THE history of the littoral of the Mediterranean goes back to the earliest dawn of maritime enterprise.

The coast was visited by the Phoenicians, those first and adventurous merchants and navigators of the Levant, who pushed their commerce even as far as the shores of distant Britain. Carthage was one of the Tyrian Colonies, and so also was Cadiz, founded about 1100 B.C.

The Phoenicians established many cities and ports on the coast, such as Illiberris, Narbonne, and Marseilles, and carried on a considerable trade with them. Some of these have entirely perished, while in the remainder only a few traces have been found of their Phoenician origin.

The next navigators who explored the Riviera were the Greek colonists from PhocÆa, itself a Grecian colony on the coast of Asia Minor, the inhabitants of which were forced to leave their country by the invasion of the Persians under Cyrus.

These adventurers, after establishing themselves in Corsica, spread to other parts of the coast. They settled about 600 B.C., by treaty with the natives, at Massilia or Marseilles. Owing to its fine rock-sheltered harbour, and from its proximity to the mouth of the Rhone, which then formed the highway to the extensive and populous country lying to the northwards, this colony soon grew into a flourishing seaport. In course of time the Massiliotes became rich, and acquired extensive lands around their town. They also spread their canvas over the neighbouring seas, and established numerous colonies all along the coast, such as Narbonne, Antibes, Nice, Monaco, &c.

The PhocÆans brought with them from their native home, and introduced wherever they went, their Greek tongue, together with their Grecian culture and love of Art.

The government of their towns was founded on the pattern of that of PhocÆa, the people choosing a council of 600, a committee of whom formed the executive.

They had also schools and colleges for the teaching of grammar and letters, and the encouragement of science and art.

The language, civilisation, and culture of the whole of the Massiliote towns were thus entirely Greek, and gave a Grecian character to the first enlightenment of Southern Gaul; a circumstance which left a distinct trace in the artistic style of the country, even under the Empire, just as in Sicily and southern Italy, the settlement of the Greek colonists in those countries produced a similar result.

The Massiliotes, being rivals of the Carthaginians as merchants and navigators, naturally took part with the Romans in their Punic wars, furnished them with ships, and became their allies.

In 154 B.C. the Ligurian tribes of South Gaul rose against the Massiliote colonies, and the latter in their turn applied to their Roman allies for assistance. This formed the first introduction of the Roman Legions into Gaul. Other disputes with the native tribes arose, and in 123 B.C. C. Sextus Calvinus completed the subjugation of the Salyes, and founded the first Roman settlement in transalpine Gaul at Aquae Sextiae (now Aix), where he had found the warm springs attractive.

The road from Italy into Gaul by the sea-coast was thus secured, and a way opened for further conquest.

In 118 B.C. Q. Fabius Maximus and C. Domitius Ahenobarbus defeated the Avernes and Allobroges, and became masters of the Southern Celts. A Roman colony was then established at Narbo Martius (Narbonne), to secure the country and protect the road into Spain.

During the civil war Massilia espoused the cause of Pompey, a course which led to the town being besieged and taken by Caesar. Massilia was then Romanized and lost her colonies, but she still retained her letters and arts, and her schools continued to flourish under the Empire.

By the year 50 B.C. the whole of Gaul had been subdued by Julius Caesar. Colonies were established by him and his successors at Arles, Orange, Vienne, and all the important Gallic towns, and the country was thus brought under Roman rule and influence. Traces of the gradual passage from Greek to Roman culture are to be found in the monuments of the earlier centuries of the Christian era. This is observable in the change from the Greek to the Latin language, the Greek names assuming a Latin form and being inscribed in Roman characters.

Under Rome the towns of Gaul were adorned with the profusion of splendid public buildings universal throughout the Empire, every town being provided with its Forum and Temples, its Theatre, Amphitheatre, Baths, Aqueducts and Triumphal Arches. The style of architecture adopted was naturally that of the Romans, but in many buildings and sculptures of the early centuries, a strong Greek feeling may be detected. This is also the case at Pompeii, in Southern Italy, which was likewise originally a Greek colony.

During the second and third centuries, South Gaul gradually became entirely Romanized, and was the favourite province of the Empire, with the seat of the prefect at TrÈves. In the first brilliant period of the Empire, her extensive conquests added to her strength, both in supplying men for her armies, and wealth for the embellishment of her cities. Hence the magnificent display of public buildings then erected everywhere throughout the Roman world. But it also tended to her enervation through luxury and superfluity. This gradually encouraged the growing corruption of the Empire, and caused continually fresh demands on the provinces to feed the central craving and consumption—while with luxury the strength of Rome relaxed, and she became unable in return to extend to the provinces the support they required.

This weakness went on, gradually increasing, till in the fifth century the country fell an easy prey to the hordes of Barbarians who then poured in upon it. In the fourth century the Visigoths had burst over Southern Gaul, and settled in the fertile plains between the Pyrenees and the Garonne. That part of the country being well peopled and civilised, and the conquerors comparatively small in number, they were in course of time, to a great extent, absorbed into the general population. The civilisation and polity of the Romans thus continued to preserve a comparatively uninterrupted course in the south-west of Gaul.

It is a peculiarity of all the Greek and Roman colonies, as compared with those of modern times, that they were established in cities. In the cities were centred all the life and movement of the ancient world. The land of course had to be cultivated, but that was done by bands of slaves led out from the towns. The open country was uninhabited, and except within a short distance from the towns, lay waste and uncultivated. The form of government exercised in the various states, was founded on that of the towns. The supreme power of Rome herself, with all her wide-spread command, was but an extended municipal authority, and every town was in this respect a repetition of the capital on a small scale. As the conquests of Rome extended, this form of government was found inadequate to the control of the numerous nations finally comprised under Roman sway.

The Empire, with its stronger grasp and centralised control, with its multitude of functionaries, all appointed by and in constant relation with a central will, alone enabled the existence of Rome to be continued for some centuries.

But when the Empire also finally decayed and fell, the old municipal principle again came to the front. As the colonies had been founded in cities, so when the Imperial system gave way, the city again asserted itself; and in Southern Gaul, where the barbarians had been civilised, municipal authority prevailed, and each town became an independent little State—the natural tendency of these municipalities being to detach themselves, and to watch jealously the proceedings of their neighbours.

This municipal principle is a leading characteristic of the Middle Ages in Italy and Southern Gaul, and distinguishes these countries from the Northern provinces. Traces of it are still very apparent in Italy and Provence, and contribute greatly to the picturesque character of these provinces. There even yet the soil is to a great extent cultivated by peasants, who dwell together in crumbling old cities perched on the tops of hills, and surrounded with ancient walls. Daily the men, women, and mules descend to their labour in the fields, till the evening, when they may be met toiling up the steep and rocky paths to a well-earned rest in their ancestral town.

While in the Southern provinces the Empire was thus dying from exhaustion, and the little isolated municipal states of the towns remained the only representatives of civil government left in the land, in Northern Gaul the invasions of the barbarians were much more frequent and numerous, so that almost every trace of Roman civilization was obliterated. But in the midst of all this decay and destruction of general government a new organising and centralising power was arising, in the form of the Christian Church. After passing through the fiery trials of the first three centuries Christianity had been adopted by Constantine in A.D. 313; and by the end of the fourth century the church had become an extensive and united institution, with a well organised hierarchy of clergy, revenues of its own, and provincial, national, and general councils. The vigour of the administration of the church system was conspicuous in the general laxity, and the control of affairs naturally fell into the hands of the ecclesiastical authorities—the priests and bishops. Their jurisdiction was officially recognised, and under the codes of Theodosius and Justinian the control of municipal affairs was remitted to the clergy and bishops, who were thus for a time in their respective cities the representatives of government and order.

From the date of Constantine till the overthrow of society, Barbarism, Paganism, and Christianity went on side by side. While civilisation remained the schools continued, Christians of antique learning and Pagan students discussed together the same problems of philosophy, and the Fathers endeavoured to reconcile them with Christianity. But as successive waves of Barbarians rushed over the land, drowning all before them, almost every semblance of learning was swept away. Hence arose a desire on the part of learned men to retire from the anarchy and insecurity of the conditions around them to some safe retreat, where they might converse on and study in peace those high problems which occupied their minds. These societies, in the natural course of events, were by degrees converted into monasteries. The celebrity of the Eastern ascetics and devotees had penetrated to Western Europe, but the solitary form of religious observance did not at first meet with much encouragement there. Societies of recluses were then, however, also common in the East, and the Eastern monastery was the form adopted by the Western recluses as their model. But monasteries were not at this time religious societies, nor were the monks in Holy orders. They were simply associations of laymen who wished to retire from the confusion and turmoil into which all civil government was thrown, and find peace for study and quiet for contemplation. Such was the famous monastery of the LÉrins, founded early in the fifth century by St Honorat, on an island off the coast near Cannes, which soon became the most celebrated school of learning and piety in Southern Gaul, and was as great a blessing to the countries of the Mediterranean as the similar colony of St Columba at Iona was to the North of Britain.

It is easy, however, to fancy how, in the midst of the strife and unrest of the fifth and sixth centuries, such societies tended to become religious, and thus obtain protection from the Church. This they were finally compelled to do, although at the sacrifice of their liberty, by placing themselves under the authority of the bishops, where alone they could find rest and safety. For the Barbarians, many of whom were already Christians, stood in awe of the Church, and the Church strove to secure her ascendancy by maintaining the independence of the spiritual power, and the incapacity of the temporal powers to interfere with it; a doctrine which afterwards led to the terrible struggle for supremacy between the temporal and spiritual powers, represented on the one hand by the Emperor, and on the other by the Pope, a struggle which lasted so long, and involved so many cities in the horrors of the factions of the Guelphs and Ghibellines.

During the fearful reign of anarchy and destruction which prevailed in the sixth and seventh centuries, when all security for life and property had disappeared, and the armed hand of the Barbarian bore down all rule and order before it, the authority of the Bishops likewise gave way. Their Sees were invaded by Goths and Franks, who assumed their titles and drew their revenues. The fate of the monasteries was similar. The invaders seized the seats of the abbots, and the recluses were dispersed. Everywhere nothing but decay and disintegration prevailed. No wonder then, that monuments of this period are rare; the marvel is that any human structures should have survived the shock of universal ruin and destruction. Only a few of the more massive Roman monuments, built as if to last for ever, were able to withstand the tornado. The small and modest Christian edifices have been almost entirely swept away; but fortunately a few rare vestiges have been preserved within our district, sufficient to indicate the nature of the early Christian Architecture under the Empire.

By the eighth century the Barbarian invaders of Gaul had become somewhat settled in their new possessions, and had abandoned their original wandering mode of life. A certain nominal supremacy had always been accorded to the Merovingian Kings of the Franks, but the royal power, together with the title, had now passed into the stronger and more active hands of the Carlovingians, under whom it grew into a distinct royal authority.

At this time a new danger from an unexpected quarter threatened the slowly reviving prospects of the West, and seems for the moment to have had the effect of uniting all the otherwise discordant elements for the purpose of resistance to the common foe. This was the invasion of the Saracens from the South. These warlike zealots had, after over-running and destroying the Roman civilisation of Northern Africa, passed over into Spain, and in 719 they crossed the Pyrenees and invaded Southern Gaul. The old Roman cities were at that time in a comparatively settled and prosperous condition, when their tranquility was thus rudely interrupted. The whole country was devastated by the Saracen invaders, the towns were besieged, and in most cases taken and destroyed. We shall find, as we proceed, that there is scarcely one which does not bear the mark of the destructive hand of the Saracen. The overwhelming flood was, however, at length stemmed by Charles Martel in 732 at Tours, when the Moors were completely defeated and driven back beyond the Pyrenees. This great victory gave repose for a time; and thinking men being weary of the long night of Anarchy which had so long oppressed them, began to look round for some principle by which rule and order might again be restored. Any durable and fixed system would be better than the fluctuation and uncertainty so long experienced. After so many changes and so much diversity of government, the principle of unity naturally presented itself to men’s minds. The tyranny of the Empire was forgotten under the more crushing oppressions of all kinds which had since had to be submitted to; while its unity and strength were remembered, and people began to long for what now appeared to be “the good old times” of the Empire. It was agreed that the only satisfactory form of government was one which, like the Empire, should include the whole Roman world. This was considered to be in accordance with the nature of things. As there is one God, so there should be one Emperor to represent Him on earth as temporal ruler, and one Pope to represent Him in matters spiritual as the head of the Church. And by a remarkable coincidence this idea came to be realised about A.D. 800, in the person of Charlemagne, who extended his sway over nearly the whole of Western Europe. What rendered possible at that time the apparent fulfilment of the dream of universal temporal and spiritual government, was the fact that during Charlemagne’s time these two powers recognised that they could be of considerable service to one another, and were consequently on very friendly terms. As Charlemagne was now the supreme temporal Emperor, so the Bishop of Rome had also fully established his supremacy in the Church. This had been brought about by various fortunate circumstances—by his occupying the See of the great city whose name was still a power, and where the Bishop held the old municipal authority and rule which had there been less disturbed by the invasions of the Barbarians than elsewhere; by his importance as a suzerain, being a very extensive proprietor in Italy and Gaul; and by means of the influence of missionaries sent direct from Rome by the Pope to Britain and Germany, where the converts, being thus brought into immediate connection with Rome, naturally gave their support to the Pope as head of the Church.

The Papal sanction had now become usual, and was considered necessary by Kings, to their establishment on the throne—especially in Germany, where Papal supremacy so fully reigned. But while the King required the Pope’s countenance, the Pope also was most desirous to obtain the aid of the temporal power, in order to overthrow the authority of the Lombards in the North of Italy, and to obtain possession of the Exarchate.

Their requirements thus fitted in with one another, so that at the coronation of Charlemagne as Emperor by Pope Leo, in the year 800, the supremacy and unity of the two heads of affairs, in matters spiritual and temporal, seemed to be complete, and the Holy Roman Empire to be established on a secure and permanent basis.

After the time of Charlemagne, however, great disruptions of his empire ensued; but the idea of a central power took root, and although not developed according to the original conception, it led in time to the formation of the various nations which now occupy the different countries of Western Europe.

The idea of an universal Holy Empire deserves special attention in connection with Architecture. The same causes as led to this conception would also prevail with regard to the art, and especially the style of Architecture to be followed in the Empire. This we shall find there is reason to believe was the case, and that up to this time, and even till the tenth century, the churches were apparently erected in one traditional style, more or less followed in the whole of the Western Empire; whereas after the above date the architecture diverges into various national varieties in the different countries into which Europe was then sub-divided.

Under Charlemagne a wonderful revival took place in Letters, Arts, Schools, and Religion—the first dawn after the long night of anarchy. In Italy, Provence, and Aquitaine, where the towns had preserved something of the Roman municipal rule, and of the manners, letters, and arts of the Empire, Literature and Art began slowly to improve and revive. The relics of Roman culture which they possessed, together with the constant intercourse of the dwellers in the towns with one another, and the circumstance that here, as in Italy, the Nobles as well as the Burghers dwelt within the walls, all helped to bring about a more speedy revival in the South than in the North, where the Nobles dwelt apart in their isolated castles. The reminiscences of Roman luxury, and the warm and voluptuous climate, while they tended to enervate and weaken, tended also to the growth of music, song and literature. National poets arose, the predecessors of the Troubadours, who became so prominent in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.

This enlightenment, combined with the nascent chivalry of the eleventh century, which introduced the worship of Woman with gallantry and the Courts of Love, formed a striking contrast to the rigid asceticism of the Burgundians, and competed strongly with the expansion of the Monastic institutions. It was the same spirit of freedom and progress which in the following century excited the suspicion and hatred of the clergy, and gave rise to the dreadful scenes of massacre amongst the Albigenses of Aquitaine, and the horrors of the Inquisition.

Architecture naturally participated in the general advancement and showed symptoms of new life. From the ninth century evidences exist of this revival in the monuments still to be found in these countries.

Charlemagne’s relations with the East were of a friendly character, and he is said to have sent to Byzantium for men of learning and science. Amongst these were no doubt Architects and Sculptors, who would thus bring with them the elements of the Byzantine influence so distinctly manifested in the early churches of the Rhineland.

The revival of the Holy Roman Empire under Charlemagne, although it paved the way for the new life which was to follow, was not in itself that new life. Up to this time the shadow of old Rome was still upon the nations. The Goths wondered at, and envied the great central government of the Empire, and strove to imitate and revive its power in their own persons; and for this purpose they caused the Roman Laws to be collated, and they endeavoured to administer them. This too, as we have seen, was Charlemagne’s idea. But the new life of the modern world did not look back to Rome as its model. It was glad to borrow from Rome all the laws and culture it could make available, but its central idea is not that of universal empire, but of separate and independent kingdoms. Hence the long struggle in the North between the Austrasians, who strove to impose upon the provinces their missi and officials from a central head, and the Neustrians, whose Germanic instincts of individual freedom led them to contend for the independence and liberty of action of the hereditary rulers of the various provinces—the principle which in the end prevailed and determined the condition of modern European countries.

The dream of an universal spiritual and temporal Empire was only an attempt to raise the ghost of old Rome, but the new principle now being developed of independent kingdoms marks the birth of the new modern life.

The revival of the eleventh century was further greatly aided by the Church, both secular and regular. The bishops and clergy being the best educated class in the community, were the frequent advisers of those in authority, thus leading to the proper position of the Church being recognised and maintained. The monasteries also underwent the same spirit of revival and reformation. Of this the history of the Abbeys of Cluny and Citeaux form a remarkable illustration. The Abbey of Cluny was founded about 909 A.D. by Guillaume le Pieux, duc d’Aquitaine, but Odon, the second Abbot, was the real creator of the house. He introduced the idea of subordination and order amongst monasteries, i.e., that there should be one head Abbey, with numerous others subordinate to, and dependent on it. This plan was also adopted by the House of Citeaux (the Cistercians), founded about 1100, and others. The monasteries were, however, as yet all subject to the rule of St Benedict—different orders had not hitherto been introduced, only different controlling centres. Such control and superintendence were at this time only too much needed, all discipline having been lost in the midst of the general disorder. As has already been observed, many of the abbeys had become mere castles in the hands of lay abbots, and were filled with armed men. In other cases the clerical abbots acted as lay proprietors, and commanded troops, and mixed in the quarrels of the nobles.

The AbbÉ MaÏeul governed Cluny for the forty years preceding 994, during which time a large number of monasteries from every part of Europe, extending from Ravenna and Pavia in Italy to Tours in France, and including the ancient monastery of St Honorat de LÉrins in Provence, adopted the rule of Cluny and became subject to its authority. Under this reformed rule monastic institutions began to assume a great importance and to exercise much influence in Western Europe. In the midst of disorder they were the only representatives of a well regulated government, and in fact produced the model from which modern society and order sprung. Cluny now began to feel its power, and to long for independence from the authority of the Bishops, desiring to hold from the See of Rome alone.

Abbot Hugues and his friend Hildebrand (afterwards Gregory VII.) both contended strongly for the independence of the spiritual power—a struggle ending with the final victory of the Pope over the Emperor Henry IV.

Hugues, like the other superiors of the monastic institutions, such as the AbbÉ Suger and St Bernard, took part in all the great affairs of the time (eleventh century). The AbbÉ of Cluny was invited by William the Conqueror to regulate the religious affairs of England. In Hugues’ time the dominion of Cluny extended over 314 monasteries. The Abbot-General thus became the equal of any temporal prince, and owed his allegiance only to the Pope. He struck his own coinage, and he appointed abbots to all his subject monasteries, of whom he occasionally called together a Council.

In the eleventh century the monastery, besides being a model of centralised organisation, was the only place of repose for intellectual minds. The monks also resuscitated the culture of the soil-establishing small convents, or ObÉdiences, in remote and neglected territories, where they cleared the ground, drained the marshes, enclosed fields, and planted vineyards. They also constructed roads and established bridges and ferries. Trades of all kinds were likewise practised and encouraged in the monasteries, and the arts of the gold and silver smith, the glazier and glass painter, the illuminator, and the carver were specially subjects of the monks’ attention. The houses of the inhabitants who carried on these trades clustered round the walls and increased in number with the importance of the monastery. The workmen consisted of tanners, weavers, curriers, and drapers, who manufactured the produce of the live stock of the abbey. Where there were mines on the property, the necessary labourers were employed; and all the ordinary trades, such as those of bakers, butchers, shoemakers, smiths, &c., were needed and supported. Schools were established, and the education of all provided for. The sick were attended to, and all travellers were welcomed and entertained.

It was natural that the monasteries, well regulated as they were, and encouraging all kinds of industries, should speedily grow rich. But it would be difficult to imagine how wealth could have been better made available for the benefit of the community at that time, and under the conditions then existing, than it was in the hands of the Benedictines.

The history of the Cistercian monasteries is similar to that of the Clunisiens. In the end of the eleventh century some monks of Molesmes, whose monastery had fallen into the greatest laxity, obtained from the Papal Legate permission to found an Abbey on rules of great strictness. Twenty monks established themselves in the forest of Citeaux, in the diocese of ChÂlon, on a desert territory surrendered to them by the Viscount of Beaune. The monks built an Oratory and established Rules—one of which was that they should live by the work of their hands. These monks were soon afterwards joined by St Bernard and his companions, when the rule of Citeaux took a great start. In less than twenty-five years after these twenty men began their labours in the marshy forest by reclaiming and cultivating a small patch of ground, they were represented by 60,000 Cistercian monks spread over every part of Europe. They were called in by feudal lords from all countries to clear the land, to establish industries, to rear flocks and herds, to drain the marshes, and cultivate the soil. In a short time Citeaux ruled over the incredible number of 2000 houses of both sexes, each house possessing 5 or 6 granges.

Nothing can better illustrate the immense strides made in the West during the eleventh century than the great development of these establishments, and no part of the progress then made had greater influence on Architecture. It is from this time that we may date the revival of our art, after the almost total extinction of the Dark Ages. It is evident that the very large number of new monasteries and churches now required would have a great effect in stimulating the growth of Architecture. The position of this and every other art was at that time necessarily in the hands of the monks, who alone had sufficient knowledge for the designing and decorating of any building. Under the monastic influence, however, the designs naturally became subject to rule and tradition, and tended to assume fixed forms, although these varied somewhat under the regulations of the different orders, and in different localities.

Another remarkable phenomenon, which was both an indication of the new life and religions awakening of the epoch, and had also a very powerful effect in increasing these movements, was the Crusades. The same enthusiasm which prompted thousands to devote their lives to a holy and useful existence in the cloister, stirred up in others through the eloquence of Peter the Hermit and St Bernard, a resolve to sacrifice everything to the righteous endeavour to rescue the places sanctified by the great events in our Saviour’s Life from the hands of the Infidels. Amongst the innumerable multitudes who joined in the Crusades, and visited the East, there must have been many who were able to appreciate the splendid architecture and decoration of Santa Sophia and the other great churches and buildings of the Levant; and these travellers would bring back with them fresh ideas which they would endeavour to import into the structures of the West. Besides, the eyes of all were opened and their minds enlarged by contact with the culture and refinement of the Eastern empire, where the ancient Greek and Roman civilisation had continued uninterruptedly during the centuries of darkness and barbarism which had well nigh obliterated them in the West. They also saw at Constantinople the great mart where the commerce between the East and West was concentrated, and became acquainted with the rich fabrics and beautiful art of Persia and India.

The transport of men and materials to the East, for the prosecution of the war, likewise gave a great impulse to navigation and maritime enterprise, while contact with the Saracens (then an enlightened and scientific people) taught valuable lessons to the soldiers of the cross. They especially acquired from them many improvements in the art of the attack and defence of fortifications, and in the construction of military engines, the results of which the Western nobles were not slow to avail themselves of in the great castles which they erected on their return from the Holy Land. The buildings of the Holy places themselves were naturally adopted as models, and the circular churches of the West are probably mostly imitations (although sometimes remote ones) of the church of the Holy Sepulchre (which was itself rebuilt by the Crusaders). It will be further pointed out in dealing with the history of the Architecture how the ancient Greco-Roman art had been preserved in Syria, and the direct influence it had on the Architecture of the West.

Such being the general condition of affairs, and their bearing on the art of the West of Europe up to the twelfth century, let us now look a little more closely at the progress of events in the province with which we are specially concerned.