<p><SPAN name="link2HCH0059" id="link2HCH0059"></SPAN></p>
<h2> CHAPTER IV. THE MARRIAGE OF QUASIMODO. </h2>
<p>We have just said that Quasimodo disappeared from Notre-Dame on the day of
the gypsy's and of the archdeacon's death. He was not seen again, in fact;
no one knew what had become of him.</p>
<p>During the night which followed the execution of la Esmeralda, the night
men had detached her body from the gibbet, and had carried it, according
to custom, to the cellar of Montfau�on.</p>
<p>Montfau�on was, as Sauval says, "the most ancient and the most superb
gibbet in the kingdom." Between the faubourgs of the Temple and Saint
Martin, about a hundred and sixty toises from the walls of Paris, a few
bow shots from La Courtille, there was to be seen on the crest of a
gentle, almost imperceptible eminence, but sufficiently elevated to be
seen for several leagues round about, an edifice of strange form, bearing
considerable resemblance to a Celtic cromlech, and where also human
sacrifices were offered.</p>
<p>Let the reader picture to himself, crowning a limestone hillock, an oblong
mass of masonry fifteen feet in height, thirty wide, forty long, with a
gate, an external railing and a platform; on this platform sixteen
enormous pillars of rough hewn stone, thirty feet in height, arranged in a
colonnade round three of the four sides of the mass which support them,
bound together at their summits by heavy beams, whence hung chains at
intervals; on all these chains, skeletons; in the vicinity, on the plain,
a stone cross and two gibbets of secondary importance, which seemed to
have sprung up as shoots around the central gallows; above all this, in
the sky, a perpetual flock of crows; that was Montfau�on.</p>
<p>At the end of the fifteenth century, the formidable gibbet which dated
from 1328, was already very much dilapidated; the beams were wormeaten,
the chains rusted, the pillars green with mould; the layers of hewn stone
were all cracked at their joints, and grass was growing on that platform
which no feet touched. The monument made a horrible profile against the
sky; especially at night when there was a little moonlight on those white
skulls, or when the breeze of evening brushed the chains and the
skeletons, and swayed all these in the darkness. The presence of this
gibbet sufficed to render gloomy all the surrounding places.</p>
<p>The mass of masonry which served as foundation to the odious edifice was
hollow. A huge cellar had been constructed there, closed by an old iron
grating, which was out of order, into which were cast not only the human
remains, which were taken from the chains of Montfau�on, but also the
bodies of all the unfortunates executed on the other permanent gibbets of
Paris. To that deep charnel-house, where so many human remains and so many
crimes have rotted in company, many great ones of this world, many
innocent people, have contributed their bones, from Enguerrand de Marigni,
the first victim, and a just man, to Admiral de Coligni, who was its last,
and who was also a just man.</p>
<p>As for the mysterious disappearance of Quasimodo, this is all that we have
been able to discover.</p>
<p>About eighteen months or two years after the events which terminate this
story, when search was made in that cavern for the body of Olivier le
Daim, who had been hanged two days previously, and to whom Charles VIII.
had granted the favor of being buried in Saint Laurent, in better company,
they found among all those hideous carcasses two skeletons, one of which
held the other in its embrace. One of these skeletons, which was that of a
woman, still had a few strips of a garment which had once been white, and
around her neck was to be seen a string of adr�zarach beads with a little
silk bag ornamented with green glass, which was open and empty. These
objects were of so little value that the executioner had probably not
cared for them. The other, which held this one in a close embrace, was the
skeleton of a man. It was noticed that his spinal column was crooked, his
head seated on his shoulder blades, and that one leg was shorter than the
other. Moreover, there was no fracture of the vertebrae at the nape of the
neck, and it was evident that he had not been hanged. Hence, the man to
whom it had belonged had come thither and had died there. When they tried
to detach the skeleton which he held in his embrace, he fell to dust.</p>
<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0074" id="link2H_4_0074"></SPAN></p>
<h2> NOTE </h2>
<h3> ADDED TO THE DEFINITIVE EDITION. </h3>
<p>It is by mistake that this edition was announced as augmented by many new
chapters. The word should have been unpublished. In fact, if by new, newly
made is to be understood, the chapters added to this edition are not new.
They were written at the same time as the rest of the work; they date from
the same epoch, and sprang from the same thought, they have always formed
a part of the manuscript of "Notre-Dame-de-Paris." Moreover, the author
cannot comprehend how fresh developments could be added to a work of this
character after its completion. This is not to be done at will. According
to his idea, a romance is born in a manner that is, in some sort,
necessary, with all its chapters; a drama is born with all its scenes.
Think not that there is anything arbitrary in the numbers of parts of
which that whole, that mysterious microcosm which you call a drama or a
romance, is composed. Grafting and soldering take badly on works of this
nature, which should gush forth in a single stream and so remain. The
thing once done, do not change your mind, do not touch it up. The book
once published, the sex of the work, whether virile or not, has been
recognized and proclaimed; when the child has once uttered his first cry
he is born, there he is, he is made so, neither father nor mother can do
anything, he belongs to the air and to the sun, let him live or die, such
as he is. Has your book been a failure? So much the worse. Add no chapters
to an unsuccessful book. Is it incomplete? You should have completed it
when you conceived it. Is your tree crooked? You cannot straighten it up.
Is your romance consumptive? Is your romance not capable of living? You
cannot supply it with the breath which it lacks. Has your drama been born
lame? Take my advice, and do not provide it with a wooden leg.</p>
<p>Hence the author attaches particular importance to the public knowing for
a certainty that the chapters here added have not been made expressly for
this reprint. They were not published in the preceding editions of the
book for a very simple reason. At the time when "Notre-Dame-de-Paris" was
printed the first time, the manuscript of these three chapters had been
mislaid. It was necessary to rewrite them or to dispense with them. The
author considered that the only two of these chapters which were in the
least important, owing to their extent, were chapters on art and history
which in no way interfered with the groundwork of the drama and the
romance, that the public would not notice their loss, and that he, the
author, would alone be in possession of the secret. He decided to omit
them, and then, if the whole truth must be confessed, his indolence shrunk
from the task of rewriting the three lost chapters. He would have found it
a shorter matter to make a new romance.</p>
<p>Now the chapters have been found, and he avails himself of the first
opportunity to restore them to their place.</p>
<p>This now, is his entire work, such as he dreamed it, such as he made it,
good or bad, durable or fragile, but such as he wishes it.</p>
<p>These recovered chapters will possess no doubt, but little value in the
eyes of persons, otherwise very judicious, who have sought in
"Notre-Dame-de-Paris" only the drama, the romance. But there are
perchance, other readers, who have not found it useless to study the
aesthetic and philosophic thought concealed in this book, and who have
taken pleasure, while reading "Notre-Dame-de-Paris," in unravelling
beneath the romance something else than the romance, and in following (may
we be pardoned these rather ambitious expressions), the system of the
historian and the aim of the artist through the creation of the poet.</p>
<p>For such people especially, the chapters added to this edition will
complete "Notre-Dame-de-Paris," if we admit that "Notre-Dame-de-Paris" was
worth the trouble of completing.</p>
<p>In one of these chapters on the present decadence of architecture, and on
the death (in his mind almost inevitable) of that king of arts, the author
expresses and develops an opinion unfortunately well rooted in him, and
well thought out. But he feels it necessary to say here that he earnestly
desires that the future may, some day, put him in the wrong. He knows that
art in all its forms has everything to hope from the new generations whose
genius, still in the germ, can be heard gushing forth in our studios. The
grain is in the furrow, the harvest will certainly be fine. He merely
fears, and the reason may be seen in the second volume of this edition,
that the sap may have been withdrawn from that ancient soil of
architecture which has been for so many centuries the best field for art.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, there are to-day in the artistic youth so much life, power,
and, so to speak, predestination, that in our schools of architecture in
particular, at the present time, the professors, who are detestable,
produce, not only unconsciously but even in spite of themselves, excellent
pupils; quite the reverse of that potter mentioned by Horace, who dreamed
amphorae and produced pots. <i>Currit rota, urcens exit</i>.</p>
<p>But, in any case, whatever may be the future of architecture, in whatever
manner our young architects may one day solve the question of their art,
let us, while waiting for new monument, preserve the ancient monuments.
Let us, if possible, inspire the nation with a love for national
architecture. That, the author declares, is one of the principal aims of
this book; it is one of the principal aims of his life.</p>
<p>"Notre-Dame-de-Paris" has, perhaps opened some true perspectives on the
art of the Middle Ages, on that marvellous art which up to the present
time has been unknown to some, and, what is worse, misknown by others. But
the author is far from regarding as accomplished, the task which he has
voluntarily imposed on himself. He has already pleaded on more than one
occasion, the cause of our ancient architecture, he has already loudly
denounced many profanations, many demolitions, many impieties. He will not
grow weary. He has promised himself to recur frequently to this subject.
He will return to it. He will be as indefatigable in defending our
historical edifices as our iconoclasts of the schools and academies are
eager in attacking them; for it is a grievous thing to see into what hands
the architecture of the Middle Ages has fallen, and in what a manner the
botchers of plaster of the present day treat the ruin of this grand art,
it is even a shame for us intelligent men who see them at work and content
ourselves with hooting them. And we are not speaking here merely of what
goes on in the provinces, but of what is done in Paris at our very doors,
beneath our windows, in the great city, in the lettered city, in the city
of the press, of word, of thought. We cannot resist the impulse to point
out, in concluding this note, some of the acts of vandalism which are
every day planned, debated, begun, continued, and successfully completed
under the eyes of the artistic public of Paris, face to face with
criticism, which is disconcerted by so much audacity. An archbishop's
palace has just been demolished, an edifice in poor taste, no great harm
is done; but in a block with the archiepiscopal palace a bishop's palace
has been demolished, a rare fragment of the fourteenth century, which the
demolishing architect could not distinguish from the rest. He has torn up
the wheat with the tares; 'tis all the same. They are talking of razing
the admirable chapel of Vincennes, in order to make, with its stones, some
fortification, which Daumesnil did not need, however. While the Palais
Bourbon, that wretched edifice, is being repaired at great expense, gusts
of wind and equinoctial storms are allowed to destroy the magnificent
painted windows of the Sainte-Chapelle. For the last few days there has
been a scaffolding on the tower of Saint Jacques de la Boucherie; and one
of these mornings the pick will be laid to it. A mason has been found to
build a little white house between the venerable towers of the Palais
de-Justice. Another has been found willing to prune away
Saint-Germain-des-Pres, the feudal abbey with three bell towers. Another
will be found, no doubt, capable of pulling down Saint-Germain
l'Auxerrois. All these masons claim to be architects, are paid by the
prefecture or from the petty budget, and wear green coats. All the harm
which false taste can inflict on good taste, they accomplish. While we
write, deplorable spectacle! one of them holds possession of the
Tuileries, one of them is giving Philibert Delorme a scar across the
middle of his face; and it is not, assuredly, one of the least of the
scandals of our time to see with what effrontery the heavy architecture of
this gentleman is being flattened over one of the most delicate fa�ades of
the Renaissance!</p>
<p>PARIS, October 20, 1832.</p>
<p><br/></p>
<hr />
<p><br/></p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />