Why not the Northern Route?

[lmorris]

I think that the Ley lines played a large part in which became the main
route for pilgrims of then and now.

rd MILFORD wrote:
>
> Here is a question which I think may prove interesting.
>
> When I have been explaining to friends the reason that the Camino Frinces is so
> prominent, I have told them that is because most people from France and anyone
> from Northern Europe that walked towards Santiago would end up at the Pyrenese
> and would look for the northern most pass through.  This led them to Pamplona
> through the Napoleon Pass or the Samport.
>
> However, looking at the map, there is a more northerly pass thast avoids the
> mountains at the coast.  It seems to me that somebody travelling from, for
> example, Paris would find it quicker to follow the northern route.  So why did
> the Camino Frances get all the attention?
>
> I thought of a few explanations:
> Following the coast could be difficult in the absence of bridges.  Every time
> one came to a major river one would have to strike inland until it could be
> forwarded or there was a bridge.
>
> Are there cliffs that go all the way down to the waters edge, that make
> progress difficult?
>
> The northern route is there; that proves that it is not impossible.
>
> Maybe people just followed those who went before them.  Broadway in New York
> was once a goat track that led from New Amsterdam north; maybe the Camino route
> is similar.
>
> Or maybe powerful people along the route (Kings, Princes, Bishops) wanted the
> pilgrims to come through their towns and ran a gentle "protection racket" to
> induce people to take that particular route.  "We would look after you if you
> come this way but if you go that way bad things might happen".
>
> Has anybody got any ideas?