Professional Documents
Culture Documents
This Content Downloaded From 147.52.192.16 On Sat, 19 Dec 2020 14:56:44 UTC
This Content Downloaded From 147.52.192.16 On Sat, 19 Dec 2020 14:56:44 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/750446?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
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.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
The Warburg Institute is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes
By Richard Krautheimer
Since
beingthe Renaissance
determined it has
by "commodity, become
firmness customary
and delight" to consider architecture as
or, to use a less
Wottonian terminology, by function, construction, and design. To view
architectural problems from these angles and from them alone, has become
something like a fundamental tenet of architectural history. Yet the validity
of such a view appears rather doubtful where mediaeval architecture is
concerned.' Obviously there can be no doubt that problems of construction,
design and function, and of the integration of these elements, were of funda-
mental importance to mediaeval as well as to later architects. Yet it would
seem that these essentials of architecture as laid down by Sir Henry Wotton,
and before him by Leone Battista Alberti, were differently emphasized and
that in addition to them other elements played a vital part in the mediaeval
conception of architecture. As a matter of fact, no mediaeval source ever
stresses the design of an edifice or its construction, apart from the material
which has been used. On the other hand the practical or liturgical functions
are always taken into consideration; they lead on to questions of the religious
significance of an edifice and these two groups together seem to stand in the
centre of mediaeval architectural thought. Not once, it will be remembered,
does Suger refer to the revolutionary problems of vaulting and design in his
new building at St. Denis. Evidently the design of an edifice or for that matter
the construction were not within the realm of theoretical discussion. On the
other hand the religious implications of a building were uppermost in the
minds of its contemporaries. Time and again Suger discusses the dedications
of altars to certain Saints. Questions of the symbolical significance of the lay-
out or of the parts of a structure are prominent; questions of its dedication to
a particular Saint, and of the relation of its shape to a specific dedication or
to a specific religious-not necessarily liturgical-purpose. The 'content' of
architecture seems to have been among the more important problems of
mediaeval architectural theory; perhaps indeed it was its most important
problem. The total of these questions would form the subject of an icono-
graphy of architecture. Such an approach would merely return to an old
tradition which as recently as a century ago was still present in the minds of
archaeologists of art ;2 it is during the last fifty years only that this has ap-
This article is based on a brief paper readChristian Church, London, I708-22; J. Britton,
to the meeting of the College Art AssociationArchitectural Antiquities, London, 1807; J.
held in Chicago in January 1941. I want toKreuser, Der christliche Kirchenbau2, Regens-
thank my wife, Mrs. Trude Krautheimer-burg, I86o-6 I; Otte, Handbuch der kirchlichen
Hess for her continuous collaboration in pre-
Kunstarchdologie des deutschen Mittelalters5, Leip-
paring and writing this essay. zig, 1883-85. A very few ecclesiastical
1 Throughout this paper the term "Middle archaeologists have continued this century-old
Ages" will be used so as to cover the wholetradition to the present day; the most
period from the 4th to the end of the 12th prominent among them are: J. Sauer,
century. Symbolik des Kirchengebdudes, Freiburg, I924
2 J. Ciampini, Vetera Monimenta ..., Rome, and F. J. Doelger, Antike und Christentum,
1690-99; J. Bingham, The Antiquities of the Miinster, 1929 ff.
I
i??i,, , iii, i : i .:.. iiiiiiilfii ii ii i-i iiiiii :iii iiii'i8:i- ii;'':?: - i-:-';i--"'; :-:'::i-i`i;-:-:- ----:--------- --'-::-
:: i !:illi~ii~i~!
! . i111' s.\
L::-iiii'iii:- iili:i
ii
e-St. Michael, Fulda (pp. 3, 7) f-Holy Sepulchre, Cambridge (From Britton, Arch. Antiq
,'-' ;
i:" -`-
',,'
ol::::iii::: '::
l: \\ !
I"
B
C
a-Anastasis,
b-Anastasis, Jerusalem. 1725 (After c-
Horn, Cod. Vat. lat. 9233, (p. 5)
iiiiiiiii
R iii~ iisii
'@I!
a-Sto. b-Sto.
Stefan
(P
d-
c-Neuvy-St
1 The Commemoratorium de Casis Dei, Tobler- cit., p. 301 ff., for instance, p. 306: "In
Molinier, op. cit., p. 305, gives the distance inferiore
at ... parte urbis, ubi templum ...";
p. 309: "In hac (sc. valle Josaphat) turris est
Jerusalem as 28 dexteri =41.58 m. In reality
the measurement is 4In m.; the distanceregis
at Josaphat ... cuius ad dexteram de rupe
Bologna measures 42 m. . . excisa ... domus."
2 Bedae Liber de locis sanctis, I-V, Geyer, op.
i :::p :::::::.
iiiiiidiiliiiiiiiiiiiil
iiiiiii-iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
s on-~ii:::::::::-i-?::::-::::::
"- -i~iii:~
-i~ii ii ~ii
n
w
u
"" : :
i~i:i i :I-
~i~i i ?s~
I
- -~- :,ii
~~Tk --:i _
~---
?~i
1" r
""":
g
d~ ~;
::::
:s -~--~ , iiil
CI~
-:'~::::~~~::"I':
-~
,::I ili~~iiii ~
?~
~iii;:ii~i~i i-::i:~: ,
r k ?~
i ii,, i~W
I _~
~W
-
~iljT
~ ~"" -~ii-_
r-
~
~'"'~l~~'~.~;:a,~.~~......., ; . ___~
"
d--Baptistery, Djemila, Ambulatory (p. 24) e-Baptistery, Djemila (p. 24) f--Baptistery, Nocera (From J. C. R. de Sai
toresque, 1781)
1 On plans of Roman Thermae what some- plicated type, are frequent among the Roman
times looks like such an outer corridor, ismonuments drawn in the I6th century, for
really nothing but a furnace passage. instance, by Bramantino, Le Rovine di Roma
2 H. Koethe, "Zum Mausoleum der west- S. . , ed. Mongeri, Turin 1879, or by G. B.
r6mischen Dynastie," Rimische Mitteilungen, Montano, Le Cinque Libri di Architettura, Rome
46, 1931, p. 9 ff.; idem, "Das Konstantins- 1621. Yet these drawings seem to be fre-
mausoleum und verwandte Denkmailer," quently "variations on Roman themes"
Jahrbuch des Archdologischen Instituts, 48, 1934, rather than actual surveys. Thus it seems in-
p. I85 ff. advisable to depend on them too much.
3 L. Canina, Gli edifizi di Roma ... antica e r B. de Montfaucon, L' Antiquiti Expliqude,
sua Campagna, Rome, 1848-56, VI, 2, pl. V, I, Paris, 1719, pls. I8, Io8, III, II8. The
CXXIII; the monument which now goes by history and the significance of these subter-
the name of Sta. Maria della Tosse, seems to ranean tomb corridors in pre-Roman and
have been erected in the middle of the 4th Roman times have been discussed by G.
century. Welter, "Zwei vorr6mische Grabbauten in
4 Canina, op. cit., VI, I, pl. LXXXII. Nordafrika," Riimische Mitteilungen, 42, 1927,
Similar patterns, sometimes of a more com- p. 84 ff.
1 Leo Magnus, Epist. xvi, cap. 3, 3, Migne, 6 Kirsch, op. cit., p. 229.
Pat. Lat., LIV, c. 698 (719). 7Junyent, op. cit., Atti del Illo Congresso,
2 Anselm of Canterbury, De azymo et fer-p. 283 ff-
mentato, cap. IV, Migne, Pat. Lat., CLVIII, 8 Prudentius, Peristephanion, VIII, v. I ff.,
c. 544 (136). Migne, Pat. Lat., LX, c. 430 ff.
3 Leo Magnus, ibid., c. 696. 9 Gerola, op. cit., passim.
40. Marucchi, "La basilica papale del 10 F. W. Unger, "Uber die christlichen
Cimiterio di S. Priscilla," Nuovo Bull. di Arch. Rund- und Octogon-Bauten," Bonner Jahr-
Crist., XIV, 1908, p. 5 ff., especially p. 48 ff. biicher 41, 1866, p. 52, n. 2. As late as the 9th
5 G. P. Kirsch, Le Catacombe Romane, Rome,century, the Baptistery of Santa Severina was
1933, P-. 93 ff. crowded with tombs; see above, p. 24, n. 9.