Arty Calls

 

The Portrayal of Emperors in the Reichenau Manuscripts

 

Such a study presents the distinct problem of having a technically non-existent subject. If one follows the writings of CR Dodwell, particularly CR Dodwell and DH Turner’s ‘Reichenau Reconsidered: A Reassessment of the Place of Reichenau in Ottonian Art’, there are no portrayals of Emperors in the Reichenau manuscripts. This is simply because the manuscripts have mostly been reattributed to other schools and places. The portrayals in question, then, will be treated as a group, irrespective of the Reichenau question, in an attempt to show homogeneity. However, this is not to underestimate the role of aesthetic antecedents, but merely to proceed from general characteristics of such ruler portraits to unusually close similarities.

The ruler portrait is rarely designed to be an accurate portrayal of an individual, or at least the more important intention is to show an ideal of a ruler. This necessitates the additional element of subject powers and, sometimes, members of court, in order to show the act of ruling. The ruler is thus usually shown in the middle of the picture with his accessories, often as personifications and symbols, which provide a frame around the central point of focus. The Emperor is sometimes further emphasised by a distinction of size from his subjects. This is not an uncommon feature in art generally, but it may have a fairly direct precedent in late classical art. For example the size of the Emperor in relation to his subjects on the Column of Marcus Aurelius or on the silver Missorium Theodosius in Madrid. Another method of distinction which may have been carried over into Ottonian art is the idea of having the Emperor seated on a throne and his subjects standing in attendance, as in the Arch of Constantine.

The Carolingians had had a tradition of ruler portraits, accompanied by allegories of empire, representations of ecclesiastical and secular dignitaries, homage bringing nations and the hand of God placing a crown upon the Emperor’s head. Most of these characteristics are evident, for example, in the Emperor in Majesty, from the Codex Aureus from St. Emmeram, of  the school of Charles the Bald, made around 870. This miniature also has the throne framed by a canopy or baldachin, which is reminiscent of late Byzantine manuscripts. On a Byzantine ivory relief Christ is shown crowning a German Emperor and Queen in the same manner as late Ottonian miniatures of Christ crowning King Henry II, before he became Emperor, and his Queen. The frontispiece of the Bible of San Callisto belongs to the same type of representation, this time without the hand of God, as are most of the representations in the Reichenau group.

The idea of distributing a composition over two facing pages, with tributary nations approaching the Emperor, might be said to stem from the Roman ‘Notitia Dignitatum’ which was copied in Ottonian times in the Trier circle. There was a 5^th Century copy of it in the Cathedral of Speyer. But, in general, Carolingian art is the most direct influence on Ottonian art; Roman and Byzantine influence, though great, can, in many cases, be traced through Carolingian. Although this is not the case with the direct early Christian influence on the work of the manuscript artist known as the Gregory Master.

Such elements of composition that have already been mentioned with the Carolingian manuscript, the Codex Aureus, can be seen in the Otto III Christomimetes from a Gospel book presented to the Emperor by Liuthar. This is thought to have been made around 1000 and is now in the Central Treasury at Aachen. Otto III is crowned by two subject Kings and the representatives of church and state. In its concept of government by divine right it may refer to St. Augustine’s commentary on Psalm 90. Otto III is enthroned in a mandorla, like Christ in Majesty, accompanied by symbols of the evangelists. The veil across Otto’s breast, and therefore heart, may be a scroll and refer to the inscription surrounding Liuthar on the opposite page: Hoc Auguste Libro Cor Deus Iduat Otto (With this book, Otto Augustus, may God invest thy heart). Although the idea of imperial christomimesis is not far removed from Byzantine ideology, no Byzantine Emperor would be represented in the daring manner of Otto III. In art the Byzantines rarely placed the natural in such a supernatural context.

Three other Reichenau Emperor portrayals, whilst sharing general elements with what had gone before, also have remarkable similarities with each other. One is a miniature of Otto II receiving the homage of the four parts of the empire:- Germania, Alemannia, Francia and Italia. It is from the Registrum Gregorii, produced around 983 and presented to the cathedral of Trier by archbishop Egbert. The codex is now lost, but two miniatures from it are in the Stadtbibliothek at Trier and the Musée Condé at Chantilly respectively. The former is a representation of Pope Gregory. The second Emperor portrayal is of Otto III receiving the homage of the four parts of his empire:- Slavinia, Germania, Gallia and Roma. It comes from the Gospel Book of Otto III and was probably made between 997 and 1000. It was given as a gift to Bamberg Cathedral by Henry II and is now in Munich. The last is again Otto III receiving the homage from the four parts of his empire. This one is the Bamberg Prachthandschrift fragment from a Liuthar manuscript.

The Registrum Gregorii shows the Gregory master’s grasp of form beneath the draperies, his handling of space and subtly graded tones. In some ways his style derives from late antique art: J. Beckwith relates the Emperor to a portrait of a Theodosian prince. The Gospel of Otto III shows some of the same attention to detail, there is even an attempt to show different facial tones, but is a move towards greater angularity and geometric abstraction. The Bamberg fragment, on the other hand, while superficially closest to the Gospel of Otto III, is handled with a softness more reminiscent of the Gregory master.

In two of the portraits – the Registrum Gregorii and the Bamberg fragment – the architectural settings are almost identical. They have baldachins supported by patterned columns and two-tiered acanthus capitals. Each tiled roof is crowned with a single, simple, decoration while the spandrels have recessed panels. Both artists have made the baldachins look slightly awkward by an only partially successful attempt at showing the canopy to be three-dimensional. The platform thrones have high curved backrests with growling lion heads at each end. A cloth has been draped over the backrests and in each case falls in the same, heavy, regular folds. The poses of the Emperors are almost exactly the same. The sceptres and orbs which they hold are also nearly identical. Their clothes, both in overall design and the way in which the cloth hangs, are very similar. In colour and pattern, however they differ.

The Emperor in the Gospel of Otto III differs from the others in drapery, despite having similar designs on the chest and right arm. His sceptre terminates in a bird design and he holds the orb away from his chest. The positioning of the feet also differs, but in general he shows much the same seated, frontal posture. The base of the throne is different and, in fact, is very close to the stool of Gregory in the Registrum Gregorii. In both cases the growling lion heads are at the top of the stool (since they have no backrests) and have animal paws at the base. This means that it is also close to the stool of Mark in the Gospels of Ste. Chapelle but this miniature lacks the similar roofs above the figures which Gregory in the Registrum Gregorii and Otto III in his Gospel book have in common.

The Gospel of Otto III follows the same compositional theme as the Bamberg fragment. The ecclesiastical and secular dignitaries, in particular, have much in common. The faces, hair styles and colours, as well as costume are the same. The poses of the rear figures are identical while those of the front pairs differ slightly. The personifications of provinces are basically of the same design in the Gospel of Otto III and the Bamberg fragment. But in each case the figure is changed. For example the receptacles for gifts are in three areas approximately the same but are in a different order. The drapery is softer in the Bamberg fragment and is, in that sense, more reminiscent of the Registrum Gregorii. Two of the crowns on the Bamberg fragment are closer to the Registrum Gregorii than to the Gospel of Otto III. But the provinces in the Bamberg fragment are, in general, a fresh portrayal, with the same composition as the Gospel of Otto III.

These three manuscripts, as well as the Otto III Christomimetes, fall within a larger tradition of Emperor and ruler portraits. This tradition can be traced through Roman art, Byzantine art and most directly through Carolingian art, as in the Otto III Christomimetes. But of greater importance is that the portrayals in three frontispieces, in the Registrum Gregorii, the Gospels of Otto III and the Bamberg fragment, form a closely linked stylistic unit. The compositions have only one major difference, that between the Registrum Gregorii and the other two. In general impression, and in many of the details, they can be seen as variants of a single iconographic idea.

Copyright 1981 Adrian Annabel