San Fernando church question

[Jake]

Yes, the grey walls are the early church walls, on the left (west), and the larger rectangular outlined walls are the late 1800's construction, the present cathedral building. Today, if you drive around the building, you'll see the western half of the smaller early church sticking out of the back of the cathedral to the west. Inside, you'll see it as the narrower area at the west end of the church, opposite the main entrance, where the altar stands today.

The dotted lines on the plan show where the foundations of the front half of the early church remain under the floor of the cathedral, and the grey walls in the excavation units show where these foundations and lowest wall sections were found by our excavatioins.

Notice TP 16 and TP 18, right at the front of the old church. Those two units are against the front wall of the building, and the little grey square in the southwest corner of 18 and the northwest corner of 16 are the corners of the base of the carved frame around the main doorway that you can see in the photographs of the front of the church.

Jake

[Donald Hash]

Thank you for that! -- I recall being outside to the west and telling my wife that there was a vague familiarity about that portion of the cathedral that I couldn't pin down. That is amazing.

[Paul Sylvain]

This is most interesting. I'd been to San Fernando, but never entered beyond the small coffin with the ashes at the entrance (there was some kind of service going on inside and didn't want to interrupt). I will be in S.A. the last week in June and will try to look around inside a bit. This post has been enlightening to say the least.

Paul

[Donald Hash]

We stepped beyond the foyer (where the coffin is) after a nice lady invited us in to take a look. We stopped just inside the next set of doors. There were folks quietly praying in there, but having never been inside of a Catholic church I had no idea what protocol to follow.

There were about a half-dozen tourists walking around all over inside, gawking with their backpacks and brochures, talking, snapping pictures (with their flashes on) up and down the aisles, and going up around where the priest would otherwise be. My wife and I were shocked at their disrespect.

I exited the cathedral about 30 yards back into the plaza and took a photo of the coffin from outside, at such an angle as not to intrude even from that great distance.

Paul - In the gift shop next door there are artifacts inside of there. There is some sort of wooden chair or something (whatever it's called in Catholic terms) that I *think* came from inside the original church? Check it out.

[valerobowie]

i was recently doing some extensive work on my Fernando church model,using photos of the dripping springs movie set for comparison,i noticed the the movie set included 3 columns along the east side,but most maps and models i have found only included 2.plus while i was doing the interior on my church i figured out that having 3 columns on each side just did not work structurally.is there any reason why the movie set was built with 3 columns rather than 2?

[Rich Curilla]

Sorry, I meant to respond the other day.

Well, Dustin, that is a very good question and keen observation. I hadn't noticed the difference, but I see the problem on Michael's ground plan of San Fernando.

First, I must be sure what you are talking about, as I think you made a mistake. The "east side" of San Fernando Church is the front, so you must mean the north or south side(s). Since it is so close in "footprint" to the Alamo Church, compare the buttresses (not columns) to the Alamo's. Remembering that San Fernando only has one bell tower and the Alamo would have had two, that means that San Fernando's north wall came from the north transept all the way out to the front of the building without a tower to strengthen it (as was on the south side). Thus, that expanse of wall needed an third buttress to support it. All photos of San Fernando taken before the Gothic structure was added in the 1860's clearly show three buttresses on the north side. I can find no photo or drawing that shows us anything about the south side buttresses -- and, alas, the architectural floorplan done by the archeologists did not indicate buttresses on the original building at all!

Regarding Michael's set, he correctly shows three buttresses on the north wall -- and I think assumes (because he couldn't see) three opposite them on the south wall -- they would have lined up. However, I believe he got the spacing wrong between them. I think he assumed that the three on the north wall were all in between the transept and where a tower would have been normally, and then he simply put three directly across from them on the south wall between the transept and the tower. When I look at his plan/elevation, those three on the north, so jammed together, leave a tremendous stretch of unsupported wall to the east.

Here's what I think. The three on the north wall of the real building were spaced farther apart than Michael's (probably exactly like the Alamo's two south wall buttresses), thus placing the eastern-most of the three aproximately where the west wall of a tower would have been, adding the support needed since no tower existed. This, when projected to the south wall, would have resulted in only two buttresses placed and spaced like those on the south wall of the Alamo church because a tower did exist for support.

[Rich Curilla]

Dustin, I sent Michael Corenblith the link to this page so he could read your question and my answer. Here's his response -- this from a very busy fellow:


Rich,
While it's been nine years since I was immersed in this design, here's what I remember.
The three buttresses that I drew were taken from some source material, I just can't remember what it was.
But I stand behind the spacing as I drew it, and feel the fidelity of the proportions to be correct.
If you think about the interior of the Alamo chapel, remember that the full-height ceiling is behind what would have been the
two bell towers, and that there was a sort of mezzanine level just inside the front doors.
A buttress expressed on the exterior of a cathedral is indicative of a big vault on the inside, which the buttress is receiving the thrust/load for.
So I feel that symmetry is definitely involved here, and that the spacing on the east wall only indicates that there was a "balcony level" above
the entrance doors, and that the vaulted ceiling, and therefore the buttresses didn't begin till further back.
Let's see if this makes sense to those involved with this question.
Michael

[Rich Curilla]

Sept 6, 2010 21:09:02 GMT -5 valerobowie said:

...plus while i was doing the interior on my church i figured out that having 3 columns on each side just did not work structurally.

Since this is the reason for your question, can you tell me more about what you saw inside that made you question what was outside? What does not work structurally?

[jrboddie]

The HABS report says "three buttresses on each side strengthened the nave walls." It also suggests that the design could have incorporated a northern bell tower which implies that the buttresses were all west of the southern tower.

[Rich Curilla]

Sept 15, 2010 14:23:34 GMT -5 jrboddie said:

The HABS report says "three buttresses on each side strengthened the nave walls." It also suggests that the design could have incorporated a northern bell tower which implies that the buttresses were all west of the southern tower.

That's pretty conclusive. Perhaps that's what Michael saw. All I was able to find to send him was the floorplan done during the archeological dig, which did not have any buttresses indicated.

Do you have a link to the HABS report?

[jrboddie]

Here is the link:

loc.gov/pictures/item/tx0012/

Text is in the data pages.

[Rich Curilla]

Sept 15, 2010 15:25:17 GMT -5 jrboddie said:

Here is the link:

loc.gov/pictures/item/tx0012/

Text is in the data pages.

I found that after I asked you to post a link, but, after browsing the text, I never saw the comment. I'll do 'er again later. Thanks.

[jrboddie]

Data page 9

[Rich Curilla]

Sept 15, 2010 16:56:45 GMT -5 jrboddie said:

Data page 9

Thanks. That'll help.

[valerobowie]

well like i said i found this out by doing interior work on my model and going by what i have seen in the design of the other missions,the San Fernando church is almost the exact size of the Alamo church,which is kind of cool i think.its really hard to explain how it would not work out structurally all i know is when i was building the interior,i first tried 3 on each side and i just could not make it work. plus there is a model outside the imax theater in the mall that shows the entire city of San Antonio in 1836,and it shows the church having 2 on one side and 3 on the other as well as the book "the Alamo an illustrated history" also shows this as well.like i mentioned a moment ago,with all the measurements i was given for my Fernando church,i compare it to my Alamo church,and they are basically the same size,so on some of the things im not sure about on building the interior,i just look at the Alamo measurements and it works out great.

www.lib.utexas.edu/photodraw/missions/index.html