Gothic Cathedral

Summary.  The standing cathedral was originally Gothic in architectural style. The stonework overawed, but there is a scant record of what it actually looked like before the Civil War destruction. The repaired cathedral has a Victorian Gothic Revival style, which is not the same as the original.

           The revolution in cathedral architecture, known as Gothic, is thought to have been first used in the building of the  Abbey of Saint-Denis, Paris, in 1144 and Notre-Dame, Paris, in 1163. Similar Gothic decoration had been used in the early mosques of the Middle East, so the western version was an adaptation and extension. This Gothic style, sometimes known as High Gothic, first came to England at Byland Abbey (1170) and then a rebuild of the east end of Canterbury Cathedral, 1174.[1]

French stonemasons in the Ile de France had worked out the stresses on the frame of a cathedral and began to change its appearance and functionality. At the time it was known as Opus Francigenum or French work.[2] Solid, monumental, Romanesque buildings with small lancet windows and timbered roofs became larger, lighter, more ornate, and with stone vaulted roofs. Many more pointed arches,[3] originally a Saxo-Norman feature, appeared. The heavy, thick walls were now pierced by large open windows and arcades. Pillars and columns held up pointed arches and together with flying buttresses (external, semi-arches often added later when weakened walls were noticed) enabled the walls to support elaborate vaulted, stone roofs. Large windows were now subdivided by closely spaced parallel mullions (narrow vertical bars of stone) often up to the level of the arch at the top of the pointed window. It gave the impression of a severe grid-like pattern which later became curvilinear and elaborate. Above there was stone tracery in elaborate, exuberant, geometrical patterns. There was usually at least one rose-window. The arrangement supported heavy, cut, coloured-glass windows. The triforium (middle layer) was reduced in size, but the clerestory above with larger windows increased in size. More vaulting ribs appeared including one central rib extending down the middle of the roof. Some side ribs were merely ornamental. The west front was generally monumental with twin towers and great doors. Wide towers supported narrow, tall spires, usually octagonal.[4] Pinnacles appeared on corners of the building. Statues and gargoyles were added. Walls were painted, usually red and green. In many cathedrals heraldic shields became a decorative device. There were abstract and animal images with bold colours symbolizing noble lineages. All these features are known from other Gothic cathedrals since there is no record or etching of the cathedral before its extensive destruction in the English Civil War, 1643-6.

 

Wenceslaus. Hollar’s (1607-77) etching, 16th-century. Note how all the niches are filled with statues. This is the earliest known image of the west front. Hollar's engravings were presented by Ashmole to Fuller's "Church History," published in 1655. Thanks to Univ. of Toronto Libraries.

 

               Wenceslaus. Hollar’s etching of the south side.  Has a reference to a bishop dated 1672

 

East end shrine chapel – French designed and constructed.

 

Vaulting at the crossing. Note the central ribs running down the middle of the cathedral. Some side ribs were purely ornamental. 

 

      Inside the central spire. Spires were tall, narrow and octagonal.

 

Narrow, comparatively small triforium.

 

          There are several reasons why this architectural style became the convention. Firstly, during the 13th-century there was a population growth with larger towns and an economy swollen with silver. There were new agricultural improvements, use of good quarries and better stonemasons. Communication improved and labour became more mobile. The wealth of cathedrals increased considerably.[5] The second reason for the new architecture was extra light was let into the cathedral and worship could now be seen in a way not possible before.[6] Liturgy was enriched. Some have linked this with the fourth Lateran Council, 1215, in which many theological changes were made to church organisation including infallibly defining transubstantiation as the centre of the Eucharist.[7] It enhanced the position of the chancel and many were now extended, squared off, had an ambulatory and given sedilia for more priests to sit close to the altar.  Piscina (for washing the sacred vessels) and a cupboard or aumbry (for storing the vessels) appeared. The third reason was it encouraged worshippers to look upwards to heaven. Height was not the greatest feature of early Gothic, but it became the defining feature of improved Gothic. The three spires reminded all of the Trinity. Bosses on the vaulting showed significant events. The polished stone subliminally stated a vision of heaven. The elevated gargoyles scared away evil and made the cathedral a safe space.[8] Statues had natural poses and gestures, full of tender feeling and strong emotion. Column capitals showed beautiful arrangements of leaves. A fourth explanation was it expressed the hierarchy of the church. The Angevin kings and bishops (often related) were frequently in tandem and all wanted to own a magnificent house of God, especially for their own glory or an ancestor’s memorial. The cathedral had a Consistory Court and a Chapter House to enforce rules and law. Somewhere in the edifice felons could be held for a short time. All behaviours were being determined by biblical explication. The spiritual majesty of a cathedral replaced the raw power of a castle.

Bishop’s chair between two stalls in the Consistory Court. Offenders were subject to the bishop and there was no way to appeal. 

Lichfield Cathedral did not begin until early-13th century (see the post ‘Third cathedral dates’), but epitomises in every way this revolution in style (alongside rebuilt Canterbury, Wells, Salisbury and rebuilt Lincoln). Even the Close became a fortified residence with a battlemented curtain wall and external ditch and moat. The new Jerusalem was given a city wall.[9] The cathedral felt spacious, could be full of light and everywhere stonework made the onlooker peer upwards; all pointing to heaven. By 1220, a new national style had been formed and Lichfield fully exemplified this. It has been written the 130 years 1220-1350 stand out as amongst the most energetic, inventive and extravagant period of building in English history.[10] It was a performance of majesty, new liturgy, craftsmanship and increased wealth.

             All this new architectural invention appears to be deterministic and relatable to the times. The wealth of kings and gifted money from nobles wanting recognition funded the revolution.[11] However, building took decades and lives were short. The cathedral took 110–140 years to build and that could have been 4 to 5 generations of wealth-givers. At Lichfield names of several master-masons are known and each in turn would have had their own ideas of building in stone. 

Supposed face of Walter de Ramessey, a mason engaged in 1337 to join the extension of the choir with the old choir so that the continuation was masked. Walter was a ‘King’s Mason’ and this face Is on the east side of the capital of the pillar by the north gate of the choir. From H. E. Savage, The fourteenth century builders, Unpub. article in Cathedral Library, (1916), 22.

 

 Several kings and bishops would have added their own particular preferences. Consequently, the cathedral was a bewildering mix of different styles. Even sizes varied, see the two front towers on the west end and the side aisles of the nave. A comprehensive account of the early Gothic transepts[12] highlights differences between the two transepts, between the bays of the transepts and between the levels of the transepts. It is a surprise to many how there is little symmetry in the building. Gothic was an evolving fashion, never a fixed design and went through several phases.

Today, it is inaccurate to describe Lichfield Cathedral as Medieval Gothic. Victorian rebuild, repair and replacement, 1854‑98, means the cathedral is now a neo-Gothic revised building. The Gothic Revival started in Napoleon III’s France by Eugène Viollet-le-Duc, 1814-79. Around 1830 and within a decade it became the architectural fashion in England, Germany, France and in missionary churches abroad. The revival included many variations, much of it was contrived and some was detrimental. At Lichfield George Gilbert Scott gave the cathedral a measured Gothic appearance relative to other cathedrals. However, there is precious little original Gothic in the visible fabric of the cathedral. It is a Victorian Gothic Revival edifice. Gothic is now a concept and not a defined architecture.

---

[1] Strangely, not in Scotland or Wales. Perhaps, the greatest example was the royal chapel of Sainte-Chapelle in Paris. There were rivals in other parts of Europe; the cathedrals of Burgos and Toledo in Spain, the cathedral of Strasbourg near the French border with Germany and the cathedral of Cologne when it was finally completed.

[2] The term Gothic was first coined by Italian writers in the later Renaissance period (late 15th to early 17th–century). It was meant to be derogatory meaning barbaric. Between 1180 and 1270, eighty cathedrals, five hundred abbeys and tens of thousands of churches were built in France.

[3] Early pointed arches can be found in Syria and Mesopotamia, and Western builders probably took the idea from Islamic architecture that would have been seen in Spain at this time.

[4] Only 9 spires were built on French cathedrals before 1300.

[5] By the end of the thirteenth century twelve out of Europe's forty richest dioceses were in England.

[6] God was the light of the world, so it was liturgically important to show that light.

[7] This was a driver of change given in a Gresham online talk by Simon Thurley in 2010 entitled ‘A New Jerusalem: Reaching for heaven 1130–1300’. See https://vimeo.com/22404136.

[8] As well as draining off rainwater away from the wall.

[9] It resonates with the Book of Revelation.

[10] See S. Thurley, 2010. He added, boom leads to bust and the series of busts that hit English Society after 1300 came thick and fast: economic stagnation, climate change, famine, and disease. All led to changes in the way that the English built.

[11] W. C. Jordan, Europe in the High Middle Ages, (London: 2002), 141. ‘The greatest patrons continued to be the aristocracy and the Crown’.

[12] M. Thurlby, ‘The Early Gothic Transepts of Lichfield Cathedral’, In Medieval Archaeology and Architecture at Lichfield, J. Maddison (ed.) (1993), 50–64.

Archbishop Higbert of Lichfield

Summary. Following King Offa’s success at removing competing warlords, making money with exports and taxation and building a mother church, he persuaded the pope in 787 to convert the Bishop of Lichfield into an Archbishop. He ruled over an extended Mercia for 12 /14 years. In 788, Offa had his son made co-king in a remarkable coronation led by the archbishop.

 

          When Bishop Berthun of Lichfield died, c. 777/9, he was succeeded by Higbert in 779.[1] Higbert was probably a native of Mercia and known to King Offa. In 787, he was elevated to be an archbishop, signing himself as Hygeberht or Hygebeorht. His see was much of Southumbria, an area from the Thames to the Humber,[2] until 799, After Offa’s reign he was demoted to be an abbot and Ealdwulf succeeded him at Lichfield,[3] 799-80. Higbert died sometime in or after 803.[4]  This meant for 12 to 14 years there was an archbishop for the enlarged Mercian part of Southumbria and based at Lichfield.

    

 

Hygeberht in a floor roundel in the presbytery.

 

Hygeberht signing a charter, the third name, in 787. From BL Cotton MS Augustus II 97 

 

Multiple reasons for raising an archbishopric at Lichfield have been speculated. 

1.     Offa became the king of Mercia in 757 and continued, like Æthelbald his predecessor, to overpower other Early Medieval kings and warlords until he was unopposed. By the 770s, he ruled over most of England from the River Ribble southwards. An Archbishopric then marked Offa’s new found power. He began trading skins and furs through the ports of Chester and London and became wealthy. Abundant coins were then issued and taxation became normal. It was an accumulation of power.

 

The Archiepiscopal See of Higbert according to William of Malmesbury in 1120, but is probably incorrect. Higbert and Offa could have had more control of much of the church in southern England, especially after the death of the Archbishop of Canterbury (Jaenberht) in 792, but this was short-lived,

 

                                          Offa penny found at Elford. Courtesy of Yorkcoins.com

 2.     Charlemagne, Holy Roman Emperor of west and central Europe (Francia), called Offa his dearest brother. Trade was negotiated between Francia and Mercia, cloaks and stones were mentioned. At one time, both rulers had a silver coin of similar size and parity to enable this commercial interchange. People, especially scribes, also freely passed between the kingdoms. Offa began to see himself as equivalent to Charlemagne and wanted the same standing, including having an archbishop. This also enabled his son Ecgfrith being anointed co-ruler and thus securing Offa’s royal hereditary.[5] Archbishop Jænberht of Canterbury, is thought to have resisted this unprecedented arrangement and so Offa by-passed him.[6] Despite Offa having nominal control over Kent, he was not free to arrange a consecration of his son.[7] With Pope Hadrian’s permission Offa elevated his bishop to archbishop in 787 and in 788 had a coronation of his son, probably then aged around 17. After this, Ecgfrith witnessed at least two of Offa's charters as ‘Ecgfrith King’ or ‘Ecgfrith King of the Mercians’. After Offa's death and Ecgfrith’s early death[8] his distant relative Coenwulf became king, and he petitioned the pope to have Lichfield returned to a bishopric. The pope agreed to do so in 802 and this was confirmed at the council of Clovesho in 803; by which time Hygeberht was no longer even considered a bishop. Instead, he was listed as an abbot, his abbey is unknown, at the council that oversaw the demotion of Lichfield in 803.[9] 

3.     Offa was the first English king to hold a Council in 786 with papal legates attending and approving how Offa was generously giving to the church. This bought Pope Hadrian’s support for Offa’s request for a third archbishop.[10] Canterbury and York[11] remained, but Lichfield could have had pre-eminence. Consequently, Higbert officiated at the coronation of his son and heir in 788. This was the first coronation in England with a king being holy oil-anointed and probably the first ceremony with a religious element in the making of a king. It must have been opulent and unprecedented.[12] Maybe, Offa thought his kingship needed further confirmation[13] and this was a way of continuing his royal lineage.[14] Offa was grandstanding.   

Offa on the west front of Lichfield Cathedral. He is looking southwards to Rome whilst holding his Archbishop’s mitre.

          The new archbishop of Canterbury appointed in 793 was consecrated by Archbishop Higbert, which shows his pre-eminence at this time. When Offa had Ethelbert, king of the East Angles, executed in 794, Higbert buried the body in Lichfield cathedral in the presence of his clerks and deacons.[15]

 

     4.     A letter to the Pope Leo III written by Coenwulf, who succeeded Offa's son Ecgfrith to the Mercian throne, claimed that Offa's motives were his dislike of Jænberht the archbishop and of the men of Kent; there was a personal enmity.[16] Furthermore, Jænberht supported the Kentish king Egbert II, who appeared not to be a firm supporter of Offa's. This might say more about Coenwulf who was only distantly related to Offa; and later goes on to crush Kent.[17] In 798, Alcuin writing from the Palace School of Charlemagne in Aachen to Æthelheard, the new Archbishop of Canterbury, suggested that it would be good if the unity of the southern English church could be restored, given that it was apparently torn asunder not out of reasonable motives but out of a desire for power by Offa. This was a harking back to the traditional arrangement with Canterbury having the earliest church.  

      5. Fuller [18] in 1837 gave another reason why the Archbishopric came to Lichfield. He explained Lichfield was ‘in the navel of the land’ (the centre of Offa’s kingdom). “The highest candlestick should be in the middle of the table.” For him, Canterbury was located at a remote corner.

 

          Offa died on 29 July 796, but his place of burial is unknown.[19] It would be reasonable to think Archbishop Higbert officiated at his funeral just as he had for King Ethelbert two years previously. If so, it would be reasonable to assume this also was in Lichfield Cathedral and would be somewhere in the choir area. 

---

[1] At a Mercian council he attended that year at Hartleford he was styled electus praesul or bishop elect. H. Wharton, Anglia Sacra. (1691), 430 calls him Higberthus.

[2] An estimated area used by M. W. Greenslade, 'Lichfield: History to c.1500', in A History of the County of Stafford: Volume 14, Lichfield, (London, 1990), 4-14. 

[3] William of Malmesbury, Gesta Pontificum Anglorum  Book 4, 311 (Cambridge: 1125), 467 has Ealdwulf being elevated to archbishop. Also, in William of Malmesbury, Chronicle of the kings of England. From the earliest period to the reign of King Stephen, c. 1090-1143; trans. J. Sharpe, 1769-1859; J. A. Giles, 1808-1884, (1887), “Yet rebellious against God, he (Offa) endeavoured to remove the archiepiscopal see formerly settled at Canterbury, to Lichfield, envying forsooth, the men of Kent the dignity of the archbishopric: on which account he at last deprived Lambert, the archbishop, worn out with continual exertion, and who produced many edicts of the apostolical see, both ancient and modern, of all possessions within his territories, as well as of the jurisdiction over the bishoprics. From pope Adrian, therefore, whom he had wearied with plausible assertions for a long time, as many things not to be granted may be gradually drawn and artfully wrested from minds intent on other occupations, he obtained that there should be an archbishopric of the Mercians at Lichfield, and that all the prelates of the Mercians should be subject to that province.” 80.

[4] A. Williams, Hygeberht [Higbert], Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. 2004.

[5] In 781, Charlemagne had his two sons oil anointed by the pope.

[6] By about 765 Offa’s overlordship was recognised in Kent, and from this time onwards Offa would be increasingly restive under the commanding position of the archbishop of Canterbury. See C. J. Godfrey, The Archbishopric of Lichfield, (Cambridge: 2016).

[7] Perhaps as early as 786 the creation of a Mercian archbishopric was being discussed at Offa's court.

[8] Some think his death might not have been natural. One Chronicle stated he was seized with a malady.

[9] The Decree of the church council at Clofesho abolishing the archbishopric of Lichfield is known from Cotton MS Augustus II 61. The list of witnesses begins with two names: Æthelheard of Canterbury, who signed as archbishop, while Ealdwulf attested this decree as bishop.

[10] Offa vowed to donate 365 mancuses each year to the papacy, to provide for poor people in Rome and provide lights for St Peter’s church. The donation was in return for approval of an archdiocese. 

[11] In 735, the papacy elevated another Anglo-Saxon bishopric to an archbishopric when Ecgbert became the first Archbishop of York.

[12] See the post on the Second Cathedral. A large basilical shaped church would have been appropriate for this grand occasion. The order of service is unknown. The next order for a coronation is thought to have been written in the mid-9th century and the second was for the coronation of Edward the Elder, reigned 899‑924, in the year 900. These services were disregarded in 1066, but reimagined for the coronation in 1953.

[13] Unlike predecessors, Offa’s ancestry was not directly linked with earlier kings.

[14] See N. Brooks, The early history of the Church of Canterbury: Christ Church from 597 to 1066. (Leicester Uni. Press: 1984), 118–126.

[15] See note 2.

[16] The enmity between Offa and Jænberht raises the possibility that it was Jænberht who started the rumour that surfaced in about 784 that Offa planned to dethrone the pope, as part of a plan to discredit Offa in the Papal Curia and ensure that any suggestion from the Mercian king about changing the arrangement of bishoprics should fall on deaf (or enraged) ears. From N. Brooks, see note 5.

[17] He requested the pope centre the archbishopric in London, but this was refused.

[18] T. Fuller, The Church History of Britain, (London: 1837), 160.

[19] Matthew Paris, a 13th-century St Alban’s monk, recorded he was buried in a chapel by the river Usk outside Bedford, but both chapel and tomb were destroyed in a flood. The text was Vitae duorum Offarum, ‘The lives of the two Offas’. Author and veracity of the history have been questioned.

Easter Cross and Bishop Wilfrid

Summary.  A folded gold cross found in the Staffordshire Hoard has zoomorphic imagery which is decoded and explained. It has profound iconography conveying the Easter message of crucifixion and resurrection that heals with eternal life. A 7th century cross emphasising Easter could be the work of Bishop Wilfrid of Mercia. It could have adorned the cover of the St Chad’s Gospels. It is a national treasure.

     An incomplete, jewelled gold cross,[1]now called ‘The Great Gold Cross,’ was recovered within the Staffordshire Hoard together with five roundel attachments, two garnets and a ‘D’ shaped stone.[2]  Parts have been reassembled and a replica made with the few missing bits added. It is extraordinary for its explicit depiction of Easter and salvation and for its time in Early Medieval zoomorphic imagery. It emphasises Easter for the early English, Roman church at the time when it was being established. This links with Bishop Wilfrid and adds to its significance.

 

Drawing of the recovered cross with the replica held by Lichfield Cathedral. The cross unfolded is c. 300mm (12 inches) tall. Another slightly different reconstruction has been given.[3]

 

Understanding its appearance

 The ends of the arms have leaf-shaped extensions which are most likely vine leaves illustrating a ‘tree-of-life’ motif symbolising spiritual growth.[4] Vine motifs are seen on Acca’s stone at Hexham, Northumberland and the standing crosses at Bewcastle, Cumbria, and Ruthwell, Dumfriesshire.[5] Such crosses have been linked with the reforms of Bishop Wilfrid and his mission to connect the northern churches especially with the Church of Rome.[6] It is argued the gold cross is contemporary with free-standing stone high crosses in the Early Medieval kingdom of Northumbria and churches of southern Ireland having grapevine motifs and espousing communion with Rome. This is not original; the three stone crosses have previously been envisaged as monuments imitating gold, jewelled crosses, of which some are displayed in mosaics in Rome churches.[7] Between the roundels and garnets of the cross are five incised panels containing non-figurative, semi-naturalistic zoomorphs.[8] This animal art is interpreted as having cryptic biblical references rooted in the seventh century. The explanation begins with deciphering panels from the bottom stem of the cross and continues by moving upwards and then outwards along the arms of the cross.

 

Lower Stem

The lowest stem panel has five ribboned zoomorphs, each identifiable with a single eye. The five figures refer to the five days from Palm Sunday to Maundy Thursday in Holy Week. The bottommost zoomorph is small and represents Palm Sunday, this being the Lord’s Day with an avoidance of activity, including dietary restriction. The zoomorph has a large hand above the head and has the appearance of waving, such as with a palm leaf. The uppermost fifth zoomorph has an extra limb to its sinuous body and is taken to be showing an upturned foot washed on Maundy Thursday (John 13 v5). The hind leg has an upturned, trailing paw and is repeated in the next panel, showing all remain washed and spiritually unsullied.

Lower stem

 The panel above has two more zoomorphs and symbolically presents crucifixion. At the bottom of this panel is a chain of four linked rings which could be a skeuomorph to show the arrest and shackling of Christ at the end of the fifth day. A raised, sharp point at the bottom left side of this panel has to denote the spear of the Roman soldier, (John 19 v34). The top zoomorph under the large garnet has a distinct tilted-ring around the body close to the head. The position of this ring is either the crown of thorns, or is a nimbus and tilted to show Jesus is dead. The eye of this zoomorph is indistinct. There is a total of thirteen feet in the two panels below the central garnet which presumably represents Christ and the twelve disciples. 

 Upper Stem

 

Panel above the central garnet

 Above the central garnet is a small panel separated by a crossline from the top panel. It shows two sinuous appendages, taken to be arms with rings and ending in three fingers. It has the general shape of the letters ‘IHS’, or nearer still the alternative ‘JHS’, a Christogram using the first three capital letters of the name for Jesus in Greek. The name was incised on Cuthbert’s oak coffin, c. 698, in runic letters,[9] and the zoomorph panel is similar in shape to the three incised runic letters. The small panel would reflect Christ in a small rock tomb on Holy Saturday and its shape resembles the headpost added to many crucifixes. Using arms to signify the name of Jesus would not be unusual, there is considerable Biblical[10] reference to portray him as the arm of God. A ring around the arm recalls the Early Medieval signature for kingship and must be significant.

Above the line in the top panel are two entwined ribbon animals with mouths touching. The bodies of these animals have simpler ornamentation; studs along the body are absent and eyes are again indistinct. If this panel characterised Easter and resurrection, their appearance is inevitably schematised and a biblical context is offered. Interpreting the two zoomorphs as touching in an embrace recalls reference to John 13 v34, I give you a new commandment that you love one another. This is elaborated in Galatians 5 v14-15, “For the whole law is summed up in one commandment. You shall love your neighbour as yourself. If you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another”.

Zoomorphs biting bodies, tails and legs are numerous in Early Medieval artwork, but these two zoomorphs are unusual in having touching mouths. The south side of the Ruthwell cross near to the top has two figures in an embrace. A pair of remarkably similar zoomorphs with interlocking jaws were carved on the jambs of the entrance porch to St Peter’s church, Monkwearmouth, Sunderland. These late 7th-century figures appear to be embracing each other and their ribbon bodies intertwine to form a tau cross.[11] They could have reminded all who enter the church to love one another.

Monkwearmouth zoomorphs. Image thanks to N. Platts.

A similar representation is on an early 8th-century grave cover or marker known as the Herebericht stone[12], also at Monkwearmouth, with two confronted animals (birds?) above a cross with squared arms.[13] Did the gold worker of the cross know the sculpture at the church at Monkwearmouth and if this was so, a date of late-7th or early-8th century could be given.

 

Ó Carragáin thought the paws of the two animals on the Bewcastle cross originally crossed over to form a Chi- ‘X’ shape for the first Greek letter of Christ, but weather had obliterated this. It is more obvious in a panel on the north side of the Ruthwell cross.[14] The sinuous bodies of the zoomorphs in the top panel of the gold cross clearly show an ‘X’ shape. If the gold cross imagery was contemporary with the two stone crosses, a date in the first half of the 8th-century is recalled.[15] Finally, the two hands, each with three digits, of the two sinuous zoomorphs point upwards to the top garnet, as if holding high a ‘living stone’[16]; a theophany. Bede viewed the living stones metaphor as the faithful in the new temple or church.[17] Christ holds the equivalent trope of a ‘Book of Life’ on the Bewcastle cross.

 

Side arms

If the stem of the cross showed zoomorphic representation of the days leading to crucifixion and resurrection then the side arms show imagery of salvation.[18]

Side arm panels and its iconography labelled for the figurative river and associated fruits.

 

The two side panels refer to Psalm I. v3 and particularly to a vision expressed in the Book of Revelation 22 v1-2.^[19] This vision consists of a river which proceeds from the throne of God that flows to the people of the church who are embraced by the side arms. The river-of-life is envisaged with a fruit tree growing on each side of the bank producing 12 kinds of fruit.^[20] The fruit tree is the tree-of-life and underlines the whole cross being a tree-of-life allegory. The ribbon body is deciphered as a river because it has two lines of raised studs that are tear-shaped eliciting the appearance of flowing water.^[21] The elbow pieces are analogous in shape to a stalked fruit and there are 12 on the cross; 4 on each side arm and 4 on the top panel. There are animal heads at the ends looking outwards and this suggests they have a protective function.^[22] It fits with a following verse in Revelation 22 v15, outside are the dogs and sorcerers and fornicators and murderers and idolators and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. Dogs symbolically guarded against those who sin and by extension harm the fidelity of the church. The inside dog on the left arm has its ear missing and this could artistically refer to three verses later in which everyone is exhorted to hear the words of Revelation 22 v18, otherwise they lose their share in the tree of life. To illustrate this trope of dogs looking outwards see St Chad’s Gospels in which Luke, on page 218, sits on a chair with finials shaped as dog heads looking outwards.^[23]

 

Dog looking outwards on Luke’s Incipit page of St Chad’s Gospel.

 

Bede, in his ‘Commentary on Revelation,’ c. 703, emphasised the fruit as the reward for Christian obedience, Romans 6 v21–22 and Galatians 5 v22, and is a metaphor for all time, that is 12 months with 12 fruits. In Bede’s words the Lord gives eternal health and the eternal food of life.^[24] The arms of the cross are stretching outwards and healing all by offering everlasting life. This sentiment was in Tatwine’s riddle 9 describing a cross using the words, “Now I appear iridescent; my form is shining now. Whoever enjoys my fruit will immediately be well for I was given the powers to bring health to the unhealthy”.^[25] Tatwine, c. 670-734, was a monk at Breedon on the Hill, Leicestershire, and appointed Archbishop of Canterbury, 731-4, by King Æthelbald of Mercia. He could, like Bede, have been concerned with the healing of people out of reach of the Mercian church. A similar animal ornamentation occurs on the impressed silver-gilt foils around the rim of a Maplewood bottle found amongst the grave goods in the Sutton Hoo ship burial, c. 620–30.^[26] This similarity does not necessarily make the two items contemporaneous or make the bottle decoration explicitly Christian,^[27] but could be an image that was well-known, loved and copied over several generations.[28]

 

The cross conveys the Easter message that belief in crucifixion and resurrection will heal with eternal life. Most crux gemmata are eschatological and have crucifixion imagery, sometimes on the reverse side.^[29] It could have been inspired by the gemmed cross^[30] set up, year 417, by Theodosius II, 408-50, on the altar of the true cross in the Sepulchral complex in Jerusalem.^[31] The same imagery, that is Christ crucified, Paradise, Tree-of-life, and Revelation, is evident in the Byzantine mosaics of various Italian churches from the 6th-century^[32] and would most likely have been seen by bishops on their pilgrimage to Rome. This suggests the sponsor could have been Bishop Wilfred of Ripon and Hexham, 634-710, who went on three pilgrimages to Rome and presumably visited these churches. The Easter trope associates with someone adhering to the canonical laws decreed in 672 after the Synod of Whitby, 664.[33] Wilfrid believed strongly in the centrality of Easter and his fervent promotion for Roman observance throughout much of England.[34] After Wilfrid was exiled from Northumbria, he turned to Æthelred of Mercia, 690–2, and was acting bishop for the Middle Angles.[35] Then, with Bishop Headda of Lichfield, c. 691-716–27, a close relationship with Mercia continued and lasted for eleven years, 691/2 to 703.[36] By the end of Wilfrid’s life there existed a large network of monasteries in Mercia owned and influenced by him.[37] Wilfrid, aged c. 76 in early 710, in front of ten witnesses at Ripon, including two Mercian monks, ordered his treasurer to open the church treasury, spread out the gold, silver and precious jewels and distribute them to his abbeys and monasteries in Northumbria.[38] Around this time, after 709, Wilfrid made his last journey to Mercia, met Mercian abbots and gave away endowments.[39]  It is possible he passed on jewelled objects to his Mercian brethren before he died at Oundle, 24 April, 710, [40] with burial at Ripon. Foot concluded material prosperity seems both to have marked out the Wilfridian houses and to have bound them to their patron. There is good reason Lichfield would have been in his, ‘kingdom of churches’ and perhaps a beneficiary of liturgical objects.[41] Wilfrid was at the centre of Romanising England as well as developing the cathedral-church at Lichfield. This cross could be his work.

 

[1] It measured folded 114 mm long, 74 mm wide and 1.3 mm thick, see catalogue No. 539 online at Archaeology Data Service (ADS), The Staffordshire Hoard: An Anglo-Saxon Treasure. The hoard contained five cross-shaped objects and other objects with crosses displayed on them.

[2] C. Fern, ‘Magnificent was the cross of victory: the great gold cross from the Staffordshire Hoard’, Barbaric splendour. The use of image before and after Rome, ed. T. F. Martin and W. Morrison (Oxford, 2020), 78–86.

[3] C. Fern, T. Dickinson and L. Webster eds. The Staffordshire Hoard. An Anglo-Saxon treasure. Research Report of the Society of Antiquaries, No. 80. (London: 2019), 100.

[4] Refers to the tree in the middle of paradise according to the visions of Ezek 17 v22–4 and Dan 4 v7–14. Also, the tree in the middle of the Garden of Eden, Gen. 2 v15. The cross as a tree is poetically described in The Dream of the Rood, c. 8th-century, R. Hamer, A choice of Anglo-Saxon Verse (London, 1970), 160-1. Lines 7 and 8 state it is covered in gold and gleams with jewels. The extensions have been described as animal ears, possibly equine, Fern ‘Magnificent was the cross of victory’, 84 and 94.

[5] Acca’s Cross is in The Corpus of Anglo-Saxon stone sculpture,1, 174–176. The Bewcastle cross is in The Corpus of Anglo-Saxon stone sculpture, 2, 61–72, see <http://www.ascorpus.ac.uk>.

[6] W. Herren and S. A. Brown, Christ in Celtic Christianity, (Woodbridge: 2002), 207.

[7] J. Blair, The Church in Anglo-Saxon Society, (Oxford, 2005), 137.

[8] Fern described the cross as combining a Christ-in-victory message with animal art of northwest Europe rooted very probably in pagan pre-Christian belief. See note 2. Fern, ‘Magnificent was the cross of victory.’ 78.

[9] R. Page, An introduction to English Runes (Woodbridge, 2006), 171–2.

[10] Isaiah 51 v9 is one of around 40 references to the arms of Jesus.

[11] Animal shown in E. Wamers, ‘Behind animals, plants and interlace: Salin’s Style II on Christian objects.’  Anglo-Saxon/Irish relations before the Vikings ed. J. Graham-Campbell and M. Ryan (Oxford 2009), 182, is described as a crane bird zoomorph in The Corpus of Anglo-Saxon stone sculpture, 1, 125–6 is labelled reptilian. There is a superficial resemblance to the main zoomorph in the Durham Gospels (Durham A. II. 17, fol. 2r), late seventh century.

[12] The Corpus of Anglo-Saxon stone sculpture, 1, Monkwearmouth, 5. 1040 x 530 x 180 mm.

[13] J. Hawkes, ‘Symbolic lives: the visual evidence’ The Anglo-Saxons from the migration period to the eighth century: an ethnographic perspective. (Woodbridge, 1997), 322.

[14] É. Ó Carragáin, ‘The periphery rethinks the centre: inculturation, Roman Liturgy and the Ruthwell Cross’. Rome across time and space. Cultural transmission and the exchange of ideas, c. 500–1400 ed. C. Bolgia, R. McKitterick and J. Osborne. (Cambridge, 2011), 4, 79.

[15] It is generally thought the two crosses were produced by the same team of sculptors who were foreign and importing Continental artistic concepts, Herren and Brown, Christ in Celtic Christianity, 237–9. A Statement of Significance for Historic Environment Scotland, 2019, dates the Ruthwell Cross to c. 730s.

[16] I Peter 2 v 4, ‘Come to him, a living stone’.

[17] From Bede’s Homilies on the Gospels, Book 2, 24.

[18] The explanation was first published in a book, R. Sharp, The Hoard and its History. Staffordshire’s secrets revealed (Studley: 2016).

[19] Ibid R. Sharp, (2016), 56. Biblical references are from the Biblia Sacra Vulgata, 5th edition Bible.

[20] “And he showed me a river of water of life, clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the middle of the street, and on both sides of the river, the tree bearing fruit twelve months, yielding its fruit and leaves are for the healing of nations”. The alternative to the Vulgate in the N.R.S.V. Bible is found at 258.

[21] The rivers could allude to the four rivers which watered the Garden of Eden, Genesis 2 v10–14. The rivers were named as the Phison, Geon, Tigris and Euphrates. On the cross arms are 4 rivers each ending in four animal heads. Four rivers frequently appear in the Rome apse mosaics issuing from Christ’s throne or from below His feet, see P. Murray and L. Murray, The Oxford Companion to Christian Art and Architecture (Oxford, 1996), 433. The tear-shaped studs have been suggested to be hair on an animal’s body, see C. Fern, ‘Magnificent was the cross of victory: the great gold cross from the Staffordshire Hoard’, Barbaric splendour. The use of image before and after Rome, ed. T. F. Martin and W. Morrison (Oxford, 2020), 85.

[22] The bears at the end of hogback stones might have had a similar protective role, see M. Carver, Formative Britain. An Archaeology of Britain, fifth to eleventh century AD (London and New York, 2019), 555. A cat forms the border to Luke’s incipit page of the Lindisfarne Gospels, fol. 139r, and is thought to be a guardian at the entrance of the underworld, see M. P. Brown, Painted labyrinth. The world of the Lindisfarne Gospels (London, 2003), 30. F. Wallis, Bede: Commentary on Revelation (Liverpool, 2013), 284 gives Bede’s comment on Revelation 22, v15 as ‘the savage ferocity of shameless men assaulting the church from the outside’.

[23] See page 218. <https://lichfield.ou.edu/content/luke-portrait-pg-218> [accessed February 2020].

[24] See note 22, Wallis, Bede: Commentary on Revelation, 280.

[25] M. J. B. Allen and D. G. Calder, Sources and Analogues of Old English Poetry. The Major Latin texts in translation (Cambridge, 1976), 56.

[26] London, British Museum object 1939,1010.122–7,1, see K. Hoilund Nielson, ‘Style II and all that: the potential of the hoard for statistical study of chronology and geographical distribution’. Papers from the Staffordshire Hoard Symposium ed. H. Geake (London, 2010).

[27] There is no justification in labelling any of the burials, Sutton Hoo horse, ship and bed burials, as Christian, see Carver, Formative Britain. An Archaeology of Britain, fifth to eleventh century, 34.

[28] It is feasible the bottle contained a drink, Comey thought sweet mead or ale, which would give healing of a sort. Placement in the middle of the burial chamber must have had a funerary significance. See, M. G. Comey, ‘The wooden drinking vessels in the Sutton Hoo assemblage: Materials, morphology and usage’. Trees and timber in the Anglo-Saxon World. Medieval History and Archaeology, ed. M. D. J. Bintley and M. G. Shapland (Oxford, 2013), 117.

[29] The recently installed cross icon hanging above the nave at Lichfield Cathedral has jewels on the east side representing the Staffordshire Hoard.

[30] The existence and form of this monumental cross has been questioned, see C. Milner, ‘Lignum Vitae or Crux Gemmata? The Cross of Golgotha in the Early Byzantine Period. Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 20, (1996), 77–99.

[31] J. Hawkes, ‘Venerating the Cross around the year 800 in Anglo-Saxon England’ The Jennifer O’Reilly Memorial Lecture (Cork, 2018), 4.

[32] M. Baghos, ‘Christ, Paradise, trees and the Cross in the Byzantine art of Italy’ J. of Orthodox Theology, 9, (2018).

[33] At the Synod of Whitby, AD 664, it was established how Easter should be fixed, made distinct and kept separately. It had to be restated in the first of ten decrees at the Council of Hertford (Herutford), 672. A meeting on 24 September, convoked by Archbishop Theodore with Bishop Winfrith of Mercia, 672-76, present and Bishop Wilfrid of Ripon attending by a proxy.

[34] M. Laynesmith, ‘Anti-Jewish rhetoric in the Life of Wilfrid’, Wilfrid Abbot, Bishop, Saint. Papers from the 1300th Anniversary Conference, ed. N. J. Higham. (Donington, 2013).

[35] C. Cubitt, ‘Appendix 2: The Chronology of Stephen’s Life of Wilfrid’. Wilfrid Abbot, Bishop, Saint. Papers from the 1300th Anniversary Conference, ed. N. J. Higham. (Donington, 2013), 345–347.

[36] M. Capper, ‘Prelates and politics: Wilfrid, Oundle and the Middle Angles’. Wilfrid Abbot, Bishop, Saint. Papers from the 1300th Anniversary Conference, ed. N. J. Higham. (Donington, 2013), 262.

³⁷ S. Foot, ‘Wilfrid’s monastic Empire. Wilfrid Abbot, Bishop, Saint. Papers from the 1300th Anniversary Conference, ed. N. J. Higham. (Donington, 2013), 31. At least six have been suggested between AD 691/2 and 703, see P. Coulstock, The Collegiate Church of Wimborne Minster (Woodbridge, 1993). Capper, ‘Prelates and politics: Wilfrid, Oundle and the Middle Angles, 263, mentioned Bath, Oundle, Ripple, possibly Inkberrow and Chester. Evesham and Wing have some claim, see D. Farmer, The Oxford Dictionary of Saints, fifth ed.’ (Oxford, 2011), 448. Also, Worcester, Leicester and Medeshamstede (Peterborough) with its satellite minsters at Breedon-on-the-hill, Woking, Bermondsey and perhaps Hoo (Kent) and Brixworth, see Blair, The Church in Anglo-Saxon Society, 83. Foot, Monastic life in Anglo-Saxon England c. 600–900, 258–269, included Repton and Thorney. Mercian monks were regarded as part of the Ripon Community according to Stephen, Vita Sancti Wilfrithi, chapter 64,138.

[38] Vita Sancti Wilfrithi, 63, 136–137. See A. Thacker, ‘Wilfrid, his cult and his biographer.’ Wilfrid Abbot, Bishop, Saint. Papers from the 1300th Anniversary Conference, ed. N. J. Higham. (Donington, 2013), 10.

[39] J. Blair, The church in Anglo-Saxon Society, (Oxford: 2005), 96.

[40] C. Stancliffe, Dating Wilfrid’s death and Stephen’s life’ Wilfrid Abbot, Bishop, Saint. Papers from the 1300th Anniversary Conference, ed. N. J. Higham. (Donington, 2013), 21.

[41] S. Foot, Monastic life in Anglo-Saxon England c. 600–900, 26. See note 37.