19
Gothic Sculpture from 1150 to 1250
The sculpture of the period from c.1150 to c.1250 is usually labeled “Gothic.” Primarily associated with the cathedral, sculpture developed rapidly until around 1250. Most of the leading workshops of Gothic sculpture were attached to cathedrals, and their artistic leadership came from French abbeys after the Romanesque period.1 The exteriors of Gothic cathedrals became the setting for large sculptural projects of a size that had never before been seen. The outside of Chartres Cathedral displays about 2,000 pieces of sculpture; Reims Cathedral has even more. Rood-screens (jubés), too, were covered with sculpture. Unfortunately, only fragments are left in France to tell us about their once lavish programs; most of them were destroyed during the seventeenth century. Rood-screens functioned as barriers to restrict the view of the chancel from the nave at the celebration of the Mass.
Defining sculpture of this period as “cathedral sculpture” becomes even more convincing once we notice the changes in the character of such work after 1250, when the outsides of church buildings were no longer covered with large amounts of sculpture. For example, Sainte-Chapelle at Paris, which functioned as a chapel for the royal palace and which was built to house the Crown of Thorns (recently brought from Constantinople), marks the end of our period. Its sculptural program consists primarily of statues of the twelve Apostles which flank the shrine where the crown was located. Elsewhere as well, sculptures inside churches, often made for chantry chapels, became more dominant.
Although monumental architectural sculpture is the main subject of our considerations, we should note that other forms of sculpture were not without importance between 1150 and 1250. Sculptured altarpieces – wooden Madonnas, for example – played a significant role, and the same is true for the work of goldsmiths. Delicate ivory carvings appear at the end of our period, particularly in Paris.2 But the exterior sculptural decoration of the cathedral has a very different developmental potential from that of the more restricted liturgical art. Exterior sculpture has no actual liturgical function. While it often represents the liturgy, it also includes programs that are far removed from the liturgical, such as the masks of Reims. Sculpture between 1150 and 1250, therefore, allows for a varied vocabulary.
France is the starting-point of the Gothic sculpture that soon found its way to England (Wells, Winchester, London), Spain (Sangüesa, Burgos, Léon), and the Empire (Strasbourg, Bamberg, Naumburg, Magdeburg). “Gothic” became more and more the common language of European sculptural production.
Gothic sculpture of French cathedrals has been interpreted according to a number of different themes, including its subordinate relation to architecture, its otherworldly spirituality, realism, the study of nature, the discovery of the individual, the reception of the antique, and proto-humanism.3 These sometimes opposing ideas have two different causes: first, the fact that Gothic sculpture is not homogenous and, second, a desire to convey a general idea of what the cathedral is.
The portals of the west façades at St Denis, Chartres, and Paris4 have a clear arrangement, consisting of tympana, lintels, archivolts, and jambs. This arrangement seems to represent the new spirit of these portals. But it is in fact the jamb statue which is the new invention, being both an element and a sign of the new, more clearly articulated arrangement. Discussion of Gothic sculpture often revolves around the column (jamb) statue. The new porch of Abbot Suger’s abbey church was dedicated in 1140.5 The invention of jamb statues and their great influence on the development of Gothic sculpture allows us to distinguish the sculptures of these portals as “early Gothic,” in contrast to the Romanesque sculpture that had come before. Jamb statues are connected to the column behind them but appear nevertheless to be in front of the column. They are a form of relief sculpture, although this is visually far from obvious.6
The column statues at St Denis were removed during the eighteenth century and only some fragments of the heads are preserved. But we know something about them thanks to the engravings of Montfaucon. The series of jamb statues which extended over three portals created a new monumentality. Each statue was distinct from the others. Jamb statues were only frontally arranged during the early Gothic period, and the creation of series of column statues proclaims a new message, which has not yet been fully interpreted. The tympanum of the central portal at St Denis depicts the Last Judgment, the one at Chartres the Majestas Domini – subjects that were both well known from Romanesque portal programs. A new invention, however, is the desire to show a series of witnesses. Jamb statues represent typological figures from the Old Testament, members of the ordo propheticus, and saints. This is, however, not the place to discuss the meaning of jamb statues in detail.7
Contemporaries were apparently impressed by the portals of St Denis. We can find successors not only in Chartres and Paris but also in such different places as the French capitals of the Plantagenets – Le Mans and Angers – and in Champagne, Burgundy, and Berry. But even though an epoch always has a real starting point, it is only succession that produces the beginning.8 It is therefore not important whether the jamb statue is an original invention of St Denis or whether it has forerunners in Romanesque sculpture.9
The royal portals of Chartres, dating from the middle of the twelfth century, are famous by virtue of how well preserved they are (fig. 19-1). The rebuilding of the cathedral in 1194, however, probably caused several changes.10 Five of the jamb statues were lost and were replaced by columns in 1830. Today we can find 19 column statues in situ, some of them casts whose originals are now deposited in the crypt. The central portal as a whole conveys an impression of great harmony. Most of the jamb figures have not been identified in spite of how well preserved they are. Only the figure of Moses is certain. There are a surprising number of queens, something for which no convincing interpretation has yet been given. The great number of kings and queens is responsible for the term “royal portals,” evoking the idea of a representation of the French monarchy. The queens in particular have continued to fascinate scholars. The romantic Joris-Karl Huysmans admired the fresh, enchanting smile of the so-called Queen of Sheba. He also called her a fragile spindle, a stem of celery that has been put over a waffle pattern which has been carved in wax; the queen’s soul is apparently filled with the glory of God.11 So far from such a poetic conception did the German art historian Wilhelm Lübke take these jamb statues to be that he described them as servants who have received a command. But he also noticed the high quality of the expressions on their faces.12 This description, continued by Wilhelm Vöge,13 is even present in modern interpretations.14
What is the reason behind such a controversial perception? The queens of the west central portal demonstrate a new style of figure: they are attached to columns and at the same time present a new intensity of facial expression. They are works of the “Headmaster”15 – but this traditional attribution says nothing about the organization of the workshop: it is only acceptable as a “stylistic term.” Nor do we know anything about the organization of the cathedral’s workshops.16
The concentration upon the central axis, denying completely every traditional device meant to indicate pose, is significant. There is no need for any indication of weight breaking the stance since all movement is aligned along the central axis. The drapery of the queens emphasizes the vertical composition of very fine folds. The differences between these statues and those at St Denis are obvious, since the movement of the jamb statues is in significant contrast to their relation to the column. At St Denis the “dancing” of the Romanesque figural vocabulary seems to have bound the statues to the column.17 The architecture seems to present the sculpture in a new arrangement. But at Chartres, the sculptor has created a fresh style for the jamb statues. The static element has been reduced. The foot hangs down over a sloping basis; the bare parts of the body, the head and the hands, have become the dominant features. The clothed body is a foil in front of which the hands form their gestures and present objects to explain their texts. The faces are of a wonderful beauty. The queens wear contemporary clothes in spite of their vertical styling and the upper parts of their bodies know something of the charms of wearing these clothes.
FIGURE 19-1 Central west portal, Chartres Cathedral, c.1150.
The sculpture shows no sign that the body might have been understood as a totality. Each part of the body has in fact a different expression and meaning. This is no invention of Chartres, but can be found since the middle of the eleventh century – as the so-called “Siechhaus Madonna” in the Liebieghaus of Frankfurt demonstrates.18 The jamb statues of Chartres are in this sense comparable with the contemporary wooden Madonnas of the Auvergne. Up to the latest period of Gothic sculpture, it is normal for the upper part of the body to be clothed in modern dress. But, below the waist, the rhetoric of the drapery frees itself increasingly from any semblance of naturally hanging folds.
The Antique Tendency of the Early Thirteenth Century
The vocabulary of the early Gothic style is rarely seen after c.1200, with the cathedrals of Paris, Laon, and Sens demonstrating a great interest in the antique or in antique models (fig. 19-2).19 The orientation toward the antique is not the only significant phenomenon of this period. Although other ideas become dominant later, the recourse to the antique still existed and explains many significant compositions. It is not only found in monumental sculpture. The works of goldsmiths show the same tendency, as the so-called altar of Verdun in Klosterneuburg, dated to 1181, and the Shrine of the Three Kings in Cologne produced by the same artist around 1200, demonstrate. The legal code, known as the Constitutiones Augustales, of Emperor Fredrick II is a famous example of the imitation of antiquity. Some scholars believe that kings and emperors in particular were responsible for the promotion of the use of antique models.20 But it is possible in only a few cases to demonstrate that a figure from antiquity has been directly copied. Job’s head from a relief of Notre Dame in Paris, showing him amongst his wife and friends, comes very close to an antique portrait bust.21 Only the sculptors of Reims between 1220 and 1233 seem to have concentrated on a more direct connection with the antique.22 But here, too, the number of antique models used is very small. The sculpture of Laon from around 1200 is comparable to the images of the Ingeborg Psalter.23 Objects of early Christian and Byzantine art preserved in church treasuries may have had some influence. The depiction of finely rendered drapery and graceful movement is impressive after the linearism of the early Gothic. The question whether the antique style was meant to be understood as consciously imitating antique models is still under discussion. It seems impossible to find in the famous Visitation of Reims, which is very similar to antique statues, a spirituality that is very different from those in other images of Mary and Elizabeth which are not based on antique models. The Gothic sculptors avoided the mythological aspect in contrast to the Carolingian reception of the antique. Gothic sculpture showing Christian subject matter does not repeat mythological personification, the sculptors distinguishing between style and iconography.24
FIGURE 19-2 Nebukadnezar, from left west portal, Laon Cathedral, c.1200.
The antique tendency represents a great change, but it was not the only course of artistic development at the beginning of the thirteenth century. The sculpture of the transept of Chartres Cathedral shows that, while it was possible for the antique style to become schematic, another workshop might give it new life. The very rich sculptural decoration of the two façades of the transept is part of the ambitious rebuilding after 1194. The decoration extends over six portals and the projecting porch. The sculptures, if we follow the recent theory of Kurmann, were for the most part put in place only after both they and all the ashlar masonry had been carved.25 The sculptures were probably made over a period of 40 years.
The north transept consists of three sculpted portals, with that of the Triumph of Mary in the center and the Epiphany and the story of Job on either side. The south transept has the Last Judgment in the center flanked by those of the Martyrs and Confessors. Workshops from Laon and Sens were responsible for the execution of the sculptures, each developing very differently.
The workshop of Laon presents a new conception of jamb statues based on the antique style. Its masters were responsible for the Annunciation and the Visitation groups of the Epiphany portal. In both groups, the address of Gabriel and Elizabeth mitigates the frontality of the compositions as their bodies are turned toward Mary. The sculptures give the appearance of being less attached to the column behind them than those discussed above. The antique style of Gabriel culminates in a head of curly hair.26 But this style is less pronounced in the tympanum of the Triumph of Maria by the same workshop. A new kind of linearism dominates this tympanum, which is the programmatic center of the portal. It seems to reflect the desire for a new style. Around the same time, the Virgin portal at Notre-Dame in Paris achieved a general similarity in facial depiction, something that gives a strong sense of harmony to the entire portal and is felt to have a positive meaning.27
Similarity is also the driving force behind the Last Judgment of the south central portal at Chartres. The jamb statues mirror those of the royal portals of the west façade. The feet, again, hang down. The Beau Dieu, the most characteristic sculpture of the new movement, has a body that is again a foil against which large hands carry a voluminous book. The axially arranged head has achieved full natural proportions and demonstrates the underlying principles of symmetry and uniformity.28 It seems to realize nearly the same idea as the early Gothic jamb figures of the west central portals,29 but was produced by a workshop whose tradition was based on the antique style.
The new schematism is combined with another novel phenomenon. The many figures of the Last Judgment portal apparently forced the sculptors to create more simply composed sculptures. Most of them are of a much lower quality than the Beau Dieu. The Apostles at the jamb accompanying Christ have been called stereotypical or uniform by some scholars.30 They are not in fact uniform, but rather repeat a few motifs over and over.31 The necessity of producing a great number of sculptures was also responsible for the lower quality at Amiens.
The other workshop at Chartres, coming from Sens, took a very different direction. Their first work comprised the sculptures of the Job-Solomon portal (fig. 19-3).32 The differences between these and those of the first workshop appear all the greater since the Sens sculptures were produced at the same time as those of the Last Judgment. The Job-Solomon portal is unique in that it is the only portal of a French Gothic cathedral to show scenes from the Old Testament exclusively. While the element of the antique style is no less obvious than before, the sculptors have employed a very different vocabulary. It is not possible to characterize the style in general, since the vocabulary took its distinctive forms from many sources. The positive connotation of stylistic similarity shown in the Last Judgment of the south transept is employed here to characterize the angels of the inner archivolt in contrast to evil, whose appearance is much more “realistic.” The Queen of Sheba in the same portal is one of the most charming and lively sovereigns of the Gothic period, who, in the process of walking, picks up her clothes, gently pulls on the corded clasp of her cape and addresses herself to King Solomon. The antique style made the sculptors aware of nature. But this does not seem to constitute a sufficient explanation. This female figure, with her full heavy hair and a fleshy face, stands in contrast to the slender young Judith at the other side of the jamb. And never before has evil found such an intensive expression in a Gothic portal as in those who torment Job in the tympanum and in the heads of the tyrants in the archivolts. Pejorative characterization is the driving force behind this individualization. It has drastically formed the faces of two of the friends of Job, who is sitting on the manure heap, scratching his abscesses, given over to Satan’s claws. Pejorative physiognomies separate the bad from the evil counselors inside the scene of the Judgment of Solomon, located in the lintel. The “counterface” to all this can be seen in the jamb statue of Solomon, with his wonderful curly hair and eyes of enormous visual power, whose sockets have been deeply carved out. That the face of Solomon is the “counterface” to the evil faces becomes obvious when we compare it with the heads of the tyrants in the lowest voussoirs of the archivolts. The discovery of the “Königsköpfe” by Wilhelm Vöge has shown a new aspect of Gothic sculpture. Physiognomic and pathognomic mediums33 formulate the visages of the tyrants. In contrast to Solomon, one king with a contemporary hairstyle has a shriveled beard and a turgid eye. Two others show signs of anger.34 This is not the place for a discussion of the program of the portal. Nevertheless, the typological aspect of the imagery does make some allusions to contemporary history, with the blind Job or the hero-like Samson becoming figures of multiple meanings,35 something that must be kept in mind if we are to understand these types.
FIGURE 19-3 Balaam, Queen of Sheba, and King Solomon, from right northern portal, Chartres Cathedral, c.1220.
The so-called “divergence of style” phenomenon became famous through the sculpture of the transept of Chartres Cathedral. Wilhelm Vöge was the first to remark on this divergence,36 thereby influencing the discussion of scholars for a long time. Sauerländer saw here a style existing beside the “mainstream,” whose route we can follow from Sens to Strasbourg.37 The idea that the vocabulary of the workshop of the Job-Solomon portal might be related to its typological program suggests that the portal is an integration of stylistic elements of very different sources, which are used to distinguish the different types within the portal.38 Vöge characterized the “Master of the Kings’ Heads” as an artist of unusual genius, a forerunner of the artists of the Renaissance, a visionary, removed from the sculptors who were mere servants of the overarching spiritual unity of the cathedral.39 The “Master of the Kings’ Heads” would deny this idea of an overarching unity without individualism, without an interest in nature. Emile Mâle begins the first chapter of his book about thirteenth-century French art with the statement that art of this period was organized like a dogma which excludes every individual artistic fantasy.40 But Vöge found in the “Master of the Kings’ Heads” an artist with just such an individual attitude. Vöge accepted, however, the characterization of medieval art that Mâle and others have given with regard to mainstream art. The dominant workshops were, according to this theory, responsible for carving the sculptures in all the prominent places of the south façade, whereas the workshop of the Job-Solomon portal was responsible for the less important portal on the north side.
While Vöge has found an artist of the proto-Renaissance, it was Erwin Panofsky who found the proto-humanistic patron. This role was assigned to Abbot Suger, who supposedly anticipated the Platonism of the Renaissance in his use of Pseudo-Dionysian thought.41 Not much is left today of the picture of the protohumanistic Abbot Suger.42
It is necessary here to discuss again the question of what realism in Gothic sculpture is. The study of nature is not the antithesis of the spirituality prevalent in the art of the time. The interest in individualism, as in the Job-Solomon portal and the so-called masks of Reims, demonstrates a conception of individuality that was supposed to be a deviation from the will of heaven. Considered a vice, it was seen as self-destructive, a kind of sinful fantasy. Many theologians therefore identify fantasy with heresy. Medieval theology has views not only about “ordo”, but also about individualism and fantasy. The latter were both thought of as vices. We find the same idea and the same kind of realism in Dante’s Divina Commedia.43
Realism, as art historical discussion has demonstrated,44 has as many stereotypes as so-called non-realistic art. The realism of physiognomy and pathognomy can be transformed into a rhetorical system. The masks of Reims are full of pejorative projections, as is the imagery of the passion of the saints. In the Job-Solomon portal, the idea of similarity is bound to the images of angels. But it is problematic to distinguish between Gothic sculptures along the lines of “ideal” and “realistic,” which are the terms usually employed in art history. There are too few representations of living persons to allow a discussion as to whether depictions of contemporary persons employ the iconographical types found in hagiographical imagery.
Reims and Paris: The New Dignity and Statuary Presence of Sculpture in the mid-Thirteenth Century
The constitution of rhetorical stereotypes seems to be the main impetus behind the “pathognomical revolution” at Reims. The rebuilding of Reims Cathedral took place between 1210 and the beginning of the second half of the thirteenth century.45 The sculpture of Reims documents a period of about 50 years. The early years were still very much influenced by the Triumph of Mary at Chartres. The years around 1230 saw an orientation toward antiquity. The use of models from Amiens starts some years later. The figures, which are of great statuary presence, were carved during the final period – perhaps between 1245 and 1255. The creation of a rich and authoritative body of sculptures at the cathedrals is obvious.
No other cathedral can boast a number of sculptures comparable to Reims. The entire west façade is covered with sculptures up to the figures in the buttress aediculae of the towers. Sculptures are located in the buttress aediculae above the choir ambulatory and in the aediculae of the high buttresses of the nave. The reveals of the rose windows include reliefs. The blind triforium of the transept has console-figures of busts and heads, the so-called masks, which we can also find in the archivolts of the clerestory windows and below the eaves of the towers of the transept. Atlantes can be found above the buttresses of the choir and the nave. The sculptures are not restricted to the portals alone, as they were in the early Gothic sculptural programs. Even the inner side of the west façade is decorated with niches for figures. The wealth of places for sculptural display enables every kind of sculptural art to find a place in the cathedral.
The smiling angels, in particular, are very famous.46 The way in which they display emotion is entirely new. Theologians had determined that the blessed in heaven, too, have emotions: the emotion of joy, which is indicated through smiling.47 The passions of martyrs also received a new intensive expression. Dionysius’ half-closed eyes and the half-opened mouth without lips – at the jamb of the west left portal – expresses the passion of a man whose head has been chopped off and who has brought this head to the place where he wants to found his place of patronage. The masks are the counterparts to the smiling angels and the suffering saints. These are almost invisible to the average visitor at the church. They are without any liturgical function. They were nevertheless a great influence upon later Gothic art as models for facial expressions. Their interpretation leads to the same problem of understanding realism as has been discussed above. Some scholars see only the decorative results of the study of nature; in contrast, others interpret these images as pictures of the vices and of outcasts.48 No other facial expression of the masks is shown as often as is the expression of laughing. Laughing was apparently used as a sign to denote the vices in contrast to the smile of the blessed.49 To characterize vices only through facial expression was entirely new. It seems as if the artists had studied the pantomime of the jongleurs.50 The composite creatures, typical of Romanesque sculptures, are transformed into animal-like physiognomies. Similar examples of the study of facial expressions can be found in the archivolts which depict the Apocalypse and which date only slightly later. Never before did Gothic sculpture produce such an image of the terror of the Last Days.
Some sculpture has great statuary presence and dignity. The so-called Vierge dorée of the south portal of Amiens Cathedral is no longer a relief but stands free in front of the trumeau, emancipated from the architecture.51 The Madonna is related to the Madonna of the trumeau of the northern portal of Notre-Dame in Paris, but the Vierge dorée is a new composition. The Vierge dorée addresses herself to the child, not only with her face but also with her whole bearing, in contrast to earlier trumeau Madonnas who present the child frontally – the same feature can be seen in the case of the Madonna of the west right portal of Amiens. The enormous volume and weight of the body contribute to the staging of this address. The Vierge dorée had a great influence upon the work of goldsmiths and ivory carvers.
Most of the jamb statues of Reims from the years 1245–55 are sculpturally very expressive, even though they are fixed to the columns. John the Evangelist of the west left portal (fig. 19-4) reminds one almost of an orator of antiquity. The book becomes a minor attribute compared to the freestanding leg. The folds of the flowing drapery which cover the weight-bearing leg are dominant. John turns his head to the side of his weight-bearing leg, where his equally flowing hair falls in fashionable curls. One of the preconditions of this new depiction of presence in the sculpture is the recent method of representing drapery which had been devised by the sculptors of Amiens.52 In the beginning, the “large-fold style”53 was developed as a means of simplifying the depiction of drapery necessitated by the demands of mass production. But the resultant ability to depict volume led to new means of expression. Drapery was no longer an ornamental structure applied to the figure; it now adopts the aspect of a material which takes its form according to the movement of the body. The reliefs of the Creator in the archivolts of the porch of the north right portal of Chartres demonstrate how effective this drapery style could be in depicting the volume of seated figures.54 Soon, a new rhetorical vocabulary of drapery was created through large dish-shaped folds.
The sculptors of the mid-thirteenth century used the cathedral like an enormous model book. Recourse to an older vocabulary can be frequently found. One of the latest sculptures of the north porch of Chartres, St Modesta, borrows some elements from the sculpture of the north central portal, incorporating them into the new style.55 The head of one of the Apostles of Sainte-Chapelle – today in the Musée de Cluny – reverts to an older type, probably in order to achieve a greater differentiation.
FIGURE 19-4 Saints, from left west portal, Reims Cathedral, c.1250.
These Apostles flank the shrine of the Crown of Thorns. Attached to the pillars of the upper church, they demonstrate the eagerness of the patron to find new places and functions for sculptures which could bring new meaning to their character. The leading workshops of the Empire show the same phenomenon. The sculptures of the Judgment Pillar of Strasbourg Cathedral are closely linked to the tradition of the workshop which came from Sens to work at Chartres.56 The Gothic sculpture of Bamberg mirrors the classicizing sculpture of Reims.57 The workshop of the donor-figures of Naumburg demonstrates the same dignity and statuary presence as the sculpture at Reims around the middle of the thirteenth century, although there are no specific connections. The context, nevertheless, has brought about significant changes. The unusual idea of displaying, inside the choir, images of nobles who had died long before, probably in order to honor them as patrons, resulted in an apparently arbitrary selection of figures. Their unusual position inside the choir seems to reflect the transformation of the position of the Apostles at Sainte-Chapelle.
It is also in the middle of the thirteenth century that we find divergent interests in studying the body and in creating a hieratic mode. There were few opportunities to present the nude in the Middle Ages. Adam and Eve in paradise is one. The sculptor of the Adam of the south transept of Notre-Dame in Paris – now in the Musée de Cluny – took advantage of the new possibilities. This life-sized statue demonstrates an interest in the nude combined with the study of an antique model never to be seen again until the beginning of the Quattrocento. The figure is not without Gothic elements, but it also shows many anatomical details similar to those found in works from antiquity.58 But we would miss the point if we tried to define the period on the basis of figures like this one alone. Realism more often entails a single expressive motif than an original mentality. For example, the various levels of sanctity may be distinguished in the depiction of holy figures. The late sculptures of Reims give us the opportunity to understand better the way in which this is done. It has been remarked that the head of the Virgin on the trumeau of the west central portal and the head of a figure not far away – identified as a servant of the Virgin, part of a Presentation scene – both employed the same model. But the fleshiness of the face found in the servant has been altered in the case of the Virgin. The cheeks are less full, the smile is formed almost without lips. The eyebrows are nothing more than the upper part of the eye-sockets. The depiction of the Virgin is the result not so much of a general stylistic conception as a characterization of Mary as the patron of the church in her central position in the trumeau.59
The hieratic mode of the middle of the thirteenth century is known as “court style.”60 This term derives from the fact that Paris was the seat of the French court. Indeed, Paris, the royal capital, becomes more and more the center of art. Book painters, ivory carvers, goldsmiths: they all went to Paris as the place with the best opportunities for their skills. The production of art in the city increasingly focused on style to the exclusion of other possibilities. It is still open to discussion whether we can really find the ideal of the court in the face of the court-style Virgin, or whether we can talk of a sublimation of the French Gothic.61 The works of ivory carvers and goldsmiths are based on the sculptures of the cathedrals. This is demonstrated by the Virgin of Sainte-Chapelle, today in the Louvre, and the Virgin of St Denis, now in Cincinnati. The appearance of these works becomes more important at a time when the large sculptural projects in the cathedrals were coming to an end. Ivories now became the leading expressions of French Gothic. This change can hardly be underestimated: the end of the large sculptural programs of the cathedrals marked the end of an epoch, and, with it, a wide range of sculptural production ceased to be produced. It becomes difficult to find after this period artistic undertakings of an ecclesiastical nature in which experiments like the Reims masks were possible. The cathedral tradition in the German Empire, in contrast, was not broken. This is one of the premises of the great importance of the sculptures of the west portals of Strasbourg Cathedral which were executed at the end of the thirteenth century. After this, German sculpture could no longer be described as a reflection of the development in France.
1 [On Romanesque sculpture, see chapters 15 and 16 by Hourihane and Maxwell respectively in this volume (ed.).]
2 [On the sumptuous arts, see chapter 22 by Buettner in this volume (ed.).]
3 [On Gothic architecture, see chapter 18 by Murray in this volume (ed.).]
4 Vöge, Anfänge; Stoddard, Sculptors of the West Portals; Sauerländer, Königsportal in Chartres; Villette, Portails de la cathédrale; Grodecki, “Première sculpture gothique”. Erlande-Brandenburg, Notre Dame de Paris, pp. 27–8, dates the right west portal of Paris to before 1148, whereas it was usual to date the portal to 1163; cf. Sauerländer, Gotische Skulptur, pp. 87–9. Erlande-Brandenburg’s argument is convincing. [On sculptural programs in general, see chapter 26 by Boerner in this volume (ed.).]
5 Hoffmann, “Königsportale in Saint-Denis,” pp. 29–38; Crosby, Royal Abbey of Saint-Denis, pp. 167–213; Blum, Early Gothic Saint-Denis; Büchsel, Geburt der Gotik, pp. 135–80; Brown, Saint-Denis, pp. 77–112.
6 Kurmann-Schwarz and Kurmann, Chartres, p. 208. The central aspects of the description of the jamb statues have been around for more than 100 years.
7 Beaulieu, “L’iconographie des statues-colonnes,” pp. 273–307.
8 It is therefore always easy to criticize the stylistic distinction between periods; cf. Suckale, “Unbrauchbarkeit der gängigen Stilbegriffe,” pp. 231–50. But most critics cannot produce an alternative solution.
9 Sauerländer, Jahrhundert der grossen Kathedralen, p. 56, sees it as an original creation; Vöge, Anfänge, pp. 8–49, as the transformation of Romanesque concepts as at Arles and Toulouse. Kurmann-Schwarz and Kurmann, Chartres, p. 213, give no answer but ask for a new discussion. See also Watson, “Origins of the Headmaster,” pp. 363–81.
10 Kurmann-Schwarz and Kurmann, Chartres, pp. 209–11, summarize the whole discussion of the creation and changes of the west façade and find a new explanation for the irregularities. The reasons might be found in the problem of the transportation of the stones, which were brought from quarries around Paris.
11 Huysmans, La Cathédrale, p. 200; Viollet-le-Duc, Dictionnaire, p. 118, described the column statues as the remains of a schematic Byzantinism, calling them “bunches of asparagus,” “mummies wrapped in bandages.”
12 Lübke, Geschichte der Plastik, p. 375.
13 Vöge, Anfänge, pp. 9–10.
14 Sauerländer, Königsportal in Chartres, pp. 5–12; Villette, Portails de la cathédrale, p. 25.
15 Vöge, Anfänge, p. 67–69; Stoddard, Sculptors of the West Portals, p. 130.
16 Kurmann-Schwarz and Kurmann, Chartres, p. 211.
17 Büchsel, Geburt der Gotik, p. 164; Kurmann-Schwarz and Kurmann, Chartres, p. 212, observe the same difference comparing the Chartres figures with those at Autun.
18 Büchsel, Ottonische Madonna, p. 25.
19 Hoffmann, Year 1200, talks about “style 1200.”
20 Sauerländer, Jahrhundert der grossen Kathedralen, pp. 77–8.
21 Ibid., p. 94; Erlande-Brandenburg, Notre-Dame de Paris, pp. 114–15.
22 Sauerländer, “Antiqui et Moderni,” pp. 19–37, is more inclined to see a connection to Trier, which would have been introduced by goldsmiths.
23 Kitzinger, “Byzantine Contribution,” p. 39; Sauerländer, “Sculpture on Early Gothic Churches,” p. 43.
24 Büchsel, Skulptur des Querhauses, pp. 112–13.
25 Kurmann-Schwarz and Kurmann, Chartres, pp. 79–94.
26 Büchsel, Skulptur des Querhauses, pp. 23–5.
27 Sauerländer, “Kunsthistorische Stellung,” pp. 23–5.
28 Büchsel, Skulptur des Querhauses, pp. 20–7.
29 Vöge, “Bahnbrecher,” p. 72, has already remarked on this phenomenon. This is discussed by Gosebruch, “Bedeutung des Gerichtsmeisters,” pp. 142–86. Kurmann-Schwarz and Kurmann, Chartres, pp. 213–20.
30 Vöge, “Bahnbrecher,” p. 74.
31 Büchsel, Skulptur des Querhauses, pp. 27–9; Kurmann-Schwarz and Kurmann, Chartres, believe that it is incorrect to describe the figures of the Last Judgment as being of lesser quality.
32 Büchsel, Skulptur des Querhauses, pp. 54–93.
33 Giuliana, Bildnis und Botschaft, has introduced a distinction between physiognomy and pathognomy into the archaeological discussion.
34 Büchsel, “Königsbilder,” pp. 127–33.
35 Katzenellenbogen, The Sculptural Programs, p. 67; Levis-Godechot, Chartres, pp. 155–6, 173–6.
36 Vöge, “Bahnbrecher,” pp. 63–97.
37 Sauerländer, Von Sens bis Strassburg.
38 Büchsel, Skulptur des Querhauses, pp. 79–93.
39 Vöge, “Bahnbrecher,” p. 67.
40 Mâle, L’Art religieux du XIIIe siècle, p. 29.
41 Panofsky, Abbot Suger.
42 Büchsel, “Ecclesiae symbolorum,” pp. 74–5; Büchsel, “Die von Abt Suger,” pp. 57–63; Markschies, Suger von Saint-Denis, pp. 46–60.
43 Büchsel, Skulptur des Querhauses, pp. 70–4; Büchsel, “Königsbilder,” pp. 127–33.
44 Giuliani, Bildnis und Botschaft; Himmelmann, Realistische Themen; “Das realistische Porträt.”
45 The question of dating is under discussion: Kurmann, Façade de la cathédrale, pp. 19–25; Hamann-MacLean and Schüssler, Reims, vol. II, pp. 317–21; Decrock and Demouy, Reims, pp. 170–3, 211–19. Hamann-MacLean/Schüssler and Sauerländer date the sculpture of the west portals – without the early group – to between 1230 and 1255, Kurmann and Decrock/Demouy to between 1235/45 and 1275. Kurmann dates the classicizing sculpture to between 1241 and 1245.
46 Svanberg, “Gothic Smile,” pp. 357–70.
47 Büchsel, “Königsbilder,” p. 137.
48 Reinhardt, Reims, p. 156, sees only a decorative function of the masks; Hamann-MacLean and Schüssler, Reims, p. 67, see more the result of an intensive study of nature. Fraenger, Masken von Reims, Sauerländer, “Physiognomik,” p. 104, and Büchsel, “Königsbilder,” pp. 133–9, stress the pejorative dimension. Wadley, Reims Masks, p. 30, has found undoubted examples of virtue–vice representations.
49 Sauerländer, “Gelächter des Teufels,” pp. 36–42.
50 Fraenger, Masken von Reims, p. 13; Sauerländer, “Physiognomik,” p. 104.
51 Kimpel and Suckale, “Vierge Dorée,” pp. 217–19, date the Vierge dorée to between 1235 and 1240; Sauerländer, Jahrhundert der grossen Kathedralen, p. 267, to around 1250.
52 Kurmann, Reims, pp. 174–9.
53 Branner, Manuscript Painting, p. 97.
54 Büchsel, Skulptur des Querhauses, pp. 129–32.
55 Ibid., pp. 139–41.
56 Sauerländer, Gotische Skulptur in Frankreich, pp. 124–5; Von Sens bis Strassburg.
57 The question of how the strong relation between Reims and Bamberg can be explained is under discussion; cf. Sauerländer, “Reims und Bamberg,” pp. 167–92; Suckale, “Bamberger Domskulpturen,” pp. 27–92; Feldmann, Bamberg und Reims, pp. 63–76.
58 Erlande-Brandenburg, Notre-Dame de Paris, p. 190.
59 Büchsel, Skulptur des Querhauses, pp. 116–17. Kurmann, Façade de la cathédrale de Reims, p. 268, explains the similarity between the faces of the Madonna and the servant by introducing the idea of a specialist for chiseling heads.
60 Branner, Saint Louis; Sauerländer, Jahrhundert der grossen Kathedralen, p. 89; Adams, “Column Figures of Chartres,” pp. 153–62.
61 Sauerländer, Jahrhundert der grossen Kathedralen, pp. 254, 267.
Roger J. Adams, “The Column Figures of Chartres Northern Foreportal and the Monumental Representation and Saint Louis,” Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 36 (1973), pp. 153–62.
Michele Beaulieu, “Essai sur l’iconographie des statues-colonnes de quelques portails du premier art gothique,” Bulletin monumental 142 (184), pp. 273–307.
Pamela Z. Blum, Early Gothic Saint-Denis, Restorations and Survivals (Berkeley, LA, Oxford, 1992).
Robert Branner, Saint Louis and the Court Style (London, 1965).
——, Manuscript Painting in Paris during the Reign of Saint Louis (Berkeley, LA, London, 1977).
Elisabeth A. R. Brown, Saint-Denis, La basilique (Saint-Léger-Vauban, 2001).
Martin Büchsel, “Die von Abt Suger verfassten Inschriften. Gibt es eine ästhetische Theorie der Skulptur im Mittelalter?” in Herbert Beck and Kerstin Hengevoss-Dürkop, eds., Studien zur Geschichte der Europäischen Skulptur im 12./13. Jahrhundert, vol. I (Frankfurt, 1994), pp. 57–63.
——, “Ecclesiae symbolorum cursus completus”, Städel-Jahrbuch, N.F. 9, (1989), pp. 69–87.
——, Die Geburt der Gotik, Abt Sugers Konzept für die Abteikirche Saint-Denis (Freiburg i. Br. 1993.
——, “Nur der Tyrann hat sein eigenes Gesicht, Königsbilder im 12. und 13. Jahrhundert in Frankreich und Deutschland,” in Martin Büchsel and Peter Schmidt, eds., Das Porträt vor der Erfindung des Porträts (Mainz, 2003).
——, Ottonische Madonna, Liebieghaus Monographie, 15 (Frankfurt, 1993).
——, Die Skulptur des Querhauses der Kathedrale von Chartres (Berlin, 1995).
Summer McKnight Crosby, ed., with Pamela Z. Blum, The Royal Abbey of Saint-Denis (New Haven and London, 1987).
Bruno Decrock and Patrick Demouy, “Die Skulptur,” in Patrick Demouy, ed., Reims, Die Kathedrale (Regensburg, 2001).
Alain Erlande-Brandenburg. Notre-Dame de Paris (Paris, 1997).
Hans Christian Feldmann, Bamberg und Reims, Die Skulpturen 1220–1250, Zur Entwicklung von Stil und Bedeutung der Skulpturen in dem unter Bischof Ekbert (1203–37) errichteten Neubau des Bamberger Doms unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Skulpturen an Querhaus und Westfassade der Kathedrale von Reims (Hamburg, 1992).
Wilhelm Fraenger, Die Masken von Reims, Mit 38 Abbildungen, Einer Einleitung und der Legende “Tänzer unserer Lieben Frau” (Erlenbach, Zürich, Leipzig, 1922).
Luca Giuliani, Bildnis und Botschaft, Hermeneutische Untersuchungen zur Bildniskunst der römischen Republik (Frankfurt, 1986).
Martin Gosebruch, “Zur Bedeutung des Gerichtsmeisters am südlichen Querhaus der Kathedrale von Chartres,” in Argo, Festschrift für K. Badt (Köln, 1970), pp. 142–86.
Louis Grodecki, “La ‘première sculpture gothique’, Wilhelm Vöge et l’état actuel des problèmes,” Bulletin monumental 117 (1959), pp. 265–89.
Richard Hamann-MacLean and Ilse Schüssler, Die Kathedrale von Reims, vol. II, Die Skulpturen (Stuttgart, 1996).
Nikolaus Himmelmann, “Das realistische Porträt als Gattungserscheinung in der griechischen Kunst,” in Martin Büchsel and Peter Schmidt, Das Porträt vor der Erfindung des Porträts (Mainz, 2003) pp. 19–28.
——, Realistische Themen in der griechischen Kunst der archaischen und klassischen Zeit (Bonn, 1994).
Konrad Hoffmann, “Zur Entstehung der Königsportale in Saint-Denis,” Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 48 (1985), pp. 29–38.
——, The Year 1200, A Centennial Exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York, 1970).
Joris-Karl Huysmans, La Cathédrale (Paris, 1980).
Adolf Katzenellenbogen, The Sculptural Programs of Chartres Cathedral, Mary, Christ, Ecclesia (Baltimore, 1959).
Dieter Kimpel and Robert Suckale, “Die Skulpturenwerkstatt der Vierge Dorée am Honoratusportal der Kathedrale von Amiens,” Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 36 (1973), pp. 217–65.
Ernst Kitzinger, “The Byzantine Contribution to the Western Art of the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 20 (1966), pp. 25–67.
Peter Kurmann, La façade de la cathédrale de Reims, Architecture et sculpture des portails, Étude archéologique et stylistique (Lausanne, 1987).
Brigitte Kurmann-Schwarz and Peter Kurmann, Chartres, Die Kathedrale (Regensburg, 2001).
Nicole Levis-Godechot, Chartres révélée par sa sculpture et ses vitraux (Paris, 1987).
Wilhelm Lübke, Geschichte der Plastik, vol. I (Leipzig, 1870).
Emile Mâle, L’Art religieux du XIIIe siècle en France, Etude sur l’iconographie du moyen âge et sur ses sources d’inspiration, 8th edn. (Paris, 1948).
Christoph Markschies, Gibt es eine Theologie der gotischen Kathedrale? Nochmals: Suger von Saint-Denis und Sankt Dionys vom Areopag, Abhandlungen der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse (Heidelberg, 1995).
Erwin Panofsky, Abbot Suger on the Abbey Church of St.-Denis and Its Art Treasures, 2nd edn. (Princeton, 1979).
Hans Reinhardt, La Cathédrale de Reims (Paris, 1963).
Willibald Sauerländer, “Antiqui et Moderni at Reims,” Gesta 42 (2003), pp. 19–37.
——, “Vom Gelächter des Teufels zur Ironie der Philosophen,” Jahrbuch der Bayerischen Akademie der Schönen Künste 13 (1999) pp. 30–70.
——, Gotische Skulptur in Frankreich 1140–1270 (München, 1970).
——, Das Jahrhundert der grossen Kathedralen 1140–1260 (München, 1989).
——, Das Königsportal in Chartres, Heilsgeschichte und Lebenswirklichkeit (Frankfurt, 1984).
——, “Die kunsthistorische Stellung der Westportale von Notre-Dame in Paris,” Marburger Jahrbuch für Kunstwissenschaft 17 (1959), pp. 1–56.
——, “Über Physiognomik und Porträt im Jahrhundert Ludwigs des Heiligen,” in Martin Büchsel and Peter Schmidt, eds., Das Porträt vor der Erfindung des Porträts (Mainz, 2003), pp. 101–21.
——, “Reims und Bamberg,” Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 39 (1976), pp. 167–92.
——, “Sculpture on Early Gothic Churches: The State of Research and Open Questions,” Gesta 9 (1970), pp. 32–48.
——, Von Sens bis Strassburg (Berlin, 1966).
Whitney S. Stoddard, The Sculptors of the West Portals of Chartres Cathedral, Their Origins in Romanesque and Their Role in Chartrain Sculpture (Including the West Portals of Saint-Denis and Chartres) (Harvard, 1952; repr. New York and London, 1987).
Robert Suckale, “Die Bamberger Domskulpturen,” Münchner Jahrbuch 38 (1987), pp. 27–82.
——, “Die Unbrauchbarkeit der gängigen Stilbegriffe der französischen gotischen Architektur des 12. und 13. Jahrhunderts,” in Friedrich. Möbius and Helga Sicurie, eds., Stil und Epoche, Periodisierungsfragen (Dresden, 1989), pp. 231–50.
Jan Svanberg, “The Gothic Smile,” Künstlerischer Austausch. Artistic Exchange, Akten des XXXVIII. Internationalen Kongreses für Kunstgeschichte, Berlin, July 15–20, 1992, ed. Thomas W. Gaehtgens, vol. II (Berlin, 1993), pp. 357–70.
Jean Villette, Les Portails de la cathédrale de Chartres (Chartres, 1994).
Eugène-Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc, Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture française du XIe au XVIe siècle, vol. 8 (Paris, 1866).
Wilhelm Vöge, Die Anfänge des Monumentalen Stiles im Mittelalter, Eine Untersuchung über die erste Blütezeit französisicher Plastik (Strasbourg, 1894).
——, “Die Bahnbrecher des Naturstudiums um 1200,” in Erwin Panofsky, ed., Bildhauer des Mittelalters, Gesammelte Schriften (Berlin, 1958).
William Bert Wadley, “The Reims Masks, A Reconstruction, Stylistic Analysis and Chronology of the Corbel Sculptures on the Upper Stories of Reims” (Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas at Austin, 1984).
Carolyn Joslin Watson, “The Origins of the Headmaster of the Royal Portal of Chartres Cathedral,” South-eastern College Art Conference Review 12 (1995), pp. 363–81.