University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The Cloisters Cross: a re-examination of date and style

(USC Thesis Other)

The Cloisters Cross: a re-examination of date and style

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content The Cloisters Cross:
A Re-Examination of Date and Style
by
E lizab eth A n n e M o n ro e
A T hesis P resen ted to the
FACULTY OF TH E GRADUATE SCH O O L
U n iv ersity of S o u th e rn C alifornia
In P artial F u lfillm en t of the
R eq u irem en ts for th e D egree
M A STER OF ARTS
(A rt H istory)
A u g u st 1995
C opyright 1995 E lizab eth A n n e M onroe
UNIVERSITY O F S O U T H E R N CA LIFO RN IA
T H E GRA DUATE SCHOOL.
U N IV ER SITY PARK
L O S A N G ELES, C A L IFO R N IA 9 0 0 0 7
This thesis, written by
..EL±zab£tb.jinne.ilaa£Qe...............................................................
under the direction of Aer. Thesis Committee,
and approved by all its members, has been pre
sented to and accepted by the Dean of The
Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
■ ................. Haster-.af.J^cts-.XArt.Hi^toJCXl.......................
<£2 ^ - C . / z L u s
Dtm*
......
THESIS C i ITTEE
Chairm]
'j
Acknowledgements
I w ould like to thank Professors C arolyn M alone, G lenn
H arco u rt an d R ichard D ales for their im m easurable guidance and
advice. M y gratitude also extends to m y family, C hristopher H euer,
H ow ard Sm ith an d Tom Tom linson for their patience and support.
Table of Contents
List of Illustrations iv-x
Section I: Description and Iconography 1-17
Section II: Date and Style 18-61
C onclusions 62-63
Bibliography 64-67
List of Illustrations
1. C loisters cross, front, c. 1130. N ew York, M e tro p o litan M u seu m
of A rt.
2. C loisters cross, back, c. 1130. N ew York, M etro p o litan M useum
of A rt.
3. A d am a n d Eve o n lignum vitae. C loisters cross, lo w e r shaft,
front, c. 1130. N ew York, M etro p o litan M u seu m of A rt.
4. M oses a n d the R aising of the B razen S erpent. C loisters cross,
central m edallion, front, c. 1130. N e w York, M etro p o litan
M u seu m of A rt.
5. Synagogue piercing the L am b of G od. C loisters cross, central
m edallion, back, c. 1130. N ew York, M etropolita M u seu m of A rt.
6. A scension, C aiaphas a n d P ilate d isp u tin g the cross title, H a n d of
G od a n d titulus. C loisters cross, u p p e r shaft, front, c. 1130. N e w
York, M etro p o litan M u seu m of A rt.
7. C ru c ifix io n /D e p o sitio n /L am en ta tio n . C loisters cross, rig h t
term inal p laq u e, front, c. 1130. N e w York, M etro p o litan
M u seu m of A rt.
8. T hree M aries a t the T o m b /R e su rrec tio n . C loisters cross, left
term inal p laq u e, front, c. 1130. N e w York, M etro p o litan
M u seu m of A rt.
9. Eagle of St. John w ith p ro p h e ts D avid, S olom on a n d O b ad iah .
C loisters cross, u p p e r shaft, back, c. 1130. N ew York,
M e tro p o litan M u seu m of A rt.
10. P ro p h ets H osea, Isaiah, M icah a n d H abakkuk. C loisters cross,
lo w er shaft, back, c. 1130. N ew York, M etro p o litan M u seu m of
A rt.
iv
11. Prophets M alachi, Am os and Job. Cloisters cross, rig h t crossbar,
back, c. 1130. N ew York, M etropolitan M useum of Art.
12. Prophets N ahum , H aggai an d Balaam. Cloisters cross, left
crossbar, back, c. 1130. N ew York, M etropolitan M useum of Art.
13. Cross of C onrad II. Vienna, K unsthistorisches M useen, c. 1030.
14. Prophets w ith scrolls. Portable A ltar, Eilbertus of Cologne,
c. 1130-40. Berlin, Staatliche M useen.
15. C hrist in M ajesty w ith E vangelist sym bols and Apostles.
Portable altar, Eilbertus of Cologne, c. 1130-40. Berlin, Staatliche
M useen.
16. Three M aries a t the Tom b. St. A lbans Psalter, c. 1123.
H ildesheim , St. G odehard.
17. Longinus an d personification of the Sun. Cloisters cross,
detail of right term inal, front, c. 1130. N ew York, M etropolitan
M useum of Art.
18. N icodem us and crow d of onlookers w ith personification
of the M oon. Cloisters cross, detail of rig h t term inal, front,
c. 1130. N ew York, M etropolitan M useum of Art.
19. E nshrouded body of C hrist w ith m ourning figures andOceatius.
Cloisters cross, detail of right term inal, front, c. 1130. N ew York,
M etropolitan M useum of A rt.
20. Castile crucifix, front. M adrid, M useo A rqueldgico N ational, c.
1060.
21. Castile crucifix, back. M adrid, M useo A rqueldgico Nacional, c.
1060.
22. G unhild cross, front. C openhagen, N ationalm useet, c. 1075.
23. G unhild cross, back. C openhagen, N ationalm useet, c. 1075.
24. N ativity, Crucifixion and A scension. Ivory book cover,
Lifege, c. 1050. Brussels, M usses Royaux d'A rt et d'H istoire.
V
25. Stone d o ister figure, third quarter of the tw elfth century.
C halons-sur-M arne, N otre-D am e-en-V aux.
26. Christ Healing the Paralytic, stained-glass panel, c. 1170.
St. Etienne, Troyes Cathedral.
27. Leviticus illum ination, c. 1170-1180. C apuchin Bible, Paris, BN
lat. 16743, fol. 62.
28. Luke illum ination w ith scrolls, c. 1170-1180. C apuchin Bible,
Paris, BN lat. 16746, fol. 42.
29. M en astride lions. Ivory box, c. 1120. London, Victoria and
A lbert M useum .
30. Centaurs. Ivory box, c. 1120. London, Victoria and A lbert
M useum .
31. A dam and Eve. St. Albans Psalter, c. 1123. Hildesheim , St.
G odehard.
32. Nativity, Flight into Egypt, W ashing of the Feet of the Disciples,
Last Supper, Crucifixion and Entom bm ent. Ivory liturgical
comb, c. 1120. London, Victoria and A lbert M useum .
33. M assacre of the Innocents, A doration of the Magi, D eparture of
the M agi an d A nnunciation to the Shepherds. Ivory liturgical
comb, c. 1120. London, Victoria and A lbert M useum .
34. Last Supper, Betrayal and Flagellation. Ivory liturgical comb, c.
1120. V erdun, MusSe de la Princerie.
35. Entom bm ent, Three M aries at the tom b and Noli me Tangere.
Ivory liturgical comb, c. 1120. V erdun, M us6e de la Princerie.
36. Daniel in the Lion's Den. Ivory panel, second quarter of the
tw elfth century. L utton H oo, W ernher collection.
37. Deposition. Ivory panel, second quarter of the tw elfth century.
N ew York, Pierpont M organ Library.
Vi
38. A nnunciation to the S hepherds. St. A lbans Psalter, c. 1123.
H ildesheim , St. G odehard.
39. W ashing of the Feet of the Disciples. St. A lbans Psalter, c. 1123.
H ildesheim , St. G odehard.
40. D escent from the Cross. St. A lbans Psalter, c. 1123. H ildesheim ,
St. G odehard.
41. Parable of the W icked H u sb an d m en , C leansing of th e T em ple
an d Feeding of the 5,000. G ospels of St. A lbans, c. 1125.
C am bridge, Pem broke College, MS. 120, f. 1.
42. Blind M an H ealed a n d Raising of L azarus. G ospels of St. A lbans,
c. 1125. C am bridge, Pem broke College, MS. 120, f. lv .
43. Parable of the G ood S am aritan an d Zaccheus. G ospels of St.
A lbans, c. 1125. C am bridge, Pem broke College, MS. 120, f. 2.
44. E lders Seeking to Stone C hrist, Parable of the G uest w ith o u t a
W edding G arm ent a n d E ntry into Jerusalem . G ospels of St.
A lbans, c. 1125. C am bridge, P em broke College, MS. 120, f. 2v.
45. Last Supper, W ashing of the Feet of the Disciples, B etrayal an d
A rrest. G ospels of St. Albans, c. 1125. C am bridge, Pem broke
College, MS. 120, f. 3.
46. Flagellation, M ocking of C hrist, Sim on C arries the C ross a n d
Crucifixion. G ospels of St. A lbans, c. 1125. C am bridge, Pem broke
College, MS. 120, f. 3v.
47. D eposition, E ntom bm ent, Jew s R equesting a G u ard for the Tom b
a n d the T hree M aries a t the Tom b. G ospels of St. A lbans, c. 1125.
C am bridge, Pem broke College, MS. 120, f. 4.
48. H arro w in g of Hell, Noli me Tangere, E m m aus an d D oubting
T hom as, G ospels of St. A lbans, c. 1125. C am bridge, Pem broke
College, MS. 120, f. 4v.
49. C hrist's A ppearances after the R esurrection. G ospels of St.
A lbans, c. 1125. C am bridge, Pem broke College, MS. 120, f. 5.
vii
50. Ascension and Beheading of John the Baptist. Gospels of St.
Albans, c. 1125. Cambridge, Pembroke College, MS. 120, f. 5v.
51. Pentecost. Gospels of St. Albans, c. 1125. Cambridge, Pembroke
College, MS. 120, f. 6.
52. Second Coming and Last Judgm ent. Gospels of St. Albans, c.
1125. Cambridge, Pembroke College, MS. 120, f. 6v.
53. Moses and A aron Enthroned and Moses N um bering the People
of Israel. Frontispiece to Num bers. Bury Bible, c. 1138.
Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 2, f. 70.
54. Moses Expounding the Law to the People of Israel and Unclean
Beasts. Frontispiece to Deuteronom y. Bury Bible, c. 1138.
Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 2.
55. Elkanah w ith H annah and Penninah, H annah's Prayer before Eli
and Birth of Samuel. Frontispiece to I Kings. Bury Bible, c. 1138.
Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 2, f. 147v.
56. Jeremiah Pointing to the Attack on Jerusalem. Frontispiece to
Jeremiah. Bury Bible, c. 1138. Cambridge, Corpus Christi
College, MS 2, f. 245v.
57. Ezekiel’ s Vision of God. Frontispiece to Ezekiel. Bury Bible, c.
1138. Cambridge, Corpus Christi College MS 2, f. 281v.
58. The Children of Job, Job’ s Prayer, Job Seated on Ashes and Asked
by his Wife to Renounce God. Bury Bible, c. 1138. Cambridge,
Corpus Christi College, MS 2, f. 344v.
59. Angel at the Tomb. Cloisters cross, detail of left term inal plaque,
front, c. 1130. New York, M etropolitan M useum of Art.
60. Job’ s Prayer. Detail of f. 344v. Bury Bible, c. 1138. Cambridge,
Corpus Christi College, MS 2.
61. Malachi. Cloisters cross, detail of right crossbar, back, c. 1130.
New York, M etropolitan M useum of Art.
viii
62. H ead of a Prophet. St. Albans Cathedral, c. 1130-1150.
63. Limestone head. Bury St. E dm unds Abbey, c. 1130. M oyses Hall,
Bury St. Edm unds.
64. David. Cloisters cross, detail of upper shaft, back, c. 1130. N ew
York, M etropolitan M useum of Art.
65. Solomon. Cloisters cross, detail of upper shaft, back, c. 1130.
N ew York, M etropolitan M useum of Art.
66. Hosea. Cloisters cross, detail of lower shaft, back, c. 1130. N ew
York, M etropolitan M useum of Art.
67. D eposition and Entom bm ent. Detail of ivory plaque. Byzantine,
eleventh century. London, Victoria and A lbert M useum .
68. K ing/P rophet. Ivory panel, c. 1160. London, British M useum .
69. K ing/Prophet. Ivory panel, c. 1160. London, British M useum.
70. Flight into Egypt. Ivory statue, c. 1180. N ew York, M etropolitan
M useum of Art.
71. Prophet. Detail of lead font, c. 1150. W alton-on-the-Hill, Surrey.
72. Seal. Bury St. Edm unds, c. 1150. Oxford, Bodleian Library.
73. C hrist in Majesty. Ivory plaque, c. 1150. Berlin, Staatliche
M useen.
74. Aaron. Ivory plaque, c. 1150. Florence, M useo N azionale del
Bargello.
ix
The objects discussed in this p a p er are not rep ro d u ced here d u e
to copyright issues. A copy of the p a p er w hich includes illustrations
m ay be b o rro w ed th ro u g h the U niversity of S outhern C alifornia. For
the convenience of the m icrofilm rea d er I have listed w h ere each
illu stratio n m ay be found:
Parker, E. an d C. Little. T he C loisters Cross: Its A rt a n d M eaning,
ills. 1-13,17-24, 59-66, 72
N ilgen, U. "Das grosse W alrossbeinkreuz in d e n 'C loisters.'”
ills. 25-28
Beckw ith, J. Ivory C arvings in Early M edieval E n gland,
ills. 29-30, 32-37, 68-70, 73-74
K auffm ann, C. M. "The B ury Bible."
ills. 53-58
W eitzm ann, K. an d A. G oldschm idt. Die b v zantinischen
E lfenbeinskulpturen des X-XIII T ahrhunderts.
ill. 67
H oving, T. "The B ury St. E d m u n d s Cross."
ill. 71
Sw arzenski, H . M onum ents of R om anesque A rt: The A rt of C hurch
T reasures in N o rth -W estern E u ro p e,
ills. 14-15
M cLachlan, E. P. The S criptorium of B ury St. E dm unds in the T w elfth
C en tu ry . (Ph. D. diss.)
ills. 41-52
Pacht, O. T he St. A lbans Psalter.
ills. 16, 38-40
x
Section I: D escription an d Iconography
U sually assigned to the E nglish m onastery of B ury St. E dm unds,
the C loisters cross (ills. 1-2) has b een given a m id-tw elfth century d ate
w hich places it after the p ro d u ctio n of the Bury Bible, c. 1138. T his
thesis aim s to situate the C loisters cross w ith in established ivory-
carving an d m an u scrip t illu m in atio n trad itio n s flourishing d u rin g the
tw elfth century n o t only in Bury St. E d m u n d s, b u t also in St. A lbans. I
in ten d to re-exam ine the cross prim arily in term s of style, suggesting
influences o utside of B ury to g ro u n d the cross firm ly w ith in another
context. Further, I w ill recom m end an alternative to the accepted Bury
Bible style, and ad d ress certain iconographic issues, specifically those of
the fro n t of the rig h t term inal.
C om posed of seven interlocking pieces of w alrus (m orse) ivory,
the cross stands at 22 5 / 8 x 14 1 /4 inches. E ach shaft is capped w ith a
term inal plaque, a n d on either side a m edallion covers the crossing of
the shafts. C arved in its entirety, the cross accom m odates m ore than
one h u n d re d figures a n d over sixty inscriptions. T he unifying
p ro g ram of the cross is C hrist's Passion, as foreshadow ed in the O ld
T estam ent an d realized in the N ew .
The fronts of the crossbars are carved w ith naturalistic detail as
the T ree of Life, or lignum vitae . A long the thorny b ran ch of the
vertical shaft is a n inscription in L atin w hich d isap p ears into tw o
carved figures of A dam an d Eve w h o seem to craw l u p the T ree of Life
1
(ill. 3).1 A long the sides of the cross are m o re L atin in scrip tio n s w hile
along the edges of th e to p p laq u e are G reek inscriptions. In the central
m ed allio n M oses raises th e B razen S e rp en t b efo re th e eyes of his
follow ers w hile p ro p h e ts clutching scrolls a ttest to the full p o w e r of the
ev en t (ill. 4). M issing from the fro n t of th e cross is the corpus, or
crucified b o d y of C hrist, w h ic h a p p e a rs to h a v e b een attac h ed to b o th
th e h o rizo n tal a n d vertical shafts. A b re a k in the pierced-circle p a tte rn
w h ich d eco rates the fro n t of the crossbars in d icates h o w large the
corpus m u st hav e b een.2
O n the back are sev en teen O ld T estam en t p ro p h e ts a n d
M atth ew , carv ed b u st-len g th d o w n th e vertical sh aft a n d fu ll-len g th o r
h alf-len g th along the h o rizo n tal, all of w h o m b e a r inscribed scrolls.
T hey seem to ra d ia te fro m th e cen tral m edallion, a com plex
a rra n g e m e n t of in te rtw in in g scrolls a n d figures, a t the c en ter o f w h ich
is the L am b of G od (Agnus D e i ) p ierced b y a personification of
S ynagogue (ill. 5). T he term in als are carv ed w ith m o n u m e n tal, highly
n atu ralistic sym bols of the E vangelists; Jo h n 's eagle is at the to p of the
cross, L u k e's ox is o n the rig h t w ith M a rk 's lio n o n th e left. T h eir
p lacem en t co rresp o n d s to the n a rra tiv e scenes fro m C h rist's life w hich
1For translations o f all inscriptions see Elizabeth C. Parker and Charles
Little, The Cloisters Cross: Its Art and Meaning (New York: Metropolitan
Museum o f Art, 1994), pp. 241-252.
2In 1969 a morse ivory co rp u s from the Kunstindustrimuseet in Oslo was
suggested to belong originally to the cross. Although the two works were
exhibited together in both New York and Oslo during the 1970’s, they are
now agreed to have no stylistic connection to one another as the co rp u s
was probably carved in the thirteenth century. For a com plete description
o f the Oslo corpus see The Cloisters Cross, pp. 30-35, and Appendix II.
2
are carved on the fronts of the plaques.3 T hus Jo hn's eagle is
com plem ented o n the fro n t w ith th e A scension on the to p plaque,
w hich in tu rn is su p p o rted by the figures of the H igh P riest (Caiaphas)
a n d Pilate in the m idst of the title (titulus) d isp u te (ill. 6). They stand
o n the titulus itself w hich rests on the H an d of G od. L uke's ox o n the
back of the right p laq u e corresponds to the th ree Passion events
(Crucifixion, D eposition a n d L am entation),4 com bined o n the term inal
front (ill. 7), w hile o n the left the scenes of the T hree M aries a t the
Tom b an d the R esurrection them atically harm o n ize w ith M ark 's lion
(ill. 8) .5
^Parker points out that these liturgical correspondences between
Evangelist symbol and Christian mystery were formalized by St. Gregory.
"The Missing Base Plaque of the Bury St. Edmunds Cross," Gesta. 14 / I
(1975), 19-26, esp. note 19.
^According to traditional iconography this scene is neither the
Lamentation nor the Entombment, since the Virgin who holds Christ's head
in the Lamentation, and the tomb o f the Entombment, are both missing.
According to Schiller the Lamentation as a separate scene "appears to have
remained unknown in art north of the Alps during the thirteenth century;
the earliest known independent formulae date from the fourteenth
century." Gertrude Schiller, Iconography of Christian Art. Janet
Seligman, trans. 2 vols. (Greenwich: New York Graphic Society Ltd., 1968),
vol. 2, p. 176. Because Christ is surrounded by mourning figures, however,
I will refer to this narrative as the Lamentation.
5The entire bottom section of the cross has been lost. We know from the
surviving inscription that Jonah was the lowest prophet carved on the
reverse of the vertical shaft. We also can assume Matthew’s Evangelist
symbol, the man, was carved on the missing terminal beneath while it is
unknown what narrative was represented on the front. For some time it
was believed the missing plaque had been found, the subject of which was
Christ before the High Priest. This theory has since been discarded. For a
description of the Caiaphas plaque and its “restoration” to the cross see
Thomas Hoving, "The Bury St. Edmunds Cross," Metropolitan Museum of Art
Bulletin. 22/10 (1964), 317-340; and The Cloisters Cross, pp. 34-35, 230-232.
For a convincing argument for the representation of the Nativity on the
plaque, see “The Missing Base Plaque of the Bury St. Edmunds Cross.”
3
The intricacy of carving testifies to the rich complexity of the
cross' m eaning. Before exam ining iconographical interpretations, it is
im portant to understand the cross as a whole. The two sides of the
cross are visually and theologically consonant. Each is a program m atic
reinforcem ent of the other, ultim ately celebrating prophesy and
fulfillment. W hat was prefigured and foretold through the prophets
during the pre-history of the church is carved on the back of the cross,
and is fulfilled through further historical narrative, and bolstered by
eternal, divine im agery on the front of the cross. The prophets on the
verso represent the Judaic foundation of the church; their inscribed
scrolls em body Old Testam ent prophesy of C hrist and H is Passion.
These testim onies (prophesies of C hrist's ordeal), w ere chosen as
unshakable evidence for the divinity of Christ. W hat the scrolls
adam antly proclaim is visualized on the front of the cross in
narratives, such as the Raising of the Brazen Serpent in the center.
Encircling the prophets both visually and ideologically are the
Evangelist symbols. Dw arfing the prophets in scale, w inged and
holding texts of their own, the beasts reinforce the m essage of the
prophets. As sym bols they rem ind us of the eternal spirituality of the
C hurch, here juxtaposed w ith the ancient and hum an. Thus the
w inged beasts com plete a unified reading of the narratives. Between
prophesy (speech / text), and historic realization in the form of the
narrative events them selves (the Passion), is prophetic history (the
Raising of the Brazen Serpent). Ultim ately the beasts and Agnus Dei
unify all three through symbol.
4
U niting these ideas of prophesy and fulfillm ent is the m issing
body of Christ as it w ould have hung on the lignum vitae. T hrough
His death and R esurrection the tree will blossom w ith life, sym bolizing
m an's redem ption. A dam and Eve craw l u p the Tree of Life,
rem inding the view er of the Tree of K now ledge and their original sin
w hich necessitated, and is absolved through, C hrist's sacrifice.
Suspended directly underneath an O ld T estam ent prefiguration of the
sam e event (the Raising of the Brazen Serpent), C hrist's body w ould
represent the ultim ate Christian suffering and salvation. C hrist's death
on the cross was not a historical narrative as the N ativity or
Deposition, but an om nipresent act of m ercy and atonem ent, a symbol
of the trium ph of faith.
One of the cross' enigm atic features is the arrangem ent of the
O ld Testam ent figures on the back sides of the shafts (ills. 2, 9-12).
W hile their individual prophesies abbreviatedly inscribed on their
scrolls easily correlate to C hrist's Passion as depicted o n the front of the
cross, their physical arrangem ent rem ains som ew hat puzzling as it
does not follow Biblical sequence. In fact, the iconographic structure
seems to be unique. Did the artist of the cross have a specific program
in mind, or d id he, as Hoving suggests, w ish to prove only that
evidence for C hrist's divinity exists throughout the Old Testam ent?6
^Hoving notes the proliferation of prophet figures and accompanying
scrolls, yet decides that “the scrolls held by the prophets on the back [of
the cross]...are in no Biblical or logical sequence, but by their very
haphazard order seem to insist that no matter where one looks in the Old
Testament there will be a clear reference to the Passion.” "The Bury St.
Edmunds Cross," p. 332.
5
H oving's theory is alluring only because of the lack of a know n m odel,
b u t is otherw ise w eak. O ne w ould expect the inventor of the cross'
program (from now on referred to for convenience as the artist) to
have follow ed a coherent sequence rath er th an have "haphazardly"
searched the Bible for m aterial.
Because no visual m odels appear to exist, it is tem pting to posit a
textual source, perhaps liturgical dram a, in w hich O ld T estam ent
prophesies are ord ered according to a logic other th an chronological,
foreshadow ing C hrist's Passion. The O rd er of the P rophets (Ordo
Prophetarum) is such a text, a n d probably developed o u t of the
C hristm as liturgy. Parker an d Little note the visual relationship of the
prophets to the Ordo Prophetarum, w hich during the M iddle Ages w as
attributed to St. A ugustine an d is now thought to have originated from
a serm on read during C hristm as M atins, authored by a fifth century
C arthaginian bishop nam ed Q uo d v u ltd eu s.7 In the Ordo, O ld
T estam ent prophets, N ew T estam ent personages an d even Gentiles are
called upon in succession to give testim ony to C hrist's divinity in order
to show those w ho do not accept Christ, specifically the Jews, the error
7The Cloisters Cross, p. 211. The authors’ strategy is to present Bury St.
Edmunds as a center for dramatic productions and thus insinuate that the
artist of the cross would have had access to these texts and seen plays which
stimulated the conception of the cross: “From the evidence of the Cloisters
cross, it seems that the artist- selectively and for his own purpose-was
drawing on the same rich vein of liturgical inspiration as did the
dramatists for their embellishments of the biblical narrative. Even without
the attribution of the cross, Bury, whose importance as a drama center in
the later medieval period has been evaluated by Gail Gibson, is an early
source of works of art that reflect a dramatic approach and was thus
potentially open to a particularly fruitful exchange.” The Cloisters Cross, p.
212.
6
of their disbelief. A lthough individual prophets on the cross can be
found in various liturgical dram as, their texts do not correspond to the
inscriptions. Thus at this juncture there are no convincing parallels
betw een the cross prophets and those in any other visual or textual
source.
Despite the lack of an identifiable textual m odel, w e can find
antecedents for the Cloisters cross' arrangem ent of O ld Testam ent
prophets. M etal crosses w ith engraved designs provide a visual and
ideological context for this form at. The Cross of C onrad II, now in the
K unsthistorisches M useum in Vienna, c. 1030, indeed represents the
prototypical m odel for processional and altar crosses w ith its square
term inals and central m edallion (ill. 13).8 The front of the cross is
entirely jew el-encrusted an d the reverse engraved w ith the standard
placem ent of Evangelist sym bols and Lam b of God. Along the shafts
the Apostles, each identified by inscription, sit w ith raised arm s in the
gesture of conversation. This com position is sim ilar to that of the
Cloisters cross w here prophets, both full and bust-length, are engaged
in discussion along the shafts of the reverse of the cross, bracketed by
the Evangelist symbols and locked into place by the central Agnus Dei
m edallion. O ther examples, such as the A ltar of Eilbertus, c. 1130-40,
8Peter Lasko refers to this cross as an example of the format employed by
the Cloisters cross. P. Lasko, Ars Sacra: 800-1200 (Harmondsworth: Pelican
History of Art, 1972), p. 168. For further discussion of the various shapes of
crosses, see The Cloisters Cross, p. 48.
7
suggest that this sort of program w as n o t new to tw elfth century
view ers (ills. 14-15).9
The top of the portable altar show s C hrist in M ajesty, seated o n
the rainbow in a central m andorla, flanked by the four Evangelist
sym bols and scenes of C hrist's life along either en d .10 S urrounding
this im age are the tw elve A postles, each seated an d bearing an
inscribed scroll w ith the opening w ords of the Credo, again in the
attitu d e of discussion. Similarly, around the sides of the altar are
standing prophets, separated b y colum ns, w ho again gesture w ith
inscribed scrolls. As on the cross, their prophesies foreshadow and bear
w itness to the events of the N ew T estam ent. It seems, then, that the
com position of the C loisters cross is p a rt of an established tradition
signaling discussion an d corroboration w hich w o u ld have been
recognizable to the com m unity of the faithful.1 1
F urther obscuring o u r understanding of the cross is the fact that
som e of the narratives represented either deviate from or com bine
k now n m odels, w hile others seem to be entirely new inventions. The
9The altar is now in the Staatliche Museen, Berlin. Christ with the four
apocalyptic beasts is on vellum, c. 1140, while the plaques are champleve
enamel. Hanns Swarzenski, Monuments o f Romanesque Art: The Art of
Church Treasures in North-Western Europe. 2nd ed. (Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 1967), p . 57, pi. 106, and Ars Sacra, p p . 173-174.
10The narrative panels from top to bottom, left to right: Annunciation,
Visitation, Nativity and Presentation in the Temple on the left, and
Crucifixion, Three Maries at the Tomb, Harrowing of Hell and Ascension on
the right.
^Parker and Little also cite two late-twelfth century examples, the
Klosterneuburg ambo, and Gospels of Henry the Lion, while mentioning a
ninth century fragmentary stone cross discovered by Mersmann with
apostles or prophets carved along the shafts. The Cloisters Cross, p. 97.
8
left term inal, for exam ple, show s the T hree M aries approaching
C hrist's em pty tom b as they are greeted by the A ngel (ill. 8). Just to the
left of the A ngel is the Resurrection. C hrist b o th looks an d gestures
heavenw ards, tow ard the H an d of G od and H is ow n A scension on the
u p p e r m ost plaque. U nderlining these narratives five soldiers sleep,
leaving the tom b unguarded. In this w ay the artist com bines the
M aries at the Tom b and the R esurrection w ithin the sam e boundaries
of the plaque, instead of respecting chronology- the M aries ap p ear after
the Resurrection. A m ore typical form at is em ployed by the Alexis
M aster in the St. A lbans Psalter (ill. 16). The sleeping soldiers are
stacked alongside an architectural conception of the em pty tom b. As
the Three M aries proceed tow ard the tom b they are h erald ed by an
angel sitting along its right edge. Faced w ith spatial lim itations, the
carver com pressed the scene, and as w ith the o th er narrative plaques,
elim inated architectural details. Because of the condensation tw o
tem porally distinct m om ents occur sim ultaneously. Strangely, the
R esurrection seem s m ore an afterthought. C hrist is truncated, pushed
off to the edge of the plaque and partly obscured behind the angel and
tomb. The pow er of this scene clearly lies w ith the greeting of the Holy
W om en an d Qnem Queritis scroll-inscription, underscored by the
elongated soldiers.
Perhaps the m ost iconographically distinct plaque on the cross is
the right term inal of the C rucifixion/D eposition/L am entation (ill. 7).
A s w as discussed, this plaque condenses three narrative m om ents into
one scene, th u s com bining elem ents from each event. Personifications
9
of the Sun and M oon over the crossbars,12 in conjunction w ith
Longinus to the left an d Oceanus at the bottom of the plaque, indicate
the Crucifixion; N icodem us' presence along w ith M ary an d John's
m ourning signify the D eposition, w hile C hrist of the L am entation,
shrouded and surro u n d ed by grieving figures, provides the physical
foundation an d them atic closure for the entire group. The carver of
the cross thus dem onstrates a skillful visual realization of a difficult
narrative am algam ation, yet reveals enigm atic references to past
m odels.
John (19:34) describes a soldier w ho pierced C hrist's side after His
death, upon w hich blood and w ater issued forth and the soldier
realized C hrist’s divinity. The synoptic gospels m ention a centurion
w ho, at the tim e of Christ's death, recognized H im as the Son of G od
(M atthew 27:54, M ark 15:39, Luke 23:47). H ence the nam e Longinus
("lance-bearer"), w as given as a conflation of the soldier and
c en tu rio n .13 Longinus stands to the left of the Crucifixion on the
term inal plaque, yet w ithout his usual foil, the spongebearer, w ho one
expects to find to C hrist’ s left. Instead of the spongebearer w e find
N icodem us rem oving the nail in C hrist's left hand. Sim ilar to
Longinus, N icodem us is w ithout his usual pair, Joseph of A rim athea
12Although primarily representative of Christ's cosmological significance,
the Sun and Moon further strengthen the theme of fulfilled prophesy. The
moon is symbolic of the Old Law eclipsed by and intelligible through the
light of the New, personified by the sun. Interestingly, Schiller mentions
that in the twelfth century the sun and moon "cease to be personified in
the Crucifixion image." Iconography of Christian Art. vol. 2, p. 109.
13The sponge-bearer is likewise never mentioned by name in any of the
gospels, yet legend has named him Stephaton.
10
who lowered Christ's dead body from the cross. W itnessing his
progress and the events of the Crucifixion /D eposition is a group of
three Jews, denoted by their tall, pointed caps. This crowd stands above
the figure of Oceanus in the lower right comer. A personification of
the w orld's oceans as he pours w ater out of an urn, this figure is also
included w ithout his usual foil, Terra.14 Even w ithout their respective
visual and theological companions each figure lends deeper m eaning
to the three events unfolding before them. W hat is striking is the
carver's m ethod; w hereas earlier ivories or m anuscript m iniatures
provide encyclopedic accounts of the Crucifixion w ith combinations of
Longinus and Stephaton, Earth and Ocean, the carver of the Cloisters
cross m anages to evoke the entire spectrum of m eaning em bodied by
each pair despite the exclusion of figures.
How, then, are w e to interpret Longinus w ithout the
spongebearer, N icodem us w ithout Joseph of Arimathea? The clue, I
believe, lies w ith the personifications of the Sun and Moon. As was
m entioned, Longinus pierced Christ's side and subsequently
recognized C hrist’s divinity. More im portantly, the Golden Legend
14Most likely originating from a classical source, Earth and Sea when read
together are part of a tradition extending from the ninth century
reinforcing the universal implications of the Crucifixion through
allegory. When illustrated with the Earth and Ocean, the sun and moon can
be interpreted as fire and air, representing the four elements and lending
cosmological significance to the Crucifixion. Iconography of Christian Art.
vol. 2, p. 109. One can find many examples of this pairing in earlier ivories.
A ninth century book-cover in the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, as cited by
Parker and Little, shows Oceanus and Terra in reversed position. More
often Earth occupies the lower left zone, as in the cover of a Gospel Book c.
1050 now in Oxford in the Bodleian Library, or in another eleventh
century panel of Notre-Dame of Tongeren.
11
reports he h ad been afflicted previously w ith "a m alady of the eyes;
an d by chance he touched his eyes w ith a d ro p of the blood of C hrist
w hich ran d o w n the shaft of his lance, an d im m ediately his eyes w ere
h ealed ."15 A lm ost em erging directly from his eyes, the bust-length
im age of the Sun underscores this them e of sight restored. The artist of
the cross physically joined the Sun an d L onginus in his carving to
reinforce the central fact of the Crucifixion, that th rough C hrist’s d eath
the N ew Law rises, illum inating w h at w as once blindness (ill. 17).
U nderstood in this w ay, L onginus’ visual pairing w ith N icodem us
m akes sense. A m em ber of the Sanhedrin, the Jew ish council of
Jerusalem , N icodem us not only w as tau g h t by C hrist d u rin g nocturnal
visits (John 3:1-21), b u t also "upheld the interests of the C hristians in
all councils of the Jews."16 O n the plaque he stands am ong a crow d of
Jew ish m en w ho, I w ould argue, are m ore than m ere on-lookers; they
are sym bolic of the (unbelieving) Jew s before w hom N icodem us
literally "upholds" the interests of the C hristians (ill. 18). The on
lookers w itness the triu m p h of C hrist an d H is C hurch, although their
very "seeing" w as in itself an act of "blindness." The carver thus
positions them as reluctant w itnesses to the fall of the O ld Law and the
tru th of the N ew .17 The M oon, in the m idst of being eclipsed, seem s to
15The Golden Legend of Tacobus de Voraeine. Granger Ryan and Helmut
Ripperger, trans., New York, 1941; (repr. New Hampshire: Ayer Company,
Publishers, Inc., 1991), p. 191.
16The Golden Legend, p. 56.
17I would use this interpretation as one of several to counteract Hoving’s
argument that the Cloisters cross was inspired by fierce anti-Jewish
sentiment. Given this argument one must wonder why a small-scale altar
12
w ith d ra w am o n g th em as the S un sp rin g s fo rw ard . T h u s the tw o sides
of the p laq u e balance each o th er visually a n d ideologically, w ith
L on g in u s a n d N ico d em u s, G entile a n d Jew , enclosing the event. T he
O ld T estam ent p ro p h esies fro m the b ack of th e cross, a n d the
p re fig u ra tio n of th e C rucifixion w ith th e B razen S erp en t m ed allio n on
th e fro n t, rev erb erate w ith in N icodem us, th e Jew ish cro w d a n d the
M oon; w h a t w a s fo reto ld is n o w realized, a n d those w h o w e re b lin d are
forced to "see" th e tru th o f C h rist’ s salvation.
L onginus a n d N ico d em u s sta n d o n to p of a seated, m o u rn in g
fig u re a n d Oceanus respectively. T he rip p lin g w a te r flow ing fro m
O cean 's u rn m eets the cu rv in g scroll of th e figure seated in the lo w er
cross, presumably never seen by the Jewish community, would be
painstakingly carved to attack it, rather than address the im m ediate needs
o f its worshippers. Rather than being polem ically anti-Semitic, I would
argue the cross’ program recognizes the Judaic foundation of the Christian
church while celebrating the triumph of the latter. Such an
interpretation could be used to explain the unique representation of
Synagogue piercing the Lamb o f God on the back m edallion. The A gnus Dei
m edallion has eluded satisfactory interpretation, although the them es of
prophesy and fulfillm ent, sight versus blindness may serve as clues to
understanding its power. Parker and Little summarize m ost succincdy the
anom alous representation o f Synagogue piercing the Lamb of God; it is
exceptional that Ecclesia is absent from the scene since the two
personifications are "consistently paired in Crucifixion scenes from the
inception of this symbolic and allegorical form ulation in Carolingian art."
The Cloisters Cross, p. 112. Without a personification of the Church the
m edallion is truly unique, and has been interpreted as another anti-Jewish
statement. According to Schiller, during the twelfth century
representations of Synagogue "emphasize the defeat of Jewry, the sin of
unbelief and the contrast between the Jewish cult of sacrifice and Christ's
sacrificial Death." Iconography of Christian Art. vol. 2, p. 112. The Cloisters
A gnus Dei m edallion, then, juxtaposed with the front m edallion of the
Brazen Serpent and the crucified body of Christ now missing from the
front of the cross, would reinforce the idea o f sacrifice vs. sacrificial death,
as well as the triumph of the new Law. Truly this aspect of the cross is the
most in need of systematic study.
13
corner of the term inal. H e ad in h an d , this b eard ed m an echoes the
p o stu re of Oceanus, a n d the tw o together are visual parentheses,
enclosing the d e ad b o d y of C hrist (ill. 19). This figure is an anom aly
n o t because of a m issing co unterpart, b u t by his very inclusion. W ho is
he? H is p o stu re recalls th at of Joseph at the N ativity, y et he could also
be Joseph of A rim athea, w h o w as p resen t at b o th the L am entation and
the E ntom bm ent. A lso a m em ber of the S anhedrin, Joseph of
A rim athea w as a secret disciple of C hrist w h o requested Pilate's
perm ission to take d o w n C hrist’ s d e ad body in o rd er to p rep are it w ith
spices an d linen a n d w ith N icodem us give H im p ro p e r b u rial in
Jo sep h ’ s o w n tom b.
A t the sam e tim e, how ever, his scroll carries an inscription from
Z echariah 12:10: "they shall m o u rn for him as [one m o u rn eth for] an
only son." T he sentim ent of this passage has been in terp reted as
heightening the em otive d ram a b etw een the V irgin a n d C hrist after
H is d e ath on the cross, underscoring h e r planctus, or lam ent, an d thus
facilitating the b eliev er's identification w ith the V irgin's com passion.18
T he m ain flaw in this in te rp retatio n is the V irgin's absence from the
scene. W hereas she is m ost often sh o w n eith er kissing o r caressing the
h ead of h er d e a d so n in L am entation scenes, accom panied by M ary
M agdalene a n d M ary of C leophas, in th e C loisters cross p laque the
18“The depiction of Mary holding Jesus’ right hand, a motif borrowed from
Byzantine art, corresponds to her planctus, a lament in poetic form...the
lament finds its counterpart in images such as this one that move the
believer to identify with the Virgin’s com passio, her shared suffering,
with her son.” The Cloisters Cross, pp. 157-158.
14
V irgin is not represented thoug h the other tw o M aries cover their faces
in grief. A lthough it is not exceptional th at she should n o t be repeated
in the com position, a distinction reserved for Christ, her replacem ent
is indeed peculiar. W hile the em otive pow er of the scene cannot be
denied, and is certainly accentuated by the em phasis o n C hrist's
w ounds, it seem s logical the m eaning of Z echariah's text w ould not
hinge on a figure n o t represented in the plaque.
Instead of the V irgin the person closest to C hrist's face is a m an
w earing a tall, pointed cap like those of the crow d backing N icodem us,
w ho intently focuses o n C hrist as though sadly scrutinizing H im .
N otably, he does n o t cover his face in m ourning; he is perfectly able to
see w h at is in front of him . A lthough w h at is inscribed o n the seated
figure’ s scroll, "they shall m o u rn for him as [one m ourneth] for an
only son," indeed seem s to refer to the Virgin, the unabbreviated text
of Zech. 12:10 runs:
A nd I w ill p o u r u p o n the house of David, an d upon the
inhabitants of Jerusalem , the spirit of grace and of
supplications: and they shall look u p o n m e w hom they have
pierced, an d they shall m o u rn for him , as one m ourneth for
his only son, an d shall be in bitterness for him , as one that is
in bitterness for his firstborn.
The unidentified onlooker is a Jew ish w itness to C hrist's d eath at the
h ands of his ow n people, m uch like the crow d behind N icodem us.
Z echariah's w ords, then, speak not only to the Virgin an d devout
believers, b u t also to those responsible for the Crucifixion. The angled,
m ourning faces of the Jew ish w itness an d Joseph of A rim athea fram e
15
C hrist’s head; they illustrate continuity, not rejection of the past.
Joseph recognized Christ's divinity before H is death, w hile the
m ourner, underlined by the text from Zechariah, recognizes C hrist
after the Crucifixion, thus w hen it is "too late." Prophesy is once again
fulfilled through the juxtaposition of sight versus blindness.
In recounting these narrative m om ents, the artist of the cross
reveals a profound understanding not only of visual, b u t also textual
im agery, while sim ultaneously dem onstrating his skill in
m anipulating com positional and iconographic details to enrich the
view er's experience of the cross.
The iconographical possibilities of the cross are thus rich and
varied, and have been explored by various authors. In the m ost
general sense the iconographical arrangem ent is typical for m edieval
processional and altar crosses.19 A t the sam e time the cross presents
m any problem s and is in itself an anom aly. A lthough during the
tw elfth century precious liturgical objects such as altar crosses m ust
have proliferated, only tw o other ivory crosses, carved both recto and
19Here I am referring to the most basic arrangement of the cross, with the
crucified body of Christ (now missing) hanging on the front, with the
Evangelist symbols and Lamb of God on the back. Many metal crosses from
the tenth through the twelfth centuries, as well as the above mentioned
ivory Castile crucifix, are decorated on the reverse with the apocalyptic
beasts surrounding the Agnus Dei in the center. Examples in metal include
the Cross of Mathilda, c. 980 in Essen (Monuments of Romanesque Art. pi.
29); the Cross of Conrad II, c. 1030 in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in
Vienna (Monuments of Romanesque Art. pi. 32); a reliquary cross from
the late eleventh century from the Staatliche Museen (Ars Sacra, fig. 167),
and the cross of St. Modoaldus, c. 1107, perhaps attributable to Roger of
Helmarhausen, now in the Schniitgen Museum, Cologne (Ars Sacra, fig.
165).
16
verso, a re n o w extant. The C astile crucifix (c. 1060, n o w in M adrid),
a n d the D an ish G u n h ild cross (c. 1075, c u rren tly h o u se d in
C o p enhagen), are also carv ed w ith figures a n d inscriptions rela tin g to
ren ew al th ro u g h C h rist's d e a th a n d R esurrection (ills. 20-23).20 B oth
th e C astile a n d G u n h ild crosses stress the re d e m p tio n of m an k in d
th ro u g h C h rist’s d e a th .21 N e ith e r of these crosses, ho w ev er,
ap p ro ach es the visual intricacies o f text a n d ico n o g rap h y exhibited b y
the C loisters cross. Scholars are th u s faced w ith th e p re d ic a m e n t of
a ttem p tin g to u n d e rs ta n d a w o rk w ith o u t historical reco rd . T he cross
has becom e a u n iq u e object for w h ic h n o d irect m o d el or antecedent,
20The Castile crucifix was presented to the church of San Isidoro in Leon
by King Ferdinand I and Qjieen Sancha, and is now housed in the Museo
Arqueologico Nacional in Madrid. The cross of Lady Gunhild, in the
Nationalm useet in Copenhagen, according to Parker and Little, “has been
dated about 1075 and attributed to an English artist working in Denmark.”
For a discussion of these two crosses and their relationship to the Cloisters
cross, see The Cloisters Cross, pp. 132-144. In his survey o f twelfth-century
English ivories, John Beckwith includes another morse ivory crucifix
which is now in the Louvre. Originally adorning the cover o f a twelfth-
century Evangelistary from St. Gereon in Cologne, this crucifix is carved
only on one side. Beckwith disputes Goldschmidt’s theory that the crucifix
could be linked specifically to Sibylla, wife of Thierry d’Alsace, Count o f
Flanders, who died 1163. Because he provides no further analysis, stylistic
or otherwise, Beckwith’s attribution to twelfth-century England remains
unsupported. J. Beckwith, Ivory Carvings in Early Medieval England (New
York Graphic Society Ltd., 1972), cat. 87. Parker and Little consider this
piece North French or Meuse Valley, and accept to connection to Sibylla.
The Cloisters Cross, pp. 30-32.
21 On the Castile crucifix Christ is triumphant in death; His eyes are open
and His wounds not visible on His feet or on His side. Further, above the
co rp u s is His Ascension into heaven. Beneath the cross is Adam, whose
original sin Christ, the New Adam, obliterates. On the reverse the
Evangelist sym bols are carved within square frames, capping the ends of
each shaft while in the center is the A gnus Dei, or Lamb o f God. All five
animals clearly refer to the Last Judgment. Salvation and triumph over
death is expressed on the Gunhild cross again through images of the Last
Judgment, and m oreover by personifications of Life, Death, Church and
Synagogue w hich surrounded the now-m issing corpus.
17
either physical or textual, survives. After thirty years of research and
debate scholars have been unable to agree on a fixed date for the cross,
to decide w ho determ ined its theological program or to identify its
textual sources beyond the Bible.
18
Section II: D ate and Style
W hile the English attrib u tio n has rem ained constant22, scholars
have disputed the d ate of the cross since the tim e of its purchase by the
M etropolitan M useum of A rt in N ew York in 1963.23 The cross'
22T. A. Heslop implies he feels otherwise while offering no concrete
alternative. He describes iconographic details, specifically Synagogue
piercing the Lamb of God, and the Brazen Serpent raised on a forked stick
instead of a column as ‘ ‘unattested in England,” and the tall, conical Jewish
hats “best attested east of the Rhine.” T. A. Heslop, review of Parker and
Little, The Cloisters Cross. (New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art,
19941. Burlington Magazine. 136, 1994, pp. 459-460. As for the costumes
being “wrong for England,” Ruth Mellinkoff in her treatment of Jewish
dress in Northern European art finds no quarrel with the cross’ English
attribution. R. Mellinkoff, Outcasts and Signs of Otherness in Northern
European Art of the Middle Ages 2 vols. (Los Angeles: University of
Berkeley Press, 1993), vol. 1, p. 66. Furthermore, Parker and Little assert
that the type of armor worn by the sleeping soldiers at the tomb is
characteristic of late eleventh and twelfth century England, and that the
style of Christ’s p erizonium (long, not short above the knees, and tied on
the side), is a “specifically English motif," also occurring in the St. Albans
Psalter and Pembroke MS 120. The Cloisters Cross, pp. 87,80.
23W. Mersmann, “Das Elfenbeinkreuz der Sammlung Topic-Mimara,”
Wallraf-Richartz-Tahrbuch. 25 (1963), 7-108; T. Hoving, “The Bury St.
Edmunds Cross,” pp. 317-340; S. Longland, “Pilate Answered: What I Have
Written I Have Written,” Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin. 26 (1968).
410-429; — . “The Bury St. Edmunds Cross: Its Exceptional Place in
English Twelfth Century Art,” Connoisseur. 172 (1969), 163-173; — . ”A
Literary Aspect of the Bury St. Edmunds Cross,” Metropolitan Museum of
Art Journal. 2 (1969), 45-74; The Year 1200: A Centennial Exhibition at The
Metropolitan Museum of Art Exh. cat. K. Hoffmann, ed. (New York: The
Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1970), p. 57; W. Sauerlander, Exhibition
Review of “The Year 1200,” Art Bulletin. 53 (1971) 512; L. Stone, Sculpture
in Britain: The Middle Ages (Harmondsworth: Pelican History of Art, 1972),
p. 87.; P. Lasko, Ars Sacra: 800-1200. pp. 167-168 ; J. Beckwith, Ivory
Carvings, pp. 107; N. Scarfe, “The Bury St. Edmunds Cross: The Work of
Master Hugo?” Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology 33.
(1973-75), 75-85; T. E. Christiansen, “Ivories: Authenticity and
Relationships,” Acta archaeologica 46 (1975), 119-133; E. C. Parker, “The
Missing Base Plaque of the Bury St. Edmunds Cross,” pp. 19-26; K. Bateman,
St. Albans: Its Ivory and Manuscript Workshops: A Solution to the St.
Albans/Burv Dilemma Univ. of Michigan Ph.D., 1976; D. Gaborit-Chopin,
19
enigm atic p ro venance leaves us w ith no factual account of its history
before the early 1950's.24 In 1956 the cross w as considered by the
M etropolitan M useum w hile it w as offered for sale by its ow ner, A nte
T opic-M im ara, w h o k ep t his v ast collection in a Z urich b a n k vault.
Topic-M im ara declined to p ro v id e a n account of the cross' provenance
before his p u rch ase of it; th u s w e are left w ith only the evidence
em bodied b y the cross itself. Speculation o n the cross' d ate initially
ran g ed across tw o centuries. W iltrud M ersm ann, T opic-M im ara's w ife
a n d in 1963 the first to publish the cross, suspected an eleventh century
date, w hile T hom as H oving, the first to pu b lish after its acquisition,
argues for a d ate to w ard the en d of the tw elfth century, b etw een 1181-
1190.25
Elfenbeinkunst im Mittelalter (Berlin, 1978) 107-108; E.C. Parker, The
Descent From the Cross: Its Relation to the Extra-Liturgical Depositio Drama
(New York University: Garland Publishing, 1978); — . "Master Hugo as
Sculptor: A Source for the Style o f the Bury Bible,” Gesta20/1 (1981), 99-
109; D. Kahn, “Recent Discoveries of Romanesque Sculpture at St. Albans,”
Studies in Medieval Sculpture. F. H. Thompson, ed. (London, 1983), pp. 71-89;
P. Lasko, "Ivory Carvings," entry in the Arts Council o f Great Britain,
English Romanesque Art 1066-1200 Exh. cat., Hayward Gallery (London: Arts
council of Great Britain and Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1984), pp. 225-26; U.
Nilgen, “Das grosse Walrossbeinkreuz in den ‘Cloisters’,” Zeitschrift fur
K unstgeschichte. 48 (1985). 39-64; Karl Morrison. History as a Visual Art
in the Twelfth Century Renaissance (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1990), pp. 38-45; Parker and Little, The Cloisters Cross: Heslop,
review of Parker and Little, The Cloisters Cross, pp. 459-460.
24Here Heslop's questioning o f an English provenance for the cross is
enigmatically sharpened as he suggests the cross may have been a 'trophy
of conquest,’ perhaps ’acquired' through the Nazi takeover during World
War II. Review of Parker and Little, The Cloisters Cross, p. 459.
25Mersmann originally established the English provenance for the cross,
citing a Winchester style, and ultimately believed the cross as
representative of monumental Insular crosses popular in the eleventh
century.
20
A lthough a d a te w ithin the 1100's is n o w generally ag reed upon,
p ro p o sed dates continue to fall w ithin the entire spectrum of the
tw elfth century. P eter Lasko, for exam ple, places the cross early in the
century, b etw een 1100-1130; John B eckw ith agrees w ith H o v in g 's d ate
in the latter p a rt of the century, w hile E lizabeth P arker a n d C harles
Little, the first to a u th o r a m o n o g rap h o n the C loisters cross, settle for
an unspecified, m id-century date. In 1989 the cross w as subjected to
carbon-14 d atin g processes in hopes of resolving the m atter. R ather
th an substantiate a tw elfth cen tu ry date, how ever, the tests revealed
only that the ivory d ates from the seventh century.26
R unning th ro u g h o u t m ost of these arg u m en ts o n d ate is an
uneasy agreem ent on the cross' overall style. In his prelim inary
exam ination of the cross in 1964, H oving links the style of the cross to
that of the Bible of B ury St. E d m u n d s (c. 1138, ills. 53-58 ), th u s the
origin of the p o p u lar nam e "th e C ross of Bury St. E d m u n d s."27 W hile
26“Instead of locating the material within the Romanesque period, two
independent analyses determined that the tusk had come from a walrus
whose death had occurred toward the end of the seventh century A.D.,
probably 676 according to one report and 694 according to the other.” The
Cloisters Cross, pp. 18-19.
27Hoving is responsible for first establishing the connection to the Bury
St. Edmunds abbey, not only through stylistic similarities between the cross
and the Bury Bible, but also through inscriptions on the cross which match
those painted on a Bury St. Edmunds choir screen. Although he saw the
Bible's illuminations and the cross' carving as stylistically parallel, he did
not date the cross within the 1130's and instead assigned a late twelfth
century date. His primary evidence for this shift rests on Abbot Samson
whose anti-Jewish policies affected Bury during the 1190's, and who
Hoving believes might have influenced the perceived anti-Jewish
sentiments expressed through the cross' inscriptions. To account for the
time gap between the Bury Bible and Abbot Samson, Hoving postulates that
the majority of the cross' carving was completed by mid-century, and the
21
dissension continues to surface, along w ith occasional re-examinations
of style, m ost scholars agree the Bury Bible w as the primary influence
upon the carver of the cross due to the visual consonance of damp-fold
drapery patterns betw een the illuminations and the carving.28 This
argument rewards the Bury Bible with stylistic and chronological
precedence. The tendency has been to interpret the cross' perceived
stylistic parallels to the Bible, a work for which a secure date is known,
as influenced but not influencing. Consequently the Cloisters cross is
considered a m id-twelfth century production of Bury St. Edmunds,
w hose artist w as impacted primarily by the illuminations of the Bury
Bible.
There are, however, a few differing opinions which
provocatively weaken this standard interpretation.29 Lasko, as was
mentioned, proposes a date early in the twelfth century and minimizes
stylistic similarities betw een the cross and the Bury Bible. Rather than
exhibiting a later incarnation of Master H ugo's early twelfth century
stylized drapery patterns, the Cloisters cross embodies in Lasko's
more inflammatory inscriptions added later, personally overseen by Abbot
Samson. "The Bury St. Edmunds Cross," p. 339.
28Most recently Parker and Little’s book re-emphasizes stylistic
connections to the Bible, while providing a brief synopsis of the most
relevant scholarship to this effect. The Cloisters Cross, pp. 198-206.
29Heslop vehemently takes issue with the accepted Bury attribution. He
states the style of the cross “is not close to anything made at Bury and, even
if it were, this would prove little at a time when artists and style traveled
widely and rapidly.” Review of Parker and Little, The Cloisters Cross, p. 459.
Further, he disputes the textual links proposed between the cross’
inscriptions and other Bury examples. Heslop’s argument would be
stronger, however, if he advanced an alternative to the English, Bury
attributions.
22
opinion a tentative form w hich m u st have preceded the Bible. W hile
acknow ledging the "slight beginnings" of the dam p-fold drap ery style
of the cross' carving, Lasko states the cross in no w ay represents its
fully-developed form .30 Instead L asko's com parative focus rests on late
eleventh century Lifege ivories an d "th eir English relatives of the
second half of the eleventh century."31 Specifically he cites the V-fold
drapery of M oses in the front m edallion as parallel to those of an
A postle to the right of the Crucifixion in an ivory book cover, carved c.
1050 (ill. 24).32 Lasko also points to m ore general traits such as "the
sam e rath er plum p, ro u n d faces, large, alm ost globular eyes, an d wavy,
close-fitting hair."33 Further, Lasko reveals that the general form of the
cross, one capped w ith square term inals, "is based fundam entally on an
eleventh-century tradition established by the im perial cross in Vienna
[the C ross of C onrad II, ill. 13], w hich enjoyed great popularity in the
early tw elfth century," and argues
only pieces of "m inor im portance” sh ared this form at in th e late
tw elfth century.34
A lthough a them atic correlation exists betw een the Brussels
plaque an d the cross,35 obvious gaps in style and iconographic
30Ats Sacra, p. 167; English Romanesque Art 1066-1200. p. 226.
31 Ars Sacra, p. 167.
32The ivory panel is now in the Musees Royaux d’Art et d’Histoire in
Brussels, and probably originally decorated the cover of a gospel book.
33Ars Sacra, p. 167.
34Ars Sacra, p. 168. Here he cites H. Schnitzler, "Das sogenannte Grosse
Bernwardskreuz,1 ' Karolingische und ottonische Kunst (Weisbaden, 1957).
35The Cloisters Cross, pp. 131-132. Parker and Little broaden Lasko’s dating
range for the plaque to c. 1030-1050.
23
com position signal a distinct chronological distance. The general style
of elongated figures in close-fitting, ground-length tunics is som ew hat
sim ilar, yet the cross deviates significantly from the Brussels panel's
eleventh century m odes of representation. A t the top of the plaque
C hrist ascends into heaven, stepping and reaching upw ards as though
grasping at the decorative fram e of the panel or tow ard the im plied
H an d of God. O n the cross a radically different strategy is em ployed;
C hrist hovers in the air above an on-looking crow d w hich includes
M ary and John. C louds obscure His body above the w aist while
flanking angels unfurl inscribed scrolls on either side. M eyer Schapiro
discusses this type of "disappearing Christ" as popular in England after
the tenth century.36 Interestingly, on the Cloisters term inal plaque
C hrist during the Resurrection closely m im ics the "w alking u p to
H eaven" Ascension posture. As the Resurrection itself w as rarely
portrayed until the tw elfth century, perhaps this instance is one of
transition; w e see how the carver m ight have relied on past m odels to
create original im agery for a new ly represented narrative m om ent.
The m ost patent divergence betw een the carvings is signaled by
Crucifixion iconography. O n the Brussels ivory C hrist is alm ost fully
frontal, w ith both arm s still outstretched on the cross. His costum e, a
garm ent w hich covers m ost of His body, is m arkedly different from
that of C hrist on the cross term inal. M ore significantly, the Brussels
36Meyer Schapiro, “The Image of the Disappearing Christ: The Ascension
in English Art Around the Year 1000,” Gazette des Beaux-Arts. 1943, pp. 135-
152.
24
C hrist is show n in trium ph. A lthough H is eyes are perhaps shut,
indicative of death, His frontal posture, lack of obvious w ounds from
the nails and crow n low ered over H is head by the H and of God, signify
a m ore rem ote, regal Christ w ho trium phs even in death, rather than
the hum an C hrist in the right term inal plaque of the cross. Em phasis
on the structure of the cross itself, the inclusion of Ecclesia, the
personification of the Church, collecting blood in a chalice and the
pairing of Longinus w ith the spongebearer and of the two thieves
provide further contrast w hich dem onstrates d o se to a century of
iconographical change. Despite these drastic differences there are
compelling stylistic parallels w hich Lasko observed. Facial types and
drapery patterns in some details of the Brussels plaque and the cross are
close, although it is evident the cross could not have been carved
during the eleventh century. It seem s m ost benefitial, then, to search
for ivories carved w ithin the sam e century and geographic region as
the cross.
A t the other extrem e in dating are U rsula N ilgen’ s stylistic
com parisons w ith w orks produced outside of England, as well as those
connected to the m onastery of St. Albans.37 W hile N ilgen believes a
strict Bury St. E dm unds attribution inhibits a full understanding of the
cross, she agrees there is a connection betw een the drapery patterns of
the Bible and the carvings. In her opinion the cross w arrants a date c.
1170 and is thus representative of early Gothic. H er closest stylistic
37"Das grosse Walrossbeinkreuz," 1985.
25
evidence lies w ith C ontinental w orks such as stone figures from the
cloister of N otre-D am e-en-V aux at C halons-sur-M arne (ill. 25), dated
w ithin the third q u arter of the tw elfth century, stained glass from St.
Etienne at Troyes (ill. 26) c. 1170, an d C hannel-style m anuscripts, the
m ost convincing exam ple of w hich is th e C apuchin Bible (ills. 27-28), c.
1170. The Bible's illum inations an d the cross are sim ilar in their use of
m edallions crow ded w ith figures w hose curving, inscribed scrolls
violate the confines of their fram es. D rapery styles and facial types,
how ever, are in m y opinion too divergent betw een the w orks to
indicate a shared date. Further, the device of unfurled, inscribed scrolls
w inding over the surface of the illum inations is p a rt of a traditional
stylistic lineage in all m edia, and thus cannot be seen as a
chronologically distinct design.38 N ilgen also proposes a late-tw elfth
century connection betw een the C apuchin Bible an d the Sim on M aster,
and his w orkshop at St. Albans.39 Lasko an d N ilgen's argum ents are
im portant, then, in establishing the ultim ate ends of the spectrum for
style an d date of the cross, Lasko representing the earliest and N ilgen
the latest it could possibly be.
W hile m any argum ents have been advanced in favor of the
Bury Bible style, the possibility of an early tw elfth century St. Albans
38The Lambeth Bible, c. 1140, for example, utilizes this format. Other
earlier metalwork examples include the portable altar of Eilbertus of
Cologne (ills. 13-14); and the reliquary casket of St. Andrew, c. 1100-1130,
now in the treasury of St. Servatius in Siegburg (Monuments of
Romanesque Art. pi. 193).
39Nilgen concludes "Abbot Simon of St. Albans had the intellectual
qualifications for creating the program o f the cross, even though he could
not be specifically linked to it as patron." The Cloisters Cross, p. 38.
2 6
influence h as b e e n neglected. I w ish to explore stylistic connections
b e tw e e n the C loisters cross an d early -tw elfth cen tu ry w o rk s fro m St.
A lbans n o t necessarily to arg u e for a strict d a te o r p ro v en an ce, b u t to
rev eal h o w com plex th e cross is n o t only in style a n d co m position b u t
also in ico nography, th u s ex p an d in g the cross' sources ra th e r th an
lim iting them . B ecause th e cross is tru ly sin g u lar, com parisons to
o th e r ivories, p rim a rily e x ta n t in frag m e n ta ry form , h a v e b een few an d
far betw een. W hile th ey have p o in te d to th e B ury Bible o r o th e r
co n tem p o rary sources, p rev io u s sch o lars h av e failed to establish
co n tex tu al p rec ed e n ts for the cross, iv o ry o r otherw ise.
A lth o u g h g a p s in the historical rec o rd re n d e r it im possible to
n am e a specific a rtist a n d /o r exact d a te for the cross, th e w o rk can be
p laced w ith in a n artistic trad itio n . C o m p ariso n s to o th e r ivories,
m an u scrip ts, sto n e carv in g a n d m e ta lw o rk from th e tw elfth cen tu ry
help to establish a stylistic fram ew o rk a n d y ield clues as to w h e re the
a rtist m ig h t h a v e b e e n train ed . A n o val box fro m the V ictoria an d
A lb ert M u seu m a n d tw o liturgical com bs, one fro m th e L loyd-B aker
collection n o w in th e V ictoria a n d A lb ert M useum , a n d the o th e r in
V erd u n , are the e arliest ivory c arv ed fo reru n n ers w e h a v e to th e
C loisters cross, d a tin g to the first p a rt of the tw elfth century an d
o rig in atin g in St. A lbans. A lso a flo u rish in g cen ter o f m a n u scrip t
p ro d u ctio n , the St. A lbans scrip to riu m is cred ited w ith the St. A lbans
P salter (c. 1123, H ildesheim , St. G o d eh ard ), w hich is th o u g h t to hav e
27
been illum inated by the Alexis M aster .40 This m asterpiece represents
the culm ination of the St. A lbans style of the tw elfth century and
influenced the pro d u ctio n of tw o other m anuscripts, a N ew T estam ent
cycle now in Pem broke College at C am bridge (MS 120, c. 1125), and a
Life an d M iracles of St. E dm und in the P ierpont M organ Library (MS
736, c. 1130). O f specific relevance to this p ap er is the Pem broke MS
120.41 O ther m anuscripts and ivories from the second q u arter of the
century, both from St. A lbans an d Bury, vary stylistically. These
variances, along w ith the relative scarcity of carvings them selves,
render English ivories especially difficult to localize an d d ate.42
Beckwith places separate ivory plaques of D aniel in the L ion's D en and
the D eposition w ithin either a St. A lbans o r Bury St. E dm unds
40For the most complete treatment of the St. Albans Psalter, see Otto Pacht,
C. R. Dodwell and Francis Wormald, The St. Albans Psalter (Psalter AlhaniL
London, 1960.
41 The Morgan MS 736, almost certainly produced at Bury, will not be closely
considered in this paper. The illuminations, while based on those of the St.
Albans Psalter, are the work of a lesser hand, and since they depict the life
o f St. Edmund, follow an iconographic program different than that of the
cross. For reproductions of the illuminations, please see E. Parker
McLachlan's dissertation The Scriptorium of Burv St. Edmunds in the
Twelfth Century (1965; repr. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1986).
What is important about the Life and Miracles, however, is that it proves
early twelfth century artistic exchange between the St. Albans and Bury St.
Edmunds monasteries. Kauffmann concludes that "the Alexis Master or an
assistant came to Bury to carry out the prefatory miniatures for this
manuscript, which is otherwise the work of local scribes and illuminators.
A date c. 1130, indicated by the relationship with the St. Albans Psalter, is
supported by the evidence of copies of letters from Henry I and Prior Talbot
to Abbot Anselm of Bury inserted at the beginning of the book." English
Romanesque Art 1066-1200. p. 95.
42For comprehensive treatments of English ivory carvings, I have relied
on Beckwith's Ivory Carvings. For more focused compendia I have also
relied on Katherine Bateman's St. Albans: Its Ivory and Manuscript
Workshops, and English Romanesque Art 1066-1200.
28
w orkshop.43 Also of consideration is the Bury Bible (Cambridge,
Corpus Christi College, MS 2), which all agree originated at Bury St.
Edm unds no later than 1138.44
The earliest ivory stylistically com parable to the cross is an oval
box from the Victoria and Albert M useum w hich Beckwith dates to
1120 and attributes to St. Albans (ills. 29-30). While Bateman agrees on
a St. Albans provenance, she pushes the date forw ard five years.45
Encircling the sides of the box are two pairs of m ale figures. One pair
sit astride lions and face each other, holding whips, while the other
pair is of centaurs shooting bow s away from each other. The ribs of the
centaurs and lions are visible, carved as successions of parallel grooves
in the same m anner as those of A dam and Eve on the cross (ill. 3).
Clutching the base of the lignum vitae, A dam and Eve are at the same
time gaunt and flabby. Eve's breasts sag to her lower rib, and along the
sides of both A dam and Eve carved grooves clearly indicate their
prom inent ribs, yet at the same time swollen stomachs anchor both
figures. M eanwhile stunted and thin arm s and legs shimmy their long
bodies up the cross, just as the thin arm s of the m en on the Victoria
and Albert box m anipulate the bows and arrows. This device is found
also in the St. Albans Psalter illum ination of the Fall of M an (ill. 31).
A dam and Eve's anatomies are delineated by elliptical sections,
43Bateman does not treat these carvings.
44Kauffmann provides the most complete discussion of this manuscript in
“The Bury Bible,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, vol. 29,
1966, pp. 60-81.
45Ivorv Carvings, p. 131, and St. Albans: Its Ivory and Manuscript
Workshops, pp. 55-59.
29
im plying a m u scu latu re, y e t th e ir ribs a re stressed w ith a co rresp o n d in g
series of p arallel lines.
O th e r early carvings w h ic h are stylistically p e rtin e n t to the cross
are the tw o liturgical com bs (ills. 32-35), again of d isp u ted date. O f the
tw o, the V ictoria a n d A lbert M u se u m 's com b fro m the L loyd-B aker
collection is the m ore relev an t.46 W hile B eckw ith p ro p o ses 1120,
B atem an argues for a d a te closer to 1125; they b o th agree on S t A lbans
as the probable w o rk sh o p .47 T he p rim ary sim ilarities b e tw ee n these
objects are co m p o sitio n a n d d ra p e ry p attern s. Like the cross, the com b
is com pletely w o rk ed . N a rrativ e scenes, w h ic h in clu d e the N ativ ity ,
Flight in to E gypt, C rucifixion a n d E n to m b m en t on one side, a n d the
M assacre of the Innocents, A d o ra tio n o f th e M agi, a n d A n n u n ciatio n
to the S h ep h erd s o n the o th er, entirely co v er b o th surfaces. D espite the
com plexity of arran g em en t, very few fram ing devices create b o u n d a rie s
b e tw ee n scenes. T his sam e p h e n o m e n o n h as alread y b e e n discu ssed as
46lvory Carvings, p. 132. The Verdun comb, housed in the Musee de la
Princerie, is not of great relevance to this examination, yet I include it
because all (Beckwith, Bateman and Paul Williamson in English
Romanesque Art 1066-1200) agree on an early twelfth century, St. Albans
attribution. Stylistically the comb and cross do not have much in common.
Not as packed with figures as the Lloyd-Baker comb and cross, the Verdun
comb is also divided into compartments with framing devices, a feature not
found in the other two works. Similar narratives, however, are included:
Last Supper, Arrest and Flagellation on one side, and the Entombment,
Three Maries at the Tomb and Noli m e Tangere on the other. The
beginnings o f dam p-fold drapery are noticeable (Christ and soldier of
Flagellation), and facial types are not exclusively rendered in profile. In
fact Christ in the Arrest, the stand-by soldier of the Flagellation and one of
the Maries at the Tomb and upper left soldier at Entombment are shown in
three-quarter view.
47St. Albans: Its Ivory and Manuscript Workshops, pp. 43-50. Here Bateman
discusses both combs, relating them specifically to the St. Albans Psalter.
30
it appears on the cross' term inal plaques. E ven though tw o narratives
coexist on each plaque, there are no divisions betw een scenes. The
enshrouded C hrist of the L am entation provides the g ro u n d line for the
D eposition/C rucifixion, just as the Angel, n o t the architecture of the
tom b as is typical, creates a chronological an d com positional division
betw een the T hree M aries at the Tom b an d the R esurrection (ills. 7-8).
Besides a sim ilar com positional strategy, the cross and the comb
share an overall stylistic "feeling." Standing figures are elongated, and
w ear long robes w hich fall to the ground. A lthough carved w ith m ore
fluidity and to reveal large sections of the body underneath, the drapery
o n the Cloisters cross recalls that of the V ictoria and A lbert comb.
P revalent on b o th w orks are V -shaped folds w hich fall w ith m ultiple
pleats d ow n the full-length garm ents of the figures. This type of
drapery p attern is repeated in b o th St. A lbans carvings and m anuscript
illum inations, an d has been noticed by Lasko.48 Exhibited by tw o
fem ale figures on the low er left side of com b in the M assacre of the
Innocents, this characteristic is exaggerated in H erod's cloak o n the
u p p e r left side. Falling in a large V -shaped m ass, the cloak is sim ilar to
those w o rn by the prophets on the back of the cross, an d by C aiaphas
an d Pilate u n d er the A scension (ill. 6). Also analogous is the m anner
in w hich cloaks fasten around the shoulders an d necks. The
com parison is especially close betw een the prophets along the back side
4®Lasko also places the comb within the St. Albans milieu, asserting it must
have been carved “in the generation that produced the St. Albans Psalter.”
Ars Sacra, p. 235; Williamson too acknowledges the St. Albans connection,
English Romanesque Art 1066-1200. p. 220.
31
of the cross and the central M agus on the comb. M oreover, on this side
of the com b one can detect hints of the elliptical dam pfold drapery style
in the figure of the w om an just left of center in the M assacre of the
Innocents. This com b is also an im portant com parison because not all
the figures are in profile (the tw o figures in the W ashing of the Feet,
the Virgin and the person next to her in the A doration of the Magi),
and for incidental iconographical details such as the Crucifixion
portrayed w ith the Sim and M oon and the sw addling clothes of the
infant C hrist of the N ativity w hich are sim ilar to C hrist's shroud on
the right term inal plaque of the cross.
An ivory plaque of Daniel in the Lions' Den, w hich Beckwith
localizes and dates to the second quarter of the tw elfth century at St.
Albans, is iconographically unrelated to the Bury Cross, yet reveals a
sim ilar stylistic tendency w ith V -shaped folds of drapery (ill. 36) 49
Seated am ong lions in the low er center of the panel, Daniel raises his
arm s, orant fashion, tow ard H abukkuk w ho is low ered d o w n by an
angel. O verlooking this m iracle is King N ebuchadnezzer, w ho lifts his
arm s in surprise. H is cloak is pinned around his shoulders m uch like
that of King H erod from the Lloyd-Baker comb and Pilate of the title
dispute on the cross. A section of drapery falls over his left shoulder in
a single V-fold dow n tow ards his knees. Also sim ilar to the cross, but
perhaps in a m ore general way, are H abukkuk's d rap ed hands. There is
a propensity for draped hands in the cross' narrative scenes w hich
49The panel is now in the Wernher collection in Lutton Hoo, Ivory
Carvings, p. 132.
32
seem s u n u su al in E nglish carving an d illum ination, an d w hich m ight
stem from the influence of liturgical dram a. The V irgin beside the
Crucifixion, the V irgin and John w atching the A scension an d the
T hree M aries a t the Tom b raise their h an d s shielded beneath their
outer cloaks (ills. 6-8). The only other w o rk related to the cross w hich
displays this sam e tendency is the St. A lbans Psalter in w hich the
V irgin of the D escent grasps C hrist's han d w ith d rap ed h an d s (ill. 40).
T hough not w ith o u t its ow n anom alies, a plaque of the
D eposition provides a strong com parison to the Bury cross b o th in style
and com position (ill. 37).50 This work, now p a rt of the P ierpont
M organ Library collection in N ew York, once decorated the front of a
tw elfth century G ospel Lectionary.51 The plaque renders a rath er
crow ded and enigm atic depiction of the D eposition in w hich a variety
of gestures an d postures are em ployed. C hrist is su rro u n d ed by
onlooking angels as the H an d of G od appears above H is head. W hile
Joseph of A rim athea su p p o rts H is descent, kneeling m en pull the nails
from C hrist's feet as N icodem us w orks at the nail attaching H is left
h an d to the cross.
50Although Beckwith identifies the man supporting Christ's descent as
Nicodemus, a more standard reading, I believe, interprets him as Joseph of
Arimathea. John on the left side raises his hand and holds a book.
Strangely enough the Virgin has been omitted from this scene. Also
unusual are the two lower roundels underneath the men removing the
nails from Christ’s feet which Beckwith describes as “circular mounds
containing pebbles (?).” Ivory Carvings, p. 134.
51The Lectionary apparently originated in Westphalia, at an abbey with
ties to a Dutch monastery, “which in turn was closely affiliated with an
English house.” Ivory Carvings, p. 134.
33
O n b o th the plaque and the cross term inal, C hrist's perizonium
is tied in the sam e m anner; falling below the knee, an d open on the left
side, the drapery is knotted o n the left hip an d loops over the w aist on
the right (ill. 7). Legs are together, a n d feet splay slightly outw ards.
H air is long an d falls over the left shoulder. Sim ilar to th at of the cross
term inal, the D eposition plaque om its any hint of architecture or
gro u n d line an d is crow ded w ith figures in a variety of anim ated
postures. In fact, just as the enshrouded body of C hrist provides the
groundline for M ary, John an d the C rucifixion/D eposition of the cross
term inal, kneeling figures are the su p p o rt for the D eposition of the
D eposition plaque. A ngels hovering above the cross arm s are carved
in three-quarter view , gesturing in reverence to the scene below .
D rapery patterns resem ble those on the cross. A gain w e see the
hanging V-fold cloaks, w orn by the left flanking figure and St. John.
The side view of N icodem us an d the right flanking figure is very
sim ilar to that of C aiaphas as he disputes the cross title w ith Pilate (ill.
6); the cloaks op en on the left side an d continue in unbroken lines
dow n their backs, w hile the right portions hang in a V-fold, revealing
the belted tunic underneath. Beginnings of the dam p-fold style,
m anifested by short grooves delineating m uscle structure, are
noticeable o n N icodem us' thigh.
This group of ivories is an im p o rtan t elem ent in u n d erstan d in g
the im m ediate stylistic heritage of the Cloisters cross. W hile the
scarcity of carvings traceable to tw elfth century England leaves a
frustrating nu m b er of questions unansw ered, it is still possible to use
34
w h at has su rvived to establish a context for the cross. The carvings just
discussed seem to indicate the artist of the C loisters cross w as fam iliar
w ith w o rk p ro d u ced at St. A lbans o r B ury St. E dm u n d s d u rin g the first
q u arter of the tw elfth century. P erh ap s the artist trained at St. A lbans
an d later traveled to Bury to carve the cross, w ith the earlier St. A lbans
ivories p ro v id in g a technical an d stylistic p reced en t seem ingly m issing
from Bury. O r it is possible he never actually visited St. A lbans yet
k n ew its w ork.
A n o th er difficulty in co m paring these ivories is the undeniable
technical virtuosity displayed by the carver of the cross. The
o u tstan d in g w orkm anship exceeds th at of any extant early tw elfth
century ivory. Because of this gulf it has b een m ore profitable for
prev io u s scholars to exam ine m an u scrip t illum inations for stylistic
com parisons, hence the early-recognized parallels b etw een the cross
a n d the B ury Bible. O nce again, how ever, the potential o f th e St.
A lbans w orkshop has been neglected as a source for su ch m anuscripts.
The carving of the C loisters cross resem bles the style n o t only of
ivories from St. A lbans, b u t also its m anuscripts. T here are, in fact,
strong stylistic an d com positional sim ilarities b etw een early tw elfth-
century illum inations an d the carving of the cross, again suggesting its
artist w as w ell aw are of St. A lbans p roduction. This m onastery fostered
thriving m an u scrip t a n d ivory w o rk sh o p s in the early tw elfth century,
a n d probably also su p p o rte d a m etalw ork tradition, alluded to in the
35
Gesta Abbatum.52 M oreover, St. A lbans w as recognized in its ow n
tim e as a center for artistic production, prim arily m anuscripts. Exactly
to w hat extent St. A lbans illum inations influenced the cross' carver is
of course h ard to determ ine, although stylistic com parison m akes clear
there w as exchange betw een the tw o m onasteries.53 The tw o m ost
im portant books to exam ine for com parisons are the St. A lbans Psalter
(ills. 16, 31, 38-40), an d the Gospels of St. Albans (Pern. MS 120, ills. 41-
52).
Figures in b o th St. A lbans m anuscripts are expressive w ith large
eyes, pointing fingers an d varied postures. Typically their feet are
splayed a n d overlap the fram es of the illum inations, sim ilar to those of
the Three M aries at the Tom b and John of the A scension on the cross
(ills. 6, 8). The V -shaped folds of their cloaks are rem iniscent of those
found not only on the ivories previously discussed, b u t also on the
52H . T. Riley, Gesta Abbatum Monasterii Sancti Albani 3 vols. (London: Rolls
Series 28, 1867), as cited in Bateman. The Gesta describe a metalwork shrine
completed by a monk named Anketil, but unfortunately neither the shrine
nor any other metal works are extant. For a history of St. Albans and its
illuminations, see Adolf Goldschmidt, Per Albani psalter in Hildesheim und
seine Beziehune zur svmbolischen kirchenskulptur des XII Tahrhunderts.
Berlin, 1895, and The St. Albans Psalter.
53Although Bateman claims, “With historical data indicating litde social
contact between St. Albans and Bury St. Edmunds...there is now no reason to
believe that those two monasteries shared any more than a li bell us of a
saint,” (St. Albans: Its Ivorv and Manuscript Workshops, p. 34.) I disagree.
It seems entirely possible that two Benedictine monasteries, separated by
only 100km, would have maintained some sort of relationship. Contact
which might have included the lending or viewing of manuscripts was
probably considered too mundane to record. Bateman herself allows for the
possibility of artistic interchange when stating “it is perfectly plausible
that a center dedicated to St. Edmund would have several versions of his life
which would allow a visiting illuminator to work from one volume while
the Bury scribes worked from another.” St. Albans: Its Ivorv and
Manuscript Workshops, p. 33. Also see The Cloisters Cross, p. 233.
36
cross.54 C row ds are portrayed either as a series of stacked heads and
torsos, overlapping each other and receding into space as w ith the
D oubting Thom as of the Pem. MS 120 (ill. 48), or as a m ass of
individualized bodies, as seen in the A nnunciation to the Shepherds
and the W ashing of the Feet of the Psalter (ills. 38-39). O n the cross we
find a sim ilar am bivalence. W hereas the w itnesses to the Ascension
are represented only by repeated, floating heads, each prophet along the
back of the cross is unique, and the postures of the figures populating
the central m edallions are distinctly activated (ills. 4-6, 9-12). D espite
the inherent dynam ism in their execution, the illum inated figures are
elongated, w ear cloaks w hich m ost often fall in striated folds to the
ground and balance the com positions' expressive action. This trait is
also obvious on the cross, especially in the Ascension and Title
D ispute.
A com parison betw een the three treatm ents of the D escent from
the Cross illustrates the carver's inventiveness. In the St. Albans
Psalter the Alexis M aster took great pains to balance each figure w ith an
opposing one on either side of the lignum vitae, creating m irror
im ages (ill. 40). N icodem us is thus greatly dim inished in scale, and
m oved to the foot of the cross. Joseph is draw n tilting his head
540ther details, especially in dress, are shared between the illuminations
and the cross, yet it is difficult to determine whether they are specific to
the St. Albans workshop or part of a ubiquitous style. Thomas’ garment, for
example, is entirely patterned with clusters of three dots, similar to Mary
Magdalene’s (?) in the Descent from the Cross, and with the Apostles in the
Psalter. This tri-dot decoration is repeated in the narrative plaque of the
Crucifixion/Descent, not only the Virgin’s cloak, but also the on-looking
soldier’s shield, and those of the sleeping guards at the tomb.
37
opposite C hrist's so as n o t to d isru p t the sym m etry of the com position.
Several years later the artist of the Pem . MS 120 activ ated th e sam e
n a rra tiv e m o m en t in his illum ination by u sin g a m ore com plicated
configuration w ith the central action of low ering C hrist's b o d y to the
g ro u n d (ill. 47). W hile the g ro u p s of flanking fem ale an d m ale
w itnesses act as balancing elem ents on either side of the cross, also
depicted as the lignum vitae, the V irgin (kissing C h rist's w o u n d e d
h an d ), St. John (in the gesture of m ourning), N icodem us (now in the
traditional role of rem oving the nail from C h rist's left h and) an d
Joseph of A rim athea (supporting th e b ody) focus m ovem ent a n d action
onto C hrist's b o dy. The angels have b een rem oved from above the
cross arm s, probably because they d etract from the em otional intensity
o f the scene.55 T he illum inator of the Pem . M S 120 th u s telescopes the
prim ary action, tightly n arro w in g it into the center, an d
sim ultaneously directs o u r atten tio n to C h rist's body.
W ith balance a n d sim plicity, the cross' carver fu rth er narrow s
his focus, g u id in g the view er's devotion ev en m ore directly to C h rist's
w ounds. The term inal p laque of the D escent seem s a m arriage of b o th
illum inations (ill. 7). W hile the carver shares the balanced
com position of the St. A lbans Psalter, he heightens atten tio n p aid to
C hrist's d e a d body as in the G ospels, redefining it by spotlighting
55For a complete discussion of Crucifixion iconography o f tenth and
eleventh century England, see Barbara Raw, Anglo-Saxon Crucifixion
Iconography and the Art of the Monastic Revival. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1990.
38
C hrist's w o u n d s.56 The fact that the carver achieved balance in the
term inal carvings is am azing. R ather th an pare d ow n the num ber of
figures, he chose to m ultiply them . L onginus stands to one side,
tow ering over the Virgin, w hile opposite him are N icodem us an d a
crow d of witnesses. Personifications of the Sun an d M oon ap p ear over
the cross bar, echoing the positions of M ary an d John beneath them .
A dding to the com plexity of the arrangem ent is the narrative of the
low er zone of the plaque in w hich the L am entation occurs. W eeping
figures crow d a ro u n d the foot of the cross, m ourning the enshrouded
body of C hrist w hich is laid out on the stone of unction. D espite the
num erous bodies, postures an d gestures energizing the ivory surface,
the organization rem ains coherent.
W hat anchors the view er's attention is the central body of
C hrist, E verything w hich m ight serve as a distraction is set aw ay from
H is body, even the cross itself. W hereas the lignum vitae is carefully
d raw n in b o th illum inations (ills. 40, 47), the cross in the narrative
plaque's carving fades into the background; only the top an d p art of the
left side are visible (ill. 7). C hrist's body is the focal point in the
traditional m anner, b o th vertically in the D escent an d horizontally in
the Lam entation. M issing from the tw o sets of illum inations,
how ever, is an em phasis on H is w ou n d s evident on the carved
term inal. W hereas M ary of b o th the St. A lbans Psalter an d G ospel
56The eucharistic connotations of this emphasis on Christ’s wounds have
been noted, as well as the corresponding significance of the Brazen
Serpent and Lamb of God medallions. The Cloisters Cross, pp. 144-148.
39
caresses the w o u n d e d h an d , M ary o n the C loisters cross h o ld s H is
elbow , consequently rev ealin g th e w o u n d e d h a n d as it faces the v iew er
squarely. B ehind the V irgin is L onginus, lance an d sh ield in h a n d ,
rem in d in g us of th e w o u n d in C h rist's side. O p p o site h im is John on
C h rist's left side, restin g his h e ad in his h a n d m u ch like in the Pem .
MS 120. In th e c arv ed term inal, how ever, C h rist's a rm reaches u p a n d
o v e r Jo h n 's h e a d in a n u n n a tu ra l extension. N ico d em u s h as once
ag ain b e e n re d u c e d in scale, a n d is p u sh e d off to the u p p e r rig h t com er.
B lending in am o n g the cro w d of stacked h e a d s of the w itnesses, he
loses v isu a l p rim acy w h ile m a in tain in g th e im p o rta n t d e v o tio n al
fu n ctio n o f em p h asizin g the en o rm o u s n ail still e m b e d d e d in C h rist's
h an d . Finally, H is w o u n d e d feet are p lan ted squarely on th e body
below , the left foot sp lay ed so th at th e hole from the nail is clearly
visible. W hile w e c an n o t d e te rm in e conclusively w h e th e r th e cross'
c arv er m o d eled his D ep o sitio n p la q u e afte r p rec ed e n ts fro m St. A lbans,
exchange w as a t w o rk , a t least at a stylistic level.
In fact, I w o u ld arg u e the closest stylistic parallels im m ediately
p reced in g the cross a re fo u n d in the P em broke MS 120.57 This
m a n u scrip t b ears a d e ta ile d h isto ry still so m ew h at sh ro u d e d in
m ystery. Six folios of d raw in g s w h ich illu strate forty N ew T estam ent
scenes p reced e the gospel text, w h ich w as w ritte n in d e p e n d e n t of the
m in ia tu re s .58 T he first p a g e of text, folio 7, includes a n inscription
57Katherine Bateman provides the m ost recently com prehensive treatment
o f this manuscript in St. Albans: Its Ivory and Manuscript Workshops.
S8McLachlan dates the gospel text between the late first and early second
half of the century, and the illum inations about a decade before.
40
w h ich "indicates th at the m an u scrip t w as given to the abbey of B ury St.
E d m u n d s in the early fo u rte e n th c e n tu ry ."59 T h o u g h they hav e b een
p ro v e n to h av e o rig in ated c. 1125, the d raw in g s w ere b o u n d w ith the
text after its p resen ta tio n to the abbey.
Scholars a re u n ab le to d e te rm in e a concrete p ro v en a n ce for the
Pem . M S 120 d raw in g s, th o u g h B ury a n d St. A lbans are th e ir m o st
likely c an d id ates.60 M cL achlan a n d K auffm ann arg u e for B ury, n o tin g
the relatio n sh ip b e tw e e n the N e w T estam en t d raw in g s a n d those of
the M o rg an M S 736. A d v an cin g iconographic a n d stylistic evidence,
h o w ev er, B atem an convincingly a rg u e s for th e relo catio n of the N ew
T estam en t d raw in g s to St. A lbans. She d e m o n stra te s the a rtist of the
Pem . M S 120 d re w in sp iratio n n o t only from th e St. A lbans Psalter, b u t
also from the m o d els available to its illum inator, the A lexis M aster, in
com pleting th e d raw in g s. T his a rg u m e n t th u s explains differences as
McLachlan also provides a thorough description of the Pem. MS 120, citing
Ottoman and Byzantine parallels for the miniatures. The Scriptorium o f
Bury St. Edmunds in the Twelfth Century. Kauffmann accepts this later
date for the manuscript text, suggesting it was produced in the 1140’s
outside of Bury St. Edmunds. English Romanesque Art 1066-1200. p. 97.
59St. Albans: Its Ivorv and Manuscript Workshops, p. 13. Specifically the
inscription states “that the m anuscript was given to Bury by Sacrist
Reginals de Denham, sacrist at Bury in the early fourteenth century.”
60Hence it is often titled the “Bury Gospels.” M. Rickert, Painting in
Britain: The Middle Ages. Baltimore, 1954, p. 67; and, more recently, The
Scriptorium of Bury St. Edmunds, p. 264. Bateman proves the Morgan MS
736 also came from a St. Albans workshop, one intimately aware of the style
of the St. Albans Psalter. The 1130-1140 date of Morgan 736 is fairly solid,
due to a letter bound within the manuscript, from Henry I to Anselm, who
was abbot between 1121-1148. St. Albans: Its Ivorv and Manuscript
W orkshops, p. 11.
41
w ell as sim ilarities in style, iconography an d com position.61 A lth o u g h
the tangled p ro venance of the m an u scrip t m ig h t never be so rted o u t
com pletely, it is a significant rem in d er of the dynam ic artistic exchange
b etw een the tw o m onasteries.
A fu rth er intricacy of the Pem . MS 120 draw ings are w ashes of
color w hich au g m en t the first th ree folios an d seem to be later
add itio n s by a less a d ep t h a n d th an th at of the original artist. Recto an d
verso of folios 1-2, an d the recto of f. 3 hav e b een em bellished w ith a
ra th e r h eav y -h an d ed application of color in ten d ed to em phasize
drap ery striations, facial features a n d o th er details (ills. 41-45). B orders
fram ing each of the sheets have also b een decorated in folios l-3r.
B atem an decides the "sketchy, tin ted overlay of color...and
in ap p ro p riate b o rd e r decorations," w ere a d d e d d u rin g the m iddle of
the century a t Bury, y et a conclusive arg u m en t of h o w the draw ings
arriv ed at B ury rem ains undecided. B atem an suggests th at "the Alexis
M aster, or a close follow er, w as com m issioned by Bury St. E d m u n d s to
p ro d u ce a life of St. E d m u n d [the libellus, M organ MS 736] an d th at a
St. A lbans artist w en t to Bury to do so, taking Pem . 120 w ith him as a
type of p a tte rn book a n d leaving it there along w ith the Life an d
M iracles."62 W h eth er or n o t the Pem broke MS 120 is by the h an d of
the Alexis M aster him self is also debatable, th o u g h unlikely; all one
61 For the full discussion see St. Albans: Its Ivorv and Manuscript
Workshops, pp. 9-34.
62St. Albans: Its Ivorv and Manuscript Workshops, p. 32-33.
42
can be certain of are the compositional, iconographic and stylistic
similarities betw een it and the Psalter.63
A lthough the sepia-toned draw ings of the m anuscript are
difficult to read in reproductions, since they appear either rather flat, or
in the case of the re-worked scenes, dark and heavy, there is quite a
striking correlation betw een the cross and the Gospels not found in the
Psalter. General similarities, like the propensity for splayed feet, V-fold
cloaks and the orientation of key events (such as the Descent,
Lam entation and the Three Maries at the Tomb) have already been
discussed. It also should be noted that the sleeping soldiers at the
Tomb in both the cross' term inal (ill. 8), and the Pem. MS 120 draw ing
(ill. 47), w ear similar headgear and carry shields w ith central bosses.
M ost importantly, however, is that the Pem. MS 120 decorative dam p
fold drapery first appears consistently, heralding a tradition fully
exploited ten years later by the Bury Bible 64 These details, although
they occur in both re-w orked and original drawings, are easiest to spot
on those w ithout the later color washes, folios 4-6 (ills. 46-52).
63Bateman lists scenes shared between the two works, and discusses
compositional similarities. St. Albans: Its Ivorv and Manuscript Workshops.
pp. 16-26.
64Larry Ayres observes the Alexis Master's "embryonic and tentative"
experimentation with the damp-fold style in the St. Albans Psalter. L . M.
Ayres, "The Role of an Angevin Style in English Romanesque Painting,"
Zeitschrift fur Kunsteeschichte 37 (1974), 211. The two most prominent
examples are Christ carrying the cross, and an Apostle of the Doubting
Thomas illumination. For the most part, however, when such stylizations
occur they seem more part of the overall striations of the drapery, as with
the Angel Gabriel of the Annunciation, Christ during the Third Temptation
and Christ with the sleeping Apostles.
43
Significant yet previously unnoticed, drapery details in the Pem.
MS 120 are surprisingly close to those of the Cloisters cross. Delineated
by ellipses of thin, double lines, dam p-fold drapery creates the illusion
of m usculature u n d ern eath the garm ents of several figures. This
technique seem s to be em ployed m ost often w hen depicting a figure
from the side, especially on the thigh w here a large enough space is
available for em bellishm ent. The first three folios, the ones later re
w orked w ith the colored overlay, clearly illustrate these double-lined
dam p-fold patterns. C hrist and onlookers in the Cleansing of the
Tem ple (ill. 41), Raising of Lazarus (ill. 42), Zaccheus (ill. 43), Entry into
Jerusalem (ill. 44), and A rrest of C hrist (ill. 45), w ear garm ents stylized
by a dam p-fold dem arcation at the knee. It is im portant to note that the
last three leaves of the m iniatures, those untouched by a later hand,
also m ake use of this pattern. Christ's garm ents in the H arrow ing of
Hell and Road to Em m aus, and one onlooker in the D oubting Thomas
(ill. 48), are designed w ith the knee-length stylization and thus
dem onstrate the illum inator's decided experim entation w ith dam p
fold drapery. It is clear that the technique w as not a later addition
influenced by M aster H ugo's Bury Bible, b u t from the outset was part
of the St. A lbans' illum inator's conception.
By using this descriptive technique, the artist of the Pem. MS 120
illustrates the dam p-fold style in a very early stage. A lthough the
beginnings of the dam p-fold style are traceable in both the m anuscript
cycle and Cloisters cross, I do not intend to suggest the sam e artist be
credited w ith both works. There are obvious stylistic differences
44
betw een the draw ings and cross, including for example the emphatic
use of profile in the Pem. MS 120 vs. three-quarter views on the cross
and differences in headgear. Each artist uses a totally different m ethod
to profile draped arms. Variances such as these seem to be signature, as
though they should rem ain constant even if an artist switched
m edium . In other words, there are enough stylistic discrepancies
betw een the two works that I am not proposing the artist who
com pleted the Pem broke draw ings cycle later w ent on the carve the
Cloisters cross.
I w ould argue, however, that the cross represents a further
progression in the style w hich is fully developed in the illum inations
of M aster Hugo. W hile the Pem. MS 120 draw ings are inferior in
quality to the cross, they share distinct stylistic and compositional
parallels, suggesting scriptorium production in the style of Cloisters
cross which until now has not been recognized. G rouped together,
then, the St. Albans Psalter, Gospels and Cloisters cross em body nascent
forms know n and later elaborated by M aster H ugo in his Bury Bible.
This grouping sheds light not only on the Cloisters cross, but also on
the Bible, providing stylistic precedents for each.
While m uch m ore is know n about the Bury Bible, its place
w ithin the Bury tradition has rem ained a m ystery. Kauffmann
introduces this problem , acknowledging that previous to 1140 and
H ugo's Bible:
45
There is no easily recognizable Bury style, no distinctive
tradition of illum ination...H ence as an undoubted Bury
product w ith a very distinctive style and as one of the key
m anuscripts in the w hole of tw elfth-century English
illum ination the great Bury Bible appears to em erge from a
scriptorium totally lacking in a native tradition.65
A t the sam e time, K auffm ann stresses the artistic connection betw een
Bury and St. Albans, pointing out that the search for Continental
sources for M aster H ugo's style "has som etim es obscured his debt to the
style predom inant at Bury in the years im m ediately preceding his ow n
w ork, that of the St. Albans Psalter."66 Thus one can assum e the
prim ary artistic influences felt at Bury St. E dm unds during the early
tw elfth century em anated from St. Albans.67
Yet the m ost often d te d w ork in stylistic discussions of the cross
is the Bury Bible.68 Executed by M aster H ugo c. 1135, the Bible's
65"The Bury Bible," p. 61.
66"The Bury Bible," p. 74. Also see The St. Albans Psalter, pp. 170-71.
67Pacht also describes the almost certain exchange between St. Albans and
neighboring monasteries: “In terms of the history of artistic movements
this means that St. Albans had created something which the artistic
resources of these great abbeys [Bury St. Edmunds and Canterbury] were
unable to provide. If even Canterbury with its great living tradition of
book illumination had, for certain tasks, to call in artists trained at St.
Albans, it is the more understandable that the St. Albans style made deep
inroads in places where the artistic activities had been at low ebb in the
early 12 th century and where, therefore, no ingrained habits and tastes
had to be overcome.” The St. Albans Psalter, p. 170.
68A 1 though M. R. James was the first to ascribe the Bury Bible to Master
Hugo, Kauffmann provides one of the first complete treatments of the
Bible. To summarize his discussion of its history: The Gesta sacristarum
monasterii S. Edmundi notes the creation of a Bible occurred during Hervey
and Talbot's appointments, “e t m anu magistri Hugonis incom parabiliter
fecit d ep in g er” On account of the Bury pressmark on one of the folios, and
the type of parchment used, which was also specified in the Gesta's
account, the attribution has never been seriously questioned. "The Bury
Bible," p. 62.
46
illum inations caused a stylistic revolution, usurping St. Albans as the
prem ier center for artistic production. The Bible's illum inations have
served as a grounding point for the cross; the majority of scholars
treating the cross argue it was carved under the influence of H ugo's
new style, and thus date the cross anywhere betw een 1140 and 1180. A
basic, intriguing similarity betw een the cross and the Bible is that both
works lack iconographic parallels, although these iconographic
differences are not of the same type. While the cross' plaques combine
aspects of several m om ents to form a unique representation of a scene,
the Bury Bible's illum inations draw upon Old Testam ent subjects
seldom illustrated. Surviving illum inations include: Moses and
A aron E nthroned/A aron and Moses num bering the people of Israel
{ill. 53); Moses w ith Aaron expounding the Law /M oses expounding the
Law to the unclean beasts (ill. 54); Elkanah giving portions of a sacrifice
(represented as a cloak) to H annah and Penninah/ H annah's prayer
before Eli and the birth of Samuel (ill. 55); Jerem iah pointing to the
attack on Jerusalem (ill. 56); Ezekiel's vision of God (ill. 57); and
Children of Job and Job's Prayer/Job seated on ashes, asked by his wife
to renounce God (ill. 58). Many of these scenes are rare at best, some
w ith no know n model. Yet the surviving illum inations seem m ost
influenced by Byzantine sources. Kauffm ann claims that of the eleven
scenes depicted in the six surviving m iniatures "only one (the Vision
of Ezekiel) is of obviously W estern origin. Five, on the other hand, are
probably derived from Byzantine sources...A further two scenes
(Hannah before Eli and Job w ith his wife) contain Byzantine
47
elem ents."69 The cross' narratives are also unusual, though in a
different m anner; although a scene m ay have a visual precedent, the
carver eschews tradition in favor of a unique composition, such as in
the left and right terminals. It w ould be easier, then, to compare these
two works if they shared any com m on narrative. Since they do not, we
m ust rely on individual figures and compositional construction.
A lthough m ost look to the Bible for stylistic similarities and
draw general inferences, few scholars discuss direct comparisons
betw een specific figures. Hoving, the first to establish parallels betw een
the m anuscript and the cross, and Parker and Little, the m ost recent
authors on the cross, are m ost successful in their treatm ents, citing the
notable dynam ism of both works as well as systematic comparisons
betw een individual figures.70 H oving's description of dam p-fold
drapery w hich sections off anatom y seems less em phatic on the cross
than in the illum inations, although a similar technique is evident.
H ints of this style appear at the knee of a witness to the Ascension, and
again on the angel w ith the Apocalypse scroll in the Synagogue
m edallion (ills. 6, 5). M ost persuasive are the softly rounded forms
w hich define the m usculature of the right arm and left leg of the Angel
at the tomb, bulging through his garm ent and exhibiting the dam p-fold
style while underscoring the virtuosity w ith w hich the carver executed
69"The Bury Bible," p. 73. For a detailed discussion on each of the scenes,
see pp. 66-74. On the uniqueness of Master Hugo's illuminations, see p. 74.
70"The Bury St. Edmunds Cross," p. 334; The Cloisters Cross, pp. 198-206.
Parker and Little’s juxtaposition of figures from each work is especially
helpful.
48
the cross (ill. 59). Also convincing is H oving's com parison betw een the
kneeling Job of the Bible and M alachi on the cross (ills. 60-61).71 In this
exam ple the drooping sleeve, "pouch" of drapery outlining the
stom ach and "curiously frozen attitude" are indeed similar.
The Jerem iah and Job pages (ills. 56, 58) dem onstrate the m ost
notable parallels, not only in one-to-one com parisons, b u t also through
the overall feeling of the works. As in the narrative term inals, detailed
landscapes and "believable" groundlines are absent. Seated prophets
on the cross arm s float in their respective spaces (ills. 9-12), just as the
attacking soldiers on the Jerem iah frontispiece of the Bible are an
ungrounded m elee (ill. 56). The one hint tow ard landscape definition
on the cross is repeated in the decoration of the illum inations; the four
heads w itnessing the Ascension (ill. 6) rise above a step-like hill, w hich
hints at the stylization of Jerem iah's perch on his illum inated
frontispiece page. This decorative m otif reappears around the central
m edallions, and form s the clouds of heaven into w hich C hrist ascends.
Postures in both w orks are extrem ely varied and individual facial types
occur m ostly in three-quarter view. D rapery patterns are also similar.
The drooping sleeves of the kneeling Job and one of his children
resem ble that of M alachi of the cross and the Angel holding the
Apocalypse scroll in the Agnus Dei m edallion (ill. 60-61, 5). Large
sw aths of drapery w hich end in m ultiple striations appear frequently
not only on the prophets of the cross (ills. 11-12), b u t also in the
71 "The Bury St. Edmunds Cross," pp. 336-337.
49
garm ents of the wives of Elkanah and Job (ills. 55, 58). A nother specific
com parison exists betw een Job stripped dow n to only a waistcloth, and
A dam scram bling up the base of the lignum vitae (ill. 3), both of w hom
are seen in profile and face to the left. Sitting on the ash heap, Job is a
dim inutive reflection of his representation in the previous scene.
D eprived of their garm ents, his arm s and legs appear thin against the
central bulk of his torso, which, like that of Adam , is m arked by
parallel lines to indicate a ribcage.
The nature of these sim ilarities, how ever, does not necessitate
the chronological o rder argued repeatedly. Significant divergences in
technique, as already show n, allow the possibility that the cross was
carved before the Bible w as illum inated. Evidence other than stylistic
com parisons to the Bury Bible illum inations has been argued to
strengthen further a Bury provenance for the cross, yet is just scarce
enough allow ing only speculation. Longland, for exam ple, in
analyzing the Cham ridet couplet carved along the side of the cross,
w eakens H oving's argum ent that the inscription w as close enough to a
sim ilar verse found on a choir screen, created c. 1180 at the Bury St.
E dm unds abbey, to im ply a unique relationship.72 She finds sim ilar
couplets in tw elfth and thirteenth century Genesis com m entaries from
both France and England. Heslop, too, argues that this line "appears in
a different form at Bury, and at m any other places and in various forms
72S. Longland, "A Literary Aspect of the Bury St. Edmunds Cross," pp. 45-74;
and "The Bury St. Edmunds Cross," p. 338.
50
across E urope.'73 Finally, Parker and Little's discussion of liturgical
and dram atic connections betw een the cross and Bury St. E dm unds
indeed provides a contextual fram ew ork for tw elfth century religious
artistic production at the m onastery, yet cannot be understood as
unshakable evidence for a Bury attribution.74
The m ost provocative connection to Bury St. E dm unds is the
theory that the sam e M aster H ugo w ho illum inated the Bible deserves
credit for the Cloisters cross.75 This argum ent is deceptively attractive,
the danger being to attribute the cross to H ugo solely because of stylistic
links to the Bury Bible. O n the other hand, w e know from recorded
historical details that H ugo w as w ell-know n and respected at least
w ithin the im m ediate m onastic com m unity and w as certainly capable
of com pleting large-scale and complex works. H e is m entioned four
tim es in the Bury records, a rare distinction in tw elfth century England.
The passage in the Gesta sacristarum monasterii Sancti Edmundi
w hich refers to an "incom parably painted" Bible by the h an d of M aster
Hugo, has long been accepted as referring to the Bury Bible.76 Three
further citations attest to H ugo's dexterity as an artist. D uring Anselm 's
abbacy (1121-48) tw o w orks are described, a bell, thought to have been
73Review of The Cloisters Cross, p. 459.
74The Cloisters Cross, pp. 206-212.
75Scarfe, “The Bury St. Edmunds Cross: The Work of Master Hugo?”; “Master
Hugo as Sculptor,”; The Cloisters Cross.
76The complete passage runs: “Isre Hervus, frater Taleboti prioiis, om nes
expensas invenit fratri suo priori in scribenda magna bibliotheca, et m anu
m agistri Hugonis incom parabiliter fecit d epingini” Thomas Arnold,
Memorials of St. Edmund's Abbey. 3 vols., (London, 1890-96), II, p. 290; cited
in "The Bury Bible," p. 63.
51
cast 1125-1130, and double bronze doors for the w est front of the
C hurch of St. Edm und, perhaps from 1130-1135.77 U nder Abbot O rding
while Helyas w as sacrist (1149-55), H ugo receives credit in the Gesta
sacristarum for an incom parably carved "cross in the choir and statues
of the Virgin and St. John."78
This entry leaves m uch for conjecture. A lthough thought for
some time to describe the Cloisters cross, this theory is now
substantially rejected. W hile the w ord "carved" im plies either w ood or
ivory, the m edium is left unm entioned, although, as Parker and Little
point out, the fact that the particular cross nam ed in the Gesta was
considered in its ow n time as "incom parably carved" im plies a
m asterw ork like the Cloisters cross. Also enigm atic is the reference to
the Virgin and St. John. This description seems to im ply a large-scale
work, one w hich perhaps stood on the beam over the high altar or on a
choir screen, and thus negate the possibility of the dim inutive Cloisters
cross. This suggestion w as advanced by James w ho also envisioned the
m entioned cross as carved from w ood.79 Parker and Little suggest the
cross in the Gesta account could have been placed on a smaller, second
77The bell honored St. Edmund and was presented by Anselm: “ fn campana
que dicitur Hugonis /M a rtin s Badmundi iussum decus hie ita fu n d i/
AnseJmi donis donum m anus aptat ffu g o n is .” From The Cloisters Cross, p.
213; cited in James II, p. 199, no. 27. The doors were completed while Ralph
and Hervey were sacrists, and were “ insculptas digitis magistri Hugonis,
qui cum in aliis operibus omnes alios uicerit, in hoc opere m irifico uicit se
ipsum .” Cited in The Cloisters Cross, p. 213; from the Gesta sacristarum; from
Arnold, II, pp. 289-290.
78The Cloisters Cross, p. 213; from James, II, pp. 133-134,153, no. 3: “ Helyas
sacrista, nepos Ordingi Abbatis...Crucem in choro e t Mariam e t Iohannem
p e r m anus magistri Hugonis incom parabiliter fecit insculpi.”
79James, II, p. 135.
52
altar still in the choir, a n d thus be a sm all-scale object like the Cloisters
cross. C oncerning the inclusion of the figures of the V irgin a n d St.
John, they assert the cross could have b een fitted into a cross foot on
top of w hich M ary an d John m ig h t have stood.80
Based on the Bury Bible illum inations it is possible to a rg u e
H ugo m ain tain ed artistic ties to St. A lbans, w as trained in the Italo-
B yzantine tradition, an d if he w as in d eed its artist, carved the cross
before com pleting the Bible's illum inations. K auffm ann offers
evidence w hich elaborates H ugo's St. A lbans connections. W hen
discussing sources for M aster H u g o 's style, he begins b y outlining the
debts, b o th stylistic a n d com positional, ow ed to the St. A lbans Psalter.81
In fact, K auffm ann claim s th at the style of the St. A lbans P salter w as
the p red o m in an t one at Bury in the years "im m ediately preceding"
H u g o 's ow n w o rk .82 As for general sim ilarities b etw een the Psalter and
the Bible, he cites the solidity of the figures, th e elongated legs, and the
gestures. In p articu lar he discusses the typical profile sh ared by b o th
g ro u p s of m iniatures, "w ith its straig h t line from brow to tip of nose
80The Cloisters Cross, p. 213.
81 "The Bury Bible," p.74. Kauffmann also acknowledges the works of F.
Wormald, Journal of the British Architecture Association, third ser., viii,
1943, 39f, and Painting in Britain. The Middle Ages, p. 70. As far as the
physical composition of the Bury Bible, Kauffmann asserts that “It is
tempting to see, in the format of the miniatures, the influence of the St.
Albans tradition which had already penetrated to Bury in the form of the
life of St. Edmund (Morgan 736).” p. 74.
82"The Bury Bible," p. 74. Here Kauffmann cites F. Wormald, Journal of the
British Architecture Association. 3rd series, viii, 1943; and Painting in
Britain, p. 84.
53
and its regular curly black fringe [of hair]."83 Two carved stone heads,
one from St. Albans and the other from Bury St. E dm unds, strengthen
his com parison of profiles and head-types.
Excavated in 1978, the St. Albans head is approxim ately 5.5 cm
high and in good condition (ill. 62), as opposed to the Bury head, dated
c. 1130 by G. Zarnecki, w hich has suffered abrasion (ill. 63).84 There is
no indication of the identity of either head, although it seem s likely
that the one from St. A lbans is a prophet. D eborah K ahn notes the
sim ilarity of the head to those of the prophets on the cross. W earing a
close-fitting, beaded cap, the St. Albans prophet is carved w ith the same
undrilled pupils and globular eyes of the Bury fragm ent, which,
although they protrude perhaps slightly m ore than those of the cross’
prophets, are set into the face and u n d er the brow naturalistically.
Cheeks bulge near the lips and nose, while the hair curls dow n below
the ears and m ustaches droop into closely-shaven beards of the
prophets. The profile of the Bury head reveals a proportional structure
not unlike that of the others; spaces betw een the top of the head and
the bridge of the nose, tip of the nose and m outh, and m outh to chin,
83”The Bury Bible,” p. 75. Further Kauffmann argues "cycles of full-and
three-quarter-page framed miniatures are rare in twelfth-century Bible
illustration." Instead most illustrated Bibles of the time contain historiated
initials or head pieces. Also reminiscent of the St. Albans Psalter are the
double frames with their floral and geometrical designs, and the overall
figural style of "strong contours, the elongated legs, the gestures, the
architectural features, the green and blue panelled backgrounds." "The
Bury Bible," pp. 73-74.
84For a complete description of the St. Albans excavation see "Recent
Discoveries of Romanesque Sculpture at St. Albans," pp. 71-89. For the
Bury head see English Romanesque Art 1066-1200. p. 162, as well as The
Cloisters Cross, p. 233.
54
are roughly corresponding. As K ahn observes, the scale a n d intricacy
o f the St. A lbans fragm ent suggest a connection n o t only to m etalw ork,
of w hich St. A lbans w as an im p o rtan t center, b u t also to ivory carving
techniques. The sim ilarity to the ivory carved p ro p h ets o n the cross is
m o st notable in D avid, Solom on an d H osea (ills. 64-66) a n d is indeed
close enough to suggest the St. A lbans h e a d an d the C loisters cross are
p ro d u cts of a sh ared artistic vein, datable th ro u g h the Bury h e a d to the
second q u a rte r of the tw elfth century 85
O ne can only speculate w here M aster H ugo w as train ed a n d
w h a t constituted his p rim ary influences. In d eed his dam p-fold d rap ery
p attern s in the B ury Bible m ight rep resen t d eb ts to B yzantine sources,
alth o u g h K auffm ann notes H u g o 's a d a p ta tio n is m u ch m o re stylized
th an any pre-tw elfth century B yzantine exam ple. H e does n o t assert a
B yzantine m odel for th e style of the Bible, how ever, claim ing that
m ore im m ediate exam ples w ere available in the L atin W est "w here
stylized B yzantine d rap ery form s h a d b e en cu rren t since the late
eleventh c en tu ry ."86 K auffm ann d te s E. B. G arrison's observation th at
the dam p-fold d rap e ry technique is n o t consistent th ro u g h o u t the Bury
Bible.87 W hile in its fully -d ev elo p ed m anifestation in the
85Kahn does not assign a specific date to the head, although she places
other fragments within Robert's abbacy (1151-1166). Because she does not
establish stylistic parallels between the head and any other dated work it
seems the St. Albans prophet certainly could be earlier than 1150.
86”The Bury Bible," p. 75. The closest pre-1130 parallel he cites is the
Pentecost miniature from the Cluny Lectionary (Paris, Bibl. Nat., c. 1100-
1120), concluding if “the figure style of the Bury Bible was derived from
abroad, France was the most likely source.” p. 76.
87E. B. Garrison, Studies in the History of Mediaeval Italian Painting iii,
(1958), pp. 200-210; from "The Bury Bible," p. 76.
55
illum inations of N um bers, D euteronom y an d Ezekiel, clinging drapery
patterns seem m ore tentative in other instances. From this visual
evidence it is generally accepted that the Bury Bible "is the earliest of
the extant m anuscripts, sculptures, w all paintings an d enam els hall
m arked by this drapery form. The fact that it is m ore fully developed
in som e of the Bury m iniatures than in others supports the view that
M aster H ugo him self m ight have developed this style."88 Ayres, too,
notes discrepancies in H ugo's dam p-fold technique, evident in
vestigial elem ents of the A ngevin style, and speculates H ugo’s
Byzantine influence w as not so m uch ingrained as "grafted onto an
existing fram ew ork."89
The com position of the right term inal plaque is perhaps a
testam ent to Byzantine sources w hich m ight have affected the cross'
carver either directly or indirectly. Several Byzantine illum inations
and carvings utilize a D eposition form at sim ilar to that of the right
plaque. Typically C hrist's left hand rem ains nailed to the cross while
the Virgin reaches for His right hand to kiss the w ound. Joseph of
A rim athea stands supported by a ladder, grasping C hrist around His
88"The Bury Bible," p. 77.
89"The Role of an Angevin Style," pp. 210-211. E. C. Parker, in discussing
Master Hugo as sculptor, provides a brief summary of previous arguments
for his Byzantine roots. Because Hugo's bronze doors are an exception in
early-twelfth century England James and Zarnecki argued his training
must have been centered outside of England. James notes "their relation to
the many doors of southern Italy, and suggested that Anselm, who was
formerly with the Greek monastery of St. Saba in Rome, found Hugo in
Italy and brought him to England." Zarnecki argues the doors "are
evidence of Hugo's early training in the metal working centers of the
Lower Lorraine, a more likely area for Byzantine influence." "Master Hugo
as Sculptor," p. 99.
56
w aist, w hile N icodem us, also on a ladder, rem oves the rem aining nail
from C hrist's left hand. A n eleventh century ivory plaque from the
V ictoria an d A lbert M useum is an exam ple of a stan d ard B yzantine
form at w hich m ight have been seen by the artist of the cross (ill. 67).9 (1
Three events from the Passion are vertically arranged along the plaque;
the Crucifixion at the top is separated from the D eposition by a straight,
decorative band, w hile the scenes of C hrist's D eposition and
E ntom bm ent are separated only by a m ore inform al, w avy g ro u n d line.
The proxim ity of these tw o m om ents is thus sim ilar to th at in the cross
term inal. As o n the cross, the V irgin stands very close to C hrist in the
D eposition, leaning forw ard to grasp H is elbow. M eanw hile, C hrist's
left arm is again unnaturally extended, passing over John's head w ho
rests his head in his h a n d in three-quarter view. N icodem us,
precariously balanced on tw o ladders in the eleventh century ivory, is
in both carvings seen from the side an d som ew hat reduced in scale.
Joseph of A rim athea, absent from the cross term inal as noted
previously, m ay also b e linked to possible B yzantine influence.91
Exam ples of later ivories, those w hich m ust have been carved
after the cross and reflect the Bury Bible style, are m ore difficult to
discuss specifically in term s of the cross' style as their exact backgrounds
90From Adolf Goldschmidt and Kurt Weitzmann, Die bvzantinischen
Elfenbeinskuloturen des X-XIII Tahrhunderts 2 vols. (Berlin:
Deutscherverlag fur Kunstwissenschaft, 1979), vol. 2, no. 23.
91 “The omission is exceptional in Western art although it may be noted in
Middle Byzantine gospel- book illustration.” The Cloisters Cross, pp. 76-77.
57
are disputed. A lthough these carvings cannot be traced to Bury
undisputedly, they either b ear the closest stylistic resem blance to, or
have b een discussed in conjunction w ith the cross, and thus I consider
them . These exam ples include tw o king or p ro p h et carvings, from the
B ritish M useum , a statuette of the Holy Family astride a donkey o n the
Flight into Egypt, a plaque of C hrist in M ajesty from the Staatliche
M useum in Berlin and sm all plaque of A aron w ith the flow ering ro d
from the M useo N azionale in Florence.
M ost striking for their naturalistic detail are tw o figures w hich
have n o t been decisively identified as either kings o r prophets, possibly
originally adorning a portable altar. B oth plaques are carved from
w alrus ivory an d show a crow ned, bearded figure carrying a short staff
and standing in front of an architectural niche (ills. 68-69). Beckw ith
dates the plaques to second quarter of the tw elfth century St. Albans,
while Batem an re-locates them to Bury. Based on drapery and facial
sim ilarities to the Bury Cross, she dates the reliefs to the 1150's, and
considers the kings to be representative of the type of production
directly influenced by M aster H u g o 's illum inations.92 Interestingly,
Lasko considers the British M useum kings to be from the eleventh
century, citing their "hum anism " an d "classicizing" style.93 H e argues
92St. Albans: Its Ivorv and Manuscript Workshops, pp. 75-76. Lasko, in Ars
Sacra, p. 166, dates the kings to the latter part of the eleventh century,
originating in Liege, but later cites the influence of the Winchester school.
English Romanesque Art 1066-1200. p. 218.
93Ars Sacra, p. 236; later Lasko cites similarities between the costume of the
carving and that of a king from the Stavelot Bible, and also between facial
features of the ivory king and an initial figure, again from the Stavelot
Bible. It is of note that Lasko argues the crowns worn by the British
58
C aiaphas' "softly m odeled chlam ys an d close-fitting crow n w ith crossed
arches" (ill. 6) com pare closely w ith those of the B ritish M useum
figures.94 T hese striking k in g /p ro p h e ts certainly originate from the
St. A lb an s/B u ry St. E d m u n d s carving trad itio n w ith the V -fold sections
of their cloaks, distinctive h ead gear an d b e ard ed faces, b u t w hich
m onastic school sh o u ld b e credited w ith their creation is uncertain.
W hat is im p o rtan t is th at they rep resen t a carving style w hich p o st
d ates H u g o 's Bible. A lthough the cross' figures tw ist a n d tu rn
believably in space, the k in g /p ro p h e t figures are carved w ith m ore
atten tio n to anatom ical detail; a reliable bone stru ctu re seem s m ore
ev id en t in them . T here is a m ark ed difference in the level of
naturalistic detail b etw een the face an d h a n d s of these pieces an d those
of the soldier of the cross' D escent p laq u e (ill. 7) for exam ple. T hus it is
m ost likely the kings are p ro d u cts of the latter p a rt of the century,
originating a t eith er St. A lbans o r B ury St. E dm unds.
O ne fairly certain late tw elfth century carving is a sm all statue of
the Flight into E gypt fro m the M etropolitan M useum of A rt in N ew
York w hich B eckw ith convincingly d ates to 1180, a n d is his strongest
evidence for dating the cross so late (ill. 70).95 This free stan d in g g ro u p
is carved w ith the sam e atten tio n to life-like detail as the B ritish
M useum king; h u m an n atu ralism em bodied by the g estu res an d
Museum kings, which compare very closely to those of Pilate, David and
Solomon on the cross, are "difficult to find represented in the later 12th
century." English Romanesque Art 1066-1200. p. 218.
94Ars Sacra, p. 167.
95Ivorv Carvings, p. 107.
59
anim ation of the cross' figures has developed further. A lthough
Joseph's pointed beard is sim ilar to the profiles on the cross, the
carving technique is entirely different. U nfortunately the head of the
Virgin is missing, yet her heavily striated drapery is a clue to disparate
carving styles, and seems m uch closer to that of the W alton-On-Hill
Surrey font, an object Hoving refers to as evidence for his late twelfth
century date of the cross (ill. 71).96 The figures of both the Flight
statuette and Surrey font compare well to a seal from Bruy St.
Edm unds, which also dates to the second half of the twelfth century
(ill. 72) 97
A lthough Beckwith placed the Christ in Majesty plaque (ill. 73)
w ithin the Bury St. E dm unds/S t. Albans milieu, Bateman
convincingly argues for Canterbury c. 1150.98 The ornate borders w hich
decorate the plaque and create divisions betw een figures are m ore akin
to a Canterbury style, as is the pierced bead pattern, yet there is
som ething similar in the facial types and headgear of the flanking
prophets. Also hard to place is a dim inutive plaque from the Bargello
in Florence depicting Aaron, his scroll and flowering rod (ill. 74).
Based on the decorative framing, architecture and facial type, this piece
96"The Bury St. Edmunds Cross," p. 31.
97The enthroned figure is identified as St. Edmund, and the seal itself has
been speculativley attributed to Master Hugo. Zarnecki, English
Romanesque Lead Sculpture: Lead Fonts of the Twelfth Century. London,
1957: and English Romanesque Art: 1066-1200. p. 313.
98lvorv Carvings, pp. 75,133; St. Albans: Its Ivorv and Manuscript
Workshops, pp. 71-73. Based on the similarities of the pierced bead pattern
and facial type on the plaque, perhaps the small carving of Aaron with a
scroll and flowering rod should also be placed to 1150’s Canterbury.
60
seem s to belong to the m id-century C anterbury school, the sam e one
responsible for the C hrist in M ajesty just discussed. Interestingly
enough, Beckwith suggests the plaque m ight have originated from the
sam e w orkshop as the cross, although he does n o t speculate fu rth e r."
P arker and Little include the A aron carving in their discussion of the
cross, citing the "liveliness and incisiveness," as w ell as pierced-dot
p a ttern an d deep relief carving technique as parallels placing the plaque
w ithin the sam e artistic orbit as the cross.100 A lthough Parker's
observations are persuasive, it is m y opinion the plaque belongs to the
1150's from C anterbury, because of insistent architectural fram ing
devices an d differences in treatm ent betw een A aron an d the prophets
o n the C loisters cross. W hatever its provenance, the real im portance
of this plaque is that it testifies to the dissem ination of M aster H ugo's
style to artistic centers outside of Bury St. E dm unds.
99St. Albans: Its Ivorv and Manuscript Workshops, p. 107.
lO O The Cloisters Cross, p. 232.
61
Conclusions
The artist of the Cloisters cross was strongly influenced by the St.
Albans tradition. Similarities can be found in both ivory carving and
m anuscript illum ination. The m en and centaurs encircling the
Victoria and A lbert M useum oval box provide im portant anatom ical
com parisons to the cross, echoed in the illum inations of the St. Albans
Psalter. Com positional similarities betw een the liturgical combs and
the cross, as well as drapery patterns found on the plaques of Daniel in
the Lions Den and the Deposition, are close enough to establish a direct
stylistic relationship to the cross. The draw ings of the Pem broke MS
120 further strengthen the connection to St. Albans. Based on these
comparisons, I w ould place the cross w ithin the second quarter of the
twelfth century, or, m ore precisely, c. 1130. It is my opinion that the
cross was produced before the Bury Bible, right before M aster H ugo
developed his highly stylized dam p-fold drapery style.
The chronology I w ould suggest is the following:
Pem broke MS 120 c. 1110 (St. Albans)
Ivory box, liturgical
combs, Daniel in the
Lion’ s D en and
Deposition plaques c. 1120 (St. Albans /Bury)
St. Albans Psalter c. 1123 (St. Albans)
Pem. MS 120 draw ings c. 1125 (St. Albans)
Cloisters cross c. 1130 (Bury St.Edmunds)
M organ MS 736 c. 1130 (St. A lbans/Bury)
Bury Bible c. 1138 (Bury St. Edm unds)
Pem. MS 120 overlay c. 1150 (Bury St. Edm unds)
62
The cross is still rooted in a St. Albans style of elongated figures
and heavily falling drapery, yet is sim ultaneously carved w ith incipient
elliptical drapery patterns exaggerated in the Bury Bible w hich will
dom inate artistic production of the next decades. M aster H ugo's artistic
revolution, em bodied by the Bury Bible, is foreshadow ed by the
expressive figures' dynam ism w hich energizes the entire surface of the
cross; the cross' artist just begins to explore w hat will later be called the
Bury Bible style. D rapery is not as extravagant as in the Bury Bible, and
figures are still rather elongated and encased in their garm ents, a
characteristic particularly noticeable in the Ascension figures. The
Cloisters cross is situated perfectly betw een the tw o styles, relying on
techniques developed early in the century at St. Albans, yet w ith aspects
of the new style that by the late 1130’ s take hold a t Bury in H ugo's
illum inations. In fact, the cross m ay well have been carved by M aster
Hugo.
63
Bibliography
Arnold, Thomas. Memorials of St. E dm und's Abbey. 3 vols., London,
1890-96.
Arts Council of Great Britain English Rom anesque A rt 1066-1200. Exh.
cat. H ayw ard Gallery. London: Arts Council of Great Britain and
W eidenfeld and Nicolson, 1984.
Ayres, Larry. "The Role of an Angevin Style in English Romanesque
Painting," Zeitschrift fiir Kunstgeschichte. 37 (1974), 193-223.
Bateman, Katherine. "St. Albans: Its Ivory and M anuscript W orkshops:
A Solution to the St. A lbans/B ury St. Edm unds Dilemma,"
Ph.D. diss., The University of Michigan, 1976.
Beckwith, John. Ivory Carvings in Early M edieval E ngland.
Greenwich: N ew York Graphic Society Ltd., 1972.
Christiansen, T. E. "Ivories: Authenticity and Relationships," Acta
archaeologica, 46 (1975), 119-133.
Gaborit-Chopin, Danielle. Ivories d u M oven Age. Fribourg: Office d u
Livre, 1978.
The Golden Legend of Tacobus de Voragine. Granger Ryan and H elm ut
Rippenger, trans., N ew York, 1941, repr. New Ham pshire: Ayer
Com pany, Publishers, Inc., 1991.
Goldschmidt, Adolf. P e r A lbanipsalter in Hildesheim u nd seine
Beziehung zur sym bolischen kirchenskulptur des XII
Tahrhunderts, Berlin, 1895.
Heslop, T. A. Review of The Cloisters Cross: Its A rt and Meaning, by
Parker and Little. Burlington M agazine, 136 (1994), 459-460.
Hoving, Thomas. "The Bury St. Edm unds Cross." The M etropolitan
A rt M useum Bulletin. 22 (1964), 317-340.
64
Jones, Bernice. "A R eco n sid eratio n of the C loisters Iv ory C ross w ith
the C aiap h as P laque R esto red to its Base." G esta. 30 (1991), 65-
88.
K ahn, D eb o rah . ’ ’ R ecent D iscoveries o f R om anesque S cu lp tu re at St.
A lbans," S tu d ies in M ed iev al S cu lp tu re. F. H. T hom pson, ed.
(L ondon, 1983), p p . 71-89.
K auffm ann, C . M . "T he B ury Bible." Tournal of the W arb u rg an d
C o u rta u ld In stitu tes. 29 (1966), 63-81.
Lasko, Peter. A rs Sacra 800-1200. H a rm o n d sw o rth : P e n g u in Books,
1972.
L ongland, S. "P ilate A n sw ered : W h at I H a v e W ritte n I H av e W ritten ."
M e tro p o lita n M u se u m o f A rt B ulletin. 26 (1968), 410-429.
"T he B ury St. E d m u n d s Cross: Its E xceptional Place in E nglish
T w elfth C en tu ry A rt." C o n n o isse u r. 172 (1969), 163-173.
"A L iterary A spect o f th e B ury St. E d m u n d s C ross."
M e tro p o litan M u seu m o f A rt Tournal. 2 (1969), 45-74.
M cLachlan, E lizabeth P arker. T he S c rip to riu m of B ury St. E d m u n d s in
the T w elfth C e n tu ry . Ph.D . d issertatio n , U n iv ersity of L ondon,
1965. G a rla n d Series o f O u tsta n d in g T heses from the C o u rtau ld
In stitu te of A rt. N e w York: G a rla n d Publishing, 1986.
M ellinkoff, R uth. O u tcasts a n d Signs of O th ern ess in N o rth e rn
E u ro p ea n A rt of the M id d le A ges. 2 vols. Los A ngeles:
U niversity of B erkeley Press, 1993.
M ersm an n , W iltru d . "D as E lfen b ein k reu z d e r S am m lu n g T opic-
M im ara." W allraf-R ich artz-T ahrbuch. 25, (1963), 7-108.
M orrison, K arl. H isto ry as a V isual A rt in the T w elfth C en tu ry
R e n a issa n c e . P rinceton: P rin ceto n U niversity P ress, 1990.
N ilgen, U rsula. "D as grosse W alrossbeinkreuz in d e n 'C lo isters'."
Z eitschrift fu r K unstgeschichte, 48, (1985), 39-64.
65
Pacht, O tto, C. R. D odw ell a n d Francis W orm ald. The St. A lbans Psalter
(Psalter A lbani). L ondon, 1960.
Parker, E lizabeth C. "The M issing Base P laque of the B ury St. E dm unds
Cross." Gesta. 14/1 (1975), 19-26.
----------- - The D escent F rom the Cross: Its R elation to th e Extra-
Liturgical 'D epositio D ram a. N ew York U niversity: G arland
P ublishing, 1978.
------------ "M aster H ugo as Sculptor: A Source for the Style of the Bury
Bible." Gesta. 2 0 /1 (1981), 99-109.
Parker, E lizabeth C, a n d C harles Little. The C loisters Cross: Its A rt and
M e a n in g . N ew York: The M etropolitan M useum of A rt, 1994.
Raw, Barbara. A nglo-Saxon C rucifixion Iconography a n d the A rt of the
M onastic R evival. N ew York: C am bridge U niversity Press, 1990.
Rickert, M. P ainting in Britain: The M iddle A ges. B altim ore, 1954.
Riley, H . T. G esta A bbatum M onasterii Sancti A lbani. 3 vols., London:
Rolls Series 28, 1867.
Scarfe, N orm an. "T he B ury St. E d m u n d s Cross: T he W ork of M aster
H ugo?" Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of A rchaeology, 33,
(1973-75), 75-85.
Schapiro, M eyer. "Im ages of the D isappearing Christ: T he A scension in
English A rt A ro u n d the Year 1000," G azette des Beaux-A rts
(1943), p p . 135-152.
Schiller, G ertru d e. Iconography of C hristian A rt. Janet Seligm an,
trans. 2 vols. G reenw ich: N ew Y ork G raphic Society, Ltd., 1968.
Stone, L. S culpture in Britain: The M iddle A ges. H arm o n d sw o rth :
Pelican H istory of A rt, 1972.
Sw arzenski, H arm s. M o n u m en ts of R om anesque A rt: T he A rt of
C h u rch T reasures in N o rth -W estern E u ro p e . 2nd ed. Chicago:
The U niversity of C hicago Press, 1967.
66
W orm ald, F. Tournal of the B ritish A rchitecture A ssociation, th ird ser.,
vih, 1943, 39f.
T he Y ear 1200: A C entennial E xhibition a t The M etropolitan M useum
of A rt. Exh. cat. K. H offm ann, ed. N ew York: T he M etropolitan
M useum of A rt, 1970.
Z am ecki, G eorge. E nglish R om anesque L ead Sculpture: L ead Fonts of
the T w elfth C en tu ry . L ondon, 1957.
67
INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the m icrofilm master. UMI
films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some
thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may
be from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the
copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality
illustrations and photographs, print bleed through, substandard margins,
and improper alignment can adversely afreet reproduction.
In the unlikely, event that the author did not send UMI a complete
manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if
unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate
the deletion.
Oversize m aterials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and
continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each
original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in
reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced
xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations
appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly
to order.
A Bell & Howell information Company
300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. M l 48106-1346 USA
313/761-4700 800/521-0600
UMI Number: 1376487
UMI Microform 1376487
Copyright 1995, by DM1 Company. All rights reserved.
This microform edition is protected against unauthorized
copying under Title 17, United States Code.
UMI
300 Horth Zeeb Hoad
Ann Arbor, MI 48103

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

In her own image

PDF

"It was in the air": Adolph Gottlieb, the pictographs, New York, and the Zeitgeist of the 1940s

PDF

Images of Synagoga as Christian discourse (1000--1215)

PDF

A thesis

PDF

Work for the masters degree

PDF

The relationship between alcoholism and crime: autonomic and neurpsychological factors

PDF

The dream becomes a reality (?): nation building and the continued struggle of the women of the Eritrian People's Liberation Front

PDF

Predictors of pretend play in Korean-American and Anglo-American preschool children

PDF

An investigation of the pseudohomophone effect: where and when it occurs

PDF

Fine motor skills of two- to three-year-old drug exposed children

PDF

The use of occupational therapists or interdisciplinary teams in the evaluation of assistive technology needs of children with severe physical disabilities in Orange County schools

PDF

A qualitative study on the relationship of future orientation and daily occupations of adolescents in a psychiatric setting

PDF

Public art in corporate downtown Los Angeles

PDF

Children's immediate reactions to interparental conflict

PDF

A kinetic model of AMPA and NMDA receptors

PDF

Performances of orthodox and liberal Jewish children in third grade on praxis subtests of the SIPT: a cross cultural study

PDF

Occupational exposure to extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields as a potential risk factor for Alzheimer's disease

PDF

A follow up study of adapted computer technology training at the High Tech Traning Center of Santa Monica College

PDF

On the limits of not being scripted: video-making and discursive prositioning in coastal southeast Sulawesi

PDF

Structural equation modeling in educational psychology

Asset Metadata

Creator Monroe, Elizabeth Anne (author)

Core Title The Cloisters Cross: a re-examination of date and style

School Graduate School

Degree Master of Arts

Degree Program Art History

Degree Conferral Date 1995-08

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag art history,OAI-PMH Harvest,religion, Biblical studies

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Malone, Carolyn (committee chair), Dales, Richard C. (committee member), Harcourt, Glenn (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-3438

Unique identifier UC11357911

Identifier 1376487.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-3438 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 1376487-0.pdf

Dmrecord 3438

Document Type Thesis

Rights Monroe, Elizabeth Anne

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA