Building Archaeology at the Ruin of the Benedictine Abbey of Limburg an der Haardt

哈尔特河畔林布尔格大教堂的废墟是阿尔卑斯山以北早期罗马式宗教建筑最大、最高质量的见证之一。1025年奠基石的铺设是由后来的皇帝康拉德二世在施派尔大教堂的同时进行的。作为一个罗马式的圆柱长方形教堂，修道院教堂可以被理解为施派尔码头长方形教堂的建筑对应物。然而，一个更详细的比较是反对的修道院教堂的调查不足。即使在建筑设计的最基本问题上，大部分假设的重建也是矛盾的。1953年的最后一次调查结果远远落后于可比研究，从未发表。从那时起，对这座建筑的研究就停滞不前了，而二手文献中往往毫无根据的假设则得到了巩固。因此，这个时代最雄心勃勃的建设项目之一的影响和依赖性至今仍不清楚。该项目的中心目标是提出一个新的，当前的科学要求适当的，建设历史的检查。从系统的角度来看，该项目应该能够在最先进的技术的帮助下对建筑进行高度精确的测量和全面的检查，就在几年前，这将与完整的脚手架和大量的人员部署有关。在24个月的可管理时间内，建筑历史将根据建筑调查结果以及历史文本和图像来源进行更新，其中明确区分了事实和假设。建筑考古学的结果也应该超越纯粹的专家圈子，以使这一关键建筑在建筑史上发挥应有的作用。

The ruin of the basilica of Limburg an der Haardt is among the largest and most high-quality testimonies of early Romanesque sacral architecture north of the Alps. The laying of the cornerstone in 1025 was carried out by the later Emperor Konrad II at the same time as the Speyer Cathedral. As a column basilica of the Roman type, the abbey church can be understood as an architectural counterpart to the pier basilica in Speyer. However, a more detailed comparison is opposed by a insufficient investigation of the monastery church. Even in the most fundamental questions of architectural design, the largely hypothetical reconstructions are contradictory. The last investigation in 1953 stayed in its results far behind comparable studies and was never published. Since then, the research on the building stagnates, while the often unfounded assumptions in the secondary literature solidify. Therefore the influences and dependency of one of the most ambitious construction projects of this era remain unclear to this day. The central goal of the project is to present a new, current scientific requirements appropriate, building-historical examination. From a methodical point of view, the project should enable highly accurate surveying of the construction and a comprehensive examination with the aid of state-of-the-art technology, which, just a few years ago, would have been associated with complete scaffolding and considerable personell deployment. In a manageable period of 24 months, the building history is to be updated on the basis of the constructional findings in conjunction to the historical text and image sources, which clearly distinguishes between facts and hypotheses. The results of the building archaeology should be presented also beyond the circle of pure specialists in order to give this key building its proper role in architectural history.