a "chef d'œuvre de hardiesse, d'élégance, et de légèreté." Bold and light it certainly is; but we must pause before weconsider it as elegant: the lower part is a combination of very clumsy Roman pediments and columns; and, as it is constructed of wood, the material conveys an idea of poverty and comparative meanness.—It is commonly said in France, that the portal of Rheims, joined to the nave of Amiens, the choir of Beauvais, and the tower of Chartres, would make a perfect church; nor is it to be denied that each of these several cathedrals surpasses Rouen in its peculiar excellence; but each is also defective in other respects; so that Rouen, considered as a whole, is perhaps equal, if not superior, to any. The front is singularly impressive: it is characterised by airy magnificence. Open screens of the most elegant tracery, and filled, like the pannels to which they correspond, with imagery, range along the summit. The blue sky shines through the stone filagree, which appears to be interwoven like a slender web; but, when you ascend the roof, you find that it is composed of massy limbs of stone, of which the edge alone is seen by the observer below. Thisfreetracery is peculiar to the pointed architecture of the continent; and I cannot recollect any English building which possesses it. The basement story is occupied by three wide door-ways, deep in retiring mouldings and pillars, and filled with figures of saints and martyrs, "tier behind tier, in endless perspective." The central portal, by far the largest, projects like a porch beyond the others, and is surmounted by a gorgeous pyramidal canopy of open stone-work, in whose centre is a great dial, the top of which partly conceals the rose window behind. This portal, together with the niches above on either side,all equally crowded with bishops, apostles, and saints, was erected at the expence of the cardinal, Georges d'Amboise, by whom the first stone was laid, in 1509[74].

The lateral door-ways are of a different style of architecture, and, though obtusely pointed, are supposed to be of the eleventh century: a plain and almost Roman circular arch surmounts the southern one. Over each of the entrances is a curious bas-relief: in the centre is displayed the genealogical tree of Christ; the southern contains the Virgin Mary surrounded by a number of saints; the northern one, the most remarkable[75]of all, affords a representation of the feast given by Herod, which ended in the martyrdom of the Baptist. Salomè, daughter of Herodias, plays, as she ought to do, the principal character. The group is of good sculpture, and curiously illustrative of the costumes and manners of the times. Salomè is seen dancing in an attitude, which perchance was often assumed by thetombesteresof the elder day; and her position affords a graphical comment upon the Anglo-Saxon version of the text, in which it is said that she "tumbled", before King Herod. The bands or pilasters (if we may so call them) which ornament the jambs of the door-ways, are crowned with graceful foliagein a very pure style; and the pedestals of the lateral pillars are boldly underworked.

On the northern side of the cathedral is situated the cloister-court. Only a few arches of the cloister now remain; and it appears, at least on the eastern side, to have consisted of a double aisle. Here we view the most ancient portion of the tower of Saint Romain.—There is a peculiarity in the position of the towers of this cathedral, which I have not observed elsewhere. They flank the body of the church, so as to leave three sides free; and hence the spread taken by the front of the edifice, when the breadth of the towers is added to the breadth of the nave and aisles. The circular windows of the tower which look in the court, are perhaps to be referred to the eleventh century; and a smaller tower affixed against the south side, containing a stair-case and covered by a lofty pyramidical stone roof, composed of flags cut in the shape of shingles, may also be of the same æra. The others, of the more ancient windows, are in the early pointed style; and the portion from the gallery upwards is comparatively modern; having been added in 1477. The roof, I suppose, is of the sixteenth century.

The southern tower is a fine specimen of the pointed architecture in its greatest state of luxuriant perfection, enriched on every side with pinnacles and statues. It terminates in a beautiful octagonal crown of open stone-work.—Legendary tales are connected with both the towers: the oldest borrows its name from St. Romain, by whom chroniclers tell us that it was built; the other is called theTour de Beurre, from a tradition, that the chief part of the money required for its erection wasderived from offerings given by the pious or the dainty, as the purchase for an indulgence granted by Pope Innocent VIIIth, who, for a reasonable consideration, allowed the contributors to feed upon butter and milk during Lent, instead of confining themselves, as before, to oil and lard.—The archbishop, Georges d'Amboise, consecrated this tower, of which the foundation was laid in 1485; and he had the satisfaction of living to see it finished, in 1507, after twenty-two years had been employed in the building.

The cardinal was so truly delighted by the beauty of the structure, which had arisen under his auspices, that he determined to grace it with the largest bell in France; and such was afterwards cast at his expence.—Even Tom of Lincoln could scarcely compete with Georges d'Amboise; for thus the bell was duly christened. It weighed thirty-three thousand pounds; its diameter at the base was thirty feet; its height was ten feet; and thirty stout and sweating bell-ringers could hardly put it into swing.—Such was the importance attached to the undertaking, that it was thought worthy of a religious ceremony. At the appointed hour for casting the bell, the clergy paraded in full procession round the church, to implore the blessing of heaven upon the work; and, when the signal was given that the glowing metal had filled the enormous mould,Te Deumresounded as with one voice; the organ pealed, the trombones and clarions sounded, and all the other bells in the cathedral joined, as loudly and as sweetly as they could, in announcing the birth of their prouder brother.—The remainder of the story is of a different complexion:—The founder, Jean le Machon, of Chartres,died from excess of joy, and was buried in the nave of the cathedral, where Pommeraye[76]tells us the tomb existed in his time; with a bell engraved upon it, and the following epitaph:—

"Cy-dessous gist Jean le MachonDe Chartres homme de façonLequel fondit Georges d'AmboiseQui trente six mille livres poiseMil cinq cens un jour d'Aoust deuxièmePuis mourut le vingt et unième."

"Cy-dessous gist Jean le Machon

De Chartres homme de façon

Lequel fondit Georges d'Amboise

Qui trente six mille livres poise

Mil cinq cens un jour d'Aoust deuxième

Puis mourut le vingt et unième."

Nor was this the only misfortune; for, after all, this great bell proved, like a great book, a great nuisance: the sound it uttered was scarcely audible; and, at last, in an attempt to render it vocal, upon a visit paid by Louis XVIth to Rouen in 1786, it was cracked[77]. It continued, however, to hang, a gaping-stock to children and strangers, till the revolution, in 1793, caused it to be returned to the furnace, whence it re-issued in the shape of cannon and medals, the latter commemorating the pristine state of the metal with the humiliating legend, "monument de vanité détruit pour l'utilité[78]."

Some of the clerestory windows on the northern side of the nave are circular: the tracery which fills them, and the mouldings which surround them, belong to the pointed style; the arches may therefore have been the production of an earlier architect. The windows of the nave are crowned by pediments, each terminating, not with a pinnacle, but with a small statue. The pedimentsover the windows of the choir are larger and bolder, and perforated as they rise above the parapet; the members of the mouldings are full, and produce a fine effect.

The northern transept is approached through a gloomy court, once occupied by the shops of the transcribers and caligraphists, thelibrairesof ancient times, and from them it has derived its name. The court is entered beneath a gate-way of beautiful and singular architecture, composed of two lofty pointed arches of equal height, crowned by a row of smaller arcades. On each side are the walls of the archiepiscopal palace, dusky and shattered, and desolate; and the vista terminates by the loftyPortal of St. Romain; for it is thus the great portal of the transept is denominated. The oaken valves are bound with ponderous hinges and bars of wrought iron, of coeval workmanship. The bars are ornamented with embossed heads, which have been hammered out of the solid metal. The statues which stood on each side of the arch-way have been demolished; but the pedestals remain. These, as well as other parts of the portal, are covered with sculptured compartments, or medallions, in high preservation, and of the most singular character. They exhibit an endless variety of fanciful monsters and animals, of every shape and form, mermaids, tritons, harpies, woodmen, satyrs, and all the fabulous zoology of ancient geography and romance; and each spandril of each quatrefoil contains a lizard, a serpent, or some other worm or reptile. They have all the oddity, all the whim, and all the horror of the pencil of Breughel. Human groups and figures are interspersed, some scriptural, historical, or legendary; others mystical and allegorical.Engravings from these medallions would form a volume of uncommon interest. Two lofty towers ornament the transept, such as are usually seen only at the western front of a cathedral. The upper story of each is perforated by a gigantic window, divided by a single mullion, or central pillar, not exceeding one foot in circumference, and nearly sixty feet in height. These windows are entirely open, and the architect never intended that they should be glazed. An extraordinary play of light and shade results from this construction. The rose window in the centre of the transept is magnificent: from within, the painted glass produces the effect of a kaleidoscope.—The pediment or gable of this transept was materially injured by a storm, in 1638, one hundred and thirty years after it was completed; and the damage was never restored.

The southern transept bears a near resemblance to that which I have already described; but it was originally richer in its ornaments, and it still preserves some of its statues. Here the medallions relate chiefly to scripture-history; but the sculpture is greatly corroded by the weather, and the more delicate parts are nearly obliterated; besides which, as well here, as at the other entrances, the Calvinists, in 1562, and, more recently, the Revolutionists, have been most mischievously destructive, mutilating and decapitating without mercy. The spirit, indeed, of the French reformers, bore a near resemblance to the proceedings of John Knox and his brethren: the people embraced the new doctrine with turbulent violence. There was in it nothing moderate, nothing gradual: it was not the regular flow of publicopinion, undermining abuses, and bringing them slowly to their fall; but it was the thunderbolt, which—

"In sua templa furit, nullâque exire vetanteMateriâ, magnamque cadens magnamque revertensDat stragem latè sparsosque recolligit ignes."

"In sua templa furit, nullâque exire vetante

Materiâ, magnamque cadens magnamque revertens

Dat stragem latè sparsosque recolligit ignes."

Among the legends recorded on the southern portal, or thePortail de la Calende, is that of the corn-merchant; the confiscation of whose property paid, as the chronicles tell us, for the erection of this beautiful entrance. He himself, if we may believe the same authority, was hanged in the street opposite to it, in consequence of having been detected in the use of false measures.

The original Lady-Chapel, at the east end of the cathedral, was taken down in 1302. The present, which is considerably more spacious, is chiefly of a date immediately subsequent. Part, however, was built in 1430, when new and larger windows were inserted throughout the church; whilst other parts were not finished till 1538, at which time the Cardinal Georges d'Amboise restored the roof of the choir, which had been injured in 1514, by the destruction of the spire.

The square central tower, which is low and comparatively plain, is the work of the year 1200. It is itself more ancient than would be supposed from the character of its architecture; but it occupies the place of one of still greater antiquity, which was materially damaged in 1117, when the original spire of the church was struck by lightning. This first spire was of stone, but wasreplaced by another of wood, which, as I have just mentioned, was also destroyed at the beginning of the sixteenth century. A fire, arising from the negligence of plumbers employed to repair the lead-work, was the cause of its ruin.—To remedy the misfortune, recourse was had to extraordinary efforts: the King contributed twelve thousand francs; the chapter a portion of their revenue and their plate; collections were made throughout the kingdom; and Leo Xth authorised the sale of indulgences, a measure, which, at nearly the same period, in its more extensive adoption for the building of St. Peter's at Rome, shook the Papacy to its foundation. The spire thus raised, the second of wood, but the third in chronological order, is the one which is now in existence. It was, like its predecessor, endangered by the carelessness of the plumbers, in 1713; but it does not appear to have required any material reparations till ten years ago, when a sum of thirty thousand francs was expended upon it.

From what has already been said, you will not have failed to observe that this cathedral is the work of so many different periods, that it almost contains within itself a history of pointed architecture. To attempt a labored description of it were idle: minute details of any one of the portals would fill a moderate volume; and a quarto of seven hundred pages, from which I have borrowed most of my dates, has already been written upon the subject by a Benedictine Monk of the name of Pommeraye, who also published the history of the Archbishops of the See[79].

The first church at Rouen was built about the year 270: three hundred and thirty years subsequently, this edifice was succeeded by another, the joint work of St. Romain and St. Ouen, which was burned in the incursions of the Normans, about the year 842. Fifty years of Paganism succeeded; at the expiration of which period, Rollo embraced the faith of Christ, and Rouen saw once more within its walls, by the munificence and piety of the conqueror, a place of Christian worship. Richard Ist, grandson of this duke, and his son Robert, the archbishop, enlarged the edifice in the middle of the tenth century; but it was still not completed till 1063, when, according to Ordericus Vitalis, it was dedicated by the Archbishop Maurilius with great pomp, in the presence of William, Duke of Normandy, and the bishops of the province. Of this building, however, notwithstanding what is said by Ducarel[80]and other authors, it is certain that nothing more remains than the part of St. Romain's tower, just noticed, and possibly two of the western entrances; though the present structure is believed to occupy the same spot.

To the honor of the spirit and good feeling of the inhabitants of Rouen, this church is one of those that suffered least in the outrages of the year 1793. Its dimensions, in French feet, are as follows:—

Four clustered pillars support the central tower, each of which is thirty-eight feet in circumference; the rest, of which there are forty-four in the nave and choir, those in the former clustered, the others circular, are less by one-third. The windows amount in number to one hundred and thirty-three; the chapels to twenty-five. Most of the latter were fitted up during the minority of Louis XIVth, with wreathed columns, entwined with foliage, the style in vogue in the seventeenth century. In the farthest of these chapels, upon the south side, is the tomb of Rollo, first Duke of Normandy; in the opposite chapel, that of his son and successor, William Longue-Epeé, who was treacherously murdered at Pecquigny, in 944, during a conference with Arnoul, Count of Flanders.

Monumental Figure of Rollo, in Rouen Cathedral

The effigies of both these princes still remain placed upon sarcophagi, under plain niches in the wall. They arecertainly not contemporary with the persons which they represent, but are probably productions of the thirteenth century, to which period Mr. Stothard, from whose judgment few will be disposed to appeal, refers the greater part of what are called the most ancient in theMusée des Monumens Français. At the same time, they may possibly have been copied from others of earlier date; and I therefore send you a slight sketch of the figure of Rollo. Even imaginary portraits of celebrated men are not without their value: we are interested by seeing how they have been conceived by the artist.—Above the statue is the following inscription:—

HIC POSITUS ESTROLLO,NORMANNIÆ A SE TERRITÆ, VASTATÆ,RESTITUTÆ,PRIMUS DUX, CONDITOR, PATER,A FRANCONE ARCHIEP. ROTOM.BAPTIZATUS ANNO DCCCCXIII,OBIIT ANNO DCCCCXVII.OSSA IPSIUS IN VETERI SANCTUARIO,NUNC CAPITE NAVIS, PRIMUM CONDITA,TRANSLATO ALTARI, HIC COLLOCATASUNT A B. MAURILIO ARCHIEP. ROTOM.ANNO MLXIII.

HIC POSITUS EST

ROLLO,

NORMANNIÆ A SE TERRITÆ, VASTATÆ,

RESTITUTÆ,

PRIMUS DUX, CONDITOR, PATER,

A FRANCONE ARCHIEP. ROTOM.

BAPTIZATUS ANNO DCCCCXIII,

OBIIT ANNO DCCCCXVII.

OSSA IPSIUS IN VETERI SANCTUARIO,

NUNC CAPITE NAVIS, PRIMUM CONDITA,

TRANSLATO ALTARI, HIC COLLOCATA

SUNT A B. MAURILIO ARCHIEP. ROTOM.

ANNO MLXIII.

Two other epitaphs in rhyming Latin, which were previously upon his tomb, are recorded by various authors: the first of them began with the three following lines—

DUX NORMANNORUM, CUNCTORUM NORMA BONORUM,ROLLO FERUS FORTIS, QUEM GENS NORMANNICA MORTISINVOCAT ARTICULO, CLAUDITUR HOC TUMULO.

DUX NORMANNORUM, CUNCTORUM NORMA BONORUM,

ROLLO FERUS FORTIS, QUEM GENS NORMANNICA MORTIS

INVOCAT ARTICULO, CLAUDITUR HOC TUMULO.

Over William Longue-Epeé is inscribed—

HIC POSITUS ESTGULIELMUS DICTUS LONGA SPATHA,ROLLONIS FILIUS,DUX NORMANNIÆ,PREDATORIE OCCISUS DCCCCXXXXIV.

HIC POSITUS EST

GULIELMUS DICTUS LONGA SPATHA,

ROLLONIS FILIUS,

DUX NORMANNIÆ,

PREDATORIE OCCISUS DCCCCXXXXIV.

with an account of the removal of his bones, exactly similar to the concluding part of his father's epitaph.

The perspective on first entering the church is very striking: the eye ranges without interruption, through a vista of lofty pillars and pointed arches, to the splendid altar in the Lady-Chapel, which forms at once an admirable termination to the building and the prospect. The high altar in the choir is plain and insulated. No other praise can be given to the screen, except that it does not interrupt the view; for surely it was the very consummation of bad taste to place in such an edifice, a double row of eight modern Ionic pillars, in white marble, with the figures of Hope and Charity between them, surmounted by a crucifix, flanked on either side with two Grecian vases.

The interior falls upon the eye with boldness and regularity, pleasing from its proportions, and imposing from its magnitude. The arches which spring from the pillars of the aisles, are surmounted by a second row, occupying the space which is usually held by the triforium: the vaulted roof of the aisles runs to the level of the top of this upper tier. This arrangement, which is found in other Norman churches, is almost peculiar to these; and in England it has no parallel, except in the nave of Waltham Abbey. Within the aisle you observe a singular combination of small pillars, attached to the columns of the nave: they stand on a species of bracket, whichis supported by the abacus of the capital; and they spread along the spandrils of the arches on either side. These pillars support a kind of entablature, which takes a triangular plan. The whole bears a near resemblance to the style of the Byzantine architecture. Above the second row of arches are two rows of galleries. The story containing the clerestory windows crowns the whole; so that there are five horizontal divisions in the nave.—I give these details, because they indicate the decided difference of order which exists between the Norman and the English Gothic; a difference for which I have not been able to assign any satisfactory cause.

The tombs that were originally in the choir, commemorating Charles Vth, of France; Richard Cœur de Lion; his elder brother, Henry; and William, son of Geoffrey Plantagenet, were all removed in 1736, as interfering with the embellishments then in contemplation. The first of them alone was preserved and transferred to the Lady-Chapel, where it has subsequently fallen a victim to the revolution. The others are wholly destroyed; nor could Ducarel find even a fragment of the effigies that had been upon them; but engravings of these had fortunately been preserved by Montfaucon[81], from whom he has copied them. The monument of the celebrated John of Lancaster, third son of our Henry IVth, better known as the Regent Duke of Bedford, had been previously annihilated by the Calvinists. Lozenge-shaped slabs of white marble, charged with inscriptions, were inserted in the pavement over the spots that contain the remains of the princes, and they have been suffered to continueuninjured through the succeeding tumults. On the right of the altar, you read,—

Right of altar

CORRICHARDI, REGIS ANGLIÆ,NORMANNIÆ DUCIS,COR LEONIS DICTI.OBIIT ANNOMCXCIX.

COR

RICHARDI, REGIS ANGLIÆ,

NORMANNIÆ DUCIS,

COR LEONIS DICTI.

OBIIT ANNO

MCXCIX.

On the opposite side:—

Left of altar

HIC JACETHENRICUS JUNIOR,RICHARDI, REGIS ANGLIÆ,COR LEONIS DICTI, FRATER.OBIIT ANNOMCLXXXIII.

HIC JACET

HENRICUS JUNIOR,

RICHARDI, REGIS ANGLIÆ,

COR LEONIS DICTI, FRATER.

OBIIT ANNO

MCLXXXIII.

And in the choir behind the altar:—

Choir behind altar

AD DEXTRUM ALTARIS LATUSJACETJOHANNES, DUX BEDFORDI,NORMANNIÆ PROREX.OBIIT ANNOMCCCCXXXV.

AD DEXTRUM ALTARIS LATUS

JACET

JOHANNES, DUX BEDFORDI,

NORMANNIÆ PROREX.

OBIIT ANNO

MCCCCXXXV.

Of Prince William nothing is said; it was found, upon opening his place of sepulture, that he had not been interred here.—Richard strangely received a triple funeral. In obedience to his wishes, his heart was buried at Rouen, while his body was carried to Fontevraud, and his entrails were deposited in the church of Chaluz, where he was killed:—this division is commemorated in the quaint, yet energetic lines, which are said to have been inscribed upon his tomb:—

VISCERA CARCEOLUM, CORPUS FONS SERVAT EBRARDI,ET COR ROTOMAGUM, MAGNE RICHARDE, TUUM.IN TRIA DIVIDITUR UNUS QUI PLUS FUIT UNO;NEC SUPEREST UNI GLORIA TANTA VIRO.

VISCERA CARCEOLUM, CORPUS FONS SERVAT EBRARDI,

ET COR ROTOMAGUM, MAGNE RICHARDE, TUUM.

IN TRIA DIVIDITUR UNUS QUI PLUS FUIT UNO;

NEC SUPEREST UNI GLORIA TANTA VIRO.

Richard neither withheld his gifts nor his protection from the metropolitan church; and, after his death, thechapter inclosed the heart of their benefactor in a shrine of silver. But a hundred and fifty years subsequently, the shrine was despoiled, and the precious metal was melted into ingots, forming a portion of the ransom which redeemed St. Louis from the fetters of his Saracen conqueror.

Henry the younger, who was crowned King of England during the life-time of his father, against whom he subsequently revolted, also requested on his death-bed, that his body might be interred in this church; and his directions were obeyed, though not without much difficulty; for the chapter of the cathedral of Mans, where his servants rested with the bodyin transitu, seized and buried it there; nor did those of Rouen recover the corpse, without application to the Pope and to the King his father.

A tablet of black marble, affixed to one of the pillars of the nave, contains the following interesting memorial:

IN MEDIA NAVI,E REGIONE HUJUS COLUMNÆ,JACETBEATÆ MEM. MAURILIUS,ARCHIEP. ROTOM. AN. MLV.HANC BASILICAM PERFECITCONSECRAVITQUE ANNO MLXIII.VIX NATOS BERENGARII ERRORESIN PROX. CONCIL. PRÆFOCAVIT.PLENUS MERITIS OBIIT ANN. MLXVII.HOC PONTIF. NORMANNI,GULIELMO DUCE, ANGLIA POTITI SUNTANNO MLXVI.

IN MEDIA NAVI,

E REGIONE HUJUS COLUMNÆ,

JACET

BEATÆ MEM. MAURILIUS,

ARCHIEP. ROTOM. AN. MLV.

HANC BASILICAM PERFECIT

CONSECRAVITQUE ANNO MLXIII.

VIX NATOS BERENGARII ERRORES

IN PROX. CONCIL. PRÆFOCAVIT.

PLENUS MERITIS OBIIT ANN. MLXVII.

HOC PONTIF. NORMANNI,

GULIELMO DUCE, ANGLIA POTITI SUNT

ANNO MLXVI.

Monumental Figure of an Archbishop, in Rouen Cathedral

In the northern aisle of the choir, there still exists a curious monument, in an injured state indeed, but well deserving of attention, from its antiquity. It has been referred by tradition to Maurice, or William of Durefort, both of them archbishops of Rouen, and buried in the cathedral, the former in 1237, the latter in 1331; but the recumbent figure upon it seems of a yet more distant date. It differs in several respects from any that I have seen in England[82]. The tomb is in the wall, behind a range of pillars, which form a kind of open screen round the apsis. Below the effigy, it is decorated with a rowof whole-length figures of saints, much mutilated: the circular part above is lined with angels, a couple of whomare employed in conveying the soul of the deceased in a winding-sheet to heaven[83].

Monument of an Archbishop

The Lady-Chapel contains two monuments of great merit, and which, considered as specimens of matured art, have now no rivals in Normandy; for both owe their origin to a period of refinement and splendor. The sepulchre raised over the bodies of the two Cardinals of Amboise, successively Archbishops of Rouen, towers on the southern side of the chapel. The statues of the cardinals are of white marble. The prelates appear kneeling in prayer; and the following inscription, engraved in a single line, and not divided into verses, is placed beneath them:—

PASTOR ERAM CLERI, POPULI PATER, AUREA SESELILIA SUBDEBANT QUERCUS[84]ET IPSA MIHI.MORTUUS EN JACEO, MORTE EXTINGUUNTUR HONORES;AT VIRTUS MORTIS NESGIA MORTE VIRET.

PASTOR ERAM CLERI, POPULI PATER, AUREA SESE

LILIA SUBDEBANT QUERCUS[84]ET IPSA MIHI.

MORTUUS EN JACEO, MORTE EXTINGUUNTUR HONORES;

AT VIRTUS MORTIS NESGIA MORTE VIRET.

Immediately behind the cardinals are figures of patron saints; a centre tablet represents St. George and the Dragon; above are the apostles; below, the seven cardinal virtues. The execution of these is particularly admired, especially that of the figure of Prudence; but a row of still smaller figures, in devotional attitudes, carved uponthe pilasters between the virtues, are in higher taste. Various arabesques in basso-relievo, of great beauty, and completely in the style of theLoggieof Raphael, adorn the other parts of this sumptuous tomb.—As a whole it is unquestionably grand, and it is yet farther valuable as an illustration of the gorgeous taste that prevailed at the end of the fifteenth century; but the mixture of black and white marble and gilding has by no means a good effect, and every part is overloaded with ornaments[85]. These, however, are the faults of the times: its merits are its own.

On the north side of the chapel is entombed the Duke of Brezé, once Grand Seneschal of Normandy; his tomb is chaste and simple, forming a pleasing contrast to the elaborate memorial of the cardinals. The statue of the seneschal himself, represented stretched as a corpse, upon a black marble sarcophagus, is admirable for its execution. The rigid expression of death is visible, not only in the countenance, but extends through every limb. Diana of Poitiers, a beauty who enjoys more celebrity than good fame, erected the monument; and she caused her statue to be placed on the tomb, where she is seen kneeling and contemplating. In the following inscription she promises to be as faithful and united to him after his death as she was while they both lived: and she truly kept her word; for, during his life-time, she was grievouslysuspected of infidelity[86], and she subsequently lived in an open state of concubinage with Henry IInd, and was at last buried at her own celebrated residence at Anet, twenty leagues from her husband.—

Back to Index Next