The Cathedrals of Southern FranceMansfield, M. F. (Milburg Francisco)
History
The Cathedrals of Southern France
Mansfield, M. F. (Milburg Francisco)
Cathedrals -- France; France -- Description and travel
Its abbey church, the oldest portion of which dates from the tenth to
the twelfth centuries, is now but a ruin.
In the fourteenth century the establishment was greatly enlarged and
extensive buildings added.
To-day it is classed, by the Commission des Monuments Historiques, among
those treasures for which it stands sponsor as to their antiquity,
artistic worth, and future preservation. Aside from this and the record
of the fact that it became, in the fourteenth century, the seat of a
bishop's throne,--with Geoffroy I. as its first occupant,--it must be
dismissed without further comment.
[Illustration]
III
ST. LOUIS DE LA ROCHELLE
The city of La Rochelle will have more interest for the lover of history
than for the lover of churches.
Its past has been lurid, and the momentous question of the future rights
of the Protestants of France made this natural stronghold the
battle-ground where the most stubborn resistance against Church and
State was made.
The siege of 1573 was unsuccessful. But a little more than half a
century later the city, after a siege of fourteen months, gave way
before the powerful force brought against it by Cardinal Richelieu in
person, supported by Louis XIII.
For this reason, if for no other, he who would know from personal
acquaintance the ground upon which the mighty battles of the faith were
fought will not pass the Huguenot city quickly by.
The Huguenot stronghold of La Rochelle naturally might not be supposed
to possess a very magnificent Roman cathedral. As a matter of fact it
does not, and it has only ranked as a cathedral city since 1665, when
the bishopric was transferred from Maillezais. The city was in the hands
of the Huguenots from 1557 until the siege of 1628-1629; and was, during
all this time, the bulwark of the Protestant cause in France.
The present cathedral of St. Louis dates only from 1735.
Its pseudo-classic features classify it as one of those structures
designated by the discerning Abbé Bourassé as being "cold-blooded and
lacking in lustre."
It surely is all of that, and the pity is that it offers no charm
whatever of either shape or feature.
It is of course more than likely that Huguenot influence was here so
great as to have strangled any ambition on the part of the mediæval
builders to have erected previously anything more imposing. And when
that time was past came also the demise of Gothic splendour. The
transition from the pointed to the superimposed classical details, which
was the distinctive Renaissance manner of church-building, was not as
sudden as many suppose, though it came into being simultaneously
throughout the land.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account