Romanesque Churches of the Pilgrimage Roads

Author(s): Eleanor Vernon

Reviewed work(s):
Source: Gesta, , Pre-Serial Issue. Annual of the International Center of Romanesque Art Inc.
(1963), pp. 12-15
Published by: International Center of Medieval Art
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/766600 .
Accessed: 31/07/2012 04:52

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

International Center of Medieval Art is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Gesta.

http://www.jstor.org
 RomanesqueChurchesof the
age Roads
Pilgrim
INTRODUCTION
The moderntheoryof thepilgrimagechurchesis based
on the pilgrimageguide included in the twelfthcentury
"Codex Calixtinus" which describes in detail the various
routes by which the pilgrimsapproached the shrineof St.
Jamesin Santiago,Spain. This cathedral,Santiago da Com-
postela, housed the relics of the famous Saint, and became
the major European pilgrimagecenter.
Along the four major routes through France which
channeledthe flowof pilgrimsto the north-western part of
Spain, large churches were constructed which have many
similarities.On the Paris-Bordeauxroad was located St.
Martinat Tours; St. Martial at Limoges was on the Veza-
lay-Perigeuxroad; on the Le Puy-Moissac road St. Foy
was located at Conques; and on the Arles-Jacaroad there
was St. Sernin of Toulouse. The fact that most of them
were powerfulCluniac abbeys does suggestsome deliber-
ate planningof a route,but the actual dates of the church-
es and theirorderof constructionremaina problemtoday.
Kingsley Porter compares these pilgrimageroads to a
great river emptyinginto the sea at Santiago, formedby
many tributarieshaving theirsource all over Europe. (See
map)
ORIGINS OF THE PILGRIMAGE ROUTES
The cult of Saints had been active for centuries,but
it achieved singularimportancein the late eighthcentury
when reliquarieswere permittedon the altar.With the for-
mal recognitionof saintswithinthe churchtheybegan to
hold more importance,and about 1100 many saints were
formallycanonized.The strongsense of a saint as an active
intercessorwas heightenedby the fact that his relics were
often enclosed in a statue, covered with precious jewels
and glittering as if transfiguredby a divine presence.This
trendis exemplifiedin the famous statueof St. Foy. It was
soon afterthese innovationsthatthe greatchurchesbegan
to encourage the pilgrimageof the faithfulpeople to the
shrines.
The monkswere quite conscious of the materialbene-
fitsas well as the spiritualaspectsprovidedby theseroutes.
Although it seemed pure folly to attemptto set up the
road for Santiago at first,it soon succeeded in competing
withthe establishedroutesto Rome and Jerusalem.
The pilgrimswere also seen as potential crusaders,
capable of playinga role in drivingthe Moors fromSpain.
This aura of danger involved in reachinga blessed shrine
gave even more glory to the route. The harder the pil-
grims had to struggle,the greaterwere the spiritualad-
vantages they accrued. The associations of "chanson de
geste" with the pilgrimageswere also emphasized,and in
by
Eleanor Vernon
turnthe church cleverlyextendedthe cloak of sanctityto
secular heroes.
The effortsof Cluny did much to succeed in making
the road safe for the travelers.Hospices were provided,
bridges built, and roads repaired. The Codex Calixtinus
stressesthe terriblevengeanceSt. Jamesmightbe expected
to visit upon whoevermolested,or even failed to aid, his
pilgrims.In modern terms,the trip probably cost about
two hundreddollars, and took at least several monthsto
complete.
Relics became the passion of the age, and theywere
displayedto the travelersin greatprofusion.In thisperiod
the Cluniacs were greatchampionsof art,especiallysculp-
ture. It was throughthese roads that art firstrose to its
greatpopularityin the west.
To capturethe spiritof life of this time is to lose all
contact with our contemporarylife and to driftdreamily
into the ragged garmentsof a peasant fightingas well as
singinghis way to the greatsanctuaries.The absolute faith
the people had in the power of the churches,and in the
relics,explainsthe necessityof a styleof architecturethat
could accommodatethem.
SOURCES OF THE PILGRIMAGE CHURCHES.
In thisperiod monasticarchitecturewas the major liv-
ing and developingarchitecture.The Benedictinesclung at
firstto the ancient forms of building in many respects.
They had to solve the problemsof a great,self-sufficient
establishmenton one hand, and the problem of a shrine
for thousandsof pilgrimson the other.One of the major
needs was that of a fireproofstructure,for expensive
fires in the wooden roofs were constantly destroying
churches.The solution of this and other problemsled to
the stone vaults firstused successfullyin the pilgrimage
churches.Anotherimportantinnovationwas the develop-
mentof an apse withan ambulatoryand radiatingchapels
which allowed the pilgrimsto properly view the relics.
Crypts were also enlarged for this purpose. Vertical ele-
ments were developed into solutions such as the nine-
towered scheme and the crossing-towerdesign.
With the foundingof Cluny in 927 the church re-
ceived the new impetusthatled to the pilgrimageroad edi-
fices.The plan forCluny II in 1043 called fora procession
from the high altar around the monasterywith various
stations,includingone at the main door. At this point,the
leader went ahead of the procession into the church,and
this "Galilee" stationof the liturgy,then very influential,
led to the developmentof vestibules,and thisto the custom
of placing Resurrectioniconographyon the main doorway
of thechurchnave. Out of thisschemethe gorgeousidea of
the sculptural church portal was gradually developed.'
Cluny also shows progressin the elaborateplan of the east-
ern end chapels,which is due to the increasingnumberof
priestsamong the monks.
In the eleventhcentury,then,architectsbegan to be
able to design large churcheswith solid stone vaults. En-
gineeringand mathematicshad developed enough to help
themrealize theirwishes. Many of the leaders of architec-
tureare knownto have been monks,althoughmuch of the
work was done by laymen.
ArthurGardnerdiscussesthe major characteristics of
the pilgrimagechurches'. The plan was universallybased
on the basilica,modifiedintothe cruciformplan. The aisles
were carried around the apse, separated from the sanc-
tuaryby pillars,and chapels were opened fromthe ambu-
latorythusformed.Stone coveredthe structure, and several
means of vaultingwere evolved. First was the barrelvault,
a simple continuousarch like a tunnel.The big disadvan-
tage to this was the continuous outward thrustof the
stones, but pointing the arch helped, as well as some
strengthening with wall buttresses.This.was accompanied
by the use of cruciformor compounded piers to provide
directsupportor arches springingin all fourdirections. The
groinedvaults were the next development;formedby the
intersectionof two tunnels,the sharp ridges that formed
by the intersectionwere termedgroins.Finally therewere
the domed and ribbedvaults,which increasedthe flexibili-
tyof the structure,and led ultimatelyto the soaringspaces
of the Gothic. In articulatingthe buildings,recessionwas
the main means of givingvariety.The doorwayswere rich-
ly carved, and the cloisters and towers were frequently
decorated. The towersvaried in number,placed over the
crossingand westernends. In the pilgrimagechurchesthere
wereusuallyno clerestorywindowsexceptaround the apse.
It is extremelydifficultto arriveat the actual sources
for the beautifulchurchesof the pilgrimageroads, appar-
entlyspringingup out of nowhereintofull bloom through-
out France. Many differentauthors pinpointspecific an-
cient buildingsas sources for given churches,but it seems
more logical that theycame about as part of an inevitable
evolutionfromthe time of the earliestbasilica to the sec-
ond churchat Cluny. This church with its long nave and
staggeredabsides seems to stand midwaybetweenthe early
edificesand the earliestchurchof the pilgrimage,St. Mar-
tinat Tours.
THE GREAT CHURCHES OF THE
PILGRIMAGE ROADS
Much has been writtenabout the dating of the five
churchesI am going to discuss, but the order in which I
have placed themseems to be the most logical one.
St. Martinat Tours, withits modificationof the ster-
eotypedbasilican plan, is the earliestof the group. St. Foy
at Conques came next,and thenSt. Martialat Limoges,St.
Sernin at Toulouse, and finallySantiago da Compostela.
Conques and Limoges are more difficultto date than the
otherthreechurches.The pilgrimagechurcheshad a great
deal of influenceon the othermonasteries,and theirform
spread quickly,althoughmodest means often necessitated
the simplification
of the rlan.
St. Martinhas long been recognizedas one of the lost
keys to vital problemsin medieval architecture,and Carl
Hersey thoroughlydiscusses this problem in the Art Bul-
letin.3Historyshows that the church burned in 997, and
was immediately rebuiltand reconsecratedin 1014. In 1122
therewas anotherfire,and by 1175 it was being rebuiltin
the Gothic style.
The one remainingpart of the Romanesque building
is the Tour Charlemagne,and if this is dated correctlyit
sheds light on the rest of the Romanesque building. Its
most distinctivefeatureis the vaultedchamberof the sec-
ond stage with its domical vault, sustainedby heavy ribs
risingfrom engaged columns in the middle of each wall
and crossingto the centerof the vault.This is indicatedon
the exteriorwall of the tower by a double range of small
blindarcades. This towercan be dated about 1050 since the
ribbed domical vault appeared about this time. It stood
at firstat the extremityof the northtransept,and thus,ac-
cording Hersey's argument,provides evidence for dat-
to
ing the earlyconstruction.4
At its height,St. Martinhad 200 canons in its organi-
zation, and enjoyed tremendousprestige.Thus, it was im-
portant to contrive a satisfactorybuilding to house its
relics. The building was fireproofedby revaultingthe
originalplan of 1014. On the basis of analyzingthe ma-
sonry,the transeptpiers appear to be designedas early as
1030. In 1050 a barrelvault witha span of over 8 meters
replaced the formerwooden roof,utilizingfor the support
of its transversearches the wall shaftsthat rose fromthe
existingpiers,except near the crossing,whereheaviersup-
ports were constructed.5The tower was then regraftedto
the southernwall, and the masonryalso pointsto the fact
thatthis was carried out around 1050. At the same time,
the transept was partially rebuilt, and presumably the
choir and the apse.
The main importanceof the churchis in the achieve-
mentof the barrelvault which representsa synthesisof all
thathad been done before,and withinfifteenyears it was
to be adopted by all the pilgrimagechurches.The church
at Tours is probablyalso the firstto have the fiveradiating
chapels outsidethe line of the apse, and the cryptis on the
groundlevel due to the dangerof waterseepage fromthe
Loire. The facade was doubtlesslyveryplain, as it still is
at Conques.
The dimensionsof the churchwere: length,97 meters;
width,33.5; transeptlength,68 meters;width,8 meters;
nave width,ca. 9 meters;heightof nave vault,23 meters.6
As the church is completelydestroyednow, most of the
information has come fromexcavations.
Moving on to St. Foy at Conques, we already find a
more sophisticatedversionof the churchat Tours. In 773
the remainsof St. Foy were transferred to the old church
to see thatnone of the pilgrimagechurch-
(it is interesting
es were built on a freshsite, but ratherevolved gradually
from a series of older structures).St. Foy had been an
eleven year old virginwho was martyredOct. 6, 303.6 In
the late ninthcenturythe cult of the maidenbegan to grow
and her miraclesmultiplied.The churchbuilt to hold her
remainswas finishedby 980, and in the followingcentury
the abbey enjoyeda greatperiod of prosperity. As the cult
of the pilgrimagebuilt up, St. Foy became a stop on the
route to Santiago. Work on the Romanesque church was
done in the timeof theAbbot Odolric, 1030-1065. Quoting
from older chronicles,Aubert establishesthe actual date
of the beginningof constructionbetween 1041 and 1052.
The plan of the churchcalls forsingle side aisles, ex-
panding to tripleapsidioles on the transept,with a large
crossingtower. There are five radiatingchapels. A view
from the distance shows the church growingout of the
town in a mannersimilarto a mountainrisingout of the
plains. The westerntowersof the 19th centuryequal the
height of the crossing tower.7 The facade itself is sim-
ple and strong- there is littleornamentationexcept in
the recessed polychromedtympanumover the entrance.
The buildingis constructedof the yellowand red stone of
the region.
The interioris massivelycrude and overpowering. The
arches of the main aisles are simply rounded and are
echoed by similar arches of the second story, approxi-
mately half their height and divided by a central pillar.
Narrowerversionsof thesearches are seen in the apse. The
area of the altar remains austere and simple, concording
with the general atmosphereof the church. On the side
aisles, the barrelvaultswhichwere originallycovered with
stucco are now rough, contrasting with the smooth
stone of the supportingarches. Light comes from small
windows of the highertribunegalleryand fromthe apse.
A view looking up at the crossing dome shows a
strong,yet delicate,octagonal shape. The ribs of the dome
radiate out fromthe centerlike spokes of a wheel,and the
eight-sidedform is set in a square. The figuresin the
squinchesare charming,but simple,angels. Their faces are
realistic,withan animatedexpressionin theirstaringeyes.
The nave itselfwas constructedunder Etienne,abbot
from1065-1087. In all the decorationsof the nave capitals,
the figuresappear to be caught betweenthe weightof the
arch risingabove them,and the thrustof the pillar below.
On some, there are animals, and on others,figures.The
two birds of the fifthcolumn on the northside are sur-
prisinglyintricatein theirexact representation, while the
human figuresof the correspondingcolumn on the south
side are flat and lifeless.Owls stare out, ready to flyinto
the nave at any moment.Some of thisrealismdoes appear
in the human figures,but the main concern is with the
face, large hands,and feet.The feet,grasp firmlyonto the
edge of the pillar. The centralbody is flat and lifeless,al-
though the shoulderssuggest a hunchingaction as if in
an attemptto push offthe weightof the column.
The westerntympanumis the mostfamouspartof the
church, but as the sculpture is quite sophisticated,it is
doubtlesslater than the nave. This would correspondwith
the generalplan of constructionwhich generallystartedin
the east and progressedto the west. Porterdates it as late
as 1130, but Gardner dates earlier in the century,for it
was done under the rule of Bego III, abbot from 1107 to
1130.
The dimensionsof the churchare: exteriorlength,59
meters;interiorlength,56 meters;width of the transept,
6.80 meters;and of the side aisles, 4 meters;heightof the
crossingtower,26.40 meters.8
St. Martial at Limoges comes nextin the orderof de-
velopmentof the pilgrimagechurches,althoughmuch of
the work must have been going on simultaneouslywith
that at Conques, and also at Toulouse. The foundationof
the Romanesquechurchwas laid as earlyas 1012, although
the churchwas not dedicateduntilDec. 29, 1095.9 Accord-
ing to Conant much of the work was done afterthe Clu-
niac takeover in 1062. Limoges was longer than St. Foy,
witha nave extendingfornine bays, singleside aisles, and
fiveradiatingchapels. The interiorwas similarto Conques,
althougha bit simplerin its refinement of the arches and
othersmall details.
The only partof the originalchurchthatnow remains
is the crypt,with murals.Fage etched two simple capitals
from the porch. One is a plain, delicatelyfluted design,
and theotheris a slightlymore intricateleaf pattern,shoot-
ing up at the cornersof the capital, and lower in the cen-
ter.Above the leaves on all foursides are crudelydesigned
heads thatappear to be identical,and existflatlyand blank-
ly as a mere added design.
I would date the churchas being later than Conques
largelydue to the consecrationdate, and also to the fact
that the interiorplan does appear to be an improvement
of the earlier models and that is perfectedin Toulouse.
St. Serninat Toulouse is thegrandestof all the French
pilgrimagechurches.The firstchurch on the site was of
small proportions,builtbefore721, when it was destroyed
and rebuilt. Work began on the Romanesque church
around 1060. In 1083 St. Sernin was canonized and in-
stalled in the church,and on May 24, 1096, Pope Urbain
III consecratedthe choir. Not untilJuly19, 1119, was the
second altar,and probablythe nave, consecrated.10
It is the largestof the French pilgrimagechurches,
havingtwo side aisles,the innerone beingtwo storieshigh.
It is coveredwitha barrelvault,witharches separatingthe
bays. The side aisles are covered with groin vaults, sur-
mountedby tribunesand the roof is lain directlyon the
vaults.There is no directlightingon the nave.
The exteriorshows great progressfromConques. Its
main featureis the restoredsingle tower,risingabove the
crossingin diminishingpiers to a sophisticatedthrustinto
the air. The westernfacade is veryplain and unadorned.
The dimensionsof the church are: exterior length,
115 meters;transeptlength,64 meters;transeptwidth,8.60
meters; nave width also 8.60 meters; width of the side
aisles, 3.25 meters;heightof the central hall, 21 meters;
and theelevationof thecrossingdome, 37.25 meters.11
Elizabeth O'Reilly puts forwardthe theorythat the
originalarchitectfor Toulouse went to Santiago, and that
the monk, St. Raymond Gayrard, took over as architect
in the twelfthcentury.There is no doubt about the close
relationof the architecture,and historianshave disputed
theiractual foundationdates foryears.
The sculpture of Toulouse itselfcannot be exactly
dated. The sculptureof the nave is twelfthcenturybecause
of the date of its consecration,but the work of the ambu-
latoryis of an earlier date, (ca. 1096) and does show a
relationto Santiago in several obvious ways12.The bodies
are still very flat, and the only modellingis seen in the
slightly elongated face, and in the occasional jutting of an
elbow, knee, hand, or foot. The lines of the garments form
interesting geometric patterns, which often relate to the
pattern of the niche in which they stand.
The tympanum of the south portal, depicting the As-
cension, is dated ca. 1118, and shows a sense of monumen-
tality in that only five main figures are placed in a blank
background instead of the crowding of the figures at
Conques. The capitals of the portal show the figures acting
together in a very vital way. In the one of the annunciation
and visitation, the figures are much freer from their back-
ground, and there is none of the feeling of their being
caught between pressing weights as at Conques.
This brings us to the climax of the whole journey, San-
tiago da Compostela. Legend has it that in 813 strange
lights attracted a peasant to a decaying building, and on
summoning a bishop to the site, he decided that this was
the burying ground of the apostle, St. James. Thus, it be-
came the focal point for the growth of great spiritual belief.
The actual foundations of the church were several
centuries old. The building is placed on a moderate south-
western slope, so that the floor level of the nave is below
that of the sanctuary. An early church built on the site was
ded cated in 893. Santiago is also cruciform in plan, with
a massive design of nine towers, two at each of the three
facades, two at the junction of the nave and the transept,
and another over the crossing. It is constructed of the
brown granite of the area.
The building was undertaken by Don Diego Pelaez
who became bishop in 1070. Work was started in 1078 on
the eastern end of the church, and the apse was carried
back to join the earlier church. The transepts were under-
way by 1088 when Pelaez was fired, but were carried for-
ward again in 1095. Under Diego Gelmirez the nine apsi-
d;al chapels were completed by 1102, and the sanctuary by
1105. The remains of the old church were finally cleared
away in 1112. The Portico de la Gloria was resumed in
1168, and completed in 1211, when the church was for-
mally dedicated on April 3. This is the one part of the
cathedral that has the most outstanding sculpture.12
The proportions are nearly identical to those of
Toulouse, and with the exception of the single side aisles,
only the subtlest of differences are noticeable in the re-
finement of their interiors. Triforum galleries surround the
entire church across the western end, and the ends of the
transepts, thus enabling a procession to make an entire
circuit of the church. The aisle walls are higher than pre-
viously, and are carried around the chevet to the same
height as the aisles of the nave. They alternated windows
and arcading on the outer wall, a new modification of the
original plan.
The doors of the south transept are engraved with
the date 1116, and are very elaborately carved. None of
the sculpture appears to be contemporary with the earliest
construction of the church, but rather was executed in the
twelfth century. But in all views of the cathedral it ap-
pears evident that progression has been made from the
earliest works of Tours, and as the architecture took its
impetus from the pilgrimage churches of France, there is
no doubt that the sculpture did likewise.
A pilgrim of the twelfth century describes the impact
of the cathedral of Santiago in vivid terms: "In the whole
building one could not perceive of either crack or decay;
the walls are wonderfully built; the Church is vast, spa-
cious, well-lighted; noble in its massiveness, harmonious
in the proportions between width, length, and height. The
elevation is remarkable beyond words as it has galleries,
just like a royal palace. The pilgrim who ascends the gal-
leries, even when he is weary from his travel, upon dis-
covering from his vantage point the splendid beauty of the
Church, feels happy and light-hearted."13
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aubert,Marcel, L'Eglise de Conques Paris, 1939.
Aubert,Marcel,L'Eglise S. Serninde Toulouse,Paris,Laurens,1933.
Bodington,Oliver,Roman Churchesof France, Boston,Houghton-
Mifflin,1925.
Chevelier,M.C., Le Tombeau de S. Martin,Tours, 1880.
Conant, K. J., BenedictineContributionto Church Architecture,
1949.
Conant,K. J.,Early ArchitecturalHistoryof the Cathedralof San-
tiago da Compostela,Cambridge,1926.
Conant,K. J.,Carolingianand RoinanesqueArchitecture, Baltimore,
1959.
Evans, Joan, Art in Medieval France, New York, Oxford, 1948.
Fag6, Rene, La Cathedralde Limoges,Paris, n.d.
Gardner,Arthur,An Introductionto French ChurchArchitecture,
MacMillan, 1956.
Gardner,Arthur,MedievalSculpturein France,Cambridge,1931.
Hersey,Carl, " The Church of S. Martinat Tours," Art Bulletin,
vol. 25, March, 1943.
Mortet,V., Recueil de Textes,Paris, 1911.
O'Reilly,Elizabeth,How France Built her Cathedrals,Harper,1932.
Porter,A. K., Romanesque Sculpture of the PilgrimageRoads,
Boston, 1923.
Street,George, Some Account of Gothic Architecturein Spain,
New York, Dutton,1914.
Tyler,Royall,Spain, A Studyof her Life and her Arts,New York,
1909.
NOTES
1. Bodington,p.8. 8. Aubert,p. 21.
2. Gardner,Introduction. . 9. Fage
3. Hersey,p. 4. 10. Aubert,p. 7.
4. ibid, pp. 8-9. 11. ibid.
5. ibid, pp. 10-12. 12. Conant,Early Arch. Hist. pp.
21-33.
6. ibid, introduction
13. Mortet,p. 397.
7. Conant, CarolingianArch.
p. 98.