Body-Part Reliquaries: The State of Research

Author(s): Barbara Drake Boehm

Source: Gesta , 1997, Vol. 36, No. 1 (1997), pp. 8-19
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the International Center of
Medieval Art

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/767275

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/767275?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

The University of Chicago Press and International Center of Medieval Art are collaborating
with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Gesta

This content downloaded from

193.198.212.4 on Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:39:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Body-Part Reliquaries: The State of Research
BARBARA DRAKE BOEHM

The Metropolitan Museum of Art

Abstract
Freiburg im Breisgau in 1940, with an introduction by the
For the first time since the nineteenth century, pub- author signed on the Feast of Pentecost and bearing the nihil
lished articles, monographs, conferences, and lectures obstat of the Society of Jesus.
dedicated to the medieval cult of relics have proliferated Braun listed both surviving and recorded reliquaries,
during the past decade.' Studies specifically of reliquar-exhaustively tallying their number over the course of Middle
ies that assume the form of parts of the human body
have begun to occupy a small corner of this field of Ages, as well as the Renaissance and Baroque periods. He
research. The newness of this pursuit in literature pub-classified reliquaries by their form. Under the rubric of "Re-
lished in English is evidenced in the rather awkwarddende Reliquiire" ("Talking Reliquaries"), which included all
and inelegant term "body-part reliquaries" that has been manner of reliquaries whose form apparently related to the
adopted in the context of this publication of papers thatrelics they contained,4 he first listed examples in the form of
were first offered at the College Art Association in San
a foot, then others shaped like a hand, finger, rib, arm, leg,
Antonio in February 1995. This essay surveys the state
of research on "body-part reliquaries." By way of specific followed by figural reliquaries in the form of a head or bust.
example, particular emphasis is placed on French works,For reliquaries in the form of a head or a bust alone, over 150
a number of which survive and about which there is con- examples were cited. Braun's work established an approach to
siderable documentation. Given the perspective of the au- the subject that has been imitated, but not surpassed, by iso-
thor, a museum curator and specialist on the subject of
lated publications since 1964 by Kovaics, Bessard, and Falk.5
head reliquaries, consideration is also placed on the in-
stallation of such reliquaries in American museums and Churchmen likewise played a role in the numbering and
what that suggests, historically, about their perception as study of medieval reliquaries preserved in France. Abb6 Tex-
works of art. ier noted the presence of forty-seven reliquaries in the form
of an arm in churches of the Limousin alone.6 The publica-
Throughout the nineteenth century and until well aftertion by Bouillet and Servibres of the Majesty of Saint Foy at
the Second World War the study of reliquaries, and within Conques, the golden image that enshrines the head of the vir-
that context the classification and study of those whose con-gin saint, and their translation of the legend of Saint Foy into
tainers assume the form of parts of the human body, wasFrench, were done in the years immediately following the bish-
largely the province of historians drawn to their subject eitherop's investigation of the relics in the nineteenth century.7 An
by virtue of their vocation in the Roman Catholic Church, or introductory letter from the bishop of Rodez and Vabres de-
by their interest in national patrimony. One of the earliest clared the book to be "une oeuvre d'apostolat capable d'6difier
scholarly investigations of the medieval veneration of saints,les ames," noting that "l'aimable sainte vous a d6j'a marqu6 sa
including, somewhat incidentally, the enshrinement of theirgratitude par les satisfactions qu'elle vous a prodigu6es."8
relics, was written by Stephan Beissel in 1890.2 Beissel was a Overall, however, the study of reliquaries in France has
member of the Bollandists, a Jesuit group devoted to the studylargely been advanced by historians concerned with docu-
of hagiography and responsible for the publication of the Actamenting national patrimony. The first example of a body-part
sanctorum and the Analecta Bollandiana.3 The first encyclo- reliquary preserved in France-the head of Saint Maurice,
pedic attempt to discuss and analyze the medieval productioncommissioned by Boson, king of Provence from 879-887 and
of reliquaries of all types was written by Beissel's student andbrother-in-law of Charles the Bald-was described in 1625
fellow Jesuit, Joseph Braun. While teaching archaeology andby Nicolas Fabri de Peiresc, an indefatigable historian
art history for his order at Valkenburg, Frankfurt, and Pullachnaturalist.9 Its appearance was recorded in two pencil sketc
near Munich, he published probing studies on focused themesas part of his wider investigation of important monument
of the liturgical arts, including Der christliche Altar in seinerthe history of France, including the vessels preserved at Sai
geschichtlichen Entwicklung (Munich, 1924), Die liturgische Denis, notably the chalice of Abbot Suger.10 The pivotal art
Gewandung im Occident und Orient nach Ursprung und Ent-discussing the reliquary recorded by Peiresc in the seventee
wicklung, Verwendung und Symbolik (Freiburg im Breisgau, century was published by Eva Kov~cs only in 1964.11 The b
1907), Sakramente und Sakramentalian (Regensburg, 1922),reliquaries that formed part of the treasury of Saint-Denis
and Das christliche Altargeriit in seinem Sein und seiner Ent- recorded among and alongside a wide variety of liturgical
wicklung (Munich, 1932). Within this context, Die Reliquiare jects in the engravings of the cabinets published by Dom
des christlichen Kultes und ihre Entwicklung was published inF61ibien, Histoire de l'abbaye royale de Saint-Denys en Fra

8 GESTA XXXVI/1 ? The International Center of Medieval Art 1997

This content downloaded from

193.198.212.4 on Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:39:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 1~~~~1)- g> .. P; .

li iiiiii ii

-~~ ~ ,..T:i

~i: i - : : : : : :_: : i: : i : : ?: : _:-: _-:-: -:-: --:: :-: :-: :-:_ : : -: . -::- :_: _:- -: : _- : : : : : : : : -:: : : : : : : : : :- --:- : : - : -:: :

:::: ::::::: :::: : : : : :: ::: ::::::::::: ::: :::: :::: ::: ::: : ::: ::: :

iii~i!7 7 ii~iiii~!!i~i!!!!!!!:i i: !! !! !!! ! !! !!! ! !!! i!

iiiiii~i~ iii~iT~iii i :: :: :: : :: : : ::::: :: :: :: :: : iiiii :i
:::: : :: :: : : : :: : :: : :: : : : : ::: ::: ::: ::: ::: : :: :: ::: :: :: : :: ::: :

. ......:

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : I: : : : : : : : : :': : : i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
: : :: : : : :: : :: : : : :: : :: :: ::: ::: : : : : : : : :: :: :: : :: : :

:::: :: _i i: i- i:ii i i

FIGURE 1. Saint-Nectaire, Bust Reliquary of St. Baudime, as recorded by FIGURE 2. Saint-Nectaire, Bust Reliquary
Anatole d'Auvergne, Revue des societ~s savantes, ser. 2, 1 (1859) (photo: (photo: Caisse nationale des monuments h
Bibliotheque nationale, Paris).

(Paris, 1706). The appearance of the head reliquary of Saint on one head reliquary in the region
Louis from the Sainte-Chapelle was recorded as the frontis- from Soudeilles.14
piece engraving for the 1688 Paris edition of Joinville's His- His work did not pass without n
toire de s. Louis IX. In the nineteenth century, the journals of context of Rupin's publication that
French archaeological societies, on both the national and local sented to J. Pierpont Morgan, th
levels, were of great importance in making known reliquaries vast collection of medieval art forms the nucleus of the Me-
like the bust of Saint Baudime at Saint-Nectaire, recorded by dieval Department's holdings at the Metropolitan Museum.15
Anatole d'Auvergne in 1859 (Figs. 1-2).12 Both the bust of Saint Yrieix (Fig. 6) and the one of Saint
Ernest Rupin discussed a number of reliquaries in the Martin-then in parish churches of the Limousin and now in
form of busts in a separate chapter of his book, L'Oeuvre de the Metropolitan Museum and the Louvre respectively-were
Limoges, published in Paris and Brive in 1890. As a native of acquired for his collection in the first decade of this century.
the region, and sometime president of the Soci6t6 arch6o- Morgan's acquisitions of these objects along with other
logique et historique du Limousin, he dedicated himself to liturgical arts seems to have been a function of his own keen
publishing the metalwork that he attributed to the Limousin. antiquarian taste and the development of his "princely" col-
In so doing, he classified reliquaries by their form, noting that, lection, rather than of his own faith (Morgan was an Episco-
while the majority of reliquaries contained bodies or body palian) or of his national heritage. Henry Walters of Baltimore,
parts, it was often the case in the Middle Ages that the "enve- a Roman Catholic and Morgan's only real rival as an Ameri-
lope" reflected the contents.13 Rupin also published an article can collector of medieval liturgical art, apparently did not have

This content downloaded from

193.198.212.4 on Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:39:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 ---

II :I

ii-i-i i-i iii-i-i:iii i-iii i::-i2 i-i ii ii-i : iii-ii i~i~i~i : i--::'
W - .0 .1:

:
:-:-:

ii

-:::
:::'

i ii ::'

- i:ii

-:::::

i
-i:

:1

:- --_
: i :iii~
:: :: 1 -:
;-----------
- ::-- : ::- i:- i:::i- _:_-:;iiiii~iiiwi.~~i:iliiii:_ii:-- ii::: -,-,~.~?iiisiiaiiii''i:iiisiiii : :: -i-i--:i- -:: :

FIGURE 3. Bust Reliquary of Saint Juliana, After 1376, New York, Metro- FIGURE 4. Bust Reliquary of Saint Juliana (as in Fig. 3), x-ray photo-
politan Museum of Art (photo: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York). graph of wooden core with gesso build-up (photo: Metropolitan Museum
of Art, New York).

a taste for "body-part" reliquaries. Morgan's interest does not published in 1951, that they were key elements in the rebirth
seem to have been shaped by mainstream art history, but of monumental sculpture. Keller asserted that the individual
by the example of French amateur collectors; there was no limbs and truncated torsos represented the first attempts on
Berenson-like figure influencing his choice of these singular the road to representing the entire human figure.18 It was this
works of art. In fact, beyond the confines of Roman Catholic line of research that informed a number of subsequent con-
literature and discussions of patrimony, art historical study siderations of this material. In the 1950s Rainer Riickert be-
continued to ignore such works, and when discussing them, gan a study for a doctoral dissertation on the subject of head
to be dismissive of them. reliquaries. Again, the principal motivation was the exami-
As national treasures, reliquaries in the form of parts nation
of of the "evolution" of medieval sculpture. The result
the body were important items in the great Exposition Uni- was an important article on sculptural metalwork of the
verselle held in Paris in 1900. The culmination of the inves-
Limoges region, without further investigation of the bust
tigation of such reliquaries as national patrimony wasreliquary
the as a form in Western medieval art.19
1965 exhibition Trhsors des eglises de France, which included The only publication on reliquaries to follow the Tresors
nineteen head/bust reliquaries and twenty-one arms, as well des eglises exhibition was entitled "Les Bustes Reliquaires et
as foot and thigh reliquaries.16 By contrast, two years later,lathe
sculpture."20 The single entry on a bust reliquary in the
Cleveland catalogue of Treasures from Medieval France dis-
international loan exhibition held at Cleveland, Treasures from
Medieval France, focused on sculpture and manuscripts.17cussed Al- the work as the equivalent of a Renaissance portrait
though it featured thirteen works of art that likewise had bust-emphasizing the degree of naturalism it achieves, sug-
figured in the Paris show, it included but a single example gesting
of again an "evolution," towards the canon of Renais-
a bust reliquary and none of other body parts. sance art.21 For American scholars of the Renaissance, such
By this time, body-part reliquaries had begun to enter as Irving Lavin22 and Anita Moskowitz, the importance of
bust reliquaries has been their relationship to Renaissance
into art historical literature following Harald Keller's theory,

10

This content downloaded from

193.198.212.4 on Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:39:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
portrait busts, Moskowitz maintaining that "reliquary heads
and busts tend, throughout the Middle Ages, toward portray-
als that suggest individual likenesses."23
In an American museum context the treatment of body-
part reliquaries has likewise focused on them as portraiture.
Of the four busts of companions of Ursula in the Metro-
politan, three were purchased between 1959 and 1970. The
papers for their acquisition stressed their importance as por-
traiture, and indeed, their installation until the late 1980s atop
a credenza at The Cloisters was a setting more appropriate to
Renaissance busts than to devotional objects.24
In addition, museums have pursued what might be called
the archaeology of reliquaries, meticulously examining their
construction and their contents, rather than considering them
for their aesthetic importance or historical context. A notable
example was Paul Pieper's study of the Head of Saint Paul at
Miinster, published in 1967,25 and Rudolf Schnyder's of the
head of Saint Candidus.26 In 1963, Thomas Hoving examined
the bust of Saint Juliana at The Cloisters using x-ray technol-
S- - :'- ----- ----- - ----- -------------- ::- : : -:: -: : : -::

ogy (Figs. 3, 4), just as the French had done for the image of mft? ;x..

Saint Foy at Conques. Perhaps unable to shake the parallels,

he theorized the existence of an earlier male bust underlying
the princess-like Juliana, just as Taralon, similarly, had iden-
tified an imperial Roman mask as the face of the virgin
martyr Foy at Conques.27 It was not until the publication of
the Thyssen collection in 1987 that what Hoving saw as the
peculiarities of the Juliana bust were explained in the context
of Sienese polychromed sculpture.28 As a result, its relation-
ship to lost reliquary busts such as those of Peter and Paul
made for the Vatican29 or the Bust of Saint Agatha in the trea-
FIGURE 5. Bust Reliquary of Saint Agatha, 14th century and later, Church
sury of Catania30 (Fig. 5) was overlooked. of Sant'Agata, Catania (photo: after Rossi, 1956).
The disassembling of the reliquary of Saint Yrieix (Figs.
6, 7) at the Metropolitan Museum in the 1960s provides a
particularly telling example of this approach to body-part
reliquaries. During preparation for the Tre'sors des dglises ex-
hibition, it came to the attention of French and American art of any kind. In fact, Gardner illustrates no Romanesque or
historians that there were two versions of the reliquary. That Gothic goldsmithswork, at all. The one inclusion is a Caro-
this fact had not been explored since the acquisition of the lingian bookcover-the Codex Aureus of Saint Emmeram.
reliquary in 1917 is in itself testament to the inattention these In periodical literature reliquaries have been considered par-
works of art have received. The response was to strip the Saint enthetically in relation to other questions. For example, the
Yrieix in New York of his silver sheathing. In fact, careful head reliquary of Saint Alexander preserved in Brussels has
comparative examination of the examples in Paris and New been examined chiefly for its importance in the beginnings of
York based on existing Monuments Historiques photographs champlev6 enameling. Other forms, especially arms, but also,
would have shown conclusively that the New York example exceptionally, fingers and thighs, have barely been considered
was the original, even though the relic itself had been trans- at all.31

ferred to the copy in France in 1907. Since the 1960s the wood This disregard may be attributed, in part, to the fact that
core and silver revetment of the reliquary head of Saint Yrieix so much goldsmithswork has been destroyed, and that, in
have been exhibited side by side, the prevailing opinion being American museums, it is particularly rare.32 But I would ar-
that the core, a masterly piece of Gothic wood carving, is too gue that reliquary sculpture has been not merely undervalued,
beautiful to cover. but, in some circles, considered suspect, as well. Although
body-part reliquaries were embraced as a subject by Roman
Such thinking springs from a prejudice in art historical
Catholic historians in Europe, they were generally rejected as
literature that undervalues "minor arts" like goldsmithswork,
and especially sculpture in precious metal. The 1975 edition a subject of serious research in America. An important ex-
of Gardner's History of Art includes no body-part reliquariesception-and virtually the only discussion in English of bust

11

This content downloaded from

193.198.212.4 on Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:39:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 . .... . ....

.-_. ........ .

. ... .

: -_i:--Al-
.... .. ... ...
...........~
. . .i
4M.Aia-:

... . ........

ii~i ...... .......~

......... ....... .

..... . . . . . .- i : ii

..........ii l ii -i . i iii

.... ......- -i
All ol.!R?!?2
.. ........'ii

:-i': ii..............

A.
. .... .... ........

i-i~ii-_i:iiiiiiii :.. . iii -ij~-........ .........~-:li

-- W ..........

. . . . .........

..... ..... . ..... ... ...

.......

... . ... . m

-: -: i:-:-: . i-ii -i-. .. .........i~i

. . . .... ..

.. .. ...

: : iEii'i~i~fliiiiiir:r'lr";ass p ~ l~,.. . . ........._ir-

. . .......

FIG
Mus

12

This content downloaded from

193.198.212.4 on Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:39:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 I
. .".
.... I'll .-,-.
-.
"
1.
-111 - .

. -'?..'?Iz
-., 1? ?::, ? -- I ... ?
. .1
? . M. ,x,
k??: ..
.. MIM , ,MM.M?...,... .
..-
... .
-
.-.. ,I
,
??,
" , ,:??
..
-
.. .. ,::? ?::K:::?o.
,?:?m
. , .
?
.

.
mMom
-,gmm
"I.", ; '. ?g
? ,,
Mr.,NN ...
WWR?'.i
,...
,
1.11, *
.
.
?.
. X.? .1 ,
I...,-"-.,

-
.
. 1-.11.11.1.
W .,
...... a
I
,
W
I.. .::.*.
,....--
..
? ?.,??..xi??.??:?
-,%..?
?.,-.
"',
0
- .
- - -x
........... ..
.. -
g
g
?
.
?'-'-' M Z
ll-
MH
?a
- ....
...,
?', 1%lt.v
.. I
.

I ,-
- - l .........
...- --l- ,?
... ft'.
.M
", M
l.-
. .... - ?::: "%.-
...?.,...
.........
.. I
... .....
11 .:: -
ii ??,
. ,,?.?,??n.:.?
... ,I .. ,::
I M
, ... ?, P ......,

?0
sm
M. "3. ....
m!
?o
? .. :,::::
- m .. , .....
?? ...
.... ...
.,.
,I ..

? -
MA"
--:--:-:?
.
. . . ,??.R':
. .
-..
.. -
??
,...........-
..,
. . . . . . . . , , , ", I ? ?
...

. . .?. V, . . . . x , . : 4 ::., :.- .

': I
. ,.,x .. . .
E....;,.?..
I .I.:
x
-:..??: . .- I.. .1R.IX
--,...'.............
.
" .
. .. p

.
'..;-;-..;.:..l,?
... p
--Xm...
.. M.. -:..
1.1-1-1.
-.?.?...-
..... ...-
-

ll.,?--
- .
-
??.,,
-..

? .....1
-11.

",
. ... I...?
.....-
.I ..... . ..
...
-
. ,w I
7 ? , ? ?'.,
...
.'.
??::::!?.:::??,,.??:?,???:,.::?:?
,.,
",
-

-
.
?
'
,--
I
... . ..
,.::: .m
",-:-.............

,,....,.
...... ..

.
x-
.... . ?.
..
-,
,.t ,
-
??; ??.:
.
. I . ? .
. .:::?::
.
::?:::%:?:,:.:.,
.1
?
.l.
. . .
-

.
.1.
1, ?

",
...

.. . hL.
-,,?:,.: k -, IV , .-
-. .
. . ,

.
. ... 11 W-??:::,M ?., ..
...
. ,:: ::.
," :::?,
":" - .:?,??,'?
.-...-....-.......... ::-
. ...-. -
......
. I,..-,...I..
??..,...V?..?.?-1.?..?..?..%.,?lI ...
....'.......... ...
.... ............... .....
. .
. ...
.
.. I -:-::-: - . .... .
. .,-..-....-: 5:?- -- - ..:?..:: ..... . . .

?. :..
.....
I......
.
-
I?
?
?
,
..:?::...,:
.....
-:?
.
.1.
::?
1.?
...
.. .
?
-
.:.-
?,--
..
....,
?
.
. .-
. .................
.. . .
. .. ......
... .::?
.:.::.....?.:..V.:.:
.... l-.-%.-..,
... . ....
.......
.. . ..
. ........
..,
. : ...
..
. ..
..... ..1 .
-.-
. -.A
.,--.,. ... :,.
?: ..
'.I
.

, . ...... I.... . :,?

. . . . x
- I .
.I I..''...
. . .I . .. . . ?.. . , ... . . .
? ., -... - .. . . . ., : . . . . . . . . . .. ...
, : ..
.: ,.,
::?...?:??:
,,: :-?.,.,.:::
?x.:??,?::?.: I . .... . ..
. ,? j........Xm.
..I I': 11,
, - . . ... , , . , ... ..

..
..
.. ? ?- ,:--,
v- ... F I
.....
.,-...-..-........... v ...... .....
% ... ... %,. . .
?? ....
... zll?'- . . .,:.? M::??::. ...

. :,::: . :::-.-:::?.::-:-
.? I.I.-
?.
. :,.-? . -? ?,? ?
.. ? ...........
I... .. - .
..I ...

... ji .? ,- ,?. .. .. .. , .
I... - .. .- : -:- ? ?;:. - ..-.::, .. Mll? -
...-.. - ?::-,-:- ?__- .... .. ?
,. ..,., - ? .
?. -, ... 11-1 .
..-..........??.....?......,...........?...- ,. .. 0- - : I X:: ? ,....,...
,. I : -... 11 ,
:. .-
- .,
-..::=
......,-
? . ..:,-- t2 . ---..."
....
..................... .: P ?? - Z: .... I'.,. - .
.. ::: ::: ::: ::" .:,: :- .:..:- ... .. :::: . -:-,.::..--
-.- . .
,:.
...
.. .
...I" ;.
. -.1. ...-
..

-
--...
-
. .. - - ... ... . .. . ?
I ? 11 I..... -:-- -. .. .1 ?
"... - .
- . . . . ................... I ... ? ....... ... - %V-M-%.

v,?::?-
,...
'.. ............
..
?.. I
.'... '.
.. :?
... -......
:--
.. - ..............
....
..
.. . .. ' ..
....-
...
,
..
--
.
,-:-
-,,,.:,::.-
...... ..
...
.., -
".-I. -.
-....-
%.-
,
.-..-. ...
,?.? . ?
. ...--,
1. ??VT,
.-MEAL - 4
-,?..% . -

:::'l.,:l
...I...
I.:.,:: I.....- .l..",l
, -...,....,-. ::.z".? 1.? ?.,.:.--
.! ,..
?? .. I
...... .... --
?:,i: .. ..?:
..... .
. .::, K-
?- ?- . 1

I
..-. -
...- -
-, . ?
?:,
..l. .-...
- , ?%.-
:,?:.:,?: ...
.?Kll.?
.... .
m
:.:
. ..V-
?W , -
:-.1???,.?l.,-".,??:,:.,.?.:.:..''.:-
- ill
...
lk?r:%
I...
I :
-
,.?-
'I" ?
.g,,.:.:,. ...- .?.: . m' ??. ,
..... ,
,".:.
" I .,:...
... .. ??
.:.:-- - ,.
- ? - ....
, .
..... x .:
ll?.- :
: I..
-,.- -- .-...-..l ,-
.............. 11 .
........ .....
11 .... ' ., . , & ..;, . , .. .
.... . .1
:::?::- :::,.-
... ?: I ??::??:??:?:??: .. '
.??:,??:??:? ... : :??:??:::?.??:?:?M 1: :
- :.?::?.: ?:::,:. ::, -?.
:::,?.?
:1
"I .11
?.M?..... kxlm'2111.--...
. ...,.,r
',::?:::?:- . -j .
I . -
....... .
Y
I%,,-,-
,.,..%
;?,??ff,
.11
::.
...
....
.....
'..."....:..
?.._
,
,,- . -
.. -
..,......-...m
'.1 ..
,- . -
..-.::
."
m.. .... .
?
..,.l
- ..
?..
-
X I
:
.
? ::i.4- .....:xx ii?. .....'......... I..
9I - %?:
11 . . ..m.
. . . . . ... .
.1 ...
,:. ? . .... - .. :::F.
.11 - .. ... ?
- f.. ? , ::::.,?.::....:.::??:..:?:?,i:::?:?::::: " . ... I.. I . . ... . 1
.. .... .
-?
, - .............
.,
..'? .I....
-
:
?'... : I . . I ...
.......... -:-,-??::-:?
. .
.. M ... . : ; ,

- ,.? . . : , : ...
, , .1
&??.'Xmm.-----:,:, ..?'. X:...??:.?.:::
. . .... - ,
.:::,.
-11-1-

- .. .1 .. ,... :- , 'k.:.
-
I - - -
.

-
?
?:
., .
-
* e

M. - . . . -
??.,. - .
.......- ...:..... .
....... 1.11-1 .
?? . . .11.- .
:... - , ? .
......
,
;;
. .......... . .. : . I .... - .. . ... ..

...
".. ? ,* ??::???:::
,." ? x? .... .....I.,
?? : - . . .... . .

,- -....--d . - -.-.., ?...::: : 7?1.11 ,

,. ..:.:? . 0 1 ? R. ,. I
... . ..?
.....'... : % ::-
.:X, . I .

.11'..,.,..-",.- ....-........- I.- I M

- ? ... .?,:,?W
- ... . ...... - .
::????i , ???:.. .i; ? . .
....-........'?..,......,......-. a a m .:.:., .
... - .... I ... .... ... ?i? .
..
......,...?. ... .. .. , . ... ..
..,......,..,...,...?.."...,
I.-
. ? ;, ... - , ?::.----%
...........
I
?
......
-,.... ..
... :.:: :
-..::..:...

::]:?:?:i :.." . -., :?. .. ..*I.: -

.??::?.-::i:: W M ?,.zM .111-1.1 1 .. ?: , ?? ... ..: ,?: ?i9 oWw'.o:a .

::x::?n" '. ...
:?:??:?:-??M ff . m
..... ?- .,.l..ll
::?: . I......,....".........
,; . I ..... ? , .

. ..... W . ..P : :-:::,

. -? ? - .. .. ... 1: F, .. .
.1 ..... .-.... '... M .1

- ?;. ... .. .. , X...:....X?.?

., W. ..?.a . . . - ....
x........... .. ,.??:?-.:--,- :?.,...'?.
?,:- : ... .... . .. - - . . : .I........ .: .
11-1 ?..
I'l- ,.- . .3??M
. -
..... .N...;
m R'n'.
. , :.... ".
.IN
.- ............ 00".M
.I . I ...
. R ..... ? ..
...... :.::x.
, ,:,:.
--
? ?::.? I-.:
...- .:. ..::??-: ?. o 1I
... , ...

... ..
. 90
" '. .0
M -
.. - - . . . ..... vxlox.,.:?,? ? ....m?? , :.- ?-, I
- .. . ?."..".
. . ::
. i?:w
. - w . - -.. : -
::: .% .,
::.?? . . . .-?. ft:
..

- , ... ? . ?.. ... .

.. ... .. N. a I ?? . .
. . . ?- - 1. %n? . ...... .. - .. ...?:::: I. ,:?, ,........................... , , .
.- ?x....-,-,...,.._..
M ? .. . %::- ? .. .... ...
....-... -m
.. ? . ..m --
It -..... .
., .?I ...
. . . . -...
..F...X.
... ..I n
...
4xi ..!...-.i?i 1- 1:? -:: , r ,. :..

w " .........
w om
.....
:.. :!:: m ........ .. :?. :. ?.?mj??,*M.q
- .. I ,
... ................ ?,? ?, .. . . ?e ,:.:? .. 1
... .. '. " .... ..
? .... : Z:: %,: ,_.. - I.,
?04.-
. a
-.l...7%,Xl ......
. .NIM??
W . V.
??
-.:::?. A,
...... :Q V
im i::: ,ej.,? - .:..:::m:
. .I .....?.:.
... zk 9 '.I...
-I .
... I .: . ,? .. '. . .. .....
.. .11 .? ,
M .- - ,:.... m - ... \ .-.. ?--... .-... .
:::::..:x
l .... "I o ...- ..
::::,:A i, ?? . . . ....
?.
............ ..:. -- - - .......
..... ? ....
.. .! -I I.-
M
. '. .....

.1. xw . .. . . ......
.
1.
"
..
'l 0 .1-1-"?WM
l ......
?1,1.3..W?-
.N;*. .
.-.....
........,.
.- ...............?..
....:Mff p .? ......
e?
W
..
..
,.
.1
?..
: ... ?.
??
.?
?.1
::
?
??
'?-X
W,
:
I
.
.W ., .

I M ... .:.:
:lz-.:..'?:.:,:,??.
.?. .... .
A .."..: ,M
.:??....:!:..::
. .. -.-,
1. .
:?V:: ?F .-11-..
N
lx.
,4V 1:
... l,:?i?a
... ..:
I.... .
? "....
I
.,?*%
....
..?'. ...I
.'- I
-,...
.,..-
.
-
-
.,-.-
. ?
....
- 1 '
11.1 ..... ?. I ,?.?: .::......
?I?i W, :I..l. -1 ?,:....... %: .
. ... ?%e .. ........ . .. ll?:?:?M ?:?? . ...
% - ?.
:::?i- . A-.........
.?i?? W -
.....-... -
U ...
...
.. "..'',
11- -.. -
,.-:.:,,
., . .
a ?,gp.
.....I., ..: ..
.... ........... %, 1. :::.:v7:.
- I
:.
.
- .....
?- . ...-I
... ..... .
-:.=
::: R I
.. .1.
.w . ..
. . -
. ?
...
. ,X.X
- . : ? 6%
XX.. x :
,
.. ......... ..... , . .-- .- R :. : I :
.w n - 4 1 ? %%?,.??:?:...
.11. . ?
I .... ..? NO ll',? ..W ..- -? '.
, ? . .. ...... . x, ?
- .ii: .W . '. ..
...... . . . . . ??m .. .:?? ? . I . 1

'..
xllmmm:..
W.M ..,M .... .....
...
::,?, -.. -,-w W ,,.? - . ..

... ....
.P. ?::?:Xy-
1?:.? :::v ::-m:::m :: ..,-.
.l .11
... ... - ? T , ... . ... .
.. I .- -
.. ... ..... ? I .1
.
M I M E I .?- I . .
... - ,:.... ..
? ... ? . .. ?.
M
? .. ..... I --...::: I
. 1. ..

u ?a.,.? - :, ? . ... 1. I., ... . .. I - ? -,-- --:

. I R - ,
... ...'.......
v:??:
..... . .. 7%...Q
-
.:
.. ?, M
,:.:?.: ? ?
,??a,,
........ I
.
?' : .. :r,::. . -..:-:
,. I ...... I ... 1.

::::k
:::::
.
:?
.:::?:.:.:.
x:
::::?v .
I.
.3
.?
....
.....
.-
*: . % W.
3 ?: ??:.:::
...
,. .?..
......
lll-.....
.W
.Io.
.........
U ;?:.
4a .P
?...,
? ..
- ...
I.....
..
::
. ?I?v
.........
?:?
:..:??*
:,]i?
I
.
-
.
.. -
.-
",:*:
.
.
.
?
...
.
:
.
I. ...... ..- ... . .... ..... .1.1'... -
", ? ? III - ... ??...- --
-. I... 1--1
.
.........l. '...
?.I., ..
.......
'.%
.... ,?",.x.`,:*:
&. ., I
4..
.. ...
. ..
?::?,.g
?? ?.
.
., .
?::?:.j
?..
ez ? ... - ?:.?:.:.:.:.:,x:?. , - - ?. 1
?.-:?.::??-
..:, ??- .-.....
A .1 ... -..-
.

FIGUR
Museu

13

This content downloaded from

193.198.212.4 on Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:39:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
reliquaries before the 1990s-is Ilene Forsyth's Throne of This was the argument of Platonists, and of the French Rev-
Wisdom, published in 1972.33 olution, when churches were rechristened Temples of Reason,
Long recognized as a classic study of Romanesque carved and of French intellectuals to the present day, as elucidated
wood images of the Virgin and Child, Forsyth's book is ex- by Martin Jay.39 While other kinds of medieval sculpture can
tremely important to the study of body-part reliquaries for be (and often are) dissociated from their original religious
two reasons. First, it refutes Harald Keller's assertion that these context, and thus can be analyzed formally-for their rela-
reliquaries were created as the first halting and incomplete tion to its supporting column, for contrapposto, for "natural-
efforts of sculptors of limited ability. Second, it treats such ism" or "realism"--medieval reliquary sculpture is insistently
reliquaries as a genre of sculpture with its own distinctive cultic. At their very core, body-part reliquaries have a direct
aesthetic-manifest in the hieratic quality of the figures, their connection with a relic-with something that, but for the
otherworldly mien, the use of precious metal and stones. For- "odeur de sanctit6," would be associated with decay and
syth notes the disregard in which objects like the bust of Saint putrescence.
Baudime had been held by earlier scholars: While Caroline Bynum's pioneering work in examining
medieval attitudes about the body has shown the rewarding
Considered the Christian 'idols' of the Early Middle Ages, depth of work for historians in this area, body-part reliquaries
they have been thought more pertinent to a study of reli- are only now being considered seriously by historians of art.
gion than to a serious history of sculpture. It has been My own interest in pursuing research on head reliquaries,
difficult for art historians to realize that sculptures en- considered arguably eccentric in 1986, was awakened by the
dowed by the boundless medieval imagination with the experience of working in a museum context and by the sup-
power to speak, to weep, to fly out of windows, to bring port of a French advisor, Danielle Gaborit-Chopin. Since that
rain in time of drought, to deter invaders in time of war, time the involvement of art historians with European training
or simply to box the ears of the naughty, might also have in issues that relate to the cult of relics has paved the way for
aesthetic merit.24 more widespread investigation of reliquary sculpture. David
Freedberg's Power oflmages has lent legitimacy to works that
Body-part reliquary images, by virtue of their style and/or provoke an intense response.40 Hans Belting's work has been
their materials, often fall outside the canons we have con- critical in opening up lines of research into works produced
structed for the art of Greece and Rome or of the Renaissance. in the so-called "era before art."4'
Even for medievalists, their revetment with precious materials And yet, body-part reliquaries are still too often deemed
distances them from the now colorless and consequently dis- chiefly, as Emile Male declared, "to offer the perfume of the
passionate limestone of the portal figures of Gothic cathedrals. past." This "scent" can too easily infect scholars today. Mi-
The insistent presence of these reliquary objects is frankly chael Camille, in his review of Hans Belting's Bild und Kult,
unsettling. confesses to a fascination with images, born of what he con-
This distinctive, affective aesthetic, articulated by For- sidered an extraordinary experience of witnessing a devout
syth, was the focus of Ellert Dahl's study of the Majesty of woman's efforts to expel demons from her daughter by bang-
Saint Foy.35 But while Forsyth's apologia for Romanesque ing the child's head against an image.42 And in The Gothic
images was accepted for the polychromed wood sculptures of Idol he marvels at the qualities of head reliquaries by musing:
the Auvergne, her discussion of the larger context of cult im- "Head reliquaries are in fact rather disturbing, decapitated
ages did not win many converts. Catholicism's insistence on objects."43
the importance of the image has long been perceived by some Has the recent study of body-part reliquaries in the Mid-
(including some Catholics) as pagan, "primitive," "popular," dle Ages emerged almost as a parallel to the interest in study-
and therefore anti-intellectual. This was the argument that ing third-world or "primitive" cultures and their religious
Bernard of Angers set out in his discussion of image reliquar- practices? In recent years these have given birth to an exhi-
ies.36 This was the belief of Protestant Reformers on thebition entitled Le Crane: objet de culte, objet d'art, held in
Marseille in 1972, and Heads and Skulls in Human Culture
Continent and in England-elitists of the Word, as Margaret
Miles37 has described them-who mocked and decried the and History, in 1991, which, while held at the Malaysian Na-
importance of relics, even in rhyme: tional Museum was nevertheless reviewed in the Wall Street
Journal, under the headline "An Exhibition that will really
The blessed arm of sweet Saint Sunday: And whosoever turn heads."44 The National Museum of Anthropology in Mex-
is blessed with this right hand, Cannot speed amiss by seaico City mounted an exhibition, Human Body, Human Spirit,
nor by land. And if he offereth eke with good devotion, exploring "human figures made in ritual circumstances for
He shall not fail to come to high promotion. And anotherritual purposes."45
holy relic here may ye see: The great toe of the Holy There is, at present, a keen, almost voyeuristic interest in
Trinity... .38 "dismemberment" during the Middle Ages. But the creation

14

This content downloaded from

193.198.212.4 on Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:39:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
of body-part reliquaries should not be perceived as a deli- themselves need to reaffirm their focus on visual evidence

ciously gruesome and gory aspect of the medieval cult of
saints. The placement of a skull or other relic in its container
was part of a solemn ceremony: the account of the discovery
of the relics of Saint Privatus of Mende, their veneration, and
their placement in reliquaries is typical in emphasizing the
reverence of the bishop and the congregation, the importance
of the bishop's sermon concerning the saint's life and the
healing power of the relics.46 A decision to isolate the skull
as a relic was not dependent on the saint's death by decapi-
tation. Nor was the division of relics into other body-shaped
and aesthetic issues. A linear evaluation of stylistic develop-
ment following the tradition of the analysis of Romanesque
or Gothic sculpture is not possible, given the now-limited
body of material, nor what I would advocate. We must con-
tinue to pay attention to questions of style and quality, and o
attribution, as Pierluigi Leone de Castris and Danielle Gaborit-
Chopin have done in the case of the silver-gilt, crystal and
enamel arm reliquaries of Saint Louis of Toulouse and Sain
Luke in the Louvre (Figs. 8, 9).52
Art historians need to examine how and where such rel-

reliquaries a function of a saint's tortured dismemberment. iquaries were conceived and executed. Though I have ques-
The subsequent veneration of the relic was equally reveren- tioned some aspects of their conclusions, the efforts of Jean
tial in nature: the fourteenth-century account of the venera- Hubert and Marie-Clotilde Hubert in defining the geographic
tion of the head of Saint Martial at Limoges specifies that distribution of image reliquaries exemplify the kind of seri-
pilgrims went to the "altar of the head" as the monks sang the ous historical research that needs to be done for body-part
Te Deum and rang bells. There they wept and proclaimed reliquaries.53
their thanks to the saint before a crowd of witnesses before Studies of patronage will reveal a great deal about the
proceeding to the sepulcher in the crypt.47 importance of body-part reliquaries in the Middle Ages. The
We should be concerned about a method that may reduce reliquary made for Boson, king of Provence, was not an iso-
works of art to mere sociological curiosities. It is not, lated
or example. The fourteenth-century head reliquary of Saint
Martial was made at Avignon as a gift of Pope Gregory XI to
should not be, our final goal as art historians to tell amusing
stories about the church of the Middle Ages, its beliefshis ornative diocese of Limoges.54 The Duke of Berry, known
practices. It is only the beginning of our homework to know for his manuscripts, was also the patron of richly jeweled bust
the catechism of faith through the course of the Middle Ages.and arm reliquaries bearing his coat of arms.55
We must applaud the publication of the legends of the saints We need to consider how the appearance of these reli-
quaries related to their function. How did reliquaries in the
in English.48 It is instructive to document modern processions
of relics, like those of Saint Yrieix during the Ostensions that
form of bodily parts differ in function and/or material from
are held every seven years in the Limousin, to suggest sarcophagus-shaped
the chasses? In the Massif Central, for ex-
continuing tradition of the rites of the Middle Ages.49 Fo- ample, image reliquaries of precious materials that could be
cused analysis of the context, where it informs us about thecarried about were created to contain the skull of the saint,
object, is essential. In her study of the treasury of Trier Hil-
while other bodily relics were placed in a chasse for venera-
trud Westermann-Angerhausen was able to show convincingly tion at the tomb. How often can one see a hierarchy of rel-
that the so-called Reliquary Foot of Saint Andrew was in fact
ics suggested by the materials used to contain different parts
a portable altar; similarly, in a forthcoming publication Joan
of the body, as at Saint-Nectaire in the Auvergne in the fif-
Holladay has used contemporary church history to explain teenth century? There, in 1488, Antoine, "seigneur de Saint-
the choice of polychromed wood busts of Saint Ursula Nectaire,"
and ordered the fabrication of a silver bust for the head
her companions and the manner of their decoration at of Co- Saint Nectaire, a silver arm, a crystal ampulla enclosed in
logne.50 As they are in these studies, the links between con-
silver for the heart, a copper chasse for the rest of the body
text and works of art must be manifest; historical research and a wood box for "Aliqua parva ossa beati Necterii et terra
that does not, finally, inform our understanding of the object
quae fuit reperta infra tumulum."56 At Bourges, the existence
of a series of silver-gilt arm reliquaries of the cathedral's
is a discipline other than art history: finding out that Paul
Revere rode through the towns around Boston the 18thsainted of bishops appears to present thematic analogies to the
April in '75 may or may not tell us anything about him asimages
a of the bishops in stained glass.57
silversmith, and we are obliged as art historians to ask our- It is essential to consider how these works were viewed in
selves if it does. aesthetic terms in the Middle Ages. It matters that the eleventh-
It is important that we consider body-part reliquariescentury
as description of the head reliquary of Saint Valerien
at Tournus called it "a comely image of gold and most pre-
part of the history of images; since Forsyth and Belting, such
an argument now seems self-evident. Still, a large dosage of
cious gems in the likeness to a certain point, of the martyr,"'5
"old" art history must remain in the mix. The historian and that Bernard of Angers referred to the "animated, lively
Patrick Geary, echoing the words of Marc Bloch more than a
expression" of the image of Saint Geraud at Aurillac.59 Texts
generation ago, has just recommended that historians use like
ar- these remind us that a head like the one of Saint Yrieix
is not meant to be seen as a wooden core, but as a luminous,
chaeology as part of their body of evidence;51 art historians

15

This content downloaded from

193.198.212.4 on Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:39:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 :: ::: ::: :: : _ii

m . . ... . .. . .. ....... ...: . .. :

AMON&~

......

iiiiiiiiii ii ii iiiii iiiii iiiii

iiiiiiiiiiiii~~iii!iiii~i~iiiiiiiiiiiill iii~~i~iixiim.

ICA*:

iiiiiiiiil

FIGURE 9.1337-38,
FIGURE 8. Arm Reliquary of Saint Louis of Toulouse, Arm Reliquarymusee
of Saint Luke,
du ca. 1337-38, musee du Louvre,
Paris (photo: Courtesy of the musee du Louvre).
Louvre, Paris (photo: Courtesy of the musee du Louvre).

luxurious presence that was a likeness "to Saint Philip resembling

a certain point, a head
ofreliquary appears in the ca-
the martyr," and that it was considered beautiful.
thedral glazing ofAt theofend
the choir the cathedral of Troyes, which
of the thirteenth century, it mattered that acquired
thethe head after
head the sack of Constantinople.63
reliquary
of France's royal Saint Louis resemble the head Additional texts should of
reliquary be scoured for references to body-
Saint Denis in appearance and construction-that
part reliquaries.64the visual
Such texts can be related to what we know
metaphor served to link the saints.60 from surviving objects and provide a broader picture of the
The images on seal matrices, and onkinds pilgrim
of reliquariesbadges,
produced in particular centers of gold-
smithwork atSaint
such as those of Thomas Becket, Saint Quentin,61 particular periods. For example, the silver-gilt
Julien
of Le Mans,62 or those, perhaps of Saint Denis, recently
head of Saint Stephen of ex-
Muret from the Grandmont Treasury
cavated at Saint-Denis should be looked at more thoroughly time of Rupin as part of the
has been considered since the
Oeuvre Images
in relation to descriptions of lost reliquaries. de Limoges.65in Yet,other
with its heavily individualized fea-
tures, it seems
media may further inform us concerning the form and usage anomalous in the context of Limousin metal-
work. Early
of body-part reliquaries. For example, an image ofdescriptions
the relic indicate
ofthat it once had enameled

16

This content downloaded from

193.198.212.4 on Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:39:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 enne" recorded in 1396, and a single arm-shaped reliqu
containing an arm of the virgin martyr saint Agnes and on
Agatha.70 Each of these three was necessarily an exceptio
the standardized image of an arm with its right hand gest
ing in priestly blessing.
While we consider the evidence of lost treasures, we
... ..... .....

. ........ . .

must likewise turn our attentions to great works of art that

have not been adequately studied, of which the bust of San
.......

Gennaro in the treasury of his titular church at Naples, made

ol by French goldsmiths,71 and the head of Saint Agatha in the
treasury of Catania are but two examples (Figs. 10, 5).72 It is
only through such probing study of individual problems that
a more complete sense of the whole will emerge. If we con-
sider Braun as our Arthur Kingsley Porter, laying out the cor-
pus of reliquary sculpture, it is time to get on with focused
studies of individual works and of the production of particu-
lar periods and regions. Only then can we approach any kind
of encyclopedic understanding of medieval body-part reli-
quary sculpture, over the long course of the Middle Ages and
throughout Western Europe.

FIGURE 10. Bust Reliquary of San Gennaro, 1304-6, Treasury of the Ca- NOTES
thedral of San Gennaro, Naples (photo: after Leone de Castris, 1986).
1. The CD-Rom for the BHA (Bibliographie de l'histoire de l'art)
cludes over 200 entries under the subject of reliquaries for the y
1990-1995.
scenes of the life of the saint around the base. This de-
2. S. Beissel, Die Verehrung der Heilige und ihrer Reliquien in Deut
scription, plus the fact that it once bore the arms of Cardinal
land bis zum Beginne des 13. Jahrhunderts, Ergainzungshefte zu
Brissonet, suggests that it should rather be considered inStimmen
the aus Maria-Laach, 47 (Freiburg im Breisgau, 1890, repri
context of Italian examples, such as the one of Saint John Darmstadt, 1983).

Gualbert at Passignano.66 3. See H. Delehaye, L'Oeuvre des Bollandistes a travers trois si

Successive inventories of a single treasury can offer Subsidia
in- hagiographica 13a.2, 2nd ed. (Brussels, 1958).
sights into the varying uses and changing forms of reliquaries
4. The container sometimes belies the contents. During a trip to Ro
in a particular location. Eight surviving inventories, ranging
Abbot Gauzlin of Fleury (1004-1030) purchased a golden arm in w
in date from 1396 to 1791, plus a number of documents sug- he placed, not an arm bone, but a relic of the shroud of Christ.
Andre de Fleury, Vita Gauzlini abbatisfloiracensis monasterii. (Vi
gest changing patterns of veneration at Mont-Saint-Michel.
Gauzlin, Abbe de Fleury), ed. and trans. R.-H. Bautier and G. Lab
The body of Saint Aubert, a saint whose origins are obscure (Paris, 1969), 61-63.
but whose body was preserved at the abbey, was enshrined in
5. See E. Kovics, Kopfreliquiare des Mittelalters (Budapest, 1964),
a chasse; a separate reliquary for his skull was made in 1131.
veying and illustrating forty-two examples; B. Bessard, II Tesoro
As with other recorded examples from the north of Francelegrinaggio
be- ai corpi santi e preziosi della cristianith (Milan, 1
and B. Falk, "Bildnisreliquiare. Zur Entstehung und Entwicklung
fore the second quarter of the thirteenth century, this twelfth-
century reliquary for the head was not in bust form,67 metallenen
but Kopf-, Bdisten- und Halbfigurenreliquiare im Mittelal
Aachener Kunstblidtter, LIX (1991/93).
rather dome-shaped. A separate arm reliquary of Saint Aubert
was first fabricated in 1477;68 the inventory specifies6.that
Abbeit
Texier, "Bras," Dictionnaire d'orfrvrerie, de gravure et de
lure chretiennes... (Paris, 1857), cols. 279-80.
was used for the swearing of oaths. The patron of the arm rel-
7. See
iquary, prior Oudin Bou~tte, also had a new chasse made forA. Bouillet and L. Servibres, Sainte Foy, vierge et martyre (R
1990). The authentication of the relics was published two years befo
the body. While the reliquary for the skull of Saint Aubert
Mgr. Bourret, Procks-verbaux authentiques et autres pieces concern
was apparently not replaced, a new bust-shaped silver-gilt
la reconnaissance des reliques de sainte Foy, vierge et martyre (R
reliquary was fabricated at the same time for the head of
1888).
Saint Innocent.69 There were also arm-shaped reliquaries for
8. A. Bouillet and L. Servieres, Sainte Foy, vierge et martyre, unpag-
relics brought to Mont-Saint-Michel from abroad: the "osse-
inated prefatory letter.
ment du bras" of Saint Lawrence, brought to the monastery
9. On Peiresc see La Grande encyclopddie: Inventaire raisonnd des sci-
from Rome in 1165. There were also reliquaries for the arms
ences, des lettres et des arts (Paris, 1885-1900), XXVI, 256; J. B. Re-
of female saints-an arm of Mary "la bienheureuse Egypti-
quier, Vie de Nicolas-Claude-Peiresc (Paris, 1770).

17

This content downloaded from

193.198.212.4 on Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:39:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
10. Six volumes of Peiresc's letters were included in M. Tamizey de Lar- 28. P Williamson, The Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection: Medieval Sculp-
roque, Collection des documents inidits sur l'histoire de France. ture and Works of Art (London and New York, 1987), 98-103, no. 18.
11. E. Kovics, "Le chef de Saint Maurice a la cathedrale de Vienne 29. The images of these destroyed bust reliquaries are illustrated in D.
(France)," Cahiers de civilisation mdie'vale, VII (1964), 19-26. Gaborit-Chopin, Regalia: Les Instruments du sacre des rois de France
(Paris, 1987), 57, figs. 7-8.
12. A. d'Auvergne, "Notice sur le Buste de saint Baudime conserve dans
l'6glise de Saint-Nectaire (Puy-de-Dome)," Revue des societis savantes,
30. See E Rossi, Capolavori di orefeceria italiana dall'XI al XVIII secolo
ser. 2, 1 (1859), 1-4. (Milan, 1956), 9, fig. 3.
13. "Dans tous les reliquaires qui viennent de passer sous nos yeux, onthe finger-shaped reliquary of John the Baptist held by the saint,
31. For
placait des corps entiers ou des parcelles de corps, ou bien des objets,see Tresors des iglises, cat. 168, pl. 149; for the thigh at Saint-Gilad-
comme des v&tements, qui avaient appartenu aux bienheureux en l'hon- de-Rhuys, see cat. 331, pl. 167.
neur desquels ces reliquaires 6taient executes. Mais il arrivait souvent,
32. The Cloisters, for example, as originally conceived, had no treasury
quand on possedait une partie determinre du corpus d'un saint, qu'on
for precious objects.
faisait un reliquaire de form speciale pouvant representer aux yeux, par
33. I. H. Forsyth, The Throne of Wisdom: Wood Sculptures of the Ma-
l'enveloppe exterieure, la form de l'objet contenu dans cette enveloppe
meme." E. Rupin, L'Oeuvre de Limoges (Paris and Brieve, 1890), 447. donna in Romanesque France (Princeton, 1972).

14. E. Rupin, "Chef de Saint Martin en argent dora et 6maill6 XIe 34. Ibid., 3.
siecle,
Eglise de Soudeilles (Correze)," Bulletin de la socite' scientifique, his-
35. See E. Dahl, "Heavenly Images: The Statue of St. Foy of Conques and
torique et archdologique de la Correze, IV (1882), 435-56.
the signification of the Medieval 'Cult-Image' in the West," Acta ad
15. On Morgan as a collector of medieval art, see W. D. Wixom, "J. Pier- Archaeologia etArtium Historiam Pertinenta, VIII (1987), 175-91. The
pont Morgan: The Man and The Collector," in Migration Period Art emphasis
in on this aspect of images was repeated by A. G. Remensnyder,
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 3rd-8th Century: Highlights from "Un probleme de cultures ou de culture?: La statue-reliquaire et les
the J. Pierpont Morgan Collection and Related Material Reconsid-joca de sainte Foy de Conques dans le Liber miraculorum de Bernard
ered, papers of the symposium held May 22-23, 1995, forthcoming.d'Angers," Cahiers de civilisation midievale, XXXIII (1990), 351-79.

16. Les tresors des iglises de France, exhibition at the Musee des36.
arts
Bernard of Angers, "Liber miraculorum S. Fidis," J.-P Migne, ed., PL,
decoratifs, Paris, 1965. CLXI, 127-64.

17. W. D. Wixom, Treasures from Medieval France, exhibition at the37. See M. Miles, Image as Insight (Boston, 1985).
Cleve-
land Museum of Art, Cleveland, Ohio, 1967. See no. VII, 13, Bust rel-
38. See J. Phillips, The Reformation of Images: Destruction of Art in En-
iquary of Saint Felicule from Saint-Jean-d'Aulps (Haute-Savoie), late
gland, 1535-1660 (Berkeley, Los Angeles and London, 1973), 19.
fifteenth century.
39. M. Jay, Downcast Eyes: The Denigration of Vision in Twentieth-Century
18. H. Keller, "Zur Entstehung der sakralen Vollskullptur in der ottoni-
French Thought (Berkeley, 1993).
schen Zeit," in Festschriftfiir Hans Jantzen (Berlin, 1951), 71-90.
40. D. Freedberg, The Power of Images: Studies in the History and Theory
19. R. RUckert, "Beitrdige zur limousiner Plastik des 13. Jahrhunderts,"
of Response (Chicago, 1989).
ZfK, XXII (1959), 1-16. Rtickert also published an article on the Byz-
antine reliquaries for the skulls of saints, which traditionally do not as- discussion of the bust reliquary of Saint Martial (actually four suc-
41. His
sume the form of a human head or bust. See R. Riickert, "Zur Form der cessive heads and busts) at Limoges is, however, an inadequate re-
byzantinischen Reliquie," Miinchener Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst, hearsal of the literature. The first recorded image was fabricated after
VIII (1957), 7-36. 952; the second was made by 1206; the third was new in 1307; the
fourth was created between 1370-1380 for Pope Gregory XI. See B. D.
20. E Souchal, "Les Bustes reliquaires et la sculpture," Gb-a, LXVII (1966),
Boehm, "Medieval Head Reliquaries of the Massif Central" (Univer-
205-15.
sity Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich., 1990), 322-28.
21. W. D. Wixom, Treasures of Medieval France, 318.
42. M. Camille, review of H. Belting, Bild und Kult: Eine Geschichte des
22. I. Lavin, "On the Sources and Meaning of the Renaissance Portrait Bildes vor dem Zeitalter der Kunst (Munich, 1990), AB, LXXIV (1992),
Bust," The Art Quarterly, XXXIII (Autumn 1970), 207-26. 514.

23. A. Moskowitz, "Donatello's Reliquary Bust of Saint Rossore,"

43. M.AB,
Camille, The Gothic Idol. Ideology and Image-Making in Medieval
LXIII (1981), 41-48. Art (Cambridge, 1989), 279.
24. The four reliquaries are accession numbers 17.190.728, 59.70, 67.155.23
44. The article by John D. Wagner was published on August 20, 1991,
and 1976.89. They are now exhibited in a chapel-like setting at The p. A12.
Cloisters. They are discussed in terms of their original context in W. D.
45. From the flyer from the University of Pennsylvania Press for C. E.
Wixom, "Medieval Sculpture at The Cloisters," The Metropolitan Mu-
Tate, ed., Human Body, Human Spirit, A Portrait of Ancient Mexico,
seum of Art Bulletin, XLVI/3 (Winter 1988/89), 40-41.
first published in 1993.
25. P. Pieper, "Der goldene Pauluskopf des Domes zu MUnster," in Studien
46. See C. Brunel, Les Miracles de Saint Privat, suivis des opuscules d'Al-
zur Buchmalerei und Goldschmiedekunst des Mittelalters. Festschriftfiir
debert III, eveque de Mende (Paris 1912), 59-74.
Karl Hermann Usener zum 60. Geburtstag am 19. August 1965 (Mar-
burg an der Lahn, 1967), 33-40. 47. See E Arbellot, "Miracula S. Martialis Anno 1388," Analecta Bollan-
diana, I (1882), 411-45.
26. "Das Kopfreliquiar des heiligen Candidus in St-Maurice," Zeitschrift
fiir schweizerische Archiologie und Kunstgeschichte, XXIV/2 (1965/48. A model in this regard is Pamela Sheingorn, ed., The Book of Sainte
66), 65-127. Foy (Philadelphia, 1995).

27. TP. E Hoving, "The Face of St. Juliana," The Bulletin of The Metro- 49. See E Lautman, "Ostensions et identitis limousines," in L~gende dorde
politan Museum ofArt, NS XXI (1963), 173-81. du Limousin: les saints de la Haute-Vienne (Limoges, 1993), 78-89.

18

This content downloaded from

193.198.212.4 on Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:39:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The exhibition, held at the Musee de Luxembourg in Paris in 1993-94, 58. The text is given in R. Poupardin, ed., Monuments de l'histoire des
included a number of medieval reliquaries of exceptionally fine quality abbayes de Saint-Philibert, 1905.
and importance. Because the exhibition's focus was on the broader
59. Bouillet and Servibres, 472.
topic of devotion to the cult of saints in the Limousin throughout his-
tory, the visual impact of the medieval masterpieces in the exhibition 60. The resemblance was noted by C. Enlart, "L'Emaillerie cloisonnee a
was significantly lessened. Paris sous Philippe le Bel et le maitre Guillaume Julien," Monuments
et memoires publie's par lAcademie des inscriptions et belles-lettres
50. H. Westermann-Angerhausen, "Die Goldschmiedearbeiten der Trierer
(Fondation Eugene Piot), XXIX (1927-28), 36.
Egbertwerkstatt," Trierer Zeitschrift fiir Geschichte und Kunst des
Trierer Landes und seine Nachbargebiete, XXXVI (1973). J. Holla- 61. For pilgrims' badges of a bust of Saint Quentin, see A. Forgeais, Col-
day, "Relics, Reliquaries, and Religious Women; Visualizing the Holy lection de plombs historie's trouves dans la Seine, 2 vols. (Paris, 1863),
Virgin of Cologne," forthcoming in Studies in Iconography, XVIII II: 194-96. For a reference to the sixteenth-century seal of the chapter
(1996). with the bust and a coat of arms of the city, see P Guerin, ed., Les Petits
Bollandistes. Vies des saints de lancien et du nouveau testament, 7th
51. P Geary, "The Uses of Archaeology. Sources for Religious and Cul-
ed., 17 vols. (Paris, 1878), XIII: 60.
tural History," in Living with the Dead in the Middle Ages (Ithaca,
N.Y., 1994), 30-45. 62. The bust, known from an inventory of the fifteenth century brought to
my attention by Denis Bruna, may be illustrated on a pilgrim's badge
52. See P Leone de Castris, "Une attribution 'a Lando di Pietro: Le bras-
in the Musee national du moyen age.
reliquaire de saint Louis de Toulouse," Revue du Louvre, XXX (1980),
71-76; D. Gaborit-Chopin, "Le Bras-reliquaire de Saint Luc au Mus~e 63. See Corpus Vitrearum, Inventaire ge'ne'rale des monuments et richesses
du Louvre," Melanges Verlet. Studi sulle arti decorative in Europa artistiques de la France, vol. 4: Les Vitraux de Champagne-Ardenne
(Antologia di Belle Arti), XXVII-XXVIII (1985), 5-18. (Paris, 1992), 229, briefly discussed in P. Geary, "Saint Helen of Athyra
and the Cathedral of Troyes in the Thirteenth Century," reprinted in
53. J. Hubert and M.-C. Hubert, "Piet6 chretienne ou paganisme: Les
Living with the Dead, 238-40. I am grateful to Mary B. Shepard for
Statues-reliquaires de l'europe carolingienne," Cristianizzazione ed
this reference.
organizzazione ecclisiastica delle campagne nell'alto medioevo: espan-
sione e resistenze, Settimane di studio del centro italiano di studi 64. William Diebold's scrutiny of Carolingian texts for his forthcoming
sull'alto medioevo, XXCIII (Spoleto, 1982), 235-75. My discussion of publication provides a model. Texts pertinent to the Massif Central ap-
their work appears in Boehm, "Medieval Head Reliquaries." pear in Boehm, 1990. Descriptions may be imprecise or deceiving,
however. A reliquary at Clermont-Ferrand was referred to in a tenth-
54. See Boehm, "Medieval Head Reliquaries," 322-28.
century inventory as a caput, but then described as having a palm and
55. The inventory of May 10, 1405, of the palace chapel at Bourges notes scepter, indicating that it may have been at least bust-length with arms.
the presence of silver-gilt and enameled heads of Saint James and of See Dou&t-d'Arcq, "Inventaire du tresor de la cathedrale de Clermont-
Saint Ursin, first bishop of Bourges. See "Tresor de la Sainte-Chapelle Ferrand. Document de la fin du Xe siecle," Revue archiologique, X
de Bourges," Annales archdologiques, X (1850), 143-44. For the arm (1853).
of Saint Andrew at the cathedral of Bourges, see below, note 57. For
the reliquary head of Saint Philip given to Notre-Dame, Paris, see H.-E
65. Rupin, L'Oeuvre de Limoges, 448-49.
Delaborde, "Le procks du chef de Saint Denis en 1410," Mimoires de 66. This was first suggested to me by Jean-Rene Gaborit. See Boehm,
la socie'te' historique de Paris, XI, 1884 (1885), 300. 1990, 182-83. For the reliquary see E Rossi, Capolavori di oreficeria
56. L'Abb6 Forestier, L'Eglise et la paroisse de Saint-Nectaire. Notice his- italiana dall'XI al XVIII secolo (Milan, 1956), pl. XII.
torique, archdologique et religieuse (Clermont-Ferrand, 1878), 66, cit- 67. Discussed in a paper I gave on "Le chef reliquaire de Saint Denis au
ing from the inventory of 1622 preserved in the departmental archives tr6sor de Saint-Denis," at the colloquium in Paris, Trdsors du Moyen
of the Haute-Loire. The silver arm reliquary is preserved in the church. Age, March 15, 1991.
The bust was destroyed in the French Revolution and the bones burned
in a fire of 1854. 68. See J. Dubois, Aspects de la vie monastique en France au Moyen Age,
550-53, nos. 16, 16a; 554-58, nos. 16c-17.
57. For the arm reliquaries of Saints Williams, Austreille and Sulpice Se-
69. Ibid., 583.
vere, described in an inventory of 1537, see M. le baron de Girardot,
"Histoire et inventaire du tresor de la cathedrale de Bourges," Me- 70. Ibid., 547.
moires de la socie'te' imperiale des antiquaires de France, XXIV (1859),
71. See P Leone de Castris, Arte di Corte nella Napoli angioina (Florence
212. The cathedral also possessed the left hand of Saint Andrew with
1986), 194; 163, fig. 37.
the arms of the Duke of Berry. For the stained glass, see Corpus Vit-
72. See S. J. A. Churchill, "Giovanni Bartolo, of Siena, Goldsmith and
rearum, Les vitraux du centre et des pays de la Loire, France, Recen-
sement des vitraux anciens de la France, II (Paris, 1981), 175-76. Enameller, 1364-1385," BM, X (October 1906-March 1907), 120-25.

19

This content downloaded from

193.198.212.4 on Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:39:59 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms