Mary of Guelders and Her Book Prolegomena to the Study of a Remarkable Manuscript
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
JOANKA VAN DER LAAN Mary of Guelders and her Book Prolegomena to the study of a remarkable manuscript Arichlyilluminateddevotionalmanuscript,datingfromthefirsthalfofthe fifteenthcentury,commissionedandownedbyaduchessofGuelders,containing alargenumberofminiaturesandsomeunusualtextselections. Reading this, it is easy to assume we are talking about one of the best-known manuscripts from the Middle Ages, the Hours of duchess Catherine of Cleves (ca. 1440).1 Only a few people know that there is a second manuscript that fits this description, the prayer book of duchess Mary of Guelders (1415 and ca. 1423-1426). This book, comprising a total of 619 folios, divided into two volumes, one in Berlin and one in Vienna,2 with rich border decoration throughout most of the manuscript, 6 full-page miniatures, 86 half-page miniatures, an illustrated calendar, numerous drolleries and an unusual selection of texts, can hardly be described as unknown, but it has thus far escaped the ample attention given to its famous younger coun- terpart. One of the reasons for this is the fact that the main part of the book, cur- rently in Berlin, has been taken out of its binding a few decades ago for reasons of conservation and is too fragile to be studied.3 Luckily, since high-quality digital images of the entire book – both the Berlin and Vienna parts – were avail- ¶ The research presented in this article has been made possible through the Gerard Brom CRM Humanities grant awarded by the Radboud University, under the supervision of prof. dr. Johan Oosterman. The development of this research into the current essay was finished during the first months of my current PhD-project TextsinAction:PerformativeReading, partoftheprojectCitiesofReaders:ReligiousLiteraciesintheLongFifteenthCentury, supervised by prof. dr. Sabrina Corbellini and prof. dr. Bart Ramakers (University of Groningen) and funded by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO). I thank Kathryn Rudy and Johan Oosterman for their role in developing and discussing the ideas forming the basis for this article, and Miranda Bloem, Rob Dückers, Sabrina Corbellini, Bart Ramakers and the two anonymous reviewers of OnsGeestelijkErf for commenting on earlier drafts. 1 New York, The Morgan Library & Museum, MS M.917 and M.945. 2 The largest part, 482 folios, is in Berlin, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, MS Germ. qu. 42. The remaining 137 folios are Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. 1908. I will refer to these manuscripts as Berlin and Vienna, respectively. In both manuscripts leaves have been lost, so originally the manuscripts had even more leaves, which suggests that the book may have been divided in an earlier stage too, although in a different way. See also the appendix and below in the section about the portrait of Mary of Guelders. 3 On 23 February 2015, the 600th anniversary of Mary’s prayer book, a crowdfunding pro- ject was initiated by prof. dr. Johan Oosterman at the Radboud University in Nijmegen for restoration of the Berlin part in order to make it accessible for research and display. The first goal of raising € 25.000 was achieved in a few months. In the summer of 2015, a team of experts has started the technical analysis of the book in order to find out more about the cause of the damage. The restoration of the Berlin prayer book is scheduled to be finished OnsGeestelijkErf 86(3), 178-218. doi: 10.2143/OGE.86.3.3154601 © Ons Geestelijk Erf. All rights reserved. MARY OF GUELDERS AND HER BOOK 179 able, it has been possible to study various aspects of the book. Preliminary research of these images has led to this article, in which I will discuss the current state of research on the manuscript. First, I will present a brief history of the scholarship on the prayer book, to set a context for current research. I will proceed by discussing the information available about its first patron, Mary of Guelders, and provide a short outline of the book. Then I will examine both some current art historical and textual issues and discuss the categorisation of the book. In the final two parts of the article I will first contextualise these topics within the devo- tional culture of the early fifteenth century and then suggest lines for further research on the book. Although art historical questions concerning the book will be discussed, the focus of this study will be on the so-far unexplored book his- torical and devotional context of the book. HISTORIOGRAPHY Art historians have been aware of the existence of the prayer book since at least 1850, but up until the 1960s the research investigation of the manuscript was limited to the Berlin part,4 which contains all the miniatures, therefore receiving attention in most discussions of the history of art of this region and time period. The first publications that discuss the prayer book date from the middle of the nineteenth century. Early German scholarship was mainly concerned with the description of the history of painting and book illumination and discusses the miniatures in the prayer book in relation to the development of a specific style of the ‘school of Cologne.’5 The first one in Dutch scholarship to discuss the book is W. Moll in a short note in the Kunstbode of 30 March 1874. Moll had read about the book in the work of C. Schnaase.6 Working from Schnaase’s description of Mary’s book, in 2016. An exhibition is planned for 2018-2019 at Museum Het Valkhof in Nijmegen. For news and regular updates on the project, see the website www.mariavangelre.nl. 4 The similarities between the Berlin and Vienna manuscripts had already been noticed earlier than the 1960s, as becomes clear from an inscription in the Vienna manuscript on one of the paper leafs at the beginning (not part of the foliation). This inscription is signed R.B., the initials of Rudolf Beer, who was, as P.J.H. Vermeeren points out, the head of the manuscript department at the library in Vienna from 1901 until 1913 (“Kodikologische Notizen zum Gebetbuch der Herzogin Maria von Geldern,” in RheinundMaas,Kunstund Kultur800-1400,2:Berichte,BeiträgeundForschungenzumThemenkreisderAusstellung unddesKatalogs(Cologne, 1973), 474). However, in scholarship and exhibitions the man- uscripts appear together only since the 1960s. See for example EuropäischeKunstum1400 (1962), the catalogue of an exhibition where the two manuscripts were displayed together. 5 G.F. Waagen, “Zur Malerei im Böhmen, Deutschland, Frankreich und den Niederlanden von 1350-1450,” DeutschesKunstblatt39 (30 sept. 1850), 306-308; C. Schnaase, Geschichte derbildendenKünste,VI. (Düsseldorf, 1861), see 444-446; R. Kautzsch, DieHolzschnitte derKölnerBibelvon1479 (Strassburg, 1896). 6 “Het gebedenboek van Maria, Hertogin van Gelder,” NederlandscheKunstbode 30 March 1874, 19. See for C. Schnaase, note 21. 180 JOANKA VAN DER LAAN the author argued that the monasteries of the Windesheim Chapter were involved in the illumination of manuscripts, as is demonstrated by the book of Mary of Guelders, which – according to its colophon – was copied in Marienborn, a monastery of Windesheim canons regular. From this he deducted that the illumination must also have been a product of the canons. This notion was questioned by J.G.R. Acquoy a few years later, who is hesitant to attribute an active role in the development of book illumination to the Windesheim Chapter.7 From the start of the twentieth century onwards the book is discussed more extensively. In these discussions the localisation of the style of the illumination remains the main issue. For a long time this issue is seen as problematic because the book seems to defy any attribution to a region that fits within modern boundaries. Labels that are given to the book range from ‘Northern Nether- landish’, ‘Lower-Rhenish’ to ‘close to the Cologne style’. This cut short some discussions of the book: W. Vogelsang in his HolländischeMiniaturen, pub- lished in 1899, seems to refuse to do more than to mention Mary’s book briefly because the dialect in which it is written is from the Cologne region and there- fore it is best understood in context of the Cologne-style.8 The issue is complicated further by the notion that the book shows influence from French models. For example, H. Brandt in his work published in 1912, notes a connection between the illumination in Mary’s book and the work of the Limbourg Brothers, artists working in France at the end of the fourteenth and beginning of the fifteenth century.9 Other scholars, for example F. Winkler in a 1920 publication, see the book as an example that the development of book 7 HetkloosterteWindesheimenzijninvloed, II (Utrecht, 1875-1880), 245. The notion that these [Windesheim] monasteries were involved with illumination is repeated again some time later by Lieftinck and De Vreese: G.I. Lieftinck, “Windesheim, Agnietenberg en Marienborn en hun aandeel in de Noordnederlandse boekverluchting,” in Dancwerc:Opstellen aangebodenaanProf.D.Th.Enklaar (Groningen, 1959), 188-207; A.L. de Vreese, “Een fraai verlucht vroeg-Agnietenbergs getijden- en gebedenboek in de Albertina te Brussel,” BulletinvandeKoninklijkeNederlandseOudheidkundigeBond 14 (1961), 202-222, discus- sion of Mary’s prayer book on 212-220. The discussion of the relation with the Windesheim Chapter centers on the added miniatures, now ascribed to the Masters of Otto van Moerdrecht. However, since the so-called illumination style of Agnietenberg is now dated to a different time and has been demonstrated to have different origins the involvement of the Chapter of Windesheim in Mary’s manuscript is now recognized to be limited to the work of scribe Helmich die Lewe. See for a discussion of the former ‘Agnietenberg-manuscripts’, Lydia Wierda, DeSarijs-handschriften:Studienaareengroeplaat-middeleeuwsehandschriften uitdeIJsselstreek(voorheentoegeschrevenaandeAgnietenbergbijZwolle) (Zwolle, 1995). 8 Vogelsang, HolländischeMiniaturen(Strassburg 1899), 31. 9 DieAnfängederdeutschenLandschaftsmalerei imXIV.undXV.Jahrhundert(Strassburg, 1912),115.It is important to note that at this time it was not yet known that the Limbourg Brothers originally came from Nijmegen and that borrowings could have occurred through their occasional visits to their home town.