The Plan of St. Gall :: :: University of Virginia Library

By far the most radical attempt to reconcile the drawing
of the church of the Plan of St. Gall with that of its corrective
explanatory titles was that which Wolfgang Schöne
published in 1960.[203] Schöne not only shortened the church
to the desired 200 feet, but applied the same reduction to
all the other buildings of the Plan. However, in advancing
this theory he either overlooked or disregarded the fact that
the same proposition had already been discussed and convincingly

[ILLUSTRATION]

133. NEUSTADT-AM-MAIN

SAVIOUR'S CHURCH (after 768/69). PLAN

[after Boeckelmann, 1952, fig. 3]

Although the early date of this church has recently been questioned
(see Vorromanische Kirchenbauten, 1965, 233), with other
Carolingian churches of similar plan (fig. 153.B) it demonstrates the
liveliness of the concept of the square-divided Early Christian quincunx
church (figs. 144-149) with tower-surmounted crossing and extended
altar space.

rejected twenty-two years earlier by Fritz Viktor
Arens, who pointed out that if one were to redraw the Plan
according to the measurements given for the length of the
Church (i.e., 200 feet), the Cloister and all of the service
structures of the Plan would be too small to perform their
designated functions.[204]

My own analysis of the scale used in designing the Plan
confirmed this view. Were the Plan redrawn in this manner
not only would the monks, including the abbot and the
visiting noblemen (i.e., Monks' Dormitory, Abbot's House,
and House for Distinguished Guests) no longer fit into
their beds, but the Refectory of the Monks would be too
small to seat the full contingent of monks, the horses would
lack the required floor space to stand in their stables, and
the workmen could not carry out their respective crafts and
labors.[205]

The most decisive counter argument, however, to
Schöne's interpretation of the Plan is to be found in a
statement made by a man who lived at the time when the
Plan was drawn. In his commentary on the Rule of St.
Benedict, written around 845 in the monastery of Civate,
Hildemar, a monk from Corbie, declared that in his days
"It was generally held that the cloister should be 100 feet
square and no less because that would make it too small."[206]

Schöne reduces it to a little less than 67 × 67 feet. It is
historically incongruous to assume that a scheme of paradigmatic

185

[ILLUSTRATION]

134. REICHENAU-MITTELZELL

HAITO'S CHURCH (CONSECRATED 816)

[after Reisser, 1960, fig. 285]

Built by the "author" of the Plan of St. Gall, between 806-817 (but
the nave perhaps not before 811), this church continues the tradition of
St. Riquier with its extended altar space and tower-surmounted
crossing. (Also see figs. 117 and 171 for comment on its alternating
supports, and its underlying modular concepts.)

significance should propose a cloister whose dimensions
fall by one-third below what at the time was
considered to be the lowest suitable limit.

[203]

Schöne, 1960, 147-54. Thomas Puttfarken, in an article not
available when this chapter was written (Puttfarken, 1968, 78-95)
expressed similar views. My objections are the same as those here
proffered against Schöne's interpretation. Both studies tend to give
insufficient weight to the carefully argued views of previous students of
the Plan (Arens, 1938; Boeckelman, 1956).

[204]

Arens, 1938, 66-67; cf. above, p. 87.

[205]

See my analysis of the Dormitory, below, pp. 249ff; the Abbot's
House, below, pp. 321ff; the House for Distinguished Guests, below, p.
155ff; and the Refectory, below, pp. 267ff.

[206]

Wolfgang Hafner has drawn attention to this fact in an interesting
article in Studien, 1962, 177-92; see below, p. 246, for a more detailed
discussion of this passage.