Spicer Images and Objects-libre

8/9/2019 Spicer Images and Objects-libre

1/24

Images and Objects in Ritual Practices

in Medieval and Early Modern Northernand Central Europe

Edited by

Krista Kodres and Anu Mnd


2/24

Images and Objects in Ritual Practices in Medieval and Early Modern Northern and Central Europe,Edited by Krista Kodres and Anu Mnd

This book first published 2013

Cambridge Scholars Publishing 12 Back Chapman Street, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2XX, UK

British Library Cataloguing in Publication DataA catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Copyright 2013 by Krista Kodres, Anu Mnd and contributors

All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or

otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner.

ISBN (10): 1-4438-5133-7, ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-5133-6


3/24

T ABLE OF C ONTENTS

Acknowledgements ......................................................................................vii

Introduction Krista Kodres and Anu Mnd ........................................................................1

Part IImages and Objects in Religious Rituals .................................................13

Late Medieval Images and the Variability of Rituals Gerhard Jaritz ........................................................................................15

To Show That the Place Is Divine:Consecration Crosses Revisited

Andrew Spicer ........................................................................................34

The Rosary and the Wounds of Christ: Devotional Imagesin Relation to Late Medieval Liturgy and PietyStina Fallberg Sundmark ........................................................................53

Image, Time and Ritual: The Motif of the Last Supperin Lutheran Churches

Martin Wangsgaard Jrgensen ...............................................................68

Morian and Merian. Word and Image: A Painting Usedin Teaching the Catechism in the Keila Church (1669)

Aivar Pldvee .........................................................................................89

Part IIVisual Culture and the Performances of Power ....................................103

The Gaze of Power, the Act of Obedience: Interpreting ByzantineWall Paintings in Trakai, LithuaniaGiedr Micknait ................................................................................105

Baptism and the Kings Coronation: Visual Rhetoric of theValdemar Dynasty on Some Scanian and Danish Baptismal Fonts

Kersti Markus .......................................................................................122


4/24

vi

In Between the Secular and the Religious: Art, Ritual andScience in the Funeral Chapel of Reinoud III of Brederode,Lord of Vianen (14911556), and His Wife, Philipotte de laMarck (d. 1537), in the Reformed Church of Vianen

Juliette Roding and Nico Hijman .........................................................143

Images of Hereditary Succession Hugo Johannsen ...................................................................................164

Magic of Presence: The Ceremony of Taking an Oathof Allegiance in 1690 in Tallinn (Reval)

Krista Kodres .......................................................................................183

Between Act, Image, and Memory: Ritual Re-Enactmentsin Eighteenth-Century Denmark

Birgitte Bggild Johannsen ..................................................................204

Part IIIRitual and Self-Representation ...............................................................225

The Self-Representation of the Late Medieval Cistercian Abbot:The Case of Henry Kresse of Bukowo Morskie

Emilia Jamroziak ..................................................................................227 Memoria and Sacral Art in Late Medieval Livonia:The Gender Perspective

Anu Mnd .............................................................................................239

The Ritual Context of Chandeliers and Sconcesin Early Modern Lutheran Churches

Jrgen Beyer .........................................................................................274

The Art of Rituals: How Samuel Pepys Used His Eyes and Ears Ruth-E. Mohrmann ...............................................................................289

Wining and Dining in Style: Architectural Innovationsas a Source for Ritual Change in German Renaissance PalacesStephan Hoppe .....................................................................................301

Contributors ...............................................................................................324

Table of Contents


5/24

A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Throughout the process of preparing this collection of articles, we havereceived support from many people and institutions, whom we would like toacknowledge. Thanks are due in particular to the editorial assistant, MartinJnes, who contributed almost a year of his time to this project. We are alsograteful to Richard Adang, who kindly reviewed the language of the book,and to Carol Koulikourdi who recommended it to Cambridge Scholars Pub-lishing. The following institutions and research projects have contributed tothe funding of the book: Institute of History of Tallinn University, Institute ofArt History of the Estonian Academy of Arts, Estonian Cultural Endowment,targeted nanced project no. SF0130019s08 Christianization, Colonizationand Cultural Exchange: The Historical Origins of the European Identity ofEstonia (13th 17th Centuries), and the EuroCORECODE programmes project Symbols that Bind and Break Communities of the European ScienceFoundation. Last, but not least, we would like to thank all the contributors fortheir stimulating ideas.


6/24

T O S HOW T HAT THE P LACE I S D IVINE :

C ONSECRATION C ROSSES R EVISITED

A NDREW S PICER

The medieval parish church stood out within the landscape as often the largestand sometimes the only stone building in the community. It was de ned asa sacred space, but within it there were gradations of holiness that increasedfrom the churchyard to the church and then to the chancel, where at the altarChrist became manifest in the consecrated elements at the celebration of the parish Mass. The churchyard, church and altar became sacred sites through theact of consecration, which appropriated them for religious uses and set themapart from the secular realm. While the sanctity of the building was under-stood by the community, it nonetheless remained intangible to them and wasde ned in terms of access and accepted forms of behaviour that were enforced by the church and its courts. Furthermore the holiness of the building could be imperilled through an act of desecration and the spilling of blood or other bodily uids. In such instances, the celebration of the Mass was suspendedand the interment of the dead in the churchyard ceased until the building could be reconciled.1 There was, however, one constant visual reminder of the ritesthat had set the church apart from the world, the series of crosses which had been anointed by the bishop during the rite of consecration.

The consecration might have taken place earlier than the living memoryof the congregation, but the crosses on the internal and external walls of thechurch symbolised this rite and the designation of the church as a holy place.This understanding of sacred space was rejected at the Reformation, which

also dismissed the ritual of consecration as superstitious and lucrative. Whena new Protestant rite emerged in the early seventeenth century, it did not inc-lude the asperging and anointing of church walls.2 Consecration crosses are,therefore, a relic of the sanctity of medieval churches.1 See Daniel E. Thiery, Polluting the Sacred: Violence, Faith and the Civilizing of

Parishioners in Late Medieval England (Leiden: Brill, 2009), 4154.2 Walter Howard Frere, ed.,Visitation Articles and Injunctions of the Period of the

Reformation , vol. 2,15361558 (London: Longmans, Green, 1910), 104; AndrewSpicer, God Will Have a House: De ning Sacred Space and Rites of Consecration

in Early Seventeenth-Century England, in De ning the Holy: Sacred Space in Medi-eval and Early Modern Europe , ed. Andrew Spicer and Sarah Hamilton (Aldershot:


7/24


8/24

36 To Show That the Place Is Divine

notes, photographs and rubbings of consecration crosses on which Dewicksarticles were based, together with the papers of Francis Carolus Eeles on thesame subject, were deposited at the Society of Antiquaries in London duringthe 1960s.6 Middletons and Dewicks articles formed the principal sourcesfor later studies of consecration crosses in medieval England.7

Recent research into sacred space has concentrated more on the delineationor creation of sacred space, in particular considering the demarcation betweenthe sacred and the profane, the religious and the secular. Further studieshave considered the desecration and destruction of sacred space, particularlythrough the iconoclastic assaults associated with the Reformation, as wellas the re-conceptualisation of the sanctity of religious buildings in the earlymodern period.8 This research has not examined the symbolism of consecration

crosses; even within the broader eld of the material culture of medieval andearly modern religion, they have not been the focus of attention.9 Consecrationcrosses have been considered brie y by some architectural historians; theyare noted, for example, in the Royal Commission on Historical Monumentsinventories as church ttings, but do not appear in Nikolaus Pevsners Buildingsof England series.10 Research has been undertaken by art historians as part ofthe wider iconographic and schematic studies of medieval wall paintings.11 There has, therefore, not been any attempt to research consecration crosses per6 Society of Antiquaries, London, SAL/MS/972, 973.7 See, e.g., John Charles Cox,Churchwardens Accounts from the Fourteenth Centuryto the Close of the Seventeenth Century (London: Methuen, 1913), appendix; RaymondW. L. Muncey, A History of the Consecration of Churches and Churchyards (Cambridge:Heffer & Sons, 1930), ch. 7.8 Barbara A. Hanawalt and Michal Kobialka, eds., Medieval Practices of Space (Min-neapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000); Will Coster and Andrew Spicer, eds.,Sacred Space in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005);Spicer and Hamilton, De ning the Holy; Lawrence Besserman, ed.,Sacred and Secularin Medieval and Early Modern Cultures: New Essays (New York: Palgrave Macmillan,

2006).9 See, e.g., Eamon Duffy,The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England,c. 1400c. 1580 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1992); Robert Whiting,The

Reformation of the English Parish Church (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2010).10 See, e.g., Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (England), An Inventory ofthe Historical Monuments in Essex , 4 vols. (London: HMSO, 191623), 1:xxx, 2:xxxiv,4:xlii.11 Ernest W. Tristram, English Medieval Wall Painting , 2 vols. (London: Oxford Uni-versity Press, 194450); Tristram, English Wall Painting of the Fourteenth Century , ed.Eileen Tristram (London: Routledge & Paul, 1955); Roger Rosewell, Medieval Wall

Paintings in English and Welsh Churches (Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2008).


9/24

37Images and Objects in Ritual Practices

se, in spite of the renewed focus on sacred space. The intention of this essayis therefore to reconsider the artistic form and signi cance of consecrationcrosses, in relation to ecclesiastical rituals and traditions. It draws upon theearlier research of Dewick and Middleton, but it is also based on extensive

eld work, revisiting and reassessing their examples but also identifyingother consecration crosses. Although consecration crosses are found on thecontinent, this preliminary essay will focus solely on the surviving examplesand evidence from pre-Reformation England.

I

During the Middle Ages a complex ritual of consecration had developed, which

included a number of particular ceremonies that were intended to purify thenew church and sanctify it for religious use. The key elements included: the puri cation of the building through using hyssop branches to asperge both theinternal and external walls with holy water, the symbolic taking possession bythe bishop knocking three times on the door and entering the building, prayersand litanies for the sancti cation of the church, the abecedarium , or writing ofthe Greek and Latin alphabets, in ashes in two diagonal lines across the oor ofthe building, the consecration of the altar and the burial of relics, the anointingof the walls with chrism, and nally the celebration of the Mass. There were

a number of variants to this rite but, in the late thirteenth century, the servicecompiled by the papal administrator and liturgist Guillaume Durand, the bishopof Mende, from earlier sacramentals and ponti cals came to be recognised asthe authoritative form of consecration.12 A revised version was published in1485 as the Liber Ponti cales and, ultimately, as the Ponti cale Romanum itwas enjoined on the whole Catholic Church by Pope Clement VIII in 1596, providing a single form of ceremonies to be used by bishops.13

Dewicks close examination of the English ponti cals demonstrated thatthere was one signi cant difference from the rites that were employed on thecontinent. From the eleventh century onwards, the English ponti cals required

12 For an overview, see Didier Mhu, Historiae et imagines de la conscration delglise au Moyen ge, in Mises en scne et mmoires de la conscration de lglisedans lOccident mdival , ed. Didier Mhu (Turnhout: Brepols, 2007), 1528; MichelAndrieu, Le ponti cal romain au Moyen-ge, vol. 1, Le ponti cal romain du XIIe sicle (Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1938), 1718.13 Pierre de Puniet,The Roman Ponti cal: A History and Commentary, trans. MildredB. Harcourt (London: Longmans, Green, 1932), 4451; Thaddeus S. Ziolkowski,The Consecration and Blessing of Churches: A Historical Synopsis and Commentary (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1943), 2224.


10/24


the bishop not only to anoint the internal walls with chrism in twelve places,which was the usual continental practice, but also the external walls. Thisdivergence in liturgical practice was con rmed in a late fourteenth- or early

fteenth-century ponti cal of London, which recorded two forms for consec -rating a church, one according to the Roman use and the other in the manner ofthe English Church. By this date, the rites had evolved from the simple anoin-ting of the walls to the painting of consecration crosses before this could take

place. English ponti cals stipulated that twelve equally-spaced crosses wereto be painted on the internal walls and a similar number on the external walls.These crosses were to be anointed by the bishop with chrism and then censed.The London ponti cal stated that these crosses were to be painted red and eachwas to have an iron branch for a candle. By the sixteenth century, the Roman

ponti cal required the crosses to be painted at a height of ten palms, 7.5 feet(2.3 m), off the ground. This meant that a ladder was required for the bishopto reach the consecration cross and anoint it with holy oil; this was depicted ina woodcut that accompanied a 1520 printed edition of the ponti cal. 14

Surviving consecration crosses indicate that liturgical practice broadlyconformed to the ordinances speci ed in the ponti cals. Antiquarian accountsand surviving examples provide some insight into the form and pattern ofexternal consecration crosses. There is evidence to suggest that these weresometimes painted on the outside walls. In the late nineteenth century, a

Norfolk antiquarian noted that there were twelve patches of plaster on theexternal walls of the Newton St. Faiths Church and apparently still tracesof colour on similarly plastered sections at Shotesham. Middleton remarkedthat, at North Repps in the same county, there were patches of stucco on thewalls of roughly cut int; there were twelve of them, each four foot (1.2 m)square, onto which consecration crosses would have been painted.15 Suchsimple external crosses were probably commonplace but, as at North Repps,have subsequently been lost through church restoration and rebuilding. Discson which consecration crosses were painted remain at the east and west endsof the Holbrook church in Suffolk, inside of which there were apparently threeinternal crosses at the west end, but these are now covered by a noticeboardand only two others are visible.16 The surviving examples of external con-

14 Dewick, Consecration Crosses, 511; Walter Howard Frere, ed., Ponti cal Ser -vices: Illustrated from Miniatures of the XVth and XVIth Centuries , 4 vols. (London:Longmans, Green, 19018), 1:4950, 88, 4:3839.15 Middleton, On Consecration Crosses, 458; Extracts from the Proceedings, 352;Dewick, Consecration Crosses, 21n2.16 H. Munro Cautley,Suffolk Churches and Their Treasures , 5th ed. (Woodbridge:Boydell, 1982), 196, 297.


11/24


secration crosses tend to be either carved or incised examples. At Uf ngton inBerkshire, eleven of the twelve external roundels with traces of consecrationcrosses remain, with three at the east and west ends of the church and the restdistributed along the north and south walls.17 There appears to have been asimilar arrangement of incised consecration crosses at Yetminster in Dorset,where eleven are still evident.18

There appear to be fewer relatively complete series of internal consecrationcrosses. At Throcking, Hertfordshire, twelve painted internal crosses werediscovered and recorded in the early twentieth century, although they weresubsequently concealed. The twelve crosses were unevenly distributed alongthe north and south walls of the church; their height from the ground varied between 3 feet 2 inches (97 cm) and 6 feet 9 inches (2.1 m).19 The lowest

consecration cross was located in the chancel and a similar distinction inheight can be seen elsewhere, such as with the surviving consecration cros-ses at Inglesham in Wiltshire. The arrangement and height of the survivingconsecration crosses in Henry VIIs chapel at Westminster Abbey accordedmore closely with the rubrics. Dewick identi ed nine crosses, three crossesof similar size on both the south and north aisle walls and three larger crosseson the west wall; he also found possible traces of two other crosses at the eastend of the two aisles. The aisle crosses were all at a height of nearly eight feet,as required by the Roman ponti cal. 20 Only the repainted west wall crosses

now remain; the much smaller aisle crosses, which would have been pain-ted within the narrow spaces of intricate wall tracery, have been lost. Smallholes above modern wall lighting in three locations in both aisles appear to be at the right height to be the remains of these smaller consecration crosses.At the Exeter Cathedral, there is an example of an un nished consecrationcross cut into the wall of the south aisle with a completed cross above it. Thelower cross was abandoned, presumably because it was not at the requisiteheight for a consecration cross.21 In many churches, the number of extantconsecration crosses are too few to get a clear sense of whether they wereequally distributed around the church interior or placed at the requisite height, but from the examples that do survive it is clear that actual practice variedmarkedly.

The symbolism of these crosses was discussed in Durands commentaryon his ponti cal, the Rationale divinorum of ciorum. Composed in 1286,

17 Dewick, Consecration Crosses, 17.18 Eeles, Consecration Crosses, 2627.19 Whitford Anderson, Throcking Church Consecration Crosses, 117.20 Dewick, Consecration Crosses, 1920.21 Ibid., 1819.


12/24


it became one of the most widely circulated medieval liturgical treatises.According to Durand:

These crosses are painted, in the rst place, to terrify the demons, so that when

the demons that have been expelled from there see the sign of the cross, theywill be terri ed and not presume to return there. In the second place, they aresigns of triumph, for the crosses are battle standards of Christ and the signsof His triumph. It is right, therefore, that crosses be painted there to show thatthis place is subjected to the dominion of Christ.

Third, so that they re ect on the Passion of Christ, by which He Himself con -secrated His Church, and that faith in the Passion will be implanted in theirmemory.22

This discussion of the symbolism of consecration crosses was also incorpo-rated into another popular medieval work, the largely hagiographicalGolden

Legend , which asserted that there are painted the crosses for to show thatthe place is divine, subject to God. Besides the crosses themselves, lightswere placed in front of them to represent the twelve Apostles, which bytheir faith of god cruci ed, they enlumined [illuminated] all the world. 23 Thecrosses were also important as a tangible reminder that the church had beenconsecrated in the past. Discussing the circumstances in which reconsecra-tion should take place, Durand argued that it was doubtful that a church had been previously consecrated if there is no text or picture or sculpture treatingthis event.24

The anniversary of the buildings dedication or consecration was animportant feast in the parishs liturgical year. Some of the English ponti calseven called upon the bishops to remind the congregation at the time of consec-ration to mark the date so that the anniversary could be kept as a special feast,which occasionally also came to be included in ecclesiastical calendars. Insome dioceses, it was ordered that the date of the feast of dedication should berecorded in the church. The occasion was also associated with parish pardons,

indulgences which were granted by local bishops to those who attended theseanniversary services.25 The indulgences were publicly advertised, perhaps with

22 The Rationale Divinorum Of ciorum of William Durand of Mende: A New Translationof the Prologue and Book One , trans. Timothy M. Thibodeau (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 2007), 69.23 Jacobus de Voragine, Here begynneth the legende in latyn legenda aurea that is to

saye in Englysshe the golden legende. , 2 pts. (Westmynster: Wynkyn de Worde,[1498]), 2: fol. 37v.24 Rationale Divinorum Of ciorum, 70.25 Nicholas Orme, Indulgences in Medieval Cornwall, Journal of the Royal Institu-tion of Cornwall , n.s. ii, 1, pt. 2 (1992): 15051; Orme, English Church Dedications:


13/24


the date of consecration, through being painted on the church walls. At Mil-denhall in Suffolk, for example, a papal rather than episcopal pardon appearsto have been carved into or painted on the wall of the church.26 According totheGolden Legend , the dedication of the church is solemnly hallowed amongthe other feasts of the church. And because that it is double church or temple,that is to wit, material and spiritual.27 The liturgy for the occasion remindedthe faithful that this is the house of God; this is the gate of Heaven.28 JohnMirks collection of sermons included one for the feast of dedication whichcalled upon the congregation to come to church to worship God, having inmind the causes why the church is hallowed: one for the church cleansing, andfor devout praying, and for the dead burying.29 Dewick argued that, while onthe continent candles were burnt before the consecration crosses at these feasts,

he could neither nd references in English liturgical works for the practice norevidence in churchwardens accounts for additional expenditures for the settingup of lamps at dedication feasts, or that the cost of candles was greater than forother major feast days. While acknowledging the celebration of the feast, heconcluded that I am disposed to think that in most cases the crosses receivedno annual cult in England.30

Although further research needs to be undertaken, not least a close lookat a range of churchwardens accounts, Dewicks assertion is questionableand has been challenged by Tristram.31 From an archaeological perspective, beneath or sometimes in the centre of surviving consecration crosses, there areholes which would have been used for a branch to hold a candle or for xing asconce. These are particularly evident below the external crosses at Edingtonin Wiltshire, and in the centre of some of the crosses at Barwick (Somerset)and Yetminster. In some cases, such as Ottery St. Mary, iron stumps of these

With a Survey of Cornwall and Devon (Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1996), 8; Robert N. Swanson, Indulgences in Late Medieval England: Passports to Paradise?

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 5045.26 Nicholas Orme, Indulgences in the Diocese of Exeter, 11001536, Reports andTransactions of the Devonshire Association 120 (1988): 21; Judith Middleton-Stewart,ed., Records of the Churchwardens of Mildenhall: Collections (14461454) and

Accounts (15031553) (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2011), xxxiii, lxvii, 85.27 De Voragine,Golden legende , 2: fol. 34v.28 The Sarum Missal in English , trans. Frederick E. Warren, 2 vols. (London: A. R.Mowbray, 1913), 1:414.29 John Mirk, Mirks Festial: A Collection of Homilies , ed. Theodor Erbe, vol. 1 (Lon-don: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trbner, 1905), 27778.30 Dewick, Notes on Consecration Crosses, 180.31 Tristram, English Medieval Wall Painting , 1:62.


14/24


former lamp brackets still remain protruding beneath the crosses.32 Whilecandles would have been lit before these crosses as part of the rite of consec-ration, it seems unlikely that they would not have been lit on other occasions,such as dedication festivals. In fact, at Hessett in Suffolk, one of the churchsconsecration crosses is stained by scorch marks, which suggests that theselamps were used more than once.33 That they were used for dedication festivalsis also suggested by the protest made to the consistory court of Wells by thechurchwardens of Carhampton, Somerset, in ca. 1528. They complained thatthere were no crosses on the doors of the church before which candles should be lit on the feast of the dedication.34 This fragmentary evidence does implythat the consecration crosses were part of the annual feasts of dedication, andtherefore an important reminder of the sanctity of the building.

II

One of the problems in examining consecration crosses is the loss of so manyexamples as a consequence of the religious changes associated with the Ref-ormation. The requirement to purge church interiors of religious imagery ledto the whitewashing of wall paintings and with them consecration crosses.By the time William Dowsing came to visit and destroy any surviving reli-gious imagery in East Anglian churches during the 1640s, most consecrationcrosses had probably been painted over. Amidst his destruction of cruci xesand external crosses, such as on the church gable, porch or tower, there are afew references in his journal to what might have been remaining consecrationcrosses. At Offton in Suffolk, Dowsing found some crosses on the outside ofthe church, and chancel; and we gave order to deface them and at Darmsdenhe found three crosses in the chancel, on the wall.35 Besides the ideologicaldestruction of the Reformation, further losses occurred in the nineteenth centuryas a result of the restoration of medieval churches, during which plaster wasstripped from church interiors, and exterior walls were refaced with new stone.

It was this later destruction that in part led Dewick and others to recordthe surviving examples, but their notes also reveal instances where the crosses

32 John Neale Dalton, ed.,The Collegiate Church of Ottery St. Mary: Being the Ordi-nacio et Statuta Eecclesie Sancte Marie de Otery Exon. Diocesis, A.D. 1338, 1339 (Cambridge: University Press, 1917), 21; Dewick, Consecration Crosses, 23.33 Rosewell, Medieval Wall Paintings , 152.34 Aelred Watkin, ed., Dean Cosyn and Wells Cathedral Miscellanea ([Frome]: printedfor subscribers only [by Butler & Tanner], 1941 [i.e. 1943]), 158.35 Trevor Cooper, ed.,The Journal of William Dowsing: Iconoclasm in East Angliaduring the English Civil War (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2001), 100, 237, 30910.


15/24


were subsequently lost due to the actions of restorers.36 Keyser noted someseventy-nine crosses in his gazetteer of medieval wall paintings, while Dewickidenti ed 170 parish churches where they remained. 37 This seems likely to bean underestimate, as Dewicks research appears to have been largely basedon published sources and examples sent to him by correspondents rather thanextensive eldwork. Several examples included in this paper, such as Ingles -ham, are not on his lists.38 Furthermore, as another antiquarian noted, thereare few subjects as to which more blunders have been made in the past thanthat of consecration crosses. Confusion has also arisen over incised crossesinside doorways, which were not consecration crosses, as well as instanceswhere a cross was used merely as a form of decoration.39 This is particularlytrue of the int used to decorate and embellish some East Anglican churches.

At Blythborough, the two elaborate quatrefoil int crosses beneath the eastwindow of the church were identi ed by Middleton as consecration crosses;in the centre is an undecorated weathered stone. The same quatrefoil design,however, is repeated on the lower parts of aisle buttresses, where they seemmore likely to be decorative than an indication of past religious rites.40

The artistic form of consecration crosses varied markedly, but by the f -teenth century the English ponti cals had become more prescriptive, requiringcrosses to be painted red and to be enclosed by circles. Some crosses were painted green or ochre, but these seem to have been amongst the earlier forms.41

The most common and simplest form of cross was incised into the plaster usinga compass to form a cross patte (where the arms at the centre of the cross arenarrow but wide at the end), within a circle or circular border, as can be seen atInglesham ( g. 1) and Kenton (Suffolk) ( g. 2). In his attempt to classify thesecrosses, Middleton described this form as Type A. However, as his examplesillustrated, within this conventional form it was possible to vary the size andshape of the cross, such as having curved or straight arms, or developing morecomplicated geometric designs. A second artistic form of cross can also be36

Middleton, On Consecration Crosses, 45758; Dewick, Consecration Crosses,1. See also Mural Paintings in Sussex Churches, 22048.37 Charles E. Keyser, A List of Buildings in Great Britain and Ireland Having Muraland Other Painted Decorations. , 3d ed. (London: HMSO, 1883), 35253; Dewick,Consecration Crosses, 21n1.38 Society of Antiquaries, London, SAL/MS/972.39 Dewick, Consecration Crosses, 2933; Cox,Churchwardens Accounts , 35051.See also Pritchett, Early Consecration Crosses, 28485.40 Middleton, On Consecration Crosses, 463, plate XXXVII g. 23; Dewick, Noteson Consecration Crosses, 188.41 Tristram, English Wall Painting of the Fourteenth Century , 29; Mural paintings inSussex Churches, 231, 242.


16/24


identi ed. Again formed within a circle, this type of cross was simpler and thearms were all the same thickness. The two surviving consecration crosses atSt. Marys Church, Ashby near Herring eet, Suffolk ( g. 3), for example, arevery thin, but each arm ends in a trefoil. A further variation can be found atIf ey, Oxfordshire, where the painted straight arms of the cross extend beyond

the roundel. As these few examples illustrate, within the ritual requirementsof the ponti cal, the appearance of consecration crosses could be subtly orsigni cantly different.

Besides the crosses themselves, the roundels could be further embellishedwith decorative garlands. At Carleton Rode in Norfolk, this took the form of astylised chain or interwoven circles, but they could be much more elaborate.At Westhall, Suffolk ( g. 4), there is a simple cross with crude trefoil termini,which is surrounded by an ochre circle from which shoot off sprigs with leavesand owers in the same colour. Even more impressive oral garlands can beseen surrounding a number of the extant consecration crosses at Bale, Nor-folk ( g. 5). The elaborate swirls of these garlands mean that some of theseconsecration crosses are four feet wide. The elaborate, decorative forms ofthese crosses make them appear more important and prominent than the simpleroundels painted on the church walls.

These more elaborate forms would seem to challenge Dewicks argumentthat consecration crosses were often neglected in England or covered bymedieval wall paintings. Although he did not change his opinion, he later

admitted that a payment of three pence made by the churchwardens of St.Michaels Church, Bath for seven new crosses may have been to replace those

Fig. 1. Consecration cross at thechurch of Inglesham, Wiltshire.Photo by the author.

Fig. 2. Consecration cross at thechurch of Kenton, Suffolk.Photo by the author.


17/24


obliterated when the church was whitewashed.42 Further research needs to be undertaken into the relationship between wall paintings and consecrationcrosses. At Thornham Parva, Suffolk, the crosses appear beneath the depictionof the martyrdom and miracles of St. Edmund, and at Inglesham the consec-ration cross at the east end appears against a background of painted drapery.In other instances, the cross appears amidst or even superimposed on the wall

42 Dewick, Consecration Crosses, 14; Dewick, Notes on Consecration Crosses,18081; Charles B. Pearson, ed., The Churchwardens Accounts of the Church andParish of St. Michael without the North Gate, Bath, 13491575, Proceedings of theSomerset Archaeological and Natural History Society 2326 (187780): 82.

Fig. 3. Consecration cross atSt. Marys Church, Ashby near

Herring eet, Suffolk.Photo: Evelyn Simak.

Fig. 4. Consecration cross at the churchof Westhall, Suffolk. Photo by the author.

Fig. 5. Consecration crossat the church of Bale, Norfolk.

Photo by the author.


18/24


paintings rather than being covered over by new decorative schemes. Thiswould suggest that consecration crosses could be a part of the broader visual programme of the church interior.

Furthermore, the signi cance of some crosses appears to have beenenhanced by painted inscriptions emphasising the sanctity of the church. The popularity of such inscriptions increased during the fourteenth century.43 In Norwich, two crosses which were recorded on the east wall of the chancelof St. Saviours Church bore the words et porta celi [ sic ] and et aulavocabitur dei ([This is] the gate of heaven; and it shall be called the court ofGod), words which came from the of ces for the consecration of the church,as well as for the anniversary of its dedication.44 Crosses in other churches inthe city similarly once bore religious inscriptions asserting the sanctity of the building. At St. John de Sepulchre, one bore the legend Adorabo sanctumtuum dominie (I will worship in thy holy temple, O Lord), while at St. PeterMancroft painted scrolls above the crosses stated Domum tuam domine decetsanctitudo (Holiness becometh thy house, O Lord) and Beati qui habitant indomo tua domine (Blessed are they that dwell in thy house, O Lord).45 Outsidethe city, there are traces of black letter inscriptions associated with the crossesat Worstead.46 Further a eld in Devon, in the crosses anking the west doorof the church of Ottery St. Mary, each has a dressed stone beneath the crosses43 Tristram, English Wall Painting of the Fourteenth Century , 29.44 Sarum Missal , 1:414; Extracts from the Proceedings, 352.45 Extracts from the Proceedings, 352.46 Rosewell, Medieval Wall Paintings , 15052.

Fig. 6. Consecration cross atthe church of Yetminster, Dorset.Photo by the author.

Fig. 7. Consecration cross atthe church of Nether Compton,Dorset. Photo by the author.


19/24


of equal width, which may have also been intended to bear an inscription or perhaps a record of the consecration.47

Besides the painted crosses, another artistic type were those carved instone or incised into the existing church wall. At Yetminster ( g. 6), there areten external crosses which are carved into the walls, in some instances acrossseveral courses of masonry. An eleventh cross at the apex of the west door ismuch smaller but stylistically similar to the other crosses, so it may well be aneleventh consecration cross rather than a decorative detail. Stylistically, thereis a clear resemblance to the carved crosses at nearby Nether Compton ( g. 7).There are a further ve churches in this area of West Dorset where there aresimilarly carved external and internal consecration crosses.48

Eeles identi ed a series of carved consecration crosses at several Somersetchurches, which are stylistically different from the Dorset crosses.49 At Chedzoy( g. 8), the medieval consecration crosses are carved in relief within a roundel;the centres and ends of the arms are decorated with roses. Those at Moorlinch( g. 9) resemble painted crosses with slender arms ending in trefoils, but whe -ther these are medieval is questionable. The external stonework of the chancelappears to have been refaced, possibly at the same time as the restoration ofthe interior, and the surviving consecration crosses might be of a similar date,

47 Dalton,Collegiate Church of Ottery St. Mary , 21.48 Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (England), An Inventory of the Histori-cal Monuments in Dorset , vol. 1,West (London: HMSO, 1952), xli, 28, 101, 124, 134,168, 250, 271.49 Eeles, Consecration Crosses, 25; Dewick, Notes on Consecration Crosses, plate 3.

Fig. 8. Consecration cross atthe church of Chedzoy, Somerset.Photo by the author.

Fig. 9. Consecration cross atthe church of Moorlinch, Somerset.Photo by the author.


20/24


perhaps replacing medieval stones.50 The seventeen carved chunky crosses atCannington ( g. 10), with bold trefoils at the end of each arm but not withina roundel or circle, are particularly puzzling. These are carved square stonesinserted into the red sandstone walls and, while some of them are placed whereone might expect to nd consecration crosses (such as three at the east end),

their number far exceeds the required twelve. Furthermore, some of thesecarvings are relatively crisp and do not seem to have been subject to morethan ve centuries of weathering. They may have been inserted during thenineteenth-century restoration of the church, perhaps replacing earlier crosses,their number being increased to ornament the external walls.

Although the form of a carved cross in a roundel is the predominant typeof consecration cross, there are two examples where the design is much moreelaborate. At Ottery St. Mary ( g. 11), which was rebuilt by Bishop Grandissonof Exeter in 1337, roundels are carved into square stone panels. The interiorof the roundel is carved as a quatrefoil in which there is a half-length gureof an angel bearing a cross. Although some are badly eroded and others have been restored, there are now thirteen such crosses on the exterior of the churchand a further six inside, although heavily restored in the nineteenth century

by William Butter eld. 51 At St. Georges Chapel, Windsor ( g. 12), there is asimilarly elaborate form, which incorporates a crown and therose-en-soleil 50 A History of the County of Somerset , vol. 8,The Poldens and the Levels , ed. RobertW. Dunning (Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2004), 133.51 Dalton,Collegiate Church of Ottery St. Mary , 2122; Dewick, Notes on Consecra-tion Crosses, 186.

Fig. 10. Consecration crossat the church of Cannington,Somerset. Photo by the author.

Fig. 11. Consecration cross atthe church of Ottery St. Mary,Devon. Photo by the author.


21/24


badge of Edward IV. The cross, now eroded from this example, was originallyat the centre of the design, but it is overshadowed by royal iconography. Thereare no holes or spikes below the crosses which could have held brackets forcandles and, as there are only eight extant, it is possible that the scheme may beincomplete and that the chapel was not consecrated.52 Dewick has questionedwhether these were actually consecration crosses, perhaps merely intendedto be decorative.53 A later evaluation concluded that due to variations in theirheight, and the lack of evidence of spikes, and also because their iconographywas very different from other consecration crosses, that these were in fact royal badges or emblems.54 There is no doubt that the crosses at Ottery St. Maryare consecration crosses, even though they are markedly different from thenorm. The diversity of English consecration crosses and also the distributionof those at St. Georges make it more credible that they are consecration cros-52 William H. St. John Hope,Windsor Castle: An Architectural History , 2 vols. (London:Country Life, 1913), 2:408; Maurice F. Bond, The Cruci x Badges of St. GeorgesChapel, Annual Report of the Friends of St. Georges (1954): 89.53 Dewick, Notes on Consecration Crosses, 187.54 Bond, Cruci x Badges, 1112.

Fig. 12. Consecration cross atSt. Georges Chapel, Windsor,

Berkshire. Photo by the author.


22/24


ses rather than badges. This particular case re ects the dif culties that arisein identifying original designs for a consecration cross. Nonetheless, as theexamples of St. Georges Chapel and Ottery St. Mary demonstrate, it was notnecessary for the simple painted form of the cross to be used in what werehigh status building projects.

From as early as the thirteenth century, there was a move away from incisedand painted crosses to a further elaborate form. These were inlaid brass crosses,a technique which was also sometimes employed for the smaller marks of con-secration on altars.55 At the Salisbury Cathedral ( g. 13), the remains of nineexternal crosses can be seen, although the brass appears to have disappeared by the seventeenth century. These take the form of a carved stone disc, each ofwhich has an indentation for a oriated brass cross; fragments of lead remain inthe holes of the dowels that would have held them in place. These discs musthave been inserted at the time of the construction, as the brass crosses couldonly have been attached when the stones were in a horizontal position. This hasled to the conclusion that the crosses were in place for the consecration of thecathedral on 28 April 1220.56 This form of consecration cross was repeated atother churches in the diocese. At Uf ngton, there are eleven external crossesdating from the mid-thirteenth century with similar circular discs and holes for

55 Tim Tatton-Brown, The Salisbury Cathedral Consecration Crosses,Transactionsof the Monumental Brass Society 16 (1998): 116.56 W. J. Blair, The Consecration-Cross Indents of Salisbury Cathedral,Transactions ofthe Monumental Brass Society 12 (1975): 1620; Tatton-Brown, Salisbury CathedralConsecration Crosses, 11316.

Fig. 13. Consecration cross atSalisbury Cathedral, Wiltshire.Photo by the author.

Fig. 14. Consecration cross atthe priory church of Edington,Wiltshire. Photo by the author.


23/24


attaching crosses. The priory church of Edington ( g. 14) was consecrated in1361 by Robert Wyville, the bishop of Salisbury; the consecration crosses are avariation of the Salisbury indents. Instead of a roundel, the indents indicate thatnot only the cross but also the surrounding circle were of brass. The internalcrosses took a similar form, but before the nineteenth-century restoration of thechurch it was noted that the four quarters formed by the cross being painted blue and red alternately.57 Most of the internal crosses have been restored; the brass insets serve as late nineteenth- and twentieth-century memorials, with brackets holding lights beneath them. According to the Churches ConservationTrust, the small twelfth-century church at Upper Eldon in Hampshire boastsnine consecration crosses.58 These also bear markings that demonstrate thatthere were originally metal crosses attached to them, and there are also traces

of paint. However, not all of the crosses appear to be in situ (one appears insidea squint at the west end, for example) but, as the building was derelict bythe early eighteenth century and also served as a cowshed, some alterationsduring restoration are perhaps not surprising.

III

New approaches towards understanding church interiors and devotional prac-tices also offer the potential for a better understanding of how these crosseswere regarded by members of the congregation. Although they could be deco-rative in form, consecration crosses were reminders of the ritual that in the

past transferred the building into the churchs possession and sancti ed it asa place of worship, through the bishops anointing the church walls with holyoil. Recent research by archaeologists into the decoration and appearance ofmedieval churches suggests ways in which we might be able to gain greaterinsight into how these crosses were regarded by church-goers. In particular,drawing upon medieval understandings of sight and vision, Kate Giles hascalled for a reconsideration of the role of wall paintings in the devotional lifeof the parish church. Medieval treatises considered seeing as being akin totouching and that the object of attention radiated a light back to the viewer.Furthermore, visual mnemonics was seen as an important aspect of the artof memory in the late medieval period. Wall paintings were therefore morethan ecclesiastical decoration; their role in late medieval devotional practice

57 Tatton-Brown, Salisbury Cathedral Consecration Crosses, 116; J. E. Jackson,Edingdon Monastery,The Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine 20 (1882): 295, 301.58 John E. Vigar,Church of St. John the Baptist, Upper Eldon, Hampshire (London:Churches Conservation Trust, 2006).


24/24


needs to be reassessed in relation to the periods understanding of sight andvision.59 This approach was taken further by Pamela Graves, who argued thatthe concept of sensory environment should be particularly useful when itcomes to analysing in a more anthropological sense, the relationship betweenthe physical form and decoration of churches and the religious practices thattook place within them.60 Although often painted on church walls, consecra-tion crosses were distinct from the visual imagery of wall paintings, but thisnew approach might also provide a better understanding of their location andhow they were perceived.

This essay has provided an overview of the current state of research onconsecration crosses and a reappraisal of the work of some earlier studies, butit has also revealed a number of new avenues for research. Even within the

narrow limits de ned by the ponti cal, there was clearly a range of differentartistic styles employed for consecration crosses. Further systematic recordingof them and their appearance would help to develop a fuller sense of theirartistic variation and the evidence with which to challenge some of the morequestionable identi cations of consecration crosses. Although fraught with dif -

culties, this might also help in establishing a chronology for their developingartistic style. Undoubtedly these crosses were an important element in the riteof consecration, but their subsequent ritual signi cance in the devotional lifeof the parish needs to be explored further. Evidence is needed to challenge

Dewicks assertion that crosses did not have a role in annual dedication services;the close examination of churchwardens accounts might provide further insighton this matter. In spite of these limitations, it is clear that consecration crosseswere an important artistic reminder of an earlier religious ritual. Furthermore,they visually de ned and demarcated the church as a sacred place. As a shaftof sunlight caught the brass indents of the consecration cross, or perhaps acandle ickered beneath another form, the churchs sanctity and the holinessof the building literally shone out in the surrounding landscape.

59 Kate Giles, Seeing and Believing: Visuality and Space in Pre-Modern England,World Archaeology 39 (2007): 10521.60 C. Pamela Graves, Sensing and Believing: Exploring Worlds of Difference inPre-Modern England; A Contribution to the Debate Opened by Kate Giles,World

Archaeology 39 (2007): 524.

Spicer Images and Objects-libre

Documents

Transcript of Spicer Images and Objects-libre