Carolingian Art and Politics

8/9/2019 Carolingian Art and Politics

1/41

Carolingian 7kt anb Politics

L A W R E N C E N E E S

ewworksofmedievalartaresooftenreproduced

as

thefamouspor

trait coins ofCharlemagne (fig. 3).The proud motto

KarolusIm

peratorAugustus

(Charles Emperor Augustus) written

in

classicizing

epigraphiccapitalletters,combineswiththehandsomeprofileviewofthe

rulerwearingdiadem andchlamysto evoketheheritageofancientRome

andthustorepresenttheCarolingian"renaissance."

1

Hencetherenown

oftheimage,whichseemstoembodythemodernhistoriographicalcon

ceptionthattheessentialcharacterandindeedtheintentionof the Caro

lingian court was, at least in cultural terms, arevivalof ancient Rom e.

2

SinceweknowthatCharlemagnereceivedtheRomanimperialtitleonly

onChristmasDay800,andthatthesurvivingcoinsofthisportraittypeall

postdatethatevent,infactpostdate804,thiscoinserieshasplausiblybeen

said to reflect the imperial coronation, especially as all three of Char

lemagne'searliercoinserieswereof

an

entirelydifferent aniconictype .

3

In the caseof the Charlemagne portrait coin, nearly allscholars seem

happilyprepared togrant therelationshipbetweenapoliticaleventandits

reflectionshortlythereafterin

a

workofpictorialart,

4

asmostscholarsare

preparedtogranttheconnectionbetweenartandcontemporarypolitical

eventsinotherhistoricalperiods.However,intheCarolingianperiodthe

Charlemagne portrait coins are commonly held to have been a special

case.

5

Ifone asksthequestion in broader terms, "How did the imperial

coronationaffectthedevelopmentofCarolingianart?"itprovesverydiffi

186


2/41

187arolingianArtand Politics

F I G U R E 3.Portrait coin of Charlemagne (ob

verse).StaatlicheMuseenzuBerlin.Reproduced

bypermissionoftheStaatlicheMuseenzuBerlin.

culttom ove beyon dthissinglecointyp e,sinceoth er apparently classiciz

ing o r Roman iz ing works a re as likely to p redate as to postda te 800 .

6

Thus,insofarasthedevelopmentandinterpretationoftheso-calledCourt

School manuscrip ts and related works of ar t are concerned, the imperial

coronation appears to be a t most a m inor issue, and perhaps a ltogether

irrelevant.

I t is aview still held by some that specific contem porary relevance of

Carolingian art is all but impossible to determine in l ight of the Carolin

gian artist's tendency to relyu pon earlier models, and that we bootlessly

spend our t ime in looking for such specific connections and significance.

Rosam ond M cKitterick recently observed that "i t is unfashionable to l ink

manuscrip t images with anything the ar tist has seen in real life ," before

proceedingtosuggest,Ithinkrightly,thataminiatureintheUtrechtPsal

ter (fig. 4) reflects the ar tist 's familiarity with a contemporary Frankish

synod or assembly, which he intended to recall in this new context.

7

H e r

criticismo fthelongprevailingtendencya m ong arthistoriansisbo th pain

ful andjustified, and byn om eans adead issue.Ind eed, in an article pub

lished in 1 9 8 8, a w e ll-k no wn scholar o f C a ro lin gian and o th e r early

medievalart, H er be rt Kessler,hasarguedthatintheearlyMiddleAgesth e

artists'"goalwasgenerallyto com e ascloseaspossible to reprod ucing the

model ," and tha t such a goal all bu t p recludes impor tan t con temporary

references thatw em ight term polit ical .

8

Perhaps I should say that in theview succinctly articulated by Kessler,

which emphasizes theroleofprior pictorial mo dels,onlyspecific contem

porary political references are excluded, for in fact in the same article he

argues that the choice of models is i tself ahighly charged political state

mentinageneralsense,that"theimplicationsoforiginconnotedbystyle

were exp lo ited by pa trons and a rtis ts , as when Char lemagne set about

to a ttach h is cour t to the age o f Constant ine by rehabi li ta ting classical


3/41

188


F I G U R E 4.Utrecht Psalter: achurch council. Utrecht, Universiteitsbibliotheek,

MS32,fol.90v.ReproducedbypermissionoftheUniversityLibrary,Utrecht.

forms."

9

Ifthis interpretation ofCharlemagne's artistic patronage iscor

rect, then clearly Carolingian art is profoundly political. However, this

view makes the Carolingian artists appear almost as precocious post-

modernists,sincethepresenceof systems ofreferencestoearlierworksof

artisallegedtohavebeenthecentralsignificanceoftheirart.Suchaview

isof ancientand,onemight say,augusthistoriographical tradition, since

alreadyintheearlynineteenthcenturyHegelwrotethattheessentialfea

ture ofGermanichistorywasitsinitialreference to the Roman heritage:

"Theprocessofculturethey[theGermans]underwentconsistedintaking

up foreign elements and reductively amalgamating them with their own

nationallife."

10

I do not by anymeansdoubt that Carolingian artists often, perhaps

evennormally, followed models in both style and iconography, but Iam

verymuchdisposedtodoubtthattheirownaimsandunderstandingwent

nofurther thanth is,evenifwetodayfrom ourdistantperspectivechoose

to regard their aims and understanding aslessinteresting and significant

thantheircontributionstoagrandHegelianhistoricaldevelopment.In

deed, it seems to me not only that Carolingian artists invented images

quite without anypictorial models when the occasion demanded,

11

but

alsothat,inatleastsomeinstances,theychoseandadoptedmodelsinsuch

awaythat theworksofarttheyproduced beardirectlyupon contempo


4/41

189arolingianArt and Politics

raryCarolingian circumstancesand issues.It isnot myintention here to

provideasurveyof

all

previousattemptsto linkCarolingianworksofart

withapoliticalcontext.

12

Instead,Ihopetodonomorethanpointto

wardafewparticularworksofartthatappeartometoshedlightupon

thisgeneralquestion,andifIcanpersuadereadersthatCarolingianworks

ofartoughttobeinvestigatedwiththepossibilityinmindthattheymight

have some connection with contemporary issues, then I will be well

contented.

In some cases, the specific political significance of Carolingian artistic

workscanscarcelybedoubted.AgoodexampleistheDagulfPsalter,pro

ducedatCharlemagne'sordersasagiftforPopeHadrianI,astheversesat

thebeginningof the volume itselfattest,anddatable,atleastinmyview,

to794-95.ThevolumeopensnotwiththePsalmsthemselves,butwitha

nearly unprecedented collectionofcreedsandother prefaces that occupy

afull twenty-three folios.The inclusionofthecredalcollectionconveysa

messagetothepopethatCharlemagneandhiscourtknowandfollowthe

venerable orthodox traditions of the church, and Donald Bullough has

shownhow this statement andthe specific textsof some of the creedsre

latetopositionstakeninthe

Libri Carolini

writtenatthecourtinabout

793.

13

No one doubts that at least one significant aspect of the

Libri

Carolini

—thegreattreatisethatattemptedtorebuttheactionsoftheSev

enthEcumenicalCouncilatNicaeain787,inwhichtheByzantinechurch

accepted the legitimacy of venerating religious images—is its polemical

and political purpose.

14

I therefore think I am onfirmground when I

claimthecredalcollectionsincludedinthecontemporaryDagulfPsalteras

apointed political statement.What then oftheartisticdecorationofthe

manuscript in which that political message was intended to reach the

pope?

The theme of authoritative transmission of orthodox texts and doc

trinesisacentralpoliticalmessageoftheDagulfPsalter, as wellasofmany

Carolingianlegalandadministrativepronouncements,andisunderscored

byvisualimages,for instancebythetwoivorypanelsthatformedtheorig

inalcoversofthebook(fig.5).Theseshowfour

scenes,

twooneachpanel,

ofwhichthefirst,Davidplayinghislyre,isatraditionalelementofPsalter

decoration— as,forexample,intheslightlyearlierbutalsoeighth-century

Vespasian Psalter from Canterbury—and clearly follows some sort of

model.

15

Theartistorpatronof this iconographicprogramwashereper

fectlywellservedbyanexistingpictorialcompositionthatmusthavebeen


5/41

190

L A W R E N C E

N E E S

i

F I G U R E

5.DagulfPsalter: ivorycovers.Paris,Museedu Louvre.Photo:Cliche

desMuseesNationaux.

in common circulation and accessible to thew orkshop, and thus felt no

need to ,asitwere,reinvent thewheel.However, itiseithervery difficult

or altogether impossible to findgood parallelsfor theother scenesofthe

DagulfPsaltercover,forwhichclosepictorialmodelsinearlierartcannot

beadduced.

16

TheotherthreescenesoftheivoriesshowDavidselectingthescribes

whowillwritedownthePsalms,JeromereceivingfromPopeDamasusa

commission to translate the Psalms into Latin, andJerome dictating his

new translation to a secretary. Clearly these unprecedented scenes bear

uponageneralissueofecclesiasticalauthority,specifically papalauthority.

Thisgeneralissueis,however,specifically linkedto acontemporarypoliti

calsituation,no tonlythe Iconoclasticcontroversy but alsotheemerging

disputeoverAdoptionism,inregardtowhichCarolingianpolicysought


6/41


toinvokepapalauthorityassupportforviewsoftheCarolingiancourt.

17

Asalreadynoted,thetextsinthebookcoveredbytheivorypanelsdirectly

relateto thesecontroversies,andit is,in fact, theseprefatory texts,rather

than the Psalms themselves, that explain the unique iconography of the

covers of the Dagulf Psalter, ashaslong been noted byscholars.These

surelyqualify as"political" images,and itseemsto meperverse to argue

that theirspecialfeatures aretheproductofmerecoincidence.Theyshare

withtheportraitcoinsofCharlemagneofaboutadecadelaterveryclose

datingandunusualformandsubjectmatter,andarethusrelativelyeasyto

interpretinspecificterms.Theyshouldattheveryleastindicatethatsuch

interpretationswereno tbeyondthe grasporinterestofCarolingianartists

andpatrons.

Thereallydifficult hermeneuticalproblemsarisewhendealingwithworks

thatarepartof

a

series,apictorialtradition ,andthusarenotmanifest in

ventionsor elsearenot socloselydated.Letmetakeupfirstawork that

formspartof a seriesandaskwhetheritmightnonethelesscarryspecific

politicalrelevancetocontemporarybeholders.

The manuscript commonly known as the Gundohinus Gospels was

writtenbyasinglescribeworkinginanunknownFrankishmonasteryand

isdatedtothe"thirdyearofKingPepin,"probably754.Itis,then,the

earliestsecurelydated illustratedmanuscriptfrom Carolingian Francia.It

haslongbeenrecognizedthatthemanuscriptdrawsuponearlyMediterra

nean sources for its texts and decoration. Indeed, I havemyself argued

elsewhereatlengththatthebookprobablycloselyfollowsinmostrespects

aGospelbookwritteninnorthernItalyinroughlythemiddleofthesixth

century, finding,for example, that the closest parallel for the enthroned

beardless Christ with pearled cross nimbus between angels seen in the

Gundohinus imageofChrist inMajesty (fig.6) istheapsemosaicofSan

VitaleinRavenna,datable546-48.

1 8

JeanPorcherandsomeotherscholarshavetakenthecoincidenceof a

bookwith primarilyM editerranean sourcesdating from thefirstyearsof

thenewCarolingiandynastyasanannouncementof a new"classicizing"

directionofCarolingianart,thebeginningoftheCarolingianrenaissance

inart,albeitahumbleand,somehaveevensaid,acrudebeginning.

19

In

thissense,Porcher's interpretation belongsto thehistoriographical tradi

tion continued also by Kessler, a tradition that sees ageneral program

matic statement expressed through the style or through the models or

references evoked by Carolingian artists. The model is the message, in


7/41

192


F I G U R E 6. Gospel Book of Gundohinus: Christ in Majesty. Autun, Biblio

thequeMunicipale,MS3,fol.12v.


8/41

193arolingian Art and Politics

other words. Thus here, the Mediterranean sources of the book, even in

the absence of compelling evidence of Mediterranean classicizing style, are

said to suggest a latent political program, namely, the revival of the Roman

Empire.

20

If the meaning of the art of the Gundohinus Gospels is exhausted when

we say that it evokes the Roman past, then what can we say of the meaning

of such a book as the Lorsch Gospels, produced in the orbit of Pepin's son

Charlemagne close to the imperial coronation in 800?

21

Both sets of Evan

gelist portraits—for example, the portraits of John from the Gundohinus

and Lorsch Gospels,

22

with the figures displayed under arches on columns

and with their respective eagle symbols in the lunettes above—do, after

all, stem ultimately from Mediterranean traditions.

23

Surely art historical

distinctions are limned with a very broad brush if we can only say that

such sharply differing images in fact mean the same thing.

Obviously the Lorsch artist's work has more fully evoked the classical

heritage in terms of style, and very likely directly followed some late Ro

man work, such as the so-called Calendar of 354, at least for salient details

like the medallion-decorated mantle.

24

Florentine Mutherich has inter

preted the relationship between such works as the Gundohinus and

Lorsch Gospels by saying that both reflect the official goal of

a

Romaniza

tion of culture and society, but that the Carolingian program was both

"developed" and "perfected" in the later works.

25

Such a view implies that

the scribe Gundohinus aimed to make a work like the Lorsch Gospels, but

failed to do so because of lack of experience or skill and lack of access to the

right kind of model. In fact the evidence of the book as a whole contradicts

this interpretation.

The Christ in Majesty miniature of the Gundohinus Gospels shows this

artist and the intended meaning of his work in a very different and more

ambitious light, suggesting a sophisticated and specific political context

for his work. The two angelic beings flanking Christ are absent from the

vast majority of the seemingly countless later Majesty images, such as that

in the already cited Lorsch Gospels, but occur in the earlier tradition as a

heritage from Roman imperial iconography, the angels of the Majesty sub

stituting for the original soldiers.

26

Suddenly a problem begins to emerge

here: if the Lorsch Gospels "develops and perfects" the imitation of Ro

man art crudely begun in such works as the Gundohinus Gospels, why is it

that Gundohinus is in fact closer to the ancient iconography, which all the

"developed and perfected" later works spurn?

Notice here two features of the Gundohinus angels. They are inscribed

cyrubin (cherubim) and their wings are raised together so that they meet


9/41

1 9 4 L A W R E N C E N E E S

overtheheadof

Christ.

These features areunparalleled inother Majesty

imageswhetherearlierorlater,yetbothoccurtogetherin

a

differentseries

ofimages,thosedepictingthetabernacleoftheArkoftheCovenantas

described in theOldTestament booksofExodus (37 :7-9 ) and 1Kings

(6:23—28).Bothdescriptionsspecifythatabovethearkweretwogolden

cherubimfacingeachother,withtheirextendedwingstouching,exactlyas

visualizedintheGundohinusGospelsminiatureandindepictionsofthe

ark,asforexampleinaminiatureof theAshburnhamPentateuch,aLatin

manuscript most probably from theseventh century andknown tohave

beenatToursintheCarolingianperiod.

27

DidGundohinussimplycon

fuse different models, or can we look for a sensible contemporary

explanation?

The Gundohinus Gospelsminiature isobviouslynot an imageofthe

ArkoftheCovenant,andthusthecherubimseemquiteoutofplacehere.

Considering the image in relation to thecontemporary political context

can,however, suggestaplausiblemotivefor thisanomalousfeature.The

cherubimofthearkandsanctuaryhadbeeninvolvedwiththedebateover

images almost from the beginning ofthe Iconoclasticcontroversy inthe

earlyeighth century,sincetheyoffered thepreeminentexampleof figural

images specifically authorized by God. Both Byzantine and Carolingian

authorsusedtheimageofthecherubimofthearkandsanctuaryasacen

tralelement inthedebateoverimages,thelatereighth-century

Libri

Caro

lini

discussingthecherubimatlengthinseveralplaces.

28

TheodulfofOr

leans,theLibri Carolines author, alsomadeuseof

a

visualimageofthe

cherubim inorder to statehisunderstandingof the properinterpretation

ofscripture and theproper attitude toward images: thejustly celebrated

imageofthecherubimerectedinhischapelatGermigny-des-Pres.There,

asinthe

Libri

Carolini, the imageservednot tojustify, but rather tore

stricttheuseofholyimagesintheChristian church.

29

ClearlytheimageryofthecherubimintheGundohinusGospelssug

gests some connection with one of the more important theological and

politicalcontroversiesoftheeighthcentury,theIconoclasticcontroversy.

Whileitistruethatthemanuscript'simageofChristinMajestybelongsto

alongseriesof images thatsignifyinageneralsensetheHarmonyofthe

Gospelsandrelatedthemes,andthatthisgenericsignificancewasretained

intheGundohinusGospels,anewlevelofspecificmeaningwasaddedto

thethemeinthatmanuscript,notonlythroughitsinclusionof

the cher

ubim but also through its direct juxtaposition oftheMajesty miniature

with a TrinitariantextbyJerome(ormorelikelyRufinusofAquileia).

30

In

themanuscriptthetextwas,verypeculiarly,writtenintwoseparateloca


10/41

195arolingian Art and Politics

tions, the first excerpt on folios l r - l v and the second on folio 13r, directly

facing the Majesty miniature. In the absence of any codicological or his

torical explanation for the division of the text into two parts, one is at least

entitled to investigate the possibility that this juxtaposition of image and

text was no completely unmotivated accident, and that the image and text

face each other because they must have been intended to be seen together.

I shall not attempt here even a summary of my argument, advanced

elsewhere, that we see here no coincidence but a deliberate reaction to a

contemporary historical situation; that Gundohinus became aware of the

Iconoclastic arguments and rearranged the position of his texts and the de

tails of

his

miniature with the deliberate intention of proclaiming his own

orthodoxy and, in a broader sense, that of the Latin and Frankish church

in the face of a Byzantine "innovation."

31

It may be enough here to recall

that, from the very beginning of Carolingian art, we have a startlingly

complex and immediate reaction to a contemporary political issue. The in

stance is particularly interesting and to some degree not unusual in what I

take to be its political reference and content, even though no evidence sug

gests a close connection of the Gundohinus Gospels with patronage of the

Carolingian court circle. Surely no one would call the manuscript courtly

in the style or luxury of

its

decoration

Most of the examples to follow are, in contrast, closely connected to the

court, but it is well to bear in mind that our ability to relate these works of

art to a political context is more likely to be the accidental product of our

sources of knowledge than of any essential apoliticism in the provinces.

The courtly works of art are much better known and have been more thor

oughly studied, and our documentary sources are very scanty when we

leave the activities of the court circles.

An image from the court of Charlemagne whose possible relevance to

contemporary political concerns has never been suggested is the front

cover of MS Douce 176 in the Bodleian Library at Oxford, which bears a

small ivory carving universally associated with Charlemagne's so-called

Court School (fig. 7).

32

It depicts in the large central panel Christ tram

pling on the asp, basilisk, lion, and dragon, an image inspired by Psalm 90.

That image was also the central subject in two closely related Carolingian

ivory carvings: one of the two Genoels-Elderen ivories in Brussels, appar

ently the earliest of the three versions of the subject,

33

and one of the two

famous Lorsch Gospels covers, now in the Vatican (fig. 8).

34

Like the Lorsch panel, the Bodleian ivory is in a five-part form, but


11/41

196


t

F I G U R E

7.Ivorybookcover:Christtramplingon theasp,

basilisk, lion, and dragon. Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS

Douce 176. Reproduced by permission of the Bodleian

Library.

whereas the Lorsch composition is in fact five separate pieces of ivory

joined together and measuring thirty-nine by twenty-eight centimeters

overall,theBodleiancoverisasingleivoryplaquemeasuringbut twenty-

onebytwenty-one centimeters.Alsodiffering from theLorschexampleis

the iconography of the smaller satellite images of the Bodleian ivory,


12/41

197

ctrolingicmArt and Politics

F I G U R E

8.Ivory bookcover from Lorsch:Christ between two angels.Vatican,

Museo Sacro,BibliotecaApostolica. Reproduced bypermission ofthe Biblioteca

ApostolicaVaticana.


13/41


whichshownotlargeangelsbutsmallnarrativescenesconcentratingupon

theinfancyandthemiraclesofChrist.Sixofthesescenesaredirectlycop

iedfrom twofifth-century EarlyChristianpanelsinParisandBerlin (figs.

9and10,respectively),presumablyoncepartofalarge

five-part

composi

tionsuch asweseeintheLorschGospelscover.

35

Foroncewecanactually

compareaCarolingianworkofartwithitssurvivingmodel!

Atfirstthecomparisonseemstosuggestthat theCarolingianartistwas

indeedaslavishcopyist,butoneshouldbe waryofjumpingtoconclusions

alongthisline.NotethatforthesceneofthemarriageofCanatheEarly

Christian carver hasprovided four waterjugs,but theCarolingian artist

six,anditisthelatterthatagreeswiththespecificevidenceofJohn2:6,as

wasrecentlypointedouttomebyaperceptivestudent,JackBecker.

36

The

Carolingian artist hasin fact "corrected"hislate antique pictorialmodel

byrecourse to the appropriate textual source,hardly an indication ofan

automaton-likeslavishimitator.Ofcourse,onemustalsosaythattheCar

olingianartisthascondensedtheimagesand,wemightsay,removedtheir

relatively naturalistic spaciousness, although one should remember that

eachoftheEarlyChristianpanelsmeasuresroughlytwentybyninecenti

metersandisthusnearlyaslargeastheentireBodleianplaque,sothatthe

Carolingian artist faced a significant alteration of scale, and some alter

ationswouldperforceneedtobemadeinadaptingthemodel.

Oneimportantchangevis-a-vishismodelwouldnothavebeenforced

upontheartistoftheBodleianplaquebyreducedspace,however.^Note

thatthethreescenesattheleftoftheBodleianivorycorrespond,albeitnot

inthe sameorder,to theplacementof the threesceneson theParisEarly

Christianpanel,whichwouldhaveoccupiedtheleftpositionintheorigi

nalfive-partdiptych. Yet,on the other sideof the Bodleian plaque, the

threescenesthatcorrespondtotheEarlyChristiansourcearenotallbe

sidethecentralpanelbuthavebeenpusheddown,sothatthelowest,the

miracleatCana,appearsonwhat,inanEarlyChristianfive-partmodel,

wouldhavebeenadifferent panel,thebottomratherthantheside.

37

Why

makethischange?Presumablyit

was

madesoastoinsertsomethingatthe

top of the panel that wasnot in anymodel.Thereisindeed an obvious

interpolation atthetopofthepanel:thefigureoftheprophetIsaiahhold

ingascrollattheupperleftcorner.

In his studyofthe Court School ivories,ThomasHoving couldfind

neither precedent nor parallel for linking afigureof the prophet Isaiah

withtheAnnunciation,

38

asweseeontheBodleianplaque.Hovingpro

posedthat thefigurewascopiedfrom alostSyrianmodelcontainingim

ages of prophets holding scrolls, something like the famous Rossano


14/41

199arolinpfianArt and Politics

F I G U R E 10.EarlyChristianivorydip-

F I G U R E 9.Early Christian ivory dip- tych panel. Berlin, Dahlem Museum,

tych panel. Paris, Musee du Louvre. ReproducedbypermissionoftheStaat-

Photo:copyright R.M .N. licheMuseenPreussischer Kulturbesitz.

Gospe ls,w here quite different half-length prop hets hold scrolls benea tha

seriesofGospelscenes.

39

Evenifthiscomparisonisatallgermane,which

Idoubt, Hovingsuggestednomotivewhatsoeverfor thecopyingofsuch

afigure.IsaiahholdsanopenscrollclearlyinscribedECCE VIRGO CON

CIPIET "Behold a v irgin shall conceive ," a well known and often used

quo ta tion from Isa iah 7 :14 . Tha t p rophe ti c text is quo ted in Mat thew


15/41

20 0 L A W R E N C E N E E S

1:23alongwithitscontinuation,"Beholdavirginshallbewithchild,and

bring forth ason, and they shall callhisname Emmanuel,which being

interpretedis,Godwithus."TheMatthewtextisthelectionforthevigil

oftheNativity,thefirstGospelreadinginthefamousGodescalcGospel

lectionary, written for Charlemagne in 78 1- 83 and apparently kept at

courtthroughouthisreign.

40

Hencetheinclusionofa

figure

ofIsaiahdis

playingthistext,whichopenstheroughlycontemporarylectionaryfrom

thesamemilieu,mightbeexplainedonthebasisoftheancientandunder

standabletendencytoillustratethefirstwordsthatfollowit.

41

Yetsuchan

interpretationentailsseriousdifficulties,

as

weshallsee.Inanyevent,inan

ivorycloselyassociatedwithCharlemagne'scourt,it is notatallsurprising

to seethe reference tospecific contem poraryliturgicalsources.Butwhere

is the indication of a singular contemporary political context or

inspiration?

Bodleian MS Douce 176,the manuscript to which our ivory isnow

and, asfar asanyoneknows,alwayshasbeen attached, isitselfaGospel

lectionary.Itisahandsomelydecoratedmanuscript,withfinescriptand

illuminationinwhathascometobecalledtheMerovingianstyle,empha

sizingzoomorphiclettersdominatedbyfishandbirds.Nodoubtbecause

ofthecontrastbetweenthisstyleandtheclassicizingstyleoftheivory,the

manuscript and itscoverhaveoften been thought tohavebeen brought

together at some late date; their mutual close connection with Char

lemagne's court and almost exactly contemporary dates have been re

garded as coincidental.

42

In fact, as Adolph Goldschmidt observed,

although the leather-covered seventeenth-century binding intowhichthe

ivory

issetcannotbetheoriginal,theivory

fits

hemanuscriptvery well in

sizeandproportion,makingitlikelythatthetwoalwayswent together.

43

Themanuscriptwaswritteninapproximatelythefirstdecadeoftheninth

centuryatChelles,thefemalemonasterywhoseabbesswasGisla,Char

lemagne's sister.

44

Gisla was an importantfigure in her own right, and

duringthelate790sandearlyyearsoftheninthcenturyshewasaregular

correspondent ofAlcuin,severalof

whose

letterstohersurvive.

45

Alcuin

alsodedicatedtoGislahislongcommentaryontheGospelaccordingto

John,whichwasbegunby800andcompletedinabout80 2.

46

Alcuinis,itseemsto me,

a

verylikelysponsorofthemanufactureofthe

ivory cover intended for a new lectionary manuscript to be written in

Gisla'sownmonastery.Chelleshadaveryaccomplishedandactivescrip

torium, working in adistinctly un-Roman Frankish ornamental style.

47

Chellessurelydidnothaveitsownivorycarver,andthecovermusthave

been executed elsewhere, presumably at or near Charlemagne's court.


16/41

CarolingianArt and Politics 201

Other evidence supports theview that the ivory coverwasnot made at

ChellesforthelectionarywrittenthereandnowpreservedasMSDouce

176. Ihavealreadym entioned that Isaiah'sprophecyasrepeated inMat

thewisthefirstlectionorpericopeintheGodescalclectionary.Itwasalso

thefirstlectioninAlcuin'slectionaryaseditedbyWilmart,andcertainly

wouldhavebeen thebasisforalectionarycoverproducedatthe court .

48

However,MSDouce 176beginsitsseriesnotwiththevigilforChristmas

butwiththeChristmasfeast itself;not,therefore,withtherubric

InVig

iliaNatalisDni.

but

withlnNataleDni. ads.Mariatn,

forwhichthetextis

Luke2 :1 -1 4 .MSDouce 176sharesthisopeningpericopewiththeear

liercalendarpreservedinWiirzburg,Universitatsbibliothekcod.M.P.th.

fol.62,

49

andthereforerepresentsaliturgicalfamilydistinctfromthatem

ployedatCharlemagne'scourtbyAlcuinandothers.

One might see the emphasis given in the Bodleian ivory to Isaiah's

prophecyandtothelargefigureoftheenthronedVirgin,whositsatthe

topcenterofthepaneldirectlyaboveChrist,

as

nothingmorethan

a

rather

simple complimentary reference to the specialvirtue of female virginity,

whichGislaandhernunssharedwithChrist'smother.Such acompliment

maywellhavebeenintended,andmaybepartoftheexplanationforthe

unusualiconographyof theplaque.However,theemphasisuponthevir

ginityofMary,upon the angelicsalutation to theAnnunciation, and in

deed upon Isaiah's prophecy may also have a more distinctly political

implicationinthelate790sorthe

first

yearsoftheninthcentury,ascanbe

seen through an examination of works by Alcuin and others of Char

lemagne'sscholarswrittenagainsttheAdoptionistheresyinSpain.

Donald Bullough has written that, in his

Seven Books against Felixo f

Urgelwrittenin799(PL101:119-230),Alcuin"ismostclearlyinnova

toryinhistreatmentofMary as theMotherofGodandofherrelationship

bothwithfallenmanandwiththeIncarnateword."

50

Indeed,theexalted

position of the Virginfiguresprominently throughout the treatise asa

central argument against the Adoptionists. Following thefifth-century

writerArnobius,Alcuininthesametreatisealsolinkstheimperialpurple

woolthatMarywasspinningatthemomentoftheAnnunciationwiththe

divinityofChrist from before hishuman conception (PL 101:2IOC). If

Hoving wascorrect in linking the woman besideMary in the Bodleian

plaquew ith oneofthe sevendaughters ofIsraelwhowereM ary's spin

ningcompanions,

51

thenAlcuin'santi-Adoptionistworkmayhelptoex

plain another iconographic motif in the work. At the same time, it is

noteworthythatAlcuindirectlylinksthisdiscussionof theVirgin'sspin

ning with the angelic salutation and the conception of Christ by the


17/41


Theotokos,writing"VirgoConcepit"(PL101:211A),paraphrasingand

perhaps alluding to the prophecy ofIsaiah.Elsewhere in his treatiseDe

Incarnatione

of about the same date (PL 101:271-300), also written

against the Adoptionists, Alcuin explicitly cites the prophecy of Isaiah

7:14, and approvingly notes its reappearance inM atthew 1:23, withthe

addition that "Emmanuel" signifies "God with us" (PL 101:276D).Al

cuinis,infact,notaloneinusingtheIsaiahtextagainsttheAdoptionists,

sincePaulinusofAquileia's Contra Felicemof796citesthetextfour differ

enttimesandwithgreatemphasis,

52

afactkindlybroughttomyattention

by Celia Chazelle. Surely the iconography of this ivory, with its Isaiah

prophecyandconcentrationuponChrist'smiracles,hascontemporarypo

liticalresonance.

Anotherivorycarving,thisonemadeforCharlestheBald,raisestheissue

ofthepoliticalrelevanceofCarolingian worksofart in arather different

and— most today would say—more direct way, since the previous ex

amplesbearprimarilyuponwhatnowwouldbecalledecclesiasticalmat

terswith only secondary politicalovertones andconnections. The ivory

carvingatthecenterofthejeweledbackcoverofCharles'sPsalter,nowin

Paris,B.N. cod. lat. 1152,showsadramaticepisode in the life ofDavid

(fig.

I I ) ,

5 3

the well-known episode of his sinful affair with Bathsheba,

whichcausedhimtofallfromfavorwiththeLord.Thestoryistoldin2

Samuel 11 -1 2 . From his roofDavid saw the beautiful Bathsheba inher

bath, wasovercome by lust for her, layw ith her andconceived achild,

and, abusing his royal powers, deliberately and maliciously gaveorders

thatledtothedeathofherhusband,Uriah.TheprophetNathancomesto

David inhisroyalpalaceand speaksatfirstindirectlyof

theactionsof an

unnamed richmanw ho,wishingto haveasheepwithwhichto makean

offering, took one not from his own large flocks but instead seized the

singlelambbelongingto apoorman.Davidangrilydenouncesthepitiless

richman, atwhichpointNathantellshimthathehascondemnedhimself

("Thouarttheman"),andaspunishmentexplainsthatDavid'sownsons

willriseagainsthimandthatBathsheba'schildwilldie.Thisrebukeisthe

occasion for David'sgreat Psalmof Repentance,Psalm50(51), inwhich

he begs for cleansing mercywhile saying,"I acknowledgemytransgres

sions;

andmysiniseverbeforeme."

TheivoryillustratesthisstoryfromSamuelandalsothe titulustoPsalm

50,

54

depictingtheparableoftherichmanandthepoormaninthelower

register. In the larger upper scene,Nathan bursts in from one sideand


18/41

2 3

arolingicm

Art and

Politics

F I G U R E

11. Ivory cover of the Psalter of Charles the Bald: David and

BathshebabeforeNathan.Paris,BibliothequeNationale,MSlat.1152.Repro

ducedbypermissionof theBibliothequeNationale.


19/41


points to the corpse ofUriah, and Bathsheba apparently seeks to retain

David entwined in her snare, perhaps literally her weaving, asthe two

standbeforewhatmustbetakentorepresenttheroyalpalace.Davidhim

selfiscaughtatamomentofdecision:shouldhedenyhiscrimeandpun

ishNathan,oradmithisfaultandbegforgiveness?

Itispreciselybecausehechoosesthelattercourseofhumilityandpeni

tencethatDavidisapropermodelforaCarolingianruler,guidedbythe

manofGod,awareofhisownsin.SeduliusScottususestheepisodeinhis

treatise D£

rectoribus christianis(On ChristianRulers),

writtenbetween855

and859foreitherCharlestheBaldhimselforforhisnephewKingLo

thairII,inwhichDavid isbothcontrastedwiththe"impiousKingSaulof

Israel[who]wasdeprivedof hiskingdomandhislifebecausehedidnot

stand before the Lord asafaithful minister," andpraised for hissubmis

siontoNathan,whenhe"bewailedhimselfwithbitterpenance."

55

Arch

bishop Hincmar ofReimscites theNathan passage to Lothair II in his

treatise againstLo thair's divorce,citesitagainto Charlesthe Baldinhis

importantandpervasivelyAugustiniancomprehensiveworkof873onthe

royal office and duties, and indeed cites thepassage yet oncemore ina

letter to Pope Hadrian II, along with ecclesiastical canons and decretals

andAugustinianinjunctionsconcerningtheproperdutyofecclesiasticsto

bringaccusationagainstthesinsanderrorsoftheirrulers.

56

TheimageontheivorycoverofCharlestheBald'sPsalter wascommis

sioned by or presented to the king at an undetermined moment before

869,

andpresentsanexampleofaroyalsinthatmustbeavoided,notroyal

glory to be imitated. Its selection can beexplained in manyways.Least

satisfactory isthe notion that sincePsalm 50 begins the secondofthree

partsintowhichearlymedievalPsaltermanuscriptswereoftendivided,its

selectionreflects theparticular importanceofillustrationsofthatpsalmin

thepictorialtradition.Ifthisasitwereunthinkingly"automatic"explana

tionofthechoiceofPsalm50hadanyvalidity,oneshouldexpecttosee

Psalm1orPsalm100decoratingtheotherivorycoveronthefrontofthe

book,not Psalm 56,asisinfact thecase.

57

Thatothercarvingillustrates

notthe

titulus

butthepsalmtextitself (verses 5and7,respectively), specif

ically showing the Psalmist "delivered from themidstof theyoung lions

. . .and the sonsofmen,whoseteeth areweaponsandarrows,and their

tongueasharpsword,"whileatthebottomofthepaneltheenemieswho

have dug ap it as a snare fall into it themselves. Clearly the two covers

makeaprogram,arguingthatiftheruleractsjustly—specifically,doesnot

confiscatethepropertyofthepowerless(orthechurch!)—hewillbegiven

victoryoverhisenemies.


20/41


Certainly the imageofNathan's rebukeofDavid isbyno meansrare

andmaybefound inasubstantialpercentageofthepreservedearlymedi

evalPsaltersinboth LatinandGreekworlds,asinthe well-knownminia

tureofthetenth-centuryByzantineParisPsalter.

58

Yetinthatmanuscript

the episode isbut one in asubstantial seriesof scenesfrom David's life,

andneither therenor inanyotherworkisthesinandpenitenceofDavid

givensuchprominenceasinCharlestheBald'sPsalter,whereitisoneof

only two psalms illustrated. In this instance wecan even saywith some

confidencethatthechoiceofthisscenecannothavebeenduetothechance

availability of amodel for that scene andno other, since,aswasalready

notedbyGoldschmidt,

59

theivorycoverofCharlestheBald'sPsalterap

pearstohavehaditsdirectsourceintheprofuselyillustratedUtrechtPsal

ter,

60

whichcouldhaveprovidedtheartistandprogramdesignerwitha

modelforanyof the150psalms,notforPsalm50only.ClearlyPsalm50

was deliberately chosen by the artist or designer of the program of

thePsalterofCharlestheBald;moreover,intakingthecompositionofthe

Utrecht Psalter for Psalm 50 asits essential inspiration, the artist ofthe

ivoryhasalteredthecompositionsoastoplacethedeadbodyofUriahin

avery prominent position at thecenterofthe ivory panel. Surely,espe

ciallyinthecaseof a workofsuchsuperlativequalityofexpressionand

composition,suchconcentration upon theeffect ofDavid'ssincannotbe

dismissedasaccidental.

ThespecialbearingofPsalm50andthepenitenceofKingDavidupon

contemporarypoliticalthinkinghasrecentlybeenindicatedbyChristoph

Eggenberger in his study of the late ninth-century Carolingian Golden

Psalterof Saint Gall,avery richly illustrated book, yetone inwhich the

Bathshebaepisodeisabsentaltogether.Eggenbergerdismisses,rightlyin

myopinion,thepossibilitythatthepsalmisnotillustratedinthatmagnifi

centbookbecausenomodel wasavailabletotheartists,whodemonstrably

drewupon awidevarietyofsources.Eggenbergersuggeststhattheimage

ofthesinandpenitenceofDavid was deliberatelyexcludedfromthatillus

trativecyclebecausethehumilitythemewasnotconsidereddesirablefora

bookdesigned tobeusedbyvarious important visitorstothemonastery,

that it wasperhaps too provocative.

61

As Eggenberger shows, drawing

uponliturgicalandexegeticalsources,thispsalmhadaparticularlyimpor

tantmonitory function asoneofthepenitentialpsalms.

Althoughimagessometimescouldanddidde-emphasizeDavid'ssin—

as in the later Byzantine example already mentioned and in the earlier

Carolingian Corbie and Zurich Psalters—by depicting his praiseworthy

humblepenitencewithoutshowingBathshebaorthedeadbodyofUriah,


21/41


whichwerethecausesofthatpenitence,thecoverofthePsalterofCharles

theBaldgivesUriah andespeciallyBathshebagreatprominence.It must

alsoberememberedthatthedesigneroftheprogramfortheivorycover

deliberately chose thispsalm with its penitential theme,where hecould

havefollowed earlierCarolingian royaltradition byplacing David asau

thorandmusicianonthecover,asontheDagulfPsalter.

62

Surelyalsothe

themeofthepenitenceofDavidwaschosen,andthesinwhichpreceded

thepenitenceemphasized,onthecoverofCharlestheBald'sPsalterbe

cause the conception of royalhumility was soimportant to the idealof

rulershippreachedintheninth-century Furstenspiejjel

63

based ultimately

uponAugustine'spictureofthehumilityofTheodosiusinhis

CityofGod,

book5,chapter

2 6 .

64

Indeed, immediately after citing to Lothair II the

proper penitence and humility ofDavid after being rebuked for hissin

with Bathsheba,SeduliusScottuscitesatgreatlength theepisodeof"the

wonderful humility and penance of the glorious prince Theodosius,"

whichAugustinehadsoprominently featured.

65

Sedulius Scottus' close linkage of David and Theodosius as royal

models supports the view that the program of images developed for

Charles the Bald's Psalter extends to the miniatures inside the volume.

There Charles appears in anenthroned portrait image,wearing acrown

and holding ascepter and anorb,while the handofGod reachesdown

towardhim.TheinscriptionabovethekingsaysthatheislikeJosiahand

Theodosius.

66

Whyarethesetwofigurescited,ratherthanMoses,David,

or,conceivably,Constantine?

JosiahwasthekingofJudahwho,duringthetimeoftheprophetIs

aiah,cametothethroneasaboyofeightafterhiswickedfather,Amon,

hadbeenslainbyhisownhousehold.Josiahsubsequentlyrebuiltthedam

aged temple inJerusalem and found there thebooksofMoses (2Kings

21-23) ,

the"booksoftheLaw,"whichhereadtothepeople,

67

whomhe

attem pted toleadinareligiousrevivalbydestroyingallthealtarsandidols

thathadbeenestablishedbyhispredecessorssincethetimeof

David.

In

deed, Josiah is said to have"walked in thewaysof his father David" (2

Kings22:2).Josiahinthissenseformsanaturalmodelforemulationbya

Frankish king concerned, asCharles theBald andothers had been,with

legislation seekingtoreform theChristianchurchandthemorallifeofthe

peopleintheircare.Josiahhadbeencitedearlierassuchamodel,along

withMoses,David,andSamuel,byTheodulfofOrleansinhispoemCon

traindices,addressedtoCharlemagne.

68

Ontheotherhand,Josiah'sstory

alsocarriesa subversivesubtext,forhisvirtuesdidnotpreventtheLord's


22/41


continuingangerwiththepeopleofJudahfromallowinghimtobekilled

inbattleagainsttheEgyptiansand,inthetimeof

his

sons,allowingJeru

salem to be taken by Nebuchadnezzar, the Temple destroyed, and the

people taken into captivity in Babylon. Josiahwasgood, but not trium

phant,amodelespeciallyappropriateforakingbesiegedbypowerfulene

miesandnotalwaysvictorious.

WhyisJosiahlinkedwithTheodosius asamodel forCharlestheBald?

Theodosius isa different but no lessdifficult figure. First isa problem of

simple identification. It isnot altogether clearwhether Theodosius I or

TheodosiusIIismeantbytheinscription,andeitherisapossibility;in

deed it may well be that the two were either confused or erroneously

mergedintheninthcentury.

TheodosiusIIisoftenconsideredtobetheemperorrepresentedinthis

miniature,for hisname isattached to thegreatestcodification ofRoman

law before Justinian.Theodosius II isspecified in anearly ninth-century

NorthItalianmanuscript,withaninscriptionreading Theodosius iuniorim

perator

in the portrait showing him enthroned and accompanied bythe

teemingbishopsattendingtheCouncilofEphesus.

69

TheodosiusIIhad

alsoundoubtedlybeenrepresentedinanearlyCarolingianminiaturecon

tained in a law book, without any inscription specifying which Theo

dosius isshown but presumably identifiable on the basisofthe legaltext

withwhichheislinkedandbecauseofthelawyerswhosurroundhim.

70

However,TheodosiusI"theGreat"wasalso awell-knownfigureinthe

Carolingian period, paired with Constantine as a predecessor of the

Carolingian kings in adescription ofwall paintings in the royal hall at

Ingelheim written in the late 820sbyErmoldusNigellus, inwhichThe

odosius' great deeds (actis praeclaris) are mentioned.

71

When Lupus of

FerriereswrotetoCharlestheBaldin844,hereferstoa"verybriefsum

maryofthedeedsoftheemperors [thathehad]presented toYourMaj

esty,"in which heespecially commendsTrajan andTheodosius "because

youcanmostprofitablyfindmanythingsamongtheirdeedstoimitate."

72

Theodosiusishereunnumbered, but theelderemperor ispresumablyin

tended, because the reference is to his great deeds, as in the Ingelheim

poemofErmoldus.

One could argue that the common denominator between Josiah and

Theodosius, and between each and Charles the Bald, isthe idea oflaw.

Josiahdiscoveredandprom ulgated the"booksoftheLaw";TheodosiusII

wasalawcodifier; andCharleswasactivelyinterested inthelaw.Werethe

miniatures thefrontispiece to alawbook—as theycouldwellhavebeen,


23/41


sinceweknowof some luxuriouslydecorated legalcodicesfrom the time

andthecircleof

Charles

theBald

73

—thiswouldbethemorelikelyinter

pretation.However,themanuscriptisaPsalter,indeedaprivatePsalterof

thesortthatcouldbeandpresumablywasintendedtobeusedforprivate

devotionsbytheking.

The imageofDavid andBathsheba iscertainly anappropriatelydevo

tionalimage,acalltohumilityandpenance,Psalm50beingoneofthe

sevenpenitentialPsalms.Hence,itseemsmorethanlikelythattheinvoca

tionofTheodosiusinconnectionwithCharlestheBald'sportraitshould

sharethe samethem eand reflect theidentification ofTheodosius Iasnot

onlythedoerofgreatdeedsbutalsotheshiningexampleof a ruler'shu

milityandpenance,ascitedbyAugustineinthe

CityofGod

andreiterated

bysuchcontemporaryauthorsasSeduliusScottus,asalreadymentioned.

Augustinepraisesboth thegreatdeedsandthehumilityofTheodosius

inthesamechapter,andthatchapterdeservesfurther scrutinyforfourad

ditional themes that connect it to the artistic decoration of Charles the

Bald's Psalter. First, Augustine also praises Theodosius for having con

sultedtheprophetichermitJohnfor advicebefore proceedingagainstthe

tyrannical Maxentius, a theme analogous to that on the ivory cover of

DavidhearingtheprophetNathan,andoneofobviousattractivenessfora

clericalprogram designer. Second,AugustinepraisesTheodosiusforcast

ingdownthestatuesofJupiterthathadbeensetupintheAlpsbyhis

enemies,recallingJosiah'sactionsincastingdowntheidolsfrom thehigh

places,asdescribedintheOldTestament.Third,AugustinepraisesTheo

dosius for not having confiscated the property of his defeated enemies'

heirs,

athemerecallingthesinofDavidandNathan'sparableandgently

evoking Carolingian churchmen's claims for the inviolability of church

property against the actions of some rulers' attempts to reclaim land.

Finally,theoverarchingthemeofAugustine'sdiscussion,inwhichTheo

dosius serves as an exemplum, is the idea of personal salvation far out

weighinganyearthlygood:

Theseandother similargoodworks,whichitwouldbelongtotell,

hecarriedwithhim from theworldof

time,

wherethegreatesthu

man nobility and loftiness are but vapour. Of these works there

wardiseternalhappiness,ofwhichGodisthegiver,thoughonly

tothosewhoaresincerelypious.Butallotherblessingsandprivi

leges of this life, as the world

itself,

light, air, earth, water, fruits,

andthesoulofman

himself,

hisbody,sense,mind,life,Helavishes

on good and bad alike.And among these blessings is also to be


24/41


reckoned the possession of an empire,whose extent He regulates

according to the requirements of His providential government at

varioustimes.

74

HowappropriateathoughttobeevokedbythereferencetoTheodosius

in the portrait miniature in a royal Psalter! Surely this section ofAu

gustine's

CityofGod

whichhasbeentermedby a recentscholar

the

Chris

tianFiirstenspiegelparexcellence,"

75

wouldhavebeenknowntoCharles

theBald himself, aswellasto theas-yet-unidentified designerof thepro

gram of images for his Psalter.

76

The Augustinian passage articulated a

fundamental conception underlying the intended significance ofthe por

traitof Charles as"likeJosiahandTheodosius."

Inwhatcontextwouldsuchaprogramofimages,suchaconcatenation

ofthemes and allusions,have been particularly appropriate? The themes

includethedeathofafavoredson,tobesupplantedbyanotherbornebya

newwife;rejectionofidolatry;protection, ratherthanconfiscation,ofthe

property of the "poor and defenseless," however those might be con

strued;andthedefeatof the righteouskingbecauseofGod'sangerathis

ancestorsandpeople.Manyofthosethemesmusthavehadcontemporary

resonance.Theking'sduty to protect rather than confiscate ecclesiastical

propertyisamajorthemeofninth-centurywriters;indeedthatdutywas

sometimes linked with the often reiterated call to defend the rights of

widowsandorphans.

77

Suchfrequentreiterationsuggestsabuse,andCharlestheBaldfollowed

a long family tradition in assigning ecclesiastical estates to lay followers.

LupusofFerrieres'manylettersoveraperiodofeightyearsbeggingfor

restitution of the cellof Saint Josse are only one of the best knownex

amples of this phenomenon.

78

The possibility that the Lord's anointed

kingmight bedefeated inbattlebyinfidels,ashappenedtoJosiah,cannot

havebeenapointofmerelyantiquarianinterestinCharlestheBald'sking

dom.TheVikingraidsandindeedinvasionshadalreadybeguninearnest

intheearlydaysofCharles'srule,inthe840s,andgrewinintensitythere

after, withthegreatinvasionsof856-6 2 providing ahighorlowpoint,

dependinguponthepointofview

79

TheprophecyofNathanconcerningthesonsofDavidmustalsohave

been areference with special resonance for one of the sonsof Louis the

Pious,

aswasCharlesthe Bald.Adominant factor inCarolingianhistory

duringthesecondquarteroftheninthcenturywastherevoltofLouis's

sons,

who had indeed, like David's son Absalom, repeatedly rebelled

againstpaternalauthority,causingtheirfathertobedeposed,imprisoned,


25/41


andhumiliated—a revolt,alsoinananalogousmanner,prom pted invery

largepart bythefather's newmarriageto abeautifulwom an,inthiscase

Charles's own mother, Judith. Although the first child of David and

BathshebadiedasaresultofGod'sangeratDavid'ssin,itisalsotruethat

thesecondsonofthatunionwasSolomon, thegreatfuture kingdestined

tosucceedtothethroneof all IsraelandtobuildtheTemple.

In terms ofthe narrative situation, Judith's son CharlestheBald thus

standsasaparalleltoBathsheba'ssonSolomon.Arewereallytoimagine

thatnosuchconnectioneveroccurredtothemanwhodesignedthepro

gramof

this cover,ortoCharlestheBald,forwhomitwasintended?To

take such aview seems to me to require that we imagine aparticularly

densestupidityon thepart oftheCarolingiankingandcourt, andinmy

view the surviving evidence suggestsnothing ofthe kind. Indeed, ithas

beenobservedbyJoachimGaehdeandothersthatthefrontispieceminia

turefortheBookofKingsinthegreatBiblegivenbyCharlestheBaldto

thepopein875,ontheoccasionofhisimperialcoronationinRome(now

preservedinthemonasteryofSanPaolofuorilemurainthatcity),shows

Solomon seatedupon histhrone (fig. 12)lookingverymuch indeedlike

portraits ofCharles the Bald in such works astheCodex Aureus ofSt.

Emmeran,producedlikewiseintheearly870s.

80

ImustadmitthatIhaveusedsuchusefullyvaguetermsas"resonance"

toglosstheissueofdirecttopicalpoliticalreferenceintheimageryofthe

PsalterofCharlestheBald'sivorycoverandportraitminiature.

81

Ihave

notbeenabletouncoveranyspecificevidencethatwouldallowthepro

gramtobelinkedexclusivelywithaparticulareventormoment.Icould

easily imagine it being commissioned in the dark days of 858, when

Charles'skingdomwasinvadedbyboththeVikingsandhisownbrother

LouistheGerman;Icouldalsoimagineitbeingcommissionedincelebra

tionofCharles'ssurvivalof

the latterthreat,withthehelpofHincmarof

Reims and other churchmen who refused to abandon their king. The

problem is that the imagery is not strictly allegorical, but rather more

loosely allusive—as it were, metaphorical. The program is also unusual

anddifficult to interpret, therebynicelyreflecting thefactthatitmusthave

beenunusual anddifficult tointerpret intheninthcentury.Thecombina

tionofPsalms50and56,eachreflectingaquitedifferent evocationofthe

king'srelationshiptoGod,hispeople,andthechurch,withthecitationof

Josiah and (unspecified) Theodosius cannot have been thought to be

straightforward by the program's designer. Evidently the program was

meanttoprovokeextendedthought,orperhapsoneshouldsayreflection,

onthepartofitsprimeaudience,theking

himself.Infact,theaudiencefor


26/41

211

Carolinjjian

Art and

Politics

F I G U R E 12.Illustration from the Bibleof Charles theBaldatSanPaolofuorile

mura, Rome: Solomon seated upon the throne. Rome,San Paolo fuori lem ura,

fol.

188v.Photo:I.C.C.D.Roma,neg.E47522.


27/41

212 L A W R E N C E N E E S

such awork was most severely restricted, numbering no more than the

kingandintimatemembersofhisfamilyandcourt,whowouldhavebeen

inthefortunateposition,whichwedonotshare,ofknowingthedateand

contextofthecommissionandthereforebeingabletointerpretthemanu

script'simagery inthatspecific context.

Weareinadoublebindintryingtodeterminethecontext(thatis,on

the simplestlevel,thedate) andthe interpretation atonce,when the two

areinterdependent.Onlyaterminusantequernseemstobesecurelyfixed,

asthemanuscriptwasgivenbyCharlestheBaldtothecathedralofMetz

(togetherwiththeso-calledVivianBible)in869.TheVivianBiblewasat

that timenearlytwentyyearsold,sothereisnoreasontothink adatenear

869eitherlikelyorunlikelyforthePsalter.Thecircumstancesofthegift

do,however,suggestthatthePsalter

was

thoughtofbythekinginapolit

icalcontext.ItisprobablynotanaccidentthatthedonationtoMetzfol

loweduponCharles'scoronationthere,byBishopArnulfofToulandby

ArchbishopHincmarofReims,askingofLothairIPsrealm.

82

Thetrium

phant outcome ofCharles's ancient desire to possesshisnephew's king

dom no doubt encouraged him to believe, incorrectly as later events

proved,thathewasoneoftheluckyfewchosenrulerswhowouldbesuc

cessful in hisearthly career and alsomerit heavenly salvation thereafter.

ThemonitorycontentoftheimageryofthePsalterthatheoffered

as a gift

ontheoccasionsuggeststhathehumblyrecognizedhisshortcomingsand

had been exalted inpart forthat reason,asDavidandTheodosius before

him.

ThemonitorycontentofthecoverofCharlestheBald'sPsalterisnotan

isolatedexampleofanimageembodyingamonitoryorimplicitlycritical

addresstoaCarolingianmonarchthatmayperhapsbecloselyrelatedtoa

specific historical situation. One of themost famous andmost beautiful

artworksoftheCarolingianperiodisthemagnificentrockcrystalofKing

Lothair II (fig. 13),decorated with aseries ofnarrative scenes from the

OldTestamentstoryofSusanna,beginningwiththetwoevilElderspeer

ingoverthegardenwallattheyoungwomanpreparingtotakeherbath.

83

At the center ofthe crystal in amedallion appears theenthroned judge,

usually interpreted as Daniel, vindicating the innocent young woman

against her perjured accusers. This scene is clearly unusual, not being

called for by the biblicaltext andgiven specialprominence byitscentral

location and framing. Since the inscription

LothariusRex Francorum ...

[me][fjieri iussit

(LothairKingoftheFranksorderedmetobemade)ap


28/41

213

arolingianArt and Politics

F I G U R E 13.Lothair crystal: Scenes from the life of Susanna. London, British

Museum.Reproduced bypermissionoftheBritishMuseum.

pears immediately above this scene, it seems more than likely that some

parallelism between Lothair and thejustjudge oftheO ldTestament isin

tended, the royal connection of the image being further underscored by

thecom positional similarityof thecanopy-like coffered vaulton four col

umns above the scene to a s imilar featu re in the por tra it o f Char les the

Baldfrom the Codex Aureusof

St.

E m m c r a n .

8 4


29/41


30/41


the archbishops of Trier and Cologne, the key figures in condemning

Teutberga.

Theproperand,Ithink,intendedreadingoftheworkbycontempor

arieswouldhavebeenmoreindirectandironic,asisalsoindicatedbyfor

mal qualities of the crystal. It is noteworthy that the compositional

arrangementundercutstheclosenessoftheparallelbetweenthejustjudge

ofthecrystalandtheCarolingianking,sincedespitetheformalanalogyto

near-contemporary Carolingian ruler portraiture already adduced, itcan

hardlybemerelycoincidentalthatthejudgeofthecrystaldoesnotoccupy

thecentralspace,heregivenovertoSusanna,andispresentedinprofile.

Carolingian ruler portraits, including not only those already mentioned

butmanyothersaswell,habituallyportraythekingfrontallyinsomevari

ation of the "majesty" formula, and disguised portrayals of Carolingian

rulers through Old Testament prototypes use the same formula. Thus

when, in theBibleof San Paolofuori lemura, thefrontispiece miniature

for the bookofProverbs showsSolomon enthroned beneath just sucha

canopy-vaultasisthejudgeontheSusannacrystal,Solomon,whoispro

vidingwiseandjustjudgmentforthetwowomenquarrelingoverachild

depicted belowhim,isportrayed frontally atthecenterof

the

image(see

fig.

12).Evidently,had the Carolingian artistwished tomakeasimilarly

directassociationbetweencontemporaryrulerandOldTestamentproto

typehecouldhavedone so,andweareentitled to suspect thatwhenhe

usedadifferent mannerofpresentationhewished tomakearather differ

entpoint.

TheSusannacrystalisclearlynot aninsulttoLothairIInoranapology

byhimbutremains,inmy

view,

a pointedwarningtohimofthedangerof

failing to execute properly his royal responsibilities. Surely, if simple

flatteryandpraisewere intended bythe designerof the Susannacrystal,

theywere managed veryawkwardly indeed, and Lothair IIofallmenis

unlikelytohavebeenunreservedlydelightedwithagifttellinghimof

his

duty tovindicatewomenagainstunjust accusationsofsexualmisconduct!

Scholarstoday,includingarthistorians,arewellawareofthedifficulties in

establishingtheoriginalintentionoftheartistsandpatronsofanyhistori

calmoment,includingthepresentone,tosaynothingof the Carolingian

past.Iamsufficiently old-fashioned to think that, impossibleasitmaybe

fullytorecapturecreativeintention,itispossibletodeduceatleastsome

portionofavowedconsciousintention,andverylikelysomethingofun

conscious significance aswell. In any event, the search seemsto mewell


31/41

216


worth theeffort, andI am not apologetic for sharingwithyousomeex

amplesofwhatappeartometheintentofCarolingianartistsandpatrons

toreflectandconveyspecific andoccasionallycomplexandsubtlepolitical

messagesthroughworksofart.Atthesametime,wecannotconfusein

tentoftheartistwithreceptionbycontemporary audiences.Wemustnot

toosimplyandschematicallyreducethediversityandcomplexityofthe

Carolingianaudience,orindeedaudiences,forworksofart,whichwere

presumably and, in my view, demonstrably as variable as those today.

Complexmeanings and programs maywellhavebeen incomprehensible

tocontemporaries,eventotherelativelylearned,tosaynothingoflater

observers.Perhapsanexamplewillclarifymypoint.

ThemajorityoftheprofileportraitcoinsofCharlemagnewithwhichI

beganmyremarksbearonthereverseanimageof

a

Roman temple (fig.

14 ,

deriveddemonstrablyfrom lateantiqueRomanseries,suchastheex

ampleof

a

coinofMaxentiusofabout 308.Here,clearly,wehavearefer

ence to Rome, but with across replacing the cult imageof the ancient

coins,

anothercrosssurmountingthetemplefacade,andthelegend

Cris

tianaReligio,

alltestifying to the importanceof regarding Charlemagne's

assumptionof

the

imperialtitleand styleasaChristianconversionofthe

originally pagan Roman tradition.

89

This idea of Hugh Fallon, who

showedtheoriginofthe Cristiana Relijjio

termandthemeinthe

Libri

a-

rolini

text,istomenotonly

a

justassessmentbutanimportant

one.

These

coins bear acoherent politicalprogram uniting obverse and reverse ina

meaningful way, and I think they were intended to do so, having been

elaborated insomeofficial setting,presumably atthe court, for manufac

ture atthe important mint atFrankfurt, whereallwereproduced.Yetal

readyinCharlemagne's reign,othermintscopiedtheobverseportraitbut

replaced the meaningful reverse image and legend with alocal emblem,

suchastheshipoftheportatQuentovicandthecitygateof the

oldRo-

F

IGUR E 14. Carolingiancoin (reverseof

fig.

3):

imageof aRomantemple.StaatlicheMuseenzu

Berlin. Reproduced bypermission of the Staat

licheMuseenPreussischer Kulturbesitz.


32/41

217arolinianArt and Politics

man city ofTrier, destroying the meaning of the program.

90

Evidently

evenhighly placed contemporaries either failed to receiveor deliberately

rejectedthepoliticalprogramormessageintendedbytheoriginalissueof

theseries,or thefigures atthecourt who designed theoriginalprogram

were resigned to its significance being opaque in the provinces in any

event,sothatalterationofthereverseimagewouldnotactuallybealoss.

Theoriginalintentwasnotlostaltogether,however,andcouldbere

covered and restated bylater issues, ason the templecoinswith profile

portraitsissuedbyCharlemagne'ssonLouisthePious.Evenhere,how

ever,thereproductionofthesameimageandlegendtypeswasverylikely

intended to carry a rather different meaning. Fallon suggested, I think

persuasively, that the Charlemagne temple coins carried a sharply anti-

Byzantine message still in the tradition of the diatribes ofthe LibriCa

roling

but itwould bedifficult to seesuch ameaning being intendedby

Louisthe Piousroughlytwodecadeslater, if Irightlyunderstandimpor

tantrecentworkbyThomasNobleonLouis'srelationswithByzantium.

91

Theinterpretiveandhistoricalgroundhereprovidesverytrickyfooting,

inotherwords,andweshouldtreadupon itwithgreatcircumspection.

IfAristotle is right in defining man as "by nature apolitical animal,"

92

then even Carolingian art must be in some sensepolitical too ; the diffi

culty isapparently indefining politicsandmanner.RecentlyJanetNelson

hasarguedthatCarolingianpoliticswasmorethan amatterofpartiesand

campaigns,but"anaffairofthegutsandofthesoul."Specificallyaddress

ingCarolingianroyalritual,whichseemsfarlessvariedandchangingthan

Carolingianart,sheheldthatitwasindeedpolitical.

93

Perhaps,aswellas

reflectingthehoaryhistoriographicaltraditionofholdingthe"darkages"

in low regard, thedenialofthe political relevanceofCarolingian artbe

speaksanarrowerdefinitionofpoliticsthanshewouldallow.Documenta

tionofartisticworksasimmediate responsesto particularpoliticalevents

isverydifficult inthisperiod,butprobablynotonlybecauseof thequan

tity ofour evidence.Worksof art are abundant, as arewritten sources,

bearingupon such issuesasthe imperialcoronationofCharlemagne, the

revoltsofLouisthePious'ssons,ortheattempteddivorceofLothairII,

butthetwocanseldombebroughttogetherinarelationshipsoexclusive

as to rule out alternative explanations. Carolingian thinking is not, I

would argue,vagueandunfocused, but itisclasticandoften multivalent,

repeatedly employing familiar conceptsandstoriesdrawn from Scripture

and the Fathers but deploying them in new contexts to carry new mcs


33/41


sages.

Carolingiansmightinthissenseberegardedaspostmodernistsbe

foretheirtime,asrejectingthemodernistunivocalhermeneuticattitude.

ItwasthereforenottroublingtoCarolingianauthors,andpresumablyar

tisticpatrons,that,forexample,theDavidandBathshebastorymightbe

authoritativelyinterpretedbothasroyalsinandabuseofpowerandasthe

marriageof the SaviorwithEcclesia.

94

Hotes

ThisessayhasbeenextensivelyrevisedsinceitwasgivenasalectureatTheO hio

StateUniversityin1989,butIhavetriedtomaintaintheessentialstructureand

somethingof

the

toneof

the

originallecture.Afewimportantpublicationsthat

appeared inandafter 1992havebeennotedhere,but thetexthasnotbeen

revisedagaintorespondtotheircontributions.Iamgratefultomembersofthe

originalaudienceatColumbus for theirhelpful comments,aswellastoan

anonymousrevieweroftheearlywrittenversion.Biblicalquotationsarefromthe

DouayRheimsVersion.

1.

See

Karl der

Grosse:

WerkundWirkung,

nos.12—25,andtheillustrationon

thecoverofthecatalogue.

2. ForabriefdiscussionoftheRenaissancequestion,seeLawrenceNees, A

TaintedMantle: Herculesand the ClassicalTraditionat theCarolingian Court,

pp.3—17,with further literature.

3.

PhilipGrierson,"MoneyandCoinageunderCharlemagne,"esp.pp.5 1 8

20.

4.

Itshouldbenoted,however,thatalthoughthecoinportraitseemsto

presupposethe imperialcoronation, itdoesnotdirectlyfollowthatevent

andmayhaveother,moreimmediatecauses;forafinelybalanceddiscussion

ofthisworkandoftheentireclassofroyalimages,seeDonald

A.

Bullough,

'"ImaginesRegum'andTheirSignificanceintheEarlyMedievalWest,"esp.

pp.247-48.

5.

TheinterestingstudyofStanleyMorison,

Politics and Script: Aspects of

Authorityand Freedomin the Development ofGraeco-Latin ScriptfromtheSixth

CenturyB.C. to the Twentieth CenturyA.D.,makesusefulcommentsabout

theCarolingianreformofscriptbutmakesthisaparalleltoaverygeneral

politicaldevelopmentratherthanaresponsetospecificindividualsand

events.

6. Nostudiesarewhollydevotedtothequestionoftheimperialcoronation's

impactupon art, although the issuewasaddressedbyJohnBeckwith,

"ByzantineInfluenceonCarolingianArt,"andthereareimportantcau

tionaryremarksinBullough,"'ImaginesRegum,'"pp.244-49.One

interestingexampleof

the

problemispresentedbytheGatehouseor

Torhalleof

Lorsch.

RichardKrautheimermadethisanimportantpointin

hisjustlyfamousarticleseekingtoconnectvariousaspectsofearlyCar

olingianarchitecturewiththeimitationof

Rome,

datingitcloseto800

becauseitwassoRoman;see"TheCarolingianRevivalofEarlyChristian


34/41


Architecture."Morerecently,WernerJacobsenhaspersuasively proposeda

much laterdateanddifferent interpretation; seehis"DieLorscherTorhalle:

ZumProblemihrerDatierungandDeutung."

7.

RosamondMcKitterick,

The Carolingiansand theWritten Word

p.30.The

miniature isUtrecht,BibliotheekderRijksuniversiteit, cod.32 (olimcod.

Script,eccles.484),fol.90v,forwhichseeKoertvanderHorstandJacobus

H.A. Engelbregt , eds . ,Utrecht-Psalter: Vollstandige FaksimileAusgabe in

Originalformat derHandscrift 32 am demBesitzder Bibliotheekder

Rijksuniversiteit te Utrecht.Amoreconvenientreproductionmaybefoundin

JeanH ubert, JeanPorcher,andWolfgang FritzVolbach, The Carolingian

Renaissance,trans.JamesEmmons,StuartGilbert,andRobertAllen,fig.88,

alongwithaninterpretationthattheartist"selected,assembled[fromearlier

Mediterraneanmodels],anddasheddownhisvivid

figurations,

nwhich

nothingwasreallynewbutthezestgivingthemsuchvibrantlife"(p.105).

Itisinterestingtonotethatsincetheseremarkswerewritten,thissamemin

iaturehasbeenthesubjectof animportantstudybyCeliaChazelle,pre

sentedasalectureatthe26th InternationalCongressofMedievalStudies

atKalamazooin 1991andto bepublishedinthenearfuture.Chazelleof

fersastrongargumentthattheminiaturecontainsspecificdetailsof

cos

tumeandsettingthatconnectitwithCarolingianecclesiasticalceremonies

andpoliticalcontexts.

8. HerbertKessler,"OntheStateofMedievalArtHistory,"esp.p.182.

9. Ibid.,p.178.Itshouldbenotedthatinaseriesofimportantrecentworks

Kesslerhasinfactvigorouslypropoundedtheimportanceoftheculturaland

politicalcontentof several Carolingianimages.Seehis"AnApostleinAr

morandtheMissionofCarolingianArt"; "ALayAbbot asPatron:Count

VivianandtheFirstBibleof

Charles

theBald";and"'Fadesbibliotheca

revelata':CarolingianArtasSpiritualSeeing."

10.

GeorgWilhelmFriedrichHegel, The Philosophyo f

History,

trans.J.Sibree,

pp. 341-42.

11. ArecentstudyofCarolingianarmsandarmorargues,againsttheearlier

prevailingview,thatCarolingianimageryusuallydepictscontemporary

weaponrywithconsiderableaccuracy,anddoesnotsimplyfollowearlier

iconographicmodels;seeSimonCoupland,"CarolingianArmsandArmor

intheNinthCentury,"esp.p.50:"Carolingian ivoriesandmanuscript

illuminationareamore reliableguidetocontemporary armamentthanhas

hitherto been believed .. .eventhough certainfeatures mayhavebeen

influenced bylateRomanorByzantinepictorialtraditions, ninth-century

Frankishillustrationsdepictedcurrentformsofhelmets,shields,swords,

sword-mountsandspears."Ihave,inanotherrecentstudy,attemptedto

addresstheissueof "invented"images;seeNees,"TheOriginalityof Early

MedievalArtists."

12.

TworecentstudiesthatdeservementionareJoanS.Cwi,"AStudyin

CarolingianPoliticalTheology:TheDavidCycleatSt.John,Miistair";and

theimportantarticlebyKessler,"AnApostleinArmor,"p.35.

13. SeeBullough,"'ImaginesRegum,"'p.243andn.88;andBullough,

"Alcuinandthe Kingdom ofHeaven:Liturgy,Theology,andthe


35/41


Carol ingian Ag e,"esp.pp. 1 3 -1 5 . For the Vienna manuscript, see K urt

Holter , ed. ,Dergoldene Psalter"Dagu lf-Psalter": VollstandigeFaksimile-

Ausgabe imOriginalformat vonCodex1861 der OsterreichischenNational

bibliothek. For thedatesof them anuscript andmo reon itscredal collection,

seemyreviewofHolter 'sDergoldene PsalterinArt Bulletin 67 ( 1985):

681-90 . On the da te o f theLibri Caroliniandrelatedquestions,seeAnn

Freeman,"C arolingian Ortho dox y and theFate of theLibriCarolini."

14.

Form oreo n this th eme ,seechap.7 in thisvolume,byThom asF. X.

Noble .

15. SeeAdolphGoldschmidt ,DieElfenbeinskulpturenausderZeitder

karolingischenund sachsischenKaiser,v ol. 1,no s.3—4;andH olte r, ed.,

GoldenePsalter,2:58— 65.For arecentdiscussion ofsuchDavid iconog

raphy, seeChristophEggenberger, PsalteriumAureum SanctiGalli:

MittelalterlichePsalterillustration imKlosterSt. Gallen, p p . 3 9 - 5 4 .

16.

Fora tho rou gh discussion of the ivories 'sources,seeTho ma sP. F.H ov ing,

"T he Sourcesof the Ivoriesof theAda School,"pp. 71—78.Altho ugh he

note sth at the Da gulf imagesinfact divergefrom those fewearlier works

that treat the samesubject, and thatsom eof its features are"purely Car

olingian,"H ov ing assumes th at the ivoriesmust follow alost model. Since

he thinks the styleof the ivories indicates amod elof theTheodosian period,

H ov ing suggests tha t the Carolingian work closelycopiesa lostoriginal of

that per iod.

17. Ingeneralo n thepoliticalcontext of the imageandA doptionist contro

versies,seeMcKitterick, ThePrankishKingdoms undertheCarolingians, 751

987,

p .5 9 ; and Bul lough, "Alcuin and theK ingdomofHeaven," pp .3 1

40 .

SeealsoFreeman, "CarolingianOrthodoxy,"pp.

9 0 - 9 1 ,

onLibri

Carolini, bk. 1,chap.6, whichgivesanunprecedented statementof papal

autho rity and in fact i l lustrates this them ewith Jerome's appeal to the pope

evenon agrammatical poin t.

18.

Nees,TheGundohinusGospels,esp.pp.132—44.

19. Hubert , Porcher , andVolbach,TheCarolingianRenaissance, p p . 7 1 - 7 4 .

20.

SeeW olfgang Braunfels, "Karolingischer Klassizismusals politisches

Programmundkarol ingischer Humanismusa ls Lebenshal tung."

21. SeeWilhelm Koehler,Die karolingischenMiniaturen, vol. 2 :Die Hofschule

Karls desGrossen,

pp.8 8 -1 0 0 and pis .9 9 -1 1 6 . For a complete facsimile

publication,seeBraunfels,Das LorscherEvangeliar.

22. For the former, seeNees,GundohinusGospels,pi. 35,andforthelatter, see

H ub er t , Porcher , andVolbach,

TheCarolingian

Renaissance,

fig.78.

23. Nees,GundohinusGospels, pp. 83-129. Ingeneral for this iconography, see

Albert Boeckler , "Die Evangelistenbilder derA da-Gru ppe"; and Elizabeth

Rosenbaum,"TheEvangelist Portraitsof theAdaSchoolandTheir

Models ."

24.

For the Calendar of3 54, seeHe nr i Stern,LeCalendrierde354:Etudesur son

texteet sesillustrations, includingadiscussionoftheCarolingiancopiesof

this lost manuscript.

25. Florent ine Muther ichandJoachimE. Gaehde,CarolingianPainting, p .9 .

26.

Ontheabsenceoff lankingangels: Nees,GundohinusGospels,fig 70; and


36/41


Braunfels, Lorscher

Evangeliar

p.36.On imperialiconography: forexample,

on thefamous silverplateofEmperorTheodosius Ifrom thelate fourth

century,seeVolbach, EarlyChristianArt, pi.53 ;andKurtWeitzmann,ed.,

AgeofSpirituality: LateAntique and EarlyChristianArt, Third to Seventh

Century,

no .64.O nangelssubstitutingforsoldiers:seeingeneralAndre

Grabar, UEmpereur dans Partbyzantin,esp.pp.196—205;andGrabar,

ChristianIconography:A StudyofItsOrigins,

pp.42—44.

27. TheminiatureisreproducedinPeterBloch,"DasApsismosaikvon

Germigny-des-Pres:KarlderGrosseundderAlteBund,"fig.5.Forthe

manuscript'spresenceatTours,seeGrabar,"Fresquesromanescopiessur

lesminiaturesduPentateuquedeTours,"showingthepresenceofthe

manuscriptatToursbytheeleventhcentury;andBezalelNarkiss,"Towards

aFurtherStudyof theAshburnamPentateuch(PentateuquedeTours),"esp.

p.58,forthesuggestionthattheerasureoftheheterodox"secondCreator"

byninth-centurymonksintheToursscriptoriummayhavebeenaresponse

totheAdoptionistcontroversy.Foramorerecentstudyofthe manuscript,

seeFranzRickert,

Studienzum Ashburnham Pentateuch(Paris,

Bibl.

Nat.

NAL.2334).

28. AnnFreeman,"Theodulfof Orleans andthe Libri

Carolini"

esp.pp.699

701.

29.

Libri

Carolini,

bk.1,chaps.15and20,andbk.2,chap.26,whichspecifi

callyrejecttheequationofmakingimageswithmakingtheimagesofthe

cherubimfortheArk;see Libri Carolini sive CaroliMagni Capitulare de

Imaginibus,ed.HubertBastgen,MGH,Concilia2,Supplementum

(Hannover, 1924),pp.34 -3 7 ,45 -4 8 ,and8 5 -8 6 ,respectively.Fora

discussionofthe Libri Carolinesviewofthosethingsthatcanproperlybe

describedasholy,seeChazelle,"Matter,Spirit,andImageinthe

Libri

Carolini"

esp.pp.165—70.Foraconvenientillustrationandabrief

discussionof theGermignymosaic,seeHubert,Porcher,andVolbach,

Carolingian

Renaissance,pp.11-14andfigs.

10-11.

TheGermignymosaic

itselfprobablycarriedamorepointedlypoliticalmessagethan isgenerally

recognized.Bloch,"Apsismosaik,"pp.258-59,touchesuponthisinlinking

ittoabroadertendencytoappealtoandevoketheOldTestamentin

Charlemagne'scircle,especiallylinkingCharlemagnetoDavidandSolomon

and,inabroadersense,theFrankstotheIsraelitesasGod'schosenpeople.

Itisimportant that, inpraisingthespecialcharacterandpowerof

theark

andnotofimages,Theodulf in Libri

Carolini,

ed.Bastgen,bk.2,chap.26,

pp. 85-86,speaksof theark'sabilitytodefeatGod'senemies,andmentions

thatthekingandprophet [David,at2Sam. 6:14-23]wasnotashamedto

dancebeforetheark.NotpreviouslynotedisthepassageinIsaiah37:16—

38inwhichKingHezekiahpraystothe"Lordofhosts,GodofIsrael,who

sittestuponthecherubims,"forhelpagainsttheAssyrians,singlingoutas

theAssyrians'crimetheirworshipofgodsthat"werenotgods,but the

worksof men s hands,ofwoodandstone."Thearkisthevisiblesignof

God'smilitarysupport forhischosenpeople;on theearlyFrankish

emphasisonprayersformilitaryvictory,seeMichaelMcCormick,

Eternal

Victory:

Triumphal RulershipinLateAntiquity,Byzantium,and the Early


37/41

222 L A W R E N C E N E E S

Medieval West pp.344-58,arguingthatTheodulfhimselfonseveral

occasionsreferredtoandpromotedthislinkage,whichbecamearegular

practiceinthe790s.

30. Forthistext,seePaulMeyvaert,"ExcerptsfromanUnknownTreatiseof

JerometoGaudentiusofBrescia,"attributingtheworktoJerome;and

Yves-MarieDuval,"Le'LiberHieronymiadGaudentium':Rufind'Aquilee,

GaudencedeBresciaetEusebedeCremone,"arguingratherforan

attributiontoRufinus.Meyvaerthasinformedmethatheacceptsthe

correction.

31.

Nees,"Imageand Text:ExcerptsfromJerome's'Detrinitate'andthe

Maiestas DominiMiniatureoftheGundohinusGospels";treatedmore

brieflyinNees, GundohinusGospels,pp.178-88.

32.

Goldschmidt,Elfenbeinskulpturen,no.5;Karl derGrosse: WerkundWirkung,

no.519;andVolbach, Elfenbeinarbeiten der Spdtantike

und

desfruhen

Mittelalters,no.221.

33. Goldschmidt,Elfenbeinskulpturen, no.1;andVolbach, Elfenbeinarbeiten,no.

217.Forrecentliteratureandan interestingandplausiblesuggestionthat

theivorymighthavebeenexecutedinthesoutheasternpartof theCarolin

gianterritories,seeCarolNeumandeVegvar,"TheOriginof theGenoels-

ElderenIvories."

34.

Goldschmidt,Elfenbeinskulpturen, no.

13;

Karl derGrosse: Werkund

Wirkung,no.521;andVolbach,Elfenbeinarbeiten,no.223.

35.

Fortheseivories,seeVolbach,Elfenbeinarbeiten,nos.112and113.The

relationshipwasnotedbyGoldschmidt,Elfenbeinskulpturen,p.10andfig.6.

36. Hoving,"Sources,"p.31,notesthesixpotsandstatesthatthisisthe

"commonnumberfromthesixthcentury."TherebyHovingimpliesthat

althoughweinfacthavetheCarolingianartist'sdirectmodelbefore us,with

fourjugs,hecarvedsix,notbecausehecorrectedhismodelbyreferenceto

thetext,butbecauseforthisspecific featurehefollowed adifferent model.

37. Ibid.,p.32,notingthedisplacement.

38. Ibid.,p.34.

39. Weitzmann,LateAntique and Early Christian BookIllustration,pi.29,the

figure atthelowerrightbeingIsaiah.Forafacsimile ofthemanuscript,see

GuglielmoCavallo,JeanGribomont,andWilliamC.Loerke,Codexpurpu

reus

Rossanensis:

Museo

deWArcivescovado,

RossanoCalabro

(RomeandGraz,

1987),esp.p.122fordiscussion.

40.

MutherichandGaehde, Carolingian

Fainting

pi.3.

41. Weitzmann,"ATabulaOdysseaca"(repr.inhis Studiesin Classical and

Byzantine ManuscriptIllumination, esp.p.18).

42.

Iamforced to imaginethebasisfor separatingthebookfrom itscover;in

Karl derGrosse: Werkund Wirkung no. 519 ,itissimplyassertedthat"die

Handscrift ursprunglichwohlnichtzugehorig."

43.

Goldschmidt,Elfenbeinskulpturen, no.5,p.10.

44. Karl derGrosse: Werkund Wirkung no.519,withliterature.

45.

Forthe standardLatineditionofAlcuin'sletterstoGisla, seeAlcuini sive

Albini

Epistolae,nos.15,84,154,195,196,213,214,216,and228,ed.

ErnstDummler,MGH,Epp.4(Berlin,1895),pp.40-42,127,249,322

23, 354 -5 7 ,3 59 -6 0, and3 71 -7 2.Atranslationofsomeofthelettersinto


38/41


EnglishisinStephenAllott, Alcuin of

York

HisLifeandLetters(York, 197 4),

nos. 8 7 - 9 1 , 9 3 - 9 4 .

46.

SeeAlcuin, Commentarium injoannem, in P L 1 0 0 : 6 6 5 - 1 0 0 8 . O n th e

commentary, see Bullough, "AlcuinandK ingdom ofHeaven," pp. 5 9 -6 2 .

47. Bernhard Bischoff, "Die KolnerN onnenhandscr if ten und das Skr iptorium

vonChelles."

48.

Winfried Boh ne, "Beob achtungen zur Perikopenreihe des Godescalc-

Evangeliars."

49.

SeeBohne, "Beobachtungen," pp. 149,

1 6 0 - 6 1 .

50.

Bullough, "AlcuinandtheKingdomofHeaven,"p. 56.

51. Hoving, "Sources,"p. 33.

52.

PaulinusofAquileia,

ContraFelicem,

PL99:343-468; c i ta t ionsa t cols .

371 b-72 a , 393 c -94a , 394d , and 447c.

53. Goldschmidt ,Elfenbeinskulpturen, no. 40 ;Daniel le Gabo r i t-Chopin,

ElfenbeinkunstimMittelalter, n o . 5 4 .

54.

That minia tures shouldbe basedupon thetituli of thePsalmsrather than

uponthePsalmtextitself isne i ther unprecedentednor uncommon; for a

discussionofth eissueinthe contextofthe laterCarolingian Psalter, Saint

Gallcod.22,whoseminiaturesconsistentlyillustratethe tituli, see

Eggenberger,Psalteriumaureum, esp.pp.9—11.

55.

S.Hellmann, ed. ,SeduliusScottus(Munich, 1906 ),chap.3 ,p.29 ;and

SeduliusScottus:On ChristianRulers and thePoems,

t rans.Edward Gerard

Doyle, Medieval andRenaissanceTextsand Studies 17(Bing hamp ton, N.Y.,

1983), p. 56. For thecontroversial questionof theruler for whomthework

waswritten, seemostrecentlyDeanSimpson's introduction to

SeduliiScotti

collectaneummiscellaneum,ed. Simpson, CC cont . med. 67 (Turnhout ,

1988), p. xxiv. I amgrateful to DavidG anzfor havingkindly brou ght

Simpson'sedition tomyattention.

56. OnLothair ' s divorce: Hincmar of Reims,De divortioLotharii regiset

Tetbergaereginae,PL 125 :760 . O n royaloffice andduties:H incma r,De regis

personaet regioministerio,chap.3 0, PL 125 :854 . Unfortunately there is no

moderneditionofthistext. Foradiscussionoftheworkandthispassage,

seeKarlF.Morrison, The TwoKingdoms: EcclesiologyinCarolingian Political

Thought, p p . 1 2 3 - 2 4 , a n d

1 0 - 1 1 ,

n . 14.On the le tter toPope Hadr ian:

Hincmar ,Epistolae, in PL 126:178.

57. SeeGoldschmidt,Elfenbeinskulpturen,no. 40 ;and Gabori t -Chopin,

Elfenbeinkunst,p . 62.

58.

The s tandard publica tion remains H ug oBuchtha l,

TheMiniatures ofthe

Paris Psalter:A Study inMiddle Byzantine Painting. Forauseful tabulation

ofthe subjects inearlymedieval Psalterillustrations, seeSuzy Du frenne,

Tableaux synoptiques des 15 psautiersmedievauxaillustrations integrates issues

du texte.

59. Goldschmidt ,Elfenbeinskulpturen,p. 24andfig.11.

60.

SeevanderHoerst andEngelbregt, eds. ,Utrecht-Psalter.

61.

Eggenberger,Psalteriumaureum, p p. 1 6 2 - 6 5 .

62.

Goldschmidt ,Elfenbeinskulpturen,nos.3and4;fordiscussion,seealso

Holter , ed. , GoldenePsalter.

63. O n this im portant genre of texts in theC arolingian period, see Han s


39/41


HubertAnton,

Eurstenspiegel und Herrscherethosin der Karolingerzeit.

Fort

imageof the Carolingian ruler'shumilityinart,seethefundamental article

byRobertDeschman,"TheExaltedServant:TheRulerTheologyofthe

PrayerbookofCharlestheBald."

64.

SanctiAureliiAugustini De civitateDei,bk.5,chap

Documents

Carolingian Art and Politics