- Time of past OR future Camino
- Frances 15,16,18
VdlP 23, Invierno 23, Fisterra 23
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) |
---|
HI @Robo
You may like to add the Aragones - from Col du Somport to Puenta la Reina - to your list of possibilities. It's a wonderful path.
For information on history, geology, art ... you might be interested in the book The Pilgrimage Road to Santiago, or maybe you already have it. I have a kindle version. It covers both of the routes across the Pyrenees. Part 1 chapters 1 to 15 deal with the section from the Col du Somport to Puenta la Reina.
Happy planning.
Pilgrimage Road to Santiago: The Complete Cultural Handbook - GITLITZ, DAVID M. | 9780312254162 | Amazon.com.au | Books
Pilgrimage Road to Santiago: The Complete Cultural Handbook [GITLITZ, DAVID M.] on Amazon.com.au. *FREE* shipping on eligible orders. Pilgrimage Road to Santiago: The Complete Cultural Handbookwww.amazon.com.au
LOL, all I can add is that I spent a considerable amount of time once to find out from which moment of time onwards the whole long road from say Pamplona to Santiago started to be called Camino Francés but I never found an answer. I just know for certain that the medieval pilgrims never wrote that they had walked the Camino Francés or the Camino Primitivo let alone a Camino combo. They wrote that they went to Saint James in Galicia and that was it, mostly. Oh, and one of them famously wrote about the Upper Road and the Lower Road but nobody speaks about that today and both are neither labelled nor waymarked or promoted as such.to @Kathar1na
The upper and the lower road are described here for example:Upper road El Nortr
Lower Road Francès
?
Just a guess
TaThe upper and the lower road are described here for example:
https://www.peterrobins.co.uk/itineraries/kuenig
When I imagine regal journeys such as that of Alfonzo II, I imagine the main entourage preceded several days earlier by his scouting party. This would have been run by a major domo or highly placed deputy charged with seeking out suitable accommodation along the route. I also suspect that there would have been considerable honour amongst local families in hosting the king, albeit with the attendant downside that not all the costs might have been recoverable. So the major domo might have been more engaged with the challenge of selecting which was the best of several places on offer, rather than finding any at all.Alfonso II may very well be the first pilgrim, or at least the first one important enough to be recorded. I don't believe the precise route he took from Oviedo was recorded, though. So the Primitivo is someone's best guess approximation and he may or may not have gone through the towns along the Primitivo, never mind along the tracks and roads we follow.
I suspect that pilgrims took many roads and paths along northern Spain. Even with the route marking, maps, and standardization we have now, think of all the alternate paths there are (e.g. the three out of Villafranca del Bierzo). Also, the roads medieval pilgrims most frequently walked upon probably ended up as highways today, precisely the roads that we are steered clear of.
That said, the Camino Frances in general, from town to town, is the best documented of the early routes with the Codex Calixtinus. And scholarly research seems to indicate that the Somport Pass to the Aragones start to the Frances was more popular in the early middle ages before it was overtaken by the Cize Pass to the west.
Heh.
I am curious which of the routes that you have walked have provided these characteristics, and which have not.I prefer routes that have a long history and tradition of Pilgrimage. They have a different feel and energy for me somehow. Maybe it's just in my head?
I am curious which of the routes that you have walked have provided these characteristics, and which have not.
Is it the historical art, architecture, and pilgrimy landmarks or symbolism? Is it the frequency of albergues and camino afficionados? Or is it your personal interest in the history of the region?
HI @Robo
You may like to add the Aragones - from Col du Somport to Puenta la Reina - to your list of possibilities. It's a wonderful path.
For information on history, geology, art ... you might be interested in the book The Pilgrimage Road to Santiago, or maybe you already have it. I have a kindle version. It covers both of the routes across the Pyrenees. Part 1 chapters 1 to 15 deal with the section from the Col du Somport to Puenta la Reina.
Happy planning.
Pilgrimage Road to Santiago: The Complete Cultural Handbook - GITLITZ, DAVID M. | 9780312254162 | Amazon.com.au | Books
Pilgrimage Road to Santiago: The Complete Cultural Handbook [GITLITZ, DAVID M.] on Amazon.com.au. *FREE* shipping on eligible orders. Pilgrimage Road to Santiago: The Complete Cultural Handbookwww.amazon.com.au
On the VDLP and the Mozarabe, I always thought I was on an older well travelled route with a history of pilgrimage, even if the numbers weren't as high as the Frances. I just wasn't constantly reminded of it.The VdlP. Not much. 3/10
Thanks I'll have a look at that thread.On the VDLP and the Mozarabe, I always thought I was on an older well travelled route with a history of pilgrimage, even if the numbers weren't as high as the Frances. I just wasn't constantly reminded of it.
One thread that had considerable discussion of historical numbers was this one. It has a lot of references to historical sources and it also points out the unreliability of many of such sources.
Exactly. And that raises the question how the “most traditional routes from a historical perspective“ can be defined. I would not know how to answer this question. Perhaps it ought to be rephrased along the lines of what makes a recreated Camino pilgrimage route attractive today and why.Alfonso II may very well be the first pilgrim, or at least the first one important enough to be recorded. I don't believe the precise route he took from Oviedo was recorded, though
Nor I.And that raises the question how the “most traditional routes from a historical perspective“ can be defined. I would not know how to answer this question.
Indeed !! (with a small number of local exceptions, such as the road up to Montserrat for example, and some other roads or short sections thereof laid down for specific pilgrim purposes)Christian pilgrims walked on normal roads which they shared with all sorts of travellers, they did not create specific pilgrimage roads.
Oh, I'd say 4th to 18th Centuries, between Christianity being decriminalised by Constantine and the post-Renaissance attempts to sideline it.Christian pilgrimage saw its heydays in Europe during the 11th to 15th century.
Yes -- we do !!They walked all over the place.
When I walked VDLP, I was very mindful that this was a north-south route that did not develop as a Camino pilgrimage, given its destination was not Santiago de Compostela. But, throughout centuries, pilgrims used this road to travel from the south of Spain northward in order to reach Santiago. The Roman history of this route was of keenest interest to me right from the beginning, in Seville, where relics repurposed from Italica through time were readily visible all around the city: in the royal palace, in bars, on street corners, in the Palace of the Countess of Lebrija. I'd say my main purpose for choosing this route was to learn about and soak up Roman history of this walk. I can go on and on with my enthusiasm here, but I'll diverge.The Plata and the Lana were transhumation routes
On point @Tincatinker . Over the centuries, Pilgrims used multiple routes to get there.Does anyone else but me think it odd that a pilgrimage to the bones of one who may have touched the divine should be prescribed by guidebook writers, App compilers and tourist offices? I always thought, have always thought, that the purpose of pilgrimage was pilgrimage. All the other stuff is just stuff.
We can all try to track down the perfect Albergue or Orujo depending on our inclination but, surely, the point was the bones? Or have I lost the plot entirely?
But so far, you name only one route that appealed to you in this way. As @Rebekah Scott said, the Camino Frances is in a class apart, for many reasons. I question whether any other routes will support your theory about sheer numbers of pilgrims being the critical factor in their appeal to you in the 21st century. Also, be aware of confirmation bias when you look for historical evidence to support a theory!I just find those most travelled over time, to have a special appeal........
Who said there is anything logical about this ......But so far, you name only one route that appealed to you in this way. As @Rebekah Scott said, the Camino Frances is in a class apart, for many reasons. I question whether any other routes will support your theory about sheer numbers of pilgrims being the critical factor in their appeal to you in the 21st century. Also, be aware of confirmation bias when you look for historical evidence to support a theory!
When I walked the Camino de Madrid, long stretches of it were marked as Via Pecuaria (for livestock movement).When I walked VDLP, I was very mindful that this was a north-south route that did not develop as a Camino pilgrimage, given its destination was not Santiago de Compostela. But, throughout centuries, pilgrims used this road to travel from the south of Spain northward in order to reach Santiago. The Roman history of this route was of keenest interest to me right from the beginning, in Seville, where relics repurposed from Italica through time were readily visible all around the city: in the royal palace, in bars, on street corners, in the Palace of the Countess of Lebrija. I'd say my main purpose for choosing this route was to learn about and soak up Roman history of this walk. I can go on and on with my enthusiasm here, but I'll diverge.
In reading placards along the way, I learned of the transhumation aspect of the Camino Real that paralleled VDLP in that it was a route for livestock movement between the north and south as seasonal temperatures gave reason for this movement. I found this intriguing and chalked it all up to learning something new about history of Spain.
Well, now with Robo's OP and dick bird's comment, I've just spent a couple of hours spiraling through varied online rabbit holes, reading and learning about transhumation in Europe. A UNESCO website has a beautiful 10min. video on transhumation in the Med. and the Alps which now gives me a visual of the roads / paths I had seen -beyond what I had read on placards- on my VDLP walk.
Perhaps my post doesn't quite fit with the sentiment of the OP, but today my VDLP pilgrimage has now swollen with richness with my new-found knowledge.
Thank you Robo and dick bird!
I would have thought so too. And once upon a time so did the cathedral and pilgrim office. But now it is not enough that you visit the tomb of the Apostle to be recognised as a pilgrim. As a pilgrim on foot unless you follow one of the cathedral's prescribed routes then your journey will not be recorded as a pilgrimage and you will not receive a Compostela. The last time I asked for a Compostela I was given a ticking-off for starting off-piste and not on an approved route. Apparently the official line is that walking someone else's line on the map really does make the difference between being a pilgrim or not...Does anyone else but me think it odd that a pilgrimage to the bones of one who may have touched the divine should be prescribed by guidebook writers, App compilers and tourist offices? I always thought, have always thought, that the purpose of pilgrimage was pilgrimage. All the other stuff is just stuff.
If the question is which route has the first documented pilgrimage it is indeed the Primitivo, the King of Oviedo made the first recorded visit to Santiago to confirm that the grave of St James was officially accurate. His route is now called the Primitivo. He financially supported the shrine . I believe that the Camino Ingles from A’ Corunna to Santiago was probable the most used by Western Europeans due to the wine trade . With the coming of the Crusades the Camino France gained prominence.The oldest Christian pilgrimage routes in Spain, short local ones excepted, are Cádiz > Rome (and the secondary routes attached to it, including those joining it via Catalonia and the Eastern Pyrenees towards Perpignan) ; and Western/Northern Spain & Portugal > Rome via more or less the French Piémont Way >> Béziers, albeit not on the current French route, and its own subsidiary routes.
The newest routes in Spain are the ones leading to Fátima, as it really is only just starting to become a destination for foot pilgrimages beginning outside of Portugal -- but there's a Madrid > Fátima and a Burgos > Fátima -- though most of Burgos > Fátima is actually on the Lisbon > Rome Way, so "newest" is quite relative.
As to the history of the establishment of the various routes to Santiago with relation to the Reconquista, hard to tell. The Primitivo is not really older than the Francès, as in years when relationships were better, Iberian Muslims would not impede the passage of Christian pilgrims, so that even very early on some would take what eventually became the Francès.
The Catalan Way is quite old, as it is a route to Rome that has additionally become a Camino de Santiago and an Ignatian Way, plus a route to Montserrat which is a major pilgrimage destination in its own right. Similar is likely true of the Camino de Castilla y Aragón.
It's true anyway that the first Caminos tended to be Ways to Rome & Jerusalem walked in "reverse", so that the Roman roads that the Francès is based around would have been Ways to Rome long before they ever became a Way to Compostela -- though Lugo and Ourense would have been the "starting" points for it in Galicia.
Conversely then, that means that the newer Camino routes are those that are not sensible Ways to Rome, so ones like the Madrid, Sureste, VDLP, Português, Mozarabe and so on, despite being historic, are not as old as the Francès and Primitivo/Norte, the Catalan, and so on that are Ways of both St. Peter and St. James. Another older one is the Vasco Interior, as some pilgrims would head to Rome via Burgos > Vitoria > Irun > Hendaye > Bayonne.
The hospitalera at the albergue in St Jean de Luz declared that I and an Australian pilgrim were tourists because we started our walk in Biarritz and skipped part of the route from Bayonne.The last time I asked for a Compostela I was given a ticking-off for starting off-piste and not on an approved route
That is not correct -- the VAST majority of pilgrims to the Tomb of the Apostle have not travelled to the Cathedral on any Camino.But now it is not enough that you visit the tomb of the Apostle to be recognised as a pilgrim.
We've talked about this, including in person, and it's clear that the individual volunteer on that occasion made a mistake.As a pilgrim on foot unless you follow one of the cathedral's prescribed routes then your journey will not be recorded as a pilgrimage and you will not receive a Compostela. The last time I asked for a Compostela I was given a ticking-off for starting off-piste and not on an approved route.
The pilgrimage routes from Spain & Portugal to Rome and Jerusalem are centuries older than the Primitivo.If the question is which route has the first documented pilgrimage it is indeed the Primitivo
You may have misunderstood what howardd5 was saying. The Primitivo route is without any shadow of a doubt the earliest recorded pilgrimage route to Santiago de Compostela. As for defining what is or is not a pilgrimage, apart from the fact that the Roman Catholic church has no monopoly on pilgrimages or their definition, that is getting dangerously close to asserting what is or is not a pilgrim, and we all know the rules regarding that.The pilgrimage routes from Spain & Portugal to Rome and Jerusalem are centuries older than the Primitivo.
I fully accept the cathedral's right to set its own criteria for granting a Compostela. I just happen to disagree profoundly with the understanding of pilgrimage which those criteria represent. So I am no longer interested in meeting those particular conditions and receiving a Compostela at the end of my journeys.It is also worth reminding everyone that the chapter of Santiago cathedral has its own criteria for the issuing of a compostela, as they have a perfect right to do.
A Coruña certainly did trade with western Europe, especially the British Isles, but was never that important as a pilgrimage route. Most of the wine imported into England came from the south of France until various wars put a stop to it after which the English aristocracy, unsurprisingly, developed a taste for ´port wine´ laced with brandy to stop it going off on the longer sea voyage from Oporto, hence the name. The vast majority of mediaeval pilgrims heading for Santiago entered Spain via France, and so followed what is now known as the Francés, but this was also an important east-west trade route. And just to set the cat amongst the pigeons, Alfonso II may have had his own good reasons for recognising those remains as being authentic.If the question is which route has the first documented pilgrimage it is indeed the Primitivo, the King of Oviedo made the first recorded visit to Santiago to confirm that the grave of St James was officially accurate. His route is now called the Primitivo. He financially supported the shrine . I believe that the Camino Ingles from A’ Corunna to Santiago was probable the most used by Western Europeans due to the wine trade . With the coming of the Crusades the Camino France gained prominence.
I think I can relate to that.I fully accept the cathedral's right to set its own criteria for granting a Compostela. I just happen to disagree profoundly with the understanding of pilgrimage which those criteria represent. So I am no longer interested in meeting those particular conditions and receiving a Compostela at the end of my journeys.
Making a counterpoint is not to misunderstand the original point.You may have misunderstood what howardd5 was saying.
That has been contested by others in this very thread ; in that it's the earliest recorded Santiago pilgrimage, but that the "Primitivo" as currently laid down is not necessarily the precise route that he followed.The Primitivo route is without any shadow of a doubt the earliest recorded pilgrimage route to Santiago de Compostela.
I said nothing at all about what is "not" a pilgrimage.As for defining what is or is not a pilgrimage
Sorry, but as to the question of Credenciales provided or not provided by the Catholic Church in Santiago de Compostela, this is of practical pertinence to pilgrims in this place, and for their practical purposes and expectations.apart from the fact that the Roman Catholic church has no monopoly on pilgrimages or their definition, that is getting dangerously close to asserting what is or is not a pilgrim, and we all know the rules regarding that.
Oh sure -- but it's still not the oldest pilgrimage route in Spain.My humble assertion is that pieces of the Primitivo are also historical.
What leads you to believe the Primitivo is the same route he followed. We know that the starting and ending points are the same, but there are many ways to get from Point A to Point B. Is there any historical record of the route he followed and the towns or villages he passed through? If not, it seems to be a stretch to assume we are following his same route.If the question is which route has the first documented pilgrimage it is indeed the Primitivo, the King of Oviedo made the first recorded visit to Santiago to confirm that the grave of St James was officially accurate. His route is now called the Primitivo. He financially supported the shrine . I believe that the Camino Ingles from A’ Corunna to Santiago was probable the most used by Western Europeans due to the wine trade . With the coming of the Crusades the Camino France gained prominence.
Moorish slavers as far north as the British Isles and into the late 18th Century.It isn't like there were Moorish corsairs wreaking piracy in the Atlantic
I don't think anyone in this thread is anywhere asserting that pieces of the Primitivo are not also historical. But there is quite a distance between the assertion that the Primitivo goes through places that pilgrims at various times in history walked through and that it follows the path that Alfonso II took between Oviedo and Santiago and is thus the route of the "first pilgrimage".Quite true that the Primitivo laid down in 1993 is not the precise route used by medieval pilgrims. Leaving aside the question of the historical accuracy of every step on the Frances...
...is there a historically based counterclaim that Oviedo was not the starting point for Alfonso II, and that he caused a church to be built in what became Santiago?
...is there a historically based counterclaim that the monastery in Corellana was not a stopping place for pilgrims from the 1100s?
...is there a historically based counterclaim that the hospital in Salas didnt originally date to 1405?
...is there a historically based counterclaim that Tineo was not mandated as a stopping point for pilgrims ( along with the monastery at Obono) since the 1200s?
...is there a historically based counterclaim that the hospital ruins on Los Hospitales are not what they claim to be?
...and Lugo was established significantly prior to any Camino.
My point? Some of the claimed history of points along what is now the Primitivo predates or co- dates the Codex. While the entire route may not be hallowed ground from the pilgrims passing by, some of it is.
The OP wanted to walk in historical steps. My humble assertion is that pieces of the Primitivo are also historical.
///stepping down from soapbox ///
And they started with the Crusades pushing people out of the Ingles and to the Frances as was implied?Moorish slavers as far north as the British Isles and into the late 18th Century.
So yes, it is.
eh, hard to properly discuss that without discussing religion, as even so many Centuries later, the discussion could get heated.And they started with the Crusades pushing people out of the Ingles and to the Frances as was implied?
Nope, the Ingles and a lot of the Norte fell into disuse when Henry VIII, Cromwell and Cranmer brought about the Reformation and amongst other acts effectively banned pilgrimage. Ships had sailed from all along the southern coasts of the UK and Eire to make landfall along the Northern coast of Spain, not just Coruna but any sound harbour from Bilbao on. Pilgrims walked from where they made landfall. Coruna was a popular but expensive destination, a long voyage and little prospect of complimentary trade. Several ship owners in my home port were effectively bankrupted by the Reformation which left them without a lucrative trade.And they started with the Crusades pushing people out of the Ingles and to the Frances as was implied?
It is an interesting video about the history of the route construction, how much was (or wasn't) on actual Vías Romanas, how much was on vía pecuaria, etc., and some of the misconceptions about the routing of modern highways and footpaths. He says very little about pilgrim usage.the presenter looks at the history of the VdlP route.
Very interesting -- one thing, he isn't making the proper distinction between major Roman roads and minor ones ; so when he says that the Roman road is found basically between Malaga and Salamanca, this means Major Roman road.Ah. I found the video I was referring to above, where the presenter looks at the history of the VdlP route.
From video description: Today the entire corridor is promoted for tourism and has even become the Camino de Santiago, so that tourists are convinced of traveling a path with a notable historical entity, which is uncertain.
If you want some English pilgrimage routes with a long history take a look at the Peddars Way, linking to The Ridgeway and of course the South and North Downs Ways. How else do you think all those pilgrims from Europe got to Salisbury Plain and that vast Megalithic sacramental landscapeWhere I live in England, along the edge of the South Downs Way there are numerous hill forts from way back linked by old tracks. I think we want a pilgrimage to be a route to a place of vernaration ? or of special significance to somebody ?
Indeed. Interesting to follow this thread.It's fascinating stuff -- and thanks @Robo for initiating the discussion of it !!
Some are named that way, for sure. Others are named for the land they pass through (e.g. Camino Aragonés). Others for where they start (Camino de Madrid). The Via de la Plata has a different naming origin, in the name of a Roman road that went along more or less the same route. Since there is no central authority for the Caminos, there isn't a lot of consistency.I'd always assumed, rightly or wrongly that the names of the routes we use today were named after the people who came along them towards Santiago. Ingles for my mob, Frances .. for the French etc...
The name is a corruption of a Mediaeval colloquial name for it, meaning something like Cobbled Road or Stoney Road.The Via de la Plata has a different naming origin, in the name of a Roman road that went along more or less the same route.
The longest tradition of pilgrimage as we understand it would be the classic French Way. That is, contemporary pilgrims doing contemporary stuff. After the revival of the Camino in the late 20th century, pilgrims were basically walking the French Way, and on the shoulder of highways (my experience in 1994).I'm planning future Caminos, and have come to the conclusion that I prefer routes that have a long history and tradition of Pilgrimage. They have a different feel and energy for me somehow. Maybe it's just in my head?
The Primitivo I think was one of the first?
Others perhaps more recently created.
In searching online I was hoping to find a source that might give a brief history of the various routes.
But no luck so far.
Perhaps other Forum members might know of such a resource?
I think the earliest description of a route commonly walked by Pilgrims was the Codex Calixtinus, and the routes it describes in Spain we now call the Aragones and the Frances. The Primitivo claims to be the oldest route, on the basis that the "first pilgrim", Alfonso II, went from Oviedo to Santiago, although I don't think the precise route he took was documented.I thought the Olvidado was the oldest route to Santiago…
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?