church. The desire to possess a Crypt in early mediæval times was
widely spread. As a rule, though, as we shall presently explain, not
always was the Crypt the resting-place of some noted martyr. In Gaul
and on the banks of the Rhine these crypts were fairly general in the
early Middle Ages: their retention, enlargement, and reconstruction was
largely due to the sentiment and tradition of the very early age of
Christianity.
In Gaul, in the Merovingian period, in the more important churches
they seem to have been very usual; for instance, we still possess the
Crypts of S. Avitus of Orleans (sixth century), the Crypt of Jouarre
and parts of the Crypt of Vézelay, supposed to contain the remains of
S. Mary Magdalene, S. Medard of Soissons; large portions of the vast
Crypt of Chartres, the Crypt of the Cathedral of Auxerre, and certain
parts of the Crypt of the famous Church of S. Benignus of Dijon, one of
the largest existing. The underground Church of S. Seurin of Bordeaux
dates, however, from the eleventh century, as does also the famous and
vast Crypt of S. Eutropius of Saintes.
On the banks of the Rhine and in the Eastern districts of Gaul, dating
from the eleventh century, and even somewhat earlier, we may cite as
prominent examples the Crypts of Besançon and Strasburg, and the great
underground Church of Spires.
In Anglo-Saxon England, we have the Crypts of Ripon and Hexham, both
the work of Wilfred in the seventh century, a little later that of Wing
in Buckinghamshire, and somewhat later still, Repton.
In the early Norman period we have in England the important Crypts of
Winchester, Worcester, Rochester, Gloucester and Canterbury (in parts).
The Oxford and York Minster Crypts were built as late as in the last
part of the twelfth century.
But then they came to an end. The vogue of building Crypts ceased soon
after the famous action of Suger, Abbot of S. Denys near Paris, who,
in A.D. 1144, probably owing to the impossibility of providing for
the vast crowds of pilgrims to the Shrines of S. Denys and his two
companions SS. Rusticus and Eleutherus in the Crypt of the abbey,
brought up from the underground Church of S. Denys the remains of the
three saints, and placed them near the high altar of the church above,
where they could be more easily seen and visited by the pilgrim crowds.
The example of Abbot Suger seems to have been largely followed, notably
at Canterbury, where the body of S. Thomas à Becket, a most popular
object of pilgrimage, was removed from the under to the upper church in
A.D. 1248.
This general removal of the remains of the saints and confessors from
their original place beneath the church, to a position hard by the high
altar of the main building above, seems to have taken away completely
the traditional interest of the Crypt. It now was never constructed. In
the planning of an abbey or of any considerable church the Crypt found
no place; and thus the vogue which had prevailed for so many centuries
passed away completely.
Singularly enough the great Cluniac Brotherhood of Benedictines, with
its two thousand churches, scattered over the countries of the West,
never seems to have adopted the Crypt as a part of any of their many
homes of prayer. There is little doubt that the example of so mighty
and influential a section of the Church of the twelfth century also
contributed largely to the disuse of this most ancient and interesting
feature, which for some ten centuries or more had occupied a place
in the planning of so many of the more important abbeys and homes of
prayer in the West.
To sum up, the Crypt was entirely a Latin and Western use; it was
virtually unknown, and practically non-existent outside the broad
area of Latin Christianity. The custom of the Eastern Church received
it not. It belonged exclusively to the Western school of Romanesque
architecture. It is interesting to remember that as the school of
Romanesque building gave place to another and different school of
architecture, the Crypt virtually disappeared. No purely Gothic Crypt
can be quoted or referred to.
In the first place it was undoubtedly understood to be the
resting-place of the remains of the famous saint or confessor after
whom, in so many cases, the church built over the Crypt in question
was named, and to whose honoured memory the church was dedicated. But
it came to pass, when the vogue or fashion of constructing a Crypt or
under-church became very general, that not unfrequently we find this
under-church, sometimes of considerable size and importance, designed
and planned _without_ the presence of any of these hallowed remains
dating from far-back days. Such, for instance, was the vast Gloucester
Crypt. No tradition exists in Gloucester of the remains of any saint
or confessor ever having been laid to rest in the wide ambulatory or
in the central division of that most venerable and solemn under-church
which lies beneath the stately Cathedral of Gloucester.
[Illustration: The central part of the Crypt of Gloucester Cathedral.
XI Century.]
THE CRYPT OF S. PETER ON THE VATICAN HILL
THE STORY OF A TOMB
There was one Crypt of remarkable sanctity--that of S. Peter at Rome.
It was the favourite object of all Western pilgrimage from the last
years of the first century--and it retained its far-reaching popularity
for many centuries.
This Crypt which contains the remains of the great Apostle, with the
“Memoria” of Anacletus immediately above it, may justly be considered
to have set the vogue which prevailed in the planning of a Crypt in so
many important churches of Western Christianity, from the fourth until
the end of the twelfth century.
The immense and enduring estimation in which this Crypt of S. Peter at
Rome was held for so many centuries, has determined the writer of these
studies to describe it with some detail--and to tell its eventful and
striking story at some length.
In the year of grace 70, Jerusalem and her glorious temple were burnt
and destroyed by Titus and his Legions, who saw in Jerusalem, the
sacred city and citadel not only of the rebel Jews, but also of the
hated Christian sect. There is no doubt but that from the year of the
great catastrophe Rome gradually became the acknowledged centre and
metropolis of Christendom--it had no longer any recognised centre when
Jerusalem was destroyed.
This position has been altered and the influence of Rome has been
dimmed, and to a certain extent materially diminished by certain
other centres of Christianity which have arisen. But she holds it to
a certain extent still. _Constantinople_ the home of the widespread
Eastern or Greek Christianity, and later _Moscow_ after the fall of
Constantinople, were important religious centres. _London_ among the
far-reaching Anglo-Saxon peoples may claim, with some reason, the lofty
title of the Metropolis of the Christian world.
Yet after all these great religious centres have been reckoned with,
Rome, though her old fame and influence has been sadly tarnished and
dimmed, still ranks first. The Eastern or Greek Church, changeless
in the midst of change, silently watches _her_ loved metropolis of
Constantinople all spoiled and desecrated, in the hands of unbelievers.
The Protestant Churches dear to the Anglo-Saxon and Teutonic peoples,
reluctantly perhaps, sadly without doubt, in their hearts still think
of Rome as the centre or metropolis of that living faith in the
Crucified which has been adopted as the religion of the fairest and
most powerful portion of the world.
* * * * *
S. Peter is regarded by Roman Catholic writers (as might have been
expected) as the founder of the Roman congregation--many too among
Anglo-Saxon and Teutonic scholars now accept this view. This conclusion
undoubtedly is supported: (1) by the general testimony of early
Christian writers mostly of the second century; (2) by the important
traditional “Memories” of the presence and preaching of S. Peter in
Rome. Some of these “Memories,” it is true, are purely traditional,
others have clearly an historical foundation; but taken all together,
they constitute an argument of no little weight. In the written
testimonies, as well as in the “Memories” which hang round the figures
of SS. Peter and Paul in Rome, who are generally joined together as
founders of the great Church of the Metropolis of the Empire, it is
notable that Peter, not Paul, ever is the principal figure; (3) the
place which the two mighty Basilicas of S. Peter and S. Paul have ever
occupied in the minds and hearts not only of the dwellers in Rome, but
also of all the innumerable pilgrims in all ages to the sacred shrines
of Rome, seems accurately to measure the respective positions which
the two great Apostles have ever held in the estimate of the Roman
congregation.
The comparative neglect of S. Paul’s Basilica in Rome when measured
with the undying reverence bestowed on the sister Basilica of S. Peter,
is due, not to any want of reverence and regard for the great Apostle
of the Gentiles, but solely because Rome itself and the innumerable
pilgrims to the Queen City were conscious of the special debt of Rome
to S. Peter, who was evidently in all ages regarded as the first and
real founder of the mighty Church of the Capital.
This great and revered teacher S. Peter suffered martyrdom about
the year 66-67. Somewhere about A.D. 69, when the violence of the
terrible persecution of Nero, who perished A.D. 68, was dying away, the
Christian worshippers in Rome prepared a tomb in the nearest available
spot to the place of his martyrdom on the Vatican Hill. This tomb was a
vaulted chamber almost entirely subterranean.
This sacred sepulchre was visited from very early days by ever large
and increasing numbers of the faithful, not only belonging to the Roman
congregations, but including pilgrims from all parts of the Roman world
who wished to pray at the sacred tomb; these visitors were undeterred
by any danger of arrest and death. Pilgrimage to the holy places of
Jerusalem was impossible since a heathen temple had arisen on the site
of the Holy Sepulchre. It was therefore to Rome, and especially to
the tomb of S. Peter, that the early pilgrim devotees of Christendom
chiefly turned.
But the original sepulchre or vault where the remains of S. Peter
rested[26] provided but little space for pilgrims, and was not indeed
very easy of access. So Anacletus, who followed Linus as Bishop of
the Roman Church, A.D. 79-87, built a “Memoria” or upper chamber
immediately above the tomb to serve as a little church or meeting-place
for the ever-increasing numbers of pilgrim visitors. This “Memoria” of
Anacletus was constructed by simply raising the walls of the tomb or
crypt to a higher level, and was of the same shape as the vault itself;
thus, as it were, providing a chamber for the pilgrim visitors on the
floor immediately above the actual tomb.
This little upper chamber of the tomb, which was above ground, is the
“Tropæum” spoken of by Caius the presbyter, when, in A.D. _circa_ 210,
he writes as follows: “I can show you the trophies of the Apostles, for
whether you go to the Vatican or on the Ostian Way you will meet with
their ‘trophies’” (_i. e._ of SS. Peter and Paul who founded the Church
in Rome).
But in addition to building the little upper chamber or “Memoria” of
the tomb itself, Bishop Anacletus prepared places, or graves, in which
he himself and a certain number of his successors might be buried round
S. Peter.
In this sacred burying-place, in these graves prepared by Anacletus
round the Apostle’s tomb, were the early second-century Bishops of Rome
laid, close to the resting-place of S. Peter, and it is these graves
which were laid open in the excavations of which we shall presently
speak, in the year 1626.
* * * * *
There is no record of the exact date of the building of the Basilica of
S. Peter, but there can be no doubt that it was really, as immemorial
tradition has asserted, the work of Constantine the Great after he
became absolute master of the Roman world.
We should put the date probably shortly _after_ A.D. 324, in which
year the yet earlier Basilica of the Lateran was consecrated. The
inscription which still runs along the west front of the Lateran
Church--
“Sacrosancta Lateranensis ecclesia, omnium urbis
et orbis ecclesiarum Mater et Caput”--
voices the ancient tradition that the consecration of the great Lateran
Church preceded the building of S. Peter.
The venerable dedicatory inscription originally on the principal arch
which spanned the nave of S. Peter recorded the name of its imperial
builder:
“Quod duce Te Mundus Surrexit Ad Astra Triumphans
Hanc Constantinus Victor Tibi Condidit Aulam.”
The entry in the _Liber Pontificalis_, presently quoted, tells of the
first Christian Emperor’s special work in the vault or crypt of the
Apostle’s tomb.
It was over this sacred tomb and the little “Memoria” above it that
Constantine erected the magnificent church known as Old S. Peter’s.
Before the days of Constantine, the humble “Memoria” of Anacletus
represented the church above the tomb. Under the first Christian
Emperor, the little “Memoria of Anacletus” grew into the magnificent
Basilica[27] renowned for centuries through the Western world.
But here we have only to do with the tomb and the immediate work above
it in the “Memoria” of Anacletus. The entry in the _Liber Pontificalis_
gives us a precise account of what the Emperor Constantine did in the
vault of the tomb.
“He hid away the stone coffin which contained the body after this
manner: He enclosed the coffin altogether in bronze, and then built up
(_i. e._ filled the vault) with masonry. After this manner he enclosed
the body of the blessed Peter and hid it away.”
There is no doubt, however, that the Emperor, in enclosing the
sarcophagus of the Apostle with solid masonry, left clear a little
space actually above the coffin in the ceiling of the vault, for the
same entry goes on to tell us that Constantine made a gold cross and
placed it above the bronze covering of the coffin. This gold cross was
seen gleaming through an opening as late as A.D. 1594. We know too that
in the early Middle Ages, objects of devotion were occasionally lowered
from the church above, through the ceiling, and these objects were
revered as bonâ fide precious relics of the Apostle whose coffin they
had touched.
* * * * *
Here the entry in the _Liber Pontificalis_ ends, and the particulars of
any work which Constantine carried out in the “Memoria” of Anacletus,
which had been built above the tomb, we can only learn from its present
appearance and from detached notices which occur in later entries of
the _Liber Pontificalis_ which tell us of the splendid gifts made to
this “Memoria” by the Popes and others in the following centuries.
Directly above the “Memoria” it is clear that Constantine, when he
built the great church, placed a heavy stone altar. This had to be
supported by strengthening the comparatively slender walls of the
“Memoria.” The vault of the tomb filled up, save directly above the
sarcophagus, with solid masonry, provided a firm foundation, and the
“Memoria,” which was now divided into two chambers, was made strong
with additional masonry. The lower of the two chambers was completely
filled up save for a small opening or passage which led directly down
to the vault of the tomb.
The walls of the upper chamber of the “Memoria” were also strengthened
with masonry sufficient to support the great altar placed immediately
above it, but enough space was left to form the Confessionary, part of
which still exists beneath the great altar.
Thus direct communication with the sacred vault of the tomb itself
existed by means of the narrow opening or passage through the lower
chamber above mentioned, by means of which handkerchiefs or similar
objects could be let down so as to touch the sarcophagus in which lay
the remains of the Apostle. This opening or passage was closed with two
small gratings carefully locked. These gratings are generally known by
the term “cataracts”--the one at the lower end, which was in fact the
ceiling of the vault, which ceiling consisted of one or more marble
slabs; the other on the top of the opening or passage, on the floor
of the upper chamber of the “Memoria”--which became the well-known
Confessionary.[28]
We possess in the writings of S. Gregory of Tours a vivid description
of the manner in which pilgrims to Rome revered the sacred shrine in
early times. The description in question was given to S. Gregory by his
deacon Agiulphus who had made the pilgrimage. The account is given us
by S. Gregory in his book called _In gloriâ Martyrum_, written about
the year of grace 595. We append a translation of the words here of S.
Gregory--
“S. Peter is buried in a church called from ancient times the
Vatican.... His sepulchre, which is placed under the Altar, is
exceedingly rarely entered. However, if any one desires to pray, the
gates by which the place is fenced are opened, and he goes in above
the sepulchre, and then, having opened a little window, puts his head
within and makes request concerning his needs.
“Nor is the result delayed, if only the petition be a just one. For
if he desires to carry away with him some blessed memorial, he throws
within a little handkerchief that has been carefully weighed, and then
watching and fasting, he prays most fervently that the Apostle may give
an effectual answer to his devotion. Wonderful to say, if the faith of
the man prevails, the handkerchief when it is raised from the tomb,
is so filled with divine virtue that it weighs much more than it did
before, and then he who has raised it knows that he has obtained the
favour which he sought.
“Many also make golden keys to unlock the gates of the blessed
sepulchre, and then they take away those which were used before, as a
sacred treasure, and by these keys the infirmities of the afflicted are
cured. For true faith can do all things.”
Mgr. Barnes in his work on S. Peter’s tomb gives a detailed explanation
of the above report of Agiulphus to S. Gregory of Tours.
“The actual sepulchre, the subterranean chamber in which the
sarcophagus (of S. Peter) was placed, was scarcely ever opened,
and was not, even at that early date (late in the sixth century),
accessible to ordinary worshippers. The most that they could hope for,
was to visit the Confession under the Altar ... the pilgrim passes on,
throws himself with his body prostrate within the recess, raises the
little window or grating which closed the aperture in the floor, and
so puts himself in communication, not indeed with the tomb itself, but
with the space which intervened between the Confession and the vault,
which space had once formed the lowest part of the old upper chamber or
‘Memoria’ of Anacletus.”
From the vault and the actual sepulchre he was still shut off by a
second grating or cataract--which was unlocked for him.
Through these two gratings, when opened, the handkerchief or other
object was lowered so as to touch the tomb, and this could be carried
away as a precious relic.
* * * * *
By the early Popes and Bishops of Rome, and other illustrious
persons, notably by Pelagius II, A.D. 579-590; S. Gregory, A.D.
590-604; Sergius, A.D. 687-701; S. Gregory III, A.D. 731-741; Paul
I, A.D. 757-768; Hadrian I, A.D. 772-795; and S. Leo III--Hadrian’s
successor--were magnificent and costly offerings bestowed upon the
sacred shrine. These decorated with unexampled magnificence the
Confession, the Altar and the canopy above.
In the reign of Paul I, King Pepin of France was also a munificent
donor to this famous shrine.
These gifts consisted in gold and silver coverings for the canopy of
the altar--in costly mosaics--in precious marble columns--in pavements
of silver--in railings and gates of gold--in superb candelabra. Many of
these costly gifts are chronicled with much care and detail in entries
in the _Liber Pontificalis_.
A specially interesting entry in the _Liber Pontificalis_ tells us
how Charlemagne, accompanied by Pope Hadrian, was permitted to enter
the vault of the tomb--the only visit to the sepulchre itself that is
recorded. The few words which tell of this, perhaps solitary, visit of
the great Frankish sovereign and the Pope are memorable--
“Descendentes pariter ad Corpus beati Petri.”
* * * * *
In the time of Pope Sergius II, we read of another imperial visit
to Rome. The Emperor Louis II, A.D. 845, was received with the same
ceremonial respect as his great predecessor Charlemagne. He, too,
prayed before the Confession, but there is no allusion to any visit to
the body of S. Peter. The sacred vault indeed seems to have been, even
in these far-back centuries, very rarely if ever entered. Charlemagne’s
visit was probably never repeated.
Only two years after Louis II’s visit occurred the destructive raid
of the Saracens. For several years these Mahommedan invaders, who
had taken possession of Sicily, had ravaged the Italian coasts. They
had plundered the great Monastery of Monte Cassino, and in A.D. 847
appeared before Rome. This raid was not unexpected, for some of the
treasures seem hastily to have been removed to a more secure home
within the walls of the city.
No attempt to move the great bronze-covered sarcophagus was evidently
thought of, but the entrance to the vault was concealed by pouring
down stones and rubble through the upper opening below the Confession,
completely filling up the space between the two cataracts or gratings,
which thus escaped the notice of the plundering invaders, who, however,
carried off many of the treasures, the gifts of the Popes and other
distinguished persons to which we have alluded above, which adorned the
shrine.
The Saracens only stayed in the vicinity of S. Peter’s for some eight
days, and then retreated. There is little doubt but that the “earthing
up” the narrow passage which led to the sacred vault where the
sarcophagus lay, the filling it up with the stones and rubbish which
_still_ effectually blocks up all access to the tomb itself, must be
dated from the period of this raid of the Saracens in A.D. 847.
Much was done by S. Leo IV, A.D. 847-855, and his successors in the
Papacy, to restore the damage done and the havoc wrought by the
Saracenic raiders; but the passage to the tomb itself was never again
opened. Many beautiful and costly gifts were often made to the shrine,
and especially to the Confession, by various Popes and illustrious
visitors and pilgrims, among whom the Anglo-Saxon Ethelwolf, the father
of Alfred, must be included. But in spite of these efforts and gifts
the shrine never again reached anything like the glory and magnificence
which it possessed before the terrible incursion of the Saracen
invaders in A.D. 847.
For more than a thousand years there has been no access to the vault of
the tomb; and no serious attempt, for various reasons, has ever been
made to restore the original communication which once evidently existed
between the floor of the Confession and the sacred chamber which held,
and no doubt holds still, the bronze-covered sarcophagus of S. Peter.
We possess no accurate contemporary details of this disastrous
Saracenic raid, as the manuscripts of the _Liber Pontificalis_ are
deficient here.
* * * * *
A story of surpassing interest is told by Bonanni (_Templi Vaticani
historia_), the authenticity of which is accepted by Marucchi,
Lanciani, Barnes and other scholars and experts.
In the spring of A.D. 1594, when the works connected with the new S.
Peter’s were going on, Giacomo della Porta, the architect in charge,
reported to Pope Clement VIII that a portion of the ground in the
vicinity of the tomb had given way, and through an aperture thus
uncovered the interior of the chamber of the tomb could be seen.
The Pope, accompanied with three Cardinals, at once visited the spot,
and with the aid of a lighted torch the sarcophagus was visible, with
the great golden cross of Constantine lying upon it. Clement VIII,
after viewing the strange sight, immediately ordered the aperture to
be closed with cement in his presence. The names of the Cardinals, who
were well known, were Bellarmine, Antoniano and Sfondriato.
* * * * *
The building of the new S. Peter’s was slowly drawing to its
completion, when in A.D. 1607 Pope Paul V planned to bring the ancient
Confession of S. Peter into sight. In the new planning of the church,
this Confession was concealed in the Crypt, and any access to it was
almost impossible.