What is religion
but a reflection of the society it is a part of? For thousands of years the
Christian Church has been a dominating and prevailing function of society, but
modern Christian churches are not built in the same style as they have been in
the past. The architecture of the church changes with the tides of social
revolution. An example: most Christians in Rome worshiped in their homes for
fear of persecution, but when Christianity became the accepted religion, it
became illegal to worship alone. This pattern of religious reform following
social revolution prevails through the architectural styles: Classical,
Byzantine, Romanesque, Gothic, Neo-Classical, Baroque, Rococo, and Neo-Gothic.[1]
Though, there is a hiccup with this theory; there was no massive social
revolution in the 12th to 14th centuries, but instead
only small social winds of change as Europe moved from the middle ages towards
the Renaissance. The period from the 12th century to the 14th
century is seen as a transitory time and normally overlooked by the non-classical
studies portion of society, so how did it produce the most recognizable style
of religious architecture?
So how do we
explain the linear relationship between society and its religion, and how does
this relate to cathedrals? Before we can talk about architecture, it is
important to understand the solidarity of the connection between religion and
society. All religions have two facets
in common: adherents hold certain beliefs and certain rituals are collectively
preformed based on those beliefs. Society, like religion, is a force larger
than any individual and is depended on by everybody. In Christianity, the idea
of God versus the Devil mirrors the dilemmas in society. The governments,
economies, and social structures of the society collectively form the religion.
For instance, tribal societies with weak political systems, simple economies,
and have multiple gods, all of whom are roughly equal in power, and a malleable
barrier between gods and humans. [2] In
agrarian societies, the culture is built around agriculture, there is greater
economic wealth compared to tribes, and women have a high status. Similarly,
these cultures’ religions are built around female images and fertility rights,
and have complex organization mimicking the complexity of agriculture. Empires
tend to have powerful centers with numerous colonies and a distinct, complex
division of labor. Their religions follow the same pattern. Take Rome, for
example: you have Zeus as the powerful center and then lesser gods like Apollo
and Aphrodite that are more numerous, have less power, and have a distinct
reason for existing. Then we come to modern societies that are organized around
the central political authority, which belies monotheism and the idea that one
entity does everything and is everything. There is transition in this pattern
as the majority of the world moves through these religious stages as society
develops. What causes this change in religion? Society does, by slowly changing
itself. If we describe societies by their characteristics, does it not made
sense to describe religions by their monuments?
When
people think of classic churches, massive towers, wide spaces, and arches come
to mind, these are prominent features of gothic architecture. To understand why
this evolution of style happened, it is important to have a basic understanding
of what the differences are between Gothic and Romanesque. [3] While Romanesque cathedrals had
small windows, round arches, thick walls, and were built to a modest height,
Gothic cathedrals have large stained glass windows, pointed arches, exterior
flying buttresses, and were built to soaring heights. These characteristics led
Romanesque cathedrals to be dark and gloomy in comparison to the lofty, light
filled Gothic cathedrals. Romanesque cathedrals had chapels and apses that were
built in separate compartments in contrast to the unified, unbroken space of
Gothic.[4]
So how did this transition take place?
What allowed the architecture of the church to transform? First on the list is
math and science: the ability to engineer the differences between Romanesque
and Gothic cathedrals. The idea of supports and arches central to Gothic
architecture came about due to an increased knowledge of physics as compared to
the Romanesque period.
ß[5] Flying buttresses are seen on all notable
Gothic cathedrals, most notably on Notre Dame de Paris. These are half arches that
spring from the aisle walls to the ground with the purpose of supporting the
weight of the vaulted, stone ceilings by transferring the lateral forces from
the building to the ground.[6]
The presence of these supports allowed the walls to be thinner because they no
longer needed to withstand as much force. This allowed the use of more windows
and more stained glass, which helped create the brighter, loftier
characteristics of gothic architecture. One simple engineering idea alone
revolutionized the ideas of what architects thought possible.
Engineering
was not the sole reason for this architectural revolution, however. As Edward
Norman so eloquently points out, “gothic architecture is the style of emergent
urban capitalism”.[7]
While the main social groups at the time remained the royalty, the clergy, and
everyone else, a new social group of merchants and independently rich was
emerging. Everyone had a part in funding the construction of cathedrals be it
though tithes or donations, but the emergence of this new group meant that
around the 12th century, most of the work on Gothic cathedrals was
not done by groups of people, but by experienced artisans called masters. In a
nutshell, the emerging class had money, supplies, and expensive taste to donate
to the church.
In the end, it all links back to the church. The Catholic Church at this point in time, the early 12th century, was stable with no threat of encroaching religions. Lutheranism had not yet entered the stage and would not be prevalent until the emergence of the printing press in the 16th century. Instead, Lutheranism, Calvinism, and the Antibaptists were part of the social revolution that led from Gothic to Neo-Classical. However, the tides of Christianity were changing. Simultaneously, a flood of social and economic improvement swept over Europe: people developed the willingness to try new ways of organization and were receptive to new ideas. Many did not believe that the whole of mankind could be damned, and there was new wind for a more personalized and intense religious experience. Prior to the 12th century, individuality was stressed. You worked on your own, for your own. Slowly the idea of de-distantiation crept into society.[8] This seemingly complicated word explains one idea, that the distance between the average day folk and the authorities was becoming [9] smaller. This trend can be seen in Gothic architecture. Prior to the 12th century, the altar was placed at the end of the naves and represented the distance between man and God, as well as the sociological distance between man and government. Late medieval churches followed a different method that eventually led towards the spacious Gothic style. Instead of the altar placed at the end of the naves, there were no naves and the church was instead one undivided hall in which the altar can be seen from every point. The previous sense of awe towards religion and the government forged into a sense of solidarity and safety. While early medieval art depicted figures taken out of normal settings, late medieval art showed people in three-dimensional spaces with more illusionary characteristics.[10]
This brings up an
interesting point; churches were no longer built to provide more room for
worship, but were built as a testament to God in honor of the beliefs and
aspirations of society.[11] Cathedrals
represented every idea of the society and the engineering mastery of the time. The
depictions on the walls, arches, and windows told stories of the glory of God.
During this time period, the luxury of creating for the sake of beauty and
wonder was allowed. This transitioned cathedrals from being simple places of
worship to places that worshiped God themselves. Even empty, cathedrals stand
as a testament to the power of God. They spread like wildfire. Churches all
over Europe from the 12th to 15th centuries were replaced
with Gothic styles, and astonishingly were all built in a similar manner
showing amazing emulation between professional builders. Villages were throwing
Gothic churches up like they were daisies.
This brings up an
important question: how could so many villages afford expensive, intricate
churches and cathedrals? This Gothic movement came to change the way people
judged the prestige of towns, villages, and cities because only the best could
afford the best craftsmen. Cathedrals were a source of prestige because of how
long it took to create one, which could take up to one hundred years. This was
not because of intense labor, but because of fluctuations in finances. The
success of a cathedral became dependent on the expertise of balancing expenses,
not just massive wealth.[12] Amiens
managed to build one of the cathedrals most celebrated today, Notre Dame
d’Amiens, while Cologne failed. This seems counterintuitive since Cologne was a
larger, more prosperous city than the small village of Amiens. Amiens managed
to beat out Cologne because they worked as a whole and managed their economy.
Cathedrals were costly and time consuming and required a stable environment.
Amiens provided this far better than Cologne.
So, imagine
yourself walking up to a Catholic cathedral. From far away you can see the tall
spires, which in actually had little use other than aesthetics.[13]
Upon entering you walk through double doors into a holy sanctum. The light is
limited, and while Gothic stained glass allows more light than Romanesque
architecture, their main purpose is to depict and wow rather than let sunlight
into the sanctum. At this point in time, early 12th century, there
are not many benches to sit on; in fact the only ones in sight are made of
stone for the use of the high clergy. The use of benches is a new idea and will
not be used until into the 13th century and not common until the 15th
and 16th with the Neo-Classic and Baroque style. [14]
As you look around you notice the supports and arches. While looking at the
supports you see leaves and plants etched into the decoration. Another idea new
to the 13th century was extensive carvings of the earth symbolizing
the ascent of life.[15]
Finally, you may remain standing and take a moment of prayer.
Be it a visual
journey through Gothic architecture, or the literate journey through the facets
of the church, the church has much to offer. In a society where religion was
prevalent, the emerging urban population and wealthy class threw their money
into projects that soon defined the times. Cathedrals were not only a place of
worship, but also symbols of religion. A proud society exiting the medieval
ages was eager to replace old churches with new, luxurious examples of what
they were capable of. This style of architecture spoke so loudly without ever
saying a word that it became the standard, so much so that there was revival
period during the 19th century. For a style that was not born out of
political or religious strife, it has influenced how people think of
cathedrals.
[1]
J.B. O’Connell, Church Building and Furnishing: The Churches Way (Notre Dame:
University of
Notre Dame Press, 1956). 5.
[2]
Randall Collins, Sociological Insight: An Introduction to Non-Obvious Sociology
(New
York: Oxford
University Press, 1992). 30-60
[3]
Carlo Trabia. Gothic and Romanesque, gif, http://www.bestofsicily.com/
[4]
Paul Frankl, Gothic Architecture (London: Penguin Books, Ltd., 1962). 223-243.
[5]
Corel Family. Gothic Church Diagram, gif, http://www.historylink101.com/
[6]
Frankl, 86-89.
[7]
Edward Norman, The House of God: Church Architecture, Style, and History
(London:
Thames and
Hudson, Ltd., 1990). 147.
[8]
Karl Manheim, Essays on the Sociology of Culture (London: Lowe and Brydone
Printers,
1956) 220-1.
[9]
Unknown, jpeg, http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v487/blank14/Untitled-8copy.jpg
[10]
Manheim, 224
[11]
Norman, 150.
[12]
Norman, 148.
[13]
Gulielmus Durantis, The Symbolism of Churches and Church Ornaments (New York:
AMS
Press, 1973)
cxxx-cxxxii.
[14]
O’Donnell, 70.
[15]
Norman, 162.
