Reading Comprehension: Three

[1] Compare and contrast the cathedrals according to the matrix. To illustrate your post, hand draw a view of your “main” cathedral, scan it and place it at the top of your response. Your written thoughts should fully illuminate the questions asked with each cathedral pairing on the website. Strive for 250- 300 words total for this response. Include additional images, as applicable, if you wish. Also check out the west vs. east page and digest what is written there (20 points).

Salisbury

http://www.oxfordtraveltours.co.uk/tours.php

http://www.trekearth.com/gallery/Europe/United_Kingdom/England/Wiltshire/Salisbury/photo840139.htm

Cologne

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cologne_Cathedral.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Koelner_Dom_Innenraum.jpg

Inside/Outside- Cologne/Salisbury

The insides of the Salisbury Cathedral and the Cologne Cathedral are both very similar in style. They both have trussed/ribbed ceilings, arches, clerestory windows, verticality, rosettes, columns, traces/windows, stained glass telling stories, altars, and pews. Both have axial progression, and both have the shape of cross. They differ in that the buttresses leap higher in the Cologne chapel verses the Salisbury. The Salisbury has one spire at the crossing, whereas the Cologne has two at the entrance. “Towers with spires accent crossings. English cathedrals emphasize horizontally with bands of sculpture and stringcourses. They usually have shorter façade towers and fewer flying buttresses” (p. 148, Harwood). The Salisbury has cloisters, and the Cologne does not. “English examples often have flat eastern ends and more than one transept. Monasteries with a cloister may be attached to important churches” (p.146, Harwood).

The difference in their locations certainly bring changes in their over all structure. “Complex vaulting found in Germany, where the hall churches, with nave aisles the same height, are particularly characteristic” (p. 145, Harwood). These characteristics were not found in England.  Also, in the geographical sense Cologne has structures built up beside it, and the Salisbury has a courtyard surrounding it.  “Indicating their importance in town life, most Continental cathedrals are in the center of town surrounded by markets, dwellings, and other secular structures. However, lawns and tress surround most England cathedrals.”(p. 146, Harwood).

Amiens

http://chicagomontreal.wordpress.com/2007/07/11/amiens-cathedral/

Time- Amiens/Salisbury

Both structures began their construction at the same time in history. Both have Gothic historical language and context. However, Amiens took 190 years to complete, whereas Salisbury only took 38 years. Through the process of changing hands of both designers/craftsman and laborers the architecture changed for Amiens. Not only because of the thought process of the individuals but also because of the culture changing. Culture/location dictate the movements in architecture. Both structures maintain a sense of gothic history with their interiors with ribbed trussed ceilings, columns, and stained glass. Both hold rich history in their own right. Amiens may hold history from more time periods, but Salisbury is a tribute to one time period, being more dear, focused, and in my opinion more of a time capsule, and therefore richer.

I am reminded of something Patrick said in class, in that buildings are a blueprint for future architecture. One can either choose to make a reproduction of the original structure, or one can choose to alter it.  In the case of Amiens and Salisbury it is clear that Amiens used structures such as Salisbury as a blueprint, but instead of replicating it exactly, the craftsmen/architects altered the design, and incorporated “today’s” thinking along the way during construction.

http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/endmiddle/art2.html

Patrons- Florence/Salisbury

It is incredible to think that the individual mindset of the patrons did not change the over all design of the Florence cathedral. I would have assumed that there would have been a substantial influence since it was their money provisioning the additions to the structure. I would have assumed that they would have had stipulations for how their money would be spent.

I have no issue with the patrons underwriting the cost of the structures. In doing so it is keeping government separate from the construction, allowing for it to remain strictly a place of worship without outside influence, other than cultural context of the time period in which the structures were built.

I think the patrons working together cohesively certainly brings greater understanding of how the structure of design or underpinnings work together as well. One builds on the other to create the whole. This is important during the Middle Ages because at the time there were not funds to draw on, it was a feudal society, and in order to survive they had to band together. This is still important to architecture today.  If there are too many hands in the pot, and people are not working together to accomplish a common goal, the final product would not be cohesive, and perhaps would never be finalized.

http://www.amazon.com/Medieval-Home-Companion-Housekeeping-Fourteenth/dp/0060166541

[2]This illustration from A Medieval Home Companion depicts woman at work in a medieval interior. Unfortunately, the image is closely cropped so we don’t see much of the rest of the dwelling in which she works. Using Harwood and Roth, complete the rest of the scene using words and images to demonstrate your understanding of the domestic medieval interior (10 points).

What we know of medieval interiors is that those in this time period inhabited one space that was not split into sections with physical boundaries, for example a great hall. There may have perhaps been a minstrel section above, but again nothing physical dividing the space on the floor. The woman depicted in the image may have been the lady of the house, or a servant. Based on her clothing, I would imagine her to be a servant performing household duties.

The society during the middle ages was a feudal one. The homes were built with heavy materials, much like a fortress. They were dark, and closed in.  The windows are narrow, and the doors are a dark wood.