JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for MEDIEVAL-RELIGION Archives


MEDIEVAL-RELIGION Archives

MEDIEVAL-RELIGION Archives


MEDIEVAL-RELIGION@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

MEDIEVAL-RELIGION Home

MEDIEVAL-RELIGION Home

MEDIEVAL-RELIGION  January 2002

MEDIEVAL-RELIGION January 2002

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: basilicas, collegials, monasteries [<Saint-Denis]

From:

ctault <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 19 Jan 2002 22:46:47 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (208 lines)

medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture

Dear Colleagues, Here I am butting in again.  Regarding St. Denis, here is
what Bannister Fletcher has to say about it:

"The Abbey of S. Denis (c.1135-44), near Paris, was built by the Abbe' Suger
and is one of the few buildings in this  style (i.e. Romanesque) in the Ile de
France.  The Abbey Church is of great interest as the burial place of the
French kings.  The original choir and two internal bays still remain, and a
Gothic nave and transept (c.1231) have been wedged in between them.  The west
front includes an early instance of the use of the pointed arch, while the
eastern end, though still retaining many Romanesque features, is probably the
earliest truly Gothic structure.

The _Dictionary of Christian Antiquities_, London & Hartford, 1880, has a
rather lengthy entry for "Basilica"  which I shall cite in part:

"The use of the word "basilica" as meaning a church seems to haave arisen
gradually, for the anonumous pilgrim who, in 333,  wrote an itinerary from
Bordeaux to Jerusalem, when he says that a "basilica" had been built aat the
Holy Sepulchre by Constantine, adds the explanation, "id est dominicum."
Mabilon (Op. posthum., t, ii. p.355) says that it has been satisfactorily
shown that in the sriting of authors who wrote in Gaul in the 6th & 7th
centuries "basilica" is to be understood as meaning the church of a covent,
cathedral and parish churches being called "ecclesiae;" the writers of other
countries do not observe this distinction.

"Seven churches at Rome--S. Pietro in Vaticano, S. Giovanni Laterano, Sta.
Maria Maggiore,  Sta. Croce in Gerusaleme, S. Paolo fuori le mura, S. Lorenzo
in Agro Verano and St. Sebastiano, -- are styled basilicas by pre-eminence and
enjoy certain honorific privileges."

I would like to point out here that all these older churches are
architecturally basilicas, anyway.  Not having read Mabilon, I don't know the
reference to S. Pietro in Vaticano, but if he means the old St. Peters that
was torn down to make way for the present Renaissance church, then all seven
of the churches he mentions are basilican and usually referred to as "Early
Christian."  From this one might conclude, well yes, they were basilicas but
revered for their age and history in the holy city, and the name "basilica"
was simply appropriated at a later date to identify other venerable churches
which were not arcitecturaly basilicas.

To further confuse things, the citation continues:

"Basicula is used by St. Paulinus (Epist. xii, ad Severum) and by Avitus
Viannensis (Epist. vi.) for a chapel or oratory.

Finally, it addresses the issue of structures being built as a monument to
important persons:

"The word "basilica" is found in the Salic Law (tit. 58, c. 3,  4, & 5) in the
senes of a monument erected over a tomb, apparently the tomb of a person of
high rank.  With the Franks they appear to have been constructued of
wood......"

Mention of tombs stones resembling buildings being also used by the Franks.
This may explain or at least provide a clue to the

Thanks for the opportunity to write this.  I hope it adds something to the
discussion.  This is a very interesting list from which I profit a great deal
and enjoy very much also.  As I rarely have anything to contribute I though I
would make the best of this one.  yrs, t. ault

>===== Original Message From Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and
culture  =====
>medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
>
>Marjorie Greene  wrote:
>
>>First, let me confess I didn't read to the end of your message.
>
>well, of course not.
>
>those last 12k are just there for show.
>
>"Fire for Effect," as they say in the Artillery, once the target is nicely
>bracketed.
>
>>Saint-Denis, if one is to believe *most* books
>
>i.e., the secondary literature?
>
>believable if traceable back to the primary sources (in this case,
>archeological evidence is as good as written sources).
>
>>treating of its history, was originally a... basilica!
>
>in definitions 1 and 2, i assume you mean --i.e., that the building itself
was
>"basilican" in *form* (or, perhaps, was thought to be such by some ancient
>writer who so characterized it thus --*which* writer, btw?).
>
>(now's about the time i wish i could find duCange on line, see what obscure
>sources he cites under his entry for _BASILICA_.)
>
>>"Built" by Sainte Genevieve over the supposed tomb of Denis in a cemetery of
>Catolacum
>
>?
>
>the original name of the romano-gaulish settlement?
>
>i don't think i've ever seen that one.
>
>>and, according to ctault's posting, probably requiring the pope's
>participation in its designation as such.
>
>NO
>
>that's not my understanding, at all.
>
>if some ancient source indeed refers to the building as a "basilica," it has
>nothing whatever to do with the modern use of that term in the Roman church.
>the place was --or was not-- a basilica because of it's architectural form,
>not because of anything any pope did or did not do.
>
>likewise, the modern designation of "basilica" has *nothing* whatever to do
>with the particular architectural form which a building takes (the thrust of
>CTAult's contribution), but is rather some sort of Papal designation, of
>relatively quite recent date, concerning *only* its *institutional* character
>and status among churches (note the distinction between "Greater" and
"Lesser"
>Basilicas in the CE article cited by someone else here recently).
>
>thus, a *totally* different question.
>
>>It was Dagobert who imported some Benedictines to care for the shrine and
>pray for his ever-blackening soul. The church thus became a basilical
>abbatiale.
>
>goodness, i don't believe i've ever, *ever* seen that wonderful
mongrelisation
>before:
>
>"basilical abbatiale"
>
>nicely blending languages, architectural terminologies and institutional
>status, all at once, with a very nice ring to it, as well.
>
>my hat's off to you on that one!
>
>"Confusion to the Bugslags," i say!
>
>and: "Pass the Bottle."
>
>>If we are speaking of the _current_ edifice, which replaced/enlarged a
>Carolingian S-D, then yes, it was "always" an abbatiale.
>
>right.
>
>well, ever since the monks were introduced.
>
>and, architecturally speaking, always will be, saecula saeculorum.
>
>and the "original" or Dagobertan structure may have also been a "basilica"
>(either in the sense that some ancient writer might have understood that term
>and used it to describe the building/church, or in the much more strictly and
>narrowly defined architectural sense of the term in current usage among Art
>Hysterians).
>
>the latter question we cannot know for certain, since we certainly cannot
>reconstruct that building's elevation, nor even, perhaps, its ground plan
with
>certainty (knowledge of both of which aspects are, to my mind, necessary for
>the application of such an architectural designation).
>
>>Depends on what the meaning of "is" is or of what "was" is ;-)))
>
>well, i don't know as to how i would go *that* far.
>
>it depends more on what the sense of "basilica"
>
>was.
>
>christopher
>
>p.s. out of consideration to some of our long-suffering list collegues who
>might be paying for their bandwidth by the minute, it's probably not a good
>idea to reproduce the *whole* of my already tediously long posts
>--already too lengthy for some to finish, i'm told-- in response to just a
>part of them.
>
>i'm sure Moma George would agree.
>
>**********************************************************************
>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

**********************************************************************
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

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager