TAMDRUP KIRKE - Nationalmuseet

5172
two small straight­edged peepholes, a kind of
‘squints’ placed at different levels, but symmetrically
around the middle of the altar. The function
of these peepholes is difficult to understand, but
they should perhaps be viewed in the light of a
similar situation in Sahl Church, where the peepholes
were connected with the secondary erection
of a golden altar. The apse was demolished
shortly afterwards, when the chancel was extended
with a larger sacristy towards the east. With
this expansion the partition wall was retained,
and at the beginning of the 1600s – when the
Renaissance altarpiece of the church was set up
– it was given two new doors, flanking the extended
altar (fig. 49).
In a comprehensive restoration in 1933­34 (architect:
Viggo Norn) the altar niches of the sideaisles
were re­established and a new stairwell was
built on the south side of the tower. The church
exterior was refurbished in 1995­98 (architect:
Mogens Svenning); the same architect carried
out interior refurbishing in 2001­02.
Architectural background: In older research the
building was dated to the middle of the eleventh
century, and much was made of its ‘primitive’ features.
With a dating to c. 1125 the church must be
assigned to the second generation of the Danish
stone churches, built at a time when the construction
of the cathedrals in Lund and Odense, for
example, was well advanced. It is clearly younger
than the Church of Our Lady in Roskilde, which
– although it is not necessarily a direct model –
is a good representative of the large three­aisled
churches that had already been erected and consecrated
in Denmark when the craftsmen went to
work in Tamdrup. Another parallel is the church
in Asmild near Viborg, which is however not as
well preserved as the church in Tamdrup.
Technically speaking it exhibits fine construction
work; the architectural design is perhaps less
convincing. The arcade walls undeniably have a
strangely stocky appearance – even when one allows
for the fact that the floor of the nave was
originally 30­40 cm lower than at present.
It should not surprise us that the architect appears
to have used one of the standard measuring
units of the age (a ‘foot’ of 28.5­29 cm), nor that
ENGLISH SUMMARY
the more complex parts of the construction, the
nave with its regular rhythm of pillar and arcade,
can be broken down into simple dimensions and
proportions (fig. 16).
It is reasonable to believe that the architecture
and the murals were to some extent coordinated
– indeed the ‘primitive’ look of the building can
perhaps be explained precisely on the basis of
consideration for and interplay with the paintings
that soon followed. It may for example have been
the intention to create space for the two continuous
friezes above the low­slung arches, while the
placing of the individual scenes may have determined
the placing of the windows (Crucifixion
in the middle of the north wall, fig. 58) and the
establishment of the peculiar opening above the
chancel arch. The number of pillars hints that
there may have been symbolic considerations behind
the planning: two rows with six pillars each
(the twelve apostles), separated by seven arcades,
another important figure in Christian symbolism.
MURALS. The church has murals from two periods.
Their presence was earliest ascertained in
1869 and they were mainly uncovered in 1934,
1973 and 2001­02.
1) The oldest paintings, from c. 1125, were executed
shortly after the completion of the basilica,
and must have covered most of the interior of the
building. The main work preserved is the representation
in the chancel arch of the sacrifice of
Cain and Abel (figs. 53­54) as a eucharistic motif
associated with the entrance to the chancel. Related
to this, on the east wall of the nave, are the
remains of an angel standing north of the chancel
arch (fig. 55) probably honouring the now lost
holy rood (cf. fig. 56).
The remaining decorations are above the Late
Medieval arches on the upper walls, but only
the preliminary drawing has been preserved. In
the chancel one can make out some architectural
features, but otherwise the traces of painting
can only be seen on the central nave walls, where
there were once two friezes, the upper one a cycle
of scenes from the life of Christ below a broad
key­pattern border. This appears to have begun
in the easternmost part of the south wall. In the