Viewer an Imagined Spiritual Journey of St
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Florida State University Libraries Honors Theses The Division of Undergraduate Studies 2015 The Unidentified Blazonry of St. Margaret's Shoe Reliquary Jasmine Van Weelden Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF FINE ARTS THE UNIDENTIFIED BLAZONRY OF ST. MARGARET’S SHOE RELIQUARY By JASMINE VAN WEELDEN A Thesis submitted to the Department of Art History in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with Honors in the Major Degree Awarded: Spring, 2015 The members of the Defense Committee approve the thesis of Jasmine Van Weelden defended on April 3, 2015. Dr. Doron Bauer Thesis Director Dr. Geoffrey Thomas Outside Committee Member Dr. Lynn Jones Committee Member 2 ABSTRACT THE UNIDENTIFIED BLAZONRY OF ST. MARGARET’S SHOE RELIQUARY by Jasmine Van Weelden The Florida State University, 2015 Under the Supervision of Dr. Doron Bauer The Shoe Reliquary from the Cloisters Collection is a leather-and-iron reliquary shaped in the form of a shoe. Believed to have once held the relic of St. Margaret of Antioch’s foot, the decorative program embossed and tooled into the leather features eleven scenes of the saint’s legend, as well as four unidentified coats of arms. Since the twelfth century, the practice of blazoning arms has produced specific heraldic terms, guidelines, and orders of standard for creating and describing coats of arms. The combination of tinctures (colors) used in a heraldic design was crucial to the construction of authentic armorial devices. Since the original tinctures used on the Shoe’s coats of arms are now lost, it is nearly impossible to reconstruct their original appearance. Although the Shoe’s coats of arms contain several formal heraldic elements seen in authentic armorial devices, certain features in their designs imply a striking resemblance to decorative coats of arms used in Limoges enameled works. Decorative arms intentionally did not follow the established guidelines of heraldry in order to produce ornamental designs. I will argue that it is evident the Shoe Reliquary’s armorial devices were used for decorative purposes that were not attributed to a specific family or institution. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures……………………………….…………………………………………………….5 Introduction…………………………………………………………...…………………..……….8 Chapter 1: Background Information……...…………………………………...……..………..…10 The Legend of Saint Margaret………...…………………………………………...…….10 The Art and Science of Blazonry………………...………………………………..…..…12 The Shoe Reliquary’s Coats of Arms………………………………………...…......……15 Coat of Arms #1………………………………………….……….………..…….16 Coat of Arms #2……………………..……………………...…………...…….…18 Coat of Arms #3…………………….……………………………………...…….19 Coat of Arms #4…………………………………………………..……………...20 Chapter 2: Analysis and Results…………………………………………………….………...…21 Patronage in the Middle Ages……………………………………………………………21 Patronage Historical Information Results……………………………………..…22 Decorative Coats of Arms………………………………………………………………..23 Decorative Coats of Arms Results……………………………………………….25 Images in the Style of Limoges and Illustrated Manuscripts………….…25 Tinctures…………………………………………………………………27 Figural Charges and Geometric Patterns for Field Designs……………...28 Non-enameled……………………………………………….……...…....31 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………….33 References………………………………………………………………………………………..36 Appendix A: Glossary of Blazon…………………………..……………....…..…………..…….38 Appendix B: Figures...………………………………..………...………………………...……...41 4 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: Shoe Reliquary, ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 2: Shoe Reliquary, opened, ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 3: Shoe Reliquary, back, ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 4: Shoe Reliquary, side, ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 5: Shoe Reliquary, back, first scene of St. Margaret’s legend, ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 6: Shoe Reliquary, right side, second scene of St. Margaret’s legend, ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 7: Shoe Reliquary, right side, third scene of St. Margaret’s legend, ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 8: Shoe Reliquary, front, fourth scene of St. Margaret’s legend, ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 9: Shoe Reliquary, right, fifth scene of St. Margaret’s legend, ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 10: Shoe Reliquary, right, sixth through eighth scene of St. Margaret’s legend, ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 11: Shoe Reliquary, back, ninth scene of St. Margaret’s legend, ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). 5 FIGURE 12: Shoe Reliquary, top, tenth and eleventh scene of St. Margaret’s legend, ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 13: Illustration of imaginary coat of arms. From: Carl-Alexander von Volborth, Heraldry: Customs, Rules and Styles (Poole: Blandford Press, 1983), viii. FIGURE 14: Examples of field divisions. From: Carl-Alexander von Volborth, Heraldry: Customs, Rules and Styles (Poole: Blandford Press, 1983), 16. FIGURE 15: Examples of geometric ordinaries. From: Carl-Alexander von Volborth, Heraldry: Customs, Rules and Styles (Poole: Blandford Press, 1983), 17. FIGURE 16: Example of marks of cadency within a family. From: Michel Pastoureau, Heraldry: An Introduction to a Noble Tradition (London: Thames and Hudson Ltd., 1997), 76 FIGURE 17: Shoe Reliquary, right side, Coat of Arms #1 (CoA #1), ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 18: Shoe Reliquary, left side, Coat of Arms #2 (CoA #2), ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 19: Example of marks of cadency within the fifteenth-century Count of Harcourt’s family. From: Carl-Alexander von Volborth, Heraldry: Customs, Rules and Styles (Poole: Blandford Press, 1983), 76. FIGURE 20: Shoe Reliquary, back, Coat of Arms #3 (CoA #3), ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 21: Shoe Reliquary, top, Coat of Arms #4 (CoA #4), ca. 1350-1400, leather & iron. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art). FIGURE 22: Reliquary with the Man of Sorrows, detail, 1347-49, gilded silver, champlevé enamel, & glass paste. (Photo: The Walters Art Museum, Baltimore). 6 FIGURE 23: Reliquary Arm of Saint Louis of Toulouse, detail, 1336-38, gilded silver, basse-taille enamels on silver, & rock crystal. (Photo: Musée du Louvre, Paris). FIGURE 24: Heraldic Casket of Saint. Louis, 1234-7, multimedia coffer. (Photo: Musée du Louvre, Paris). FIGURE 25: Applique From A Casket With A Coat of Arms, 13th century, partially gilt and champlevé enameled copper. (Photo: Sotheby’s, London). FIGURE 26: Pyxis, second half 13th century, partially gilt and champlevé enameled copper. (Photo: Sotheby’s, London). FIGURE 27: Morse, 1325-1350, champlevé enamel on gilt copper. (Photo: The Walters Art Museum, Baltimore). FIGURE 28: Angel Carrying a Crown, ca. 1230-50, repoussé, engraved, chased, and gilt copper. (Photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York). FIGURE 29: Chrismatory, c. 1200, copper and champlevé enamel. From: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Enamels of Limoges: 1100-1350 (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1996), 255. FIGURE 30: Lover Looking Into a Fountain, Egerton 881 f. 11v, c. 1380, illuminated manuscript. (Photo: The British Library, London). FIGURE 31: The Church Militant, Velislav Picture Bible, c. 1340, illuminated manuscript, (Photo: National Library, Prague). 7 Introduction The Shoe Reliquary (c.1350-1400), from the Cloisters Collection, is a leather and iron reliquary case from the late medieval period (fig.1). Measuring slightly over eleven inches long and five inches high, a large iron hinge connects the two halves of the reliquary, along with an iron bar that wraps around the heel and joins the hinge to the latch on the opposite side.1 Believed to have once held a relic of St. Margaret of Antioch, who is the patron saint of pregnancy and childbirth, the Shoe Reliquary features two motifs in its decorative program: a visual narrative of St. Margaret’s legend, and four coats of arms.2 Formed over a wooden core, the tooled and embossed leather overlay creates a hollow, shoe-shaped case for the relic (fig.2). This overlay includes eleven embossed and painted scenes of St. Margaret’s legend - most framed in gothic trefoil arches – and constitute the majority of the surface decorations. In addition, tooled sections of foliage are placed between each scene, which divide the narrative and guide the eye upward towards the four unidentified coats of arms. The Shoe Reliquary’s four coats of arms are also quite sizable within the decorative program, occupying roughly a third of the decorations on the Shoe’s posterior section. Each measures approximately 1.5 inches high, and all are situated on the three sides of the heel and at the top of the shoe (figs.3-4). This prominence may lead one to naturally assume these have been used to indicate the patronage of the reliquary since, like a person’s signature, a coat of arms is a unique, visual documentation that signifies a specific owner (e.g., a family member, a guild, or a town).3 This