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.