Our systems are now restored following recent technical disruption, and we’re working hard to catch up on publishing. We apologise for the inconvenience caused. Find out more: https://www.cambridge.org/universitypress/about-us/news-and-blogs/cambridge-university-press-publishing-update-following-technical-disruption
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 November 2011
The Alfred Jewel in the Ashmolean Museum has received attention on numerous occasions; the most recent and most complete publication is that by Miss J. R. Kirk, issued by the Museum in the form of a ‘guide’. A full bibliography is there given. The figure in enamel on the obverse has been variously described by different authorities as Christ, the pope, some saint, or even Alfred himself (pl. xv a). Earlier parallels for its iconography have been cited, and Miss Kirk notes several instances in Celtic art, where similar figures are to be found, as well as a textile from Akhmin, in the Kaiser Friedrich Museum, which bears the bust of a figure holding two wands in a similar position. In connexion with it she cites a suggestion put forward by Dalton that the idea of this figure holding two wands was modelled on that of the Egyptian god Osiris, who assumes a very similar position. More recently Dr. Schramm has attempted to explain the two staffs as a sceptre and a ‘baculum’, twin insignia of rule. Though Dr. Schramm's explanation is reasonable, and the ultimate derivation of the theme from an ancient Egyptian model seems perfectly possible, the more immediate ancestry of the jewel's decoration is hardly accounted for by these explanations, and what seems to the writer a more convincing iconographical prototype is here proposed. It is that the figure represents a portion of a theme which was very popular in East and West alike from the tenth century onwards, namely the ‘Ascent of Alexander’.
page 214 note 1 The Alfred and Minster Lovel Jewels (Oxford, 1948).Google Scholar
page 214 note 2 Loc. cit., pl. iv. Strzygowski, , Jahrbuch der Königlich – Preussischen Kunstsammlungen, XXIV (1903), 164.Google Scholar
page 214 note 3 Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, 2nd series, XX (1904), 71 ff.Google Scholar
page 214 note 4 Schramm, E., Herrschaftszeichen und Staatssymbolik, I (Stuttgart, 1954), 173.Google Scholar
page 214 note 5 Loc. cit., pl. III.
page 214 note 6 Strzygowski, , Amida (Heidelberg, 1910), pp. 120Google Scholar and 348. Migeon, , Manuel d’art mussulman (Paris, 1927), II, 21.Google Scholar Migeon suggests that it was done by a Chinese craftsman, a proposition which seems most improbable. There is nothing Chinese in its style, and excellent enamels were being produced at this time in the Byzantine world and in the Caucasus. The style of the enamel is moreover markedly Byzantine.
page 215 note 1 The story appears as an interpolation in the Life of Alexander of the Pseudo-Callisthenes, which was composed in Alexandria in the third century A.D. The original text has perished but there are a number of later variants. See Millet, G., ‘L’Ascen sion d’Alexandre’, Syria, IV, 1923.Google Scholar This important article by Millet, marked at the end ‘à suivre’, was never actually completed. There is every reason to suppose that an illustrated version of the text existed in the late classical period. See Weitzmann, K., Greek Mythology in Byzantine Art (Princeton, 1951), p. 194.Google Scholar
page 215 note 2 Burlington Magazine, XXXII (1919), 136 ff. and 177 ff.Google Scholar
page 215 note 3 It was assigned to the tenth by Bertaux, , L'Art dans l'Italie méridionale (Paris, 1904), p. 490Google Scholar, but this dating seems too early on stylistic grounds. Bréhier dates it to the tenth or eleventh; La Sculpture et les arts mineurs (Paris, 1936), pl. XXI.Google Scholar
page 215 note 4 Arberry, J. H., The Legacy of Persia (Oxford, 1953), pl. 12Google Scholarb. In publishing this photograph, I failed to recognize the true nature of the theme.
page 215 note 5 L'Orange, L. P., Studies on the Iconography of Cosmic Kingship in the Ancient World (Oslo, 1953), fig. 87. He dates it to the tenth century, but the eleventh is more probable.Google Scholar
page 215 note 6 Grabar, A., ‘Le succès des arts orientaux à la cour byzantine sous les Macédoniens’, Münchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst, 3rd series, III (1951), 46.Google Scholar
page 215 note 7 This will be published in the catalogue now being prepared by M. E. Coche de la Ferté, as no. 21. It dates from the thirteenth century. I take this opportunity of thanking him for telling me of it.
page 215 note 8 Grabar, , loc. cit., p. 46. I am indebted to Professor Grabar for the loan of the photograph.Google Scholar
page 215 note 9 Bank, A., ‘Une bulle de plomb avec l'image de 1'Ascension d'Alexandre le grand’, Hermitage Museum, Oriental Department, Travaux, iii (Leningrad, 1940). Text in Russian, summary in French.Google Scholar
page 215 note 10 Male, É, L'Art religieux en France au XIIe siècle (Paris, 1922), p. 271.Google Scholar
page 216 note 1 Pope, A. U., A Survey of Persian Art (Oxford, 1938), IV, pl. 207.Google Scholar
page 216 note 2 Millet, G., loc. cit., p. 113.Google Scholar
page 216 note 3 Budge, E. A. Wallis, Life and Exploits of Alexander, p. 33.Google Scholar
page 216 note 4 For an interesting note on this confusion see Riefstahl, Elizabeth, ‘A Coptic roundel in the Brooklyn Museum’, in Coptic Studies in Honor of W. E. Crum (The Byzantine Institute, 1950), p. 539.Google Scholar
page 216 note 5 History of Russian Art, I (Moscow, 1953), 255.Google Scholar
page 216 note 6 L'Orange, , op. cit., fig. 54.Google Scholar
page 216 note 7 Bréhier, , La Sculpture et les arts Mineurs, pl. XXXIX.Google Scholar
page 216 note 8 Rosenberg, M., Gesckichte der Goldschmiedekunst; Zellensckmelz, III (1921), fig. 46.Google Scholar
page 217 note 1 Falke, Von, Kunstgeschichte der Seidenweberei (Berlin, 1913), p. 57, fig. 74.Google Scholar
page 217 note 1 Op. cit., pl. III.
