Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland Volume 150, 2020 The JOURNAL is published annually. Paper and notes for publication, books and journals for review, and all business relating to the JOURNAL should be addressed to the honorary editor at the Society’s House, 63 Merrion Square, Dublin 2. The contents of the journal are subject to full peer review, and the editor wishes to acknowledge and thank the anonymous peer reviewers for carrying out their important task efficiently and to the highest standard. Contributors should follow the Rules for contributors detailed at the end of this volume, and available online through the Society’s website. The editor also acknowledges the contribution of the book reviews editor and the staff of No. 63 for their assistance throughout the year. Members receive the JOURNAL free. Fellows receive in addition any extra volumes that may be published. The annual subscriptions are as follows: Fellows / Members €75, institutions €90, retired Fellows / retired Members €50, family Members €35 and student Members €25. Payable to the honorary treasurer at the Society’s house, or online through the Society’s website. All rights reserved. The responsibility for obtaining permission from copyright holders rests solely with the individual authors. If any involuntary infringement of copyright has occurred, sincere apologies are offered, and the owner of such copyright is requested to contact the publisher. Editor: Niall Brady Book reviews editor: Kelly Fitzgerald Published December 2021 by the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, 63 Merrion Square, Dublin 2. Email: rsai@rsai.ie Website: www.rsai.ie ISSN: 0 035 9106 Originated and printed by CRM Design + Print Ltd. Contents Editorial 5 JOHN Ó NÉILL A Late Bronze Age horn hoard from Eagry, Co. Antrim 7 KEN DARK Royal burial in fifth- to seventh-century western Britain and Ireland 21 DIETER QUAST and NORBERT FRANKEN An early medieval Insular reliquary fragment from Rome 41 MAEVE SIKORA and FIONNBARR MOORE A decorated and ogham-inscribed beater from Leabeg, Lemanaghan Bog, Co. Offaly 63 PATRICK J. O’REILLY Rinderpest in early medieval Ireland: an agricultural game changer 90 ALAN R. HAYDEN Archaeological excavations in Maynooth Castle, Co. Kildare 105 JESSICA COOKE The Annaghdown doorway and King Ruaidhrí Ua Conchobair: loyalty and patronage in twelfth-century Connacht 182 DANIEL PATRICK CURLEY Reconstructing the Lough Croan cenn áit of the medieval Ó Cellaig lordship of Uí Maine 201 BRÍD McGRATH Fraternities and mysteries: early-modern provincial Irish guilds and trade companies 225 TOBY BARNARD ‘China-men’ in Dublin between 1790 and 1843: Samuel and George Alker 246 PATRICK R. RYAN The tomb of Miler Magrath. The monument and the message 257 MISCELLANEA Accounts of two early ninth-century coins found in Ireland Folly at Palmerstown Demesne 274 279 Book reviews 283 Reports on Council 2020 286 Accounts 2020 291 Book received 2020 293 Rules for Contributors 294 An early medieval Insular reliquary fragment from Rome Dieter Quast and Norbert Franken In 1892 Wilhelm von Bode, director of the Skulpturenabteilung und Gemäldesammlung of the Berlin Museums, bought in Rome a bronze fitting with enamel decoration. It was named in a purchase report as the ‘part of a buckle or something similar’, but the report contained no illustration. Since the end of WW II the object has been lost. It is now identified based on an old photograph as the hinge mount of an early medieval Irish Reliquary. In this paper the artefact is discussed within the context of other early medieval ecclesiastical objects found in Italy. Fig. 1: Hinge mount of an Irish shrine from Rome, formerly in the Antikensammlung Berlin, Inv. Misc. 8243. – 1 Photograph. – 2. Graphical reconstruction made by various digital enlargements and graphic rectifications (Berlin, Antikensammlung – SMB. Kleinfilmnegativ 797 (Detail). Drawing by Michael Ober, RGZM Mainz). Correspondence email: dieter_quast@hotmail.com norbert.franken@gmx.de 41 DIETER QUAST AND NORBERT FRANKEN Provenance and disposition Fig. 2: Registration of the hinge mount as buckle plate under Number 8243 in the Inventory of Miscellany of the Königliches Antiquarium, today the Antikensammlung - Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, by Adolf Furtwängler. In the right column the provenance ‘Rome’ is specified (Berlin, Antikensammlung – SMB. Inv. 28. Journal für die Vermehrung des Antiquariums im Königlichen Museum Bd. II. Angelegt von Ernst Heinrich Toelken. 1.1.1851-1911 (= Inventar der Bronzen und Miscellanen. Misc. 3043-11910)). 42 The Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG / ‘German Research Foundation’) funded two projects between 2004 and 2011 aimed at creating an internet-based image database of the bronze, lead and iron objects acquired before 1945 in the Antikensammlung – Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (ANT-SMB).1 In the context of his work on these projects, one of the authors (NF) was able to identify, add missing parts, and even locate several hundred lost art objects, some unaccounted for since the end of World War II. NF has reported several times in the past about objects that have reappeared in various museums in Berlin, Bochum, Dresden and Moscow.2 Most of the time, these accounts resemble a novel with a happy ending, concluding with the reappearance of a long-lost object. The bronze object that is discussed in this paper is still missing despite all efforts to locate it, but the subsequent investigation is justified on two grounds: first of all, by the fact that the object has so far remained almost unnoticed in the archaeological literature and therefore was never correctly classified in terms of chronology and origin; and secondly because, as a result of the new examination of the antique bronzes in Berlin, an historical photograph can now be assigned to it (Fig. 1), giving for the first time a more precise idea of the missing piece. The story begins in 1892 when the then-director of the Skulpturenabteiltung und Gemäldesammlung, Wilhelm von Bode (1845-1929), later general director of the Berlin museums, purchased the object of interest in Rome. As an art historian Bode typically acquired works of European provenance in a systematic way. But this 42 AN EARLY MEDIEVAL INSULAR RELIQUARY FRAGMENT FROM ROME small bronze caught his eye in an art dealer’s shop and so came into the museum’s collection by chance (which says nothing about Bode’s specific acquisition policy concerning antiquities). Unfortunately, we do not know anything about the art dealer. A little later, the archaeologist Adolf Furtwängler (1853-1907) registered the object under Number 8243 in the Inventory of Miscellany of the Königliches Antiquarium, today the Antikensammlung - Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (Fig. 2). Accompanied by a small sketch, Furtwängler described the object as Theil einer Schnalle od. dgl. von Bronze, mit flüßig in die Zellen eingeschmolzenem Glasschmelz, bei “a” blauer Glasknopf, das Glas sehr verwittert –‘part of a buckle or something similar made of bronze, with molten glass melted into cells, at ‘a’ blue glass stud, the glass very weathered’.3 In the right column he specified the provenance of the object: Rome. Of course, a provenance given in an art dealer’s shop is never sure. But in this case two observations should be mentioned: - The object is clearly corroded and therefore came from the ground - It was bought in an art dealer’s shop who dealt with ‘precious’, ‘valuable’ art (which explains why Bode was there). Fig. 3: Collective photograph of the hinge mount together with other objects of known size (Berlin, Antikensammlung – SMB. Kleinfilmnegativ 797). Our object was without any doubt an item of lower value and because of this very probably not brought from far away to the dealer in Rome. In a purchase report published in the Amtliche Berichte aus den Preußischen Kunstsammlungen, vol. xiii, in the same year, Furtwängler briefly recorded the object without mentioning the inventory number as a ‘jewellery item with richly enamelled cells’.4 In the Archäologischer Anzeiger of the following year, under the misleading heading ‘Cut stones, gold and silver’, he describes ‘Inv. 8243’ as a ‘Buckle with rich, colourful glass melted into cells’. Still, he only gives its provenance as ‘from Italy’.5 Since Furtwängler supplies no measurements in the inventory book or acquisition reports, 43 DIETER QUAST AND NORBERT FRANKEN further consideration is required to reconstruct the object’s dimensions. Assuming the sketch mentioned in the inventory book is at 1:1 scale, a length of approximately 7.5cm and a width of 2.6cm can be determined. Fortunately, one of the authors (NF) was able to use the description and sketch to identify the missing object of interest as the second one from the right in a collective photo (small film negative 797) taken around 1939 (Fig. 3).6 By comparing it with the other pieces depicted, a length of approximately 7.7cm could be calculated, which corresponds sufficiently well with the dimension inferred from the sketch. The supposed ‘buckle’ (Inv. Misc. 8243) has been missing since the end of World War II.7 According to current knowledge, it is not in the Antikensammlung or any other department of the State Museums in Berlin;8 nor is it among the bronzes looted from the Berliner Antikensammlung that are currently kept in the Museum of Fine Arts A. S. Pushkin in Moscow (Государственный музей изобразительных искусств имени А.С. Пушкина). Unless it was stolen from the art depot in the flak bunker in Berlin-Friedrichshain in the spring of 1945, as occurred with some other bronzes, it could have been melted in one of two fires that swept the bunker at that time.9 The missing object might possibly be in the special depot of the Moscow Pushkin Museum, primarily intended for the post-antique bronzes from the former inventory of the Berliner Skulpturensammlung, but this possibility cannot yet be ruled out.10 First, let us turn to the object itself and describe it in as much detail as possible, based on the photograph and the older descriptions. We identify the ‘buckle’ as a strap attachment from a small Insular reliquary. It has a long, rectangular shape with two projecting lugs that formerly engaged with a hinge on the lower end and a tongue-shaped extension that ends in a spherical thickening with slightly concave sides at the upper end. The ornamentation along the right side, described as ‘melting cells’ (champlevé enamel), is still mostly identifiable despite partial incrustations. In the slightly deepened central field, a flat geometric pattern appears with two crosses in a broad, cruciform-shaped frame, which is adjoined by four angular fields. The right edge is filled with a row of five angular or stepped Z-shaped inlays, which begins and ends with L-shaped inlays. We should assume a corresponding decor along the heavily encrusted left edge. The ornaments on the narrow ends are encrusted in places and therefore cannot be precisely described. One sees a reasonably regular subdivision into two rows of square and trapezoidal fields on the lower end. There seem to be pointed ovals in the corners. In the triangular field at the top of the mount, there appears to be an image field that displays a broad-ribbon triquetra knot. At the side of this triangular field, one can see the elongated head of an animal with a comma-shaped eye, whose snout is oriented towards the glass stud at the upper end of the attachment. 44 AN EARLY MEDIEVAL INSULAR RELIQUARY FRAGMENT FROM ROME Unfortunately, the old black and white photo does not provide any information about the colour of the decorative enamel. Only the round stud at the top of the strap attachment was, according to Furtwängler, explicitly made of heavily weathered blue glass. Some of the inlays show a whitish sheen in the photo, which could be understood as a light reflection. Stronger contrasts between the different inlays, however, seem imperceptible. In general, on analogy with other finds, it can be expected that the lengthy deposition in the soil in combination with the metallic parts of the hinge mount, may have changed the original colour values of at least some of the glass inlays. The classification of the hinge mount Fig. 4: Portable house shaped Irish shrine from monastery San Salvatore, Monte Amiata, Province Siena, Tuscany, Italy, M. 3:4 (after M. Ryan, ‘A houseshaped shrine of probable Irish origin at Abbadia San Salvatore, province of Siena, Italy’, in M. Ryan (ed.), Irish Antiquities. Essays in memory of Joseph Raftery (Wicklow, 1998) pp 141150, esp. p. 142 fig. 1). The enamelled (champlevé enamel) fitting from Rome has such a characteristic shape that there can be no doubt that it is the upper part of a hinge from a small, portable Irish reliquary (Fig. 4). These containers are described as tomb-, house- or church-shaped,11 and were commonly only 8-10cm high and 11-12cm wide. The oldest known specimens from Bobbio and Clonmore are even a bit smaller. The small shrines were designed to be carried in procession and/or on trips and could be suspended from the neck on a strap. Contemporary illustrations, i.e. the eighth- / ninth-century stone crosses from Bressay and Papil (Shetland Islands), show monks wearing containers in this way; unfortunately, one cannot determine their material (textile, leather, wood, metal) or function.12 It could represent just as well a book satchel.13 From the Carolingian period there are image representations of a small travel reliquaries. Just a few years ago, Peter Yeoman and Jane Geddes drew attention to the earliest portrait of St Columba together with the drawing of a small house-shaped shrine.14 From around 900 A.D., there is an additional 45 DIETER QUAST AND NORBERT FRANKEN pictorial testimony for a small travel reliquary, carried by St Gallus, (not coincidentally) an Irish monk. Two splendidly decorated ivory covers adorn the Evangelium longum / Codex 53 of the St Gallen Abbey Library. They are attributed to the monk and artist Tuotilo, who died around 912, and display the scene from the vita Galli that occurred when Gallus found the place in the wilderness for his hermit cell and where St Gallen was later established. The image Fig. 5: Miniature from Echternach, Luxembourg, from the Flores epytaphii sanctorum (fol. 99r) of Abbot Thiofrid (10811110), first decade of the twelfth century, with two hanging house-shaped shrines (Forschungsbibliothek Gotha der Universität Erfurt. Signatur Memb. I 70. fol. 99r). 46 AN EARLY MEDIEVAL INSULAR RELIQUARY FRAGMENT FROM ROME shows Gallus, who orders a bear to put wood on the fire and gives him bread in gratitude. The inscription above the image field reads: S [ANCTVS] GALL [VS] PANE [M] PORRIGIT VRSO. There is an interesting detail at the top of the scene in the centre: Gallus has hung his small, cross-shaped reliquary from a tree. Medieval authors use a variety of termini when referring to reliquaries and other personal clerical equipment. Raghnall Ó Floinn has convincingly identified the term meinistir, used in the Irish written sources, as the name for the portable shrine of the seventh century; he argues that this was ‘an object associated with the saint during his lifetime, equal in importance to his bell, crozier or gospel book’.16 Several Continental sources also report that clerics carried reliquaries when they were travelling. Gregory of Tours, for instance, provides examples of reliquias and capsulae that were worn around the neck or attached to a belt as permanent companions of the bearer. The holy Germanus, Aridius, Gallus and Bonifatius suspended their crismaria and their capsulae from their necks.17 Chrismalia were used to hold the holy sacrament. They are also mentioned in the written sources as ‘travel companions’ for Insular priests, used not only in Britain and Ireland but apparently carried along wherever the clergy went.18 While a pyxis was used in the church for this purpose, the chrismale was used domestically and on processions or when travelling.19 Of course, such private reliquaries could enter a church treasure after the owner’s death. The earliest portrait of St Columba, from the Carolingian period, together with the drawing of a small house-shaped shrine has already been mentioned.20 A miniature from Echternach, a foundation from the very late seventh century of the Anglo-Saxon missionary Willibrord of Northumbria, is also relevant since it shows the abbey’s relic collection.21 Two tomb-, house- or church-shaped shrines are pictured among the suspended reliquaries (Fig. 5). The miniature comes from the Flores epytaphii sanctorum of Abbot Thiofrid (1081-1110) and was created in the first decade of the twelfth century.22 Hinge Mount and belt fittings The mount from Rome (Fig. 1) was an essential part of such a travel reliquary because it served to attach a strap to one of the narrow sides (Fig. 4). Originally there would have been an identical counterpart for the other side. Such fittings consisted of two parts hinged together, one immovable and attached to the side of the reliquary, the other movable and designed to receive a strap. The immovable pieces are mostly triangular or semi-circular; in the latter type, opposed bird heads could form a termination.23 The fittings for fastening the straps, on the other hand, are rectangular and have a round (or slightly profiled) end at the top. 47 DIETER QUAST AND NORBERT FRANKEN Almost all the hinge mounts from Irish travel reliquaries are decorated.24 These fall into three groups25 A curvilinear ornament is engraved on the oldest, the Clonmore specimen.26 The second group has polychrome inlays (enamel, millefiori glass); the third group has chip-carved-like ornaments. The examples of the second and third groups share a similar division of the decorative surface. A wide, decorated frame borders a central rectangular field. While there are comparable belt fittings for the third group’s hinges, for example from Bø (Rogaland) in Norway or Ziethen-Menzlin (Lkr. VorpommernGreifswald) in Germany,27 comparable belt fittings are missing for the second group. Enamelled buckle plates are known, but they differ from the hinges of the shrines, if only because of their shape (either they are not rectangular or lack a terminating stud).28 Besides, the hinge from Rome shows an almost characteristic division of the decorative fields, namely a central field with a wide frame (Fig. 1). This arrangement is not seen on enamelled belt buckles. Therefore, the functional assignment of our Roman fitting is clear. Comparable hinges 48 Enamelled hinges were used for the reliquaries from Melhus, NordTrøndelag, Norway29 and the ‘Monymusk shrine’;30 in addition, two single finds of unknown provenance are in the National Museum of Ireland.31 The lower half of a hinge was found in the River Blackwater near Shanmullagh, Co. Armagh, and a suspension mount for attaching a strap near Derryloughan, Co. Tyrone.32 Both have a mimicked interlace of hook-shaped cells along the edge – just like the mount from Rome. The Derryloughan mount additionally displays pointed oval cells at the right and left of the lower end – like the item from Rome. A very good parallel to the Derryloughan hinge is a bucket mount excavated in the Anglo-Saxon monastery at Breedon-on-theHill, Leicestershire.33 Another enamelled hinge from the eighth century is known from the royal crannog of Llangorse near Brecon, Brecknockshire, in Wales. Its decoration, like the hinge from Rome, consists of two framed crosses.34 There are other specimens from Scandinavia, most of which had been converted into brooches. They come from Gjønnes, Vestfold, Norway,35 Sanddal, Sogn og Fjordane, Norway,36 Nærheim, Rogaland, Norway,37 and Kalmargården, Tissø, Holbæk Amt, Zealand, Denmark.38 The decoration of the hinge fitting from Rome is predominantly made up of right-angled cells (Fig. 1). The central field is divided into two identical fields, the centre of which forms a Greek cross. Comparable ornamentation, a composition of crosses or around crosses, can be found on some rectangular ornamental fields on the Ardagh chalice, on the belt buckle from Lough Gara, Co. Sligo, and on the Emly Shrine.39 Different openwork patterns from the back of the Soiscel Molaise, from the base of the Breac Maodhóg, from the shrines of Stowe Missal, and of the bell of St Patrick’s Will are AN EARLY MEDIEVAL INSULAR RELIQUARY FRAGMENT FROM ROME Fig. 6: 1. Animal head from the Moylough buckle plate. – 2. Hinge without provenance, National Museum of Ireland, Dublin (© National Museum of Ireland). similarly composed.40 The long sides of the hinge from Rome have an imitated interlace made of hook-shaped cells;41 the short side at the bottom, above the hinge, is decorated with rectangular cells. Strikingly, the imitated interlace finds only a few parallels on Irish metalwork. A hinge of unknown provenance from the National Museum of Ireland displays the ornament on its narrow side (Fig. 6.2). Otherwise, this pattern is engraved on some hanging bowls, such as on those from Mildenhall, Suffolk, Ford Down, Wiltshire and Whitby, Yorkshire.42 However, the imitated interlace made of hook-shaped cells is often found in the finds from the River Blackwater, for example on the ridge of a shrine from Shanmullagh and on the hinge mounts from Derryloughan and Shanmullagh that have been mentioned above.43 Only the upper triangular end of the fitting from Rome displays figural decorations. A pair of elongated animal heads with commashaped eyes are shown at the edges; their snouts are oriented towards the glass stud at the upper end. The buckle plate of the belt-shrine from Moylough, Co. Sligo from the eighth century, which also ends in a 49 DIETER QUAST AND NORBERT FRANKEN triangle with a closing stud, can be mentioned in terms of composition. On its long sides, animal heads with comma-shaped eyes gape their jaws in the direction of the stud (Fig. 6.1).44 Comparable animal heads are also shown on the hinge from the National Museum mentioned above, which also dates to the eighth century (Fig 6.2).45 Animal heads with comma-shaped eyes are known from manuscript illustrations46 and metalwork as well, for example on an annular brooch from Killamery, Co. Kilkenny, dated to the ninth century; on the crozier form Helgö, Uppland, Sweden, and very prominently on one of the scabbard chapes of the St. Ninian’s Isle treasure, Dunrossness, Shetland,47 all products of the eighth century. On the hinge from Rome, in the field between the animal heads, reconstructing the original design is made more difficult by the state of preservation. Most probably it was a broad-ribbon triquetra knot.48 Unfortunately, the photograph of the fitting does not allow a more detailed classification of the glass stud at the top (angular cell pattern?).49 It is tempting to observe grooves for inset wires in the stud but, unfortunately, no pattern can be reconstructed. Chronological Classification The rough chronological framework for Insular portable reliquaries covers the seventh to ninth centuries. There are different typological and chronological subdivisions, such as those suggested by Martin Blindheim and Raghnall Ó Floinn.50 The latter is more relevant to the classification of the hinge mount from Rome. Size, structure and decoration are the determining criteria for Ó Floinn’s division into three groups. The reliquaries of the first group (Bobbio, Clonmore) do not have a wooden core, but rather soldered plates. They date from the seventh century. On the other hand, the reliquaries of the second group – the typical Insular tomb-, house- or church-shaped shrines – can be assigned from the late seventh into the ninth century. Most have a wooden core to which the metal parts are affixed.51 Enamel and millefiori inlays appear as decorative elements, often applied in small rectangular or round frames (c. 3cm in diameter). The reliquaries of the third group date to the ninth century. The applied medallions are larger (more than 4cm in diameter), and no longer have polychrome decorative elements, bearing chip-carved-like, curvilinear patterns (spirals, trumpets, triskeles) instead. The approximately 7.5cm-long hinge from Rome belongs to the second group and must be dated accordingly. Insular objects from Italy Although Insular reliquaries are very rare, the presence of such a find in Italy is not as surprising as it may appear at first glance. Three other specimens have long been known. One comes from Bobbio, Province Piacenza, another from Abbadia San Salvatore, Province Siena (Fig. 4) and a third, without exact provenance, is in the Museo Civico 50 AN EARLY MEDIEVAL INSULAR RELIQUARY FRAGMENT FROM ROME Fig. 7: 1. Small mount possibly from an Insular shrine from Nonantola, Province Modena, EmiliaRomagna, Italy. 1.75cm x 1.75cm. – 2. Escutcheon from San Vincenzo al Volturno, Prov. Isernia, Molise, Italy. Diam. 5.8cm (after Cianciosi et al. ‘Culti e reliquie’ 344 pl. I,10. Medievale of Bologna.52 While the small shrine from Bobbio dates to the seventh century,53 the other two – like the hinge from Rome – belong to Ó Floinn’s second group and should date from the late seventh into the ninth century. An extensive analysis by Martin Blindheim dated the Bologna shrine to the late eighth / ninth century on the basis of its Pictish ornamentation.54 Michael Ryan, on the other hand, sees the closest parallels for the decoration of the Bologna shrine in Irish metalwork.55 In any case, it is an Insular shrine. The shrine from Bobbio can be well associated with historically documented events. The abbey was founded in 612 by the Irish monk, Columbanus of Luxeuil.56 Whether or not the small shrine was made in Ireland or in Bobbio by Irish artisans, as Ryan thinks,57 it shows a strong connection between Ireland and Bobbio. The Abbadia San Salvatore also has close relationships with the Insular world, having been the depository of the Codex Amiatinus. The abbey is also linked to the Bobbio Monastery according to tradition; relics of St Columbanus are located in the Church of San Salvatore.58 51 DIETER QUAST AND NORBERT FRANKEN Another piece of evidence for Insular contact with Italy is seen in a small mount possibly from a shrine from the treasury of the Abbey of Nonantola (Province Modena, Emilia-Romagna, I) which was published a few years ago.59 The fine gilt rectangular fitting measures just 1.75cm by 1.75cm in size and has a pierced lug on the back (Fig. 7.1). The orientation of the lug shows that the fitting was affixed as a square standing on one corner.60 Comparable mounts occur in Vikingperiod contexts as parts of weights in some numbers, for example in Tissø, Zealand, Denmark, Berg, Buskerud, Norway, Kvistad, Møre og Romsdal, Norway, or Håland, Rogaland, Norway.61 However, Egon Wamers and Maria Panum Baastrup argue that all these mounts on weights are in secondary use and were formerly parts of shrines.62 Their original use in secular objects such as pieces of harness cannot be excluded either.63 Another Italian object of Insular provenance is an escutcheon found in the immediate vicinity of the monastery complex of San Vincenzo al Volturno. Province Isernia, Molise, I (Fig. 7.2).64 The object, measuring only 5.8cm in diameter, was found in ‘stratigraphic unit 17079’, which dates from the eighth / ninth century. There are no remnants of enamel left, nor are there any traces of a hook. The ornament belongs to the group ‘running spirals around a central setting’ identified by Rupert Bruce-Mitford.65 A very good comparison piece is known from Bekesbourne, Kent, from the third quarter of the seventh century.66 A pair of enamelled mounts from Hockwold in Norfolk date from the second half of the seventh century, with a diameter of 5.5cm, roughly the same size as that from San Vincenzo.67 However, such escutcheons already appear in the first half of the sixth century, for example on the basal disc of the hanging bowl from Baginton, Warwickshire.68 It means that the object from San Vincenzo was already ‘old’ when it was deposited. Unfortunately, we do not know if it was used in an ecclesiastical context, but it is undoubtedly of Insular origin. Reworked fragments of Insular reliquaries A fitting with a diameter of only 3.2cm, probably from a small reliquary, comes from Vindinge on the Danish island of Fyn. It has an ornament comparable to the escutcheon mentioned above and was secondarily reworked into a brooch. Michael Müller-Wille interprets the specimen – as well as the other Insular finds from Scandinavia, which include many fittings from reliquaries – as loot from Vikingage raids.69 Aina Margrethe Heen Petersen recently demonstrated that the Insular finds from central Norway were often reworked into elements of female costume, which should ‘visualize the household’s involvement in successful overseas expeditions’.70 John Sheehan had already emphasized the role of the reworked Insular objects as part of a gift exchange.71 52 Fig. 8: Oronsay, Colonsay, Inner Hebrides, two brooches from the Viking ship burial, made from a pair of reliquary hinge mounts (Photograph by Hugo Anderson-Wymark. © National Museums of Scotland). The few complete shrines from Viking period Norway surely had a special significance.72 Most Insular metalwork found in Scandinavia is in a fragmentary state and it appears that the objects these pieces derive from were disassembled by the Vikings whilst still in Ireland and Britain..For example, Raghnall Ó Floinn interpreted the two fittings discovered near the church of Linns, Co. Louth, close to the Viking base of Annagassan, in this way. They may ‘well represent broken up pieces of ecclesiastical objects looted from a neighbouring church treasury which were destined to be refashioned into the brooches which were so popular among the Vikings’.73 Griffin Murray makes the same argument for the shrine fragments from Park North Cave, Co. Cork, and Kilgreany Cave, Co. Waterford.74 The two brooches from the Viking ship burial from the island of Oronsay, Colonsay, Inner Hebrides,75 which were made from a pair of reliquary hinge mounts, show that the reworking could also be done outside of Scandinavia (Fig. 8). Wandering monks and Insular continental contacts In this context, the question arises whether the hinge mount from Rome also came to Italy as a fragment, or if it represents the sole remaining portion of a once-complete shrine. The question cannot be answered, of course, because that object no longer survives. Although we have no information about the back of the mount (such as traces of reworking, had it been used as a brooch), it nevertheless seems unlikely that the hinge reached Rome only as a fragment. Insular objects came to Scandinavia as loot. Outside the Christian world, sacral articles lacked their symbolic value. Their material value was not exceptionally high. They were reworked and brought into circulation.76 In contrast to the Insular finds from Viking-age Scandinavia, the hinge mount from Rome had apparently not been redesigned. Nor did it leave the Christian world, but rather came to the centre of Western 53 DIETER QUAST AND NORBERT FRANKEN Christianity. An Irishman most likely carried a complete shrine with him. The three complete specimens from Bobbio, Abbadia San Salvatore and Bologna show that Irish reliquaries came to Italy, carried by wandering monks, and were integrated into church treasures because of their importance. With the foundation of Bobbio, Columbanus created a significant Irish ‘contact point’ in Italy. In addition, important individual finds like the escutcheon from San Vincenzo al Volturno prove the extensive networks of early medieval clerics and probably their large radius of movement. The written sources also document the great mobility of ecclesiastical élites who travelled to the more or less regularly-held councils.77 On the continent, the three Anglo-Saxon reliquaries from Chur, Kanton Graubünden, Switzerland; Fritzlar, Schwalm-EderKreis, Germany, and Mortain, Départment Manche, France could be seen in this context.78 They must not necessarily attest to any kind of missionary effort (but they may do so). Irish shrines from the Merovingian realms have so far been lacking. A fragment from the Musées Royaux d’Art et d’Histoire Bruxelles is unfortunately of unknown provenance.79 However, the relationship between Insular and continental Christianity became closer in the seventh and eighth centuries. The escutcheons from Lede, Province Osst Vlaandren, Belgium; Krefeld-Gellep, Germany; grave 2061, the ‘northern Netherlands’; Kaiseraugst, Kanton Aargau, Switzerland, and the hanging bowl from the River Maas near Heerewarden (Province Gelderland, Netherlands, document that interaction from an archaeological point of view.80 In the second half of the eighth century, there was even talk of is the suggestions of an ‘Insular art province’ in Salzburg,81 which was recently linked by Egon Wamers to the Tassilo’s Court School.82 The ‘Tassilo chalice style’ is also referred to as ‘Anglo-Carolingian’ or a ‘continental animal style of Insular imprint’.83. And – additionally – the relationship between Insular and continental Christianity became apparent by the 22 relic labels from the insular world of the eighth-ninth century preserved at SaintMaurice d’Agaune, Kanton Valais, Switzerland and Sens, Départment Yonne, France. Some of these labels are in Irish script and/or naming Irish saints.84 The clerics’s high degree of mobility was not only due to their attendance at councils. Pilgrimage was of the greatest significance, and Rome was the most important destination of Western Christianity with its shrines of Peter and Paul, the numerous tombs of saints and the catacombs.85 Mark Handley compiled 18 inscriptions of Insular pilgrims from Rome alone (mostly from the catacombs) from the seventh and eighth centuries.86 The lively practice of pilgrimage is also illustrated by the fact that vessels, which Richard Gem identifies as hanging bowls, are mentioned in the Liber Pontificalis for the churches of Rome, the gabatae saxiscae. At least some of these vessels will have arrived there with pilgrims.87 The 54 AN EARLY MEDIEVAL INSULAR RELIQUARY FRAGMENT FROM ROME hoard of Anglo-Saxon coins and a coin brooch from Rome, deposited in 927, could also be seen in this context.88 In the other direction, the influence or rather the transference of Mediterranean Christian iconography to the Insular world has been discussed several times. It has been attributed to the agency of Insular pilgrimages.89 Additionally, the grave from Dromiskin, Co. Louth, shows clearly the direct adoption of Mediterranean (or at least Eastern Alpine) models. The burial was accompanied by a wooden reliquary with a bronze needle, which was deposited in a stone reliquary with a sliding lid. Stone boxes of this type, but also the custom of nesting reliquaries, can be found only in the Mediterranean and Alpine regions, where they are widespread.90 Rome was also a starting point in the quest for and the supply of relics. For the seventh century, the letter of Cummian to Ségéne, the fifth abbot of Iona, is important.91 He described (632/33) his journey to Rome in the context of the Easter controversy. Cummian and his Irish companions brought back relics by which miracles were performed. The late seventh-century Book of Angels obliquely mentions the relics of the Roman martyrs Peter, Paul, Lawrence and Stephen in Armagh, and Tírechán refers to them as well.92 Of course, Rome was not only a valued destination for Irishmen but for all of Western Christianity.93 The enormous demand for relics meant that the popes rarely gifted corporeal relics anymore, but instead gave out brandea (contact relics).94 It does not mean that there are no other types of relics in the early medieval shrines,95 but it does suggest that textile relics predominated. The reliquary fitting presented here – all that remains of an Irish tomb-, house- or church-shaped shrine – may have come to Rome during such a journey by an Irishman in the eighth century. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Norbert Franken wishes to thank Mechthild Schulze-Dörrlamm, RGZM Mainz, for the first classification of the object and for making the contact with Dieter Quast. Dieter Quast wishes to thank Cormac Bourke, Belfast, Raghnall Ó Floinn, Dublin, and Susan Youngs, London, very sincerely for critical and helpful comments. Additionally, Dieter also owes many thanks to Michael Ober, Mainz, for the graphical reconstruction of the hinge mount based on the old photograph. For photographs and permissions for reproduction, we wish to thank Eleonaora Destefanis, Vercelli, Nicodomeo Abate, Naples and Fraser Hunter and Martin Goldberg of the National Museums of Scotland, Edinburgh. Carola Murray-Seegart has translated the text into English. 55 DIETER QUAST AND NORBERT FRANKEN NOTES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 56 N. Franken, Bilddatenbank ʻAntike Bronzen in Berlinʼ (http://ww2.smb.museum/ antikebronzenberlin/) (15 Nov. 2011). For a complete compilation of the previously published reports on the projects and the associated results cf. N. Franken‚ ‘Samos – Berlin – Moskau. Zu Schicksal und Bedeutung eines archaischen Dreifußkesselsʼ in Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung, cxxix/cxxx (2014/2015), pp 77–93. Inv. 28. Journal für die Vermehrung des Antiquariums im Königlichen Museum Bd. II. Angelegt von Ernst Heinrich Toelken. 1.1.1851-1911 (= Inventar der Bronzen und Miscellanen. Misc. 3043-11910). A. Furtwängler, ʻAntiquariumʼ in Amtliche Berichte aus den Königlichen Kunstsammlungen xiii (1892), Columns 55-56 without fig. A. Furtwängler, ʻErwerbungen der Antikensammlungen in Deutschland: Berlin 1892ʼ in Archäologischer Anzeiger (1893), pp 72–102, esp. p. 101 no. 23 without fig. Five of the six, all of which are no longer in the Antikensammlung – Staatliche Museen zu Berlin. Detectable objects can be identified from left to right as follows: Fr. 1552 a 4; unidentified; Misc. 8064, 198; Misc. 6433; Misc. 8243; Fr. 397. – For the identified objects cf. Franken 2011. – For Misc. 8064, 198 cf. additionally M. Schulze-Dörrlamm, Byzantinische Gürtelschnallen und Gürtelbeschläge im Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseum. Teil 1. Die Schnallen ohne Beschläg, mit Laschenbeschläg und mit festem Beschläg des 5. bis 7. Jahrhunderts (Mainz, 2002), pp 227–228 no. 224 with parallels (oval purse buckle with four animal head protomas). The other objects in the photograph are not in context with the reliquary fragment. As not ascertainable, i.e. not detectable, the ‘Buckle with Glass Melt’ (Misc. 8243) appears for the first time in A. Greifenhagen, Schmuckarbeiten in Edelmetall. vol. 1: Fundgruppen (Berlin, 1970), p. 12 (information kindly provided by Barbara Niemeyer). There is no trace of the missing object in the Museum für Vor- und Frühgeschichte (MVF - SMB) or in the Skulpturensammlung und Museum für Byzantinische Kunst der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin (SBM – SMB) according to the kind information of Marion Bertram (MVF - SMB) and Gabriele Mietke (SBM - SMB). Thanks to Gertrud Platz-Horster (formerly ANT-SMB) as well as Agnes Schwarzmaier and Barbara Niemeyer (both ANT-SMB) for the concurrent information that the missing object, Inv. Misc. 8243 from the bronze storeroom of the Antikensammlung is also not located in the museum’s treasury. Evidence that the May 1945 fires in the flak bunker in Berlin-Friedrichshain reached the melting point of bronze is provided by a largely amorphous, solidified lump incorporating a few still-recognizable and identifiable Berlin bronzes, which the author saw in 2009 and 2010 during two visits to the Special Depots of the Moscow Pushkin Museum. The author did not view these stocks himself. Their examination by employees of the Staatliche Museen Berlin was not yet complete in 2016. Thanks to Neville Rowley (Skulpturensammlung und Museum für Byzantinische Kunst der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin) for advice. For the description of the shape cf. S. Gerace, ‘Wandering Churches: Insular houseshaped shrines and the Temple of Jerusalem’ in C. Newman, M. Mannion and F. Gavin (eds), Islands in a Global Context. Proceedings of the seventh international conference on Insular Art, held at the National University of Ireland, Galway, 1620 July 2014 (Oxford, 2017), pp 84-91. V. H. Elbern, ʻBaptizatus et Confirmatus. Ein neuer Beitrag zum frühmittelalterlichen Chrismaleʼ in Archiv für Liturgiewissenschaft, xlvii (2005), pp 25–45, esp. pp 25–26 with fig. 1 (interpreted there as chrismale); J. R. Allen and J. Anderson, The early Christian monuments of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1903), Part III, p. 7 fig. 4; p. 12 fig. 7. Cf. the discussion of the depiction of Christ on high cross (‘West Cross’) from Kilfenora, Co. Clare, by P. Harbison, The High Crosses of Ireland (Mainz, 1992), p. 116 with fig. 375. AN EARLY MEDIEVAL INSULAR RELIQUARY FRAGMENT FROM ROME 14 P. Yeoman, ‘A house-shaped shrine in a Carolingian setting, as depicted in the oldest portrait of St Columba in Cod Sang 555’ in P.S.A.S., cxlvi (2016), pp 153– 165; J. Geddes, ‘The earliest portrait of St Columba: Cod Sang 555, p. 166’ in P.S.A.S., cxlvii (2017), pp 127–145. 15 J. Duft and R. Schnyder, Die Elfenbein-Einbände der Stiftsbibliothek St. Gallen (Beuron, 1984), pp 16-19, 55-75 with pl. after p. 64; E. G. Rüsch, ‘Tuotilo. Mönch und Künstlerʼ in Mitteilungen zur vaterländischen Geschichte xli, no. 1 (1953), pp 1–89, esp. 15–30; T. G. Natter (ed.), Gold. Schatzkunst zwischen Bodensee und Chur (Ostfildern, 2008), pp 90–96. 16 R. Ó Floinn, ‘A fragmentary house-shaped shrine from Clonard, Co. Meath’ in Journal of Irish Archaeology, v (1989/90), pp 49–55, esp. p. 54; N. Wycherley, The cult of relics in early medieval Ireland (Turnhout, 2015), pp 120–124 (with sources); Gerace, ‘Wandering Churches’, p. 84. 17 All references are easily accessible at D. von Reitzenstein, Privatreliquiare des frühen Mittelalters (Marburg, 1991), pp 6–7. Cf. M. Weidemann, Kulturgeschichte der Merowingerzeit nach den Werken Gregor von Tours (Mainz, 1982), ii, p. 186. 18 Elbern, ʻBaptizatus et Confirmatusʼ, pp 27–28. with evidence. 19 J. Braun, Das christliche Altargerät in seinem Sein und in seiner Entwicklung (München, 1932), p. 287; E. von Erhardt-Siebold, ʻAldhelm’s Chrismalʼ in Speculum, x (1935), pp 276–280, esp. p. 277; O. Nussbaum, Die Aufbewahrung der Eucharistie (Bonn, 1979), pp 88–89, p. 111; Ó Floinn, ‘A fragmentary house-shaped shrine from Clonard‘, p. 53; V. H. Elbern, ʻEin frühmittelalterliches Chrismale in New Yorkʼ in Arte Medievale, N.S. i, no. 2 (2002), pp 9–24, esp. pp 9–10, 20–22; Idem, ‚Baptizatus et Confirmatus‘, pp 27–31. 20 Yeoman ‘A house-shaped shrine in a Carolingian setting’; Geddes, ‘The earliest portrait of St Columba’. 21 For Echternach and Willibrord cf. in detail J. Schroeder and H. Trauffler, Die Anfänge der Abtei Echternach. Von der Villa Epternacus zum frühmittelalterlichen Wallfahrtszentrum (Luxembourg, 1996); M. C. Ferrari, J. Schroeder and H. Trauffler, Die Abtei Echternach 698-1998 (Luxembourg, 1999); D. Ó Cróinín, ʻWillibrord und die frühe angelsächsische Missionierung Kontinentaleuropasʼ in C. Stiegemann, M. Kroker and W. Walter (eds), Credo, Christianisierung Europas im Mittelalter. Vol. I: Essays (Petersberg, 2013), pp 239–249. 22 A. van Euw, ‘Die Prachthandschriften aus Echternach’ in M. C. Ferrari, J. Schroeder and H. Trauffler (eds), Die Abtei Echternach 698-1998 (Luxembourg, 1999), pp 165–202, esp. p. 201 with fig. 37; Ó Cróinín, ʻWillibrord und die frühe angelsächsische Missionierung Kontinentaleuropasʼ, p. 240, fig. 144. 23 Ó Floinn, ‘A fragmentary house-shaped shrine from Clonard’, p. 53. 24 The only exception seems to be the shrine from Abbadia San Salvatore, Province Siena: D. Quast, Das merowingerzeitliche Reliquienkästchen aus Ennabeuren. Eine Studie zu den frühmittelalterlichen Reisereliquiaren und Chrismalia (Mainz, 2012), p. 126 no. 9 with further reading. 25 Ó Floinn, ‘A fragmentary house-shaped shrine from Clonard’, pp 52–53. 26 C. Bourke, ‘Clonmore and Bobbio: two seventh-century shrines’ in Dúiche Néill, xiv (2003), pp 24–34, esp. p. 26 pl. 2. 27 E. Wamers, Insularer Metallschmuck in wikingerzeitlichen Gräbern Nordeuropas (Neumünster, 1985), p. 101 no. 105 and 109f. no 171 with pl. 29.2.3a (with further reading). 28 Lough Gara, Co. Sligo, S. Youngs (ed.), The work of Angels. Masterpieces of Celtic metalwork, 6th-9th centuries AD (London, 1989), p. 58 no 46; G. Haseloff, Email im frühen Mittelalter. Frühchristliche Kunst von der Spätantike bis zu den Karolingern (Marburg, 1990), p. 167 and p. 189 fig. 136. Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, S. Youngs, ‘Two medieval celtic enamelled buckles from Leicestershire’ in Leicester Archaeological and Historical Society Trans., lxvii (1993), pp 15–22. Keelby, Lincolnshire, J. Carroll, ‘Millefiori and the development of early Irish enamelling’ in C. Bourke (ed.), From the Isles of the North. Early medieval art in Ireland and Britain. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Insular Art held in the Ulster Museum, Belfast, 7-11 April 1994 57 DIETER QUAST AND NORBERT FRANKEN 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 58 (Belfast, 1995), pp 49–57, esp. 50–52 with fig. 2,d. Summarising with gazeteer S. Youngs, ‘Recent finds of Insular enamelled buckles’ in C. E. Karkov, M. Ryan and R. T. Farrell (eds), The Insular tradition (New York, 1997), pp 189–209. Quast, Das merowingerzeitliche Reliquienkästchen aus Ennabeuren, p. 126 cat.no 3,8 and pl. 26,A; . Haseloff, Email im frühen Mittelalter p. 198 fig. 147b Quast, Das merowingerzeitliche Reliquienkästchen aus Ennabeuren, p. 126 cat.no 3,13 and pl. 26B; Haseloff, Email im frühen Mittelalter, p. 194 fig. 144a; Youngs, The work of Angels‘, p. 163 fig. 129. A. Mahr, Christian art in ancient Ireland (New York, 1976) (Reprint, first edition vol. 1: Dublin, 1932; vol, 2: Dublin, 1941), pl. 50,5; Haseloff, Email im frühen Mittelalter p. 192 fig. 142; Youngs, The work of Angels, p. 207 no 212. – The function of the second one is not confirmed, it could be also a mount from a book: Mahr ibidem pl. 50.3. C. Bourke, ‘Antiquities from the River Blackwater IV, Early Medieval non-ferrous metalwork’ in U.J.A., Third Series, lxix (2010), pp 24–133, esp. pp 54 no. 203, 59 no. 244 with figs. 22 and 26. A. Dornier, ‘The Anglo-Saxon monastery at Breedon-on-the-Hill, Leicestershire‘ in idem (ed.), Mercian Studies (Leicester, 1977), pp 155–168, esp. 164 with fig. 41,1 (interpreted as a buckle). M. Redknap, ‘Insular non-ferrous metalwork from Wales of the 8th to 10th centuries’ in C. Bourke (ed.), From the Isles of the North, pp. 59–73, esp. pp 65– 66 with fig. 4,a; Idem, ‘Glitter in the dragon’s lair: Irish and Anglo-Saxon metalwork from pre-Viking Wales, c. 400-850’ in J. Graham-Campbell and M. Ryan (eds), Anglo-Saxon / Irish Relations before the Vikings (London, 2009), pp 281–309, esp. p. 305 with fig. 13.12b. Wamers, Insularer Metallschmuck in wikingerzeitlichen Gräbern Nordeuropas, p. 103 cat.no. 119 Taf. 7.1. Ibid., p. 95 cat.no. 53 Taf. 7.2; Idem, ʻInsulære importfunn i vikingetidens Skandinavia og spekulasjoner om Norges samlingʼ in J. F. Krøger (ed.), Rikssamlimgen – Høvdingmakt og kongemakt (Stavanger, 1996), pp 8–21, esp. p. 9 fig. 4 (colour photo). Wamers, Insularer Metallschmuck in wikingerzeitlichen Gräbern Nordeuropas, p. 99 cat.no. 82 Taf. 7.3. Ibid., p. 50 fig. 2.4b. Youngs, The work of Angels, p. 58 no. 46; Haseloff, Email im frühen Mittelalter, pp 181 fig. 128b; 189 fig. 136;193 fig. 143. H. S. Crawford, ‘A descriptive list of Irish shrines and reliquaries’, R.S.A.I. Jn.. liii (1923), pp 74–93 esp. p. 78 fig. 2; Mahr, Christian art in ancient Ireland, pls 57.2; 62.1b; 67.3.4; 80. R. Bruce-Mitford, A corpus of late Celtic hanging bowls (Oxford, 2005), pp 288, 304, called it a ‘running twist or guilloche pattern’; M. Lennartsson, ʻKarolingische Metallarbeiten mit Pflanzenornamentikʼ in Offa, liv/lv (1997/98), pp 431–619, esp. p. 450 fig. 4f ʻMuster S4bʼ called it a ʻmeander friezeʼ. Haseloff, Email im frühen Mittelalter p. 192 fig. 142; Bruce-Mitford, A Corpus, pp 257 fig. 329; 287 fig. 394; 304 fig. 433. Bourke, ‘Antiquities from the River Blackwater IV, Early Medieval Non-Ferrous Metalwork’, pp 48–49 no. 141, 54 no. 203; 59 no. 244 with figs. 18, 22 and 26. M. J. O’Kelly, ‘The belt-shrine from Moylough, Sligo’ in R.S.A.I. Jn. Xcv (1965), pp 149–188, esp. pp 164–165 with fig. 5 and pl. 13; Youngs, The work of Angels, p. 58f. no 47 (with further reading). Good photographs at M. Blindheim, ‘A houseshaped Irish-Scots reliquiary in Bologna, and its place among the other reliquiaries’ in Acta Archaeologica lv (1984), pp 1–53, esp. p. 7 fig. 3 and Haseloff, Email im frühen Mittelalter p. 185 fig. 131c. J. Werner, ʻJonas in Helgöʼ in Bonner Jahrbücher clxxviii (1978), pp 519–530, esp. pp 528–530 with fig.7, has pointed out the typological dependency of the buckle plates from Moylough on models from the Merovingian empire, which originated around 600. From this he proposed a dating for the Irish belt shrine to the seventh century. The article has apparently not been received in Insular archaeology. AN EARLY MEDIEVAL INSULAR RELIQUARY FRAGMENT FROM ROME 45 Mahr, Christian art in ancient Ireland pl. 50.5; Youngs, The work of Angels, p. 207, no. 212; Haseloff, Email im frühen Mittelalter p. 192 fig. 142. 46 e.g. S. Marx, ‘Studies in Insular animal ornament in late 7th- and 8th-century manuscripts’ in Bourke (ed.), From the Isles of the North, pp 105–110, esp. pp 108– 110 with figs. 2-4. 47 Youngs, The work of Angels, pp 99 no. 80, 110 no. 102 with colour pl. on. p. 154; Werner, ʻJonas in Helgöʼ, p. 521 fig. 1,1; Wamers, Insularer Metallschmuck in wikingerzeitlichen Gräbern Nordeuropas pl. 8.2. 48 cf. S. Youngs, ‘Medium and motif: polychrome enamelling and early manuscript decoration in Insular art’ in C. Bourke (ed.), From the Isles of the North, pp 37–47, esp. p. 41 with fig. 3f and 5e. 49 For possible ornaments cf. F. Henry, ‘Irish enamels of the Dark Ages and their relation to the cloisonné techniques’ in D. B. Harden (ed.), Dark-Age Britain. Studies presented to E. T. Leeds (London, 1956), pp 71–88, esp. p. 87 fig. 118. 50 Blindheim, ‘A house-shaped Irish-Scots reliquiary in Bologna’; Ó Floinn, ‘A fragmentary house-shaped shrine from Clonard’, pp 52–53. 51 Exceptions without a wooden core are the Bologna shrine and the smaller Lough Erne shrine; the latter is a crossover between group 1 and 2. 52 Most recently Quast, Das merowingerzeitliche Reliquienkästchen aus Ennabeuren, pp 125–126 nos. 1.2.9 with further reading. 53 Bourke, ‘Clonmore and Bobbio’, p. 30 addressed a dating in the second half of the seventh century. 54 Blindheim, ‘A house-shaped Irish-Scots reliquiary in Bologna’, pp 5–14. 55 M. Ryan, ‘Frühe irische Metallarbeitenʼ in J. Erichsen (ed.), Kilian. Mönch aus Irland, aller Franken Patron. Aufsätze (München, 1989), pp 75–83, esp. p. 77. 56 A. Angenendt, Das Frühmittelalter. Die abendländische Christenheit von 400 bis 900, 3rd edition, (Stuttgart, 2001), p. 213. – For Bobbio cf. additionally E. Destefanis, Il monastero di Bobbio in età altomedievale (Firenze, 2002); Le alte valli di Taro e Ceno tra fede e laicità: re, monaci e pelegrini (a cura di Catarsi, M. & Raggio, P) (Bologna, 2017). 57 M. Ryan, ‘Decorated metalwork in the Museo dell’Abbazia, Bobbio, Italy’ in R.S.A.I. Jn., cxx (1990), pp 102–111, esp. p. 110. For Bourke, ‘Clonmore and Bobbio’ p. 29 ‘the Bobbio shrine must be the product of an Irish workshop’. Even if it is difficult to decide whether the shrine was made in Ireland or by Irish craftsmen somewhere else, it is quite surely a foreign (Irish) product in Italy. Cf. H. Vierck, ‘Cortina Triposi. Ein Beispiel spätantiker Traditionen der insularen Mission’ in Praehistorische Zeitschrift xlv (1970), pp 236–240, esp. p. 238. 58 S. Lomartire, ‘Hausförmiges Reliquiar’ in Chr. Stiegemann and M. Wemhoff (eds), 799. Kunst und Kultur der Karolingerzeit (Mainz, 1999), pp 456-458, esp. p. 458; A. Ducci, ‘Dal tardoantico alle sogilie del mille. Il cammino delle arti nell’altomedioevo toscano’ in M. Collareta (ed.), Visibile parlare. Le arti nella Toscana medievale (Firenze, 2013), pp 35–67, esp. pp 58–61. 59 A. Cianciosi, L. de Ferri, E. Destefanis, C. Moine, G. Pojana and D. Vallotto, ‘Culti e reliquie’ in S. Gelichi, M. Librenti and A. Cianciosi (eds), Nonantola 6. Monaci e contadini, abati e re. Il monastero di Nonantola attraverso l’archeologia (2002-2009) (Sesto Fiorentino, 2018), pp 329–354, esp. pp 348–349 with pl. I.10; the object was already mentioned in S. Youngs, ‘From island to island and beyond: workshop practices and the cultural roots of fine metalwork in the eighth century’ in C. Newman, et al. (eds), Islands in a Global Context, pp 266–274, esp. p. 272 with note 32. 60 cf. Setnes (Møre og Romsdal, N) Blindheim, ‘A house-shaped Irish-Scots reliquary in Bologna’, p. 47 fig. 44; Quast, Das merowingerzeitliche Reliquienkästchen aus Ennabeuren, p. 126 no. 10 with pl. 28B.3. 61 M. Panum Baastrup, ‘Iriske Lodder’ in Skalk, iv (2013), pp 12–15, esp. p. 14; Wamers, Insularer Metallschmuck in wikingerzeitlichen Gräbern Nordeuropas pp 94 no. 43, 98 no. 80, 104–105 no. 130 with pl. 5.3.5.6. 62 Wamers, Insularer Metallschmuck in wikingerzeitlichen Gräbern Nordeuropas p. 18; Baastrup, ‘Iriske Lodder’ p. 12. – cf. in general for weights of the Viking period in 59 DIETER QUAST AND NORBERT FRANKEN 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 60 Ireland (and England) P. F. Wallace, ‘Weights and weight systems in Viking Age Ireland’ in A. Reynolds and L. Webster (eds), Early medieval art and archaeology in the northern world. Studies in honour of James Graham-Campbell (Leiden, 2013), pp 301–316; D. Haldenby and J. Kershaw, ‘Viking-Age lead weights from Cottam’ in Yorkshire Archaeological Jn., lxxxvi (2014), pp 106–123; P. F. Wallace, Viking Dublin. The Wood Quay excavations (Sallins, 2016), pp 360–364. R. Ó Floinn, ‘Cast and gilt copper alloy’ in I. Russell and F. Hurley (eds), Woodstown. A Viking-Age settlement in Co. Waterford (Dublin, 2014) pp 172–193 esp. pp 183–184 no. 02E0441:600:950. N. Abate, ‘I manufatti metallici: un catalogo ragionato’ in F. Marazzi and A. Luciano (eds), Iuxta flumen Vulturnum. Gli scavi lungo il fronte fluviale di San Vincenzo al Volturno (Cerro al Volturno, 2015), pp 145–170, esp. p. 163 with. pl. IX.65; Idem, ‘Circolazione di merci, artisti et idee nell’Alto Medioevo: il caso del monastero di San Vincenzo al Volturno (IS)’ in VII Congresso Nazionale di Archeologia Medievale. vol. 2 (Sesto Fiorentino, 2015), pp 213–217, esp. pp 215–216 with fig. 2; G. P. Brogiolo, F. Marazzi and C. Giostra (eds), Longobardi, un popolo che cambia la storia (Milano, 2017), p. 502 no. VIII.6. – The Catalogue of exhibits is published only online (www.museicivici.pavia.it/mostralongobardi/catalogo) (07 Dec 2021), cf. Ibid., pp 142–143. Bruce-Mitford, A corpus, p. 13 fig. e. Ibid., pp 156–159 with fig. 127 and 129. C. Breay and J. Story (eds), Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, art, word, war (London, 2018), p. 92 no. 16. Bruce-Mitford, A corpus, pp 276-283 with figs. 375 and 384. M. Müller-Wille, ʻDer Beschlag eines frühmittelalterlichen Reliquiars von Vindinge, Fünenʼ in C. Dobiat (ed.), Reliquiae gentium. Festschrift für Horst Wolfgang Böhme zum 65. Geburtstag. Teil I (Rahden/Westf., 2005), pp 323–337, esp. p. 335; basic to this Wamers, Insularer Metallschmuck in wikingerzeitlichen Gräbern Nordeuropas esp. pp 17–24 for objects of the sacral sphere; E. Wamers, ʻInsular finds in Viking Age Scandinavia and the state formation of Norway’ in H. B. Clarke, M. Ní Mhaonaigh and R. Ó Floinn (eds), Ireland and Scandinavia in the early Viking Age (Cornwall, 1998), pp 37–72. A. M. Heen Petersen, ‘Objects from a distant place: transformation and use of Insular mounts from Viking-Age burials in Trøndelag, Central Norway’ in Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History, xxi (2018), pp 60–75, esp. pp 60, 72–73. J. Sheehan, ‚Viking raiding, gift-exchange and Insular metalwork in Norway’ in Reynolds and Webster (eds), Early Medieval Art and Archaeology in the Northern World, pp 809–821. A. Heen Petersen and G. Murray, ‘An Insular reliquary from Melhus: the significance of Insular ecclesiastical material in early Viking-Age Norway’ in Medieval Archaeology, lxii, no. 1 (2018), pp 53–82. R. Ó Floinn, ‘Irish and Scandinavian art in the early medieval period’ in A.-Chr. Larsen (ed.), The Vikings in Ireland (Roskilde, 2001), pp 87–97, esp. p. 88 with fig.1; Müller-Wille, ʻDer Beschlag eines frühmittelalterlichen Reliquiars von Vindinge, Fünenʼ p. 335; Cf. in this context S. Youngs, ‘ “From Ireland Coming”: fine Irish metalwork from the Medway, Kent, England’ in C. Hourihane (ed.), From Ireland coming. Irish art from Early Christian to Late Gothic period and its European context (Princeton, 2001), pp 249–260, esp. p. 254, for whom the non-ecclesiastical Irish metal fragments from England are ‘the result of trading and recycling of decorative metalwork in the ninth and tenth centuries’. G. Murray, ‘Early medieval shrine fragments from Park North Cave, Co. Cork and Kilgreany Cave, Co. Waterford’ in M. Dowd (ed.), Underground Archaeology. Studies on human bones and artefacts from Ireland’s caves (Oxford, 2017), pp 150–159. J. Anderson, ‘Notice of bronze brooches and personal ornaments from a ship-burial of the Viking-time in Oronsay, and other bronze ornaments from Colonsay’ in P.S.A.S., xli (1906/07), pp 437–450, esp. p. 438 fig. 1-2. AN EARLY MEDIEVAL INSULAR RELIQUARY FRAGMENT FROM ROME 76 Sheehan, ‘Viking Raiding’. 77 D. Thurre, ‘Les trésors eccléastiques du haut moyen âge et leur constitution. Éclairage à travers deux exemples helvétiques: Saint-Maurice d’Argaune et Sion’ in idem. (ed.), Les trésors de sanctuaires, de l’antiquité à l’époque romane (Paris, 1996), pp 43–81, esp. p. 70 with further reading in note 121. 78 Quast, Das merowingerzeitliche Reliquienkästchen aus Ennabeuren, p. 124 nos. 1-3 (with further reading). 79 M. Ryan, ‘An insular gilt-bronze object in the Royal Museums for Art and History’ in Bulletin Musées Royaux Art et Histoire, lvi, no. 2 (1985), pp 57–60; Quast, Das merowingerzeitliche Reliquienkästchen aus Ennabeuren, p. 127 no. 15. 80 Summarising: H. Vierck, ‘Cortina Tripodis. Zu Aufhängung und Gebrauch subrömischer Hängebecken aus Britannien und Irland’, Frühmittelalterliche Studien, iv (1970), pp 8–52, esp- on pp 34–36 with fig. 9, he mentioned additionally a ladle from a grave from Maintal-Dörnigheim (Main-Kinzig-Kreis) dating in the first half of the eighth century). Vierck interpreted the hanging bowls as ecclesiastical objects and they had come to the continent in the context of an AngloIrish mission; Bruce-Mitford, A corpus, pp 347 no. 126, 352–355 no. 129-130; S. Youngs, ‘ “Little Men” and the missing link: Irish anthropomorphic vessel mounts’ in Reynolds and Webster (eds.), Early Medieval Art and Archaeology in the Northern World, pp. 789-808. The escutcheon from Kaiseraugst seems to be a Merovingian version of an Irish prototype (Bruce-Mitford;s Group 1); Vierck, ‘Cortina triposi. Ein Beispiel spätantiker Traditionen der insularen Mission’, pp 238–240 with fig. 1.3 mentions additionally a ‘surely Anglo-Saxon escutcheon’ from Tauberbischofsheim-Impfingen, Main-Tauber-Kreis, Germany. 81 V. H. Elbern, ʻZwischen England und oberitalien. Die sog. insulare Kunstprovinz in Salzburgʼ in Jahres- und Tagungsbericht der Görres-Gesellschaft (1989), pp 96–111; further reading in Quast, Das merowingerzeitliche Reliquienkästchen aus Ennabeuren, p. 65 with note 231. Cf. now R. Gratz, ʻDas Rupertuskreuz von Bischofshofen. Ein Forschungs- und Restaurierungsprojektʼ in E. Wamers (ed.), Der Tassilo-Liutpirc-Kelch im Stift Kremsmünster. Geschichte, Archäologie, Kunst (Regensburg, 2019), pp 211–221. 82 E. Wamers, ʻCum thesauric ac familia. Zur Schatzkunst und Hofschule Tassilos IIIʼ in Idem (ed.), Der Tassilo-Liutpirc-Kelch, pp 377–449. 83 The discussion about the derivation and dating of the Tassilo chalice style has a long history, especially in Germany. Cf. Quast, Das merowingerzeitliche Reliquienkästchen aus Ennabeuren, p. 65 with further reading in note 228. 84 J. M. H. Smith, Relics and the insular world, c. 600 - c. 800. Kathleen Hughes Memorial Lectures, xv (Cambridge, 2017), pp 28–44. 85 B. Kötting, Peregrinatio religiosa. Wallfahrten in der Antike und das Pilgerwesen in der alten Kirche (2nd edition, Münster, 1980), pp 228–245; K. Herbers, ʻPilger auf dem Weg nach Jerusalem, Rom und Santiago de Compostelaʼ in P. Caucci von Saucken (ed.), Pilgerziele der Christenheit (Darmstadt, 1999), pp 103–133, esp. pp 104, 121–123; A. Benvenuti, ʻRomʼ in von Saucken (ed.), Pilgerziele der Christenheit, pp 259–292. 86 M. A. Handley, ‘Saxons, Britons and Scots: pilgrims, travellers and exiles on the continent’ in Reynolds and Webster (eds.), Early Medieval Art and Archaeology in the Northern World, pp 743–778, esp. pp 751–758 nos. I3-I18. A further 19 inscriptions (Ibid. pp 766–773 nos. I.28-I.46) were excluded because the names have no equivalent in the Insular area. 87 R. Gem, ‘Gabatae Saxiscae: Saxon bowls in the churches of Rome during the eighth and ninth centuries’ in Reynolds and Webster (eds), Early Medieval Art and Archaeology in the Northern World, pp 87–109. 88 R. Bruce-Mitford, ‘Late Saxon disc-brooches’ in D. B. Harden (ed.), Dark-Age Britain, pp 171–198, esp. p. 200 with pl. XXX,E-F; D.M. Wilson, Anglo-Saxon ornamental metalwork 700-1100. Catalogue of antiquities of the Later Saxon Period I (London, 1964) p. 163 no. 64 with pl. XXVIII,64. 89 e.g. J. Hawkes, ‘Symbols of the Passion or power?’ in Karkov et al. (eds.), The Insular tradition, pp. 27–44; D. Hoogland Verkerk, ‘Pilgrimage ad Limina 61 DIETER QUAST AND NORBERT FRANKEN 90 91 92 93 94 95 62 Apostolorum in Rome: Irish crosses and early christian sarcophagi’ in C. Hourihane (ed.), From Ireland coming, pp 9–26. J. Raftery and H. G. Tempest, ‘A burial at Dromiskin, Co. Louth’ in County Louth Archaeological Society Jn., x, no. 2 (1942), pp 133–137, with pl. 2; C. Bourke, The archaeology of a saint (Belfast, 1993) p. 14. For further reading cf. Quast, Das merowingerzeitliche Reliquienkästchen aus Ennabeuren, p. 75 with notes 290-291; R. Ó Floinn, ʻReliquiarʼ in Chr. Stiegemann, M. Kroker and W. Walter (eds), Credo, Christianisierung Europas im Mittelalter, vol. ii: Katalog (Petersberg, 2013) pp 221–222 no. 180. There are different opinions about the author: M. Walsh and D. Ó Cróinín (eds), Cummian’s Letter De controversia paschali. Together with a related Irish computistical tract de ratione conputandi (Toronto, 1988) pp 7–15 are discussing Cuimíne Ailbe, the later abbot of Iona, as well as Cuimine Fota; T. M. CharlesEdwards, Early Christian Ireland (Cambridge, 2000) p. 265 ‘Cumméne the Tall … is likely to be the Cummian who composed a penitential and may also be the author of the letter to Ségéne, abbot of Iona … on the paschal question’. A. Breen, ‘Cummian (Cumméne, Cumméne) Foto (‘the long’)’ in Dictionary of Irish Biography vol. ii (Cambridge, 2009), p. 1085: ‘it is probable that Cummian Foto ‘the long’ is the author of the Paschal letter of 632 addressed to Ségéne’; P. Ó’Riain, ‘Cuimén Fionn’ in A Dictionary of Irish Saints (Dublin, 2011), p. 246: ‘Cuimín Fionn’ (the fair) is best known for his alleged authorship of a book on the miracles of Colum Cille … and of a letter on the paschal question, sometimes attributed to him’; Bourke, ‘Clonmore and Bobbio’, p. 33. – with many thanks to Cormac Bourke for these references. L. Bieler (ed.), The Patrician texts in the Book of Armagh (Dublin, 1979), pp 122– 123, 186–187; Bourke, ‘Clonmore and Bobbio’, p. 33. Cg. In general M. MacCormick, Origins of the european economy. Communications and commerce, A.D. 300-900 (Cambridge, 2001) pp 283–318. F. Carlà-Uhink, ʻDie Differenz als Argument: Gregor der Große, Konstantina und der Kopf des Apostels Paulusʼ in L. Körntgen, J. Kusber, J. Pahlitzsch and F. Carlà-Uhink, Filippo (eds), Byzanz und seine europäischen Nachbarn. Politische Interdependenzen und kulturelle Missverständnisse (Mainz, 2020), pp 11–21; N. Wycherley, The cult of relics in early medieval Ireland (Turnhout, 2015), pp 108, 114. The ‘production’ of brandea played an important role not only in Rome. Gregor von Tours reports that the cloths that are put on the tombs of Peter and St Martin had soaked up that much with virtus that they were heavier the next morning. A. Angenendt, Heilige und Reliquien. Die Geschichte ihres Kultes vom frühen Christentum bis zur Gegenwart (München, 1997), pp 155-158; M. Weidemann, ʻReliquie und Eulogie. Zur Begriffsbestimmung geweihter Gegenstände in der fränkischen Kirchenlehre des 6. Jahrhundertsʼ in J. Werner (ed.), Die Ausgrabungen in St. Ulrich und Afra in Augsburg 1961-1968 (München, 1977), pp 353–373, esp. pp 357–358; Weidemann, Kulturgeschichte der Merowingerzeit nach den Werken Gregor von Tours, vol. ii, pp 164–165. In the Ranvaik shrine in Copenhagen bone fragments, a piece of wood and a textile fragment were identified. The Abbadia San Salvatore shrine contained small bone fragments; Wycherley, The cult of relics in early medieval Ireland, p. 121.