Yes, it's just as ridiculous as it sounds. So I made a joke about needing coffee because the library does not liking it when I drool on the books, and some employee mentioned, "could make for some interesting future DNA testing . . . like that eyebrow they found in the Gutenberg Bible." As I have learned to do in such situations, I smiled and nodded. But now I'm curious. So I went to that great bastion of learned information, Google, to find out. Turns out Christie's was selling a page from the Gutenberg Bible with an eyebrow embedded in the ink, "conceivably from the master himself" [Christie’s (2000) The Nakles Collection of Incunabula, Christie’s (NewYork, NY, USA), Lot 1, sale held on 17 April 2000].
My first reaction was "Isn't it pretty to think so?" because realistically the odds of it REALLY being from the master himself seem pretty unlikely.
My immediate next thought was that I'm so putting a hair in the manuscript that I'm reading today -- the Old French Fall of Princes. That way, people of the future will know that I could have read the manuscript. Really, I was just comparing pictures with the illustrated English Fall of Princes manuscript, but don't tell them that because I'm deliberately selecting a page with text, not illustrations.
I have found that the French manuscript is decidedly more bloody -- with more blood, scenes of eyes being gouged out, decapitated heads (and fleshy headless necks), and people stabbing themselves in the neck, chest, and forehead (not sure how that works) with swords that are bigger than their bodies. The French manuscript also contains a cross-dressing king -- with full beard and wearing a pretty pink dress. He was trying to escape in disguise, but alas! He was recognized and killed anyway (not for cross-dressing, for some prior crime against his people). It's odd because the pictures range from very gruesome to absolutely boring. There are the gross death scenes, but then there are an inordinate number of scenes of "the author and repentent kings" or "unhappy people complain to the author." The latter makes sense because the premise is that the author has a vision of these noblemen/women whose lives were ruined through some fault of their own, and he tells their stories. But, really, a few illustrations of the author and unhappy individuals would do. Or they should be gnashing their teeth or rending their hair while they visit with them. But only one queen is pulling her hair, one queen is crying, and one king is pulling his beard when they stand before the author. I guess one has to let the reader regain his/her wits between the man in the bed on fire and the king in bed with worms leaving his body (I don't understand this one). It's very, very odd. And it's one of the entertaining features of my field and why I got into it!
For some free scanned images of the manuscripts I'm viewing, see http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/Scriptorium/hehweb/HM268.html (English) and http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/Scriptorium/hehweb/HM936.html (the French) and click "View all Images from this Manuscript." By far there are more for the English one on the website, which I think is a real shame. I've heard people theorize that the illustrations in the English one served a similar purpose/vicarious thrill as the violent movies of today, and that statement would be so much more true of the French manuscript, and none of the really gory illuminations are online!
NB: if you do check out the English manuscript, be sure and view Narcissus at the well, fol. 8v. It's an example of the "continuous method" of illustration, similar to comic strips, and I, at least, find it very funny. And I think it seems rare for there to be 3 scenes contained in one miniature (technical term for illustration). Usually, I think there are only 2 scenes. . . .
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment