Gothic Art Outside France? Any Good? Central Europe, etc.?

French Gothic art is very renown, and for good reason. French cathedrals are magnificent, totally awe-inspiring.

Sadly, often it is only Gothic art known to travelers in Europe, and I understand that. Time and money can be a limiting factor. I consider myself lucky, growing and living where I could just take a walk and could step in a welcoming interior of a Gothic cathedral. Or a Gothic church, or a Baroque one, and other international styles. For sure this can nourish your aesthetic sensibilities. This is one reason I write this blog, to be able to share what I got for granted.

Sure, Reims, Chartres, Notre Dame, etc. are worth the journey, are iconic. So are Paris, Giverny, Carcassonne, and other beautiful places. So is Cologne with magnificent and finished cathedral towers.Stump-like towers of French cathedrals are unfinished, you know, those towers with flat tops? Those are unfinished ones, not just the intention of the builders.

Other German cathedrals or Gothic churches are also worth the visit. They look very much like the French ones, but the towers are usually much taller, truly the intention of Gothic, often with open work spires, lacy. Gothic was architecture which ambition was to grow as much in height as possible, the ideal was  to get the numbers of the ratio of walls and floor space as much different as possible (1:1 would be a bad ratio!) Cologne cathedral has 1:4 ratio of surface vs. height. French cathedrals get to 1:3 ratio. It was like a racing toward the sky, and often the attempts of getting the ratio to the extremes resulted in collapses of the cathedrals.Here is shown what you can see, and hear at the Cologne Cathedral.

And here are the magnificent bells an the exterior of Cologne Cathedral

  But there is of course beautiful lot of Gothic art in other countries too: England, Spain, Portugal, Czech Republic, Poland, Baltic States. Poland and Baltic States have examples of brick Gothic.

Portal of St. Vitus Cathedral wit rose window, stone masonry, Prague, via wiki commons courtesy of Vaylag

With mass tourism being such lively enterprise, many people are able to see a lot, but often this is knowledge given by the tour guides. Pity when among Gothic cathedrals only Chartres or Notre Dame rings the bell, but Amiens is a total mystery. I mean I don't argue to visit all possible sites, but to read. I wonder, maybe it is the fault of art historians, or popularizes, or people like me who can't make the subject interesting? For ex. authors who make Chartres a place of mystery reshaping its once famous cathedral school, (but one of many cathedral schools of the day) into some esoteric tradition school have the upper hand, as captivating story is given. Facts can be captivating? I think so, but then I am an art history geek.

There is also a curious situation regarding the Middle Ages: most popular knowledge deals with Western, parts of Central Europe, little with Eastern Europe. Byzantium is kind of a lost empire. Prague, luckily, developed into a tourist attraction. Krakow (Cracow) seems to be on its way now. I am Polish, and I am sometimes surprised when some people are surprised when they see that this country had Romanesque, Gothic, Renaissance, etc. It seems that it was such an empty hole in European history, regarding some countries, due to long slumber behind the iron curtain. Once I felt like someone coming totally out of empty space when I watched supposed to be educational video (US produced VHS), about Battle of Vienna. It made me laugh, as the video mentioned only prince Eugene of Savoy, as army commander. No mention about Polish army, even though it was a bi-national enterprise, and actually the Polish king, Johan III Sobieski was more in charge than Prince Eugene. Not that I care so much, and during times of Wikipedia such things are corrected, but it was really funny, how big of  a hole in knowledge can be created in one piece of material. One of the most decisive battles in European history, two big armies of two nations, and you totally forget one army plus the commander in chief? What a curious and amusing case of selective blindness! Cold War legacy? ;-)

Along the line of random info spreading, the Czechs had their own brand of Protestantism, c. one century before Luther (Jan Hus, Czech Brethren, etc.). Poland had religious tolerance guaranteed by law, including Statutes of Kalisz, about the protection of Jews. (Not as bad as in other countries, but it didn't mean it was a totally safe heaven). Religiously different people lived there, including the Cathars. The Kinghts Templars too. Or other crusaders who went for Northern Crusades, (often turned against Poles) . One blog writer from Czech Republic claims that every village in his country has some legend about the Knights Templars. Templar legends in general are not so very French-centered.

 Lots of mysterious, interesting stuff in other parts of Europe. For example devil in Polish art was treated as humorous nasty  figure and was often ridiculed, not a scary being like in the Western Europe. Devils form St. Mary Church in Cracow were painted in strong colors. In another Central European country, Germany, devil was feared, and stakes witches were burned. The conspiracy theory about witches came to Poland during the Renaissance, when the witch hunts intensified, but it was less common, and actually the Latin Church was not by law excluded form participation: only secular power did it. Strange? No. This is info is to point out the diversity of Europe during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.

I don't have links about Gothic art in Slovenia, but Gothic went there via Prague, and Parler.I am mentioning Slovenia, as it it a very pictoresque country, (my hubby loved it), which enjoys, rightly so, many tourists visits. Very, very interesting landscapes, history, architecture, coasts in general.
A beautiful Corvin Castle in Romania you can see clicking on this sentence.

Here is a link to a site, in Polish; I apologize, but just for the sake of the pictures. There are iconic examples, such as Chartres, Nuamberg, Limbourg Brothers, Sluter, Crucifix of Geron, but also believed to be a miracle working crucifix from Cracow, and other examples, like the biggest Gothic altar in the St.Mary Church in Cracow, or probably the first authoportrait by Peter Parler in Prague, and wonderful St. Vitus Cathedral, Malbork Castle, and  "armor Madonnas" (Crusaders art, can be opened as cabinets!), and other exciting examples. The other is the link to St. Vitus Cathedral Wikipedia article. Enjoy!
http://www.historiasztuki.com.pl/001_KANON_GOT_2.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Vitus_Cathedral 

Mary Magdalene:Colors, Robes and Archetype History of Color # 8

I noticed in my blog's statistics that some of you came to my blog searching for info about the colors of Mary Magdalene's robes. I must have been a disappointment to see so little about it. I hope this entry will give you more of satisfying information.


Red was very common when she was depicted, but other colors were not rare either. I feel I need to move beyond the Middle Ages, as I was writing about vermilion robe of Mary Magdalene already. I am focusing in this post on Latin Christianity. Byzantine Christianity depicted her also in red robes, often with red egg in her hand. In this tradition she also she was considered extremely virtuous, one generation older than Jesus, died in Ephesus, her relics (body) were revered in Constantinople. Disappeared of course, maybe together with other relics after sack and looting of Constantinople they, tradition say were brought to Western Europe. But we don't know for sure what happened.

Mary Magdalene, Orthodox icon

 Red was often the color of choice by the later painters as well, but I would advise not to rely on red so much. Some people do, to some degree of annoyance of the well-educated art historians, when the non-art historians try to convince them, sometimes quite harshly,  they know it better because they read a few popular books. Thing can turn rather grotesque.About annoyances and my defence of art historians  later, in another entry, now I focus on colors and Mary Magdalene as a cultural phenomenon.

Magdalene was shown in red robes, quite often in a green dress. Green symbolized eternal life, color of paradise, hope and promise of eternal happiness in heaven. Green of the  paradise was shown already in the early Christian art. Shouldn’t be confused with non-religious matters, when green symbolized rebirth, Spring, fertility, hope in matters other than theological. It is important to know about such differences, not only for knowledge sake, but also for avoiding mistakes, for example reshaping Mary Magdalene into fertility goddess, as it sometimes happens in some books authored by some non-art historians. The context of the art matters, quite a lot.

 Red was common, yes, but not an exclusive color assigned to her only, nor she was shown in red only. This is a curious misconception, recently spreading. I would like to know about the sources of it. Assuming that she was shown only in red robes, isn't in relation with factual history of art, it is  huge over-simplification. Red in religious, not secular tradition  represented  love in sense of charity, (agape), martyrdom, sacrifice on the cross, redemption through crucifixion.

 But she was also depicted in lush and colorful robes, rich and beautifully embroidered, often golden. Look at this picture, which I got through twitter. One of many examples of colorful robes, from the collection in Kassel Museum, Germany. Cloak is elegant subtle shade of red.
Mary Magdalene and Jesus as Gardner

Or click to see life of Mary Magdalen at Chartres Cathedral stained glass window. Click on links to different images, and you will see range of colors, blue included.

Form gold we go to yellow, which was in certain times the color assigned by law to the common prostitutes and courtesans. Red wasn't. There is another misconception that red was color of prostitutes, which is not true: yellow was. Red sometimes only. I wonder if this assumption comes from Scarlet Letter? Who knows. Mary Magdalene could be dressed in yellow, or only be a part of her garment, like for ex. the sleeves were yellow, the dress itself  is black and white, and no cloak. Etc.

Piero di Cosimo, Mary Magdalene, public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Penitent Magdalene by Artemisia Gentileschi,via wikimedia commons

Colorful, rich robes were shown too, or in very subdued colors, when she was depicted as a meditating penitent. Or dressed in shiny silvery silk, XIX c. And I am glad she was not depicted in red only, and not in vermilion only. She captured the imagination of the people of Latin Christianity as a very colorful personality anyway, as someone who lived a whole spectrum of human emotion and full spectrum of ethics. Why she should be than depicted in one color only? It would be very limiting. She was considered the accessible saint, giver of hope to fallen humanity, and as a personality more a symphony than a simple melody. She was one of the Latin Christianity highly elevated persons who was somehow considered unclean at the beginning.

Mary Magdalene by Jan van Scorel, via wikimedia commons

To the masses of believers she was the embodiment of a phenomenon of transformation. From a women from whom seven demons were expelled, a prostitute by profession, who than became no less than "Apostle to the apostles," the title given her by the Catholics church, a base metal changed alchemically to gold. Transformation which Oscar Wilde one described as: "every saint had a past, every sinner has a future." Initially a bad girl, but with golden heart, also in accordance to some societal views about the harlot with a heart of gold. Europe loved such stories, Europeans were not Puritans. La Traviatta is one of those stories, for example. I don't think there is an equivalent in the US. Different cultures, different views, different archetypes.

And she was an embodiment of a loving, yet a very independent woman. Sometimes I am asked if I believe Mary Magdalene was the Grail. Depends what you understand as "grail". To me grail as an archetype can’t be confined to the ideas of biological reductionism. Grail of the legends itself is an archetype of a quest, and it is elusive, as quest is often about elusive goals. Many people are on quest, but don't know what the quest is about. And nothing wrong with it. Mary Magdalene: it is nothing wrong in being a parent, it is something very noble in parenthood. I respect that. But did she really need to be a mother, a cup bearing diving DNA in order to be more important to us?

Penitent Mary Magdalene, by Vaccaro, via wiki commons

We may find out that today we are less tolerant toward her than the people who didn’t believe that she was the mother of Jesus offspring. Those people loved her anyway, even when they believed she was a reformed fallen woman. It seems they were quite  forgiving. She was loved and venerated the way she was perceived, with all her imperfect humanity, the way she was seen. Imperfect saint? People didn’t mind. This is not about who she was historically, as stories were often confused. Mary the Egyptian for example, or dispute which body was the real Mary Magdalene, as at times there was more than one body claimed to be Mary Magdalene's. Holy relics were not such clear business, and there are also cases of spurious claims. Her story is not so much about her, but very much about us: how much were are willing to accept in a person, specially in a women, in order to consider someones contribution a worthy one.

 And how many prejudices we have. Her story is a very interesting case in social history, indeed. Interesting, unique perspective in a Guardian article by the novelist and  columnist who was herself a prostitute, Tracy Quan. She mentions her visit in Southern France to see the relics whom she considers to be her patron saint. Specially important, I think, is the quote engraved on the stone tablets along the steps leading to the cave said to be saint's meditation hermitage: "Blessed are those who have been persecuted." Quan noticed this quote as she climbed the stairs. To me Quan's article was a gentle reminder and a rebuke, to all, me including, calling to not forget those who are in need, no matter who they are, or how "lowly" they are. Over a millennium and half Latin Christianity's message regarding this saint was: stop marginalizing, be open to others. 

The founder of  the first church in Europe was Lydia. She was a business woman, dealing with luxury goods prohibitively expensive purple cloth. She was unusual for the place and times, when women were considered deficient human beings, with human rights comparable of that of children assigned to them. Why she is not talked about now, along with Mary Magdalene? Not sexy enough? Not enough of sensationalistic dramas? No way to focus on her genitals/womb, as it was done in Mary Magdalene's case, and still is today?

In general this turmoil about Mary Magdalene and women, being not given enough enough respect,  not given enough place for them in the church, as much as it is healthy and good has it own flaws: conveniently blaming the Catholics for everything evil seems to be a little bit displaced, when we take women as archetypes. In Orthodox Christianity there was no mention of her as prostitute, and there she also has churches devoted to her, and the legend saying that she traveled to Ephesus, stayed there and her grave is there. After the schism this is a competing legend, as the legend  of Mary Magdalene traveling to France is more well known, as Western Europe is more well known. To me the position of Mary Magdalene is more problematic in Protestantism. It seems to me that the Catholic sisters of Protestantism don't complain as much about women not given enough place in the church theology, except complaints that women can't be ordained. And other issues not relating to theology, which I omit know as they don't relate to the subject directly. Mary Magdalene was always a very popular saint, tin Catholicism, if not the most popular one after all.

Here is Mary Magdalene in brown robe of a penitent, those often were extremely crude, made of goat hair or crude wool (other races of those animal than today), or was she was supposed to be covered only by her long flowing hair.

Ascension of Mary Magdalene, Anonymous, via wiki commons
Mary Magdalene here taken to heaven is dressed in coarse penitent robe, or according to the legend, 
her naked body was covered by her very long hair.

Their (Catholics) equivalent of the Sacred Feminine, a term so often used now, is Virgin Mary, given the title of the co-saviour, as saving together with Jesus. Mary Magdalene is the  apostle to the apostles. And other women saints. They say those personages are just humans among the Protestants, who reject cult of Virgin Mary, etc. not divine enough. Should we reject their opinions as illogical? Given the number of the churches devoted to Virgin Mary and and Mary Magdalene in Catholic countries in general? Look at the picture above, is this disrespectful? The word "vilified" is often used in relation to Mary Magdalene. Is she as vilified as it is complained in popular opinion? I think we need to to look deeper, it is easy to repeat catchy phrases, which can be emotionally satisfying, but on the long run those phrases make things shallow. And the subject of Mary Magdalene is not shallow, not matter which tradition we analyse or which one we like.

Art history gives another picture. On the last example above she is rather glorified than vilified.And it was one of many kind of depictions of Mary Magdalene.

Oral tradition. Folk Stories Geneis and Finding Sacred Art

 I wrote before that during middle Ages some ideas took lives on their own (proto- sciences). Today I will talk about folklore.

There is folk current in European Christianity, for example the  folk Catholicism. Secular or pagan  stories which were liked were appropriated, so, the Christian/religious current and the pagan/secular one created very interesting stream.

One  story is form Ukraine, and Belarus,( if I am right), and it is about a bird: the raven. It tells that "the raven’s plumage was very colorful as a rainbow, and even was radiating rays. Raven was a true bird of Paradise." When the paradise was no more, the land become barren, and the raven become black. But his plumage will be back in its full glory the moment the Paradise is back on Earth. Medieval art represented Paradise as radiant and colorful, cathedrals and basilicas were earthly representations of ideal of Paradise.

Other legends relate to concrete objects,  art which were found and installed in local churches and enjoyed special devotion. Typical motive: the sculpture, for ex. a Black Madonna, or an  icon was lost during turmoil, than was found in a miraculous way. Or even appeared in a miraculous way from the beginning, without being lost. The finders were the animals, such as cattle, or an owl, or a sheep. It appears to me that the animals are the most frequent finders of religious art, but I am not a folklorist, and those are just my original studies. My formal studies in this subject are limited, were part of my anthropology class, and dealt with the subject of art objects which were subject of veneration in Catholicism, and especially those relating to healing. I don't claim special knowledge here, (reading and listening stories passed as part of living oral tradition).

Sometimes instead of the animals young children are the finders.find the art taken then to the local church, or a blind woman. The story about the blind woman whose blindness was healed when she stood in the river and the crucifix was floating on the water, the Jesus on the crucifix talked to her and she was healed. It relates to one small village in Poznan region, Poland. This particular story has variants, including the treasure which was dug up by the oxen. The finders are somehow innocent, or under-priviledged. Those stories represent the idea that the divine is very accessible, and approachable through intuition, no special intellectual training is needed.

But lets go back to the story about the blind women. When the women was told by Jesus on the crucifix he wanted to stay at the local church (common motive, the holy one depicted decides on location where he/she wants to stay). The crucifix was pulled out of the river and put on a cart which was supposed to be pulled by oxen. But the load became so heavy, the oxen couldn't pull the cart even a a single step forward. They just were stepping in place. They tried and tried, but couldn't move, were just digging deeper and deeper into the soil. And this is how the oxen dug up the chest with golden treasure, from which the money was spend for renovation of the church. The chest is still exhibited in the church; the crucifix itself is in Gothic style, dated by art historians as created during early 15 c. The church itself became a local pilgrimage site. The crucifix was moved to other churches, richer and more impressive.The crucifix appeared in a miraculous way back in its humble church which was chosen at the beginning. This is also common: the artifact wants to stay in one and only place. But always I didn't visit this place, I didn't see the crucifix and the chest, but I listen to the story told by very old people. Maybe one day, I will visit this place too.

Red: Mary Magdalene's Case:Medieval Art, History of Color # 7

Mary Magdalene wasn't depicted only in red though history, as Virgin Mary wasn't depicted in blue only. But let take a look at the red, as both Marys were depicted in red garments. For example the red of the robes of Mary Magdalene had a different, double symbolism, than for example red of other persons' cloaks. Mary Magdalene's robes were painted in cinnabar red, (vermillion), having more hint of orange. Red in general can tend toward more to direction of yellow, or blue, and during the Middle Ages the quality of red was important, which red was symbolizing which idea. The other red symbolized regal values and charity.

 Here comes Crucifixion by Juan Rexach from Northon Simon Museum, Los Angeles. Due to poor lighting conditions the color of Mary Magdalene robes not very accurate on this photograph, in person is like on the photo bellow.

 Crucifixtion by Jaun Rexach, Norton Simon Museum Los Angeles

Here you can see desctiption and a better quality photo 
You can zoom into, and see very well the specific color of Mary Magdalene's garment.

Crucifixion by Masaccio, Museo di Capodimonte, Naples,public domain,  via Wikimedia Commons
 

 I am glad that Maria Rzepinska wisely comments is her book about color that red in Middle Ages was not just red, but it had two aspects. Red was one color in which case people paid attention to its shade, shades had codified meaning. Two types of red were differentiated: the noble one, considered sublimed, and the earthly one, viewed as "sinful". Several examples of this red can be seen close to my living place in California: Norton Simon Museum and  the Huntington Library art collection.But today Massacio, as more widely known.

In general, red stood for love in sense of charity, blood of martyrs, sacrifice on the cross, redemption through crucifixion. But as it could be a color of love in spiritual sense, redemption, also when in specific tone, could symbolize sin, or lust, or both: redemption form sin.This dichotomy is visible in portrayals of Virgin Mary as the sinless one who is represented in another red than Mary  Magdalene  ( dressed in "sinful" red). A medieval painted wouldn't confuse those two reds.


We need to remember that color in medieval art isn't always symbolic: sometimes just the need of decorative usage of color was important. In Latin Christianity (Byzantium was another case) the robes of such a person as Virgin Mary wouldn't have been painted in the same as red of Mary Magdalene's.

Above the crucifixion scene by Masaccio, Mary Magdalene in dramatic gesture of devotion and anguish dressed in red so typical for her. Although there are quite a number of representations of Mary Magdalene in this type of red, specially at crucifixion, this one is probably the most famous one. It is still very medieval. But there are hints of coming of the new era: the Renaissance in Italian art,there are more of human emotions shown. Gothic was very emotional in other countries, (for example showing suffering of Jesus),  but art in Italy was more reserved, making more usage of  Byzantine ideals.

 All  older medieval representations of crucifixion in Latin Christianity would show Jesus fully dressed, each foot nailed separately, and no signs of his suffering. With the passing of time Jesus became more humanized, specially in the art of Northern and Central Europe. The body was more and more exposed, agony and blood shown, feet nailed together. For example in German art Jesus was shown with great attention to expression. From Jesus as a symbol there was a shift  toward showing Jesus as a human being.

What about Masaccio himself? His name was Tommaso di Ser Giovanni di Simone. He died when he was only 27 years old, and he wasn't as famous as the other painters of his times. Even his name was a humorous take on his given name. Masaccio, as he is known even today, is a form from Tom, meaning "clumsy" Tom, as separated form his collaborator Masolino,  the "delicate " Tom.

Yet Masaccio influenced the other Italian artists. It was his example which caused a shift in art:  more and more toward realistic representations of the world around. Here we see a paintings which is still medieval: composition, golden background.  But carved into the golden background humans who were much more real, not idealized, captured in a moment of strong emotion. Figures are real, not ideal.

Other colors of Mary Magdalne's robes in another post, more colors.
And my post about Mary Magdalene depicted in blue click here

Byzantine Christianity depicted her also in red,  with an egg in her hand. In this tradition she was an extremely virtuous woman in similar age of Jesus's mother, and both women died in Ephesus. Mary Magdalene's body was was kept in Constantinople as a very venerated relic. This dissapeared still during the Middle Ages, but also later her relics started to be venerated in Western Europe, Latin Christianity. Relics were hot commodity then, and many stolen from the Churches in Constantinople in 1204 when crusaders sacked and looted this cultured city. Virgin Mary's house is believed still to be there, what was one part of the Byzantine Empire, among ancient ruins of Ephesus, today in Turkey, in a rather remote location but among the most wonderful ruins.

History of Science at Chartres Cathedral, and Zodiac

In the previous post there was Zodiac window form Chartres, today is the astronomical clock. Strange setting for such symbols?

No way. Zodiac then was nothing unusual in churches. So, why all the mystery so many tourists talk about? Actually there is nothing mysterious about it. Explanation follows.

Chartres Cathedral Choir, Astronomical Clock, via Wikimedia Commons, thanks to Harmonia Amanda

First, the clock comes form XVI c. but its ideological roots are medieval, and proto-scientific, not really esoteric. Astronomy, astrology, the synthesizing medieval minds didn't see the difference.

 It is a common misconception that the Middle Ages were not interested in science, only in religion, or there was no reading of Classical texts before the Renaissance. Actually the classics were read, not as widely as  during the Renaissance, of course, but were not unknown, rather kept in high esteem. Many Classical and Arabic texts of science were translated into Latin. Arabic texts about astronomy, mathematics, anatomy and chemistry, and medicine contributed a lot in development of Western medical sciences, we often forget about it. Or simply don't want to know. And there was no agreement about if the Sun was the center of Universe or moved around the Earth. The official decision   in favor of the Earth as the center of the Universe came later. Science was fine as long it didn't oppose any dogma. For example the theological idea of dignity of the human body was applied to the medical field, and this particular idea didn't allow dissecting human corpses for anatomical research. Dead animals were dissected instead, specially pigs. Sometimes, rarely, human bodies were dissected also.

Chartres itself had a cathedral school, as often was the case with such buildings: there were also centers of learning, not only part of religious live of communities as today. Chartres was one of such centers, and was among the famous ones. Neo-Platonism was flourishing there, sciences were treated as separated from theology. A number of so called than natural philosophers (philosophers interested in science) came from Chartres. School of Chartres became less influential when universities started to compete with cathedral schools, but this was a case with all cathedral schools.

So, if the clerics of Chartres were so scientifically minded, why such thing as Zodiac in the cathedral?

 Here we need to understand the mind of people who lived before us, and don't project our XXI c. world view on them. The clerics form Chartres were still products of their times, and during their times astrology was science, before the Catholic Church opposed it, and before it was mocked  by the scientists of the Enlightenment era as superstition, not a scinece. Medicine was part of curriculum at Chartres school, and astrology was officially part of medicine also. Here is the illumination dealing with the human body as related to Zodiac.

Anatomical Zodiac Man, Limburg Brothers, Book of Hours of Duke de Berry, illuminated manuscript tempera on vellum, public domain, via Wikimedia Commons, thanks to Petrus Berbygere

In addition to proto-scientific reasons, Zodiac was a very popular motive in depictions of passing time. One  was very common:  the labors of the months. Frequently months and Zodiac signs were tied together, and this is often found in medieval churches and religious  manuscripts. Labors of the months showed secular world. Zodiac window at Chartres belongs to this popular category. Here is incomplete list of  zodiacs and labours of months in churches.

 Another example, most famous of this type is the series of illuminations from the mentioned  Book of Hours of Duke de Berry, (the same book from which the illumination above comes from). It is not the only example of this kind, but among the most beautiful ones, if not the most skilfully rendered, so far. Here it is, via Wikipedia article and picture gallery.

The Book of Hours of Duke de Berry is  of the most beautiful examples of book illumination in International Gothic style, and contains a very good example of Gothic blue, specially loved and used in France.

 Art history itself is an interdisciplinary endeavor, and understanding history of science or cultural history can enhance knowledge of art. Art doesn't exist in historical vacuum. It is connected to the world around, it exists in historical contexts. Striping old art form its historical context can give us only partial insight, and lead to some  misunderstanding too, some of them can be quite funny.

Lost Secrets of Chartres Blue? History of color, and why astrology in a church?

 A story instead of history? It happens.

Some people believe that making of blue color from the medieval stained glass windows of Chartres Cathedral was kept very secret, and the secret vanished. Since Middle Ages no one was able to re-create the famous Chartres-blue. Interesting story, very romantic, but simply not true. It is a part of cultural phenomenon involving romanticizing and sensationalizing art history. Specially the mystery of Chartre's blue was beloved during the era of Romanticism. Such sensationalizing happens most often in archeology, but art history isn't free from such exciting modern legends.

 In fact, there are enough of ancient "recipes" for making stained glass which survived until today. Problem with medieval recipes is that they often don't makes sense, because terminology is confusing, like for example the idea that sapphire was added  in making stained, glass, when this was also latinized name for  saffer, which was name of cobalt oxide. Often the color is also affected by patina, impurities, or the main compound: the sand. Subtle differences matter, for ex. if the was taken from the river or if was sea sand. We can't know exactly, we know which compounds were added, but in which form we don't know. Also the combination of blue with other colors on the installed window itself makes it look specific way, using the optical principle of color contrast.

But modern glass makers are fully capable of recreating the" mysterious" or "lost" Chartres-blue. It is sad to think so little about their skills and talents. Maria Rzepinska in her expertly researched book about history of color mentions those recipes, and even tells how color of the glass mass changed in relation of time involved in heating in the glass making kilns.Known phenomenon, nothing new,  just a reminder. Also some impurities, air bubbles, etc. which were the result of working in more crude conditions affect the color. Today's glass is extremely  pure.

But there is the  kernel of truth in this disappearance story: after the Age of Faith the Chartres-blue, or to be more exact, the presence of  strong colors diminished to almost disappear from stained glass windows, to reappear during XIX c. in their full glory.

So, what is the secret?

Stained glass window, with the Zodiac Sign of Pisces, Chartres Cathedral, via Wikimedia, photo taken by Dinkum

  It fact after the Middle Ages there was less interest in installing very colorful stained glass windows of the types as those seen in Chartres and the other Gothic cathedrals or churches. The reason was simple: colorful stained glass windows were prohibitively expensive. The cost of stained glass was closer to the price of precious stones than to the cost of the stained glass of today, as Maria Rzepinska says. (And she has also has a strong supportive bibliography which is a great resource for me). We also need to keep in mind that in addition to the already extremely high cost of its production, Gothic stained glass windows were very thick, which made the price even higher than those which are made of thin glass panels today. And thickness makes colors more intense too.Stained glass windows at Chartres Cathedral are for example c.1 inch thick. Due to progress of technologies, today's stained glass which is similar to the glass of XIX c. Gothic Revival has only a fraction of the thickness (c. 1/8 of inch) of the Gothic glass window panels. Gothic Revival brought colored window back into buildings but adjusted with new technologies. Religious buildings of the Middle Ages needed masses of expensive glass.
The tastes also changed, after jewel-like colors of the  Middle Ages white and grissaille glass became popular. With time people also became less religiously devoted than during the Age of Faith. Unstoppable religious enthusiasm which fueled building of the great cathedrals simply diminished with time.

 The window above is a curious case in popular imagination, as some other objects at Chartres. Many people think the Zodiac signs were too esoteric, and foreign to the doctrines of Christian religion, and as such couldn't find place in any church building.

One thing: Zodiac isn't anything unusual in Gothic churches. Actually it was a common subject. Astrology was intertwined with astronomy, as other proto-sciences of the day were.  Proto-science was called natural philosophy in those days. Zodiac itself represented to people God's role in creating order in Universe, and showed the idea that all things are inter-connected. Medieval people, even priests, didn't have problem with Zodiac. Zodiac wasn't esoteric in real sense, it was a perfect illustration of the idea of perfect order in the Universe.

The science of old was a mixture of experimentation, science, theology, metaphysics and superstition. The divide between science and theology, philosophy and metaphysics was drawn first during the XVIII c. Astrology was part of sciences and was legitimate than,  and was as legitimate as anatomy today is legitimate part of medicine.  During the Middle Ages astrology was part of medicine, and even clerics learned astrology. What the Church forbid in relation to astrology  was the belief in fatalism, and astrology was supposed to be something which didn't determine human fate completely, it was supposed  to give people some free will. Even Newton was still involved in a mixture of philosophy, theology, science and even alchemy. This of course relates to the history of science itself, but as you see art history involves partially history of science, not only in this particular case..

Zodiac window at Chartres cathedral from Sacred Destinations travel page

Here another one stained glass window, very jewel-like.

Stained glass window at Chartres cathedral, via Wikmedia, courtesy of Juan J.Rodriguez

 As the there was no clear division between the rational  and irrational in medieval sciences, as the division between science and religion didn't exist in the form  as we see it today, the same was with fine arts and crafts. Art and crafts were woven together in the same aesthetic system, and art often imitated craft. For example the stained glass window as above was reminding of jeweled and enameled objects crafted by jewelry makers.

 Mentioning Rzepinka again: she writes that people believed the only difference which existed between precious stones and stained glass was  that the natural jewels possessed magic powers, and glass was not effective. Even clerics were writing that the powers and colors of precious stones were virtues given to them by God. We need to take in account the differences in human knowledge and thinking when interpreting art done by humans from eras long gone, if we want to understand their art more fully.

Jewel-like aesthetics in stained glass windows was later replaced by imitative qualities of painting. Even during XIX c. particular paintings were recreated as stained glass version, a tribute to the value of the art of painting. Painting became "true" art," stained glass became craft. But as it was the case with theology, mysticism and proto-science, there was no divide between art and craft, no value judgement in this regard. Medieval mind was kind of holistic mind.

I have chosen those windows not only because stained glass is such a strong mark of Gothic art, but also because shows the duo of blue and red, a color contrast of the Middle Ages.
Tomorrow more about medieval zodiac and science, more about blue in illuminated manuscripts.

The Famous Blue: History of Color # 5- the Middle Ages

 Wilton Diptych: Virgin and Child with Angels, Unknown French Master, via Wikimedia Commons

Blue was famous during the Middle Ages. People valued the color of the sky, it reminded them of heaven, and its symbolism put it close to gold: it was also the color of divine wisdom, (but gold was used also as light), color of spirituality, calm, contemplation, and all things heavenly. It became also the color of power, but about this on another occasion. Today I will explain the dense code of visual symbolism of the picture above.

Still during 15th century Cennino Cennini, (artist, who was also a writer and theorist of painting techniques) wrote that blue was “illustrious, beautiful, and most perfect, beyond all other colors”.

People talked and wrote a lot about this color. It was considered extremely beautiful and working good on human psyche, it was praised a lot. Also blue pigment was extremely expensive, and for this reason people talked about it in a very different context: painting was a business like any other enterprise, and business talks and written contracts regarding  commissions in which using blue was necessary, specified how much blue should be used. Blue pigment was almost as expensive as gold, sometimes more than gold. It had a beautiful name: ultramarine. It was imported from a valley which is today Afghanistan, made from nothing less than high quality semi-precious lapis lazuli stone, also used in jewelry. The poetic name ultramarine means "from beyond the seas." The stone was extremely difficult to grind, which added to the high price of the pigment.

Artists wanted to make sure how much of ultramarine was to be used, on which parts of the painting. Because of the high price of the pigment, and together with red it was usually reserved for painting robes of the Madonna and Jesus. This example is saturated with blue. Blue was specially the color of French Gothic, especially Late Gothic. Many Madonnas in French art had blue robes, after times of purple and red. (Red for Madonnas’ robes was used more often in the North).

What is the symbolism included in this painting? You know already about gold as diving light and wisdom, blue as divine wisdom and contemplation, things heavenly. This picture is about joys of heavenly existence. First, we have the banner of victory, the banner of resurrection. The colors represent purity of the soul, the sins of humanity washed clean with blood of love ( the sacrifice on the cross) . Wreaths of white roses on the heads of angels symbolize purity and joy of heavenly life. The broaches of the stags represent Jesus: stag means purity and destruction of evil (stag tramples on evil and destroys it). Black on of angels wings stands for depth of the divine mystery. 

Flowers: white rose represents purity and is the flower of the Virgin. The iris was also her emblem, and daisies stand for baby Jesus, his purity and innocence. A lot about purity, right? The vegetation was also emblem of purity; the Virgin was often shown in a garden, which was her emblem, hortus conclusus, "enclosed garden," symbolizing her virginity. Garden had also other meaning starting from early on in Christian art: it was representation of heavenly paradise.

This painting was commissioned for King Richard II. Here the Virgin looks like a fine courtly lady surrounded by ladies in waiting. During Medieval times adoration of the Virgin and courtly love had often similar visual and linguistic vocabulary.