The Architecture of Provence and the Riviera

by David MacGibbon

The towers and campaniles of Provence also either correspond in design with those of Italy or are imitated from Roman monuments in the country.

The circular baptisteries, of which a good many examples survive, are like those in Rome, constructed with columns and caps from ancient buildings, or are wrought in imitation of them.

Sculpture also abounds in Provence, being inspired by the abundant remains of ancient work in this favoured province of the Empire. Along with the imitations of Roman work, there is also, as already remarked, a considerable infusion of Byzantine influence. This, according to Viollet-le-Duc, may be observed in the polygonal form of the apses; in the polygonal cupolas supported on a series of corbelled pendentives; in the flat arcades employed to decorate the walls; in the mouldings with small projection and numerous members; in the flat and delicate ornament; and in the sharp and toothed carving of the foliage. Other writers, however, are of opinion that too much weight has been attributed to the influence of Byzantine art, and that almost all the above elements may be accounted for by the Roman traditions of the locality. It is doubtful in how far the Roman buildings which survived in Provence and the imported classic taste of Byzantium were beneficial to the arts in that country. They no doubt gave an impetus and motive which would otherwise have been awanting, and thus assisted the Provençals in making the early start they did in the revival of their architecture. But on the other hand they acted prejudicially to that revival, in impressing on it the stamp of the classic trabeated style, which in their absence it would have escaped, and might probably have been developed in the freer and more natural manner which occurred at a later date in the North.

The early use of the pointed arch in the vaulting of the Provençal churches is another striking feature of the architecture of the district. Much has been written about the origin of the pointed arch and the date of its introduction into Western Europe. In the North of France its first use occurred in the twelfth century, and it was at one time maintained that the Provençal churches, from their having pointed vaults, must necessarily be later than that date. There is now, however, no question as to the greater antiquity of many of the Southern buildings, thus proving that the use of the pointed arch was adopted in the South considerably earlier than in the North.

We have already seen that that form of arch was first used in Provence as a constructional expedient, and not from any preference for the pointed form. The original idea may possibly have been derived from the Moors in Spain, amongst whom the pointed arch was common from early times, and was employed as a decorative feature. In Provence its use was limited to the vaulting, the round arch being preferred for all the ornamental parts of the architecture, and it continued to be so employed till the thirteenth century. It is a striking circumstance, observes Mérimée, that at the moment when the round arch was entirely abandoned in the North the pointed arch experienced the same disgrace in the South. In the North the pointed arch became the decorative form, when in the South the round arch was preferred. The position of the pointed arch is thus completely reversed in the North and in the South. The greater part of the vaulted constructions of the thirteenth century in the South are exclusively round, the advancement in skill, both in execution and in the use of materials, having rendered that form more generally available. Numerous examples of this employment of the round arch will be found in the following pages.

The Roman and Byzantine influences were naturally strongest where the ancient remains and Eastern ornaments were most frequently met with. As we retire from the Mediterranean northwards and westwards the Roman buildings become less numerous and the signs of Byzantine commerce diminish. In those various countries different styles were naturally developed. These are divided by Viollet-le-Duc into the schools of Toulouse, Poitou, Auvergne, Burgundy, &c., all having distinct characteristics in plans, elevations, form of towers, ornament, sculpture, and every detail. Of these various schools the Burgundian was, during the twelfth century, in advance of all the others, not only in the size and magnificence of its buildings, but also as regards progress in design—efforts being there made to free the ornaments from the conventional and stereotyped patterns of classic art.

Viollet-le-Duc endeavours to account for this advancement in Burgundian architecture by the suggestion that it possibly arose from the study of the paintings of Byzantine MSS., which were numerous in the monasteries, and therefore more frequently under the eyes of the monks than the purely architectural forms of buildings. These paintings preserve considerable freedom of treatment both as regards natural expression in the features and dramatic action in the figure, and are much less bound and fixed by traditional and conventional rules than the architectural forms and ornament.

The artist monks of the Burgundian convents were thus led to look to nature as their model in sculpture, and their attention was gradually turned to natural objects as their guide in the representation of foliage, as well as figures. This process, in course of time, opened the way for an entire departure from ancient precedent, and led to the wonderful development of the natural school of the Royal Domain, which took place in the end of the twelfth and beginning of the thirteenth centuries.

At the head of the Burgundian school stood the great Benedictine Abbey of Cluny. (See ante, p. 20). The church of this Abbey was the largest building of its time, although unfortunately not one stone of it now remains upon another. Cluny had numerous dependencies and offshoots which were all animated with the same spirit, and spread a taste for richness and magnificence in architecture, wherever they were planted.

But the period we are now considering was one of awakening and expansion, not only in the direction of architectural art, but also in every department of intellectual and religious development. It is not therefore to be wondered at that all men were not actuated by the same feeling of admiration for splendid buildings and paintings. Many of the religious rather sympathised with the severity of the old ascetics. It appeared to these reformers that all this sumptuous and splendid mode of life was not in accordance with the fundamental principles of their religion, and they longed to return to the simplicity of the primitive church.