The disgrace of Foucquet was the last determining cause of the establishment of the Gobelins factory under Louis XIV, an act which after this brief review of Paris factories (and an allusion to sporadic cases outside of Paris) we are in position at last to consider. Pursuit of knowledge in regard to the Gobelins factory leads us through ways the most flowery and ways the most stormy, through sunshine and through the dark, right up to our own times.
[Ill.u.s.tration: GOBELINS TAPESTRY, AFTER LEBRUN, EPOCH LOUIS XIV
Collection of Wm. Baumgarten, Esq., New York]
[Ill.u.s.tration: THE VILLAGE FeTE
Gobelins Tapestry after Teniers]
FOOTNOTES:
[14] For the facts here cited see E. Muntz, "Histoire de la Tap.i.s.serie," and Jules Guiffrey, "Les Gobelins."
[15] See Loriquet, "Les Tap.i.s.series de Notre Dame de Rheims."
CHAPTER X
THE GOBELINS FACTORY, 1662
Colbert saw the wisdom of taking direction for the king, Louis XIV, of the looms of Foucquet"s chateau. Travel being difficult enough to make desirable the concentration of points of interest, Colbert transferred the looms of Vaux to Paris. To do this he had first to find a habitat, and what so suitable as the Hotel des Gobelins, a collection of buildings on the edge of Paris by which ran a little brook called the Bievre. The Sieur Leleu was then the owner, and the sale of the buildings was made on June 6, 1662.
This was the beginning only of the purchase, for Louis XIV added adjoining houses for the various uses of the large industries he had in mind, for the development of arts and crafts of all sorts, and for the lodging of the workers.
The story of the original occupants of the premises is almost too well known to recount. The simple tale of the conscientious "dyers in scarlet" is told on the marble plaque at the present entry into the collection of buildings still standing, still open to visitors. It is a tale with a moral, an obvious simple moral with no need of Alice"s d.u.c.h.ess to point it out, and it smacks strong of the honesty of a labour to which we owe so much.
Late in the Fifteenth Century the brothers Gobelin came to the city of Paris to follow their trade, which was dyeing, and their ambition, which was to produce a scarlet dye like that they had seen flaunting in the glowing city of Venice. The trick of the trade in those days was to find a water of such quality that dyes took to it kindly. The tiny river, or rather brook, called the Bievre, which ran softly down towards the Seine had the required qualities, and by its murmuring descent, Jean and Philibert pitched the tents of their fortune.
They succeeded, too, so well that we hear of their descendants in later centuries as having become gentlemen, not of property only, but of cultivation, and far removed from trades or bartering. Their name is ever famous, for it tells not only the story of the two original dyers, but of their subsequent efforts in weaving, and finally it has come to mean the finest modern product of the hand loom. Just as Arras gave the name to tapestry in the Fourteenth Century, so the Gobelins has given it to the time of Louis XIV, even down to our own day--more especially in Europe, where the word tapestry is far less used than here.
The tablet now at the Gobelins--let us re-read it, for in some hasty visit to the Latin Quarter we may have overlooked it. Translated freely it reads, "Jean and Philibert Gobelin, merchant dyers in scarlet, who have left their name to this quarter of Paris and to the manufacture of tapestries, had here their atelier, on the banks of the Bievre, at the end of the Fifteenth Century."
Another inscription takes a great leap in time, skips over the centuries when France was not in the lead in this art, and recommences with the awakening strength under the wise care of Henri IV. It reads:
"April 1601. Marc Comans and Francois de la Planche, Flemish tapestry weavers, installed their ateliers on the banks of the Bievre."
"September 1667, Colbert established in the buildings of the Gobelins the manufacture of the furniture (_meubles_) of the Crown, under the direction of Charles Lebrun."
The tablet omits the date that is fixed in our mind as that of the beginning of the modern tapestry industry in France, the year 1662, but that is only because it deals with a date of more general importance, the time when the Gobelins was made a manufactory of all sorts of gracious products for the luxury of palaces and chateaux, not tapestries alone, but superb furniture, and metal work, inlay, mounting of porcelains and all that goes to furnish the home of fortunate men.
In that year of 1667 was inst.i.tuted the ateliers supported by the state, not dependent upon the commercialism of the workers. This made possible the development of such men as Boulle with his superb furniture, of Riesner with his marquetry, of Caffieri with his marvels in metal to decorate all _meubles_, even vases, which were then coming from China in their beauty of solid glaze or eccentric ornament.
Here lies the great secret of the success of Louis XIV in these matters, with the coffers of the Crown he rewarded the artists above the necessity of mere living, and freed each one for the best expression of his own especial art. The day of individual financial venture was gone. The tapestry masters of other times had both to work and to worry. They had to be artists and at the same time commercial men, a chimerical combination.
The expense of maintaining a tapestry factory was an incalculable burden. A man could not set up a loom, a single one, as an artist sets up an easel, and in solitude produce his woven work of art. Other matters go to the making of a tapestry than weaving, matters which have to do with cartoons for the design, dyes, wools, threads, etc.; so that many hands must be employed, and these must all be paid. The apprentice system helped much, but even so, the master of the atelier was responsible for his finances and must look for a market for his goods.
What a relief it was when the king took all this responsibility from the shoulders and said to the artists and artisans, "Art for Art"s sake," or whatever was the equivalent shibboleth of that day. Here was comfort a.s.sured for the worker, with a housing in the Gobelins, or in that big asylum, the Louvre, where an apartment was the reward of virtue. And now was a market a.s.sured for a man"s work, a royal market, with the king as its chief, and his favourites following close.
The ateliers scattered about Paris were allied in spirit, were all the result of the encouragement of preceding monarchs, but it remained for Le Grand Monarque to gather all together and form a state solidarity.
Kings must have credit, even though others do the work. It was the labour of the able Colbert to organise this factory. He was in favour then. It was after his acuteness had helped in deposing the splendid brigand Foucquet, and his power was serving France well, so well that he brought about his head the inevitable jealousy which finally threw him, too, into unmerited disgrace.
Colbert, then, although a Minister of State, head of the Army of France, and a few other things, had the fate of the Gobelins in his hand. As the ablest is he who chooses best his aids, Colbert looked among his countrymen for the proper director of the newly-organised inst.i.tution. He selected Charles Lebrun.
The very name seems enough, in itself. It is the concrete expression of ability, not only as an artist, but as a leader of artists, a director, an a.s.sembler, a blender. He called to the Gobelins, as addition to those already there, the apprentices from La Trinite, the weavers from the Faubourg St. Germain, and from the Louvre. He established three ateliers of high-warp under Jean Jans, Jean Lefebvre and Henri Laurent; also two ateliers of low-warp under Jean Delacroix and Jean-Baptiste Mozin. When charged with the decoration of Versailles he had under his direction fifty artists of differing scopes, which alone would show his power of a.s.sembling and leading, of blending and ordering. Workers at the Gobelins numbered as many as two hundred fifty, and apprentices were legion.
Ten or twelve important artists composed the designs for tapestries, yet the mind of Lebrun is seen to dominate all; his genius was their inspiration. It was he whose influence pervaded the decorative art of the day. More than any others in that grand age he influenced the tone of the artistic work. We may say it was the king, we may have styles named for the king, but it was Lebrun who made them what they were. The spirit of the time was there, monarch and man made that, but it was Lebrun who had the talent to express it in art. It was a time when France was fully awake, more fully awake than Italy who had, in fact, commenced the somnolence of her art; she was strong with that brutal force that is recently up from savagery, and she took her grandeur seriously.
At least that was the att.i.tude of the king. No lightness, no effervescing cynical humour ever disturbed the heavy splendour of his pose. And this grand pose of the king, Lebrun expressed in the heavy sumptuousness of decoration. The tapestries of that time show the mood of the day in subject, in border and in colour. All is superb, grandiose.
Rubens, although not of France, dominated Europe with his magnificence of style, a style suited to the time, expressing force rather than refinement, yet with a splendid decorative value in the art we are considering. Flanders looked to him for inspiration, and his lead was everywhere followed. His virile work had power to inspire, to transmit enthusiasm to others, and thus he was responsible for much of the improvement in decorative art, the re-establishment of that art upon an intellectual basis. Designs from his hands were full, splendid and self-a.s.sertive; harmony and proportion were there. A study of the _Antony and Cleopatra_ series and of the plates given in this volume will establish and verify this.
[Ill.u.s.tration: DESIGN BY RUBENS]
[Ill.u.s.tration: DESIGN BY RUBENS]
Lebrun"s century was the same as that of Rubens, but the former had the fine feeling for art of the Latin, who knows that its first province is to please. A comparison between the two men must not be carried too far, for Rubens was essentially a painter, attacking the field of decoration only with the overflow of imagination, while Lebrun"s life and talent were wholly directed in the way of beautifying palaces and chateaux. Yet Rubens" work gave a fresh impulse to tapestry weaving in Brussels while Lebrun was inspiring it in France.
Lebrun had, then, to direct the talent and the labour of an army of artists and artisans, and to keep them working in harmony. It was no mean task, for one artist alone was not left to compose an entire picture, but each was taken for his specialty. One artist drew the figures, another the animals, another the trees, and another the architecture; but it was the director, Lebrun, who composed and harmonised the whole. Thus, although the number of tapestries actually composed by him is few, it was his great mind that ordered the work of others. He was the leader of the orchestra, the others were the instruments he controlled.
It was while at Vaux that Lebrun had more time for his own composition. He there produced a series called _Les Renommes_, masterpieces of pure decorative composition. These were designed as portieres for the Chateau of Maincy. They came to be models for the Gobelins, and were woven to hang at royal doors, the doors of Foucquet being at this time dressed with iron bars.
The Gobelins wove seventy-two sets after this beautiful model which had made Lebrun"s debut as an artist. Foucquet had given him a more pretentious work; it was to complete a suite, the _History of Constantine_, after Raphael. Rubens had given a fresh flush of popularity to this subject, which again became the mode. The _History of Meleager_ was begun at Vaux and finished at the Gobelins. Later, Vaux forgotten, or at least a thing of the past, Lebrun"s decorative genius found expression in the series called _The Months_ or _The Royal Residences_, of which there were twelve hangings.
In these last the scheme is the perfection of decoration, with the subject well subdued, yet so subtly placed that notwithstanding its modesty, the eye promptly seeks it. The castle in the distance, the motive holding aloft the sign of the Zodiac, are seen even before the splendid columns and the foliage of the middle-ground.
Such a hanging has power to play pretty tricks with the imagination of him who gazes upon it. The columns, smooth and solid, declare him at once to be in a place of luxury. Beyond the foreground"s columns, but near enough for touching, are trees to make a pleasant shade, and beyond, in the far distance, is the chateau set in fair gardens, even the chateau where the lovely Louise de la Valliere held her court until conscience drove her to the convent.
The set of most renown, woven under Lebrun"s generalship, was that splendid advertis.e.m.e.nt of the king"s magnificence known as the _History of the King_. Louis demanded above all else that he should appear splendidly before men. He was jealous of the magnificence of all kings and emperors, whether living or dead. Even Solomon"s glory was not to typify greater than his. With this end in view, pomp was his pleasure, ceremony was his gratification. Add to these an insatiable vanity that knows not the disintegrating a.s.saults of a sense of humour, and we have a man to be fed on profound adulation.
[Ill.u.s.tration: DESIGN BY RUBENS]
[Ill.u.s.tration: GOBELINS TAPESTRY. DESIGN BY RUBENS
Royal Collection, Madrid]
The subjects for the _History of the King_ were chosen from official solemnities during the first twelve years of his reign. Lebrun"s task, into which he threw his whole soul, was to celebrate the power and the glory of his master, to show the king in perpetual picture as the greatest living personage, and to still his fears with regard to long defunct royal rivals. His life as a man was pictured, his marriage, his treaties with other nations, and his actions as a soldier in the various battles or military conquests. In the latter affairs he had not even been present, but poet"s license was given where the glorification of the king was concerned. The flattery that surrounds a king thus gave him reason to think that his persecutions in the Palatinate and his constant warfare were greatly to his glory.
It is the tapestry in this set that is called _Visit of Louis XIV to the Gobelins_ that interests us strongly, as being delightfully pertinent to our subject. The picture shows the king in chary indulgence standing just within the court of the Royal Factory, while eager masters of arts and crafts strenuously heap before him their masterpieces. (Plate facing page 114.)
The borders of these sumptuous hangings are to be enjoyed when the original set can be seen, for the borders are Lebrun"s special care.
The three pieces added late in the reign are drawn with different borders, and no stronger example of deteriorating change can be given, the change in the composition of the border which took place after the pa.s.sing of Lebrun. The pieces in the set of the _Life of the King_ numbered forty; with the addition of the later ones, forty-three. They were repeated many times in the succeeding years, but on low-warp, reduced in size, and without the superb decorative border which was composed by Lebrun"s own hand for the original series.
Francois de la Meulen was Lebrun"s able coadjutor in the direction of this famous set. Eight artists accustomed to the work were charged with the cartoons, but Lebrun headed it all. It is interesting to note that the temptation to sport in the fields of pure decoration, led him into the personal composition of the border. These borders are the very acme of perfection in decoration, full of strength, of grace, and of purity. They suggest the cla.s.sic, yet are full of the warm blood of the hour; they are Greek, yet they are French, and they foreshadow the centuries of beautiful design which France supplies to the world.