The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy: Royal Architecture in Thirteenth-Century Paris 9781139950206, 9781107025578

Table of contents :
Cover
Half-title
Title page
Copyright information
Dedication
Table of contents
Acknowledgments
List of abbreviations
Introduction
Approach and Orientation
Beyond the Building: Reception, Space, and History
Chapter Outline
1 The Making of a Royal City
1.1 The Urban Power Structure and the Architectural Programs of Philip Augustus
1.2 Demographics and the Urban Transformation
1.3 The New Look of Paris: The Rayonnant City
2 The Sainte-Chapelle
2.1 Architecture and Aesthetics
2.2 Proportions and Dimensions
2.3 Sculptural Decoration
2.4 The Royal Chapel and Rayonnant Architecture
2.5 The Sainte-Chapelle and Amiens
3 The Architecture of Sacral Kingship
3.1 Distant Kin: Imperial and Royal Reliquary Chapels beyond France
3.2 Capetian Palatine Chapels and the Sanctuaries of the Palais de la Cité
3.3 Saint-Germain en Laye
3.4 Local Sources: The Bishop’s Chapel and Ecclesiastical Architecture
3.5 The Representation of Royal Sanctity
4 Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings
4.1 The Design of the Palais de la Cité
4.2 Indulgences and Liturgy
4.3 Setting the Stage: The Lower and Upper Chapels
The Lower Chapel
The Upper Chapel
4.4 The Chapel in the City: Processions and Public Display
4.5 The Liturgy of the Crown of Thorns and the Cult of Kings
4.6 Royal Sovereignty
5 Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris
Conclusion
Appendix 1 Who Devised the Sainte-Chapelle?
Appendix 2 The Donjons of Philip Augustus
Appendix 3 Dates and Documents
The Documents
Privileges Granted to the Sainte-Chapelle
Indulgences Granted to the Sainte-Chapelle
Episcopal Bull (October 2, 1244, Paris)
First Foundation of the Sainte-Chapelle (January, 1246, Paris)
Papal Bull (November 6, 1246, Lateran)
Papal Bull (November 6, 1246, Lyon)
Arch/Episcopal Bull (April, 1248, Paris)
Bull from the Papal Legate (May 27, 1248, Paris)
Second Foundation of the Sainte-Chapelle
(August, 1248, Aigues-Mortes)
Additional Indulgences Granted to the Sainte-Chapelle
Papal Bull (October 25, 1265, Perugia)
Paris, AN L 619.12. Original, seal lost.
Papal Bull (October 25, 1265, Perugia)
Appendix 4 The Dimensions of the Sainte-Chapelle
Notes
Introduction
1 The Making of a Royal City: Paris and the Architecture of Philip Augustus
2 The Sainte-Chapelle: Parisian Rayonnant and the New Royal Architecture
3 The Architecture of Sacral Kingship
4 Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings
5 Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris
Conclusion
Appendix 1
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Bibliography
Primary Sources, Manuscripts
Primary Sources, Printed
Secondary Sources
Works Published before 1851
Works Published after 1851
Index
Plates

Citation preview

T h e S a i n t e - C h a p e l l e a n d t h e C o n st r u ct i o n of Sacral Monarchy

This book offers a novel perspective on one of the most important monuments of French Gothic architecture, the Sainte-Chapelle, constructed in Paris by King Louis IX of France between 1239 and 1248 especially to hold and to celebrate Christ’s crown of thorns. Meredith Cohen argues that the chapel’s architecture, decoration, and use conveyed the notion of sacral kingship to its audience in Paris and in greater Europe, thereby implicitly elevating the French king to the level of suzerain, and establishing an early visual precedent for the political theory of royal sovereignty. By setting the chapel within its broader urban and royal contexts, this book offers new insight into royal representation and the rise of Paris as a political and cultural capital in the thirteenth century. Meredith Cohen is assistant professor of art history at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). She specializes in the art, architecture, and urban development of high medieval Europe, particularly in France and England. She has published articles on the Sainte-Chapelle, the Court Style, medieval Paris, nineteenth-century restoration, and the historiography of Gothic architecture. In addition, she has edited a series of interdisciplinary volumes on medieval history and culture. In 2010, she curated an exhibition (with Xavier Dectot) on medieval Paris at the Musée national du Moyen Âge. She has received fellowships and grants from the British Academy, the Châteaubriand Foundation, the Graham Foundation, the Société des Professeurs de Français et Francophones d’Amérique, the Whiting Foundation, and UCLA for her research. In 2003 Cohen founded the International Medieval Society of Paris, an interdisciplinary scholarly society based in Paris, and served as its president until 2013.

The Sainte-Chapelle a n d t h e C o n st r u ct i o n of Sacral Monarchy

opo R o ya l A r c h i t e ct u r e i n T h i rt e e n t h - C e n t u ry Pa r i s

Meredith Cohen University of California, Los Angeles

32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013-2473, USA Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge. It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence. www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107025578 © Meredith Cohen 2015 This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 2015 Printed in the United States of America A catalog record for this publication is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication data Cohen, Meredith. The Sainte-Chapelle and the construction of sacral monarchy : royal architecture in thirteenth-century Paris / Meredith Cohen. pages  cm Based on the author’s thesis (Ph.D. – Columbia University, 2004). Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-107-02557-8 (hardback) 1.  Sainte-Chapelle (Paris, France)  2. Architecture, High Gothic – France – Paris.  3. Louis IX, King of France, 1214–1270 – Art patronage.  4.  Symbolism in architecture – France – Paris.  5. France – Kings and rulers – Religious aspects.  6.  Sovereignty – Religious aspects – Christianity.  7. Paris (France) – Buildings, structures, etc. I.  Title. NA5550.S7C64  2014 726.50944'361–dc23    2014012758 ISBN 978-1-107-02557-8 Hardback Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party Internet Web sites referred to in this publication and does not guarantee that any content on such Web sites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.

To Raphaël

Contents

Acknowledgments List of Abbreviations

page ix xi

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Approach and Orientation 5 Beyond the Building: Reception, Space, and History 7 Chapter Outline 10

1. The Making of a Royal City: Paris and the Architecture of Philip Augustus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 The Urban Power Structure and the Architectural Programs of Philip Augustus 1.2 Demographics and the Urban Transformation 1.3 The New Look of Paris: The Rayonnant City

14 15 29 33



2. The Sainte-Chapelle: Parisian Rayonnant and the New Royal Architecture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 2.1 Architecture and Aesthetics 67 2.2 Proportions and Dimensions 75 2.3 Sculptural Decoration 85 2.4 The Royal Chapel and Rayonnant Architecture 92 2.5 The Sainte-Chapelle and Amiens 106



3. The Architecture of Sacral Kingship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 3.1 Distant Kin: Imperial and Royal Reliquary Chapels beyond France 115 3.2 Capetian Palatine Chapels and the Sanctuaries of the Palais de la Cité 125

vii

viii

Contents

3.3 Saint-Germain en Laye 3.4 Local Sources: The Bishop’s Chapel and Ecclesiastical Architecture 3.5 The Representation of Royal Sanctity



4. Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 The Design of the Palais de la Cité 4.2 Indulgences and Liturgy 4.3 Setting the Stage: The Lower and Upper Chapels 4.4 The Chapel in the City: Processions and Public Display 4.5 The Liturgy of the Crown of Thorns and the Cult of Kings 4.6 Royal Sovereignty 5. Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 Royal Architecture and Royal Patronage 5.2 Royal Patronage after the Crusade, 1254–1270: Textual Evidence 5.3 Sacral Kingship in the Urban Space 5.4 Royal and Rayonnant Architecture: The Visual Evidence 5.5 The Architecture of Humility

131 135 142 146 148 151 157 164 167 169 171 172 174 178 182 191

Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 Appendix 1.  Who Devised the Sainte-Chapelle? Appendix 2.  The Donjons of Philip Augustus Appendix 3.  Dates and Documents Appendix 4.  The Dimensions of the Sainte-Chapelle Notes Bibliography Index Plates found at the end of the book

201 203 205 228 231 269 287

Acknowledgments

The mottled image of the Sainte-Chapelle, projected from a gritty, old slide in a seven-hundred-person lecture theater in my first art history course at UC Santa Barbara, did not hinder my immediate captivation by this fantastic monument. That spectacular, unforgettable building only raised questions, questions that I have now spent years pursuing from California, to New York, France, and England, and back again. This book is the product of that long ­process – one of discovery, learning, hard work, and growth along the way. Over that time, many, many different people and institutions have guided and supported my pursuit. I would like to thank Stephen Murray for giving me the opportunity to write my PhD dissertation, the foundation for this book, on this subject, and for his sage advice throughout this process. I am also grateful to Michael Davis, who has been a continually supportive source of insight, information, and inspiration. Alyce Jordan and Cecilia Gaposchkin’s monographs on the Sainte-Chapelle and Saint Louis respectively have also served as significant intellectual complements to my study of the architecture, and I would like to thank them for their generosity and their friendship. William Chester Jordan’s encouragement of and intrigue in my ideas, as well as his insights early on in the project, also propelled me. I would not have been able to accomplish this study without the monumental foundation on Philip Augustus provided by John Baldwin and the publications by Caroline Bruzelius on Paris’s other great monuments, Saint-Denis and Notre-Dame. Thanks also to Elizabeth A. R. Brown, a well of knowledge and font of energy, for her keen questions over the years. Sharon Farmer, Keiko Nowacka, Mark O’Tool, and Tanya Stabler’s work on the “Other” Paris provided new perspectives that further enriched this project. Both Stefaan Van Lieffering and Mailan Doquang, New York–Paris compatriots, were essential to the survey at the Sainte-Chapelle and to my general sanity along the way. In France, where I conducted the majority of the research for this study, I would like to give special thanks to the équipe at the Sainte-Chapelle, ix

x

Acknowledgments

especially to Béatrice de Parseval and Francis Margot, for their unceasing assistance, and for literally opening the doors of the chapel to me. I am ­particularly grateful to Agnès Bos, Xavier Dectot, Dominique IognaPrat, Danielle Johnson, and Fanny Madeline for their collegiality and for their friendship, which made research and life in Paris even more fulfilling. I would also like to thank Alain Erlande-Brandenburg, Bruno Galland, Olivier Guyotjeannin, Sophie Lagabrielle, Jean Mesqui, Elisabeth Taburet-Delahaye, and Dominique Vermand for their encouragement, advice, and support at different stages throughout this process. The first draft of this manuscript was produced while I was a research Fellow at both the University of Leeds and the University of Oxford; I am grateful for the opportunities that those affiliations made possible. Special thanks are extended to Paul Binski, Mary Carruthers, Paul Crossley, Eric Fernie, and Richard Morris for generously sharing their time and knowledge in discussions of this project with me. A British Academy research grant further propelled this work to completion. Returning stateside, the deans of Humanities and faculty of the Department of Art History at UCLA have been fantastically encouraging and supportive while I completed the manuscript. Additional appreciation is given to those who have shared their beautiful photographs with me – Michael Davis, Mailan Doquang, Stephen Murray, and Andrew Tallon. I would also like to thank Beatrice Rehl and Anastasia Graf at Cambridge University Press, as well as the anonymous readers of the different drafts of this book, for their time and constructive comments. In the final days of this manuscript’s production, I am grateful to Meg Bernstein for her assistance. Throughout this process, continuous support from my friends and family provided the stability required to complete this project. My deepest gratitude goes to Raphaël, without whose fortitude and wisdom this book would never have been finished.

Abbreviations

AN Archives nationales de France du Breul du Breul, Jacques, Le théatre des antiquitez de Paris (Paris: Société des imprimeurs, 1639 [1612]) Budget Le premier budget de la monarchie française: le compte général de 1202–3, ed. Ferdinand Lot and Robert Fawtier (Paris: H. Champion, 1932) Layettes Layettes du Trésor des Chartes, ed. Alexandre Teulet, Henri-François Delaborde, and Elie Berger, 5 vols. (Paris: Plon, 1863–1909) Lebeuf Lebeuf, Henri, Histoire de la ville et tout le diocèse de Paris, 6 vols. (Paris: Féchoz et Letouzey, 1883) £/£p livres (tournois)/livres parisis Ordonnances Ordonnances des rois de France de la trosième race, ed. Eusèbe-Jacob de Laurière [et al.], 21 vols. (Paris, 1723–1849) Registres Les registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. John Baldwin, Françoise Gasparri, Michel Nortier, Elisabeth Lalou, and Robert-Henri Bautier, Recueil des historiens de la France. Documents financiers et administratifs, vol. 7 (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1992) RHF Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, ed. M. Bouquet [et al.], 24 vols. (Paris, 1738–1904) Sauval Sauval, Henri, Histoire et recherches des antiquités de la ville de Paris, 3 vols. (Paris: Charles Moette, 1724)

xi

Introduction

T

he Sainte-Chapelle stands today among a multitude of historic monuments in Paris. In view of all the city has to offer, this relatively small Gothic chapel is easily overlooked; moreover, it stands behind a series of towering eighteenth- and nineteenth-century structures built especially to hide it.1 Only from a few points in the bustling contemporary city  – along the Quai du Louvre, the top of the Boulevard Saint Michel, or along the Rue Monge, for example – can a viewer identify the Sainte-Chapelle’s soaring spire and scintillating pinnacles in the distance. Those distinctive forms call attention to and almost insist on the building’s former grandeur. For in the thirteenth-century, when it was built, the SainteChapelle dominated the medieval city; forty-two and a half meters from ground to gable, its towering silhouette pierced the urban skyline, ­making it one of a very few buildings that were visible far beyond the great medieval walls (Plate I).2 Within the Palais de Justice, where the Sainte-Chapelle stands, the building still makes a powerful statement. Although compact in its lateral dimensions, its elaborate double porch, great buttresses, and height generate a monumental presence (Plates II and III). Moreover, the interior, a multimedia extravaganza of translucent stained-glass walls, polychrome sculpture, and gilding, creates one of the most memorable experiences of Gothic color and light (Plates IV and V). In its overwhelming resplendence, the contemporary experience of the upper chapel still approaches that described in the fourteenth century by the enraptured Jean de Jandun, who felt as if he ascended “directly into one of the chambers of Paradise.”3 Louis IX (“Saint Louis,” r. 1226–70) built the Sainte-Chapelle within the royal palace of Paris, the Palais de la Cité (Figure I.1), starting in 1239 as a reliquary chapel especially for the crown of thorns, the holy cross, and other relics. Though extant for more than seven hundred fifty years, knowledge of this magnificent building is nevertheless obscured by the patina of its long and tumultuous history.4 As a classified monument historique, the Sainte1

2

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

I.1.  Palais de la Cité in the 16th century. Engraving by Huyot. © BnF Est. (Va 225 / A20459).

Chapelle exemplifies a Noranian “realm of memory,” a reified locus of French cultural and national identity.5 During the nineteenth century, the chapel sustained a comprehensive ideological restoration under the direction of Félix Duban and Jean-Baptiste Lassus.6 Their interventions substantially changed the Sainte-Chapelle’s structure and decoration. Beyond simply repairing damage effected during the Revolution and from later neglect, the restorers “improved” the building by removing the post-fifteenth-century additions and by creating new parts to make it a rational exemplar of Gothic architecture, mythologized in that period as the origin of French national culture.7 The new construction rendered the Sainte-Chapelle a retrospective fantasy poised to consolidate the nation in an ideal past. At the same time, in terms of the building’s function, it constituted only a subtle transformation, for even in the Ancien Régime, the chapel operated as a powerful political symbol. While the Sainte-Chapelle has served as the subject of numerous studies, our knowledge of its architectural and cultural significance during the thirteenth century remains unclear.8 A more definitive understanding of the building during this period proves essential for the identification of the many formal, functional, and ideological changes it withstood throughout history. Yet over the past one hundred years, studies of the thirteenth-century chapel have focused almost exclusively on the issues of style and iconography. These subjects were paired in two foundational texts published in the mid-

Introduction

twentieth century that have shaped the discourse on this monument.9 Louis Grodecki’s ­Sainte-Chapelle (1963) stands as the primary reference for a clear and concise orientation to the chapel’s architecture and decorative program.10 Robert Branner’s Saint Louis and the Court Style in Gothic Architecture (1965) gave rise to a great debate in the larger field of medieval art history.11 In short, Branner proposed that in thirteenth-century Paris, royal patronage generated what he termed a “court style,” whose prestige explains its popularity in later medieval European architecture. The Sainte-Chapelle was central to this conception. However, in its delineation of the stylistic evolution of architecture, the book fell short of proving what was essentially an iconographical argument.12 If Branner’s Court Style was well received, and indeed highly successful, in its day  – it inspired museum exhibitions, doctoral dissertations, and books as well as university courses, and extended into other media such as manuscripts  – over the past few decades, researchers have substantially revised most of its assertions.13 Scholars now routinely identify other Parisian buildings of the period, such as Notre-Dame, Saint-Denis, and the lost Lady Chapel of Saint-Germain des Prés, as more avant-garde, finer in quality, and of greater architectural consequence, thus diminishing the Sainte-Chapelle’s importance.14 Because the royal chapel is not deemed to have developed any of the period’s most progressive forms, it is generally characterized as a building that perpetuated the style of the day without contributing anything particularly new. Such is the consensus that even Jacques Le Goff summarized the chapel’s historiography in the following terms: “whatever boldness and beauty the Sainte-Chapelle may offer, [scholars] have also stressed the fact that it did not present any real innovations. It simply brought the architecture of traditional Gothic apsidal chapels … to completion.”15 Yet, even if those more critical, post-Branner studies developed a range of new methods and offered insights on a larger spectrum of medieval architecture, scholars have been reluctant to examine the Sainte-Chapelle through the same revisionist terms, and even to pursue further research on thirteenth-century Paris.16 It is worth noting that this phase in the historiography of Gothic architecture coincides with the “theoretical turn” in the humanities, which, among other shifts in art history, corresponded to a reevaluation of the canon, resulting in a concomitant emphasis of the margins over the center. Moving beyond style, scholars have also examined the iconography of the Sainte-Chapelle’s decorative program, with an emphasis on its internal decoration, particularly its stained glass. Early interpretations generally assumed that, given Louis’ canonization, the chapel was a material expression of the king’s remarkable piety and fervent devotion.17 While some scholars have identified royal themes in the ensemble, only the more recent publications have gone as far as to qualify the Sainte-Chapelle as a “dual religious and political” monument.18 These studies elicit a complex array of political themes that position the chapel as a Capetian political program, a translatio imperii, a

3

4

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

manifesto for the Crusade of 1248, and a celebration of kingship.19 Yet the place of the chapel’s themes within the broader culture and history that produced them remains unexamined. While scholars have long recognized that the Capetians, particularly during the reign of Louis IX, made prolific use of biblical typology and promoted sacral kingship, they have directed less thorough attention toward the French monarchy’s visual expression of these ideas.20 Indeed, despite the interest in the subject, surprisingly few studies exist of the history of royal representation per se, particularly in medieval architecture.21 This book examines the Sainte-Chapelle in relation to royal architecture and the establishment of the French monarchy in Paris. With a contextual approach, it offers new perspectives on a range of important subjects in the fields of history and art history. In the first place, this study illuminates how Louis’ chapel permanently transformed habitual modes of Capetian royal representation. Prior to this pivotal monument, French royal architecture largely projected an image of the king as defensor pacis. The Sainte-Chapelle’s sophisticated employment of meaningful local and international forms crafted a new, at once more subtle and more powerful royal image. With its unrestrained integration of ecclesiastical and royal architectural forms, Louis’ monument publicly broadcast the notion of sacral kingship, an idea reinforced by a liturgical program expressly designed to naturalize this exalted status. This was tantamount to an assertion of royal suzerainty, if not outright royal sovereignty. Promulgating these themes from the Palais de la Cité, the Sainte-Chapelle constituted a major turning point in the French monarchy’s relentless march toward royal absolutism over the next centuries. This study also sheds new light on the life and reign of Louis IX, who is still often perceived in retrospect through the gilded lens of his canonization.22 It proposes that the Sainte-Chapelle constituted an astute response to myriad political problems in the period during which it was constructed, revealing Louis as a shrewd politician who tackled trouble creatively and forcefully. At the same time, the five chapters here illuminate that this king actively constructed his sanctity, with his efforts toward that holy endeavor not only changing, but also becoming increasingly earnest over the longue durée. Finally, this book illustrates the role royal architecture played in the establishment of Paris as the political and cultural capital of France, traits still associated with the city today.23 During the thirteenth century, the style of Gothic architecture made in Paris was called opere francigeno (“French work”).24 The term refers to an architectural period style that during the Middle Ages became associated with the French kingdom through its sheer ubiquity there, particularly in Paris, where many of its most visible and innovative exemplars were built. This process began in the twelfth century with the first experiments in Gothic architecture.25 Over the next few generations, the architecture of Philip Augustus (1180–1223) and Louis IX significantly transformed

Introduction

the city.26 This study credits Philip Augustus’s well-known urban projects as engendering a major building boom from which issued this distinctive and important architectural style. I argue that Louis IX’s architectural patronage, including not only the Sainte-Chapelle but also his other buildings in Paris, built on this momentum. While those royal structures did not constitute the only great buildings there, the ubiquitous royal patronage imparted a royal imprimatur on the city. This book delineates how royal architectural projects acted on and encoded the urban space, redefining Parisian architecture as “French” and definitively establishing Paris as the royal and artistic capital of the kingdom. It was to become an even more complex cultural symbol when this phase of Gothic was later remade to represent the post-Revolutionary reconstruction of la République française.

Approach and Orientation

These observations on the meaning and greater significance of the SainteChapelle issue from an approach that situates this monument within its architectural, royal, and urban contexts. The chapel did not exist in isolation in the Palais de la Cité; rather, it was integrated into a network of discourses that both conditioned and contributed to its design and meaning.27 These interconnected discourses have in turn shaped my approach to this monument. In the first place, the Sainte-Chapelle was built in the predominant ecclesiastical style of the day, a phase of Gothic, which for clarity in this book is referred to neither as opere francigeno nor as the “court style,” but rather by its most common contemporary name, Rayonnant.28 Characterizing this phase are relatively small buildings or parts of buildings that have thin, cage-like supports, large stained-glass windows with complex tracery, delicate stone screens for articulation, and abundant decorative crockets, trefoils, quatrefoils, and rosettes. Germinating in Paris from as early as 1225, this style flourished in French architecture until about 1300.29 The Sainte-Chapelle shared a number of these forms with other buildings of the period and place. Analysis of the chapel’s style illuminates its unique role in this milieu as well as its contributions to Gothic architecture more broadly. At the same time, the Sainte-Chapelle’s form and function as a palatine reliquary chapel aligned it with others of the same type throughout Christendom.30 With its cache of Christological relics, the royal chapel of Paris evoked distant structures that recalled Christ’s sacrifice, beginning with the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. It succeeded the famous but now lost Sacra Capella of the Great Palace or Boukoleon in Constantinople, which held the crown of thorns until Louis acquired the relic.31 With this most holy, symbolic relic, and the others Louis collected, the Sainte-Chapelle redefined the sacred center of the Christian Empire as Paris.32 This dialogue with the great

5

6

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

historic capitals of Christendom propelled the Sainte-Chapelle beyond the local into the international sphere, where it could be compared to other great palatine chapels. While its stature drew in part from such analogies, its local resonances with bishops’ chapels and within the Palais de la Cité of Paris were equally significant, allowing the chapel to communicate on different levels to a diverse audience. Examination of the Sainte-Chapelle’s typological frameworks reveals that its architecture manifested a complex and nuanced program of meaning. The location of this monument also conditioned its design and meaning. Situated in the heart of the Palais de la Cité of Paris, the Sainte-Chapelle complemented a series of royal chapels already there and in other palaces of the kingdom.33 Research on palatine chapels in France distinguishes the innovations and significance of the Sainte-Chapelle’s design choices.34 Moreover, Louis’ palatine chapel was deeply integrated into the city of Paris. In addition to its visual prominence, its liturgy brought the building into communication with the urban population and the built environment. Processions extended the chapel beyond the Palais de la Cité into the densest quarters and far beyond the city walls, while indulgences encouraged visitors to worship within the palace enceinte. Analysis of the chapel’s use and role in the city generates new insights concerning its contribution to the establishment of Paris as both an artistic center and as the royal capital of France. Finally, the Sainte-Chapelle participated in a discourse on power that was expressed in the physical environment. The representation of power in monumental architecture has its origins in the earliest of cultures, and the SainteChapelle was no exception. In this study, the royal chapel exists as an inherent part of the dynamic power relations within the city of Paris and of the monarchy’s development into an authoritative nation-state. It made visual assertions that responded to political problems and offered bold, new solutions for them. Built to the monarchy’s needs and specifications, the Sainte-Chapelle merged political ideologies with religious practice in its architecture, decoration, and liturgy.35 Indeed, the chapel fulfilled a role tailored more to the royal institution than to the person of Louis IX. While each of these perspectives constitutes a distinct discursive formation, they were integrated in the Sainte-Chapelle. This analysis sees these discourses as constituting those “webs of significance” that create meaning in cultural symbols. My project therefore works toward a “thick description” as defined by Clifford Geertz, with the royal chapel situated as a component of a larger conglomerate of social circumstances, relationships, and practices.36 Given that the description of “context” proves an ultimately infinite task without a conceivable end, I have chosen to focus on the architectural, sociocultural, and historical factors that shaped the chapel’s thirteenth-century production and significance.37

Introduction

By describing “context” in terms of discursive networks and power relations, I am also drawing on the sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Two of his concepts have explicitly shaped my approach to and analysis of this monument: “habitus” and “symbolic power.” While the concept of the habitus derives from Aristotle, through whom it became a subject for medieval scholastics, Bourdieu defines it as the “practices and dispositions that give rise to an individual or group’s attitudes, activities, and decisions.”38 For the purposes of this study, the Sainte-Chapelle’s habitus is defined as the royal, political, and architectural histories that contributed to the choices the patron and builders made in the development of the monument. Delineation of this setting (in Chapters 1 through 3) highlights the chapel’s unique qualities and provides the material with which to define their significance. The SainteChapelle existed in a relational position by building on knowledge from the past and responding to the present. With this monument, the monarchy of Louis IX drew on the habitual practices of Philip Augustus to assert royal power through visual means, but also modified those practices to serve more effectively the particular circumstances it confronted. Bourdieu’s notion of “symbolic power” also aptly describes how royal architecture, and the Sainte-Chapelle in particular, operated on a sociopolitical level during the Middle Ages.39 The royal chapel was a highly codified, symbolic monument. Its assertion of sacral kingship was made through visual means when such a concept would have had little positive impact in words, and it was subtly aggressive.40 Both indirectly through references built into the monument and explicitly with its stained-glass program and liturgy, the chapel naturalized this extension of royal power such that it was not rejected but rather embraced at a time when such status had not been formally confirmed.

Beyond the Building: Reception, Space, and History

While one goal of this project has been to identify, to the extent possible, the ideas inherent to and even built into the Sainte-Chapelle, another primary aim of this work has been to identify the chapel’s broader resonances in its social and urban space. The Sainte-Chapelle was not simply a “bearer of meaning”; it also projected, incited, and generated ideas.41 Insofar as architectural forms function as symbols or signs, buildings also possess agency within their broader cultural systems.42 They shape thought and experience in individuals and they have an impact on the collective space of their environments. In her work on memory and rhetoric, Mary Carruthers explained the fundamental role of architecture in medieval cognitive practices.43 For many of

7

8

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

the great scholars and theologians of the Middle Ages, buildings, both real and imagined, functioned as mnemonic devices for the machina memorialis. The structure and decoration of buildings invited and stimulated interpretation; they fashioned thoughts. In his well-known letter to William of SaintThierry, Bernard of Clairvaux notoriously decried that “we are more tempted to read in marble than in our books, and to spend the whole day wondering at these things rather than in meditating the law of God.”44 Architecture and its ornaments had the power to direct new ideas.45 Indeed, even Bernard would attest that monumental architecture like the Sainte-Chapelle generates thought through the experience of its design. In the practice of the art of memory, this orderly thought process is known as ductus, a path that motivates a certain sequence of perception. The path can vary, but it leads to an end point, which is the idea obtained from that journey.46 And like rhetoric, which crafts language to emphasize certain ideas or embellishes language with similes and metaphors to focus attention on certain subjects, architectural design privileges certain elements over others in the construction of its messages. Buildings do not simply convey the ideas built into them; in their shaping of experience, they function as a kind of visual rhetoric.47 In the thirteenth century, at the University of Paris, treatises on the art of memory by John of Garland (active in the 1230s), Albertus Magnus (active in the 1240s), and Thomas Aquinas (active in the 1270s) circulated widely.48 Their employment of architectural mnemonics in memory and thought exercises enjoyed a surge of popularity among a range of people including students and professors, friars, clerks, merchants, physicians, and notaries.49 In short, the use of architecture as a means to craft thought was taught and employed in Paris, and people educated there would have been familiar with the practice. These people would have been sensitive to the signifiers in monumental architecture. While forms and images stimulate cognition, reception is nevertheless conditioned by a variety of factors, particularly the social structures determined by power hierarchies within a designated field.50 These relationships can enhance the implications of certain signifiers. In other words, sociological factors, such as the habitus and the fields in which messages are made and exist, affect not only the production of architecture, but also the interpretation of it. It is through these practices that the Sainte-Chapelle and more broadly royal architecture generated meaning for its audiences. Beyond such interactions with individuals, monuments also operate in and act on the environment around them. The recent “spatial turn” in medieval studies has contributed much to our understanding of the way buildings functioned beyond their immediate purpose, highlighting the depth of their greater cultural and historical impact in the Middle Ages.51 Concerning the church structure, Dominique Iogna-Prat has delineated how Church

Introduction

dogma manifested in buildings, generating what he termed the process of “­monumentalization,” or how a church, a once simple locus of worship, became a monument that conveyed theological ideas and commanded territory.52 Michel Lauwers demonstrated how the physical space around the church structure similarly became encoded as sacred territory.53 In addition to these studies informed by historical anthropology, archaeological analyses of how great buildings physically impact the land around them have enriched these insights.54 Further beyond the monument, historical circumstances also bear on the production and significance of architecture. Town riots and political unrest can halt the construction of a monument for years, sometimes decades.55 Competition among different institutions can affect the subjects chosen for sculptural or pictorial display as well as the height of a building’s vaults and towers.56 Famines and economic downturns slow development across the board. Foreign visitors or the introduction of foreign objects or methods can also be transformative.57 In the analysis of art and architecture, such histories are not merely circumstantial; they act on cultural production and are integral to it. Thus, this study shows how monumental architecture such as the SainteChapelle has both centripetal and centrifugal properties; a great building invites the consideration of makers and spectators, while these elements also develop and convey meaning outward beyond its very foundations.58 As much as such buildings issue from and are made meaningful from a habitus, they also shape and encode space through their physical presence, constructed meanings, and functions or uses over time.59 The goals of this study have necessitated a synthetic approach to the material. My original research builds on, clarifies, and, at times, corrects the historiography in advancing the discourse on these subjects. Along with the more conventional methods of architectural history that I incorporate, other disciplinary practices, such as history, literature, musicology (with its interest in liturgy), as well as anthropology and sociology have contributed much to my analysis. There will still be many more questions to ask and to answer of the Sainte-Chapelle, of royal patronage, of Paris, and of Louis IX. My aim is to reinvigorate these subjects with new perspectives gained by the integration of diverse disciplines. In this recontextualization effort, there is at once a risk of overdetermination and the possibility of exclusion. I do not aim to recreate all the signifying webs or even most aspects of the chapel’s habitus. Interpreting reception is also highly problematic. Yet the subjects selected for discussion here illuminate important, unmistakable aspects of the building’s thirteenth-century architecture as well as its social and political status. Over the course of its long existence, this seminal building engendered manifold experiences, ideas, and practices that go far beyond the scope of this book.

9

10

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

Chapter Outline

While the Sainte-Chapelle constitutes a grand assertion of royal power, it existed neither as the only point nor as the end point in the larger process of the monarchy’s installation in Paris. For this reason, a broad examination of royal architecture in Paris that explains the physical imposition of the monarchy in the city during the reigns of Philip Augustus and Louis IX brackets this study. This framework functions as much to situate the Sainte-Chapelle in an architectural and historical context as to show how royal architecture shifted the balance of power in the city to royal advantage, which in turn imparted new meanings in the urban space and its architecture.60 The first chapter thus examines the well-known, pivotal role Philip Augustus played in making Paris a capital city.61 While scholars routinely cite how the king’s administrative efforts contributed to this status, the innovative focus here is on the way his urban-architectural program instilled a royal presence throughout the city and encoded its space.62 The chapter begins with a brief assessment of the power structures in the city, finding that the episcopal institution dominated it in the late twelfth century. Philip’s royal entrenchment in Paris subtly undermined episcopal authority and incited a tacit battle for power that was fought through architecture and the control of urban space. Two aspects of the royal program receive special attention. The first subject of examination is the image the king generated through his architectural program. From this survey, I propose that Philip Augustus deliberately maintained a “visual division of power,” which crafted the monarch as a strictly secular overlord despite his actual status as sacral king. The visual qualities of his architecture were emphatically distinct from ecclesiastical architecture, which flourished in the Gothic idiom. This “visual division of power” conveyed an ostensible parity of authority between the monarchy and the Church, although it actually functioned to subvert the Church’s terrestrial authority. Moreover, this division constituted an important dimension of the royal habitus, as it laid the foundation for Louis IX’s architectural programs, including the Sainte-Chapelle. Although Philip’s architectural image set a precedent, Louis IX went further than his grandfather did to assert his authority on a public scale. Second, this chapter examines the effects of Philip’s program on the city and its architecture. In Paris, the king’s building projects had a major impact on urban development. Along with other important economic and cultural factors, Philip’s efforts in the city encouraged immigration and urban expansion, which were the catalysts for an important building boom in Paris. A different style of architecture, with easily adaptable forms brought together from other cities but unified in Paris, proliferated among the new churches and extended into domestic architecture.63 This architectural style, Rayonnant, responded

Introduction

to the rapid urban growth with easily adaptable forms and smaller, less expensive structures. This first chapter thus provides an alternate response to the scholarship on Rayonnant and the “court style” by examining the historical circumstances of this architecture’s genesis in Paris. It demonstrates that this architecture issued not from the hand of Louis IX, but from a wider variety of churches built in the wake of the urban programs and governing decisions of Philip Augustus. At the same time, it shows that while royal action generated an environment in which this architecture developed and flourished, it was not a “top-down” phenomenon, but rather an urban-ecclesiastical style developed by masons, architects, and craftsmen who came to Paris to meet the demands of the growing city.64 This architecture imparted a new visual identity to Paris at the time when it became a royal city par excellence. Chapter  2 turns to the Sainte-Chapelle, offering an examination of the building’s governing aesthetics, proportions, and place within Rayonnant architecture. A more thorough understanding of the royal chapel’s aesthetic characteristics issues fresh perspectives on its architectural priorities and formal innovations.65 This analysis is necessarily limited by the fact that the building was heavily restored during the nineteenth century. Few original stones remain in situ, even if many of them are replacements of originals.66 The floors of both chapels have been entirely replaced or refurbished, and the interior of the building is almost entirely covered in modern polychromy. Significant parts of the building, such as a monumental staircase on the south side and the Trésor des Chartes on the north side, have been completely obliterated from its fabric. These alterations greatly complicate the analysis of its thirteenth-century structure. Nevertheless, because the chapel is relatively securely dated to the decade after 1239 and because its original forms remain largely unmodified, it still exists as a paradigm from which to assess other monuments of its period. This formal examination illuminates that the Sainte-Chapelle represented an alternative direction in Rayonnant Gothic architecture, one that was easily reproduced in the most basic to the most elaborate of structures. Prioritized at the Sainte-Chapelle was an ornamental aesthetic that appealed to the complex multisensory requirements of medieval artistic experience, in contrast to the modernist architecture of Saint-Denis and the Lady Chapel of SaintGermain des Prés.67 The perpetuation of the royal chapel’s distinctive motifs, in part or whole, in other buildings in and beyond Paris attests to the chapel’s popularity and success as an architectural structure on its own merits. At the same time, Chapter 2 finds that the Sainte-Chapelle also constituted a new orientation in royal architecture. The use of Rayonnant forms detracted from the utilitarian emphasis of Philip Augustus’s architecture and enhanced the aesthetic allure of the Palais de la Cité. Royal representation, by extension, turned from the terrestrial to the sublime. The

11

12

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

implications of this shift are examined over the course of the following two chapters. The third chapter examines the range of typological sources available for the royal chapel and considers the meaning of the forms actually selected for the building. Richard Krautheimer’s most basic premises concerning the iconography of architecture, that medieval architectural forms conveyed multiple meanings to their spectators, and that such forms and meanings were flexible during the Middle Ages, underscore this part of the study.68 At the same time, this chapter challenges those ideas by showing that the chapel’s design (and therefore some of its meaning and significance) derived from diverse venues rather than a single typological source. While its Rayonnant style cohered with that of the contemporary architectural scene in medieval Paris, the chapel’s plan and design were selected from the broader habitus that provided a variety of available options, specifically, international reliquary chapels, doppelkapellen, as well as palace chapels. Just as the implementation of the Rayonnant style itself had meaningful implications, the planners’ selection of certain architectural references and types over others further enhanced the building’s ideological program. Of these sources, I argue that the now lost Sacra Capella of the Great Palace in Constantinople and the bishop’s chapel type played more important roles than previously recognized in the conception and design of the royal chapel in Paris. Biblical references built into the monument and the ecclesiastical Rayonnant style enriched those models as visual signifiers in the construction of the chapel’s meanings. These combined architectural references effected an unambiguous statement about sacral kingship and the prerogatives of royal power. The chapel’s form and design elided biblical with terrestrial royalty, inviting worship and exaltation of the cult of kings. If the Sainte-Chapelle’s visual rhetoric was not obvious, its themes were verbally reiterated through liturgy and performance, the subjects of the fourth chapter. Although traditionally considered a private monument, built for the personal enjoyment of the king and his court, the chapel also catered to a broader, public audience. An earlier article of mine provided an introduction to this argument, which has been revised and extended here.69 The question remains as to whether people outside of the royal entourage could actually enter the chapel, particularly the upper chapel. A comprehensive examination that takes into account the architectural design, the interior furnishings, the decorative program, as well as the liturgy of the Sainte-Chapelle, still points to the affirmative. While the chapel’s design allowed for both broad and exclusive use by the king and his court, this chapter further illustrates that the chapel’s liturgy extended well beyond the celebration of regular services inside the building. Indeed, on its many special feast days, in rites celebrated in the great courtyard of the palace complex and in processions from the royal palace, not to mention the distribution of its specially designed feasts to

Introduction

other churches in other cities, the Sainte-Chapelle interacted with the city of Paris as well as on an international scale. Given architecture’s role in the craft of thought, the chapel’s projection of sacral kingship must have resounded far and wide as a claim to royal suzerainty, at the very least. The final chapter turns from the Sainte-Chapelle to consider Louis IX’s architectural patronage in Paris. Like his esteemed predecessor Philip Augustus, Louis was a prolific patron of architecture in the city. Based on diplomatic as well as graphic and archaeological records, this analysis reveals that the king’s patronage of new mendicant groups, charitable foundations, and hospitals after 1254 is of an entirely different order than earlier royal architecture.70 No longer articulating the extent of royal power, the new buildings encoded the city with the image of a moral and altruistic Christian monarch, corresponding to the king’s own religious epiphany and his governmental reforms. As Louis’ patronage turned in this different direction, the bold political thrust of the Sainte-Chapelle was tempered such that it came to stand as primus inter pares in the architecture of Louis’ sacred kingship. Despite the differing political and spiritual inclinations of the king’s two architectural phases, as a whole, the buildings associated with Louis IX contributed to the construction of this monarch as a saint.

13

1

opo The Making of a Royal City Paris and the Architecture of Philip Augustus

T

he events that took place over the course of the thirteenth ­century transformed Paris from what had been a prosperous medieval town into the uncontested cultural and political capital of France. By 1300, the city prided itself on its exalted status as the capital of the monarchy, the center of learning, the nexus of commerce, and the flower of the arts, as well as the cradle of the largest urban population in Western Europe. The glory of Paris reached such heights that encomia such as that by Eustache Deschamps hailed “nothing can compare to Paris!”1 Yet the city’s preeminence was not predestined. Indeed, at the end of the twelfth century, Paris was comparable to a number of other towns in northern France. Rouen, the capital of Normandy, competed with Paris in size and sophistication.2 The markets of Reims and Amiens were equally if not more prosperous than those of Paris. While the scholars of Paris were already internationally renowned in the twelfth century, the university had not been formally incorporated. And even though the city on the Seine had functioned intermittently as an important seat of the monarchy, it was not the mainstay of the itinerant royal government.3 Historians often point to the progressive institutionalization of the monarchy in Paris as a primary agent of its urban transformation over the course of the thirteenth century.4 Yet great cities are not merely political and administrative centers; they become distinctive through their cultural production and the collective recognition of their output as uniquely privileged.5 The fame of the University of Paris, formally established in the early thirteenth century, certainly contributed to the city’s prestige. But, in addition to the government and the university, the physical and social changes that took place over the course of the century were fundamental to the identification of Paris as the capital of France.6 In particular, the city’s architecture and art became highly distinctive and were recognized throughout Europe as either Parisian or French at this time. While scholars have examined this aesthetic trend, the various and 14

The Making of a Royal City

complex factors that fostered its association with Paris merit further analysis. The art of this period is usually associated with Louis IX, both because it began to flourish around the time he ascended to the throne and because of Robert Branner’s classic book from 1965, Saint Louis and the Court Style in Gothic Architecture, which had a great impact in the field of Gothic architecture.7 However, this chapter proposes that Philip Augustus played an equally essential role in its development. It is well known that Philip Augustus (r. 1180–1223) initiated the permanent installation of the monarchy in Paris with the establishment of his archives there in 1194.8 More important for this discussion, he also carried out a significant number of urban improvements and architectural projects there.9 The monarchy’s physical insertion in the city ultimately transformed its identity. At the same time, royal building projects constituted a distinct image of the king, forming a basis for public forms of royal self-representation on which Louis IX would later capitalize to great advantage, both with the Sainte-Chapelle and then again with his later patronage of urban architecture.

1.1 The Urban Power Structure and the Architectural Programs of Philip Augustus

To appreciate the achievements of Philip Augustus in Paris, first it is important to recognize the power of the Church, which for all intents and purposes controlled the better part of the city at the time Philip ascended to the throne in 1180.10 The temporal role of the Parisian Church dated to at least the ninth century, when the breakdown of Carolingian power and recurring Norman invasions in France forced episcopal institutions around the kingdom to step into greater leadership positions in their respective cities.11 By the twelfth century, the bishopric of Paris stood out among them all in terms of its wealth and power.12 Indeed, it employed a governing council similar in size to the royal administration to manage the extensive land and rights the institution oversaw within and beyond Paris (Figure 1.1).13 Moreover, as was customary in the feudal hierarchy, vassals were required to give homage to the bishop and the chapter. In Paris, those who knelt before the bishop of Paris included such high-ranking personages as the queen of Navarre; the counts of Alençon, Blois, Nevers, Meulan, Saint-Paul, Bretagne, and Bar-le-Duc; and the barons of Bourbon, Montmorency, Beaumont, Saint-Marc, Garlande, Chevreuse, and Brunoy. The king of France was also technically required to give homage to the bishop, although this did not always come to pass.14 The episcopal presence was underscored in the city space by the panoply of diocesan churches and chapels across it, not least of which was the cathedral of Notre-Dame, whose reconstruction, initiated around 1160 by

15

16

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.1. Episcopal Posessions in Paris. Map © Parigramme, with overlay by author based on B. Guérard and Arch. nat. F31 73-96 – Arch. Paris © ALPAGE: H. Noizet and B. Bove-MMC, 2014.

Maurice de Sully, was planned as the tallest building ever built in France (Figure  1.2).15 The cathedral project spanned the majority of the Île de la Cité, and it included a strikingly, large episcopal palace (Figure 1.3).16 Built rapidly and to the highest of standards, the new buildings visibly conveyed the power of the Parisian Church.17 The size of the project was decried by Peter the Chanter, who famously proclaimed, “Alas, why do you want your houses so tall? What is the use of your towers and ramparts? Do you believe the devil cannot scale them? Nay, I say that thereby you will become the neighbor and companion of demons!”18 The condemnation of the height of the buildings and the towers in the episcopal complex suggests that some saw it as an immoral attestation of episcopal power and ambition. In contrast, the monarchy’s physical presence in Paris paled under the shadow of the enormous cathedral and its revitalized precinct. While the

The Making of a Royal City

17

1.2.  Paris, Notre-Dame Cathedral, exterior from south. Photo: Author.

1.3.  Bishop’s palace of Paris, exterior from southeast, engraving by Israel Silvestre, 1658. © BnF Est. (Va 253h / H34065).

18

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.4.  Péronne, castle of Philip Augustus, exterior. Photo: Author.

Palais de la Cité had stood on the western side of the Île de la Cité since late antiquity, it had been last rebuilt in the eleventh century by Robert II (r. 996–1031), and only intermittently refurbished with new walls, apartments, and a tower.19 Even though Guy of Bazoches praised the strength of the palace’s great enceinte in 1175, such comments were relatively standard and one might question the accuracy of the assessment.20 Given its age, it is hard to imagine that the Palais de la Cité could have compared to the beautiful, gleaming new episcopal quartier. Yet even if Notre-Dame unreservedly displayed the bishop’s authority, it also represented the swansong of episcopal power in the city, for it was just as the cathedral’s construction was coming to a close that Philip Augustus installed the monarchy in Paris.21 Apart from his administrative actions, Philip’s architectural and urban projects in Paris were only one facet of a much larger architectural program that he enacted throughout France.22 Throughout his kingdom, his building projects served more than their immediate, designated functions; much like the Norman building program after the conquest in England, Philip’s architecture constituted a public form of royal representation that instilled the presence of the king throughout the land.23 In other words, it functioned to convey royal power and status. Philip Augustus funded an extraordinary amount of secular architecture – primarily castles, towers, and urban works. He initiated construction in at least sixty-three locations in France.24 His castles established a new type of military architecture.25 Exemplified by the extant buildings at Péronne (ca. 1205) and Dourdan (ca. 1220), Philippan castles were built on a flat surface according to a large polygonal (usually quadrilateral) plan reinforced at the corners with circular towers, and often a master tower (Figures 1.4 to 1.6).26 The straight walls of ashlar stones laid along a rubble core, between thirty and sixty meters long, formed ramparts and were surmounted by crenellations. Although slight variations were made to the design as time passed,

The Making of a Royal City

1.5. Dourdan, castle of Philip Augustus, view from east angle. © BnF Est. (Va 91 2 fol. / B6141).

1.6. Dourdan, castle of Philip Augustus, plan. BnF Est. (Va 91 fol. tome II / B6142).

what became known as the “Philippan plan” served as a model for castle construction in France until the fifteenth century. The consistent form and sheer ubiquity of Philippan castles across his kingdom made them unmistakable symbols of the king’s power. Individual towers or donjons built at Philip’s expense were similarly standardized. Archaeological, documentary, and graphic evidence attributes thirty-two to his initiative; there may have been more (see Appendix 2). Like

19

20

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.7. Issoudun, tower of Philip Augustus. Photo: Author.

the castles, the towers were built with uniformly quarried stone and coursing around a rubble core. They were consistently circular and they possessed similar dimensions; on average they rose about 32 meters high (27.28 meters at Péronne, 31.8 meters at Laon), and they had an exterior diameter ranging from 7.25 meters (Corbeil) to 19.72 meters (Bourges) with a wall width ranging from 1.98 meters (Corbeil) to 4.60 meters (Bourges).27 The tower at Issoudun still offers an impression of how striking such monuments were in the rural landscape (Figure 1.7).28 Urban fortifications constituted another important element of his architectural program. The king funded the construction of walls with towers in no fewer than sixteen cities, including Paris.29 These were significant projects; in Melun, for example, Guillaume de Flamenville was appointed to make walls, moats, three doors, and ten different towers.30 Less important urban and defensive works were carried out in the smaller towns of Arques, Gaillefontaine, La Ferté, ­Lyons-­la-Forêt, and Le Goulet.31 Even in the state of peace after the Battle of Bouvines in 1214, Philip continued to have walls and towers built until his death. The royal accounts record only a fraction of what Philip actually spent on these projects. In Paris, he contributed more than 12,000£p for urban improvements, more than a quarter of what was noted for his entire program

The Making of a Royal City

throughout France.32 Although Melun also received a generous £9,400 for similar work, including walls and a castle, Philip’s average expenditure for urban works was between £2,000 and £500, but expenditures of less than £1,000 are recorded in twenty-two other cities.33 Yet not all entries list all of the work actually executed; for example, the records for an entire master tower attributed to Philip Augustus at Issoudun only mention the amount of money necessary to cover the tower with a lead roof (400£p), although the tower itself would have cost up to £2,000.34 Although Philip was an avid builder, the number of his utilitarian buildings and the amount he spent on them far outweighed his contributions toward ecclesiastical structures.35 The king’s gifts to churches were relatively minor and often appear obligatory; he never showed the devotional zeal of his family members. In fact, he only founded one church ex nihilo: Notre-Dame de la Victoire, near Senlis.36 It was established at the urging of prelates as a commemoration of his victory at Bouvines in 1214, years after the event. Construction began only in 1221 and Philip did not live to see its completion. It was consecrated in 1225, two years after his death, by his son and successor, Louis VIII. Indeed, the situation regarding Philip’s ecclesiastical patronage was so unusual and, in fact, so unbecoming for a king that even his chroniclers had to find creative ways to justify his lack of generosity.37 Moreover, the aesthetic properties of Philip’s architecture differed significantly from those of ecclesiastical architecture. Even though the king’s masons applied the techniques associated with ecclesiastical architecture (and vice versa), they neither employed the same formal elements nor worked in the same style. If ecclesiastical architecture, with its columns, shafts, pointed arches, and ribbed vaults, became increasingly anagogical, that of Philip Augustus, made of mortar and rubble coursed horizontally with wide stone blocks, was resolutely terrestrial. While stained glass and sculpture embellished ecclesiastical architecture, royal architecture appeared strong but austere. Philip’s architectural patronage adhered to a strict formal and functional code that did not integrate ecclesiastical attributes. In other words, his architecture conveyed a visual division of power between the monarchy and the Church. These projects represented the king primarily as defensor populi, not as a sacral king. In practice, however, royal and church relations were not clearly defined. Notions of sacral kingship had long shaped royal identity, and Philip himself was popularly called “Dieudonné” (“God-given”) when he was born.38 Yet Philip’s buildings did not visually express this idea. If the king’s public image did not go as far as it might have, royal architecture made as strong a statement as was beneficial to the monarchy. The image of the terrestrial lord that his architecture created conformed to public desires and expectations, which ultimately facilitated his ability to amass new jurisdictional and land rights in his cities.39

21

22

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.8. Louvre of Philip Augustus. Plan: Author, after Fleury.

This is especially true in Paris.40 If Philip’s first few projects in Paris were minor urban improvements apparently initiated on an ad hoc basis, the later projects increased in size, scope, and effect. Rigord reports that in 1185, after suffering in the Palais de la Cité from the stench emitted from the Rue de la Draperie, the king ordered the main streets of the city paved.41 Even if Philip had made the decision in response to a personal reaction, the solid, new roads would have been appreciated by all who used them. Perhaps this action gave Philip a sense of how politically beneficial such pragmatic interventions in the city could be; a few years later, he encircled the Cemetery of the Innocents with walls, and he transferred the lepers’ market to the Champeaux.42 He also built walls around the market and erected two long one-storied buildings, halles, parallel to one another, starting in 1183.43 With their construction, Philip protected the merchants and their goods and established a security patrol, the guetum, to guard the market walls and keep peace within the city. This last initiative, however, became a point of contention with the bishop, who still claimed to hold the right to jurisdiction in the Champeaux.44 Philip began in earnest to fortify Paris in 1190.45 Construction on the Louvre probably began soon after, although the exact date is unknown.46 Some scholars believe that the Louvre was the first castle with the “Philippan” plan, although this probably reflects a wish to highlight the centrality of Paris more than fact. Like the king’s other castles, the Louvre was a quadrilateral structure reinforced at the corners with towers and a central gate on one side (Figures 1.8 and 1.9).47 The master tower was separate from the main structure but located in the center of the courtyard. This arrangement suggests that the master tower preceded the construction of the fortress, although it is possible that the main structure also was built early in the royal program’s chronology; the later castles usually incorporated the master towers within

The Making of a Royal City

1.9.  Pol Limbourg (?) “October,” Très Riches Heures de Jean, Duc de Berry, ca. 1416. © Musée Condé Chantilly, ms. 65, fol. 10v.

the main structure, such as at Dourdan, which was reconstructed c. 1220. Without further evidence, it is nevertheless difficult to ascribe primacy to the Louvre, especially considering that a number of major constructions were under way throughout the French domain during these years. Construction of the Louvre shifted the locus of defense in Paris to the northwest of the city, away from the Palais de la Cité with its increasingly administrative function. Although it was located outside of the walls, the Louvre’s tower impinged on ecclesiastical property in that area. In 1204, Philip paid an indemnity of thirty sous to the monks of Saint-Denis de la Charte, and then, in 1210, he reimbursed the bishop for property lost when he built there.48 Despite the loss to these individual institutions, the new castle must have been a welcome addition to the city, given the conflicts in the north with the kings of England. While it reinforced royal protection of the city, the Louvre established another visual symbol of the king in Paris.

23

24

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.10.  Petit-Châtelet. © (BnF Est. Va 260e / H42377).

In addition, in 1210, Philip had the Petit Châtelet, a small fortress on the Left Bank guarding the Petit Pont, enlarged (Figure 1.10). New walls, gates, posterns, and fireplaces, as well as a three-storied jail, improved this building for a total of 570£p.49 In addition to their defensive functions, both the Louvre and the Châtelet served as reminders that Paris was now securely under the king’s protection. To add to the new structures on the Cité and the Right Bank, Philip also initiated a series of refurbishments in the Palais de la Cité. The king had the Salle du Roi enlarged (by one pillar), the castle grounds paved, new stables built, buildings repaired, and a new roof placed on the buildings.50 It is also possible that the king had the Grosse Tour (also known as the Tour Montgomery), first constructed by Louis VI, enlarged or rebuilt, for

The Making of a Royal City

1.11.  Walls of Philip Augustus. Plan © Parigramme.

its ­dimensions are ­comparable to his other towers.51 Given that the urban defenses were now located at the Louvre, these improvements may have been an effort to raise not only the functionality but also the allure of the royal palace, perhaps in response to the resplendent new episcopal residence and cathedral only three hundred meters east. While both Parisian fortresses emphasized royal protection and implied royal dominance over the city, the most significant building work Philip initiated in Paris was the construction of walls (Figure 1.11).52 They created a new physical boundary around the inhabited bourgs consisting of the “Ville” or mercantile area of the Right Bank and the “Université” of the Left Bank. The walls extended from Saint-Antoine in the east and moved north to encompass the Marais and the Champeaux before descending in front of Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois in the west. On the Left Bank, the walls were funded with £7,020 from Philip himself, starting in about 1200.53 There the walls began outside the Bièvre in the east and encircled the Montagne Sainte-Geneviève with its

25

26

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.12.  Paris, rue des Jardins. Walls of Philip Augustus. Photo: Author.

abbey in the south before turning to the north and terminating just outside of Saint-Germain des Prés. Made of two lengths of coursed stones filled with a mortar and rubble core, the walls were approximately three meters thick at the ground and they rose eight meters high (Figure 1.12).54 Fortified gates controlled access into the city during the day, while at night they were closed to protect the inhabitants within.55 With parapets and crenellations for defense, as well as an upper rampart and no fewer than seventy-seven regularly spaced watchtowers for surveillance, the walls created a permanent form of protection for those who lived within them. The staunch materiality of these imposing structures provided safety and defined a new, larger urban center. Despite the manifold advantages of belonging to the inner city, the renowned abbeys of Saint-Martin des Champs, Saint-Victor, and SaintGermain des Prés remained outside of the walls.56 The Temple, too, the center of the royal fisk as well as the locus of the Knights Templar, stood extra muros. This arrangement must have been at least in part related to the symbolic value of the walls. The physical separation distinguished the monastic life from the worldly urban center. Moreover, their exclusion from the city might have ensured that monastic affairs (such as lands and jurisdictions) would at least for a time remain outside royal oversight. Construction of the walls generated significant secondary effects for the king and the city of Paris. They worked to royal advantage in the accession of rights and jurisdictions, even if at first they raised conflicts that, at least in the short run, seemed to benefit others. The inclusion of the Merovingian abbey of Sainte-Geneviève within the walls, for example, ultimately served the king. The abbey’s location on the Montagne Sainte-Geneviève required that the walls surround a vast expanse of fields and cultivated land before

The Making of a Royal City

turning back toward the Seine. The most developed zone of the Left Bank at the time stood between the Rue Saint-Jacques and the Rue de la Harpe, and along the Rue Sainte-Geneviève. The surrounding areas were mostly cultivated lands and vineyards (clos).57 Although these lands and vineyards were held by the bishopric, its parishes, abbeys, and independent families, the king ordered the construction of buildings there.58 With this royal mandate, streets were opened and allotments parceled for new houses. In this way, the walls affected the urban morphology – particularly the cadastral pattern – for new blocks and streets were aligned along the same axes as the walls. The new streets carved out quartiers and created a network of public space where economic, social, and cultural transactions took place. While only a few sections of Philip’s walls remain standing today, their ground plan is reflected like a palimpsest by the contemporary city above. In addition to their indelible impact on the city’s topography, the walls shifted the balance of power in Paris.59 By cutting across old boundaries, they imposed on customs and rights traditionally held by the established monasteries that governed the land on which they were placed. In the north of the city, on the Right Bank, the walls divided Jean de Montreuil’s fief of Thérouanne, and to the east they also severed the bourg Saint-Gervais.60 Anne Lombard-Jourdan detailed the surreptitious ways the monarchy took control of new rights as a result of this destabilization of customary practice.61 At the same time, the church, the monarchy, and the seigneurs were constantly challenging each others’ rights because multiple boundaries overlapped between parishes, censives, and territories in Paris, particularly after the twelfth century. On the Left Bank, construction of the walls gave rise to problems with previous establishments. One disagreement arose in 1210 among the bishop, the abbot of Saint-Germain des Prés, and the king over the management of the Porte de Buci.62 The king assigned the right to the abbot of Saint-Germain des Prés, but the bishop contested this. After formal negotiations, the bishop took control of the gate while the walls remained under the guard and in the possession of the king. Another problem occurred because the parish of Saint-Sulpice was divided and Saint-Séverin appropriated its land. This led to another dispute among the bishop of Paris, the abbot of Saint-Germain des Prés, and others, which had to be terminated by arbitration in 1211.63 The result was that new jurisdictions were defined in the area, leading to the establishment of two parish churches, Saint-Côme-Saint-Damien and Saint-André des Arcs.64 Tensions like these reached a climax with a well-known conflict that occurred in 1222, when Bishop William of Seignelay and Philip Augustus were forced to negotiate an agreement concerning the rights of their respective institutions throughout the city where the king had built on church land.65 Similar accords were made throughout the kingdom where Philip Augustus built new walls and fortifications.66 The treaty they produced confirmed the

27

28

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

various rights to certain services and taxes in the major episcopal domains. To the bishop were restored all judicial rights over the inhabitants in the bourg Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois, the Couture-l’Évêque, and the Clos Bruneau, with some exceptions. In these areas, the king could administer justice for the crimes of rape and murder, and if less dramatic, not less important, the king also held right of jurisdiction over mercantile disputes. Philip Augustus acquired primary jurisdictional rights over the fief of Thérouanne, but the land itself did not pass into royal possession until the end of the thirteenth century.67 Finally, the king was able to raise taxes from this sector for military action. In return for damages caused by the construction of the walls, and to assure royal justice on the streets of the Right Bank, the king established a rent for the bishop from the Prévôt of Paris.68 While most scholars agree that the treaty benefited the bishop, whose rights were restored, its existence proves that episcopal possessions had been under siege.69 Moreover, its delineation of each institution’s prerogatives is equally significant, for the monarch began amassing written rights and jurisdictions in a city long run de facto by others. Whether Philip’s predecessors had the rights of high justice in a certain area, in almost all parts of his domain the king aimed to establish his unquestioned possession of these powers.70 In this way, his architectural programs functioned to bolster royal authority. No less important, the walls of Philip Augustus profoundly affected the cultural identity of Paris. In addition to the physical changes they engendered, the walls fostered a sense of place. In distinguishing the interior from the exterior of the city, the walls shaped an urban collective that was reinforced by the building programs within them. The contemporary chronicler William the Breton claimed that Philip Augustus “brought the Parisians together and made them one people.”71 In fact, the merchants of Paris paid for the first phase of construction on the Right Bank. If they did not appreciate parting with their hard-earned money to support the construction of the walls, their contributions nevertheless must have fostered a sense of joint ownership and pride in their fortified city, as well as a sense of personal responsibility for its upkeep. While increasing civic pride, the walls, streets, fortifications, and urban improvements became physical signs of Philip’s involvement in Paris that destabilized the balance of power in the city, allowing for the establishment of a new order. It is important to recognize that the success the city increasingly appreciated over the course of Philip’s reign cannot be attributed to his initiative alone. Concomitant to the king’s programs, other sectors already established in Paris flourished at the end of the twelfth and throughout the thirteenth century. One of the greatest attractions in early thirteenth-century Paris was its university.72 Paris excelled in the liberal arts of the trivium (grammar, logic, and rhetoric) and quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy), and its special subjects were theology and natural philosophy, although law and medicine were also taught. Peter Abelard and Hugh of SaintVictor, who drew students from across Europe, had contributed especially

The Making of a Royal City

to the university’s renown in the twelfth century. Philip encouraged the ­institution’s prosperity, joining the pope in ratifying its official establishment in the first decades of the thirteenth century.73 By the fourteenth century, the University of Paris had about forty thousand students.74 Paris was also a thriving center of production and commerce at the turn of the thirteenth century.75 Its largest industry was cloth, but the city was also known for its clothing, furs, and goldsmithery. Wares were sold on Saturdays in the Halles as well as at the main fairs, those of Saint-Laurent and SaintGermain, the first of which took place for eighteen days beginning the first Monday in November after All Saints’ Day, and the second for the same period starting fifteen days after Easter. Because of the university population, book production also became a highly specialized industry in the city of Paris, contributing to the development of painted and illuminated manuscripts, and to the increasing importance of the city as an artistic center.76 Although it was never a chartered commune, Paris had a strong mercantile corporation in the Marchands de l’eau, which at first controlled commercial navigation along the Seine and then with the king’s support expanded to include the merchandise associated with river transport: primarily grain, wine, salt, and wood. Eventually the organization took over other types of commerce.77 It controlled the measures and the values at which merchandise was sold in Paris. By the thirteenth century, royal favor and taxes made the Marchands de l’eau wealthy and powerful, and eventually the group assumed judicial power over trading rights. By 1265, it became so strong that the king had to limit its rights.78 The economy of Paris also flourished throughout the thirteenth century.79 The technological improvements made in agriculture during the eleventh century had by the twelfth century transformed the economy throughout the kingdom, leading to increased and more efficient trade between rural producers and market towns, particularly after Philip’s conquest of Normandy in 1204 and his success at Bouvines in 1214.80 The ever-growing city of Paris could rely on resources from as far as one hundred kilometers away.81 Most important, the city’s food supply was buffered by a ring of rich, ­grain-­producing lands that protected it from the debilitating famines suffered in the northern countries over the course of the century.82 Unlike in Liège and England, for example, grain prices in Paris remained the same during the crises of the midthirteenth century.83 The general inflation rate remained relatively stable as well.84 While the king was responsible for some of this prosperity, these varying factors contributed to the city’s ascendancy.

1.2 Demographics and the Urban Transformation

Philip’s programs and the other sectors bolstered by the royal presence engendered long-lasting effects for the population and the urban identity of Paris.

29

30

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

Economic stability and the security provided by the new walls, combined with the opportunities available from urbanization, the university, and the greater presence of the monarch and his court, encouraged immigration. In the course of a century, the population rose exponentially to more than four times its original size. In 1180, Paris contained approximately twenty-five thousand inhabitants, and by 1220, it had nearly doubled to fifty ­thousand.85 By 1328, when the first census was taken, the city was home to over two hundred thousand inhabitants.86 So many immigrants arrived that the population quickly outgrew the walls, particularly on the Right Bank, where there had been little open space at the time of their elevation.87 These newcomers played a crucial part in the city’s urban, architectural, and artistic developments for they brought with them the skills and techniques that would contribute to the distinctive architectural style developed in Paris and known today as Rayonnant. Most immigrants came from a distance of about one hundred kilometers from Paris, but others came from the northern regions of France, especially Picardy, Vermandois, and Artois in the northeast, and Normandy and Bretagne in the northwest.88 The decorative motifs developed in the great High Gothic churches of these regions would be combined to form Rayonnant in Paris. New buildings of all types were required to meet the needs of the ­growing population. As old parish quarters swelled, entirely new ones had to be constructed, forming a dense urban fabric. While at first initiated by Philip Augustus, this process took on a life and character of its own. The sheer number of the buildings that were reconstructed or built ex nihilo during this period is overwhelming (Figure 1.13). This urban phenomenon, a veritable building boom, can only really be grasped in reviewing the foundations, locations, functions, and visual qualities of the buildings themselves. From this examination emerges a richer picture of the architecture of thirteenthcentury Paris prior to the construction of the Sainte-Chapelle. On the Right Bank, the parish of Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois extended over a vast amount of land; by the thirteenth century, its population had expanded to more than thirty-three thousand parishioners.89 Its land was subsequently subdivided into seven parishes (including Saint-Germain) both within and outside of the walls so clerics could administer the sacraments to all the ­people in the area. The parish churches of Saint-Leufroi (after 1205) and Saint-Sauveur (after 1216) were built especially to accommodate them.90 On the land of Saint-Gervais-et-Saint-Protais, the chapel of SaintJean was elevated to the status of parish in 1213 behind the Right Bank’s largest mercantile port, called “la Grève.”91 A chapel dedicated to Saint Nicolas was founded near the Louvre in 1217.92 To the west, just outside of the walls, a certain Renold Cherey and his wife, Sybille, founded a new church dedicated to Saint Honoré in 1204.93 To the east, just outside the walls, a Cistercian church dedicated to Saint Antoine was built after 1215.94

opo

1.13. The Building Boom in Thirteenth-Century Paris. Ile de la Cité 1. Hôtel-Dieu 2. Notre-Dame 3. Sainte-Chapelle and Palace Refurbishments 4. Saint-Denis de la Chartre 5. Saint-Geneviève aux Coulons (des Ardents) 6. Saint-Pierre aux Boeufs 7. Saint-Jean le Rond 8. Saint-Symphorien Right Bank 9. Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois 10. Saint-Eustache 11. Saints-Innocents 12. Saint-Opportune 13. Saint-Josse 14. Saint-Leu/Saint-Gilles 15. Saint-Merry 16. Saint-Jean-en-Grève 17. Saint-Gervais/Saint-Protais 18. Brothers of the Holy Cross 19. White Mantles (later Guillemites)

20. Béguines Left Bank 21. Sacks (Augustinians from 1295) 22. Saint-André des Arts 23. Premonstratensians 24. Cordeliers 25. Saint-Côme/Saint-Damien 26. College of Cluny 27. Sorbonne 28. Jacobins 29. Mathurins 30. Saint-Séverin 31. Saint-Julien le Pauvre 32. College of the Bernardins 33. Saint-Jean de Latran 34. Carmelites (after 1262) 35. Saint-Nicolas du Chardonnet 36. Saint-Etienne du Mont 37. Saint-Geneviève 38. Bons-Enfants Extra Muros 39. Filles-Dieu 40. Hôpital la Trinité 41. Saint-Sauveur

31

42. Saint-Denis 43. Saint-Martin des Champs 44. Saint-Nicolas des Champs 45. Guillemites (exact first location unknown, moved to White Mantles in 1274) 46. Temple 47. Sainte-Catherine du Val des Écoliers 48. Saint-Paul 49. Saint-Antoine des Champs 50. Carmelites (moved to Left Bank after 1262, and original location became Celestins) 51. Carthusians (initial settlement at Gentilly) 52. Saint-Sulpice 53. Saint-Germain des Prés 54. Saint-Nicolas du Louvre 55. Quinze-Vingts 56. Saint-Honoré Plan © Parigramme with overlay by author.

32

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

The priory of Sainte-Catherine du Val des Écoliers in Paris was founded in the Marais in 1228–9.95 In 1258, the Order of the Serfs of the Virgin built another new church nearby.96 On the Left Bank, more space intra muros remained for urban development than on the Right Bank. After the construction of the walls of Philip Augustus, the property dispute of 1211 involving Saint-Sulpice led to the construction of the parish churches of Saint-Séverin, Saint-André des Arts, and Saint-Côme-Saint-Damien within the walls.97 A number of the new mendicant orders were installed on the Left Bank; the Dominicans arrived in 1217 and the Franciscans shortly thereafter. After acquiring property from SaintGermain des Prés between 1236 and 1239, the former built a church off of the Rue Saint-Jacques that was consecrated in 1262.98 The Franciscans moved to a site on the Left Bank near the city walls in 1239.99 The Augustinian friars, the Carmelites, the Mathurins, and the Premonstratensian canons joined their mendicant brethren on the Left Bank after mid-century.100 Many of these new churches replaced chapels or altars within larger churches and were named after them. On the Right Bank, the construction of a church dedicated to Saint Gervais began in 1202 on the site of a chapel.101 To the west, chapels on the land of Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois were rebuilt as parish churches: Saints-Innocents, Saint-Eustache (between 1212 and 1223), and Saint-Opportune (in 1220).102 The parish church of Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois, already partially rebuilt in the twelfth century, received a new façade in the first two decades of the thirteenth century.103 Saint-Merry, an eighth-century parish church, was enlarged in the thirteenth century.104 In the north of the city, chapels separated from the parish of Saint-Laurent by the new walls were transformed into the churches of Saint-Leu-Saint-Gilles (1235) and Saint-Josse (1260).105 Outside of the walls, to the east, Saint-Paul, a cemetery chapel elevated to parish status in 1107, was also reconstructed during this period.106 Further east, in 1198, the well-known preacher of the Fourth Crusade, Foulques de Neuilly, refounded an earlier chapel in honor of Saint Antoine, which was subsequently given to the Cistercians by Odo of Sully and rebuilt as a church starting in 1215.107 On the Left Bank, SaintÉtienne du Mont, once a chapel located in the crypt of Sainte-Geneviève, was built on the north flank of its abbey church for the parishioners soon after 1222.108 The monastery of Saint-Victor, located outside of the walls, ceded five quarters of land inside the walls on the Left Bank to build a chapel and a presbytery on the Clos du Chardonnet, which was dedicated as SaintNicolas du Chardonnet. The chapel became a parish in 1243.109 On the Île de la Cité, Sainte-Geneviève des Ardents was also rebuilt after reaching parish status.110 A number of parish churches had chapels near the cathedral on the Île de la Cité, and of these, Saint-Pierre aux Boeufs, Saint-Denis de la Chartre/Saint-Symphorien, and Saint-Jean le Rond (the baptistery of NotreDame) were all refurbished over the course of the century, although there were perhaps more.111

The Making of a Royal City

In addition to the new parish activity, the great churches and ­monasteries established in or near Paris were either partly reconstructed or sponsored new buildings during this period. To the north, starting in 1231, the great abbey of Saint-Denis had an entirely new nave, transepts, and cloister built.112 Saint-Martin des Champs followed suit with the construction of a new nave, cloister, and refectory.113 The abbots of Saint-Germain des Prés and Sainte-Geneviève both had refectories and chapels erected after 1239.114 The Knights Templar constructed a narthex for their fantastic rotunda, which was dedicated in 1230, although it may not have been completed for another decade.115 The Knights Hospitalers of Saint-Jean de Jerusalem (also known as Saint-Jean de Latran), whose chapel stood on the Rue Saint-Jacques and the Rue Saint-Jean de Beauvais, constructed a church, tower, and cloister in the thirteenth century.116 On the Île de la Cité, Notre-Dame was remodeled with an enlarged clerestory, new chapels between the buttresses, and magnificent new transept façades.117 Parishes and churches were not the only new edifices in the city. In 1244, Stephen of Lexington, Abbot of Clairvaux, founded the Cistercian College of the Bernardins on the Left Bank.118 The Bernardins were soon followed by other colleges, including the Sorbonne (1257) and the College of Cluny (1262).119 Around 1258, Louis IX founded the Bons-Enfants to house students.120 Hospitals and charitable hospices were founded with increasing frequency during the thirteenth century. While the old Hôtel-Dieu on the Île de la Cité was enlarged with new rooms, on the Right Bank, the new hospices of La Trinité (1202) and the Quinze-Vingts, a hospital for the blind (by 1260), were established outside the walls.121 A hospice for reformed prostitutes, known as the Filles-Dieu was established on the Right Bank on the Rue SaintDenis in 1226.122 Occurring simultaneously in a relatively short period of time, the rapidly changing political, cultural, and demographic circumstances invigorated the city, igniting an urban renewal that generated the mass production of architecture. The combination of the high demand for new structures and the new suppliers from different regions profoundly affected the city’s visual culture and cultivated a strong urban identity. The emerging pride in the new urban environment is apparent in the numerous poems (dits) written about the city and its churches over the course of the thirteenth century.123

1.3 The New Look of Paris: The Rayonnant City

In this whirlwind of activity, a new and distinctive architectural style known today as Rayonnant proliferated in Paris. The previous generation of Gothic architecture, a period of extraordinarily rapid technical and creative change, laid the groundwork for this aesthetic turn. Construction at the cathedrals of

33

34

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.14.  Paris, Notre-Dame Cathedral, façade. Photo: Pascal Lemaître © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

Chartres, Reims, Soissons, and Amiens, resolved the early design and technical issues that drove the first century of Gothic architecture, particularly the goal of building an extremely tall edifice with a skeletal structure that permitted the insertion of large stained-glass windows for colored light. During this phase, masons began to standardize stone shapes, sizes, and forms, effectively systematizing the methods of production, which facilitated construction as well as the exchange of ideas among builders.124 At the same time, architectural drawing became a design tool that not only recorded ideas but also served as a mode of artistic exchange.125 As construction increasingly began to rely on planning and prepared stones, the role of the master mason or architect became increasingly intellectual. Over time, the emphasis on architectural structure was directed to the articulation of space and surfaces that

The Making of a Royal City

1.15.  Paris, Notre-Dame Cathedral, detail of south tower. Photo: Author.

generated new forms: the gables of Cambrai and Tournai; the crockets and pinnacles of Reims, the trefoils and tracery of Amiens; and the unified elevation of Saint-Denis. Combined, repeated, and revised, these forms became ubiquitous in the new Parisian architecture. This architectural shift is most easily observed on the extant monuments in the city.126 Over the course of the thirteenth century, Notre-Dame Cathedral was completed and refurbished in the novel style. While the first four levels of the façade appear as a sheer wall with sculpted decoration applied to enhance different parts and sections, as typical of the late twelfth century, above the king’s gallery and the central rose window, the decoration becomes almost indistinguishable from the structure of the towers (Figure 1.14). There stands a screen of bar tracery forming a pointed arcade with crockets lining the inner arches and trefoils occupying the spandrel zone; subset within the arcade stands a rhythmic series of narrow trilobe arches surmounted by larger trefoils (Figure 1.15). The thin and elongated columns of the arcade cover the tower base and appear as impossibly narrow supports for the mass rising above. While this upper arcade resonates with other architecture in Paris from about 1235–40, the program here may have begun as early as 1228.127

35

36

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.16.  Paris, Notre-Dame Cathedral, north chapels 1–3, exterior. Photo: Author.

1.17.  Paris, Notre-Dame Cathedral, north chapels 5–6, exterior. Photo: Author.

Around that time, new chapels were also inserted at Notre-Dame between the nave buttresses, and the clerestory windows were extended down to the level of the oculi (Figures  1.16 to 1.18). The tracery patterns of the chapel windows formed a lace-like screen around the building and became familiar motifs in this architecture. Monumental but thin decorative façades were added to the transepts at mid-century, and additional portals and chapels were built around the edifice until the 1330s (Figures 1.19 to 1.22).128 In fact, over the course of the thirteenth century, the original exterior of Notre-Dame was almost completely refurbished in this new architectural

The Making of a Royal City

1.18.  Paris, Notre-Dame Cathedral, interior, nave from west. Photo: © Scala / Art Resource NY.

style. These layered, additive elements became characteristic of Rayonnant architecture. If the new style first appeared in the additions to Notre-Dame, this architectural aesthetic was integral to the thirteenth-century design of the abbey church of Saint-Denis (Figures  1.23 and 1.24). There, monumentality was rejected in favor of lower vaults that created more harmonious proportions between the vertical and horizontal planes. The nave of the abbey church exhibits a tight coherence of parts because the vault responds descend from the springing points uninterrupted through the compound piers to the bases on the floor. The clerestory mullions fall to the base of the triforium, which is glazed, allowing for the passage of light at every level of the elevation. A cage of glass, the building seems to stand only on thin shafts. Decorative features

37

1.19.  Paris, Notre-Dame Cathedral, north transept façade. Photo: Author.

1.20.  Paris, Notre-Dame Cathedral, south transept facade. Photo: Author.

38

The Making of a Royal City

1.21.  Paris, Notre-Dame Cathedral, Portail Rouge. Photo: Author.

1.22.  Paris, Notre-Dame Cathedral, northeast chevet chapels, exterior. Photo: Author.

39

1.23. Saint-Denis, abbey church, interior, nave. Photo: Patrick Cadet © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

1.24. Saint-Denis, abbey church, nave elevation, detail. Photo: Author.

40

The Making of a Royal City

merge with these linear structural elements, as in the great rose windows of the transept façades, whose tracery both secures and shapes the forms in the rose window. On the capitals and portals, foliate patterns predominate, following both established practices of stylization and a new naturalistic tendency, particularly in the later campaigns. These distinctive features were developed further and combined with new decorative patterns in the other churches in Paris. While Saint-Denis is the earliest extant, integral monument to manifest the architectural tendencies that characterize this new architectural style, it is important to recognize that it did not originate there. Given the appearance of these forms in the refurbishments at Notre-Dame, it was a broader urban phenomenon from the start. That so many of the buildings from this period have been lost, either rebuilt in subsequent centuries or destroyed during the Revolution, makes it difficult to attribute the earliest forms to any single building. The well-known extant examples from this period of Parisian architecture – Saint-Germain en Laye, the Sainte-Chapelle, parts of Notre-Dame, Saint-Denis, Saint-Séverin, and Saint-Martin des Champs, and fragments of the Lady Chapel and Refectory of Saint-Germain des Prés – represent but a small fraction of what once existed. The remaining written, graphic, and occasional archaeological materials testify that no fewer than fifty-six monumental buildings were either constructed ex nihilo or rebuilt on old foundations in and around the city over the course of the thirteenth century (Figure  1.13). This number includes small and large parish churches funded by individuals, royal mendicant foundations, hospitals, and colleges. It is a significant number, given that in 1270 the Dit des moustiers lists only seventy-two churches in the city.129 Among those, at least twenty-six had Merovingian foundations.130 Although the source material for these buildings is highly fragmentary, some of their physical attributes can be identified. This, combined with the evidence concerning their patronage and function, secures our understanding of Parisian Rayonnant architecture as an urban phenomenon. Moreover, what emerges from this analysis is a sense of the manifest flexibility of this style in the arts of thirteenth-century Paris. One example of this diversity exists in Saint-Pierre aux Boeufs, which was located on the Île de la Cité, close to Notre-Dame (Figure 1.25). This modest church had an impressive façade. On the ground level stood a large sculpted portal above which appeared a single arched window subdivided into two levels of lancets. The building had a rectangular plan of three bays and a large gallery in the elevation.131 When the church was demolished in 1837 to make way for the Rue d’Arcole, the sculpted portal was transferred to Saint-Séverin on the Left Bank, where it remains (Figure 1.26). The impressive door embrasures, carved with delicate foliate patterns over which were placed en délit shafts and foliate capitals, relate

41

42

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.25. Saint-Pierre aux Boeufs, west façade. © BnF Est. (Va 252 fol. / H032983).

this building to a number of other mid-thirteenth century churches in and around Paris, including Larchant, Gonesse, Saint-Denis, Saint-Martin des Champs, and the Lady Chapel of Saint-Germain des Prés (Figures  1.27 to 1.32). The financial sources for the sculpture of Saint-Pierre aux Boeufs are unknown, although in 1195 a church dedicated to Saint Peter on the Île de la Cité was associated with the abbey of Saint-Maur des Fossés outside of Paris.132 This association seems to have been transferred to the bishop of Paris who, as dean of Saint-Maur, received 900£p per year in rent from the chapel.133 If the bishop was not entirely responsible for its decoration, SaintPierre might have had munificent parishioners, even if the parish itself only

1.26. Saint-Pierre aux Boeufs, embrasures (in situ at Saint-Séverin, Paris). Photo: Author.

1.27. Saint-Denis, abbey church, north transept, façade portal, embrasure. Photo: Author.

43

1.28. Larchant, Saint-Mathurin, west façade, portal, embrasure. Photo: Stephen Murray © Mapping Gothic France.

1.29. Gonesse, Saint-Pierre-Saint-Paul, west façade, portal, embrasure. Photo: Andrew Tallon © Mapping Gothic France.

44

1.30.  Paris, Saint-Martin des Champs, refectory, portal, embrasure. Photo: Author.

1.31. Saint-Germain des Prés, Lady Chapel, embrasure. Photo: Author.

45

46

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.32. Saint-Gervais-Saint-Protais, embrasure, fragment from thirteenth-century west façade. Photo: Author.

comprised seven houses.134 The residents on the Île de la Cité were among the most prosperous in Paris. The 1297 census indicated that those who resided there paid the second highest level of taxes, reflecting their elevated incomes.135 Whatever the source, the decoration of this parish church proves that elaborate sculpture did not adorn only the most prestigious buildings, even if it required significant funding. At the same time, Saint-Pierre aux Boeufs was fairly typical of many of the small parish churches built during the thirteenth century. The sculpted portal enhanced the façade and indicated the building’s ecclesiastical function for parishioners and passers-by, while its less elaborate architecture reflected its status as a modest parish church. With its decorated portal, however, the façade of Saint-Pierre aux Boeufs resembled and recalled to its visitors the most magnificent buildings on the Cité – Notre-Dame and the Sainte-Chapelle. Similar visual comparisons between parish churches and special monuments could be made throughout the city. Another example of this type of decorated portal exists in the sole surviving fragment from the thirteenth-century parish church of Saint-Gervais (Figure 1.32).136 With its undulating profile and vertical grooves of sculpted foliate bands, it follows the same typology as the embrasures at Saint-Pierre aux Boeufs and the Sainte-Chapelle, among others in Paris from the 1240s, suggesting that the construction of this parish church, which began in 1202, may have been nearing completion by this time. The proximity of SaintGervais to the port of the Right Bank and the place de la Grève in the mercantile quarter of the city contributed to the wealth of its parish, to which this sculpture attests. With the exception of part of the tower, still in situ, the present church of Saint-Gervais-Saint-Protais, located on the Right Bank, was almost entirely rebuilt starting at the end of the fifteenth century, and a new façade was added in the seventeenth century. No other material from the earlier church survives.137 The complex of the Knights Templar, located just outside of the walls on the Right Bank, offers an alternative perspective on the function and patronage of this thirteenth-century Parisian architecture. The order was founded

The Making of a Royal City

1.33. Temple, exterior from south. © BnF Est. (Va 243 fol. / H026562).

in 1118 and established in Paris in 1140, at which time a large church with a distinctive rotunda was built.138 In Paris, the Templars kept and protected the royal treasury, becoming closely aligned with the monarchy and extremely wealthy from this association.139 A magnificent narthex was added to the church in the years around 1230, the date of a papal indulgence granted for attending its dedication (Figure 1.33).140 The new addition had two stories supported by large buttresses. On the ground story, the wall surfaces were replaced by large open lancets filled with unglazed tracery of cusped arches surmounted by rosettes. In the upper story, four-lancet windows were also crowned with trefoils and sexfoil rosettes. Branner compared these window designs to Notre-Dame.141 Had it not been razed, the Temple narthex would have stood with Saint-Denis and Notre-Dame as one of the earliest expressions of this architecture in Paris, and like those buildings it was not an exclusively royal establishment. If the Temple narthex exhibits a splendor achievable only from royal funding, some of the most magnificent examples of the new Parisian architecture had no such privilege. Starting in 1227, Abbot Eudes of Saint-Germain des Prés initiated construction on a new cloister for the abbey, which led to the reconstruction of the older cloistral buildings, notably the refectory and the chapel dedicated to the Virgin (Figure  1.34).142 Contemporary documents attribute the design to the renowned Pierre de Montreuil, who worked on the south transept façade of Notre-Dame in the 1260s and 1270s.143 The refectory was begun under the abbacy of Simon in 1239 and was probably completed before his death in 1244.144 The chapel was begun under Abbot Hugh d’Issy, who died in 1247 and was buried in its chevet, and it was completed some time during the abbacy of Thomas de Mauléon.145 An election held in the chapel in 1255 to designate the next abbot serves as a possible terminus ante quem.146

47

48

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.34.  Monasticon Gallicanum, Saint-Germain des Prés © BnF Est. (Va 269a fol. / H048583).

Both buildings were razed during the Revolutionary period. The refectory was destroyed first, in 1797, the Lady Chapel by 1802.147 In addition to graphic evidence and a detailed description of these buildings by Dom Bouillart, a number of exquisite fragments survive.148 The refectory hall extended 37.5 meters over eight bays and was 10.4 meters wide. Its rib vaults ascended 15.5 meters high. The exterior elevation had two levels. The lower wall was divided by a large setback molding about a third of the way up from the ground, which probably corresponded to a dado on the interior. The second level contained tall windows with tracery lights of two lancets surmounted by an oculus. The building had three doors and the floor was paved with colored stones.149 The Lady Chapel encompassed four large bays and a seven-part apse. It measured one hundred royal feet (32 meters) in length, twenty-nine feet (9.5 meters) in width, and forty-seven feet and two and a half inches (15.3 meters) in height.150 With a difference of only one royal foot, the dimensions of this chapel were nearly the same as those of the body of the Sainte-Chapelle. The elevation was similar to that of the refectory, with a low dado wall forming the first story, although above it were placed four lancet windows and three rosettes. The Lady Chapel’s portal stands today in the Musée national du Moyen Âge, and parts of the dado screen from the interior elevation are located

The Making of a Royal City

1.35. Lady Chapel, Saint-Germain des Prés, portal (Musée national du Moyen-Age – Thermes de Cluny). © RMN-Grand Palais/Art Resource, NY.

in the Place Apollinaire adjacent to Saint-Germain des Prés (Figures 1.35 and 1.36). The capitals from the Lady Chapel and refectory portals exhibit extraordinarily naturalistic foliate sculpture (Figures 1.35 and 1.37), while the Louvre possesses a majestic trumeau figure of King Childebert, which once stood in the refectory’s portal.151 More recently, a sculpture of the Virgin and Child, found on the grounds of Saint-Germain des Prés during construction of a parking lot under the contemporary Place Furstenburg, has been identified as a first attempt at the Lady Chapel’s trumeau figure, unfinished and buried because of an inherent flaw in the stone.152 Although the finished statue was destroyed in the Revolution, the extant parts of the

49

50

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.36.  Paris, Place Apollinaire, Lady Chapel, Saint-Germain des Prés, dado. Photo: Author.

1.37. Lady Chapel, Saint-Germain des Prés, capital. Photo: Author.

The Making of a Royal City

portal follow the same typological pattern as many others from the 1240s, with fine, botanically accurate foliate sculpture running down the embrasures, in a frieze across the capitals, and along the archivolts. This proliferation of foliate sculpture on archivolts, capitals, and stringcourses became, along with the extension of surface shafting, a telltale feature of Rayonnant architecture. The Lady Chapel dado screen is similarly delicate, with thin columns and shafts, and a crisp, almost metallic sharpness in the cusped arches, which are softened by the sculpted leaves framing them. In addition to these distinguished abbeys, two Parisian priories with multiple sources of funding also employed motifs associated with this urban architectural phenomenon. The Cistercians of Saint-Antoine, just outside the gate of the same name, expanded their church starting in 1215 with bourgeois, noble, and perhaps royal funding.153 Du Breul writes that Louis VIII gave the church the land upon which it stood in honor of his marriage to Blanche of Castile in 1200, and Louis IX purportedly supported the foundation from 1227.154 With aisles, a tall transept, and flying buttresses down the nave, the church was likely vaulted (Figure 1.38).155 The clerestory windows were pointed and contained simple tracery of a double lancet, an oculus, and perhaps a rose, as popularized in the High Gothic churches. The cloister had thin double columns with waterleaf and crocket capitals (Figure 1.39). Sainte-Catherine du Val des Écoliers, a monastery established at the request of the royal sergeants d’arms in honor of the victory in the Battle of Bouvines, was also constructed during this period with the aid of royal patronage. A late entry in the church’s cartulary stated that Louis IX mandated that a church be built and posed the first stone himself, although the royal foundation from 1228–9 only provided thirty deniers a day.156 Built in the shape of a Latin cross, the church was reputedly fifty meters long.157 Graphic evidence for the lost church depicts a tall nave with rounded clerestory windows and a more elaborate transept that contained a rose window, as well as a crocketed gable pierced with an oculus, both elements typical of the new style (Figures 1.40 and 1.41). A number of mendicant foundations were also established over the course of the thirteenth century. Of these, only the refectory of the Franciscan friars, “the Cordeliers,” still stands (Figure 1.42). Their church had a simple basilican plan with a complex polygonal apse of radiating chapels which might have been vaulted (Figures 1.42 to 1.45). The church in the Dominican priory of the Jacobins had a double nave with twelve bays and a flat apse (Figures 1.46 to 1.51). The church windows were filled with the modish bar tracery motif of three cusped lancets surmounted by three rosettes. While these mendicant foundations also benefited from royal patronage, the size of their buildings reflected the new orders’ widespread popularity more than their royal association, and their decoration

51

52

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.38. Saint-Antoine, abbey church, view from northeast. © BnF Est. (Va 299 t. 4 / H77679).

1.39. Excavations from the abbey of Saint-Antoine. © BnF Est. (Va 299 t. 4 fol. / H77729).

The Making of a Royal City

1.40. Sainte-Catherine du Val des Écoliers, view from the cloister. © BnF Est. (Va 249 fol. / H31301).

1.41. Sainte-Catherine du Val des Écoliers, bird’s-eye view of priory from east. © BnF Est. (Va 249 fol. / H31301).

53

1.42. Convent of the Cordeliers, refectory, exterior from southwest. Photo: Author.

1.43. Convent of the Cordeliers, Sainte-Marie-Madeleine, exterior from the cloister. © BnF Est. (Va 267 A fol. / H046991).

54

The Making of a Royal City

1.44. Convent of the Cordeliers, plan in mid-16th c. © BnF Est. (Va 267 A fol. / H046987).

1.45. Convent of the Cordeliers, Sainte-Marie-Madeleine, view of interior during destruction of the church. © BnF Est. (Va 267a / H47010).

remained fairly sober in accord with the principles of poverty espoused by these orders.158 Secular colleges also exhibit the new style of architecture. Next to the college established by Robert of Sorbon in 1257, the abbot of Cluny, Yves de Vergy, founded the College of Cluny in 1262 on land that is now the Place

55

1.46. Convent of the Jacobins, exterior from west, Gallia Dominicana. © BnF (Gallia fol. Ld22 105.2 pl. 39).

1.47. Convent of the Jacobins, plan, Gallia Dominicana. © BnF (Gallia fol. Ld22 105.2 pl. XX).

56

The Making of a Royal City

1.48. Church of the Jacobins, exterior elevation from northwest. © BnF Est. (Va 259i / H41631).

1.49. Church of the Jacobins, interior elevation, Gallia Dominicana. © BnF (Gallia fol. Ld22 105.2 pl. 41).

de la Sorbonne.159 The exact dates of the construction of the college buildings are unknown, but Philip III of France (r. 1270–85) founded two altars in the chapel in 1276, and with such elite patrons, it is unlikely that completion of these structures lagged.160 Nineteenth-century images of the chapel and the cloister of Cluny present an architectural language consistent with the late thirteenth century. The pattern that made up the cloister arcade of the college of Cluny (Figure 1.52) existed in different variations throughout the thirteenth-century monuments of Paris. The chapel of the college of Cluny, which had six bays and a five-part apse, and which measured approximately thirty meters, possessed lancet windows (Figures 1.53 and 1.54), whose bar

57

58

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.50. Convent of the Jacobins, drawing of tracery from chapter house, Gallia Dominicana. © BnF (Gallia fol. Ld22 105.2 pl. 47).

1.51. Convent of the Jacobins, fragment of tracery from chapter house. Photo: © Musée Carnavalet.

The Making of a Royal City

1.52. College of Cluny, cloister. © BnF Est. (Va 260 fol. / H42964).

1.53. College of Cluny, plan. © BnF Est. (Va 260j / H42958).

tracery recalled that of the Sainte-Chapelle. Inside, the college buildings were decorated with foliate keystones, capitals, and other forms of sculpted articulation. Although the college was entirely destroyed in 1833, a number of keystones from the chapel have survived and are now in the Musée national du Moyen Âge in Paris (Figure 1.55).161 They are delicately carved foliate bosses rendered with botanically correct accuracy, such as at the Lady

59

60

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.54. College of Cluny, chapel from east end, by Pernot. © Musée Carnavalet.

1.55. College of Cluny, keystone. Photo: Author.

The Making of a Royal City

1.56. Hôtel-Dieu, east end along rue Neuve Notre-Dame. © BnF Est. (Va 255 / H34602).

Chapel of Saint-Germain des Prés, the transepts of Notre-Dame, and the Sainte-Chapelle. Even the Hôtel-Dieu, the hospice that benefited from numerous gifts, alms, and testamentary donations by canons, independent bourgeois, nobility, and the corporations of Paris, displayed motifs in the new style.162 The eastern end, which turned onto Rue Neuve Notre-Dame, had gabled windows with elaborate tracery alternating with small, gabled niches typical of the thirteenth century (Figures 1.56 and 1.57). From this survey, it can be seen that the forms and designs of this architecture in Paris were applied irrespectively of building types and their sources of patronage. Varying and endlessly repeated, it was not specific to great churches, and was being employed as decoration in the architecture throughout the city. Sometimes munificently funded buildings (such as that of the Franciscans) had little decoration, while more modest sites (such as Saint-Pierre aux Boeufs) possessed sumptuous sculpture. Despite differences in size, function, and patronage, these buildings show that a common repertory of forms was employed in thirteenth-century Paris – from typologically similar foliate capitals to the ubiquitous trilobe and trefoil in tracery patterns, gables and pinnacles, the simple oculus, and the liberal use of fleurons – as if masons, sculptors, and patrons could select from a stockpile of pre-fabricated stones or large catalog, like an extended handbook

61

62

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

1.57. Hôtel-Dieu, façade. Drawing by Viollet-le-Duc. © BnF Est. (Va 255 / H34595).

of Villard de Honnecourt.163 The similarities in this architecture may be in part due to masons exchanging ideas or reusing extant forms in the quarries as they responded to the increased level of architectural production in Paris. While this new architecture may have been triggered by demographic factors resulting from urbanization and immigration, there was also an economic element to it. The fact that so many buildings could be built in a short period of time also indicates the increasing prosperity of Paris. Many of these buildings were smaller, short-term projects that needed to be executed quickly to accommodate either people or individual patrons. The smaller dimensions, reuse of forms, and applied decoration of this architecture, including perhaps the proliferation of foliate sculpture in place of figural sculpture, may have demanded less time to produce as well. With many of its forms deriving from ex-urbe origins, Parisian architecture of the thirteenth century was not particularly unique or original, rather it became distinctly Parisian through progressive synthesis and repetition. This common visual repertoire conveyed a shared language, an architectural “lingua franca,” forged from the diverse new urban collective who produced it.164 The visual language of this architecture became so adaptable that by the middle of the century, it began to be used in all other artistic media, on ivories

The Making of a Royal City

and reliquaries, and in the pages of illuminated manuscripts, becoming the ­predominant aesthetic for Parisian arts. Because of its sheer ubiquity in the city’s art and architecture, this new visual style became distinctly associated with Paris.

opo

T

his vision of thirteenth-century Paris has focused on the dynamic interplay between politics, local circumstances, demographics, and architecture that transformed the city and contributed to its long-standing status as both a political and a cultural capital of France. While a major factor in the construction of the capital city was Philip’s selection of Paris as his administrative center, his building program also accelerated urban growth, generating in its wake a new and distinctive visual identity for the city. Yet his actions in Paris were part of a larger architectural program he initiated in France, one that conveyed a secular image of the king. Philip’s visual division of power in architecture did not issue from a clearly demarcated separation of power. Nor was it a question of form responding to function. Royal and religious architecture often shared the same structural vocabulary. Towers employed the new technology of rib vaults. The episcopal close and palace on the east end of the Île de la Cité stood within its own walls and contained functional buildings with defensive elements such as crenellations, watch towers, and fortified gates, in addition to the new cathedral. Thus, while ecclesiastical structures utilized the full spectrum of architectural and decorative elements, royal architecture did not. The built environment rendered distinct images for the different institutional authorities. Architecture functioned as visual rhetoric in a discourse of power and status. To Philip’s credit, there were clear advantages to his ostensible lack of pretension: his architecture reflected the accepted social hierarchy and maintained the status quo.165 Even though Philip had been anointed with the holy chrism of Saint-Remi during his coronation, it was not in his interest to cause unnecessary tensions with the Church by asserting his divine status publicly in monumental architecture. Moreover, Philip was never in any real position to assert his divinely sanctioned power, especially after the papal interdiction of 1200 and his near excommunication over the repudiation of his first wife, Ingeborg of Denmark, and then his remarriage to Agnes of Meran. In addition, from a practical perspective, the construction of functional and austere architecture was less costly than elaborate monuments; Philip preferred to spend money on his military campaigns.166 That a visual division of authority became a habitual means of royal public imaging is underscored in two sculptures in the Salle Synodal of Sens. Commissioned in 1234 by Gautier Cornut, the archbishop of Sens,

63

64

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

one sculpture displays Louis IX under a canopy depicting a castle, and the other Cornut himself.167 The archbishop was a strong supporter of the monarchy, and of Louis IX in particular, so it appears that these sculptures reflect the diverse roles of the different governing institutions that each of these men represents. They convey the collective perspective of those visual distinctions between temporal and spiritual powers Philip Augustus had enforced. From its sheer consistency, Philip’s architecture appears as an intentional program. Even so, the king could not have anticipated all of the long-term effects it would bring about in his cities. In Paris, his initiatives were successful in augmenting royal power incrementally. The paved streets, bigger markets, protection from the fortifications, and collective work undertaken for urbanization had unforeseeable but important secondary effects. In the first place, they must have fostered a greater sense of place among the inhabitants. In addition, the new amenities and initiatives created new opportunities for work. Lured by the prospect of employment and wealth, immigrants flocked to the city in record numbers. They contributed to its growth, bringing their contacts and regional techniques that enhanced production. Combined with the growing reputation of the university and the economic momentum in the region, Paris prospered under Philip Augustus. Urbanization, wealth, and immigration together provided the ingredients for the building boom that generated the Rayonnant city. New buildings, from lodgings to churches, were constructed to accommodate the rapidly expanding population. With simpler structures and a repertoire of decorative forms that could be applied in any number of combinations, the new style of architecture in Paris met these requirements. Ubiquitous among the new thirteenth-century buildings of the city, from the small parish churches to the great abbey chapels, this style gave the city a distinct visual identity, one that became associated with its success. Again, this architecture did not issue directly from the king’s actions – it was not a “top-down” phenomenon – but rather the dynamic interplay of politics, people, and local factors produced this metropolitan style. If the new architecture built in thirteenth-century Paris created a visual culture based on Rayonnant motifs, it is important to remember that many of the new buildings were not particularly remarkable or special. Even if they reflected the materialization of a cohesive urban aesthetic, some monuments had more agency and greater appeal than others. While applied with more or less vigor to new churches, hospitals, and colleges, the style was most fully developed at the most important ecclesiastical institutions in Paris. Each of these institutions actively engaged in the urban environment either through their liturgical practices or because of their secular prerogatives.

The Making of a Royal City

Their involvement in the city encoded the urban space and its architecture with the prestige they possessed and projected from them. This will become clearer as we move, in the next chapters, to discuss the patronage of Louis IX and particularly the Sainte-Chapelle. Yet even this monument can only be understood fully when considered in light of the architectural program of Philip Augustus and the metamorphosis of Paris in the early thirteenth century.

65

2

opo The Sainte-Chapelle parisian rayonnant and the new royal architecture

B

etween 1239 and 1248, as Paris continued to prosper and expand and the new style of architecture grew increasingly distinctive in both large and small Parisian buildings, the Sainte-Chapelle was constructed (Plates II–V).1 Indisputably the most extraordinary monument of Louis IX’s reign, and possibly of the century, the chapel’s colored walls of stained glass and multimedia effects dazzle contemporary spectators as much as they did in 1323 when Jean de Jandun compared the building to Paradise itself.2 The Sainte-Chapelle was a remarkably innovative structure, although this quality has been overlooked because of the way the chapel also integrated seamlessly into its period style. Indeed, based on its architectural style, the Sainte-Chapelle has rarely been considered one of the finest exemplars of its period. Most scholars refer to other contemporary structures, such as Saint-Denis and the buildings associated with Pierre de Montreuil at Saint-Germain des Prés, as exhibiting higher-quality workmanship and a more avant-garde approach.3 The history of architecture has privileged these Gothic buildings that developed broad spaces, a thin, skeletal structure, and what are essentially curtain walls of stained glass – ­attributes of modern architecture akin to the Chicago school and Mies van der Rohe’s mid-century architecture. This assessment owes as much to historiography as it does to the aesthetic qualities of the SainteChapelle, which, in contrast, was highly decorative. Medieval concepts of beauty may explain in part the chapel’s divergence from such minimalist, modernist forms. That which was qualified as “pulcher” in the Middle Ages did not exhibit elegant restraint, but rather generated an overwhelming, almost sublime effect through multiple sensory experiences.4 Ironically, it was Abbot Suger who famously expounded on the anagogical potential of the wondrous arts within his twelfth-century church at Saint-Denis.5 In her recent book on the medieval experience of beauty, Mary Carruthers observes that written responses to the arts emphasize their sensory and emotive powers.6 Those objects and buildings with the most abundant 66

The Sainte-Chapelle

decoration often generated the most hyperbolic, exuberant descriptions, as the Sainte-Chapelle did. A reevaluation that embraces this decorative aesthetic as much as ­structural tectonics provides a new perspective on the Sainte-Chapelle’s place within the thirteenth-century architectural milieu. From this examination, it emerges that there was not one but two directions for architecture in Paris at this time, although they were not mutually exclusive: some buildings prioritized a linear and overtly skeletal system, while others employed decorative motifs to effect a distinct style. The forms that defined the period did not originate at the Sainte-Chapelle, although the royal chapel brought elements together in such a way as to inspire their perpetuation and development. In the course of this analysis, it also becomes apparent that the SainteChapelle constituted a significant shift from the unadorned and functional, urban architecture of Philip Augustus. Louis IX’s royal chapel manifested a new emphasis on decoration. This amounted to a transformation in royal representation from the utilitarian architecture of Philip Augustus. To fully appreciate the extent of this change, it is necessary to begin this discussion with an examination of the monument, both in itself and within its formal context. This reveals new insights about the Sainte-Chapelle’s place in Rayonnant architecture and its contributions to broader thirteenth-century practice. It is but the first step in the process of uncovering how the chapel conveyed a complex ideological program that projected royal ideals.

2.1 Architecture and Aesthetics

The Sainte-Chapelle is a double-level chapel comprising a porch, four bays, and a seven-part polygonal apse (Plates VI and VII). The exterior elevation reveals the organization of the interior space while accentuating the building’s monumental height (Plate II).7 A series of closely spaced buttresses frame the chapel and mark the bay divisions. The buttresses telescope upward with a series of setbacks and culminate with pinnacles that accentuate the building’s monumentality. Linked together by gables that frame the upper chapel windows, the alternation of pinnacles and gables produces a distinctive rhythmic pattern around the top of the building. The gables are decorated with crockets and pierced with oculi, further embellishing the monument. This ornamental upper section of the Sainte-Chapelle resembles a royal crown, which thus provides a visual cue for the royal relic housed inside. Below, a foliate stringcourse under a mid-level setback wraps around the buttresses dividing the exterior elevation horizontally into two parts corresponding to the lower and upper chapels. A thick masonry wall rises from the ground to form the lower chapel, and this is replaced by a large arched window midway in each bay. Above the dividing stringcourse, a narrow strip

67

68

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

2.1. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, upper chapel plan with Solomonic dimensions superimposed. Plan: Author, with dimensions after Murray.

of coursing gives way to translucent walls of glass, which extend upward via long, vertical mullions of tracery that further emphasize the upper chapel’s dominating height. Although the Sainte-Chapelle appears far taller than long or wide, the length of the chapel is actually nearly equal to its height. From the ground to the top of the west gable, the Sainte-Chapelle reaches 42.5 meters, while from west to east, including the porch at ground level, the length of the chapel is 42.2 meters.8 Between length and height, then, the chapel has almost exactly a 1:1 proportion.9 The body of the chapel reiterates this balanced ratio. Excluding the porch, from west to east the chapel extends 32.5 meters from the lower chapel door to the exterior of the apse wall. The height of the Sainte-Chapelle from the ground to the top of the lateral gables is also 32.5 meters.10 On the north-south axis, the chapel spans 16.19 meters from exterior buttress to exterior buttress, exactly half of the length and height of the building. While the distances are not whole numbers in meters, in royal feet (the primary measure by which the Sainte-Chapelle was designed), the building’s frame is contained within a double square of 100 by 50, as Stephen Murray has shown (Figure 2.1).11 The disproportionately tall appearance of the building is actually an effect of the low porch, the vertical buttresses, and the narrow space, because the actual proportions are quadratic. Moving to the western entrance, a double-level porch precedes the façade (Plate III). Here, the buttresses skirting the chapel have been pulled forward 5.91 meters (or 18.18 royal feet, the length of one interior nave bay) from the façade to create the porch perimeter.12 The buttresses frame the tripartite distribution of space in the lower chapel, creating a wide central aisle (6.66 meters or 20.5 royal feet) flanked by a narrow aisle (2.78 meters or about 8.55 royal feet) to either side. At the ground, to either side of the central space,

The Sainte-Chapelle

a socle bench unifies and conceals a pair of buttresses, while above, pointed arches join them at the level of the vaults. The lower chapel porch vaults ascend 6.83 meters (21.01 royal feet) from ground to keystone while those of the upper chapel porch reach to 8.46 meters (26.03 royal feet). With its modest dimensions, the porch sets up a striking transition into the chapel’s broad interior spaces. Crossing the threshold of the portal, one enters the lower chapel (Plate V). As anticipated by the porch, the area within is arranged into a wide central nave divided by freestanding columns that form narrow aisles to either side, for a total floor width of 9.66 meters, nearly 30 royal feet.13 The freestanding columns demarcate four bays between the entrance and the hemicycle. Columns define the space; all rising to the same height and capped by foliate capitals, they run down the nave, multiply in the colonettes of the dado, and congregate in the apse. They obscure the lower chapel wall, adding an insistent decorative quality that detracts from their purpose as supports for the upper chapel. The vaults rise on average 6.55 meters or 20 royal feet from ground to keystone and seem to hover over the columns, billowing open and extending to the furthest perimeters of the lower chapel. A series of daring architectural adjustments enhances the sense of open space in this level. In the first place, the lower chapel vaults descend onto the nave columns rather than onto the thick perimeter wall. This creates an opening for the aisles, whose vaults ascend to the same height and lift the space of the chapel laterally, indeed, extending the wall to the furthest possible boundary. To ensure the building’s stability, stone brackets abut the extrados of the nave vaults and extend to the chapel wall, functioning like internal flying buttresses (Figure 2.2). Yet rather than solid stone, as one would expect given their structural purpose, the brackets are instead made of bar tracery, with a cusped half arch, a foliate band, and a trefoil within a right angle. Further supporting the vault, a thin iron bar above and below reinforces the bracket. By providing a strong yet thin and pliable support, the iron permitted the decorative enhancements of the stone brackets. A second daring adjustment is found in the lower chapel wall, which is pierced above the dado and filled with large tracery windows that span the width of the bay. The weight of the upper chapel appears to rest on the thin responds of the nave that transfer the mass via delicate brackets and iron ties to the perforated exterior of the building. In addition to the emphasis on lateral expansion and thin supports, all of the articulation in the lower chapel has been subdivided and repeated. The dado is articulated with a screen of pointed trilobe arches with pierced trefoils in the spandrels (Plate VIII). The colonettes of the dado screen are separated from the wall (en délit), creating a layered effect, and their capitals are each distinguished with a variation of the crocket pattern or sometimes with simple foliate forms. Running around the lower chapel, the arcaded screen generates

69

70

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

2.2. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior, lower chapel, aisle, stone bracket and iron tie. Photo: Author.

a sense of rhythm, moving the gaze along the wall. Demarcating the bays are bundles of five colonnettes of equal height, each with its own ornamental capital. Above, a molded cornice marks the transition from the dado to the windows, which are set only twenty centimeters from the wall plane. This transition disguises the width of the lower chapel wall (1.01 meters/3 royal feet). The window melds into the arch of the vaults. These visual diversions – the screen-like effect in the dado, the window frames and their tracery, the omnipresent columns and capitals, and the decorative brackets, originally all covered by gilding and polychromy – further obscure the architectonics of the lower chapel, whose primary function, after all, was to support the upper chapel. Even if the space of the lower chapel might appear somewhat restricted to those accustomed to the large expanses of Gothic cathedrals, the structural design of the lower chapel exemplifies the architect’s technical virtuosity. It is nothing less than an architectural tour de force. The aesthetics of the lower chapel also govern the upper chapel, where open space, the appearance of weightless architecture, and abundant decoration predominate (Plate IV). In contrast to the tripartite arrangement of the lower chapel, the upper chapel was constructed as a single, unified space. Upon entering this level, the gaze is directed immediately upward as the vaults

The Sainte-Chapelle

ascend more than three times as high as those of the lower chapel to keystones set at an average of 19.86 meters/61 royal feet from the upper chapel floor.14 The clear floor area extends 32.5 meters/100 royal feet from the portal threshold to the apse wall and spans about 9.9 meters/30 royal feet.15 The width of the chapel interior is therefore just slightly less than half of its height. Every effort was directed toward the production of unimposing, light architecture. The vaults hover over window arches and descend onto slender responds that demarcate the chapel’s four bays. As on the lower level, each respond comprises five shafts, but here, only the large central shaft descends to the floor, creating the illusion that the shaft alone delicately bears the weight of the high vault above. The other responds land on a banquette at the base of the dado, recessing into the wall and providing a veneer for the buttresses behind them. As on the porch and in the lower chapel, the weightbearing elements have been minimized and directed to the exterior. The design of the elevation also detracts from the architecture’s structure. The upper chapel dado maintains a separate existence from the windows above it, as there is little linkage between the two parts. As in the lower chapel, the dado is the only wall area and it too offers itself as a blank canvas for decoration (Plate IX). In each bay, the dado carries three pointed arches subdivided into two round trilobe arches crowned by a quatrefoil. At the wall plane, each quatrefoil, known as a “medallion,” contains an image of a martyr decorated in glass, enamel, paint, and gilding.16 The dado colonnettes are decorated with capitals sculpted in an extensive variety of botanically accurate plant species. Additional foliate sculpture adorns the extrados of the great arches, and winged angels holding crowns inhabit the spandrels. Above, another foliate band frames the dado, reiterating the horizontal line produced by the arcade. The upward movement of the main respond in each bay is interrupted by the apostle statues at the juncture of the dado and the windows. These design choices separate the elevation into different parts and detract from its visual unity, adding to the ethereal, floating quality of the stained-glass windows above. Another adjustment in the upper chapel occurs in the third bay, where a niche occupies two of the three major arches of the dado (Figure 2.3). With a length of 2.93 meters or 9 royal feet and a depth of 1.12 meters or 3.4 royal feet, the niche cuts into the upper chapel wall, forming a small transept in the plan. Only a forty-centimeter sheath of stone between the buttresses divides the interior from the exterior at this level, and it is corbelled out imperceptibly at the level of the exterior stringcourse. The niche is framed by a low and wide round arch onto which a tracery molding forms a wide trilobe in the intrados. The extrados is decorated with a sculpted relief of angels in profile carrying crowns to a central bust of a nimbed Christ. Within the niche, the same motif of the dado is followed. A small window in the third trilobe arch allows a view of the exterior as if to reiterate the permeability of the wall.

71

72

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

2.3. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior, upper chapel, niche. Photo: Author.

Above the dado hover the immense stained-glass windows. With a height of 15.5 meters, they account for more than three-quarters of the chapel’s internal elevation, and cover a surface of 618 meters.17 In the nave, the lancets have a total width of 4.66 meters, each of which is subdivided by bar tracery; first into two smaller lancets surmounted by a sexfoil rosette (oeil du boeuf), and again into two smaller lancets with cusped arches crowned with quatrefoils. The narrower hemicycle windows are arranged as two lancets crowned with three trefoils. The predominant colors throughout the program are blue and red, which were also ubiquitous in Parisian manuscript painting, but green, pink, light blue, white, and yellow are also present. As enormous translucent banners that transform light into color, the stained-glass windows infuse the chapel with a mystical glow.18 Additional architectural manipulations visually expand the apse enclosure. The hemicycle walls were laid on seven sides of a concentric dodecagon whose center point has an eccentricity of 1.5 meters or about 4.5 royal feet from the easternmost transverse arch, and the vault keystone is set at 20.5 meters or 63 royal feet, slightly higher than in the nave. The transitional bay is notably narrower and lower than the hemicycle: its windows are 13.05 meters high and with two lancets of 90 centimeters, while those of the turning bays are 13.55 meters tall and have lancets with a width of 1.08 meters.19 The turning bays are defined by the deep webs of the vaults whose responds are narrower than those in the nave. Reduced to only three shafts corresponding

The Sainte-Chapelle

to the hemicycle ribs, the central responds no longer fall directly to the floor, but are recessed toward the wall (Plate VII and Figure  2.41 ahead). If the narrowness of the transitional bay may be explained as a means to ensure a straight transition to the hemicycle, the structural alterations in that space – the expanded windows and slender, recessed responds – subtly enlarge and thus enhance the hemicycle space. Metal plays an integral role in the chapel’s structural design. Iron bars extend from the brackets to the lower chapel wall. They form a system of linked bars that wrap around the lower chapel chevet and in the upper chapel at the base of the windows, the springing of the vaults, and the base of the upper cornice.20 In the upper chapel, the bars run through the window mullions, also reinforcing the stained-glass armatures (Figure 2.4).

2.4. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, exterior, upper chapel, iron armature. Photo: Author.

73

74

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

2.5. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, exterior, upper chapel, window armature, iron tie. Photo: Author.

However, in the process of construction, the window armatures were not coordinated to the iron bars; at the insertion of the stained glass, metal ties had to be added to the armature and then hammered around the iron bar to hold the window in place (Figure  2.5). Iron bars also run through the buttresses and stair turrets, joining above the upper chapel vaults.21 Finally, iron and lead bolts reinforce the tracery joints and attach the capitals and en délit colonnettes to the chapel body.22 Combined with the iron and lead required for the stained-glass armature, the amount and cost of metal alone in the Sainte-Chapelle would have been significant.23 This systematic use of iron and lead throughout the chapel reflects an increasing confidence in and knowledge of how iron could reinforce the weak points in masonry, after experimentation at Bourges and Chartres, as well as at Amiens and Reims.24 To summarize, the architecture of the Sainte-Chapelle exhibits two main aesthetic priorities. The first is the creation of an open, unencumbered space; all extraneous elements have been pushed outward and directed toward the external perimeter wherever possible. This tendency for an open space with a sleek design was typical of Paris, expressed early in the eleventh century

The Sainte-Chapelle

at Saint-Germain des Prés and also espoused in the nave of Notre-Dame, where all three-dimensional articulation was reduced to open the inner space of the  nave and to enhance the planar quality of the wall. At the SainteChapelle, this aesthetic preference led to daring solutions in both the upper and the lower chapels. In the upper chapel, the structural supports and dado arcade adhere closely to a single yet diaphanous enclosing frame. In the lower chapel, the effect of openness is more conceptual because of the lower vaults; although the nave extends laterally to aisles, the numerous columns and colonnettes appear decorative and the chapel wall is pierced by windows. In both cases, confidence in the use of iron to reinforce the chapel’s structure allowed for a reduction in the massing of the stone. The second priority involved the concealment of architectonics through refinements and decoration that create a trompe l’oeil effect. In the grand scheme of the architecture, this aesthetic was expressed in the porch with the placement of the buttresses to the west, in the lower chapel with the lateral extension of the nave wall to form aisles of the same height as the nave, and in the upper chapel with the illusion of a single respond per bay carried through to the floor from the vaults. The decorative motifs of the exterior, the profusion of columns, colonnettes, and tracery in the lower chapel, the upper chapel’s strategically placed apostles, abundant sculpture, recessed shafts, and lack of unification in the elevation interrupt the transparent appearance of the structure, creating a less rational and more mystical atmosphere. The brilliant colors of the stained-glass windows, the glow of the gilding, and the opposing harmonies of the polychromed surfaces (red/blue, yellow/green) enhance this effect. Once in operation, these attributes of the Sainte-Chapelle, combined with the mellifluous songs of the liturgy and heady perfume of the incense, created a multi-sensory experience that brought the terrestrial in communion with the divine.

2.2 Proportions and Dimensions

The proportions and dimensions of the Sainte-Chapelle are also important properties of the aesthetic priorities governing the building’s architecture. Consideration of these elements offers insight into the chapel’s formal as well as its ideological relationships with other monuments. In addition, this data provides an indication of the process by which the building was constructed. As mentioned previously, the preferred unit of measure at the SainteChapelle was the royal foot, which here is taken to be .325 meters.25 While no standard unit of measure was employed in thirteenth-century France and local foot measures (based on the Roman foot of .295m) were still frequently employed, the royal foot was predominant in Paris, and use of it at the Sainte-

75

76

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

Chapelle is evident from the whole numbers identified throughout the chapel: the large shafts of the lateral pier responds, and the vault ribs in the upper and lower chapels are one royal foot.26 Two and a half royal feet made the width of the socles in the lateral pier responds, three royal feet the lower chapel wall at the dado, and four royal feet the lower chapel wall at the ground.27 The upper chapel buttresses are six by four royal feet.28 While a 1:1 ratio governs the chapel’s length and height, other proportional relationships are apparent at the Sainte-Chapelle. The distance from the interior of the upper chapel façade to the interior east wall is 31.70 meters or about 97.7 royal feet, yielding a proportion of nearly 3:4 between the porch and the internal dimensions of the chapel and exactly 3:4 between the internal dimensions of the chapel and its overall height. The elevation of the Sainte-Chapelle also exhibits striking proportional relationships. From the ground, the keystones of the upper chapel are set at an average height of 27.27 meters or 84 royal feet.29 The upper chapel floor, at 7.3 meters or 22.46 royal feet from the ground, stands at about a quarter of the way up to the keystones.30 The upper chapel abaci are set at 20.85 meters or 64.15 royal feet from the ground, about three-quarters of the way to the upper keystone, and about a third of the way up from the upper chapel floor.31 The upper vault keystones rise 19.88 meters or about 61 royal feet on average from the upper chapel floor, just more than three times the height of the lower chapel vaults.32 The keystones of the lower chapel are set at a height of 6.51 meters or 20 royal feet, just less than one-quarter of the height from the ground to the upper chapel vaults; given the changes in the ground level, this proportion may once have been exact.33 While the lower and upper chapel vaults are related in proportion, the wall elevations do not show similar associations. In this respect, the chapel’s elevation does not compare directly to those of the great cathedrals like Chartres, with its A:B:A elevation comprising nave arcade, triforium, and clerestory, or Amiens, with its A:A elevation between the nave arcade and the unified triforium and clerestory. Both the lower and the upper chapels have two-part elevations comprising a dado and windows above. Although the lower chapel does not rise to the height of a cathedral nave, the upper chapel’s elevation can be likened to the triforium and clerestory zones of a great church. These elements far extend the normative proportions in those types of buildings. At Saint-Denis, for example, the triforium, which is equivalent in height to its dado, represents one-third of the height of the clerestory. In the Sainte-Chapelle, the upper chapel dado, rising 4.3 meters (13.2 royal feet) from the floor, comprises only about one-fifth of the entire upper chapel elevation, and represents just over one-quarter of the height of the windows. The upper windows dominate the elevation at 15.5 meters (47.7 royal feet), comprising almost half of the height of the entire chapel from the ground to

The Sainte-Chapelle

the pinnacles (32.5m/100 royal feet). Nevertheless, the relation of the height of the upper chapel keystones to the width of the chapel is 1:2.8, proportions more modest than those at Reims, with a ratio of 1:2.9, and at Amiens, which is 1:3.2.34 If the elevation of the Sainte-Chapelle does not correspond to that of a great church or cathedral, the height of the building definitely does. At 42.5 meters, the tip of the west gable rises to the same level as the vaults of Amiens Cathedral. The exterior elevation (from the ground to the pinnacles), 32.5 meters, reaches the height of the keystones in the choir at Notre-Dame Cathedral.35 The keystones of the upper chapel, at 27.27 meters from the ground, rise slightly higher than those of Laon Cathedral (at 26.6 meters), and they are similar to the thirteenth-century nave vaults of Saint-Denis, which average 27 meters to the keystone.36 Yet the lateral dimensions of the Sainte-Chapelle bring the building within the framework of chapels in the Paris region. The royal chapel at Saint-Germain en Laye was proportionally similar to the Sainte-Chapelle: the interior width of Saint-Germain (from wall to wall) is very close to the clear floor space of the Sainte-Chapelle, and the total east-west length of the chapel fits within the straight bays of the Parisian chapel.37 The body of the Sainte-Chapelle is nearly equivalent in size to the Lady Chapel of Saint-Germain des Prés. Although we do not know exactly where the measurements were taken, the dimensions of the Lady Chapel were 100 feet by 29 feet in length and width, and 47 feet 2 inches to the vault keystones, corresponding to 32.5 meters by 9.425 meters.38 From later in the century, the chapel of the College of Cluny extended approximately 30 meters east to west by 10 meters north to south (Figure  1.53). It is thus in the elevation, most particularly, where the Sainte-Chapelle deviated from these chapels, because its great height associates the building with great churches and cathedrals. In addition to these affinities with contemporary buildings, the dimensions of the Sainte-Chapelle bring the royal chapel into communion with ­biblical structures. Stephen Murray has shown that the 100 royal foot by 50 royal foot dimensions of the chapel body and the 50 royal foot by 30 royal foot porch correspond to the measures given for the house and porch of Solomon in 1 Kings 7:1–3 and 7:6.39 While the perimeter of the Sainte-Chapelle was made according to a double square of 100 royal feet by 50 royal feet, the internal design of the building was based on a different standard. Studies of Gothic design have shown that the exterior and interior geometry were not always related.40 Distances inside the chapel run from pier center point to center point. In the lower chapel, from the north to the south, each nave bay spans an average 6.60 meters, just slightly more than 20 royal feet (20.3 meters).41

77

78

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

2.6. Sainte-Chapelle, plan with royal foot dimensions superimposed. Plan: Author.

On the east-west axis, the nave bays extend 5.91 meters, or about 18 royal feet, on average. These irrational numbers indicate that the lower chapel nave bays are the physical expression of geometric proportions obtained by the application of dynamic geometry on the ground. Between the freestanding piers, the nave bay has a diagonal of 27 royal feet, creating a ratio of 2:3 units between the east-west length of the nave bay and the diagonal, with each unit being 9 royal feet (Figure 2.6). These numbers are the physical expression of the √5/2 rectangle (the golden ratio). The numbers are so precise here that this must have been integral to the construction of the chapel; with a diagonal of exactly 27 royal feet, the sides of the rectangle are exactly 18.15 royal feet and 20.6 royal feet.42 In the lower chapel, the center points between the nave bays fall almost exactly at these numbers (bay 1 has a north-south distance of exactly 20.67 royal feet; the average of the east-west distances in the lower chapel bays is 18.11 royal feet).43 The distance of 27 feet could have been determined by the use of a perch of 9 royal feet.44 It is perhaps a key to the construction of vaults in general as this ratio is also observed in those of Notre-Dame.45 The Sainte-Chapelle likely was planned from the top down, with priority given to the open space of the upper chapel. The upper chapel’s dimensions of 100 royal feet by 50 royal feet between the external length and the buttresses and 100 royal feet by 30 royal feet for the internal clear space exhibit solid whole numbers of the kind often used in the design of great churches. Yet even if the upper chapel guided the overall design of the building, the relationship between the upper and the lower chapel is obviously very close; the two levels share the same perimeter and the lower chapel supports the upper chapel. The center points of the lower chapel wall responds match the center points of upper chapel responds, so the lower chapel wall responds ultimately connect to and support the upper chapel vaults. In the upper chapel, this meant that the first bay began 1.37 meters east of the façade wall. This area provided the extra space for the doors of the spiral staircases.

The Sainte-Chapelle

Great attention was paid in the planning to reduce the mass that the upper chapel would exert on the lower chapel. The wall of the lower chapel is on average 1.31 meters (4 royal feet) thick at the ground, while that of the upper chapel is on average .86 meters or about 2.5 royal feet.46 While the lower chapel façade is 3.3 meters (about 10 royal feet) thick, that of the upper chapel is 1.84 meters (5.5 royal feet) thick. The buttresses also reduce in size as they ascend from the lower chapel to the upper chapel. At ground level, the buttresses are 3 meters long by 1.35 meters wide, while at the level of the upper chapel floor, they are 2 meters long by 1.27 meters wide.47 The fact that windows also occupy most of the upper chapel’s elevation also works to lighten the overall superstructure. If the Sainte-Chapelle had been planned from the top down, it nevertheless had to be built from the ground up. The whole numbers in the lower chapel bay vaults and the clear ratios in the heights of the vaults were important factors in the framing of the chapel and the laying out of its plan. Yet the precise geometry used in the setting of the chapel plan on the ground remains elusive.48 Despite the differences between the upper chapel and the lower chapel, the relative consistency in the building’s structure and articulation suggests that no major breaks occurred during the process of its rapid construction.49 However, a few incongruities reveal incremental adjustments to the building. They occur in the nave bays. On the north side of both the upper and lower chapels, the second bay contains a small portal, each of which was obstructed on the exterior by the elevation of the south wing of the Palais de Justice. Scaffolding put in place on the north side of the chapel for the restoration of the stained-glass windows in 2012 brought the upper chapel north nave portal to light (Figure 2.7).50 The lower chapel portal, hidden by retail tapestries of the Dame à la Licorne, opens into what has been made into the storage area of the boutique (Figure 2.8). While both portals have sustained minor restorations (Figure 2.9), most of the stones of the upper chapel portal are medieval, making it the only major element of the Sainte-Chapelle that has not been subjected to transformative restoration and whose masonry is apparent to the naked eye. On the exterior, both doors are framed by two en délit colonnettes attached with lead onto a coursed embrasure with thin, sculpted shafts. Their capitals, of varying heights corresponding to either shafts or colonnettes, bear foliate sculpture datable to the mid-thirteenth century. Above, the lintel of each door is made of a single monolith articulated with a depressed arch formed by thick moldings. Oddly, the upper chapel portal, although complete, never opened into the interior of the chapel. At the level of the capitals, unfinished jamb imposts with diagonal profiles move directly into the door space and hold a single keystone (by means of a temporary lead joint) between them. A ­nineteenth-century

79

opo

2.7. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, exterior, upper chapel, north nave, second bay, portal. Photo: Author.

2.8. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, exterior, lower chapel, north nave, second bay, portal. Photo: Author.

The Sainte-Chapelle

81

2.9. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, lower chapel, second bay portal, restoration attachment. © BnF Est. (Va 225h / A21744).

stone inserted between the keystone and the lintel corresponds to a dado capital on the interior, added during the nineteenth-century restoration. While the stones in the coursing through the door opening have different finishes, they are medieval. Indeed, this door offers fascinating insight into the process of construction and anticipated use of the Sainte-Chapelle. Given that the monolithic, molded lintel was cut to fit onto the coursing, as well as the harmony of the sculpted capitals and bases with those of the interior chapel, it appears that the portal was inserted sometime soon after the walls were raised. But at some point during its construction, it was decided that there would be no use for it and the doorway was never opened.

82

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

An image by Ransonnette illustrates the portals from the interior of the chapel as they looked in the eighteenth century (Figure  2.10). Both had square frames designating their location. An altar stood in front of the lower chapel door, which suggests it was not in use at the time the image was made. The upper chapel door had a framed painting hanging on it, which also suggests it was not used. Had they been operational, the doors would have opened out to the central courtyard of the palace, in front of the Trésor des Chartes, itself linked to the first turning bay of the chapel. Jean Guerout claimed that the Audience du Roi (Office of the Royal Seal) stood in this location from about 1285.51 A two- or three-storied building existed in the location of the portals in the eighteenth century (Figure 2.11).52 According to plans of this building drawn in 1783, neither level had direct access to the Sainte-Chapelle (Figures 2.12 and 2.13). The design of the portals, with their shafts, sculpted capitals, and molded arch, suggests that they were made for important dignitaries. It is tempting to consider that the doors may have been planned for royal ceremonial entrances from either the courtyard or the gallery, but at some point, apparently even during the process of construction, they were rejected.53 Another incongruous part of the plan and elevation exists in the third bay at the niche. As discussed earlier, the niche opens into the upper chapel wall, which has been narrowed (Plate VII and Figure 2.3). The outer enclosure of the niche does not extend from the chapel wall but is cantilevered beyond the level of the lower chapel wall. On the exterior, the arch of the lower chapel window pushes the dividing stringcourse into a point at the level of the third bay where the niche is located (Plate II). While this point indicates the niche from the outside of the chapel, it also represents a difference in design from the other bays. As many cathedrals were built simultaneously at the west and the east, it is possible that the third bay was one of the last bays completed, and the niche was not an inherent part of the plan. On the inside, the sculptural transition in the spandrel area where the niche was placed is somewhat awkward (Figure 2.14, left). However, if it is tempting to see these incongruities as later adaptations, the niche construction parallels those (heavily restored) at the royal chapel of Saint-Germain en Laye (see Figures 2.33 and 3.13 through 3.15 ahead), and they were integrated into the chapel’s thematic program with the stained-glass windows, which enriched their function as a setting for the royals, as Beat Brenk has suggested.54 Overall, the correspondence between the upper and lower chapels, especially the links between the wall responds of the lower and upper chapels, suggest that the two levels were built in relation to one another, probably simultaneously.

opo

2.10. Ransonnette, Sainte-Chapelle, interior of upper and lower chapels. © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

2.11. Etienne Martellange, Palais de la Cité. View of Cour du Mai. © Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (CL II 117).

83

2.12. Palais de la Cité, plan of the Cour du Mai prior to reconstruction in 1783, lower level. (BnF Est. Ve 84 fol. 1). Photo: Author.

2.13. Palais de la Cité, plan of the Cour du Mai prior to reconstruction in 1783, upper level. (BnF Est. Ve 84 fol. 2). Photo: Author.

84

The Sainte-Chapelle

2.14. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior, upper chapel, niche, detail of sculpture. Photo: Author.

2.3 Sculptural Decoration

Sculpture plays an important role in the Sainte-Chapelle. Profuse but not ­overwhelming, sculpted decoration accentuates transitions, adds ornament, and detracts from the architectonics. On the ­exterior, figural sculpture animates the tympana, archivolts, and quatrefoils in the upper chapel socle (Plates X and XI). This sculpture was so effaced during the Revolution that the original themes could only be identified through earlier graphic sources and descriptions. While this material unanimously informs that the upper chapel tympanum contained an image of Christ in Majesty and a trumeau of Christ in Benediction, records of the lower chapel tympanum are less consistent. The majority of antiquarians identified the tympanum as the Coronation of the Virgin and attest that the trumeau held a sculpted image of the Virgin.55 All of these sculptures were recreated in the nineteenth century by Geoffroy Dechaume, who employed the tympanum of the Coronation of the Virgin at Notre-Dame as a model.56 The surrounding archivolts of prophets and the quatrefoils in the socle with scenes from Genesis were also devised by the same workshop with little knowledge of the original. On the interior of the upper chapel, the figural sculpture consists of small angels censing and carrying crowns in the spandrel zones of the dado and the famous group of twelve apostle statues. Six of the original apostle sculptures remain in the chapel, albeit heavily restored, while the six others are fragmentary but less heavily reworked in the Musée national du Moyen-Âge.57 Formal

85

86

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

differences among the sculptures have led scholars to question whether they were produced and installed in the chapel at the same time.58 If not, why only six apostles would have been sculpted in the first place is difficult to justify in terms of their placement in the chapel and in terms of their function. Stylistic difference does not always indicate a programmatic change, and in this case it may have simply been down to the presence of several workshops or hands working on the sculpture at once. In contrast to the conventional subjects of the figural sculpture, the foliate sculpture is impressively varied, with representations of diverse genus and species of local forest plants. Denise Jalabert identified representations of ivy and grape vines; oak, maple, poplar, and fig trees; and shrubs and flowers, including rhubarb, parsley, thistle, fern, and different species of daisies and roses.59 Yet for all of its variety and apparent naturalism, the foliate sculpture at the Sainte-Chapelle is also artfully arranged on its support and controlled; indeed, as Jean Givens has observed, it is more “descriptive” than mimetic.60 Foliate sculpture lines the exterior stringcourse marking the transition between the lower and upper chapels, ornaments the upper reaches of the chapel in the form of crockets, extends beyond the capital frieze and lintel in the portal to the embrasures in the upper chapel, and flourishes on the capitals. Capitals accentuate all responds throughout both upper- and lower-chapel porches, on the portal jambs, throughout the lower chapel in the freestanding piers and the dado arcade, at the springing of the vaults, in the upper chapel on the dado, in the window tracery, and on the responds at the springing of the vaults. This collection of foliate sculpture can be grouped into four general types. While differences in capital type are usually associated with campaign changes in larger buildings or sometimes with diverse locations and functions, such clear demarcations do not occur at the Sainte-Chapelle. In general, the majority (but not all) of the finer, more descriptive foliate capitals were placed on the portals or in the upper chapel dado, while most (but not all) of the simply styled foliate capitals appear in the lower chapel. If these differences might have responded to a directive to apply the more detailed work to specific parts of the building, they might also indicate the presence of multiple hands or workshops. There is no indication that the most elaborate capitals were positioned to accentuate the liturgy or draw attention to certain members of the audience. Before describing the different types of capitals, a word should be written about their state of preservation, particularly given the near total replacement of the figural sculpture during the nineteenth-century restoration. Visual and archival examination suggests that the portal capitals, most of the porch capitals, and the dado capitals of the upper chapel are original, while in the lower chapel, all of the freestanding capitals and most of the dado capitals are nineteenth-century replacements.61 While it is impossible to know how much freedom was actually permitted in the nineteenth-century carving of the new

The Sainte-Chapelle

capitals, the restoration itself aimed to be archaeological, so these capitals may very well be reproductions of types that existed in the lower chapel.62 However, the cul-de-lampes that support the apostle statues are modern, and so distinct from the other sculpture that they may have little resemblance to what originally stood in their place. The first type of capital at the Sainte-Chapelle, a variation of the simple crocket capital, proliferates in the interior and on the porches of the lower and upper chapels (Figure  2.15). Rising from the astragal, long, wide, and sometimes ridged stems reach to accentuate the angles of the abacus. Rather than carrying regular crockets, the stems terminate in a cluster of two or three small leaves. Some of these capitals also carry a single leaf or a sprig of leaves on the lower basket (Figure 2.16). Although the placement of the leaves on the capital is contrived, many are botanically accurate. This type of capital is ubiquitous in Paris after about 1230, seen, for example, in the transept arms of Saint-Denis (Figure 2.17), as well as in the new buildings of Saint-Germain des Prés, Saint-Jean de Latran, and other Parisian sites.63 Located predominantly in the upper chapel dado and along the exterior balustrades, a second type of capital has botanically accurate leaves that are artfully positioned along contours of the basket (Figures  2.18 and 2.19). Identifiable down to the genus and species, a leafy sprig is set near the base of the basket and leaves or flowers ascend to the abacus. With sculpted roses, berries, acorns and so forth, and sometimes small fauna, these are the most striking capitals at the Sainte-Chapelle, but they are also unusual insofar as they no longer adhere to a classicizing composition. While these capitals have few parallels in quality and variation, capitals of this type also existed in the contemporary refectory and the Lady Chapel of Saint-Germain des Prés (Figures 1.35 and 1.37).64 Another, less refined example of the type has a provenance from the (no longer extant) Carmelite church founded by Louis IX around 1257 (Figure 2.20). A third type of capital has single leaves that run vertically from the astragal up to the abacus over which they turn back slightly, with or without another row of leaves around the basket (Figure 2.21). This type might have derived from the earlier waterleaf form. It is seen throughout Paris over the course of the century, from Notre-Dame (Figure  2.22) to Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois, Saint-Jean de Latran, and Saint-Germain des Prés.65 A final type extant on the upper chapel porch has two distinct rows of leaves arranged around the basket of the capital (Figure 2.23). This type had a long history throughout Paris, becoming more common in the second half of the century, and appearing at Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois (Figure 2.24).66 While predominant at the Sainte-Chapelle, the emergence of this type of foliate sculpture throughout the region, and then Europe, after about 1225 raises a number of questions that go beyond the scope of this ­chapter.67 Its significance transcends traditional interpretations of this sculpture as a general

87

2.15. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior, upper chapel, dado, capital, type 1. Photo: Author.

2.16. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior, upper chapel, dado, capital, type 1, variation. Photo: Author.

2.17. Saint-Denis, abbey church, interior, nave triforium, capital, type 1. Photo: Author.

2.18. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior, upper chapel, dado, capital, type 2. Photo: Author.

2.19. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior, upper chapel, dado, capital, type 2. Photo: Author.

2.20. Church of the Carmelites, capital, type 2 (Musée national du Moyen-Age – Thermes de Cluny). Photo: Author.

90

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

2.21. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior, upper chapel, dado, capital, type 3. Photo: Author.

2.22. Paris, Notre-Dame, north portal of west façade, capital, type 3. Photo: Author.

The Sainte-Chapelle

2.23. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior, upper chapel, porch, capital, type 4. Photo: Author.

2.24. Paris, Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois, interior nave, capital, type 4. Photo: Author.

91

92

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

allusion to Paradise or Eden, and may be explained more broadly by a shift in visual culture. The resurgence of Aristotelian empiricism, although highly debated in the Paris schools, may have had an impact on those who commissioned this type of work.68 The sheer number of capitals in the chapel would have allowed for a certain amount of experimentation and development on location, although the botanical accuracy and diversity could equally have been a directive issued by a patron. While the capitals at the Sainte-Chapelle share similarities with other Parisian sculpture, they cannot be associated definitively with a single site, which suggests a broad trend. Beyond the SainteChapelle and other prestigious buildings, another explanation for ­foliate sculpture’s prominence in Paris during this period may be simply that it was perhaps faster and less expensive than foliate sculpture to produce, and therefore employed more often to decorate buildings with smaller endowments.

2.4 The Royal Chapel and Rayonnant Architecture

The Sainte-Chapelle participated fully in the metropolitan style of architecture produced in Paris in the 1240s known as Rayonnant, and many of its decorative features appear in contemporary buildings throughout the region. If the chapel did not innovate new forms, it popularized certain motifs and decorative elements within the Rayonnant style. At the same time, the SainteChapelle’s ornamental emphasis existed as an alternative to another trend characterized by the linear forms and architectural unity pioneered at SaintDenis. A closer look helps to identify the different approaches in the architecture of the two monuments, which were not entirely mutually distinct. One of the significant innovations in the generation preceding the SainteChapelle was the unification of the elevation. At the cathedrals of Reims (in the apse) and at Amiens (in the nave), the mullions of the clerestory were extended down to the triforium, joining the two levels.69 At Saint-Denis, this linkage went further: the vault responds descend from the springer in an uninterrupted line down to the floor (Figures 1.23 and 1.24). Mullions elongated from the clerestory formed vertical units that broke the horizontal rhythm of the triforium arcade. In the clerestory, the mullions became indistinguishable from bar tracery when they ascended into rosette patterns. The aesthetic effects of the liberated mullion developed in two general directions. First, at Saint-Denis, the walls between these linear forms were progressively voided, creating the skeletal structure so characteristic of Gothic architecture.70 There, architectural decoration, such as foliate stringcourses and capitals like those seen at Amiens and Reims, was minimized to emphasize the vertical elements of the building. With the glazing of the triforium at Saint-Denis, only the arcade, now joined by mullions to the clerestory, remained to designate the mid-level. This architecture ­emphasized

The Sainte-Chapelle

2.25. Troyes, Cathedral Saint-Pierre-Saint-Paul, interior, nave toward chevet. Photo: Stephen Murray © Mapping Gothic France.

the ­anagogical implications of Gothic, with the main forms of the structure ascending vertically from the ground to the vault of heaven with the least amount of interruption. The cage-like structure and ascendant qualities of the architecture of ­Saint-Denis were reproduced in buildings and reconstructions that succeeded it. In Paris proper, the finest expression of this tendency is seen in the reconstructed fragments of the Lady Chapel at Saint-Germain des Prés (Figure 1.36). Though having an elevation of but two levels, the dado and clerestory were unified by responds that ran uninterrupted from the vault springers to the floor, dividing each arch of the dado into a single rectangular unit. The entire system was separated from the wall and stood as an independent screen in the apse. At Saint-Germain, these forms were extremely thin and delicate, appearing more like perfect metalwork filaments than heavy stone. Other noteworthy Parisian examples exist in the later phases of the nave chapels and the ­transept façades of Notre-Dame (Figures  1.17, 1.19, and 1.20).71 Further afield, this approach to architecture also found expression at Troyes (Figure 2.25), Clermont-Ferrand (Figure 2.26), and Limoges

93

94

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

2.26. Clermont-Ferrand, Notre-Dame Cathedral, interior, nave toward chevet. Photo © Sam Sweeny.

cathedrals, to name a few, and reached a zenith in France at Saint-Urbain at Troyes (Figure  2.27). The emphasis on linear verticality informed what became the Perpendicular Style in England. But it was not the only direction in which Rayonnant architecture, ever experimental and adaptable, developed. The decorative potential of the liberated mullion and arcade screen became important as an alternative direction for other Rayonnant buildings in Paris and beyond. The Sainte-Chapelle manifested this orientation. While arcaded dados were relatively common, at the Sainte-Chapelle, the repetition of shafts and arches throughout the elevation produced patterns across the lateral surfaces. This approach confounds the perception of structure and emphasizes the mystical potential of architecture.

The Sainte-Chapelle

2.27. Troyes, Saint-Urbain, interior, nave toward chevet. Photo: Stephen Murray © Mapping Gothic France.

In addition to this linear decoration, sculpted ornament and applied decorative forms are pervasive at the Sainte-Chapelle. All shafts carry foliate capitals set at different levels corresponding to their spring points. The sweeping line of the main responds in the upper chapel are interrupted by the apostle statue at the transition between the dado and the stainedglass windows. The wall surfaces of the dados are either sculpted as in the upper chapel spandrel zone, or decorated with trefoils and figural medallions in the lower chapel. Trefoils are repeated in the spandrels of the lower chapel windows as well as in the apse windows of the upper chapel. Stringcourses are given foliate ornament. The exterior gables are accentuated with crockets.

95

96

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

Such ornament as that found at the Sainte-Chapelle could be applied onto different surfaces and in different scales without the total architectural commitment required at Saint-Denis. A foliate embrasure on the façade or an arcaded triforium with a motif of quatrefoils or trefoils was enough to signal the style. While the anagogical, cage-like structure of Saint-Denis existed as the most avant-garde iteration of this architecture, the transcendental, ornamental quality of the Sainte-Chapelle became one of the defining features of thirteenthcentury Paris. Again, if these forms did not originate at the Sainte-Chapelle, this building perpetuated and popularized them, ensuring their continuity. The great formalist scholars of twentieth-century medieval architecture, Bony, Branner, and Grodecki, among others, have identified many of the sources and repetitions of the motifs that define the Sainte-Chapelle. Some of their observations may be reconsidered. One of the most distinctive patterns identified with the Sainte-Chapelle is the alternating gable and pinnacle motif that encircles the exterior at the top of the building (Plate II). As Branner and Bony found, this combination also exists at Cambrai and Tournai.72 However, the precise dates of these two monuments now force a reconsideration of these as a source. While Branner conjectures that the east end of Cambrai was planned by about 1230, Bony dates it to between 1239 and 1251.73 Construction on Tournai began in 1243, a few years after the Sainte-Chapelle, although the pattern may have been more common in the northeast than in Paris. An early source for the gable and pinnacle pattern exists in the west façade at Laon, constructed between 1190 and 1205 (Figure 2.28). Massive gables, separated by equally large pinnacles, frame the projecting arches of the portal porches. The separation of these large volumes into discrete parts in the façade at Laon also anticipates the “breaking up” of forms with mullions that became ubiquitous in Rayonnant.74 But the gable and pinnacle motif at the front of the building would be repeated often after this church, at Amiens and Reims, for example. The now lost church of Saint Nicaise at Reims offers a near contemporary comparison with the Sainte-Chapelle (Figures 2.29 and 2.30). Although the exact dates for the construction of the church are uncertain, the first stone was laid in 1231 and the façade appears to have been nearing completion by 1256.75 A series of seven graduated gables spans the portals, reaching its highest point above the central portal. Pinnacles stand at the interstices of the gables and rise higher than each gable apex to accentuate the vertical axis of the façade. If the graduated gables do not parallel those of equal size at the Sainte-Chapelle, they exhibit the same alternating motif. In addition to the gable and pinnacles, other correspondences exist between Saint-Nicaise and the Sainte-Chapelle. Every arch on the church façade is filled with a tracery quatrefoil over trilobe arches, a design that exists in the upper chapel dado. This design also runs down the nave of the great church, as seen in the image of the southern side of the building (Figure 2.30). The

The Sainte-Chapelle

2.28. Laon, Notre-Dame Cathedral, exterior, façade. Photo: Andrew Tallon © Mapping Gothic France.

design of the cloister arcading at Saint-Nicaise is also close to the tracery pattern of the Sainte-Chapelle’s nave windows (Figure 2.31). Equally interesting is the conception of the mass of the façade at SaintNicaise, which corresponds to the exterior of the Sainte-Chapelle. In many High Gothic churches, the tendency was to create a grid-like structure in the façade using different levels of arcading and a gallery of kings. These horizontal elements were omitted in the façade of Saint-Nicaise, which, like the Sainte-Chapelle, emphasizes verticality. In addition, at Saint-Nicaise the massing of the large central arch flanked by smaller units to either side is also seen in the west front of the Sainte-Chapelle. Another important similarity is the opening between the heavy buttressing of the front. Even the bases of the bell towers at Saint-Nicaise are open, filled only with light tracery.

97

98

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

2.29. Saint-Nicaise, Reims, west façade. © BnF Est. (Va 51 t. 12 Marne-Reims III / H133898).

2.30. Saint-Nicaise, Reims, exterior, elevation from south. © BnF Est. (Va 51 t. 12 fol. /H133899).

The Sainte-Chapelle

2.31. Saint-Nicaise, Reims, cloister arcading. © BnF Est. (Va 51/H133903).

The buttresses themselves are unadorned and capped with small pediments ­decorated with trefoils; a similar form is found at mid-level on the south stair turret of the Sainte-Chapelle. In Paris, gables appeared on the series of chapels added to the nave of Notre-Dame over the course of the thirteenth century. The dates of the chapels are uncertain, and they have sustained a significant amount of restoration, but documents and stylistic analysis offer insight into their relative chronology. In the most recent analysis, Mailan Doquang dates the earliest of the nave chapels, the first of the south side nearest to the façade and the four western bays of the north side of the nave, to between 1228 and 1245 (Figure 1.16).76 Built up to a decade before the construction of the SainteChapelle, these chapels originally carried pediments rather than gables.77 The second group of nave chapels at the cathedral, constructed after 1245, is more unified in its architecture, to the point that even the capitals for different responds are now all set at the same level. Corbel fragments at the Musée Carnavalet deriving from the chapels during restoration suggest that they originally had gables.78 Both transept façades also possess a distinct gable and pinnacle pattern (Figures  1.19 and 1.20). Michael Davis has convincingly argued that the gables of the late thirteenth-­century choir chapels of NotreDame referenced the pattern at the Sainte-Chapelle (Figure 1.22).79 Another feature of the Sainte-Chapelle widely employed in the region of Paris around the 1230s was the portal with foliate embrasures (Figures 1.26 to 1.32).80 Branner identified possible sources for this arrangement at Rouen

99

100

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

Cathedral, Villeneuve-sur-Verberie, and Saint-Frambourg at Senlis.81 The north transept portal of Saint-Denis as well as Saint-Germain en Laye preceded the royal chapel in Paris, and the portal type is also seen nearby at Larchant and Gonesse from around 1235 (Figures 1.28 and 1.29).82 Examples in Paris include the thirteenth-century portal of Saint-Gervais-Saint-Protais, Saint-Pierre aux Boeufs, the refectory of Saint-Martin des Champs, the Lady Chapel of Saint-Germain des Prés, and the Portail Rouge of Notre-Dame. While none can be dated with precision, this portal type was clearly a major trend in the region during and after the 1230s. If the foliate embrasures of the Sainte-Chapelle were a local phenomenon, the tracery motifs of the royal chapel appeared throughout France after midcentury. Close variations of the nested lancets and rosettes of the nave windows of the upper chapel (Plate II) existed in the nave of Amiens Cathedral (Figure  2.32), at Saint-Denis (Figures 1.23 and 1.24) and Saint-Germain en Laye (Figure 2.33), and in the later phases of the nave chapels of Notre-Dame (Figure  1.22), but with different proportions and sometimes with only pointed rather than trilobe arches. The tracery in the Sainte-Chapelle’s apse, three lancets with pointed and cusped arches surmounted by three upright trefoils, is also seen in the radiating chapels of Amiens (Figure  2.34), without the trilobe arches. The chapel of the College of Cluny, founded in 1269, perpetuated the combination but inverted the lower two trefoils and added a lancet (Figure 1.54). Even the unusual spherical triangle with rosette of the lower chapel windows had identifiable sources and successors; a similar version appears first in the façade aisle lights at Amiens (Figure  2.35), and was reproduced after 1254 in the radiating chapels of Westminster Abbey (Figure 2.36). The decorative patterns of the interior of the Sainte-Chapelle are also found throughout the region during this period. The motif of a large arch filled with a tracery quatrefoil over tri2.32. Amiens, Notre-Dame Cathedral, interior, lobe arches seen in the upper chapel nave elevation. Photo: Stephen Murray.

opo

2.33. Saint-Germain en Laye, royal chapel, exterior from south. Photo: Author.

2.34. Amiens, Notre-Dame Cathedral, exterior, chevet. Photo: Author.

101

102

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

2.35. Amiens, Notre-Dame Cathedral, reverse façade, aisle, detail of spherical triangles. Photo: Stephen Murray.

dado of the Sainte-Chapelle was particularly popular (Plate IX). The arrangement of a simple double arch or lancet surmounted by an oculus has Norman antecedents, for example, at Fécamp, from the late twelfth century, where the motif existed in plate tracery in both the gallery and the clerestory, or just slightly later in the chevet of Saint-Étienne at Caen, from the 1180s, with a quatrefoil or trefoil in the gallery arcade.83 After the motif’s uptake in clerestory windows after Chartres, it proliferated and was extended into triforium arcades, such as at Troyes

2.36. London, Westminster Abbey, exterior, radiating chapels. Photo: Author.

The Sainte-Chapelle

2.37. Chartres, Saint-Père, interior, nave toward choir. Photo: Stephen Murray © Mapping Gothic France.

(Figure 2.25) and at Saint-Denis (Figures 1.23 and 1.24). In the towers of Notre-Dame the pattern appears with an openwork trefoil in the spandrel (Figure 1.15). The triforium of Brie-Comte-Robert from the first quarter of the thirteenth century preceded in plate tracery the same arrangement in bar tracery at the Sainte-Chapelle; an example with a simple pointed arcade surmounted by a tracery quatrefoil exists in the triforium at Gonesse from around 1230.84 A version of the motif without the major arch is seen in the western nave of Saint-Père of Chartres, built between 1205 and 123l, and then in expanded form in the fourteenth-century eastern campaign (Figure 2.37). In Paris, the triforium at Saint-Séverin carries the motif with a surrounding arch, although as this part is dated to between 1225 and 1250,

103

104

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

2.38. Paris, Saint-Séverin, interior, nave showing thirteenth-century bays. Photo: Author.

the question remains whether it precedes or postdates the Sainte-Chapelle (Figure 2.38).85 The transept triforium of the abbey church carries a tracery arcade of pointed arches holding trefoils over trilobe arches with recessed trefoils in the spandrel. The triforium of Clermont-Ferrand offers another example, surmounted by crocketed gables (Figure 2.26). Other types existed at the Cistercian abbey church of Royaumont, built from 1228, as well as on the façade of Saint-Nicaise of Reims, built after 1231. More elaborate versions of the pattern, such as that in the cloister of the College of Cluny in Paris, built in the 1270s, were reproduced throughout the latter part of the century (Figure 1.52).

The Sainte-Chapelle

2.39. Amiens, Notre-Dame Cathedral, interior, radiating chapels, dado. Photo: Author.

The design of the lower chapel dado (Plate VIII), with pointed and cusped trilobe arches with a trefoil piercing the spandrel, was also prominent. The pattern first appeared in the dado of the radiating chapels at Amiens Cathedral (Figure 2.39), but variations of it were employed throughout Paris, notably in the dado of the Lady Chapel of Saint-Germain des Prés (Figure 1.36), where the spandrels carry responds instead of a blind trefoil. The north nave dado of Strasbourg cathedral carries a similar design. A variant of the design was also repeated in the upper chapel tribune of the Sainte-Chapelle, added after the first phase of construction (Plate XVI).86 The decorative motifs of the Sainte-Chapelle are seen throughout Paris and the region both before and after the royal chapel’s construction. If the Sainte-Chapelle did not initiate a new approach to architectural structure, it contributed to the proliferation of Rayonnant decorative forms. The adaptability and flexibility of these forms and motifs made this style easily reproducible. If the thirteenth-century design of Saint-Denis and its successors stands at the origin of the French Flamboyant, and later the English Perpendicular styles of architecture, that of the Sainte-Chapelle did not lead to stagnation and torpor; rather, its legacy can be seen in the varied use of decorative motifs throughout Paris, and contributing later beyond the capital into what is known as the Decorated Style in England.87

105

106

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

2.5 The Sainte-Chapelle and Amiens

Even if many of the features of the Sainte-Chapelle can be identified in contemporary Parisian and regional buildings, an overwhelming number of them point to Amiens Cathedral as their possible source. As discussed here, the lower chapel dado and windows, as well as the upper chapel tracery in the nave and particularly in the hemicycle, are identified in the Picard church. Yet there are still other correspondences. The motif of the trefoil arch surmounted by a quatrefoil in the upper chapel dado at the SainteChapelle can be seen in the tracery decoration of a buttress on the west façade of Amiens.88 Further, the exterior of the Sainte-Chapelle, with its narrow buttresses with regularly spaced setbacks, also resembles the axial chapel of the cathedral (Figure 2.34). In addition to these widely acknowledged similarities, Jean Bony noted that the distinctive star-shaped abaci in the lower chapel nave exist in the capitals of the upper nave elevation of the cathedral.89 Finally, Peter Kurmann has identified compelling similarities in the faces of the sculpted angels in upper chapel dado spandrels and the figural sculpture on the west façade of Amiens.90 A new association between Amiens and the Sainte-Chapelle may be observed in the plans of both monuments, which manifest the same subtle refinements. In the hemicycle of the axial chapel at Amiens, the number of shafts in the responds has been reduced to correspond to the number of vault ribs they meet (Figure 2.40);

2.40. Amiens, Notre-Dame Cathedral, plan of chevet showing axial chapel. Courtesy of Stephen Murray.

The Sainte-Chapelle

2.41. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior, upper chapel, hemicycle respond, base and socle. Photo: Author.

similarly at the Sainte-Chapelle, the five shafts of the straight bays have been syncopated to three, also corresponding to the number of ribs in the hemicycle (Plate VII). In both structures, the larger main shafts now fall primarily onto the banquette (Figures 2.41 and 2.42) instead of projecting into the floorspace. Only the plinth of the main respond protrudes (and only slightly) at ground level, as if to suggest that the respond shaft goes through the banquette. This reduction and recession of the responds in the apse at Amiens and the SainteChapelle is not seen at other chapels in Paris, although it was reproduced a few decades later in the apse of Saint-Germer de Fly.91 The plinth arrangement and base profiles are also extremely close there. The responds of the Sainte-Chapelle and Amiens also operate in similar fashion. In both buildings, the respond shafts provide linear divisions between the bay units, and all but one terminate on the banquette. A single major shaft protrudes into the floor space, while minor shafts are given second place behind it. This was the configuration of the nave responds at Amiens, and it is seen in the responds of the upper chapel straight bays in Paris (Figures 2.43 and 2.44).92 Despite the differences in size between the two buildings, intriguing correspondences exist in certain details involving their dimensions. At the

107

108

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

2.42. Amiens, Notre-Dame Cathedral, interior, axial chapel, turning bay, responds. Photo: Author.

Sainte-Chapelle, the lower chapel wall responds exhibit a ratio of 4:2:1 foot. The same ratio exists in the aisle wall responds at Amiens.93 While it is possible that the process of standardization in the production of ashlar may have lent itself to this combination of numbers, and it is difficult to judge whether any architect would have used a pier of that size and shape for a building of that height, it is tempting to think that the plan of the SainteChapelle might literally have been an adaptation of a model that was the cathedral at Amiens. Because of these similarities, the evidence strongly suggests that a master mason from Amiens, or someone extremely familiar with the workshop practices there, also designed the Sainte-Chapelle.94 The cathedral at Amiens was begun around 1220 and most of the building was complete in a mere twenty years: the nave and west side of the transept up to the aisle vaults, the hemicycle including the radiating chapels, the west façade up to the exterior triforium, and the southern bell tower were all finished early in the 1240s.95 Because these are all areas that provided sources for the Sainte-Chapelle, in terms of dating alone it is plausible that a master who had been working at the cathedral went to Paris to work on the royal chapel.

The Sainte-Chapelle

109

2.43. Sainte-Chapelle nave respond section (a, above) and Amiens nave aisle respond section (b, below, original state). Courtesy of Stephen Murray.

2.44. Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior, upper chapel, nave, bay responds. Photo: Author.

110

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

2.45. Notre-Dame d’Amiens, axial chapel straight bay, respond section. Courtesy of Stephen Murray.

2.46.  Kreutzpfeilers in northern France: nave aisle responds at Longpont (left) and Soissons (right). Courtesy of Stephen Murray.

Which mason of Amiens this was, however, is more difficult to ascertain. Branner proposed that the architect was Thomas de Cormont, the second master at Amiens, who he believed completed the eastern end and the radiating chapels of the cathedral.96 Kimpel and Suckale assigned authorship of the royal chapel to the first master of Amiens, Robert de Luzarches, who they believed completed that same radiating chapel at the cathedral before going to the royal capital in 1241.97 More recently, however, Murray showed that the responds of the straight bays of the axial chapel at Amiens, which have evenly sized shafts splayed around a round core (Figure 2.45), do not match those at the royal chapel in Paris, which have a large central shaft separated from smaller shafts by a dosseret forming a cross-shaped core and a triangular profile overall (Figure 2.43a above). If the respond section is a telltale sign of the master mason, then the mason who designed the responds at the intersection of the radiating chapels at the cathedral was indeed a different person from the one who designed the Parisian building.98 However, as mentioned earlier, the nave responds of Amiens are similar to those of the Parisian building (Figure 2.43b). This type of respond is common in eastern Picardy and the Soissonais, and seen at Laon Cathedral, Saint-Yved at Braine, Soissons Cathedral, the collegiate church of Saint-Quentin, and the Cistercian abbey church of Longpont (Figure 2.46).99 The responds in the nave of Amiens were either not designed by the same master as the one who completed those for the axial chapel or they

The Sainte-Chapelle

were simply differentiated according to their diverse locations. According to Murray’s chronology, the first architect in charge of the nave of Amiens was Robert de Luzarches.100 He purportedly established the entire ground plan for the cathedral and oversaw the construction of the nave to the triforium and outer aisles, including their vaults. During the 1230s, the nave vaults, choir aisles, hemicycle, and radiating chapels were completed. The articulation of these parts, notably the new dado in the radiating chapels and the use of a beaked capital (chapiteau à bec) at the springing of the vaults, differs from that of the earlier sections completed at the cathedral. At this junction Thomas de Cormont took over, although the reasons for and the author of these changes are hotly disputed, particularly because it is probable that Robert de Luzarches and Thomas de Cormont worked closely together from the beginning, at least until this stylistic transition. If the two masters did share new ideas and techniques, which is entirely possible, particularly given that architectural forms were often borrowed, adapted, and exchanged during this period, then Kimpel and Suckale’s thesis concerning the Sainte-Chapelle appears a real possibility: Robert de Luzarches was called to Paris where he employed responds similar to those in the nave of Amiens and adapted ideas developed in the radiating chapels at Amiens.101 This seems all the more plausible given that the articulation at the SainteChapelle is more rounded and full, which might be explained as the work of an older master. However, any emphasis on one or another name and the concomitant association of it with a strict stylistic repertoire remains highly problematic. Master masons belonged to a workshop that produced architecture through teamwork. It seems unlikely that each form and shape was branded or used exclusively by the hand of a single master mason. It is entirely possible that one master advised on the design, perhaps in communication with another who executed the Sainte-Chapelle, for the similarities in Paris point to both masters. Similarly, any attempt to explain the significance of the visual association with Amiens, as opposed to a Parisian building or a different cathedral, for example, tends too much toward speculation. While it is true that the city of Amiens, with its prosperous markets and peaceful inhabitants, could be described as a “good” royal city in contrast to those where riots took place (such as Chartres or Reims), or those with difficult bishops (such as Beauvais), the choice of a master mason probably had more to do with the cathedral’s craftsmanship and the architect’s vision for the chapel in Paris. That the Sainte-Chapelle brought the architecture of Amiens to Paris indicates that France was becoming increasingly centralized in the capital city. Architects, masons, and sculptors went to and from different building sites; they were not necessarily attached to a single city or location.102 Indeed, in addition to the Amienois qualities at the Sainte-Chapelle, some

111

112

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

of the sculpture at the royal chapel correlates stylistically with that at Reims Cathedral. If more lithic evidence from Saint-Nicaise existed, it is possible that stronger connections would be found there as well. Workshops and/ or individual workers traveled from one place to the next, and the centrality of Paris was an effect of the urban demographics as well as the economic and architectural boom in the city. The Sainte-Chapelle may have exhibited forms associated with parts of one or another cathedral, but as it was located in the center of the thriving new cosmopolitan city where the Rayonnant style became distinct, it was thoroughly Parisian.

opo

W

ith only minor alterations effected on the structure over the centuries (including the extensive restoration it sustained from 1836 to about 1870), the Sainte-Chapelle thus offers rare insight into the creative dynamics of thirteenth-century architecture in Paris. Having ethereal open expanses, rich ornament, and trompe l’oeil qualities, the chapel’s architecture both conformed to and reaffirmed certain practices. Yet it was not a passive or inert continuation of the less novel aspects of this trend, as it is so often described, but rather a significant contributor to it. At the Sainte-Chapelle, the cagelike structure associated with the modernist tendencies at Saint-Denis and the Lady Chapel of Saint-Germain des Prés was rejected in favor of an ornamental aesthetic that appealed to the multisensory requirements of medieval artistic experience. These two architectural directions developed in Paris are seen most markedly a generation later in England, where, upon combining with indigenous trends, the Decorative and Perpendicular Styles developed. Above all, however, the Sainte-Chapelle affirmed an alternative direction for thirteenth-century architecture in France by showcasing easily reproducible forms that could be used in the most simple to the most elaborate of structures. The perpetuation of the chapel’s forms, in part or in whole, in other buildings attests to the emergence of the Sainte-Chapelle as an architectural prototype. At the same time, beyond questions related to the practice of Gothic architecture, the Sainte-Chapelle constituted a significant, new orientation in royal architectural patronage. The unabashed proliferation of ornament at the chapel redefined the royal image as constructed in the architecture of Philip Augustus. The specific characteristics, implications, and historical justification for this change are discussed over the course of the next two chapters.

3

opo The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

A

s the last chapter demonstrated, examination of the SainteChapelle in terms of style places the building squarely within the milieu of thirteenth-century Paris, which increasingly centralized architectural trends in France. In this chapter, analysis of the chapel’s typology reveals that the forms selected for it also derived from important near and distant sources. This endeavor reveals that the SainteChapelle was a sophisticated, highly planned building whose design conveyed complex and powerful meanings to a diverse audience. The question of how artworks possess and project meaning has been a primary subject in art history since the discipline’s inception.1 Richard Krautheimer’s 1942 article “Introduction to an ‘Iconography of Architecture’” still exists as the fundamental, if not unproblematic, source for interpretations of meaning in medieval architecture.2 His most compelling concept remains that architectural “quotations” or “copies,” elements of later buildings that recall earlier buildings, embody the ideological content, or meaning, of their models. Thus a five-aisled basilica such as Notre-Dame in Paris recalls the power and prestige of Old Saint Peter’s in Rome in its plan, if not in its elevation. Krautheimer maintained that such architectural references could be imprecise, multiple, and even contradictory, but he also cautioned against overinterpretation, which became a problem in subsequent publications that developed his method.3 Indeed, despite its age, Krautheimer’s theory still inspires analysis and provokes criticism. For example, what constitutes a copy can be overly vague, and the question of intentional copying as opposed to habitual use of an architectural type has not been thoroughly debated.4 Additionally, insofar as architectural quotations or copies are based on established precedents of centuries past, and that meaning arises from the recollection of the past, this interpretive model prioritizes historical or diachronic relationships over synchronic relationships between buildings.

113

114

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

Regardless of the finer points in the debate, it is difficult to deny that established practice and earlier models were important factors in the design of medieval buildings. Historical recollection through formal indicators figured, for example, in each phase of reconstruction at Saint-Denis, when the older parts of the building were razed but recreated or respected in some form in the new construction.5 Chapels or churches founded by illustrious patrons could not be destroyed without some form of justification or reconstruction in the new monument. The past reinforced the present, so the recollection of it was not merely tributary, but rather empowering. Nevertheless, the historical emphasis of iconography assumes that medieval patrons, planners, and builders possessed a comprehensive knowledge of architectural history that extended not only into the depths of time but also across great distances. While people and knowledge did travel during the Middle Ages, encyclopedic knowledge of the relationships between monuments is a modern phenomenon.6 Thus the associations identified between buildings in an iconographic study of architecture risk being a purely academic exercise. Moreover, while certain ancient places and monuments inspired medieval buildings, local practice and circumstances played an equally important role in contributing to the content of architectural and decorative programs in new buildings.7 Innovation and change from precedent and practice can be equally significant.8 The space around a site can also contribute meaning.9 At the same time, meaning is reformed and adapted through the process of reception, as well as altered over time and through practice.10 Ultimately, interpretations of meaning depend in large part on the conceptual frameworks employed for them.11 Therefore, identification of the framework/s within which buildings operate illuminates the different ways they convey meaning. The Sainte-Chapelle integrated a variety of meaningful forms deriving from both local contemporary and distant ancient sources. As discussed in the previous chapter, the chapel’s style brought the building into communion with its Rayonnant counterparts. In this chapter, the Sainte-Chapelle’s design is considered as a successor to a series of prestigious international palatine reliquary chapels, with which it competed while intimating France’s supremacy in the Christian world order. In addition, analysis of the chapel’s local sources illuminates its relationship with other royal palatine chapels and bishop’s chapels in France. The chapel’s location in the Palais de la Cité as well as its explicit formal references to sources near and far were fundamental to its ideological program. Together, both the Rayonnant style and the meaningful design of the Sainte-Chapelle evoked the notion of sacral kingship on a monumental scale.

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

3.1  Distant Kin: Imperial and Royal Reliquary Chapels beyond France

The most important international predecessor for the Sainte-Chapelle of Paris was the Sacra Capella of the Great Palace of Constantinople. The Latin occupiers described this building as the “Holy Chapel” in their official documents, but it had been dedicated as the Theotokos of the Pharos (Blessed Virgin of the Lighthouse), for it stood near to the ancient lighthouse that overlooked the Bosphorus. First constructed by the iconoclast Constantine Copronymous (741–55), the chapel was completed under Michael III (842– 67), receiving its dedication from the patriarch Photius, who wrote about it in 864.12 The Sacra Capella was renowned for its extensive collection of holy relics, which included the holy cross, the crown of thorns, the nails, the lance, the sponge, and the purple mantle of Christ, as well as the tunic and the belt of the holy Virgin.13 The most sacred relics in the collection first came to the imperial city through the efforts of Constantine’s pious mother, Helena, in the fourth century, and they were augmented during the following centuries.14 The crown of thorns and many of the other relics Louis collected for his chapel derived from this historic location. With its similar name, its function as a monumental reliquary, and its location within a palace, then, the Sainte-Chapelle of Paris recalled its predecessor.15 If scholars have recognized these associations between the two buildings, their possible visual or architectural similarities have received less attention. Indeed, Louis’ chapel may also have shared a number of design and decorative features, if not the complete architectural plan, with the renowned Byzantine chapel. However, any assertion of a specific and intentional formal relationship between the two buildings remains hypothetical because of the fact that the latter fell into ruin in the wake of the conquest of Constantinople in 1204. Interpretations of the extant archaeology are inconclusive.16 Medieval descriptions as well as contemporary archaeological and topographical reconstructions of the Great Palace give significant insight into certain aspects of the chapel, but they are also incomplete. Nevertheless, even with this limited information, tantalizing parallels exist between the two monuments in terms of location, design, and decoration. The Sacra Capella stood to the east of the Hippodrome on the Heliakon terrace, which overlooked the Bosphorus. From the harbor below, the site was accessed by a large ceremonial staircase.17 On the terrace, a multileveled architectural complex comprised the throne room (or Chrisotriklinos), the imperial apartments, and the chapel, which were linked by galleries. When the emperor stood in the southern part of the throne room, he was near the vault leading to his apartment, and when he passed through the gallery of

115

116

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

the imperial apartments, he reached the Theotokos of the Pharos chapel.18 Its proximity to the throne room via galleries recalls the plan of a number of medieval palace complexes including Aachen, and in France, Compiègne, the Palais de la Cité, and Saint-Germain en Laye. This raises intriguing questions about the Roman imperial sources for medieval palace complexes in general. Other texts offer more concrete information about the Sacra Capella’s basic features and decoration. Anthony of Novgorod wrote in 1200 that it was a small church dedicated to the Virgin.19 An atrium and a narthex preceded its façade, which gleamed with white marble.20 The building had a central plan with at least one apse, a ribbed dome, and a peristyle, suggesting it had a double-shelled structure like many Byzantine buildings.21 Compared with others in the palace, it was small, but what it lacked in size, it made up for in splendor. Variegated marble, gold, and silver mosaic covered the interior surfaces. On the dome hovered a mosaic of Christ, surrounded by shimmering angels. A mosaic of the Virgin glistened over the sanctuary. Around the choir, apostles and martyrs enlivened the walls, while prophets and patriarchs populated the rest of the church.22 So lavish and awesome was the chapel that, on the day of its dedication, the celebrating patriarch, Photius, enthused, “it is as if one had entered heaven itself.”23 A number of the Sacra Capella’s distinctive architectural features also defined the Sainte-Chapelle – the small size, the palatine location, the staircase access, and the narthex, as well as the abundant decoration, including, notably, apostles, prophets, and martyrs  – but none of what exists at the Sainte-Chapelle can be confirmed as a specific formal reference to the Byzantine structure. Nevertheless, the nominal similarities may have sufficed as signifiers to associate the two buildings in a meaningful way. Krautheimer maintained that important prototypes such as this could be broken down into component parts or signifiers and selectively recreated in the most basic terms to associate two structures.24 Only this explains why, for example, the chapel at Germigny-des-Prés was perceived to have been built in the likeness of the palatine chapel at Aachen, even though the differences outweigh the similarities between them. At Germigny, the central plan and dome of Aachen were recreated as a central-square plan with a dominant central tower.25 This interpretation acknowledges a great amount of artistic freedom in the medieval copy, which has led to larger problems in contemporary interpretations of these monuments.26 The fact that the Byzantine and the Parisian chapel shared a number of similar features suggests an intentional affinity between them. That the Sacra Capella inspired two of the more unusual features of the Sainte-Chapelle may also answer long-standing questions about the Parisian chapel. In the first place, it might help to explain its relatively small size, given that there was more space available in other parts of the Palais de la Cité (like the garden at the tip of the island, which was eventually developed) and the

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

building’s grand presence in the city of Paris.27 Second, it may account for the existence of the Sainte-Chapelle’s porch. Indeed, the two-storied porch fronting the west façade is one of the Sainte-Chapelle’s most distinctive features (Plate III). While porches or external narthexes were not uncommon in French architecture, particularly during the eleventh and twelfth centuries, as at Saint-Benoît sur Loire, Vézelay, and Autun, they were less common during the thirteenth century, particularly in the region of Paris. The Templars of Paris had an elaborate external narthex/ porch constructed in front of their church in the 1230s (Figure 1.33), but the only comparable extant porch in Paris stands at Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois, and it was constructed in the mid-fourteenth century.28 No other porches are known in Parisian churches of this period. The extraordinary presence of a porch at the Sainte-Chapelle suggests that this form had a distant source, although that precedent is now lost and may have looked very different from the Gothic version in Paris. In his study of reliquary chapel typologies, André Grabar identified the Sacra Capella as a foundation for a series of related monuments spanning time and place. Reliquary chapels such as that one, he claimed, ultimately derived from martyria, particularly the Anastasis rotunda of the Holy Sepulchre.29 He drew connections between the sixth-century church of San Vitale at Ravenna with its narthex, central plan, and tribune, the Sacra Capella of the Great Palace, and the imperial chapel at Aachen, which also comprised a westwork, a central plan, and a tribune.30 With these, he related archaeological evidence of chapels with narthexes and central plans at the Lombard palace of the Arechi in Benevento, Italy, at the Bulgarian palace of Preslav, and the Carolingian chapel in Nijmegen (in present-day Holland) to the Sacra Capella.31 Grabar saw the Sainte-Chapelle of Paris, with its great relic collection, its elevated level, and its porch, as the culmination of this group, although it notably does not have the central plan that the other chapels have.32 Apart from that, Grabar’s academic exercise of grouping buildings so disparate in time and place suggests a continued practice even if these buildings only referred to a single (holy) prototype rather than each other. Daniel Weiss stipulated that such typological connections were based more on political values than on formal ones.33 He therefore considered Charlemagne’s palace at Aachen as the most important prototype for the Sainte-Chapelle (Figures 3.1 and 3.2).34 This sanctuary, which held important contact relics of Mary and Saint Martin, expressed powerful political themes that designated the Frankish king as the servant of Christ. In the early ninth century, the newly established capital at Aachen became a “new Rome” and was sometimes even referred to as a “new Jerusalem.”35 Moreover, this new center of power was built to rival the imperial court at Byzantium with whom Charlemagne competed for dominance.36

117

118

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

3.1.  Aachen, Palatine Chapel of Charlemagne, view of interior. © Foto Marburg/Art Resource NY.

3.2.  Aachen, Palatine Chapel. Plan: Dehio-Bezold.

While Weiss recognized the debt that the palace chapel of Aachen owed to Byzantine architecture, via the church of San Vitale at Ravenna, as both had a central plan and a westwork – a narthex in the case of Ravenna, a western atrium in the case of Aachen – he also associated the two levels and the double dedication to the Virgin on the lower level and to Christ on the upper level at Aachen with the Sainte-Chapelle.37 In addition, Weiss saw a similarity in the hierarchical arrangement of space at Aachen and the Sainte-Chapelle whereby the king remained on the upper level while commoners stood below ­(discussed further in Chapter 4). The fact that the SainteChapelle does not have a central plan, like Aachen and its Byzantine precedents, but rather a longitudinal plan, was explained as a decision to model the Parisian chapel on easily available local sources.38

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

119

3.3.  Oviedo, Cámara Santa, plan and transverse section showing pier sculptures. Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando, Madrid, Spain © Album / Art Resource, NY.

However, Hans Böker ’s study of architectural references to Aachen argues that medieval copies of the Carolingian chapel were more precise than generally acknowledged.39 While his research focused on the now lost bishop’s chapel at Hereford Cathedral, which was at one point mistakenly identified as an ideological copy of Aachen, he found that buildings associated with Aachen were usually circular and had, in addition to some kind of dome, columns within arches.40 If the builders of the Sainte-Chapelle wanted to reference Aachen, why did they select a longitudinal plan for the Parisian chapel? The formal connections between the two buildings are hardly obvious. Aachen’s westwork is not recognizable in the Sainte-Chapelle’s double porch; Aachen’s two levels are unified by a central opening, while those of the SainteChapelle are completely separate; and Aachen had a specially designated presentational seat for the king at the western entrance, while the SainteChapelle had a niche behind a choirscreen near the apse  – if that was where the king sat during services. Because none of the standard formal

120

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

references to Aachen are present in the Parisian chapel, it becomes difficult to see that building as an important formal prototype for it. Moreover, in terms of ideology, why would the Capetian king wish to align his chapel in Paris to the Carolingian king’s chapel in Aachen? Even if Charlemagne was a popular figure in thirteenth-­century France, indeed one of the Nine Worthies on par with Solomon himself, and even if the Capetians made every effort to associate themselves with the Carolingian dynasty, the fact is that the Sainte-Chapelle displays no explicit visual parallels with the chapel at Aachen.41 Given the availability of typological precedents in the Holy Land and in Europe, the rejection of the central plan at the Sainte-Chapelle in favor of a longitudinal plan may have been equally significant. This architectural type also has a history. Chapels that were longitudinal and had either a single ground level with two-part elevation or two separate levels were not unusual, existing alongside the central plan throughout greater Europe. These chapels derive from Carolingian doppelkapellen, which had two levels that sometimes communicated with each other in a manner similar to the open plan with gallery at Aachen. However, doppelkapellen usually did not have a porch or narthex, they did not necessarily house relic collections, and many were not royal productions.42 An example of the longitudinal chapel type exists in the ninth-century Cámara Santa at Oviedo (Figure 3.3). Alfonso II of Asturias (759–842) had the Cámara Santa built over three martyrs’ tombs within a cemetery next to the cathedral of San Salvador.43 The chapel has two levels and a rectangular plan comprising a single nave terminated by a flat apse. Each level is barrel vaulted and supported by external buttresses. Made of brick, the buttresses are linked by round arches at the top of the building. On the interior of the upper chapel, six double columns held sculpted images of the apostles, which might have been distant prototypes for those in the upper chapel of the Sainte-Chapelle, although the literal placement of the apostles as the “pillars of the church” was a common practice (seen also, for example, at Troyes Cathedral). Also like the Sainte-Chapelle, the Cámara Santa was a reliquary chapel; it held the most treasured relics of the Asturian dynasty, notably the Cross of Victory, the so-called Caja de los Agates, and the Arca Santa, although they were kept in the lower chapel.44 Perhaps the closest connection between the chapel at Oviedo and the Sainte-Chapelle is a personal rather than an architectural one. The Cámara Santa was reconstructed and lavishly decorated in 1180 by Blanche of Castile’s immediate family. Although Blanche married the future Louis VIII in 1200, when she was only twelve, perhaps she held the reliquary chapel in Oviedo as a special place of importance. This possible if oblique connection could also serve as another justification for those who see Blanche’s initiative as essential to the genesis of the Sainte-Chapelle (see Appendix 1).

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

3.4. London, Tower of London, White Tower, Chapel of Saint John the Evangelist, interior. © Vanni Archive/ Art Resource, NY.

Nevertheless, according to the foundation charter, the Parisian chapel was made in the name of the French king, and it would be difficult to justify why the French monarchy would make a formal association to a different dynasty, particularly when Blanche herself took pains to distance herself from her Spanish origins. The eleventh and twelfth centuries saw a number of single-storied or twostoried and longitudinal chapels erected throughout Europe. In England, the finest exemplar of the longitudinal palace chapel is the Norman chapel of Saint John the Evangelist in London from circa 1075. Built into the fabric of the White Tower, with a simple apse to distinguish the chapel from the exterior, the interior has an elegant two-level arcaded elevation, which was originally covered with paintings (Figure 3.4).45

121

122

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

3.5.  Schwarzrheindorf, palace chapel of Saint Maria and Clement, exterior. © Foto Marburg / Art Resource, NY.

One of the most expansive and elaborate buildings based on the doppelkapellen type is the church of Saint Maria and Clement in Schwarzrheindorf (near Bonn).46 Built by Arnold II von Wied (ca. 1098–1156), Archbishop of Cologne, and consecrated in the presence of Conrad III in 1151, it has five bays, a shallow transept, and an apse (Figures 3.5 and 3.6). The two levels were distinct except for an octagonal opening at the crossing, which allowed those in the upper chapel to view the altar below. An imperial throne, accessible through a covered stone stairway located on the south side, stood at the west end of the upper level. The ground level was open to the local community while the first floor was reserved for those of higher status. The church contains elaborate wall paintings depicting the vision of Ezekiel and Christological imagery.47 Another example of an important royal chapel based on the doppelkapellen type is the Cappella Palatina of Roger II in Palermo, built between 1132 and 1140.48 The chapel had an elevated platform in the nave and a balcony in the sanctuary for the king, rather than two completely distinct levels (Figure 3.7). The Cappella Palatina is also sumptuously decorated with painting and gold mosaics that emphasized the king’s birthright and exalted him as a divine ruler.

opo

3.6.  Schwarzrheindorf, palace chapel of Saint Maria and Clement, lower chapel, interior. © Foto Marburg / Art Resource, NY.

3.7.  Palermo, Capella Palatina, interior, view to west. © Alinari / Art Resource, NY.

123

124

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

This select group demonstrates that royal doppelkapellen existed throughout Europe. While having general similarities of longitudinal plan and sumptuous decoration, the specific formal sources for these buildings stemmed from models closer to their own geographical spheres. If dignitaries in the French royal court were familiar with the architectural type, if not every individual chapel, there is still little basis for any special relationship between these buildings and the Sainte-Chapelle.49 The problem with such associations is historical anachronism. Given the range of formal and ideological possibilities for the Sainte-Chapelle, that the French monarchy would intend its most special reliquary chapel to refer to the doppelkapellen built in ninth-century Spain, or in eleventh- or twelfth-century England, Germany, and Italy, particularly when more important reliquary chapels such as the Sacra Capella in Constantinople or the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem were equally available as models, would require extensive justification.50 Rather than serving as direct sources for the Parisian chapel, the European buildings served only in a general way as formal and ideological precursors. Moreover, the longitudinal plan of the SainteChapelle had much closer, more resonant precedents in France itself. More significant parallels might be found in the liturgy and uses of these royal/imperial chapels. In his study of the proceedings at the Cappella Palatina in Palermo, William Tronzo identified that the earliest documents associated with the Norman chapel in Sicily relay that it served a public purpose, and that many people heard sermons there.51 The liturgy included the king as a central performer on special holy feasts.52 These elements parallel similar theatrics at the Sainte-Chapelle, where the king participated in rites for a large and varied audience.53 Comparison of the liturgies of these royal reliquary chapels, from the Sacra Capella through Aachen, Palermo, and the SainteChapelle, might reveal deeper connections among them, perhaps going as far back as the Holy Roman Empire.54 Studies such as Kantorowicz’s Laudes regiae have shown how early Roman imperial chants were used and adapted through the late Middle Ages across Europe, suggesting that these liturgies also could have been reinterpreted through common practice over the longue durée.55 The planners of the Sainte-Chapelle selectively adopted, adapted, and amalgamated distinguishing features of important precedents including, in particular, the Sacra Capella of the Great Palace in Constantinople. The formal associations also harbored ideological ambitions. Daniel Weiss rightly observed that this Parisian reverberation amounted to an ideological translatio imperii, whereby Paris, with its Sainte-Chapelle and cache of Christological relics, now replaced Constantinople as the center of Christendom.56 The longitudinal chapel type, whose exemplars range from the Cámara Santa in Oviedo and the Cappella Palatina of Palermo, also existed as precedents for the Sainte-Chapelle. If the planners of the Sainte-Chapelle did not intend to associate these buildings, the general similarities they shared reveal

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

that within the broader, international context of palatine chapel construction in Europe, the Parisian royal chapel was not particularly novel in terms of its form or the content and abundance of its decoration. Such features propelled the Sainte-Chapelle to an international level, asserting France’s ultimate dominance, in a manner not unlike national competitions to build the tallest building. The Parisian chapel simply existed as the latest model in this series of international buildings. It was within the immediate local architectural context that the Sainte-Chapelle stood out as particularly extraordinary.

3.2  Capetian Palatine Chapels and the Sanctuaries of the Palais de la Cité

Other possible models for the Sainte-Chapelle existed closer to home, both within the broader array of palatine chapels in France and within the Palais de la Cité itself. Because few palaces exist in their medieval form, documents, graphic images, plans, and engravings provide most of the information concerning the foundations and physical appearance of these chapels.57 This material demonstrates that a variety of chapels existed in royal palaces; indeed, that no standard building type or dedication existed for royal palace chapels in France. For example, the chronicler Helgaud of Fleury mentioned that King Robert II (996–1031) corrected a robber in an “oratorio turris” (tower oratory) at the palace of Compiègne, suggesting that an oratory was located in one of the towers.58 The palace at Compiègne also contained a church dedicated to Saint Mary, which had been founded by Charles the Bald “in the likeness of Aachen,” although it was later reconstructed as the Abbey of Saint-Corneille and the site of the palace was moved in the twelfth century.59 Robert II also founded a palace chapel dedicated to Saint Hilaire at Orléans; a modern plan depicts the chapel as an independent rectangular structure.60 In the palace at Senlis, Louis VI (1107–37) dedicated a chapel to Saint Denis in 1120 (Figure 3.8).61 Although the extant building stands in ruin, an elevated platform remains to the west of the rounded apse, where the altar would have been placed. The king accessed the platform directly from a door on the northwest side of the chapel that connected this structure to the aula and his apartments. At Laon, Louis VII (r. 1137–80) rebuilt the royal residence and founded a chapel within it.62 The plan of this residence demonstrates that the sanctuary was part of the main structure of the building and, notably, rectangular rather than apsidal (Figure 3.9). Considering buildings like this one, Viollet-le-Duc asserted that French royal chapels were commonly single storied and square.63 Unfortunately, little other conclusive evidence exists for chapels in royal palaces in France. One must therefore turn to the Palais de la Cité of Paris for the richest source of information concerning French palatine chapels within a single

125

126

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

3.8.  Senlis, palace chapel of Saint Denis. Courtesy of D. Vermand.

3.9. Laon, royal palace. Plan: Lucien Broche.

palace. It was among the oldest royal residences in the French kingdom. Archaeological evidence from the site dates the earliest stone structure to the fourth century.64 Prior to the construction of the Sainte-Chapelle on the site in the thirteenth century, no fewer than four chapels existed within its walls: Saint-Barthélemy, Saint-Michel, Saint-Nicolas, and the Oratory of the Virgin (Figure 3.10).65

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

3.10.  Chapels of the Palais de la Cité. A) St. Barthélemy, B) Sainte-Chapelle, C) Oratory of the Virgin, D) Saint-Michel. Plan: Jean Guerout with overlay by author.

The first royal chapel in the Palais de la Cité, Saint-Barthélemy, was founded as early as the fifth century and located on the northeastern edge of the palace grounds. Robert II, who rebuilt the palace, donated the foundation to a monastic order, which subsequently moved to the Right Bank.66 Robert II then founded a church (“ecclesia”) in the palace and dedicated it to Saint Nicolas.67 Louis VI reconstructed this sanctuary (now called a “capella”) a century later, and in 1160, Louis VII added a chaplain to it.68 The rest of our knowledge concerning the chapel derives from the reign of Saint Louis. The accounts of Louis IX for Ascension Term in 1248 record payment to five chaplains of the (“royal chapel”), two wardens (“matriculati” / Fr. ­“marguilliers”) and a master chaplain designated as Matthew of Saint-Nicolas,

127

128

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

who received additional funds.69 This administration anticipates that of the Sainte-Chapelle.70 Chronicles concerning the translation of the crown of thorns into Paris relay that Louis IX brought the relic to Saint-Nicolas in August 1239.71 The last mention of that chapel exists in the foundation documents for the Sainte-Chapelle, which relocate Matthew “of the old chapel” to the new chapel.72 On the early foundation document for Saint-Nicolas, a fourteenth-century note reads: “Carta vetheris capelle inferioris” (“charter of the old lower chapel”), which indicates an association between the old chapel and an altar dedicated to Saint Nicolas in the lower chapel of the SainteChapelle.73 This material suggests that Saint-Nicolas was razed to make way for the Sainte-Chapelle. As the immediate predecessor to the Sainte-Chapelle, Saint-Nicolas would provide insight on whether any formal or functional parallels existed between the two buildings. However, no archaeological evidence of any other medieval structure has been identified under the foundations of the Sainte-Chapelle. Theodore Vacquer’s excavations of the east end of the chapel only recorded parts of the late-Empire fortress.74 Comparison of the chapels in other royal residences built by the same founder, Louis VI, (such as that at Senlis) only leads to greater speculation about the physical aspects of Saint-Nicolas. These problems have not, however, prevented scholars from hypothesizing about the size and shape of the chapel. Salch represented Saint-Nicolas as rectangular, while Guerout inferred it was apsidal and had two stories.75 If we lack concrete information about Saint-Nicolas’s form, evidence exists concerning its function. The documents designate the space both as a capella and as an ecclesia, in contrast to the other chapels extant by that time in the palace, which were described as oratorii.76 This hierarchy may suggest that Saint-Nicolas served as the primary chapel for palace personnel and/or the public until the thirteenth century. Its larger administration of five chaplains also suggests greater use. Moreover, Saint-Nicolas, like the Sainte-Chapelle after it, was located in the public sphere of the palace, as the living quarters stood on the western side of the complex, where another chapel stood. That chapel, the third founded in the palace, is known as the Oratory of the Virgin. Established by Louis VII in 1154, this chapel was located near the sleeping chambers.77 A single chaplain was assigned to the oratory with an annual rent that was augmented when the king and royal family were in Paris.78 Philip IV refounded and reconstructed this sacred space when he made changes to the palace starting in the mid-1290s.79 Illustrations of the western side of the Palais de la Cité, such as the drawing of June from the Très Riches Heures (Plate I), and later plans give no evidence of a large chapel, though they usually illustrate the top of the gable, the roof, the turrets, and the spire of the Sainte-Chapelle. Turgot’s plan from 1739 illustrates a building

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

3.11.  Paris, Palais de Justice, Oratoire de la Conciègerie (Oratoire de la Vièrge). Photo: Author.

with a flat apse in this location, while Delagrive’s plan of the palace from 1774 indicates a polygonal apse.80 In these and other early maps of Paris, the inconsistent representation of the structure’s eastern end suggests that the mapmakers might not have seen the oratory, although some, but not all, knew it was there. From an eastern vantage point, the Oratory of the Virgin was not visible from the ground because it was located behind the palace wall and the gallery that connected the Sainte-Chapelle to the Salle du Roi, and from a western vantage point, the palace wall and the Chambre Verte impeded a view of the Oratory. Following a fire in 1776, the structure was rebuilt yet again, and today it stands deep within the Palais de Justice as the Chapelle de la Concièrgerie, a single-storied, axial, and apsidal building with an eastern extension (Figure  3.11). Because of its modest foundation, inconspicuous size, and discreet location in the palace, we can infer that the Oratory of the Virgin functioned during the thirteenth century as a space for private devotion. Finally, a fourth royal chapel stood extra muros in a small square south of the palace complex (Figures I.1 and 3.12). Dedicated to Saint Michel, the chapel was first mentioned in association with the baptism of Philip Augustus in 1165, when his father, Louis VII, endowed the chaplaincy with one satchel of wheat and two barrels of wine from the palace reserves.81 The initial foundation and early history of the chapel is undocumented, but it received royal gifts and new altar foundations from palace personnel until Louis IX took

129

130

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

3.12.  Saint-Michel du Palais. © BnF Est. (Va 225i / A21916).

responsibility for the chapel’s maintenance.82 Located just south of the palace, it possibly served as a parish church.83 It was incorporated into the palace and reconstructed after 1308 when Philip the Fair rebuilt the eastern wall. Théodore Vacquer identified the chapel’s foundations during his excavations of the Palais de la Cité.84 Saint-Michel was a rectangular structure whose flat apse bordered the wall of the palace. An engraving by Huyot illustrates the exterior of the chapel as re-built in the fourteenth century; it had a high gable flanked by smaller gables, a large lancet window filled with tracery characteristic of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, and a small narthex. While the chapel was endowed with three more altars and three more confraternities from the

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

131

end of the thirteenth through the eighteenth century, it never ­possessed the stature of the Sainte-Chapelle, although it did eventually leave its name to the present-day Place and Boulevard Saint-Michel on the Left Bank. In 1789, it was in ruin, and a new building was constructed on the site in 1790. The Sainte-Chapelle was therefore the fifth and final chapel founded in the Palais de la Cité. It replaced the chapel of Saint-Nicolas, which was not deemed sufficient or adequate for its purposes. Similarly, the other chapels in the palace inform more about the Sainte-Chapelle’s function than about its formal sources.

3.3  Saint-Germain en Laye

The closest formal source for the Sainte-Chapelle was in fact a palatine ­chapel that Louis IX had constructed in the palace at Saint-Germain en Laye (Figures 2.33, 3.13, and 3.14). Despite significant similarities between these two buildings, important formal differences also exist between them, and the location and function of Saint-Germain en Laye further distances this ­building from its esteemed successor, which rose to prominence with a large foundation and liturgy tailored especially for it in the city of Paris. A palace (palatio) is not mentioned at Saint-Germain until 1124.85 During the seventeenth century, Louis XIII (r. 1610– 43) and Louis XIV (r. 1643–1715) nearly completely reconstructed the medieval palace. Apart from a vaulted basement, a tower base, and the chapel, little else remains from the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, the archaeology suggests that the palace complex was laid on a plan similar to that of the Palais de la Cité, with the chapel parallel to the aula/ throne room and joined by a walkway.86 The earliest known chapel at the site was founded by Philip Augustus in 1223 in honor of the Virgin. He bestowed £14 per year to be paid by the Prévot of Paris for services conducted by a monk from the monastery of Colombs. In 1238, Louis IX refounded the chapel, presumably when its construction was complete or nearing completion (Appendix 3).87 The foundation 3.13.  Saint-Germain en Laye, royal chapel. Plan: charter explains that the new construction Viollet-le-Duc.

132

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

3.14.  Saint-Germain en Laye, royal chapel, interior, view west toward rose. Photo: Author.

was to make the chapel “more beautiful” as well as to enlarge the divine cult, which was to be celebrated henceforth by a designated royal chaplain (rather than a monk from the nearby abbey) with a daily mass and full office, although he provided no additional income to the establishment. The reference to the chapel’s improvement provides an oblique comment about Philip’s lackluster foundation. Louis’ chapel at Saint-Germain en Laye stands out from the other royal chapels in France because of its highly decorative architecture. However, the current structure largely reflects a nineteenth-century interpretation of the thirteenth-century monument that had been nearly erased in subsequent remodeling.88 Today the chapel stands on a tall substructure and comprises four bays that terminate in a five-sided polygonal apse. The

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

3.15.  Saint-Germain en Laye, royal chapel, interior, niche. Photo: Author.

exterior elevation is divided into two parts and is mostly a nineteenth-century fabrication; the exception is the windows, notable for their unusual rectangular frames. In the first three bays, the tracery plays on the repetition and subdivision of elements; a wide tracery arch occupies the main square frame of the rectangular window; to either side in the spandrels upright trefoils occupy the corners. Within the arch stand two smaller arches capped by an oculus accentuated with a sexfoil. Each arch also contains an oculus and a sexfoil placed over two smaller arches. Running horizontally above the windows is a sculpted foliate band at the cornice and a simple arcaded balustrade at roof level. The rectangular screen of tracery and glass at Saint-Germain was made possible through the use of a champenois passage set over a tall dado arcade on the interior, which permitted the separation of the wall plane from the upper internal vaults (Figure 3.14). Although the dado has been entirely recreated, the niches set within the dado to either side of the third bay were part of the thirteenth-century design (Figure 3.15) and precede those of the Sainte-Chapelle.89 Marking the bay divisions, interior responds,

133

134

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

distinct from the window plane, extend from the ground over the dado into the vaults. To the west remains the tracery of the great rose window (Figure 3.14).90 It occupies the entire width of the chapel, and from a central sexfoil boss radiate twelve segments, each of which holds another sexfoil rosette above two small trilobe arches. The portal embrasures are sculpted with vertical bands of foliage that alternate with en délit shafts, as seen in many other portals from the Parisian region throughout the second third of the thirteenth century. The architecture of Saint-Germain en Laye has been associated with the new construction at Saint-Denis, and they are contemporary with one another.91 While salient stylistic parallels to the royal abbey church exist, such as the related design of the rose window, the lancets, and even the base profiles, the elaborate architecture of Saint-Germain en Laye had no immediate precedent in French palatine architecture, particularly since the reign of Philip Augustus. As such, this chapel constituted a significant shift in the approach to French royal architecture. What was considered appropriate for the royal residence therefore changed under Louis IX with respect to his grandfather. SaintGermain incorporated the most stylish ecclesiastical architecture into a royal palatine context, imparting a new aesthetic quality to the royal residence. Because of this shift, Saint-Germain en Laye might be seen to manifest the same implications concerning the power, status, and image of the king as the Sainte-Chapelle. Unfortunately, nearly all of Saint-Germain’s decorative program has been lost, which would have offered valuable insight into the chapel’s themes and ideologies. The palace’s tripartite plan, also similar to the Palais de la Cité, and the presence of niches in the chapel, like those at the Sainte-Chapelle, might imply a more important role than is usually assigned for this palace and its chapel. But too little of its thirteenth-century decoration and history remains to make any tenable conclusions. Moreover, significant differences remain between the chapel at SaintGermain en Laye and the Sainte-Chapelle. The latter had two functioning levels as well as a double porch that Saint-Germain did not have. That double porch, with its reference to the Sacra Capella and its Solomonic dimensions, added a layer of meaning to the Sainte-Chapelle absent at Saint-Germain. The Sainte-Chapelle also had multiple altars and a much larger number of clergy than at Saint-Germain en Laye. Moreover, the implications of SaintGermain’s architecture remained latent, for it did not possess the important relic that went to Paris. The crown of thorns gave the Sainte-Chapelle its unique power. With that symbolic relic, the Parisian building elaborated on Saint-Germain’s architectural innovations, invigorating them with an even more ambitious decorative program, the sheer size of its structure, as well as its large foundation and its distinctive liturgy. The formal transformation effected in the palace chapel of Saint-Germain en Laye culminated in

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

the Sainte-Chapelle of Paris, whose urban setting ensured that its powerful ideas were conveyed to a broad and diverse audience.

3.4 Local Sources: The Bishop’s Chapel and Ecclesiastical Architecture

In a well-known article, Inge Hacker-Sück argued that the typological predecessors for the chapel at Saint-Germain en Laye and the Sainte-Chapelle derived from chapels built not in royal but in episcopal residences in France.92 Archbishop’s or bishop’s chapels existed at Angers, Auxerre, Beauvais, Laon, Le Mans, Meaux, Noyon, Reims, Paris, Senlis, and Soissons.93 Erected over the course of the twelfth century, they were relatively small, independent structures with longitudinal plans deriving from the Carolingian doppelkapellen. Usually located adjacent to a cathedral and the bishop or archbishop’s palace, they provided high prelates with an exclusive space for small ceremonies, acts of homage, and private devotion. Because they were redundant to the cathedral, they reinforced the prestige and high status of the bishop or archbishop. Paradoxically, however, bishop’s chapels were not usually highly decorated but were rather modest structures. The episcopal chapel at Reims exemplifies this architectural form (Figures 3.16 and 3.17). While its first foundation dates to 1171, the extant structure was built circa 1220, concurrently with the cathedral, and probably by the same masons.94 Unlike the complex plan of its gigantic counterpart, the cathedral of Reims, the archbishop’s chapel comprises only four straight bays and terminates in a seven-part apse. The exterior of the chapel is unadorned but for a series of two simple glacis moldings that divide its exterior elevation into three parts. The ground level of the chapel is pierced by small lancet windows. A sheer wall of coursed masonry between the two stringcourses corresponds to a dado arcade on the interior of the upper level of the building. Thin lancet windows illuminate the chapel above, and they do not carry tracery. With the exception of the buttresses that protrude from the wall, there is little other external articulation, but for the lower chapel tympanum, which contains a sculpted Adoration of the Magi, although this may not have been original to the early thirteenth-century building.95 As it stands, on the interior the archbishop’s chapel presents a marked contrast to the elaborate decoration of Reims Cathedral. The dado arcade below the slender champenois passage is made of simple pointed arches without cusping or spandrel decoration. While the capitals carry delicate foliate sculpture, the archbishop’s chapel displays no additional architectural or sculptural embellishments. The remains of the bishop’s chapel at Noyon also show little evidence of a particularly elaborate structure in terms of decoration. Although

135

136

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

3.16.  Reims, Notre-Dame Cathedral, archbishop’s chapel, view from southeast. Photo: Author.

many bishop’s chapels do not survive, the ostensible austerity of the Reims chapel seems consistent with other chapels of this type constructed during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Hacker-Sück maintained that the bishop’s chapel type was transposed to the royal residences of Louis IX because it was part of local working practice for palatine chapels in France.96 Yet even if the ubiquity of the local model was a factor in the planning for the royal chapel, it does not necessarily follow that the choice had no significance. To assume that these chapels’ forms were selected simply because they were easily available is to underestimate the creativity and sophistication of planners and the technical abilities of thirteenth-century builders. Given the variety of possible precedents we have

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

137

3.17.  Reims, Notre-Dame Cathedral, archbishop’s chapel, interior. Photo: Archives photographiques, Médiathèque de l’architecture et du patrimoine © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

examined here, the planners could have demanded any kind of building  – large or small, single- or double-storied, centrally planned, even round as well as longitudinal. All of these shapes and architectural types were available in Paris and in past royal chapels. And again, the rejection of the historic central plan that would have associated the Sainte-Chapelle more explicitly with either the Holy Sepulchre or the Sacra Capella may equally indicate that the longitudinal, apsidal plan was a significant choice. The fact that bishop’s chapels were ubiquitous in France and built more or less to a standard plan contributed to their identity as episcopal chapels in a way that the variety of royal chapels could not. More pointedly, in the local context of Paris, a prominent bishop’s chapel stood next to

138

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

­ otre-Dame, in the recently reconstructed episcopal palace and quarter, N only two hundred meters away from the Sainte-Chapelle (Figure  1.3). Even if the plan of the Sainte-Chapelle recreated that of the chapel of Saint-Nicolas or referenced the European doppelkapellen more generally, its physical proximity to the bishop’s chapel type and the new bishop’s chapel at Notre-Dame would have made the association obvious. In the context of the Palais de la Cité, the physical similarities between the two buildings brought the ecclesiastical and the royal residences, as well as their chapels, into dialogue. Louis’ construction of the Sainte-Chapelle in the Palais de la Cité was accompanied by a number of other architectural improvements to the palace complex, which would have further embellished the site. On the southern perimeter of the palace, the walls were extended to provide space for three buildings constructed to lodge the Sainte-Chapelle’s chaplains.97 On the north side of the palace, along the riverbank, Louis had the Salle sur l’Eau (later Salle Saint Louis) and the Tour Bonbec constructed, both of which are depicted in the Très Riches Heures (Plate I).98 The Galerie du Roi that connected Saint-Nicolas to the Salle du Roi is also generally taken to have been reconstructed during the reign of Louis IX.99 Known in the eighteenth century as the Galerie des Merciers, it had a central doorway with a prominent staircase built or rebuilt by Philip the Fair called the “Grands Degrez.” On or by the new staircase stood a marble stone and/or a podium from which criers proclaimed new edicts and information.100 Concurrently to the construction of the chapel and the gallery, Louis had a satellite structure built alongside the Sainte-Chapelle. This small building, known from the fourteenth century as the Trésor des Chartes, was located to the northeast of the chapel, and it had three stories (Figure 3.18).101 The ground floor rose to the same height as that of the lower chapel, but the upper two levels were not as tall as the upper chapel. The ground floor served as a sacristy, and the second level, known as the “Révestiare,” may have had the same function.102 These spaces connected to the fourth bay of the SainteChapelle by means of an enclosed passage. The third level of the Trésor des Chartes was only accessible from a hidden staircase that stood to the west of the passage against one of the chapel’s buttresses.103 It held the king’s book collection as well as the archives (“chartes,” charters) of Philip Augustus, which gave the building its name.104 Collectively, these buildings updated the Palais de la Cité, imparting a new allure to the royal residence that would, with the Sainte-Chapelle, henceforth stand on equal ground to the grand episcopal precinct across the island. Still, the Sainte-Chapelle surpassed the other palace refurbishments in size and style. The royal chapel integrated ecclesiastical with royal architecture in a way that other royal chapels and even Saint-Germain en Laye had not. In the first place, the Sainte-Chapelle was much larger than any of

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

3.18.  Trésor des Chartes of the Sainte-Chapelle. © BnF Est. (225 fol. / A020479).

its predecessors. At 42.5 meters from ground to gable, with vault keystones pitched at more than 27 meters from the ground, the chapel rose as high as many of the cathedrals of its day.105 From the exterior, the Sainte-Chapelle compares closely in height to its episcopal counterpart on the Île de la Cité, Notre-Dame, whose choir vaults rise 32.5 meters.106 Second, the style of the Sainte-Chapelle also surpassed other royal and episcopal chapels, bringing it into dialogue with great churches and cathedrals. Elaborate tracery, gables, and pinnacles were not forms typically associated with the defensive royal residences of this period but rather the great churches and monumental reliquary shrines. With its architecture, the Sainte-Chapelle introduced a new decorative aesthetic into the Palais de la Cité, paving the way for the ornate palaces of the Renaissance. During the thirteenth century, this type of architectural decoration was primarily associated with ecclesiastical architecture. Finally, the Solomonic dimensions inscribed the Bible into the building.107 In these manifold ways, the architecture of the Sainte-Chapelle unified the royal with the sacred. It was, in other words, a physical expression of sacral kingship. The interior decoration of the Sainte-Chapelle, particularly the stainedglass windows of the upper chapel, also emphasized the theme of sacral kingship.108 As an ensemble, the windows illustrate a Capetian perspective of Christian cosmology (Figure 3.19).109 Moving clockwise from the entrance, the four bay lancets on the north side of the chapel represent scenes from the Old Testament, starting with Genesis and proceeding through Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy (with an emphasis on Joshua). The northern

139

140

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

3.19.  Sainte-Chapelle, plan of stained-glass windows (after Grodecki and Lafond).

hemicycle windows up to the apse illustrate scenes from Judges in one lancet, followed by the prophesies of Isaiah with a Tree of Jesse in another, and then Saint John the Evangelist and the Infancy of Christ in a lancet bordering the apse. The Passion fills the apsidal window and is followed by lancets dedicated to the lives of Daniel and John the Baptist, the prophesies of Ezekiel, and Jeremiah and Tobias. From east to west on the southern bays, the Old Testament scenes continue with Judith and Job, Esther, and the book of Kings. Finally, at the western end on the north side closest to the entrance, an entire bay window is dedicated to the reception of the relics into France. Four lancets describe the legendary discovery of the cross and the crown and show the processions and display of the relics to the public in France (Plates

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

XII–XIII). The window alludes to Louis IX as the inheritor of biblical history and thus the thirteenth-century descendant of the Old Testament kings and the divinely ordained leader of Christ’s people on earth. The western rose window, rebuilt after a fire in the fifteenth century with the original theme and a few thirteenth-century panels, foretells the future with John’s visionary scenes of the Apocalypse. All of the windows are set on an elaborate carpet pattern decorated with the Capetian fleur-de-lys and the castle of Castile (Plate XIV). It is the most extensive use of heraldry to date in stained-glass windows. In her study of the narrative techniques within the windows of the SainteChapelle, Alyce Jordan discerned five interrelated themes relating to kingship throughout the program: first, genealogy, involving repeated scenes of marriage (Solomon and Rahab, Moses and Zipporah, Joseph and Asenath, etc.), the production of a male heir (Boaz), and lineage (Tree of Jesse); second, justice, represented by repeated scenes of kings giving orders (Moses, Joshua, David); third, coronation and royal acclamation (protracted kings in the book of Numbers, the crowning of Moses, Joshua and Gideon, who are not crowned in the Bible, arms throughout the cycle); fourth, the protection of the kingdom from evil, particularly the infidel (multiple scenes of the waging of war); and fifth, good government, measured by proper religious conduct (Moses and the Ten Commandments, and by the rhetorical device of opposition to multiple images of the infidel as well as Judith and Esther).110 Some of the scenes within these themes enhance royal prerogatives. Jordan distinguished a lack of clerical representations throughout, finding that Old Testament leaders assumed roles usually delegated to priests in the Bible.111 In many of the coronation scenes, the kings are crowned by biblical exemplars of kingship rather than by priests.112 Moreover, they are not acclaimed by a full group of ecclesiastical and lay peers, but only by the Israelites as a whole.113 The major themes of the stained-glass windows thus fully complement the powerful messages inscribed within the Sainte-Chapelle’s architectural matrix. Moreover, they carry the notion of sacral kingship a step further by locating (in bay one south) Louis’ acquisition of the crown of thorns and the royal family itself within this broader Christian cosmology. It is a bold statement. By direct analogy within the same cycle of biblical peers, Louis figures as a sacral king. The architecture of the Sainte-Chapelle, with its references to biblical and historic forbears as well as local signifiers, underscores these explicit narrative associations. The Sainte-Chapelle surpassed all of its immediate, local predecessors in design and decoration, forming an entirely new type of royal monument in France. It amalgamated architectural elements from diverse local, international, and historical sources. Located within the royal palatine complex of Paris, the implications of this architecture uniformly and unambiguously conveyed sacral kingship. This was not the only theme elicited in the building’s decorative program, but it was the most salient.

141

142

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

3.5  The Representation of Royal Sanctity

Sacral kingship relies on the conviction that a secular king is, like a bishop, a vicar of Christ who receives authority to rule from God without intermediary. Because the exaltation of leaders, kings, and emperors has its origins in the earliest civilizations, it is generally assumed that public recognition and royal practice of rites relating to sacral kingship were commonplace during the Middle Ages. But monarchical display of the concept developed only intermittently in Europe over this long period. For the Christian rulers of the Middle Ages, the Bible set a precedent for the notion of sacral kingship. In the Old Testament, high priests and prophets anointed the kings of Israel, symbolically inscribing them into the realm of the sacred.114 While early Christianity maintained a dualist perspective that distinguished the Heavenly Kingdom from the Earthly Kingdom, which in real terms supported the separation of sacred from secular civic authority, over time, the distinction between these two authorities became less marked as the act of unction became an essential rite in medieval coronations. The ancient custom of anointing kings was revived in the West in the eighth century.115 In 751, the papal legate and archbishop of Mayence, Boniface, anointed Pepin the Short at Soissons Cathedral. Just three years later, Pope Stephen II anointed Pepin a second time, as well as his wife, Berthe, and his sons, the young Charlemagne and Carloman, at Saint-Denis. Both brothers were anointed on various other occasions as they acquired additional titles throughout their lives, the most important of which was that of Holy Roman Emperor, a title Charlemagne received in Rome. Royal unction then became a constituent part of the Carolingian coronation ceremony. Louis I the Pious (r. 814–40) was the first king to be anointed and crowned in the same ceremony, which took place at Reims in 816.116 It was at Reims where Archbishop Hincmar further developed the concept of sacral kingship.117 He claimed that Reims possessed a unique right to confer this status because of its possession of a miraculous chrism. In the Life of SaintRemi (probably written by Hincmar between 877 and 881), a dove of the Holy Spirit descended from the heavens and delivered a divine chrism in its beak to Saint Remi on the day of the baptism of Clovis (r. 466–511).118 Through baptism with the holy chrism, God was made manifest in the king, who embodied the “beata stirps,” the blessed royal blood. Thus, the holy chrism gave the kings of France a superior claim to sanctity above other kings. Conflating the two ceremonies, in 869 Archbishop Hincmar employed the same chrism in the coronation of Charles the Bald, establishing a direct association between the baptism of Clovis and the coronation of Carolingian kings.119 Over time, royal anointment with the holy balm of Saint Remi became indispensable to the act of coronation, and by 1027, Reims had become the established center for this rite.120 While Hincmar’s possession of the chrism originally

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

empowered the role of the archbishop, the chrism and the rite itself clearly had political advantages for the monarchs, who could assert their sacral character as a means to justify their rule.121 In addition to the coronation unction, the Laudes regiae, which were sung at such celebrations and on high feasts, highlighted sacral kingship.122 Marc Bloch and Ernst Kantorowicz have examined how sacral kingship, reinforced by the coronation unction and the liturgical Laudes, enabled monarchs to perform miracles, the most common of which became the practice of touching for scrofula, a disease of the lymph caused by tuberculosis that creates painful abscesses on the neck.123 Such performances were important public acts that projected the king’s sacral character to his subjects. The first king recorded as having enacted this rite was Robert II in the eleventh century.124 Louis VI was the last king to touch for scrofula before the thirteenth century. The three kings that preceded Louis IX did not publicly express their sacral character through this rite. Although Saint Louis performed this act, the date when he began to do this is not recorded. The practice was not conducted with regularity until the reign of Philip the Fair.125 Thus, while Capetian identity was defined by a notion of sacrality reinforced by the coronation unction, outside of the liturgical rite, the public display of sacral kingship by the kings themselves does not appear to have been common practice for most of the twelfth and the first half of the thirteenth century. In other words, if the kings of France during this period were exalted, they did not often publicly selfrepresent as sacral monarchs.126 This is not to suggest that the monarchs who did not touch did not have widely recognized supernatural or sacral qualities. For example, while few extolled the piety of Philip Augustus, he was nevertheless given the epithet Dieudonné (“God-given”) from birth, and miracles were associated with his body at his death. Although he did not touch for scrofula, he blessed his knights before the Battle of Bouvines, even though the practice was uncommon.127 However, it was primarily others who exalted Philip and his reign, for sacral kingship was not a quality he articulated in his actions and architecture. One notable exception to this observation is the use of the fleur-de-lys in Capetian heraldry. Although the Carolingians and the Ottonians incorporated the symbol from time to time in their regalia, the Capetians employed it with increasing consistency from the reign of Robert the Pious until about 1175, when it became a permanent fixture of the reverse of the royal seal.128 Also around this time, the royal banner was covered with the fleur-de-lys.129 It was over the course of the twelfth century that the symbol took on Marian as well as Christological overtones. Brigitte Bedos-Rezak maintains that Abbot Suger played a fundamental role in the enrichment of this symbol, for in the Tree of Jesse window at Saint-Denis the fleur-de-lys is superimposed over the tree that harbors the kings of Israel. It is in this first monumental representation

143

144

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

of the subject that the fleur-de-lys unified the Capetian kings, represented by their heraldic symbol, with Christ and the Old Testament kings, imparting a divine quality to the Capetian monarchy.130 Indeed, it was Suger himself who had the fleur-de-lys (on the reverse face) and the equally potent throne of Dagobert (on the front face) incorporated onto the royal seal, when he was regent of France.131 While the Capetians consistently employed the symbol thereafter, it was Louis IX who took this ideology to the next level with the minting of the legend Christus Vincit, Christus Regnat, Christus Imperat (“Christ wins, Christ rules, Christ commands”) and the placement of the shield of the fleur-de-lys on his gold Ecu d’Or in 1266, further encouraging popular perceptions that Christ ruled through the French king.132 This raises an important point about royal representation in the public sphere prior to the Sainte-Chapelle. At least during the twelfth and the thirteenth centuries, the visual representation of sacral kingship in France was developed in the public arena primarily by churchmen. Suger’s Saint-Denis, for example, long the necropolis for the kings of France, incorporated royal themes throughout its architectural decoration. Erected between 1136 and 1140, the façade highlighted sacral kingship with the full-sized jamb statues of Old Testament kings, establishing a new model that became ubiquitous for portal iconography. Among the stained-glass windows of the 1240–4 chevet, in addition to the Tree of Jesse that emphasized divine Capetian kingship, two panels celebrated the deeds of Charlemagne (as yet uncanonized) in a window devoted to Holy War and the First Crusade.133 The cathedral of Reims also incorporated numerous themes related to kingship on the interior of the façade as well as in the stained-glass windows. While Saint-Denis celebrated kingship, at Reims the message was crafted as a statement of episcopal authority to confer the sacred coronation blessing.134 Both cases, however, are well-known examples of the wider Church practice of the Church’s incorporation of royal subjects and themes in to its decoration to elevate its own status or position, while at the same time, consciously or not, affirming the sacral quality of terrestrial rule. Thus in this way the public expression of sacral kingship was primarily manipulated by the Church. This changed during the reign of Louis IX. Examination of the SainteChapelle’s architectural sources gives new insight into the depths of its political content. Building upon the foundation of Saint-Nicolas, the chapel’s planners selected architectural elements that had a prestigious international history as well as powerful local resonances. In this way, the Sainte-Chapelle conveyed meaning to a varied audience. Members of the international community of nobles and clergy would have recognized it as a great chapel on par with a handful of other magnificent royal chapels throughout Christendom, especially the Sacra Capella and perhaps more obliquely the Holy Sepulchre, as well as some of the more notable doppelkapellen. On another level, in the defining space of the Palais de la Cité, the Sainte-Chapelle’s visual references

The Architecture of Sacral Kingship

to local architecture – contemporary bishop’s chapels in its form and cathedrals in its style – were equally if not more significant to the broader population. The monumental Solomonic proportions and elaborate decoration of the chapel changed the king’s palace from a site of secular power to one merged with sacred authority. While the architecture of Philip Augustus emphasized the terrestrial functions of kingship, the Sainte-Chapelle generated an image of Louis IX as a divinely ordained sacral king. It was an architectural assertion of royal power and prerogative, projecting Louis’ God-given right to rule on a monumental, public scale.

145

4

opo Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings

T

he Sainte-Chapelle projected a powerful new image of kingship, one that transformed the persona Philip Augustus had established. What could account for this bold change in royal representation? History may provide an answer. Although the city of Paris was booming, the monarchy, having lost Philip Augustus in 1223 after his forty-three-year reign, was destabilized again just three years later by the unexpected death of his successor, Louis VIII, in 1226. Unprepared for the abrupt succession, the monarchy struggled to maintain and then reassert its authority, a process that took nearly two decades.1 In fact, the government was so debilitated that this first part of Louis IX’s reign has been described as the “greatest period of weakness that the House of Capet had ever experienced.”2 Although Louis IX was the legitimate heir, he was only twelve when he ascended to the throne, and Queen Blanche of Castile, his mother, was appointed regent. While Blanche was an able leader, the fact that the regent was a woman and a foreigner infuriated France’s ambitious barons, who, seeing their own opportunities to reach greater positions of power derailed, challenged the new monarchy from the very beginning.3 Baronial treason and revolt became thematic during these first two decades, and much of the monarch’s energy during this period was spent on efforts to appease and assert authority over the restless barons. Royal authority was established only after a long quarrel in which Louis supported baronial rights over Church prerogatives. However, the case, described by historian Gerard Campbell as the “Protest of Saint Louis,” brought the king into conflict with the spiritual authority, such that at one point Bishop Guy of Auxerre, on behalf of all bishops, complained that “Christianity is suffering in [the king’s] hands.”4 Yet other crises occurred between the monarchy and the Church during this period. In the 1230s, troubles arising from upstart bishops nearly earned Louis an excommunication and France a series of interdicts after the king refused to submit to the Church when a quarrel over royal rights escalated to 146

Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings

the papal authority.5 Rome changed its position against the French king only when it needed his support against Frederick II. Such difficulties began to wane in the mid-1240s, when Louis began to prepare for the crusade. Indeed, the crusade appears as somewhat of an escape from the incessant troubles, not least of which was Louis’ inability to fully extricate himself from his mother’s yoke.6 The very real problems of the first two decades are often overshadowed by Louis IX’s later popularity, particularly his canonization, which seems to have imparted a golden glow over his entire life. And though all the writing on his legendary status makes it difficult to truly know the “real” Louis IX, the decisions taken during his reign are consistent in many ways with those of Philip Augustus and Louis VIII, who after all, established the habitus for the monarchy’s actions.7 But these difficult circumstances also required new tactics. Even more than his forefathers, who managed to assert their dominance in war and territorial acquisitions over the course of their reigns, Louis IX had to find other means to establish his power. In addition to overcoming revolts and skirmishes, the monarchy had to bolster the public’s perception of its authority. An alternative to the royal image of the king as defensor populi established by Philip Augustus, one that would reach a broad spectrum of people and create a stronger image of the king, was a necessity. The fortuitous acquisition of the crown of thorns, a process that began in 1237 as Louis’ troubles reached a crescendo, became just the opportunity. The monarchy paid a lofty sum of 100,000£t, nearly half its annual income, for this and the other reliquaries proffered with it.8 As a symbol of Christ’s divine rule, the crown of thorns became an invaluable asset to the French monarchy, and was almost immediately promulgated as a sign that God favored Louis IX and his kingdom. On the relic’s reception into Paris, which was celebrated with great pomp and ceremony, royal counselor and loyal archbishop Gautier Cornut pronounced, “it seems and it is believed that our Gaul was chosen especially for venerating very devotedly the victory of His passion [with His crown].. . . The kingdom of France is honored indeed by these remarkable acts for a long time, for the duration of our time, either due to the zealous care of King Louis and his religious mother Blanche.”9 This divine approbation was crafted into material form in the SainteChapelle, which became the French monarchy’s most ambitious means of conveying its unique power. From the center of Paris, the chapel’s distinctive architecture unambiguously proclaimed sacral kingship, asserting royal preeminence and prerogative on a grand scale. If these visual ideas were not explicit enough, they were also conveyed through the chapel’s liturgy and use. With multisensory appeal, the Sainte-Chapelle actively engaged a broad audience whose experiences fulfilled, adapted, and extended the themes built into its architecture out into the kingdom of France.10

147

148

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

The evidence presented here, ranging from analyses of the building’s ­exterior and interior design to its program of use and liturgical function, ­suggests that the chapel’s audience included a broad public, ranging from the international elite to the poorest inhabitants of the city.11 This inclusivity began in 1239 on the very day of the reception of the crown of thorns, when all of Paris participated in the relic’s translation.12 Gautier Cornut described it as an occasion in which “the French Church, and all the French people, without difference of age, sex, or status” rejoiced.13 The chapel, constructed soon after this event, did not have an isolated existence within the Palais de la Cité, but rather was deeply integrated into the religious practices and urban culture of the city of Paris. With its broad and varied operations, the Sainte-Chapelle became the defining locus for the cult of kingship, projecting Louis and his successors as sacral kings, and by extension, suzerain.

4.1  The Design of the Palais de la Cité

Before turning to the documentary evidence, it is worth considering how the design of the chapel and its location in the Palais de la Cité indicate the type  of audience for whom it was built. With its great height, the SainteChapelle beckoned visitors from afar. The image of the month of June in the Très Riches Heures from 1416 shows the chapel towering over the other structures in the palace and dominating the city of Paris from a vantage point in the fields near Saint-Germain des Prés (Plate I). Its upper decoration of gables and pinnacles accentuated the top of the building, emphasizing the chapel’s presence in the skyline, bringing it into dialogue with other churches around the city, and indicating its communal function. Those who were drawn to the chapel could enter the Palais de la Cité. Throughout its history, this architectural complex served a number of purposes: in addition to housing the royal retinue, after 1194 it was also the locus of royal administration and justice. Court cases were tried, laws were made and recorded, the king held court, and royal proclamations were promulgated from this central site. During the thirteenth century, a single entrance on the rue de la Barillerie, the main north-south road through Paris, led to a large courtyard, the Cour du Roi (later known as the Cour du Mai), in which the Sainte-Chapelle (with its appended Trésor des Chartes), and the Salle du Roi (the aula or throne room) were situated (Figure 4.1).14 A long enclosed corridor, the Galerie du Roi (the later Galerie des Merciers), joined these buildings together.15 These were the first structures encountered upon entrance into the Palais de la Cité, and their presence separated the more public and administrative sphere from the more private, residential sphere further west in the complex. Behind the gallery stood the Great Tower that Louis VI had built; the residential quarters were located farther west and northwest, where the Chambre Verte and the

149

4.1.  Palais de la Cité. Plan: Jean Guerout. Photo: Bruno Acloque © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

150

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

Oratory of the Virgin were located.16 Beyond the fortified western enclosure grew a vast garden, the Verger du Roi. We have already considered the chapels in the Palais de la Cité as precursors and potential models for the Sainte-Chapelle. It is useful now to review how their different positions and roles within the palatine complex further support a public function for the royal chapel. The Oratory of the Virgin was located in the private sector of the palace near the royal chambers. A single chaplain was assigned to the oratory with an annual rent that was augmented when the king and royal family were in Paris.17 It is reasonable to assume that this small chapel served for private devotion in contrast to the larger chapel of Saint-Nicolas, which probably functioned for those who lived and worked in the Palais de la Cité. That the Sainte-Chapelle replaced Saint-Nicolas in the public sector of the palace is significant. The demolition of that chapel, founded by Louis’ royal forbears, would have required some justification as well as the redirection of its foundation. There were other locations in the Palais de la Cité where a private chapel of the same size or larger could have been constructed, such as to the west in the Verger du Roi, which was developed for other purposes in later generations. Once inside the Palais de la Cité, several points of access provided entrance to the Sainte-Chapelle. At least two staircases facilitated direct access to the upper chapel. One staircase led from the south side of the chapel directly to the upper level of the porch. The earliest known image of this structure exists in the Breviary of Châteauroux, dated to circa 1410 (Plate XV). It illustrates a stone staircase with a wooden canopy above. The close wall of the SainteChapelle, built in 1318, extended eastward on the ground from the staircase. If the image is accurate, then the staircase had been built prior to the close wall. It was rebuilt at least two times during its history before restorers permanently removed it during the nineteenth century.18 To the north of the chapel, another staircase (called the “Grands Degrez” from 1308) ascended to the Galerie du Roi, which connected the upper chapel of the Sainte-Chapelle to the Salle du Roi (Figures I.1, 2.11, and 4.1). Up to two additional doorways located on the second bay of the north side of the chapel opened either onto the Cour du Roi or another structure (Figures 2.8, 2.9, and 2.11). The size and shape of these doorways, if they had been completed and used at all, indicate that they were not intended for large numbers of people. The interior spiral staircases used to access the upper chapel today were enlarged in the nineteenth century, and would have been too small and impractical for any liturgical purpose.19 In terms of capacity, the Sainte-Chapelle is more accommodating than it seems. Today, the monument historique welcomes nearly one million visitors a year. During the Middle Ages, the chapel’s internal space would have been reduced from today’s expanse by the interior furnishings, but the Cour du Roi allowed for an ample number of visitors to gather outside. With the courtyard enframed by the Sainte-Chapelle, the gallery, and the Salle du

Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings

Roi, a spectacular backdrop existed for the chapel’s liturgy and other royal ­ceremonies. The rites of Easter Week expanded into this site, where an extra altar and cross stood.20 Philip IV’s reconstruction of the Grand’Salle and the Grands Degrez created an even more monumental setting for the large audiences, who gathered in the courtyard to hear decrees, judgments, and proclamations.21 Froissart informs of the lavish ceremonies held in the Cour du Roi and at the Sainte-Chapelle for the reception of Queen Isabella of Bavaria into Paris in 1389.22 The fact that merchants’ stalls were located both inside the gallery and around the Sainte-Chapelle from at least the fourteenth century suggests that the area served different purposes and that a variety of people had access to the palace.23 Given its monumental height, Rayonnant architecture, and location, the Sainte-Chapelle appears specifically designed to attract attention and to incite people to the Palais de la Cité, where the upper and lower chapels could both be accessed directly from the Cour du Roi.

4.2  Indulgences and Liturgy

Early documents associated with the Sainte-Chapelle provide further information concerning its audience. The foundation charters of 1246 and 1248 explain that the chapel was constructed to hold in particular the relics of the crown of thorns and the holy cross, as well as the other precious relics (in that order), and to ensure the well-being of royal souls (Appendix 3).24 Both documents detail the institutional organization and financial arrangements for the new establishment, which informs of the chapel’s use and thereby offers information concerning its audience. While these documents are prescriptive, describing the anticipated arrangement and use of the chapel, rather than descriptive, there is no reason to assume that these directives were not followed at the time. The first foundation established a college of seventeen people: five principal chaplains having each the support of a sub-chaplain and a clerk, and two administrators.25 The personnel received their salaries from the Châtelet, with the wages dependent on rank, as well as a fixed sum from distributions received for services performed on festis sive privatis diebus (“feast days and fast days”).26 Feast days (festis diebus) defined the Sanctorale calendar and had more elaborate liturgies that cultivated and responded to larger audiences. On fast days (privatis diebus) the regular Temporale dictated the liturgical proceedings.27 In addition to the foundation documents, the series of papal and episcopal bulls granted to the chapel beginning in 1244 offer evidence about those welcome there (Appendix 3).28 The bulls offered indulgences on prescribed feast days to omnibus penitentibus et confessis (“all penitent and confessed persons”)

151

152

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

and to omnibus cum devotione ac reverentia visitantibus (“all persons visiting with devotion and reverence”). Although these phrases are fairly standard in the rhetoric of indulgences, by their very nature indulgences were universally applicable; in this case they inform that visitors were welcome in the SainteChapelle. The indulgences were valid on at least seventy-two days each year. The first papal indulgence, dated June 3, 1244, establishes the primary feasts for which pilgrims would reap rewards for their effort to visit the SainteChapelle.29 It names the Feast of the Reception of the Relics (September 30)  and its octave, the Feast of the Crown of Thorns (August 11), Good Friday, and every Friday of the year. Bishops William of Paris and Adam of Senlis confirmed these indulgences soon after in a bull dated October 3, 1244.30 In 1246, the pope accorded two more indulgences for visitors to the Sainte-Chapelle on the Feast of the Dedication (April 26) and its octave and the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross (September 14).31 Two years later, in April 1248, no fewer than sixteen archbishops and bishops rewarded visitors to the chapel on the anniversary of the dedication and its octave with more indulgences.32 In May, Odo of Châteauroux, the papal legate, awarded indulgences for the same feast days.33 The issuing of indulgences for the Sainte-Chapelle continued for generations. Pope Clement IV reconfirmed the first indulgences in 1265, and later popes increased the number of feast days and kinds of days for which indulgences were available. Boniface VIII granted indulgences following Louis’ canonization in 1298 and again in 1300 for the translation of his head from Saint-Denis to the Sainte-Chapelle.34 In 1306, Clement V and the bishops of France issued additional indulgences to those who participated in and attended the translation of the relics of Saint Louis to the Sainte-Chapelle.35 In 1380, indulgences were granted on the feasts of Saints Stephen, Laurence, Martin, Benedict, Bernard, and Mary Magdalen.36 While the pope and papal legates maintained the power to offer indulgences at will, they usually issued indulgences in response to a specific request. The very first indulgence granted clearly states that the request was disclosed on the king’s behalf.37 Thus the monarchy made a concerted effort to bring visitors to the chapel, although the royal inquiry for the indulgences is not inventoried in the Vatican Archives.38 Indulgences functioned as forms of capital exchange that did not always involve money. They offered a reward, and thus an incentive, for the performance or fulfillment of a specified action. For attendance at the SainteChapelle, visitors were granted various increments of clemency from their sins. The amount of mercy a visitor could receive depended on the authority of the prelate who accorded the indulgence, the rank of the feast, and the number of times that visitor attended the chapel. For a given feast and its octave, the pope and the papal legate granted indulgences for up to one

Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings

year and forty days. Bishops could grant a maximum of only forty days per feast.39 Pope Innocent IV granted the largest single indulgence, one year and one hundred days (thereby extending what was normative to papal rule), to visitors of the Sainte-Chapelle on the annual Feast of the Dedication and its octave. The papal legate, Odo of Châteauroux, offered a year and forty days, and diocesan archbishops as well as bishops gave another year of mercy for the same feast. For the other important annual feasts, including the Feasts of the Crown of Thorns, the Reception of the Relics, the Exaltation of the Cross, and Good Friday, the pope bestowed a full year of redemption, which the bishops confirmed. If guests returned to the chapel for the octaves of the Feast of the Dedication and the Feast of the Reception of the Relics, the pope and papal legate granted special bonuses of one hundred forty days of divine mercy. Visitors on Fridays received an additional forty days from the papal authority. As indulgences were cumulative, if one attended the Feast of the Dedication and its octave, one received up to three years and one hundred forty days of grace; participation in all of the chapel’s feasts carrying indulgences in a single calendar cycle yielded almost fourteen years of salvific credit from the purgatorial fires.40 Regular attendance at the Sainte-Chapelle would have been a spiritually lucrative affair, one that would have encouraged people to visit the sacred site often. While indulgences provided spiritual rewards to those who received them, they also benefited the institution that possessed these privileges. In general, indulgences were an effective means of generating money. Donations or payments for indulgences helped to finance the construction of many a church or public utility.41 During the First Crusade, the promise of full redemption via plenary indulgences encouraged men to take up the cross; indulgences also helped to pay for other military campaigns.42 The financial advantages of indulgences are evident, which is in part why the Fourth Lateran Council circumscribed the practice by delimiting who could issue them and how many days could be granted. What benefit did the indulgences generate for the Sainte-Chapelle or the monarchy? As mentioned in the foundation documents, a fixed sum from distributions, perhaps from people visiting on days with indulgences, supplemented the endowments of the chapel and its clerics.43 In addition, they paid for the maintenance of the stained-glass windows.44 It is possible that the indulgences helped to finance the chapel’s construction before it was completed, as occurred for many a cathedral. Donations might have contributed to the completion of the chapel’s sumptuous decoration or the exorbitant sum reportedly spent on the reliquaries.45 It is equally possible that funds from donations could have been directed to the crusade effort, which became a reality after December 1244. While the indulgences may have procured

153

154

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

donations from visitors, they did not require them, so it is difficult to ­ascertain whether the expectation of revenue generated the indulgences. Nevertheless, the indulgences of the Sainte-Chapelle appear to have served more than a pragmatic financial goal. They publicized the king’s new relics to all the faithful in the kingdom and invited the people to celebrate the feasts at the Sainte-Chapelle.46 In theory, if not in practice, the indulgences would have been publicized by proclamation in the dioceses of bishops who signed the bull as well as throughout Christendom itself; the archbishop, the papal legate, and the pope also signed these bulls. The higher the authority that granted the indulgence, the wider the spectrum of people who could benefit from it. Few studies of early indulgences extend beyond those oriented toward crusaders and pilgrims; none have addressed the city of Paris and/or its buildings specifically. However, the range and breadth of the dignitaries who granted indulgences to the Sainte-Chapelle in the relatively short period of time during which it was under construction as well as beyond its completion reflect at the very least a desire to inform as many people as possible about the privileges to be gained by attending services at the Sainte-Chapelle. Ordinals from the Sainte-Chapelle offer further evidence on the presence of the public. The two earliest extant manuscripts detailing the rites of the Sainte-Chapelle are Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS lat. 1435, from the second half of the fourteenth century, and Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, MS 114, from 1470.47 Although they were written well after the chapel’s construction and therefore reflect a later practice, liturgy tends to be conservative, changing primarily with the introduction of new offices for new feasts. Sarah Long’s study of Easter Week in Paris suggests that the liturgy for Good Friday changed little from the fourteenth to the fifteenth century, although there were variations in practice from one church to another, particularly in the Mandatum ceremony of Maundy Thursday and the Easter vigil processions.48 At the Sainte-Chapelle, the position of a cantor was created in 1320, and new foundations provided for some thirty-five chaplains to service the chapel by the fifteenth century.49 While the ordinals do not reflect the original practice, they are nevertheless our only and earliest source of information concerning the performance of the rites at the Sainte-Chapelle. The ordinal BnF Lat. 1435 contains only a minimum amount of information concerning liturgical performance; it lists the items necessary for the rites, such as the number of candles that should be used, the amount of incense required, the color of the robes worn for the mass (at the SainteChapelle, usually red or white), and which kind of chaplain should celebrate the various offices.50 Yet BnF Lat. 1435 does reveal information concerning the audience: for the Feast of Good Friday the ordinal prescribes, “at terce . . . he who does the office puts the cross before the altar . . . and first he adores and kisses it with knees bent; immediately after him the king adores it. . . He

Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings

who does the office . . . displays the cross to the people standing by.”51 The text informs us that, in addition to the prelates and the king, other “people” participated in this ceremony. This is one of the days for which an indulgence was received for attendance at the Sainte-Chapelle. According to the records, only minor alterations to the chapel’s practices occurred during the fifteenth century, when Arsenal 114 was written.52 On July 18, 1401, Charles VI (r. 1380–1422) ordered the performance of the complete Office at the Sainte-Chapelle as well as a daily mass prepared specifically by the chapel’s clergy.53 He mandated them to perform the rites they were intended to do, but probably were not respecting at the time. The act by Charles VI amounts to a reinstatement of earlier modes rather than a new practice.54 The text of Arsenal 114 follows the reinstatement of the Office at the Sainte-Chapelle and contains more directives concerning the way feasts were to be celebrated.55 Because the performance of royal devotion became increasingly exclusive, the ordinal may indicate distinctions between public and private and the king’s presence that might not have been necessary earlier.56 In its orchestration of the rites, Arsenal 114 distinguishes “the people” from other social groups, such as the chapel’s clergy, the poor, and the various members of the nobility; it also details which member of the clergy should perform each action. In this ordinal, “the people” are present on a number of feast days. On the Feast of the Dedication, “when a procession is made before the high altar of the lower chapel, . . . the prelate censes the altar and the king, if he is there, and the aforementioned choirboys, and then a boy censes the college and the people” before an antiphon is begun by the choirboys and the procession moves to the upper chapel.57 On Palm Sunday, after terce, the ordinal instructs the celebrant to do the blessing of palms or branches and to distribute them “to the college and to the people standing by here.”58 On Maundy Thursday, “the doors of the chapel are closed and the poor are received within. . . The treasurer and the canons . . . wash [their] feet with knees bent; . . . and after the blessing of the bread and wine, the aforementioned treasurer and canons ought to give and administer some of this to the poor whose feet they have washed.”59 On Good Friday, “the prelate, the treasurer or the person who does the office . . . sings the antiphon Ecce lignum [while] showing the people the aforementioned cross, . . . and the chaplain first should adore and kiss the cross, then the king, the lords and the barons, and the college and people assisting.”60 The “people” in Arsenal 114 are identified by the Latin term populus. By distinguishing the different kinds of people in the chapel, Arsenal 114 indicates that the populus are those outside of the immediate clerical and noble community, the audience.61 Although exactly who these “people” were remains unknown, the indulgences reveal them to be individuals and groups who could visit the Sainte-Chapelle. While the ordinal mentions the presence of “the people” during the indulgenced Feasts of Good Friday and the Dedication, it also includes “the people” as participants on a number of occasions for

155

156

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

which there were no indulgences at the chapel, including Purification, Ash Wednesday, Palm Sunday, Maundy Thursday, Holy Saturday, and the vigil of Pentecost.62 Conversely, the manuscript does not specifically identify “the people” as present during celebrations when we know from the indulgences that they were welcome, such as the Feasts of the Crown of Thorns, the Exaltation of the Cross, and the Reception of the Relics, and their related octaves. From these sources we learn that “the people” were expected during a number of liturgical celebrations in the Sainte-Chapelle; if they were not always active participants in the liturgy, they would have provided an audience for many of the rites at the royal chapel. The ordinal mentions “the people” the most during Easter Week. While the presence of a general populus during this period is conventional within the larger Paschal rite, it is important to recognize that during this week, major celebrations took place in the Palais de la Cité and the Sainte-Chapelle. On Palm Sunday, part of the service was held outside in the Cour du Mai, possibly because of the large crowds. Specifically, after terce, a procession led by clerics with the cross and other liturgical instruments moved from the chapel to the courtyard, where a marble altar table and another cross were located. A double choir sang while the celebrant, the college of canons, and the people adored the cross before the deacon read the Gospel.63 After this, a procession moved to the upper chapel, and the liturgy continued to address those outside who did not or could not enter. The ordinal directs the celebrant to take the cross and strike the door three times before opening it to the chant of Ingrediente.64 On Holy Saturday, “the people and the college” gathered in the chapel at the beginning of the day for the blessing of the Easter candles and holy water with which the king, canons, and people were later sprinkled.65 On Easter, the king himself participated in the performance of the liturgy; this is described in two places for the same feast in Arsenal 114, first in the section containing the ordinal for the winter Temporale (fols. 35r–92r) at second vespers, when “choirboys and helpers ought similarly to chant the verse Crucifixum. And note that if the king is at this procession, [unclear] they ought to chant that verse Crucifixum,” and then again in the section containing the masses of the Temporale (fols. 209r–231r), when “the verse Crucifixum, which, according to the custom of the Sainte-Chapelle, is chanted by the choirboys and the helpers . . . in the presence of the king.”66 It is particularly intriguing to consider that, in the context of the Easter liturgy, at times the king was likened to Christ.67 Morand reported that on Pentecost as well as the two days of the Feast of the Holy Sacrament, after the procession, the king lunched in the room above the sacristy with the treasurer, college, and canons of the Sainte-Chapelle, in the manner of an early Christian agape feast, as a memorial reenactment of the Last Supper.68 Further analysis of the emphasis on royalty in Arsenal 114 might reveal the same exaltation of divine kingship known in the actual texts for feasts celebrated at the Sainte-Chapelle.

Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings

Finally, other documentary sources confirm that ordinary people worshipped at the chapel during the fourteenth century: for example, while giving testimony for a trial concerning Marguerite Porete, Guiard of Cressonsseart mentioned that he believed himself to have received a special mission from God in 1306 when he was in the “lower royal chapel” in Paris.69 Further study of the documents concerning the legal activities in the Palais de la Cité, such as trials and letters of remission, might yield additional information. To summarize, the various texts associated with the Sainte-Chapelle  – the foundations, the indulgences, and the later ordinals – point to a prominent permanent college of chaplains who served an array of worshippers. The indulgences inform that the people had to be “penitent and contrite,” and the ordinals distinguish people from the clergy and the king and nobles. They further detail that on special occasions the poor were admitted into the chapel. Remember that even at the first translation ceremony all people celebrated the arrival of the crown of thorns in Paris.70 The relic was not intended for the exclusive appreciation of the king or his retinue, but rather for the subjects of the kingdom of France. As such, it was celebrated at the chapel in the Palais de la Cité and within the entire city of Paris.

4.3  Setting the Stage: The Lower and Upper Chapels

The design of the Sainte-Chapelle allowed for a certain amount of crowd control, for the two levels created separate spaces for distinct audiences. On special occasions, such as royal events or a distinguished visitor, the upper chapel could have been closed to the broader public. During these times, the lower chapel provided an alternate space, where others could have gone to receive indulgences and worship. However, the evidence does not indicate clearly one way or another how the interior spaces were used. Nevertheless, some observations can be made. While for most occasions Arsenal 114 mentions only that the clergy and the people gathered “in the chapel,” some procedures in the ordinal have more specific instructions.71 On Pentecost, the bishop, when present, blessed the people in the lower chapel.72 On the Feast of the Dedication, after terce, in the lower chapel the chaplain sprinkled the people and the king, if present, with holy water, before the choir returned to the upper chapel for mass.73 On Maundy Thursday, after the main meal of that day, the college and “the people” were instructed to process and wash each of the altars in the upper and lower chapels before the Mandatum ceremony; the service began in the upper chapel and continued to the lower chapel, where verses and responsories were chanted at all the altars, before returning to the upper chapel where the Gospel and the sermon were read before Compline and the actual

157

158

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

Mandatum.74 While processions went from upper to lower chapel or vice versa, the ordinal does not otherwise clarify the degree to which the upper and lower chapels were used as distinct spaces.75 The Lower Chapel The lower chapel’s design provides further clues with which to answer this question. However, this space has been greatly altered since the thirteenth century and its original appearance and complete iconographic program are no longer retrievable. The deeply saturated polychromy of the interior walls and columns that presently decorates the lower chapel was devised by the restorer Boeswillwald in the nineteenth century, who lacked sensitivity toward the archaeological evidence and left minimal accounts of his interventions. The original stained-glass windows were removed after the great flood of 1690 and replaced by grisaille.76 Although nothing definitive is known about the windows’ original iconography, it is likely that they illustrated a Marian theme, such as the Life of the Virgin.77 The geometric medallions currently within the window rosettes contain images of Old Testament prophets. These scenes are complemented in the dado of each bay with an image of an apostle or prophet within a heavily decorated glass and jeweled frame, all restored by Steinheil. The pairing of Marian themes with Old Testament prophets in the lower chapel physically and figuratively provided the foundation for the genealogical emphasis of divine kingship articulated in the upper chapel. The capitals in the lower chapel are all foliate, and even though they have been entirely replaced in most cases with copies, they are mostly simplified crocket capitals with simple leaf terminations in contrast to the upper chapel where the foliage is lush and highly diversified. The fact that the decoration in the lower chapel was less ornate with respect to the larger multimedia show in the upper chapel underscores the importance of the upper chapel, although it does not necessarily indicate that the public’s access was limited solely to the lower level. The history of the interior arrangement and furnishings of the lower chapel may also provide some indication of its use. In the thirteenth century, only a single altar was dedicated to the Virgin at the time of its foundation. The documents assigned only one principal chaplain and sub-chaplain from the group to ensure the daily performance of the divine service in the lower chapel.78 This may suggest a limited use relative to the upper chapel, which was endowed with more altars serviced by more chaplains from the very beginning. However, significant changes took place in the furnishing of the lower chapel. By 1339, the number of altars and chaplains in the lower chapel had grown from one to six. Three were assigned to Saint Clement, Saint John the Baptist, and Saint Nicolas and Saint Louis.79 Arsenal 114 mentions that

Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings

in the lower chapel on Maundy Thursday, responsories were sung at the main altar, at a second altar behind the main altar, and in addition to the altars just mentioned, at the altar of Saint Jacob the Apostle (Saint James).80 By 1690, there were eight altars in the lower chapel, after which two were suppressed and the other four attached to the chapel walls in each bay, as per Ransonnette (Figures 2.10 and 4.2).81 The plan illustrates a division of the lower chapel into three distinct parts. The western two bays were divided from the eastern bays by a screen that was attached to the freestanding columns. The hemicycle sanctuary, distinguished by a raised floor, contained the main altar and a secondary altar in the apse. In the early sixteenth century, a door was opened off of the fourth bay of the south side of the lower chapel when one of the chapel’s canons, Jean Parent (†1533), refounded an altar dedicated to Saint Michael in the space underneath the vault that served as the platform for the Oratory of Saint Louis, which was added to the upper chapel during the reign of Louis XII (r. 1498–1515).82 The lower chapel therefore became increasingly prominent as new altars and chaplains were founded. These changes may have been made in relation to the upper chapel, which became increasingly private over time. The Upper Chapel The entire program of the Sainte-Chapelle  – visual, iconographic, and ­ideological – ­culminated in the upper chapel, for it was here that the great collection of relics that Louis amassed during his reign, including the precious crown of thorns and the holy blood, were enshrined (Plate IV). As explained in the foundation documents, the relics, especially the crown of thorns and the holy cross, were the primary reason for the construction of the chapel. The spatial arrangement, furnishing, and decoration of the upper chapel were oriented around the display of the relics and the presence of a varied audience in this location. The upper chapel was divided into three distinct spaces (Figures  2.10 and 4.3). An openwork tribune and microarchitectural baldachin, constructed around 1254 and completed by 1270 at the latest, defined the eastern sanctuary (Plate XVI).83 The reliquary chasse, a gilt and silver miniature church with a gable and a trefoil arch, stood on four crouching lions and had a curtain at the front to facilitate the ostentation of the relics within (Figure 4.4). The crown of thorns and the other relics that Louis collected for the chapel were thus indicated by a series of architectural frames that diminished in size as a mise-en-abyme from the monumental exterior of the Sainte-Chapelle via the gabled tabernacle to the chasse itself. Through this expanding and contracting play on size, the architecture of the Sainte-Chapelle mirrored the reliquary chasse, publicly displaying it throughout the city of Paris. The sanctuary decoration highlighted the Christological relics within the Grande Chasse. The apsidal windows depicted the Life and Passion of

159

160

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

4.2.  Ransonnette, Sainte-Chapelle, lower chapel, plan showing altars. © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

Christ, enframed by John the Baptist, who foretold his arrival, and John the Evangelist, beloved disciple who recorded the Gospel. Judges, Isaiah and Jesse, Daniel, Ezekiel, and Jeremiah occupy the other lancets in the turning bays of the hemicycle (Figure 3.19). Surrounded by Christological imagery, prophets, and church fathers, the sanctuary’s program emphasized the incarnation manifest in the relics of Christ. Elevated on the golden baldachin, ­surrounded by architectural frames, and encircled by brilliant colored glass, the relics were the main focal point and the raison d’être of the Sainte-Chapelle. On occasion, the relics were actually taken out of the chasse and displayed to the people in the upper chapel. Jean de Joinville wrote that he saw Louis IX climb the stairs of the tribune and take the relic of the true cross out of its reliquary to show it to people below.84 In later years, special dignitaries

Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings

161

4.3.  Ransonnette, Sainte-Chapelle, upper chapel, plan showing altars. © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

were also invited up to the tribune for a closer view of the relics. Bar Sauma, the Mongol ambassador who visited Paris between 1287 and 1288, relates that Philip IV invited him to the Sainte-Chapelle, where Philip personally presented the relics to him: “And forthwith he went up with the king to an upper chamber of gold, which the king opened. And he brought out the casket of crystal [‘beryl’] in which was set the crown of thorns.”85 Such displays continued over the centuries. In 1378, Emperor Charles IV was hoisted by his servants onto the baldachin because his gout prevented him from ascending the small spiral staircases on his own!86 West of the sanctuary, a large choir screen, which stood one arch east of the respond dividing the second and third bays, created a second space

162

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

4.4.  Ransonnette, La Grande Chasse. © BnF Est. (Va 225i / A21895).

in the chapel (Figure 4.3).87 The niches within the wall were located to the east of this screen, and the door of the second bay, although possibly never opened, was positioned to the west of it. Beat Brenk argued that the niches were constructed especially for the king and Blanche of Castile because of their position immediately under the stained-glass windows that illustrate Old Testament models of kingship and queenship. The two eastern bays picture Judith and Esther among the castles of Castile on the south side, while the north side illustrates the book of Numbers with crowned kings over a carpet pattern decorated with the fleur-de-lys in the third bay (Plate XIV), and the book of Joshua in the fourth bay.88 Questions remain about which side the king and queen would have occupied – either under their respective models or opposite them, in which case the stained glass would have served

Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings

a moralizing and didactic purpose. If these niches were indeed intended for them, the royal persons would have been literally incorporated within the wall of the chapel as physical extensions of the biblical exemplars above them.89 However, these structures stood behind the screen that separated this space from the two western bays of the upper chapel, where presumably the populus stood, when they were allowed inside. The forty-four so-called medallions (tracery quatrefoils) that encircle the chapel in the dado provide further indications of the upper chapel’s spatial arrangement and function (Plate IX). Unfortunately, the images they contain have suffered greatly, making the identification of the martyrs extremely difficult. Robert Branner recognized twenty-five, and more recently, Emily Guerry brought that number to thirty-six.90 Among those, Agatha, Blaise, George, Lawrence, Sebastian, Stephen the Protomartyr, and Vincent were particularly popular in France. Others were especially venerated in Paris, including Denis, Léger, Quentin, Chrodegang, and Eugene.91 Given that the chapel harbored a large and diverse collection of relics, the visual expression of the subject is a natural one, although it was distinct from the stained glass program. The identified martyrs do not correspond to all of the relics held in the Sainte-Chapelle and not all the relics there were represented in the medallions. Moreover, the depicted martyrs did not receive any special celebrations at the royal chapel. For these reasons, Branner suggested that the images reflected more generally the collection of relics within the city of Paris, thus rendering the chapel a kind of “national” shrine.92 The logic behind the organization of the martyrs, if there was one, remains elusive, but some of their locations appear to underscore the chapel’s spatial divisions. Saint Philip, the namesake of Louis’ great predecessor, was located within the northern niche in the third bay. Denis, the patron saint of France and the French kings, was located on the south wall in the medallion located just before the choir screen, and Marguerite, the patron saint of Louis’ wife, was located directly opposite Denis.93 These medallions visually announced the royal presence behind the screen. The most commonly represented and popular saints of France – Blaise, Catherine, Lawrence, Sebastian, and Thomas Becket – also happen to be located in the two western bays, where the populus would have congregated. Notably, the Royal Window, which shows the history of the arrival of the relics in France and exalts Louis as the natural and incarnate successor of biblical kings, is also appropriately located in this more public area. This area of the chapel is also closest to the entrance, which facilitated the viewing of this window. The distribution of the altars in the upper chapel corresponds to this ­tripartite spatial arrangement (Figure  4.3). Five altars stood in the upper chapel. The high altar, dedicated to the Holy Cross, was located at the tribune under the baldachin. Behind this, in the apse, stood an altar dedicated

163

164

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

to Saint Venant. These altars were visible from the niche. When the Oratory of Saint Louis was constructed, off of the fourth bay on the southern side in the fifteenth century, a third altar was consecrated there. Two additional altars were attached to the west side of the choir screen, in the more public area of the chapel. Despite this tripartite spatial distribution, the relics could be appreciated by all within the upper chapel because they were elevated. The decorative imagery throughout the upper chapel expounded on the themes of incarnation, sacral kingship, and martyrdom implicit in the relics and was thematically designed around each distinct social space in the upper chapel. Commentaries about the Sainte-Chapelle inform that people outside of the aristocracy knew it well. Jean de Jandun, the political writer, philosopher, and university theologian who worked as a professor at the College of Navarre in Paris, penned his enraptured response to the upper chapel in 1323.94 In addition, the Dit des monstiers, written by an anonymous Parisian author between 1326 and 1328, describes the Sainte-Chapelle as a noble place where the relics and God are venerated.95 Further research on the dissemination of the decorative program at the Sainte-Chapelle may also indicate that it was visible to more than just the king, his retinue, and special guests.

4.4  The Chapel in the City: Processions and Public Display

Although located within the walls of the Palais de la Cité, the Sainte-Chapelle was deeply integrated into the network of urban rituals in Paris. Liturgical processions traveled from the palace to different churches in Paris on a regular basis. On Easter Sunday and throughout the octave of Easter, processions from the Sainte-Chapelle took place daily.96 On the Monday after Easter the procession culminated at Saint-Martin des Champs; on Tuesday, the procession led to Saint-Catherine de la Couture (on the Right Bank). On the vigil of the Ascension (forty days after Easter), the procession visited Saint-Jean de Latran (on the Left Bank), and on Ascension, Corpus Christi, as well as Saint Mark’s Day, the route led to Saint-Michel de la Place.97 On other occasions, processions stopped at the church of the Billettes, the Saints-Innocents, Saint-Jean en Grève, Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois, SaintMagloire, and Sainte-Catherine de la Couture on the Right Bank, the Cordeliers, Saint-Geneviève, and Saint-Jean de Latran on the Left Bank, and the chapels of Saint-Michel, Saint-Denis de la Chartre, and the Cathedral of Notre-Dame on the Île de la Cité.98 They even went outside the city walls, as far as Saint-Antoine des Champs, Saint-Ladre, Saint-Martin des Champs, and Saint-Denis.99 Before 1400, the canons of the Sainte-Chapelle and court officers had founded as many as thirty-six additional processions.100 There were ordinary and extraordinary

Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings

165

4.5.  Processions to and from Sainte-Chapelle. 1) Sainte-Chapelle 2) Saint-Michel 3) Saint-Denis de la Chartre 4) Notre-Dame 5) Saint-Jean de Latran 6) Cordeliers 7) Sainte-Catherine du Val des Écoliers 8) Saints-Innocents 9) Saint-Ladre 10) Saint-Martin des Champs 11) Les Billettes 12) Saint-Jean en Grève 13) Saint-Antoine. Plan © Parigramme,with overlay by author.

processions, such as those that took place in honor of the king, when he was sick.101 These processions traversed the entire city, from the Right Bank to the Left Bank, extending the rich ceremonial of the Sainte-Chapelle beyond the palace walls into the public space of the city (Figure 4.5). Processions did not only start at the Sainte-Chapelle and move outward; other congregations visited the royal chapel on their own feast days, too. On Quinquagesima (the Sunday before Lent), for example, the congregations of all the parishes of the Île de la Cité assembled in the morning at the chevet of the Sainte-Chapelle and said grace before requesting permission to use milk and butter during Lent.102 The Sainte-Chapelle also was a destination for processions originating at other churches in the city of Paris, such as NotreDame.103 These processions were major events. On a May Day procession

166

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

with relics from Saint-Denis in 1395, three thousand people “of both sexes” traveled to the Sainte-Chapelle for mass.104 Further research on stational processions in Paris would surely enrich our knowledge of the way the SainteChapelle and other churches employed urban space and interacted with the communities around them. Arsenal 114 prescribes the accoutrements the chaplains, dressed in fine red or white silk robes, should carry during these processions: crosses, censers, holy water, Gospel books, and epistolaries. Although the ordinal does not mention the relics, they were processed and displayed often.105 The stained-glass panel in the Royal Window of the Sainte-Chapelle, which illustrates a bishop displaying the crown of thorns from a balcony, flanked by the king and queen (Plate XIII), is but one example. To the left at the bottom of the panel, undulating blue-and-white lines, presumably the Seine, indicate that this event took place on the Île de la Cité. Placed within a visual narrative of the history of the relics, the image depicts what occurred before the construction of the Sainte-Chapelle, perhaps the moment when the crown arrived at Saint-Nicolas. The panel also could be read proleptically and be seen to allude to the anticipated recurrent display of the relic from the upper porch after the completion of the Sainte-Chapelle. The public demonstration of the relics began with a series of processions around France even before the Sainte-Chapelle was built. On the day of the translation of the crown of thorns into Paris, a procession moved from Saint-Antoine, located outside the city walls, to Notre-Dame, where mass was held, before terminating in the palace at the chapel of Saint Nicolas.106 Gautier Cornut was not the only cleric to write about it. The thirteenthcentury biographers of Louis IX  – Geoffrey of Beaulieu, the king’s personal confessor; William of Chartres, his chaplain; William of Nangis, a Benedictine monk of Saint-Denis; and William of Saint-Pathus, Queen Marguerite of Provence’s confessor – all described the great event in similar terms.107 That fateful day was so important to the construction of Louis IX as king that it was even recorded in the Grandes chroniques.108 The celebrated translation day was not the only one when the relics were carried around the city. John of Garland, the university master, noted between 1241 and 1254 that Louis IX carried the cross and the crown of thorns.109 William of Chartres’s hagiographical narrative, written shortly after Louis’ death, emphasizes the king and the people’s adoration of the relics at the processions on their feast days.110 William of Saint-Pathus emphasized that when Louis carried the relics in procession, both the clergy and the people of Paris joined him.111 Such processions involving the relics and the Sainte-Chapelle were enacted on major feast days and other occasions for hundreds of years. In her analysis of fifteenth- and sixteenth-century documents related to the SainteChapelle, Claudine Billot observed that the relics were processed in times of

Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings

crisis and war.112 In the eighteenth century, Félibien recounted that the king carried the relics on the four major feasts of the year: Easter, Pentecost, All Saints, and Christmas.113 By means of grand processions and the regular display of the relics, the public participated in the liturgical program of the Sainte-Chapelle. On certain days, in addition to the spiritual benefits gained from attending the feasts, visitors also received the added privilege of the indulgences. Beyond any financial gratuities the indulgences procured, they gave the royal chapel an important spiritual value. They transformed the Palais de la Cité and the Sainte-Chapelle into a pilgrimage site. Yet this was no ordinary pilgrimage site. Worship at the Sainte-Chapelle meant worship of the cult of kings.

4.5  The Liturgy of the Crown of Thorns and the Cult of Kings

By encouraging the public to attend and participate in services at the SainteChapelle, the relic processions and indulgences effectively promoted the cult of kings. Scholars have already examined many of the various rites, monuments, figures, and events that generated and supported this cult, especially in France. Most of this research has been directed toward understanding the complex relationship between the king and the church as the cult developed, often via texts and images associated with Saint-Denis and Reims Cathedral.114 The Sainte-Chapelle held a unique position among those institutions because of its exclusively royal patronage and its location. In the Palais de la Cité, images and ideologies were crafted without significant interference from authorities with opposing agendas. This included the creation of the liturgy at the SainteChapelle, even though it generally followed the Use of Paris.115 While the Divine Office provided a basic structure for the liturgy, some freedom in the selection of themes existed within this framework in the selection of lessons from the Gospels at each canonical hour as well as in the antiphons and responsories of the chants. While new offices were often adapted from older chants, the liturgy could be tailored to express the ideology of the event or place for which it was created. The planners of the Sainte-Chapelle thus had a certain amount of flexibility to design a program that would best serve the monarchy. In 1240, Louis and Blanche initiated the creation of the Feast of the Crown of Thorns in honor of their new relic.116 This required a new liturgy that would also appropriately glorify the crown and highlight its significance. Scholarship on the Feast of the Crown of Thorns has brought attention to the royalist agenda of the office, particularly that practiced in Paris.117 A breviary from Sens dated to the thirteenth century (BnF lat. 1028) remains the earliest extant manuscript that possesses both the Parisian office and mass for the feast.118 Nine new lessons were created expressly for the feast. Judith

167

168

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

Blezzard, Stephen Ryle, and Jonathan Alexander have signaled the sequence Si vis vere gloriari as one of the most outstanding examples of secular royal exaltation within the text of the new liturgy.119 Louis, Paris, and the kingdom of France are praised repeatedly in verses such as “To you, O famous city, endowed with every praise, mother of learning, the crown was entrusted; in you it was placed, city of Paris,” and “The king [Louis IX] visited everyone in the region and revealed himself to us to be the true Solomon.”120 Though we do not know who wrote the first versions of these texts, it is likely that someone closely associated with the royal house was involved in their production. Gautier Cornut remains the most likely candidate, because the liturgy for the feast appropriated many of the phrases and biblical lessons from his Historia about the relics, and he was close to the king.121 However, almost any literate cleric who had heard the first celebration in 1239 would have been able to transcribe it into the feast, and the prevalence of copies of Cornut’s chronicle of the reception of the crown of thorns makes it difficult to ascertain his authorship of the new liturgy. In any case, it is perhaps more important to recognize that, whoever the author was, he privileged royal interests, because the liturgy emphasizes the relic’s political significance over its relation to the Passion or its spiritual and redemptive powers. This observation becomes more compelling in light of the fact that the Dominican version of the Feast of the Crown of Thorns, which spread throughout the order across Europe in the mid-thirteenth century, omitted the explicitly political allusions.122 In contrast, the Parisian version was maintained for an audience who may have been more receptive to its political ideology. The liturgy for the Feast of the Crown of Thorns was performed every day of its octave, even though this included the Feast of the Assumption of the Virgin, which falls within the same week.123 In addition, a mass of the relics was celebrated at the Sainte-Chapelle on days that had fewer than nine lessons throughout the period running from Purification (February 2) to Quinquagesima.124 New liturgy was not written for the other days with indulgences, presumably because those feasts already existed. While the Feast of the Crown of Thorns contained the most politicized themes, praises to Louis IX were sung often at the Sainte-Chapelle, especially after his canonization in 1297, and allusions to the divine kingship of Christ as well as to Mary, Queen of Heaven, saturated the royal chapel’s liturgy throughout the yearly cycle. Through indulgences, special feast days with new liturgy, and processions throughout Paris, a large audience, invited to worship there on specific holidays, was able to attend services at the Sainte-Chapelle. The imagery and design of the building glorified kingship. In light of these observations, the visual program of the Sainte-Chapelle takes on a larger political meaning.

Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings

4.6  Royal Sovereignty

The Sainte-Chapelle did not exist solely for its royal patrons; through its architectural design and decoration, the royal chapel communicated in no subtle manner the power and prestige of the king to a large and varied audience. The liturgy that audience heard while there encouraged the veneration of the monarch and exalted the city of Paris as well as the kingdom of France. Given the political implications of the monument, the public representation of sacral kingship appears not as an expression of exalted piety but rather as an assertion of royal suzerainty. The Sainte-Chapelle was a form of symbolic power: it expressed through visual means what was not or could not be uttered explicitly in words. Royal suzerainty and its legal corollary, sovereignty, were not securely established in thought or practice in the thirteenth century. Similarly, contemporary understanding of the medieval meaning of this concept is far from unified; Gaines Post argued that on the whole the king was de facto if not de jure independent and supreme within his kingdom, while more recently Kenneth Pennington suggested the opposite, that the king was de jure if not de facto superior by the mid-thirteenth century.125 Though the legal definition of sovereignty had been clearly circumscribed in Roman antiquity when the emperor had absolute power, by the thirteenth century it had developed into a complex concept involving the rights and practices of different governing institutions and their relationship to one another. Power relations between the monarchy and the Church were defined more by habitual practices than by clearly defined legal limits. Even though the pope (Innocent II) had proclaimed during the Investiture Controversy that “the king is sovereign in his kingdom,” the concept was complicated by the fact that kingdoms, even when behaving as individual entities in legal terms, participated within the universal church, which was presided by the pope.126 The issue was debated in the political and legal discourse of thirteenth-century Paris. The strongest advocate for royal suzerainty at the time was William of Auvergne. In his De Universo, completed around 1247, William defined a universal hierarchy maintaining an earthly kingdom parallel to that of the heavenly kingdom, and in which the king, the representative of wisdom, stands at the top as the visible image of God.127 William of Auvergne taught at the university, and as bishop of Paris from 1243 to 1249, presided over the entire university, so it is very likely that his views were well known, or at the very least available to learned men and students, as well as the royal counselors. But the bishop was not the only person to express his views on the subject. Jurist Jean of Blanot, active in the mid-thirteenth century, argued, “The king of France is princeps of his kingdom; for as long as he is king he recognizes no superior.”128 Blanot is well known among legal historians today for his

169

170

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

assimilation of Roman law into French political thought. However, the implications of Blanot’s citation of Roman law, specifically whether he implied that there was no superior in the French kingdom to the French king, or in effect, that the king possessed the same legal privileges as the emperor, has been the subject of scholarly debate.129 Historians of medieval legal thought generally maintain that Blanot described the monarch as the dominus mundi.130 Irrespective of the different interpretations one may have, Blanot unequivocally argued that anyone who rebelled against the king broke the Lex Julia, an action tantamount to high treason.131 Jacques de Révigny provided another opinion on the subject circa 1270–80, though interpretations of his thought differ. Gaines Post and Marguerite Boulet-Sautel argued “on the whole, he expresses the theory of independence.”132 However, Calasso and Ercole, and more recently Kenneth Pennington, maintain that Révigny refuted any notion that the king maintained the same status as princeps and argued that he must act as a “magistrate of the empire.”133 Regardless of these individual opinions, the question of the king’s sovereignty was controversial in the kingdom and in Paris, where it was debated well into the fourteenth century.134 In this context of controversy and debate over the subject of sovereignty, a subject that could not have been alien to the royal court, the forceful message of the Sainte-Chapelle takes on a deeper resonance, asserting royal prerogatives at a time when the point needed to be made, after two decades of trouble and weakness within the monarchy. However, it was but one of several royal ideals the chapel projected throughout the reign of Louis IX. As he began to turn his attention to the crusade, the chapel’s themes of Holy War became more pertinent, and after the crusade, the dramatic shift in his devotional practices added further nuance to the chapel’s existence as a sacred reliquary shrine. From a contemporary perspective, the program of the Sainte-Chapelle would be understood as propagandistic. In the thirteenth century, however, the notion of divinely sanctioned kingship already had a long history, and what we would identify as propaganda may not have been perceived in the same manner. It was, after all, a chapel, a place for religious worship of the sacred mysteries. Nevertheless, at the Sainte-Chapelle, word and image worked with performance and people to naturalize the notion of sacral kingship. Public recognition of this was essential for the establishment of an exalted royal status, a basis for royal sovereignty. The Sainte-Chapelle actively and explicitly constructed royal sanctity, a project that became Louis’ life work after his return from the crusade.

5

opo Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris

Just like the writer who has finished his book and who illuminates it with gold and azure, so the king illuminated his kingdom with the beautiful abbeys he made, and with the great number of hospitals and convents of Dominicans, Franciscans, and other religious orders. . . . Thus the good King surrounded the city of Paris with men of religion. –Jean de Joinville1

A

lthough the most prominent, the Sainte-Chapelle was not the only major architectural project Louis undertook in Paris. Prior to 1248, he funded buildings for no fewer than four ­religious groups in the city: the Cistercians of Saint-Antoine, the Benedictines of Sainte-Catherine du Val des Écoliers, the Dominicans, and the Franciscans.2 After his return from the Holy Land, however, his charitable initiatives within and beyond the city increased exponentially. Indeed, after 1254, Louis IX contributed to more than five times the number of institutions in Paris than he did during the first two decades of his reign. As Joinville’s comment explains, the king’s patronage made an indelible imprint, transforming Paris from a rich and active urban center to a sacrosanct royal city. Both William Chester Jordan and Marguerite David-Roy have expounded on the general nature and scope of Louis’ charity, and a few articles and monographs on the individual histories of certain establishments have succeeded these initial studies.3 But a comprehensive assessment of Louis’ architectural and institutional patronage in Paris on its own terms and in relation to the Sainte-Chapelle is lacking. While it is clear that Louis’ later efforts, in tandem with the new governing programs he initiated after his return especially contributed to his canonization, the specifics remain unclear. The form and extent of his funding are not well documented, and none of the original buildings still exist. While the remaining evidence is incomplete and often circumstantial, this material nevertheless offers tantalizing insight into the scope and variety of Louis’ undertaking, as well as the basic form, style, and 171

172

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

size of architectural structures in Paris associated to him. To the extent these can be resurrected from the sediments of time, this material also illuminates the way royal representation in architecture changed over the course of the king’s life. Louis’ later patronage constructed a different image of the king than that of his early reign. Unlike the Sainte-Chapelle, which was an exclusively royal foundation standing within the very center of Paris in the Palais de la Cité, Louis’ later patronage was broader both socially and spatially. His efforts enlisted the collaboration of others and extended across Paris. To Philip Augustus’ utilitarian royal city, with its paved roads, new and refurbished castles, and impermeable walls, Louis added Christian foundations, which defined themselves in terms of humility and charity. In the later reign, his patronage, like his governance, became synonymous with these Christian virtues. In this way, Louis’ later patronage tempered the bold assertions of the Sainte-Chapelle, transforming the royal image and redefining the metropolitan architecture of Paris as royal.

5.1  Royal Architecture and Royal Patronage

Discussion of Louis’ patronage in Paris raises the question of whether royal architecture in the city differed in some way from other urban architectural tendencies. In the first two chapters, we observed that Rayonnant was a thirteenth-century metropolitan style with a new aesthetic approach to structure and decoration based on the reuse, multiplication, and repetition of individual forms originally from extra-Parisian sources. Even though Louis was reputedly involved in the architecture and construction of his foundations, Branner’s belief that he played a significant role in the formation of the style has little to sustain it.4 At best, it was Philip Augustus who can be credited with initializing the building boom from which this metropolitan architecture generated. Moreover, the idea that a distinctly “royal” style of architecture existed is problematic, because architecture itself is the product of multiple factors and/ or authors. Even if a single person originated the idea for a new project, the final outcome was mitigated by a number of other people and circumstances. Egidio Colonna, Archbishop of Bourges (1294–1316), offered some insight into the process.5 He explained that when the king wanted to establish a new foundation, he first discussed the idea with his counselors, who advised him on the project. These men then coordinated with others, seeking the necessary property titles and rents for the new institution and ­discussing it with the architect. Only then did the building go into construction, led by an architect or master mason who directed a large team of specialized builders. If the foundation was intended for a third party, then that group would also have

Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris

been involved. History and economics further condition the construction of buildings. Preexisting regulations and structures, topography, and the cost of materials all factor in architectural production. The final product never issues directly from a single person, even a king, but rather results from a variety of complex and sometimes competing factors. This discussion also raises the question of whether the king had his own group of builders or a “Master of the Works.” While Philip Augustus apparently employed a specific group of masons, it is not clear that a single supervisor managed them and all the different architectural projects he initiated.6 Individual buildings had master masons, as we know from those involved in the construction of the great cathedrals. Close stylistic connections among some buildings, such as Saint-Denis and Saint-Germain en Laye, would suggest that such masters oversaw the construction of several buildings at the same time.7 But a single person in charge of site managers or any systematic code of practice does not appear to exist before the thirteenth century. Louis’ appointment of Étienne Boileau in 1260 as prévôt royale changed this. His Livre des Métiers, written in 1268, aimed to standardize the trade sector in the city. Title 48, which concerns masons, stonecutters, plasterers, and mortarers, informs that the king appointed to the head of the profession a certain master William of Saint-Pathus, who “swore in the Palace lodge that he would guard the profession as well and as loyally as he could, for the poor as well as for the rich, for the weak as well as the strong, as it pleases the king.”8 Although masons and carpenters had always been under the king’s jurisdiction, this appointment must have streamlined project administration and management, and similar positions also were established in other prévôtés outside of Paris. Yet exactly what functions the Master of the Works performed remains unclear. It seems unlikely, even impossible, that a single individual would have directed all royal projects and spearheaded royal architectural policy, given the diversity of types, styles, functions, and locations of buildings constructed under the royal aegis. But even so, it is still important to acknowledge that from that point onward, the Master of the King’s Works and that office’s policies would have played a role in the final outcome of an architectural project. In the context of this discussion, it becomes apparent that Louis’ later foundations were not exclusively “royal.” Rather, they served independent groups, orders, or establishments to which the king was a primary benefactor and/or founder. As such, the monarchy did not have control of the architectural design, visual program, or liturgy of these institutions. Thus, both visually and ideologically they do not reflect unmitigated royal interests as at the Sainte-Chapelle. Nevertheless, even if their buildings do not directly represent a ­distinct “royal architecture,” insofar as the new institutions owed either their very presence in Paris and/or the better part of their foundations to royal patronage, they still reflected the king’s will and manifested the royal imprimatur throughout

173

174

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

the city. For their part, the new institutions also publicly acknowledged and celebrated their royal patron, who both gilded their reputation and encouraged additional aristocratic and popular patronage. Thus, even though the monarchy did not maintain complete control over the institution and its architecture, the king’s patronage functioned as a form of royal representation.

5.2  Royal Patronage after the Crusade, 1254–1270: Textual Evidence

While Louis established new foundations and donated alms throughout his kingdom, his greatest efforts were directed to Paris.9 Upon his return from the crusade, his patronage of mendicant groups and the urban unfortunate became a concerted, programmatic effort. From 1254, and with the greatest frequency through 1261, Louis established no fewer than eight groups of mendicants in Paris by providing royal contributions in the form of land and rents. These were the Augustinians, the Brothers of the Holy Cross, the Brothers of the Holy Trinity for the Redemption of Captives (“Mathurins”), the Carmelites, the Carthusians, the Brothers of the Penitence of Jesus (“Friars of the Sack”), the Brothers of the Mary Mother of Christ (“Servants of the Virgin,” “BlancsManteaux/White Mantles,” “Friars of the Pied”), and the Guillemites.10 The Carmelites, who began as hermits and became an official order in 1226, came to Paris with the king upon his return from the crusade in 1254.11 While they first lodged at Charenton, in 1257 Louis brought them to the city proper, giving them land near Saint-Paul, where a small church was erected.12 In addition to this group, Joinville writes that Louis bought the order of the White Mantles, a penitential fraternity whose rule was confirmed only in 1257, a house and land by the Temple gate.13 In 1258, the king paid compensation to the Templars for the loss of revenue on the land where the White Mantles were to build a new convent.14 Permission for a chapel and cemetery was accorded by Bishop Renaud de Corbeil in 1263, at which time Louis gave the Temple another annual rent of £40 on their behalf as an indemnity for lost parish revenues.15 With Louis’ help, the Augustinian friars, who began as hermits in Italy in the twelfth century but became an official order in 1243, holding their first general chapter only in 1256, were also installed in Paris in 1258.16 In a land exchange with Robert of Sorbon, Louis provided the new group with a farm outside the Montmartre gate and subsequently built a church there.17 The king later furnished the necessary resources to complete the group’s priory.18 The Carthusians arrived in 1259; the foundation document of that date, preserved in their cartulary, explains that it was at the king’s request that the order establish a chapter in Paris.19 Notably, this was the first urban foundation for the order of the hermits, and symbolically they were installed just outside of the city walls, at Vauvert, in a building once home to

Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris

the Franciscans.20 The foundation confirmed the donation of a second house that belonged to Peter the Cook at Gentilly along with all its goods, as well as five muids of wheat from Gonesse annually. Additional gifts of land and money were given to the Carthusians over the course of the next decade and confirmed by Louis on the eve of his departure for his second crusade in 1269.21 Less is known about the Brothers of the Holy Cross, who arrived that same year, in 1259. Joinville relays that they wore crosses on their chests and that Louis housed them on the “the Temple intersection which is now called the Rue Sainte-Croix.”22 Further, in 1261, Louis donated a house in the parish of Saint-André des Arts (on the river bank) and its goods to the Friars of the Sack, so that the brothers could build a church and a cemetery (with the consent of the bishop, the parish priest, and the abbot of SaintGermain des Prés).23 The king promised to compensate the parish seventy sous per year for the loss of alms that would now presumably go to the new institution. In 1263, the abbot of Saint-Germain des Prés recorded that Louis gave another £100 to the Sacks so that they could continue construction of their monastery.24 Such was Louis’ generosity that Rutebeuf penned a satirical poem relaying their dependence on him.25 In addition to these documented establishments, Lebeuf reported that Louis established the Brothers of Saint William (Guillemites) in Paris, in 1256, outside the city walls.26 Along with the new mendicant orders that Louis actively established in Paris, he supported with greater fervor after the crusade those already in the city – the Franciscans, the Dominicans, and the Trinitarians. Already in 1230, the king had been involved in procuring land for the Franciscans.27 He brokered a deal with Bishop William of Auvergne to lend them a ­parcel in the city walls at the Porte Gibard, near the church of Saint-Côme-et-SaintDamien, from Eudes, the abbot of Saint-Germain des Prés.28 However, only when Louis purchased the land along with a neighboring property in 1234 and gave the friars an annual rent did Church authorities permit construction of a church there.29 The Grandes Chroniques de France recorded that the church was built with the remainder of the indemnity paid in 1256 by Enguerrand IV of Coucy for hanging three Flemish boys caught hunting on his lands.30 An indulgence issued in 1261–2 praised the king for having “built the new church of the Friars Minor of Paris from nothing and not without great expense.”31 Indeed, most of the hagiographic sources emphasize that the church benefited most from Louis’ patronage, although other records show basic support of the order in Paris in general. Despite being one of the first mendicant groups to settle in Paris, the Jacobins remained poor in the second quarter of the century.32 By 1225, only the studium generale was operational.33 A few years after Louis’ coronation, the bishop of Paris, William of Auvergne, begged Blanche of Castile to cancel her pilgrimage to Compostela in order to donate the Jacobins the money she had reserved for it, a cache of £1,500.34 It is possible that this request was

175

176

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

granted, for the Jacobins gave “the king, his mother, and his wife” a special blessing during their general chapter of 1241.35 Richard Sundt found compelling evidence that work on the church commenced during the master generalship of John the Teuton (1241–51) and was completed under that of Humbert of Romans (1254–63).36 This period coincides with the order’s turn to indoor preaching and expanded church building at the height of the clerical-mendicant tensions that culminated with William of Saint-Amour’s spiteful treatise.37 Blanche of Castile, along with the lords and ladies of the court, reportedly attended the church’s dedication.38 Du Breul ascribed the construction of the church and convent to Louis, and reported that the dormitory was built with the indemnity received from Enguerrand of Coucy in 1256.39 William of Nangis specified that Louis paid for the construction of both the schools and the dormitory of the Jacobins, while William of SaintPathus and the author of the Grandes Chroniques wrote that Louis was responsible for only the dormitory.40 The Trinitarians, who formed in 1198 to aid the return of Christians captured in the Holy Land and who only gained official status as an order with the other mendicants in 1215, were first welcomed by the bishop of Paris in 1229.41 They subsequently came to be known in the city as Mathurins.42 While Louis had connected to the group by the time of his first crusade, when he was accompanied by Nicolas, their general minister, donations to them began in 1258. Over a period of four years, Louis gave them rents, land, and houses on the Left Bank, which allowed them to expand their convent.43 In 1260, his support for the group was so strong that he bestowed a thorn from the crown of thorns to the Mathurins.44 Despite these generous gifts, however, exactly what his patronage contributed to the architecture of their convent remains unknown, and the chroniclers also are silent on this subject. Aside from these mendicant communities, Louis supported religious laywomen, perhaps from the encouragement of his pious sister Isabelle.45 The Béguines, who lived quietly in pious communities but did not take formal vows or establish a rule, had settled in Paris in the early thirteenth century, but in 1264, the king gave them institutional credibility with the purchase for £100 of a vast terrain on the Right Bank in the parish of Saint-Paul in front of the Porte Barbeel.46 Louis also mercifully gave to (reformed) prostitutes. The House of the Daughters of God (Filles-Dieu) was a semireligious hospice for “unfortunate women, who on account of their poverty had abandoned themselves to the sins of the flesh.”47 The charity was founded in 1225–6 by William of Auvergne, when he was a lecturer in theology before he was appointed bishop of Paris, and he presided over the dedication of their church in 1231.48 But the Filles-Dieu received so much support from Louis that Joinville and other contemporary chroniclers attributed the entire foundation to him.49 In fact, Louis took charge of the institution only after William of Auvergne died in 1250, when it required a new patron for its subsistence.50 While he first

Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris

gave minor rents of wheat and water in 1250 and 1256, starting in 1258 he donated an enormous £400 annually from the royal treasury and shared the administration of the institution with the bishop.51 This allowed the convent to grow to two hundred women.52 In addition to these groups, Louis founded the Quinze-Vingts, a hospital for three hundred (fifteen times twenty) sightless people.53 While the original royal foundation for the institution no longer exists, a royal charter dated to March 1260 assigned a Jacobin priest named Jean Biram as chaplain and clerk to the new chapel.54 In June 1260, another royal charter gave an annual rent to the bishop of Paris for land “on which is now constructed the house of the blind,” suggesting that Louis had also paid for their dormitory.55 Louis confirmed an annual gift of £30 to the foundation, ensuring its perpetuation before departing on his second crusade in a document dated to 1269.56 Louis also established a school for the “Bons-Enfants” (lit. “Good Boys”) in Paris.57 While similar schools for Bons-Enfants existed in Orléans and Reims from the mid-1240s, Louis’ foundation was made in the late 1250s, probably around 1258.58 Louis bought properties on which he built “good and big houses” so that the students could live and study there.59 Finally, Louis increasingly supported the primary hospice for the poor in Paris, the Hôtel-Dieu, whose foundation dated to the sixth century.60 In 1255, the king issued a mandate to his administrators to respect the HôtelDieu’s privileges and to not impose on the hospital.61 In 1260, Louis increased his Lenten alms to the charity to a total of £2,110, including sixty-three muids of wheat, and sixty-eight thousand herrings.62 He also assigned an extra £20 annually at the beginning of Lent to buy almonds and sweets for those in the Hôtel-Dieu.63 That same year, he increased the annual rent to the Hôtel-Dieu to 200£p, to be taken from the Temple.64 Finally, he had a new structure built to the west of the Salle Saint Thomas, which became known in perpetuity as the Salle Neuve, and he founded two chapels at the base of the Petit Pont, one of which was dedicated to Saint Agnes.65 These various sources show that for a decade after 1254 the king made a concerted effort to provide land, funding for buildings, and sustenance so that different mendicant and poor groups could settle in his city. The amounts of the donations varied and might have reflected his affinity for the group, its size at the time of the donation, its perceived need, or a requested sum. None of these groups were forgotten in 1269, when Louis drew up his testament prior to embarking for a second time on crusade. While he assigned gifts throughout France, most of his donations were directed to institutions he had supported in Paris.66 To the Cordeliers and the Jacobins, Louis left a sizable £400 each, the greatest amount he gave to any order, and much larger than what he provided for all the Franciscans and Dominicans outside of Paris, who received £600 together. Louis bequeathed £100 to the Carthusians of Paris specifically “to build their new house” and the same amount to the Béguines to “build and enlarge” their compound in the city.67 The penitential Filles-

177

178

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

Dieu and the Cistercians of Saint-Antoine were allocated a robust £100 each. The Trinitarian Mathurins and the Sacks as well as the Bons-Enfants were to receive £60 each.68 The religious of Sainte-Catherine du Val des Ecoliers were allocated £40. While that amount seems minimal in relation to the aforementioned numbers, it was twice the amount given to the Carmelites, the White Mantles, the Order of the Holy Cross, and the Guillemites, who received £20 respectively. Another £20 was set aside for the poorest Béguines. While Louis bequeathed the entire Augustinian order a generous £300, only £15 was allocated to those of Paris, less than even the smallest orders. Although Louis was not the sole contributor to these institutions, his role in their success was fundamental, because his generosity encouraged others of means to give to them. At the outset of the thirteenth century, the royal beneficiaries – reformed prostitutes, the blind, religious laywomen, students, and even the mendicants – were not conventional or popular groups to support.69 His patronage set a precedent for similar royal and aristocratic munificence. In his generosity to the Sacks, Louis was joined by his younger brother, Alfonse of Poitiers, who also bequeathed them money.70 The BonsEnfants came to enjoy popular support, receiving many testamentary alms from bourgeois and aristocratic Parisians.71 It became such a prestigious institution that other student groups in Paris later appropriated the name of the Bons-Enfants.72 Royal support for the Béguines persisted even after they were condemned in 1312 at the Council of Vienne, and through their dissolution during the Hundred Years’ War.73 The Franciscan and Dominican churches held extensive numbers of aristocratic and royal tombs, giving material evidence to continuous generations of elite support.74 Although Louis left the Carmelites only £20 in his testament, royal support of the order continued until at least 1400.75 In turn, the institutions themselves employed the royal association to their greatest advantage. These institutions publicized their royal affiliations to garner greater benefits. Sainte-Catherine had sculptures of the king and queen erected on its main portal.76 The blind of the Quinze-Vingts were given permission in 1312 to wear the fleur-de-lys on their shirts, which legitimized their begging and thus encouraged donations.77 These broadly based forms of support provided the stability that allowed most of Louis’ foundations to remain in operation well into the nineteenth century, and the Quinze-Vingts and the Hôtel-Dieu still exist today.

5.3  Sacral Kingship in the Urban Space

Royal patronage contributed to the construction of nearly a third of all monumental buildings erected in Paris over the course of the century, and thus constituted a substantial portion of the built environment.78 Dispersed

Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris

5.1.  Louis IX’s patronage in Paris. Plan © Parigramme with overlay by author.

throughout the city, Louis’ foundations and beneficiaries left an indelible mark on the urban topography (Figure 5.1). The Left Bank hosted the largest of the new mendicant orders as well as Louis’ new school for the Bons-Enfants. The Cordeliers, who did not settle in side the walls of Paris until 1230 when Louis purchased land for them, were located between the Porte Gibard and the Porte St-Germain, near the church of Saint-Côme-et-Saint-Damien.79 The Jacobins settled in the southern part of the city on what is now the Rue Saint-Jacques by the gate that took their name.80 The Mathurins were given land in the area delimited by the present-

179

180

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

day Rue de Sommerard, Rue Saint-Jacques, and Boulevard Saint-Germain.81 The Sacks were located on the bank of the Seine inside the walls within the parish of Saint-André des Arts, along the present-day Quai des Grands Augustins.82 The Bons-Enfants were established on two parallel streets in front of the Roman baths not far from the Porte Saint-Victor, close to the other schools.83 And in Vauvert, just beyond the city walls and the Porte d’Enfer, were situated the Carthusians, in the present-day Jardin de l’Observatoire, between the Rues d’Assas, Auguste-Comte, and the Boulevard Saint-Michel.84 On the Right Bank were situated the Augustinian friars, the Béguines, the White Mantles, the Brothers of the Holy Cross, the Carmelites, the FillesDieu, the Guillemites, and the Quinze-Vingts. As space on the Right Bank was scarce even around the walls at mid-century, the implementation of these orders required concerted effort involving purchase or exchange of land, rights, and deeds. The Augustinian friars were located outside the Montmartre gate until 1294, when Philip IV transferred them to the Left Bank in the location of the Sacks, who had been banned at the Council of Lyon in 1274.85 The Béguines built their convent in the parish of Saint-Paul by the Porte Barbeel.86 Located to the south of rue Saint-Antoine, their property extended from the medieval Rue des Pouliers to the north and the Rue des Barrés in the south, and from the Rue de la Fauconnerie in the west and the Rue des Jardins beyond the wall.87 Louis bought the White Mantles a house and land near the weavers by the Temple gate.88 The Brothers of the Holy Cross were situated nearby, on the “the Quarrefour du Temple, which is now called the Rue Sainte-Croix.”89 The king first installed the Carmelites near Saint-Paul, but after receiving land from two bourgeois of Paris on the Left Bank in the Censive of Saint-Geneviève in 1262, they moved closer to the university, where they also established a school, near the present-day Place Maubert.90 To the north, outside of the city by the Porte Saint-Denis and not far from Saint-Lazare, lived the Filles-Dieu.91 The Guillemites were located just outside the city walls until 1274, when they moved to the convent of the White Mantles who, like the Sacks, were dispelled at that time.92 The hospice of the Quinze-Vingts was located in the episcopal cens just outside the Porte SaintHonoré along the street of the same name.93 Thus, a royal foundation or donation was made in almost every parish (Figure  5.2). There are pragmatic explanations for this spatial distribution: the pope mandated that mendicants should not be located within three hundred meters of each other, a provision made to diffuse competition among them.94 Although the bull was not issued until 1268, the locations of mendicant convents in Paris followed this practice prior to the official rule. In addition to the Jacobins and Cordeliers, the Friars of the Sack were the only mendicant group Louis installed within the walls on the Left Bank, just about three hundred meters from the Cordeliers.95 The location of the Carthusian convent, outside of the city walls, also respected this minimum requirement.

Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris

5.2.  Distribution of Louis IX’s patronage in parishes. Plan © Parigramme with overlay by author.

On the Right Bank, the Augustinians originally held ground in the northwest of the city, the Carmelites were located near the Seine, and the smaller groups, the  White Mantles and the Brothers of the Holy Cross, stood in between those convents. At the same time, these locations were financially beneficial to these institutions. Nearly all were placed at the edge of the city, just within or

181

182

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

beyond the walls at gates. Although this may testify to the increasingly limited space within the walls, alms were given and tolls were extracted at city gates. On the Left Bank, the Jacobins were at the gate of that same name, while the Cordeliers were at the Porte Saint-Germain, and the Carthusians near the Porte d’Enfer. On the Right Bank, the Quinze-Vingts were located at the Porte Saint-Honoré, the Augustinians at the Porte Montmartre, the Filles-Dieu by the Porte Saint-Denis, the Brothers of the Holy Cross and the Brothers of Mary Mother of Christ at Porte du Temple, and the Béguines close to the Porte Saint-Antoine. This could not have been purely a question of finding open space; it appears as a strategic approach. Most important, with this broadly based spatial distribution, the king’s good intentions were made manifest and given a physical presence throughout the city, with emphasis at the gates of Paris. As attested by his chroniclers, his good efforts were well known, and the beneficiaries themselves promoted their illustrious liaison with the king. Thus through physical markers and proactive reiterations of the king’s legacies, Louis’ patronage further encoded the city with the royal presence. His efforts complemented the pragmatic public works Philip Augustus had begun a generation earlier, but added a more charitable, Christian, and sacred dimension to the royal presence. Louis’ later patronage transformed Paris into a sacred city that flourished under royal largesse.

5.4  Royal and Rayonnant Architecture: The Visual Evidence

But what about the buildings themselves? Did anything about their form or style make them stand out as particularly royal? How did these monuments operate in the visual economy of Paris? The Sainte-Chapelle had incorporated the flourishing metropolitan (Rayonnant) style into the Palais de la Cité, both uniting the building with the city and layering the style with royal prestige. Its multimedia splendor, with its walls of saturated glass, polychromy, and rich sculpted ornamentation, befit the king. This level of decoration was not possible or necessarily desirable for the Parisian institutions Louis supported. The richest source for understanding the physical attributes of Louis’ later patronage derives from the graphic materials that exist in varying amounts and level of detail for some of these establishments. Because these images date to after the sixteenth century, they illustrate these monuments more than three centuries after their initial construction, oftentimes with subsequent alterations and reconstructions. With an educated reading, they nevertheless still offer valuable insight into the initial structure and decoration of these buildings. Regardless of the Cordeliers’ initial distress over the size of their first location at Vauvert, the church they eventually built by the Porte Girbaud was also

Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris

very large, surpassing even Notre-Dame in its horizontal dimensions.96 With a length of 98 meters and a width of approximately 27.6 meters, the three-aisled basilica comprised seventeen straight bays (Figure 1.44).97 At bay nine, a series of lateral chapels divided the aisles. They were built within the main frame, which, bordering the street, could not extend into a transept. The chevet comprised a polygonal hemicycle with five equally sized radiating chapels. Despite the large plan and complex hemicycle, the church remained modest in height. Instead of impressive stone vaults, Sainte-Marie-Madeleine had a barrel-vaulted timber roof through the nave and possibly extending into the hemicycle (Figure 1.45).98 Michael Davis and Nick Baker have developed a compelling three-dimensional digital reconstruction of the church, and they conjecture that the columns were about 5.5 meters tall, the arcade to the top of the arch between 7.5 and 8 meters, the top of the wall about 15 to 16 meters, and the crown of the ceiling 18 to 20 meters.99 For comparison, we might recall that the Sainte-Chapelle was 27.5 meters from ground to upper keystone and the chevet of Notre-Dame was 32.5 meters.100 The simple facade of the church contained a large arched portal with a trumeau of Louis, a stair turret to the right, a truncated tower to the left, and a thin lancet window centered in the gable. On the interior, the two-story elevation of Sainte-Marie-Madeleine comprised a pointed arcade on single columns and a planar clerestory zone defined by a single stringcourse and an upper cornice (Figure  1.44).101 Other architectural embellishments remained minimal, with foliate capitals and simple tracery windows. Du Breul reports that the windows were not historiated, although some of them had borders of fleur-delys and castles, suggesting that they were donated by Louis and Blanche.102 Yet despite these highlights, the ample funding the king gave to the project seems to have been directed primarily to the size of the building rather than to its decoration, which remained understated in keeping with the order’s ethics. Attached to the south side of the church, a trapezoidal cloister conformed to the topography imposed by the walls of Philip Augustus (Figure  1.44). A sacristy of three bays with an apse was built off of the east side of the cloister. Behind the church, to the southeast, and on a slightly different axis, stood the refectory, a hall-style structure (which still stands today within the Ecole de Medicine) with fourteen bays punctuated by a single row of central columns with foliate capitals that also supported a timber roof (Figure 1.42).103 The Dominican church of Saint Jacques took the form of a great hall with a single row of twelve piers running down the center, forming two naves of unequal width (Figure  1.47).104 The building had a wide span of approximately twenty meters.105 Rather than a hemicycle with a polygonal apse, the church had a flat terminus bordering the rue Saint-Jacques.106 On the north side of the building were appended eight chapels. The plan shows that on the interior the main altar stood on a raised platform before the east wall of the south nave behind a choir screen that enclosed the six easternmost bays.107

183

184

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

A minor altar existed on a platform in the north nave. On the sixth column from the west, a screen formed a passage to the cloister. Before this screen stood two altars, which faced the space for the lay audience.108 One bay east, another screen formed the choir. Along the southern wall in this area were integrated four small oratories or chapels. Exterior views from the northwest illustrate the church with a two-story elevation (Figure 1.48). The chapels rise to a height of about one-third of the elevation and large clerestory windows occupy the upper two-thirds. Tracery lights adorned each clerestory window. The western chapels exhibited tracery with Flamboyant motifs from a campaign begun in 1354.109 Part of the interior elevation is represented in an engraving from the Gallia Dominicana (Figure 1.49): it shows a columnar arcade of pointed arches with single columns carrying foliate capitals. At the eastern intersection of the choir screen, a single, full-sized sculpted figure stood on one column; the sketch suggests a figure with a mid-length hairstyle wearing a tunic (or surcot), and it is tempting to imagine that this might have been Louis IX himself. No moldings or responds extend upward from the capital abacus, suggesting a planar wall surmounted by a timber roof as at the Cordeliers. Although no illustrations provide details of the upper levels, the simple, aisleless plan and the lack of flying buttresses suggest the presence of a timber roof.110 To the south, the cloister was shoehorned between the church and the city wall (Figure 1.47). The cloister arcades were divided by colonnette and decorated with a trilobe motif.111 While the church-cloister complex had an axis perpendicular to the Rue Saint Jacques, that of the refectory, located to the west of the church and the cloister, was oriented toward the city wall, where it was mirrored by an extension where others could take their meals.112 Further to the west, at an angle to the refectory, stood the school and the infirmary, which formed another cloister enclosed by the city wall. Another image from the Gallia Dominicana illustrates that the tracery from the cloister of the Jacobins comprised three cusped arches surmounted by a five-petaled rosette (Figure 1.50). This pattern matches a fragment of tracery at the Musée Carnavalet with a provenance from the Jacobins (Figure 1.51). These motifs are in line with a date of 1230–40. The church and refectory arcades also belonged to this phase of construction.113 Illustrations of the church of the Mathurins show that the façade followed thirteenth-century models (Figure  5.3). It had a simple portal embellished with sculpture in the archivolts and a trilobe arch instead of a tympanum. Above, a round oculus with a quatrefoil stood in the clerestory section under a gabled roof pierced with a single lancet. A stair tower flanked the south side of the façade, while the north side had a decorated pinnacle. The church had a rectangular plan and the nave had seven bays with chapels extending from the buttresses on both sides of the building. Given the lack of aisles and flying buttresses, it is likely that this church also had only a timber roof (Figure 5.4).

5.3.  Church of the Mathurins, façade. © BnF Est. (Va 260e H42251).

5.4.  Church of the Mathurins, exterior. © BnF Est. (Va 260e).

185

186

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

5.5.  Chapel of the Convent of the Carmelites by Thorigny. © BnF Est. (Va 259g fol.).

When the Carmelites moved to the Left Bank, they brought the stones from their first location and used them in the reconstruction of their church between 1309 and 1318.114 A sole capital with a provenance attributed to the convent of the Carmelites carries delicate foliage sculpture in line with a thirteenth-century date (Figure 2.20). An engraving by Thorigny from 1866 depicts the chapel with two levels, whose upper-level windows were filled with tracery identifiable as of the thirteenth and the fourteenth centuries (Figure 5.5). The chapel referenced the architecture of the Sainte-Chapelle even though it was built nearly a century later. The Augustinians, who first received land from Louis outside the walls of Paris, replaced the Sacks on the Left Bank by 1295.115 Construction of a new convent began with royal patronage in 1299, but exactly what was razed and rebuilt at the time is unclear.116 Mallet’s eighteenth-century engraving of the site depicts a church with a steeply pitched roof and eight bays (Figure 5.6). This type of building, a simple box-like structure, had become typical for the mendicants by the end of the thirteenth century. Lebeuf states that the church was enlarged in 1368 with funding from Charles V, and this may correspond in Mallet’s image to an extension of seven bays along the Seine with the same wall height and a lower roof.117 Each bay was delineated by a deep buttress. As at Saint-Jacques, the first third of the elevation was reserved for chapels, while the upper two-thirds held a single window with tracery. A simple pedimented doorway at the intersection of the main façade and the extension opened onto the boardwalk. The extant

Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris

187

5.6.  Convent of the Augustinians (ex Brothers of the Sack), view from north, by Mallet. © BnF Est. (Va 262b fol. / H043772).

images of the church offer few stylistic details to which a precise date can be assigned. The plan of this church is strikingly similar to that of the Dominican church of Saint-Jacques; it also had a row of columns forming two unequal aisles (Figure 5.7). The chevet was flat and the main altar stood in the last two east bays of the southern aisle on a raised platform. The choir enclosed five bays, the fourth of which had stronger piers, which may have corresponded to the west end of the earlier church. The choir was extended beyond these piers, enclosed with a screen, and preceded by a passage to the cloister formed by a second screen. In front of the western screen stood two additional altars, and the nave remained open for the laity. Chapels extended along the northern aisle of the church. The hospice of the Quinze-Vingts was built ex nihilo. At least a domus and a capella dedicated to Saint-Remi were constructed during Louis’ reign.118 By 1384, the institution included a large gatehouse, a meeting room, individual rooms on two levels for the residents, two courtyards, a lodge, a mill, a kitchen, a prison, and taverns, as well as a cemetery.119 An engraving by Israël Silvestre illustrates the church of the QuinzeVingts as it looked in the seventeenth century from the west (Figure 5.8). By

188

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

5.7.  Church of the Augustinians. Plan: Epitaphier du Vieux Paris.

5.8.  Church of the Quinze-Vingts, exterior. © BnF Est. (Va 227 / 75 C 69112).

Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris

5.9.  Church of the Quinze-Vingts, plan. © BnF Est. (Va 227 / 75 C 69112).

this time, Saint-Remi was an irregular trapezoid, and Berty’s plan indicates a nave length of 34.10 meters and a width between 21.43 and 26.31 meters (Figure 5.9).120 The church had eight bays and a jubé at the intersection of the fifth and the sixth bays from the western portal. A sacristy stood in the southeast corner, and five chapels appended to the south aisle were ­consecrated in 1530.121 The plan suggests that the aisles to either side of the nave were vaulted (delineated by their crosses), while the central section of the church may have had only a timber roof. In 1754, Lebeuf observed that the south aisle was the oldest part of the church, and that there were three extant sculptures from the thirteenth century, one of which represented Louis IX himself as founder.122 The sculptures had been placed in modern niches on the north portal in the third bay from the west, which gave access to the church by means of an ascending staircase. The west façade, in addition to an ample portal with sculpted tympanum, carried three large lancet windows with tracery, each surmounted by a separate single oculus. To the south, a stair tower

189

190

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

5.10.  Bird’s eye view of the Convent of the Carthusians. © BnF Est. (Va 265 / 73 C 61960).

rose on the corner of the façade. There was another street entrance, indicated by a gable, along the south wall. Although the main structures of the Carthusians’ convent were not built until after Louis’ death, an eighteenth-century aerial view offers a possibility for locating the buildings to which Louis donated funds (Figure 5.10). The great cloister dominates the complex to the south, and the church, which was not completed until 1325, flanked a smaller cloister appended to it.123 Along the northwest perimeter, next to a gate, and isolated from the rest of the complex, stood five single houses with three gardens behind them. In an old city where space was scarce, new buildings were regularly built on old buildings, so even if these had been reconstructed, they might have been at first the rooms that Louis funded in 1259.

Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris

At the Hôtel-Dieu, the king was responsible for the construction of the Salle Neuve and the chapel of Saint-Agnès at the very least.124 Engravings of the Salle Neuve’s west façade, which opened onto the Petit Pont, illustrate a structure with a double portal in a Gothic style (Figure  1.57). However, the style of this façade indicates a fourteenth- and fifteenth-century reconstruction, although some features of Louis’ thirteenth-century Salle Neuve were likely incorporated into this building or its portal’s jambs and voussoirs. A second structure to the north doubled the size of the Salle Neuve in the sixteenth century. Images of the eastern end of the Hôtel-Dieu, which turned on to Rue Neuve Notre-Dame, illustrate gabled windows with elaborate tracery alternating with small gabled niches (Figure 1.56). Although these images do not specifically represent the visual characteristics of Louis’ architectural contributions to the Hôtel-Dieu, his chroniclers claim the institution’s expansion in the thirteenth century was due to his generous gifts.125

5.5  The Architecture of Humility

The visual evidence that remains offers insight into a variety of buildings, from large, well-funded mendicant convents to smaller mendicant groups who did not survive even the thirteenth century, as well as hospices. Despite their functional differences, on the whole, these institutions were simple, utilitarian structures. The plans of these buildings remained plain, even boxlike, with the exception of the complex radiating chapels of the Cordeliers’ church. All of the churches had timber roofs rather than stone vaults. The lateral expanses of these buildings varied, but seem to have accorded with the institution’s popularity and size, although the grand length of the Franciscan Sainte-Marie-Madeleine has also been seen as a competitive response to the Dominicans’ wide church.126 While less information remains concerning their interior decorations, the elevations carried at best a few embellishments – foliate and minimal figural sculpture on the interior, simple tracery in the windows, and at times gables, pinnacles, and small rosettes on the façades. These buildings were nevertheless more insistently modest than those that had benefited from royal patronage prior to this period, the priory of Sainte-Catherine with its elaborate transept rose and the Cistercians of Saint-Antoine, with their vaulted church (Figures  1.38 through 1.41). More comprehensive studies of mendicant architecture have already considered the meaningful implications of its striking simplicity.127 In his study of German examples, Richard Krautheimer found the sources of this architecture to lie in secular buildings, such as refectories and hospitals.128 Beyond the usual explanation of these buildings as reflecting apostolic simplicity, he argued that these plans suited mendicant architecture because they

191

192

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

primarily served for preaching and teaching rather than for worship of the sacred through the Divine Offices.129 However, As Richard Sundt pointed out, the mendicants preached in public during the early years, and little evidence exists to support the idea that they regarded their churches as anything other than sacred.130 While accepting the typological model, Wolfgang Schenkluhn claimed instead that Dominican and Franciscan churches quoted from university college structures, which were related to their identities as teaching institutions.131 For him, their use as sites of worship worked to render these secular spaces sacred.132 Rejecting this typology, Sundt found the distinctive double nave of the Dominican church at Toulouse (a parallel and possible formal precursor to that of Paris) to be a function of the limitations of its site, while its decorative simplicity reflected both the order’s very real poverty and institutional identity.133 In fact, this austerity obtained a sacred value and reflected a deliberate approach on the part of the Dominicans.134 Indeed, at their outset and then again in the 1260s, both the Franciscans and Dominicans had adopted constitutions that strictly limited architectural decoration and governed the construction of their churches and conventual buildings.135 If these ideals for the Dominicans and Franciscans apply more broadly, particularly to the group of Parisian institutions discussed here, then they reflect at once their true economic circumstances, the limitations of their often cramped sites, as well as changing attitudes toward the visual expression of the sacred. The level of decoration in these buildings reflected economic circumstances and religious ideals rather than the exaltation of the divine through material forms. The expression of these different artistic-ideological poles recalls the great debate about art and architecture that took place in the early twelfth century.136 Both sides of the spectrum were represented in Paris and in the architecture associated with Louis IX. But they do not necessarily negate each other. The Rayonnant motifs in Louis’ later structures linked them to the broader urban architecture of Paris as well as to the king’s touchstone monument, the Sainte-Chapelle, although it was significantly more elaborate.137 The simplicity of these institutions’ architecture did not constitute an anti-aesthetic or a pointed rejection of the Sainte-Chapelle, for its exuberant decoration continued to be produced in Paris and elsewhere. Rather, Louis’ later patronage subtly nuanced the Sainte-Chapelle’s initial, vigorous assertions. Upon return from the crusade, Louis had the tribune built to elevate the relics under a large microarchitectural baldachin that emphasized them and, by extension, the chapel as a votive offering (Plate XVI). Some of the medallions in the apse were damaged to accommodate the new structure, and a painting of the Crucifixion, God’s greatest sacrifice, was prominently emblazoned between its supports behind the altar at the apex of the apse.138 It was also after the crusade when Louis increasingly donated thorns from the crown of thorns to others; prior to 1248, he gave a

Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris

thorn from the relic to three institutions; after the crusade, he gave a thorn to seventeen different institutions.139 These efforts softened the chapel’s forceful insistence on sacral kingship; the internal transformations and the larger context of his charitable endowments beyond the palace rendered the SainteChapelle an offering and emblem of the king’s devotion and subservience to God. Through such visual indexes and the circumstances of their production, Louis’ foundations synthesized royal patronage with the metropolitan architecture of Paris. Some of these structures even pointed to Louis’ patronage on their facades, with an identifying stair turret to one side and a trumeau figure of the patron at the front, such as at Sainte-Marie Madeleine, Saint-Remi of the Quinze-Vingts, and Sainte-Catherine du Val des Écoliers. While royal funding integrated the new urban institutions with the king, the decorative forms these buildings displayed unified them with others carrying the same motifs, including the highly prominent Sainte-Chapelle. In this way, the metropolitan architecture of Paris became imbued with royalty; city and king were merged and mutually reinforcing. That this architecture became meaningful as both royal and urban is evidenced by its reiterations within and beyond the city generations after its initial production, despite the stylistic development of Gothic in new directions. Aurélie Perraut has observed that many of the chapels founded in new university colleges in Paris appropriated aspects of the Sainte-Chapelle, in an effort to link their institutions to those founded during the golden reign of Louis.140 Michael Davis has called attention to the eastern and apsidal chapels of Notre-Dame, constructed two generations later by Philip IV in a style that consciously evoked architecture of the mid-thirteenth century.141 Beyond architecture, the decorative arts of Paris  – metalwork, ivories, and ­painting  – ­also integrated these urban architectural forms as frames from about 1250, becoming ubiquitous by the end of Louis’ reign in 1270. As history has shown, these objects and the architecture itself became immensely popular throughout Europe thereafter. The question that remains is: what could have prompted this shift in royal representation? It is no revelation that the king’s personal history played an important role in the changes effected during his later reign. His departure to the Holy Land stood at the zenith of the first twenty years of his reign insofar as he was finally able to assume power over his barons and assert authority over ecclesiastical matters in France, while seemingly sanctioned by God through the acquisition of the crown of thorns. The construction of the Sainte-Chapelle boldly asserted these ideas. If that power and optimism explains the success of the early campaigns of his crusade, soon enough the entire mission failed, a loss exacerbated by the tragic battlefield death of his brother, the development of dysentery and other illnesses among the troops, and the king’s own humiliating capture in 1250. Only two years after it began,

193

194

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

the crusade that had been planned for the better part of six years came to a sudden and disillusioning end. It took Louis another four years, during which time he worked to reinforce the crusader states, before he was prepared to return to his kingdom. All of the chroniclers convey that this painful experience transformed Louis.142 He returned to Paris a repentant king, profoundly humble and noticeably more pious.143 At one point, he even wanted to resign from his responsibilities to become a friar!144 However, he ultimately came to accept his birthright and increasingly directed his efforts to improving the kingdom. What strikes scholars most about this phase of the reign is not so much the technical changes Louis effected in the government, because in many cases the reforms themselves were not radical, but rather his efforts to establish an honest, orderly, and just government that protected and promoted peace in the kingdom. Beginning in 1254, Louis issued a series of administrative and judicial reforms throughout France, with a significant concentration aimed at Paris.145 There Louis worked toward establishing greater public order and safety, and he appointed Étienne Boileau in the new position of prévot royal.146 Joinville claimed that the new ordinances and appointments so improved the kingdom that people flocked to Paris to live under Louis’ rule.147 Louis’ later patronage was an inherent part of this broader program. In every quartier, the inhabitants of Paris were surrounded by the king’s goodwill, charity, and glory, expressed physically in the city’s urban architecture and reiterated at its very center with the Sainte-Chapelle.

Conclusion

A

lthough the Middle Ages are considered a “pre-propagandistic” period, a range of media, from visual and diplomatic materials to rituals and liturgy, shaped political culture.1 Royal architecture defined the king in new ways when other forms of public representation were nonspecific and/or based on precedent.2 In thirteenthcentury Paris, the royal image in architecture constituted a form of self-representation, one that effectively manipulated public opinion. The nature of that constructed image changed significantly between the reigns of Philip Augustus and Louis IX. Consisting of castles, towers, and urban works, the architecture of Philip Augustus projected an image of the king as a secular leader engaged in the affairs of the earthly realm. Although Philip was a sacral king, anointed at the time of his coronation with the holy chrism sent by Saint-Rémi, he did not overtly proclaim special spiritual authority. As a secular king, his role was to defend his subjects and protect the church, and his architecture constructs a similar image. It maintained a distinct “visual division of power” from ecclesiastical prerogatives. It was not a mere reflection of the royal persona, indeed, not an unconscious extension of Philip’s ruling practices. His architecture’s limitation to functional and secular structures, and the consistency with which Philip built in this vein in locations where it served offensive as well as defensive functions, suggests that it was programmatic. As a form of institutional representation, it reflected the king’s temporal power in the French domain. In Paris, the architecture of Philip Augustus had profound effects on the city’s topography and its identity. The new walls he initiated tested customary rights and necessitated the formal designation of institutional possessions, which was only effected through arbitration and a treaty at the very end of his reign in 1222. Although the result initially benefited the bishop of Paris and other ecclesiastical institutions, the very act of drawing up the treaty reflects increasing royal prerogatives. As with his architecture, royal ­concessions on 195

196

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

this occasion may also have been a means to maintain the status quo for an anticipated advantage in the long term. With the walls and the new Louvre, Paris was fortified with a strong royal presence. Uniting the two banks of the Seine around the Île de la Cité, the walls enclosed the city. Philip encouraged construction within the walls, and this along with the increasing renown of the university and the expanding presence of the royal administration incited immigration. This rapid expansion necessitated adjustments within Paris, such as the parceling out of new parishes and the construction of new churches within them. Parisian Rayonnant architecture developed in this milieu. Like the new inhabitants of Paris, the motifs that came to define this architecture derived from northern France and adapted easily to different scales and sizes of artistic production. Decorative patterns, based on the use of tracery arches, trefoils, and quatrefoils, often arranged in mis-en-abyme, were copied from building to building, exchanged in the quarries, and reconfigured in countless ways. Ubiquitous in the city, this new metropolitan architecture, Rayonnant architecture, was Parisian before it became royal. At the same time, by the end of his reign, Philip had made Paris a de facto royal city. Young Louis IX and the regent Blanche of Castile ascended to the throne only three years after Philip’s death, and they built on his legacy. The early reign of Louis IX coincided with the flourishing of a new architectural style. It is through this new metropolitan architecture that Louis’ monarchy redefined itself. The Sainte-Chapelle found its place among both royal and ecclesiastical architectural practices. Its style fell within the visual repertoire of Parisian Rayonnant, and its location in the Palais de la Cité kept it within the monarchy. As a highly planned, sophisticated monument, the novel integration of a variety of local and distant historical sources within the royal complex generated new and powerful meanings that reverberated far beyond the palace gates. In addition to the chapel’s collection of important relics, its striking visual qualities and bold messages distinguished the Sainte-Chapelle from other structures like it and captured the attention of its spectators. Louis IX’s monumental reliquary chapel transformed standard modes of royal representation as established by his grandfather, Philip Augustus. With its highly decorative motifs – the multiple trefoils and quatrefoils, alternating gables and pinnacles, tracery and crockets  – the Sainte-Chapelle aestheticized the royal residence, altering the defensive and administrative functionality of the Palais de la Cité. Within the castle walls on the Île de la Cité, the Sainte-Chapelle indexed multiple buildings and ideas. Its name, its porch, its small size, and its reliquary function pointed to its predecessor in Constantinople, the Sacra Capella. The Sainte-Chapelle’s longitudinal form and double level built on the doppelkapellen, which translated locally into the bishop’s chapel type. Its spirited decoration of gables, crockets, and

Conclusion

pinnacles as well as trefoils and tracery recalled that of the great churches. These ­characteristics were not simply the continuation of standard practices for royal chapels, but rather meaningful choices. The selection of the bishop’s chapel type and ecclesiastical decoration appropriated Church imagery into the royal domain and thus constituted an assertion of sacral kingship. With its revision of international architectural prototypes, especially the Sacra Capella, the Sainte-Chapelle also asserted a translatio imperii in which Paris, France, and the Rex Christianissimus predominated. In the Sainte-Chapelle, the royal image no longer merely articulated the royal role as defensor populi; it projected the king as the divinely ordained ruler of Christendom. One reason the Sainte-Chapelle’s novelty has not been recognized in the past is because scholars have considered its architecture strictly from stylistic or typological perspectives. Broadening and shifting the analytic framework has revealed new insights. Instead of examining the building solely in terms of style (Gothic/Rayonnant) or type (chapel, church), this study has considered royal architecture as forms of royal self-representation or institutional imaging. In most academic literature, the examination of castles and churches remains distinct. But irrespective of their formal and typological differences, this monumental architecture stands above all as a form of materialized authority. With this perspective, one can observe topographies of power in the disposition of monumental architecture in cities and territories. This, in turn, provides insight into social and historical patterns as they are manifested in visual culture. The Sainte-Chapelle was deeply integrated into the social and political spheres. The notion of sacral kingship articulated in the chapel’s architecture was deeply rooted in biblical precedent. Its dimensions recreated the palace of Solomon. The interior decoration, particularly the stained glass, with its images of dynastic lineage, coronation, faith against the infidel, and justice, as well as the reception of the holy relics into France, fused past and present while elevating Louis IX as the successor of the kings of Judah. This building did not convey its position only visually; the notion of sacral kingship was also conveyed through the liturgy associated with feasts specially designed for the royal sanctuary. In them, sacred royalty was emphasized and by extension Louis’ kingship was exalted. Louis was heralded not only as Rex Christianissimus, but also as a new Solomon, while France was elevated as a holy land. By means of indulgences, people throughout Christendom were invited to celebrate kingship at the Sainte-Chapelle. Processions brought the chapel and its relics into direct communication with the city of Paris. The mendicants extended the celebration of the feast of the crown of thorns to other churches throughout Christendom. The acquisition of the crown of thorns gave the monarchy a physical justification for the claim to sacral kingship, and it was exhibited, often, as proof of Louis’ chosen status. The Sainte-Chapelle, while fulfilling its traditional

197

198

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

role as a palatine chapel celebrating the memory of Louis’ royal predecessors, was not built simply to hold the relic; it was made to publicize the concepts associated with it. The fact that the monarchy did not give the relic to SaintDenis for safekeeping as tradition dictated also reveals its value for the Palais de la Cité. The Sainte-Chapelle was built after the monarchy had experienced nearly two decades of difficulty and hardship.3 The early reign of Louis IX was a stark contrast to that of his illustrious predecessor, Philip Augustus. Philip’s image as a secular ruler no longer sufficed for the scale of problems Louis’ monarchy faced. The serendipitous reception of the relic and the construction of the chapel gave the monarch a means with which to correct these problems and to assert his rule. As a monument with a message, it hardly could have been more direct, although its visual program worked in complex ways, with centripetal and centrifugal force. Soaring from the Palais de la Cité into the skyline of Paris, the messages of its architecture were brought into communion with other sites in the city through liturgy and processions, while its style also harmonized with other buildings. With this sameness and difference, the Sainte-Chapelle turned Rayonnant into an architecture of prestige, one associated with royalty. It merged with metropolitan forms, but predominated over them. Given the political implications of the monument, the public representation of sacral kingship appears not merely as an opulent expression of piety but rather as an assertion of royal suzerainty. In the complex social hierarchy of thirteenth-century France, the monarchy was not the sole institution responsible for social governance, and ecclesiastical authority constantly tested the extent of royal power. The Sainte-Chapelle expressed through visual means what could not be written explicitly. It was a form of symbolic power; it supplanted international predecessors and integrated ecclesiastical forms, the Rayonnant style, and the bishop’s chapel within a palatine context, imparting new meaning to them. Suzerainty and its corollary, sovereignty, were highly debated in thirteenth-century Paris during the time that the Sainte-Chapelle staked its own position: with this reliquary chapel, God himself sanctioned the French king’s divine rule. Through multiple multimedia reinforcements, this powerful statement was made in no subtle terms. Because of its success, the need as well as the desire for such a statement waned as time progressed. The disappointing crusade of 1248–54 changed the course of Louis’ reign. Upon return from the Holy Land, Louis reformed his kingdom. Again, architecture was inherent to this project. In Paris, his patronage was directed almost exclusively toward new mendicant orders and charitable foundations. For the most part, the buildings that rose because of his support were simple structures with minimal decoration, but they were ubiquitous in the city. Louis’ charitable piety extended into nearly every urban quarter, bringing the royal presence in close contact with the people through

Conclusion

new institutional foundations and architecture. Paris became a sacred city with Louis as its patron saint. Whether royal architecture was a conscious form of propaganda can only be debated. Insofar as monumental architecture requires a significant amount of funding, a certain amount of thought goes into its planning and the statement it will make. With the visual division of institutional power, the architecture of Philip Augustus projected a single, consistent idea, and while having pragmatic uses, it also carried that strong royal image throughout the domains he conquered, which in turn worked to entrench his authority. The Sainte-Chapelle conveyed the notion of sacral kingship through the selective appropriation of diverse ecclesiastical forms and the integration of biblical themes within the palatine complex. Following the crusade, Louis’ later architecture had a programmatic quality; as a whole, the different buildings reflect a consistent effort toward Christian charity and humility. It is difficult to imagine that neither the king nor his subjects were unaware of the ideas royal architecture conveyed, particularly given the fact that architecture served as a symbolic foundation for cognitive processes.4 Moreover, throughout his life, Louis was acutely aware of his image. An anecdote relayed by Jean de Joinville reveals how Louis keenly recognized the importance of correct self-representation; after a heated exchange about the etiquette of dress at court between the seneschal and Robert of Sorbon, Louis took them aside and said, [Y]ou ought to dress well, and in a manner suited to your condition, so that your wives will love you all the more and your men have more respect for you. For, as a wise philosopher has said, our clothing and our armor ought to be of such a kind that men of mature experience will not say that we have spent too much on them, nor younger men say we have spent too little.5

Louis’ sensibility toward correct representation and self-image continued even after the changes made in his governance following his crusade of 1248–54.6 His taking to simple clothes and even a hair shirt caused widespread consternation, eventually causing him to reconsider and reject the practice in favor of standard forms of royal self-presentation. That Louis IX became a master manipulator of public opinion is clear to the very last, for he was canonized soon after his death. Some may see the emphasis on the political expediency of royal architecture in this study as a challenge to traditional assessments of Louis’ piety or the medieval Christian worldview in general. Louis lived in a world defined by the Church, to which he and his family were particularly devout. Isabella, his sister, joined the orders when she was nineteen, and Blanche of Castile was renowned for her charity and patronage. Yet there are indications that this world was more complex. William Chester Jordan was the first to illuminate the exponential shift in Louis’ behavior from the ­beginning to the end

199

200

The Sainte-Chapelle and the Construction of Sacral Monarchy

of his reign. Le Goff’s biography of Louis furthers this conclusion by showing that his environment generated and shaped his sanctity as much as the man himself adopted this role. Recently, Hans-Joachim Schmidt has written that Louis’ devotion became a means to legitimize the Capetian dynasty.7 The aim here is less to assess Louis’ devotion than to explain how his architecture existed as a form of institutional representation, irrespective of its assigned function, and how it operated in ways that were ultimately beneficial for the monarchy. By altering topography and experience in space, this architecture effected changes in social patterns and thought. The fact that royal architecture under Louis IX had underlying political, propagandistic value does not negate it as an act of devotion or its religious function. Above all, Louis’ architecture promoted his sanctity, which, irrespective of the reasons for it, issued from determination as much as devotion. On a broader level, this book has examined the way the visual forms associated primarily with the Church during the twelfth century became additionally encoded with the image of the king and his kingdom during the thirteenth century. After all, the architecture we describe today as “Gothic” was not known in the later Middle Ages as paradigmatically Christian, but in some cases literally as opus francigenum, French work.8 If the importance of this Latin phrase has been exaggerated, its very existence nevertheless informs us that something about this architecture did come to be associated, at least by some people, with the French kingdom. This happened first in France with the integration of royal themes into ecclesiastical architecture, such as at Saint-Denis and Reims. But the association was secured by royal integration of the ecclesiastical style such that the two were no longer distinguished, and the Sainte-Chapelle exists as a paradigm of this. The architectural style of thirteenth-century Paris also became closely identified with royalty, both because it developed in the city when royal power began to assert itself definitively and because royal patronage was represented through this style throughout Paris. Gothic architecture and the royal image became so closely associated by the eighteenth century that buildings like the Sainte-Chapelle, identified with the oppressive collusion of church and state in the Ancien régime, were punished by Revolutionary hammers. If the chapel has been radically transformed since the thirteenth century, its meaning has never been entirely lost, for in the nineteenth century, the government-sponsored restoration recreated the monument as a paragon of that which was to be “French.”

Appendix 1

opo Who Devised the Sainte-Chapelle?

T

he political precepts underlying the Sainte-Chapelle raise the question of who in the royal entourage was actually responsible for the chapel’s inception and/or ideological program. In recent years, speculation has turned to Blanche de Castile although no publication has outright promoted her as a driving force in its conception.1 The documents offer limited insight because they only cite the official patron. In the case where foundation documents refer to Blanche of Castile as this person, there is little doubt that she stood at the basis of the initiative. Such is true for her celebrated but lost monuments at Lys and Maubuisson.2 But when the documents cite Louis IX as founder, there is perhaps room for conjecture. This is particularly true for the period during which Blanche was regent, which lasted officially from 1226 to 1234 or 1235, when Louis’ majority would have been recognized.3 But even after that turning point she continued to play an important role as counselor, and the degree of separation between mother and son in the domain of royal decision making remains unclear, at least until Louis took the oath to go on crusade and started preparations for that endeavor.4 Even after Blanche of Castile died in 1252, many of Louis’ later foundations were made with specific reference to her, while the ascription to the memory of his royal forefathers remained generic. Given the closeness of mother and son, and the impossibility of distinguishing their individual actions without more explicit references in the documents, royal architectural patronage during the early reign of Louis IX may best be understood as a joint enterprise. Royal patronage of the Cistercians and the Mendicants, for example, derives from Blanche’s support of these groups while Louis was still a boy. Royaumont is a well-known example. The documents clearly ascribe the foundation of the Cistercian abbey to Louis, and diverse sources explain his involvement in the construction project as well as his long-lasting affection for it.5 Yet the foundation was also made in relation to Louis VIII’s testament, which specified that the royal crowns and gems be sold to provide the funding for a Victorine establishment. Scholars 201

202

Appendix 1

see the decision to ignore those terms and to ­associate the foundation with the Cistercian order as Blanche’s predilection.6 Eventually Royaumont became a royal necropolis for Louis’ family, although this too is often understood as Blanche’s initiative, even though she chose to be interred at Maubuisson. Despite her involvement at Royaumont, the regent’s actions toward this establishment did not run against her son’s will; rather they seem to have nurtured it. For even after Louis’ majority, the royal purse continued to donate generously to Royaumont.7 The same questions concerning Blanche’s involvement at Royaumont arise in relation to the Sainte-Chapelle, even though the earliest date at which it could have been initiated, 1237 (and more likely, 1239), still succeeded Louis’ majority in 1234. The association arises from the fact that Blanche’s coat of arms, the castles of Castile, proliferates alongside the French monarchy’s fleurde-lys throughout the chapel, particularly in the glass above one of the two royal niches in the third bay, as if to designate that space as her own. Moreover, the Sainte-Chapelle employed both Cistercians and Mendicants to perform the rites within it on special occasions, and Louis’ own proclivity toward these orders was undoubtedly related to Blanche’s wholehearted support of them. This question as to whether or not Blanche had a major role in the planning of the Sainte-Chapelle cannot be proven definitively without additional documentation. While it is true that traditionally queens were often founders of royal chapels  – Queen Constance, wife of Louis VI, provides an earlier example of generous royal female patronage of royal chapels – those in the Palais de la Cité were founded by kings, and the documents squarely assign the Sainte-Chapelle’s foundation to Louis IX.8 Regardless of the possibilities, the documents assign the role to the king, implying that the chapel should be seen as the monarch’s will and action. More recently, scholars have begun to speculate on the role of Gautier Cornut, the archbishop of Sens, in the development of the political ideology associated with the chapel.9 After all, it was Cornut who wrote the history of the relics that provided the textual basis for the liturgy associated with the Feast of the Relics celebrated from 1240 onward. It is true that Cornut was a close advisor to the monarchy since the reign of Philip Augustus, and he officiated the marriage of Louis IX to Marguerite de Provence in 1234. He was originally elected bishop of Paris in 1220, but Pope Honorius III gave the position to William of Seignelay, and instead assigned Cornut to the archbishopric of Sens in 1221. The distance did not seem to hinder his close relation to the king. In any case, with the writing of the Historia, it was clearly Cornut, in complete accord with monarchic ideals, who first translated the royal implications of the crown of thorns into text. Whether he singlehandedly devised the broader royalist agenda of the crown of thorns is impossible to ascertain, and it is most likely that a group of royal advisors including Gautier Cornut, Louis IX, and Blanche of Castile developed the chapel’s powerful political messages.10

Appendix 2

opo The Donjons of Philip Augustus

Location

Source

1 2 2 4 5 6 7

Bourges Issoudun Dun-le-Roi Cléry-sur-Somme Janville Gournay-en-Bray La Ferté St. Samson

Acts no. 257, 1189 (Delaborde) (chapel founded in tower) Budget 1202–3 Budget 1202–3 Budget 1202–3 Budget 1202–3 Budget 1202–3 Budget 1202–3

8

Paris Louvre

Acts no. 854, 1204 (Delisle), Acts no. 1187, 1210 (Delisle)

9 10 11 12 13 14

Cappy Corbeil Laon Loudun Orléans Montargis

15 16 17

Péronne Pont de l’Arche Villeneuve le Roi (sur Yonne)

Register A, f 93 r (between 1204–12) Register A, f 94 r Register A, f 92 r Register A, f 92 v (one “tournelle” of four) Register A, f 94 r Register A, f 92 v (“tournelle” mentioned), plan by du Cerceau Register A, f 66 v Register A f 93 r (single “tournelle” mentioned) Register A, f 94 r

18 19 20 21

Montdidier Ribemont Sully-sur-Loire Compiègne (Tour de Beaurigard)

Register C, f 2 v (after 1212) Register C, f 93 r Register C, f 17 and Acts no. 1802 (Delisle), March 1218 Baldwin cites “diverse evidence” Register C, f 2 v

22

Dourdan

Acts no. 2144, 1222 (Delisle)

23 24 25

Chinon (Tour de Coudray) Falaise (Tour Talbot) Gisors (Tour du Prisonnier)

Archaeological/lithic evidence Archaeological/lithic evidence Archaeological/lithic evidence

203

204

Appendix 2 Location

Source

26 27 28 29

Lillebonne Rouen (Tour Jeanne d’Arc) Verneuil (Tour Grise) Vernon (Tour d’Archives)

Archaeological/lithic evidence Archaeological/lithic evidence Archaeological/lithic evidence Archaeological/lithic evidence

30 31 32

Beauvais Charlieu Sens

Baldwin cites “diverse evidence” Mesqui cites “at limits of the royal domain” Châtelain, 1991, cites “iconographic evidence”

Appendix 3

opo Dates and Documents

I

f the documents related to the Sainte-Chapelle leave a number of ­questions open, they nevertheless convey valuable information concerning the chapel’s relative chronology as well as its purpose, function, and organization. The first royal foundation, dated to January 1246, makes clear that the crown of thorns was one of the principal raisons d’être for the chapel. The preamble states that “Louis founded and built the chapel within the walls of his house in Paris for the benefit of his soul, the memory of Louis VIII, Blanche, and his other illustrious royal ancestors, as well as in honor of God and the holy crown of thorns.” It goes on to state that the crown of thorns, the holy cross, and many other precious relics were placed in the chapel for special veneration. While the first clause of the preamble follows standard protocol for royal foundations, the mention of the crown of thorns is extraordinary, and it highlights this relic as having a special position in the decision to found the chapel.1 Over all the other relics, the crown of thorns was particularly fundamental to this building, and this is essential for understanding its visual and ideological program. Because of this close relation with the relic, planning for the SainteChapelle could have begun as early as 1237 with the discussion of the acquisition of the crown of thorns from the Latin emperor of Constantinople.2 However, construction did not begin until after the crown had safely arrived in Paris. Gautier Cornut, the archbishop of Sens who translated the relic with the king into the city on Friday, August 19, 1239, wrote that the crown of thorns was first deposited in Saint-Nicolas in the Palais de la Cité.3 But precisely when construction on the Sainte-Chapelle began is unknown. On October 3 that same year, a payment was recorded in the royal accounts for the transfer of the crown to Saint-Denis.4 While this source has been understood as a post quem for the commencement of the Sainte-Chapelle because no further mention of Saint-Nicolas in the Palais de la Cité appears after that date, the translation could have been made in honor of the Feast of Saint Denis on October 9 and may be unrelated.5 Whether the crown actually 205

206

Appendix 3

went to Saint-Denis at all is questionable, because there is no mention of its presence in the abbey church and no record of it returning to the Palais de la Cité. However, it is not inconceivable that it left the palace, given that Saint-Denis guarded the royal regalia and already possessed a small relic of the crown of thorns.6 Two more groups of relics arrived in 1241 and 1242, and scholars have conjectured that the royal chapel was not begun until after this date.7 However, this assumes that the relic collection had to be complete before the decision could be made to construct a new chapel, and yet these other relics do not appear to have been of primary importance in the foundation document.8 The collection of relics for the Sainte-Chapelle was, after all, an ongoing project. Moreover, Gérard of Saint-Quentin, who wrote a history of the relics after Gautier Cornut in the early 1240s, explained that Louis decided to build a chapel not long after the reception of the crown of thorns, but before the acquisition of the other relics.9 Matthew Paris relayed in 1241 that the king “ordered the construction” of the reliquary chapel where the relics would later be kept, suggesting that work might have already begun.10 He also mentioned that the pope had granted an indulgence to all those who entered the chapel in Paris.11 Historians (beginning with François Gébelin) interpreted several documents from 1244 as yet another post quem for the construction of the SainteChapelle.12 In May and June of that year, Pope Innocent IV granted privileges and indulgences to the chapel, followed by a second series of indulgences from Bishops William of Paris and Adam of Senlis in October of that same year.13 The privileges and indulgences would have generated money for the Sainte-Chapelle, so the most compelling argument for a 1244 start date based on this evidence is that these benefits were intended to finance (in part) its construction, as occurred often for cathedrals and other churches. If Matthew Paris’ entry was indeed written in 1241, then the indulgences he mentioned could have been used for the same purpose. These indulgences identify the foundation and the endowment as the king’s “generous contribution,” suggesting that the money obtained from alms given with the indulgences would have been supplemental. Moreover, Daniel Weiss has suggested that the relative cost of the chapel, estimated at about £40,000 total, would have required an output of only about £5,000 per year, a relatively modest imposition on the annual revenue of about £235,000.14 Finally, the Sainte-Chapelle’s foundation documents of 1246 and 1248 detail how offerings from masses were to be given to the chaplains, so they likely served this purpose from their inception. These 1244 documents also refer to the “sumptuousness” of the monument and mention that its “workmanship surpass[es] the materials,” possibly indicating a level of completion. Even if the phrase from Ovid’s Metamorphosis

Appendix 3

became a standard trope for many buildings in the Middle Ages, indeed, also applied to Abbot Suger’s chevet in Saint-Denis, it was not entirely tautological. “Opere superante materiam” was very likely copied from the initial (royal) request for the indulgences to the pope, the reference to which was mentioned in the bulls. At the very least, the phrase conveys that the chapel was to be highly decorated. However, if construction of the chapel had already commenced in 1239, the documents could be interpreted as an indication that enough of the building had been completed by that time to see its workmanship and to allow for the indulgences to be received on site itself, perhaps in the lower chapel. In addition to supplying information concerning the chapel’s decoration, the bulls make clear that the Sainte-Chapelle was not conceived in direct relation to the upcoming crusade, at least not initially. They were issued prior to the moment when Louis IX swore to go on crusade, during his illness in December 1244.15 The chapel and its indulgences were initiated independently of the crusade, although that theme may have been integrated into it at any time over the course of its construction. This is an important point to remember when considering the initial function, iconography, and ideological program of the Sainte-Chapelle. As mentioned previously, the first foundation for the college of the SainteChapelle was issued in January 1246. With it, a second set of indulgences was bestowed on the chapel.16 In addition to explaining the reason for the foundation, the document prescribed the administrative organization and the payments for the personnel. It detailed the amount of candles to be used in the services and indicated their source of funding. Further, it instructed that the new chapel’s decoration and relics be maintained, detailing that a chaplain (or subchaplain) must sleep in the chapel nightly to do so. It also gave the king the right to assign new chaplains. The administrative detail outlined in the document suggests that the Sainte-Chapelle would be operating imminently, and again, if construction had begun in 1239, it is possible that much of its architecture (if not necessarily its glass and other decoration) was complete by this time. Yet the official dedication for the chapel did not take place at the same time as this initial foundation. It was postponed to coincide with events arranged around Louis’ departure for the crusade in 1248.17 Thus by this time the Sainte-Chapelle had become officially associated with this king’s crusade, as Daniel Weiss and others have argued. The official dedication of the Sainte-Chapelle took place on April 26, 1248, two months before Louis’ departure for the Holy Land. Dedicatory inscriptions, no longer extant, were written on the south sides of the upper and lower chapels.18 Yet another series of indulgences was issued shortly thereafter.19 These documents do not explicitly reveal the degree of completion of the chapel, but if construction had begun in 1239, with ample royal funding and incentive, it is certainly possible that the architecture could

207

208

Appendix 3

have been completed by this time. Although large for a chapel, it was not as expansive as a cathedral, nor was it subject to as many of the bureaucratic or logistical problems that often delayed ecclesiastical building. Moreover, in the 1230s, with the experience gained from construction of the great churches at Chartres, Reims, and Amiens, buildings of all sizes were completed much more quickly and efficiently.20 The chapel’s decoration would not have needed to be finished for it to be operational, as we know from cathedral chantiers where services often proceeded despite the fact that they were under construction. On June 12 that same year, Louis left Paris for the crusade. In August, from his departure point at Aigues-Mortes, he issued a second foundation charter for the Sainte-Chapelle, which slightly altered the organization established by the 1246 document.21 Citing his special devotion to the chapel and his love of the universal Church, Louis enlarged the administration to twentyone people. Whether every decorative detail at the chapel was complete by this time remains open to conjecture, but these minor transformations suggest that by the time Louis went on crusade in 1248, the chapel was operational for all practical purposes. Thus the documentary evidence suggests that the Sainte-Chapelle was conceived after 1237, although construction probably did not begin until after the crown of thorns arrived in Paris in August 1239. With a formal dedication and second foundation in 1248, it took less than a decade to build and become operational. The Sainte-Chapelle thus affords rare insight into the architecture of circa 1240–50, for few buildings with such secure dates still exist in their original form.

The Documents

Presented here in chronological order are the foundation documents for Saint-Germain en Laye, the privileges and indulgences granted to the SainteChapelle, as well as the foundation documents for the Sainte-Chapelle, each followed by translations into English from Latin. Formulaic repetitions among the same types of documents (foundations and indulgences) have been omitted and signaled in brackets, while new information has been retained.22 Foundation of Saint-Germain en Laye (June, 1238) Transcribed in Layettes du Trésor des Chartes, II, 384, no. 2727.

[Simon] Columbensis abbas et ejusdem loci conventus notum faciunt quod, cum excellentissimus dominus suus Ludovicus rex Francorum, loco capellae quam Philippus rex ejus avus in domo regia S. Germani, sub

Appendix 3

invocatione B. Mariae, anno 1223, mense aprili, fundaverat, aliam exstruxerit capellam materia et artificio venustiorem, et cultum divinum ibidem pariter ampliare volens, loco monachi Columbensis qui in dicta capella missam et vesperas celebrat, proprium instituerit capellanum ibi missam quotidie celebraturum, suum ad hoc assensum praebuisse ea conditione ut praefatus Columbensis conventus quatordecim libratas annui redditus sibi a Philippo rege pro dicta capella assignatas, conservet et praefatus monachus Columbensis officium, quod in eadem capella celebrabat, ad capellam S. Egidii in ecclesia S. Germani singulis diebus sit celebraturus. – Quod ut perpetue firmitatis robur obtineat, presentes litteras sigillorum nostrorum munimine fecimus communiri. Actum anno Domini millesimo cc tricesimo octavo, mense junio. Simon, abbot of Coulombs and the monastery of the same place, let it be known that, since their most excellent lord Louis, king of the Franks, in place of the chapel that King Philip, his grandfather, had founded under the name of Blessed Mary in the month of April, 1223, in his royal house of Saint Germain, has built another chapel, more beautiful in material and workmanship, and [since he], desiring to expand equally divine worship there, in place of the monk of Coulombs who celebrates mass and vespers in the said chapel has instituted a designated chaplain to celebrate daily mass there, they have offered their assent to this on this condition that the aforesaid monastery of Coulombs should keep the fourteen pounds annual rent made over by King Philip for the said chapel, and the aforesaid monk of Coulombs should celebrate daily the office that he used to celebrate in that same chapel in the chapel of Saint Egidius in the church of Saint Germain. So that this decision should maintain the vigor of perpetual strength, we have reinforced the present letter with the authority of our seal. Done in the year of the Lord 1238, the month of June.

Privileges Granted to the Sainte-Chapelle

Papal Bull (May 24, 1244, Lateran) AN L 619. 2 Transcribed (from a copy) in Morand, “Pièces justificatives,” 2-3. Cited in Elie Berger, ed., Les registres d’Innocent IV (Paris, 1884–1921), no.  717, and Bernard Barbiche, ed., Les actes pontificaux originaux des Archives nationales de Paris, I, Index actorum romanorum pontificum ab Innocentio III ad Martinum V electum (Cittá del Vaticano, 1975), no. 493.

Innocentius episcopus servus servorum dei carissimo in Christo filio Regi Francorum illustri salutem et apostolicam benedictionem. Inter alia que tue celstitudini a divina gratia tuis suffragantibus meritis sunt concessa, illud prae sua magnitudine singulare ac precipuum nec immerito reputamus,

209

210

Appendix 3

quod te dominus in sua corona spinea, cuius custodiam eius ineffabili ­dispositione, tue commisit excellentie coronavit. Cum igitur sicut ex parte tua fuit propositum coram nobis, capellam Parisiis infra septa domus regie opere superante materiam ut ibidem predicta corona sanctissima ac alie pretiosse reliquie quas de ligno crucis, et aliis sacris habere dignosceris, sub veneranda ­custodia conserventur, tuis sumptibus duxeris construendam, ipsamque deputandis ibi ministris ydoneis de bonis propiis dotare proponas. Nos volentes ut eadem capella speciali gaudeat privilegio libertatis ­devotionis tue precibus inclinati ut nullus in capellam ipsam vel personas inibi constitutas aut constituendas excommunicationis suspensionis vel interdicti sententias absque speciali mandato sedis apostolicae faciente plenam de hac indulgentia mentionem promulgare valeat auctoritate presentum indulgemus; quas si per praesumptionem cujusquam promulgari forsan contigerit, eadem authoritate decernimus irritas et inanes. Nulli ergo omnino hominum liceat hanc paginam nostrae concessionis infringere, vel ei ausu temerario contraire. Si  quis autem hoc attentare praesumpserit, indignationem omnipotentes Dei, et beatorum Petri et Pauli apostolorum ejus se noverit incursurum. Datum Laterani nono calendas Junii anno 1243, pontificatus nostri anno primo. Bishop Innocent, servant of the servants of God, to his most dear son in Christ, the illustrious king of France, greetings and the papal blessing. Among other things granted to your highness by divine grace for your deserving acts, we consider this one thing singular and outstanding for its importance, that the Lord has crowned you in His crown of thorns, the guardianship of which He with his ineffable management has entrusted to your excellency. Accordingly as it has been disclosed in my presence on your behalf that you decreed a chapel be built in Paris at your expense, within the royal residence, in which the workmanship surpasses the material, so that in the same place the aforesaid most holy crown and other most precious relics, which you are known to possess, from the wood of the cross and other holy items, may be kept safe there under venerable custody, and you proposed to endow it with servants of good character. We therefore, wishing that the same chapel should enjoy a special privilege of freedom for your devotion, and being persuaded by your prayers, do indulgently grant by the authority of the present document that no person is to have the power to make known sentences of excommunication, suspension or interdiction in respect of the same Chapel, or rather persons who have been, or are to be, appointed there, without a special mandate from the apostolic See which makes detailed mention of this indulgence. But if perchance such things should happen to be made known by the presumption of some person, we decree by the same authority that they are null and void. Therefore let no man be permitted to infringe the concession of ours set down in this document nor act against it in some rash act of foolhardiness. But if anyone should attempt this he should know that he will incur the anger of almighty God and of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul. This document was issued at the Lateran on the twenty-fourth of May, in the year 1243, in the first year of our pontificate.23

Appendix 3

Indulgences Granted to the Sainte-Chapelle

Papal Bull (June 3, 1244, Lateran) Paris, AN L 619.5. Original, parchment, 300/332 mm × 195/198 mm (fold 83/79 mm), red and yellow silk thread (seal lost). Cited in Barbiche, Les actes pontificaux originaux, I, no. 496.

Innocentius episcopus servus servorum dei carissimo in Christo filio Regi Francorum illustri salutem et apostolicam benedictionem. Inter alia que tue celsitudini a divina gratia tuis suffragantibus meritis sunt concessa, illud prae sua magnitudine singulare ac precipuum nec immerito reputamus, quod te dominus in sua corona spinea, cuius custodiam eius ineffabili dispositione tue commisit excellentie coronavit. Cum igitur sicut ex parte tua fuit propositum coram nobis, capellam parisius infra septa domus regie opere superante materiam, ut ibidem predicta corona sanctissima, ac alie pretiose reliquie, quas de ligno crucis, et aliis sacris habere dignosceris, sub veneranda custodia conserventur, tuis sumptibus duxeris construendam, ipsamque deputandis ibi ministris ydoneis de bonis propriis dotare proponas. Nos cupientes ut eadem capella congruis honoribus frequentetur, omnibus vere penitentibus et confessis, qui capellam ipsam venerabiliter visitarint in die susceptionis predictarum sanctarum reliquiarum singulis annis annum unum, et octo diebus sequentibus centum dies, necnon et quolibet anno in die sancto passionis domini annum unum, et in festo etiam translationis sancte corone spinee dominis annum unum, per singularas quoque ebdomadas omnibus sexta feria, quadraginta dies de iniuncta sibi penitentia misercorditer relaxamus. Datum laterani iii nonas junii pontificatus nostri anno primo. Bishop Innocent, servant of the servants of God, to his most dear son in Christ, the illustrious king of the Franks, greetings and the papal blessings. Among other things granted to your highness by divine grace for your deserving acts, we consider this one thing singular and outstanding for its importance, that the Lord has crowned you in His crown of thorns, the guardianship of which He with his ineffable management has entrusted to your excellency. Accordingly as it has been disclosed in my presence on your behalf that you decreed a chapel be built in Paris at your expense, within the royal residence, in which the workmanship surpasses the material, so that in the same place the aforesaid most holy crown and other most precious relics, which you are known to possess, from the wood of the cross and other holy items, may be kept safe there under venerable custody, and you proposed to endow it with servants of good character. We, desiring that this chapel be attended by suitable honors, for all truly penitent and confessed people who reverently visit this chapel on the Day of the Reception of the aforesaid Holy Relics each year, mercifully remit one year from penance imposed on them, and during the following octave, a hundred days, and for each year on the day of the Holy Passion of the Lord [Good Friday], one year also, and on the Feast of the Translation of the

211

212

Appendix 3

Crown of Thorns of the Lord, one year, and also for each week for all people [who do so] on the sixth day [Friday], forty days. This document was issued at the Lateran on the third of June, in the first year of our pontificate.

Episcopal Bull (October 2, 1244, Paris) Paris, AN L 619.6. Original, parchment, 24.0/24.5 cm × 15.5/14.9 cm, two seals: (1) seal of the bishop of Senlis in green wax joined by parchment, (2) lost.

Guillermus parisiensis et Adam silvanectensis dei gratia episcopus. Universis presentes litteras inspecturis eternam in divino salutamus. Noverit universitas cum nos litteras domini pape non abolitas non cancellatas nec in aliqua sui parte viciatas inspexisse sub hac forma. [Innocenntis episcopus servus servorum dei . . . Dat Lateran iii non junii pontificatus nostri anno primo]. Nos vero in huius inspectionis testimonium sigilla nostra presenti transcripto duximus apponenda. Datum anno dominni Millesimo, ducentesimo, quadragesimo quarto. Dominica proxima post festum beati michaelis. William and Adam, bishops by the grace of God of Paris and Senlis, send everlasting greetings in the Lord to all who will view the present document. All men are to know that the document from our lord the Pope has not been revoked or cancelled, nor rendered defective in some part, and we have viewed it in these terms [. . .] Indeed we considered that as evidence of this inspection our seals should be set on the present transcript. Issued in the year of the lord one thousand two hundred forty four, the Sunday after the feast of Saint Michael.

First Foundation of the Sainte-Chapelle (January, 1246, Paris) Paris, K 32.2 (AE/II/2406). Original, parchment, 61.5 × 44.5 cm, green seal with red silk thread. Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, “Pièces justificatives,” 4–7.

In nomine sanctae et indivduae Trinitatis, amen. Ludovicus Dei gratiâ Francorum rex. Notum facimus universis tàm praesentibus quàm futuris praesentem paginam inspecturis, quòd nos pro salute animae nostrae, et pro remedio animarum inclytae recordationis regis Ludovici, genitoris nostri, clarissimae Dominae et genitricis nostrae Blanchae reginae, et omnium antecessorum nostrorum, in honorem Dei omnipotentis, et sacrosanctae coronae spineae Domini nostri Jesu-Christi, fundavimus et aedificavimus infra septa domus nostrae Parisiensis, Domino concedente, capellam, in quâ eadem sacrosancta corona Domini, crux sancta, et aliae quamplures pretiosae reliquiae

Appendix 3

repositae continentur, quae ut divinae laudis obsequio jugiter honorentur, et idem locus in perpetuum debito et devoto divini cultûs servitio frequentetur, volumus, statuimus et ordinamus, ut in eâdem capella sint quinque presbyteri principales, sive magistri capellani, computato illo qui capellae veteris beneficium obtinebat, et duo matricularii in diaconatûs vel subdiaconatûs ordine constituti. Quilibet autem illorum quinque principalium capellanorum tenebitur secum habere unum presbyterum subcapellanum, et unum clericum diaconum vel subdiaconum existentem. In beneficium autem et sustentationem eorundem quinque principalium capellanorum, damus eisdem et concedimus centum libras Parisienses annui redditus, unicuique videlicet viginti libras pro corpore capellaniae; quas ­centum libras volumus eos percipere Parisiis in castelleto de praepositurâ nostrâ Parisiensi singulis annis, duobus terminis, videlicet medietatem ad festum Ascensionis Domini, et aliam medietatem ad festum omnium Sanctorum, quousque easdem centum libras annui redditûs eisdem assignemus alibi competenter. Praedictis etiam matriculariis damus pro beneficio triginta libras Parisienses annui redditûs, unicuique videlicet quindecim libras annui redditûs, quas similiter ipsi percipient in castelleto de praepositurâ nostrâ Parisiensi, medietatem videlicet ad festum Ascensionis Domini, et aliam medietatem ad festum omnium Sanctorum, quousque eis eundem redditum alibi competenter fecerimus assignari. De consensu quoque Matthaei presbyteri, qui praedictae veteris capellae nostrae beneficium obtinebat, cui spontaneus cessit et renunciavit expressè, volumus et concedimus quòd totum illud beneficium cum omnibus ejus proventibus, oblationibus ad manus presbyterorum in missis venientibus, et emolumentis, sicut in litteris clarae memoriae regis Ludovici atavi nostri, et regis Ludovici proavi nostri pleniùs continetur, cedat in augmentum quinque capellanarum praedictarum, et ut inter praedictos quinque principales capellanos aequaliter dividantur. Ad haec volumus et statuimus quòd praeter redditus supradictos praedicti principales capellani et subcapellani, matricularii, et clerici capellanorum praedicti, divinis officiis insistentes, percipiant distributiones inferius annotatas. Pro festis sive privatis diebus percipiet unusquisque principalium capellanorum duodecim denarios, videlicet ad matutinas sex denarios, ad horam primam, tertiam, majorem missam et sextam tres denarios, ad nonam, vesperas et completorium tres denarios etiamsi de praedictis horis in die omiserit duas horas: distributiones tamen matutinarum non percipiet, nisi qui matutinis praesens erit, vel qui infirmus fuerit vel minutus : quod idem de missa majori et vesperis statuimus observandum, eisdem quoque diebus privatis quilibet subcapellanus habebit quator denarios, videlicet ad matutinas duos, in horis de manè cum missâ majori unum, et in horis serotinis unum, sub conditione praedictâ. Similiter et eisdem diebus quilibet de praedictis clericis capellanorum praedictorum habebit tres denarios, videlicet unum ad matutinas, et duos

213

214

Appendix 3

ad omnes horas diei cum majori missâ. Diebus dominicis et in festis singulis novem lectionum percipiet quilibet principalium capellanorum praedictorum sexdecim denarios, videlicet ad matutinas octo denarios, ad supradictas horas de manè cum missâ majori quatuor denarios, et ad horas de serò quatuor denarios, omissione duarum horarum non obstante, sicut superius est expressum. Singuli subcapellanuorum habebunt sex denarios, videlicet in matutinis quatuor denarios, et ad horas de manè cum missâ majori unum, et ad horas de serò unum. Singuli quoque de praedictis clericis capellanorum habebunt quatuor denarios, videlicet ad matutinas duos denarios, ad horas de manè cum missâ majori unum, et ad horas de serò unum. In festis quae cum semiduplo celebrantur, habebit quilibet principalis capellanus decem et octo denarios, videlicet ad matutinas octo denarios, et ad horas de manè cum missâ majori quinque, et ad horas de serò quinque. Sub-capellanus habebit octo denarios, videlicet ad matitinas quatuor denarios, ad horas de manè cum missâ majori duos denarios, et ad horas de serò duos denarios. Clericus habebit sex denarios, videlicet ad matutinas quatuor denarios, ad horas de manè cum missâ majori unum denarium, et ad horas de serò unum denarium. In festis duplicibus habebit quilibet principalis capellanus duos solidos, videlicet ad matutinas duodecim denarios, ad horas de manè cum missâ majori sex denarios, et ad horas de serò sex denarios. Subcapellanus habebit decem denarios, videlicet ad matutinas sex denarios, ad horas di manè cum missâ majori duos denarios, et ad horas de serò duos denarios. Clericus habebit octo denarios, videlicet at matutinas quatuor denarios, ad horas di manè cum missâ majori duos denarios, et ad horas de serò duos denarios. In festis annualibus percipiet quilibet principalis capellanus tres solidos, videlicet ad matutinas duos solidos, ad horas de manè cum missâ majori sex denarios, et ad horas di serò sex denarios. Subcapellanus habebit quatuordecim denarios, videlicet ad matitinas octo denarios, ad horas de manè cum missâ majori tres denarios, et ad horas di serò tres denarios. Clericus habebit decem denarios, videlicet ad matutinas sex denarios, ad horas de manè cum missâ majori duos denarios, et ad horas de serò duos denarios. In iis tamen omnibus intelligimus esse salvum, ut nulli eorum qui distributiones debent percipere supradictas, omisso unius vel duarum horarum omni die non obsit quoad percipiendas distributiones praedictas, dùm tamen Missae et vesperarum officia nullatenùs intermittant. Distributiones autem matutinales, ut suprà dictum est, nullus habebit, nisi praesens fuerit in matutinis, vel qui minutus fuerit vel infirmus. In distributionibus quoque praedictis omnibus et singulis matricularios subcapellanis volumus esse pares. Omnes autem distributiones praedictas volumus fieri de obventionibus et oblationibus quae annuatim fient in capellâ praedictâ, exceptis illis oblationibus quae fient in missis ad manus sacerdotum; quae oblationes erunt principalium capellanorum, sicut superiùs est expressum.

Appendix 3

Luminare quoque ipsius capellae, videlicet tres cereos continuè nocte et die in bacillis argenteis ante sanctuaria et  altare ardentes, quorum quilibet tres libras ponderabit ad minùs; et aliud luminare, sicut à nobis est ordinatum, fieri volumus successivè per capellanos principales praedictos, videlicet ab uno quoque ipsorum vice suâ, de obventionibus et oblationibus praedictis cum additione sexaginta solidorum annui redditûs, qui ad faciendum luminare praedictae capellae veteris, prout in supranotatis praedecessorum nostrorum litteris continetur, fuerunt ab antiquo concessi. De ipsis obventionibus et oblationibus verrerias ejusdem capellae refici et repari volumus quotiens opus fuerìt, et in bono statu servari. Si quid verò de obventionibus et oblationibus completis huiusmodi residuum fuerit, nos illud voluntari et ordinationi nostrae, quoad vixerimus, volumus fideliter reservari. Volumus insuper et ordinamus quòd quilibet praedictorum quinque principalium capellanorum cùm deserviet in ordine vicis suae, qualibet nocte dormiat cum matriculariis in capellâ praedictâ, ut circa sanctarum reliquiarum custodiam juges excubiae perseverent. Ut autem eis ex hoc aliquod temporale emolumentum accrescat, volumus ut ille capellanus qui vice suâ jacuerit in capellâ, pro singulis noctibus percipiat in matutinis tres denarios plus quam caeteri capellani. Liceat autem cuilibet principali capellano, quòd si legitimum habeat impedimentum, subcapellanus ipsius vices ejus suppleat, quantùm ad ecclesiasticum officium faciendum in ordine vicis suae, et jacendum in capellâ de nocte, et percipiat in distributionibus quantùm perciperet principalis capellanus dominus suus, si in officio illo personaliter deserviret. Super liberatione verò quam Matthaeus quondam capellanus capellae nostrae veteris, nobis sive reginâ vel prole regiâ praesentibus in palatio nostro Parisiensi, percipere consuevit, ita duximus ordinandum. Quòd idem Matthaeus, qui est unus de principalibus capellanis, percipiet liberationem quamdiù vixerit, in officio capellaniae praedictae; qui cùm decesserit, vel capellanus capellae ipsius esse desierit, capellanus hebdomadarius liberationem percipiet antedictam. De capellâ autem inferiori duximus providendum, ut omni die, salvo capellae superioris servitio, per aliquem de capellanis principalibus, sive de subcapellanis eorum, uno sibi de clericis assistente, divina ibidem officia celebrentur. Jurabunt autem praedicti principales capellani, necnon et matricularii tàm praesentes quàm futuri, quòd in praedicta capellâ continuam facient residentiam bonâ fide. Jurabunt etiam ipsi principales capellani, necnon et matricularii tàm prasentes quàm futuri, quòd in praedictâ capellâ continuam facient residentiam bonâ fide. Jurabunt etiam ipsi principales capellani, et omnes eisdem pro tempore successuri, necnon et omnes subcapellani et clerici eorum, et matricularii supradicti, quòd nobis et haeredibus nostris regibus sanctas Reliquias universas et singulas et totum thesaurum capellae praedictae, tàm in auro quàm in argento et labidibus pretiosis, ornamentis, libris etiam, et

215

216

Appendix 3

quibuscumque aliis rebus, benè et fideliter conservabunt. Quotiens verò principales capellani novos secùm subcapellanos aut clericos evocabunt, illi ­subcapellani novi et clerici tenebuntur praestare simile juramentum. Vacantibus autem capellaniis principalibus et matriculariis supradictis, nos et haeredes nostri reges conferemus easdem, et hoc jus nobis et haeredibus nostris regibus in perpetuum reservamus. Personae autem quibus eas contulerimus, juramentum ejusdem formae facere tenebuntur. In iis etiam omnibus quae superiùs sunt expressa, retinemus et reservamus nobis salvam et liberam potestatem, ut in iis et aliis quae circa statum praedictae capellae viderimus ordinanda, possimus addere, minuere vel mutare dùm vixerimus. Quae omnia ut perpetuae stabilitatis robur obtineant, presentem paginam sigilli nostri auctoritate, et regali charactere inferiùs annotato fecimus communiri, actum Parisiis anno Incarnationis Dominicae millesimo duecentesimo quadragesimo quinto, mense Januarii, regni verò nostri anno vicesimo, astantibus in palatio nostro, quorum nomina supposita sunt et signa, dapifero nullo. S. Stephani buticularii. S. Johannis camerarii. Constabulario nullo. Datum vacante cancellariâ. In the name of the sacred and indivisible Trinity, amen. Louis, by the grace of God, king of the Franks. We make known to all both present and future who will examine the present page, that we for the salvation of our soul, and for the remedy of the souls of King Louis of illustrious memory, our father, and of the most brilliant Lady, Queen Blanche, our mother, and all our ancestors, in honor of the all powerful God and the holy crown of thorns of our lord Jesus Christ, have founded and constructed within the walls of our house in Paris, with God’s permission, a chapel, in which the holy crown of the Lord, the sacred cross, and many other relics are kept safe. So these ­relics may be continuously honored through the office of godly praise, and the same place may be filled in perpetuity with the faithful and devout service of divine worship, we wish, we establish, and we ordain, that in that chapel there should be five principal presbyters, or master chaplains, including that one who used to hold the benefice of the old chapel, and two wardens.24 Moreover, each of those five principal chaplains will be bound to have with him one elder subchaplain, and one clerk serving as deacon or subdeacon. Moreover, for the benefice and sustenance of those same five principal chaplains, we give and grant to them one hundred livres Parisis annual rent, that is twenty livres apiece for the corps of the chaplaincy; these hundred livres we would like them to receive at Paris in the Châtelet from our Parisian prefecture each year at two terms, that is half at the feast of the Lord’s Ascension, and the other half at the feast of All Saints, until such time as we assign those same hundred livres of annual rent to the same men properly elsewhere. Furthermore, to the aforesaid wardens we give as a benefice thirty livres Parisis annual rent, that is for each one fifteen livres annual rent, which similarly they will receive in our Châtelet from our Parisian prefecture, that is half at the feast of the Lord’s Ascension, and the other half at the feast of All Saints, until such time as we have caused the same rent to be assigned to them properly elsewhere.

Appendix 3

With the consent also of the priest Matthew, who used to hold the benefice of our aforesaid old chapel, which he spontaneously yielded and renounced expressly, we wish and grant that that benefice, with all its profits, its offerings coming to the hands of the priests at mass, and gains, as is more fully contained in the letter of King Louis, our great grandfather of glorious memory, and of King Louis our great-great grandfather, should go towards a bonus for the five aforesaid chaplains, and between those aforesaid five chaplains, it should be divided equally. In addition to this, we wish and establish that besides the aforesaid rents, the aforesaid principal chaplains and subchaplains, those wardens, and aforesaid clerks of the chaplains, participating in the divine offices, should receive the distributions noted below. For a feast day or a fast day, each of the principal chaplains will receive twelve deniers, that is at matins six deniers, and at the hours of prime, terce, the major mass, and sext three deniers, at nones, vespers, and compline three deniers, even if of those abovementioned hours in a day he will have missed two hours: nevertheless, no one will receive distributions for matins unless he was present for matins, except if he was ill or weak; and we establish the same rule to be kept for major mass and vespers, and also on these same fast days, each subchaplain will have four deniers, that is two at matins, in the morning, with the major mass one, and in the evening hours one, subject to the aforesaid condition. Similarly, and on the same days, each of the aforesaid clerks of the aforesaid chaplains and priests will have three deniers, that is one at matins, and two at all hours of the morning with the major mass. On Sundays, and on simplex feast days of nine lessons, each of the aforesaid principal chaplains will receive a new assessment of sixteen deniers, that is at matins eight deniers, and at the abovementioned hours of the morning with the major mass four deniers, and in the evening hours four deniers, notwithstanding an omission of two hours, as it has been expressed above. Each subchaplain will have six deniers, that is at matins four deniers, and in the hours of the morning with the major mass one, and in the hours of the evening one. Each of the aforesaid clerks of the chaplains will have four deniers, that is at matins two deniers, and at the hours of the morning with the major mass one, and the evening hours one. On the feast days which are celebrated as semiduplex, each principal chaplain will have ten and eight deniers, that is at matins eight deniers, and at the hours of the morning with major mass five, and at the hours of the evening five. Each subchaplain will have eight deniers, that is at matins four deniers, at the hours of the morning with major mass two deniers, and at the hours of the evening two deniers. Each clerk will have six deniers, that is at matins four deniers, at hours of the morning with major mass one denier, and at the hours of the evening one denier. On duplex feast days, each of the principal chaplains will have two solidi (twenty-four deniers), that is at matins twelve deniers, at the hours of the morning with major mass six deniers and at the hours of the evening six deniers. The subchaplain will have ten deniers, that is at matins six deniers, and hours of the morning with major mass two deniers, and at hours of the evening two deniers. The clerk will have eight deniers, that is at matins four deniers, at hours of the morning with major mass two deniers, and at the hours of the evening two deniers. On annual feast days each of the principal chaplains will receive three solidi, that is at matins two solidi, at hours of the morning with major mass six deniers, and at hours of

217

218

Appendix 3

the evening six deniers. Each subchaplain will have fourteen deniers, that is at matins eight deniers, at hours of the morning with major mass three deniers, and at hours of the evening three deniers. The clerk will have ten deniers, that is at matins six deniers, at hours of the morning with major mass two deniers, and at hours of the evening two deniers. In all these things, still, we understand it to be good, that for no one of those who should receive the abovementioned distributions, even if he has missed one or two hours in a whole day, should this stand in the way of his receiving the aforesaid distributions, provided that indeed the offices of mass and vespers are in no way interrupted. However, as has been stated above, none will have the matins distributions unless he has been present at matins, except if he was weak or ill. In each and every one of the aforesaid distributions, too, we want the wardens to be equal with the subchaplains. However, we want all the aforesaid distributions to come from the revenues and offerings which will be made in the aforesaid chapel annually, except those offerings which are made at masses and placed in the hands of the priests; which offerings will be for the principal chaplains, as has been expressed above. Also the light of the chapel, that is three wax candles burning continuously night and day in silver candelabra before the sanctuaries and the altar, of which each will weigh at least three pounds; and the other light as we have ordained it, we want to be made sucessively by the aforesaid principal chaplains, that is by each of them in his turn, from the revenues and offerings aforesaid, with the addition of sixty solidi of the annual rent, which have been granted to make the light of the aforesaid old chapel, just as is contained in the aforesaid letters of our predecessors. From these revenues and offerings we want the windows of the aforesaid chapel to be remade and repaired whenever there will be need, and to be kept in a good state. But if there is anything of this kind left over from the revenues and offerings when completed, we want this to be faithfully kept back for our own will and ordainment, as long as we shall live. In addition we wish and ordain that each of the aforesaid five principal chaplains when he will do duty in his turn, each night should sleep with the wardens in the aforesaid chapel, in order that a guard might keep watch continually over the holy relics. Moreover, so that some temporal benefit may accrue to them from this, we wish that that chaplain who in his turn has lain in the chapel, for each night, he should receive at matins three deniers more than the other chaplains. Let it be permitted also that for each principal chaplain, only if he has a legitimate impediment, his subchaplain may take his place, including performing the offices of the church in the order of his turn, and lying in the chapel at night, and he should receive in distributions as much as the principal chaplain his lord receives, if he serves that office personally. But about the payment which Matthew, the former chaplain of our old chapel, used to receive when we or the queen or the royals were present in our palace of Paris, we have decided on the following arrangement. That the same Matthew, who is one of the principal chaplains, will receive this payment as long as he lives, in the office of the aforesaid chaplaincy; that when he has died or has ceased to be one of the chaplains of the chapel, the chaplain of the week will receive the above-mentioned payment. Also for the lower chapel, we have decided that it should be seen to, that every day, while keeping the upper chapel service, by one of the principal chaplains, or by one of their subchaplains, with one of his clerks assisting him, the divine office should be celebrated there.

Appendix 3

Also the aforesaid principal chaplains will swear, along with the assigned chaplains both present and future, that in the aforesaid chapel they will keep a perpetual presence in good faith. The principal chaplains will also swear, and all who will succeed them according to circumstances, including all of their subchaplains and clerks and the aforesaid wardens, that they will well and faithfully guard for us and our royal successors the holy relics, each and every one, and the whole treasury of the aforesaid chapel, whether in gold or in silver and precious stones, ornaments, and also the books, and all the other things. But whenever principal chaplains will summon new subchaplains or clerks, those new subchaplains and clerks will be bound to offer the same oath. Moreover, when there is a vacancy of the principal chaplains and the aforesaid wardens we and our royal successors will assign the same things and we reserve this right for ourselves and our royal successors in perpetuity. Moreover, the persons upon whom we will have conferred these things will be bound to take an oath of the same form. In everything that has been expressed above, we retain and reserve our own free and safe power, so that concerning these and other things which we see must be ordained concerning the condition of the aforesaid chapel, we may add, delete, or change as long as we shall live. So that all these things may maintain the right of perpetual stability, by the royal signature marked below with these additions we make public, this act made in Paris in the year of the incarnation of our Lord one thousand two hundred forty five25 in the month of January, indeed in the twentieth year of our reign with those present as witnesses in our palace whose names have been appended, and with vacant offices. The marks are Steven the Butler (signed), John the Chamberlain (signed); the Constable was absent; given when the office of the Chancellor was vacant.

Papal Bull (November 6, 1246, Lateran) Paris, AN L 619.8. Original, parchment, 35.8/36.1 cm × 27.2/27.1 cm, red and yellow silk thread, seal missing. Transcribed in Layettes du Trésor des Chartes, II, 640, no. 3559 (after a later copy, AN J 155). Cited in Barbiche, Les actes pontificaux, I, no. 593 (after Olim AN L 526).

Innocentus episcopus servus servorum dei [. . .] frequentetur omnibus vere penitentibus et confessis qui capellam ipsam in die qua ipsam dedicari contigerit et postmodum in eius anniversario venerabiliter visitarint annuatim de omnipotentes dei misericordia et beatorum petri et pauli apostolorum eius auctoritate confisi annum unum. Illis vero qui ad eam per octabas sue dedicationis accesserint singulis diebus centum dies de injuncta sibi penitentia misericorditer relaxamus. Datum laterani lugdum viii idus novembrorum pontificatus nostri anno quarto. Bishop Innocent, servant of the servants of God [. . .] to all those truly penitent and confessed who shall visit that same chapel on the day on which the same was dedicated, and

219

220

Appendix 3

subsequently on the anniversary of this day, through the mercy of almighty God and trusting in the authority of His apostles, saints Peter and Paul we mercifully remit one year from the penance enjoined upon them for each annual day of attendance; for those however who visit it during the octave following its dedication we remit one hundred days for each single day of attendance. Issued at the Lateran on November 6 in the fourth year of our pontificate.

Papal Bull (November 6, 1246, Lyon) Paris, AN L 619.9 9. Original, 38.8/39.0  cm × 30.9/30.2  cm, red and yellow silk thread, seal lost. Cited in Barbiche, Les actes pontificaux, I, no. 594.

Innocentus episcopus servus servorum dei [. . .] frequentetur omnibus vere penitentibus et confessis qui capellam ipsam] in die exaltationis sancte crucis in qua fuerunt ibi relique predicte de ligno sancte crucis reposite venerabiliter visitaverint annuatim de omnipotentis dei misericordia et beatorum petri et pauli apostolorum eius auctoritate confisi unum annum de iniuncta sibi penitentia misericorditer relaxamus. Datum lugdunum viii ides novembrorum pontificat nostri anno quarto. Bishop Innocent, servant of the servants of God [. . .] to all those truly penitent and confessed who shall visit the same chapel on the day of the exaltation of the Holy Cross, on which the aforementioned relics from the wood of the Holy Cross were stored there, through the mercy of almighty God and trusting in the authority of His apostles, saints Peter and Paul, we mercifully remit one year from the penance enjoined upon them for each year of their attendance. Issued Monday, November 6 in the fourth year of our pontificate.

Arch/Episcopal Bull (April, 1248, Paris) Paris, AN L 619.11. Original, 44.5/44.5 cm × 33.7/33.6 cm, five seals present, eleven additional seals lost. Copy transcribed in Layettes du Tresor des Chartes, III (J 155).

Universis christi fidelibus presentes litteras inspecturis. Biturcensi, Senonensi, Rochomagensi, Turnoensi et Tholetanensi archepiscopis, Laudunensi, Suessionensi, Silvanectensi, Lingonensisse, Carnotensi, Aurelianensi, Meldensi, Baiocensi, Ebroicensi, et Aprenensi episcopis, salutem in Domino sempitenam [. . .] Sane, cum capella illlustrissimi regis Francorum Ludovici, domini nostri, Parisiis in eiusdem regis palatio constituta in honore sancte corone Domini nostri Jhesu Christi et victoriosissime crucis eius fuerit a reverendo patre Odone, Dei gratia tusculanensi episcopo, legato Sedis Apostolice,

Appendix 3

nobis eidem assistentibus, dedicata, singuli nostrum, ob reverenciam reliquiarum huiusmodi que ibidem una cum pluribus aliis honorifice requiescunt, nos quoque Remensis archiepiscopus, licet die qua dedicata fuit predicta capella presentes non fuerimus, die tamen sequenti advenientes ibidem, de omnipotentis Dei misericordia et beatorum Petri et Pauli apostolorum eius meritis confidentes, auctoritate eiusdem divini legati ad id accedente pariter et consensu, omnibus qui dictam capellam in festivitate dedicationis eiusdem sive infra octabas et in ipsius octabis, cum devotione et reverentia annuatim visitaverint, annum unum de injunctis sibi penitenciis misericorditer relaxamus, facientes presentes litteras ad perpetuam huius rei memoriam, sigillorum nostrorum munimine communiri. Datum anno Dominice incarnationes millesimo duecentesimo quadragesimo octavo, mense aprili. To all those faithful in Christ who will inspect the present letters. The archbishops of Bourges, Sens, Rouen, Tours, and Toledo, the bishops of Laon, Soissons, Senlis, Langres, Chartres, Orleans, Meaux, Bayeux, Everux, and Apros (Verissa, Macedonia), send greetings in the eternal Lord [. . .] Truly, since the chapel of our lord Louis, the most illustrious king of France, situated in Paris in the palace of the same king, has been dedicated in honor of the holy crown of our lord Jesus Christ and his most victorious cross by the reverend father Odo, bishop, by the grace of God, of Tuscany, legate of the Holy See, in our presence, each of us, on account of the reverence for relics of this kind which rest in the same place along with a number of others, and we too, the archbishop of Reims, who although we were not present on the day when the aforesaid chapel was dedicated nevertheless came on the following day to the same place, by the mercy of almighty God and trusting in the merits of His apostles, saints Peter and Paul, and equally with the authority and consent thereto of the same divine legate, mercifully remit for all who shall visit the said chapel with devoutness and reverence on the feast of the dedication of the same or within the octave thereof or on the octave itself one year from the penances enjoined upon them for each year of their attendance. We are ensuring that the present document bears our seals to serve as a record in perpetuity of this measure. Issued in the month of April in the year of the incarnation of our Lord 1248.26

Bull from the Papal Legate (May 27, 1248, Paris) Paris, AN L 619.10. Original, 29.0/29.0  cm × 22.0/22.5  cm, red and yellow silk thread, seal lost. Transcribed in Layettes du Trésor des Chartes, III, no. 3666 (after copy J 155)

Odo miseratione divini Tusculanensis episcopus, aspostolice sedis legatus, universis presentes litteras inspecturis, salutem in domino [. . .] Cum itaque idem dominus noster capellam Ludovici, Dei gratia francie regis illustrus, Parisius, in eiusdem regis palatio constitutam sancta corona et vexillo ­victoriosissime crucis eiusdem unigeniti Filii sui Jhesu Chrsti dotandam

221

222

Appendix 3

duxerit et ditandam unde noster animus, in quadam magna extasi pre ammiratione suspensus, quodammodo expavescit, quia non potest tanta dei magnalia dignis attollere laudibus vel debita honorificencia resonare, licet assurgamus ad quas possimus gratiarum actiones multiplices exolvendas, nos volentes ut eadem capella, quam in honore sancte corone de victoriosissime crucis ­prefate consecravimus in octavis Resurrectionis Dominice, assistentibus nobis, Biturcensi, Senonensi, Rochomagensi, Turnoensi et Tholetanensi archepiscopis, Laudunensi, Suessionensi, Silvanectensi, Lingonensisse, Carnotensi, Aurelianensi, Meldensi, Baiocensi, Ebroicensi, et Aprenensi episcopis, et pluribus aliis prelatis, congruis honoribus frequentetur, ob reliquiarum huiusmodi reverentiam que ibidem cum multis aliis honorifice requiescunt, et specialis favoris gratia prosequatur de omnipotenrtis Dei misericordia et beatorum Petri et Pauli apostolorum eius et qua fungimur auctoritate confisi omnibus dictam capellam in festivitate dedicationis eiusdem et usque ad octavum diem cum devotione ac reverentia visitantibus annum unum et quadraginta dies de injuncta sibi penitencia misericorditer relaxamus. Datum Parisius, vi kalendas junii anno Domini millesimo ducento quadragesimo octavo. Odo, by the mercy of God bishop of Tuscany, legate of the Apostolic See, sends greetings in the Lord to all who will view the present document [. . .] and so, since that same Lord of ours has concluded that the chapel of Louis, illustrious king, by the grace of God, of France, situated at Paris in the palace of the same king, should be endowed and enriched with the holy crown and standard of the most victorious cross of His same only-begotten son Jesus Christ, as a result of which our heart, in a sort of ecstasy brought on by wonder, is in some way frightened, because it is unable to exalt such great and mighty works with worthy praises or resound these praises with the honor they deserve, although we rise to pay such manifold offerings of thanks as we can, therefore we, desiring that the same chapel, which we have consecrated in honor of the holy crown from the aforementioned most victorious cross, on the octave of our Lord’s resurrection, in the presence of the archbishops of Bourges, Sens, Rouen, Tours, and Toledo, the bishops of Laon, Soissons, Senlis, Langres, Chartres, Orleans, Meaux, Bayeux, Everux, and Apros (Verissa, Macedonia), and many other prelates, should be attended with fitting honors, on account of our reverence for relics of this kind which rest honorably in this same place with many others, and further desiring that the grace of the special favor of the mercy of almighty God should attend, and trusting in the authority of His apostles, saints Peter and Paul and in the authority which we exercise, mercifully remit one year and forty days from the penance enjoined upon them for all who visit the said chapel on the feast of the dedication of the same, and up to the eighth day thereafter, with devoutness and reverence. Issued in Paris on May 27, 1248.

Appendix 3

Second Foundation of the Sainte-Chapelle (August, 1248, Aigues-Mortes) Paris, AN K 30.17 Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, “Pièces justificatives,” 8–11. NB: Only the changes to the original foundation are presented here. The repeated text is indicated in brackets.

[In nomine sanctae et individae Trinitatis, amen. Ludovicus Dei gratiâ Francorum rex.] Etsi ad omnes ecclesias quae non solùm in regno, sed in toto terrarum orbe consistunt, sincere devotionibus habeamus affectum, speciali tamen praerogativâ sinceritatis amplectimur venerabilem illam et sacram capellam, [quam pro salute nostrae . . . volumus, statuimus et ordinamus, ut in eâdem capellâ sint quinque presbyteri principales, sive magistri capellani, computato illo qui veteris capellae beneficium obtinebat], et tres matricularii sacerdotes. [Quilibet autem illorum quinque principalium capellanorum tenebitur . . . subdiaconatum] et quilibet illorum trium matriculariorum [secum habere tenebitur in eâdem capellâ, unum clericum diaconum vel subdiaconum existentem.] [In beneficium . . . concedimus] centum viginti quinque libras Parisiensis annui redditus, unicuique videlicet viginti quinque libras pro corpore ­capellaniae; quas centum viginti quinque libras Parisiensis annui redditus [volumus eos percipere . . . eisdem assiderimus alibi competenter. Praedictis etiam matriculariis damus pro beneficio] septuaginta quinque libras Parisienses annui redditus, unicuique videlicet viginti quinque libras annui redditus, [quas similiter . . . aequaliter dividantur]. Super liberatione verò quam Mattheus quondam capellanus praedictae cpaellae nostrae veteris, nobis sive reginâ vel prole regiâ prasentibus in palatio nostro Parisiensi, percipere consuevit, ita duximus ordinandum. Quòd idem Matthaeus qui est unus de principalibus capellanus, percipiet liberationem praedictam quamdiù vixerit in officio capellaniae praedictae; qui cùm decesserit, vel capellanus capellae ipsus esse desierit, capellanus hebomadarius liberationem percipiet ante dictam.27 [Ad haec . . .Pro festis sive privatis diebus percipiet unusquisque principalium capellanorum] et matriculariorum [duodecim denarios, videlicet . . . exceptis illis oblationibus quae fient in missis ad manus sacerdotium; quae oblationis erunt principalium capellanorum] et matriculariorum [sicut est superius est expressum.] [Luminare . . . fuerunt ab antiquo concessi.] De quo luminari sic ordinavimus, ut tres cerei quorum quilibet tres libras ponderabit ad minùs, continuè

223

224

Appendix 3

omni die ac nocte ardeant in bacinnis argenteis antè majus altare, privatis diebus ad vesperas, matutinas, et ad majorem missam super majus altare ante sanctuaria ardeant quatuor cerei; in festis novem lectionum et dominicis ­diebus sex cerei; in festis quae cum semiduplo fiunt, octo; in festis duplicibus duodecim; in festis annualibus viginti quatuor, quorum cereis quilibet pondeabit duas libras. Praeter haec etiam volumus ut in omnibus annualibus festis in missâ, in matutinis, et vesperis primis et secundis, et omnibus diebus quibus de sacrosanctis reliquiis fiet missa solemnis, in missâ ardeant duodecim cerei, quorum quilibet ponderabit duas libras, circà capsam sanctarum reliquiarum sex videlicet ab uno latere, et sex ab alio; et similiter quotiens infrà octavas susceptionis sanctae coronae, sanctae crucis, vel sanctarum reliquiarum, de ipsus sacrosanctâ coronâ, de sanctâ cruce, vel praedictis reliquiis celebrabitur missa solemnis. [De praedictis etiam obventionibus et oblationibus verrerias ejusdem capellae refici et repari volumus quotiens opus fuerit . . . nos illud voluntari et ordinationi nostrae,] et successorum nostrorum regum Franciae, volumus fideliter reservari in defectum luminaris ipsius, vel alios usus ejusdem capellae convertendum: si quid verò defecerit volumus et praecipimus, ut illud quod deerit de praedictis obventionibus et oblationibus ad praedicta complenda, percipiatur de denariis nostris et successorum nostrorum regum Francie, Parisiis apud Templum, quosque super hoc aliter duxerimus ordinandum. [Volumus insuper et ordinamus quòd quilibet praedictorum principalium capellanorum, cùm deserviret in ordine vicis suae qualibet nocte dormiat. . . .Personae autèm quibus eas contulerimus, juramentum ejusdem formae facere tenebuntur.] Veruntamen ne ea quae super praedictis à nobis ordinata praemisimus, inordinatè procedant, cùm inter praedictos capellanos, matricularios et clericos, si pares essent, et personam certam sibi praepositam non haberent, paritas ipsa et superioris defectus, procedente tempore, posset esse jurgiorum fomes et materia scandalorum, volumus quod de praedictis capellanis, aut matriculariis quo pro tempore fuerint, per nos et heredes nostros reges assumatur unus qui praesit aliis capellanis, matriculariis, subcapellanis, et Clericis universis capellae praedictae; et ipsi tenebuntur ejusdem parere mandatis. Ipse autem contradictores et rebelles per subtractionem beneficiorum et aliàs convenienti poterit districtione punire. Ille autem qui caeteris praerit, habebit quindecim libras prae coeteris in beneficio, percipiendas in Castelleto nostro Parisiensi, eodem modo qui superius est expressus, et in festis duplicibus et annualibus duplicem distributionem. [In iis etiam omnibus quae superiùs sunt expressà . . . mutare]; retinemus etiam nobis et haredibus nostris regibus Franciae plenum jus et perpetuam potestatem, ut de praedictis reliquiis universis et singulis, et ornatu eorum, et de thesauro quod reposuimus, aut reponemus imposterùm in capellâ praedictâ, in auro, argento, lapidibus pretiosis, ornamentis etiam et aliis quibuscumque rebus, ad nostrum beneplacitum ordinare et nostram possimus facere

Appendix 3

voluntatem. Rogamus tamen haeredes nostros ut praedictas sacras reliquias, sive ornatum earum vel aliquid de thesauro quod ibidem reposimus, in auro, argento, lapidibus pretiosis, seu aliis rebus de capellâ praedictâ non amoveant in futurum, vel amoveri permittant. [Quod ut perpetuae stabilitatis robur obtineat, praesentem paginam sigilli nostri auctoritate, et regii nominis caractere inferiùs annotato fecimus communari.] Actum apud Aquas mortuas, anno 1248, mense Augusto, regni verò nostri vigesimo secundo, astantibus in palatio nostro, quorum nomina supposita sunt et signa; dapifero nullo. S. Stephanii buticularii; S. Joannis camerarii; S. Huberit constabularii. Datum vacante cancellariâ. [In the name of the sacred and indivisible Trinity, amen. Louis, by the grace of God, king of the Franks.] Although I have a sincerely held affection in my prayers towards all the churches which exist not only in my kingdom, but in all the world, yet I embrace with an especially privileged sincerity that venerable and holy chapel, [which for the salvation of our soul, . . . we wish, we establish, and we ordain, that in that chapel there should be five principal presbyters, or master chaplains, including that one who used to hold the benefice of the old chapel], and three wardens. [Moreover, each of those five principal chaplains will be bound to have . . . a subdeacon] and each of those three wardens [will be bound to have with him in that chapel one clerk serving as deacon or subdeacon.] [Moreover, for the benefice . . . we grant] one hundred and twenty-five livres Parisis annual rent, that is twenty-five livres apiece for the corps of the chaplaincy; these hundred twentyfive livres Parisis annual rent [we would like them to receive . . . until such time as we assign those elsewhere. Furthermore to the aforesaid wardens we give as a benefice] seventy-five livres Parisis annual rent, that is for each one twenty-five livres annual rent [which similarly . . . should be divided equally.] But about the payment which Matthew, the former chaplain of our old chapel, used to receive when we or the queen or the royals were present in our palace of Paris, we have decided on the following arrangement. That the same Matthew, who is one of the principal chaplains, will receive this payment as long as he lives, in the office of the aforesaid chaplaincy; that when he has died or has ceased to be one of the chaplains of the chapel, the chaplain of the week will receive the above-mentioned payment. [In addition to this . . . for a feast day or a fast day, each of the principal chaplains] and the wardens [will receive twelve deniers, that is . . . except those offerings which are made at masses and placed in the hands of the chaplains; which offerings will be for the principal chaplains] and wardens [as has been expressed above]. [Also the light of the chapel . . . just as is contained in the aforesaid letters of our predecessors.] Of the lights we ordered that three candles which weigh at least three pounds each continue to burn every day and night in silver candelabra before the major altar, on fast days at vespers, matins, and at the major mass on the major altar before the sanctuary burn four candles; in feasts of nine lessons and on Sundays six candles; in feasts which are done as semiduplex eight; in duplex feasts twelve candles, in annual feasts twenty four, with each candle weighing two pounds. Besides these, we also wish that in each annual feast at mass,

225

226

Appendix 3

at matins, and in first and second vespers, and every day that a high mass of the holy relics is done will burn twelve candles, each of which will weigh two pounds, around the holy relic box six namely on the one side and six on the other, and similarly during the octaves of the reception of the crown of thorns, the holy cross, or the holy relics, of the holy crown of thorns, of the holy cross, and the aforesaid relics will be celebrated high mass. [From these revenues and offerings we want the windows of the said chapel to be remade and repaired whenever there will be need . . . for our own will and ordainment, as long as we shall live.] and that of the kings of France who shall succeed us, to provide for any failure of the lighting in the chapel, or any other needs of the same chapel. If however any deficit occurs, we wish and instruct that the deficiency in the aforesaid revenues and offerings should be made up to the aforesaid amount from my cash holdings and those of the kings of France who shall succeed us, at the Temple in Paris, and from any other cash which we consider should additionally be ordered for this purpose. [In addition we wish and order that each of the aforesaid principal chaplains, when he will do duty in his turn, . . . . Moreover, the persons upon whom we will have conferred these things will be bound to take an oath of the same form.] Yet, to prevent disorder prevailing in respect of anything which I have omitted from the foregoing, for if the aforesaid chaplains, wardens and clerks were equal, and had no specific person in authority over them, this very equality and the lack of a superior might, with the passage of time, prove to be fuel for disputes and provide material for scandal, we desire that one of the chaplains or wardens, for whatever time they shall be in office, should be appointed by myself and the kings who shall be my heirs, to be in charge of the other chaplains, wardens, subchaplains and all the clerks of the aforesaid chapel, and they are to be bound to obey the instructions of this man. Furthermore he will be empowered to punish gainsayers and those who refuse to cooperate by removing their benefits and by any other appropriate punishment. Furthermore the man who is in charge of the rest will receive fifteen pounds more in his benefit than the others, to be paid at my Châtelet in Paris, in the same way as has been described above, and a double distribution on duplex and annual feast days. [In everything that has been expressed above, . . . change] we also retain for ourselves and for our heirs who shall be kings of France full rights and power for ever, to make arrangements and act as we see fit in respect of each and every one of the aforesaid relics, and their decorations, and the treasure which we have placed, or will in future set, in the aforesaid chapel, and the gold, silver, precious stones, and also the ornaments and all other things whatsoever. We ask however that my aforesaid heirs should not remove from the aforesaid chapel, or permit to be removed, the aforesaid holy relics, or their decoration, or anything from the treasure that we have placed there, in gold, silver, precious stones or other items. [So that all these things may maintain the right of perpetual stability, by the royal signature marked below.] Act made at Aigues-Mortes, in the year 1248, in the month of August, indeed in the twenty-second year of our reign, with those present as witnesses in our palace whose names have been appended and with vacant offices; the marks are Steven the Butler (signed), John the Chamberlain (signed); Hubert the Constable (signed); the office of the Chancellor was vacant.

Appendix 3

Additional Indulgences Granted to the Sainte-Chapelle

Papal Bull (October 25, 1265, Perugia) Paris, AN L 619.12. Original, seal lost. Cited in Edouard Jordan, Les registres de Clement IV (Paris, 1893–1945), no. 1847, and Barbiche, Les actes pontificaux, II, no. 1356.

Clemens episcopus servus servorum dei [. . .] omnibus vere penitentibus et confessis qui ad eamdem capellam in anniversario dedicationis ipsius die et usque ad octo dies sequentes causa devotionis accesserint annuatim centa dierum indulgentias concesserunt. Nos itaque vestris supplicationibus inclinati indulgentias huiusmodi ratas et firmas habemus et etiam approbamus [. . .] Dat perusii viii kl novembre pontificatus nostri anno primo. Bishop Clement servant of the servants of God [. . .] for all sincere penitents and confessed persons who shall visit the same chapel on the anniversary of the dedication of the same and including the following eight days for the sake of their devotion, they have granted indulgences of one hundred days or each year of their attendance. And so we, being sympathetic to your entreaties, ratify, confirm and also approve indulgences of this kind [. . .] Issued in Perugia on October 24 in the first year of our pontificate. Papal Bull (October 25, 1265, Perugia) Paris, AN L 619.13. Original, yellow and red thread, seal lost. Cited in Jordan, Les registres de Clement IV, no. 1848, and Barbiche, Les actes pontificaux, II, no. 1357.

Clemens episcopus [. . .] frequentetur omnibus vere penitentibus et confessis qui ad eamdem capellam in anniversario die dedicationis ipsius et usque ad octo dies sequentes causa devotionis accesserint annuatim de omnipotentis dei misericordia et beatorum petri et pauli apostolorum eius auctoritate ­confisi unum annum et quadraginta dies de injunctis sibi penitentiis misericorditer relaxamus. Datum perusii viii kl novembre pontificatus nostri anno primo. Bishop Clement [. . . ], by the mercy of almighty God and trusting in the authority of His apostles, saints Peter and Paul, mercifully remit for all sincere penitents and confessed persons, who shall visit the same chapel on the anniversary day of the dedication of the same and up to the eight following days for the sake of devotion, one year and forty days from the penances enjoined upon them for each year of their attendance. Issued in Perugia on October 24 in the first year of our pontificate.

227

Appendix 4

opo The Dimensions of the Sainte-Chapelle

Location

Meters

Royal Feet

Lower Chapel-Lateral Plane1 External Dimensions Porch to apse buttress Porch to exterior apse wall Façade to apse wall Door to apse wall Buttress to buttress (greatest width) (north to south) Wall to wall (north to south)

42.2 39.95 33.90 32.52 16.19 11.27

129.84 122.9 104.30 100.06 49.81 34.6

Porch Dimensions External buttress piers to west façade North-south span at western buttresses Internal clear floor space (north-south)

6.02 16.44 9.66

18.5 50.5 29.72

Chapel Body-Internal Dimensions Façade wall to apse Façade respond center point to apse Façade respond center point to center point bay 4 Dado wall to dado wall

29.73 30 23.31 10.43

91. 47 101.69 71.7 32.09

Bay Divisions (north-south x east-west axis)2 Bay 1 Bay 4

9.68 x 5.84 9.66 x 5.92

29.7 x 17.96 29.72 x 18.21

Nave Bay Dimensions (center point to center point; north-south x east-west)3 Bay 1 Bay 2 Bay 3 Bay 4

6.72 x 5.84 6.66 x 5.91 6.68 x 5.89 6.60 x 5.92

20.67 x 17.96 20.49 x 18.18 20.55 x 18.12 20.3 x 18.21

Aisle (south side, at bay 2)

2.75 x 5.91

8.5 x 18.18

Hemicycle keystone eccentricity Upper Chapel-Lateral Plane External Dimensions Porch buttress to exterior tip of eastern buttress

1.1 or 1.21

228

41.95

3.38

129.07

229

Appendix 4 Location

Meters

Royal Feet

33.97 32.5 15.34

104.52 100 47.2

Internal Dimensions Façade to apse wall Façade to bay 4 center point Façade center point to apse Dado wall to dado wall (bay 3)

31.77 25 32.05 10.65

97.7 76.9 98.61 32.7

Internal Bay Divisions (center point to center point; north-south x east-west) Façade to Bay 1 center point Bay 1 Bay 2 Bay 3 Bay 4 Hemicycle keystone eccentricity

1.37 9.94 x 5.89 9.93 x 5.94 9.95 x 5.91 9.94 x 5.91 1.55

Niche Length-north -south Depth-north -south Clear floor space at niche

2.93 2.87 1.12 1.1 12.18

9 8.8 3.4 3.38 39.38

3.30 1.84 1.31 1.01 .86 .44

10.15 5.5 4.03 3.10 2.64 1.35

Façade to apse wall Trumeau threshold to exterior apse wall Buttress to buttress (high buttress)

Wall Thickness Lower chapel façade Upper chapel façade Lower chapel wall at ground Lower chapel wall at dado Upper chapel wall at dado Upper chapel wall at niche Buttresses Lower chapel nave Upper chapel nave Vertical Measurements Lower chapel vault keystones Porch central keystone Façade, internal arch keystone Bay 1, vault keystone Bay 2, vault keystone Bay 3, vault keystone Bay 4, vault keystone Hemicycle keystone Transverse arch keystone (bay 2) Upper chapel keystones (from ground/upper chapel floor) Porch central keystone Bay 1 vault keystone

3 x 1.35 2 x 1.27

6.83 6.59 6.55 6.51 6.53 6.475 6.53 5.91 8.46 19.91

4.21 30.6 x 18.12 30.55 x 18.27 30.61 x 18.18 30.58 x 18.18 4.76

9.23 x 4.15 6.15 x 3.90

21.01 20.27 20.15 20.1 20.09 19.92 20.09 18.18 26.03 61.20

230

Appendix 4

Location

Meters

Royal Feet

19.86 27.37/19.92 27.24/19.84 27.27/20.5

61.10 84.21/61.29 83.81/61.17 83.90/63.07

7.3 20.85 27.27

22.46 64.15 83.90

Size of freestanding columns, at base

.54

1.66

Circumference of freestanding columns

.95

2.92

Diameter of freestanding columns

.3025

Bay 2 vault keystone Bay 3 vault keystone Bay 4 vault keystone Hemicycle keystone Other Ground to upper chapel floor Ground to upper chapel vault abacus (average) Ground to upper chapel hemicycle keystone

.93

Notes

Introduction

bestow such a hyperbolic beauty on that house of prayer, that in ascending into it, one understandably believes oneself, as if rapt to heaven, to be entering into one of the best chambers of Paradise”); Jean de Jandun, Éloge de Paris composé en 1323 par un habitant de Senlis, in Paris et ses historiens aux XIVe et XVe siècles, ed. A. J. V. Le Roux de Lincy and N.-R. Taranne (Paris: Imprimerie impériale, 1867), 13; translation given in Emma Dillon, The Sense of Sound: Music and Meaning in France, 1260–1330 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), 68–9; cf. ibid. 66–75, for a discussion of Jandun’s quote. 4 For a history of the Sainte-Chapelle after its initial construction, see Magalie Lenoir-Quintard, “Entretenir un monument gothique sous l’Ancien Régime: La Sainte-Chapelle du Palais” (Thèse du Doctorat, Sorbonne, 2007). 5 Pierre Nora, ed., Les lieux de mémoire, 3  vols. (Paris: Gallimard, 1984–92); Realms of Memory: Rethinking the French Past, trans. Arthur Goldhammer, 3 vols. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996–8). 6 On the chronology and events of the nineteenthcentury architectural restoration, see Leniaud and Perrot, Sainte-Chapelle, 9–48; and Meredith Cohen, “La Sainte-Chapelle du Moyen Âge à la lumière des archives de la restauration: problèmes et solutions,” in La Sainte-Chapelle de Paris: royaume de France et Jérusalem céleste? Actes du colloque (Paris: Collège de France, 2001), ed. Christine Hediger (Turnhout: Brepols, 2007), 211–28. Concerning the glass, see Alyce Jordan, “Rationalizing the Narrative: Theory and Practice in the Nineteenth-Century Restoration of the Windows of the Sainte-Chapelle,” Gesta 37/2 (1998): 192–200. 7 For an analysis of the ideas driving the architectural restoration, see Meredith Cohen, “Restoration as Re-creation at the Sainte-Chapelle of Paris,” RES, Journal of Anthropology and Comparative Aesthetics 48 (November, 2005): 145–64; for that of the stained-glass windows, see Jordan, “Rationalizing the Narrative.”

1 On the obstruction of the Sainte-Chapelle, see Jean-Michel Leniaud and Françoise Perrot, La Sainte-Chapelle (Paris: Nathan, Caisse nationale des monuments historiques et des sites 1991), 22–3; The Sainte-Chapelle, trans. Charles Penwarden (Paris: Éditions du patrimoine, Centre des monuments nationaux, 2007). 2 The keystones of the upper chapel of the SainteChapelle are set at an average height of 27.27 meters from the ground; those of the choir of Notre-Dame are set at 32.5 meters; for the measurements of the Sainte-Chapelle, see Chapter 2 and Appendix 4; for those of the eastern end of Notre-Dame, see Stefaan Van Liefferinge, “The Choir of Notre-Dame of Paris: An Inquiry into Twelfth-Century Mathematics and Early-Gothic Architecture” (PhD Dissertation, Columbia University, 2006), 166, table A.15. 3 The whole quote is: “Sed et illa formosissima capellarum, capella regis, infra menia mansionis regie decentissime situata, integerrimis et indissolubilibus solidissimorum lapidum gaudet structuris. Picturarum colores electissimi, ymaginum deauratio preciosa, vitrearum circumquaque rutilantium decora pervietas, altarium venustissima paramenta, sanctuariorum virtutes mirifice, capsularum figurationes extranee gemmis adornate fulgentibus, tantam utique illi orationis domui largiuntur decoris yperbolem ut, in eam subingrediens, quasi raptus ad celum, se non immerito unam de paradisi potissimis cameris putet intrare” (“But also that most beautiful of chapels, the chapel of the king, most appropriately situated within the walls of the royal residence, enjoys a complete and indissoluble structure of most solid stone. The most select colors of the pictures, the precious gilding of its images, the beautiful transparency of the gleaming windows on all sides, the most beautiful cloths of the altars, the wondrous merits of the sanctuaries, the figured work on the reliquaries externally adorned with dazzling gems,

231

232

Notes to pages 2–3

8 One of the earliest publications on the history of the Sainte-Chapelle remains an important reference: Sauveur Jerôme Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle royale du Palais, enrichie de planches (Paris, 1790). 9 By “monument,” I am referring to what Christopher Wilson has described alternatively as the “Great Church,” in Christopher Wilson, The Gothic Cathedral: The Architecture of the Great Church, 1130–1530 (London: Thames and Hudson, 1990), 7, and the French concept of the monument historique. 10 Louis Grodecki, La Sainte-Chapelle, Petites notes sur les Grands Édifices, 3rd edn. (Paris: Caisse ­nationale des monuments historiques et des sites, 1979 [1963]). 11 Robert Branner, Saint Louis and the Court Style in Gothic Architecture (London: Zwemmer, 1965). 12 As defined in Richard Krautheimer, “Introduction to an ‘Iconography of Mediaeval Architecture,”’ Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 5 (1942): 1–33. 13 The research-based publications of French Rayonnant architecture that problematize the notion of the “court style” are Michael T. Davis, “The Choir of the Cathedral of Clermont-Ferrand: The Beginning of Construction and the Work of Jean Deschamps,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 40/3 (1981): 181–202; Caroline Astrid Bruzelius, The 13th-Century Church at St-Denis (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985); Christian Freigang, Imitare ecclesias nobiles: Die Kathedralen von Narbonne, Toulouse und Rodez und die Nordfranzösische Rayonnantgotik im Languedoc (Worms: Wernersche Verlagsgesellschaft, 1992), esp. 349–50; Stephen Murray, Notre-Dame, Cathedral of Amiens (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), esp. 57–8 and 79–80; and Rupert Schreiber, “Reparatio ecclesiae nostrae”: Der Chor der Kathedrale in Tours (Messkirch: Gmeiner, 1997), esp. 73–87. See also Caroline Bruzelius, The Stones of Naples: Church Building in the Angevin Kingdom, 1266–1343 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004). For a critique of Branner’s definition of the “court style,” see Brigitte KurmannSchwartz, “La Châsse de Sainte Gertrude et l’art de la cour en France au XIIIe siècle: état de la question et problèmes,” in Un trésor gothique: la châsse de Nivelles (Paris: Réunion des musées nationaux, 1996), 238–9; cf. with the most recently published critique in Harvey Stahl, Picturing Kingship, History and Painting in the Psalter of Saint Louis (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2007), 9–10. For a discussion of the reception of Branner’s book, see Meredith Cohen, “Robert Branner and the Anxiety of Influence,” Medieval Art and Architecture after the Middle Ages, ed. Janet Marquardt and Alyce Jordan (Cambridge: Scholars Press, 2009), 218–45; cf. with a special issue of Gesta 39/2 (2000) entitled “Robert Branner and the Gothic.” 14 Bruzelius, St-Denis; Caroline Bruzelius, “The Construction of Notre-Dame in Paris,” Art Bulletin 69/3 (1987): 540–69; Alain Erlande-Brandenburg,

Notre-Dame de Paris (Paris: Éditions de la Martinière, 1997), 147–210; Mailan Doquang, “Rayonnant Chantry Chapels in Context” (PhD Dissertation, Institute of Fine Arts, 2009); Meredith Cohen and Xavier Dectot, Paris, ville rayonnante (Paris: Réunion des musées nationaux, 2010), 11–12. 15 Jacques Le Goff, Saint Louis, trans. Gareth Evan Gollrad (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2009), 100. 16 For a discussion of the diverse approaches the revisionist studies employed to analyze medieval architecture, see Michael T. Davis, “‘Sic et non’: Recent Trends in the Study of Gothic Ecclesiastical Architecture,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 58/3 (1999): 414–23. The lack of research on Parisian buildings is particularly marked among Anglo-American scholars; in recent years, French scholars have increasingly examined the development of the city and its architecture during the Middle Ages. See, for example, Alain ErlandeBrandenburg et  al., Autour de Notre-Dame (Paris: Action artistique de la Ville de Paris, 2003); Agnès Bos, Les églises flamboyantes de Paris, XVe  – XVIe siècles (Paris: Picard, 2003); Philippe Laurentz and Dany Sandron, Atlas de Paris au Moyen Âge: éspace urbain, habitat, société, religion, lieu de pouvoir (Paris: Parigramme, 2006). From the same series, see Danielle Chadych and Claudine Leborgne, Atlas de Paris: évolution d’un paysage urbain (Paris: Parigramme, 1999). See also the social history of the city by Simone Roux, Paris au Moyen Âge (Paris: Hachette, 2003) and John Baldwin, Paris, 1200 (Paris: Aubier, 2006). The classic texts on the history of Paris during this period are Jacques Boussard, De la fin du siège de 885–886 à la mort de Philippe Auguste, Nouvelle Histoire de Paris (Paris: Hachette, 1976) and Raymond Cazelles, De la fin du règne de Philippe Auguste à la mort de Charles V, 1223–1380, Nouvelle Histoire de Paris (Paris: Hachette, 1972). See also Jean Favier, Paris: Deux mille ans d’histoire (Paris: Fayard, 1997). An equally foundational study is Louis Halphen, Paris sous les premiers capétiens (987–1223): étude de topographie historique (Paris: Leroux, 1909). 17 Henri Stein, Le Palais de justice et la Sainte-Chapelle de Paris: notice historique et archéologique (Paris: D. A. Longuet, 1912), 119; Sophie de Sède, La SainteChapelle et la politique de la fin des temps (Paris: Julliard, 1972). 18 This is already mentioned on a single page in Louis Grodecki, Marcel Aubert, Jean Lafond, and Jean Verrier, Les vitraux de Notre-Dame et de la Sainte-Chapelle de Paris, Corpus vitrearum medii aevi: France 1 (Paris: Caisse nationale des monuments historiques: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1959), 83–4. One of the earliest to develop the political values of the chapel is Claudine Billot, “Le message spirituel et politique de la Sainte-Chapelle de Paris,” Revue Mabillon, nouvelle série t. 2/63, (1991): 119–41. Interpretations of the Sainte-Chapelle became increasingly political in the wake of Dieter Kimpel

Notes to pages 3–4 and Robert Suckale, L’architecture gothique en France, 1130–1270, trans. Françoise Neu (Paris: Flammarion, 1990), 400–5. 19 Beat Brenk saw the niches of the upper chapel as presentational structures for typological kingship. See Beat Brenk, “The Sainte-Chapelle as Capetian Political Program,” in Artistic Integration in Gothic Buildings, ed. Kathryn Brush, Peter Draper, and Virginia Chieffo Raguin (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995), 195–213; Daniel Weiss argued that it was both a translatio imperii and a visual manifesto of Louis IX’s upcoming crusade in Art and Crusade in the Age of Saint-Louis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 16–25; Leniaud and Perrot, Sainte-Chapelle, 187–91, described the Sainte-Chapelle’s royal themes as a response to international pressure for France to have a sacral king; Alyce A. Jordan, in Visualizing Kingship in the Windows of the Sainte-Chapelle (Turnhout: Brepols, 2002), 15–29, argues that the windows present a history of Capetian cosmology that highlights the theme of sacral kingship. 20 On sacral kingship, the foundational studies are: Marc Bloch, The Royal Touch, trans. J. E. Anderson (New York: Dorset Press, 1989 [1924]), 130–41; Ernst H. Kantorowicz, Laudes Regiae: A Study in Liturgical Acclamations and Mediaeval Ruler Worship, University of California Publications in History 33 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1946); Ernst H. Kantorowicz, The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Medieval Political Theology (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1957); Percy Ernst Schramm, Der König von Frankreich: Das Wesen der Monarchie vom 9. zum 16. Jahrhundert, 2 vols., 2nd edn. (Weimar: H. Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1960), 1:177–88; Andrew W. Lewis, Royal Succession in Capetian France: Studies on Familial Order and the State, Harvard Historical Studies 100 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981), esp. 104–54; Joseph Strayer, “France, the Holy Land, the Chosen People and the Most Christian King,” in Action and Conviction in Early Modern Europe, ed. Theodore K. Rabb and Jerrold E. Seigel (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1969), 3–16. More recently, see Alain Boureau, “How Christian Was the Sacralization of the Monarchy in Western Europe (Twelfth-Fifteenth Centuries)?” in Mystifying the Monarch: Studies on Discourse, Power and History, ed. J. Deploige and G. Deneckere (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2006), 25–34, and Alain Boureau, La religion de l’état: la construction de la République étatique dans le discours théologique de l’Occident médiéval (1250– 1350) (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2006). 21 For royal representation in architecture, see Paul Binski, Westminster Abbey and the Plantagenets: Kingship and the Representation of Power (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1995); in architectural sculpture, see Donna Sadler, “The King as Subject, the King as Author: Art and Politics of Louis IX,” in European Monarchy: Its Evolution and Practice from Roman Antiquity to Modern Times, ed. Heinz Duchhardt, Richard A.

233

Jackson, and David Sturdy (Stuttgart: F. Steiner, 1992), 53–68, and more recently, Donna Sadler, Reading the Reverse Facade of Reims Cathedral: Royalty and Ritual in 13th-Century France (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2012). The development of the royal image in France naturally has focused on painted images. A groundbreaking publication on this subject is Anne D. Hedeman, The Royal Image: Illustrations of the Grandes Chroniques de France, 1274–1422 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991). Harvey Stahl wrote obliquely about Louis’ image in Picturing Kingship; see also Martin Kauffmann, “The Image of Saint Louis,” in Kings and Kingship in Medieval Europe, ed. Janet Bately (London: King’s College, 1993), 265–88; Marguerite A. Keane, “Remembering Louis IX as a Family Saint: A Study of the Images of Saint Louis Created for Jeanne, Blanche, and Marie of Navarre” (PhD Dissertation, University of California at Santa Barbara, 2002); note the latter two publications focus on Louis’ later/memorialized image in elite manuscripts. More broadly (concerning a slightly later period), see Stephen Perkinson, The Likeness of the King: A Prehistory of Portraiture in Medieval France (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2009). Seals also constituted a form of representation; on this, see Brigitte Bedos-Rezak, Form and Order in Medieval France: Studies in Social and Quantitative Sigillograhy (Aldershot: Variorum/Ashgate, 1993) and Martine Dalas, Corpus des sceaux français du Moyen Âge, vol. 2, Les sceaux des rois et de régence (Paris: Archives Nationales, 1991). A groundbreaking study of the construction of the memory of Saint Louis is M. Cecilia Gaposchkin, The Making of Saint Louis: Kingship, Sanctity, and Crusade in the Later Middle Ages (Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press, 2008). 22 Le Goff, Saint Louis, the last biography written on this king, tends to uphold this position even though the author claims that the real Saint Louis cannot be known; my orientation toward Louis IX builds on William Chester Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979). 23 On the debatable subject of the different times when Paris became a capital, see Robert-Henri Bautier, “Quand et comment Paris devint capitale,” Bulletin de la Société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Îlede-France 105 (1978): 17–46. 24 In 1268, the Prior of Wimpfen-im-Thal, Burchard of Hall, “Richardus . . . qui tunc noviter de villa Parisiensi ex partibus venerat Franciae, opere francigeno Basilicam ex sectis lapidibus construi jubit” (“Richard . . . caused the basilica to be constructed in the French style by a very experienced architect who had recently come from the city of Paris”), in Paul Frankl, The Gothic: Literary Sources and Interpretations through Eight Centuries (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1960), 55. 25 See Willibald Sauerländer, “Medieval Paris: Center of European Taste: Fame and Realities,” Paris,

234

Notes to pages 4–7

Center of Artistic Enlightenment, Papers in Art from the Pennsylvania State University 4 (Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1988), 13–45. 26 Louis VIII reigned as king for only three years, from 1223–6. His legacy to Parisian architecture is minimal and is therefore not considered essential to this study. 27 By “discourse,” I mean a pattern of communication based on a similar theme or subject. Here, I examine the discourse between architectural monuments (and the people who make them) as well as through historiography. For further discussion, see Michel Foucault, The Archaeology of Knowledge (1st English edn., New York: Pantheon Books, 1972). 28 In the heyday of stylistic taxonomies, Camille Enlart coined the term “Rayonnant” in 1919 to describe the architectural style in Manuel d’archéologie française depuis les temps mérovingiens jusqu’à la Renaissance, 3 vols., 3rd edn. (Paris: Picard, 1929), 1:501. Robert de Lasteyrie elaborated on the Rayonnant style in L’Architecture religieuse en France à l’époque gothique, 2 vols. (Paris: Picard, 1926–7). See also Steven Murray, “Rayonnant Style,” Grove Dictionary of Art Online. http://www.oxfordartonline.com/subscriber/article/ grove/art/T070965?q=Rayonnant&search=quick&p os=1&_start=1#firsthit. 29 For other characterizations of the style, see Jean Bony, French Gothic Architecture of the 12th and 13th Centuries (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983), 357–405, as well as Kimpel and Suckale, L’architecture gothique en France, 410–54. While artistic styles do not have a fixed end date, the year 1300 stands as a turning point; see Alexandra Gajewski and Zoë Opačić, ed., The Year 1300 and the Creation of a New European Architecture, Architectura Medii Aevi 1 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2007). 30 On the history of this type of building, see André Grabar, Martyrium. Recherches sur le culte des reliques et l’art chrétien antique (Paris: Collège de France, 1943–6). 31 The Sainte-Chapelle was referred to as a “sacram capellam” in its second foundation document (see Appendix 3). The first group of relics also had a brief interlude in Venice. For a study of the history of the relics, see Bernard Flusin, “Les reliques de la SainteChapelle et leur passé impérial à Constantinople,” in Le trésor de la Sainte-Chapelle (Paris: Réunion des musées nationaux, 2001), 20–31. 32 Weiss, Art and Crusade, 15–25. 33 The most complete study of this site remains Jean Guerout, “Le Palais de la Cité à Paris des origines à 1417: essai topographique et archéologique,” Mémoires de la Fédération des sociétés historiques et archéologiques de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 1 (1949): 57–212; 2 (1950): 21–204, and 3 (1951): 7–101. Fundamental studies on palatine architecture in France are Carlrichard Brühl, Fodrum, Gistum, Servitium Regis: Studien zu den Wissenschaftlichen Grundlagen des Königstums im Frankenreich und in den Fränkischen nachfolgestaaten Deutschland, Frankreich und Italien vom 6. bis zur Mitte des 14. Jahrhunderts, 2 vols. (Cologne: Böhlau,

1968), and Carlrichard Brühl, Palatium und Civitas: Studien zur Profantopographie spätantiker Civitates vom 3. bis zum 13. Jahrhundert, 2 vols., vol. 1, Gallien (Cologne: Böhlau, 1975). 34 For broader studies of French castles, see Jean Mesqui, Châteaux forts et fortifications en France (Paris: Flammarion, 1997); Jean Mesqui, Les châteaux forts de la guerre à la paix (Paris: Gallimard, 1995); Annie Renoux, ed., Palais royaux et princiers (Le Mans: Université du Maine, 1996); André Châtelain, L’évolution des châteaux forts dans la France au Moyen Âge (Strasbourg: Éditions Publitotal, 1988); CharlesLaurent Salch, Dictionnaire des châteaux et des fortifications du Moyen Âge en France (Strasbourg: Éditions Publitotal, 1979); Yvan Christ, ed., Dictionnaire des châteaux de France (Paris: Berger-Levrault, 1978); Gabriel Fournier, Le Château dans la France médiévale: essai de sociologie monumentale (Paris: Aubier, 1978); Raymond Ritter, Châteaux, donjons et places fortes (Paris: Larousse, 1953). 35 By “ideologies,” I intend the reasons and ideas underlying a meaningful or programmatic effort. Ideologies are not singular and unchanging, and they may not even be formally articulated or ­recognized, but general trends can be identified. Studies on French royal ideology most relevant to this project are: Colette Beaune, Naissance de la nation France (Paris: Gallimard, 1985); English edn., The Birth of an Ideology: Myths and Symbols of Nation in Late-Medieval France, ed. Susan Ross Huston, trans. Fredric L. Cheyette (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991); Yves Sassier, Royauté et idéologie au Moyen Âge: Bas-Empire, monde Franc, France (IVe–XIIe siècle) (Paris: Armand Colin, 2002); Jacques Krynen, L’Empire du roi: idées et croyances politiques en France (XIIIe–XVe s) (Paris: Gallimard, 1993); for the government and ideology of Louis IX in particular, see Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade and Le Goff, Saint Louis. 36 Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures (New York: Basic Books, 2000 [1973]), 5–6. 37 On the problem of defining a context from the multiple variants that construct culture, see Mieke Bal and Norman Bryson, “Semiotics and Art History,” Art Bulletin 73/2 (1991): 174–208. This study of the thirteenth century is also inherently limited by the lack of materials remaining from the period. 38 For a more complete definition, see Pierre Bourdieu, The Logic of Practice, trans. Richard Nice (Cambridge: Polity, 1990), 53–65. Panofsky also discussed the notion of habitus in Gothic Architecture and Scholasticism (Latrobe, Pa: Arch-abbey Press, 1951). 39 Pierre Bourdieu, “On Symbolic Power,” in Language and Symbolic Power, ed. John B. Thompson (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991), 163–70. A concise definition is found on page 170. 40 The implications of symbolic power are further described in Pierre Bourdieu, Ce que parler veut dire: l’économie des échanges linguistiques (Paris: Fayard, 1982).

Notes to pages 7–9 41 John Onians, Bearers of Meaning: The Classical Orders in Antiquity, the Middle Ages, and the Renaissance (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988). 42 Alfred Gell, Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory (Oxford: Clarendon, 1998). The notion that art objects inspire the viewer to action was discussed more extensively by David Freedberg in The Power of Images: Studies in the History and Theory of Response (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1989). The ability of an art object to “influence” others has been contested by Michael Baxandall, who argued that the perpetuation of ideas and forms depends on reception in Patterns of Intention: On the Historical Explanation of Pictures (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985). 43 Mary Carruthers, The Book of Memory: A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990); Mary Carruthers, The Craft of Thought: Meditation, Rhetoric, and the Making of Images, 400–1200 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998). 44 Bernard of Clairvaux to William of Saint-Thierry, trans. Meyer Schapiro, in “On the Aesthetic Attitude in Romanesque Art,” in Romanesque Art: Selected Papers (New York: Braziller, 1977), 6; for the Latin text, see Victor Mortet and Paul Descamps, Recueil de textes relatifs à l’histoire de l’architecture et à la condition des architectes en France au Moyen Âge, XIe – XIIIe siècles, ed. Victor Mortet and Paul Descamps, 2nd edn. (Paris: Comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques, 1995 [1911]), 366–70. 45 If such distraction was inappropriate in the cloister, Bernard acknowledged that it had its place on public monuments: “Let us allow this to be done in churches because, even if it is harmful to the vain and greedy, it is not such to the simple and devout. But in cloisters, where the brothers are reading, what is the point of this ridiculous monstrosity, this shapely misshapenness, this misshapen shapeliness?” Translated in Schapiro, “On the Aesthetic Attitude,” p. 6 46 Carruthers, The Craft of Thought, 77–9; 116–17; 266–8. On the nonverbal uses of rhetoric (including memory), of which ductus is an essential component, see also Mary Carruthers, ed., Rhetoric beyond Words: Delight and Persuasion in the Arts of the Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010). 47 Cf. Roland Barthes, “The Rhetoric of the Image,” in Image, Music, Text, 32–51. 48 For a detailed discussion of these texts in the Parisian milieu, see Carruthers, The Book of Memory, 122–55. 49 Ibid., 153. One of the most famous examples of an architectural mnemonic from the twelfth century in Paris is Hugh of Saint-Victor’s De arca Noe. 50 These ideas are underscored in Bourdieu, The Logic of Practice; Pierre Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power, ed. John B. Thompson (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991); Pierre Bourdieu, The Field of Cultural Production, ed. Randal Johnson (New York:

235

Columbia University Press, 1993). Gell, Art and Agency. 51 For the historiography of the spatial turn in medieval studies, see Meredith Cohen, Dominique Iogna-Prat, and Fanny Madeline, “Introduction,” in Space in the Medieval West: Places, Territories, and Imagined Geographies, ed. Meredith Cohen and Fanny Madeline (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014), 1–17). Formative publications on this approach in medieval studies are Barbara A. Hanawalt and Michal Kolbialka, ed., Medieval Practices of Space (Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 2000) and André Vauchez, ed., Lieux sacrés, lieux de culte, sanctuaires. Approches terminologiques, methodologiques, historiques et monographiques (Rome: École française de Rome, 2000). See also Monique Bourin and Elizabeth Zadoria-Rio, ed., Construction de l’éspace au Moyen Âge: pratiques et représentations Actes du XXXVIIe congrès de la SHMESP, Mulhouse, juin 2006, ed. Société des Médiévistes de l’Enseignement Supérieur Public (Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 2007). 52 Dominique Iogna-Prat, La Maison Dieu: une histoire monumentale de l’Église au Moyen Âge (v. 800–v. 1200) (Paris: Seuil, 2006). 53 Michel Lauwers, La naissance du cimetière: lieux sacrés et terre des morts dans l’Occident médiéval (Paris: Aubier, 2005). See also André Vauchez, ed., Lieux sacrés, lieux de culte, sanctuaires. Approches terminologiques, méthodologiques, historiques et monographiques (Rome: École française de Rome, 2000). 54 Such as that by Oliver Creighton, Castles and Landscapes: Power, Community and Fortification in Medieval England (London: Equinox, 2002). Other studies of this social-spatial relationship in archaeology include Pierre Toubert, Les structures du Latium médiéval: le Latium méridional et la Sabine du IXe siècle à la fin du XIIe siècle (Rome: École française de Rome, 1973); Jean Chapelot and Robert Fossier, Le village et la maison au Moyen Âge (Paris: Hachette, 1980). See also Campagnes médiévales: l’homme et son espace. Études offertes à Robert Fossier (Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 1995); Monique Bourin and Elizabeth Zadoria-Rio, “Pratiques de l’espace: Les apports comparés des données textuelles et archéologiques,” in Construction de l’espace au Moyen Âge: pratiques et représentations, 39–55; Magali Watteaux, “A propos de la ‘naissance du village au Moyen Âge’: La fin d’un paradigme?” Études rurales 167–8 (2003): 307–18. 55 Such interpretations have become current in the last generation of art historical scholarship; see Davis, “‘Sic et non,’” 420. See also Stephen Murray, “The Choir of the Church of St.-Pierre, Cathedral of Beauvais: A Study of Gothic Architectural Planning and Constructional Chronology in Its Historical Context,” Art Bulletin 62/4 (1980): 533–51; Barbara Abu-el-Haj, “The Urban Setting for Late Medieval Church Building, Reims and its Cathedral between 1210 and 1240,” Art History 11/1 (1988): 17–41; M. Cecilia Gaposchkin, “The King of France and the

236

Notes to pages 9–15

Queen of Heaven: The Iconography of the Porte Rouge of Notre-Dame of Paris,” Gesta 39/1 (2000): 58–72; Bos, Les églises flamboyantes de Paris, XVe – XVIe siècles. 56 Laura D. Gelfand, “Negotiating Harmonious Divisions of Power: A New Reading of the Tympanum of the Sainte-Anne Portal of the Cathedral NotreDame de Paris,” Gazette des Beaux-Arts 6th série, t. 140/1606 (2002): 249–60. 57 For example, French influences in English architecture; for a basic overview, see Wilson, The Gothic Cathedral. 58 I credit Stephen Murray for providing this metaphor. 59 Henri Lefebvre, The Production of Space, trans. Donald Nicholson-Smith (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991). 60 This subject was also explored broadly in a conference that resulted in Topographies of Power in the Early Middle Ages, ed. Mayke de Jong, Frans Theuws, and Carine van Rhijn (Leiden: Brill, 2001). 61 The primary reference for the history of Philip Augustus’s government remains John W. Baldwin, The Monarchy of Philip Augustus: Foundations of French Royal Power in the Middle Ages (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986). 62 On the hegemony that manifests in social space, see Lefebvre, The Production of Space, 11. 63 The extant sources for this study have directed my research primarily to church architecture, as opposed to domestic architecture, which would greatly enhance our understanding of this phenomenon. For a recent anthology of studies on this subject, see La demeure médiévale à Paris, ed. Étienne Hamon and Valentine Weiss (Paris: Archives nationales and Somogy Éditions d’Art, 2012). 64 Paul Binski described the style as “metropolitan” in Westminster Abbey, 44. The term was carried forth in Eric Fernie, “Robert Branner’s Treatment of Architectural Sources and Precedents,” Gesta 39/2 (2000): 158. 65 It has not been my aim to produce a complete archaeological and structural analysis – which would produce a different book altogether – although both are due for this building. 66 For images and descriptions of the building during the restoration, see Histoire archéologique, descriptive et graphique de la Sainte-Chapelle du Palais par MM. Decloux et Doury, suivi de la Sainte-Chapelle de Paris après les restaurations; planches, M. Duban, M. Lassus; texte, M. de Guilhermy; sous la direction de M. V. Calliat, ed. JeanMichel Leniaud, Les introuvables du patrimoine (Asnières: Éditions Molière, 2007). See notes 6 and 7 for the literature on the subject. 67 For an important, recent reassessment of medieval aesthetic experience, see Mary Carruthers, The Experience of Beauty in the Middle Ages (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013). 68 Krautheimer, “Introduction to an ‘Iconography of Mediaeval Architecture.”’

69 Meredith Cohen, “An Indulgence for the Visitor: The Public at the Sainte-Chapelle,” Speculum, a Journal of Medieval Studies 83/4 (2008): 840–83. 70 Marguerite David-Roy provided a summary of these monuments in “Saint-Louis, bâtisseur des monuments disparus,” Archéologia 31 (1969): 14–21; William Chester Jordan discussed the archival sources for these monuments in Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, 183–90. Chapter 1  The Making of a Royal City: Paris and the Architecture of Philip Augustus 1 “Ballade (Paris),” in Poètes et romanciers du Moyen-Âge, ed. Albert Pauphilet (Paris: Pléiade, 1979 [1952]), 976–7. 2 See Bernard Gauthiez, “Paris, un Rouen capétien? (Développements comparés de Rouen et Paris sous les règnes de Henri II et Philippe Auguste),” AngloNorman Studies 16 (1993): 117–36. 3 From the Merovingians to the Carolingians, the kings of the Franks conducted business throughout their realm, sojourning in Compiègne, Étampes, Lorris, Melun, Orléans, and Senlis nearly as often as in Paris; see Olivier Guyotjeannin, “Résidences et palais des premiers Capétiens en Île-de-France,” in Vincennes: aux origines de l’état moderne. Actes du colloque scientifique sur Les Capétiens et Vincennes au Moyen Age organisé par Jean Chapelot et Elisabeth Lalou à Vincennes les 8, 9, 10 juin 1994, ed. Jean Chapelot and Elisabeth Lalou (Paris: Presses de l’École normale supérieure, 1996), 134. 4 Favier, Paris: deux mille ans d’histoire, 271–8; Baldwin, Paris, 1200, 155–209; Boussard, De la fin du siège de 885–886 à la mort de Philippe Auguste, 299–313. 5 On the construction of cultural and national identities, see Ernest Renan, “What Is a Nation?” (lecture delivered at the Sorbonne in 1882), trans. Martin Thom, in Nation and Narration, ed. Homi K. Bhabha (London: Routledge, 1990), 8–22; Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, 2nd edn. (London: Verso, 1991 [1983]); Homi K. Bhabha, “Introduction: Narrating the Nation,” in Nation and Narration, 1–7. 6 The issues that arise with the meaning of “nation” are also pertinent to “capital”; see Bautier, “Quand et comment,” esp. 17–18. 7 Robert Branner, Saint Louis and the Court Style in Gothic Architecture (London: Zwemmer, 1965). Cf. the discussion of this historiography in the introduction. 8 The authoritative history of this king remains John W. Baldwin, The Monarchy of Philip Augustus: Foundations of French Royal Power in the Middle Ages (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986). 9 For Philip’s activities in Paris, in addition to Baldwin, see Susan J. Kupper, “Town and Crown: Phillip Augustus and the Towns of France” (PhD Dissertation, Johns Hopkins University, 1976), 229–73.

Notes to pages 15–18 10 The most complete study of the episcopal institution in Paris remains Benjamin Guérard, Cartulaire de Notre-Dame, 4 vols., Collection des cartulaires de France VI (Paris: Imprimerie de Crapelet, 1850). For Philip Augustus’s possessions in Paris, see Kupper, “Town and Crown,” 249–55. 11 In addition to the bishop, the chapter of NotreDame, which comprised fifty-one canons, was equally powerful. See Craig Wright, Music and Ceremony at Notre-Dame of Paris, 500–1550 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 18. On the relation between the bishop and the chapter of Paris, see Pierre-Clément Timbal and Josette Metman, “Evêque de Paris et chapitre de Notre-Dame: la juridiction dans la cathédrale au Moyen Âge,” in Huitième centenaire de Notre-Dame de Paris (Congrès des 30 mai–3 juin 1964). Recueil des travaux sur l’histoire de la cathédrale et de l’église de Paris (Paris: J. Vrin, 1967), 115–40. 12 Guérard, Cartulaire de Notre-Dame, 1:lx–lxxix; see also Robert Gane, Le chapitre de Notre-Dame de Paris au XIVe siècle: étude sociale d’un groupe canonial (Saint-Étienne: Publications de l’Université de Saint-Étienne, 1999), 69–81. For a recent study of cens and possessions in Paris, including those of the bishop, see the exhaustive work by Valentine Weiss, Cens et rentes à Paris au Moyen Âge. Documents et methods de gestion domaniale, 2  vols. (Paris: Champion, 2009).In addition to the episcopal institution, the old, established abbeys of Saint-Germain des Prés, Sainte-Geneviève, and Saint-Martin des Champs were also wealthy, powerful landholders. The combined possessions in land rights and justice of ecclesiastical seigneurs in Paris far outnumber those that belonged to the king, even during the thirteenth century, although the monarchy held the largest amount for a single institution. For the documents concerning the rights and justice of the Parisian abbeys, see Louis Tanon, Histoire des justices des anciennes églises et communautés monastiques, suivie des registres inédits de Saint-Maur-des-Fossés, Sainte-Geneviève, Saint-Germain-des-Prés, et du registre de Saint-Martin-desChamps (Paris: L. Larose et Forcel, 1883). Cazelles listed the number of streets for which each institution had right of justice and censive in De la fin du règne de Philippe Auguste, Annexe IV, 423. 13 The bishop and the chapter possessed a host of properties and rents within and beyond Paris; see Guérard, Cartulaire de Notre-Dame, 1:lxi–lxii and lxvi–lxxiv, and Gane, Le chapitre de Notre-Dame, 72. Thirteen provosts (prévôts) managed the episcopal income; twelve prévôts controlled Church land outside of the city and one prévôt was assigned to collect income and tax in Paris. An additional prévôt was assigned to the Grand Pont alone. Guérard, Cartulaire de Notre-Dame, 1:lxvi. 14 Ibid., 1:lxix–lxxi. 15 The traditional start date of 1163 associated with the laying of the cornerstone by Pope Alexander III is based on a legend begun by fourteenth­century chronicler Jean de Saint-Victor. Maurice

237

de Sully acceded to the post in 1160, so plans for the new cathedral may have been initiated from this date. Marcel Aubert, Notre-Dame de Paris, sa place dans l’architecture du XIIe au XIVe siècles (Paris: Henri Laurens, 1920), 30. For the most recent chronology of Notre-Dame, see Caroline Bruzelius, “The Construction of Notre-Dame in Paris,” Art Bulletin 69 (1987): 540–69. 16 Alain Erlande-Brandenburg qualified the project as an “urban program” in Notre-Dame de Paris, 1991), 39–48, esp. 48. For the palace, see Thierry CrépinLeblond, “Recherches sur les palais episcopaux en France au Moyen Âge (12e et 13e s.)” (Thèse de l’ École ­nationale des chartes, 1987), 220 and passim. 17 Funding for the new buildings derived primarily from episcopal revenues; the monarchy was apparently discouraged from giving directly to the fabric. On this, see Henry Kraus, Gold Was the Mortar: The Economics of Cathedral Building (London: Routledge, 1979), 23. While the degree of royal patronage of the cathedral is not well known, Kraus observed that: “the two lone gifts by royalty to the cathedral fabric that are to be found in its cartulary are not supplemented by grants listed in other sources. We have collated a number of royal foundations at the cathedral but they are almost all for prayers and masses for their founders’ personal salvation,” ibid., 23, and that the funding for the first period of reconstruction stemmed from “strictly church sources,” 25–6. The burghers funded much of the building during the period after 1225–30; ibid., 29. Kimpel and Suckale, L’architecture gothique en France, 148, overemphasize the king’s association with Notre-Dame in describing it as the “king’s cathedral,” and in writing that it was “the privileged place for all state ceremonies.” While the king did fulfill certain ritual obligations at Notre-Dame, not all royal ceremonies were held there. Philip Augustus was not baptized at the cathedral nor its baptistery, but at Saint-Michel in the palace precinct. After the death of his first wife, Isabella of Hainaut, Philip Augustus founded an altar with two priests and an annual rent of £25 in Notre-Dame (Guérard, Cartulaire de Notre-Dame, 4: 29, LXXIV), and a few months later issued an act that promised protection of the cathedral (ibid., 2:402, XXIV). These were not extraordinary actions; they fit entirely within customary devotional practice for the monarch. Moreover, such foundations are not indicative of particular support for the bishop, but for Notre-Dame. 18 Peter the Chanter, Verbum, in J. P. Migne, Patrologia cursus completes . . . series latina (Paris, 1844–1903), 205:257B, cited in John Baldwin, Masters, Princes, and Merchants: The Social Views of Peter the Chanter and His Circle (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1970), 68. 19 Guerout, “Palais de la Cité,” 1:117–31. 20 “in ejus insule sinu precelsa palatii regalis altitudo consurgit, que totius urbis capitibus humero minatur

238

Notes to pages 18–21

audaci. Eam non tantum mirabilis operum structura, quantum nobilis illius regni reverenda commendat auctoritas,” Guy of Bazoches, in Lasteyrie, Cartulaire, no. 535, 439. 21 The last bays of the nave were vaulted during the 1190s. See Bruzelius, “The Construction of NotreDame in Paris,” 561. 22 On the architectural program of Philip Augustus in France, see Alain Erlande-Brandenburg, “L’architecture militaire au temps de Philippe Auguste: une nouvelle conception de la défense,” in La France de Philippe Auguste: le temps des mutations. Actes du colloque international organisé par le CNRS, Paris 29 septembre – 4 octobre 1980, ed. Robert-Henri Bautier (Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1982), 595–603; Baldwin, Government, 294–302; André Châtelain, “Recherche sur les châteaux de Philippe Auguste,” Archéologie médievale 21 (1991): 115–61. 23 The literature on the Norman conquest and its aftermath is too extensive to list here. For an introduction to the architecture of England during this period, see Eric Fernie, The Architecture of Norman England (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000). 24 Most of these are listed in the “Compoti” of Les Registres de Philippe Auguste, ed. John Baldwin, Françoise Gasparri, Michel Nortier, Elisabeth Lalou, and Robert-Henri Bautier, 245–54. Others are extant and/or have been identified through archaeology. Philip controlled many more castles than those he built. After 1206, his chancery clerks listed one hundred ten castles and fortifications that the king possessed, in “Compoti,” 338–42. 25 Pierre Héliot, “Le genèse des châteaux de plan quadrangulaire en France et en Angleterre,” Bulletin de la Société nationale des antiquaires de France 56 (1965): 238–57. On the Philippan type, see also Mesqui, Châteaux forts, 290–1. 26 For Péronne, see Registres, “Compoti,” O, II, 252; Robert Embry, Histoire du château de Péronne et réalisation de l’historial (Saint-Quentin: Imprimerie Lepage, 1994); Société archéologique de la région de Péronne, Rapport sur le suivi des travaux à l’historial et au château de Péronne (Péronne, 1991–2). For Dourdan, see Catalogue des actes de Philippe Auguste, avec une introduction sur les sources, les caractères et l’importance historique de ces documents, ed. Léopold Delisle, 2nd edn. (Brussels: Culture et Civilisation, 1968  [1856]), 472, no.  2144; Mesqui, Châteaux forts, 153–4. See also Denise Humbert, “Le Château de Dourdan,” Congrès archéologique de France, 103ème session (1944): 236–45; Joseph Guyot, “Quelques fouilles récentes opérées au château de Dourdan,” in Conférence des sociétés savantes de Seine-et-Oise (1906), 72–7; Joseph Guyot, “L’église et le château de Dourdan,” Bulletin monumental ser. 4, t. 8 (1872): 613–33; Joseph Guyot, Chronique d’une ancienne ville royale: Dourdan, capitale du Hurepoix (Paris: Aubry, 1869); Joseph Guyot, “Notice sur le château de

Dourdan,” Congrès archéologique de France 34 (1867): 94–100. 27 Châtelain, “Recherche sur les châteaux de Philippe Auguste,” 156. 28 Ibid., 156. 29 These are: Bière, Bourges, Cappy, Compiègne, Évreux, Gournay en Bray, Laon, Loudun, Melun, Montargis, Montdidier, Montreuil, MontreuilBellay, Péronne, and Ribemont; “Registres, “Compoti,” O, 245–51. 30 Ibid., 246. 31 Ibid., 245–54. 32 Ibid. Baldwin estimated the total expense of the program at £40,000, Government, 300. 33 The expenditures between 2,000 and 5,000£p were (in £p) for Montdidier, 1,992; Ribemont, 3,147; Montreuil-Bellay, 2,650; Dun-le-Roy, 2,612; Péronne, 3,940; Laon, 1,900; Compiègne, 5,500; Corbeil, 1,760; Bière, 2,000, Villeneuve-le-Roi, 1,600, Orléans, 1,400; Cappy, 3,200. The smaller sums were for Saint Mard, Meulan, Anet, SaintLéger, Janville, Montargis, La Forêt, Aubigny, Montereau, Bray sur Seine, Cléry-sur-Somme, Arques, Gaillefontaine, La Ferté Saint-Samson, Gournay, Lyons-la-Forêt, Le Goulet, Pont de l’Arche, Evreux, Nonancourt, Loudun, and Issoudun; “Compoti,” 245–54. 34 Brussel, “Compte générale de 1202–3,” cliv. 35 Philip’s interests toward the church were primarily political, economic, and financial; Bernard Guillemain, “Philippe Auguste et l’épiscopat,” in La France de Philippe Auguste, 366–83. 36 Amédée Vattier, “L’abbaye de la Victoire,” Comité archéologique de Senlis, comptes-rendus et mémoires 3e série (Senlis: Imprimerie Eugène Dufresne), I (1887): 3–60, II (1889–90): 83–133; cf. Geneviève Mazel, “L’abbaye royale de Notre Dame de la Victoire à Senlis,” Bulletin du GEMOB, Beauvais, Groupe d’Étude des Monuments et Œuvres d’art de l’Oise et du Beauvaisis (GEMOB), 103–4 (2001). 37 Baldwin, Government, 380. On the king’s alms, see ibid., 187–9; cf. with Xavier de la Selle, Le service des âmes à la cour: confesseurs et aumôniers des rois de France du XIIIe au XVe siècle (Paris: Bibliothèque de l’École des chartes, 1995), 35–6. Philip’s practices of almsgiving formed the foundation for royal almsgiving under Louis IX, ibid., 164. 38 Baldwin, Government, 14. 39 Indeed, since the Carolingian period, even though the king had been anointed with the holy balm that conferred sanctity onto him, the archbishops made it clear that his authority remained the temporal and his purview the terrestrial. See the nuanced discussion in Sadler, Reading the Reverse Façade at Reims, 125–6. For a thorough analysis of the precedent for this divide, see Karl Frederick Morrison, The Two Kingdoms: The Ecclesiology in Carolingian Political Thought (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1964).

Notes to pages 22–28 40 The following discussion in this chapter develops an initial, abbreviated version of ideas published in “Metropolitan Architecture, Demographics, and the Urban Identity of Paris in the Thirteenth Century,” in Cities, Texts, and Social Networks, ed. Caroline Goodson, Anne Lester, and Carol Symes (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2010), 65–102. 41 Recueil de textes relatifs à l’histoire de l’architecture et à la condition des architectes en France au Moyen Âge, XIe – XIIIe siècles, ed. Victor Mortet and Paul Descamps, 2nd edn. (Paris: Comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques, 1995 [1911]), 784. 42 Ibid., 784. 43 Ibid., 783. 44 The bishop had claimed these rights since 795; Guérard, Cartulaire de Notre-Dame, 1:240. The legal rights in the area had been complicated since 1136, when the bishop, with the consent of the chapter, conceded two-thirds of the profits from the market to Louis VI. Hence the tensions that first arose with Louis VI over this area reignited under Philip Augustus. 45 Mortet and Descamps, Recueil de textes, 786. 46 Michel Fleury and John Baldwin maintain that construction of the Louvre began at the same time the first fortifications were constructed in Paris, between 1190 and 1202; Michel Fleury, “Le Louvre de Philippe Auguste,” in L’enceinte et le Louvre de Philippe Auguste, ed. Maurice Berry and Michel Fleury (Paris: Délegation à l’action artistique, 1988), 137–40; Baldwin, Government, 298. The 1202 date is based on the payment for a tower at Dun-le-Roy “built to the measure of the tower of Paris” (ad mensuram turris Parisius), though neither tower is still extant. While most researchers believe that the Paris tower refers to the Louvre, it is possible that this donjon was located in the Palais de la Cité. Louis VI was the first to erect the “Tour Montgomery,” and it is entirely possible that Philip refortified it, as he did others at Janville or Cléry-sur-Somme. Jean Mesqui has observed that the form and dimensions of the Palais de la Cité tower signal a Philippan construction (personal communication, 1998). The first clear reference to the Louvre’s tower appears in a document dated to August 1204, when an indemnity of thirty sous was paid to the monks of Saint-Denis de la Charte for their land on which the tower was sited; Recueil des actes, no.  834 (1204). Another act, issued in 1209, describes the turris extra muros as new, which would support a later date, although a tower built in 1200 could still have been considered new: Recueil des actes, no. 1109. 47 For the archaeology of the Louvre, see Berry and Fleury, L’enceinte et le Louvre. 48 For payment to the monks of Saint-Denis de la Charte, Catalogue des actes, no. 854. For payment to the bishop: ibid., no. 1187. 49 Registres, “Compoti,” O (I), 249. 50 Guerout, “Palais de la Cité,” 1:154. 51 Châtelain, “Recherche sur les châteaux de Philippe Auguste,” 133.

239

52 On the uses and significance of city walls, see City Walls: The Urban Enceinte in Perspective, ed. James Tracey (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). 53 Registres, “Compoti,” O (I), 249. 54 On the archaeology of the walls, see Berry and Fleury, L’enceinte et le Louvre, as well as the Procès verbaux de la Commission du Vieux Paris (1898–1933). 55 The walls of the Left Bank had only six gates at first. The total number of gates was augmented to fourteen by 1292. Chadych and Leborgne, Atlas de Paris, 32. 56 However, they possessed their own enclosing walls. Alexandre Grady, “Les enceintes d’abbayes,” in Les Enceintes de Paris, ed. Béatrice de Andia (Paris: Action artistique de la Ville de Paris, 2001), 90–1. 57 These are: to the west of the Rue Saint-Jacques, from the Petit Pont to Saint-Germain des Prés, the Clos du Laas; east of Saint-Jacques, moving south from the Seine, the Clos Mauvoisin, the Clos de Garlande, the Clos Bruneau and the Clos Saint-Symphorien. Just within the walls stood the Clos Saint-Étienne, and the Clos Sainte-Geneviève lay right next to the abbey. Along the eastern shore of the Seine to the Bièvre was the Clos du Chardonnet. 58 Catalogue des actes, no. 1109. For the urban development of individual clos, see Boussard, Nouvelle histoire de Paris, 179–95. 59 The most comprehensive account of this to date remains Adrien Friedmann, Paris, ses rues, ses paroisses du Moyen Âge à la Révolution: origine et évolution des circonscriptions paroissiales (Paris: Plon, 1959). 60 The fief extended along the Rue Saint Denis, north of the Cimitière des Innocents. The western limit was the rue de Mondétour, and the northern edge was formed by the rue du Petit Lion; these were in the censive of the king. Anne Lombard-Jourdan, Aux origines de Paris: la genèse de la rive droite jusqu’en 1223 (Paris: Centre national de recherche scientifique, 1985), 82–3. 61 Ibid., 85–9. 62 Henri Sauval, Histoire et recherches des antiquités de la ville de Paris, 3 vols. (Paris: Charles Moette, 1724), 1:85, describes a similar dispute over land caused in association with the walls in the area of the Cordeliers in 1230. 63 Sauval, 1:85 and 413–14. Cf. Friedmann, Paris, ses rues, ses paroisses, 234–8. 64 Ibid., 238; Lombard-Jourdan, Aux origines de Paris, 25–8. 65 AN K 28, no.  17. This document has been transcribed in several editions. See Guérard, Cartulaire de Notre-Dame, 1:122–5; Catalogue des actes, no. 2180. For a detailed analysis of the discord between bishop and king, as well as an edition of the treaty (in Old French), see Lombard-Jourdan, Aux origines de Paris, 85–9 and 128–9. 66 Kupper, “Town and Crown,” 158. 67 Favier, Paris: deux mille ans d’histoire, 105. 68 Lombard-Jourdan, Aux origins de Paris, 85–9. 69 Lebeuf read the treaty of 1222 in favor of the king; he explains that the bishop no longer possessed

240

Notes to pages 28–32

the right to adjudicate murder in the bourg of SaintGermain, and, in the Halles, only had the rights during the week, and more important, that the king obtained from this the right of justice on the two largest thoroughfares in Paris, the rue Saint Honoré and from the house of the archbishop of Reims to the bridge of Chaillot. Henri Lebeuf, Histoire de la ville et tout le diocèse de Paris, 6 vols. (Paris: Féchoz et Letouzey, 1883), 1:26–7 (hereafter Lebeuf). 70 Kupper, “Town and Crown,” 177. 71 Baldwin, Government, 576 n. 76, cites William the Breton, Oevures de Rigord et de Guillaume le Breton, 2 vols., ed. H.-F. Delaborde, vol. 1, Gesta (Paris: 1882), 171 and vol. 2, Philippidos (Paris: Renouard, 1885), 11, 13. 72 For an introductory text, see Thomas Raleigh, The University of Paris from Its Foundation to the Council of Constance (Oxford: Shimpton and Son, 1873); more recently, see Gordon Leff, Paris and Oxford Universities in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries: An Institutional and Intellectual History (New York: Wiley, 1968). 73 Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis sub auspiciis consilii generalis facultatum parisiensium, ed. H. Denifle, 4 vols. (Paris: Delalain, 1889–97), 1:1. 74 Boussard, De la fin du siège de 885–886 à la morte de Philippe Auguste, 353. 75 Ibid., 315–408. 76 The breakthrough text on this subject is Richard H. Rouse and Mary A. Rouse, Manuscripts and Their Makers: Commercial Book Producers in Medieval Paris, 1200–1500 (Turnhout: Harvey Miller, 2000). 77 On the relation between the Marchands de l’eau and Philip Augustus, see Jacques Boussard, “Philippe Auguste et Paris,” in La France de Philippe Auguste, 331–3. 78 Ibid., 333. 79 The authoritative study on the economy of France during the thirteenth century remains Gerard Sivéry, L’économie du royaume de France au siècle de Saint Louis (Lille: Presses universitaires de Lille, 1984). Cf. with Gerard Sivéry, Saint Louis et son siècle (Paris: Tallandier, 1983). 80 Jean Gimpel, The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1976), esp. 29–58. 81 Sivéry, L’économie du royaume de France, 16. 82 On the famines, see William Chester Jordan, The Great Famine: Northern Europe in the Early Fourteenth Century (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996). 83 Sivéry, L’économie du royaume de France, 60. 84 Ibid., 43. 85 Laurentz and Sandron, Atlas de Paris, 68. 86 For the first, ibid., 68; for 1328, Cazelles, De la fin du règne de Philippe Auguste, 140. The census tallied the number of hearths, which totaled 61,098, although it only reflected houses with foyers, which families of varying sizes occupied. The number includes analysis of the tax records in conjunction with the number of hearths. See the discussion of Paris demographics in Jordan, The Great Famine, 128–31.

87 Cazelles estimates that by 1292 on the Right Bank, the area beyond the walls of Charles V was already densely inhabited, and that on the Left Bank, the wall of Philip Augustus had been outgrown toward the southeast, beyond the Bièvre and Saint-Marcel, Cazelles, De la fin du règne de Philippe Auguste, 136. 88 Sharon Farmer, Surviving Poverty in Medieval Paris: Gender, Ideology, and the Daily Lives of the Poor (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2002), 19–21. Fewer immigrants traveled from the Loire valley and even fewer from the south. England, Scotland, and Normandy generated more new inhabitants in the city than did the south of France. Ibid., 134. See also Cazelles, De la fin du règne de Philippe Auguste, 134, who estimated immigration based on the names of origin in the 1313 taille. Cazelles found that the earlier tailles of 1292 and 1297 were too limited to make larger population estimations, ibid., 131–3. 89 Friedmann, Paris, ses rues, ses paroisses, 346. 90 Ibid., 231–97. Louis IX might have reconstructed Saint-Sauveur around 1250. Sauval, 1:362. 91 AN LL 805 1. Cited in Bos, Églises flamboyantes, 215. 92 The chapel was located between Saint-Thomas du Louvre and the Seine. It was suppressed in 1740 and destroyed before the Revolution. Henri-Léonard Bordier, ed., Les églises et monastères de Paris (Paris: A. Aubry, 1856), 18 n. 42. 93 Completed a few years later, Saint-Honoré had twenty-one prebends or canons and thus was a collegiate church. Paris et ses historiens aux XIVe et XVe siècles: Documents et écrits originaux de Paris, ed. Antoine Le Roux de Lincy and Lazare-Maurice Tisserand, Histoire générale de Paris (Paris: Imprimerie Impériale, 1867), 184; it became the wealthiest collegiate church of Paris and was destroyed in 1792; Bordier, ed., Églises et monastères de Paris, 18 n. 43. 94 Du Breul, Le Théatre des antiquitez de Paris (Paris: Société des Imprimeurs, 1639 [1612]), 1023 (hereafter Du Breul). 95 Ibid., 654; Le Roux de Lincy and Tisserand, Paris et ses historiens, 190. Weiss, Cens et rentes, 235, writes that it was founded by Louis IX and Blanche of Castile. 96 Paul Biver and Marie-Louise Biver, Abbayes, monastères et couvents de Paris (Paris: Éditions d’histoire et d’art, 1970), 60. 97 Saint-André des Arts was built in 1211–12 and demolished in 1790; Bordier, ed., Églises et monastères de Paris, 14 n. 21; Saint-Côme-Saint-Damien was constructed from 1212; ibid., 12 n. 11. 98 AN S 4229, pièce 1 and 2 (copies of the letter of donation from 1221). Cf. Sauval, 1:634, and Lebeuf, 1:149. For the consecration date, see Edmond Faral and Julia Bastin, ed., Les oeuvres complètes de Rutebeuf, 2 vols. (Paris: Picard, 1959–77), 1:300. 99 AN L 941, layette 8, 1, no.  1 (eighteenth-century copy). See Laure Beaumont-Maillet, Le Grand Couvent des Cordeliers de Paris: étude historique et archéologique du XIIIe siècle à nos jours (Paris: Champion, 1975). 100 For the Augustinians, see Biver and Biver, Abbayes, monastères et couvents, 176; for the Carmelites, see

Notes to pages 32–33 William of Saint-Pathus, RHF 20:94; Perraut, Collèges parisiens, cites AN L 927. Mathurins: Sauval, 1:640–1; Lebeuf, 1:113–14: Premonstratensians: Perraut, Collèges parisiens, 34, cites Dom Michel Félibien, Histoire de la ville de Paris, revue, augmentée et mise à jour par Dom Lobineau, 5  vols. (Paris: Desprez et Jean Desessartz, 1725), 3:208–9. 101 On the early church, see Abbé Louis Brochard, Saint-Gervais: histoire du monument d’après de nombreux documents inédits (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1938), 23–9. For the later history of Saint-Gervais, see Abby McGehee, “The Parish Church of Saint-GervaisSaint-Protais: Parisian Late Gothic in the 15th and 16th Century” (PhD Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1997)  and Bos, Églises flamboyantes, 188–95. 102 The Saints-Innocents existed in the mid-twelfth century; Bordier, ed., Églises et monastères de Paris, 23 n. 71. Saint-Eustache was built over a chapel dedicated to Saint Agnès and funded mostly by its parishioners, Kraus, Gold Was the Mortar, 29–30. Saint-Opportune probably existed in the ninth century and was transformed in the thirteenth century into a collegiate church and parish. See André Auniord, “Le chapitre de Saint-Opportune à Paris,” Positions des thèses de l’École nationale des chartes (1917), 5–13. 103 Willibald Sauerländer, Gothic Sculpture in France, 1140– 1270, trans. Janet Sandheimer (London: Thames and Hudson, 1972), 457; for a short history of the church, see Amédée Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 3 vols. (Paris: Éditions du Minuit, 1958–64), 1:264–96; Bos, Églises flamboyantes, 167–84, observes that the parts of the interior of the church traditionally ascribed to the thirteenth century were more likely completed in the early fourteenth century. 104 Robert-Henri Bautier, “L’abbaye de Saint-Pierre et Saint-Merry de Paris du VIIIe aux XIIe siècle,” Bibliothèque de l’École des chartes 118 (1960): 17. 105 Saint-Leu-Saint-Gilles: AN LL 819, fol. 142. See Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 297–304 for a brief history of Saint-Leu-Saint-Gilles. For Saint-Josse, see ibid., 311. 106 Sauval, 1:441, Lebeuf, 1:323; Christ, Églises de Paris, 38 n. 78. 107 Du Breul, 1021 and 1024. 108 Bos, Églises flamboyantes, 149. 109 On Saint-Nicolas du Chardonnet, see Friedmann, Paris, ses rues, ses paroisses, 238–43. 110 Lebeuf, 1:244, observed that the structure appeared to have been built toward the end of the twelfth century. Christ, Églises de Paris, 20, Xavier Dectot, “Sainte-Geneviève des Ardents,” in ErlandeBrandenburg et al., Autour de Notre-Dame, 127–8. 111 Saint-Pierre aux Boeufs: Lebeuf, 1:318. Xavier Dectot, “Saint-Symphorien,” in Autour de Notre-Dame, 138; ibid., “Saint-Jean-le-Rond,” 142. 112 Bruzelius, St-Denis, 123. 113 Philippe Plagnieux, “Saint-Martin-des-Champs et la genèse de l’art gothique,” Bulletin monumental 167/1 (2009): 3–40.

241

114 Jacques Moulin and Patrick Ponsot, “La chapelle de la Vierge à l’abbaye Saint-Germain des Prés et Pierre de Montreuil,” Archeologia 140 (1980): 48–55; Mary Shepard, “The Lady Chapel at SaintGermain-des-Prés” (PhD Dissertation, Columbia University, New York, 1990). 115 Bull 1230 from Gregory IX, Bernard Barbiche, Les actes pontificaux originaux des Archives nationales de Paris, 1, Index actorum romanorum pontificum ab Innocentio III ad Martinum V electum, Commission internationale de Diplomatique (Cittá del Vaticano, 1975–82) 133, no. 338. 116 Jean-Aimar Piganiol de la Force, Description historique de la ville de Paris et de ses environs, 10 vols. (Paris: Libraire associés, 1765), 5:31; Lebeuf, 1:149; Jean-Pierre Willesme, Sculptures médiévales (XIIe siècle–début du XVIe siècle), Catalogues d’art et d’histoire du Musée Carnavalet 1 (Paris: Musée Carnavalet, 1979), 291. For the later church, see Bos, Églises flamboyantes, 209–10. 117 For the chronology, see Bruzelius, “The Construction of Notre-Dame in Paris,” 564–6; Doquang, “Rayonnant Chantry Chapels,” 20, 84–8, 94–101. See also Dieter Kimpel, “Die Querhausarme von Notre-Dame zum Paris und ihre Skulpturen” (PhD Dissertation, Bonn: Rheinische Fredrich-WilhelmsUniversität, 1971). For the later chapels at NotreDame, see Michael T. Davis, “Splendor and Peril: The Cathedral of Paris, 1290–1350,” Art Bulletin 80/1 (1998): 34–65. 118 Sauval, 1:435–6; 1:621. For more detailed studies of the college, see Philippe Dautrey, “Croissance et adaptation chez les Cisterciens au XIIIe siècle, les débuts du collège des Bernardins de Paris,” Analecta cistercensa 32 (1976): 122–215; Philippe Dautrey, “L’église et de l’ancien collège des Bernardins de Paris et son image,” in Mélanges à la mémoire du Père Anselme Dimier, ed. Benoît Chauvin, 3  vols. (Arbois: B. Chauvin, 1982–7), 3:497–514; Anselme Dimier, “Pèlerinage cistercien à travers Paris,” Archéologia 44 (1972): 70–7; on the fourteenth-century church, see Michael T. Davis, “Cistercians in the City: The Church of the Collège Saint-Bernard in Paris,” in Perspectives for an Architecture of Solitude: Essays on Cistercians, Art and Architecture in Honour of Peter Fergusson, ed. Teryl N. Kinder (Turnhout: Brepols, 2004), 223–34. Aurélie Perraut, L’architecture des collèges parisiens au Moyen Âge (Paris: Presses universitaires de la Sorbonne, 2009), 34, cites the date of its foundation as 1246. 119 On the foundation of the Sorbonne, see Perraut, Collèges parisiens, 35–6; for Cluny: Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis, ed. Denifle, 1:375 and 388. Sauval, 1:629; Dom O. Anger, Le Collège de Cluny fondé à Paris dans le voisinage de la Sorbonne et dans le ressort de l’Université (Paris: Picard, 1916). On the foundation of colleges in Paris, see Perraut, L’architecture des collèges parisiens au Moyen Âge. 120 RHF 21:84: “[Le roi] fonda une communauté de clers escoliers, c’on apelle les Bons-Enfanz, à Paris vers Saint-Victor.”

242

Notes to pages 33–49

121 On the Hôtel-Dieu, see Ernest Coyecque, L’HôtelDieu de Paris au Moyen Âge: histoire et documents (Paris: Société de l’histoire de Paris, 1887). For la Trinité, destroyed in 1817, see Bordier, ed., Églises et monastères de Paris, 19 n. 49. For the Quinze-Vingts, see: Jean de Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. and trans. Jacques Monfrin (Paris: Dunod, 1995), v. 724; Gérard Dubois, Historia ecclesiae Parisiensis, 2  vols. (Paris: Francis Muguet, 1690–1710), 2:447. See also Mark Polking O’Tool, “Caring for the Blind in Medieval Paris: Life at the Quinze-Vingts, 1250–1430” (PhD Dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara, 2007). 122 AN S 66 26 d. 7 (History of the Filles-Dieu) and Geoffrey of Beaulieu, RHF 20:11–12. Leon Le Grand, “Les Maisons-Dieu et léprosies du diocèse de Paris au milieu du XIVe siècle, d’après le registre de visites du délégué de l’évèque (1351–1369),” Mémoires de la Société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 24 (1897): 250–3, 255. 123 “Les Moustiers de Paris,” in Églises et monastères de Paris, ed. Bordier, 11–23. For a study of this dit with a useful annotated appendix of the churches named within it, see Wendy Pfeffer, “The Dit des Monstiers,” Speculum, A Journal of Medieval Studies 73/1 (1998): 80–114. 124 On this, see Dieter Kimpel, “Le développement de la taille en série dans l’architecture médiévale et son role dans l’histoire économique,” Bulletin monumental 135 (1977): 195–222. 125 For a thorough analysis of Gothic drawings, see Robert Bork, The Geometry of Creation: Architectural Drawing and the Dynamics of Gothic Design (Farnham: Ashgate, 2011). 126 Indeed, very few of these monuments remain standing and/or in their original condition. Lost monuments for which graphic evidence remains (beyond a location/plan on a map) showing thirteenthcentury architecture (at the BnF Estampes) include: Sainte-Catherine du Val des Ecoliers, Saint-Antoine, Saint-Côme-Saint-Damien, Saint-Jean en Grève, Saint-Leufroi, and Saint-Sauveur. The refectory of Saint-Geneviève still stands (as the Lycée Henri IV); parts of Saint-Leu-Saint-Gilles (rue Saint-Denis), Saint-Séverin, and the refectory of the Bernardins also remain in their thirteenth-century state, but will not be included in this discussion. Others extant but not included in this discussion have been either razed or refurbished to such an extent in later years that their thirteenth-century aspects are no longer visible. 127 The date of this gallery is uncertain: Bruzelius maintains that the arcade above the rose was constructed sometime between 1235 and 1240, “The Construction of Notre-Dame in Paris,” 565 and 569; Kimpel and Suckale, L’architecture gothique en France, 528, suggest a decade earlier; see also Kimpel, Die Querhausarme, 32–41. Doquang, “Rayonnant Chantry Chapels,” 20, 84–8, 94–101, proposes a date of around 1230 for the construction of the chapels, in

accord with a program initiated by Bishop William of Auvergne, who was elected to the post in 1228. See also Mailan Doquang, “The Lateral Chapels of Notre-Dame in Context,” Gesta 50/2 (2011): 137–62. 128 Davis, “Splendor and Peril,” 34–65. 129 Alfred Franklin, Les rues et les cris de Paris au XIIIe siècle (Paris: Léon Wille, 1874), 183–90; cf. “Les Moustiers de Paris” (1337), in Églises et monastères de Paris, ed. Bordier, which lists ninety-two. 130 For a list of Merovingian churches in Paris, see the “Tableau récaptiulatif des sources relatives aux églises mérovingiennes de Paris,” in Patric Périn, Philippe Velay, Laurent Renou, et  al., Collections mérovingiennes, Catalogues d’art et d’histoire du musée Carnavalet 2 (Paris: Musée Carnavalet, 1985), 780. 131 Lebeuf, 1:318, specifically writes of the “hautes galeries.” 132 Xavier Dectot, “Saint-Pierre-aux-Boeufs,” in Autour de Notre-Dame, 125–6, cites Lebeuf, 1:308. 133 Sauval, 1:384. 134 Friedmann, Paris, ses rues, ses paroisses, 194. 135 Cazelles, De la fin du règne de Philippe Auguste, 98. 136 Cohen and Dectot, Paris, ville rayonnant, 43. 137 Bos, Églises flamboyantes, 188–95. 138 Sauval, 1:454–5. 139 Indeed, this is why the crown suppressed the order in 1307–12 and transferred the knights to Saint-Jean de Jérusalem in 1313; Sauval, 1:454–5. The Temple was damaged in the Revolution and razed in 1805; Christ, Églises de Paris, 40, n. 84. 140 Bernard Barbiche, Les actes pontificaux originaux, 133, n. 338. 141 Branner, Saint Louis and the Court Style, 72. 142 Dom Jacques Bouillart, Histoire de l’abbaye royale de Saint-Germain-des-Prés (Paris: G. Dupuis, 1724), 124; Hélène Verlet, “Les bâtiments monastiques de l’abbaye Saint-Germain des Prés,” Mémoires de la Fédération des Sociétés historiques et archéologiques de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 9 (1957–8): 9–69. 143 Bouillart, Saint-Germain-des-Prés, 124. On Pierre de Montreuil, see Anne Prache, “Un architecte du XIIIe siècle et son oeuvre: Pierre de Montreuil,” Dossiers d’histoire et archéologie 47 (1980): 26–38. 144 Bouillart, Saint-Germain-des-Prés, 123. Pierre Bonfons, Antiquitez et singularitez de Paris (Paris: Nicolas Bonfons, 1608), 38, also cites an inscription carved over the refectory door with this information. 145 Bouillart, Saint-Germain-des-Prés, 126–7. 146 Shepard, “Lady Chapel,” 12, suggests it was “likely finished a few years earlier.” 147 For a history of the destruction of the chapel and the dispersal of its stained glass, see Shepard, “Lady Chapel,” 23–61. 148 Bouillart, Saint-Germain-des-Prés, 123–6. 149 Ibid., 126. 150 Ibid. We do not know from what locations the measurements were taken. 151 For the Carnavalet collection, see Jean-Pierre Willesme, Sculptures médiévales (XIIe siècle–début

Notes to pages 49–71 du XVIe siècle), Catalogues d’art et d’histoire du Musée Carnavalet 1 (Paris: Musée Carnavalet, 1979) notices 143–5, 203–9, 205–21, and 290. See also Commission du Vieux Paris. Procès verbaux, 1901, 1903. 152 Cohen and Dectot, Paris, ville rayonnant, 92–3. 153 For a study of the archives remaining for SaintAntoine, see Vanessa Szollosi, “Les moniales de Saint-Antoine-des-Champs au XIIIe siècle ‘Velut lucernas in loco caliginoso lucentes’” (Thèse de l’École nationale des chartes, 2007); she claims that the primary funders of this church were bourgeois and nobility of Paris, and that royal funding was largely absent. Du Breul, 1024, writes that the new church was dedicated in 1235. 154 Du Breul, 1023; Weiss, Cens et rentes, 1:234, describes this as a royal abbey from 1227. 155 Images show conflicting evidence for the chevet; the plan of Turgot shows the church with a flat chevet, while that from the History of Saint-Victor shows a rounded chevet (BnF Est. St. Victor Va 299 t. 4, H77679). 156 Du Breul, 654 and 695, relays that the following was written in their now lost cartulary: “S. Ludovicus Rex voluit et ordinavit anno Domini 1229 quod pro animabus regum praedictorum (id est Philippi Augusti et Ludovico 8 cui scelicet et patris sui) animabus construeretur ecclesia nostra, et primum lapidem posuit, et dotavit eam quolibet die de triginta denariis reditus, percipiendis quolibet anno tribus terminis: Videlicet in Purificationis in Ascensione et in festo omnium Sanctorum.” Ibid. also states that thirty deniers was not enough money at the time to support even one monk’s sustenance at the monastery. Cf. Le Roux de Lincy and Tisserand, Paris et ses historiens, 190. Weiss, Cens et rentes, 235. 157 Christ, Églises de Paris, 38. 158 A more complete discussion of both the Franciscans and the Dominicans is found in Chapter 5. 159 Sauval, 1:629; Anger, Le Collège de Cluny. 160 Sauval, 1:629. 161 Christ, Églises de Paris, 29. 162 Leon Brièle, Archives de l’Hôtel-Dieu de Paris (1157–1300) avec notice, appendice et table par Ernest Coyecque (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1894). 163 On the controversy surrounding the portfolio and profession of this draftsman, see Carl R. Barnes, The Portfolio of Villard de Honnecourt (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS Fr 19093): A New Critical Edition and Color Facsimile (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2007). 164 Stephen Murray has described Rayonnant as a “koine,” in “The Architectural Envelope of the SainteChapelle,” Avista Forum, Journal of the Association Villard de Honnecourt for the Interdisciplinary Study of Medieval Technology, Science, and Art 10, no. 1 (1996/7): 21–25. 165 Kupper stressed the importance of Philip’s concerted maintenance of the status quo, “Town and Crown,” 227. See also Morrison, The Two Kingdoms. 166 Baldwin, Government, 300.

243

167 The Salle Synodale was restored by Viollet-le-Duc, and the sculptures appear to be heavily restored. For a discussion of this building and an image of the sculptures of Louis IX at Sens, see Kimpel and Suckale, L’architecture gothique, 369. Chapter 2  The Sainte-Chapelle: Parisian Rayonnant and the New Royal Architecture 1 For a discussion of the date and the documents of the Sainte-Chapelle, see Appendix 3. 2 See Introduction, n. 3; Jean de Jandun, Éloge de Paris, 13. 3 Bruzelius, St-Denis, 1, writes that Saint-Denis is the site of “revolutionary achievements in architecture.” Wilson, Gothic Cathedral, 123 writes, “The St-Denis scheme was to remain standard in France during the rest of the Middle Ages.” 4 See Mary Carruthers, “Varietas: A Word of Many Colors,” Poetica: Zeitschrift für Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft [Munich, Germany], (2009): 33–54. 5 See Erwin Panofsky, Abbot Suger on the Abbey Church of Saint-Denis and Its Art Treasures (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979), 63–5. An extensive bibliography accompanies a great “debate” in medieval art between Suger’s perspective and Bernard of Clairvaux’s exhortation to rid the cloister of extraneous decoration, although recent studies are beginning to reassess these positions. 6 See Carruthers, The Experience of Beauty, esp. chapters 5 and 6. 7 Grodecki, Sainte-Chapelle, 16. 8 Height to gable at the Sainte-Chapelle given in Nicolas-Michel Troche, La Sainte-Chapelle de Paris: notice historique, archéologique et descriptive sur ce célèbre oratoire de Saint Louis (Paris: Boucquin, 1855 [1853]), 37–40. My analysis was conducted using the Leica Total Station TPS 700 with the assistance of Michael Davis, Mailan Doquang, and Stefaan Van Liefferinge. The measurements are based on the stone floor level of the interior lower and upper chapels, which diverges from the original level and present surface covering. For additional measurements, see Appendix 4. 9 The eastern buttresses may be slightly longer as my distances for the buttresses in the east end were measured by hand and extrapolation. 10 I am grateful to Francis Margot for taking this measurement for me. 11 Murray, “Architectural Envelope,” 22. 12 Measurements are taken from the center points of the vault responds. 13 Exactly 29.7 royal feet at bay 4. From wall to wall at the dado level the distance is 10.43 or 32 royal feet. 14 The keystone of the arch of the façade is 20.42 meters or 63 royal feet; the keystone of the hemicycle is 20.5 meters or just about 63 royal feet.

244

Notes to pages 71–77

15 On average, this is 9.95 meters or exactly 30.61 royal feet. 16 On these, see Robert Branner, The Painted Medallions in the Sainte-Chapelle in Paris, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, New Series, 58.2 (Philadelphia, PA: American Philosophical Society, 1968), and Jeanne Mairey, “Les médaillons peints de la Sainte-Chapelle, restaurations et techniques,” Livraisons d’histoire de l’architecture 1 (2001), 75–88. See also the more recent study by Emily D. Guerry, “The Wall Paintings of the Sainte-Chapelle” (PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2012). 17 For the window dimensions, see Corpus Vitrearum, ed. Grodecki, 94. 18 The rich and varied content of these windows is examined in the following chapter. 19 Corpus Vitrearum, ed. Grodecki, 159 and 172. 20 Eugène Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc, Dictionnaire raisonné de l’achitecture francaise du XIe au XVIe siècle, 10  vols. (Paris: Bance, 1854–68), s.v. “Chaînage,” 2:401. 21 The current iron armature above the upper chapel vaults is modern. The original iron ties were set high above the vault extrados; their placement can be identified today in the front and back of the chapel. 22 For a detailed discussion of how this worked, see Maxime l’Héritier, “L’emploi du fer dans la construction gothique: Présentation de la méthodologie. Les exemples des cathédrales de Troyes et Rouen,” in L’homme et la matière: l’emploi du plomb et du fer dans l’architecture gothique. Actes du colloque du Noyon, 16–17 novembre 2006, ed. Arnaud Timbert (Paris: Picard, 2009), 61–73. 23 Paul Benoit, “Fer et plomb dans la construction des cathédrales gothiques,” in L’homme et la matière, ed. Timbert, 51–9. 24 However, because of rust, the iron bars ultimately damaged the mullions, necessitating their replacement in the nineteenth century. Viollet le Duc, Dictionnaire, s.v. “Chaînage,” 2:401. 25 This is rounded up from .3248 meters. On the subject of the royal foot of Paris, see Armand Machabey, Histoire des poids et mesures en France depuis le treizième siècle (Paris: Revue de métrologie pratique et légale, 1962), 31–40. A maximum margin of error of 1.5 percent is respected here. Peter Kidson employs a margin of error of 3 percent in “The Historical Circumstances and the Principles of the Design,” in Salisbury Cathedral: Perspectives on the Architectural History, ed. Thomas Cocke and Peter Kidson (London: Royal Commission on Historical Monuments of England, 1993), 35–94. 26 With a diameter of 30.25 centimeters, the freestanding columns in the lower chapel are also close to one royal foot, but almost exactly one Roman foot (29.5 centimeters). Other correspondences with the Roman foot appear throughout the chapel, and it is possible that both systems were employed; both were present at Amiens cathedral as well. On this

see Murray, Amiens, 158–63. These issues will be developed more thoroughly in another study. 27 At ground level, the lower chapel wall in bays 1–3 on the south side have an average thickness of 1.31 meters or 4.03 royal feet; at dado level, the lower chapel wall is 1.01 meter thick from bays 1–3 or 3.10 royal feet. 28 Points taken at the exterior on the south side at the base of the foliate stringcourse delineating the upper chapel. 29 Measured at the hemicycle keystone. 30 At 26.7 percent to the keystone. 31 Exactly 76.4 percent from ground to keystone; the abaci are set at 35.01 percent of the way up from the floor to the keystone. 32 Exactly three times would be 19.53 meters. The keystone of the vault in bay four is 19.84 meters or 61 royal feet; the keystone of the hemicycle is 20.5 meters or about 63 royal feet. Restoration has altered the upper chapel floor, and this may have affected the measures slightly. 33 20.03 royal feet from the ground (stone). Measurements to keystones were taken with a laser pointer. Concerning the quarter height: this might involve taking the measure of the keystone from the extrados of the vault. Right now it is 23.8 percent of the height of the upper chapel vaults, but my measurement of the floor was affected by the insertion of a thick protective cover over the later tombstones, and the original level of the floor has long been altered. 34 Measurements for Reims and Amiens given in Christopher Wilson, “Calling the Tune? The Involvement of King Henry III in the Design of the Abbey Church at Westminster,” Journal of the British Archaeological Association 161 (2008): 75. 35 For the height of the eastern keystones of Notre-Dame, see Stefaan Van Liefferinge, “The Choir of Notre-Dame of Paris: An Inquiry into Twelfth-Century Mathematics and Early-Gothic Architecture” (PhD Dissertation, Columbia University, 2006), 166, table A.15. The height of the nave of Notre-Dame is given as 42.09 meters in Mapping Gothic France (http://mappinggothic.org, accessed July 29, 2013). 36 Height of Laon in Mapping Gothic France (http:// mappinggothic.org, accessed July 29, 2013). Saint-Denis measurement given in Bruzelius, SaintDenis, 80. 37 Murray, “Architectural Envelope,” 23. 38 Bouillart, Saint-Germain-des-Prés, 126. For a schematic drawing, see Murray, “Architectural Envelope,” figure 5. 39 Ibid., 24. 40 On this subject, see, for example, Michael T. Davis and Linda Neagley, “Mechanics and Meaning: Plan Design at Saint-Urbain, Troyes and Saint-Ouen, Rouen,” Gesta 39/2 (2000): 161–82. See also Kidson, “Historical Circumstances and the Principles of the Design,” 35–94.

Notes to pages 77–86 41 Measured from center point to center point on the interior at the chapel responds, bay four is 6.6 meters or exactly 20.3 royal feet. 42 A diagonal taken between the center points, rotated outward, touches the midpoint of the lower chapel wall. 43 The numbers here are in royal feet for bay one: (north-south by east-west): 20.67 (6.72 meters) by 17.96 (5.84 meters); bay two: 20.49 (6.66 meters) by 18.18 (5.91 meters); bay three: 20.55 (6.68 meters) by 18.12 (5.89 meters); bay four: 20.3 (6.6 meters) by 18.21 (5.92 meters). 44 The size of the lateral niche in the third bay of the upper chapel is also nine feet. A nine-foot perch was rare. For a discussion of the perch and the different forms of mensuration in the Middle Ages, see Peter Kidson, “A Metrological Investigation,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 53 (1990): 71–97. 45 Van Liefferinge, “The Choir of Notre-Dame,” chapter 3. 46 Measured at the dado of bays 1–3 on the south side. The upper chapel wall is exactly 2.64 royal feet. 47 To the interior center point. 48 Evidence exists that the plan was laid through dynamic geometry based on a modular unit within the nave of the lower chapel, equivalent to the size of the portal space in the lower chapel, approximately 10 royal feet by 9 royal feet. A number of √2 relationships in the chapel follow from this unit. A diagonal drawn between the corners of one module and rotated outward points to the center of the lower chapel wall. The arc of this rotation in the other bays (or the diagonal in the next module) passes through the center point of the wall responds. This diagonal creates an approximate √2 relationship between the module and the larger spaces extending from it. A diagonal taken from the center of the module and rotated forty-five degrees sets the center points for the nave columns of the lower chapel. The walls of the apse were laid on seven sides of two concentric dodecagons. In the upper chapel, the keystone of the dodecagon, which has an eccentricity of 1.55 meters or about 4.75 royal feet, corresponds to the center point of a geometric module placed beyond the last transverse arch. While the modular design relates most closely to the design of the lower chapel, it also agrees with the upper chapel, for the upper chapel hemicycle keystone was placed directly in the center of the last module in the apse. Yet even if these are valid within the chapel, this system appears overcomplicated compared to other known methods of design. 49 All of the bases of the Sainte-Chapelle have been replaced, making this an unreliable analytical tool for determining changes in campaign, design, or date of execution. 50 The remarks here are based only on an initial observation; the results of a further study will be published in a later article.

245

51 Guerout, “Palais de la Cité,” 2:184–7. 52 This was probably not the first house. According to Morand, a parliamentary act from 1646 gave permission to Louis Piget, parcheminier, to rebuild the house associated with the office. Histoire de la SainteChapelle, 108. 53 The door may have been planned as a royal entry prior to the direct entrance provided by the Galerie des Merciers, which was also reconstructed under Louis IX. This will be examined at a later time. 54 Brenk, “Capetian Political Program,” 195–213. 55 Describing the chapel in 1853, Troche identified the subject as the Dormition of the Virgin, in La SainteChapelle de Paris, 37. The restorers, however, recreated the lower chapel tympanum as a Coronation of the Virgin. Two unrelated fragments of this subject, once on permanent display at the Musée national du Moyen Âge in Paris, were previously attributed to this location at the Sainte-Chapelle, although their provenance is uncertain. 56 On the work of this sculptor, see Jean-Michel Leniaud, ed., Du plâtre et d’or: Geoffroy-Dechaume, sculpteur romantique de Viollet-le-Duc (L’Isle-Adam: Val d’Oise, 1988). 57 On the distinctions between the original sculptures and the copied and restored sculptures, see Francis Salet, “Nouvelle note sur les statues d’apôtres de la Sainte-Chapelle,” Bulletin monumental 112 (1954): 362. Xavier Dectot describes three distinct groups in Sculptures du XIIIe siècle. Collections du musée de Cluny (Paris: Réunion des musées nationaux, online catalog, 2010). http://www.sculpturesmedievales–cluny. fr/accueil/index.php. Cf. Cesare Gnudi, “Le jubé de Bourges et l’apogée du classicisme dans la sculpture de l’Île-de-France au milieu du XIIIe siècle,” Revue de l’art 3 (1969): 31–6, who described only two major groups. 58 On the disputed possibility that the apostles were sculpted at different times, see Annette Weber, “Les grandes et les petites statues d’apôtres de la Sainte-Chapelle de Paris: Hypothèses de datation et d’interprétation,” Bulletin monumental 155/2 (1997): 81–101; and “Apostel für König Louis IX – Neue überlegungen zu den apostelstatuen der Sainte-Chapelle,” in La Sainte-Chapelle, ed. Hediger, 363–92. 59 Denise Jalabert, “La flore sculptée de la SainteChapelle,” Bulletin archéologique du comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques (1932–3): 739– 47; Cohen and Dectot, Paris, ville rayonnante, 77. 60 Jean Givens, Observation and Image-Making in Gothic Art (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 2–3 and 5–36. Givens examines the differences between observation of the material world and copying from memory or other drawings in the production of naturalistic foliate sculpture in a variety of contexts. She employs a new vocabulary to distinguish between naturalistic foliate sculpture that is descriptive of natural phenomena, but that does not precisely follow natural laws.

246

Notes to pages 86–110

61 Cohen, “La Sainte-Chapelle à la lumière des archives,” 211–28. 62 Cohen, “Restoration as Re-creation,” 145–64; see also Jordan, “Rationalizing the Narrative,” 192–200. 63 This is also seen in the remaining capitals from the upper parts of Royaumont. Saint-Germain des Prés: fragments of Place Apollinaire and Musée national du Moyen Âge Cl. 23668; Saint-Jean de Latran: Musée national du Moyen Âge Cl. 23866; Parisian capital (provenance unknown): Musée national du Moyen Âge Cl. 18642b. 64 The embrasures of the Lady Chapel also exhibit this type of delicacy and variety. 65 Notre-Dame north portal, Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois façade, Saint-Jean de Latran: Musée national du Moyen Âge Cl.  19102 / Cl.  12724, Lady Chapel/ Refectory of Saint-Germain des Prés: Carnavalet AP 225. 66 Capital with a provenance from Paris; Musée national du Moyen Âge RF 542 / Cl. 19566. 67 This topic has been examined from a wide number of perspectives: see, for example, Nikolaus Pevsner, The Leaves of Southwell (London: Penguin Books, 1945); Otto Pächt, “Early Italian Nature Studies and the Early Calendar Landscape,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 13 (1950): 13–47; Ernst H. Gombrich, The Sense of Order: A Study in the Psychology of Decorative Art (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1979); James S. Ackerman, “Early Renaissance ‘Naturalism’ and Scientific Illustration” (1985) in Distance Points: Essays in Theory and Renaissance Art and Architecture (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1991), 185–207; Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, The Mastery of Nature: Aspects of Art, Science and Humanism in the Renaissance (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993); Paul Binski, “The Angel Choir at Lincoln and the Poetics of the Gothic Smile,” Art History 20 (1997): 350–74. 68 Cohen and Dectot, Paris, ville rayonnant, 70–83. 69 This feature is also seen in the nave of Saint-Nicaise of Reims. Earlier manifestations of this tendency exist at Arras, Saint-Remi of Reims, and Chalonssur-Marne. Branner, Court Style, 20–1. 70 Bruzelius, Saint-Denis, 43–5. 71 For the dates of the nave chapels of Notre-Dame, see Doquang, “Rayonnant Chantry Chapels,” 20, 84–8, 94–101 and “The Lateral Chapels of NotreDame in Context,” 137–62. 72 Branner, Court Style, 23 and pl., Bony, French Gothic Architecture, 386–7. 73 Bony, French Gothic Architecture, 386. 74 Ibid., 193. 75 The great bells were paid for in 1256, and Hugues Libergier, who is said to have completed the “two towers” (i.e., the façade), died in 1263. Kimpel and Suckale, L’architecture gothique en France, 346; see also Maryse Bideaut and Claudine Lautier, “Saint-Nicaise de Reims: Chronologie et nouvelles remarques sur l’architecture,” Bulletin monumental 135 (1977): 295–300.

76 Doquang, “Rayonnant Chantry Chapels,” 94–101 and Doquang, “The Lateral Chapels of Notre-Dame in Context,” 137–62. 77 Dieter Kimpel, “Die Querhausarme von Notre-Dame zu Paris und ihre skulpturen” (PhD Dissertation, Universität Bonn, 1971), 32. 78 Ibid., 72–3, cites Branner, Court Style, 69–70. 79 Davis, “Splendor and Peril,” 34–65. 80 In Court Style, plates 51–6, Branner identifies but does not discuss this phenomenon. 81 Ibid., 142, cites these and older examples in France at Rouen Cathedral, Villeneuve-sur-Verberie and Saint-Frambourg at Senlis. 82 An image of the embrasures of Saint-Germain en Laye is found in Branner, Court Style, plate 56. 83 Lindy Grant, Architecture and Society in Normandy, 1120–1170 (New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press, 2005), 78. 84 Branner, Court Style, plates 8 and 9. 85 See Jean Verrier, “L’église Saint-Séverin,” Congrès archéologique (1947): 138–48. 86 Branner, Court Style, 91 and 93, dated the structure to after 1254. The medallions in the apse were damaged by the insertion of the tribune and baldachin. See Leniaud and Perrot, Sainte-Chapelle, 103–4. 87 Wilson cites Westminster and York as English appropriations of French Rayonnant, both of which were formative in the development of the English Decorated Style, although he sees microarchitecture as its main inspiration, Gothic Cathedral, 178–88 and 191–6. 88 Branner, Court Style, plate 7. 89 Bony, French Gothic Architecture, 389. 90 Peter Kurmann, “Himmelsboten aus Amiens: Bemerken zu den Engeln der Blendarkatur in der oberen Sainte-Chapelle,” in La Sainte-Chapelle, ed. Hediger, 399. 91 For a plan, see Mapping Gothic France (http://mappinggothic.org/building/1046, accessed August 5, 2013). 92 See also Murray, Amiens, plate 59. 93 Ibid., 160; the pier/respond sections in both buildings are also syncopated. 94 From the sixteenth century through the nineteenth century, scholars generally believed that Pierre de Montreuil designed the royal chapel. See Germain Brice, Description nouvelle de ce qu’il a de plus remarquable dans la ville de Paris, 2 vols. (Paris, 1698), 2:366. This was accepted by Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 30, Viollet-le-Duc, Dictionnaire, s.v. “Chapelles (Saintes),” 2:425. These associations derive more from a desire to attach a known Parisian figure to an important royal monument than from a scientific understanding of his work. 95 Murray, Amiens, 48–58, 62–6, and 93–5. 96 Branner, Court Style, 61–5, esp. 64. 97 Kimpel and Suckale, L’architecture gothique en France, 404. They also noted that the evenly coursed stonework at the Sainte-Chapelle paralleled that at Amiens.

Notes to pages 110–115 98 Concerning the respond as “handprint,” see Murray, Amiens, 55–6. 99 Ibid., 55 and plates 58–63. 100 Ibid., 84. 101 Ibid. reasons Robert de Luzarches could not have been the master of the Sainte-Chapelle because in his interpretation Luzarches was not responsible for the radiating chapels at Amiens. 102 On this subject, see, for example, Peter Kurmann, “Mobilité des artistes ou mobilité des modèles? A propos de l’atelier des sculpteurs rémois au XIIIe siècle,” Revue de l’Art 120 (1998): 23–34. Chapter 3  The Architecture of Sacral Kingship 1 Aby Warburg (1866–1929) pioneered this trajectory during the early history of the discipline of art history in Germany, while the many publications of Erwin Panofsky (1892–1968) on iconography established a system to analyze meaning in art. Many other approaches have been deliberated since the postmodern turn of the 1980s. 2 Richard Krautheimer, “Introduction to an ‘Iconography of Medieval Architecture,’” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 5 (1942): 1– 33, reprinted in Richard Krautheimer, Studies in Early Christian, Medieval, and Renaissance Art (New York: New York University Press; London: University of London Press, 1969), 115–50. 3 Ibid., 127. On the problems of overinterpretation, see Paul Crossley, “Medieval Architecture and Meaning: The Limits of Iconography,” Burlington Magazine 130 (1998): 115–21. Authors who have extended the idea of architectural iconography include Günter Bandmann, Mittelalterliche Architecktur als Bedeutungsträger (Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1951); English edn., Early Medieval Architecture as Bearer of Meaning, trans. Kendal Wallis (New York: Columbia University Press, 2005); Hans Sedlmayr, Die Entstehung der Kathedrale (Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, 1988 [1950]); Martin Warnke, Bau und Überbau: Soziologie der mittelalterlichen Architectur nach den Schriftquellen (Frankfurt: Syndikat, 1976). 4 For a recent commentary on this subject, see Catherine Carver McCurrach, “Renovatio Reconsidered: Richard Krautheimer and the Iconography of Architecture,” Gesta 50/1 (2011): 41–69. 5 See, for example, the essay on this subject by William W. Clark, “‘The Recollection of the Past is the Promise of the Future.’ Continuity and Contextuality: Saint-Denis, Merovingians, Capetians, and Paris,” in Artistic Integration in Gothic Buildings, ed. Kathryn Brush, Peter Draper, and Virginia Chieffo Raguin (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995), 92–113. 6 On medieval information networks and communication patterns, see Thomas Wetzstein, “New

247

Masters of Space: The Creation of Communication Networks in the West (Eleventh-Twelfth Centuries),” in Space in the Medieval West: Places, Territories, and Imagined Geographies, ed. Meredith Cohen and Fanny Madeline (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014) 115–132. 7 For a structuralist interpretation, see, for example, the paradigm Pierre Bourdieu articulated in The Logic of Practice, trans. Richard Nice (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 1990); Pierre Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power, ed. John B. Thompson (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991); Pierre Bourdieu, The Field of Cultural Production, ed. Randal Johnson (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993). 8 As an example, Marvin Trachtenberg interpreted the transition to Gothic architecture as a deliberate rejection of classicizing/historicizing forms. See Marvin Trachtenberg, “Suger’s Miracles, Branner’s Bourges: Reflections on Gothic Architecture as Medieval Modernism,” Gesta 39 (2000): 183–205. 9 Henri Lefebvre, La production de l’espace (Paris: Anthropos, 1974), English edn. The Production of Space, trans. Donald Nicholson-Smith (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991). 10 Concerning the issue of reception, see the foundational series of articles by Hans Robert Jauss, reprinted in Toward an Aesthetic of Reception, trans. Timothy Bahti, Theory and History of Literature, II (Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 1982). With reference to art specifically, see David Freedberg, The Power of Images: Studies in the History and Theory of Response (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1989) and Alfred Gell, Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory (Oxford: Clarendon, 1998). 11 This is essentially a structuralist argument: for this approach to art history, see Mieke Bal and Norman Bryson, “Semiotics and Art History,” Art Bulletin 73/2 (1991): 174–208. 12 The Homilies of Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople, ed. and trans. Cyril Mango (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1958), 184. 13 For a thirteenth-century list of the relics in the chapel, see Anthony of Novgorod, “Le livre du pélerin,” Itinéraires russes en orient, ed. Société de l’Orient latin, trans. B. de Khitrowo (Geneva: Imprimerie Fick, 1889), 97–8. 14 Flusin, “Les reliques de la Sainte-Chapelle et leur passé impérial à Constantinople,” in Le trésor de la Sainte-Chapelle, ed. Jannic Durand and MariePierre Laffitte (Paris: Réunion des musées nationaux, 2001). 20–31. 15 Note that Sacra Capella is different from Sancta Capella (Sainte-Chapelle). In a keynote address at a conference on Saintes-Chapelles held by the CESR in Tours on June 25–8, 2013, Elizabeth A. R. Brown questioned when the Sainte-Chapelle of Paris received this title. The second foundation document for the SainteChapelle, dated 1248, describes it as a “sacram capellam,” but the chapel was often referred to simply as the “king’s chapel in the palace” (Appendix 3).

248

Notes to pages 115–124

16 G. Downey, “Review of ‘The Great Palace of the Byzantine Emperors: Being a First Report on the Excavations Carried Out in Istanbul on behalf of the Walker Trust (the University of St. Andrews), 1935–1938’” (London: Geoffrey Cumberlege; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1947), American Journal of Archaeology 53/1 (1949): 82. 17 Jonathan Bardill, “Visualizing the Great Palace of the Byzantine Emperors at Constantinople: Archaeology, Text, and Topography,” in Visualisierungen von Herrschaft: Frühmittelalterliche Residenzen: Gestalt und Zeremoniell internationales Kolloquium 3./4. Juni 2004 in Istanbul, ed. Franz Alto Bauer, Byzas 5 (Istanbul: Ege Yayınları, 2006), 36. 18 Ibid., 30. 19 Anthony of Novgorod, “Le livre du pèlerin,” 98. 20 For the atrium and the marble, see Photius, ed. Mango, 185–6. For the narthex specifically, see Ioli Kalavrezou, “Helping Hands for the Empire: Imperial Ceremonies and the Cult of Relics at the Byzantine Court,” in Byzantine Court Culture from 829–1204, ed. Henry Maguire (Baltimore, MD: Dumbarton Oaks, 1997), 56. 21 Photius, ed. Mango, 185–8. 22 Ibid. 23 Ibid., 186. 24 Krautheimer, “Introduction to an ‘Iconography of Architecture,’” 8, 13, passim. 25 Ibid., 14–15. 26 For an analysis of these problems, see Crossley, “Limits of Iconography,” 116–21, and McCurrach, “Renovatio Reconsidered,” 41–69. 27 The function of the chapel is discussed in the next chapter. 28 Bos, Églises flamboyantes, 167. This porch was extended and rebuilt in the late fifteenth century. 29 André Grabar, Martyrium. Recherches sur le culte des reliques et l’art chrétien antique (Paris: Collège de France, 1943–6), 559–60. 30 Ibid., 562–9. 31 Ibid., 564–70. 32 Ibid., 571–2. 33 Weiss, Art and Crusade, 19–24. 34 Ibid., 22: “Charlemagne’s palace chapel was perhaps the most influential for Louis IX.” 35 Heinrich von Fichtenau, The Carolingian Empire, trans. Peter Munz (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1957), 72; Einhard, The Life of Charlemagne, trans. Lewis Thorpe (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1969), 125–8. 36 Weiss, Art and Crusade, 23. 37 Ibid. 38 This view was based on the well-known article by Inge Hacker-Sück, “Les Saintes-Chapelles de Paris et les chapelles palatines du Moyen Âge en France,” Cahiers archéologiques 13 (1962): 224 and 227–57. See later in this chapter for a more detailed discussion of the local bishop’s chapel.

39 Hans J. Böker, “The Bishop’s Chapel of Hereford Cathedral and the Question of Architectural Copies in the Middle Ages,” Gesta 37 (1998): 45–54. 40 Ibid., 45. 41 On the problem of anachronistic copies of Aachen, see Jenny Shaffer, “Recreating the Past, Aachen and the Problem of the Architectural ‘Copy’” (PhD Dissertation, Columbia University, New York, 1992); on the complex mediations obtaining for such likenesses, see Jenny Shaffer, “Letaldus of Micy, Germigny-des-Prés, and Aachen: Histories, Contexts, and the Problem of Likeness in Medieval Architecture,” Viator 37 (2006): 53–83. 42 Oskar Schürer, “Romanische Doppelkapellen: Eine Typengeschichtliche Untersuchung,” Marburger Jahrbuch für Kunstwissenschaft 5 (1929): 99–192. 43 Luis Menendez Pidal, “La Cámara Santa, su desctrucción y reconstrucción,” Boletin del Insituto de Estudios Asturianos (1960): 11. 44 Ángeles García de la Borbolla, “El culto y la devoción al lignum crucis en los reinos occidentales de la península Ibérica (VII–XV),” Pecia: ressources en médiévistique 8–11 (2006): 565–600; Maria Pilar García Cuentos, “El culto a las reliquias en Asturias: La Cámara Santa y el Monsacro, Ovideo, Asturias, España,” in Religion and Belief in Medieval Europe, ed. Guy de Boe and Frans Verhaegh (Zellik: Instituut voor het Archeologisch Patrimonium, 1997), 241–54; Joaquín Manzanares Rodríguez, Las joyas de la Cámara Santa (Oviedo: Tabularium Artis Asturiensis, 1972). 45 Edward Impey, The White Tower (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008), 13. 46 Schürer, “Romanische Doppelkapellen,” 102. 47 Heinrich Blumenthal, Baugeschichte der Doppelkirche von Schwarzrheindorf − Gedanken zur Erstellung des Bauwerks vor 850 Jahren (Siegburg: RheinlandiaVerlag, 2001). 48 William Tronzo, The Cultures of His Kingdom: Roger II and the Cappella Palatina in Palermo (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997). For a more recent and scopic history, see La Capella Palatina a Palermo, ed. Beat Brenk (Modena: Franco Cosimo Panini, 2010). 49 The Cappella Palatina might have been known to Louis IX through his dealings with Frederick II. Weiss, Art and Crusade, 224 n. 69. 50 On the problem of anachronistic copies of Aachen, see Shaffer, “Recreating the Past.” 51 Tronzo, Cultures of His Kingdom, 15–16. 52 Ibid., 97–124. 53 The liturgy of the Sainte-Chapelle is discussed in the next chapter. 54 On such connections, see Eric Rice, Music and Ritual at Charlemagne’s Marienkirche in Aachen (Kassel: Merseburger Verlag, 2009). 55 Ernst Kantorowicz, Laudes Regiae: A Study in Liturgical Acclamations and Medieval Ruler Worship (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1946). 56 Weiss, Art and Crusade, 30–2.

Notes to pages 125–128 57 For a more detailed discussion of the evidence for palatine chapels in France, please refer to chapter 4 of my dissertation. Note that the evidence collected here concerns only royal residences documented specifically as palaces/palatii. On this, see Olivier Guyotjeannin, “Résidences et palais des premiers Capétiens,” in Jean Chapelot and Elisabeth Lalou, ed., Vincennes aux origines de l’état moderne. Actes du colloque scientifique sur les Capétians et Vincennes au Moyen Âge les 8, 9, 10 juin 1994 (Paris: Presses de l’École normale supérieure, 1996), 134. The meaning of “palatium” is nuanced; see ibid., 131. The most comprehensive analysis of royal residences based on archival documents remains Carlrichard Brühl, Fodrum, Gistum, Servitium Regis: Studien zu den Wissenschaftlichen Grundlagen des Königstums im Frankenreich und in den Fränkischen nachfolgestaaten Deutschland, Frankreich und Italien vom 6. bis zur Mitte des 14. Jahrhunderts, 2 vols. (Cologne, Graz: Böhlau, 1968). See also Thomas Zotz, in Palais royaux et princiers. Actes du colloque international tenu au Mans les 6–7 et 8 octobre 1994, ed. Annie Renoux (Le Mans: Publications de l’ Université du Maine, 1996), 7–15. 58 Helgaud de Fleury, Vie de Robert le Pieux. Epitoma vitae regis Rotberti pii, trans. and ed. Robert-Henri Bautier and Gillette Labory (Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1965), 92. The extant tower at Compiègne was constructed by Philip Augustus. 59 On this, see May Vieillard-Troïekouroff, “La chapelle du palais de Charles le Chauve à Compiègne,” Cahiers archéologiques 21 (1971): 89–108; Josiane Barbier et Martine Petitjean, “Compiègne (Oise): palais mérovingien et carolingien,” in Palais médiévaux (France-Belgique): 25 ans d’archéologie, ed. Annie Renoux (Le Mans: Publications de l’Université du Maine, 1994), 37–40; Louis Carolus-Barré, Études et documents sur l’Île-de-France et la Picardie au Moyen Âge, vol. 1, Compiègne et le Soissonnais (Compiègne: Ville de Compiègne, 1994), 13–14. 60 Jacques Debal, “Le cadre urbain aux XIe et XIIe siècles,” in Histoire d’Orléans et de son terroir, Histoire des villes de France, ed. Jacques Debal (Saint-Justla-Pendue: Imprimerie Chirat, 1983), 263; Jacques Debal, Le plan d’Orléans à travers les siècles (Orléans: Société archéologique et historique de l’Orléanais, 1980). See also Robert-Henri Bautier, “De Robert le Fort à Louis le Gros: Orléans et la region d’entre Seine et Loire dans la politique des Robertiens et des premiers Capétiens,” Bulletin de la Société archéologique et historique de l’Orléanais 10/80 (1988): 26–44. 61 Dominique Vermand, “Le palais royal de Senlis et le prieuré Saint-Maurice,” in Les Capétiens et Senlis de Hugues Capet à Saint-Louis, ed. Françoise Baron (Senlis: La Sauvegarde de Senlis, 1987), 19. See also Dominique Vermand, Le palais royal: le prieuré Saint-Maurice, Collection du Patrimoine Senlisien (Poitiers: Syndicat d’initiative de Senlis, 1992). For more on the palace at Senlis, see Brühl, Palatium und Civitas, vol. 1, Gallien, 83–90, and Annie Renoux,

249

“Evocation morphologique des palais Normands et Capétiens à la fin du Xe siècle et au début du XIe siècle,” in Le roi de France et son royaume autour de l’an mil. Colloque Hugues Capet, 987–1987, la France de l’an mil, Paris-Senlis, 22–25 Juin 1987, ed. Xavier Barral i Altet and Michel Parisse (Paris: Picard, 1992), 193–200. 62 Lucien Broche, “L’ancien palais des rois à Laon,” Bulletin de la Société académique de Laon 31 (1904): 180–212; Brühl, Palatium und Civitas, 1:73–82. 63 Viollet-le-Duc, Dictionnaire, s.v. “Chapelles (Saintes),” 2:424. 64 Didier Busson, Paris, ville antique, Guides archéologiques de la France (Paris: Centre des ­monuments nationaux, 2001), 59. 65 Guerout, “Le Palais de la Cité.” All references are to 1 (1949) unless otherwise noted. See also Guerout, “Les sanctuaires de la Cité autres que la cathédrale,” Dossiers d’archéologie 218 (1996): 50–77. Topographical information is given in Lebeuf, 1:173–6. Also see Marie-Louise Arrivot, “Dix-sept églises dans la Cité,” Positions des thèses de l’École nationale des chartes (Paris: École nationale des chartes, 1921). For a different interpretation of the palace’s archaeology, see Charles-Laurent Salch, “Le palais des rois de France à Paris en l’Île de la Cité, du XIIe au XIVe siècle,” Châteaux forts d’Europe 4 (1997): 7–42. 66 The church was repaired and elongated in 1309–15 and rebuilt in 1520. It was once again reconstructed in 1772. The church was sold in 1791 and razed in 1858 to allow for the enlargement of the Boulevard du Palais. Jacques Hillairet, L’Île de la Cité (Paris, Éditions du Minuit, 1969), 140–2. 67 Helgaud de Fleury, Vie de Robert le Pieux, 130–1; RHF 10:115. Sauval informs that Robert dedicated this chapel to Notre-Dame de l’Étoile and Saint Nicolas and that Saint Louis rebuilt this chapel. Sauval, 1:445. 68 Robert de Lasteyrie, Cartulaire Général de Paris (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1887), 364–5, no.  418 (AN K 25.1): “Ego Ludovicus . . . notum facimus . . . quod pater meus, bone memorie rex Ludovicus . . . in honore beati confessoris Nicholai, Parisiius, in palatio, capellam constituit et de sacerdotis ibidem servituri sustenatione magnifice providit. Nos etiam, obtentu remissionis peccatorum nostrorum . . . constituimus capellano.” 69 “Quinque capellani de capella regis, pro medietate, 50 l. Duo matricularii, pro medietate, 15 l. Dominus Mattheus capellanus, pro augmento capellaniae, pro medietate 100 s.” Accounts, RHF 21:262. 70 The first foundation for the Sainte-Chapelle established five chaplains, two wardens, and two clerks per chaplain. This is discussed further in the next chapter. See also the foundation document from 1246 in Appendix 3 for comparison. 71 Gautier Cornut, “De susceptione Coronae Spineae,” RHF 22:31. 72 Cited in the 1246 and 1248 foundation documents of the Sainte-Chapelle. Morand, “Pièces justificatives,”

250

Notes to pages 128–138

Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 4–7 and 8–13: “Matthaeus quondam capellanus capellae nostrae veteris.” 73 Guerout, “Palais de la Cité,” 1:128. 74 Bibliothèque historique de la Ville de Paris, Papiers Théodore Vacquer, ms. 242, Cité (1843–61), 118. Vacquer, 17 n. 1, wrote, “La Sainte-Chapelle n’a remplacé aucun édifice religieux,” but his excavations of the east end did not go far enough into the Sainte-Chapelle to identify any earlier structure. 75 Salch, “Palais des rois,” 35; Guerout, “Palais de la Cité,” 1:128. 76 RHF 10:115 (Robert II): “Fecit . . . in civitate Parisius ecclesiam in honore S. Nicolai pontificis in palatio”; Lasteyrie, Cartulaire, 364, no.  418 (Louis VII): “Ego Ludovicus . . . notum facimus . . . quod pater meus, bone memorie rex Ludovicus . . . in honore beati confessoris Nicholai, Parisiius, in palatio, capellam constituit.” Morand, “Pièces justificatives,” Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 4–7 and 8–13 (Louis IX): “Matthaeus quondam capellanus capellae nostrae veteris.” 77 Guerout, “Palais de la Cité,” 1:141 cites Lasteyrie, Cartulaire, 341, no. 386. 78 Morand, “Pièces justificatives,” Histoire de la SainteChapelle, 1. On the augmentation of the chaplain’s income, see Xavier de la Selle, Le service des âmes à la cour: confesseurs et aumôniers des rois de France du XIIIe au XVe siècle (Paris: École nationale des chartes, H. Champion, 1995), 34. 79 Michael T. Davis, “Désespoir, Espérance, and Douce France: The New Palace, Paris, and the Royal State,” in Fauvel Studies: Allegory, Chronicle, Music, and Image in Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France MS français 146, ed. Margaret Bent and Andrew Wathey (Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), 188. See also Guerout, “Palais de la Cité,” 2:23–44. 80 Fires ravaged the Palais de la Cité in 1601, 1618, 1776, and 1871, but no major changes were made to the palace between the first and second of these plans. Palais de Justice de Paris, Historique (Service de communication, n. d.), 7–10. 81 Guerout, “Palais de la Cité,” 1:145. See also Marc Nortier, “La Chapelle Saint-Michel du Palais à Paris, siège de la confrérie des pèlerins du Mont-SaintMichel,” Bulletin annuel des Amis du Mont-SaintMichel 105 (2000): 34–45. 82 Guerout, “Palais de la Cité,” 1:145. Nortier, “Chapelle Saint-Michel,” 137, writes that the chapel may have been founded in 1158 on the occasion of the pilgrimage that Louis VII made to Mont-SaintMichel. 83 Ibid., 1:145, and Nortier, “Chapelle Saint-Michel,” 34–45. 84 Vacquer, dossier 64, 21, no. 28. 85 J. Dufour, Recueil des actes de Louis VI, 4  vols. (Paris: Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres, 1992–4) 1: n. 221. For a recent history of Saint-Germain en Laye in the Middle Ages, see Cécile Léon, Le Château de Saint-Germain-en-Laye au Moyen Âge: histoire et évolu-

86 87

88

89

90

91 92 93

94

95 96 97

98

tion architectural d’une résidence royale, XIIe–XIVe siècles (Paris: Presses Franciliens, 2008). See the plans in Léon, Saint-Germain-en-Laye, 68–9. Layettes, 2:384, no.  2727. Other work at the palace may have accompanied the foundation of the chapel; Léon, Saint-Germain-en-Laye, 112–13. For the details of its postmedieval history, see Alain Villes, “La chapelle palatine de Saint-Germain-en-Laye, une oeuvre essentielle du gothique rayonnant,” Antiquités nationales 40 (2009): 193–216. On this see Marie-Thérèse Berger, “La restauration de la chapelle du château au XIXe siècle, le gothique retrouvé,” Antiquités nationales 22/23 (1990–1): 141. Also see Eugène Millet, Monographie de la restauration de Saint-Germain-en-Laye d’après les projets et les détails d’execution traces par feu Eugène Millet (Paris: Silvestre et Cie, 1892). In the caption for plate 10, “Suite du projet 1865,” is written: “Cette coupe montre l’arcature de soubassement qui avait été détruite sous Louis XIV. Quand on a rehaussé le sol intérieur au niveau de la cour, les fragments trouvés en 1865 en effectuant le déblai montrerent que l’arcature ancienne avait un autre tracé que celui-ci.” The rose window was rediscovered between two walls at the time of the restoration, Millet, Monographie, plate 77: “En 1873 on a découvert, en piquant l’enduit, le remarquable rose du pignon ouest, absolumment intact, qui avait été aveuglée pendant la Renaissance par la Salle des Fêtes.” Bruzelius, Saint-Denis, 107; Branner, Court Style, 51–5. Hacker-Sück, “Les Saintes-Chapelles de Paris,” 224 and 227–57. Thierry Crépin-Leblond, “Recherches sur les palais épiscopaux en France au Moyen Âge (12e et 13e s.)” (Thèse de l’École nationale des chartes, 1987). See also Thierry Crépin-Leblond, “Une demeure épiscopale du XIIe siècle: l’exemple de Beauvais (actuel Musée départementale de l’Oise), Bulletin archéologique du comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques, nouvelle série 20–1, années 1984–5 (1988): 8–58 and Thierry Crépin-Leblond, entries on Auxerre, Beauvais, Laon, Meaux, Noyon, Paris, and Reims, in Palais médiévaux, ed. Renoux, 135–68. Crépin-Leblond, “Recherches,” 272–4, dated the upper chapel to 1211–20 by stylistic comparison with the radiating chapels of the cathedral (indeed, the chapel has two levels). See also Emile Amé, “La chapelle de l’archevêché de Reims,” Annales archéologiques 15 (1855): 213–23. Crépin-Leblond, “Recherches,” 276. Hacker-Sück, “Les Saintes-Chapelles de Paris,” 240. William of Saint-Pathus cited three, Vie de Saint Louis par Guillaume de Saint-Pathus, confesseur de la Reine Marguerite, ed. Henri-François Delaborde (Paris: Picard, 1899), 42; discussion of new wall, in Guerout, “Palais de la Cité,” 1:168–70. Ibid., 1:171.

Notes to pages 138–142 99 Ibid., 1:172; 2:89 n. 4, cites a plan by Delagrive that shows that, during the eighteenth century, the gallery of Philip the Fair stopped just north of the porch of the Sainte-Chapelle, but was attached to it by means of a thirteenth-century passage. 100 Guérout, “Palais de la Cité,” 1:173 and 2:88 maintains that the staircase was first built by Philip the Fair, but also observes that the practice of having a stone or podium from which criers relayed proclamations and information dates to antiquity. My opinion is that the ancient gallery required a staircase, and a podium probably existed at this location from early in its history. The castle of Louis VI at Senlis had a similar staircase with a balcony from which information could have been cried. Cf. Davis, “Désespoir,” 197; Mary Whiteley, “Deux escaliers royaux du XIVe s.: les ‘grands degrez’ du Palais de la Cité et la ‘grande viz’ du Louvre,” Bulletin monumental 147 (1989): 132–54. 101 For recent work on the Trésor and its contents, see Yann Potin, “Archives en sacristie: le trésor est-il un batiment d’archives? Le cas du ‘Trésor des chartes’ des rois de France (XIIIe–XIXe siècle),” Livraisons d’histoire de l’architecture et des arts que s’y rattachent 10 (2005): 65–85; Yann Potin and Olivier Guyotjeannin, “La fabrique de la perpetuité: le Trésor des chartes et les archives du royaume (XIIIe – XIXe siecle),” Revue de Synthèse 5/125 (2004): 15–44. 102 Guerout, “Palais de la Cité,” 1:165. 103 Ibid., 1:166. 104 Geoffrey of Beaulieu, RHF 20:15, describes the book collection as located in the treasury of the chapel at Paris. 105 For example, Laon Cathedral has a height of 27.82 meters (http://mappinggothic.org/building/1024). 106 Van Liefferinge, “The Choir of Notre-Dame,” 166, table A.15. 107 Murray, “Architectural Envelope,” 24; Weiss, Art and Crusade, 63–76, recognizes Solomonic references in the porch and in the tribune that held the Grande Chasse in his analysis of the chapel’s relation to the crusade. 108 Individual scenes and subjects of the windows are elaborated in Louis Grodecki, et  al., Les vitraux de Notre-Dame et de la Sainte-Chapelle de Paris, Corpus vitrearum medii aevi: France 1. 109 Leniaud and Perrot, Sainte-Chapelle, 127–200. 110 Jordan, Visualizing Kingship, 18–29. 111 Ibid., 28. 112 Ibid. 113 Ibid., 27. 114 For early histories of coronation and unction, see Percy Ernst Schramm, “Die Krönung bei den Westfranken und Angelsachsen von 878 bis zum 1000,” Zeitschrift für Rechtgeschichte 23 (1934): 117–242; Percy Ernst Schramm, “Ordines Studien II. Die Krönung bei den Westfranken und den Franzosen,” Archiv für Urkundenforschung 15 (1938): 3–55; Cornelius A. Bouman, Sacring and Crowning: The Development of the Latin Ritual for the

251

Anointing of Kings and the Coronation of an Emperor before the Eleventh Century (Groningen: Wolters, 1957); Jean Goy, Le Sacre des rois de France (Reims: Koulon, 1975); Arnold Angenendt, “Rex et sacerdos. Zur Genese der Königablung,” in Tradition als historische Kraft: Interdisziplinäre Forschungen zur Geschichte des frühen Mittelalters: Festschrift für K. Hauck, ed. Norbert Kamp und Joachim Wollasch (Berlin-New York, 1982). Studies of coronation that address the Capetians include Richard A. Jackson, ed., Ordines Coronationis Franciae: Texts and Ordines for the Coronation of Frankish and French Kings and Queens in the Middle Ages, 2 vols. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995 and 2000); Jacques le Goff, “A Coronation Program for the Age of Saint Louis: The ordo of 1250,” in Coronations: Medieval and Early Modern Monarchic Ritual, Janos M. Bak, ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990), 46–57; Janos M. Bak, “Manuscripts, Texts and Enigmas of Medieval French Coronation Ordines,” Viator 23 (1992): 35–70; Jean-Pierre Bayard, Sacres et couronnements royaux (Paris: G. Trédaniel, 1984); Jacques Le Goff, Éric alazzo, Jean-Claude BonneP, and Marie-Noël Colette, Le sacre royal à l’epoque de Saint Louis d’après le manuscrit latin 1246 de la BNF (Paris: Gallimard, 2001). See also Alain Boureau, “Les cérémonies royales françaises entre performance juridique et compétence liturgique,” Annales. Économies, Sociétés, Civilisations 46/6 (1991): 1253–64. 115 Le Goff et al., Le sacre royal, 10, write, however, that the Visigoths also anointed their kings, but that this was most likely not a source for the Carolingian practice. 116 Ibid. 117 See Jean Devisse, Hincmar, archevêque de Reims, 845– 882, 3  vols. (Geneva: Droz, 1976), 2:671–723, esp. 703–9. The archbishop’s role as advocate is also illustrated in the sculptural program of the cathedral of Reims. See also Anne Prache, “L’abbatiale, le tombeau de Saint Remi et la sainte ampoule,” in Le Sacre des rois. Actes du colloque international d’histoire sur les sacres et couronnements royaux, Reims, 1975 (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1985), 191–8. 118 The legend of the chrism predates Hincmar. Georges Tessier, Le Baptême de Clovis (Paris: Gallimard, 1964), 130–2; Devisse, Hincmar, 2:704; Marc Bloch, Les Rois Thaumaturges: étude sur le caractère surnaturel attribué à la puissance royale, particulièrement en France et en Angleterre, 2nd edn. (Paris: Gallimard, 1983), 224–9. 119 Jacques Krynen, L’Empire du roi: idées et croyances politiques en France, XIIIe–XVe siècle (Paris: Gallimard, 1993), 27. 120 See Jacques Le Goff, “Reims, ville du sacre,” in Les lieux de mémoire, ed. Nora, vol. 2, no. 1 La nation, Bibliothèque des histoires (Paris: Gallimard, 1986), 89–184; Willibald Sauerländer, “Observations sur l’iconographie et l’iconologie de la cathédrale du

252

Notes to pages 142–148

sacre,” Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres (1992): 463–79; also Hans Reinhardt, “La cathédrale de Reims, cadre du sacre des rois de France,” in Le Sacre des rois. Actes du colloque, 183–90. 121 One element in particular that circumscribed the monarch’s status was the oath he had to make in which he promised to protect and defend the church. On this subject see Marcel David, “Le ­serment du sacre du IXe au XVe siècle: contribution à l’étude des limites juridiques de la souveraineté,” Revue du Moyen Âge latin 6 (1950): 5–272. 122 On the performance of the Laudes in the High Middle Ages, see David Hiley, Western Plainchant: A Handbook (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993), 591; Andrew Hughes, Medieval Manuscripts for Mass and Office (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995), 85. Cf. Ian Bent, “The English Chapel Royal before 1300,” in Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association 90 (1963–4): 77–95; Edward John Cowdrey, “The Anglo-Norman Laudes regiae,” Viator 12 (1981): 37–78. 123 Bloch, Rois thaumaturges; Kantorowicz, The King’s Two Bodies; Kantorowicz, Laudes Regiae. 124 Bloch, Rois thaumaturges, 36. 125 Ibid., 30–2 and 94–5. 126 Ibid., 36 and 186. Sadler emphasizes that this would have displeased the bishops and archbishops who claimed the power to confer the status in the first place. See Reading the Reverse Façade of Reims, 125–6 and passim. 127 Bloch suggests he might have learned of this from the Song of Roland, Rois thaumaturges, 230. 128 Brigitte Bedos-Rezak, “Suger and the Symbolism of Royal Power: The Seal of Louis VII,” in Abbot Suger and Saint-Denis, ed. Paula L. Gerson (New York Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1986), 99–100. 129 The earliest representation of such a banner dates to about 1185–90 (BnF, ms. Lat. 14267, fol. 23). Anne Lombard-Jourdan, Fleur de lis et oriflamme: signes célestes du royaume de France (Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1991), 267. 130 Bedos-Rezak, “Suger and the Symbolism of Royal Power,” 100. 131 Ibid. 132 Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, 210–11. 133 Elizabeth A. R. Brown and Michael W. Cothren, “The Twelfth-Century Crusading Window of the Abbey of Saint-Denis: Praeteritorum enim recordatio futurorum est exhibitio,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 49 (1986): 1–40. 134 Donna Sadler, “The King as Subject, the King as Author,” 53–67, and Reading the Reverse Façade of Reims Cathedral, passim; see especially chapter  5. Related to this is the evocation of the coronation liturgy in the stained-glass windows; see Meredith Parsons Lillich, “King Solomon in Bed,” 764–801.

Chapter 4  Private, Public, and the Promotion of the Cult of Kings 1 The myriad troubles of the first twenty years of Louis’ reign are described in William Chester Jordan Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, 3–34; Cf. Le Goff, Saint-Louis, trans. Gollrad, 57–77. 2 Robert Fawtier, The Capetian Kings of France: Monarchy and Nation, 987–1328, trans. L. Butler and R. J. Adam (London, New York: Macmillan, St. Martin’s Press, 1960), 27–8. 3 The two most recent biographies of Blanche of Castile are: Elena Bonoldi Gattermayer, Bianca di Castiglia: regina di Francia e madre di un santo (Milan: Jaca, 2006) and Philippe Delorme, Blanche de Castille: épouse de Louis VIII, mère de Saint Louis (Paris: Pygmalion, 2002). The standard reference for Blanche is that by Gérard Sivéry, Blanche de Castille (Paris: Fayard, 1990). 4 Gerard J. Campbell, “The Protest of Saint Louis,” Traditio 15 (1964): 405–18; Jean de Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin (1995), v. 670, 335: “L’éveque Gui d’Auxerre lui dit pour eux tous: ‘Sire,’ fit il, ‘ces archevêques et ses évêques qui sont ici m’ont chargé de vous dire que l’autorité religieuse déchoit et se perd entre vos mains.’” 5 Odette Pontal, “Le différend entre Louis IX et les évêques de Beauvais et ses incidences sur les conciles (1232–1248),” Bibliothèque de l’École des chartes 123 (1965): 5–34. 6 Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, 12 and passim. 7 The impossibility of identifying the “real” Louis IX is one of the primary themes in Le Goff’s monograph on Saint Louis. 8 William of Saint-Pathus, Vie de Saint Louis, d’après Guillaume de St. Pathus, confesseur de la reine Marguerite, ed. Henri-Francois Delaborde (Paris: Picard, 1899), 41–2; RHF 21:200f. The expenditure refers to the reliquaries because one could not pay for relics. 9 Gautier Cornut, “De Susceptione Coronae Spineae Jesu Christi,” RHF 22:31: “sic ad passionis suae triumphum devotius venerandum nostram Galliam videtur et creditur specialiter elegisse. . . . Honoratum enim gestis insignibus per multa tempora regnum Franciae, tempore nostro, per sedulam regis Ludovici necnon et religiosae matris suae Blanchae vigilantiam, corona capitis sui,” ibid., 27–8. 10 The ideas presented here offer a revised and extended version of an earlier article; Meredith Cohen, “An Indulgence for the Visitor: The Public at the Sainte-Chapelle,” Speculum, a Journal of Medieval Studies 83/4 (2008): 840–83. 11 Some scholars have recognized that a larger public had access to the building, although conclusions remain cautiously ambivalent, especially for the period before the fourteenth century. Alyce Jordan observed that “the Sainte-Chapelle in Paris functioned as both a private palace chapel and a monumental reliquary” in “Stained Glass and the Liturgy: Performing

Notes to pages 148–152 Sacral Kingship in Capetian France,” in Objects, Images, and the Word: Art in the Service of the Liturgy, ed. Colum Hourihane, Index of Christian Art Occasional Papers 6 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003), 274. The essay referred to public displays of the relics and suggested that the public would have been informed of sacral kingship by means of word and image at the Sainte-Chapelle. While Daniel Weiss argued that the Sainte-Chapelle “was above all a personal enterprise designed to represent the king’s emerging religious and political identity,” he also explained that ceremonies and processions, in particular the two translation ceremonies of the relics, articulated the Franks as the new chosen people and the king as the leader of the Christian world, in Art and Crusade, 16 and 76. Leniaud and Perrot, SainteChapelle, 74–9, discussed the public ceremonies held there during later periods. By “public,” I intend that which Gautier Cornut describes (see note 13). 12 “in tanta populorum frequentia quantam Parisius exierit,” Cornut, “De Susceptione Coronae Spineae Jesu Christi,” 31. Cornut’s account was written in 1240 for an anniversary of the 1239 ceremony. 13 “Laetetur in iis sacris solemniis Ecclesia Gallicana, et tota gens Francorum, sine differentia sexuum, dignitatum, ac graduum,” ibid., 27. 14 This was before Philip IV (r. 1285–1314) enlarged the perimeter of the palace and made a series of new constructions starting in the 1290s. On the fourteenth- and fifteenth-century transformation of the palace, see Davis, “Désespoir,” 187–213. 15 The Salle du Roi was known as the Grand’Salle after it was reconstructed by Philip IV in the fourteenth century: Guerout, “Palais de la Cité,” 1:176. 16 Ibid., 1:132, 141–3, and 175. 17 Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, “Pièces justificatives,” 1. 18 Louis XII reconstructed the staircase in 1506, in a larger, grander style, suggesting that the processions up to the chapel had also increased in size, number, and importance. This staircase was almost entirely destroyed in a fire in 1630, and it was not repaired until 1811, when the architect Peyre rebuilt it in a “Neo-Egyptian” style. Leniaud and Perrot, SainteChapelle, 26–7. 19 Médiathèque de l’Architecture et du Patrimoine, Archives des monuments historiques, SainteChapelle. The spiral staircases that Charles IV ascended in 1378 were those of the reliquary platform under the baldacchino, Chroniques de France: Les grandes chroniques des règnes de Jean II et de Charles II, ed. R. Delachenal (Paris, 1916), reprinted in Peter Kováč, “Notes on the Description of the SainteChapelle in Paris from 1378,” in Court Chapels of the High and Late Middle Ages and Their Artistic Decoration, ed. J. Fajt (Prague: National Gallery, 2003), 169. 20 Arsenal 114, fol. 67v; Barbara Haggh, “An Ordinal of Ockeghem’s Time from the Sainte-Chapelle of Paris: Paris, Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, MS 114,” Tijdschrift

253

van de Koninklijke Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziek Geschiedenis 47/1–2 (1997): 40. 21 Davis, “Désespoir,” 197. 22 Froissart, Chronicles, ed. Geoffrey Brereton (London: Penguin, 1968), 351–60. 23 François I ordered the shops around the palace enceinte to be destroyed in 1526. Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 189. 24 Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, “Pièces justificatives,” 3 and 8. For the protection of the relics, see Louis-Sébastien Le Nain de Tillemont, Vie de Saint Louis, roi de France, ed. Julien Philippe de Gaulle, 6 vols. (Paris: Renouard, 1847), 2:414. 25 Ibid., 3. The second foundation enlarged the total number of personnel, from two to three wardens, each benefiting from the services of one clerk, for a total of twenty-one. Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, “Pièces justificatives,” 8–9 and Appendix 3. 26 “pro festis sive privatis diebus”; ibid., 3–4. 27 F. Niemeyer defines “privatus” in opposition to ­“festis” – as a non-festal day, Mediae Latintatis Lexicon Minus (Leiden: Brill, 1976), 852. 28 In his entry for 1241 (note the early date), Matthew Paris says that the pope granted an indulgence of forty days to those who prayed in the Parisian chapel; Matthew Paris, Chronica majora, ed. Henry Richards Luard, 7  vols. (London: Longman & Co., 1872–83), 4:92. The extant indulgences are at Paris, AN L 619.5–6, L 619.8–11. AN L 619.10 was cited in Saint Louis à la Sainte-Chapelle. Exposition organisée par la Direction générale des archives de France, Sainte-Chapelle, mai-août 1960 (Paris: Presses artistiques, 1960), 101, and a photograph is in Leniaud and Perrot, SainteChapelle, 66. Many of the indulgences were copied in later royal registers. Copies are published in the Layettes, 2:640, no.  3559, and 3:30–1, no.  3666. Barbiche calendared L 619.5, L 619.8, and L 619.9 in Actes pontificaux, 1:191, 227, and 228, respectively. Jordan mentioned a number of the indulgences and the popular appreciation of the relics in Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, 107–9. For the earliest indulgences, see Appendix 3. 29 AN L 619.5. 30 AN L 619.6. 31 AN L 619.8 and L 619.9, respectively. 32 AN L 619.11. In attendance were the archbishops of Bourges, Sens, Rouen, Troyes, and Toulouse and the bishops of Laon, Soissons, Amiens, Senlis, Langres, Chartres, Orléans, Meaux, Bayeux, Evreux, and Apros (Verissa, Macedonia). As discussed in Appendix 3, the dates of the two foundation documents do not correspond with the dates of the chapel’s formal dedication. Concerning Hugo, Bishop of Apros, see Léopold Delisle, “Un des fondateurs de la Sorbonne, Hugo episcopus Aprensis,” Bulletin de la Société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 25 (1898): 159–63. 33 AN L 619.10, granted on May 26, 1248.

254

Notes to pages 152–155

34 Alexandre Vidier, “Le trésor de la Sainte-Chapelle,” Mémoires de la Société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 34 (1907): 302. For the bull of 1300, see 316–17. (I am grateful to Cecilia Gaposchkin for this reference). 35 Ibid., 317–18. 36 Paul de Riant, Exuviae sacrae Constantinopolitanae, 2 vols., 2nd edn. (Paris: Comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques , 2004 [1877–8]), 2:166–7. 37 AN L 619.5: “Cum igitur sicut ex parte tua fuit propositum coram nobis.” 38 The request from Philip IV to Clement V for indulgences at the Sainte-Chapelle on the day of the translation of the head of St. Louis and its octave exists. See Etienne Baluze and William Mollat, eds., Vitae paparum Avenionensium: Hoc est Historia pontificum Romanorum qui in Gallia sederunt ab anno Christi MCCCV usque ad annum MCCCXCIV, 4 vols. (Paris: Letouzey et Ané, 1914, 1916, and 1928), 3:63–4. 39 Henry Charles Lea, A History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences in the Latin Church, 3 vols. (Philadelphia, PA: Lea Brothers, 1896), 3:13–14. See also Robert W. Shaffern, “The Medieval Theology of Indulgences,” in R. N. Swanson, ed., Promissory Notes on the Treasury of Merits: Indulgences in Late Medieval Europe, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 5 (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 11–36. 40 Thomas Lentes, “Counting Piety in the Late Middle Ages,” in Ordering Medieval Society: Perspectives on Intellectual and Practical Modes of Shaping Social Relations, ed. Bernhard Jussen (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001), 55–91. 41 Lea, A History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences, 3:13. See also Jean Mesqui, “Grands chantiers de ponts et financements charitables au moyen âge en France,” in Tecnologia y sociedad: las grandes obras publicas en la Europa medieval. XXII Semana de estudios medievales de Estella, 17 a 21 de Julio de 1995, ed. Ángel J. Martin-Duque (Pamplona: Gobierno de Navarra, Departamento de Educacion, Cultura, Deporte y Juventud, 1996), 153–77. 42 Jean Richard, “Urbain II, la prédication de la croisade et la definition de l’indulgence,” in Deus qui mutat tempora: Menschen und Institutionem im Wandel des Mittelalters. Festschrift für Alfons Becker zu seinem fünfundsechzigsten Geburtstag, ed. Ernst-Dieter Hehl, Hubertus Seibert, and Franz Staab (Sigmaringen: J. Thorbecke, 1987), 132. 43 Appendix 3; Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, “Pièces justificatives,” 4 and 9. 44 Appendix 3; Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, “Pièces justificatives,” 6 and 11. 45 The anonymous chronicle from circa 1297 reported that the chapel itself was built for a mere £40,000: “spatiosissimam capellam pro sacris reliquiis, juxta palatium suum Parisius, multo scemate aedificavit, quae XL. millia librarum Turonensium et amplius constitit,” RHF 21:200. William of Saint-Pathus, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Delaborde, 41,

recorded the same figure: “l’en dit que il despendi bien xl mile livres de tournois et plus.” Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, 79, estimated the royal budget as approximately £250,000 per annum. For additional information on the king’s finances, see Jean Favier, “Les finances de Saint Louis,” in Septième centenaire de la mort de Saint Louis. Actes des colloques de Royaumont et de Paris (21–27 mai 1970), ed. Louis Carolus-Barré (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1976), 133–40. 46 On the distribution of indulgences as a means to encourage devotion, see Robert W. Shaffern, “Indulgences and Saintly Devotionalisms in the Middle Ages,” Catholic Historical Review 84 (1998): 643–61. See also Ben Nilson, “The Medieval Experience at the Shrine,” in Pilgrimage Explored, ed. J. Stopford (York: University of York, 1999), 95–122; and Flora Lewis, “Rewarding Devotion: Indulgences and the Promotion of Images,” in The Church and the Arts: Papers Read at the 1990 Summer Meeting and the 1991 Winter Meeting of the Ecclesiastical History Society, ed. Diana Wood (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992), 179–94. 47 Arsenal 114 does not copy BnF lat. 1435, and a comparative examination of the two would yield valuable insight into some of the changes that occurred during the course of the fifteenth century. 48 Sarah Long, “The Rite of Paris and Local Practice: The Chanted Mass in Parisian Institutions, c. 1480–1540” (PhD dissertation, University of Illinois, 2008). 49 Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, “Pièces justificatives,” 47. Alexandre Vidier, “Notes et documents sur le personnel, les biens et l’administration de la Sainte-Chapelle du XIIIe au XVe siècles,” Mémoires de la Société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-deFrance 28, 1901 (1902): 235. 50 For more on BnF 1435, see Éric Palazzo, “La liturgie de la Sainte-Chapelle: un modèle pour les chapelles royales francaises?” in La Sainte-Chapelle, ed. Hediger, 101–12. 51 “Ad tertiam . . . ille qui facit officium deponit crucem coram altare . . . et primum adorat et osculatur eam flexis genibus; post eum rex statim adorat eandem . . . ille qui facit officium . . . ostendit crucem populo assistenti” BnF lat. 1435, fols. 13v and 14r. 52 Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, “Pièces justificatives,” 50–67 and 92–101. Leniaud and Perrot, Sainte-Chapelle, 67–72, also provide a summary of the Sainte-Chapelle’s ceremonial use based on this information. 53 Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, “Pièces justificatives,” 68–71. 54 Other changes postdate the ordinals; see Stein, Le Palais de justice et la Sainte-Chapelle, 129–44; Vidier, “Notes et documents,” and Magalie Lenoir, “Entretenir un monument gothique.” 55 In the following footnotes, in addition to citing Haggh, I offer transcriptions and paraphrase the parts of the manuscript that indicate any people other than clerics.

Notes to pages 155–156 56 During the late fifteenth century, the French kings began to favor private recitations of Low Mass, as opposed to the “traditional public celebration” of Solemn High Mass. John Brobeck, “Musical Patronage in the Royal Chapel of France under Francis I, r. 1515–1547,” Journal of the American Musicological Society 48/2 (1995): 228–9. 57 The entire passage is: “dum fuerit processio ante magnum altare inferioris capelle . . . prelatus thurificat altare, et regem, si ibidem praesens fuerit, et praedictos chorales, et deinde puer thurificat collegium et populum . . . et incepta antiphona . . . a choralibus . . . processio revertatur in capellam superiorem” (Arsenal 114, fol. 133v; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 50). 58 The entire passage is: “prelatus vel thesaurarius si non fuerit aliquis prelatus . . . debet facere benedictionem palmarum sive ramorum, et palmis distributis, collegio et populo hic assistenti” (Arsenal 114, fol. 67r–v; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 43). 59 “clauduntur fores capelle, et recipiuntur pauperes infra ipsam . . . thesaurarius et canonici . . . lavant pedes genibus flexis . . . et facta panis et vini benedictione, thesaurarius et canonici praedicti, debent de ipsis dare et ministrare pauperibus quorum laverunt pedes” (Arsenal 114, fol. 71r–v; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 43). Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 171, writes that this practice dates to the foundation of the chapel: “A dater de la fondation de cette église, tous les ans la nuit du Jeudi au Vendredi Saint, il y avoit exposition de la Vraie Crois pour les malades, dans la nef de la Sainte-Chapelle . . . on trouve des traces de cet usage dans les Registres de la Sainte-Chapelle” (“From the date of the foundation of this church, each year on the night from Thursday to Holy Friday, the True Cross was shown to the sick, in the nave of the Sainte-Chapelle . . . one finds the proof of this use in the registers of the Sainte-Chapelle”). 60 “Prelatus, thesaurarius aut ille qui facit officium . . . cantat antiphonam Ecce lignum ostendendo populo crucem praedictam . . . et capellanus primus adoret et osculetur, deinde Rex, domini et Barones, collegium et populus assistens,” Arsenal 114, fol. 221v; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 43–4. 61 The term populus was frequently used in reference to the congregation of people around relics during the events surrounding the Peace of God and, more generally, pilgrimage sites. Thomas Head and Richard Landes have explained that in these contexts, the term refers to “all those free laypeople of relatively low social status whom we might call commoners, that is, to wealthy merchants and impoverished peasants alike,” in “Introduction” in The Peace of God: Social Violence and Religious Response in France around the year 1000 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992), 2, n. 3. See also Anne-Marie Bautier, “Popularis et la notion de ‘populaire,’” Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 23 (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1975), 285–303.

255

62 For Purification, the text reads “in die purificationis cantata tertia conveniunt clerici et populus in capella; . . . accenduntur cerei et dividuntur, clero et populo” (“On the day of Purification after terce has been sung, the clerics and the people gather in the chapel; . . . the candles are lit and divided up among the clergy and the people”), Arsenal 114, fol. 240v; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 49. On Ash Wednesday, “thesaurarius . . . facit absolutionem super populum et deinde facit benedictionem cinerum, et facta benedictione apponit super capita singulorum in modum crucis” (“the treasurer . . . does the absolution over the people and then does the blessing of the ashes; and when the blessing is done he puts [the ashes] on the head of each person in the form of a cross”), Arsenal 114, fol. 57v and “manu extenta super populum dicat orationem absolutionis” (“with his hand extended over the people, [the celebrant] offers a prayer of absolution”); fol. 213r–v; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 39. For Palm Sunday, see note 57. On Maundy Thursday, “post prandium congregato collegio et populo ad pulsationem fit processio ad lavanda singula altaria superioris et inferioris capelle” (“after the main meal [with] the people and the college having gathered at the ringing of the bells, a procession is made to wash each altar of the upper and lower chapel”), Arsenal 114, fols. 70r–71v; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 42–3. On Holy Saturday, “Sabbato in vigilia pasche hora quasi viii, populo, cum collegio in sacra capella, congregato, quidam capellanus aut dyaconus faciat benedictionem cerei paschalis” (“on Holy Saturday at around the eighth hour, the people having gathered with the college in the holy chapel, a certain chaplain or deacon should do the blessing of the Easter candle”), Arsenal 114, fol. 222v; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 44. And on the vigil of Pentecost, “ille qui facit officium vadit ad altare aquam benedictam aspergendam, deinde ad collegium et populum” (“he who does the office goes to the altar to sprinkle the blessed water, then to the college and the people”), Arsenal 114, fol. 229v; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 48. 63 The prescription reads: “debet adorari crux primo ab illo qui facit officium, et deinde a collegio, et [illegible] populo. . . . Et cruce ab omnibus adorata dyaconus debet legere evangelium ante crucem” (“the cross ought to be adored first by he who does the office, and then by the college, and [illegible] by the people. . . . And [after] the cross has been adored by everyone, the deacon ought to read the Gospel in front of the cross”), Arsenal 114, fol. 67v; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 40. 64 Arsenal 114, fols. 218v–219v; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 41. 65 “ad aspergendum Regem, dominos et populum,” Arsenal 114, fol. 223v; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 44–5. 66 “chorales et adiutores debent pariter cantare versum Crucifixum. Et nota quod rege existente ad processionem [unclear] debent istum versum, Crucifixum cantare” (Arsenal 114, fol. 75r); and

256

Notes to pages 156–164

“versum Crucifixum qui secundum morem sacre capelle cantatur a choralibus et adiutoribus . . . apud regem” (fol. 224v). Haggh, “Ordinal,” 46–7, paraphrases as “choirboys and helpers must chant the v. Crucifixum ‘secundum morem sacre capelle’ and, if the king is at this small procession, he must chant that v.” 67 I am grateful to William Flynn for this observation. 68 Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 260–1. 69 Robert E. Lerner, “An Angel of Philadelphia in the Reign of Philip the Fair: The Case of Guiard of Cressonssaert,” in William Chester Jordan, Bruce McNab, and Teofilo F. Ruiz, ed., Order and Innovation in the Middle Ages: Essays in Honor of Joseph R. Strayer (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976), 348. I am grateful to Sean Field for generously sharing this with me. Additional testimonies such as this might be found in letters of remission and other acts that occurred in the Palais de la Cité. 70 Cornut, “De Susceptione Coronae Spineae Jesu Christi,” 27. 71 For example, “conveniente clero et populo in sacra capella” Arsenal 114, fol. 221r. 72 “fit processio . . . in capellam inferiorem. . . . Episcopus si faciat officium faciat benedictionem super populum” (“a procession is made . . . in the lower chapel. . . . The bishop, if he does the office, does the blessing over the people”), Arsenal 114, fol. 230r; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 48. 73 Arsenal 114, fol. 133v (see note 57); Haggh, “Ordinal,” 50. 74 Arsenal 114, fols. 70r–71v (see note 59). 75 Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 260, writes that both spaces were also employed on Ash Wednesday, when the priests of the Confraternity of NotreDame aux Bourgeois (founded in 1168) in virtue of a foundation made in 1499, processed to the lower chapel for the Mass of the Holy Relics and then went to the upper chapel to adore the True Cross. 76 Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 229. 77 In addition to its dedication to the Virgin, the lower chapel harbored a relic of the Milk of the Virgin and contained sculpted images of the Virgin in the trumeau and tympanum. In addition, above the sacristy door, the presence of a (now heavily restored) thirteenth-century painting of the Annunciation suggests a Marian subject matter for the windows. The passage to the sacristy did not allow for the placement of a window in this location, and so the wall was decorated with blind tracery consisting of two cusped lancets surmounted by an oculus, as in the other hemicycle windows. On the eve of its restoration, Troche described that it imitated stained glass. It therefore may have continued the subject matter of the other windows. See Troche, La SainteChapelle de Paris, 59, n. 1. 78 Appendix 3; Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, “Pièces justificatives,” 6. 79 A chaplaincy for Louis was established in 1271 in an unspecified location in the chapel prior to his

canonization; Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, “Pièces justificatives,” 15–16. After his canonization in 1297, it was refounded on the altar of SaintNicolas in 1301. The chapel of Saint-Clement is mentioned at this time; ibid., 23–4. The chapel of Saint John the Baptist was founded in 1318; ibid., 32–3. For these foundations, see also Vidier, “Notes et documents,” 232–4. 80 Arsenal 114, 71r. 81 Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 229. 82 Leniaud and Perrot, Sainte-Chapelle, 88. 83 Branner, Court Style, 91 and 93, dated the structure stylistically to after 1254. The insertion of the tribune and baldachin caused damage to the medallions in the apse. See Leniaud and Perrot, Sainte-Chapelle, 103–4. Jean de Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 733; also Jean de Joinville, “The Life of Saint Louis,” in Chronicles of the Crusades, Joinville and Villehardouin, trans. M. R. B. Shaw (New York: Penguin, 1963), 345, provides the ante-quem of 1270. 84 Ibid. 85 The History of Yaballaha III, Nestorian Pastor, and of His Vicar, Bar Sauma, Mongol Ambassador to the Frankish Courts at the End of the Thirteenth Century, trans. James A. Montgomery (New York: Columbia University Press, 1927), 64–5. 86 Kováč, “Notes on the Description of the SainteChapelle in Paris,” 162. 87 The original construction date of this screen is unknown; that illustrated by Ransonnette (Figure  2.10) is not medieval. Morand, SainteChapelle, 229, wrote that it had been recently reconstructed. The exact location of the medieval screen is unknown; modern plans place the screen in different locations: while that of Ransonnette is one arch behind the second bay respond, Branner illustrated the screen at the second bay respond. Branner, “Painted Medallions,” 6. 88 See Brenk, “Capetian Political Program,” 195–213. 89 As representational structures, these recall those at the Cappella Palatina in Palermo. Tronzo, Cultures of His Kingdom, 108. 90 Branner, “Painted Medallions,” 13. Emily Guerry, “The Wall Paintings of the Sainte-Chapelle” (PhD Dissertation, Cambridge University, 2013), 172–259, 265. 91 Branner, “Painted Medallions,” 13. 92 Ibid, 13–15. 93 Ibid., 14. 94 Jean de Jandun, Tractatus, 13; James B. South, “John of Jandun,” A Companion to Philosophy in the Middle Ages, ed. George J. E. Gracia and Timothy B. Noone (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2002), 372. 95 “Pres d’ilec siet une chapele/ qui moult est digne et riche et bele:/ c’est la chapele nostre roy,/ ou de biauté a grant arroy/ et de richesse; y a grant masse/ de reliques en une chasse/ as quiex l’en doit porter honneur/pour l’amour de nostre Seignieur:/ sa crois, sa coronne, et li cleu/ paiens sont mis en noble lieu/

Notes to pages 164–167 et si I sert on noblement Dieu” (“a great mass of relics in a reliquary to which we show honor for the love of Our Lord: his cross, his crown, and the pagan nails are placed in a noble spot and so we serve God nobly there”), in Pfeffer, “Dit des monstiers,” lines 77–86. 96 “Et nota quod per totas octavas pasche . . . debet fieri processio singulis diebus usque in sabbatum” (“and note that for the whole octave of Easter . . . there ought to be a procession each day right up to Saturday”), Arsenal 114, fol. 75r; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 47–9. 97 Arsenal 114, 228r; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 47–50; it is unclear whether processions on the latter two feasts stopped at Saint-Michel de la Place or the altar of Saint-Michel just under the Oratoire de Saint Louis. 98 Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 192. 99 Billot, “Message spirituel,” 124–7. For Saint-Denis and Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois, Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 170. For Saint-Magloire, ibid., 152. Haggh (“Ordinal,” 56–61) lists additional processions performed with memorials founded at the Sainte-Chapelle. 100 Haggh, “Ordinal,” 56–7. 101 Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 190. 102 From seven to eleven in the morning, the True Cross was exposed from the chevet window to those in the courtyard, and the treasurer or a canon would give his benediction to the people. Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 259: “Le Dimanche de Quinquagésime, les Paroisses de la Cité se rendent sucessivement, le matin, dans la cour du Palais, & font une action de graces vers le chevet de la SainteChapelle, pour la permission d’user de laitage & de beurre, pendant la Carême; & il y a en consequence, depuis sept heures jusqu’à onze, exposition de la vraie Croix, devant la fenêtre qui est au chevet de l’Eglise. A onze heures le Trésorier ou un chanoine, avant de renfermer la Croix, donne la bénédiction au peuple” (“On Quinquagesima Sunday, the parishes of the Cité assemble successively, in the morning, in the courtyard of the palace, and make a gesture of grace toward the chevet of the Sainte-Chapelle, for permission to use milk and butter during Lent, and there is as a result, from seven to eleven, exhibition of the true Cross, in front of the window which is at the chevet of the church. At eleven, the Treasurer or a canon, before closing the Cross, blesses the people”). 103 Craig Wright, Music and Ceremony at Notre Dame of Paris, 900–1550 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 45–65, and Rebecca Baltzer, “Geography of the Liturgy at Notre-Dame of Paris,” in Plainsong in the Age of Polyphony, ed. Thomas Forrest Kelly, Cambridge Studies in Performance Practice 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 45–64. 104 Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 152. 105 Ibid., 152, 202 and passim.

257

106 Cornut, “De Susceptione Coronae Spineae Jesu Christi,” 31. 107 Geoffrey of Beaulieu, RHF 20:15–16; William of Chartres, RHF 20:29; William of Nangis, RHF 20:51; William of Saint-Pathus, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Delaborde, 42. 108 Jules Viard, ed., Les Grandes chroniques de France, 6 vols. (Paris: H. Laurens, 1932 [1920]), 4:72–5. 109 Louis John Paetow, ed., “Morale scolarium” of John of Garland (Johannes de Garlandia), a Professor in the Universities of Paris and Toulouse in the Thirteenth Century (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1927), 216. 110 “ipso pio Rege . . . ac universo populo devote sacras ipsas reliquias adorante” (“this pious king . . . with all the people devotedly adoring the sacred relics”), William of Chartres, RHF 20:29. 111 “Et a cele procession li benoiez rois portoit a ses propres espaules, avec les evesques, les reliques devant dites, et a cele procession s’assembloit li clergié de Paris et li pueples” (“and at that procession the blessed king carried on his own shoulders, with the bishops, the said relics, and at that procession the clergy and the people of Paris assembled”), William of Saint-Pathus, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Delaborde, 42. 112 Billot, “Message spirituel,” 127. See also Stein, Palais de Justice et la Sainte-Chapelle, 145, and Jordan, Visualizing Kingship, 289. 113 Félibien, Histoire de la ville de Paris, 1:296. 114 A seminal article on the mutually supportive relationship forged between the monks of Saint-Denis and the French monarchy is Gabrielle M. Spiegel, “The Cult of Saint Denis and Capetian Kingship,” Journal of Medieval History 1/1 (1975): 43–69. An informative interdisciplinary volume on the extent of the relationship between the king and Saint-Denis is Abbot Suger and Saint-Denis, ed. Paula Lieber Gerson (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1986). On the royal tomb program at Saint-Denis, see Elizabeth A. R. Brown, “Burying and Unburying the Kings of France,” in Persons in Groups: Social Behavior as Identity Formation in Medieval and Renaissance Europe, ed. Richard C. Trexler, Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies 36 (Binghamton, NY: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1985), 241–66 (repr. in The Monarchy of Capetian France and Royal Ceremonial, Collected Studies 345  [Aldershot, Eng.: Variorum, 1991]). On the thirteenth-century royal tomb program, see Georgia Sommers Wright, “A Royal Tomb Program in the Reign of Saint-Louis,” Art Bulletin 56/2 (1971): 223–43; cf. Alain Erlande-Brandenburg, Le roi est mort: étude sur les funérailles, les sépultres, et les tombeaux des rois de France jusqu’à la fin du XIIIe siècle, Bibliothèque de la Société française d’archéologie 7 (Paris: Arts et métiers graphiques, 1975), 81–3 and 162. On Reims, see Lillich, “King Solomon in Bed,” and Donna Sadler, Reading the Reverse Facade of Reims Cathedral: Royalty and Ritual in 13th-century France (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2012).

258

Notes to pages 167–169

115 The Sainte-Chapelle held free privileges, meaning it was not subject to the oversight of the Bishop of Paris and/or Archbishop of Sens, although it followed the Breviary of Paris, Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 202 and Pièces, pp.  2–3. For the document, see Appendix 3. Concerning the Use of Paris, see Michel Huglo, “An Ordinal of Ockeghem’s Time from the Sainte-Chapelle of Paris,” Bulletin codicologique (1999): 50. 116 Geoffrey of Beaulieu, RHF 20:15: “Quas solemnitates pius Rex celebriter fieri instituit bis in anno, videlicet die anniversariâ, quâ Parisius receptae fuerunt” (“That solemnity the pious king instituted to be celebrated on the year, and the day of the anniversary, that [the relics] were received in Paris”). William of Chartres wrote that Louis instituted this feast as well as the Feast of the Reception of the Relics: “cum quanta frequentia ac devotione plebis, solemnitates illas, quas instituerat in Capella sua regia, unam sacrosanctae Coronae Domini in crastino S. Laurentii, quae in tota Senonum Provincia celebratur, aliam sanctarum aliarum Reliquiarum in crastino S. Michaëlis Archangeli celebrari fecit annuatim” (“with such frequent and devotion to the people, those feasts, which he instituted in his royal chapel, one on the day of the holy Crown of Thorns on the morrow of Saint Laurent, which in all of the province of Sens would be celebrated, and all the other relics on the morrow of Saint Michael the archangel he established annual celebrations”), RHF 20:29. William of Saint-Pathus wrote that Louis initiated three feasts: “Et pour soverainement ennorer les dites reliques, li benoiez rois establi en la dite chapele trois sollempnitez chascun an. En la premiere sollennité [sic] il fesoit estre le couvent des Freres preecheeurs de Paris, en la seconde le couvent des Freres meneurs, et en la tierce, il fesoit estre des uns et des autres ordres . . . qui sont a Paris” (“And to honor in a sovereign manner the said relics, the blessed king established in the said chapel three feasts each year. In the first feast he had the convent of the Friars Preachers of Paris, in the second the convent of the Friars Minor, and in the third, he had one of the other orders . . . that are in Paris”), Vie de Saint-Louis, ed. Delaborde, 42. See also Tillemont, Vie de Saint Louis, roi de France, ed. de Gaulle, 2:344: “Le chapitre de Cisteaux ordonna, l’an 1240, à la prière du roy et de la reine, qu’on feroit la feste de la Couronne d’épines dans les abbayes de France le 11 d’aoust, et même avec deux messes” (“The chapter of Cîteaux ordered, [in] the year 1240, at the request of the king and the queen, that one does the feast of the Crown of Thorns in the Abbeys of France the 11th August, and even with two masses”). 117 Douglas Kirk, “‘Translatione Corona Spinea’: A Musical and Textual Analysis of a ThirteenthCentury Rhymed Office” (M.M. thesis, University of Texas, 1980); Judith Louise May Taylor, “Rhymed Offices at the Sainte-Chapelle in the Thirteenth-Century: Historical, Political, and

Liturgial Contexts” (PhD dissertation, University of Texas, 1994); Judith Blezzard, Stephen Ryle, and Jonathan Alexander, “New Perspectives on the Feast of the Crown of Thorns,” Journal of the Plainsong and Mediaeval Music Society 10 (1987): 23–47; Chiara Mercuri, “Stat inter spinas lilium: Le Lys de France et la couronne d’épines,” Le moyen âge 90 (2004): 479–512. In their study of sermons associated with the crown of thorns and the relics, Alexis Charansonnet and Franco Morenzoni have recently argued against overly political readings of the king’s chapel. However, the sermons they examined were neither given in the Sainte-Chapelle or by the capella regis, and some were preached in the Holy Land while Louis was on crusade. See Alexis Charansonnet and Franco Morenzoni, “Prêcher sur les reliques de la Passion à l’époque de Saint Louis,” in La Sainte-Chapelle, ed. Hediger, 61–99. Their conclusions challenge those of Nicole Bériou, who argued that sermons delivered in the Sainte-Chapelle evoke the notion of a royal ministry subordinate to Christ in L’avènement des maîtres de la Parole. La predication à Paris au XIIIe siècle, 2 vols. (Paris: Institut d’études augustiniennes, 1998), 1:311. 118 Guido Maria Dreves, Clemens Blume, and Henry Marlott Bannister, ed., Analecta hymnica medii aevi, 55  vols. (Leipzig: Fuess Verlag, 1886–1915; repr. Bern, 1961), 5:39–42. The octave of the celebrations contains a text, Regis et pontificis, which includes the entire sequence Si vis vere gloriari, which is also published in 8:21–2, and with additional annotation in 54:204. Blezzard, Ryle, and Alexander, “New Perspectives,” 33, date this text to the thirteenth century. 119 Ibid., 33. 120 Ibid., 33 and 40–1. Such descriptions of Louis IX became increasingly common in the mid-thirteenth century, as Gérard of Saint-Quentin, a monk who chronicled the arrival of the second group of relics the king brought to the Sainte-Chapelle, described Louis as “Noster David, rex Ludovicus” (“Our David, king Louis”), cited in E. Miller, “Exuviae [Review],” 296. 121 It is unknown whether the office or Gautier Cornut’s account of the reception of the relic was written first. See Kirk, “Translatione,” 170. Natalis de Wailly, RHF 22:26, suggested that Gautier’s Historia was actually used as a sermon. Riant, Exuviae, 1:69, rejected this and stated that he believed it had originally existed as a prologus and a historia. 122 Blezzard, Ryle, and Alexander, “New Perspectives,” 32–3. 123 Haggh, “Ordinal,” 51. 124 Arsenal 114, fol. 241v; Haggh, “Ordinal,” 50. 125 Gaines Post, Studies in Medieval Legal Thought: Public Law and the State, 1100–1322 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1964), 472; Kenneth Pennington, The Prince and the Law 1200–1600: Sovereignty and Rights in the Western Legal Tradition (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993), 18. On the formation of

Notes to pages 169–174 royal ideologies, see Yves Sassier, Royauté et idéologie au Moyen Âge: Bas-Empire, monde franc, France (IVe-XIIe siècle), (Paris: Armand Colin, 2002). 126 Pennington, Prince and the Law, 30 and 101. See Ferdinand Lot and Robert Fawtier, Histoire des Institutions Francaises au Moyen Âge, 3 vols., Institutions ecclésiastiques, vol. 3, ed. Jean-Francois Lemarignier, Jean Gaudement, and Mgr. William Mollat (Paris: Presses universitaires françaises, 1962), esp. “L’Église et le Roi du milieu du XIIe siècle à la mort de Saint Louis,” 145–59 and “Saint Louis,” 153–9. 127 Yves Congar, “L’eglise et l’état sous le règne de Saint Louis,” in Septième centenaire de la mort de Saint Louis, 258. 128 “Rex Francie in regno suo princeps est; nam in temporalibus superiorem non recogniscit” cited in Marguerite Boulet-Sautel, “Jean de Blanot et la conception du pouvoir royal au temps de Louis IX,” in Septième centenaire, ed. Carolus-Barré, 63. 129 Post, Medieval Legal Thought, 471–2. Post writes that F. Ercole, Da Bartolo all’Althusio (Florence: Valecchi, 1952), 157, maintains that Blanot’s writing argues for legal independence from the empire, though Calasso, I Glossatori e la teoria della sovranità, 2nd edn. (Milan: Giuffré, 1951), 113–14, sees in this that even though the king is supreme in his realm, he is nevertheless subject to the Roman emperor. Cf. with Marguerite Boulet-Sautel, “Jean de Blanot et la conception du pouvoir royal au temps de Louis IX,” in Septième centenaire, ed. Carolus-Barré, 57–68. 130 Ibid., 65; Post, Medieval Legal Thought, 471–2; Pennington, The Prince and the Law, 97. 131 Pennington, The Prince and the Law, 96–7, cites Friedrich Carl von Savigny, Geschichte des römischen Rechts im Mittelalter, 7 vols., 2nd edn. (Berlin, 1834–51; Bad Homburg, 1961), 5:495–501. 132 Post, Medieval Legal Thought, 472–3. See also Marguerite Boulet-Sautel, “Le concept de souveraineté chez Jacques de Révigny,” Actes du Congrès sur l’ancienne Université d’Orléans. Recueil des conférences prononcées les 6 et 7 mai 1961 (Orléans: [Conseil générale du Loiret], 1962), 17–27. 133 Post cites Calasso, I Glossatori, 31, no. 35, 46; Ercole, Da Bartolo, 167; Pennington, The Prince and the Law, 97. 134 Ibid., 97–8. Chapter 5  Louis’ Later Patronage in Paris 1 The original quotations are: “Et ainsi comme l’escrivain qui a fait son livre, qui l’enlumine d’or et d’azur, enlumina le dit roy son royaume de belles abbaïes que il y fist, et de la grant quantité de mansions Dieu, et des Preescheurs, des Cordeliers et des autres religions qui sont ci devant nommées,” Jean de Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 758. “Einsi avironna le bon roy de gens de religion la ville de Paris,” ibid., v. 729. 2 For the early period, it is difficult to distinguish Louis’ own architectural ideas from those of his

259

mother, particularly because he was a minor for the first eight years of his reign and she was officially the regent queen of France. Concerning his involvement with Saint-Antoine, see Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 691; Du Breul, 1024; Emile Raunié, Épitaphier du vieux Paris, 4  vols. (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1890–1901), 1:128–9; Szollosi, “Les moniales de Saint-Antoinedes-Champs au XIIIe siècle”; Weiss, Cens et rentes, 1:234 and the discussion in Chapter  1. For SaintCatherine, Du Breul, 654–5; Raunié, Épitaphier, 2:265–6; Le Roux de Lincy and Tisserand, Paris et ses historiens, 190; Weiss, Cens et rentes, 235, and the discussion in Chapter  1. In addition to these, just a day’s walk from Paris, the abbey church of SaintDenis was reconstructed from 1231. William of Nangis stated that the new church was initiated by Eudes Clément with the consent of Louis and Blanche, RHF 20:320–1. While recent scholarship tends to deny the direct involvement of the king, the two institutions were closely linked. Beyond Paris, Royaumont was another prominent royal foundation from this period, although the initiative for it derived from Blanche of Castile in honor of the departed Louis VIII. On this, see appendix 1. 3 Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, 183–90; Marguerite David-Roy, “Saint-Louis, bâtisseur des monuments disparus,” Archéologia 31 (1969): 14– 21. See the references to individual studies in the context of their discussion later in this chapter. 4 Concerning Louis’ involvement in his buildings, William of Saint-Pathus writes that Louis would visit construction sites: “Et quant li benoiez rois fesoit les mesons et autres lieues povres, il meesmes en sa propre personne aloit veoir les oevres quant l’on fesoit les mesons devant dites et ordenoit et disposoit comment les sales des mesons et les chambers et les officines des dites mesons fussent fetes,” RHF 20:94. 5 Branner, Court Style, 7, already pointed this out; he cited B. Vallentin, “Der Engelstadt,” in K. Breysig et  al., Grundrisse und Bausteine zur Staats-und Geschichtslehre, zusammengetragen zu Ehren G. Schmollers (Berlin, 1908), 109. 6 Erlande-Brandenburg, “L’architecture militaire au temps de Philippe Auguste,” in Bautier, La France de Philippe Auguste, 595–603. 7 As just one example, see Bruzelius, Saint-Denis, 107; Branner, Court Style, 51–5. Another example is between Amiens and the Sainte-Chapelle, as discussed in Chapter 2. 8 Les métiers et corporations de la ville de Paris, XIIIe siècle: le livre des métiers d’Étienne Boileau, ed. René de Lespinasse and François Bonnardot (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1879), title 48, pp. 88–9. 9 See the discussion of the reforms that concerned Paris in Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, 171–81. 10 Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 724–30. See also Lester K. Little, “Saint Louis’ Involvement

260

Notes to pages 174–175

with the Friars,” Church History 34/2 (1964): 125–48. 11 William of Saint-Pathus, RHF 20:94; Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 727. On the history of this order, see Frances Andrews, The Other Friars: The Carmelite, Augustinian, Sack and Pied Friars in the Middle Ages (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2006), 7–68. 12 Du Breul, 427. Perraut, Collèges parisiens, cites AN L 927. 13 Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, 361, v. 727. Little is known about this group; for a résumé of its history, see Andrews, Other Friars, 224–30. 14 Raunié, Épitaphier, 2:25. Andrews, Other Friars, 227, cites Félibien, Histoire de la ville de Paris, 1:374. 15 Raunié, Épitaphier, 2:26. 16 Du Breul, 465, writes that Louis obtained land in 1258 from Robert of Sorbonne. For the history of the Augustinians, see Andrews, Other Friars, 69–172. 17 Raunié, Épitaphier, 2:420–1, cites the act of exchange AN S 6213. 18 Ibid. 2:421. Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 727. 19 AN K 31.12 B. Reprinted in Annales ordinis cartusiensis ab anno 1084 ab annum 1429, ed. Charles le Couteulx, 8 vols. (1888), 4:194 (1257), 203–4, and Du Boulay, Historia Universitatis Parisiensis, 3:360. 20 On the history of the Carthusians, see Paul Châtel, “La Chartreuse de Paris (1257–1792)” (Thèse de l’École nationale des chartes, Paris, 1966). The history of the site of Vauvert can be traced through the sources. In 1224, the Franciscans obtained land in Vauvert (Vallis-viridis). Although they subsequently built a house there, many of the brothers considered it exceedingly large, and seeing it as contrary to the order’s principles, they “begged the blessed Francis to destroy it.” Their prayers were met, for the roof and walls of the building miraculously collapsed in 1228 or 1229. Abandoned and laid to waste, it eventually became associated with an evil spirit, later known as “the devil of Vauvert,” who taunted passers-by, giving rise to the name of the nearby street and gate as the “Porte d’Enfer.” On this, see Beaumont-Maillet, Le grand couvent, 13–14; Du Breul, 345, explains that the Carthusians exorcised the evil spirits in the house before settling there. 21 AN S 3963.1 and 3963.4; S 3973 A and B. 22 Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 729. This is the present-day rue Croix de la Bretonnerie. The extant convent of the Billettes stands in this location, and even though that order has a separate history, its establishment in Paris dates to the late thirteenth century, so it is reasonable to consider that the Billettes replaced the Brothers of the Holy Cross in the wake of their dissolution in 1274. 23 Du Breul, 418, copied the charter. The earliest mention of the Friars of the Sacks in Paris dates to 1255, when Alexander IV granted them permission to preach in the city upon approval of the bishop. Their order’s constitution allowed two friars to be

sent to the studium generale there, suggesting that a school might have been established around the same year. A general chapter for the Sacks was held in Paris in 1258. On the history of the order, see Richard Emery, “The Friars of the Sack,” Speculum, a Journal of Medieval Studies 18/3 (1943): 323–34. Andrews, Other Friars, 175–224. 24 Du Breul, 418, again copied the charter. The amount is also mentioned in Sauval, 1:618; see also Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 728. 25 Rutebeuf, Oevures complètes, ed. E. Faral and J. Bastin, 2 vols. (Paris: Picard, 1959), 1:325–6. 26 Lebeuf, 1:93–4. For the date of their establishment, see Biver and Biver, Abbayes, monastères et couvents, 61. 27 Their history in the city has been studied at length. See especially Beaumont-Maillet, Grand couvent and Jérôme Poulenc, “Une histoire du grand couvent des Cordeliers de Paris des origines à nos jours,” in Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 69 (1976): 474–95; concerning their architecture, see Michael T. Davis, “Fitting to the Requirements of the Place: The Church of Sainte-Marie-Madeleine,” in Architecture, Liturgy and Identity, ed. Zoë Opačić and Achim Timmerman (Turnhout: Brepols, 2011), 247– 61; Wolfgang Schenkluhn, Ordines Studentes: Aspekte zur Kirchenarchitektur der Dominikaner und Franziskaner im 13. Jahrhundert (Berlin: Mann, 1985), 76–84; Wolfgang Schenkluhn, Architektur der Bettelorden: Die Baukunst der Dominikaner und Franziskaner in Europa (Darmstadt: Primus, 2000), 71–2, 160–1, have discussed the church within the context of Franciscan and mendicant architecture. 28 Du Breul transcribed the original charter, 391. At first the property was only leased to the order; in 1234, Louis IX bought the land, which may have included a large residence for the Franciscans from Saint-Germain des Prés. Beaumont-Maillet, Grand couvent, 233–5. The early land transactions for the Cordeliers are found in AN S 4161–3. 29 For the denial of the permission, Du Breul, 391, again recorded the document; for the purchase and rent, ibid., 392–3. 30 Les Grandes Chroniques de France, ed. Paulin Paris, 6  vols. (Paris: Techener, 1836), 1:1033, no.  75 (1256). For the trial and fine of Enguerrand of Coucy, see Edmond Faral, “Le Procès d’Enguerrand IV de Coucy,” Revue historique de droit français et l’étranger 26 (1948): 213–58, esp.  242–3 for the king’s use of the money on architectural projects. It is unclear exactly what buildings of the convent Louis’ patronage enabled. Geoffrey of Beaulieu wrote that Louis “enlarged” the church of the Franciscans, while William of Nangis claimed he built the whole thing from the foundations. Both Geoffrey of Beaulieu, RHF 20:11 and William of Nangis write: “domum dei Parisius cum magnum sumptibus ampliavit et redditus augmentavit,” RHF 20:406; William of Nangis, “et ecclesiam fratrum Minorum à fundamentis in integram consummavit,” RHF 20:400. William of Saint-Pathus detailed that

Notes to pages 175–177 the king donated his own wood to the church and the cloister, presumably for their roofs. William of Saint-Pathus, Vie de Saint Louis, RHF 20:95, “et fist couper en son bois les tres et autre merrien de l’église des Freres Meneurs de Paris, et pour leur cloistre de ladite église.” 31 Beaumont-Maillet, Grand couvent, 252 n. 10. The accolade to Louis suggests that the indulgence was in response to a specific royal request. 32 For the legend behind the name Jacobin, see AN S 4229, pièce 1 and 2 (copies made in 1221 of the letter of donation from Jean de Barastre). Sauval, 1:634; Lebeuf, 1:149; Du Breul, 378; Hinnebusch, Dominican Order, 1:58–9. 33 Biver and Biver, Abbayes, monastères et couvents, 355. 34 Richard Sundt, “The Jacobin Church of Toulouse and the Origin of the Double Nave Plan,” Art Bulletin 71/2 (1989), 196 n. 49 cites an excerpt of William of Auvergne (Tours, Bibl. Mun. Ms. 205, fol. 72v) published in Stephen of Bourbon, Anecdotes historiques, légendes et apologues: Tractatus de diversis materiis praedicabilibus, ed. A. Lecoy de la Marche (Paris, 1877), 389, n. 1. 35 AN LL 1528A, proceedings of the general chapter. 36 While most scholars believe construction of the church began as early as 1221, Richard Sundt found that the documents referring to this date do not support that assumption. The earlier date would make the Parisian church precede the church at Toulouse, which was constructed from 1229. Sundt, “The Double Nave Plan,” 203 and n. 81. Sundt cites seventeenth-century Dominican friar J.-M. de Griffe de Rechac, La Vie du glorieux patriarque S. Dominique . . . avec la foundation de tous les couvens . . . dans toutes les provinces du Royaume de France et dans les dix-sept PaysBas (Paris, 1647), 610. The friar likely had access to the conventual archives, which were lost after the Revolution. Sundt observed that the necrology of the Paris convent, compiled in the late eighteenth century, supports this dating. However, there are conflicting arguments; see E. Bernard, Les Dominicains dans l’université de Paris (Paris: E. de Soye, 1883), 74 and 87–8, cited in Sundt, “The Double Nave Plan,” 203, n. 82. 37 Sundt, “The Double Nave Plan,” 194, cites Gilles Meersseman, “L’architecture dominicaine au XIIIe siècle: legislation et pratique,” Archivium Fratrum Praedicatorum 16 (1946), 158–73. 38 Biver and Biver, Abbayes, monastères et couvents, 355, no source given. They provided the date 1254, but Blanche of Castile died in 1252, so if she did attend the dedication it must have been by that date. 39 For the church and convent, Du Breul, 379; for Enguerrand, ibid., 380, and the author notes that in 1263, Louis gave the Jacobins of Paris two additional houses and a hospital on rue Arondelle, which the crown acquired from an exchange related to the establishment of the Sorbonne. 40 William of Nangis: “scholas et dormitorium Jacobitarum Parisius” (“the schools and the Jacobin’s

261

dormitory of Paris”), RHF 20:400. William of Saint-Pathus, RHF 20:94  “il fist fere le dortoier des freres Preecheeurs de Paris, et autres mesons ilecques meesmes” (“he had made the dormitory of the Brothers Preachers of Paris, and other houses of those same people”), and Grandes Chroniques, ed. Paulin Paris, 1:1033. 41 See Sauval, 5:640–1; Lebeuf, 1:113–14. A mistaken foundation date (1209) is corrected in Paul Deslandres, “Le Couvent et l’église des Mathurins de Paris (1229–1792),” Bulletin de la Société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 61 (1934): 50–1. 42 Sauval, 5:640–1, records that their first chapel had been dedicated to Saint Mathurin, whence their Parisian name derived. 43 AN S 4241 Box 2, pièces 1, 11, 12, 13, 14. Vidimus of Philip III of gifts by Louis IX to the Mathurins in 1258 and 1261. Du Breul, 373, writes that Louis gave them the censive that had seven or eight houses on the rue du Foin. The 1259 document is that mistakenly attributed to 1209 as described by Deslandres. Biver and Biver, Abbayes, monastères et couvents, 230, offer an initial construction date of 1219 for the convent but do not cite the source. 44 Vidier, “Trésor,” pt. 3, p. 262. The only other order Louis donated a thorn to prior to this was the Franciscans of Sées, in 1259 or 1260. Ibid. 45 See Sean Field, Isabelle of France: Capetian Sanctity and Franciscan Identity in the Thirteenth Century (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2006), 34–5; for their mutual support of Longchamp, see 64–6. 46 Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, 361, no. 725. AN J 151 A, n. 16. Cf. William of SaintPathus, RHF 20:76. On the history of the Béguines in Paris, see Léon le Grand, “Les béguines de Paris,” Mémoires de la Société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 20 (1893): 295–357. For a recent study, see Tanya Stabler, “Now She Is Martha, Now She Is Mary,” and Tanya Stabler, “What’s in a Name? Clerical Representations of Parisian Béguines (1200–1328),” Journal of Medieval History 33/1 (2007): 60–86. 47 Geoffrey of Beaulieu, RHF 20:11–12. The whole phrase is: “Praeterea miserandarum mulierum, quae propter victus penuriam erant publice expositae ad peccatum, vel ad exponendum paratae.” 48 Raunié, Épitaphier, 4:317, n. 2 cites the Chronicle of Aubrey of Trois-Fontaines, 1225, “Magister Guillelmus Alvernus, theologiam legens Parisius, novam domum Filiarum inchoavit.” 49 Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 725; Geoffrey of Beaulieu, RHF 20:11–12. 50 Raunié, Épitaphier, 4:324. 51 AN L1053, dossier 1, pièce 2, and Geoffrey of Beaulieu, RHF 20:11–12, Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 725. 52 Raunié, Épitaphier, 4:324. 53 Geoffrey of Beaulieu, RHF 20:11. Léon Le Grand, “Les Quinze-Vingts: depuis leur fondation jusqu’à leur translation au Faubourg Saint-Antoine,

262

Notes to pages 177–178

Mémoires de la Sociéte de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 13 (1886): 114 and 123. For a recent study, see Mark Polking O’Tool, “Caring for the Blind in Medieval Paris,” and Mark Polking O’Tool, “The povres avugles of the Hôpital des Quinze-Vingts: Disability and Community in Medieval Paris,” in Difference and Identity in France and Medieval Francia, ed. Meredith Cohen and Justine Firnhaber-Baker (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2010), 157–74. 54 Dubois, Historia ecclesiae Parisiensis, 2  vols. (Paris: Francis Muguet, 1690–1710), 2:446. 55 “in qua plateâ nunc constructa est domus caecorum,” ibid., 2:447. The same charter provides an annual rent of 100 sous on the Prévôté de Paris to replace wheat and oats the bishop received annually from that land. It is unclear as to whether the structure was a church or chapel. Geoffrey of Beaulieu, RHF 20:11 mentions a chapel, not a church, although William of Saint-Pathus (writing later) mentions a church. Joinville describes it as a chapel, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 724. 56 Ibid., 724. Archives du Quinze-Vingts, no.  375, cited in Le Grand, “Quinze-Vingts,” 124. 57 William of Saint-Pathus, RHF 21:84. 58 J. M. Rietzel, “The Medieval Houses of BonsEnfants,” Viator 11 (1980): 181–2. 59 RHF 21:84. 60 Ernest Coyecque, L’Hôtel-Dieu de Paris au Moyen Âge: Histoire et documents (Société de l’histoire de Paris, 1887)  and Positions des thèses de l’École nationale des chartes (1887), 9–20. Cf. Louis Rondonneau de la Motte, Essai historique sur l’Hôtel-Dieu de Paris ou tableau chronologique de sa fondation et de ses accroissemens successifs (Paris: Nyon l’aîné, 1787), 24, and Leon Brièle, Archives de l’Hôtel Dieu de Paris (1157–1300) avec notice, appendice et table par Ernest Coyecque (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1894). Royal patronage of the hospital was fairly continuous from the reign of Louis VII, who donated money and rights from a land situated near Paris in 1157. In 1208, Philip Augustus decided that each time he moved from Paris, he would give all of the bedding from his house to another town. This was confirmed in 1358. Ibid., 27. 61 Letter to the prevosts and baillis, Ordonnances des Roys de la Troisieme Race, 19:376. Cf. Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade. 62 AN M 58.32. The increase in alms is also part of a larger charitable program; the key study on Louis’ alms and royal charity in general is Robert-Henri Bautier and François Maillard, “Les aumônes du roi aux maladeries, maisons-dieu, et pauvres établissements du royaume. Contribution à l’étude du réseau hospitalier et de la fossilisation de l’administration royale de Philippe Auguste à Charles VII,” in Assistance et assistés. Actes du 97e congrès national des sociétés savantes, Nantes, 1972, section de philologie et d’histoire jusqu’à 1610 (Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 1979), 37–105. 63 Archives de l’Hôtel-Dieu, ed. Brièle 353–4, notice 683.

64 Ibid., 353, notice 682. 65 Coyecque, Positions, 18. 66 The testament and thus the numbers in this paragraph are in “Testament de Louis IX,” in Historia universitatis parisiensis, ed. C. E. du Boulay, 6 vols. (Paris, 1666), 3:392–3. 67 “Ad aedificationem novae Domus suae iuxta Parisius 100. Libr,” ibid., 393. 68 Ibid. Louis also left money to three other groups of poor scholar boys in Paris. 69 For example, the Franciscans were taken to be heretics when they arrived in Paris, and given refuge only at Saint-Denis because they were refused in the city center. Beaumont-Maillet, Grand Couvent, 8, n. 12, cites Jourdain de Giano, Chronica fratris Jordani a Jano, ord. Fratrum Minorum, Analecta franciscana 1 (Karachi: St Bonaventure, 1885), 3. Disdain of these new groups ran so deeply that Honorius III, acting on their request, issued a series of bulls between 1218 and 1220 recommending the “faithful catholics” to archbishops and bishops in France: 1218 Bull, Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis; 1219 Bull: Sbaralea, Johannes-Hyacinthus, O.F.M. Conv., Bullarium franciscanum romanorum pontificum constitutiones, epistolas ac diplomata continens, 4 vols. (Rome, 1759–68), 1:2 and 5, cited in Beaumont-Maillet, Grand Couvent, 9–10. These tensions preceded the outright conflict between the secular clergy and the mendicants within the University of Paris, culminating first in the “great dispersion” of 1229–30 and later in William of Saint-Amour’s 1256 acrimonious treatise, Concerning the Perils of the Last Days, which attacks the doctrine and practice of mendicancy. The document also critiques Louis IX for his mendicant sympathies. See Michel-Marie Dufeil, Guillaume de Saint-Amour et la polémique universitaire parisienne 1250–1259 (Paris: Picard, 1972). For a more thorough discussion of the tensions between town and gown, see Stephen Ferruolo, “Parisius-Paradisus: The City, its Schools and the Origins of the University of Paris,” in The University and the City: From Medieval Origins to the Present, ed. Thomas Bender (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988), 22–46. On the place of prostitutes in Paris, see Keiko Nowacka, “Persecution, Marginalization, or Tolerance: Prostitutes in Thirteenth-Century Parisian Society,” in Difference and Identity, ed. Cohen and Firnhaber-Baker, 175–96. Students, notoriously penurious, rarely received charity from others, because of the assumption that their status and debts would be relieved once gainfully employed after receiving the degree, Rietzel, “Bons-Enfants,” 177. 70 Berger, Layettes, 4:413, cited in Andrews, Other Friars, 200, n. 129. 71 Rietzel, “Bons-Enfants,” 205–6. 72 Geoffrey of Beaulieu, RHF 20:12, Rietzel, “BonsEnfants,” 205–6. 73 In later years, the Béguines received regular donations of royal alms and pensions from the canons of the Sainte-Chapelle. Stabler, “Now She Is Martha,” 39–49, and 243–8.

Notes to pages 178–183 74 The documentary material, which is too copious to cite here, is paralleled by the evidence in the Épitaphier du Vieux Paris as well as in the Collection de Gagnières for these sites. 75 Du Breul, 431. 76 Ibid., 655. 77 O’Tool, “Caring for the Blind,” 221. 78 Of all the buildings constructed over the course of the thirteenth century as per Figure 1.14, those to which Louis contributed account for about a third. 79 After an initial phase starting in 1217 at Saint-Denis, their first establishment within the walls was a school founded in 1224 by Alexander of Hales for thirty brothers on Rue Sainte-Geneviève in the English Quarter of the Left Bank. The school was operational by 1224; Jacques Guy Bougerol, “Théologie et spiritualité franciscaine au temps de Saint Louis,” in Septième centenaire, ed. Carolus-Barré, 248–9. That same year, 1224, is when the Franciscans obtained land just outside of the southern walls of the city on the western side of the Rue Saint-Jacques, in a desolate area known as Vauvert, which they eventually rejected, probably because it was extra muros (although they claimed it was because of the size). See note 20. Then in 1230 the monarchy intervened on their behalf for the current location. Du Breul transcribed the original charter, 391: “quendam locu cum domibus ibidem constructis, situm in parrochia sanctorum Cosma et Damiani infra muros Domini Regis, propre portam de Gibardo (cuius fundus et proprietas ad ipsos Abbatem et Conventum sancti Germani pertinent) divine charitatis intuitu commodaverunt dilectis in christo filiis, fratribus ordinis fratrum Minorum, ut ibi maneant tanquam hospites.” 80 Du Breul, 378; Cf. Sauval, 1:634; Lebeuf, 1:149; Hinnebusch, Dominican Order, 1:58–9 and 63. 81 AN S 4241 Box 2, pièces 1, 11, 12, 13, 14. Vidimus of Philip III of gifts by Louis IX to the Mathurins in 1258 and 1261. Du Breul, 373, writes that Louis gave them the censive that had seven or eight houses on the rue du Foin. The 1259 document is that mistakenly attributed to 1209 as described by Deslandres. Biver and Biver, Abbayes, monastères et couvents, 230, offer an initial construction date of 1219 for the convent but do not cite the source. 82 AN S 3632–3; Du Breul, 418. However, the Sacks were banned at the Council of Lyon in 1274. Their convent remained in their possession until the last brother died or departed, and in April 1293, Philip IV promised the church to the Augustinians, subject to papal or other appropriate authorization, which was granted in 1295. Eelcko Ypma, “L’acquisition du couvent parisien des Sachets,” Augustiniana 9 (1969): 105–17, cited in Andrews, Other Friars, 219, n. 253. 83 RHF 21:84; For the proximity to Saint-Victor, Rietzel, “Bons-Enfants,” 184, cites Friedmann, Paris, ses rues, ses paroisses, 238–9. 84 AN K 31.12 B in le Couteulx, 203–4, and Du Boulay, Historia Universitatis Parisiensis, 3: 360. Geoffrey of Beaulieu, RHF, 20:12.

263

85 Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 727. Du Breul, 465. 86 AN J 151 A, n. 16. Cf. William of Saint-Pathus, RHF 20:76. 87 Now the rue Charlemagne, rue de l’Ave-Maria, and rue de la Fauconnerie; Le Grand, “Béguines,” 320. 88 Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 728. 89 Ibid., v. 729. This is the present-day rue Croix de la Bretonnerie. 90 AN S 3707, gift from bourgeois of Paris. Their former location on the Right Bank was subsequently inhabited by the Celestins. For the studium generale, see Andrews, Other Friars, 22. It seems possible that their departure gave way for this land to be given to the Béguines. 91 Raunié, Épitaphier, 4:317. The original buildings were razed in 1358 for the elevation of new walls at the dawn of the Hundred Years’ War, and a new, smaller convent was built within them. Ibid., 4:328. 92 Lebeuf, 1:93–4. For the date of their establishment, see Biver and Biver, Abbayes, monastères et couvents, 61. The Benedictines, who took the name of the White Mantles, were later given this space and rebuilt the church entirely during the seventeenth century. 93 Dubois, Historia ecclesiae Parisiensis, 2:447. 94 In his bull Quia plerumque from June 28, 1268, Clement IV regulated that the minimum distance between the different churches of the mendicants should be less than three hundred perches: “infra spatium trecentarium cannarum a vestries ecclesiis mensurandarum per aera etiam ubi alias recte non permitteret loci dipositio mensurari.” Cited in Jacques Le Goff, “Ordres mendiants et urbanisation dans la France médiévale,” Annales. Economies, Sociétés, Civilisations 25 (1970): 932. 95 These distances were obtained by measuring the current locations on Google Maps. 96 Erlande-Brandenburg, Notre-Dame, 39, records the length of the cathedral as seventy-five meters and the width at the façade as about thirty-five meters. Michael Davis has done considerable work to digitally reconstruct the church: see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0o3cuEC-ac. 97 Du Breul, 393, provided the dimensions in feet. Modern equivalents are given for the royal foot of 32.5 centimeters. 98 None of the graphic material illustrates the chevet; radiating chapels might suggest the presence of vaults in that location. Questions remain about the original plan of the Cordeliers because of the restoration necessitated by the 1580 fire. However, Davis, “‘Fitting,’” 253, maintains that only the fabric was renewed. Many of the mendicant churches throughout Europe were of this type; for mendicants in Northern Europe, see Thomas Coomans, “Belfries, Cloth Halls, Hospitals, and Mendicant Churches: A New Urban Architecture in the Low Countries around 1300,” in The Year 1300, ed. Gajewski and Opačić, 185–202. Caroline Bruzelius describes mendicant churches as having a “culture of incompleteness” and

264

Notes to pages 183–190

extension in “The Dead Come to Town: Preaching, Burying and Building in the Mendicant Orders,” in Gajewski and Opačić, 203–24. 99 Davis, “‘Fitting,’” 257. 100 Notre-Dame’s choir height was 32.5 meters. Van Liefferinge, “The Choir of Notre-Dame,” 166, table A.15. 101 The visual evidence for this stringcourse is ambiguous; see Davis, “‘Fitting,’” 257–8, for discussion. 102 Du Breul, 402, writes that some of the windows were “sans histoires et images . . . faites à demy lozanges peintes et damassées de noir par dessus aux bordures de fleur de lys et de chasteaux d’or sur du rouge, qui monstrent qu’elles y avoient esté mises du temps de S. Louys et Madame Blanche de Castille, sa mere” (“[the windows were] without stories and images . . . made in half lozenges painted and covered in black damask above with borders of fleur-de-lys and golden castles on red, which shows that they were made in the time of Saint Louis and Madame Blanche of Castile, his mother”). 103 The priory also had a double infirmary, as well as a double chapel founded by Jeanne de Navarre. Du Breul, 393. 104 The Dominican church at Toulouse also employs this plan; it was constructed from 1229. See Schenkluhn, Ordines Studentes, 59–62, 73–5, and Sundt, “The Double Nave Plan,” 185–207. 105 Schenkluhn, Ordines Studentes, 72. 106 There has been much discussion concerning this unusual plan, which closely resembles that of the Dominican church in Toulouse. Because the dates are uncertain, it is difficult to pronounce a verdict on which church preceded the other. If the Parisian church was indeed begun under John the Teuton after 1241 and completed or nearing completion in 1254 at its dedication, then the Parisian church succeeded that of Toulouse, the “mother house.” Cf. the different perspectives in Schenkluhn, Ordines Studentes, 72–6, and Sundt, “The Double Nave Plan,” esp. 203; inquiries into this plan began with Richard Krautheimer, Die Kirchen der Bettelorden in Deutschland (Cologne: F. J. Marcan, 1925). 107 Like their monastic and canonical counterparts, the Dominicans segregated their practices from the laity; a decree issued by the general chapter in 1249 mandates that screens be erected so that the “friars cannot see or be seen by the laity,” Acta capitulorum generalium Ordinis Praedicatorum (MOPH, III) ed. B. M. Reichert (Rome, 1898), 47, cited in Sundt, “The Double Nave Plan,” 190 n. 23. The decree also says that windows may be put in the screen so that the laity can look in during the elevation of the host. 108 Schenkluhn, Ordines Studentes, 56. The jubé also contained a kind of pulpit from which brothers could preach. Anselme Dimier, Les moines bâtisseurs, architecture et vie monastique (Paris: Fayard, 1964), 154. 109 In 1354, a donation of 4000£p was given by Humbert, the Earl of Vienna, to the Jacobins,

annually for ten years, until the construction that had been started was finished: “construuntur, vel perficiuntur seu in melius reformantur inchoate . . . fratres proponent ecclesiam pociori confirmitate novi operis non modicum sumptuosi ad laudem divini Numinis decorare.” This permitted the completion of the windows, the western bays, and the portal of the Jacobins on the rue Saint Jacques, as well as bronze tombs. Fleury, Gallia Dominicana, n. p.; Schenkluhn, Ordines Studentes, 60. The chapels were not built into the main frame of the basilica and may also be understood as later additions. Fleury, Gallia Dominicana, vol. 2, n. p. writes that the northern chapels, at least the windows of three arcades, seem to have been added in the sixteenth century, when Nicolas Hennequin reconstructed the cloister and the school of Saint Thomas. A final modification to the structure was completed in 1622 by Cardinal Mazarin, to the master altar. The church was finally destroyed in 1850. 110 Most scholars assume that this church had a timber roof, like the first Dominican church at Toulouse. See Sundt, “The Double Nave Plan.” 111 Fleury, Gallia Dominicana, vol. 2, Paris, n. p. 112 Dimier, Moines bâtisseurs, 154, writes that the refectory was at least eighty meters long and could hold three hundred people. 113 Fleury judged that they were from the thirteenth century after seeing photographs of the tracery before it was razed, Gallia Dominicana, vol. 2, “Paris,” n. p.: “j’ai eu les photographies entre les mains. Ces arcades coupées par des colonnettes, ornées d’un cercle trilobe, semblent marquer le milieu du XIIIe siècle.” 114 AN L 927. Du Breul, 427, writes that the Carmelites kept the stones from their first church for the new one, and, citing the actual charter on 429–30, that they brought these stones with them for the new church. For the date, see Du Breul, 428–9. 115 See note 82. 116 Jacques-Maximilien Benjamin Bins de Saint-Victor, Tableau historique et pittoresque de Paris depuis les Gaulois jusqu’à nos jours, four volumes in eight books, 2nd edn. (Paris: Gosselin, 1822–7), 6.1:606–7. 117 Lebeuf, 1:289; Raunié, Épitaphier, 1:154. 118 See note 53. Dubois, Historia ecclesiae Parisiensis, 2:446–7. 119 Le Grand, “Les Quinze-Vingts,” 174–5. It was reconstructed in part or entirely in 1380. A. Berty et al., Topographie du vieux Paris: région du Louvre et des Tuileries (Paris: 1866), 67. 120 17.5 toises long down the middle of the nave, 11 toises on the east end, and 13.5 toises on the west. Berty, Topographie, 67. Distance for 1 toise has been based on 1.949 meters. 121 Ibid., 67. 122 Ibid., cites Lebeuf. 123 The church was reputedly fifty-five meters long and twenty-two meters wide, and had a seven-sided polygonal apse with a turret, a spire, and a series of

265

Notes to pages 190–199 five chapels with pitched roofs on the south side of the nave. Biver and Biver, Abbayes, monastères et couvents, 110, cite Antoine-Marital Le Fèvre, Description des curiosités de Paris (Paris: P. and F. Greffier, 1759), n. p. for an image of the church after an engraving by Jean Marot, ca. 1650, Musée Carnavalet, Topo PC 110B. 124 Coyecque, Positions des thèses, 18. An infirmary was built between 1225 and 1250, as well as a chapel near the Petit-Pont between 1250–60, ibid. 125 Geoffrey of Beaulieu, RHF 20:11; William of Chartres, RHF 20:36; William of Saint-Pathus, RHF 20:94, Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 723. 126 Schenkluhn, Ordines Studentes, 68–72. 127 The foundation for this perspective lies in Krautheimer, Die Kirchen del Bettelorden in Deutschland, as well as in his studies in the iconography of architecture. Again, cf. Schenkluhn, Ordines Studentes, chapters 4, 5, and conclusion, as well as Sundt, “The Double Nave Plan.” 128 Krautheimer, Die Kirchen del Bettelorden in Deutschland. 129 This found support in P. Frankl, Gothic Architecture, rev. edn. with introduction by P. Crossley (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2000 [1962]), 123, 158. 130 Sundt, “The Double Nave Plan,” 125–6. 131 Schenkluhn, Ordines Studentes, chapters  4, 5, and conclusion. Not all Jacobin churches employed this plan; of fifty-three known plans for Dominican churches in southern France, thirty-eight have single nave plans, and nine are basilican, while only six have two naves, Sundt, “The Double Nave Plan,” 195 n. 45. 132 On the visual ideology of these churches, see the reassessment in Schenkluhn, Ordines Studentes, as well as the insightful review by Paul Crossley, Burlington Magazine 128, no. 996 (Mar. 1986), 220–1. 133 Sundt, “The Double Nave Plan,” 197–206. 134 Ibid. 135 Richard Sundt, “Mediocres domos et humiles habeant fratres nostri: Dominican Legislation on Architecture and Architectural Decoration in the 13th Century,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 46/4 (1987): 394–407. Saint Francis himself had prohibited the orders’ acceptance of churches or anything constructed for them unless they are in harmony promised in the Rule, although this was abandoned upon his death. 136 I am referring to the so-called controversy seen in relation to Bernard of Clairvaux’s famous letter to William of St. Thierry and Abbot Suger’s description of materials at Saint-Denis. The literature on this subject is too vast to cite in entirety here; for a focused study on this, see Conrad Rudolph, Artistic Change at St-Denis: Abbot Suger’s Program and the Early Twelfth-Century Controversy over Art (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990), and Conrad Rudolph, The “Things of Greater Importance”: Bernard of Clairvaux’s Apologia and the Medieval Attitude toward Art

(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1990). For recent reassessment of this as a controversy, see Carruthers, Experience of Beauty, esp. 147. 137 On architectural ranks, see the discussion in Davis, “Splendor and Peril,” 55–8. 138 Note that the entire chapel was repainted on the interior between 1298–9. See Guerout, “Palais de la Cité,” 2, 43, and n. 7. 139 See the full chart in Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, 192. 140 Perraut, Collèges parisiens, 230–43. 141 Davis, “Splendor and Peril,” 58. Mailan Doquang’s study of lateral chapels observes strong affiliations with those produced in Paris. See Doquang, “Rayonnant Chantry Chapels in Context,” chapter 3. 142 The most explicit descriptions are in Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 667; Matthew Paris, Chronica majora, 5:465–6; Geoffrey of Beaulieu, Vita, RHF 20:18–19. See the discussion in Le Goff, Saint Louis, trans. Gollrad, 155–7. 143 Le Goff, Saint Louis, trans. Gollrad, 154, believes that the encounter with Hugh of Digne in 1254, after returning from the crusade, played an important part in shaping Louis’ new outlook. 144 Le Nain de Tillemont, Vie de Saint Louis, 4:82, cites Geoffrey of Beaulieu: “Saint Louis a eu effectivement le dessein de quitter la couronne” (“Saint Louis had actually planned to leave the crown”). 145 Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, “Spirit of Reform,” 135–81. 146 See Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, 178–81. 147 “Par cest establissement amenda moult le royaume,” Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 714. Conclusion 1 For a discussion of propaganda during the Middle Ages, see Le forme della propaganda nel Due e nel Trecento: relazioni tenute al convegno internazionale organizzato dal Comitato di studi storici de Trieste, dall’École française de Rome e dal Dipartimento de storia dell’Università degli studi di Trieste, Trieste, March 2–5, 1993, ed. Paolo Cammarosano (Rome: École française de Rome, 1994). See also Jacques Verger, “Théorie politique et propagande politique,” in ibid., 29–44. 2 For example, seals with images of the king were based on traditional forms and were not portraits. See the discussion in the introduction, note 21. 3 Fawtier, The Capetian Kings of France, 27–8. 4 Mary Carruthers, The Craft of Thought: Meditation, Rhetoric, and the Making of Images, 400–1200 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998). 5 Joinville, “Life of Saint Louis,” trans. Shaw, 171. 6 See Louis Carolus-Barré, “La grande ordonnance de 1254 sur la réforme de l’administration et la police du royaume,” in Septième centenaire, 85–96; Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, 135–220; Le Goff, Saint Louis, 209–90.

266

Notes to pages 200–206

7 Hans-Joachim Schmidt, “La dévotion de Louis IX: exeption ou normalité?” in La Sainte-Chapelle de Paris, ed. Hediger, 59. 8 The term was used by the prior Richard von Deidesheim of Wimpfen-im-Thal to describe the style in which he wished his church to be built. Joannis Friderici Schannat, ed., Vindemiae literariae Collectio secunda, Burchardi de Hallis Chronicon ecclesia Collegiatae S. Petri Winpiensis (Fulda and Leipzig, 1724), 59. Günther Binding suggests an alternative interpretation to the notion of opus francigenum. Instead of referring to French ecclesiastical architecture, Binding claims the term refers more to the masonry technique employed in France. See Günther Binding, “Opus Francigenum: Ein Beitrag zur Begriffsbestimmung,” Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 71 (1989): 45–54. Appendix 1 1 Biographies of Blanche include Elena Bonoldi Gattemayer, Bianca di Castiglia: regina di Francia e madre di un santo (Milano: Jaca Book, 2006); Philippe Delorme, Blanche de Castille: épouse de Louis VIII, mère de Saint Louis (Paris: Pygmalion, 2002); Gérard Sivéry, Blanche de Castille (Paris: Fayard, 1990). 2 Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Monfrin, v. 724, specifically states that Louis “permitted” his mother to found these institutions. 3 Le Goff, Saint Louis, trans. Gollrad, 83. 4 This is the still widely accepted thesis of Jordan in Louis IX, 8–9, although he also reiterated that one should not overstate Blanche as an ambitious ruler. Cf. Le Goff, Saint Louis, trans. Gollrad, 83, who suggests that Blanche “had a taste for power,” and goes as far as to say “in practice there was a kind of ‘co-royalty.’” 5 Geoffrey of Beaulieu associates the foundation to Louis alone, RHF 20:11. 6 On the construction of Royaumont, see Caroline Astrid Bruzelius, Cistercian High Gothic: The Abbey of Longpont and the Architecture of the Cistercians in France in the Early Thirteenth Century, Analecta Cistercensa, 35 (1979). For Blanche of Castile’s patronage of the Cistercian order, see Teryl N. Kinder, “Blanche of Castile and the Cistercians: An Architectural Re-evaluation of Maubuisson Abbey,” Citeaux, Com. Cist, fasc. 3–4 (1976), 161–88. 7 In 1236, Louis confirmed the remarkably generous annual donation of five hundred livres parisis for the maintenance of at least sixty monks. In 1258, this was augmented to support at least one hundred fourteen monks. Bruzelius, Saint-Denis, 95. 8 Helgaud of Fleury mentions that Contance founded a number of chapels, such as that within the palace at Étampes. Helgaud de Fleury, Vita Roberti Regis, RHF 10:110. Concerning the Sainte-Chapelle, the preamble states that Louis founded and built the chapel. See Appendix 3; Sauveur Jerôme Morand, Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle royale du Palais, enrichie de

planches (Paris, 1790), “Pièces justificatives,” 3. See also Claudine Billot, “La fondation de Saint Louis: Le collège des chanoines de la Sainte-Chapelle (1248–1555),” in Le trésor de la Sainte-Chapelle, ed. Durand and Lafitte, 99. 9 Brigitte Arnaud, “L’office de la couronne d’epines dans l’archdiocèse de Sens, d’après le ms Paris, BNF lat. 1028, XIIIe s. suivie du catalogue des manuscrits liturgiques notés et conservés à Sens” (PhD dissertation, Université de Paris Sorbonne, 2008). 10 On the advisors of Louis IX, see Quentin Griffiths, “New Men among the Lay Counselors of Saint Louis,” Mediaeval Studies 32 (1970): 234–72. Appendix 3 1 For reference on diplomatic standards, see Olivier Guyotjeannin, Jacques Pycke, and BenoîtMichel Tock, La diplomatique médiévale (Turnhout: Brepols,1993), 71–86. 2 Schreiber, Reparatio ecclesiae nostrae, 73, also holds this view. 3 Cornut, “De susceptione Coronae Spineae”: “Collocatur in capella regia beati Nicolai cum molto gaudio Domini Corona.” 4 Accounts of Louis IX (1239), RHF 22:605: “Renerius Testa Cocta, pro cereis factis ante sanctam Coronam ex quo adducta fuit usque ad sanctum Dionisium, lxx s.” 5 Stafan Gasser, “L’architecture de la Sainte-Chapelle: Etat de la question concernant sa datation, son maître d’oeuvre et sa place dans l’histoire de l’architecture,” in La Sainte-Chapelle de Paris: royaume de France ou Jérusalem céleste, ed. Christine Hediger (Turnhout: Brepols, 2007), 159, cites Stefan Matter, Die schriftlichen Quellen zur Datierung des Baubeginns der Sainte-Chapelle in Paris (unpublished 3rd cycle seminar paper, Universität Freiburg, 2001). 6 Charles the Bald gave Saint-Denis this relic from the collection at Aachen. Rigord, RHF 17:18 and de Gagnieres 2:12; Michel Félibien, Histoire de l’abbaye royale de Saint-Denys en France (Paris: F. Leonard, 1706), 96–7, 354. 7 For the 1241 reception of the relics, see Exuviae sacrae Constantinopolitanae, ed. Paul de Riant, 2 vols., 2nd edn. (Paris: Éditions du Comité des travaux ­historiques et scientifiques, 2004 [1878]), 1:24. For the 1242 reception of the relics, see, Anatole Frolow, La relique de la Vraie Croix: recherches sur le développement d’un culte (Paris: Institut Français d’Etudes Byzantines, 1961) n. 530, 427–8. 8 Félibien, Histoire de la ville de Paris, 1:297, and Jean Filleau de la Chaise, Histoire de Saint Louis, 15  vols. (Paris: Jean Baptiste Coignard, 1688), 1:310, advanced the latter date. In recent memory, Kimpel and Suckale, L’architecture gothique en France, 529, as well as Weiss, Art and Crusade, 5, date the start of construction to 1241. Ibid., 16, also states that the chapel was begun after the crown was moved on October 3, 1239.

267

Notes to pages 206–228 9 Gérard of Saint-Quentin (or Saint-Quentin-enl’Isle), in E. Miller, “Exuviae” [Review], 297–8. Cf. Natalis de Wailly, “Récit du treizième siècle sur les translations faites en 1239 et en 1241 des saintes reliques de la passion,” Bibliothèque de l’École des chartes 39 (1878): 401–15. 10 That is, the verb is in the perfect tense: “Rex igituir Francorum, non procul a palatio suo, capellam mirifici decoris dicto thesauro regio convenientem jussit fabricari, in qua ipsum honore condigno postea collocavit,” Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, ed. Henry Richards Luard, 7 vols. (London: Longman and Co., 1872–83), 4:92. 11 Ibid. 12 François Gébelin, La Sainte-Chapelle et la Conciergerie (Paris: H. Laurens, 1931), 8–9; Denise Jalabert, La Sainte-Chapelle, Nefs et Clochers (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1947), 2; Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 1:235. Chapter  4 of this book contains a more complete discussion of the use and function of these indulgences. 13 Privileges: Morand, “Pièces justificatives,” Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle, 2–3. Indulgences: AN L 619.1, L 619.2, and L 619.6 and L 619.7, respectively. 14 Weiss, Art and Crusade, 16. For the annual revenue, Jean Richard cites Natalis de Wailly in Saint Louis, roi d’un France féodale soutien de la Terre saint (Paris: Fayard, 1983), 61. There are several sources for the cost of the Sainte-Chapelle: the “anonymous chronicle” from circa 1297: “spatiosissimam capellam pro sacris reliquiis, juxta palatium suum Parisius, multo scemate aedificavit, quae XL. millia librarum Turonensium et amplius constitit,” in RHF 21:200; William of Saint-Pathus (active 1277– 1315), Vie de Saint Louis, in RHF 20:41–2, recorded the same figure: “l’en dit que il despendi bien xl mile livres de tournois et plus.” As a comparison, Henry III spent upward of £40,000 on his refurbishment of the church and shrine at Westminster, which represented nearly two years’ worth of his income. H. M. Colvin, ed., A History of the King’s Works: The Middle Ages, 3 vols. (London: H.M.S.O., 1975 [1963]), 1:155–7. The English pound was worth more than the livre tournois, but the similarity in the numbers spent raises questions about royal parity and competition. 15 Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, 3. 16 AN L 618.8–9, Barbiche, Actes pontificaux, nos. 593, 227 and nos. 594, 228.

17 Jordan, Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade, 105–9. 18 Du Breul, 104–5. 19 ANL 619.10 and L 619.11. 20 See Kimpel, “Taille en série,” 195–222; also Kimpel and Suckale, L’architecture gothique en France, 35–7. 21 Morand, “Pièces justificatives,” Histoire de la SainteChapelle, 8–13. 22 These are paraphrased translations of the indulgences, which I have transcribed from the original documents, and the foundations, transcribed from Morand. I am very grateful to Amy Richlin and John Holland for their masterful corrections; all errors are mine. 23 Innocent IV was pope from June 25, 1243 to December 7, 1254. The first year of his pontificate therefore went until June 24, 1244, which explains why the date is given here as 1243 when, in the current system, it is really 1244. 24 The term in French is marguillier, for which there is no exact English equivalent. 25 The year is given as 1245 on the document because of the Easter style of dating (where Easter initiates the new year rather than January). See for reference Guyotjeannin, Pycke, and Tock, Diplomatique médiévale, 50–3. 26 The numbering in the archives and the date given in the AN archival inventory for the L series (April 1–3, 1249), is incorrect [Bruno Galland, ed., Série L. Monuments ecclésiastiques. Titre V. Collégiales et paroisses du diocese de Paris. Saintes Chapelles, Inventaire sommaire des cartons L 618 à L 629 (Paris: Archives nationales, 2001–2), 34]. This act was made in April at the time of the chapel’s official dedication; the papal legate’s act, signed with a precise date as May 27, 1248, follows. 27 This passage about Matthew has been moved up from the previous foundation. Appendix 4 1 All points taken on the ground at the plinth unless otherwise noted. 2 Bays 2 and 3 are obstructed by the chapel boutique. 3 The first points of lower chapel bay 1 are embedded in the façade wall, and are not considered here. Again, the piers of bays 2 and 3 were obstructed.

Bibliography

This bibliography is divided into four sections. Primary manuscript sources have been distinguished from printed primary sources and secondary sources. Concerning the archival sources, I have only listed the general series number; in the notes I have made specific references to individual manuscripts and page numbers. The secondary sources have been divided into two sections to distinguish works published before 1850 by authors who may have had access to records now lost (such as Félibien and Sauval). Some references guide the reader to reprinted articles cataloged as books, the format I consulted. In some cases I have listed references in their original language (usually French) as well as the (English) translation, for those studies had not yet been translated when I began this project but then were later in its course, from which time I began to refer to them. In every case I have tried to describe the manuscript and source as carefully as possible to facilitate the work of future researchers.

Primary Sources, Manuscripts Châteauroux, Bibliothèque municipale, MS 2 Paris, Archives nationales de France Augustinians: L 921–2; S 3632–3, S 3634 Blancs-Manteaux/White Mantles: S 3685; L 912; LL 1528A Carmelites: H5 3924; L 914, L 921; L 927–31; LL 1491–3; S 3707–27; S 3734–5 Chartreux: H5 3937–49, H5 4128–4137bis, K 31, L 937–40, L 1019; L 1053, LL 1487, LL 1654–7; S 3948–4160, S 4694–4733 Cordeliers: H5 3953–5, H5 3959, H5 3674, L 767, L 941–2, LL 1508–1527A, S 4161–3 Filles-Dieu: L 1053, L 4694; S 4694–5 Hôtel-Dieu: M 30–2, 47–56, MM 218–35 Jacobins: H5 3960–76, H5 3995; L 945–6; LL 1528–38; S 4228–9, S 4231–4, S 4237–9 Mathurins: H5 3981–9; K 33; L 947–9; LL 1544–51; S 4241–84 Sacks: S 3632–3 Saint-Pierre de Montmartre: K 32

Saint-Sauveur: H5 3811, L 707, LL 920–2; S 3494 Saint-Victor: K 33 Sainte-Catherine du Val des Écoliers: H5 3687; L 919; LL 1457–61; S 1013–45 Sainte-Chapelle: J 461, K 30–2, L 618–19, S 4163 Paris, Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, MS 114 Paris, Bibliothèque historique de la Ville de Paris, Papiers Théodore Vacquer, Paris, ms. 242, Cité (1843–61); dossier 64. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS Lat. 15182 Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Estampes Essonne: Va 91 fol. Marne: Va 51 Paris: Va 91, Va 91 fol., Va 225, Va 225g, Va 225i, Va 227, Va 243, Va 243 fol., Va 252, Va 253, Va 255, Va 255h, Va 258a, Va 259g, Va 259g fol., Va 259i, Va 260, Va 260e, Va 260 fol., Va 260j, Va 262b, Va 267a, Va 267a fol., Va 269 Paris, Médiathèque de l’architecture et du patrimoine, Archives des monuments historiques Sainte-Chapelle, dossiers 2068, 2077–83

269

270

Bibliography Primary Sources, Printed

Les actes pontificaux originaux des Archives nationales de Paris, ed. B. Barbiche, 3  vols., Commission internationale de diplomatique, vol. 1, Index actorum romanorum pontificum ab Innocentio III ad Martinum V electum (Cittá del Vaticano: Biblioteca apostolica vaticana, 1975–82). Analecta hymnica medii aevi, ed. G. M. Dreves, C. Blume, and H. M. Bannister, 55 vols. (Leipzig, 1886–1915; repr. Bern, 1961). Annales ordinis cartusiensis ab anno 1084 ab annum 1429, ed. C. le Couteulx, 8 vols. (1887–91). Archives administratives de la ville de Reims: collection de pièces inédits pouvant servir à l’histoire des institutions dans l’intérieur de la cité, ed. P. Varin, 5 vols. (Paris: Imprimerie de Crapelet, 1839–48). Archives de l’Hôtel-Dieu de Paris (1157–1300), ed. L. Brièle (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1894). Burchard of Hall, Chronicon ecclesia Collegiatae S. Petri Winpinensis, vol. 6 of Vindemiae literariae Collectio secunda, ed. J. F. Schanaat (Fulda and Leipzig, 1724). Cartulaire de l’église de Notre-Dame de Paris, ed. B. Guérard, 4 vols., Collection des cartulaires de France I, Histoire politique (Paris: Imprimerie de Crapelet, 1850). Cartulaire général de Paris ou Recueil des documents relatifs à l’histoire et à la topographie de Paris, 528–1180, ed. R. de Lasteyrie (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1887). Catalogue des actes de Philippe Auguste, avec une introduction sur les sources, les caractères et l’importance historique de ces documents, ed. L. Delisle (2nd edn., Brussels: Culture et Civilisation, 1968 [Paris, 1856]). Chartes et documents de l’Abbaye de Saint-Magloire, vol. 1, Fin du Xe siècle–1280, ed. A. Terroine and L. Fossier (Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique and Turnhout: Brepols, 1998). Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis sub auspiciis consilii generalis Facultatum Parisiensium, ed. H. Denifle, 4  vols. (Paris: Delalain, 1889–97). Chronique latine de Guillaume de Nangis de 1113 à 1300, avec les continuations de cette chronique de 1300 à 1368, Société de l’histoire de France, ed. H. Géraud (Paris: J. Renouard, 1843). Exuviae sacrae Constantinopolitanae, ed. P. de Riant, 2 vols., 2nd edn. (Paris: Comité des travaux ­historiques et scientifiques, 2004 [1877–8]). Froissart, Chronicles, ed. and trans. G. Brereton (London: Penguin, 1968). Les Grandes Chroniques de France, ed. J. Viard, Société de l’histoire de France (Paris: Renouard, 1920). Helgaud de Fleury, Vie de Robert le Pieux: epitoma vitae regis Rotberti pii, trans. and ed. R.-H. Bautier and G. Labory (Paris: Éditions du Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1965). Historia Universitatis parisiensis, ed. C. E. du Boulay, 6  vols. (repr. Frankfurt am Main: Minerva, 1966 [Paris, 1665–73]). Histoire des institutions françaises au Moyen Âge, ed. F. Lot and R. Fawtier, 3 vols. (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1957–62).

The History of Yaballaha III, Nestorian Pastor, and of His Vicar, Bar Sauma, Mongol Ambassador to the Frankish Courts at the End of the Thirteenth Century, trans. J. A. Montgomery (New York: Columbia University Press, 1927), 64–5. The Homilies of Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople, ed. and trans. C. Mango (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1958). Itinéraires russes en Orient, ed. Société de l’Orient latin, trans. B. de Khitrowo (Geneva: Imprimerie Fick, 1889). Jean de Jandun, Tractatus de laudibus Parisius. Éloge de Paris composé en 1323 par un habitant de Senlis, in Paris et ses historiens aux XIVe et XVe siècles, ed. A. J. V. Le Roux de Lincy and N.-R. Taranne (Paris: Imprimerie impériale, 1867), 3–79. Jean de Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. and trans. J. Monfrin (Paris: Dunod, 1995).   “The Life of Saint Louis,” in Chronicles of the Crusades: Joinville and Villhouardin, trans. M. R. B. Shaw (London: Penguin, 1963), 163–353. Layettes du Trésor des Chartes, ed. A. Teulet, H.-F. Delaborde, and E. Berger, 5 vols. (Paris: Plon, 1863–1909). Matthew Paris, Chronica majora, ed. H. R. Luard, 7  vols. (London: Longman & Co., 1872–83).   Chronicles of Matthew Paris: Monastic Life in the Thirteenth Century, ed. and trans. R. Vaughan (Gloucester: A. Sutton; New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1984). Les métiers et corporations de la ville de Paris, XIIIe siècle: le livre des métiers d’Étienne Boileau, ed. R. de Lespinasse and F. Bonnardot (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1879). “Morale scolarium” of John of Garland (Johannes de Garlandia), a Professor in the Universities of Paris and Toulouse in the Thirteenth Century, ed. L. J. Paetow (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1927). Les oeuvres complètes de Rutebeuf, ed. E. Faral and J. Bastin, 2 vols. (Paris: Picard, 1959–77). Oeuvres de Rigord et de Guillaume le Breton, historiens de Philippe Auguste, ed. H.-F. Delaborde, 2  vols. (Paris: Librairie Renouard, H. Loones, successeur, 1882–5). Ordines coronationis Franciae: Texts and Ordines for the Coronation of Frankish and French Kings and Queens in the Middle Ages, ed. R. A. Jackson (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995–2000). Ordonnances des rois de France de la trosième race, ed. E. J. de Laurière [et  al.], 21  vols. (Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1723–1849). Paris et ses historiens aux XIVe et XVe siècles: documents et écrits originaux de Paris, ed. A. J. V. le Roux de Lincy and L.-M. Tisserand, Histoire générale de Paris (Paris: Imprimerie impériale, 1867). Privilèges accordés à la couronne de France par le Saint-Siège, publiés d’après les originaux conservés aux Archives de l’Empire et à la Bibliothèque impériale, ed. A. Tardif (Paris: Imprimerie impériale, 1855). Recueil des actes de Philippe Auguste, roi de France, ed. H.-F. Delaborde, C. P. Dutaillis, J. Boussard, and M. Nortier, 6  vols. (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1916 [2005]). Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, ed. M. Bouquet [et al.], 24 vols. (Paris, 1738–1904).

271

Bibliography Recueil de textes relatifs à l’histoire de l’architecture et à la condition des architectes en France au Moyen Âge, XIe – XIIIe siècles, ed. V. Mortet and P. Descamps, 2nd edn. (Paris: Comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques, 1995 [1911]). Robert de Clari, The Conquest of Constantinople, ed. E. H. McNeal (New York: Columbia University Press, 1936). St. Thomas Aquinas, On Kingship, to the King of Cyprus, ed. G. B. Phelan, 2nd edn. (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1982). Statuts d’Hôtels-Dieu et de léproseries: recueil de textes du XIIème au XIVème siècle, ed. L. le Grand (Paris: Picard, 1901). Vitae paparum Avenionensium, hoc est Historia pontificum Romanorum qui in Gallia sederunt ab anno Christi MCCCV usque ad annum MCCCXCIV, 4 vols., ed. E. Baluze and G. Mollat (Paris: Letouzey et Ané, 1914–22). Secondary Sources Works Published before 1851

Archon, L., Histoire (ecclésiastique) de la chapelle des rois de France sous les trois races de nos rois, 2  vols. (Paris: P. A. Le Mercier, 1711). Bouillart, Dom J., Histoire de l’abbaye royale de Saint-Germaindes-Prés (Paris: G. Dupuis, 1724). Bonfons, P., Antiquitez et singularitez de Paris (Paris, 1608 [G. Corrozet, 1581]). Brice, G., Description nouvelle de ce qu’il a de plus remarquable dans la ville de Paris, 2 vols. (Paris, 1698). Brussel, N., Nouvel examen de l’usage général des fiefs en France pendant le XIe, le XIIe, le XIIIe, et le XIVe siècle, 2 vols. (Paris: J.-N. le Clerc, 1727). Du Breul, J., Le théatre des antiquitez de Paris (Paris: Société des imprimeurs, 1639 [1612]). Du Peyrat, G., L’histoire ecclésiastique de la cour, ou les Antiquitez et recherches de la chapelle et oratoire du roy de France, depuis Clovis Ier jusques à notre temps (Paris: H. Sara, 1645). Félibien, Dom M., Histoire de la ville de Paris, revue, augmentée et mise à jour par Dom Lobineau, 5 vols. (Paris: G. Desprez, 1725). Morand, Sauveur J., Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle royale du Palais, enrichie de planches (Paris: Clousier, 1790). Le Nain de Tillemont, L. S., Vie de Saint Louis, roi de France, ed. J. de Gaulle, Société de l’histoire de France, 6 vols. (Paris: J. Renouard, 1847–51). Oroux, É., Histoire ecclésiastique de la cour de France, où l’on trouve tout ce qui concerne l’histoire de la chapelle et des principaux officiers ecclésiastiques de nos rois (Paris: Imprimerie royale, 1776–7). Paucton, A.-J.-P., Métrologie, ou Traité des mesures, poids et monnoies des anciens peuples et des modernes (Paris: Yve Desaint, 1780). Piganiol de la Force, J.-A., Description historique de la ville de Paris et de ses environs, 10 vols. (Paris, 1765). Randonneau de la Motte, L., Essai historique sur l’Hôtel-Dieu de Paris ou Tableau chronologique de sa fondation et de ses accroissemens successifs (Paris: Nyon l’aîné, 1787).

Rouillard, S., Traicté de l’antiquité, veneration et privilèges de la Saincte Chapelle du Palais royal de Paris (Paris: Thomas de la Ruelle, 1606). Saint-Victor, J.-M. B. B. de, Tableau historique et pittoresque de Paris depuis les Gaulois jusqu’à nos jours, 4 vols. in 8, 2nd edn. (Paris: C. Gosselin, 1822–7). Sauval, H., Histoire et recherches des antiquités de la ville de Paris, 3 vols. (Paris: C. Moette, 1724), new edn. M. Fleury (Paris: Éditions du Palais Royal, 1973).

Works Published after 1851

Abu-el-Haj, B., “The Urban Setting for Late Medieval Church Building: Reims and Its Cathedral between 1210 and 1240,” Art History 11/1 (1988): 17–41. Alpers, S., “Style Is What You Make It: The Visual Arts Once Again,” in The Concept of Style, ed. B. Lang (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1987), 137–62. Amé, E., “La chapelle de l’archevêché de Reims,” Annales archéologiques 15 (1855): 213–23. Anderson, B., Imagined Communities, 2nd edn. (London: Verso, 1991 [1983]). Andrews, F., The Other Friars: The Carmelite, Augustinian, Sack and Pied Friars in the Middle Ages (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2006). Anger, P., Le Collège de Cluny fondé à Paris dans le voisinage de la Sorbonne et dans le ressort de l’Université (Paris: Picard, 1916). Arrivot, M.-L., “Dix-sept églises dans la Cité,” Positions des thèses de l’École nationale des chartes (Paris: École nationale des chartes, 1921), 15–21. Aubert, M., Notre-Dame de Paris, sa place dans l’architecture du XIIe au XIVe siècles (Paris: Henri Laurens, 1920).   “Building Yards and Master Builders in the Middle Ages,” Liturgical Bits 19 (1951): 84–7. Auzépy, M. F., and J. Cornette, Palais et pouvoir de Constantinople à Versailles (Vincennes: Presses universitaires de Vincennes, 2003). Babelon, J.-P., ed., Le château en France (Paris: Berger-Levrault, 1986). Bak, J., Coronations: Medieval and Early Modern Monarchic Ritual (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990). Bal, M., and N. Bryson, “Semiotics and Art History,” Art Bulletin 73/2 (1991): 174–208. Baldwin, J. W., Masters, Princes and Merchants: The Social Views of Peter the Chanter and His Circle, 2 vols. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1970).   The Government of Philip Augustus: Foundations of French Royal Power in the Middle Ages (Los Angeles and Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986).   ed. F. Gasparri, M. Nortier, E. Lalou, and R.-H. Bautier, Les Registres de Philippe Auguste, vol. 7 (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1992).   ed. F. Gasparri, M. Nortier, E. Lalou, and R.-H. Bautier, Paris, 1200 (Paris: Aubier, 2006). Baltzer, R. A., “The Geography of the Liturgy at NotreDame of Paris,” in Plainsong in the Age of Polyphony, ed. T. F. Kelly (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 45–64.

272

Bibliography

Barral i Altet, X., and M. Parisse, Le roi de France et son royaume autour de l’an mil. Colloque Hugues Capet, 987–1987, la France de l’an mil, Paris-Senlis, 22–25 Juin 1987 (Paris: Picard, 1992), 193–200. Bautier, A. M., “Popularis et la notion de ‘populaire,’” Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 23 (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1975), 285–303. Bautier, R.-H., “L’abbaye de Saint-Pierre et Saint-Merry de Paris du VIIIe aux XIIe siècle,” Bibliothèque de l’École des chartes 118 (1960): 5–19.   “Quand et comment Paris devint capitale,” Bulletin de la Société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 105 (1978): 17–46. Bautier, R.-H. and F. Maillard, “Les aumônes du roi aux maladeries, maisons-dieu, et pauvres établissements du royaume: contribution à l’étude du réseau hospitalier et de la fossilisation de l’administration royale de Philippe Auguste à Charles VII,” in Assistance et assistés jusqu’à 1610. Actes du 97e Congrès national des sociétés savantes, Nantes, 1972, Section de philologie et d’histoire jusqu’à 1610 (Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France, 1979), 37–105.   ed., La France de Philippe Auguste: le temps des mutations. Actes du Colloque international organisé par le CNRS, Paris 29 septembre–4 octobre 1980 (Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1982).   “De Robert le Fort à Louis le Gros: Orléans et la region d’entre Seine et Loire dans la politique des Robertiens et des premiers Capétiens,” Bulletin de la Société archéologique et historique de l’Orléanais 10/80 (1988): 26–44. Bauer, F. A., Visualisierungen von Herrschaft. Frühmittelalterliche Residenzen: Gestalt und Zeremoniell internationales Kolloquium 3./4. Juni 2004 in Istanbul, Byzas 5 (Istanbul: Ege Yayınları, 2006). Baxandall, M., Painting and Experience in Fifteenth-Century Italy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1974).   Patterns of Intention: On the Historical Explanation of Pictures (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985). Bayard, J.-P., Sacres et couronnements royaux (Paris: G. Trédaniel, 1984). Beaumont-Maillet, L., Le grand couvent des Cordeliers de Paris: étude historique et archéologique du XIIIe siècle à nos jours (Paris: Champion, 1975). Beaune, C., Naissance de la nation France (Paris: Gallimard, 1985); The Birth of an Ideology: Myths and Symbols of Nation in Late-Medieval France, ed. F. Cheyette and trans. S. Ross Huston (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991). Bedos-Rezak, B., Form and Order in Medieval France: Studies in Social and Quantitative Sigillograhy (Aldershot: Variorum/ Ashgate, 1993). Bender, T., ed., The University and the City: From Medieval Origins to the Present (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988). Benoit, P., “Fer et plomb dans la construction des cathedrals gothiques,” in L’homme et la matière: l’emploi du plomb et du fer dans l’architecture gothique. Actes du colloque du Noyon, 16–17 novembre 2006, ed. A. Timbert (Paris: Picard, 2009), 51–9.

Bent, I., “The English Chapel Royal before 1300,” in Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association 90 (1963–4): 77–95. Berger, M.-T., “La restauration de la chapelle du château au XIXe siècle: le gothique retrouvé,” Antiquités nationales 22/23 (1990–1): 141–54. Berriman, A. E., Historical Metrology: A New Analysis of the Archaeological and the Historical Evidence Relating to Weights and Measures (London: Dent, 1953). Bériou, N., L’avènement des maîtres de la Parole: la prédication à Paris au XIIIe siècle, 2  vols. (Paris: Institut d’études augustiniennes, 1998). Berry, M., and M. Fleury, ed., L’enceinte et le Louvre de Philippe Auguste (Paris: Délégation à l’action artistique de la Ville de Paris, 1988). Berty, A., et al., Topographie historique du vieux Paris, 6 vols., Histoire générale de Paris (Paris: Imprimerie impériale/nationale, 1866–97). Bideaut, M. and C. Lautier, “Saint-Nicaise de Reims: ­chronologie et nouvelles remarques sur l’architecture,” Bulletin monumental 135 (1977): 295–330. Billot, C., “Le message spirituel et politique de la SainteChapelle de Paris,” Revue Mabillon 63, no.  2 (1991): 119–42.   “Le college des chanoines de la Sainte-Chapelle de Paris,” in L’état moderne et les élites, XIIIe–XVIIIe siècles. Actes du colloque international CNRS—Paris I, 16–19 octobre 1991 (Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 1996) 291–307.   “L’insertion d’un quartier canonial dans un palais royal. Problèmes de cohabitation: l’exemple de la SainteChapelle de Paris,” in Palais royaux et princiers. Actes du colloque international tenu au Mans les 6–7 et 8 octobre 1994 (Le Mans: Publications de l’ Université du Maine, 1996), 111–16.   Les Saintes-Chapelles royales et princières, Thématiques du patrimoine (Paris: Éditions du patrimoine, 1998). Binding, G., “Opus Francigenum: Ein Beitrag zur Begriffsbestim­ mung,” Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 71 (1989): 45–54.   High Gothic: The Age of the Great Cathedrals (Cologne: Taschen, 1999). Binski, P., The Painted Chamber at Westminster, Occasional Papers (Society of Antiquaries), new series, 9 (London: Society of Antiquaries of London: Thames and Hudson, 1986).   Westminster Abbey and the Plantagenets: Kingship and the Representation of Power (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1995).   Becket’s Crown: Art and Imagination in Gothic England, 1170– 1300 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004).   “Reflections on the ‘Wonderful Height and Size’ of Gothic Great Churches and the Medieval Sublime,” in Magnificence and the Sublime in Medieval Aesthetics: Art, Architecture, Literature, Music, ed. C. S. Jaeger (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), 129–56. Biver, P., and M. L. Biver, Abbayes, monastères et couvents de Paris (Paris: Éditions d’histoire et d’art, 1970). Blezzard, J., S. Ryle, and J. J. Alexander, “New Perspectives on the Feast of the Crown of Thorns,” Journal of the Plainsong and Mediaeval Music Society 10 (1987): 23–47.

Bibliography Bloch, M., Les rois thaumaturges: étude sur le caractère surnaturel attribué à la puissance royale, particulièrement en France et en Angleterre, 2nd edn. (Paris: Gallimard, 1983 [1924]); The Royal Touch, trans. J. E. Anderson (New York: Dorset Press, 1989 [1961]). Blumenthal, H., Baugeschichte der Doppelkirche von Schwarzrheindorf − Gedanken zur Erstellung des Bauwerks vor 850 Jahren (Siegburg: Rheinlandia Verlag, 2001). Böker, H. J., “The Bishop’s Chapel of Hereford Cathedral and the Question of Architectural Copies in the Middle Ages,” Gesta 37/1 (1998): 45–54. Boinet, A., Les églises parisiennes, 3  vols. (Paris: Éditions du Minuit, 1958–64). Bongartz, N., “Die frühen Bauteile der Kathedrale in Troyes: Architekturgeschichtliche Monographie,” PhD dissertation, Albert-Ludwigs Universität Freiburg, 1973. Bony, J., French Gothic Architecture of the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983).   “French Influences on the Origin of English Gothic Architecture,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 12 (1949): 1–15. Bordier, H.-L., Les églises et monastères de Paris (Paris: A. Aubry, 1856). Borissavliévitch, M., The Golden Number and the Scientific Aesthetics of Architecture (London: Alec Tiranti, 1958). Bork, R., The Geometry of Creation: Architectural Drawing and the Dynamics of Gothic Design (Farnham: Ashgate, 2011). Bos, A., “Les archives des fabriques parisiennes à la fin du Moyen Âge et à l’époque moderne,” Bibliothèque de l’École des chartes 156 (1998): 369–405.   “Restauration et reconstruction des églises parisiennes après la guerre de cent ans,” Livraisons d’histoire de l’architecture 3 (2002): 9–16.   Les églises flamboyantes de Paris, XVe  – XVIe siècles (Paris: Picard, 2003). Bouman, C. A., Sacring and Crowning: The Development of the Latin Ritual for the Anointing of Kings and the Coronation of an Emperor before the Eleventh Century (Groningen: Wolters, 1957). Bourdieu, P., Ce que parler veut dire: l’économie des échanges linguistiques (Paris: Fayard, 1982).   The Logic of Practice, trans. R. Nice (Cambridge: Polity, 1990).   Language and Symbolic Power, ed. J. B. Thompson (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991).   The Field of Cultural Production, ed. R. Johnson (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993). Boureau, A., “Les cérémonies royales françaises entre performance juridique et compétence liturgique,” Annales. Économies, sociétés, civilisations 46/6 (1991): 1253–64.   “How Christian Was the Sacralization of the Monarchy in Western Europe (Twelfth-Fifteenth Centuries)?” in Mystifying the Monarch: Studies on Discourse, Power and History, ed. J. Deploige and G. Deneckere (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2006), 25–34.   La religion de l’état: la construction de la République étatique dans le discours théologique de l’Occident médiéval (1250–1350) (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2006).

273

Bourin, M., and E. Zadoria-Rio, ed., Construction de l’éspace au Moyen Âge: pratiques et représentations (Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 2007). Boussard, J., De la fin du siège de 885–886 à la mort de Philippe Auguste, Nouvelle histoire de Paris (Paris: Hachette, 1976).   “Philippe Auguste et Paris,” in La France de Philippe Auguste: le temps des mutations. Actes du colloque international organisé par le CNRS, Paris 29 septembre–4 octobre 1980, ed. R.H. Bautier (Paris: Centre national de la recherche ­scientifique, 1980), 323–40. Bouttier, M., “La reconstruction de l’abbatiale de SaintDenis au XIIIe siècle,” Bulletin monumental 145 (1987): 357–86. Bozóky, E., La politique des réliques de Constantin à Saint Louis: protection collective et légitimation du pouvoir (Paris: Beauchesne, 2007). Branner, R., Gothic Architecture (New York: Braziller, 1961).   “Paris and the Origins of Rayonnant Gothic Architecture,” Art Bulletin 44/1 (1962): 39–51.   “Westminster Abbey and the French Court Style,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 23/1 (1964): 3–18.   Saint Louis and the Court Style in Gothic Architecture (London: Zwemmer, 1965).   The Painted Medallions in the Sainte-Chapelle in Paris, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, New Series, 58/2 (Philadelphia, PA: American Philosophical Society, 1968).   “La place du ‘style de cour’ de Saint Louis dans l’architecture du XIIIe siècle,” Le siècle de Saint Louis (Paris: Hachette, 1970), 133–9.   “The Sainte-Chapelle and the Capella Regis in the Thirteenth Century,” Gesta 10/1 (1971): 19–22.   Manuscript Painting in Paris during the Reign of Saint Louis: A Study of Styles (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975). Braunfels, W., ed., Karl der Grosse: Lebenswerk und Nachleben, 5 vols. (Düsseldorf: L. Schwann, 1966–8). Brenet, M., Les musiciens de la Sainte-Chapelle du Palais (Paris: Picard, 1910). Brenner, E., M. Cohen, and M. Franklin-Brown, ed., Memory and Commemoration in Medieval Culture (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2013). Brenk, B., “The Sainte-Chapelle as Capetian Political Program,” in Artistic Integration in Gothic Buildings, ed. K. Brush, P. Draper, and V. C. Raguin (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995), 195–213.   Medieval Image Concepts and the Meaning of Visual Programs (London: Pindar, 2010).   ed., La Capella Palatina a Palermo (Modena: Franco Cosimo Panini, 2010). Brieger, P., and P. Verdier, ed., Art and the Courts: France and England from 1259–1328, exh. cat. (Ottowa: National Gallery of Canada for the Corporation of National Museums of Canada, 1972). Brobeck, J., “Musical Patronage in the Royal Chapel of France under Francis I, r. 1515–1547,” Journal of the American Musicological Society 48 (1995): 187–239.

274

Bibliography

Brochard, L., Saint-Gervais: histoire du monument d’après de nombreux documents inédits (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1938). Broche, L., “L’ancien palais des rois à Laon,” Bulletin de la Société académique de Laon 31 (1904): 180–212. Brown, E. A. R., and M. Cothren, “The Twelfth-Century Crusading Window of the Abbey of Saint-Denis: Praeteritorum enim recordatio futurorum est exhibitio,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 49 (1986): 1–40.   The Monarchy of Capetian France and Royal Ceremonial, Collected Studies 345 (Aldershot: Variorum, 1991).   Politics and Institutions in Capetian France, Collected Studies 350 (Aldershot: Variorum, 1991).   Saint-Denis: la basilique, trans. D. Cabo (Saint-LégerVauban: Zodiaque, 2001). Brown, P., The Cult of Saints: Its Rise and Function in Latin Christianity (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1981). Brühl, C., Fodrum, Gistum, Servitium Regis: Studien zu den Wissenschaftlichen Grundlagen des Königstums im Frankenreich und in den Fränkischen nachfolgestaaten Deutschland, Frankreich und Italien vom 6. bis zur Mitte des 14. Jahrhunderts, 2 vols. (Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 1968).   Palatium und Civitas: Studien zur Profantopographie spätantiker Civitates vom 3. bis zum 13. Jahrhundert, 2  vols., vol. 1, Gallien (Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 1975). Brush, K., P. Draper, and V. C. Raguin, ed., Artistic Integration in Gothic Buildings (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995). Bruzelius, C. A., “Cistercian High Gothic: The Abbey of Longpont and the Architecture of the Cistercians in France in the Early Thirteenth Century,” Analecta Cisterciensa 35 (1979): 3–204.   The 13th-Century Church at St-Denis (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985).   “The Construction of Notre-Dame in Paris,” Art Bulletin 69/4 (1987): 540–69.   The Stones of Naples: Church Building in the Angevin Kingdom, 1266–1343 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004). Bucher, F., “Design in Gothic Architecture: A Preliminary Assessment,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 27/1 (1968): 49–71.   “Medieval Architectural Design Methods, 800–1560,” Gesta 11/2 (1972): 37–51.   “Micro-architecture as the ‘Idea’ of Gothic Theory and Style,” Gesta 15/1–2 (1976): 71–89. Busson, D., Carte archéologique de la Gaule: pré-inventaire archéologique publié sous la responsabilité de Michel Provost (Paris: Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres, 1998).   with N. Alix, Paris, ville antique (Paris: Centre des monuments nationaux, Éditions du ­patrimoine, 2001); Paris, a Roman City, trans. A. Keens (Paris: Centre des monuments nationaux, Monum, Éditions du patrimoine, 2003). Cahn, W., “The Tympanum of the Portal of Saint-Anne at Notre-Dame of Paris and the Iconography of the Division of Powers in the Early Middle Ages,” Journal

of the Warburg and the Courtauld Institutes 32 (1969): 55–72. Cammarosano, P., Le forme della propaganda nel Due e nel Trecento: relazioni tenute al convegno internazionale organizzato dal Comitato di studi storici de Trieste, dall’École française de Rome e dal Dipartimento de storia dell’Università degli studi di Trieste, Trieste, March 2–5, 1993 (Rome: École française de Rome, 1994). Camille, M., Image on the Edge (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).   Gothic Art: Glorious Visions (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1996). Campbell, G. J., “The Attitude of the Monarchy toward the Use of Ecclesiastical Censures in the Reign of St. Louis,” Speculum, A Journal of Medieval Studies 35/4 (1960): 535–55.   “The Protest of Saint Louis,” Traditio 15 (1964): 405–18.   “Temporal and Spiritual Regalia during the Reigns of St. Louis and Phillip III,” Traditio 20 (1964): 351–83. Candille, M., and C. Hohl, Dix siècles d’histoire hospitalier parisienne: l’Hôtel-Dieu, exposition organisée par l’Administration générale de l’Assistance publique à Paris et la Direction des archives de France (Arpajon: Imprimerie coopérative arpajonaise, 1961). Carolus-Barré, L., ed., Septième centenaire de la mort de Saint Louis. Actes des colloques de Royaumont et de Paris, 21–27 mai 1970 (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1976).   Études et documents sur l’Île-de-France et la Picardie au Moyen Âge, vol. 1, Compiègne et le Soissonnais (Compiègne: Ville de Compiègne, 1994). Carruthers, M., The Book of Memory: A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).   “The Poet as Master-Builder: Composition and Locational Memory in the Middle Ages,” New Literary History 24/4 (1993): 881–904.   The Craft of Thought: Meditation, Rhetoric, and the Making of Images, 400–1200 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).   “Varietas: A Word of Many Colors,” Poetica: Zeitschrift für Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft [Munich, Germany], (Fall, 2009): 33–54.   ed., Rhetoric beyond Words: Delight and Persuasion in the Arts of the Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010).   The Experience of Beauty in the Middle Ages (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013). Casati, C., “Compte d’un maître chapelain de la SainteChapelle (1298–1299),” Bibliothèque de l’École des chartes 17 (1856): 160–4. Cazelles, R., De la fin du règne de Philippe Auguste à la mort de Charles V, 1223–1380, Nouvelle histoire de Paris (Paris: Hachette, 1972). Chadych, D., and C. Leborgne, Atlas de Paris: évolution d’un paysage urbain (Paris: Parigramme, 1999). Chapelot, J., Le château de Vincennes: une résidence royale au Moyen Âge (Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, Caisse nationale des ­monuments ­historiques et des sites, 1994).

Bibliography Chapelot, J., and E. Lalou, ed., Vincennes aux origines de l’état moderne. Actes du colloque scientifique sur les Capétians et Vincennes au Moyen Âge les 8, 9, 10 juin 1994 (Paris: Presses de l’École normale supérieure, 1996). Chapelot, O., and P. Benoit, ed., Pierre et métal dans le bâtiment au Moyen Âge (Paris: Éditions de l’École des hautes etudes en sciences sociales, 1985). Charansonnet, A., “L’universite, l’église, et l’état dans les sermons du cardinal Eudes de Châteauroux, 1190–1273,” Thèse de doctorat, Université de Lyon II, 2001. Chartier, F.-L., L’ancien chapitre de Notre-Dame de Paris et sa maîtrise d’après les documents capitulaires (1326–1790) (Paris: Perrin, 1897). Chatel, P., “La Chartreuse de Paris (1257–1792),” Positions des thèses de l’École nationale des chartes (1966), 16–22. Châtelain, A., Chateaux et guerriers de la France au Moyen Âge, vol. 2, Evolution architecturale et essai d’une typologie (Strasbourg: Publitotal, 1981).   “Recherche sur les châteaux de Philippe Auguste,” Archéologie médievale 21 (1991): 115–61. Christ, Y., Églises de Paris actuelles et disparues (Paris: Éditions Tel, 1947). Clark, W. W., and R. King, Laon Cathedral: Architecture, Courtauld Institute Illustration Archives, Companion Text 1 (London: H. Millar, 1983). Clark, W. W., R. King, and F. Luden, “Notes on the Archivolts of the Sainte-Anne Portal of Notre-Damede-Paris,” Gesta 25/1 (1986): 109–18. Cleyet-Michaud, M., Le nombre d’or, 12th edn. (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 2002 [1973]). Cohen, M., “Restoration as Re-creation at the SainteChapelle of Paris,” RES, Journal of Anthropology and Comparative Aesthetics 48 (2005): 145–64.   “La Sainte-Chapelle du Moyen Âge à la lumière des archives de la restauration: problèmes et solutions,” in La Sainte-Chapelle: royaume de France et Jérusalem céleste. Actes du colloque (Paris, Collège de France, 2001), ed. C. Hediger (Turnhout: Brepols, 2007), 211–28.   “An Indulgence for the Visitor: The Public at the SainteChapelle,” Speculum, A Journal of Medieval Studies 83 (2008), 840–83.   “Robert Branner and the Anxiety of Influence,” in Medieval Art and Architecture after the Middle Ages, ed. J. Marquardt and A. Jordan (Cambridge: Scholars Press, 2009), 218–45.   “Metropolitan Architecture, Demographics, and the Urban Identity of Paris in the Thirteenth Century,” in Cities, Texts, and Social Networks, ed. C. Goodson, A. Lester, and C. Symes (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2010), 65–100. Cohen, M., and X. Dectot, Paris: ville rayonnante, exh. cat. (Paris: Réunion des musées nationaux, 2010). Cohen, M., and F. Madeline, ed., Space in the Medieval West: Places, Territories, and Imagined Geographies (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2014). Cottineau, L. H., Répertoire topo-bibliographique des abbayes et prieurés, 3 vols. (Macon: Protat Frères, 1935–70). Cowdrey, E. J., “The Anglo-Norman Laudes regiae,” Viator 12 (1981): 37–78.

275

Coyecque, E., “L’Hôtel-Dieu de Paris au Moyen Âge,” Positions des thèses de l’École nationale des chartes (1887), 9–20.   L’Hôtel-Dieu de Paris au Moyen Âge: histoire et documents, 2 vols., Société de l’histoire de Paris (Paris: Champion, 1889–91). Crépin-Leblond, T., “Recherches sur les palais episcopaux en France au Moyen Âge (12e et 13e siècles)” Thèse de l’École nationale des chartes, Paris, 1987.   “Une demeure épiscopale du XIIe siècle: l’exemple de Beauvais (actuel Musée départemental de l’Oise), Bulletin archéologique du comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques, nouvelle série 20–1, années 1984–5 (1988): 8–58.   “Le palais épiscopal de Noyon et ses liens avec la construction de la cathédrale au 12e siècle,” Bulletin du Groupe d’étude des monuments et oeuvres d’art de l’Oise et du Beauvaisis (GEMOB). L’art gothique dans la ville et ses environs (2001): 55–62. Crosby, S., The Royal Abbey of Saint-Denis from its Beginnings to the Death of Suger, 475–1151 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1987). Crossley, P., “Review of ‘Ordines Studentes. Aspekte zur Kirchenarchitektur der Dominikaner und Franziskaner im 13. Jahrhundert by Wolfgang Schenkluhn,’” Burlington Magazine 128/996 (1986): 220–1.   “Medieval Architecture and Meaning: The Limits of Iconography,” Burlington Magazine 130 (1988): 116–21. Ćurčić, S., “Some Palatine Aspects of the Capella Palatina in Palermo,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 41 (1987): 126–44. Dalas, M., Corpus des sceaux francais du Moyen Âge, vol. 2, Les sceaux des rois et de régence (Paris: Archives nationales, 1991). Dautrey, P., “Croissance et adaptation chez les Cisterciens au XIIIe siècle, les débuts du collège des Bernardins de Paris,” Analecta cisterciensa 32 (1976): 122–215.   “L’église et de l’ancien collège des Bernardins de Paris et son image,” in Mélanges à la mémoire du Père Anselme Dimier, ed. B. Chauvin, 3 vols. (Arbois: B. Chauvin, 1982–7), 3:497–514. David, M., “Le serment du sacre du IXe au XVe siècle: contribution à l’étude des limites juridiques de la souveraineté,” Revue du Moyen Âge latin 6 (1950): 5–272. David-Roy, M., “Saint-Louis, batisseur des monuments disparus,” Archéologia 31 (1969): 14–21. Davis, M. T., “The Choir of the Cathedral of ClermontFerrand: The Beginning of Construction and the Work of Jean Deschamps,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 40/3 (1981): 181–202.   “Désespoir, Espérance, and Douce France: The New Palace, Paris, and the Royal State,” in Fauvel Studies: Allegory, Chronicle, Music, and Image in Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France MS français 146, ed. M. Bent and A. Wathey (Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), 187–213.   “Splendor and Peril: The Cathedral of Paris, 1290– 1350,” Art Bulletin 80/1 (1998): 34–65.

276

Bibliography

  “‘Sic et non’: Recent Trends in the Study of Gothic Ecclesiastical Architecture,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 58/3 (1999): 414–23. Davis, M. T. and L. Neagley, “Mechanics and Meaning: Plan Design at Saint-Urbain, Troyes and Saint-Ouen, Rouen,” Gesta 39/2 (2000): 161–82.   “Cistercians in the City: The Church of the Collège Saint-Bernard in Paris,” in Perspectives for an Architecture of Solitude: Essays on Cistercians, Art and Architecture in Honour of Peter Fergusson, ed. T. N. Kinder (Turnhout: Brepols, 2004), 223–34.   “‘Fitting to the Requirements of the Place’ : The Franciscan Church of Sainte-Marie-Madeleine in Paris,” in Architecture, Liturgy, and Identity, ed. Z. Opačić and A. Timmermann (Turnhout: Brepols, 2011), 247–61. D’Avray, D., The Preaching of the Friars: Sermons Diffused from Paris before 1300 (Oxford: University of Oxford Press, 1985). De Andia, B. [et al.], eds., Les enceintes de Paris (Paris: Action artistique de la ville de Paris, 2001). Débal, J., Le plan d’Orléans à travers les siècles (Orléans: Société archéologique et historique de l’Orléanais, 1980).   Histoire d’Orléans et de son terroir, Histoire des villes de France (Saint-Just-la-Pendue: Imprimerie Chirat, 1983). De Boe, G., and Frans Verhaegh, eds., Religion and Belief in Medieval Europe (Zellik, Belgium: Instituut voor het Archeologisch Patrimonium, 1997). Dectot, X., “Sainte-Geneviève des Ardents,” “Saint-Pierreaux-Boeufs,” “Saint-Symphorien,” and “Saint-Jean-leRond,” in A. Erlande-Brandenburg [et  al.], Autour de Notre-Dame (Paris: Action artistique de la ville de Paris, 2003), 127–8; 125–6; 138; 142.   Sculptures du XIIIe siècle. Collections du musée de Cluny (Paris: Réunion des musées nationaux, online catalog, 2010). http://www.sculpturesmedievales-cluny.fr/accueil/ index.php. Dectot, X. and M. Cohen, Paris: ville rayonnante, exh. cat. (Paris: Réunion des musées nationaux, 2010). De Dion, A., “Note sur les progrès de l’architecture militaire sous le règne de Philippe Auguste,” Mémoires et documents publiés par la Société archéologique de Rambouillet 1 (1870–1): 157–81. De Fleury, G. R., Gallia Dominicana: les couvents de St Dominique au Moyen Âge, 2 vols. (Paris, 1903). De Fossa, F., Le château historique de Vincennes à travers les âges, 2 vols. (Paris: H. Daragon, 1908–9). De Jong, M., and F. Theuws, eds., Topographies of Power in the Early Middle Ages (Leiden: Brill, 2001). De la Borbolla, Á. G., “El culto y la devoción al lignum crucis en los reinos occidentales de la península Ibérica (VII-XV),” Pecia: Ressources en médiévistique 8–11 (2006): 565–600. De la Selle, X., Le service des âmes à la cour: confesseurs et aumôniers des rois de France du XIIIe au XVe siècle (Paris: École nationale des chartes, 1995). Delhumeau, H., “L’oeuvre de Louis IX, le roi saint: la SainteChapelle,” in Le Palais de la Cité, du Palais des rois de France au Palais de justice (Paris: Actes Sud, 2011), 30–41.

Delisle, L., “Un des fondateurs de la Sorbonne, Hugo episcopus Aprensis,” Bulletin de la Socitété de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île de-France 25 (1898): 159–63. Delorme, P., Blanche de Castille: épouse de Louis VIII, mère de Saint Louis (Paris: Pygmalion, 2002). De Mély, F., La sainte couronne d’épines à Notre-Dame de Paris (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1927). De Sède, S., La Sainte-Chapelle et la politique de la fin des temps (Paris: Julliard, 1972). Deslandres, P., L’Ordre des Trinitaires pour le rachat des captifs, 2 vols. (Paris: Plon, 1903).   “Le couvent et l’église des Mathurins de Paris (1229– 1792),” Bulletin de la Société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 61 (1934): 48–56. Devisse, J., Hincmar, Archevêque de Reims, 845–882, 3  vols. (Geneva: Droz, 1976). Dilke, O. A. W., Mathematics and Measurement, vol. 2, Reading the Past (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987). Dillon, E., The Sense of Sound: Music and Meaning in France, 1260–1330 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012). Dimier, P. A., “Pèlerinage cistercien à travers Paris,” Archéologia 44 (1972): 70–7.   Les moines bâtisseurs, architecture et vie monastique (Paris: Fayard, 1964). Doquang, M., “Rayonnant Chantry Chapels in Context,” PhD dissertation, Institute of Fine Arts, 2009.   “The Lateral Chapels of Notre-Dame in Context,” Gesta 50/2 (2012): 137–62.   “Status and the Soul: Commemoration and Intercession in Rayonnant Chapels,” in Memory and Commemoration in Medieval Culture, ed. E. Brenner, M. Franklin-Brown, and M. Cohen, (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2013), 93–118. Duby, G., L’économie rurale et la vie des campagnes dans l’occident médiévale (Paris: Éditions Montaigne, 1962). Duby, G., ed., Histoire de la France urbaine, vol. 2, La ville médiévale des Carolingiens à la Renaissance, A. Chedeville, J. Le Goff, and J. Rossiaud (Paris: Seuil, 1980). Dufeil, M.-M., Guillaume de Saint-Amour et la polémique universitaire parisienne 1250–1259 (Paris: Picard, 1972). Duggan, A., ed., Kings and Kingship in Medieval Europe (London: King’s College London Centre for Late Antique and Medieval Studies, 1993). Dumolin, M., and G. Outardel, Paris et la Seine, Les églises de France: répertoire historique et archéologique par département (Paris: Librairie Letouzey et Ané, 1936). Durand, J., and M.-P. Laffitte, eds., Le trésor de la ­Sainte-Chapelle, exh. cat. (Paris: Réunion des musées nationaux, 2001). Eco, U., and C. Marno, eds., On the Medieval Theory of Signs (Amsterdam; Philadelphia, PA: J. Benjamins, 1989). Emery, R., “The Friars of the Sack,” Speculum, A Journal of Medieval Studies 18/3 (1943): 323–34.   “The Friars of the Blessed Mary and the Pied Friars,” Speculum, A Journal of Medieval Studies 24/2 (1949): 228–38.

Bibliography   “The Second Council of Lyons and the Mendicant Orders,” The Catholic Historical Review 39/3 (1953): 257–71.   The Friars of Medieval France: A Catalogue of French Mendicant Convents, 1200–1550 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1962). Erlande-Brandenburg, A., Le roi est mort: étude sur les funérailles, les sépultures et les tombeaux des rois de France jusqu’à la fin du XIIIe siècle, Bibliothèque de la Société française d’archéologie 7 (Paris: Arts et métiers graphiques, 1975).   “L’architecture militaire au temps de Philippe Auguste: une nouvelle conception de la défense,” in La France de Philippe Auguste: le temps des mutations. Actes du Colloque international organisé par le CNRS, Paris 29 septembre  – 4 octobre 1980, ed. R.-H. Bautier (Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1982), 595–603.   “Organisation du conseil d’architecture militaire et du corps des spécialistes sous Philippe Auguste,” in Artistes, artisans et production artistique au Moyen Âge, 2 vols., ed. X. Barral i Altet, vol. 2, Commande et travail (Paris: Picard, 1987), 221–4.   Notre-Dame de Paris (Paris: Éditions de la Martinière, 1997).   “La pierre armée au XIIIe siècle dans l’architecture rayonnante,” Bulletin de la Société nationale des antiquaires de France (1993): 271–4.   The Cathedral: The Social and Architectural Dynamics of Construction, trans. M. Thom (Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 1994 [1989]). Erlande-Brandenburg, A. and B. Jestaz, Le Château de Vincennes (Paris: Picard, 1989). Erlande-Brandenburg, A. et  al., eds., Autour de Notre-Dame (Paris: Action artistique de la ville de Paris, 2003). Fajt, J., ed., Court Chapels of the High and Late Middle Ages and Their Artistic Decoration (Prague: National Gallery in Prague, 2003). Faral, E., “Le Procès d’Enguerrand IV de Coucy,” Revue historique de droit français et l’étranger 26 (1948): 213–58. Farmer, S., Surviving Poverty in Medieval Paris: Gender, Ideology, and the Daily Lives of the Poor (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2002). Fassler, M., “Liturgy and Sacred History in the TwelfthCentury Tympana at Chartres,” Art Bulletin 75 (1993): 499–515.   The Virgin of Chartres: Making History through Liturgy and the Arts (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010). Favier, J., Paris: deux mille ans d’histoire (Paris: Fayard, 1997). Fawtier, R., The Capetian Kings of France: Monarchy and Nation, 987–1328, trans. L. Butler and R. J. Adam (London, New York: Macmillan, St. Martin’s Press, 1960). Fernie, E., “Historical Metrology and Architectural History,” Art History 1/4 (1978): 383–99.   “Robert Branner’s Treatment of Architectural Sources and Precedents,” Gesta 39/2 (2000): 157–60. Fernie, E. and P. Crossley, eds., Medieval Architecture and Its Intellectual Context (London: Hambledon, 1990).

277

Field, S., Isabelle of France: Capetian Sanctity and Franciscan Identity in the Thirteenth Century (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2006). Fitchen, J., “The Erection of French Gothic Nave Vaults: A Study of 13th-Century Building Practices,” Gazette des Beaux Arts 6/55 (1960): 281–300.   The Construction of Gothic Cathedrals: A Study of Medieval Vault Erection (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1961). Fleury, M., “Le Louvre de Philippe Auguste,” in L’enceinte et le Louvre de Philippe Auguste, ed. M. Berry and M. Fleury (Paris: Délegation à l’action artistique, 1988), 137–40. Fleury, M. and V. Kruta, eds., Le château du Louvre, 2nd edn. (Dijon: Faton, 2000). Focillon, H., The Life of Forms in Art, 2nd English edn. (New York: Wittenborn, 1963 [1948]). Fournier, G., Le château dans la France médiévale: Essai de sociologie monumentale (Paris: Aubier, 1978). Frankl, P., The Gothic: Literary Sources and Interpretations through Eight Centuries (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1960).   Gothic Architecture, rev. edn. with introduction by P. Crossley (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2000 [1962]). Franklin, A., Les rues et les cris de Paris au XIIIe siècle (Paris: Léon Willem, 1874). Freedberg, D., The Power of Images: Studies in the History and Theory of Response (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1989). Friedmann, A., Paris, ses rues, ses paroisses du Moyen Âge à la Révolution: origine et évolution des circonscriptions paroissiales (Paris: Plon, 1959). Freigang, C., Imitare ecclesias nobiles: Die Kathedralen von Narbonne, Toulouse und Rodez und die nordfranzösische Rayonnantgotik im Languedoc (Worms: Wernersche Verlagsgesellschaft, 1992). Frolow, A., La relique de la Vraie Croix: recherches sur le ­développement d’un culte (Paris: Institut français d’études byzantines, 1961). Gabriel, A., Student Life in Ave Maria College, Mediaeval Paris: History and Cartulary of the College (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1955). Gajewski, A., and Opačić, Z. eds., The Year 1300 and the Creation of a New European Architecture, Architectura Medii Aevi 1 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2007). Gane, R., Le chapitre de Notre-Dame de Paris au XIVe siècle: étude sociale d’un groupe canonial (Saint-Étienne: Publications de l’Université de Saint-Étienne, 1999). Gaposchkin, M. C., “The King of France and the Queen of Heaven: The Iconography of the Porte Rouge of Notre-Dame of Paris,” Gesta 39/1 (2000): 58–72.   “Louis IX, Crusade and the Promise of Joshua in the Holy Land,” Journal of Medieval History 34 (2008): 245–74.   The Making of Saint Louis: Kingship, Sanctity, and Crusade in the Later Middle Ages (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2008).   “Louis IX and Liturgical Memory,” in Memory and Commemoration in Medieval Culture, ed. E. Brenner, M. Franklin-Brown, and M. Cohen (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2013), 261–76.

278

Bibliography

  with P. B., Katz trans. Blessed Louis, the Most Glorious of Kings: Texts Relating to the Cult of Saint Louis of France (NotreDame, Ind.: University of Notre-Dame Press, 2012). Gattermayer, E. B., Bianca di Castiglia: Regina di Francia e madre di un santo (Milan: Jaca, 2006). Gébelin, F., La Sainte-Chapelle et la Conciergerie (Paris: H. Laurens, 1931). Geertz, C., The Interpretation of Cultures (New York: Basic Books, 2000 [1973]). Gelfand, L. D., “Negotiating Harmonious Divisions of Power: A New Reading of the Tympanum of the Sainte-Anne Portal of the Cathedral Notre-Dame de Paris,” Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 6th série 140/1606 (2002): 249–60. Gell, A., Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory (Oxford: Clarendon, 1998). Geremek, B., The Margins of Society in Late Medieval Paris, trans. J. Birrell (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987). Gerson, P. L., Abbot Suger and Saint-Denis (New York, 1986). Ghyka, M. C., Le nombre d’or: rites et rythmes pythagoriciens dans le développement de la civilisation occidentale, 2 vols. (Paris: Gallimard, 1976 [1931]). Gimpel, J., The Cathedral Builders (New York: Grove Press, 1961).   The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1976). Givens, J., Observation and Image-Making in Gothic Art (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005). Gnudi, C., “Le jubé de Bourges et l’apogée du classicisme dans la sculpture de l’Île-de-France au milieu du XIIIe siècle,” Revue de l’Art 3 (1969): 31–6. Gouïn, H., L’Abbaye de Royaumont (Paris: H. Laurens, 1932). Goy, J., Le sacre des rois de France (Reims: Koulon, 1975). Grabar, A., Martyrium. Recherches sur le culte des reliques et l’art chrétien antique (Paris: Collège de France, 1943–6). Grant, L., “Gothic Architecture in Southern England and the French Connection in the Early Thirteenth Century,” in Thirteenth Century England III. Proceedings of the Newcastle upon Tyne Conference, 1989, ed. P. R. Coss and S. D. Lloyd (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1991), 113–26.   Architecture and Society in Normandy, 1120–1270 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2005). Grésy, E., Description historique du château royal de Melun figuré sur un sceau du 15e siècle (Paris: Boucquin, 1852). Griffiths, Q., “The Counselors of Louis IX,” PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1964.   “New Men among the Lay Counselors of Saint Louis,” Mediaeval Studies 32 (1970): 234–72. Grodecki, L., M. Aubert, J. Lafond, and J. Verrier, Les vitraux de Notre-Dame et de la Sainte-Chapelle de Paris, Corpus vitrearum medii aevi: France 1 (Paris: Caisse nationale des monuments historiques/Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1959).   “La Sainte-Chapelle de Paris: un édifice exemplaire,” Archéologia 31 (1969): 42–51.   “Saint Louis et le vitrail,” Monuments historiques de la France 16 (1970): 5–21.

  La Sainte-Chapelle, Petites notes sur les grands édifices, 3rd edn. (Paris: Caisse nationale des monuments ­historiques et des sites, 1979 [1963]). Guenée, B., “Le voeu de Charles VI: essai sur la dévotion des rois de France aux XIIIe siècles,” Journal des Savants 1 (1996): 67–135. Guérin, M. Sarah., “Meaningful Spectacles: Gothic Ivories Staging the Divine,” Art Bulletin 95/1 (2013): 53–77. Guerout, J., “Le Palais de la Citè à Paris des origines à 1417: essai topographique et archéologiques de Paris et de l’Ile-de-France,” Mémoires de la Fédération des sociétés historiques et archéologiques de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 1 (1949): 57–212; 2 (1950): 21–204; 3 (1951): 7–101.   “Les sanctuaires de la Cité autres que la cathédrale,” Dossiers d’archéologie 218 (1996): 50–77.   “Les Sanctuaires du Palais de la Cité à Paris antérieurs à la Sainte-Chapelle (Xe–XIIe siècles) mise à jour et mise au point” (unpublished manuscript). Guerry, E., “The Wall Paintings of the Sainte-Chapelle,” PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge, 2012. Guillemain, B., “Philippe Auguste et l’épiscopat,” in La France de Philippe Auguste: le temps des mutations. Actes du Colloque international organisé par le CNRS, Paris 29 septembre–4 octobre 1980, ed. R.-H. Bautier (Paris: Éditions du Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1982), 366–83. Guyot, J., “Notice sur le château de Dourdan,” Congrès archéologique de France 34 (1867): 94–100.   Chronique d’une ancienne ville royale: Dourdan, capitale du Hurepoix (Paris: Aubry, 1869).   “L’église et le château de Dourdan,” Bulletin monumental 4/8 (1872): 613–33.   “Quelques fouilles récentes opérées au château de Dourdan,” in Conférence des Sociétés savantes de Seine-et-Oise (1906), 72–7. Guyotjeannin, O., “Résidences et palais des premiers Capétiens en Île-de-France,” in Vincennes, aux origines de l’état moderne. Actes du colloque scientifique sur les Capétiens et Vincennes au Moyen Âge organisé par Jean Chapelot et Elisabeth Lalou à Vincennes les 8, 9, 10 juin 1994, ed. J. Chapelot and E. Lalou (Paris: Presses de l’École normale supérieure, 1996), 123–36. Guyotjeannin, O., Jacques Pycke, and Benoît-Michel Tock, La diplomatique médiévale (Turnhout: Brepols, 1993). Hacker-Sück, I., “Les Saintes-Chapelles de Paris et les chapelles palatines du Moyen Âge en France,” Cahiers archéologiques 13 (1962): 218–57. Haggh, B., “An Ordinal of Ockeghem’s Time from the Sainte-Chapelle of Paris: Paris, Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, MS 114,” Tijdschrift Van de Koninklijke Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziek Geschiedenis 47/1–2 (1997): 33–71. Hahnloser, H. R., Villard de Honnecourt: Kritische Gesamtausgabe des Bauhüttenbuches ms. fr 19093 der Pariser Nationalbibliothek (Vienna: A. Schroll, 1935). Hallam, E. M., and J. Everard, Capetian France, 987–1328, 2nd edn. (London: Longman, 2001). Hamann-Maclean, R., Die Kathedrale von Reims (Stuttgart: Steiner, 1993).

Bibliography Hanawalt, B. A., and M. Kolbialka, eds., Medieval Practices of Space (Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 2000). Harper, J., The Forms and Orders of Western Liturgy from the Tenth to the Eighteenth Century: A Historical Introduction and Guide for Students and Musicians (Oxford: Clarendon/ University of Oxford Press, 1991). Harvey, J., The Master Builders: Architecture in the Middle Ages (London: Thames and Hudson, 1971). Hawkins, P. S., Civitas: Religious Interpretations of the City (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1986). Head, T., and R. Landes, The Peace of God: Social Violence and Religious Response in France around the Year 1000 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992). Hedeman, A. D., The Royal Image: Illustrations of the Grandes Chroniques de France, 1274–1422 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991). Hediger, C., ed., La Sainte-Chapelle de Paris: royaume de France ou Jérusalem céleste? Actes du colloque (Paris, Collège de France, 2001) (Turnhout: Brepols, 2007). Héliot, P., “Le genèse des châteaux de plan quadrangulaire en France et en Angleterre,” Bulletin de la Société nationale des antiquaires de France (1965): 238–57.   “La Cathédrale de Tournai et l’architecture du Moyen Âge,” Revue Belge d’archéologie et d’histoire de l’art 31, 33 (1962, 1964): 3–139. Henriet, J., “La cathédrale Saint-Étienne de Sens: le parti du premier maître et les campagnes du XIIe siècle,” Bulletin monumental 65 (1982): 81–174. Hiley, D., Western Plainchant: A Handbook (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993). Hillairet, J., L’Ile de la Cité (Paris: Éditions du Minuit, 1969). Hinkle, W., “The King and the Pope on the Virgin Portal at Notre-Dame,” Art Bulletin 48/1 (1966): 1–13. Hinnebusch, W., A History of the Dominican Order: Origins and Growth to 1500, 2  vols. (New York: Alba House, 1966). Horste, C., “‘A Child is Born’: The Iconography of the Portail Ste-Anne at Paris,” Art Bulletin 69/2 (1987): 187–210. Houdard, G., Les châteaux royaux de Saint-Germain-en-Laye, 3  vols. (Saint-Germain-en-Laye: Maurice Mirvault, 1909–11). Hourihane, C., Objects, Images, and the Word: Art in the Service of the Liturgy, Index of Christian Art Occasional Papers 6 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003). Hughes, A., Medieval Manuscripts for Mass and Office (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995). Huitième centenaire de Notre-Dame de Paris (Congrès de 30 mai–3 juin 1964): recueil de travaux sur l’histoire de la cathédrale et de l’église de Paris, ed. G. le Bras, Bibliothèque de la Société d’histoire ecclésiastique de la France (Paris: J. Vrin, 1967). Humbert, D., “Le Château de Dourdan,” Congrès archéologique de France, 103ème session (1944): 236–45. Iogna-Prat, D., La Maison Dieu. Une histoire monumentale de l’Église au Moyen Âge (v. 800-v. 1200), (Paris: Seuil, 2006).

279

Irvine, M., “A Guide to the Sources of Medieval Theories of Interpretation, Signs and the Arts of Discourse, Aristotle to Ockham,” Semiotica 63/1–2 (1987): 89–108. Jalabert, D., La Sainte-Chapelle, Nefs et Clochers (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1947).   “La Flore sculptée de la Sainte-Chapelle,” Bulletin archéologique du Comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques (1932/33): 739–47. James, J., The Template-Makers of the Paris Basin: Toichological Techniques for Identifying the Pioneers of the Gothic Movement, with an Examination of Art-Historical Methodology (Leura, Australia: West Grinstead, 1989).   The Creation of Gothic Architecture: An Illustrated Thesaurus: The Ark of God (Hartley Vale, Australia: West Grinstead, 2002). Jantzen, H., High Gothic: The Classic Cathedrals of Chartres, Reims and Amiens, trans. J. Palmer (New York: Pantheon Books, 1962 [1957]). Jauss, H. R., Toward an Aesthetic of Reception, trans. T. Bahti, Theory and History of Literature 2 (Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 1982). Jordan, A. A., “Narrative Design in the Stained Glass Windows of the Sainte-Chapelle in Paris,” PhD dissertation, Bryn Mawr College, 1994.   “Rationalizing the Narrative: Theory and Practice in the Nineteenth-Century Restoration of the Windows of the Sainte-Chapelle,” Gesta 37/2 (1998): 192–200.   “More is Better: Amplification and Design Theory in the Windows of the Sainte-Chapelle in Paris,” in Stained Glass as Monumental Painting, ed. L. Kalinowski, H. Malkiewicz, and P. Karaszkiewicz (Krakow: Department of Conservation and Restoration of Works of Art, Academy of Fine Arts, 1999), 141–55.   Visualizing Kingship in the Windows of the Sainte-Chapelle (Turnhout: Brepols, 2002). Jordan, W. C., Louis IX and the Challenge of the Crusade (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979). Jordan, W. C., B. McNab, and T. F. Ruiz, eds., Order and Innovation in the Middle Ages: Essays in Honor of Joseph R. Strayer (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976).   “Liturgical and Ceremonial Cloths: Neglected Evidence of Medieval Political Theology,” Revue des archéologues et histories d’art de Louvain 12 (1979): 104–19.   The Great Famine: Northern Europe in the Early Fourteenth Century (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996).   “The ‘People’ in the Psalter of Saint Louis and the Leadership of Moses,” in Medieval Paradigms: Essays in Honor of Jeremy Duquesnay Adams, ed. S. Hayes-Healy (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2005), 13–28.   A Tale of Two Monasteries: Westminster and Saint-Denis in the Thirteenth Century (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2009). Joubert, F., and D. Sandron, eds., Pierre, lumière, couleur: etudes d’histoire de l’art du Moyen Âge en l’honneur d’Anne Prache, Cultures et civilisations médiévales 20 (Paris: Presses de l’Université de Paris-Sorbonne, 1999).

280

Bibliography

Kamp, N., and Wollasch J., Tradition als historische Kraft: Interdisziplinäre Forschungen zur Geschichte des frühen Mittelalters. Festschrift für K. Hauck (Berlin-New York, 1982). Kantorowicz, E. H., Laudes Regiae: A Study in Liturgical Acclamations and Mediaeval Ruler Worship, University of California Publications in History 33 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1946).   The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1957). Keane, M., “Remembering Louis IX as a Family Saint: A  Study of the Images of Saint Louis Created for Jeanne, Blanche, and Marie of Navarre,” PhD dissertation, University of California at Santa Barbara, 2002. Kidson, P., “A Metrological Investigation,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 53 (1990): 71–97.   “The Historical Circumstances and the Principles of the Design,” in Salisbury Cathedral: Perspectives in Architectural History, ed. T. Cocke and P. Kidson (London: Royal Commission on Historical Monuments of England, 1993), 35–94. Kimpel, D., Die Querhausarme von Notre-Dame zum Paris und ihre Skulpturen (Bonn: Rheinische Fredrich-WilhelmsUniversität, 1971).   “Le développement de la taille en série dans l’architecture médiévale et son role dans l’histoire économique,” Bulletin monumental 135 (1977): 195–222.   “Ökonomie, Technik und Form in der Hochgotischen Architektur,” Bauwerk und Bildwerk im Hochmittelalter Anschauliche Beiträge zur Kultur- und Sozialgeschichte, ed. K. Clausberg et  al., Kunstwissenschaftliche Untersuchungen des Ulmer Vereins, Verband für Kunst- und Kulturwissenschaften 11 (Giessen: Anabas, 1981), 103–26. Kimpel, D. and R. Suckale, L’architecture gothique en France, 1130–1270, trans. F. Neu (Paris: Flammarion, 1990). Kirk, D., “‘Translatione Corona Spinea’: A Musical and Textual Analysis of a Thirteenth-Century Rhymed Office,” M.M. thesis, University of Texas, 1980. Kleinbauer, E., “Charlemagne’s Palace Chapel at Aachen and its Copies,” Gesta 4 (1965): 2–11. Kováč, P., “Notes on the Description of the Sainte-Chapelle in Paris,” in Court Chapels of the High and Late Middle Ages and Their Artistic Decoration, ed. J. Fajt (Prague: National Gallery, 2003), 162–70. Kraus, H., Gold Was the Mortar: The Economics of Cathedral Building (London: Routledge, 1979). Krautheimer, R., Die Kirchen del Bettelorden in Deutschland (Cologne, 1925).   “Introduction to an ‘Iconography of Mediaeval Architecture,’” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 5 (1942): 1–33.   Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1965). Krynen, J., L’empire du roi: idées et croyances politiques en France XIIIe–XVe siècle (Paris: Gallimard, 1993). Kunst, H.-J., “Freiheit und Zitat in der Architektur des 13. Jahrhundert,” in Bauwerk und Bildwerk im Hochmittelalter: Anschauliche Beiträge zur Kultur- und Sozialgeschichte, ed. K. Clausberg et  al., Kunstwissenschaftliche

Untersuchungen des Ulmer Vereins, Verband für Kunst- und Kulturwissenschaften 11 (Giessen: Anabas, 1981), 87–102. Kupper, S. J., “Town and Crown: Phillip Augustus and the Towns of France,” PhD dissertation, Johns Hopkins University, 1976. Kurmann, P., La cathédrale Saint-Étienne de Meaux (Paris: Arts et métiers graphiques, 1971).   La façade de la cathédrale de Reims: architecture et sculpture des portails, étude archéologique et stylistique, trans. F. Monfrin with the author (Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1987).   “Mobilité des artistes ou mobilité des modèles? A propos de l’atelier des scupteurs rémois au XIIIe siècle,” Revue de l’Art 120 (1998): 23–34.   “Himmelsboten aus Amiens: Bemerken zu den Engeln der Blendarkatur in der oberen Sainte-Chapelle,” in La SainteChapelle: royaume de France et Jérusalem céleste. Actes du colloque (Paris, Collège de France, 2001), ed. C. Hediger, 393–411. Kurmann-Schwartz, B., “La châsse de Sainte Gertrude et l’art de la cour en France au XIIIe siècle: état de la question et problèmes,” in Un trésor gothique: la Châsse de Nivelles, exh. cat. (Paris: Réunion des musées nationaux, 1996), 237–49. Labarge, M. W., Saint Louis: The Life of Louis IX of France (Boston, MD: Little, Brown, 1968). Lagarde, G., “Les sources de l’histoire des ordres mendiants conservées aux Archives nationales,” Annales. Économies, sociétés, civilisations 25/4 (1970): 947–53. Laplanche, F., and C. Grell, ed. La monarchie absolutiste et l’histoire en France: théories du pouvoir, propagandes monarchiques et mythologies nationales. Colloque tenu en Sorbonne les 26–27 mai 1986 (Paris: Presses de l’Université de ParisSorbonne, 1987). Lassus, J.-B., “De l’art et de l’archéologie,” Annales archéologiques (February, 1845): 69–77; (April 1845): 197–204; (June 1845): 329–35. Laurentz, P., and D. Sandron, Atlas de Paris au Moyen Âge: éspace urbain, habitat, société, religion, lieu de pouvoir (Paris: Parigramme, 2006). Lauwers, M., La naissance du cimetière: lieux sacrés et terre des morts dans l’Occident médiéval (Paris: Aubier, 2005). Lea, H. C., A History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences in the Latin Church, 3 vols. (Philadelphia, PA: Lea Brothers, 1896). Lebeuf, H., Histoire de la ville et tout le diocèse de Paris, 6 vols. (Paris: Féchoz et Letouzey, 1883). Lefebvre, H., The Production of Space, trans. D. NicholsonSmith (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991). Lefèvre-Pontalis, E., “Etude historique et archéologique sur l’église de Saint-Germain-des-Prés”, Congrès archéologique de France (session tenu à Paris en 1919) 82 (1920): 301–67. Leff, G., Paris and Oxford Universities in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries: An Institutional and Intellectual History (New York: Wiley, 1968). Le Goff, J., “Ordres mendiants et urbanisation dans la France médiévale”, Annales. Économies, sociétés, civilisations 25/4 (1970): 924–46.

Bibliography   La naissance du purgatoire (Paris: Gallimard, 1981); The Birth of Purgatory, trans. A. Goldhammer (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1984 [1981]).   “Manuscripts, Texts and Enigmas of Medieval French Coronation Ordines,” Viator 23 (1992): 35–70. Le Goff, J., Saint Louis (Paris: Gallimard, 1996); Saint Louis, trans. G. E. Gollrad (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2009). Le Goff, J., and E. Palazzo, J.-C. Bonne, and M.-N. Colette, Le sacre royal à l’époque de Saint Louis d’après le manuscrit latin 1246 de la BNF (Paris: Gallimard, 2001). Le Grand, L., “Les Quinze-Vingts: depuis leur fondation jusqu’à leur translation au Faubourg Saint-Antoine,” Mémoires de la Sociéte de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 13 (1886): 107–260.   “Les béguines de Paris,” Mémoires de la société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 20 (1893): 295–357.   “Les Maisons-Dieu et léprosies du diocèse de Paris au milieu du XIVe siècle d’après le registre de visites du délégué de l’évèque (1351–1369),” Mémoires de la Société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 24 (1897): 61–362.   Statuts d’Hôtels-Dieu et de léproseries: recueil de textes du XIIème au XIVème siècle (Paris: Picard, 1901). Leniaud, J.-M., Du plâtre et d’or: Geoffroy-Dechaume sculpteur romantique de Viollet-le-Duc (L’Isle-Adam: Val d’Oise, 1988). Leniaud, J.-M. and F. Perrot, La Sainte-Chapelle (Paris: Nathan, 1991); The Sainte-Chapelle, trans. C. Penwarden (Paris: Éditions du patrimoine, Centre des monuments nationaux, 2007). Leniaud, J.-M., ed., Histoire archéologique, descriptive et graphique de la Sainte-Chapelle du Palais par MM. Decloux et Doury, suivi de La Sainte-Chapelle de Paris après les restaurations; planches, M. Duban, M. Lassus; texte, M. de Guilhermy; sous la direction de M. V. Calliat, Les introuvables du patrimoine (Asnières: Éditions Molière, 2007). Leniaud, J.-M. and P. Plagnieux, La basilique Saint-Denis (Paris: Éditions du patrimoine, Centre des monuments nationaux, 2012). Lenoir-Quintard, M., “Entretenir un monument gothique sous l’Ancien Régime: la Sainte Chapelle du Palais,” Thèse du doctorat, Paris: École pratique des hautes études, 2007. Lentes, T., “Counting Piety in the late Middle Ages,” in Ordering Medieval Society: Perspectives on Intellectual and Practical Modes of Shaping Social Relations, ed. B. Jussen (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001), 55–91. Léon, C., Le Château de Saint-Germain-en-Laye au Moyen Âge: histoire et évolution architectural d’une résidence royale XIIe– XIVe siècles (Paris: Presses Franciliens, 2008). Léon, P., La Vie des monuments français: destruction, restauration (Paris: Picard, 1951). L’Héritier, M., Le sacre des rois. Actes du colloque international d’histoire sur les sacres et couronnements royaux, Reims, 9–12 octobre, 1975 (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1985).   Les Capétiens et Senlis de Hugues Capet à Saint-Louis, exh. cat. (Senlis: La Sauvegarde de Senlis, 1987).

281

  “L’emploi du fer dans la construction gothique: ­presentation de la méthodologie. Les exemples des cathedrals de Troyes et Rouen,” in L’homme et la matière: l’emploi du plomb et du fer dans l’architecture gothique. Actes du colloque du Noyon, 16–17 novembre 2006, ed. A. Timbert (Paris: Picard, 2009), 61–73. Lesser, G., Gothic Cathedrals and Sacred Geometry, 3  vols. (London: A. Tiranti, 1957–64). Lewis, A. W., Royal Succession in Capetian France: Studies on Familial Order and the State, Harvard Historical Studies 100 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981). Lewis, F., “Rewarding Devotion: Indulgences and the Promotion of Images,” in The Church and the Arts: Papers Read at the 1990 Summer Meeting and the 1991 Winter Meeting of the Ecclesiastical History Society, ed. Diana Wood (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992), 179–94. Lillich, M. P., “King Solomon in Bed, Archbishop Hincmar, the Ordo of 1250, and the Stained-Glass Program of the Nave of Reims Cathedral,” Speculum, A Journal of Medieval Studies, 80/3 (2005): 764–801.   The Gothic Stained Glass of Reims Cathedral (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2011). Little, A. G., “Friars of the Sack,” English Historical Review 9 (1894): 121–7. Little, L. K., “Saint Louis’ Involvement with the Friars,” Church History 34/2 (1964): 125–48. Lombard-Jourdan, A., Paris-genèse de la ville: la rive droite de la Seine des origines à 1223 (Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1976).   Aux origines de Paris: la genèse de la rive droite jusqu’en 1223 (Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1985).   Fleur de lys et oriflamme: signes célestes du royaume de France (Paris: Centre national de la recherche ­scientifique, 1991). Long, S., “The Rite of Paris and Local Practice: The Chanted Mass in Parisian Institutions, c. 1480–1540,” PhD dissertation, University of Illinois, 2008. Lopez, R., “Economie et architecture médiévales, cela aurait-il tué ceci?” Annales. Économies, sociétés, civilisations 7 (1952): 433–8. Lot., F., and Fawtier, R., Le premier budget de la monarchie française: le compte général de 1202–3 (Paris: H. Champion, 1932). Machabey, A., Histoire des poids et mesures en France depuis le treizième siècle (Troyes: Imprimerie de Troyes, 1962). Madeline, F., “La politique de construction des Plantagenêt et la formation d’un territoire politique, 1154–1216,” Thèse du doctorat, Paris I Sorbonne, 2009. Maguire, H., Byzantine Court Culture from 829–1204 (Baltimore, MD: Dumbarton Oaks, 1997). Mairey, J., “Les médaillons peints de la Sainte-Chapelle: restaurations et techniques,” Livraisons d’histoire de l’architecture 1 (2001): 75–88. Mango, C., Byzantine Architecture (New York: Abrams, 1976, c1974). Martin, T., Queen as King: Politics and Architectural Propaganda in Twelfth-Century Spain (Leiden: Brill, 2006).

282

Bibliography

McCurrach, C. C., “Renovatio Reconsidered: Richard Krautheimer and the Iconography of Architecture,” Gesta 50/1 (2011): 41–69. McGehee, A., “The Parish Church of Saint-Gervais-SaintProtais: Parisian Late Gothic in the 15th and 16th century,” PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1997. Mercuri, C., Corona di Cristo, corona di re: la monarchia francese e la corona di spine nel medioevo (Rome: Edizioni di storia e letteratura, 2004).   ‘Stat inter spinas lilium: le lys de France et la couronne d’épines,’ Le Moyen Âge, revue d’histoire et de philologie 3–4 (2004): 479–512. Mesqui, J., Île-de-France gothique: les domiciles seigneuriales, 2 vols. (Paris: Picard, 1988).   Châteaux et enceintes de la France médiévale, 2  vols. (Paris: Picard, 1993).   Les châteaux forts de la guerre à la paix (Paris: Gallimard, 1995).   “Grands chantiers de ponts et financements charitables au Moyen Âge en France,” in Tecnologia y sociedad: las grandes obras publicas en la Europa medieval. XXII Semana de estudios medievales de Estella, 17 a 21 de Julio de 1995, ed. A. J. Martin-Duque (Pamplona, 1996), 153–77.   Les Châteaux forts et fortifications en France (Paris: Flammarion, 1997). Miller, E., “Review of C. de Riant, ‘Exuviae Sacrae Constantinopolitanae,’” Journal des Savants (1878): 292–309. Millet, E., Monographie de la restauration de Saint-Germain-enLaye d’après les projets et les détails d’execution tracés par feu Eugène Millet (Paris: Silvestre et Cie, 1892). Moorman, J., A History of the Franciscan Order: From Its Origins to the Year 1517 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968). Mortet, V., Étude historique et archéologique sur la cathédrale et le palais épiscopal de Paris du VIe au XIIe siècle (Paris: Picard, 1888). Moulin, J., and P. Ponsot, “La chapelle de la Vièrge à l’abbaye Saint-Germain des Prés,” Archéologia 115 (1980): 48–55. Müller, M., “Paris, das neue Jerusalem? Die Ste.-Chapelle als Imitation der Golgotha-Kapelle,” Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 59/3 (1996): 325–36. Murray, S., “The Choir of Saint-Etienne at Beauvais,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 36/2 (1977): 111–21.   Building Troyes Cathedral: The Late Gothic Campaigns (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1987).   Beauvais Cathedral: Architecture of Transcendence (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989).   Notre-Dame Cathedral of Amiens: The Power of Change in Gothic (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).   “Notre-Dame of Paris and the Anticipation of Gothic,” Art Bulletin 80/2 (1998): 229–53.   “The Architectural Envelope of the Sainte-Chapelle of Paris,” in Avista Forum, Journal of the Association Villard de Honnecourt for the Interdisciplinary Study of Medieval Technology, Science and Art, 10/1 (1996–7): 21–5. New version published in Pierre, lumière, couleur: études d’histoire de l’art du Moyen

Âge en l’honneur d’Anne Prache, ed. F. Joubert and D. Sandron, Cultures et Civilisations Médiévales 20 (Paris: Presses de l’Université de Paris-Sorbonne, 1999), 223–30.   A Gothic Sermon: Making a Contract with the Mother of God, Saint Mary at Amiens Cathedral (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004). Mussat, A., “Les cathédrales dans leurs cités,” Revue de l’Art 55 (1982): 9–22. Nees, L., “Carolingian Royal Palaces: The State of Research from an Architectural Historian’s Point of View,” in Court Culture in the Early Middle Ages: The Proceedings of the First Alcuin Conference, ed. C. Cubitt, Studies in the Early Middle Ages 3 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2003), 129–54. Nilson, B., “The Medieval Experience at the Shrine,” in Pilgrimage Explored, ed. J. Stopford (York: University of York, 1999), 95–122.   Cathedral Shrines of Medieval England (Suffolk: Boydell and Brewer, 2011). Nora, P., ed. Les Lieux de Mémoire, 3 vols. (Paris: Gallimard, 1984–92); Realms of Memory: Rethinking the French Past, trans. A. Goldhammer, 3 vols. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996–8). Nortier, M., “La Chapelle Saint-Michel du Palais à Paris, siège de la confrérie des pèlerins du Mont-SaintMichel,” Bulletin annuel des Amis du Mont-SaintMichel 105 (2000): 34–45. Onians, J., Bearers of Meaning: The Classical Orders in Antiquity, the Middle Ages, and the Renaissance (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988). O’Tool, M. P., “Caring for the Blind in Medieval Paris: Life at the Quinze-Vingts, 1250–1430,” PhD dissertation, University of California Santa Barbara, 2007.   “The povres avugles of the Hôpital des Quinze-Vingts: Disability and Community in Medieval Paris,” in Difference and Identity in France and Medieval Francia, ed. M. Cohen and J. Firnhaber-Baker (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2010), 157–74. Ousterhout, R., “The Church of Santo Stefano: A ‘Jerusalem’ in Bologna,” Gesta 20/2 (1981): 311–21.   “Architecture as Relic and the Construction of Sanctity: The Stones of the Holy Sepulchre,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 62 (2003): 4–23. Palazzo, E., A History of Liturgical Books from the Beginning to the Thirteenth Century, trans. M. Beaumount (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1998).   “Art and Liturgy in the Middle Ages: Survey of Research (1980–2003) and Some Reflections on Method,” Journal of English and Germanic Philology 105 (2006): 170–84. Papin, M. D., and J. Vallot, Métrologie générale (Paris: Dunod, 1946). Paulus, N., Geschichte des Ablasses im Mittelalter, 3  vols. (Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh, 1922–3; repr. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2000). Pauphilet, A., ed., Poètes et romanciers du Moyen Âge (Paris: Pléiade, 1979 [1952]).

Bibliography Pennington, K., The Prince and the Law 1200–1600: Sovereignty and Rights in the Western Legal Tradition (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993). Perkinson, S., The Likeness of the King: A Prehistory of Portraiture in Medieval France (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2009). Perraut, A., L’architecture des collèges parisiens au Moyen Âge (Paris: Presses de l’Université Paris-Sorbonne, 2009). Pevsner, N., “Terms of Architectural Planning in the Middle Ages,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Instititues 5 (1942): 232–7.   A History of Building Types, A. W. Mellon lectures in the fine arts 19, Bollingen series 35 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976). Pfeffer, W., “The Dit des monstiers,” Speculum, A Journal of Medieval Studies 73/1 (1998): 80–114. Pidal, L. M. “La Cámara Santa, su desctrucción y reconstrucción,” Boletin del Insituto de Estudios Asturianos (1960): 3–34. Pigeon, E.-A., Histoire de la cathédrale de Coutances (Coutances: E. Salettes Fils, 1876). Pingeot, A., “La sculpture décorative sur pierre de 1137 à 1314 déplacée au musée de Cluny,” Thèse de l’École du Louvre, Paris, 1974. Plagnieux, P., and D. V. Johnson, “Le cloître du XIIIe siècle de l’ancien prieuré de Saint-Martin-des-Champs,” Cahiers archéologiques 45 (1997): 89–98.   “Saint-Martin-des-Champs et la genèse de l’art gothique,” Bulletin monumental 167 (2009): 3–40. Poëte, M., Une vie de cité: Paris de sa naissance à nos jours (Paris: Hachette, 1924–31). Pontal, O., “Le différend entre Louis IX et les évêques de Beauvais et ses incidences sur les conciles (1232– 1248),” Bibliothèque de l’École des chartes 123 (1965): 5–34. Post, G., Studies in Medieval Legal Thought: Public Law and the State, 1100–1322 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1964). Potin, Y., and O. Guyotjeannin, “La fabrique de la perpetuité: le Trésor des chartes et les archives du royaume (XIIIe – XIXe siecle),” Revue de Synthèse 125, 5ème serie (2004): 15–44.   “Archives en sacristie: le trésor est-il un batiment d’archives? Le cas du ‘Trésor des chartes’ des rois de France (XIIIe – XIXe siècle),” Livraisons d’histoire de l’architecture et des arts que s’y rattachent 10 (2005): 65–85. Poulenc, J., “Une histoire du grand couvent des Cordeliers de Paris des origines à nos jours,” Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 69 (1976): 474–95. Prache, A., “L’abbatiale, le tombeau de Saint Remi et la sainte ampoule,” in Le sacre des rois. Actes du colloque international d’histoire sur les sacres et couronnements royaux, Reims, 1975 (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1985), 191–8.   “Un architecte du XIIIe siècle et son oeuvre: Pierre de Montreuil,” Dossiers d’histoire et archéologie 47 (1980): 26–38. Pradel de Lamase, M. de, Le Château de Vincennes (Paris: Calmann-Lévy, 1932).

283

Raleigh, T., The University of Paris from Its Foundation to the Council of Constance (Oxford: Shimpton and Son, 1873). Raunié, E., Epitaphier du vieux Paris, 4 vols. (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1890–1901). Ravaux, J.-P., “Les campagnes de construction de la cathédrale de Reims au 13e siècle,” Bulletin monumental 137 (1979): 7–66. Réau, L., Histoire du vandalisme: les monuments détruits de l’art français (Paris: Hachette, 1959), rev. edn. M. Fleury and G.-M. Leproux (Paris: Robert Laffont, 1994). Recht, R., Believing and Seeing: The Art of Gothic Cathedrals, trans. M. Whittall (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2008 [1999]). Renan, E., “What is a Nation?” [1882], trans. M. Thom, in Nation and Narration, ed. H. K. Bhabha (London: Routledge, 1990), 8–22. René-Bazin, P., “La Chartreuse de Paris,” La sauvegarde de l’art français 5 (1991): 5–96. Renoux, A., “Evocation morphologique des palais Normands et Capétiens à la fin du Xe siècle et au début du XIe siècle,” in Le roi de France et son royaume autour de l’an mil. Colloque Hugues Capet, 987–1987, la France de l’an mil, Paris-Senlis, 22–25 Juin 1987, ed. X. Barral i Altet and M. Parisse (Paris: Picard, 1992), 193–200. Renoux, A., ed., Palais médiévaux (France-Belgique): 25 ans d’archéologie (Le Mans: Publications de l’Université du Maine, 1994). Renoux, A., Palais royaux et princiers. Actes du colloque international tenu au Mans les 6–7 et 8 octobre 1994 (Le Mans: Publications de Université du Maine, 1996).   “Aux marches du palais”: qu’est-ce-qu’un palais medieval? Données historiques et archéologiques. Actes du VIIe congrès international d’archéologie médiévale, Le Mans-Mayenne 9–11 septembre 1999 (Le Mans: Publications de l’ Université du Maine, 2001). Rice, E., Music and Ritual at Charlemagne’s Marienkirche in Aachen (Kassel: Merseburger Verlag, 2009). Richard, J., Saint Louis: roi d’un France féodale, soutien de la terre sainte (Paris: Fayard, 1983).   “Urbain II, la prédication de la croisade et la definition de l’indulgence,” in Deus qui mutat tempora: Menschen und Institutionem im Wandel des Mittelalters. Festschrift für Alfons Becker zu seinem fünfundsechzigsten Geburtstag, ed. ErnstDieter Hehl, Hubertus Seibert, and Franz Staab (Sigmaringen: J. Thorbecke, 1987). Rietzel, J. M., “The Medieval Houses of Bons-Enfants,” Viator 11 (1980): 179–207. Ritter, R., Châteaux, donjons et places fortes (Paris: Larousse, 1953). Rodríguez, J. M., Las joyas de la Cámara Santa (Oviedo: Tabularium Artis Asturiensis, 1972). Rouleau, B., Paris: histoire d’une espace (Paris: Seuil, 1997). Rouse, R. H., and M. A. Rouse, Manuscripts and Their Makers: Commercial Book Producers in Medieval Paris, 1200–1500, 2 vols. (Turnhout: Harvey Miller, 2000). Roux, S., Paris in the Middle Ages, trans. J. McNamara (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009 [2003]). Sadler, D., “The King as Subject, the King as Author: Art and Politics of Louis IX,” in European Monarchy:

284

Bibliography

Its Evolution and Practice from Roman Antiquity to Modern Times, ed. H. Duchhardt, R. A. Jackson, and D. Sturdy (Stuttgart: F. Steiner, 1992), 53–68.   Reading the Reverse Façade of Reims Cathedral: Royalty and Ritual in 13th-Century France (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2012). Saint-Denis, A., Saint Louis à la Sainte-Chapelle. Exposition organisée par la Direction générale des archives de France, Sainte-Chapelle, mai-août 1960 (Paris: Presses artistiques, 1960).   “Saint Louis et la fondation de la chartreuse de Vauvert,” in Analecta Cartusiana 234, L’ordre des chartreux au XIIIe siècle. Actes du colloque international d’histoire et de spiritualité cartusienne, VIIIè centenaire de la fondation de la chartreuse de Valbonne, 11–13 juin 2004 (2006), ed. J. Hogg, A. Girard, and D. le Blévec (Salzburg: Institut für Anglistik und Americanistik, 2006), 94–104. Salch, C.-L., J. Burnouf, and J. F. Fino, eds., L’atlas des châteaux forts en France (Strasbourg: Publitotal, 1977). Salch, C.-L., J. Burnouf, and J. F. Fino, ed., Dictionnaire des châteaux et des fortifications du Moyen Âge en France (Strasbourg: Publitotal, 1979). Salch, C.-L., J. Burnouf, and J. F. Fino, “Le palais des rois de France à Paris, en l’Île de la Cité, du XIIe au XIVe siècle,” Châteaux forts d’Europe 4 (1997): 7–42. Salet, F., “Les statues d’apôtres de la Sainte-Chapelle conservées au musée de Cluny,” Bulletin monumental 109 (1951): 135–56.   “Nouvelle note sur les statues d’apôtres de la SainteChapelle,” Bulletin monumental 112 (1954): 357–63. Sassier, Y., Royauté et idéologie au Moyen Âge: Bas-Empire, monde Franc, France, IVe–XIIe siècle (Paris: Armand Colin, 2002). Sauerländer, W., Gothic Sculpture in France, 1140–1270, trans. J. Sandheimer (London: Thames and Hudson, 1972).   “Die Sainte-Chapelle du Palais Ludwigs des Heiligen,” Jahrbuch der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (1977): 92–115.   “Medieval Paris: Center of European Taste: Fame and Realities,” Paris, Center of Artistic Enlightenment, Papers in Art from the Pennsylvania State University 4 (Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1988), 13–45.   “Observations sur l’iconographie et l’iconologie de la cathédrale du sacre,” Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres (1992): 463–79. Schramm, P. E., “Die Krönung bei den Westfranken und Angelsachsen von 878 bis zum 1000,” Zeitschrift für Rechtgeschichte 23 (1934): 117–242.   “Ordines Studien II. Die Krönung bei den Westfranken und den Franzosen,” Archiv für Urkundenforschung 15 (1938), 3–55.   Der König von Frankreich: Das Wesen der Monarchie vom 9. zum 16. Jahrhundert, 2 vols., 2nd edn. (Weimar: H. Böhlaus, 1960). Schapiro, M., “On the Aesthetic Attitude in Romanesque Art,” in Romanesque Art: Selected Papers (New York: Braziller, 1977), 1–27.   Theory and Philosophy of Art: Style, Artist, and Society: Selected Papers (New York: Braziller, 1994).

Schenkluhn, W., Ordines Studentes: Aspekte zur Kirchenarchitektur der Bettelorden, die Franziskaner im 13. Jahrhundert (Berlin: Mann, 1985).   Architektur der Bettelorden: Die Baukunst der Dominikaner und Franziskaner in Europa (Darmstadt: Primus, 2000). Schreiber, R., “Reparatio ecclesiae nostrae”: Der Chor der Kathedrale in Tours (Messkirch: Gmeiner, 1997). Schürer, O., “Romanische Doppelkapellen: Eine Typengeschichtliche Untersuchung,” Marburger Jahrbuch für Kunstwissenschaft 5 (1929): 99–192. Serchuk, C., “Images of Paris in the Middle Ages,” PhD dissertation, Yale University, 1997.   “Paris and the Rhetoric of Town Praise in the Vie de St. Denis Manuscript (Paris Bibliothèque nationale de France, ms fr. 2090–2092),” Journal of the Walters Art Gallery 57 (1999): 35–47. Shaffer, J., “Recreating the Past: Aachen and the Problem of the Architectural ‘Copy,’” PhD dissertation, Columbia University, 1992.   “Letaldus of Micy, Germingy-des-Prés, and Aachen: Histories, Contexts, and the Problem of Likeness in Medieval Architecture,” Viator 37 (2006): 53–83. Shaffern, R. W., “Indulgences and Saintly Devotionalisms in the Middle Ages,” The Catholic Historical Review 84/4 (1998), 643–61. Shelby, L., ed. and trans., Gothic Design Techniques: The Fifteenth-Century Design Booklets of Mathes Roriczer and Hanns Schmuttermayer (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1977). Shepard, M., “The Lady Chapel at Saint-Germain-desPrés,” PhD dissertation, Columbia University, New York, 1990. Spiegel, G. M., “The reditus regni ad stirpem Karoli Magni: A New Look,” French Historical Studies 7/2 (1971): 145–74.   “The Cult of Saint Denis and Capetian Kingship,” Journal of Medieval History 1 (1975): 43–69.   The Chronicle Tradition of Saint-Denis: A Survey (Brookline, MA: Classical Folia Editions, 1978). Stabler, T., “Now She Is Martha, Now She Is Mary: Beguine Communities in Medieval Paris (1250–1470),” PhD dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara, 2007.   “What’s in a Name? Clerical Representations of Parisian Beguines (1200–1328),” Journal of Medieval History 33/1 (2007): 60–86. Stahl, H., Picturing Kingship, History and Painting in the Psalter of Saint Louis (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2008). Stein, H., Le palais de justice et la Sainte-Chapelle de Paris: Notice historique et archéologique (Paris: D. A. Longuet, 1912). Stookey, L. H., “The Gothic Cathedral as the Heavenly Jerusalem,” Gesta 8/1 (1969): 35–41. Strayer, J., “France, the Holy Land, the Chosen People and the Most Christian King,” in Action and Conviction in Early Modern Europe, ed. T. K. Rabb and J. E. Seigel (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1969), 3–16.   On the Medieval Origins of the Modern State (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1970).

Bibliography Sundt, R., “The Jacobin Church of Toulouse and the Origin of the Double Nave Plan,” Art Bulletin 71/2 (1989): 185–207.   “Mediocres domos et humiles habeant fratres nostri: Dominican Legislation on Architecture and Architectural Decoration in the 13th Century,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 46, no. 4 (1987): 394–407. Swanson, R. N., ed., Promissory Notes on the Treasury of Merits: Indulgences in Late Medieval Europe, Companions to the Christian Tradition 5 (Leiden: Brill, 2006). Tanon, L., Histoire des justices des anciennes églises et communautés monastiques (Paris, 1883). Taylor, J. L. M., “Rhymed Offices at the Sainte-Chapelle in the Thirteenth-Century: Historical, Political, and Liturgial Contexts,” PhD dissertation, University of Texas, 1994. Terline, J. de, “La Tête de Saint Louis à Saint-Germainen-Laye,” Monuments et mémoires publiés par l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, Fondation Eugène Piot (1951): 123–40. Tesnière, M. H., and P. Gifford, Creating French Culture: Treasures from the Bibliothèque nationale de France (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1995). Tessier, G., Le baptême de Clovis (Paris: Gallimard, 1964). Thérel, M.-L., Le triomphe de la Vièrge-Église: á l’origine du décor du portail occidental de Notre-Dame de Senlis (Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1984). The Year 1200, 2 vols., The Cloisters Studies in Medieval Art 1–2 (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1970). Timbal, P.-C., and J. Metman, “Evêque de Paris et chapitre de Notre-Dame: La juridiction dans la cathédrale au Moyen Âge,” in Huitième centenaire de Notre-Dame de Paris (Congrès des 30 mai-3 juin 1964). Recueil des travaux sur l’histoire de la cathédrale et de l’église de Paris (Paris: J. Vrin, 1967), 115–40. Timbert, A., ed., L’homme et la matière: l’emploi du plomb et du fer dans l’architecture gothique. Actes du colloque du Noyon, 16–17 novembre 2006 (Paris: Picard, 2009). Tracey, J., ed., City Walls: The Urban Enceinte in Perspective (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). Trachtenberg, M., “Suger’s Miracles, Branner’s Bourges: Reflections on Gothic Architecture as Medieval Modernism,” Gesta 39 (2000): 183–205. Troche, N. M., La Sainte-Chapelle de Paris: notice historique, archéologique et descriptive sur ce célèbre oratoire de Saint Louis (Paris: Boucquin, 1853). Tronzo, W., The Cultures of His Kingdom: Roger II and the Cappella Palatina in Palermo (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997). Vallery-Radot, J., “Yèvre-le-Châtel,” Congrès archéologique de France (session tenue à Orléans en 1930) 93 (1931): 401–12.   “Quelques donjons de Philippe Auguste,” Bulletin de la Société nationale des antiquaires de France 55 (1964): 155–60. Van Liefferinge, S., “The Choir of Notre-Dame of Paris: An Inquiry into Twelfth-Century Mathematics and EarlyGothic Architecture,” PhD dissertation, Columbia University, 2006.

285

Vauchez, A. “Beata stirps: Saintété et lignage en occident aux XIIIe et XIVe siècles,” in Famille et parenté dans l’Occident médieval (Rome: École française de Rome, 1977), 397–406. Vauchez, A., ed., Lieux sacrés, lieux de culte, sanctuaires. Approches terminologiques, methodologiques, historiques et monographiques (Rome: École française de Rome, 2000). Vermand, D., “Le palais royal de Senlis et le prieuré SaintMaurice,” in Les Capétiens et Senlis de Hugues Capet à SaintLouis (Senlis: La Sauvegarde de Senlis, 1987), 18–28.   Le palais royal: le prieuré Saint-Maurice, Collection du ­patrimoine senlisien (Poitiers: Syndicat d’initiative de Senlis, 1992). Verrier, J., “L’église Saint-Séverin,” Congrès archéologique de France (1947): 138–48. Vidier, A., “Notes et documents sur le personnel, les biens et l’administration de la Sainte-Chapelle du XIIIe au XVe siècles,” Mémoires de la Société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 28 (1901): 218–313.   “Le Trésor de la Sainte-Chapelle,” Mémoires de la Société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 34 (1907): 199–324; 35 (1908): 189–339; 36 (1909): 245–395; 37 (1910): 184–369; (reprinted Paris, 1911).   “Les marguilliers laïcs de Notre-Dame de Paris (1204– 1790),” Mémoires de la Société de l’histoire de Paris et de l’Île-de-France 40 (1913): 117–380; 41 (1914): 131–343. Vieillard-Troïekouroff, M., “La chapelle du palais de Charles le Chauve à Compiègne,” Cahiers archéologiques 21 (1971): 89–108. Villes, A., “La chapelle palatine de Saint-Germain-enLaye, une oeuvre essentielle du gothique rayonnant,” Antiquités nationales 40 (2009): 193–216. Viollet-le-Duc, E. E., Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture française du XIe au XVIe siècle, 10 vols. (Paris: B. Bance, 1858–70). de Wailly, N., “Récit du treizième siècle sur les translations faites en 1239 et en 1241 des saintes reliques de la passion,” Bibliothèque de l’École des chartes 39 (1878): 401–15. Warnke, M., Bau und Uberbau: Soziologie der mittelalterlichen Architektur nach den Schriftquellen (Frankfurt am Main: Syndikat, 1976). Weber, A., “Les grandes et les petites statues d’apôtres de la Sainte-Chapelle de Paris: Hypothèses de datation et d’interprétation,” Bulletin monumental 155 (1997): 81–101.   “Apostel für König Louis IX  – Neue überlegungen zu den apostelstatuen der Sainte-Chapelle,” in La SainteChapelle, ed. Hediger, 363–92. Weiss, D., “Architectural Symbolism and the Decoration of the Ste-Chapelle,” Art Bulletin 77/2 (1995): 308–20.   Art and Crusade in the Age of Saint-Louis (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1998). Weiss, M., ed., Atlas historique de Saint-Denis: des origines au XVIIIe siècle, Documents d’archéologie française 59 (Paris: Maison des sciences de l’homme, 1996). Weiss, V., Cens et rentes à Paris au Moyen Âge. Documents et methods de gestion domaniale, 2  vols. (Paris: Champion, 2009).

286

Bibliography

Wessel, R., “Die Sainte-Chapelle in Frankreich: Genese, Function, und Wandel eines sakralen Raumtyps,” PhD dissertation, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, 2003. Whiteley, M. “Deux escaliers royaux du XIVe s.: les ‘grands degrez’ du Palais de la Cité et la ‘grande viz’ du Louvre,” Bulletin monumental 147 (1989): 132–54. Willesme, J.-P., Sculptures médiévales (XIIe siècle-début du XVIe siècle) Catalogues d’art et d’histoire du Musée Carnavalet 1 (Paris: Musée Carnavalet, 1979).   Les ordres mendiants à Paris (Paris: Éditions des musées/ SPADEM, 1992). Williamson, P., Gothic Sculpture, 1140–1300 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1995). Wilson, C., The Gothic Cathedral: The Architecture of the Great Church, 1130–1530 (London: Thames and Hudson, 1990).   “Calling the Tune? The Involvement of King Henry III in the Design of the Abbey Church at Westminster,”

Journal of the British Archaeological Association 161 (2008): 59–93. Wright, C., Music and Ceremony at Notre-Dame of Paris, 500–1550 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989). Wright, G. S., “A Royal Tomb Program in the Reign of Saint-Louis,” Art Bulletin 56/2 (1971): 223–43. Wu, Nancy Y., ed., Ad Quadratum: The Practical Application of Geometry in Medieval Architecture (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002). Ziolkowski, J. “The Highest Form of Compliment: Imitatio in Medieval Latin Culture,” in Poetry and Philosophy in the Middle Ages: A Festschrift for Peter Dronke, ed. J. Marenbon (Boston, MA: Brill, 2001), 293–305. Zupko, R. E., French Weights and Measures before the Revolution: A Dictionary of Provincial and Local Units (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1978).

Index

Aachen Charlemagne’s palace chapel, 117 as prototype for Sainte-Chapelle, 117–20 relics, 117 Abbot Suger, 143 Abelard, Peter, 28 Adam of Senlis, bishop, 152 Agnès de Méran, 63 Albertus Magnus, 8 Alexander, Jonathan, 168 Alfonse of Poitiers patronage of Friars of the Sack, 178 Alfonso II of Asturias, 120 Amiens, city of, 111 cathedral, 34, 92 masons, 108–11 Robert de Luzarches, 110 Thomas de Cormont, 110 radiating chapels, 100 relation to the Sainte-Chapelle, 106–12 tracery, 100 Aquinas, Thomas, 8 Aristotle, 7 Arnold II von Wied, archbishop of Cologne, 122 Arsenal ms. 114. See Sainte-Chapelle: ordinals art history “theoretical turn,” 3 Autun Saint-Lazare porch, 117 Baker, Nick, 183 Bar Sauma, 161 Battle of Bouvines. See Philip Augustus beauty medieval concepts of, 66–7 Beauvais Cathedral, 34, 111 Bedos-Rezak, Brigitte, 143 Béguines, 176, 177, 178, 180 Bernard of Clairvaux, 8 Berty, Adolph, 189

Billot, Claudine, 166 Biram, Jean, 177 bishop’s chapel (building type), 135–8 Blanche of Castile, 51, 146, 147, 162, 167, 176, 196, 199 architectural patronage, 120–1, 183 Blezzard, Judith, 168 Bloch, Marc, 143 Boeswillwald, Émile, 158 Boileau, Étienne, 173, 194 Böker, Hans, 119 Boniface VIII, pope, 152 Boniface, archibishop of Mayence, 142 Bons-Enfants, 177, 178 Bony, Jean, 96, 106 Boulet-Sautel, Marguerite, 170 Bourdieu, Pierre, 7 habitus, 7 symbolic power, 7 Branner, Robert, 3, 15, 47, 96, 99, 163, 172 responses to, 3 Brenk, Beat, 82, 162 Breviary of Châteauroux, 150 Brie-Comte-Robert Saint-Étienne triforium plate tracery, 103 Caen Saint-Étienne plate tracery, 102 Cambrai Cathedral, 35, 96 Capetians perspective of Christian cosmology in Sainte-Chapelle glass, 139 promotion of sacral kingship, 4 Carruthers, Mary medieval experience of beauty, 66 memory and rhetoric, 7 Carthusians, 174–5, 177

287

288 Catholic Church dogma, 8 Paris ecclesiastical authority, 15–18 Charlemagne, 117, 142 Charles IV, 161 Charles V patronage, 186 Charles the Bald, 125 Chartres, city of, 111 cathedral, 34, 206 Saint-Père tracery, 103 Cistercians, 178, 191 Clement IV, pope, 152 Clement V, pope, 152 Clermont-Ferrand Cathedral triforium tracery, 104 verticality, 93 College of Cluny, 55 Conrad III, 122 Constantinople Great Palace/Boukoleon as prototype for Sainte-Chapelle, 5 Sacra Capella, 12, 115–17, 124, 137, 144 Constantine Copronymous, 115 Michael III, 115 Passion relics, 115 Patriarch Photius, 115 Cornut, Gautier, archbishop of Sens, 63, 166, 168 coronation rituals, 143 Council of Lyon, 180 Council of Vienne, 178 Court Style, 3, 11 Crusade of 1248, 4 cult of kings, 167 David-Roy, Marguerite, 171 Davis, Michael, 99, 183, 193 Dechaume, Geoffroy, 85 Decorated Style. See England Deschamps, Eustache, 14 Dit des monstiers, 41, 164 Dom Bouillart, 48 doppelkapellen, 120–4, 135, 144, 196 Doquang, Mailan, 99 Du Breul, Jacques, 183 Duban, Félix, 2 ductus. See memory Egidio Colonna, archbishop of Bourges, 172 England architecture Decorated Style, 105, 112 Perpendicular Style, 94, 112 Hereford Cathedral, 119 Westminster Abbey radiating chapels, 100

Index White Tower St. John the Evangelist, 121 Enguerrand IV of Coucy, 175, 176 Fawtier, Robert, 197 Fécamp La Trinité plate tracery, 102 Félibien, André, 167 Filles-Dieu, 180. See also Paris buildings fleur-de-lys, 162, 178 in Capetian heraldry, 143–4, 183 Foulques of Neuilly, 32 Fourth Lateran Council, 153 Froissart, Jean, 151 Gallia Dominicana, 184 Geertz, Clifford thick description, 6 Geoffrey of Beaulieu, 166 Givens, Jean, 86 Gonesse Saint-Pierre-Saint-Paul tracery, 103 Gothic architecture apsidal chapels, 3 decorative motifs, 37–41 first generation, 33–5 Rayonnant, 5, 11, 12, 35–63, 92, 112, 198 development of as urban phenomenon, 41 as ecclesiastical style, 5, 11, 200 in Louis IX’s later structures, 192 transmission to other artistic media, 63 Grabar, André on reliquary chapel typologies, 117 Grandes chroniques de France, 166, 175, 176 Grodecki, Louis, 3, 96 Guerout, Jean, 128 Guy of Bazoches, 18 habitus. See Bourdieu, Pierre Hacker-Sück, Inge, 135, 136 Helgaud of Fleury, 125 Hereford Cathedral. See England Hugh of Saint-Victor, 28 Humbert of Romans, 176 Hundred Years’ War, 178 Huyot, Jean-Nicolas, 130 iconography of architecture. See Krautheimer, Richard Île de la Cité, 16. See also Paris indulgences. See Sainte-Chapelle: indulgences Ingeborg of Denmark, 63 Innocent II, pope, 169 Innocent IV, pope, 153 Investiture Controversy, 169 Iogna-Prat, Dominique, 8 Isabella of Bavaria, 151

Index Jacques de Révigny, 170 Jalabert, Denise, 86 Jean de Blanot, 169, 170 Jean de Jandun, 197, 1, 66, 164 Jean de Joinville, 160, 171, 174, 176, 194, 199 Jerusalem Holy Sepulchre, 124, 137 as prototype for Sainte-Chapelle, 5 John of Garland, 8, 166 John the Teuton, 176 Jordan, Alyce, 141 Jordan, William Chester, 171, 199 Kantorowicz, Ernst, 124, 143 Kimpel, Dieter, 110 kingship images of, 4 Knights Hospitalers, 33 Knights Templar, 26, 33, 46–7, 174 Krautheimer, Richard, 12, 191 iconography of architecture, 12, 113–14 Kurmann, Peter, 106 Laon Cathedral, 35, 77, 96 Lassus, Jean-Baptiste, 2 Lauwers, Michel, 9 Le Goff, Jacques, 3, 232, 251 Lebeuf, Abbé Jean, 175, 186, 189 Limoges Cathedral verticality, 93 liturgy, 12 at royal reliquary chapels, 124 Livre des Métiers, 173 Lombard-Jourdan, Anne, 27 longitudinal plan, 120–4 Louis I the Pious, 142 Louis IX, 144 acquisition of the Crown of Thorns, 147 as benefactor, 174 comparison with Philip Augustus, 198 early reign, 146, 196 interacting with relics, 160 later reign, 192–4, 198–9 patronage, 1, 4, 5 architectural, 5, 13, 171–91, 198–9 appointment of Master of the King’s Works, 173 later reign, 192–3 patronage of religious foundations, 172 problems with the Church, 146–7 promotion of sacral kingship, 4 reign of, 7 sacral kingship, 143, 147–8 Sainte-Chapelle’s role in, 197–8 Sainte-Chapelle’s role in the monarchy of, 196 sanctity of, 4 second crusade, 177 self-representation, 199–200 Louis VI, 24, 125, 127, 143 Louis VII, 125

Louis VIII, 21, 51, 120, 146 Louis XIII, 131 Louis XIV, 131 Louvre. See Philip Augustus Magnus, Albertus. See Albertus Magnus Mallet, Alain Manesson, 186 masons, 62 mobility of, 111 Pierre de Montreuil, 47 Robert de Luzarches, 110 role of master mason, 34 Thomas de Cormont, 110 Maurice de Sully, 16 medieval studies:, 8 memory, 7–8. See also Carruthers, Mary mendicants, 32, 192 architecture, 191–2 Augustinians, 32, 174, 178, 180, 181, 186–7 Brothers of Saint William. See (mendicants: Guillemites) Brothers of the Holy Cross, 174, 175, 178, 180, 181 Brothers of the Holy Trinity for the Redemption of Captives. See (mendicants: Mathurins) Brothers of the Penitence of Jesus. See (mendicants: Friars of the Sack) building projects, 55 Carmelites, 32, 174, 178, 180, 181, 186 Carthusians, 174, 180 Cordeliers, 32, 171, 175, 177, 179, 180, 182, 191 Dominicans. See (mendicants: Jacobins) Franciscans. See (mendicants: Cordeliers) Friars of the Sack, 174, 175, 178, 180 Guillemites, 174, 175, 178, 180 Jacobins, 32, 171, 176, 177, 179, 180, 183–4, 191 Louis IX as patron of, 174 Mathurins, 32, 174, 176, 178, 179, 184 in Paris, 180–1 White Mantles, 174, 178, 180, 181 Merovingian architecture, 41 Mies van der Rohe, Ludwig, 66 monumentalization. See also Iogna-Prat, Dominique Murray, Stephen, 68, 77 on Amiens, 110 Musée national du Moyen Âge, 48, 59, 85 Nora, Pierre realm of memory, 2 Notre-Dame Saint-Jean le Rond, baptistery, 32 Notre-Dame de la Victoire, 21 Notre-Dame, cathedral of Paris. See Paris buildings Odo of Châteauroux, papal legate, 153 Odo of Sully, 32

289

290 Orléans, city of, 177 O’Tool, Mark, 262 Oviedo Cámara Santa, 120–1, 124 Palais de la Cité. See Paris buildings: Île de la Cité Palermo Cappella Palatina, 122–4 Parent, Jean, 159 Paris, 1, 10 buildings architectural importance, 3 portals, 99–100 as a sacred city, 182 city gates, 181–2 commerce and economy, 29 decorative arts, 193 ecclesiastical authority, 15–18 economy, 62 establishment as a capital, 4 growth of urban population, 29–32 hospitals, 33 as the New Jerusalem, 5 parish churches, 41–6 population growth, 64 royal architecture, 4, 10 Frenchness of, 5 as capital city, 111 secular colleges, architecture of, 55–61 thirteenth century building boom, 64 university of, 8, 29 Paris buildings extra muros Bons-Enfants, 177 Carthusians, 180, 190 Filles-Dieu, 176–7, 180 Guillemites, 180 Quinze-Vingts, 177, 178, 180, 187–90 sculpture, 189 Saint-Antoine des Champs, 30, 32, 164, 171, 191 Saint-Denis. See (Saint-Denis) Sainte-Catherine du Val des Ecoliers, 32, 51, 171, 178, 191 Saint-Germain des Prés, 3, 33, 41, 77, 93, 148, 175 capitals, 87 Eudes, abbot of, 47 Hugh d’Issy, abbot of, 47 Lady Chapel, 11, 51, 100 capitals, 87 dado, 105 modernist tendencies, 112 refectory, 48 capitals, 87 Simon, abbot of, 47 Thomas de Mauléon, 47 Saint-Germain en Laye. See (Saint-Germain en Laye) Saint-Honoré, 30

Index Saint-Ladre, 164 Saint-Martin des Champs, 26, 41, 164 refectory, 100 Saint-Nicolas du Louvre, 30 Saint-Paul, 32 Saint-Sauveur, 30 Saint-Victor, 26 Temple, 26, 46–7 Île de la Cité Hôtel-Dieu, 33, 61, 177, 178, 191 Notre-Dame, 3, 15, 33, 35, 41, 113, 139, 164, 183 bishop’s chapel, 137–8 decoration, 35 lateral chapels, 99 nave chapels tracery, 100 Portail Rouge, 100 Rayonnant verticality, 93 towers tracery, 103 tympanum, 85 Palais de Justice, 1 Palais de la Cité, 11, 1, 18, 23, 24, 114, 125, 148–51, 196 Chambre Verte, 148 chapels, 125–31 Cour du Roi, 148, 150 Galerie du Roi, 138, 148 Grand’Salle, 151 Grands Degrez, 151 Grosse Tour, 24, 148 Oratory of the Virgin, 150 palace complex improvements, 138 Saint-Barthélemy, 127 Saint-Nicolas, 138, 144, 150 Salle du Roi, 24, 138, 148, 151 Salle sur l’Eau/Salle Saint-Louis, 138 Tour Bonbec, 138 Trésor de Chartes, 138 Verger du Roi, 150 Saint-Denis de la Chartre, 32, 164 Sainte-Geneviève des Ardents, 32 Saint-Jean le Rond, 32 Saint-Michel, 164 Saint-Pierre aux Boeufs, 32, 41, 46, 100 Saint-Symphorien, 32 Left Bank, 180 Augustinians, 186–7 Bons-Enfants, 179 Carmelites, 180, 186 College of Cluny, 33, 100 cloister tracery, 104 College of the Bernardins, 33 Cordeliers, 164, 179, 180, 182–3, 191 decoration, 183 timber roof, 184 Friars of the Sack, 180 Jacobins, 51, 179, 180, 183–4, 187, 191 double nave plan, 183 timber roof, 184 windows, 184

Index Mathurins, 179, 184 Saint Jacques. See (Left Bank: Jacobins) Saint-André des Arts, 32, 175, 180 Saint-Côme-Saint-Damien, 32, 179 Sainte-Geneviève, 26, 32, 33 Sainte-Marie-Madeleine. See (Left Bank: Cordeliers) Saint-Étienne du Mont, 32 Saint-Jean de Latran, 33, 164 capitals, 87 Saint-Martin des Champs, 33 Saint-Nicolas du Chardonnet, 32 Saint-Séverin, 32, 41 triforium tracery, 103 Sorbonne, 33 Right Bank Augustinians, 180, 181 Béguines, 176 Brothers of the Holy Cross, 180, 181 Carmelites, 180, 181 Filles-Dieu, 33, 180 Guillemites, 180 La Trinité, 33 Quinze-Vingts, 33, 180 Sainte-Catherine de la Couture, 164 Saint-Eustache, 32 Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois, 25, 30, 32, 164 capitals, 87 Saint-Gervais-Saint-Protais, 32, 46 portal, 100 Saint-Josse, 32 Saint-Leu-Saint-Gilles, 32 Saint-Merry, 32 Saint-Opportune, 32 Saints-Innocents, 32 White Mantles, 180, 181 Pennington, Kenneth, 169, 170 Pepin the Short, 142 performance, 12 Perpendicular Style. See England Perraut, Aurélie, 193 Peter the Chanter, 16 Philip Augustus, 10, 146, 195–6 architectural and urban projects, 11, 15 building program in Paris, 4–5, 64–5, 196 masons, 173 walls, 22–8, 183 building program outside of Paris, 18–21 castles, 18–19 Dourdan, 18 Péronne, 18 donjons, 19–20 Issoudun, 21 Melun, 21 walls, 20 Notre-Dame de la Victoire, 21 secular architecture, 18–21 in comparison with Louis IX, 145 Louvre, 22–3 Petit Châtelet, 24

assertion of royal power, 7 Battle of Bouvines, 20, 21, 51, 143 as defensor populi, 147 development of Paris as capital, 10–11, 15, 63, 196 metropolitan architecture, 172 sacral kingship, 143 Saint-Germain en Laye, 131 as secular ruler, 198 visual division of power, 10, 21–6, 63–4 Philip III, 57 Philip IV, 130, 138, 143, 151, 161, 193 Philip the Fair. See Philip IV Pierre de Montreuil, 47, 66 Post, Gaines, 169, 170 Premonstratensians, 32 Quinze-Vingts. See Paris buildings Ravenna San Vitale, 117, 118 Rayonnant. See Gothic architecture reception of architecture, 8, 9 Reims, city of, 111, 177 bishop’s chapel, 136 cathedral, 34, 92, 167, 200 divine chrism and sacral kingship, 142–3 episcopal authority, 144 stylistic relationship with SainteChapelle, 112 Hincmar, archibishop of, 142–3 Saint-Nicaise, 96–9, 104 relics, 193 crown of thorns, 1, 5, 147, 159 holy cross, 1 Robert II, 18, 125, 143 Robert of Sorbon, 55, 174 Robert the Pious. See Robert II Roger II, 122 Rome Old Saint Peter’s, 42, 113 Rouen, city of cathedral portal, 100 status in twelfth century, 14 royal image role of architectural ornament, 112 royal suzerainty, 169–70 Rutebeuf, 175 Ryle, Stephen, 168 Sacra Capella. See Constantinople sacral kingship, 4, 7, 142–5, 169–70, 197–8 relationship of architecture to, 12 Sainte-Chapelle as an expression of, 139–41, 198 Saint Dominic, 184 Saint Helena, 115 Saint Louis. See Louis IX

291

292 Saint Louis and the Court Style in Gothic Architecture. See Branner, Robert Saint-Denis, 3, 11, 33, 37, 41, 77, 164, 167, 200 association with Saint-Germain en Laye, 134 decorative motifs, 37–41 modernist tendencies, 112 north transept portal, 100 sacral kingship, 144 tracery, 100 Tree of Jesse window, 144 Sainte-Chapelle, 1, 41, 183 Aachen as prototype, 117–20 access to, 150 altars, 134 apostle sculptures, 86 architecture Rayonnant, 5 as an architectural prototype, 112 audience, 12–13, 155–64 capacity for visitors, 151 capitals lower chapel, 158 chaplains, 151 concealment of architectonic elements, 75 decoration, 70, 196–7 iconography and meaning of, 3 as an expression of sacral kingship, 139–41 exterior, 69 external elevation, 72 feasts Ash Wednesday, 156 Feast of Good Friday, 153, 155, 156 Feast of Purification, 156 Feast of Saint Benedict, 152 Feast of Saint Laurence, 152 Feast of Saint Martin, 152 Feast of Saint Mary Magdalen, 152 Feast of Saint Stephen, 152 Feast of the Crown of Thorns, 153, 156 new liturgy for, 167 Feast of the Dedication, 152, 153, 155 Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross, 152, 153, 156 Feast of the Reception of the Relics, 153, 156 Maundy Thursday, 156 Palm Sunday, 156 Quinquagesima, 165 vigil of Pentecost, 156 finances, 153–4 formal and ideological association with Constantinople, 124 function as palatine chapel, 5 Galerie du Roi, 150 geometry, 77–8 historiography, 2–3 as an index, 196 indulgences, 151–5, 167 liturgy, 168 location in the Palais de la Cité, 114

Index longitudinal plan, 120–4, 137 lower chapel, 70, 75, 159 painting, 232 worship in, 158–9 Marian imagery, 158 ordinals, 154–6 Arsenal ms. 114, 155–6, 157–8, 166 as pilgrimage site, 167 porch, 69 portals, 79–82 processions, 164–7 proportions and dimensions, 75–9 relation to Amiens, 106–12 relation to bishop’s chapel type, 135–8, 197 relation to Great Palace/Boukoleon, 115–17, 197 relation to Saint-Germain en Laye, 131–5 as reliquary, 114 as representation of power, 6 restoration, 2, 11, 79, 86–7, 112, 158, 200 role of metal, 74 Sacra Capella as prototype, 134 Salle du Roi, 150 sculptural decoration figural, 86 foliate, 86–92 shift in royal representation, 67 sources political content of, 145 space, 75 stained glass, 139–41, 159–60 lower chapel, 158 tracery, 100–4 trumeau, 85 tympanum, 85 typological sources, 12 upper chapel, 74, 75, 164 altars, 164 baldachin, 159 choir screen, 161 dado, 102 medallions, 163 Grande Chasse, 159 martyr iconography, 163 niches, 162 Royal Window, 163, 166 sanctuary, 161 stained glass, 159–60 tribune, 159 Saint-Germain en Laye, 41, 82, 131–5, 138 portal, 100 tracery, 100 Schenkluhn, Wolfgang, 192 Schmidt, Hans-Joachim, 200 Schwarzrheindorf Saint Maria and Clement, 122 Senlis Saint-Frambourg, 100 Silvestre, Israël, 187

Index Soissons Cathedral, 34, 142 Stephen of Lexington, 33 Strasbourg Cathedral nave dado, 105 Suckale, Robert, 110 Sundt, Richard, 176, 192 symbolic power. See Bourdieu, Pierre Thérouanne, 28 Toulouse Dominican church, 192 Tournai Cathedral, 35, 96 tracery, 37–41 Très Riches Heures, 128, 138 June, 148 Tronzo, William, 124 Troyes, city of cathedral tracery, 106 verticality, 93 Saint-Urbain verticality, 94

Vézelay Sainte-Marie-Madeleine porch, 117 Villard d’Honnecourt, 62 Villeneuve-sur-Verberie portal, 100 Viollet-le-Duc, Eugène, 125 visual division of power, 10, 63–4, 195

Use of Paris, 167

Weiss, Daniel, 117, 124, 207 Westminster Abbey. See England White Tower. See England William of Auvergne, bishop of Paris, 169, 175, 176 William of Chartres, 166 William of Flamenville, 20 William of Nangis, 166, 176 William of Paris, bishop, 152 William of Saint-Amour, 176 William of Saint-Pathus, 166, 173 William of Saint-Thierry, 8 William of Seignelay, bishop of Paris, 27 William the Breton, 28

Vacquer, Theodore, 128

Yves de Vergy, abbot of Cluny, 55

293

Plate I.  Limbourg Brothers, “June,” Très Riches Heures de Jean, Duc de Berry, ca. 1416. Musée Condé, Chantilly, MS. 65, fol. 6v. Photo: René Gabriel Ojéda © RMN-Grand Palais/Art Resource, NY.

Plate II.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, exterior from south. Photo: David Bordes © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

Plate III.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, exterior from southwest. Photo: Jean Feuillie © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

Plate IV.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior of upper chapel. Photo: David Bordes © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

Plate V.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior of lower chapel. Photo: Bruno Acloque © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

Plate VI.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, lower chapel, plan by author.

Plate VII.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, upper chapel, plan by author.

Plate VIII.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior, lower chapel, dado. Photo: Author.

Plate IX.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, interior, upper chapel, dado. Photo: Bruno Acloque © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

Plate X.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, upper chapel portal. Photo: Jean Feuillie © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

Plate XI.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, lower chapel portal. Photo: Bruno Acloque © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

Plate XII.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, upper chapel, Royal window, detail, “Translation of the Relics.” Photo: Bruno Acloque © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

Plate XIII.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, upper chapel, Royal window, detail, “Ostentation of the Crown of Thorns.” Photo: Bruno Acloque © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

Plate XIV.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, upper chapel, Numbers window, detail, “Coronation of a King.” Photo: Bruno Acloque © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.

Plate XV.  “Doll’s house” view of the Sainte-Chapelle showing exterior staircase. Breviary of Châteauroux, Bibliothèque municipale, MS 2, fol. 350v. Photo: © IRHT-CNRS, Paris.

Plate XVI.  Paris, Sainte-Chapelle, upper chapel, interior, tribune. Photo: David Bordes © Centre des monuments nationaux, Paris.