the earliest church at ourscamp, cîteaux 62 (2011)

Cîteaux �– Commentarii cistercienses, t. 62, fasc. 1-4 (2011)

THE EARLIEST CHURCH AT OURSCAMP AND THE LONG HISTORY OF CISTERCIAN �“FIRST CHURCHES�” IN FRANCE*

Sheila BONDE, Kyle KILLIAN, Clark MAINES

A small number of Cistercian monasteries chose to preserve the �“first churches�” erected on their sites long after successor buildings were undertaken.1 Studying the phenomenon of the preservation and reuse of these early buildings, at Notre-Dame d�’Ourscamp and other sites, contributes to a fuller understanding of the earliest phases of Cistercian monastic architecture. Notre-Dame d�’Ourscamp was founded in 1129/1130 by Simon de Vermandois, the bishop of Noyon, in the filiation of Clairvaux.2 The new community�’s first church was erected quickly and conse-crated in 1134 by Renaud de Prez, archbishop of Reims.3 Destroyed sometime in the eighteenth century,4 little is known of the church itself and even less about its six-hundred-year history.

Oral tradition, probably dating to the nineteenth century, has long situated the first church at the abbey of Notre-Dame d�’Ourscamp at the extremity of the northern transept arm of the existing ruins, where Peigné-Delacourt�’s schematic plan of the

* It is a pleasure to acknowledge here again the warm support for this project that our research group has received from the brotherhood of the Serviteurs de Jésus et de Marie under the leadership of Père Élie Ferrandon.

ABBREVIATION

PEIGNÉ-DELACOURT Achille PEIGNÉ-DELACOURT, Histoire de l�’abbaye Notre-Dame d�’Ourscamp, Amiens 1876.

1 The numbering of buildings, as well as their phases and campaigns, has a convoluted history in medieval architectural scholarship. For Ourscamp, we have opted not to follow Marie-Anselme DIMIER (Recueil de plans d�’églises cisterciennes, 2 vol., Grignan & Paris 1949, I: 143) who used Church I to designate the foundation church under discussion here. Instead, we refer to the foundation church sim-ply as the �“first church�” and, occasionally, as the �“ancienne église�” as did seventeenth-century writers at the abbey.

2 Gallia Christiana in Provincias Ecclesiasticas distributa�…Tomus nonus : Provincia Remensi, Paris 1751, col. 1129, �…quod IV id(ibus) Decembris, anno 1129, ex annalibus ordinis Cisterciensis, & chronico Nangii, Simon Noviomensis episcopus resuscitavit [the alleged vetus monasterium S. Eligio mentioned earlier in the GC entry] sub patrocinio Deiparae Virginis, accitis hanc in rem e Clara Valle monachis, quibus anno sequenti, firmata fundatione,�… A version of the foundation charter is found in Gallia Christiana, X, col. 375-377. The original charter has evidently not survived, and no medieval copies of it are known.

3 Gallia Christiana, IX, col. 1129, �… post aliquot annos absoluta ecclesia, eam dedicasi obtinuit an(no) 1134 a Reginaldo Remensi archiepiscipo, praesentibus plerisque suffraganeis.

4 As we will see below, the first church was still standing late in the 17th century. No mention of it was made, however, when the abbey was sold at the time of the French Revolution and we assume from that fact that it had been destroyed, probably during the restoration and rebuilding of much of the abbey that took place in the 18th century (Notre-Dame d�’Ourscamp, Archives des Serviteurs de Jésus et de Marie, Département de la Somme, Adjudication de domaines nationaux, 1792).

95334_Citeaux_t62_01_aOurscamp.indd 595334_Citeaux_t62_01_aOurscamp.indd 5 4/05/12 15:584/05/12 15:58

6 SHEILA BONDE, KYLE KILLIAN, CLARK MAINES

site first placed it (Fig. 1).5 Amateur excavations of uncertain date �– also known only by oral tradition �– have not, however, revealed any remains of the church in this area. What survives in this zone are the remains of two bays presumably connected to a third, now destroyed. The masonry of these bays is integral with that of the north transept arm, establishing that the later twelfth-century transept and the extension bays were built at the same time, something that could not be the case if the bays belonged to the abbey�’s first church (Fig. 2). Further, the decorative elements of these two bays are very similar to those in found in the great Romanesque church, providing a second confirmation of their construction with that building later in the twelfth century. On the basis of an early lithograph, it is clear that these bays once formed a single-storey porch that was accessed from the north transept arm of the Romanesque church and that gave onto the monastic cemetery (Fig. 3).

In opposition to oral tradition and the plan proposed by Peigné-Delacourt, early modern sources and new archaeological information allow us to assert that the first church of Ourscamp was located more or less on axis with the existing ruins and that it was entered through the axial chapel of the Gothic chevet. The texts of two seventeenth-century sources describe the first church and its entrance from the Gothic choir, while a third source shows an engraving of a tomb in the radial chapel leading to the church. The three sources, however, require correlation since

5 PEIGNÉ-DELACOURT, foldout plan after p. 23. DIMIER (Recueil de plans, II, plate 218) reproduced Peigné-Delacourt�’s plan of the first church but as an independent structure.

Fig. 1. Ourscamp, schematic plan of the abbey church in the 13th century, showing a �“first church�” attached to the terminal wall of north transept arm. (Peigné-Delacourt, see n. 5)


THE EARLIEST CHURCH AND �“FIRST CHURCHES�” IN FRANCE 7

Fig. 2. Ourscamp, juncture of the north transept porch and the terminal wall of the north transept. While the moulding at the impost level varies between the two spaces, the courses in the pier are integral. (authors)



one describes the passage leading to the first church, another identifies the chapel leading to it, and the third provides the location of that chapel. Our excavations in this zone during 2011 brought to light limited but conclusive material evidence of the church and its decoration.

I. LOCATION OF THE FIRST CHURCH ON THE ABBEY SITE

1. The Textual Evidence

A procès-verbal de visite, written by a commissioner delegated by the Parle-ment de Paris and dated to 1662 on internal evidence, gives a description of the various buildings and spaces of the abbey, detailing particularly those structures needing repair.6 The commission visiting the abbey not only describes the site, but

6 Notre-Dame d�’Ourscamp, Archives des Serviteurs de Jésus et de Marie, Procès-Verbal de 1662. The procès-verbal resulted from a legal dispute between the brothers and their commendatory abbot over the cost of repairs needed at the monastery. The text begins, �“L�’an mil six cens soixante deux, le Vingt quatriesme jour d�’octobre�…�”

Fig. 3. Ourscamp, view of the church from the northwest during its dismantling (lithograph after a drawing by Constant Bourgeois) published by Charles de Lasteyrie in 1819 (Collection of the Serviteurs de Jésus et de Marie, Ourscamp).



does so in the order of the visit, thus providing information on the layout of abbey buildings. The manuscript was purchased by Peigné-Delacourt from a bus driver in nearby Carlepont and was partially published by him as a set of disconnected excerpts.7 The manuscript is preserved at the abbey, which holds it in its archives. The procès-verbal contains a short description of Ourscamp�’s first church:

(fol. 223r) Ancienne Eglise.

De la nous sommes passeé[s] par une alleé assez estroictedans l�’ancienne Eglise de ladicte abbaye, de vingt cinq pas seulleme[nt] de long sur vingt de large, des bancs de(fol. 223v) menuiserie autour et n�’y a que le maistre autel. L�’on voit quelques vestiges d�’une Eglise fleishe au dessusde l�’Eglise dont l�’on nous a dict que la cheute estoit arriveé depuis peu.Pour reparations les carreaux ou (fol. 224r) pave, vistrageet quelques endroits de la menuiserie ne sont pas dans le meilleur estat et manque[nt] par caducité.8

The alley connecting the �“old church�” and its successor is described in another part of the procès-verbal where the cost of repairs is recorded:

(fol. 293r) Item avons veu l�’alleé qui va de la grande Egliseá l�’ancienne Eglise qui est du á costé du choeur [il] convientrefaire les deux parti de ladicte alleé de massonnerie (fol. 293v)de tout leur longueur sur huict piedz de haulteur, Ce quicoustra pour matiere et fai[s]on sixvingt livres. Les ruinesprouvenant depuis dixhuict à vingt ans ou environ.9

This short passage makes clear that the allée had been in disrepair for about twenty years. Further, it suggests that the allée may have originally been built of wood; but regardless of the original material, it was to be redone in stone. Finally, in addition to the narrowness of the allée described in the passage cited earlier, it was evidently not very tall. Peigné-Delacourt�’s placement of the first church, attached to the north transept arm of the main church, leaves no place for this allée, which served to link the first church to its successor.

7 At the bottom of the first page, in a different hand, is the following, �“achété par Peigné Delacourt en 1855 à [.....] conducteur de l�’omnibus de Carlepont à station d�’Ourscamp.�”

8 Ourscamp, Archives des Serviteurs, procès-verbal, fol. 223r-224r. This section follows the visit to the transept and the choir. Additions in brackets here and in other citations belong to the authors. Crossed out words appear as such in the original. After the submission of this article, we became aware that Luce-Marie Nazart (-Albigèse), in her unpublished thesis for the École des chartes, entitled �“Le temporal et les constructions de l�’abbaye d�’Ourscamp jusqu�’à la fin du moyen âge�”, (c. 1970) had come to the same conclusion as had we about the location of Ourscamp�’s first church (p. 113-114). We are grateful to Mme. Nazart-Albigèse for providing us a copy of her thesis and for the fruitful discus-sion we shared at Ourscamp in June 2011.

9 Ourscamp, Archives des Serviteurs, procès-verbal, fol. 293r-294r. One should note that the phrase á costé du choeur is better rendered as �“near�” than as �“beside�”.



Peigné-Delacourt also published excerpts from a description of the chapels sur-rounding the choir of the abbey church, written (though evidently not published) in 1678 by Antoine de Torcy, a monk of Ourscamp.10 Following his discussion of the tombs found in the Chapelle de Tous les Saints, also known as the Chapelle de Cany, Torcy wrote,

Cette chapelle de Cany fait l�’entrée dans la petite église, qui est la première bâtie par le fondateur de la maison, le révérendissime évêque de Noyon, laquelle fut dédiée l�’an 1134, le 15 février, par Renaud des Prez, 49e archevêque de Reims, assisté de ses suffragants. Pour sa façon et grandeur elle est assez régulière, longue de 72 pieds et large de 26. Il n�’y a qu�’un autel ancien; le pavé est petit, mais fort joli et fait de belles figures, aussi bien que les vitres anciennes. Et proche l�’autel à côté de l�’épitre, se voit la forme d�’un sépulcre de pierre curieusement travaillé, dans lequel, selon la tradition, ont été déposé les ossements de cet illustre prélat, Simon de Vermandois, que l�’on y rapport de Seleucie, deux ans après son décès�…Il parait sur le vélin une peinture ancienne de la pompe funèbre qui se fit à la récep-tion de son corps par les religieux de cette abbaye, dont l�’on fait tous les ans à même jour l�’anniversaire qui s�’annonce par le son des cloches, avec les vigilles et la messe fort solonnelle le lendemain. Au lambris de cette Église se voit aussi une autre peinture où cet illustre prélat, vêtu de ses habits pontificaux, présente la clef de cette nouvelle église à saint Bernard, accompagné du venerable dom Valeran de Baudement, premier abbé de la Maison, et autres religieux. Et proche la porte sont quatre tombes�…11

Neither the procès-verbal, nor Torcy, explicitly provides a location for Ourscamp�’s first church, though it can be inferred from each to have been somewhere close to, but physically separated from, the Gothic choir. The procès-verbal indicates that one passed from somewhere in the eastern part of the main church through an allée to enter the first church. Torcy permits us to infer that this allée was entered through the Cany chapel for which he does not unfortunately provide a location. One of the tombs in this chapel belonged to Michel de Barbançon, Lord of Cany (�†1547) and was drawn by Roger de Gaignières in the late seventeenth/early eighteenth century (Fig. 4). Published by Jean Adhémar and Gertrude Dordor, Gaignières�’ drawing of the tomb includes the following information below the image: �“Tombeau de pierre dans la Chapelle du milieu derrière le Choeur de l�’église de l�’abbaye d�’Orcamp,...�”12 From the combined evidence of the procès-verbal,

10 PEIGNÉ-DELACOURT, p. 47. Antoine de Torcy wrote an �“Abrégé de l�’histoire des anciens Sei-gneurs de Roye�”. As a logical extension of that work, he included an �“Instruction des tombeaux de plusieurs personnes de qualité inhumées dans l�’abbaye�” (excerpts on the tombs within the church itself are found in PEIGNÉ-DELACOURT, p. 47-67). Torcy�’s work was approved for publication; but, according to PEIGNÉ-DELACOURT, was never published. The latter (p. 47) makes clear that he had the actual man-uscript in hand and that he received it from a M. de Lafons of Câteau-Cambresis. It is not known how much of Torcy�’s manuscript was published by Peigné-Delacourt, nor have we been able to locate it.

11 PEIGNÉ-DELACOURT, p. 61-62, quoting Torcy.12 Jean ADHÉMAR, with the collaboration of Gertrude DORDOR, Les tombeaux de la collection Gaig-

nières, Dessins d�’archéologie du XVIIe siècle, II, [Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 6th series, 88 (1976)], p. 1-88, n° 1596, p. 88. The meaning of the phrase, �“derrière le Choeur,�” is less obvious than it first seems. Based on its use by Gaignières to describe other chapels in the choir, we should infer that it



Torcy and Gaignières, there can be little doubt that the first abbey church was posi-tioned to the east of the existing church, and subsequently connected to it through the axial chapel, very likely when the Gothic chevet was constructed.

2. The Archaeological Evidence

During June and July of 2011, three soundings were laid out on the abbey site with the aim of confirming or rejecting the textual suggestion that the first church at Ourscamp was located to the east of the existing ruins of the Gothic chevet (Figs. 5, 6 and 7). One of the trenches was located entirely within the axial, or Cany, chapel of the chevet (Tr. 2011-03) while the second extended from that chapel�’s interior out to the area just east of it (Tr. 2011-04). The aim of both trenches was to identify any remains of the allée leading to the first church as

means �“behind�” in the sense of �“outside.�” It is the use of the phrase �“du milieu�” which is decisive here, and it is used only this once.

Fig. 4. Ourscamp, engraving of Gaignière�’s drawing of the tomb of the Lord of Cany, buried in the Cany (also known as All Saints�’) Chapel. (After Adhémar, see n. 12).



Fig. 5. Ourscamp, surveyed site plan showing the locations of trenches 2009-01/2011-05 in the Gothic choir, 2011-03 and 2011-04 in the axial chapel and 2011-06 east of the chevet. (authors)



Fig. 6. Ourscamp, top plan of trenches 2011-03 and 2011-04. (authors)



described in the procès-verbal of 1662. The remains of a pillaged grave, a consid-erable number of stained glass fragments and mostly broken, glazed floor tiles (all evidently resulting from the dismantling of the chapel) were brought to light. No evidence of the passage was, however, discovered, probably because of a com-bination of the dismantling process and of the insertion of a substantial iron pipe datable to the nineteenth century (Fig. 7).

The third trench (Tr. 2011-06) was more productive. A long transect laid out to the east of the Gothic chevet, the third trench was begun mechanically and then partially excavated by hand after reaching a depth of 1.12 meters (Figs. 8 and 9a & 9b). This trench exposed the remains of a foundation wall with its alignment very close to the axis of the main church (Figs. 10 and 11).13 Only the lowest courses of the nearly two and a half meter length of wall survived, though the edges of the robber trench dug to remove its upper courses were clearly visible in the baulks near the bottom of both sides of the trench,14 and we can thus confirm that the wall originally rose several courses higher.

13 The top of the wall is at 37.635 meters above mean sea level. Excavation of the area immediately to the north of it began at approximately 37.5 meters.

14 The roots of large trees standing immediately to the east and the west of the excavated area severely disturbed the stratigraphy above the remains of the robber trench. Those trees, and an underground

Fig. 7. Ourscamp, overhead view of the trenches 2011-03 and 2011-04. (authors)



The wall itself was composed of two courses of variously-sized limestone blocks and rubble, and measured 47 centimeters in width. Any mortar used to bind the stones had leached away, not surprisingly for a relatively wet site like Our-scamp. Such a �“footing�” would have likely served to provide a stable construction surface on which to place the dressed blocks or the wooden sill plate of the rising wall. While a two and a half meter length of masonry certainly does not �“make�” a building, the location of the wall just east of the Gothic chevet �– and its nearly identical angle with respect to the axis of the main church �– make it highly likely that this narrow wall belonged to the first church at Ourscamp.

We can further assert that this length of foundation wall formed part of the southern exterior wall of the building. Beginning about 1.25 meters south of the wall at a depth of 42 cm. (c. 37.10 m above sea level) the transect revealed an extensive surface composed of limestone powder and small chunks of limestone (Fig. 8). This surface extended into the baulks on both the east and west sides of the trench so that its full area remains unknown. A very similar surface, also just

electric cable running to the infirmary, made extending the excavated area effectively impossible. Also to the north lies a fenced field and the Serviteurs�’ pathway to the medieval infirmary that serves as their chapel. While further excavation might be possible, conditions limiting trench placement and the presence of so many large trees in the zone immediately adjacent to the excavation area make it impracticable.

Fig. 8. Ourscamp, view of trench 2011-06 southern three-quarters of the trench. (authors)



Fig. 9a. Ourscamp, plan of the northern segment of trench 2011-06. (authors)

Fig. 9b. Ourscamp, western section drawing of the northern segment of trench 2011-06. (authors)



Fig. 10. Ourscamp, trench 2011-06: view of wall from the north. (authors)

Fig. 11. Ourscamp, trench 2011-06: view of wall from above and area containing human bones and other material culture. (authors)



east of the Gothic church of Saint-Jean-des-Vignes in Soissons, was revealed dur-ing excavations there in 1983 and 1985.15 Comparison of that deposit with sur-faces in two contemporary restoration ateliers led to the identification of the Saint-Jean deposit as a workshop area for the construction of the Gothic church. It was dated on the basis of coins found within it to the mid 1220�’s. It seems reasonable to infer from the similarities in composition and location of the calcareous surfaces in Ourscamp and Soissons that they were created by similar processes, and that the former was also part of a workshop area, though whether for construction of the infirmary or the Gothic choir remains unclear. In either case, the presence of a workshop surface a few meters south of the wall that we assign to the abbey�’s first church assures us that the interior of that church lay to the north and that the part of the wall revealed was its southern wall.

The location of Ourscamp�’s first church and its relationship to the Gothic chevet have parallels. It is quite similar to the thirteenth-century chapel constructed east of the abbey church of Saint-Germer de Fly (Oise), which was also entered from the axial chapel off the ambulatory (Fig. 12). A related example can be found in the Saint-Piat chapel at Chartres which, while axially aligned with the cathedral, is accessed from the small chapel adjacent to the axial one on the latter�’s southern side.16 Perhaps more interesting still is the late twelfth-/early thirteenth-century Chapel of the Counts of Flanders at Clairvaux.17 This modest funerary chapel was destroyed between 1715 and 1740, and was evidently a vaulted cruciform building with a crypt beneath the apse. The chapel is shown on Milley�’s 1708 plan of the abbey and was connected to the great church by a long passage that ran from the chapel�’s west façade along the north side of the small cloister to an entrance in the first radial chapel of the main church (Fig. 13).18 The Chapel of the Counts of Flanders thus provides another example, this one within a Cistercian context, of the use of passages to connect churches of different date.

15 See Sheila BONDE and Clark MAINES, Saint-Jean-des-Vignes in Soissons, Approaches to its Archi-tecture, Archaeology and History (Bibliotheca Victorina XV), Turnhout 2003, p. 241.

16 In a forthcoming study we will show that there was also a chapel aligned with, and accessed through, the axial facet of the polygonal apse of the Carthusian church at Bourgfontaine in the Retz forest not far from the town of Villers-Cotterêts (Aisne). Ultimately, such chapels belong to a much older tradition, deriving from the arrangement of the Holy Sepulchre and including such complexes as Saint-Pierre-le-Vif in Sens and Saint-Germain in Auxerre, among others.

17 Marie-Anselme DIMIER, �“La chapelle des comtes de Flandre à Clairvaux,�” Annales du Comité flamand de France, 45 (1954), p. 151-156; reprinted in Mélanges à la mémoire du père Anselme Dim-ier, ed. Benoît CHAUVIN, Pupillin 1982, I: 2, p. 826-829.

18 Marcel AUBERT, with the collaboration of the Marquise DE MAILLÉ, L�’architecture cistercienne en France, 2 vols., Paris 1947, I:11. Oddly, DIMIER (�“La chapelle,�” p. 828) states that there is no trace of it on the post-Revolutionary plan of the abbey published by AUBERT and de MAILLÉ (II : 150), though he surely must have known of the Milley plan in the same study. That he did is evident by comparing the reconstructed plan of the chapel DIMIER published (p. 829), because the tombs he shows are in exactly the same place on the Milley plan.



II. PLAN AND ELEVATION OF OURSCAMP�’S FIRST CHURCH

1. Textual Evidence for the Plan of the First Church at Ourscamp

Neither the author of the procès-verbal nor Torcy gives absolute dimensions for the first church at Ourscamp. Rather, their dimensions are given in pas (steps) and pieds (feet), both relative measures that vary somewhat according to the length of the stride, or the size of the foot, of the person pacing off the building.19 We can reasonably assume that one pas is approximately equal to three pieds and infer from the lengths and widths given that the building was modest in size.20

19 An attempt was made to convert the approximate measures given by the two authors to absolute measures taken on the site. The results were, however, completely inconsistent, making it clear either that the distances measured (length of the dorter, width of the church) were not the same as those paced or that there was more than one person pacing the spaces, or both.

20 The pas and pied varied according to local standards, especially in pre-Revolutionary France. On the variability in France, see Robert TAVERNOR, Smoot�’s Ear: The Measure of Humanity, New Haven/London 2007, p. 48-50. For the usage and equivalencies of pas and pied, see Ronald Edward ZUPKO, French Weights and Measures Before the Revolution: A Dictionary of Provincial and Local Units, Bloomington, IN 1978, p. 128 (pas) and 134-135 (pied).

Fig. 12. Saint-Germer-de-Fly, view from the south showing the relationship between church, passage and chapel. (authors)



Fig. 13. Clairvaux, plan of the abbey showing the Chapel of the Counts of Flanders and its connection to the great church. (Milley 1708, after A.-F. Arnaud, Voyage archéologique et pittoresque dans le département de l�’Aube, Troyes 1837, p. 229)



The measurements given by the two men are, however, inconsistent. Assuming the one to three ratio given above, the length measurement of twenty-five pas cited in the procès-verbal is reasonably close to Torcy�’s seventy-two pieds (25 to 24 pas, or 75 to 72 pieds). The problem arises in the width measurements, given in the procès-verbal as 20 pas and by Torcy as 26 pieds (20 to 8.67 pas, or 60 to 26 pieds). The difference in measurements is critical because it amounts to the differ-ence between a centrally-planned building and a hall.

Torcy, however, also uses the phrase, assez régulière, to describe the first church, a term that, as applied to form, conveys the notion of symmetry.21 If his width measurement is transposed from 26 to 62 pieds, the result in pas is 20.67. This, if it were true, would make Torcy�’s measurements essentially the same as those in the procès-verbal, and congruent with his own description of the building as being �“rather regular.�” It is also worth observing that we do not have Torcy�’s original manuscript to verify what he actually wrote, which means that there were two chances for a transposition to occur. The first might have been by Torcy him-self, who was not primarily concerned with describing architecture, and the second by Peigné-Delacourt, who was copying information from Torcy�’s text.

There is, of course, no way of knowing for certain whether Torcy himself, or Peigné-Delacourt, transposed the width measurement. We believe that the weight of the evidence �– the congruence of the length measurements between the two texts, and Torcy�’s description of the building as assez régulière �– makes it more likely that the first church at Ourscamp was essentially centrally-planned, measur-ing about 25 × 20 meters.

Indirect support for this interpretation may be found in the first church at Clair-vaux, which was also centrally-planned (Figs. 13 and 14). Ourscamp was founded from Clairvaux in 1129, its first abbot, Waleran, and twelve monks having been sent by Saint Bernard to establish the new community.22 Those men were certainly familiar with the first church at Clairvaux, having worshipped there, and it would not be surprising were they to model the first church at their new house on that at Clairvaux. Glyn Coppack has recently argued for a similar direct influence of Clairvaux�’s early monastic buildings at Fountains, an influence brought into being by a monk, Geoffrey d�’Ainai, sent from Clairvaux to Fountains.23

2. Remarks on the Elevation of Ourscamp�’s First Church

Material evidence for the elevation of the first church at Ourscamp is certainly limited. The material recovered from excavation, however, when combined with textual evidence, permits us to offer a few observations. First, the comparative

21 Paul ROBERT, Le petit Robert, Dictionnaire alphabétique & analogique de la langue française, ed. Alain REY and Josette REY-DEBOVE, Paris 1979, p. 1647, �“régulier, ière�”.

22 Gallia christiana, IX, col. 1129, Walerannus de Baudemont�…factus anno 1128 Clarevallensis monachus, mittitur anno sequenti a S. Bernardo cum duodecim monachis ad Ursi-Campum.

23 Glyn COPPACK, Fountains Abbey, the Cistercians in the North of England, Stroud 2009, p. 21, 24-25.



thinness of the foundation courses excavated in 2011 could be read in one of two ways. The wall may have served to support the sill plate of a wooden wall, or it may have supported a relatively thin masonry wall. The proximity of forest belong-ing to the abbey makes a wooden structure possible, although stone construction of small churches is typical for the region in the first half of the twelfth century.24 In passages detailing needed repairs, however, the procès-verbal of 1662 suggests strongly that the first church at Ourscamp was made of wood. Use of phrases such as poultres pourris (rotted beams) and terms like sablierre (large horizontal beam) and latte (lathe) are clear evidence of its wooden construction.25

Wooden walls alone would permit us to assert that the first church was not stone-vaulted and may have had an open truss-work roof.26 This observation is supported indirectly by two other passages in the procès-verbal that discuss repairs:

24 Abandoned quarries still exist on the hills surrounding the Oise River valley, as at, for example, les Cinq Piliers located on the bluff called Mont Conseil between Dreslincourt and Chiry-Ourscamp, just four kilometers down and across the river from Ourscamp.

25 Ourscamp, Archives des Serviteurs, procès-verbal, fols. 312r, 313r and 335v.26 It is worth recalling that the procès verbal was concerned with describing the need for structural

repairs and frequently mentions vaults and the cracks in them when discussing buildings elsewhere on the site. This makes the omission of any mention of vaults in the oldest building on site more signifi-cant than it might otherwise be.

Fig. 14. Clairvaux, detail of Milley�’s view of the abbey (1708) showing the first church.



Item avons visité l�’ancienne Eglise de ladicte abbaye, ilconvient la descouvrir recouvrir toute a neufve les lattes...27

Item avoir visité la nef de ladicte ancienne Eglise de la longueur de sept époiseur28 et de la halteur de quatrequ�’il fault descouvrir et recouvrir tout (fol. 336v)a neuf les lattes estant abbaissez rompue.29

Uncovering and recovering the lathes clearly refers to roofing and, though it makes no mention of them, probably alludes to removing and replacing ceramic roof tiles. Fragments of roof tiles that were recovered from the area excavated beside the church�’s foundation wall support this notion.30 Further, the description of lathes being weakened and sagging certainly refers to roofing.

Finally, the procès-verbal mentions une fleishe au dessus de l�’église, dont la cheute estoit arriveé depuis peu. Such a fleishe, or small spire, in a centrally-planned building would most likely have been positioned above the center of the building, as in Milley�’s view of the first church at Clairvaux (Fig. 14). This suggests, in turn, that the interior of the first church at Ourscamp may have been divided by four piers (whether of stone or wood) into a central vessel surrounded by aisles, as was the case at Clairvaux (Fig. 13). In any case, we can be reasonably sure that the first church at Ourscamp was a centrally-planned structure that probably had a raised central vessel. Once connected by an allée to the axial chapel of the Gothic choir, it would have appeared much like older, centrally-planned crypt chapels of Benedic-tine monastic sites like Saint-Pierre-le-Vif in Sens and Saint-Germain in Auxerre.

3. Textual and Archaeological Evidence for the Interior of the First Church at Ourscamp

Both the author of the procès-verbal and Torcy describe the interior of Our-scamp�’s first church, though in scant detail. According to the procès-verbal, the church had des bancs de menuiserie autour (a phrase that also suggests a central plan) et [il] n�’y a que le maistre autel.31 In the list of items in need of repair, this author also mentions carreaux ou pave[ment], (and) vistrage. Regarding the latter, the procès-verbal says in another passage:

Item a la vielle Eglise il fault destacher dix panneaux etremettre moitjé en plomb neuf...32

27 Ourscamp, Archives des Serviteurs, procès-verbal, fol. 335v.28 Alternatively, époiss[eur]. Regardless of the reading of this word, the passage lacks several words

in the original. It clearly sets up a parallel construction listing the length, width (or thickness) and height of a portion of the roofing that is to be repaired.

29 Ourscamp, Archives des Serviteurs, procès-verbal, fols. 335r-336v.30 See the discussion below on the types of finds recovered from the small area excavated inside the

first church. 31 See the full quotation given above. 32 Ourscamp, Archives des Serviteurs, procès-verbal, fol. 460v.



suggesting that these were stained glass windows in need of having their leads replaced.

Torcy confirms most of this earlier description, but adds much more detail about the tiles and windows, �… le pavé est petit, mais fort joli et fait de belles figures, aussi bien que les vitres anciennes.33 He goes on to describe two later paintings and five tombs in the church, including that of the bishop who founded Ourscamp, Simon de Vermandois.34

The material evidence recovered from a small area approximately 2.5 m2 just north of the wall (i.e. inside the first church) correlates closely with the early mod-ern descriptions of the building�’s interior.35 More than 130 human bones and bone fragments were found, including pieces of cranium, mandible, vertebra, sacrum, ribs, and a patella, as well as long bones and tarsals, the presence of which corre-lates with the notion of disturbed burials within a destroyed church. A small num-ber of medieval pottery shards and one fragmentary glazed floor tile bearing a floral motif (Fig. 15) were also revealed, as were more than fifty fragments of roof tile and numerous pieces of slate. Finally, two large pieces of rose mortar, datable by type to the early modern period, were excavated in the same area. In short, the finds recovered just inside the southern wall of the church correspond to what one would expect to find in destruction layers from a small religious building that had been maintained and in continuous use for about six hundred years.36

Combining the textual and excavated evidence concerning the first church at Ourscamp permits us to make several inferences about its material history. The evidence suggests that the church was paved or repaved with bicolor tiles during the thirteenth or fourteenth centuries.37 Further, we can assert that the church did indeed receive some burials and that it continued to be (re-)decorated (paintings on cloth mentioned by Torcy) and repaired (rose mortar) over time. Finally, it would seem that the first church also retained at least some medieval stained glass as well

33 See the passage quoted above, from PEIGNÉ-DELACOURT, p. 61.34 See the passage quoted above, ibid, p. 61-62.35 The finds all come from a single layer that was probably deposited during the dismantling of the

church sometime during the eighteenth century. 36 Similar material culture, including more fragmentary glazed tiles, more shards of medieval

ceramic, some also glazed, and one moulded block that may have been part of a door or window jamb, was recovered from the supervening layers in this area of the transect. These layers were removed mechanically and disturbed not only by root action from trees adjacent to the trench, but also by the laying of the same pipe revealed in trenches 2011-03 and 2011-04. As such these finds cannot be con-clusively associated with the first church, though they may have belonged to it.

37 See Christopher NORTON, �“The Origins of Two-Color Tiles in France and England,�” in Terres cuites architecturales au moyen âge, ed. Didier DEROEUX, Arras 1986, p. 256-294, on the origin of bi-color tiles in the thirteenth century. For the tiles recovered from the main church in 2006 and 2009, see Sheila BONDE and Clark MAINES, �“Découvertes récentes à l�’abbaye d�’Ourscamp: carrelages, éléments architecturaux et potentiel archéologique du site�”, Cîteaux �– Commentarii cistercienses 57 (2006), p. 116-129 (esp. p. 117-119 and figs. 3-5), and Sheila BONDE, Caitlin BASS, Kyle KILLIAN and Clark MAINES, �“Sondages archéologiques à Notre-Dame d�’Ourscamp : Bilan provisoire des résultats�”, Cîteaux �– Commentarii cistercienses 60 (2009), p. 239-271 (esp. p. 267-8 and fig. 21). The 2011 tiles have not yet been published.



as its original altar. All of these aspects support the idea of a church that remained in use and in good repair across the centuries following its falling into redundancy. Our hypothetical reconstruction plan (Fig. 16) presents a centrally-planned and presumed wooden building measuring about 25 × 20 meters, subdivided on the interior by four posts that would have supported the high walls of the central ves-sel, and sited between the later infirmary and Gothic chevet to which it was directly connected.

III. CISTERCIAN �“FIRST CHURCHES�” AFTER REDUNDANCY

Ourscamp�’s earliest church was evidently similar to the few other known, so-called Cistercian �“first churches�” in France.38 They include, in addition to Ourscamp,

38 On Cistercian �“first churches�” in France, see Jean Owens SCHAEFER, �“The Earliest Churches of the Cistercian Order,�” in Studies in Cistercian Art and Architecture, I, ed. Meredith P. LILLICH, Kalam-azoo 1982, p. 1-12, and AUBERT and de MAILLÉ, L�’architecture cistercienne I, p. 151-153. See also Terryl N. KINDER, �“Les églises médiévales de Clairvaux: probabilités et fiction,�” Histoire de Clairvaux: Actes du Colloque de Bar-sur-Aube/Clairvaux, 22 et 23 juin 1990, Association Renaissance de

Fig. 15. Ourscamp, fragment of a glazed tile with a floral motif, revealed in trench 2011-06, just north (inside) the wall. (authors)



Fig. 16. Ourscamp, plan of the site including the first church and its connection to the Gothic chevet. (authors)



those at Cîteaux (Fig. 17), Clairvaux (Figs. 13 and 14), Pontigny (Fig. 18) and Saint-Sulpice-en-Bugey (Fig. 19).39 While none of these �“first churches�” still stands today, all are known to have survived well into the early modern period (Figs. 20a, b, c; 21a, b). Much of the limited scholarship on these buildings has been devoted to establishing their plan-form. Three of them were simple rectangular halls, two with an apse, one without; the two others, Clairvaux, and now Ourscamp appear to have been centrally-planned.

Retaining these buildings for centuries after they became redundant meant accepting the costs of maintaining them;40 yet, almost no attention has been given to the new function(s) they may have acquired during this time. Literary and some archaeological evidence strongly suggests that the majority of these early Cistercian churches took on new roles as commemorative structures once they were replaced as the principal monastic church. Later tombs were placed in four of the five churches, three on the basis of early modern textual mentions (Cîteaux, Pontigny and Ourscamp)41 and one on the basis of excavated evidence (Saint-Sulpice-en-Bugey).42

Of the known Cistercian first churches in France, only the first church at Ourscamp was directly and physically connected to its successor church. The Chapel of the Counts of Flanders at Clairvaux may be related to this group of first

l�’Abbaye de Clairvaux (Bar-sur-Aube 1991), 204-229. On first churches generally see now, Matthias UNTERMANN, Forma Ordinis, die mittelalterliche Baukunst der Zisterzienser, Munich/Berlin 2001, p. 119-127. So-called first churches outside France are known within the order, especially in Eng-land; see Peter FERGUSSON, Architecture of Solitude: Cistercian Abbeys in Twelfth-Century England, Princeton 1984, p. 23-29. Recent remote sensing and archaeological excavation have expanded our knowledge of first churches at Rievaulx and Fountains; see Peter FERGUSSON and Stuart HARRISON, with contributions by Glyn COPPACK, Rievaulx Abbey, New Haven/London 1999, p. 45-50, and COPPACK, Fountains Abbey, p. 20-25.

39 On the first church at Cîteaux see Martine PLOUVIER, �“L�’abbaye médiévale, Histoire et analyse critique,�” in Pour une histoire monumentale de l�’abbaye de Cîteaux, 1098-1998, ed. Martine PLOUVIER and Alain SAINT-DENIS, Dijon 1998, p. 123-153; on Clairvaux, SCHAEFER, �“Earliest Churches,�” p. 4-7 and KINDER, �“Les églises médiévales�”; on Pontigny, Terryl N. KINDER, �“Some observations on the Origins of Pontigny and its first church,�” Cîteaux �– Commentari cistercienses 31 (1980), p. 9-19 and �“A Note on the Plan of the First Church at Pontigny,�” in Mélanges Dimier, III:6, p. 601-608; and on Saint-Sulpice, Yves BRU, �“Les églises de l�’abbaye de Saint-Sulpice-en-Bugey,�” in Mélanges Dimier, III:5, p. 205-225, esp. 207-209, 211-213, and 215. One should note that in the PLOUVIER/SAINT-DENIS volume the church commonly referred to as Cîteaux I is identified as Cîteaux II, based on the prior existence on a wooden chapel. We continue to designate the first stone church as Cîteaux�’s �“first church.�”

40 See KINDER, �“Some Observations,�” p. 16, on a mid-17th-century estimate of the repair costs for Pontigny�’s first stone church, one of the rare examples where such work is documented.

41 On Cîteaux, see PLOUVIER, �“L�’abbaye médiévale,�” p. 141-142, quoting MARTÈNE and DURAND that Saint Stephen Harding and Saint Alberic were buried there. On Pontigny, see KINDER, �“Some observations,�” p. 16, where a local historian and monk, Dom Robinet (�†1720) is cited as attesting that the bishop of Auxerre and later Paris, William of Seignelay (�†1223), and Hervé de Donzy (�†1222), Count of Auxerre, Nevers and Tonnerre, were buried in the church. See Torcy above (PEIGNÉ-DELACOURT, p. 61), on the burial of the founding bishop, Simon de Vermandois (�†1148) in the first church at Ourscamp, and (PEIGNÉ-DELACOURT, p. 62) on the four other tombs in the church.

42 BRU, �“Les églises de l�’abbaye,�” p. 211-212, and 215, on the tomb of the Longecombe family in the apse of the first church at Saint-Sulpice.



Fig. 17. Cîteaux, plan of the abbey. (after Prinstet, 1702, reproduced in Marcel AUBERT, with the collaboration of the Marquise DE MAILLÉ, L�’architecture cistercienne en France, 2 vols., Paris 1947, I: 109)



Fig. 18. Pontigny, plan of the abbey. (from KINDER, 1982 [see n. 39] after Vaast-Barthélemy HENRY, Histoire de l�’abbaye de Pontigny, ordre de Cîteaux, département de l�’Yonne, Auxerre et Avallon 1839 [re-edition 1888])



churches through its funerary function and its placement to the east of the main church. This chapel was probably built, according to Dimier, after the count�’s death in 1191 and certainly before 1269.43 The notion of connecting a commemo-rative chapel to the main church by a covered passage may have originated at Clairvaux and been transmitted to its daughter at Ourscamp toward the end of the thirteenth century. At that time the Gothic chevet at Ourscamp replaced the apse and four of the transept chapels of the twelfth-century church.44 On the other hand, the first church at Cîteaux may also have played a role. Located east of its succes-sor, it was linked by two separate, presumably covered, passageways to an entry in the south terminal wall of the transept (Fig. 17).45

43 DIMIER, �“La chapelle,�” p. 828 and n. 18-21.44 See Sheila BONDE, Kyle KILLIAN and Clark MAINES, with the collaboration of Caitlin BASS, �“The

Cistercian Church at Ourscamp: A Critical Genealogy of Plans and their Implications for Construction Practice�” (forthcoming in Cîteaux �– Comm. cist.) for the argument on a later dating of the Gothic chevet.

45 We are not certain of the date of these passageways, which are destroyed, and hence cannot be sure whether they were in place in time to influence Ourscamp.

Fig. 19. Saint-Sulpice-en-Bugey, plan of the abbey. (after BRU, 1982, see n. 39)



Fig. 20 a-c. Comparison plans of the three Cistercian single-vesselled first churches: Cîteaux (a), Pontigny (b) and Saint-Sulpice (c). Plans are not to scale.

A B

C



In addition to the subsequent use of Cistercian �“first churches�” as funerary chapels, the evidence for Cîteaux, Ourscamp and Pontigny suggest other com-memorative functions. In the case of Cîteaux, the first church is known to have been dedicated originally to the Virgin, but was later dedicated to Saint-Edme (Edmund) (canonized 1246), probably after 1247 when his feast was instituted at the abbey,46 a change that implies the presence of relics and their periodic venera-tion in the building. In discussing the dedication of the first church at Ourscamp by the archbishop of Reims, Renaud des Prez, in February 1134, Torcy wrote that, L�’on fait aussi à pareil jour annuellement l�’office de cette dédicace.47 He also states that the Ourscamp community celebrated the anniversary of the reception of their founder-bishop�’s bones.48 Though Torcy does not say where the vigil and mass took place, it is reasonable to think that they were held in the first church since that was where Simon de Vermandois�’ bones were entombed. Thus, the first church at Ourscamp played an annual role in the commemorative liturgy of the

46 PLOUVIER, �“L�’abbaye médiévale,�” p. 130 and 131, n. 30. Saint Edmund, archbishop of Canter-bury, took ill at Pontigny during his second visit on the way to Rome in 1240, and turned around to head back to England. The saint, however, died en route at Soisy. In accordance with his wish, his body was taken back to Pontigny for burial. We are grateful to Terryl Kinder for this information.

47 See the full passage quoted above, from PEIGNÉ-DELACOURT, p. 61.48 See the full passage quoted above, ibid, p. 61-62.

Fig. 21 a & b. Comparison plans of the two Cistercian centrally-planned first churches. Clairvaux (a) Ourscamp (b). Plans are not to scale.

A B



Cistercian community, even though it was no longer their principal place of wor-ship. Following the sacks of Pontigny by the Huguenots during the late 1560�’s, the first church of that abbey, which at some point had been rededicated to Saint Thomas Apostle,49 served as the monks�’ principal worship space while repairs to the great church were carried out.

The evidence for later use of Clairvaux�’s first church is more allusive. Two early modern letters make clear that the wooden church remained in good repair.50 Joseph Meglinger�’s 1667 description of the building identifies the dedication of the two secondary altars shown in the eastern aisle of Milley�’s 1708 plan of the monasterium vetus.51 The northernmost altar was dedicated to Saint Benedict and the southernmost to Saint Lawrence and, as Meglinger states, the Life of Saint Bernard tells us that the saint prayed at these altars and that the holy persons there venerated appeared to him.52 Meglinger also describes as the only ornament in the church a �“crudely painted�” (rudi artificio exprimitur) wooden crucifix hung above the main altar. On it, the Christ was flanked by half-length figures of the Virgin

49 KINDER, �“Some Observations,�” p. 16, suggests that the first church was rededicated �“...when it was recalled to active use...�” in the 16th century. The argument we make here would suggest rededica-tion in the early 13th century as more likely, since by that time the great church had been completed (and added on to) and the chapel was by then receiving burials. Liturgies of remembrance in the first church can be presumed to have been continuous since the time the deceased were interred.

50 The first letter resulted from a 1517 visit to Clairvaux by the Queen of Sicily. Published by DIDRON, �“Un grand monastère au XVIe siècle,�” Annales archéologiques, 3 (1845), p. 223-239, mention of the wooden church is quite succinct : Et prez et joingant [sic] de ladicte chambre est la vielle église, qui est une chappelle de bois, à laquelle sainct Bernard veoit par une fenestre estant en sa chambre [in the dorter], et y a ung petit jardinet devant.... See the discussion of this text in SCHAEFER, �“Earliest Churches,�” p. 5 and n. 23 and 24. The second letter was written by Frère Joseph MEGLINGER, �“Descrip-tio Itineris Cisterciensis quod ad Comitia Generalia ejusdem sacri Ordinis, faventibus superis feliciter expedivit,�” in J. P. MIGNE, Patrologia Latina, vol. 185bis (1854), cols. 1565-1622, esp. col. 1609 and is more useful. Meglinger�’s letter was also the subject of an extended study by Henri CHABEUF, �“Voyage d�’un délégué au chapitre général de Cîteaux en MDCLXVII, étude sur l�’Iter Cisterciense de Joseph Meglinger,�” Mémoires de l�’Académie des sciences, arts et belles-lettres de Dijon, 3e sér., vol. 8 (1883-1884), p.169-405. Chabeuf�’s study contains historical context, translated excerpts from the Iter cister-ciense and commentary on it; but, the work does not provide a new edition of the Latin original. For Chabeuf�’s translation of Meglinger�’s description of the first church at Clairvaux, see p. 316-317. For Chabeuf�’s view that the first church was faithfully restored after the monasterium vetus was garrisoned in 1590, see p. 317.

51 MEGLINGER, �“Descriptio,�” col. 1609. The description of the church in its entirety reads : Inde ad oratorium descendimus; quod tale est, ut ipsa paupertas breviori compendio non concinnaret. Frontem altare occupat, eodem omnino hac tempestate cultu spectabile, nec alio, quam quo divus Bernardus instruxit; nimirum in lignea tabula vili colore imago Christi in cruce pendentis rudi artificio exprimi-tur; a cujus latere virgineae Matris et divi Joannis dimidia corpora pinguntur eodem exiguae artis penicillo elaborata. Extra chorum, seu mediam templi partem in latere dextro est altare S. Laurentii, in sinistro S. Benedicti pariter simplici manu expressis effigiebus nota. Altarium horum memoriam cele-brem ex Vita divi Bernardi breviter accipe.

52 For the passage of the Vita prima referred to by Meglinger, see Vita Prima Sancti Bernardi Claraevallis abbatis, ed. Paul VERDEYEN (ser. Corpvs Christianorvm Continuatio Mediaevalis, LXXXIX B) Turnhout 2001, p. 74 (lib. I, c. 58, l. 1472-1477) : Eadem igitur hora adfuit uiro Dei praedicta beata Virgo, duobus illis stipata ministris, beato scilicet Laurentio et beato Benedicto. Ader-ant autem in ea serenitate et suauitate quae eos decebat, et tam manifeste, ut ex ipso introitu cellulae personas quoque descerneret singulorum.



and Saint John. From both the aesthetic judgment and from the iconography, it seems reasonable to infer that the crucifix was a medieval one, almost certainly painted after the lifetime of Saint Bernard.53 No other decoration, later or contem-porary with the building, is mentioned, suggesting that the building was kept in a pristine, �“original�” condition, presumably in honor of Saint Bernard who was believed to have prayed at its altars and whose body was entombed in the great church that replaced this one.

Nearly thirty years ago, Jean Owens Schaefer wrote that �“A proper study of...[Cistercian first churches]...throughout Europe should offer significant contribu-tions to the discussions of, on the one hand, the relationship between the early architecture of the Order and the local architectural environment and, on the other, of the spirituality of the movement at its beginnings.�”54 We agree, but would add that the post-redundancy history of these early Cistercian buildings can tell us much as well. We do not presently have much more evidence than did Schaefer about Cistercian first churches in France; but that is because looking for their remains in the soil and in the archives has not yet become a priority among Cister-cian scholars. And while we do not (yet) have evidence of continued ritual use for other Cistercian first churches, it would not be surprising to find it. Indeed further archival and archaeological research may enlarge the scope of our knowledge of Cistercian first churches. That all five of the known examples in France continued to play an active role in the medieval and early modern ritual lives of their com-munities attests to the importance of doing so.

Department of History of Art and Architecture Sheila BONDE

Brown UniversityProvidence, Rhode Island 02912

Department of Anthropology Kyle KILLIAN

California State University at ChicoChico, California 95926

Department of Art and Art History Clark MAINES

Wesleyan UniversityMiddletown, Connecticut 06459

53 Elphège VACANDARD (Vie de Saint Bernard, abbé de Clairvaux, 2 vol., Paris 1927, I : p. 70, n. 1) also believed that the painting was �“surement postérieure à saint Bernard.�”

54 SCHAEFER, �“Earliest Churches,�” p. 1.



La plus ancienne église d�’Ourscamp et la longue histoire des «premières églises» cister-ciennes en France

Cette étude rouvre la question des «premières églises» cisterciennes en France. Elle consi-dère l�’architecture, les données écrites et iconographiques ainsi qu�’archéologiques de la première église du monastère cistercien de Notre-Dame d�’Ourscamp. Elle examine l�’empla-cement, la forme et la fonction de ce bâtiment à travers les six siècles de son existence et elle situe cette première église en comparaison avec d�’autres premières églises cisterciennes en France.

The earliest church at Ourscamp and the long history of Cistercian �“First Churches�” in France

This study reopens the question of Cistercian �“first churches�” in France. It investigates the architectural, textual and iconographic as well as archaeological evidence for the first church at the Cistercian monastery of Notre Dame d�’Ourscamp. It examines the location, form and function of this building across the six centuries of its existence, and places it in a comparative context with other Cistercian first churches in France.

Die erste Kirche at Ourscamp und die lange Geschichte der �“Frühkirchen�” der Zisterzien-ser in Frankreich

Diese Forschungsarbeit richtet erneut den Blick auf die Frühkirchen/ersten Kirchen der Zisterzienser in Frankreich. Sie untersucht die architektonischen, textlichen, bildlichen und archäologischen Beweise für die erste Kirche im Zisterzienserkloster von Notre Dame d�’Ourscamp. Die Arbeit analysiert die die Lage, Form und Funktion dieses Gebäudes übr die sechs Jahrhunderte seines Bestehens und vergleicht sie mit anderen ersten Kirchen/Frühkirchen in Frankreich.


the earliest church at ourscamp, cîteaux 62 (2011)

Documents