medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
On Thursday, March 6, 2008,at 9:40 am, christopher crockett wrote:
> From: John Dillon <[log in to unmask]>
>
> > I too used to think of this building as a gatehouse. But the
> English-language account of the monastery's building history given on
> the
> museum's present website
> > http://www.kloster-lorsch.de/lingua/englisch.html
> > says otherwise:
>
> > "With the disappearance of the first atrium the necessity came up to
> construct a new atrium in the west. Most probably the big courtyard
> with it's
> two big covered walks on both sides was built at that time, the last quarter
> of the ninth century. Together with this courtyard the famous "King’s
> Hall“ which has nothing to do with the monastery's gateway, was
> erected
>
>
> nothing to do with the "gateway" to the whole monastery, perhaps but,
> from its
> position (to say nothing of its shape) it was surely a "gateway" to the
> "atrium" (forecourt) of the church --criminey, it is placed on the
> same axis
> as the portal of the church.
Shape, obviously, is more important than axial position: the Vatican Obelisk is on the same axis as the principal entrance to St. Peter's
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l280/kachina2012/vatican2.jpg
but few, I suspect, would consider it a gateway.
The shape of the "Königshalle“ _would_ suggest a gateway. But if the gateway were not placed on the perimeter of the enclosure (in this case, the atrium or forecourt of the abbey church) it would not have functioned as an entrance to that enclosure. Herewith a few examples of gateways that were built as free-standing structures over roads but which when they were built were not part of any enclosing wall:
Arch of Orange:
http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WM1K41
http://www.livius.org/a/france/orange/orange_arch_n.JPG
Arch of Septimius Severus:
http://tinyurl.com/228jh7
Arch of Constantine:
http://tinyurl.com/2v4tky
The view endorsed by the Lorsch website is that the "Königshalle" always stood _within_ the atrium. See its plan,
at the foot of this page, of the rebuilt site ca. 1150:
http://www.kloster-lorsch.de/lingua/englisch.html
Lacking from this plan, though, is a clear break in the wall separating area 1 (the west tower entrance to the monastery) from area 2 (the atrium). Some textual detail on that wall (whose remains presumably were uncovered in the excavations of 1927-37) would also have been helpful. The site's page (German-language) on the excavations is here:
http://www.kloster-lorsch.de/kloster/spuren.html
It would have been nice too had we been given a plan of the complex in the late ninth century, when the "Königshalle" is thought to have been built. But the site's German-language account of the building's history is quite clear on its always having been enclosed within the atrium. See again:
http://www.kloster-lorsch.de/kloster/bauwerk.html
especially this:
"Die von Werner Jacobsen aufgestellte Hypothese gewinnt zusätzliche Wahrscheinlichkeit, wenn wir unterstellen, daß die „Königshalle“ und das sie umgebende große Atrium gleichzeitig entstanden sind und das Atrium gleichsam als architektonischen Rahmen für die „Königshalle“ ansprechen."
> > "Because we don't know the function of the building as a whole we also
> cannot say anything about the use of this the room in the upper floor.
> We can
> only exclude it's utilization as a chapel in carolingian time. The neutral
> mural paintings don't allow such a conclusion anyway.
>
> ??
>
> these paintings
>
> http://www.brynmawr.edu/Acads/Cities/wld/01010/01010e.jpg
>
> ?
> which are both late medieval
>
> >It was in gothic time, at the end of 14th century, that the gabled
> roof was
> made as steep as is now."
>
>
> and hardly "neutral"
>
No, not _those_ paintings. Re-read the description at:
http://www.kloster-lorsch.de/lingua/englisch.html,
especially this:
"During restoration works it was found out that we have to distinguish nine different layers of painting. Rests of the first one build a group of letters which was painted briefly after the wall was constructed and roughcast. It is not possible to explain this strange inscription. According to a scholar's theory it may be a part of a devotional phrase which was meant to be covered by the final layer of plaster. Regarding the type of scripture it is possible to date the inscription between 830 and 880.
"The second layer is also carolingian. It is an architectural decoration consisting of a sort of balustrade wit painted columns on it. These columns with their Ionic capitals divide a white space where no painting was found. Carrying a sort of architrave these columns remind of ancient classical mural painting and also of the decoration of the facade of the „Gateway“.
"Some centuries after these paintings were carried out a new romanesque layer was painted over it. Rests of the new layer were found here, and this might be a figure with a head with a round nimbus and garment with folds or pleats. Unfortunately we cannot distinguish more details of it. The fourth layer is of late gothic origin. We can see an angels' choir on both sides - angels, singing the praise of Mary. Most probably the western broadside of the room once showed scenes from the Mary’s life."
Though this account is not altogether clear, it would appear the the "neutral" paintings referred to above are those of the second layer.
> > That text seems based on Dr. Hermann Schefers' German-language
> discussion on
> the same site (from the Kuratorium Weltkulturdenkmal Kloster Lorsch e.V.):
> > http://www.kloster-lorsch.de/kloster/bauwerk.html
> > especially:
> > "Mit der Funktionsbestimmung der „Königshalle“ sind sogar noch
> größere Unsicherheiten verbunden.
> > [Various conjectures:] Als von der Architektur römischer Triumphbögen
> inspiriertes Denkmal des durch Karl den Großen wiederbelebten lateinischen
> Kaisertums,
>
> yes, as would befit a "gateway" to the atrium of the church.
>
> > [Favored view:] Am meisten Plausibilität dürfte aber derzeit die von
> Achim
> Hubel erörterte Möglichkeit für sich beanspruchen, daß die Lorscher
> „Königshalle“ dem Beispiel einer vergleichbaren Baulichkeit in St.
> Emmeram (Regensburg) aus dem Umfeld Ludwigs des Deutschen für das nicht
> zuletzt ja auch liturgisch begangene Ereignis und Zeremoniell des
> Herrscherempfangs nachgebildet und ausgestattet worden sein dürfte. Damit
> gewinnt die Vorstellung einer dem Herrscher zugedachten Baulichkeit inmitten
> des „Prozessionsweges“ zur Klosterkirche zusätzliches Gewicht. Nur eben
> die Kennzeichnung als profanes Bauwerk müßte dann revidiert werden."
>
> not inconsistent with an atrium "gateway", if my Dodgey Kraut is worth
> anything at all.
Well, if they're thinking of the free-standing Roman triumphal arches on the Sacra Via and elsewhere, this _would_ be inconsistent with your view of the building as a gateway _to_ the atrium.
Best again,
John Dillon
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
|
