- Time of past OR future Camino
- Olvidado/San Salvador/Primitivo 2019
For 2024 Pilgrims: €50,- donation = 1 year with no ads on the forum + 90% off any 2024 Guide. More here. (Discount code sent to you by Private Message after your donation) |
---|
I got into Santiago De Compostela on Thursday 10 October after walking to Oviedo on the San Salvador and then to SdC on the Primitivo. The Olvidado was without doubt the best and most spectacular of the 3. However, I was a little disappointed to be told I could not have the official Compostela as i had not walked an ‘official ‘ camino. It appears they don’t recognise the Olvidado. Never had the problem before when I have combined other caminos such as the VdlP/Sanabres or the Sureste with the Frances and then the Invierno.
Just been back to the office to try to understand exactly what the problem was. Initially they said there was something wrong because I had only been walking for 3 weeks! Explained I walk about an average of 40 km a day. Had all the stamps (luckily I even bothered to get 2 each day in the last 100 km which I haven’t done before) showed them the route and all my individual day’s accounts! So then he called the boss over who went through the same questions and then he eventually said it’s because the Olvidado is not an official route for them! I smiled and thanked them for their help all the time through this interrogation. The boss left and the guy helping me then filled out a Compostela and asked me for the distance- so alls well that ends well.Congratulations @MikeJS ! But what a pity to hear about not getting the Compostela?
So weird.
Maybe @t2andreo , @peregrina2000 or @VNwalking can shine a light on this situation?
Just been back to the office to try to understand exactly what the problem was.
So then he called the boss over who went through the same questions and then he eventually said it’s because the Olvidado is not an official route for them! I smiled and thanked them for their help all the time through this interrogation. The boss left and the guy helping me then filled out a Compostela and asked me for the distance- so alls well that ends well.
Must say I did not realise the Olvidado route had not been accepted as office. However, I would have walked it any way as it was so fantastic!
This is ridiculous. If you had started in Oviedo, you would be eligible for the Compostela. So the fact that you walked several hundred more kms than necessary disqualifies you? This is either a mistake or a very silly rule. Hoping that @t2andreo can shed some light here. But hey, don’t let it tarnish the glow. Btw, I should point out that I also walked the Olvidado this year and got a compostela with full explanation of my route.Just been back to the office to try to understand exactly what the problem was. Initially they said there was something wrong because I had only been walking for 3 weeks! Explained I walk about an average of 40 km a day. Had all the stamps (luckily I even bothered to get 2 each day in the last 100 km which I haven’t done before) showed them the route and all my individual day’s accounts! So then he called the boss over who went through the same questions and then he eventually said it’s because the Olvidado is not an official route for them! I smiled and thanked them for their help all the time through this interrogation. The boss left and the guy helping me then filled out a Compostela and asked me for the distance- so alls well that ends well.
Must say I did not realise the Olvidado route had not been accepted as office. However, I would have walked it any way as it was so fantastic!
I understand that totally and it really does not worry me. That’s why I smile and thank all through the process. But as others have said not only did I walk the lady 100km but I did walk the official Camino Primitivo so there really should not have been any problem to get a Compostela. Fortunately for me it’s the way that is important but I think my wife likes to see the Compostela to prove I wasn’t elsewhere!!I am glad that Mike eventually got his Compostela. In my experience, there are staff and volunteers who follow the LETTER of the rules, without deviation. Then there are others who follow the SPIRIT of the rules.
This latter group understand and consider the totality of the effort, the context, and the intention. In this particular instance, the Primitivo from Oviedo is well recognized. However, the Olvidado is not as well known.
It IS true that until the Jacobeo and Cathedral “officially” recognize a route does it become fully accepted for Compostela purposes. Then again, the full Olvidado does start at Bilbao and ends at Villafranca del Bierzo, not at Santiago. This is not the basis for formal route approval.
I obtained this information at:
El Camino Olvidado a Santiago
El camino Olvidado a Santiago, ofrece a los viajeros una experiencia única y auténtica. A lo largo de este camino, se encuentran pueblos.....www.elcaminoolvidado.com
This said, I accept that there might be another town/ pueblo lash-up that effects a detour towards Santiago earlier on.
To be a recognized Camino route, it is my understanding that the route must either end at Santiago, OR directly feed into a recognized Camino route that does end at Santiago. Examples would be the Aragones, Sanabres, or the other tributary routes that feed some of the major routes terminating at Santiago.
The Camino Olivdado, if I understand it correctly (having no direct experience), cuts a more or less diagonal line to the north of the Camino Frances. It effectively joins with the Norte at Bilbao, or with the Frances at Villafranca del Bierzo. Either way, it is sort of a highly-piggly route to get to Santiago, at least in my limited understanding.
This, I suspect, was the cause of Mike’s disconnect at the counter. I am glad it was resolved. But, I suspect this issue, in general, will worsen as more pilgrims seek creative ways to avoid crowding on the major pilgrimage routes over the coming years.
Pilgrims need to be mindful of how their new and creative routing will be interpreted at the Pilgrim Office. If you plan to walk on an indirect route, do plan to feed into one of the accepted routes that actually end at Santiago.
This way you can say you walked the Norte, Ingles, Frances, Sanabres, etc., but started from X on the tributary / feeder Y Camino Route. Many accepted routes follow this pattern, including the de la Plata and Invierno among others.
Planning ahead is a good thing. Do not presume that, just because you wandered about Spain like a pinball for several hundred Km, before ending up in Santiago, that the mere distance covered qualifies you for a Compostela. That issue is the basis for the formal rule printed on most credencials, that says you must have walked / cycled at least the final 100 / 200 km on any recognized route THAT ENDS AT SANTIAGO.
Hope this helps.
I don't understand this - why did he ask you for the distance? Had you asked for a Compostela and a distance certificate?So then he called the boss over who went through the same questions and then he eventually said it’s because the Olvidado is not an official route for them! I smiled and thanked them for their help all the time through this interrogation. The boss left and the guy helping me then filled out a Compostela and asked me for the distance- so alls well that ends well.
I don't understand this - why did he ask you for the distance? Had you asked for a Compostela and a distance certificate?
I am glad that Mike eventually got his Compostela. In my experience, there are staff and volunteers who follow the LETTER of the rules, without deviation. Then there are others who follow the SPIRIT of the rules.
This latter group understand and consider the totality of the effort, the context, and the intention. In this particular instance, the Primitivo from Oviedo is well recognized. However, the Olvidado is not as well known.
It IS true that until the Jacobeo and Cathedral “officially” recognize a route does it become fully accepted for Compostela purposes. Then again, the full Olvidado does start at Bilbao and ends at Villafranca del Bierzo, not at Santiago. This is not the basis for formal route approval.
I obtained this information at:
El Camino Olvidado a Santiago
El camino Olvidado a Santiago, ofrece a los viajeros una experiencia única y auténtica. A lo largo de este camino, se encuentran pueblos.....www.elcaminoolvidado.com
This said, I accept that there might be another town/ pueblo lash-up that effects a detour towards Santiago earlier on.
To be a recognized Camino route, it is my understanding that the route must either end at Santiago, OR directly feed into a recognized Camino route that does end at Santiago. Examples would be the Aragones, Sanabres, or the other tributary routes that feed some of the major routes terminating at Santiago.
The Camino Olivdado, if I understand it correctly (having no direct experience), cuts a more or less diagonal line to the north of the Camino Frances. It effectively joins with the Norte at Bilbao, or with the Frances at Villafranca del Bierzo. Either way, it is sort of a highly-piggly route to get to Santiago, at least in my limited understanding.
This, I suspect, was the cause of Mike’s disconnect at the counter. I am glad it was resolved. But, I suspect this issue, in general, will worsen as more pilgrims seek creative ways to avoid crowding on the major pilgrimage routes over the coming years.
Pilgrims need to be mindful of how their new and creative routing will be interpreted at the Pilgrim Office. If you plan to walk on an indirect route, do plan to feed into one of the accepted routes that actually end at Santiago.
This way you can say you walked the Norte, Ingles, Frances, Sanabres, etc., but started from X on the tributary / feeder Y Camino Route. Many accepted routes follow this pattern, including the de la Plata and Invierno among others.
Planning ahead is a good thing. Do not presume that, just because you wandered about Spain like a pinball for several hundred Km, before ending up in Santiago, that the mere distance covered qualifies you for a Compostela. That issue is the basis for the formal rule printed on most credencials, that says you must have walked / cycled at least the final 100 / 200 km on any recognized route THAT ENDS AT SANTIAGO.
Hope this helps.
Originally they only gave me a certificate of distance. After my discussion I got the Compostela. As I had both walked the last 100km and the Primitivo from start to finish I was confused as well. I think they had a confusion with giving me a Compostela for the whole 720km of the route. As I said before all ended fine. But it shows how confusing it can be f you don’t do a simple ‘official ‘ camino. However, it’s the rules and their rules so really not a problem for me.I think you’re thinking the same thing I am, Kathar1na. Mike, did they give you a compostela or a certificate of distance?
Ok, @t2, from one rule lover to another. The letter of the rule says you have to walk at least 100 km on an official camino route. Mike did that. Period. End of discussion. There is nothing to interpret here. I don’t see why it has become so complicated and convoluted.
Whether he drove, walked, or flew into Oviedo is totally beside the point.
I think we are all pretty chilled about this and I never made any criticism of the people doing their tasks. I was simply highlighting potential problems and specifically that the Olvidado is not and approved route. To reiterate I walk all of the Primitivo so there really should not have been any confusion. When I went back to try to understand what the reason was for not originally getting the Compostela it was complicated by their original distrust of me walking such a distance. However, at all times everyone was polite and cheerful.I recommend that we all chill. Consider volunteering to work at the counter, doing the job of trying to make sense of the various credencials that pilgrims drop on you. I am very OCD, keep my credencial in a waterproof pouch and protect it. All the entries in MY credencials are neat, orderly, and legible. You would not believe some of the tripe I have seen over the years...
Before we criticise what we THINK is a 'no brainer' I suggest walking a mile / km in the other guy's moccasins before making decisions. It is never as easy as it seems.
Also, in my direct experience, you might (or not) be surprised about how the most benign issue can quickly become a huge incident, solely from miscommunication or misunderstanding. Arguments about routings, distances, and Compostela eligibility are primary subjects of sometimes violent disagreements.
This is yet another reason to stop issuing Compostelas and to merely affix sellos to signify that one reached the destination. But, I digress...
Hope this helps.
I know that when I was there, there was someone “in charge” for each shift. This was back in the day when the vast majority of people working in the office were paid, and there were just a few volunteers, but I assume that is still the case.What I wonder is if as a general rule there is any recourse for someone who hits a snag like this in the Pilgrims Office. Is it possible to appeal a decision made in error like this?
I understand that feeling, @Bradypus, but as long as we are in the compostela rabbit hole (I’m starting to agree with Tom’s idea that the world would be better without them) but I think that it makes sense for the pilgrims office to have an official and limited list of starting points that qualify. I don’t think that means that anyone thinks you only became a pilgrim at Neda, any more then when you walk from Budapest to Santiago you became a pilgrim at Sarria — yet that is all the office cares about and recognizes.My last visit to the pilgrim office was after walking from San Andres de Teixido. Also not on a recognized route. After some initial hesitation I was told that I could have a Compostela because I had joined the Camino Ingles at Neda 102km from Santiago and I would be recorded as having begun my pilgrimage there. As I was not prepared to endorse the notion that I only became a pilgrim once I set foot on an approved route I declined that offer and left without a Compostela for that journey.
I disagree on this point. Over the years I have seen the Compostela rules grow gradually more narrow and restrictive. I have reluctantly accepted this. But the recent insistence on walking only an approved route marks a new and unacceptable qualitative shift in understanding: an endorsement of a changing definition of 'pilgrimage' which now places the emphasis mainly on the physical characteristics of the journey itself and not on its motivation and its increasingly nominal goal at the shrine of the Apostle. The Compostela testifies that the named person has visited the tomb of the Apostle in 'pietatis causa'. Is walking exclusively on an officially approved path for the final 100km of that journey really an essential demonstration of that religious or spiritual intent? What is it about the officially approved routes which adds that unique spiritual quality to one's journey which walking the same distance on a parallel but unblessed road would lack?but I think that it makes sense for the pilgrims office to have an official and limited list of starting points that qualify.
From the version of the credencial I was shown in November last yearThe requirements for obtaining a Compostela say nothing about a recognised route, only the requirement of at least walking the last 100 km. Has this changed? I vaguely remember having read a claim that words to that effect are in the newest editions of the S.A.M.I. Cathedral's own credential. If that is true, can someone post an image of the text?
What I wonder is if as a general rule there is any recourse for someone who hits a snag like this in the Pilgrims Office. Is it possible to appeal a decision made in error like this?
Off the top my head actually there are 3 official distances - Porto vía Coastal fully (I.e. Baiona, Vigo) 280, Porto vía Coastal then via Tui 260 and Porto vía Central fully 240. Don’t know how they calculate them though!I still wonder how they calculate the distance they write on the distance certificate. On the Camino Portugues from Porto to Santiago de Compostela there are different routes: the Central and the Coastal (with or without Litoral stages).
Starting and finishing point is the same, but Central route is 260 km, Coastal (or Litoral) is 280 km. Cannot find anywhere if they do consider this difference, or if they always put down 260 km because the central is the original route.
There could be other reasons. There's currently another recent drama on the topic "I didn't get my Compostela" doing the rounds on FB and amongst all the comments and opinions there is this line "The gentleman didn’t have good English and we didn’t have good Spanish".I have the distinct feeling that the pilgrim's office have some mysterious "unofficial rules".
@Bradypus, you had mentioned this story a few times before but this is the first time that I get a clearer understanding of what happened there. While I admire your principled stand I still wonder whether there wasn't a misunderstanding or a lack of knowledge or insufficient training on this particular staff's or volunteer's side. OK, fair enough, the last 100 km have to be done on one of the official routes but even if San Andres de Teixido isn't in their database as a starting point beyond those 100 km, they could have entered your starting point as "Resto de Galicia" and "Otro camino" for their statistics. 326 brave souls were registered by the Oficina in 2018 as having followed an "other camino".My last visit to the pilgrim office was after walking from San Andres de Teixido. Also not on a recognized route. After some initial hesitation I was told that I could have a Compostela because I had joined the Camino Ingles at Neda 102km from Santiago and I would be recorded as having begun my pilgrimage there. As I was not prepared to endorse the notion that I only became a pilgrim once I set foot on an approved route I declined that offer and left without a Compostela for that journey.
That might have been an option but it was not suggested at the time. It would still not address my basic objection to the demand that the final 100km is walked on an approved route. Do you define a pilgrimage by its route or by its destination? Historically the Compostela has been given to mark a visit to the shrine of the Apostle. Now it is being given only after walking a specific path ending in Santiago. The distinction may seem trivial but I do not find it so.OK, fair enough, the last 100 km have to be done on one of the official routes but even if San Andres de Teixido isn't in their database as a starting point beyond those 100 km, they could have entered your starting point as "Resto de Galicia" and "Otro camino" for their statistics.
Wonderful. And respect...just...wow.I get to Santiago on 25 November vía the Arles, Aragonés, Ebro, Castellano-Aragonés, Lana, Olvidado, Manzanal, Vïa de la Plata, Zamorano-Portugués and Sanabrés and don't get my tenth compostela, well, I'll be quite sad.
I fully agree that a pilgrimage is about the destination and intention and not how you get there. They gave that up, not when they limited it to specific paths, but when they said the last 100 km had to be walked and that people who took the bus to Santiago don't qualify. That was when it ceased to be about the destination and intention. This last is but a variation in a theme that has been around for a long time.That might have been an option but it was not suggested at the time. It would still not address my basic objection to the demand that the final 100km is walked on an approved route. Do you define a pilgrimage by its route or by its destination? Historically the Compostela has been given to mark a visit to the shrine of the Apostle. Now it is being given only after walking a specific path ending in Santiago. The distinction may seem trivial but I do not find it so.
I agree. A very unfortunate decision which has distorted the understanding of pilgrimage ever since. This latest development simply reinforces that shift in understanding in a way which I personally regard as being the final straw.They gave that up, not when they limited it to specific paths, but when they said the last 100 km had to be walked and that people who took the bus to Santiago don't qualify.
I suspect that the person behind the counter took note of all the other sellos and simply lost the plot. The Compostela would have been based on the route followed for the final 100 km into Santiago.
And yet in its annual statistics, the Pilgrims' Office lists people who began their journey in Russia, Australia, Egypt, resto Africa...Presumably there are not approved routes that commence in all these places, so the idea of starting at a non-standard point of origin surely cannot be a foreign concept to the authorities.
I hope not, anyway. I'm thinking of starting my next trip either at the Cathédrale Saint-Pierre in Geneva or St James' Church in Dublin, and I'm not sure that either of those will elicit many nods of recognition in the Rúa das Carretas.
It is not, but I doubt that distances from obscure places is a high priority for the Office. The boss probably just instructs volunteers to do a Google Map walking distance query, and calls it a day. When I am a cranky old man, I plan to argue with the clerk for an hour because the mileage is wrong for my variant to Calzadilla out of Sahagun...the idea of starting at a non-standard point of origin surely cannot be a foreign concept to the authorities.
Something similar to that very thing occurred to me at the counter last October. The volunteer was a bit confused about the placement of a few sellos which was - due to the inattention of a busy bar owner and myself - skipped a couple of blank spaces. This was after Sarria.
At the next two stops, I told the sello givers to go ahead and stamp in the blank spaces left above. So the sellos and their locations were out of sequence. I guess that for the volunteer, it was more of a question related to puzzlement, rather than any concern over my having followed the 'rules' themselves.
Anyway, I was a bit surprised that this level of attention was paid to sellos and locations. It wasn't any big deal; it just made me realize that the Credencial does get more than a short cursory glance
I had a similar experience last week when explaining that I'd walked the Camino Mendocino, Camino de Madrid and part of the Camino Francés. I was told in no uncertain terms that the Camino Francés was the only recognised part of my walk.
I didn't feel inclined to argue, as it wasn't a particularly empathetic encounter. However I had promised the Camino Mendocino folk that I'd declare myself as having walked this recently recognised route, so it was a little disappointing not to be able to do that (or even to have the Camino Mendocino or Madrid mentioned on a distance certificate). Not a disaster, though as I don't usually bother with such formalities any more!
On a more general note - I wonder if this situation impacts on pilgrim office statistics for the smaller routes? And does that have a knock-on effect for the amigos groups who try to demonstrate pilgrim numbers for the routes they work hard to develop and maintain?
Well, I can't speak for ther countries that you've mentioned but as for Russia it is on one of the Camino routes. I live in Kaliningrad, on the coast of the Baltic sea, and one of the routes starting in Lithuania passes through Kaliningrad (former Koenigsberg) and goes to Gdansk in Poland, then further west to Germany along the sea coast. It's called Via Baltica, and is easy to walk now with the electronic visas to Kaliningrad introduced this July. There is also another official option from here - Camino Polonia, which is a bit further south in Poland. And I've heard about that Russian guy from Kazan, Tatarstan who cycled all the way from there to Santiago last year. I am hoping to start my walk from home some day as well.And yet in its annual statistics, the Pilgrims' Office lists people who began their journey in Russia, Australia, Egypt, resto Africa...Presumably there are not approved routes that commence in all these places, so the idea of starting at a non-standard point of origin surely cannot be a foreign concept to the authorities.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?