CHAPEL, a place of religious worship,[1] a name properly applied to that of a Christian religious body, but sometimes to any small temple of pagan worship (Lat. sacellum). The word is derived through the O. Fr. chapele, modern chapelle, from the Late Lat. capelle or cappella, diminutive of cappa, a cape, particularly that of a monk. This word was transferred to any sanctuary containing relics, in the early history of the Frankish Church, because the cloak of St Martin, cappa brevior Sancti Martini, one of the most sacred relics of the Frankish kings, was carried in a sanctuary or shrine wherever the king went; and oaths were taken on it (see Ducange, Glossarium, s.v. Capella). Such a sanctuary was served by a priest, who was hence called capellanus, from which is derived the English “chaplain” (q.v.). The strict application of the word to a sanctuary containing relics was extended to embrace any place of worship other than a church, and it was synonymous, therefore, with “oratory” (oratorium), especially one attached to a palace or to a private dwelling-house. The celebrated Sainte Chapelle in Paris, attached to what is now the Palais de Justice, well illustrates the early and proper meaning of the word. It was built (consecration, 1248) by St Louis of France to contain the relic of the Crown of Thorns, ransomed by the king from the Venetians, who held it in pawn from the Latin emperor of the East, John of Brienne, lately dead. The chapel served as the sanctuary of the relic lodged in the upper chapel, and the whole building was attached as the place of worship to the king’s palace. This, the primary meaning, survives in the chapels usually placed in the aisles of cathedrals and large churches. They were originally built either to contain relics of a particular saint to whom they were dedicated, or the tomb of a particular family.
In the Church of England the word is applied to a private place of worship, attached either to the palaces of the sovereign, “chapels royal,” or to the residence of a private person, to a college, school, prison, workhouse, &c. Further, the word has particular legal applications, though in each case the building might be and often is styled a church. These are places of worship supplementary to a parish church, and may be either “chapels of ease,” to ease or relieve the mother-church and serve those parishioners who may live far away, “parochial chapels,” the “churches” of ancient divisions of a very large and widely scattered parish, or “district chapels,” those of a district of a parish divided under the various church building acts. A “free chapel” is one founded by the king and by his authority, and visited by him and not by the bishop. A “proprietary chapel” is one that belongs to a private person. They are anomalies to the English ecclesiastical law, have no parish rights, and can be converted to other than religious purposes, but a clergyman may be licensed to perform duty in such a place of worship. In the early and middle part of the 19th century such proprietary chapels were common, but they have practically ceased to exist. “Chapel” was early and still is in England the general name of places of worship other than those of the established Church, but the application of “church” to all places of worship without distinction of sect is becoming more and more common. The word “chapel” was in this restricted sense first applied to places of worship belonging to the Roman Church in England, and was thus restricted to those attached to foreign embassies, or to those of the consorts of Charles I. and II. and James II., who were members of that church. The word is still frequently the general term for Roman Catholic churches in Great Britain and always so in Ireland. The use of “chapel” as a common term for all Nonconformist places of worship was general through most of the 19th century, so that “church and chapel” was the usual phrase to mark the distinction between members of the established Church and those of Nonconformist bodies. Here the widened use of “church” noticed above has been especially marked. Most of the recent buildings for worship erected by Nonconformist bodies will be found to be styled Wesleyan, Congregational, &c., churches. It would appear that while the word “chapel” was not infrequent in the early history of Nonconformity, “meeting-house” was the more usual term.
From the architectural point of view the addition of chapels to a cathedral or large church assumes some historical importance in consequence of the changes it involved in the plan. It was the introduction of the apsidal chapels in the churches of France which eventually led to the chevet or cluster of eastern chapels in many of the great cathedrals, and also sometimes to the extension of the transept so as to include additional apsidal chapels on the east side. In France, and to a certain extent in Italy, the multiplication of chapels led to their being placed on the north and south side of the aisles, and in some cases, as at Albi in France, to the suppression of the aisles and the instalment of the chapels in their place. The chapels of the colleges at Oxford and Cambridge are sometimes of large dimensions and architecturally of great importance, that of Christ Church being actually the cathedral of Oxford; among others may be mentioned the chapel of Merton College, and the new chapel of Exeter College, both in Oxford, and the chapel of King’s College, Cambridge, which is roofed over with perhaps the finest fan-vault in England. (See [Vault], Plate II., fig. 19.)
[1] The only other English sense is that of a printer’s workshop, or the body of compositors in it, who are presided over by a “father of the chapel.”
CHAPELAIN, JEAN (1595-1674), French poet and man of letters, the son of a notary, was born in Paris on the 4th of December 1595. His father destined him for his own profession; but his mother, who had known Ronsard, had determined otherwise. At an early age Chapelain began to qualify himself for literature, learning, under Nicolas Bourbon, Greek and Latin, and teaching himself Italian and Spanish. Having finished his studies, he was engaged for a while in teaching Spanish to a young nobleman. He was then appointed tutor to the two sons of a M. de la Trousse, grand provost of France. Attached for the next seventeen years to the family of this gentleman, the administration of whose fortune was wholly in his hands, he seems to have published nothing during this period, yet to have acquired a great reputation as a probability. His first work given to the public was a preface for the Adone of Marini, who printed and published that notorious poem at Paris. This was followed by an excellent translation of Mateo Aleman’s novel, Guzmán de Alfarache, and by four extremely indifferent odes, one of them addressed to Richelieu. The credit of introducing the law of the dramatic unities into French literature has been claimed for many writers, and especially for the Abbé d’Aubignac, whose Pratique du théâtre appeared in 1657. The theory had of course been enunciated in the Art poétique of J.C. Scaliger in 1561, and subsequently by other writers, but there is no doubt that it was the action of Chapelain that transferred it from the region of theory to that of actual practice. In a conversation with Richelieu in about 1632, reported by the abbé d’Olivet, Chapelain maintained that it was indispensable to maintain the unities of time, place and action, and it is explicitly stated that the doctrine was new to the cardinal and to the poets who were in his pay. French classical drama thus owes the riveting of its fetters to Chapelain. Rewarded with a pension of a thousand crowns, and from the first an active member of the newly-constituted Academy, Chapelain drew up the plan of the grammar and dictionary the compilation of which was to be a principal function of the young institution, and at Richelieu’s command drew up the Sentiments de l’Académie sur le Cid. In 1656 he published, in a magnificent form, the first twelve cantos of his celebrated epic La Pucelle,[1] on which he had been engaged during twenty years. Six editions of the poem were disposed of in eighteen months. But this was the end of the poetic reputation of Chapelain, “the legist of Parnassus”. Later the slashing satire of Boileau (in this case fairly master of his subject) did its work, and Chapelain (“Le plus grand poète Français qu’ ait jamais été et du plus solide jugement,” as he is called in Colbert’s list) took his place among the failures of modern art.
Chapelain’s reputation as a critic survived this catastrophe, and in 1663 he was employed by Colbert to draw up an account of contemporary men of letters, destined to guide the king in his distribution of pensions. In this pamphlet, as in his letters, he shows to far greater advantage than in his unfortunate epic. His prose is incomparably better than his verse; his criticisms are remarkable for their justice and generosity; his erudition and kindliness of heart are everywhere apparent; the royal attention is directed alike towards the author’s firmest friends and bitterest enemies. To him young Racine was indebted not only for kindly and seasonable counsel, but also for that pension of six hundred livres which was so useful to him. The catholicity of his taste is shown by his De la lecture des vieux romans (pr. 1870), in which he praises the chansons de geste, forgotten by his generation. Chapelain refused many honours, and his disinterestedness in this and other cases makes it necessary to receive with caution the stories of Ménage and Tallemant des Réaux, who assert that he was in his old age a miser, and that a considerable fortune was found hoarded in his apartments when he died on the 22nd of February 1674.
There is a very favourable estimate of Chapelain’s merits as a critic in George Saintsbury’s History of Criticism, ii. 256-261. An analysis of La Pucelle is given in pp. 23-79 of Robert Southey’s Joan of Arc. See also Les Lettres de Jean Chapelain (ed. P. Tanuzey de Larroque, 1880-1882); Lettres inédites ... à P.D. Huet (1658-1673, ed. by L.G. Pellissier, 1894); Julien Duchesne, Les Poèmes épiques du XVIIe siècle (1870); the abbé A. Fabre, Les Ennemis de Chapelain (1888), Chapelain et nos deux premières Académies (1890); and A. Muehlan, Jean Chapelain (1893).