Spoken Words and Images in Late Medieval Italian Painting

SpokenWords and Images
in Late Medieval Italian Painting
Jens T Wollesen
The more I thought ofthe theme ofthis colloquium, and ofmy own contribution
within this conference frame. the more grew my concem: What were these words, and
what was the meaning and significance of what we call oral, verbal, or written, within
the visual historical context that I chose? Then, quite contrary to an earlier publication1
where I emphasized that „pictura loquitur,“ [ concluded that pictures do not really
speak.2 At best, they could be read, or better: perceived as a visual text – sometimes
with a ‚real‘ text included in the picture – not similar to words, but probably in terms
of inspixere et videre – the new way to denote silent private reading in the fourteenth
century.3 And how about the oral or written text outside the confinement of the image,
if it was there, and why? Did the image need words and text, and how did these relate
to it? To be sure, those monumental pictures – due to their Jocation and relatively small
format – could not be discemed in a way that would allow their true „reading“ – at
least as we understand the term „read“ or „see“ today?
Was it true, then, according to a modem slogan, that seeing is believing? Should
it not say instead: believing is seeing? Was it not the mind or the word that made you
believe what you really could not see? What actually was thought, i f not said in front
of pictures by their respective audiences? Was it just something that came to mind, as
we would think today, or was it a kind of thinking of a different nature, as indeed
different were the images in the medieval mind of the time?4
Typically, art history still owes us explanations as to what was thought, said and
done in front of pictures. This is true for monumental frescoes and mosaics, and of
1 Jens T. Wollesen, „‚Ut poesis pictura?‘ Problems oflmages and Texts in the Early Trecento“ in
Petrarch ’s Triumph􀛂 Allegory and Spectac/e, cds. K. Eisenbichler and A. A. Iannucci. (Onawa:
Dovehouse Editions, Inc., 1990), pp. 183-210.
2 However, see: Leslie Brubaker, ‚·When Pictures Speak: the lncorporation ofDialogue in the NinthCentury
Minialures of Paris gr. 5 1 0,“ Word & Image, 1 2 ( 1 996), pp. 94-109. Here, of course, not
the pictures, but the words in the picture speak … ; sce also Roger Tarr, ‚“Visible parlare:‘ the
Spoken Word in Fourteenth-Century Central ltalian Painting,“ Word & Image, I 3 ( 1997), pp. 223·
244.
‚ Paul Saenger, „Silen! Reading: Its Impact on ]..ate Medieval Script and Society,“ Viator 1 3 ( 1982),
pp. 367-414, 384 f. See also now Paul Saengcr, Space between Words: The Origin of Silent
Reading (Stanford University Press, Stdllford, I 997), passim.
4 The medieval mind, to be sure, is an academic hybrid – especially when discussed within this brief
evaluation.
258 JENS T. WOLLESEN
their relatives in sculpture and reliefoutside the cult building. Both, I believe, required
the explanatory spoken words based on, most likely, biblical texts. Maybe, these
images were first understood in a kind of silent perception of their imaginative visual
appearance, and then enhanced and specified by the spoken word.
In any event, so it seems to me, medieval pictw·es rarely functioned without the
support of ( established) texts or legends, and the spoken word. In many instances,
words – sometimes not referring to established (biblical) texts – were included with the
picture, and more specifically, within the picture, however, again in Latin, and not in
the vemacular, and facing the illiterate vemacular beholder within a specific extrapictorial
context.
Moreover, to complicate the issue – ignored by most art historians – many
pictures were rarely visible at all times, and not for everybody. Altar pieces were
norrnally closed with shutters, and their sacred images only briefly exposed for limited
visionary occasions, such as the mass, or special liturgical festivities and celebrations.
This sacred invisibility remains to be addressed, too.
lt seems that images were often enhanced with words: within the context ofthe
mass, or other para-liturgical occasions. Rarely could the imago truly compete with the
imaginative power ofwords or the mind. To complicate matters, I should like to add
that mind, words, and texts, are distinct and different entities, but intricately dependent
on each other, psychologically, as we would call it, creating a complex realm of a
historically changing mode of perception – in fandem with and applied to images.
Fwther on, the medieval imago, the image, is a peculiar and complex phenomenon that
is part – and inseparable, Iogether with the word – of the imaginative realm of the
mind, soul and intellect. This discrepancy between imago and imagination becomes
apparent, for example, in a passage of Angela of Foligno’s (d. 1309) book of the
Believers ‚ True Experience, where she realized that:
Quando transibam iuxta crucem pietarn vel passionem, videbatur michi quod
nichil erat pictum comparatione maxime passionis que facta est ei secundum
veritatem et que fuerat michi ostensa et impressa cordi.5 (My italics)
Or, the function of images, and therefore their message, was deterrnined by the
specifics of their location, and the words, occasionally, and in predeterrnined, fixed
terms, perforrned in front ofthem. To be sure, this does not mean to play down the
importance or docurnentary value of pictures in relation to texts and spoken words, but
just to hint at the complex interactive roles of words and images. 8oth words and
images – and imagination – in my view, worked closely together, for at least most of
the thousand years we call medieval.
A vital change regarding texts, pictures, and a new category of owners occurred
in the outgoing thirteenth and the beginning ofthe fourteenth century. New genres of
5 Liber de vere fidelium experientia ,cited from Georg Weise, Die geistige Welt der Gotik und ihre
Bedeutung für Italien (Deutsche Viertei-Jahresschrift flir Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte,
vol. 25, ed. P. Kluckhahn and E. Rothacker), (Halle/Saale, !939), p. 356, n. 2. See also
Bcatrice Coppini, La scrillura e i/ percorso mistico. II »iiber« di Angela da Foligno (Rome:
Editrice lanua, 1986), passim.
SPOKEN WORDS AND IMAGES 259
private books of prayer, and panel paintings of devotion were illustrated with scenes
of silent devotional reading, emphasizing both the new spiritual role attributed to the
book and to the image. What I refer to, here, is a new kind of supplicatory, meditational
dialogue between the image and its beholder. This dialogue or conversation
consisted in loud or silent contemplation within a private realm, capturing wandering
thoughts, and/or the reiteration of fixed vernacular prayers – while focussing on the
image.
The main stimulus for this development, of course, did not originale in the
picture, but in the mind: regarding new ideas of piety, private life and devotion – and
language, the vernacular – in France and Italy – a true change of paradigms.
Pictures followed suit to mind and language, reluctantly, however, because of
their inherent traditional or canonical structures bound to certain functions and rules
oftheir carriers, and their contextual liturgical roles. This change, in my view, is weil
testified by the Lambeth Apocalypse of around 1260, although outside France, but
intimately related to its culture.6 The handy manuscript was owned by Lady Eleanor
of Quincy, and inspired by her Benedictine monastic advisor (fig. I). Obviously added
later to the Apocalypse, there is a nurober of full page miniatures of less glossy and
expensive quality. Two ofthem are outstanding and foreign within this context. They
reveal the attempt to turn this manuscript into a truly private devotional tool: the
CrucifiXion with St. John ostensively gazing at the reader, and a leaf showing Eleanor
or an allegory of penitence, literally shielding herself against the evil spirits. Only the
latter page bears inscriptions not in Latin, but in vernacular French, whereas all the
other folios that follow the Apocalypse, strangely enough, are void of any textual
comment. Therefore, they are no text illustrations but stand-alone miniatures, comparable
to privately owned panel paintings „“hich came to exist at the time in Italy.
Moreover, their composition is a remarkable mixture between allegorical and narrative
elements that, again, betray their intentional conception and perception as devotional
pictures.
Anyway, this part of the manuscript is a tentative experiment to add strong
personal and private devotional dialogue qualities to an otherwise rather conventional,
biblical repertory. Apart from the Crucifixion and the page depicting the successful
resistance against the devil’s aggression thanks to her virtuous devotion, there are fullpage
portraits of her favourite saints with no accompanying text at all.
Of course, the supplicatory dialogue, i. e. the spoken word or prayer, had to be
added from outside by Eleanor herself, probably guided by the expertise of her
monastic advisor. This part ofthe manuscript reflects the attempt to pictorially achieve
an even more individual devotional dialogue. However, neither do we do know what
Eleanor thought nor what she really said while looking at these pictures which were
not yet rdated to certain hours of prayers, such as in a Book of Hours. 7
6 London, Lambelh Palace Library, MS 209, fol. 48, the Lambeth Apocalypse; sec Suzanne Lcwis,
Reading Images: Narrative Discourse And Reception in the Thirteenth-Centwy 11/uminated
Apocalypse. (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1 995), passim.
1 P. Saenger, „Books ofHours and the Reading Habits ofthe Late Middle Ages.“ Scrittura e Civiltii.
260 JENS T. WOLLESEN
Parallel to these Books ofHours, but pictorially unrelated to this phenomenon,
we witness the equally unique invention and use of privately owned panel paintings
in the outgoing thirteenth centtrry in Italy: private devotional, small single panels,
diptychs, and triptychs.8 lt seems that these privately owned devotional panels became
extremely popular. The most important cause for the triumph of small devotional and
private panel paintings is the contemporary development of private meditative devotion.
The surviving small panels are all anonymous. They are neither signed nor
dated, because they were not made for the type of use that would propagate the reputation,
fame or sake of the soul of their makers within an official or public ( cuJt)
ambience. Equally important is that they did not relate the artists to the proteelive
power ofthe image that they created. One cannot emphasize enough that these small
panels were not fmnly placed within a fixed liturgical, saintly, apothropaic, miracuious
or propagandistic-religious context (church altars), but were – without any liturgical
„detours“ – directly bound to people. These new, privately owned pictures also
reprocessed the images of their authoritative official and liturgical models. In other
words, they were not only adopting the main characteristics and conventional features
of established official imagery – and there was no alternative to that as yet – but they
were adapting them to the personal wishes and needs of the private clientele. The same
buyers then also included devout portraits ofthemselves in the picture, together with
a growing explicit and concrete visual expression oftheir personal pious needs, wishes
and hopes. In modern terms, pictures became truly interactive, functioning as part of
a new visual, personal and devotional dialogue that paved the way for the use of these
images as pictures and not primarily as liturgical tools. These panels not only
introduced a new category of pictures, but far more importantly, point to a new
category of users, private lay men and women. These, to be sure, do not stand at the
very end of an art historical development, as was usually the case in the past, but are
the true catalysts. The panels, by their miniature size alone, escaped the liturgical frame
to become devotional images for both semi-private, monastic groups, and then an
exclusively private civic clientele. Remarkably, this phenomenon is parallelled by contemporary
developments regarding the vernacular language.9 Jf- within the context
9 (1 985), pp. 239-269.
8 My study on this phenomenon entitled HASTEN TO MY AID AND COUNSEL. .. The Answers
0/The Pictures: Private Devotional Panel Painting In ltaly Around 1300. is pending publication
See also Hans Belting, Das Bild und sein Publikum im Mille/alter: Form und Funktionfrüher
Bildtafeln der Passion (Berlin: Gebrüder Mann, 1981 ); Hendrik Willern V an Os (with Eugene
Honee, Hans Nieuwdorp, Bemhard Ridderbos), The Art of Devotion in the Late Middle Ages in
Europe /300-1500 (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1994); Jens T. Wollesen,
“Das bürgerliche ‚Betrachterporträt‘ Ein Beitrag zum Problem der Bildsprache im Medium des
kleinen Privatbildes um 1300,“ Europdi.􀛃che Ku/1St um 1300. Akten des .XXV . internationalen Kongreß
flir Ku11Stgeschichte, ClflA. Vienna 4-10 Sept 1983 (Böhlau: Vienna, 1986), vol. 6., pp. 223-
232, idem, „The Case ofthe Disappeared Stoclet Madonna,“ Pantheon. LVI ( 1 998), pp. 4-9.
9 Forthis issue see Franz Bäum!, „Varieties and Consequences of Medieval Litcraey,“ Speculum,
55 ( I 980), pp. 237-264. Serge Lusignan, Par/er vu/gairement. Les inte//ectue/s et Ia Iangue franr;aise
GI/X X11/e et X/Ve siecles, 2nd ed. (Montreal: Les Presses de I’Universite de Montreal, 1 987),
SPOKEN WORDS AND IMAGES 261
of Books of Hours – the emphasis is on the text or word in conjunction with the
picture, it is here the stand-alone picture that invited for a verbal or oral dialogue.
Many of them show the Virgin and the Christ Child with Passion scenes, such
as the Crucifixion 10 (fig. 2). They could, whenever and wherever required, be pulled
out of their protective leather cases and be contemplated. For that matter, they were
quite different from – if not superior – to what I called the imago or image which only
appeared temporarily within a liturgical, prototypical context.
Their private use – and in particular the issue ofthe complimentary company of
spoken words – was never discussed, and seemed to have been more diverse and
substantial than one would expect. From the Ricordi, a diary written by a certain
Florentine Giovanni di Pagolo Morelli between 1371 and 1444,1l we know that he
used a small panel with the Crucifixion for his devotional practice. Dressed only in a
shirt, with bare head and knees, he would contemplate the image, reflect on his sins,
and burst out in tears in view of Christ’s suffering. 12 After a while, however, he regains
the „allegria“ of his mind, and engages in a mixture of supplications and prayers, citing
psalms, ‚orazioni‘ and laude, ‚con voce pietosamente (compassionately) ordinate,‘ and
then speaks to the picture in his own words. 13 This exercise goes on for some time; he
then touches and k.isses the protagonists ofthe Cruciftxion picture, and, finally, after
passim. Eugenio Savona, Intelletualita e pubblico nell’eta comuna/e (Messina and Florence: Casa
Editrice G. D‘ Anna, 1 979), and, of course, Ernst Robert Curtius, Europäische Literatur und
lateinisches Mitleialter (Bern: A. Francke AG Verlag, 1 948), passim, and esp. pp. 383-388.
10 As an example, I chose the small (Reder) triptych from the Art Museum, Princeton University,
acc. no.: 58-126, gift of Mr. And Mrs. Jacob Reder in memory oftheir son; overall: 42.2 x 52.2
cm. Edward Benjamin Garrison, ltalian Romanesque Panel Painting. An lllustrated Index
(Florence: Olschki, 1949; reprint New York: Hacker Art Books, 1nc., 1 976), no. 303, F1orentine,
dated c. 1260-70
11 Ricordi (Fiorence, Biblioteca Nazionale, Codex Magliabecchiano I1 IV 52, between 1 3 7 1 and
1444). Cited from Collezione in Ventiquatrresimo, eds. E. Cecchii and V. Branca. (Fiorence: Felice
Le Monnier, 1 956), pp. 476 ff.
12 „a ginocchie ignude e ’n camicia, sanza avere sopra alla testa a1cune cosa, colla correggia in collo,
nel mio orazione cosi verso di quello ragguardando, incominciai prima a immaginnare e
ragguardare in me i miei peccati, ne‘ quai duramente vedea avere offeso il Figliuolo di Dio. E
appreso, considerando con quanta dura, acerba e scura passione Yesu Cristo crocifisso, Ia cui
figura ragguradava, avea dal1’eternali pene ricomperato, non pati‘ a‘ miei occhi Lui con durezza
ragguardara, ma, credo per dono di pieta per Lui a me conceduta, i1 cuore e tutti i miei sensi rimossi
a somma tenerezza, per Ii meic occhi il viso di lagrime si bagnava“.
13 „E cosi per ispazio di buon pezzo dimorando, e gia alleggerato Ia debolezza dello ’nteletto, ripreso
buon conforto, con divoti salmi e orazioni al crocifisso Figliuolo di Dio a orare incominciai; e
dopo pi‘ salmi e laude a sua riverenza detti con voce piatosemente ordinata, a Lui pregare
coll’occhio, col cuore e colla mente m’addirizzai, nelle seguenti parole procedendo: 0 santissimo
e sagratissimo Padre, Figliuolo e Spirito Santo, nella cui maesta, divinita e unita allumina e
risprende il Paradiso santo e ‚I mondo uni􀏀erso, concedi al tuo picciolo servo e fedele cristiano
tanto della tua infmita grazia ch’i‘ possa dire a tua laude e riverenza quelle parole Je quai meritino
trapassare dinanzi al tuo cospetto, facendole per tua misericordia favorevoli alla benedetta anima,
delle quale prima dalla tua grazia ricevetti dono, e qualla, come disidera, sia beatificata nel tuo
cospetto.“
262 JENS T. WOLLESEN
making the sign of the cross, retires to bed. 14 This dialogue between picture and
beholder comprehends, at that time, roughly around 1400, imagination, exaltation,
supplication, contemplation, and the spoken word in terms of structured text, and in
his own words, or what Giovanni calls his rozzo parlare. 15
A most interesting and much earlier testimony of this kind of discourse that I
should like to mention here for the sake of both its originality and orality, happened
again in front of a picture of the crucifixus – but now within the confinement of the
Benedictine nunnery of Helfta near Eis leben, Germany. This geographical side step is
inserted here in order to show that this type of vemacular orality was, so it seems,
much more developed north of the Alps, and especially within the context of nunneries
and its visionaries. It is provided by Gertrude of Helfta ( 1256- 1 30 1 /02),16 who,
however, entrusted someone eise to pray for her ante imaginem crucifu:i with the
following words recorded in Latin, as part of her visionary account written post
festum: 17
Per tuu m transvulneratum Cor, transfige, amantissime Domine, cor ejus jacu1us
amoris tui, in taoturn ut nihil terrene continere possit, sed a sola efficacia tuae
divinitatis contieatur … Domine, fateor quod secundum merita mea non sum
digna accipere minimum donorum tuorum; sed tarnen meritis et desiderio
ornnium adstantium supplico Pietatis tuae, ut transfigas cor meum tui amoris
sagitta, etc.
This supplication before the image ofa crucifu:us, in all likelihood, was not spoken in
Latin, but in the vemacular, and therefore reflects an important instance of orality in
taodem with an image araund 1300. However, it remains obscure, towards what kind
of picture Gertrude was directing her prayer, since she only mentions the imago of the
crucifu:us: Since she also mentions that the crucifixus was „in an elevated place,“ one
may assume that she was looking at a sculpted or painted Crucifixion on an elevated
rod beam right in front of an altar.
Back in Italy, one realizes that this discourse was less smooth and eloquent at
that time regarding the new medium of privately owned devotional panel paintings. A
rather peculiar case in point is a small private devotional panel in the Princeton Art
14 „E dette ch’i‘ ebbi Je sopra iscritte orazione, rendendo molte laude a Dio e ai suoi benedetti Santi,
con gran conforto, parendomi dovere essere asaudito, moltissime volte, tenendo nelle braccia Ia
tavola, basciai il Croeifisso e Ia figura della sua Madre e dello Evangelista, e di poi dissi il Taddeo.
E fatto riverenza alle sante merite, mi parti per andare a riposare il corpo; e cosi lieto e pieno di
buona isperanza e di gran eonforto me n“entrai nel mio letto, e fatto mi il segno della croce
m·acconciai per dormire“.
15 „Ma pure, come piaeque a Dio, preso sieurta, istetti fermo; e ragguardando Iei ripiena di tanto
dolore, comineiai a piangcre e in tanta fisima venni, ehe gran pezzo non poterono i miei oeehi
raffrenare. Ma ispirato da Dio, ehe io piangeva Ia salute de‘ peccatori, ripresi cuore e eonforto; e
rasciutti gli occhi e Ia faccia dalle molte lagrime, fattomi il segno della croce, dissi Ia Salve
Regina; e qualla detta, cosi nel mio rozzo parlare incomineiai … “
16 Jeffrey Hamburger, ‚·The Visual and the Visionary: The Image in late Medieval Monastic Devotions,“
Viator 20 ( 1 989), pp. 1 6 1 – 1 82, 172 f.f.
17 Quotcd from Hamburger, „The Visual and the Visionary,“ p. 1 72, n. 52.
SPOKEN WORDS AND IMAGES 263
Museum (24.5 x 1 7.7 cm), again with the Crucifixion (Fig. 3).18 In all like1ihood it was
part of a diptych, is datable between 1 3 1 5 and 1 335, and shows the red letters ECE.
MATER TUA – rather clumsily, it seems – inscribed beneath Christ’s 1eft arm and
directed towards Saint John.
In my opinion, the panel shows a verbal dialogue between Christ and John that
could be read and spoken by the owner of the diptych. lt seems peculiar, however, that
this discourse was not he1d in the vemacular, but in Latin, and that it was not more
explicitly visualized. For exarnple one could imagine Christ’s arm reaching down from
the cross toward his favorite disciple – as shown in a unique Sienese exarnple around
129019 (fig. 4). The on1y insignificant, so it appears, and visual support of Christ’s
words is that his head, usually sunken on the shoulder on Mary’s side, is not depicted
in agony but seems to speak to and is turned toward Saint John. Most likely, then, the
inscription was not just a kind of afterthought in order to make the panel more
attractive, if not more suitable for the devotional dialogue with its owner and client.
Instead, it has to be seen ( or better: read) in conjunction with the extraordinary position
ofChrist’s head. Therefore, text and image in the Princeton Crucifixion are meaningful
derivations of the normal official pictorial scheme. The conventional Crucifixion
theme was manipulated to parallel the message of the inscribed words. Together,
picture and words estab1ish not only a dialogue within the picture, but the more so
between the depicted religious protagonists and the supplicant outside the picture. But
what exactly were the role and the reference ofthese words within the picture and their
echo outside? Were they repeated, or spoken by the beholder as part ofhis devotional
contemplation with this panel? The answer is yes, but has to be significantly qualified.
As far as I can see, the message and the use of this picture was – at least
occasionally – bound to other accompanying textual or oral resources. I would assume
that the diptych’s owner, apart from ad hoc prayers and supplications that carne to
18 Garrison, Index, no. 263. Except for this catalogue enll)‘, this panel is not published or discussed
elsewhere. The Art Museum, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey. lnv. no.: 36-18. Gift
ofMargarct G. Mather. Datable between 1 3 15-1335. Attributcd to „The Speaking Christ Master,“
(Garrison). ltalian, Venetian. Tempera on panel; 24.5 x 17.7 cm. Hinge marks are visible on the
left – therefore this was the right wing of a diptych.
19 Garrison, Index, no. 4 1 1 (232 x 1 1 3 cm). From Colle Val d’Elsa, now in the Pinacoteca of Siena
(no. 3 1 3); Piero Torriti, La pinacoteca nazianale di Siena. I dipinti dal XI! al XV secolo (Genova:
Sagep Editrice, 1980), fig. p. 39, p. 39, no. 3 1 3, dated around 1290. See also Vincent Moleta,
From Sr. Francis to Giollo. The lnjluence ofSt. Francis on Ear/y ltalian Art and Literature (Chicago:
Franciscan Herald Press, 1983), pp. 29 f.; H. V an Os, „St. Francis of Assisi as a second
Christ in early ltalian Painting,“ Simiolus 7 ( 1 975), pp. 3-20, esp. p. 9, fig. 7. To Gabor KJaniczay
I owe the reference to the interesting, but much later picture of Christ conversing with Saint
Hedwig in the Vita Hedvigis ( 1353) in the Hedwig Codex; where: „hymago crucifixi manurn et
brachium [ … ] de ligno crucis absolvens extendensque ipsam benedixit, dicens voce sonora: Udita
est oracio tua et que postulans, impetrabis,“ (Vita Hedvigis 520-52 1). See David Freedberg, The
Power of Images. Studies in the History and Theory of Response (Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press, 1989), pp. 283-343, and in general: Carotine Walker Bynum, „Women Myslies
and Eucharistie Devotion in the Thirteenth Century,“ Women ’s Studies I I ( 1 984), pp.l79-214.
264 JENS T. WOLLESEN
mind, retumed to unillustrated prayer books – or their memorized words and passages
– which would provide a suitable text; those prayers which Ringborn rightly
recognized as a „fundamental accessory.“20 Moreover, this referral to a more organized
and standard form of prayer before or „with“ these or similar panels may be significant
in regard to their function as an important source of indulgences.
What kind of prayers would have been suitable for a similar private devotional
practice? The very popular Obsecro te (I beseech you) and 0 lntemerata (0 Immaculate
Virgin) in many Books ofHours contain passages that could weil be read before
a panel picture such as the Princeton Cruciftxion. Especially the ,Obsecro te‘ illustrates
several important characteristics of late medieval piety, and tri es to create an intimate
relationship with the supernatural person being addressed.21
This intirnate relationship, or the intimate dialogue, launched by the religious
protagonists in these panels‘ pictures, is one of the most important qualities that
privately owned devotional panels could offer. The Obsecro te first concentrates on
Mary, and then focuses on the crucifvcus. The compassionate reflection on the
crucitied Christ is followed by an impatient and quite demanding supplication.22
Manuscripts with this prayer sometimes are accompanied by the picture ofthe Virgin
with the Christ child, and, in some cases, by a „portrait“ of a lay person kneeling and
praying before her.
This would perfectly correspond to the situation ofthe supplicant with a prayer
text in front ofthe panel or diptych in question similar to the before mentioned illumination
with Lady Eleanor de Quincy in the Lambeth Apocalypse (fig. 1 ). This is also
manifest, albeit much later, in an ensemble of a panel and prayer book from the prayer
book of Philip the Good of Burgundy ( 1419-1467). There, he is depicted Iogether with
his son, kneeling and praying from a prayer book topped by a small diptych23 (fig. 5).
20 Sixten Ringbom, lcon 10 Narrative. The Rise of the Dramaric CloseUp in Fifieenth-Century
Devotional Painting (Abo: Abo Akademi, 1 965), p. 30. See also Josef Stadlhuber, „Das Laienstundengebet
vom Leiden Christi in seinem minelalterlichen Fortleben,“ Zeitschrift j1lr Theologie.
72 ( 1950), pp. 282-325, esp. pp. 302 ff. Franz Beringer, S. J., Die Ablässe. ilzr Wesen und Gebrauch,
vol. I (Paderbom: Ferdinand Schöningh. 1921 ), passim. Nikolaus Paulus, Geschichte des
Ablasses im Mittelalter vom Ursprung bis zur Mille des 1-1. Jahrhunderts (Paderbom, 1922).
Further on, Ringbom, lcon to Narrative, 30: „8oth the Gnadenbilder and the images ofindulgence
in some cases adopted identical motifs and pictorial formulas. but the similarity does not end
there. In fact, both represent thc samc trend oflate medicval piety, the tendency, that is, to regard
the devotion in front of an image as an effective rneans of supplication, the efficacy in the one case
consisting of the alleged »authenticity« and miraculous power of the image itself, in the other
being the prospect of salvation offercd by the indulgence which was connected with the irnage.“
21 Roger S. Wieck, Time Sanctified. The Book ofHours in Medieval Art and Life (New York/Baltirnore:
George Braziller, Jnc., in assoc. with the Wallers Art Gallery. Baltimore, 1988), p. 42.
22 Wieck, Time Sanctified, pp. 1 63 f.
23 Otto Pächt (ed.), Die illuminierten Handschriften und lncunabe/n der Osterreichischen Nationalbibliothek.
Fortsetzung des beschre1bende11 Verzeichnisses der illuminierten Handschriften der
Nationalbibliothek in Wien. vol. 6: 0. Pächt, Ulrike Jcnni, Dagrnar Thoss, Flämische Schule, I
(Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen. Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1983), p. 19, figs. 16-2 1 ,
esp. fig. 25; Prayer book i n Vienna, Austrian National Library, Cod. 1 800, fols. lv/2r; from
SPOKEN WORDS Al\D IMAGES 265
This testimony for a facultative connection of a private devotional picture and prayer
book is, of course, rather late; but it refers to the potential, purely pragmatic problern
ofthis context and its unique and noble solution.
After this rather complex prayer encompassing the full spiritual and bodily
realm or welfare ofthe supplicant, the 0 Intemerata prayer focuses on the protagonists
ofthe Crucifixion and Christ’s famous last words as follows:
… thus saying to you, as he was hanging on the cross, ‚Woman, behold thy son,‘
and then to the other, ‚Behold thy mother. ‚ By the sweetness ofhis most sacred
Iove may you be joined by the words of Our Lord as mother and son, you two
to whom I, the sinner, commend my body and soul today and every day, so that
you might be, at every hour and every moment of my life, inside and outside
me, my stea􀁿fast guardians and pious intercessors before God.24
Thus, the popular 0 lntemerata prayer contains exactly the words that are written on
our panel, including the reference to its user. The Princeton Crucifixion, therefore,
testifies for the lJSe of standardized prayers with picture panels as part of private
devotion. Of course, we cannot say whether these prayers – induced by the picture –
were performed aloud or silently – with a prayer book at hand, or the prayer
memorized.
The context of supplicatory text and picture is further evident in a contemporary
portable – most likely privately owned – panel in the Museo Bandini in Fiesole, near
Florence (fig. 6)25. It shows Mary as Regina Coeli, and a male, kneeling supplicant to
her right on a star-studded blue surface. The top horizontal and vertical margins of the
golden background behind them are incised with the following supplicatory prayer:
AVE REGINA M!SERJCHORDIA DI ME MADRE Dl PIATA (PfETA) CHE SON MISERO
SERVO VIRGHO VIRGINIS.
This time, the personal supplication or prayer is literally included in the picture, and
could be read (aloud) as part ofthe devotional practice.
Moreover, the immediate context between seemingly independent private
pictures and prayers is corroborated hy two other examples datable around 1334: the
so-called Opera Madonna in Florence26 (fig. 7), and her fragmented sister panel in
Flanders, c. 1450 ( 1 8.5 x 13 cm). The diptych, according to Pächt, Jenni and Thoss, dates from
ca. 1430, whereas the manuscript is from ca. 1450.
24 Wieck, Time Sanctijied, p. 164.
2s Odoardo H. Giglioli, Catalogo de/le cose d ‚Arte e di Antichita d ‚lta/ia. Fiesoie (Rome, 1 933), pp.
205 f., fig. 6; (54.4 x 30.2 cm, from S. Ansano).
26 Florence, Museo deli’Opera del Duomo, no. 89; ex·cathedral. Catalogo del museo dell ‚Opera del
Duomo, (Florence: Tipografia Barbera, 1904), p. 41 (no. 89), attributed to Taddeo Gaddi; Miklos
Boskovits & Mina Gregori, A Critical and Historical Corpus of Floremine Paillling. The
Fourteenth Century. Bernardo Daddi, His, Shop and Fo/lowing, Section III, vol. IV, (Florence:
Giunti Gruppo Editoriale, 1991), pp. 205-209, pl. XXII. l-5; Wilhelm Suida, , „Studien zur
Trecentomalerei,“ Repertoriumfür Kunstwissenschaft, XXIX ( 1 906), pp. 108-1 17, 1 1 1 ; Mostra
Gio“esca, no. 169, figs. 169 a, b, with Iiterature up to 1937, p. 529. Richard Offuer, A Critical and
Historical Corpus of Floremine Painting. The Fourteenth Century. Sec. m, vols. I-VllJ, (New
York: Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, 1930-1958), III, IV ( 1 934), pp. 50 ff., pls.
266 JENS T. WOLLESEN
Rome, the Magnificat Madonna27 (fig. 8). Both, although for different oeeasions but
related funetions, hold books in their hands. The Opera Madonna’s book on the left
eontains a personal prayer that was verbalized in front of the pieture, whereas her
„Roman sister“, the Magnifieat Madonna to the right, aeeepts a Marian hyrnn, the
Magnificat. Let me frrst foeus the Opera Madonna whieh was presumably part of the
many devotional pietures and altarpieees in Santa Reparata, the eathedral ofFlorenee.
Mary is shown as a half-length figure, neither erowned nor enthroned, with no
Christ ehild on her lap, holding a book in her left hand with a text that reads as follows:
„Dolcissima Vergine Maria dabangnuolo priegovi ehe pr(e)ghiate lui per sua eharita
(e) p(er) Ia sua pote(n)zia mi faeeia gr …. dieio ehe mi fam mestiere.“2
The book is held upside down so that its text ean be read and pronouneed by the
supplieant below. The prayer is written in volgare, just as it probably was aetually
spoken by the Iady in blaek, and therefore eould be understood as weil by the lay
beholder who eould read, but was not familiar with Latin.29 Obviously, she was not
praying for the salvation of her soul, but for heavenly adviee and divine support
XXII, XXII, 1., („close following of Daddi“). Richard Fremantle, Floremine Gothic Painters from
Giotto to Masaccio. A Guide to Painting in and near Florence I 300-1450 (London: Martin Secker
and Warburg, 1975), p. 629, fig. 98, attributes to Bernardo Daddi; Dirk Kocks, „Die
Stifterdarstellung in der italienischen Malerei des 13.- 15. Jahrhundert,“ Ph. D., Diss., University
of Cologne, 1 9 7 1 , pp. 130 f., no. 345; Barbara Greenhause Lane, „The Development of the
Medieval Devotional Figure;‘ Ph. D. Diss., University ofPennsylvania (Ann Arbor: University
Mierefilms 70-25, 675, 1 970), p. 140. The frame is modern, therefore there are no hinge marks
visible on either side of the panel and there is no indication whether originally there were
additional wings or, more probably, shutters attached. See also Klaus Krüger, „Bildandacht und
Bergeinsamkeit Der Eremit als Rollenspiel in der städtischen Gesellschaft,“ in Malerei und
Stadtkultur in der Dantezeit. Die Argumentation der Bilder, ed. Hans Belting and Dieter Blume
(Munich: Hirmer, 1989), pp. 1 87-200, 193 ff.
27 Rome, Pinacoteca Vaticana, inv. no. 174 (cut on all sides, tempera on poplar, 86,7 x 52,6 cm);
Offner, Corpus, lll, IV, p. 544, pl. XXIII, has different measures: 72,5 x 33 cm. For the two panels
with the rnissing saints see Offuer, Corpus, lli, Vlll, pl. XXV, and Boskovits & Gregori, Bernardo
Daddi, section lll, vol. IV, pl. XXIII. l, pp. 205-209; Caroline Feudale, „The lconography ofthe
Madonna del Parto,“ Marsyas, VII ( 1 954-195i), 1957, pp. 8-24, esp. p. I I . Wolfgang Fritz
Volbach, II Trecento. Firenze e Siena. Monumenti musei e gallerie pontificie. Catalogo della
Pinacoteca Vaticana (Cittä.del Vaticano Libreria: Editrice Vaticana, 1987), vol. Tl, p. 30, no. 3 1 ,
fig. 5 7 (71 x 5 3 cm). A similar gesture, probably referring to the picture o f a (lost) supplicant, is
performed by the Madonna with Christ Child in Le Rose ’s church of San Lorenzo (near Tavarnuzze).
See Fremantle, Floremine Gothic Pointers, fig. 1 4 1 , (95 x 60 cm).
28 „Sweetest Virgin Mary ofBagnuolo I ask you to pray to Hirn for His grace and His power !hat He
does (grazia?) to me as concerns my things.“ The best transcription ofthe book’s text is given by
Offner, Corpus, lll, IV ( 1 934), p. 50. See also Suida, „Studien,“ p. l 1 1; Kocks, „Stifterdarstellung,“,
p. 406, no. 345; Giulia Sinibaldi and Giulia Brunetti, Pittura italiana del Duecento e Tre.
Catalogo della mostra giottesca del 1937 (Fiorence: Sansoni, 1 943), p. 529.
29 For the vemacular reading ability of women see Susan Groag Bell, „Medieval Women Book
Owners: Arbiters ofLay Piety and Arnbassadors ofCulture,“ Signs (Journal ofWomen in Culture
and Society), 7 ( 1 982), pp. 742-768. Further on James Westfall Thompson, The Literacy ofthe
Laity in the Middle Ages (Berkeley: University of Califomia Press, 1939), passim, and Franz
Bäum!, „Varieties and Consequences of Medieval Literacy,“ Speculum 55 ( 1 980), pp. 237-264.
SPOKEN WORDS AND IMAGES 267
regarding her worldly and, most likely, her professional concems. It is significant that
the Opera panel records the prayer as a book, or in a book held upside down, therefore
suggesting that it indeed „belongs“ to the supplicant(s).
What remained of the Vatican Magnificat Madonna (right) is – to judge from
the extant evidence – a replica of the Opera panel’s centre. Her book contains the
beginning ofthe following gospel passage:
Magnificat anima mea Dominum: Et exsultavit spiritus meus in Deo salutari
meo. Quia respexit humilitatem ancilla suae 30
However, the Vatican Mary holds the book as ifreading it herself. This is another way
to physically demonstrate the acceptance of the supplication. The text, though, is of a
more official type. To be sure, it is based on a biblical source (Luke I:46-55). More
important is, however, that it is a famous and popular Marian hyrnn, the Magnificat
(anima mea), or the Cantieie ofthe Virgin which is an important part of the Officium
or Hours ofthe Virgin, and the Office ofthe Dead in Books of Hours.31
Both pictures are fairly unique, as far as we know. In both cases, the Madonnas
present texts as books, one containing an unconventional and personal supplication
(Museo dell’Opera), the other one (Vatican) a Marian hyrnn.
A fairly !arge number of French manuscripts also shows the owner of the
devotional manuscript with the same book right in front of a picture that is part of the
same book. Similarly, in Italy, the owners of these panels also „enter“ the picture,
always depicted as a kneeling and praying supplicant, but never with a book in their
hands, because it is not an integral and formal part of the devotional, supplicatory
practice of this medium. In this respect, the panel picture becomes indeed a kind of
mirror, reflecting the supplicant and the actual supplicatory dialogue. The Book of
Hours never took root in Italy compared with its great popularity in France. lt seems
that the owners of these Italian panels were less dependent on similarly established
texts, but relied more on an oral tradition, or memory,32 when it came to cite
appropriate words of prayer, supplication or intercession.
In sum, I would suggest that the messages ofthe new devotional pictures in Italy
around 1300 and little later were significantly enhanced by words – although less
eloquently as compared with northem examples ofthe same time – performed spoken
or silently, from an ad hoc mind, or according to more structured vemacular prayers,
and hymns. To be sure, the visual message, i. e. the picture, was as yet neither as
imaginative as the believing mind, nor as eloquent as the spoken word. It seems that
30 Luke I, 44 ff.
31 Wieck, Time Sanctified, pp. 166 f.; Franz Unterkircher, Das Stundenbuch des Mittelalters (Graz:
Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 1985), pp. 120, 153.
3 2 Suzannr Lewis, Reading Images, pp. 242 ff. („Memory was supplied by the imagination, the
irnage-making faculty ofthe mind and the sensitive part ofthe soul that is imprinted with sense
irnpressions“); Mary J. Carruthers, The Book of Memory. A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), pp. 122-155. Frances A. Yates, The Art of
Memory (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1966), pp. 61, 70 f. , 77, and passim; see also Helga
Hajdu, Das mnemotechnische Schrifttum des Mittelalters (Vienna: Franz Leo, 1 936), pp. 61-65.
268 JENS T. WOLLESEN
the picture, apart from its (limited) emotional-devotional impact, triggered those words
which would be drawn from memory, or (memorized) vernacular prayer repertory. The
same words also would influence the picture’s composition – resulting in the visual
presence ofthe supplicant in the picture.
No doubt, the pictures discussed here mark the beginning of a profound change
of paradigms regarding this intricate context: the development from images to phantasmata
(Thomas Aquinas), metaphorica, or imagines agentes (Albertus Magnus)33 – i.
e. to pictures, and the gradual emancipation of the imagination – and therefore of the
picture – from structured, established prayers to more vernacular oral supplications.34
33 Lewis, Reading Images. pp. 242 ff.
34 See also Hamburger, „The Visual and the Visionary,“ pp. 172 f.
SPOKEN WORDS AND IMAGES 269
Fig. I : London, Lambeth Palace Library, MS 209, fol. 48, the Lambeth Apocalypse. Lady Eleanor
de Quincy kneeling and praying before the Virgin with Child; photo: museum. From: Ruth Menler,
Nigel Morgan, and Michelle Brown, Die Lamberh Apoca/ypse (Stungart: Verlag Müller &
Schindler), facsimile vol., fol. 48.
270 JENS T. WOLLESEN
Fig. 2: Princeton, N. J., Princeton University Art Museum (acc. no. 58-126). The Princeton
(Reder) Madonna; photo: museuro
SPOKEN WORDS AND IMAGES
Fig. 3: Princeton, N. J., the Art Museum, Princeton University (no. 36-18);
panel with the crucifixion, gift ofMargaret G. Mather; photo: museum.
271
272 JENS T. WOLLESEN
Fig. 4 : Siena, Pinacoteca no. 3 1 3, Franciscan Vita panel, detail: St. Francis before Christ; photo:
Alinari. From: Hellmut Hager, Die Anfänge des italienischen Altarbildes. Untersuchungen zur
Entstehungsgeschichte des toskonischen Hochaltarretabels. Römische Forschungen der Bibliotheca
Hertziana, XVII (Munich: Anton Sehroll & Co., 1962), fig. 136.
SPOKEN WORDS AND IMAGES 2 73
Fig. 5: Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. 1800, fols. lr-2v, Prayer Book of Philip the
Good ofBurgundy, Philip the Good and his son Count of Charolais praying before an altar topped
by a diptych; from: Otto Pächt, ed., Die illuminierten Handschriften und Incunabeln der Osterreichischen
Nationalbibliothek, Fortsetzung des beschreibenden Verzeichnisses der illuminierten
Handschriften der Nationalbibliothek in Wien, vol. 6: 0. Pächt, Ulrike Jenni, Dagmar Thoss, Flämische
Schule, I. Österreichische Akademie de􀀸 Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Klasse, Denkschriften,
vol. 160. Veröffentlichung der Kommission ftir Schrift- und Buchwesen des Mittelalters, Reihe I,
vol. 6 (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1983 ). Fig. 1 9.
274 JENS T. WOLLESEN
Fig. 6: Florence, Fiesole, Museo Bandini,
Madonna del Parto panel with supplicant; supplicant; photo: Wollesen.
SPOKEN WORDS AND IMAGES 275
Fig. 7: Florence, Museo dell’Opera. The Madonna dell’Opera(before restoration); from: Giulia
Sinibaldi & Giulia Brunetti, Pittura ita/iana del Duecento e Trecento. Catalogo della mostra
giollesca de/ 1937 (Florence: Sansoni, 1943), fig. 89.
276 JENS T. WOLLESEN
Fig. 8: Rome, Pinacoteca Vaticana, (formerly no. 90, now no. 1 74), the Magnificat Madonna; from:
Richard Offner, A Critical and Historical Corpus of Floremine Painting. The Fourteenth Century,
sec. lll, vol. IIIIIV (New York: Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, 1930-1958), pl. XXIJI.
ORAL HISTORY OF THE MIDDLE AGES
THE SPOKEN WORD IN CONTEXT
Edited by Gerhard Jaritz and Michael Richter
MEDIUM AEVUM QUOTIDIANUM
SONDERBAND XII
=
CEU MEDIEV ALIA
VOLU1vfE 3
Oral History of the Middle Ages
The Spoken W ord in Context
Edited by Gerhard Jaritz and Michael Richter
Krems and Budapest 200 1
GEDRUCKT MIT UNTERSTÜTZUNG DER ABTEILUNG
KULTUR UND WISSENSCHAFT DES AMTES
DER NIEDERÖSTERREICIDSCHEN LANDESREGIERUNG
niederästerreich kultur
copy editor: Judith Rasson
Cover illustration: The wife of Potiphar covets Joseph: “ … erat autem Joseph pulchra facie et
decorus apectu: post multos itaque dies iecit domina oculos suis in Ioseph et ait donni mecum.“
(“ … And Joseph was (a] goodly fperson], and weil favoured. And it came to pass after these
things, that his master’s wife cast her eyes upon Joseph; and she said, Lie with me. „), Gen. 39:
6-7 (KJV). Concordantiae Caritatis, c. 1350. Cistercian abbey of Lilienfeld (Lower Austria), ms
151, fol. 244v (detail). Photo: Institut fiir Realienkunde des Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit
(Krems an der Donau).
Alle Rechte vorbehalten
– ISBN 3-90 Hl94 15 6 (Krems)
All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any
form or by any means, without the permission of the Publishers.
Published by:
and
– ISBN 963 9241 64 4 (Budapest)
-ISSN 1587-6470 CEU MEDIEVALIA
Medium Aevum Quotidianum. Gesellschaft zur Erforschung
der materiellen Kultur des Mittelalters, Körnermarkt 13, A-
3500 Krems. Austria,
Department ofMedieval Studies, Centrat European University,
Nador utca 9, H-1051 Budapest, Hungary.
Printed by Printself, Budapest.
Table of Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ……………………….. 7
Michael RICHTER, Beyond Goody and Grundmann ………. . . . . . . ………. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I
Tom PETTIIT, Textual to Oral: the Impact ofTransmission
on Narrative Word-Art …………………………………………………………………….. 1 9
Elöd NEMER!<.ENYI, Fictive Audience. The Second Person Singular in the Deliberatio ofBishop Gerard of Csanäd …………………………………………….. 3 9 Katalin SZENDE, Testaments and Testimonies. Orality and Literacy in Composing Last Wills in Late Medieval Hungary ……………………………. 49 Anna ADAMSKA, The Kingdom of Po land versus the Teutonic Knights: Oral Traditions and Literale Behaviour in the Later Middle Ages …………… 67 Giedre MICKÜNAITE, Ruler, Protector, and a Fairy Prince: the Everlasting Deeds of Grand Duke Vytautas as Related by the Lithuanian Tatars and Karaites ………………………………… 79 Yurij Zazuliak, Oral Tradition, Land Disputes, and the Noble Community in Galician Rus‘ from the 1440s to the 1 460s ……………………………………… 88 Nada ZECEVIC, Ai􀃭tc; yA.uKeia. The Importance ofthe Spoken Word in the Public Affairs ofCarlo Tocco (from the Anonymous Chronaca dei Tocco di Cefalonia) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 108 lohn A. NICHOLS, A Heated Conversation: Who was Isabel de Aubigny, Countess of Arundel? …………………………… 1 1 7 Tracey L. BILADO, Rhetorical Strategies and Legal Arguments: ‚Evil Customs‘ and Saint-Florent de Saumur, 979- 1 0 1 1 …………………….. 1 28 Detlev KRAACK, Traces of Orality in Written Contexts. Legal Proceedings and Consultations at the Royal Court as Reflected in Documentary Sources from l21h-century Germany ……… 1 42 6 Maria DOBOZY, From Oral Custom to Written Law: The German Sachsenspiegel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 Martha KEIL, Rituals of Repentance and Testimonies at Rabbinical Courts in the 151h Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 64 Michael GOODICH, The Use of Direct Quotation from Canonization Hearing to Hagiographical Vita et Miracula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 77 Sylvia ScHEIN, Bemard of Clairvaux ’s Preaching of the Third Crusade and Orality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ….. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 Michael BRAUER, Obstades to Oral Communication in tbe Mission offriar William ofRubruck among the Mongois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196 Elena LEMENEVA, From Oral to Written and Back: A Sermon Case Study . . . . . . . . 203 Albrecht CLASSEN, Travel, Orality, and the Literary Discourse: Travels in the Past and Literary Travels at the Crossroad of the Oral and the Literary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 217 Ulrich MÜLLER and Margarete SPRJNGETH, “Do not Shut Your Eyes ifYou Will See Musical Notes:“ German Heroie Poetry („Nibelungenlied“), Music, and Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 Jolanta SZPILEWSKA, Evoking Auditory Imagination: On the Poetics of Voice Production in The Story ofThe Glorious Resurrection ofOur Lord (c. 1580) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 Jens T. WOLLESEN, SpokenWords and Images in Late Medieval Italian Painting . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 257 Gerhard JARTTZ, Images and the Power of the Spoken Word . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277 List of Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 Preface Oral culture played an instrumental role in medieval society.1 Due to the Iack of any direct source evidence, however, research into the functions and importance of oral communication in the Middle Ages must confront a number of significant problems. Only indrect traces offer the opportunity to analyze phenomena that were based on or connected with the spoken word. The ‚oral history‘ of the Middle Ages requires the application of different approaches than dealing with the 201h or 2 151 century. For some decades Medieval Studies have been interested in questions of orality and literacy, their relationship and the substitution of the spoken by the written word2 Oral and literate culture were not exclusive and certainly not opposed to each other.3 The ‚art of writing‘ was part of the ‚ars rhetorica‘ and writing makes no sense without speech.4 Any existing written Statement should also be seen as a spoken one, although, clearly, not every oral Statement as a written one. Authors regularly wrote with oral delivery in mind. ‚Speaking‘ and ‚writing‘ are not antonyms. It is also obvious that „the use of oral conununication in medieval society should not be evaluated … as a function of culture populaire vis-a-vis culture savante but, rather, of thc communication habits and the tendency of medieval man 1 For the late Middle Ages and the early modern period, cf. Willern Frijhoff, „Communication et vie quotidienne i1 Ia fin du moyen äge et a l’epoque moderne: reflexions de theorie et de methode,“ in Kommunialion und Alltag in Spätmillefalter und fniher Neuzeit, ed. Helmut Hundsbichler (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1992), p. 24: „La plupart de gens vivait encore pour l’essentiel dans une culture orale et !es procedes d’appropriation des idCes passaient de prefcrence par Ia parolc dite et ecoutee, quand bien memc on ctait capable d’une Ieelure visuelle plus ou moins rudimentaire.“ 2 See Marco Mostert, „New Approaches to Medieval Communication?“ in New Approaches to Medieval Communication. ed. Marco Mostert (Tumhout: Brepols, 1999), pp. 15-37; Michael Richter, “Die Entdeckung der ‚Oralität‘ der mittelalterlichen Gesellschaft durch die neuere Mediävistik,“ in Die Aktualität des Miue/alters, ed. Hans-Werner Goetz (Bochum: D. Winkler, 2000), pp. 273-287. 3 Peter Burke calls the constrnct of „oral versus literate“ useful but at the same time dangerous: idem, „Mündliche Kultur und >Druckkultur< im spätmittelalterlichen Italien,“ in Volkskultur des europäischen Spätmittelalters, eds. Peter Dinzelbacher and Hans-Dieter Mück (Stuttgart: Alfred Kröner Verlag, 1987), p. 60. 4 Michael Clanchy, „lntroduction,“ in New Approaches to Medieval Communication. ed. Marco Mostert (Tumhout: Brepols, 1999), p. 6. 8 to share his intellectual experiences in the corporate framework.“5 Oral delivery was not „the sole prerogative of any socioeconomic class. „6 For all these reasons, it is important to analyze the extent of and context, in which ’speech acts,‘ auditive effects, and oral tradition occur in medieval sources .7 Research into the use of the spoken word or references to it in texts and images provides new insight into various, mainly social, rules and pattems of the communication system. 1t opens up additional approaches to the organization and complexity of different, but indispensably related, media in medieval society, and their comparative analysis.8 The spoken word is connected with the physical presence of its ’sender.‘ Speech may represent the authenticity of the given message in a more obvious way than written texts or images. Therefore, the use of ’speech acts‘ in written or visual evidence also has to be seen in context with the attempt to create, construct, or prove authenticity. Moreover, spoken messages contribute to and increase the lifelikeness of their contents, which may influence their perception by the receiver, their efficacy and success. Being aware of such a situation will have led to the explicit and intended use and application of the spoken word in written texts and images- to increase their authenticity and importance, too. lf one operates with a model of ‚closeness‘ and ‚distance‘ of communication with regard to the Ievel of relation of ’senders‘ and ‚receivers,‘ then the ’speech acts‘ or their representation have to be seen as contributors to a ‚closer‘ connection among the participants of the communication process.9 At the same time, however, Speech might be evaluated as less official. One regularly comes across ‚oral space‘ 5 Sophia Menache, The Vox Dei. Commwzication in the Middle Ages (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), p. 19. 6 Ibidem, p. 21. Cf. also Jan-Dirk Müller, „Zwischen mündlicher Anweisung und schrifilicher Sicherung von Tradition. Zur Kommunikationsstruktur spätmittelalterlicher Fechtbücher,“ in Kommunikation und Alltag in Spätmittelalter und früher Neuzeit, ed. Helmut Hundsbichler (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1992), p. 400: „Offensichtlich sind schriftliche und nichtschriftliche Tradierung von Wissen weiterhin relativ unabhängig voneinander, nachdem die Schrift längst dazu angesetzt hat, lnseln der Mündlichkeil oder praktisch-enaktiver Wissensvermittlung zu erobem. Die Gedächtnisstütze kann die Erfahrung nicht ersetzen, sendem allenfalls reaktivieren. Sie ist sogar nur verständlich, wo sie auf anderweitig vermittelte Vorkenntnisse stößt.“ 7 􀆿f. W.F.H. Nicolaisen, ed., Oral Tradition in the Middle Ages (Binghamton: Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 1995). 8 See, esp., Horst Wenzel, Hören und Sehen, Schrift und Bild. K ultur und Gedächtnis im Mittelalter (Munich: C.H. Beck, 1995), passim. 9 See also Siefan Sonderegger, „>Gesprochen oder nur geschrieben?< Mündlichkeil in mittelalterlichen
Texten als direkter Zugang zum Menschen,“ in Homo Medietas. Aufsätze zu Religiosität,
Literatur und Denkformen des Menschen vom Mittelalter bis in die Neuzeit. Festschrift
for Alois Maria Haas zum 65. Geburtstag, eds. Claudia Brinker-von der Heyde and
Niklaus Largier (Bem e\ al.: Peter Lang, 1999), p. 665: „Jedenfalls darf man sich bewußt bleiben,
daß auch in den Texten des deutschen Mittelalters die Reflexe gesprochener Sprache eine
bedeutende Schicht ausmachen, die besonders dann immer wieder hervortritt, wenn es um
einen direkten Zugang zum Menschen geht, um einVerstehen aus unmittelbarer Partnerschaft
heraus … “
9
that has become institutionalized or more official by the application of ‚written
space.‘ 10 Simultanous employment of such different Ievels and qualities of
messages must often have had considerable influence on their efficacy.11
The papers in this volume are the outcome of an international workshop that
was held in February, 2001, at the Department ofMedieval Studies, Central European
University, Budapest. Participants concentrated on problems of the occurrence,
usage, and pattems of the spoken word in written and visual sources of the
Middle Ages. They dealt with the roJe and contents of direct and indirect speech in
textual evidence or in relation to it, such as chronicles, travel descriptions, court
and canonization protocols, sermons, testaments, law-books, literary sources,
drama, etc. They also tried to analyze the function of oral expression in connection
with late medieval images.
The audiovisuality of medieval communication processes12 has proved to be
evident and, thus, important for any kind of further comparative analysis of the
various Ievels of the ‚oral-visual-literate,‘ i.e. multimedia culture of the Middle
Ages. Particular emphasis has to be put on methodological problems, such as the
necessity of interdisciplinary approaches,13 or the question of the extent to which
we are, generally, able to comprehend and to decode the communication systems
of the past.14 Moreover, the medievalist does not come across any types of sources
in which oral communication represents the main concem.15 lnstead, she or he is
confronted, at first glance, with a great variety of ‚casual‘ and ‚marginal‘ evidence.
We would like to thank all the contributors to the workshop and to this
volume. Their cooperation made it possible to publish the results of the meeting in
the same year in which it took place. This can be seen as a rare exception, at least
in the world of the historical disciplines. The head, faculty, staff, and students of
the Department of Medieval Studies of CentTal European University offered
various help and support. Special thanks go to Judith Rasson, the copy editor of
10 This, e.g., could be weil shown in a case study on thc pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela:
Friederike Hassauer, „Schriftlichkeit und Mündlichkeil im Alltag des Pilgers am Beispiel der
Wallfahrt nach Santiago de Compostela,“ in Wallfahrt und Alltag in Mittelalter und früher
Neuzeit, eds. Gerhard Jaritz and Barbara Schuh (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie
der Wissenschaften, 1992), pp. 277-316.
11 Cf. Bob Scribner, „Mündliche Kommunikation und Strategien der Macht in Deutschland im
16. Jahrhundert,“ in Kommunikation und Alltag in Spätmittelalter und früher Neuzeit, ed.
Helmut Hundsbichler (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften,
1992), pp. 183-197.
12 Wenzel, Hören rmd Sehen, p. 292.
13 Cf. Ursula Schaefer, „Zum Problem der Mündlichkeit,“ in Modernes Miuelalter. Neue Bilder
einer populären Epoche, ed. Joachim Heinzle (Frankfurt am Main and Leipzig: Insel Verlag,
1994), pp. 374 f.
14 Frijhoff, „Communication et vie quotidienne,“ p. 25: „Sommes-nous encore en mesure de
communiquer avec Ja communication de jadis?“
1􀅄 Michael Richter, Sprache und Gesellschaft im Mittelalter. Untersuchungen zur mündlichen
Kommunikation in England von der Mit te des elften bis zu Beginn des vierzehnten Jahrhunderts
(Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann, 1979), p. 22.
10
this volume, who took particluar care with the texts of the many non-native
speakers fighting with the pitfalls of the English language.
Budapest, Krems, and Constance
December 200 I
Gerhard Jaritz and Michael Richter