Architectural historians have at least a partial framework for exploring the process

Transcription

1 Text: The Origins of Gothic Design Process Architectural historians have at least a partial framework for exploring the process of construction in western Europe from the mid-thirteenth century forward: by this period, specific figures receive specialized job titles related to building (master of work, ymagier, stonecutter, appareilleur) in records. Architectural drawing had also made an appearance, and these early surviving drawings can be analyzed to reveal methods of planning. As the style known as Gothic was spreading in the course of the thirteenth century, coincidental with this documented emphasis on hierarchy and organization at building sites, it seems logical to conclude that new or changed building practices may have led to the initial emergence of Gothic. However, architectural historians focusing on the mid-twelfth century the era during which Gothic appeared face absent or altered buildings, a dearth of textual documentation, and no evidence of drawings, templates, or other means of advance planning other than what can be extrapolated from the buildings themselves. An association between the new style and new building practices has thus been notoriously difficult to prove. What little textual evidence we do have for example, the famous writings of Suger at Saint-Denis suggests possible specialization, though not necessarily hierarchy, among workers of the twelfth century. Suger lists the titles of his workers: caementariorum, lathomorum, sculptorum, et aliorum operiorum, though he had nothing to say about how they were organized and who, if anyone, led them. A study of sites exemplifying the formation of early Gothic indicates a dearth of hierarchy. At the church of Notre-Dame d Étampes, a significant twelfth-century project within the French royal domain, an analysis of the surviving architectural fabric indicates

2 a building constructed not according to a predetermined plan, but in a series of short campaigns by a small, flexible group of workers; these workers were not limited to single roles, and the evidence of the building indicates no particular changes in the labor force even as supposed Gothic structural and stylistic elements make their appearance. Comparison with buildings such as La Madeleine du Châteaudun, and Notre-Dame de La Ferté-Alais supports this theory that the hierarchy and fixed roles of the building site documented in the thirteenth century were not strictly associated with the emergence of Gothic elements in the twelfth. This analysis of mid-twelfth century sites suggests that a more hierarchical and organized labor force may not be directly associated with the formation of Gothic; instead, these changes in the typical labor force may have been engendered by the increasingly large scale or structural complexity of projects dating from the later twelfth or early thirteenth centuries. Notre-Dame d Etampes was built in multiple campaigns that span the supposed transition from Romanesque to Gothic. With the exception of the earlier crypt, the structure was entirely rebuilt in a series of campaigns dating from roughly 1110 to 1160, a period during which Étampes rose in prominence as a strategically and economically vital holding within the royal domain. The early campaigns (c ), which replaced an eleventh-century structure, resulted in an aisled, groin-vaulted nave; this work, however, was quickly modified during a series of new campaigns, beginning c , which resulted in a flat-ended chevet with two tiers of window and an expanded crossing that shortened the nave by one bay. From the late 1130s to roughly 1160, the transept arms and double choir aisles further expanded the east end. The choir campaign saw the introduction of rib vaults to the church; combined with articulated supports and enlarged

3 windows, this new technique helped to increase light and maximize space within the building as its ground plan was expanded to the limit of the available land. The last medieval addition, made around 1200, was the new western façade, incorporating two new western chapels for the nave and crenellations around the building. Notre-Dame has very few documents relating to its construction; thankfully, the church is rich in visual evidence, and the restoration of the church has been well-documented, allowing me to make reasonable assumptions about which surfaces and stones represent medieval fabric. The sheer number of closely-spaced campaigns at Notre-Dame (at least seven taking place within a fifty-year span), each not only marked by visible sutures, but by differences in structure and aesthetics, indicates that no consistent master plan existed for Notre-Dame; instead, new campaigns seem to have been added as required, using workers as they were available. A number of false starts the first bay of a transept, quickly remodeled; a few exterior courses laid for the north choir aisles abandoned and taken up by a different crew also point to the absence of an overarching concept for the building s design. The nave campaign created a three-bayed nave with thick round piers, thin walls, broadly pointed, unmolded arches, and groin vaults throughout. The vaulting type and articulation of the choir differ enough from the nave to indicate new builders, but these builders maintained some continuity with the nave in both structure and aesthetics, using similar sculpture, imposts, formerets, and a frame-and-fill technique, with small-stone masonry for the walls and ashlar blocks for piers, wall buttresses, dosserets, shafts, and arches. In both the nave and the choir, builders were concerned with appropriate articulation and support of their chosen vault type, and adapted capitals and imposts

4 during the course of construction to align with the vault s diagonal groins or ribs. When features can be combined, they are coursed together for added stability: note, for example, the coursed corners of the east end, where the piers and the window jambs of the lower level were built together. This kind of building technique indicates an interest in economizing (the small-stone fill is more easily cut and transported than the large, regular ashlar), but also an understanding of the structural possibilities for supporting a building with concentrated points of strength, leading to an emphasis on the differences between supports and walls both aesthetically and structurally. Dealing with the issue of support via the creation of a strong ashlar skeleton has long been viewed as a characteristic of Gothic, although, as Edson Armi has pointed out, this structural concept derives from Northern First Romanesque building techniques. 1 While using a new vaulting type, the concerns of the choir builders are not so different from those of the nave, emphasizing the continuity between the categories of Romanesque and Gothic. The variety of impost profiles in the choir, as well as breaks indicating that they were recut to fit a diagonal configuration, indicates a change in the vault-to-pier articulation when the walls reached their upper stages. While the differences between impost profiles are not all that noticeable from ground level, the choir does present a number of examples of highly visible differences, including the change between rounded windows and pointed windows on the east wall and the unique design of each capital (most are based on rinceaux, but each has a unique pattern). Also noticeable are the different profiles used for each transverse arch and for the ribs of each bay (note the transition from a doublerolled to single-rolled profile in the transverse arches, and from an ogee to a semicircular 1 C. Edson Armi, "First Romanesque Wall Systems and the Context of the Ambulatory with Radiating Chapels," Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 65, no. 4 (2006).

5 profile in the ribs) every bay or transverse arch associated with the choir and crossing bears a different rib design. These differences indicate two possibilities. First, the choir doesn t reflect an organization of labor wherein one master designed all the articulating elements; presumably someone had to conceive of the general plan of the structure, but the workshop model in which a single master provides the templates for the stonecutters simply does not hold above the level of the piers. Even the bases, though appearing visually similar, offer minor variations in height and decoration. A single master would be unlikely to design multiple templates with strong visual similarities but minor differences in width or height; it seems much more likely that these variations did not derive from a set template, but from one or more masons attempting to produce similar shapes without a measured pattern. Second, the stylistic differences may be a matter of choice. If no particular master provided templates for profiles, the builders had more liberty to determine the forms they used. Alternatively, the variation in the decoration of structural forms forms that would have been visible from below, regardless of whether plaster was used to cover wall surfaces may have been considered a way to visually enrich the space of the choir. The choir aesthetics continued westward into the crossing, resulting in four existing piers being encased in added masonry. Sutures then indicate the collation of the north transept arm, and here the aesthetic shifts markedly from the choir and crossing, incorporating sheer walls punctuated by piers with multiple thin shafts. The change in masonry and window type from the southernmost to the northernmost transept bay (visible on the exterior western wall) indicates that there was at least one bay of an earlier

6 transept prior to the construction of the current north transept arm. 2 Under the roof, both of the transept arm campaigns join the central vessel beneath its summit, in some cases interrupting existing wall buttresses; the varied height and the interruption of the existing structure indicate that the current transept form was not fully planned when the choir and crossing were erected. Windows are no longer chamfered or flanked by coursed shafts, as in the choir; instead, they are enlarged, round-headed, and articulated by orders of en delit shafts, an indication that the builders were saving on the cost of transportation and labor by incorporating standardized parts into their construction. Other elements typically labeled Gothic, including continuous acanthus capitals, make their debut here as well, as does the use of ashlar instead of small stone masonry for the fill between piers and windows. The north choir aisles were laid out along the lower east corner, but building paused here; when the north choir aisles were resumed, a smaller group of workers used reduced pier profiles for the narrower space. The capitals throughout the north choir aisles are of an acanthus distinct from that of the north transept arm: the grooves in the leaves are broader and flatter; and the sculptor does not define leaf tips and separations with the depth or consistency of the sculptor or sculptors of the north transept arm acanthus. While the acanthus does have the defined central veins of the north transept work, the capitals lack defined bells with visible rims. 3 Some incorporate monsters or lions with toothy grimaces, an element also not seen elsewhere in the church. The 2 The small-stone construction of the exterior upper west wall of the southernmost bay was faced with coursed ashlar on the interior, likely at a later date, and the interior side of the window was also updated with en delit shafts and capitals. The imposts don t penetrate the full thickness of the window, while those in the upper window in the northernmost bay pass all the way through the wall s thickness. The left capital has the broad leaf design typical of those found in the south transept, the only capital of its type on the north side of the building, confusing the chronology of the alteration. 3 Saulnier-Pernuit and Montclos, "Dossier."

7 numerous changes in both articulating elements (capitals, rib and transverse arch profiles, window molding profiles, vault bosses, and pier forms) and construction techniques (vaulting the main bays without formerets) suggest that the composition of the building team in the north choir aisles was different from that of the north transept; considering the smaller area of the campaign and the consistency of the sculpture, this workshop may have had only a few members. Two of those members seem to have been sculptors who also knew how to erect vaults. In the westernmost bays, an angel is carved on each rib near the vault boss, and angels also sit in the webs where the ribs meet; their hands, as well as some of their heads, have been broken off. The easternmost bay bosses have kings and queens with outstretched arms in the vault webs. At the very least, the sculptors would have had to work with the masons who cut the ribs, and may have cut the ribs themselves; in fact, the ribs subtly change in concert with the sculptural style, with those in the east having a wider roll molding and a flatter setback than the pronounced, thin rolls of the western bays. Suspending the figures by incorporating them into the vault webs would have been a complex process that required knowledge of how to erect a vault, indicating that architectural sculptors didn t follow a strict specialization. Bases with an increased diagonal splay, decorative plinths, modified pier forms, and the introduction of multiple capital types demonstrate that a new team worked on the south transept and choir aisles, which were laid out together. The transverse arches of both transept arms have a similar profile that suggests a close date or overlap. While the details may differ, the aesthetic of the south transept is very similar to the north, maintaining the large rounded windows and sheer wall planes. Also maintained was a

8 constructional system in which windows (and on the south side, piers) were framed before walls were filled in between them, indicating builders who still differentiated between frame and fill even as they built with ashlar. In comparison to the choir, the simplified forms of the imposts, the inclusion of en delit shafts as articulating elements for window openings, and the reduced number of rib profiles in the transepts and choir aisles indicate an increased tendency toward standardization. This standardization varies in form in the north choir aisles, the capitals are more consistent; in the south transept and choir aisles, the transverse arches are nearly identical throughout and may vary in cause. In the north choir aisles, the single acanthus type likely results from a single creator, while other sculptors/masons were available to work on the several types of bosses and ribs. In the south, more sculptors worked on capitals, but fewer workers may have cut the ribs or perhaps they were cut by different workers according to a single template. Such measures could suggest economy, but may also relate to the availability of particular workers or the degree of control exerted by a designer. Preference may also play a role. It should be noted that the transept articulation is similar enough to visually relate one transept arm to another and to distinguish the transepts from the nave, crossing, or choir. The choir aisles, while differently laid out and executed on each side, are in both cases visually distinguished from the transept. Perhaps the degree and consistency of articulation could be tied to a desire to emphasize spatial distinctions within the church. Notre-Dame exemplifies the non-programmatic nature of mid-twelfth century construction. The campaigns are not tidily separated; instead, a number of elements overlap from one campaign to the next, suggesting a kind of limited continuity. Builders

9 had no qualms about changing or rebuilding what had only recently been built, demonstrating a surprising willingness to adapt and alter structure. The rapid succession of the campaigns indicates a desire to get work done as quickly as possible, indicating a patron who kept funding continuously flowing. The partial continuity between campaigns may indicate that the projects were not separated by periods of total inactivity; in fact, the campaigns (and some of the workers) may have overlapped. The variety at Notre-Dame, as well as the flux of continuity and change between campaigns, may be explained by the arrival and departure of groups of workers, as well as the flexible composition of these groups. Elements often identified as Gothic make an appearance at Notre-Dame only gradually, not as a set that can associated with a particular change in workshop. Rib vaults and enlarged windows appear first in the choir, while continuous acanthus capitals, en delit shafts, and thin angle rolls appear first in the north transept. However, the concern with supporting and articulating the rib vault that we see in the choir can find a precursor in the nave, indicating the similarities, rather than the differences, between Gothic and its antecedents. The traditional Gothic found at Notre-Dame is in the form of selected elements shafted piers, rib vaults, and large windows that are particularly suited to builders trained in frame-and-fill-construction that emphasizes the difference between support and wall structure. However, each campaign incorporates a different combination of forms, demonstrating the plurality of Gothic possibilities. Based on the repetition of sculptural techniques and profiles, workers from Notre- Dame d Etampes can potentially be identified at other early Gothic sites, but no Notre- Dame workshop moves as a unit. Workshop members seem instead to travel

10 individually, likely as jobs became available. The mid-twelfth century church of Notre- Dame de La Ferté -Alais contains capitals connected to the work found in Étampes s north transept and north choir aisle campaigns: one sculptor, whose work appears in the south chapel, uses the broad, shallow grooves and rounded lobes of Notre-Dame s north choir aisle leaves. Other elements of La Ferté-Alais are broadly similar to Notre-Dame d Étampes but not a match: a whole crew did not move, only individuals. La Ferté-Alais provides a regional context for Notre-Dame: workers found employment and moved from project to project as needed; they were not imported from distant locations. The connection between Notre-Dame d Étampes and La Madeleine de Châteaudun some sixty miles southwest is usually discussed in relation to their sculpted portals. Unfortunately, the sculptural program of Châteaudun s north portal does not survive, but it is known through drawings made in 1731 by Simonneau. These drawings show a distinctive style of spiral folds punctuated with band of embroidery that can be linked with those of the Étampes master, at least to the degree that drawings can be used as evidence of the same hand. Châteaudun also possesses interior sculpture that bears resemblance to that of Notre-Dame; in particular, a number of the north nave aisle capitals have acanthus designs bearing the strongest similarity of any location to those of Notre-Dame. 4 In particular, the sculptor of the capital above pier 6N at Notre-Dame was probably the same man who sculpted the central capitals on second pier from the west in Châteaudun s north nave aisle. Both sculptors have created a double-tiered acanthus 4 The dates for Châteaudun s architecture are usually given as post-1131, when the comte de Blois sponsored the installation of canons regular here; Philippe Plagnieux suggests with later alterations. Bertrand Lemoine, Châteaudun, Le Guide du patrimoine: Centre et Val de Loire, Jean-Marie Perouse de Montclos, ed. (Paris: Hachette, 1995), 297; Philippe Plagnieux, La Madeleine du Châteaudun, Pierre, lumière, coleur: etudes de l art en Moyen Âge en l honneur d Anne Prache, ed. F. Joubert and D. Sandron (Paris: Presses de l Université de Paris-Sorbonne, 1999): 39.

11 capital with leaf tips curling at the center and corners of each side. Both create deep ridges at corners and along the centers of leaf forms, but otherwise create broad, shallowly channeled, rounded-tipped foliage framing acanthus palmettes. The impost types above the capitals follow the same profile (a quirked cavet), although the neckings of the capitals are unconnected. Transverse arch forms are similar not to those of Notre- Dame s north choir aisles, but its south transept: the flat soffit with angle rolls. The wide semicircular torus of the diagonal rib above a slightly wider chamfer and squared base can be found in the Étampes north choir aisle. The capital sculptor who worked at both Étampes and Châteaudun may not have traveled alone, given the possible relationship in portal sculpture. He may have cut his own imposts, and he may have been involved in cutting ribs as well. Unlike at Notre- Dame, he did not join his capitals with neckings, but at both sites the capitals are not conceived as continuous forms around the pier: at Notre-Dame s north choir aisles, the sculptor sometimes shows the bare, squared edge of the dosseret between the capitals. At both sites, consistency of articulation within a given space is apparent; even more so at Châteaudun, where the same rib and transverse arch profiles appear throughout the north choir aisles. The sculptor who worked at both sites did not travel in the context of a large workshop, as many other details differ from one site to the other. When this sculptor moved to a new site, he merged his skills with those of a new group in new circumstances. Saint-Denis is one of the few buildings for which any assurance of construction dates exists: Suger s famous writings describe the dedication ceremonies of the church, and as a result the construction dates for the work under Suger can be narrowed to 1137

12 to 1140 for the western block and 1140 to 1144 for the east end. Saint-Denis would have been a significantly more prestigious project; however, some ties can be drawn between it and Notre-Dame: the portals with Old Testament royalty serving as jamb figures, the form of the narthex windows, the interest in articulating the connection of ribs and responds, and a similar acanthus form. 5 One particular capital has leaves with plain, sharp blades and a deeply, precisely defined central vein dividing the leaf from its base to its tip. At both Notre-Dame and Saint-Denis, the sculptor has emphasized the vein with a subtly rounded lip and an incised line. The leaves are arranged in two tiers, with a double layer at the top, and curve outward from the bell in high relief. The acanthus capitals are similar in conception, but not identical in the methods used to create leaf shapes and arrangements; these two capitals, on the other hand, may have been made by the same sculptor. At Saint-Denis, his work appears in the context of imposts with tori; broader and more complexly shafted piers; decorative motifs, such as chevroned arch profiles, that do not appear at Étampes; and capitals placed at different levels around piers to differentiate vaults and transverse arches. Even at a larger, more prestigious project, we are reminded of the flexibility of workshop composition. Also, this worker s presence 5 Noted by Nolan and James. Nolan does not specify the location of the acanthus at Étampes; James, however, indicates that it appears on the south and north portals, the north and south transepts, and the north and south choir aisles. He describes the kind of acanthus as having two tiers of leaves with creased leaves and lozenge-shaped spaces between leaf tips; the upper tier has branches of acanthus framing a simple, palm-shaped central leaf. James believes these different examples as well as examples from Sens, Saint-Pierre de Montmartre, Noel-Saint-Martin, Poissy, Chartres, Saint-Loup de Naud, Ivry-la- Bataille, Châteaudun, La Ferté-Alais, Saint-Ayoul de Provins, Val-Chrétien, Lierval, Binson, Vailly, Domont, Laon, Noyon, Nouvion, and Glennes are by the same sculptor, who he names the Palmier master. While I don t doubt James s assertions that capital types were created in stylistic phases that can be used as a tool for dating Gothic buildings, I don t see a strong enough similarity between capitals at Saint- Denis and Étampes to declare that these palmier acanthus capitals were sculpted by the same person. In the example James uses in his article, the leaves from Notre-Dame s south portal are more shallowly creased than those at Saint-Denis, with less emphasized, less detailed leaf tips. The Saint-Denis acanthus capitals do have a compositional similarity to those of Étampes, with tiers of acanthus leaves; the lobes of each leaf are articulated with an indented channel, and larger leaves extend to frame smaller palmettes at corners or centers.

13 brings another comparison between Notre-Dame and Saint-Denis to the forefront: in both locations, elements associated with Gothic appeared piecemeal in closely-spaced campaigns. Saint-Denis, in many ways exceptional, is in this way typical of early Gothic constructional practices. The gradual, pluralistic development of new forms of style and structure at sites demonstrating no particular changes in workshop organization suggests that such workshop changes were not responsible for bringing about Gothic. Nor does it seem that Gothic brought about the workshop changes. I would instead suggest that what brought these changes in labor about may have been the increased scale and complexity of later twelfth-century projects; as the necessary workforce size grew, sites could only benefit from the increased economy and efficiency of specialization.