Vienna Baroque

Doris Binder

 

The center of Baroque art was undisputable Vienna, as a special promoter appeared the Emperor Charles VI., under whose reign not only the Karlskirche was built, but also numerous buildings have been newly planned or built. The passion for building of the High Baroque is not only founded by the destructions of the Turks, but also has its causes in the backward economic structure and its lack of production plants. Whether nobleman, cleric or commoner, all those with sufficient capital put it rather in construction funds into practice than not make use of it. Responsible for this was a deep distrust to the imperial fiscal policy and concern about the currency and a possible bankruptcy.

The Baroque emerged within the civil peace (*) Burgfrieden) of the city of Vienna, had at the beginning of the High Baroque era still dominated religious buildings, so the cityscape changed in just four decades. Vienna was transformed into a "palace city", by the year 1740, the number of pleasure palaces, gardens and belvederes had doubled. The Baroque style, which by crown, church and nobility was forced upon the citizens, is considered of Felix Czeike as "authority art". The existing social gap should be camouflaged by the rubberneck culture in festivities, receptions and parades.

 

*) Burgfrieden (The term truce or Castle peace referred to a jurisdiction in the Middle Ages around a castle, in which feuds, so hostilities of private individuals among themselves, under penalty of ostracism were banned. Today the term is mainly used in a figurative sense.

 

Due to the return of Fischer von Erlach to Vienna in 1686 and a decade later, Lukas von Hildebrandt, the primacy of the Italians in architecture was broken and the victory parade of Austrian Baroque began. The connection between the spiritual and secular powers found its mode of expression in the Baroque, which the appearance of the city of Vienna should characterize in a decisive manner.

 

Construction of Charles Church

The Karlskirche was built by Emperor Charles VI. commemorating the plague saint, Charles Borromeo. In 1713 the plague raged in Vienna and claimed about 8,000 human lives, in February 1714 the plague disappeared and as a sign of gratitude was began with the construction of the church, this should become the most important religious building of Vienna in the 18th century.

In a contest was decided on the builder - participants were Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, Johann Lukas von Hildebrandt and Ferdinando Galli-Bibienas. As winner emerged the famous architect Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, he died in 1723 and did not live to the achievement of the Church. The supervision was transferred to the imperial court architect Anton Erhard Martinelli, as Fischer von Erlach died, his son, Joseph Emmanuel, finished his work. On 28 October 1737 St. Charles Church was solemnly by the Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Sigismund Count Kollowitz, inaugurated. The spiritual care ceded Emperor Karl VI. to the chivalric Order of the Cross with the Red Star, since 1783 is the Karlskirche imperial patronage parish.

The church at that time lay still behind the regulated river Wien (Wienfluss) and in the open field. The directed towards the city face side of the Charles Church, which stood on the edge of the suburb of Wieden, was target point of a line of sight the Hofburg and St. Charles Church in the sense of a "via triumphalis" connecting. On the temple-like front building of the Karlskirche the dedication inscription is clearly visible "Vota mea Reddam in conspectu timentium Deum" - "I will fulfill my vow before those who fear God."

Already during the construction by Fischer von Erlach (senior), there were several project phases, three of which have been preserved:

 

1. Medaillon by Daniel Warou for the groundbreaking ceremony

2. Fore stitches in Fischer's draft of a historical architecture 1721

3. Viennese view of work by Klein and Pfeffel 1722 (1724)

 

Due to the death of Fischer von Erlach, occured recent changes made by his son, Joseph Emmanuel most of all being concerned the dome (much higher and steeper), the priest choir (omitted) and the interior (simpler). The entire project took a total of 21 years and the costs amounted to 304 045 guilders and 22 ¼ cruisers. The construction costs were shouldered by all crown lands of the Empire, but also Spain, Milan and the Netherlands had to make a contribution.

The Karlskirche is the most important Baroque building of the city and represents the most convincing the so-called Empire style in which for the last time an empire awareness in the architecture of the capital of the Holy Roman Empire after the victorious ended wars against the Turks and the French was expressed.

Symbolism of the Karlskirche

The Karlskirche consists of a central rotunda with a dome, preceded by a column structure like a Greek temple, of two high pillars illustrated on the model of Trajan's Column in Rome and of two lateral gate pavilions. The illustrated columns represent Charles VI. as a wise and strong secular ruler, the two great pillars were created by Marder and Matielli. The columns are crowned by golden eagles, symbolizing the two virtues of the Emperor - fortitudo (bravery) and constantia (resistance). The two pillars are evocative of the two pillars before the temple in Jerusalem - Jachin and Boaz. However, the illustration of the two columns does not match the model of the Trajan columns in Rome, portraying war deeds, but these tell the life story of St. Borromeo. In the front view of the Karlskirche a wide range of different symbols become one whole - the Roman emperors Trajan and Augustus, the Temple of Solomon, St. Peter's Church in Rome, Hagia Sophia, Charlemagne and the Empire of Charles V. - through the skillfully used symbols should be shown the claim of the house of Habsburg to the European domination.

The plan view of the church is, as in baroque typical, ellipsoid. In the interior of the Karlskirche the great Baroque sculpture is immediately noticeable, representing St. Borromeo. At the base the four Latin Fathers of the Church are depicted. The interior of the Karlskirche is dominated by the tremendous fresco in the oval dome room, it was created by the eminent Baroque painter Johann Michael Rottmayr between 1725-1730. The fresco shows the Mother of God representing the intercession of the patron Saint of the Church to help head off the plague, surrounded is the scene by the cardinal virtues (faith, hope and love). In the left entrance wing is situated the tomb for the Austrian poet Heinrich Joseph von Collin (17771-1811).

Inside the St. Charles Church, there is a museum where the most valuable pieces are exhibited.

These include: the vestments of St. Borromeo, a reliquary of gold and silver - a donation of Emperor Charles VI. and a rococo monstrance (1760) containing a drop of blood of the saint. Thomas Aquinas.

Even the image of the architect Fischer von Erlach, painted by Jacob von Schuppen, is one of the church treasures.

The iconographic program of the Charles Church was written by Carl Gustav Haerus, by this the Saint Charles Borromeo should be connected to the imperial founder.

www.univie.ac.at/hypertextcreator/ferstel/site/browse.php...

 

Vienna Baroque

Doris Binder

 

The center of Baroque art was undisputable Vienna, as a special promoter appeared the Emperor Charles VI., under whose reign not only the Karlskirche was built, but also numerous buildings have been newly planned or built. The passion for building of the High Baroque is not only founded by the destructions of the Turks, but also has its causes in the backward economic structure and its lack of production plants. Whether nobleman, cleric or commoner, all those with sufficient capital put it rather in construction funds into practice than not make use of it. Responsible for this was a deep distrust to the imperial fiscal policy and concern about the currency and a possible bankruptcy.

The Baroque emerged within the civil peace (*) Burgfrieden) of the city of Vienna, had at the beginning of the High Baroque era still dominated religious buildings, so the cityscape changed in just four decades. Vienna was transformed into a "palace city", by the year 1740, the number of pleasure palaces, gardens and belvederes had doubled. The Baroque style, which by crown, church and nobility was forced upon the citizens, is considered of Felix Czeike as "authority art". The existing social gap should be camouflaged by the rubberneck culture in festivities, receptions and parades.

 

*) Burgfrieden (The term truce or Castle peace referred to a jurisdiction in the Middle Ages around a castle, in which feuds, so hostilities of private individuals among themselves, under penalty of ostracism were banned. Today the term is mainly used in a figurative sense.

 

Due to the return of Fischer von Erlach to Vienna in 1686 and a decade later, Lukas von Hildebrandt, the primacy of the Italians in architecture was broken and the victory parade of Austrian Baroque began. The connection between the spiritual and secular powers found its mode of expression in the Baroque, which the appearance of the city of Vienna should characterize in a decisive manner.

 

Construction of Charles Church

The Karlskirche was built by Emperor Charles VI. commemorating the plague saint, Charles Borromeo. In 1713 the plague raged in Vienna and claimed about 8,000 human lives, in February 1714 the plague disappeared and as a sign of gratitude was began with the construction of the church, this should become the most important religious building of Vienna in the 18th century.

In a contest was decided on the builder - participants were Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, Johann Lukas von Hildebrandt and Ferdinando Galli-Bibienas. As winner emerged the famous architect Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, he died in 1723 and did not live to the achievement of the Church. The supervision was transferred to the imperial court architect Anton Erhard Martinelli, as Fischer von Erlach died, his son, Joseph Emmanuel, finished his work. On 28 October 1737 St. Charles Church was solemnly by the Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Sigismund Count Kollowitz, inaugurated. The spiritual care ceded Emperor Karl VI. to the chivalric Order of the Cross with the Red Star, since 1783 is the Karlskirche imperial patronage parish.

The church at that time lay still behind the regulated river Wien (Wienfluss) and in the open field. The directed towards the city face side of the Charles Church, which stood on the edge of the suburb of Wieden, was target point of a line of sight the Hofburg and St. Charles Church in the sense of a "via triumphalis" connecting. On the temple-like front building of the Karlskirche the dedication inscription is clearly visible "Vota mea Reddam in conspectu timentium Deum" - "I will fulfill my vow before those who fear God."

Already during the construction by Fischer von Erlach (senior), there were several project phases, three of which have been preserved:

 

1. Medaillon by Daniel Warou for the groundbreaking ceremony

2. Fore stitches in Fischer's draft of a historical architecture 1721

3. Viennese view of work by Klein and Pfeffel 1722 (1724)

 

Due to the death of Fischer von Erlach, occured recent changes made by his son, Joseph Emmanuel most of all being concerned the dome (much higher and steeper), the priest choir (omitted) and the interior (simpler). The entire project took a total of 21 years and the costs amounted to 304 045 guilders and 22 ¼ cruisers. The construction costs were shouldered by all crown lands of the Empire, but also Spain, Milan and the Netherlands had to make a contribution.

The Karlskirche is the most important Baroque building of the city and represents the most convincing the so-called Empire style in which for the last time an empire awareness in the architecture of the capital of the Holy Roman Empire after the victorious ended wars against the Turks and the French was expressed.

Symbolism of the Karlskirche

The Karlskirche consists of a central rotunda with a dome, preceded by a column structure like a Greek temple, of two high pillars illustrated on the model of Trajan's Column in Rome and of two lateral gate pavilions. The illustrated columns represent Charles VI. as a wise and strong secular ruler, the two great pillars were created by Marder and Matielli. The columns are crowned by golden eagles, symbolizing the two virtues of the Emperor - fortitudo (bravery) and constantia (resistance). The two pillars are evocative of the two pillars before the temple in Jerusalem - Jachin and Boaz. However, the illustration of the two columns does not match the model of the Trajan columns in Rome, portraying war deeds, but these tell the life story of St. Borromeo. In the front view of the Karlskirche a wide range of different symbols become one whole - the Roman emperors Trajan and Augustus, the Temple of Solomon, St. Peter's Church in Rome, Hagia Sophia, Charlemagne and the Empire of Charles V. - through the skillfully used symbols should be shown the claim of the house of Habsburg to the European domination.

The plan view of the church is, as in baroque typical, ellipsoid. In the interior of the Karlskirche the great Baroque sculpture is immediately noticeable, representing St. Borromeo. At the base the four Latin Fathers of the Church are depicted. The interior of the Karlskirche is dominated by the tremendous fresco in the oval dome room, it was created by the eminent Baroque painter Johann Michael Rottmayr between 1725-1730. The fresco shows the Mother of God representing the intercession of the patron Saint of the Church to help head off the plague, surrounded is the scene by the cardinal virtues (faith, hope and love). In the left entrance wing is situated the tomb for the Austrian poet Heinrich Joseph von Collin (17771-1811).

Inside the St. Charles Church, there is a museum where the most valuable pieces are exhibited.

These include: the vestments of St. Borromeo, a reliquary of gold and silver - a donation of Emperor Charles VI. and a rococo monstrance (1760) containing a drop of blood of the saint. Thomas Aquinas.

Even the image of the architect Fischer von Erlach, painted by Jacob von Schuppen, is one of the church treasures.

The iconographic program of the Charles Church was written by Carl Gustav Haerus, by this the Saint Charles Borromeo should be connected to the imperial founder.

www.univie.ac.at/hypertextcreator/ferstel/site/browse.php...

 

Claude Monet, Paris 1840 - Giverny 1926

Die japanische Brücke - The Japanese footbridge (1890)

National Gallery of Art, Washington DC, USA

 

Ten years after moving to Giverny in 1883, Claude Monet envisioned turning a small pond on an adjacent parcel of land into an Asian-influenced water garden. Overcoming the resistance of locals wary of introducing foreign plants into the region, Monet won approval to expand the pond by diverting water from the Epte River. He encircled the basin with a vivacious arrangement of flowers, trees, and bushes, and the next year filled it with water lilies. He added a Japanese-style wooden bridge in 1895, then a few years later started to paint the pond and its water lilies—and never stopped, making them the obsessive focus of his intensely searching work for the next quarter century.

 

Lush and luminous, The Japanese Bridge immerses us in the physical experience of being in the garden. With the bands of the blue bridge suspended like a canopy near the top of the canvas and no sky to be seen, the water and billowing foliage fill the visual field, immersing the viewer in the verdant, brightly colored waterscape. Cool blue and green tones predominate, but are balanced by the pink, white, and yellow lilies floating in complex pattern across the surface of the water from near to far. Controlled, vertical dabs of paint define the sparkling greenery and its fleeting reflection in the water, while the more fluid lilies are rendered with broad, textured, horizontal strokes that emphasize the shared physicality of the paint and the landscape.

 

Deeply admiring nature’s central role in Japanese culture, Monet here fuses Japanese motifs with his impressionist palette and brushstrokes to posit a hybrid, transcendent understanding of nature’s primacy. He first seriously explored translating the garden into paint in the summer of 1899, producing a series of 12 views of its light-dappled surface, arching footbridge, and surrounding flora. He exhibited the paintings, including this one, at the Durand-Ruel Gallery in Paris the following year.

 

Source: National Gallery of Art

236: On the north shore of the Sea of Galilee is the Church of St. Peter's Primacy where Jesus told Peter that upon this rock I shall build my church. It's a beautiful and quiet place to sit, relax and pray.

 

The water was warm and calm. We had the place to ourselves as we waded into the waters. The only ones to greet us was a large amount of fish swimming in and around our legs. Beautiful spot!

Built in 1937, this Usonian Modern house was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright for Herbert and Katherine Jacobs, whom would go on to commission Wright to design a second home for them further west about a decade later. The house is considered Wright’s first Usonian-style house, a departure from his previous Prairie School work in both aesthetics and in clientele, as the Jacobs family were Wright’s first clients who were middle class, rather than wealthy. The house was built during the Great Depression, and is the result of Herbert Jacobs, a friend of Wright, challenging the architect to design an affordable and decent home for $5,000. Wright took on the project, and created a design philosophy from it known as “Usonian,” which takes its name for Wright’s proposed moniker for people, places, and things from the United States of America, distinguishing it from the long-established phrase “American” which, confusingly, can refer to either people, places and things from either the United States of America, or the North American and South American continents. Wright envisioned a new form of architecture with the Usonian philosophy that would be affordable and not be beholden to traditions derived from Europe, responding instead to the American landscape. Wright designed his Usonian homes to not feature shrubbery, prominent foundations, chimneys, or front porches, and instead, directly connect to the surrounding landscape, and utilized materials including glass, stone, wood, and brick in the design and construction of the houses. The Jacobs House I became the prototype typical house for Wright’s envisioned “Broadacre City” concept that intended to drastically alter the form of human settlement in North America, which somewhat influenced suburban development in the United States, but did not ever get realized in anything close to resembling what Wright had intended. The Usonian houses grew more elaborate over time, eventually becoming far less affordable than they were intended, but the Jacobs House I was the first of these houses, and the most true to form, embodying the underlying design philosophy. At the time of the house’s construction, Herbert Jacobs was a young journalist who had just took on a position at the Madison Capital Times, and had a wife, Katherine Jacobs, and a young daughter. The Jacobs family lived in the small house until they outgrew it, moving out and selling the house in 1942, moving to a farm nine miles west of Madison, where they commissioned Wright to design them a new house, the Jacobs House II, in 1946-1948, which he dubbed his “Solar Hemicycle House,” which featured a more curvilinear form meant to follow the path of the sun and take advantage of passive solar heating in the winter and daylighting in the summer. The Jacobs family remained in Madison until Herbert retired in 1962, after which they lived in California until their deaths.

 

The L-shaped house is clad in wood and brick with a low-slope roof and wide overhanging eaves. The simple form of the house is a result of the Usonian philosophy of economical design, with small ribbon windows on the front offering privacy, contrasting with the much larger windows in the rear, which open to the rear garden. One end of the front facade features a carport that is open on two sides with a cantilevered roof supported by brick walls that run along the portions of the carport’s perimeter that adjoin the rest of the house. The house’s entrance is off the carport, as the design recognizes the primacy of the automobile in accessing the house, rather than walking to it from somewhere nearby. The house’s exterior accentuates its horizontality with its banded wooden cladding, roofline, and front facade windows, carrying over from Wright’s earlier Prairie School work. Inside the house, it is divided into two distinct areas, with the rear wing being quieter and more private spaces with the bedrooms and study inside this wing of the house. By contrast, the front wing has the more public areas, with an open-plan living room and dining room, the kitchen in a nook behind the fireplace, a terrace with large glass doors looking out at the rear garden, and the bathroom sitting between the two sections of the house. The interior features the same materials as the exterior, with brick and wood cladding, including economical prefabricated sandwich drywall, and wooden trim, and a stained concrete floor throughout containing heat conduits based on the Korean “Ondol” or “warm stone” system of heating, which consisted of pipes in a layer of sand below the house’s floor slab. The house does not feature an attic or basement except for a small cellar containing a boiler under the kitchen and bathroom, and was built utilizing a version of the simple slab-on-grade construction that became popular in the following decades for suburban middle class housing. The only major difference between this house’s four-inch slab foundation and conventional slab-on-grade construction is that it lacks any footings except at the large masonry fireplace, as the heating system prevents the ground under the house from freezing, eliminating the need for a footing below the frost line to prevent frost heave.

 

The house was a sensation when it was built, and the Jacobs family allowed tours of the house early on. The house was prominently featured in magazines and publications, and influenced the design of the ranch house that became popular in the 1950s and 1960s with its open kitchen, dining room, and living room. After the Jacobs family moved out, the house was cared for inconsistently by subsequent owners. The house was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1974, owing to its major historical significance, and was designated a National Historic Landmark in 2003. In 1982, the house was purchased by James Dennis, an Art History professor at the University of Wisconsin - Madison, who subsequently restored the house’s exterior and interior to their original appearance, and updating the building systems, which had worn out. The house remains in excellent condition today under the careful stewardship of multiple owners. The house is occasionally open for tours through the owner’s partnership with the Frank Lloyd Wright Wisconsin Heritage Tourism Program, Inc. One of the latest developments in the significant house’s history came in 2019, when it became one of eight Frank Lloyd Wright-designed buildings in the United States to be designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, known as “The 20th-Century Architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright”, alongside other notable buildings including Taliesin and Taliesin West, the Hollyhock House, Unity Temple, the Robie House, Fallingwater, and the Guggenheim Museum. The house’s influence on 20th Century modern residential architecture cannot be overstated, as it was the first time that such design quality really became attainable for the average person. The house, along with Fallingwater and the Johnson Wax Complex, marked a renaissance in Wright’s career, making him the well-known historical figure he is today, rather than as a derivative of Louis Sullivan he would likely have been viewed as had he ended his career at an age when most people retire.

  

In 192 BC, the Romans conquered the area and founded the outpost Toletum. Due to its iron ore deposits, Toledo developed into an important settlement. Since the first barbarian invasions, the ancient walls were reinforced. In 411 the Alans and later the Visigoths conquered the city. Toledo was the capital of the Visigoths' empire from about 531 to 711.

 

The Moors conquered the place in 712. Toledo experienced its heyday during the period of Moorish rule as Ṭulayṭula during the Caliphate of Córdoba until its conquest by Alfonso VI in 1085, after a four-year siege. In 1088, only a few years after the conquest, Archbishop Bernard of Toledo obtained confirmation from Pope Urban II that Toledo should hold the "primatus in totis Hispaniarum regnis" (primacy in all the kingdoms of the Iberian dominions). The Archbishop of Toledo is still today the Primate of the Catholic Church of Spain.

 

In the 12th and 13th centuries, the Toledo school of translators translated ancient philosophical writings (Plato, Aristotle) that had been translated from Greek into Arabic, but also genuinely Arabic writings from the fields of astronomy, mathematics, Islamic religion and theology into Latin.

 

After the conquest by Alfonso VI, Toledo became the residence of the Kingdom of Castile in 1087 and remained the capital of Spain until 1561.

In the 12th century, more than 12,000 Jews lived in Toledo.

 

According to an inscription, this synagogue was built in 1180, but it probably only acquired its current appearance in the 13th century. It is considered the oldest synagogue building in Europe still standing. After the attacks on the Jewish quarter in 1355 and 1391 and the emigration of many Jews, it was converted into a Catholic church in 1405.

 

The synagogue is a Mudéjar construction, created by Moorish architects. But it can also be considered one of the finest examples of Almohad architecture. The plain white interior walls as well as the use of brick and of pillars instead of columns are characteristics of Almohad architecture.

 

 

PERIYAR E.V.RAMASAMY and WOMEN RIGHTS

 

With regards to marriage, Periyar has stated that it is one of the worst customs in India. He claimed that the marriage principle, briefly, involves the enslavement of a woman by her husband and nothing else. This enslavement is concealed under the cover of marriage rites to deceive the women concerned by giving the wedding the false name of a divine function.[7]

 

There have been numerous papers in South India reporting how husbands have killed their wives, suspecting immoral behavior. The husband's suspicion of his wife's character has often led to murders. Those who believe in the divine dispensation, according to Periyar, do not have the knowledge to ask themselves why marriages conducted according to religious rites and the approval of God end in this fashion.[7]

 

Periyar further states that the very idea that the only proper thing for women to do is to be slaves of domesticity, bear children and bring them up, is a faulty one. As long as these restrictions are imposed on women, we can be sure that women have to be subservient to men and depend on men for help. If women have to live on terms of equality with men, they must have the liberty, like men, to have the kind of education they like and also to do unhampered, any work suitable to their knowledge, ability and taste.[8]

 

Furthermore, Periyar objected to terms like "giving of a maid" and "given in marriage". They are, "Sanskrit terms" and treat woman as a thing. He advocated the substitution of the word for marriage taken from the Tirukkual "Valkai thunai" or "life partner".[9]

 

Expenses[edit]

With marriage comes the expenses. Periyar stated that in our country, and particularly in Hindu society, a marriage is a function causing a lot of difficulties and waste to all people concerned. But those who conduct the marriage function and those who are getting married do not appear to notice the attendant difficulties because they think that social life necessitates wasteful expense and many difficulties and therefore they must necessarily face those inconveniences and hardships.[10]

 

Wedding feast, jewels, expensive clothes, procession, pandal, dance, music—money is spent on all these to satisfy the vanity of the organizers. Whatever may be the amount of money spent on the wedding and however pompous each of the items may be, the mirth and jollity associated with these are over in two or three days. In a week's time the prestige and honor connected with these are forgotten.[10] But the wedding expenses leave many families crushed; for many poor families these expenses leave an enormous burden and the debts remain uncleared for a number of years.[11]

 

However, if the money intended for the wedding expense is not borrowed and belongs to either of the marriage parties, then that amount could be used by her to bring up her children and to educate them. Such a procedure would be highly beneficial to her.[12]

 

Arranged marriages[edit]

In South Asia we mostly hear of arranged marriages as part of custom, heritage, and religions. Periyar thought that the Aryan wedding methods were barbarous because of the Aryan religion and art: Vedas, Sastras, Puranas, and Epics belong to the barbaric age. He further stated that is the reason why their wedding methods involve the parents giving the girl, prostituting the girl children and some stranger carrying the girl away by force or stealth.[13]

 

Arranged marriages in general were meant to enable the couple to live together throughout life and derive happiness, satisfaction and a good reputation, even years after the sexual urge and sexual pleasure are forgotten.[14]

 

But, with the selfish manipulation of this pact, Periyar claimed that women find 'pleasure' in slavish marriage because they have been brought up by their parents without education, independence and self-respect and because they have been made to believe that marriage means subordination to males. The inclusion of such slavish women in the group of 'chaste' women is another lure to them, leading them to find pleasure in such marriages.

 

Because a man is also married before he has understood the nature of life, its problems and its pleasures, he is satisfied with the slavish nature of the wife and the sexual pleasure she gives. If he finds any incompatibility, he adapts himself to his partner and the circumstances and puts up with his lot.[14]

 

Love marriages[edit]

Love marriages, claims Periyar, on the other hand will suit only those who have no ideals in life. Such a wedding gives primacy to sexual union along and it is doubtful if it indicates an agreement between the couple for good life. Sexual compatibility alone does not ensure happy married life; the couple should be able to live together cheerfully. Suitability for life or living together can be determined only if the man and woman get used to the company of each other, and are satisfied with each other. Only then, they can enter into an agreement to live together.[13]

 

Periyar further states that love marriages can give pleasure only as long as there is lust and the ability to satisfy that lust. If there is no compatibility between the partners in other respects, such marriages end only in the enslavement of women. The lies of such women resemble the lives of bullocks which are tied to a cart, beaten up and made to labor endlessly until they die.[14]

 

Therefore, there is a proverb stating, "A deeply loving girl is unfit for family life; a suitable life partner is unfit for love." Periyar believed that the agreement between partners to live together will constitute a better marriage than a love marriage.[14]

 

Self-respect marriages[edit]

In a leading article of Viduthalai, Periyar states that a self-respect wedding is based on rationalism. Rationalism is based on the individual's courage. Some may have the courage to conduct it during the time which almanacs indicate as the time of the planet Rahu and that, particularly in the evening. Some others may have just enough daring to avoid the Brahmin priest and his mother tongue - the Sanskrit language.[15] Some may feel nervous about not keeping the traditional lamp burning in broad daylight. Some others may have the rotten thought that conducting a wedding without 'mangala sutra' is disgraceful.

 

Still, the self-respect weddings conducted during the past thirty years have some basic limits. They are: Brahmins and their mantras should be utterly avoided; meaningless rituals, piling mud pots, one on another, having the traditional lamp during day time, ritual smoke - all these should be avoided. Rationalism does not approve of these. Periyar then asks why can't the government pass an Act that legalizes weddings which avoid the above-mentioned superstitious practices. If all these details cannot be accommodated in the Act, the latter can legalize weddings which don't have Brahmin priests, the Sanskrit language and the so called holy fire.[16]

 

Thus, marriages styled as Self-Respect marriages carried a threefold significance: a) replacing the Purohit, b) inter-caste equality, c) man-woman equality. Periyar claimed to have performed Self-Respect marriages unofficially since 1925 and officially since 1928.[17] Self-Respect marriages were legalized in 1967 by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) Government.[18]

 

Widow-remarriage[edit]

On the remarriage of widows, Periyar states that among the atrocities perpetrated by the Hindu male population against women, here we have to consider the treatment meted out to widows alone. If a girl loses her husband, even before knowing anything of worldly pleasures, she is compelled to close her eyes to everything in the world and die broken-hearted. Even in Periyar's community at the time, there were widowed girls below the age of 13 years. Periyar stated how it is a touching sight to see the parents of those widowed children treating them like untouchables.[19]

 

He goes on to say that whatever may be the reason for the present state of the Hindu society, my firm belief that the low position given permanently to widows may prove to be the reason for the utter ruin of the Hindu religion and the Hindu society.[20]

 

If we try to find the reason for such conduct, we will have to conclude that they instinctively feel that women are slaves, subservient to men and that they must be kept under control. That is why these people treat women like animals. They seem to feel that giving freedom to women is equivalent to committing a very serious crime. The result of this attitude is that there is no independence or freedom to one half of the human race. This wicked enslavement of half of the human race is due to the fact that men are physically a little stronger than women. This principle applies to all spheres of life and the weaker are enslaved by the stronger.

 

If slavery has to be abolished in society, the male arrogance and wickedness which lead to the enslavement of women must be abolished first. Only when this is achieved, the tender sprouts of freedom and equality will register growth.[21]

 

One of the reasons why Periayr hated Hinduism and the orthodoxy practiced in the name of Hinduism was the practice of child marriage. Many of the girl children who were married before they were ten or twelve years old became widows before they knew the meaning of the word. According to the 1921 All India Census the details of the child widows reported living in the country that time were as follows:[22]

 

1 year baby widows - 497

1 to 2 year child widows - 494

2 to 3 year child widows - 1,257

3 to 4 year child widows - 2,837

4 to 5 year child widows - 6,707

Total number of widows - 11,342

5 to 10 year young widows - 85,037

10 to 15 year young widows - 232,147

15 to 20 year young widows - 396,172

20 to 25 year young widows - 742,820

25 to 30 year young widows - 1,163,720

Total number of widows - 2,631,238[22][23]

Periyar was deeply disturbed when he realized that among the widows in India, 11,892 were little children below 5 years and that young widows below 15 years numbering 232,147 were denied the pleasures of life.[24]

 

With regards to the re-marriage of widows, Periyar stated that it is the practice of our people to refer to such a wedding as "a widow's marriage". Such an expression is used only with reference to women and in connection with men. Just as this lady is marrying another husband after the death of the first husband, many men marry again after the death of the first wife. But the second marriage of a man is not referred to as "a widower's marriage", though that is the proper thing to do.

 

Periyar himself was a widower. After becoming one, he took a second wife. He claimed that in the ancient days, both men and women in the country had this practice. There were numerous instances in sastras and puranas of women getting married again after the death of their first husband. Periyar further stated that this is not an unusual practice in the rest of the world though it might appear strange for us at the present time. Christian and Muslim women marry again after the death of the first husband. 90 percent of women in Muslim countries get married again soon after the death of the first husband. This may be unusual in certain sections of Indian societies. But it is a common practice in certain other sections of our society which are called very backward communities.[25]

 

Further, inter-caste marriages and remarriage of widows are on the increase in India. Brahmins oppose these because they are afraid that they cannot exploit the people any more in the name of sastras. For the same reason they oppose the Sharada Act which is necessary for social well-being.[26]

 

Child marriage[edit]

In all the meetings of the non-Brahmins and the Self-Respectors, Periyar condemned child marriages and emphasized the need for educating all girl children and giving right to young widows to get married again.

 

Periyar has been very much against child marriage and stated that it reflects the cruelty to which innocent girls were subjected by their well-meaning parents. Periyar asked that if these parents can be considered civilized in any sense of the term. There was no other leader other than Periyar who reacted against this practice of child marriage.[24]

 

Those who supported child marriage were strongly against Periyar's condemnation of this act. Take for example, the Sharada Act. Those who opposed this Act say that it was against the Sastras to conduct the marriage of a girl after she has attained puberty. They further say that those who conduct such marriages are committing a sin and therefore will go to hell.[27]

 

Chastity[edit]

Periyar claimed that "household duties" have risen out of the foolishness of people and were not natural duties.[28] He went on to say that it was our selfish greed which has multiplied our household work. Nobody need worry that without household work, the women will lose their "chastity". On chastity, Periyar went on to say that it is something that belongs to women and is not a pledge to men. Whatever, chastity is, it was something that belonged to individuals.

 

In society, it was believed that if people lose their chastity, they will get divine punishment. Others are not going to get that punishment. Referring to the doctrines of institutionalized orthodox religions, he went on to say that men need not to worry themselves that women are committing a sin by not doing household work. Thus, let men realize that women are not slaves and that men are not their masters or guardians. Women should be allowed to develop the competence to protect themselves and their chastity and men need not be their watchdogs. He also believed that it was derogatory for men to play such a role.[citation needed]

 

It was said by the orthodox[who?] that women will develop diseases if they lose their chastity. The disease that a woman gets affects the husbands also. If we[who?] educate the women, they will develop the capability to keep themselves and their husbands pure. Thus, Periyar stated in the Kudi Arasu for the society to think deeply about taking a decision and do the right thing for their sisters and girl children.[29]

 

Periyar kindled the thoughts of everybody by also ridiculing the use of the word chastity only with reference to women. (Periyar-Father of Tamil 32) He stated that character is essential for both men and women and that speaking of chastity only with reference to women degraded not merely women but men also. He extended this thought and said that in any sphere of activity, civilized society cannot think of one law for men and another for women. He also said that the way most men treated their women was far worse than the way the upper class people treated the lower class, the way in which rich men treated the poor and the way in which a master treated his slave.[30]

 

Education[edit]

On education, Periyar stated that some foolish parents believe that if girls get educated, they will correspond with their secret lovers. That it is a very foolish and mischievous notion. No parent need be anxious about it. If a girl writes a letter, it will only be to a male. We can even now caution men not to read any love letter addressed to them by a woman and, even if they read it, not to reply to it. If men do not listen to this advice, they, as well as the girls who write them must be punished. It will be a hopelessly bad thing, if parents keep their girl children uneducated for this reason.[29]

 

At a speeched delivered by Periyar at the Prize Distribution function in the Municipal School for Girls at Karungal Palayam, Erode, he stated that girl children should be taught active and energetic exercises like running, high jump, long jump,and wrestling so that they may acquire the strength and courage of men. Their time and energy should not be wasted in light pastimes like Kummi (groups going in a circle, clapping their hands rhythmically) and in Kolatam (striking with sticks rhythmically).

 

In ancient Tamil literature, poets have stressed the value of education for women. In a famous verse, a poet by the name of Naladiar stated that, "What gives beauty to a woman is not the hair style or the patter of her dress or the saffron on her face but only education".[31] In a verse of Eladhi it states, "Beauty does not lie in the style of wailing or in the charm of a blush but only in the combination of numbers and letters (education).[32]

 

In a 1960 issue of Viduthalai Periyar stated that "There should be a drastic revolution in the desires and ideals of Indian women. They should equip themselves to do all types of work that men are doing. They should have good domestic life without allowing nature's obstacles in their own lives. Therefore, there should be a welcome change in the minds of our women. The administrators also most pay special attention to the advancement of women".[33]

 

Armed forces[edit]

Periyar advocated for women to be given weapons to protect themselves in reply to a question put in the Central Legislature. He stated that we have no hope that the state governments will do anything in this sphere because most of the state ministers hold the orthodox belief that women are slavish creatures.[34] Though here and there we[who?] find women also as ministers, they are old-fashioned traditionalists who will say, "We don't want any kind of freedom. We are perfectly happy with slavery".[33]

 

In Periyar's time he explained that ""Indian" women had no self-determination in any sphere of life like education property and marriage. They thought that modern civilization meant dressing themselves like British and American women and adorning themselves. Even our educated women do not entertain any thought that they must enter the police and army departments and learn to pilot airplanes like the women of Russia and Turkey. Just as modern education has made men cowards an book-worms, it has made our women decoratie [sic] dolls and weaklings".[33]

 

In a leading article written by Periyar in Viduthalai in 1946, he claimed that unless there is a drastic, fundamental and revolutionary change in our[who?] administrative machinery, it is impossible to make our women independent beings.[33]

 

Periyar goes on to explain that in our country also, there are thousands of women with the courage, competence and desire to work in the police department. Just as girls going to school was considered wonderful and cycle-riding by girls was considered funny, a few years ago, women on police duty may appear to be wonderful or strange for a few years. Then, in course of time, this will be considered natural.[33]

 

We[who?] need methods that will effect an astounding revolution in the world of women. Until we acquire those methods, we will be moving forward like a tortoise and writing and talking about Drowpath and Sita.[35]

 

Periyar, in a 1932 article of Kudi Arasu, explained that "women should develop physical strength like men. They must take exercise and get training in the use of weapons. They must acquire the ability to protect themselves when any sex-mad person tries to molest them. They should get the necessary training to join the armey [sic] when need arises and fight the enemy. This is the view of all civilized people. Women also wholeheartedly support this view. When the general view in the world is like this, who can accept the statement of some people that there is no use in giving higher education to women?"[33]

 

Birth control[edit]

"Others advocate birth-control, with a view of preserving the health of women and conserving family property; but we advocate it for the liberation of women."[36]

In the Kudi Arasu of 1932, Periyar explained the basic differences between the reasons given to us for contraception and the reasons given by others for this. We say that contraception is necessary for women to gain freedom. Others advocate contraception taking into consideration many problems like the health of women, the health and energy of the children, the poverty of the country and the maintenance of the family property. Many Westerners also support contraception for the same reasons. Our view is not based on these considerations. We recommend that women should stop delivering children altogether because conception stands in the way of women enjoying personal freedom. Further, begetting a number of children prevents men also from being free and independent. This truth will be clear if we listen to talk of men and women when their freedom is hampered.[33]

 

He went on to say how birth control does not aim at preventing the birth of children altogether, but aims only at limiting births. A man and his wife may have two children, or at the most, three children. This birth control policy is against bringing forth an unlimited number of children.[37]

 

While Periyar and the Self-Respect movement were advocating for birth control, Rajaji (C. Rajagopalachariar) very strongly opposed it. Others who opposed birth control was Thiru Adhithanar, the publisher of an extremely popular newspaper, Dina Thandhi at the time. In response to Rajaji's stand against birth control, Periyar explained that he was against this since he was of the Vedic Brahmin community that staunchly engrossed in the Manu Dharma. Thus, limiting births of overpopulation would limit diseases and death from many and therefore leave Brahmin priests without a job of doing ceremonies for the sick and funerals. In a 1959 article of Viduthalai he exclaimed that "If people like Rajaji discover new islands, make the forests habitable, do propaganda for the birth of more and more children and have farms for the upbringing of children, we may be in a position to understand them."[38]

 

During the late 1950s, 80 percent of the men and 90 percent of the women in Tamil Nadu were illiterate. Siriyar argued in a 1959 article in Viduthalai that "in this situation, if birth control is not practiced and people are allowed to have any number of children, the result will be the multiplication of castes among the "Sudras", like washermen, barbers, pot-makers, kuravas or gypsies, hunters, fishermen, famers [sic], toddy tappers, padayachies, pillars, cobblers, pariahs, and a thousand others and a limitless increase in population. The increase in population will force the 'Sudras' to preserve themselves from starvation by standing with folded hands before lazy fellows and calling them 'swami', 'master' and 'landlord'. What good result can we expect if birth control is not adopted?"[39]

 

Previously in a 1933 article of the Kudi Arasu, Periyar, in his words, explained that "even a High Court Judge in India does not know the amount of trouble that a mother takes to bring up a child. If a husband is kind to his wife and shows concern for her health and happiness, he must adopt the contraceptive method. Otherwise, he must be one who could manage to see that in delivery and in the brining [sic] up of children, she does not have much trouble. Therefore, the proper thing to do now is to drastically cut the expenses mentioned above and spend money on the proper upbringing of children with the help of nurses."[40]

 

Property rights and divorce[edit]

With regards to property rights for women, Periyar stated that there was no difference between men and women. He went on to say that like men, women should have the right to own property and enjoy its benefits. With regards to divorce or separations, he advocated that a woman can lie away from her husband if he is an undesirable person and if he has nay virulent disease. When a woman has to live apart from her husband in these circumstances, she is entitled to maintenance allowance and a claim on the husband's property. Even if a widow gets remarried, she must be given the right to claim a share of the first husband's property.[41]

 

On February 4, 1946, the Central Legislature passed an Act giving the right the Hindu married woman to get from her husband in certain circumstances a separate place to live in and a maintenance allowance. Periyar explained how that it was a useless Act. since it seems that the members of the Hindu Mahasabha and Sanadahnis agitated against the grant of even this right.[42]

 

Dowry[edit]

On the Dowry system practiced widely throughout the Indian sub-continent not only by Hindus but Christians too, Periyar calls it a "serious disease that was spreading fast amongst Tamilians". He went on to state that the disease was also found in its virulent form among the Andhras and the Brahmins of Tamil Nadu. Periyar also argued that if a man with property worth one lakh has three daughters, he has to become a beggar by the time these daughters are married. In the name of dowry, the parents of the young men who marry the three daughters, squeeze the man's property out of him.[43]

 

In the 1959 issue of Viduthalai, Periyar stated that, "according to a new legislation, women have the right to a share of the parents' property. Therefore every girl will definitely get her legitimate share from the parents' wealth - if the parents are wealth. It is inhuamane [sic] on the part of the parents of a boy to dump on him a girl whom he does not like and to plan to such as much as they can from the property of the girl's father. There is basically no difference between selling education and love for money and selling one's chastity for money. 'Prostitute' is a germ of contempt for a woman; a boy should not be reduced by his avaricous [sic] parents to get the name, 'a prostituted boy' or 'a boy that has been sold'. A father-in-law who has means, however miserly he may be by nature, will not be indifferent when his daughter suffers out of poverty. Therefore, it is very shameful on the part of the bridegroom's parents to demand from the bride's father that at the time of the marriage he should gie jewels worth so many thousands along with so many thousand rupees as dowry and that he should provide the bridegroom with a house and a care. The fact that another party makes such demands at the time of his daughter's marriage does not justify any parent's demands at the time of his son's wedding. All people must realize that both demanding and giving dowry are wrong and they must boldly declare this when occasion arises."[44]

 

Periyar calls the dowry an evil and exploitative practice depriving tens of thousands of talented and beautiful young women with sound character remaining spinsters without any chance of getting married.[45]

 

Devadasis[edit]

Among the atrocities the Tamil society committed against women was the practice of keeping some women attached to temples as Devadasis. Dr. Muthulakshmi proposed the resolution at the Madras Legislature that the Devadasi system should be abolished. The Government wanted comments on that from all important people. Periyar in his statement pointed out that the Devadasi system was a disgrace to Hindu religion. The fact that, in the name of a temple or a god, some women are kept as common property is an insult to all the women in the society. He also remarked that the prevalence of this system encouraged immorality among men and thus set the pattern for unprincipled life in many families. This was stoutly opposed in the Assembly by Satyamurthi Iyer, an orthodox Congress member, under the pretext of safeguarding the Hindu traditions. It should be said to the credit of Dr. Muthulakshmi and the leaders like Periyar that the proposal of the Doctor was accepted and a law was enacted against the Devadasi system.[30]

 

Periyar's example of the degradation of women in the Devadasi system is explained that "if a man's physical passion is aroused when his wife is not with him, he immediately goes to a prostitute. Rough stones are planted where cows and bufaloes [sic] graze to facilitate the animals to rub against the stones when they feel like it.[46] Likewise, Devadasis served in temples and in all villages rough stones planted on the borders and they say that these two (employing devadasis and the planting rough stones) are aamong [sic] the 32 dharmas mentioned in the sastras. When we consider why his kindness to the suffering and also the 32 dharmas are all bogus".[46]

 

Resolutions passed[edit]

As the Self-Respect conference held in Chengalpattu, Tamil Nadu in 1929, the following were among the many resolutions passed with regards for women's rights:

 

Women should be given equal right along with men for the family property.

There should be no objection to employing women to any job for which they are qualified.[47]

Schools, particularly schools, should try to employ only women teachers.

At the conference held in Erode in 1930, the same resolutions were passed again reminding the delegates and others that the interest of women was still uppermost in Periyar's mind. M.R. Jayakar who presided oer the Erode conference was greatly impressed by the progressive views of Periyar and other members. He was particularly happy that the movement included not merely non-Brahmin Hindus but Christians and Muslims too. He pointed out that the Self-Respect movement was more progressive than Congress. Furthermore, at the Virudhnagar conference the women members held a separate conference and passed some resolutions demanding that women should have the right to select their life partners without any consideration of religion or community and that weddings should not involve wasteful expenditure and elaborate ceremonies.[47]

Vienna Baroque

Doris Binder

 

The center of Baroque art was undisputable Vienna, as a special promoter appeared the Emperor Charles VI., under whose reign not only the Karlskirche was built, but also numerous buildings have been newly planned or built. The passion for building of the High Baroque is not only founded by the destructions of the Turks, but also has its causes in the backward economic structure and its lack of production plants. Whether nobleman, cleric or commoner, all those with sufficient capital put it rather in construction funds into practice than not make use of it. Responsible for this was a deep distrust to the imperial fiscal policy and concern about the currency and a possible bankruptcy.

The Baroque emerged within the civil peace (*) Burgfrieden) of the city of Vienna, had at the beginning of the High Baroque era still dominated religious buildings, so the cityscape changed in just four decades. Vienna was transformed into a "palace city", by the year 1740, the number of pleasure palaces, gardens and belvederes had doubled. The Baroque style, which by crown, church and nobility was forced upon the citizens, is considered of Felix Czeike as "authority art". The existing social gap should be camouflaged by the rubberneck culture in festivities, receptions and parades.

 

*) Burgfrieden (The term truce or Castle peace referred to a jurisdiction in the Middle Ages around a castle, in which feuds, so hostilities of private individuals among themselves, under penalty of ostracism were banned. Today the term is mainly used in a figurative sense.

 

Due to the return of Fischer von Erlach to Vienna in 1686 and a decade later, Lukas von Hildebrandt, the primacy of the Italians in architecture was broken and the victory parade of Austrian Baroque began. The connection between the spiritual and secular powers found its mode of expression in the Baroque, which the appearance of the city of Vienna should characterize in a decisive manner.

 

Construction of Charles Church

The Karlskirche was built by Emperor Charles VI. commemorating the plague saint, Charles Borromeo. In 1713 the plague raged in Vienna and claimed about 8,000 human lives, in February 1714 the plague disappeared and as a sign of gratitude was began with the construction of the church, this should become the most important religious building of Vienna in the 18th century.

In a contest was decided on the builder - participants were Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, Johann Lukas von Hildebrandt and Ferdinando Galli-Bibienas. As winner emerged the famous architect Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, he died in 1723 and did not live to the achievement of the Church. The supervision was transferred to the imperial court architect Anton Erhard Martinelli, as Fischer von Erlach died, his son, Joseph Emmanuel, finished his work. On 28 October 1737 St. Charles Church was solemnly by the Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Sigismund Count Kollowitz, inaugurated. The spiritual care ceded Emperor Karl VI. to the chivalric Order of the Cross with the Red Star, since 1783 is the Karlskirche imperial patronage parish.

The church at that time lay still behind the regulated river Wien (Wienfluss) and in the open field. The directed towards the city face side of the Charles Church, which stood on the edge of the suburb of Wieden, was target point of a line of sight the Hofburg and St. Charles Church in the sense of a "via triumphalis" connecting. On the temple-like front building of the Karlskirche the dedication inscription is clearly visible "Vota mea Reddam in conspectu timentium Deum" - "I will fulfill my vow before those who fear God."

Already during the construction by Fischer von Erlach (senior), there were several project phases, three of which have been preserved:

 

1. Medaillon by Daniel Warou for the groundbreaking ceremony

2. Fore stitches in Fischer's draft of a historical architecture 1721

3. Viennese view of work by Klein and Pfeffel 1722 (1724)

 

Due to the death of Fischer von Erlach, occured recent changes made by his son, Joseph Emmanuel most of all being concerned the dome (much higher and steeper), the priest choir (omitted) and the interior (simpler). The entire project took a total of 21 years and the costs amounted to 304 045 guilders and 22 ¼ cruisers. The construction costs were shouldered by all crown lands of the Empire, but also Spain, Milan and the Netherlands had to make a contribution.

The Karlskirche is the most important Baroque building of the city and represents the most convincing the so-called Empire style in which for the last time an empire awareness in the architecture of the capital of the Holy Roman Empire after the victorious ended wars against the Turks and the French was expressed.

Symbolism of the Karlskirche

The Karlskirche consists of a central rotunda with a dome, preceded by a column structure like a Greek temple, of two high pillars illustrated on the model of Trajan's Column in Rome and of two lateral gate pavilions. The illustrated columns represent Charles VI. as a wise and strong secular ruler, the two great pillars were created by Marder and Matielli. The columns are crowned by golden eagles, symbolizing the two virtues of the Emperor - fortitudo (bravery) and constantia (resistance). The two pillars are evocative of the two pillars before the temple in Jerusalem - Jachin and Boaz. However, the illustration of the two columns does not match the model of the Trajan columns in Rome, portraying war deeds, but these tell the life story of St. Borromeo. In the front view of the Karlskirche a wide range of different symbols become one whole - the Roman emperors Trajan and Augustus, the Temple of Solomon, St. Peter's Church in Rome, Hagia Sophia, Charlemagne and the Empire of Charles V. - through the skillfully used symbols should be shown the claim of the house of Habsburg to the European domination.

The plan view of the church is, as in baroque typical, ellipsoid. In the interior of the Karlskirche the great Baroque sculpture is immediately noticeable, representing St. Borromeo. At the base the four Latin Fathers of the Church are depicted. The interior of the Karlskirche is dominated by the tremendous fresco in the oval dome room, it was created by the eminent Baroque painter Johann Michael Rottmayr between 1725-1730. The fresco shows the Mother of God representing the intercession of the patron Saint of the Church to help head off the plague, surrounded is the scene by the cardinal virtues (faith, hope and love). In the left entrance wing is situated the tomb for the Austrian poet Heinrich Joseph von Collin (17771-1811).

Inside the St. Charles Church, there is a museum where the most valuable pieces are exhibited.

These include: the vestments of St. Borromeo, a reliquary of gold and silver - a donation of Emperor Charles VI. and a rococo monstrance (1760) containing a drop of blood of the saint. Thomas Aquinas.

Even the image of the architect Fischer von Erlach, painted by Jacob von Schuppen, is one of the church treasures.

The iconographic program of the Charles Church was written by Carl Gustav Haerus, by this the Saint Charles Borromeo should be connected to the imperial founder.

www.univie.ac.at/hypertextcreator/ferstel/site/browse.php...

 

Vienna Baroque

Doris Binder

 

The center of Baroque art was undisputable Vienna, as a special promoter appeared the Emperor Charles VI., under whose reign not only the Karlskirche was built, but also numerous buildings have been newly planned or built. The passion for building of the High Baroque is not only founded by the destructions of the Turks, but also has its causes in the backward economic structure and its lack of production plants. Whether nobleman, cleric or commoner, all those with sufficient capital put it rather in construction funds into practice than not make use of it. Responsible for this was a deep distrust to the imperial fiscal policy and concern about the currency and a possible bankruptcy.

The Baroque emerged within the civil peace (*) Burgfrieden) of the city of Vienna, had at the beginning of the High Baroque era still dominated religious buildings, so the cityscape changed in just four decades. Vienna was transformed into a "palace city", by the year 1740, the number of pleasure palaces, gardens and belvederes had doubled. The Baroque style, which by crown, church and nobility was forced upon the citizens, is considered of Felix Czeike as "authority art". The existing social gap should be camouflaged by the rubberneck culture in festivities, receptions and parades.

 

*) Burgfrieden (The term truce or Castle peace referred to a jurisdiction in the Middle Ages around a castle, in which feuds, so hostilities of private individuals among themselves, under penalty of ostracism were banned. Today the term is mainly used in a figurative sense.

 

Due to the return of Fischer von Erlach to Vienna in 1686 and a decade later, Lukas von Hildebrandt, the primacy of the Italians in architecture was broken and the victory parade of Austrian Baroque began. The connection between the spiritual and secular powers found its mode of expression in the Baroque, which the appearance of the city of Vienna should characterize in a decisive manner.

 

Construction of Charles Church

The Karlskirche was built by Emperor Charles VI. commemorating the plague saint, Charles Borromeo. In 1713 the plague raged in Vienna and claimed about 8,000 human lives, in February 1714 the plague disappeared and as a sign of gratitude was began with the construction of the church, this should become the most important religious building of Vienna in the 18th century.

In a contest was decided on the builder - participants were Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, Johann Lukas von Hildebrandt and Ferdinando Galli-Bibienas. As winner emerged the famous architect Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, he died in 1723 and did not live to the achievement of the Church. The supervision was transferred to the imperial court architect Anton Erhard Martinelli, as Fischer von Erlach died, his son, Joseph Emmanuel, finished his work. On 28 October 1737 St. Charles Church was solemnly by the Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Sigismund Count Kollowitz, inaugurated. The spiritual care ceded Emperor Karl VI. to the chivalric Order of the Cross with the Red Star, since 1783 is the Karlskirche imperial patronage parish.

The church at that time lay still behind the regulated river Wien (Wienfluss) and in the open field. The directed towards the city face side of the Charles Church, which stood on the edge of the suburb of Wieden, was target point of a line of sight the Hofburg and St. Charles Church in the sense of a "via triumphalis" connecting. On the temple-like front building of the Karlskirche the dedication inscription is clearly visible "Vota mea Reddam in conspectu timentium Deum" - "I will fulfill my vow before those who fear God."

Already during the construction by Fischer von Erlach (senior), there were several project phases, three of which have been preserved:

 

1. Medaillon by Daniel Warou for the groundbreaking ceremony

2. Fore stitches in Fischer's draft of a historical architecture 1721

3. Viennese view of work by Klein and Pfeffel 1722 (1724)

 

Due to the death of Fischer von Erlach, occured recent changes made by his son, Joseph Emmanuel most of all being concerned the dome (much higher and steeper), the priest choir (omitted) and the interior (simpler). The entire project took a total of 21 years and the costs amounted to 304 045 guilders and 22 ¼ cruisers. The construction costs were shouldered by all crown lands of the Empire, but also Spain, Milan and the Netherlands had to make a contribution.

The Karlskirche is the most important Baroque building of the city and represents the most convincing the so-called Empire style in which for the last time an empire awareness in the architecture of the capital of the Holy Roman Empire after the victorious ended wars against the Turks and the French was expressed.

Symbolism of the Karlskirche

The Karlskirche consists of a central rotunda with a dome, preceded by a column structure like a Greek temple, of two high pillars illustrated on the model of Trajan's Column in Rome and of two lateral gate pavilions. The illustrated columns represent Charles VI. as a wise and strong secular ruler, the two great pillars were created by Marder and Matielli. The columns are crowned by golden eagles, symbolizing the two virtues of the Emperor - fortitudo (bravery) and constantia (resistance). The two pillars are evocative of the two pillars before the temple in Jerusalem - Jachin and Boaz. However, the illustration of the two columns does not match the model of the Trajan columns in Rome, portraying war deeds, but these tell the life story of St. Borromeo. In the front view of the Karlskirche a wide range of different symbols become one whole - the Roman emperors Trajan and Augustus, the Temple of Solomon, St. Peter's Church in Rome, Hagia Sophia, Charlemagne and the Empire of Charles V. - through the skillfully used symbols should be shown the claim of the house of Habsburg to the European domination.

The plan view of the church is, as in baroque typical, ellipsoid. In the interior of the Karlskirche the great Baroque sculpture is immediately noticeable, representing St. Borromeo. At the base the four Latin Fathers of the Church are depicted. The interior of the Karlskirche is dominated by the tremendous fresco in the oval dome room, it was created by the eminent Baroque painter Johann Michael Rottmayr between 1725-1730. The fresco shows the Mother of God representing the intercession of the patron Saint of the Church to help head off the plague, surrounded is the scene by the cardinal virtues (faith, hope and love). In the left entrance wing is situated the tomb for the Austrian poet Heinrich Joseph von Collin (17771-1811).

Inside the St. Charles Church, there is a museum where the most valuable pieces are exhibited.

These include: the vestments of St. Borromeo, a reliquary of gold and silver - a donation of Emperor Charles VI. and a rococo monstrance (1760) containing a drop of blood of the saint. Thomas Aquinas.

Even the image of the architect Fischer von Erlach, painted by Jacob von Schuppen, is one of the church treasures.

The iconographic program of the Charles Church was written by Carl Gustav Haerus, by this the Saint Charles Borromeo should be connected to the imperial founder.

www.univie.ac.at/hypertextcreator/ferstel/site/browse.php...

 

In 192 BC, the Romans conquered the area and founded the outpost Toletum. Due to its iron ore deposits, Toledo developed into an important settlement. Since the first barbarian invasions, the ancient walls were reinforced. In 411 the Alans and later the Visigoths conquered the city. Toledo was the capital of the Visigoths' empire from about 531 to 711.

 

The Moors conquered the place in 712. Toledo experienced its heyday during the period of Moorish rule as Ṭulayṭula during the Caliphate of Córdoba until its conquest by Alfonso VI in 1085, after a four-year siege. In 1088, only a few years after the conquest, Archbishop Bernard of Toledo obtained confirmation from Pope Urban II that Toledo should hold the "primatus in totis Hispaniarum regnis" (primacy in all the kingdoms of the Iberian dominions). The Archbishop of Toledo is still today the Primate of the Catholic Church of Spain.

 

In the 12th and 13th centuries, the Toledo school of translators translated ancient philosophical writings (Plato, Aristotle) that had been translated from Greek into Arabic, but also genuinely Arabic writings from the fields of astronomy, mathematics, Islamic religion and theology into Latin.

 

After the conquest by Alfonso VI, Toledo became the residence of the Kingdom of Castile in 1087 and remained the capital of Spain until 1561.

 

The cathedral was founded in 1226. Ferdinand III (aka “the Saint”) laid the first stone in 1227 after he had the old Visigothic church demolished. This had previously been converted into a mosque by the Moors and they wanted to radically remove this influence. The first architect, named “Master Martín” is mentioned in 1227. He either was French or had worked there before, as this building was clearly modeled after the Bourges Cathedral. It is widely believed to be one of the most important Gothic churches in Spain.

 

It measures 120 meters in length by 59 meters in width and 44.5 meters high. It consists of five naves with a transept and double ambulatory.

   

Kent Town Wesley Uniting Church

 

Built 1864 as Wesleyan Methodist Church.

Tapley’s Hill bluestone construction.

Transepts added 1867, vestries & classrooms 1869, lecture Hall 1874.

Opening service July 1865. First Pastor Rev S Ironside.

Church pioneers include Michael Kingsborough, Mayor 1870–71.

Originally Collegiate Church of Prince Alfred College.

*Ref: plaque by Kensington & Norwood Historical Society Inc. August 1994.

 

Kent Town was named after pioneer settler, Dr Benjamin Kent MD, who established East Park Farm in 1840 on Section 255 on land leased from Colonel Torrens. However, due to a dispute over ownership it was not subdivided until 1854 following Charles Robin’s purchase of the section. A mere two kilometres east of the city, Kent Town was the largest and most expensive sale of land in the colony and the close proximity made it a desirable residential area for prosperous merchants, enterprising businessmen and for many influential Wesleyan Methodists.

 

The reformist Wesleyan Methodists were part of South Australia’s great experiment in social democracy which fostered religious freedom and cultivated a ‘Paradise of Dissent’ that challenged the supremacy and authority of Anglicanism. A leading member of the community, Sir John Colton purchased three blocks at the corner of Kent Town and Grenfell Street on which to build a grand church to mark the 1864 jubilee of the Wesleyan Missionary Society and to be a symbol of Wesleyan achievement in the new province.

 

Prominent Wesleyans such as Francis Faulding of the pharmaceutical business, George P Harris, founder of Harris Scarf & Co, merchants Thomas & William Rhodes and W T Flint, insurance agent Thomas Padman, land agent George Cotton, importer Michael Kingsborough and local vigneron William Clarke donated money to the building of the church. An important benefactor was the wealthy mining investor and founding director of the Bank of Adelaide, Thomas Greaves Waterhouse, whose charismatic conversion to Wesleyan Methodism came after he married Eliza Faulding in 1852.

 

London trained architects, Edmund Wright (1824–1888) and Edward Woods (1837–1913) were commissioned to design the new church described as ‘English Gothic’ in style. Their design reflected the preoccupation with medieval forms and the devotion to ‘uplifting the spirit’ and the primacy of preaching in Methodism with its magnificent central pulpit. The church was constructed with a steeply pitched roof, pinnacles, arched window tracery, wall buttresses and an imposing grand interior that gave it an aura of religious splendour.

On Sunday 6 August 1865, the nave of the new church was opened by the evangelist American preacher, Reverend William ‘California’ Taylor, with over 4000 people attending the celebratory service. In 1868, transepts and a schoolroom were added to the building. The Kent Town Jubilee Church could seat 1100 people for a service making it one of the largest in the State.

 

As rivalry between the Wesleyans and the Anglicans grew the idea of a Wesleyan College was considered to counter the influence of the Collegiate School of St Peter’s at Hackney. T G Waterhouse purchased the last section of undeveloped land in Kent Town for the purpose of building a school devoted to the education of young men. In November 1867, one of the greatest controversies to beset the province of South Australia occurred when His Royal Highness Prince Alfred was invited to lay the foundation stone of the new Dissenters’ School and to give permission for it to be named Prince Alfred College.

 

For over a century, the Jubilee Church had a special place in the hearts of generations of Methodist who were moved to action by great preachers and beliefs which challenged the mores of South Australian society.

Ref: Jubilee Church story board

   

St John the Baptist Catholic Cathedral of East Anglia, Earlham Road, Norwich

 

This great church sits just beyond the inner ring road, on the site of the former city gaol. Four lanes of traffic cut it off from Upper St Giles and the city centre, but as they drop sharply down Grapes Hill they accentuate the position, power and sheer bulk of this magnificent building as it rises above the west side of the city. The massive tower seems a fatherly companion to the thirty-odd surviving medieval towers in Norwich, and it may surprise you to learn that it was only completed in 1910. At that date, St John the Baptist was the largest post-Reformation church in England, for this building only became a Cathedral as recently as 1976. Many people consider it to be the finest Gothic Revival church in the country.

 

These days, the Catholic Church has the largest number of practising members of any of the Christian Churches in England. It's been that way for several years, and with the recent influx into the country of hundreds of thousands of East Europeans, it is unlikely to change in the near future. It is salutary to remember, then, that it is less than two hundred years since the practice of the Catholic Faith in this country was decriminalised.

 

The Catholic Church had been expelled from England at the time of the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century, and consequently thousands of Catholics suffered grim punishments for their adherence to the faith of their forefathers. Many of the government reformers of the 1540s had wanted to go further, and to establish a fully protestant Church in England without any traditional hierarchy; but the early death of Edward VI, the similarly short reign of Mary, and the Anglican Settlement of the Elizabethan years, ensured that protestantism in England would retain the administrative structures of the banished Catholic Church, and some of the outward aspects of its worship. Mind you, it would be a rocky ride for the Anglicans over the next century or so.

 

Catholicism became increasing irrelevant and marginalised during the long, penal years. In retrospect, this was a good thing. After the furious martyrdoms of the Elizabethan period, the English Catholic community settled into an introspective retreat from public view. During the 17th Century, it would on occasion be forced unwillingly into the glare of controversy by 'Popish plots', real or imagined, but by the 18th century it had become a rare and exotic flower, occasionally encountered, but significant more for its strangeness than for its influence. By the start of the 19th century, there were perhaps less than a thousand Catholics in all East Anglia.

 

During these times, England was treated as a missionary territory by the Catholic Church. In the early years, the Faith was largely maintained and ministered by Jesuits, but by the 18th century there were Vicars Apostolic appointed by the Vatican to carry out the work of Bishops in designated Districts. East Anglia was in the vast Midland District. The work of these proto-Bishops was quite illegal, and they would be arrested if they were caught. Catholics relied for the sacraments on the itinerant Priests maintained by certain large country houses. Catholics in London had access to the chapels of foreign embassies, which welcomed the indigenous Faithful to Mass. It was not permissible for Catholics in England to build their own churches, and there was no right of assembly. However, there were already mission chapels in most towns, which were tolerated as long as the local Catholic community kept a low profile. There was one in Norwich in a room in the St Swithin's district, off of St Benedict's Street, run by Jesuits. It was followed soon after by a purpose-built chapel in Maddermarket Street, dedicated to St John the Baptist.

 

In 1780, a Reform Act began the process of decriminalisation; in response, an anti-Catholic pogrom in London, the Gordon Riots, resulted in hundreds of deaths. There was widespread public revulsion against this event, resulting in an increased sympathy for the Catholic community. A few years later, the fear of the French Revolution caused further support for the Catholic minority in England, and this contributed to more reform in the 1820s and 1830s. At last, it was possible for Catholic churches to be built, and for Catholic communities to be formed.

 

During the 1820s, the first proper Catholic church in Norwich since the Reformation was built. The Holy Apostles Chapel, a grand classical building in Willow Lane, survives as the headquarters of a firm of solicitors. It was ministered by Jesuits. It would be true to say that the Catholic Church in England had become very visible, very quickly, in these early decades of the 19th century. This led to further difficulties, because for the first time in centuries the possible influence of the Church led to a reaction. Would newly-liberated Catholics be loyal to the Crown? Would a Catholic Church which was given its head threaten the legitimacy of the Church of England?

 

A group of Anglican dons at Oxford University issued a series of tracts in an attempt to assert the primacy of the Church of England as a National Church. The teachings of the Oxford Movement, as it was known, spread like wildfire through the Church of England, turning it upside down, and reinventing it in terms of its medieval past. Anglican parish church buildings became sacramental and liturgical spaces once more, no more the preaching houses they had become under the influence of protestantism.

 

Religion was a popular thing in the middle years of the 19th century. At the time of the 1851 Census of Religious Worship, perhaps one in three of all English people attended an Anglican church service on a Sunday. Many others were drawn to the non-conformist chapels, especially in East Anglia.

 

The Catholic Church barely registers on the radar of the 1851 census, especially in East Anglia. Yet, in a little over 150 years, it would become the largest Church in England in terms of attendance. How did this happen?

 

One of the major rites of passage for the newly-legal Catholic Church happened the same year as the census. This was the re-establishment of the Church hierarchy in England and Wales. For the first time, there would be a college of Bishops, led by the Archbishop of Westminster, each Bishop having his own diocese. These Catholic dioceses, of course, would overlay those of the Church of England. Because there were far fewer Catholics, the Catholic dioceses were much larger - Norwich was in the vast Diocese of Northampton. The sees of Catholic dioceses were chosen carefully by the hierarchy; no city which already had an Anglican cathedral would be given a Catholic one, so as not to stir up anti-Catholic feeling. The new Cathedrals were in places of significance to Church history: Southwark and Westminster, Leeds and Middlesbrough, Salford and Clifton.

 

The dioceses were carved up into Catholic parishes, again overlaying the Anglican ones, and again much bigger than their pre-Reformation counterparts. Whereas 16th century Norwich had perhaps 36 Catholic parishes, there was now just one.

 

By 1870, the Holy Apostles Parish had a community of 1,200 Catholics, and a further town centre church followed in Fisher Lane. Yet Norwich was a staunchly protestant town, looking askance on the ritualist movement within the Church of England, and barely tolerating the increasing Catholic presence within its midst.

 

It was the industrialisation of England which had led to the emergence in the 19th century of a large, urban, mainly poor, Catholic population. This sat ill-at-ease with the Country House-led Catholicism of previous generations, but it was often the philanthropy of the landed Catholics which enabled the Catholic Church in urban areas to thrive. In the 1870s, Our Lady and the English Martyrs, a vast Catholic church, was opened in Cambridge. It had been erected thanks to the fortunes of Mrs Lynne-Stephens of Lynford in Norfolk, and was one of the largest churches built in England in the 19th century. It was clear that if, as seemed likely, the Diocese of Northampton was one day split into two smaller dioceses, the Cambridge church would be ideal as the Cathedral of the new eastern diocese. Cambridge, after all, had no Anglican cathedral, while Norwich did. A similarly large church was begun in Ipswich, although it was never completed. All over England, the Catholic communites were becoming more confident, even triumphalist. Larger and larger churches were being erected. And yet, the mood seemed not to have affected Norwich, with its two little Catholic chapels.

 

However, this hedging of bets for the future was complicated by one unusual, but ultimately significant, fact. The leading Catholic family of England then, as now, were the Dukes of Norfolk. The Duke of the day had been very generous with his money towards the building of the Cathedral at Southwark, and was responsible for the building of two great churches at Arundel and Sheffield, two places where the family had great influence. Norwich was a third.

 

In 1877, Henry Fitzalan Howard, the 15th Duke of Norfolk, married Lady Flora Hastings, and he decided to commemorate the event in stone. In 1892 he would write a letter to the Mayor of Norwich, remembering the occasion. "When, shortly after my most happy marriage, I wished to build a church as a thank-offering to God, many places were suggested to me. Bearing in mind the title that I hold, I decided to build this church in Norwich, the chief city of Norfolk." A site had been purchased in Coslany, but before any clearance began, the 1827 city gaol came onto the market. This was also bought, and in 1881 the buildings on it were demolished. The Duke selected as architect for the new building George Gilbert Scott Junior, a convert to Catholicism. It would be dedicated to St John the Baptist, in memory of the chapel in Maddermarket Street. The style was to be Early English Gothic. The size would be immense. There seems to have been no competition. The foundation stone was laid on the 17th July 1884.

 

Construction proceeded smoothly until 1892, when it was discovered that there was no planning permission for the full length of the building. This was the occasion for the Duke's letter mentioned in the previous paragraph, throwing himself somewhat on the mercy of the Corporation. "After considerable hesitation", he wrote, "I venture to address you on the subject of the church I am building in Norwich. As you are aware, difficulties have arisen... and I fear that there is danger not only of the city and myself being driven to great expense in litigation, but of its appearing as if I was acting in a hostile spirit towards the Corporation of Norwich in my attempt to add one more to the beauties of their beautiful city. It is this last consideration which chiefly induces me to trouble you with this letter."

 

The Duke went on to observe that "I have now built half the church, and I do not think any member of the corporation will suggest that it is a building of which Norwich has any cause to be ashamed... Norwich has got half my church. If it does not want the other half, perhaps I had better build it in some place which will appreciate it more. To me, of course, the result will be a disappointment."

 

This combination of charm and bluff seemed to do the trick, and by 1894 the nave had been completed, and services were moved from the two smaller churches in the parish into St John the Baptist. Scott died in 1897, and the work was finished by his brother, John Oldrich Scott. And so, on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, December 8th 1910, the great church was opened with a Blessing and High Pontifical Mass celebrated by the Bishop of Northampton, Dr Keating. Within the lifetime of people who had known the end of the penal years, the greatest Catholic church in England was complete.

 

The church is a magnificent, cruciform structure, 275 feet long. The chancel roof rises to a height of 80 feet, the top of the crossing a further 80 feet above that. Although the harmony and confidence of the Early English style here is perfection, the glory of the cathedral is perhaps not in its stonework at all, but in the extensive scheme of glass by Powell & Son. The style is entirely in keeping, entirely traditional. The overwhelming colour is blue, and on a bright day it can be like standing inside of a vast jewel.

 

You enter the building through the north porch. On a bright day, it can take a moment to accustom the eyes to the dim light within, although, because of the glass, this church could never be described as gloomy. The great arcades lead the eye down the long bays to the light of the crossing, and the sanctuary beyond. The walls climb high to the triforium and clerestory. As in all large churches, the nave would be greatly improved if it were cleared of the 19th century benches and these were replaced with modern chairs. But these are not too intrusive, not least because the aisles are clear and punctuated by devotional statues, a pleasing route to walk around the church. Incidentally, it is not unusual to find yourself alone in this vast space. Even today, Norwich has a much smaller Catholic population than either Cambridge or Ipswich, and you can wander here as if you owned the place in a way which would never be possible in Cambridge's Our Lady and the English Martyrs. This is true even since the completion of the brilliant narthex complex to the north, with its very fine café.

 

Beyond the crossing, smaller chapels let eastwards off of the transepts, including the Walsingham Chapel and the chapel of Christian Unity. The Second Spring of the Catholic Church in England has flourished into a vigorous Summer, and today the Catholic population of East Anglia continues to grow rapidly. In 1961, an Auxiliary Bishop was appointed to the Diocese of Northampton, with special responsibility for East Anglia. Fifteen years later, on the 13th of March 1976, the Diocese of Northampton was split in two, and the three eastern counties of Cambridgeshire, Norfolk and Suffolk formed the new Diocese of East Anglia. There was never any question that the Cathedral would be here in Norwich. Since the sensitivities of the 19th century, the Church of England had created a number of Cathedrals in cities already served by Catholic Cathedrals, most significantly Birmingham and Liverpool, but in deference to the spirit of those times this Church is always known as the Cathedral of East Anglia, or St John's Cathedral, without any reference to the name of the city.

 

A friend observed to me recently that you could see everything there was to see in St John the Baptist in an hour, while it would take a week for the Anglican Cathedral to give up all its treasures. This is certainly true, and while I would observe that the Anglican Cathedral was itself a Catholic Cathedral once, I would also say that it is a good thing. For, as Bill Wilson observes in the revised edition of Pevsner, this "amazing church... is of course an end and not a beginning". He goes on to describe the style as "self-effacing historicism... with nothing of the new freedom and licence of Sedding or Caroe, i.e. the Arts & Crafts". And amen to that, for here we have the best example in England of a great Gothic Revival church, a perfection of the late Victorian imagination in stone. As with its Anglican counterpart, it is certainly a great national treasure.

Vienna Baroque

Doris Binder

 

The center of Baroque art was undisputable Vienna, as a special promoter appeared the Emperor Charles VI., under whose reign not only the Karlskirche was built, but also numerous buildings have been newly planned or built. The passion for building of the High Baroque is not only founded by the destructions of the Turks, but also has its causes in the backward economic structure and its lack of production plants. Whether nobleman, cleric or commoner, all those with sufficient capital put it rather in construction funds into practice than not make use of it. Responsible for this was a deep distrust to the imperial fiscal policy and concern about the currency and a possible bankruptcy.

The Baroque emerged within the civil peace (*) Burgfrieden) of the city of Vienna, had at the beginning of the High Baroque era still dominated religious buildings, so the cityscape changed in just four decades. Vienna was transformed into a "palace city", by the year 1740, the number of pleasure palaces, gardens and belvederes had doubled. The Baroque style, which by crown, church and nobility was forced upon the citizens, is considered of Felix Czeike as "authority art". The existing social gap should be camouflaged by the rubberneck culture in festivities, receptions and parades.

 

*) Burgfrieden (The term truce or Castle peace referred to a jurisdiction in the Middle Ages around a castle, in which feuds, so hostilities of private individuals among themselves, under penalty of ostracism were banned. Today the term is mainly used in a figurative sense.

 

Due to the return of Fischer von Erlach to Vienna in 1686 and a decade later, Lukas von Hildebrandt, the primacy of the Italians in architecture was broken and the victory parade of Austrian Baroque began. The connection between the spiritual and secular powers found its mode of expression in the Baroque, which the appearance of the city of Vienna should characterize in a decisive manner.

 

Construction of Charles Church

The Karlskirche was built by Emperor Charles VI. commemorating the plague saint, Charles Borromeo. In 1713 the plague raged in Vienna and claimed about 8,000 human lives, in February 1714 the plague disappeared and as a sign of gratitude was began with the construction of the church, this should become the most important religious building of Vienna in the 18th century.

In a contest was decided on the builder - participants were Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, Johann Lukas von Hildebrandt and Ferdinando Galli-Bibienas. As winner emerged the famous architect Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, he died in 1723 and did not live to the achievement of the Church. The supervision was transferred to the imperial court architect Anton Erhard Martinelli, as Fischer von Erlach died, his son, Joseph Emmanuel, finished his work. On 28 October 1737 St. Charles Church was solemnly by the Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Sigismund Count Kollowitz, inaugurated. The spiritual care ceded Emperor Karl VI. to the chivalric Order of the Cross with the Red Star, since 1783 is the Karlskirche imperial patronage parish.

The church at that time lay still behind the regulated river Wien (Wienfluss) and in the open field. The directed towards the city face side of the Charles Church, which stood on the edge of the suburb of Wieden, was target point of a line of sight the Hofburg and St. Charles Church in the sense of a "via triumphalis" connecting. On the temple-like front building of the Karlskirche the dedication inscription is clearly visible "Vota mea Reddam in conspectu timentium Deum" - "I will fulfill my vow before those who fear God."

Already during the construction by Fischer von Erlach (senior), there were several project phases, three of which have been preserved:

 

1. Medaillon by Daniel Warou for the groundbreaking ceremony

2. Fore stitches in Fischer's draft of a historical architecture 1721

3. Viennese view of work by Klein and Pfeffel 1722 (1724)

 

Due to the death of Fischer von Erlach, occured recent changes made by his son, Joseph Emmanuel most of all being concerned the dome (much higher and steeper), the priest choir (omitted) and the interior (simpler). The entire project took a total of 21 years and the costs amounted to 304 045 guilders and 22 ¼ cruisers. The construction costs were shouldered by all crown lands of the Empire, but also Spain, Milan and the Netherlands had to make a contribution.

The Karlskirche is the most important Baroque building of the city and represents the most convincing the so-called Empire style in which for the last time an empire awareness in the architecture of the capital of the Holy Roman Empire after the victorious ended wars against the Turks and the French was expressed.

Symbolism of the Karlskirche

The Karlskirche consists of a central rotunda with a dome, preceded by a column structure like a Greek temple, of two high pillars illustrated on the model of Trajan's Column in Rome and of two lateral gate pavilions. The illustrated columns represent Charles VI. as a wise and strong secular ruler, the two great pillars were created by Marder and Matielli. The columns are crowned by golden eagles, symbolizing the two virtues of the Emperor - fortitudo (bravery) and constantia (resistance). The two pillars are evocative of the two pillars before the temple in Jerusalem - Jachin and Boaz. However, the illustration of the two columns does not match the model of the Trajan columns in Rome, portraying war deeds, but these tell the life story of St. Borromeo. In the front view of the Karlskirche a wide range of different symbols become one whole - the Roman emperors Trajan and Augustus, the Temple of Solomon, St. Peter's Church in Rome, Hagia Sophia, Charlemagne and the Empire of Charles V. - through the skillfully used symbols should be shown the claim of the house of Habsburg to the European domination.

The plan view of the church is, as in baroque typical, ellipsoid. In the interior of the Karlskirche the great Baroque sculpture is immediately noticeable, representing St. Borromeo. At the base the four Latin Fathers of the Church are depicted. The interior of the Karlskirche is dominated by the tremendous fresco in the oval dome room, it was created by the eminent Baroque painter Johann Michael Rottmayr between 1725-1730. The fresco shows the Mother of God representing the intercession of the patron Saint of the Church to help head off the plague, surrounded is the scene by the cardinal virtues (faith, hope and love). In the left entrance wing is situated the tomb for the Austrian poet Heinrich Joseph von Collin (17771-1811).

Inside the St. Charles Church, there is a museum where the most valuable pieces are exhibited.

These include: the vestments of St. Borromeo, a reliquary of gold and silver - a donation of Emperor Charles VI. and a rococo monstrance (1760) containing a drop of blood of the saint. Thomas Aquinas.

Even the image of the architect Fischer von Erlach, painted by Jacob von Schuppen, is one of the church treasures.

The iconographic program of the Charles Church was written by Carl Gustav Haerus, by this the Saint Charles Borromeo should be connected to the imperial founder.

www.univie.ac.at/hypertextcreator/ferstel/site/browse.php...

 

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!

 

Some background:

The Vickers Type 287 was a British 1930s light bomber built by Vickers-Armstrongs at Brooklands near Weybridge, Surrey, for the Royal Air Force. The Type 287 was originally built as a private venture and designed as a single-engine monoplane with a very high aspect ratio wing, and a manually operated, retractable undercarriage. It used the same geodetic design principles for both the fuselage and wings that had been derived from that used by Barnes Wallis in the airship R100. As it was not known how the geodetic structure could cope with being disrupted by a bomb bay, the Wellesley's bomb load was carried in two streamlined panniers under the wings.

 

The RAF ultimately ordered a total of 176 of the two-seater aircraft, with a 14-month production run starting in March 1937, and it was introduced into service the same year.

While it was obsolete by the start of the Second World War, and unsuited to the European air war. By the outbreak of the Second World War, the Wellesley had been phased out from home based squadrons, with only four examples remaining in Britain, but remained in service with three squadrons based in the Middle East. The Wellesley Mk. I bomber was successfully used in the desert theatres of East Africa, Egypt and the Middle East, where it was used until 1942.

While the Wellesley was not a significant combat aircraft, the design principles that were tested in its construction were put to good use with the Wellington medium bomber that became one of the main types of RAF Bomber Command in the early years of the European war.

 

The GR Mk. IV (Type 301) was a late special development for the RAF Coastal Command. It was actually a stopgap solution - during the first three years of the Second World War, Coastal Command and the Admiralty fought a continuous battle with the RAF and Air Ministry over the primacy of trade defense in relation to the bomber effort against mainland Germany, a strategic tussle which conceivably could have cost the Western Alliance the Battle of the Atlantic. The Air Staff and Bomber Command enjoyed the backing of Churchill and the maritime air effort struggled to receive the recognition it needed. On the outbreak of war, the Coastal Command’s order of battle listed just 298 aircraft, of which only 171 were operational.

 

Owing to the starvation of resources, even as late as March 1943 the Atlantic supply lines were being threatened. This situation arose as a direct result of the lack of very long-range aircraft. The Wellesley, even though basically outdated, offered a quick and proven basis for a radar-equipped maritime reconnaissance aircraft, especially for the Mediterranean, Middle East and African theatres, as these were regarded as less risky than the battle of the Atlantic or over the North Sea.

 

The Wellesley GR Mk. IV was a heavily modified version of the Mark I, built from existing airframes that were returned to Great Britain for conversion at Weybridge and Chester. A total of 28 aircraft were modified in early 1942.

 

The GR Mk. IV featured an ASV Mark III radar with a radome under the fuselage and additional mast antennae on fuselage and wings. The crew rose to three, as an operator for the ASV radar joined pilot and navigator/gunner, was placed behind the pilot.

In order to improve survivability the aircraft's defensive armament was considerably improved: instead of a single .303 in (7.7 mm) Vickers K machine gun in the Mk. I's rear cockpit, a powered dorsal turret, equipped with four 0.303 in (7.7 mm) Browning machine guns, was installed. The Brownings were electrically fired and insulated cut-off points in the turret ring prevented the guns firing when they were pointing at the propeller disc or tailplane.

The wing-mounted .303 in (7.7 mm) Vickers machine gun was retained, as well as the capability to carry up to 2,000 lb (907 kg) of bomb ordnance in underwing panniers. These were modified to carry up to four 450 lb (200 kg) Mark VII depth charges and an array of flash bombs for night missions, as the GR Mk. IV could not carry a Leigh Light.

 

In order to keep overall performance up despite the additional equipment on board and the extra drag created through radome and gun turret, the original Bristol Pegasus XX 9 cylinder radial piston engine with 925 hp (690 kW) was replaced by a 14 cylinder 1.525 hp (1.121 kW) Hercules VI powerplant.

The complete front of the engine had to be modified in order to take the heavier and much more powerful engine, similar to the Type 289 and 292 long range conversions of the basic Wellesley. As a further means of keeping the performance up, parts of the original steel fuselage structure were replaced by light alloy elements.

 

All GR Mk. IV's were sent to the Mediterranean theatre in summer 1942, primarily for defensive tasks, e. g. defending supply lines. The aircraft also took part in Operation Torch (initially called Operation Gymnast), the British-American invasion of French North Africa in World War II during the North African Campaign, which started on 8 November 1942.

 

By 1943 Coastal Command finally received the recognition it needed and its operations proved decisive in the victory over the U-Boats, and when more powerful Vickers Wellington aircraft became available, the Wellesleys of Coastal Command were withdrawn or deployed to Greece, and performed various support duties during the RAF interference in the Greek Civil War. By 1944, the last aircraft had been retired.

  

General characteristics:

Crew: 3

Length: 39 ft 3 in (11.96 m)

Wingspan: 74 ft 7 in (22.73 m)

Height: 15 ft 3½ in (4.67 m)

Wing area: 630 ft² [11] (58.5 m²)

Empty weight: 6,760 lb (3,066 kg)

Loaded weight: 11,048 lb (5,011 kg)

Max. takeoff weight: 12,500 lb (5,670 kg)

 

Powerplant:

1× Bristol Hercules VI, rated at 1,675 hp (1,250 kW)

 

Performance:

Maximum speed: 228 mph (198 kn, 369 km/h) at 19,700 ft (6,000 m)

Cruise speed: 180 mph (157 kn, 290 km/h) at 15,000 ft (4,600 m) (57% power)

Range: 1,220 mi (1,963 km)

Service ceiling: 25,500 ft (7,772 m)

Wing loading: 18 lb/ft² (86 kg/m²)

Power/mass: 0.08 hp/lb (0.14 kW/kg)

Climb to 15,000 ft (4,600 m): 17.8 min

 

Armament:

5× .303 in (7.7 mm) Vickers machine guns, one fixed forward in the right wing, four in a dorsal powered turret

Up to 2.000 lb (907 kg) of bombs in underwing panniers

  

The kit and its assembly:

Honestly, this kit conversion was inspired by an idea from fellow users (NARSES2 and pyro-manic) at whatifmodelers.com, who suggested a Wellesley in Coastal Command service. I have always liked these aircraft's elegant livery with a dark top side, white undersides and a very high waterline - and using THIS on a Wellesley, which traditionally carried Dark Green/Dark Earth uppers and Night (Black) undersides, would certainly look cool.

 

But it would certainly not remain a standard Mk. I bomber for sure, and as I cooked up a story I found the idea of a re-engined, radar-equipped reconnaissance aircraft pretty convincing - the Wellesley's long range and payload (the thing could carry more than it weighed itself!) made it an excellent choice.

 

The basis is the vintage Matchbox kit, which actually has some nice features. The geodetic surface is fine and not over-emphasized, just the landing gear is rather poor - I decided to drill open the landing gear wells and add some interior, as the kit offers OOB offer neither a well nor any detail. Inside, I glued parts from a plastic cookie box - not intended to be realistic, I just wanted to have some depth and structure.

As further means to enhance the overall look I also lowered the flaps, which was easy to realize.

 

Engine conversion to a Hercules (from a Matchbox Wellington bomber) was straightforward, as the Wellesley kit not only offers the original Jupiter engine of the Mk. I. bomber, but also an alternative, streamlined engine cowling for the Type 292 Long Range Development Aircraft. This offers a nice adapter for the Hercules – and with the bigger propeller and a spinner, this changes the look of the Wellesley a lot.

 

In order to beef up rearward defense I decided to implant a powered gun turret - a quadruple .303 turret from a Boulton Paul Defiant. The turret was taken from a Pavla kit and consists of styrene and resin parts, plus a vacu canopy. The gunner is a personal addition, I think it comes from a Matchbox Privateer, from one of the optional dorsal turrets.

Mounting the Defiant turret in the fuselage was tricky, as the turret is relatively wide, almost the same diameter as the Wellesley’s. I placed it where the original navigator cockpit with the rearwards-facing Vicker K is located. I carefully opened up the fuselage around that opening until the turret would fit, and then added covers made from styrene strips so that the whole thing would look a bit organic and streamlined. Inside, the turret sits on a styrene axis, so that it can be inserted/taken out at will. Very handy during painting, and the construction makes the turret 360° turnable.

 

Otherwise, the interior was taken OOB, as there’s hardly anything to identify once the canopy is fitted. The latter would remain closed, anyway.

 

The radome under the fuselage was a late addition: originally I had planned to add antenna masts for an ASV Mk. II radar, but then found the ASV Mk. III radome from the aforementioned Matchbox Wellington kit. As the Wellesley did not have a bomb bay, that space between the landing gear was just perfect. And while it would not be necessary I still added some antenna masts (scratched from heated sprues) under the wings and on the fuselage flanks - it just looks cool... ;)

  

Painting and markings:

The interior (cockpit, turret, landing gear) was painted in classic Interior Green (Humbrol 78).

 

On the outside, rather simple, classic Coastal Command colors were used: Dark Sea Grey and Dark Slate Grey on the upper side, with the pattern taken from the RAF Wellesley, and white undersides with a very high waterline and white leading edges on the wings.

 

Painting started with the lower sides – I used spray paint from the rattle can, since the large areas are hard to paint, esp. with white. Consequently I rather used a very light grey (RAL 7047, Telegrau 4), since pure white would be too bright/ by tendency. The color pictures I consulted for reference suggest that these machines would easily tend to become dirty, much room for weathering! After basic spray painting, the “white” areas received a counter-shading and dry-brushing with Humbrol 196 (RAL 7035, Lichtgrau), which is slightly more yellow-ish and lighter than RAL 7047.

 

After that had dried up, waterlines and leading edges were masked with Tamiya Tape, for the upper colors. Humbrol 27 and 224 were used as basic enamel colors, as they are the darkest tones for the job. Later, these were treated with Modelmasters’ 2056 and 2059, in order to weather the upper surfaces and work out the geodetic structure – similar procedure as for the lower surfaces.

 

The kit received a wash with black ink and serious dry-brushing in order to work out the wonderful surface structure - basically with some Humbrol 64 (Light Sea Grey) all around - no pure white has been used on the kit at all. Dirt, soot and stains were added with grinded graphite and thinned Humbrol 224.

 

Decals were puzzled together from the scrap box, from various RAF aircraft. Even though I took 179th Squadron Wellingtons as benchmark, I decided to add a full three-digit code with dull red letters – it adds an eye-catcher to the aircraft’s flanks, and the letters come from a MIcroscale aftermarket sheet.

The respective Wellingtons only had scarce markings and just single-letter codes (the full squadron code, "OZ", had obviously been omitted?).

  

In the end, not a major conversion, but the different paint scheme and the more massive nose change the overall look of the Wellesley considerably. I am quite happy with the result.

Vienna Baroque

Doris Binder

 

The center of Baroque art was undisputable Vienna, as a special promoter appeared the Emperor Charles VI., under whose reign not only the Karlskirche was built, but also numerous buildings have been newly planned or built. The passion for building of the High Baroque is not only founded by the destructions of the Turks, but also has its causes in the backward economic structure and its lack of production plants. Whether nobleman, cleric or commoner, all those with sufficient capital put it rather in construction funds into practice than not make use of it. Responsible for this was a deep distrust to the imperial fiscal policy and concern about the currency and a possible bankruptcy.

The Baroque emerged within the civil peace (*) Burgfrieden) of the city of Vienna, had at the beginning of the High Baroque era still dominated religious buildings, so the cityscape changed in just four decades. Vienna was transformed into a "palace city", by the year 1740, the number of pleasure palaces, gardens and belvederes had doubled. The Baroque style, which by crown, church and nobility was forced upon the citizens, is considered of Felix Czeike as "authority art". The existing social gap should be camouflaged by the rubberneck culture in festivities, receptions and parades.

 

*) Burgfrieden (The term truce or Castle peace referred to a jurisdiction in the Middle Ages around a castle, in which feuds, so hostilities of private individuals among themselves, under penalty of ostracism were banned. Today the term is mainly used in a figurative sense.

 

Due to the return of Fischer von Erlach to Vienna in 1686 and a decade later, Lukas von Hildebrandt, the primacy of the Italians in architecture was broken and the victory parade of Austrian Baroque began. The connection between the spiritual and secular powers found its mode of expression in the Baroque, which the appearance of the city of Vienna should characterize in a decisive manner.

 

Construction of Charles Church

The Karlskirche was built by Emperor Charles VI. commemorating the plague saint, Charles Borromeo. In 1713 the plague raged in Vienna and claimed about 8,000 human lives, in February 1714 the plague disappeared and as a sign of gratitude was began with the construction of the church, this should become the most important religious building of Vienna in the 18th century.

In a contest was decided on the builder - participants were Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, Johann Lukas von Hildebrandt and Ferdinando Galli-Bibienas. As winner emerged the famous architect Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, he died in 1723 and did not live to the achievement of the Church. The supervision was transferred to the imperial court architect Anton Erhard Martinelli, as Fischer von Erlach died, his son, Joseph Emmanuel, finished his work. On 28 October 1737 St. Charles Church was solemnly by the Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Sigismund Count Kollowitz, inaugurated. The spiritual care ceded Emperor Karl VI. to the chivalric Order of the Cross with the Red Star, since 1783 is the Karlskirche imperial patronage parish.

The church at that time lay still behind the regulated river Wien (Wienfluss) and in the open field. The directed towards the city face side of the Charles Church, which stood on the edge of the suburb of Wieden, was target point of a line of sight the Hofburg and St. Charles Church in the sense of a "via triumphalis" connecting. On the temple-like front building of the Karlskirche the dedication inscription is clearly visible "Vota mea Reddam in conspectu timentium Deum" - "I will fulfill my vow before those who fear God."

Already during the construction by Fischer von Erlach (senior), there were several project phases, three of which have been preserved:

 

1. Medaillon by Daniel Warou for the groundbreaking ceremony

2. Fore stitches in Fischer's draft of a historical architecture 1721

3. Viennese view of work by Klein and Pfeffel 1722 (1724)

 

Due to the death of Fischer von Erlach, occured recent changes made by his son, Joseph Emmanuel most of all being concerned the dome (much higher and steeper), the priest choir (omitted) and the interior (simpler). The entire project took a total of 21 years and the costs amounted to 304 045 guilders and 22 ¼ cruisers. The construction costs were shouldered by all crown lands of the Empire, but also Spain, Milan and the Netherlands had to make a contribution.

The Karlskirche is the most important Baroque building of the city and represents the most convincing the so-called Empire style in which for the last time an empire awareness in the architecture of the capital of the Holy Roman Empire after the victorious ended wars against the Turks and the French was expressed.

Symbolism of the Karlskirche

The Karlskirche consists of a central rotunda with a dome, preceded by a column structure like a Greek temple, of two high pillars illustrated on the model of Trajan's Column in Rome and of two lateral gate pavilions. The illustrated columns represent Charles VI. as a wise and strong secular ruler, the two great pillars were created by Marder and Matielli. The columns are crowned by golden eagles, symbolizing the two virtues of the Emperor - fortitudo (bravery) and constantia (resistance). The two pillars are evocative of the two pillars before the temple in Jerusalem - Jachin and Boaz. However, the illustration of the two columns does not match the model of the Trajan columns in Rome, portraying war deeds, but these tell the life story of St. Borromeo. In the front view of the Karlskirche a wide range of different symbols become one whole - the Roman emperors Trajan and Augustus, the Temple of Solomon, St. Peter's Church in Rome, Hagia Sophia, Charlemagne and the Empire of Charles V. - through the skillfully used symbols should be shown the claim of the house of Habsburg to the European domination.

The plan view of the church is, as in baroque typical, ellipsoid. In the interior of the Karlskirche the great Baroque sculpture is immediately noticeable, representing St. Borromeo. At the base the four Latin Fathers of the Church are depicted. The interior of the Karlskirche is dominated by the tremendous fresco in the oval dome room, it was created by the eminent Baroque painter Johann Michael Rottmayr between 1725-1730. The fresco shows the Mother of God representing the intercession of the patron Saint of the Church to help head off the plague, surrounded is the scene by the cardinal virtues (faith, hope and love). In the left entrance wing is situated the tomb for the Austrian poet Heinrich Joseph von Collin (17771-1811).

Inside the St. Charles Church, there is a museum where the most valuable pieces are exhibited.

These include: the vestments of St. Borromeo, a reliquary of gold and silver - a donation of Emperor Charles VI. and a rococo monstrance (1760) containing a drop of blood of the saint. Thomas Aquinas.

Even the image of the architect Fischer von Erlach, painted by Jacob von Schuppen, is one of the church treasures.

The iconographic program of the Charles Church was written by Carl Gustav Haerus, by this the Saint Charles Borromeo should be connected to the imperial founder.

www.univie.ac.at/hypertextcreator/ferstel/site/browse.php...

 

6000sqm Landscaping

"Michael – which means: “Who is like unto God?” – is the champion of God’s primacy, of His transcendence and power. Michael fights to re-establish divine justice; he defends the People of God from its enemies and above all of the enemy par excellence, the devil. And Saint Michael triumphs because it is God who acts in him. This sculpture, then, reminds us that evil has been vanquished, the accuser is unmasked, his head is crushed, because salvation was accomplished once and for all in the Blood of Christ…

 

On consecrating Vatican City State to Saint Michael the Archangel, we ask him to defend us from the Evil One and to cast him outside."

 

– Pope Francis.

 

This statue by Antonio Lomuscio is in the Vatican Gardens and it was commissioned by Pope Benedict XVI and blessed by Pope Francis in 2013.

6000sqm Landscaping

A reredos of Corsham Stone, representing the Last Supper, was erected behind the altar of St Patrick’s Church of Ireland Cathedral, Armagh, in 1903.

 

St Patrick’s Church of Ireland Cathedral, Armagh (Irish: Ardeaglais Phádraig, Ard Mhacha) is the seat of the Anglican Archbishop of Armagh and Diocese of Armagh. Although the origins of the site are as a 5th century Irish stone monastery, said to have been founded by St. Patrick, and there has been a significant church on the site since, its present appearance largely dates from Lewis Nockalls Cottingham’s restoration in the years after 1834, although the fabric of Primate O’Scanlan’s 1268 building remains. Over the centuries, the church on the site has been at least partially destroyed and rebuilt 17 times.

 

Throughout the Middle Ages, the cathedral was the seat of the Catholic Archbishop of Armagh, head of the Catholic Church in Ireland, and one of the most important churches in Gaelic Ireland. With the 16th-century Protestant Reformation, the cathedral was taken over by the Church of Ireland.

 

Following Catholic emancipation in the 19th century, a new Catholic cathedral was built in Armagh, also called St Patrick’s Cathedral, on another hilltop half a kilometre away.

 

Evidence suggests that the hilltop was originally a pagan sanctuary.

By the 7th century, it had become the most important monastery and monastic school in the north of Ireland, and monastic settlement grew up around it. Brian Boru, High King of Ireland, visited Armagh in 1004, acknowledging it as the head cathedral of Ireland and bestowing it a large sum of gold. Brian was buried at Armagh cathedral after his death at the Battle of Clontarf in 1014. Armagh’s claim to the primacy of Ireland was formally acknowledged at the Synod of Ráth Breasail in 1111.

 

The cathedral was renovated and restored under Dean Eoghan McCawell (1505–1549), having suffered from a devastating fire in 1511 and being in poor shape. Soon after his death the cathedral was described by Lord Chancellor Cusack as “one of the fairest and best churches in Ireland”. However, by the end of the Nine Years’ War which devastated Ulster between 1593 and 1603, Armagh lay in ruins.

 

Following the Nine Years’ War, Armagh came under English control and the town began to be settled by Protestants from Britain, as part of the Plantation of Ulster. During the Irish Rebellion of 1641, many Protestant settlers fled to Armagh cathedral for safety. After negotiations with the besieged settlers, Catholic rebels occupied the town until May 1642.

 

As mentioned above, the cathedral largely owes its current appearance to a rebuilding between 1834 and 1840 by Archbishop Lord John George Beresford and the architect Lewis Nockalls Cottingham. The fabric remains that of the mediaeval building but much restored. While Cottingham was heavy-handed in his restoration, the researches of T. G. F. Patterson and Janet Myles in the late twentieth century have shown the restoration to have been notably antiquarian for its time. The tracery of the nave windows in particular are careful restorations as is the copy of the font. The capital decoration of the two westernmost pillars of the nave (either side of the West Door internal porch) are mediaeval as are the bulk of the external gargoyle carvings (some resited) of the parapet of the Eastern Arm. Cottingham’s intention of retaining the richly cusped West Door with flanking canopied niches was over-ruled. Subsequent restorations have more radically altered the internal proportions of the mediaeval building, proportions which Cottingham had retained.

 

Many other Celtic and mediaeval carvings are to be seen within the cathedral which is also rich in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century sculpture. There are works by Francis Leggatt Chantrey, Louis-François Roubiliac, John Michael Rysbrack, Carlo Marochetti and others.

Rural people walk perhaps for 30 kilometres (20 miles) one way to bring firewood to cities or towns, a whole load of which they sell for about 70 euro cents (still less than a dollar). Around the city of Harar whole strings of people (in fact women) lead from all over the country side to the city to ensure its firewood supply. Surely slowly depriving the country side of it in ever bigger circles around.

The photo is from somewhere along the road Addis Ababa - Harer (Ethiopia).

 

Harar (Ethiopia) is a magical place! See my Harar photo series.

If you have only 12 days to finally visit Africa, you should perhaps focus on one place: let it be Harar, Ethiopia (July 2006).

For centuries, until about 1860, it was an independent city at the borders of two different worlds: the Abbysinian mountains and the deserts stretching to the Red Sea coast. Trade and religious affairs (Muslim) must have alternated primacy during its history. As a holy city to Islam it feels as a surprisingly relaxed place. Tom Waits can not imagine the kind of dark yet exalted bars you find here at night. The size of the walled old city is at least half that of Jerusalem's old city. Most important the people are really open and the city is one of the world's few cities that within a few days demonstrate their very own distinct living atmosphere you'll never forget.

(See also my friend Elmer's photos from this trip, where by change you can also see me on a photo.)

 

Vienna Baroque

Doris Binder

 

The center of Baroque art was undisputable Vienna, as a special promoter appeared the Emperor Charles VI., under whose reign not only the Karlskirche was built, but also numerous buildings have been newly planned or built. The passion for building of the High Baroque is not only founded by the destructions of the Turks, but also has its causes in the backward economic structure and its lack of production plants. Whether nobleman, cleric or commoner, all those with sufficient capital put it rather in construction funds into practice than not make use of it. Responsible for this was a deep distrust to the imperial fiscal policy and concern about the currency and a possible bankruptcy.

The Baroque emerged within the civil peace (*) Burgfrieden) of the city of Vienna, had at the beginning of the High Baroque era still dominated religious buildings, so the cityscape changed in just four decades. Vienna was transformed into a "palace city", by the year 1740, the number of pleasure palaces, gardens and belvederes had doubled. The Baroque style, which by crown, church and nobility was forced upon the citizens, is considered of Felix Czeike as "authority art". The existing social gap should be camouflaged by the rubberneck culture in festivities, receptions and parades.

 

*) Burgfrieden (The term truce or Castle peace referred to a jurisdiction in the Middle Ages around a castle, in which feuds, so hostilities of private individuals among themselves, under penalty of ostracism were banned. Today the term is mainly used in a figurative sense.

 

Due to the return of Fischer von Erlach to Vienna in 1686 and a decade later, Lukas von Hildebrandt, the primacy of the Italians in architecture was broken and the victory parade of Austrian Baroque began. The connection between the spiritual and secular powers found its mode of expression in the Baroque, which the appearance of the city of Vienna should characterize in a decisive manner.

 

Construction of Charles Church

The Karlskirche was built by Emperor Charles VI. commemorating the plague saint, Charles Borromeo. In 1713 the plague raged in Vienna and claimed about 8,000 human lives, in February 1714 the plague disappeared and as a sign of gratitude was began with the construction of the church, this should become the most important religious building of Vienna in the 18th century.

In a contest was decided on the builder - participants were Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, Johann Lukas von Hildebrandt and Ferdinando Galli-Bibienas. As winner emerged the famous architect Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, he died in 1723 and did not live to the achievement of the Church. The supervision was transferred to the imperial court architect Anton Erhard Martinelli, as Fischer von Erlach died, his son, Joseph Emmanuel, finished his work. On 28 October 1737 St. Charles Church was solemnly by the Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Sigismund Count Kollowitz, inaugurated. The spiritual care ceded Emperor Karl VI. to the chivalric Order of the Cross with the Red Star, since 1783 is the Karlskirche imperial patronage parish.

The church at that time lay still behind the regulated river Wien (Wienfluss) and in the open field. The directed towards the city face side of the Charles Church, which stood on the edge of the suburb of Wieden, was target point of a line of sight the Hofburg and St. Charles Church in the sense of a "via triumphalis" connecting. On the temple-like front building of the Karlskirche the dedication inscription is clearly visible "Vota mea Reddam in conspectu timentium Deum" - "I will fulfill my vow before those who fear God."

Already during the construction by Fischer von Erlach (senior), there were several project phases, three of which have been preserved:

 

1. Medaillon by Daniel Warou for the groundbreaking ceremony

2. Fore stitches in Fischer's draft of a historical architecture 1721

3. Viennese view of work by Klein and Pfeffel 1722 (1724)

 

Due to the death of Fischer von Erlach, occured recent changes made by his son, Joseph Emmanuel most of all being concerned the dome (much higher and steeper), the priest choir (omitted) and the interior (simpler). The entire project took a total of 21 years and the costs amounted to 304 045 guilders and 22 ¼ cruisers. The construction costs were shouldered by all crown lands of the Empire, but also Spain, Milan and the Netherlands had to make a contribution.

The Karlskirche is the most important Baroque building of the city and represents the most convincing the so-called Empire style in which for the last time an empire awareness in the architecture of the capital of the Holy Roman Empire after the victorious ended wars against the Turks and the French was expressed.

Symbolism of the Karlskirche

The Karlskirche consists of a central rotunda with a dome, preceded by a column structure like a Greek temple, of two high pillars illustrated on the model of Trajan's Column in Rome and of two lateral gate pavilions. The illustrated columns represent Charles VI. as a wise and strong secular ruler, the two great pillars were created by Marder and Matielli. The columns are crowned by golden eagles, symbolizing the two virtues of the Emperor - fortitudo (bravery) and constantia (resistance). The two pillars are evocative of the two pillars before the temple in Jerusalem - Jachin and Boaz. However, the illustration of the two columns does not match the model of the Trajan columns in Rome, portraying war deeds, but these tell the life story of St. Borromeo. In the front view of the Karlskirche a wide range of different symbols become one whole - the Roman emperors Trajan and Augustus, the Temple of Solomon, St. Peter's Church in Rome, Hagia Sophia, Charlemagne and the Empire of Charles V. - through the skillfully used symbols should be shown the claim of the house of Habsburg to the European domination.

The plan view of the church is, as in baroque typical, ellipsoid. In the interior of the Karlskirche the great Baroque sculpture is immediately noticeable, representing St. Borromeo. At the base the four Latin Fathers of the Church are depicted. The interior of the Karlskirche is dominated by the tremendous fresco in the oval dome room, it was created by the eminent Baroque painter Johann Michael Rottmayr between 1725-1730. The fresco shows the Mother of God representing the intercession of the patron Saint of the Church to help head off the plague, surrounded is the scene by the cardinal virtues (faith, hope and love). In the left entrance wing is situated the tomb for the Austrian poet Heinrich Joseph von Collin (17771-1811).

Inside the St. Charles Church, there is a museum where the most valuable pieces are exhibited.

These include: the vestments of St. Borromeo, a reliquary of gold and silver - a donation of Emperor Charles VI. and a rococo monstrance (1760) containing a drop of blood of the saint. Thomas Aquinas.

Even the image of the architect Fischer von Erlach, painted by Jacob von Schuppen, is one of the church treasures.

The iconographic program of the Charles Church was written by Carl Gustav Haerus, by this the Saint Charles Borromeo should be connected to the imperial founder.

www.univie.ac.at/hypertextcreator/ferstel/site/browse.php...

Not mentioned in the article are Mexico's refusal to sanction Russia and it appears the Netherlands isn't going to follow the U.S. newly announced export control on shipping DUV machines to China.

 

slkanthan.substack.com/p/american-world-order-in-trouble-10

 

American World Order in Trouble - 10 Recent News

Events around the globe portend the dramatic weakening of American hegemony

 

US-led World Order in Trouble

 

Geopolitics is undergoing tectonic changes, which augur an emerging new world order that will be extremely disruptive to the American unipolar hegemony of the last thirty years. What is unique about this quiet and organic revolution is that it is simultaneously erupting all over the world. And this phenomenon is based on multipolarity and multilateralism, where countries engage and cooperate with each other as equals.

 

Of course, Americans will be the last people to acknowledge the arrival of a multipolar world. They will be kicking and screaming, “But I live in the greatest country! I want my American Century back! I don’t want to treat those black, brown and commie countries as my equal.”

 

However, the inexorable cycle of history moves forward. Here are top 10 recent news that together portend a terrible future for American primacy.

 

German Leader Visits Beijing

 

Ignoring all the American warnings and threats, German leader Scholz visited China, Germany’s largest goods trading partner. Writing in an op-ed that decoupling from China is not prudent or possible, Scholz took with him leaders of BMW, BASF, Siemens and dozen other largest German corporations.

 

According to Erdogan, the German Chancellor is also thinking about negotiating with Putin to end the war in Ukraine.

 

If Germany flips, so will most of Europe, and America’s entire Eurasian strategy of divide-and-rule will be dead.

 

Saudi Arabia’s Pivot

 

Saudi Arabia rejects Biden’s demand to increase oil production. Furthermore, Saudis work with Russia (OPEC+) to cut production.

 

Then, to really rub it in, Saudi Prince MBS invites Xi Jinping for a visit. This won’t be just a fist-jump greeting. Instead, this will involve long-term realignment of Saudi foreign policy and economic interests. Saudis will not only join BRICS but may also entertain the idea of oil-for-Yuan. There are many more areas ripe for strategic partnership – infrastructure, nuclear energy, military etc.

 

Qatar, the world’s third largest exporter of natural gas -- and not a great ally of the Saudis -- rejects price cap on Russian energy. Qatar also revealed one of the world’s largest solar farms – with 1.8 million solar panels – which was built by a Chinese firm.

 

It’s like an Arab Spring in the reverse direction!

 

Rise of Anti-imperialism in Latin America

 

Anti-imperialists have been winning all across Latin America, including even Colombia. In the latest, Lula wins in Brazil, talks up a new currency to a replace US dollar. He also assigns blame on NATO for the war in Ukraine.

 

BRICS and SCO Expansion

Iran, Algeria, Turkey, Argentina, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and others have applied for or shown interest in BRICS membership.

 

This truly represents multilateralism, with countries from all parts of the world coming together as equals and working towards common prosperity. If they manage to create their own basket of currency that is backed by commodities, it will spell the end of America’s dollar tyranny.

 

China-led SCO also adds Iran, a geopolitically pivotal player in the Middle East.

 

As Brzezinski warned twenty-five years ago, the triumvirate of Iran, Russia and China will have the potential to displace American hegemony in Eurasia.

 

Iran Increases its Strategic Role

 

Iran’s relatively inexpensive but highly precise drones have been destroying overpriced American and European hi-tech weapons deployed in Ukraine.

 

Iran’s oil minister visits Russia to discuss far-reaching projects like the North-South freight corridor that links Russia and India through Iran. Other key projects include sea ports in Mediterranean and Caspian seas; LNG terminals; exports of Russian gas; and a pipeline to Pakistan.

 

Singapore and Vietnam: Solidarity with China

 

Singapore clearly stated that it is not going to choose between China and USA. Singapore also signs more than a dozen significant trade and technology deals with China.

 

Vietnam’s leader visits Beijing, hugs Xi Jinping – a rare spectacle, by the way - and deepens the comprehensive strategic partnership between the two countries.

 

India Emphasizes Multipolar World

 

India has not only refused to ostracize but Russia but has done the opposite. Indian foreign minister Jaishankar visits Moscow, schmoozes with Russian FM Lavrov, and repeats phrases like “multipolar world” and “re-balanced world” to the utter consternation of Washington elites.

 

Regarding the same visit, Russia releases press release that calls for a “polycentric world” that opposes “imperialist agendas.” Ouch.

 

India has also increased purchases of Russian energy products, and even pays for some of it using Yuan. In October, Russia was the #1 supplier of India’s crude oil.

 

India’s imports from China also increases rapidly.

 

India, a member of QUAD, is embracing an “all-alignment” policy, which doesn’t bode well for America’s divide-and-rule plans for Asia.

 

Pakistan and Sri Lanka Coup Aftermath

 

After US-led coup in Pakistan, the new Prime Minister visits Beijing, renews commitment to CPEC, and secures funding for a 1800km high-speed rail project to be built by China.

 

Similarly, Sri Lanka’s close relations with China don’t seem to have been affected much after the US-led color revolution. The island country still allows visit by Chinese ships and allegedly even helps refuel Chinese ships in international waters.

 

International Bankers are Still Pro-China

 

Swiss bank UBS’ chief says that bankers don’t read American media, and are very bullish on China. Haven’t they read the memo about decoupling and de-globalization? And that China is a threat to the West?

 

G20 and Asian Leaders Embrace China

 

If you believed the Western media, China is run by a ruthless dictator and China’s economy is on the verge of collapse. However, looking at how Western leaders were lining up for lucrative deals and a photo op with Xi Jinping, the mainstream narratives sound hollow.

 

Joe Biden had a three-hour meeting with Xi Jinping; Australian PM met with Xi and then said that he’s against Taiwan joining the CPTPP free trade treaty; Dutch PM’s meeting with Xi was followed by a Dutch minister saying that the Netherlands won’t follow US diktats on exports (referring to the US demand that Dutch ASML stop selling semiconductor chip-making machines to China); and Italy’s new leader announcing her upcoming trip to China. Heck, even Indian PM Modi shook hands and chatted with Xi Jinping — the first time the leaders have spoken since the deadly border skirmish in 2020.

 

Interestingly, none of these leaders bothered to repeat American propaganda about human rights, Uyghurs etc.

 

In short, China’s global status has been skyrocketing over the last month. So much for America’s containment strategy.

 

Conclusion

 

To paraphrase Lenin, decades are happening in months. The American Empire’s unseen and cynical rules-based order is unraveling at a rapid pace.

 

America’s biggest geopolitical gamble, the shock-and-awe campaign against Russia, has faltered spectacularly, despite the occasional wins for US-led Ukrainian forces in the battlefield. Europeans are waking up from their hypnotized state and are protesting against NATO and anti-Russia sanctions. Even US Generals are now openly talking about negotiating a peace settlement with Putin.

 

As for China, it is on solid footing, in spite of America’s countless WTO-violating sanctions and hybrid warfare. Casting aside the incessant and hysterical American propaganda, people in the Global South hold positive views about Russia & China. Even Latin America is trying to break free from the Monroe Doctrine; and the future of Petrodollar might be in trouble!

 

We are witnessing the birth of a multipolar world, and it’s going to be painful and beautiful.

 

--- S.L. Kanthan – writer and world traveler, based out of Bangalore, India.

The United Nations independent expert on foreign debt and human rights warned that the austerity measures and structural reforms proposed to solve Greece’s debt crisis may result in violations of the basic human rights of the country’s people, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) reported.

 

“The implementation of the second package of austerity measures and structural reforms, which includes a wholesale privatization of state-owned enterprises and assets, is likely to have a serious impact on basic social services and therefore the enjoyment of human rights by the Greek people, particularly the most vulnerable sectors of the population such as the poor, elderly, unemployed and persons with disabilities,” said Cephas Lumina, who reports to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

 

“The rights to food, water, adequate housing and work under fair and equitable conditions should not be compromised by the implementation of austerity measures,” he said, urging the Government to “strike a careful balance between austerity and the realization of human rights, taking into account the primacy of States’ human rights obligations.”

 

Mr. Lumina also called upon the authorities to maintain some fiscal leeway to meet its people’s basic human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights.

 

“Tax rises, public expenditure cuts and privatization measures have to be implemented in such a way that they do not result in unbearable suffering of the people,” he said.

 

“Debts can only be paid out of income,” Mr. Lumina said. “A shrinking economy cannot generate any revenue and contributes to a reduced capacity to repay the debt. More time should have been allowed for the restructuring measures already in place to work.”

 

The independent expert also called on the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the European Union (EU) and the European Central Bank (ECB) to remain aware of the human rights impact of the policies they design in attempting to resolve the sovereign debt crises in Greece and other countries.

 

“There will be no lasting solution to the sovereign debt problem if the human rights of the people are not taken into account,” said Mr. Lumina, who serves in an unpaid capacity.

 

www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=38901&Cr=auster...

In the late 19th century, Hussein II Bey authorised the French consul-general to build a cathedral on the site of ancient Carthage, and to take all the land necessary for the project. The consul charged his son Jules, with this duty and having closely examined possible sites, he concluded that the chapel ought to be built on Byrsa Hill, in the centre of the Punic acropolis, where the temple of Aesculapius was once located.

 

King Louis-Philippe approved the project. The architect chosen conceived a building of modest proportions that contained a mix of Gothic and Byzantine styles. In any case, he succeeded in giving it the look of a rich marabout similar to the royal chapel at Dreux. A cross, the only one standing at that time in Tunisia, topped the building. Descendants of crusaders' families, and companions of the sovereign, helped finance the construction.

 

Built between 1884 and 1890, under the French protectorate, the cathedral acquired primacy for all of Africa when the title of primate of Africa was restored for the benefit of Cardinal Lavigerie, titular of the Archdioceses of Algiers and Carthage. The building was consecrated with great pomp in the presence of numerous dignitaries.

 

York Minster in York, United Kingdom. View from the city walls to the south-west of the cathedral.

 

York had been an episcopal see since the early middle ages later was the second most important archdiocese in England. To rival the primacy of Canterbury, in 1215, archbishop Walter de Gray began construction of a great gothic cathedral dedicated to St. Peter. Construction continued in various stages until 1472, when the cathedral was consecrated. Consequently, the style of the building evolved over time: while the transepts are built in Early English style, nave and chapter house follow the Decorated style and the choir and towers the Perpendicular style.

Vienna Baroque

Doris Binder

 

The center of Baroque art was undisputable Vienna, as a special promoter appeared the Emperor Charles VI., under whose reign not only the Karlskirche was built, but also numerous buildings have been newly planned or built. The passion for building of the High Baroque is not only founded by the destructions of the Turks, but also has its causes in the backward economic structure and its lack of production plants. Whether nobleman, cleric or commoner, all those with sufficient capital put it rather in construction funds into practice than not make use of it. Responsible for this was a deep distrust to the imperial fiscal policy and concern about the currency and a possible bankruptcy.

The Baroque emerged within the civil peace (*) Burgfrieden) of the city of Vienna, had at the beginning of the High Baroque era still dominated religious buildings, so the cityscape changed in just four decades. Vienna was transformed into a "palace city", by the year 1740, the number of pleasure palaces, gardens and belvederes had doubled. The Baroque style, which by crown, church and nobility was forced upon the citizens, is considered of Felix Czeike as "authority art". The existing social gap should be camouflaged by the rubberneck culture in festivities, receptions and parades.

 

*) Burgfrieden (The term truce or Castle peace referred to a jurisdiction in the Middle Ages around a castle, in which feuds, so hostilities of private individuals among themselves, under penalty of ostracism were banned. Today the term is mainly used in a figurative sense.

 

Due to the return of Fischer von Erlach to Vienna in 1686 and a decade later, Lukas von Hildebrandt, the primacy of the Italians in architecture was broken and the victory parade of Austrian Baroque began. The connection between the spiritual and secular powers found its mode of expression in the Baroque, which the appearance of the city of Vienna should characterize in a decisive manner.

 

Construction of Charles Church

The Karlskirche was built by Emperor Charles VI. commemorating the plague saint, Charles Borromeo. In 1713 the plague raged in Vienna and claimed about 8,000 human lives, in February 1714 the plague disappeared and as a sign of gratitude was began with the construction of the church, this should become the most important religious building of Vienna in the 18th century.

In a contest was decided on the builder - participants were Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, Johann Lukas von Hildebrandt and Ferdinando Galli-Bibienas. As winner emerged the famous architect Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, he died in 1723 and did not live to the achievement of the Church. The supervision was transferred to the imperial court architect Anton Erhard Martinelli, as Fischer von Erlach died, his son, Joseph Emmanuel, finished his work. On 28 October 1737 St. Charles Church was solemnly by the Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Sigismund Count Kollowitz, inaugurated. The spiritual care ceded Emperor Karl VI. to the chivalric Order of the Cross with the Red Star, since 1783 is the Karlskirche imperial patronage parish.

The church at that time lay still behind the regulated river Wien (Wienfluss) and in the open field. The directed towards the city face side of the Charles Church, which stood on the edge of the suburb of Wieden, was target point of a line of sight the Hofburg and St. Charles Church in the sense of a "via triumphalis" connecting. On the temple-like front building of the Karlskirche the dedication inscription is clearly visible "Vota mea Reddam in conspectu timentium Deum" - "I will fulfill my vow before those who fear God."

Already during the construction by Fischer von Erlach (senior), there were several project phases, three of which have been preserved:

 

1. Medaillon by Daniel Warou for the groundbreaking ceremony

2. Fore stitches in Fischer's draft of a historical architecture 1721

3. Viennese view of work by Klein and Pfeffel 1722 (1724)

 

Due to the death of Fischer von Erlach, occured recent changes made by his son, Joseph Emmanuel most of all being concerned the dome (much higher and steeper), the priest choir (omitted) and the interior (simpler). The entire project took a total of 21 years and the costs amounted to 304 045 guilders and 22 ¼ cruisers. The construction costs were shouldered by all crown lands of the Empire, but also Spain, Milan and the Netherlands had to make a contribution.

The Karlskirche is the most important Baroque building of the city and represents the most convincing the so-called Empire style in which for the last time an empire awareness in the architecture of the capital of the Holy Roman Empire after the victorious ended wars against the Turks and the French was expressed.

Symbolism of the Karlskirche

The Karlskirche consists of a central rotunda with a dome, preceded by a column structure like a Greek temple, of two high pillars illustrated on the model of Trajan's Column in Rome and of two lateral gate pavilions. The illustrated columns represent Charles VI. as a wise and strong secular ruler, the two great pillars were created by Marder and Matielli. The columns are crowned by golden eagles, symbolizing the two virtues of the Emperor - fortitudo (bravery) and constantia (resistance). The two pillars are evocative of the two pillars before the temple in Jerusalem - Jachin and Boaz. However, the illustration of the two columns does not match the model of the Trajan columns in Rome, portraying war deeds, but these tell the life story of St. Borromeo. In the front view of the Karlskirche a wide range of different symbols become one whole - the Roman emperors Trajan and Augustus, the Temple of Solomon, St. Peter's Church in Rome, Hagia Sophia, Charlemagne and the Empire of Charles V. - through the skillfully used symbols should be shown the claim of the house of Habsburg to the European domination.

The plan view of the church is, as in baroque typical, ellipsoid. In the interior of the Karlskirche the great Baroque sculpture is immediately noticeable, representing St. Borromeo. At the base the four Latin Fathers of the Church are depicted. The interior of the Karlskirche is dominated by the tremendous fresco in the oval dome room, it was created by the eminent Baroque painter Johann Michael Rottmayr between 1725-1730. The fresco shows the Mother of God representing the intercession of the patron Saint of the Church to help head off the plague, surrounded is the scene by the cardinal virtues (faith, hope and love). In the left entrance wing is situated the tomb for the Austrian poet Heinrich Joseph von Collin (17771-1811).

Inside the St. Charles Church, there is a museum where the most valuable pieces are exhibited.

These include: the vestments of St. Borromeo, a reliquary of gold and silver - a donation of Emperor Charles VI. and a rococo monstrance (1760) containing a drop of blood of the saint. Thomas Aquinas.

Even the image of the architect Fischer von Erlach, painted by Jacob von Schuppen, is one of the church treasures.

The iconographic program of the Charles Church was written by Carl Gustav Haerus, by this the Saint Charles Borromeo should be connected to the imperial founder.

www.univie.ac.at/hypertextcreator/ferstel/site/browse.php...

Vienna Baroque

Doris Binder

 

The center of Baroque art was undisputable Vienna, as a special promoter appeared the Emperor Charles VI., under whose reign not only the Karlskirche was built, but also numerous buildings have been newly planned or built. The passion for building of the High Baroque is not only founded by the destructions of the Turks, but also has its causes in the backward economic structure and its lack of production plants. Whether nobleman, cleric or commoner, all those with sufficient capital put it rather in construction funds into practice than not make use of it. Responsible for this was a deep distrust to the imperial fiscal policy and concern about the currency and a possible bankruptcy.

The Baroque emerged within the civil peace (*) Burgfrieden) of the city of Vienna, had at the beginning of the High Baroque era still dominated religious buildings, so the cityscape changed in just four decades. Vienna was transformed into a "palace city", by the year 1740, the number of pleasure palaces, gardens and belvederes had doubled. The Baroque style, which by crown, church and nobility was forced upon the citizens, is considered of Felix Czeike as "authority art". The existing social gap should be camouflaged by the rubberneck culture in festivities, receptions and parades.

 

*) Burgfrieden (The term truce or Castle peace referred to a jurisdiction in the Middle Ages around a castle, in which feuds, so hostilities of private individuals among themselves, under penalty of ostracism were banned. Today the term is mainly used in a figurative sense.

 

Due to the return of Fischer von Erlach to Vienna in 1686 and a decade later, Lukas von Hildebrandt, the primacy of the Italians in architecture was broken and the victory parade of Austrian Baroque began. The connection between the spiritual and secular powers found its mode of expression in the Baroque, which the appearance of the city of Vienna should characterize in a decisive manner.

 

Construction of Charles Church

The Karlskirche was built by Emperor Charles VI. commemorating the plague saint, Charles Borromeo. In 1713 the plague raged in Vienna and claimed about 8,000 human lives, in February 1714 the plague disappeared and as a sign of gratitude was began with the construction of the church, this should become the most important religious building of Vienna in the 18th century.

In a contest was decided on the builder - participants were Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, Johann Lukas von Hildebrandt and Ferdinando Galli-Bibienas. As winner emerged the famous architect Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, he died in 1723 and did not live to the achievement of the Church. The supervision was transferred to the imperial court architect Anton Erhard Martinelli, as Fischer von Erlach died, his son, Joseph Emmanuel, finished his work. On 28 October 1737 St. Charles Church was solemnly by the Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Sigismund Count Kollowitz, inaugurated. The spiritual care ceded Emperor Karl VI. to the chivalric Order of the Cross with the Red Star, since 1783 is the Karlskirche imperial patronage parish.

The church at that time lay still behind the regulated river Wien (Wienfluss) and in the open field. The directed towards the city face side of the Charles Church, which stood on the edge of the suburb of Wieden, was target point of a line of sight the Hofburg and St. Charles Church in the sense of a "via triumphalis" connecting. On the temple-like front building of the Karlskirche the dedication inscription is clearly visible "Vota mea Reddam in conspectu timentium Deum" - "I will fulfill my vow before those who fear God."

Already during the construction by Fischer von Erlach (senior), there were several project phases, three of which have been preserved:

 

1. Medaillon by Daniel Warou for the groundbreaking ceremony

2. Fore stitches in Fischer's draft of a historical architecture 1721

3. Viennese view of work by Klein and Pfeffel 1722 (1724)

 

Due to the death of Fischer von Erlach, occured recent changes made by his son, Joseph Emmanuel most of all being concerned the dome (much higher and steeper), the priest choir (omitted) and the interior (simpler). The entire project took a total of 21 years and the costs amounted to 304 045 guilders and 22 ¼ cruisers. The construction costs were shouldered by all crown lands of the Empire, but also Spain, Milan and the Netherlands had to make a contribution.

The Karlskirche is the most important Baroque building of the city and represents the most convincing the so-called Empire style in which for the last time an empire awareness in the architecture of the capital of the Holy Roman Empire after the victorious ended wars against the Turks and the French was expressed.

Symbolism of the Karlskirche

The Karlskirche consists of a central rotunda with a dome, preceded by a column structure like a Greek temple, of two high pillars illustrated on the model of Trajan's Column in Rome and of two lateral gate pavilions. The illustrated columns represent Charles VI. as a wise and strong secular ruler, the two great pillars were created by Marder and Matielli. The columns are crowned by golden eagles, symbolizing the two virtues of the Emperor - fortitudo (bravery) and constantia (resistance). The two pillars are evocative of the two pillars before the temple in Jerusalem - Jachin and Boaz. However, the illustration of the two columns does not match the model of the Trajan columns in Rome, portraying war deeds, but these tell the life story of St. Borromeo. In the front view of the Karlskirche a wide range of different symbols become one whole - the Roman emperors Trajan and Augustus, the Temple of Solomon, St. Peter's Church in Rome, Hagia Sophia, Charlemagne and the Empire of Charles V. - through the skillfully used symbols should be shown the claim of the house of Habsburg to the European domination.

The plan view of the church is, as in baroque typical, ellipsoid. In the interior of the Karlskirche the great Baroque sculpture is immediately noticeable, representing St. Borromeo. At the base the four Latin Fathers of the Church are depicted. The interior of the Karlskirche is dominated by the tremendous fresco in the oval dome room, it was created by the eminent Baroque painter Johann Michael Rottmayr between 1725-1730. The fresco shows the Mother of God representing the intercession of the patron Saint of the Church to help head off the plague, surrounded is the scene by the cardinal virtues (faith, hope and love). In the left entrance wing is situated the tomb for the Austrian poet Heinrich Joseph von Collin (17771-1811).

Inside the St. Charles Church, there is a museum where the most valuable pieces are exhibited.

These include: the vestments of St. Borromeo, a reliquary of gold and silver - a donation of Emperor Charles VI. and a rococo monstrance (1760) containing a drop of blood of the saint. Thomas Aquinas.

Even the image of the architect Fischer von Erlach, painted by Jacob von Schuppen, is one of the church treasures.

The iconographic program of the Charles Church was written by Carl Gustav Haerus, by this the Saint Charles Borromeo should be connected to the imperial founder.

www.univie.ac.at/hypertextcreator/ferstel/site/browse.php...

 

Built in 1937, this Usonian Modern house was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright for Herbert and Katherine Jacobs, whom would go on to commission Wright to design a second home for them further west about a decade later. The house is considered Wright’s first Usonian-style house, a departure from his previous Prairie School work in both aesthetics and in clientele, as the Jacobs family were Wright’s first clients who were middle class, rather than wealthy. The house was built during the Great Depression, and is the result of Herbert Jacobs, a friend of Wright, challenging the architect to design an affordable and decent home for $5,000. Wright took on the project, and created a design philosophy from it known as “Usonian,” which takes its name for Wright’s proposed moniker for people, places, and things from the United States of America, distinguishing it from the long-established phrase “American” which, confusingly, can refer to either people, places and things from either the United States of America, or the North American and South American continents. Wright envisioned a new form of architecture with the Usonian philosophy that would be affordable and not be beholden to traditions derived from Europe, responding instead to the American landscape. Wright designed his Usonian homes to not feature shrubbery, prominent foundations, chimneys, or front porches, and instead, directly connect to the surrounding landscape, and utilized materials including glass, stone, wood, and brick in the design and construction of the houses. The Jacobs House I became the prototype typical house for Wright’s envisioned “Broadacre City” concept that intended to drastically alter the form of human settlement in North America, which somewhat influenced suburban development in the United States, but did not ever get realized in anything close to resembling what Wright had intended. The Usonian houses grew more elaborate over time, eventually becoming far less affordable than they were intended, but the Jacobs House I was the first of these houses, and the most true to form, embodying the underlying design philosophy. At the time of the house’s construction, Herbert Jacobs was a young journalist who had just took on a position at the Madison Capital Times, and had a wife, Katherine Jacobs, and a young daughter. The Jacobs family lived in the small house until they outgrew it, moving out and selling the house in 1942, moving to a farm nine miles west of Madison, where they commissioned Wright to design them a new house, the Jacobs House II, in 1946-1948, which he dubbed his “Solar Hemicycle House,” which featured a more curvilinear form meant to follow the path of the sun and take advantage of passive solar heating in the winter and daylighting in the summer. The Jacobs family remained in Madison until Herbert retired in 1962, after which they lived in California until their deaths.

 

The L-shaped house is clad in wood and brick with a low-slope roof and wide overhanging eaves. The simple form of the house is a result of the Usonian philosophy of economical design, with small ribbon windows on the front offering privacy, contrasting with the much larger windows in the rear, which open to the rear garden. One end of the front facade features a carport that is open on two sides with a cantilevered roof supported by brick walls that run along the portions of the carport’s perimeter that adjoin the rest of the house. The house’s entrance is off the carport, as the design recognizes the primacy of the automobile in accessing the house, rather than walking to it from somewhere nearby. The house’s exterior accentuates its horizontality with its banded wooden cladding, roofline, and front facade windows, carrying over from Wright’s earlier Prairie School work. Inside the house, it is divided into two distinct areas, with the rear wing being quieter and more private spaces with the bedrooms and study inside this wing of the house. By contrast, the front wing has the more public areas, with an open-plan living room and dining room, the kitchen in a nook behind the fireplace, a terrace with large glass doors looking out at the rear garden, and the bathroom sitting between the two sections of the house. The interior features the same materials as the exterior, with brick and wood cladding, including economical prefabricated sandwich drywall, and wooden trim, and a stained concrete floor throughout containing heat conduits based on the Korean “Ondol” or “warm stone” system of heating, which consisted of pipes in a layer of sand below the house’s floor slab. The house does not feature an attic or basement except for a small cellar containing a boiler under the kitchen and bathroom, and was built utilizing a version of the simple slab-on-grade construction that became popular in the following decades for suburban middle class housing. The only major difference between this house’s four-inch slab foundation and conventional slab-on-grade construction is that it lacks any footings except at the large masonry fireplace, as the heating system prevents the ground under the house from freezing, eliminating the need for a footing below the frost line to prevent frost heave.

 

The house was a sensation when it was built, and the Jacobs family allowed tours of the house early on. The house was prominently featured in magazines and publications, and influenced the design of the ranch house that became popular in the 1950s and 1960s with its open kitchen, dining room, and living room. After the Jacobs family moved out, the house was cared for inconsistently by subsequent owners. The house was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1974, owing to its major historical significance, and was designated a National Historic Landmark in 2003. In 1982, the house was purchased by James Dennis, an Art History professor at the University of Wisconsin - Madison, who subsequently restored the house’s exterior and interior to their original appearance, and updating the building systems, which had worn out. The house remains in excellent condition today under the careful stewardship of multiple owners. The house is occasionally open for tours through the owner’s partnership with the Frank Lloyd Wright Wisconsin Heritage Tourism Program, Inc. One of the latest developments in the significant house’s history came in 2019, when it became one of eight Frank Lloyd Wright-designed buildings in the United States to be designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, known as “The 20th-Century Architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright”, alongside other notable buildings including Taliesin and Taliesin West, the Hollyhock House, Unity Temple, the Robie House, Fallingwater, and the Guggenheim Museum. The house’s influence on 20th Century modern residential architecture cannot be overstated, as it was the first time that such design quality really became attainable for the average person. The house, along with Fallingwater and the Johnson Wax Complex, marked a renaissance in Wright’s career, making him the well-known historical figure he is today, rather than as a derivative of Louis Sullivan he would likely have been viewed as had he ended his career at an age when most people retire.

   

In 192 BC, the Romans conquered the area and founded the outpost Toletum. Due to its iron ore deposits, Toledo developed into an important settlement. Since the first barbarian invasions, the ancient walls were reinforced. In 411 the Alans and later the Visigoths conquered the city. Toledo was the capital of the Visigoths' empire from about 531 to 711.

 

The Moors conquered the place in 712. Toledo experienced its heyday during the period of Moorish rule as Ṭulayṭula during the Caliphate of Córdoba until its conquest by Alfonso VI in 1085, after a four-year siege. In 1088, only a few years after the conquest, Archbishop Bernard of Toledo obtained confirmation from Pope Urban II that Toledo should hold the "primatus in totis Hispaniarum regnis" (primacy in all the kingdoms of the Iberian dominions). The Archbishop of Toledo is still today the Primate of the Catholic Church of Spain.

 

In the 12th and 13th centuries, the Toledo school of translators translated ancient philosophical writings (Plato, Aristotle) that had been translated from Greek into Arabic, but also genuinely Arabic writings from the fields of astronomy, mathematics, Islamic religion and theology into Latin.

 

After the conquest by Alfonso VI, Toledo became the residence of the Kingdom of Castile in 1087 and remained the capital of Spain until 1561.

The Museo de Santa Cruz is housed in an architecturally significant 16th-century building, the Hospital de Santa Cruz. The hospital was founded in order to centralize assistance to orphaned and abandoned children in the city.

 

The museum was created in 1844. In 1919, the Provincial Museum of Archaeology was moved to this location. A Fine Arts section was created in 1961, and the museum was then renamed as Museo de Santa Cruz.

 

La Sagrada Familia / The Holy Family

 

El Greco (1541 - 1614) - 1495

 

El Greco (aka "Domenikos Theotokópoulos") was born on the island of Crete. He traveled to Venice at age 26 to Venice and in 1570 moved to Rome, where he executed a series of works. In 1577, he moved to Toledo, where he lived and worked until his death.

 

 

PERIYAR E.V.RAMASAMY and WOMEN RIGHTS

 

With regards to marriage, Periyar has stated that it is one of the worst customs in India. He claimed that the marriage principle, briefly, involves the enslavement of a woman by her husband and nothing else. This enslavement is concealed under the cover of marriage rites to deceive the women concerned by giving the wedding the false name of a divine function.[7]

 

There have been numerous papers in South India reporting how husbands have killed their wives, suspecting immoral behavior. The husband's suspicion of his wife's character has often led to murders. Those who believe in the divine dispensation, according to Periyar, do not have the knowledge to ask themselves why marriages conducted according to religious rites and the approval of God end in this fashion.[7]

 

Periyar further states that the very idea that the only proper thing for women to do is to be slaves of domesticity, bear children and bring them up, is a faulty one. As long as these restrictions are imposed on women, we can be sure that women have to be subservient to men and depend on men for help. If women have to live on terms of equality with men, they must have the liberty, like men, to have the kind of education they like and also to do unhampered, any work suitable to their knowledge, ability and taste.[8]

 

Furthermore, Periyar objected to terms like "giving of a maid" and "given in marriage". They are, "Sanskrit terms" and treat woman as a thing. He advocated the substitution of the word for marriage taken from the Tirukkual "Valkai thunai" or "life partner".[9]

 

Expenses[edit]

With marriage comes the expenses. Periyar stated that in our country, and particularly in Hindu society, a marriage is a function causing a lot of difficulties and waste to all people concerned. But those who conduct the marriage function and those who are getting married do not appear to notice the attendant difficulties because they think that social life necessitates wasteful expense and many difficulties and therefore they must necessarily face those inconveniences and hardships.[10]

 

Wedding feast, jewels, expensive clothes, procession, pandal, dance, music—money is spent on all these to satisfy the vanity of the organizers. Whatever may be the amount of money spent on the wedding and however pompous each of the items may be, the mirth and jollity associated with these are over in two or three days. In a week's time the prestige and honor connected with these are forgotten.[10] But the wedding expenses leave many families crushed; for many poor families these expenses leave an enormous burden and the debts remain uncleared for a number of years.[11]

 

However, if the money intended for the wedding expense is not borrowed and belongs to either of the marriage parties, then that amount could be used by her to bring up her children and to educate them. Such a procedure would be highly beneficial to her.[12]

 

Arranged marriages[edit]

In South Asia we mostly hear of arranged marriages as part of custom, heritage, and religions. Periyar thought that the Aryan wedding methods were barbarous because of the Aryan religion and art: Vedas, Sastras, Puranas, and Epics belong to the barbaric age. He further stated that is the reason why their wedding methods involve the parents giving the girl, prostituting the girl children and some stranger carrying the girl away by force or stealth.[13]

 

Arranged marriages in general were meant to enable the couple to live together throughout life and derive happiness, satisfaction and a good reputation, even years after the sexual urge and sexual pleasure are forgotten.[14]

 

But, with the selfish manipulation of this pact, Periyar claimed that women find 'pleasure' in slavish marriage because they have been brought up by their parents without education, independence and self-respect and because they have been made to believe that marriage means subordination to males. The inclusion of such slavish women in the group of 'chaste' women is another lure to them, leading them to find pleasure in such marriages.

 

Because a man is also married before he has understood the nature of life, its problems and its pleasures, he is satisfied with the slavish nature of the wife and the sexual pleasure she gives. If he finds any incompatibility, he adapts himself to his partner and the circumstances and puts up with his lot.[14]

 

Love marriages[edit]

Love marriages, claims Periyar, on the other hand will suit only those who have no ideals in life. Such a wedding gives primacy to sexual union along and it is doubtful if it indicates an agreement between the couple for good life. Sexual compatibility alone does not ensure happy married life; the couple should be able to live together cheerfully. Suitability for life or living together can be determined only if the man and woman get used to the company of each other, and are satisfied with each other. Only then, they can enter into an agreement to live together.[13]

 

Periyar further states that love marriages can give pleasure only as long as there is lust and the ability to satisfy that lust. If there is no compatibility between the partners in other respects, such marriages end only in the enslavement of women. The lies of such women resemble the lives of bullocks which are tied to a cart, beaten up and made to labor endlessly until they die.[14]

 

Therefore, there is a proverb stating, "A deeply loving girl is unfit for family life; a suitable life partner is unfit for love." Periyar believed that the agreement between partners to live together will constitute a better marriage than a love marriage.[14]

 

Self-respect marriages[edit]

In a leading article of Viduthalai, Periyar states that a self-respect wedding is based on rationalism. Rationalism is based on the individual's courage. Some may have the courage to conduct it during the time which almanacs indicate as the time of the planet Rahu and that, particularly in the evening. Some others may have just enough daring to avoid the Brahmin priest and his mother tongue - the Sanskrit language.[15] Some may feel nervous about not keeping the traditional lamp burning in broad daylight. Some others may have the rotten thought that conducting a wedding without 'mangala sutra' is disgraceful.

 

Still, the self-respect weddings conducted during the past thirty years have some basic limits. They are: Brahmins and their mantras should be utterly avoided; meaningless rituals, piling mud pots, one on another, having the traditional lamp during day time, ritual smoke - all these should be avoided. Rationalism does not approve of these. Periyar then asks why can't the government pass an Act that legalizes weddings which avoid the above-mentioned superstitious practices. If all these details cannot be accommodated in the Act, the latter can legalize weddings which don't have Brahmin priests, the Sanskrit language and the so called holy fire.[16]

 

Thus, marriages styled as Self-Respect marriages carried a threefold significance: a) replacing the Purohit, b) inter-caste equality, c) man-woman equality. Periyar claimed to have performed Self-Respect marriages unofficially since 1925 and officially since 1928.[17] Self-Respect marriages were legalized in 1967 by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) Government.[18]

 

Widow-remarriage[edit]

On the remarriage of widows, Periyar states that among the atrocities perpetrated by the Hindu male population against women, here we have to consider the treatment meted out to widows alone. If a girl loses her husband, even before knowing anything of worldly pleasures, she is compelled to close her eyes to everything in the world and die broken-hearted. Even in Periyar's community at the time, there were widowed girls below the age of 13 years. Periyar stated how it is a touching sight to see the parents of those widowed children treating them like untouchables.[19]

 

He goes on to say that whatever may be the reason for the present state of the Hindu society, my firm belief that the low position given permanently to widows may prove to be the reason for the utter ruin of the Hindu religion and the Hindu society.[20]

 

If we try to find the reason for such conduct, we will have to conclude that they instinctively feel that women are slaves, subservient to men and that they must be kept under control. That is why these people treat women like animals. They seem to feel that giving freedom to women is equivalent to committing a very serious crime. The result of this attitude is that there is no independence or freedom to one half of the human race. This wicked enslavement of half of the human race is due to the fact that men are physically a little stronger than women. This principle applies to all spheres of life and the weaker are enslaved by the stronger.

 

If slavery has to be abolished in society, the male arrogance and wickedness which lead to the enslavement of women must be abolished first. Only when this is achieved, the tender sprouts of freedom and equality will register growth.[21]

 

One of the reasons why Periayr hated Hinduism and the orthodoxy practiced in the name of Hinduism was the practice of child marriage. Many of the girl children who were married before they were ten or twelve years old became widows before they knew the meaning of the word. According to the 1921 All India Census the details of the child widows reported living in the country that time were as follows:[22]

 

1 year baby widows - 497

1 to 2 year child widows - 494

2 to 3 year child widows - 1,257

3 to 4 year child widows - 2,837

4 to 5 year child widows - 6,707

Total number of widows - 11,342

5 to 10 year young widows - 85,037

10 to 15 year young widows - 232,147

15 to 20 year young widows - 396,172

20 to 25 year young widows - 742,820

25 to 30 year young widows - 1,163,720

Total number of widows - 2,631,238[22][23]

Periyar was deeply disturbed when he realized that among the widows in India, 11,892 were little children below 5 years and that young widows below 15 years numbering 232,147 were denied the pleasures of life.[24]

 

With regards to the re-marriage of widows, Periyar stated that it is the practice of our people to refer to such a wedding as "a widow's marriage". Such an expression is used only with reference to women and in connection with men. Just as this lady is marrying another husband after the death of the first husband, many men marry again after the death of the first wife. But the second marriage of a man is not referred to as "a widower's marriage", though that is the proper thing to do.

 

Periyar himself was a widower. After becoming one, he took a second wife. He claimed that in the ancient days, both men and women in the country had this practice. There were numerous instances in sastras and puranas of women getting married again after the death of their first husband. Periyar further stated that this is not an unusual practice in the rest of the world though it might appear strange for us at the present time. Christian and Muslim women marry again after the death of the first husband. 90 percent of women in Muslim countries get married again soon after the death of the first husband. This may be unusual in certain sections of Indian societies. But it is a common practice in certain other sections of our society which are called very backward communities.[25]

 

Further, inter-caste marriages and remarriage of widows are on the increase in India. Brahmins oppose these because they are afraid that they cannot exploit the people any more in the name of sastras. For the same reason they oppose the Sharada Act which is necessary for social well-being.[26]

 

Child marriage[edit]

In all the meetings of the non-Brahmins and the Self-Respectors, Periyar condemned child marriages and emphasized the need for educating all girl children and giving right to young widows to get married again.

 

Periyar has been very much against child marriage and stated that it reflects the cruelty to which innocent girls were subjected by their well-meaning parents. Periyar asked that if these parents can be considered civilized in any sense of the term. There was no other leader other than Periyar who reacted against this practice of child marriage.[24]

 

Those who supported child marriage were strongly against Periyar's condemnation of this act. Take for example, the Sharada Act. Those who opposed this Act say that it was against the Sastras to conduct the marriage of a girl after she has attained puberty. They further say that those who conduct such marriages are committing a sin and therefore will go to hell.[27]

 

Chastity[edit]

Periyar claimed that "household duties" have risen out of the foolishness of people and were not natural duties.[28] He went on to say that it was our selfish greed which has multiplied our household work. Nobody need worry that without household work, the women will lose their "chastity". On chastity, Periyar went on to say that it is something that belongs to women and is not a pledge to men. Whatever, chastity is, it was something that belonged to individuals.

 

In society, it was believed that if people lose their chastity, they will get divine punishment. Others are not going to get that punishment. Referring to the doctrines of institutionalized orthodox religions, he went on to say that men need not to worry themselves that women are committing a sin by not doing household work. Thus, let men realize that women are not slaves and that men are not their masters or guardians. Women should be allowed to develop the competence to protect themselves and their chastity and men need not be their watchdogs. He also believed that it was derogatory for men to play such a role.[citation needed]

 

It was said by the orthodox[who?] that women will develop diseases if they lose their chastity. The disease that a woman gets affects the husbands also. If we[who?] educate the women, they will develop the capability to keep themselves and their husbands pure. Thus, Periyar stated in the Kudi Arasu for the society to think deeply about taking a decision and do the right thing for their sisters and girl children.[29]

 

Periyar kindled the thoughts of everybody by also ridiculing the use of the word chastity only with reference to women. (Periyar-Father of Tamil 32) He stated that character is essential for both men and women and that speaking of chastity only with reference to women degraded not merely women but men also. He extended this thought and said that in any sphere of activity, civilized society cannot think of one law for men and another for women. He also said that the way most men treated their women was far worse than the way the upper class people treated the lower class, the way in which rich men treated the poor and the way in which a master treated his slave.[30]

 

Education[edit]

On education, Periyar stated that some foolish parents believe that if girls get educated, they will correspond with their secret lovers. That it is a very foolish and mischievous notion. No parent need be anxious about it. If a girl writes a letter, it will only be to a male. We can even now caution men not to read any love letter addressed to them by a woman and, even if they read it, not to reply to it. If men do not listen to this advice, they, as well as the girls who write them must be punished. It will be a hopelessly bad thing, if parents keep their girl children uneducated for this reason.[29]

 

At a speeched delivered by Periyar at the Prize Distribution function in the Municipal School for Girls at Karungal Palayam, Erode, he stated that girl children should be taught active and energetic exercises like running, high jump, long jump,and wrestling so that they may acquire the strength and courage of men. Their time and energy should not be wasted in light pastimes like Kummi (groups going in a circle, clapping their hands rhythmically) and in Kolatam (striking with sticks rhythmically).

 

In ancient Tamil literature, poets have stressed the value of education for women. In a famous verse, a poet by the name of Naladiar stated that, "What gives beauty to a woman is not the hair style or the patter of her dress or the saffron on her face but only education".[31] In a verse of Eladhi it states, "Beauty does not lie in the style of wailing or in the charm of a blush but only in the combination of numbers and letters (education).[32]

 

In a 1960 issue of Viduthalai Periyar stated that "There should be a drastic revolution in the desires and ideals of Indian women. They should equip themselves to do all types of work that men are doing. They should have good domestic life without allowing nature's obstacles in their own lives. Therefore, there should be a welcome change in the minds of our women. The administrators also most pay special attention to the advancement of women".[33]

 

Armed forces[edit]

Periyar advocated for women to be given weapons to protect themselves in reply to a question put in the Central Legislature. He stated that we have no hope that the state governments will do anything in this sphere because most of the state ministers hold the orthodox belief that women are slavish creatures.[34] Though here and there we[who?] find women also as ministers, they are old-fashioned traditionalists who will say, "We don't want any kind of freedom. We are perfectly happy with slavery".[33]

 

In Periyar's time he explained that ""Indian" women had no self-determination in any sphere of life like education property and marriage. They thought that modern civilization meant dressing themselves like British and American women and adorning themselves. Even our educated women do not entertain any thought that they must enter the police and army departments and learn to pilot airplanes like the women of Russia and Turkey. Just as modern education has made men cowards an book-worms, it has made our women decoratie [sic] dolls and weaklings".[33]

 

In a leading article written by Periyar in Viduthalai in 1946, he claimed that unless there is a drastic, fundamental and revolutionary change in our[who?] administrative machinery, it is impossible to make our women independent beings.[33]

 

Periyar goes on to explain that in our country also, there are thousands of women with the courage, competence and desire to work in the police department. Just as girls going to school was considered wonderful and cycle-riding by girls was considered funny, a few years ago, women on police duty may appear to be wonderful or strange for a few years. Then, in course of time, this will be considered natural.[33]

 

We[who?] need methods that will effect an astounding revolution in the world of women. Until we acquire those methods, we will be moving forward like a tortoise and writing and talking about Drowpath and Sita.[35]

 

Periyar, in a 1932 article of Kudi Arasu, explained that "women should develop physical strength like men. They must take exercise and get training in the use of weapons. They must acquire the ability to protect themselves when any sex-mad person tries to molest them. They should get the necessary training to join the armey [sic] when need arises and fight the enemy. This is the view of all civilized people. Women also wholeheartedly support this view. When the general view in the world is like this, who can accept the statement of some people that there is no use in giving higher education to women?"[33]

 

Birth control[edit]

"Others advocate birth-control, with a view of preserving the health of women and conserving family property; but we advocate it for the liberation of women."[36]

In the Kudi Arasu of 1932, Periyar explained the basic differences between the reasons given to us for contraception and the reasons given by others for this. We say that contraception is necessary for women to gain freedom. Others advocate contraception taking into consideration many problems like the health of women, the health and energy of the children, the poverty of the country and the maintenance of the family property. Many Westerners also support contraception for the same reasons. Our view is not based on these considerations. We recommend that women should stop delivering children altogether because conception stands in the way of women enjoying personal freedom. Further, begetting a number of children prevents men also from being free and independent. This truth will be clear if we listen to talk of men and women when their freedom is hampered.[33]

 

He went on to say how birth control does not aim at preventing the birth of children altogether, but aims only at limiting births. A man and his wife may have two children, or at the most, three children. This birth control policy is against bringing forth an unlimited number of children.[37]

 

While Periyar and the Self-Respect movement were advocating for birth control, Rajaji (C. Rajagopalachariar) very strongly opposed it. Others who opposed birth control was Thiru Adhithanar, the publisher of an extremely popular newspaper, Dina Thandhi at the time. In response to Rajaji's stand against birth control, Periyar explained that he was against this since he was of the Vedic Brahmin community that staunchly engrossed in the Manu Dharma. Thus, limiting births of overpopulation would limit diseases and death from many and therefore leave Brahmin priests without a job of doing ceremonies for the sick and funerals. In a 1959 article of Viduthalai he exclaimed that "If people like Rajaji discover new islands, make the forests habitable, do propaganda for the birth of more and more children and have farms for the upbringing of children, we may be in a position to understand them."[38]

 

During the late 1950s, 80 percent of the men and 90 percent of the women in Tamil Nadu were illiterate. Siriyar argued in a 1959 article in Viduthalai that "in this situation, if birth control is not practiced and people are allowed to have any number of children, the result will be the multiplication of castes among the "Sudras", like washermen, barbers, pot-makers, kuravas or gypsies, hunters, fishermen, famers [sic], toddy tappers, padayachies, pillars, cobblers, pariahs, and a thousand others and a limitless increase in population. The increase in population will force the 'Sudras' to preserve themselves from starvation by standing with folded hands before lazy fellows and calling them 'swami', 'master' and 'landlord'. What good result can we expect if birth control is not adopted?"[39]

 

Previously in a 1933 article of the Kudi Arasu, Periyar, in his words, explained that "even a High Court Judge in India does not know the amount of trouble that a mother takes to bring up a child. If a husband is kind to his wife and shows concern for her health and happiness, he must adopt the contraceptive method. Otherwise, he must be one who could manage to see that in delivery and in the brining [sic] up of children, she does not have much trouble. Therefore, the proper thing to do now is to drastically cut the expenses mentioned above and spend money on the proper upbringing of children with the help of nurses."[40]

 

Property rights and divorce[edit]

With regards to property rights for women, Periyar stated that there was no difference between men and women. He went on to say that like men, women should have the right to own property and enjoy its benefits. With regards to divorce or separations, he advocated that a woman can lie away from her husband if he is an undesirable person and if he has nay virulent disease. When a woman has to live apart from her husband in these circumstances, she is entitled to maintenance allowance and a claim on the husband's property. Even if a widow gets remarried, she must be given the right to claim a share of the first husband's property.[41]

 

On February 4, 1946, the Central Legislature passed an Act giving the right the Hindu married woman to get from her husband in certain circumstances a separate place to live in and a maintenance allowance. Periyar explained how that it was a useless Act. since it seems that the members of the Hindu Mahasabha and Sanadahnis agitated against the grant of even this right.[42]

 

Dowry[edit]

On the Dowry system practiced widely throughout the Indian sub-continent not only by Hindus but Christians too, Periyar calls it a "serious disease that was spreading fast amongst Tamilians". He went on to state that the disease was also found in its virulent form among the Andhras and the Brahmins of Tamil Nadu. Periyar also argued that if a man with property worth one lakh has three daughters, he has to become a beggar by the time these daughters are married. In the name of dowry, the parents of the young men who marry the three daughters, squeeze the man's property out of him.[43]

 

In the 1959 issue of Viduthalai, Periyar stated that, "according to a new legislation, women have the right to a share of the parents' property. Therefore every girl will definitely get her legitimate share from the parents' wealth - if the parents are wealth. It is inhuamane [sic] on the part of the parents of a boy to dump on him a girl whom he does not like and to plan to such as much as they can from the property of the girl's father. There is basically no difference between selling education and love for money and selling one's chastity for money. 'Prostitute' is a germ of contempt for a woman; a boy should not be reduced by his avaricous [sic] parents to get the name, 'a prostituted boy' or 'a boy that has been sold'. A father-in-law who has means, however miserly he may be by nature, will not be indifferent when his daughter suffers out of poverty. Therefore, it is very shameful on the part of the bridegroom's parents to demand from the bride's father that at the time of the marriage he should gie jewels worth so many thousands along with so many thousand rupees as dowry and that he should provide the bridegroom with a house and a care. The fact that another party makes such demands at the time of his daughter's marriage does not justify any parent's demands at the time of his son's wedding. All people must realize that both demanding and giving dowry are wrong and they must boldly declare this when occasion arises."[44]

 

Periyar calls the dowry an evil and exploitative practice depriving tens of thousands of talented and beautiful young women with sound character remaining spinsters without any chance of getting married.[45]

 

Devadasis[edit]

Among the atrocities the Tamil society committed against women was the practice of keeping some women attached to temples as Devadasis. Dr. Muthulakshmi proposed the resolution at the Madras Legislature that the Devadasi system should be abolished. The Government wanted comments on that from all important people. Periyar in his statement pointed out that the Devadasi system was a disgrace to Hindu religion. The fact that, in the name of a temple or a god, some women are kept as common property is an insult to all the women in the society. He also remarked that the prevalence of this system encouraged immorality among men and thus set the pattern for unprincipled life in many families. This was stoutly opposed in the Assembly by Satyamurthi Iyer, an orthodox Congress member, under the pretext of safeguarding the Hindu traditions. It should be said to the credit of Dr. Muthulakshmi and the leaders like Periyar that the proposal of the Doctor was accepted and a law was enacted against the Devadasi system.[30]

 

Periyar's example of the degradation of women in the Devadasi system is explained that "if a man's physical passion is aroused when his wife is not with him, he immediately goes to a prostitute. Rough stones are planted where cows and bufaloes [sic] graze to facilitate the animals to rub against the stones when they feel like it.[46] Likewise, Devadasis served in temples and in all villages rough stones planted on the borders and they say that these two (employing devadasis and the planting rough stones) are aamong [sic] the 32 dharmas mentioned in the sastras. When we consider why his kindness to the suffering and also the 32 dharmas are all bogus".[46]

 

Resolutions passed[edit]

As the Self-Respect conference held in Chengalpattu, Tamil Nadu in 1929, the following were among the many resolutions passed with regards for women's rights:

 

Women should be given equal right along with men for the family property.

There should be no objection to employing women to any job for which they are qualified.[47]

Schools, particularly schools, should try to employ only women teachers.

At the conference held in Erode in 1930, the same resolutions were passed again reminding the delegates and others that the interest of women was still uppermost in Periyar's mind. M.R. Jayakar who presided oer the Erode conference was greatly impressed by the progressive views of Periyar and other members. He was particularly happy that the movement included not merely non-Brahmin Hindus but Christians and Muslims too. He pointed out that the Self-Respect movement was more progressive than Congress. Furthermore, at the Virudhnagar conference the women members held a separate conference and passed some resolutions demanding that women should have the right to select their life partners without any consideration of religion or community and that weddings should not involve wasteful expenditure and elaborate ceremonies.[47]

Built in 1937, this Usonian Modern house was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright for Herbert and Katherine Jacobs, whom would go on to commission Wright to design a second home for them further west about a decade later. The house is considered Wright’s first Usonian-style house, a departure from his previous Prairie School work in both aesthetics and in clientele, as the Jacobs family were Wright’s first clients who were middle class, rather than wealthy. The house was built during the Great Depression, and is the result of Herbert Jacobs, a friend of Wright, challenging the architect to design an affordable and decent home for $5,000. Wright took on the project, and created a design philosophy from it known as “Usonian,” which takes its name for Wright’s proposed moniker for people, places, and things from the United States of America, distinguishing it from the long-established phrase “American” which, confusingly, can refer to either people, places and things from either the United States of America, or the North American and South American continents. Wright envisioned a new form of architecture with the Usonian philosophy that would be affordable and not be beholden to traditions derived from Europe, responding instead to the American landscape. Wright designed his Usonian homes to not feature shrubbery, prominent foundations, chimneys, or front porches, and instead, directly connect to the surrounding landscape, and utilized materials including glass, stone, wood, and brick in the design and construction of the houses. The Jacobs House I became the prototype typical house for Wright’s envisioned “Broadacre City” concept that intended to drastically alter the form of human settlement in North America, which somewhat influenced suburban development in the United States, but did not ever get realized in anything close to resembling what Wright had intended. The Usonian houses grew more elaborate over time, eventually becoming far less affordable than they were intended, but the Jacobs House I was the first of these houses, and the most true to form, embodying the underlying design philosophy. At the time of the house’s construction, Herbert Jacobs was a young journalist who had just took on a position at the Madison Capital Times, and had a wife, Katherine Jacobs, and a young daughter. The Jacobs family lived in the small house until they outgrew it, moving out and selling the house in 1942, moving to a farm nine miles west of Madison, where they commissioned Wright to design them a new house, the Jacobs House II, in 1946-1948, which he dubbed his “Solar Hemicycle House,” which featured a more curvilinear form meant to follow the path of the sun and take advantage of passive solar heating in the winter and daylighting in the summer. The Jacobs family remained in Madison until Herbert retired in 1962, after which they lived in California until their deaths.

 

The L-shaped house is clad in wood and brick with a low-slope roof and wide overhanging eaves. The simple form of the house is a result of the Usonian philosophy of economical design, with small ribbon windows on the front offering privacy, contrasting with the much larger windows in the rear, which open to the rear garden. One end of the front facade features a carport that is open on two sides with a cantilevered roof supported by brick walls that run along the portions of the carport’s perimeter that adjoin the rest of the house. The house’s entrance is off the carport, as the design recognizes the primacy of the automobile in accessing the house, rather than walking to it from somewhere nearby. The house’s exterior accentuates its horizontality with its banded wooden cladding, roofline, and front facade windows, carrying over from Wright’s earlier Prairie School work. Inside the house, it is divided into two distinct areas, with the rear wing being quieter and more private spaces with the bedrooms and study inside this wing of the house. By contrast, the front wing has the more public areas, with an open-plan living room and dining room, the kitchen in a nook behind the fireplace, a terrace with large glass doors looking out at the rear garden, and the bathroom sitting between the two sections of the house. The interior features the same materials as the exterior, with brick and wood cladding, including economical prefabricated sandwich drywall, and wooden trim, and a stained concrete floor throughout containing heat conduits based on the Korean “Ondol” or “warm stone” system of heating, which consisted of pipes in a layer of sand below the house’s floor slab. The house does not feature an attic or basement except for a small cellar containing a boiler under the kitchen and bathroom, and was built utilizing a version of the simple slab-on-grade construction that became popular in the following decades for suburban middle class housing. The only major difference between this house’s four-inch slab foundation and conventional slab-on-grade construction is that it lacks any footings except at the large masonry fireplace, as the heating system prevents the ground under the house from freezing, eliminating the need for a footing below the frost line to prevent frost heave.

 

The house was a sensation when it was built, and the Jacobs family allowed tours of the house early on. The house was prominently featured in magazines and publications, and influenced the design of the ranch house that became popular in the 1950s and 1960s with its open kitchen, dining room, and living room. After the Jacobs family moved out, the house was cared for inconsistently by subsequent owners. The house was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1974, owing to its major historical significance, and was designated a National Historic Landmark in 2003. In 1982, the house was purchased by James Dennis, an Art History professor at the University of Wisconsin - Madison, who subsequently restored the house’s exterior and interior to their original appearance, and updating the building systems, which had worn out. The house remains in excellent condition today under the careful stewardship of multiple owners. The house is occasionally open for tours through the owner’s partnership with the Frank Lloyd Wright Wisconsin Heritage Tourism Program, Inc. One of the latest developments in the significant house’s history came in 2019, when it became one of eight Frank Lloyd Wright-designed buildings in the United States to be designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, known as “The 20th-Century Architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright”, alongside other notable buildings including Taliesin and Taliesin West, the Hollyhock House, Unity Temple, the Robie House, Fallingwater, and the Guggenheim Museum. The house’s influence on 20th Century modern residential architecture cannot be overstated, as it was the first time that such design quality really became attainable for the average person. The house, along with Fallingwater and the Johnson Wax Complex, marked a renaissance in Wright’s career, making him the well-known historical figure he is today, rather than as a derivative of Louis Sullivan he would likely have been viewed as had he ended his career at an age when most people retire.

St John the Baptist Catholic Cathedral of East Anglia, Earlham Road, Norwich

 

This great church sits just beyond the inner ring road, on the site of the former city gaol. Four lanes of traffic cut it off from Upper St Giles and the city centre, but as they drop sharply down Grapes Hill they accentuate the position, power and sheer bulk of this magnificent building as it rises above the west side of the city. The massive tower seems a fatherly companion to the thirty-odd surviving medieval towers in Norwich, and it may surprise you to learn that it was only completed in 1910. At that date, St John the Baptist was the largest post-Reformation church in England, for this building only became a Cathedral as recently as 1976. Many people consider it to be the finest Gothic Revival church in the country.

 

These days, the Catholic Church has the largest number of practising members of any of the Christian Churches in England. It's been that way for several years, and with the recent influx into the country of hundreds of thousands of East Europeans, it is unlikely to change in the near future. It is salutary to remember, then, that it is less than two hundred years since the practice of the Catholic Faith in this country was decriminalised.

 

The Catholic Church had been expelled from England at the time of the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century, and consequently thousands of Catholics suffered grim punishments for their adherence to the faith of their forefathers. Many of the government reformers of the 1540s had wanted to go further, and to establish a fully protestant Church in England without any traditional hierarchy; but the early death of Edward VI, the similarly short reign of Mary, and the Anglican Settlement of the Elizabethan years, ensured that protestantism in England would retain the administrative structures of the banished Catholic Church, and some of the outward aspects of its worship. Mind you, it would be a rocky ride for the Anglicans over the next century or so.

 

Catholicism became increasing irrelevant and marginalised during the long, penal years. In retrospect, this was a good thing. After the furious martyrdoms of the Elizabethan period, the English Catholic community settled into an introspective retreat from public view. During the 17th Century, it would on occasion be forced unwillingly into the glare of controversy by 'Popish plots', real or imagined, but by the 18th century it had become a rare and exotic flower, occasionally encountered, but significant more for its strangeness than for its influence. By the start of the 19th century, there were perhaps less than a thousand Catholics in all East Anglia.

 

During these times, England was treated as a missionary territory by the Catholic Church. In the early years, the Faith was largely maintained and ministered by Jesuits, but by the 18th century there were Vicars Apostolic appointed by the Vatican to carry out the work of Bishops in designated Districts. East Anglia was in the vast Midland District. The work of these proto-Bishops was quite illegal, and they would be arrested if they were caught. Catholics relied for the sacraments on the itinerant Priests maintained by certain large country houses. Catholics in London had access to the chapels of foreign embassies, which welcomed the indigenous Faithful to Mass. It was not permissible for Catholics in England to build their own churches, and there was no right of assembly. However, there were already mission chapels in most towns, which were tolerated as long as the local Catholic community kept a low profile. There was one in Norwich in a room in the St Swithin's district, off of St Benedict's Street, run by Jesuits. It was followed soon after by a purpose-built chapel in Maddermarket Street, dedicated to St John the Baptist.

 

In 1780, a Reform Act began the process of decriminalisation; in response, an anti-Catholic pogrom in London, the Gordon Riots, resulted in hundreds of deaths. There was widespread public revulsion against this event, resulting in an increased sympathy for the Catholic community. A few years later, the fear of the French Revolution caused further support for the Catholic minority in England, and this contributed to more reform in the 1820s and 1830s. At last, it was possible for Catholic churches to be built, and for Catholic communities to be formed.

 

During the 1820s, the first proper Catholic church in Norwich since the Reformation was built. The Holy Apostles Chapel, a grand classical building in Willow Lane, survives as the headquarters of a firm of solicitors. It was ministered by Jesuits. It would be true to say that the Catholic Church in England had become very visible, very quickly, in these early decades of the 19th century. This led to further difficulties, because for the first time in centuries the possible influence of the Church led to a reaction. Would newly-liberated Catholics be loyal to the Crown? Would a Catholic Church which was given its head threaten the legitimacy of the Church of England?

 

A group of Anglican dons at Oxford University issued a series of tracts in an attempt to assert the primacy of the Church of England as a National Church. The teachings of the Oxford Movement, as it was known, spread like wildfire through the Church of England, turning it upside down, and reinventing it in terms of its medieval past. Anglican parish church buildings became sacramental and liturgical spaces once more, no more the preaching houses they had become under the influence of protestantism.

 

Religion was a popular thing in the middle years of the 19th century. At the time of the 1851 Census of Religious Worship, perhaps one in three of all English people attended an Anglican church service on a Sunday. Many others were drawn to the non-conformist chapels, especially in East Anglia.

 

The Catholic Church barely registers on the radar of the 1851 census, especially in East Anglia. Yet, in a little over 150 years, it would become the largest Church in England in terms of attendance. How did this happen?

 

One of the major rites of passage for the newly-legal Catholic Church happened the same year as the census. This was the re-establishment of the Church hierarchy in England and Wales. For the first time, there would be a college of Bishops, led by the Archbishop of Westminster, each Bishop having his own diocese. These Catholic dioceses, of course, would overlay those of the Church of England. Because there were far fewer Catholics, the Catholic dioceses were much larger - Norwich was in the vast Diocese of Northampton. The sees of Catholic dioceses were chosen carefully by the hierarchy; no city which already had an Anglican cathedral would be given a Catholic one, so as not to stir up anti-Catholic feeling. The new Cathedrals were in places of significance to Church history: Southwark and Westminster, Leeds and Middlesbrough, Salford and Clifton.

 

The dioceses were carved up into Catholic parishes, again overlaying the Anglican ones, and again much bigger than their pre-Reformation counterparts. Whereas 16th century Norwich had perhaps 36 Catholic parishes, there was now just one.

 

By 1870, the Holy Apostles Parish had a community of 1,200 Catholics, and a further town centre church followed in Fisher Lane. Yet Norwich was a staunchly protestant town, looking askance on the ritualist movement within the Church of England, and barely tolerating the increasing Catholic presence within its midst.

 

It was the industrialisation of England which had led to the emergence in the 19th century of a large, urban, mainly poor, Catholic population. This sat ill-at-ease with the Country House-led Catholicism of previous generations, but it was often the philanthropy of the landed Catholics which enabled the Catholic Church in urban areas to thrive. In the 1870s, Our Lady and the English Martyrs, a vast Catholic church, was opened in Cambridge. It had been erected thanks to the fortunes of Mrs Lynne-Stephens of Lynford in Norfolk, and was one of the largest churches built in England in the 19th century. It was clear that if, as seemed likely, the Diocese of Northampton was one day split into two smaller dioceses, the Cambridge church would be ideal as the Cathedral of the new eastern diocese. Cambridge, after all, had no Anglican cathedral, while Norwich did. A similarly large church was begun in Ipswich, although it was never completed. All over England, the Catholic communites were becoming more confident, even triumphalist. Larger and larger churches were being erected. And yet, the mood seemed not to have affected Norwich, with its two little Catholic chapels.

 

However, this hedging of bets for the future was complicated by one unusual, but ultimately significant, fact. The leading Catholic family of England then, as now, were the Dukes of Norfolk. The Duke of the day had been very generous with his money towards the building of the Cathedral at Southwark, and was responsible for the building of two great churches at Arundel and Sheffield, two places where the family had great influence. Norwich was a third.

 

In 1877, Henry Fitzalan Howard, the 15th Duke of Norfolk, married Lady Flora Hastings, and he decided to commemorate the event in stone. In 1892 he would write a letter to the Mayor of Norwich, remembering the occasion. "When, shortly after my most happy marriage, I wished to build a church as a thank-offering to God, many places were suggested to me. Bearing in mind the title that I hold, I decided to build this church in Norwich, the chief city of Norfolk." A site had been purchased in Coslany, but before any clearance began, the 1827 city gaol came onto the market. This was also bought, and in 1881 the buildings on it were demolished. The Duke selected as architect for the new building George Gilbert Scott Junior, a convert to Catholicism. It would be dedicated to St John the Baptist, in memory of the chapel in Maddermarket Street. The style was to be Early English Gothic. The size would be immense. There seems to have been no competition. The foundation stone was laid on the 17th July 1884.

 

Construction proceeded smoothly until 1892, when it was discovered that there was no planning permission for the full length of the building. This was the occasion for the Duke's letter mentioned in the previous paragraph, throwing himself somewhat on the mercy of the Corporation. "After considerable hesitation", he wrote, "I venture to address you on the subject of the church I am building in Norwich. As you are aware, difficulties have arisen... and I fear that there is danger not only of the city and myself being driven to great expense in litigation, but of its appearing as if I was acting in a hostile spirit towards the Corporation of Norwich in my attempt to add one more to the beauties of their beautiful city. It is this last consideration which chiefly induces me to trouble you with this letter."

 

The Duke went on to observe that "I have now built half the church, and I do not think any member of the corporation will suggest that it is a building of which Norwich has any cause to be ashamed... Norwich has got half my church. If it does not want the other half, perhaps I had better build it in some place which will appreciate it more. To me, of course, the result will be a disappointment."

 

This combination of charm and bluff seemed to do the trick, and by 1894 the nave had been completed, and services were moved from the two smaller churches in the parish into St John the Baptist. Scott died in 1897, and the work was finished by his brother, John Oldrich Scott. And so, on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, December 8th 1910, the great church was opened with a Blessing and High Pontifical Mass celebrated by the Bishop of Northampton, Dr Keating. Within the lifetime of people who had known the end of the penal years, the greatest Catholic church in England was complete.

 

The church is a magnificent, cruciform structure, 275 feet long. The chancel roof rises to a height of 80 feet, the top of the crossing a further 80 feet above that. Although the harmony and confidence of the Early English style here is perfection, the glory of the cathedral is perhaps not in its stonework at all, but in the extensive scheme of glass by Powell & Son. The style is entirely in keeping, entirely traditional. The overwhelming colour is blue, and on a bright day it can be like standing inside of a vast jewel.

 

You enter the building through the north porch. On a bright day, it can take a moment to accustom the eyes to the dim light within, although, because of the glass, this church could never be described as gloomy. The great arcades lead the eye down the long bays to the light of the crossing, and the sanctuary beyond. The walls climb high to the triforium and clerestory. As in all large churches, the nave would be greatly improved if it were cleared of the 19th century benches and these were replaced with modern chairs. But these are not too intrusive, not least because the aisles are clear and punctuated by devotional statues, a pleasing route to walk around the church. Incidentally, it is not unusual to find yourself alone in this vast space. Even today, Norwich has a much smaller Catholic population than either Cambridge or Ipswich, and you can wander here as if you owned the place in a way which would never be possible in Cambridge's Our Lady and the English Martyrs. This is true even since the completion of the brilliant narthex complex to the north, with its very fine café.

 

Beyond the crossing, smaller chapels let eastwards off of the transepts, including the Walsingham Chapel and the chapel of Christian Unity. The Second Spring of the Catholic Church in England has flourished into a vigorous Summer, and today the Catholic population of East Anglia continues to grow rapidly. In 1961, an Auxiliary Bishop was appointed to the Diocese of Northampton, with special responsibility for East Anglia. Fifteen years later, on the 13th of March 1976, the Diocese of Northampton was split in two, and the three eastern counties of Cambridgeshire, Norfolk and Suffolk formed the new Diocese of East Anglia. There was never any question that the Cathedral would be here in Norwich. Since the sensitivities of the 19th century, the Church of England had created a number of Cathedrals in cities already served by Catholic Cathedrals, most significantly Birmingham and Liverpool, but in deference to the spirit of those times this Church is always known as the Cathedral of East Anglia, or St John's Cathedral, without any reference to the name of the city.

 

A friend observed to me recently that you could see everything there was to see in St John the Baptist in an hour, while it would take a week for the Anglican Cathedral to give up all its treasures. This is certainly true, and while I would observe that the Anglican Cathedral was itself a Catholic Cathedral once, I would also say that it is a good thing. For, as Bill Wilson observes in the revised edition of Pevsner, this "amazing church... is of course an end and not a beginning". He goes on to describe the style as "self-effacing historicism... with nothing of the new freedom and licence of Sedding or Caroe, i.e. the Arts & Crafts". And amen to that, for here we have the best example in England of a great Gothic Revival church, a perfection of the late Victorian imagination in stone. As with its Anglican counterpart, it is certainly a great national treasure.

"For no one can be in doubt, indeed it was known in every age that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith and the foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our lord Jesus Christ, the savior and redeemer of the human race, and that to this day and for ever he lives and presides and exercises judgment in his successors the bishops of the Holy Roman See, which he founded and consecrated with his blood

 

Therefore whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole Church. So what the truth has ordained stands firm, and blessed Peter perseveres in the rock-like strength he was granted, and does not abandon that guidance of the Church which he once received."

– from Vatican I, 'Pastor Aeternus'.

 

Today is the Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter, in which we thank God for his faithfulness in giving us the ministry of the popes.

 

This stained glass window in Cologne Cathedral illustrates the quotation above.

  

In 192 BC, the Romans conquered the area and founded the outpost Toletum. Due to its iron ore deposits, Toledo developed into an important settlement. Since the first barbarian invasions, the ancient walls were reinforced. In 411 the Alans and later the Visigoths conquered the city. Toledo was the capital of the Visigoths' empire from about 531 to 711.

 

The Moors conquered the place in 712. Toledo experienced its heyday during the period of Moorish rule as Ṭulayṭula during the Caliphate of Córdoba until its conquest by Alfonso VI in 1085, after a four-year siege. In 1088, only a few years after the conquest, Archbishop Bernard of Toledo obtained confirmation from Pope Urban II that Toledo should hold the "primatus in totis Hispaniarum regnis" (primacy in all the kingdoms of the Iberian dominions). The Archbishop of Toledo is still today the Primate of the Catholic Church of Spain.

 

In the 12th and 13th centuries, the Toledo school of translators translated ancient philosophical writings (Plato, Aristotle) that had been translated from Greek into Arabic, but also genuinely Arabic writings from the fields of astronomy, mathematics, Islamic religion and theology into Latin.

 

After the conquest by Alfonso VI, Toledo became the residence of the Kingdom of Castile in 1087 and remained the capital of Spain until 1561.

In the 12th century, more than 12,000 Jews lived in Toledo.

 

According to an inscription, this synagogue was built in 1180, but it probably only acquired its current appearance in the 13th century. It is considered the oldest synagogue building in Europe still standing. After the attacks on the Jewish quarter in 1355 and 1391 and the emigration of many Jews, it was converted into a Catholic church in 1405.

 

The synagogue is a Mudéjar construction, created by Moorish architects. But it can also be considered one of the finest examples of Almohad architecture. The plain white interior walls as well as the use of brick and of pillars instead of columns are characteristics of Almohad architecture.

 

Started Sept. 15, completed Dec. 7, this 8000-piece art puzzle by Francisco de Goya ranks within the top few puzzles I've done in terms of difficulty. The very limited color palette, the dominance of muted and dark hues, and the fact that the image on the accompanying box didn't match the colors of the puzzle, made this one especially challenging. On the other hand, the painting's composition, punctuated by the square light-box and white shirt, and then emanating outwards into darker peripheries, made this one a real pleasure 'to watch grow.'

 

*****

 

I thought this might be a good time to provide some context about the painting itself - The Shootings of May 3rd, 1808 - which is very significant both in terms of Spanish art and art history in general. The text below is an excerpt from smarthistory.khanacademy.org/romanticism-in-spain.html:

 

Goya's dark vision

This painting offers an excellent example of the radical stylistic shift that rejects Neo-Classicism. Goya presents us with a dark vision of innocent Spaniards executed by a Napoleonic firing squad. In order to offer an explanation of what this event meant to Goya, we first need to introduce a little history.

 

The Napoleonic Empire

Napoleon Bonaparte, who, in a coup d'etat in 1799 seized control of post-revolutionary France from the weak governing body, the Directory. Napoleon eventually consolidated his power, and with a nod to Charlmagne and the Caesars declared himself Emperor. At the height of his power, Napoleon's empire included France, the low countries (Belgium, Luxembourg, and The Netherlands), Germany, Italy, Spain, and much of north Africa and the Near East. It is, of course, Spain that we need to focus on here.

 

By the end of the 18th century, Goya's talents had been rewarded and he had attained the post of First Painter to the Spanish monarch, King Charles IV. This enviable position was to be short lived, due to the poor judgment of the King. Early in the new century, Charles became convinced that Great Britain, which had previously wrest control of the world's seas from Spain, intended to invade its historical enemy.

 

The Crown's defensive response was catastrophic. Charles invited Napoleon Bonaparte to bring troops onto Spanish soil in order to defend against Great Britain, their great mutual enemy. The French recognized King Charles's fateful request as an admission of weakness and seized Spain. Eventually, Napoleon's brother, not the English, would replace Charles on the Spanish throne.

 

Initially, Goya, like many Spanish intellectuals, welcomed the French. Spain had been declining in wealth and power since the 16th century and had managed to avoid the beneficial revolutions in science, philosophy and industry that were then transforming Northwestern Europe. Intellectuals hoped that France would impose its modern Enlightenment culture on an increasingly reactionary Spain.

 

The Third of May, 1808

Goya's 1814 painting, The Third of May, 1808, The Shootings at Mount Principio Outside Madrid, expresses Goya's bitter disappointment. On May 2, 1808, a French soldier was shot dead in Madrid. A Spanish sniper was blamed for the murder, ostensibly an act in defense of Spanish autonomy. The French response was swift, brutal and wildly disproportionate.

 

On May Third, the following day, Napoleonic troops rounded up a large number of innocent civilians, marched them beyond the city's walls, and shot each of them. Goya depicts this grim scene by brilliantly twining form and content. In other words he finds ways to support the narrative through his choices in the actual construction of the canvas. For example:

 

Scale

This is a large canvas of a contemporary tragedy (the painting could be safely made only after Napoleon was deposed in 1814). It consciously refers to the historical use of large-scale history and religious painting (ex. David's Oath of the Horatii, 1784-85), asserting the Romantic claim that the present should reclaim its primacy over an idealized past. Large scale both implies significance and makes the scene both proximate and immediate for the viewer. Goya's scale places us not so much outside the canvas, looking in, but rather so that it seems that we are enveloped into the space, we are not so much observer as direct witnesses.

 

Composition

Rather than the more obvious solution where both the French and the Spanish face off in perfect and equal profile, Goya has shifted our vantage so that we more directly face the victims while the faces of the Napoleonic guard are obscured. This successful strategy increases our sympathy on the one hand while reducing the soldiers individuality and perhaps even equating them with the guns that become their faces on the other.

 

Similarly expressive is Goya's decision to trap the persecuted against the rising mountain and the heavy and forbidding blackness of the night sky. Finally, Goya multiplies the terror of the immediate ordeal by trailing the line of unfortunate captives into the distance, suggesting the that this action will by repeated throughout the night.

 

Line, Brushwork and Color

In sharp contrast to the smooth surfaces and modulation of tone seen in Neo-Classicism, French and Spanish Romanticism tended to strive instead for a more impulsive, more physical mark.

 

In Goya's painting the figures are rendered in comparatively broad and rough strokes of the brush. Like the mature work of the Great Spanish Baroque painter Diego Velasquez whom Goya so much admired, there is in the Third of May... an effort to invigorate and humanize the frozen compositions of the previously dominant styles (the High Renaissance and Neo-Classicism respectively). This newly recovered aggressiveness is also expressed through light and color. Goya intensifies the painting's emotional pitch by the interaction of sharp contrasts; light collides with expansive darks; white and yellow are sharp and vivid against the deep blacks, browns and reds.

 

Symbolism

Light is central to Goya's image. Like the Baroque masters, Gentileschi and de la Tour, the picture's sole source of light, the papered oil lantern controlled by the French, is contained within the frame of the canvas. Some art historians that specialize in Goya have suggested that this lantern functions as the bitter core of the painting. It symbolizes the Enlightenment that Goya had once hoped the French would bring to Spain but is here used to further their campaign of terror, the enlightenment turned to evil purpose. Certainly, the lantern focuses our attention on the spectrum of emotions on the face of those being shot.

 

Our eyes are drawn to the young man in white and yellow. In contrast to the pleading and terrified faces that surround him, he stands with arms up facing his enemy. It is in the mighty yet fragile bravery expressed in this man's face that Goya's deep humanity becomes apparent. But Goya invests this figure with even greater importance. While at first the figure's raised arms might be read as a sort of active surrender, Goya is in fact mimicking Christ upon the cross. Note the stigmata that appears in the figure's right hand. Goya has cast this massacre as a martyrdom borrowing more than scale from the history of art.

Bison, symbolic animals of the Great Plains, are often mistakenly called buffaloes. By any name, they are formidable beasts and the heaviest land animals in North America.

 

Bison stand some 5 to 6.5 feet (1.5 to 2 meters) tall at the shoulder, and can tip the scales at over a ton (907 kilograms). Despite their massive size, bison are quick on their feet. When the need arises they can run at speeds up to 40 miles (65 kilometers) an hour. They sport curved, sharp horns that may grow to be two feet (61 centimeters) long.

 

These large grazers feed on plains grasses, herbs, shrubs, and twigs. They regurgitate their food and chew it as cud before final digestion.

 

Females (cows) and adult males (bulls) generally live in small, separate bands and come together in very large herds during the summer mating season. Males battle for mating primacy, but such contests rarely turn dangerous. Females give birth to one calf after a nine-month pregnancy.

 

Bison once covered the Great Plains and much of North America, and were critically important to Plains Indian societies. During the 19th century, settlers killed some 50 million bison for food, sport, and to deprive Native Americans of their most important natural asset. The once enormous herds were reduced to only a few hundred animals. Today, bison numbers have rebounded somewhat, and about 200,000 bison live on preserves and ranches where they are raised for their meat.

 

Source: National Geographic

Vienna Baroque

Doris Binder

 

The center of Baroque art was undisputable Vienna, as a special promoter appeared the Emperor Charles VI., under whose reign not only the Karlskirche was built, but also numerous buildings have been newly planned or built. The passion for building of the High Baroque is not only founded by the destructions of the Turks, but also has its causes in the backward economic structure and its lack of production plants. Whether nobleman, cleric or commoner, all those with sufficient capital put it rather in construction funds into practice than not make use of it. Responsible for this was a deep distrust to the imperial fiscal policy and concern about the currency and a possible bankruptcy.

The Baroque emerged within the civil peace (*) Burgfrieden) of the city of Vienna, had at the beginning of the High Baroque era still dominated religious buildings, so the cityscape changed in just four decades. Vienna was transformed into a "palace city", by the year 1740, the number of pleasure palaces, gardens and belvederes had doubled. The Baroque style, which by crown, church and nobility was forced upon the citizens, is considered of Felix Czeike as "authority art". The existing social gap should be camouflaged by the rubberneck culture in festivities, receptions and parades.

 

*) Burgfrieden (The term truce or Castle peace referred to a jurisdiction in the Middle Ages around a castle, in which feuds, so hostilities of private individuals among themselves, under penalty of ostracism were banned. Today the term is mainly used in a figurative sense.

 

Due to the return of Fischer von Erlach to Vienna in 1686 and a decade later, Lukas von Hildebrandt, the primacy of the Italians in architecture was broken and the victory parade of Austrian Baroque began. The connection between the spiritual and secular powers found its mode of expression in the Baroque, which the appearance of the city of Vienna should characterize in a decisive manner.

 

Construction of Charles Church

The Karlskirche was built by Emperor Charles VI. commemorating the plague saint, Charles Borromeo. In 1713 the plague raged in Vienna and claimed about 8,000 human lives, in February 1714 the plague disappeared and as a sign of gratitude was began with the construction of the church, this should become the most important religious building of Vienna in the 18th century.

In a contest was decided on the builder - participants were Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, Johann Lukas von Hildebrandt and Ferdinando Galli-Bibienas. As winner emerged the famous architect Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, he died in 1723 and did not live to the achievement of the Church. The supervision was transferred to the imperial court architect Anton Erhard Martinelli, as Fischer von Erlach died, his son, Joseph Emmanuel, finished his work. On 28 October 1737 St. Charles Church was solemnly by the Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Sigismund Count Kollowitz, inaugurated. The spiritual care ceded Emperor Karl VI. to the chivalric Order of the Cross with the Red Star, since 1783 is the Karlskirche imperial patronage parish.

The church at that time lay still behind the regulated river Wien (Wienfluss) and in the open field. The directed towards the city face side of the Charles Church, which stood on the edge of the suburb of Wieden, was target point of a line of sight the Hofburg and St. Charles Church in the sense of a "via triumphalis" connecting. On the temple-like front building of the Karlskirche the dedication inscription is clearly visible "Vota mea Reddam in conspectu timentium Deum" - "I will fulfill my vow before those who fear God."

Already during the construction by Fischer von Erlach (senior), there were several project phases, three of which have been preserved:

 

1. Medaillon by Daniel Warou for the groundbreaking ceremony

2. Fore stitches in Fischer's draft of a historical architecture 1721

3. Viennese view of work by Klein and Pfeffel 1722 (1724)

 

Due to the death of Fischer von Erlach, occured recent changes made by his son, Joseph Emmanuel most of all being concerned the dome (much higher and steeper), the priest choir (omitted) and the interior (simpler). The entire project took a total of 21 years and the costs amounted to 304 045 guilders and 22 ¼ cruisers. The construction costs were shouldered by all crown lands of the Empire, but also Spain, Milan and the Netherlands had to make a contribution.

The Karlskirche is the most important Baroque building of the city and represents the most convincing the so-called Empire style in which for the last time an empire awareness in the architecture of the capital of the Holy Roman Empire after the victorious ended wars against the Turks and the French was expressed.

Symbolism of the Karlskirche

The Karlskirche consists of a central rotunda with a dome, preceded by a column structure like a Greek temple, of two high pillars illustrated on the model of Trajan's Column in Rome and of two lateral gate pavilions. The illustrated columns represent Charles VI. as a wise and strong secular ruler, the two great pillars were created by Marder and Matielli. The columns are crowned by golden eagles, symbolizing the two virtues of the Emperor - fortitudo (bravery) and constantia (resistance). The two pillars are evocative of the two pillars before the temple in Jerusalem - Jachin and Boaz. However, the illustration of the two columns does not match the model of the Trajan columns in Rome, portraying war deeds, but these tell the life story of St. Borromeo. In the front view of the Karlskirche a wide range of different symbols become one whole - the Roman emperors Trajan and Augustus, the Temple of Solomon, St. Peter's Church in Rome, Hagia Sophia, Charlemagne and the Empire of Charles V. - through the skillfully used symbols should be shown the claim of the house of Habsburg to the European domination.

The plan view of the church is, as in baroque typical, ellipsoid. In the interior of the Karlskirche the great Baroque sculpture is immediately noticeable, representing St. Borromeo. At the base the four Latin Fathers of the Church are depicted. The interior of the Karlskirche is dominated by the tremendous fresco in the oval dome room, it was created by the eminent Baroque painter Johann Michael Rottmayr between 1725-1730. The fresco shows the Mother of God representing the intercession of the patron Saint of the Church to help head off the plague, surrounded is the scene by the cardinal virtues (faith, hope and love). In the left entrance wing is situated the tomb for the Austrian poet Heinrich Joseph von Collin (17771-1811).

Inside the St. Charles Church, there is a museum where the most valuable pieces are exhibited.

These include: the vestments of St. Borromeo, a reliquary of gold and silver - a donation of Emperor Charles VI. and a rococo monstrance (1760) containing a drop of blood of the saint. Thomas Aquinas.

Even the image of the architect Fischer von Erlach, painted by Jacob von Schuppen, is one of the church treasures.

The iconographic program of the Charles Church was written by Carl Gustav Haerus, by this the Saint Charles Borromeo should be connected to the imperial founder.

www.univie.ac.at/hypertextcreator/ferstel/site/browse.php...

 

Built in 1937, this Usonian Modern house was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright for Herbert and Katherine Jacobs, whom would go on to commission Wright to design a second home for them further west about a decade later. The house is considered Wright’s first Usonian-style house, a departure from his previous Prairie School work in both aesthetics and in clientele, as the Jacobs family were Wright’s first clients who were middle class, rather than wealthy. The house was built during the Great Depression, and is the result of Herbert Jacobs, a friend of Wright, challenging the architect to design an affordable and decent home for $5,000. Wright took on the project, and created a design philosophy from it known as “Usonian,” which takes its name for Wright’s proposed moniker for people, places, and things from the United States of America, distinguishing it from the long-established phrase “American” which, confusingly, can refer to either people, places and things from either the United States of America, or the North American and South American continents. Wright envisioned a new form of architecture with the Usonian philosophy that would be affordable and not be beholden to traditions derived from Europe, responding instead to the American landscape. Wright designed his Usonian homes to not feature shrubbery, prominent foundations, chimneys, or front porches, and instead, directly connect to the surrounding landscape, and utilized materials including glass, stone, wood, and brick in the design and construction of the houses. The Jacobs House I became the prototype typical house for Wright’s envisioned “Broadacre City” concept that intended to drastically alter the form of human settlement in North America, which somewhat influenced suburban development in the United States, but did not ever get realized in anything close to resembling what Wright had intended. The Usonian houses grew more elaborate over time, eventually becoming far less affordable than they were intended, but the Jacobs House I was the first of these houses, and the most true to form, embodying the underlying design philosophy. At the time of the house’s construction, Herbert Jacobs was a young journalist who had just took on a position at the Madison Capital Times, and had a wife, Katherine Jacobs, and a young daughter. The Jacobs family lived in the small house until they outgrew it, moving out and selling the house in 1942, moving to a farm nine miles west of Madison, where they commissioned Wright to design them a new house, the Jacobs House II, in 1946-1948, which he dubbed his “Solar Hemicycle House,” which featured a more curvilinear form meant to follow the path of the sun and take advantage of passive solar heating in the winter and daylighting in the summer. The Jacobs family remained in Madison until Herbert retired in 1962, after which they lived in California until their deaths.

 

The L-shaped house is clad in wood and brick with a low-slope roof and wide overhanging eaves. The simple form of the house is a result of the Usonian philosophy of economical design, with small ribbon windows on the front offering privacy, contrasting with the much larger windows in the rear, which open to the rear garden. One end of the front facade features a carport that is open on two sides with a cantilevered roof supported by brick walls that run along the portions of the carport’s perimeter that adjoin the rest of the house. The house’s entrance is off the carport, as the design recognizes the primacy of the automobile in accessing the house, rather than walking to it from somewhere nearby. The house’s exterior accentuates its horizontality with its banded wooden cladding, roofline, and front facade windows, carrying over from Wright’s earlier Prairie School work. Inside the house, it is divided into two distinct areas, with the rear wing being quieter and more private spaces with the bedrooms and study inside this wing of the house. By contrast, the front wing has the more public areas, with an open-plan living room and dining room, the kitchen in a nook behind the fireplace, a terrace with large glass doors looking out at the rear garden, and the bathroom sitting between the two sections of the house. The interior features the same materials as the exterior, with brick and wood cladding, including economical prefabricated sandwich drywall, and wooden trim, and a stained concrete floor throughout containing heat conduits based on the Korean “Ondol” or “warm stone” system of heating, which consisted of pipes in a layer of sand below the house’s floor slab. The house does not feature an attic or basement except for a small cellar containing a boiler under the kitchen and bathroom, and was built utilizing a version of the simple slab-on-grade construction that became popular in the following decades for suburban middle class housing. The only major difference between this house’s four-inch slab foundation and conventional slab-on-grade construction is that it lacks any footings except at the large masonry fireplace, as the heating system prevents the ground under the house from freezing, eliminating the need for a footing below the frost line to prevent frost heave.

 

The house was a sensation when it was built, and the Jacobs family allowed tours of the house early on. The house was prominently featured in magazines and publications, and influenced the design of the ranch house that became popular in the 1950s and 1960s with its open kitchen, dining room, and living room. After the Jacobs family moved out, the house was cared for inconsistently by subsequent owners. The house was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1974, owing to its major historical significance, and was designated a National Historic Landmark in 2003. In 1982, the house was purchased by James Dennis, an Art History professor at the University of Wisconsin - Madison, who subsequently restored the house’s exterior and interior to their original appearance, and updating the building systems, which had worn out. The house remains in excellent condition today under the careful stewardship of multiple owners. The house is occasionally open for tours through the owner’s partnership with the Frank Lloyd Wright Wisconsin Heritage Tourism Program, Inc. One of the latest developments in the significant house’s history came in 2019, when it became one of eight Frank Lloyd Wright-designed buildings in the United States to be designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, known as “The 20th-Century Architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright”, alongside other notable buildings including Taliesin and Taliesin West, the Hollyhock House, Unity Temple, the Robie House, Fallingwater, and the Guggenheim Museum. The house’s influence on 20th Century modern residential architecture cannot be overstated, as it was the first time that such design quality really became attainable for the average person. The house, along with Fallingwater and the Johnson Wax Complex, marked a renaissance in Wright’s career, making him the well-known historical figure he is today, rather than as a derivative of Louis Sullivan he would likely have been viewed as had he ended his career at an age when most people retire.

Apollon Tapınağı / Temple of Apollo

 

Mevcut Tapınak, eski ve dini mağara olarak bilinen Plutonion üzerinde kurulmuştur. Yerli halkın en eski dini merkezi olan bu yerde, Apollon bölgenin ana Tanrıçası Kybele ile buluşmuştur. Eski kaynaklar, Ana Tanrıça Kybele rahibinin bu mağaraya indiğini ve zehirli gazdan etkilenmediğini bildirirler. Apollon Tapınağı’nda üst yapıya ait kalıntılar MS III. yüzyıldan geriye gitmemekle birlikte, temeller Geç Helenistik Döneme kadar uzanmaktadır.

Mermer giriş basamaklarından tanınan 70 metre uzunluğundaki Tapınak, temenos duvarı ile çevrili kutsal alan içinde bulunmaktadır. Temenos duvarı güney, batı ve kuzeyde bir kısmı kazılmış olan portiğe yaslanmıştır. Mermer portiğe ait dor düzenindeki yivli yarım sütunlar, astragal ve inci dizisi, ekhinusu da yumurta dizisi ile bezeli sütun başlıkları taşımaktadır.

Tapınak, daha geç bir döneme tarihlenmekte, fakat müzede bulunan iki ion bir korint düzenindeki nefis başlık ile bazı mimari parçalar MS I. yüzyıla tarihlenmekte ve daha eski çağlara dayanan bir tapınağın varlığına işaret etmektedir. Apollon Tapınağı’ndan günümüze kalan mermer merdivenden başka, mermer levhalar ile kaplı ve silmeli kornişleri olan bir podyum görülmektedir. Cephesi iki ante ve arasında yer alan iki sütun ile bezelidir. Tarihlenmesi ante ve başlıklarında, cella duvarında ve tabanında kullanılan yazıtlı bloklar sayesinde yapılabilmektedir. Bir tanesinin üzerinde Apollon kehanetine ait bir yazı okunmaktadır. Tapınak mimari bezemelere göre MS III. yüzyıla tarihlenmektedir.

Tapınağın arkasındaki merdivende, Apollon Tapınağı’ndan alınan parçalar, sütun gövdeleri, arşitrav parçaları, başlıklar, kaideler ile doldurulan bir alan görülmektedir. Bu yapıda, MÖ IV. yüzyıl heykel şemalarını yenileyen, kıvrımlı giysili olan, nitelikli bir kadın heykeli bulunmuştur. Yazıtından da anlaşıldığına göre; Zeuxis’in kızı Apphia imparatorluk tanrılarına ve Demos’a (Hierapolis halkının kişileştirilmesi) adamıştır.

Bir ucu, kuzeyindeki adını imparator Domitiandan alan Domitian kapısı ve diğer bir ucu güneyinde Güney Roma kapısına uzanan, 1 km uzunluğundaki Cadde görülmeye deger en önemli tarihi eserler arasındadır. Her iki tarafında sütunlu revarklar ve kamu yapıları bulunan cadde şehri bir uçtan diğer bir ucuna kadar ikiye ayırır. Ayrıca cadde giriş ve çıkışlarında bulunan kapılar ise tarihi hâlen omzunda taşıyan koca bir medeniyetin en güzel örnekleridir.

 

A temple was raised to Apollo Lairbenos, the town's principal god during the late Hellenistic period. This Apollo was linked to the ancient Anatolian sun god Lairbenos and the god of oracles Kareios. The site also included temples or shrines to Cybele, Artemis, Pluto, and Poseidon. Now only the foundations of the Hellenistic temple remain. The temple stood within a peribolos (15 by 20 metres (49 by 66 ft)) in Doric style.

The structures of the temple are later, though the presence of two Ionic capitals in the Museum, as well as of a Corinthian capital of the 1st century AD and other architectural fragments lead archeologists to suppose the existence of an earlier temple on the site.

The temple, which has a marble staircase, lies within a sacred area, about 70 metres (230 ft) long. It was surrounded by an enclosure wall (temenos). The back of the temple was built against the hill, the peribolos was surrounded on the remaining southern, western and northern sides, by a marble portico which has been partially excavated. This portico has pilasters bearing fluted Doric semi-columns supporting capitals that are decorated below with a row of astragali and beads and which, on the decorated below with a row of astragali and beads and which, on the echinus, bear a series of ovolos.

The new temple was reconstructed in the 3rd century in Roman fashion, recycling the stone blocks from the older temple. The reconstruction had a smaller area and now only its marble floor remains.

The temple of Apollo was deliberately built over an active fault. This fault was called the Plutonion. It was the oldest religious centre of the native community, the place where Apollo met with Cibele. It was said that only the priest of the Great Mother could enter the cave without being overpowered by the noxious underground fumes. Temples dedicated to Apollo were often built over geologically active sites, including his most famous, the temple at Delphi.

When the Christian faith was granted official primacy in the 4th century, this temple underwent a number of desecrations. Part of the peribolos was also dismantled to make room for a large Nympheum.

 

A print from the Phillip Medhurst Collection (published by Revd. Philip De Vere at St.George's Court, Kidderminster, England)

I know the feeling. It often stops me in my tracks as well. But it brings a special smile to my face when I see it happening to someone else.

 

There's a primacy to staring the morning directly in the face. Seeing others doing it gives me faith in the human spirit and draws a sharp line linking me to others.

 

DSCF5394_72

A print from the Phillip Medhurst Collection (published by Revd. Philip De Vere at St.George's Court, Kidderminster, England)

Composite image, consisting of several shots taken in portrait orientation, stitched together using the excellent freeware utility, Hugin.

My wife reckons she hasn't got quite enough decorations yet. I should make her read the following article that caught my eye in The Telegraph by Richard Godwin

 

Every year, as Winter tightens its grip, about eight million British householders venture into the cold, procure a tree, drag it home – and worship it.

 

We adorn the idol in silver and gold. We animate it with electricity, dress it with meaningful items – baubles, bells, angels, glass brussel sprouts in tiny santa hats – and attach huge moral weight to questions of tinsel. We say: “Welcome to the family” and give the tree the plum view of the TV, establishing a bond that crosses not only the species divide but the realms of the living and the dead – for the thing that brings us such cheer is already in the process of decay. In fact it was killed for our pleasure, literally cut off at the roots.

 

The Christmas tree ritual is perhaps the closest we come in 21st-century Britain to ritualised pagan sacrifice. It also happens to be my favourite part of Christmas – the only part that modern capitalism can’t quite poison, though Lord knows it tries. Even in an age of Pre-Lit Ultra Mountain Pine artificial trees and “Novelty Jingle Balls Adult Baubles” (£8.99 on Etsy), tree day retains its innocence. I love it all. The elemental tussle of wrestling a six-foot thing that clearly wants to be outside, inside; the resurrection of the Christmas playlist; the making of punch; the larking of children; the disinterring of the ornaments. (“Those guys from the Christmas decorations box. They’re fun, right?” as Woody reminds his fellow toys in Toy Story 3.) It all happens before Christmas has had any chance to become tedious or stressful.

 

So you can imagine how my heart leapt as I drove into Marldon Christmas tree farm near Torquay in Devon on a blue winter morning last week to be greeted by thousands of trees, in their own element, or close to it. The trees here are underplanted in a forest-like arrangement, most of them human-sized – three to six foot or so – but with the occasional 15-foot giant in their midst, destined for a hotel lobby or department store or town square.

 

Some of the trees are pre-decorated by families who have picked them out in advance; a crowd management technique because this place becomes extremely popular at weekends. Marldon’s clients have included the National Trust, the Crown Estates, the Royal Horticultural Society and 10 Downing Street, and the trees here are not the cheapest: £50 plus for a Nordmann fir. But what is on sale is rather grander than a mere tree – it is enchantment itself, complete with Alpine ski lodge, huskies, reindeer, a snow machine, and, it is rumoured, the big man himself, FC

 

“Christmas basically starts with a tree purchase, doesn’t it?” says Sadie Lynes, the founder of Christmas tree wholesalers Jadecliff, which grows around 200,000 trees across these sites in Devon, in addition to importing trees from Scotland, Ireland, Germany and Denmark for wholesale. “We see so many families come into sites like Marldon and for them it’s when Christmas begins. We all need a bit of feel-good with the climate as it is in the world. That’s what the Christmas tree symbolises. It’s the catalyst. Here we go. It’s Christmas.”

 

The practice of dragging evergreens into the home in midwinter actually predates Christmas. Some have interpreted this as a pagan tree worship. It seems equally feasible that our ancestors found a bit of holly, ivy and/or mistletoe cheered them up a bit during the darkest months of winter.

 

The modern Christmas tree ritual is, like so many Christmas rituals, a German innovation, imported to Britain by way of Prince Albert in the 1840s. As is tat. Baubles were invented in the 16th century by a German glassblower from Lauscha. Tinsel comes from 17th-century Nuremberg where it was originally made from shredded silver, though the word comes from the French étinceller, to sparkle. Apparently it was common practice in 16th-century Germany to hang Christmas trees upside down and, according to certain lifestyle influencers, this might make a quirky centrepiece to a 21st-century home – but this seems like a terrible hassle. Witch trials were also common in Germany in the 1500s too and there’s no reason to resurrect those.

 

In any case, Albert’s trees were the right way up. So is the Trafalgar Square tree that the citizens of Oslo donate to the citizens of London to say thanks for the war. Trees are of course a staple of Hollywood imagery too, White Christmas, It’s a Wonderful Life… though my favourite Christmas tree scene in a movie is the bit in Joe Dante’s Gremlins where one of the eponymous critters stages a surprise attack from between the branches of a tree. For all their cosy domestication, trees should remain a little bit menacing – a little bit other.

 

As for the British Christmas tree industry, that only took root comparatively recently. Sadie Lynes entered the business thanks to her father, Keith Fletcher, who began importing trees from the Ardennes forest to sell in his greengrocers in the early 1980s. “There wasn’t a supply in the UK back in the early 1980s,” she says. “A lot of them came from Belgium and Denmark. The farmers in the UK would perhaps plant a few in a corner of a field that they couldn’t use for anything else and would then wander back ten years later to see how it was getting on.”

 

The industry has seen rapid development in the 40 or years since then, many of which Lynes has spent as the head of the British Christmas Tree Growers Association, which has over 300 members. “It has gone from a product that is field-grown but without much care to a product that has been standardised. We prune, we net, we label, we palletise.”

 

Christmas trees tend to thrive on marginal land which makes them a tempting crop for farmers looking to maximise their land use. But they are not to be taken lightly. According to Marldon’s chief operating officer, Steve Gribbon, it costs around £1.50 to plant one Nordmann sapling and ten years for it to grow to a profitable size. “A lot of people say: ‘What do you do after Christmas?’ If only you knew!” A Nordmann requires at least two prunings a year to retain the desired rocket-like shape, both the top and bottom whirls (a “whirl” is the term for a layer of branches; the tip is called the “leader”; the soft green growth that arrives in Spring is the “flush”).

 

Let’s say you plant 2,000 trees in a field over ten years. You’ll have 20,000 trees to prune before the time you’ve seen a return. The costs of fertiliser and fuel have vastly increased in recent years too. “You really need to be set up well. A lot of farmers start growing trees and only later do they realise how much work is going to be involved.”

 

Compared to many other appalling rituals of Christmas – the mechanised slaughter of turkeys, for example, or the panic-buying of plastic nonsense on Amazon – the cultivation of millions of trees may seem comparatively benign. And yet it seems to attract undue angst. Witness the recent fracas in Italy, where various environmental associations from Trentino wrote a furious letter to the Pope urging him not to accept a 29-metre fir tree from their region for a “purely consumerist” Christmas display at the Vatican. “It is inconsistent to talk about fighting climate change and then perpetuate traditions like this, which require the elimination of such an ancient and symbolic tree.” The local mayor, Renato Girardi, pronounced himself bewildered at the fury, noting that the tree would otherwise be destined for the sawmill – as is fairly standard practise when it comes to forestry management.

 

The inherent absurdity of the business is not lost on Lynes. “It’s one of the most stupid business models out there, if you think about it,” she says. “You grow this thing for ten years. It has a four-week life span. And then it’s worth nothing.” Still, she’s being a little disingenuous about that. If cultivated with care, Christmas trees can be an exemplary circular business. For the ten years or so that it takes for a Nordmann fir to grow to six feet, it recycles CO2 into oxygen and provides a rich habitat for wildlife. Indeed it is precisely the sustainability of the business that attracted Gribbon to the industry.

 

He spent most of his career working in advertising before taking a “substantial” pay cut to come and grow Christmas trees. But as we stroll among the trees he seems almost unreasonably content. “It’s a lovely industry. When you get to the retail part, it’s nothing but smiles. And everything we do is about sustainable forestry. A lot of companies like to talk around the subject of sustainability. It’s very easy to greenwash things. But we’ve tried to look at the whole cycle.”

 

The trees grown here are processed in the neighbouring farm just visible over the hill, whereupon they end up as 3,000 tons of compost, used to help grow other crops: corn, wheat, more Christmas trees. Where underplanting is not possible, fields are rotated in such a way as to not strip whole areas bare in one go.

 

“We try and do it in such a way as to not disrupt the animals,” says Gribbon. “If it wasn’t like that, I probably wouldn’t be here.”

 

There is another element that is not usually factored in when the benefits of real trees are compared with artificial trees – which is how useful they are for fundraising. I should confess that I have some skin in this game. In fact, I am a seasoned Christmas tree salesman. For the last six years, I have somehow landed myself in a WhatsApp group of dads who sell trees on the first weekend of December. As someone who mostly pushes words around a computer for a living, this is a thrilling insight into what it might be like to do a proper job. We rise at 5.30am or so, head out nobly into the dark with our Stanley knives and torches to manhandle 150 or so Christmas trees from their pallets on the back of a lorry and line them up around the dark playground. Then, as the sun rises, the Christmas tunes come on, bacon sandwiches are prepared and everyone parades in to buy their tree.

 

The camaraderie is unmatched. No one is sad to be buying a Christmas tree. The last event raised over £2,000 for the school, a margin it is hard to reproduce in, say, bake sales. “It’s an all-round win-win and a joyous occasion to boot!” says Zoe, the head of the PTA. If anyone raises a query regarding waste, I will tell them that the trees are all grown just a couple of miles away, at Frenchay Forestry just off the M32 and the Bristol Waste Company will collect them for free after Christmas whereupon they will be shredded, blended, mixed and seasoned into organic compost; there is also a local hospice that will collect trees for modest donations.

 

Christmas tree fashions have changed. A couple of generations ago, the Norway spruce predominated. “Considered purely as a tree, a piece of living greenery, the Norway spruce hasn’t much to commend it,” notes Richard Mabey in Flora Britannica, who quotes a vintage poem produced by a cleaning company lamenting the tendency for its needles to get everywhere: “It’s mid-July, you cry out, ‘Waiter / What’s this in my soup?’ / He replies ‘Norwegian Tarragon / According to the cook’”.

 

Today, over 80 per cent of all Christmas trees sold in the UK are Nordmanns. This is a hardier variety that was apparently “discovered” by the Finnish botanist Alexander von Nordmann on a trip to the Caucasus in the 1830s (presumably the locals had been wondering what those green pointy things were.) The Nordmann has much to recommend it: its shapely whirls, its pert leader, its excellent needle retention. But much like a supermarket apple, its hardiness comes at the cost of character. It has almost no aroma, unlike the Norway spruce, which in turn has nothing to the “incredible scent” of the Noble fir, Lynes assures me. She imports these from Ireland. “If we can’t produce a tree ourselves, we try to buy them from where they thrive.” The chic thing these days would be to source a rare breed: a Fraser fir, a koreana, a lasiocarpa fir, a lodgepole pine.

 

There are of course commercial pressures on the Christmas tree. One is that everyone wants their trees up much sooner: “In my father’s day, we never sold a tree wholesale until the sixth of December. Now our wholesale season is already finished,” says Lynes. The thing is, the earlier you put up your tree, the sooner it will die. Lynes’s advice is to put it in water and replenish regularly; keep it away from any heat sources – underfloor heating is deadly – and ideally slice a layer off the bottom of the tree midway through the season to allow it to take in more water. “We try to say to our customers, ‘come on, you’ve got to look after your tree.’”

 

The primacy of the Nordmann has been challenged in recent years by the rise of artificial trees, which like artificial lawns and AI friends are increasingly hard to distinguish from the real thing. My parents were delighted that it took my sisters and me three years to notice that their tree spent most of the year disassembled in the attic. According to a YouGov survey, 60 per cent of British people planned to use an existing fake tree over Christmas 2022 and seven per cent intended to buy a new one, compared to 15 per cent who intended to buy a real tree. Interestingly, 54 per cent considered the artificial tree to be more environmentally friendly. In fact, it is estimated that it would need to be reused at least seven times for it to have a smaller carbon footprint – and this doesn’t take in such benefits as local employment, composting, charity fundraisings, nor the forever plastics in fake trees.

 

Still, Lynes is less concerned about fake trees than she is about supermarkets devaluing real trees and exploiting farmers. Lidl is currently advertising £11.99 pot grown trees. Tesco is offering half-price trees to Clubcard customers. “They’re kind of ruining the industry,” Lynes says. “At a farm or a garden centre, you can see the trees and you’ll know they’re fresh. You’ve got some degree of expertise too. Whereas the supermarkets are not really engaged with the products. It’s just there to help footfall. You don’t know how long it’s been sitting there. The margins are small and if they don’t sell them they’ll push it back to the farmers and farmers can’t live like that.” Many Christmas tree farmers have been left exposed by the collapse of Homebase, which has gone into administration.

 

But this is another reason why farms like Marldon are leaning so heavily on the experience of buying the tree. “Christmas basically starts with a tree purchase. I had a friend who bought her house based on where the tree would go at Christmas. For her that was really special.” Gribbon says that many local families come for the day and don’t actually buy a tree at all and he’s fine with that. “You can see, for them, it’s just an amazing day out. It might be their Christmas. You can see it’s a tradition for them and it’s harking back to the traditions of their childhood.”

 

It’s the ritual enchantment that’s the thing. T.S. Eliot wrote a late masterpiece called The Cultivation of Christmas Trees, in which he recalled the “the glittering rapture, the amazement / Of the first-remembered Christmas Tree.” For the 66-year-old Eliot those memories, unboxed each year, were “not be forgotten in later experience, / In the bored habituation, the fatigue, the tedium / The awareness of death, [or] the consciousness of failure.”

 

The trees are themselves enormous metaphors. They sit there flashing in our homes, half-raves, half-shrines, reminders that none of us have long before our needles drop.

The primary outbuildings on the farm in Columbia County were two large barns, a silo, and a corn crib. The rectangle gable-end barn was probably the first barn built on the farm. The lower-level fieldstone wall is suggestive of its primacy. The gambrel roof, or Wisconsin barn, and the adjacent silo is indicative of a dairy operation. The corn crib could be filled from opening on the roof.

A wonderful street to spend a few sun-sets, Harar, Ethiopia.

 

Harar (Ethiopia) is a magical place! See my Harar photo series.

If you have only 12 days to finally visit Africa, you should perhaps focus on one place: let it be Harar, Ethiopia (July 2006).

For centuries, until about 1860, it was an independent city at the borders of two different worlds: the Abbysinian mountains and the deserts stretching to the Red Sea coast. Trade and religious affairs (Muslim) must have alternated primacy during its history. As a holy city to Islam it feels as a surprisingly relaxed place. Tom Waits can not imagine the kind of dark yet exalted bars you find here at night. The size of the walled old city is at least half that of Jerusalem's old city. Most important the people are really open and the city is one of the world's few cities that within a few days demonstrate their very own distinct living atmosphere you'll never forget.

(See also my friend Elmer's photos from this trip, where by change you can also see me on a photo.)

 

Vienna Baroque

Doris Binder

 

The center of Baroque art was undisputable Vienna, as a special promoter appeared the Emperor Charles VI., under whose reign not only the Karlskirche was built, but also numerous buildings have been newly planned or built. The passion for building of the High Baroque is not only founded by the destructions of the Turks, but also has its causes in the backward economic structure and its lack of production plants. Whether nobleman, cleric or commoner, all those with sufficient capital put it rather in construction funds into practice than not make use of it. Responsible for this was a deep distrust to the imperial fiscal policy and concern about the currency and a possible bankruptcy.

The Baroque emerged within the civil peace (*) Burgfrieden) of the city of Vienna, had at the beginning of the High Baroque era still dominated religious buildings, so the cityscape changed in just four decades. Vienna was transformed into a "palace city", by the year 1740, the number of pleasure palaces, gardens and belvederes had doubled. The Baroque style, which by crown, church and nobility was forced upon the citizens, is considered of Felix Czeike as "authority art". The existing social gap should be camouflaged by the rubberneck culture in festivities, receptions and parades.

 

*) Burgfrieden (The term truce or Castle peace referred to a jurisdiction in the Middle Ages around a castle, in which feuds, so hostilities of private individuals among themselves, under penalty of ostracism were banned. Today the term is mainly used in a figurative sense.

 

Due to the return of Fischer von Erlach to Vienna in 1686 and a decade later, Lukas von Hildebrandt, the primacy of the Italians in architecture was broken and the victory parade of Austrian Baroque began. The connection between the spiritual and secular powers found its mode of expression in the Baroque, which the appearance of the city of Vienna should characterize in a decisive manner.

 

Construction of Charles Church

The Karlskirche was built by Emperor Charles VI. commemorating the plague saint, Charles Borromeo. In 1713 the plague raged in Vienna and claimed about 8,000 human lives, in February 1714 the plague disappeared and as a sign of gratitude was began with the construction of the church, this should become the most important religious building of Vienna in the 18th century.

In a contest was decided on the builder - participants were Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, Johann Lukas von Hildebrandt and Ferdinando Galli-Bibienas. As winner emerged the famous architect Johann Bernhard Fischer von Erlach, he died in 1723 and did not live to the achievement of the Church. The supervision was transferred to the imperial court architect Anton Erhard Martinelli, as Fischer von Erlach died, his son, Joseph Emmanuel, finished his work. On 28 October 1737 St. Charles Church was solemnly by the Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Sigismund Count Kollowitz, inaugurated. The spiritual care ceded Emperor Karl VI. to the chivalric Order of the Cross with the Red Star, since 1783 is the Karlskirche imperial patronage parish.

The church at that time lay still behind the regulated river Wien (Wienfluss) and in the open field. The directed towards the city face side of the Charles Church, which stood on the edge of the suburb of Wieden, was target point of a line of sight the Hofburg and St. Charles Church in the sense of a "via triumphalis" connecting. On the temple-like front building of the Karlskirche the dedication inscription is clearly visible "Vota mea Reddam in conspectu timentium Deum" - "I will fulfill my vow before those who fear God."

Already during the construction by Fischer von Erlach (senior), there were several project phases, three of which have been preserved:

 

1. Medaillon by Daniel Warou for the groundbreaking ceremony

2. Fore stitches in Fischer's draft of a historical architecture 1721

3. Viennese view of work by Klein and Pfeffel 1722 (1724)

 

Due to the death of Fischer von Erlach, occured recent changes made by his son, Joseph Emmanuel most of all being concerned the dome (much higher and steeper), the priest choir (omitted) and the interior (simpler). The entire project took a total of 21 years and the costs amounted to 304 045 guilders and 22 ¼ cruisers. The construction costs were shouldered by all crown lands of the Empire, but also Spain, Milan and the Netherlands had to make a contribution.

The Karlskirche is the most important Baroque building of the city and represents the most convincing the so-called Empire style in which for the last time an empire awareness in the architecture of the capital of the Holy Roman Empire after the victorious ended wars against the Turks and the French was expressed.

Symbolism of the Karlskirche

The Karlskirche consists of a central rotunda with a dome, preceded by a column structure like a Greek temple, of two high pillars illustrated on the model of Trajan's Column in Rome and of two lateral gate pavilions. The illustrated columns represent Charles VI. as a wise and strong secular ruler, the two great pillars were created by Marder and Matielli. The columns are crowned by golden eagles, symbolizing the two virtues of the Emperor - fortitudo (bravery) and constantia (resistance). The two pillars are evocative of the two pillars before the temple in Jerusalem - Jachin and Boaz. However, the illustration of the two columns does not match the model of the Trajan columns in Rome, portraying war deeds, but these tell the life story of St. Borromeo. In the front view of the Karlskirche a wide range of different symbols become one whole - the Roman emperors Trajan and Augustus, the Temple of Solomon, St. Peter's Church in Rome, Hagia Sophia, Charlemagne and the Empire of Charles V. - through the skillfully used symbols should be shown the claim of the house of Habsburg to the European domination.

The plan view of the church is, as in baroque typical, ellipsoid. In the interior of the Karlskirche the great Baroque sculpture is immediately noticeable, representing St. Borromeo. At the base the four Latin Fathers of the Church are depicted. The interior of the Karlskirche is dominated by the tremendous fresco in the oval dome room, it was created by the eminent Baroque painter Johann Michael Rottmayr between 1725-1730. The fresco shows the Mother of God representing the intercession of the patron Saint of the Church to help head off the plague, surrounded is the scene by the cardinal virtues (faith, hope and love). In the left entrance wing is situated the tomb for the Austrian poet Heinrich Joseph von Collin (17771-1811).

Inside the St. Charles Church, there is a museum where the most valuable pieces are exhibited.

These include: the vestments of St. Borromeo, a reliquary of gold and silver - a donation of Emperor Charles VI. and a rococo monstrance (1760) containing a drop of blood of the saint. Thomas Aquinas.

Even the image of the architect Fischer von Erlach, painted by Jacob von Schuppen, is one of the church treasures.

The iconographic program of the Charles Church was written by Carl Gustav Haerus, by this the Saint Charles Borromeo should be connected to the imperial founder.

www.univie.ac.at/hypertextcreator/ferstel/site/browse.php...

 

Pope Leo IX (21 June 1002 – 19 April 1054), born Bruno of Egisheim-Dagsburg, was Pope from 12 February 1049 to his death in 1054. He was a German aristocrat and a powerful secular ruler of central Italy while holding the papacy. He is regarded as a saint by the Roman Catholic Church, his feast day celebrated on 19 April. Leo IX is widely considered the most historically significant German Pope of the Middle Ages. His citing of the Donation of Constantine in a letter to the Patriarch of Constantinople brought about the Great Schism between the Catholic and Orthodox churches.He was born to Count Hugh and Heilwig and was a native of Eguisheim, Upper Alsace (present day France). His family was of noble rank, and his father, Count Hugh, was a cousin of Emperor Conrad II (1024–1039).[4] He was educated at Toul, where he successively became canon and, in 1026, bishop. In the latter capacity he rendered important political services to his relative Conrad II, and afterwards to Emperor Henry III. He became widely known as an earnest and reforming ecclesiastic by the zeal he showed in spreading the rule of the order of Cluny. On the death of Pope Damasus II in 1048, Bruno was selected as his successor by an assembly at Worms in December. Both the Emperor and the Roman delegates concurred. However, Bruno apparently favored a canonical election and stipulated as a condition of his acceptance that he should first proceed to Rome and be freely elected by the voice of the clergy and people of Rome. Setting out shortly after Christmas, he met with abbot Hugh of Cluny at Besançon, where he was joined by the young monk Hildebrand, who afterwards became Pope Gregory VII; arriving in pilgrim garb at Rome in the following February, he was received with much cordiality, and at his consecration assumed the name Leo IX.

Leo IX favored traditional morality in his reformation of the Catholic Church. One of his first public acts was to hold the well-known Easter synod of 1049, at which celibacy of the clergy (down to the rank of subdeacon) was required anew. Also, the Easter synod was where the Pope at least succeeded in making clear his own convictions against every kind of simony. The greater part of the year that followed was occupied in one of those progresses through Italy, Germany and France which form a marked feature in Leo IX's pontificate. After presiding over a synod at Pavia, he joined Henry III in Saxony and accompanied him to Cologne and Aachen. He also summoned a meeting of the higher clergy in Reims in which several important reforming decrees were passed. At Mainz he held a council at which the Italian and French as well as the German clergy were represented, and ambassadors of the Greek emperor were present. Here too, simony and the marriage of the clergy were the principal matters dealt with. After his return to Rome he held another Easter synod on 29 April 1050. It was occupied largely with the controversy about the teachings of Berengar of Tours. In the same year he presided over provincial synods at Salerno, Siponto and Vercelli, and in September revisited his native Germany, returning to Rome in time for a third Easter synod, at which the question of the reordination of those who had been ordained by simonists was considered. In 1052 he joined the Emperor at Pressburg and vainly sought to secure the submission of the Hungarians. At Regensburg, Bamberg and Worms, the papal presence was celebrated with various ecclesiastical solemnities. Commemorative shield on the wall of the Castle of Eguisheim, Alsace, birthplace of Pope Leo IX. In constant fear of attack from the Normans in the south of Italy, the Byzantines turned in desperation to the Normans own spiritual chief, Pope Leo IX and, according to William of Apulia, begged him "to liberate Italy that now lacks its freedom and to force that wicked people, who are pressing Apulia under their yoke, to leave." After a fourth Easter synod in 1053, Leo IX set out against the Normans in the south with an army of Italians and Swabian mercenaries. "As fervent Christians the Normans were reluctant to fight their spiritual leader and tried to sue for peace but the Swabians mocked them – battle was inevitable." Leo IX led the army himself but his forces suffered total defeat at the Battle of Civitate on 15 June 1053. Nonetheless, on going out from the city to meet the victorious enemy he was received with every token of submission, pleas for forgiveness and oaths of fidelity and homage. From June 1053 to March 1054 the Pope was nevertheless held hostage at Benevento, in honourable captivity, until he acknowledged the Normans conquests in Calabria and Apulia. He did not long survive his return to Rome, where he died on 19 April 1054. Leo IX sent a letter to Michael Cærularius, Patriarch of Constantinople, in 1054, that cited a large portion of the Donation of Constantine, believing it genuine. The official status of this letter is acknowledged in the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 5, entry on Donation of Constantine, "The first pope who used it in an official act and relied upon it, was Leo IX; in a letter of 1054 to Michael Cærularius, Patriarch of Constantinople, he cites the "Donatio" to show that the Holy See possessed both an earthly and a heavenly imperium, the royal priesthood." Leo IX assured the Patriarch that the donation was completely genuine, not a fable, so only the apostolic successor to Peter possessed that primacy and was the rightful head of all the Church. The Patriarch rejected the claims of papal primacy, and subsequently the One Church was split in two in the Great East–West Schism of 1054.Before his death, Leo IX had sent a legatine mission under Cardinal Humbert of Silva Candida to Constantinople to negotiate with Patriarch Michael I Cerularius in response to his actions concerning the church in Southern Italy. Humbert quickly disposed of negotiations by delivering a bull excommunicating the Patriarch. This act, though legally invalid due to the Pope's death at the time, was answered by the Patriarch's own bull of excommunication against Humbert and his associates and is popularly considered the official split between the Eastern and Western Churches.

A makeshift curtain at Scranton Lace's factory floor. Scranton Lace, once the employer of Hillary Clinton's father and grandfather, was one of the world's largest producers of fine, Nottingham lace. The looms were precision calibrated to read punch cards that contained encoded instructions for weaving the fine, intricate lacework. Revolutionary for its time, Scranton's looms represented the primacy of mechanization and automation in an age that benefitted greatly from mass production.