WIXLIB

rising Caliphate. It is against this multi-layered backdrop that Alcuin’s own anxieties andprojected aspirations of Frankish leadership of the Imperium Christianum begin toemerge, and necessitate Charlemagne embracing Christ as the sole acceptable model ofrulership. Alcuin’s promotion of christomimesis allowed for the simultaneous exaltationand admonition of the Carolingian ruler, and provides a compelling filter through whichother prominent aspects of Charlemagne’s reign can be reassessed, including the designof the Aachen chapel, the imperial coronation of Christmas Day 800, and the Trier codex.This dissertation makes a strong case for the recognition of the Gospels of Sta.Maria ad Martyres as the gift mentioned in the dedication poem, and not as a later, andlesser copy of this offering. In the process, this study directly engages with, and disruptsinterpretative paradigms that have long dominated the scholarship on Carolingian art andthought, highlighting the need for an overdue revision of distorting and anachronisticprojections, which fail to account for the totality of the remaining evidence and itsundeniable diversity. The approach presented in this dissertation can therefore beproductively applied to other works from this period whose appearance, format orcontents have long been unsatisfactorily sidelined by modern scholarship, and thereforehelp paint a truer, more reliable picture of artistic production and patronage at the time ofCharlemagne.xii

Chapter 1THE GOSPELS OF STA. MARIA AD MARTYRES IN THE SCHOLARLYDISCOURSE ON CAROLINGIAN ART AND THOUGHTThe Gospels of Sta. Maria ad Martyres is a Carolingian manuscript of the fourgospels, bound in two volumes, and loosely dated to the first quarter or first third of theninth century. It is currently housed in Trier’s Stadtbibliothek under the shelf mark 23(122a/b) and will be referenced in this dissertation as Trier 23. The codex featuresextensive prefatory materials, including canon tables, unusually spread over sixteenfolios, and a dedication poem (fol. 4v) appended to a tripartite exegesis on the Hebrewnames appearing in the genealogy of Christ presented in Matthew 1:1-18. The poemreferences the commentary explicitly and mentions ‘Albinus’, the Anglo-Saxon scholarAlcuin, as its author and as the donor of a two-part gift to a ‘venerable king’, logicallyidentified as Alcuin’s patron, benefactor, and friend, the Frankish ruler Charlemagne(r.768-814). Each gospel is introduced by an elaborate decorative sequence comprisinglarge illuminated initials and frontispieces featuring the four evangelist symbols locatedin medallions alongside the bust-length figure of the youthful Christ, appearing under anarch. [Fig. 1-4] In the Ottonian period, a full-page depiction of Christ in Majesty1

surrounded by the symbols of the evangelists was painted on a previously blank folio(22v).1 [Fig. 5]This dissertation provides this fascinating manuscript with the overdue scholarlyattention from which it has long been excluded in spite of its luxurious appearance, theconnections with key figures of the Carolingian period and its prominent location. TheGospels of Sta. Maria ad Martyres are flanked on the shelf by two masterpieces of earlymedieval illumination: the Ada Gospels, (Trier, Stadtbibliothek, Cod. 22) originatingfrom the court of Charlemagne,2 and the Codex Egberti, (Trier Stadtbibliothek, Cod. 24),the extensively illuminated Ottonian production associated with Archbishop Egbert ofTrier and one of the most famous early medieval artists, the Gregory Master.3 Thesustained scholarly interest in its prestigious shelf mates sharply contrasts with scholarlyreservations about Trier 23. As will be shown, the Carolingian renaissance paradigm andits implications and expectations with regard to classicism, taste, and luxury have long1The 1956 exhibition catalog, Werdendes Abendland an Rhein und Ruhr: Ausstellung inVilla Hügel. Essen, 18.Mai bis 15.Sept, 1956, Herausgegeben von Villa Hügel Verein.Mit einem Vorwort von Theodor Heuss und Joseph Cardinal Frings, Essen (TellusVerlag, 1959), erroneously claimed in entry number 288, on p.178 that the folio bearingthe Ottonian Maiestas Domini was “ eingebunden.” into the existing manuscript. Thismisinformation occasionally reappears in later publications. In fact, folio 22r displays thelast few lines of Matthew’s chapter lists, clearly written in the same script and ink as therest of the manuscript.2The manuscript features a dedication to Ada, Charlemagne’s sister. The group of luxurymanuscripts produced at Charlemagne’s court was long labeled the “Ada School” or the“Court School”. The publication of a facsimile as early as the late nineteenth centurytestifies to the manuscript’s appeal. Karl Menzel, Peter Corssen, Hubert Janitschek,Alexander Schnütgen, F. Hettner, Die Trierer Ada-Handschrift, (Leipzig: A. Dürr, 1889).3The Codex Egberti has also been the object of extensive studies and is available in anew facsimile. Der Egbert-Codex, Luzern (Faksimile-Verlag, 2005). Carl Nordenfalk,“Der Meister der Registrum Gregorii,” reprinted in Studies in Manuscript Illumination,(London: Pindar Press, 1992), pp. 133-148.2

relegated Trier 23 to a realm of secondary relevance, and preemptively dismissed claimsthat it should be identified as the gift to Charlemagne referenced in the dedication poem.Consequently, the manuscript has been viewed as a copy of this now lost original gift,regardless of the absence of a known precedent for the practice of making a copy of aprestigious offering almost immediately following its presentation.4 The great, latepaleographer Bernhard Bischoff’s declaration that the Trier codex’ script dates to theperiod after Charlemagne effectively put to rest any attempt to challenge this readydismissal.5The present investigation addresses various points of contention connected to themanuscript’s textual, pictorial and material components and its context of creation. Arthistorical reservations have long reflected the tyranny of the outdated and ill-fittingCarolingian renaissance paradigm, while the illusory aura of paleographical certaintieshas accepted Bischoff’s opinions as definitive. An objective reassessment of Trier 23must also negotiate philological arguments regarding authorship, date and place ofredaction of early medieval exegesis, including doubts over the very existence of adistinctive Hiberno-Saxon tradition as well as historical debates over the impact andlegacy of Alcuin as either an influential exegete and primary agent behind Charlemagne’s4This unsatisfactory default explanation emerges periodically to account for workswhose appearance, contents, or other characteristics challenge modern scholarlyassumptions, especially those pertaining to issues of style, taste, and luxury at the court ofCharlemagne or in its orbit.5This most consequential dating will be addressed at length below and in Chapter 3. Itoccurred in a footnote to Bischoff’s influential article “Panorama derHandschriftenüberlieferung aus der Zeit Karls des Grossen” published in the second offour volumes surrounding the 1965 Karl der Grosse exhibition at Aachen. Karl derGrosse: Lebenswerk und Nachleben, Band II, Das Geistige Leben, Düsseldorf (Verlag L.Schwann, 1965), p. 236, footnote 17.3

program of reforms or conversely as a passive witness to momentous events over whichhe exerted limited control.6This dissertation does not claim to resolve these complex issues but attempts tomake a modest contribution to the broader debates by focusing on their manifestation inthe context of the Trier codex. This will be accomplished via a two-pronged approach. Asystematic investigation of the manuscript’s textual and ornamental components will beprovided and the findings contextualized within the political, artistic and ideologicalbackground of the Carolingian period. Uncompromising expectations that havecontributed to Trier 23’s virtual absence from scholarly discourse on Carolingian bookproduction will be problematized. A review of the fate of the manuscript and a briefdiscussion of the few instances where it has garnered some attention will lay thefoundation for the detailed discussion unfolding in the following chapters.The Fate of the Trier Codex and its Scholarly ReceptionTrier 23’s relative absence from art historical discussions of Carolingian artisticachievement exposes the shortcomings of the Carolingian renaissance paradigm.7 This6As will be seen below, Michael Gorman has been an ardent detractor of Alcuin’ssystematic aggrandizement. In contrast, it is not uncommon to encounter statements asbold as Liutpold Wallach’s “The work of the Northumbrian Alcuin in the service ofCharlemagne by far excels in importance the contributions of other scholars allied withthe Frankish king.” Alcuin on Virtues and Vices: A Manual for a Carolingian Soldier,”The Harvard Theological Review, Vol. 48, No.3 (Jul., 1955), p.175.7This problematic interpretive paradigm’s failure to account for the diversity of theCarolingian artistic output and its reductive perspective on the impetus behindCharlemagne’s program of reforms has been noted. An overview of its misguidedimplications appears in Lawrence Nees, “The Problem of the Carolingian Renaissance”in his A Tainted Mantle: Hercules and the Classical Tradition at the Carolingian Court,Philadelphia (University of Pennsylvania Press, Middle Ages Series, 1991), pp. 3-17. It is4

ubiquitous interpretative model inadequately accounts for the range and diversity of thepreserved evidence.8 Furthermore, it silences the agency of courtiers, advisors and otherprominent and influential figures disseminated throughout the expanding Frankishterritory, while perpetuating the illusionary homogeneity of a well-defined program ofreform and artistic expression which Charlemagne supposedly sought to systematicallyenforce. The totality of the remaining evidence, in contrast to the select examplesseemingly confirming this assumption, attests to active patronage by a wide range of menand women who possessed the will, means and resources necessary for the creation ofthis diverse artistic output. These patrons’ origins, personal taste, needs, but also agendas,beliefs and ambitions, materialized in the sophisticated objects they sponsored, whoseluxury is often expressed in visual modes sharply divergent from the renaissanceparadigm’s narrow expectations of classicism.9important to acknowledge the lasting impact of this discriminating construct oncontemporary scholarship as it long dictated which works received scholarly attentionand publications. See also Phillipe Depreux, “Ambitions et limites des réformesculturelles à l’époque carolingienne,” Presses Universitaires de France, Revue historique,(2002-3), No. 623, pp. 721-753. This call for a careful reassessment of once celebratedinterpretative models extends beyond art historical scholarship and has parallels inmedieval history, as demonstrated by Elizabeth A. R. Brown, in her influential essay,“The Tyranny of a Construct: Feudalism, and Historians of Medieval Europe”, TheAmerican Historical Review, Vol. 79, No. 4 (Oct.1974), pp.1063-1088. Brown points outthe damage caused by the overuse of this passe-partout label and urges scholars to stopusing the term all together.8Richard E. Sullivan’s “The Carolingian Age: Reflections on Its Place in the History ofthe Middle Ages,” Speculum, Vol. 64, No.2 (Apr., 1989), pp. 267-306, calls for areexamination of scholarly assumptions re

The Gospels of Sta. Maria ad Martyres (Trier, Stadtbibliothek, Cod. 23, 122a/b), a Carolingian manuscript of ca. 800, contains a dedication poem mentioning Albinus, the Anglo-Saxon scholar Alcuin, as its author and donor of a two-part gift to a king,