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

林堡和下哈尔特大教堂的废墟是阿尔卑斯山以北规模最大、质量最高的早期罗马式圣餐建筑遗迹之一。1025年，后来的皇帝康拉德二世与施佩尔大教堂同时进行了奠基石的铺设。作为罗马式的柱式大教堂，修道院教堂可以被理解为与斯派尔的码头大教堂的建筑对应物。然而，一个更详细的比较是反对的调查不足的修道院教堂。即使在最基本的建筑设计问题上，很大程度上假设的重建也是矛盾的。1953年的最后一次调查的结果远远落后于同类研究，也从未发表过。从那时起，对这座建筑的研究停滞不前，而二手文献中往往毫无根据的假设却得到了巩固。因此，这个时代最雄心勃勃的建筑项目之一的影响和依赖至今仍不清楚。该项目的中心目标是提出一种新的、符合当前科学要求的建筑历史考察。从有条理的角度来看，该项目应该能够高度精确地测量建筑，并借助最先进的技术进行全面检查，而就在几年前，这些技术还需要完整的脚手架和大量人员的部署。在一个可管理的24个月期间，建筑历史将在建筑发现的基础上更新，并结合历史文本和图像来源，明确区分事实和假设。建筑考古的结果也应该超越纯粹的专家圈子，以赋予这座关键建筑在建筑史上应有的地位。

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.