| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
 |
|
You would think the most important manuscript in Britain, and one of the most important in the world, would have its provenance inspected from time to time. You'll see why it isn't...
----------
Page Thirteen of Forgeries
850 AD
A woman gives some agricultural produce to these monks in exchange for the monks singing Psalm XX every day on her behalf. This agreement was recorded by means unknown
850 – 950
Book continues to be carefully preserved by the Canterbury monks
950
The monks decide to deface their most treasured possession in order to record a transaction concerning agricultural produce and psalm singing made a hundred years before and which can have no significance now the woman is long gone but it does en passant confirm St Augustine's Abbey is the legal owner of some property at Brabourne in Kent. Should anyone ask.
Ninth century, tenth century, what does it matter? But speaking of defacement, the first few pages of the treasured book are missing. Not quite treasured enough. As Dr de Hamel tells us
| The manuscript opens mid-word in the capitula list preceding the Gospel of St Matthew [Meetings, p.19] |
Although de Hamel and his colleagues treat missing opening pages as just normal wear and tear for ancient manuscripts, this runs foul of another of our golden rules: “Opening out, forgers about.”
The reason is that text is easy to reproduce but introductions are not. Anyone can turn out a Gospel of St Matthew but title pages, frontispieces, notes regarding who/ where/ when/ why the book was made, the original owner's scribbled name on the flyleaf, are all potential pitfalls for the forger.
So forgers do their best to ensure opening pages are missing whenever possible. This stratagem never arouses suspicion because the authenticators of ancient manuscripts always treat missing pages as just normal wear and tear.
These are not the only pages that have gone dubiously walkabout. Most early gospel books were profusely illustrated and the Gospels of St Augustine is no different. However, few of the original pictures in the book have ‘come down to us’, as the phrase has it, but those that have survived are useful for establishing its true provenance. Dr de Hamel for one finds them helpful
| The inclusion of integral pictures, even if only two now survive, is of importance too in assigning the manuscript to an origin under the patronage of Gregory the Great, since Gregory himself made a famous defence of the value of religious illustrations [Meetings, p.39] |
and who are we to disagree since one of the illustrations is a blatant smoking gun left by the forgers. Twelfth century forgers were highly professional craftsmen but not trained in art history. Like all art forgers, they could reproduce pictures of any period so long as they had the originals to work from.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
This was my debut as art forgery expert extraordinaire which proved to be so fecund a field of enquiry
-----------
Page Fourteen of Forgeries
As there were no illustrated gospel books from the sixth century – or at least they didn't have access to any of them – they simply used twelfth century styles and made them coarser, more rustic, less polished, to reflect that artists of five hundred years earlier would, in all probability, be like them but not as advanced as them.
This simple ruse has fooled generations of modern scholars who are trained in art history but think there is nothing unusual in styles hanging around for half a millennium. If they do come across glaring anachronisms of this sort they have no difficulty explaining them away. Here is de Hamel’s caption for one of the St Augustine illustrations
| The picture of the Last Supper in the Gospels of Saint Augustine was copied nearly five hundred years later into the Bayeux Tapestry, where it was adapted to become the scene of Odo of Bayeux feasting with his nobles [Meetings, p.48] |
It would appear the dear ladies embroidering the Bayeux Tapestry had a conversation something along these lines:
"What’s next on the list, Doris?"
"Odo feast scene, Marge. What do you reckon?"
"Dunno, how about a Last Supper type of treatment. You know, with Odo taking the place of Christ?"
"That's pushing it a bit, isn't it?"
"His lot are paying."
"Fair point. What have we got for Last Suppers?"
"There's that one in the Augustinian Gospels. We could use that."
"Leave it out, dear, that's five hundred years old!"
"Form is temporary, Doris, class is permanent."
Bayeux might seem a long way from Canterbury but as it happens – and it says a lot about the opacity of medieval history – nobody knows where the Bayeux Tapestry was in fact made, though Dr de Hamel has a theory
| The Gospel Book of Saint Augustine therefore has a part to play in the argument that the Bayeux Tapestry was actually made in Canterbury [Meetings, p.47] |
* * *
We turn next to the ‘marginalia’. The official line is we are dealing with a standard early gospel book consisting of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, with some accompanying lists and commentaries, all written in Latin in Italy during the sixth century.
After it arrived in England, English hands got to work on it. In the seventh century some minor erasures and alterations to the text were made (in Latin) for reasons that are obscure, but in the tenth century the monks of St Augustine’s Abbey, founded by the great man himself, started using blank
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Page Fifteen of Forgeries
pages in his gospel book to record documents of importance to their abbey. These additions, mainly in Anglo-Saxon, consist of eleven land charters and one list of relics held by the abbey. Land holdings and relics could be thought strange bedfellows but most medieval monastic foundations relied on two income streams: rents from land and offerings from pilgrims come to see the relics.
Before Becketomania took over in the thirteenth century, the abbey’s relics were the main draw in Canterbury, England's premier visitor destination. St Augustine’s Abbey, Canterbury, and Canterbury Cathedral were something of a joint operation. Quite why the abbey thought it necessary to list their relics in the Gospels of St Augustine is baffling but the relics themselves provide an insight into Canterbury’s attitude to authenticity in general.
Most of them are routine – crumbs of the true cross, pieces of the Virgin Mary’s cloak, hair of St Cecilia – but very appropriately they also had a finger of Pope Gregory, presumably included in a later package from Rome than the parcel of books he sent over.
There was an arm of St Bartholomew but, not wishing to be unkind, apostles' arms are two a penny in the pilgrimage trade; the abbey's real pride and joy was the head of the beheaded (in 316 AD) St Blaise. St Blaise has always been one of the most popular of all the patron saints – sore throats, wild animals, the wool trade – so getting the head was a coup. Everybody else had to make do with the off-cuts. Come to think of it, the relics probably do merit their place in the Augustine Gospels.
Ironically the relationship between medieval pilgrims and their relics is mirrored by the relationship between modern historians and Anglo-Saxon land charters. They want to believe in them, they demand evidence as to why they should believe in them, they proceed on the basis they do believe in them ... but there are always those nagging doubts.
Which may not always be shared with the lay audience so here’s a fun quiz you can try at home. Study this passage from an accredited authority
| Over a thousand Anglo-Saxon charters are extant today, as a result of being maintained in the archives of religious houses. These preserved their charters so as to record their right to land. Some surviving charters are later copies |
Obviously the original charters are historical gold, being contemporary witness to what was actually going on in Anglo-Saxon England. The copies, less so. What you have to do is consider the phrase ‘some surviving charters’ in the above passage and estimate the kind of number the writer is trying to convey. Is it
A. half-a-dozen, a dozen, maybe a few more?
B. fifty or thereabouts?
C. could it be a hundred, even two hundred?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
I use an old trick of mine even though it doesn't quite work here.
------------
Page Sixteen of Forgeries
The correct answer is D, eight hundred:
| Overall, some two hundred charters exist in the original form whilst others are post-Conquest copies |
We cannot say (I mean, modern historians cannot say) whether the copies are genuine or not, so let us concentrate on the two hundred claimed to be originals, and therefore presumed genuine.
As usual with such fine judgements, it all boils down to a battle of wits between forgers and authenticators. So, Question Two in your home quiz:
There are two hundred Anglo-Saxon land charters whose authenticity will be decided by one of two groups, forgers and authenticators. Using your skill and judgement, which of the two groups do you think will prevail?
A. Professional forgers whose fulltime job is the creation of authentic-seeming Anglo-Saxon land charters and all the necessary appurtenances. Their work has to withstand the scrutiny of legal, albeit medieval, authorities
B. Professional historians whose fulltime job is lecturing and writing about Anglo-Saxon England. Their jobs would be at risk were there no authentic Anglo-Saxon land charters and all the necessary appurtenances. Their work has to withstand the peer review of other professional historians whose fulltime job is lecturing and writing about Anglo-Saxon England.
None of this bears directly on the authenticity of the Gospels of St Augustine. Even if every single Anglo-Saxon land charter in it were bogus this would not prove the gospel book itself is bogus.
If the book was truly written in Italy during the sixth century it could still be a repository for land charters, genuine or otherwise, written in England during the tenth, eleventh and twelfth centuries.
Unless there was some reason why these particular charters needed to be associated with St Augustine and his gospel book. That would be mighty fishy. Let us, so to speak, forge that link. To do this we shall need to look at the orthodox history of land tenure in England. It will be mercifully short and dates will once again be occasionally rounded up
pre-AD 43
nothing known
43–400
England is part of the Roman Empire. All land is held at the whim of the Roman authorities. No information about how land was apportioned, title to land established, ownership recorded etc.
400–500
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
I don't know why I'm keeping to the Kindle pagination, it must be inconvenient for you, but I am. Nothing in red, all standard stuff.
-----------------
Page Seventeen of Forgeries
Romans leave, nothing known, everything ‘in flux’
500-900
Anglo-Saxon kingdoms are established throughout England. Land appears to be distributed among and by Anglo-Saxon kings, thegns, monasteries, commoners etc. The title to that land is verified in a number of ways – mainly customary rights and force but also, reportedly, written land charters
900–1066
Another period of flux as Anglo-Saxon and Danish regimes vie for supremacy. Since some kind of legitimacy is continuous, land holdings too are continuous but ‘subject to change’
1066
Norman Conquest. Ownership of all English land is vested in William the Conqueror
1066-1139
Feudal system. Technically all land is owned by the king and large parts continue to be owned directly by the king, but most is given to Norman magnates and others who assisted in the original Conquest, and they in turn parcel land out to people useful to them e.g. men-at-arms, the Church, monasteries, tenant farmers etc. Often new people, sometimes the previous people.
Not everyone was given formal written title to specific areas of land. If, for instance, a magnate’s job was to guard the Welsh border he might be given, say, ‘the land and entitlements of Shrewsbury’ but what that amounted to would be largely a matter of what he could hold and keep, not just vis à vis the Welsh but vis à vis other Norman magnates on either side. What he ended up with may or may not be formally recorded but either way it was ‘subject to change’ depending on his relationship with the central Norman authorities in London.
On the other hand these same authorities, including Norman law courts such as they were, could be expected to support him in his peaceable and heritable (for a price) land holdings.
1139–1153
Civil War between King Stephen, representing the existing Norman administration, and Empress Matilda, representing the potentially new Angevin regime. Land ownership is not necessarily underwritten and enforced by the central authorities because a) there was not much by way of a central authority during the civil wars and b) it might turn out to be the wrong central authority.
1153
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
| but very appropriately they also had a finger of Pope Gregory, presumably included in a later package from Rome than the parcel of books he sent over. |
Are you sure, this appears to be a mix up with the legend concerning the Mass of St Gregory....maybe it was the finger of Christ?
| The earliest version of the story is found in the 8th-century biography of Gregory by Paul the Deacon, and was repeated in the 9th-century one by John the Deacon. In this version, the Pope was saying Mass when a woman present started to laugh at the time of the Communion, saying to a companion that she could not believe the bread was Christ, as she herself had baked it. Gregory prayed for a sign, and the host turned into a bleeding finger.[1] | |
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
| Wiley wrote: | but very appropriately they also had a finger of Pope Gregory, presumably included in a later package from Rome than the parcel of books he sent over.
Are you sure, this appears to be a mix up with the legend concerning the Mass of St Gregory....maybe it was the finger of Christ? |
I thought I took this claim direct from de Hamel's Meetings with Remarkable Manuscripts but your query prompted me to type in 'List of relics in the Augustine Gospels' and I got back from AI
-----------
The St. Augustine Gospels, a manuscript, contains an inventory of relics, not of Saint Augustine himself, but of other saints and holy objects. These include a piece of the True Cross, a bone of Saint Paul, and relics of Saint Andrew, Saint Luke, and others.
The St. Augustine Gospels, also known as the Gospels of St. Augustine, is a 6th-century illuminated manuscript that was sent by Pope Gregory the Great to Augustine of Canterbury. It is the oldest surviving illustrated Latin gospel book and the oldest non-archaeological artifact of any kind to have survived in England. The manuscript is currently held at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge.
The manuscript includes a relic list, which is a detailed inventory of relics housed in Canterbury, likely added in the 12th century. This list includes:
Relics of Saints:
A piece of the True Cross
A bone of Saint Paul
Relics of Saint Andrew, including a jawbone, a piece of the cross, and a portion of his arm
A relic of Saint Luke
A relic of Saint Stephen
A relic of Saint Lawrence
Relics of Saint Martin
Relics of Saint Vincent
A relic of Saint Pancras
Other Holy Objects:
A lock of hair from the Virgin Mary
Milk from the Virgin Mary
Some of the wood from the manger where Christ was born
Some of the dust from the tomb of Saint Peter
A piece of the stone on which Christ stood when he ascended into heaven
Some of the stone from Mount Sinai
A piece of the stone upon which Saint John the Baptist was beheaded
----------
No mention of the Pope's (or Jesus's or A N Other's) finger or the head of St Blaise. Which is odd given that AI 'knows all'. I shall investigate further (though it is somewhat incidental). However your further quote
| The earliest version of the story is found in the 8th-century biography of Gregory by Paul the Deacon, and was repeated in the 9th-century one by John the Deacon. In this version, the Pope was saying Mass when a woman present started to laugh at the time of the Communion, saying to a companion that she could not believe the bread was Christ, as she herself had baked it. Gregory prayed for a sign, and the host turned into a bleeding finger.[1] |
sounds to me more like a transubstantiation matter, a controversy more relevant to Reformation than to Pilgrimage times.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
According to Dark Age historians, Pope Gregory was 'the Apostle of the English' on account of having converted them to Christianity, though his cult seems to have been the brainchild of Lanfranc, credited with founding St Gregory's Priory, Canterbury, in 1087.
It turns out not a single English church has bodily, or even 'contact', relics of the sainted Gregory, a somewhat surprising admission. Perhaps because no-one knew where to get them from?
| Oddly, for someone of Gregory's importance, the location of his burial seems to have gone unrecorded. |
Despite (or, as may be, because of) the absence of a known burial site, there are "numerous portions of the relics of St Gregory throughout the world and it would be difficult to trace the history of each". In the circumstances it's hardly surprising if their provenances derive from 'oral tradition' and stories of 'wrong' relics replacing authentic ones (but accompanied by a letter to authenticate them).
Constantine, in about 950, reportedly had Gregory's relics brought to Constantinople though no-one knows where he got them from, and had them enshrined inside the Church of the Holy Apostles. Most if not all the relics disappeared, taken off to Rome by Crusaders in 1204 after the Sack of Constantinople. It's a standard scenario, often referred to in connection with lost manuscripts and missing monasteries. Some four centuries later the relics were installed in St Peter's Basilica in the Vatican (the first to be housed there after those of St Peter).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Library Index 
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
