CHAPTER I
CIRCUMVALLATION OF TOWNS The distinctive character of military architecture in the Middle Ages must be sought in defensive fortification. In all other respects its constructive methods were identical with those employed in architectural works generally. The few ornamental features of military buildings, as, for instance, the interior vaults and the profiles of consoles and cornices, diverge but slightly from the accepted types of such features in the churches, monasteries, and domestic structures of the period. The Latin, Roman, Gallo-Roman, Romanesque, and Gothic architects were versed in every department of the art they practised. The same architect was called upon to construct the church and the fortress, the abbey, and the ramparts which were often its necessary complement, the donjon, and castle, the town hall, the hospital, the rural barn, and the urban dwelling. He was responsible not only for the inception of every class and form of building, but for its successful elaboration; on him alone the responsibility of its execution rested; no scientific specialist checked his conclusions and verified his calculations as in our own time. The system by which the architect and the engineer have each their separate functions and responsibilities in the construction of the same building was unknown. The builder, or mason, as some would have him called, was an architect in the fullest sense; he himself traced the diagrams of his conceptions, and directed the execution of every detail, careful alike of stability and beauty. 163. ABBEY OF MONT ST. MICHEL. GATE-HOUSE It is a curious and disheartening phenomenon that such a direct contravention of the principles of mediÆval art as the modern system of divided responsibility implies, should obtain only among the French, the very people to whom Western Europe owes its initiation into those principles. In England, in Belgium, in Holland, Switzerland, and Germany the architect is also the engineer; the science and the art of his craft are inseparable. "This intimate union of qualities gives an individuality to certain productions of these nations which we might well lay to heart and make the subject of serious comparative study. We must needs admit to begin with that we ourselves have become disciples rather than pioneers in a great movement."[57] The one preoccupation of the modern engineer seems to be the satisfaction of imperious necessity. He is inclined to neglect all that mathematics cannot give him. And yet he has brought about a very sensible progress by his mathematical application of modern science. He has unquestionably excelled in industrial masterpieces perfectly adapted to the needs of the moment, if wanting in the qualities that make for immortality. We accept with qualified admiration his marvellous bridges and kindred works in metal—marvellous yet ephemeral; but we accept them merely as a temporary substitute for the more solid if less showy stone bridges of our early architects. We would not have the servant of yesterday the master of to-morrow. We protest against the degradation of the architect from his high and noble estate to the rank of a mere decorator, however skilful. We would not witness the extinction of the ancient French traditions which inspired so many masterpieces, and to which we look as the source of many yet to come. It appears, moreover, that the general acceptation of the word ingÉnieur (engineer) is a totally mistaken one. It is derived from the mediÆval term engigneur, which was very differently applied. The architect and the engineer of our own day are both constructors, but with a difference. The architect loves and cultivates his art; the engineer, with few exceptions, despises, or affects to despise, his. In the Middle Ages their functions were perfectly distinct. The architect constructed what the engigneur used his utmost cunning to destroy. The architect built ramparts and strengthened them with towers; the engigneur undermined them if attacking, or countermined them if defending. It was his business to invent or direct the use of engines of war, such as rams, mangonels, arblasts, and machines for the slinging of enormous projectiles, or grenades. He constructed the portable wooden towers which the besieging party brought up against the walls for an escalade, directed the sappers who undermined them, and, in fact, superintended the manufacture of all such offensive engines as were necessary in the conduct of a siege, a process which, before the invention of firearms, necessitated preparations as prolonged and tedious as they were complicated and uncertain. In short, the architect was the constructor of fortifications, the engigneur their assailant or defender. It was not until the time of Vauban that military engineers were called upon to exercise functions so much more extensive. At an earlier period there were, however, specialists in construction who undertook such works as the circumvallation of Aigues-Mortes, but their labours had little in common with those of modern engineers. 164. CITY OF CARCASSONNE. RAMPARTS TO THE SOUTH-EAST Before the feudal period the fortifications of camps consisted either of earthworks, of walls built of mud and logs, or of palisades surrounded by ditches, in imitation of the Roman methods of castrametation. The enceintes of towns fortified by the Romans were walls defended by round or square towers. These walls were built double; a space of several yards intervened, which was filled up with the earth dug from the moat or ditch, mixed with rubble. The mass was levelled at the top and paved to form what is technically known as a covered way, or terrace protected by an embattled wall rising from the outer curtain. That portion of the enceinte of Carcassonne which was built by the Visigoths in the sixth century is thus constructed on the Roman model. "The ground on which the town is built rises considerably above that beyond the walls, and is almost on a level with the rampart. The curtains[58] are of great thickness; they are composed of two facings of dressed stones cut into small cubes, which alternate with courses of bricks; the intervening space is filled not with earth, but with a concrete formed of rubble and lime."[59] The flanking towers which rise considerably above the curtains were so disposed that it was possible to isolate them from the walls by raising drawbridges. Thus each tower formed an independent stronghold against assailants. Fig. 165 shows a portion of the north-west ramparts of the city of Carcassonne, with the first round tower; to the left of the drawing is the Romano-Visigothic tower, flanking right and left the curtains of the same period. 165. CITY OF CARCASSONNE. NORTH-WEST RAMPARTS. ROMANO-VISIGOTHIC TOWER (FIRST ON THE LEFT) In accordance with the Roman tradition the enceinte of a town, formed, as we have seen, of ramparts strengthened by towers, were further defended by a citadel or keep, of which we shall have more to say in the following chapter. This keep commanded the whole place, which was usually situated on the slope of a hill above the bank of a river. The bridge which communicated with the opposite bank was fortified by a gate-house or tÊte de pont, to guard the passage. The circumvallation of towns often consisted of a double enclosure, divided by a moat. By the close of the twelfth century architects had caught the inspiration of the great military works of the Crusaders in the East, and military architecture had progressed on the same lines as religious and monastic architecture. The territories, conquered by the Crusaders in the course of establishing the Christian supremacy in the East, had been divided into feofs as early as the twelfth century. These soon boasted castles, churches, and monastic foundations, of the Cistercian and Premonstrant orders among others. According to G. Rey, the following abbeys and priories were built in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem at this period:—The monasteries of Mount Sion, Mount Olivet, Jehoshaphat, St. Habakkuk, and St. Samuel, etc., and in Galilee, those of Mount Tabor and PalmarÉe. The military organisation was regulated by the Assises de la haute Cour (Assizes of the Supreme Court), which determined the number of knights to be furnished by each feof for the defence of the kingdom, and in like manner, the number of men-at-arms required from each church and each community of citizens.... The middle of the twelfth century was the period at which the Christian colonies of the Holy Land were most flourishing. Undeterred by the wars of which Syria was the theatre, the Franks had promptly assimilated the Greek and Roman tradition as manifested in Byzantine types of military architecture. The double enclosure flanked by towers, one of the main features of Syrian fortresses built by the Crusaders, was borrowed from the Greeks. Many of their strongholds, notably Morgat, the so-called Krak of the knights, and Tortosa, were of colossal proportions. They may be divided into two classes. In the first, the buildings are of the Frankish type, and seem to be modelled on the French castles of the eleventh and twelfth centuries. The flanking towers are nearly always round; they contain a defensive story, while their summits and those of the intervening curtains are crowned with battlements in the French fashion. Other features subsequently introduced were: the double enceinte, borrowed from the Byzantines, the inner line of which commanded the outer, and was sufficiently near to allow its defenders to engage, should assailants have carried the first barrier; secondly, stone machicolations in place of the wooden hourds or timber scaffoldings which were retained in France till the close of the thirteenth century; and finally, the talus, a device by which the thickness of the walls was tripled at the base, thus affording increased security against the arts of the sapper and the earthquake shocks so frequent in the East. 166. FORTRESS OF KALAAT-EL-HOSN IN SYRIA (KRAK OF THE KNIGHTS). SECTION, AS RESTORED BY M. G. REY 166A. FORTRESS DE KALAAT-EL-HOSN IN SYRIA (KRAK OF THE KNIGHTS). AS RESTORED BY M. G. REY The buildings of the second class belong to the school of the Knights Templars. Their characteristic features are the towers, invariably square or oblong in shape, and projecting but slightly from the curtains. The fortress of Kalaat-el-Hosn,[60] or Krak of the knights, commanded the pass through which ran the roads from Homs and Hamah to Tripoli and Tortosa, and was a military station of the first importance. Together with the castles of Akkar, Arcos, La ColÉe, Chastel-Blanc, Areynieh, Yammour, Tortosa, and Markab, and the various auxiliary towers and posts, it constituted a system of defence designed to protect Tripoli from the incursions of the Mahometans, who retained their hold on the greater part of Syria.... The Krak, which was built under the direction of the Knights Hospitallers, has a double enceinte, separated by a wide ditch partly filled with water. The inner wall forms a reduct, and rising above the outer enclosure commands its defences. It also encompasses the various dependencies of the castle, the great hall, chapel, domestic buildings, and magazines. A long vaulted passage, easy of defence, was the only entrance to the place. To the north and west the outer line consisted of a curtain flanked by rounded turrets, and crowned by machicolations, which formed a continuous scaffolding of stone along the greater part of the enceinte. 167. CITY OF CARCASSONNE. PLAN (THIRTEENTH CENTURY) The action of the East upon the West was manifested in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries by the application to the fortification of Carcassonne and Aigues-Mortes of methods in use among the Crusaders in Syria. This oriental influence is apparent at Carcassonne in the double enceinte borrowed from Syrian fortresses. The city of Carcassonne stands upon a plateau commanding the valley of the Aude, the site of an ancient Roman castellum. In the sixth century it fell into the hands of the Visigoths, who fortified it. It increased considerably in extent during the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth centuries, but in the time of Simon de Montfort (1209) and of Raymon de Trancavel (1240) the enceinte was not nearly so important as it became under St. Louis. By the middle of the thirteenth century the king had begun the construction of defensive works on a vast scale, and built the outer enceinte, which still exists, as may be seen on the plan (Fig. 167) taken from Viollet-le-Duc's CitÉ de Carcassonne. 168. CITY OF CARCASSONNE. RAMPARTS. SOUTH-WEST ANGLE The primary object of the enceinte was to secure the place against a sudden attack during the completion or enlargement of its interior defences. The additions of St. Louis, which were carried on by Philip the Bold, rendered Carcassonne impregnable in the general estimation. "As a fact, it was never invested, and did not open its gates to Edward the Black Prince till 1355, when all Languedoc had submitted to him."[61] 169. RAMPARTS OF AIGUES-MORTES, NORTH AND SOUTH Oriental influences are equally evident at Aigues-Mortes. The Genoese Guglielmo Boccanera, who constructed the enceinte, was apparently familiar with the system of fortification adopted by the Crusaders in Syria. The machicolations which here make their first appearance in Languedoc (in the reign of Philip the Bold), proclaim the filiation of Aigues-Mortes to the Syrian fortresses. Italian influences are also perceptible in the square plan of the flanking towers. French architects had always preferred the round tower, as more solid in itself, and less open to attack from sappers, who, in advancing against a building of this form, were fully exposed to the missiles of the defenders from the curtains adjoining; while, on the other hand, the angles of the square tower gave a certain protection to assailants advancing against its front. 170. RAMPARTS OF AVIGNON. CURTAIN, TOWERS, AND MACHICOLATIONS The ramparts of Avignon, which date from the fourteenth century, seem to have been constructed on Italian methods. The curtains are flanked by square towers, open towards the town, and surmounted by embattled parapets corbelled out from the walls, and machicolated so as to command their bases. In the thirteenth century walls and towers were provided with movable wooden scaffoldings, as shown at A in the figure. Spaces were left in the masonry of the walls for the insertion of wooden beams, which, projecting from the curtain, supported an overhanging gallery. This, being pierced with traps or apertures in the flooring, commanded the base of the wall, and was an important element in defensive operations. But as it was found that these timber galleries were easily set on fire by assailants, they were replaced in the fourteenth century by stone machicolations, as shown at B, consisting of corbels, supporting an embattled parapet. Between the inner face of the parapet and the outer face of the curtain the supporting corbels alternated with openings for the defence of the base, as already described. This arrangement, among the earliest examples of which are the square towers of Avignon, was soon generally adopted by architects in the construction of city ramparts. "The art of fortification, which had made great advances at the beginning of the thirteenth century, remained almost stationary to the end of it. During the Hundred Years' War, however, it received a fresh impetus. When order had been restored in the kingdom, Charles VII. set about the restoration or reconstruction of many fortresses recaptured from the English. In the defensive works of such towns and castles, and in various new undertakings of a like nature, we recognise the method and regularity proper to an art based on well-defined principles, and far advanced towards mastery."[62] In the Abbey of Mont St. Michel the successive modifications applied to military enceintes from the thirteenth to the fifteenth century, are illustrated in the fullest and most interesting manner. 171. RAMPARTS OF ST. MALO (FIFTEENTH CENTURY) Of the fourteenth century fortifications, which surrounded the original town at the summit of the rock, connecting the ramparts with the Merveille on the north, and the abbey buildings on the south, some fragments still remain. The tower on the north is intact. The walls are crowned with machicolations, in accordance with the then novel system of massing the defences at the top of the ramparts. The gate of the enceinte was to the south-east, judging from the miniatures in the livre d'heures of Pierre II., Duke of Brittany, which show the arrangement of the original enceinte at the close of the fourteenth century. The abbey was at this time governed by Pierre Le Roy, one of its ablest abbots and most famous constructors. He rebuilt the summit of the Tour des Corbins (merveille), restored, and re-roofed the abbey buildings to the south of the church, which, begun by Richard Justin in 1260, were carried on at intervals by his successors till they were partially destroyed by the fire of 1374. He completed the eastern defences by the addition of the square tower at O on the plan (Fig. 151), in which he built several rooms for the accommodation of his soldiers. The tower is known as the Tour Perrine, in memory of its author. We have seen that the abbots gradually became great feudal chieftains; the Abbot of Mont St. Michel was further commandant of the place for the king; and he was empowered to bestow feofs on the nobles of the province, who bound themselves in return to keep guard over the mount in certain contingencies, enumerated in the following rendering of a Latin text:—[63] "The tenure of these vavassories was by faith and fealty, and their holders were bound to furnish relief and thirteen knights, each of whom was to come in person to guard the gate of the abbey when necessary—that is to say, in time of war; each to keep guard for the space of the ebb and flow of the sea—that is to say, during the rising and falling of the tide; and each to be provided with gambeson, casque, gauntlets, shield, lance, and all requisite arms; and further to present themselves thus armed yearly at the feast of St. Michael in September." In the early years of the fifteenth century he built the gate-house and crenellated curtain which connects it with the Merveille, to the north of the guard-room, Bellechaise (see Fig. 163, beginning of this chapter). The gate-house was placed in front of the northern faÇade of Bellechaise (D, Fig. 150); an open space between this and the south wall of the new structure formed a wide machicoulis for the protection of the north gate (that of Bellechaise), which, by the erection of the new building, had been transformed into a second interior entrance. The gate-house or chÂtelet is a square structure, flanked at the angles of the north front by two turrets, corbelled out upon buttresses. In general appearance they resemble a pair of huge mortars standing on their breeches. Between the pedestals of these turrets was the doorway and the inclined vault over the staircase leading to the guard-room. This entrance was defended by a portcullis worked from within on the first story, and by three machicoulis at the top of the curtain, between the battlements of the turrets. For the further protection of the gate-house Pierre Le Roy built the barbican which covers it to the east and north, and also commands the great staircase (Grand DegrÉ) on the north. He modified the ramparts by the addition of the tower known as the Tour Claudine at the north-east angle of the Merveille. In the lower story of this tower he constructed a guard-room, the postern of which communicated with the Grand DegrÉ, and by a series of ingenious and unique combinations was so contrived as to command all the approaches.[64] 172. MONT ST. MICHEL. SOUTH FRONT (AS IT WAS IN 1875) In 1411 the Abbot Robert Jolivet was nominated lord of the abbey by Pope John XXIII. After his election by the monks he was made captain of the garrison by the king, but continued to live in Paris. In 1416, however, he hastened to his abbey, which was threatened by the English, who had possessed themselves of Lower Normandy after the battle of Agincourt in 1415. Whilst the English were busy fortifying Tombelaine, Robert Jolivet completed his walls and certain towers round about the town, which still exist. To meet the expenses of his undertaking the abbot obtained a grant from the king of fifteen hundred livres from the revenues of the Viscounty of Avranches, besides a subsidy from the Master of the Mint at St. LÔ. 173. MONT ST. MICHEL. FORTIFICATIONS OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY (AS RESTORED BY ED. CORROYER) At the time when Robert Jolivet was building
the new ramparts, from about 1415 to 1420, the town had greatly increased towards the south, and even setting aside the dangerous proximity of the English at Tombelaine, some more extensive system of defence than that afforded by the fortifications of the fourteenth century was imperatively needed to secure the place against attack. Robert Jolivet incorporated his new walls on the east with those of the preceding century, which, following the escarpments of the cliff, descend to the beach, and are protected by the northern tower. These walls he flanked with an additional tower projecting considerably from the surface, which was destined to command the adjoining curtains and protect the main line of his defences. He then carried his walls round to the south of the rock and strengthened them by five other towers. The last of these, known as the Tour du Roi, forms the south-eastern projection of the place, and commands the western gate of the town. The walls and their sloping bases are defended by stone machicolations above, the consoles of which support open crenellated parapets. Several of the towers were roofed, and afforded shelter for the defenders of the ramparts. After leaving the Tour du Roi the walls turn off at a right angle and unite themselves to the abrupt declivities of the rock by means of a series of steps and covered ways, commanded by a fortified guard-room. Even the inaccessible peaks of the rock itself are fortified and connected with the defences of the abbey on the south. At the beginning of the fifteenth century, and still more notably towards its close, firearms had been successfully used in various sieges, and had made such rapid progress that the whole system of attack and defence was transformed. Towers gave way to bastions, the terraces of which became batteries, while the battlements of the earlier mode were replaced by epaulments. Machicolations which were now merely a traditional decoration at last disappeared altogether, and military science gradually took the place of architecture, for which there was henceforth little scope in this particular field.
CHAPTER II
CASTLES AND KEEPS, OR DONJONS The first French castles of the mediÆval period seem to have been built for the purpose of arresting invasion and affording shelter to communities decimated by the raids of the Normans. They consisted of simple intrenchments more or less extensive. Surrounded by a fossÉ or ditch formed of earthworks, the scarp of which was defended by a palisade, they had much in common with the camps of the ancient Romans. In the centre of the enclosure rose the motte (mote or mound), a conical elevation, either natural to the ground, or artificially formed on the model of the Roman prÆtorium. This was surmounted by a building, generally of wood, which served as a post of observation and a retreat less accessible than the enceinte itself. In these rudimentary dispositions we recognise the germ of those feudal keeps and castles which were such important features of mediÆval architecture, notably during the Gothic period. Defensive works of this nature sprang up at various points of the royal domain which were exposed to the incursions of the Scandinavian pirates; but the temporary concessions of Charles the Bald were claimed as definitive by those to whom they had been made. "When, therefore, that feeble monarch proclaimed the heredity of the feofs at Quierzy-sur-Oise in 877, he did but sanction that which was already an accomplished fact.... When the feudal system was firmly established, the nobles turned their attention to the maintenance of their usurpations alike against the kings of France, strangers, and neighbours. To this end they carefully chose the best strategic positions in their territories, and fortified them in the most durable fashion at their command. The imposts they levied were considerable, and their serfs were subject to endless exactions."[65] Stone castles were accordingly built which, in general arrangement, adhered to primitive models. In 980 Frotaire had raised no less than five around PÉrigueux, his episcopal town. In 991 Thibault File-Étoupe built a fortress on the hill of MontlhÉry, near the royal residences of Paris and Étampes, which was very formidable to the first five kings of the house of Capet. Later, when it became a royal possession, it was one of the chief bulwarks of the city. 175. CARCASSONNE; CITADEL. VIEW FROM THE NORTH-EASTERN ANGLE. (SEE PLAN, FIG. 167) In the Middle Ages the castle bore the same relation to the fortified town as did the keep to the feudal castle, and the history of one is bound up in that of the other. In a fortified town the castle was the lodging of the leader and his soldiers. It was connected with the ramparts of the place, and had one or more special outlets; it was further provided with defences on the side of the town itself, so that upon occasion it became an isolated stronghold. The Castle of Carcassonne is a famous example of such offensive and defensive fortification. It was built in the first years of the twelfth century, and is composed of various lodgings for the chief and his garrison, defended east and north, on the side towards the city, by towers and curtains (Fig. 175). At the south-west angle independent reducts and towers guard the courtyards and approaches. The west front overlooks the open country, and here was placed the gate, which was defended by a series of formidable devices so ingenious as to preclude all possibility of surprise.
During the Romanesque and Gothic periods the castle was a miniature town, with its own fortified enceinte, composed of walls reinforced by towers which served as refuges at various points of the circumference, and formed so many reducts for the arrest of assailants. The keep was the citadel of this miniature town, the temporary lodging of the lord whose vassals lived in the internal offices, and whose soldiers occupied the gate-house buildings and the towers of the ramparts. The noble sought to give his special habitation the most formidable aspect possible, and thereby to strike terror to the beholder, a very necessary device in those days of conflict when the friend of night was often the implacable foe of morning. "In times of peace the keep was the receptacle for the treasure, arms, and archives of the family; but the lord did not lodge there; he only took up his quarters in the keep with his wife and children in time of war. As it was not possible for him to defend the place alone, he surrounded himself with a band of the most devoted of his followers who shared his dwelling. From thence he exercised a scrupulous surveillance over the garrison and its approaches, for the keep was always placed at the most vulnerable point of the fortress, and he and his bodyguard held the horde of vassals and retainers in due subservience; as they were able to pass in and out at all hours by secret and well-guarded passages, the garrison was kept in ignorance of the exact means of defence, the lord, as was natural, doing all in his power to make them appear formidable."[66] Castles and keeps of stone were generally built upon the natural scarp of some spur commanding two valleys and near the banks of a river; the primitive mounds of the feudal fortresses were abandoned; as we have already remarked, these were in many cases artificial, and would have been quite inadequate to the support of the huge masses of masonry of the new architecture. "By the close of the tenth century and the opening years of the eleventh, Foulques Nerra was raising castles throughout his own territories in Anjou, and on every available point of vantage he could wrest from his neighbour, the Count of Blois and Tours; the latter built fortresses to resist the aggressor and complete the network of strongholds begun by his father, Thibault the Trickster, one of the most turbulent nobles of his day."[67] The keep of Langeais, on a precipitous hill overlooking the Loire, was founded by Foulques Nerra at the close of the tenth century; the walls, which are still standing on three sides, show traces of Gallo-Roman methods of construction; the dressed stones are of small size, and brick and stone are used conjointly for the voussoirs of the window arches. A large number of castles and keeps were built in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, among others those of Plessy, Grimoult, Le Pin, and La Pommeraye, the last on a mound surrounded by deep moats which separate three lines of circumvallation from each other; Beaugency-sur-Loire, the vast keep of which was four stories high; and Loches, which is ascribed to Foulques Nerra, but which seems to belong rather to the twelfth century, at which period military architecture had made a great advance. The keep of Loches is perhaps the finest of all such structures in France; in height it is nearly 100 feet; the ramparts seem to date from the thirteenth century; the form of the towers on plan is a pointed arch, a shape adopted as offering greater resistance at the part most frequently attacked by the sapper. 177. FALAISE CASTLE. KEEP At Falaise, where the castle like that of Domfront is built on a rugged promontory, the ramparts are later than the keep, the architectural details of which point to the twelfth century. This hypothesis is supported by a passage in the Chronicle of Robert du Mont, quoted by M. de Caumont. In 1123 Henry II. rebuilt the keep and ramparts of Arques, and carried out similar restorations at Gisors, Falaise, Argentan, Exmes, Domfront, Amboise, and Vernon. 178. LAVARDIN CASTLE. KEEP 179. KEEP OF AIGUES-MORTES. TOUR DE CONSTANCE Other keeps of equal interest in point of situation, plan, or details of construction are:—Ste. Suzanne, Nogent-le-Rotrou, Broue, L'Islot, Tonnay-Boutonne, Pons, Chamboy, Montbazon, Lavardin, Montrichard, and Huriet in the Bourbonnais. All these, in common with those first described, are square or rectangular on plan. From the end of the twelfth century onwards the cylindrical form predominates in the plan of keeps and towers. On the whole, it offered the best resistance to the mediÆval assailant. The convex surface was of equal strength all round, and as we have seen in the preceding chapter, the circular trace for towers gave the garrison the best chance of defending their bases from the curtain, and of opposing the work of sappers and miners. 180. PROVINS CASTLE. KEEP The great advance made in architecture by the general adoption of an expedient so simple and easy of execution as the vault on intersecting arches manifested itself very strongly in military structures. The heavy wooden floors of the earlier keeps, which were so apt to catch fire, were replaced by less ponderous vaults, binding the circular walls firmly together, and forming a flooring for the various stories less unsteady and infinitely more durable than the huge beams and joists of earlier days. A further improvement was the pointed roof, round on plan, now generally adopted as better calculated to withstand projectiles or combustibles which shattered the angles of the roof in the old square towers, and set fire to the timbers. The form of keeps, however, varied considerably throughout the twelfth century. At Houdan the keep is a great tower strengthened by four turrets; at Étampes it is composed of four clustered towers, forming a quatrefoil on plan; the vaulted stories are marked by many curious features, among others a deep well, the opening of which is in the second floor. Some historians date this building from the eleventh century; there are indications, however, in the details of the architecture and sculptures, which point to the early part of the reign of Philip Augustus. The keep of Provins, which belongs to the twelfth century, has certain very original features. It rises from a solid mound of masonry, and has a circular enceinte. The base of the keep itself is square, and is flanked at each angle by a turret. An octagonal tower surmounts the square base, and is connected with the flanking turrets by flying buttresses. The keep of Gisors is also octagonal in form, one of its octagons being at a tangent to the circular enceinte which crowns the feudal motte or mound. It was built in the twelfth century, and was considerably augmented by the line of walls and square towers which Philip Augustus drew round the mound. The ChÂteau Gaillard, built at the close of the twelfth century on an eminence commanding the Seine at Les Andelys, has several peculiarities of arrangement. The round keep is first enclosed by a circular enceinte, or rather by a square, the angles of which have been rounded. This in its turn is surrounded by an elliptic enclosure connected with the defences of the castle, and consisting of a series of segmental towers united by very narrow curtains. In this massive structure the art of the architect manifests itself only in the robust solidity of the masonry. It is the keep in its purely military character. No trace of decoration mitigates its austerity. 181. CASTLE OF CHINON. SOUTH FRONT Philip Augustus, having possessed himself of the ChÂteau Gaillard, fortified Gisors on the same formidable scale, and proceeded to build the castle of Dourdan as well as his own palace fortress of the Louvre, in Paris. Upon the death of the king, Enguerrand III. began to build a fortress at Coucy, which he completed in less than ten years (1223-1230). Its grandiose proportions and formidable system of defence surpassed everything that had gone before. Coucy was, in fact, the architectural manifestation of that haughty ambition to which Enguerrand is said to have given free expression during the minority of his sovereign. 182. CASTLE OF CLISSON. KEEP Next in importance to the castles and keeps of the thirteenth century, already enumerated, are the following:—The White Tower of Issoudun; the Tower of Blandy; the octagonal keep of ChÂtillon-sur-Loing, Semur; the royal fortresses of Angers, built by St. Louis; Montargis, Boulogne, Chinon, and Saumur; the Tour Constance or keep of Aigues-Mortes, ascribed to St. Louis; the castle of Najac, built by his brother, Alphonse of Poitiers; the castles of Bourbon l'Archambault and Chalusset, and the castle of Clisson, rebuilt or begun by Olivier I., Lord of Clisson, after his return from the Holy Land, etc. 183. VILLENEUVE-LES-AVIGNON. CASTLE OF ST. ANDRÉ In the fourteenth century military architecture developed chiefly on reconstructive lines. Ancient fortresses were reorganised in accordance with the new methods of attack and (consequently) of defence, and the weak points brought to light by recent sieges were dealt with. The same process was applied to the construction of towers which had hitherto been furnished with several rows of loopholes, an excellent expedient for the defence of curtains and approaches, but subject to this drawback, that it directed attention to the most vulnerable points. The first effect of the use of cannon in warfare was to increase the thickness of the walls; subsequently, such structural modifications were adopted as were required by the novel method of massing all the defences at the summit of machicolated walls. The principal castles of this period were Vincennes, near Paris, built by Philip of Valois and Charles V., and the vast fortified palace at Avignon, constructed by the Popes Benedict XII., Clement VI., Innocent VI., and Urban V., of which we shall have more to say in Part IV. Gaston Phoebus, Count of Foix and BÉarn, built square keeps in the Bastide of BÉarn, at Montaner, and at Mauvezin, besides circular keeps at Lourdes and at Foix. Among keeps and castles completed or entirely built in the fourteenth century, Anthyme St. Paul enumerates those of Roquetaillade, Bourdeilles, Polignac, Briquebec, Hardelot, Rambures, Lavardin (the foundations of which were laid in the twelfth century), Montrond, Turenne, Billy, Murat, and HÉrisson, the curious keep of Montbard, the keeps of Romefort, Pouzauges, Noirmoutier, and many others. At the end of the fourteenth and beginning of the fifteenth century Louis of Orleans, son of Charles V., took advantage of the madness of his brother Charles VI. to fortify various positions on which he relied for the furtherance of his ambitious schemes. In 1393 and the years immediately following he acquired various estates in Valois: MontÉpilloy, Pierrefonds, and La FertÉ-Milon, the castle of which he rebuilt entirely. He also bought the domain of Coucy in 1400, after the death of the last male descendant of Enguerrand III. Coucy, Pierrefonds, and La FertÉ-Milon have been so exhaustively described in special works, notably those of Viollet-le-Duc, that we need not reproduce them here. We have cited them as characteristic types of those colossal fortresses and keeps, admirable alike in grandiose proportion and refinement of detail which are the supreme expression of feudal power. Several other castles were built in Albigeois, Auvergne, Limousin, Guyenne, La VendÉe, and Provence, notably at Tarascon. The keeps of TrÈves in Anjou also date from this period. Important castles sprang up all over Brittany in the fifteenth century. Such were Combourg, FougÈres, Montauban, St. Malo, VitrÉ, Elven, Sucinio, Dinan, TonquÉdec, etc. Many of these buildings which date from the close of the century were remarkable for their ingenuity of arrangement and richness of decoration. But though worthy of all attention from the artistic point of view, they do not come within the scope of our present study—that of military architecture in the Gothic period.
CHAPTER III
GATES AND BRIDGES Though confining ourselves to a brief historical abstract of the so-called Gothic period in architecture, without reference to Roman examples, we have said enough in the foregoing studies on castles and keeps, and the circumvallation of towns, to give some idea of the importance attached by architects to the gates which secured the enceintes, and the bridges which afforded an approach. Gates.—Following the example of those Frankish architects whose works in Syria after the first Crusade seem to have exercised such far-reaching influence, French builders of the reigns of Philip Augustus and St. Louis reduced the entrances of fortresses and fortified enceintes to the smallest number practicable. Their construction was based upon a system calculated to repulse any ordinary attempt to carry the place by direct attack; as a rule, fortresses were taken rather by ruse, surprise, or treason than by regular siege. 186. CITY OF CARCASSONNE. GATE-HOUSE OF THE CASTLE During the twelfth, and more especially the thirteenth century, the gates were the points most strongly fortified. They were approached over a bridge, by raising a movable portion of which, however, entrance might be barred on the very threshold. The narrow gateway passage was defended by two projecting towers pierced with loopholes, and connected by a curtain. The whole structure formed a fortified gate-house, known as a chÂtelet, which had to be carried before an assailant could penetrate to the fortress beyond. The passage was further defended by a single or double portcullis, a grated timber framework like a harrow, cased with iron, the uprights of which were spiked at the bottom. The passage was also defended by machicolations or holes in the roof, through which the garrison could hurl down missiles on the heads of their enemies, should the latter have forced the gate. The castle-gate of Carcassonne which was built about 1120 still exists, and is a good example of such arrangements. The minute precautions adopted by architects to guard against surprise are very manifest in this example. A sudden attempt was often successful, especially if favoured by traitors among the defenders themselves. The difficulties of passage were increased by the multiplication of portcullises, the windlasses of which were worked from different stories of the tower, so as to prevent collusion between different parties of the garrison, which was often composed largely of mercenaries. In the gate-house of Carcassonne the first portcullis was raised or lowered by means of chains and counter-weights worked from a windlass on the second floor; the second portcullis was worked in like manner from the first floor, in a place entirely cut off from communication with that above, to which access could only be obtained by a wooden staircase in the castle courtyard. In the thirteenth century military architects further provided against surprises by defensive outworks. The gate of Laon, at Coucy, so admirably described by Viollet-le-Duc, is a famous example. These outworks, which were called barbicans, were designed to protect the great gate and its approaches. 187. CARCASSONNE. GATEWAY OF THE LISTS, KNOWN AS THE PORTE DE L'AUDE Around the walls of the city of Carcassonne a second line of ramparts had been drawn by St. Louis, in which only a single opening gave access to the lists (Fig. 187)—that is to say, the space between the inner and outer enclosures. He afterwards built a huge tower, known as the Barbican, to the west of the castle, with which it was connected by crenellated walls, and by inner cross-walls, so arranged in a kind of echelon that the open spaces on one side were masked by the projections on the other (see plan, Fig. 167). The tower was destined to cover sorties from the garrison, and to keep open communication by the bridge across the Aude. It was rather an outwork than a barbican such as Philip the Bold built before the Porte Narbonaise, on the east of the city, towards the close of the thirteenth century. 188. CITY OF CARCASSONNE. GATE KNOWN AS THE PORTE NARBONAISE The Porte Narbonaise bears a general resemblance to the main gate of the castle, subject, however, to the great advance made in military architecture in the course of a century. The gateway towers are provided with spurs, an invention directed against the attack of miners, which had the further advantage of interfering with the action of a battering-ram, by exposing those who worked it to missiles from the adjacent parts of the curtain. The gate opened immediately upon the lists; it was defended by the crenellated semi-circular barbican, which was united on either side to the embattled parapet of the lists. Access to the barbican was obtained only by a narrow passage preceded by a bridge, the latter easily defended by a redan which adjoined the postern of the barbican. The gate itself was provided with two portcullises like those of the castle gate; behind the first were massive folding-doors, and over it a wide machicolation. The constructive methods employed in the building of fortified gates were modified as military architecture progressed on lines already considered by us in the first chapter of this section, when dealing with defensive methods generally, which, in the fourteenth century, seem to have been in advance of those of attack. A steady improvement in details went on until the invention of gunpowder came in to profoundly modify the conditions alike of defence and assault. 189. RAMPARTS OF AIGUES-MORTES. GATE KNOWN AS THE PORTE DE LA GARDETTE. DRAWBRIDGE. (TO THE RIGHT OF THE DRAWING THE TOUR CONSTANCE, BUILT BY ST. LOUIS) The gateways of fortified enceintes were modified in the fourteenth century not only by alterations in the plan of towers, the substitution of stone machicolations for the wooden hourds or scaffoldings of parapets, the addition of portcullises, folding-doors, and the machicoulis of the vaulted passage, but further by the invention of the drawbridge. A drawbridge, it may be hardly necessary to say, consisted of a wooden platform suspended by chains to cross-beams poised on uprights on the principle of a see-saw; when lowered, the bridge afforded a passage across the moat. It was raised by depressing the inner ends of the lever-beams which pivoted upon a fulcrum, and thus brought the platform up vertically against the front of the building, where it formed an outer door which an attacking party had either to batter in or to bring down by cutting the chains. 190. RAMPARTS OF DINAN. GATE KNOWN AS THE PORTE DE JERZUAL It will be readily perceived that such a bridge was infinitely more effectual and more to be depended upon than the portable bridge mentioned in our description of the castle gate of Carcassonne. The latter had to be raised piece by piece, a prolonged operation impossible of execution in case of a sudden surprise. Aigues-Mortes seems to have been one of the first fortresses to which the new methods were applied. The gates east, west, and south are constructed on the twelfth-century system, as exemplified at Carcassonne. But the northern gate, known as the Porte de la Gardette, which was either made or altered in the fourteenth century, still shows the grooves for the beams of the drawbridge, and the pointed arch of the doorway is enframed by a square rebate destined for the platform when raised. The use of drawbridges became very general in the fourteenth century, and gave rise to various ingenious combinations. The gate at Dinan, known as the Porte de Jerzual, which probably dates from the close of the century, is a curious example. It is not placed between two towers in the manner then usual, but is pierced through the actual face of a tower. In this case, the inner prolongation of the lever-beams formed a solid panel like the platform of the bridge itself. It was worked through a hole in the roof of the entrance archway, being raised with the help of a chain, and falling through its own preponderant weight. The horizontal pivot on which it turned rested on the brackets shown in Fig. 190; the external sections of the lever-beams sank in the usual manner into the vertical grooves above the arch, and when the bridge was up, the solid panel joining the inner ends of the levers doubled the protection it gave. In case of alarm, the chain had simply to be let go, and the panel falling by its own weight, the bridge rose, and the barricade was complete. 191. VITRÉ CASTLE. GATE-HOUSE By the fifteenth century drawbridges were in universal use; an interesting development was the result. This was the introduction of a smaller gate or postern in the curtain between the towers, by the side of the great gateway. Each of the two apertures was furnished with its own drawbridge. That of the centre, which was reserved for horsemen and vehicles, was worked by two beams or arms, as we have seen, while the smaller footbridge of the postern was raised by means of a single beam, the chain of which was attached to a forked upright. 192. ENCEINTE OF GUÉRANDE. GATE OF ST. MICHEL The castle of VitrÉ, which was built, or at least completed at the close of the fourteenth or beginning of the fifteenth century, illustrates the system in the gateway of its chÂtelet. The gate-house, known as the Porte St. Michel, at GuÉrande, which was built together with the enceinte by John V., Duke of Brittany, in 1431, still preserves the lateral grooves which indicate the shape and arrangement of the postern drawbridge. When raised, the two drawbridges closed the apertures of gateway and postern, while the open gulf of the great ditch, either empty, or full of water, cut off the approach to the entrance. The Abbey of Mont St. Michel, which we have already studied under various aspects, has further information to give us with regard to the construction of fortified gateways. In accordance with contemporary usage, the Abbot Pierre Le Roy built a gate-house or bastille (Fig. 163), the entrance of which was guarded by a portcullis and a wide machicoulis; he masked this gate-house by a barbican, which was connected north and south with the great stairway leading to the abbey. The northern staircase is rendered specially interesting by the ingenious arrangement of its gates, which opened within the barbican. The apertures were filled by a panel which worked horizontally, on a system necessitated by the exceptional situation of the abbey, where the military, as well as the domestic buildings, were superposed, communicating with each other only by an elaborate series of staircases and inclines. The doors pivoted upon horizontal axes. Resting upon salient jambs in the embrasures of the doorways, they opened in a direction parallel with the slope of the steps, and could be shut at the least alarm, being carried into place by their own weight. They were kept fastened by lateral bolts, the slots of which still exist in the jambs.[68]
193. RAMPARTS OF MONT ST. MICHEL. GATEWAY KNOWN AS THE PORTE DU ROI The main gate of the ramparts, which was built between 1415 and 1420, is to the west of the place, in the curtain flanked by the tower known as the Tour du Roi. This gate and the lateral postern gave access to the town, their drawbridges forming a passage across the moat when lowered, and when raised, an initial barrier to assailants. Above the gates was the warder's lodging, beneath which the vaulted passage and the postern communicated directly with an outer guard-room in the ground-floor of the Tour du Roi. In addition to the first barrier, formed by the raised platform of the drawbridge, the main entrance was secured by double doors, and by an iron portcullis, which still remains in its lateral grooves. The great arch is crowned by a tympanum, on which the united arms of the king, the abbey, and the town were carved. The works designed for the defence of rivers flowing through fortified towns, or of the inlets of harbours, are closely allied to the military architecture of gates. At Troyes the river arches in the town ramparts were guarded by gratings or portcullises of iron. At Paris the passage of the Seine was barred by chains stretched across the river from wall to wall, and upheld in the middle of the stream by piles or firmly anchored boats. At Angers the walls of the town abutted on two towers known as the Haute ChaÎne and the Basse ChaÎne (the Higher and Lower Chains), containing windlasses for the chains, which at night were stretched across the Maine at its passage through the enceinte. Seaports were defended at the mouth by towers on either shore, between which chains, worked from within, could be stretched to bar the passage. The harbour of La Rochelle is thus protected. According to some archÆologists of authority, the tower known as the Tour de la ChaÎne (to the left of the drawing) is older than that of St. Nicholas (on the right), which is supposed by them to have been built in the sixteenth century on the foundations of an earlier tower contemporary with that on the other side of the Channel. The piles upon which these towers stand seem to have given way in part, and to have caused a perceptible inclination of the Tower of St. Nicholas. 194. ENTRANCE TO THE PORT OF LA ROCHELLE. TOWER OF ST. NICHOLAS, AND TOWER CALLED TOUR DE LA CHAÎNE. BEFORE THE RESTORATION The suggestion made in a very fanciful modern design, that the two towers were once united by a great arch, is wholly without foundation. Such a useless structure would have entailed defensive works equally useless, seeing that a chain stretched from tower to tower at high tide—at low tide the harbour was inaccessible—would have been perfectly effectual against any vessels of that period attempting to force a passage. Bridges.—As is the case with all other architectural buildings, the origin of bridges dates back to the Romans, by whom they were often decorated with triumphal arches. The bridge of St. Chamas in Provence, known as the Pont Flavien (Flavian Bridge), is an example which seems to date from the first centuries of the Christian era. The triumphal arches were in later times replaced by fortifications; they became tÊtes de pont, bastilles, or crenellated gate-houses, the function of which was not, like that of the arches, the decoration of the structure or the glorification of its founder, but the defence of the passage across the river, and the protection of the fortress with which it communicated. 195. BRIDGE AT AVIGNON. RUINS OF THE BRIDGE KNOWN AS THE PONT DE ST. BÉNÉZET Among the bridges constructed by mediÆval architects, that of St. BÉnÉzet, the Bridge of Avignon, seems to be the most ancient. This bridge, which was begun about 1180, and completed some ten years later, is equally remarkable for its architectural details, and the structural problems solved by its builders. It crosses, or rather used to cross, the Rhone—for though the arm towards the Rocher des Doms is the narrower, it is the deeper—on nineteen arches, extending from the foot of the Doms, on the Avignonese bank, to the Tower of Villeneuve, on the right bank, after a slight deflection southward. The gate-house on the left bank, some fragments of which still remain, is said to have been built by the Popes in the fourteenth century, for the purpose of levying tolls, a perquisite shared by them with the King of France. The Bridge of Avignon seems to have been one of the first constructed by the fraternity of the Hospitaliers pontifs, which was founded in the twelfth century for the double object of building bridges and succouring travellers. The head of the order at the time of the building of the Rhone bridge was St. BÉnÉzet. It must have numbered architects of ability among its members, for the construction of the Bridge of Avignon is very remarkable. Each of the elliptical arches is composed of four independent arches in simple juxtaposition one with another. This device ensures elasticity, and as a consequence stability. The solidarity of the whole is rendered complete by the masonry of the spandrils, which recall the architectural portions of the aqueduct, known as the Pont du Gard; its width is about 16 feet. The arches spring from piers furnished on either face with acute spurs designed to break the force of the stream and the impact of floating ice in the winter. The spandril above each pier is pierced with a round arch, to give free passage to the water during those floods which at times completely submerge the piers. The bridge in its present ruined condition has only four arches. On the pier nearest to the left bank the ancient chapel, dedicated to St. Nicholas, is still standing. Access to it is obtained by means of a flight of corbelled steps rising from the foundation to the entrance, and by an overhanging landing-stage, resting at one end against the pier, at the other against the flank of the arch. 196. BRIDGE OF MONTAUBAN, KNOWN AS THE PONT DES CONSULS The old bridge at Carcassonne seems to be contemporary with that of Avignon, but its arches are semi-circular, their keystones are bound into the intrados, and their piers are spurred to the level of the platform, where they form recesses or refuges, which the narrowness of the bridge rendered very necessary. Among bridges of the thirteenth century we may mention that at BÉziers, where the arches, both pointed and semi-circular, resemble those of Carcassonne in construction; but here the piers only rise above the summers of the arches by the height of two or three courses, and their spandrils are pierced to give free passage to the current during floods. The bridge which spanned the Rhone at St. Savournin du Port, known as the Pont St. Esprit, was the work of a Clunisian abbot about 1265. It resembled the Bridge of Avignon in the construction of the piers with their pierced spandrils; the arches, however, were semi-circular. The platform, which is some 16 feet across, was barred at either end by toll-gates; that nearest to the little town was connected with the tÊte de pont, which, in after times, was incorporated with the fortress commanding the course of the Rhone above the bridge. 197. BRIDGE OF CAHORS, KNOWN AS THE PONT DE VALENTRÉ The question of tolls was an important one in those days, and gave rise to frequent disputes. The towers and gate-houses of bridges were toll-bars as well as defensive outworks. The bridge at Montauban, known as the Pont des Consuls, which was begun at the close of the thirteenth century, remained unfinished till the beginning of the fourteenth, when Philip the Fair gave such help as was needed for its completion, on condition that he should be allowed to raise three towers on the bridge, with a view to the appropriation of the tolls. The Bridge of Montauban is built entirely of brick. It consists of seven pointed arches, resting on spurred piers, which are pierced with arches, also pointed, and rising to the same height as the main arches, to provide for the frequent floods of the Tarn. The Bridge of Cahors is one of the most beautiful of fourteenth-century examples. It is still of great interest in spite of the various restorations it has undergone, chiefly of late years. This bridge, which is known as the Pont de ValentrÉ, was begun in 1308 by Raymond Panchelli, Bishop of Cahors from 1300-1312, and cannot have been finished before 1355. It consists of six slightly pointed arches; the piers, which rise to the level of the parapet, forming lateral refuges, are triangular above bridge and square below. At each end the bridge was commanded by a crenellated structure, forming a gate-house or tÊte de pont on either bank. In the middle rose a lofty tower with gates, by means of which passage might be barred and assailants checked in the event of a surprise of either gate-house. 199. ABBEY OF MONT ST. MICHEL. FORTIFIED BRIDGE CONNECTING THE LOWER CHURCH WITH THE ABBEY The Bridge of Orthez has strong affinities with that of Cahors. It must date from about the same period, and there is every reason to suppose it was defended, not only by the central tower, but by tÊtes de pont, one of which at least must have been destroyed to make way for the railroad from Bayonne to Pau. Bridges were of great importance in the Middle Ages, both as public highways and military outworks. At certain points, notably at the confluence of two rivers, they were strongly reinforced by very considerable defences, as at Sens, Montereau, etc. At Paris, Orleans, Rouen, Nantes, and a large number of other towns traversed by rivers, bridges were not only important as military defences, but of great interest as architecture. Mont St. Michel shall furnish us with our last example, a bridge of the fifteenth century. Though it spans no stream, it is none the less remarkable. In the details of this bridge—its embattled platform uniting the lower church to the abbey, its machicolated parapet guarding the inner passages—we recognise an art consummate as that which stirs our enthusiasm in the vast proportions and perfect execution of the splendid choir, the whole proclaiming the versatile genius of those great builders who welded into one noble monument a triad of masterpieces—religious, monastic, and military.
|
