 |
 |
medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture Werner Robl <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >until late 12th century, the city walls of Chartres were much more perforated and permeable than the Parisian. When Peter of Celle completed the walls of Chartres in about 1180, he gained much sympathy among the citizens: "Civitatem enim istam a porta de Sparris usque ad ecclesiam S. Fidis, quae in ea parte fossatis tantummodo cingebatur, ad quorum reparationem ipsius episcopi terrae homines pro voluntate comitis saepius urgebantur, de suo proprio novis muris vallavit..." this is from a charter in the cathedral cartulary, i believe ? i don't recall, some sort of agreement between the Bishop and the Count regarding the use of the labor of the cathedral's men on the *Count's* project for the new walls ? perhaps i'm missing the subtilty of the latin here, but calling these walls Peter's work is stretching things a bit, it seems to me. the newly enclosed property would mostly have belonged to the Count (some of it, especially the areas around the city gates, being held by the Viscount, in fief from the Count). here's an interesting map of the town : http://www.ithaca.edu/chartres/imagemaps/townmap.html the "porta de Sparris" is the present "Place des Epars", the large roundabout several blocks West of the cathedral. i *think* that the actual "gate" there would have been on the East side of the Place, where the yellow street enters it, on this map. the new city walls of the late 12th c. would have followed the "Blvd. de la Resistance", i think, but only for a short distance, to about the period in "Blvd.", then would have followed the street going East, the chruch of St. Foi is on that street, at the intersection of the second North-South street, just above (at 11:00) the Western-most red dot on the map. St. Foi was, thus, outside the "original" city walls --which basically followed the outlines of the exterior houses of the cloister : http://www.ithaca.edu/chartres/imagemaps/favier.environs.html there was a "portam novam" opened up in the North side of the cloister in the 9th century, which is, i believe, at the red dot near the Northwest tower of the cathedral (though it might have been at the street just to the East of that). it was called "portam novam" in a necrology entry of circa 1105 (for little Odo, son of the late Count & Countess Adela), which also makes mention of there being some obnoxious butchers stalls just there (presumably just outside the gate), which the Countess agreed to have moved so that the great _poutres_ of the on-going repairs to the roof of Fulbert's cathedral could more easily navigate the gateway and to relieve the canons of the stink of the butchers' work. as i envision it, by the later 12th century (Bishop Peter held the see from 1180-1183 http://www.ariadne.org/centrechartraine/bishops/bpetercelles.html ) the town would have seriously outgrown the old cloister, on all sides --rembember that the cathedral is at the summit of a scarp (not really of a hill) which overlooks the valley of the Eure, and that scarp drops off very percipitously East of the cathedral, more gently to the south, towards the _burg_ and abbey of St. Peter's (at the end of the "Rue Saint Pierre" on the map). so, saying that "the city walls of Chartres were much more perforated and permeable than the Parisian" is one of those things which is at once both true and not true --the Parisian situation (speaking of the Ile-de-la-Cité) was rather unique, but, it too had overspilled its walls by the middle/end of the 12th c. and new walls had to be built on both the Left and Right banks at nearly the same time (reign of Phil. Augustus, whose great tower of the Louvre was excavated in the '90s --traces of his walls can be seen on the Left bank as well, behind the Sorbonne, as i recall). in both cases it wasn't so much that "the city walls were perforated and permeable" as it was that there simply weren't any *city* walls protecting the new "suburbs" of both cities. expanding the walls was a Big Project, of course, but both King and Count could use it as a great excuse to exact labor and money from the newly-protected burghers, and also consolidate their power over the newly expanded city, as well. the importance of Peter's agreement with the Count was, i suspect, that it "regularised" what, specifically, the Bishop owed the Count in terms of labor for such a project and got him "on board" the venture. a collateral result may also have been to "regularise" the Bishop & Chapter's authority over the Cloister itself. just guessing, here. i seem to have lost my copy of Andre Chedville's _Chartres et ses campagnes_ (c.1970), which would have quite a bit more to say about the matter (but which must be used with caution). best from here, christopher ********************************************************************** 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