The fundamental principle behind toichology is observation. We can look for consistency in order to determine which portions of a building were constructed at the same time, or we can look for anomalies in order to find breaks in construction and changes in design concept. Usually, common sense will allow us to determine which portions of a building came before or after others, and this in turn allows us to develop a relative chronology. Further study of details and carving styles allows us to narrow the dating of those portions, and in the end we should be able to arrive at a convincing chronology of construction for any given building. On this page we present initial observations and speculate about the likely implications for chronology.

Click the thumbnails to see larger images.

Project D - Nave Arcade Bases The four pairs of piers of the nave are regularly spaced and properly aligned from east to west. Implications The consistency of the spacing suggests the piers were all part of a coherent plan, and the existence of four pairs, equally spaced, supports a theory that the nave was originally designed to have three bays rather than two. NOTE: The dimensions presented on this site are taken from a hi-resolution laser scan done by Andrew Tallon. This scan was scaled such that one pixel equals one centimeter, and then distances were measured in pixels using Photoshop. Because almost nothing is square in the building, obtaining accurate dimensions at the site is very difficult. Even if the technique used above is not perfect, it is likely to be as accurate or more accurate than anything else at our disposal. In any case, it is the consistency of the dimensions and not necessarily their accuracy that is at issue in most cases.

Project D - Nave Arcade Bases There are four pairs of bases in the new nave, with the easternmost pair being set lower than the rest. Implications The site slopes down from west to east, and it may be that the lower placement of the easternmost bases was intended to adapt to the slope. It also seems possible that the floor was lower in this area immediately to the west of the crypt, which in turn suggests that there may have been some way to enter the crypt from this direction, or to view the relics in the crypt from this part of the church.

Project D - Nave Aisle Walls The north aisle wall has shafts that are spaced considerably farther apart than the piers of the nave. Implications Had the building site been clear, one would expect a near perfect alignment of the wall shafts with the piers, but this is not the case. While the spacing of the nave piers is 7.85m, that of the north aisle wall shafts is 8.39m. One reasonable explanation is that there was something in between that precluded accurate measurement and alignment. I suggest that the aisle wall of the original church was still in place, between the new piers and new aisle wall, and that this made it impossible to directly align the new construction. The difference in spacing is more difficult to explain. There may have been a measuring error carrying over the spacing of the nave piers to that of the aisle shafts.

Project D - Nave Aisle Walls On the south side, two of the wall shafts are properly aligned but the third is not. Implications It is not clear why this would be the case. Perhaps the masons on this side were more adept at translating the dimensions through the original aisle wall, or it could be that after their failures on the north side, a decision as taken to remove the original south aisle before setting out the shafts.

Project D - Nave Heights of the Lower Capitals The heights of the tops of the capitals of the aisles are different from those of the arcade, and different from each other. Implications This suggests that the masons did not have direct access to the arcade piers from the aisles, and the reconstruction shows the aisle walls of the original church in the way. This may explain the differences in heights, because they could not be accurately measured. Again, the difference in the north (24cm) is much greater than that on the south (5cm), suggesting some failures on the north that were largely avoided on the south.

Project D - Nave Nave Length The nave currently consists of two bays, but there is compelling evidence that it originally had three, and that the easternmost bay was adapted to become a "crossing" of sorts. Implications The restoration reports by Magne in the 19th century indicate that there were springs for an arcade arch in the easternmost bay of the nave, but these were abandoned and covered over by later work. It was only the fact of the rebuilding of the second pier from the east on the north that exposed this fact. It is also the case that the south portal is awkwardly crammed into the corner between the nave and the later south transept, and it seems likely that it was originally intended to be in the middle bay of a three-bay nave.

Project D - Nave Nave Length The impost on the easternmost surviving wall shaft on the north side does not wrap around toward the north transept, but has a termination that turns to the east. Implications This is also indicative of an intent to construct a third bay east of the existing two nave bays.

Project D - Nave Nave Length The east side of the pilaster of the easternmost wall shaft of the north aisle shows evidence of a vertical joint in the same location as on the west side of the same pilaster. Implications This suggests that there may have been an aisle wall for a third bay that was demolished to the pilaster and then filled in with ashlar.

Project D - Nave Nave Length The two capitals framing the entrance to the choir (right) share the same character as those in the nave aisles. (left) Implications These two capitals are a bit of an anomaly, having no clear purpose. More importantly, the abacus profiles are similar, and the fact that this molding turns at the back of the southern capital, (bottom right) suggest that they may have been reused from the aisles, which in turn suggests that the aisles were at one time longer, or planned to be longer, and when they were truncated, their unused capitals and abaci were put to reuse. It is worth noting here that the pilasters behind the shafts beneath these capitals are not of the same stones as the shafts, and it could be that the shafts, and the reuse of their capitals, was an afterthought, perhaps intended to support a jubé.

Project D - Nave Western Wall The western piers have been built against on either side and the imposts of the capitals differ from those on either side. There is a difference in the heights of the horizontal mortal beds, which are very thin in the pier and much taller in the adjacent wall. Implications We conclude from this that the lower parts of the westernmost nave piers were originally freestanding. It suggests that the masons did not yet know what they were going to do at the west end, eliminate the narthex or adapt it to support a western tower. That decision seems to have come fairly quickly, and an attempt was made to link the westernmost piers with the existing narthex. This juncture between nave and narthex/tower would remain an issue throughout the construction of the nave.

Project D - Nave Western Wall The impost of the westernmost pier on the north side includes several stones of slightly different character. There is the ghostly imprint of the original doubleau arch visible above the impost. Implications There is a darker area on the western (right) side of the voussoirs in exactly the expected location of an original doubleau arch across the aisle. There are two conclusions to draw from this. First, the lowest voussoirs of the original doubleau were not cut from the same stones as the arcade voussoirs, indicating that the doubleau arches were constructed after the arcade was complete, and second, that the original doubleau was removed when the new arch was constructed between the aisle and the western chapel. The south end of the new arch was shifted westward in order to eliminate some of the irregularity cause by the shifting of the north shaft at the aisle wall 81cm further west than one would expect. At the same time the impost was modified - the profiles are slightly different and the zigzag decoration on the later stones is thicker than that on the original. The toothed carving underneath at the bottom of the original impost is not copied to the new stones either. Note also how the corner of the impost over the original capital is not notched in any way.

Project D - Nave Capitals The capitals of the main piers at the aisle level are the same character as those at the clerestory level. The designs of the imposts vary. Implications This suggests that the nave piers were erected to their full height without significant interruption. It has been theorized that these capitals may have been intended to be installed at a lower level, and that they were raised at a later date. This theory will be dispelled below. The imposts of the westernmost piers at the aisle level (left) do not have a notch at the corners, whereas all others do. Some have seen these notches as evidence that groin vaults were planned from the start because these notches "emphasize" the corners. Because all of the bays are square, one would expect the notches to align with the groins at a 45-degree angle, but many do not, as seen on the right of the photo. It could just as easily be said that the imposts face the cardinal directions, and therefore emphasize them.

Project D - Nave Aisle Vaults There are unusual corbels supporting the groin vaults of the nave aisles. The aisle walls have formerets, and these have roll moldings. All other moldings in the nave are either square or chamfered. Implications On the south side (top) it appears that roof corbels were repurposed. The lines of the groins above and below these corbels do not correspond. The corbels are simpler on the north (bottom). If we consider that groin vaults were intended from the start, these brackets are clumsy and serve no practical purpose. Clean groin vaults could have been installed without them. However, if we consider that groin vaults were not intended from the start, and that these are all retrofittings intended to prepare the bays for vaulting, they start to make more sense. The use of rubble for these vaults does suggest an earlier date rather than later, but they need not have been contemporary with the original construction of the aisles. The vaults in the westernmost bays of the aisles have been cut into to adapt to the arches into the western chapels, which appear to have been added at the end of the 12th century or at the beginning of the 13th century.

Project D - Nave Nave Construction The same mason's marks appear at the bottom and top of the nave piers. Implications The photo shows a mason's mark at the top of one of the nave piers (left) and the same mark at the bottom of the same pier (right). The existence of the same mason's marks at the bottom and the top of the same piers clearly indicates that the construction of those piers was continuous from bottom to top. Any significant pause during the construction of these piers would be reflected in a change in the mason's marks. As such, there is no reason to believe that the nave was not a singular, continuous construction from floor to roof. Later modifications did not alter the piers themselves, only the walls between them.

Project D - Nave Nave Construction The same masons marks appear in the south aisle and the upper parts of one of the north nave piers. Implications The photo shows mason's marks on the westernmost doubleau arch (top - just left of the corbel), the original doubleau and not the later infill, and the same mark appears on the central of the north piers of the nave, in the fourth course above the string course (bottom). The existence of the same mason's marks in both the lower and upper parts of the nave clearly indicates that the construction of the nave and its aisles was continuous. Any significant pause during the construction of these piers would be reflected in a change in the mason's marks. As such, there is no reason to believe that the nave, including the aisles, was not a singular, continuous construction from floor to roof.

Project D - Nave West Wall Although the course heights are very similar, there is a keyed vertical joint on either side of the choir loft, close to the corner pier. At the top of this joint there is a straight vertical joint of several courses, leading up to an extension of the impost moldings of the clerestory capital. This extension mirrors that at the aisle level below. Implications This indicates that as the westernmost nave piers were going up, the masons still had no clear idea of how they were going to tie the nave to the tower. It is VERY unusual for masons to match course heights as they have throughout the building at Etampes. Normally, the juncture between two separate portions of work would be made using notched stones to transition from one set of course heights to another. At Etampes there are very subtle differences between courses - they don't perfectly match, but the effort to match course heights has made it far more difficult to discern one portion of work from another. In this case, there are subtle differences in mortar bed thicknesses and in the quality of the stone. This joint also reflects that it is very likely that the nave of the original church still extended to the narthex, and that the masons of the new church were working around it, leaving a keyed opening that would later be resolved.

Project D - Nave Triforium There is a short course of stone at the base of the visible triangular strut, at the same level and of the same height as the string course above the nave arcade. Implications This is another indication that the nave originally consisted of three bays. It reflects the floor level of the triforium, a logical "stopping point" during construction. If this wall were meant to be the exposed wall of the transept, its coursing would be more consistent.

Project D - Nave Triforium There is a triangular strut wall, capped with blocks set vertically, visible at the east end of the north aisle. Implications As noted above, the existence of this feature suggests that this wall was not originally meant to be exposed. It appears to be a strut intended to support the upper part of the pier and the transverse arch across the nave. When the windows were enlarged later, the remainder of these struts were replaced by flying buttresses which were less obtrusive.

Project D - Nave Triforium A fragment of the strut wall remains on the exterior on the south side of the nave. Implications The south is different from the north. Instead of adding above the strut wall to create the west wall of the transept, a completely new plane of wall from floor to roof was constructed just to the east of the existing strut. This was necessitated by the existence of the south portal, and an effort to preserve as much of its sculpture as was possible. So the strut probably remained until the upper part of the new wall plane was completed, replacing the strut as support for the upper pier and transverse arch, at which point the strut was dismantled so that it did not block the upper window.

Project D - Nave Flying Buttresses The flying buttresses on the exterior of the clerestory are inconsistent with the rest of the nave Implications Flying buttresses were not a feature of the period of the original construction of the nave. They appear to be substitutes for the more massive and obtrusive strut walls, as they were less prone to blocking the light after the clerestory windows had been enlarged.

Project D - Nave Flying Buttresses A section of the nave drawn by Magne around 1841 shows the configuration and state of the buttresses as they were at that time. Implications These buttresses are not the same as the current buttresses, which must have been restored either by Magne or afterward. Those depicted are likely to date to the time of the enlargement of the nave windows, as it would have been logical when increasing the window size to also remove the original strut in order to improve the lighting.

Project D - Nave Clerestory Windows The size of the clerestory windows and their tracery are not consistent with the remainder of the nave Implications The clerestory windows that exist today are the result of an enlargement made in the 13th century. On the south the windows are groupings of lancets, while on the north they have the more advanced plate tracery. As elsewhere, an effort was made to tie into the existing stonework by matching the course heights of the earlier work. It is likely that the zone between the string course and the imposts of the clerestory capitals was originally much more mural, perhaps with small penetrations into the dark roof area over the aisles. Above, there were either short lancets or perhaps oculi.

Project D - Nave Later Encasing of the Piers The drums of the eastern four nave piers have been encased by later shafting, but a portion of them remains visible. Implications Close inspection of the photographs taken at the church indicate that there is no meaningful correlation between the coursing of any of the vertical components of any of the piers. The drums of the nave were there first, from floor to current height of the capitals. As the choirs and transepts were added, shafts were added to these drums to reflect the differing schemes of articulation of each new space. Each of these shafts were completely separate from the drums and completely separate from each other. In the photo, the drum (left), central shaft, and shafts for the two capitals on the right are all separate from one another, being appended to the drum at different times and for different purposes.

Project D - Nave Vaulting The groin vaults of the nave seem inconsistent with the thin walls and large span. Implications There has been considerable dispute about whether the nave was originally vaulted. If so, the vaults would have been comparatively very large for the period, and the generally thin construction of the walls does not seem to support such a conclusion. The vaults currently over the nave are the product of later reconstruction. The existence of notches in the corners of the imposts of the nave capitals is not necessarily indicative of an anticipation of vaulting. A timber roof seems more consistent with the rest of the construction.

Project D - Nave Connection to the Tower On the south side, the connection of the nave to the tower was complicated. Implications The buttress in the center of the photo corresponds to the current west wall of the nave, which corresponds to the new nave pier spacing. There was a space left between the new piers and the old narthex, and this space remained when the narthex was adapted to become a proper tower. The masons seemed at all times to struggle with making this connection. The metal decoration on the buttress is the terminal for a long iron rod that extended through the entire building and ends with an identical terminal on the north side. In the area to the left of the buttress, and beneath the scalloped decoration of the new tower, we see a mix of rubble and ashlar construction. There is also some thickening of the wall between the blocked window and buttress of the tower.

Project D - Nave Connection to the Tower On the south side, the joint between the existing tower buttress and the ashlar of the clerestory can be seen. Implications The arrow indicates this joint. This level of the tower must have preceded the connection from the nave clerestory.

Project D - Nave Connection to the Tower On the north side, the connection of the nave to the tower was complicated. Implications The later tower is not centered on the axis of the nave, being shifted somewhat to the south. On the north side the rubble construction in the center of the photo represents the original stair tower, and the small chamber at the top of the stairs. It was built against the tower, and is therefore later than the tower. Its east wall is the ashlar mass seen in the photo to the left of the rubble construction. This ashlar mass is also constructed against the tower, and postdates it. As on the south, the buttress corresponds with the current west wall of the nave. As on the south there is a mixture of ashlar and rubble construction, and there is no reason to believe that the rubble work is older than the ashlar, in fact, here some is earlier and some is later. It reminds us that the choice of ashlar versus rubble had more to do with either economy or aesthetics than currency.

Project D - Nave Connection to the Tower The various levels of the nave abut the tower and are not coursed with it. Implications It seems the tower was always ahead of the nave, as in all instances the walls of the nave abut those of the pre-existing tower. All indications suggest that the designers struggled with how they would make the connection between the new nave and the existing tower.

Project D - Nave Connection to the Tower Above the chamber at the top of the tower stairs, it is clear that the ashlar of the clerestory abuts a pre-existing level of the tower. Implications In every instance, the tower existed before the nave was connected to it.