Artikelen

• De Heilige Kruiskapel te Utrecht. Die Tatsachen bleiben, die Interpretation schwänkt

  As is generally assumed, there was a small church within the walls of the Roman castellum as early as the seventh century. It is likely that it was founded by the Merovingian king Theutbert II (586-612) or his successor Chlotarius II (584-629) and destroyed by the Frisians. Around 695 Willibrord rebuilt the destroyed church and consecrated it to St Maarten (St Martin), possibly as a sign of gratitude towards the Frankish king, whose mayor of the palace, Pippijn II, supported him in his missionary work. Next to it he built a second church, St Salvator. He connected this church with a monastery. Until 1829 the Heilige Kruiskapel, a single-nave building with two modest transepts and a strikingly long choir was situated at Dom square. To the north of it was the collegiate church of St Maarten (Dom cathedral) and until 1582 the collegiate church of St Salvator was to be found to the south of the chapel.

  The special situation of three church buildings occurring at a very short distance from one another, linked to the question where the first church of Utrecht was situated, has intrigued many researchers. There is general agreement on the history and situation of St Salvator, however, the location of the small St Maarten's church built by Willibrord is contested. Within the boundaries of the Gothic St Maarten's church no trace of an older church that could date back to the time of Willibrord has been found so far. Nor has any trace ever been found of the small Merovingian church.

  Before the Second World War excavations at Dom Square made the remnants visible of the Heilige Kruiskapel and the Roman main building situated directly under it. A.E. van Giffen, the leader of the excavation, dated the chapel to the tenth century. There are archaeological arguments to assume that the oldest church of Utrecht must have consisted of a converted (?) Roman Principia. The Heilige Kruiskapel was built directly upon this converted, and subsequently destroyed, main building.

  Van Giffen's dating of the chapel appears to be ill-founded, and moreover, the locations of the finds are scarcely documented. Re-evaluation of the old documentation on the excavation has made a dating of the chapel to around 700 more likely. In order to test this hypothesis part of the chapel was excavated once again in 1993. Apart from one exception, the observations in this research have confirmed the hypothesis which had been developed on the basis of the old data.

  This exception concerns radiocarbon dating. ¹⁴ C-datings of charcoal, found in the mortar of the brickwork of the chapel, result in a dating to the late ninth or tenth century. The datings are: UtC-2975: 1100 BP ± 60, which corresponds to a dating between 888 and 1011; UtC-2976: 1110 BP ± 70 (883-1011 AD); UtC-2977: 1150 BP ± 60 (820-842 and 859-979 AD).

  The renewed interpretation of the old archaeological data, the reconstruction of ground-level heights derived from it and the architectural and topographical arguments, however, make it more likely that the Heilige Kruiskapel is to be identified with the little church rebuilt by Willibrord after all. The (written) historical sources also fit in with this conception. However, if the ¹⁴ C-datings are correct, bishop Balderik (917-976) would have been the building commissioner. In that case he would have built a completely new church, according to an outdated model, at the site of its destroyed predecessor. The written sources record that he restored the two heavily damaged churches of St Maarten and St Salvator: no mention is made of new construction, nor of a chapel. Moreover, Balderik decided to proclaim St Maarten's church a cemetery for the bishops. The small chapel seems to be inconsistent with this, although it is frequently regarded as a burial chapel.

  To the south of the chapel two parallel foundations have been found, which must have been part of a predecessor of the Roman St Salvator and which may date back to the same period as the chapel. They are the oldest building traces found within Salvator church. For that reason it is not likely that the Kruiskapel is to be identified with an older St Salvator. But the relative chronology, too, both of the reconstructed ground-level heights and of the walling found to the west and south of the chapel would present serious problems in case of a dating to the tenth century. Moreover, this would create a great problem in respect of the ground-level height which must have gone together with the sarcophagi of the eighth and ninth centuries: in the tenth century the walking level would have been at least half a metre lower and this seems unlikely.

  However, when we assume that the Kruiskapel was built at the end of the seventh or beginning of the eighth century, all the arguments and data can be explained. The relative chronology and the identical site of the Roman main building and the conversion of it on the one hand, and the chapel on the other do not present any problems then, and neither does the building material used in the various periods and the way in which it was applied. This also applies to the walls to the west of the chapel and those of St Salvator. The shape of the chapel also points to an early dating, and the strikingly large choir possibly to a use for collegial purposes.

  But the Kruiskapel as old St Maarten's church also fits in easily with the development causing St Maarten's church to become much more important than St Salvator, a pursuit started by Balderik. The fact that the chapel was situated on the territory of Salvator is not inconsistent with this. On the contrary, this very fact combined with the uniform manner of construction of the oldest foundations within St Salvator and those of the Kruiskapel indicate that here we are dealing with the two oldest churches of Willibrord. Consequently, for the time being, we are of the opinion that in spite of the contradiction presented by the radiocarbon datings, the Heilige Kruiskapel is the small church (re)built and (re?)consecrated to St Maarten by Willibrord.

  As is generally assumed, there was a small church within the walls of the Roman castellum as early as the seventh century. It is likely that it was founded by the Merovingian king Theutbert II (586-612) or his successor Chlotarius II (584-629) and destroyed by the Frisians. Around 695 Willibrord rebuilt the destroyed church and consecrated it to St Maarten (St Martin), possibly as a sign of gratitude towards the Frankish king, whose mayor of the palace, Pippijn II, supported him in his missionary work. Next to it he built a second church, St Salvator. He connected this church with a monastery. Until 1829 the Heilige Kruiskapel, a single-nave building with two modest transepts and a strikingly long choir was situated at Dom square. To the north of it was the collegiate church of St Maarten (Dom cathedral) and until 1582 the collegiate church of St Salvator was to be found to the south of the chapel.

  The special situation of three church buildings occurring at a very short...

  As is generally assumed, there was a small church within the walls of the Roman castellum as early as the seventh century. It is likely that it was founded by the Merovingian king Theutbert II (586-612) or his successor Chlotarius II (584-629) and destroyed by the Frisians. Around 695...

  H.L. de Groot

  135-149

  • Bekijk artikel
• De ecclesiola in het Utrechtse castellum. Bouwhistorische interpretatie van de resten van de Heilig-Kruiskapel

  The 're-excavation' in 1993 of part of the foundations and above-ground walling of the Heilig-Kruiskapel has revealed new data with respect to the history of its construction. The most important conclusion is that the southern annex of this chapel was a separate unit and as such it was the seventh-century predecessor of the church attached to it later. It is likely that the Heilig- Kruiskapel itself is to be identified with the St Maarten's church built by Willibrord.

  This hypothesis on the basis of architectural-historical findings implies that a new architectural structure is to be added to the structure at Dom square in Utrecht we are already acquainted with, a small church which so far had only been known from written sources and the location of which was conjectured to have been outside as well as inside the Castellum. The site and size of the first Christian foundation in Utrecht now localized raise new questions on its original function.

  In view of its small size the square chapel or cella may have been a burial chapel or cella memoriae. The existence has been proved of early-medieval burials in stone sarcophagi in and around the earliest Salvator church in Utrecht, which probably date back to the eighth and ninth centuries. More deeply situated burials in wooden coffins could be part of the oldest Christian burial place.

  Unfortunately, the medieval burials in and around the Heilig-Kruiskapel have not been researched accurately enough to be able to refer to them as early-medieval burials with any certainty. A number of burials in wooden coffins, just as similar burials around Salvator church situated at a rather large depth and appearing to be somewhat grouped into two strips to the east of the Heilig-Kruiskapel, possibly are among the oldest Christian tombs.

  The niche in the eastern wall must have had a funerary function in the use of the place as a burial chapel. Although the internal dimensions of the niche are rather small, one may think of the lay-out of a tomb as ‘arcosolium’ or niche tomb, possibly with an altar placed in front of it. A cella memoriae can also be interpreted in another meaning: the memoria may refer to the presence of one or more relies. At any rate, from the sixth century onwards each altar was provided with at least one relic.

  Particularly for a Christian outpost in an area which had to be converted, the presence of a relic may have been an important condition for the success of missionary activities. The question which relic was already present in Utrecht in the early seventh century, however, will have to remain unanswered for the time being. In view of the consecration at any rate in the time of Willibrord, a St Maarten's relic is most likely, but an original consecration to Thomas Apostle is also possible; however, in this respect the Utrecht tradition is very late.

  The scarce data on the earliest Christian history of Utrecht are to be supplemented with the foundations and part of the aboveground walling of the first little church in the castellum, referred to as ecclesiola by Boniface. However, all sorts of questions on its use, consecration and incorporation in the later episcopal cluster of church buildings remain unsolved as yet, and it will only be possible to answer them after closer research.

  The 're-excavation' in 1993 of part of the foundations and above-ground walling of the Heilig-Kruiskapel has revealed new data with respect to the history of its construction. The most important conclusion is that the southern annex of this chapel was a separate unit and as such it was the seventh-century predecessor of the church attached to it later. It is likely that the Heilig- Kruiskapel itself is to be identified with the St Maarten's church built by Willibrord.

  This hypothesis on the basis of architectural-historical findings implies that a new architectural structure is to be added to the structure at Dom square in Utrecht we are already acquainted with, a small church which so far had only been known from written sources and the location of which was conjectured to have been outside as well as inside the Castellum. The site and size of the first Christian foundation in Utrecht now localized raise new questions on its original function.

  In view of its small...

  The 're-excavation' in 1993 of part of the foundations and above-ground walling of the Heilig-Kruiskapel has revealed new data with respect to the history of its construction. The most important conclusion is that the southern annex of this chapel was a separate unit and as such it was the...

  Raphaël Rijntjes

  150-161

  • Bekijk artikel
• De Heilig-Kruiskapel in Utrecht: Sint-Maarten of Sint-Salvator?

  For centuries there has been a small chapel at Dom square in Utrecht, squeezed in between Dom cathedral, consecrated to St Maarten, and the church of St Salvator or Oudmunster: the Heilig- Kruiskapel. In the thirties this chapel was dated to the tenth century by the archaeologist A.E. van Giffen.

  However, a few years ago the Utrecht town archaeologist H.L. de Groot expressed the assumption that we are dealing with a church from the end of the seventh century here, notably with the first St Maarten's church rebuilt by the Anglo-Saxon missionary Willibrord on the foundations of an older little church. However, we are of the opinion that, if the Heilig-Kruiskapel does indeed date back to the time of Willibrord, we are not dealing with the first St Maarten's church, but with the church of St Salvator founded by the missionary. Our arguments are the following:

  l . There appear to be no archaeological indications that the Heilig-Kruiskapel was rebuilt on the foundations of an older little church, as Willibrord's pupil Boniface - who also worked in Utrecht and even built a church there - wrote in a letter to the pope about the St Maarten's church rebuilt by Willibrord. 2. Later in the Middle Ages the chapel did not belong to St Maarten's or Dom chapter, but to the chapter of St Salvator or Oudmunster. The function of baptistery, given to the chapel by the I4th-century historiographer Jan Beke, proves to have been taken over by Oudmunster later on. 3. Beke makes mention of the building of a new St Salvator church by Boniface next to the church founded by Willibrord. On that occasion the old church must have received the patrocinium of the Holy Cross. 4. The patrocinia of St Salvator and of the Holy Cross are closely related: both refer to Jesus Christ, who died on the cross for the salvation - Salvator means Saviour - of mankind. 5. St Maarten's or Dom chapter has never claimed that the Heilig-Kruiskapel was the first St Maarten's church. 6. Finally, as far as the Heilig-Kruiskapel is concerned, medieval historiography unequivocally refers to the first St Salvator church built by Willibrord and not to the church rebuilt by him and consecrated to St Maarten.

  It is striking that for their datings and attributions present as well as earlier archaeologists frequently make use of the written sources or at least of the literature based on them. This literature, however, has proved to be quite unreliable. Before making far-reaching pronouncements on the history and development of the oldest churches of Utrecht, these sources ought to be thoroughly re-analyzed and re-integrated into the study of these church buildings. It is only the study of all church buildings in their three-dimensional, chronological and functional context, placed within the framework of the political and ecclesiastical events of the time in which they arose, that can lead to satisfactory results.

  For centuries there has been a small chapel at Dom square in Utrecht, squeezed in between Dom cathedral, consecrated to St Maarten, and the church of St Salvator or Oudmunster: the Heilig- Kruiskapel. In the thirties this chapel was dated to the tenth century by the archaeologist A.E. van Giffen.

  However, a few years ago the Utrecht town archaeologist H.L. de Groot expressed the assumption that we are dealing with a church from the end of the seventh century here, notably with the first St Maarten's church rebuilt by the Anglo-Saxon missionary Willibrord on the foundations of an older little church. However, we are of the opinion that, if the Heilig-Kruiskapel does indeed date back to the time of Willibrord, we are not dealing with the first St Maarten's church, but with the church of St Salvator founded by the missionary. Our arguments are the following:

  l . There appear to be no archaeological indications that the Heilig-Kruiskapel was rebuilt on the foundations of...

  For centuries there has been a small chapel at Dom square in Utrecht, squeezed in between Dom cathedral, consecrated to St Maarten, and the church of St Salvator or Oudmunster: the Heilig- Kruiskapel. In the thirties this chapel was dated to the tenth century by the archaeologist A.E. van...

  Charlotte J.C. Broer, Martin W.J. de Bruijn

  162-168

  • Bekijk artikel
• De afmetingen van de Salvator- of Oudmunsterkerk in de afbeeldingen van de Monumenta van Van Buchel en in de collectie Booth: Toetsing en interpretatie aan de hand van opgravingsresultaten

  In 1587 the curtain fell for one of the very oldest churches of Utrecht. For in that year the town council decided to pull down Salvator or Oudmunster church. The demolition started soon after the decision had been taken. This church, founded by Willibrord in the former castellum Traiectum around 700, was situated at just a very short distance to the south of St Maarten's Dom Cathedral.

  In spite of the total demolition of the building, even most foundations were excavated, the church did not sink into oblivion. The church has been passed down to us through a small series of qualitatively quite reasonable illustrations of both the ground plan and the vertical elevation. The best-known illustration is the pen drawing by A. van Buchel in his ‘Monumenta passim in templis ac monasteriis Trajectinae’. Furthermore, there is an extensive description of the interior of the church by Joh. Mersman, canon of the church, and many data on the building have come down to us through the building accounts which have been handed down from 1346 onwards.

  A number of ordinarii, books in which the liturgical proceedings in the church are recorded, have also been preserved. In the thirties of this century the site where the eastern parts of Salvator church were once situated, was subjected to archaeological research. The results of these excavations, too, are very important to the doctoral research into this vanished church, started by me in 1991 within the framework of the so-called Dom-square project. Two other authors also take part in this research project under the leadership of A.J.J. Mekking (Leiden), who have also produced contributions to this issue of KNOB Bulletin, notably R. Rijntjes and E. van Welie.

  In this article I further pursue the use of dimensions in the church, as passed down to us through the dimensions indicated on the ground-plan drawings and through the archaeological research of the thirties of this century. Determining the dimensions is of great importance to further reconstruction (on paper) of the church, which is the aim of this research. Meanwhile it has become evident that the dimensions indicated in the drawings are consistent with the dimensions of the eastern parts of the church determined during the excavations. This was a reason to consider the known dimensions indicated for the western parts of the church, which have not been excavated (reasonably), reliable.

  The western parts of the church turned out to have quite unusual (but definitely not impossible) proportions. These curious proportions seem to have been caused by the fact that in building the western parts an older building phase was the starting point (which is quite normal), possibly even the oldest building phase, the foundation by Willibrord. It concerns a hall church of monumental dimensions, which was probably connected with a contracted annex on the east side.

  In the thirties remnants of walling of the supposed annex were discovered at the level of the former crossing of Salvator church and are to be dated to the eighth century without much difficulty, chiefly on the basis of the dating of a large eighth-century sarcophagus which was found within the walls. The hall church in Utrecht may have had a length of 18 metres and a width of 12 metres. Hall churches of such considerable size are rare in the eighth century, it is true, but not utterly unique. It is known that other important churches, such as the cathedral of Eichstätt (building phase I) and the church of Elst (building phase I) were large hall churches in the eighth century. The 'discovery' of a large hall church in Utrecht detracts from the hypothesis that the missionaries could only have the disposal of small primitive churches in their missionary regions.

  In 1587 the curtain fell for one of the very oldest churches of Utrecht. For in that year the town council decided to pull down Salvator or Oudmunster church. The demolition started soon after the decision had been taken. This church, founded by Willibrord in the former castellum Traiectum around 700, was situated at just a very short distance to the south of St Maarten's Dom Cathedral.

  In spite of the total demolition of the building, even most foundations were excavated, the church did not sink into oblivion. The church has been passed down to us through a small series of qualitatively quite reasonable illustrations of both the ground plan and the vertical elevation. The best-known illustration is the pen drawing by A. van Buchel in his ‘Monumenta passim in templis ac monasteriis Trajectinae’. Furthermore, there is an extensive description of the interior of the church by Joh. Mersman, canon of the church, and many data on the building have come down to us through...

  In 1587 the curtain fell for one of the very oldest churches of Utrecht. For in that year the town council decided to pull down Salvator or Oudmunster church. The demolition started soon after the decision had been taken. This church, founded by Willibrord in the former castellum Traiectum...

  R. Jos Stöver

  169-185

  • Bekijk artikel
• Omnes canonici. Een verkenning van de Utrechtse stadsliturgie

  The unity of the urban Christian community, dating back to early Christianity, as an idea lying at the root of the stational organization of the cathedral city, gave way to an urban liturgy of a distinctly clerical, in Utrecht even 'collegial' character during the high and late Middle Ages. For Utrecht liturgy distinguishes itself from urban liturgy as it proceeded in other medieval cathedral cities by a focus on five main churches.

  The desire to celebrate the commemoration of the saint in his own sanctuary, combined with the need to visualize and confirm the mutual relations between the various chapters, resulted in the fact that, apart from the old foundations of Dom and Salvator, the younger chapters also received stations at the festivals of patron saints and the anniversary of the church consecration.

  The old rights of the Dom and Salvator chapters with respect to the younger foundations of St John, St Mary and St Peter are made visible by means of various stations, notably around the traditional festivals in the temporale. In the time when the three ordinarii dealt with in this article were in force, the Chapel of the Holy Cross had been reduced to an annex of Salvator church. It only figures in the ordinarius of the latter, in a number of processions of the Salvator chapter.

  The unity of the urban Christian community, dating back to early Christianity, as an idea lying at the root of the stational organization of the cathedral city, gave way to an urban liturgy of a distinctly clerical, in Utrecht even 'collegial' character during the high and late Middle Ages. For Utrecht liturgy distinguishes itself from urban liturgy as it proceeded in other medieval cathedral cities by a focus on five main churches.

  The desire to celebrate the commemoration of the saint in his own sanctuary, combined with the need to visualize and confirm the mutual relations between the various chapters, resulted in the fact that, apart from the old foundations of Dom and Salvator, the younger chapters also received stations at the festivals of patron saints and the anniversary of the church consecration.

  The old rights of the Dom and Salvator chapters with respect to the younger foundations of St John, St Mary and St Peter are made visible by means of various...

  The unity of the urban Christian community, dating back to early Christianity, as an idea lying at the root of the stational organization of the cathedral city, gave way to an urban liturgy of a distinctly clerical, in Utrecht even 'collegial' character during the high and late Middle Ages....

  Eelco G. van Welie

  186-192

  • Bekijk artikel