i theimaginedandrealjerusaleminartandarchitecture ·...

i

TheImaginedandRealJerusaleminArtandArchitecture

© Goudeauetal.,2015 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_001This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/


ii

Radboud Studies in Humanities

Series Editor

SophieLevie(RadboudUniversity)

Editorial Board

PaulBakker(RadboudUniversity)AndréLardinois(RadboudUniversity)DanielaMüller(RadboudUniversity)

GlennMost(ScuolaNormaleSuperiore,Pisa)PeterRaedts(RadboudUniversity)

JohanTollebeek(KULeuven)MarcSlors(RadboudUniversity)

ClaudiaSwan(NorthwesternUniversityEvanston)

VOLUME2

Thetitlespublishedinthisseriesarelistedat brill.com/rsh

http://www.brill.com/rsh

iii

The Imagined and Real Jerusalem in Art and Architecture

Edited by

JeroenGoudeauMariëtteVerhoeven

WouterWeijers

LEIDEN|BOSTON

iv

Thispublicationhasbeentypesetinthemultilingual“Brill”typeface.Withover5,100characterscoveringLatin,ipa,Greek,andCyrillic,thistypefaceisespeciallysuitableforuseinthehumanities.Formoreinformation,pleaseseebrill.com/brill-typeface.

issn2213-9729isbn978-90-04-27082-4(hardback)isbn978-90-04-27085-5(e-book)

Copyright2014bytheEditorsandAuthors.ThisworkispublishedbyKoninklijkeBrillNV,Leiden,TheNetherlands.KoninklijkeBrillNVincorporatestheimprintsBrill,BrillNijhoff,GlobalOrientalandHoteiPublishing.KoninklijkeBrillNVreservestherighttoprotectthepublicationagainstunauthorizeduseandtoauthorizedisseminationbymeansofoffprints,legitimatephotocopies,microformeditions,reprints,translations,andsecondaryinformationsources,suchasabstractingandindexingservicesincludingdatabases.Requestsforcommercialre-use,useofpartsofthepublication,and/ortranslationsmustbeaddressedtoKoninklijkeBrillNV.

Thisbookisprintedonacid-freepaper.

Coverillustration:AviewfromtheoldcitywallofJerusalemtotheareaoutside.Photo:MariëtteVerhoeven.

LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData

TheimaginedandrealJerusaleminartandarchitecture/editedbyJeroenGoudeau,MariëtteVerhoeven,WouterWeijers.pagescm.--(Radboudstudiesinhumanities;volume2)Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.ISBN978-90-04-27082-4(hardback:alk.paper)--ISBN978-90-04-27085-5(e-book)1.Jerusalem--Inart.2.Jerusalem--Symbolicrepresentation.3.Symbolisminarchitecture.I.Goudeau,Jeroen,editor.II.Verhoeven,Mariëtte,1963-editor.III.Weijers,Wouter,editor.N8214.5.J4I432014704.9’499569442--dc232014029482

ThisisanopenaccesstitledistributedunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommonsAttribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License,whichpermitsanynon-commer-cialuse,distribution,andreproductioninanymedium,providedtheoriginalauthor(s)andsourcearecredited.

http://www.brill.com/brill-typeface


vContents Contents

Contents

Acknowledgements vii List of Illustrations viii List of Contributors xiiiXIV

Introduction – Recollection in Patches 1

Part1Competing Memories and Contrasting Meanings

1 Sites and SensesMapping Palestinian Territories in Mona Hatoum’s Sculpture Present Tense 11

Anneke Schulenberg

2 The Green Line Potency, Absurdity, and Disruption of Dichotomy in Francis Alÿs’s Intervention in Jerusalem 33

Mette Gieskes

3 Jerusalem as Trauerarbeit On Two Paintings by Anselm Kiefer and Gerhard Richter 59

Wouter Weijers

4 Ezekiel for SolomonThe Temple of Jerusalem in Seventeenth-century Leiden and the Case of Cocceius 88

Jeroen Goudeau

5 Jerusalem as PalimpsestThe Architectural Footprint of the Crusaders in the Contemporary City 114

Mariëtte Verhoeven

6 Translations of the Sacred City between Jerusalem and Rome 136Sible de Blaauw

vi Contents

Part2Imitation and Translocation

7 The Reconquered Jerusalem RepresentedTradition and Renewal on Pilgrimage Ampullae from the Crusader Period 169

Katja Boertjes

8 ‘As if they had physically visited the holy places’Two Sixteenth-century Manuscripts Guide a Mental Journey through Jerusalem (Radboud University Library, Mss 205 and 233) 190

Hanneke van Asperen

9 Jerusalem in Renaissance ItalyThe Holy Sepulchre on the Sacro Monte of Varallo 215

Bram de Klerck

10 Overdetermination of a Heavenly JerusalemContemporary Windows by Gérard Garouste and Jean-Michel Alberola 237

Daan Van Speybroeck

11 ‘You want to take us to Jerusalem …’Medinat Weimar: A Second Jerusalem in Contemporary Visual Arts and Klezmer Songs 254

Rudie van Leeuwen

Index 279

289

Contents vListofIllustrations viiIntroduction–RecollectioninPatches 1part1CompetingMemories 9andContrastingMeanings 9Chapter1 11SitesandSenses 11MappingPalestinianTerritoriesinMonaHatoum’sSculpturePresent Tense 11AnnekeSchulenberg 11Chapter2 33The Green Line Potency,Absurdity,andDisruptionofDichotomyinFrancisAlÿs’sInterventioninJerusalem 33MetteGieskes 33Chapter3 59JerusalemasTrauerarbeit OnTwoPaintingsbyAnselmKieferandGerhardRichter 59WouterWeijers 59Chapter4 88EzekielforSolomonTheTempleofJerusaleminSeventeenth-centuryLeidenandtheCaseofCocceius 88Jeroen Goudeau 88Chapter5 114JerusalemasPalimpsestTheArchitecturalFootprintoftheCrusadersintheContemporaryCity 114MariëtteVerhoeven 114Chapter6 136TranslationsoftheSacredCitybetweenJerusalemandRome 136SibledeBlaauw 136part2 167ImitationandTranslocation 167∵ 167Chapter7 169TheReconqueredJerusalemRepresentedTraditionandRenewalonPilgrimageAmpullaefromtheCrusaderPeriod 169KatjaBoertjes 169Chapter8 190‘Asiftheyhadphysicallyvisitedtheholyplaces’TwoSixteenth-centuryManuscriptsGuidetoaMentalJourneythroughJerusalem(RadboudUniversityLibrary,Mss205and233) 190HannekevanAsperen 190Chapter9 215JerusaleminRenaissanceItalyTheHolySepulchreontheSacroMonteofVarallo 215BramdeKlerck 215Chapter10 237TheOverdeterminationoftheHeavenlyJerusalemContemporaryWindowsbyGérardGarousteandJean-MichelAlberola 237DaanVanSpeybroeck 237Chapter11 254‘YouwanttotakeustoJerusalem…’MedinatWeimar:ASecondJerusaleminContemporaryVisualArtsandKlezmerSongs 254RudievanLeeuwen 254Index 279

viiAcknowledgements

Acknowledgements

• Funding:DepartmentofArtHistory,RadboudUniversityNijmegen• InterfacultythemegroupCulture,ReligionandMemory(CRM),Radboud

UniversityNijmegen• Imageeditor:CentrumvoorKunsthistorischeDocumentatie(CKD),

RadboudUniversityNijmegen• TranslationofthecontributionsofKatjaBoertjes,DaanVanSpeybroek

andWouterWeijersbyPoortLanguageServices• EnglishtextrevisionsbyClereStory

viii ListOfIllustrationsList of Illustrations

List of Illustrations

1.1 MonaHatoum,Present Tense,1996,soapandglassbeads,4.5×241×299cm,installationatAnadielGallery,Jerusalem 12

1.2 MonaHatoum,Present Tense(detail),1996,soapandglassbeads,4.5×241×299cm,installationatAnadielGallery,Jerusalem 12

1.3 MonaHatoum,Light Sentence,1992,wiremeshlockers,slow-movingmotorizedlightbulb,198×185×490cm,Paris:CentrePompidou 17

1.4 MonaHatoum,Map,1999,14mmclearglassmarbles,installationdimensionsvariable.InstallationatCasino,Luxembourg 20

1.5 CarlAndre,144 Magnesium Square,1969,magnesium,1×365.8×365.8cm,London:TateCollection 25

1.6 MonaHatoum,The Light at the End,1989,Angleironframe,sixelectricheatingelements,166×162.5×5cm 26

2.1 FrancisAlÿs,The Green Line, Jerusalem2004,Videodocumentationofanaction 34

2.2 FrancisAlÿs,The Green Line,Jerusalem2004,Ephemera 352.3 FrancisAlÿs, View of Aboudis,Jerusalem,June2004,Photographfeaturing

Untitled (2004) 382.4 MarleneDumas,Figure in a Landscape,2010,oiloncanvas,180×300

cm 432.5 FrancisAlÿs,Bridge(Snails),Brussels1992,Installation 512.6 FrancisAlÿs,Snakes and Ladders,2008,oilandencausticoncanvas,

28.7×22cm 523.1 AnselmKiefer,Jerusalem,1986,acrylic,emulsion,shellac,goldleaf,on

canvas(intwoparts)withsteelandlead,380×560cm,Chicago:Collec-tionSusanandLewisManilow 60

3.2 GerhardRichter,Jerusalem,1995,oiloncanvas,126×92.3cm,Baden-Baden:MuseumFriederBurda 61

3.3 AnselmKiefer,Bilder-Streit,1980,oil,emulsion,shellac,sandonaphotowithwoodcuts,290×400cm,Rotterdam:MuseumBoymans-vanBeuningen 63

3.4 AnselmKiefer,Nero malt,1974,oiloncanvas,220×300cm,Munich:StaatsgalerieModernerKunst 66

3.5 AnselmKiefer,Sulamith,1983,oil,acrylic,emulsion,shellac,strawandashesoncanvaswithwoodcuts,290×370cm,London:SaatchiCollec-tion 68

3.6 AnselmKiefer,Eisen-Steig,1986,emulsion,acrylic,goldleafoncanvaswithtwowroughtclimbingirons,olivebranchesandlead,220×380cm,

ixListOfIllustrations

formerlyPhiladelpia:ThePincusCollection,currentwhereaboutsunknown 71

3.7 GerhardRichter,Landschaft bei Hubbelrath,1969,oiloncanvas,100×140cm,Aachen:LudwigForumfürInternationaleKunst 74

3.8 GerhardRichter,Onkel Rudi,1965,oiloncanvas,87×50cm,Prague:TheCzechMuseumofFineArts,Lidicecollection 78

3.9 GerhardRichter,Tante Marianne,1965,oiloncanvas,120×130cm,Taiwan:YageoFoundation 79

3.10 GerhardRichter,Atlas,panels19and20,‘PhotosfromBooks’,1967 814.1 HieronymusPradoandJuanBattistaVillalpando,In Ezechielem Explana-

tiones [...](Rome1596-1604),vol.3JuanBattistaVillalpando,Apparatvs Vrbis Ac Templi Hierosolymitani [...],Rome1604,titlepagewithautographofConstantijnHuygens,engraving 93

4.2 PetrusCunaeus,De Republyk Der Hebreeen [...],Amsterdam1682,foldedandinterpagedmapofJerusaleminbird’s-eyeview,afterVillalpando,engraving 95

4.3 JohannesCocceius,Ezechiels Prophetie [...],Amsterdam1691,Tab.XVIII,bird’s-eyeviewoftheTemplecomplex,engraving 102

4.4 JohannesCocceius,Opera Omnia [...],Amsterdam1673-75,vol.3,TabsXIVandXV,elevationsoftheHouseofthePriests,southernandnorthernfaçades,engraving 104

4.5 JohannesCocceius,Ezechiels Prophetie [...],Amsterdam1691,Tab.VIII,elevationoftheTemplebuilding,southernsidewall,engraving 105

4.6 JohannesCocceius,Ezechiels Prophetie [...],Amsterdam1691,Tab.IX,longitudinalsectionoftheTemplebuilding,engraving 109

5.1 Jerusalem,Church of the Holy Sepulchre,remainsoftheCanon’scloister,lookingwesttowardstheapseofthechurch 118

5.2 Jerusalem,Chapel of the Ascension,viewfromtheeast 1195.3 Jerusalem,Church of St Anne,viewfromthenorth-west 1235.4 Jerusalem,buildingsoftheArmenian Patriarchate withthedomeofthe

Church of St James totheright,fromthecitywallsneartheSionGate 127

5.5 Jerusalem,St Mary in the Valley of Jehoshaphat,staircaseleadingtothecrypt 129

5.6 Jerusalem,viewoftheOldCity,fromtheMountofOlives,withtheDome of the Rockinthefronttotheright 132

6.1 Rome,S. Croce in Gerusalemme,ca.320-50,reconstructionoffourth-cen-turyplanandelevation(afterKrautheimerandCecchelli) 138

6.2 MapofJerusalemwithcitywallsandchurches(Bethlehemuppercornerleft).Designafterms.Cambrai,ca.1150 142

x ListOfIllustrations

6.3 Rome,S. Croce in Gerusalemme,inscriptionreferringtoHelenafromtheSessorianPalace,fifthcentury 144

6.4 Rome,S. Pudenziana,apsemosaic,ca.410 1486.5 Rome,S. Giovanni in Laterano,classicalbronzecolumnsintheAltarof

theBlessedSacrament,1600,withoriginalcapitaltotheleft 1556.6 Rome,S. Giovanni in Laterano,cloisters,columnsandmarblestonefrom

theAulaConciliiintheancientLateranPalace,constitutingtheMensura Christi 158

7.1 PilgrimageampullafromJerusalemwithdepictionsoftheworshipoftheCross/theCrucifixion(front)andtheWomenandAngelattheHolySepulchre(reverse),secondhalfsixthorearlyseventhcentury,pewteralloy,diameter46mm,Washington:DumbartonOaks,inv.no.48.18 173

7.2 PilgrimageampullafromJerusalemwithdepictionsoftheChurchoftheHolySepulchre(front)andtheWomenandAngelattheTomb(reverse),secondhalftwelfthcentury,pewteralloy,60×46mm,Berlin:Skulptu-rensammlungundMuseumfürByzantinischeKunst,inv.no.25/73 176

7.3 PilgrimageampullafromJerusalemwithdepictionsoftheChurchoftheHolySepulchre(front)andtwowarriorsaints(reverse),secondhalftwelfthcentury,pewteralloy,58×39mm,London:BritishMuseum,inv.no.M&LA1876,12-14,18 178

7.4 PilgrimageampullafromJerusalemwithdepictionsoftheChurchoftheHolySepulchre(front)andtheDescentintoHell(reverse),secondhalftwelfthcentury,pewteralloy,43×29mm,Cleveland:ClevelandMuseumofArt,inv.no.1999.234 179

7.5 PilgrimageampullafromJerusalemwithdepictionsofChristontheCross(front)andtheandtheDescentintoHell(reverse),secondhalftwelfthcentury,pewteralloy,60×46mm,Berlin:SkulpturensammlungundMuseumfürByzantinischeKunst,inv.no.24/73 180

7.6 PilgrimageampullafromJerusalem/Bethlehemwithdepictionsoftheangelatthetomb(front)andtheNativity(reverse),fourteenthcentury,pewteralloy,57×40mm,Copenhagen:Nationalmuseet 182

8.1 FirstpageofThe Indulgence of the Holy Sites of Jerusalem,possiblywritteninMaaseik,ca.1500,parchment,Nijmegen:RadboudUniversityLibrary,Ms205,fol.240r 192

8.2 FirstpageofA Devout Exercise of the Passion of Our SaviourinaprayerbookforPassiondevotion,writtenforaFranciscanaudience,firsthalfofthesixteenthcentury,parchment,Nijmegen:RadboudUniversityLibrary,Ms233,fol.1r 193

xiListOfIllustrations

8.3 MasterS,theSorrows of the Virgininaroundel-reliquary,ca.1500-1525,engraving,145×97mm,London:BritishMuseum,Prints&Drawings,reg.1847,1009.21 201

8.4 Anonymous,glued-inminiatureofChrist’sshoulderwoundwithtext,ca.1500,parchment,Nijmegen:RadboudUniversityLibrary,Ms85,fol.1204

8.5 Openingpageofaprayertothenailwithalife-sizeminiatureofthenailpiercingthepage,Brabant,ca.1520(certainlyafter1513),page:paper,nail:parchment,RotterdamLibrary,Ms96E12,fol.28v 205

8.6 Hand-colouredsinglesheetprintofChrist’ssidewoundwithxylographictext‘Odususserihesucristwieserdirdemherczdurchstochenist’withlatertextualadditions,Nuremberg,block70×59mm,sheet84×67mm,ca.1480-1490,parchment,NewYork,MetropolitanMuseumofArt,BequestofJamesC.McGuire1931,acc.31.54.142 206

9.1 GiulioCesareProcaccini, St Charles Borromeo, the Deceased Christ and an Angel,1615,oiloncanvas,200×160cm,Milan:PinacotecadiBrera 216

9.2 Anonymous, Deceased Christ,1491,wood,Varallo:SacroMonte(ChapeloftheHolySepulchre) 217

9.3 GaudenzioFerrari, The Arrival of the Magi in Bethlehem (detail),fresco,stucco,1520-28,Varallo:SacroMonte(ChapeloftheMagi) 219

9.4 Varallo,Sacro Monte,reliquarywithapieceofrockfromtheHolySepulchre,ca.1490 223

9.5 Varallo,Sacro Monte, replicaofthestonecoveringChrist’stomb,ca.1490 223

9.6 Varallo,Sacro Monte, entrancetotheChapeloftheNativity,1514 2249.7 Varallo,Sacro Monte,ChapeloftheHolySepulchre,entrancetotheburial

chamber,1491 2259.8 LeonBattistaAlberti, Aedicule,finished1467,Florence:RucellaiCha-

pel 22810.1 GérardGarouste,Jerusalem window,1995-1997,stainedglassrealizedby

AtelierPierre-AlainParot,Talant:égliseNotreDamedeTalant 24410.2 GérardGarouste,Capernaum window,1995-1997,stainedglassrealizedby

AtelierPierre-AlainParot,Talant:égliseNotreDamedeTalant 24410.3 Jean-MichelAlberola,Heavenly Jerusalem window,alsocalledBabylon

window,stainedglassrealizedbyAtelierDuchemin,Nevers:CathédraleSaint-Cyr-et-Sainte-JuliettedeNevers 246

10.4 Jean-MichelAlberola,Heavenly Jerusalem window,alsocalledBabylon window(bottomleft),stainedglassrealizedbyAtelierDuchemin,Nevers:CathédraleSaint-Cyr-et-Sainte-JuliettedeNevers 248

11.1 RonenEidelman,ProtesterattheMedinatWeimarRallywithasigndemandingkosherbratwurst 255

xii ListOfIllustrations

11.2 RonenEidelman,Office of Medinat Weimar,October2009,installationatTegen2Gallery,Stockholm 260

11.3 RonenEidelman,Office of Medinat Weimar at the Heimatkundeexhibition, 2011/2012,installationatJüdischesMuseum,Berlin 261

11.4a,b CoversofthegatefoldandbookletoftheCDThe Unternationale,AurisMediaRecords,AUM014,2008 271

11.5 CharlesLéandre,“Rotschild” or “Dieu protège Israel”:AnAnti-SemiticCartoonofthePredatoryJewgraspingtheGlobe,1898,NewYork:HolocaustMuseum,photograph#06328 272

11.6 CoverofW.Creutz,Le Peril Juif!,in:Les Protocoles des Sages de Sion,notdated,butfirstedition1934 273

xiiiListOfContributorsListofContributors

List of Contributors

Hanneke van AsperenisPostdoctoralResearcherinCulturalStudiesatTilburgUniversityaswellasResearchAssistantandAdjunctLecturerintheHistoryofMedievalArtatRadboudUniversityNijmegen.

Sible de BlaauwisVanderMeerProfessoroftheHistoryofEarlyChristianArtandArchitec-tureatRadboudUniversityNijmegen.

Katja BoertjesisaPh.D.candidateintheHistoryofMedievalArtatRadboudUniversityNijmegen.

Mette Gieskes isAssistantProfessoroftheHistoryofModernandContemporaryArtatRadboudUniversityNijmegen.

Jeroen GoudeauisAssistantProfessoroftheHistoryofEarlyModernandModernArchitec-tureatRadboudUniversityNijmegen.

Bram de KlerckisAssistantProfessoroftheHistoryofEarlyModernArtatRadboudUniver-sityNijmegen.

Rudie van LeeuwenisaPh.D.candidateandResearchAssistantintheHistoryofEarlyModernArtatRadboudUniversityNijmegen.

Anneke SchulenbergisaPh.D.candidateandAdjunctLecturerinContemporaryArtatRadboudUniversityNijmegen.

Daan Van SpeybroeckisformerArtCuratoratRadboudUMCandRadboudUniversityNijmegen.

xiv ListOfContributors

Mariëtte VerhoevenisPostdoctoralResearcherandAdjunctLecturerintheHistoryofEarlyChristianandByzantineArchitectureatRadboudUniversityNijmegen.

Wouter WeijersisAssistantProfessoroftheHistoryofModernandContemporaryArtatRadboudUniversityNijmegen.

1Introduction–RecollectionInPatches

© JeroenGoudeauetal.,2014 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_002This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.

Introduction–RecollectioninPatches

Introduction – Recollection in Patches

Jerusalemisacity,aplace,amentalconstruction,abiblical-mythicalmemory.OnceJerusalemhasbeenallthisatthesametime,thenJerusalemcanbeallthistimeandagainbyactiveremembrancewithinthecontextandproblem-aticnatureofthepresent.ThroughthecenturiesJerusalemhasbeenvisited,soughtafter,used,reused,appropriated,andithasactedasapointofreferenceonmany levels.Thecityhasbecomepartofdifferentcultural figurations indifferentperiodsandplaces.Howeverpoliticallyexplosive,areferencetothiscityisultimatelypointingbacktotheJerusalemoftheBible.Thecity,orevenonlyitsname,canbeanexperienceofdivinepresence,asmuchasitcanbeasourceofconflictderivingfromthesameclaimthatitistheHolyCity–aclaimthatisforevercontestedandreasserted.FromEarlyChristiantimeson,agreatvariety of legitimizations have been constructed by emphasizing myriad as-pectsofthissource,bywayofmoreorlessorchestratedmemoryprocesses.

Thecontributionsinthisbookrefer,explicitlyorimplicitly,todimensionsofculturalmemory,thewayinwhichthepastisremembered,appropriatedandrepresented.Memory takesavitalpart in thedynamicsofculture. It recap-tures,recycles,reshufflesandre-mediatesculturalpractices.Ituseslanguage,texts,imagesandbuildingsinordertodevelop,preserveandcontinueculturalidentities.Culturalmemoryisthusamediatedmemory.Itsmediaarenotsomuch vessels of memory in which memory passively resides but objects ormanifestations through which memories are produced, shared, and givenmeaning.1Theyselectandorganizerepresentationsofthepastinsuchawaythattheycanbemeaningfulinthe(historical)present,thoughsuchredirec-tionsmayleadtoconflictsamonggroupswithdifferentorantagonisticexperi-ences.2Culturalmemoriesarethusnegotiated,present-orientedandrelative,andtheydependuponprocessesofexchangeandtransfer.Inthisbook,read-erscanfindvariousexamplesoftheseprocessesthroughoutarangeofhistori-calperiodsandartisticmedia.

ThiscollectionofstudiesonJerusaleminartandarchitectureistheresultofa joint project by researchers of the Department of Art History at RadboudUniversityNijmegen.InMay2011andSeptember2012twosymposiaservedasmid-termreviewsatwhichthepreliminaryresultswerepresented.Specialistsinvariousfieldssuchasthehistoryofpainting,sculpture,architecture,bookillumination,andappliedarts, fromEarlyChristiantimestothepresent,ar-

1 Sturken1997,p.9.2 Rigney2005.



2 Introduction–RecollectionInPatches

ticulated a variety of cultural, religious, philosophical and political implica-tionsofthevisualizationofJerusalem.Worksofartwerethepointsofdepartureandmainfocusofthosemeetings,wheretheaimwastodiscernconstantsandvariablesinattitudestowardstherealandimaginedJerusalem.

Jerusaleminarthasbeenasubjectofstudymorefrequentlyinrecentyears.3ThisinterestcanbesaidtohavebeeninitiatedbyBiancaKühneloftheHe-brewUniversityinJerusalem,whohadalreadydedicatedapublicationtoEar-lyChristianandmedievalrepresentationsoftheHolyCityin1987.4Adecadelatersheeditedamuchbroadercollectionofessaysonthesametheme,thistimecoveringaspanoftwomillenniaandthethreefaithsJudaism,Christian-ityandIslam.5In2007theKunsthistorischesInstitutinFlorenceorganisedtheconference‘JerusalemasNarrativeSpace’,whichconcentratedagainonmedi-evalandEarlyModernrepresentations.Herethetextualandvisualnarrativesweretheleitmotif,withtheworksofartprimarilyunderstoodasthebearersofmeaning.6In2009followedaconference‘ImaginingJerusalemintheMedievalWest’atUniversityCollege,Oxford.7Almostparalleltoourproject,theJohannWolfgang Goethe-Universität in Frankfurt am Main organised the congress‘RäumederPassion’,onceagaindealingwiththeMiddleAgesandtheEarlyModernperiod,thistimeconfinedtovisualizationsofthePassion.8

ThevolumeathandprovesoncemorethatJerusalemisanobjectofperen-nialinterest.Asasourceofreligious,political,culturalandconsequentlyartis-tic focal points, the theme shows no signs of running dry. On the contrary,becauseoftheongoingturmoil,thecityasapointofreferenceseemstogainnewimportanceallthetime.Thisobservationwaspreciselythestartingpointfor thepresent researchproject.Everyperiodconstructs itsown Jerusalemsdeterminedbytheaspirations,desiresandissuesofitsowntime,whileatthesametimereferringbacktoanunchallengedorigin.Howdidartrespondtoallthis?WithregardtoJerusalem,arthasbeencreatedattheintersectionoftwoaxes:thatoftheuncertaincontemporarysituationandthatofthecontinuouschainofmeaningsthathistoryputsonthecity.Fromthisobservationthreenotionsemerge:context–contrast–conflict.TheseconceptscanberelatedtothegeographicalJerusalemthatcanbevisited;tomemoriesandobjectsthatcanbebroughtback;andto interpretationsthatcanbeattachedtothecity

3 Forexamplesee:Montefiore2011.4 Kühnel1987.5 Kühnel1998.6 JerusalemasNarrativeSpace2012.7 ImaginingJerusalem2012.8 RäumederPassion [foreseen2014].


froma(mental)distance–ortothecomplexinterplayofthesedifferentman-ifestations.

WithoutaimingtosurveythesubjectofJerusaleminartinitsentirety,ourgoalwastoencompassaperiodofalmosttwentycenturies,fromEarlyChris-tiantimesonwards.ThechoicewasmadetofocusonWesternobjectsandtreatthem as works of art,withattention to theirmaterialityand tangibility.Ouraim was not to arrive at general conclusions beyond those already made inotherstudies,butrathertoaddnewinsightstothetotalityofmechanismsthatplayaroleinrepresentationandmemoryprocessesconcerningJerusalembymeansofaselectionofspecializedtopics.ThegoalwastodiscussindepthaseriesofartworksandartefactswhichquestiontherepresentationofJerusa-lemandcomplementeachotherorputothercasesinperspective.Inevitablyallcasesdealtoacertainextentwithreligiousorpoliticalnotionsandtheef-fectstheyproduceontherepresentationofJerusalemandonculturaldebatein general. As a whole and in connection to each other, the individual casestudiesthusdoexceedtheirownscope.Thecontributionsdifferintheirap-proach.Theyrangefromaculturalhistoricalperspectivetoanarttheoreticaloramoreessay-likediscussion,assuchalsocoveringdifferentwaysofwritingarthistory.

Thecontributionsofthisvolumearegroupedundertwomainthemes.Thefirstpartofthebook,Competing Memories and Contrasting Meaningsisdedi-catedtocasesinwhichtheconceptofJerusalemcreatescontraststhroughtheway it is remembered and through the specific meanings contained in thismemory.Thesecasestudiesdemonstratehowthecontextgeneratesconflict-inginterpretationsofaspectsofthecity.Theconflictshavehadwideconse-quencesbothinmanyculturalenvironmentsandalsoinart.

Thesecondpartofthebook,Imitation and Translocation,concentratesonhowJerusalemwasbroughttotheWesternWorld–bothphysicallyandmeta-phorically.Whatlinksthesecasestudiesistheaspectofmotion.Thechangeofcontextconfrontsoldwithnewconcepts,hereandnowwiththereandthen.TravellingtoJerusalemandbackagain,peoplegatheredspiritualmemoriesaswellasmaterialobjects.Backhometheymaterializedthecityinanotherplace.Through translocation theHolyCitywas recreatedelsewhere in thought, inworksofartandinbuildings.Theserecreationswereconsideredtobemorethanameresubstitute,actingasinstrumentsofmemory.

TostressthepermanenttopicalityofJerusalem,thefirstpartbeginsinthetwenty-firstcentury.Thesuccessivetextstracethewaybacktothefourthcen-tury.Mostcontributionsinsomewaypursuetheoriginalsource,theJerusalemoftheBible.ThesecondpartofthevolumethendepartsfromtheperiodinwhichJerusalembecameatopicinWesternartandproceedsforwardsagainto


thepresentandthefuture.Thepresenttimethusfunctionsasaframethatsur-roundsandcontextualizesthecases,highlightinghowthetimeinwhichwelivedeterminesourperspectiveonthesubject.

AlthoughthisbookexaminescontinuityintheartisticquestioningofJeru-salem, this does not mean that it ignores major shifts in the history of thissubject.ThemostprominentdividinglineiswithoutdoubttheHolocaustandthesubsequentfoundationofthestateofIsraelinthetwentiethcentury.Aftertheseevents,artiststendedtoputterrorandcollisionintheforeground.Al-thoughconflictwasbynomeansabsentinearliertimes,itwasofadifferentnature.Ratherthanirresolvableconflictswithinworksofart, therewerein-steadjuxtapositionsofalternativeinterpretationsandrepresentationsofJeru-salem. The aim of artworks in earlier times had been first and foremost topropagateaunivocal,oftendoctrinal,visioninreactiontodeviatingopinions.

InthecontributionbyAnnekeSchulenbergtheworkPresent TensebytheBrit-ish-PalestinianartistMonaHatoumisdescribedasthesearchforahomelandthat,astheresultofpoliticalandreligiousconflicts,consistsonlyofdispersedterritories.Theimpactofthedeterminingpowerofmappingastheoutcomeofenforcedtreatieswiththeaimofcontrolmeansimprisonmentineverydaylife.ThesculptureofthismapofthefragmentedPalestinianterritoriesdeterminedin1993,symbolicallymadeofaromaticNablussoap,notonlyreflectsuponthelimitsofboundaries,butatthesametimetriestopointatthestabilitytheseshouldandcanprovide.Inawaythesculptureembodieshopeforthefuture.

Withthisopeningarticlethestageisset:JerusalemandIsraelasplacesofconflict, caused by history, problematic and contested in the present, and apossiblehopefulanswerforthefuture.

In her contribution on The Green Line by the Belgian artist Francis Alÿs,MetteGieskesalsotacklesthecontestedboundariesofJerusalemandIsraelasawhole.Here,thefocusisontheimpactofthepoliticallysensitivearmisticedemarcation line of 1948, which Alÿs traced in 2004 with a dripping can ofgreenpaint.Thistemporaryinterventioninpublicspaceinvitesreflectionontheseminalyetrelativelynon-intrusivearmisticelineasanhistoricalsourceofseparationbetweenIsraelisandPalestiniansandtheconflictbetweenthem,aswellasapotentialsourceoffuturepeace.Theabsurdityoftheaction,whichalsoexplores thepoliticalpotentialofart, stimulatesawarenessof thearbi-trariness of two-dimensional borders that are enforced onto a continuous,three-dimensionalworld,dividingtheindivisible.

WouterWeijerspresentsaprofoundanalysisoftwohomonymouspaintingsentitled Jerusalem by Anselm Kiefer and Gerhard Richter. The contrast be-tweentheworksturnsouttobeasfundamentalastheinternalconflictthattheseparatepaintingsevoke.Theworksofthetwoartistsmarktheextremesof


the way in which the problematic implications of Jerusalem could be dealtwithinGermanyafter1945.ThemythicandmaterialmemoryofJerusalemischallengedonvariouslevelsinrelationtoGermany’sroleintheSecondWorldWarandtheafter-warperiodinIsrael.Bothworkstryinaveryparticularwayto cope with the burden of recent history, especially that of the Holocaust.Whatwasforcefullyforgottenisrecalled,whatisrememberedisquestioned,whatisunimaginableisrepresented.EventuallyallthispointsbackattheHolyCity.

ThestrivingforahumanisticsolutiontodeviatingopinionsaboutthecityofJerusalemanditsmonumentshasledtohighlydetailedreconstructionsofthepast.Aseventeenth-centurymanifestationof thisphenomenonisdiscussedbyJeroenGoudeau,inatextontheTempleofJerusalemintheDutchRepublic.TheOldTestamentTempleisprobablyoneofthemostemblematicbuildingsinhistory.Ontheinterfacebetweentheologyandarchitecture,scholarsofalltimehavetriedtointegratethisbiblicalstructureintothereligious,politicaland aesthetic paradigms of their own milieu. Lost as a material source andonly fragmentarily described in various texts, the divine JewishTemple, theholiestofplacesforthePeopleoftheBook,madeoneoftheauthoritativefocalpoints of the real and imagined city.The article evaluates an Early ModernprotestantreconstructionoftheTempleasavisualcomponentofthehuman-istenterpriseofbiblicalcriticism.

Althoughinquiteanothersense, reconstructingandremouldingthepastarchitecturallyisalsothesubjectofthecontributionbyMariëtteVerhoeven.SheconcentratesonthestoneremnantsofCrusaderarchitectureincontem-porary Jerusalem. Instead of reconstructing their original form, seven keymonuments,startingwiththeChurchoftheHolySepulchre,areconsideredasmultilayered objects that have been subject to constant change. Verhoevenshowsthedifferentmechanismsbywhichbuildingscanacquirenewmean-ingsorcanundergoradicalchangesthatinvolvespecificvalues.Ineachsubse-quentinterventionanewlayertothecityanditshistoryhasbeenaddedwhiletheolderlayersremainvisible.AsvisiblewitnessesofthepastthesebuildingspassdownthenarrativeoftheturbulenthistoryofJerusalem.

SibledeBlaauwexamineshowavarietyofmedia,includingrelics,images,locations, buildings and liturgical ceremonies, were employed to representand incorporate Jerusalem in (Early) Christian Rome. His diachronic surveyshows that the linkbetween the twocitieshad beenestablishedasearlyasConstantinian times and was (re)activated through the ages. However, thereferencesseemtobemoreorlessindependentphenomena.DeBlaauwdem-onstrates convincingly that the strong and concrete potentials of meaningtransferdidnotresultinacomprehensive,consistent,orevenlastingconcept


ofJerusaleminRome.ApparentlythecityofPeterandPauldidnotneedtobecomeaSecondJerusalem.

DeBlaauw’scontributionistheclosestthisbookgetstothestartingpointofJerusalemassourceforartisticrepresentationinWesternart.However,atthesametimeitseemsthatthesourceintheagesbeforeChristianizationdrawsback,dissolves,andgrowsimpalpable.TheconceptofJerusalemthatseemssoclearandmeaningfulinlaterperiodsofWesternart,becomesmoreandmorediffuse,witheverystepfurtherbackintime.AfterthedestructionoftheTem-pleandtheexpulsionoftheJewishinhabitants,JerusalembecamearelativelyinsignificantRomancitywithanindeterminateidentity.Yet,itssacredcharac-terdidnotfallintooblivion,butwasratherincreasinglyopenforinterpreta-tions and appropriations from new religious and cultural perspectives.ThismultiplicationofengagementswithJerusalemasasacredcity,byChristians,MuslimsandJewsalike,madethehistoryofthecityintooneofcontinuouslychangingconfigurations, fromtolerantcoexistenceandculturalexchangetoaggressionandsegregation.

ItwastheCrusaderswhore-establishedJerusalemasaChristiancity.KatjaBoertjesdescribesthecultofpilgrims’ampullaethatbearimagesofthenew,reconqueredJerusalem.TheyfunctionedassouvenirsforthepilgrimsandCru-sadersthemselves,butperhapsevenmoreasdevotionalobjectsforthosewhohadnotvisitedtheHolyLand.Theampullaetravelledbackwiththepassen-gersandthuscapturedthememoryofJerusalemandtheHolySepulchreinnarrative,aswellasmateriallytransferringatangible‘memento’oftheHolyCity.

Besidestheactivepilgrimageandmaterialsouvenirstherewasthepilgrim-ageinthemind,asHannekevanAsperenexpoundsonthebasisoftwolate-medievalmanuscriptsfromthecollectionoftheRadboudUniversityLibrary.Bywayofthesetexts,whichdescribedevotionalexercises,thementalpilgrimcouldtravelinstantaneouslytotheholyplaces.Thisspiritualwayoftravellingnotonlybridgedageographicaldistance,butalsodistanceintime,asthewor-shipper felt actually present at the biblical events themselves, especially atChrist’sPassion.Inordertoenhancetheexperience,thetextscontaindetailedmeasurementsofdistancesbetweensites,andtopographicalinformationsuchasthenumberofstepstobeclimbed.Inaway,thispilgrimagewasmorerealthananactualpresenceinJerusalem.Inthetextsthelikenesswiththecon-temporarycitywasnolongerimportant.Thebiblicalcityprevailed.Thebibli-calscenesevengainedrelic-likeimportance.

MeasurementsandotherspecificphysicalfeatureswerealsoimportantincopiesaftertheholysitesastheydevelopedinEuropeduringtheMiddleAgesand the Renaissance.With their translocation to other regions, monuments


markingbiblicalepisodesweretransformedintosimulacra,enablingpilgrimsto pursue their devotions to the holy places without having to travel to theHolyLand.Apartfromafewsometimesratherrandomlychosencharacteris-tics, as a rule, exactitude in these reproductions was not an issue. Bram deKlerck’scontributiondealswiththisrichphenomenonin late-medievalandRenaissanceItaly,focussingonthepilgrims’sanctuaryknownas‘SacroMonte’nearVaralloinPiedmont.Inchapelsandtheirinteriordecorations,scenesoftheLifeandPassionofChristwerevisualized insuchaway that thevisitormusthavefelthimselfpresentattheepisodesdepicted.DeKlerckconfrontsbothstyleandfunctionofthelife-like,expressivedecorationofthechapeloftheHolySepulchreatVarallo,withLeonBattistaAlberti’srenaissance-human-ist‘copy’ofChrist’stomb,locatedintheCappellaRucellaiintheChurchofSanPancrazioinFlorence.

ThecounterpartofthecityoftheOldTestamentandthehistoricalJerusa-lemistheNewJerusalem,envisionedinStJohn’sApocalypse.Thisheavenlycity isnotrealyetbut isexpectedtobecomesoattheendoftime.CuratorDaanVanSpeybroeckexaminestwostainedglasswindowrepresentationsofthisapocalypticcitybythecontemporaryFrenchartistsGérardGarousteandJean-Michel Alberola. Glass windows, being one of the most immaterial offormsinvisualart,seemveryapttorepresentaheavenlysituation.Inthelightofrecenthistory,however,theconnectionbetweenJerusalemandheavenhasbecomeproblematic.ThatiswhyGaroustechallengedthetraditionalconfigu-rationofOldandNewTestamentbyplacingGenesisonthedarknorthsideofthechurchbuildingandtheApocalypseonthesunlitsouth.InAlberola’swin-dowstheconflictisstressedthroughtherepresentationoftheirreconcilabilityoftheheavenlyJerusalemandbiblicalBabylon.

IntheclosingcontributionRudievanLeeuwenalsodealswiththeNewJe-rusalem,thistimetobeestablishedonearth.Twoenterprisesinperformanceand music are presented within a specific Jewish context.With his Medinat Weimar project the artist Ronen Eidelman plays with implicit sensitivitiesaroundZionismandthefearofJewishworlddominion,whenhepropagatestheidealNewJerusaleminthehistorically‘brown’GermanstateofThuringia.Hedislocatesthepublicbythisprovocativeproposition,ofwhichitisnotclearatfirstsighttowhatextentthisisaseriousenterprise.TheYiddishsongsbyforinstanceDanielKahnandthecontextoftheirperformance,aswellasrefer-encestoSocialism,alienatetheaudiencejustliketheworkofEidelman.Nowa-days it is perhaps by these confusing projects, in which irony meets socialcriticism and an excruciating but still ongoing history meets a sense of hu-mour,thatwecanreflectonourownattitudetowardsJerusalem.


Afterall,itisinthenatureofarttoexpresscomplexconcepts,tomediatebetweentheordinaryandtheunsaid,tooscillatebetweenrealityandimagina-tion–alwaysprovidingaprovisionalandsinglewayout.

The Editors

Literature

Imagining Jerusalem in the Medieval West,ed.byLucyDonkinandHannaVorholt,ProceedingsoftheBritishAcademy175,Oxford2012.

Jerusalem as Narrative Space/ Erzählraum Jerusalem, ed. by Anette Hoffmann andGerhardWolf,VisualisingtheMiddleAges6,Leiden2012.

Kühnel,Bianca,From the Earthly to the Heavenly Jerusalem. Representations of the Holy City in Christian Art of the first Millenium,RömischeQuartalschriftfürchristlicheAltertumskundeundKirchengeschichte,Supplementheft42,Rome1987.

––––––,The Real and Ideal Jerusalem in Jewish, Christian and Islamic Art. Studies in Honor of Bezalel Narkiss on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday,JewishArt23/24(1997–98),Jerusalem1998.

Montefiore,SimonSebag,Jerusalem. The Biography,London2011.Räume der Passion – Raumvisionen, Erinnerungsorte und Topographien des Leidens

Christi in Mittelalter und Früher Neuzeit / Spaces of the Passion: Visions of Space, Places of Remembrance and Topographies of Christ’s Suffering in the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period,ed.byHansAurenhammerandDanielaBohde,VestigiaBibliae–JahrbuchdesDeutschenBibel-ArchivsHamburg,Hamburg[foreseen2014].

Rigney,Ann,“Plenitude,ScarcityandtheCirculationofCulturalMemory”,Journal of European Studies,35(1),2005,pp.11–28.

Sturken,Marita,Tangled Memories. The Vietnam War, the AIDS Epidemic, and the Politics of Remembering,Berkeley,LosAngelesandLondon1997.


part 1

Competing Memories and Contrasting Meanings

∵

11SitesAndSenses

Chapter1

Sites and SensesMapping Palestinian Territories in Mona Hatoum’s Sculpture Present Tense

Anneke Schulenberg

InApril1996,MonaHatoum,aBritishartistofPalestinianorigin,installedaworkentitledPresent TenseattheAnadielGalleryinEastJerusalem,anareaannexedbyIsraelin1967(Figs1.1–1.2).1Onthefloorofthegallery,Hatoumlaid2400piecesofsoapinarectangularshape.ThesoapwasNablussoap,atradi-tional Palestinian product made of olive oil. Hatoum pressed tiny red glassbeadsincurvedlines intothesoap(Fig. 1.2).At firstsight, the linesseemtomakeupabstractforms,butinfacttheydepictpartoftheoccupiedPalestinianterritories that, as determined by the 1993 Oslo Accords, Israel should havehanded back to the Palestinian authorities. Hatoum came across a map oftheseterritoriesonthefirstdayofhervisittoJerusalem.InPresent Tense,sheomittedtheoutlinesofthemapofIsrael,onlydrawingthePalestinianterrito-ries:fragmentedparcelsofland,scatteredacrossIsrael,resemblinganarchi-pelago.

Present Tensewasoriginallyasite-specificsculptureastheworkwasmadespecificallyforthatexhibitioninJerusalemandwasanimmediateresponsetothesite.ByinscribingthemapoftheOsloAccordsonalocaltraditionalprod-uct, Hatoum investigated the political, social and cultural dynamics at playwithintheIsraeli-Palestinianconflict.DrawingonlythePalestinianterritoriesinIsraelonthesoap,HatoumfocusedonthePalestiniansituationwithintheconflict.ThecontextofthecityofJerusalemaffectedthemeaningoftheart-work,enhancingthepoliticaldimension.JerusalemwasandremainsthecoreissueintheIsraeli-Palestinianconflictasitisclaimedbybothpartiestobethecapitaloftheirstates.YetsincetheexhibitioninJerusalem,Present Tensehasbeendisplayedinseveralsoloandgroupexhibitions,andwasevenacquiredby

1 TheAnadielGalleryisnowcalledtheAl-Ma’hamFoundation,anditsaimis‘topromote,in-stigate,disseminateandmakeartinPalestine’:“Al-Ma’halHistoricalBackground,”Al-Ma’hal.FoundationforContemporaryArt,http://www.almamalfoundation.org/aboutus.php(ac-cessedon28June2012).

© AnnekeSchulenberg,2014 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_003This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.



12 Schulenberg

Figure1.1 Mona Hatoum, PresentTense, 1996, soap and glass beads, 4.5 × 241 × 299 cm, installation at Anadiel Gallery, Jerusalem. CourtesyWhiteCubeandAnadielGallery,Jerusalem.

Figure1.2 Mona Hatoum, PresentTense (detail), 1996, soap and glass beads, 4.5 × 241 × 299 cm, installation at Anadiel Gallery, Jerusalem. CourtesyWhiteCubeandAnadielGallery,Jerusalem.

13SitesAndSenses

Tatein2013.Theimportantrelationbetweentheworkanditsoriginalsiteisnowbroken,whichaffectsthemeaningofthework.

WithPresent Tense,HatoumnotonlyexploredtheimplicationsofthemapforthePalestinians,butalsosetuparelationshipbetweentheworkandtheviewer.SheconstructsthisrelationshipbyadoptingtheaestheticlanguageofMinimalArt,morespecificallyitsstrategiestoestablisharelationshipbetweentheviewerandtheartwork,inhercasebyactivatingtheviewer’solfactoryor-gan through the smell of soap.Through this relationship, an interplay takesplacebetweenthepoliticalcontentofthework,thesiteandtheviewer.Al-though the exhibition at the Anadiel Gallery included several of Hatoum’sworks,thiscontributionfocusesonhowHatoum,inhersite-specificsculpturePresent Tense – as installed in Jerusalem – sets up a physical encounter be-tweenartworkandviewerbystimulatingthesenses,inordertoexaminethesocio-political implications for the Palestinians of the map of the Oslo Ac-cords.Iwillendwithadiscussionoftheconsequencesforthemeaningoftheworkofreinstallingitinotherplaces.

Mapping Palestinian Territories

WhenHatoum,thedaughterofPalestinianrefugees,wenttoJerusalemforhersoloexhibitionattheAnadielGallery,itwasherfirstvisittotheformerhome-land of her parents. In an interview with Michael Archer, Hatoum revealedhowshefeltaboutworkinginJerusalem:‘GoingtoJerusalemwasaverysig-nificantjourneyforme,becauseIhadneverbeenthere.[…]JackPersekian,whohasthislittlegalleryinEastJerusalem,andIhadbeendiscussingthepos-sibilityofdoingtheexhibitionthereforovertwoyears.Ikeptpostponingitbecauseemotionallyit’saveryheavything…’.2

The visit to Jerusalem was of personal importance for Hatoum. She wasbornin1952inBeirut,Lebanon,butherfamilyisoriginallyfromHaifa.Whenthe Jewish militants bombed Haifa in 1948, the family fled to Beirut. WhileHatoumwasvisitingLondonin1975,theLebanesecivilwarbrokeout.Expect-ingtheconflicttolastforafewdays,maybeweeks,sheplannedtoreturntoBeirut.AstheproblemslastedlongerthansheexpectedandtheBeirutairportwasclosedforninemonths,shewasforcedtostayinLondon.Hatoumdecidedtoattendartschool,firsttheByamShawSchoolofArt(1975–79),followedbythe Slade School of Art (1979–81).3 After she finished art school, Hatoum

2 Hatouminterviewedby:Archer1997,p.26.3 Brett1997,pp.34–35.

14 Schulenberg

remainedinLondon,whereshecurrentlystill livesandworks,althoughshehasalsohadastudioinBerlinforseveralyears.

WhenHatoumfinallydecidedtoexhibitinJerusalem,itseemedalmostin-evitablethatthecontextofthecitywouldplayaroleintheexhibition,notonlybecauseofherPalestinianbackground,butalsobecausesheoftencreatesart-worksinresponsetothecontextofthelocationofanexhibition.BeforegoingtoJerusalem,Hatoumalreadyhadideasforthegalleryshow,butneverexecut-edthemwhenshearrivedinthecity: ‘TheideasIhadproposedbeforehandseemed to be about turning the gallery into a hostile environment, but theenvironment outside was already so hostile that people hardly needed re-minding’.4Asmentionedearlier,onherfirstdayinJerusalem,Hatoumstum-bleduponamapoftheOsloagreement.Aftersomeconsiderationshedecidedtomakeasculpturebasedonit:‘WhenIfirstcameacross[themap],Ihadnointentionofusingit,butaweeklaterIdecidedIwouldliketodosomethingwiththislocalsoapmadefrompureoliveoil,andtheworkcametogether’.5The hostility of the environment of Jerusalem also seems to have affectedHatoum’schoiceoftheredbeads:‘OriginallyIwasgoingtodrawtheoutlineofthemapbypushingnailsintothesoap,butitlookedquiteaggressiveandsad.IendedupusinglittleglassbeadswhichIpressedintothesoap’.6

Fromancienttimesonward,map-makinghasbeentiedtoconquest.7Mapsareoftenusedtoaffirmterritorialclaims,asisthecasewiththemapfromtheOslo Accords. In 1993, an attempt was made to resolve the ongoing conflictbetweenPalestiniansandIsraelis.ThegovernmentofIsraelandthePalestineLiberationOrganization(PLO)signed,afteryearsofnegotiations,theOsloAc-cords,alsocalledOsloI,or,officially,theDeclarationofPrinciplesonInterimSelf-Government Arrangements. In this agreement, the two parties decidedthattheIsraeliarmywouldwithdrawfromsomepartsoftheWestBankand

4 Hatouminterviewedby:Archer1997,p.26.AccordingtoGannitAnkori,Hatoum’svisittoherhomeland,orhergoingback‘home’,aswellasthe‘cosy’atmosphereofthegallery,eventuallyinspiredHatoumtoturnthespaceinto‘asymbolichome’.Heclaimsthatheruseofthetraditionalsoapalludestothebathroom,arguingthatotherworksintheexhi-bitioncanalsoberelatedtospecifichomespaces.InthesculpturesNo WayandNo Way II,Hatoumplacedboltsintheholesoftwokitchenutensils–acolanderandastrainer–turningthemintostrangeobjectsnormallykeptinkitchens.Onthesecondfloor,HatoumdisplayedametalbedwithoutamattresscalledLili (Stay) Put,asareferencetoabed-room.Thebedwasstandinginthemiddleoftheroom,tiedtothefloorwithtransparentnylonthreads,evoking,accordingtoAnkori,‘theconflictbetweendisplacementandroot-edness’.See:Ankori2006,pp.141–43.

5 Hatouminterviewedby:Archer1997,pp.26–27.6 Hatouminterviewedby:Archer1997,p.27.7 Black1997,p.9.

15SitesAndSenses

theGazaStrip.Furthermore,aprovisionalPalestinianself-governancewouldbeestablished,andIsraelandPalestinewouldpubliclyrecognizeeachother.Anewseriesofnegotiations,however,wouldhavetobesetuponissuessuchastheexactbordersbetweenIsraeliandPalestinianterritories,returnofPalestin-ianrefugees, Jewishsettlements intheOccupiedTerritories,andthebiggestproblemofall,thefutureofJerusalem.8

Present Tensenotonlyexaminesapoliticalmap,butwasalsocreatedespe-cially fortheexhibitioninJerusalem,andthecontextofthecity framesthemeaningof thework. Jerusalemhasa longandcomplexhistory,but for thesakeofthiscontribution,onlytherelevanteventsafter1948willbeexpoundedupon.TheAnadielGallery,inwhichPresent Tensewasexhibited,waslocatedinEastJerusalem.In1948,EastJerusalemwasoccupiedbyJordan,whileIsraelhadcapturedWestJerusalem.Oneyearbefore,however,in1947,theGeneralAssembly of the United Nations had agreed to make an international zone,includingJerusalem,thatwouldbegovernedbyaU.N.trusteeshipcouncil.Be-fore this plan could be made operable, Jerusalem had already been dividedbetweenIsraelandJordan.IsraelthenclaimedJerusalemasitscapitalin1950,going on to conquer East Jerusalem in 1967. According to the internationalcommunity,Jerusalem’ssituationremainsundecidedand,assuch,itdoesnotrecognizeIsrael’sclaimofJerusalemasitscapital.ThecaptureofEastJerusa-lemin1967isalsoseenbytheinternationalcommunityasillegal,andittreatsEastJerusalemasPalestinianterritoryundermilitaryoccupationbyIsrael.ThePalestinians claim East Jerusalem as the capital of their future Palestinianstate.9Present TensewasthuscreatedinahighlycontestedareaintheIsraeli-Palestinianconflict.

Moreover,Present TensewascreatedinApril1996,onlymonthsafterIsraeliprimeministerYitzhakRabinwasmurdered.Afewmonthsbeforethismurder,on24September1995,thesecondpartoftheOsloAccords,OsloII,hadbeensignedbyIsraelandthePLO.ThissecondagreementgavethePalestiniansself-governanceinBethlehem,Hebron,Jenin,Nablus,Qalqilya,Ramallah,Tulkarm,aswellasinapproximately450villages.On28September,OsloIIwasratifiedbyRabinandPLOchairmanYasserArafat.Justoverfiveweekslater,on4No-vember1995,RabinwasmurderedbyanIsraeliopponentoftheOsloAccords.Afterthisincident,thepeaceprocessbegantofallapartandviolentattacksbyIslamicfundamentalistsofHamasledtoahalttonegotiationswiththePales-tinians.10AlthoughPresent Tense doesnotrefertothesepoliticalevents,they

8 Fischback2000[a],p.284.9 Fischbach2000[b],pp.213–16.10 Montefiore2011,p.507.

16 Schulenberg

arelikelytohaveframedtheviewer’sexperienceoftheworkintheEastJeru-salemgalleryatthattime.

Themapwhichwasdrawnasaresultofthe1993OsloAccordstoindicatethe future Palestinian territories in Israel, was the point of departure forHatoum’swork.Thismapisareflectionofpoliticalideasandservesmilitarygoalsofcontrollingtheterritorialdivisions,somethingHatoumiswellawareof:‘[…][I]twasamapaboutdividingandcontrollingthearea.Atthefirstsignof trouble, Israel practises the policy of ‘closure’: they close all the passagesbetweentheareassothattheArabsarecompletelyisolatedandparalyzed’.11ThedivisionoftheterritoriesbytheOsloAccordshasservedasaformofsur-veillanceofthePalestinians,themaprepresentingpowerrelations.

ThetopicofsurveillanceandcontrolofhumanbeingshasbeenofinteresttoHatoumeversinceasastudentshereadthebookDiscipline and Punish: the Birth of the PrisonbytheFrenchphilosopherMichelFoucault.12InthisbookFoucaultarguesthatthedisciplinarytechniquesusedinprisonsstartinginthemiddleoftheeighteenthcenturyareameansofcontrollingpeople.OneofthetechniquesFoucaultdescribesishierarchicalobservation.Peoplecanbemadeto behave in certain ways by merely observing them. Several architecturalstructures,suchaswatchtowers,aredesignedforobservationandcommandoverpeople,butFoucaultwasespeciallyinterestedinJeremyBentham’span-opticon.Thepanopticonisacylindricalconstructionwithasmalltowerinthemiddleofahugecupula.Allthecellsoftheinmatesarelocatedaroundthistower against the wall of the cylinder. From the central tower, a guard canmonitoreachcell.Thekeytodiscipliningtheprisonersistomakethembelievetheyareunderconstantobservation,eveniftheyarenot.Thus, inmatesarecontrolled through surveillance, not only as a result of physical constraints.Foucaultarguedthatthroughthisthreatofobservationofthebodiesthatneedtobecontrolled,institutionslikeprisonshavemouldedbodiesintothecorrectform,creatingso-called‘docilebodies’.Docilebodieswereidealinamodernindustrialsocietyastheywouldalsofunctioninotherdisciplinaryinstitutions,suchasfactories,militaryregiments,andschools.13

Hatoumhasmadeanumberofartworksthatdealwithissuesofcontrolandsurveillance,mainlyinrelationtoinstitutionalandarchitecturalstructures,forexampleLight Sentence(1992)(Fig.1.3).Forthiswork,Hatoumpiledupwiremeshlockersandplacedtheminthemiddleofadarkroom.Someofthelock-erdoorsareopen.Theverticalpilesoflockersareconnectedtoeachotherto

11 Hatouminterviewedby:Archer1997,p.27.12 Pieters1997,s.p.13 Foucault1979,pp.135–41,170–77,and195–228.

17SitesAndSenses

formaU-shape.InthemiddleoftheU-shapealightbulbhangsfromtheceil-ing.Thislightbulbslowlymovesfromtheceilingtothefloor,touchesthefloor,andafterslightlytopplingover,slowlyrisesagain.Thelightfromthebulbfallsonthelockers,castingshadowsonthewallsoftheroom.Whenthelightbulbreachesthefloor,theshadowsbegintotremble.Visitorswhoentertheinstal-lationseetheirownshadowsprojectedontothewall,makingthempartoftheinstallation,andareburdenedwithfeelingsofunease,orasHatoumdescribedit:

[…] [T]hemovementof the lightbulbcauses theshadowsof thewiremeshlockerstobeinperpetualmotion,whichcreatesaveryunsettlingfeeling.Whenyouenterthespaceyouhavetheimpressionthatthewholeroomisswayingandyouhavethedisturbingfeelingthatthegroundisshifting under your feet.This is an environment in constant flux – no

Figure1.3 Mona Hatoum, LightSentence, 1992, wire mesh lockers, slow-moving motorized light bulb, 198 × 185 × 490 cm.Photo:PhilippeMigeat.CourtesyCentrePompidou,Paris.

18 Schulenberg

singlepointofview,nosolidframeofreference.Thereisasenseofinsta-bilityandrestlessnessinthework.14

With the title Light Sentence, Hatoum steers the viewer’s interpretation to-wardsideasofconfinementorimprisonment.Thelockers,however,areper-hapsalsoanallusiontootherinstitutionalstructures,likeschoolsorfactories,wherepeoplecanputtheirpersonalbelongingsinlockersbeforegoingtoclassor to work. As Foucault indicated, these institutions also discipline people,sincetheysetnorms–eitherthroughexaminationofstudentsorjobdescrip-tions that determine their behaviour – which people have to adjust to. ForHatoum,Light Sentencereferstoallinstanceswherethebuiltenvironmentisdesignedtorestrictpersonalfreedom:

[…]IhavenowspenthalfofmylifelivingintheWest,sowhenIspeakofworkslikeLight Sentence,[…]asmakingareferencetosomekindofinsti-tutionalviolence,Iamspeakingofencounteringarchitecturalandinsti-tutional structures in Western urban environments that are about theregimentation of individuals, fixing them in space and putting themundersurveillance.15

AlthoughPresent Tensedoesnotdirectlyrefertostructuresofcontrol,thedivi-sionsofterritoriesintheOsloAccordsalsofixedpeopletospacesinordertoputthemundersurveillance.ThemapoftheOsloAccordsshowshowPales-tiniansweretobeconfinedinsmallareas.Hatoumalsoreferstotheserestric-tions: ‘[…] [T]he saddest thing in Jerusalem was the policy of ‘closure’ thatrestrictedmovementfortheArabs’.16Also,thePalestinianAuthoritytookoverthetaskofpolicingthePalestinianpopulationinsidetheterritories,andquick-lysetuppoliceandsecurityforces.Israel,however,maintainedcontrolovertheborders,airspace,labor,waterandnaturalresourcesoftheoccupiedterri-tories.Israelalsocontrolledtheregistrationofthepopulation,possessingthe

14 Hatouminterviewedby:Antoni2002,p.117.15 Hatoum interviewed by: Antoni 2002, pp. 117–19. Although Hatoum specifically relates

institutionalviolencetoWesternurbanenvironments,institutionalizationisnotatypicalWesternphenomenon.HatoumperhapsrelatesinstitutionalizationtoWesternenviron-ments,because–shehasstated– itwas inLondonthatshe for the first timebecameawareofsuchaninstitution:‘TheSlade[SchoolofFineArt]wasmyfirstencounterwithalargeinstitution,andtheimpersonal,bureaucraticmachinerythatconstitutesthe‘insti-tution’ was totally foreign to me. I was so much at odds with that environment that Istartedtoexaminethereasonswhy’.Hatouminterviewedby:Archer1997,p.10.

16 Hatouminterviewedby:Archer1997,pp.27–28.

19SitesAndSenses

powertograntPalestiniansresidency,tochangetheirresidencystatus(forin-stancefromGazatotheWestBank),andtoissueidentitycards.17Palestinianswere also confronted with checkpoints, curfews, and road blocks that wereusedbytheIsraelistorestrictthemovementofthePalestinians.Thus,Pales-tinianswerenotonlyconfinedtosmallareas,but‘theinstitutionalizedsystemofcheckpoints,curfews,andclosures introducedbyOslo ledtoever-greaterimmobilizationandparalysis…’.18

InPresent Tense,Hatoumnotonlyexplorestheconfinementofpeopletorestrictedareasusingmilitarypresence,butalsouttersahopethatthesitua-tionwillchange.ThetitlePresent Tense isbasedonthegrammaticaltermfortheinflectionofverbstolocateasituationinthepresenttime,butitcanalsorefertoatensesituationinthepresent.Hatoumhasexplainedthetitleasfol-lows:‘ThepieceiscalledPresent Tense;it’saboutthesituationasitwasthen’.19Hatoum’sreference inthisquotetoaspecificsituationataspecifictimeal-readyhintsatthefactthattheterritorialdivisionsaresubjecttochangeduetopoliticalconflicts.HatoumhasstatedaboutPresent Tense,inreferencetothetransientnatureofsoap,that‘itholdsthepromise[thesoap]willdissolveonedayandwithitalltheseridiculousborders’.20Thus,thefragilityandinstabilityof thebordersaswellasHatoum’shope that theborderswilldissolve is re-flectedinthenatureofthematerial.

Present TensewasthefirstofHatoum’sworkstodealwiththeissueofmap-pingandchange.Manyfollowedafterwards.AccordingtoHatoum,maps‘give[…] the allusion of a stable, measurable space. [My] works are more aboutmappings of precarious space with unstable boundaries and a shakygeography’.21 Three years after Present Tense, Hatoum created another floorpiece,calledMap(1999)(Fig.1.4).Onthefloorofamuseum,Hatoumlaidoutthecontinentsoftheworldwithglassmarbles.IncontrasttoPresent Tense,inMapnopoliticalbordersofthenationsonthecontinentsarevisible;onlytheoutlinesofthecontinentscanbeseen.Themapis,however,fragile,becausewhenviewersentertheroom,theirstepsmakethefloorvibrateandtheglassmarblesrolloutofplace.Viewerscanslipoverthedispersedglassballs,expe-

17 Makdisi2008,pp.84–85.18 Makdisi2008,p.85.19 Hatouminterviewedby:Archer1997,p.27.ThisstatementbyHatoumisnotcompletely

correct.The1993OsloAccordshaveneverbeenfullyexecutedasnotalloftheoccupiedterritorieswerereturnedtothePalestinianAuthoritybyIsrael.

20 LecturebyHatoum:Mona Hatoum: Mappings,Vimeovideo,24:03min.,postedbySerpen-tineGallery,2011,http://vimeo.com/24541176(accessedon7November2012).


http://vimeo.com/24541176


20 Schulenberg

riencingthegroundtheywalkonasunstable.Sinceinthisworkthebordersaregeographicalratherthanpolitical,Hatoumdestabilizesthesurfacewhichviewerswalkuponto‘expandtheideaofashakygroundtotheentireearth’.22Showingonlygeographicalborders,MapislesspoliticallychargedthanPres-ent Tense.

Symbolic Soap of the Homeland

ForPresent Tense,HatoumusedalocalmaterialthatisemotionallychargedforPalestinians,traditionalPalestinianNablussoap.ThissoapismadeinNablus,acitynorthofJerusalem,outofvirginoliveoil,waterandasodiumcompound.Thecenturies-oldproductionmethodtakesseveralweeks.ItissaidthatPales-tinian women were already making the soap for household purposes morethanonethousandyearsago.Themajorsoapindustryinthecitycameintoexistence in the tenth century, and the soap was exported across the ArabworldandEurope.Theindustrywasatitsheightattheendofthenineteenthcenturywithnearly40factoriesinexistence.Inthetwentiethcentury,many


Figure1.4 Mona Hatoum, Map, 1999, 14 mm clear glass marbles, installation dimensions variable. Photo:ChristianMosar.CourtesyCasinoLuxembourg.


21SitesAndSenses

factoriesweredestroyedthroughseveralnaturaldisasters,suchastheearth-quakein1927,andagainafterIsraelimilitaryinvasionswhichbeganin2000atthestartoftheSecondIntifada.Currently,onlytwofactoriesremainactive.23The factory that produced ‘Al-Jamal’ soap, the brand Hatoum used, was de-stroyedbyIsraeliforcesin2002.24

Nablus soap is thus inextricablyconnected toPalestinianculturalhistoryandidentity.UsingthismaterialforasculptureinJerusalemhaspolitical,cul-turalandemotionalimplications.ForHatoum,thesoapfunctionedasa‘sym-bolofresistance’.25ThissymbolismmightbeinterpretedasaresistanceagainstoppressionofPalestiniansingeneral,but inrelationtothemapoftheOsloAccordsimprintedonthesoap,itismoreasymbolofresistanceagainsttheabsurdityofthebordersdeterminedbytheagreement.

Thesoapnotonlyfunctionsasasymbolicsignwithpoliticalconnotations,butithasanadditional,perhapsevenmorepowerful,effectasthesmellofthesoap triggers recollection. In his book Swann’s Way, Remembrance of Things Past (1913), Marcel Proust described how penetrating smells can be, as didPatrickSüskindinhisnovelPerfume: The Story of a Murderer(1985).AlthoughinSüskind’snovel,themaincharacterGrenouillehasextraordinarypowertodiscernodours,whichisofnoimportanceinrelationtoHatoum’swork,thefragmentgivenbelowdoesshowhowasmellcanproduceabodilyresponseandhowitcanberelivedatalatertime:

Grenouille sat on the logs, his legs outstretched and his back leanedagainstthewalloftheshed.Hehadclosedhiseyesanddidnotstir.Hesaw nothing, he heard nothing, he felt nothing. He only smelled thearomaofthewoodrisinguparoundhimtobecapturedunderthebonnetoftheeaves.Hedrankinthearoma,hedrownedinit,impregnatinghim-selfthroughhisinnermostpores,untilhebecamewoodhimself;helayon the cord of wood like a wooden puppet, like Pinocchio, as if dead,untilafteralongwhile,perhapsahalfhourormore,hegaggeduptheword“wood.”Hevomitedthewordup,asifhewerefilledwithwoodtohisears,asifburiedinwoodtohisneck,asifhisstomach,hisgorge,his

23 ‘Nablus’oliveoilsoap:aPalestiniantraditionliveson’,InstituteforMiddleEastUnder-standing (IMEU), http://imeu.net/news/article008132.shtml (accessed on 7 September2012).

24 Mansoor2010,p.55n.18;‘MonaHatoum’,Al-Ma’hal.FoundationforContemporaryArt,http://www.almamalfoundation.org/index.php?action=events&type=7&artist=MonaHatoum(accessedon13June2012).

25 Hatouminterviewedby:Archer1997,p.27.

http://imeu.net/news/article008132.shtml

22 Schulenberg

nosewerespillingoverwithwood.Andthatbroughthimtohimself,res-cuedhimonlymomentsbeforetheoverpoweringpresenceofthewood,itsaroma,wasabouttosuffocatehim.Heshookhimself,sliddownoffthelogs,andtotteredawayasifonwoodenlegs.Dayslaterhewasstillcom-pletely fuddled by the intense olfactory experience, and whenever thememoryofitroseuptoopowerfullywithinhimhewouldmutterimplor-ingly,overandover,“wood,wood.”26

ThesmellofthesoapinPresent Tensecansimilarlyproduceanembodiedre-sponse in the viewer. Present Tense is Hatoum’s only olfactory artwork, andHatoumhasneverexplicitlysaidanythingabouttheeffectofsmellsonview-ers. However, in an interview in 1997, after the installation of Present Tense,Hatoumexplainedtheimportanceofexperiencingherartworksthroughthesenses:

Forme,theembodimentofanartworkiswithinthephysicalrealm;thebodyistheaxisofourperception,sohowcanartaffordnot[to]takethatasastartingpoint?Werelatetotheworldthroughoursenses.Youfirstexperienceanartworkphysically.Iliketheworktooperateonbothsen-sual and intellectual levels. Meanings, connotations and associationscomeaftertheinitialphysicalexperienceasyourimagination,intellect,psychearefiredoffbywhatyou’veseen.27

ForHatoum,abodilyexperienceofherworkthroughthesensesisessentialas,againinherownwords,thisexperience‘activate[s]apsychologicalandemo-tionalresponse’.28Althoughmostartworksprimarilyaddresstheviewer’ssightinadirectway,theothersenses–touch,hearing,smellandtaste–canalsoplayaroleinengagingwithartworks.29Hatoumhasalsousedsoundinacou-pleofartworkstoelicitemotionalresponsesfromtheviewer,forinstanceinHome(1999)andCurrent Disturbance(1996).

In Present Tense, the smell of the Nablus soap pulls a viewer towards thework.Asthematerial isatraditionalPalestinianproduct,thesmellcanalsoevokeemotionalresponsestotheworkinPalestinians.LauraU.Markshasar-gued that smells activate emotions, and that individuals retain olfactory

26 Süskind1985,p.17.27 Hatouminterviewedby:Archer1997,p.8.28 Hatouminterviewedby:Antoni2002,p.123.29 Formoreinformationontheroleofthenon-visualsensesinartworks,see:Art,History,

andtheSenses2010.

23SitesAndSenses

memorieslongerthanvisualorauditorymemories.Theycanevokepersonalandnostalgicmemoriesof, for instance,grandmother’spieormother’sper-fume.30Hatoumhas indicatedthatPalestinianvisitorsoftheexhibitionim-mediatelyrecognizedthematerialandthesmell.31It is,however,difficulttodetermine which thoughts, memories, emotions or ideas the smell actuallytriggeredintheviewers.Perhapsthesmellrecalledchildhoodexperiences,orpossibly–asasymbolofthePalestinianidentity–functionedasareminderofthe Nakba32, connecting it to the current Palestinian situation. Marks alsopointsoutthat, forexiles,sensessuchassmell, tasteandtouchcanbeare-minderofthehomeland,andespeciallyareminderoftheirseparationfromit.33Fortheviewer’sofPresent Tensein1996,thespreadofthesmellofthesoapthroughoutthegalleryinoccupiedEastJerusalem–forPalestiniansanemo-tionallychargedplace–maynotonlyhaveactivatedmemories,butmayalsohaveintensifieda longingforthehomelandthatwastakenfromthem.Thislonging may have been accompanied by a feeling of sadness, because thehomeland,astheyknewit,nolongerexisted.TheintegrationofthemapoftheOsloAccordsmusthaveonlyenhancedthat feeling,as it shows fragmentedPalestinian territories. Hatoum activated the senses of Palestinian viewerswiththescentofthiswork,which,alongwiththemapoftheOsloAccords,mayhavecausedarelivingofpersonalandculturalmemoriesofPalestinianhistoryandthelossofhomeland.

The meaning of the smell of Nablus soap is, however, partially culturallydetermined.34ThesmellofoliveoilsoapwillonlyevokememoriesinPalestin-ians,andonlyinthosePalestinianswhogrewupwiththesmell.Viewerswith-out a Palestinian background are likely not to be familiar with the specificscent.Fortheseviewers,thesmellofthesoapperhapsonlycarriesconnota-tionsofcleaning,andwillconjurecompletelydifferentthoughts,memoriesoremotions.Theuseofsoapasamediumcanalsoevokeacompletelydifferentreaction.AnIsraeliartist,forinstance,askedHatoum,afteralectureattheal-WasitiArtCentreinEastJerusalem,ifshewasnotawarethatsoapwascon-nected with the Holocaust. DuringWorldWar II, soap in the concentration

30 Marks2000,p.205.31 Hatouminterviewedby:Archer1997,p.27.32 NakbaisanArabictermforcatastropheandreferstotheeventsthattookplaceinPales-

tineduringandafter1948.Almost80percentofthePalestiniansbecamerefugeeswhen,during thewar, thestateof Israelwasestablished.For thePalestinians, thiswarwasa‘catastrophe’aspeopleweredispersedandtheircommunallifewasendedwithviolence,see:Abu-LughodandSa’di2007,p.3.

33 Marks2000,pp.231–32.34 Classen1993,pp.1–11.

24 Schulenberg

campswasmanufacturedfromthehumanfatofthecamp’svictims.35Hatoumsaidaboutthisreaction:‘Thiscouldn’thavebeenfurtherfrommythoughts’.36Thus,viewers’reactionstothesmellofthesoap,ortothesoapitself,canbeverydiverse,andtheintensityofthereactionmayalsodifferfromviewertoviewer.Butwhateverresponsesviewersmighthave,thesmellofthesoapwillprovokeaphysicalsensationandsetupaninterplaybetweentheviewerandthesculpture.

Minimalism and Material

Althoughthesmellofthesoapcausesaphysicalreactionintheviewer,Hatoumalsoaimedtoprovokeabodilyexperienceoftheworkintheviewerthroughtheuseoftheartistic languageofMinimalArt.ThemajorityofMinimalistswantedtocreateaphysicalrelationshipbetweentheartworkandtheviewer.Hatoum’splacementoftheblocksofsoapinagridontheflooris,however,especiallyreminiscentofthefloorpiecesbyMinimalartistCarlAndre.For144 Magnesium Square(1969),forexample,Andreplaced144platesofmagnesiuminasquareflatonthefloor(Fig.1.5).ThemagnesiumplatesareunprocessedinpartbecauseAndre,likeotherMinimalists,aimedtomakeworksthatwerenottheexpressionoftheartist’semotions.Toachievethis,Andreusedprefabri-catedindustrialmaterials,whichhedidnotcarveormodel.Andreleftthema-terials intact,andin 144 Magnesium Square simplyplacedtheplatesnexttoeachothertocreateasquare.Asnoneofthemagnesiumplateshasbeengivenmoreimportancethananotherwithintheserialstructure,thereisnointernalhierarchyinthework.144 Magnesium Squaredoesnotrefertoanythingout-sidethework,butonlytoitsownstructureandthematerials.ForAndrethematerialwasessential.Heaimedforadirectandsensualengagementoftheviewerwiththework’sphysicalandtactilequalities,suchasthematerial’sso-lidity,weight,andcolor,whichaviewercouldexperienceliterallybytouchingthematerialorbywalkingonthework.37

ThesculpturePresent TenseisnotaworkofMinimalart,butHatoumem-ploystheminimalistlanguagetosetuparelationbetweenartworkandviewer.BeforediscussingHatoum’suseof theminimalist language inPresent Tense,thiscontributionexpandsonherideasonaphysicalinteractionbetweenview-ersandherartworksingeneral,asitprovidesabetterunderstandingofhow

35 Persekian2013,s.p.36 Hatouminterviewedby:Archer1997,p.27.37 Gieskes2006,p.18.

25SitesAndSenses

important this relationship has been for her since the late 1980s. Hatoum’searlyworkinthe1980sconsistedofperformancesandvideoart,inwhichsheoftenexplicitlyreferredtoeventsintheMiddleEast.Afterafewyears,Hatoumfeltthattheseworksweretoodidactic,andsheswitchedtoinstallationartandsculptures.Thisswitchinmediumsalsoentailedaswitchinherapproachtotheviewer,asshehasexplained:‘Whatchangedisthatinsteadofmedeliver-ingamessagetotheaudiencethroughmyactionsasaperformer,Idecidedtoset up situations where viewers could experience for themselves feelings ofdanger, threat, instability and uncertainty through the physical interactionwiththework’.38

ThefirstofHatoum’sworkstoestablishaphysicalrelationshipbetweentheviewerandtheworkwastheinstallationThe Light at the End(1989)(Fig.1.6).OriginallymadefortheShowroom,agalleryinEastLondon,Hatoumplacedsixverticalelectricheatingelementsinasteelframeinthecornerofaroom.Thewallsofthegallerywerepaintedthecolorofdriedbloodandtheroomwas

38 Hatoumquotedin:Masters2008,s.p.

Figure1.5 Carl Andre, 144MagnesiumSquare, 1969, magnesium, 1 × 365.8 × 365.8 cm, London: Tate Collection. ©Tate,London2013,©CarlAndre,144Magne-siumSquare,1969,c/oPictorightAmsterdam.

26 Schulenberg

completely dark.39 Standing at a distance, the viewer was attracted by thebeautyofthesixredlines,butwhenapproachingthework,theheat–anotherbodilysensation–becameuncomfortableandatacertainpointeventhreat-ening. As Hatoum states: ‘The associations with imprisonment, torture andpainweresuggestedbythephysicalaspectoftheworkandthephenomenol-ogyof thematerialsused’.40Hatoumestablishedaphysical relationshipbe-tween the viewer and the work, so that through her work the viewer mightexperiencefeelingsofthreat,dangerandfear.

The Light at the EndandPresent Tensebothmakeuseofasensoryexperi-encetopulltheviewertowardstheworkandarousestrongassociativeemo-tional responses. For both works, Hatoum used the minimalist aestheticlanguage.Hatoumstarted touse theminimalist language in 1989,when thephysical interaction between viewer and artwork became important to her.

39 AccordingtoBrett,theroomwasevendarkerthanitappearsonthephotographs,see:Brett1997,p.60.

40 Hatouminterviewedby:Archer1997,p.17.

Figure1.6 Mona Hatoum, TheLightattheEnd, 1989, Angle iron frame, six electric heating elements, 166 × 162.5 × 5 cm.Photo:EdwardWoodman.CourtesyWhiteCube.

27SitesAndSenses

Shehasstated:‘Ilikedtheminimalaestheticbecauseoftheeconomyofformandtheemphasisonthematerialrealityofthework.Atthetime,itfeltimpor-tanttousethelanguageofminimalismbutalsotofillitwithsignsthatrefertotheworldoutside,asopposedtokeepingitnon-referential’.41

Althoughinthiscomment,Hatoumdoesnotspecificallyrefertominimal-ists’ preoccupation with the viewer’s physical encounter with an artwork,Hatoum’sappropriationoftheminimalistaestheticlanguageinPresent Tensecontributestoaphenomenologicalexperienceandunderstandingofthework.As it is beyond the reach of this contribution to delve into the minimalists’theoriesontheviewer’sbodilyengagement,thefollowingwillberestrictedtoAndre’sfloorpieces,suchas144 Magnesium Square,whichissimilartoPresent Tense on several levels. In his book The Sculptural Imagination. Figurative, Modernist, Minimalist,AlexPottsdescribeshowaviewer’sengagementwithAndre’s floor pieces differs from an interaction with a traditional sculpture.Andre’s144 Magnesium Squarehasnofrontalviewfromwhichthesculptureistobeseen,sothereisnofixedviewpoint.AccordingtoPotts,thislackofasin-gularviewpoint‘forcesonetoengagewiththeworkatakinaestheticaswellaspurelyvisuallevel’.42Theworkcanbeviewedfromallsides,evenfromabove.43Theviewerisinvitedtowalkaround,andevenon,theworktoexperiencethesculptureanditsmaterial.

Aspreviouslystated,forAndre,adirectengagementoftheviewerwiththephysicalandtactilequalitiesofhisworkisessential.Hehaswritten:‘[…][T]hetendencyofmyworkistoengagetheparticipant inamorephysical, tactileexperience’.44Althoughtheviewercanhaveatactileexperienceofthemate-rialusedbyAndrebywalkingontheworkandtouchingtheplates,theycannotexperiencetheweightofthematerial,astheyarenotallowedtopickuptheplates.AccordingtoPotts,thistactileexperienceoftheworkcanonlybeexpe-riencedbytheviewerthrough‘imaginativeidentification’.45Theviewerhastoimaginehowtheartistlaiddowntheplatesandfeelsthesubstanceandmass

41 Hatoumquotedin:Masters,2008,s.p.42 Potts2000,p.313.43 Pottsalsostatesthatacomplexdynamicarisesbetweentheencounteroftheverticality

oftheviewer’sbodyandthehorizontalityofthework,asitcreatesatensionbetweenthetwo.Theeffectofthistensionisanincreasedawarenessofone’sverticalityandthehori-zontalityofthefloorpiece,see:Potts2000,p.320.

44 Andrequotedin:Gieskes2006,p.76.45 Potts2000,p.321.According toPotts,viewersareneverallowed to touch theplatesof

Andre’swork.Pottsseemstoresthisstatementona leaflet thatwashandedoutatanexhibitiononAndre’ssculpturesin1996attheMuseumofArtinOxford,whichstatedthatviewersshouldnottouchtheworks.ThisseemsinconsistentwithAndre’sideason

28 Schulenberg

ofthematerial.PottsstatesthatAndrewasalsofascinatedbythisinternalizedtactileexperiencebeforerealizingtheactualpiece,whentheartistlaiddowntheworkinhismind.AsAndreclaimed:

IdonotvisualizeworksandIdonotdrawworksandtheonlysenseIhaverunningthroughmymindoftheworkisalmostaphysicalliftingofit.Icanalmostfeeltheweightofitandsomethingrunningthroughmymindeitherhastherightweightoritdoesn’t.46

AccordingtoPotts,theviewercansharetheartist’sinternalizedtactileexperi-ence.Walkingaroundandonthework,theviewercanimaginehowtheartisthadatactileexperiencewiththematerial,justasaviewercanimaginehowasculptorcarvedafigureoutofwoodormarble,ormoldedclay.47

AviewerengagingwithHatoum’sworkPresent TensemighthaveasimilartactileandbodilyexperienceasaviewerofAndre’swork.Similarlytoaview-er’s engagement with Andre’s floor sculpture, the viewer can walk aroundHatoum’ssculpturePresent Tense toexperiencetheworkfromdifferentper-spectives.Althoughtheviewercannotwalkonthework,nortouchitsmateri-al,theviewercanalsohaveaninternalizedtactileexperiencewiththesoap.Theviewercanimaginetouchingthematerialandfeelingitssubstance,orcanimaginehowHatoumpressedthebeadsintothesoap.Togetherwiththesmellofthesoap,this internalizedtouchingofthematerialenhancestheengage-mentoftheviewerwiththework,andperhapsalsotheemotionalresponseofPalestinianviewers.Bydrawingapoliticalmaponthesoap,Hatoumrelatesthesoaptoapoliticalreality,andestablishesasensualaswellaspoliticalen-gagement with the work for the viewer. This is different from Carl Andre’swork, which does not explicitly refer to politics, even if the artist’s politicalconvictionsinpartdeterminedthestructure,materials,andformofhiswork.48Within the politically charged context of Jerusalem, Hatoum uses the mini-malistaestheticlanguagetoemphasizethematerialandtosetuparelation-shipbetweentheviewerandtheartwork,tomaketheviewerawareoftheirownbodyinrelationtothesiteandtoengagethevieweronaphysicallevelwiththepoliticalcontentofthework.

theviewer’sparticipationwithhisworks.Itislikely,however,thattheleafletistheresultofthemuseum’spolicyonconservation.

46 Andrequotedin:Potts2000,p.321.47 Potts2000,p.321.48 SeeGieskes2006,pp.14–97.

29SitesAndSenses

Reinstallations of Present Tense

AsPresent Tensewasshownat,andmadeexplicitlyfor,anexhibitioninJerusa-lem,thecontextofthecityaffectsthework.Hatoum,however,reinstalledthework several times, for instance for her solo exhibition Present Tense: Mona HatoumattheParasolUnit,FoundationforContemporaryArtinLondonin2008;atthegroupexhibitionDisorientation II: The Rise and Fall of Arab CitiesatAbuDhabiArtin2009–2010;andatasoloexhibitionatArterinIstanbulin2012.In2013,asalreadymentioned,theoriginalworkfrom1996wasacquiredbytheTate,andisnowpartoftheirpermanentcollection.49Whenasite-spe-cificworkismovedtoanotherplace,thereplacementaffectsthemeaningandinterpretationofthework.50Thesiteatwhichtheworkismadeinformsit,andisthereforepartoftheinterpretation.Witharelocation,therelationshipbe-tweenworkandsiteisbroken,andasaresultthemeaningoftheworkshifts.

Present TenseisnolongerexhibitedinthehighlychargedpoliticalcontextofJerusalem,buttheworkneverentirelylosesitspoliticalcontent.ThatispartlyduetoHatoum’suseofthepoliticalmapoftheOsloAccords,butalsobecausevisitorstothelaterexhibitionsaregiveninformationaboutthebackgroundofthesculpture.ThemeaningofPresent Tensenowdiffersfromexhibitiontoex-hibition.InthecontextoftheexhibitioninIstanbul,themeaningofPresent TensewasframedinrelationtootherworksinHatoum’soeuvre,withtheirre-curringthemesofwar,conflictandborders.WithinthegroupexhibitionDis-orientation II: The Rise and Fall of Arab Cities,Hatoum’ssculptureobtaineditsmeaningthroughthecontextofthesubjectoftheexhibition.Thisexhibitionshowed the work of Arab artists who examined issues of conflicts, war anddisplacement in their work after the utopian vision of the pan-Arab unityfailedinthe1970s.51

Thequestionmayarise,however,whetherthereinstallationandconserva-tion of Present Tense is desirable, as the sculpture loses a major part of its

49 AsPresent TensehasnotbeenondisplayyetattheTate,itisunknowninwhatcontextitwillbeexhibitedandwhatitwillmeanforthenotionof‘site-specificity’.

50 Kaye2000,pp.1–2.51 ‘DisorientationII:TheRiseandFallofArabCities’,SharjahArtFoundation,http://www.

sharjahart.org/exhibitions-events/past-events-2009/november/disorientation-ii-the-rise-and-fall-of-arab-citie(accessedon5December2012).Duringthisexhibition,therewasalsoaperformancebyJackPersekian,directorandcuratorofHatoum’s1996exhibi-tioninJerusalem,andTarekAtoui,inwhichtheyreactonPresent Tense.Itisbeyondthescope of this article to discuss the performance, but for an excerpt, see: Nablus Soap excerpt, YouTube video, 6:29 min., March 10, 2011, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fa22rgbggLE(accessedon5December2012).

http://www.sharjahart.org/exhibitions-events/past-events-2009/november/disorientation-ii-the-rise-and-fall-of-arab-citie



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fa22rgbggLE


30 Schulenberg

social,culturalandpoliticalimplicationsinthesenewanddifferentcontexts.Forinstance,thepresentauthorsawthesculptureatHatoum’ssoloexhibitionin Istanbul in2012,alongwith29otherartworksbyHatoumfromthe 1990suntilthepresentyears.Although,assaidbefore,Present Tensedoesnotloseitspoliticalcontententirelyinnewcontexts,theworkdoesloseits‘sharpedges’.Thisisprobablyenhancedbythefactthatthesoapwasalready16yearsold:thesmellwasgone!Inavideofrom2011that ismadeavailableonYouTube,Hatoumsaysthatsheisalsoremakingthework,becauseofthebrownstainsonthesoap:‘Atthetime[ofthemakingofPresent Tense],wedidn’tthinkaboutconservationverymuch,soitisalldryingout,shrinking,andgoingbrown.Sonowwhatwearedoingwiththefreshsoapisthatwearecoveringitwithliqui-textosealthemoisturein,sothathopefullyitwillstaylikethis’.52Becauseoftheliquitex,thematerialwillstayintact,buttheworkwillnolongerhaveitscharacteristicsmell.

Apparently,theshiftinthemeaningofPresent Tenseduetoarecontextual-izationandthelossofsmellarenotproblemsforHatoum.Whatisalsostrikingisthatthesereinstallations,theconservation,andremakingofthesculpturedisregardanimportantdimensionoftheoriginalwork:theimplicationsofthetransientnatureofsoap,whichinitsdissolvingprocessalsodissolvedthebor-derswithinthework.ThereinstallationsaswellasthenewversionoftheworkthusshowthattherecontextualizationandconservationofPresent Tensehasconsequencesforthemeaningofthework,whichwasoriginally linkedtoaparticularsite,toJerusalem.

Bibliography

Abu-Lughod,Lila,andAhmadH.Sa’di,‘Introduction:TheClaimsofMemory’,in:Nakba. Palestine, 1948, and the claims of memory,ed.byAhmadH.Sa’diandLilaAbu-Lughod,NewYorketc.2007,pp.1–24.

‘Al-Ma’halHistoricalBackground’,Al-Ma’hal.FoundationforContemporaryArt,http://www.almamalfoundation.org/aboutus.php(accessedon28June2012).

Ankori,Gannit,Palestinian Art,London2006.Antoni,Janine,‘MonaHatouminterviewedbyJanineAntoni’,in:Mona Hatoum,exhib.

cat.,ed.byChristinaZelich,pp.117–31,Salamancaetc.:CentrodeArtedeSalamanca

52 Hatoumquotedin:TateShots: Mona Hatoum, studio visit,YouTubevideo,4:15min.,postedbyTate,September29,2011,http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs3DzydSKu8(accessedon 25 June 2012). The final destination of this new version of Present Tense is at themomentofwritingunknowntothisauthor.

http://www.almamalfoundation.org/aboutus.php

http://www.almamalfoundation.org/aboutus.php

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs3DzydSKu8

31SitesAndSenses

andCentroGalegodeArte2002.OriginallypublishedinBomb Magazine,no.63(Spring1998).

Archer,Michael,‘Interview.MichaelArcherinconversationwithMonaHatoum’,in:Mona Hatoum,London1997,pp.8–30.

Art, History, and the Senses: 1830 to the Present,ed.byPatriziadiBelloandGabrielKoureas,Farnhametc.2010.

Black,Jeremy,Maps and Politics,London1997.Brett,Guy,‘Itinerary’,in:Mona Hatoum,London1997,pp.34–87.Classen,Constance,Worlds of Sense. Exploring the Senses in History and across Cultures,

LondonandNewYork1993.‘DisorientationII:TheRiseandFallofArabCities’.SharjahArtFoundation,http://www.

sharjahart.org/exhibitions-events/past-events-2009/november/disorientation-ii-the-rise-and-fall-of-arab-citie(accessedon5December2012).

Fischback,MichaelR. ‘OsloAgreements’,in:Encyclopedia of the Palestinians,ed.byPhilipMattar,Chicagoetc.2000[a],pp.284–85.

––––––.‘Jerusalem’,in:Encyclopedia of the Palestinians,ed.byPhilipMattar,Chicagoetc.2000[b],pp.208–15.

Foucault,Michel,Discipline and Punish. The Birth of the Prison,transl.byAlanSheridan,NewYork1979.Originalpublication:Surveiller et punir. Naissance de la prison,Paris1975.

Gieskes,Mette,The Politics of System in the Art of Carl Andre, Sol LeWitt, and Vito Acconci, 1959–1975,Ph.D.diss.,UniversityofTexasatAustin2006.

Kaye,Nick,Site-Specific Art. Performance, Place and Documentation,NewYorkandLondon2000.

Makdisi,Saree,Palestine Inside Out. An Everyday Occupation,NewYork[etc.]2008.Mansoor,Jaleh,‘MonaHatoum’sBiopoliticsofAbstraction’,October133(summer2010),

pp.49–74.Marks,LauraU.,The Skin of the Film. Intercultural Cinema, Embodiment, and the Senses,

DurhamandLondon2000.Masters,H.G.,‘MonaHatoum:DomesticInsecurities’,ArtAsiaPacific Magazine2008,

http://artasiapacific.com/Magazine/59/DomesticInsecuritiesMonaHatoum (ac-cessedon28June2012).

‘MonaHatoum’.Al-Ma’hal.FoundationforContemporaryArt,http://www.almamal-foundation.org/index.php?action=events&type=7&artist=MonaHatoum(accessedon13June2012).

Mona Hatoum: Mappings,Vimeovideo,24:03min.,postedbySerpentineGallery,2011,http://vimeo.com/24541176(accessedon7November2012).

Montefiore,SimonSebag,Jerusalem. The Biography,London2011.Morgan,Jessica,‘ThePoeticsofUncovering.MonaHatoumInandOutofPerspective’,

in:Mona Hatoum,exhib.cat.,Chicago:MuseumofContemporaryArt1997,pp.1–23.


32 Schulenberg

‘Nablus’ olive oil soap: a Palestinian tradition lives on’. Institute for Middle EastUnderstanding(IMEU),http://imeu.net/news/article008132.shtml(accessedon7September2012).

Nablus Soap excerpt,YouTubevideo,6:29min.,10March2011,http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fa22rgbggLE(accessedon5December2012).

Persekian,Jack,‘MonaHatoum:PresentTense’,ArtAsiaPacific Magazine2013,http://www.artasiapacific.com/Magazine/84/PresentTenseMONAHATOUM(accessedon10July2013).

Pieters, Din, ‘Mona Hatoum’, in: Mona Hatoum, exhib. cat., ed. by E. van Duyn,Amsterdam:DeAppel1997,s.p.

Potts,Alex,The Sculptural Imagination. Figurative, Modernist, Minimalist,NewHavenandLondon2000.

Süskind,Patrick,Perfume. The Story of a Murderer,transl.byJohnE.Woods,NewYork1985.Originalpublication:Das Parfum. Die Geschichte eines Mörders,Zürich1985,retrievedfrom:http://ebookbrowse.com/patrick-suskind-perfume-the-story-of-a-murderer-pdf-d162932379(accessedon4September2012).

TateShots: Mona Hatoum, studio visit,YouTubevideo,4:15min.,postedbyTate,29September2011,http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs3DzydSKu8(accessedon25June2012).

Zimmer,Nina,‘EphiphaniesoftheEverydayMaterialityandMeaninginMonaHatoum’sWork’, in: Mona Hatoum, exhib. cat., ed. by Christoph Heinrich, HamburgerKunsthalle/KunstmuseumBonn/Magasin3StockholmKonsthall,Ostfildern-Ruit2004,pp.66–72

http://imeu.net/news/article008132.shtml



http://ebookbrowse.com/patrick-suskind-perfume-the-story-of-a-murderer-pdf-d162932379

http://ebookbrowse.com/patrick-suskind-perfume-the-story-of-a-murderer-pdf-d162932379

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs3DzydSKu8

33TheGreenLine

Chapter2

The Green Line Potency, Absurdity, and Disruption of Dichotomy in Francis Alÿs’s Intervention in Jerusalem

Mette Gieskes

JerusalemisoneoftheplaceswherethepersonalconcernsofartistFrancisAlÿs(Antwerp,1959)havecoincidedwithlocalcircumstances.Likemanyoth-erartistsintoday’sageofglobalizationandbiennialculture,Alÿstravelstheworldlikeanomad,creatinghisartworks–or‘interventions’,ashecallsthem–inresponsetotheplaceshevisits,oftensituationsofsocietalandeconomiccrisis or political impasse. Not infrequently, his interventions, in the artist’sownwords,‘hitanerve’inthelocalcommunityandbeyond,usuallywhenhisownpreoccupations‘meet’thesituationheencounterswithafruitful‘clash’.1TheconfrontationbetweenAlÿs’snarrativeandJerusalem,whichtookplaceonthefourthandfifthofJune2004,receivedthetitleThe Green Line:Some-times doing something poetic can become political, and sometimes doing some-thing political can become poetic.Forthispiece,whichhasalsobeenreferredtoasWalk through Jerusalem,Alÿswalkedthroughwhathehasidentifiedasthearchetypalcityofconflictwithapiercedcanofgreenpaintinhishand,creat-ingalinethattracedhisjourney(Fig.2.1).2Theartist’srouteroughlyfollowedthesectionwithinJerusalemofthearmisticedemarcationlinethathassepa-ratedtheIsraeliandPalestiniancommunitiessincetheendofIsrael’sWarofIndependencein1948:acontestedborderthatwasinternationallyratifiedun-derUNsupervisionin1949,andhasthereforebeendubbed‘the1949armisticeline’,butlostofficialboundarystatusin1967(Fig.2.2).

BothconceptandstructureofThe Green Linearemarkedlysimple,yettheworkevokesacomplexnetworkofassociations,regardingthehistory,present,andfutureofJerusalemaswellasthemesprevalentinmuchcontemporaryart,includingAlÿs’sownwork.Theworkfirstandforemostinspiresreflectiononthe contemporary status of the 1949 armistice line Alÿs partially traced 56yearsafteritsinstitutionin1948.Thelinehasbeenviewedbothasanundesir-able,arbitrarysourceofconflictanddivisionand–contrarily–asarelatively

1 From:FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception 2010,p.35.2 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.37.

© MetteGieskes,2014 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_004This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.



34 Gieskes

Figure2.1 Francis Alÿs, TheGreenLine,Jerusalem 2004, Video documentation of an action. CourtesyDavidZwirner,NewYork/London.

flexibleandunimposing,yet,accordingtosome,muchneededboundarybe-tweenPalestiniansandIsraelis;onethatismuchpreferabletotherelentless,mammothseparationwallsbuiltundertheaegisofArielSharonsome55yearslater;onethatmaycontaintheonlypromiseoffuturepeace.BesidesrekindlingthememoryofwhatcanbeseenasthesourceoftheseparationofIsraelisandPalestiniansandtriggeringconsiderationofthecontestedpastandprospectsofJerusalem,The Green Linealsorelatestotheartist’sownoeuvre,whichheconceives of as a narrative that is constructed by the episodes that are hisworks.3

ManyofthechaptersofAlÿs’sfiction,liketheepisodeofThe Green Line,aresetinaparticularsitewhichtheartist,sotospeak,hasimportedintohisfic-tion,andzoominonthespecificcircumstancesofthatsite.4Yet,inspiteofthesite-specificityanduniquenessofeachoftheepisodes,severalthemescanbedetectedthatsincethe1990shaverecurredinthemultipleepisodesthatmake

3 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.19–20,35.Cf.AlÿsandLambrechts2013(accessedNovember2013).

4 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.36.

35TheGreenLine

Figure2.2 Francis Alÿs, TheGreenLine, Jerusalem 2004, Ephemera. CourtesyDavidZwirner,NewYork/London.

36 Gieskes

uptheweavingofAlÿs’spersonalnarrative,includingtheepisodesetinJerusa-lem.Amongthesethemesaretherelationbetweenartandpolitics,socialprac-ticesandstructuresthatacquiresculpturalshape,Westernmodernhegemonicstructuresofcontrolaswellasinformalpracticesthatexistinspiteofthepre-dominance of such structures (e.g. bartering, drug trafficking, and artist’sstrolls),and,morespecifically,therepercussionsofborderregulations.OtherthemesrecurringinAlÿs’snarrative,notsomuchmanifestinThe Green Line,arethedeceptivemythofprogressthatdefinesthecapitalistproject,theover-valuationofefficiency,andinformallabor.Fromthebeginning,Alÿs’snarra-tivehasmoreovergivenacentralplacetotheGreeknotionofthepolisasaplaceofconflicts‘whencethematerialstocreatefictions,artandurbanmythsareextracted’.5ItseemsthatAlÿs’sjourneythroughsitesthatoffernewmate-rialanddimensionstohisnarrative–oftensitesthatshowthepitfallsofmod-ernsystemsofcontrol–wasboundtoleadhimtoJerusalem,thecityIsraeliand Palestinians both see as the political and administrative center of theirrespectiveterritories.IthadpreviouslytakenhimtoplaceslikeMexicoCity,Tijuana,andLima,andwouldlaterleadhimtoHavanaandKabul.

ThispaperwillconsiderhowThe Green LinefitsintothenarrativeofAlÿs’soeuvreandthroughwhichmechanismsitwasabletohitanervelocallyaswellasglobally.Didthework,whichseemstocallattentiontotheartificialityandabsurdityofborders,emerge fromahope thatartcanprovideawayoutofimpasse,thatartiscapableofaffectingpolitics,asthesubtitlesuggests?GiventhatinAlÿs’sworks,structureandshapetendtobeanaloguesforsocialsitua-tionsandpractices,whatcanbemadeofthesimpleshapeoftheline?Havingitsoriginsinacanofpaint,heldbyanartist,thelineAlÿsleftbehindduringhiswalkthroughJerusalemseemstorefertooneofthemostbasicelementsofart–theartist’smark–yetherethisessentialfeatureofartappearsinapublicsiteofpoliticalconflict.Likeitslocation,theline’shorizontalityandtemporalityhaveimplicationsaswell.Inallitssimplicityandspecificity,thislineseemstobepregnantwithmeaning.ThispaperwilldiscussthegreenlineinAlÿs’sWalk through Jerusalemasthelocuswherevariouskindsofdialecticsmeetandaredissolved,incarnatingbothsimplicityandcomplexity,separationandlinkage,inflexibilityandfluidity,arbitrarinessandpurpose,ironyandseriousness,andartandpolitics.Attheend,discussionsofthevarioustypesofdialecticsem-bodiedinAlÿs’sproteanlinewillbringouttheparadoxinAlÿs’suseofaline,themostconcretemanifestationof the ideaofborders, todefyandcontestboundaries,includingalsothosebetweenthelocalandtheglobal,representa-tionandabstraction,lifeandart,andconflictandsolution.


37TheGreenLine

The Green Line: Source of Conflict and Conciliation

Alÿs’sactioninJerusalemwasrecordedonvideobyfilmmakerJulienDevaux,whiletheartistwalkedandtracedalineofabout24kilometersthroughvari-ousneighborhoods,roads,anduninhabitedlotsofland,walkingpastseveralbarriersandsecuritycontrolpoststhatrestrictthemovementofthecity’sin-habitants, primarily Palestinians.6 At various intervals, the artist stopped torefillthecaninordertoensurethatthelinewascontinuous,usingatotalof58litersofgreenvinylpaint.7Theensuingvideoisengineeredinsuchawaythattherefillingisnotshown.Whatisremarkableaboutthefootageonthevideoisthatfewbystandersreacttotheartist’sactivity,includingtheguardsatthese-curitycheckpoints,possiblybecausethepresenceofthecamerasetAlÿs’sac-tion off as an extraordinary, singular event with a destination beyond theimmediatesurroundings,paradoxicallyneutralizingitsimmediateeffects.

AlthoughthevideosurvivedasadocumentofAlÿs’swalk,itshouldalsobeseenasanintegralpartofthework,whichwasfirstputonviewattheIsraelMuseuminJerusalemin2005,andin2007attheDavidZwirnerGalleryinNewYork.InbothJerusalemandNewYork,itwasshownaspartofanexhibitionthatcarriedthenameofthesubtitleofthework:Sometimes doing something poetic can become political, and sometimes doing something political can be-come poetic,aqualifiedyetstillhopefulstatementthatcanbeseenasthelead-ingmaximofmanyofAlÿs’sworks. IntheDavidZwirnergallery,notonlyaprojectionofthefilmwasshown,butalsoarchivalmaterialabouttheGreenLine, paraphernalia, sculptures by the name of camguns – hybrids betweencamera’sandmachineguns–andpaintingsofvariousplacesinandaroundJerusalem,suchasJerusalem E.,Baqe,BazraandUntitled (2004),whichtheart-istcreatedwhilehewasworkingon The Green Line (Fig.2.3).8Eleven inter-viewstheartistconductedinOctober2004withvariousdistinguishedpeople–mostlyIsraeliandPalestinians–whiletheywatchedanexcerptof there-cordedwalkwerealsomadeavailableintheexhibitionspace,oncomputerswith headphones. These interviews, some of which can now be accessedthroughtheartist’swebsite,gavevisitorstothegalleryasenseofthevarietyof

6 Publicaccess:www.francisalys.com(accessedOctober2013).7 Alÿs2007,s.p.8 See:‘FrancisAlÿs’,Art|40|Basel.DavidZwirner2009,pp.12–13,aswellasimagesoftheinstal-

lationandofindividualworksonviewintheexhibitionatDavidZwirnerin2007:http://www.davidzwirner.com/exhibition/sometimes-doing-something-poetic-can-become-political-and-sometimes-doing-something-political-can-become-poetic/?slide=1(accessedOctober2013).ItisnotuncommonforAlÿstodisplaydrawings,objects,paintings,diagrams,photos,letters,andotherephemeraaspartoftheinstallationsofhisworks.See:FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.12–13.

38 Gieskes

viewsonthesituationintheMiddleEast,particularlywithregardtothestatusofthe1949armisticeline,andonthepowerandlimitsofartinsuchsituationsofconflict,thoughmostoftheintervieweesseemtohavebeenpartialtothePalestinians.9

What gave Alÿs’s walk through Jerusalem an extra charge and provokedmuchcommentarywasofcoursethefactthathisroutewasdeterminedbytheGreenLinethatLtColonelMosheDayan,militarycommanderoftheIsraeliforces intheregionof Jerusalemtowardstheendof Israel’s 1948–49WarofIndependence, had drawn with green wax pencil on a map by the scale of1:25,000onthe30thofNovember,1948,theyearoftheendoftheBritish/Unit-edNationsMandateofPalestineandtheproclamationoftheStateofIsrael.10

9 AlÿsinterviewedactivistRubenAberjil,historianAlbertAgazarian,KnessetdeputyanddaughterofMosheDayan,YaelDayan,arthistorianJeanFisher, journalistAmiraHass,architectNazmiJobeh,publisherYaelLerer,filmmakerandcriticofIsraelipoliticsEyalSivan,activistMichelWarschawski,andarchitectandcriticEyalWeizman.See:http://francisalys.com/greenline/(accessedOctober2013).

10 MostsourcesonAlysmentionascaleof1:20,000,probablybasedonMeronBenvenisti,whosebookAlÿshimselfcitesinthevideo.See:Benvenisti1996,p.57.Newman,however,

Figure2.3 Francis Alÿs, ViewofAboudis, Jerusalem, June 2004, Photograph featuring Untitled (2004). CourtesyDavidZwirner,NewYork/London.

39TheGreenLine

Thelinewasapproximately310kilometersinlength,startingatthenorthernsection of the JordanValley and ending in the Dead Sea at the median linebetween Israel and Jordan, officially separating Israel from the West Bank,from1948until1967.11DayanhadplottedthelineonthebasisofthepositionoftheIsraeliandArabicarmiesatthetimeofthearmisticethatmarkedtheendoftheArab-Israeliwar,tomarkthelandthatwastobecontrolledbyIsrael.LtColonelAbdullahal-Tal,theJordaniancommanderrepresentingtheArabforc-esintheJerusalemregion,markedtheboundariesoftheareasunderJordancontrolwithredpencil.Thetwolinesconvergedinmostplaces,butfailedtodo so at some sites, areas that were to become demilitarized buffer zones,widelyknownas ‘no-man’s land’.12Thelinewashence,as isnotuncommonwithborders,aproductofbothconflictandattemptsatresolutionandrecon-ciliation.

Thelinesettleduponin1948was,withsomeadjustments,internationallyrecognized in 1949as theprovisionaleasternborderof Israel in theRhodesArmisticeAgreements,alsosignedbytheneighboringcountriesEgypt,Leba-non, Jordan, and Syria.13 David Newman gives an overview of the changesmadeinthe1949agreements,whichslightlyalteredthecourseofthedemarca-tion lineof 1948.Manyof thechangesweredeterminedbyIsrael’sdesire tomaintaincontrolovermainroadsandrailwaysand,less,bytheneedsofthelocalpopulation.The1949armisticelinewas,asaresult,morecurvedinsomeplaces than the line drawn by Dayan in 1948.14 Within Jerusalem, the mostsouthernpointofthelineisnearRamatRachelanditsmostnorthernpointisin the proximity of Givat HaMivtar. According to Meron Benvenisti, whose1996bookCity of Stone: The Hidden History of JerusalemAlÿsexcerptedinhis

statesthatthescalewas1:25,000.Newman1995,p.8.Newmanwritesthatthelineonthemap was drawn with colored pencil, called green because it was printed in green onIsraelimaps.See:Newman1995,p.8.NewmanbaseshisaccountonMosheBrawer’sThe Boundaries of Eretz Israel,TelAviv:Yavneh1988,writteninHebrew. Theonlycopyofthemap was apparently stored in a safe deposit box at the UN observers’ headquarters atArmonHaNatziv.Alÿsusedamapfrom2003publishedbytheSurveyofIsraelInstitute.Alÿs2007,s.p.

11 Newman1995,pp.3,8.From1950until1988,residentsoftheWestBankwereJordaniancitizens.HansonBourke,p.18.JordandidnotgiveupitsrightstotheWestBankwhenIsrael conquered it in 1967. In 1988, however, Jordan recognized the state of PalestinewhenPalestinesdeclaredindependence.

12 Eg.theareabetweenthevillagesKatanaandBudrus,justnorthofJerusalem.Newman1995,p.8.

13 Newman1995,pp.4–9.14 Newman1995,p.9.

40 Gieskes

video,thewidthoftheactual,coarsepencilmarks,approximatelythreetofourmillimeters on the map, in reality covered an area of 60 to 80 meters. Ben-venistiwrites:‘Thesevastbufferzonesquicklybecameempty“noman’slands”prohibitedtobothsides,scarringtheheartofJerusalem’.15Newmanhasalsoremarkedthattheareaalongtheboundaryline,whichwassituatedinthecitycore,remainedundeveloped,especiallythenoman’slandthatbetween1948and1967wastheonlybordercrossingalongthe310-kilometerGreenLine,withawidththatatplacesreachedhundredsofmeters.16After1980,whenIsraelofficiallydeclaredJerusalemasphysicallyunited,parksandresidentialareaswere established in previous frontier zones, but much land is still undevel-oped.17Alÿs’svideodocumentsthisuncultivatedland:aviewerunawareofthelocationoftheartist’swalkmaywellsuspectattimesthatAlÿswaswalkingthroughthecountrysideratherthanthroughalegendarycity.

As the armistice line was not officially marked on the actual land, partlybecause itwasnotmeanttobeapermanentborderbutratheratemporaryboundaryseparatingtwocommunities intoethnicallyhomogeneousterrito-ries,itdidnothaveasobviousaneffectasitmighthavehadunderothercir-cumstances,buttheexperienceofdivision,bothphysicallyandmentally,hasbeenrealsince1948.Newmanhasobservedthatthelineremained ‘stronglyimprintedonthementalimagesofIsraelis,Palestinians,andtheInternationalCommunityasconstitutingtheterritorialdemarcatorbetweentwopeopleandtheirrespectiveterritories’.18Astheyearswentby,bothIsraelisandJordaniansbuiltwirefencesandpatrolroads,andminedborderareasalongandneartheGreenLinetomarkthelineandtoenhancesecurity.19In1953,BorderGuardswereestablished.20Peoplelivingalongthelineonbothsideshavelivedinfearofaggression.EveniftheGreenLinehasnolongerhadanyrealpoliticalbear-ingsince1967,whenIsraelexpandeditsterritoryduringtheSix-DayWarandhassincethenblurredandshiftedthelinethroughbuildingactivitiesandex-pansiondrift,thedivisionof1948isstillmanifestedinJerusalem’slayoutand

15 Benvenisti1996,pp.56–57.ItisdifficulttoverifyBenvenisti’saccount.Othersourcesindi-catethatthepenlinescovered1millimeteronthemap(Newman1995,p.8),whileyetothers speak of 2 millimeters, which would amount to 200 meters in reality. See, forinstance: http://www.jewishpress.com/sections/travel/jerusalem-walking-tour-along-part-of-the-1948-armistice-line/2012/09/28/(accessedOctober2013).

16 Newman1995,p.40.17 Newman1995,p.42.18 Newman1995,p.2.19 Newman1995,p.9.20 Newman1995,p.11.

41TheGreenLine

itsinhabitants’dailylives,continuingtoseparatetheEastfromtheWest.21Itstillmarksaninternalboundary,betweenthelandadministeredbyIsraelandthesurroundingterritoriesthatIsraeloccupiedfollowingtheSix-DayWarof1967:theWestBankandtheGazastrip.22Thede factopreservationofanoffi-cially revoked boundary has been deliberately secured by Israel in variousways. As Newman has pointed out, Israel has, for instance, minimized eco-nomiccontactbetweentheWestBankandlandwestoftheformerGreenLine,protecting the Israeli economy by preventing cheap products from crossingtheline.HedescribesthisIsraelistrategyasasymptomoftheparadoxthatIs-raelopenedtheboundaryyetatthesametimeinhibitedmovementofgoodsandpeopleacrosstheline,therewithineffectperpetuatingthelineandclos-ingtheboundarythatwasofficiallyopen.23

AlthoughtheGreenLinethatDayanhaddrawnwascontestedsinceitsin-ception,after1967thequestionaroseifIsraelshouldnotagainrecedetothe1948 line,whichmayhavebeenallbut ideal forPalestinians,butwasmuchmorefavorableforthemthanthesituationthatarosein1967,whenIsraelstart-edtodisregardborders, confiscatinglandthataccordingtothe1949negotia-tionsdidnotbelongtoit,and–after1967–foundingsettlementsintheWestBank and constructing various types of infrastructure.24 After the 1967War,Israel actually instituted a law annexing East Jerusalem to its own territory.Since then, highly segregated Jewish residential neighborhoods have beenfoundedintheeasternpartofthecity,locatedinsuchawaythatapotentialfuturerepartitioningofJerusalemintoaJewishWestandaPalestinianEasthasbecomeclosetoimpossible,unlessthesettlersareevacuated.25EyalWeizman,whohaswrittenaboutthe‘spatialpolitics’ofJerusalem,haspointedoutthatthelineisshownonmostPalestinianandinternationalmaps,butonfewoffi-cialIsraeliones,suggestingthatIsraelwouldhappilyerasethememoryoftheonceofficialstatusoftheline.26SomearguethattheGreenLineshouldagain

21 See: http://www.sayarch.com/introduction-to-%E2%80%9Cresolution-planning%E2%80%9D-2/1020/(accessedOctober2010).Seealso:Newman1995,pp.1–3.

22 HansonBourke,pp.17–20.TheGolanHeightsisalsointernationallyconsideredoccupiedterritory,butin1981theKnessetextendedIsraeliadministration,jurisdiction,andlegisla-tiontothearea.

23 Newman1995,p.13.24 Newman1995,p.14.25 Newman1995,pp.40–41.26 WeizmaninFrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.175.Weizmanisnotaloneinpoint-

ingoutthatIsraelbenefitsfromcoveringupthehistoryofthegreenline.PeaceNow,anactivistnon-governmentalorganizationthatadvocatesatwo-statesolutiontothecon-flictbetweenIsraelandPalestinians,hasarguedthattheso-called‘infitadabypass’roads

42 Gieskes

serveasastartingpointofnegotiations,asitwasintheearly1990s.27Fatah,forinstance,seesthelineasapotentialfutureborderofaPalestinianstate,butmostmembersofHamasarenotopentothis.Theparadoxicalsituationhasarisenthatalinethatoncepropelledandinmemorystillembodiesconflict,mayatthesametimeofferasolutionthatwouldnotbeperfect,butthatwouldatleastendthecurrentimpasse.

Porous Lines, Intrusive Walls

ThequestionariseswhetherAlÿs’saction,byreinsertingtheGreenLineinJe-rusalem,acityofdivisionthatin1980was,however,declaredbytheKnessetthe‘completeandunited’capitalofIsrael,advocatedareturntothesituationbefore1967.Theappealingunobtrusiveness,relativefluidityandevenhorizon-talityofAlÿs’slinecouldindeedbeinterpretedasexpressingapositivenodtowhatareoftencalledthe‘pre-1967borders’,whichweremuchmoreflexible,immaterial, and abstract, than the literally and physically segregating, con-creteanddominantlyverticalsecuritybarriersthatIsraelhasconstructedinvariouscitiessince2002,followingattacksofArabicsuicideterroristsduringthesecondIntifada.28Theseseparationbarriers,oftendubbed‘apartheidwalls’byPalestinians,aretoreachalengthofmorethan420mileslong,consistingofconcretewallsastallas26feetwithinareasofJerusalem.Itslocationsarecon-troversial,tosaytheleast:asestimatedin2011,aftercompletionofthebarrier,whichdepartsinmanyplacesfromtherouteoftheGreenLine,9.5%oftheWestBankisestimatedtobesituatedonthewesternside,85%ofthebarrierbeing located in theWest Bank.29 Such massive separation walls appear on

Israel hasbuilt toconnect thesettlements to themain Israeli land, all in thenameofincreaseofsecurityforIsrael,weremeant‘tocreatefortheiruserstheillusionthattheGreenLinehasdisappearedandthatthereisnoArabpopulationinthearea’.See:http://www.fmep.org/reports/archive/vol.-5/no.-3/new-roads-create-an-asphalt-revolution(accessedOctober2010).Cf.Newman1995,p.14.HansonBourkearguesthatmostPales-tinianmapsdonotshowtheGreenLineeither.HansonBourke,p.47.

27 Newman1995,p.1.Newman’sBoundaries in Flux: The ‘Green Line’ Boundary between Israel and the West Bank – Past, Present and Future, isasynthesizingstudyofthehistoryandfutureoftheGreenLinethatisclearlypredicatedontheideathattheGreenLineshouldplay a role in future negotations. In 1995, Political geographer Newman was exploringvariousalternativestoatwo-statesolutionoftheIsrael-Palestineproblem.

28 HansonBourke,pp.46,64.29 See:‘TheSeparationBarrier’,http://www.btselem.org/separation_barrier,thewebsiteof

theIsraeli InformationCenter forHumanRights intheOccupiedTerritories(accessed

http://www.btselem.org/separation_barrier

43TheGreenLine

someofthepaintingsAlÿsmadeinJerusalemwhileworkingonThe Green LineandarealsothesubjectofaseriesofpaintingsofMarleneDumas,whichwereshownattheDavidZwirnerGalleryin2010intheexhibitionAgainst the Wall(Fig.2.4).

Whencomparingtheuncompromising,almost threateningwalls thatap-pearinthesepaintingstoAlÿs’sgreenline,thelatterappearsespeciallynon-intrusive,emphasizingthemeritsofthestatustheGreenLinehadhadpriorto1967:comparativelyfewgatesorwallswereerectedontheactuallandtomarktheprovisionalarmisticeline,asaresultofwhichtheboundarywasrelativelyeasilypassedandadjusted,evenifthe1949linedidleadtoeconomicandset-tlementdislocation,cutoffpeople–mainlyPalestinians–fromfertilefields,houses,andplacesofemployment,andseveredeightyvillagesfrompartsoftheirland.30Alÿs’spaintingsBaqeandBazra(2004),and–moreemphaticallyso–Dumas’sFigure in a Landscape(2010)andThe Wall(2009),ontheotherhandpresentthedepictedwallsasvertical,imposingstructuresthatobstructbothviewandmovement.31LikeAlÿs’sindividualworks,whichoftenrespondtoaparticularsocio-politicalsituationyetareintrinsicallywovenintothefab-ricoftheartist’snarrative,Dumas’spaintingsfromtheAgainst the Wallseries

October2013).Cf.HansonBourke,p.64.30 Newman1995,pp.9–12;HansonBourke,pp.43,62–64.31 See:AgainsttheWall.MarleneDumas2010.

Figure2.4 Marlene Dumas, FigureinaLandscape, 2010, oil on canvas, 180 × 300 cm. CourtesytheartistandDavidZwirner,NewYork/London.

44 Gieskes

correspondtothepersonalnarrativeoftheSouthAfrican-Dutchartist,whoseworkisrootedintheexperienceofApartheid.ManyofDumas’spaintingscon-cernsegregation,oppression,andhumanity’sfailuretocoexist.Herpaintingsfromtheabove-namedseriesarethefirstinheroeuvrethatprovideacriticismof this failurebymeansofa representationofarchitecture:oppressivecon-structionsthatdetermineandrestrictpeople’slivesinaveryliteralway.32The Wall,basedonanewspaperphotograph,depictsagroupofOrthodoxJewishmeninfrontofawallthatcouldbeinterpretedastheWailingWallinJerusa-lembutwhichisactuallyanIsraelisecurityfencenearBethlehem.ViewersofWall WailingandWall Weeping,twootherpaintingsfromtheAgainst the Wallseries,arealsolikelytointerpretthedepictedwallsastheWailingWall,butthepeoplepressedagainstthewallactuallydepictPalestinianswhoin1967weresearchedbyIsraelisinaraidinJerusalem.33

In considering the disjunction between the transience, horizontality, andfragilityoftheGreenLineontheonehandandthepermanence,verticality,andmassivenessofthesecuritywallontheother,itisusefultorefertoasmallpublicationoftheHenryMooreInstituteinLeedsof2008thataccompaniedtheexhibitionThe Object Quality of the Problem (On the Space of Palestine/Is-rael),whichreflectsonthePalestine/Israelconflictinspatialterms.34Inthiscatalogue,whichalso includesashortentryonAlÿs’sThe Green Line,writerAdaniaShibliexplainsthatsheisunwillingtoviewPalestineasa‘territory’,atermthattoher‘suggestsborders’.While‘theoccupier/colonizer’hasturnedthelandintoterritoryby‘cutting’spacethatwasonceunmarkedand‘continu-ous’, Palestinians still attempt to experience the space as a porous ‘space offlows’.35Inanothercontributiontothesamecatalogue,EyalWeizman’s‘Poli-ticsofVerticality’–asectionfromHollow Land – Israel’s Architecture of Occu-pation(2007)–thisspaceofflowsischaracterizedas‘indivisibleterritory’.36Weizmanargues,followingRonPundak,oneofthemainmastermindsofthe

32 See:‘”AgainsttheWall”byMarleneDumasopensatSerralvesMuseum’2010.33 ‘”AgainsttheWall”byMarleneDumasopensatSerralvesMuseum’2010.34 Theproject The Object Quality of the Problem (On the Space of Palestine/ Israel)startedby

askingthequestionofwhethersculpturalthinkingcanhelp‘understandanotherplace,andotherspatialexperiences,aslivedelsewhere,inourowntime’.TheObjectQualityoftheProblem2008,p.8.

35 TheObjectQualityoftheProblem2008,p.10.SincetheFirstIntifada(1987–1991/1993),regulationsforPalestiniansfromtheOccupiedTerritoriesliketheWestBanktravelingtoIsrael for (temporary) employment have been much stricter than before: workers areissuedidentitycardsthathavetobeshownatcheckpostsandroadblocksestablishedalongwhatusedtobetheGreenLine.Newman1995,p.14.

36 The Object Quality of the Problem 2008, pp. 41–45; Weizman 2007, pp. 12–16. Cf.Weizmanin:FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.175–77.

45TheGreenLine

OsloProcessof1993,thattheonlyfeasiblewaytodividethissingle,indivisibleterritory isathree-dimensionalmatrixofroadsandtunnels.Weizmanmen-tionsthatPresidentBillClinton’s2000planforthepartitioningofJerusalemproposedthatallsectionsofJerusalemoccupiedbyJewsweretobecomeIs-raeli,whileallsectionsinhabitedbyPalestiniansweretoconstitutethePales-tinianState.Sixty-fourkilometersofwalls‘wouldhavefragmentedthecityintotwoarchipelagosystemsalongnationallines.Fortybridgesandtunnelswouldhaveaccordinglywoventogethertheseisolatedneighborhood-enclaves’.37Var-iousbuildings in theOldCitywouldhavebeensplitalongvertical linesbe-tweenIsraelisandPalestinians,withthelowerfloorsoccupiedbyJewsandtheupperfloorsinhabitedbyMuslims.Althoughthisthree-dimensionalplanmayseemdoomedforfailure,itreflectedareal‘politicalspace’,desperatelystrug-gling to ‘separate the inseparable’.38 Itmoreoverwas in factnotmuchmorethananextensionoftheactualsituation:WeizmanpointsoutthatPalestinianmilitantshavebeencircumventingIsraelibarriersinthreedimensions,diggingtunnelsandlaunchingrocketsthroughtheair,whiletheexistingIsraeliinfra-structure,withitselevatedbypassroads,viaducts,andtunnels,hasalsoalreadytakenthree-dimensionalform.

Artificial Borders and Absurdity

Althoughconsiderationsof‘technologiesofdomination’39likesolidwallsmaymakeaninterpretationofAlÿs’sappealinglynon-intrusiveandmodestlineasanattempttopointoutthebenefitsofthe1949armisticelineplausible,vari-ousotherqualitiesoftheworkspeakagainstit:theline’semphaticephemeral-itycouldalsobeinterpretedasanexpressionofpartialitytodisappearance,andconcomitantlyapreferenceforunificationoverthesegregationthatwouldpersistwithanofficialreinstitutionoftheGreenLine.Moreover,Alÿs’s line,which–asnotedabove–cutsthroughneighborhoods,nottakingtheslightestnoticeofthedailyroutinesofinhabitantsofJerusalem,seemstobeaparodyofthecallouswayinwhichDayanhadcutalineonthesurfaceofthemap,thatabstractedrepresentation,notconsideringthewaytheactualspacewasusedbyeitherIsraelisorPalestinians.Evenif,asnotedearlier,the1949linesweresomewhatadjustedtotherealityofthelivesoftheland’sinhabitants,thear-misticeagreementsof1949,BrawerandNewmanhaveobserved,stilldiscount-edthe‘physicalandhumangeographicalfeatures’alongthefulllengthofthe

37 TheObjectQualityoftheProblem2008,pp.41–42.38 Weizmanin:TheObjectQualityoftheProblem2008,p.43.39 Weizmanin:TheObjectQualityoftheProblem2008,p.44.

46 Gieskes

boundary,alsoignoringlandusagelikethecenturies-oldpasturesoftheBed-ouinpopulation.40TheparodicnatureofAlÿs’sThe Green Line,whichaccentu-ates the fact that this highly influential boundary is in fact relativelyunrecognizable on the actual ground, gives viewers the sense that the workfirst and foremost demonstrates the artificiality and absurdity of the GreenLine,andperhapsevenofbordersingeneral.Indeed,oneofthethemesthatreturnsinvariousepisodesofAlÿs’snarrativeistheideathatallorderanddivi-sions,forinstanceintheformofborders,areenforcedontoachangeableandcontinuousworld.

Theabsurdityandartificialityofborderpolitics isperhapsmostsalientlyrevealed in The Loop (1997), inwhichAlÿs tookonemonthand fivedays totravelfromTijuana,Mexico,toSanDiego,crossingthroughCentralandSouthAmerica,thePacificRim,China,Russia,Canada,andtheUnitedStates.Avoid-ingtheborderbetweenMexicoandtheUnitedStates,theartistnotonlyre-versed the modern ideal of minimum effort, maximum result (for Alÿs anearmarkofeconomiclogic),butalsomockinglycontrastedtheobstaclesmi-grantworkersfacewhenattemptingtocrossborderstotheunreflectiveeaseand naturalness with which artists and other art world denizens nowadaystraveltheworldfromonebiennialortriennialtoanother.41Withregardtoalater work, Don’t Cross the Bridge Before You Get to the River (working title)(2008),Alÿshassaidthatthe‘contradictionofourtimes’is:‘howcanweliveina global economy and be refused free global flow?’42 For this work, Alÿs in-structedonelineofchildrenwithtoyboatsintheStraitofGibraltartoleaveSpain in the direction of Morocco and another one to wade towards SpainfromMorocco,withtheimaginaryintentionofmeetingatthehorizon.Bothoftheseworks resist thestagnationof flowandcontinuity,causedby theeco-nomicsystem,politicalcontrol,andfearof‘other’people,liketheillegalim-migrantswhorisktheirlivesinattemptstocrosstheUS-MexicanborderandtheStraitofGibraltar.Inallcasesthestagnationistheresultoftheenforce-mentofunnatural,restrictingboundariesontoachangeable,flowingworld.

In a different yet comparable way, The Green Line, as mentioned earlier,bringstomindtheblatantfactthat,whenDayandrewtheGreenLineonthemap(anabstractedrepresentationremovedfromreality),hedidnotreckonwiththeneighborhoodsandthefreemovementofthecommunitiesthroughwhichthelinewouldcut,indifferenttothesocialandgeographicalrealityof1948.Itcouldbearguedthatthismovewasconcomitantwiththewaythenew

40 Newman1995,p.8.41 See:FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.86–87.42 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.36,166–67.

47TheGreenLine

stateofIsraelhadbeenformedinthelate1940sand1950s:a‘fictitiousunder-taking’,asZviEfrathasargued,ofpoliticians,planners,andarchitectsignoringexistingbuildings,infrastructureandpeoplewhileconfiguringthelandasifithadbeenvacantand‘amorphous’before.Thisabstract,two-dimensional‘card-boardproto-state’ofthemasterplanners–reallyanactofpower–wascon-structed,onecouldstate,withdisregardofthethree-dimensionallivedreality,highlightingitsartificiality.AsWeizmanpointsoutinatextonAlÿs’sThe Green Line,mapsmanage,regulate,andordertheworld‘asmuchastheyrepresentit’.43Hehasobservedthat‘[t]odrippaintoverthesurfaceofthecityalong[thegreen] line is to transform, for thedurationof thiswalk, theterritory intoamap,aone-to-onemap’.44Thismappingofapapermaponthesurfaceoftherealcity,withits‘changesinmateriality,patternsoflightandshadow[…],tex-turesoftheground’,aswellasitssocialreality,driveshomethedistancebe-tween the conceptual space in which political decisions are made and theexperientialspaceontowhichthesedecisionsareimposed.45

WeizmanarguesthatthepowerofAlÿs’sretracingoftheGreenLineisthatitprovidesaprovocative‘challengetotheexistingdominantandexpansionistlogicofthecity’,butclaimsthatThe Green Linefailstoquestion‘theverylogicof separation’. Weizman himself believes that the seed of a peaceful futuredoes not lie in yet ‘another borderline’, but in ‘the possible emergence of asharedsurface’.46The Green Linemay,however,aswellbereadasaquestioningofthelogicofpartition.Ifthehumorousdimensionandseemingpurposeless-nessofAlÿs’sactionareacknowledged,The Green Linecanbeseenasanat-tempttomakepeopleawareoftheabsurdityandimpactoftheGreenLineandofborders ingeneral,anawarenessthatmayhavemorepotentialto leadtochangethanthemorecommonsenseandlessextraordinaryattemptsofpoliti-cians.In2005and2007,thefollowingtextbyAlÿswaswrittenonawallattheentranceoftheaforementionedexhibitionsattheIsraelMuseumandDavidZwirner:

Cananartisticinterventiontrulybringaboutanunforeseenwayofthink-ing, or is it more a matter of creating a sensation of ‘meaninglessness’that shows the absurdity of the situation? Can an absurd act provokea transgression that makes you abandon the standard assumptions onthesourcesofconflict?Canthosekindsofartisticactsbringaboutthe

43 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.176.44 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.175.45 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.175.46 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.177.

48 Gieskes

possibilityofchange?Inanycase,howcanartremainpoliticallysignifi-cant without assuming a doctrinal standpoint or aspiring to becomesocial activism? For the moment, I am exploring the following axiom:Sometimesdoingsomethingpoeticcanbecomepoliticalandsometimesdoingsomethingpoliticalcanbecomepoetic.47

Perhapsanartworkthatwouldhavestagedmoreidealcircumstances,avisionofafutureofpeacefulcoexistence,wouldhavebeenmoretoWeizman’ssatis-faction,asitwouldhavegonebeyondwhatcouldbeseenasnotmuchmorethantherearticulationofaboundary.Invariousotherworks,Alÿsdoespres-entavisionofalesspartitioned,superiorworld,ifinahighlyimaginary,un-practicalway.InhisworkintheStraitofGibraltar,thetwolinesofMoroccansandSpaniardsevoketheimageofameetingatthehorizon,envisagingamoredesirable situation with fewer restrictions and obstructions.This 2008 workclearlyrevisitsanearlierwork,Bridge/Puente(2006),forwhichAlÿsrequestedfishermeninbothHavanaandKeyWesttopositiontheirboatsinlinespoint-ingtowardthecityontheoppositesideoftheStraitsofFlorida,generatingthefabularmentalimageofacollectiveeffortcreatinga‘floatingbridge’betweentheUnitedStatesandCuba,twonationsinconflict.48Butwhereassuchworksusethestrategyofimagination,The Green Linereferstotheactualpast,relat-ingittotheactualpresent.

Itseemspreciselythesenseofpurposelessnessandthemanifestationoftheabsurdity of past events and the current, very real situation, along with theabsenceofaproposalthatsuggestsawayoutofdeadlock,thatpreventsThe Green Linefrombecomingone-dimensionallydoctrinalandactivist,ornaivelyoptimistic.Giventheclose tounsurpassablecomplexityof the Israeli-Pales-tineconflict,Alÿswasnotreallyinthepositiontoenvisageamythical,unified,non-partitioned space for Jerusalem in the vein of Bridge/Puente, one thatmighthaveembodiedthehopeAlÿshasfrequentlyexpressedthatrumorssetoff by his works could lead to a transformation of fiction into reality.49ThepotentialofrumorstriggeredbyThe Green Linetobringaboutchangearemorelikelytoresideinthework’sinvitationtoviewerstoseetheactualsituationasabsurd.The ludicrous transgression of most of Alÿs’s actions, including The Green LinebutalsoWhen Faith Moves Mountains(2002),forwhich500volun-teersmovedanenormoussanddunenearLima,Peru,tencentimetersfromits

47 FrancisAlÿs2007,s.p.48 See:Medinaetal.2007,pp.104–07;FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.158–59.49 ForadiscussionofAlÿs’snotionofthetransformational,circulatorypowerofrumor,see:

FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.41,89;SevenWalks2005,p.24.

49TheGreenLine

originalplace,makestheworksmemorableandespeciallysuitablesubjectsofrumors.Theuseofhumornotonlyallowsartiststoconfrontpeoplewithsensi-tive situations, affronting them with painful issues from a humorous dis-tance50: unexpected absurdities are also more likely to stick to people’smemoriesandbecomematerialfordiscussion,especiallyiftheeventtobere-memberedcanbecondensedintoaconciseimageoranecdote,asisusuallythecasewithAlÿs’sprojects,whichoftentranslatesocio-politicaltensionsintoasimplevisual-spatialform,likealine.MarkGodfreyhaselaboratelydiscussedAlÿs’sstrategyofdevisingperformancesthatcaneasilybedistilledintoasin-gle, succinct image, phrase, or aphorism, one that can crystalize the entirework.51 This condensation facilitates the subsequent dissemination of thework to a vast public, beyond the art community, through postcards, DVD’s,magazines,websites,and–most importantly–rumors.52 It is inthisdemo-craticpost-stageofhisworks,inwhichrumorsarespreadbymouth,publishedtexts,ormediumssuchastheinternet,thatAlÿssituatesthepoweroftheworktobringaboutthepromiseofchange,to‘affectthesocialimaginary’,53tocausepeopleto‘revise’theirown‘discourse’.54Theabsurdityofawork,inadditiontothework’scapacitytocausea‘clash’betweentheartist’sconcernsandthelocalsituationintowhichtheworkintervenes,islikelytoincreasethepowerofarttoprovokechange,as itoffersa ‘momentofsuspensionofmeaning,abriefsensation of senselessness that reveals the absurdity of the situation and,throughthisactoftransgression’,whichmakespeople‘stepbackorstepout’,itcan‘openup–evenifjustforafewseconds–anew,other,perspectiveonthesituation’.55Itisthroughthisstrategyofabsurditythat‘sometimesdoingsome-thingpoeticcanbecomepolitical’.

50 ForremarksofAlÿs’sonthecriticalpowerofhumor,which‘oftenallowsyoutobypasssituationsthatwouldnototherwisehavebeenallowedtohappenifIhad,forinstance,amilitantattitude’,see: ‘WalkingtheLine’2009,p.4andRussellFerguson, ‘Interview’, inFrancisAlÿs2007,p.25.

51 Godfreyin:FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.10.52 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.15,127.53 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.51.54 AlÿsandMedina2005,p.90.ItispartlybecauseoftheemphasisAlÿsplacesonthepower

ofdisseminationthatmaterialslikeletters,notes,andsketchesareexhibitedalongwithdocumentationoftheartist’sperformances:thesematerialsalladdmoredimensionstothediscourseandrumorspromptedbytheartwork.

55 RussellFerguson,‘Interview’,in:FrancisAlÿs2007,p.40.

50 Gieskes

Resolving Dialectical Structures: A Practice of Disruption

Assuggestedearlierinthisessay,Alÿs’sworksoftencombineseeminglyoppo-siteconcepts,practices,andterms,dissolving thedichotomy in theprocess.Theworksmayincorporatebothsimplicityandcomplexity, inflexibilityandtransience,conflictandresolution,humorandseriousness,thelocalandtheglobal,artandlife,andpoetryandpolitics.ThisdialecticalstructurealreadyappearedinsomeofAlÿs’searliestworks.The Collector(1990–92),forinstance,featuredtheartistwalkingthroughMexicoCitywithatinymagneticdogonwheelsthatcollectedthemetallicwasteitencounteredinthestreets.Hintingatstreetdogsandpeoplesurvivingonthegarbagefoundonthestreets,reali-tiesthatAlÿscreditedwiththepowertoresisttheregulated,hygienicmodernidealofurbanplanning,The Collectornotonlyprefiguredthelaterworks’criti-cismofthemodernWesternidealofcontrolandregulation,butalsothedia-lecticalplaythatcharacterizesmuchofthelaterwork.The Collector’sdialecticsmovedbetweenthepositiveandnegativemagneticpoles,artandnon-art(thedailylifeofgarbage),andserioussocialcommentaryontheonehandandhu-morous,childlikeplayontheother.56

Anotherearlywork,Bridge (Snails)(1992),featurescombinationsofoppo-sitesthatareevenmoreclearlyrelatedtoThe Green Line(Fig.2.5).Inanexhibi-tionspaceinBrussels,Alÿsreleased1300snailsonthewallsandceiling.Thesnailstendedtostaywithinalinearperimeterofgreensoapwithawidthof8centimetersandalengthof112meters,consumingthedrawingshangingonthewallwithinthegreenline,whichtheywereunabletocross.Alÿshascom-mentedthatthe‘lineofsoapturnsintothehygienicfilterseparatingandpro-tectingtheartworkfromthepublicandvice-versa,whileaplayofterritoriestakesplaceinbetweentheflooroccupiedbythevisitorsandthewallsandceil-inginvadedbythesnails’.57Whilethegreenlinesegregatedtheanimalsfromthehumans,protectingthevisitorsfromthesnails,therewasonepassageintheotherwiseimperviousboundaryline:asoaplesscolumninthemiddleofthegalleryconnectingtheterritoryofthesnails,whichincludedtheceiling,tothat of the visitors, who stood on the floor. Alÿs and art critic CuauhtémocMedinahavewrittenthat,althoughthe‘segregationandcommunicationbe-tweenbothspacessuggestedthefantasyoftheirunification’,‘eventhatutopi-anpossibilitywasdisturbing’:‘Notfarawaywasthememoryofthedisruptionofcivilizedorderbyaninvasionofanimals’.58Bridge (Snails)isclearlyrelated

56 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.50–51.57 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.54–55.58 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.54–55.

51TheGreenLine

totheartist’sexplorationduringhisarchitecturaltrainingofthetransforma-tioninthelateMiddleAgestoanew,modernmodelofcityplanning,inwhichanimals no longer co-existed with people near the old city center, but wereevictedtolandoutsideofthecitywalls,atransformationtheartistobviouslylaments.59 The utopian possibility Alÿs and Medina recognized in Bridge (Snails)consistedinthepromiseofdisruptionofthismodern,civilizedorgani-zationofurbanspace.

ThequestionarisesofwhetherAlÿswithThe Green Line,whichseemstoreferinvariouswaystotheearlierBridge (Snails),alsohopedtogiveaglimpseof theutopianpossibilityofunificationandco-existence, thoughThe Green LinedidnotfeatureabridgeforPalestiansorIsraelithatcouldhaveservedafunctioncomparabletothatofthecolumninBridge (Snails).Itisnotirrele-vanttonoteinthiscontextthatinsomeofAlÿs’sworks,linesdonotseparatebutconnect,as isvery literallydepicted in thepaintingSnakes and Ladders(2008),undoubtedlyrelatedtohisworkintheStraitofGibraltarofthesameyear(Fig.2.6). In thissmallpainting, thegreensnakeand ladder, insteadof


Figure2.5 Francis Alÿs, Bridge(Snails), Brussels 1992, Installation. Photo:FrancisAlÿs.CourtesyDavidZwirner,NewYork/London.

52 Gieskes

connectingboardsquaresasinthehomonymousgame,linkmountainsthatareseparatedbywater.Butwherelinesintheguiseofbridges–aswellasintheformofcorridorsofcooperatingpeople(Don’t Cross the Bridge Before You Get to the River,Bridge/Puente,and When Faith Moves Mountains)–canbringto-gether,whengiventhefunctionofboundary,theytendtoseparate.IfAlÿs’slineinThe Green Linehasautopianpossibility,besidesitspotentialtorevisepeople’sperspectivesthroughabsurdity,itmayinsteadlie,assuggestedbefore,inthefactthatitislesstransientthanthewallsthatwerebeingbuiltaround2004.Thetransienceofthelinemightsuggestthatsegregatinglinesareaccept-abletoAlÿsaslongastheyareflexibleandprovisional.

IfBridge (Snails)simultaneouslybringstolightandquestionsthevalidityoflinesofdemarcationbetweenanimalsandhumans, theuncivilizedandthecivilized,revulsionandattraction,publicandprivate,lifeandart,anddivisionandunification,itisnotonlythelastpairthat12yearslateragaintookona

Figure2.6 Francis Alÿs, SnakesandLadders, 2008, oil and encaustic on canvas, 28.7 × 22 cm. CourtesyDavidZwirner,NewYork/London.

53TheGreenLine

primaryroleinThe Green Line,butcertainlyalsothesecondtolastpair:thelife-artdichotomy.WhereBridge (Snails)bringselementsoflife,ornature,toanartcontext,The Green Linemostobviouslybringsarttolife,revisitingAlÿs’slesspolitically-chargedactionThe Leak(1995),inwhichtheartistleftagallerywithaperforatedcanofpaint,walkedthroughtheneighborhoodandreturnedtothegalleryafterhavingfoundhiswaybacktothegallerywiththeaidofthepaint trail.60The Leakobviouslyalludes to JacksonPollock’sactionpaintinganddrippingtechnique,althoughAlÿsreplacedthearenaofthecanvasbythatoftheurbansurface,takingartbeyondtheconfiningwhitearchitectoniccubeofthegallery.

AlÿshasdisclosedthatwithThe Leak,hehopedto‘createanarrativepro-ducedbyamaterialexpenditureordissipation’,generatingastorybyusing up materialpaint,perhapsinreferencetothedematerializationofartsincethe1960s,butmorepertinentlyrelatingtohisdecisionasanartistandformer-ar-chitectnottomakebuildings,sculptureorotherobjects,allofwhichhaveacertain ‘consistency’.61 Through the practice of walking, an ‘exercise with atemporalityakintothatofnarrative’,asopposedtothestabilityofobjects,Alÿsratherwantedtochallengethe‘permanence’ofart.62Thetemporalityofevery-daylife,walking,andnarrativeassuchoffersAlÿsamodeofresistancewithinthe field of art.With his ambulatory explorations of the poetic potential ofunplannedeventsandsituationsintheurbanfabric,hemoreoverattemptedtoresist theprevailingconceptofarchitectureandurbanismas ‘apredeter-minedfieldoftrajectoriesandtransactions’.63Aswalkingismarkedbytempo-rality and movement, and cannot be controlled and predetermined, it canchallenge the modern systems of control and regulation that have come todominateourlives,includingthosethathaveenforcedartificialpoliticalbor-ders.64Duringwalks,ourdirectcontactwithourconcreteenvironmentleadsustoexperiencetheunexpected,undetermined,andinconsistent,whichpro-videsuswithamodetoescapefromthestructuresthatattempttoorder,di-vide,andcontroleverything.

AlÿshascomparedThe Leak’s ‘materialexpenditure’ tothatofhisperfor-manceFairy Talesofthesameyear,awalkthroughMexicoCity(re-enactedinStockholmin1998)duringwhichheleftbehindatrailbyunravelinghisownsweater,as ifunweavingthe ‘thread’ofanarrativethathadpreviouslybeen

60 AlÿsperformedThe LeakbothinSãoPauloandinGhentin1995.61 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.66.62 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.47-49.63 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.47.64 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.47–52.

54 Gieskes

woven.65LikeThe LeakandThe Green Line,Fairy Talesisanactof‘productiveunmakingakintotheunravellingoftalesandstories’.66ThereferencestothefairytaleofHanselandGretel,themythofAriadne,Theseus,andtheMino-taur’slabyrinth,aswellasthestoryofPenelope’snightlyundoingoftheshroudsheweavesduringthedayaremostexplicitinFairy Tales,butcanalsobere-lated to The Leak and The Green Line.67Alsoapplicable to The Green Line isAlÿs’scommentonthefabulardimensionofFairy Tales:‘WhereasthehighlyrationalsocietiesoftheRenaissancefelttheneedtocreateutopias,weinourtimesmustcreatefables’.68UnweavingwithintheeverydayrealityofJerusa-lemathreadofpaintthatoriginatedbothinthestoryofartandinthehistoryofthatholyyetconflictedcitycanbeseenasparallelalsotoanotherworkthatAlÿshasassociatedwithfables:When Faith Moves Mountains.Likethisearlierwork,whichtookplaceinatransitional,post-dictatorialperiodduringwhichPeru was struggling to institute a democracy, The Green Line attempted to‘translatesocialtensionsintonarratives’and‘visual-spatialform’,withthein-tentto‘infiltratethelocalhistoryandmythology’ofJerusalem,‘toinsertan-other rumor into its narrative’ in the hope that the action would become astory, a fable, that will ‘survive the event itself ’, intervening in the ‘imaginallandscape’ofthecity,andthereby‘actualizing’thework.69

Ofallhisnumerousperformances,The LeakmusthaveseemedtoAlÿstooffermostunexploredpossibilities,asitistheonlyworktowhichhereturnedseveraltimes.AyearbeforehiswalkthroughJerusalem,AlÿshadwalkedwithapiercedcanofbluepaintfromtheMuséed’ArtModernedelaVilledeParistoaformerconventintheLatinQuartertowhichthemuseumlocatedtempo-rarily while its permanent building was being renovated. Alÿs and MedinahavewrittenthattheartistreenactedThe Leakmultipletimesbecauseitisa‘paradigm’oftheartist’s‘desiretoleaveapermanenttraceinthefabricofthecityandthecollectiveimaginationofitsinhabitantsthroughtheactofwalk-ing’,suggestingthatitontheonehandmockedartists’narcissisticeagernesstoleaveapermanenttraceofthemselvesintheworldwhileontheotherhandexpressing the more altruistic ambition of affecting the world in a positivemannerthroughthistrace.70AlÿsandMedinahaveindicatedthatwithsuch

65 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.90.66 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.66–67.67 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.90.68 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.90.69 ThesewordsofAlÿs’sdescribeWhen Faith Moves Mountains.AlÿsandAnton2002,p.147;

FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.15,36,126–29.70 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.66–67.

55TheGreenLine

actionsinvolvingdispellingandtheleavingofatrace,theartistreversedtheprincipleofearlierworkslikeThe Collector,whichwasagathering(ofnon-artintotherealmofart)ratherthanamarking(ofanon-artisticsitethroughanartisticact).71Intheseworks,onemightsay,Alÿsexplicitlyactedouthisinsightthat‘[…]anyartdocumentis,bynature,aself-consciousinterventioninthecomplextextureofreality–atleastintermsofprovokingahiatusinthecus-tomaryorderofthings’.72Alÿs’saxiom‘sometimesdoingsomethingpoeticcanbecomepolitical’,partofthesubtitleofThe Green Line,takesthisstatementintotherealmofthepolitical.

The dictum ‘sometimes doing something poetic can become political’,whichexpressesAlÿs’sdesirethatartcanaffect lifeonapolitical level, is inturnrelatedtotheartist’smuch-quotedproposition‘Sometimesdoingnothingleadstosomething’,aprinciplethatreversestheproposition‘Sometimesdoingsomethingleadstonothing’,whichisalsothesubtitleofthefive-minutevideoParadox of Praxis 1(1997).ThisvideodocumentsAlÿspushingabigblockoficethroughthestreetsofMexicoCityuntilitisnomorethanapuddleofwater.Anotherinstanceofproductiveunmaking,Paradox of Praxis 1 isaparodyofthe‘unproductivehardshipinvolvedinthedailysurvivaltactics’ofmanyla-boringpeopleinLatinAmerica,playingoutthedisproportionaterelationbe-tween maximum effort and minimum outcome. It is one of a number ofartworksinwhichAlÿscommentsonthebattleofLatinAmericancountriesto‘adjusttothesocialandeconomicexpectationsoftheirnorthernneighbors’inan‘epicofeffort’.73Besidesacommentaryonthelocal,orinthiscaseregional,situation,Paradox of Praxis 1alsoexploresthequestionofwhetherartcanleadto true change or whether art really is without purpose, a question alsobroachedinWhen Faith Moves Mountains,whichcarriedthemotto‘maximumeffort, minimum result’, inverting ‘the principle of efficiency that lies at theheartofmoderneconomicthought’butalsoprovokingreflectiononthepur-posesofart.74Itisnotacoincidencethattheaxiom‘Sometimesdoingsome-thingleadstonothing,andsometimesdoingnothingleadstosomething’hasastructureanalogousto‘Sometimesdoingsomethingpoeticcanbecomepoliti-cal,andsometimesdoingsomethingpoliticalcanbecomepoetic’.Wherethepoeticandart tendtobeassociatedwiththe ‘nothing’andthepurposeless-ness, thepolitical ismore likely tobeconnected to the ‘something’and the

71 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.90.72 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.76.73 FromadescriptionbyAlÿsandMedinaofRehearsal I(1999–2000),inwhichacarfailsto

ascendahillinTijuana. FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,pp.102–3.74 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.127.

56 Gieskes

‘purposeful’.InhisactionTuristaof1994,inwhichAlÿsstoodinlinewithun-employed Mexican laborers offering his ‘services’ as a tourist, he seemed toridiculethepurposelessnessofartist’swork.Standingbehindasignidentify-inghimas‘Turista’,theartistempathizedwiththelaborers’struggletosurviveinacapitalisteconomybutalsoself-mockinglyidentifiedtheroleoftheartistas‘professionalobserver’.75

Alÿshasstatedthatformorethan10yearsafterhisexplorationoftheadage‘sometimesdoingsomethingleadstonothing’,heattemptedtodeviseasequelwithactionsthatwereto ‘illustratethecontraryprinciple: ‘sometimesdoingnothingleadstosomething’.76Theseattempts,hehasargued,havefailed,butthefailurehasinspired‘anumberofotherworksbasedonthequestioningofefficiency’.The Green Lineseemstosimultaneouslyquestionthecapacityofarttoleadtotruepoliticalchangeandcautiouslyexpressthebeliefthatart,pos-siblythroughitsabsurdity,canbequalifiedto‘provokeahiatusinthecustom-aryorderofthings’andleadtodifferentperspectives,more,atleast,thantheextremely time-consuming, expensive political negotiations and military ef-fortsthathaveofferednowayoutoftheconflictupuntilnow.77Evenifitmaynot explore concepts like ‘faith’, bridge’, and change’ in as courageously and‘naivelyutopian’awayasWhen Faith Moves Mountains,The Green Lineisstillrelativelyoptimisticandresistantinthatitisunwillingtoconformtothe‘cli-mateofskepticism’thatdoubtsallambitiousattemptsatprovokingpoliticalchange.78EvenifThe Green LinedoesnotofferastangibleautopianpossibilityasBridge (Snails),whichinvitesviewerstoimagineaunificationbetweenani-malsandhumans,likethatearlierworkitincitesadisruptionby,ontheonehand, revealing the tendency of human beings to bring about segregationthroughlinesofdemarcationand,ontheotherhand,concurrentlyincorporat-ingingredientsthancancounterseparatingforces,suchasthepointofpoten-tialpassageinBridge (Snails),butalsothetransienceandnon-intrusivenessofthepaintedlineinThe Green Line.Itcontainsthehopethatartcanmakeadif-ference,leadingpeopletothinkdifferentlythroughthestrategyoftheabsur-dity.

Alÿshasexplainedthathedoesnotwantto‘addtothecity’,but‘toabsorbwhatwasalreadythere,toworkwiththeresidues,orwiththenegativespaces,the holes, the spaces in-between’.79 It is the negative spaces in the

75 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.6176 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.8277 FrancisAlÿs,AStoryofDeception2010,p.7678 RussellFerguson,‘Interview’,in:FrancisAlÿs2007,p.48.79 Alÿsin:SevenWalks2005,p.44.

57TheGreenLine

modern hegemonic structures, including perhaps semi-forgotten yet fullypresentborders,thathavethepowertodisruptandresistthesestructures.ThestructureofAlÿs’snarrative,likethestructureofitsparticularepisodeslikeThe Green Line, seems to oscillate between opposites: a negation of oppositesthrough an exploration of liminal, interstitial spaces, spaces in-between, astructurethatseemstoresonateintheartist’sexplorationofboththefutilityandpotencyofartaswellasinhisdesiretoinvitepeopletoreflectonsolutionsto conflicts while simultaneously drawing inspiration from them, seeminglyconceivingofconflictsasinstigatorsofchange.80Itisintheplacesinbetween,wheredichotomiescometogether,thattheorderofthingscanberesisted.

Bibliography

Against the Wall. Marlene Dumas,exhib.cat.,NewYork:DavidZwirnerGallery2010.‘“AgainsttheWall”byMarleneDumasopensatSerralvesMuseum’,Artdaily.org(July2,

2010), http://artdaily.com/news/39009/-Against-the-Wall--by-Marlene-Dumas-Opens-at-Serralves-Museum#.UsQMQPTuI6g(accessedOctober2013).

Alÿs,FrancisandSaulAnton,‘AThousandWords:FrancisAlÿstalksaboutWhen Faith Moves Mountains’,Artforum 10,no.40(Summer2002),pp.146–47.

Alÿs,FrancisandCuauhtémocMedina,When Faith Moves Mountains,Madrid2005.Alÿs,Francis, Sometimes doing something poetic can become political, and sometimes

doing something political can become poetic,exhib.cat.,NewYork:DavidZwirnerGallery2007.

Alÿs,Francis,andJefLambrechts, ‘TheCanvas–InterviewwithFrancisAlÿs:“TheObserverPositionisthePointofViewofanOutsider”’,<H>art International,no.118(7November2013),http://www.kunsthart.org/fr/16/51/the-canvas-interview-with-francis-Alÿs-the-observer-position-is-the-point-of-view-of-an-outsider-.aspx (ac-cessedNovember2013).

Art|40|Basel. David Zwirner,NewYork:DavidZwirnerGallery2009.Benvenisti,Meron,City of Stone. The Hidden History of Jerusalem,BerkeleyandLos

Angeles1996.Fabiola. An Investigation,exhib.cat.,ed.byLynneCookeandKarenKelly,NewYork:Dia

ArtFoundation2008.Francis Alÿs, A Story of Deception,exhib.cat.,ed.byMarkGodfrey,KlausBiesenbach,

andKerrynGreenberg,NewYork:TheMuseumofModernArt2010.

80 FrancisAlÿsandJamesLingwood, ‘Rumours:AconversationbetweenFrancisAlÿsandJamesLingwood’,in:AlÿsandMedina2005,p.44.

58 Gieskes

HansonBourke,Dale,The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict . Tough Questions, Direct Answers,DownersGrove,IL2013.

Medina,Cuauhtémoc,RusselFerguson,andJeanFisher,Francis Alÿs,LondonandNewYork2007.

Newman,David,Boundaries in Flux: The ‘Green Line’ Boundary between Israel and the West Bank. Past, Present and Future,Boundary&TerritoryBriefing1no.7,ed.byCliveSchofield,Durham1995.

The Object Quality of the Problem (on the Space of Palestine/ Israel),exhib.cat.,ed. byKatrinaBrownandPenelopeCurtis,Leeds:TheHenryMooreInstitute2008.

O’Rourke,Karen,Walking and Mapping. Artists as Cartographers,CambridgeMA2013.Seven Walks,exhib.cat.,ed.byJamesLingwood,London:ArtangelandNationalPortrait

Gallery2005.‘WalkingtheLine:FrancisAlÿsinterviewedbyAnnaDezeuze’,Art Monthly,no.323

(February2009),pp.1–6.Weizman,Eyal,Hollow Land. Israel’s Architecture of Occupation,LondonandNewYork

2007.

59JerusalemasTrauerarbeit

Chapter3

Jerusalem as Trauerarbeit On Two Paintings by Anselm Kiefer and Gerhard Richter

Wouter Weijers

In1986,AnselmKieferproducedapaintingheentitledJerusalem(Fig.3.1).Itisa large and heavy work measuring approximately thirteen by eighteen feet.Whenviewedupclose,thesurfaceisreminiscentofabstractMatterPainting.Liquidleadwasapplied,lefttosolidifyandthenscrapedoffagaininplaces,rippingthework’sskin.Whentheworkisviewedfromadistance,ahighhori-zonwithagoldenglowshiningoveritscentreappears,which,partlyduetothetitle,couldbeinterpretedasareferencetoaheavenlyJerusalem.Twometalskisareattachedtothesurface,which,asFremdkörper,donotenterintoanykindofstructuralorvisualrelationshipwiththepainting

Eleven years later, Gerhard Richter painted a much smaller work that,although it was also given the title Jerusalem, was of a very different order(Fig.3.2).Thepaintingshowsusaviewofasun-litcity.ButagainJerusalemishardlyrecognizablebecauseRichterhasletthecitydissolveinahazyatmo-sphere,whichis,ineffect,theresultofapaintingtechniqueusingafine,drybrushinpaintthathasnotyetcompletelydried.Itisthetitlethatidentifiesthecity.Insidersmightbeabletorecognizethewesternwalloftheoldcityinthelit-upstripjustbelowthehorizon,butotherwiseallofthebuildingshavedis-appearedinthehaze.Alongerviewingofthepainting,however,revealsacarparkwithlamppostsinthezoneatthebottom.

Apartfromtheiridenticalnames,theseartworksarepolesapart–insize,materialityandtexture,depictionandreligiousreference,intheconceptionofartbehindeachwork,inthewaystheyrelatetohistoryandmemory,andinhowtheywere received.Thesepaintingsaredifferent in somanyways thattheybarelytolerateeachother.Butwhicheverwayyoulookatit,inbothworksthename Jerusalem refers to thecitymarkedbyhistory,whereancient reli-giousandpoliticalconflictsarestillpresenttodayandarecontinuouslyfedbymemory. Even in these relatively recent paintings, Jerusalem is inevitably aplaceofmemory.

Memoriesdonotsimplyemergefromareadilyavailablepastbutarecon-structedandreconstructedinthepresent.Recollectionisasocialandcultural

© WouterWeijers,2014 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_005This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.



60 weijers

practiceinwhichacontinuousselection,rearrangementandtransformationofmemorytakesplace.However,thatselectionisalwaysperspectivalandin-fluencedbysocio-culturalandpoliticalmotives.Thesameappliestothesetwoworks.

Theartistsareclosetobeingcontemporaries.Richter,borninDresdenin1932,wasthirteenyearsoldwhentheSecondWorldWarended,andthengrewupintheGDRuntilhetookrefugeinWestGermanyin1961.KieferwasborninDonaueschingen(Baden-Württemberg)in1945,awarchild.Bothartistshavehadaconnectiontotheburdenoftotalitarianregimesandonethingtheydohaveincommonisthattheyhavenotavoidedthathistoryintheirwork.TheirtwoJerusalemsarepartofthishistory.AftertheexterminationofmillionsofEuropean Jewsduring theShoah,everyGermanartistwhodecides tocallapainting Jerusalem knows that this work will carry the burden of that past.RichterandKiefergrewupinitsshadow,andmemoriesofithavehadapro-foundinfluenceontheoeuvreofbothartists.However,whereoneartistseemstowanttoremember,theotheroneseemstowanttoforget,tosuchanextentthat one could speak of ‘divided memories’, to borrow Benjamin Buchloh’sconcept,albeitinaslightlydifferentcontext.1

1 Buchloh1996.

Figure3.1 Anselm Kiefer, Jerusalem, 1986, acrylic, emulsion, shellac, gold leaf, on canvas (in two parts) with steel and lead, 380 × 560 cm. Chicago:CollectionSusanandLewisManilow.


Buchlohisthecriticwhohasprovidedwhat ispossiblythesharpest,andideological, formulationof thedifferencebetweenKiefer’sandRichter’sart.Hepositionedbothartists inrelationtotheartisticcultureofpost-warGer-many and to the (self-)reflective and socio-critical attitude of the historicalavant-garde.AccordingtoBuchloh,thebiggestproblemwashowtorepresenthistoryinpost-fascistGermany.2TherecentGermanpasthad,withthelossofGermany’sculturalidentity,alsoproblematizedmemorytoanexceptionalde-gree.Anewmeaningcouldonlyemergefromthecreationofnewmodesofmemory,whichdidhavetoremaininextricablylinkedtotherealityofthepast,however.Inthatrespect,BuchlohconsideredKiefertobea‘regressive’artistwhoseworksuggestedthathistorycouldbetranscended.Inhisopinion,Kieferdoes not provide historical insight into processes of cultural memory but

2 Buchloh1996,p.64andpp.69–70.

Figure3.2 Gerhard Richter, Jerusalem, 1995, oil on canvas, 126 × 92.3 cm. Baden-Baden:MuseumFriederBurda.

62 weijers

rather mythologizes the past. Richter’s art, on the other hand, is explicitlyaimed at the time span that was still accessible to individual memory.3 Bu-chloh sees Kiefer and Richter as artistic and political antagonists. However,whethertheartists,withalltheirmajordifferences,shouldbeopposedsodia-metricallywhenitcomestotheirreworkingofGermanhistoryisdebatable.

InhisstudyontheHolocaust,MichaelRothberghasaskedseveralweightyquestionsaboutwhathappenswhentwopartiesdealingwiththepastcom-peteforprecedenceincollectivememoryprocesseswhereonepastwillalwaysbeattheexpenseoftheother.4Heusesaconceptofrecollectionthatisnotbasedonconstantrivalry,butstartsfromthecomplexinterweavingofvariouspractices of memory, which are constantly formed and reformed in varyingrelation between collective memory and (group) identity. Applied to KieferandRichter’swork,suchanapproachisnotanattempttomediatebetweentheirhighlydivergentconceptionsofartandpractices,butanoccasiontoex-amine their relationship with post-war German cultural memory. Rothbergsees memory as fundamentally ‘multidirectional’, subjected to constant ex-change, cross-pollination and mutual borrowing. This interaction betweenvariousmemoriesinastateofcontinuousreconstructionleadstowhathe,asopposedtorigidcompetitivememory,callstheproductivedynamicsof‘multi-directionalmemory’.5Thequestionishowthesetwoverydifferentpaintingsrelate to thisdynamics. Inorder toanswer thatquestion, the two Jerusalem paintings inthisessayarethedeparturepoint foraseriesofconsiderationsthatviewtheseartworksinrelationtoeachother,butalso,explicitly,tootherworksfrombothoeuvres.

Kiefer’s Iconoclastic Controversy

Inthewinterof1986,Kiefer’sJerusalemwasondisplayintheStedelijkMuse-um in Amsterdam at the exhibition Anselm Kiefer. Bilder 1986 → 1980.6 Thestrikingreversalofdatesinthetitlesuggestsareturntothepast.Theexhibi-tionstarted(orended)withawork from1980:Bilder-Streit,whichdepictsablack-and-whitephotoofthefloorandbrickwallinKiefer’sstudioatthetime

3 Buchloh1996,p.72.4 Rothberg2009,pp.1–21.Rothberg’sbookisnotaboutartbutaboutthecompetitionbetween

thepositionsoftheHolocaustandslaveryinculturalmemory.5 Rothberg2009,pp.2–3.6 Anselm Kiefer. Bilder 1986→1980,StedelijkMuseumAmsterdam,20December1986–8February

1987.TheexhibitionwasorganisedbythethendirectorWimBeeren.


(Fig. 3.3). Glued to the floor are strips of paper on which a well-discerniblewoodgrainpatternofplanksisprinted.Theoutlinesofapainter’spalettehavebeendrawnoverthesewithblackpaint.ThepaletteisamotifthatrecurstimeandagaininKiefer’spaintings,especiallyduringtheseventies,butalsolater.Inthe photo are displayed three miniature German tanks which have set thewood,orthepalette,alight.ThetitleBilder-StreitreferstotheconflictbetweeniconoclastsandiconodulesduringtheeighthandninthcenturyinByzantiumasaresultofthedecreeissuedbyEmperorLeoIIIin726,prohibitingtheuseofimages, out of fear of idolatry. In earlier versions of Bilder-Streit, Kiefer hadpaintedthetanksaswellasthenamesoftheByzantinecombatantsfrombothsides.7KieferlinkstheByzantineiconoclasmtothedestructionandbanningofentartete KunstduringtheNaziregimehere.

Butthere isanother important issuethatseverelyburdenedpost-warart.Theessay ‘KulturkritikundGesellschaft’,writtenbyTheodorAdornoin1948and published in 1951, contains the now famous line ‘Nach Auschwitz einGedichtzuschreiben,istbarbarisch’,whichhasbeenquotedoften,inanycon-

7 AnselmKiefer 1984,pp.88–89.

Figure3.3 Anselm Kiefer, Bilder-Streit, 1980, oil, emulsion, shellac, sand on a photo with woodcuts, 290 × 400 cm. Rotterdam:MuseumBoymans-vanBeuningen.

64 weijers

ceivablecontext,andisactuallypartofasentencefromalongerquotation.8InherbookAnselm Kiefer and Art after Auschwitz,LisaSaltzmanexploresAdor-no’sthesisinrelationtoKiefer’sBilder-StreitandtheSecondCommandment,whichforbidsthemakingof ‘gravenimages’.9Whatthatcommandmentim-plies isnotthatGodshouldnotbedepictedbutthathecannotbedepictedbecauseheisunknowable.Adornoappliesthecommandmenttotheunspeak-ablehorrorsoftheHolocaust,whichleavenootherpossibilitythan ‘anaes-theticethicsofvisualabsenceandpoeticsilence’.10However,thissilenceisnottotalandcanbearticulated,as inPaulCelan’spoetryand insomeformsofabstractartandatonalmusicwhichgiveawideberthtosensualexperiences,pleasuresanddesires.Withhisrejectionof ‘libidinousengagement’,Adornoshiftstheresponsibilityfromtheobjecttothespectator:MosesdestroyedAar-on’sgoldencalfbecausetheJewsdidnotdirecttheirworshipatGodbutatthestatue.11Theimageisnotforbiddenbut itrequiresanethicalspectatorwhohasinternalizedtheoldtestamentarylaw.Onlythencantestimonybegiven,asrequiredinLeviticus5:1.

InBilder-Streit,Keiferalsothematizesthetensionbetweenimagesandtheirprohibitionbystackingvariouslayersofmeaninginhiscombinationofstudiophotoandpainter’spalettewithtanks,fireandsmoke:layersthatrefertothemythicaltimeoftheBible,tothehistoricaltimeoftheByzantineiconoclasticcontroversyandtothelived-throughtimeoftheSecondWorldWarthatisstillnear.Moreover,heviewsthisstratificationinrelationtohiscontemporaryar-tisticcalling.

InhisbookDas kulturelle Gedächtnis,EgyptologistandculturalscientistJanAssmann distinguishes two modes of remembering, which permeate eachotheroften.12‘Communicativememory’ishistermforthe‘biographical’mem-ory,whichgoesbackthreegenerationsandreferstomemorieswesharewithcontemporaries.Thiscommunicativememorydisappearswithitsbearersandcanthenonlybeconveyedthroughmedia.Nexttothis,Assmannplacesthe‘cultural memory’, which in his theory refers to what he calls ‘origins’. It isaimedata (distant)past thathasdisappearedbut isconstantlycommemo-ratedthroughsymbolicfiguressuchasmyths.InAssmann’snotionofcultural

8 ‘KulturkritikfindetsichderletztenStufederDialektikvonKulturundBarbareigegenüber:nachAuschwitzeinGedichtzuschreiben,istbarbarisch,unddasfrisstauchdieErken-ntnisan,dieausspricht,warumesunmöglichward,heuteGedichtezuschreiben’.Adorno1977,p.30.

9 Saltzman1999,pp.17–27.10 Saltzman1999,p.19,andExodus20:4–6.11 Saltzman1999,p.21.12 Assmann1992,pp.48–59.


memory,factualhistoryistransformedintorememberedhistoryandtherebyintomythos.Culturalmemorycontainssomethingsacredthen,inwhichmem-oryoftentakestheshapeofaceremonialcelebrationthatservestobringthepastintothepresent.ThisprocessinvolvestheconstantapplicationofwhatAssmannhascalledtheRekonstruktivitätofculturalmemory,whichisthewaythismemoryadaptsitselftoever-changing,contemporarymemoryneeds.

IfKiefer’sBilder-Streitalsoshowsaformoftransferencefromaprimevalagetohisowntime,thequestioniswhatmemoryneedsitisbasedon.Thisques-tionisdirectlylinkedtothatofhowKiefermanages,inhisvisualartandinhisowntime‘afterAuschwitz’,todealwiththehistoricaleventwhoseextraordi-naryhorrorspreventtheirexpression,yetatthesametimedemandtobere-membered.

Kiefer’s artworks from the period 1970–1986 problematize the possibilityandimpossibilityoftherepresentationofhistory,specificallythatofGermany,fromtheperspectiveofthepost-wargenerationwhichhastopositionitselfinrelationtotheburdenedheritageofthepreviousgeneration.However,intheeyesofsomecritics,hisreclaimingofGermanpreoccupationsandmythsthathadbeendeeplytaintedbyNazism,ledtoanartthatwasattheveryleastam-bivalent,buttosomeplainlyreactionaryandmostlydisturbing.Criticismin-creased when Kiefer showed a series of landscapes, woodcuts and artist’sbooks,includingthepaintingNero malt(1974)intheGermanpavilionattheVeniceBiennalein1980(Fig.3.4).Byfarthelargestpartofthepaintingistakenup by the blackish-brown, scorched-looking, ploughed arable land in whichtracesofbloodarealsostillvisible.Overthis,Kieferpainted,inredandorangestrokes,atransparentpalettewithpaintbrushesthatchangeintocandles.Highonthehorizontheysetavillagealightwiththeirflames.Theambiguousim-age, in which fire can be interpreted as both destructive and cleansing13,seemedtocontainabarelyconcealedallusiontothe‘BlutundBoden’ideologywithitsatavisticdreamofapurerace,inwhicheventhenotionofextermina-tionresounded.14

InherreviewoftheexhibitioninDie Zeit,PetraKipphoffvoicedher fearthat Kiefer did not refer to the German horror and aggression to denouncethembuttomaintaintheminasubduedforminhismegalomaniacwork.15Withthiscommentshesubscribedtoamoregenerallysupportedconvictionthat Kiefer did not so much come to grips with the shameful chapters of

13 Fuchs1980,p.57.Malen = VerbrennenisthetitleofanotherpaintingbyKieferfrom1974,whichwasalsoshowninVenice,besidesNero malt.

14 Saltzman1999,p.109–10andp.163n.36.15 Saltzman1999,p.110;Kipphoff1980.

66 weijers

Germany’shistorybutreaffirmedthem.Theoften-quotedheadline‘ÜberdosisamTeutschen’aboveWernerSpies’sreviewoftheexhibitionintheFrankfurter Allgemeine Zeitungof2June1980speaksvolumes.

BenjaminBuchloh’scriticisminhisessay‘FiguresofAuthority,CiphersofRegression: Notes on the Return of Representation in European Painting’,which was published in the spring of 1981, was even sharper.16 Even thoughKieferismentionedjustonceandonlyinaderivativewayinanote,BuchlohclasseshimwithcontemporaryGermanartistslikePenck,BaselitzandLüpertz,whowiththeirreturntoformsofrepresentationembodiedthenegative,ifnotreactionary,antithesisofthehistoricalavant-garde.Buchlohregardsthereturntorepresentationasthemost importantsymptomofthisregression.Hebe-lieves that although this ‘neo-expressionism’ pretends to be subversive, itsradicalismisapoliticalintheend,andheseesthe‘postmodern’demolitionoftheavant-garde idiomasacynicalattempt to reaffirm(conservative)powerstructures.Eightyears later, in1989,Buchlohrepeatedhiscriticism,butthistimemuchmoreexplicitlyaimedatKiefer.AccordingtoBuchloh,theattrac-tionofKiefer’sworkpartlystemsfrom‘itsreconstitutionoftraditionalidentity

16 Buchloh1981.

Figure3.4 Anselm Kiefer, Neromalt, 1974, oil on canvas, 220 × 300 cm. Munich:Staats-galerieModernerKunst.


forthegenerationofWestGermanswhowishtoabandonthelonganddiffi-cultprocessofreflectionuponapost-traditionalidentity’.17However,whetheritwasKiefer’saimtofulfilthatwishishighlydoubtful.

Mourning

AttheheartofKiefer’sworksreferringtoGermanhistory isthequestionofhowthisheritageistoberepresentedbythepost-wargeneration‘whosemem-oryiswithout“recollections”’becausethepersonalremembrancesoftheNaziyearsareabsent.18‘WhatKieferdoesisnotsomuchawork“of”memory,butawork“on”memory’,writesDanielArasse.19Becausepersonal‘recollections’areabsentforhisgeneration,Kieferclaimsthememorythroughother’sobjects,textsandimages.Furthermore,accordingtoAndreasHuyssen,Kiefer’sthema-tizingisnotexpressedinastereotypingof‘theGerman’butintheambiguityofKiefer’sworkinthecontextofGermansocietyafterAuschwitz.Kieferdoesnotexplore,andexploit,thepowerofmythicalimageswithout(self-)reflectionontheambivalentnatureofsuchmystificationsatatimewhenWestGermancul-ture was haunted by the past – a culture ‘haunted by images which in turnproducehauntingimages’.20

By detecting an ambivalence between fascination and horror that partlygoesbacktothetheoryoftheSublime,Huyssenshiftstheattentionfromthework itself to theambiguousexperiencesof thespectator, for instancewithrespecttothepaintingSulamith,apaintingaboutmourninginaculturethatisunabletomourn.InSulamith(1983),Kieferhastransformedafascistarchitec-turalspacefortheNazideathcultintoitsopposite(Fig.3.5).ByusingthenameSulamith–thegirlfromShulem(SongofSolomon7:1),Solomon’sgreatloveandbride–KiefertakesabigstepinhisworktowardsaconfrontationwiththeHolocaustinsteadofwithhisownGermanhistory.Thepaintingharksbacktoaphotoofamodelof thevaultedcryptundertheSoldatenhalle,whichwasdesignedbyWilhelmKreisbutneverbuilt,andwasmeanttobeaPantheonfor‘deutsche Kriegshelden’. Kiefer subjects the fascist death cult to a rigorousmetamorphosis.Thecrypt’swindowsareshutandthebrickvaultsnowshowblackscorchmarks.Sevenfiresburninthebackground,immediatelybringingtomindtheMenorah,thegoldencandlestickwithsevenarms,whichisoneof

17 Buchloh1989,p.100n.5.18 Arasse2001,p.77.19 Arasse2001,p.74.20 Huyssen1989,pp.26–28.

68 weijers

theoldestsymbolsforJudaismandwhichburnedpermanentlyintheSecondTempleinJerusalem,therebyraisingthesuggestionthatthisisasacredplace.Atthesametime,thetunnel-shaped,darkholeattheendisreminiscentoftheincineratorsinwhichthegassedJewswerecremated.KieferhastransformedtheplacewheregloriousGermanheroesweresupposedtobehonouredforathousandyearsintoaplaceofmourningforthevictimsoftheShoah.21Inor-dertounderstandtheimpactofthepaintingin1983,itisimportanttorealizethat therewerenomemorials for thevictimsof theHolocaustanywhere inWest Germany at the time, apart from the remains of the concentrationcamps.22

InthispaintingcommemoratingSulamith,sheisabsent.Yethernameandhermetonymicalrepresentationarethereinthegrey,ash-likelayerthathasspreadfromthefireoverthetophalfofthepainting,inkeepingwiththebanonimages,whichprohibitsthedepictionofthatwhichcannotbedepicted.Atthesametime,Sulamithisanimagethatbearswitnesstotheunspeakable.

21 Saltzman1999,pp.28–32;Huyssen1989,pp.42–43.22 Lauterwein2007,p.157.

Figure3.5 Anselm Kiefer, Sulamith, 1983, oil, acrylic, emulsion, shellac, straw and ashes on canvas with woodcuts, 290 × 370 cm. London:SaatchiCollection.


AmajorproblemrelatedtotherepresentationoftheHolocaustthatKieferand others encountered during the eighties, is what Primo Levi (who was aprisoner in Auschwitz himself) has called ‘the memory of the offence’, thememoryoftheextremeexperiencethatbindsvictimandperpetratortogetherforever.23ThepaintingSulamithvisualizes thisunavoidable interweavingbysituatingSulamith’smonumentinaNazibuildingthatitselfwasmeantasaplace of commemoration.This conflicting coordination of the German andtheJewishleadstowhatMatthewBirohascalled‘hermeneuticundecidabili-ty’:‘theabilityofaculturalrepresentationtogeneratenotjustambiguity,butaconflictofinterpretations:radicallycontradictoryreadingsofthesamesetofsignifiers’.24ThewayKieferplacesvarious timesandwaysof representationnexttoeachotherinhisworkdefiesthespectatortocompareandcontrastthedifferentlevelsoftimeandspace.ThisalsohappensinJerusalem.

Jerusalem (1)

Kiefer’sJerusalemalsoreferstotheHolocaustandGermanhistory,eventhoughthiscannotimmediatelybededucedfromthepainting.Itdoesnotshowusthehistoricalorthecontemporary,earthlyJerusalem,anddespitetheallusioninagoldenglowthatlightsupatthetopoftheimage,thepaintingdoesnotshowthepromisedheavenlyplacefromtheRevelationofStJohneither(21:1–4).

JerusalemstartedasapaintedlandscapeandKieferhimselfidentifiedtheearthlypartasastubblefield.25Thiswouldindicatethathestartedwiththesamelandscapehehasusedtimeandagain(compareFig.3.4)butthatitthenbecamehiddenfromviewbymanyadditionsandscrapings-off.Overthislay-eredsurface float the twometal skis,parallel to thecanvas,onewith its tippointingupandtheotherwithitstippointingdown.Bothdirectionsareem-phasisedevenmorebytwoarrowsthathavebeendrawnontheskiswithwhitechalk.Withtheirverticalposition,theskispointfromearthlytoheavenlyre-gionsandbackagain.

Thepaintingcanbeseenasbothaflat,almostimpenetrablesurfaceandasalandscapethatrunsintothebackgroundtothehorizon,perspectively.Theskisareattachedfrontallyandorientedalongaverticalaxis,astrangepositionforskis,whichwewouldsoonerwanttoletglideintothelandscape.AccordingtoKiefer,theyrepresent‘thecosmicclamberingthatissupposedtoleadusto

23 Levi1989,p.12;Biro2003,pp.114.24 Biro2003,p.117.25 KieferinaconversationwithMarkRosenthal,December1986:AnselmKiefer1987,p.143.

70 weijers

theHeavenlyJerusalembutthatroadgoesupanddown,downandup[…]’.26AsfarasIknow,itistheonlytimeKieferusedskisasa,ratherstrange,meta-phorforthismotionbetweenupanddown.27Heusedthemoreaptimageofascendinganddescendingaladdermuchmoreoften.

In(late)medievalart,theladderisdepictedcountlesstimesasasymbolforthelinkbetweenearthandheaven,withthechosenoneshavingtowalkupmany steps to reach the Divine light, and the damned making the oppositemovementdowntohell.Anillustrationfromafourteenth-centuryCatalonianmanuscriptshowsa ladder that leads to ‘thehouseofwisdom’whereGod’shandletsdown‘theropeofmercy’fromabove.Fromthisropehangtheintel-lect,thememoryandwillpower,followedbythesevenvirtues.Furtherdown,thesevensins,onlymentionedbyname,burninthefiresofhell.28

Kiefer’sJerusalem,withitsupwardanddownwardmotion,canalsobeinter-pretedalongtheverticalaxis.However,evilisdraggedintoKiefer’sowntime–andforhim,inthe1980s, it isthepureeviloftheHolocaust.This ishigh-lightedbyacomparisonwithanotherpaintingbyKiefer.Eisen-Steig(1986)alsoshowsalandscapewithahighhorizonandwasinitiallyentitledHeavenly Jeru-salem (Fig.3.6).29TheskisinJerusalemhavebindings,theclipsthatclampthefeettothe(metal)slatsandthereforepresumeapotentialhumanpresence.InEisen-Steig,wealsoseebindingsattachedtometal–inthiscaseareferencetotheironsmechanicsusetoclimbupanddowntelephonepoles.30However,Kiefertransformsthemotionalongtheverticalaxisintoahorizontalonehere,asiftheladderislaiddownonthegroundandnowformstheironpaththatdoesnotleadtoheavenbuttodestruction.

Eisen-Steig,writesMatthewBiro,showstheHolocaustasananonymoustriptodeath.31 Just like Jerusalem, its surfacepossessesan intrudingmateriality,butthiswall,withitsheavyimpastois,muchmorethaninJerusalem,brokenbyacoerciveperspectivethatconvergestoapointatthecentreofthehorizon.Thislay-outalsopullsusspectatorsthroughthewallintothebackground.

Nevertheless, Eisen-Steig is an ambiguous painting, one that confronts uswithourown‘hermeneuticundecidability’.Thetraintracksbendawayfrom

26 KieferinaconversationwithWimBeeren,3September1986:Beeren1986,p.20.27 Avariationonthiscanbefoundonpanelnumber7ofKiefer’s14-partcycleThe Secret Life

of Plants for Robert Fludd(GrotheCollection,Duisburg),wheretheleftandrighthalfofapairofslippers,splashedwithwhitepaint,pointupanddowninoppositedirections.

28 RamónLlull,ThomasdeMyésier,Electorium Parvum seu Breviculum,BadischeLandes-bibliothek,CodexSt.Peterperg.92.Seealso:Roob2006,p.250.

29 AnselmKiefer1987,p.143.30 KieferinaconversationwithMarkRosenthal,December1986.AnselmKiefer1987,p.143.31 Biro2003,p.133.


eachothertotheleftandtherightinthedistanceandKiefer,againasinJeru-salem,makes thesky lightup justabovethehorizonusinggold leaf.What’smore,olivebranchesprotrudefromthebindings.TheolivebranchhasbeenasymboloflifeandcontinuanceeversinceadovereleasedbyNoahreturnedtothearcwithanolivebranchas the first signof lifeonearthafter theFlood(Genesis,6–9).Seenasahorizontalaxisdisappearinginthedistance,wearestandingatthebeginningofarailwaythatpullsoureyestothehorrificendinthedistance.Seenasaverticalaxis,weareatthebottomoftheladderwhichmayleaduptosalvation,butonlyifweclimbitonerungatatime.Eveninthatcase,we,spectators,areclosertothefiresofhellthantothelightofheaven.

TheparadoxoftherepresentationoftheHolocaustinGermanyisthedutytorememberitandtheimpossibilityofdepictingit.Eisen-SteigandJerusalemgiverisetoconflictinginterpretations.Theconstantreversalofmotionalongtheverticalandthehorizontalaxesshowsthedichotomyofheavenandearthandgoodandevil inKiefer’sworkfromthatperiodmostclearly,butwithapessimistic undertone that shows the irreparable tear in the fabric of theworld.However,itisduringtheseveryyearsthatKieferbendshisworkawayfromscenesthatreflecttheburdenedGermanhistoryandtowardsartworksthatfocusonvariousaspectsofJewishmysticismandmythology.Inthisre-spectJerusalemalsoformsapivotalpoint.

Figure3.6 Anselm Kiefer, Eisen-Steig, 1986, emulsion, acrylic, gold leaf on canvas with two wrought climbing irons, olive branches and lead, 220 × 380 cm. formerlyPhiladelphia:ThePincusCollection, current whereabouts unknown.

72 weijers

Richter’s ‘Inability To Represent’

In 1995,GerhardRichterwas in JerusalemontheoccasionofhisexhibitionGerhard Richter – Paintings intheIsraelMuseum(19September–30Decem-ber1995).Thedayaftertheopening,hetookaphotoofthetownfromtheKingDavidHotel,facingthenortheast,lookingoutovertheYeminMoshedistricttowardstheChristianpartoftheoldcity,thewesternwallsofwhicharevisi-ble.32Onthephotoitselfthedateoftheshotisdisplayed:’95 9 20.Thatsameyear,Richterdecidedtousethephotofrom1995asthebasisoftwovirtuallyidentical paintings of slightly different sizes that were both given the title Jerusalem. I will limit myself to the larger work here, which is part of theFrieder-BurdacollectioninBaden-Baden.Ontheback,thenameanddatearedisplayed:‘RichterXII.1995’.

Comparedtothephoto,Richter’spainting ismoreschematicandtheco-lour,howeverrefined,hasamoreartificialfeeltoit.Inthepainting,thecityisalmosterased,bothliterallyandfiguratively(Fig.3.2).33Jerusalemisnothingbutanunspectacularshade,onethatdoesnotshowanyofitscomplicatedhis-tory.Richter’sJerusalemdoesnotgobacktoamythicalprimevalsource,buttoabanal,everydayphotoofaplacethatseemsjustasbanalandeveryday.Yet,just like Anselm Kiefer’s Jerusalem, Richter’s painting cannot be separatedfrom a long series of historical connections, a context in which it becomesmeaningful.ThefactthatRichterdoesnotfeeltheneedtomythologizeJerusa-lemagaindoesnotmeanthattohimthecityfallsoutsidetheshadowofhis-tory, and specifically that of the Shoah. Even in this earthly form, Richter’sJerusalemisaplaceburdenedwithmemories.

Ayearearlier,inJerusalem,Richterhadbeenawardedthe1994/5WolfPrizeinarts(painting).34‘Callingonhistoryandarthistory,[…]GerhardRichterin-troducestheproblemofrepresentationandtherepresentable,ofhistoryandpolitics, in thespecificcontextofpost-AuschwitzGermany,ofGermanybe-yondthewall’,accordingtothejudges’report.Inthisreport,Richter’sworkis

32 Macaulay2008,s.p.Thephoto isprinted inAtlas2006,panel617, inasection ‘VariousMotifs’.

33 Gerhard Richter Bilder 2008, pp. 142, 167. See also: http://www.gerhard-richter.com/search/?search=jerusalem%201995(accessedon28July2014).ThesmallerpaintingJeru-salem(CR825–1)madeinternationalnewswhenitfailedtosellattheguidepriceoffivetosevenmillionpoundssterlingataSotheby’sauctioninLondonon20October2008andwaswithdrawnfromtheauction.Itwassoldfor6.6milliondollarsbySotheby’son26June2012,however.

34 AP,‘GermanpainterGerhardRichtergetstheWolfPrize’,The Jerusalem Post,30November1994,p.3.Richterwasawardedtheprizeon29November1994andwasthesecondGer-manartisttowinit,afterAnselmKiefer,whohadreceiveditin1990.


called‘continuouslyambivalent’anditsstrengthisthatit‘rendersobsoletetheconstant references to the “endofpainting”, its inability to represent’.35Thequestion is how this ambivalence and the ‘inability to represent’ relate to abanalandeverydayviewofJerusalempaintedfromasnapshottakenfromahotelroom.

Landscapes (‘Für uns ist Alles leer’)

Richter’soeuvreislayeredandvaried.Overtheyearsithasmovedindifferentdirectionswhichcanexistalongsideoneanotherorcancrosseachother.Theartworksarerelatedtovarioustraditions,includingthatofabstraction,whicharereusedandunderminedinequalmeasure,butalsotoadiverserepertoireofsecond-handimagesthatcancomefromanywhere–frommassmedia,arthistoryandphotoshetookhimself.

ThecategoryinwhichJerusalemissometimesplacedinRichter’sseeminglyveryheterogeneousoeuvre is that of landscapeart.That is thecase inbothRichter’sclassificationofhisownwork36andinGerhard Richter Landscapes from1998,whichwascompiledbyDietmarElger.37YetwithinRichter’scom-pleteoeuvrethelandscapehasamodestplace,especiallywhencomparedtothelargenumberofabstractworks.

Duringtheyears1968–69,Richterthematizedthemotifofthelandscapeinaninterrelatedseriesofworksbasedonphotosof,amongstotherthings,theflatlandscapesurroundinghistownofresidence,Düsseldorf,asinLandschaft bei Hubbelrath(1969,Fig.3.7).Thesepaintingsmetwithsurpriseatthetime.Richterwasaccusedofanescapistreturntothefinearts,whichcouldhardlybetakenseriously,especiallyinthoseyearsofsocio-culturalandpoliticaltur-moil.38 However, these negative qualifications were reversed by others. It istruethatRichterhimself, inasomewhatobstinatestatement,explainedtheoriginofthesepaintingsfromaneedforsomethingbeautifultopaint39andlatersaidthatthelandscapesshowedhisdesire40,yetatthesametimethey

35 ‘The1994/95WolfFoundationPrizeinArts(Painting),http://www.wolffund.org.il/index.php?dir=site&page=winners&cs=417&language=eng(accessedon28August2013).

36 http://www.gerhard-richter.com(accessedon28July2014).37 GerardRichterLandscapes1998.Thebookwaspublishedontheoccasionoftheexhibi-

tionGerhard Richter. Landschaften,SprengelMuseumHannover,1998.In2011,asecondeditionappearedinwhichRichter’sJerusalemisnolongerincluded.

38 Godfrey2011,p.79.39 Richter,‘InterviewmitRolf-GunterDienst,1970’,in:GerardRichterText2008,p.56.40 Richter,‘Notizen1981’,in:GerardRichterText2008,p.102.

74 weijers

alsoexhibitedasubversiveironicqualitythatcouldrefutetheaccusationofthenostalgicescapefromthepresent.41Moreover,Richterhimselfcalledhislandscapes ‘first and foremost “untruthful”’.42 This untruthfulness does notonlylieintheprojectionofhumanemotionsontoanaturethatisitselfcom-pletelysoulless,butspecificallyinthenostalgiclongingsthatledhimtomakethesepaintingsinthelatesixties.Theanachronismofthesepaintingsisalsotheirunderminingquality,yetatthesametime,dreamsandlongingsareac-ceptabletoRichter,providingtheiruntruthfulnessvis-à-visreal life isrecog-nized.43

Notonlylandscapepaintingbuttheentireartofpaintingasacredibleartis-ticmediumwasundergreatpressureinavant-gardecirclesduringthoseyears.This led to a paradoxical iconoclasm amongst ambitious artists, in whichpainting only seemed possible if it simultaneously showed it was no longerpossible,orattheveryleastshowedawarenessofitsownimpossibility.44So

41 Bätschmann2011,p.64.42 ‘vorallem“verlogen”’.Richter,‘Notizen1986’,in:GerardRichterText2008,p.159.43 Bätschmann2011,p.66.44 Bätschmann2011,p.66.

Figure3.7 Gerhard Richter, LandschaftbeiHubbelrath, 1969, oil on canvas, 100 × 140 cm. Aachen:LudwigForumfürInternationaleKunst.


Richter’sfundamentalproblemwaspaintingwhileitcouldnolongerbedone,showingthis‘impossibility’inapainting,anddoingsowhileawarethatitwasnotgoingtogethimanywhere.Thiskindofattitudecanonlyleadtoa,perhapsmorerepressedthandirectlyvisible,criticalandreflectiveart,evenifitseemstodrawonthetraditionalgenreofthelandscape.

OskarBätschmanhaspointedoutthatRichter’s interest inthe landscapemore or less coincided with a renewed orientation on the Sublime and onnorthernEuropeanartintheartandarthistoriographyofthoseyears(anin-terest thatcomesto light inadifferentway inKiefer’swork).45Accordingly,Richter was sometimes called a ‘belated Caspar David Friedrich’ in art criti-cism.46

ButeventhoughRichteradoptedalay-outdevelopedbyFriedrich(anopen-endedlandscapewithoutrepoussoirs,withalowhorizon,ahigh,emptyskyaboveitandaforegroundwithoutaspecialfocus),hisapparentimitationofFriedrichismediatedbyaphoto.AccordingtoRichter,thismethod,whichisfundamentaltohim,iswhatmakesthepaintingmoreobjectiveand‘corrects’hisownview.Apartfromthat,thetechniqueofblurringdisturbsthepainting’sconnectiontothelandscapethatisrepresented.Thepaintedlandscapeishardtofixandoscillatesbetweenappearinganddisappearing.

Richter’sallegedconnectiontotheworkofCasparDavidFriedrichisam-biguous at the very least. In 1973, Richter said ‘dass wir die Romantik nichthinterunsgelassenhaben.[…]DieRomantikistbeiweitemnichterledigt.SowenigwiederFaschismus’.47Butstraightafter,whenaskedaboutthediffer-encebetweenhisworkandromanticism,headded:‘Wasmirfehlt,istdiegeis-tigeGrundlageaufderdieromantischeMalereiberuhte.Wirempfindennichtmehrdie“AllgegenwärtigkeitGottesinderNatur”.Fürunsistallesleer’.48

Richter’sLandschaft bei Hubbelrathshowsacontemporary,banallandscapeinwhicharain-drenchedasphaltroad,aroadsignandbollardshavedomesti-catednature.Thefactthatthepaintingisbasedonanamateursnapshotturnsitintoafragmentintimethatseemstonegateanyclaimtoeternity.Neverthe-less,Richter’slandscapes,howeverunspectacular,canbeseenasmediatorsofmoodsanddesiresintheirallusiontoromanticnotions,eventhoughcontinu-ityanddiscontinuitygohandinhandhereandassociationswithromanticismareimmediatelyundermined.49Richter’spainting Abendstimmung (1969),for

45 Bätschmann2011,p.64.Seealso:Rosenblum1961andRosenblum1975.46 WernerKrügerquotedin:Godfrey2011,p.79.47 Richter,‘InterviewmitIrmelineLebeer’,1973,in:GerardRichterText2008,p.82.48 Richter,‘InterviewmitIrmelineLebeer’,1973,in:GerardRichterText2008,p.82.49 Butin2011,pp.121–29.

76 weijers

example,recaptures,amongstotherthings,theromanceofeverydaydesiresastheyareplayedoutinanytravelbrochure.Inthatsenseitisareproductionofareproductionofaclichédmood,whetherornotburdenedwithextralayersofmeaningasitpervadesourcommoditycultureinanendlesscirculationofunreflected images. The use of travel brochures or amateur snapshots alsofreedRichter’slandscapesoftheartisticneedforpersonalexperienceandas-pectsoftheartofpaintinglikestyle,composition,or(self-)expression.Afterall,thephotohadalreadydonethatforhim.Inthatsense,Richter’sAbendstim-mungisjustasbanalashispaintingofatoiletroll(Klorolle,1965).Butthereismore.

JustasKiefer’sretakingofearlierphasesofpaintingduringthesixtieswasseenasananachronism,evenasregressive,aproposthecompellingcourseofarthistory,sowereRichter’slandscapes.Thetaboowasreinforcedbytheideathatthesekindsofpaintingshadperhapshadtheirlegitimatehistoricalmo-mentduringtheromanticperiodbutlater,especiallyduringthetimeofNa-tionalSocialism,hadbecometainted.Moreover,Richter’ssupposedrelationtoFriedrichwascolouredbytheparticularwayFriedrichhadbeenreceivedintheThird Reich, when some Nazis had seen him as a precursor of NationalSocialisticart.50

However,inRichter’semptinessitisthegulfthatseparatesGermanroman-ticismfromthepost-HolocausthistoryofRichterandGermanythatisshown.51Richter’slandscapesaredominatedbytheneedforavisualreflectiononhisownhistoricalsituationandthepossibilitiesthatareleftforpaintinginthisperiod.Hisartdestabilizestraditionalformsofrepresentationandtheinher-itedmeaningsattachedtothem.ThesubversiveandcontemporaryqualityofRichter’slandscapes,andthisalsoappliestohisJerusalem,entailsourinsecu-rityaboutwhatweactuallyseeinfrontofus.

WethinkwediscernFriedrich’sartinLandschaft bei Hubbelrathbecausewebendthelandscapetoanarthistoricaltradition,whichthenpervadedeverynookandcrannyofourmediaculture.ItisanimageconveyedbymediathatRichterdisplaysinhispaintings,andhislandscapes,ratherthanclaimingin-nerexperiencesofareligiousnature,showthecasual,incidentalandbanal-contemporary.Yetsimultaneously,culturalandpoliticallayersofmeaningthatenriched, or indeed burdened, the landscape earlier also sound through inRichter’spaintings.What’smore,inhisrepresentationofthelandscapehealso

50 Godfrey2011,p.79andp.89n.38.51 Godfrey2011,p.80.


touches upon nostalgic feelings of longing for what was lost.52 This makesRichter’slandscapesaformof‘Trauerarbeit’.53

Memory Images

Therelationshipbetweenthepaintingasanart-immanentaestheticalattemptdirectedatthemediumandtheartisticdebateononehand,andthenarrativespunaroundit,throughwhichthepaintingpositionsitselfinrelationtotheworldatlargeontheother,isoftencomplicatedinRichter’swork.Oneexam-ple is the way Richter uses his family album for a layered and multifacetedmemoryart.

WhenRichterleftEastGermanywithhiswifeMarianne(Ema)Eufingerin1961,healsolefthisfamilybehind.Hewouldneverseehisparentsagain.Ap-parentlyhedidtakephotosfromthefamilyalbum,becauseinthemid-sixtiesheusedseveralofthoseasthebasisofanumberofpaintings.Muchhasbeenwrittenaboutthesepaintings,especiallybecauseoverthecourseoftheyears,andthereforeinhindsight,aconnectionbetweentheseworks,whichhadini-tiallygoneunnoticed,wasspotted.Thestorythatpullstheseworkstogetherleadsusbacktoextremelynastyaspectsof life inGermanyunderNaziruleduringtheSecondWorldWar,butitisimportanttorealisethattotheuniniti-ated spectator – meaning virtually everyone around 1965 – these paintingsseemedtohavebeenderivedfromneutral,everydayprivatesnaps.

Fromthegroupoffiveorsixpaintings,Iselecttwohere:Onkel Rudi(1965,Fig. 3.8) and Tante Marianne (1965, Fig. 3.9). The narrative one could spinaroundthesephotoscanbesummarizedasfollows.54Onkel RudiisbasedonaphotoofthebrotherofRichter’smother,RudolfSchönfelder.Itwasanordi-naryphotographatthetimebutitwasmadespecialbythecourseofhistory.ItshowsaproudlysmilingyoungmaninhisWehrmachtofficer’suniform,short-lybeforehewaskilledin1944.Tante MarianneisthependantpaintingtoOnkel Rudi. In the painting she, 14 years old, is depicted with a baby: her nephewGerhardRichter.Whenshewasaboutnineteen,amentalillnessthatwasdiag-nosedas schizophreniamanifested itself,and in 1938shewasadmitted toa

52 Seealso:Butin1995.53 Germer1989,pp.51–53.Germer’sconceptappliestoRichter’sseriesofpaintingsabout

theBaader-Meinhofgroup,entitled18.October 1977from1988.54 The story of the connection between these works is described in many publications.

Unless indicatedotherwise, IhavemainlyusedGerardRichterMaler2002,pp. 161–84;GerhardRichterFortyYears2002,pp.40–41;Verhagen2011,pp.8–37.

78 weijers

psychiatricclinicwheresheunderwentforcedsterilisationthatsameyear,asaresultofadecisionbythecourt inDresden.InFebruary1945,shewasmur-deredaspartoftheNazi’seuthanasiaprogrammeforthementallyill.HerlifestoryandtheuniquehistoricalcircumstancesofherdeathcannotbededucedfromthepaintingRichtermadeofher,however.Thosecircumstancesonlyap-pearwhenweseethepaintinginrelationtoOnkel Rudiandoneortwootherworksthatareconsideredpartofthisgroup,andtheunderlyingstorythatcon-nectsthesepaintings.55

ThesefamilypaintingsareoftenseeninthelightofthecollectivesilenceoftheGermanpeopleaboutthewarandthemassdestructionofpeopleincon-centration camps and psychiatric institutions. This self-imposed forgetting

55 Familie(1964)andHerr Heyde(1965)belongtotheseotherworks.Familie am Meer(1965)wasnotincludeduntillater.

Figure3.8 Gerhard Richter, OnkelRudi, 1965, oil on canvas, 87 × 50 cm. Prague:TheCzechMuseumofFineArts,Lidicecollec-tion.


playsanimportantroleindivergentandsometimesconflictinginterpretationsofRichter’swork.Oneof thequestions is towhatextentRichter’spaintingshelpedbreakthepost-warsilence,allthemorebecausetheintrinsicconnec-tionoftheworkswasnotknowntoalargeraudienceatthetime.Withthesepaintings,RichterseemstosimultaneouslythematizetheNazieraandkeepitatadistance.Duringthesameyears,AdolfEichmann(in1961 inJerusalem)andguardsoftheconcentrationcampsinAuschwitz(in1963–1965inFrank-furt) went on trial, and the German press wrote detailed reports about themassdestructionoftheJewsforthefirsttime.

Richter’s‘realistic’paintingsarebasedonaspecifictypeofgiven,everydayreality:amateurphotosfromthefamilyalbumorphotosfrompapersandmag-azines.Byusingthemheplaysoutthedialecticbetweenadesiredaestheticactononehandandastatic,objectiveworldontheother.Whatisofspecialim-portanceinthisconnectionbetweenpaintingandphotographyistherelationtomemory.Aphotoshowsusarealitythatiselsewhereintimeandplaceandthusreplacesthecurrentobservationofreality.Livingrealitybecomeshistoryinthephoto,butatthesametimeamateurphotosareusedas‘memoryaids’inthebattleagainstthedestructionoftime.InthewordsofRolandBarthes:‘in-

Figure3.9 Gerhard Richter, TanteMarianne, 1965, oil on canvas, 120 × 130 cm. Taiwan:YageoFoundation.

80 weijers

stantaneousinspaceandpastintime,inphotographyanillogicallinkbetweenthenowandthethenisforged[…]the“hasbeen”encroachesonthe“isnow”’.56

Richtertransformsthedematerialized,commonplacelightimage,handeddownthroughtime,intoamaterialandhandcraftedobject,andbydoingsoreturnstheactualtimeandtheactualspacetothepainting.Thedialecticbe-tweentheplastic-pictorialpresenceofthepaintingandaniconic-photograph-icabsence,andthemovingbackandforthbetweenpresentandpast,presenceandabsenceinoneandthesameimage,leadstotheessenceofRichter’swork.

AlthoughemptinessandabsenceformthecoreofRichter’sart,thatwhichtheimagereferstostillresonatesinthepainting,eventhoughitsaccessibilityisaffected,asifaveilisloweredthatprecludesasharpfocus.Thepastissimul-taneouslybroughtcloserandblurredinthepainting.Thefactthattheseart-works are paintings is crucial, because with their special technique they doexactlywhataphotocannotdo:presentandpullbackatthesametime.Withthistechnique,Richtershowsprocessesofrememberingandforgetting,andthisiswhatmakeshispaintingsintomemoryimages.

Impossible Paintings

Germany’sdeepestwound,whichhasneverhealed,istheHolocaust.Richterconsidereddefiningthatalmostunfathomablemassmurderartisticallyinhispaintingsatleasttwiceinhislifeasanartist,butbothattemptsfailedduetotheimpossibilityofthetask.BothattemptscanbetracedinRichter’sAtlas.57The first, from 1967, is a group of photos depicting the persecution of theJews(arrests,publichumiliation,executionsandimagesfromconcentrationcamps)copiedfrombooks,someofwhichhavebeenblurredorcolouredin(Fig.3.10).58InAtlas, theseareimmediatelyfollowedbyanumberofpanels

56 Buchloh 2000, pp. 378–79, Originally in Roland Barthes, ‘Rhétorique de l’image’, Com-munications(1964),no.4,pp.40–51: ‘Ils’agitdoncd’unecatégorienouvelledel’espace-temps:localeimmédiateettemporelleantérieure;danslaphotographieilseproduituneconjonctionillogiqueentrel’icietl’autrefois’.

57 Richter’sAtlas istheever-expandingcollectionofphotos,newspaperandmagazinecut-tingsanddesignsketches,broughttogetheronpanels,whichservedaspartofthesourcematerialforRichter’sartworksandwhichhasalsobeenpublishedasabook.AlthoughtheimagesinRichter’sAtlasmoreorlessfollowhisdevelopmentovertheyears,theorderandarrangementofthepanels/pagesismorethematicthanstrictlychronological.

58 Thephotoatthetopleft(Fig.10,panel19),whichisrepeatedtwicemore,depictsJewishforced labourers, including Elie Wiesel, in concentration camp Buchenwald and wastakenfivedaysaftertheliberationbytheAmericans.


withphotos frompornographicmagazines.59Thesecondattempt isa largergroupofphotos,againof thepersecutionof theJews,whichhe includedinAtlas under the title ‘Holocaust’ in 1997 (panels 635–646). I believe that theproblemwiththeseattempts,andthereasontheyfailed,isthatRichter’sdia-lectic relation between appearing and disappearing cannot work here. Anyartistictransformationofthephotosisdoomedtofailbecausetheseimageswillnotbeerasedsoeasily.Whatthephotos fromtheconcentrationcampshaveincommonwiththepornographicimagesisthattheeyeiscaughtinandbytheobscene,whichkeepsforcingitselfonthespectatorthroughallartisticinterventions.Apparently,Richterdidnotfindawaytotransformtheneedtolooktoadifferentlevel.Hisstrategyof‘unpainting’,thatistosay,emphasizingthephysicalrealityofthepaintingbypushingbacktheimage,didnotworkhere.60 All that was left was repetition and with it the impossibility of aes-theticreflection.

Jerusalem (2)

Richter’ssoft-tonedandsunnyJerusalemtakesusinwithease–oratleastitseemsto.Oncloserexaminationitturnsoutthatthecitycannotbereachedby

59 Richter, Atlas, panels 16–20 (‘Photos from Books’, 1967) and 17–23 (‘Photos from Maga-zines’,1967).

60 Theconceptof‘unpainting’comesfromStorr2000,p.111.

Figure3.10 Gerhard Richter, Atlas, panels 19 and 20, ‘PhotosfromBooks’,1967.

82 weijers

ourgaze.Andeventhoughthepaintingisbasedonanordinaryphoto,datedtotheexactday,thatcapturedthefactualexistenceofthecityon20September1995,thepaintingdoesnotescapethe‘imaginedreality’,thewebofassocia-tions,desires,andmemoriesthathavebeenspunaroundtheactualJerusalemthroughthecenturies.61Threereligionshavedevelopeda ‘sacredgeography’therethathaseverythingtodowiththeancientphenomenonofrecognizingaplaceasthelocationwhereonemakescontactwithasupernatural,spiritualdomain.Jerusalemcannotbeseparatedfromthemysterious,heavenlyblissitrepresents.Eventhoughseveralreligionsdismisseachother’sfoundingstoriesas‘mere’myths,thecity’sholinessispre-eminentlybasedonthesemytholo-gies.ThesemythsarewhatmakethevariousreligiousclaimsonJerusalemsoirrationalandexplosiveandtheyarethesourceofdeepconflictsthatstillcon-tinueinourtime.

UnlikeKiefer’spainting, inwhichtheheavenlyandmythical Jerusalemisplayedoutandseparatedfromthegeographicalplace inmodern-dayIsrael,Richter’searthly,personallyviewedJerusalemseemstobestrippedofallthatisholyandsymbolic.However,thisdoesnotmeanthatJerusalemcanbecon-strued as a commentary on paintings that are overburdened with meaning,likeKiefer’s.EvenifRichter’sJerusalem trulyisstrippedofallthingstranscen-dental and spiritual, that does not mean that the discordant history of theplacecanbebanishedfromourmemoryandthatRichterhasnottakenitintoaccount.Justashisbanal,pseudo-romantic, ‘untruthful’Landschaft bei Hub-belrath can only exist artistically by letting several cultural and historicalmeaningsthatshapedthelandscapeinartinthepastsoundthroughinthepainting,Jerusalemcannotmakeusforgeteverythingthecitystandsforjustlikethat. Jerusalemisalsopartofahistoricalandnarrativecontextthatexistsoutsidethepainting.

Inthepost-warera,JewsregardJerusalemasthecitywith‘healingpower’:‘theyseeJewishJerusalemrisingphoenix-likefromtheashesofAuschwitz’.62Richterisaspecialoutsiderhere,however–notaperpetrator,butaGermanandraisedintheGDR,astatethatdidnotconsidertheNazierapartofitsownhistory and therefore excused itself from the moral duty of recognizing thestateofIsrael.Asidefromthat,hisJerusalemplacesitselfinanartisticcontextthatispartlyformedbyRichter’sartprecedingthispainting.Thepaintinglinksitselftootherworks,includingOnkel RudiandTante Marianne,whichshowusinanambivalentwaythatweareunabletopreventthetragediesthatensue

61 The concept of ‘imagined reality’, specifically related to Jerusalem, is borrowed fromArmstrong2005,p.xi.

62 Armstrong2005,p.x.


fromconvictions,ideasandreligion.Theydrawonactualeventsintheworld,eventhoughtheactofpaintingbringsthemintotherealmofart,wheretheyplaytheirowngame.

IfKiefer’sJerusalemsetsoffintoamythicalUrsprungszeit,Richter’sJerusa-lemshowsthedialecticofthethenandnow,thenowofDecember1995,whenhepaintedthetown.Ontheeveningof4November1995,primeministerYit-zhsakRabinwasmurderedinTelAvivbyYigalAmir,anultra-right,Jewishstu-dentwhoviolentlyopposedtheso-calledOsloAccordsthatRabinhadreachedearlierwiththePalestinianleaderYasserArafatin1993and1995.Basedonthepoliticsof‘landforpeace’,theseagreementsregulatedtherightofself-govern-mentofthePalestiniansinthePalestineterritories.Anotherpartoftheagree-mentwasthatArafat’sPLOwastorecognisethestateofIsrael’srighttoexistandrenounceitsdestruction.However,orthodoxJews,ultranationalists,andsupporters of the Likud Party saw the Palestinian territories as indissolublylinkedtotheGod-givenJewishland.ThemagazineNekuda,publishedbyset-tlers,wrotethatRabin’sgovernmentwasa‘governmentofblood’andthelead-erandfounderofthesecularright-wingpartyTsomet,RafulEitan,calledthecouncil of ministers ‘a bunch of judenrat quislings’.63 On 5 October 1995, amonth before Rabin’s murder, a demonstration was held against ‘Oslo II’, atwhichLikudpoliticiansBenjaminNetanyahuandArielSharonspoke,amongstothers.RabinwasrepresentedasaNazicollaboratoranddemonstratorscar-riedpostersonwhichhewasdepictedwearingaNaziuniform.64Inthispoliti-calturmoil,mythicalhistory,recentpastandcurrenteventsfellontopofeachother.

Beforetheendofthatyear,GerhardRichterpaintedJerusalem–afadingimageof longing,absence, incompletenessandfrustrationthat isasequallyincapableofholdingontothepastasitisoffocussingonthefuture.65

63 Quotedin:Shindler2008,p.261.64 TheposterscanbeseeninaYouTubeclipabouttheLikuddemonstration.(http://www.

youtube.com/watch?v=9MTx8O_1hzU, accessed on 28 August 2013). At 2:31 signs areshownonwhichArafatiscomparedtoHitlerandRabintoPétain(theFrenchFieldMar-shalwhocollaboratedwiththeGermansduringWorldWarIIandledapuppetregimeinVichyFrance).Between4:10and4:25thepostersdepictingRabininaNaziuniformareshown.TheseposterswerebasedonaphotoofHeinrichHimmler.

65 RichtertookhisphotoofJerusalemon20September1995.InGerhardRichter 2005,allpaintingsarementionedandshowninchronologicalorder.BothpaintingswiththetitleJerusalem (numbers 835–1 and 835–2) are part of the last six of a total of 61 paintingsRichtermadethatyear.Afterthatfollowedfoursmallerabstractworks.

84 weijers

Jerusalem & Jerusalem: diverging and converging practices of memory

BothAnselmKieferandGerhardRichter’spracticesofmemoryconsistofacontinuous selection, rearrangement and transformation of images. This iswhyaconstanttransferenceofmeaningtakesplaceintheworkofbothartists,makingitimpossibletofixthatworkinitsmeaning.Yetthewaythevariousworkswithinbothoeuvresrefertoeachotherfollowsacoursethatpreventsarbitrarinessandprovidesaconsistencybehindwhichacoherentconceptionofartishidden,developingindifferentdirectionsovertime.Itisclearthattheconceptions of both artists vary greatly. Kiefer’s Jerusalem consists of an al-mostoverwhelmingaccumulationofmaterialsandobjects,inpartmetaphori-callyused;Richter’smuchsmallerworkshowsnothingmorethanathinskinofoilpaint,inwhichhisdistinctiveartisticprocesses(fromphototopainting)lie.Kiefer’spaintingseemsoverburdenedwithpotentialmeaningsofagreatandmysticalweight,whileinRichter’sworksuchanotionof‘deep’meaningappearstohavebeendissolvedsofarthatitseemsemptytous–althoughin-abilityisalsothematizedinhiswork.

Nonetheless,bothartistsplayoutthedualismbetweenthebanalandthesublime.AlthoughKiefer’simaginationmaypossessahistoricalandmythical-theologicaldimensions,theimpulsebehinditistheGermanhistoryandiden-tity, which he and his contemporaries experienced as highly problematic.Moreover,hisworkisatleastasconcernedwiththeearthlyandhuman,eveninitshorrificforms,asitiswithapromiseofsalvation.

Richtermayseemmuchmorefocussedonthehereandnowandreflectoncurrenteventsinhisart,butwhiledoingsohealsooftenrefers,directlyorin-directly,toalongtraditionofculturalandreligiouspractices.AndatleastpartofhisworkdealswiththesameproblematicGermanhistoryandidentitythatwasalsoattherootofKiefer’sworkupuntilandwellintotheeighties.Bothartistsshowthattheyareambivalentabouttheworldandhowitcanberepre-sentedbyart,andthatambivalencereturnsinartworksfilledwithhermeneu-tic undecidability. Both apply, albeit in very different ways, a self-conscious,anachronisticpracticeof‘postmodern’historypaintingthatiscapableofkeep-inghistorypresentintheconsciousnessinacriticalandhistorically-specificway.

Intheirart,bothKieferandRichterworkwithaconceptof‘multidirection-almemory’,whichisbasedonthecomplicatedinterweavingofvariousprac-ticesofmemoryinastateofconstantreconstructionandinvaryingrelations


betweencollectivememoryandidentity,asadvocatedbyMichaelRothberg.66Memoryandidentityareneverpureandauthentic,neitheraretheyconnectedbyastraightline.Theirrelationshipissubjecttocontinuousreconstruction,whereby one’s own memories and identities interfere with those of others:‘Memoriesarenotownedbygroups,noraregroups“owned”bymemories’,ac-cordingtoRothberg.67Addtothistheahistoricalqualityofmemory–bringingtogetherthenandnow,thereandhere–andthememorypracticesandiden-tityconstructionsattachedtothemseemunstableandsubjecttoconstanten-richmentorevenreversal.KieferandRichterbothtakepartinthesekindsofmultiplememoryprocesses.Eventhoughtheirartisticideasandtheexecutionofthoseideasareverydifferent,theybothreflecteachother’spractices.Itisinthatreflectionthattheytakepartinthedynamictransferasitoccursinmem-orybetweenvariousplacesandtimes.Tobothartists,rememberingis‘makingpresent’, bringing a layered and traumatic past into a heterogeneous andchangingpresent.

BothKiefer’sJerusalemandRichter’sJerusalemareaboutcopingwithbe-reavement in a productive way rather than about passive melancholy. BothpaintingsarepartofchainsofreferenceswithinoeuvresthatdealwiththewayGermanycopeswiththeSecondWorldWar,especiallytheHolocaust,andtheinabilitytovisualizeitdirectly.InKiefer’scase,JerusalemtakesanewpositionwithinagroupofworksthatmakethetransitionfromanartthatisfocussedonGermanhistorytoonethattakesJewishhistoryandcultureasitssubject.Richter’sJerusalemplacestheimpossibilityofrememberingoppositethis.Ofcourseheremembers,buthedoesnotreallyknowwhatandhowandwhattodowithit,excepttoturnthatinabilityintoanartwork,andbydoingso,visual-izetheproblemofcontemporarypaintingwithouta‘deepermeaning’.

BothJerusalemsaretheresultoftheconflictbetweenrememberingandfor-gettingand the ‘re-remembering’ofa ruinedpast inan indirectway. In thepaintings,theunimaginableispartlypresentedbyusingthebanal,trivialandcliché, but in such a way that the result remains filled with doubt. Like allmemories,thesepaintingsarelayeredandsubjecttoconstantrearranging,be-causetheydonotonlyrefertoothermediathemselves,fromtourists’photosto historical images, but also because they in turn are media that activatememoryandcarryitsburden.

66 Rothberg2009,‘Introduction’,pp.1–29.67 Rothberg2009,p.5.

86 weijers

Bibliography

Adorno,TheodorW.,‘KulturkritikundGesellschaft’,in:TheodorW.Adorno,Gesammelte Schriften, Band 10.1: Kulturkritik und Gesellschaft I. Prismen, Ohne Leitbild,FrankfurtamMain1977,pp.11–30.

Anselm Kiefer,exhib.cat.,ed.byJürgenHarten,Düsseldorf:StädtischeKunsthalle/Paris:ARC|Musée d’Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris/Jerusalem: The Israel Museum,Düsseldorf1984.

Anselm Kiefer,exhib.cat.,ed.byMarkRosenthal,Chicago:TheArtInstituteofChicago/Philadelphia:ThePhiladelphiaMuseumofArt,Munich1987.

––––––,Bilder 1986 → 1980,exhib.cat.,Amsterdam:StedelijkMuseumAmsterdam1986.Arasse,Daniel,Anselm Kiefer,London2001.Armstrong,Karen,A History of Jerusalem. One City, Three Faiths,London2005.Assmann,Jan.Das kulturelle Gedächtnis. Schrift, Erinnerungund politische Identität in

frühen Hochkulturen,Munich1992(2005).AssociatedPress,‘GermanpainterGerhardRichtergetstheWolfPrize’,The Jerusalem

Post(30November1994).Bätschmann,Oskar,‘LandscapesatOneRemove’,in:Gerhard Richter Landscapes,ed.

byDietmarElger,Ostfildern2011,pp.57–69.Beeren,Wim,‘AnselmKiefer:recuperatievandegeschiedenis’,in:Anselm Kiefer. Bilder

1986 → 1980,exhib.cat.,Amsterdam:StedelijkMuseumAmsterdam1986.Biro,Matthew,‘RepresentationandEvent:AnselmKiefer,JosephBeuysandtheMemory

oftheHolocaust’,The Yale Journal of Criticism16,no.1(2003),pp.113–46.Buchloh,Benjamin,‘FiguresofAuthority,CiphersofRegression:NotesontheReturn

ofRepresentationinEuropeanPainting’,October16(1981),pp.39–68.––––––,‘ANoteonGerhardRichter’sOctober18,1977’,October48(1989),pp.88–109.––––––, ‘DividedMemoryandPost-TraditionalIdentity:GerhardRichter’sWorkof

Mourning’,October75(1996),pp.60–82.––––––,‘Readymade,Photography,andPaintinginthePaintingofGerhardRichter’,in:

BenjaminBuchloh,Neo-Avantgarde and Culture Industry. Essays on European and American Art from 1955 to 1975,CambridgeMAandLondon2000,pp.365–403.

Butin,Hubertus,‘DieunromantischeRomantikGerhardRichters’,in:Ernste Spiele. Der Geist der Romantik in der deutsche Kunst 1790–1990,exhib.cat.,Munich:HausderKunst1995,pp.454–56.

––––––,‘RomanticLandscapesas“Cuckoo’sEggs”’,in:Gerhard Richter Landscapes,ed.byDietmarElger,Ostfildern2011,pp.121–29.

Fuchs,Rudi,‘Kiefermalt’,in:Anselm Kiefer. Verbrennen, Verholzen, Versenken, Versanden,exhib. cat., ed. by Klaus Gallwitz,Venice: Deutscher Pavillon, BiennaleVenice,Stuttgart1980,pp.57–62.


Gerhard Richter. Bilder aus privaten Sammlungen, exhib. cat., ed. by Götz Adriani,Duisburg:MKM,MuseumKüppersmühlefürModerneKunst2008.

Gerhard Richter. Forty Years of Painting,exhib.cat.,byRobertStorr,NewYork:TheMuseumofModernArt2002.

Gerhard Richter Landscapes,ed.byDietmarElger,Ostfildern-Ruit1998.Gerhard Richter Landscapes,ed.byDietmarElger,Ostfildern2011.Gerhard Richter, Maler,ed.byDietmarElger,Cologne2002.Gerhard Richter. Text 1961 bis 2007. Schriften, Interviews, Briefe,ed.byDietmarElgerand

HansUlrichObrist,Cologne2008.Germer,Stefan,‘UngebeteneErinnerung’,in:Gerhard Richter 18. Oktober 1977,exhib.cat.,

Krefeld: Museum Haus Esters/Frankfurt am Main: Portikus, Cologne 1989, pp.51–53.

Godfrey,Mark,‘DamagedLandscapes’,in:Gerhard Richter. Panorama,exhib.cat.,ed.byMarkGodfreyetal.,London:TateModern2011,pp.73–89.

Huyssen,Andreas, ‘AnselmKiefer:TheTerrorofHistory, theTemptationofMyth’,October48(1989),pp.25–45.

Kipphoff,Petra,‘DieLustanderAngst–derDeutscheHolzweg’,Die Zeit,6.6.1980,p.42.Lauterwein,Andréa,Anselm Kiefer/Paul Celan. Myth, Mourning and Memory, transl.by

DavidH.Wilson,London2007.Levi,Primo,‘TheMemoryoftheOffence’,in:PrimoLevi,The Drowned and the Saved,

transl.byRaymondRosenthal,London1989,pp.11–21.Macaulay,Michael, ‘MasteringtheMedium’,brochureSotheby’sContemporaryArt,

LondonSeptember/October2008.Richter,Gerhard,Atlas,ed.byHelmutFriedel,MunichandCologne2006.––––––,Gerhard Richter. Catalogue Raisonné 1993–2004,ed.byAnetteKruszynskiand

the Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen, Düsseldorf: K20 KunstsammlungNordrhein-Westfalen2005.

––––––,http://www.gerhard-richter.com(accessedon28July2014).Roob,Alexander,Alchemy and Mysticism. The Hermetic Museum,Cologne2006.Rosenblum,Robert,‘TheAbstractSublime’,Art News(October1961),pp.38–41.––––––, Modern Painting and the Northern Romantic Tradition. Friedrich to Rothko,

London1975.Rothberg,Michael,Multidirectional Memory. Remembering the Holocaust in the Age of

Decolonization,StanfordCA2009.Saltzman,Lisa,Anselm Kiefer and Art after Auschwitz,Cambridge1999.Shindler,Colin,A History of Modern Israel,Cambridge2008.Verhagen,Erik,‘GerhardRichtersFamilienbilder’,in:Gerhard Richter. Fotografie und

Malerei – Malerie als Fotografie. Acht Texte zu Gerhard Richters Medienstrategie,ed.byDietmarElgerandKerstinKüster,Cologne2011,pp.9–37.

88 Goudeau

Chapter4

Ezekiel for Solomon The Temple of Jerusalem in Seventeenth-century Leiden and the Case of Cocceius

Jeroen Goudeau

TheTempleofJerusalem,oneofthemostimportantbuildingsitesforJews,Christians,andMuslims,hasbeenapermanenttopicoftheological,historical,andpoliticaldiscourse.TheTempleisalsooneofthemostarchetypicalbuild-ingsinthehistoryofarchitecture.1Itwasnotjustonebuildingbutreferredtovarioussuccessivebuildingcomplexes,oneofwhichwasseenonlyinavisionbytheprophetEzekiel.SpeakingoftheTempleingeneralisproblematic.Afteranecessarilylapidaryoverviewofsomehistoricaldata,inthiscontributionthecontextofthediscussionwillbelimitedtotheworkofageographicallydelin-eated group of scholars who offered an interpretation of theTemple at oneparticular period in time. In order to grasp some of the peculiarities of themultifaceted phenomenon, this paper will concentrate on the situation inLeideninthesecondhalfoftheseventeenthcentury,fromanarchitectural-historicalpointofview.AspecialfocuswillbeonJohannesCocceius(1603–69)andhisinterpretationoftheTempleasdescribedinEzekiel’sprophecy.IttookthisverboseLeidentheologianonlyafewwordstoexplaintheTemplevisionofEzekiel:‘ItisclearthatthissightwasshownforthesolaceoftheIsraelites,sothatthosewhohavenothad,norhadseentheTemple,whilebeholdingthisTemple, would contemplate on the meaning of this sight’.2 Along with hisphilological,emblematic studyof theTemple,CocceiuspresentedanactualreconstructionoftheTempleascontemporaryarchitecture.Hisattemptcanbeunderstoodasbiblicalcriticismbyvisualmeans,inwhichtextandimageareclosely intertwined.TheengravingsoftheTemplethataccompaniedhis

1 Muchhasbeenwrittenon(aspectsof)theTemple.Arecentgeneralintroduction:Goldhill2004;onthesiteoftheTemplewithreferencestotheactualsituation:Schanks2007.Asthiscontributionconcentratesonarchitecture,seeespecially:Hermann1967;Busink1970–80;Rosenau1979;Vogelsang1981;VanPelt1984;Ramirez1991;VonNaredi-Rainer1994.

2 ‘’tIsklaar,datditgesichtevertoondgeweestistotvertroostingevandenIsraeliten,opdatdie,diegeentempelhaddennogsagen,doorhetbeschouwenvandesentempelondertusschensigsoudenbesighoudenenoverdenken,watditgesigtezoudekunnenbetekenen’.Cocceius1691,p.641.

© JeroenGoudeau,2014 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_006This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.



89EzekielForSolomon

textcanbeunderstoodaspartofanarchitecturaldebate,paralleltotheologyandbiblicalchronology,conductedonanotherlevelandwithothermeans,butwithinthesamecontextofcriticism.

Biblical Architecture

ThequestionoftheTemplecanberegardedascloselyconnectedtothehistoryofthePeopleoftheBookasawhole–toJerusalemaswellastotheExileandDiaspora.Inthecourseoftheunsettledtimes,theappearanceoftheTemple,or,tobemoreprecise,ofthesuccessiveTemples,evolvedfundamentally,asdidthemeaning.Inordertocontextualizetheseventeenth-centuryperspective,afewdatathatplayedaroleinthedebatesofthateraneedtobediscussed.

TheoriginalTempleofJerusalemonMountMoriawouldhavebeenbuilt(according to modern knowledge around 961 BCE) by King Solomon as perGod’sowninstructionstoKingDavid.Theso-calledfirstSecondTemplewaserectedonthesamespot,onthefoundationsofthisearliestconstruction.Therebuildingwasexecuted(between536–515BCE)aftertheJewishpeoplehadreturnedfromtheirExileinBabylon.Thefirstbuildinghadbeendestroyed(in586BCE)whenKingNebuchadnezzartookJerusalem.Therebuildingof theTemple took place under Judah’s governor Zerubbabel, during Darius reign,andisalsoreferredtoasTempleofZerubbabel.ThissecondconstructionwasonceagainpartlyreplacedandwasexpandedtotwiceitssizeunderRomanrulebyKingHerod(startedin20BCEandonlycompletedafterhisdeath).3Thelattercomplex,alsoreferredtoastheSecondTemple,wasfinallydestroyedbytheRomancommanderandfutureemperorTitusin70CE.Thesestructuresreceivedavirtualcounterpart:thefutureTempleinthevisionoftheprophetEzekiel.ChronologicallyEzekiel’swastheseconddocumentedTemple,envi-sionedduringtheCaptivity(around593–568BCE).Ontheonehand,Ezekiel’sversionwasaprophecyofaTempleyettocomebut,ontheotherhand,thedescriptionclearlyrecalledSolomon’sdivineandarchetypicalexampleinJe-rusalem.4

AlltheseTemplesandtheirsupposedhistoricalexistencewereknownfromtexts.InthelatesixteenthandseventeenthcenturytheTemplearousednewinterest, as did other biblical physical structures and locations, such as the

3 Seee.g.:Edelman2005.4 TheinterpretationofEzekiel’svisionaryTempleisanongoingdebate.Thisisalsothecase

withthebiblicalTempledescriptions.Seeforinstance:McCormick2002.

90 Goudeau

TowerofBabel,Noah’sArk,andtheGardenofEden.5Prelates,princes,biblicalscholarsandarchitectsbegantostudyanewtheTempleof JerusalemintheOldTestament,andinadditiontothatintheJewishrabbinicalcommentaries.ThemoststudiedpassageswereinthehistoricalBiblebooksIKings6and7,IIChronicles3,andtheMishnahpassagesMiddothIIandIV.BiblicalscholarsalsoconsultedtheaccountoftheTemplebytheRomano-JewishhistorianFla-viusJosephusinAntiquities of the Jews(ca.94CE)andthechronicleofthefinaldestruction of Jerusalem and theTemple in 70 CE in The Jewish War (ca. 75CE).6Ezekiel’sTemplevisionwasdescribedinchapters40–48ofhisprophecy.ThemainreferencetotheoriginalTabernacle, theheartof theTemple,wasfound in Exodus 25–31 and 35–40. Josephus’s report was about the Templebuildinghehadactuallyseen,whereasEzekielsawsomethingthatmightcomeinthefuture.Thentherewasalsoanotherview–thatoftheendoftime,be-yondEzekielandbeyondtheTemple.TheNewTestamentendswithpagesofJohn’sApocalypseinwhichtheNewJerusalemisimaginedinchapter21.Thiswasagainasymbolicviewbutwithmentionofexact formalcharacteristicsthatinsomerespectswereconsideredtoresemblethoseofSolomon’sTemple.

Thesetextscontainamixof references tocharacteristicsand fairlyexactmeasurementsoftheTemplecomplex.Today,scholarsemphasizethediffer-encesincharacter,age,andaimoftheaccounts,whileearlymodernbiblicalcriticsandtheologiansweremainlyconcernedwiththefactthatmultipledatainthetextsvary.Scholarlydebatewasdevotedtothereconciliationofalltheapparentlyincompatibleindications,aswellastothequestionofhowtofittheinconsistenciesintoonetheologicalnarrative.IntheirmeticulousdiscussionoftheexactphysicalqualitiesofthevariousTempledescriptionsandthespa-tialrelationshipsbetweenthebuildingsandtheirsurroundings,theearlymod-ernscholarsdifferedessentiallyfromtheirmedievalpredecessors.7

Onewayofarrangingallthedirectionsintoameaningfulwholewastore-constructtheverbalTemplevisually–inscaleddrawingsorbywayofawell-proportionedmodel.Hereartists,architectsandarchitecturaltheoristsbecameinvolved.They not only translated words into images but in addition trans-ferred certain characteristics of theTemple to new buildings, and – in partunintentionally–transferredcharacteristicsofcontemporaryarchitecturetotheTemple.Forthefirsttimevisualizationwasmorethanschematic,allegori-calortypologicalinterpretation–itenteredthedomainofthearchitect.

5 See:BennetandMandelbrote1998.6 FlaviusJosephus, Antiquities of the Jews, esp.VIII61–129,XI8–17,57–83,XV380–424;idem,

The Jewish War, esp.V136–247,VI249–356.NeitherJosephus’sapparentideologicalpointofview,northedependabilityofhisaccountwerequestionedatthetime.

7 Seee.g.:Delano-Smith2012,pp.42–44.

91EzekielForSolomon

Protestant Tendencies

HavingbeendestroyedinJerusalemandprojectedasafuturestate,theTemplecould just be detached symbolically from its original context and be trans-ferredtoothertimesandotherplaces.8Moreover,withregardtotheTemple,inearlymodernEuropethetravelreportsfromtheHolyCitywereconsideredfar less reliable than the accounts in the Bible, because after Josephus theycouldonlydescribewhatwasnolongerthere,andeventheninfragmentarydetail.Inthesixteenth,butmainlyintheseventeenthcentury,inthewakeofthenewbiblicalcriticism,thethemeofreconstructingtheTemplegainedim-portance.DespitetheirreconcilabledifferencesbetweentheRomanCatholicChurchandProtestantismandthevehementcontroversiesbetweenthetwo,theTemplereceivedagreatdealofscholarlyattentionfrombothsides.TheCatholiccountrieskepttheir focusprimarilyonCatholicsources.9TwoveryinfluentialreconstructionsoftheTemplewereconceivedattheSpanishcourtofKingPhilipII(1527–98).ThefirstwastheresultoftherationalapproachofthelibrarianoftheEscorialBenitoAriasMontanus(1527–98),whostudiedthehistoricallysuccessiveTempleconstructions.Insharpcontrasttothis,theJe-suitJuanBattistaVillalpando(1552–08)developedacomprehensiveandverydetailedclassicistreconstructionincollaborationwithhiscolleagueJerónimoPrado (1547–95). This reconstruction was primarily based on the propheticTempleofEzekiel.10PublishedonlyafterthedeathofPhilipIIandPrado,inthreevolumesbetween1596an1605,itwasVillalpando’simpressivelyvisual-izedarchitecturethatwoulddefinitelycombinethereconstructionaccordingtoEzekiel’svisionwiththenotionofSolomon’sfirstTemple.

WhiletheweightofVillalpando’sintimidatingscholarlyreconstructionhadalmostsettledthediscussioninCatholiccirclesintheSouth,withFranceinasomewhatindefinitemiddleposition,hisworkchallengedthestudiesintheNorth.UnlikeItalyandSpain,thereligiouslyfragmentedterritoriesofNorth-ernEurope tookmany differentavailableTemple reconstructionsand inter-pretationsintoconsideration.YeteventherethemonumentalworkbyPradoandVillalpandowouldbecomethebenchmarkofTempleliterature,especiallyintheProtestantstatesofGermanyandintheDutchRepublic.Itdidnotmat-ter that the Northern Netherlands had freed themselves from the Spanish

8 OnthetranslocationofholysitessuchastheHolySepulchre,seeforexamplethecontri-butionbyBramdeKlerckinthisvolume.

9 OfcoursethisholdsforthemorestrictlyCatholictheologicalcircles.AcounterexampleistheJewishphysicianAbrahambenDavidPortaleone(1542–1612).See:Miletto2004.

10 Prado-Villalpando1596–1705;Ramirez1991.

92 Goudeau

crownonlyshortlybefore.WhatisstrikingisthatinthecountriesoftheRefor-mationthescholarlydebateontheTemplewasbothbroadandintense.

IntheDutchRepublic,theTempleappearstobeetchedinthememoryoftheologians,poets,playwrights,paintersandarchitectsalike.Thepainter-ar-chitectSalomondeBray(1597–1664)soughttheoriginofarchitectureinGod’sinstructionstoSolomon,justasVillalpandohaddonepreviously.11TheJewishscholarandrabbi,JacobJehudaLeon(1602–75)fromMiddelburgmadeanal-mostobsessivestudyofSolomon’sarchitecture,earninghimselfthenickname‘Templo’.HeconstructedalargewoodenscalemodelwithwhichhetravelledroundasfarasLondonandpublishedaseriesofengravingsanddescriptionsof theTempleMount inJerusalembasedonVillalpandoandJewishsourcessuchasMiddoth.12ThecirclearoundtheStadtholder’ssecretaryanderuditediplomatConstantijnHuygens(1596–1687)tookakeeninterestinthesubjectaswell,especiallyinrelationtoarchitecture.Inhisdiscussionswiththearchi-tectJacobvanCampen(1596–1657)onthecharacteristicsandimportanceofthenewclassicistarchitecture,HuygensincludedtheTemplereconstructionsbyVillalpandoandtheFrenchmanFrançoisVatable(d1547).In1637,HuygensobtainedafinecopyofVillalpando’sEzekielcommentaryhimself(Fig.4.1).13VanCampenmusthavebecomegreatlyfascinatedbytheTemple,asheinte-gratedaspectsoftheTempleinhisownarchitecture.HemadeexplicitformalreferencestotheTemplewith,forinstance,theimposingoutwardcurvingbut-tresses(derivedfromVillalpando’sengravings),ornamentssuchasthepome-granate (common emblems of the Resurrection and the community of thefaithful)and,lessobvious,theTempledimensionsthatwerederivedfromthescatteredBiblepassages.AfineexampleistheNieuweKerkinHaarlem(1645–47),whichcontainsalltheseelements,bothontheexteriorandtheinterior.14The magistral Portuguese Synagogue of Amsterdam of 1671–74 designed byEliasBouman(1635–86)isanotherattempttointegratetheTempleintoDutchClassicistarchitecture.15VanCampenwentfurtherthanapplyingtheTempletohischurcharchitecture.HeevenusedthelesscommonPalaceofSolomonasamodelfortheprestigiousAmsterdamTownHall.16Boththearchitectural

11 [DeBray]1631,p.2.12 Between1642and1675ninedifferenteditionsappearedinsevenlanguages.See:Offen-

berg1976;Offenberg1993;Offenberg2004.13 On Huygens and Villalpando, see: Ottenheym 1999, pp. 94–95; Vlaardingerbroek 2011,

pp. 71–72. Huygens’s own copy can be identified in the library of Radboud UniversityNijmegen,sign.ODa30.Thethreefrontispiecescontainhisautograph:‘Constanter’.

14 Ozinga1929,pp.59–66;VanderLinden1990.15 PortugeseSynagoge2012,pp.55–72.16 Vlaardingerbroek2011,pp.68–76.

93EzekielForSolomon

and intellectual references to biblical architecture in which Van CampenmixedSolomon’sandEzekiel’sTemple–asdidmanyothers–hadastrongin-fluence on the most important architects of Dutch Classicism around him,suchasPieterPost,DaniëlStalpaert,AdriaanDortsmanand,notleast,Arent

Figure4.1 Hieronymus Prado and Juan Battista Villalpando, InEzechielemExplanationes[...] (Rome 1596-1604), vol. 3 Juan Battista Villalpando, ApparatvsVrbisAcTempliHierosolymitani[...], Rome 1604, title page with autograph of Constantijn Huygens, engraving. Nijmegen:RadboudUniversityLibrary.

94 Goudeau

van ’s-Gravesande (ca. 1610–62). After his training with Van Campen, Van’s-GravesandewastobecomecityarchitectofLeiden.17

The Rapenburg Constellation

ForsometimetheheartlandofTemplestudyintheDutchRepublicmusthavebeenLeiden.TheDutchCalvinisttraditionofHebrewandrabbinicalstudiesrootedinandaroundthenewstate’sfirstuniversity,whichwasfoundedinthissecondlargestcityoftheRepublic.Liketheinterestinmoreorlessmodernclassicalphilology ingeneral, the interest inHebrewalsostarted therewithJosephJustusScaliger(1540–1609).18ItwasfurtherestablishedbytheHebraistJohannesDrusiusSen.,whosoonleftLeidenin1584forapositioninFraneker.ThisbrandnewuniversitythenwouldbecomethesecondcentreofHebrewstudies.InLeidenthejuristandantiquarianPetrusCunaeus(1586–1638)setastandardwithhisDe Republica Hebræorum,a three-volumestudyonJewishpolityintheOldTestament,whichappearedin1617andranthroughfourteenreprintsaswellastranslationsinDutch,French,andEnglish.19Thehighlyde-tailedtreatmentoftheoldlegislationandofthemanyJewishcustoms,aswellasthoseofancientgentiles,wasillustratedbyevocativeprints.

Withregardtoarchitecture,Cunaeus’sgroundplanofJerusalem,forwhichhehadlookedcloselyatVillalpando’sexample,isofinterest(Fig.4.2).Their-regular city consists of more or less square housing blocks that have beenadaptedtothehillyterrain.Thepublic,religiousandstatebuildingsareplacedonsquaresand,whatisessential,theyallhaveelementarygeometricvolumes.David’sPalaceissituatedinthecentreofthecircularfortressofhiscity,where-asthebuildingitselfisbuiltonasquareplan.Thesquareorrectangulargroundformwithcubiccornerpavilionsisthebasictypefornearlyalltheotherlargestructures,liketheFortressofAntiochus,thePalaceofAnnasandtheHouseofPilatus.ThespecialshapeofthePalaceofSolomonisremarkable,withitsdou-bleinnercourtsthatwouldbecometheexampleforVanCampen’sAmsterdamTownHall.20Semicircularandellipticaltheatresarealsopresent,referringtotheRomanperiod.Thecityisdominatedhowever,bythecubicTemplemoun-tainandthesquareTemplecomplexontopofit,consistingofthreeconcentriccourtswiththeinnercourtagaindividedinnineinnersquares.Cunaeuswas

17 Steenmeijer2005.18 Katchen1984,esp.partI.19 IhaveconsultedtheDutcheditionbyWillemGoeree:Cunaeus1682–83.20 FirstobservedbyGuidoSteenmeijer.See:Vlaardingerbroek2011,p.254n.190.

95EzekielForSolomon

farfromoriginalwiththisplanofJerusalem.Indeedthisrepresentation,estab-lishedbyVillalpando,canbesaidtobetheiconicimageoftheHolyCityduringtheseventeenthcentury.What isperhapsmost interesting inthiscontext isthattheplancanbetakenasasamplesheetfor(Dutch)classicistarchitecturaltypesandtownplanning.Inacomplexreciprocity,thisimageontheonehandwastheproductofacontemporaryclassicistideal,whileontheotherhandthisarchitecture, once projected on the buildings of the Holy City, provided au-thoritativetypeexamples for thearchitectureof its time.Thoughfrequentlyoccurringinarchitecturalhistory,theforceofthisvisualrhetoricalmechanisminthespreadoftheclassicalidealintheDutchRepublicmustnotbeunderes-timated.

TheTempleandtheappealofbiblicalarchitecturefounditsexpressioninthedesignofrealbuildings.TheLeidencityarchitectArentvan’s-Gravesandedrew inspiration from the Temple for the measurements of the Marekerk(1639–48):100by100(by100)feet,aproportionJacobJehudaLeonhadgiven

Figure4.2 Petrus Cunaeus, DeRepublykDerHebreeen[...], Amsterdam 1682, folded and interpaged map of Jerusalem in bird’s-eye view, after Villalpando, engraving. TilburgUniversityLibrary.

96 Goudeau

before.21InthefaçadeofthealmshousesoftheHofjevanBrouchoven(1639–41),Van’s-GravesandemadereferencetothefrontispieceofVillalpando’ssec-ond volume of Ezekiel’s Temple vision.22 In this case the source was not aparticularreconstructedancientbuilding,buttheclassicist imaginaryarchi-tectureofatitlepage–apurelyintellectualcitation.

CunaeusandhisgenerationhadonlystartedadiscussionthatalsospreadtoFranekerandAmsterdam.Nevertheless,theCalvinistscholarlydiscussioncul-minated in Leiden with the two most influential Christian Hebraists of thetime,ConstantijnL’EmpereurandJohannesCocceius.ConstantijnL’EmpereurvanOppyck(1591–1648)becameprofessorofHebrewstudiesin1627.HemetVan’s-GravesandewhentheybothbecameinvolvedintheprojectoftheBib-liothecaThysiana(1654–57)atLeyden’smostprominentcanaltheRapenburg.23In1630,L’EmpereurpublishedthefirstLatintranslationoftheMishnahtrea-tiseMiddoth.24Thechoiceforthistextisnotclearandevenraisessomeques-tions. Moreover, it cannot be explained by L’Empereur’s official universitycommitmenttorefuterabbinicalexegesis(adversus judæos).25ThetextdealsmainlywiththeproportionsoftheTemple–Middothmeans‘measurements’–andthereforeisatsomedistancefromtheologicalkeyproblemsofthetimeorofrabbinicstudiesingeneral.However,thebookdidcomplementorcorrectknowninformationaboutthedimensionsoftheTemplegivenintheOldTes-tament.L’EmpereurmentionsinhisprefacetothebookthathisclosefriendsDanielHeinsiusandGerardJohannesVossiusinLeidenhadencouragedhimtocarryoutthisenterprise.ThebookwasdedicatedtotheStatesofHolland,whichsuggeststhatitfilledacertainneed,oratleastthattherewasanintel-lectualaudienceforit.MaybetheaudiencewasindeedtheStadtholder’scourtortheHuygenscircle.26Moreimportantisthephenomenonthatonmanyoc-casionsandinart,politicsandtheologythenewDutchstatewasadvertisedastheNewIsrael–theconceptofNeerlands Israel.27

21 Steenmeijer2005,pp.182–87,esp.p.183.22 Steenmeijer2005,pp.217–21.Pradohaddiedin1595soVillalpandodeliveredthelasttwo

volumesofthestudyalone.23 Steenmeijer2005,pp.255–56.24 L’Empereur1630;VanRooden1985,pp.137–40.25 VanRooden1985,p.174.26 L’EmpereurknewHuygensfromadistanceandoncewrotetohim,remindinghimthat

theyhadcommonfamilyties.See:VanRooden1985,pp.231–32.27 Bisschop1993;VanCampen2006,passim.Dunkelgrün2009providesaneruditeoverview

ofinterpretationsofthis‘abundanceofHebraicimagery,OldTestamentthemes,biblicalanalogies,andotherexpressionsofIsraeliteself-perceptioninDutchGoldenAgeculture’.

97EzekielForSolomon

InLeiden,theTemplethemeprovedtobefarmorethananincidentalwhimorprivatematterofisolatedtheorists.Thepeopleinvolvedcamefromdifferentdirectionsandoperatedmoreorlessindependentlyontheirownprojects,butgeographicallytheywereconcentratedaroundasmallspotinLeiden,theRap-enburg.Theuniversitywaslocatedaroundthiscanal,aswereseveralpublish-inghouseslikeElsevier’s.Nearlyalltheprofessorsofimportancelivedonornearthiscentreoflearning.Atthesametimeastheriseoftheintellectualandsocial status around the canal, the townscape of this quarter developed ata brisk pace. Its medieval character acquired a new décor, an architectureaccording to the latest classicist standards with the ‘learned’ ionic pilasterfaçades. Mathematician and private lecturer Nicolaus Goldmann (1611–65)taughtarchitectureandfortificationinablockofhousesattheRapenburg.28Bynowitwillcomeasnosurprisethatthecomprehensiveandhighlysystem-aticarchitecturaltheoryhedevelopedwasultimatelyfoundedontheTemple.HismainsourcewasEzekiel’svision,andhismainexampleVillalpando.Onthiscanal,also,livedthesecondrenownedHebraistoftheera,JohannesCoc-ceius.29

Under the Spell of Ezekiel

LikeL’Empereur,thetheologianJohannesCocceius(KochorCock;1603–69)wasborninBremen.30HewastrainedasaphilologistinLatinandGreek,aswellasinHebrewandArabic.InHamburghewastaughtbyarabbi.In1626hemovedtoFranekerwherehecameundertheinfluenceoftheHebraistSixtinusAmama, who by that time had succeeded Drusius. There Cocceius skilfullytranslatedSanhedrinandMakkot,twotreatisesfromtheMishnah,intoLatin,an achievement that won the admiration of Hugo Grotius, Heinsius andL’Empereur.31Eventually, in1650,his famebroughthimtoLeiden,wherehebecameprofessoroftheology.Therehefurtherdevelopedhisfederaltheology,claimingacovenantofgracetoalltrueChristians.32Althoughafamoustheo-logian, it was for his Hebrew Lexicon that he became renowned after his

28 Goudeau2005.GoldmannlivedintheHofvanZessen,i.e.Rapenburg28F,nowtheRijks-museumvanOudheden.

29 ‘Coccejus,professor,weduweenerven,Noord-Rapenburg’.Leidse Lasten 1674.30 OnCocceius:VanAsselt1997;VanAsselt2001[a]and[b].InDutchhisnameiswrittenas

Coccejus,inLatinasCocceiusorCoccejus.31 Cocceius1629.32 Developedinhismainpublication:Summa Doctrinæ de Fœdere & Testamento Dei expli-

cata,Amsterdam1648.

98 Goudeau

death.33TheCountessPalatineMariaEleonoreofBrandenburg(1642–88)atKaiserslauternurgedhimtothisimmenseproject;hewasabletofinishitonlyshortlybeforehisdeathin1669.Hisstrongphilologicalinclinationandhisal-mostexclusivefocusontheBible,combinedwithhismoreorlesspropheticexegesis,broughthimattheendofhislifetodelveintothevisionofEzekiel.34

ThebookProphetia Ezechielis, Cum CommentarioappearedinAmsterdamin1669.Itconsistsofthreeparts:forty-eightrichlyannotatedchaptersoftheBible book (‘Ezechiel Propheta’, 372 pp.); an elaborate commentary on thechapters40–48thatdealwiththedescriptionoftheTemple(‘SignificatioTem-pliEzechielis’,42pp.);andinbetween,nineteenfull-pageengravingsthatvisu-alize Cocceius’s interpretation of Ezekiel’s Temple, accompanied by a shortdescription(‘TypusSanctuarii’;4pp.).ThetreatisewasreprintedinCocceius’sOpera Omniaof1673–75byhissonJohannesHenricusCocceius,whoalsopub-lishedaDutchtranslationin1691:De Prophetie Van Ezechiel, Met de Uitleggin-gen Van Johannes Coccejus.35Forthiseditionthe illustrationswereengravedanew,differingonlyinminordetails.

CocceiusarguedthatEzekiel’svisionwasabouttheThirdTempleandcouldnotbetheonebuiltbyZerubbabel.HemaintainedthatthisSecondTemple,whichlookedverydifferentfromEzekiel’sversion,hadbeencorruptedinthepastandhadsubsequentlybeendestroyed.Moreover,ChristhadcometotheSecondTemple,andaccordingtotheprophecyofDaniel9:24,theHolyCityanditsSanctuaryhadbeenruined.JerusalemwasnolongertheplacewhereGodcouldbefound.36Finally,EzekielsawaTempleinthesouth,outsideacity,whereasthemeasurementswerefartoolargetofitontheplateauanyway.

TheThirdTemplewouldbeimmaterial,statedCocceius,becauseGodcouldnot dwell in a House made by man. To understand the significance of thisimaginedbuildingwastosearchforitshidden meaning.ThevisionprophesiedtheKingdomofGod,aspiritual realitywithaspiritualsignificance.37Coccei-us’s whole commentary, in fact, is an argument to prove these points. It isstrangethattothisendCocceiusundertookameticulousreconstructionoftheTemplevision,bothinwordsandinarchitecture(Figs4.3–4.6).Althoughin

33 OnCocceius’srelationtothestudyofJewishsources,see:VanCampen1992;Yoffie2004.34 OnCocceiusandEzekiel,see:Vogelsang1981,pp.241–43;VanPelt1991;VanAsselt1996;

VanCampen2006,pp.299–307.35 Cocceius 1669; Cocceius 1673–75, vol. 3 1673, pp. 9–215; Cocceius 1691, pp. 1–627 – ‘De

PropheetEzechiel’;pp.628–40–‘AfbeeldingedesHeyligdoms,sooderVoorhoven,alsdesTempels,welkeEzechielgesienheeft’;pp.641–711–‘DebetekenissevanEzechiel’.ThetitlepageoftheDutcheditionstates1691aspublicationdate,thefrontispiece1692.

36 Cocceius1691,p.642.37 Cocceius1691,p.642.

99EzekielForSolomon

thishewasanythingbutanexception,his ratherhands-onapproachto thearchitecturaldesignseemsatfirstsightincompatiblewithhisemphasisontheintangibilityofthestructure.Hetookhisprojectseriouslyandinvolvedtwospecialistsinit.ThefirstofthesewasSamuelKechelius,orSamuelCarlKechelabHollensteyn(1611–68).38KecheliuswasamathematicianandastronomerfromPragueandworkedasaprivatelecturerinLeiden.Hebecameknownforfirst observing the comet (‘staert-ster’) of 1664, which he described both toChristiaanHuygensandinashorttract.39CocceiusaskedKecheliusbecauseofhisknowledgeofmathematicalproblemsandofarchitecture.40Hecouldhelpwiththeconversionandinterpretationofthebiblicaltextualindicationstoathree-dimensional architecture. It is unknown if the two were already ac-quainted,butbothwhereconnectedtotheuniversity.41

Curiously,theCzechKecheliuswasthedirectRapenburgneighbouroftheSilesianmathematicianandarchitecturalprivatelecturerNicolausGoldmann,whohadpresentedhisreconstructionoftheTemplein1659orevenearlier,sotheymusthaveexchangedideasonthisandotherarchitecturaltopics.42Coc-ceiushadbegunhisEzekielcommentarybefore1665,theyearGoldmanndied.ItispossiblethatKechelius,ashisneighbourandcolleague,thenbecamethenearestspecialistathand.43Kechelius,inhisturn,diedin1668.Possiblytheworkwasnotwhollyfinishedatthattime.Meanwhile,asecondspecialistwasaddedtotheteam.Cocceius’sAmsterdampublisher,JohannesvanSomeren,

38 Cocceiuswrites:‘Wijhebbendanook,nadatwydewoordendesPropheten,soonauwalsmogelikondersochthadden,allesaangewend,opdatvolgensdeProphetischematen,alledeplaatsenendeelendesHeyligdoms,doordenEdelenenVermaardenWis-KonstenaarSamuelKarelKechelgoedergedachtenisse,soudenafgeschetstwerden,opdatselfsdeoogenmochtensienenoordeelenvandeseergevoegsamebestellingeenbouw-orden’.Cocceius1691,p.628.

39 Jorink2007,pp. 157–58.PassagesonKechelius:Goudeau2005,p.94and339;Goudeau2012,pp.227–29.

40 Ina lettertoConstantijnHuygenstheLeidenmathematicianFranciscusvanSchootenJuncharacterizedhimasveryrenownedforhisknowledgeinarithmetic,geometry,forti-ficationandperspective,andaslovedbyallhiscolleagues:‘soheeftdevoorsz.persoongrooterenomméeindekonst[...]endehyverdersvanijderseerbemintsy’.BriefwisselingHuygens1911–17,vol.4(1915),1644–49,GS24,p.317,letter4369,4June1646.

41 On8February1666Kecheliusreceivedanannualsalaryof200guildersbythesenateofthe university for 32 years of service in the study of mathematics. In 1667 he was notappointedasthesuccessorofGoliusbutinsteadobtainedpermissionforastronomicaldemonstrationsattheuniversityobservatory.See:Molhuysen1913–24,vol.3,pp.204and212.

42 BothlivedatRapenburg28F.See:LunsinghScheurleer1986–92,vol.4b(1989),p.653.43 CocceiusmakesnomentionofGoldmann,norexplainshischoiceforKechelius.

100 Goudeau

recommendedaskilledarchitectoftheRomanCatholicconfession.Althoughheisnotmentionedbyname,itisalmostcertainthatPhilipsVingboons(1607–78)wasthearchitectinquestion.44VingboonswasingreatdemandbytheeliteonthenewcanalsinAmsterdam,forwhomhealsodesignedafineseriesofcountryestates.45Thepreparationforthebookandtheillustrationsweresentbymailandeachstageofthevisualizationwasdiscussed.46InitiallytherehadevenbeenplanstobuildawoodenmodeloftheTempleaswell,asJacobJe-hudaLeonandothershaddone.After1665,thisexpensiveandlabour-inten-siveplanmusthavebeenabandoned.47

According to Cocceius

Onthewhole,CocceiusinterpretedtheBiblehistorically.Hedevelopedapre-cisedoctrineofsevensuccessivestagesoftheliberationoftheChurchasde-scribedintheRevelationofStJohnandprophesizedinDeuteronomy.These

44 Later,Cocceius’ssonJohannesHenricusdidnotcomeupwithanameeither,butspokeof‘oneofthemosteminentarchitectsofAmsterdam’.CocceiusJun1692,p.30.IthankRob-ertJanvanPeltforthisadditionalinformation.HisexplanationforthisanonymityisthattherearoseaconflictbetweenCocceiusandVingboons.VanPelt1991,p.105.

45 ‘OokheeftdeBoekverkoper,eentreffelikMan,sichnietontsien,metgeenweinigkosteneenseerervarenBouw-meesterenookdiergelijkenPlaat-snydertehuiren;diemetallevlijd getracht hebben, ‘t geen wy in ons verstand bevat hadden, met alle neerstigheidafgetekend,denLeeserineenigeTaferelentevertoonen’.Cocceius1691,p.628.OnVing-boons,see:Ottenheym1989.

46 CocceiuswroteabouttheprogressinsomeletterstohisfriendJohannesvanDalen,theCalvinist minister of the Palatine court at Kaiserslautern. While the typesetting pro-gressed to chapter 38, Cocceius received the drawing of the Temple façade from theAmsterdam artist, he reported at 3 September 1667: ‘Ezechiel ad cap. 38. processit.Amsterodami Templum incidetur æri. Artificem nacti sumus Pontificium, qui ortho-graphiamejusexhibeat’,Cocceius1673–75,vol.6(1673),p.67,EpistolaCXLIV;‘Sextabulæsuntcaulatæ[...]PleraquehæcjamsuntformataabArchitectoAmstelodamensi,hominePontificio, sed industrio, cælatura restat. Editor meus non parcit sumtibus’. Cocceius1673–75,vol.6(1673),p.74,EpistolaCLXI:On22/12May1668thearchitects’drawingswereready.Apartfromthefirstsixillustrations,alltheengravinghadstilltobedone,forwhichthepublisherreachedintohispocketswillingly.

47 This ismentionedina letteragaintoVanDalenin1665,butCocceius isnotverycon-vincedaboutthechanceofsuccess:‘Cæterumidemartifex[i.e.Kechelius/Vingboons?]cogitaveratstructuramhancerigereèligno.Sed,quiaèmanulaborat,&nonhabet,quieumadjuvet,abipsonihilspero.Etnonnulliussumtusidforet’.Cocceius1673–75,vol.6(1673),p.57,EpistolaCXVIII.

101EzekielForSolomon

stagesweretakenassevensuccessiveandactualhistoricalperiods(curriculum regni).48ThefirststagespannedtheperiodfromChrist’sAscensiontothede-structionofJerusalem.ThefifthperiodwasmarkedbytheReformation,whiletheThirtyYears’War(1618–48)madethesixth.God’sRealmwaseventuallytobefulfilledintheseventhstage.AccordingtoCocceius’smulti-staged,dynam-icandeschatologicalexpectation, theendof time would take place around1667.HisbeliefintherestorationofIsraelinthecountriesoftheReformation,withfar-reachingtheologicalconsequences,putsCocceius’ssimultaneousin-volvementwithEzekiel’sTemplevisioninanimperativecontext.Astheendoftime, the present day acquired pregnant biblical dimensions. Therefore, forCocceius the spiritualTemple must have been of highly topical interest. Hemusthavefeltstronglyabouthisreconstructionproject.

Whilebecomingrealintheseveryyears,theTemplecouldnotbevisualizedotherthanbytheapexofcontemporaryarchitecture.Thisbecomesevidentinthenineteenengravingsthataccompanythetext.Theyshowthegroundplansof the terrain, the complex and individual buildings, the façades, the cross-sections,andsomespecialarchitecturalelementssuchastheSolomoniccol-umns,cherubdecorationandthealtarforburntoffering(holocaustum)(Figs4.3–4.6).BesidestheTemplebuildinginthecentreofthecomplex,Cocceiusdevotedagreatdealofspacetotheannexes,suchastheentrancegatesandthehousesofthepriests.Allbuildings,withtheirspecificposition,measurementsanddecorationcometogetherinapersuasivebird’s-eyeviewofthecomplexwiththeTempleinthemiddleofasymmetricallay-out(Fig.4.3).Theaccuracyofthereconstructionisrepresentedbythedominatinggrid.Moreover,theef-fectoftheone-pointperspectiveisintensifiedbyaxonometricprojection,inthiscasetheabsenceofaperspectivalshortening.Thisdrawingmethodalsostressestheimportantroleoftheexactitudeofthemeasurements.Allinall,this perspective is more than an attractive addition to the traditional set ofdrawingsrequiredinarchitecturaldesign:plan,elevation,andsection.Itistherecapitulationofaninterpretation,emphasizingthatallthepartsandallthebiblicalinstructionsfittogether.

OneofthestandingpointsofcriticisminmostreconstructionsoftheTem-plewasthedeterminationoftheunitofmeasure,thatis,theinterpretationofthebiblicalterms‘cubit’and‘palm’andtheexactlengthofthemeasuringrod,asinEzekiel40:5.Villalpandoandmanyothershadoptedforarodofsixcubitsplusonepalm.CocceiusreadinsteadthateverysacredCubitmeasuredanor-dinarycubitplusapalm.49Theconsequencesfortheoveralldimensionswere

48 VanAsselt1997,pp.232–46;VanAsselt1996,pp.205–25.49 Cocceius1691,p.646.

102 Goudeau

enormous,asCocceius’slatercriticswouldadduce.Infact,almostthewholeprojectoftheTempleisaboutmeasurements.Theproblemnowisabouthowtobringthesemeasurementstogetherforthepurposesofarchitecture,or,per-hapsmoreaccurately,howtofillinthepartsthatwerenotspecified.ThewayCocceiusspeaksaboutarchitecturaldetailshowshiskeeninterestinthemat-terandrevealshiscontactwitharchitecturalspecialists.Hewriteswitheaseaboutthedetailingofmouldingsorthearrangementofrooms.Alargepartofhisphilologicalenterpriseconcernstheinterpretationofthetextinarchitec-tural terms. However, at every turn Cocceius uses his architectural enuncia-tionsforatheological,emblematicinterpretation.50Soforexample,thesevenstepsoftheentrancegatestothecourtssymbolizethesevenbiblicalperiods.TheTemplegatereferstoChrist;thethreetresholdsrepresentthethreewit-nesses.Theincidenceoflightwastelling–thewindowsrepresentingtheen-lightenmentoftheeyesofintellect,aswereallsortsofsymbolicnumbers(forinstance3,7,8,12,30,60)andmeasuresofrooms.Theelementaryproportions1:1and1:2dominated,justastheroundbiblicaldimensions(forinstance500,100, 50 and 25 rods; the square with sides of 500 rods = 3,000 Cubits → a

50 On Cocceius’s emblematic exegesis, see: Faulenbach 1973, pp. 66–79; Van Asselt 1996,pp.193–98.

Figure4.3 Johannes Cocceius, EzechielsProphetie[...], Amsterdam 1691, Tab. XVIII, bird’s-eye view of the Temple complex, engraving. LeidenUniversityLibrary.


circumferenceof12,000Cubits).Thewinddirectionswerealsosignificant:theAntichristcame fromthesouth; theTemplewassituated in thewestof thecomplex.ThreestepsremindedoftheTrinity.Betweenthegatesofthecourtswasastraightlineasanallegoryofthepathtoperfection.Theoutercourtwasonehundredbyonehundredrods,‘meaningalargenumber’.TheHolyofHo-liesrepresentedtheheavenlystateonearthbywayoftheChurchoftheNewTestament,andsoon.51EspeciallytellingistheasymmetricallocationofthehouseofthepriestsonthenorthsideoftheTemple.ForCocceiusthisprovesthatthe(Churchofthe)NorthwaspredestinedtoleadtheSouth–theProtes-tantChurchwouldeventuallyleadtoSalvation.52

Thereconstructioncontainssomestrikingarchitecturalfeatures.Itinvolvesa square plan (following Villalpando), but here divided in two concentriccourts and theTemple connected against the inner quadrant (Fig. 4.3).Theasymmetrical setting of the gates in the ring-walls is noteworthy. Cocceius’sTemplebuildinglacksthecommonhigherfrontpart,acharacteristicofEze-kiel’svision.Furthermore,CocceiusdoesnotfollowtheT-shapedgroundplanwith a broader front part, as in Josephus. Other reconstructions of Ezekiel’sTemple, including Villalpando’s, preferred Solomon’s type with the tall en-trancehall.ThetypicalcurvedbuttressesareappliedtothewallsaroundthecourtsandtheyalsosupporttheTemplenave.TheflatroofsoftheTempleandthegatesareexceptional.ThisisalsothecasewiththeressaultsoftheTemplesidewallsandtheunusualapplicationofthelowest,Tuscanorderattheen-trances. Most peculiar, however, are the asymmetrically positioned and set-back priests’ housing blocks which are provided with large buttresses. Thelay-outofthefrontsstronglyresemblethecontemporaryDutchhousebuild-ingpractice,especiallythenorthernfaçadeintheausterestyle,whichwouldbecometheidealinthelaterseventeenthcentury(Fig.4.4).Withrespecttothedecoration, the palm leaves on the outer walls of the Temple building, thepalmtreesonthegatesandthecrowningpomegranatesarecharacteristic.

Althoughmuchmorecanbesaidaboutthearchitecture,inthiscontexttworemarksareespeciallyrelevant.First,thattextandillustrationdonotalwayscorrespondexactly.ThisissalientinthecaseofthetwoSolomoniccolumns,JachinandBoaz,whicharemademuchsmallerthaninCocceius’sdescription.AnotherstrikingdetailconcernsthepositioningofthebuttressesoftheTem-plebuildinginrelationtothepilasters(Figs4.3and4.5).Incomparingtheel-evation drawings, the only way to solve this question is to assume that thepilastersareatthesametimebuttresses–averyoddarchitecturalsolution.

51 Cocceius1691,p.664.52 Cocceius1691,p.670.

104 Goudeau

ThecleverprojectioninwhichtheTemplesidewallsarenotvisibleconcealstheinconsistencyalmostperfectly,onlybetrayedbythecurvedshadowsofthepilastersonthesidewalls(Fig.4.5).Onthispointthetheologianandthearchi-tectmusthavedisagreedstrongly.

ThisincongruenceleadstothefundamentaldifferencebetweenthetextualandvisualreconstructionoftheTemple.Thekeyproblemisthatinphilologyonecanomitoravoidcertaingapsthatadrawingcannot.Architecturalrecon-structionsdemandthatevery detailisconsideredmeticulouslyandalignswithalltheotherinstructions.Thearchitectorartisthastoremedythedeficienciesandforthathehastomakemanychoices.Intheend,theinterpretationcouldbedeterminedby featuresonwhich the textual sourcesweresilent.Oneof

Figure4.4 Johannes Cocceius, OperaOmnia[...], Amster-dam 1673-75, vol. 3, Tabs XIV and XV, elevations of the House of the Priests, southern and northern façades, engraving. TilburgUniversityLibrary.


thesethingscanbethechoiceofaspecificarchitecturalstyle.Notinfrequentlycritics of certain Temple reconstructions stressed the aspects that were theconsequenceoffillingintheselacunas.Assuch,apartfromatheologicalstand,thereconstructionsalsobecamepartofanarchitecturaldebate.

Images of Biblical Criticism

As one of the most influential theologians of his time, Johannes Cocceiusbecameinvolvedinvariousdebates.Apartfromthecontroversywiththetheo-logianGisbertusVoetius,hewas,unwillingly,andtoacertainextent,undeserv-edly classified as a Cartesian.53 His theology thus was perceived as havingphilosophicalandevenscientificdimensions.Thishaditseffectontheposi-tionoftheso-calledCocceians,manyofwhominsomewayengagedinEze-kiel’s vision.54 With his Temple reconstruction Cocceius also entered the

53 BroeyerandVanderWall1994;Vermij2002,pp.318–21;McGahagan1976,pp.274–76,307–11,364–69.

54 ForexampleJacobusvanOstade,DavidFludvanGiffen,FredericusVanLeenhof,Fried-richAdolfLampeandSalomonvanTil.See:VanCampen2006,passim.

Figure4.5 Johannes Cocceius, EzechielsProphetie[...], Amsterdam 1691, Tab. VIII, elevation of the Temple building, southern side wall, engraving. LeidenUniversityLibrary.

106 Goudeau

domainofarchitecture.InhisarchitecturaltranslationofEzekiel,thefuturewasnotonlyaprojectionofreligiousdesire,butalsoaplacewhereoneactu-allycouldandwouldwant to live.Thearchitecturewasboth ideallydistantandfamiliar,referringtothebestexamplesofthenewclassicistarchitectureintheDutchRepublic.Cocceius’scommitmenthadtwodimensionsthatmutu-allyinteracted.Onthetheologicallevel,thearchitecturefunctionedasame-dium, by which the immaterial was visualized and by means of which thespiritualmeaningcouldmoreeasilybegrasped.Thistheologicalandlearnedreconstruction was at the same time a manifestation of thinking about thefoundationsoftruearchitecture.

Itisnotsurprisingthatdissentingopinionscamefrombothsides.Coccei-us’sopponentCampegiusVitringa(1659–1722)interpretedEzekiel’sTempleasamaterialbuildingandrejectedCocceius’schiliasticinclination.Theantiquar-ian,booksellerandarchitecturaltheoristWillemGoeree(1635–1711)criticizedthereconstructioninarchitecturalterms;thebasicrod,forinstance,wasmis-understood.55 These combined attacks were countered in 1692 by JohannesHenricusCocceius(1642–1712),sonofJohannes,inthecomprehensivedefenceNaeder Ondersoeck Van het Rechte Verstand Van den Tempel.56ThispublicationinitsturnprovokedasecondargumentbyVitringaintheformofa‘letter’ofafewhundredpages.57Inarchitecturalpublications,Johannes’soriginalrecon-structionwasnotedseveraltimes,forinstanceinatreatiseontheTemplebytheGermanarchitectandtheologianLeonhardChristophSturm(1669–1719),whosefather,theCartesianmathematicianJohannChristophSturm(1609–70)once had studied in Leiden. Sturm was also in the possession of the manu-scriptsoftheLeidentheoristNicolausGoldmann,includinghisTemplerecon-struction. In 1696, Sturm was to publish the latter’s architectural theory inwhichheincludedtheunabridgedtextofEzekiel40–46.58

Cocceius’sTempleengravingswerebiblicalcriticismbyvisualmeans.Gen-erallythetermbiblicalcriticismisreservedfortextualoperations,inwhichtheBiblecountsastheuniversal,andonlyreliableandincontestablesource–theadagesola scriptura.Asaconsequence,theBiblehadtobetakenliterallyandthe truemeaning ofGod’swordcouldonlybe revealed through thecorrectsource.ApartfromthetextoftheBiblecontainingobscuretractsandconflict-

55 Vitringa 1687;Goeree’scriticismesp. in:Goeree 1690.OnGoereeandarchitecture, see:VandenHeuvel1997.

56 CocceiusJun1692.57 Vitringa1693.ThediscussionbetweenCocceiusJun,VitringaandGoereeinrelationtothe

interpretationofCocceiusSenisoutsidethescopeofthispaper.58 Sturm1694;Goldmann1696,pp.32–40and42–46.Goudeau2005,ch.14.


ing information, there was also the question of which counted as the basicauthoritativetext.ThereforepeoplesuchasHugoGrotiusstartedtocomparethemostimportantBiblesources,thosebeingtheSeptuagint,theVulgateandtheMasoreticTanakh,intheirmostreliableversions.Todoso,onehadtomas-terthethreelanguagesofAntiquity:Greek,LatinandHebrew–theidealoftheeruditio trias lingualis.59Cocceiuswasoneofthosescholarsintheheydayofbiblicalcriticism.Inscholarlycircles,theproblematiccharacterofcorruptedtranscripts, translations and editions caused a vehement discussion on therightinterpretationoftheBible.Perhapslessobvious,butcertainlylessstud-iedinthecontextofthisdebate,istheimpactoftheimage.

ThethemeoftheTemplecanserveasagoodexample.Thevisualizationsofthereconstructionaremorethanasupplementaryillustrationtoasourcetext.Asstated,theengravingsalsocausedadebate,theologicallyaswellashistori-cally,albeitconductedonanotherlevelandwithothermeans,butwithinthesamecontextofcriticism.TheexamplesofthepairPrado-VillapandoandtheallianceCocceius-Kechelius-Vingboonsshowthattextandimagearestronglyintertwined.InhiswrittencommentaryonEzekiel,Cocceiustooktheclassiccourse–fromthereproductionofthesourcetext,throughanextensivephilo-logicalcommentaryongrammarandsemantics,toaspecifictheologicalinter-pretation. To that he added the visual translation of the text by way of areconstructionthathethoughtofasaccurate.Actually,withtheillustrationshewentintheoppositedirection:heusedtheinsightsgainedbyhiscriticism,viaanarchitectonictranslationtoavisualrepresentationofwhathethoughtofastheoriginalTemple–fromtheinterpretationbacktothesource.

Vanishing Points – Jerusalem and the Temple

CocceiuswasconvincedthatifallthebiblicalinformationontheTemplewascorrectthenEzekielcouldnothaveseentheTempleofJerusalem,althoughitsharedsomefeatureswithSalomon’sFirstTemple.Villalpando,amongothers,hadstriventocombinethetwo(Ezekiel≈Salomon).Otherauthors,suchasVatable,consideredthementirelydifferentstructures(Ezekiel≠Salomon).ForCocceius,attheendtimeEzekiel’sTemplewouldreplacetheonceperfectSol-

59 Thethreelanguagesweregraduallyextendedtofour,withArabic.InthecourseoftheseventeenthcenturyHebrewbecamemoreandmoresubsumedundertheologyandintheeighteenthcenturytheHebraistswouldbeeventuallyreplacedbythebroader-basedOrientalists.See:Katchen1984,p.18.

108 Goudeau

omonicTemple(Ezekiel←Salomon).Mostoftheseventeenth-centuryauthorssawEzekiel’svisioninonewayoranotherasapointofreference.

WhenevaluatingthedifferentTemplereconstructions,onehastobeawareoftheconnectionbetweenthetworealTemplesandtheenvisionedthirdone.InthecaseofCocceius,theTemplewasapurelyspiritualonethatneverthelesswouldberealizedinashortspaceoftime–asastateofbeinginwhichthevisualizedbuildingactedastheemblem.Cocceiuswasconvincedthattheendoftimewasathandaround1667.60Hence,theDutchRepublicwasonlythelast–andbest–phaseofworldhistory.AlthoughCocceiuscannotberegardedasachiliastpur sang,itisremarkablethatinsomerespectshisexpectationscoincidewithotherchiliasticprophesies,suchastheturmoilaroundtheself-proclaimed messiah Sabbatai Zevi (1626–76) around 1666, which affectedespeciallytheSephardiccommunityinAmsterdam.61Cocceius’sstrongcon-victionthatEzekiel’svisionwastopicalisrevealingwithrespecttothechoicefor aTemple reconstruction by one of the leading contemporary architects.CocceiusrelatedthearchitectureofEzekiel’sTempletothecontemporarysitu-ationintheRepublic.TheDutchclassicistarchitecturewasthedécoroftheyoungself-confidentRepublicthatshoweditsnewlygainedprosperitythroughit.Thefoundationofcontemporarydesignprinciplesontruebiblicalarchitec-tureconnectedtheRepublic,notonlyinametaphoricalwaybutalsoinaphys-icalsense,tothelandoftheBible.Thistheoreticalconnectionhadpracticalarchitecturalapplications.ExplicitreferencestotheTempleweremadeinem-blematic ornamentation such as the curved buttresses, palm leaves, pome-granatesandcherubsmentioned(Fig.4.6).LessobviousweredesignschemesfollowingthemeasurementsorproportionsoftheTemple,indirectlyreadablebutdirectlyrelatedtoGod’sownarchitecture.Whatisremarkableisthatinthebuiltexamples,eclecticismwasmorecommonthantherestrictiontoonein-terpretation. Apart from the better-known references that could be under-stood by anyone, a more scholarly interpretation was reserved for a smallaudience.WithreferencestotheTemple,thepatrons,scholarsandarchitectsdebated by means of stone; they showed their knowledge and status to theeducated beholder. Similar to Cocceius’s goals on a theological level, in thisarchitecturetheimmaterialbecametangible.Inrealbuildings,theTemplere-constructionasanhistoricalandphilologicaloperation,acquiredameaning

60 VanAsselt1996,p.211.Moreover,forCocceiusthebroadinterestbyscholarsinthestudyofHebrewsourceswasanindicationthattherestorationofIsraelwouldbeimminent.See:VanCampen2006,p.290.

61 Kaplan2004,pp.152-54.


forthesocietyofthattime,withanimplicitviewtoafutureendstate–theeschaton,thenewheavenandnewearth.

AndJerusalem?IntheDutchRepublic,thedistancetotheJerusalemoftheSecondTemplewasgreat–geographically,intime,butaboveallideologically.ThedestructionoftheTemplewasirreversible.Thetwosuccessivebuildingshadbeenlost,ashadtheOldCovenant.TheNewTestamentwouldeventuallylead to the fulfilment of the Scripture, including the Temple, the visionarymeaningofwhichprevailed.TheTemplewaslost inJerusalembutwaspro-jectedontotheRepublicinacivilsocietysteepedwithCalvinism,andindiffer-ent ways now regarded as the New Jerusalem.62With Ezekiel, the exclusivebondwithJerusalemhadbeenremoved,asCocceiusstressedwithreferencetothelastverseofthevision.63TosearchforthephysicalremnantsoftheTempleinJerusalemwasnolongerrelevant.ThecertaintyofthetwofolddestructionsurpassedtheknowledgeofremainsstilltobeseenintheHolyCity.TheTem-plebelongedtoaclosedperiodofhistory.Thusthebuildingbecameadoublevanishingpointinmemory–backtoSolomon,aheadwithEzekiel.ForCoc-ceiustheTempleofJerusalemhadbecomeaplaceoftheabsenceofGod,a

62 Cocceius1691,Voor-reden;Dunkelgrün2009.63 Cocceius1691,p.711.

Figure4.6 Johannes Cocceius, EzechielsProphetie[...], Amsterdam 1691, Tab. IX, longitudinal section of the Temple building, engraving. LeidenUniversityLibrary.

110 Goudeau

divinedwellingbutnowanemptyone.Ezekiel’sTempletookitsplace–bothimmaterialandmaterial,spiritualandeveneschatological,arevaluatedChris-tianconceptofaquintessentiallyJewishpromise.

Bibliography

Primary Sources[DeBray,Salomon],‘AendenLeser’,in:HendrickdeKeyser,Architectvra Moderna ofte

Bouwinge van onsen tyt [...],Amsterdam1631,pp.1–5.Cocceius,Johannes,Duo Tituli Talmudici Sanhedrin et Maccoth cum versione, et com-

mentarius,Amsterdam1629.––––––,Prophetia Ezechielis, Cum Commentario [...] Accedunt XIX Typi æri incisi, qui

exhibent Sanctuarium, quod vidit Propheta ejusque partes & mensuras earum,Amsterdam1669.

––––––,Opera Omnia Theologica, Exegetica, Didactica, Polemica, Philologica [...],8vols,Amsterdam1673–75.

––––––, De Prophetie Van Ezechiel, Met de Uitleggingen Van Johannes Coccejus [...] Getrouwelijk uyt het Latijn Vertaald,Amsterdam1691.

Cocceius, Johannes Henricus, Naeder Ondersoeck Van het Rechte Verstand Van den Tempel die den Propheet Ezechiel Gesien en beschreven heeft in sijn Laetste Gesichte, En des Jesuits Villalpands bevattingen daer omtrent: Voorgesteld aen den seer Eerwaerden en Geleerden Heer Campegius Vitringa [...] Verçierd met de nodige Afbeeldsels,Amsterdam1692.

Cunaeus,Petrus,De Republyk Der Hebreeen, Of Gemeenebest der Joden. In drie boeken,ed.byW.Goeree,3vols,Amsterdam1682–83.

L’Empereur, Constantijn,Masekhet midot me-Talmud Bavli; hoc est, Talmudis Babylonici codex Middoth, sive De mensuris Templi, unà cum versione Latina [...] Additis com-mentariis,Leiden1630.

Goeree,Willem,Voor-Bereidselen Tot de Bybelsche Wysheit en Gebruik der Heilige en Kerkelijke Historien [...],Amsterdam1690.

Goldmann,Nicolaus,Vollständige Anweisung zu der Civil Bau=Kunst [...],ed.LeonhardChristophSturm,Wolfenbüttel1696.

Prado,Hiëronymus,and JuanBautistaVillalpando, In Ezechielem Explanationes Et Apparatvs Vrbis, ac Templi Hierosolymitani. Commentariis Et Imaginibvs Opvs Tribvs Tomis Distinctvm,3vols,Rome1596–1605.

Sturm,LeonhardChristoph,Sciagraphia templi Hierosolymitani ex ipsis SS. literarum fontibus, præsertim ex visione Ezechielis ultima Architectonice quidem [...],Leipzig1694.


Vitringa,Campegius,Aanleydinge tot het Rechte Verstand van den Tempel, Die de Propheet Ezechiel gesien en beschreven heeft,Franeker1687.

––––––,’t Rechte Verstant van den Tempel Ezechielis, Verdeedigt en Bevestigt, in een Brief, dienende tot antwoord, aen den Ed. en Wel-geleerden Heer, Johannes Henricus Cocceius [...],Harlingen1693.

Secondary LiteratureAsselt,W.J.van,‘Ultimumtempusnobisimminet.Eschatologischestructurenvande

theologievanJohannesCoccejus’, Nederlands Archief voor Kerkgeschiedenis/ Dutch Review of Church History76(1996),pp.189–226.

––––––,Johannes Coccejus.Portret van een zeventiende-eeuws theoloog op oude en nieuwe wegen,Heerenveen1997.

––––––, ‘Chiliasm and Reformed Eschatology in the Seventeenth and EighteenthCenturies’,in:Christian Hope in Context,StudiesinReformedTheology4,ed.byA.vanEgmondandD.vanKeulen,Zoetermeer2001[a],pp.11–29.

––––––,The Federal Theology of Johannes Coccceius (1603–1669),LeidenandBostonMA2001[b].

Bennet,Jim,andScottMandelbrote,The Garden, the Ark, the Tower, the Temple. Biblical Metaphors of Knowledge in Early Modern Europe,Oxford1998.

Bisschop,Roelof,Sions Vorst en volk. Het tweede-Israëlidee als theocratisch concept in de Gereformeerde kerk van de Republiek tussen ca. 1650 en ca. 1750, Veenendaal1993.

De briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens (1608–1687),ed.byJ.Worp,6vols,TheHague1911–17.

Broeyer,F.G.M.,andE.G.E.vanderWall,eds,Een richtingenstrijd in de Gereformeerde Kerk. Voetianen en Coccejanen 1650–1750,Zoetermeer1994.

Busink, Th.A., Der Tempel von Jerusalem von Salomo bis Herodes, 2 vols, Leiden1970–1980.

Campen,Mathijsvan,‘VoetiusenCoccejusoverdeJoden’,Documentatieblad Nadere Reformatie16,no.1(1992),pp.2–16.

––––––,Gans Israël. Voetiaanse en coccejaanse visies op de joden gedurende de zeventiende en achttiende eeuw,Ph.D.diss.,Leiden2006.

Delano-Smith, Catherine, ‘The Exegetical Jerusalem: Maps and Plans for EzekielChapters40–48’,in:Imagining Jerusalem in the Medieval West,ed.byLucyDonkinand Hanna Vorholt, Proceedings of the British Academy 175, Oxford 2012,pp.41–76.

Dunkelgrün, Theodor, ‘“Neerlands Israel”: Political Theology, Christian Hebraism,BiblicalAntiquarianism,andHistoricalMyth’,in:Myth in History, History in Myth,ed.byLauraCruzandWillemFrijhoff,LeidenandBostonMA2009,pp.201–36.

Edelman,Diana,The Origins of the ‘Second’ Temple. Persian Imperial Policy and the Rebuilding of Jerusalem,LondonandOakvilleCT2005.

112 Goudeau

Faulenbach,Heiner,Weg und Ziel der Erkenntnis Christi. Eine Untersuchung zur Theologie des Johannes Coccejus,BeiträgezurGeschichteundLehrederReformiertenKirche36,Neukirchen-Vluyn1973.

Goldhill,Simon,The Temple of Jerusalem,CambridgeMA2004.Goudeau,Jeroen,Nicolaus Goldmann (1611–1665) en de wiskundige architectuurweten-

schap,Groningen2005.Goudeau,Jeroen, ‘SafeStrongholds.MathematicalFortificationandtheFortressof

Mathematics’,in:Festungsbau. Geometrie – Technologie – Sublimierung,ed.byBettinaMarten,UlrichReinisch,andMichaelKorey,Berlin2012,pp.219–35.

Hermann, Wolfgang, ‘Unknown Designs for the “Temple of Jerusalem” by ClaudePerrault’,in:Essays in the History of Architecture presented to Rudolph Wittkower,ed.byD.Fraser,H.Hibbard,andM.J.Lewine,Bristol1967,pp.143–58andillsXVII.

Heuvel, Charles van den, ‘Willem Goeree (1635–1711) en de ontwikkeling van eenalgemenearchitectuurtheorieindeNederlanden’,Bulletin KNOB96,no.5(1997),pp.154–76.

Jorink,Eric,Het Boeck der Natuere. Nederlandse geleerden en de wonderen van Gods Schepping 1575–1715,Leiden2007.

Kaplan,Y.,‘DejodenindeRepubliektotomstreeks1750.Religieus,cultureelensociaalleven’, in:Geschiedenis van de joden in Nederland,ed.byJ.C.H.Blom,R.G.Fuks-Mansfeld,andI.Schöffer,2004²,pp.129–73.

Katchen,AaronL.,Christian Hebraists and Dutch Rabbis. Seventeenth Century Apologetics and the Study of Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah,HarvardJudaicTextsandStudies3,CambridgeMAandLondon1984.

Leidse Lasten 1674. Twee belastingcohieren uit 1674,RegionaalArchiefLeiden,sign.:SALeidenSAII,4387.Retrievedfrom:http://www.janvanhout.nl/leilas/gjp_frame.htm(accessedDecember2012).

Linden,C.J.R.vander,‘DesymboliekvandeNieuweKerkvanJacobvanCampenteHaarlem’,Oud Holland104,no.1(1990),pp.1–31.

LunsinghScheurleer,Th.H.,C.WillemijnFock,andA.J.vanDissel,Het Rapenburg. Geschiedenis van een Leidse gracht,6volsin11bindings,Leiden1986–92.

McCormick,CliffordMark,Palace and Temple. A Study of Architectural and Verbal Icons,BerlinandNewYork2002.

McGahagan,ThomasArthur,Cartesianism in the Netherlands, 1639–1676. The New Science and the Calvinist Counter-Reformation,Ph.D.diss.,PhiladelphiaPA1976.

Miletto,Gianfranco,Glauben und Wissen im Zeitalter der Reformation. Der Salomonische Tempel bei Abraham ben David Portaleone (1542–1612),StudiaJudaica27,BerlinandNewYork2004.

Molhuysen,P.C.,Bronnen tot de geschiedenis der Leidsche Universiteit,7vols,TheHague1913–24.


Naredi-Rainer,Paulvon,Salomos Tempel und das Abendland. Monumentale Folgen his-torischer Irrtümer,withacontrib.byCorneliaLimpricht,Cologne1994.

Offenberg,A.K.,‘JacobJehudaLeon(1602–1675)enzijnTempelmodel’,in:De Tempel van Salomo. Een terugblik in het nabije en verre verleden ter gelegenheid van de feestelijke opening van de Synagoge bij de Princessegracht in Den Haag,ed.byJ.F.vanAgtetal.,TheHague1976,pp.54–75.

––––––,‘JacobJehudaLeonenzijntempelmodel:eenjoods-christelijkproject’,De zeven-tiende eeuw9,no.1(1993),pp.35–50.

––––––,‘DirkvanSantenandtheKeurBible:NewInsightintoJacobJudah(Arye)LeonTemplo’sModelTemple’,Studia Rosenthaliana37(2004),pp.401–22.

Ottenheym,Koen,Philips Vingboons (1607–1678) architect,Zutphen1989.Ozinga,M.D.,De protestantsche kerkenbouw in Nederland. Van Hervorming tot Franschen

Tijd,Amsterdam1929.Pelt,RobertJanvan,Tempel van de wereld. De kosmische symboliek van de tempel van

Salomo,Utrecht1984.––––––,‘Coccejusyeltemplosinarquitecto’,in:Ramirez,JuanAntonio,Dios Arquitecto.

J.B. Villalpando y el Templo de Salomón,Madrid1991,pp.104–08.De Portugese Synagoge in Amsterdam,ed.byPieterVlaardingerboeketal.,Zwolle/

Amersfoort/Amsterdam2012.Ramirez,JuanAntonio,Dios Arquitecto. J.B. Villalpando y el Templo de Salomón,Madrid

1991.Rooden,PeterTheodoorvan,Constantijn L’Empereur (1591–1648), professor Hebreeuws

en theologie te Leiden. Theologie, bijbelwetenschap en rabbijnse studiën in de zeven-tiende eeuw,Ph.D.diss.,Leiden1985.

Rosenau,Helen,Vision of the Temple. The Image of the Temple of Jerusalem in Judaism and Christianity,London1979.

Shanks,Hershel,Jerusalem’s Temple Mount. From Solomon to the Golden Dome,NewYorkandLondon2007.

Steenmeijer,Guido,Tot cieraet ende aensien deser stede. Arent van ’s-Gravesande (ca. 1610–1662), architect en ingenieur,Leiden2005.

Vermij,Rienk,The Calvinist Copernicans. The Reception of the New Astronomy in the Dutch Republic, 1575–1750,Amsterdam2002.

Vlaardingerbroek,Pieter,Het paleis van de Republiek. Geschiedenis van het stadhuis van Amsterdam,Zwolle2011.

Vogelsang, Bernd, ‘Archaische Utopien’. Materialien zu Gerhard Schotts Hamburger ‘Bühnenmodel’ des Templum Salomonis,Ph.D.diss.,Cologne1981.

Yoffie,AdinaM.,‘CocceiusandtheJewishCommentators’,Journal of the History of Ideas65,no.3(2004),pp.383–98.

114 Verhoeven

Chapter5

Jerusalem as Palimpsest The Architectural Footprint of the Crusaders in the Contemporary City

Mariëtte Verhoeven

LatinCrusaderscapturedJerusalemon15July1099,afterPopeUrban’scallattheendof 1095 for theFirstCrusade.1Latindominationof Jerusalemlasteduntil1187whenSultanSaladincapturedthecity.AlthoughLatinrulewasre-established for short periods between 1229 and 1239, and between 1241 and1244, itwas in the twelfthcentury that theCrusadersexecutedanextensivebuildingcampaignthataimedattheredefinitionofthecity’sChristiantopog-raphy.

Crusader architecture is mostly viewed as an isolated phenomenon withdistinguishing stylistic and formal characteristics. In the first studies of thenineteenth and twentieth centuries, Crusader architecture was typified byFrenchscholarsasFrenchRomanesquebut,later,ByzantineandlocalEasterninfluenceswerealsoacknowledged.2Asisoftenthecaseinarchitecturalhis-tory, research into theCrusaderperiod focusesonthereconstructionof theoriginalshapeofbuildingsandnotontheirafterlifeandcontinuoustransfor-mation.Indescriptionsofthebuildings,lateradditionsandtransformationsare omitted while the captions of photographs of buildings in their currentformmentiononlytheoriginalbuildingdates.InhisstudyonCrusaderJerusa-lem,AdrianBoasremarksthat‘inappearance,theOldCityofJerusalemisstillessentiallyamedievalcity[…]withtheexceptionoftheJewishQuarter,whichhasbeenlargelyrebuiltsince1967,thecityisverymuchasitappearedninehundredyearsagoandavisitorfromthetwelfthcenturywouldprobablynot

1 Thegenericterm‘Crusaders’referstoaheterogeneousgroupofChristiansfromalloverLatinWesternEuropeandfromeverylevelofsocietywhoparticipatedintheCrusades.BecauseknightsandsoldierscameingreaternumberfromFranceandGermanythanfromanyothercountrythecontemporaryterm‘Franks’wasusedbybothEuropeansandMuslimsforthesettlersintheHolyLand.

2 TheoldestcomprehensivestudyisbyDeVogüé1860,followedbyVincentandAbel1914–26;Enlart1925–28;Dechamps1964;ArtandArchitectureoftheCrusaderStates1977andPringle2007.

© Mariëtteverhoeven,2014 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_007This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.

http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22Marie-Anne+Matard-Bonucci%22


115JerusalemAsPalimpsest

havetoomuchtroubleinfindinghiswayabout’.3AlthoughBoasrefersmoretothelay-outofthecitythantotheshapeandfunctionofthebuildingsfromtheCrusaderperiod,hesuggestsatleastthatthelattersurvivedmoreorlessintact.

Buildings,however,althoughbuiltonspecificandfixedlocations,changecontinuously,asdoestheculturearoundthem.EspeciallyinacitysuchasJe-rusalem,wheremanybuildingsarethemarkersofholy,oftencontested,plac-es,religiousbuildingshaveundergonesignificant(physical)transformationsduringdramaticreligiousturnarounds, includingchangesof functionorpa-tronage,rebuildingandrestoration,andneglectordemolition.Inthefollow-ing, therefore, instead of framing Crusader buildings in the time of theirconception,theconstitutionoftheirarchitecturallayerswillbediscussedinordertodojusticetoandacknowledgetheprocessualityofarchitecture.Iwilldosobyconsideringthebuildingsasarchitecturalpalimpsests.Themetaphorofthepalimpsestrefersbothtothemulti-layerednessofbuildingsaswellastotheobservationthatolderarchitecturallayersmixwithnewlayers,asoldtextshines through the new text of a reused piece of parchment. In the case ofbuildingsthiseffectcanbetheresultofdecayorrepairandthereforeuninten-tional,ordeliberateasinthecaseofrestorationorrebuildingwiththepurposeoferasingorre-establishingtheold.

Thestartingpointofwhatfollowsistheappearance,theupperlayerofthepalimpsest,ofasetofCrusaderbuildingsthatareconsideredtobethebestpreserved examples of Crusader architecture in contemporary Jerusalem.4The selection includes buildings that were newly built by the crusaders(Churches of St Anne; Church of the Ascension and of St James) as well asolderbuildingsthatweresubstantiallyrebuiltintheCrusaderperiod(ChurchoftheHolySepulchre,StMaryofMountZionandStMaryintheValleyofJe-hoshaphat).InadditionIwilldiscusstheTemplum Domini,theIslamicDomeoftheRock,whichwasappropriatedbytheCrusadersandplayedanimpor-tantroleinthereestablishmentofaChristianJerusalemintheCrusaderperi-od.

3 Boas2001,p.3.4 Thedescriptionsof thebuildingsarebasedonmyownobservationsduringmystay in

JerusaleminNovember2011.DetailsonthehistoryofthebuildingsarebasedonthestudiesofVincentandAbel1914–26 andPringle2007, unlessotherwisementioned.InhiscorpusofthechurchesofJerusalem,DenysPringlemainlycompilestheresultsofearlierstudies(seenote1).Inparticular,thearcheologicalandhistoricalresearchoftheDominicanFathersVincentandAbelisstillfundamentalforourknowledgeofCrusaderarchitectureinJerusalem.ThespecificpagesintheworkofVincentandAbelandPringlewhichrelatetothebuildingsdiscussedinthisarticlearereferredtoineachparagraph.

116 Verhoeven

Blended Architecture: Church of the Holy Sepulchre5

The‘liberation’oftheHolySepulchre(whichturnedouttobenotonlyfromtheMuslimsbutfromtheEasternChristiansaswell),andvisitingtheplaceofChrist’sresurrection,themostholyplaceofChristendom,werethemaingoalsfortheCrusaderswhojoinedtheFirstCrusade.TherebuildingoftheChurchoftheHolySepulchre,whichdatedbacktothetimeoftheemperorConstan-tineandhismotherHelena,wasthemostimportantbuildingcampaignaftertheCrusadershadcapturedthecityin1099.TodayitisstillthemostimportantChristianpilgrimagesiteintheworld.

The church is located in the Christian Quarter of the Old City, near theMuristan.Thesouthfaçadeistheonlypartofthechurchthatisnothemmedinbyotherbuildingsandthatisvisiblefromstreetlevel.Thefaçadeconsistsoftwostorieswithadoubleportalinthefirstandadoublewindowonthesecondstorey.The most striking characteristic of the façade is the rich ornamentalsculptureofthecapitalsandthevoussoirsofthearchessurroundingthepor-talsandwindows,andofthefriezesframingbothlevelsofthebuilding.

Throughtheleftportalinthesouthfaçadeoneentersthesouthbayofthetranseptofthechurch.Theenclosureofthenave,whichfunctionsastheKa-tholiconoftheGreekOrthodox,blockstheviewontheRotundatothewestofit.Infact,asaresultofthedivisionofthechurchamongthedifferentdenomi-nationswiththeGreekOrthodox,ArmenianApostolicsandRomanCatholicsastheprimarycustodians,andtheCoptic,EthiopianandSyrianOrthodoxasthesecondaryones,allviewsthroughthebuildingareblocked.

Theinconvenientarrangementofspaceinthecurrentbuildingcanonlybeunderstoodwithinthecontextofitshistory.ThebuildingcampaignoftheCru-saders,whichlastedfrom1099until1170,uniteddifferentholysitesunderoneroof:theRotunda,acentrally-plannedmartyrium withtheTombofChrist,therockofCalvaryandthecaveoftheFindingoftheCross.Thecourtyardtotheeast of the Rotunda which also dates back to Constantinian times, was re-placedbyachurchwithanaveandfouraisles,galleries,andcross-vaults.Thechurchhadatranseptwithadomeattheintersectionofthetranseptwiththenave, and a choir with an ambulatory and chapels on the east side. Behindthesechapels,stairsleddowntotheChapelofHelena.ThechapelwasbuiltonthefoundationsofConstantine’sbasilicaandcontainedcapitalsthatwerespo-lia,likeotherpiecesofreusedarchitecturalsculptureinthechurch,possiblycoming from one of the Islamic monuments on the Temple Mount.6 From

5 VincentandAbel1914–26,pp.88–300;Krüger2000;Pringle2007,pp.6–72.6 Wilkinson1987,pp.27–28.Krüger2000,p.90,statesthatthespoliaintheChapelofHelena

derivefromtheAlAqsaMosque.Ousterhout2003,p.18,questionswhetheritislikelythatall


thechapelanotherflightofstairsleddowntothecaveoftheFindingoftheCross.

Ontheexterior,thesouthfaçadewiththedoubleportalwasaddedbytheCrusaders,andontherightofthefaçadeaporchconstitutedanexternalac-cesstotheChapelofCalvary.Otheradditionswereabell-towerandacloisterforAugustinianCanons.ThefirstwasbuiltoverandaroundtheexistingchapelofStJohntheEvangelistonthesouthsideoftheRotunda,whilethelatterex-tendedovertheChapelofHelenaandthecaveoftheFindingoftheCross.

AftertheCrusaderperiodthechurchonceagainunderwentseveralchang-es. It is not clear whether the Aedicule with the Tomb of Christ had beenstrippedofitssilverornamentsbytheMuslimsorbytheChristiansafterJeru-salemfelltoSaladinin1187andthechurchcameunderMuslimcontrol.7In1211–12 theWestern pilgrimWilbrand of Oldenburg saw the church with itsmarble and mosaic decoration intact.8 Later in the thirteenth century thecloister of the Augustinian Canons was destroyed. The few remains of it,amongwhichtracesofanarch(Fig.5.1),areincorporatedintheCopticpatri-archateandtheEthiopianmonastery,whicharenowlocatedontheroofofthechurch.In1555theAediculewascompletelyrebuiltbytheFranciscans.In1719thetimberroofoftheRotundawasrenewedandtheheightofthebelltower,whichhadbeenwithoutbellssince1187andthespireofwhichhadfallenin1549,wasreducedbytwostories.Afterafirein1808theinteriorofthechurchwasalmostcompletelyrestored,includingtherebuildingoftheapseinaba-roquestylewithanewiconostasisinstone.TheopenconicalroofoftheRo-tundawasreplacedbyatimberdomeandagainbetween1866and1868byadomewithasteelconstruction.Inthemiddleofthenineteenthcenturytheporch that gave access to Calvary was renewed, walled up and furnished aswhatiscalledtheChapeloftheFranks.Afteranearthquakein1927thedomeoverthecrossingoftheCrusadertransepthadtobepulleddownandrebuilt,andtheRotundawasalsoalmostcompletelyrenewed.

Today, it is difficult to establish to what extent the Crusader church hadbeenaunity.Thebuildingbroughtalltheholyplacesunderoneroof,andforthat purpose both existing and new structures were joined together; butwhereasintheCrusaderperiodtheinteriorcouldbeperceivedinitsentirety

ofthereusedcapitalsintheCrusaderchurchcamefromthesameplace.Hestatesthat‘ifthecrusadermasonswerescouringthecityforsuitablebuildingmaterials,theycouldcertainlyhavefoundbetterpiecesthan,forexample,themismatchedcolumnsandcut-downcapitalsinthechapelofHelena’.

7 Pringle2007,p.31,withreferences.8 WilbrandofOldenburg,IHC, vol.III,pp.236–38.

118 Verhoeven

fromanyvantagepoint9,thateffecthasbeenobliteratedbylateralterationsand partitions of the interior space. The extensive mosaic decoration pro-grammeoftheCrusaderperiodmusthavecontributedtotheunity,butofthatlayoutonlythemosaicoftheAscensionofChristintheChapeloftheCrucifix-iononCalvaryremains.

Thismeansthatalthoughthegroundplanofthecurrentchurchisstillthatofthetwelfthcentury,onlyafewpartsofthebuildinghavebeenleftuntouchedsincetheCrusaderperiod.Eventheapparentlyundamagedfaçadedidnotsur-viveintact.ThedecoratedmarbleplaquesthatwereappliedtothelintelsofthedoubleportalwereremovedtotheRockefellerMuseumin1927.Themosa-icsofthetympanaabovethedoors,representingtheVirginandChildonthe

9 Kühnel1994,p.22.

Figure5.1 Jerusalem, ChurchoftheHolySepulchre, remains of the Canon’s cloister, looking west towards the apse of the church. Photo:MariëtteVerhoeven.


lefttympanumandontherightChristappearingtoMaryMagdalene,didnotsurvive.

Inside Out: Church of the Ascension10

Inthevillageofat-Tur,onthehighestpointof theMountofOlives,asmallchapellieshiddenbehindthewallsofacourtyard.ThechapelisbuiltonthelocationfromwhichChristsupposedlyascendedtoheaven.

TheChapeloftheAscensionisanoctagonalbuildingconstructedinyellowashlarmasonry(Fig.5.2).Thefirstzone,terminatedbyacornice,consistsofablind arcade with arches springing from the corner pilasters. Except for the

10 VincentandAbel1914–26,pp.360–419;Pringle2007,pp.72–88.

Figure5.2 Jerusalem, ChapeloftheAscension, view from the east. Photo:MariëtteVerhoeven.

120 Verhoeven

pair framing theentranceon thewestern face,eachof theeightpilasters isflankedbyapairofcolumnswithfinelycarvedcapitals.Theabacionthewest-ern face indicate that on the location of the masonry pilasters underneaththemthereoncestoodcolumnswithcapitalsthathavebeenlost.Thevoussoirsofthearchesandtheabaci,capitals,columnsandbasesareofblue-whitemar-ble.

Thesecondzoneofthebuilding,wherethemasonryismoreirregularthanthatofthelowerzone,consistsofanoctagonaldrumsupportingadome.Thedrumhassmallwindowsonfoursides.

Onthewestalowrectangulardoorgivesentrancetotheinteriorofthecha-pelwithitsroundedwallsurface.Ithasamihrab,anIslamicprayernicheinthesouthwall.Totheright,onthefloor,isaslabofstonewiththeallegedfootprintofChrist.

WeknowthattheCrusadersbuiltaChurchoftheAscensioninthefirsthalfofthetwelfthcentury.11JohnofWürzburg(c.1165)describes‘alargechurch,inwhosecentre,uncoveredbyalargeaperture,isshowntheplaceoftheLord’sAscension’.12 The pilgrim Theodoric (1172) gives a fuller description of thebuilding:‘Oneascendsintothechurchbytwentygreatsteps;inthemidstofthechurchtherestandsaroundstructure,magnificentlydecoratedwithPari-anmarbleandbluemarble,withaloftyapex,inthemidstwhereofaholyaltarisplaced,beneathwhichaltaristobeseenthestoneonwhichtheLordissaidtohavestoodwhenHeascendedtoheaven’.13ThesedescriptionsmakeclearthatthebuildingthatisnowcalledtheChapeloftheAscensionwasinfactanaedicule in the central bay of a larger church. The archeological evidenceshowsthatthewallsofthecourtyardsurroundingtheaediculeorchapelpart-lyfollowthetracesoftheoctagonalexternalwalloftheCrusaderchurchofwhichonlyafewremainssurvive.

WhatweknowoftheCrusaderbuildingisthatitwasanoctagonalchurchwithanaediculeofthesameforminthecentralbay.Nothingisknownaboutthevaultingoftheinnerspaceofthechurch,includingtheoriginalvaultingofthecentralbay.DenysPringleproposesaratherunlikelyreconstructionwithadivisioninninebayscoveredbygroin-vaultswithcrossribssupportedbywall

11 OnthebasisoftheaccountsofthepilgrimSaewulf(1102)andtheRussianAbbotDaniel(1106–08),Kühnel1994,p.33,datestheCrusaderchurchoftheAscensionbetween1102and1106–07;Kühnel1994,p.33.Pringle2007,p.73,concludes,onthebasisofthesameaccountsandotherearlytwelfth-centurytexts,thatthechurchwasnotyetrebuiltinthebeginningofthetwelfthcentury.AccordingtoPringletheearliestreferencesindicatingthatthechurchhadbeenrebuiltdatefromaroundthemiddleofthetwelfthcentury.

12 JohnofWürzburg,CCCM,vol.CXXXIX,p.126;ELS,407,no.635,PPTS,vol.V,p.42.13 Theodoric,CCCM,vol.CXXXIX,pp.163–64;PPTS,vol.V,p.44;ELS,408,no.637.


pilasters, fourcentralpiersandpendentivessupportingadrumcappedbyadomeoverthecentralsquarebay.14Accordingtodescriptionsbypilgrims,theinteriorofthechurchwasdefinedbyafree-standingcolonnade.15BiancaKüh-nelassumesacircularformfortheinnerrowofcolumns,thisinrelationtothesuppositionthattheCrusaderChurchoftheAscensionwasareplica,bothinformandsize,oftheinneroctagonoftheDomeoftheRock,ortheTemplum DominiasitwascalledintheCrusaderperiod(seebelow).16

Thehistoryofthechurchgoesbacktotheendofthefourthcenturywhensourcesalreadymentionachurchinthatlocation.17Thewallsofthetwelfth-centuryCrusaderchurchoverlayandpartlyenclosedthefoundationsofaByz-antinechurchthatwasbuiltonaroundedplatform.TowardstheendoftheseventhcenturythepilgrimArculf,abishopfromGaul,describedthechurch.18

After 1187 the church came into Muslim possession when Saladin estab-lished the building as a foundation in favour of two sheikhs. In 1211–12 themonasterythatadjoinedthechurchwasdestroyedandamosquewasestab-lishedinit.Thechurchwasinruinsfromthefifteenthcenturyon,buttheae-diculeinthecentralbayremainedintact.

Theaediculetransformedintoitscurrentformofanindependentbuildingin1620whenadrumsupportingadomewasaddedtothechapelwhiletheeastdoorwasblockedandamihrabwasinsertedintoitssouthwall.Oneoftheal-legedfootprintsofChristwasremovedtotheDomeoftheRock.Theinternalroundedwallsurfacealsodatesfromthisperiod.Thedomecollapsedduringanearthquakein1834andwassubsequentlyrebuilt.

Thebuilding that isnowcalled theChapelof theAscension is in factnomorethanafragmentofthetwelfth-centuryCrusaderchurch.Onlythewalls,includingthearchitecturalsculptureofthefirstzoneofanaediculeinthecen-tralbayofthelargerchurch,survived.Thewallsofthesurroundingcourtyardgiveanimpressionofthesizeofthatchurch.TheChapelisstillinMuslimpos-sessionandisaholyplaceforbothMuslims–whobelieveintheascensionoftheprophetJesusbutnotinhiscrucifixion–andChristians.

14 Pringle2007,p. 79,p.81andPlan9.15 Kühnel1994,p.31,withreferences.16 Kühnel1994,p.31.17 Kühnel1994,p.30;Pringle2007,p.72.18 Adomnán,CCSL,vol.CLXXV,pp.199–200;transl.byWilkinson1977,pp.100–01.

122 Verhoeven

Restoration or Reconstruction: Church of St Anne19

TheChurchofStAnneisconsideredtobethebestpreservedandmostrepre-sentativeexampleofCrusaderchurcharchitectureinJerusalem.ThechurchislocatedtothenorthoftheTempleMount,neartheLion’sGateand50mnorthofJehoshaphatStreet(ViaDolorosa).RuinsherewereidentifiedwiththeBathsofBethesdaortheSheepPool,thelocationtowhichboththeMiracleoftheHealingof theParalyticandtheBirthofMary intheHouseof JoachimandAnnearelinked.Fromthesixthtothetwelfthcenturybotheventswerecom-memoratedinonechurch,StMaryneartheSheepPool.

After the conquest of Jerusalem the Crusaders dedicated the ByzantineChurchofStMaryneartheSheepPooltoStAnne,themotheroftheVirgin.20However,between1102and1165,theCrusadersbuiltanewChurchofStAnneatashortdistancetothesoutheastoftheByzantinechurch.21Onthefounda-tionsoftheByzantinebuildingtheyerectedasmallchurchormonasteryded-icatedtotheMiracleoftheHealingoftheParalytic,whichisnowinruins.22Excavations in the 1960s showed no evidence for the presumption that theCrusaderchurchwasbuiltupon the remainsofaByzantinepredecessoral-though structures associated with the Byzantine Church of the Sheep Poolwouldhaveextendedintotheareaofthetwelfth-centurybuilding.23

TheChurchofStAnneliesinacourtyardintheMuslimquarter,behindthewallsofthehiddencomplexadministeredbytheWhiteFathers.Itisoneoffewfree-standingchurchesinthe‘OldCity’ofpresent-dayJerusalem(Fig.5.3).Thebuilding,constructedin limestoneashlar, isabasilicaof irregularmeasure-mentswithanaveandtwoaisles, fourbays in length,andadomeover thecrossinginthefirstbay.Ontheeastthechurchterminatesinthreesemi-circu-larapses,whicharepolygonalontheexterior.Thechurchisgroin-vaultedwithbarrelvaultsoverthefirstbay.Thepointedarchesrestuponcompoundpiers.

Thecryptisenteredviaaflightofstairsinthecentralbayofthesouthaisle.Itconsistsofacomplexofseveralsubterraneanspacesincludingapairofrock-cutcavesbelowtheapsethatissupposedlythehouseofJoachimandAnneandthebirthplaceoftheVirginMary.

19 VincentandAbel1914–26,pp.669–742;Pringle2007,pp.142–56.20 Mayer1977,p.248.Pringle2007,pp.142–43,supposesthatthefirstStAnnewasasmaller

predecessoroftheCrusaderchurchonthesamelocation.21 Mayer1977,p.248;Pringle2007,pp.142–43.AccordingtoVincentandAbel1914–26,p.733,

thechurchwasbuiltinthefirsthalfofthetwelfthcentury.IthasalsobeenconsideredtobeafoundationofQueenMelisendeinthe1140s;Kühnel1994,p.19andFolda2008,p.36.

22 Mayer1977,p.249;Kühnel1994,p.24.23 Pringle2007,p. 145.


Thebuildingasawholegivestheimpressionofhavingsurvivedmoreorlessintact,butactuallyhowwellpreservedisthisbasilica?In1192Saladinfoundedamadrasa,areligiousschool,includingamosque,inthechurch.ThebuildingwasinChristianhandsagainbetween1229and1244.After1244Christianshadlimitedaccesstothebuilding,buttheywereallowedtoenterthecrypt.Bytheearlyeighteenthcenturythebuildingwasunoccupied,althoughtheFrancis-cans,togetherwithlocalChristians,celebratedmassinthecrypt.In1841–42themosquewasrepairedbytheOttomangovernorofJerusalem,TayarPasha.Anewmihrabwasinstalledandtheconstructionofacylindricalminaretwasstarted,butwasnevercompleted.Thebasefortheminaretwasthestair-turretofthebelltower,whichstoodoverthewesternbayofthesouthaisleandhadbeendamagedduringtheearthquakein1834.In1856thebuildingwasgrantedtoNapoleonIIIasanexpressionofgratitudeforFrenchhelptotheOttomansintheCrimeanWar.

Thecurrentstateofthechurch,whichhasbeeninhandsoftheCatholicWhiteFatherssince1878,istheresultofthecompleterestorationofthebuild-ingbetween1862and1877.Therenewalincludedthesuppressionofthemih-rab, the excavation and reconstruction of the crypt, the reconstruction of a

Figure5.3 Jerusalem, ChurchofStAnne, view from the north-west. Photo:MariëtteVerhoeven.

124 Verhoeven

diminutive bell-tower and the replacement of much of the sculptural orna-ment.Afterthisnineteenth-centuryrestoration,thechurchwasdamagedbyanIsraelimortarshellin1967afterwhichthedomewaspartiallyrebuilt.

Theresultoftheradicalnineteenth-centuryrestorationwasareconstruc-tiontotheallegedoriginalstateofthebuilding.Itincludedtheerasureoflaterlayers,moreespeciallytheIslamicones.Theonlypresentrelicofthebuilding’sIslamichistoryisSaladin’sinscriptionof1192,recordingtheestablishmentofthemadrasa,setinthetympanumabovetheentrancedoorinthewesternfa-çade.

Commemoration and Context: Cenacle (St Mary of Mount Zion)24

TheCenacleorLastSupperRoomisnoteasytofindinpresent-dayJerusalem.ItislocatedonMountZiononthesecondfloorofabuildinginthecourtyardofayeshiva,aJewisheducationalinstitutionforTorahandTalmudstudies.TheCenacleconsistsofaroom,measuring15.3by9.4m,dividedinsixbayscoveredbygroinvaultscarriedbyfree-standingcolumnsandpilasters.Astaircaseinthesouthwestcornerthatleadsdowntothefirstfloorissurmountedbyabal-dachin.Stairs inthesouth-eastandnorth-eastcorners leaduptodoors, thenorth-easternoneofwhichgivesentrancetoaminaret.OtherIslamicfeaturesare a mihrab in the south wall of the room and stained-glass windows andplaqueswithArabicinscriptions.Neitherfromthelocationnorfromthedeco-rationcanitbededucedthatthiswasonceaspacewithaChristianreligiousfunction.

TheCrusadersrestoredaByzantinebasilicathathadbeenassociatedwiththeFlagellation,theLastSupper,thedescentoftheHolySpiritandwithMary’sDeath.25Theyincorporatedtheapseandflankingchapelsofthisbuildingintoanew,vaultedchurchthatwas11metreslongerthanitspredecessor.Ithadanaveoftwelvebaysanddoubleaisles.Withinthefoureasternbaysofthetwosouthernaislestherewasagallery,whichcommemoratedtheupperroomoftheLastSupper(theso-calledCenacle)andtheChapeloftheHolySpirit.To-wardsthewestendofthenorthernaisleasquareaediculesurmountedbyaroundedbaldachinrepresentedtheplaceoftheVirgin’sDormition.TheCena-clewasremodeledinanearlyGothicstyleinasecondbuildingphase,proba-blyinthe1170sor80s.Bythe1180sthelowerroominthesouthwesterncornerwasidentifiedasthelocationoftheTombofDavid.

24 VincentandAbel1914–26,pp.441–81;Pringle2007,pp.261–87.25 Bede,CCSL,vol.CLXXV,p.258;transl.byWilkinson1977,pp.194–95,pls3–4.


ThechurchcameintoMuslimpossessionafter1187andwasprobablyinru-insaround1219whenal-Mu‘azzam‘IsâdestroyedthefortificationsofJerusa-lem.Pilgrimaccountsfromthethirteenthcenturydescribethechurchasbeinginaruinousstate,apartfromthepartofthebuildingthatenclosedtheCena-cle.Between1332and1336theFranciscanspurchasedtheCenacleandtheru-inedChapeloftheHolySpiritfromtheMamluksultan.NicolasofPoggibonsi(1346–50)describesthestationsintheruinedchurch:theplacewhereStJohntheEvangelistsaidmasstoStMary;theplacewhereStMarydied;theplacewhere St Matthias was made Apostle; the stone that the angel carried fromMountSinaitotheHolySepulchre;thechamberinwhichtheVirginMaryre-mainedforsevenyears;thestonewhereStJamestheLesswasmadebishopofJerusalem;thestonewhereStStephenwasburiedinMountZion;theTombofDavidandofSolomoninMountZion;theplacewheretheHolySpiritcametotheApostles;theplacewhereChristwashedthefeetonMaundyThursday;theplace where Christ appeared to his disciples in Mount Zion, and the placewhereChristhadSupperwithhisApostles.26ThelastisdescribedasachurchheldbytheFriarsMinorcontainingthreealtars.In1523theOttomanSultanSüleymanorderedtheexpulsionofthefriarsfromMountZionandayearlaterthe Cenacle was converted into a mosque. The Franciscans retained someroomsintheconventthattheyhadestablishedandoneintheCenacleforuseasachapel.Afterthecitywallswererebuiltbetween1536and1541MountZionlayoutsidethecity.In1551allthebuildingsofthecomplexcameintoOttomanhands. In theseventeenthcenturyasmallmosque,coveredbyadome,wasbuiltintheplaceofthechapeloftheHolySpirit,directlyabovetheTombofDavid.

From1831,theFranciscanswereallowedtocelebratemassintheCenacleonMaundyThursdayandWhitSunday,anditwasonlyin1948thattheMuslimsweredefinitelyexcluded.TheCenaclecameunder thecontrolof the IsraeliMinistryofReligiousAffairs,andthepresentyeshivawasestablished intheformerconventbuildings.

OfalltheeventsthatwereoncecommemoratedintheChurchofStMaryofMount Zion only the commemoration of the Last Supper has survived.TheCenacleretainsthememoryoftheLastSupperbutfromitsoriginalcontext,theCrusaderChurchofMountZion,onlywrittenevidencehassurvived.Con-fusingly,theCenacleislocatedneartheChurchoftheDormition,builtbytheGermanEmperorWilliamIIin1900.Thischurchwaslaidoutaroundthere-mains of a supposedly Byzantine building, identified with the ByzantineChurchofStMaryofMountZion.Theonlypartthatremainedofthelatter,

26 NicolasofPoggibonsi,SBFCollmai,vol.II,pp.35–40.

126 Verhoeven

however, is locatedundertheCenacle.Here, inanexedraofachapeloftheByzantinechurch,standstheso-calledTombofDavid,nowinJewishposses-sion.

Baroque Treasury: Church of St James (Armenian Cathedral)27

The Church of St James or Armenian Cathedral is located in the Armenianquarter,nearthesouthernwalloftheOldCity.ThechurchishiddenbehindthewallssurroundingtheterrainoftheArmenianPatriarchateand,apartfromitswesternfaçade,isenclosedbyotherbuildings(Fig.5.4).

TheArmenianCathedralisabasilicaofthreebays,withadomeoverthecentral bay, a walled-in narthex along its south side containing the Etchmi-adzinchapelandanothernarthexandgalleryalongitswestside.Fourpiers,withaprojectingpilasterorshaftoneachsidecoveredwithpaintingsandtiles,carrythevaults.Thechurchterminatesintheeastinacentralapseandtwosideapses.OnthenorthsidestandstheChapelofStMenas,presumablydat-ingbacktothefifthcentury,with,onitsupperlevel,achapeldedicatedtotheHoly Apostles. The chapel of St Stephen, which functions as the sacristy, isbuilt in the angle between the east wall of the Chapel of St Menas and thenorthsideofthechurch.Thebuildingisopentothepublicforashortperiodonceadaybutentranceto thechapelsof thechurch isallowedonly to theArmeniancommunity.

TheChurchofStJameswasbuiltbytheArmeniansbetween1142and1165.According to the pilgrim John ofWürzburg (1165) the head of St James theGreat, who had been decapitated by Herod, was venerated in the church.28Fromthefourteenthcenturyonwards,thepatronofthechurchwasidentifiedbypilgrimsasStJames,brotherofJesusandthefirstbishopofJerusalem,whoisinLatinWesterntraditionidentifiedwithJamestheLess.29Intoday’schurchtheheadofStJamestheGreatiskeptinasmallchapelinthenorthwalltotherightoftheentrancetotheStMenaschapel.ThethroneofStJamestheLessisattachedtothenorth-easternpierofthechurch,andhisgrave,markedbyalowroundedgrille,islocatedinfrontofit.Thethronedatesfromtheseven-teenth century, the period in which other works were also executed in the

27 VincentandAbel 1914–26,pp.516–61;ArmenianArt 1980,pp. 121–29; Pringle2007, pp.168–82.

28 JohnofWürzburg,CCCM,vol.CXXXIX,p.133;PPTS,vol.V,p.45.29 LexikonTheologieundKirche,vol.V,p.270;Pringle2007,p.170,withreferencestopil-

grimsaccounts.


church,includingthewallingupofthenarthexandthedecorationofthechoirwithamosaicfloor.

Themainpartofthedecoration,however,datesfromthefirsthalfoftheeighteenthcentury.InthatperiodtheCrusaderfabricwascoveredwithplas-ter,tilesfromKütahyainpresent-dayTurkey,woodenpanelsandgildedorna-ments.Theentrancestothechapelsofthechurchweredecoratedwithdoorswithinlaidwork,anewmainaltarandiconostasiswereplacedintheapseandtheEtchmiadzinchapelwaserectedintheeasternendoftheformernarthex.In1821thedomewasrepairedandaftertheearthquakeof1834anewnarthexandagallerytothewestfrontwerebuilt.

The baroque decoration obscures the view of the architectural form andspacewhichgoesbacktothetimeoftheCrusaders.Fromthedecorationofthetwelfth-centurybuildingonlyafewofthecapitalsofthepiersremainaswellastheframeoftheportalfromthenarthextothechurch,consistingofapoint-edarchoftwoordersrestingoncolonnettes.

Figure5.4 Jerusalem, buildings of the ArmenianPatriarchatewith the dome of the ChurchofStJamesto the right, from the city walls near the Sion Gate. Photo:MariëtteVerhoeven.

128 Verhoeven

Crusader Staircase to a Byzantine Crypt: St Mary in the Valley of Jehoshaphat30

AtthebaseoftheMountofOlivesstepsfromtheroaddescendintoasquarecourtyardcontainingafaçadewithaportal.Theportalisenclosedbyapointedarchofthreeorders,supportedonsixcolonnetteswithCorinthiancapitals.Abroaderarch,supportedbyapairofcolonnettes,surroundstherecessedpor-tal.Behindtheportalastaircaseof47steps(Fig.5.5)leadstoacryptwiththetomboftheVirginMary.Thewallsandvaultsofthecryptareblackenedwiththesmokefromcandlesandoil lamps.Theinterior isdecoratedwithaltars,icons,andaforestofhanginglamps.ThecomplexisknownasStMaryintheValleyofJehoshaphat.

TheCrusadersrebuiltachurchdedicatedtoStMarythatalreadyexistedin451andwasdescribedbythepilgrimArculf(c.685):‘Itisachurchbuiltattwolevels,and the lowerpart,which isbeneathastonevault,hasa remarkableroundshape.Attheeastendthereisanaltar,ontherightofwhichistheemp-ty rock tomb in which for a time Mary remained entombed. [...]The upperChurchofStMaryisalsoround,andonecanseefouraltarsthere’.31Fromtheninthcenturyonwarddifferentsourcesdescribetheupperchurchasbeinginruins.

TheCrusadersrebuilttheupperByzantinechurchasathree-aisledbasilicawithaneasternapseandtwintowersatthewestend.Theyalsoextendedthelowerchurch,orcrypt,whichwasbuiltintheshapeofacross.Theeasternarm,containingtherock-cuttombaediculeofMary,wasextendedbyca14metresandended, likethewesternarm,inasemi-circularapse.Thetombaediculewasregularizedbyamasonrycoating,coveredinmarbleandsurroundedbyanarcade.Thesouthernarmwasextendedwithamonumentalstaircasewhichgaveaccesstothecrypt.

ThestaircaseisspannedbyatransversearchwhichmusthavecarriedthesouthwalloftheupperCrusaderchurch.ThearchtouchestheByzantinema-sonryofthecrypt.In1161,QueenMelisendewasburiedinanarchedchapel(moreaniche)totherightofthemonumentalstaircase.InthelaterMiddleAgesshewasidentifiedasthefounderofthechurch.Sincethefifteenthcen-turythechapelofMelisendehasbeenidentifiedasthatofJoachimandAnne.Opposite,alittlefurtherdownthestairswasanotherniche,probablytheburi-alplaceofQueenMorphia,wifeofBaldwinIIandMelisende’smother,who

30 VincentandAbel1914–26,pp.805–31;Pringle2007,pp.287–306.31 Adomnán,CCSL,vol.CLXXV,p.195;transl.byWilkinson1977,p. 99.


wasburiedinthechurchinc.1129.SincethesixteenthcenturythischapelhasbeendedicatedtoStJoseph.

Saladindestroyedtheupperchurchin1192,whenhebegantorebuildthecitywalls.ThetombofMary,motheroftheprophetIsa(Jesus),nowbecameanIslamicsacredplacebutChristianswerenotexcludedfromit. Inthesix-teenthcentury,theOttomansremovedthemarblecoveringofthetombaedi-culeandplasteredoverit.Intheseventeenthcenturythealtartothesouthofthetombof theVirginwasreplacedbyamihrab.Anotherprayernichewasaddedinsidethetombaedicule.Thecolumnsofthearcadethatsurroundedthe tomb, and the ciborium above it (described by the pilgrim Theodoric),wereremovedbutthecapitalsandbasesremainedinsitu.In1757thecryptwastakenoverbytheGreeksandArmenianswhiletheFranciscans,whohadbeen

Figure5.5 Jerusalem, StMaryintheValleyofJehoshaphat, staircase leading to the crypt. Photo:MariëtteVerhoeven.

130 Verhoeven

allowedtosaymassatthetombsincethefourteenthcentury,wereexcludedfromit.

ThefaçadeoftheupperchurchandtheextensionstotheByzantinecrypt,includingthemonumentalstaircase,iswhathasremainedfromtheCrusadercomplex.ItisoneoftwolocationsinJerusalemcommemoratingMary’sDeath,theotheronebeingonMountZion(seeabove).

Creating a Christian Jerusalem: The Templum Domini32

InEarlyChristiantimesnoattempthadbeenmadetorebuildtheJewishTem-plethathadbeendestroyedbyTitusinAD70.AfterthecaptureofthecitybytheMuslimsin638,theUmayyadcaliphbuilttheshrineoftheDomeoftheRockonwhatiscalledTempleMount.AccordingtotraditionitwasbuiltonthelocationofMohammed’sascensionafterhemadehis‘nightjourney’fromMeccato‘thefarthestmosque’.ThiswassupposedtobetheTempleinJerusa-lem,althoughJerusalemisnotmentionedintheQur’an.

In1099theCrusadersidentifiedtheDomeoftheRockastheTemplum Do-minialthoughtheymusthavebeenwellawarethatitwasnottheTempleoftheOldTestament.AccordingtothepilgrimSaewulf,thefootprintsintherockthatwasexposedinsidethebuildingwerethoseofChrist.33Inthe1120sFulcherofChartresnotedthatanaltarhadbeenplacedovertherockandachoirhadbeeninstalledfortheclergy.34WhenthechurchcametobeservedbyAugus-tinianCanonsisnotclear,butaprioroftheTemplum Dominiisfirstmentionedin1112.35ThepilgrimJohnofWürzburg(c.1165)givesadescriptionofthebuild-ing:‘NowthissameTempleoftheLord,whichhasbeenadornedbysomeonebothwithinandwithoutwithawondrouscasingofmarble,hastheformofabeautifulrotunda,orratherofacircularoctagon,thatis,havingeightanglesdisposedinacircle,withawalldecoratedontheoutsidefromthemiddleup-wardswiththefinestmosaicwork,fortheremainderisofmarble.Thissamelowerwalliscontinuous,savethatitispiercedbyfourdoors,havingonedoortowardstheeast,whichadjoinsachapeldedicatedtoStJames,foronthatsidehewasthrowndownfromtheroofoftheTempleandkilledwithafuller’sclub,havingbeenthefirsthighpriestunderthenewlawofgrace inJerusalem’.36

32 Pringle2007,pp.397–417.33 Saewulf,CCCM,vol.CXXXIX,p.68;transl.byWilkinson1988,p.105.34 FulcherofChartres,RHCocc,vol.III,pp.356–57;transl.byRyan1969,pp.117–18.35 Pringle2007,p.401,withreferences.36 JohnofWürzburg,CCCM,vol.CXXXIX,p.92;PPTS,vol.V,pp.14–16.


Johngoesontoquotetheinscriptionstobeseenonthebuildinganddescribesthesitesinandaroundit,includingastonemarkedbytheLord’sfootwhenhethrew the buyers and sellers out of the Temple. This was joined to a stonemarkingthespotwhereChristwaspresented.AccordingtothepilgrimThe-odoric(1172)thisplacewasenclosedbyanironscreenwithdoors.HeistheonlyonewhostatesthattheTempleanditsaltarwerededicatedtotheVirginMary.37JohnofWürzburgmentionsthatthesignoftheHolyCross,whichtheChristians had placed on the dome was ‘very offensive to the Saracens, andmanyofthemwouldbewillingtoexpendmuchgoldtohaveittakenaway;foralthoughtheydonotbelieveinChrist’sPassion,neverthelesstheyrespectthisTemple,becausetheyadoretheircreatortherein,whichneverthelessmustberegarded as idolatry on the authority of Saint Augustine, who declares thateverythingisidolatrywhichisdonewithoutfaithinChrist’.38

WiththeappropriationoftheDomeoftheRock,themostprominentbuild-ingofthecity(Fig.5.6),theCrusadersestablishedanaxisrunningfromtheChurch of the Ascension via the Templum Domini to the Holy Sepulchre.39While the IslamicDomeof theRock,now Templum Domini, had beenbuiltaftertheexampleoftheEarlyChristianRotundaoftheHolySepulchre,theChurchoftheAscensioninitsturnimitatedtheformoftheDomeoftheRock(seeabove).Becauseofthisconsciousmisconceptiontheoctagonbecamethearchetypical model for theTemple in (Northern) Europe during the MiddleAges.40

TheotherIslamicbuildingsontheTempleMountthatwereappropriatedbytheCrusadersincludedtheQubbat-as-SilsilaorDomeoftheChain,whichbecametheChapelofStJamestheLess,andtheal-AqsaMosquethatbecamethePalatium Salomonis.

WiththetransformationanddedicationofthemonumentsontheTempleMount,theCrusadersdeniedtheIslamicoriginofthebuildings.ThenamesofthebuildingsnowreferredtoanoriginintheEarlyChristianpast,theperiodinwhichtheTempleMounthadnotbeenoccupiedbytheChristians.AfterthefallofJerusalemtoSaladinthebuildingsontheTempleMountwerereturnedtoMuslimuseandthetracesofChristianpossessionwereerased.Withthat,theconceptualaxisoftheChurchoftheAscension–Templum Domini–Holy

37 Theodoric,CCCM,vol.CXXXIX,pp.163–64;PPTS,vol.V,p.30.38 JohnofWürzburg,CCCM,vol.CXXXIX,p.94;PPTS,vol.V,p.18.39 ThisargumentwasproposedbyBiancaKühnelinthepapershepresentedattheexpert

meeting ‘MonumentsandMemory’,organizedattheRadboudUniversityNijmegenon8–9December2011.

40 IthankJeroenGoudeauforpointingthisouttome.

132 Verhoeven

Sepulchrewasalsodisturbed.ThecrossthatstoodoverthedomeoftheTem-plum Dominiwaspulleddownanddraggedthroughthestreetswhereitwassmashedtopieces.Saladin’spurificationofthebuildingincludedthereplace-ment of the Latin inscriptions and decoration. The wrought-iron Crusadergrillesurroundingtherockremainedinplaceuntilthe1950s.Forashortperiodintheyear1244theTemplum Dominiwasre-occupiedbytheLatins,whoagainraisedacrossoverthedome,butthiscametoanendwiththecaptureofJeru-salembytheKhwarizmianTurks.

TodaythemonumentsontheTempleMountarenotaccessibletonon-Mus-lims.However,anyonecanvisitthevastplatform,whereonlyafewpiecesofarchitecturalsculptureserveasareminderoftheCrusaderoccupationofthearea,althoughtheywillhardlyberecognizedassuchbymostofthevisitors.

Conclusion

DuringtherelativelyshortperiodofaboutahundredyearsinwhichtheCru-saders occupied Jerusalem, they managed to execute an extensive building

Figure5.6 Jerusalem, view of the Old City, from the Mount of Olives, with the DomeoftheRock in the front to the right. Photo:MariëtteVerhoeven.


program.Itincludedthere-adaptationorrebuildingofmonumentsthatdatedbacktoEarlyChristianorByzantinetimes,theappropriationofIslamicedi-fices,andtheconstructionofnewbuildings.Withthattheyrealizedtheirgoalofthere-establishmentofJerusalemasaChristiancity.

AfterthefalltoSaladinin1187,JerusalembecameapredominantlyIslamiccity.Tousethemetaphorofthepalimpsest:anewlayerwasaddedtothecity,olderlayerswereerasedormixedwiththenewlayer.EspeciallyduringtheOt-tomanperiod(sixteenth–nineteenthcenturies)Islamicfeatures,forexamplemihrabs andminarets,wereaddedtoconvertedbuildingssuchasthechurchesoftheAscension,StAnne,StMaryofMountZionandStMaryintheValleyofJehoshaphat.InthecaseoftheChurchofStAnnetheseadditionshavebeenerased, as happened with the Christian features of the appropriated monu-ments on theTemple Mount that were returned to Muslim possession.TheChurch of the Holy Sepulchre and the Church of St James the Great nevercameintoMuslimusebuttheyhadtheirownhistoryoftransformation.

If one compares the current appearance of the Crusader buildings withtheiroriginalform,onecanconcludethatonlyfragments–astaircase,acrypt,afaçade,columnsorfoundations–havesurvived.Eventheapparentauthen-ticity of the Church of St Anne is the result of extensive restorations in thenineteenth century.The buildings can be designated as ‘Crusader buildings’onlywhentheyareframedinthetimeoftheirconception.

Atthesametime,despite–orthanksto–Jerusalem’shistoryofreligiousconversions,manyoftheCrusaderbuildingsstayedinuseandarethecity’svisiblewitnessestothisturbulentpast.Theirdifferentformsandmeaningsinvariouscontextsweretheresultofdifferenttypesoftransformation:blending,pilingup,erasure,reconstructiveinterpretation,demolition,isolation,cover-ingupandappropriation.Andinthesurvivingbuildings,howevermuchtrans-formed,thecontinuityofatleastapartofJerusalem’sChristiantopography,re-establishedinthetwelfthcentury,hasbeenpreserved.

Bibliography

Abbreviations CCCM Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Mediaevalis,Turnhout1966-CCSL Corpus Christianorum Series Latina,Turnhout1953-IHC Itinera Hierosolymitana Crucesignatorum (saec. XII-XIII), ed.bySabino

deSandoli,4vols,SBF,CollMai.,no.24,Jerusalem1978–84.PPTS The library of the Palestine Pilgrims’ Texts Society, 13 vols, London

1890–97.

134 Verhoeven

RHCHistocc Recueil des Historiens des Croisades. Historiens occidentaux,5vols,Paris1844–95.

SBFCollmai Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio maior,Jerusalem1941-

Primary SourcesAdomnán,De Locis Sanctis,ed.byL.Bieler, I,XXIII,1–4,CCSL,vol.CLXXV,pp.175–234;

transl.byWilkinson1977,pp.93–116.Bede,De Locis Sanctis, ed.byI.Fraipont,CCSL,vol.CLXXV,pp.245–80.FulcherofChartres,Gesta peregrinantium Francorum cum Armis Hierusalem pergenti-

um,RHC.Histocc,vol.III,pp.311–485;transl.byF.R.Ryan,A History of the Expedition to Jerusalem, 1095–1127,Knoxville1969.

JohnofWürzburg,Descriptio Locorum Terrae Sanctae,ed.byR.B.C.Huygens,CCCM,vol.CXXXIX, pp. 78–141; PPTS, vol. V, http://archive.org/stream/libraryofpalesti05paleuoft#page/n93/mode/2up(accessedApril2013).

NicolasofPoggibonsi,Libro d’Oltramare,ed.byBacchidelaLega,rev.B.Bagatti,SBFCollmai,vol.II,Jerusalem1945.

Saewulf,Peregrinatio,ed.byR.B.C.Huygens,CCCM,vol.CXXXIX;pp.59–77;transl.byWilkinson1988,pp.177–80.

Theodoric,Libellus de Locis Sanctis,ed.byR.B.C.Huygens,CCCM,vol.CXXXIX,pp.143–97;PPTS,vol. V,http://archive.org/stream/libraryofpalesti05paleuoft#page/n217/mode/2up(accessedApril2013).

WilbrandofOldenburg,Itinerarium Terrae Sanctae,IHC,vol.III,pp.195–249.

Secondary LiteratureArmenian Art Treasures of Jerusalem,ed.byB.Narkiss,Oxford1980.The Art and Architecture of the Crusader States,ed.byH.W.Hazard,AHistoryofthe

CrusadesIV, Madisonetc.1977.Boas,A.J.,Jerusalem in the Time of the Crusades. Society, Landscape and Art in the Holy

City under Frankish Rule,Londonetc.2001.Dechamps,P.,Terre Sainte romane,Saint-Léger-Vauban1964.DeVogüé,M.,Les Églises de la Terre Sainte,Paris1860.Enlart,C.,Les monuments de croisés dans le royaume de Jérusalem. Architecture réligieuse

et civile,Paris1925–1928.Folda, Jaroslav, Crusader Art. The Art of the Crusades in the Holy Land, 1099–1291,

Alderschotetc.2008.Krüger, Jürgen, Die Grabeskirche zu Jerusalem. Geschichte – Gestalt – Bedeutung,

Regensburg2000.Kühnel,Bianca,Crusader Art of the Twelfth Century. A Geographical, an Historical or an

Art-Historical Notion?,Berlin1994.Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche,11vols,Freiburg19572.


Mayer, H.E., Bistümer, Klöster und Stifte im Königreich Jerusalem, Schriften derMonumentaGermaniaeHistorica26,Stuttgart1977.

Ousterhout,Robert,‘ArchitectureasRelicandtheConstructionofSanctity.TheStonesof theHolySepulchre’, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians62,no. 1(March2003),pp.4–23.

Pringle,Denys,The Churches of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem. A Corpus. Volume III. The City of Jerusalem,Cambridge2007.

Vincent,L.-H.andF.-M.Abel,Jérusalem. Recherches de topographie, d’archéologie et d’histoire,vol.II,Jérusalem nouvelle,4volsandplates,Paris1914–26.

Wilkinson,John,Jerusalem Pilgrims Before the Crusades,Warminster1977.––––––,Column Capitals in the Al-Haram Al-Sharif, Jerusalem1987.––––––,Jerusalem Pilgrimage 1099–1185,London1988.

136 DeBlaauw

Chapter6

Translations of the Sacred City between Jerusalem and Rome

Sible de Blaauw

SeveralcitiesandindividualchurchesintheMiddleAgeswereassociatedwiththeideaofrepresentingorincorporatingJerusaleminonemanneroranother.This widely attested phenomenon occurred in a large range of variants, de-pendingonthe‘type’ofJerusalemrepresentedandthewayinwhichtherep-resentationwasmadeconcrete.1Inthiscontribution,Iaimtodiscussoneoftheearliest,andperhapsoneof themostnotablecasesof ‘being’ JerusalemoutsideJerusalem.ThechurchleadersofRomemayhavehadveryspecificrea-sonsforappropriatingthesignificanceofthehistoricalJerusalemasthean-cient capital of the Roman Empire. Moreover, they may have utilized veryspecificinstrumentsinorderforthisclaimtomaterialize.Itwasrootedintheidea that Christian Rome had been founded directly from Jerusalem by themission of the apostles Peter and Paul. Rome was, in the words of JenniferO’Reilly:‘thewesternextremityoftheirevangelizingmissionfromthebiblicalcentreoftheearthatJerusalemandbecamethenewcentrefromwhichtheirpapal successors continued the apostolic mission to the ends of the earth’.2Theexistenceoftheapostles’tombs,reinforcedbytherecollectionsofnumer-ousChristianmartyrs,wasthefundamentalfactorinmakingRomeintothenewspiritualcapitaloftheChristianworld.ThisclaimurgedChristianRometoestablishnewtermsforitsrelationshipwithwhatqualified,perhaps,as‘theideologicalcentreoftheChristianempire’ inJerusalem.3IthasbeenarguedthattheRomanChurchdidsobyaliteraltransferofthesignificanceofearthlyJerusalemtoRome,andhencebymaking Jerusalemsuperfluous.HartmannGrisar’s1899essay ‘AntichebasilichediRomaimitanti isantuariidiGerusa-lemmeeBetlemme’containedstimulatingideasandobservations,whichhavelargelybeenreproducedbylaterscholarship,often,however,withoutcriticalevaluationoftheevidence.4

1 E.g.Kühnel1987andOusterhout1998.2 O’Reilly2007,p.13;cf.O’Reilly2003,pp.148–50.3 Elsner2000,p.194.4 Grisar1899.

© SibledeBlaauw,2014 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_008This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.



137TranslationsOfTheSacredCityBetweenJerusalemAndRome

Inthefollowingpages,thevisualandmaterialmeansemployedtolinkJeru-salemorideasofJerusalemtothephysicalcityofRomeinLateAntiquityandtheMiddleAgeswillbeexamined.Buildings,topography,iconographyandlit-urgyinChristianRomecomprisedvariousimagesandreflectionsofJerusalem.Theinvestigationwillconcentrateonthemostconspicuousandconsistentex-amplesofreferencestotheearthlyJerusalem,whichrepresentavarietyof‘me-dia’,includingrelics,visualrepresentations,locationsandceremonies.ThesequotationsorallusionsmayalsorefertotheHeavenlyJerusalem,butthislevelofinterpretationneedsnoinclusioninthepresentargument.ThediscussionstartsinConstantiniantimesandendsintheperiodoftheoverwhelmingin-creaseofideasabout,andmemoriesof,JerusalemproducedalloverWesternEuropeasa resultof theCrusades.Forobvious reasons, theRomanChurchwhichisitselfcalled‘Jerusalem’,SantaCroceinGerusalemme,willclaimacen-tralroleintheensuingdiscussion.

The Earliest Relic from the Holy Land?

ThebuildingprogrammeoftheemperorConstantine,rulingoverthecityofRomefrom312untilhisdeathin337,includedthefirstall-embracingprojectofarchitecturalandurbanisticChristianizationoftheancientcapital.5Thenew,publicbuildingsforChristianworshipweredestinedfordifferentfunctionalcategories:theurbancathedraloftheLateran,thememorialbasilicaofStPe-ter’sontheVaticanhillandfunerarybasilicasontheChristiancemeteriesout-sidethewalls.OneofConstantine’sfoundations,however,wasexceptionalinallrespects.Itwasachurch(basilica)installedinanexistingbuilding,theSes-sorianpalace,anditwasallocatedtothevenerationofarelicbrought fromafar,afragmentofthewoodencrossonwhichJesusofNazarethhadbeencru-cified(Fig.6.1).6BoththereuseofanolderbuildingandtheculticfocusonatranslatedrelicareuniqueinConstantine’sbuildingactivitiesinfavouroftheChristianChurch,includinghisprojectsintheHolyLandandthenewcapitalofConstantinople.TheRomaneditoroftheearlysixthcentury,whomadeuseoforiginalarchivaldocumentsconcerningConstantine’schurchfoundationstocompiletheLiber Pontificalis,thebookwiththebiographiesoftheRoman

5 Recentoverview:Brandenburg2004.6 LP34c.22:‘EodemtemporefecitConstantinusAugustusbasilicaminpalatioSessoriano,ubi

etiamdelignosanctæCrucisdomininostriIesuChristiinauroetgemmisconclusit,ubietnomenecclesiædedicavit,quæcognominaturusqueinhodiernumdiemHierusalem[…]’

138 DeBlaauw

bishops,didnotfailtoaddthatthechurchinquestionwasentitledHierusalem‘untilthepresentday’.

TheintricatelayersoftraditionsregardingtheFindingoftheTrueCross,theroleoftheempressHelena,Constantine’smother,andthediffusionofCrossrelicsandtheircultovertheempireinthecourseofthefourthcenturyhaveobscuredthesignificanceofthefactsregardingRome.Theearlyinstallationofa memoria of the Holy Cross in an imperial palace complex in Rome is ex-tremely plausible, in view of sound written and archaeological evidence.7‘Early’meansbeforethe350s,theperiodinwhichthelegendarytraditionofthe Cross Finding and the pilgrimage of Helena (died 329/330) to the Holy

7 ForbrevitysakeIrefertotheargumentsdiscussedinDeBlaauw1997.

Figure6.1 Rome, S.CroceinGerusalemme, ca. 320-50, reconstruction of fourth-century plan and elevation (afterKrautheimerandCecchelli).


Landwasconstructed.8ThecultinRomeappearstobelongtotheprotohistoryofthisfamouslegend:amomentwhenthevalueoftheHolyCrossasarelichadbeenrecognizedandtheproliferationofparticleswasabouttostart,butwithoutanunderpinningnarrative.ThefoundationdocumentsoftheRomanmemoriadonotspeakaboutHelena,eveniftheempress-dowagermayhavelivedintheSessorianpalace.Thechurch,basicallyalargerectangularhallwithdiaphragmcolonnadesandanapseatitseasternend,musthavebeenfoundedduringConstantine’sreign,butmayhavebeenaccomplishedonlyunderCon-stantine’ssons,oneortwodecadesaftertheirfather’sdeathin337.9

Theremaininghardevidenceisremarkableenough.Thecreationofame-moriaoftheHolyCrossinRomeisthefirstoutsideJerusalemthatishistori-cally corroborated. From its arrival in Rome, the Cross relic was sealed in acasingofgoldandjewels–mentionedbytheLiber Pontificalis.Itsmostprob-ableplaceofconservationwasachapeldirectlybehindtheapseofthechurch,decoratedwithmosaicsonbehalfofthereigningemperorsintheperiod425–44.ThislaterbecamethechapelofStHelena.Accidentallyornot,itsdisposi-tioncorrespondedtothelocationofGolgothainrelationtotheConstantinianbasilica of the Holy Sepulchre complex in Jerusalem.10 The aspect of topo-graphicalidentificationisreflectedintheepithetHierusalem,currentatleastfromthefifthcenturyonwardsandhenceforthexpressedintheusualdesigna-tion of the Church as the Holy Cross in Jerusalem (today: Santa Croce inGerusalemme).11

8 ScholarlyconsensusconfirmstheconstructionoftheHelenalegendinJerusalemaroundthemiddleofthefourthcenturyorslightlylater:DrijversandDrijvers1997,p.13.

9 Brandenburg2004,pp.103–08.10 Already noticed by Grisar 1899, pp. 557–58.The difference is the location of the Cross

sanctuary:totheleftoftheapseinJerusalemandtotherightinRome.Althoughthedis-positionsofthesanctuariesareopposite,botharesituatedonthesouthside.Cf.apossi-bleparallelinSantaCroce,Ravenna,intheyearsofGallaPlacidia(c.430-50),whoisalsoknown as the patron of a decoration of the Roman chapel: Smith 1990, pp. 193–95. InRavennathepossiblelocationofacultoftheCrossissituatedtotheleft,i.e.thenorthoftheapse.SmithiswronginsupposingthattheRomanchapelissituatedtotheleftoftheapseaswell.

11 Fortheearliestsource,aninscriptionof425–44:DeBlaauw1997,pp.56–59.Forthehis-toryofSantaCroceinGerusalemmesee:GerusalemmeaRoma2012.

140 DeBlaauw

Jerusalem as the Christian Sacred City

TheRomanrelicbelongstothefirststageoftheperceptionofJerusalemandtheHolyLandasthememorialplaceoftheSalvationonearth,forwhichthephysicalevidenceofChrist’sCrosswasincreasinglyavitalnotion.12Constan-tine’s patronage of building in the Holy Land after 325 AD, early pilgrimagemovements and the first diffusion of Cross relics confirm the growing con-sciousnessofthesacredtopographyofJerusaleminthe330sand340s.13Inawidercontext,thisdevelopmentmaybeseenasanepisodeintheredefinitionofChristianidentityintheRomanEmpire,whereChristiancommunitieshadbeenminoritiessufferingundersuppressiononlyrecently,andnowbecamepartofanimperialprojecttomakethemparticipantsinthelegitimizationoftheemperor’sauthority.14AlthoughConstantinenevervisitedJerusalemasanemperor,andcanhardlyhavenourisheddirectpoliticalinterestsfortheincon-siderableprovincialcity,hisculturalorreligiouscommitmenttolocalChris-tian sites is well documented.15 His position may have converged well withtendencies in the city’s Christian community to establish a Christian domi-natedJerusalem,whichwoulderaseJewishandpaganrecollections.16

Onlyinasecondphase,reasonablylinkedwiththepolicyandcatecheticalactivityofBishopCyrilfrom350,wasChristianculturalmemoryinJerusalemredefined and assembled into the story of the Finding of theTrue Cross byHelena.Withoutdoubt,usewasmadeofthehistoricalnotionsofthepreviousgenerationtowhichmaybelongtheidentificationoftheCrossofChristunderConstantine,aswellasajourneyofHelenatotheHolyLandin326.Helena’sexpeditionwasremarkableenoughforanempressandapioneeringactofpil-grimage.The combination of these elements in one narrative, however, hasmanyfeaturesofaninventionoftradition.17Itspreadcontinuallyovertheem-pire,inspiringseveralvariantsintheEast.Ultimately,inthe390s,theHelenalegend was known in Italy.18 The idea that Helena found the True Cross ofChristinthedirectvicinityoftheveryspotoftheCrucifixion,andstartedthe

12 Heid2001[a],pp.119–25.13 Elsner2000.14 OntheroleoftheHolyLandinthisprocess:Jacobs2004.15 Iam,however,ratherscepticaltowardsthecentralroleoftheHolyLandinthe‘construc-

tionofChristianimperialideology’stressede.g.byElsner2000andJacobs2004.16 Jacobs2004,pp.139–43.17 Drijvers1991,pp.79–180,esp.pp.138–45.Themostrecentevaluationofthesourcesand

relevantscholarship:Heid2001[b].18 Drijvers1992,pp.109–13.


distributionofitsrelics,wouldbecomethedominantstoryallovertheChris-tianworldintheMiddleAges.

ConstantinehadbeenwillingtomarktheurbanareaofJerusalemandnear-by Bethlehem with three conspicuous Christian buildings on the sites ofChrist’sbirth,ofhisTeachingandofhisDeathandResurrection.Inthecourseof the century, these Constantinian memoriae became the nuclei of a land-scapeof loca sancta,holysites,whichmadeJerusalemintoaHolyCity(Fig.6.2). Its memorial geography of the history of Salvation attracted Christiansfromthewholeempireandbeyond.19Theyvisitedplaceswherebiblicaleventsthemselveshadtakenplace,spotswherecrucialmomentsinthehistoryofSal-vationcouldbeexperiencedwiththehumansenses inthemostdirectway.The accounts of early pilgrimages from theWest to Jerusalem testify to theuniquevalueoftheHolyLand.AnanonymouspilgrimfromBordeauxhadal-readytravelledduringConstantine’sreign,leavingthefirstwrittenpilgrimageaccount(333AD).Anotherpilgrim,Egeria,visitedtheHolyLandinthelateryearsofCyril’spontificate,andleftadetaileddiary(381–84AD).Thedevelop-mentofthecultoftheCrossinhalfacenturyseemstobereflectedinthewaybothauthorsrefertoit.ThefirstaccountonlymentionsGolgothainpassing,astheplaceof theCrucifixionclosetotheHolySepulchre,whereasEgeriade-scribestheceremoniesofvenerationoftheHolyCrossextensively.20

TheincomparablespiritualsignificanceofthesacredtopographyofJerusa-lem and the Holy Land was recognized in Rome during the fourth century,aboveallinasceticalcircles.Jerome,thelearnedtheologian,andaristocraticwomenlikePaulaandMelaniatheelderandtheyoungerallleftthebusycapi-talandtravelledtoPalestine,tofindaspiritualrefugeinthedirectvicinityoftheholyplaces.21Romemayhavebeenblessedwiththetombsoftheapostles;ametropoliscouldnotoffertheidealplaceforascetic‘imitation’astheholyplacesinPalestine.22Inhis lettertoMarcella,JeromestressedtheparticularsanctityofJerusalemanddidnothesitatetoconcludethatthecitywasevensuperiortoRome.23

19 For this development I was able to consult the recent, still unpublished Habilitations-schriftbyUteVerstegen,UniversityofErlangen2013:‘HeiligerOrt–sakralerRaum.Kon-tinuitätundWandelinderInszenierungderHerrenorteinJerusalem’.

20 ItinerariumBurdigalenseandEgeria37/48in:Itineraria1965CC175,pp.13–20,80–81,89.21 Jenal1995,pp.350–52.22 Hieronymus,Epist.46.8.11(392/93AD),CSEL54,pp.338–41.23 Bitton2005,p.74.

142 DeBlaauw

Jerusalem Hierotopy in Rome and the Diffusion of Cross Relics

Inthislight,thedecisiontobringaparticleofthe‘sacredwood’toRomeandtomakeitthefocusofanimperialfoundationmusthavebeenameaningfulandostentatiouschoice in theearlyphase indicated above. It isnotknownwhotooktheinitiative,buttheideacanonlyhaveariseninthecontextoftheempire-wide imperialpatronage for theChristianChurch.Thecreationofamemoria of the Holy Cross, probably the first outside Jerusalem, must haveaimedataddingaspiritualqualitytothealreadyexistingeminenceofRomeasthecityoftheapostlesPeterandPaulandofnumerousmartyrs.Throughit,

Figure6.2 Map of Jerusalem with city walls and churches (Bethlehem upper corner left). Design after ms. Cambrai, ca. 1150. From:R.Röhricht,ZeitschriftdesDeutschenPalästina-Vereins14(1891)tav.4.


theRomanChurchwasabletoappropriateakeyaspectofJerusalem’srisingidentityastheuniqueChristianSacredCity.Asnotedabove,thenomenclatureHierusalemoftheRomanmemoria,andmaybethearrangementoftheCrossrelicinaseparateroombehindthemainapse,referdirectlytothetopographi-caldimensionoftherelationshipwithJerusalem.

With this notion of the appropriation of Jerusalem that could be tracedbacktotheemperorConstantine,thesecondfounderofChristianRomeaftertheapostles,theChurchofRomemightcherishthepotentialofdemonstrat-ingitselfasasuccessorandsubstitutefortheearthlyJerusalem.Hierotopy,thecreationofsacredplaces,wasanimportantinstrumentusedbychurchleaderssuch as Pope Damasus (bishop of Rome 366–84) to establish Rome as theChristianSacredCitypar excellence,atthesametimethathiscolleagueCyrilwasworkingwithsimilarintentionsinJerusalem.24However,thepresenceofanearlyCrossrelicinSantaCroceandtheconcomitanttopographicalnotionofholinessassociatedwiththischurchwerenotcapitalizedonsystematicallytothegreatestextentduringthefollowingdecadesandcenturies,asfarasthescantysourcesreportit.DamasussetthetoneinconcentratingentirelyontheRomanmartyrs,withoutanyreferencetotheCrossrelic.

ThestoryoftheFindingbyHelenawasnotlinkedtotheConstantinianrelicinRomebeforethelateMiddleAges.ThisisnotwithstandingthepopularityoftheFindinglegendononehand,andontheotherthehighprobabilityofsomeconnectionbetweenHelenaandtheSessorianpalacecomplex,inwhichtheHierusalemmemoriawascreated(Fig.6.3).25Epigraphicalevidencesuggeststhat theempressmadeuseof thepalaceduringher stays inRome, thecitywhereshediedandwasburiedin329/330AD.About500ADthe‘Sessorian’church was spontaneously mentioned as Basilica Heleniana.26The editor oftheLiber PontificalisintheearlysixthcenturyreferstoHelenaas‘beata’,imply-ing her sainthood.27 He also gives evidence of knowing the so called JudasCyriacusversionoftheCrossFindinglegend.28Nevertheless,thesameeditorrefrainsfromincludingHelena’snameinthepassageonthefoundationoftheBasilicaHierusalemandthedonationofaCrossrelicbyhersonConstantine.Obviously,hesawnoreasontogivethewidelyknownlegendoftheFindingoftheCrossaspecificRomantwist.

24 Forthetermhierotopysee:Lidov2006.25 DeBlaauw1997,p.60;Brubaker1997,pp.57–69.26 GestaXystiinLP(Duchesne18861,p.196n.75).27 LP34c.26.28 LP32c.2.

144 DeBlaauw

Meanwhile, theexpansionof thecultof theCross in theChristianworldfromthelastquarterofthefourthcenturyonwardshadproducedanumberofplaceswereCrossrelicswerekeptandvenerated.TheearliesttestimonyafterthatoftheRomanreliccomesfromNorthernAfrica,whereinTixter(KherbetOum el-Ahdam, modern Algeria) an inscription mentions relics kept in aChristiansacredbuilding.29‘Holymemorial.PartoftheearthofpromisewhereChristwasborn,[...]oftheapostlesPeterandPaul[...ofAfricanmartyrs]andpartofthewoodoftheCross’. It isclearlydated359.30Apart fromthelocalsaints, the itemsmentionedarestriking.Romewas firminnotallowingthedistribution of relics of its martyrs for many centuries.The items regardingPeterandPaulmusthavebeensecondaryorcontactrelics,butevenforthiscategory,thementionisveryearly.JustasremarkablearetherelicsfromtheHolyLand,referringtotheNativityandtheCrucifixionofChrist.BothCrossrelicsandearthorstonefromholyplaceswouldbecomeverycommonrelics

29 Cooley2012,pp.246–48;Duval1982vol.1,pp.331–37.30 ThelineregardingtheCrossmayhavebeenadded,butonlyslightlyafterwardsandinthe

samelettering:Duval1982vol.1,pp.331–37.

Figure6.3 Rome, S.CroceinGerusalemme, inscription referring to Helena from the Sessorian Palace, fifth century. Photo:SibledeBlaauw.


inthefuture,buttheirexistenceatthisdate,inaruralplaceintheprovinceofMauretania is noteworthy. The inscription demonstrates that the growingawarenessoftheholinessofthesitesoftheSalvationwasawidespreadphe-nomenonintheRomanworldofthethirdquarterofthefourthcentury.

ThenewcapitalofConstantinoplewascreditedashavingthemostimpor-tantCrossrelicsaftertheremnantspreservedonGolgothaitself.Theearliestversionof theHelenaLegendmentions therelicofConstantinople, sentbyHelenatoherson,butkeepssilentonthatofRome.31Thissilenceontheoth-erversionsofthelegendmaybeexplainedbytheEasternperspectiveofthelegends,but,inthelongrun,thisaccountwillcertainlyhavehaditseffectgiv-enthebackgroundoftherivalrybetweenthetwocapitals.ThesourcesfromConstantinople,however,failtoprovideanunequivocalviewofthepresenceofsignificantCrossrelicsinthecity.32Obviously,noexplicitcultoftheCrosshaddevelopedintheEasterncapitalsincetheallegedtranslationfromJerusa-lem.33Onlyinthelatesixthcentury,afterthetranslationofanothercelebratedCross relic fromApamea,didapopular traditionofvenerationof theCrossbegintoturnupinConstantinople.34Meanwhile,thesignificanceofConstan-tinopleitselfasaSacredCityhadbeenemphasizedbythoseChristianauthorswhocriticizedtheobsessionwithpilgrimagetotheHolyLand.TheauthoroftheLifeofDanieltheStylitearound500AD,forexample,encourageshisread-erswiththewordsoftheByzantinesainthimselftorefrainfromthejourneytoJerusalem,butrathertogoonlocalpilgrimagetothecapital:withitstombsofmartyrsandhonourinspiringplaces‘youwillseetheSecondJerusalemthere’.35Thisqualificationwascertainlyexaggerated, since itwasexactly the lackofimportantmartyr’stombsthatwasatangibleweaknessoftheNewRomecom-paredtotheOld.AsystematicdevelopmentofConstantinopleasacentreofpilgrimageandasiteofloca sanctaseemsonlytohaveoccurredintheKomne-nianperiod(1081–1185).36

ThediffusionofthewoodoftheCrossmadethepossessionofCrossrelicslessexclusiveandtheclaimtoembodyJerusalemless imaginative. InRomeitselfduringthelaterfifthcentury,popesprovidedthebaptisteriesofthemainbasilicas, the Lateran and St Peter’s, with special chapels containing Cross

31 RufinusAquileiensis,HistoriaEcclesiastica10.7in:Eusebius Werke2.2,1908,p.970.32 FortheimprobabilityofareliccollectioninConstantinoplealreadyunderConstantine

see:Wortley2004.33 Klein2004,pp.33–35.34 Klein2004,pp.36–37.35 Bitton2005,p.202.36 Magdalino2004,26–27;Bozóky2007,pp.85–87,94–106.Foradifferentviewsee:Maraval

2002.

146 DeBlaauw

relics mounted in gold and precious stones.37Yet, the earliest relic in Romecouldhavebeenexploitedjustbecauseofitsearlydateandcelebrateddonor.Itsfame,however,doesnotseemtohavespreadaboutoutsideRome.WhereasthecitybecameaprincipaldestinationforpilgrimagefromtheentireChris-tianworldduringthefourthcentury,thefocuswasexclusivelyonthetombsoftheApostles.38TheCrossrelicisnevermentionedbyanyexternalsource.Butthereisalsoavirtualabsenceoflocalwitnesses.LeotheGreat(444–61),thefirstnoteworthytheologianamongtheRomanbishops,highlightsthesignifi-canceoftheCrossasthesymbolofChrist’striumphandrecognizesthevalueofCrossrelicsastestimoniesoftheIncarnationthatmayhelptostrengthenthefaith,withouteverreferringtotheprominentexistenceofsucharelicinRomeitself.39HislatersuccessorGregorytheGreat(590–604)hasadefiniteinterestinthemartyrs’tombsinRomeandinthephenomenonofrelics.Atthesametime,hesharesthecritiqueofearlierauthorsondistantpilgrimagestotheHolyLand,divergingopenlyfromJeromeandhisRomanfollowers.40Allthesame,thisopiniondidnotkeephimfromsupportinginstitutionsforpil-grims in Jerusalem and the Holy Land with money and goods.41 Ultimately,GregorynourishedapredominantlyspiritualviewofJerusalem:astheplaceofGoditcanbeinthesoulofeachindividualinsearchforpeace,whereverheorsheis.42

EveniftheinterestinRomeforitsconnectionwiththeHolyLandanditssacred topography may not have been consistent and enduringly intense, itappearedtobealastingfeatureofthepapalcityanditsurvivedLateAntiquity.Rome’ssecondurbanpatriarchalchurch,SantaMariaMaggiore,boretheepi-thetad praesepefromtheseventhcenturyonwards.Thenameimpliestheex-istenceofarelicofChrist’smangerfromBethlehem.Indeed,theserelicsaredocumented inSantaMariaMaggiore in latercenturies,aswellasa specialchapelatthenorthernflankofthenavetoshelterthem.43Thefirstrecordofthenamead praesepemaynotaccidentallyoccurinthepontificateofPopeTheodore (642–49), himself born in Jerusalem.44 Its promotion occurred inadramaticallynewpoliticalconfiguration.TheHolyLandhadbeencapturedby the Arabs in 637, so that the safety of the important testimonies of the

37 LP46c.3;LP53c.7;DeBlaauw1997,pp.68–69.38 Bardy1949.39 LeoMagnus,Tractatus59.4.7(444AD),ed.1973,pp.354–59.40 Bitton2005,pp.51–57.41 GregoriusMagnus,Epist.13.26,ed.CCL140A,p.1027;Maraval1991,pp.66–67.42 GregoriusMagnus,HomEz.1.10.24,ed.CCL142,p.156;Maraval1991,pp.72–75.43 DeBlaauw1994,pp.400–01;Saxer2001,pp.70,103–04.44 LP75c.2.


Incarnationhadbecomeanurgentissue.45Theodoreinterfereddirectlyinaidof thecontinuationof theChristianpresence in Jerusalem.Duringthenextdecades,thepapacyshoweditslastinginterestintheHolyCityandwasevenabletofillpartofthepowervacuuminChristianJerusalem.46IntheinnerRo-manperspective,theparallelsoftheRomanBethlehemwiththeJerusalemofSantaCrocecannotbemissed.Albeitchronologicallydistantintheirorigins,thecreationof‘Bethlehem’mayhavestrengthenedandupdatedtheolder‘Je-rusalem’andtheotherwayaroundmaybetheCrossmemoriahashelpedtoenhancethecredibilityofthatoftheCrib.ThereceptionofthisHolyLandto-pographyinRomeistestifiedinaneleventhcenturyordoforthecoronationofthe Holy Roman emperors in Rome, in which the newly crowned emperormakesaminiaturepilgrimagefromthe‘Bethlehemchurch’tothe‘Jerusalemchurch’.47

Iconographical Evocations of Jerusalem

TherepresentationoftheHolyLandplaysaremarkableroleinthemonumen-taliconographicprogrammesofLateAntiqueRomanchurches.Inoneoftheearliestpreservedapsemosaics,ofSantaPudenziana(shortlyafter400AD),arepresentation of Jerusalem even constitutes one of the main iconographiccomponents(Fig.6.4).BehindtheenthronedChristinthemidstofthecollegeofapostles,atalljewelledcrossonahilltopemergesagainstthebackdropofapanoramiccityscapewithrepresentativebuildings.

ThediverginginterpretationsoftheSantaPudenzianamosaicactuallycon-tributetotheperceptionofamultilayeredmeaningwithlevelsofrepresenta-tionthatlargelydonotexcludeeachother.48ChristappearsatthesametimeasKing,Teacher,JudgeandGod.Thecompositionofthemosaicwiththecen-tralthroneclearlyreferstotheactualliturgicalsituationintheapseduringtheEucharist,where–onstationaldays–theRomanbishopwouldsitonthecen-tralcathedraandthehigherclergy(thelatercardinals)onthewallbenchesatbothsidesofthepope.TheteachingfunctionofChristisdirectlymirroredinthat of the pope underneath. This is also a representation of the Church,

45 ÓCarragáin2005,p.239.46 VanDijk2001,pp.324–27.47 ‘[...]coronatusvaditdeecclexiaBethleemadecclexiamYerusalem’,OrdoCoronationis

Imperatoris13.7,MGH Fontes iuris Germanici antiqui in usum scholarum9,1960,p.35.Thisritualisnotreferredtoagaininthelaterordines.

48 Dassmann1970(stillfundamental);Kühnel1987,pp.63–72.

148 DeBlaauw

emphasizedbythetwowomen,whomaysymbolizetheJewsandtheGentilesasthedistinctgroupsconstitutingtheChurch.Christiswithoutdoubtdepict-edinhisdivinebeing,harkingbackto iconographical featuresofthepagangods.49ButeveryvisitortothechurchwouldalsoimmediatelyrecognizetheimperialcharacteristicsusedtoexpressthecomplexideaofamajesticGod-Man.Thewomenholdingcrownsactually takepart inan imperial throningceremonial.Simultaneously,themosaicclearlyhasaneschatologicalperspec-tive,intheFourLivingCreaturesfromtheBookofRevelation.Thereflectionofaterrestrialrealityandtheheavenlyvisionthatarebothpresentinthemosaicareconnectedbythecrossandthecity.Thecross–preciouslydecoratedwithgems–risesonahillcutbacktobarestone,whichisclearlyarepresentationofGolgothainPalestine.50Atthesametime,thecrossdoesnotrepresentthemomentoftheCrucifixionbutisinitsglorifiedappearanceasymboloftheTriumph of Christ. These terrestrial and heavenly layers of meaning mustthereforealsobepresentinthecitypanorama.Thebuildingsbehindthecon-tinuousporticusarerenderedinsuchaparticularwaythattheyaremostlikelyreproductionsofactualmonuments inearthly Jerusalem.Theymay includetheChristianbuildingsAnastasisandMartyriumtotheleft,andtheImbomon

49 Mathews1993,pp.98–114.50 OntheRealCrossmonumentofGolgothasee:Heid2001[a],pp.169–242.

Figure6.4 Rome, S.Pudenziana, apse mosaic, ca. 410. Photo:CentrumvoorKunsthis-torischeDocumentatie,RadboudUniversityNijmegen.


andEleonabasilicasontheMountofOlivestotheright.51Thisportrayaloftheearthly, Christianized Jerusalem was the best formula for representing theheavenlycityofNewJerusalemthatwasthefocusoftheeschatologicalmes-sageoftheliturgyaswellasofsacrediconography.52ThegemmedcrosswouldreturnasthecentralmotifofseveralRomanmosaicsduringthenextcentu-ries,forexampleintheaddedsmallapseinSantoStefanoRotondo.Themo-saicwasinstalledbyPopeTheodore(642–49)inachapelthathecreatedastheburialplaceforhisfather,originatingfromJerusalem.53ThoughtheJerusa-lemassociationofthiscrossmayhavebeenveryconcrete,sinceitmayhaverepresentedthegemmedcrossstandingonGolgothaafterthe ‘liberation’ofJerusalemfromthePersiansbytheemperorHeracliusin629,thereisnotopo-graphicalcontext,notevenahilltop.54

AmorespecificrepresentationofHolyLandsitesisagaintobefoundinthefifthcentury,ontheformerapsearchofSantaMariaMaggiore(432–40AD).ThecyclededicatedtotheChildhoodandSecondComingofChristincludestheemblematicimagesoftwocitiesaseachother’scounterpartsinthelowerzoneofthearch.TheyareinscribedasHierusalem(left)andBethleem(right).Eventhoughthecompactformulaandthejewelledwallsmightindicateother-wise,theyareprimarilythesymbolicrepresentationsoftherealcitiesinPales-tine,withsomeoftheircharacteristicbuildings.55ThegemsonthewallsareclearlyderivedfromtheapocalypticJerusalem,butobviouslytransmittedtothe earthly cities. (Bethlehem has no eschatological character.) The sheepcomingfromthecitiesstresstheirsymbolicmeaningfortheChurchforJewsandGentilesrespectively.

DuetothefragmentarysurvivalofEarlyChristianmonumentaliconogra-phyandanalmostcompletevacuumofexamplesintheEast,itisnotpossibleto evaluate the surviving works in Rome in a comparative way.56Yet, a pro-nouncedtopographicalspotlightontheearthlyJerusalemisvisiblemainlyintwoworksof the firsthalfof the fifthcentury.The heavenly Jerusalem may

51 Pullan1998(withsomedebatablepointsregardingdetails);Heid2001[a],176–88;critical:Deckers1988,pp.326–30.

52 Matthiae1967,p.61;ÓCarragáin2005,pp.232–33.53 LP75c.1/c.4(andnote1byDuchesne18861,p.333);forTheodore’sfather’sburial:Syll.

LaureshamensisI,Duchesne18861,p.334n.9.54 ÓCarragáin2005,p.234.55 Gerhard Steigerwald, forthcoming article in Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 55

(2012);cf.Sahner2009,p.114.56 IleaveinabeyanceOsborne2008onthesevencandlesticksintheSS.CosmaeDamiano

mosaicaspossibleallusiontothelostTempletreasure.

150 DeBlaauw

havebeenlessafocusthanhasoftenbeensuggested.57Moreover,eveninaneschatological context, the representation of Jerusalem may have exhibitedrecognizablefeaturesoftherealcity.TheimageryofthetriumphalCross,ontheotherhand,wasdirectlyassociatedwiththegemmedreliccrossesinwhichthewoodoftheHolyCrosswaspreservedandveneratedinrealliturgy.

Liturgical Evocations of Earthly Jerusalem

IntheRomanliturgicalyearthreedaysweremoreorlessfocussedonthecultoftheCross.GoodFridaybelongedtothemostancientcoreoftheliturgicalyearovertheentireChristianworld.ThefeastoftheFindingoftheCrossonMay3rdmayhaveoriginatedinRome,whereasthefeastoftheExaltationoftheCrosswasintroducedinRomefromtheEast,mostprobablysoonafterthetriumphofHeracliusoverthePersiansandtherecoveryoftheHolyCrossatGolgotha.CrossrelicsplayedaroleintheceremonialonGoodFridayandontheExaltation. In the lateseventhcentury,whentheseritualswere firstde-scribedinRome,relicsoftheTrueCrosshadbecomerelativelynumerous,alsoinRomeitself,sothattheydonotnecessarilyrepresentanexplicitrelationshiptoJerusalem.However,suchadirectrelationshipdoesexistinsomeaspectsofthefeastascelebratedinRome.

TheInventio Crucison3MayisadirectresultoftheJudasCyriacusversionoftheCrossFindinglegend,whichmentionsthediscoverybyHelenaonthethirddayofMay.58Theprobablecreationof this feast inRome,outsidethepapalliturgyandatarelativeearlydate–itwasobservedinthesixthcentury– isaremarkabletestimonyofarareWesterninitiative inthiscontext.OnewonderswhetherthispurposefulreceptionoftheEasternlegendwasaven-tureoftheclergyoftheSessorianbasilica,inanattempttocallattentiontotherelicandtothestorythatgaveheritsname,Hierusalem.

The introduction of the Exaltatio sanctae Crucis feast was stimulated bytopicaleventsinJerusalemin629–31.Thedayof14Septemberwasthetradi-tionalDedicationfeastoftheHolySepulchrechurchinJerusalem,whichbe-cameacelebrationofChristiantriumphafterthedefeatofthePersiansandtherestorationoftheCrossmemorialonGolgotha.InRome,itscommemo-ration was combined with the veneration of a ‘lifegiving’ relic of the Holy

57 Thraede1996,cc.757–60.58 DeBlaauw1997,pp.70–72(withfurtherliterature).


Cross.59This is testified for St Peter’s, but probably was also in use in otherchurchesthathadapreciousCrossrelicintheirpossession.60Ultimately,un-dertheSyrianPopeSergiusI(687–701)thefeastwaspartofthepapalliturgicalsystem.TheauthorofSergius’lifeinthe Liber Pontificalisgivesitaspecialpro-filebymeansofasemi-miraculousstoryofthe‘discovery’ofaforgottenbutverypreciousreliccrossina‘darkcorner’ofStPeter’s.61Onopeningasilvercasketandremovingasilkcushionthatwasinit,thePopefoundametalcrossdecoratedwithpreciousstones.Afterremovingthefourplates inwhichthejewelswereembeddedhediscovereda‘largeandindescribableportionofthesaving wood of the Lord’s Cross’.This relic was obviously judged to have anextraordinaryvalue,sinceitwastransferredtothepapalresidenceoftheLat-eran and exposed in the Lateran basilica each year on 14 September, to bekissed and worshipped by the people. It is the oldest known Cross relic inRome that can be traced physically, with a fair amount of probability, untilmoderntimes.Thegemmedcrosscontainingthesacredwoodwithabalm-filledcavityinitscentrewasdiscoveredinthealtaroftheLateranpalacecha-pel in the early twentieth century in a cruciform silver container from theCarolingianperiod.62ThecentralrolegiventothisrelicinthepapalliturgyoftheExaltatiofromthelateseventhcenturyonwardsprovesthatitwasconsid-eredthemajorCrossrelicinRomeandthemostdirectrepresentativeoftherelicsthatwerekeptonGolgothaitself,meanwhileunderMuslimrule.

TheliturgyofGoodFridaycertainlywastheoldestJerusalem-relatedriteinRome.Theearliestlistsofpapalstations,rootinginthelaterfifthcentury,men-tion the basilica Hierusalem as the place for the celebration on the day ofChrist’sdeath.63Theroleofthebasilica’sCrossrelic,however,isunclear.Onlyafter700doestheearliestpreserveddescriptionoftheritementionsasolemnvenerationoftheCrossbypopeandpeopleatthealtarofSantaCroce,butthiswas astonishingly not the Constantinian relic.The object of veneration wasbroughtinapenitentialprocessionfromtheLateran,andwasinallprobabilityidenticalwiththereliccrossdiscoveredinStPeter’sandsincethensecuredinthepalacechapeloftheLateran.ThedescriptionoftheCrossintheordofor

59 OntheintroductionofthefeastintheWest:VanTongeren1998,41–77;cf.Constantinople:Klein2004,pp.40–43.

60 VanTongeren1998,pp.52–59;ÓCarragáin2005,pp.189–92;DeBlaauw1994,pp.197–98.61 LP86c.10.62 Thunø2002,pp.21–22.Thegemmedcrossitselfisnowlost,butphotographsanddescrip-

tionsexist.63 DeBlaauw1997,pp.71–72;DeBlaauw1994,188–89.ThesuggestionofGrisar1925,pp.4–6,

thattheRomanstationalorganizationwasbasedonthatofJerusalemhasproventobeuntenableinthelightoflaterresearch.

152 DeBlaauw

theritualcorrespondsperfectlytotheother information: itwascarriedinagoldcasingwithgems,thewoodoftheCrossitselfwascoveredwithgoldandgemsandhadacavitywithodoriferousbalm.64

Accordingly,about700ADthegemmedcross fromStPeter’s/ theLateranpalacehadbeenabletosurpassotherwellknownCrossrelicsinRome,par-ticularlythoseoftheVaticanandLateranbaptisteriesandthatofSantaCroce.Thereasonforthisremarkableturn,evenintheprimevalriteofGoodFriday,isunknown,butitdefinitelywasaninfringementoftheprestigeoftherelictraditionofSantaCroce.Themostplausibleexplanationis,thattheConstan-tinianrelicinitspreciouscasinghadnotsurvivedthesackingsofRomeinthefifthcentury.Notwithstandingthelossofanobject,theidentificationoftheConstantinianmemoriawithJerusalemwasrooteddeeplyenoughinRomansoiltowarrantthatthestationofpapalliturgyonthedaysoftheliturgicalyearwhichhadthestrongestassociationswithJerusalembeheldinSantaCroce:GoodFridayandtheSundayofLentwhenthepsalm‘LaetareHierusalem’wassungastheIntroit.Meanwhile,theroleofthepalaceasatreasuryforthemostpreciousrelicshasaparallel in the imperialpalaceofConstantinople, fromwhereaCrossrelicwascarriedforthinprocessions.65

Perhaps the ritual significance of Cross relics had not been essential inRomein theprecedingcenturies.Theunmistakableboost in thecultof theCrossduringtheseventhcenturymayhavebeenenergizedbydevelopmentsintheEast,aboveallbythevicissitudesofJerusalem,thatsawtheextinctionofByzantineChristianrule in favourofPersianandfinallyofArabpower.ThedevelopmentofRomanritualsinthisperiodshowsatanyrateaspecialsus-ceptibility for the traditionsof Jerusalem,aphenomenon likewisevisible inConstantinople.66 The Good Friday procession from the Lateran to SantaCrocehadclearlymimeticfeaturesinrelationtotheprocessionofbishopandpilgrimsinJerusalemtoveneratetheCrossatGolgotha,includingitsassocia-tionswiththePassoverofExodusanditseschatologicalperspectiveof jour-neyingtowardstheheavenlyJerusalem.67Thefactthatnotthepope,buttheCrossrelicwastheprotagonistoftheprocession,andthebarefootwalkingofallparticipantsasapenitentialgesture,madethisprocessiontoS.Croceintoa

64 ORXXIII11,Andrieu3(1974),p.271.65 Klein2004,pp.36–37;Flusin2004,pp.69–70(11thcentury);Bacci2003;Lidov2012;Bozóky

2007,pp.106–18(viewstheimperialreliccollectioninConstantinopleasthemodelforseveralimitationsintheWest.ThisisdebatableinthelightoftheLaterantradition).

66 Klein2004,pp.41–43.67 ORXXIII9–22,Andrieu3(1974),pp.270–72.


symbolicpilgrimagetoGolgotha.68EvenifSantaCrocenolongercontributedarelic,itstopographicalassociationwiththecityoftheSalvationcouldobvi-ouslystillworkinaneffectiveway.Theriteofvenerationitselfconsistedoftheopeningofthereliquarycasingonanaltarandtheexpositionofthereliccrosscontainedinitsothatitcouldbekissedbytheclergyandfaithful.Thiswasacenturyoldtradition,practisedinJerusalemalreadyinthelatefourthcentu-ry.69TheinteractionofculttraditionsbetweenJerusalem,RomeandConstan-tinople is obvious, but hardly traceable in its exact patterns of causes andeffects,particularlybeforetheseventhcentury.Thisispreciselywhyitisim-portanttounderlinethebarefactsoftheJerusalemassociationinRomeinthefourthcenturyandthedevelopmentofthecultoftheCrossinthefifthcenturyundertheaegisofthepopes.

Diachronic Perspectives

TheattentiontothehistoricalsitesoftheSalvationinEarlyChristianRomehadnocounterpartinadirectinterestfortheJewishhistoryoftheHolyLand.Ontheotherhand,neitheristhereanyindicationofaconsciousstrategytodenyoroutdotheJewishdiscourseontheLandofIsrael.70AnylocalinterestinthesacredvesselsoftheHerodianTemple,installedbyVespasianinRomeastrophies,islackingbeforetheeleventhcentury.71AgeneralChristianattentiontothebiblicaltempleanditscultwasslowlydevelopingandresultedinamoreconsistentcorpusofexegeticalreflectionandsymbolicinterpretationonlyaf-terthetreatisesontheTabernacleandtheTemplebytheVenerableBedeindistantBritaininthedecadesaround700.72Notwithstandingthestrongmeta-phoricalconceptoftheseworks,theyenhancedandstimulatedknowledgeofthehistoricaltemplesofJerusalem.73

DirectreflectionsoftheJerusalemTemplearefoundinRomefromtheelev-enthcenturyonwards.Then,thepapalchapelofStLawrenceintheLateranpalacestartedtobeentitledSancta Sanctorum.Theexpressionsancta sancto-rumwasalreadyknownforthereliccollectioninachurchaltarsincetheearly

68 ÓCarragáin2005,pp.148–150,183–201.69 Egeria37.1,Itineraria1965,pp.80–81;cf.Klein2004,pp.43–44.70 Cf.Boustan2008.71 Boustan2008,pp.338,358–59,368.72 O’Reilly1995,pp.xvii-xviii.73 TheTempleasanobjectofemulationintheEarlyChristiantradition:Ousterhout1990.

154 DeBlaauw

fifthcentury.74Nonetheless,itsapplicationforaspatialentitymayindicateastrengtheningofitsoriginalreferencetotheHolyofHoliesintheTempleofJerusalem.ThecollectionofrelicsfromtheHolyLandandtheLifeofChristinthealtarsofthischapeloriginatesintheseventhoreighthcenturies.75ApartfromtheeminentCrossrelic,thecollectionalsocontainedgeographicalmem-oriesfromtheHolyLandintheformofstonesandsoilfromthesacredsites,agenregoingbacklikewisetothefourthcentury,witnesstheinscriptionfromTixter.Inarecentstudy,Gallandcountssixwrittenlabelsforrelicsfromvari-ous biblical places, and several tens for relics from geographically indicatedplacesrelatedtotheLifeofChrist,almostallofthempaleographicallydatedintheseventhoreighthcentury.Thisbearswitnesstoa(first)inventoryofthereliccollection,whichmayitselfhaveexistedearlier.76Atwelfthcenturyau-thorbringstomindthatthefamousiconoftheSaviourinthepalacechapel,consideredasnothavingbeenpaintedbyhumanhands,hadbeenbroughttoRomebyTitusandVespasian.77

TheassociationoftheLateranbasilicawiththeTempleofJerusalemintheHighMiddleAgeshasbeenstudiedintenselyduringthelastdecades.78Fromthe tenth century onwards, the Temple allusion was obviously one of themeanstodistinguishthepapalcathedralvis-à-vistheVaticanbasilicawiththetombofPeter.Soon,thepretentionofbeingthesuccessorofthebiblicalTem-pletookonmaterialfeatures,withtheclaimthatthebasilicahousedthesa-credvesselsoftheTempleasrelicsinitshighaltar.79Thistraditionhasalwaysbeen controversial in Rome itself, not in the least due to obvious historicalimprobabilities. The first author of the Description of the Lateran Church, atreatiseoriginatinginthelater11thcentury,attributesalltherelicsfromtheTemplepurportedlykeptinthebasilicanottoTitusandVespasian,buttoHel-ena,whowouldhavebroughtthemwithherfromJerusalemtoRome,onbe-half of her son Constantine.80 The successive versions of the DescriptionduringthetwelfthcenturyshowhowtheprocessofuncoveringthehistoryoftheLateranbasilicawasverifiedusinghistoricalandlegendarymaterial,themainingredientsofwhichwereConstantine,HelenaandtheJerusalemTem-ple.

74 Nussbaum1959,pp.242–43.75 Galland2004,pp.87–89.76 Galland2004,catalogue,pp.93–144.77 NicolausManiacutius,quotedbyLongo2012,p.133.78 Herklotz2000(neweditionofearlierstudies),hereesp.pp.170–80;DeBlaauw1990;some

morerecentstudiesarereferredtointhefollowingnotes.79 DLE,pp.335–42;furtherreferencesin:DeBlaauw1994,pp.233–46.80 DLE,cf.pp.335and341.


Another tradition claimed the singular bronze columns from imperialtimes,standinginfrontoftheLateranhighaltar,ascomingfromJerusalemaswell(Fig.6.5).Asolemnlatethirteenthcenturyinscriptionreferstothebronzecolumnsas‘broughtfromJerusalemtoRomebyTitusandVespasian’.81Morethan a century earlier, the Jewish author Benjamin ofTudela had identifiedthemas‘thehandiworkofKingSolomon’fromtheFirstTemple.82FromthesweatsaidtorundownfromthecolumnseachyearontheanniversaryofthedestructionoftheTemplebytheRomans,itisclearthatthelocalRoman-Jew-ishcommunitytrulybelievedthatthesewererelicsoftheauthenticTemple,presentinRome.

Notoriously,pro-LateranauthorsintheReformperiodoftheChurchdevel-opedtheconceptoftherealJerusaleminRome:Jerusalem,withthepopeasitshighpriest,wasnowinRome,andhadtakenovertherelevanceoftheoldJe-

81 Nilgen1977,pp.21–24(‘deHerusolimaadUrbem’).82 ChampagneandBoustan2011,pp.477–81.

Figure6.5 Rome, S.GiovanniinLaterano, classical bronze columns in the Altar of the Blessed Sacrament, 1600, with original capital to the left. Photo:SibledeBlaauw.

156 DeBlaauw

rusaleminaneschatologicalperspective.83Justasclear,however,isthatthisconceptwasnourishedonlyinalimitedcircleandforalimitedtime:itwasnotdecisivetotheideologyofpapalauthorityandhadobviouslyalreadylostitsvitalforceinthecourseofthetwelfthcentury.InthepolemicsbetweentheLateranandVaticancanons,thoseoftheVaticantookcaretoaccusetheirLat-eranbrothersofbeing ‘iudeaeosetmoysistas’ servinga ‘synagogue’,deliber-ately avoiding the identification of the Lateran basilica with the Temple ofJerusalem.84 Notwithstanding some propagandistic turns, the medieval Lat-erancomplexcannotplainlybereadasalieu de mémoireoftheTempleandtheHolyLand.IngoHerklotzhasdemonstratedthatthecombinationofremi-niscences, in which Roman antiquity as well as the first Christian emperor,Constantine, play a prominent role, was ultimately focussed on Christ andaboveallonthepopeasChrist’srepresentativeonearth,ashighpriestandasimperialruler.85

SincethebeginningoftheCrusades,materialmemorabiliafromtheHolyLand and the earthly Jerusalem spread all over Western Europe in a neverequalleddensity.AftertheFallofConstantinoplein1204,thedispersaloftheHolyLandtreasurescollectedovercenturiesintheEasternChristiancapitalaugmentedtheWesternrelicresourceswithalastquantitativeandqualitativeinundation.86Sincethen,atthelatest,thematerialmementoesofJerusaleminRomelosttheirrelativeexclusivity.Certainly,theacquisitionofthefamousColumnoftheFlagellationfromtheimperialpalaceinConstantinoplebytheRomancardinalGiovanniColonnain1223,wasamajorcatch.87Nevertheless,therelic,placedintheZeno-chapelofthecardinal’stitularchurchofS.Pras-sede,neverattainedtheprestigeandpopularityofChrist’sCrownofThorns,broughtfromConstantinopletoParisviaVenicein1238–1239asatrophybyKingLouisIX.OtherrelicscamedirectlyfromtheHolyLandtoRome,inordertorescuethemforthepossiblethreatoftheArabre-conquerors.Asignificantcasewasthe‘re-burial’ofStJerome,whoseremainsweretranslatedfromhistombintheNativitychurchinBethlehemtoSantaMariaMaggiore.88AnaltarwithhisrelicswassetupinfrontoftheentrancetothePraesepe-chapelinthecourseofthethirteenthcentury,sothatthedirectconnectionofthechurchfathertothesiteoftheNativityofChristwassuggestedascontinuing.Thus,

83 Cf.Longo2012,pp.134–36.84 Longo2012,p.126.85 Herklotz2000,pp.10–14.86 Byzanceetlesreliques2004,pp.91–105,183–90,238–48.87 Vannuttelli1896.88 Saxer2001,pp.343–66;DeBlaauw1994,pp.408–09.


Rome not only confirmed its association with Bethlehem, but also fetchedbackoneofthemostimportantteachersofthefaithwhohadonceleftthecityinfavouroftheHolyLand.TheretrospectiveconsiderationthatnoremainsofthesainthaveeverbeendiscoveredintheRomanbasilicaonlycorroboratesthefrequentexperienceofscholarsthatthespiritualintentionofthestoryismoreimportantthanthepurportedfacts.89

AfterthedefinitelossoftheLatinterritoriesintheHolyLand,theinterestintherealcityseemstohavegivenwaytoamorespiritualconceptofJerusa-lem. The Jubilee Years promulgated by the popes from 1300 onwards madeRomeintoafullsuccessorofJerusalemforthepilgrims,substitutingforiteveninbeingthe‘naveloftheworld’.90ThelinkswitholdJerusalemtendedtobe-comemoresymbolic,aspartofageneralprocessofuniversalizationandme-diationinlatemedievalpiety91.

Meanwhile,ancientassociationswithJerusalemintheRomansacredland-scape were retained and sometimes were revitalized. In the Lateran palace,newtestimoniesoftheHolysitespoppedup,notablythemensura ChristiandtheHolyStairs.Inthethirteenthcentury,theregularentrancestepsoftheme-dievalLateranpalaceweresaidtobethestepsthathadleduptothepraetori-um of Pontius Pilate in Jerusalem.92 It is an interesting example of a longexistingfunctionalobjectthatwasprovidedgraduallywithasupplementarylayerofsignificanceasarelic,inthiscaseofChrist’sPassion.93ThesameistrueforthreebeautifulmarbleportalsintheLateranAulaoftheCouncils,saidtobefromPilate’spalace.94Themensura Christi,fourcolumnsinthesamelargepalace aula were believed in the fifteenth century to establish the corporalheightoftheLord(Fig.6.6).ThestonetabletonwhichthesoldiersplayeddicefortherobeofChristathiscrucifixionwasshownhereaswell.95Authorsre-portthepersistent,butunplausibletraditionthattheserelicsfromJerusalemwerebroughttoRomeinthebootyofTitus.Onlylaterinthesixteenthcentury,wastheirpresenceinRomeconnectedtothepilgrimageofthepiousempressHelena.96Bythen,comparablerelicshadalsoappearedinsecondarychurch-es.Forexample,thestoneonwhichAbrahamintendedtosacrificeIsaacand

89 OnthearchaeologicalsearchafterStJerome’srelicsinS.MariaMaggioresee:DeBlaauw1994,pp.378–79.

90 Caputano2005,pp.354–57.91 Wolf1998,p.427.92 Horsch2003.93 D’Onofrio1974,pp.104–10.94 D’Onofrio1974,pp.104–10.95 Ginzburg1982,pp.68–70.96 D’Onofrio1974,pp.107–08.

158 DeBlaauw

thealtaronwhichJesuswaspresentedintheTempleofJerusalemfortydaysafterhisbirth,werepreservedinanobscurechurchbetweentheTiberandStPeter’s(nowintheChurchoftheFrisians,SS.MicheleeMagno).97

CertainlynotbychancedidtheVaticanbasilicaappropriateanoldertradi-tionfromtheLateranbasilicabyidentifyingthetwistedvine-scrollcolumnsinfrontofthehighaltarasspoilsfromtheTempleofSolomon.TheassociationoftheseexceptionalspoilsdonatedbyConstantinewiththeJerusalemTemplewouldfindasuccessfulreceptionintheTempleiconographyfromthefifteenthcenturyonwards.98Atthesametime,theLateranhadlostitsTempleobses-sion,andhadturnedtothemoresolidRomantraditionofthevenerationofthe apostles Peter and Paul, whose alleged head relics were installed in themonumentalciboriumofthehighaltarin1370circa.99

97 TraditionappearinginS.GiacomoaScossacavalliinthesixteenthcentury:Grisar1899,pp.576–77.

98 DanesiSquarzina1991.99 Mondini2011.

Figure6.6 Rome, S.GiovanniinLaterano,cloisters, columns and marble stone from the Aula Concilii in the ancient Lateran Palace, constituting the MensuraChristi. Photo:SibledeBlaauw.


ToreturnatlasttothestartingpointofJerusaleminRome:duringtheMid-dleAgestheChurchofS.CroceinGerusalemmedidnotprojectastrongpro-fileastheoldestChristologicalsiterelatedtoJerusaleminRome.Thetitulus,thepanelwithinscriptionwhichwashungonChrist’sCrossaccordingtotheGospels,seemstohavebeenthemostprominentrelicandwasenclosedhighinawallnicheofthenewtriumphalarchinthetwelfthcentury.100PeterCor-neliusClaussensuggestsconvincinglythatthesingularmarbledecorationofthetwelfthcenturybelltower,consistingofadoublecrossinsertedinthefrontwall, is a medieval reference to the cult of the Holy Cross in this church.101However,itisonlyinthecourseofthefifteenthcentury,thatamoreovertfo-cusonthebasilica’sparticularidentitybecomesdiscernable.ThefirstRomansourcelinkingHelenaexplicitlywiththefoundingofS.CroceisFlavioBiondoabout1445.102Afterthe ‘rediscovery’ofthetitulus relic in1492,notacciden-tallyinthesameyearasthefinaldefeatofMuslimruleinSpain,theSpanishcardinalpriestsofthebasilicalaunchedagrandscalerevivalofthecultoftheCross,includingthevenerationofHelenaasfounderofthebasilica.ThevaultoftheapseandthechapelofStHelenareceivednewdecorationscelebratingtheHolyCross, its inventionandexaltation.103A long inscriptioncombinedseverallegendarytraditionsregardingthechurch,itsrelicsandfounders.Pil-grimsnowvisitedthechapelhearingthatiswasHelena’sbedroomandthatitspavementwaslaidonearthfromGolgotha,broughtalongbytheempresstoherRomanpalace.104

Concluding Remarks

There has never been a comprehensive and lasting concept of Jerusalem inRome,neitheronadevotionalandliturgicallevel,norasacoherentideology.Therearenotracesofthecreationofa‘sacredlandscape’accordingtoa‘topo-graphicalblueprintoftheHolyLand’thatwouldtransformRomeintoa‘NewJerusalem’.105 Yet, the materials for a direct line of meaning-transfer from

100 Claussen2002,pp.431–32.101 Claussen2002,pp.427–30.102 DeBlaauw1997,p.66.103 Gill1995.104 GerusalemmeaRoma2012,passim.105 Sahner,p.103.TheproblemofSahnersarticleis,apartfromtheerrorsintheuseofsources

andarchaeologicalevidence,theunderlyingpresuppositionthatJerusalemwasgenerallyacceptedasamodel thathadtobe imitatedoreventobereproducedasa ‘blueprint’.Thereishardlyanyevidenceforthispremise.

160 DeBlaauw

JerusalemtoRomewereprovidedataremarkablyearlydate.‘Potentials’isthebesttermforthem,usedinasimilarmannerbyOusterhoutwhenspeakingonmedievalItaliancities.Heobservesa‘widerangeofpotentials’withaddedas-sociations‘thatcouldtranscendphysicalforms’.106InthecaseofRome,thesepossiblecapacitiesmayhavebeenstrongerandmoreconcretethaninotherItaliancities,notatleastduetotheearlyoriginsoftherelictraditionsandtheirtopographicalassociations.FromConstantineonwards,thisJerusalemsubtextcouldbeactivatedandwasactivatedatrelevantmomentsinrelevantplaces.TheearlycultoftheCrossinthefourthandfifthcenturies,aswellastheTem-ple associations in the eleventh and twelfth centuries are the most specificRomanphenomena.Itmayseemastonishingthattheywerenotexploitedinamoreintenseandconsistentway.Thereasonis,however,self-evidentenough.ThecityofPeterandPauldidnotneedJerusalem.Inhis1868treatiseontheholysitesoftheJerusalemTempleandtheGrottooftheNativity,DomenicoBartolini,canonoftheLateranbasilicaandlateracardinaloftheHolyRomanChurch, deals extensively with the history of the locations in Palestine, butdoesnothitupontheideaofanyallusiontothetopographicaltraditionsoftheholysitesandtheprimevalChristologicalrelicsinRome.107Evenwithhisgen-uineinterestinJerusalem,thenineteenth-centuryprelatecannotveilthelongtraditionofRomansuperioritytowardtheHolyLand.EvenJeromecamebacktoRome.

Bibliography

Andrieu,Michel,Les ordines romani du haut moyen-âge,5vols,Leuven1931–61.Bacci,Michele,‘RelicsofthePharosChapel:AViewfromtheLatinWest’in:Восто-

чнохристианские реликвии/ Eastern Christian Relics,ed.byM.Lidov,Moscow2003,pp.234–48.

Bardy,Gustave,‘PèlerinagesàRomeverslafinduIVesiècle’,Analecta Bollandiana 67(1949),pp.224–35.

Bartolini,Domenico,Sull’antico tempio di Salomone in Gerusalemme, sua pianta ed avanzi e Sull’antica grotta del presepio di N.S. Gesù Cristo in Betlemme, soprastante basilica costantiniana ed altri luoghi storici annessi, Ph.D.diss., RomeandTurin1868.

Bitton-Ashkelony,Brouria,Encountering the Sacred: The Debate on Christian Pilgrimage in Late Antiquity,TransformationoftheClassicalHeritage38,Berkeley2005.

106 Ousterhout1998,p.404.107 Bartolini1868.


DeBlaauw,Sible,‘TheSolitaryCelebrationoftheSupremePontiff.TheLateranBasilicaastheNewTempleintheMedievalLiturgyofMaundyThursday’in:Omnes circum-adstantes. Contributions Towards a History of the Role of the People in the Liturgy: Presented to Herman Wegman,ed.byCh.CaspersandM.Schneiders,Kampen1990,pp.120–43.

––––––, Cultus et decor. Liturgia e architettura nella Roma tardoantica e medievale: Basilica Salvatoris, Sanctae Mariae, Sancti Petri,Studietesti355–56,2vols,VaticanCity1994.

––––––,‘JerusaleminRomeandtheCultoftheCross’in:PratumRomanum. Richard Krautheimer zum 100. Geburtstag, ed. by R. Colella et al., Wiesbaden 1997, pp.55–73.

Boustan,Ra‘ananShaul,‘TheSpoilsoftheJerusalemTempleatRomeandConstantinople:JewishCounter-GeographyinaChristianizingEmpire’in: Antiquity in Antiquity: Jewish and Christian Pasts in the Greco-Roman World,ed.byGreggGardnerandKevinL.Osterloh,Tübingen2008,pp.327–72.

Bozóky,Edina,La politique des reliques de Constantin à Saint Louis. Protection collective et légitimation du pouvoir,Paris2007.

Brandenburg,Hugo,Die frühchristlichen Kirchen Roms vom 4. bis zum 7. Jahrhundert. Der Beginn der abenländischen Kirchenbaukunst,Regensburg2004.

Brubaker,Leslie,‘MemoriesofHelena:PatternsinImperialFemaleMatronageintheFourthandFifthCenturies’in:Women, Men, and Eunuchs. Gender in Byzantium,ed.byLizJames,London1997,pp.52–75.

Byzance et les reliques du Christ. XXe Congrès International des Études Byzantines, 19–25 août 2001,ed.byJannicDurandandBernardFlusin,Paris2004.

Caputano,Claudio,“FactaestRomanaecclesianovaIerusalem”:cittàterrenaecittàcelestenellavisionediGioacchinodaFiore’in:Fra Roma e Gerusalemme nel Medioevovol.3,ed.byMassimoOldoni,Salerno2005,pp.337–58.

Champagne,MarieThérèseandRa‘ananShaulBoustan,‘WalkingintheShadowsofthePast:TheJewishExperienceofRomeintheTwelfthCentury’,Medieval Encounters[MedievalJewish,ChristianandMuslimCultureEncounters inConfluenceandDialogue]17(2011),pp.464–94.

Claussen,PeterCornelius,Die Kirchen der Stadt Rom im Mittelalter 1050–1300 A-F,CorpusCosmatorumII,1,Stuttgart2002.

Cooley,AlisonE,The Cambridge Manual of Latin Epigraphy,Cambridge2012.DanesiSquarzina,Silvia,‘LaSistinadiSistoIVel’ereditàdelpensieroreligiosomedi-

evale’in:SilviaDanesiSquarzina, Ricerche sul’400 a Roma. Pittura e architettura,Rome1991,pp.215–49.

Dassmann,Ernst,‘DasApsismosaikvonS.PudentianainRom:philosophische,impe-rialeundtheologischeAspekteineinemChristusbildamBeginndes5.Jahrhunderts’,

162 DeBlaauw

Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte 65(1970),pp.67–81.

Deckers,JohannesG.,‘TraditionundAdaption:BemerkungenzurDarstellungderchrist-lichenStadt’,Römische Mitteilungen95(1988),pp.303–82.

DLE:DescriptioLateranensisecclesiae:R.Valentini–G.Zucchetti,Codice topografico della città di Roma,4vols,Rome1940–53,vol.3(1946),pp.319–73.

D´Onofrio,Cesare,Scalinate di Roma,Rome1974.Drijvers,J.W.,Helena Augusta. The Mother of Constantine the Great and the Legend of her

Finding of the True Cross,Leiden1991.Drijvers,H.J.WandJ.W.Drijvers,The Finding of the True Cross: The Judas Kyriakos Legend

in Syriac. Introduction, Text and Translation,Leiden1997.Duval,Yvette,Loca sanctorum Africæ. Le culte des martyrs en Afrique, du 4e au 7e siècle,

2vols,Rome1982.Elsner,Jàs,‘TheItinerariumBurdigalense:PoliticsandSalvationintheGeographyof

Constantine’sEmpire’,The Journal of Roman Studies90(2000),pp.181–95.Eusebius Werke 2: Die Kirchengeschichte,ed.byEduardSchwartzandTheodorMommsen,

3vols,Leipzig1903–09.Galland,Bruno,Les authentiques de reliques du Sancta Sanctorum,Studietesti421,

VaticanCity2004.Gerusalemme a Roma. La Basilica di Santa Croce e le reliquie della Passione,ed.byRoberto

CassanelliandEmiliaStolfi,Milan2012.Gill,MeredithJ.,‘AntoniazzoRomanoandtheRecoveryofJerusaleminLateFifteenth-

CenturyRome’,Storia dell’arte83(1995),pp.28–47.Ginzburg,Carlo,The Enigma of Piero. Piero della Francesca, the Baptism, the Arezzo Cycle,

the Flagellation [transl.fromItalian1981],London1985.Grisar,Hartmann,‘AntichebasilichediRomaimitantiisantuariidiGerusalemmee

Betlemme’in:idem,Analecta Romana,Rome1899,pp.555–94.––––––,Das Missale im Lichte römischer Stadtgeschichte: Stationen, Perikopen, Gebräuche,

FreiburgimBreisgau1925.Heid,Stefan,Kreuz, Jerusalem, Kosmos. Aspekte frühchristlicher Staurologie,Jahrbuch

fürAntikeundChristentum.Ergänzungsband31,Münster2001[a].––––––,‘DieguteAbsichtimSchweigenEusebsüberdieKreuzauffindung’,Römische

Quartalschrift 96(2001[b]),pp.37–56.Herklotz,Ingo,Gli eredi di Costantino. Il papato, il Laterano e la propaganda visiva nel

XII secolo,Rome2000.Horsch,Nadja,‘DieScalaSantaimmittelalterlichenLateranpalast:eineneueLektüre

derQuellen’,Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte66(2003),pp.524–32.Itineraria et alia geographica,ed.byP.GeyerandO.Cuntz,CCSL175-76,2vols,Turnhout

1965.


Jacobs,AndrewS.,Remains of the Jews. The Holy Land and Christian Empire in Late Antiquity,StanfordCA2004.

Jenal,Georg,Italia ascetica atque monastica: das Asketen- und Mönchtum in Italien. Von den Anfängen bis zur Zeit der Langobarden (ca. 150/250–604),MonographienzurGeschichtedesMittelalters39,Stuttgart1995.

Jerusalem as Narrative Space/ Erzählraum Jerusalem,ed.byAnnetteHoffmannandGerhardWolf,Leiden2012.

Klein,Holger,‘Constantine,Helena,andtheCultoftheTrueCrossinConstantinople’in:Byzance et les reliques du Christ,ed.byJannicDurandetBernardFlusin,Paris 2004,pp.31–59.

Kühnel,Bianca,From the Earthly to the Heavenly Jerusalem. Representations of the Holy City in Christian Art of the First Millennium,RQCAKGSupplementheft42,Rome,FreiburgandVienna1987.

LP:Le Liber Pontificalis. Texte, introduction et commentaire,ed.byLouisDuchesne,2vols,Paris1886–92;Additions et corrections,ed.byC.Vogel,Paris1957(Reprint:3vols,Paris1981).

Lidov,A.‘Hierotopy.TheCreationofSacredSpacesasaFormofCreativityandSubjectofCulturalHistory’in:Hierotopy. Creation of Sacred Spaces in Byzantium and Medieval Russia,ed.byA.Lidov,Moscow2006,pp.32–58.

––––––,‘ByzantineJerusalem.TheImperialPharosChapelastheHolySepulchre’in:Jerusalem as Narrative Space/ Erzählraum Jerusalem,ed.byAnnetteHoffmannandGerhardWolf,Leiden2012.

Longo,Umberto,‘DimensionelocaleeaspirazioniuniversaliaRomanelXIIsecolo:SanGiovanniinLateranocomesantuarioel’ereditàdell’Anticaalleanza’in:Expériences religieuses et chemins de perfection dans l’Occident médiéval. Études offertes à André Vauchez par ses élèvesed.byD.Rigaux,D.Russo,andC.Vincent,Paris2012,pp.121–37.

Magdalino,Paul,‘L’égliseduPhareetlesReliquesdelaPassionàConstantinople(VIIe/VIIIe-XIIIesiècles)’ in:Byzance et les reliques du Christ,ed.byJannicDurandetBernardFlusin,Paris2004,pp.15–30.

Maraval,Pierre,‘GrégoireleGrandetleslieuxsaintsd’Orient’in:Gregorio Magno e il suo tempo. I: XIX Incontro di studiosi dell’antichità cristiana in collaborazione con l’École française de Rome, Roma 9–12 maggio 1990,StudiaEphemeridisAugustinianum33,Rome1991,pp.65–76.

––––––,‘TheEarliestPhaseofChristianPilgrimageintheNearEast(beforethe7thcentury)’,Dumbarton Oaks Papers56(2002),pp.63–74.

Mathews, Thomas F., The Clash of Gods: A Reinterpretation of Early Christian Art.PrincetonNJ1993.

Matthiae,Guglielmo,Mosaici medioevali delle chiese di Roma,2vols,Rome1967.

164 DeBlaauw

Mondini,Daniela,‘Reliquieincarnate:le“sacreteste”diPietroePaoloaSanGiovanniinLateranoaRoma’in:Del visibile credere. Pellegrinaggi, santuari, miracoli, reliquie,ed.byD.ScottoandG.Cracco,Florence2011,pp.265–96.

New Jerusalems. Hierotopy and Iconography of Sacred Spaces,ed.by AlexeiLidov,Moscow2009.

Nilgen,Ursula,‘DasFastigiuminderBasilicaConstantinianaundvierBronzesäulendesLateran’,Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte 72(1977),pp.1–31.

ÓCarragáin,Éamonn,Ritual and the Rood. Liturgical Images and the Old English Poems of the DreamoftheRoodTradition, TorontoandBuffalo2005.

O’Reilly,Jennifer,‘Introduction’in:Bede: On the TempleTranslatedTextsforHistorians21,transl.withnotesbySeánConnolly,Liverpool1995,pp.xvii-lv

––––––,‘TheArtofAuthority’in:After Rome,ed.byThomasCharles-Edwards,Oxford2003,pp.141–89.

––––––,‘BedeonSeeingtheGodofGodsinZion’in:Text, Image and Interpretation. Studies in Anglo-Saxon Literature and Its Insular Context in Honour of Éamonn Ó Carragáin,ed.byAlistairMinnisandJaneRoberts,Turnhout2007,pp.3–29.

Osborne, John, ‘The JerusalemTempleTreasureand theChurchofSantiCosmaeDamianoinRome’,Papers of the British School at Rome76(2008),pp.173–81.

Ousterhout,Robert,‘TheTemple,theSepulchre,andtheMartyrionoftheSavior’,Gesta29(1990),pp.44–53.

––––––, ‘FlexibleGeographyandTransportableTopography’ in:The Real and Ideal Jerusalem in Jewish,Christian and Islamic Art,Jewish Art23/24(1997–98),ed.byB.Kühnel,Jerusalem1998,pp.393–404.

Pullan,Wendy,‘JerusalemfromAlphatoOmegaintheSantaPudenzianamosaic’in:The Real and Ideal Jerusalem in Jewish,Christian and Islamic Art,Jewish Art23/24(1997-98),ed.byB.Kühnel,Jerusalem1998,pp.405–17.

The Real and Ideal Jerusalem in Jewish,Christian and Islamic Art,Jewish Art23/24(1997-98),ed.byB.Kühnel,Jerusalem1998.

Sahner,ChristianC.‘HierusaleminLaterano:theTranslationofSacredSpaceinFifthCenturyRome’in: New Jerusalem/Novye Ierusalimy,Moscow2009,pp.103–30.

Saxer,Victor,Sainte-Marie-Majeure.Une basilique de Rome dans l’histoire de la ville et de son église (Ve-XIIIe siècle),CÉFR283,Rome2001.

Smith, J.C., ‘FormandFunctionof theSideChambersofFifth-andSixth-CenturyChurchesinRavenna’,Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians49,no.2(1990),pp.181–204.

Thraede,Klaus,‘JerusalemII’in:Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum17,Stuttgart1996,cc.718–64.

Thunø,Erik,Image and Relic. Mediating the Sacred in Early Medieval Rome,ARID-S32,Rome2002.


Tongeren,Louisvan,Exaltation of the Cross. Toward the Origins of the Feast of the Cross and the Meaning of the Cross in Early Medieval Liturgy,Liturgiacondenda11,Leuven2000.

Vannutelli,Vincenzo,‘LasantacolonnachesivenerainRomaaS.Prassede:conferenzaarcheologicatenutadomenica16febbraio1896’,L´Arcadia8(1896)[offprintcon-sultedinBibliotecaApostolicaVaticana].

Wolf,Gerhard,‘LaetarefiliaSion:ecceegovenioethabitaboinmediotui;imagesofChrist’,in:The Real and Ideal Jerusalem in Jewish,Christian and Islamic Art,Jewish Art 23/24(1997-98),ed.byB.Kühnel,Jerusalem1998,pp.418–29.

Wortley,John,‘TheLegendofConstantinetheRelic-Provider’in:Daimonopylai: Essays in Classics and the Classical Tradition presented to Edmund G. Berry,ed.byRoryB.EganandMarkA.Joyal,Winnipeg2004,pp.487–96.

166 DeBlaauw


part 2

Imitation and Translocation

∵

168 DeBlaauw

169TheReconqueredJerusalemRepresented

Chapter7

The Reconquered Jerusalem Represented Tradition and Renewal on Pilgrimage Ampullae from the Crusader Period

Katja Boertjes

Several pewter pilgrimage ampullae whose iconography refers to Jerusalemhavebeenpreservedfromthesecondhalfofthetwelfthcentury.Theseampul-laeenabledcrusaders,pilgrimsandothervisitorsoftheHolyCitytotakean‘imageofJerusalem’tootherplaces.TheseimagesincludeddepictionsoftheChurchoftheHolySepulchreastheCrusadershadrebuiltitinthemiddleofthetwelfthcentury,butalsoofeventsthathadtakenplaceinJerusalem.Thecustomofdecoratingobjectswithimagesreferringtoasiteofpilgrimageandofferingthemtopilgrims,whothenspreadthesouvenirstootherregions,wasnotanewone.EvenintheEarlyChristianperiod,pilgrims’ampullaeandothersouvenirsbearingreferencestotheHolySepulchre,oreventsthathadtakenplaceintheHolyLand,werealreadyavailablethere.However,theampullaefromtheCrusaderperiodaredecidedlydifferentfromtheearlieronesorigi-natingfromtheHolyCity.Traditionalternateswithrenewal.AfterageneraldiscussionofthecustomoftakingsouvenirsfromJerusalemfromthetimeofthefirstpilgrimages,thefocuswillbeonpilgrimageampullaefromtheCru-saderperiod.WhatinfluencedidthepresenceoftheCrusadersinJerusalemhaveontheiconographyoftheampullaeandtheirdistributiontotheWest?

Relics and Eulogiae

FromthetimeofConstantinetheGreatonwards,pilgrimagetotheHolyLanddevelopedrapidly.WorshippersvisitedtheplaceswhereeventsfromtheOldandNewTestamenthadtakenplace.Theyalsowantedtobeabletosee,wor-shipandeventouchthemanyrelicsthathadbeenfoundoverthecenturies.InJerusalem, worship was concentrated in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre,wherebelieverscouldvisittherelicoftheTrueCrossandChrist’sHolySepul-chre.AsmorepilgrimscametoJerusalemduringthefourthcentury,theholyplacesandrelicshadtobebetterprotected,becausefragmentsofreveredob-jects were popular souvenirs. In some places it was even necessary to place

© KatjaBoertjes,2014 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_009This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.



170 Boertjes

guards toprevent the theftof relics.Splintersof thewoodof theCrossandpiecesofrockfromChrist’sTombwereparticularlyindemand.Egeriarecordsinherlatefourth-centurypilgrim’saccountthattheCrossintheChurchoftheHolySepulchrewasprotectedbyguardsafterapilgrimhadbittenapieceofitoffwhenkissingit.1Atthebeginningofthefifthcentury,almosteveryregionoftheRomanEmpirepossessedfragmentsoftheCrossrelic.2

Tangiblememoriesoftheholyplacescouldalsobeobtainedbycollectingeulogiaeortertiaryrelics.3Theeulogiaeincludenaturalia,‘naturalsigns’,suchasapebblepickedupneartheHolySepulchre,apieceofwoodfoundontheMountofOlives,waterfromtheriverJordanornaturalmaterialsliketheroseofJericho,palmbranchesorthornsthatwerepickedfromthehedgesontheMountofOlives.Theeulogiaealsoincludeothermaterialsfoundclosetosa-credplaces,likedustthathadcoveredChrist’sTomb,waxfromthecandlesintheChurchoftheHolySepulchreoroilfromlampsthatburnednearChrist’sTomb.4Augustine(354–430)reportedthatafriendoftheformerofficialHes-perus,fromthevicinityofHippo,hadtakensomesandfromtheHolyLandforhiscomrade.Hesperus,whohadhungthecontainerwiththesandinhisbed-room,usedittowardoffmisfortune.5AntoninusofPiacenzarecordsinhislatesixth-centurypilgrimageaccountthatvisitorstotheChurchoftheHolySepul-chrecouldcollecttwokindsofeulogiae:soilfromtheHolySepulchreandoilfromthelampthatburnedpermanentlyneartheTomb.6AgoodexampleofacollectionofeulogiaeisthewoodenrelicboxfromthetreasurechamberoftheCapellaSanctaSanctorumoftheLateran,whichwaspaintedwithfivescenesfromtheLifeofChristinthelatesixthcenturyorearlyseventhcentury.7The

1 Passage37,2.Wilkinson1981,p.137.2 HuntmentionsSyria,AsiaMinor,Italy,GaulandAfrica.Hunt1982,p.129andnote6with

acknowledgmentofsources.3 Eulogia(derivedfromtheGreekword“eulogia”)isusedinthesenseof‘blessedsouvenir’

here.Theconceptof‘eulogia’hasmoremeanings(inadifferentcontext).See:Stuiber1966foradetaileddescription.Aeulogia’svaluewasbasedonthebeliefthatthesanctityandsacredpowerofplaces,peopleandobjectscouldbetransferredbytouch.Seee.g.:Vikan1984.Inamoregeneralsense,eulogiaealsoservedasamulets,attractingprosperityandwardingoffmisfortune.The word “eulogia” appears on Early Christian pilgrimage ampullae fromJerusalemaswellasinwrittensources.

4 ForadetailedstudyoftheeulogiaepilgrimstookfromtheHolyLand,seeBagatti1949.5 Hunt1982,p.130andnote9,withareferencetoAugustine,De Civitate dei,22,8.6 Passage18,2–3.See:Milani1977,p.142.AntoninusofPiacenzausestheword‘benedictio’in

the sense of a souvenir that was taken by a pilgrim as a relic here. See:Vermeer 1965,p.79.

7 NowintheMuseoSacroinVaticanCity,inv.no.1883A-B.


originalcontentsoftheboxconsistedofpiecesofcloth,soil,stonesandwoodfromsacredplaces,accompaniedbystripsoftextthatshowthatthevariouseulogiaecamefromdifferentplacesintheHolyLand.8

Mass Production

Whentheonrushofpilgrimskeptincreasingduringthefifthandsixthcentury,anothersolutionforobtainingasouvenir,whichdidnotinvolvetakingoriginalrelics fromtheplaceofpilgrimage,arosealongsidethephenomenonof ter-tiary relics:man-madepilgrimsouvenirs.Theseobjectswereproducedonalargescale.Theywereusuallymadebymeansofmoulds,whichmadeitpos-sibletoproducemanyidenticalcopiesrelativelyquickly.Thequantityanddi-versity of man-made souvenirs from Jerusalem is unprecedented. Examplesaremedallions,censers, jugs,smallbottles, jewelleryandscalemodelsoffa-mouslandmarks.9Thepewterpilgrimageampullaeformaspecialgroupwith-inthiscategorybecausetheycombineamass-producedobjectwithaeulogia.Apart from the ampullae’s precious contents, the images depicted on themalsoplayedanimportantrole.Afterall,bytransportingampullaetootherplac-esonedidnotjusttakeatangiblepieceofthesacredplaceelsewhere(boththeampullaitselfanditscontents)butalsoan‘imageofJerusalem’.Literally,be-causetheampullaeweredecoratedwithdepictionsofmonumentsseenintheHolyCity,orofeventsthathadtakenplacethere.TheampullarepeatedwhatthevisitorsoftheHolyCityhadseenthemselves, thuskeepingthememoryalive.

TheampullaewerenotonlyimportantasvisualmementoesoftheplacethepilgrimorCrusaderhadvisited,theyalsoplayedanimportantroleinthewayvisitorstotheChurchoftheHolySepulchreexperiencedtheirdevotion.Theimagesontheampullacouldincreaseitsvalueasaeulogia.Theampullamightevenhavebeenbroughtintocontactwithrelicsorholyplacesthepilgrimhadvisited.Thatiswhytheiconographyoftheampullaedidnotjustemphasizethesacredcontents,butalsotheuniqueexperiencethepilgrimorCrusaderhad had in that place. The ampullae were not complete until the pilgrimssupplemented them with their own experiences, especially if the souvenirs

8 See: Morey 1926; Vikan 1982, pp. 18–20, Figs 13a-b; Ornamenta Ecclesiae 1985, vol. 3,pp.80–81,no.H8;Kitzinger1988,p.60andp.61,Fig.7;Krüger2000,p.69,Fig.69andp.70.

9 Foramoregeneralarticleonthemeaning,appearanceandmaterialsoftheJerusalemsouve-nirsfromtheEarlyChristianperiodtothepresentday,seeGockerell1983.Thepilgrimageampullaefromthecrusaderperiodarenotmentionedinthisarticle.

172 Boertjes

had been filled, blessed and sealed in the presence of the visitors.10 Imagescouldstrengthenthememoryofthisexperience:thecombinationoftheim-ageonandthematerialsintheampullamadeiteasierforthewearerofthesouvenirtorecallandperhapsevenrelivethesanctityoftheplacetheyhadvisited,bothwhiletravellingandoncetheyhadreturnedhome.

ArelativelylargegroupofaboutthirtypreservedEarlyChristianampullaeandapproximatelytwenty-fiveampullasides,madefromanalloyoftinandlead,11refertoJerusalemandotherplacesintheHolyLandintheiriconogra-phy.Thereisastrongresemblancebetweentheampullaewithregardtodeco-rationmotifsandshape.Thebest-knownarethoseintheMuseodelDuomoinMonzaandtheMuseodiSanColombanoinBobbio.Thesetwocollectionscanbedatedfairlyaccuratelyintheperiodfromthemiddleofthesixthcenturytotheearlyseventhcenturyonhistoricalgrounds.Thisiswhyitisgenerallyas-sumedthatsimilarampullaeweremadeinthesameperiod.12Theyallhaveround bellies with detailed images in bas-relief that refer to the NewTesta-ment(Fig.7.1).13ThediscoveryofacastingmouldinthevillageofSiloam,closeto Jerusalem, in 1992, revealedthatmanufacturersalsomadeampullaewithdepictions of scenes from the Old Testament.14 Some bear inscriptions inGreekwriting.Asuspension ismissing.Perhapsa strapwasattached to theampulla’sneck,withorwithoutearstorunastringthrough.15

10 Hahn1990,p.91.11 Grabar1958,p.11,thinkstheyaremadeoflead.Thismisconceptionhasoccasionallybeen

adoptedinlaterliterature.Materialanalysisofanumberofampullaehasshownthatthetincontentofthealloyisquitehigh.SeeEngemann1973,p.7andnote16and17;Enge-mann2002,pp.154–55,note11.

12 Seee.g.:Grabar1958,p.14.Thisdatinghasbeenadoptedinlaterliteraturewithoutdiscus-sion.

13 Muchhasbeenwrittenaboutthequestionofwhetherornottheseimagesonthepilgrim-ageampullaereflect(decorationsof)monumentalsanctuariesofthelocasanctainJeru-salemortheHolyLand.SeeSmirnov1897,pp.90–91;Grabar1958,pp.45–50;Ainalov1961,pp. 225–48, specifically pp. 233–36; Engemann 1973, pp. 22–25; Grigg 1974; Weitzmann1974,pp.48–49;Kötzsche-Breitenbruch1984,p.232;andVikan1995(withasummaryofthediscussiononpp.377–78).

14 Themould,datedinthesecondhalfofthesixthcenturyorearlyseventhcentury,wasusedtoproduceampullaeofthesametypeasthespecimensdiscussedhere.Ononeside,theSacrificeofIsaacisdepicted,theothersideshowsDanielintheLion’sDen.See:Pic-cirillo1994.

15 ThestrapsandchainsthatarenowattachedtotheampullaeinMonzaarenotauthentic.Theleathercarryingstrapsaroundthenecksofanumberofotherampullaedoseemtobeauthentic,however.SeeWürttembergischeLandesmuseuminStuttgart,inv.nos1980–205a and 1980–205b; Cleveland Museum of Art, inv. no. 1999.46; private collection


Intheexistingliterature,thisgroupofpilgrimageampullaeisoftenreferredtoas‘Palestinianampullae’,indicatingthattheyoriginatefromtheHolyLandwithoutascribingtheobjectstoaspecificplaceofpilgrimage.ItseemslikelythattheyweredistributedattheChurchoftheHolySepulchreinJerusalem,because all images refer to Christ, whose tomb and relics of theTrue Crosswereworshippedwithsuchintensitythere.Pilgrims’souvenirsoftendisplayscenesfromthelivesofthesaintwhoisworshippedintheareawheretheywereacquired,eventhoughinmanycasesthoseeventsdidnotoccurinthatparticularplaceofpilgrimage.Theyrefertoimagesthatpilgrimswouldseeinchurchortostoriesthatthevisitorswouldhearonthespot.Notallimagesonthe ampullae from the Holy Land refer directly to the Holy City, but scenesfrom Christ’s Life in Jerusalem (particularly his death and resurrection) arewellpresented.ThatiswhyJerusalemisthemostlikelyplaceofproduction.

Ampullae from the Crusader Period

ThereisnorecordofampullaeoriginatingfromtheHolyLandbetweenthelateseventhandthemiddleofthetwelfthcentury.Duringthesecondhalfof

ChristianSchmidtinMunich,inv.nos1550and1723;DiözesanmuseuminCologne,inv.no.1996/436;MenilCollectioninHouston,inv.no.83–024DJ.See:Kötzsche-Breitenbruch1984,p.239(ontheleatherstrapsaroundtheampullaeinStuttgart)andEngemann2002,p.169.

Figure7.1 Pilgrimage ampulla from Jerusalem with depictions of the worship of the Cross/the Crucifixion ( front) and the Women and Angel at the Holy Sepulchre (reverse), second half sixth or early seventh century, pewter alloy, diameter 46 mm. Washington:DumbartonOaks,inv.no.48.18.

174 Boertjes

thetwelfthcentury,theproductionofpewterpilgrimageampullaeinJerusa-lemrevived–adatingthatismainlybasedonthewaytheChurchoftheHolySepulchreisdepictedonthesouvenirs.TheampullaeproductioninJerusalemduringtheCrusaderperiodcoincideswiththemassproductionofbadgesandrelatedmaterialsinvariousotherplacesofpilgrimage,particularlyinWesternEurope.However,JerusalemseemstohavebeentheonlyplaceofpilgrimagewherepewterpilgrimageampullaeweremadeinboththeEarlyChristianpe-riodandtheHighMiddleAges.Noampullaehavebeenpreservedfrombothperiods from any other place of pilgrimage. The preserved Early Christianspecimens that refer to a specific place of pilgrimage all originate from theeasternMediterranean.16AftertherevivalofthetraditioninJerusaleminthemiddleofthetwelfthcentury,theemphasisoftheampullaproductionshiftstoWesternEurope.17IntheWesternplacesofpilgrimage,theampullaearelesspopular than thebadges.Nevertheless, theyremainaconstant factor in thesupplyofdevotionalobjectsinmanyplacesofpilgrimageupuntil,andinclud-ing,thelateMiddleAges.TheCrusaderswhocametoJerusalemfromWesternEuropeandreturnedhomeafterwardsundoubtedlycontributedtothewide-spreadfamiliaritywith,andthedistributionof,thesouvenirsintheWest.

Thetwelfth-centuryampullaefromJerusalemarenottheonlyonesthatcanbeassociatedwiththeCrusadersintheHolyLand,however.Itisworthmen-tioningauniquearchaeologicalfindintheCrusaderstateAcre,which,afterthefallofJerusalemin1187,becamethemainpilgrimagecentreoftheregion.Here,pilgrimsarrivedfromEuropeandthentravelledontothevarioussacredplacesinSyria,GalileeandJerusalem.Inthisseaporttown,athirteenth-centu-ryworkshopwasdugup,wherepewterpilgrimageampullaewithdecorativepatternshadbeencast.Thefind includedsixcastingmoulds,scrapsof leadandotherunwroughtmaterial,andoneampullathathadalreadybeencastbutnotfinished.18

16 Early Christian places of pilgrimage from which ampullae whose iconography and/orinscriptions refer to theirplaceoforigin havebeenpreserved,are (besides Jerusalem)KarmAbuMena,Nazareth,MonsAdmirabilis,SergiopolisandConstantinople.

17 Inthelatetwelfthcentury,CanterburyandThessalonikifollow.InthethirteenthcenturyVendôme, Evesham, Burton-upon-Trent, Westminster, Bromholm, Worcester, York,Waltham, Walsingham and Boulogne-sur-Mer; in the fourteenth century, Noyon andMaastricht.TherevivalofampullaproductioninthesecondhalfofthetwelfthcenturyandthepopularityofampullaeinthethirteenthandfourteenthcenturycoincidewiththeperiodinwhichmanyChristianpilgrimageswereundertaken.

18 Syon1999.Accordingtohim,the(mouldsfor)ampullaedonotshowacharacteristicico-nographybecausetheydidnotserveaspilgrims’souvenirsfromoneparticularplace,butbecause they were meant to be taken from Acre to other sanctuaries in the region.


FiveampullaethatwerepreservedfromtheCrusaderperiodcanbeascribedto Jerusalem on the basis of their iconography. Two of those reside in theSkulpturensammlungundMuseumfürByzantinischeKunstinBerlin(Figs7.2and7.5),19oneintheBritishMuseuminLondon(Fig.7.3)20oneintheMalcoveCollectioninToronto,21andoneintheClevelandMuseumofArt(Fig.7.4)22Theyarealldecoratedonbothsides.Toavoidconfusioninthedescriptions,theterms‘front’and‘reverse’oftheampullaewillbeusedbelow.Bothsidesareofequalimportance,however.Images, inscriptionsorshapedonotindicatethatoneparticularsidewasconsideredmoreimportantthantheother.

Iconography

ItisonlylogicalthattheHolySepulchrewasanubiquitousimageontheam-pullaefromboththeEarlyChristianperiodandtheHighMiddleAges,butitsspecific iconography is different in both periods. Three ampullae from thetwelfthcenturyshowtheChurchoftheHolySepulchreinvirtuallythesameway(Figs7.2–7.4).23Thebuilding is renderedschematicallybut is recogniz-able.Boththeinteriorandexteriorarecombinedinoneimage.Thestructureconsistsofthreeparts,eachwithanarchintheirinterior.Underthecentral,largestarchliesChrist’sbody,wrappedincloths,onatomb.Hehasanimbusaroundhishead.Abovethetomb,asaddlerooforconicaldomeisdepicted.Thearchontheleftiscrownedwithasmalldomedroofwithacross.Abovethearchontheright,athree-storytowerwithapointedroofrisesup.Alampissuspendedfromeacharch.AllthisclearlyreferstothenewChurchoftheHolySepulchreastheCrusadershadrebuiltitinthemiddleofthetwelfthcentury:withatalltower(ontherightoftheampulla)andadomedroof(ontheleftoftheampulla).OntheampullainBerlin,anumberoffaded,Greekletterscanbe

BecausetheampullaeneitheroriginatefromJerusalemnorreferspecificallytotheHolyCity,theywillnotbediscussedhere.

19 Inv.nos24/73and25/73.Kötzsche1988,pp.13–32;Folda1995,pp.294–97;DieWeltvonByzanz2004,p.200,no.276.

20 Inv.no.M&LA1876,12–14,18.Smith1861,pp.247–248,pl.xxxix,Fig.1;Dalton1901,no.997;Byzantium1994,p.187,no.202.

21 Inv.no.M82.210.TheMalcoveCollection1985,p.79,no.103(erroneouslydatedinthesixthcentury).

22 Inv.no.1999.234.Unpublished.23 OneampullaintheSkulpturensammlungundMuseumfürByzantinischeKunstinBer-

lin,inv.no.25/73,oneintheBritishMuseuminLondon,inv.no.M&LA1876,12–14,18,andoneintheClevelandMuseumofArt,inv.no.1999.234.

176 Boertjes

seen.TheymayhavespelledO A[GIOC] TA[FOC],theHolySepulchre.24TheampullaeinLondonandClevelanddonotbear inscriptions(anymore).Thenecksof thethreeampullaearedecoratedonbothsideswithsymbolicanddecorativepatternsincludingacross,apatriarchalcross,azigzagandvines.These motifs vary per ampulla.The combination of vines and a patriarchalcrossonbothnecksoftheampullainBerlinleadsFoldatotheobservationthatthisisareferencetothecrossastheTreeofLifeintheByzantinetradition.TheimagemightrefertotheGolgothachapelintheChurchoftheHolySepulchre.25

Foriconographicalandhistoricalreasons,KötzschedatesthesouvenirsinBerlinintheperiodbetweentheconsecrationoftheCrusaderchurchin1149and the conquest of Jerusalem in 1189.26 Folda believes that the ampulla inBerlinbearingtheimageoftheChurchoftheHolySepulchrewasmadeaftercirca1154,whenthebelltowerwascompleted.27Thisdatingcanperhapsbespecifiedevenfurtherbecauseofthethreelampsdepictedunderthearches.

24 Kötzsche1988,p.17.25 Folda1995,p.295.26 Kötzsche1988,p.28;Kötzsche1995,p.283.27 Folda 1995, p. 294. Moreover, for stylistic reasons he thinks the ampullae were made

before1160.Folda1995,pp.296–97.

Figure7.2 Pilgrimage ampulla from Jerusalem with depictions of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre ( front) and the Women and Angel at the Tomb (reverse), second half twelfth century, pewter alloy, 60 × 46 mm. Berlin:Skulptu-rensammlungundMuseumfürByzantinischeKunst,inv.no.25/73.


ArnoldofLübeckmentionsinhisChronica Slavorum thatHenrytheLiondo-natedthreeeternallampstotheChurchoftheHolySepulchreonhispilgrim-agetotheHolyLand:onefortheHolySepulchre,oneforGolgotha,andonefortheCrossrelic.28Ifthethreelampsunderthedepictedarchesrefertotheselanterns,thesouvenirsmustdatefromafter1175,whenthedukeundertookhisjourney.Anotherpossibilityisthatthelampsrefertothe‘holyfire’,aceremonythathastakenplaceontheSaturdaybeforeEastereversincethefourthcen-tury.AflamefromheavensupposedlycomesdownandmiraculouslylightsthelanternsabovetheHolySepulchre.

Thereversesidesofthethreeampullaeeachshowadifferentscene.OneshowstheThreeWomenattheTomb(Fig.7.2),29athemethatwasalsooftendepictedonEarlyChristianampullae(Fig.7.1).Ontheleftsideoftheampulla,the three women are depicted. According to the Gospels they came to theTomb early in the morning with spices and aromatic oils to anoint Christ’sbody,whentheynoticedthatthestonethatsealedtheTombhadbeenmovedandthebodyhaddisappeared.Theyaredressed in longgarmentsandhavenimbusesaroundtheirheads.Behindthem,weseebuildingsthatindicatethecity of Jerusalem. The woman in front, probably Mary Magdalene, wears asmalljugorampulla.Totherightsitsanangel,alsowithanimbus.Heholdsasceptrewithaknobintheshapeofafleur-de-lisinhislefthand.Withhisoth-erhand,hepointstoshowthewomentheemptyTombonthefarrightoftheampulla.Ithasanarchedentrance.Theangelextendshisrightwingoverthewomen,whoarerenderedonaslightlysmallerscale.Theguardsarenotde-picted.TheGreeklettersontheampullaeareyetagainhardtoread.AccordingtoKötzsche, theymight formthewordsH MHRO FW[RAI], thecarriersofointment.30Thesubjectisthematicallyconnectedtothefrontoftheampulla.Theimageofthebuilding(theChurchoftheHolySepulchre)islinkedtoanimportanteventthathadtakenplacethere.ThewomenwerethefirsttovisitJesus’s Tomb and pilgrims visiting the Church of the Holy Sepulchre couldidentifywiththem.

Ontheothersideof thesecondampulla, twowarriorsaintsaredepicted(Fig.7.3).31Bothhaveanimbusandaredressedinchainmail.Thesaintsbothcarryspearsintheirlefthand,andresttheirrighthandonashieldthatstandsontheground.ItispossibletodeducefromthepartlyweatheredGreeklettersnexttothesoldiersthatoneofthemisSaintGeorge.Theotherpersoncannot

28 Baert2004,p.187.29 SkulpturensammlungundMuseumfürByzantinischeKunst,Berlin,inv.no.25/73.30 Kötzsche1988,p.19.31 BritishMuseum,London,inv.no.M&LA1876,12–14,18.

178 Boertjes

beidentifiedwithcertaintyanymore,butitisprobablysaintDemetrius.32ThetwowarriorsaintsshouldundoubtedlybeseeninthecontextoftheCrusaders.Georgeisregardedasthepatronsaintofknights,particularlytheCrusaders.Demetrius was also a warrior saint the Crusaders could identify with. Onceagain we see a connection between the figures depicted on one side of theampullaandthebuildingontheother.ThewarriorsaintshelpedtheCrusadersseethemselvesastheprotectorsofJerusalemingeneralandtheHolySepul-chreinparticular.

32 Byzantium1994,p.187,no.202.Dalton1901,p.176,no.997,identifiesthewarriorsaintsasGeorgeandAetius.Fromthe late twelfthcentury,ampullaedepictingsaintDemetriuswereinuseinThessaloniki,oftencombinedwithanimageofanothersaint.Nevertheless,theampulladiscussedherecertainlydoesnotoriginatefromThessaloniki,butfromJeru-salem.TheampullaefromtheGreekplaceofpilgrimagearedesigneddifferently.Theydohaveacircularbellybuttheimageissurroundedbyadecorativeband,whichtheampulladiscussedabovelacks.Moreover,thesaintsontheampullaefromThessalonikiareinvari-ablyonlydepicteddowntothemiddleoftheirtorsos,whilehisentirebodyisshownhere.Lastly,theimageoftheChurchoftheHolySepulchreonthefrontoftheampulladis-cussedhereevidentlyreferstoJerusalem.

Figure7.3 Pilgrimage ampulla from Jerusalem with depictions of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre ( front) and two warrior saints (reverse), second half twelfth century, pewter alloy, 58 × 39 mm. London:BritishMuseum,inv.no.M&LA1876,12-14,18.©TheTrusteesoftheBritishMuseum.


ThereverseoftheampullainClevelandshowstheDescentintoHell,alsocalledtheDescentintoLimboortheAnastasis(Greekfor‘resurrection’)(Fig.7.4).Christdescendsintolimboafterhisdeath,theregionbetweenheavenandhell,tofreethesoulsoftheOldTestamentarysaints.Theyhaddiedinthepe-riodinwhichtherewerenoChristiansacraments,afterall,andwherethere-forebanishedtothisplace,neitherheavennorhell,untilChristwouldcometofreethem.Withalonggarmentandacruciformnimbus,Christoccupiestheampulla’scentralposition.Heholdsapatriarchalcrossinhislefthand,whilepullingAdamtowardshimwithhisrighthand.Behindthem,Eveholdsupherhandsinsupplication.OntherightsitKingDavidandKingSolomon,whocanberecognizedbytheircrowns.Underneaththisimage,theunderworldisindi-catedwithafewlines.Thecross-shapedbeamsChriststandsonsymbolizethegatestotherealmofthedead,whichhehasknockedopen.Nexttothecruci-formnimbusaretheGreeklettersICXC,JesusChrist.Avirtuallyidenticalde-pictionofthethemeisdisplayedonthereverseofanampullainBerlin(Fig.7.5).33 It refers to the deliverance by Christ and mainly occurs in Byzantine

33 SkulpturensammlungundMuseumfürByzantinischeKunst,Berlin,inv.no.24/73.

Figure7.4 Pilgrimage ampulla from Jerusalem with depictions of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre ( front) and the Descent into Hell (reverse), second half twelfth century, pewter alloy, 43 × 29 mm. Cleveland:ClevelandMuseumofArt,inv.no.1999.234.

180 Boertjes

painting.ThereisaneasyexplanationforthefactthattheDescentintoHellisdepictedonpilgrimageampullaefromJerusalemandthatthethemeislinkedto the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The original martyrium that EmpressHelenahadbuiltoverChrist’sTombaround326wascalledtheAnastasisRo-tundabecauseChristhadrisenfromthedeadthere.Thebuilding,whichwaslaterincorporatedintheChurchoftheHolySepulchre,appearsfrequentlyontheEarlyChristianampullae(Fig.7.1).ThetwoampullaefromtheCrusaderperiod,however,donotshowthebuildingbutthestoryoftheAnastasis.Thistheme,illustratedwithAdamandEveaswellasthekingsDavidandSolomon,wasnotdepicteduntiltheninthcentury.ThesceneisthematicallylinkedtotheAnastasisandthustotheAnastasisRotunda,whichstillformedanimpor-tantpartoftheChurchoftheHolySepulchreduringtheCrusaderperiod.34

TheampullainBerlinthatbearsadepictionoftheDescentintoHell,showsanimageoftheCrucifixiononitsfront(Fig.7.5).Christhangsfromacrosswithbroadbeams.Heisdressedinalong,sleevelessrobethatischaracteristicofByzantineart.Hisheadisslightlybentandhasacruciformnimbusaroundit.AbovethehorizontalbeamarethelettersICXC,JesusChrist.Atthebottomofthecrossanarchisseen,withahead-sizedobjectunderneathit.Itisprobablyaskull,referringtobothGolgotha(placeoftheskull)andtheskullofAdam.

34 Kartsonis1986,p.123.

Figure7.5 Pilgrimage ampulla from Jerusalem with depictions of Christ on the Cross ( front) and the Descent into Hell (reverse), second half twelfth century, pewter alloy, 60 × 46 mm. Berlin:SkulpturensammlungundMuseumfürByzantinischeKunst,inv.no.24/73.


AdamwassupposedlyburiedontheplacewhereChristwascrucified,afterall.MaryandJohntheEvangelist flankthecross.Bothhaveanimbusandwearlonggarments.Mary,onChrist’sright,hasbentherheadslightlyandlifts–asasignofgrief–herlefthandtohercheek,supportingtheelbowwiththeotherhand.BetweenthecrossandMarystandsastickwithasponge,asareferencetotheRomansoldierStephaton,whoofferedChristsomethingtodrink.Be-hindMary,onthefarleftoftheampulla,weseeabuildingthatfunctionsasaschematic representation of the city, Jerusalem. To the left of the crucifiedChriststandsJohn.Betweenthem,thelanceofthesoldierLonginusisdepict-ed.BehindJohn,aglimpseof thecityof Jerusalemcanbeseenagain.EarlyChristianampullaealsofrequentlyfeaturedepictionsoftheCrucifixion,butwithadifferenticonography(Fig.7.1).ThecombinationoftheCrucifixionandtheDescentintoHellononeampullaisnotsurprising.Boththemesareclose-lyrelatedtothePassionofChristaswellastothelocationofimportantplacesintheChurchoftheHolySepulchre,namelytheGolgothachapelandtheAn-astasisRotunda.

TheampullainToronto,lastly,istooweatheredtodescribeindetail.Bothsidesdisplayasimplecross.35Anyconceivableinscriptionsordetailsarenolongervisible,butitwouldappearthatthisampullaalsoreferstotheCrucifix-ion.

ItisclearthattheiconographyofallampullaefromtheCrusaderperiodhastodowiththeChurchoftheHolySepulchre,theCrusaders,ortheeventsthattookplaceonornearthissite.JustliketheimagesontheEarlyChristianam-pullae,thescenesonthemedievalonesmightrefertoimagesthatwereshownintheChurchoftheHolySepulchreortostoriesthatweretoldthere.KötzscheformulatedtheplausibletheorythatthemosaicsintheCrusaderchurchmayhaveservedasexamplesfortheiconographyontheampullae.WrittensourcesconfirmthatdepictionsoftheCrucifixion,theAnastasisandtheWomenattheTomb were part of the mosaic decoration of the Church of the Holy Sepul-chre.36

After the Crusades

InTårnborg(Denmark),apewterpilgrimageampullathatreferstotwoplacesintheHolyLandwasdugupin1986(Fig.7.6).Ononeside,theHolySepulchreinJerusalemisdepicted.TheothersideshowsthebirthofChristandthusre-ferstotheChurchoftheNativityinBethlehem.Thesouvenir,currentlyinthe

35 MalcoveCollection,Toronto,inv.no.M82.210.TheMalcoveCollection1985,p.79,no.103.36 Kötzsche1988,pp.21–23.

182 Boertjes

NationalmuseetinCopenhagen,isdatedinthefourteenthcentury.37Bothearshave broken off, but their joins are still visible.The front shows an angel atChrist’semptyTomb.Theangel,ontheleftsideoftheampulla,wearsalongrobeandhasanimbusaroundhishead.Oppositehim,ontherightsideoftheampulla, theHolySepulchre is shownasadomedmonument.Thebuildinghasasquareentranceatthefront.Intheforegroundlieanumberofunidenti-fiable objects.38The reverse undoubtedly shows a depiction of the Nativity,whichtookplaceinBethlehem.OntheleftsideoftheampullaMaryisshown,whileontherightbabyJesusliesinthemanger,wrappedincloths.Behindthemanger,astylizedoxanddonkeyareseen.Adivinelightseemstoshineinthebackground.Thusthebeginning(theNativity)andtheend(theResurrection)ofChrist’sLifeoneartharedisplayedononeampulla,aswellastwoimportantlocationsintheHolyLand.

37 Noinv.no.Liebgott1988,p.218,no.11,p.219,Fig.21,p.220,Fig.22.Thesiteswheretheothermedievalampullaewerefoundareunknown.

38 Liebgott1988,p.218,suggeststhatitisanAnnunciationscene:theangelwouldthenbeGabrielgreetingMary.TheVirginisabsentfromthescene,butLiebgottclaimssheisinthebuilding.

Figure7.6 Pilgrimage ampulla from Jerusalem/Bethlehem with depictions of the Angel at the Tomb ( front) and the Nativity (reverse), fourteenth century, pewter alloy, 57 × 40 mm. Copenhagen:Nationalmuseet.©LennartLarsen/TheNationalMuseumofDenmark.


Severalwrittensourcesalsoconfirmthatthecustomofbringingbackam-pullaefromtheHolyLandstillexistedaftertheCrusaderperiod.Inanaccountof his travels, the French nobleman Nompar II describes the souvenirs heboughtduringhisstayinJerusalemin1418togiveaspresentstohiswifeandtheliegelordsandladiesofhisestate.Neartheendofhissummaryhemen-tions an ampulla decorated with palm branches ‘filled with water from theriverJordan’.39Suchfifteenth-centuryampullaedecoratedwithpalmbrancheshavenotbeenfoundasyet.FriarFelixFabri fromUlmalsobroughthomeabottleofwaterfromtheriverJordanfromtheHolyLandinthefifteenthcentu-ry.40Whatitlookedlikeisnotmentionedinhisaccount.

Contents of the Ampullae

Itisnotonlytheiconographythatmakestheampullaespecial,butalsotheircontents.Asmentionedabove,thepilgrimageampullaeformaspecialgroupthat has its own (extra) practical value within the category of man-madesouvenirs.TheampullawasnotjustatangiblemementoofJerusalem,thesou-venir also contained a memory of the Holy City.That is why the pilgrimageampullae offer just a bit more than the other souvenirs, like medallions orbadges:apartfromthefactthattheyboreimagesreferringtoJerusalemandhadperhapsbeenbroughtintophysicalcontactwiththesacredplaces,atan-giblememoryoftheplaceofpilgrimagecouldbetakenalongintheampulla.

SomeimagesontheEarlyChristianampullaehaveGreekcircumscriptionsthat reveal what the original contents were, for instance ELAION XVLOVZWHCTWN AGIWN TOPWN, oil from the tree of life of the loca sancta –whichindubitablyreferstothewoodoftheCross.Thistypeofoilisalsomen-tionedinseveralwrittensources.CyrilofScythopolis(circa524–558),forone,wroteaboutoilthathadbeenblessedthroughcontactwiththeHolyCrossinhisVita S. Sabæ.SaintSabasofJerusalemusedtheoiltochasedemonsfromthehillofCastellion,healaseverelyillman,andexorcizethedevilfromagirlwhohadbeenpossessed.41In598,PopeGregorytheGreatthankedtheformerconsulLeontiosfor‘oleum[…]sanctæcrucis’hehadreceivedfromhim.42ThepilgrimAntoninusofPiacenzawasthefirsttoreporttheuseofampullaeincombinationwiththisholyoil.InhisdescriptionoftheworshipoftheHoly

39 SeigneurdeCaumont1975,p.139.40 Prescott1954,p.216.41 CyrilofScythopolis,VitaS.Sabæ,27,45,63.SeeFestugière1962,pp.37,62,93.42 LibroVIII,33.GregoriiIpapæregistrumepistolarum1893,pp.35–36.

184 Boertjes

CrossintheatriumoftheChurchoftheHolySepulchre,hereportshowam-pullae, which were half-filled with oil, were blessed in the presence of thewood of the Cross.When the Cross touched the rim of the ampulla, the oilstartedtofoam.Ifthebottleshadnotbeenclosedquickly,theoilwouldhaveflowedrightoutagain,accordingtoAntoninus.43

What thecontentsof thepewterpilgrimageampullae fromtheCrusaderperiod discussed here were has not been recorded in written sources or in-scriptionsonampullae.Moreover,theywereallemptywhenfound.Weknowfromvariousotherplacesofpilgrimagethatthecontentsoftheampullaeusu-allyconsistedofholywateroroil.TherewereseveralsacredspringsintheHolyLand,liketheoneatEmmaus,inwhichChristsupposedlywashedhisfeet,orthespringinBethlehemfromwhichMarydrankwhenfleeingtoEgypt.44TheriverJordanwasalsoanimportantpartofapilgrimagetotheHolyLand,be-causetheriverismentionedseveraltimesintheBible.Theriverwateritselfwasconsideredtohavehealingpowers.Asmentionedabove,friarFelixFabribroughthomeabottleofwaterfromtheriverJordan.Anotherpassagefromhispilgrim’saccountrevealsthathewasnottheonlyone.Hesawmanypeoplefillingsmalljugs,flasksandglassbottleswithwaterfromtherivertotakewiththem as a souvenir.45 It is unclear whether the pewter pilgrimage ampullaewithareferencetotheChurchoftheHolySepulchrediscussedherewereusedfortakingalongthisholywater.NoneofthemrefertotheriverJordanoranyofthespringswithhealingpropertiesintheHolyLand.Thefourteenth-centuryampullainTårnborg,whichreferstoJerusalemand Bethlehem,maybelinkedtothecurativespringinBethlehem,butthiscannotbesaidwithcertainty.

WhenitcomestothecontentsoftheampullaefromtheCrusaderperiod,itseemsmorelogicaltolookinthedirectvicinityoftheChurchoftheHolySep-ulchre,becauseoftheiriconography.ItisprobablethatnotonlytheexteriorbutalsothecontentsfollowedtheEarlyChristiantradition.DuringtheCru-saderperiod there isnomorementionofoil flowing fromtheWoodof theCross,however.Closeexaminationoftheampullaethataredecoratedwithadepiction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre reveals that oil lamps hangaboveandnexttotheTomb(Figs7.2–7.4).ThethreelanternsthatHenrytheLiondonatedtotheChurchoftheHolySepulchrein1172andtheceremonyofthe holy fire have already been mentioned above. It is unclear whether thesuspendedlampsontheampullaereferspecificallytothoseoriftheyrepre-senttheoillampsabovetheTombinamoregeneralsense.Thefactthatthese

43 Passage20,5–6.See:Milani1977,pp.150,152.44 Kötting1980,p.408mentionsseveralsprings.45 Prescott1954,pp.157–58.


lightsareshownsoprominentlyonthesmallpilgrims’souvenirsdoesindicatethattheyplayedabigroleinthedevotionalexperienceofthepilgrimsduringthesecondhalfofthetwelfthcentury.46Itispossiblethatthevisitorsofthechurchtookasmallamountofsacredoilfromoneofthelampsthatburnednear Christ’s Tomb to carry with them as a eulogia. The pilgrims’ ampullaewereperfectcontainersforafewdropsofthisliquid.Perhapstheoriginalcon-tentsoftheampullaefromtheCrusaderperiodshouldbesoughtinthisdirec-tion.

The Depiction of Jerusalem on Pilgrimage Ampullae

Itisclearthatthepilgrims’souvenirsfromtheHolyCityhavealongtradition:fromrelicsandeulogiaetomassproduction.PilgrimageampullaeoriginatingfromJerusalemfromboththeEarlyChristianperiodandtheMiddleAgeshavebeenpreserved.OntheampullaefromtheCrusaderperiod,thecontinuityoftheEarlyChristiantraditionis(partly)visibleinthechoiceofthethemesthatare depicted in bas-relief, the use of Greek letters for the inscriptions, theroundshapeoftheampullaeandthechoiceofmaterial(analloyoftinandlead).Butitisnotsurprisingthat,afterseveralcenturiesofPersianandArabicrule,theEarlyChristianampullatraditioninJerusalemdidnotcontinueun-changed.Theproductionrevivedinthesecondhalfofthetwelfthcentury,butthedesignsweredifferent.TheampullaefromtheCrusaderperiodhavebroad-ernecksandhave–asopposedtothespecimensfromtheEarlyChristianpe-riod – two ears to hang them from. Moreover, the images on the medievalampullaearefairlyschematicandlinear,whilethoseontheearlyspecimensareverydetailed.TheimagesontheampullaefromtheCrusaderperiodareamixoftraditionalandinnovativeiconography.Thefrontandreverseconnectelementsthatcanbelinkedtothelocation:building(ChurchoftheHolySep-ulchre),event(theThreeWomenattheTomb,ChristontheCross,theDescentintoHell)orpeople(warriorsaints).Thenarrativesceneofthedescentintohell(theAnastasis)hadnotyetoccurredinEarlyChristiantimes.However,theAnastasiswasindicatedasabuildinginthatperiod(theAnastasisRotunda,

46 TheselampsarenotonlydepictedontheampullaefromJerusalembutalsoonanumberofdevotionalobjectsfromotherplacesofpilgrimage.ForinstanceonanampullafromCanterbury(1171–1250)withanimageofThomasàBecket’sbodylyinginstate.Threeoillampsaresuspendedabovethebier.Spencer1998,pp.63–65,no.19.Afourteenth-centurybadgefromSaint-Antoine-l’Abbayeshowstwooillamps.TheyhangabovetwocripplesworshippingStAnthony.VanBeuningen,KoldeweijandKicken2001,p.247,no.1049.

186 Boertjes

whichEmpressHelenahadbuiltaround326).Narrativethemeslikethecruci-fixionofChristandtheWomenattheEmptyTombaredepictedinbothperi-ods,butindifferentways.ThetraditionofdepictingtheChurchoftheHolySepulchreonpilgrimageampullaealsocontinues,butintheCrusaderperiodonlyasectionoftheoriginalbuildingwithChrist’sTombwaspreserved.Onlaterampullaeweseethechurchasitwasrebuiltjustbeforethemiddleofthetwelfthcentury,ontheinitiativeoftheCrusaders,asapowerfulsymbolofthereconqueredJerusalem.Thefactthatampullamanufacturerschosetheimageof two warrior saints with whom the Crusaders could identify and throughwhomtheycouldseethemselvesasprotectorsoftheChurchoftheHolySep-ulchre,isalsonodoubtconnectedto(thepresenceof)theCrusadersintheHolyCity.

TheinfluencetheCrusadershavehadontheappearanceoftheampullaefromJerusalemshouldnotbeunderestimated.Theampullaehadbecomesim-pleyeteffectivepropagandamaterialasaresultofthecombinationoftradi-tionalandinnovativeelements.Theywereanadequatemeansofspreadingan‘image’ofanew,ChristianJerusalemonawidescale,aJerusalemthatoweditsexistencetotheconquestsoftheCrusades.TheseCrusadershaveundoubtedlyhadtheirshareintheiconographyaswellasthedistributionof(andthereforefamiliaritywith)thepilgrimageampullaeinWesternEurope.Theyhadcon-quered Jerusalemandwantedpeople inWesternEuropetoknowabout thepowershiftintheHolyLand.Theampullae,decoratedwithimagesofthere-builtChurchoftheHolySepulchre,wereanidealmediumforthis.Thesouve-nirs were mass-produced quickly and cheaply and their compactness madethemeasytotakealong.TheampullaedepictingthenewChurchoftheHolySepulchrebecamethewaytospreadtheimageoftheWesternJerusalemoveralargearea.

Bibliography

Ainalov,D.V.,TheHellenistic Origins of Byzantine Art,NewBrunswickandNewJersey1961

Baert,Barbara,A Heritage of the Holy Wood. The Legend of the True Cross in Text and Image,LeidenandBoston2004.

Bagatti,B.,‘EulogiePalestinesi’,Orientalia Christiana Periodica,15(1949),pp.126–66.Byzantium. Treasures of Byzantine Art and Culture from British Collections,ed.byDavid

Buckton,London1994.Dalton,O.M.,Catalogue of the Early Christian Antiquities of the British Museum,London

1901.


Die Welt von Byzanz, Europas östliches Erbe. Glanz, Krisen und Fortleben einer tausend-jährigen Kultur, exhib. cat., ed. by Ludwig Wamser, Munich: ArchäologischenStaatssammlungMünchen–MuseumfürVor-undFrühgeschichte/Berlin:StaatlicheMuseenzuBerlin-PreussischerKulturbesitz,Stuttgart2004.

Engemann,Josef,‘PalästinischefrühchristlichePilgerampullen.ErstveröffentlichungenundBerichtigungen’,in:Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum45(2002),pp.153–69andfigs6–10.

––––––,‘PalästinensischePilgerampullenimF.J.Dölger-InstitutinBonn’,Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum16(1973),pp.5–27.

Festugière,A.-J.,Les moines d’Orient. III/2: Les Moines de Palestine. Cyrille de Scythopolis. Vie de Saint Sabas,Paris1962.

Folda,Jaroslav,The Art of the Crusaders in the Holy Land, 1098–1187,Cambridge1995.Gockerell, Nina, ‘Pilgerandenken aus Jerusalem’, in: Dona ethnologica Monacensia:

Leopold Kretzenbacher zum 70. Geburtstag,ed.byHelgeGerndt,KlausRothansGeorgR.Schroubek,Munich1983,pp.163–79.

Grabar,André,Les ampoules de Terre Sainte (Monza-Bobbio),Paris1958.Gregorii I papae registrum epistolarum. Tom. II, pars I, Libri VIII-IX (Monumenta

Germaniae Historica. Epistolae),ed.byLudoMoritzHartmannandPaulEwald,Berlin1893.

Grigg,Robert John,The images on the Palestinian Flasks as Possible Evidence of the Monumental Decoration of Palestinian Martyria,Minneapolis1974.

Hahn,Cynthia,‘LocaSanctaSouvenirs:SealingthePilgrim’sExperience’,in:The Blessings of Pilgrimage,IllinoisByzantineStudiesI,ed.byRobertOusterhout,UrbanaandChicago1990,pp.85–96.

Hunt,E.D.,Holy Land Pilgrimage in the Later Roman Empire AD 312–460,Oxford1982.Kartsonis,A.D.,Anastasis. The Making of an Image,Princeton1986.Kitzinger,Ernst,‘ReflectionsonthefeastcycleinByzantineart’,Cahiers archéoloques,

36(1988),pp.51–73.Kötting,Bernhard,Peregrinatio Religiosa. Wallfahrten in der Antike und das Pilgerwesen

in der alten Kirche,Münster1980.Kötzsche,Lieselotte,‘DasheiligeGrabinJerusalemundseineNachfolge’,in:Akten des

XII. Internationalen Kongresses für christliche Archäologie, Bonn, 22.-28. September 1991,JahrbuchfürAntikeundChristentum,Ergänzungsband20, 3vols,ed.byErnstDassmannandJosefEngemann,vol.1,Münster1995,pp.272–90.

––––––, ‘Zwei Jerusalemer Pilgerampullen aus der Kreuzfahrerzeit’, Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte51(1988),pp.13–32.

Kötzsche-Breitenbruch, Lieselotte, ‘Pilgerandenken aus dem Heiligen Land. DreiNeuerwerbungendesWürttembergischenLandesmuseumsinStuttgart’,Vivarium. Festschrift Theodor Klauser, zum 90. Geburtstag. Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum11(1984),pp.229–46.

188 Boertjes

Krüger,Jürgen,Die Grabeskirche zu Jerusalem. Geschichte, Gestalt, Bedeutung,Regensburg2000.

Liebgott,Niels-Knud,‘Metaldetektorerogmiddelalderensfromhedsliv’,in:Festskrift til Olaf Olsen,Copenhagen1988,pp.208–22.

The Malcove Collection. A Catalogue of the Objects in the Lillian Malcove Collection of the University of Toronto,ed.bySheilaD.Campbell,Toronto1985.

Milani,Celestina,Itinerarium Antonini Placentini. Un viaggio in Terra Santa del 560–570 d.C.,Milan1977.

Morey,Charles,‘ThepaintedpaneloftheSanctaSanctorum’,in:Festschrift zum sechzig-sten Geburtstag von Paul Clemen 31. Oktober 1926,Bonn1926,pp.150–67.

Ornamenta Ecclesiae. Kunst und Künstler der Romanik in Köln,exhib.cat.,ed.byAntonLegner,Cologne:Schnütgen-MuseumsinderJosef-Haubrich-Kunsthalle1985.

Piccirillo,Michele,‘UnoStampoperEulogiaTrovatoaGerusalemme’,Liber Annuus44(1994),pp.585–90.

Prescott,HildaFrancesMargaret,Jerusalem Journey. Pilgrimage to the Holy Land in the Fifteenth Century,London1954.

Seigneur de Caumont. Le voyage d’oultremer en Jherusalem,ed.byPeterScottNoble,Oxford1975.

Smirnov,J.I.,‘HristianskijamozaikiKipra’,Vizantinjskij Vremennik,4(1897),pp.90–92.Smith,CharlesRoach,Collectanea Antiqua. Etchings and Notices of Ancient Remains,

Illustrative of the Habits, Customs, and History of Past Ages,part5,London1861.Spencer,Brian,Medieval finds from excavations in London. 7. Pilgrim Souvenirs and

Secular Badges,London1998.Stuiber,Alfred,‘Eulogia’,in:Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum. Sachwörterbuch zur

Auseinandersetzung des Christentums mit der antiken Welt,6,ed.byTheodorKlauser,Stuttgart1966,cc.900–28.

Syon,Danny,‘SouvenirsfromtheHolyLand.ACrusaderWorkshopofLeadAmpullaefromAcre’,in:Knights of the Holy Land. The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem,ed.bySilviaRozenberg,Jeruzalem1999,pp.111–15.

Van Beuningen, H.J.E., A.M.Koldeweij, and D. Kicken, Heilig en Profaan 2. 1200 Laatmiddeleeuwse insignes uit openbare en particuliere collecties, RotterdamPapers12,Cothen2001.

Vermeer,G.F.M.,Observations sur le vocabulaire du pèlerinage chez Égérie et chez Antonin de Plaisance,NijmegenandUtrecht1965.

Vikan, Gary, ‘Art, Medicine and Magic in Early Byzantium’, in: Dumbarton Oaks Symposium 1983: Byzantine Medicine,ed.byJohnScarborough, Dumbarton Oaks Papers38(1984),pp.65–86.

––––––,Byzantine Pilgrimage Art, DumbartonOaksByzantineCollection5,Washington1982.


––––––,‘EarlyByzantinePilgrimageDevotionaliaasEvidenceoftheAppearanceofPilgrimage Shrines’, in: Akten des XII. Internationalen Kongresses für christliche Archäologie, Bonn, 22.-28. September 1991 (Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum, Ergänzungsband20, 3vols),ed.byErnstDassmannandJosefEngemann,vol. 1,Münster1995,pp.377–88.

Weitzmann,Kurt,‘Loca SanctaandtheRepresentationalArtsofPalestine’,Dumbarton Oaks Papers28(1974),pp.31–55.

Wilkinson,John,Egeria’s Travels to the Holy Land,JerusalemandWarminster1981.

190 VanAsperen

Chapter8

‘As if they had physically visited the holy places’ Two Sixteenth-century Manuscripts Guide a Mental Journey through Jerusalem (Radboud University Library, Mss 205 and 233)

Hanneke van Asperen

InthespecialcollectionsofRadboudUniversityLibraryaretwosixteenth-cen-turymanuscriptsthatcontaininternal,ormental,pilgrimagesthroughthecityofJerusalem.ThetextsallowthereadertovisitthebiblicalsitesinJerusalemwithoutleavingtheconfinesofthehome.OneelementsetsthemapartfromthepopulardevotionknownastheStationsoftheCross:bothtextsmentiontheexactdistancesbetweenthesites.ThismakesittheoreticallypossibleforthereaderstoduplicatethejourneyofChristtoMountCalvarywhiletryingtoimaginehissuffering.Thementalpilgrimscouldearnremissionsoftemporalpunishment‘asiftheyhadphysicallyvisitedtheholyplaces’.1

Jerusalem was vividly present in collective thought at the time the textswerewrittenandused,althoughaccesstosomeoftheChristiansitesofwor-shiphadbecomedifficultbecausethecitywasunderMuslimcontrol.Somechurcheshadfallenintodisrepairorwere(partly)destroyed.Theincalculablesignificanceofthefar-awaycitythathadbecomelessandlessaccessiblegaverisetoalargebodyofliteraturededicatedtopilgrimagestotheHolyLand.Oneof the genres was the religious exercise of mental pilgrimage. The spiritualjourney through the city of Jerusalem has been the subject of well-wroughtresearch.2However,afewelementsinthepilgrimageexercisesmeritfurtherattention.First,theexerciseswerenotlimitedtositesinJerusalem,butfocusedonrelicsinRomeaswell.Apparently,thementalpilgrimagegavethedevoteefreedomto‘move’beyondgeographicalandtemporalboundaries.Additionally,theexercisescombinetraditionalmeditationsontheLifeandPassionofChrist

1 Ms233,fol.1r:‘diemoghenverdienenaldieoflatendesheijlighestatsiherusalemalleleensofsijalledieheijligheplaetsenlichamelickvisitierden’.

2 IwouldliketothankKathrynRudy,becausethisarticlereliesforamajorpartonherextensiveworkonthesubject.Shemadeseveralvaluablesuggestionsforimprovementafterreadingitpre-publication.

© HannekevanAsperen,2014 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_010This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.



191‘asIfTheyHadPhysicallyVisitedTheHolyPlaces’

with(elementsof)popularfifteenth-centurydevotionssuchastheSorrowsoftheVirginandtherosary.Finally,measurementslinkedtoChrist’sroadtoCal-vary,suchasthedistancesbetweenthedifferentstations,gavethepilgrimthepossibilityofreplicatingthephysicaljourney,buttheyalsoturnthebookintoaveritablerelicofthePassion.

Augustinian Canonesses and Franciscans

Mentalpilgrimagehasalongtradition.Itwaspopularizedduringthelatefour-teenth and fifteenth centuries by different religious orders, not least by theprotagonistsoftheDevotio ModernaorModern-DayDevout,aspiritualreformmovement under the guidance of the theologian and preacher Geert Grote(1340–84).3GeertGroteandtheModern-DayDevoutfocusedonthenecessityforeveryindividualtoimitateChrist.DevotionalliteraturewithastrongfocusonthePassionwouldhelptoaccomplishtheirgoal.4Pilgrimageontheotherhand, including the journey to the Holy Land, was regarded with suspicionsinceitmoreoftenleadtophysicalcorruptionthanmentalsalvation.5MentalpilgrimageprovidedthedevoutwithawaytoimitateChristandprofitfromtheadvantagesofpilgrimage,whileavoidingthedangersandtemptationsthatwereinextricablyboundupwithaphysicaljourney.Furthermore,mentalpil-grimagewasawelcomealternativeforthosepeoplewhocouldnotleavetheirhomes,forexamplethosewhohadtakenthevowofclausura.Religiouswom-en,especially,seemtohavehadapreferenceforpilgrimageexercises.6

Two manuscripts in Radboud University Library illustrate, however, thatmental pilgrimage was an exercise that did not limit itself to circles of theModern-DayDevoutbutwaspickedupandelaborateduponindifferentreli-giousorders.7Thefirst(Ms205;Fig.8.1)wascompiledandusedattheconvent

3 Rudy2011,pp.23–30and119–20;Bethlehem1992,p.326.Theexerciseofmentalpilgrimageharksbacktothetwelfthcenturyandmaybeevenfartherback,e.g.Connolly2005,pp.310–13;Miedema2003,p.404;Connolly1999,pp.598–622;Bethlehem1992,pp.326–29;Marrow1979,pp.1–27;VanHackeborn1958,pp.63–64.

4 Kock1999andWierda1996,pp.104–11.5 Koldeweij2000,p.230andBethlehem1992,pp.321–325;ThomasàKempiswrote:‘alsowerden

sioecseldenheylichdieveelpelgrymaedzegaen’.KempisandBruyn1954,p.82(bookI,ch.23).ForcriticismonphysicalpilgrimagebyothersthantheModern-DayDevout,e.g.byFelixFabri,see:Beebe2008,pp.43–44andBeebe2006,pp.105–06.

6 Rudy2011,pp.255–56.7 Rudy2011,pp.23–35.

192 VanAsperen

ofStAgnesinMaaseik,originallyacommunityoftheSistersoftheCommonLife.8Itmovedtothegrounds‘opdeWeide’in1405wherethesisterstookuptheRuleofSaintAugustinein1415–16.In1455,theconventofMariaweidebe-cametheseatofthenewlyfoundedChapterofVenloinlinewiththewishforalifestyleaftertheexampleoftheCongregationofWindesheim,themonasticbranch of the Modern-Day Devout.9 The mental pilgrimage is in line with

8 OnMs205see:Rudy2011,esp.pp.130–46;Rudy2000[a],pp.235–36,no.9;Huisman1997,pp.148–80;StookerandVerbey1997,p.408;ModerneDevotie1984,pp.307–08,no.115;Deschamps1967;Wijngaards1957,pp.422–26;Feugen1938,pp.319–29.

9 ThebookcontainsHundert Betrachtungen und BegehrungeninDutchfromHenricusSuso(fols9–27v).SusowasoneofthefavoriteauthorsoftheModern-DayDevout.VanAelst2011,pp.93–134;VanAelst2005;VanAelst2000,pp.86–88;Bethlehem1992,p.327.

Figure8.1 First page of TheIndulgenceoftheHolySitesofJerusalem, possibly written in Maaseik, ca. 1500, parchment. Nijmegen:RadboudUniversityLibrary,Ms205,fol.240r.


thosepracticesoftheModern-DayDevoutsthatthesistersofMariaweidesodeeply admired.The pilgrimage exercise entitled The Indulgence of the Holy Sites of Jerusalem(‘DenAflaetderHeiligheStedenvanJherusalem’)hadacon-siderablepopularityamongthesistersofMaaseik;theywroteoutseveralcop-iesthathavebeencarefullyinvestigatedanddescribedinmuchdetail,mostrecentlybyKathrynRudy.10TheotherbookofmentalpilgrimageinRadboudUniversityLibrary(Ms233)stemsfromaFranciscancontext(Fig.8.2).11The

10 Rudy2011andRudy2000[a].11 LiteratureonMs233:Huisman1997,pp.209–21.See:Rudy2000[b],p.466,foramanu-

scriptwithaguideformentalpilgrimagethatwasprobablyforaFranciscanmonk.

Figure8.2 First page of ADevoutExerciseofthePassionofOurSaviour in a prayer book for Passion devotion, written for a Franciscan audience, first half of the sixteenth century, parchment. Nijmegen:RadboudUniversityLibrary,Ms233,fol.1r.

194 VanAsperen

‘auberginestyle’penworkpointstotheprovinceofSouthHolland.12Thetextsmusthavebeenwrittenin1503attheearliestbecausePopeJuliusII(1503–13)ismentionedtwice(fols42rand43r).Thebookwasprobablyproducedinthefirsthalfofthesixteenthcenturyandthisiscorroboratedbythewatermarkswhichhavebeendatedbetween1477and1553.

From Pilgrimage to Passion Devotion

Thereisanimpressivebodyofscholarshipthathasalreadyaddressedmental,or virtual, pilgrimage.13 The desire for mental exercises arose from the ideathattravellingtoasacredsiteinitselfdidnotconstituteaproperpilgrimage.The spiritual effort of pilgrimage was considered more important than thephysicalstrain.WiththewordsoftheFranciscanFriarMatfreHermengaudinhisBreviari d’Amor,whichhestartedtowritein1288:‘WithouttrueloveofGodthe attempts to reach the sanctuaries of St Menas or the Holy Virgin, of StJamesorofRomearefutile,becausethepilgrimwillnotfindGodifGodisnotinhimself ’.14TheultimategoalofErmengaud’sencyclopaedicworkistoteachthelaityaboutnatural,divinelysanctionedlove.Hecontinuouslystressesthatreligiousactssuchaspilgrimagearemeaninglesswithoutpiety.

Fromthegrowingimportanceattachedtospiritualexertionitwasasmallsteptoeliminatethephysicalaspectfrompilgrimagealtogetherandfocusen-tirelyonthespiritualelements,thuscreatingapilgrimageofthemind.15Theexerciseelaboratesontheconceptof lifeasaperegrinatio– in theclassicalsenseoflivingortravellingabroad–whichwasdevelopedbyAugustineinthefifthcentury.16Fromthis,pilgrimagecametoberegardedasametaphoroflife:areturnofthesoultohisfatherlandwhichisthecityofGod,i.e.theHeavenly

12 Kriezels1992,pp.68–83.13 Onmentalpilgrimage, see forexample:Rudy2011;Ehrenschwendtner2009,pp.45–73;

Beebe2008,pp.39–70;Rudy2006,pp.405–19;Hull2005,pp.29–50;Miedema2003,pp.398–462;Koldeweij2000,pp.222–52;Rudy2000[a],pp.211–54;Rudy2000[b],pp.494–515;Connolly1999,pp.598–622;Miedema1998,pp.73–92;Cahn1992,pp.89–98;Bethlehem1992,pp.321–34;Wasser1991,pp.29–33;Meertens1931,pp.96–108;Kneller1908,pp.7–18;Gonnet1884.Thisisjustaselectionofauthors.Foranextensivebibliography,see:Rudy2011.

14 Ermengaud1998,p.286.OntheBreviari d’Amor,see:Bolduc2006.15 Ms205,fol.240r:‘Dijtisdenaflaetderheiligerstedevaniherusalemendedesberchsvan

caluarienwelceenyegelicmensverdienenmachdiedesengancdescrucenihesuendesijnsbitterenlijdensbetrachtmetynichheit’.

16 Claussen1991,p.33.


Jerusalem.InthewordsoftheDelft-bornpriestChristiaanvanAdrichemwhowroteseveralworksontheHolyLand,Jerusalemcouldberegardedas‘afigureofeveryfaithfullmanssoule’.17PiouslytravellingthroughJerusalem,themen-talpilgrimscouldmodeltheirlivesafterChrist’sexample.Thisway,Jerusalemwasimprintedintheirhearts.

TotransformaJerusalempilgrimageaccountintoanexerciseofdevotiontothePassion,thesequenceofthesitesinthementalexercisecould(andshould)beshifted.MostHolyLandpilgrimsvisitedBethlehemandNazarethaftertheyhad seen the sites in Jerusalem.18 In A Devout Exercise of the Passion of Our Saviour,thetopographicalsequenceofthesiteshasbeenabandonedinfavourofthechronologyoftheevents.AfterthestationsofNazarethwheretheVirginwas visited by Gabriel, and Bethlehem where Christ was born, circumcizedandvisitedbytheThreeMagi,thementalpilgrimcontinueswiththesitesfromthePassionendingwiththestationofPentecost.A Devout Exercise seemsthenextlogicalstepinthemodificationoftheJerusalempilgrimageaccountintoaspiritualexercise.19Thenewsequencecorrespondswithtraditionalmedita-tionsontheLifeandPassionofChrist,suchasStAelredofRievaulxdescribesinaletterfrom1160.20

InmakingupanexerciseofPassiondevotion locationscouldbeskippedentirely.Stationswerecarefullychosen,dependingontheeventstobecom-memorated.Themisreadingormisunderstandingofthewordsinasourcetextcouldevenleadtotheinventionofanewstation.ThearchofEcceHomoiscalledswych boeginmanymentalpilgrimagetexts.Occasionally,thelastword boogorboeg(arch)ischangedintoboom or boem.21InA Devout Exercise,thisstationistransformedintothestationofthevighe boem(figtree).22Thetext

17 VanAdrichem1495,p.1.Also:Wasser1991,p.62;Waaijman2000,p.39–41.18 AsforexampleAnselmAdornes(1470–71),FelixFabri(1483)andBernhardvonBreyden-

bach(1483–84).Adornes1978,pp.285–315;Fabri[1964],pp.52–56;Davies1968.19 Itisgenerallyassumed,andwithgoodreason,thatthementalpilgrimageswerebasedon

actual pilgrimage accounts. See: Rudy 2011, pp. 255–56; Beebe 2008, pp. 39–70; Rudy2000[b],pp.514–15;Miedema1998,p.92;Wasser 1991,pp.29–32.After theexercisesofmentalpilgrimagewerefirmlyestablishedtheyprobablystartedtoinfluenceactualpil-grimageaccounts.ThismayhavebeenwhathappenedinA briefe description of Hierusa-lem.See:VanAdrichem1595,pp.57–59.

20 AelredofRievaulx1971;AelredofRievaulx1957,pp.32–49.21 ForexampleVanHaver 1963,p.49(onHeerBethléem).Both ‘swichboege’and ‘swych

boem’areusedinMs205(fols244rand245r).22 Ms233,fol.15v:‘Endealsghijolieueheerihesuxpemittencrucewederwaertopgherecht

soesijtghijingrotebanicheit[sic]voertghegaenendesijtalsoebijderstededesvijghe-boemsghecomen’.

196 VanAsperen

onthisstationisveryshort;noeventisassociatedwiththislocation,whereastheotherstationsaredescribed ingreatdetailandarealwayscoupledwithspecificeventsandemotions.Noknowntraditionofthevia crucisinvolvesafigtree.Mostlikely,thisfigtreeorvyghe boomisacorruptionofthewordforthe station of the spandrel arch. Significantly, the scribe added the correctnumberofellsbetweenthestationofthefallandtheinventedsiteofthefigtreewithoutanycorrections,makingitlikelythatheorshehadacorruptmod-elthatwascopiedfaithfully.23

Anotherstepinthetransformationwastheamalgamationofdifferentde-votionalexercises.TheMaaseikexercisewasprobablydevelopedfromatextthatfocusedontheascentofMountCalvary.Thesourcetextdoesnotcontainthe last three stations where the focus shifts from Christ to the Virgin: herswoonatthebaseofthecross,themourningoverthedeadChristandtheen-tombment.24Thesefinalthreestationswerepossiblyaddedlater.Additional,althoughindecisive,argumentsforthishypothesisareprovidedbytherubricofthesourcetext:‘ThisistheindulgenceoftheholysiteofCalvary’insteadof‘ThisistheindulgenceoftheholysitesofJerusalemandofMountCalvary’asin the later copies. Further on the rubric reads ‘If you then start the moun-tain…’whichisnotrepeatedinlaterversions.25

Regardlessoftheirorigin,thelastthreestationsfocusingonthesufferingoftheVirginclearlyindicatetheinfluenceofthepopulardevotionoftheSorrowsof theVirgin.The Sorrows were a vehicle for Passion devotion which madethemcomplementarytomentalpilgrimages.26TheMaaseikpilgrimagemakesitpossibleforthereadertofollowChrist’sexampleusingtheVirginasamodelforemotionalresponse.Consequently,Christ’smotheriselevatedtoastatuswhereshebecameworthyofimitationherself.

Therosarywasanotherpopulartool forPassiondevotioninthe fifteenthandsixteenthcenturies.InthementalpilgrimagecalledA Devout Exercise of the Passion of Our Saviour(‘EenDevoteOefeninghevanderPassijOnsSalich-makers’) in the Observant book, every meditation is followed by commonprayers,namelythePater NosterandtheAve Maria.Thiscouplingofmedita-tionsandprayersisreminiscentof theincreasinglypopularrosarydevotion.27

23 Ms233,fol.16r:‘Vandiestededesvalstotdiestededesvigheboems,datsijnxxxiijellen’.24 KathrynRudythinksitispossiblethatthelaststationsaremissingfromthesourcetext

whichsheidentifiesasamanuscriptinBrussels(RoyalLibraryofBelgium,MSIV428),butalsosuggeststhatthetextendedwiththecrucifixion.Rudy2000[a],p.222.

25 Brussels,RoyalLibraryofBelgium,MsIV428,fol.300v.See:Rudy2011,pp.371–72.26 Schuler1992,pp.5–28.27 Ontherosarydevotion:As-Vijvers2007,pp.41–79;Rosenkranz2003;Miller2002;Win-

ston-Allen1997;Wilkins1969.


TherosarysproutedfromdifferentdevotionssuchastherepetitivecitationofcommonprayersandthePsalterwhichwasoriginallyarecitationofthe150Psalms.28Althoughdifferentformsoftherosarycirculatedduringthefifteenthandsixteenthcenturies,therearesomerecurringelements:chronologically-orderedmeditationsontheLifeofChristandhismotherincombinationwithrepetitivecitationsofAvesandPater Nosters;featuresthatcharacterizethepil-grimageexerciseintheObservantmanuscript.

Jerusalem and Rome

RomewastheusualdestinationformentaltravellersinadditiontoJerusalem.JerusalemandRomewereobviouschoicesfordifferentreasons.Thetwocitiescouldclaimseniority;theyweretheoldestpilgrimagesitesofChristianity,onein theEast, theother in theWest.Secondly, JerusalemandRomehadmorethanonesitetovisit,offeringthementalpilgrimthepossibilityofasequentialexercise,whetherchronologicalornot.Thirdly,theareasinandaroundJerusa-lemandRomeofferedmnemotechnicaladvantagesthathelpedmemorizeandstructurethecorrespondingcontemplations.29Inaway,allChristianswerefa-miliarwithJerusalemandRomebecausethecitiesformedanessentialpartoftheir discourse. Fourthly, the pilgrimage attractions in Jerusalem and RomeconcentratedontheeventsdescribedintheNewTestament,especiallyChrist’sPassion.30TheholyplacesinJerusalemwerephysicallyandconceptuallytiedupwiththeincidentsfromtheLifeofChrist,andRomehadnumerousrelicsofthe Passion. The sites in Jerusalem that were saturated with Christ’s blood,sweatandtearsduringthePassionwereimportant–ifnotthemostimportant– relics of Christ on earth.31 Rome and Jerusalem were complementary inmanyrespects.HolyLandpilgrimsvisitedBethlehemtoseewhereChristwas

28 As-Vijvers2007,pp.46–47.29 Ousterhout2009andCarruthers 1998,p.269.KathrynRudydedicatedasection inher

bookonvirtualpilgrimageto‘memoryhousesofthePassion’asaidstorememberintri-catenarratives.Rudy2011,pp.150–70andalsoCarruthers2008,p.135.Obviously,streetsandchartshadthesamepotentialfor‘storing’memoriesashouses.

30 Miedema1998,pp.84–85.31 When describing Mount Calvary, one of the pilgrimage texts actually states that the

mountainis‘saturatedwiththepreciousbloodofJesusanddrenchedwiththetearsofsweetmaidMary’.(Ms205,fol.251v).Ontherelic-likeimportanceofearthandstones,see:Rudy2011,pp.107–118andBeebe2006,pp.106–07.LucyDonkiniscurrentlycompletingamonographonmedievalattitudestoholygroundwhichmightshedinterestinglightonearthenrelics.

198 VanAsperen

born,buttheycouldvisithismangerinSantaMariaMaggioreinRome.ThehouseoftheLastSupperwaslocatedinJerusalem;thetablewhereChristsatwithhisdiscipleswasinStJohnLateran.TheHolySepulchreandMountCal-varywerethemainattractionsofJerusalem;thenailsofthecrossandthetitu-luswerekept inSantaCroce inRome inachapel thatwassuggestivelyandsymbolicallycalledGerusalemme.32

MentalpilgrimagethroughthecityofRomeservedthesamepurposeasanimaginedstayinJerusalem.ThementalpilgrimcouldvisittheSevenChurchesof Rome ‘as if one were in the Holy Land’.33 Not surprisingly, pilgrimagesthroughRomeandJerusalemsometimesappear inthesamemanuscripts.34Thetwotraditionscouldevenbeintertwined.InthetwoNijmegenbooklets,therelicsofRomearewovenintothefabricofaJerusalempilgrimage.WhenthepilgrimreachesthesitewhereChristfellonthestairswhilecarryingtheCross,thetextmentionsthatthescala santaisinStJohnLateraninRome.35WhenChristreachesVeronica’shousenearJerusalem’sjudicialgateandleaveshisimprintonthecloththatVeronicagavehimtodryhisface,thereismentionoftherelicoftheveilwhichiskeptinStPeter’sinRome.36TheincorporationoftheRomanchurchesinthepilgrimagetextindicatestheimportanceattrib-utedtotheserelics.Theveilandthescala santa hadbecomesoimportantandinextricablyboundupwiththeirrespectivechurchesthatboththeseobjectsandtheirsanctuaryhadtobeincorporatedinadescriptionofChrist’swayto

32 OnRomanrelicsofthePassion,see:Miedema2003,passim;Miedema2001,pp.833–38andBirch1998,passim.OnSantaCroceinRome,see:DeBlaauw2012,pp.27–39.SeeRudy2011,pp.175–83and401–02,foramanuscriptwithamentalpilgrimagelistingthePassionrelicsinRome.SeealsoSibledeBlaauwinthisvolume.

33 Citedfromarubricinamanuscriptwithacompilationofmentalpilgrimages,writteninBrigittineconventforafemaleaudience,textsinLatinandDutch,latefifteenthcentury,keptinTheBritishLibrary,Ms31001,fols68v-69r:‘alsofmenwaerinderstatvanRoemen’astranscribedbyRudy2011,p.401.ComparetoRadboudUniversityLibrary,Ms233,fol.1r.OnRomeasanalternativetoJerusalem,see:Rudy2011,p.197.

34 Bethlehem1992,pp.327–29.See:Rudy2011,pp.235–238;Rudy2000[b],p.513,andMie-dema1998,pp.87–88,fortheexampleoftheabbessofaconventinVillingen(Germany)whohadthestationsofRomeandJerusalemcarvedonmarbleslabsallowingthenunstowalkfromoneplacetoanother.

35 Ms233,fol.15v:‘Istsaeckdatijemantdesetrappenopcruijptopsijnbloeteknijenendeopelcketrappedeuotelickspreeckteenprnrendeeenauemaria.Desetrapheeftxxviijgradenendeisnochhuijdentedaghetotsinteianstelateranenteromeninsijnkercke’.

36 Ms233, fol. 18r: ‘Endedoesijtghijo lieueheer toeghegaenendehebtvghebenedijdeaensichtvolcomelickindendoeckghedrucktendehebseveronicawederomineenteij-kendesliefsvoereentestamentghegheuenendenochtertijtsoewortdatteromeninsintepeterskerckbewaertvoerheijlichdom’.


Calvary.Althoughthedevoteeplaceshimself inChrist’sfootstepsandtrans-poseshimselftothebiblicaltimeswhentherelicsweresupposedlystillinJe-rusalem, nevertheless it is considered important to mention their currentpresenceinRome.ThesanctuariesofRomederivedtheirsignificancefromthepresenceoftheseimportantPassionrelicssothat, inturn,thechurchesbe-comeapartofbiblicalJerusalem.Althoughthetextdealswitheventsandob-jects supposedly from biblical times, not with the contemporary cities,temporal boundaries dissolve and the churches of Rome are superimposeduponthemapofJerusalem.

Despite the similarities between Rome and Jerusalem, logical but signifi-cantdifferencesinthedescriptionsoftwocitiescharacterizethementaljour-neys. Jerusalem’schurchesarenot incorporatedinthepilgrimagetext.EventheChurchoftheHolySepulchrewhichwastheclimaxofeverypilgrim’svisitto Jerusalemisnotmentioned.Thisdoesnotmeanthat thesitewasof lessimportanceto thementalpilgrim.Onthecontrary, its significance isamplyexpressedintheplenaryindulgencethatboththephysicalandthementalpil-grimcouldgain.37Theseplenaryindulgenceswerereservedforafewsitesofmajor importance. Incontrast to the indulgences tobegained fromvisitingRome,theJerusalemindulgencesareconnectedwiththesitesandtheeventsratherthanthesanctuaryanditsobjects.

Churches are not mentioned but some of Jerusalem’s monuments are,namely the elevated place where Pilate sat when he judged Christ (calledlithostrotos),andthe‘high’spandrelarch(orswych boeg)whichwasbelievedtohavebeenthelocationofPilate’secce homospeech.38Accordingtothetext,Constantine’s mother, Helena, had two stones of marble installed that wereoriginallysituatedinfrontofPilate’spalace.ChristhadstoodononeofthemduringPilate’sspeech,Pilateontheother.Theseelementswereprobablyinte-gratedinthepilgrimagebecausetheyweresupposedlypresentatthetimethecrucifixiontookplace.TheyareextantrelicsofthePassion,unlikethechurch-esthatwerebuiltafterwardstocommemorateanevent.

37 Sites with plenary indulgences are marked with a cross; these are the stations of thereceivingoftheCross(3),EcceHomo(4),whereChristmeetstheVirgin(5),MountCal-vary(9),theLamentation(11)andtheEntombment(12andlast).Besidesindicatingple-naryindulgences,thecrossesmarkthesitesofspecialimportanceontheroadtoCalvarysinceplenaryindulgencesarealwayscoupledwithsitesofsalvificsignificance.

38 Ms205,fol.241r:‘datrichthuysdatstontopenenwydenplaengenoemtlicostratos’andMs205,fol.245r:‘hoegenswychboom’.Onthelithostrotos,see:Marrow1979,pp.127–28.OntheproblemswiththeidentificationofPilate’shouseandthegatethroughthecentu-ries,see:Pringle2010,pp.89–91and93–97.

200 VanAsperen

The events themselves could be regarded as relics. Several forms of late-medievalpietyfocusedonthePassionthroughitsexcerpts;thesecouldbenar-rativescenes,Christ’sbodyandtheinstrumentsofthePassionorhiswounds.DavidArefordhasconvincinglyarguedthatthiskindofdevotionwascloselylinkedwiththevenerationofrelics.39BecauseofthefragmentationofthePas-siontheeventsgainedrelic-likeimportance.Afifteenth-centuryprintvisual-izestherelic-likestatusoftheSorrowsoftheVirgin.Twomalefigures,amonkandanobleman,kneelinadorationofthescenesoftheSorrows(Fig.8.3).40Behindthemonkandthenoblemanstandamanandawoman,apparentlyofsimplebirth.ThescenesoftheSorrowsarestoredinareliquary-shapedframereminiscentofamonstrancecontaininghostswhichwereoftenveneratedasiftheywererelicsandthoughttoinstigatemiracles.RelatedprintsexplicitlyrefertothepilgrimagesiteofDelft(Holland)where‘manymiracleshappenedaftertheinvocationofthePassionofChristandSorrowsoftheVirgin’.41TheDelftcultofOurLadyofSevenSorrowscanbetracedbacktoadocumentof1506,butmightbesomewhatolder.42BecauseofthewaytheDelftcultisde-scribed,andthewayitisvisualizedinthepilgrimageprints,itseemsthattheeventscoupledwiththeSorrowsoftheVirginwereveneratedinawaythatwasanalogoustothevenerationoftheDelftstatueofOurLadyofSorrows,asmir-acle-workingimages.

WhencontemplatingthesevenSorrowsoftheVirgin,thedevotee‘alsohastocontemplateinthePassionofOurLord’,wroteFatherDierickAdamszoonwhoactivelypropagatedthecultofOurLadyofSorrowsinthecityofDelft.43Notably,themonktothesideoftheprintisinvolvedinrepetitiveprayerusingastringofprayerbeads.Themostcommonrepetitiveprayerexercisewastherosarywhich,asmentionedearlier,wasoftenusedtocontemplatethePassion.Again, therosary, theSorrowsof theVirginandthePassionare inextricablyconnected.

39 Areford1998,pp.214–15.HolyLandpilgrimsforallstrataoccupiedthemselveswiththevenerationandthecollectingofmemorabiliaofthePassion.Beebe2006,pp.106–07.

40 Hollstein[1956],vol.XIII,p.158,no.127.OntheSorrowsoftheVirginandtheirroleinthedevotiontoChrist’sPassion,see:Schuler1992,esp.pp.7–11.

41 Forasimilarprintwiththeinscription‘EertIhspassieendedieweenvanmarien[Doe]rwelcktedelf[sic:Delft]veelmiraculenghescien’.Rudy2011,Fig.89.OtherDelftpilgrim-age prints are in the collection of the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam (inv. nos RP-OB-2123,RP-OB-2124andRP-P-1912–385).Verhoeven1992,p.355.

42 Verhoeven1992,pp.228–46.43 Verhoeven1992,p.228.


Measuring the Passion

Thepilgrimageexercisesholdanapparentparadox.Thetextscontainmanyadjectivesandadverbslikesunderlinge groete pijn(‘exceptionallylargepain’),ontellicx lasters(‘uncountableslanders’),grondeloese bermherticheit (‘unfath-omablemercy’).44Themessageisclear:thesufferingsofChristandhismotherandthepitytheyexpressareimmeasurableandindescribable.Ontheotherhand,thetextisfilledwithquantitiesandnumbers:theexactnumberofsteps

44 Ms205,fols240v,245vand250r.

Figure8.3 Master S, the SorrowsoftheVirgin in a roundel-reliquary, ca. 1500-1525, engraving, 145 × 97 mm. London:BritishMuseum,Prints&Drawings,reg.1847,1009.21.©TheTrusteesoftheBritishMuseum.

202 VanAsperen

orellsbetweendifferentsites,thesizesofthewounds,thenumberofstepsoneverystairandthenumberofpeoplepresent.

Themeasurementsaregiveninordertolendcredibilitytothedescriptions.Furthermore,thedesireforthemeasurableandcountableseemstocounter-balance the growing emphasis on extreme emotion. When describing theemotionsoftheVirginatthetimeofthecrucifixion,thetextofA Devout Exer-cisereads:‘Andnoonecanimaginehowgreathersorrowandpainhasbeen’.45Itishardtoimaginetheunimaginable;themeasurementsseemtomeetthegrowingdesiretofollowinChrist’sfootstepsalthoughthesufferingsofChristandtheVirginareinconceivable.A Devout Exerciseisachronometricrelictoboot.Thedifferentstagesofthementaljourneyarelinkedtothedaysoftheweek.Therubricstatesthatthedevoteecanperformthementalpilgrimageinoneday,butitisalsopossibletovisitspecificsitesonspecificweekdays.Thedaysarenotrandom;thestationofMountCalvaryisvisitedonaFriday,thedaythatChristwascrucified.TheResurrectiontakesplaceonaSunday.Theentirepilgrimageiscompletedinaweek.46OnlywhenthemindhasbecomeonewithChristdoesitnolongerneedprecisemeasurementstohelpitimitateChrist.47

Oneconsequenceofthisdesireforthemeasurablewasthemetricrelic.48BecausetheEnglishnoblewomanRicheldiswastoldtheexactmeasurementsof thehouseofNazarethshecouldhavethebuildingreplicated inWalsing-ham;itwouldattractpilgrimsfromallovertheUnitedKingdomandtheCon-tinent.49ManyJerusalemChapelswerebuiltaccordingtothemeasurementsoftheprototypeintheHolySepulchre.50Eventhoughtheyharkbacktooneandthesamemodel,thesechapelsareverydifferentinappearanceandsome-

45 Ms233,fols20v-21r:‘Endenijemantenmachdaerwtdenckenhoegroetdathaersmartendepijnendedroeffenis isgheweest’.

46 AsRudyhasnoted,thedivisionofatextintosegmentstobecompletedoverthecourseofaweekwasquitecommonfordevotionaltexts.Rudy2011,p.199n.42.Forexamplesofmeditationscoupledwith thedaysof theweek, seealsoVanDijk2000,pp.52–53andKock1999,pp.198–201.Foramentalpilgrimagecoupledwiththedaysoftheyear,see:Wasser1991,p.30.

47 ComparethecontemplationsofHeinrichSuso,in:VanAelst2000,p.98andBethlehem1992,p.327.

48 Rudy2011,pp.97–107;Ousterhout2009,pp.153–268;Areford1998,pp.209–38;Pieper1995,pp.38–43;Jacobi1929,p.187.

49 Spencer1998,pp.135–47.50 BramdeKlerckinthisvolume;Kroesen2000;Pieper1995;AdornesenJeruzalem1983,pp.

19–21and70–73.


timesdonotevenlookliketheirprototype;theirmeaningisinherentintheirdimensions.

ThemeasurementsthatweresomehowconnectedtoChristandhisPassioncouldbeusedtocreatemetricrelics.PilgrimscutoffcordsthathadtheexactheightofthecrossorthelengthoftheSepulchre,eventhesizesofthewoundsor the nails that were used during the crucifixion. Sometimes the cords be-camerelicsbytouchingholyrelicsorsites,butjusttheassociationwouldsuf-fice.Replicascouldpossessmiraculouspowersinthesamewayasotherrelics.DifferentdevotionalmanuscriptscontaintheexactmeasurementsofChrist’sbodyorofthecross.51BothThe IndulgenceandA Devout ExercisementionindetailthedeepwoundonChrist’sshoulderthatwasinflictedbycarryingofthecross.52TheconversationbetweenSaintBernardandChristontheexcruciat-ingpainsofhisshoulderwound‘whichwasthreefingersdeep’isdemonstra-bleintextsfromtheearlysixteenthcentury.53AnothermanuscriptinRadboudUniversityLibrary(Ms85)containsareplicaoftheshoulderwoundonapieceof parchment (Fig. 8.4).54 The figure of the wound was ‘cut out of an ironplaquewithaninstrument’,accordingtothecryptictextthatiswrittenonthesameparchmentleaf.Thetextsuggeststhattheimagewasanexactreplicaofametricrelic,thustwiceremovedfromtheactualwound.Apersoncouldob-tainanindulgencesimplybylookingattheimageandsayingaprayer.Becausemeasurementsconveyedmeaning,evenpower,thepicturebecameametricrelicitself.Theimagewasgluedtothefirstpageofthemanuscriptsothattheownerscouldseeiteverytimetheyopenedthebook.Oneofthesubsequentproprietorsofthebook,GeertgenJansvanWoercken,wrotehernameabovetheimage,possiblyinordertogivesomedirectiontothemiraculouspowersthatcouldworkthroughtheimage.55

51 Neff2002,pp.58–61.52 Ms205,fol.249r:‘Olieuehereicdancdijoecdergroterpijnenwelcduhaddesvander

dieperwondendieopdijnheiligegebnendidescholderstontdiedrievingerdiepewasweelcdijmeerweedededadieanderwonden’;Ms233,fols16v-17r: ‘endeghijsijtopteraerdengheuallenendedatswarehoutdesheijlighecruijsvielopvrechterscouderendeheeftdaeringhedruckteenwontvandrievingherediepghelijkerwijsalsmenleestdattetsintebernerdusisgheopenbaert’.

53 Rudy2011,pp.105–06;Meertens1931,pp.24–2654 Ms85,fol.1r:‘Ditisdiemaniervandiegrootheijtdeswonde,dieonselieueheere,insijn

gebenedijdeschouderhadde,daerhijsijncruijsopmostedraegen.Dat,welckeiswteenijserenplaetgesteeckenmiteeninstrument,daerditwtgemeetenis.Soewieseaensietmitdeuotie,endeleesteenPaternoster,diesalvertroostworden,inwatlijdendathijis’.

55 Ms85,fol.1r,abovetheimage:‘DitboeckhoorttoeGeertgenJansvanWoercken’.

204 VanAsperen

Themanuscriptiswrittenonpaper;theimagewaspaintedonparchment.Parchmentwasassociatedwithskin(parchment=animalskin),andconse-quently with the skin of Christ. A full-size image of a nail that was used tocrucifyChristwasdrawnonapagealongsideaprayertotheNail(Fig.8.5).56TheilluminatorhaspaintedtheNailasifithadslitthepagecausingtwohori-zontalcuts,disappearing throughoneof themandcomingout throughtheother.Thenailpiercingthepagebringstheassociationoftheparchmentwiththe skin of Christ poignantly to the fore. In the preface to Christiaan vanAdrichem’s description of Jerusalem, the Crucifixion is likewise comparedwithabook‘writtenwiththequillofthespeare,ofthenailsofthethornes,and

56 Rotterdam,gemeentebibliotheek,Ms96E12,fol.28v.SeeRudy2011,pp.104–06,Pl.I.Thecaptionreads:‘Ditisfiguernaedienaghelonsheeren’.

Figure8.4 Anonymous, glued-in miniature of Christ’s shoulder wound with text, ca. 1500, parch-ment. Nijmegen:RadboudUniversityLibrary,Ms85,fol.1r.


of thewhippes, in themostpureparchmentof the Immaculate lambe,andwiththepurplebloudeofthesame[...]’.57

Asingle-sheetimageintheMetropolitanMuseumofArtclearlyshowstheassociationofparchmentwithskin(Fig.8.6).AnangelpullsupapieceofclothrevealingthesidewoundofChrist(John19:34)inavisualformatharkingbacktoimagesofthesudariumwiththeimprintofChrist’sface.ThePassionrelicoftheVera IconwaskeptinStPeter’sinRomefromthetwelfthcenturyonwardsandshowntopilgrimsonaregularbasis.Inparalleltothesudarium thesidewoundisdepictedasaPassionrelic.Theblockprintofthesidewoundismorethananimage;itisavision.Thethree-dimensionallydepictedheartfloatsin

57 VanAdrichem1595,preface.

Figure8.5 Opening page of a prayer to the Nail with a life-size miniature of the Nail piercing the page, Brabant, ca. 1520 (certainly after 1513), page: paper, nail: parchment. RotterdamLibrary,Ms96E12,fol.28v.

206 VanAsperen

frontoftheclothinsteadofbeingimprinteduponit.Theangeldoesnot(just)showapieceofclothheunveilsthewoundtothedevotee,therebyincreasingasenseofphysicalpresence.Mostinterestingistheslitinthepage.AdiagonalcutthroughtheparchmentmanifeststhesidewoundthatwasmadewiththespearbeforetakingChristdownfromthecross.58TheparchmentsubstitutingChrist’s skin is literallywounded.Fromtheunveilingof theheart to theslitrepresentingthesidewound,thisprintprovidesseverallevelsofrevelationfor

58 Onthesidewound,see:Smith2012,p.61;Lewis1996,pp.204–29.

Figure8.6 Hand-coloured single sheet print of Christ’s side wound with xylographic text ‘O du susser ihesu crist wie ser dir dem hercz durch stochen ist’ with later textual additions, Nuremberg, block 70 × 59 mm, sheet 84 × 67 mm, ca. 1480-1490, parchment. NewYork,MetropolitanMuseumofArt,BequestofJamesC.McGuire1931,acc.31.54.142.©2013.ImagecopyrightTheMetropolitanMuseumofArt/ArtResource/Scala,Florence.


thedevoteetoexperienceandpassthroughinhisdesireforunionwithChrist.Tofurtherenhancetheeffectofthefolioaswoundedskin,redpaintindicatestheblooddrippingfromthewoundintothechalicebelow.59

Guide, Devotional Tool and Relic

PilgrimageaccountsweresuitablereadingmaterialfordevoteeswhohadnotbeentoJerusalemthemselves,becauseitallowedthemtolearnabouttheGos-pels and led to a greater understanding of Christian mysteries of salvation.ChristiaanvanAdrichemaddedasubtitletoA briefe description of Hierusalemsayingthatthebookis ‘VerieprofitableforChristianstoread,fortheunder-standingoftheSacredScriptures’.60ThedescriptionofsitesinJerusalem–andRomeforthatmatter–tookthereaderbackintimetotheeventsthatarede-scribed in theBible.Theexerciseofmentalpilgrimage takes thepilgrimageaccountonestepfurtherandturnsitintoadevotionalexerciseonthePassion.

ThetwoversionsofamentalpilgrimageinRadboudUniversityLibraryareseveralstepsremovedfromthepilgrims’guidesthatdescribeaphysicaljour-neytotopographicalsitesintheHolyLand.First,thesitesarearrangedchron-ologicallyasChristandtheVirginwouldhavevisitedthem.Secondly,thetextsevokebiblicalpassagesandemotions,notsomuchthecontemporarycityofJerusalem.BecausementalpilgrimagedidnotdealwithcontemporaryJerusa-lem,butwitheventsfrombiblicaltimes,RomeandJerusalem,whichbothhaddifferentthingstoofferthementalpilgrim,couldbeintegratedintooneexer-cise.TobecomesuitableforPassiondevotiontheexercisesofmentalpilgrim-agemergedwithdifferentpopulardevotionsinaninterestingway.Becausetheeventsarearrangedchronologically,otherdevotionsandmeditationssuchasmeditationsontheLifeandPassionofChrist, theStationsof theCross, theSevenSorrowsoftheVirginandtherosarycouldeasilybeincorporatedintothefabricofthedevotionalexercise.

ImagesofthewoundsmakedifferentpartsofthePassionphysicallypresentusingparchmentasasubstituteforskin;measurementsmakeitpossibleforthedevoteestousetheirownbodytoaddcorporeitytothedevotionalexer-cise.Someofthementalpilgrimageswithmeasurementswereconvertedto

59 Besidestheassociationofparchmentwithskin(orevenflesh)textwasassociatedwithtextile, as I have argued before.Van Asperen 2007, pp. 94–96. From these associationsgrewaninterestinginterplayoftheinnatelyrelatedphrasesparchment-textandflesh-cloth.

60 VanAdrichem1595.

http://cat.ubn.ru.nl/DB=1/SET=1/TTL=1/CLK?IKT=1004&TRM=Adrichem,+Christiaan+van

http://cat.ubn.ru.nl/DB=1/SET=1/TTL=1/CLK?IKT=4&TRM=Verie

http://cat.ubn.ru.nl/DB=1/SET=1/TTL=1/CLK?IKT=4&TRM=profitable

http://cat.ubn.ru.nl/DB=1/SET=1/TTL=1/CLK?IKT=4&TRM=Christians

http://cat.ubn.ru.nl/DB=1/SET=1/TTL=1/CLK?IKT=4&TRM=read,

http://cat.ubn.ru.nl/DB=1/SET=1/TTL=1/CLK?IKT=4&TRM=understanding

http://cat.ubn.ru.nl/DB=1/SET=1/TTL=1/CLK?IKT=4&TRM=understanding

http://cat.ubn.ru.nl/DB=1/SET=1/TTL=1/CLK?IKT=4&TRM=Sacred

http://cat.ubn.ru.nl/DB=1/SET=1/TTL=1/CLK?IKT=4&TRM=Scriptures

208 VanAsperen

replicateChrist’sjourneyphysically.61Thisdoesnotmeanthatreadersofmen-talpilgrimagealwaysturnedtheexerciseintoaphysicalreplication,evenifthetextsmentionstheexactnumberoffootstepsorells.ThereaderofThe Indul-gence of the Holy Sites of JerusalemfromMaaseikisadvisedtoretreattoase-cluded place to perform the exercise.62 Knowledge of the footsteps and ellsbetweenstationsmakesitpossibletoreplicateChrist’sjourneyphysicallyandmentally,butthemeasurementsaremorevitaltothetext:theyturnthebookintoarelicofthePassion.ThemetaphoroftextasarelicwasreinforcedbythemetaphoroftheCrucifixionasabookwritteninChrist’sbloodusingtheArmaChristi(theNails,theSpear,etc.)asstyles.ThewrittenpilgrimagetextshadanintrinsicvalueasrelicsthatfittedbooksofPassiondevotionandcouldprovidethesamerewardsasother(metric)relics.

ThementalpilgrimageprovidesthedevoteewithaguidethroughJerusalemandamatchingrelicofthePassion,becausethementalexercisesoffera‘mea-surable’ connection with the Passion of Christ. Using recognizable units ofspaceandtime,thebiblicaleventsbecomeattachedtothereader’sdomain.Geographicalboundariesdissolve;earthlyandbiblicaltimesfuse.BecauseoftheirmultilayeredconnectionwiththePassion,thetextscouldbeusedinavarietyofways:toduplicateChrist’s journeyphysicallybycopyingtheexactdistances, tomeditateon thePassionandmove in themindonlyand/or tosafeguardthebookowneraswouldanyofthePassionrelicsthatpilgrimssolovedtocarrywiththem.

Bibliography

Primary SourcesMs205:The Indulgence of the Holy Sites of Jerusalem.Nijmegen,RadboudUniversity

Library,Ms205(fols240r-255r).Ms233:A Devout Exercise of the Passion of Our Saviour.Nijmegen,RadboudUniversity

Library,Ms233(fols1r-30r).

61 Rudy2011,pp.209–18.TheDominicanHeinrichSusowhosewritingswerepopularwiththeModern-DayDevout(seen.9)coupledthemeditationsofhisHundert Betrachtungenwithacircuitthroughthemonastery.See:VanAelst2000,pp.89–91.

62 Ms205,fol.240r: ‘Alsgijdenberchvancaluarienvisentierenwiltsoesultgijgaenopvkyen[sic]sittenineenheymelickestat[…]’.Ms233,fol.1r:‘[…]altijtmachmensevolco-melick verdienen alsoe verde [sic: far from the Dutch word ‘verre’] als sij hoer hartensacken tottenheijlighenplaetsenendedenprnrendeauemaria sijn lesendealsdaerstaetgheteijkent’.


Adornes,Anselmes,Itinéraire d’Anselme Adorno en Terre Sainte (1470–1471),ed.byJacquesHeersandGeorgettedeGroer,Paris1978.

VanAdrichem,Christiaan,A briefe description of Hierusalem and of the suburbs therof, as it florished in the time of Christ,London1595[originallypublishedas:ChristianusAdrichomius,Urbis Hiersolymae quemadmodem ex Christi Tempore Floruit,Cologne1597].

AelredofRievaulx,A Letter to His Sister,transl.byGeoffreyWebbandAdrianWalker,London1957.

AelredofRievaulx,The Works of Aelred of Rievaulx, vol. I: Treatises, The Pastoral Prayer,transl.byTheodoreBerkeley,MaryMacpherson,andPenelopeR.Lawson,SpencerMA1971.

Ermengaud,Matfre,Le Breviari d’Amor de Matfre Ermengaud,vol.III,ed.byPeterT.RickettsandCyrilP.Hershon,London1998.Fabri,Felix,Die Pilgerfahrt des Bruders Felix Faber ins Heilige Land Anno MCDLXXXIII,

nach den ersten deutschen Ausgabe 1556, bearbeitet und neu herausgegeben,Berlin[1964].

VanHackeborn,Mechtild,Het Boek der Bijzondere Genade (Werken van Mystieken: H. Mechtild Van Hackeborn),transl.byM.Costanza,Bussum1958.

àKempis,Thomas,De imitatione Christi (Qui sequitur),ed.byC.C.deBruyn,Leiden1954.

Secondary LiteratureAdornes en Jeruzalem. Internationaal Leven in het 15de- en 16de-eeuwse Brugge,exhib.

cat.,ed.byNoëlGeirnaertandAndréVandewalle,Bruges:Jeruzalemkapel,9–25September1983.

VanAelst,José,‘HetgebruikvanbeeldenbijSuso’slijdensmeditatie’,in:Geen povere schoonheid. Laat-middeleeuwse kunst in verband met de Moderne Devotie, ed.byKeesVeelenturf,Nijmegen2000,pp.86–110.

––––––,Passie voor het lijden: de ‘Hundert Betrachtungen und Begehrungen’ van Henricus Suso en de oudste drie bewerkingen uit de Nederlanden,Leuven2005.

––––––,Vruchten van de passie. De laatmiddeleeuwse passieliteratuur verkend aan de hand van Suso’s ‘Honderd Artikelen’,Hilversum2011.

Areford,DavidS., ‘ThePassionMeasured:ALate-MedievalDiagramoftheBodyofChrist’,in:The Broken Body. Passion Devotion in Late-Medieval Culture,ed.byA.A.MacDonald,H.N.B.Ridderbos,andR.M.Schlusemann,Groningen1998,pp.211–38.

VanAsperen,Hanneke,Pelgrimstekens op Perkament. Originele en nageschilderde be-devaartssouvenirs in religieuze boeken (ca 1450–ca 1530),Nijmegen2009.

––––––, ‘Praying,Threading,andAdorning:sewn-inPrintsinaRosaryPrayerBook(London,BritishLibrary,Add.MS14042)’,in:Weaving, Veiling, and Dressing. Textiles and their Metaphors in the Late Middle Ages,ed.byKathrynM.RudyandBarbaraBaert,Turnhout2007,pp.81–120.

210 VanAsperen

As-Vijvers,AnneMargreetW., ‘WeavingMary’sChaplet:TheRepresentationoftheRosaryinLateMedievalFlemishManuscriptIllumination’,in:Weaving, Veiling, and Dressing. Textiles and their Metaphors in the Late Middle Ages,ed.byKathrynM.RudyandBarbaraBaert,Turnhout2007,pp.41–79.

Der Rosenkranz. Andacht, Geschichte, Kunst,ed.byUrsBeat-FreiandFredyBühler,Bern2003.

Beebe,Kathryne,‘Knights,Cooks,MonksandTourists.EliteandPopularExperienceoftheLate-MedievalJerusalemPilgrimage’,in:Elite and Popular Religion. Papers Read at the 2004 Summer Meeting and the 2005 Winter Meeting of the Ecclesiastical History Society,ed.byKateCooperandJeremyGregory,Woodbridge2006,pp.99–109.

––––––,‘ReadingMentalPilgrimageinContext.TheImaginaryPilgrimsandRealTravelsofFelixFabri’s“DieSionpilger”’,Essays in Medieval Studies25(2008),pp.39–70.

Bethlehem,Jan,‘DeDevotenenhetAardsJerusalem’,in:Serta Devota in memoriam Guillelmi Lourdeaux, I: Devotio Windeshemensis, ed. byWernerVerbeke, MarcelHaveralsetal.,Leuven1992,pp.321–34.

DeBlaauw,Sible,‘GerusalemmeaRomaeilcultodellaCroce’,in:Gerusalemme a Roma. La Basilica di santa Croce e le reliquie della Passione,ed.byRobertoCassanelliandEmiliaStolfi,Milan2012,pp.27–39.

Birch,DebraJ.,Pilgrimage to Rome in the Middle Ages. Continuity and Change,Woodbridge1998.

Bolduc,Michelle,‘TheBreviarid’Amor:RhetoricandPreachinginThirteenth-CenturyLanguedoc’,Rhetorica24,no.4(2006),pp.403–42.

Bynam,CarolynWalker, ‘SeeingandSeeingBeyond:TheMassofSt.GregoryintheFifteenthCentury’,in:The Mind’s Eye. Art and Theological Argument in the Middle Ages, ed.by JeffreyF.HamburgerandAnne-MarieBouché,Princeton2005,pp.208–40.

Cahn, Walter, ‘Margaret of York’s Guide to the Pilgrimage Churches of Rome’, in:Margaret of York, Simon Marmion and the Visions of Tondal,ed.byThomasKren,1992,pp.89–98.

Carruthers, Mary J., The Book of Memory. A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture,Cambridge20082.

––––––, ‘Moving Images in theMind’sEye’, in: The Mind’s Eye. Art and Theological Argument in the Middle Ages,ed.byJeffreyF.HamburgerandAnne-MarieBouché,Princeton2005,pp.287–305.

––––––,The Craft of Thought. Meditation, Rhetoric, and the Making of Images, 400–1200,Cambridge1998.

Claussen,M.A.,‘“Peregrinatio”and“Peregrini”inAugustine’s“CityofGod”’,Traditio46(1991),pp.33–75.


Connolly,DanielK.,‘AttheCenteroftheWorld:TheLabyrinthPavementofChartresCathedral’,in:Art and Architecture of Late Medieval Pilgrimage in Northern Europe and the British Isles,ed.bySarahBlickandRitaTekippe,Leiden2005,pp.285–314.

––––––,‘ImaginedPilgrimageintheItineraryMapsofMatthewParis’,The Art Bulletin81,no.4(1999),pp.598–622.

Dackerman,Susan,‘PaintedPrintsinGermanyandtheNetherlands’,in:Painted Prints. The Revelation of Color in Northern Renaissance & Baroque Engravings, Etchings & Woodcuts,exhib.cat.,ed.bySusanDackerman,Baltimore:TheBaltimoreMuseumofArt,October62002–January52003/St.Louis:St.LouisArtMuseum,February14–May182003,BaltimoreMDandUniversityParkPA2002,pp.9–47.

Davies,HughWM.,Bernhard von Breydenbach and his Journey to the Holy Land 1483–4. A Bibliography,Utrecht1968[reprint].

Dekeyzer,Brigitte, ‘WordandImage.Foundationsof theMedievalManuscript’, in:Medieval Mastery. Book Illumination from Charlemagne to Charles the Bold 800–1475,Leuven2002,pp.25–33.

Deschamps,Jan,‘HandschriftenuithetSint-AgneskloosterteMaaseik’,in:Album Dr. M. Bussels,Tongeren1967,pp.167–94.

VanDijk,RudolphTh.M.,‘Thematischemeditatieenhetbeeld:visualiteitinDe spiritu-alibus ascensionibusvanGerardZerboltvanZutphen(1367–1398)’,in:Geen povere schoonheid. Laat-middeleeuwse kunst in verband met de Moderne Devotie, ed.byKeesVeelenturf,Nijmegen2000,pp.43–66.

Ehrenschwendtner,Marie-Luise,‘VirtualPilgrimages?EnclosureandthePracticeofPietyatStKatherine’sConvent,Augsburg’,Journal of Ecclesiastical History60,no.1(2009),pp.45–73.

Feugen,G.,‘Nogeens:EenmerkwaardigeNederlandschekruiswegoefeninguitdeXVdeeeuw’,Ons Geestelijk Erf12(1938),pp.319–29.

FiledtKok,JanPiet,andEllinoorBergvelt,‘DevroegeNederlandseschilderkunstinhetRijksmuseum’,Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum46,nos2–3(1998),pp.125–205.

Fletcher,Shelley,LishaGlinsman,andDorisOltrogge,‘ThePigmentsonHand-ColoredFifteenth-CenturyReliefPrintsfromtheCollectionsoftheNationalGalleryofArtand the Germanisches Nationalmuseum’, in: The Woodcut in Fifteenth-Century Europe,ed.byPeterParshall,WashingtonDC2009,pp.276–97.

Gonnet,C.J.,‘OverwegingenophetlijdendesHeerenvoordegenen,dieindengeestdeheiligeplaatsenwillenbezoeken.Ao1518’,Bijdragen voor de Geschiedenis van het Bisdom van Haarlem11(1884),pp.324–43.

VanHaver,J.,‘Christusopde(koude)steen’,Volkskunde 22(1963),pp.49–63.Hollstein,F.W.H.,Dutch and Flemish Etchings, Engravings and Woodcuts ca 1450–1700,

Amsterdam[1956].Huisman,GerdaC.,Catalogus van de middeleeuwse handschriften in de Universiteits-

bibliotheek Nĳmegen,Leuven1997.

212 VanAsperen

Hull, Vida J., ‘Spiritual Pilgrimage in the Paintings of Hans Memling’, in: Art and Architecture of Late Medieval Pilgrimage in Northern Europe and the British Isles,ed.bySarahBlickandRitaTekippe,Leiden2005,pp.29–50.

Huschenbett,Dietrich, ‘PriesterBethlem’,in:Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters. Verfasserlexikon,ed.byKurtRuhetal.,BerlinandNewYork1978,vol.I,cc.835–37.

Jacobi,AdolfD.,‘HeiligeLängenmasse:EineUntersuchungzurGeschichtederAmulette’,Schweizer Archiv für Volkskunde29(1929),pp.1–17,181–216.

Kneller,KarlAlois,Geschichte der Kreuzwegandacht von den Anfangen bis zur völligen Ausbildung,FreiburgimBreisgau1908.

Kock,Thomas,Die Buchkultur der Devotio moderna. Handschriftenproduktion, Literatur-versorgung und Bibliotheksaufbau im Zeitalter des Medienwechsels,FrankfurtamMain1999.

Koldeweij,A.M.,‘Lijfelijkeengeestelijkepelgrimage:materiële‘souvenirs’vanspirituelepelgrimage’,in:Geen Povere Schoonheid. Laat-middeleeuwse kunst in verband met de

Moderne Devotie,ed.byKeesVeelenturf,Nijmegen2000,pp.222–52.Kriezels, aubergines en takkenbossen. Randversiering in Noordnederlandse handschriften

uit de vĳftiende eeuw,ed.byAnneS.Korteweg, Zutphen1992.Kroesen, Justin E.A., The Sepulchrum Domini through the Ages. Its Form and Func-

tion, Leuven2000.Lewis,FloraMay, ‘TheWoundinChrist’sSideandtheInstrumentsofthePassion:

GenderedExperienceandResponse’,in:Women and the Book. Assessing the Visual Evidence,ed.byLesleySmithandJaneH.M.Taylor,London1996,pp.204–29.

Meertens,Maria,De Godsvrucht in de Nederlanden naar handschriften van gebeden-boeken der XVe eeuw, II: Lijdensdevoties,[Antwerp/Nijmegen]1931.

Marrow,JamesH.,PassionIconography in Northern European Art of the Late Middle Ages and Early Renaissance. A Study of the Transformation of Sacred Metaphor into Descriptive Narrative,ArsNeerlandicavol.I,Kortrijk1979.

Miedema,NineR.,Rompilgerführer in Spätmittelalter und früher Neuzeit. Die ‘Indulgen-tiæ ecclesiarum urbis Romæ’ (deutsch/niederländisch).EditionundKommentar,Tü-bingen2003.

––––––,Die römischen Kirchen im Spätmittelalter nach den ‚‘IndulgentiaeecclesiarumurbisRomæ’,Tübingen2001.

––––––,‘FollowingintheFootstepsofChrist:PilgrimageandPassionDevotion’,in:The Broken Body. Passion Devotion in Late-Medieval Culture,ed.byA.A.MacDonald,H.N.B.Ridderbos,andR.M.Schlusemann,Groningen1998,pp.73–92.

Miller,JohnD.,Beads and Prayers. The Rosary in History and Devotion,London,NewYork2002.

Moderne Devotie. Figuren en Facetten,exhib.cat.,ed.byAndreasJ.Geurts,Nijmegen:NijmeegsVolkenkundigMuseum1984.


Neff,Amy, ‘PalmaDabitPalmam:FranciscanThemes inaDevotionalManuscript’,Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes65(2002),pp.22–66.

Oltrogge,Doris,‘IlluminatingthePrint:TheUseofColorinFifteenth-CenturyPrintsandBookIllumination’,in:The Woodcut in Fifteenth-Century Europe,ed.byPeterParshall,WashingtonDC2009,pp.298–315.

Ousterhout,Robert,‘“SweetlyRefreshedinImagination”:RememberingJerusaleminWordsandImages’,Gesta48(2009),pp.153–268.

Pieper, Jan, ‘The Garden of the Holy Sepulchre in Görlitz’, Daidalos 58 (1995), pp.38–43.

Pringle,Denys,The Churches of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem. A Corpus. Volume III: The City of Jerusalem,Cambridge2010.

Rudy,KathrynM.,Virtual Pilgrimages in the Convent. Imagining Jerusalem in the Late Middle Ages,Turnhout2011.

––––––,‘FragmentsofaMentalJourneytoaPassionPark’,in:Tributes in Honor of James H. Marrow. Studies in Painting and Manuscript Illumination of the Late Middle Ages and Northern Renaissance, ed. by Jeffrey H. Hamburger and Anne S. Korteweg,London/Turnhout2006,pp.405–19.

––––––, ‘Den aflaet der heiliger stat Jherusalem ende des berchs van Calvarien.IndulgencedPrayersforMentalHolyLandPilgrimageinManuscriptsfromtheSt.AgnesConventinMaaseik’,Ons Geestelijk Erf74(2000[a]),pp.211–54.

––––––,‘AGuideToMentalPilgrimage.Paris,BibliothèquedeL’ArsenalMs212’,Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte63(2000[b]),pp.494–515.

Schmidt,Peter,‘TheUseofPrintsinGermanConventsoftheFifteenthCentury:TheExampleofNuremberg’,Studies in Iconography24(2003),pp.43–69.

Schuler,CarolM.,‘TheSevenSorrowsoftheVirgin:PopularCultureandCulticImageryinPre-ReformationEurope’,Simiolus21,nos1–2(1992),pp.5–28.

Smith,KathrynM.,‘TheMonkWhoCrucifiedHimself ’,in:Thresholds of Medieval Visual Culture: Liminal Spaces,ed.byElinaGertsmanandJillStevenson,Woodbridge2012,pp.44–72.

Spencer,BrianW.,Pilgrim Souvenirs and Secular Badges,London1998.Stooker,KarlandT.J.Verbey,Collecties op orde. Middelnederlandse handschriften uit

kloosters en semi-religieuze gemeenschappen in de Nederlanden, deel 2: Repertorium,Leuven1997.

Verhoeven,Gerrit,Devotie en negotie. Delft als bedevaartplaats in de late middeleeuwen,Amsterdam1992.

Waaijman,Kees,‘Beeldenbeeldloosheid:eenuitdagingaandedevotie’,in:Geen povere schoonheid. Laat-middeleeuwse kunst in verband met de Moderne Devotie, ed.byKeesVeelenturf,Nijmegen2000,pp.31–42.

Wilkins,Eithne,The Rose-Garden Game. The Symbolic Background to the European Prayer-Beads,London1969.

214 VanAsperen

Wasser,Ben, ‘DiePeregrinatievanIherusalem:PelgrimsverslagenvanNederlandseJerusalemgangersinde15e,16een17eeeuw:ontstaanenontwikkeling’,De Gulden Passer69(1991),pp.5–72.

Wierda,LydiaS.,‘ModerneDevotenenhunboeken.EnkeleobservatiesbetreffendedeboekproductiebijWindesheimersenfraters’,in:Windesheim 1395–1995. Kloosters, teksten, invloeden, ed. by A.J. Hendrikman, P. Bange et al., Nijmegen 1996, pp.98–127.

Winston-Allen,Anne,Stories of the Rose. The Making of the Rosary in the Middle Ages,UniversityParkPA1997[reprint1998].

Wijngaards,N.,‘VoordederdemaalovereenmerkwaardigekruiswegoefeningindeNederlandenuitdeXVeeeuw’,Ons Geestelijk Erf31(1957),pp.422–26.

VandenWyngaert,Anastaas,‘EenmerkwaardigeNederlandschekruiswegoefeninguitdeXVeeeuw’,Ons Geestelijk Erf2(1928),pp.10–41.

––––––, ‘Een onuitgegeven Kruiswegoefening uit de XVe eeuw’, Bijdragen tot de Geschiedenis15(1923–24),pp.487–511.

215JerusalemInRenaissanceItaly

Chapter9

Jerusalem in Renaissance Italy The Holy Sepulchre on the Sacro Monte of Varallo

Bram de Klerck

TheiconographyofStCharlesBorromeo(1538–84)containssomeinterestinginstancesofthekneelingsaintintheimmediatevicinityoftherecumbentfig-ureofthedeceasedChrist.TheSaviour’slargelynudebody,headsometimesstillcrownedwiththorns,isplacedonacatafalqueormarbleslab.Anexampleisapaintingexecutedafter1615fortheChurchofSantiCarloeGiustinainPa-via,bytheMilaneseartistGiulioCesareProcaccini(1574–1625),nowinMilan,PinacotecadiBrera(Fig.9.1).TheworkrepresentsStCharles,dressedasacar-dinal, kneeling and looking up to an angel who is pointing at the body ofChrist.1What isespecially striking in thispaintingand images like it is thattheysuggesttherealpresenceofthesixteenth-centuryMilanesearchbishopatChrist’sbier.ByunitingthefiguresofChristandStCharlesinoneandthesamespace,realisticallyproportionedtoeachother,thepaintersemphasizethat,tothesaint,thebodyofthedeadChristisalmosttangible.Itisasif,longafterthebiblicaleventsofChrist’scrucifixionandburial,Borromeofoundamiraculousway to go back in time some one-and-a-half millennia to find the Saviour’sbodyinsidethehermeticallyclosedtomb.

However improbablethescenemayappear, thesepaintingsreflectaspe-cificreligiousexperienceandpractice,astheyaredocumentedintheearliestwrittenaccountsofCharlesBorromeo’slife.In1610,GiovanniPietroGiussanobecamethefirsthagiographerofBorromeo,whowascanonizedinthatsameyear.Onseveraloccasions,theauthorstressesthefactthatthecardinalcher-ishedaspecialdevotiontoChrist’sPassion.AccordingtoGiussano’saccountandotherbiographicalsources, inOctober1584Borromeotravelledtoapil-grim’s sanctuary known as Sacro Monte (‘Holy Mountain’) near the town ofVaralloSesiainPiedmont,someonehundredkilometresnorthwestofthear-chiepiscopal see in Milan. In Varallo, St Charles visited the chapels wherepaintingsandsculpturesdepictedepisodesfromChrist’sLifeandPassion,towhichthechapelswerededicated.Borromeoturnsouttohavegivenspecial

1 FortheiconographyofCharlesBorromeo,seee.g.:CarloBorromeo1997(forthethemeStCharlesatthebierofChrist:pp.248–50);CarloeFederico2005.

© BramdeKlerck,2014 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_011This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.



216 DeKlerck

attentiontothethemerepresentedinthechapeloftheHolySepulchre.Inthelegend of the Saint, this devotional exercise became closely linked with hisowndeath,whichoccurreddayslater,on4November1584,whenhewasbackinMilan.Indeed,StCharlesprayedinthischapelontheSacroMonte‘asifhe

Figure9.1 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, StCharlesBorromeo,theDeceasedChristandanAngel, 1615, oil on canvas, 200 × 160 cm, Milan:PinacotecadiBrera.Photo:CentrumvoorKunsthistorischeDocumentatie,RadboudUniversityNijmegen.


sawhisownendnigh’,2andcontemplatedthedeathoftheSaviour,whoselike-nesswas–andstillis–presentinalife-sized,veristicallypaintedfigurecarvedinwoodbyananonymoussculptorofaround1490(Fig.9.2).

CharlesBorromeomusthavebeenwellawareoftherepresentativepowerofthiskindofrecreationofthesacredsites.ItwashewhofamouslypraisedVar-allo’ssanctuaryasLanuova Gerusalemme(‘theNewJerusalem’),anepithetonwhichcanstillbereadintheLatininscriptionoverthearchonthemagnifi-cent entrance gate to the site.3The present contribution is concerned withreferencestothesacredsitesofJerusalem,astheybecamemanifestinWesternEuropeandmorespecificallyinItalyduringtheMiddleAgesandtheRenais-sance. Recreations of sites in the Holy Land, in the form of Calvaries, Holy

2 ‘[...]comesevedessevicinoilsuofine’:Giussano1610,p.483;foranart-historicalinterpretationofthisepisode,see:DeKlerck1999,pp.120–21;DeKlerck2009,pp.203–04.

3 Theinscriptionreads:‘haecnovaHyerVsalemvitamsVmmo[...]laboresatq.redemptio-nisomniagestarefert’.Tobesure,thecharacterization‘newJerusalem’orjust‘Jerusalem’forplacesreminiscentofthesacredsitesintheHolyLand,ishardlyoriginalandcanbefoundincountlessotherinstances.

Figure9.2 Anonymous, DeceasedChrist, 1491, wood, Varallo: Sacro Monte (Chapel of the Holy Sepulchre). Photo:BramdeKlerck.

218 DeKlerck

Mountains,andsuchlikesanctuaries,havebeenasubjectofscholarlydebatein the last few decades. Recent publications tend to treat them as isolatedmonumentsorasbelongingtoregionallyandchronologicallylimitedgroups.Inarecentcontribution,BiancaKühnelevenarguesthatonereasonforthetraditionallyratherfragmentedapproachtothese‘HolyLandscapes’isthat–‘servingpopulardevotionalpracticesandheavywithnaturalisticdetail’–theyhavelongbeenconsideredbyarthistorianstobelongtotherealmof‘lowart’.4However,itcouldalsobearguedthatsomeofthemonumentsinquestionareclearlytheproductsofartisticconceptionsconnectedtotheRenaissancehu-manistic tradition.The present contribution focuses primarily on the devo-tionalfunctionofafewfifteenth-andsixteenth-century ‘copies’oftheHolySepulchre,by juxtaposing,andat thesametimerelating, thecoarseexpres-siveness of the chapel on the Sacro Monte to a highly refined Early Renais-sancemonumentliketheshrinedesignedbythefamousRenaissancearchitectLeonBattistaAlbertifortheCappellaRucellaiinFlorence.

Varallo

Foundedinthelastdecadesofthefifteenthcentury,theSacroMonteofVar-alloisthefirstsanctuaryofitskind.Inthecourseofthesixteenthtotheeigh-teenthcenturies,manyother‘HolyMountains’wereconstructed,bothinItalyandabroad.5Eachconsistsofaseriesofindividualchapels,ofwhichtheinte-riors are decorated with frescoes and sculptures. In the case ofVarallo theydepictepisodesliketheNativity,theAdorationoftheShepherds,theArrivalofthe Magi in Bethlehem (Fig. 9.3), Ecce Homo, and the Crucifixion.6The lastchapelinthesequenceofthenarrative–whichwasinfactoneofthefirsttobeconstructedontheSacroMonte–istheonededicatedtotheSepulchre.

Overtime,thedecorationsinthechapelsofVarallowereexecutedbyanon-ymous craftsmen and by documented local artists such as the painter andsculptor Gaudenzio Ferrari (1475/80–1546) from nearby Valduggia, and thepainterTanziodaVarallo(1575/80–1632/33).Foreignartistsalsoworkedonthe

4 Kühnel2012,p.244.5 Fortheintriguingphenomenonofsacri monti,inItaly,elsewhereinEuropeaswellasin

theAmericas,see:e.g.Kubler1990;Barbero2001;ZanziandZanzi2002;DeKlerck2009.ForamorepersonaldiscussionoftheninesanctuariesinLombardyandPiedmontthat,as a group, have been introduced to UNESCO’s World Heritage List in 2003, see:Nieuwenhuis2006.

6 The chapels in other sacri monti sometimes depict different themes: for instance, inVarese(Lombardy)itisthelifeoftheVirgin;inOrta(Piedmont)thelifeofStFrancis.


SacroMonte,forexamplesculptorJeandeWespin,called‘IlTabacchetti’(ca.1567–1615)fromDinantinfar-awayWallonia.Thedecorationsconsistoffres-coesonthewallsandvaultsof thechapels,combinedwith life-sizedsculp-tures of human figures carved in wood or modelled in terracotta or stucco,paintedinvividcoloursorsometimesevensportingrealclothes,hatsandoth-er attributes, and with real hair on skulls and cheeks.These fascinating en-semblesconveytheimpressionofshow-boxesortableaux vivants invitingthedevoutbeholdertojoinandparticipate.TheSacroMonteofferedthepossibil-ityofcompletingapilgrimagewithouthavingtosetoutonthelongandhaz-ardous journey to the Holy Land. This is exactly what must have been theintentionofthefounderofthesanctuary,BernardinoCaimi,alaterbeatifiedFranciscanof therigorousObservantbranchof theOrder,whohimselfhadbeeninPalestineandvisitedthesacredsites.7Afterhediedin,orshortlyafter,1499,ObservantFranciscansweretoremainadministratorsofthesanctuary.

7 In publications on the Sacro Monte, Caimi is often defined as an administrator of thesacredsites,orguardianoftheHolySepulchre.InrealityhewasmoreofadiplomatandtroubleshooterwhowasoftensentbyhisOrderandreligiousauthoritiestosolveprob-

Figure9.3 Gaudenzio Ferrari, TheArrivaloftheMagiinBethlehem (detail), fresco, stucco, 1520-28, Varallo: Sacro Monte (Chapel of the Magi). Photo:BramdeKlerck.

220 DeKlerck

Initially, the general layout and the location of the chapels on the HolyMountainofVarallo,looselyandonamuchsmallerscale,followedthetopo-graphicaldispositionofJerusalem.Acomparabledesigncharacterizesasec-ondSacroMonte,constructedslightlylaterthanVarallo,thistimenotintheAlpineregionsofPiedmontandLombardywhereallsubsequentHolyMoun-tainsontheApenninepeninsulaaretobefound,butinTuscany.Shortlyafter1500theSacroMonteofSanVivaldowasfoundednearthetownofMontaionein Valdelsa. The arrangement of the chapels, and to some extent even theshapeofthemountainitself,aswellasthehillsandvalleyssurroundingit,calltomindthemapofthecityof Jerusalem.TheplanoftheTuscansanctuarymoreorlessreflectsthelocationof,forexample,theValleyofJehoshaphatandtheMountofOlives,theplaceswhereCalvaryandtheSepulchrewerebelievedtohavebeeninJerusalem,aswellasthegeographicalfeaturesinandaroundthatcity.8Thesuggestionofcommensurabletopographicalcharacteristicsand(proportioned)distanceshasalwaysbeenimportantintheseandsimilarsanc-tuaries.EvenaftertheoriginaltopologicallayoutofthechapelsontheSacroMonteofVarallohadbeenchangedintoonewithamorechronologicallyor-deredsequence in the 1560s,a localseventeenth-centuryclericnotonlyde-fined thesite, rathercommonplace for thatmatter, ‘ourownJerusalem’,butalsostressedthatinhisviewthenearbyriversMastalloneandSesia,aswellasLakeOrta,mirroredthewatersintheHolyLand:

theneighbourhoodistheexactcounterpartofthatwhichisintheHolyLand,havingtheMastalloneontheonesideforthebrookKedron,andtheSesiafortheJordan,andthelakeofOrtaforthatofCaesaraea.9

TheearliestchapelsinVarallowerebuiltaccordingtolocaltraditionsofver-naculararchitecture.Laterinthesixteenthcentury,from1565to1568,adrasticrenovationandreorganizationofthesiteandthechapelswascarriedoutafter

lemsandsettlediscord. In 1478hewas in theHolyLandto temporarily substitute theguardianofMountZionwhohaddiedthepreviousyear,andtoarrangeelectionsforasuccessor.Possiblyhemadeasecondjourneyeastward,withthesamemissionasthefirst,somewherebetween1487–1490.Morisi1973.

8 Vannini1989;Siew2008,especiallypp.40–44.9 Inthewordsofthenineteenth-centuryEnglishnovelist,SamuelButler(1835–1902),quot-

ing one canonTorrotti in 1686; Butler 1888, p. 26. Apparently, the canon was not veryawareofthetopographyoftheHolyLand.CaesareaisatownontheMediterraneaninthenorthofIsrael,i.e.morethanahundredkilometresnorthwestofJerusalem,whereasLakeOrtaissituatedsometwentykilometreseastofVarallo.


designsbythearchitectGaleazzoAlessi(1512–72).10Manychapelswererede-signed or newly constructed in Alessi’s elegant and varied late Renaissanceclassiciststyle.Asaresult,theexteriorsofneithertheearlynorthelatercha-pelscontaindirectreferencestotheformsofthesitesintheHolyLand–eveninsofarastheywereknownatthetime.However,architecturalelementsandpartsoftheinteriorsofseveralchapelsevidentlydoaimatimitatingaspectsofthe (real or imagined) original edifices. The chapel of the Holy Sepulchre,which was constructed in 1491 and provided with the wooden statue of thedeceasedChristmentionedearlier,isacaseinpoint.

Relics and Recreations

Apparently,asbecomesclearfromCharlesBorromeo’sdemeanourduringhispilgrimagetotheSacroMonte,butalsofromthegreatpopularitythesanctu-aryenjoyed,attractingdevoutby thehundreds,eventhousands, fromas farawayasSwitzerland,11thechapelsinVaralloservedassatisfyingsubstitutesfortheplacesintheHolyLand.This,tobesure,wasnothingnew.InmedievalandearlymodernEurope,biblicalsiteshavebeenrecreatedtimeandagain,andina great variety of forms and a multitude of appearances. One especially in-triguinginstanceisthehousewheretheVirginMarylived.Popularbeliefhasitthattheso-called‘HolyHouse’,towardstheendofthethirteenthcentury,hadbeentransportedincloudsfromNazarethtoDalmatia.Afewyearslater,angelsweretoonceagaincarryitairbornetoLoreto,atownlocatedsomethirtykilo-metressouthofAnconaontheAdriaticcoastofItalywherethehouseisstillveneratedinashrine.TheBasilicadellaSantaCasawaserectedarounditdur-ingthesixteenthcentury.Inreality,remainsofahouseatthetimebelievedtohavebeentheVirgin’sdwellingplacewereshippedtoItalybycrusadersinthethirteenth century. Many similar chapels, more or less following the shapeand/ormeasurementsoftheHolyHouseofLoretohavefollowed,everywhereinEurope.12

Loreto’ssancta casa isaspecialcase, ifonlybecauseof its size. Inaway,however,itisjustoneofthemanysecondaryrelicsoftheVirginMary.These

10 Alessi’sdrawingshavebeenpublishedinBrizioandStefaniPerrone1974.11 Samuel Butler quotes the already mentioned canon Torrotti who, in 1686 had written

about visitors from Piedmont and Milan, adding that ‘From elsewhither processionsarrivedaily,evenfromSwitzerland,andtherearesometimesasmanyastenthousandvisitorsextraordinarycomehereinasingleday..’..Butler1888,pp.25–26.

12 FortheHolyHouseofLoreto,seee.g.:SacelloSantaCasa1991.

222 DeKlerck

typesofobjects,bigandsmall,arescatteredallovertheChristianworld,oftenprovidedwithcertificatesorinscriptionstotestifytotheirauthenticity.Piecesofrockandothermaterialscrapedorcutfromsacredsiteswerebroughtbackhomebypilgrims,butalsolessdirectremainslikeoilfromthelampsabovetheHolySepulchre.ToreturntoVarallo,aninterestingexamplecanbefoundrightnexttotheentranceofthechapeloftheHolySepulchre.Here,apieceofstoneonlyafewincheshighhasbeenwalledupinanicheclosedbyawroughtironlattice(Fig.9.4).ALatinepitaphunderneathexplainsthattheobjectispartofthe‘stoneoftheHolySepulchreofourLordJesusChristwhichisinJerusalem’.13

Apartfromthisrelic,apparentlytakenfromtheSepulchre, it isclearthatsanctuariesliketheoneatVaralloarenotparticularlyconcernedwithactual,physicalremainsofthesitesintheHolyLand.Rather,theypresentthevisitorwithimitationsthatnotonlyrefertotheoriginalsbutmustevenhavetakentheirplaceintheimaginationandreligiousexperienceofthevisitorstothesanctuary. For instance, just a few steps away from the small reliquary justmentioned,farmoreeye-catchingisaslabofstoneofaman’sheight,exposedinaniche(Fig.9.5).ItisprovidedwithamarbleepitaphwithaninscriptioninItalianrevealingthat‘thisstoneineveryrespectresembles[myitalics]theonewithwhichthesepulchreofour lordJesusChristwascoveredinJerusalem’.Thereturnsouttobesomethingmiraculoustotheobjectaswell,becausethetextgoesontoexplainthatthestonehasnotbeenmanmade,butrather‘foundwhendiggingthefirstfoundationsofthissacredplace’,14suggestingthatthesitewasinawaypredestined.

Ofamoredeliberatenaturearetheeffortstorefertotheholyplacesincer-taindetailsorinthearchitecturaldesignofpartsofseveralchapelsontheSa-croMonte.ThechapeloftheNativity,forinstance,hasaconcavespacemadeoutofroughstoneworkwhichreflectstheformofthenicheabovethealtarintheGrottoinBethlehemwereChristwasbelievedtohavebeenborn.BeneaththealtarinVarallothereisalsoacopyafterthefourteen-pointsilverstarwhichin Bethlehem marks the exact spot of the Nativity. And the entrance to thechapelinVarallohasitsportalandhalf-circularstepscopiedafterthosewhichinBethlehemleadfromtheChurchoftheNativitytothesubterraneancave(Fig.9.6).TheburialchamberwhichispartoftheSepulchrechapelinVarallo

13 ‘LapissanctiSepulcriDomininostriIesvChristiquodYierosolimisestindetranslatvseterectvsHicinTitvlvm’.ForthevenerationofstonefromtheHolySepulchreasrelics,see:Ousterhout2003.

14 ‘QUESTAPIETRAÈINTUTTOSIMILEAQUELLACONLAQUALEFUCOPERTOILSEPOLCRODELNOSTROSIGNORGESÙCHRISTOINGERUSALEMMETROVATANELLOSCAVAREIPRIMIFONDAMENTIDIQUESTOSACROLUOGO’.


Figure9.4 Varallo, Sacro Monte, reliquary with a piece of rock from the Holy Sepulchre, ca. 1490. Photo:BramdeKlerck.

Figure9.5 Varallo, Sacro Monte, replica of the stone covering Christ’s tomb, ca. 1490. Photo:BramdeKlerck.

224 DeKlerck

hasbeendesignedtoresembletheTombofChristinJerusalem.Toemphasizethis, an inscription over its entrance reads: SIMILE E IL S[AN]TO SEPVLCRODE Y[ESV] XR[IST]O (‘Similar [to this] is the Holy Sepulchre of Jesus Christ’;Fig.9.7).

‘Reproductions’ of the Holy Sepulchre

BuildingsreferringinonewayoranothertotheSepulchreinJerusalemandthe so-called ‘Anastasis Rotunda’ (literally ‘Rotunda of the Resurrection’) inwhichitisenclosed,wereconstructedinWesternEuropefromatleastasearlyasthefifthcenturyonward.IntheMiddleAgesagreatvarietyofedificeswereconsideredimitationsorvariantsoftheHolyGrave.Quiteafewchurches,free-standingchapels,orchapelswithinchurcheswerededicatedtoand/ornamed

Figure9.6 Varallo, Sacro Monte, entrance to the Chapel of the Nativity, 1514. Photo:BramdeKlerck.


aftertheHolySepulchre.SometimeswrittensourcesattesttotheintentiontoconstructthoseedificesascopiesofthechurchinJerusalem.Asarulehow-ever, in outward appearance such buildings are not even close to faithful‘copies’aswewouldnowadaysunderstandtheconcept.15Oftentheyarechar-acterizedonlybyaselectionofrathervagueormerelysymbolicalreferencestothe original. Elements in a surprising variety of degrees of obviousness andprobability, turn out to have been chosen as distinguishing for the RotundaandtheHolySepulchre.16

15 A pioneering study on the practice of ‘copying’ buildings in the Middle Ages is Kraut-heimer1942,especiallysection1,‘CopiesinMediaevalArchitecture’,pp.2–20(seealsotheGermantranslationinKrautheimer1988,Ch.VI,withupdatingpostscriptsbytheauthor,pp.190–97).Inlateryears,Krautheimer’sviewshavemetwithcriticism,especiallycon-cerningtheuseoftheconceptof‘copy’,andthelackofdocumentaryevidencetoascer-tain the intentionsofarchitectsandpatrons (seeSchenkluhn 1999,CarverMcCurrach2011). Krautheimer’s analysis of the relations in form and meaning between differentmedievalreligiousbuildings,however,remainsausefulpointofdeparturefortheaspectsofarchitecturalimitationwhichconcernushere.

16 ForthereceptioninWesternEuropeoftheRotundainJerusalem:Krautheimer1942,andmorerecentlye.g.Krüger2000,pp.188–93.ForthemanyvariantsoftheHolySepulchreinEurope:e.g.Rüdiger2003;Morris2005.

Figure9.7 Varallo, Sacro Monte, Chapel of the Holy Sepulchre, entrance to the burial chamber, 1491. Photo:BramdeKlerck.

226 DeKlerck

Whatthis lastedifice lookedlikeatanygivendate, isveryhardtorecon-struct.Tobeginwith,verylittlehasremainedoftherock-cuttombthatsomethreehundredyearsafterChrist’sdeathonthecrosswasidentifiedastheonewherehewasburied.17Theso-called‘Aedicule’,whichnowstandsinthemon-umentalRotundaonthespotofthattomb,isamuchlaterconstructionbuiltin1809–1810afteritspredecessorhadbeendestroyedbyfire.Bythen,more-over,ithadalreadylivedthroughcenturiesofdestructionandrebuilding.In325–326atombbelievedtobeChrist’sburialplacewasdiscovered,andafterthattheRomanEmperorConstantinewasresponsiblefortheconstructionofahugechurchaswellasthefirstAediculeonthespotofChrist’sentombmentandresurrection.Aftermostofthecomplexhadbeendestroyedin1009byor-dersoftheEgyptianCaliphal-Hakim,itwasreconstructedlaterintheeleventhcentury.YetanotherreconstructionoftheAediculewascarriedoutin1555bytheFranciscanBonifaceofRagusa,custosoftheHolyLand.Itwasthisedificethatwas toperish in the 1808 fire.Thevariousappearancesof theAediculehaveincommonagroundplandividedintotwospaces:theso-called‘ChapeloftheAngel’,leadingtotheburialchamberitself.

IntheChristianworldmanychapelsandotheredifices,sometimescontain-ing relics taken from Jerusalem, were considered imitations of the Aediculefromatleasttheninthcenturyon.OftentheyplayedapartinEasterceremo-niescelebratingChrist’sDeathandResurrection.18 InItaly,a fewinterestinginstancesexist.In1003,forthepresbyteryoftheBenedictineabbeychurchofFruttuaria, some twenty kilometres northwest of Turin, the monk-architectGuilielmodaVolpiano(knowninEnglishasStWilliamofDijon)designedanedificedocumentedasthe‘Sepulchre’.Excavationshaverevealedthatthiswasa freestanding chapel on a circular ground plan. Something similar can befound in the old town of Aquileia in the Northern Italian region of Friuli,where, in the years around the middle of the eleventh century, a ‘Holy Se-pulchre’ was built. This edifice also has a circular plan, and a tapered roofreminiscentofwhattheearliestConstantinianAedicule in Jerusalemmighthavelookedlike;butitalsohastwelvecolumnswhichprobablyrefertothoseoftheRotundasurroundingit.Acomparablecombinationofelementscharac-

17 ForthebuildingstagesoftheHolySepulchreandthechurchsurroundingit,see:Krüger2000,pp.34–167;foranoverviewofthehistoryandvariousformsoftheAedicule,see:Briddle1999.

18 Kroesen2000;Morris2005(withpreviousbibliography).TowardstheendoftheMiddleAges,thesechapelslosetheirindependentarchitecturalformandbecomeincorporatedinchurchesaslateralchapelsorpartsoftowers.Kroesen2000,p.45,tracesthisdevelop-mentinLateGothicNorthernFrance;Schmiddunser2008,pp.21–22,mentionsevenear-lierexamplesofHolySepulchrechapelsunderchurchtowers,ineleventh-centurySpain.


terizestheAediculewhichispartofSantoStefanoinBologna:acomplexofnolessthansevenchurchesandchapels,knownas‘Jerusalem’atleastsince887.One of these edifices is the centralized, octagonal church of San SepolcrowhichwasdoubtlesslyintendedtorefertotheRotundainJerusalem.Insidethisbuildinganimaginativeconstructionbuiltafter1141,perhapsbasedonanevenearlierone,showsaremarkablecombinationofanedificereminiscentoftheAediculeand,withacrossontop,elementsofCalvary.19InGermany,andofasomewhatlaterdate,thereisthecopyoftheAediculeinEichstättinBa-varia,builtoriginallyaround1160,andrebuiltintheseventeenthcenturyinitspresentlocationintheCapuchinconventofthetown.Thecentralizedstruc-turewithslightlyprojecting,blindarchesontheexteriorevokesaspectsoftheAediculeinJerusalem.20

Achangeoccurredduringthefifteenthandearlysixteenthcenturies,whenpatronsinGermanyandItalyseemtohaveaskedformorevisualandarchaeo-logicalaccuracy.TheAediculeinalateralchapeloftheChurchofStAnneinAugsburg,builtin1507–08,isamoreorlesshalf-sizereconstructionoftheSep-ulchreinJerusalem.ProbablyduetothelimitedspaceinthechapelofStAnne,theinteriorofthisvariantlackstheChapeloftheAngel.InItaly,thealreadymentionedSacroMonteofSanVivaldoinTuscanyboastsafreestandingimita-tionoftheAedicule(datedtobefore1516,perhapsasearlyas1509),completewithaChapeloftheAngel.Here,theburialchamberitselfisplacedwithinacentralizedstructurewithblindarchesonhalf-columnsattheexterior.Inside,inarectangularspacecoveredwithabohemianvault,aterracottastatueofChristliesinasarcophagus.21

Alreadyfourorfivedecadesearlierandinanentirelydifferent,Renaissance-humanistcontextahighlyinterestingAediculehadbeenbuiltintheso-calledCappellaRucellaiinFlorence.Today,thischapelremainstheonlyconsecratedpart of the former church of San Pancrazio, originally a medieval structurewhichisnowamuseumdedicatedtothetwentieth-centuryTuscansculptorMarino Marini. Together with the completion of the façade of the nearbychurchofSantaMariaNovella(completedin1470),therenovationofPalazzoRucellai(ca.1460),andtheconstructionoftheLoggiaRucellai(ca.1466),thechapelistheresultofthecollaborationofthearchitect,LeonBattistaAlberti

19 Morris2005,pp.158–59(Fruttuaria),pp.159–61(Aquileia),p.124(Bologna).Foramono-graphicstudyofthecomplexofSantoStefanoatBologna,seealsoOusterhout1981.

20 Briddle1999,p.31.21 Briddle1999,p.31(Augsburg),pp.31–34(SanVivaldo).ForSanVivaldo,seee.g.:Gerusa-

lemmeSanVivaldo2006.

228 DeKlerck

(1404–72)andhispatron,GiovannidiPaoloRucellai(1403–81).ThiswealthyFlorentinemerchantcommissionedittobehisownburialplace.

The design of the chapel has been universally attributed to Alberti eversinceVasari in the 1550editionofhis Vite connected the learnedarchitect’sname with the project (Fig. 9.8).22 The interior of the barrel-vaulted space,whichwasoriginallyopentowardthechurch,isawonderfulexampleofAl-berti’srefinedarchitecturaldesign.Theso-calledTempietto del Santo Sepolcroiscentrallyplaced,aconstructiononarectangulargroundplanwithasemi-circularapse.Theelegant‘smalltemple’isadornedwithflutedCorinthianpi-

22 ThefirsttodiscussthechapelmonographicallyisHeydenreich1961.Formorerecentdis-cussions of the monument, see, e.g.: Borsi 1977, p. 105–12; Tavernor 1994, pp. 371–74;Paciani2006;Naujokat2008,Belluzzi2009,andthemonographpublishedontheocca-sionoftherecentextensiverestoration:Naujokat2011.

Figure9.8 Leon Battista Alberti, Tomb Aedicule, finished 1467, Florence: Rucellai Chapel. Photo:CentrumvoorKunsthistorischeDocumentatie,RadboudUniversityNijmegen.


lasterssupportinganentablaturewithaninscribedfrieze,abovewhichabandofornamentalmerlonsintheshapeofstylizedliliesisplaced.Thewallsarecovered with slabs of white marble, decorated with small circular incrusta-tionsandframeworkingreen.Theonlyopeningtotheinterioroftheedificeisthelowentranceatthefront.ALatininscriptionaboveitgivesthedateof1467inRomannumerals,andidentifiesthepatronGiovanniRucellai,whoisexplic-itlysaidtohavewantedthechapeltobelikethetombinJerusalem(...ad instar Iherosolimitani sepulchri).23

Alberti’stempietto,whichontheinsidelacksaChapeloftheAngel, hasof-tenbeencalledaratherfreevariantoftheshrineinJerusalemasitlookedatthe time. Giovanni Rucellai is known to have sent an agent to Jerusalem tostudyandtakemeasurementsoftheSepulchre.Inalettertohismotherthemerchantwritesthathehadsent‘atechnicianandassistants’totheHolyLand,tobringhim‘therightdesignandmeasurementsoftheHolySepulchre’,be-causeitwashisintentionto‘havebuiltonesimilartoit[a quella simiglianza]hereinourchapelwhichatthemomentIamhavingconstructedintheChurchofSanPancrazio’.24WeknowofatleastoneotherinstanceinwhichapatronsentanagenttotheHolyLandtogatherinformationonworksofarchitecture.Tobeabletoerectachurchad similitudinem s. Jerosolimitane ecclesie(‘similartothechurchinJerusalem’),theeleventh-centuryBishopMeinwerkofPader-bornsentAbbotWinoofHelmershausentoJerusalemtostudytheRotundaandbringbackmensuras eiusdem ecclesie et s. sepulgri(‘themeasurementsofthatchurchandoftheHolySepulchre’).25Still,thechurchbuiltinPaderborn–supposedlyonthebasisofAbbotWino’sinformation–andconsecratedin

23 ‘IOHANNES RVCELLARIVS PAVLI F VTINDESALVTEM SVAM PRECARETVR VNDE OMNIVMCVMCHRISTOFACTAEXTRESVRECTIOSACELLVMHOCADI[N]STARIHEROSOLIMITANISEPVLCHRIFACIVNDVMCVRAVITMCCCCLXVII’.Formoreonthisandtheotherinscrip-tions,see:Sperling1989.

24 ´[...]vidoavvisocomeierifiniidifarelaspedizioneinTerrasanta,avendocolàinviatiduelegniatuttemiespeseconingegnereetuomini,acciòmipiglinoilgiustodisegnoemis-uradelSantoSeplocrodiNostroSignoreGiesùCristo,echecollamaggiorceleritàglisaràpossibileinquaritorninoemeleportino,perchèiopossaadempirealmiodesiderioconfarneedificareunoaquellasimiglianzaquinellanostracappella,chenuovamentefofab-bricarenellachiesadiS.Pancrazionostracura,qualecomevoisapeteèabuonporto,nonmancandovialtroperrenderlaperfettacheilmodellodicosìriccoepreziosotesoro.Venehovolutodarequestoavviso,sapendoquantasia invoi,comepureregnainme, ladevozioneversoqueisantiluoghi’.Theundatedletter(keptinFlorence,BibliotecaNazio-nale) has come down to us in an eighteenth-century copy only, see Giovanni Rucellai1960–61,vol.1,p.136,181n.1.

25 Krautheimer1942,p.4.

230 DeKlerck

1036, is one of those examples of reproductions in medieval architecture inwhichaccuracyremains limitedtoaselectionofessential features– in thisparticularcasemerelyacentralizedgroundplanreferringtotheRotunda.26

More than four centuries later, Giovanni Rucellai had something else inmind.AsforthedegreeofaccuracyoftheinformationhisdelegatesgatheredintheHolyLand,wegropeinthedark,andithasbeensuggestedthatinfactAlberti,ratherthanlookingtoJerusalem,lookedtoEarlyChristianbuildingsinFlorenceandRomeforinspiration.27Butstill,thetempiettoinSanPancrazioshowsunmistakableallusionstocharacteristicsoftheJerusalemAedicule.Forinstance,thebasicformhastherectangulargroundplanandapsidalnicheoftheoriginal,andthearticulationoftheexterioroftheprototype,withblindarchesonhalfcolumnsisreflectedinAlberti’spilasterssupportinganentabla-tureonthesidewalls.ThelowentranceechoestheoneoftheburialchamberinJerusalem,justasthecircularlantern-likeaediculeontopissimilartothestructureon the roofof the fifteenth-century ‘original’.Although themonu-mentinFlorenceismuchsmaller,itsproportionsfollowthoseoftheshrineinJerusalem.Thus,Alberti’sdesignturnsouttobeastylized,harmoniouslyclas-sical adaptation of the original. In his 1961 study of the monument, LudwigHeydenreichsuggeststhatthiswayoftreatingarchitecturalessentialsandpro-portionsshouldnotsomuchbeconsideredaRenaissancevariantofthemedi-evalpracticeoftheimitationofarchitecture.RatheritseemsthatAlbertididnotinthefirstplacesetouttopresentafaithfulrenderingoftheedificeasitlookedlikearoundthemiddleofthefifteenthcentury.Hisisan‘ideal’,Renais-sanceimageoftheoriginalasitwasimaginedtohavebeeninEarlyChristian,i.e.LateAntique,times.28Itisnocoincidencethathechoosesthegreenandwhite marble incrustation referring to aTuscan tradition in architecture, ofwhichsome instances, like theFlorentineBaptistery,werebelieved tobeofAntiqueorigin.

26 TheoriginalchurchwaslocatedinwhatisnowtheBusdorfconventinPaderborn.Exca-vationshavemadeclearthatitwasanoctagonalstructureonacircularbase,providedwithfourprotrudingrectangularchapels.Itlackedsupportstodividetheinterior:Kraut-heimer1942,p.4,Fig.1b.

27 Borsi1977,p.106,mentionsafewchurcheswhichthemselveshavebeenbasedonaspectsoftheHolySepulchreinJerusalem,suchasSantaCostanzaandSantoStefanoRotondoinRome.Thegreenandwhitemarbleincrustationrefersto‘proto-Renaissance’architectureinTuscanylikeSanMiniatoalMonteandtheBaptisteryofFlorence.

28 Heydenreich1961,pp.222–25.Seealso:Paciani2006,esp.pp.372–73.


‘Realism’ on the Sacro Monte

TheChapeloftheHolySepulchreontheSacroMonteofVaralloisfullyinte-gratedinalargerarchitecturalcomplex.Itdoesnothaveanarticulate,separateexterior,letaloneonethatreferstotheJerusalemAedicule.Thechapel’sinte-rior,however,reflectstheAedicule’stworooms:the‘ChapeloftheAngel’onasemicirculargroundplan,andabarrel-vaultedburialchamberonarectangu-larone.HowevermuchAlberti’sidealizing,humanistconvictionsdifferfromthehigh-pitchedemotionalismexpressedbytheSacroMontedecorations,thebasicideainthefifteenthandearlysixteenthcenturieswas,inaway,compa-rable.Forbothmonumentsaimatbringingthesacredclosertotheindividualdevout by means of a ‘realistic’ reproduction. Obviously, there is the formaldifference,connectedtoanoriginalfunctionandtheoriginalpublic,betweenrealismintheRenaissancesenseofaratherdetached,idealizingreconstruc-tionontheonehand,andalesssophisticatedbutatthesametimemuchmoretangiblereproductionontheother.Apparently,however,bothAlbertiinFlor-enceandtheFranciscansinVarallovaluedarecreationofChrist’stombasitwasbelievedtohavelookedintheearlydaysofChristianity–beitinanideal-izedarchaeologicalsenseinSanPancrazio,orbeitontheSacroMonte,byin-cluding the protagonist, or protagonists, of the biblical event. For here, notonlyisthefigureofChristpresentintheformofaverylifelikesculpture,butthereisalsoastatueofMaryMagdalenekneelinginanicheintheChapeloftheAngel.

ThepresenceoftheMagdalenebringstomindEasterplaysinwhichmanyare-creationoftheHolySepulchreplayedapartduringtheMiddleAgesandthe Early Modern Period.29 Frequently, the emptiness of the tomb receivedspecificattentionintheseplays,asitindicatedChrist’striumphovermortality.Thisaspect isemphasizedalso inGiovanniRucellai’schapel: theprominentinscription on the frieze literally quotes St Mark from the Vulgate: YHESVMQVERITISNAZARENEMCRVCIFIXVMSURREXITNONESTHICECCELOCVSVBIPOSVERVNTEVM(‘yeseekJesusofNazareth,whowascrucified:heisrisen;heisnothere:beholdtheplacewheretheylaidhim’:Mark16:6).AccordingtotheEvangelist,itwaswiththesewordsthatanangelgreetedtheThreeMaryswhohadcometothegravetoanointChrist’sbodywhichwasnotthereanymore.

Indeed, like inmanyreproductionsof theHolySepulchre, thecatafalqueinsideRucellai’sAediculeisempty.AtVarallo,however,Christ’sbodyhasbeen

29 Interestingly,atVarallo,theMagdaleneisdepictedasshecametoChrist’sgraveonEasterMorning,asyetunawareoftheresurrectionoftheSaviour.Forthisplaywithdramaticirony,see:Hood1979,esp.p.301.

232 DeKlerck

madepresent:heisnotonlyvisiblebutalsophysicallytangible,invitingthepilgrimtocontemplatethedeathoftheSaviour.30Life-sizedsculpturesofthedeceasedChristhadbecome increasinglypopular inEuropesince,amongstothers, thirteenth-century Franciscans in Italy and the Modern DevotionMovementinNorthernEuropeinthefourteenthandfifteenthcenturiesbegantomakeapointofamoreemotional,personalizedreligiousexperience.31Infifteenth-century Italy,Emilianartists suchasGuidoMazzoni fromModena(1450–1518),andtheBologneseNiccolòdell’Arca(ca.1435–94)madehighlyex-pressive terracotta groups of the Lamentation. Fifteenth-century PiedmontalsosawanincreaseinproductionoflifesizewoodenstatuesofthedeceasedChrist.32

ThepresenceofsuchanimageinthechapeloftheHolySepulchreinVar-allo,confrontsthedevoutbeholderinadirectandemphaticwaywiththees-senceofthehumansufferingoftheSaviour.ItwasexactlythisaspectthatwascentraltothepilgrimagetotheSacroMonteofVarallo,asweknowfromtwosixteenth-centuryguidebookstothesanctuary.Theyreflectatypeofdevotioninwhichimagination,emotionalparticipationandidentificationareessentialfactors.Oneofthoseguidesisa22pagebookletentitledQuesti sono li Misteri che sono sopra el Monte de Varalle,publishedinMilanbyGottardodaPontein1514.33Inrhymingverse,itoffersadescriptionofthechapelsoftheSacroMon-teandtheepisodesdepictedinthem.TheversesnarratingChrist’ssepulchreare exemplary for the way in which the text directs the pilgrim in what heshouldsee,thinkandfeel,emphasizingthesimilarityofthechapeltotheHolySepulchre:

QuivicontemplaoanimadevotaEltosignorquamortoriposatoQuividipiantoognunsisepercotaSolammirarillocoasomigliato

30 Theglasscase,inwhichthewoodensculptureisplaced,isalateraddition.31 Seee.g.:Schmiddunser2008,esp.pp.37–70.32 ForthiskindofsculptureinEmilia,seee.g.:Verdon1978;Emozioniinterracotta 2009.For

PiemontandLombardy,seee.g.:TraGoticoeRinascimento 2001,pp.86–87,112–13;Legnisacrieproziosi2005,pp.92–93.Duringthesixteenthandseventeenthcenturies,imagesofthedeceasedChristbecameespeciallypopularinFranceandSpain;see:Martin1997;Schmiddunser2008,whichisconcernedmostlywithSpanishyacentesandthesculptorGregorioFernández(1575–1636).

33 For a facsimile and discussion of the guide, see: Stefani Perrone 1987. A second guide,Francesco Sesalli’s Descrittione del Sacro Monte in Varallo in Valsesia, was published inNovarain1566.See:Hood1984,pp.299–302.


ElluocoscurotalisipernotaSimilsepulcromarmoreintagliatoDalataachristodoiAngelistanoLunlacoronaelaltroigiodiinmano.34

[There,odevoutsoul,youcontemplateyourLordwhohasbeendeposedhere,thereeachchastiseshimselfwithgriefuponmerelyseeingtheplacewhichresemblestheplacewhereHepassedthenight,likethesepulchrecutinmarble.AtChrist’ssidetherearetwoangels,oneholdingthecrown,theotherthenails.]

Thiswayofimmersingthedevout,bothmentallyandphysically,insacredsto-riesandplacesistypicalofdevotionalpracticesastheyemergedduringthefirstdecadesofthesixteenthcenturyinNorthernItalyinthecontextoftheCatholic Reformation. Later in the century, Charles Borromeo was an expo-nentpar excellence ofthismovementwhichinthemeantimehadevolvedintotheCounter-Reformation.ThisdevotionalbackgroundwasexactlythereasonthatStCharlesappreciatedVarallo’sSacroMontesohighly,andwhy,inlaterpaintings,hecametobedepictedasbeingpresentinChrist’stomb,mourningforhisdeceasedRedeemer.Asifhehimselfwerethere,insidetheHolySepul-chre,inJerusalem.

Bibliography

Barbero,Amilcare,Atlante dei sacri monti, calvari e complessi devozionali europei,Novara2001.

Belluzzi,Amedeo, ‘LacappellaRucellaie il tempiettodelSantoSepolcro’, in:Leon Battista Alberti. Architetture e committenti,ed.byArturoCalzonaetal.,Florence2009,pp.103–34.

Biddle,Martin,The Tomb of Christ,Stroud1999.Carlo e Federico. La luce dei Borromeo nella Milano spagnola,ed.byPaoloBiscottini,

Milan2005.

34 StefaniPerrone1987,pp.31–32.

234 DeKlerck

Brizio,AnnaMariaandStefaniaStefaniPerrone,Libro dei misteri. Progetto di planifica-zione urbanistica, architettonica e figurativa del Sacro Monte di Varallo in Valsesia (1565–1569),Bologna1974.

Borsi,Franco,Leon Battista Alberti. Complete Edition,Oxford1977.Butler,Samuel,Ex voto. An Account of the Sacro Monte or New Jerusalem at Varallo Sesia

with some Notice of Tabacchetti’s Remaining Work at the Sanctuary of Crea,London1888.

Carlo Borromeo e l’opera della “grande riforma”. Cultura, religione e arti del governo nella Milano del pieno Cinquecento,ed.byFrancoBuzziandDaniloZardin,Milan1997.

CarverMcCurrach,Catherine,‘“Renovatio”Reconsidered:RichardKrautheimerandtheIconographyofArchitecture’,Gesta50,no.1(2011),pp.41–69.

Emozioni in terracotta. Guido Mazzoni, Antonio Begarelli; sculture del Rinascimento emil-iano,exhib.cat.,edbyGiorgioBonsantiandFrancescaPiccinini,Modena:ForoBoario2009.

La Gerusalemme di San Vivaldo. Guida alla visita del museo e alla scoperta del territorio,ed.byRosannaCaterinaProtoPisani,Florence2006.

Giovanni Rucellai ed il suo Zibaldone, Studies of the Warburg Institute 24, ed. byAlessandroPerosa,2vols,London1960–61.

Giussano,GiovanniPietro,Vita di S. Carlo Borromeo, prete cardinale del titolo di Santa Prassede, arcivescovo di Milano,Rome1610.

Heydenreich,Ludwig,‘DieCappellaRucellaivonSanPancrazioinFlorenz’,in:De artibus opuscula XL. Essays in Honor of Erwin Panofsky,ed.byMillardMeiss,NewYorkNY1961,pp.219–29.

Hood,William,‘TheSacroMonteofVarallo.RenaissanceArtandPopularDevotion’,in:Monasticism and the Arts,ed.byTimothyVerdon,SyracuseNY1984,pp.291–310.

Klerck, Bram de, The Brothers Campi: Images and Devotion. Religious Painting in Sixteenth-Century Lombardy,Amsterdam1999.

––––––,‘MontisacriinItaliaeinEuropa’,Incontri. Rivista europea di studi italiani24,no.2(2009),pp.195–206.

Krautheimer,Richard,‘Introductiontoan“IconographyofMediaevalArchitecture”’,Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes5(1942),pp.1–33.

––––––,Ausgewählte Aufsätze zur Europäischen Kunstgeschichte,Cologne1988.Kroesen,JustinE.A.,The Sepulchrum Domini through the Ages. Its Form and Function,

Leuven2000.Krüger,Jürgen,Die Grabeskirche zu Jerusalem. Geschichte, Gestalt, Bedeutung,Regensburg

2000.Kubler,George, ‘SacredMountainsinEuropeandAmerica’, in:Christianity and the

Renaissance. Image and Religous Imagination in the Quattrocento,ed.byTimothyVerdonandJohnHenderson,SyracuseNY1990,pp.418–25.


Kühnel,Bianca,‘VirtualPilgrimagestoRealPlaces:theHolyLandscapes’,in:Imagining Jerusalem in the Medieval West,ed.byLucyDonkinandHannaVorholt,Oxford2012,pp.243–64.

Legni sacri e preziosi. Scultura lignea in Valtellina e Valchiavenna tra Gotico e Rinascimento,exhib.cat.,Sondrio:Museovaltellinesedistoriaed’arte,CiniselloBalsamo2005.

Martin,Michel,La statuaire de la Mise en Tombeau du Christ des XVe et XVIe siècles en Europe occidentale,Paris1997.

Morisi,A[nna],voce‘Caimi,Bernardino’,in:Dizionario biografico degli Italiani,Rome1960-,vol.16,pp.347–49.

Morris,Colin,The Sepulchre of Christ and the Medieval West,Oxfordetc.2005.Naujokat,Anke,Ad instar iherosolimitani sepulchri. Gestalt und Bedeutung des Florentiner

Heiliggrabtempietto von L. B. Alberti,Aachen2008.––––––,Non est hic. Leon Battista Albertis Tempietto in der Cappella Rucellai,Aachen,

Berlin,andBrussels2011.Nieuwenhuis,Willebrord,Dichter bij de hemel in Italië. Een reis langs de heilige bergen

in Italië,Amsterdam2006.Ousterhout,Robert,‘TheChurchofSantoStefano.A“Jerusalem”inBologna’,Gesta20,

no.2(1981),pp.311–21.––––––,‘ArchitectureasRelicandtheConstructionofSanctity.TheStonesoftheHoly

Sepulchre’,Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians62,no.1(2003),pp.4–23.Paciani,Riccardo, ‘LaCappellaRucellaiinSanPancrazio’,in:Leon Battista Alberti e

l’architettura,exhib.cat.,ed.byMassimoBulgarelli,Mantua:CasadelMantegna,CiniselloBalsamo2006,pp.368–73.

Rüdiger,Michael,Nachbauten des Heiligen Grabes in Jerusalem in der Zeit von Gegen-reformation und Barock. Ein Beitrag zur Kultgeschichte architektonischer Devo tio-nalkopien,Regensburg2003.

Il sacello della Santa Casa. Storia e devozione,ed.byFlorianoGrimaldi,Loreto[1991].Schenkluhn,Wolfgang, ‘Richard Krautheimers Begründung einer mittelalterlicher

Architekturikonographie’, in: Ikonographie und Ikonologie mittelalterlicher Architektur,ed.byWolfgangSchenkluhn,Halle1999,pp.31–42.

Schmiddunser, Agathe, Körper der Passionen. Die lebensgroße Liegefigur des toten Christus vom Mittelalter bis zum spanischen Yacente des Frühbarock,Regensburg2008.

Siew,Tsafra,‘RepresentationsofJerusaleminChristian-EuropeanMapsfromthe6thtothe16thCenturies.AComparativeToolforReadingtheMessageofaMapinitsCulturalContext’[2008]http://academic.research.microsoft.com/Author/35335822/tsafra-siew(accessedAugust2014).

Sperling,Christine,‘LeonBattistaAlberti’sInscriptionsontheHolySepulchreintheCappellaRucellai,SanPancrazio,Florence’,Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes52(1989),pp.221–28.

236 DeKlerck

StefaniPerrone,Stefania,Questi sono li Misteri che sono sopra el Monte de Varalle (in una ‘Guida’ poeticadel 1514),Borgosesia1987.

Tavernor,Robert,‘GiovanniRucellaieilsuocomplessoarchitettonicoaFirenze’,in:Leon Battista Alberti,exhib.cat.,ed.byJosephRyckwertetal.,Mantua:PalazzodelTe,Milan1994,pp.368–77.

Tra Gotico e Rinascimento. Scultura in Piemonte,exhib.cat.,Turin:Museocivicod’arteanticaemodernaePalazzoMadama2001.

Vannini,Guido,‘SanVivaldoelasuadocumentazionemateriale.Lineamentidiunaricercaarcheologica’,in:La Gerusalemme di San Vivaldo e i sacri monti in Europa,ed.bySergioGensini,Pisa1989,pp.241–70.

Verdon,Timothy,The Art of Guido Mazzoni,NewYorkNY1978.Zanzi,LuigiandPaoloZanzi,eds,Gerusalemme nelle Alpi. Per un atlante dei Sacri Monti

prealpini,Milan2002.

237TheOverdeterminationOfTheHeavenlyJerusalem

Chapter10

The Overdetermination of the Heavenly Jerusalem Contemporary Windows by Gérard Garouste and Jean-Michel Alberola

Daan Van Speybroeck

Atthebeginningof1990s,theDutchstained-glassartisanEugèneLaudy(1921–1995)realizedawindowrepresentingtheHeavenlyJerusalemfortheDomini-cusChurchinNijmegen.Thewindowispartofacycleoftenwindowsinthechurch’snave:fivescenesfromtheOldTestamentonthenorthside,andfivewindowsonthesouthsidewithscenesfromtheNewTestament,allmadebyLaudy.Hisassignmentwasdescribedverycarefullybythechurch.1Thebiblicalscenesthatweretobedepictedinthewindowsononesidehadtocorrespondwiththoseintheopposingwindows.So,forexample,thewindowoppositetheHeavenlyJerusalemshowsMoseswhenheisshownthePromisedLand.

LaudyclearlyaccentuatedtheHeavenlyJerusaleminthiswindow:thecitydescendsfromheavenwithitstwelvegatesguardedbytwelveangels,andisacolourfulensemblethatcontrastssharplywiththemainlygreyishbackground– the world into which this city descends. In short, it is as described in theApocalypseortheBookofRevelation.Attheendofthatbook,theHeavenlyJerusalemismentioned(Rev.21.2):‘AndI,John,sawtheholycity,newJerusa-lem,comingdownfromGodoutofheaven’.

Then follows a description of the city, where the city’s brilliance is com-paredtotheglitterofpreciousjewels,withtwelvegatesinitshighwall,eachwithanangelandbearingthenameofoneofthetwelvetribesofIsrael.InthecentreoftheHeavenlyJerusalemstandsthethroneofGodandtheLamb,radi-atinglight.

Asastained-glassartisanLaudycomplieswithhiscommission,anddesignsanimageoftheHeavenlyJerusalemthatwillfunctionwithinthelocalchurchcommunity. However, the artists Gérard Garouste and Jean-Michel Alberolatranslatethecommissionintothelanguageoftheirownoeuvres.Insodoing,theydonotmerelyillustrate,butrealizetruecontemporaryworksofartwithall thecharacteristic featuresthereof.Thisessay,whichexploresrepresenta-tions of the Heavenly Jerusalem in various windows, starts with Laudy’s

1 Hogema1998,pp.2–3;Laudy2004;KoolenandVanRaaij1997.

© DaanVanSpeybroeck,2014 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_012This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.



238 VanSpeybroeck

exampleinordertocontrasthisratherconventionalapproachwiththetotallydifferentartisticconsiderationsoftheFrenchartistsGérardGarousteinTalantand Jean-Michel Aberola in Nevers, whose windows will be described morecomprehensivelyinthefollowing.

Concerns with Regard to the Heavenly Jerusalem

In his window Laudy showed the city as it has descended on earth with itsgates,angelsandflowingspring,but,unlikethecityinRevelation,ithastheshapeofacross.ThisreferstotheHeavenlyJerusalemastheembodimentofthechurchofChrist,asprofessedbytheecclesiasticalauthority.2Laudycom-pliedwiththeiconographicandtheologicaltradition,withoutquestioningorproblematizingthefactthateffectivelythechurchprematurelyappropriatesthe‘paradiseattheendoftimes’withthisimage.

Whenweexaminethissomewhatrandomlychosenexamplemoreclosely,weseethattheHeavenlyJerusalemcomestouswithaseriesofproblems.

Theproblemthatimmediatelypresentsitselfiswhyopposingwindowsinachurchshouldhavetocorrespond?ThereasonisthattheOldandNewTesta-mentcanbecontrastedwitheachotherthatway,therebyestablishinganin-equality,ahierarchy.Inthepositioningofthewindows,inwhichlightplaysanimportantrole,theoldtestamentaryscenesarelocatedonthedarknorthside.Theircontent isonlyexplained,madeclear, throughtheconfrontationwiththenewtestamentarywindowsoppositethem,whicharefloodedbysunlight.Thiskindofreadingiscalled‘typology’3andcontainsafrequentlyoccurring,yetdisguisedandlatent,formofdiscriminationagainsttheJewishscriptures.ThisisessentiallywhathappensinLaudy’swindows.

Asecondproblemisthechurch’saforementionedurgetoappropriate.ByappointingitselfastheembodimentoftheHeavenlyJerusalem,itbestowsonitselfanabsolutedimension,proclaimingitselftheonetruechurchbywant-ingitsJerusalemtoreignsupreme.

Yetanotherconcernrelatestotheproblemofcommissionedart,morespe-cificallyartworkcommissionedforachurch.Nowadays, it isafactthatcon-temporarywindowswiththemessuchastheHeavenlyJerusalemaremeantforchurches,whilethechurchisoftennolongertheinstitutionthatcommis-

2 Recht 1999, esp. pp. 37 and 116; Duby 2002, esp. pp.109 and 385–88; Frye 1986, esp. pp.208–09.

3 Frye1986,pp.131–206and287.


sionsthem;itisusuallythestateoraculturalortouristagencythatpays…andthemaxim‘hewhopaysthepipercallsthetune’applieshere,too.

Havethechurchandartnotdriftedtoofarapartthesedaysfortheformertoformulateanadequateassignmentforthelatter?Or,fromtheotherperspec-tive,istheartistnottooself-willed,followinghisownlogicandpatterns?Isheable,anddoeshewanttobowtoan‘external’clientwhohashisownagendaandwhoisusuallyastrangertotheartist?

Inthiscontext,MarkusLüpertz’sdesignforthewindowsofthecathedralofNeversinFrancecomestomind.4WhenaskedtodepictGenesis,theGermanartistshowedmanasheknewhim,scarredbytherecentwarhistoryofhiscountry(whateversidepeoplehadbeenon,oneistemptedtoadd).Hisfaceisascontortedasitistormentedandheseemstoknowneitherpeacenorfaith.ThisdidnotgodownwellwithbishopMichelMoutierofNevers.HehadaskedformanbeforetheFallandthatwaswhathewantedthewindowstopresenttohisfaithful.

Yet a further concern is the word ‘Jerusalem’ itself.This name cannot beseparatedfromhistoricalevents,forexamplethepersecutionoftheJewsbytheNazisnotallthatlongago;norfromthefoundationoftheJewishstate,asrecentlyas1948,andevenmorerecently,forinstance,in1967,theSix-DayWar.Bygivingawindowthename‘Jerusalem’,onedoesnotonlyrefertothebiblicalJerusalem:thecity’spresentcomplexissuesarealsoimmediatelyevoked,is-suesweareallawareof,thatwehearofdaily,andthatare,asyet,farfromre-solved.Thisraisesthequestionwhethercontemporaryartistsarestillabletoconnecttheword‘Heavenly’with‘Jerusalem’.Thesocio-politicalsituationinJerusalem has become so corrupted and hopeless that the said elements,‘Heavenly’and ‘Jerusalem’, canno longerbe linked.At thesame time,moregenerallyspeaking,weliveinasecularizedworldinwhich‘heavenly’isincon-ceivableinitself;soitprobablydoesnotmatteranymoreifitislinkedtoJeru-salemornot.

The Heavenly Jerusalem in Stained Glass

Althoughstainedglasswindowsinchurchesaredeterminedbyvariousthings–theirfixedposition,involvementofachurchthatisnolongertheclient,andthetraditionofopposingtheOldandNewTestament–itisspecificallyinthecase of the Heavenly Jerusalem that an overdetermination takes place. The

4 Blanchet2003,pp.31–34;Blanchet2010,pp.124–29.

240 VanSpeybroeck

term‘overdetermination’isderivedfrompsychoanalysis5andhererepresentsthefactthatanartworkisdeterminedbymanyfactorsthatarenotnecessarilyconsciouslyexperiencedbyeithertheartistortheaudience.Sowhileproduc-ingawindowisacomplexprocessinitself,atthesametimeitisdirectedbyamultitudeofdivergentforcesthathaveapartinitsrealization.Asaresult,thefinalworkisdeterminedbyamixofalliances–consciousandunconscious–eachinfluencingacomponentpartofthework.AlthoughtheHeavenlyJerusa-lemisseldommentioned,expectedordemandedexplicitlyinacommissiontodepicttheApocalypseinastainedglasswindow,thereisusuallyonewindowdepictingthatspecifictheme.TheHeavenlyJerusalemisasubjectthattheart-istmaychoosetoincludeinhisinterpretationoftheApocalypse.Ifhedoeschooseit,thisnewtestamentarythemeinmostcasesleadstotheconvention-alconfrontationwiththeOldTestament.OnecouldaskifitisappropriateinourtimetoignoreJerusalem’scurrentsituation,evenifnothingintheassign-mentrefersto itexplicitly. Jerusalemjoinedwith ‘Heavenly’ intensifiesboththeoldtestamentaryandthecontemporary:eventhoughthepeopletherewillnotstopfightingeachother,thiscitybearsthenameofpeaceandcannotcon-tinuetodosowithoutconsequenceswhenitisbeingrepresentedinart.

Thiskindofoverdetermination,andallitscontradictions,bringsustothecoreofvisualart–todepictthe‘unimaginable’.Dowenottouchuponthees-sence of visual art with this problematic situation?6 Is the entire (western)visual art not based on capturing the contradictory in one single image: oncreatinga ‘both–and’ situation,therebytranscendingthelogicalorder.Justthinkofthedepictionofthemother-virginandthe‘sonofgod’,orbeingGodandman.WassuchacontradictoryperspectivenotthedrivebehindLüpertz’swindowsforthecathedralofNevers:depictingmanasarepulsivewarcriminalandsimultaneouslyasdefencelessvictim,scarredbythosewarcrimes?Andthis,placedinreligiouscontext,showscontemporary,post-warmankindandincorporatesmanfrombeforetheFall–theimagebishopMoutierexpected?7Inshort,oneandtheother.

HeavenlyJerusalemwindowsareinevitablyconfrontedwithsuchoverde-termination,whichisfascinatingfromanartisticpointofview,andveryinter-esting and inspiring for contemporary artists. In other words, stained glasswindows,whichhavecometobeseenascraftratherthanart,andtherefore

5 Theconceptof‘overdetermination’hasvariouscognatemeanings.HereIusethetermasdefinedbyLaplancheandPontalis1981,pp.467–69.

6 Pontévia1984,p.36ff.7 Blanchet2003,pp.31–34.


slightlystuffyandmusty,could,iftheysucceedinshapinganddepictingtheunimaginable,returntotheartisticstage.

Afterthisgeneral,rathertheoreticalandabstractformulationoftheprob-lem,inordertofulfilthepromiseinthesubtitle,twowindowsinwhichartists choosetheHeavenlyJerusalemastheirsubjectwillbediscussed.

Itmustbestressedthattheterm‘artist’isemphasizeddeliberatelyhereincontrastto‘artisan’.Stainedglass‘artisans’aremorerigid,moredocileandusu-allyhaveafixediconographicalarsenalonwhichtheyfallbackeasily,andalltoosoon,inordertorealizethethemethathasbeencommissioned.8Princi-pally,theymakeuseoftheirknowledgeasartisansandrelyontheimagerythatisavailable,oracertainabstractionofit.Thatisnottosaythatintheircaseitisamatterof ‘yourwishisourcommand’: indeed,thereisaformofprofes-sionalprideanddignityineverycraft.Yet,inNijmegenLaudydidnotgetbe-yondillustratingaratherconventionaltypologicalandiconographicalschemethathadlittletodowiththeunimaginableandundepictable.Artists,ontheotherhand,reformulatetheirassignment–oratanyrateweexpectthemto–inordertoexecuteitinlinewiththeiroeuvreandtheirtime.9Thatiswhatwesaw inLüpertz’swindows inNevers,afterall.Whenchoosinganartist forastainedglasscommissionitisthereforeimportanttoknowtheartist’soeuvreandjudgewhetheritfitstheassignment.

Gerárd Garouste in Talant

In1995,GérardGarouste(b. 1946)wasassignedthetaskofdesigningall thewindows,forty-sixintotal,oftheearlyGothicchurchofTalant,afashionablesuburb of Dijon in France; a project that was finished in 1997.10 He is a re-nowned French artist, with no specific knowledge of, or experience with,stainedglass.Hisdesigns–onceaccepted–wererealizedbyAtelierPierre-AlainParot,inclosecooperationwiththeartisthimself.11

BecausethechurchwasdedicatedtotheNativityofMary,theassignmentstipulatedthatthiswasthethemetobeexpressedinthechoir.Inthechurch’s

8 Lagier2000,pp.6–9;Loire2011,pp.181–92;implicitlyaboutthecontemporarybattleoverwindowsbetweenstainedglassglaziersandartists,see:GeronandMoxhet2001.

9 Thisisdemonstratedinaseriesofartisticstainedglassprojects,describedin:Lumièrescontemporaines 2005, including the windows of Carole Benzaken in Varennes Jarcy,GérardGarousteinTalant,MartialRaysseinParis,SarkisinAzay-sur-CherandCarmeloZagariinFaymoreau.

10 Ladey1997;GarousteàTalant2006;VanSpeybroeck1998,pp.79–127;Rinuy1998,pp.2–5.11 Parot2011,pp.251–58;Parot2004,pp.73–75;Bansept1999,pp.92–95.

242 VanSpeybroeck

nave(intheclerestoryandintheaisles)themesfromtheOldandNewTesta-mentwere tobedepicted.Elaboratingon the figureofMary, theartistmir-roredwomenfromtheOldTestamentandtheNewTestament in theaisles,whilemainlyshowingscenesfromGenesisinthehighnaveonthenorthsideandscenesfromRevelationonthesouthside.

Fromthestart, theartistwasaverse to the traditionaldivisionof themesbetweenthesunnysideandthedarksidethatwasimposeduponhim.12Thewindow’s commissioners would not go back on this decision, however, be-cause they subscribed expressly to the tradition of the typological readingprevalentinstainedglasswindowsinchurches.GaroustesawthetypologicalrequirementasaformofexplicitdiscriminationagainsttheJewishheritage,adiscriminationthatheregardedasoneofthefactorsleadingtothepersecu-tionoftheJews,withwhichhewantednoassociation:nordidhewanttocon-tribute to its return. He was particularly sensitive to this because he wasmarriedtoaJewishwomanandhadtwosonswithherwhowerethereforeJew-ish.Againstthisbackground,helearnedHebrewandpreferredtospeakoftheTanakh(as thecollectionof theTorah, theProphetsandanumberofWrit-ings).Moreover,a recentlypublishedautobiography13 shows thatGarouste’sresistancetothedivisionthatwasforceduponhimhad–ifonecanputitthisway–deeperandverypersonalroots.Duringthewar,hisfatherhadsystem-atically sold goods that had been seized from Jews. On the other hand, theartistcooperatedcloselywithPèreLouisLadey,averyamiablevillagepriestand member of the diocesan commission that formulated the assignment.Both men got along extremely well, which resulted in great loyalty on bothsides.

So despite his disagreement with the typological requirements, the artistcontinuedwiththeassignment,expecting,eventrusting,thathecouldnegatetheinherentcoercionandthediscriminatorydimensionbyvirtueofthecon-tentofhiswindowsandtheirpositioninginrelationtoeachother.HetriedtodothisbyallowingwomenfromtheBibletoconfronteachotherinopposingwindows,makingsurethatthosefromtheNewTestamentwerenotseenasexplainingthosefromtheOld,norappear inanywaytobestronger. Inthiscoupledconfrontation,thepresenceofeachwasequallypowerful.

His‘strategy’–discussedtoobrieflyhere–ismostclearlyvisibleinthecon-frontationbetweenthewindowsofthesacrificialaltars,whichinterruptthesequenceofwomen in theaisles.Herewesee that thesacrificesof theOld

12 Garouste Entretiens avec Louis Ladey 1989; also: Garouste à Talant 2006, pp. 85–97;GarousteandLyon2002,pp.25–30.

13 GarousteandPerrignon2009.


Testamentareanimals,whileintheNewTestamenthumansacrifices–eventhough they are martyrs – are depicted. With this interruption, the artistobligedthevisitortoreflectforamoment,thusforcefullyraisingthequestionofwhois‘prefigured’.

ThisstrategyindicatesawidercontextenvisionedbyGarouste:hewantedhiswindowstourgethefaithfultothink.Tohim,hisassignmenttookplaceagainstabackground–eventhoughhedidnotdepictitdirectly,becausethatwouldbemerelyillustrating–oftheobediencethatisenforcedamongchil-drenfromtheirfirstHolyCommunion,throughcatechesisandthroughlisten-ingtothepriest.HecontrastedthistraditionwiththebarmitzvahofJewishboys:ontheirown,intherabbi’splace,facingallpresent,theyhavetoreadoutatextandexplainit.Withhiswindows–intheirfiguration,theircomposition,andtheirinterrelationships–heinvitedCatholicstothinkforthemselvesandto interpret independently thebiblicalscenes thatwererepresented.14ThushiswindowsinTalant,inpartthroughtheadditionoftextsinHebrew,LatinandFrench,stimulatethespectatortodomorethanviewthewindows,butalsotolookupthetextsandsoreturntothesourcewithanopenmind.

ThisisthecontextwithinwhichGarouste’sJerusalemwindowissituatedinthechurchofTalant(Fig.10.1).Itis–fromthechoir–thefirstwindowinthenorthernaisle.WeseethetwelvesonsofJacob,whoformthetwelvegatesofthecityofJerusalem,asitwere.ThisisareferencetoboththeOldandtheNewTestament:Ezekiel(48.31)andRevelation.Intheforegroundoneofthefiguresisfullyvisible–Judah–becausehegavehisnametotheJewishpeople.Depict-inghimthiswayalsomakesitlookasifhewearstheJewishtribesashiscrown,thusshowingJesustobeadescendantfromthesetribesandmakinghim,fromtheperspectiveofJewishhistory,somewhatlessoverpowering.Garoustede-pictsJudahasthegatetothetetragrammatonhere–thefourlettersusedtorefertoGodinHebrew.

However,thelinktoJerusalem–herewithnoreferencewhatsoevertotheHeavenly–isweak.IsitnotrathertheCatholiccommissionerwhowantstoseetheheavenlycityinthewindowandwhoprojectshisinterpretationontoit.15However,thewindowismirroredbyadifferent,opposingwindow,depict-inganothercity:Capernaum–asisinscribedonthewindow(Fig.10.2).Again,onenoticesthatallisnotrightonthesideoftheNewTestament:thecityisengulfedinflames–cursedbyJesus,wholivedtherebutcouldnotgetanyonetolistentohiswords.Consequently,thecityisseizedbyafirethatmayormaynotbecleansing.ButwithCapernaumwedonot findourselvesonly in the

14 GarousteandPerrignon2009,p.100.15 Ladey1997,p.14.

244 VanSpeybroeck

Figure10.1 Gérard Garouste, Jerusalemwindow, 1995-1997, stained glass realized by Atelier Pierre-Alain Parot. Talant:égliseNotreDamedeTalant.

Figure10.2 Gérard Garouste, Capernaumwindow, 1995-1997, stained glass realized by Atelier Pierre-Alain Parot. Talant:égliseNotreDamedeTalant.

New Testament, because the city is already also mentioned in the Tanakh.Thus,Garousteinvitesthevisitorstothechurchtothinkforthemselves,ratherthanconfirmingtheirbeliefs.HedoessobymixinguptheNewandtheOldTestament,asitwere,makingitimpossibletogobacktooneofthetwobooksandplacingthemonthisorthatsideofthechurch:weareconfrontedwithacomplexityofreferencesandconnections.

Inorder toenhanceour interpretationofGarouste’swindows,weshouldlookattwowindowsthatareinthesamebayintheclerestoryas‘Jerusalem’and‘Capernaum’:‘TheBurningBush’ononeside,and‘TheThroneofLight’ontheother.Godisthefocusofbothwindows;hisnameappearsintheflamesofthebush(asdepictedinthewindow)andthereisareferencetohimonthe


backofhisthrone.ThisThroneofLightbringsusbacktoRevelation,albeittothe beginning rather than the end (Rev. 4.2). Garouste shows us the emptythronewithonlyoneinscription:‘Godisone’.Inthe‘checkerboard’inthelow-erpartofthewindow,wecanseeareferencetothefloorofthetempleinJeru-salem. Both the throne and the temple are empty – we can project variousmeaningsontothem.Here,Garoustespeaksofanabsence‘toexperiencethepresenceofwhatimmaterialityabsencepossesses’.16Withoutbecomingveryconcrete,wecould(withabitofgoodwill)thinkofcontrastswhenconsideringthecheckerboard:ofalltheblack-whitesituationsinJerusalem–rangingfromgoodandevil,andwarandpeace,oraboutdayandnightandoldandnew,theearthlyandtheheavenly,thelatteremphasizedbythethronedepictedaboveit.

However,allthisdoesnotbringJerusalemitself,today’scity,totheforefront.Istheconcretenessofpresent-day,troublesomeJerusalemnot ‘missed’here,perhapsevenavoided?Ontheotherhand,theartistmighthavebeensome-whatreluctantbecausedepictingaHeavenlyJerusalemcouldbetoomuchofan invitation to see the window as ‘the church’, surrounded by its light andglory.ThuswecouldsaythatGarouste,readingRevelation,didnotreachthepassage about the Heavenly Jerusalem, and therefore lets his visual readingendearlier–althoughhedoesletthethemeshinethroughinthewindowwithTheThroneofLight.

EventhoughinGarouste’swindowsinTalant(theHeavenly)Jerusalemisnotthemaintheme,themessageofthewindowsispowerful.Andperhapsitisprecisely this ‘absence’ making room for a much more essential immaterial‘presence’thattheartistwasafter.Inanycase,visitingthechurchofTalantandbeingcaughtinthelightfallingthroughthewindows,breaksourworldopentotheheavenly.Feastingoureyes,weareencouragedtoread,tothink,andtointerpret.Inthischurch,Garoustetakesustothesourceofthewords,to‘theword as a creative agent’17 if not in order to accomplish, at least to evoke abirth,orasitwere,arebirth.

Jean-Michel Alberola in Nevers

ItisastrangefactthatoneofthewindowsofthenortherntranseptarmofthecathedralofNeversinFrance,designedbytheFrench-AlgerianartistJean-Mi-

16 GarousteàTalant2006,p.72.17 GarousteàTalant2006,p.30.

246 VanSpeybroeck

chelAlberola(b.1953),iscalled‘HeavenlyJerusalem’,althoughnooneseemstorememberwherethenamecamefrom(Fig.10.3).

Moregenerallyspeaking,thereareotherstrangeaspectstothisartassign-ment.18Initially,in1989,AlberolawascommissionedtodesignaseriesofsevenwindowsdepictingRevelation19inthesoutherntranseptarmoftheaforemen-tionedcathedral.Afterhehadfinishedthisproject–whichdoesnotshowaHeavenlyJerusalembutdoes,inasense,includetheThroneofLight–hewasgivenasecondassignmentofrealizingthesamethemeinsixwindowsinthenorthernarmofthetransept.ThefactthathewasallowedtotakeRevelationagainanddepictitasecondtimeinthesamechurch,andthissoclosetothe

18 Blanchet 1998, pp. 40–8; Alberola. Entretien avec Christine Blanchet 2010; Labar 2010;Alberola1999–2000,p.30.

19 VanSpeybroeck1998,pp.60–91;Bansept1999.ThewindowswerecommisionedbytheDélégations aux Arts Plastiques (DAP), the programme was written by the Association Regards sur la Cathédrale de NeverswithhelpfromtheCommission diocésaine d’art sacré.

Figure10.3 Jean-Michel Alberola, HeavenlyJerusalemwindow, also called Babylonwindow, stained glass realized by Atelier Duchemin. Nevers:CathédraleSaint-Cyr-et-Sainte-JuliettedeNevers.


other,existentwindows,iscurious.Whatisevenmorecuriouswasthatthesewindowsweretobeplacedonthenorthside.

Inthemeantime,stainedglassartisanPierreDenfert,withwhomAlberolahadbeenworking,haddiedandtheartistwentinsearchofanewstudio.Hechose Atelier Duchemin20, a renowned stained glass studio in Paris, passeddownfromfathertodaughter,thatspecializedinworkingwithartistsandwasveryopentowhatmanyartisanssawasthestrangeexpectationsanddemandsofartistswhowereusuallynotfamiliarwithstainedglass.Consequently,ow-ingbothtotheexperiencetheartisthadgainedwithstainedglassandthenewcollaboration,thissecondseriesofwindowshasadifferentcharacter.WhereAlberolausedquotationsfromaclassicmedievalwindow–theTree of JessefromtheKunibertusChurchinCologne21–forhiswindowsinthesouthernarm,hemainlyquotesfrommedievalilluminationsofvariousApocalypsesinthenorthernarm.TheHeavenlyJerusalemwindowmentionedaboveshouldbeplacedinthiscontext(Fig.10.3).

The position of this window in the entire wall surface may also causesurprise.The Heavenly Jerusalem window is the lowest window of the four,while,withitsheavenliness,wewouldsoonerexpectitatthetop(Fig.10.4).Thatisnotnecessarilysostrange,however,consideringthattheHeavenlyJeru-salemdescendsonearth,thereforetothelowestlevel.

Besides ‘Heavenly Jerusalem’, thiswindowis strangelyenoughsometimescalledthe‘Babylon’window,referringtotheexactopposite–thedoomedcityofimpuresoulsthatistobedestroyed.Againwearefacedwiththequestionofwherethenamecamefrom.Fromthechurch?Fromthediocesancommissionthatgottoformulatetheassignmentbuttowhichtheartistdidnotalwayslis-tenfaithfullyandattentively?Fromtheministerialinstitutionsthatfollowedandguidedtheworkclosely(andpaidforit)?Orisittheresultofthevisualquotationsthatweredetectedthrougharthistoricalandtheologicalinterpre-tationsofthewindow?Inanycase,itseemstoevokethetwoincompatibles–theheavenlyandthedemonic–simultaneously.

Theartisthimselfdoesnotseemtoaimforasinglename.Hisapproachre-sultsinasyntheticimagethatcanbe–howevercontradictory–oneandtheother.Whichbringsustotheheartofartagain.Afterall,suchasyntheticap-proachmeansthatthewindowsinthewallformawhole,andthatthevariousthemes from Revelation do not follow each other consecutively in the wall.Garouste’sworkalreadyshowedcertainleapsinthestory,withbreaksandin-terruptions.WithAlberola,theapproachisevenmoreradical:varioussubjects

20 Blanchet2010,idem,pp.135–38;AteliersDuchemin2009.21 Fordescriptionsofthewindow,see:Grodecki1977,pp.222–24.

248 VanSpeybroeck

fromRevelationcancometogetherinonewindowbyflowingintooneanotherandmixing.ItenablestheHeavenlyJerusalemandBabylontopresentthem-selvesandtakeplaceatthesametimeinonewindow–asifAlberola,whiledesigningthewindow,eatsthebooktomakeithisandletseverythingcometogetherinsidehimself.Inthisrespect,hereferredinalecturetoapassageinRevelation(Rev.10.9–10):‘SoIwenttotheangelandaskedhimtogivemethelittlescroll.Hesaidtome,“Takeitandeatit.Itwillturnyourstomachsour,butinyourmouthitwillbeassweetashoney”. Itookthelittlescrollfromthean-gel’shandandateit.Ittastedassweetashoneyinmymouth,butwhenIhadeaten it, my stomach turned sour’.22In short, in the work of this artist, the

22 Alberola1991,pp.9–11.

Figure10.4 Jean-Michel Alberola, HeavenlyJerusalemwindow, also called Babylonwindow (bottom left), stained glass realized by Atelier Duchemin. Nevers:CathédraleSaint-Cyr-et-Sainte-JuliettedeNevers.


HeavenlyJerusalemisnolongerathemethatstandsonitsownbut,nowthatthechronologyanddichotomyhasbeenbroken,ispresentinthewholeoftheRevelationwindowinmanifoldanddiversifiedways.

Whenwereturntothewindowdiscussedhere,weseethatitiscomposedofaseriesofelements.Formallyspeaking,thereisawindowinthewindow,al-thoughnotintheusualway,whereanornamentedborderframestheheartofthewindowwiththeactualtheme.Here,whatseemstobetheheartofthewindowhasbeentiltedandshiftedtotheright,andthushasdisappearedfromthecentre.Thisisclearlyshownbythewaythissectionisborderedoffinthewholeofthewindow.Wearemoreorlessfamiliarwiththefigurativepartsofthe window. Maybe ‘familiar’ is too bold a word: they mainly call up in themindofanyonewithsomeknowledgeofarthistorystrongassociationswithilluminationsfrommedievaltexts,namelyApocalypses.Atthetopofthewin-dowthehandofGodcomesdownfromheaven.Thishandseemstothrowabuildingtowardsearth.Themovementisaccompaniedbyanangelwho,up-sidedown,intheendplacesthebuildingonearth.Althoughitisan‘actofGod’–describedintheBibleas ‘comingdownfromGodoutofheaven’(Rev.21.2and10)–itisnotacitythatisthrown,butabuilding.Duringitsfallandbeforethebuildingisputstraightagain,itpassesanotherbuildingwithseveraltow-ers.Whiletheangel is ineffectshowninanosedive,hemovesontheedgebetweentheso-calledinnerwindowandtheso-calledborder,whilethepro-portionbetweenbothpartsisfarfromcentred,asmentionedbefore.Theinnerwindowismorepeacefulor,rather,harmonicinitscompositionandreferstoCistercianwindows–withlittlecolourandtaut,stylizedgeometricorvegeta-tivepatterns.Intheinnerwindow,thebuildingsarestandingupright,straight.

Weseeasequenceofquotedimageshere.BoththeHandofGodmentionedaboveandthecitythatispassedonthewaydownarederivedfromtheApoca-lypse of Oxford.ThebuildingthatisthrownandputuprightcomesfromtheApocalypse of Valenciennesandisthesynagogue/churchofSmyrna,whilethe‘accompanying’angel–hardlyrecognizableduetotheomissionsinthewin-dow,becauseonlythefeetandhandsareexplicitlyleft–comesfromtheApoc-alypse of Trier.

Ifwelookcloser,wenoticethattheApocalypse of Oxfordandof TriershowdetailsfromthedepictionoftheFall of Babylon.AndwecanaskourselvesiftherewaseveraHeavenlyJerusalemhere,orifthereeverwillbe.SeenwithinthesyntheticapproachofAlberola’sApocalypsethereissomethingtobesaidfortheidea,however.Afterall,Smyrnaisoneofthecities,mentionedatthebeginningofRevelation,thatisjudgedfavourablybecauseofitspoverty,whichisactuallyitswealth.ThecentralplaceofthefeetinthewindowcouldbeareferencetoIsaiah52.7,where,after‘thefeetofhimthatbringethgoodtidings’

250 VanSpeybroeck

havebeenapplauded,thereismentionofthe‘ruinsofJerusalem’–pillagedbytheBabylonians–but‘redeemed’now.SoaHeavenlyJerusalemonearthafterall!

Again,thecontemporaryJerusalemwithitscomplexproblemsisfaraway.Thereisnotraceofitunlessperhaps,andyetagainwithgoodwill,inthequot-edreferencetothe‘ruinsofJerusalem’.

Overdetermination

Itispreciselyinitsoverdetermination,thatJerusalempossessesalargepoten-tialforart.Theunimaginableandtheundepictablecometogetherthere–andwhenanartistneverthelessfindsawaytodisplaytheincompatible,itformsanopeningto,evenanappealfrom,adifferentworldfromtheeverydayoneandits prevailing reality. Both Garouste and Alberola have understood this wellanduseJerusalemasasuitablehandleorforce–whichtheyletgojustaseas-ily.StickingtotheactualJerusalemwouldmeangoingwiththecurrenttrendofwhatwehearandseeaboutitinthemedia,wouldeventuallybecomeideo-logicalandpossiblyevenendupin‘politicalcorrectness’.BothartistsarenotsomuchinterestedinJerusalem.Forthemitismatter to art,itoffersperspec-tive to let something be born, to hold it up to the world.They are after thepotential that is hidden in Jerusalem – a potential that goes further than‘stretching’.Atransformationtakesplacehere(thetemptationistosay‘tran-substantiation’23,becauseoftheecclesiasticalcontextinwhichthewindowsmanifestthemselves),leadinguselsewhere,possiblytakingustoanotherwayoflivingandexisting.

TheoverdeterminationofJerusalemandtheperspectiveshiddeninit,arereinforced even further, intensified, by adding ‘Heavenly’ to it on one hand,andontheotherhandbybringingtheoverdefinitionintoachurchintheformofwindows.Thusthewindowsoftheseartiststouchuponasocialareathat(duetoadvancingsecularization)graduallyletsmorelandliefallow,namelyreligion and more specifically the presentia realis that the Catholic Churchhardlyreferstoinourtime.Thepresentia realisis,however,secularizedhere.Itis,inthewordsofGarouste,‘thepresenceofwhatimmaterialityabsencepos-sesses’24.Andjustasthewindowsfillthisemptyspiritualplace,theyalsofillan empty artistic place, presenting stained glass art, a genre in which theartisticinvestmenthadpreviouslybecomeminimal.Afterbecomingoutdated

23 Sporen1991.24 GarousteàTalant2006,p.7.


andstuffyasacraft,stainedglassartisreappearingontheartisticstagethankstoartistslikeGarousteandAlberola.25

Withtheirso-called(Heavenly)Jerusalemwindows,GarousteandAlberolaopenupnewgroundforartanddevelopit,orperhapsratherperpetuateitinawayonerarelyseesinmuseumsthesedays.Throughthis–orthroughthisget-tingoutofhandasakindofdivine‘beingthrown’–muchmoreisoffered.Itleads to that which we can actually expect of art: a moving presence and apartakingofanotherdimensionofexistenceinbringingtogetherincompati-bles.Thisisprobablyanold-fashioned,outdateddemandon,andexpectationof, art. Perhaps Garouste’s and Alberola’s art only finds a suitable home inchurchesthesedaysasalastalternativeaccommodation–sointhatsensewecan speak of a conventicle or ‘hiding church’. But the attraction of so manyculturaltouristsprobablymakesitdifficulttoexperiencewhatisofferedthere.

PerhapstheseartistsbringusthenameJerusalemasthebearerofpeace.DoesGaroustenotletsomethingimmateriallikethatbeborninTalant?DoesAlberolanotturnouttoberightwhenhesaysthatwithasuccessfulartworkwefindourselvesinsomethingthattranscendsus,allowingustojoinhiminspeakingof‘regainedpeace’26,ultimatelythatoftheHeavenlyJerusalem?

Bibliography

Alberola,Jean-Michel,Astronomie populaire,exhib.cat.,Nîmes:Carréd’Art1990.––––––,“Het lichaam van een woord”,exhib.cat.,ed.byDaanVanSpeybroeck,Nijmegen:

CommanderievanSint-Jan1991.––––––,‘Unintermédiaireentreunsacréetunpeuple’‚Ligeia, dossiers sur l’art. Art et

spiritualité,nos29–32(October1999-June2000),p.30.‘Jean-MichelAlberola.EntretienavecChristineBlanchet’,in:L’affaire des 1052 m2. Les

vitraux de la Cathédrale de Nevers,ed.byJeandeLoisy,Paris2010,pp.197–219.L’Apocalypse de Jean. Traditions exégétiques et iconographiques. IIIe-XIIIe siècles. Actes

du Colloque de la Fondation Hardt 29 février-3 mars 1976,ed.byR.Petraglioetal.,Geneva1979.

Ateliers Duchemin. Vitraux,Paris2009.Bansept,Claudine,‘Dekunstenaarendemeesterglazenier’,in:De Apocalyps volgens

Jean-Michel Alberola. De beglazing van het romaans transept van de kathedraal van Nevers,ed.byDaanVanSpeybroeck,Nijmegen1999, pp.92–5.

25 Lumièrescontemporaines2005.26 Alberola1990,p.90.

252 VanSpeybroeck

Blanchet,Christine,Les vitraux contemporains de la cathédrale de Nevers,Master‘mé-moire’HistoryofArt,UniversitédeProvence,Aix-en-Provence1998.

––––––,‘Geschiedenisvaneenopdracht’,in:De Apocalyps volgens Jean-Michel Alberola. De beglazing van het romaans transept van de kathedraal van Nevers,ed.byDaanVanSpeybroeck,Nijmegen1999, pp.11–24.

––––––,‘Hetglas-in-loodprojectvanMarkusLüpertzindekathedraalvanNevers:hetverhaalvaneengemistedialoog’,Desipientia 10,no.2(September2003),pp.31–4.

––––––,‘Lesprémicesdugrandchantier(1981–1988)’,in:L’affaire des 1052 m2. Les vitraux de la Cathédrale de Nevers,ed.byJeandeLoisy,Paris2010,pp.114–30.

Carozzi,ClaudeandHuguetteTaviani-Carozzi,La fin des temps. Terreurs et prophéties au Moyen Âge,Paris1999.

Charbonneaux,Anne-MarieandNorbertHillaire,Architectures de lumières. Vitraux d’artistes 1975–2000,Paris2000.

Dagbert,Anne,Gérard Garouste,Paris1996.Duby,Georges,L’art et la société. Moyen Âge – XXe siècle,Paris2002.Frye,Nothrop,De Grote Code. De bijbel en de literatuur,Nijmegen1986.Garouste,GérardenHortenseLyon,Le Grand Apiculteur,Paris2002.Garouste,GérardandJudithPerrignon,L’intranquille. Autoportrait d’un fils, d’un peintre,

d’un fou,Paris2009.Garouste à Talant,ed.byHortenseLyon,Paris2006.‘Gérard Garouste, réflexion sur le travail de peintre. Entretiens avec Louis Ladey’,

Chroniques d’art sacré,no.19(1989),pp.2–7.Geron,Jean-MarieandAlbertMoxhet,Le vitrail contemporain. «Comme un chant de

lumière»,Paris2001.Grodecki,Louis,Le vitrail roman,Fribourg1977.Hogema,A.A.,‘Voorwoord’,in:Het verhaal van de ramen,Nijmegen1998,pp.2–3.Hoogveld,Carine,Glas in lood in Nederland 1917–1968,TheHague1989.Koolen, Anthonie and Ernst van Raaij, Glas-in-lood tegen het licht gehouden.

Glazenierskunst in Nijmegen,Nijmegen1997.Labar,Morgan, Les vitraux de Jean-Michel Alberola pour la Cathédrale de Nevers. Entre

médiévalisme et postmodernisme. L’imagerie catholique populaire à l’épreuve,Master‘mémoire’HistoryofArt,UniversitéParisIPanthéon-Sorbonne,Paris2010.

Ladey,LouisandMauriceLadey,Les vitraux de l’Église Notre-Dame de Talant. Motifs et Thèmes,Talant1997.

Lagier,Jean-François,‘LevitraildecréationàlafinduXXesiècle’,Chroniques d’art sacré: Le vitrail aujourd’hui,no.62(2000),pp.6–9.

Laplanche,Jean,andJean-BertrandPontalis,Vocabulaire de la Psychanalyse,Paris1981.Laudy, Daniëlle, Eugène Laudy 1921–1995, MA thesis Literary and Cultural Studies,

RadboudUniversityNijmegen2004.

http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22Anthonie+Koolen%22

http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22Ernst+van+Raaij%22


Loire,Bruno,‘L’artisteetlemaîtreverrier’in:Le vitrail monumental. Créations de 1980 à 2010,DossierdelaCommissionroyaledesMonuments,SitesetFouilles,no.14,Liège2011,pp.181–92.

Lumières contemporaines. Vitraux du XXIe siècle et architecture sacrée,Chartres2005.Parot,Pierre-Alain,‘Lesvitrauxcontemporainsdel’églisedeTalant,Côte-d’Or’,[monu-

mental] Revue scientifique et technique des monument historiques. Dossier Vitrail,no.1(2004),pp.73–5.

––––––,‘Levitrail:«Œuvred’artparnature,immeublepardestination»’,in:Le vitrail monumental. Créations de 1980 à 2010, Dossier de la Commission royale desMonuments,SitesetFouilles,no.14,Liège2011,pp.251–58.

Pontévia,Jean-Marie,La peinture, masque et miroir. Écrits sur l’art et pensées détachées,Bordeaux1984.

Recht,Roland, Le croire et le voir. L’art des cathédrales XII-XV siècle,Paris1999.Rinuy,Paul-Louis, ‘GérardGarouste:unethéologiedelumière’, Chroniques d’art sacré:

Propos sur Garouste,no.53(1998),pp.2–5.VanSpeybroeck,Daan,‘Eigenwijzenvanreëleaanwezigheid.Theoretischbelichtalsook

praktischuiteengezetinhetbeeldendwerkvanJean-MichelAlberola’,in:Kunst en religie,Sporen van reële aanwezigheid,ed.byDaanVanSpeybroecketal.,Baarn1991,pp.126–45.

––––––,‘Apocalyptischeramen’,in:De Apocalyps volgens Jean-Michel Alberola. De beglaz-ing van het romaans transept van de kathedraal van Nevers, ed. by Daan VanSpeybroeck,Nijmegen1999,pp.60–91.

––––––,‘Hetwoordisbeeldgeworden–glas-in-loodramenvanGérardGarousteenPierreAlainParot’,in:De Tranen van God. Genese van het beeld in werken van Joseph Semah en Gérard Garouste, ed. by Daan Van Speybroeck, Nijmegen 1998, pp.79–127.

254 VanLeeuwen

Chapter11

‘You want to take us to Jerusalem …’ Medinat Weimar: A Second Jerusalem in Contemporary Visual Arts and Klezmer Songs

Rudie van Leeuwen

On22June2008arallyandaconferencewereorganizedintheGermancityofWeimarcelebratingtheestablishmentofanewmovement:MedinatWeimar.According to an information sheet, which was handed out on-site and hadbeenpostedearlierontheinternet,thepurposeoftherallywastointroducethe movement to the general public, while the conference was meant ‘tobroadenthecollectiveelementtothemovement’.1TherallytookplaceontheTheaterplatzfrom11amtill1pm,andtheaudiencewasencouragedtoactivelyparticipateinthemeetingandtobringhomemadesignsandbanners.Itwasstatedthat‘Emptyplacardsandmarkerswillalsobeavailablesoanyonecanaddtheirownslogans’.Totheuntrainedeyeitseemedyetanotheranti-fascistdemonstration.Standardmaximsweredisplayed,suchas‘RettetunsvordenNazis’, though more cryptic expressions and demands were also presented,such as ‘Auch die Diaspora braucht ein Zuhause’ and ‘Koschere BratwurstJetzt!’(Fig.11.1).

SincetheaveragegentilewouldnotbefamiliarwiththeHebrewwordfor‘state’,Medīnat (מדינת),theultimategoalofthegatheringremainedprobablyuncleartomostofthegeneralpublicandtheguilelesspassers-by.Neverthelessboth the movement’s logo, a map of the German federal state ofThuringia(Thüringen) emblazoned with a Menorah, the Jewish seven-branched lampstand,anditsadage‘IYThuringia’,clearlyhintedatitsultimateobjective:thefoundationof JewishState in thisBundesland,withWeimaras itscapital. Itseemsratherunheymish, thoughperhapsnotinapposite,tofoundaNewJeru-saleminWeimar,thebirthplaceofthefirstconstitutionalGermanRepublic,whichmadewayforNazismand,onecouldargue,ultimatelyledtotheHolo-caust.

1 German:http://www.flickr.com/photos/maarav/2577057417/;Englishhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/maarav/2577057959/(accessedon1May2012).

© RudievanLeeuwen,2014 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_013This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.



255‘youWantToTakeUsToJerusalem…’

Weimar as a New Jerusalem

Priortothepublicmeetingawebsite(medinatweimar.org)waslaunchedbytheartistRonenEidelmanonwhichthirteenprincipleswereposted,thefirstbeing: ‘MedinatWeimarwishestoestablishaJewishstateinThuringia,Ger-many,withthecityofWeimarasitscapital’.2Thesecondprincipalstatesthat‘MedinatWeimarisasolutiontoovercomethepresentcrisesandhealJewishtrauma,Germanguilt,EastMediterraneanconflicts,EastGermantroublesandmanyotherproblemsintheworld’.Whilethebeginningofthethirdprincipleplacestheseaimsinanartisticperspective,statingthat‘MedinatWeimarwillutilizetheautonomyofartanditsinstitutions’,thusfixingitsnationalistaspi-rationswithintherealmoftheidealistic,thesecondpartpropagatesusing‘thetools of political campaigning and activism to convince the citizens of Ger-

2 http://medinatweimar.org/(accessedon1May2012).

Figure11.1 Ronen Eidelman, Protester at the Medinat Weimar Rally with a sign demanding kosher bratwurst. http://www.flickr.com/photos/maarav/2614191106/©Courtesybytheartist.

256 VanLeeuwen

many,theEuropeanUnion,theworld[’]sJewishcommunitiesandtheinterna-tionalcommunitytosupportthefoundingofthestate’.

Canwetakeboththesemissionstatementsequallyserious?Thepoliticalrelativismofthesemaximsisfurtherenhancedbypointfourwhichexplicitlystatesthatoneis‘Jewishnotthroughbloodorancestrybutthroughsimilarityinmind,culture,commonhistoryandunityoffate’.Italsobecomesclearthat‘Jewsfromnon-Europeanorigin,Palestinians[,]Arabs(MuslimandChristianalike)andallotherpartiesaffectedbytheactivitiesofthestateofIsraelareconsideredtoshareacommonfate’;andthat,accordingthentothefifthproc-lamation,even‘peoplefromanybackgroundandnationality’arewelcometobecomeactivesupportersofthecause’.

Theninaflurryofterminology,unbridledambitiontakestheupperhandanditisboldlyclaimedthat ‘MedinatWeimarcanplayanimportantroleinhealinganti-Semitism,Schuldabwehrantisemitismus(guilt-defensivenessan-ti-Semitism),problematicexpressionsofPhilosemitismus,bothGermanandJewishselfhatredandtheongoingconflictbetweentheJewish,ArabandMus-lim communities’.The term Schuldabwehrantisemitismus was introduced byTheodorAdorno(1903–1969)foranewkindofsecondaryanti-Semitism,con-sistingofprejudicesthataredirectedagainstJews,oftendisguisedasacom-parisonof theIsraelipolicytothatofNaziGermany,whichfunctionedasapsychologicaldefencemechanismforrepressingfeelingsofguilt.3

Thisenumerationoffinalsolutionsisfollowedbyanimportantprovisode-claring that though Medinat Weimar does not want to replace the ‘currentstateofIsrael’[!]itaddressesthefailureoftheZioniststateandwantstocreatea (proper) safe haven.4 More universal beliefs are put forward in the eighthandninthprinciplesthatinsistontherightof‘self-redetermination’and‘self-redefinition’,andthetraversingofallideological,culturalandreligioustrench-eswithintheIsraeliandGermandiscourse.Thetenthstatement focusesonthereasonsforthechoiceofThuringiaastheplaceforthefoundationofthisJewishstate,suchas: ‘itsimportantplaceinGermanculture,historyofanti-SemitismandGermannationalism,legacyofJewishlifeandcultureaswellasitsshrinkingpopulationandaweakeconomy’.

3 SeeforSchuldabwehrantisemitismus and‘sekundärenAnti-Semitismus’(atermdevelopedbyPeterSchönbach):Adorno1955/2003,pp.121–324;Schönbach1961,passim;Adorno1962/1998,p.362;andforamodernanalysis:Rensmann2004,p.123ff.;Uhrheimer2006,pp.100,113;Quindeau2007,pp.157–64;Heni2008,pp.132–42;SeeforSchuldabwehrantisemitismus inGermany:Werner2007.

4 ‘MedinatWeimarisnotareplacementofthecurrentstateofIsraelbutadifferentJewishstate’.


TheeleventhprincipleformulatesinaroundaboutwaythepoliticalscopeofMedinatWeimar,asbeing‘asoberandanti-fascistsolutiontomanyprob-lemsthatthestateofThuringiaisfacingasaformerEastGermanprovince’.Thisfallacyendswithacatchphrase:‘AJewishstateisnotapunishmentbutaprize’, which is followed with the almost religious promise of redemption‘throughThuringia’forallGermanpeople,aswellastheprospectofthelibera-tionfromtheghostsofthepast.Elucidatingthisunexpectedspiritualnotion,thepurposeofMedinatWeimarispinpointedwithinthecontemporarydis-course.Accordingtoitstwelfthprincipleitsetsitself‘toquestionandexploretheriseofnationalismversustherealityofglobalizationandmigrationandthere-emergenceofreligionasaculturalidentifierversusthesecularglobal-izationofcapital’.

Thethirteenthprinciple,finally,offerssomekindofsolacefortherestlessreader,reducingtheseverityofearlierassertions,byemphasizingthat‘Medi-natWeimarisnotarealisticmovement,butratheronethatseekstoagitateand provoke by taking anti-Semitic, neo-liberal, nationalistic, Zionist argu-mentstotheirunreasonableconclusionsillustratingtheirinnerlogicandab-surdity’. Thus, by purposefully undermining its very foundations, MedinatWeimar attempts to refute at first hand any fundamentalist adherence.Thepreambleofthislastkeypointadditionallywhittlesdownthelegitimacyoftheunderlyingarguments,thoughitsstratagemreaffirmsthebeliefinthepoliticalobjectivesofthemovementanditscommitmenttoprovocationasameanstoanend.

Provocative intentions also become clear from Eidelman’s other art proj-ects,suchasComing out in Lublin, Poland, whichwasmadeaspartofthe2010Open City Festival – a festival of art in public spaces, curated by KrzysztofZwirblis.InandaroundtheoldcitycentreofLublininPoland,Eidelmanpost-ed life-sizereproductionsofoldblackandwhitephotographsportrayingallkindsof Jewishpeople– ‘Young,old,modern,religious,politicalactivist…’5–whohadlivedinthosestreetsandhousesfromthelatenineteenthcenturyuntilWorldWarII.Inwhathecalled‘amodestgesture’,Eidelmanwantedtoreturnthepeopleinthephotostotheplacefromwhichtheyhadbeentaken.NearthephotosappeareddifferentquestionsinPolishwhichwereclearlyin-tended to shock the reader, even if on a subliminal level, questions such as

5 ‘…Bundist,Zionist,nihilists,bourgeois,Hasidic,yeshivastudent,communist,whoknows?’,citationfromintroductorytext‘ComingoutinLublin,Poland’byRonenEidelman,uploaded30Juneon:roneneidelman.com/?p=569; http://www.rebelart.net/diary/ronen-eidelman-com ing-out-in-lublin-polen/005363/

258 VanLeeuwen

‘Doesyourfamilyhideagreatmystery/secret?’,‘Doesyourgrandmothermum-bleinhersleepinaforeigntongue?’,and‘WhatkindofJewareyou?’6

Moreshockandawehasbeenavowedly engendered inanearlierartisticventure, called Magav in Weimar, that Eidelman clandestinely undertook in2008inThuringia’sculturalcapital,andwhichisdirectlyrelatedtotheMedi-nat Weimar project.Theartistintendedtobringanarmouredjeepofthe IsraeliborderpoliceintothestreetsofWeimar,butcouldnotdosoforobviousrea-sons,andthereforebuiltatwo-dimensionallifesizecutoutinstead,likethefakepolicecarsthatdeterdriversfromspeeding.Thismock-upjeepwassubse-quentlymountedonthesideofshoppingcartandEidelmanwentoutonpa-trol,orrather,wasescortedbythisout-of-placevehicle.

ThejeepwaspushedfrombehindbyanassistantofwhomonlythelowerlegsarevisibleinthreeshortYouTubevideoclipsthatwereuploadedin2008:Magav in front of Goethe House,Magav escorting me on the streets of Weimar,Magav in front of Bauhaus-Universität, Weimar.7 When Eidelman parked thejeepneartotheGauforum,abuildingcomplexbuiltforthenational-socialistpartyadministration,hewasaskedbyafemaleofficialtokindlymoveit.Herrationalewasnotsomuchthattheartisthadnopermission,butmoreimpor-tantlysince‘theGauforumhassuchanuglyhistorythattheyneedtowatchoutaboutwhatmessagesarebeingsent’.Reflectingonwhatshesaid,Eidelmannoted the irony by remarking that: ‘Almost anywhere in Germany where IwouldparkthejeepIwouldbeparkingonuglyhistory’.8

InaninterviewbyNatMullerforthesixthissueofVisual Foreign Correspon-dents, in de Balie Amsterdam, on the 15th April 2008, Eidelman elucidatedsomeaspectsofhisMagav in Weimarproject.

Magav(theIsraeliborderpolice)haveawell-deservedreputationforvio-lenttreatmentofminoritiesandunderprivilegedpeople,bothinIsraelandthePalestinianterritories. Inadditiontothedailyharassmentsonthe streets, during demonstrations and direct actions, while exercising

6 Czy w twojej rodzinie jest wielka tajemnica; Czy twoja babcia mamrocze w obcym języku przez sen?; Jakim Żydem jesteś?

7 Wemaysafelyassumethattheuploader(amhaaretz)isEidelmanhimself.ThetermAm ha’aretzהארץi עםmeans‘thepeopleoftheLand’.‘MagavinfrontofBauhaus-Universität,Weimar’;‘MagavescortingmeonthestreetsofWeimar’,‘MagavinfrontofGoetheHouse’,video clips uploaded on January 29, 31and February 1, 2008, last accessed 1 May, 2012,YouTube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l45bWwBInLs; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_w4pDqWLi7M;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xnT3ieL6Zw.

8 Muller2008,s.p.


their democratic rights, demonstrators get beaten, tear-gassed, shot atwithliveandrubberbullets,andarrestedbytheseforces,whosemissionshouldbetoprotectcitizensnottoattackthem.Imyselfexperiencedallthese“treatments”overtheyearsofbeingactiveinanti-occupationandanti-capitalistdirectactionsgroups.SowhenIseethempatrollingthestreets I don’t feel safe for myself, or my neighbours. Still, I decided tobring the Israeli border police toWeimar due to the unusual situationwhichiscomprisedoftheuniquerelationshipbetweenIsraelandGer-many, the catastrophic past and because of the place Israel’s securityforcestakeupwithinthediscourseaboutsecurityandmilitarism.

Eidelman acknowledges that even though not everyone would have beenawareofthesignificanceofthejeep–orforthatmatterbefamiliarwiththesituationinIsrael/Palestine–allshouldhaverecognizedthatitisamilitarizedjeep.

Andwhileafakejeepdoesmoreorlessthesamejobandprovokesdiscus-sionjustasmuchaswouldarealone,themock-upvehiclehas,moreover,aspecificconnotationsince‘thetwo-dimensionalfaçadebarley[barely]stand-ingonitswoodenframe,isverymuchlikethefakefaçadesofWeimar’shis-toricbuilding’.9OnhissiteEidelmanwrotethathisaimwastoexaminewhatthis action would bring about and how the presence of a militarized policeforce from Israel in a small quiet East German town would be perceived:‘Woulditproducefear,antagonism,discomfortormaybeunderstandingandsympathy?ThesiteoftheStarofDavidisneverneutralonthestreetsofGer-many,allthemoresowhenitispaintedonanarmoredjeep’.10

DespitethefactthatMedinatWeimarisnotarealpoliticalmovement, ithadseveralofficesinEurope,intheformofimpermanentinstallationswhichwerepartofsmallerandlargerexhibitions.A‘temporarySwedishheadquar-ters’wasestablishedatTegen2galleryinStockholminOctober2009,thuscon-stitutingtheshowpieceforasoloexhibition(Fig.11.2).AccordingtoEidelmantheKingdomofSweden–thethenpresidentoftheEuropeanUnion–couldplay‘aroleinforwardingthevisionofthemovementandcanhelppersuade

9 ‘[...] The façades, historical manipulations, and the cultural cloning wish to suggestauthenticity,buttheydohavetobereallyconvincingtofulfilltheirpurposeandtocreateinWeimartheromanticDisneylandoftheeast.Inthesameway,securitycanworkasafaçade.Itdoesnotreallyhavetobeconvincing,youdon’tneedexpensivesystems,trainedpersonnel,intelligence,andexpertise.Whatisneededisapretenceofsecurity,feelingofsecurity,theknowingofitsbeingandthestatementthatitispresent’.

10 http://ronen.dvarim.com/(accessedon1May2012).

http://ronen.dvarim.com/

260 VanLeeuwen

theEuropeancommunityaswellastheirGermanneighborsin[sic]thevital-ityoftheidea’.11

Earlierthatyear,inJune,aMa’achaz(outpost;handhold,foothold;strong-hold)waserectedatthe53rdVeniceBiennale;inrealityacardboardcut-outor“two-dimensionalscalemodel”ofabuilding.OnEidelmanspersonalwebsitewecanreadthatduetoinsufficientfinancialresources‘MedinatWeimarde-cidedinthespiritofZionismtodeferrealityandsettlewithasymbolicPavil-ion at Giardini’.12 That the Medinat Weimar project is still ongoing provesEidelman’scontributiontotherecentHeimatkundeexhibition,whichwasheldattheJewishMuseuminBerlinfromSeptember16th2011tillJanuary29th2012.Inthisexhibition,giventhesubtitle30 Künstler blicken auf Deutschland,works

11 http://www.flickr.com/photos/maarav/4995479917/(accessedon1May2012).12 http://roneneidelman.com/?p=304,posted24June2009:‘Ratherthanadopttothereality

thattheJewishstateinThuringiadoesnotexistandthemovementforthestatehasnofinancialability to renta spaceandholdadecentexhibition (like thePalestinianandgypsyparticipations)…’

Figure11.2 Ronen Eidelman, OfficeofMedinatWeimar, October 2009.installationatTegen2Gallery,Stockholm©Courtesybytheartist.


hadbeengatheredthatalladdresskeyaspectsof theirperceptionsof “Ger-many”and“inGermany”.13

Eidelman’sBerlininstallationconsisted,ashadbeenthecaseinStockholm,ofatablewithpaperworkandamaponthewall(Fig.11.3).Onlynowthetablehasacquiredmorethecharacterofadesk,ofaproperofficespace,insteadofanexhibitionstand.Thetwowhitetableflagshavebeenreplacedbyonebigwhiteflaghangingfromthewall.Theaccessorieshavebeenextendedtoin-cludewritingutensils,acylindricalmoney-box,andametalbowlfilledwithbuttonbadgesbearingsloganslike‘It’ssafenow/Youcancomeback’and‘IYThuringia’.Most importantly, the installationwasmademoreinteractive,bymeansofaTVscreenmountedabovethedesk,showingapropagandafilm.14

Thereisonlyonecomponentthatactuallyreturnsfromthepreviousinstal-lation:apictureofthecomedianMelBrooks.Itisnolongerhangingbetween

13 See: Kampmeyer 2011; http://www.jmberlin.de/heimatkunde/ausstellung/en/ausstellungsinfo.php(accessedon1May2012).

14 PicturesoftheofficeintheJewishMuseuminBerlinwerepostedontheMedinatWeimarwebsiteon19September2011.

Figure11.3 Ronen Eidelman, OfficeofMedinatWeimarattheHeimatkunde exhibition,2011/2012. installationatJüdischesMuseum,Berlin©Courtesybytheartist.

262 VanLeeuwen

otherfamous(morelong-faced)Jewsonthewall,asinStockholm,butstandsonadeskinaframeasiftoshowaportraitofalovedone.Inthisway,theseri-ousnessoftheentourageseemsdismissedwithawink.Whatisremarkableincomparisontothiscomic relief andearlierverbalizationsoftheprojectisthemoreseriousandunswervingpoliticaltoneofastatementthatwaspublishedintheexhibitioncatalogue,andaswellonthewebsite:

TheMedinatWeimarmovementnotonlysupportstheeffortsofyoungJewishIsraelistoobtainasecondpassportfromaEuropeancountryoreventotakeonGermannationality.Italsooffersavisionofasocialuto-piathataimstostopthedeclineofThuringia’spopulationandcombatthepopularityofradicalright-wingideology.MedinatWeimardrawsonvariousideasdiscussedinconnectionwiththeZionistmovementofthelatenineteenthandearlytwentiethcenturies.15

ItiswellknownthatthousandsofIsraelisarereclaimingtheirEUcitizenshipasIsrael’ssecurityconcernsescalate;Germanpassportsareespeciallypopu-lar.16

Itseemsthat–atleastwithinthecontextofthisexhibition–MedinatWei-mar intended to generate a more serious political discussion. This also be-comesclearfromtheaudiorecordingofapaneldiscussionwith‘activistsofthecommitteeMedinatWeimar’,thattookplaceon14January2012attheJew-ishMuseuminBerlin,andwhichwasmoderatedbyCillyKugelmann,curatorof the exhibition.17 More tellingly this Podiumsgespräch was given the title‘Weimar, das künftige Jerusalem?’. Participants in the discourse were SamiKhatib,aculturalscientistandactivistinthemovement,whoisasonofaPal-estinianfatherandGermanmother,andotherrepresentativesoftheacademicworld,ProfessorLizBachhuberoftheBauhaus-UniversitätWeimar,andPro-fessorDrHanneSeitzoftheFachhochschulePotsdam.Centraltothediscus-sionwasthedistinctionbetweenexhibitionandpublicspace,betweenartandpoliticalactioncampaign.

15 SeefortheGermantext:Berlin2011,p.54;http://www.jmberlin.de/heimatkunde/kuen-stler/eidelman.php(accessedon1May2012).

16 GideonLevy, ‘Fear isdrivingIsraelis toobtain foreignpassports’,Haaretz (2 June2011);TzvikaBrot,‘GermanpassportpopularinIsrael’,Israel News (31May2011).

17 Weimar, das künftige Jerusalem? Podiumsgespräch mit Aktivisten des Komitees «Medinat Weimar», Berlin, 14 January 2012. http://www.jmberlin.de/heimatkunde/ausstellung/begleitprogramm.php#medinat(accessedon1May2012).


AsanintroductiontothetalkCillyKugelmanncomparesMedinat Weimar withasimilarartproject,theJewish Renaissance Movement in Poland( JRMiP),by the Israeli-Dutch artist Yael Bartana. The fictitious Jewish RenaissanceMovement,whichpromotesthereturnof3.3millionJewstoPoland,issimu-lated through videos, stories, and conferences.18 Bartana’s cinematographictrilogy, Mary Koszmary (Nightmare) (2007), Mur i wieża (Wall and Tower) (2009),andZamach (Assassination) (2011),waspartoftheofficialPolishcon-tributiontothe54thInternationalArtExhibitioninVeniceof2011,called…and Europe will be stunned.Accordingtheofficialwebsite‘Bartanatestsreac-tionstotheunexpectedreturnofthe‘longunseenneighbour’andrecallstheforgottenmotifofalternativelocationsforthestateofIsraelthatwereonceconsideredbyZionists,suchasUganda’.19TheFirstInternationalCongressoftheJRMiPwasheld11th-13thMay2012inBerlin.20

AquotebyBartana,whichKugelmanncitesinthetalk,isverysimilartoastatementthatBartanamadeforaGermanradiostation:‘Wirwollenzurück.Nicht nach Uganda, Argentinien, Syrien oder Madagaskar. Auch nicht nachPalästina,sondernnachEuropa,indenKontinentunsererVäterundVorväter.GanzbesondersPolenliegtunsamHerzen,dasimmernochinunserenGe-dankenundTräumenexistiert..’.21TheideaofanalternativesettlementoftheJewishstateseemstohavearevivalinpopularculture,andthefollyofitisbril-liantlydepictedina2008episodeoftheCBSsitcomThe Big Bang Theory, inwhichoneofthemaincharacters,SheldonCooper,planstowintheNobelPeacePrizebybuildinganexactreplicaofJerusalemintheMexicandesert,evenwithawailingwall‘exactlyliketheoneinJerusalem,butclosetotacostandsandcheapprescriptiondrugs’.22

Fromtheperspectiveofhistoricaljustice(Historische Gerechtigkeit),Kugel-mannreferstoHannahArendt’sopinionthatGermanyistoblameforthecon-flictintheMiddleEast,andtherefore–asthelatteroncewhimsicallyaddedinapolemic–shouldputapieceoflandatIsrael’sdisposal.23Whenaskedwhich

18 Perutz2012.AccordingtoEidelman‘TherearealotofPolishpeopleupsetbecausetheyfeelthattheydeservetheJewsmorethantheGermans’.,in:Podiumsgespräch,Berlin,14January2012.(Seeabove).

19 http://labiennale.art.pl/en/exhibition(accessedon1May2012).20 http://www.jrmip.org/(accessedon1May2012).21 Richter2010,s.p.22 The Big Bang Theory, Season1,episode12,“TheJerusalemDuality”,writtenbyChuckLorre

andBillPrady,directedbyMarkCendrowski,storylinebyJenniferGlickman&StephenEngel,andteleplaybyDaveGoetsch&StevenMolaro,aired14April2008,programcode3T66.

23 Arendt’sremarkcouldnotbetracedbyme.

264 VanLeeuwen

werethemotivationsformovingHerzl’sJewishStatetoThuringia,Eidelmanbringsuptheneedfornationalism,hispersonalexperienceasaminority(‘theother’) inWeimar,andthepresentdanger forthe first Jewishstate inIsrael,whichis,accordingtohim,notsomuchthreatenedfromoutside(byIran)asfromwithin.AndthoughEidelmandoesnotopposetheStateofIsrael,andisevenwillingtofightforit,hefullyacknowledgestheneedforaPlanB,whichintimetooktheformofMedinat Weimar.

AsasupporterofthemovementSamiKhatibrepudiatestheinterpretationofitsinherentnationalisminaliteralsensebydescribingMedinatWeimarasa‘StatenloserStaat’,‘Anti-Staat’and‘ParadoxieeinesStaates’,whileemphasiz-ingitsMessianicnotionsofapromisedland,whereallpeoplecouldliveto-getherpeacefully.24ThequestioniswhethersuchastateisstillJewish,andtowhatextentitshouldbe.MedinatWeimaristhereforecharacterizedbyKhatibasa‘StaatderStatenlosen’(State of Stateless),‘StaatderWurzellosen’(State of the rootless or uprooted),anobviousparadox,sincethesenotionsarestereo-typeswhichhavebeenascribedtoJudaisminclassicalanti-Semitism,andinadditionenableustoconsiderMedinatWeimarasaJewishexperience,thoughtheycouldeasilyfitotherpeoples.Thisphenomenoniscalled“universalsingu-larity”inmodernphilosophy.25KhatibrefersalsotoGershomScholem(1897–1982)whosaid:‘WirJudensindkeinStaatsvolk.DieanderenVölkerübrigensauchnicht’.26

Ontheotherhandandforhispart,Eidelmanclaims,ashedidinthefourthprincipleofMedinatWeimarinasomewhatplatitudinousway,thatitsinhab-itantswouldbeboundtogetherbyfate,becauseallpeopleshareacommonfuture,referringtoMartinBuber’sspeechforthetwelfthZionistCongressof1921.ButBuberhasnotonlyarguedthatapeopleisdefinedbyacommonfate,butalsothatapeopleisa“natural”community,whichhedistinguishedfroma“symbolic” community of a religious nature (i.e. church).27 It seems beyonddispute that MedinatWeimar is essentially symbolic by nature and has reli-gious(Messianic)traits.

Timeandagain,thespeakersofthePodiumgesprächdrawattentiontothedifferentiationbetweenthevirtualandtherealworldofMedinatWeimar,of-tendemarcatedbytheborderbetweenartandpolitics.LizBachhuberrightly

24 Khatib, Podiumsgespräch, Berlin, 14 January 2012. Khatib is writing a Ph.D. thesis onWalterBenjamin’smessianicMarxism.

25 Seeforuniversalsingularity,thefigurewhichcombinesthedimensionofOnewiththedimensionof‘forall’:Badiou1997,p.80.

26 Scholem1995–2000,vol.1,p.82.27 Buber1921;Baum2001,pp.32–33.


notes ‘Auch fiktionale Wirklichkeiten haben Auswirkung auf uns’.28 Kugel-mann speaks of a Diasporic Utopia and interprets Medinat Weimar – ‘EineStaatohneTerritoriumabermiteinemHymne’– foremostasanartprojectandnotasapoliticalproject.29Thisinternalconflicthadalreadyrisenpain-fullytothesurfacewhentheboardoftheBauhausUniversityhadexpresseditsconcerns,fearingthat‘thevisitors,press,theJewishcommunity,theStateofIsrael, the Palestinians and other Arab visitors and Neo-Nazis would not beabletoidentifyitasanartproject’.30

Furthermore, the question arises of what kind of population this statewouldconsistofandwhichlanguagewouldbespokeninthisDiasporic Utopia.Eidelmansaysthatthequestionisdifficulttoanswerbecause‘wedon’tknowwhowillarrive’.WithinthiscontexthementionsDanielKahn(fromDetroit)andPsoyKorolenko(fromMoscow),twomodernklezmorim(professionalJew-ishmusicians)whoalreadyliveinBerlin,toillustratethatJews(andnotonlyJews)arealreadycomingtoGermany.Bothmusiciansarethecomposersofthehymnthat isusedasa leader in thepromotionalvideoshownat theBerlinexhibitionandonthewebsite.31

Nonetheless,ProfessorHanneSeitznotesthat,althoughtheprojectbeganintherealworld,withconcreteactions(Handlungsvollzüge)suchasthepublicmanifestationandtheJeepperformance,sincethen‘nothinghashappenedinrealspace’butonlyindiscourses.Byimplication,shementionsthemultian-nualprojectofthecityofSłubfurt. Launchedin1999byMichaelKurzwelly,thisprojectbyaGerman–PolishassociationstrivesforthereunificationofFrank-furtanderOderandthePolishtownofSłubiceontheothersideoftheriver,whichusedtoformasingletownuntil1945.32Thisprojectassumedarealdi-mensionwhenthenameSłubfurt wasenteredintotheRegisterofEuropeanCityNames(RECN)in2000.SeitzwondershowMedinat Weimarprojectwillcontinuetomanifestitselfinreallife,sinceactionsareindispensableforthe

28 Bachhuber,Podiumsgespräch,Berlin,14January2012.29 Kugelmann,Podiumsgespräch, Berlin,14January2012:‘…einKunstprojektundkeinpoli-

tischesProjektindererstenLinie’.30 ‘ManhatteBedenken[…]dassBesucher,Presse,jüdischenGemeinden,derStaatIsrael,

derPalästinenserundandereArabischenBesucherundNeo-Nazi’snichtinderLageseindatProjektalsKunstzuidentifizieren’,ascitedbyKugelmanninthePodiumsgespräch,Berlin,14January2012.

31 http://www.jmberlin.de/heimatkunde/kunstwerke/en/eidelman.php; ‘MedinatWeimarPro-motionalVideo’,videoclip(uploadedbyamhaaretzon12September122011),YouTube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVGeR4r5hbk(accessedon1May2012).

32 See:Asher2012.http://www.slubfurt.net/en_start.html(accessedon1May2012).

http://www.youtube.com/user/amhaaretz

266 VanLeeuwen

creationofidentity.33Sheasksifthe music, whichhasrecentlyplayedamoreimportantrolewithinthemovement,isthepathtofollow.34Sincethisques-tionremainsunansweredinthepaneldiscussionitseemsappropriatetogointothematterhere.

Shpil zhe mir a lidele oyf YouTube?

Firstandforemost,itisimportanttonotethatthenationalanthemofMedinatWeimarissunginYiddish.ThisHighGermanlanguageofAshkenaziJewishoriginisinoftenaunifyingfactorforJewishidentity-formation,especiallyforsecularJews–notexclusivelythosewithanEastern-Europeanbackground–whodonot(wantto)derivetheirJewishnessfromreligiouscultureorZionism.Thelyrics,aswrittenbyDanielKahnandPsoyKorolenkoaresimple:‘Eynem a tog ’kh vel oyle zayn, in Eretz Thüringen arayn. Eretz Thüringen! Eretz Thüringen! Eretz Thüringen, vu bist du?’,whichtranslatesas:‘Oneday,Iwanttobeapil-grim/animmigrant,intheLandofThuringia.TheLandofThuringia!LandofThuringia,whereareyou?’35

Two things come to our attention.To begin with, there is no mention ofMedinat Weimar, the“WeimarState,” asatwisttotheWeimarRepublic.InsteadwehearofEretz Thüringen,“LandofThuringia”asinEretz Yisrael, the LandofIsrael,thebiblicalnamefortheHolyLand,whichasa concepthasbeenevokedbythefoundersoftheactualStateofIsrael.Secondly,thewordoyle standsout,which isnormallyusedfortheJewishimmigranttoPalestine/Israel.

Thesecondstanzagoes:‘Eynem a tog ’kh vel zoykhe zayn, in Eretz Thüringen arayn. ay yah-yah-ay, in Eretz Thüringen arayn!(Oneday,Iwanttobeworthytoenter/livetoseetheLandofThuringia.)Interestingly,thissecondstanzaissungasanopeningcantobyKahnenKorolenkointheYouTubeclipTheUnter-nationale greet Medinat Weimar of2009,thoughwiththeEretz Thüringen re-

33 Yael Bartana tried to actively involve outsiders in the identity-building process of theJRMiPbyintroducingmembershipcardsandrecruitingdelegatesandactiveparticipantsfortheFirstInternationalCongress.

34 Seitz,inthePodiumsgespräch: ‘DieMusikspieltjetzt,glaubich,seitneuestemmehreinRolle,alsodawillIchfragen,gehtesvielleichtindieserRichtungweiter,…dassalsoHan-dlungenpassiere’.

35 http://www.jmberlin.de/heimatkunde/kunstwerke/en/eidelman.php ‘Medinat Weimar Pro-motionalVideo’, videoclip (uploaded by amhaaretz on 12 September 2011), Youtube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVGeR4r5hbk(accessedon1May2012).

http://www.youtube.com/user/amhaaretz


fraininsteadoftheay yah-yah-ay.36Moreover,onehearsnotvu (“woo”)bist du,asinthepromotionalvideo,butvi (“wee”),whichcouldbeinterpretedasaMideastern(Polish/Galician)orSoutheastern(Ukrainian)Yiddishpronuncia-tionofthewordfor‘where’,butmustbemorelikelyunderstoodas‘how’,asin“LandofThuringia,howareyou?’,whichseemsveryappropriateforagreet-ing.37

Inthisclip,firstonehearsthetuneofTheInternational, thehymnofinter-nationalSocialism,beingplayedbyKahnonamusicboxmechanism.Thenfollowstheanthem,lustilysungbyKorolenkoandKahn,whoafterwardsgreettheCongressforaNewJewishstateinThüringen.NextalittlespeechisheldinYiddishbythetwo,whichtheyinstantlytranslateintoEnglish,Russian,andGerman,thecorebeing:‘Nor mit a nayer un frayer veymarer republik ken man shafn fun daytshland a taytsh-land, un fun eyrope a nay-eyrope’,whichtheyar-tisticallyconstruedinEnglishas:‘OnlybybuildinganewandfreeWeimarRe-publicwecantrulymakeGermanyaJewmanyandEuropeaNewrope’,whileintheGermantranslationGermanyistobemade‘einBedeut-Land’,ameaning-land,aliteraltranslationoftheYiddishwordtaytsh (meaning) + land.

ThevideosessionproceedswithamusicaltransliterationofthepoemDos naye lid (TheNewSong)byAvromReyzen(1876–1953),whichwasfirstpub-lishedin1918.38ItwastranslatedbyHeinzKahlau(1931–2012)intoGermanforaGDRfolksongbook.39WehearatrilingualperformanceinYiddish,GermanandEnglishofthetext ‘Un zol vi vayt nokh zayn di tsayt fun libe un fun sholem dokh kumen vet, tsi fri, tsi shpet di tsayt – es iz keyn kholem!’40The lines that

36 ‘UnternationalegreetMedinatWeimar’,videoclip(uploadedbyamhaaretzon26June2009), YouTube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmZHAxllchQ The video descrip-tionspeaksof:‘PsoyKorolenkoandDanikRedlickoftheTheUnternationalesendtheirgreetingtoTheMovementforaJewishStateinThuringia,Germany’.

37 Weinreich2008,vol.2,p.A499(notestop.452);Seeforvoweldifferenceinthedialects:Jacobs2005,p.30ff.,andfortheYiddishtranscriptionandtheromanizationof‘vu’:p.xvi,note2,p.302.ComparethevariationsinsongsasVu/vi bist du geven? andVi/vu iz dus gesele?

38 Reyzen1947,p.42;Reyzen1951.Seealso:ThePapersofVladimirHeifetz,1881–2001,RG1259,SeriesXVIII–Add.,folder207attheYIVOInstitute.

39 Jaldati, Rebling & Kahlau 1966. The German text was published on medinatweimar.org/2008/06/10/anthem-for-medinat-weimar,buthasnowbeenremoved.

40 Theliteraltranslationbeing:Andhowlongawaywillbethetimeofloveandpeace,butwillcometooearly,toolate,thetime–itisnotadream.

268 VanLeeuwen

KahnsingsinEnglishare:‘Themorningbreaks,theworldawakestoriseandtofacethehour.Sooneandallcomehearthecalltogloryhopeandpower’.41

InthevideodescriptiononYouTubewecanreadthat‘Punk-Cabaretmusi-cian Daniel Kahn has recommended this song as the anthem for the move-ment[ofMedinatWeimar]’.42Thishymn,oftensunginYiddishschoolsintheUnitedStates,shouldnotbeconfusedwithaworkerssong(oftheJewishLa-bour Movement) with the same name, as Eidelman probably did when hecalledit‘anoldBundfreedomsong’intheclip’sdescription.43AsanoutrototheclipKahnwantstodeclaimEretz Thüringen again,butquasi-accidentallystarts tosingEretz Yisroel, correctinghismistakepromptlywithan ‘Oh’, fol-lowedbytheproperwording,andbacked-upvocallybyKorolenko.

Music, Language and Image

IntheBerlinPodiumgesprächtheformativeprinciplesofJewishidentitywerediscussed,aswellastheideologicalbasisforMedinatWeimar,suchasthede-fence against an experienced prosecution, but also a (Non-Zionist) nationalJewishawareness,whichwasfedbythefactthatEastern-EuropeanJewryhadan important cultural denominator, namely its own language (Yiddish).Yid-dish emerged, after all, as the lingua franca of a large Jewish community inEastern Europe which renounced Zionism and sought Jewish cultural unityandautonomyinEurope.Forthisreasonitseemslogicaltochoosethemothertongue(mameloshn)of theonceprosecutedasoneof theofficial languages(besidesGermanandEnglish)forMedinat Weimar, asKahnandKorolenkodidintheirmusicaltributes.AndhowdoestheirCDThe UnternationalerelatetotheMedinatWeimar,andfirstandforemost,whatisandconcernsthisso-calledUnternationale?

LanguageandmusicappertaintotheforemostoffiveareasofJewishexpe-rience: Jewish culture and tradition.The others are: Israel (Zionism), Shoah(Holocaust),personalhistoryandlocalcultureandbackground.44Theinter-estinklezmermusicandespeciallyYiddishsongsprovidedabondingmecha-nismforJewishidentitythroughoutthetwentiethcentury.Fromthelate1970stherewasaklezmerrevivalintheUnitedStatesandEurope.SinginginYiddish

41 SeeforanotherEnglishversionbyGusTyler:Mlotek1997.42 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmZHAxllchQ(accessedon1May2012).43 Seeforthelattersong:Alter1957,pp.28–30.See:Zemtsovky2006,p.216withnote41on

pp.472–73.44 Compare:Abram1994,p.10ff.


waspropagatedintheU.S.byMichaelAlpert,AdrienneCooper,andinEuropeby Ben Zimet and Manfred Lemm, amongst many others. Although the oldguardcertainlyhasnotdisappearedfromthescene,sincethebeginningofthetwenty-firstcenturyasecondklezmerrevivalisgoingon.

This revival is characterized by a multitude of styles and backgroundsamongthemusicians,comingfromallcornersfromtheworld,butprincipallyoperatingfromGermany.Themusicalgenresrangefrompop(Fayvish),heavymetal(Gevolt),glamrock(Yiddish Princess),disco(Jewrythmics),electro(Jewd-yssee)tofolkpunk(The Painted Bird),whilestillmoreauthentic,classicalandjazzvariantsofklezmerprevail.Thesuccessofsomeofthesepeculiarklezmercrossoverscouldbeexplainedbyinternet-globalismwhichguaranteestheex-istenceofsuchculturalniches.

Theparticipationofnon-JewsintheformationofJewishidentity,asintend-edbyEidelman,isalreadyhappeninginthemusicalworld.45Sometimesthisovertmulticulturalismisverymuchcultivated.GeoffBernerforinstancehasreleasedamodernChineseversionoftheclassicsongMayn Rue Plats (MyRest-ingPlace)byMorrisRosenfeld(1862–1923).46ItisnocoincidencethatBernerand his compatriot Benjy Fox-Rosen, are considered participants of the so-calledKlezmer Bund foundedbyDanielKahn.47 Sometimescalled“AlienationKlezmerBund”or“VerfremdungsklezmerBund”byKahn,RokhlKafrissenrec-ognizeditas‘anovertnodtoBrecht’stheoryofVerfremdungseffekt’.48ThereisasongaboutthisorganizationontheCDLost Causes (2010)byDanielKahn&ThePaintedBird,backed-upbyachorusoffamousklezmermusicians.49

AlthoughKahnandEidelmanshareafascinationforalienation,andbothareclearlyantifascist,Kahnseemsmoreactivelyinvolvedinthe leftist/anar-chistprotestmovement.WehavealreadynotedthatEidelmanwasnotagainsttheStateofIsrael,butisthisalsothecaseforKahnandKorolenko?TheirCDThe Unternationale – acombinedartisticeffortwiththebandOy Division – fea-turesaRusso-Englishtranslationofthesong Oy, ir narishe tsienistn (“Oh, You

45 SeeforthisphenomenoninPoland:Waligórska2005.46 GeoffBerner,Victory Party, CD/LP,MintRecords,MRD132/MRL-132, 2011,no.4.See:http://

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victory_Party47 http://geoffberner.com/?page_id=2:‘TheyrepresentthefloweringofarebornradicalJew-

ishculture,whatBerner’stourmateDanielKahnofBerlinbandThePaintedBirdcallsthe“KlezmerBund”’.

48 Kafrissen2009,s.p.SheisworkingonabookcalledThe Myth of the Yiddish Atlantis.49 DanielKahn&ThePaintedBird,Lost Causes,CD/Digi-pack,OrienteMusik,RIENCD77,

2011[2010],no.12‘TheKlezmerBund’.

270 VanLeeuwen

Foolish Little Zionists”).50ThissocialistfolksongwasfirstrecordedNovember26, 1930 in Kiev by the ethnomusicologist Moshe Beregovski (1892–1961), assungbyhousepainterTs.LachmanGershofMedzhybozhe(Ukraine).51

Thealbumtitle,The Unternationale,notonlyseemstoalludetothesocialistsongThe International,butisalsoaclearreferencetotheInternationalWork-ingmen’sAssociation(1864–1876),oftencalledtheFirstInternational,sinceasimilarwording,‘TheFirstUnternational’,appearsonthefrontpageoftheCDbooklet.Ananti-Semiticcaricatureisdepictedonthiscover,showingahook-nosed,beardedman,wearingagoldencrownwithagoldencalfontop,whograsps a world globe with his bony fingers which resemble a bat’s talons(Fig.11.4b).

Thisrecycledpoliticalcartoon,Rothschild,drawnbyCharles-LucienLéan-dre(1862–1930,wasfirstpublishedintheFrenchsatiricalmagazineLe Rire onApril16,1898(Fig.11.5).52OftenthoughttodepictthethenlongdeceasedJakobMayerRothschild(1792–1868),founderoftheFrenchbranchoftheRothschildfamilybank,thisghastlyfigureismorelikelytorepresentamoregeneralimageof the “JewishThreat”,epitomizedby theRothschild family,considering theinscriptionontheaureolewhichreads“dievpro[tège]israel”(MayGodpro-tect Israel).53 According to Jean-Michel Renault ‘le banquier Rothschildreprésente l’archétype du juif capitaliste dont l’ambition est de s’accaparertouteslesrichessesdumonde’.54

Arguablydepictingaspecificmemberoftheprominentbankingfamily,thisiconic“predatoryJew”, whostretcheshisdemonichandsaroundtheglobe,isoftenassociatedwiththeideaofaJewishconspiracytotakeovertheworld,andhasrepeateditselfeversinceinpictorialtraditionofcaricature.FredrikStrömbergsuggestsatemporalconnectionwiththepropagandabookThe Pro-tocols of the Elders of Zion,anelaborateanti-Semitichoax–thoughthatwasonlyfirstpublishedinRussianin1906.55Thebookpurportstodocumentthe

50 Daniel Kahn, Psoy Korolenko, Oy Division, The Unternationale / Унтернационал / .CD/Digi-pack,AurisMediaRecords,AUM014,2008 ,דערiאונטערנאטיאנאלע

51 ThePhonoarchiveofJewishFolkloreattheVernadskyNationalLibrary,no.1247,A694.3.Selected for vol. 1 of the anthology ЕМФ, no. 66. See: Sholokhova 2001. Digital source:http://mlib.ipri.kiev.ua/(accessedon1May2012).Seealso:Tsaytshrift (Minsk:Inbelkult) 19,col.805.SeeforBeregovski:Slobin1986.

52 See:Fuchs1921,p.209;Matard-Bonnucci2005,pp.32,447.53 Rosenberg1960,facingp.135. (Oftenrecognizedasaportrait“Mayer”Rothschild–there

were several with that second name – and sometimes wrongly attributed to GustaveDoré)See:Freedman2008,p.49.

54 Renault2006.55 Strömberg2010,p.26.


Figure11.4a,b Covers of the gatefold and booklet of the CD TheUnternatio-nale.AurisMediaRecords,AUM014,2008.

272 VanLeeuwen

minutesofasecretconferenceofJewishleadersdiscussingtheirgoalofglobalJewishhegemony.56AFrencheditionofthebookfromthe1930sindeedshowsafigureinasimilarposeasLéandre’sRothschild(Fig.11.6).57

The artwork designers, Victor Levin and Chen Langer, have connected aspeechballoontoRothschild’smouththatreads‘Pleasedtomeetyou’inYid-dish,RussianandEnglish,followedby‘hopeyouguessmyname…’,referringtothefirstsongoftheCD,Rakhmones afn tayfl, aklezmerversionoftheStones’songSympathy for the Devil.58Thefrontcoverpictureshowsamodifiedwood-cutfromaseventeenth-centurybook,TheWorldTurned Upside Down,showing

56 Cohn1966;Segel1996.57 See:DeMichelis2004,p.403;andinDutch:Smelik2010,p.205,Fig.15.58 CreditedinthelinernotesofThe Unternationale as:‘AfterrebMikhlJagger’.

Figure11.5 Charles Léandre, “Rothschild”or“DieuprotègeIsrael”:AnAnti-SemiticCartoonofthePredatoryJewgraspingtheGlobe, 1898.NewYork:HolocaustMuseum,photo-graph#06328.


abulbousfigurestandingonhishead(Fig.11.4a).59Intheglobe-likebellyofthistopsy-turvypersonificationastarofDavidhasbeeninserted,thusliterallyputtingtheconceptof“InternationalJewry”upsidedown.WhilethetitleoftheCDseemstohintonanundisclosedleftwingassembly, anotherflingwithSocialism (or rather Bundism) is suggested by the red colouring of the flagwhichhadalreadyappeared(thoughblank)ontheoriginalwoodcut,aswellasbytheredbanneronthebacksideofthegatefold.

So,isthereonlyablatantanti-Zionistsignificancetothelyricsoristheremore to it?The first two original stanzas are inYiddish, the same as in theoriginalsong.TheyarefollowedwithKahn’sveryfreetranslation:‘Ohyoufool-ishlittleZionist/Withyourutopianmentality/You’dbettergodownthefac-

59 World Turned Upside Down: No News, and Strange News, ed. by J. Kendrew, Colliergate,Yorks.d.

Figure11.6 Cover of W. Creutz, LePerilJuif! in:LesProtocolesdesSagesdeSion.notdated,butfirstedition1934.

274 VanLeeuwen

tory/Andlearntheworker’sreality.//YouwanttotakeustoJerusalem/Sowecandieasanation/We’dratherstayintheDiaspora/Andfight(work/wait)fourourliberation’.Inthelinernotesanasteriskisputafterthislastsentencewhichcallsoutafootnotestating‘thiscouldalsobesungas“andworkforas-similation”or“andwaitforannihilation,”dependingonone’spoliticalinten-tionand/orhistoricalperspective’.

Anamateurvideoclipofaperformanceon24March2011inBeitAviHai,Jerusalem,provesthatthisremarkdidnotremainadeadletter,sinceitshowsKahn repeating the comment and singing both variations of the refrain, to-getherwithKorolenko.60Kahnintroducesthesong:‘Andwe’llsingitincombi-nationwithanothersong,whichisitsdialecticalopposite.Andyoucanmaybemakeasynthesisoutofit,butprobablynot’.61HereferstothehymnIkh heyb oyf mayn hand un ikh shver (“I raisemyhandupandIswear”)of theBeitarMovement,aRevisionistZionistyouthorganizationfoundedin1923inRiga,Latvia,byVladimir(Ze’ev)Jabotinsky(1880–1940).62Thesongalsoappearsasnumber5aontheCDThe Unternationale, directlyfollowedbysong5bDi Hof-nung (“TheHope”),anEnglishtranslationofHatikvah,thenationalanthemofIsrael.63

SowecanstatewithcertaintythatThe Unternationaleisdefinitelynotanti-Zionist, nor specifically Bundist for that matter, and its political scheme ismoreakindofutopistshpileray, asisthecasewithMedinatWeimar.BothMe-dinatWeimarandtheUnternationaleseemdeliberatelytorespondtothefearofJewishworldpowerinhumoristicway,whichisperhapsthebindingcompo-nent.ItissignificantthatEidelmanaddressesthefearamongtheindigenousinhabitantsofThuringiabyreassuringthemthattheWeimarOnionMarket(Zwiebelmarkt) will not be cancelled, in contrast to the Weimar Klezmer

60 ‘PsoyKorolenkoandDanielKahn,“Oy,youfoolishZionists”’,videoclip(uploadedbyTheSh-enbuv on 1 April, 2011), YouTube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEzTFPNRP6Q at0:15–0:25

61 Kahnsays:‘We’vegotsomeotheroptionsfortheṭāl‛a[refrain]here.Dependingonyourideologyyoucansingitthisway…’,inthevideoat2:10–2:15.SeeforthePalestiniantermṭāl‛a: CohenandKatz2006,p.275.

62 ‘PsoyKorolenkoandDanielKahn,Beitarsong’,videoclip(recordedinBeitAviHai,Jerusa-lem,24March2011anduploadedbyTheShenbuvonApril2,2011),YouTube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKhD-dN3trQ.SeefortheBeitarMovement:Jabotinsky1935.

63 Creditedas:‘TheoriginalYiddishBeitarSongfromthe1930s.Recordedin2005inBrestfromMikhailLantsevitskybyDmitrySlepovichandNinaStepanskaya.Transl.intoEng-lishbyDanielKahn,intoRussianbyPsoyKorolenko’.ForthepoemHaTiq’vah byNaphtaliHerzImber (1856–1909),seethelinernotesandforitsEnglishtranslationbyJacobGood-man:BradfordBoni1947.

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheShenbuv

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheShenbuv


Festival,forwhichtherewillnolongerbeanyneedwhentheNewJerusalemhasbeenestablished.64

Bibliography

Abram,IsidoorBertHans, Joodse identiteit en imago als beelden en over joods identiteit als culturele identiteit,Kampen1993.

Adorno, Theodor W, ‘Schuld und Abwehr. Eine Qualitative Studie zum Gruppen-experiment’,in:Gesammelte Schriften,Vol.9.2(SoziologischeSchriftenII.;I:ErsteHälfte),ed.byRolfTiedemann,withtheparticipationofGretelAdorno,SusanBuck-MorssandKlausSchultz,FrankfurtamMain2003,pp.121–324[1sted.1955].

––––––,‘ZurBekämpfungdesAntisemitismusheute’,in:Gesammelte Schriften,Vol.20.1,Darmstadt1998,pp.360–383[SpeechforDie Erste Europäische Pädagogen-Konferenz des Deutschen Koordinierungsrates der Gesellschaften für jüdisch-christlichen Zusam-menarbeit,1962,previouslypublishedin:Das Argument: Blätter der Westberliner Stu-dentengruppen gegen Atomrüstung 6(1964),Heft2=29(May),p.88ff.]

Alter,Israel,Mayne Lider, Johannesburg1957.Asher,AndrewD., ‘Inventingacity:culturalcitizenshipin‘Słubfurt’’,Social Identities:

Journal for the Study of Race, Nation and Culture 17(March2012),pp.1–24.Badiou,Alain,Saint Paul: La fondation de l’universalisme, Paris1997.Baum,Gregory,Nationalism, religion, and ethics, Montreal2001.Bergmann,Werner,‘StörenfriedederErinnerung.ZumSchuldabwehr-Antisemitismus

in Deutschland’., in: Literarischer Antisemitismus nach Auschwitz, ed. by Klaus-MichaelBogdal,KlausHolzandMatthiasN.Lorenz,Stuttgart2007,pp.13–35.

BradfordBoni,Margare, Fireside book of folk songs, NewYork1947.Buber,Martin,‘Nationalismus’(addressattheTwelfthZionistCongressinKarlsbad,5

September1921,firstpublished),Wiener Morgenzeitung, 3September1921(laterpub-lishedin:Stenographisches Protokoll der Verhandlungen des XII. Zionistenkongress in Karlsbad (1–14 September 1921), Berlin1922andtransl.byOlgaMarx,in:Israel and the World: Essays in a Time of Crisis, NewYork1948,pp.214–26).

Cohen,DaliaandRuthKatz,Palestinian Arab Music. A Maqām Tradition in Practice(ChicagoStudiesinEthnomusicology),ChicagoandLondon2006.

Cohn,Norman,Warrant for Genocide. The Myth of the Jewish World-Conspiracy and the Protocols of the Elder of Zion,NewYork1966.

Freedman,Jonathan,Klezmer America. Jewishness, Ethnicity, Modernity,NewYork2008.Fuchs,Eduard,Die Juden in der Karikatur. Ein Beitrag zur Kulturgeschichte,Munich1921

64 Eidelman,Podiumsgespräch,Berlin,14January2012.

276 VanLeeuwen

Gould,Ann,Masters of Caricature: from Hogarth and Gillray to Scarfe and Levine, London1981.

Heimatkunde. 30 Künstler blicken auf Deutschland,exhib.cat.,ed.byCillyKugelmann,Berlin:JüdischenMuseumBerlin,Munich2011.

Heni,Clemens, ‘»Sekundärer«Antisemitismus:EinkaumerforschterTeildesPost-Holocaust-Antisemitismus’,Tribün: Zeitschrift zum Verständnis des Judentums47,no.187(2008),pp.132–42.

Herding,Klaus,‘DieRothschildsinderKarikatur’,Jüdische Figuren in Film und Karikatur. Die Rothschilds und Joseph Süß Oppenheimer/ Jewish Figures in Films and Caricatures. The Rothschilds and Joseph Süss Oppenheimer (SchriftenreihedesJüdischenMuseumsFrankfurt-am-Main2),ed.byCillyKugelmannandFritzBackhaus,Sigmaringen1995,pp.13–64.

Jabotinsky,Vladimir[=VladimirYevgenyevichZhabotinsky], Die Idee des Betar. Ein Umriss betarischer Weltanschauung; übers. aus dem Jidd. von I. Goldstein, Lyck1935.

Jacobs,NeilG.,Yiddish. A Linguistic Introduction, Cambridge2005.Jaldati,Lin[=RebekkaBrilleslijper],EberhardRebling,andHeinzKahlau,Es brennt,

Brüder, es brennt. Jiddische Lieder, Berlin1966.Kafrissen,Rokhl,‘PartisanorParasite?DanielKahnandtheNewJewishQuestions’,The

Jewish Daily (13 May 2009) http://forward.com/articles/105937/partisan-or-parasite/(accesseson1May2012).

Kampmeyer,Margret,‘JüdischesMuseumBerlin.Heimatkunde30KünstlerblickenaufDeutschland.16.September2011bis29.Januar2012’, Museums-Journal,no.4(2011),pp. 84–85. http://www.jmberlin.de/heimatkunde/ausstellung/museumsjournal-heimatkunde.pdf(accesseson1May2012).

Kotek,JoëlandDanKotek, Au nom de l’antisionisme. L’image des Juifs et d’Israël dans la caricature depuis la seconde Intifada, Brussels2003.

Matard-Bonucci,Marie-Anne,Antisémythes. L’image des Juifs entre culture et politique, 1848–1939,Paris[2005].

DeMichelis,CesareG.,The Non-existent Manuscript. A Study of the Protocols of the Sages of Zion (VidalSassoonInternationalCenterfortheStudyofAntisemitism), LincolnNE,Jerusalemetc.2004(Transl.of:Il manoscritto inesistente: I “Protocolli dei savi di Sion”: un apocrifo del XX secolo, Venice1998).

Mlotek,EleanorG.,JosephMlotekandZalmenMlotek, Songs of Generations. New Pearls of Yiddish Song, NewYork1997[2004].

Muller,Nat,‘VFC:InterviewwithRonenEidelman’,ontheoccasionofthesixthissueofVisualForeignCorrespondents,deBalieAmsterdam(15April2008).http://rone-neidelman.com/?p=9298(accesseson1May2012).

Perutz,Rosa,‘Kritikder7.BerlinBiennale’,Jungle World17(26April2012),s.p.http://jungle-world.com/artikel/2012/17/45322.html(accesseson1May2012).


http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22Eleanor+G.+Mlotek%22

http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22Joseph+Mlotek%22

http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22Zalmen+Mlotek%22


Quindeau,Ilka,‘SchuldabwehrundnationaleIdentität–PsychologischeFunktionendesAntisemitismus’,in:Exklusive Solidarität. Linker Antisemitismus in Deutschland,ed.byMatthiasBroschetal.,Berlin,pp.157–64.

Reyzen,Avraham,לידער צום זינגען : מיט די נאטן/Lider tsum zingen miṭ di noṭn,NewYork1947.http://archive.org/details/nybc202456.

––––––,Di lider fun Avraham Reyzen: in tsvelf ṭeiln; miṭ a forvart fun mehaber, NewYork1951.

Renault, Jean-Michel, Censure et caricatures. Les images interdites et de combat de l’histoire de la Presse en France et dans le monde,Montpellier2006.

Rensmann,Lars,Demokratie und Judenbild,Wiesbaden2004.Richter,Christoph,‘„HeimnachPolen”YaelBartanasorgtmitihrerPerformanceund

ihremRepatriierungsprogrammfürvielAufsehen’,Deutschlandradio: Aus der Jüdische Welt (28–5-2010).http://www.dradio.de/dkultur/sendungen/ausderjuedischenwelt/1191773/(accesseson1May2012).

Rosenberg,Edgar,From Shylock to Svengali: Jewish stereotypes in English fiction,StanfordCA1960.

Scholem,GershomGerhard,Tagebücher: nebst Aufsätzen und Entwürfen bis 1923, 2vols,FrankfurtamMain1995–2000.

Schönbach,Peter,Reaktionen auf die antisemitische Welle im Winter 1959/1960,FrankfurtamMain1961.

Segel, BinjaminW., A Lie and a Libel. The History of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion,ed.byRichardS.Levy,LincolnNE1996(originallypublishedin1926).

Sholokhova,LiudmylaVolodymyrivna[Шолохова,Людмила],Фоноархів єврейської музичної спадщини: колекція фонографічних записів єврейського фольклору із фондів Інституту рукопису : анотований каталог фоноциліндрів та нотних і текстових розшифровок[The Phonoarchive of Jewish Folklore: A collection of pho-nographic records of Jewish folklore of the funds of the Institute of Manuscripts: an annotated catalogue of phonocylinders and sheet music and text transcripts], Kiev2001(НацiональнабiблiотекаУкраїниiм.В.І.Вернадського/V.I.VernadskyNationalLibraryofUkraine).

Slobin,Mark,‘AFreshLookatBeregovski’sFolkMusicResearch’,Ethnomusicology30,no.2(1986),pp.253–60.

Smelik,KlaasAntonius,De zeven levens van de Protocollen van de Wijzen van Zion(CIDI-informatiereeks),Soest2010.

Strömberg,Fredrik,Comic Art Propaganda: a Graphic History, London2010.Uhrheimer,Christian,Kritische Theorie des Autoritarismus: Empirische Untersuchungen

über den Autoritarismus am Frankfurter Institut für Sozialforschung und Überlegungen zu deren Relevanz für die Gegenwart, Diplomarbeit,Munich/Ravensburg2006.

Waligórska,Magdalena,‘AGoyFiddlerontheRoof.HowtheNon-JewishParticipantsoftheKlezmerRevivalinKrakówNegotiateTheirPolishIdentityinaConfrontation

278 VanLeeuwen

withJewishness’ in:Polish sociological review: quarterly of the Polish Sociological Association,no.152(2005),pp.367–82.

Weinreich,Max,History of the Yiddish Language, 2vols,NewHaven2008(transl.of:Geshikhte fun der yidisher shprakh,firstpublished1973).

Zemtsovky,Izaly,‘TheMusicalStrandsofAn-sky’sTextsandContexts’,in:The Worlds of S. An-sky: A Russian Jewish Intellectual at the Turn of the Century, ed.byGabriellaSafranandStevenJ.Zipperstein,StanfordCA2006,pp.203–31.

279Index Index

Index

1967War(also underSix-DayWar) 15,39n11,40-41

Aaron 64Abel,F.-M. 114n2,115n4Aberjil,Ruben 38n9Abraham 157Adam 179-181Adamszoon,fatherDierick 200Adorno,Theodor 63-64,256Adrichem,Christiaanvan 195,204,207Aedicule 117,226-228,230-231AelredofRielvaulx,St 195Aetius,St 178n32Africa 182n2,144Agazarian,Albert 38n9Alberola,Jean-Michel 7,237,245-251Alberti,LeonBattista 7,218,227-231Alessi,Galeazzo 221Alpert,Michael 269Alÿs,Francis 16,33-57 Baqe 37,43 Bazra 37,43 Bridge (Snails) 50-53,56 Bridge/Puente 48,52 The Collector 50,55 Don’t Cross the Bridge Before You Get to the

River (working title) 46,52 Fairy Tales 53-54 The Green Line 16,33-57 Jerusalem E. 37 The Leak 53-54 The Loop 46 Paradox of Praxis 1 55 Snakes and Ladders 51-52 Turista 56 Untitled (2004) 37-38 Walk through Jerusalem 33,36 When Faith Moves Mountains 48,52,

54-56Amir,Yigal 83Ampulla(e) 6,169-185Amsterdam 96,98-100,108,200Andre,Carl 24,27-28 144 Magnesium Square 24-25,27-28

Annunciation 182n38Anthony,St 185n46Anti-Semitism 256,264AntoninusofPiacenza 170,183Antwerp 33Apamea 145Apartheid 42,44Apocalypse(also underRevelation) 7,90,

237,240,247,249Apostles 125-126,136,141-144,146-147,158Aquileia 226Arab-IsraeliWar(alsoWarofIndepen-

dence) 33,38-39Arafat,Yasser 15,83Arasse,Daniel 67Archer,Michael 13Arculf,bishop 121,128Areford,David 200Arendt,Hannah 263Ariadne,mythof 54Ark,Noah’s 90Arma christi 208Armenian 126-127,129ArmenianApostolics 116ArnoldofLübeck 177Assmann,Jan 64-65AsiaMinor 182n2Atoui,Tarek 29n51Augsburg,ChurchofStAnne 227Augustine,St 131,170,192,194AugustinianCanonesses 191AugustinianCanons 117,130Auschwitz 63-65,67,69,72,79,82

Baader-Meinhofgroup 77n53Babylon(also Babel) 7,89,246-248,260 Fallof 249 Towerof 90Bachhuber,Liz 262,264Baden-Baden,MuseumFrieder-Burda 72BaldwinII,king 128Barmitzvah 243Bartana,Yael 263,266n33 Jewish Renaissance Movement in Poland

(JRMiP) 263

© Goudeauetal.,2014 | doi10.1163/9789004270855_012This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial3.0Unported(CC-BY-NC3.0)License.



280 Index

Buchloh,Benjamin 60-62,66Budrus 39n12Butler,Samuel 220n9,221n11Bundism 273BurningBush 244Byzantium 63

Caimi,Bernardino 219Campen,Jacobvan 92-94Canterbury 174n17,185Capernaum 243-244Carolingian 151Castellion 183Catalonian 70Celan,Paul 64Christ(alsoJesus,Saviour) 7,98,102,

116-117,119,121,125-126,129,130-131,137,140-141,144,146-149,154,156-159,173,175,177,179-182,184-186,190-191,195-208,215-217,221-224,226-227,231-233,243

Ascension 101,118-121 Adoration 218 Burial 215,226 Crucifixion 121,140-141,144,148,157,173,

180-181,196n24,199,202-204,208,215,218

Flagellation 124 Footprints 120-121,130 Lamentation 199n37,232 Nativity 144,156,182,218,222 Passion 2,6-7,131,157,181,190-191,

193-201,203,205,207-208,215 Resurrection 116,141,173,182,202,224,

226,231n29Christianity 2,197,231Chronicles,Bookof 90Claussen,PeterCornelius 159Cleveland,MuseumofArt 175-176,179Clinton,Bill 45Cocceius,Johannes 88,96-109Cocceius,JohannesHenricus 98,106Cologne,ChurchofStKunibert 247Colonna,Giovanni,cardinal 156ConstantinetheGreat 116,137,139-141,

143,145n32,154,156,158,160,169,226Constantinople 137,145,152-153,156,

174n16

Bartana,Yael(cont.) Mary Koszmary (Nightmare) 263 Mur i wieża (Wall and Tower) 263 Zamach (Assassination) 263Barthes,Roland 79Bartolini,Domenico 160Baselitz,Georg 66Bätschman,Oskar 75àBecket,StThomas 185n46Bede(BedaVenerabilis) 153Beeren,Wim 62n6,70n26Beirut 13BeitarMovement 274BenjaminofTudela 155Bentham,Jeremy 16Benvenisti,Meron 38n10,39-40Beregovski,Moshe 270Berlin 14,175-176,179-180,260-261,263,

265,268,269n47 JewishMuseum 260,261n14,262 Skulpturensammlung 175BernardofClairvaux,St 203Berner,Geoff 269Bethlehem 15,44,141-142,146-147,149,

156-157,181-182,184,195,197,218-219,222

ChurchoftheNativity(Grotto) 160,181,222

Bible 1,3,64,90-92,98,100,106-108,184,207,242,249

Biblicalcriticism 5,88,91,105-107Biondo,Flavio 159Biro,Matthew 69-70Bobbio,MuseodiSanColombano 172Bologna 226n19 BasilicaofSStefano,basilicaoftheS

Sepolcro 226n19,227BonifaceofRagusa,franciscan 226Bordeaux,pilgrimfrom 141Borromeo,CharlesSt 215-217,221,233Bouman,Elias 92Brawer,Moshe 38n10,45Bray,Salomonde 92Bremen 97Breydenbach,Bernhardvon 195n18Brooks,Mel 261Brussels 50,196n24Buber,Martin 264

281Index

Dinant 219Donaueschingen 60Dortsman,Adriaan 93Dresden 60,78Drusius,Johannes 94,97Duchemin,studio 247Dumas,Marlene 43-44 Figure in a Landscape 55 The Wall 43-44 Wall Wailing 44 Wall Weeping 44Düsseldorf 73Dutchclassicistarchitecture 104,108DutchRepublic 5,91-92,94-95,106,108,

109

EcceHomo 195,199,230Eden,Gardenof 90Efrat,Zvi 47Egeria,pilgrim 141,170Egypt 39,184Eichmann,Adolf 79Eichstätt 227Eidelman,Ronen 7,255,257-261,263n18,

264-269,274 Coming out in Lublin, Poland 257 Magav in Weimar 258 Medinat Weimar 7,254-268,274Eitan,Raful 83Elger,Dietmar 73Eruditio trias lingualis 107Escorial,SanLorenzodeEl 91Eschatology 101,109-110,148-150,152,156EthiopianOrthodox 116Eufinger,Marianne(Ema) 77Eulogiae 169-171,185Eve 179-180Ezekiel,Templevisionof 88-110 Bookof 243

Fabri,friarFelix 183-184Faschismus 75Fatah 42Fayfish 269Ferrari,Gaudenzio 218-219Fisher,Jean 38n9Flagellation,Columnofthe 156Florence 2,7,218,227,229-231

Cooper,Adrienne 269Cooper,Sheldon 263Coptic 116-117CounterReformation 233Crib 159Cross 128,132,146-152,159,170,173,

175-176,179-181,183-185,196,198-199,203,206,226-227,238

Cultofthe 139n10,141,144-147,150,152-153,159-160

Exaltationof 150 FindingoftheTrue 138,140,143,150 Holy 131-132,138-142,150,159,183 Relic(s)of the 137-140,142-147,

150-154,170,173,177 Stationsofthe 190,195,199n37,207 True 150,169,173 Woodof 144-145,150-152,170,183-184CrownofThorns 168,215Crusaderarchitecture 17,126-27Crusades 114n1,137,156,181,186Cuba 48Cubit(Sacred) 113-115Cunaeus,Petrus 94-96CyrilofScythopolis 183Cyril,bishop 140-141,143

DaPonte,Gottardo 232Dalen,Johannesvan 100n46-47Dalmatia 221Damasus,pope 143DanieltheStylite 157Daniel,prophet 98,172n14Darius,king 89David,king 89,94,179-180David,starof 259,273Dayan,Moshe 38-39,41,45-46Dayan,Yael 38n9DeadSea 39Delft 195,200Denfert,Pierre 247DescentoftheHolySpirit 124Deuteronomy,Bookof 100Devaux,Julien 37Devotio Moderna(Modern-DayDe-

vout) 191-193,208n61,232Diaspora 89,254,274Dienst,Rolf-Gunter 73n39

282 Index

Grisar,Hartmann 136Grote,Geert 191Grotius,Hugo 97,107

Haarlem,NieuweKerk 92Haifa 13al-Hakim,caliph 226Hamas 15,42Hannover,SprengelMuseum 73n37HanselandGretel,fairytaleof 54Hass,Amira 38n9Hatoum,Mona 4,11-13,15,18-20,22-24,

26-30 Current Disturbance 22 Home 22 The Light at the End 25-26 Light Sentence 16-18 Lili (Stay) Put 14n4 Map 19-20 No WayandNo Way (II) 14n4 Present Tense 4,11-13,15,18-20,22-24,

26-30Havana 36,48Hebron 15Heinsius,Daniël 96-97Helena,empress 116,138-140,143-145,150,

154,157,159,180,186,199HenrytheLion 177Heraclius,emperor 149-150Herklotz,Ingo 156Hermengaud,friarMatfre 194HerodtheGreat,king 89,126Hesperus,officialandpilgrim 170Heydenreich,Ludwig 230Hierotopy 142-143Himmler,Heinrich 83n64Hippo 170Hitler,Adolf 83n64Holocaust 4-5,23,62,64,67-71,76,80-81,

85,254,268HolyCommunion 243HolyofHolies 103,154Huygens,Christiaan 99Huygens,Constantijn 92-93,99n40Huyssen,Andreas 67

Iconoclasm 63,74Iconography 137,149,158,169,171-172,

174n16and18,175,181,183,186,227

Florence(cont.) Baptistery 230 BasilicaofSMariaNovella 227 BasilicaofSMiniatoalMonte 230n27 CapellaRucellai(inSPancratio) 7,218,

227-228 LoggiaRucellai 227 PalazzoRucellai 227Fludd,Robert 70n27Folda,Jaroslav 176Foucault,Michel 16,18FourLivingCreatures 148Fox-Rosen,Benjy 269France 83n64,91,114n1,226n18,232n32,

239,253,257Franciscans 117,123,125,129,191,219,

231-232Franeker 94FrankfurtamMain 2,79FrankfurtanderOder 265Friedrich,CasparDavid 75-76Fruttuaria,abbeychurchof 226FulcherofChartres 130

GabrieltheArchangel 182,195Galilee 174GallaPlacidia 139n10Garouste,Gérard 7,237-238,241-245,247,

250-251GazaStrip 15,41Genesis,Bookof 7,71,239,242George,St 177-178GermanDemocraticRepublic(GDR) 60,

82,267Germany 5,60-61,65-66,68,71-72,76-77,

80,85,91,114n1,198n34,227,255-256,258-259,261,263,265,267,269

Gevolt 269Gibraltar,Straitof 46,58,51Giussano,GiovanniPietro 215Godfrey,Mark 49Goeree,Willem 94n19,106Goldmann,Nicolaus 97,99,106Golius,Jacob 99GoodFriday 150-152GreekOrthodox 116GregorytheGreat,pope 146,183Grenouille 21

283Index

ChurchoftheAscension 115,119-121,131,133

ChurchoftheDormition 125 ChurchoftheHolySepulchre 5-6,

115-118,131-133,139,141,150,169,170-171,173-181,184-186,198-199,202,229,230n27

Aedicule(HolySepulchre) 117,169,173,175-178,181-186,203,218,220,222,224-227,229,231,233

Aedicule,ChapeloftheAngel 227,231

Aedicule,TombofChrist 222,224,170,173,175-177,180,186

AnastasisRotunda 116-117,130-131,148,180-181,185,224-227,229-230

Calvary,rockof 116-117,220,227 CaveoftheFindingofthe

Cross 116-117 ChapelofCalvary(Golgotha) 117-

118,176,181 ChapelofHelena 116-117 ChapelofStJohntheEvange-

list 117 ChapeloftheFranks 117 Katholicon 116 Martyrium,seeAnastasisRotunda Rotunda,seeAnastasisRotunda Constantine’sbasilica(Churchofthe

HS) 116,139 StMaryintheValleyofJe-

hoshaphat 115,128-129,133 StMaryofMountZion 115,124-125,

133 Cenacle 124-126 ChapeloftheHolySpirit 124-125 TombofDavid 124-126 Virgin’sDormition 124 David’sPalace 106 DomeoftheRock 115,121,130-132 East 11,13,15-16,23,41 Golgotha(Calvary) 139,141,145,148-153,

159,177,180 HouseofJoachimandAnne 122 IsraelMuseum 37,47,72 JehoshaphatStreet(ViaDolorosa) 122 JewishQuarter 114 KingDavidHotel 72

Intifada,First 35n44Intifada,Second 21,42Isa,seeJesusIsaac 157,172Islam 2Israel 4-5,11,14-16,18-19,39-42,44-45,47,

82-83,101,108n60,153,220,237,266,268,270,274

asPromisedLand 237 State 4,23n32,38,256,258-259,

262-266,269Israeli-Palestinianconflict 11,15Israelis 4,14,19,34,40,44-45,262Istanbul 29-30Italy 7,91,140,182n2,215,217-218,221,

226-227,232-233

Jabotinsky,Vladimir(Ze’ev) 274JachinandBoaz,columns 103Jacob 243JamestheGreat,St 126JamestheLess,St 125-126,130-131Jenin 15Jerome,St 141,146,156,157n89,160Jerusalem Al-AqsaMosque(alsoPalatio Salomo-

nis) 116n6,131 ArmenianQuarter 126 ArmonHaNatziv,UNheadquar-

ters 39n10 asHolyCity 1-3,5-6,91,95,98,109,141,

147,169,171,173,175,183,185-186,237 BathsofBethesda 122 BeitAviHai 274 Cenacle,seeChurches,StMaryofMount

Zion ChristianQuarter 116 Churches ChurchofStAnne 115,122-123,133 ChurchofStJames(ArmenianCathe-

dral) 115,126-127,133 ChapelofStMenas 126 ChapelofStStephen 126 ChapeloftheHolyApostles 126 Etchmiadzinchapel 126-127 ChurchofStMaryneartheSheep

Pool 122

284 Index

JordanValley 39Jordan,river 170,183-184,220,Joseph,St 129Josephus,Flavius 90-91,103Judah 243Judah,kindom 89Judaism 264,268JudasCyriacus 143,150JuliusII,pope 194

Kabul 36Kafrissen,Rokhl 269Kahlau,Heinz 267KahnandKorolenko 266-274 The Unternationale 266-272,274 The Unternationale greet Medinat Wei-

mar 266,267n36Kahn,Daniel 7,265-270,273-274Kaiserslautern 98,100n46KarmAbuMena 174n16Katana 39n12KecheliusabHollensteyn(Kechel),Samuel

Carl 99,100n47,107Kedron,brook 220àKempis,Thomas 191n5KeyWest 48Khatib,Sami 262,264KherbetOumelAhdam,seeTixterKhwarizmianTurks 132Kiefer,Anselm 4,59-72,75-76,82-85 Bilder-Streit 62-65 Eisen-Steig(alsoHeavenly Jerusa-

lem) 70-71 Jerusalem 4,59-60,62,69-71 Malen = Verbrennen 65n13 Nero malt 65-66 The Secret Life of Plants for Robert

Fludd 70n27 Sulamith 67-69Kings,Bookof 90Kipphoff,Petra 65KlezmerBund 269Klezmermusic 254,268-269,272,274Knesset 38n9,41n22,42Korolenko,Psoy 265,267,274Kötzsche,Liselotte 176-177,181Krautheimer,Richard 138,225n15Kreis,Wilhelm 67

Jerusalem(cont.) LastSupperRoom,see Cenacle Lion’sGate 122 MiracleoftheHealingoftheParalytic,

locationof 122 MountCalvary 190-191,196-199,214 MountMoria 89 MountofOlives 119,128,132,149,170,

220 At-Turvillage 119 Eleonabasilica 149 Imbomonbasilica 148 MountZion 124-125,130,220 Muristan 116 MuslimQuarter 122 NewJerusalem 7,90,109,149,159,217,

237,254-255,275 OldCity 45,51,59,72,114,116,122,126,

132 PalaceofAnnas 94 PalaceofPilate(praetorium) 157,199 Palatium Salomonis(PalaceofSolo-

mon) 92,94,131 Qubbat-as-Silsila(DomeoftheChain,

ChapelofJamestheLess) 131 RockefellerMuseum 118 SheepPool 122 Siloam,village 172 Temple 5-6,68,88-110,130-131,149,

153-156,158,160,245 TempleMount 92,94,116,122,130-133 ValleyofJehoshaphat 220 WailingWall 44,263 West 15 Templum Domini, see DomeoftheRock AnadielGallery 11-13,15Jewdyssee 269JewishOrthodox 44,83,Jewrythmics 269Jews 6,45,60,64,68,79-83,88-90,94,

148-149,239,242-243,254-275Jobeh,Nazmi 38n9JohnofWürzburg,pilgrim 120,126,

130-131JohntheBaptist,St 181JohntheEvangelist,St 69,90,100,117,125,

181,237Jordan 15,39

285Index

Ma’achaz 260Maaseik,ConventofStAgnes 192-193,

196,208Madrasa 123-124Magi,theThree 195,218-219Mamluk(s) 125MandateofPalestine,British/United

Nations 38Maniacutius,Nicolaus 154n77Map(s) 4,11,13-29,38-42,45-47,95,142,

199,220,254,261Marcella,St 141MariaEleonoreofBrandenburg,countess

palatine 98Marini,Marino 227Marks,Laura 22-23Martyrs 136,142-146,243MaryMagdalene,St 119,177,231Mary,St 122,125,128,131,181-182,184,

197n31,221,231,242 Birth 122 Death 124-125,130 Dormition 124 Nativity 241Mastallone,river 220Matthias,St 125MaundyThursday 125Mauretania 145Mazzoni,Guido 232Mecca 130Medina,Cuauhtémoc 50-51,54-55MeinwerkofPaderborn,bishop 229Melania(theelderandtheyounger),

St 141Melisende,queen 122n21,128Memoria 138-139,141-143,147,152Memory 1,3,5-6,22,34,42,50,59-61,

64-65,67,69-70,77,79-80,82,84-85,140,172,183,197n29

Menas,St 126,194Menorah 67,254MexicoCity 36,46,50,53,55Middelburg 92MiddleAges 2,6,51,128,131,136-137,

141-143,154,159,174-175,185,217,224-226n18,231

MiddleEast 25,38,263Middoth 90,92,96

Kugelmann,Cilly 262-263,265Kühnel,Bianca 2,121,131n39,218Kurzwelly,Michael 265

LachmanGersh,Ts. 270Ladey,fatherLouis 242Langer,Chen 272LastSupper 124-125,198LatinAmerica 46,55,218n5Laudy,Eugène 237-238,241Léandre,Charles-Lucien, Rothschild 270,

272Lebanon 13,39Lebeer,Irmeline 75n47-48Leiden 88,94-97,99,106 BibliothecaThysiana 96 HofjevanBrouchoven 96 Marekerk 95 Rapenburgcanal 94,96-97,99Lemm,Manfred 269L’EmpereurvanOppyck,Constantijn 96-

97Lent,Sundayof 152LeoIII,Emperor 63LeotheGreat,pope 146Leon,JacobJehuda 92,95,100Leontios,consul 183Lerer,Yael 38n9Levi,Primo 69Levin,Victor 272Leviticus 64Liber Pontificalis 137,139,143,151Lieudemémoire 156LikudParty 83Lima 36,48Lithostrotos 199Loca sancta 141,145,172n13,183London 13-14,18n15,25,29,92,175-176 BritishMuseum 175 ParasolUnit 29 TateGallery 13,29 TheShowroom 25Longinus,romansoldier 181Loreto(Ancona),BasilicadellaSCasa 221LouisIX,king 156Lublin 257Lull,Ramón 70n28Lüpertz,Markus 66,239-241

286 Index

Orta,lake 220OsloAccords 11,13-16,18-19,21,23,29,45,

83Ottoman(s) 123,125,129,133Ousterhout,Robert 160Oxford 2,249 MuseumofArt 27n45

Paderborn,ConventofBusdorf 229-230n26

Palestine,ancient 141,148-149,160,219 modern 11n1,15,23n32,44,83,259,266 Palestinians 4,13-16,18-23,34,36-45,83,

256,265 PalestinianState 39n11,42,45 Palestinianterritories 42n29,44n35,83,

258PalestineLiberationOrganization

(PLO) 14-15Paris 156,241n9,247 Muséed’ArtModernedelaVillede

Paris 17,54 Parotstudio,Pierre-Alain 241,244Passover 152Paul,St 6,136,142,144,158,160Paula,St 141Pavia,ChurchofSSCarloeGiustina 215Pelt,RobertJanvan 100n44Penck,A.R. 66Penelope 54Persekian,Jack 13,29n51Peru 48,54Pétain,Philippe 83n64Peter,St 6,136,142,154,158,160PhilipII,king 91Pilate,Pontius 157,199Pilgrimage 6,116,138,140-141,145-147,153,

157,169-186,190-208,219,221,232Pinocchio 21Poland 257,263,269n45Pollock,Jackson 53Portaleone,AbrahambenDavid 91n9Post,Pieter 93Potts,Alex 27-28Prado,Jeronimo 91,93,107Presentia realis 250Procaccini,GiulioCesare 215-216 St Charles Borromeo and the Deceased

Christ 216

Mihrab 120-121,123-124,129,133Milan,PinacotecadiBrera 215-216Minaret 123-124,133MinimalArt 13,24Minotaur’slabyrinth 54Mishnah 90,96-97ModernDevotion,seeDevotioModernaMohammed 130MonsAdmirabilis 174n16Montanus,BenitoArias 91Monza,MuseodelDuomo 172Morocco 46Morphia,queen 128Mosaics 117-118,127,130,139,147-149,181Moses 64,237Mosque 121,123,125,130Mourtier,Michel,bishop 239-240al-Mu’azzam’Isâ 125Muller,Nat 258Muslim(s) 6,45,88,114n1,116-117,122,125,

130-133,152,159,190,256Myésier,Thomasde 70n28

Nablus 4,11,15,20-23,29Nakba 23NapoleonIII 123Nazareth 137,174n16,195,202,221Nazism 65,254Nebuchadnezzar,king 89NeerlandsIsraël 96Netanyahu,Benjamin 83Nevers 238-241,245-246,248NewYork 37 DavidZwirnerGallery 34-35,37-38,43,

51-52 MetropolitanMuseumofArt 205-206Newman,David 39,42n27,45Niccolòdell’Arca 232NicolasofPoggibonsi 125Nijmegen 1 ChurchofStDominicus 237,241 RadboudUniversityLibrary 192-193,

204Noah 71Noah’sArk 90NomparII,nobleman 183

O’Reilly,Jennifer 136

287Index

SessorianChurch,see SCroce SCostanza 230n27 SCroceinGerusalemme 137-139,

143-144,147,150-153,160,198 SMariaMaggiore 146,149,156,

157n89,198 Praesepechapel 156 SPrassede,Zenochapel 156 SPudenziana 147-148 SStefanoRotondo 149,230n27 StJohnLateran,see LateranBasilica StPeter 137,145,151-152,154,158,198,

205 LateranPalace,AulaoftheCoun-

cils 151-153,157-158 CapellaSSanctorum 153,170 HolyStairs 157,198 asSecondJerusalem 6,145,254 Vatican 152,156 MuseoSacro 170n7Rosenfeld,Morris 269Rosenthal,Mark 69n25,70n30Rothberg,Michael 62,85Rothschild,JakobMayer 270Rucellai,GiovannidiPaolo 218,228-231 Rudy,Kathryn 190n2,193,196n24,197n29,

202n46

Sabas,St 183Sacri monti (HolyMountains) 218,220Saewulf,pilgrim 120n11,130Saint-Antoine-l’Abbaye 185n46Saladin,sultan 114,117,121,123-124,129,

131-133Saltzman,Lisa 64Salvation 71,84,103,140-141,145,153,191,

207SanDiego 46SanVivaldo(Montaione) 220,227Sancta Casa 221Saracens 131Scaliger,JosephJustus 94Scholem,Gershom 264Schönfelder,Rudolf 77Schootenjr,Francisusvan 99n40Schuldabwehrantisemitismus 256Seitz,Hanne 262,265-266n34Sergiopolis(Resafa) 174n16

Prophets,booksofthe 242Protestantism 91,103Proust,Marcel 21Pundak,Ron 44

Qalqilya 15Qur’an 130

Rabin,Yitzhak 15,83Ramallah 15RamatRachel(nearGivatHaMivtar) 39Ravenna,ChurchofSCroce 139n10Reformation 92,101Relic(s) 5,6,137-146,150-160,169-171,173,

177,185,190-191,197-200,202-203,205,207-208,221-222,226

Renault,Jean-Michel 270Restoration(architectural) 115,122-124,

133,228n22Revelation,Bookof(also underApoca-

lypse) 69,100,148,237-238,242-243,245-249

Reyzen,Avrom 267RicheldisdeFaverches 202Richter,Gerhard 4,59-62,72-85 18. October 1977 77n53 Abendstimmung 75-76 Atlas 80-81 Familie 78n55 Familie am Meer 78n55 Herr Heyde 78n55 Jerusalem 4,59-60,62,72-73,76,81-85 Klorolle 76 Landschaft bei Hubbelrath 73-76,82 Onkel Rudi 77-78,82 Tante Marianne 77,79,82Riga 274RomanCatholic(s) 91,100,116,243RomanEmpire 89,136,140,170Rome 5,6,136-160,190,194,197-199,205,

207,230 Churches basilicaHierusalem,seeSCroce basilicaHeleniana,see SCroce ChurchoftheFrisians,SSMichelee

Magno 158 LateranBasilica 137,145,151-158,170,

198

288 Index

Modelof 90,92,100,171 ofEzekiel(alsoTempleVisionofEze-

kiel) 88-110 ofHerod(alsoSecondTemple) 68,89,

98,109,130,131,153-154,158 ofSolomon 88-94,101,103,109,155,158,

245 ofZerubbabel 89Thessaloniki 174n17,178n32Testament,New 7,90,109,169,172,197,

237-244Testament,Old 5,7,64,90,94,96,103,

130,172,179,237-244Tetragrammaton 243Tanakh 107,242,244ThePaintedBird 269TheodoreI,pope 146-147,149Theodoric,pilgrim 120,129,131Theseus 54ThirdReich 76ThirtyYear’sWar 101ThroneofLight 237,244-246Thuringia(Thüringen) 7,254-258,

260-262,264,266-268,274Tijuana 36,46,55n73Titus,consulandemperor 89,130,

154-155,157Tixter(KherbetOumelAhdam) 144,154Torah 124,242Toronto,MalcoveCollection 175,181Torrotti,canon 220n9,221n11Tulkarm 15Typology,Biblical 238,241-242

Uganda 263Umayyad 130UnitedNations 15,38UrbanII,pope 114

Valduggia 218VaralloSesia,SacroMonte(incl.Holy

Sepulchre) 7,215-233Vasari,Giorgio 228Vatable,François 92,107Venice 156 Biennale 65,260,263Venlo,ConventofMariaweide 192Vera Icon 205

SergiusI,pope 151Sesia,river 220’s-Gravesande,Arentvan 94-96Sharon,Ariel 34,83Shibli,Adania 44Shoah 60-68,72,268SistersofCommonLife 192Sivan,Eyal 38n9Six-DayWar(also under1967War) 40-41,

239Słubfurt 265Słubice 265Smyrna(İzmir) 249Socialism 7,76,273,267Sola scriptura 106Solomon,king 67,83,92,125,155,179-180Solomon,Songof 67Someren,Johannesvan 99Spain 46,91,159,226n18,232n32Spies,Werner 66Stalpaert,Daniël 93Stephaton,romansoldier 181Stephen,St 125-126Stockholm 53 Tegen2,gallery 259-262Strömberg,Fredrik 270Sturm,JohannChristoph 106Sturm,LeonhardChristoph 106Sudarium 205Sulamith 67-69Süleyman,Sultan 125Süskind,Patrick 21Suso,Henricus 192n9,208n61Sweden 259Switzerland 221Synagogue 92,156,249Syria 39,170n2,174SyrianOrthodox 116,151

Tabernacle 90,153al-Tal,Abdullah,colonel 39Talant 238,241-245,251Talmud 124TanziodaVarallo 218Tarnborg 181,184TayarPasha,governor 123TelAviv 83TempleofJerusalem(see underJerusalem)

289Index

WhiteFathers 122-123Wiesel,Elie 80n58WilbrandofOldenburg,pilgrim 117WilliamII,emperor 125Windesheim,Congregationof 192WinoofHelmershausen,abbot 229Woercken,GeertgenJansvan 203WorldWar,Second 5,23,60,64,77,

83n64,85,257

Yeshiva 124-125,257n5Yiddish 7,266-269,272-274YiddishPrincess 269YouTube 30,258,266-268

Zerubbabel,king 89,98Zevi,Sabbatai 108Zimet,Ben 269Zionism 7,260,266,268Zwirblis,Krzysztof 257

Veronica,St 198Verstegen,Ute 141n19Vespasian,emperor 153-155Villalpando,JuanBautista 91-97,101,103,

107Villingen,convent 198n34Vincent,L.-H. 114n2,115n4Vingboons,Philips 100,107Vitringa,Campegius 106Voetius,Ghisbertus 105Volpiano,Guilielmoda(Williamof

Dijon) 226Vossius,Gerard 96

Walsingham 174n17,202Warschawski,Michel 38n9Weimar 7,254-268,274Weizman,Eyal 38n9,41,44-45,47-48Wespin,Jeande(IlTabacchetti) 219WestBank 14,19,39,41-42,44WhitSunday 125

i theimaginedandrealjerusaleminartandarchitecture ·...

Documents