FRENCH CHATEAVX AN D CARD ENS I N THE XVI™ CENTVRY n&s ^ rodudflotvs ^.c&nt&mp ovarij ( 3)rau^i/ru^s fwlkerto- -lyinmwli-) ' JACQVES ANDROUET DV CERCEAV EDITED BY W.H .WARD. M A, A RIBA I DUKE UNIVERSITY WOMAN’S COLLEGE LIBRARY Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 https://archive.org/details/frenchchteavxgarOOward FRENCH CHATEAVX AND GARDENS IN THE XVI™ CENTVRY Plate AMBOISE. FRENCH CHATEAVX AND GARDENS IN T H E XVI™ CEN TVRY radii efiens afcont i? rnjj oi'cinj ( 3)rayW-i/ru^s fwl fie rt& 'Unn u of [lied BY JACOVES ANDROUET DV CERCEAV W.H WARD. MA.ARIBA LONDON Gtd, W CWIX PREFACE I N the course of researches on the Architecture of the French Renaissance my attention was directed to the remark- able series of drawings by Jacques Androuet du Cerceau the elder, in the British Museum ; nothing, however, had prepared me for the rich and varied treasure lying enshrined there. These drawings are of the greatest historical value, and none who study them can do so without feelings of profound admiration or fail to rejoice at their marvellous preservation. On my calling Mr. Batsford’s attention to the collection, he at once felt that a volume should be issued reproducing the most important of them, and asked me to make a selection and write the necessary descriptions, together with an account of du Cerceau and his work. This I gladly undertook to do, feeling that such important and inspiring works should be more generally known. The drawings largely consist of the originals for the now very rare and costly engraved work published by du Cerceau in 1576 and 1579 under the title Les plus excellents bastiments de France , but they are beyond comparison finer and richer in detail, as well as much larger in scale than the old engravings ; in fact from the latter it is not easy to judge of the beautiful and scholarly draughtsmanship of the pen and ink work. Several of them also vary considerably from the published version, and thus throw much new light upon the history of the buildings illustrated. The illustrations of the present volume present a fairly complete picture of architectural evolution in France during the sixteenth century, and comprise some of the finest specimens of each phase. The hybrid style of Louis XII with its strange medley of Gothic and Renaissance elements is represented by Amboise and Gaillon ; the purer style of Francis I with its mediaeval plan and structure clothed in Lombard Renaissance forms by Blois and Chambord ; the matured Renaissance of Henry II with its increased classicality of treatment, where the native element is reduced to a few characteristic features, by the Louvre and Ancy-le-Franc ; the decadent taste and license of Henry Ill’s time, combined with promise of better things in logical and spacious planning, by the Tuileries, Verneuil and Charleval. No other country can boast so complete a picture of its Renaissance Architecture as seen by a contemporary, still less one by the trained and sympathetic hand of a great architect. It is a picture full of suggestion for architects and designers of to-day, to whom French influence makes so strong an appeal, illustrating as it does the works, not only of du Cerceau himself, but also of Philibert de l’Orme, Pierre Lescot, Jean Goujon, Jean Bullant and other less known or unknown names. How these drawings have escaped destruction is not known, but it is possible that they were preserved by the des- cendants or professional successors of du Cerceau till one of them, falling on the evil days of the Great Revolution, was obliged to part with them for what they would fetch. Certain it is that there were persons of the name of Androuet du Cerceau practising the art of design as late as the eighteenth century, and that the drawings came into the British Museum with the Library of George III, who probably purchased them from some emigre. It is strange that they should have remained so long buried for the architectural student. In Geymuller’s octavo volumes entitled T)ie Baukunst der Renaissance in Frankreich , published some years since, a few of them are reproduced in a manner very unworthy both of the originals and of the work itself, 1 but beyond that no attention has been paid to them. It was manifestly impossible to reproduce the entire collection (the whole of which, it may be mentioned, is not of equal interest). In making the selection it has been my desire : first to illustrate the architecture of the Renaissance in general, and in particular the works of du Cerceau himself : secondly, to place before the public matter not otherwise available. All drawings referring to pre-Renaissance times have therefore been excluded, and where a choice of views of the same building was available, the preference has, as a rule, been given to those which are not followed in the engravings, or differ most from those which are. 1. Five of these drawings are also reproduced in "Jean Goujon, his Life and Work," by Reginald Lister, 1903. VI PREFACE. The List of Plates will show at a glance the selection made. Additional examples of du Cerceau’s drawings will be found among the text illustrations together with some figures (plans, details, etc.) necessary for the elucidation of the descriptions, reproduced from Destailleur’s reprint of Les plus excellents Bastimenls de France , and elsewhere. A short account of Jacques Androuet du Cerceau, his life and family, work and influence, is prefaced to the plates which are accompanied by an epitome of the history of each building from the sixteenth century to the present day. For virtually all the material of the former and not a little of the latter I am indebted to the works of Baron H. von Geymilller, to whom any merit they possess must accrue, while I must be held responsible if the following pages should unintentionally misrepresent his views or statements. Cordial thanks, in which my publisher joins, are due to the Trustees of the British Museum for permission to reproduce the drawings ; to Mr. Alfred Whitman, of the Print Room, for courteous assistance during investigations of du Cerceau’s works ; also to Monsieur Levy, of Paris, and the officials of the Bibliotheque Nationale for their kindness in facilitating my researches there. In conclusion 1 wish to express my thanks to my publisher and Mr. Harry Batsford for the un- failingly kind and discriminating manner in which they have worked with me throughout the preparation of the book. W. H. WARD. 28, Theobald’s Road, w.c. January , 1909. ABBREVIATIONS. B.M. = British Museum. Thus : B.M. II, 13 = sheet 13 in portfolio II of du Cerceau’s drawings in the Print Room. D = Destailleur. Thus : D 1, 41 = plate 41 in the first volume of Destailleur’s Reprint of Les plus excellents Bastiments de France. SCALES. Du Cerceau’s plans not being always drawn accurately to scale, the scales appended to those reproduced are only approximately correct. Except in the case of the Louvre and Ancy-le-Franc the plans are reproduced throughout to a uniform scale, but the smaller examples, figures 7, 10, 11, 20, and 21, are for the sake of clearness reproduced to double the usual scale. CONTENTS PAGE Preface ...... . • V List of Plates and Text Illustrations • ix List of Works Consulted .... xiii Part I. INTRODUC TORY ACCOUNT OF JACQUES ANDROUET DU CERCEAU Part II. DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CHATEAUX AND GARDENS : ,.1. Designs by Various Architects ...... II. Designs by J. A. du Cerceau ...... Index of Persons ........ i 9 28 35 LIST OF PLATES AND TEXT ILLUSTRATIONS. D{ote. — All the plates have been reproduced from Du Cerceaus original drawings in the British SUBJECT. AMBOISE General view from n. Description . ANCY-LE-FRANC Description . View and plan ANET General view with gardens from s. ,, ,, ,, PARK FROM S.E. Description . . . BLOIS General view with gardens from e „ „ FROM N. North side of court Description Plan in I 579 » i8 75 BOULOGNE v. MADRID SOURCE. B.M. v, 68 PAGE. B.M. iv, 48, 49 B.M. vii, 100 B.M. vii, 99 B.M. v, 62 B.M. v, 64 B.M. v, 63 a D Le Nail, Chateau de Blois 19-20 20-21 1 1-12 1 1 1 1 BURY General view with gardens from e. Description . CHAMBORD View from n. (entrance front) ,, ,, s. (lake ,, ) Description . Plan . CHARLEVAL Plan . Description . Elevation of Gallery in Court „ Base Court ECOUEN General view from n.e. Details : south portico in court . „ north „ „ Description . . . . B.M. viii, 1 1 5 B.M. v, 75, 76 D D B.M. vii, 105 B.M. vii, 106 pt. B.M. vii, 107 pt. 12 B.M. i, 12 . B.M. i, 1 1 12-13 Berty, La Renaissance en France 13 31-33 3 2 18 Museum. PLATE. Frontispiece. XIV-XV III-IV vw V(*) X VI VII (a) VII \b) XXIV-XXV XI XII {a) XII [b) X LIST OF PLATES AND TEXT ILLUSTRATIONS — continued. SUBJECT. SOURCE. PAGE. PLATE. FONTAINEBLEAU General view with gardens from s. B.M. v, 69 IX Description ..... . I4-18 Plan in i 579 .... D l S Diagram Plan of present condition based on Pfnor “ Fontainebleau ” 1 6 GAILLON General view from n.e. B.M. iv, 56 pt. II Description ..... • 9-1 1 Elevation of Fountain B.M. iv, 54 a 10 Garden, the enclosed B.M. iv, 53 b XVI (b) MAISON BLANCHE Part elevation of exterior B.M. iv, 55 pt. XXI (a) Details of interior of Lower hall B.M. iv, 53 a XXI (b) >> B.M. iv, 54 a XXI (c) Description .... • 10 IDEAL CHATEAUX Design A in form of creek cross : general view . B.M. viii, 118 XXVI Description ..... . 33 Half Plan ..... B.M. viii, 1 1 7, pt. 33 Design B in form of square with segmental JECTIONS : GENERAL VIEW PRO- B.M. viii, 1 2 1 XXVII Description ..... . 33 Half Plan ..... B.M. viii, 120, pt. 33 THE LOUVRE Elevation of west side of court B.M. i, 1 XVII Description ..... 21-7 Plan of Lescot’s design based on D 2 1 Diagram Plan of Louvre and Tuileries . based on modern works 22 Angle Pavilion of Lescot’s design D 23 Entrance Pavilion designed by du Cerceau Cab. des Estampes, Rec. N 24 Detail of Attic of P. Lescot’s design . B.M. i, 5 25 MADRID (or BOULOGNE) Front elevation .... B.M. i, 13 a X Description ..... 18 Plan ...... D 18 MONTARGIS Description ..... • 28 Pergola ..... D 28 LA MUETTE Description ..... . Plan ...... D H ST. GERMAIN-EN-LAYE General view with park from e. B.M. iii, 31 VIII Description ..... 13-H Plan of Chateau Vieux D 13 „ „ Neuf D 14 LIST OF PLATES AND TEXT ILLUSTRATIONS — continued. xi SUBJECT. SOURCE. PAGE. PLATE. ST. MAUR-LES-FOSSES General view from s.e. (entrance front of a scheme for enlargement) Description ..... B.M. vi, 88 19 XIII Plan (final scheme of enlargement) D 19 THE TUILERIES Philibert de l’Orme’s design : (a) Perspective from w. (b) Isometric projection from e. B.M. vi, 8 1 a j XVIII-XIX • B.M. vi, 80 a Details of central portion of w. wing : Towards court e. . B.M. vi, 83 XX (a) „ GARDENS W. Description ..... • B.M. vi, 84 24-7 XX (b) Plan of de l’Orme’s design ;• j D 26 VALLERY View of enclosed garden Description ..... * B.M. iii, 36 21 XVI (a) VERNEUIL General view with gardens (ist scheme) B.M. iii, 41 XXII Elevation of gallery in court B.M. iii, 44 XXIII (a) View of entrance front (ist scheme) Description ..... B.M. iii, 42 28-31 XXI 11 (Y) Plans of ist and 2nd schemes D 28 Chimney-piece .... B.M. iv, 47 pt. 29 Elevation of Garden Hall (ist scheme) D 30 View of Entrance Front (2nd scheme) D 30 (Or Charleval) Design for Gallery with Pavilions Cabinet des Estampes, Rec. N 3 1 LIST OF WORKS CONSULTED. I. The du Cerceau Family. The Works of J. A. du Cerceau. Les du Cerceau. H. von Geymiiller. Paris and London, 1887. Les grands Architectes Fran?ais. A. Berty. Paris, i860. J. A. du Cerceau ses sejours and ses travaux dans l’Orleanais. J. Loiseleur in l’Art xxix, 41. 1882. II. The Architecture of the Renaissance in France. La Renaissance en France. L. Palustre. Paris, 1881-5. The Renaissance of Art in France. Mrs. Mark Pattison. London, 1879. Die Baukunst der Renaissance in Frankreich in Das Handbuch der Architektur. H. von Geymiiller. Stuttgart, 1898-1901. III. The History of the Buildings. Les plus excellents Bastiments de France. J. A. du Cerceau. Paris, 1576 and 1579. Le premier Tome de l’Architecture. Philibert de 1 ’Orme. Paris, 1568. The Engravings of Israel Silvestre, Adam and Nicolas Perelle, Jean Rigaud, Jean Marot, etc. L’Architecture Fran9Aise. Published by P. J. Mariette. Paris, 1727. Palais, Chateaux, Hotels et Maisons de France. C. Sauvageot. Paris, 1867. La Renaissance Monumentale en France. A. Berty. Paris, 1864. Motifs Historiques. C. Daly. Paris, 1880-1. Die Baukunst Frankreichs. C. Gurlitt. Dresden. Archives de la Commission des Monuments Historiques. Paris, 1855-1872. Les Chateaux Historiques de la France. G. Eyries. Paris and Poitiers, 1877-9. La Renaissance des Arts a la Cour de France. L. de Laborde. Paris, 1850-5. Les Comptes du Batiment du Roi (1528-71). L. de Laborde. Paris, 1877. Topographie Historique du Vieux Paris. A. Berty. Paris, 1866. Paris a Travers les Ages. M. F. Hoffbauer and others. Paris, 1882. L’Architecture et la Decoration aux Palais du Louvre et des Tuileries. Anon. Paris (1907). Le Palais du Louvre. H. Guedy. Paris (1907). Das Alte Paris.- E. & W. Hessling. 2 vols. Berlin (1907). Les Comptes de Depenses du'Chateau de Gaillon. J. A. Deville. 1835, etc - Monographie du Chateau d’Anet. R. Pfnor. Paris, 1867. - Monographie du Palais de Fontainebleau. R. Pfnor. Paris, 1863. Le Palais de Fontainebleau. G. Roussel. Paris, n.d. Re-issued in 4 parts, Paris (1908). Les Chateaux de la Vallee de la Loire. V. Petit. Paris, 1861. Nouveaux Documents pour l’Histoire . . . des Residences royales du Bord de la Loire. J. de Croy. Blois, 1894. Blois, Chambord et les Chateaux du Blesois, in Villes d’Art Celebres. F. Bournon. Paris, 1908. Le Chateau de Blois. E. Le Nail. Paris, 1875. PART I. JACQUES ANDROUET DU CERCEAU. I. LIFE AND FAMILY. J ACQUES ANDROUET DU CERCEAU is one of the great figures in the artistic history of France. Living at a period of crisis in the art of his country he contributed as much as any man — not indeed to the choice of the channels along which it was to run — but to shaping them and to making their choice irrevocable. When he reached manhood French architecture was still in the main Gothic, though dressed in a garb of Lombard Renaissance forms. Long before his death the matured Roman Renaissance was firmly established and had modified the native architecture to the core.- Meanwhile the sister arts underwent a parallel change, likewise not unaffected by du Cerceau’s influence. H is life and work may be considered under various aspects, each fraught with interest. As an architect, as a designer in the most various domains, as a disseminator of classic forms, and of all kinds of professional instruction, as a recorder of contemporary architecture, as a draughtsman, as an engraver, as the founder of an architectural family, he claims attention. He was born probably about 1510, and of a family settled in Orleans, to whose name Androuet he later added that of c ‘du Cerceau,” “that is to say, ‘circle’” — as Lacroix du Maine, a younger contemporary, tells us — “from having a hoop hung to his house to distinguish it and to serve as a sign.” He followed the then growing practice of completing his studies in Italy, and was in Rome about 1530-3, where he may have met Philibert de l’Orme. Rome was then the archi- tectural university of Europe. The building of St. Peter’s and the splendour of the papal court had long attracted all the best architectural talent of Italy, while the remains of antiquity to be studied were far more numerous and complete than now. Thus a young man found stimuli and facilities for study focussed there in an unusual degree. Innumerable drawings exist to attest how students utilized them. They measured and sketched buildings, ancient and modern, copied designs by living architects, and made compositions embodying what they had drawn. The use which du Cerceau made of his opportunities, his still extant sketch books and his subsequent career were to show. On his return in 1534 he began to practise the art of etching, of which he was one of the earliest exponents in France. A few drawings and etchings survive from the next fifteen years, during which also his sons Baptiste and Jacques were born, and he not improbably began works at the church of Montargis. By 1 549 he had opened his “ officina ” at Orleans, a studio or workshop whence he issued his various publications. On Henry II’s entry into the city, in 1551, du Cerceau designed the decorations and triumphal arches, and perhaps then first received the royal command to draw the great French houses, an undertaking which grew into his best known work. He was on the point of setting out to collect materials for it when he lost his entire property on the outbreak of the Wars of Religion (1562). Fortunately he found a friend in Renee of France, daughter of Louis XII and widow of Duke Hercules of Ferrara, a woman of noble character, who had early embraced the Reformation and loved liberal studies. From her return in 1560 to her death in 1575, at the risk of no little danger, she befriended her persecuted co-religionists, no less than three hundred of whom she received in her castle of Montargis. Du Cerceau — who has generally been assumed to have been a Huguenot, as his sons certainly were — was among them. He resided there from 1562 for at least seven years and during that time issued several of his works, one of which, the Livre de Grotesques (1566), he affectionately dedicated to his benefactress. He had been employed to restore the castle for her arrival (1559), and carried out other works there and in the city (fig. 19). In 1565 the chateau of Verneuil-sur-Oise (pis. 22 and 23, figs. 22-24) was begun from his designs {see p. 28) for M. de Boulainvillers, and continued later for the Duke of Nemours, Renee’s son-in-law. About the same time he may have built the Maison Blanche, at Gaillon, for the Cardinal of Bourbon. In 1572 he began the chateau of Charleval ( see p. 31, pis. 24, 25, and figs. 25, 26) for Charles IX, interrupted shortly after by the king’s death, and dedicated to him his Libre pour bastir aux Champs (1572). In 1576 and 1579 respectively appeared the two volumes of Les plus excellents Bastiments de France , with dedications to Catharine de’ Medici, and in 1584 a last work — on the antiquities of Rome. 2 FRENCH CHATEAUX AND GARDENS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. Du Cerceau appears to have left Montargis towards the end of his life and may have settled at Paris, where, after 1559, his books were published. After 1584 his name cannot be traced, and it is supposed that he sought safety in exile. His son Baptiste is said to have resigned a royal appointment for conscience sake in the following year, and father and son may have taken flight together. In any case his death cannot have been delayed much beyond 1585. H is influence did not die with him. He left not only monuments, drawings and designs, but a lineage of architects, who, doubtless, preserved his papers and certainly put into practice his teaching. Among them a few deserve mention. Baptiste, son of Jacques (b. circa 1544-7, d. 1590), was probably associated with his father in the works of Verneuil and Charleval, began the Pont Neuf, succeeded Lescot and Bullant at the Louvre and the Valois Mausoleum respectively, designed the chateau of Ollainville for Henry III, and much ecclesiastical work. Jean, son of Baptiste (b. circa 1580-90, d. after 1649), was architect to Louis XIII, began the Pont au Change (1624), designed the Hotels de Sully and de Bretonvillers. Jacques II, another son of Jacques I (b. circa 1544-7, d. 1617), was architect to Henry III and Henry IV, completed Verneuil for the latter and designed the Hotel de Bellegarde. The Pavilion de Flore and adjoining parts of the Tuileries are ascribed to him. Paul Androuet du Cerceau and his son, Guillaume Gabriel, were designers and engravers of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries of unknown relationship to the preceding. Jehan Brosse, husband of Julienne, daughter of Jacques I, was architect to Margaret, first wife of Henry IV. He settled at Verneuil, where he probably acted as clerk of the works. Salomon de Brosse, son of Jehan (b. between 1552 and 1562, d. 1626), was architect to Maria de’ Medici and Louis XIII, designed the Luxembourg Palace, the fa5ade of St. Gervais, and other buildings in Paris, the aqueduct at Arcueil, the temple at Charenton, and the Parlement-House at Rennes, etc. Paul de Brosse, son of Salomon, was also architect to Louis XIII. II. ARCHITECTURAL WORK. Du Cerceau has long been regarded as one of the most eminent practising architects of his century and in uncritical days was credited with works beyond the limits of any possible lifetime. Some of the attributions did not bear investi- gation and by a natural reaction certain modern writers have reduced him to a mere theorist. He styles himself “architect ” and is spoken of eulogistically as such by contemporaries. The title was, it is true, at that time occasionally honorific, and applied to mere designers, but it always implied some capacity for original work. To this extent, at least, du Cerceau’s performance is indisputable. He published innumerable designs for various crafts, and for all classes of buildings and their accessories, and composed variants on designs by other architects and schemes for the completion of unfinished buildings ( e.g . the Certosa of Pavia, the Louvre and St. Eustache at Paris). It is almost certain that he also actually carried out buildings. In the case of the first group to be mentioned the evidence is at best inconclusive. Orleans. Several houses at Orleans of late Francis I and Henry II work have been connected with his name by his- torians and tradition, but without definite evidence. They are 17, Rue de la Bretonnerie ( c . 1535-40), 6, Marche a la Volaille, “ Maison de Jean d’Alibert,” and Rue Pierre Percee, “ Maison de la Coquille ” (r. 1540-50), 211, Rue de l’Ormerie (c. 1545-55) and 60, Rue des Hotelleries — now Rue du Cerceau — ( c . 1550-60). No. 1 1, Rue Ste. Anne, “ Maison des Oves,” belongs to the time of Henry III or Henry IV and if by a du Cerceau is more probably by one of his sons. Montargis (Church). G. Morin states (1630) that du Cerceau was architect for the rebuilding of the choir of the Madeleine at Montargis (begun 1540, completed 1567-87), but his long residence there may be the sole origin of the tradition. A semi-octagonal apse rises out of a square “ chevet ” with rounded angles, the aisles being of the same height as the choir. The detail of the interior and windows is late Gothic, that of the exterior Lombard Renaissance. The Louvre. There are indications that du Cerceau may have been employed at the Louvre, (i) His description exhibits a knowledge of the royal intentions, (ii) He is said to have designed a chapel near the water’s edge which was not executed, (iii) He is also said to have designed for Catharine de’ Medici the baths near the Salle des Antiques, burnt down in 1611. (iv) Two engravings by Israel Silvestre, showing the bridge-gallery connecting the palace with the “ Petite Galerie,” reveal a treatment similar to that in compositions of his in the Cabinet des Estampes. (v) He has left a design (fig. 16) for the main entrance based on Lescot’s elevations for the court. Since du Cerceau was per- sonally known to Charles IX and his mother, and his two sons were successively architects to the palace, there is nothing improbable in his having assisted Lescot in the latter’s later years. DU CERCEAU’S ARCHITECTURAL WORK. 3 In a second group of buildings we are on firmer ground. The works which du Cerceau carried out in the castle and town of Montargis (1559-66) consisted in restoring forti- fications and apartments, providing new accessory buildings, and laying out gardens. Of all these no trace remains, but the trellis arbours, one of which is illustrated in fig. 19, were probably among them. His most important later works appear to haze been the chateaux of Verneuil-sur-Oise (1st and 2nd scheme) and of Charleval and the Maison Blanche at Gaillon. As illustrated in Les plus excellents Bastiments these buildings show such marked resemblances to each other and are so dissimilar from the rest as to suggest that they are the work, or at least due to the influence of, the same architect. Further considerations point — in the cases of Verneuil and Charleval — -to that architect being du Cerceau. The most striking points of similarity consist in the frequent occurrence of : — (i) Rustication, used not merely for coigns, but for entire basements, and the decoration of wall spaces, orders, arches, pediments, roofs, and usually characterized by frequent vertical joints. (ii) Curved roofs and pediments, in the latter of which the cornice often terminates scroll-fashion or is replaced by a curved frieze. (iii) Circular lights, especially in tympana, curved pediments and dormers. (iv) Trophies of arms and armour as panels, acroteria, or wings to dormers. (v) Caryatids, hermae and similar figures, particularly in monstrous combinations, such as human busts, dogs’ legs, and butterflies’ wings. (vi) Human figures abnormally elongated. (vii) Figures of conflicting scales in the same elevation. (viii) The giant order. The considerations which point to du Cerceau as the architect of Verneuil are : — (i) Resemblances between the two schemes and other designs of his, e.g. between 1st scheme and Livre d' Architecture ( 1 2 559), p. xxxiv, and Livre pour bastir aux Champs (1572), p. xxx, also between 2nd scheme and Perspective Positive le$on LVI. 1 (ii) The unusual thoroughness with which they are illustrated — more drawings being devoted to this chateau than to any other building in Les plus excellents Bastiments , and those drawn with special care. (iii) The occurrence among du Cerceau’s drawings of designs for, or variants on the designs of Verneuil, e.g. a fountain in Petits Details d'Ordres d' Architecture {cf. D I, 56). The drawing reproduced in Les Du Cerceau , plate iv, corresponding with fig. 24 but with important differences, and that reproduced in fig. 25, possibly intended for the garden hall in scheme 2 and inspired by fig. 23d (iv) Du Cerceau’s minute acquaintance 3 not only with the history of the building up to the date of writing but with the intentions of two successive proprietors, part of which were never carried out and part already abandoned. (v) Du Cerceau’s relations to the second owner, the Duke of Nemours, son-in-law of Renee of Ferrara, whom he claims as his patron in the dedication of u Edifices Antiques Romains" (1584), where he addresses him thus: “For a long time you have done me that honour to accept me for yours and to maintain me of your liberality which makes me esteem as yours all that comes from me.” (vi) The connection of du Cerceau’s family with Verneuil ( see above , p. 2). The probability that du Cerceau was the architect of Charleval is established by the following points : — (i) Resemblances between the designs and others of his, e.g. between fig. 26 and a plate in Arcs (1549), and between two pavilions in Collection M, No. 18, 4 and the general character of Charleval. (ii) The number of plates devoted to Charleval, a chateau of which next to nothing was built. (iii) The occurrence among du Cerceau’s drawings of designs for Charleval, viz. that reproduced in Les Du Cerceau , fig. 47, and possibly that in our fig. 25. (iv) Du Cerceau’s relations with the king, in the dedication to whom of his Livre pour bastir aux Champs he reminds him of a conversation on architecture they had had at Montargis and subscribes himself “ your very obedient and affectionate servant.” (v) An entry in Henry Ill’s pension list for 1577 : “Jacques Androuet called Cerceau, architect, 200/, Baptiste Androuet called Cerceau, architect at Charleval, the same pension he was wont to have, 400/.” Probably the son superintended the carrying out of his father’s designs, but even if Baptiste had a hand in the design, this would detract little from Jacques’ credit, for the son had formed his style under his father. 1. Cf. also Livre pour bastir aux Champs, pi. xxxvii, and Perspective Positive legons liv and lix. 2. Cf. also the garden hall introduced by du Cerceau as an afterthought after the completion of the drawings, B.M. iii, 40. 3. Cf. the descriptions, headings and notes to the drawings. 4. See p. 5. 4 FRENCH CHATEAUX AND GARDENS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. Individually these arguments may seem inconclusive. Their cumulative weight is overwhelming and proves du Cerceau to have been the architect of the two chateaux, while in view of resemblances to them of the Maison Blanche 1 and the thoroughness with which it is illustrated we seem to be justified in adding it to the list of his works. Du Cerceau must be judged as a designer in the light not merely of works executed or intended for execution but also of the mass of his drawings and engravings of which some account is given in the next chapter. A study of these two classes of work will reveal that he advanced step by step with the stylistic development of his century, passing from the picturesqueness and delicate prettinesses of the Francis I style, through the sober classicality and distinction of that of Henry II, to the extravagances of ornament and imposing scale of the last Valois kings. More than that he not infre- quently anticipated types characteristic of the style of Henry IV and even much later periods . 2 Though in some, especially of his later designs, a tendency to “ bizarrerie,” to illogical use of forms and strained effects, and an uncertain sense for scale are observable, the bulk of his work exhibits many masterly qualities : indefati- gable verve in attacking the most various problems, whether utilitarian or ideal, large and ingenious planning, a strong feeling both for the monumental and the picturesque, and an encyclopaedic knowledge of the resources of the classic styles with an inexhaustible versatility in their application. III. WORK AS WRITER AND ENGRAVER. Obscure as much of du Cerceau’s career remains, one side of it stands out clearly and makes him an important factor in the history of art, namely, his self-imposed educational propaganda. Convinced that the art and in particular the archi- tecture of the future must be based on antiquity, he devoted himself to the dissemination of the results of his studies. This “ institutum,” as he calls it, had for its object the beautifying of France by all the resources of classical art, and that without the need for foreign travel or foreign intervention. He addressed himself to all whose tastes or avocations brought them into contact with the world of art. To the dilettante, the student, the employer, he provided food for study and admiration, and indicated fields for patronage. To the designer, the craftsman, the manufacturer, he supplied the principles of design and its raw material. Thus in publications intended to meet the requirements of the architect and garden-designer, the painter and book illustrator, the potter and stained-glass worker, the locksmith, armourer and damascener, the goldsmith and jeweller, the bookbinder and tapestry worker, the sculptor and wood carver, the cabinet maker and inlayer, side by side with the more obviously necessary features we find him illustrating such varied matter as landscape, human and animal figures, costume, topography, ancient history and mythology, the orders, mechanical instruments, perspective. He drew his material indifferently from existing remains of antiquity, lost monuments of Roman splendour as pictured by Renaissance imaginations, modern buildings of Italy and France, compositions of native and foreign designers, his own included, Italian, Flemish and German etchings. Into all he wove hirown personality, devising new modifications, em- broidering on or pruning down, using again and again the same motive as a starting point for ever fresh excursions, attempting as it were to exhaust the variations of which a theme was capable. He issued his drawings at one period from his own “officina” at Orleans, and later through Paris publishers, at first in isolated sheets, then in collections and complete books with or without text . 3 These cannot now be named here, but the following is a list of his principal works connected with architecture. A. BOOKS AND ENGRAVINGS. 1. Perspective. Lessons with diagrams. Traite de Perspective Positive. Paris, 1576. 2. Imaginary Views — Landscapes, Streets, Squares, Ruins, Canals. Fragments Antiques. Orl., 1550, after Leonard Thiry (Leo Daven, of Antwerp). Les Vues d’Optiques. Orl., 1551. Les Petites Vues, undated, but later than 1562, after Vredeman de Vries. r. The resemblances come out even more strongly in the British Museum drawings, cf. for instance pi. 21c with collection M, No. 23. 2. Some of his arabesques might almost be classed as " Louis XVI," and his furniture as “ Empire.” 3. Baron von Geymiiller computes that there are extant 2,843 figures on 1,930 sheets engraved in his studio and mostly by his hand, in addition to pen and pencil drawings. DU CERCEAU’S WORK AS WRITER AND ENGRAVER. 5 3. Ancient Architecture. (a) Illustrations of Roman remains, reconstitutions of ancient buildings, archasologicaliy valueless, but interesting as designs; and Renaissance buildings. Arcs. 25 Exempla Arcuum. Orl., 1549. Triumphal arches. Monuments Antiques. Orl., 1560. Various Roman edifices. Arcs et Monuments Antiques. Orl., 1560. A fresh edition of Arcs bound up with Monuments Antiques. Prsecipua aliquot Roman® antiquitatis ruinarum monimenta, undated, but later than 1561. Roman ruins. Livre des Edifices antiques Romains, 1584. The edifices of Rome in her prime as imagined at the Renaissance. Temples et Habitations Fortifiees, Petits Temples, undated, but probably c. 1540. Temples, churches and fortified houses. An enlarged edition of this work is known as Grands Temples. Temples. Moyens Temples. Orl. 1550. Similar to the above. (&) Works on the Orders — their proportions, details, with variations and application. Grands Details d’Ordres d’ Architecture, undated, c. 1545. Petits Details d’Ordres d’Architecture, of various dates, 1545-60-80. Petit Traite des cinq Ordres de Colonnes. Par., 1583. 4. Modern Architecture. (a) Illustrations of Modern Buildings. See Ch. IV. ( b ) Designs for entire buildings. Petites habitations ou logis domestiques, undated, probably c. 1540-5. Smaller chateaux. Compositions d’Architecture. Five designs for buildings, one a church suggested by the Certosa of Pavia. Two only are dated. Orl., 1562. Livre d’Architecture : Cinquante bastiments tous differents. Premier livre d’ Architecture. Par., 1559. Chateaux. Livre d’Architecture .... pour bastir aux Champs. Troisieme livre d’ Architecture. Par., 1572. Country houses and their surroundings. ( c ) Designs for minor architecture and parts of buildings. Le Second Livre d’Architecture. 1561. Features and minor structures. Termes, probably 1545-75. Hermae, Caryatids, etc. 5. Decoration. Grands Cartouches and Petits Cartouches. Decorative work of Italians at Fontainebleau and Monceaux-en-Brie. Grotesques. Petites Grotesques. First Edition, Orl., 1550. Second Edition, Par., 1562. Grandes Grotesques. Par., 1566. Arabesques of a Pompeian type. Frises, 1550-60. Friezes and borders. Trophees. Trophies of arms and armour. 6. Furniture. Designs, extending over du Cerceau’s whole career, for beds, tables, benches, dressers, cabinets, doors, stalls, panelling, mar- queterie. 7. Silversmith’s Work. Designs also extending over du Cerceau’s whole career for plate, jewelry, furniture, damascening. B. DRAWINGS. Side by side with the engravings are many drawings often unrepresented in the publications, not to mention isolated sheets. Thirteen collections are described in Les Du Cerceau (1887), and there distinguished by letters ; to these must be added that in the British Museum. Only those in public institutions are mentioned below. (tf) In the Royal Library at Munich. Collection A. Fourteen sheets of pen drawings on paper. Studies made in Italy, 1530-3. (, b ) In the National Library in Paris, Cabinet des Estampes. Collection D (Ed. 2, r. res). Twenty pen drawings on vellum. Roman buildings corresponding partly with Monuments Antiques, partly with Moyens Temples. Collection K (Ed. 2, q. res). Thirty-four pen drawings on paper. Designs for features and minor structures. Collection M (Ed. 2, p. res). 148 pen drawings on vellum, bound after N in the same volume. Designs for features and minor structures, drawings for 1st and 2nd Livre d’ Architecture, Les plus excellents Bastiments de France, Traite des Ordres, Monu- ments Antiques. Collection N (Ed. 2, p. res). Twenty-four pen drawings on vellum, bound before M in the same volume. Designs for ideal castles, palaces, porticoes, and fantastic edifices. 6 FRENCH CHATEAUX AND GARDENS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. (c) In the “Petit Palais des Champs Elysees ” in Paris. Collection F. 112 pen drawings on paper in a tooled, stained and gilded calf binding of the sixteenth century. Design for carriage and garden entrances, etc., and others similar to those in the second Livre d’ Architecture. Drawings for the Traite d’Ordres. (d) In the British Museum Print Room. Eight portfolios of drawings on vellum, mounted on 122 cardboard mounts. The drawings are executed with pen and ruling pen in Indian ink, often shaded in wash of the same. Occasionally brickwork is indicated by red lines, and slates by green lines. Blueish-green wash is sometimes used on the roofs, and yellowish green for foliage. Sheets I, 1, to VIII, 116, refer to Les plus excellents Bastiments de France ; VIII, 117-121, to the first and third Livre d' Architecture ; and VIII, 122, to the works on the orders. IV. LES PLUS EXCELLENTS BASTIMENTS DE FRANCE. Du Cerceau’s best known work, the series of views of contemporary buildings which occupied many years of his life, is perhaps his surest title to fame and most valuable legacy. He attributes its inception — though not very explicitly — to Henry II. The scope of the work was modified as it grew. Planned to illustrate the monuments of Paris it was expanded to embrace the principal mansions of France. At Henry’s death (1559) nothing — or at any rate nothing outside Paris — was drawn. The earliest mention of the book as already in preparation occurs in the dedication of the second Livre d' Architecture (1561). That of the Livre de Grotesques (1566) explains that the work had been hindered by the disturbed state of the country and the writer’s losses. Again in that of the third Livre d' Architecture (1572) he acknowledges Charles IX’s liberality which alone enabled him to visit the houses still to be drawn and solicits its continuance. Increasing infirmities and the civil war further impeded him and it was not till 1576 that Le premier volume des plus excellents Bastiments de France could be published. Three years later and in Paris like the first appeared Le deuxiesme volume des plus beaux Bastiments de France. A second im- pression of the same year (1579), published by Gille Bays of Paris, bears the title Le second volume des plus excellents Bastiments de France. Both parts were dedicated to Catharine de’ Medici who had continued her husband’s and son’s interest and financial support. A third part to be devoted to the monuments of Paris, hinted at in the dedication of the first, never saw the light. Each volume contained illustrations of a number of mansions consisting in plans, elevations, sections, and perspective views of the houses, their surroundings, details and decoration prefaced by a description. The contents were as follows : — First volume. Maisons Royales : Le Louvre, Vincennes, Chambourg (Chambord), Boulongne (Madrid), Creil, Coussy (Coucy), Folembray, Montargis, Sainct Germain (St. G. en Laye), La Mucette. Maisons Particuli&res : Vallery, Verneul (Verneuil-sur-Oise), Anssy-le-Franc (Ancy-le-F.), Gaillon, Manne (Maune). Second volume. Maisons Royales: Blois, Amboise, Fontainebleau, Villiers Coste Rets (Villers-Cotterets), Charleval, Les Thuilleries (Tuileries), Sainct Maur (St. Maur les Fosses), Chenonceau (Chenonceaux). Maison Particuli&res : Chantilly, Anet, Escouan (Ecouen), Dampierre, Challuau, Beauregard, Bury. Five plates intended for the third volume are extant : — Fontaine des Innocents, la Bastille, Bastiment entre le Pont Neuf et l’Hotel Dieu, Pont Notre Dame (not Pt. St. Michel as in Destailleur), Grande Salle du Palais (i.e. of the P. de Justice). Further editions of the work were published by P. Mariette, Paris, 1607 and 1648, and a reprint edited by H. Destailleur with facsimiles of the original plates by Faure Dujarric by A. Levy, Paris, vol. 1 (1868), and vol. 11 (1870). To the contents of vol. 1 are added from drawings by du Cerceau a woodcut of a scene on a chimney-piece at Montargis, the plan of a ceiling at the Louvre and, from the plates intended for vol. 111, elevations of the Fontaine des Innocents. The remaining four plates for vol. in are included in vol. 11. The quality of the drawing varies. In some of the originals — but these are the exception — it is the careless and in- accurate work of an underling, or the enfeebled performance of the aged master. 1 The majority are beautifully executed and full of charm. 2 Indeed when allowance is made for defects, which were those of the age — faulty drawing of complex buildings, of curved forms, of vegetation, strange combinations of elevation and perspective and so forth — it may be claimed that du Cerceau has few rivals as an architectural draughtsman, combining as he does accuracy, boldness of line and vigour in the general handling, with sympathetic rendering of detail and ornament, while the lively treatment of the figures introduced imparts a captivating air of actuality to his scenes. 1. e.g. The drawings of the Temple at Villers Cotterets, B.M. v, 74. 2. e.g. The elevation of Madrid, pi. xo, and the bird’s-eye view of the Tuileries, pi. 18, 19. DU CERCEAU’S LES PLUS EXCELLENTS BASTIMENTS DE FRANCE. 7 The engravings carried out by his own hand, or at any rate under his supervision, are splendid specimens of the en- graver’s art and do full justice to the drawings, neither of which are adequately represented by Destailleur’s reprint. All the original drawings made for this work now extant are in the British Museum (116 sheets referring to all the buildings illustrated) and the Bibliotheque Nationale (11 sheets : Chambord 4, Madrid 5, Louvre 2). The value of the work as a record of secular architecture in France in the sixteenth century cannot be over-estimated. Many of the subjects have disappeared wholly or in part ; of the survivors most have been extensively altered ; few, if any, retain their characteristic surroundings ; some remained largely unexecuted. Yet minutely accurate as the drawings appear at first sight, and drawn as they were from first-hand information — from the actual buildings or the drawings of the architects — their evidence as to the actual state of the buildings, more especially in points of detail, is subject to caution. This is due to no carelessness on du Cerceau’s part, still less to in- tentional falsification, but mainly to two characteristics of his mental attitude. He, perhaps unconsciously, reflected his stylistic predilections of the moment as he drew, and since the book belongs to his later life its architecture is insensibly assimilated to the mature Renaissance of the Henry II style. Consequently it is often impossible to determine with certainty to what phase of the Renaissance a given building belongs, and even Gothic buildings acquire a classic flavour. Again, with his critical and experimental bent, du Cerceau held that every design was capable of being improved, and never let slip an opportunity of doing so, even when the subject was existing work. Thus he prunes away excrescences, straightens crooked lines, draws diverging sides parallel and awkward corners rectangular, introduces new features to balance old, or shows as executed a portion merely in contemplation. In some cases notes taken on the spot were evidently completed from imagination. A few such differences may be quoted from the many which a comparison of drawings and plates reveals. At Blois the fortified gateway, shown in pi. 3-4, at the entrance of the road below the gardens, does not appear in D, II, 3. In the pavilion at Vallery, on pi. 16a, the roofs have “ epis,” and the chimneys wind-shields and ties, and there are a pair of turrets at the back. All these are absent in D, I, 44. The following are discrepancies other than mere omissions. At Anet, in pi. 14-15, a building to the right has a curved roof and two windows in the side, but in D, II, 41, it has a plain span roof and four windows. At Fontainebleau, in the views, pi. 9 and D, II, 1 1, and on the plans, fig. 8 and D, II, 10, the north side of the White Horse Court stops at the moat. This is probably correct as the end of the wing was no doubt pulled down when the moat was dug and not rebuilt. But in the view D, II, 12, and the plan, B.M., V, 70, the wing is carried on to the Pavilion des Aumoniers, crossing the moat on an arch. Only a selection of the drawings collected during twenty years’ work was utilized, and the final choice was not always happy. The originals of many of the plates are lost, and many of the extant originals were not engraved. Where plates and drawings correspond they are seldom identical, the most frequent divergences being in the point from which the view is taken. 1 A special interest attaches to some of the originals in that they give information not otherwise available. For instance, the Temple at Villers Cotterets (B.M., V, 74), and the chapel in the park at St. Germain (pi. 8 2 ), are known but destroyed works of Philibert de l’Orme, not illustrated elsewhere. Again, pi. 18-19 shows his complete scheme for the Tuileries, only known hitherto from the plan and the small fragment carried out. 1. e.g. Cf. Amboise, pi. i, with II, 8 ; Bury, pi. 6, with II, 62 ; Verneuil, pi. 22, with I, 49 2. Also in the plan B.M., II, 30. PART II. DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CHATEAUX & GARDENS. I. DESIGNS BY VARIOUS ARCHITECTS. AMBOISE. T HE castle of Amboise is of peculiar interest from the fact that it is in a sort the cradle of Renaissance art in France. It was for its beautification that Charles VIII founded in 1495 a colony of Italian artists and crafts- men, whose fusion with the native school endowed France with the brilliant architectural development of the early sixteenth century. The castle at its completion must have been a splendid, if heterogeneous pile (pi. 1). Unfortunately it has suffered so much from neglect and mutilations, and the building records are so incomplete that it is difficult to identify the work of the various kings either in the existing buildings or on du Cerceau’s drawings. The castle, which was repeatedly destroyed and rebuilt, had passed from the Crown to a succession of feudal families from the last of which sprang the two Cardinals of Amboise. 1 In 1434 it again became a royal residence. Charles VIII spent large sums here upon building and decoration even before his Italian campaign (1493-5) an d continued the work on his return from Naples in 1496. Almost the only portion of the mediaeval buildings which survived this remodelling seems to have been the collegiate church of Notre Dame. 2 The chapel of St. Hubert, 3 the Pavilion des Vertus 4 with the adjoining buildings 5 and the block w. of the n. tower 6 seem to belong to this period. Charles also began first the southern 7 and later the northern 8 of the two great round towers, which contain vaulted spiral sloping ways for vehicular traffic between town and castle. This idea was probably due to Italian influence, but the greater part of the buildings of this reign seem to have shown little or no Renaissance detail. Louis XII, who after Charles’ premature death, continued the works commenced and added other portions (1498-1 503) including the galleries enclosing the garden, which was laid out by Dom Pacello da Mercoliano (1 501-5) and probably the block s. of the n. tower. 9 Francis I made further additions (15 15-17), but later kings added little, and a scheme of improvements 10 by which one court was to have been formed out of the two by the removal of the sunk tennis court and cross-galleries, and completed by a new gallery joining the church of Notre Dame with the s. wing, was not executed. A great part of the castle was destroyed shortly after the Revolution. Besides the outer walls only the chapel of St. Hubert, the two round towers and the two blocks adjoining the northern one, are now left standing. GAILLON. On a hill overlooking the windings of the Seine, about thirty miles s.e. of Rouen, was erected, between 1497 an d U 10 ? the most sumptuous private residence of France (pi. 2). In the eighteenth century people said of a fine country seat : “ C’est un petit Versailles;” in the sixteenth the saying was: “ C’est un petit Gaillon.” Its creator was George of Amboise, Cardinal Archbishop of Rouen and prime minister to Louis XII, the chief of a group of enlightened prelates who did so much to spread Renaissance culture in France. 1. The builder of Gaillon (see below) and his nephew, whose joint tomb is in Rouen Cathedral. 2. Seen in the centre of pi. i. Lionardo da Vinci is said to have been buried here. 3. Just visible in pi. i, in the top right hand corner. 4. So-called from the statues of the seven virtues adorning it. 5. i.e. the range of buildings extending along s.w. and s. of the castle, behind the two courts in pi. i. 6. In the foreground on pi. i. 7. The top is just visible behind the open staircase at the back of the central court ; known as Tour Hurtault. 8. In the foreground, known as Tour des Minimes, and also as Tour des Fours from the incubators erected at its base by Luc Becjeame, a member of the Italian colony. 9. Viz., behind it, in pi. i. 10. Cf. B.M. v, 65. IO FRENCH CHATEAUX AND GARDENS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. The cardinal’s work at Gaillon consisted in the complete remodelling 1 and extension of an ancient castle of the arch- bishops of Rouen, already rebuilt by Cardinal d’Estouteville (1456-63) after its destruction by the English (1424). The plan was unsymmetrical, following to a great extent the old lines and incorporating some of the old buildings. The great s.e. gatehouse 2 led into an irregular base-court containing the offices, and separated by a range of buildings from the court of honour, which was nearly square. On the s.e. and n.w. sides of the latter were cloisters with galleries over them. On the n.e. stood the “ Grant Maison,” 3 a block containing the state apartments between the cardinal’s private rooms in the Great Tower at the n. angle and the Chapel at the junction of the two courts. In each angle of this court was a spiral staircase — the principal one near the chapel. A second gatehouse 4 at the w. angle opened on to an esplanade, beyond which was an enclosed garden, 5 while other gardens and terraces lay to the n. further down the hill. The best talent of the day, both French and Italian, was enlisted for the creation and beautification of this Nonesuch of the French Wolsey. While there is no documentary evidence for the tradition that Fra Giovanni Giocondo of Verona presided over the works, it is inherently probable that the king’s architect would be consulted by the minister, and analogies which exist between portions of the castle and Veronese architecture of the fifteenth century strengthen the probability. If, as was frequently the case, a Frenchman worked in conjunction with the Italian as inspector and general director of the works, he may perhaps be recognized in Nicolas (Colin) Biard of Blois, who paid repeated visits during the construction and has left a drawing for part of the chapel. A building carried out by French master masons working from an Italian architect’s sketches and associated with Italian decorators, would naturally exhibit at this date just such a combination of Gothic and Renaissance elements as does the chateau of Gaillon, on whose profusely enriched elevations the two types of design and ornament are in- extricably interwoven. 6 The principal among these French contractors were the master masons Guillaume Senault, Pierre de l’Orme, and Pierre Fain. Pierre Valence carried out the installation of the fountain 7 in the Great Court and made some of the panelling. The chapel, 8 as befitted an episcopal residence, was of peculiar splendour. It was decorated by the sculptor Michel Colombe of Tours, and the painter Andrea Solario, a pupil of Lionardo da Vinci, not to speak of stained glass- workers, wood-carvers, and inlayers. Statuary and reliefs by Antonio Giusto, 9 medallions by Guido Mazzoni, 10 a pavement in the court in various coloured stones, were among the adorn- ments of the chateau ; and the gardens (see pi. 1 6b), laid out by Pietro da Mercoliano (1506), contained a marble fountain by Girolamo Pacchiariti, 11 probably that illustrated in fig. 1. The gardens were further embellished by Cardinal Charles of Bourbon, 12 who built a festival hall, known as the Maison Blanche (pi. 21), in the midst of an artificial lake (c. 1565) — which we have shown above (p. 4) to be probably a work of du Cerceau — and added cloisters to the terraces (c. 1575). The castle was almost entirely destroyed at the Revolution. 13 The only portions — and those mutilated and incorporated in modern barracks — which are still in situ , are the eastern gatehouse, the lower chapel, a stair turret, and the vaulted substructures of the “ Grant Maison.” Of the fragments set up in the courts of the Ecole des Beaux Arts in Paris, 14 the most important are : — (i) an entrance bay, of which the central portion probably belonged to the gallery dividing the two courts and facing the entrance and the windows on each side to the “Grant Maison (ii) an arcade with arches springing alternately from piers and Fig. 1. FOUNTAIN IN THE UPPER GARDEN AT GAILLON. 1. The buildings to the s.e. of the courts were retained and merely refaced. 2. To the left of pi. 2. 3. In the foreground of pi. 2. 4. To the right of pi. 2. 5. See pi. 16. b. 6. In some parts, such as the structure of the chapel and the n.e. and n.w. elevations, Gothic predominates ; in others, such as the entrance gatehouse and the gallery between the courts, the Renaissance prevails ; in the gateway leading to the second court it is supreme. 7. It had been sent as a present to Cardinal d’Amboise by the Venetian Government. The lower basin was added by the Italian sculptors on the spot. See D.I., 66. 8. The upper chapel was cruciform, the lower consisted of a nave only. 9. Andrea di Giusto Betti, known in French as Andre Juste, one of a family from the neighbourhood of Florence who settled at Tours. 10. Called Modanino, or Paganino ; in French Paguenin. 11. Gerome Pacherot, probably the same as Jerome of Fiesole, who settled at Tours. 12. An uncle of Henry IV, who was set up as a rival candidate for the throne by the League, b. 1523, d. 1590, 13. The Maison Blanche had fallen into decay early in the eighteenth century, and the fountain in the court had been broken up and sold in 1757. 14. Fragment (i) faces the street and stands between the first and second courts of the Ecole des Beaux Arts. Fragments (ii) and (iii) stand at each end of the second court, facing each other. Plate II. GAILLON. I {? '/ .);•( iO-is'TMt - BLOIS with Garcl Cmanit PLATES III &IV. - ■> / '• • i rjrm jcLJlf ffiftfWi ^’pp> 'cptairtrimn from the East. DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CHATEAUX : DESIGNS BY VARIOUS ARCHITECTS. 1 1 pendants to the s.e. cloister in the great court ; and (iii) a second arcade to the n.w. cloister. The chapel stalls, decorated with intarsia, by Richard of Carpi are in the abbey church at St. Denis ; the altar piece by Colombe representing St. George and the Dragon, a third marble fountain and other fragments of sculpture, are in the Louvre. BLOIS. The chateau of Blois, one of the most splendid in France, is ot very various periods and has the unique merit of ex- hibiting first-rate examples of three periods of the Renaissance besides earlier work. The Louis XII wing is a charming example of the hybrid transitional phase : the Francis I wing and its elaborate open stair illustrates the exuberant fancy, and delicate decoration, of which the early Valois phase is capable, while the buildings of Gaston of Orleans in their sober majesty are among the most stately creations of the seventeenth century. The plateau of which the present castle occupies the eastern half was the site of a fortress even in Roman times. During the Middle Ages the whole was included in a fortified enclosure. The following description however applies to the inner court only, which from the beginning of the sixteenth century constituted the castle proper, the outer or base- court (the present “Place du Chateau”) being given over to the private residences of courtiers. Charles of Orleans, 1 on his return from England where he had been a captive since the battle of Agincourt, converted his castle of Blois from a fortress into a pleasure house (1440-65). The buildings anterior to his time still extant (in whole or in part) are the great hall 2 (a) at the n.e. angle connected by a curtain wall 3 with a tower at the n.w. angle, Fig. 2. BLOIS PLAN IN I579. 10 g o 10 20 }o 40 50 bo 70 eo go too SCALE OF l ^- 1 ‘ 1 ' 1 1 1 1 1 ' ‘metres 10 0 20 40 60 80 100 200 }00 400 SCAlE OF 1 - 1 — 1 — >— J — I — I J 1 ‘FEET References to Figure 2. A Great Hall. Salle des Etats. G Charles of Orleans’ Cloister. O Bridge Gallery. Galerie des Cerfs. B Tour des Oubliettes, or de Chateau Renault. H Chapel. P Francis I’s Stair-tower. C Position of Observatory. Tour de Foix. I Ante-chapel. QQ Apartments built by Francis I. D Charles of Orleans’ Building. K Louis XII’s Building. R Galleries round Tour des Oubliettes. E Perche aux Bretons. L Louis XII’s Cloister. S Extension built by Francis I or Henry II. FF Apartments built by Charles Of Orleans, and re- MM Louis XII’s Stair-towers. T Colonnade built by Henry II. modelled by Francis I. N Entrance Gateway. U Garden Pavilion built by Charles IX. (b) — “ Tour de Chateau-Renault,” “ des Oubliettes,” or “ du Moulin ” — and also an isolated tower to the s. + (c) “Tour de Foix ” or “ de l’Observatoire.” These buildings and probably also the chapel which occupied the s. side of the court dated from the thirteenth or early fourteenth century. Charles built in the Gothic of his day and with many crow-stepped gables 3 a residential block (d) closing the west-end of the court with a balustraded terrace 6 (e) before it. He added a rich lantern to the n.w. tower, carried a three-storeyed 1. Grandson of Charles V and father of Louis XII ; b. 1391, d. 1465. 2 Known as the " Salle des Etats ” since the holding in it of the States General by Henry III in 1576 and 1588. 3. This wall and parts of two intermediate towers attached to it can be traced embedded in the buildings of the Francis I wing. 4. This tower guarded the then only approach to the castle, i.c. from the s. by a steep lane debouching near the s.e. angle of the present buildings. 5. Attributed by French writers to English influence. 6. Afterwards called the “ Perche aux Bretons,” from its being the station of Anne of Brittany's Breton guard. 12 FRENCH CHATEAUX AND GARDENS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. suite of apartments along the inner front of the n. curtain wall (ff) and a cloister walk with a gallery over it (g) along the inner side of the chapel. It is possible that he rather than his son — to whom the work is usually attributed — rebuilt the chapel on the old foundations. In addition to the existing choir (h) it comprised a nave or ante-chapel (i) of three bays wider than those of the choir. Charles’ son who succeeded to the throne as Louis XII (1498) and married Anne of Brittany, widow of Charles VIII, completed the court (1498-1502) by building in the Transitional style the wing known by his name (k) across the eastern end between the chapel and the hall, 1 with a cloister walk (l) and two stair-towers (mm) towards the court and pierced by an entrance gateway (n). He also connected the n.w. angle of the castle by a gallery (o) “ Galerie des Cerfs ” — carried on arches across the moat — with the terraced gardens, which were being laid out at the time in the Italian manner by Dom Pacello da Mercoliano (1499-1503), and contained amongst other buildings a Gothic pavilion 2 (still standing) and a fountain under an Italian domed structure by Boccadoro. 3 Francis 1 , who married Claude, daughter of Louis and Anne (1514), and succeeded the former (1515), began at once to alter the n. wing, refacing both fronts and adding the stair-tower in the court (p, cf. pi. 5. b). While these works were in progress it was decided to add a new suite of apartments (q q) outside the curtain wall and opening on to a terrace running from the Great Hall to the n.w. tower, which latter was also enclosed in open galleries (r) (15 1 5-1 9). Soon after a one-storeyed loggia was built out on to the terrace. Apparently on Queen Claude’s death (1 524) the works which were to have been carried along the n. front of the Great Hall were interrupted. Over the loggia a wooden gallery was added (1559), but was soon replaced by a stone one (1563). Finally the third gallery was formed (c. 157c)) 4 (see pi. 5. a). Jacques Sourdeau was the master mason during Francis I’s time, but the design was probably due to Boccadoro. Either Francis or Henry II seems to have added the block (s) at the s.w. angle. H enry II and his sons added a portico between the great stair and the ends of the court (t ), 5 an arched gateway at the e. end of the Great Hall to form an approach from the town from the n. (see pi. 3, 4), an observatory for Catharine de’ Medici on the Tour de Foix (c), a block of officers’ lodgings in the upper garden (see pi. 3, 4), and a pavilion at the foot of the Stag Gallery (1563) (u). Henry IV replaced the decaying trellises in the gardens by stone galleries. Gaston, brother of Louis XIII, became duke of Orleans in 1627. On retiring to Blois he determined to rebuild the castle in accordance with the ideas of his age. Francois Mansart prepared a design comprising an inner court with two lofty storeys and a mansard roof, an outer one (covering the whole Place du Chateau) one storey lower and with terrace roofs, and a stately approach from the town at the e. end. This scheme would have produced one of the most splendid palaces in Europe, but could scarcely have compensated for the loss of all the existing buildings. Lack of funds prevented its completion, only the block at the back of the inner court (at the left of fig. 3) being built (begun 1635). To make room for this the w. end of Francis I’s wing with the Stag Gallery, almost the whole of Charles of Orleans’ buildings and the ante-chapel, were pulled down. After Gaston’s death (1660) Blois ceased to be a royal residence and both castle and gardens fell into decay. The Revolution also did much damage, but Jacques Duban carried out a successful restoration (1845-70), in the course of which, however, Henry II’s portico and gateway disappeared. Little trace is now left of the gardens, which were parcelled out into small holdings at the Revolution. BURY. The chateau of Bury (pi. 6), about six miles w. of Blois, was built soon after 1515 by Florimond Robertet, finance minister under Louis XII and Francis I, his town house being the Hotel d’Alluye at Blois. It is now a complete ruin. An entry in an inventory of the property of Robertet’s widow appears to point to Fra Giocondo as the designer of the castle, though he left France ten years before it was built. If the round towers, all but detached from the rest of the building, and other mediaeval arrangements are due to a French master mason, the graceful cloister inside the screen-wall is almost certainly the work of an Italian architect. CHAMBORD. At Chambord Francis I was able to create a mansion unhampered by pre-existing buildings. Its plan is strongly in- fluenced by mediaeval traditions, while the treatment of the elevations closely resembles that of his work at Blois, with the introduction in the decorative scheme of slate panels in the stone surfaces. The combination of a riotous profusion 1. It is not clear what buildings, if any, separated the outer and inner courts before this period. 2. Known as the baths of Anne of Brittany. Its roof appears in pi. 3, 4, at the junction of the galleries of the upper and lower gardens. 3. Domenico di Cortona, called by the French “ Boccador.” 4. By placing a row of columns on the parapet and carrying the roof out to them. In these successive additions the work below was copied in the main. The differences observable between the e. and w. halves of each front, between the tower galleries, or the staircase and the adjoining facades, are probably due rather to their being the work of different masons than to difference of date. 5. Probably only the western portion was built, though both are shown by du Cerceau, UJUinn i O BLOIS from the North, „ North side of the Court. BURY, Plate VII. CHAMBORD. View from the North (Entrance front). „ ,, ,, South (Lake front). DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CHATEAUX : DESIGNS BY VARIOUS ARCHITECTS. i3 of delicately ornamented features, each individually beautiful, with the rather clumsy general proportions fails to produce a wholly pleasing effect. The most remarkable feature of the chateau is its great hall, planned as a Greek cross, 1 in the centre of which rises a monumental staircase (b) with two spiral stairways surmounted by an elegant open lantern. On a marshy site selected by Francis in the forests of Sologne preparatory works for a new hunting-seat were set on foot in 1519. Building began in 1520, all but ceased during the Italian war and the king’s captivity in Spain, but was resumed with vigour on his release in 1526, the bulk of the castle being erected within the next ten years. The donjon (a) was com- plete by 1539, and the n.w. wing and tower containing the chapel (c) between 1540 and 1550. Denis Sourdeau (son of Jacques Sourdeau of Blois) was master mason till his death (1534) conjointly with Pierre Nepveu, known as Trinqueau. Jacques Cocqueau succeeded his brother-in-law, Sourdeau, in 1534, and was in sole charge after Nepveu's death in 1538. The design is probably due in great measure to Dominic of Cortona (Boccadoro), resident at Blois till 1531, who made a model for the castle, still existing in the seventeenth century, and differing only in detail from the executed work. 2 The balustraded terraces, which covered the one-storeyed buildings 3 (e e e) round the southern half of the court, were re- placed by Mansard roofs under Louis XIV. The two southern towers (ff) were never carried above the terrace level. The drainage of the marsh and canalisation of the river Cosson proved so costly that the moat (ggg) and the terraces (h h h) separating it from the castle walls were never completed. Stanislas Leczinski, ex-king of Poland and father-in-law of Louis XV, who inhabited Chambord (1725-33), filled up the moat and diverted the river. 100 20 40 Go 80 100 SCALE OF CJ — I — I — 1 — 1 — 1 — 200 300 400 ‘FEET Fig. 4. CASTLE OF CHAMBORD. PLAN. Donjon. Great Staircase. Chapel. Lesser Chapel or Oratory eee Offices. References to Figure 4. ff Unfinished Towers, ggg Moat, hhh Terraces, i Drawbridge, j Lake. The castle was all but gutted at the Revolution, but has been under restoration since 1830. ST. GERMAIN-EN-LAYE. ( a ) The “Chateau Vieux.” — The old castle of St. Germain is remarkable among the buildings of Francis I in more ways than one. It has nothing of the gaiety of the Loire chateaux, and shows neither their profuse and delicate ornament nor their picturesque steep roofs, but presents the frowning aspect of a fortress, and is crowned with a balus- traded terrace. 4 As in parts of Fontainebleau, and other chateaux near Paris, brick plays an important part in its elevations and is used even for pilasters and other decorative features. A royal castle existed on the site of the present one as early as the reign of Louis VI ( 1 108-37). Of the present buildings (pi. 8 and fig. 5) the only portions older than the sixteenth century are the chapel built by Louis IX (c. 1230) and the donjon rebuilt by Charles V after its burning by the English (1356). 5 Francis I pulled down the remainder and rebuilt it mostly on the old foundations (see plan, fig. 5) bringing the older fragments into harmony with the new scheme. The work was carried out by the master mason, Pierre Chambiges, possibly without an architect, but under the king’s personal supervision (c. 1537-40). Under Louis XIV Mansart added five ungainly pavilions at the angles, removed during the restoration which has been in progress since 1862. ( b ) The “Chateau Neuf.” — The remodelled castle still retained something of the gloom of a fortress, and Henry II decided to build a pleasure house pure and simple a quarter of a mile further east, on the edge of the plateau, 6 where a more extensive prospect could be enjoyed. De l’Orme designed a single-storeyed palace with a court suitable for scenic displays 1. It appears probable that the four wings of this hall were divided into storeys from the outset. 2. The entrance to the donjon was flanked by octagonal turrets, and the great stair planned in straight flights. 3. Such seems to have been the original arrangement of the front wing, but in a drawing of du Cerceau’s in the Cabinet des Estampes Recueil M, another scheme is shown with two stories and attics in the roof, and the towers (ff) covered with domes. It bears a note : “ Face du coste des offices non parfaicte. " 4. The flats are covered with stone slabs carried on vaulting, which is supported by iron ties and external buttresses, both methods belonging to the original con- struction. 5. This is the n.w. tower, which occupies the angles furthest from the spectator in pi. 8 . 6. In the foreground of pi. 8. 14 FRENCH CHATEAUX AND GARDENS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. (see plan, fig. 6), and galleries towards the view. The work remained unfinished, and Henry IV’s architect, Etienne du Perac, completed it, flanking it with outer courts, begun by the contractor, Guillaume Marchant, in 1594. A splendid series of terraces, arcades, and staircases led down to the gardens by the river, two hundred feet below. 1 The grottoes under the terraces were decorated with shellwork, painting, and statuary, and contained curious mechanical contrivances and fanciful waterworks. The new palace, being hastily and insecurely built, soon became ruinous, and was pulled down in 1776. Its only relics are one angle pavilion and some slight vestiges of the terraces and grottoes. ts 10 5 0 10 20 )0 40 50 bo 70 80 <)0 100 SCALE 08 Imii 1 1 t U METRES IOO 20 40 bO 80 100 SCALE OF UJ — I — I I I — L. — 200 1 }00 _J 400 Soo Fig. 5. CHATEAU VIEUX. PLAN. FEET )00 20 40 bO 80 100 SCALE OF LI — 1 — I— I — I — I — 200 —X FEET Fig. 6. CHATEAU NEUF. PLAN. LA MUETTE. 10 5 SCALE OFLiXU. 10 0 SCALE OFLU FEET Fig. 7. LA MUETTE. PLAN. The little chateau of La Muette — not to be confused with another of the same name 2 in the Bois de Boulogne — was built by Francis I as a hunting lodge in the woods of St. Germain. It appears in plate 8 (top right-hand corner) to be within a few hundred feet of the castle, but was in reality two leagues distant. Its elevations were similar to those of St. Germain, and it had the same stone slab roofs carried on vaulting. De l’Orme added a feature, of which he was very proud — a semicircular timber barrel-vault covered with slates, standing on the terrace roof and carrying a leaded belvedere. When du Cerceau wrote some twenty years later the weight of this superstructure already threatened the safety of the whole building, which was finally destroyed in the reign of Louis XV. The plan (fig. 7), remarkable for its convenient arrangements and its good lighting, is typical of the symmetrical and geometrical methods then coming into vogue, and an interest- ing example of their application to a small residence. It should be compared with the similar plan of Challuau. 3 FONTAINEBLEAU. The elevations of Fontainebleau can boast neither the exuberant fancy nor the delicate detail of the earlier, nor the state- liness and repose of the later, chateaux of the sixteenth century. It contains no architecture of the first rank. Yet it plays a foremost part in French architectural history. As Charles VIII planted the first batch of Italians at Amboise, which thus became the cradle of the earlier or Lombard phases of the Renaissance, so Francis I, a quarter of a century later, assembled a second colony at Fontainebleau, by whose means the later or Roman phase gained a footing in France, while they also brought with them the seeds of the decline which marked architecture under the later Valois. Their work there was mainly decorative, but by the multiplicity, the novelty, and the finish of their craftsmanship, as well as by their buildings elsewhere and their literary work, they established a lasting influence in their adopted country. 1. Du Cerceau’s drawings give no idea of the height and distance of the chateau neuf from the river, and are obviously incorrect in this respect. 2. Another form of “ Meute,” a place where hounds and hunting outfit were kept. 3. See D. 11, 56. > 4Wtfl‘ - ' i \\ ECOUEN. General view from the North-East. Plate XII. ECOUEN. Details of North and South Porticos in Court. Plate XIII. “Si f ,r> 5 ST. MAUR-LES-FOSSES (a Scheme for Enlargement). DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CHATEAUX : DESIGNS BY VARIOUS ARCHITECTS. *9 ST. MAUR-LES-FOSSES. T his chateau, of which nothing remains, is of special interest in several ways. Its original form and subsequent alterations were the work of one of the greatest architects of the century, who here won his spurs both as a practical constructor and as the pioneer of a new style. Cardinal Jean du Bellay, the friend and minister of Francis I and the patron of Rabelais, acquired in 1536 the property of St. Maur, six miles east of Paris, and commenced building soon after this date. His architect was the young Philibert de l’Orme, whom he had previously enticed back from Italy, and who has himself given us the plan, the front elevation, and a detail of the court. 1 The last is all but identical with du Cerceau’s illustrations 2 and seems not to have been altered. The rest of the design differs in several particulars from that shown in plate 13. It has no central pavilion, but an elaborate entrance doorway occurs in a low gallery (i.e. one without attic) with an order of engaged columns. The wings have a high enriched attic with pediments intended to conceal the roofs. The windows are treated with architraves and broken pediments, and rustication is confined to the angles and basement. It is an “ ensemble ” of considerable charm and very reminiscent of Italy. So classical a design is very remarkable at this early date, and as the work of a Frenchman. The gallery of Francis I and the grotto of the Pines at Fontaine- bleau, both probably by II Rosso, are the only examples in France of the Roman phase of the Renaissance earlier than St. Maur, while the chateau of Ancy-le- Franc, by Primaticcio, is about contemporary. De l’Orme characteristically boasts that it is the first edifice “ built in France to show how one should observe the proportions of architecture.” 3 He also vaunts the success with which he coped with practical difficulties. The site was a mound of made soil, through which at intervals of twelve feet he sank shafts forty feet deep down to a hard bottom. In these he built piers connected by arches to carry the walls, thus obtaining a good foundation at comparatively small cost. 4 On Francis I’s death (1547) the cardinal fell into disgrace and retired to Rome. His unfinished chateau 5 was sold to Catharine de’ Medici, who instructed de l’Orme to carry out extensive alterations. The three sheets, 6 from one of which plate 13 is reproduced, appear to illustrate a first scheme of enlargement, avoiding undue interference with the existing treatment, but adding a gatehouse and four pavilions at the back and sides. There were to have been loggias of six arches between the side pavilions and one of fifteen arches towards the garden, all carrying terraces level with the ground floor. This, however, was not of sufficiently “ great and magnificent excellence ” for Catharine. Another scheme (see plan, fig. 11) was in course of execution at the time de l’Orme wrote (1568), a model for which formed the basis of two of du Cerceau’s published drawings. 7 Each external elevation was to be flanked by double pavilions, with three storeys, steep roofs, and dormers, while the intervening spaces were to be filled by loggias of nine arches each, in two storeys, crushed under a gigantic pediment, 8 a feature which du Cerceau, while admitting its classical origin, felt to be somewhat startling. 9 All this may have rendered the chateau “ beaucoup plus riche et logeable ,” as its designer claims, but it meant the destruction of all that gave distinction and dignity to the earlier designs. ■ 10 0 SCALEOFLU- 20 40 fco 80 100 FEET Fig. 11. ST. MAUR-LES-FOSSES. PLAN OF FINAL SCHEME FOR ENLARGEMENT. ANCY-LE-FRANC. The chateau of Ancy-le-Franc, near Tonnerre in Burgundy, was built by Antoine de Clermont, who married Frangoise, sister of Diane de Poitiers. There is little, if any, doubt that Primaticcio was the architect. The building was complete by 1546 : the internal decoration, carried out by Niccolo dell’ Abate and others, was in progress till 1578. With the exception of the works of II Rosso at Fontainebleau this chateau is perhaps the earliest example in France of the 1. Premier Tome de 1 ’ Architecture, pp. 251 and 252. 2. D 11, 28, and B.M. vi, 87. 3. Nouvelles Inventions, ch. xi. 4. Premier Tome de l’Architecture, p. 46. 5. Only the back block, or at most the back and part of the side wings, seem to have been built. 6. B.M. 85 gives the basement and ground floor plans; 86, elevational bird’s-eye views from the garden and entrance fronts; 88, bird’s-eye view from the front = pi. 13. 7. D 11, 27 and 29, viz. the general plan of house and gardens, and the revised garden front. 8. Only the garden front seems to have received this treatment, and that remained unfinished in the seventeenth century. Cf. an engraving by Israel Silvestre in the Victoria and Albert Museum, No. 250. 9. Another alteration was the addition of a gallery to three sides of the court, thus concealing the stylobate of the order. 20 FRENCH CHATEAUX AND GARDENS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. matured classical Renaissance, 1 and a very perfect one of Franco-Italian fusion. The symmetry of the plan, with its completely closed courtyard (fig. 12, b) and the sober classicalism of the elevations (fig. 12, a) combine harmoniously with such native elements as projecting pavilions and high pitched roofs. Du Cerceau notes as an unique peculiarity that a raised terrace ran round the outer side of the moat. VIEW FROM NORTH. ANET. T here existed a castle at Anet, near Dreux, on the borders of Normandy from very early times. Under Philip Augustus (1 1 80- 1223) it belonged to the Crown, in the fifteenth century to the Breze family. Louis de Breze, 2 Grand Seneschal of Normandy, left it (1531) to his widow, Diane de Poitiers, who became the mistress of the dauphin Henry. On his accession as Henry II he made her Duchess of Valentinois and took a keen interest in the creation of a splendid pleasure house (pi. 14, 15) to replace the feudal fortress, supplying her with ample funds and his own architect, Philibert de l’Orme. The latter lavished all the resources of his art upon the work, laying out the three courts of the man- sion and its pleasaunce on symmetrical lines — broken only by the retention of older buildings in the eastern court. The works appear to have been completed be- tween 1548 and 1553. Jean Cousin made stained glass for the windows, and Jean Goujon, who worked there in 1 5 53 (if not earlier), made the Diana fountain in the western court, decorated the chapel and may have influenced parts of the architectural design. 3 The gate-house, with the angle pavilions and other buildings right and left of it, which together form a screen in front of the three courts, contained the offices and servants’ quarters. In the tympanum of the gateway was Benvenuto Cellini’s relief of Diana, 4 and above a bronze group in which dogs bayed at a stag as it struck the hours with its hoof. The left-hand quadrangle was closed in by the tennis court and the base court to the right contained a second fountain and gatehouse. In the centre court stood the principal buildings : in the left wing were the guests’ accommodation, in the right the chapel with galleries communicating with it, 5 while in the centre was the main entrance leading to the apartments of Henry and Diana on the first floor. The side wings were prolonged behind this central block towards the garden 6 and between them was a terrace level with the court and overlooking a sunk garden which was reached by a stately crescent stair. Below the terrace was a crypto-porticus. Arcaded loggias surrounded the garden on three sides and communicated at the further end with angle pavilions and a garden hall, roofed with de l’Orme’s system of wood vaulting ; it contained a minstrels’ gallery, and below were baths. Beyond lay the heronry and an orangery fitted with aviaries. In the seventeenth century the Duke of Vendome, who then owned Anet, carried out deplorable alterations, and at the Revolution the greater part of the buildings were pulled down. The portions still standing are the two gatehouses, the two angle pavilions and intervening buildings, the left wing of the main court, the chapel 7 and vestiges of the crypto- 10 SCALE OEL. 5 0 20 40 60 _l METRES 100 80 60 40 20 0 SCALE OF L-i— t— i—l— x— l— i—l— i—l 100 1 200 I FEET Fig. 12. PLAN. ANCY-LE-FRANC. 1. St. Maur les Fosses being almost contemporary. 2 . His tomb is on the n. side of the Lady Chapel in Rouen Cathedral. 3. e.g. The entrance portal at the back of the main court. 4. Said to have been made for the Porte Doree at Fontainebleau. 5. This wing seems to have been remodelled during construction. It can scarcely have been the original intention to imbed the turrets in the roof of the gallery as shown by du Cerceau ; possibly the front was designed at first to break back at this point, so as to exhibit the fagade of the chapel. 6. In the left-hand angle over the terrace was a cabinet added to the king’s apartments after completion, and carried on the celebrated “ trompe d’Anet,” an in- geniously devised form of stone corbelling imitating a vault, and so contrived as not to block the windows on the ground floor. 7. These buildings have been carefully restored. The new facade of the chapel is by Caristie. I licitCu A ! General view with g|j )) >1 ’1 I | PLATES XIV & XV. cr-^ , lr.cn :t. lens from the South. „ „ South-East. Plate XVI DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CHATEAUX: DESIGNS BY VARIOUS ARCHITECTS. 21 porticus. The central part of Goujon’s fountain and Cellini’s tympanum are in the Louvre. The main entrance bay has been re-erected in the court of the Ecole des Beaux Arts (r). A second chapel was erected outside the chateau to the west (1 562-76) as a mausoleum, and though dismantled at the Revolution is still standing. It is perhaps by Jean Bullant. The tombs of Diana and two children, which it contained, were broken open in 1795 ; the bodies still in good preservation were dragged out, stripped and exposed in the public road till two poor women covered them with pieces of wall paper from a ruinous house hard by. Diana’s abundant hair was distributed among local champions of democracy. VALLERY. The small medieval castle of Vallery, midway between Fontainebleau and Sens, was remodelled about the time of Henry II by Marshal de St. Andre, by the addition of an L-shaped building with a pavilion at the angle, which is said by du Cerceau to resemble the Louvre, and indeed bears some slight resemblance to Lescot’s external elevations. The design is some- times attributed to de l’Orme. Plate 1 6a shows a contemporary work, a walled pleasaunce enclosed between a terrace on the west, blind arcades on the north and south, and a cloister with two pavilions or casini on the west. The garden is bisected by a canal and divided into rectangular parterres enclosed in hedges. It is interesting to compare with the similar garden at Gaillon (pi. 16. b.) and those of Amboise (pi. 1), 100 50 0 50 100 SCALE OF | — I I 1 1 1 , |_1 u_L J 1 FEET Fig. 13. THE LOUVRE. P. LESCOT’S DESIGN. GROUND FLOOR PLAN. References to Figure 13. a Intended Entrance Pavilion. e Dais, b Intended Second Staircase (?). f Guard Room, c Intended Chapel (?). g Minstrels' Gallery, d King’s Chamber. h Main Staircase. The parts blacked in are those built between 1546 and 1576, the remainder is conjectural. This plan is based on du Cerceau, viz. : D.I. 1, 2, 3, 4, with description, B.M.I. 1 and 2, and the drawing reproduced in fig. 16, which is a design made by him for the entrance. A chapel with three apses seems to be suggested on the ground floor by D.I. 1, 1 . h. , at the point where the plan breaks off. The first floor plan, D.I. 1, r.h. , extends further east, and shows a rect- angular chamber at this place. Du Cerceau says the building was carried to the point where a second staircase was to be placed, viz., probably the project- ing bay next the s.e. angle, corresponding with the first stair next the n.w. angle. The start of a passage seems also to be indicated, which would run past the chapel and give access to the stairs and s.w. pavilion. In studying the history of the palaces their position in kept in mind. The original Louvre was built outside the Blois (pi. 3, 4), and Bury (pi. 6). THE LOUVRE AND TUILERIES. 1 The palaces of the Louvre and Tuileries, now united, once separated by a whole quarter of Paris, are of absorbing in- terest as the central residence of the French monarchies from the sixteenth century to their final disappearance, with the exception of a little over one century, when the glories of Versailles cast them into the shade. The history of their growth, union and decoration, illustrates almost every phase of architectural fashion since the establishment of the classical Renaissance in France. In the accompanying plates we may see that classical Renaissance in its earliest bloom in the Louvre of Pierre Lescot and Jean Goujon, and in a stage of expansion, but of temporary decline in taste in the Tuileries of Philibert de l’Orme. The history of the complex buildings now or once forming part of the united palaces of the Louvre and Tuileries falls into three main divisions : — I. The Louvre proper, i.e. the buildings enclosing the square eastern court. II. The Tuileries proper, i.e. the western range of build- ings occupying the space between the Pavilion de Marsan (21) on the north and the Pavilion de Flore (27) on the south. III. The junction of the two palaces. This division it- self falls into two parts each again subdivided into two, viz. : 1. The Greater Louvre, i.e. the buildings thrown out from the Louvre westward principally with a view to joining the two palaces : ( a ) Along the river. ( b ) Along the Rue de Rivoli. 2. The Greater Tuileries, i.e. the buildings thrown out from the Tuileries eastward with a view either to the com- pletion of the original scheme of that palace or to a junction with the Louvre : (a) Along the river. ( b ) Along the Rue de Rivoli. relation to the successive “ enceintes ” of the city should be walls of Philip Augustus. 2 The Louvre when its rebuilding 1. The references in small letters are to fig. 13 ; those in figures and capitals to fig. 14. 2. Built 1190-1210, indicated thus in fig. 14 : 22 FRENCH CHATEAUX AND GARDENS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 50 SCALE: OF l_i 50 _j 100 —1 150 200 250 iMfrTRK 100 50 0 SCALE OF I i I i I 100 I 200 300 _1 I 400 I 500 600 700 800 _J L_ 900 _1 FEET Fig. 14. BLOCK PLAN OF LOUVRE AND TUILERIES. N.B. — This diagram refers more particularly but not exclusively to the Ground Floor. I.— THE LOUVRE. II.— THE TUILERIES. maun West side of quadrangle as originally planned. 1546-59. Francis I and Henry II. P. Lescot, architect. South side of quadrangle. 1566-76. Charles IX and Henry III. P. Lescot, archt. 1583-1600. Henry IV. From Lescot's designs. (i) Petite Galerie, lower storey, c. 1566. Catharine de’ Medici. P. Chambiges, (?) architect or contractor. (ii) Block connecting Grande and Petite Galeries. c. 1570. Cathar- ine de’ Medici. (?) architect. (i) Grande Galerie, lower storey. 1566-72. Cath.de’ Med. (?) archt. (ii) Grande and Petite Galeries, upper storeys. 1594-9. Henry IV. (?) E. du Perac or one of the family Metezeau architect. Buildings forming Cour de la Reine to n. and w. of Petite Galerie. c. 1605-15. Henry IV and Louis XIII. (?) architect. ■wft'ct Petite Galerie remodelled. 1655-60. Anne of Austria. (?) architect. U ~1 Plan of Tuileries as originally designed. r 43 rj 2 Central portion of garden side. 1564-70. Catharine de’ Medici. Ph. de 1 ’Orme, architect. Southern Pavilion. 1570-2. Catharine de’ Medici. J. Bullant, architect. Completion of Palace proper. First instalment, 1600-9. Henry IV. (?) J- II A. du Cerceau, architect. Second instalment and remodelling of whole. 1664-80. Louis XIV. L. Le Veau and F. d’Orbay, architects, lllllllllllllll South win 8 connecting with Louvre. Galerie du Bord de 1 ’Eau and Pavilion de Flore. Henry IV. 1600-9. (?) J. II A. du Cerceau or E. du Perac, architect. Pavilion de Marsan. 1664-7. Louis XIV. L. Le Veau, architect. Enlarged quadrangle. Northern half of w. side and western half of n. side. 1624-54. Louis XIII and Richelieu. P. Le Mercier, architect. Enlarged quadrangle. Eastern half and river front. Louis XIV and Mazarin. L. Le Veau, architect. 1650-64. North wing connecting with Louvre, and Arc du Carrousel. 1806-13. Napoleon I. Percier and Fontaine, architects. Completion of connecting wings, including refacing of older work. I 1 1860-5. Napoleon III. H. M. Lefuel, architect. r^ n Enlarged quadrangle. New southern, eastern (colonnade of Louvre) and part of northern outer fronts. 1667-74. Louis XIV and Colbert. Cl. Perrault, architect. Western extension. Commencement of n. wing at e. and w. ends. 1811. Napoleon I. Percier and Fontaine, architects. Western extension. Completion, including refacing of older work. 1850-7. Napoleon III. L. Visconti and H. M. Lefuel, archts. Pavilions de Flore and de Marsan and n. wing. J/SSSJJ facing after fire of the Commune. 1873-8. H. M. Lefuel, architect. Rebuilding or re- Third Republic. References to Figure 14. THE LOUVRE. THE TUILERIES. I Pavilion de Rohan. 12 Petite Galerie. 21 Pavilion de Marsan. 2 Pavilion Turgot. 13 Salle des Antiques. 22 Wing by L. Le Veau. 3 Pavilion Richelieu. 14. 14 Grande Galerie. 23 Pavilion by L. Le Veau. 4 Pavilion Colbert. 14a Porte Jean Goujon. 24, 24 Wings by Ph. de l’Orme. 5 Block by Percier and Fontaine. 15 Pavilion Lesdiguieres. 24 a Central Pavilion. 6 Pavilion Sully 1 16 Guichets des Sts. Peres. 25 Pavilion by J. Bullant. 7 Pavilion de l’Horloge J 17 Pavilion Mollien. 26 Wing by J. II A. du Cerceau (?). 8 Block by P. Lescot. 18 Pavilion Denon. 27 Pavilion de Flore. 9 Pavilion Marengo. 19 Pavilion Daru. 28, 28 Galerie du Bord de l’Eau. 10, 10 Colonnade of the Louvre. 20 Position of Bridge Gallery from Louvre 29 Site of Porte Neuve. 11 Pavilion des Arts. to Petite Galerie. 30 Pavilion La Tremoille. 3 i Salle des Etats. 32 Arc du Carrousel. A Cour du Ministre. D Cour du Sphinx (or de la Reine). 33 Faqade by H. M. Lefuel. B.B Cours des Caisses. E Cour Visconti. 34 Wing by Percier and Fontaine. C Cour du Vieux Louvre. F Cour Lefuel. DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CHATEAUX : DESIGNS BY VARIOUS ARCHITECTS. 23 began stood inside the wall of Charles V. 1 11 The Tuileries were built outside this wall and were long virtually unpro- tected, since the new walls outside it begun by Henry II, and continued by Charles IX (1563-6), were not completed till the reign of Louis XIII (1633-6). Ten years later they were abandoned as fortifications and turned into a public promenade. I. THE LOUVRE PROPER. Facies ceometmca illivs PARTIS PAVILION IS QV^. FLYMEN RESPICIT Le Lowre Face geo-metrale dv PAV1LON D V COST E DE LA RIVIERE The Louvre 2 has many analogies with the Tower of London, of which indeed it was an imitation. Its site was similar, ad- joining the walls of the capital on the outside at a point where they met the river. Like the Tower it was the fortress, arsenal, state prison and treasury, as well as the residence of the kings. Founded by Philip Augustus in 1204, the castle occupied about one quarter of the area of the present quadrangle, 3 and con- sisted of a square court flanked by ten round towers with an isolated circular keep in its midst. 4 It was surrounded by a moat and separated from the Seine by a base court and a road, both defended by further walls and towers. Several kings left their mark on the Louvre, notably Charles V, who built the north and east facades of the court and a magnificent spiral staircase (1365), designed by Raymond du Temple. After the Hundred Years’ War the Louvre, like the Tower, ceased to be the regular residence of royalty. 5 Little alteration took place in it till the reign of Francis I, who, after first des- troying the donjon, which darkened the court (1527), and re- decorating the interior 6 (1539), decided to rebuild it. It is said 7 that a competition for the design of the new palace was held ( 1 543), and that Serlio 8 advised the king to accept Lescot’s 9 designs as superior to his own. Be this as it may, Lescot was appointed architect and conducted the building till his death (1546-78), with the collaboration of Goujon 10 (1549-62) and other sculptors. The new building was to form a square court covering approxi- mately the same area as the old, viz., 175 feet square, and pre- sumably” to have pavilions at the four angles (figs. 13 & 15), wings of two storeys and an attic on three sides (pi. 17), a lower wing containing the entrance (fig. 16) on the east (see dotted lines on %• 13 )- The west side (8, also pi. 17), begun by Francis, was built principally by Henry II, who also began the south wing. This was continued by his sons 12 and completed by Henry IV. Under Louis XIII and by Richelieu’s orders the build- ing was resumed on an extended scheme, which more than doubled the length of the sides and quadrupled the area of the court, making it 410 feet square (1624-54). The architect was Le Mercier, 13 who prolonged the west wing northwards by adding a replica of Lescot’s facade and intercalating in the centre a pavilion of his own (6, 7) (“ Pavilion de l’Horloge ” or “Sully”), and began the return wing on the north. The work was continued under Louis XIV and Mazarin by Fig. 15- THE LOUVRE. P. LESCOT S DESIGN. EXTERNAL ELEVATION OF S.W. ANGLE PAVILION. 1. Built 1367-1383, indicated thus in fig. 14 : 2. The name is first mentioned in 1189. Its origin is quite uncertain. 3. The position of its buildings is marked by lines in the pavement. 4. The “ Tour,” or “ Grosse Tour du Louvre,” from which all fiefs in the kingdom were held. 5. It was abandoned in favour of the palaces of “ St. Pol ” and the “ Tournelles.” 6. In view of the visit of the Emperor Charles V. 7. By Claude Perrault. 8. Sebastiano Serlio, b. 1475, d. 1552. 9. Pierre Lescot, b. c. 1510, d. 1578. 10. Jean Goujon, b. c. 1510, d. bef. 1564. 11. Lescot's drawings, still in existence in 1624, have since been lost. 12. Under Charles IX du Cerceau seems to have made a design for a chapel for the Louvre, near the river, which was not carried out. 13. Jacques Le Mercier, b. 1590, d. 1654. 24 FRENCH CHATEAUX AND GARDENS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. iitfttUMti Le Veau, 1 who completed the quadrangle internally and the south outer front (1650-64), following substantially the lines laid down by Lescot and Le Mercier. Colbert, who became superintendent of the royal buildings in 1664, and in whose opinion Le Veau’s elevations for the east or entrance front 2 were not sufficiently imposing, obtained other designs. 3 These, however, proving equally unsatisfactory Bernini, 4 then at the zenith of his fame, was consulted and eventually sent for from Rome. Received with all but royal honours (1665) he produced a new and grandiose scheme, which though on a vast scale was merely an example of the “ forcible-feeble ” and abounded in shams. Though the work was actually begun the Italian’s inor- dinate pretensions and the defects of a design 5 which involved the obliteration of almost all that had preceded it with- out providing the desired accommoda- tion produced a reaction and Bernini was soon travelling home with ample compensation in his pockets for his slighted talents. Meanwhile an in- had secured the royal sanction trigue to a design by Claude Perrault, 1 2 3 4 5 6 a physician who had made a hobby of architecture. This with certain modi- fications was carried out by Le Veau, and thus arose the famous colonnade of the Louvre (10, 10). Being higher and longer than the older buildings, this scheme entailed the substitution of a third order for the attic on the e. and parts of the n. and s. sides of the court and the addition of a new river facade in front of that recently finished by Le Veau (11 etc.). This, together with the greater part of the n. outer front (9 etc.) was designed by Perrault (1667-74). The works were left unfinished and unroofed till in the reign of Louis XV Gabriel 7 (1755) and Soufflot 8 (1757), and in that of Louis XVI Brebion 9 carried out works of restoration and completion, to which Percier 10 and Fontaine 11 put the finishing touches under Napoleon I (1803). At this period the third order on the n. and s. sides of the court was carried on as far as the w. end, the attic being retained on the w. side only. The only further modification of importance under- gone by the old Louvre was the refacing of its western outer front (6 etc.), (1853-7), to bring it into harmony with the new Louvre then in course of erection. Fig. l6. THE LOUVRE. DESIGN FOR ENTRANCE PAVILION BY J. A. DU CERCEAU. II. THE TUILERIES PROPER. A suburban site near the walls, named after tile and pottery works which had previously occupied it, was acquired in January, 1564, by Catharine de’ Medici for a more spacious residence than was possible within the confined limits of the 1. Louis Le Veau (Vau), b. 1612, d. 1670. 2. Illustrated in Blondel’s Architecture Frangaise. 3. Illustrated in BloodePs Architecture Frangaise. 4. Giovanni Lorenzo Bernini, b. 1598, d. 1680. 5. c.g. The main carriage entrance was ridiculously insignificant. This was the design which Bernini would only allow Wren, then in Paris, to look at for a moment as a great privilege. He gave out that it was the result of divine inspiration. See illustrations in Blondel’s Architecture Frangaise. 6. B. 1613, d. 1688. His brother Charles, who was employed in Colbert’s office, had engineered the intrigue. 7. Jacques Ange Gabriel, b. 1698, d. 1782. 8. Jacques Germain Soufflot, b. 1709, d. 1780. 9. Maximilien Brebion, b. 1716, d. 1796. 10. Charles Percier, b. 1764, d. 1838. 11. Pierre Francis Fontaine, b. 1762, d. 1853. Plate XVII. THE LOUVRE. Elevation of West Side of Court. DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CHATEAUX : DESIGNS BY VARIOUS ARCHITECTS. 2 5 Louvre, and free from the tragic associations of the Tournelles, where her husband had been killed in a tournament five years before. She entrusted the work to Philibert de l’Orme, 1 who had been out of favour since that event. He pre- pared a scheme compared with which the Louvre would have been insignificant, but a very small portion of it was executed. The plan measured about 875 feet by 540 feet. The south end was to face the river, the east front would have almost reached the walls and encroached on the moat, while the west front — the only part begun — looked on to a garden, laid out at the same time, in which Palissy 2 erected a grotto of his enamelled earthenware. At de l’Orme’s death (Jan., 1570) only the lower storey of the central pavilion (24a), containing a spiral stair of in- genious construction and the galleries on each side of it (24, 24), consisting of one storey preceded by a portico and sur- mounted by an elaborate attic, were complete. Hitherto these have been the only portions of the scheme of which the Fig. 17. THE LOUVRE. DETAIL OF ATTIC. original elevation was known (cf. pi. 20). Du Cerceau s two bird’s-eye views (pi. 18, 19) show us with great fulness the entire design. From them we learn amongst other things that de l’Orme’s stair pavilion was not to terminate in an elliptical dome flanked by four cupolas, as is usually stated, 3 but in the usual hipped roof, — that the elliptical enclosures in the lateral courts shown on the plan were domed halls, probably intended for spectacular displays or dancing, and that the buildings round the lateral courts differed from the central portion in being both higher and plainer in treatment. Bullant 4 succeeded de 1 Orme, but two years later (1572) the Oueen Mother, frightened by the prediction of a sooth- sayer and finding the position too insecure in such troublous times, abandoned the building and commissioned him to design her a mansion within the walls. 5 His work at the Tuileries consisted in the addition of a pavilion at the south end (25) with a sundial on its southern face, and possibly the first few courses of a corresponding pavilion on the north (23). He maintained the general lines of de 1 Orme s treatment, but omitted the bands on the columns, introduced broken and reversed pediments over the niches, and added an attic even more fantastic than that of the galleries. Nothing was done to the palace till Henry IV added the upper storey and dome to the stair pavilion (24a), and on the completion of his new waterside building (27, 28) connected the Pavilion de Flore (27) with Bullant’s pavilion by a block (26), forming the last link in the chain joining the two palaces (1609). This block, like the waterside buildings, was probably by J. A. du Cerceau the younger, and like them had a giant order embracing the two storeys, but a projecting stair-turret at each end had two orders and formed a transition from the old to the new treatment. 1. Philibert de l’Orme, b. c. 1512, d. 1570. 2. Bernard Palissy, b. c. 1510, d. 1590. 3. This treatment appears to have been due to one of Henry IV’s architects, possibly J. A. du Cerceau the younger. 4. Jean Bullant, b. c. 1525 (?) d. 1578. 3. The Hotel de la Reine, later known as Hotel de Soissons. The only portion of which now survives is the column attached to the Bourse du Travail, 26 FRENCH CHATEAUX AND GARDENS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. Though seventeenth century engravings balance the fa$ade by repeating Bullant’s and du Cerceau’s blocks on the north side (21, 22, 23), there was in reality nothing built north of de l’Orme’s Gallery, nor was the completion taken in hand till the ministry of Colbert under Louis XIV, when the work was begun by Le Veau and continued by d’Orbay 1 (1664-80). Their scheme involved a recasting of the existing buildings to bring them into comparative uniformity of height and treatment. For the central double pavilion (2y a ) a larger single one with an additional storey and square dome was sub- stituted, the original staircase disappearing in the process. In de l’Orme’s galleries the attic was destroyed and a plain upper storey and attic added. In Bullant’s pavilion (25) the attic was also destroyed to make way for a plainer one. In du Cerceau’s block (26) the stair turrets disappeared behind a new facade of similar treatment to the old but of more regular setting out. Both these blocks with their new Mansard roofs were repeated to the north (22, 23) and a uniform balus- trade carried through from the central to the outermost pavilions, and the palace of Catharine thus enlarged was in this manner organically united to the northern and southern extensions. The modifications since carried out at the Tuileries chiefly affected in- ternal arrangements and neither they nor the buildings which grew up on the eastern side need be mentioned here. The palace was destroyed by a fire lit by the officers of the Commune on May 23rd and 24th, 1871, and its ruins removed in 1882. III. THE JUNCTION OF THE PALACES. Catharine de’ Medici seems at an early date to have had the idea of connecting the Louvre with her new palace by a series of galleries, but to Henry IV is due the first scheme for a more organic union by means of a vast court involving the removal of the intervening streets and fortifi- cations. Neither this scheme nor those made for Louis XIV by Perrault 2 or Bernini 3 nor that made for Louis XV by Boffrand were put into execution. Napoleon resumed the project and an instalment of a scheme prepared for him by Percier and Fontaine was actually built at each end of the n. side (5, 34). Napoleon III again took up the work, and, after the rejection of a scheme by Duban, 4 his architects, Visconti 5 and Lefuel, 6 finally carried it to a successful completion. Ill (i). THE GREATER LOUVRE. ( a ) The Southern Wing. — The earliest extension of the old Louvre outside the square court was made about 1566 by Catharine de’ Medici in the form of an open arcaded gallery over which was a balustraded terrace and which ran southwards from the s.w. angle of the palace (12). It was reached from the angle pavilion by a bridge-gallery (20) crossing the moat. Whether Pierre Chambiges the younger, to whom the design of the portico is usually attributed, was the architect or merely the con- tractor is doubtful ; the bridge gallery may possibly have been designed by the elder du Cerceau. The object of this extension, later known as the Petite Galerie, was to permit the court to take the air and enjoy the prospect over the Seine without leaving the precincts of the palace. The site of the Tuileries could also be reached from it by following the public walk along the river- side walls westward as far as the Porte Neuve (29), where they turned inland, and this may have suggested the idea of connecting the two palaces by a private and covered gallery. The connection was not completed for forty years, but the first link in the chain was like the Petite Galerie begun by Catharine de’ Medici in the same or following year and like it consisted probably in a one-storeyed gallery with a terrace above it, 7 showing great richness of treatment (14, 14). This so-called Grande Gallerie, extending westwards about as far 10 s 0 , lu.ii. _ L- 20 }0 40 _1 I L_ 50 100 METRES 10 0 20 40 bo 80 100 SCALE OF u — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 200 Fig. l8. THE TUILERIES. PHILIBERT DE L’ORMES DESIGN. 300 —l FEET PLAN. 1. Francois d'Orbay, son-in-law and pupil of Le Veau, b. 1634, d. 1697. 2. Blondel’s Architecture Frangaise, IV, pi. 1 and 2. 3. Blondel’s Architecture Frangaise, IV, pi. 3. 4. Jacques Felix Duban, b. 1797, d. 1870. 5. Louis Visconti, a naturalized Italian, b. 1791, d. 1853. 6. Hector Martin Lefuel, b. 1810, d. 1880. 7. The architect is unknown. He may have been Thibaut Metezeau of Dreux, b. 1533, d. 1596. 'Y)csanr .iciciuztiot • nr in I'euc an aiHi THE TUILERIES, Ph Perspective Vi< Isometric Projec PLATES XVIII &XIX. i bert del’Orme’s Design, f from the West, c )n from the East. Towards the Court (East). DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CHATEAUX : DESIGNS BY VARIOUS ARCHITECTS. 27 as the Pavilion Lesdiguieres (15), seems to have been separated at first from the south end of the Petite Galerie by a building known as the Maison de l’Engin, which was soon replaced by a new block (“ Salle des Ambassadeurs,” “ des Antiques,” or “ d’Auguste ”) of much plainer design (13). Little work was done on any of these buildings after 1572 till Henry IV took them in hand (1594-9). His architect, who may have been du Perac, 1 or one of the Metezeau family, 2 or each in succession, made the river front into a homogeneous composition. In the centre was a slightly projecting feature (now known by the misleading name “Porte Jean Goujon ”) (14a), and at the west end buildings were designed to match the Salle des Antiques and the south front of the Petite Galerie at the east. 3 The Grande Galerie had been built at a lower level than the Petite, a fact which suggested the introduction of a mezzanine above its lower order so as to permit the upper storeys then added to the whole range of buildings and their orders to be on one level. Three narrow openings in the Grande Galerie gave access from the town to the river. Henry IV and Louis XIII further added some buildings to the north and west of the Petite Galerie, masking its junction with the old Louvre and the Grande Galerie and forming a small court known as “ Cour de la Reine ” 4 (D), and Anne of Austria transformed the Petite Galerie itself, which had hitherto been open, into apartments. No further alteration of importance was made to the south wing of the Louvre till its restoration by Duban (1849-53), followed by Napoleon Ill’s comprehensive scheme for the junction of the two palaces, which involved the refacing of its northern facades and the erection of the buildings enclosing the courts (F, E, D) named after Visconti, Lefuel, and the Sphinx (1852-7), and comprising the Pavilions Mollien, Denon, Daru (17, 18, 19). (b) The North Wing. — No attempt was made before the time of Napoleon I to join the two palaces on the north. Under him Percier and Fontaine began a wing running west from the n.w. angle of the old Louvre (5) and containing a rotunda to balance one included in the buildings of Henry IV and Louis XIII on the south (1811), and Fontaine alone built the Pavilion de Rohan (1) adjoining the new northern extension of the Tuileries (34) (1813-16). Finally, Visconti (1850-3) and Lefuel (1853-7) erected the ranges of buildings with their three small courts (A, B, B) and the Pavilions Turgot, Richelieu, and Colbert (2, 3, 4), which form the Ministry of Finance ; Lefuel also refaced the work of Percier and Fontaine. Ill (ii). THE GREATER TUILERIES. (a) The South Wing. — Having finished the galleries of the Louvre, Henry IV added a southern wing to the Tuileries and thus completed the junction of the palaces. It did not stand quite on the site contemplated in de l’Orme’s plan, but a little further south, and, being in a line with the earlier riverside galleries, was out of square with the main front of the Tuileries (see fig. 14). The main cornice of the Grande Galerie was continued, but a giant order on a high basement sub- stituted for the two orders and intervening mezzanine. 5 The new gallery (28, 28) consisted of 14 bays with pediments alternately pointed and curved. 6 The same order was carried, at the western extremity, round the Pavilion de Flore (27), which had an additional storey and attic, 7 and along the block (26) which connected it with Bullant’s pavilion (25). All these buildings were erected between 1600 and 1609, and Jacques Androuet du Cerceau the younger was probably their architect, though the Pavilion de Flore is sometimes attributed to du Perac. Little of importance was done to this part of the palace till after the completion of the new Louvre, when Lefuel, under the pretext of a restoration, not only rebuilt the Pavilion de Flore in a florid style of his own but refaced the river front of the gallery to imitate the Grande Galerie of the Louvre, adding a central feature (2 8 a ) to match the Porte Jean Goujon (14a) (1860-5). At the same time he remodelled the carriage way 8 into the present Guichet des Sts. Peres (16), building the Pavilion de la Tremoille (30) to the west of it to match the Pavilion de Lesdiguieres (15), and rebuilt the north front to match the new Louvre with a projecting block containing the Salle des Etats (31). The whole wing was damaged by the fire of 1871 and restored by Lefuel, and the demolition ol the old Tuileries taking place at that time, the Pavilion de Flore was completed on the north. (b) The North Wing. — The only portion of the north wing of the Tuileries (which like the south wing is outside the limits of de l’Orme’s plan) erected before the nineteenth century was the Pavilion de Marsan (21), which formed part of Le Veau’s and d’Orbay’s scheme (1664-7), an d was a replica of the original Pavilion de Flore. Under Napoleon I, a gallery running eastward from it was added by Percier and Fontaine (34), who copied the riverside gallery opposite, and also built the Arc du Carrousel (32). The pavilion (21) and part of this wing were damaged by the fire of 1871 and rebuilt by Lefuel (1873-8), the former to match his new Pavilion de Flore, and the latter (33) in a style inspired by the Grande Galerie of the Louvre. 1. Etienne du Perac, b. 1544, d. 1601. 2. Viz., Louis, b. 1557, d. 1615. Clement, b. 1581, d. 1652, was evidently too young to have been architect to this part of the palace. Both were sons of Thibant. 3. This pavilion, now called Pavilion de Lesdiguieres, was crowned by a lantern, and was known as the “ Lanterne des Galeries.” 4. The present “ Cour du Sphinx.” 5. The original treatment of this gallery was reproduced by Percier and Fontaine in their northern extension of the Tuileries, where part of it still exists (34). 6. Illustrated in Blondel’s Architecture Frangaisc, IV, pi. 26. 7. Illustrated in Blondel’s Architecture Fran^aise, IV, pi. 24, 25, and 26. 8. Made in 1759, a little west of the Pavilion de Lesdiguieres. \ II. DESIGNS BY J. A. DU CERCEAU. MONTARGIS. T HE castle of Montargis is an example of a primitive type of feudal fortification with a circular keep isolated in the midst of the enceinte. Its principal interest for us is that for several years it was the scene of du Cerceau’s labours and the home of his benefactress, Renee of Ferrara. The character of the improvements which he carried out for her cannot now be known, since the castle has been completely dismantled and his illustrations refer to the earlier buildings, 1 except in the case of the gardens, where the pergola, reproduced in fig. 19, and other similar structures visible in the general views 1 bear the stamp of his time and are probably his work. VERNEUIL. NfER-NXVL The chateau of Verneuil-sur-Oise was begun for M. de Boulainvillers (1565); it then passed into the hands of the Duke of Nemours, who continued the works (1568-75). They appear to have been still unfinished at his death (1584) and only to have been completed by Henry IV, who presented this chateau to his mistress, Henriette d’Entraigues (1600). It seems to have fallen into 'decay in the eighteenth century, and few ves- tiges remain of the great pile or its splendid gardens. The building of Verneuil is of considerable interest in the history of French architecture. It probably afforded du Cerceau (see p. 3) the first opportunity for the exercise of his talents on an extended scale. It gave rise to a number of interesting studies on his part, and among them to two complete and distinct schemes, each of which was — in part at least — put into execution and exhibits some of his most characteristic design. Further, the works in connection with this chateau, from their importance and long duration, became a training ground for young architects, especially those belonging to the families of du Cerceau, de Brosse, and du Ry ; they settled at Verneuil and had bonds of 10 5 scale of 1 ^ scale OFI 20 40 SCALE OF 20 J METRES Fig. 20. CHATEAU OF VERNEUIL-SUR-OISE. PLAN. FIRST SCHEME. SCALE 0F‘ 10 0 20 40 GO 80 IOO -I FEET Fig. 21. OISE. CHATEAU OF VERNEUIL-SUR- PLAN. SECOND SCHEME. i. D.I 33. B.M. II, 25-29. mlm % t§ £ o < o -4-» w £ u £ < 2: o CO M c s x w c .2 4-> a$ > 0) w Ph Details of Interior (Lower Hall). Plate XXII. - K 'rtjhjjr * L. 1 I = ' 'fc am \ fM L m I 1“ 1 Lwj« i r- c» & m i ^ fc VERNEUIL. General view with Gardens, DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CHATEAUX : DESIGNS BY JACQUES ANDROUET DU CERCEAU. 29 union not only in their common professional pursuits and the kinship which existed between some of them, but also in the fact that they were all Huguenots. Figure 20 shows the plan of the original scheme made for M. de Boulainvillers, and figure 21 that of the second made for the Duke of Nemours. In engravings by Silvestre 1 (c. 1650) the chateau appears almost identically as shown in du Cerceau’s drawings of the first scheme 2 (pi. 22 and 23b), and La Martiniere, 3 writing in 1741, states that the pavilions were double or eight in all. This would appear a conclusive proof that the first scheme was carried out were it not that Perelle 4 (c. 1680) gives a view of the chateau in substantial agreement with the second scheme (fig. 24), and thus Fig. 22. VERNEUIL. CHIMNEY-PIECE. strengthens the probability that du Cerceau knew what he was talking about when he stated that the Duke had “already” — in 1576 — caused single pavilions to be substituted for double, and showed by the titles to drawings of both schemes that the former had been abandoned when half built. The only means of settling the point finally would be to excavate the foundations. The first scheme is further illustrated by pi. 22, a bird’s-eye view of the chateau and its gardens, pi. 23b, the entrance front, and fig. 23, an alternative elevation for a hall with concave front situated below the terrace towards the garden, 5 the 1. Cf. Israel Silvestre. No. 316 (1, 2, and 3) in the Victoria and Albert Museum. 2. Viz., B.M. Ill, 40, 41, 42, 43, and D.I. 47a, 48, 49, 50, and 52. 3. In the Grand Dictionnaire Geographique, quoted by Palustre, Renaissance en France, I, p. 83, note 4. 4. In Rcceuillc des plus belles Veiies dcs Maisons Royale (sic) de France, pi. 40, which shows a walled fore-court with angle pavilions and gatehouses similar in character to the main building. The gate-pavilion resembles the variant reproduced in Les du Cerceau, p. 200, rather than fig. 24, but is simpler in treatment. 5. See pi. 22. 30 FRENCH CHATEAUX AND GARDENS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. Fig. 23. VERNEUIL. ELEVATION O'F GARDEN HALL. FIRST SCHEME. La MONSTRE DV BASTI M ENT DVCOSTE DV PARC cvyi EST LENTREE Facies inoressvs Fig. 24. VERNEUIL. VIEW FROM PARK, SHOWING ENTRANCE FRONT. SECOND SCHEME. Plate XXIII, 4 * * iu til 1 pi ^ Hi i bCltl Alt MShtHMf A C Aitcc p/trtu du tfriint o cut ann Hr'i V . V'# JA> i w ms wm Si Bli i jgg ;>4^ ilf^Axa ?ffcX^X ; - X--^ \ jpj ■ ■ - A rdrm L PLAN. DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CHATEUX : DESIGNS BY JACQUES ANDROUET DU CERCEAU. 31 semicircular space being intended for use as a theatre. Fig. 25, 1 an elevation suggested by, or having suggested, that in fig. 23, may have been intended for a hall to occupy a similar position in the second scheme, and shown in darker tint on the plan, fig. 21, but probably never built. The chimney-piece 2 in fig. 22 and the gallery in pi. 23b may belong to either scheme. The latter formed one side of the court, which was decorated with statues representing the great monarchies of antiquity. The second scheme, which is illustrated by figs. 21 and 24, though inferior to the first in picturesqueness, is of interest as showing a nearer approach than anything which had preceded it to the monumental manner which held the field in the following century. Fig. 25. VERNEUIL OR CHARLEVAL. DESIGN FOR GALLERY WITH PAVILIONS. CHARLEVAL. The “ maladie de batir ” was hereditary with the Valois race. The immense building activity of Francis I and Henry II might have seemed sufficient to provide for the wants of any court, yet Charles IX must needs erect a palace of his own. For twenty-five generations the kings of France were devotees of the chase and he was one of the keenest. He chose a romantic valley in the forest of Lyons 3 as the site for his hunting seat and gave it his name. Begun in 1572, the works had made little progress at the king’s death two years later ; they were neglected and soon abandoned by his suc- cessor. A small hall locally known as the “ Salle des Pages ” and a few rusticated piers by the stream are now the only relics of what was to have been “the first of the buildings of France.” 4 The generous lines on which the plan (pi. 24, 25) was conceived may be judged from the following figures. The base court measures internally about 500 feet square, so that the whole chateau of Chambord could almost have stood within it, while the external measurements of the base court with its four subsidiary courts are about seventy feet wider and 250 feet longer than those of de l’Orme’s plan for the Tuileries. Internally the court of honour was to be about 300 feet square, or large enough to contain the whole castle of Ecouen with room to spare, while in external measurements it would have exceeded Lescot’s complete scheme for the Louvre by some feet each way. The area to be covered by courts and buildings was about thirty-one acres, and the circular space with which the plan terminates was to be the centre not the end of the garden scheme. When in addition to the vastness of the dimensions we consider the complexity of requirements in such a palace, the number of its apartments, halls and galleries with their lobbies and staircases, we can but be struck with admiration at the 1. From a drawing in the Cabinet des Estampes, Recueil N. It may, however, be a sketch for a part of Charleval. 2. This chimney-piece is selected among several, not as a favourable specimen of du Cerceau’s design, but rather as typical of the decadent and extravagant taste of the last period of the earlier Renaissance in France. 3. About twenty miles e.s.e. of Rouen. 4. A monumental chimney-stack was pulled down as unsafe within the last ten years. FRENCH CHATEAUX AND GARDENS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. Fig. 27. CHARLEVAL. DESIGN FOR ELEVATION OF BASE COURT, -c v '""'w vfe 4> ..-a ■*v - • - -^A>' •r^ ^pF . ,. r ^c- > ~~V - -^4 :v>„f "A! £ : -Jw?-J? ■?-%A - igj 3®i 3 H - - * ■'-». d IDEAL CHATEAU in the form of a Greek Cross. DESCRIPTIONS OF THE CHATEAUX : DESIGNS BY JACQUES ANDROUET DU CERCEAU. 33 masterly skill with which they have all been combined into a scheme of perfect symmetry and regularity, a true least to the architectural eye, and we echo du Cerceau’s words : “A plan worthy of a monarch.” 1 We have only fragmentary information as to the elevations proposed. Possibly they were never fully designed. The gallery shown in fig. 26 was however begun and formed part of the base court, although it cannot be identified on the plan, which though adopted as a whole was evidently subject to revision in detail. Fig. 27 shows some studies for the external elevations of the same court, a series of variations on one theme. Had they been built in juxtaposition as drawn their lack of unity would have been distracting, but in so vast a building there was room for the introduction of many types in different parts. The elevation in fig. 25 is of unknown destination, and though resembling the foregoing in treatment seems to fit in better at Verneuil. At Charleval only the dressings and plinth were of stone and a pleasantly toned red brick was used for the walling. IDEAL CHATEAUX A & B. A great deal of du Cerceau’s architectural work consisted in the composition of designs intended, not so much for actual execution, as for suggestions to architects and their patrons. He took a special delight in elaborating schemes of ideal symmetry with plans based on regular geometrical figures, and his Livre d.' Architecture and Livre pour bastir aux Champs as well as Recueil N in the Cabinet des Estampes are composed largely of designs of this character. Plates 26, 27 and figs. 28, 29 illustrate two of the more ambitious of such schemes and give a good idea of du Cerceau’s methods. The drawings from which they are reproduced would appear to belong to the same series as those engraved in the Livre pour bastir aux Champs , in which country houses with their surroundings are figured. The book contains no close parallel to Chateau A 2 (pi. 26, fig. 28). Chateau B however (pi. 27, fig. 29) varies but slightly from No. xxxviii in the book, where the plan of the mansion externally, of the lake and of the bridge-houses is identical, but the court instead of being a simple square shows curved recesses following the exterior line of the plan. The elevations too show slight variations. Fig. 28. DESIGN FOR IDEAL CHATEAU A. HALF PLAN. Fig. 29. DESIGN FOR IDEAL CHATEAU B. HALF PLAN. 1. The plan in two sheets reproduced in pi. 24, 25, in one is almost identical with that in D II, ig ; it omits, however, the triapsal chapels which in the latter occupy the centre of each of the two smallest courts. 2. In Recueil N is a chateau planned as a Greek cross with four courts, but there the principal buildings are round the outer courts, not as here, round the inner. Plate XXVII. ^53tt| ; nonoo iaasans. ri?V- iia nnnnl /•.rnmnsir h-mnG Ingaaan dagggg gnaaaal IDEAL CHATEAU in the form of a square with projections. 1 I ' - INDEX OF PERSONS. A. Abate, Niccolo dell’, painter, ig. Amboise, George d’, Cardinal, 9, 10. Androuet, see Cerceau. Anne of Austria, wife of Louis XIII, 22, 27. Anne of Brittany, wife of Charles VIII and Louis XII, Tin., 12. B. Baillard, Charles, mason, i8n. Bays, Gilles, publisher, 6. Becjeame, Luc, architect, gn. Bellay, Jean du, Cardinal, 19. Bernini, Giovanni Lorenzo, architect, 24, 26. Betti, see Giusto. Biard, Nicolas (Colin), mason, 10. Blondel, Jacques, writer, 24m Boccador or Boccadoro, see Domenico. Boffrand, G., architect, 26. Boulainvillers, M. de, 1, 28, 29. Bourbon, Cardinal of, see Charles. Brebion, Maximilien, architect, 24 and note. Breton, Gilles le, mason, 15, 17. Breze, Diane de, see Poitiers. Breze, Louis de, 20. Brosse, Jehan, architect, son-in-law of Jacques (1) du Cerceau, 2. Brosse, Paul de, architect, son of Salomon, 2. Brosse, Salomon de, architect, son of Jehan, 2. Bullant, Jean, architect, 2, 18, 22, 25-27. C. Caristie, architect, 20. Castoret, see Girard. Catharine de’ Medici, wife of Henry II, 1, 2, 6, 12, i6n., 19, 22, 24-26. Cellini, Benvenuto, sculptor, 20, 21. Cerceau, Baptiste Androuet du, architect, son of Jacques (1), !- 3 - Cerceau, Guillaume Gabriel Androuet du, engraver, son of Paul, 2. Cerceau, Jacques (1) Androuet du, see passim. Cerceau, Jacques (2) Androuet du, architect, son of Jacques (1), 1, 2, 24, 25, 27. Cerceau, Jean Androuet du, architect, son of Baptiste, 2. Cerceau, Julienne Androuet du, daughter of Jacques (1), wife of Jehan Brosse, 2. Cerceau, Paul Androuet du, engraver 2. Chambiges, Pierre, mason, 13, 17, 22. Chambiges, Pierre the younger, contractor, 26. Charles V, Emperor, 230. Charles V, King of France, nn., 13, 23. Charles VII, King of France, 15. Charles VIII, King of France, 9, 12, 14. Charles IX, King of France, 1, 2, 6, n, 16, 17 and note, 18, 22, 23 and note, 31. Charles, Cardinal of Bourbon, 1, 10. Charles, Duke of Orleans, n, 12. Claude, wife of Francis I, 12. Clermont, Antoine de, 19. Clermont, Frangoise de, wife of Antoine, sister of Diane de Poitiers 19. Cocqueau, Jacques, mason, 13. Colbert, minister of France, 22, 24, 26. Colombe, Michel, sculptor, 10, n. Conde, Prince de, 18. Cousin, Jean, glass painter, 20. D. Daven, Leo, engraver, 4m Destailleur, H., writer, 6, 7. Diane de Poitiers, see Poitiers. Domenico or Dominic of Cortona, (Boccadoro), architect, 12, 13. Duban, Jacques Felix, architect, 12, 26 and note, 27. E. Entraigues, Henriette d’, mistress of Henry IV, 28. Estouteville, Cardinal d’, 10. Etampes, Duchess of, 16, 18. F. Fain, Pierre, mason, 10. Fontaine, Pierre Francois, architect, 22, 24 and note, 26, 27. Francis I, King of France, 2, 4, 9, 11-19, 22, 23, 31. Frangois, Gatien, mason, 18. G. Gabriel, Jacques Ange, architect, 24 and note. Gadier, Pierre, mason, 18. Gaston, Duke of Orleans, n, 12. Geymuller, H. von, writer, 4m Giocondo, Fra Giovanni, architect, 10, 12. Girard, Pierre, (Castoret), mason, 17. Giusto, Antonio, (Betti), or Andre Juste, sculptor, 10 and note. Goujon, Jean, sculptor, 18, 20, 21, 23, 27. H Henry II, King of France, 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, n, 12, 13, 17, 20, 21, 22, 31. Henry III, King of France, 2, 3, 22. Henry IV, King of France, 2, 4, ion., 12, 14, 16, 22, 23, 25-28. Hercules, Duke of Ferrara, 1. J- Jamet, Frangois, architect, 17. Jarric, Faure du, engraver, 6. Jerome of Fiesole, see Pacchiariti. Juste, Andre, see Giusto. L. Lefuel, Hector Martin, architect, 22, 26 and note, 27. Lescot, Pierre, architect, 2, 21, 22, 23 and note, 24, 31. Levy, A., publisher, 6. Louis VI, King of France, 13. Louis VII, King of France, 15. Louis IX, King of France, 13. Louis XI, King of France, 15, 16. Louis XII, King of France, 1, 9, 11, 12. Louis XIII, King of France, 2, 12, 16, 17m, 18, 22, 23, 27. Louis XIV, King of France, 13, 16, 18, 22, 23, 26. Louis XV, King of France, 13, 14, 16, 18, 24. Louis XVI, King of France, 24. Louis Philippe, King of Frdnce, 18. 36 INDEX OF PERSONS — continued. M. Maine, Lacroix du, writer, i. Mansart, Francois, architect, 12, 13. Marchant, Guillaume, contractor, 14. Marcus Aurelius, i6n. Margaret, wife of Henry IV, 2. Maria de’ Medici, wife of Henry IV, 2. Mariette, P., publisher, 6. Martini&re, La, writer, 29. Mazarin, Cardinal, 22, 23. Mazzoni, Guido, (Modanino, Paganino or Paguenin), sculptor, 10 and note. Mercier, Jacques le, architect, 18, 22, 23, 24. Mercoliano, Pacello da, garden designer, 9, 12. Mercoliano, Pietro da, garden designer, 10. Metezeau, Clement, architect, son of Thibaut, 27m Metezeau, Louis, architect, son of Thibaut, 27m Metezeau, Thibaut, architect, 26m Michael Angelo, 18. Modanino, see Mazzoni. Montmorency, Anne de, Grand Constable, 18. Montmorency, Guillaume de, 18. Morin, G., writer, 2. N. Napoleon I, Emperor, i6n., 18, 22, 24, 26, 27. Napoleon III, Emperor, 18, 22, 26, 27. Nemours, Duke of, 1, 3, 28, 29. Nepveu, Pierre (Trinqueau), mason, 13. O. Orbay, Francis d’, architect, 22, 26 and note, 27. Orme, Philibert de 1 ’, architect, 1, 7, 13, 14, 17-22, 25-27, 31. Orme, Pierre de 1 ’, mason, 10. P. Pacchiariti, Girolamo, (Gerome Pacherot), or Jerome of Fiesole, sculptor, 10 and note. Paganino or Paguenin, see Mazzoni. Palissy, Bernard, potter, 18, 25. Palustre, L., writer, i8n. Perac, Etienne du, architect, 14, 22, 27 and note. Percier, Charles, architect, 22, 24 and note, 26, 27. Perelle, Adam, engraver, 29 and note. Perrault, Charles, 240. Perrault, Claude, physician and architect, 22, 23n, 24 and note, 26. Philip Augustus, King of France, 20, 21, 23. Poitiers, Diane de, wife of Louis de Breze, 19-21. Primaticcio, Francesco, architect, 17 and note, 18, 19. R. Rabelais, 19. Renee of France, Duchess of Ferrara, 1,3, 28.- Richard of Carpi, inlayer, 11. Richelieu, Cardinal, 22, 23. Robbia, Girolamo della, potter, 18. Robertet, Florimond, 12. Rosso, 11 , architect, 17, 19. S. St. Andre, Marshal de, 21. Senault, Guillaume, mason, 10. Serlio, Sebastiano, architect, 23 and note. Silvestre, Israel, engraver, 2, 29. Solario, Andrea, painter, 10. Soufflot, Jacques Germain, architect, 24 and note. Sourdeau, Denis, mason, 13. Sourdeau, Jacques, mason, 12, 13. Stanislas Leczinski, ex-King of Poland, 13. T. Temple, Raymond du, architect, 23. Thiry, Leonard, engraver, 4. Trinqueau, see Nepveu. V. Valence, Pierre, mason and joiner, 10. Valentinois, Duchess of, see Poitiers. Veau or Vau, Louis le, architect, 22. 24 and note, 26 and note, 27. Vendome, Duke of, 20. Vinci, Lionardo da, 9, ion. Visconti, Louis, architect, 22, 26 and note, 27. Vries, Vredeman de, engraver, 4. W. Wren, Sir Christopher, 24m ■ , V • • • » • •>?:,. f. • J *ii . ■ ; V ' , y. . . •>; ■ ^ v'wV ; '| ' ■"‘/-.l V ' Sr A- <*•* * >' •$?*!; ■#:' y. ... • • • , /■ •. .,% ??* -v. /... i*:- y&fs&t ttriNHIfcv S V %iSa ■ 1 ' . ;*• { ffi 1 • * 1 y. *4? mV. r <■ •■' 'K'% v5 ' .liV * • tiW, ■ 4 * • « i \ ••, . • ': /<• (ft- •, Jj ■■jA'.",,v • 'i ., ■ -- >• £ \ • •>•... f i‘ •..»->* — i ,.r>.. . ...C^ '••; '. r\. tiro* V ;b .' ' > • . " 'AiX' * ■ 1 v.*p. ;v - '>«* ■■•• v: : .- ^ . : ‘ * .' .. Tw9SSS^"K ; '■ {•’?< j . ..-vS m- > *’ • v * • . ••,>• * . v /•■•■/> "o'; ' v * • A ic v ; £y ' ■ . -i . ,: : . 7 : : iVK ■• ■ • ■ ■ •? • . ,** • •■ • , . sMv ■ ■■:. i-sMM' 'ifeaAls«M|aia •■ - ... -.. 1 • 1 •■ •’ :;; 7 ' ■■ -XV -.*'5 ' 1 - • »v , .X' / ,• ■ 'v ■ /vV. • ■ < • •>. •’ vVi / A -** ■ * < is ii' _ a >• ' 1 ■ ; - ' • : .;• >> . J ••*•