Romanesque I – The stone doctrine of salvation

Building design
The Romanesque Baumeisters have left us spectacular church buildings, such as Groß St. Martin in Cologne. Photo: Thomas Robbin, CC BY-SA 3.0, via: Wikimedia Commons

The Romanesque Baumeisters have left us spectacular church buildings, such as Groß St. Martin in Cologne.
Photo: Thomas Robbin, CC BY-SA 3.0, via: Wikimedia Commons

Between the 10th and early 13th centuries, Europe built an architecture that is still considered a visible expression of the medieval world view today: Romanesque architecture. Characteristic features include round arches, thick walls, small windows and robust towers – features that make the era immediately recognizable. But behind the seemingly defensive aesthetics lies far more than static technology. Romanesque churches functioned as living encyclopaedias of faith: architecture, sculpture and spatial effects systematically intertwined to vividly convey the events of salvation.

Romanesque places of worship arose not only as places of prayer, but also as monumental spaces for teaching and thinking. Their massive walls offered protection – both physically and spiritually. The interior was usually dark, pierced by a few high openings that created an atmosphere of reverence. Light had not only a practical, but above all a symbolic function: it entered in a targeted manner, emphasized the sanctuary and made the divine presence visible.
The spatial structure followed a clear, strict rhythm: pillars, arches and vaults divided the nave axially and led the faithful along a specific path. A visual program began as soon as you entered through the portal. The tympanum often adorned the main portal with depictions of the Last Judgement, Christ in the mandorla or legends of saints – images that not only decorated but also taught.
Examples of this can be found in the abbey church of Sainte-Foy in Conques (France), whose tympanum impressively depicts the biblical narrative of the Last Judgement, or in the cathedral of Autun (Saint-Lazare), where Gislebertus’ famous sculptures depict the Last Judgement with dramatic imagery.
Characteristic forms can also be observed in Germany – for example in the Basilica of St. Gereon in Cologne, whose monumental decagonal building with a domed central space impressively demonstrates the engineering and symbolic power of the Romanesque style. Here, the spatial effect itself becomes a “visual language” that inscribes the faithful into a cosmic structure.

Romanesque art deliberately avoided naturalistic depictions. Figures appear elongated, statuesque and frontal; their body language follows a theological narrative, not anatomical reality. The aim was not to create a lifelike depiction, but to convey meaning: the viewer should recognize, understand and reflect morally.
The iconographic program of the Romanesque period was strictly codified. Capitals, archivolts, choir screens and portals depicted scenes from the Bible, supplemented by allegorical representations of virtues, vices, the labors of the month and animal creatures. Animals had symbolic meaning in so-called bestiaries: the lion represented Christ, the griffin was regarded as the guardian of the sacred, the dragon as a symbol of sin. This symbolism can be found, for example, in the abbey church of Moissac, whose portal and capitals show a densely populated, morally charged world of animals and figures, or in the cathedral of Vézelay, where humans and animals merge into a cosmic doctrinal image.

The language of the figures varied from region to region: in the south of France, for example in Autun or Moissac, figures were sculpturally pushed into the space with expressive facial expressions and movement. In Germany, particularly on the Rhine and in Saxony, quieter, monumental forms were preferred, such as in Speyer or Limburg an der Lahn. Italian examples, such as the Basilica of San Miniato al Monte in Florence, on the other hand, featured two-dimensional reliefs with clear lines and decorative ornamentation.
Despite these differences, Romanesque sculpture had a common goal: it served to instruct and made the invisible visible. The church thus became a stone image of the cosmos: ordered, hierarchical and imbued with divine order.

In the Romanesque period, architecture was not technology, but theology in stone. Every keystone, every capital, every ray of light had a meaning. The church interior was not a neutral shell, but a sacred cosmos. Art, architecture and light merged to form an instrument of instruction – particularly important at a time when most believers could not read. Those who could see could believe.
Romanesque churches were far more than just architectural buildings: they were a message, a warning and a promise at the same time. They showed the believer the order of the world, the path to salvation and the consequences of sin. They were a visual profession of faith that still fascinates today.

Examples of famous Romanesque churches:

  • Speyer Cathedral (Germany): largest Romanesque church in Germany, symbol of power and protection.
  • Saint-Savin-sur-Gartempe Abbey (France): famous for its murals, which illustrate biblical stories.
  • San Miniato al Monte (Italy): two-dimensional reliefs, clear lines and harmonious ornamentation.
  • Cologne Romanesque churches (Germany): St. Gereon, St. Maria im Kapitol and others – combine architecture, sculpture and lighting effects.

Read more: On the trail of Romanesque wall paintings in Westphalia.

POTREBBE INTERESSARTI ANCHE

Shared mobility: how digital platforms are redefining public transport

Building design

Shared mobility is becoming increasingly important in the modern city: digital platforms enable residents to use vehicles such as car-sharing cars, e-scooters and bicycles quickly and flexibly. These solutions relieve the burden on cities and contribute to sustainable urban mobility. Matthew Archuleta | Unsplash

Cities today face major challenges when it comes to mobility. Private transport leads to traffic jams, air pollution and land consumption. Shared mobility offers a solution that relies on the shared use of vehicles and thus relieves both the environment and the roads. Digital platforms and apps allow people to use vehicles flexibly without having to own a car. These new mobility models are not only an environmentally friendly alternative, but also an important step towards a more sustainable and liveable city. […]

Cities today face major challenges when it comes to mobility. Private transport leads to traffic jams, air pollution and land consumption. Shared mobility offers a solution that relies on the shared use of vehicles and thus relieves both the environment and the roads. Digital platforms and apps allow people to use vehicles flexibly without having to own a car. These new mobility models are not only an environmentally friendly alternative, but also an important step towards a more sustainable and liveable city.

Fun fact: According to a study by McKinsey, shared mobility solutions could reduce the need for private cars in cities by up to 30% by 2030.

Shared mobility is based on a combination of several technologies that work together seamlessly to provide users with a simple and convenient experience.

Digital platforms

Digital platforms such as Uber, Lyft, Free Now and Share Now connect users and vehicles in real time. These platforms offer features such as booking, payment and route optimization that allow users to use a vehicle immediately and without much effort.

Internet of Things (IoT)

The IoT is an integral part of shared mobility. Vehicles are often equipped with GPS and sensors that report their location and status in real time. This data helps to optimize operations by providing information on availability, maintenance and routes.

Mobile apps

Mobile apps are the main tool through which users access shared mobility services. They enable the booking of rides, payment and provide access to information such as the location of the next available vehicle and estimated arrival times.

Practical example: In Amsterdam, the car-sharing company Share Now uses a platform that provides real-time information on available vehicles and allows users to unlock the cars via an app.

Shared mobility comprises various models that are tailored to the different needs of users.

Car sharing

Car sharing enables users to rent a car for short periods of time. Models such as station-based car sharing (e.g. Zipcar) and free-floating car sharing (e.g. Share Now) offer flexibility and reduce the need for private car ownership.

Bike sharing

Bike sharing systems offer an environmentally friendly alternative for short distances. Users can find and use bikes at special stations or via GPS using an app. This promotes healthy, emission-free mobility.

Ridesharing and ride-hailing

Ridesharing (e.g. BlaBlaCar) and ride-hailing (e.g. Uber) offer users the opportunity to share journeys or order a vehicle with a driver. This optimizes traffic flow and reduces environmental pollution.

Scooter sharing

Electric scooters, which can be rented via an app, have established themselves as a popular option for short journeys. They are space-saving and emission-free and complement other means of transportation in the urban environment.

Practical example: Lime offers scooter sharing in many cities around the world and is a practical solution for the so-called “last mile”, which is often difficult to cover with public transport.

Shared mobility offers numerous advantages that have a positive impact on cities, the environment and users.

Reduction of emissions

As fewer people own their own car, the number of vehicles on the roads is reduced. Shared mobility promotes the use of electric and low-emission vehicles and thus helps to reduce CO₂ emissions.

Less traffic and congestion

When people share vehicles, traffic is reduced. Fewer vehicles on the roads means less congestion, better air quality and an overall more pleasant urban environment.

Lower costs for users

Shared mobility is often cheaper than owning a car, as users only pay for what they actually use. Maintenance, insurance and other fixed costs are eliminated.

Flexible mobility

Shared mobility models offer users a flexible and convenient way to get around without having to worry about finding a parking space or vehicle maintenance.

Expert opinion: According to a study by Deloitte, 55% of millennials prefer shared mobility solutions to owning their own car as they offer flexibility and cost efficiency.

Despite its advantages, shared mobility faces various challenges that need to be overcome.

Infrastructure and space requirements

Shared mobility requires special parking spaces and parking areas for bicycles and scooters, which can lead to conflicts in public spaces. Cities need to provide space for these vehicles without interfering with pedestrian traffic.

Safety concerns

Scooters and bikes can pose a safety risk, especially in busy areas. Accidents and lack of helmet use are common problems that jeopardize the safety of users.

Legal and regulatory issues

The regulation of shared mobility services is complex and varies from city to city. Providers must adhere to local regulations, which can increase operating costs and limit availability.

User acceptance and habits

Although shared mobility offers many advantages, some people still prefer to own their own car. It takes time and education to increase the acceptance of shared mobility solutions.

Example: In San Francisco, the rapid growth of scooter sharing has led to problems with poorly parked scooters on sidewalks, resulting in complaints from citizens and the need for stricter regulations.

Amsterdam: Car sharing integration with public transport

In Amsterdam, car sharing providers work closely with public transport to offer integrated mobility solutions. Users can use car-sharing vehicles as a supplement to public transport and thus increase flexibility.

San Francisco: Scooter sharing

San Francisco has successfully integrated scooter sharing and introduced strict regulations to ensure that the vehicles are parked properly and the safety of users is guaranteed.

Copenhagen: Bikesharing

Copenhagen, known as a bike-friendly city, has developed a comprehensive bike-sharing program that is used by locals and tourists alike. This has reduced the use of cars in the city center.

The future of shared mobility will be shaped by the integration of new technologies and business models.

  1. Autonomous driving: Autonomous vehicles could make shared mobility even more efficient and safer as they are continuously available and can move autonomously.
  2. Artificial intelligence (AI): AI can help to better manage traffic flows and vehicle availability in order to maximize efficiency and adapt the service to the needs of users.
  3. Mobility as a Service (MaaS): MaaS platforms combine different modes of transportation in a single app that integrates all mobility services from public transport to car sharing and offers a seamless user experience.
  4. Sustainability and electric drives: The introduction of electric shared mobility vehicles will help reduce emissions and improve air quality in cities.

Future outlook: A pilot project in Helsinki is testing autonomous, electric car sharing vehicles that can be booked via a MaaS app and offer users a complete, sustainable mobility solution.

Shared mobility is fundamentally changing the way people travel in cities. Through the use of digital platforms and innovative business models, it offers a sustainable alternative to private car ownership and contributes to solving urban challenges. Despite the challenges, particularly in terms of infrastructure and user acceptance, it is clear that shared mobility has the potential to make urban mobility more efficient, environmentally friendly and flexible.

Concluding thought: Shared mobility is more than just a technology – it is a vision for sustainable mobility that conserves resources and creates quality of life. If cities and providers work together, shared mobility could become an essential part of urban life in the future.

Read more: The European Garden Award 2024 went to a total of ten projects this year. The focus was on the topic of “Green Oasis”.

National Arena Bucharest – Stadiums of the European Championship 2021

Building design

Lia Manoliu Stadium

If you take a closer look at the national arena in the Romanian capital Bucharest, you are instinctively reminded of a Bundesliga stadium. This is no coincidence, as the roots of the arena lie in Germany. The Romanian national arena in Bucharest has German genes: the 55,000-seat soccer stadium was designed by Hamburg architects Gerkan, Marg […]

If you take a closer look at the national arena in the Romanian capital Bucharest, you are instinctively reminded of a Bundesliga stadium. This is no coincidence, as the roots of the arena lie in Germany.

The Romanian national arena in Bucharest has German genes: the 55,000-seat soccer stadium was designed by Hamburg architects Gerkan, Marg & Partner (gmp), the structural design was carried out by the engineering firms Schlaich Bergermann & Partner from Stuttgart and Krebs und Kiefer from Karlsruhe, and the general contractor was the construction company Max Bögl from Sengenthal in the Upper Palatinate.

Although it is a soccer stadium, the building is named after a female discus thrower: Lia Manoliu won the gold medal at the 1968 Olympic Games in Mexico City. However, the stadium is now known exclusively as the “Arena Națională”, i.e. the “National Arena”. The new building was named after Lia Manoliu after its predecessor, the “Stadionul Național Lia Manoliu”, the old national stadium. It previously stood on the same site and was demolished in 2008.

Unlike the arena, it was a multi-purpose stadium. Its stands were not covered and the athletics facilities were located between the pitch and the stands. This meant that at the beginning of the millennium it no longer met the requirements for a venue for international soccer matches. In 2006, Max Bögl won the tender for the construction of the new national arena – which, however, had been planned quite differently at the time. However, the German company submitted an alternative project to the client, the city of Bucharest, which was much simpler and cheaper to build.

The National Arena bears unmistakable similarities to Frankfurt’s Waldstadion. This is no coincidence: the same team of general contractors, architects and engineers built the stadium on the Main between 2002 and 2005. The closable membrane roof in particular is almost a one-to-one replica of the construction in Frankfurt. As there, the roof is located in the large video cube above the pitch when folded up. It extends within 15 minutes when required. It then spans the area between the grandstand roofs. The stand roofs themselves are supported by a so-called pressure ring, which towers over the stadium like a crown. The ring rests on 40 steel pillars, which sit on the concrete construction of the grandstand ring.

The stands have two tiers. The architects designed the spectator area with seating shells in different shades of red, blue and yellow, the national colors of Romania. On the outside of the stadium, the verticality of the concrete columns supporting the stands defines the appearance of the building. The grassy embankment on which the arena stands is still a relic of the old national stadium. It mediates between the new building and the historic sports park that surrounds it. Large steps lead up the rampart. They make a visit to the National Arena a bit of a pilgrimage.

Find out more about the National Stadium Budapest. Here you can find an overview of the EURO 2021 stadiums.