Situne Dei Årsskrift för Sigtunaforskning och historisk arkeologi 2018 Redaktion: Anders Söderberg Charlotte Hedenstierna-Jonson Anna Kjellström Magnus Källström Cecilia Ljung Johan Runer Utgiven av Sigtuna Museum SITUNE DEI 2018 Viking traces – artistic tradition of the Viking Age in applied art of pre-Mongolian Novgorod Nadezhda N. Tochilova The Novgorod archaeological collection of wooden items includes a significant amount of pieces of decorative art. Many of these were featured in the fundamental work of B.A. Kolchin Novgorod Antiquities. The Carved Wood (Kolchin 1971). This work is, perhaps, the one generalizing study capable of providing a full picture of the art of carved wood of Ancient Novgorod. Studying the archaeological collec- tions of Ancient Novgorod, one’s attention is drawn to a number of wooden (and bone) objects, the art design of which distinctly differs from the general conceptions of ancient Russian art. The most striking examples of such works of applied art will be discussed in this article. The processes of interaction between the two cultures are well researched and presented in the works of a group of Swedish archaeologists, whose work showed the complex bonds of interaction between Sweden and Russia, reflected in a number of aspects of material culture (Arbman 1960; Jansson 1996; Fransson et al (eds.) 2007; Hedenstierna- Jonson 2009). Moreover, in art history literature, a few individ- ual works of applied art refer to the context of the spread of Viking art (Roesdahl & Wilson eds 1992; Graham-Campbell 2013), but not to the interrelation, as a definite branch of Scandinavian art, in Eastern Europe. If we apply this focus to Russian historiography, then the problem of studying archaeological objects of applied art is comparatively small, and what is important to note is that all of these studies also have an archaeological direction (Kolchin 1971; Bocharov 1983). Even less attention was paid to the study of applied art of the north-west in the 10th–12th centuries as an artistic phenomenon that marked important milestones in the development of ancient Russian art (Zhilina 2014; Tochilova 2015). The appearance of the art of Ancient Rus, as a rule, is viewed from the stand- point of the strong influence of Byzantine culture. This view is absolutely correct and does not require any additional comments. However, Byzantine art also reflected the spiritual (and political) ambitions of the prince’s court, and, according to this author, was as such, official art. Despite this, it is also necessary to take into account the fact that Byzantine art was not the only seed in the seemingly sterile artistic soil of the time, as there is a lot of evidence of various other cultural influences in the collections of archaeological finds of the time. 76 NADEZHDA N. TOCHILOVA Certainly, one of these components in ancient Novgorod during the 10th–12th centuries is traces of the presence of Scandinavian culture. A number of written sources, mostly of Scandinavian origin, testify to dip- lomatic and political relations at the highest state level (Jackson 2000). Further, based on the Novgorod chroni- cles, one can conclude that members of the Scandinavian military lived on the “Poromonovo Yard” in Novgorod (Nasonov 1950:174). Following this, it is shown that active communi- cations existed between the local population and the members of the “Gothic Court” (Milkov & Simonov 2011:428). The literary heritage and written sources presents us with a vivid picture of multi-level cultural interaction between Scandinavia (primarily Sweden and Norway) and Russia. It would seem that communications of this kind might have had a strong impact on the material culture of the time, but archaeological data and analyses of early finds show the opposite: the sum total of early era objects is in the single digits, which lead prior research to con- clude that there is no noticeable Scandinavian influence in the material culture of early Novgorod in the 10th–11th centuries (Rybina & Khvoshchinskaya 2010:66–78). Figure 1. Arm of a chair, 11th century This divergence between written and material (after Kolchin 1971: Pl.19). sources leads to the question of what could cause such a contradiction. However, study of this question is beyond the limits of this paper. The focus here, as stated earlier, is on the origins of a common set of stylistic features that clearly do not belong to the Byzantine culture, in a number of objects of applied art from the time. The items focused on here do not all belong to the same typological category – they are fragments of kitchen utensils, furniture, decor – everything that could be a part of different aspects of everyday life. 77 SITUNE DEI 2018 Focusing on all of them in one small research project is made possible through the approach of identifying and analyzing the similarity of any stylistic features, and, as a consequence, the artistic environment that lead to the manifestation of this artistic style. One of the most remarkable works of Novgorod applied art is the armrest of an 11th century armchair. (fig. 1) Its pinpoint accuracy carving in the form of a chain of fantastic animals can be safely attributed as one of the outstanding works of applied art of Ancient Rus. The dynamism of the elongated bodies of animals creates the effect of impetuous movement. The profiles of the depicted figures are relatively flat however, and each of them seem to have two pairs of legs - the front is clearly present, whereas the back is a transverse component of a small loop at the end of the beast’s body. Every knot encircles the neck of the neighboring beast. Each element of the animal’s body is delineated by a double contour, and the inner surface is worked with oblique hatching. The line of each beast’s neck continues the outer contour, which fits into elongated zigzag lines thereafter. The small heads of animals, crowned with multipart figure-of- eight-shaped twisted horns, are sharply turned back. From the open mouths a long long ribbon-shaped tongue protrudes out, enfolding the body of the beast in the middle. The tip of the tongue ends with a small spear-shaped leaf. The sharp turn of the figures, the motif of the clasping loop, and the aspiration to fill the surrounding space as tightly as possible, creates the impression of great similarity between the decor of this find and the works of the bestial art styles of the Viking Age. It should be noted that this work is one of the few Novgorod finds of applied art of this time which is unquestionably included in the group of Scandina- vian type objects (Roesdahl & Wilson eds 1992:303). Another object which casts no doubt on the existence of a direct Viking Age artistic influence is a small pommel, in the shape of the head of a predatory beast, dated to the mid-10th century (fig. 2), and whose mane is worked in the form of a clear scaly ornament (Kolchin 1971:39; Graham-Campbell 2013:78) (fig. 3). As direct analogies of this ornamentation, one can compare with fragments of stone carving from Väsby (Skåne, Sweden), as well as from the church of the parish of Maughold from the Isle of Man (Wilson & Klindt-Jensen: Pl. XLIV), and Gosforth (Cumberland, England) (Kendrick 1949: Pl. XLIV) (figs. 3 and 4). The first impression of the similarities of the decor of the Novgorod armrest with the animal style art of the Viking Age, with more careful analysis, raises Figure 2. The shape of the head of a predatory beast, mid-10th century (after Kolchin 1971:39, figure 15). 78 NADEZHDA N. TOCHILOVA Figure 3. Stone from Väsby, Skåne, Sweden, left, and a stone from Kirk Maugold, Isle of Man, right (after Wilson & Klindt-Jensen 1980: Pl. XLIV). many questions. Particularly, exact stylistic analogies between these objects have not yet been found. Therefore, the only correct way to proceed in the comparison is to isolate the Scandinavian elements, subsequently analyze what does not fit with them. The ribbon-shaped bodies of animals, the double contour, and the internal working of the bodies make it possible draw comparisons to the so called Jelling style (from the 9th to the middle of the 10th century) and Mammen style (10th century) simultaneously. This combination of styles is not surprising - the coexistence of several styles is a known characteristic of Viking Age Scandinavian art. In the common character of the composition and bending of the bodies, and in particular, the intertwining of the knots of legs and the middle of the torsos, you can see a direct analogy of the character of this composition with the image on the Odd’s cross from Braddan from the Isle of Man (fig. 5) which combines elements in the Jelling and Mammen styles, and even the earlier style E (Wilson & Klindt-Jensen 1980:111). Elements that are not part of the Scandinavian influence include: the nature of the inner parts of the bodies and the design of the neck in the form of a zigzag line that extends the outer contour. In the Scandinavian style, there are no stylistic parallels with the heads of animals with long swirling horns. Free space is filled with vegetative sprouts - the continuation of the languages of animals. In contrast, smoothly swirling lines, laid in curls (which are especially clear on the preserved edge of the armrest), differ from those examples of sprouts and tendrils present in the art of the Viking Age. Figure 4. Cross from As such, despite the obvious hybrid nature of this work, it Gosforth, Cumberland, could be attributed to a kind of transition phase between the England (after Kendrick Ringerike and Mammen styles.