"The Former Cluniac Priory Church at Paray-le-Monial: A Study of Its Eleventh- and Twelfth-century Architecture and Sculpture,"

(Ph. D. Dissertation, Yale University: 1994)

Conclusion

The different phases of the construction of the church as outlined in Chapter 7 can be closely tied to what is known about the history of the priory as from its cartulary as sketched out in Chapter 2. The cartulary, as we have it, begins as a compilation of documents from the 1080s under Prior Hugh which collects earlier documents. The earliest events are related in the past tense indicating that they are a narrative summary rather than a verbatim copy of what existed or was known. Such a compilation indicates the desire and the need to put the priory's economic situation in order. The date of the reorganization of the priory's finances corresponds to the most likely date of the porch. Very probably, this economic reorganization around 1080 took place in order to help finance the construction of that period. The cartulary was again brought up to date in the late teens or early twenties of the twelfth century, apparently during another period of economic reorganization, since this date corresponds with the beginning of the construction of the present building east of the porch.

The termination of this phase of construction following the completion of the east end, and the commencement of the transepts and nave probably occurred sometime during the 1130s. Construction at Paray thus came to a halt precisely at a time of financial stress at the mother house at Cluny.( Note 1) This moment was also marked by increasing political disintegration throughout the region. The problem was particularly acute for Paray, because the Counts of Chalon were attempting to regain control of the priory's land in exactly these years. The relative anarchy of the time is attested to at Paray by the act of atonement of Wido de Corte for havoc he had wreaked against lands of the priory ca 1150.(Note 2) The economic decline of Paray is documented in the charter of 1151 recording the donation made by bishop of Autun of half of the revenues of the church at Rigny-sur-Arroux to the monks of Paray in order to relieve their poverty.(Note 3)

Construction, as is testified to by the use of brettelé masonry and crocket capitals, began anew only in the last decades of the century. It continued into the thirteenth. This period was a time of renewed security for the priory under the protection the King of France, who ended the raiding by the Counts of Chalon with the accord of 1180 (enacted by Philip Augustus and Count William the Second and his son at the Chateau of Lourdon). The pact was ratified by the members of the comtal family again in 1205 and one more time in 1228, dates which may correspond to the latest years of construction of the priory church.

In 1255, Paray was placed under the direct jurisdiction and supervision of the mother house at Cluny. With this loss of local autonomy, we gain more information concerning the priory's economic condition from the reports of the visitations of the grand prior of Cluny. The visitations tell us that in the late thirteenth century, the priory was again suffering economic hardship, perhaps suggesting that the completion of the church had left the priory financially stretched.

This chronology based upon an examination of both the fabric of the church and the surviving documentary evidence does not support the belief held by many nineteenth- and twentieth-century art historians that Abbot Hugh of Cluny took great interest in the priory and was responsible for the construction of the priory church.(Note 4) Saint Hugh's blood ties to the Counts of Chalon, who had founded the priory, seemed not to have played a role in the shaping of Hugh's policy towards the priory. Moreover, the documentary evidence indicates that by the date of the earliest construction that is still visible at Paray, Hugh's family, the Lords of Semur, had detached itself both from the Counts of Chalon and from the priory. By Saint Hugh's time, the Lords of Semur, unlike their more powerful relatives to the north, were no longer interested in the priory at Paray, having instead shifted their attention --religious and financial-- to institutions much closer to home, especially the nunnery at Marcigny.(Note 5) The cartulary as it has come down to us, instead, suggests that Paray was a project that was patronized by very local dynasties and not by the more distant abbot of Cluny or the Lords of Semur.(Note 6)

It was the priory's misfortune to have commenced a major building project at the very moment when financial problems began to surface within the Cluniac order. Such economic difficulties coupled with political unrest meant that the project at Paray could only be finished long after it had been started. When construction recommenced late in the twelfth century, the masons completed the building by following its original design. The decision to continue a design almost a half-century out of date may have been in part due to the fact that such a large portion of the church had already been begun, and left incomplete: the entire periphery of the church; the full height of the east walls of the transept cross arms to just beyond the engaged half- column between the choir aisles and the cross arm chapels; and the north elevation of the nave up to the cornice over the nave arcade. Perhaps the small scale of the building, in conjunction with all the fabric that was already in place, forced the masons to complete the church using the original design.

Yet, the retention of the original design may also be due to the fact that when construction recommenced at Paray, the building boom in this part of Burgundy had died out. By the end of the century, all the important construction projects were in the north. The low quality of both the masonry and the sculpture of the latest work at Paray, when compared to contemporary work in northern Burgundy, such as the choir of Vézelay, indicates that the priory was no longer able to attract the best artisans. Unlike when Paray had been begun, there were at this late date no other important construction projects nearby. Those craftsmen who were available to work at Paray were either unwilling, or more likely, unable to establish a competent new design for the priory church, which was both up to date in style and able to incorporate the parts of the building that had already been completed.

My examination of Paray has situated the church in its proper architectural and historical contexts. Studying the fabric of the entire building reveals that the construction history is much more complex than has been previously been thought. The sequence outlined in Chapter 7 can be closely linked with the history of the priory as I was able to reconstruct from Paray's cartulary in Chapter 2. As we also saw in Chapter 7, the close examination of the formal aspects of the building can be coupled with the construction sequence of the church. The division of the wall elevation into horizontal levels probably reflects the nature of the design and construction processes of the period which for the most part proceeded in horizontal sections. Thus, the close study of Paray suggests that during the Romanesque period, construction and design were parallel processes.

Send any comments or suggestions to Minott Kerr at:

Last Modified: 21 May 1996