Doorway to Devotion: Recovering the Christian Nature of the Gosforth Cross
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
religions Article Doorway to Devotion: Recovering the Christian Nature of the Gosforth Cross Amanda Doviak Department of History of Art, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK; [email protected] Abstract: The carved figural program of the tenth-century Gosforth Cross (Cumbria) has long been considered to depict Norse mythological episodes, leaving the potential Christian iconographic import of its Crucifixion carving underexplored. The scheme is analyzed here using earlier ex- egetical texts and sculptural precedents to explain the function of the frame surrounding Christ, by demonstrating how icons were viewed and understood in Anglo-Saxon England. The frame, signifying the iconic nature of the Crucifixion image, was intended to elicit the viewer’s compunction, contemplation and, subsequently, prayer, by facilitating a collapse of time and space that assim- ilates the historical event of the Crucifixion, the viewer’s present and the Parousia. Further, the arrangement of the Gosforth Crucifixion invokes theological concerns associated with the veneration of the cross, which were expressed in contemporary liturgical ceremonies and remained relevant within the tenth-century Anglo-Scandinavian context of the monument. In turn, understanding of the concerns underpinning this image enable potential Christian symbolic significances to be suggested for the remainder of the carvings on the cross-shaft, demonstrating that the iconographic program was selected with the intention of communicating, through multivalent frames of reference, the significance of Christ’s Crucifixion as the catalyst for the Second Coming. Keywords: sculpture; art history; archaeology; early medieval; Anglo-Scandinavian; Vikings; iconog- raphy Citation: Doviak, Amanda. 2021. Doorway to Devotion: Recovering the Christian Nature of the Gosforth Cross. Religions 12: 228. https:// doi.org/10.3390/rel12040228 1. Introduction The Gosforth Cross (Cumbria) (Figure1) is perhaps one of the most well-known mon- Academic Editor: Samuel Youngs uments produced in Anglo-Saxon England during the period of Scandinavian settlement in the late ninth and tenth centuries. The apparent Norse mythological nature of its extensive Received: 28 February 2021 carved figural program has been considered unequivocal, despite its preservation on the Accepted: 19 March 2021 monumental form of the cross—the pre-eminent symbol of Christianity—and the inclusion Published: 24 March 2021 of at least one overtly Christian subject: namely, the Crucifixion. Given this apparent disparity between the ‘pagan’ and Christian natures of the Gosforth Cross and its carvings, Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral its figural program will be re-assessed here within its monumental context to demonstrate with regard to jurisdictional claims in the Christian iconographic import of its carvings. published maps and institutional affil- The complete cross-shaft dates to the first half of the tenth century and belongs to a group iations. of round-shaft derivative crosses found throughout Lancashire, Cheshire, Western Yorkshire and the Peak District of Derbyshire and Staffordshire (Bailey and Cramp 1988, pp. 101–3). At Gosforth, the lower portion of the cylinder is undecorated, while the upper is encircled by a multiple ring chain. All four faces of the shaft’s upper, rectangular portion are filled with Copyright: © 2021 by the author. figural carvings depicted on different planes, an arrangement that distinguishes it from the Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. other round-shaft derivative crosses (Bailey and Cramp 1988, p. 101). The absence of panel This article is an open access article divisions to separate the figural schemes contrasts with the pre-Viking (Anglian) convention distributed under the terms and of displaying figural images within panels, and is understood to reflect Scandinavian artistic conditions of the Creative Commons conventions paralleled on Gotlandic picture-stones or objects from the Oseberg ship burial, Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// which depict seried narratives without ornamental elements dividing them (Bailey 1980, p. 79; creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ Bailey 1996, p. 87). Indeed, the unusual proportions and Scandinavian visual features of 4.0/). Religions 2021, 12, 228. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel12040228 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/religions Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 29 Religions 2021, 12, 228 2 of 28 or objects from the Oseberg ship burial, which depict seried narratives without ornamen- tal elements dividing them (Bailey 1980, p. 79; Bailey 1996, p. 87). Indeed, the unusual proportions and Scandinavian visual features of the Gosforth Cross were recognized as theearly Gosforth as 1883 Cross by William were recognizedSlater Calverley, as early who as observed 1883 by Williamthat “the Slater general Calverley, appearance who of observedthe cross, that at a “thelittle general distance appearance is that of a ofgigantic the cross, Thor’s at ahammer” little distance (Calverley is that 1883, of a giganticp. 375)— Thor’san observation hammer” that (Calverley elides the 1883 cross-form, p. 375)—an of the observation monument. that Calverley elides thealso cross-form identified ofthe thecross-shaft monument. with Calverley the mythological also identified Ash tree the Yggdrasil; cross-shaft proposed with the Scandinavian mythological mythologi- Ash tree Yggdrasil; proposed Scandinavian mythological identifications for each figure carved on cal identifications for each figure carved on the four faces of the cross, including Loki and the four faces of the cross, including Loki and Sigyn at the base of Face A; and conflated Sigyn at the base of Face A; and conflated Christ with various members of the Norse pan- Christ with various members of the Norse pantheon (Calverley 1883, pp. 377–401). theon (Calverley 1883, pp. 377–401). FigureFigure 1. 1.Gosforth Gosforth Cross, Cross, Faces Faces C C and and D. D. Tenth Tenth century. century. St St Mary’s, Mary’s, Gosforth, Gosforth, Cumbria. Cumbria. Photograph: Photo- graph: Author. Author. SinceSince then, then, with with very very few few exceptions, exceptions, the the figural figural carvings carvings of of the the Gosforth Gosforth Cross Cross have have beenbeen assumed assumed to to represent represent Norse Norse mythological mythological episodes episodes associated associated with with Ragnarök, Ragnarök, based based onon the the mythological mythological accounts accounts preserved preserved in in twelfth- twelfth- and and thirteenth-century thirteenth-century Old Old Norse Norse texts texts producedproduced in in Iceland, Iceland, which which post-date post-date the the Gosforth Gosforth CrossCross by by two two to to three three centuries centuries ( e.g.,(e.g., CalverleyCalverley 1899 1899,, pp. pp. 142–48 142–48;; Collingwood Collingwood 1923 1923,, p. p. 242; 242; Kendrick Kendrick 1949 1949,, pp. pp. 68–69 68–69;; Davidson Davidson 19641964,, pp. pp. 207–8; 207–8; Bailey Bailey 1980 1980,, pp. pp. 125–31; 125–31; Bailey Bailey andand Cramp Cramp 1988 1988,, pp. pp. 102–3 102–3;; Bailey Bailey 1996 1996,, pp.pp. 88–90; 88–90; Kop Kopárár 2012 2012,, pp. pp. 91–101; 91–101; Rekdal Rekdal 2014 2014,, p. p. 109). 109). Although Although it it is is possible possible that that early early oraloral variants variants of of these these texts texts circulated circulated in in the the Insular Insular world, world, the the temporally, temporally, geographically geographically and culturally removed written versions of the myths continue to be invoked to identify the carvings. This approach has led to the Gosforth carvings and those of other monu- Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 29 Religions 2021, 12, 228 3 of 28 and culturally removed written versions of the myths continue to be invoked to identify the carvings. This approach has led to the Gosforth carvings and those of other monu- mentsments being being regarded regarded as as ‘illustrations’ ‘illustrations’ of of the the myths myths and and legends legends recorded recorded by by twelfth- twelfth- and and thirteenth-centurythirteenth-century (Christian) (Christian) Icelandic Icelandic authors, authors, rather rather than than significant significant cultural cultural products products inin their their own own right right (e.g., (e.g., Calverley Calverley 1899 1899,, p. p. 191; 191; Collingwood Collingwood 1927 1927,, pp. pp. 157, 157, 170; 170; Kop Kopárár 2012 2012,, pp.pp. 23–30,23–30, 33–41,33–41, 90–91).90–91). This view of of the the carvings carvings further further diminishes diminishes the the significance significance of oftheir their monumental monumental contexts, contexts, undermines undermines the the po potentialtential agency agency of ofthose those responsible responsible for for se- selectinglecting the the images images and and erases erases any potential responsesresponses theythey maymay havehave been been intended intended to to elicitelicit from from their their intended intended tenth-century tenth-century Anglo-Scandinavian Anglo-Scandinavian audiences. audiences. ThoseThose who who have have eschewed eschewed this this scholarly scholarly trend, trend, however, however, have have acknowledged acknowledged both both the Christianthe Christian nature nature of the of monumental the monumental form, and form, that and of itsthat iconographic of its iconographic import ( Calverleyimport (Calver- 1883, p.ley 375; 1883, Parker p. 375; and Parker Collingwood and Collingwood 1917, p. 110;1917 Berg, p. 110; 1958 Berg, p. 1958, 33; Bailey p. 33; 2000 Bailey,