The Illumination in Middle English Manuscripts - Alexander and Dindimus (Alexander Fragment B) in MS Bodley 264

8/10/2019 The Illumination in Middle English Manuscripts - Alexander and Dindimus (Alexander Fragment B) in MS Bodley 264

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-illumination-in-middle-english-manuscripts-alexander-and-dindimus-alexander 1/20

Willen 1

1. MS Bodley 264 and Alexander and Dindimus – The Data

Bodley 264 is remarkable for its topical breadth, varied rhetoric,

diverse episodes, and pictorial content. In Bodley 264’s text and

images, Alexander is a fearless warrior, clever strategist, generous

lord, wise judge, quick-witted orator, courtly gentleman, and bold

explorer. The manuscript offers an immediate experience of this

exceptional life. (Cruse 5)

As Cruse remarks, particularly in terms of illumination MS Bodley 264 is one of the

richest manuscripts preserved today. It portrays Alexander the Great as an

extraordinary warrior, conqueror and hero. Throughout the manuscript, stories of

Alexander conquering different countries are told in a very heroic manner.

The texts in Bodley 264 were produced between the 1180s and the 1330s, and

the manuscript as such was created in Tournai, present-day Belgium. According to

colophons, the texts were completed in 1338, and the illuminations in 1348 (cf.

interview with Cruse, page 2,

http://www.boydellandbrewer.com/content/docs/QA_Illuminating_the_Roman_d%27

Alexandre.pdf ). The illumination of the Roman d’Alexandre was produced by the

Flemish illuminator Jehan de Grise and his workshop, 1344 (cf. Bunt 28).Bodley 264’s core text is a “product of the twelfth-century adaptation of Latin

literature and belongs to a tradition that generally celebrates Alexander as a conqueror,

explorer, and wise ruler” (ibid. 4) and was completed in the 1180s in northern France.

The manuscript “contains the most textually complete version of the expanded Roman

d’Alexandre; it preserves the most copiously illustrated copy of this text; it has the

largest folios of any manuscript of this text; it contains nine full-page miniatures (of an

original thirteen), the most in any French romance manuscript” (ibid. 2). This makes

clear that the manuscript is one of the most important in terms of the illumination.

All the more peculiar is the fact that there is a fragment that does not seem to

fit quite well, especially in terms of rhetoric and illumination: the so-called Alexander

Fragment B, a Middle English alliterative poem about Alexander’s encounter with

king Dindimus and the Brahmans. The fragment mainly consists of a correspondence

between Alexander and Dindimus, in which they maintain a philosophical dialogue.

There exists only one copy of this fragment which is “imperfect both at the beginning

and the end” (Skeat vii). Skeat notes that Alexander Fragment B is part of “the well-

known copy of [the manuscript of] the French Romans d’Alixandre, to which is

http://www.boydellandbrewer.com/content/docs/QA_Illuminating_the_Roman_d%27Alexandre.pdf







Willen 2

appended a copy, in another hand, of Marco Polo’s travels” (Skeat viii). Marco Polo’s

Voyages follow after two blank pages, in French (cf. Bunt 28).

Fragment B is based on a Latin text, the Collatio Alexandri Magni cum

Dindimo rege Bragmanorum de philosophia per litteras facta, which most probably

goes back to a Greek version (cf. Ross 31 f.). Ross says that it has “eight miniatures

illustrating the Collatio which are based directly on the English text on fols. 209v,

210, 211, 212, 213, 213v, 214 and 215” (ibid. 32). However, there are actually nine

miniatures in total. On fol. 215v the last one can be found. The miniatures constitute

the only type of illumination, next to decorated initials. There is no border decoration.

According to Cruse, “this manuscript is a form of ideological justification for

the nobility’s social position” (interview with Cruse, page 3). First and foremost, this

would implicate that the manuscript does not draw a critical picture of Alexander, but

rather presents him as “a largely positive figure who represented generosity, wise rule,

military skill, charisma, eloquence, craftiness, and courage, among many other

virtues” (interview with Cruse, page 2). However, Fragment B reveals other facets of

Alexander, insofar as that through Dindimus Alexander’s erroneous ways are

commented on.

Cruse notes that “Alexander was known by later generations not through

neutral biographies, but through histories and legends that transformed him into a

hero, a villain, an ambiguous moral example” (Cruse 3). Particularly, the latter is of

importance for Fragment B, as Dindimus criticizes Alexander and gives him advice in

terms of moral behavior. Furthermore, this means that the fragment does not stand

within the tradition of the rest of the manuscript which rather praises Alexander and

tells of his numerous voyages.

Moreover, the images differ very much from the ones that we have in the rest

of the manuscript. They were most certainly designed by a different workshop. Cruse

poses the question “why was Bodley 264 produced, and why in such a lavish

manner?” (2). This paper will not try to answer this question, rather will I try to

respond to the matter as to why the illuminations of Fragment B differ from the rest of

the manuscript.

A very curious phenomenon is the fact that the fragment is written in Middle

English instead of French like the rest of the Roman d’Alexandre. A question that I

will try to approach is why this Middle English fragment was inserted in this particular part of the MS.



Willen 3

As an unknown scribe remarks with a little note on folio 67r, Fragment B is

supposedly missing in the The Romance of Alexander (A collotype facs. of ms. Bodley

264): “Here fayleϷ a prossesse of Ϸis rommance of alixander, Ϸe wheche prossesse Ϸat

fayleth ʒe schulle fynde at Ϸe ende of Ϸis bok y-wrete in engelyche ryme” (cf. Skeat

viii). The folio on which this note can be found was “originally left blank” (ibid.) and

only inserted later. As the handwriting of the note and the handwriting of Alexander

Fragment B are extremely similar and most probably the same, the scribe apparently

refers to Fragment B (fols. 209r – 215v).

James has one explanation as to why Fragment B was included in the

manuscript. He states “’Alexander and Dindimus’ was apparently inserted merely to

supply incidents omitted by the French romance” (2 f.). However, this is quite

arguable, as the style of Fragment B is very different from the style of the romance. It

has a didactic undertone. The Alexander and Dindimus episode ends with a miniature

of the erection of a pillar that illustrates the end of Alexander’s conquests. The scribe

that included the fragment in Bodley 264 might have thought that this incident works

very well as the closure of Alexander’s adventures.

Skeat says that the writer of this note is clearly wrong by saying that “the

English alliterative poem supplies the deficiency” (Skeat ix) of the blank page.

However, he discards the idea that the blank space was left for the “purp ose of

introducing an illumination, because the shape of the slender column is unsuited for

this” (ibid.). Skeat comments further on that it is “more likely that the scribe of the

French romance imagined there was a defect in the MS. from which he was copying,

and that he left a space in case he should be able to supply it” (ibid.). Apparently, “the

English fragment and the French romance belong to different versions of the story”

(ibid.).

As we can see, Fragment B does not seem to fit in with the rest of the MS at

all. The tone is a very different one, and Alexander’s adventures simply go on without

having to take into account the Dindimus episode. It has to considered a separate text,

as formally it is a philosophical dialogue. The Roman d’Alexandre, instead, is a

romance that tells about Alexander’s adventures.

Cruse remarks that the inclusion of the fragment shows that Bodley 264 was

still read in England in the 15th century. As Fragment B was produced in the 14th

century, it is very probable that the manuscript was still of interest around this time, but the adaptions were made in English instead of in French so the 14th-century



Willen 4

readership was able to read it. This way, the relevance of the manuscript was

emphasized. Apparently, other elements were included after the first production phase/

after the completion of Bodley 264. The note on 67r seems to have been written by the

same scribe as Fragment B, just as another additional part of the manuscript, Marco

Polo’s Voyages, which, unlike the other parts is written in prose. Also, unlike

Fragment B, it was written in French. Cruse states that “[t]his hand also seems to have

copied the later rubrics in the Roman d’Alexandre” (Cruse 194) written “in an Anglo-

Norman dialect [that] date to well after Bodley 264 was completed” (ibid.).

According to Cruse, the “rubrics, texts, and illuminations added to Bodley 264

in England around 1410 would seem to show that years after its production the

manuscript remained a meaningful artifact that people continued to read and adapt”

(ibid. 196). Further on, he notes that the “prestige of the Roman d’Alexandre and its

additions, combined with the close cultural ties between England and France

throughout the late Middle Ages, left little terrain in which these English Alexander

poems could develop. That Bodley 264 continued to be read in fifteenth-century

England is therefore not surprising” (ibid. 197). Also, he remarks that the “addition of

the Middle English Alexander and Dindimus to Bodley 264 is a testament to the

expanded use of English in the late fourteenth and early fifteenth century” (ibid. 203).

This is one possible explanation as to why Fragment B was written in English instead

of French. As Marco Polo’s Voyages was written in French, it is obvious that French

was “still vital among the early-fifteenth-century English nobility, [however,] the

insertion of the [sic] Alexander and Dindimus is also a harbinger of French’s waning

and fossilization in England” (ibid.). When even the English nobility could no longer

understand Old French, Bodley 264 ceased to be a meaningful manuscript.

The intention with which the text was written is still unclear. Some scholars

suggest it might have been used to criticize Alexander. Skeat proposes several ideas:

“This correspondence has really nothing to do with the story of Alexander’s

adventures, but is a mere excrescence. It is easy to see that it originated with an

ecclesiastic, and was introduced with a moral purpose. There are two leading ideas in

it, both of them theological . The former is, the common and favourite contrast

between the Active Life and the Contemplative Life, which so often meets us in

mediæval literature; and the latter, the contrast between the Christian life and that of

the heathen worshippers of idols. (…) The life of Dindimus, in as far as it isassimilated to that of a Christian, is preferable to that of Alexander. The life of



Willen 5

Alexander, in its Active aspect, enlists our sympathies rather than that of Dindimus.

The author (…) strove rather for oratical effect than sought to inculcate a lesson”

(Skeat xviii).

Alexander the Great is presented as a pagan conqueror who “fights for moral

and political, not religious, reasons” (Cruse 145), the Dindimus episode can be seen as

a didactic lesson that tells the reader about the importance of Christianity. Dindimus

can be seen as something like a moral authority here, as he incorporates Christian

values. Alexander’s position is ridiculed and his authority is challenged, as the

Brahmans (Göller here calls them Gymnosophists) unmask him: “Alexander

verkörpert den Herrscher, der sich selbst vergöttlicht, aber zugeben muß (sic), daß

(sic) er sterblich ist. Er wird von den Gymnosophisten entlarvt“ (Göller 112).

The status of Alexander the Great is underlined by the fact that he can be found

among the Nine Worthies. The hero “Alexander is among the three ancient Worthies,

along with Hector and Julius Caesar” (Cruse 87) and embodies two principle virtues:

his curiosity and the success in his conquests and adventures (cf. Cruse 136).

Nevertheless, “Alexander’s desire to know and experience the world, like many other

aspects of his legend, received both negative and positive commentary in Antiquity

and the Middle Ages. For the Stoics, moralists and theologians, Alexander’s hunger

for adventure and knowledge was of a piece with his avidity for conquest. (…)

Alexander represents a thoroughly negative form of curiositas that grasps after useless

earthly knowledge and power, and forgets care of the soul and moral limits” (ibid.).

This is the impression one has when taking a look at the Dindimus episode. Dindimus

criticizes Alexander in terms of his moral conceptions. Thus, the text seems to go

along in the tradition with the negative form of curiosity, reflecting some of the

negative response that Alexander had during the Middle Ages. Precisely this point also

makes Fragment B significant, as it differs from the tone of the Roman d’Alexandre.

Göller describes that in terms of curiositas, Dindimus praises Alexander for his

thirst for knowledge. Furthermore, curiositas is seen as a signal for turning away from

God. The curiosity of a ruler can supposedly only be legitimized through wisdom.

However, Dindimus is not coherent in his argumentation, as he stresses that among the

Brahmans there are no differences in rank (cf. Göller 111). Therefore, it is quite

arguable if Dindimus actually praises Alexander or rather criticizes him.

Cruse underlines that the manuscript Bodley 264 is to be seen as “a completesignifying system whose text and images are in continuous dialogue” (Cruse 2). This



Willen 6

statement makes clear that the importance of the manuscript is the text and the images

that are thoroughly intertwined with each other.

Just as Cruse, Skeat stresses that this Fragment B “is remarkable for the

number and beauty of the illuminations contained in it” (ibid.). Precisely the

illuminations are the focus of this work. In this paper I will discuss the issue of nudity

in Middle English MS, focusing on Alexander Fragment B and the naked Brahmans.

Furthermore, I will describe how the interrelation of text and images functions.

2. Functions of Illuminated Middle English MS

Medieval images have several functions that play an important role for the analysis of

Middle English manuscripts. Firstly, they have often been viewed as a help for the

illiterate whose education was to take place through these. However, Hilmo argues that

this is a too narrow perspective and that “medieval illustrations … have come to be

viewed as lacking in profundity” (Hilmo 13). In addition to that, “many are still under the

impression that the text was always considered more important than the image … and that

medieval people themselves viewed illustration only as a didactic tool for the illiterate or

for decorative purposes” (ibid.).

Furthermore, Hilmo states that a “subject who is pictured as visually present allows for

an intense emotional engagement by the viewer who can develop and sustain an intimate

relationship through contemplation and prayer” (ibid. 16). In Fragment B, we find nine

colored miniature illuminations, six of which have Alexander as a subject. This underlines

the fact that, above all, the text is about Alexander who is the center of attention. King

Dindimus is presented almost as frequently as Alexander (five times), however, he is not

present in the last image on which Alexander erects a pillar. This pillar marks the end of

the conversation between Alexander and Dindimus and determines the end of Alexander’s

conquests. Alexander authority is reconfirmed, as he is the only human subject on the last

miniature. Apart from that, he also has the last word: “Hidur haue ich, alixandre wiϷ myn

help fare” (Skeat 42, l. 1137).

Also according to Cruse, “[t]he illustrations in Bodley 264 are a continual reminder to

the viewer of Alexander’s presence – they are a cue that the protagonist is ‘on stage’ and

in the thick of action” (Cruse 122). This is the case for the whole manuscript, Alexander is

ever-present, he is always in the spotlight. The same is true for the Dindimus episode.

Alexander can be found on the majority of the images. Notwithstanding, as the images





Willen 8

and live in caves. Later on, the text only speaks about the Brahmans: “We were in

bragmanie bred” (Skeat 8, l. 175). However, the fact that these people go naked is

found in the illuminations of the rest of the fragment.

Fol. 209v:

The first colored miniature can be found on folio 209v. It follows the

peritext which is positioned on the bottom of the left-hand column. The image,

then, is the first element that begins the right-hand column, followed by the initial

‘A’. The image shows Alexander in front of his tent, one Brahman in a boat and

two other Brahmans on the other side of a stream. The peritext says “How

alixandre remewid to a flod Ϸat is called phison”. The illustration directly refers to

this text element, as it shows the river, separating Alexander on the left-hand side

and the Brahmans on the right-hand side. Alexander points towards the strangers

on the other side of the stream, where there are also two dragons. The dragons are

mentioned in the text as well: “Dredful dragonus” (Skeat 7, l. 156), even if the

number is not specified. Another indication that the illuminator translates the text

closely into image is the fact that there is a reference to Alexander’s tents close to

the stream: “And bi Ϸe banke of Ϸe strem he biggede his tentus” (Skeat 7, l. 144).

The Brahmans are presented as naked with plant ornaments on their

bodies. As already indicated, the fact that the Brahmans walk about naked is

already mentioned at the very beginning of the text. As one can see, most of the

text that belongs to the image is found below the image, and the scene shown in

the image is basically described below the image as well. The image is directly

followed by the green initial ‘A’ that begins a new passage. Thus, the image

introduces the new chapter. As a consequence, the interrelation of text and image

works very well with this first image. The illuminator included much of what the

text communicates.

Fol. 210r:

On folio 210r, the image is placed on the very bottom of the right-hand

column, following the peritext. The initial which begins the next chapter can be

found on folio 210v in the very left-hand upper corner.



Willen 9

Image no. 2 is found on the bottom of the right-hand column. On the right,

Alexander is seated on a chair in front of his tent, holding a letter in one of his

hands and gesticulating with the other. On the left, we see the Brahman messenger

in a very dense “suit of leaves”, kneeling in front of Alexander.

The scene is a bit ambiguous, as it could either be the Brahman messenger who

hands a letter to Alexander or it could be Alexander who hands a letter to the

seems more logical that in this image, Alexander has just received Dindimus’s

letter, which is announced by the rubric that says “How king dindimus sente

lettrus to king alixandre”.

In the case that the picture shows how Alexander gives the letter to Di ndimus’s

messenger, it would function as a summary of the anteceding chapter which tells

us about the content of Alexander’s letter. Much more likely, however, is the

other solution, as the peritext, which is directly followed by the image, also talks

about Dindimus’s letter.

Fol. 211r:

Image no. 3 shows Dindimus (on the left-hand side) with another

Brahman (right hand), both naked with plant ornamentation on their bodies.

Dindimus sits at the entrance of a cave and writes a letter, the other Brahman, at

the entrance of another cave just opposite, but a on a lower level, seems to be

lying in the cave and listening or contemplating, with one hand leaning on his

head.

This time the image is very much implemented in the text. The peritext

says that Dindimus tells Alexander about the Brahmans’ way of life which,

however, takes place in the anteceding chapter as well as in the following chapter.

The image, here, could function as a distraction from the text; the decoration

loosens up Dindimus’s monotonous talk in the letter.

Fol. 212r:

Image no. 4 is positioned on the right-hand column, after 12 verses of

text. It depicts Alexander standing in front of his tent (on the left-hand side) with

four naked Brahmans on the right-hand side. The Brahmans, again, have plant

ornaments on their bodies. Alexander holds a letter in one hand and has one finger



Willen 10

of the other hand pointed toward the Brahmans. The Brahmans are all standing

upright; the first one, who appears to be Dindimus, points his finger toward

Alexander. The others stand with their arms folded or look away. The genitalia of

Dindimus are visible, although only hinted at.

Alexander ’s and Dindimus’s finger almost touch. Dindimus is in a more

elevated position. Thus, the instruction that Dindimus gives Alexander in the

letter on the “governance” of his people is indicated. Dindimus compares the two

different ways of life. He even insults Alexander’s people by calling them “folus”

(Skeat 24, l. 627) and tells them they worship “falce godus” (Skeat 25, l. 643).

Here he mentions Cupid who is the subject of the next image.

Fol. 213 r:

The main focus of image no. 5 is a pillar in the center with human-like on

top, which might be Cupid, considering the preceding lines in the text: “Cupidus

Ϸe corsede Ϸat is in care punched,ǀ ʒe worchen al worschipe & in Ϸis wise tellen”

(Skeat 26, ll. 679). Furthermore, below the image the text talks about Cupid who

“leccherie louede” (ibid. l. 681).

On the left-hand side we find Alexander, on the right-hand side

Dindimus, naked, in his usual leaf dress, standing in front of a cave. Dindimus has

his index finger of his right hand pointed towards the idol in the center and seems

to be instructing Alexander, his head in a diagonal position, which probably

indicates initiative. Alexander has a rather accepting position, holding his hands

towards his body, looking Dindimus in the eye.

The image most probably refers back to the preceding chapter “How he

spareϷ not alixandre, to telle him of his gouernance”, and more precisely to the

last two lines that deal with Cupid. It is very well integrated into the text, as the

chapter that follows the image continues to speak of Cupid and Alexander’s

various idols which Dindimus criticizes.

Fol. 213 v:

Image no. 6 shows how Dindimus receives a letter by Alexander’s

messenger in the forest. The messenger, holding his hat in the left hand, is

positioned on the left hand, Dindimus on the right-hand side. As both Dindimus





Willen 12

or he alludes to Dindimus’s pursuit to instruct and give advice to Alexander and

his people. Just as Dindimus in the preceding chapter Alexander here is

represented by his messenger. Again, the image introduces a new chapter,

showing more than actually indicated in the text.

As a peculiarity, all five of the Brahmans are dressed. Given that this

image is the penultimate and the Dindimus episode is coming to an end, the

illuminator might have had intended to present the Brahmans as a group that

Alexander will soon leave again. For the closure, he may have wanted to show

them in a more official, decent and dignified way. Furthermore, it stands to reason

that he wanted to stress what the Brahmans seem to be – people of the forest who

live in harmony with nature. The concept of the wild man emerges (see 4.3).

Fol. 215v:

The last image, image no. 9, shows “How alixandre picht a pelyr of

marbyl Ϸere” (peritext). Alexander stands upright on the left-hand side, touching a

white pillar in the center that extends from the top part of the frame to the bottom.

As it is the very last element of the fragment (apart from an inscription below the

image), the picture marks the end of the Dindimus episode, and announces

Alexander’s victory. Bunt remarks that “Alexander erects a pillar to mark the limit

of his conquests” (Bunt 28). Apparently, it forms a summary of the last chapter

and the outcome of the whole story. A moderation of Alexander takes place. The

result of the philosophical dialogue is that Alexander realizes that there is no sense

in his conquests any longer and therefore ends them.

Again, we find that one of Alexander’s feet extends to the frame. One spike of his

crown does the same. This could mark Alexander’s sovereignty that remains in

the end.

4. Nudity in Alexander F ragment B

4.1 The Naked Brahmans and Their Function

Although the beginning of Fragment B talks about the naked Gymnosophists, the

Brahmans are also represented as naked in the illuminations. This means that eitherthe Gymnosophists and the Brahmans were considered to be one kind of people by the



Willen 13

illuminator or that he simply confounded the two groups. In many sources, the

Gymnosophists and the Brahmans are believed to be one group of people: “the various

Brahman sects … later known also as gymnosophists, the wise men who go naked”

(Bernheimer 107).

Not only the images but also the text indicates that the Brahmans are people who

“[o]f bodi wente Ϸei bar wiϷ-oute any wede” (fol. 209r). The nakedness of the

Brahmans is a significant element of Fragment B, which identifies the Brahmans as

“the other”. This is what, image-wise, differentiates them most from Alexander and

his men and appeals most to the reader. This way the author and the illuminator want

them to appear strange to the reader, even oppositional to Alexander’s world. The fact

that the Brahmans are depicted in a very different manner than Alexander and his men

could support Skeat’s assumption about the Active and the Contemplative Life that are

found to be in opposition to each other.

According to Lindquist, the “representation of nudity in the Middle Ages staged

multiple discourses about the nature of sexuality, spirituality, sin, virtue, humanity,

gender, and ‘the other’”(31). Apparently, the Brahmans are ‘the other’ for the reader.

They have many qualities and curiosities in their land that the medieval reader is not

familiar with. The depiction of dragons (cf. fol. 209v) and birds that spit deadly fire

(cf. ibid.) are only some of the curious foreign elements; the depiction of nudity,

which is continuously present in the fragment, is another. The Brahmans are depicted

as almost aseptic. This kind of nudity could be a sign of poverty or, rather, shows the

simple and ascetic life of the Brahmans, who are not fond of Alexander’s aspiration to

conquer the world. This is part of an anti-greed discourse that was very present in the

Middle Ages. Thus, the reader is given a moral lesson. It seems likely that Dindimus

and the Brahman society are used as an allegory of Christianity that is the moral

authority the author refers to.

The Brahmans are represented as naked, not only in the illumination (more

usual, see Withers 2), but also in the text. The problem of the presentation of

nakedness is only present for the illuminator. He has to make sense of the content of

the story, must think about how to reflect the text in the imagery.

Mostly, according to the Christian tradition, illumination of nakedness is

subjected to gods and holy creatures. The “appearance of the naked saint ar ouses a

voyeuristic desire that is simultaneously met and denied by the vocabulary andstructure of the texts under consideration” (ibid. 3).



Willen 14

In Fragment B, Dindimus and the rest of the Brahmans are presented as a

naked people that have common human features but are covered by green plants that

seem to a certain kind of decoration that matches the clover leaves that surround the

illumination’s frames and initials. Skeat describes “Dindimus and his men [as]

apparently naked, but (…) curiously tattooed or marked all over with something that

almost gives them the appearance of wearing coats of mail” (Skeat xx).

The decoration on the Brahman’s naked bodies looks like green ivy plants. On

most of the images they really only seem to be a faint decoration. On folio 210r and on

the last illuminated folio (215v), however, this decoration is painted as more dense and

looks like a dress of leaves. Only hands and feet are bare.

4.2 The Green Man

The color green could be associated with the pagan figure of the Green Man

that has its origin in the fourth or fifth century (cf. Basford 19). The audience of the

14th century might have associated with the green leaves on their bodies something

alien, wild (see Wild Man, subchapter 4.3) and non-Christian, thus, a number of

negative images. Clearly, the non-Christian element would not go along with the

Brahmans, as Dindimus most probably embodies Christianity. However, “[t]hough

pagan in origin, the motif evolved within the Church and, during the early Middle

Ages, became part of its symbolic language” (ibid.).

Basford mentions that the “imagery can be ambivalent. The Green Man can be

at once both beautiful and sinister” (ibid.). Furthermore, she addresses the “association

between the human and plant elements [that] is often suggested as an uneasy or

actually hostile relationship rather than a balanced symbiosis” (ibid.). Following the

text, even if the Brahmans do not seem to be a very hostile people, one can still say

that the leafy ornaments on their bodies signify something ‘other’, something strange,

something uncanny. The complete otherness of this people is stressed, both by the text

and the illustrations. While the text rather stresses the Brahman’s way of life in all its

aspects, their organization and their ‘inner’ characteristics; the illumination, according

to the nature of images in general, go into the outer appearance of this extraordinary

people that Alexander encounters.

Moreover, Basford notes that in the Tête de Feuilles, a version of the head of

the Green Man of thirteenth-century France, “the human and leafy elements are fused

into one ‘organic’ whole” (Basford 15). The same seems to happen with the Brahmans



Willen 15

in Fragment B. They are naked, but have leaf-like ornaments on their bodies that seem

to be almost tattoos, interwoven with their corpuses. What differentiates the Green

Man from the Brahmans is the fact that this mythological figure derives from the

foliate head or leaf mask (cf. ibid. 9) and is usually represented only in form of the

head. The Brahmans, however, have human heads with none of the green plant

ornaments whatsoever. Only their corpuses are adorned with green leaves.

Image no. 2 and 8 differ a bit from the other representations, as the Brahmans

wear full leaf dresses that show only their bare feet. However, even here the transition

from the leaf dress to the skin is not a harsh one, it rather seems as if human body and

nature have merged. It is not clear why of all the images, the Brahmans are represented

this way here. On image no. 2 we find Dindimus’s messenger delivering a letter, on

image 8 in turn it is Alexander’s messenger who delivers a letter to Dindimus and the

Brahmans. The text does not exactly go into what can be seen on the illustrations. A

few lines above image no. 2 it merely says about Dindimus: “OϷir lettrus he let of hur

lif write,ǀ & agyn to Ϸe gome goodliche he sente” (Skeat 10, ll. 245 f.) and above

image no. 8 it says “Whan he Ϸe sonde hadde seye he sente for Ϸ newe,ǀ Ϸat was to

bragmanye brouht & prest for to rede” (Skeat 40, ll. 1074 f.).

The Green Man has often been associated with the Wild Man that has a couple

of similar characteristics. Just like the Green Man, the Wild Man comes from the

woods and has its roots in mythology. The former stems from Celtic, the latter from

classical mythology.

4.3 The Wild Man

The Wild Man is an ancient mythological creature; he belongs to the pre-

Christian world (cf. Bernheimer 21).

He is to be seen in contrast to the civilized man . He is considered a “child of nature”

(Bernheimer 3) “whose manner of life was incompatible with civilization and [who

was] relegated therefore to uninhabited places or to positions distant in space and

time” (ibid. 85). The Brahmans of Fragment B can be paralleled very well with this

picture, as they live in a faraway country and lead a very different life than Alexander

and the ‘civilized people’. In the illumination, this is most notably hinted at with the

depiction of nudity. Of course, the leaves on the Brahmans bodies also represent their

closeness to nature.



Willen 16

Alexander repeatedly calls the Brahmans beasts (cf. Skeat 32 f., ll. 858 and

892), as their way of life does not appear to him very humanlike. He also says that if

all men were alike, “Ϸanne ferde Ϸe worlde as a feld Ϸat ful were of bestes” (ibid. 5, l.

105). The concept of the ‘beast’ can be paralleled with the Wild Man. The ‘other’ in

form of the Brahmans goes together with this concept.

As a consequence, the illumination of the naked Brahmans has a couple of

things in common with the so-called ‘wild man’ or ‘woodwose’. Just like the

woodwose on the right-hand side on Dürer’s (see image a)) "Sylvan Men" they wear

leaf dresses, but have human features.

Image a) (Albrecht Dürer, "Sylvan Men" with Heraldic Shields, 1499,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ADurerWoodwoses1499.jpg)



Willen 17

4.4 The Depiction of Cupid and Its Function

One other element in the fragment that is presented as naked is a figure on

image no. 5 which is seated on a pillar or something similar (cf. fol. 213r). According

to Skeat, it “is an idol [which] is in a constrained posture, pointing, apparently,

towards its stomach. It probably represents Cupid” (Skeat xx). Skeat brings up Cupid,

as he is just before mentioned in the text and the description goes on below the image,

beginning a new chapter: “Cupidus Ϸe corsede Ϸat is in care punched, ʒe worchen al

worschipe & in Ϸis wise tellen … Ϸat, for he leccherie louede in his lif-time” (fol.

213r). On the image, Cupid can be seen as Dindimus’s instrument to show Alexander

that he is on the wrong path. Like a teacher, Dindimus points towards, and Cupid

points towards his stomach, where supposedly the sin lies, as the idol loves to be

engaged with the “leccherie” (ibid.).

The text ridicules Alexander’s way of life, also mentioning the idols that he

worships. Cupid might be presented as naked, as he is supposed to be an idol for

Alexander. Unlike the pillar that Alexander erects at the end (cf. fol. 215v), the pillar

with Cupid on top is not placed exactly in the center of the image, but rather on

Alexander’s side, while Dindimus points with his finger towards Alexander and the

pillar. Dindimus has the function of a moralist who criticizes Alexander’s ways and

shows him the right way of living, which is the Brahman’s ascetic lifestyle.

5. Conclusion

On folio 67r the accounts of Alexander stop and leave a chapter incomplete. As

one can see by the incipit, a whole chapter is supposed to follow. However, this is not

the case. Rather, half the page is left blank, and the note by the anonymous writer is

found at the top of the second half of the page. The following folio is a full-page

image which introduces another chapter. The question remains as to why the

announced chapter has never been written. It is possible that the content was not

considered appropriate, therefore discarded and the chapter censored. The incipit says

“Alexander went with the women”, which already indicates that the content might not

be appropriate for the intended readership. Perhaps, the chapter that was to follow

comprehended a scene of seduction, which most probably was not considered proper

for the readership. The only indication in the following full-page image that might

have made reference to the chapter that was supposed to follow is a nude woman in awell/ fountain. However, as one reads one it is quite obvious that the image refers to



Willen 18

the succeeding chapter. On folio 72 there can be found an image with a naked man in

the “fountaine de jeunesse” (cf. incipit fol. 72). Thus, the fragment with the nude in

the well might refer to the incident with the fountain of youth that Alexander visits.

The fact that a Middle English scribe tries to insert Fragment B in the middle of the

Roman d’Alexandre tells us that he thought of the fragment as a possible replacement

of the missing chapter.

To sum up, Alexander’s encounter with Dindimus sets itself apart from the rest

of Bodley 264, especially because of the illuminations that bear a couple of elements

that do not quite seem to fit the whole picture. Most of all, the naked Brahmans with

the plant ornaments on their bodies catch the reader’s eye, particularly since otherwise

Bodley 264 does not contain a lot of nude scenes nor plant ornaments that could

resemble the Brahmans’ dress. The depiction of nudity in Fragment B leads to a

number of valid interpretations. There are the Green Man and the Wild Man that the

Brahmans can be associated with, which, first and foremost, shows that the depiction

of ‘the other’ was imported to the illuminator. As has been shown, Fragment B has a

special position within Bodley 264, and it still needs a great deal of investigation, last

but not least in order to find out more about the purpose of the inclusion in this

manuscript.



Willen 19

Bibliography

Basford, Kathleen. The Green Man. Ipswich: Brewer, 1978.

Bernheimer, Richard. Wild Men in the Middle Ages: A Study in Art, Sentiment, and

Demonology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1952.

Bunt, Gerrit H. V. Alexander the Great in the literature of medieval Britain. Groningen:

Egbert Forsten, 1994.

Clark, Kenneth. The Nude: A Study in Ideal Form. Bollingen Series 35.2. New York:

Pantheon Books, 1956.

Cruse, Mark. Illuminating the Roman d'Alexandre, Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Bodley 264:

The Manuscript as Monument . Gallica. Cambridge: Boydell and Brewer, 2011.

Göller, Karl Heinz 1989. Alexander und Dindimus: West-östlicher Disput über Mensch und

Welt. In: Erzgräber, Willi (ed.). Kontinuität und Transformation der Antike im

Mittelalter . Sigmaringen, 1989.

Hilmo, Maidie. Medieval Images, Icons, and, Illustrated English Literary Texts: from

Ruthwell Cross to the Ellesmere Chaucer . Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2004.

Lindquist, Sherry C. M. The Meanings of Nudity in Medieval Art . Farnham, Surrey, UK,England: Ashgate, 2012.

Ross, David J. A. Alexander Historiatus: A Guide to medieval illustrated Alexander

Literature, Frankfurt am Main, Athenäum, 1988.

Skeat, Walter W. Alexander and Dindimus: or, the letters of Alexander to Dindimus, king of

the Brahmans with the replies of Dindimus; being a second fragment of the

alliterative romance of Alisaunder/ transl. from the Latin about 1340 - 50. Re-ed.

from the unique ms. in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, by Walter W. Skeat .

Withers, Wilcox. Naked Before God: Uncovering the Body in Anglo-Saxon England .

Morgantown: West Virginia University Press, 2003.



Willen 20

Internet Sources

MS Bodley 264. The Bodleian Library, University of Oxford:

http://image.ox.ac.uk/show?collection=bodleian&manuscript=msbodl264, 11/29/2012.

http://www.boydellandbrewer.com/content/docs/QA_Illuminating_the_Roman_d%27Alexan

dre.pdf , 11/29/2012.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ADurerWoodwoses1499.jpg, 11/29/2012.

http://image.ox.ac.uk/show?collection=bodleian&manuscript=msbodl264





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ADurerWoodwoses1499.jpg






Documents

The Illumination in Middle English Manuscripts - Alexander and Dindimus (Alexander Fragment B) in MS Bodley 264