Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Medieval Beekeepers PDF
Medieval Beekeepers PDF
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Original paper
ABSTRACT
________________________________________
ABSTRAKCIJNY
________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ethnoentomology 2018; 3: 1–15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
2
Ethnoentomology 2018; 3: 1–15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fig. 1 Fig. 2
Byzantine or Romanesque,
Biblioteca Nazionale–Naples6
Fig. 3 4. Εxultet
Mirabella 1, 11th century, South Italy/Italian-
Fig. 4
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
3
Ethnoentomology 2018; 3: 1–15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
4
Ethnoentomology 2018; 3: 1–15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fig. 5
Fig. 6 clumsily
trying
Fig. 7
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
5
Ethnoentomology 2018; 3: 1–15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fig. 8a
Fig. 8b
Fig. 9 Fig. 10
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
6
Ethnoentomology 2018; 3: 1–15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
clumsily trying to drive away the bees, which are leading role in apicultural practices. It has been
advancing on him rather threateningly. He is argued that such a reversal took place not only in
holding a sickle, as attested in other miniatures of beekeeping but also in Western society as a
that period, for no apparent reason, as this whole, under the strong influence of pioneering
implement was not used in beekeeping; perhaps theological catechisms and progressive social
it was used for cutting the surrounding ideas which also affected the artistic field. The
vegetation. He is clad in differently to the male figure in the background is holding a sickle,
foreground figure and on a smaller scale, as in nos. 9 and 10, a group of illustrations that
stressing his role as a secondary figure. are all included in the Third Family of Bestiaries.
10. Bestiary, Cambridge Kk 4. 25, f. 99, circa 1230, 14. Bestiary, Gonville and Caius 384/604, f. 186v,
England/early Gothic, Cambridge University 1275-1300, England/Gothic, Gonville and Caius
Library–Cambridge9,14 College Library–(University of) Cambridge13,18
The illustration is almost contemporary with This is another illustration diverging from
the above no. 9. Both of them belong to the Third traditional models of medieval beekeeping
Family of Bestiaries, a feature that may explain iconography. A male figure is depicted probably
their close similarity. feeding the bees syrup (?), an activity attested in
no other miniature. His attitude and lack of
11. Bestiary, Douai ms. 711, fol. 37r, circa 1270- protection indicate a characteristic familiarity
75, France (Cambrai)/early Gothic, Bibliothèque with bees. He is dressed in the usual garb of long
municipale–Douai15 tunic with V-shaped neck and long sleeves.
The miniature resembles the earliest Western
15. Bestiary, Douce 88, f. 111v, late 13th or 14th
one no. 7; both of them belong to the Second
century, England/Gothic, Bodleian Library–
Family of Bestiaries. A young figure with
Oxford19
evidently youthful characteristics such as the red
cheeks and the slim build, is trying, uncovered This is another two-figure scene with a central
and unprotected, to escape the bees after figure probably identified as a female (note the
attempting to approach a hive. He may be also distinctive shoes) leading the unfolding of the
identified as a potential honey-thief. drapery -which also covers her head- so as to free
the swarm. A male figure in the background is
12. Bestiary Fr. 1444, f. 260, circa 1285, northern holding a sickle, as in nos. 9, 10 and 13.
France/Gothic, Bibliothèque Νationale–Paris16
16. Isabella Psalter, gall. 16, f. 57r, 1308, England
The miniature diverges from the previous
or France/ Gothic, Bayerische Staatsbibliothe–
iconographical models. The beekeeper attempts
Munich20
to trap a swarm in a hive that resembles a skep
held upside-down. He wears a long-sleeved, The practice of capturing a swarm in a
knee-length tunic and black hose. He is depicted drapery or, more probably, into a sack and
moving with ease and confidence, without any transferring it from a full hive to an empty one is
protective gear. depicted in this miniature. The beekeeper is
protected by a wide hood and wears a long tunic.
13. Bestiary, Westminster 22, f. 30/36, 1275- The footwear looks like the typical cloggs, used
1290, England/Gothic, Westminster Abbey primarily for protection of laborers in
Library–Westminster17 agricultural tasks.
In this two-figure image the central one in the
17. Book of Hours (“The Maastricht Hours”),
foreground may be female. If indeed so, she is,
Stowe MS 17, f.148r,1310-1320, Netherlands
together with the female figure in no. 15, a major
(Liège)/Gothic, British Library–London21
innovation in the history of medieval beekeeping
illustrations. Following ancient, multicultural A man is probably catching a free swarm in a
traditions and folk customs, women had been white sack before placing it in a hive. The
forbidden to take part in honey harvest. At the depiction of the beekeeper follows the typical
end of the 13th century, however, circumstances iconographic patterns; long blue robe and black
seem to have changed significantly, as women hose without any protective means.
could now participate, even undertake the
Fig. 7
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
7
Ethnoentomology 2018; 3: 1–15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
8
Ethnoentomology 2018; 3: 1–15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16 Fig. 17
Fig. 18
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
9
Ethnoentomology 2018; 3: 1–15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 23
Fig. 22
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
10
Ethnoentomology 2018; 3: 1–15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fig. 24
Fig. 25
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
11
Ethnoentomology 2018; 3: 1–15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
18. Psalter, Douce MS 6, f. 136v, circa 1320-1330, as widely known, were a serious threat to hives,
Flanders (Ghent)/Gothic, Bodleian Library– causing great destruction to the stored honey.
Oxford
22. Georgics and Eclogues of Virgil, Holkham Hall
An ancient tactic is introduced in this
307, 1400, French-Flemish/early Renaissance,
miniature for the first time in medieval
Holkham Hall/Earls of Leicester Library–
beekeeping iconography; the beekeeper is
Norfolk1
striking a flat drum, a practice known as tanging,
in order to gather or settle the swarm into the The tanging practice first depicted in
hive22. The beekeeper is wearing a veil as face manuscript no. 18 in the early 14th century is also
protection and a long garment that fully covers described in this illustrated Virgil’s treatise.
his body. Although there are only two examples so far, it
will eventually become common in later
19. Concordantiae caritatis, Lilienfield cod. 151, f. depictions. The protective hood of the beekeeper,
81v, 1349-1351, Austria/Gothic, Stiftsbibliothek attached to a cape he is wearing, is peculiar as it
Lilienfeld–Lilienfeld22 covers the whole head, perhaps with the part
over his face remaining translucent. This is the
The beekeeper’s figure is completely different
first time that such a hood is attested in a
in features, garments and accessories comparing
beekeeping context.
to the previous depictions. His only protection is
a triangular hood wrapped around the neck like a
23. The Pontifical of Saint Mary, Ms. 400, folio
cape. His brown boots are also unique in style. He
14v, 1438-1460, northern Netherlands/early
is attributed agitated and somewhat vulnerable
Renaissance, Utrecht University Library–
to the threatening bees.
Utrecht25
20.Tacuinum Sanitatis 1673, f. 82, 1390-1400, This miniature is quite exceptional because
Ιtalian (Pavia or Milan)/early Renaissance, the beekeeping practice is used to express
Bibliothèque Νationale–Paris23 theological concepts; the beehives and the bees
probably serve as a symbol of the Immaculate
The manuscript is an illustrated treatise that
Conception. A woman is beating a drum, as the
provides advice on health and well-being. The
tanging practice depicted in nos 18 and 22.
beekeeping miniature diverges from the usual
Although the face of the young woman is bare, her
medieval patterns; a man removes the
head and arms are covered by a hood and long
honeycombs from a large barrel-hive while a
sleeves. It should be noted that this is the first
woman holds a wide open dish to collect them in.
miniature to depict coiled straw skeps instead of
New stylistic elements are introduced leading to
the earlier, more common and widespread woven
a differentiated aesthetic; the calmness in
wicker ones, and indeed of particular
movement and the composed attitude of the
construction – perhaps two-storey?
figures that are no longer depicted as peasants
but rather as professionals, their refined clothing
24. Bestiary, MMW 10 B 25, folio 37r,
-particularly of the woman and the elaborate
France/early Renaissance, circa 1450 Museum
hairstyle of the man, the apiary in the
Meermanno, Hague–Netherlands27
background.
As in nos. 6, 11 and 19 the miniature depicts
21. Dioscorides (Tractatus de Herbis), 1400, either an inexperienced beekeeper or a potential
French/ early Renaissance, Biblioteca Estense honey-thief. The rendering of the figure is
Universitaria–Modena24 completely different, in a new artistic/ aesthetic
style: his outfit -clothes and boots- is elegant and
A woman beekeeper is depicted trying to
facial features are finer. As in other similar
protect herself from bees while handling hives.
miniatures, the figure is wearing no protective
She is wearing a white headband, which is not
gear other than a hat and boots, which, however,
protecting her from the bee stings. The figure
are not of beekeeper’s attire but simply part of his
appears to be young of age, reminiscent of the
costume.
standard examples of young, inexperienced
people being attacked by bees.
25. Virgil’s Georgics, Rawl. G. 98, Italian
According to another interpretation, if the (Milan)/early Renaissance, mid-15th century,
animal under the beehives is a bear, this may Bodleian Library–Oxford28
depict the young beekeeper’s despair at finding
This last miniature is considered to be the
her harvest destroyed and the consequent
conventional temporal and artistic terminus for
irritability and aggressiveness of the bees. Bears,
the subject under examination: beekeeping is
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
12
Ethnoentomology 2018; 3: 1–15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
now depicted on an industrial basis, taking place Statistics & Closing Remarks
in a roofed workshop, with many beehives of two Through this brief overview of medieval
types and presses. Four people are actually beekeeping iconography various information can
working, with evidently well-defined duties be classified, providing interesting key-points.
(honeycomb removal/ harvesting, transporting
in a basket and extraction of honey by pressing). Table 1 shows that, in the 25 manuscripts
The man on the left is even holding a lit rag, examined, the majority of them are dated to the
smoking or perhaps burning sulphur to kill the 13th and 14th centuries, and are therefore the
swarms, a widespread harvesting technique in product of Gothic art and aesthetics. Of the five
the West. The men who actually harvest wear an Exultet rolls that form a single, independent
outfit completely adjusted to beekeeping category, one is of Byzantine influence. Regarding
operational requirements: the tunic is the crucial subject matter of the patterns, the
transformed into a hooded breech “uniform”, models transfer and the scriptoria production,
with long sleeves covering the arms and hands research is still in its preliminary stages.
like gloves. The face-mask is now shaped in the However, statistically it appears that northern
final form, the typical of beekeeping; with rigid England and France were the earliest and at the
wire oval frame probably crosshatched. Although same time the prolific centres, before the
it seems to be an easy-to-think solution, it came Renaissance and the peak of Flemish art.
as the result of many centuries of Table 2 lists the gender division and the
experimentations (see no. 1). encroachment of women in apiculture, a work
From the mid-15th century onwards, sector previously considered prohibited. It is
apiculture as an iconographic theme will be striking that it is only after the end of the 13th
diffused, inspiring not only manuscripts’ century women are depicted actively
illuminations but also woodcarving, engraving, participating in the honey harvest. The artist’s
minor arts. Its peak may be represented by the decision to portray them would not evidently
famous Flemish painting of Pieter Brueghel the contradict social mores, overturning centuries-
Elder “The Beekeepers and the Birdnester” old traditions. Although the relevant scenes are
(1568)27, in which realism and symbolism of the limited, they are significant not only in the
beekeeping activity are treated in a masterly way. beekeeping context but also in the medieval
Parallel to the new artistic models, that may have western social standards.
affected them, was the emergence of the Zeidler Tables 3 and 4 depict the evolution of the
(Beekeepers’)1 class in the West that evolved into beekeeper’s work outfit, protective measures and
a guild with established rights and a written implements used. The face-mask was the earliest
charter around the middle of 14th century (rights and most important innovation, represented in
of the Zeidler of Nuremberg Reichswald). the unique Byzantine miniature no. 1, and
resulted in the more advanced type of last no. 25.
Nonetheless, based on the available illustrations
Tab. 1
very few people used it, since, as is in fact the case, baskets for transporting them. The inexplicable
an experienced beekeeper’s familiarity with his inclusion of a sickle would have been connected
swarm allowed him to work without a mask. This to some other agricultural task, probably
is highlighted by the clumsy way in which young, weeding. The late depiction of tanging drums is
inexperienced beekeepers are portrayed linked to the revival of an ancient practice which
Women Women
Tab. 2: (with male (single)
partners)
Tab. 3 & 4:
Equipment/tools
Head/face
Manuscript Manuscript
protection
numbers numbers
is highlighted by the clumsy way in which young, weeding. The late depiction of tanging drums is
inexperienced beekeepers are portrayed linked to the revival of an ancient practice which
approaching the hives and the risk they run. The may have been updated in the 15th century and
hood mask covering the beekeeper’s entire face used as an alternative to smoking, a primeval,
in nos. 18 and 22 may not have proven functional widespread method impressively absent in
and presumably reflects contemporary medieval western apiculture (according to the
experimentation. Interestingly enough, it was relevant early medieval iconography).
associated with the practice of tanging.
The above remarks are representative of only
Western illuminations also depict other a sample of interesting conclusions to be drawn
means of protection such as broad-brimmed hats, from the study of medieval beekeeping
although not as effective as the mask. The iconography. A more detailed and complete
working outfit does not remain stable in either corpus combined with a more in-depth and
garments or colours; long tunics with long better-documented context will certainly reveal
sleeves and hose are common. At the earliest much more about apicultural laborers and the
miniatures, beekeepers are depicted barefoot but society in which they lived and worked.
gradually they are portrayed even with fancy
boots. Acknowledgments
The few implements used remain exactly the I wish to extend my thanks to the reviewers
same: short knives (except for the long pruning for their insightful comments and thoughtful
knife in no. 2) for removing the honeycombs and corrections on the present paper.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
14
Ethnoentomology 2018; 3: 1–15
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
14http://bestiary.ca/manuscripts/manubiblio94
Notes & References
6.htm.
1 CRANE, E. The world history of beekeeping and 15http://bestiary.ca/manuscripts/manubiblio15
honey hunting. London: Duckworth, 1999, 681
41.htm
pp.
16http://bestiary.ca/manuscripts/manubiblio15
2 GERMANIDOU, S. Byzantine honey culture. Athens:
08.htm
NHRF, 2016, pp. 234 pp. 17http://bestiary.ca/manuscripts/manubiblio10
3 KRITSKY, G. Beekeeping from Antiquity through
23.htm. ©Dean and Chapter of Westminster
the Middle Ages. Annual Review of with personal thanks to Christine Reynolds.
Entomology,62(1), pp. 249–264, 2017. GEORGE, W. - YAPP, B. The Naming of the Beasts.
4 HADJINA, F. MAVROFRIDIS, G. JONES, R. (eds).
Natural History in the Medieval Bestiary.
Beekeeping in the Mediterranean from London: Duckworth, 1991, pp. 1-231, figs. 158,
Antiquity to the Present. Proceedings. Syros, 9- 159.
11, October 2014. Athens: Hellenic Apicultural 18http://bestiary.ca/institutes/institutebiblio13
Organization “Demeter” – Chamber of Cyclades 27.htm.
– Eva Crane Trust, 157 pp. 19http://bestiary.ca/manuscripts/manubiblio11
5 SPATHARAKIS, I. The illustrations of the 92.htm. ©Βodleian Library
Cynegetica in Venice, cod. Marc. Gr. Z139. 20 STATON, A. R. The Psalter of Isabelle, Queen of
Leiden: Alexandros Press, 2004, pp. 181–182,
England 1308-1330: Isabelle as the audience.
fig. 128.
Word & Image. A Journal of Verbal/Visual
6 AVERY, M. The Exultet rolls of South Italy, ΙΙ.
Enquiry 18(4), pp. 1-27. 2002.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1936, 21http://www.bl.uk/manuscripts/FullDisplay.as
206 pp.
px?ref=Stowe_MS_17
7 Examples gathered in KRITSKY, G. The tears of
22 MORGAN GRASSELLI, M. Tanging the Bees: A
Re: Beekeeping in Ancient Egypt. New York:
Curious Apiarian Practice in a Drawing by
Oxford University Press, 2015, 160 pp. Also
Claude Simpol. Master Drawings, Master
CRANE, E. The World History of Beekeeping and
Drawings Association 47(4), pp. 443-446, 2009.
Honey Hunting. London: Duckworth & Co, 1999,
23http://www.symbolforschung.ch/Lilienfeld%2
690 pp.
8 For each miniature an extensive bibliography is 0Concordantiae.html
24 PARIS, H., DAUNAY, M. C., JANICK, J. The
provided by the library it now belongs. In this
case: Cucurbitaceae and Solanaceae illustrated in
http://bestiary.ca/manuscripts/manu980.htm. medieval manuscripts known as the Tacuinum
The bibliography on Bestiaries is extremely Sanitatis. Annals of Botany 103, pp. 1187 –
extensive. Sample literature on: MCCULLOCH, F. 1205, 2009.
Mediaeval Latin and French Bestiaries. Chapel 25https://manus.iccu.sbn.it//opac_SchedaSched
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
15