RhinejourneymoduleC

Module C. Some Sacred Spaces Along the Rhine: From Roman to Romanesque to New Style (“Gothic”)

On our cruise we’re going to be seeing some spectacular examples of sacred architecture such as the Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Strasbourg (the sixth-tallest church in the world and still the world’s highest extant structure built entirely in the Middle Ages).

We’ll visit the Imperial Cathedral at Speyer (also dedicated to Our Lady, Notre Dame = Mary, the Mother of Christ, and similar cathedrals in Worms and Mainz. In Mainz we hope to attend a high mass with choirs and organ at 10 am on Sunday. That evening, in nearby Rüdesheim, we hope to hear the nuns sing their evening prayers, the Vespers or the Vigils, at their medieval cloister founded by the famous St. Hildegard of Bingen.

And we’ll admire the magnificent Cologne Cathedral (dedicated to Mary and to St. Peter), possibly the most spectacular and remarkable house of worship north of St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.

(Important definition: a cathedral is the principle church of a bishop’s or archbishop’s diocese containing the episcopal throne or seat. The word is derived from cathedra, Latin for seat or chair. In German a cathedral is called a Dom, short for domus dei, house of God. Cathedrals are typically the grandest churches of all.)

We began our first module with the Romans on the Rhine, so let’s begin again with them. In this module we want to examine how the basic Roman basilica evolved into Romanesque – “Roman-like” – sacred architecture such as that we’ll see in Speyer, Worms, Rüdesheim, and Mainz.

The basilica, a Greek word meaning house of the king, referred in ancient Greece and Rome to a tribunal or kind of courthouse, where justice and other secular business was administered on behalf of the king (king = βασιλέως – basiléos). This plan shows the typical structure of a basilica with a central hall and side aisles:

http://www.mmdtkw.org/AU0554BasilicaPlan2.JPG

There was no tradition of Christian church architecture to begin with. The first Christians simply met in homes. They were familiar with the synagogue and the temple, but did not adopt or adapt them as meeting houses. The Emperor Constantine, the first Roman/Byzantine Emperor to embrace Christianity, is said to have adopted and fostered the use of the basilica style for the erection of the very first Christian churches. It just made sense to adopt this traditional, useful form of building:

http://wwolfram.com/theology/images/visual_art.png

Sliced open and seen from the front, the side aisles are obvious, as in this drawing of the original (old) St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome:

http://www.rosaryworkshop.com/BASILICA-FirstSTPeters-Rome.gif

After basilicas evolved into “Romanesque” churches, they often added a cross in the floor plan, symbolic, of course, of the crucifixion of Jesus. The main hall retained from the original basilica is called a nave (related to the words navy, navigate...etc., possibly because the nave resembles an upside-down ship; in German it is called das Schiff), and a kind of smaller perpendicular nave called a transept formed the crossing of the nave. (Some churches had two crossings, just as some Christian crosses have something resembling a footrest near the bottom.)

http://www.norwich-churches.org/glossary/Images/churh-plan.gif

A tower is often found over the crossing of the nave, but there are also often towers at the corners of the west (portal) side. Radiating chapels make up the apse, on the east, which on a floor plan also look a bit like petals on a flower.

Cathedrals are typically oriented east to west for the following symbolic reason: mortals enter from the west side, the side of the setting sun, signifying that our light is going away, but the immortal light of Christ, that of the rising sun, enters from the east, through the windows of the apse, through the little chapels called apsidiols. There is no mortal entrance on the east; only the Light of Christ and the immortal Spirit enter there.

https://classconnection.s3.amazonaws.com/178/flashcards/924178/png/sandecomp1322770671584.png

Romanesque church construction is based on the arch invented by the Romans and used by them for everything from aqueducts to the Colosseum:

http://www.makingthemodernworld.org.uk/learning_modules/maths/02.TU.03/img/IM.1470_zl.jpg

http://f.tqn.com/y/goitaly/1/S/q/4/-/-/roman-colosseum-arches.jpg

When such an arch is repeated or lengthened, it yields a barrel vault. Two barrel vaults at right angles yield a groin vault. Since the weight of the arch or vault pushes to the sides, a heavy buttress is required to prevent the arch or vault from collapsing outward:

https://xaradesign3.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/roman-arch.jpg

When a church is constructed from Roman arches, the heavy, thick walls required for buttressing mean that any windows must by necessity be quite small:

http://36.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m21f0rQuBC1qbljvvo1_500.jpg

http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/fnart/arch/romanesque/souillac13.jpg

http://www.cathedralquest.com/images/romanesque1.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/St_Michaels_Church_Hildesheim.jpg

Not that the churches themselves remained small. Speyer Cathedral, one of our important stops, is grand indeed:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/Speyer---Cathedral---South-View---(Gentry).jpg

A side aisle in Speyer:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/Speyer_Dom_Seitenschiff.jpg

From the air:

http://www.traumflieger.de/forum/files/dom_zu_speyer.jpg

West entrance showing small windows and rounded arches, lots of wall space:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Speyer_Dom_Front_pano.jpg

The space over the entrance is known as the tympanum. In Romanesque it’s still relatively simple:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/SpeyererDom_WestPortal_DomPatrone.JPG

Classical “Corinthian” column capitals adorned with angelic musicians:

http://static.zoonar.de/img/www_repository3/81/2e/af/10_c9d7b6fc027a4fda6537a9607c4e628f.jpg

Speyer is one of the few places between Strasbourg and Cologne where the river banks were high enough to put the cathedral this close to the Rhine:

http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/21141522.jpg

On this near-by model of the church you can see the features very well:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dd/Modell_Dom_zu_Speyer.jpg

Looking eastward along the nave toward the apse:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Speyer_Dom_BW_3.JPG

Relatively small, relatively simple rose window with Christ at the center:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/Speyer_Dom_BW_1_(edit).jpg

Cathedrals have subterranean crypts typically used for burials, etc. My family and I escaped into this crypt at Speyer one day in 1998 when the outside temperature broke all records for Germany at over 40̊ Celsius (104̊ Fahrenheit), and our rental car had no air-conditioning:

http://www.djott.de/wp-content/uploads/MG_0383.jpg

Despite the fact that Romanesque churches have small windows, as we have seen, and they tend to have subdued light inside, it turns out this is no accident; it is perfect, in some ways, for a house of worship, a peaceful sanctuary, a place of mysterious unification of the soul with God.

If we are able to attend as planned a service in St. Hildegard’s Abbey in Rüdesheim, for example, which is a cloister in Romanesque style, we will have the rare opportunity to hear these devoted women sing in plainsong (often called Gregorian Chant) some of their daily prayers, such as the Vespers at 5:30 pm or the Komplet & Vigils at 7:20 pm.

We will hear, I anticipate, based on some other cloisters I’ve been privileged to visit, that as the worshipers sing, their song creates echos resounding down out of the vaulted ceiling, as though angelic choirs were joining them in a form of celestial antiphony. The acoustics of the Romanesque churches remain unexcelled for worship, in my ears at least. Here’s St. Hildegard Abbey outside and inside (notice that St. Hildegard does not have vaulted ceilings, however, but rather the older basilica-style wooden roof):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/Abtei_St._Hildegard,_R%C3%BCdesheim,_Southwest_view_20140922_1.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/Abtei_St._Hildegard,_R%C3%BCdesheim,_Nave_and_Sanctuary_b_20140922_1.jpg

With their round Roman arches and vaults, Speyer and similar huge Romanesque cathedrals like Mainz and Worms pushed the limits of engineering. The weight of the stones grew so massive and the need for heavy buttressing so great that eventually a brand new way of building needed to be discovered to allow churches to be even higher, and, perhaps more importantly, with larger windows to let in more light.

This revolutionary and brilliant solution came in the form of the so-called New Style, later disparagingly called “Gothic” by people of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment. (These were the same people who coined the equally disparaging term “dark ages” or the only slightly less negative “middle ages” to describe the era between the ancient Greeks and Romans and the Renaissance, that “rebirth” of the classical ancient world. Goths were viewed by the classical world as frightening barbarians who burst into the Roman Empire, bringing an end to the Greco-Roman golden age, hence the cathedrals erected by the descendants of these “Goths” were decried as “Gothic”.)

Many New Style cathedrals in Europe began life as Romanesque churches which, when they happened to burn down, or were deemed too small, as in the case of Cologne, with its crowds of pilgrims wishing to see the venerated bones of the Three Wise Men believed buried there, were rebuilt in the new “Gothic” style.

Strasbourg cathedral is one of those churches which actually started out Romanesque. There are said to be a number of Romanesque features still visible (I’m looking forward to finding them, having not necessarily specifically looked for them, unfortunately, on a previous visit).

The site on which Strasbourg Cathedral stands was originally occupied by a Roman temple, then a Romanesque church built in 1015 and later destroyed by fire.

The present cathedral was completed in 1284, but the north spire was not finished until 1439. The south spire was never completed, a common fate of many Gothic churches, which went out of style before all the spires could be finished, such as Notre-Dame in Paris, which lacks both finished spires (a fact hotly contested by some Parisians today who claim it was never intended to have taller spires. Here’s a picture of Notre Dame in Paris):

http://1p6ep31f32pvjrml246jyq31.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/The-religious-hot-spot-of-Paris-La-Notre-Dame-4.jpg

Here’s Strasbourg:

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~margaretsimpson/images/Day6.Strasbourg%20Cathedral1.JPG

Of course the floor plan of  Strasbourg cathedral still shows the nave and the transept forming a cross, as in typical Romanesque churches:

http://www.planetware.com/i/map/F/strasbourg-cathedral-map.jpg

One big difference between Romanesque and the New Style is that in New Style a pointed arch is used, rather than a rounded arch. Here’s a Gothic groin vault compared to a round Romanesque (Domical) vault:

http://media.lanecc.edu/users/plunkettm/Moodle/Art-202/Images/Gothic-Vaults.gif

One would not think that this difference would matter much, but notice that the pointed nature of these New Style arches thrusts the weight of the stone more directly downward into the ground and less to the side, requiring significantly less buttressing.

Also, these New Style vaults are ribbed vaults, that is, the narrow ribs hold all the weight allowing the space around the ribs to be filled in by lighter materials.

All the buttressing these lighter pointed vaults do require is provided from the sides by buttresses which are said to “fly” over the side aisle roofs and transfer the push from the arches laterally onto great buttressing pillars erected outside the cathedral, rather than having to have great thick walls to push back against the force. So they’re called flying buttresses, and the other nice thing about them is that they push between the windows and do not interfere with the light streaming into the large windows:

http://architecturaldictionary.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Buttress_01.jpg

All these revolutionary innovations allowed the New Style architects to create thin, breath-takingly tall walls and to open up vast windows which could be filled with sacred images in colored glass. The best example of nearly all-glass walls is probably the beautiful little jewel-box called Sainte Chapelle in Paris:

http://hipparis.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/stechappelle.jpg

But whereas Sainte Chapelle’s glass is mostly decorative, in the vast majority of cathedrals the glass tells the stories of the Bible (except where it has been destroyed by bombing and replaced by decorative glass; we have no craftsmen nowadays capable of recreating the original windows, nor could we afford them).

As a general rule, the northern windows (on the “dark” side of the building), are devoted to the Old Testament, that time before the coming of Christ. The sunny south-facing windows, on the other hand, tell the story of the coming of Christ, the Light of the World. The great rose window over the western entrance is largely decorative, as these examples from Chartres Cathedral, probably the best surviving example of fine stained glass, show. Notice the annunciation, the nativity, the Three Wise Men, etc:

http://www.paradoxplace.com/Photo%20Pages/France/Chartres/West_Windows/Incarnation_Images/800/IncarnationA-Sept07-D7239sA.jpg

Here’s the great rose window of Chartres:

http://www.chartrescathedral.net/images/rose%20window.jpg

A fish-eye lens can only begin to capture the remarkable achievement of Gothic architecture. This happens to be St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City:

http://prometheus.med.utah.edu/~bwjones/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/St-Patricks-Cathedral.jpg

Back in Strasbourg, seen from outside the cathedral, the effect is no less stunning. Here’s Strasbourg’s rose window with its fine pink stone tracery:

http://djtravel.homestead.com/files/strasbourg_cathedral_08.jpg

The great south windows showing the flying buttresses:

http://djtravel.homestead.com/files/strasbourg_cathedral_07.jpg

An aerial view is the only way to appreciate all the features, the tower over the crossing of the nave, the two west towers, and the massive size:

http://trialx.com/curetalk/wp-content/blogs.dir/7/files/2011/05/cities/Strasbourg-2.jpg

Now let’s discuss Cologne. The place in which the cathedral is situated today was the place where the first Christians assembled in Cologne since late Roman times. Several churches –  each one in turn larger than its predecessors – were built on this site near the city walls.

The first of these churches of which we have some knowledge was the Carolingian cathedral (Carolingian refers to the great Frankish Emperor Charlemagne, Latin: Carolus Magnus) finished around 800. It had a transept on each end of the nave. The altar to the east was consecrated to the Virgin Mary and the western altar was consecrated to St. Peter. Under archbishop Bruno a northern and a southern side aisle were added to the nave. This cathedral stood until the 13th century and underwent only small changes during this time.

In Cologne, as we have mentioned, it is believed the sacred bones of the Three Wise Men, the sacred Three Kings – Kaspar, Balthasar, and Melchior –  are preserved, hence it was a major destination for pilgrims all during the Middle Ages. At some point, the older church simply could not contain the throngs of pilgrims coming to see the sacred relics, hence it was decided to build a new, bigger cathedral.

When construction was to begin in the New Style in 1248, parts of the old church were torn down to get them out of the way. Someone thought it would be a good idea to burn a certain portion of the church to speed up demolition, but the whole church caught on fire (the old churches had wooden roofs).

The new cathedral got only one story high by 1473, (with a huge crane left standing on the north tower for 400 years) when the New Style fell out of favor and people started calling it Gothic. A makeshift roof was placed over the church.

Building was resumed during the period called Gothic Revival in 1842 when nationalistic fervor caused a gigantic outpouring of funds from all over Germany (and after the original plans were discovered). (More about this in a later module.)

Cologne cathedral was completed in 1880, 632 years after its commencement. I suppose it could be called Neo-Gothic or Gothic Revival, though those terms usually refer to newer buildings completely constructed in the old “New Style.” Here’s how we will see it from the river:

http://trinitycountrystudy.weebly.com/uploads/2/7/8/7/27874649/3639438_orig.jpg

Obviously it has all the towers finished.  Here’s an evening view:

http://media-1.web.britannica.com/eb-media/25/99625-004-BDC242E4.jpg

A night view:

http://www.lovethesepics.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Cologne-Cathedral-at-night-in-K%C3%B6ln-Germany-8th-place-Wikimedia-Commons-POTY.jpg

Of course the plan is cruciform:

http://www.planetware.com/i/map/D/cologne-cathedral-map.jpg

Some interior views:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/be/Cologne_Cathedral_(6654448109).jpg

http://www.daily-hdr.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Cross-on-the-Eastern-Side-of-the-Cologne-Cathedral.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8147/7276382634_9876210384.jpg

http://koelner-dom.de/typo3temp/pics/abfc20ca7c.jpg

The west façade:

http://raredelights.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Cologne-Cathedral-4.jpg

The eastern apse:

http://classconnection.s3.amazonaws.com/736/flashcards/524736/jpg/cologne_cathedral1330310922776.jpg

Notice that one of the bells, named Peter, weighs 24 metric tons:

http://www.anicursor.com/dom/dom_glocke.jpg

Aerial views show the towers which are over 157 meters tall, more than 510 feet:

http://en.academic.ru/pictures/enwiki/75/K%C3%B6lner_Dom004_(Flight_over_Cologne).jpg

It’s a miracle that the cathedral, though damaged, withstood the saturation bombing of World War Two:

https://stevehickey.wordpress.com/files/2009/07/cologne-cathedral-wwii.jpg

So much for a brief introduction to sacred architecture along the Rhine beginning with the Romans and ending with late Neo-Gothic or the Gothic Revival. If we were in Southern Germany and Austria, we would want to talk about Baroque and Rococo church architecture, later forms identified with the Counter-Reformation, which are largely missing from the Rhine, such as this, one of my favorites, the little Rococo Wieskirche in a meadow in Bavaria (with cows):

http://www.monumente-online.de/__generated/09/06/images/by_steingaden_wieskirche_innen_florian_monheim_krefeld_3_452x.jpg

http://s2.germany.travel/media/content/staedte___kultur_1/unesco_welterben_2013/wallfahrtskirche_diewies_pfaffenwinkel_1/Wieskirche_Konzerte_RET.jpg

http://www.via-claudia-camping.de/up/bilder/kuhparade_vor_der_wieskirche_pressebild.jpg

Or how about this Baroque beauty, the Abbey of Melk, on the Danube, not far outside Vienna:

http://trainingindevotion.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/melk-abbey-church.jpg

http://www.private-city-hotels.com/uploads/tx_pchhotels/240_PCH_POI-aeusflugsziel_Wien_Stift-Melk_2.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9b/Ceiling_painting_of_the_Marble_Hall_-_Melk_Abbey_-_Austria.jpg

Even the library at Melk is stunning:

http://travelioo.com/img/Melk-Abbey-Photo3.jpg

We cannot end this module, however, without looking ahead to Amsterdam. I have not yet mentioned the churches of Amsterdam, in part because I don’t know them very well, and in part because they are in some ways quite different from the churches on the Rhine, though they have many similarities as well. Here’s a brief overview:

The Nieuwe Kerk (new church), the most important church in Amsterdam, was commenced in 1408 after the Oude Kerk (old church) was deemed too small. Nieuwe Kerk is no longer used as a church (Nor is Oude Kerk.)

Nieuwe Kerk has a Gothic flavor, much of which was added after the church burned nearly to the ground in 1645. More Neo-Gothic was added during a major renovation from 1892-1914. Another renovation from 1959-1980 proved so costly that the Dutch Reformed Church was forced to turn Nieuwe Kerk over to a non-profit foundation:

http://europaenfotos.com/amsterdam/nieuwe-kerk-8698.jpg

The original stained glass window over the (now closed) western portal had to be bricked up when the organ was installed:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/Nkerk2.jpg

Here’s a view of that organ:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/53/Amsterdam_nieuwe_kerk_interieur.jpg

There’s a great sundial on the south end of the transept:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/14/Sundial_on_church.jpg/640px-Sundial_on_church.jpg

It’s above the present main entrance to the church:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Amsterdamnieuwekerk.jpg

Dutch churches were almost all stripped of their decorations during the Reformation, as the more radical Protestant reformers – known as iconoclasts (image destroyers) – believed “graven images” of any kind to be blasphemous. Stained glass was considered a mass of graven images as well, so the present stained glass windows depict innocent things like rulers receiving tribute from their devoted followers:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/53/P1020916Nieuwe_Kerk_Amsterdam.JPG/640px-P1020916Nieuwe_Kerk_Amsterdam.JPG

Beautiful pulpits were still ok:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/P1020914Preekstoel.JPG/640px-P1020914Preekstoel.JPG

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ac/P1020913Detail_Preekstoel.JPG/640px-P1020913Detail_Preekstoel.JPG

Also ok was this beautiful gate to the choir of the church (the choir is that place in the nave just west of the altar. Singers sat facing each other on either side of the nave.):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/59/P1020907Nieuwe_Kerk_Amsterdam.JPG/1024px-P1020907Nieuwe_Kerk_Amsterdam.JPG

The overall effect of these Dutch churches is of plain, white, simple walls with just a small amount of tasteful decor:

https://learningeuropeanandchinesesinging.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/nieuwe-kerk-amsterdam.jpg

http://thewanderingscot.com/photos/2010%20Baikonur-Frankfurt/EU/midis/IMG_3006.JPG

http://tettero.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/CF036245-1.jpg

Now a note on the Oude Kerk, an unusual church indeed: It was originally a wooden church from about 1213. And even though the ground under it was swampy (and had been used as a cemetery), in 1306 a stone church was somehow built on the site. It became a kind of permanent work in progress, as side aisles, apse, and other features were added piecemeal to the original simple church over the centuries:

http://www.planetware.com/i/map/NL/oude-kerk-in-amsterdam-st-nicolaas-map.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/Amsterdam_oude_kerk2.jpg

http://theplectraconspiracydotcom.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/amsterdam-the-oude-kerk-old-church.jpg

http://www.refdag.nl/polopoly_fs/anp_22664258_1_761453!image/712452370.jpg

The floor consists entirely of gravestones from the cemetery. Local citizens continued to be buried on the site within the confines of the church until 1865. There are 2500 graves in the Oude Kerk, under which are said to be buried 10,000 Amsterdam citizens, including the famous artist Johannes Vermeer:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Amsterdam_-_Oude_Kerk_-_View_of_the_nave.JPG

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/04/Oude_Kerk_(Amsterdam)_-_a_church_with_a_wodden_roof.jpg

The roof of the Oude Kerk is the largest medieval wooden vault in Europe. The planking from Estonia dates to 1390 and gives the church some of the best acoustics in Europe. It has four organs, including the Vater-Müller organ, one of the finest (sounding and looking) in Europe:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/Orgel_Oude_Kerk.jpg/1024px-Orgel_Oude_Kerk.jpg

Rembrandt was a frequent visitor to the Oude Kerk and his children were all christened here. It is the only building in Amsterdam that remains in its original state since Rembrandt walked its halls. In the Holy Sepulchre is a small Rembrandt exhibition, a shrine to his wife Saskia van Uylenburgh who was buried here in 1642. Each year on 9 March (8 March in leap years), at 8:39 am, the early morning sun briefly illuminates her tomb.

Like the Nieuwe Kerk, the Oude Kerk is no longer a functioning church. In addition, the Oude Kerk is located in what has become Amsterdam’s red-light district, where prostitutes display themselves for sale in what are essentially show-room windows:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/eb/Old_Church_-_Old_Profession.jpg/1024px-Old_Church_-_Old_Profession.jpg

We have not discussed synagogues in much detail (though in Speyer there is a wonderful original mikveh – a ritualistic washing pool – remaining from the old synagogue there, which I describe in more detail in the next module). This is in part because the Nazis destroyed most of them in Germany. (Some, of course, like the magnificent New Synagogue in the Oranienstrasse in Berlin, have been rebuilt since World War Two.):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Berlin_Neue_Synagoge_2005.jpg

http://www.landmarktours.eu/userfiles/image/cimg_1240.jpg

There are quite a number of surviving synagogues in Amsterdam; in fact, the Jewish Historical Museum was created from four adjoining Ashkenazi synagogues (as the community grew they kept building new ones nearby), combining them with the Great Synagogue (built in 1671). The museum presents the history of Jewish life in the Netherlands, but is also an important Jewish cultural center presenting contemporary art exhibitions and concerts.

The Great Synagogue was the largest synagogue of its time and one of the biggest buildings of Amsterdam. A model of the Temple of Salomon in Jerusalem is said to have inspired the architects:

http://www.jhm.nl/beeld/cultuurgeschiedenis/gebouw/_300/gs-103n030.jpg

In Amsterdam the most famous synagogue is the Portuguese Synagogue, which also survived the Nazis. It is also known as the Esnoga or Snoge, Ladino words for synagogue. (Ladino is a Romance language derived from Old Spanish, incorporating elements from all the old Romance languages of the Iberian Peninsula, plus Hebrew, Aramaic, and incorporating in some places Ottoman Turkish, Arabic, Greek, Bulgarian, and Serbo-Croatian vocabulary.)

This is a Sephardic synagogue completed in 1675. The Amsterdam Sephardic community was one of the largest and richest Jewish communities in Europe during the Dutch Golden Age, and their very large synagogue reflected this. (The Sephardim are the Ladino-speaking Jews of Spain. Sepharad means Spain in Hebrew. They are in contrast to the Ashkenazi Jews, also known as Ashkenazim, literally “The Jews of Germany”. The traditional language of Ashkenazi Jews consisted of various dialects of Yiddish – cf. German: Jüdisch, Jewish. The Great Synagogue was Ashkenazi.)

While Columbus was “sailing the ocean blue,” the Jews were expelled en masse from Spain in 1492 by the Alhambra decree or Edict of Expulsion under Ferdinand and Isabella. Even those who fled to Portugal were forced to convert to Catholicism in 1496, and Jews who did not convert were expelled even from Portugal in 1497. For hundreds of years, the Inquisition continued to investigate the converts and their descendants in Spain and Portugal on suspicions that in secret they still practiced Judaism (which some of them did).

Some of those who wished to enjoy freedom of religion found refuge in Amsterdam. During a substantial migration that took place in the 17th century, these Jewish refugees from the Iberian peninsula called themselves Portuguese Jews, to avoid being identified with Spain, which happened to be at war with the Dutch Republic at the time.

The inscription above the entrance is from Psalm 5:8: “In the abundance of Thy loving kindness will I come into Thy house”. The sign also contains “1672", the year the building was intended to be completed – actually it took three years longer – and “Aboab”, the name of the chief rabbi who initiated the construction project:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f9/BlaDSCF7310.jpg/640px-BlaDSCF7310.jpg

Side view:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/26/Synagogo1.jpg

The building is free-standing and rests on wooden poles; it is said that the foundation vaults can be viewed by boat from the canal water underneath the synagogue.

The interior of the synagogue is a single, very high rectangular space retaining its original wooden benches. The floor is covered with fine sand, in the old Dutch tradition, to absorb dust, moisture and dirt from shoes and to muffle the noise. Only five synagogues in the world have a sand floor, and this is the only one with such a floor surviving outside the Caribbean region. Interior showing sandy floor:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/BlaDSCF7296Portuguese_Synagogue.jpg/1024px-BlaDSCF7296Portuguese_Synagogue.jpg

In conclusion, and thinking back now for a moment to the cathedrals on the Rhine, I’d like to wax philosophical for a moment.

As we visit these remarkable houses of worship along the Rhine, I hope we can better understand the magic, in fact the MIRACLE, of architecture’s power to draw our souls upward towards God. Imagine an illiterate person stepping out of the polluted streets of the middle ages (sewers disappeared with the Romans) into one of these magnificent structures. How could that person not feel that s/he had entered into the House of God, able to read the stories of salvation in the ultimate picture book of stained glass?

How could his or her soul not be drawn upward by the beautiful celestial echos of the singing (and later the organ), the otherworldly decor and the high vaulting? How could the miracle of making heavy stones appear to become weightless – especially in Gothic architecture – filled with colorful light and seeming to ascend to heaven, how could that not function to draw our light-filled souls up and away after them, up out of this heavy, burdensome earthly existence to a more glorious heavenly home?

And I hope we’ll appreciate the sheer dedication of countless faithful Christians who toiled and sacrificed so much over so many hundreds of years to help erect such buildings. How could anyone today call their faith into question? And how can we forget the faithful Jews who suffered in all these places so much persecution and abuse over so many centuries for their religion’s sake, yet managed to construct such wonderful houses of worship as they did?

Before we leave this module, since we began by discussing Romanesque, I’m tempted to make one more brief digression, in the form of a kind of footnote to Romanesque style, and talk about how the Romanesque style made its way to England, where it’s called the Norman style – the Tower of London is the earliest and best example of non-church Norman architecture – because this also gives us the opportunity to briefly mention the Normans, who they were, where they came from, and about the claims to the English crown of William the Conqueror who defeated King Harold in the Battle of Hastings in 1066. Bear with me a few moments more. Here’s the Tower of London:

http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/Thief-Steals-the-Keys-to-the-Tower-of-London-on-Guy-Fawkes-Night-2.jpg

Those very typical Norman “crenelations” on top of the tower’s walls (the word crenelation shares its origins with the common English word cranny, similarly meaning “a small opening, as in a wall or rock face; a crevice”) were used for protecting shooters on the tower from the volleys of attackers. They are very typical of the Norman style, that Romanesque style exported to Britain.

Church examples of Norman architecture in England include Norwich cathedral with its rounded Romanesque arches (the spire is obviously newer):

http://www.mma-online.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/dsc_3273-edit1.jpg

So who were these Normans? Their name is a version of Northmen, or Norsemen. They were Vikings, probably from Norway, meaning the north way, who had been allowed in 911 by the French Carolingian ruler Charles the Simple to settle in Normandy along the coast of France under their leader Rollo.

In exchange for the land, the Norsemen under Rollo were expected to provide protection along the coast against further Viking invaders. They eventually intermarried with the local population and used the territory granted them as a base to extend the frontiers of their duchy westward.

The Encyclopedia Britannica colorfully writes of them: Despite their eventual conversion to Christianity, their adoption of the French language, and their abandonment of sea roving for Frankish cavalry warfare in the decades following their settlement in Normandy, the Normans retained many of the traits of their piratical Viking ancestors. They displayed an extreme restlessness and recklessness, a love of fighting accompanied by almost foolhardy courage, and a craftiness and cunning that went hand in hand with outrageous treachery. In their expansion into other parts of Europe, the Normans compiled a record of astonishingly daring exploits in which often a mere handful of men would vanquish an enemy many times as numerous. An unequaled capacity for rapid movement across land and sea, the use of brutal violence, a precocious sense of the use and value of money—these are among the traits traditionally assigned to the Normans.

They captured southern Italy, Sicily, and Malta, and made conquests around Byzantium (present-day Istanbul) leaving their architecture in a number of places around the Mediterranean as well. Their best-known conquest, however, concerns England. Let’s let Wikipedia continue the story:

In 1002 King Æthelred II of England married Emma, the sister of Richard II, Duke of Normandy. Their son Edward the Confessor, who spent many years in exile in Normandy, succeeded to the English throne in 1042. This led to the establishment of a powerful Norman interest in English politics, as Edward drew heavily on his former hosts for support, bringing in Norman courtiers, soldiers, and clerics and appointing them to positions of power, particularly in the Church.

Childless and embroiled in conflict with the formidable Godwin, Earl of Wessex, and his sons, Edward may also have encouraged Duke William of Normandy’s ambitions for the English throne.

When King Edward died at the beginning of 1066, the lack of a clear heir led to a disputed succession in which several contenders laid claim to the throne of England. Edward’s immediate successor was Harold Godwinson, the Earl of Wessex (West Saxony), the richest and most powerful of the English aristocrats. Harold was elected king by the Witenagemot (the assembly of the Anglo-Saxon national council) of England and crowned by the Archbishop of York, Ealdred, although Norman propaganda claimed the ceremony was performed by Stigand, the uncanonically elected Archbishop of Canterbury.

Harold was immediately challenged by two powerful neighboring rulers. Duke William of Normandy, illegitimate son of Robert I, Duke of Normandy, by Robert’s mistress Herleva, and thus also known as William the Bastard, claimed that he had been promised the throne by King Edward and that Harold had sworn agreement to this.

Another king with a similar name, King Harald III of Norway, commonly known as Harald Hardrada (“Harald the Hard Ruler”), also contested Harold’s succession. His claim to the throne was based on an agreement between his predecessor Magnus I of Norway and the earlier English king, Harthacnut, whereby if either died without heir, the other would inherit both England and Norway.

William of Normandy and Harald of Norway at once set about assembling troops and ships to invade England. King Harold of England, meanwhile, spent the summer on the south coast with a large army and fleet waiting for William to invade, but the bulk of his forces were militia who needed to get home to harvest their crops, so on the 8th of September Harold dismissed them.

Harald of Norway was initially successful. He captured York before proceeding on September 24, 1066 to the tiny village of Stamford Bridge. King Harold of England probably learned of the Norwegian invasion in mid-September and rushed north, gathering forces as he went.

At dawn on the 25th of September Harold’s forces reached York, where he learned the location of the Norwegians. The English then marched on the invaders and took them by surprise, defeating them in the Battle of Stamford Bridge. Harald of Norway was killed, and the Norwegians suffered such horrific losses that only 24 of their original 300 ships were required to carry away the survivors. The English victory was costly, however, as Harold’s army was left in a battered and weakened state.

The Normans crossed to England a few days after Harold’s victory over the Norwegians at Stamford Bridge. They landed at Pevensey in Sussex (South Saxony) on the 28th of  September and erected a wooden castle at a place called Hastings, from which they raided the surrounding area. The raids ensured supplies for the army, and as Harold and his family held many of the lands in the area, they weakened William’s opponent and made him more likely to attack to put an end to the raiding.

Harold traveled south, gathering forces as he went. On the morning of October 14, the famous Battle of Hastings ensued. At first the English lines held, though they had few archers and few cavalry. But the Normans made repeated feigned withdrawals, tempting the English into pursuit, breaking their own lines and allowing the Norman cavalry to attack them on their flanks.

It has been said that Harold died from an arrow which penetrated the eye-hole in his helmet and pierced his head. Others say he was merely wounded by the arrow and then dispatched with the sword. Either way, by afternoon, Harold was dead and the battle was over.

William of Normandy still had to defeat one Edgar the Ætheling (a word meaning nobleman), who had quickly been made king by some of his supporters, but by the time William circled his forces around and reached London from the north, Edgar’s supporters had given up and melted away. William was crowned King of England on Christmas Day, 1066. (Charlemagne had been crowned Holy Roman Emperor on Christmas Day, 800, so it appears this had become an auspicious tradition by 1066.)

The Bayeux Tapestry, woven in honor of William’s victory, probably commissioned by his half-brother, Bishop Odo, shows that a bright comet gave the Norman warriors hope that god was on their side:

http://40.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ljgike8fZq1qfg4oyo1_1280.jpg

Here’s another snippet from this 230-foot long embroidery (20 inches tall) now displayed in its own museum in Bayeux, Normandy:

http://mirax.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/bayeux-tapestry-harold-1.jpg

Here Harold is killed. He is obviously the one right below his name, Harold Rex, Harold the King, and is that an arrow in his eye? There’s some evidence that it was added to the tapestry later.

The Norman invasion leads to very interesting further developments in our English language, explaining why we use French words for cooked food, but Anglo-Saxon words for the animals themselves, for example. The upper-class Normans spoke Latin-based French which became the language of cuisine, but the lower-class Saxons tended the animals in the fields and were the butchers. That’s why when we refer to the cooked meat we say pork, for example, or beef, or mutton, all French words, when the Germanic words are swineflesh, cowflesh, or sheepflesh (German: Schweinefleisch, Kuhfleisch, Schaffleisch). Likewise, calf flesh (German: Kalbfleisch) becomes veal.

Shakespeare and other English poets clearly owe their remarkable power in part to the rich vocabulary of English which consists of all the Germanic roots from Saxon and Danish plus French, and through French Latin, and through Latin to a certain extent Greek. It has been claimed that English has a vocabulary boasting over 200,000 common usage words while modern French has a mere 100,000 (though it is very hard to compare vocabularies exactly). Suffice it to say, English has a rich, diverse, heritage, due in no small part to these Normans, erstwhile Norwegian Vikings turned French dukes turned English kings.

Now that we’ve gotten a taste of some history, perhaps our next module ought to spend a bit of time sketching in some major historical events in Western Europe from the Migration of Peoples and the fall of the Roman Empire (where we more or less left off), down to the present day. We’ve mentioned Charlemagne a number of times now, for example, and it’s probably time to explore who he was and where he came from.