In the ancient days of your, early in grad school, the old wifes's tale passed
on from generation to generation from Art History Prof to student was that
*one* reason that there was a significant proliferation of axial chapels in
mature Romanesque churches (e.g., late 11th-early 12th c. "pilgrimage"
churches like S. Sernin of Toulouse, or monastic ones like Cluny III) was that
a mass could only be said once a day on any given altar.
a problem with "altar fatigue" or somesuchlikething, i suppose.
(i won't bother to say that i gave this explanation little critical
thought at the time and have given it even less in the intervening decades,
though i realise that the more cynical, elastical members of the list are
probably thinking just such a thing as i speak.)
any truth to such a notion of "altar fatigue" *at that date* (not post-Vatican
II, pls)?
does canon law of the period reflect the notion that the relics might require
some time to recharge after each use; or were they thought to be always up and
ready for action?
or was my tender and delicate twig irredemably bent up front in the course of
the gastly educational process??
and, if the latter, does this experience count as a disablity for
purposes of institutional or governmental support?
cc
____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|