77
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
Introduction
In the fall of 1152, Cardinal Nicholas Breakspear
(later Pope Hadrian IV) arrived in Norway with a papal
mandate and a pallium. During the winter of 1152
to 1153, the cardinal decreed that “the archiepiscopal
seat should be in Nidaros, in Christ Church, where
Holy King Olaf rests”, thus formally establishing
Nidaros (now Trondheim, Norway) as the ecclesiastical
center of an extremely large geographical
area that encompassed Norway, Iceland, Greenland,
Sodor, and the Faroe, Orkney, and Shetland Islands.
(Diplomatarium Norvegicum VIII No. 1; Regesta
Norvegica 1898; Snorri Sturluson 1967:757, 608).
Due to a vacancy at the see of Nidaros, Bishop Jón
Bírgisson of Stavanger, situated in southwest Norway,
was appointed as the first archbishop, where
he held authority until 1160. Many political reasons
have been suggested for the establishment of the see
in Norway,2 but more significant for this discussion
is that this “elevation of Nidaros Cathedral from
a provincial see to a metropolitan seat meant that
the old cathedral would have to be rebuilt and/or
enlarged to fit its new status” (Ekroll 2004:160). Although
this is not the first Scandinavian archdiocese,
with Lund established in 1104 and its cruciform
cathedral consecrated in 1145, Lund was nonetheless
maintaining its orientation to its previous ecclesiastical
leaders in Hamburg-Bremen (Donnelly
1992:41). Trondheim, however, freed from its place
in Lund’s archiepiscopal province, was necessarily
oriented towards the west, with its archdiocese
stretching across the North Sea to encompass the
northern Scottish isles along with Iceland and
Greenland (Fischer 1965:38, Helle 1995:67). Architecturally,
it marks the first cruciform basilica constructed
along Norway’s western fjords and as such
it looked further west for visual quotations along
the eastern coasts of central and northern England
for the contemporary building projects of its most
influential archiepiscopal patrons. Essentially, this
archiepiscopal promotion meant that Olaf Kyrre’s
Christ Church (ca. 1100) would no longer suffice; it
would have to be rebuilt into a grander structure befitting
its new status while also accommodating new
members of the clergy, the need for both new altars
and the ability to perform more ceremonies, and to
provide access to an increased amount of pilgrims,
resulting in a major building program that lasted
nearly 200 years (Ekroll 2004:160, 2007:194–197;
Wergeland 1966:148). These symbolic and functional
requirements were immediately met through
the addition of aisleless east–west transepts with
two-storey chapels off their eastern façades to the
pre-existing church on the site, thus repurposing its
western tower as the crossing tower (Fig. 1).
This paper considers sources for the first stage
of this grand reconstruction project, and through
an in-depth visual analysis, I will demonstrate that
Nidaros’ first archbishops looked to the great architectural
projects spearheaded by influential ecclesiastical
patrons in England. In quoting such major
contemporary buildings, Nidaros Cathedral itself
was elevated to a new status within Christendom.
Interestingly, this initial phase of construction
commenced a dialogue across the sea between
major and minor Norwegian, English, and eventually
Scottish, patrons and buildings that, based on
unique similarities, suggest a group of structures
A “North Sea School of Architecture?”: Nidaros Cathedral’s Romanesque
Transepts and North Sea Medieval Architecture
Candice Bogdanski*
Abstract - In 1152/3, Nidaros Cathedral in Trondheim, Norway, became the center of a vast archiepiscopal authority reaching
across the North Sea. The cathedral then became the site of much architectural activity, beginning with the addition
of Romanesque transepts during the 1150s–1160s to the pre-existing church. This paper considers the patronal efforts of
Nidaros’ first and second archbishops, Jón Bírgisson (1152/3–1160) and Øystein Erlendsson (1161–1188), in relation to
this construction period. It examines the cathedral’s influence on Norwegian architecture based on the relationship between
the Nidaros stone workshop and contemporary Norwegian churches, including the geographically close Stiklestad and Old
Sakshaug. Subsequently, it identifies related structures across the North Sea in England, such as Southwell Minster, York
Minster, and Lincoln Cathedral, thus expanding on the concept of a “North Sea School of Architecture”, as briefly discussed
by Eric Fernie on St. Magnus Church in Egilsay and Malcolm Thurlby on Kirkwall Cathedral. This study begins to establish
a group of buildings that can comprise this North Sea school, emphasizing an argument for the paramount role the sea played
as a conduit of stylistic transmission.1
Across the Sólundarhaf: Connections between Scotland and the Nordic World
Selected Papers from the Inaugural St. Magnus Conference 2011
Journal of the North Atlantic
*Graduate Program in Art History and Visual Culture, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada; bogdansk@yorku.ca.
2013 Special Volume 4:77–106
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
78
that will begin to comprise the “North Sea School
of Architecture”. Consequently, the creation of the
archiepiscopal see was one of the catalysts for the
development of Christ Church into Norway’s grandest
cathedral, and in order to accomplish this, the patrons
of Nidaros Cathedral looked across the North
Sea to the most magnificent ecclesiastical structures
of the time.3
Method: Visual Analysis
This paper will discuss the earliest rebuilding
phase during the mid-1150s to the mid-1160s at Nidaros
Cathedral, with the addition of Romanesque
transepts to the earlier non-cruciform plan. This
period marks the first stage of this grand building
program under the patronage of the first two archbishops
of the see of Nidaros, Jón Bírgisson and
Øystein Erlendsson. Preeminent scholar of Nidaros
Cathedral Gerhard Fischer proposed a timeline for
the cathedral’s rebuilding that positions the transepts
as the oldest part of the structure, built in Romanesque
and Transitional traditions, identifying breaks
in building styles and stages in the clerestory level
(Fischer 1965:568–569). Stylistic analysis of these
chronological aspects will allow a consideration
of sources for this early building program. With
many successive building stages,4 it is clear that
the transepts initiated a lengthy building program
that looked to the major contemporary campaigns
of Romanesque, and subsequently Gothic, architecture
for its inspiration. The cathedral has suffered a
tumultuous history and has undergone many reconstructions,
but thankfully for our purposes much of
the Romanesque material remains in tact.5 In order
to set a visual stage for suggestions of comparanda,
I will primarily consider the transepts in formal, architectural
terms, emphasizing the most unique and
occasionally troubling aspects. This critical visual
analysis of the extremely varied structural and decorative
elements that are combined within Nidaros’
transepts ultimately offers an understanding of the
often unusual forms and their specific relationship
to other sites, which is then crucial for determining
both patronal preoccupations, as well as the influx
of stylistic influence into Norway across the North
Sea. Overall, this methodology will provide overdue
insight into the stylistic and patronal relationships
that were established during the first building stages
in the cathedral’s transepts. This paper thus offers a
foundation for understanding why certain English
sites became sources of constant influence throughout
the history of construction at Nidaros and looks
intently at the role patronage held in determining
these stylistic relationships.
The Scholarly Context and the Visual Evidence:
A “North Sea School” of Architecture?
The sites that are visually connected to Nidaros
in this paper represent only a small portion of a larger
project that considers much broader temporal and
geographical parameters in order to comprehensively
argue for the existence of a North Sea School of
Architecture. Though the idea of a North Sea School
is not new, suggested by both Malcolm Thurlby
and Eric Fernie with regards to Kirkwall Cathedral
and St. Magnus Church in Orkney, respectively, the
Figure 1. A. Plan ca. 1140–1180 (nave only planned). Reprinted from Fischer (1965: Pl. XXVI: Plan 3) with permission
from Gyldendal Forlag. B. Transept and tower, section, looking east. Reprinted from Fischer (1965: Pl. I) with permission
from Gyldendal Forlag.
79
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
concept deserves pointed attention.6 Using Nidaros
Cathedral as a focal point for my visual assessment,
I argue that the North Sea operated as a conduit for
mutual stylistic influence between Norway, Scotland,
and northern England. Despite its seemingly
remote location, Nidaros operated as a significant
trading port for the early 11th–13th century North Sea
trade,7 and, as previously mentioned, was the center
of a large ecclesiastical domain (Stratford 1997:44–
47). In his 1965 study of Norwegian Romanesque
sculpture, art historian Martin Blindheim suggested
a variety of strands of influence into Trondheim. He
emphasized the importance of the North Sea for putting
Norway into contact with the Orkney, Shetland,
and Faroe Islands. From here, the waterways could
lead along the east coast of the isles to Scotland,
England, and France via the Irish Sea. He notes that
despite the orientation of the Norwegian Church
towards Bremen and Lund prior to 1153, finding visual
evidence throughout Denmark and Germany, it
seemed to regard England as its mother church more
directly (Blindheim 1965:4–5). Previous scholars
have also considered the visual connections between
Nidaros Cathedral and English Romanesque buildings,
beginning with Gerhard Fischer’s foundational
study of the cathedral suggesting many connections
at Lincoln Cathedral in particular. In fact, it has been
documented that even earlier connections are found
between Stavanger, the original home of Nidaros’
first archbishop, and Winchester’s north transept
(ca.1079–1093), when Bishop Reinald was sent
from Winchester in 1125 (Donnelly 1992:44). Further,
the historical relationship across the North Sea
was well established long before 1153. The art-historical
evidence certainly adheres to this argument,
and the initial role of the North Sea allows for the influx
of English contemporary styles and masons into
Norway. As a result, the intermingling of foreign
and local craftsmen offers an interesting synthesis
of local and international techniques and stylistic
preoccupations that disseminated swiftly throughout
the Scandinavian regions. Though further investigation
into the exact relationship between stone and
wooden workshops will not be discussed in detail
here, it is visually clear that multiple Norwegian
buildings express North Sea visual connections,
with many, such as Old Sakshaug Church (ca. 1184)
and St. Olav’s, Stiklestad (ca. 1181), originating
at Trondheim during its first rebuilding stage. For
this period of construction, I have found multiple
parallels in the significant diocese of Lincoln and
the archdiocese of York with its daughter collegiate
church at Southwell in Nottinghamshire. As we will
see, the newly minted archbishops of Nidaros were
seeking out some of the most ambitious and innovative
contemporary ecclesiastical structures and their
respective patrons as models for their own building
programs.8 Known to his contemporaries as “Alexander
the Magnificent”, Lincoln Cathedral’s Bishop
Alexander (1123–1148) was the nephew of Roger,
Bishop of Salisbury (d. 1139), who was also a major
patron of highly decorated building projects at the
time (Cook 1950:21). As such, Alexander followed
this line of extravagant patronage and would have
been seen as one of the great builders of the day, and,
therefore, most worthy of emulation. York archbishops
Thomas of Bayeux (1070–1100) and Thomas II
(1108–1114), with his earlier work at Southwell, and
Roger of Pont l’Evêque (1154–1171) at York were
similarly key architectural contemporary patrons
in England. As with Nidaros, these motherhouses
became the sites from which their parish churches
gleaned stylistic decisions. In expanding well
beyond these key monuments to include smaller
churches, I emphasize that both major and minor
buildings borrow stylistic ideas from one another,
and thus all of which are contained within a “North
Sea School” of architecture. Though this suggestion
of a dialogue across the North Sea may seem
one-sided in this initial discussion, with England
coming into Trondheim in its first building phase,
the influence of Nidaros expanded beyond its national
borders immediately following the transepts’
construction, with a number of Scottish structures
bearing stylistic similarities to its Norwegian neighbor.
My reinvigorated and rigorous visual study
demonstrates that Nidaros not only reflects major
stylistic trends, but also a distinct process of selection
of individual features from buildings associated
with the great 12th-century architectural patrons of
northern England while further expanding beyond
these key monuments to suggest a broader network
of buildings linked to key patrons surrounding the
North Sea.
Cathedral History
In its own right, Nidaros Cathedral set a standard
of architectural and decorative prowess in
12th-century Norway and aimed to rival the great
churches of western Christendom. The previous
church on the site, constructed by King Olaf Kyrre
at the end of the 11th century in order to house the
shrine of his ancestor and Norway’s patron saint,
Olaf Haraldsson (d. 1030) (Snorri Sturluson 1967:
522–524, 665–666), was significant for its initiation
of the use of stone for a large-scale building
project in the country (versus the more common
timber constructions).9 Beyond this, it has been
suggested his church was a very basic two-cell
plan, unaisled with a large square western tower.10
As previously mentioned, the establishment of the
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
80
archiepiscopal seat at Nidaros in 1152/3 meant a
larger cathedral was required, and so immediately
following this development, new structural and
decorative features were added to the cathedral in
the Romanesque style, thus repurposing the western
tower as the crossing tower between the transepts
(Ekroll 2004:160, 158). The fact that Nidaros Cathedral
was constructed in stone by 1100 should not
be under-emphasized. With no major churches built
in stone in Norway prior to 1100, it is unlikely that a
master builder and craftsmen of the caliber required
for a project of the magnitude initiated in the 1150s
would have been available in Trondheim at that
time. Furthermore, there is “no indication that the
Anglo-Norman architecture of the new cathedral
had been introduced [into this part of Norway]
before 1150, and [as such], everything points to
this style being … [initiated] through the cathedral
rebuilding project” (Ekroll 2004:161). Though beyond
the scope of this discussion, research on the
construction of the “Chapter House” in 1165–1175
at Nidaros indicates that, based on masons’ marks,
at least 25 masons were working on the project at the
time. This finding suggests that a well-sized workshop
of some significance was centered at Nidaros,
employing craftsmen from both within and beyond
the regional and Norwegian borders (Syrstad Andås
2010:296–317). Falling in within the second phase
of construction of the transept, the “Chapter House”
is stylistically related to many sites of Scottish influence
as well as Archbishop Roger’s early Gothic
work at York (Syrstad Andås 2001:89). This is not to
suggest that exactly the same masons were working
at these sites of influence and then directly at Nidaros,
but certainly we are seeing craftsmen who were
well-versed in the Anglo-Norman tradition and who
could accommodate the lavish and varied tastes of
Archbishops Jón Bírgisson and Øystein Erlendsson.
Blindheim (1965:10–12) addresses questions surrounding
the innovative use of stone in Norwegian
carving and posits that the woodcarvers must have
been trained abroad in the new medium. The relationship
between Norway’s more common timber
building material and the stone masonry of Nidaros
deserves more attention than can be afforded in this
discussion, but suffice it to say that traces of the Romanesque
building program at Nidaros are apparent
in a number of subsequent Norwegian churches.
Visual Analysis: A Detailed Study of the Transepts
We know that during Jón Bírgisson’s period of
authority, the lower portions of the transepts were
completed, with the altar in the south transept
lower chapel dedicated to St. John by Øystein in
1161 according to an inscription on the interior.
The triforium passages and clerestory levels were
subsequently added during Øystein’s archiepiscopacy
(Ekroll 2004:164–165). Blindheim (1965:14,
16–18) argues foundations were laid for transepts
in the Romanesque style as early as the 1140s,
though there is little visual evidence or scholarly
support for this assertion. He adds that “on this occasion
one to two gifted carvers were sent to England
to learn the latest trends in decoration,” and
suggests that the walls of the transepts were likely
completed during Archbishop Jón’s episcopacy,
dating the heads visible on the outer corbel table
to ca. 1155, citing local parallels for the style and
dating of these sculptures. Though Blindheim’s
assertions deserves further consideration, as we
will see, this change in building stages is certainly
apparent with more sophisticated masonry and
sculptural techniques that find their origins in contemporary
English stylistic trends. Beginning with
the interior of the north transept, the obvious break
in building stages is apparent in the transition from
coursed rubble masonry to fine ashlar stone into the
triforium and clerestory levels (Fig. 2). The change
is also noticeable in sculptural details, with cushion
capitals in the triforium on the east wall, and
waterleaf on the west (Figs. 3, 4; Fischer 1965:78–
Figure 2. North transept interior, west wall, Nidaros
Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice
Bogdanski.
81
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
83). The clerestory level displays additional sophistication
on all sides as the single responds of
the triforium are multiplied into slender compound
responds with narrow detached shafts (Fig. 5).
Arguably the earliest portion of the Romanesque
transepts, the western wall of the north transept
Figure 3. Triforium, east wall, north transept, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 4. Triforium, west wall, north transept, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
82
architectural details from Lincoln Cathedral and
Southwell Minster. The chevron stringcourse with
beads in the voids echoes a similar horizontal decouses
ashlar only for its main structural and decorative
features, the dado arcade and arch mouldings.
Here we see the first of many parallels to the
Figure 5. Clerestory, east wall, north transept, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 6. Detail, west wall, north transept, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
83
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
stylistic similarities, Gerhard Fischer goes so far as
to suggest that a mason from Nidaros was sent to
Lincoln to study its forms (Fischer 1965: 568). The
rative band on Lincoln’s southwest tower. As we
will see, many visual connections can be made between
Nidaros and Lincoln, and based on the close
Figure 7. Detail, southwest tower, Lincoln Cathedral, Lincolnshire, UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
Figure 8. Detail, north porch, Southwell Minster, Nottinghamshire, UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
84
continuous chevron articulation of the windows can
be found on Southwell Minster’s north porch (Figs.
6, 7, 8). The west wall of the south transept bears
similar structural and stylistic changes to its northern
companion (Figs. 9, 10).
Moving to the east wall of the transepts, two
Figure 9. Detail, north transept chapel, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 10. Detail, south transept chapel, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
85
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
extremely sophisticated chevron patterning (Figs. 9,
10). Hood moulds terminated in dragons’ head label
stops that bear a close relationship to the west doorviews
of the ground chapel arches in the north and
south chapels, respectively, show slight variations;
however, both are characterized by four orders of
Figure 11. Detail, arch profile, south transept chapel, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 12. Detail, arch, north porch, Southwell Minster , Nottinghamshire, UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
86
ways at Lincoln surmount each of these large, fourordered
arches. The square plans for these transept
chapels find additional parallels in the remodelled
transept chapels at York Minster, prior to Archbishop
Roger’s work on the site. The chevron ribs find
sources in Lincolnshire with Bishop Alexander’s
work on the eastern arm at Stow, Lincolnshire (Hoey
and Thurlby 2004:117–184, figure 35). Focusing on
the south transept chapel arch profile, we find parallels
with the north portal at Southwell, referenced
for its stylistic innovation here as well in the north
transept portal (Figs. 11, 12). In particular, the first
and 4th orders at Nidaros, which feature two rows of
affronted chevron that are further articulated with
quirks on each order’s soffits, find a major source on
Southwell’s north portal’s 3rd and 6th order. Southwell
provides additional parallels for capital design
in Romanesque Nidaros, with striking similarities
between the shown scalloped capitals with unusually
wide faces. Further influence for Nidaros’ chapel
capitals can be found in the crypt at York Minster,
commenced after 1154 by Archbishop Roger, where
Figure 13. Detail, crypt capital, York Minster, Yorkshire,
UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
Figure 14 (right column lower). Detail, rib vaults, north
transept chapel, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway.
Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 15 (lower to the right). Detail, west crossing arch,
Freiston, Lincolnshire, UK. Photograph © Malcolm
Thurlby.
87
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
fillets can be seen between the curved scalloped elements
of each capital (Figs. 11, 13). Moving back
to Lincolnshire, we find similarities for Nidaros’
chapel rib vaults, which are characterized by a roll
moulding flanked by affronted chevron ornament
(Fig. 14). Both the crossing arch at the former mo-
Figure 16. Detail, south porch arch, Sempringham, Lincolnshire, UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
Figure 17. Detail, capital, north transept chapel, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
88
Figure 18. Detail, right capital, north portal, St. Gile’ s Balderton, Nottinghamshire, UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
Figure 19. Detail, respond, south transept chapel, Nidaros
Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice
Bogdanski.
Figure 20. North portal, St. Gile’s Balderton, Nottinghamshire,
UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
89
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
nastic church at Freiston and the inner respond of
Sempringham parish church’s south porch bear this
arrangement of chevron and roll moulding (Figs. 15,
16). Drawing again from one of the major regions
of English influence, the geometrical articulation
of the scallop faces in the north transept chapel
find origins in Nottinghamshire’s north portal at St
Giles’, Balderton (Figs. 17, 18). The unique chevron
respond at St Giles’ is also copied in one of the only
original responds remaining in the Romanesque
transepts on the south wall of the south transept
chapel interior (Figs. 19, 20). Whether the additional
transept chapel responds were similarly articulated
is unknown, and so it remains possible that this
chevron respond represents either one of many, or
is meant to articulate a site of particular significance
within the chapel.
Keeping attention focused on the earlier building
stages, the arch moulding of the first few bays
from the north on the east wall of the transept mirror
the simple but well-carved quirk, hollow, and
roll mouldings of the enclosing arch on the north
transept’s western exterior (Figs. 3, 21). This further
emphasizes the initial stages of construction on the
transepts’ inner western walls, with the upper stories
and exterior wall details finding completion in a
second building campaign that looked ahead to more
elaborate and varied stylistic and structural elements.
As a result, the basic triforium arch moulding
was quickly abandoned, with the remaining bays of
the eastern triforium to the crossing characterized by
this highly unique play on the popular chevron ornament,
in a very three-dimensional almost ladder-like
arrangement (Fig. 22). A possible source for this
unusual design can be found at Selby Abbey in south
Yorkshire, where individual spears of affronted
chevron hug the soffit of the gallery arcade (Fig. 23).
Considering the influence of the Nidaros workshop
beyond the cathedral, we see a direct replica of the
gallery arch on the exterior northern portal of St.
Olaf’s Church Stiklestad, dedicated 1181 (Fig. 24).
Though obviously part of the later stages at Nidaros,
and emphasizing the increasing sophistication as the
building campaign progressed, a detail of a capital
in the eastern clerestory demonstrates an elaborate
foliated waterleaf design, with parallels in Anglo-
Norman Lincolnshire at Fiskerton and Selby Abbey
(Figs. 25, 26, 27).
Continuing this examination of the cathedral
from the exterior of the north transept, we find the
earlier chronological suggestions again emphasized.
Looking to its northern face (Fig. 28), stylistically
the earliest portion of the transept arms as detailed
in its interior appearance, we see the grand en-
Figure 21. Detail, west wall enclosing arches, exterior, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice
Bogdanski.
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
90
turrets flank the north façade, with its upper portions
largely remodelled during the 19th-century
restoration project. The major focus for this portion
closing arches from the western wall are repeated
over the ground and triforium storeys, with a blind
round-headed arcade at the clerestory level. Stair
Figure 22. Detail, east wall triforium arch, north transept, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice
Bogdanski.
Figure 23. Detail, gallery arcade, Selby Abbey, Yorkshire, UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
91
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
(Fig. 29). Though there are potential parallels with
Old Sarum’s south transept portal and the northwest
transept porch at Kelso Abbey, it is likely that this
of the cathedral is the north transept portal, unusual
not only for its rare location on the end of the arm,
but further for the presence of a first storey room
Figure 24. Detail, north portal, St. Olaf ’s, Stiklestad, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 25. Detail, east clerestory, north transept, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
92
ordered round-headed arch surmounted by a hood
mould with dragonhead label stops characterizes the
entrance. Above this entrance is a roundel containportal
at Nidaros held a major role as a primary entrance
in the absence of a functional western portal
(as the nave was not begun until 1248). A double-
Figure 26. Detail, capital, Fiskerton, Lincolnshire, UK. Photog raph © Malcolm Thurlby.
Figure 27. Detail, left capitals, south door, Sempringham, Lincolnshire, UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
93
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
ing a sculptured head of Moses, who should be seen
in relation to the heads of a bishop and king above,
representing the three “laws” of medieval society
(Syrstad Andås 2007). A marble plaque featuring St.
Michael slaying a dragon is fitted within the gable,
and so this upper space is often described with the
standard historical designation of first storey portal
altars as St. Michael’s Chapel. Margrete Systad
Andås discussed these features in terms of the liminal
zone of the portal, arguing that St. Michael is
commonly associated with “high places”, hence the
frequent dedication of upper chapels to him, but that
here he is further representing the war between good
and evil. Combined with the three legal figureheads,
she suggests that this portal may have served as a
location for the proclamation of law and judgment.
These specific elements were only interpolated in
the Gothic period, however, so it is unclear if and
how this iconography would have been expressed
in the earlier, Romanesque space (Syrstad Andås
2007:91–93).
More salient for our consideration of North Sea
connections is a direct comparison between Southwell
and Nidaros, for Southwell also has a projecting,
two-storey, gabled porch, albeit off its north
nave aisle (Figs. 30, 31). Its walls feature similar, if
Figure 28. North façade, north transept, Nidaros Cathedral, slightly more elaborate, intersecting dado arcading,
Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 29. North porch, north transept, Nidaros Cathedral,
Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 30. North porch, Southwell Minster, Nottinghamshire,
UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
94
ron ornamentation. Both portals are barrel-vaulted,
which, according to Nikolaus Pevsner, is very rare in
England (Pevsner 1979:322). Most importantly, the
leading to a grand, 6-ordered arched entryway. Much
like Nidaros, though on a larger scale, Southwell’s
north porch also features varied and sumptuous chev-
Figure 31. Detail, north porch, Southwell Minster, Nottinghamshire, UK. Photograph courtesy of Malcolm Thurlby.
Figure 32. Detail, right capitals, north porch, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
95
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
three lights in the gable at Southwell indicate that
there is an upper room. At this point, its function is
unclear, but it is obvious that the patrons of Nidaros
were taking cues from the innovative early 12th-century
work constructed in Nottinghamshire. Moving
to the interior of Southwell Minster’s nave, another
element from the cathedral was clearly adopted at
Nidaros. The necking of the Minster’s cylindrical
pier is articulated with a rope design, which we can
see repeated on the outer capitals of Nidaros’ north
portal archway (Figs. 32, 33).
Constructed during Archbishop Øystein’s patronal
episcopacy, the interior of the upper room at
Nidaros’ north portal contains a trefoil-headed font
carved into the right wall of the north opening, decorated
with an early Gothic stiff-leaf capital, which
looks to late 1170s work at Wells Cathedral and
Lincoln’s St. Hugh’s Choir, begun after 1192 (Figs.
34, 35). Now an 18th-century addition, the shutters
on either side of the foliate crocket capital represent
earlier timber versions, so we know that this opening
was never glazed (Syrstad Andås 2007:93). Because
this portal faced the main route into the town, it is
possible that this space functioned as an external
pulpit, though the majority of cited examples for
this possibility are from the mid-late Gothic period
Figure 33. Detail, nave capital, Southwell Minster, Nottinghamshire,
UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
Figure 34. Detail, right font, first storey, north porch,
Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph ©
Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 35. Detail, shutters, first storey, north porch,
Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph ©
Candice Bogdanski.
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
96
2001). At this stage, all possible functions for this
space are still being explored.
Despite these unclear issues regarding its pur-
(Fleisher 2007). Potentially, it could have been used
for the showing of relics, or as a watching chamber
to see who was approaching the church (McAleer
Figure 36. Detail, north porch outer arch, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 37. Detail, north doorway, west front, Lincoln Cathedral, Lincolnshire, UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
97
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
orders of highly detailed and sophisticated chevron
patterning (Fig. 36). In particular, the inner order’s
three-dimensional lattice chevron/lozenge design is
pose, there are many stylistic comparisons within
the north transept portal that suggest North Sea
connections. The outer arch of the portal bears two
Figure 38. Inner portal arch, north porch, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 39. Detail, central doorway arch, Lincoln Cathedral, Lin colnshire, UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
98
first archbishop came from Stavanger, there is an
interesting relationship between the stone cathedral
completed initially at Nidaros by 1100, the work
directly comparable to a detail of the south porch
from Stavanger Cathedral, built from ca. 1100–
1150s (Fischer 1964:35). Considering that Nidaros’
Figure 40. Detail, dado arcade, east wall, north porch, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice
Bogdanski.
Figure 41. Detail, northwest tower, Lincoln Cathedral, Lincolnshire, UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
99
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
per chapel windows, flank the eastern façade. These
three lights are in a subtle aBa arrangement set
against the outer edge of the wall’s thickness, and
thus are only articulated with simple single quirked
chamfered hood moulds. An additional window in
the gable adds light to this upper chapel. The narrow
windows in the turrets are emphasized for the important
reason that they provide light not to the central
room of the north transept upper chapel, but rather
to four small rooms that flank the windows on the
eastern end of the space. At most 2 m square, each
room is situated on either side of the windows. The
north-flanking room included iron rings imbedded
into the upper wall surface, potentially for hanging
fabric (Fig. 45).11 Even more unusual are the
extremely narrow octagonal spaces fitted within the
turrets accessible through small openings in the window
frames (Fig. 46). In order to access this space,
one must climb up a ladder onto the stepped window
ledge into the room. The walls that divide the
windows bear the chapel’s dedication: “On the 27th
July the consecration of this altar in honour of the
blessed Virgin Mary and saint Hippolytus the martyr
whose relics are in the altar” (Syrett 2002:152).
Much more investigation is required to determine
how these spaces functioned and how they related to
the chapel’s apparent designation as both a martyr’s
reliquary and a Lady Chapel.
The south transept is arranged very similarly to
at Stavanger, and the rebuilding stages in the new
archiepiscopal see. This lattice design can be seen
in the 1140s work at Lincoln’s north door on the
west front (Fig. 37). Further, there are clear parallels
between the outer order of Bishop Alexander’s
work on the central doorway of Lincoln Cathedral
with basically identical embattled ornament to the
inner order of Nidaros’ north portal arch (Figs. 38,
39). Details of Lincoln are once again quoted on the
walls of the north transept portal, where two quirks
and a roll moulding characterize a short dado arcade,
with variously carved scalloped capitals (Fig. 40).
Parallels for these simple yet sophisticated arcade
mouldings are found on Lincoln’s northwest and
southwest tower facades, respectively, as well as
on the east face of the crossing tower at Southwell
Minster (Figs. 41, 42). Interestingly, these similarities
indicate not only the beginnings of a visual relationship
between Nidaros and the northern English
buildings, but also suggest a connection between
Southwell and Lincoln, adding weight to their
proposed inclusion as a group within a North Sea
School of architecture.
Moving on to the north transept’s eastern chapel,
exterior views from both the north and eastern faces
bear giant round-headed orders articulated with two
rows of affronted chevron that enclose single thin
round-headed windows (Figs. 43, 44). Turrets, each
with two very small windows set opposite the up-
Figure 42. Detail, east façade, crossing tower, Southwell Minster, Nottinghamshire, UK. Photograph © Malcolm Thurlby.
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
100
Figure 43. Detail, north façade, north transept chapel,
Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph ©
Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 44. Detail, east façade, north transept chapel, Nidaros
Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice
Bogdanski.
Figure 45. Detail, interior south flanking room, first storey, north transept chapel, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway.
Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
101
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
Figure 46. Detail, entrance to left octagonal room, first
storey, north transept chapel, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim,
Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 48. Northeast exterior, south transept, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 47. South façade, south transept chapel, Nidaros
Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph © Candice
Bogdanski.
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
102
out the unusual flanking rooms present in the north.
The particular detail of note here is the presence of
a doorway that leads from the upper chapel to the
the north, with the exception of the portal (Figs. 47,
48). It also featured a two-storey eastern chapel,
dedicated to saints Olaf and Stephen, though with-
Figure 49. Detail, first storey hoodmoulds, south transept chapel, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph ©
Candice Bogdanski.
Figure 50. Detail, hoodmould, Old Sakshaug Church, Trøndelag, Norway. Photograph © Candice Bogdanski.
103
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
stone element at the otherwise rubble-constructed
Old Sakshaug Church, about 100 km north of Trondheim,
speaks to the growing impact of the workshop
at Nidaros in surrounding communities (Figs. 49,
50). We know that Archbishop Øystein himself consecrated
Sakshaug in 1184 (Sakshaug Old Church
2010), and so connections between these Norwegian
churches are quite tangible.
Finally, a detail of the corbel table along the
south chapel shows a series of stylized animals, one
a quadruped gazing down at the viewer, with the other
a grotesque mask showing an animal with small
pointed ears, large oval eyes with drilled pupils that
are delineated with a deeply carved line, and a long
snout (Fig. 51). These heads are comparable to some
Norwegian wooden counterparts: the roof-truss
heads on the interior of the nave at Værnes stone
church in Trøndelag, Norway, ca. 1125–1150, which
lies roughly 80 km north of Trondheim (Blindheim
1987:15). Roof-trusses are short beams of a structural
“propping system that protrude into the church
interior, with the ends [at Værnes] shaped, in most
cases, like heads of fantastic animals that grin, snap
and let their tongues ply threateningly in the air”
(Blindheim 1965:15). The nineteen heads in the
church interior show a degree of individualization
and seem to be connected to the artistic milieu at
Nidaros during its transept construction period ca.
exterior on the south side. It should be emphasized
that there is a similar doorway in the north transept
upper chapel. The purpose of this doorway is not
entirely clear, though it is possible it originally led
to a wooden walkway on the perimeter of the upper
chapel’s exterior, potentially for the display of relics,
with reference to a similar arrangement on the
west tower of St. Peter, Beho (Belgium), and formerly
on the west porch of Anglo-Saxon Priory Church,
Deerhurst, Gloucestershire (England) (Hare 2009,
Hoey and Thurlby 2004). Fischer (1965:566) does
note the close relationship between the King and
Saxon expatriates who fled following the Norman
Conquest of 1066, and as such finds the presence of
Anglo-Saxon stylistic forms in the foundations of
Christ Church unsurprising. In her discussion of earlier
Norwegian stave church architecture, Erla Bergendahl
Hohler (1999:82) cites the role of the North
Sea as a means for transmitting late Anglo-Saxon
stylistic preferences into the Norse sculptural milieu.
It is possible, then, that these connections were
maintained and Anglo-Saxon upper tower rooms
found purpose in Nidaros’ later transept portal.
Considering some final Norwegian connections,
as on the north transept chapel’s eastern exterior
façade, the south transept chapel bears the same
simple but well-executed hood moulds around its
upper chapel windows. The repetition of this cut-
Figure 51. Detail, south façade corbel table, south transept chapel, Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, Norway. Photograph ©
Candice Bogdanski.
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
104
for local and foreign craftsmen to combine the best
techniques with the most popular, sophisticated, and
desirable current designs. As a result, despite its designation
as the most northern of all medieval cathedrals
(Syrstad Andås et al. 2007:9–10), Romanesque
Nidaros can be understood as reflecting the height
of architecture surrounding the North Sea during the
mid- to late 12th Century.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to express her gratitude to the
organizers of the Inaugural St. Magnus Conference (April
2011) for her inclusion in both the conference and its proceedings.
The author is indebted to her adviser, Dr. Malcolm
Thurlby, for his constant guidance and for providing
many original photographs, without which this project
could not be completed. Many thanks are also due to the
Nidaros Domkirkes Restaureringsarbeider (NDR), staff
and, in particular, Øystein Ekroll at Nidaros Cathedral for
offering me guidance and for affording me the opportunity
to photograph the cathedral. The author would like
to further express gratitude to the Fortidsminneforeningen
for providing me access to many restricted historical sites
and to Margrete Syrstad Andås for arranging my visit to
Stiklestad. This research was completed with the generous
assistance of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research
Council of Canada’s Joseph M. Bombardier Doctoral
Research Award (SSHRC-CGS), the Royal Norwegian
Embassy’s Association for the Advancement of Scandinavian
Studies in Canada (AASSC) Travel Grant, and York
University’s Graduate Development Fund.
Literature Cited
Blindheim, M. 1965. Norwegian Romanesque Decorative
Sculpture, 1090–1210. Alec Tiranti, London, UK. 108
pp.
Blindheim, M. 1970. Scandinavian art and its relations to
European art around 1200. Pp. 429–467, In K. Hoffman
(Ed.). The Year 1200. Metropolitan Museum of
Art, New York, NY, USA. 594 pp.
Blindheim, M. 1987. The roof-truss heads of the nave of
Værnes Church in Trøndelag, Norway. Pp. 15–17, In
N. Stratford (Ed.). Romanesque and Gothic: Essays
for George Zarnecki. The Boydell Press, Woodbridge,
Suffolk, UK. 368 pp.
Cant, R. 1988. Norwegian influences in the transitional
and gothic design of the cathedral. Pp. 127–139, In B.
Crawford (Ed.). St Magnus Cathedral and Orkney’s
Twelfth-Century Renaissance. Aberdeen University
Press, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK. 283 pp.
Cook, G.H. 1950. Portrait of Lincoln Cathedral. Phoenix
House, London, UK. 65 pp.
Diplomatarium Norvegicum VIII no. 1. 1871. P.T.
Mallings Forlagshandel. Bergen, Norway. 416 pp.
Donnelly, M.C. 1992. Architecture in the Scandinavian
Countries. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA. 401 pp.
Ekroll, Ø. 2004. Nidaros Cathedral: The development of
1150–1160 (Blindheim 1987:16). There is certainly
a visual comparison between the wooden and stone
heads, with a similar shape to the eyes, the small
pointed ears, long noses and stylized detailing of
these features using striations of lines. Blindheim
suggests that this carving tradition was initiated
during the building period of Olaf Kyrre at Nidaros,
and from there it spread to the rural churches
in the surrounding area. Though their appearance
beyond these examples is uncertain, these figural
embellishments are found in Mære church and a few
other churches within the Trøndelag region in the
Romanesque period; Blindheim hesitates to ascribe
them to local tradition. He does not believe Norse
wood carpenters would have studied and copied the
stone forms for their stave interiors, but rather that
the carver was trained in the internationally influenced
stone-carving tradition that was introduced
at the cathedral site (Blindheim 1987:17). What
is certain is that the love of tables of individuated
heads continued at Nidaros Cathedral, seen on both
transepts as well as on the exterior of the Gothic
eastern end known as the “Octagon”. Due to the
skilled tradition of wood-carved figural sculpture in
Norway’s traditional stave churches that both predate
and are contemporary with the stone carvings,
however, it seems less definite that the craftsmen
were necessarily trained in a foreign style as per
Blindheim’s assertion. It is, however, probable that
the woodworkers would have had contact with stone
carvers working contemporaneously in the region,
thus amplifying the likelihood of incorporating both
traditions onto the surface of Nidaros Cathedral.
Conclusion
Though true of some of the examples, I am not
suggesting that these comparisons indicate the direct
copying of elements from one church to another or
the direct employment of masons at multiple locations.
These salient connections do, however, lend
weight to the concept of a tangible connection
between the leading patrons and among their major
minsters at Southwell, Lincoln, and York, with
their linked parish churches, across the North Sea
to Nidaros Cathedral. In suggesting the visual links
between Nidaros and these significant northern English
buildings, I am arguing that the desire of the new
Norwegian archbishops to create an elaborate cathedral
fitted with the most up-to-date stylistic elements
that could compete with the greatest churches of
Christendom led Jón and Øystein to seek influence at
the most innovative contemporary structures across
the North Sea. This dialogue served to establish
Nidaros as a center for architectural and sculptural
innovation, with the cathedral acting as a focal point
105
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
Dokumenter vedkommende Norge, Nordmænd og den
norske Kirkeprovins. I. 991–1263. Det Norske Historiske
Kildeskriftfond, Oslo, Norway. 107 pp.
Sakshaug Old Church. 2010. Fortidsminneforeningen,
Oslo, Norway. 6 pp.
Snorri Sturluson. 1967. Heimskringla: History of the
Kings of Norway. L.M. Hollander (trans.) University
of Texas Press, Austin, TX, USA. 854 pp.
Stratford, N. 1997. The Lewis Chessmen and the Enigma
of the Hoard. British Museum Press, London, UK. 64
pp.
Syrett, M. 2002. The Roman alphabet Inscriptions of
Medieval Trondheim. 2 vols. Tapir Academic Press,
Trondheim, Norway. 588 pp.
Syrstad Andås, M. 2001. Smekre vannliljekapiteler og
rike chevroner: Spor av Yorkbygghyttens folk i Trondheims-
og Bergensområdet 1160–1180. Pp. 75–90, In
Foreningen til Norske Fortidsminnesmerkers Bevaring
Særtrykk av Årbok, Oslo, Norway.
Syrstad Andås, M. 2007. Art and ritual in the liminal zone.
Pp. 47–126, In M. Syrstad Andås, Ø. Ekroll, A. Haug,
and N. Holger Petersen (Eds.). The Medieval Cathedral
of Trondheim: Architectural and Ritual Constructions
in their European Context. Brepols Publishers,
Turnhout, Belgium. 375 pp.
Syrstad Andås, M. 2010. Relikviekapell og kongelig mausoleum?
Om det senere kapittelhuset ved katedralen
i Trondheim og bygningens tidligste historie. Pp.
296–317, In K. Bjørlykke, Ø. Ekroll, and B. Syrstad
Gran (Eds.). Nidarosdomen—ny forskning på gammel
kirke. Domkirkes Restaureringsarbeiders forlag,
Trondheim, Norway. 355 pp.
Syrstad Andås, M., Ø. Ekroll, A. Haug, and N. Holger
Petersen. 2007. Introduction. Pp. 1–20. In M.
Syrstad Andås, Ø. Ekroll, A. Haug, and N. Holger
Petersen (Eds.). The Medieval Cathedral of Trondheim:
Architectural and Ritual Constructions in their
European Context. Brepols Publishers, Turnhout,
Belgium. 375 pp.
Thurlby, M. 1997. Aspects of the architectural history
of Kirkwall Cathedral. Proceedings of the Society of
Antiquaries of Scotland 127:855–888.
Wergeland, A.M. 1966. Leaders in Norway and Other
Essays. Books for Libraries Press, Inc., Freeport, NY,
USA. 193 pp.
Endnotes
1This paper represents a more detailed consideration of
material presented at the Inaugural St. Magnus Conference
held by the Centre for Nordic Studies UHI in
Kirkwall, Orkney, April 2011. It also represents an early
investigation into Romanesque Nidaros that will receive
more attention in my upcoming doctoral thesis. I am
indebted to Dr. Malcolm Thurlby for his guidance as
an adviser and for his contributions to this paper, both
through editing and in providing many of his own research
images.
2At this time, the papacy was in conflict with the Holy Rothe
building. Pp. 157–73, In G. Attinger, and A. Haug
(Eds.). The Nidaros Office of the Holy Blood: Liturgical
Music in Medieval Norway. Tapir Academic Press,
Trondheim, Norway. 205 pp.
Ekroll, Ø. 2007. The shrine of St. Olav in Nidaros Cathedral.
Pp. 147–207, In M. Syrstad Andås, Ø. Ekroll, A.
Haug, and N. Holger Petersen (Eds.). The Medieval
Cathedral of Trondheim: Architectural and Ritual
Constructions in their European Context. Brepols
Publishers, Turnhout, Belgium. 375 pp.
Fernie, E. 1988. The Church of St. Magnus, Egilsay. Pp.
140–161, In B. Crawford (Ed.). St. Magnus Cathedral
and Orkney’s Twelfth-Century Renaissance. University
of Aberdeen Press, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK. 283 pp.
Fischer, G. 1964. Domkirken i Stavanger: Kirkebygget i
Middelalderen. Dreyers Forlag, Oslo, Norway. 87 pp.
Fischer, G. 1965. Domkirken i Trondheim: Kirkebygget i
Middelalderen. 2 vols. Forlaget Land og Kirke, Oslo,
Norway. 1109 pp.
Fleisher, J. 2007. External pulpits and the question of
St. Michael’s Chapel at Nidaros. Pp. 127–46. In M.
Syrstad Andås, Ø. Ekroll, A. Haug, and N. Holger Pe -
tersen (Eds.). The Medieval Cathedral of Trondheim:
Architectural and Ritual Constructions in their European
Context. Brepols Publishers, Turnhout, Belgium.
375 pp.
Gereon Beukers, K. 2007. Zu den Obergeschosskapellen
am Querhaus der Kathedrale von Nidaros und ihrer liturgischen
Nutzun. Pp. 209–251, In M. Syrstad Andås,
Ø. Ekroll, A. Haug, and N. Holger Petersen (Eds.).
The Medieval Cathedral of Trondheim: Architectural
and Ritual Constructions in their European Context.
Brepols Publishers, Turnhout, Belgium. 375 pp.
Hare, M. 2009. The 9th-century west porch of St. Mary’s
Church, Deerhurst, Gloucestershire: Form and function.
Medieval Archaeology 53:35–93.
Helle, K. 1995. Part I: Down to 1536. Pp. 3–188, In R.
Danielsen, S. Dyrvik, T. Grønlie, K. Helle, and E.
Hovland (Eds.). M. Drake (Trans.). Norway: A History
from the Vikings to our Own Times. Scandinavian
University Press, Oslo, Norway. 486 pp.
Hoey, L., and M. Thurlby. 2004. A survey of Romanesque
vaulting in Great Britain and Ireland. Antiquaries
Journal 84:117–184.
Hohler, E.B. 1999. Norwegian Stave Church Sculpture.
Vol. II. Scandinavian University Press, Oslo, Norway.
335 pp.
Jordan, P. 2004. North Sea Saga. Pearson Education Limited,
Harlow, UK. 272 pp.
Kavli, G. 1958. Norwegian Architecture: Past and Present.
Dreyers Forlag, Oslo, Norway. 147 pp.
Metcalfe, F. 1881. Introduction. Pp. 1–60, In E. Erlendsson.
Passio et Miracula Beati Olaui. Clarendon Press,
Oxford, UK. 130 pp.
McAleer, P. 2001. The north portal of Durham Cathedral
and the problem of “sanctuary” in medieval Britain.
Antiquaries Journal 81:195–258.
Pevsner, N. 1979. Buildings of England: Nottinghamshire.
2nd Edition. Penguin Books, Harmondsworth,
UK. 447 pp.
Regesta Norvegica. 1898. Kronologisk fortegnesle over
C. Bogdanski
2013 Journal of the North Atlantic Special Volume 4
106
11More consideration of these spaces, including plans
and isometric models can be found in Gereon Beukers
(2007).
man Emperor, who had a close ally in the powerful archbishop
of Hamburg–Bremen. Øystein Ekroll (2004:160)
has argued that the establishment of the Nidaros archbishopric
served as a counterweight to Hambur g–Bremen.
3The North Sea is located in the area between the mountains
of Scotland and Scandinavia, the hills of South
England, the Low Countries, and North Germany. Today,
its official geographical coordinates define it as the body
of water that is contained south of latitude 60°N and east
of longitude 5°W on its northwest side; north of latitude
58°44.8'N from the top of Denmark to the south coast of
Sweden, and east of longitude 5°W and north of latitude
48°30'N at the south side. This, definition, however, includes
the English Channel in its coordinates and so, in
practice, the North Sea is an area of about 600,000 km2,
about 1000 km long and 64 0km wide, “involving, apart
from the sea to the north, the south coast of Norway, a
short part of the northeast coast of Sweden, the north
and west coasts of Denmark, the northwestern coast of
Germany and the coasts that the Netherlands and Belgium
possess, together with a minimal piece of the French
coast and all the eastern coastline of Britain with the
Northern Isles.” (Jordan 2004:4, 9–10).
4Successive building stages included the addition of the
so-called “Chapter House” to the cathedral’s north side
that was constructed ca. 1165–1675, followed by the addition
of the eastern Octagon ca. 1180–1220 and the choir
and crossing subsequently rebuilt, finally concluding
with the completion of the nave (Metcalfe 1881:60–62).
5Nidaros Cathedral was ravaged by fires in both 1328 and
1432, resulting in financial strain, followed by the onset
of the “Black Death” in 1349–1350, which took the lives
of over 50% of Norway’s population. St. Olaf’s shrine
was dismantled for parts and sold in Copenhagen (Ekroll
2007:163).
6In his discussion of St Magnus Church on Egilsay, Eric
Fernie (1988) makes reference to the North Sea as a
grouping category for a type of buildings. Thurlby (1997)
makes a similar categorization in his discussion of St
Magnus Cathedral, Kirkwall, Orkney. Reginald Cant
(1988) also considers the relationship between Scottish
and Norwegian architecture, see R. Cant, Norwegian Influences
in the Transit. Martin Blindheim (1970) further
examines the relationship of Norwegian medieval art to
trends in Europe ca. 1200.
7In 1070, Adam of Bremen called Nidaros “the capital of
the Norsemen.” (Stratford 1997:44).
8In light of Archbishop Øystein’s elaborate plans for his
cathedral’s extensions, Ekroll suggests ties between the
Norwegian ecclesiast and his colleagues in England,
Archbishop Thomas Becket of Canterbury (1162–70)
and Archbishop Roger of York (1154–81), who were
both extensive architectural patrons at their seats (Ekroll
2004:161–162).
9Almost all previous architecture in Norway was in wood;
stone as a building material was fairly unknown before
the arrival of Christianity. Wooden architecture continued
to be built in Norway in the form of stave churches during
the entire building process of Nidaros Cathedral, from
its earliest stages in around 1100 to its completion in the
mid-14th century. See Kavli (1958:34–35).
10Ekroll (2004:Figures 2–4).