II.—The Kells Crosier

Máire Mac Dermott

doi:10.1017/S0261340900003672

II.—The Kells Crosier

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 July 2011

Máire Mac Dermott

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Extract

In the year 1850, Cardinal Wiseman writing to Dr. Russell of Maynooth mentions an ancient crosier which had come into his possession. This is the first record of the shrine known variously as the Kells crosier or the crosier of Cúduilig and Maelfinnén, which now forms one of the most beautiful and most treasured exhibits in the British Museum collection of Irish Early Christian antiquities. In his letter the cardinal describes how he had acquired this ‘most valuable relic’ at the auction of the belongings of a solicitor in London, the crosier evidently having been left in the chambers by a previous occupant, and asks for help in deciphering the inscription. Nothing whatever is known of the earlier history of the crosier or of when it was removed from Ireland. At the request of Dr. Russell, Petrie exhibited the crosier at a meeting of the Royal Irish Academy on 14th February 1851, and read a paper on it. The shrine was at the time deposited on loan in the Academy museum. The next step in the modern history of the Kells crosier was its acquisition by the British Museum in 1859.

Type: Research Article
Information: Archaeologia , Volume 96 , 1955 , pp. 59 - 113

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261340900003672 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © The Society of Antiquaries of London 1955

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 59 note 1} Reproduced in Stokes, Life of Petrie, London, 1868, p. 293Google Scholar and in Petrie, Christian Inscriptions in the Irish Language, ii, 117, Dublin, 1872.

^{page 59 note 2} P.R.I.A. v (1850–3), 82Google Scholar.

^{page 59 note 3} U.J.A. ix (1861), 51–56Google Scholar.

^{page 59 note 4} Early Christian Art in Ireland, 1887, pp. 84 and 92.

^{page 60 note 1} Mr. Geoffrey Tandy of the British Museum (Natural History) has identified the wood, after a microscopic examination, as Taxus baccata, Linn., the common yew.

^{page 62 note 1} I am grateful to Dr. H. J. Plenderleith of the British Museum laboratory who has verified by analysis that the metal of this casing and of the terminal reliquary-box is bronze.

^{page 66 note 1} The triangles are wings projecting from the circumference of the outer edge of the spirals and not expansions of its outside end; they do not therefore make a true trumpet-pattern.

^{page 68 note 1} The front being the side of the crosier-tip.

^{page 72 note 1} Margaret Stokes, op. cit., p. 84.

^{page 72 note 2} Zimmerman, , Vorkarolingische Miniaturen, Berlin, 1916Google Scholar, Taf. 205, a.

^{page 72 note 3} Henry, Françoise, Irish Art, London, 1940Google Scholar, pl. 41, b.

^{page 72 note 4} Françoise Henry, La Sculpture Irlandaise, Paris, 1933, pl. 35, 2.

^{page 78 note 5} Crawford, Carved Ornament from Irish Monuments, Dublin, 1926, pl. xlviii, 148. See other representations of crosiers on same plate.

^{page 78 note 1} Since the material of this repair strip resembles that of the foot, it may have been added at the same time, thus implying an early date for some of the damage here described.

^{page 78 note 2} Macalister, Corpus Inscriptionum Insularum Celticarum, ii, Dublin, 1949, p. 38 and Shetelig, , ‘The Norse Style of Ornamentation in the Viking Settlements’, Acta Archaeologica, xix (1948), 110Google Scholar.

^{page 80 note 1} Subsequent to the writing of this paper I had an opportunity to examine for the first time St. Mel's crosier (pl. XLII, a) which is preserved in St. Mel's College, Long-ford. More complete than St. Dympna's, it is structurally very similar to our example and while much of the ornament is of a more degenerate type, some panels present a very close analogy. It undoubtedly belongs to the same complex. (Illustrated in Christian Art in Ancient Ireland, vol. i, pl. 73, 3 and pl. 76.)

^{page 80 note 2} Christian Art in Ancient Ireland, vol. ii, edited Raftery, Dublin, 1941, p. 158 (hereinafter referred to as C.A.).

^{page 81 note 1} Henry, Françoise, La Sculpture Irlandaise, Paris, 1933, i, 77Google Scholar.

^{page 81 note 2} C.A. ii, 120, where the implications of the word ‘imlan’ vol. xcvi. (complete) in the inscription are discussed.

^{page 81 note 3} C.A., vol. i, pl. 57. 2.

^{page 82 note 1} C.A. ii, 147 and Smith, R., ‘Irish Brooches of Five Centuries’, Archaeologia, lxv (1913–14), 249Google Scholar.

^{page 82 note 2} Smith, loc. cit., pp. 238, 240, and 248.

^{page 82 note 3} British Museum, Anglo-Saxon Guide, pp. 135–6.

^{page 82 note 4} Cahercommaun, Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, Special volume 1938, p. 20 and fig. 17.

^{page 82 note 5} J. Anderson, Scotland in Early Christian Times, 2nd ser., fig. 11.

^{page 82 note 6} Ibid., fig. 8.

^{page 82 note 7} Smith, loc. cit., p. 248.

^{page 82 note 8} C.A., vol. i, pl. 14.

^{page 84 note 1} Smith, loc. cit., pl. xxvi, 8 and p. 249.

^{page 84 note 2} C.A., vol. i, pl. 23, 4 and ii, p. 113.

^{page 84 note 3} Hencken, Archaeology of Cornwall and Scilly, London, 1932, p. 262.

^{page 84 note 4} The development of this graceful but degenerate style from the ninth-century southern English manuscript ornament, in its turn based on Frankish models, has been traced by Brondsted, , Early English Ornament, London and Copenhagen, 1924, pp. 127Google Scholar ff.

^{page 84 note 5} Brøndsted, op. cit., figs. 104 and 105.

^{page 84 note 6} Ibid., fig. 108.

^{page 84 note 7} Der Tassilokelch, Munich, 1951, p. 35.

^{page 84 note 8} Anglo-Saxon Art, London, 1938, p. 196Google Scholar PubMed.

^{page 84 note 9} See for comparison the animals on the mounts from Trewhiddle (pl. xxxix, a) and Brondsted, loc. cit., fig. 104.

^{page 85 note 1} J.R.S.A.I., xlviii (1918), pl. xiii.

^{page 85 note 2} La Sculpture Irlandaise, p. 185.

^{page 85 note 3} English ornament in its turn shows some evidence of contacts with Ireland during the period in question. Brondsted, op. cit., pp. 142 ff.

^{page 85 note 4} Der Tassilokelch, Munich, 1951, p. 49 and passim.

^{page 85 note 5} Haseloff, loc. cit., abb. 33.

^{page 86 note 1} C.A., pl. 18. 6.

^{page 86 note 2} Hencken, P.R.I.A. liii (1950), fig. 95A.

^{page 86 note 3} Ibid., p. 183.

^{page 86 note 4} British Museum Anglo-Saxon Guide, London, 1923, fig. 185. 2.

^{page 86 note 5} Crawford, Carved Ornament from Irish Monuments, Dublin, 1926, pl. xxxiv, 86.

^{page 86 note 6} Ibid., pl. xxxii, 81 and 82.

^{page 86 note 7} Facsimile Edition, Berne, 1951.

^{page 87 note 1} Hencken, loc. cit., fig. 89, 958.

^{page 87 note 2} Ibid., fig. 11, 323 and pl. xiv, 3.

^{page 87 note 3} See Hencken, Cahercommaun, figs. 11, 15, and 17 and p. 30 where their possible Merovingian-southern English connexion is discussed.

^{page 87 note 4} C.A., pl. 21, 36.

^{page 87 note 5} C.A., pl. 56.

^{page 88 note 1} La Sculpture Irlandaise, fig. 48b.

^{page 88 note 2} Crawford, op. cit., pl. xxxiv, 90.

^{page 88 note 3} Ibid., pl. xxxiv, 89.

^{page 88 note 4} La Sculpture Irlandaise, pp. 63–65 where the motif is fully discussed; also Irish Art, pp. 80–5.

^{page 88 note 5} Ibid., pl. 25, e.

^{page 88 note 6} Dated by an inscription to the end of the eighth century is century—Henry, ‘L'Inscription de Bealin’, Revue Archéologique, 1930, pp. 111–15. Illustrated in Crawford, op.cit., pl. xxxiv, 91.

^{page 88 note 7} Haseloff, op. cit., p. 19 and Abb. 2, 4, and 6.

^{page 88 note 8} Åberg, The Occident and the Orient in the Art of the Seventh Century: The British Isles, p. 117.

^{page 88 note 9} Brondsted, op. cit., fig. 62.

^{page 89 note 1} Brandsted, op. cit., figs. 35, 46, 50.

^{page 89 note 2} British Museum Anglo-Saxon Guide, London, 1923, fig. 185, 3.

^{page 89 note 3} C.A., pl. 18, 1.

^{page 89 note 4} Ibid.,, pl. 58, 2.

^{page 89 note 5} Examples will be found in the Book of Kells, Lindis- vol. xcvi. fame Gospels, Echternach Gospels, St. Gall Gospels, &c.

^{page 89 note 6} Brandsted, op. cit., figs. 83, 84, 85, 87.

^{page 89 note 7} Aberg, op. cit., fig. 84, 6.

^{page 90 note 1} Henry, Irish Art, London, 1940, pl. 41, b.

^{page 90 note 2} Irish Art, fig. 40.

^{page 90 note 3} Crawford, op. cit., pl. xl, 113.

^{page 90 note 4} La Sculpture Irlandaise, figs. 89 and 93.

^{page 90 note 5} Ibid., pl. 58, 2 and pl. 37, 4 and 6.

^{page 90 note 6} Curle, , ‘The Chronology of the Early Christian Monuments of Scotland’. P.S.A.S. lxxiv (1939–40)Google Scholar, pis. xxxiv. xliii, and xlvi.

^{page 90 note 7} J.R.S.A.I., xlviii (1918), pl. xiii.

^{page 90 note 8} Irish Art, fig. 25.

^{page 91 note 1} La Sculpture Irlandaise, fig. 45, c and d and fig. 4s, d.

^{page 91 note 2} Crawford, op. cit., fig. 12, A.

^{page 91 note 3} Ibid., fig. 11, c.

^{page 91 note 4} Irish Art, pl. 12.

^{page 91 note 5} Ibid., pl. 43, d.

^{page 91 note 6} Irish Art, p. 175.

^{page 91 note 7} Crawford, op. cit., fig. 10, A.

^{page 91 note 8} C.A., i, pl. 19, 9. fig.

^{page 91 note 9} La Sculpture Irlandaise, fig. 46, b and c.

^{page 91 note 10} Ibid., p. 56 for references.

^{page 91 note 11} Crawford, op. cit., fig. 8, A.

^{page 91 note 12} Ibid., fig. 10, D.

^{page 91 note 13} Anderson, Scotland in Early Christian Times, 2nd ser., fig. 73.

^{page 92 note 1} Crawford, op. cit., fig. ii, A and B.

^{page 92 note 2} Excellently illustrated in La Sculpture Irlandaise, pl. 27, 2.

^{page 92 note 3} Crawford, op. cit., pl. xviii, 19.

^{page 92 note 4} See for example a panel from Muiredach's cross, Monasterboice, ibid., pl. xviii, 18.

^{page 92 note 5} Kendrick, , Anglo-Saxon Art, London, 1938Google Scholar, pl. xcii, 2—upper roundel.

^{page 92 note 6} Ibid., p. 202.

^{page 92 note 7} La Sculpture Irlandaise, fig. 74.

^{page 92 note 8} Lawlor, H. C., The Monastery of Saint Mochaoi of Nendrum, Belfast, 1925Google Scholar, pl. xi, 86.

^{page 92 note 9} La Sculpture Irlandaise, p. 77.

^{page 92 note 10} Ibid., fig. 34, f.

^{page 93 note 1} La Sculpture Irlandaise, p. 76.

^{page 93 note 2} Ibid., p. 77.

^{page 93 note 3} C.A., pl. 62, 3 and p. 131.

^{page 93 note 4} Hencken, op. cit., figs. 89, 958 and 95 a.

^{page 93 note 5} For examples see C.A., pls. 29, 2 and 9, 31, 3a, and 36, 1a.

^{page 93 note 6} Henry, , ‘Les Débuts de la miniature Irlandaise’, Gazette des Beaux Arts, 1951Google Scholar, fig. 20, j, k. I.

^{page 93 note 7} Irish Art, pl. 52—the beasts which form the evangelist's chair.

^{page 93 note 8} Ibid., p. 153. The heads are illustrated in Salin, Thierornamentik, p. 349—end-piece.

^{page 93 note 9} Irish Art, fig. 46, b.

^{page 93 note 10} La Sculpture Irlandaise, pl. 132, 1.

^{page 94 note 1} Crawford, op. cit., pl. xxx, 71 and 75.

^{page 94 note 2} Irish Art, fig. 68, c.

^{page 94 note 3} Rather poorly illustrated in J.R.S.A.I. iii (1860–1) facing p. 308.

^{page 94 note 4} C.A., pl. 117.

^{page 94 note 5} C.A., pls. 27, 1 and 71, 1.

^{page 94 note 6} Ibid., p. 123.

^{page 94 note 7} C.A., pl. 9.

^{page 94 note 8} Crawford, op. cit., pl. xx, 25.

^{page 94 note 9} Irish Art, pl. 41, a-very top of shaft.

^{page 95 note 1} Hencken, op. cit., fig. 95, A and 324.

^{page 95 note 2} Wilde, Catalogue, Animal Materials, fig. 228.

^{page 95 note 3} Ibid., fig. 242.

^{page 95 note 4} Ibid., fig. 234.

^{page 95 note 5} Crawford, op. cit., pl. xxiv, 44.

^{page 95 note 6} La Sculpture Irlandaise, pl. 52, 9.

^{page 95 note 7} Ibid., pl. 52, 3.

^{page 95 note 8} Crawford, loc. cit., pl. xxii, 39.

^{page 95 note 9} C.A., pl. 33, 7 and p. 136.

^{page 95 note 10} Illustrated in Ant. J. v (1925), p. 136, fig. 1 and in Kendrick, Anglo-Saxon Art, pl. lxxviii.

^{page 96 note 1} P.S.A.S. xlvii (1912–13), p. 15, fig. 4.

^{page 96 note 2} Crawford, op. cit., fig. 5, A.

^{page 96 note 3} La Sculpture Irlandaise, pl. 20, 4.

^{page 96 note 4} C.A., pl. 13, 4.

^{page 96 note 5} La Sculpture Irlandaise, p. 100.

^{page 96 note 6} C.A., pl. 25 and pl. 34-object in bottom right-hand corner.

^{page 96 note 7} La Sculpture Irlandaise, pl. 26, 2 and 3.

^{page 96 note 8} Irish Art, fig. 43.

^{page 96 note 9} La Sculpture Irlandaise, fig. 59.

^{page 96 note 10} C.A., pl. 90.

^{page 97 note 1} BrØndsted, op. cit., pp. 275 ff.

^{page 97 note 2} C.A.., pl. 36, 40.

^{page 97 note 3} Early Christian Art in Ireland, 1887, p. 53.

^{page 97 note 4} C.A., ii, 156.

^{page 97 note 5} Brøndsted, op. cit., p. 276, footnote 1.

^{page 97 note 6} C.A., pl. 81.

^{page 97 note 7} Kermode, Manx Crosses, London, 1907, pl. xxx.

^{page 97 note 8} Shetelig, , ‘The Norse Style of Ornamentation in the Viking Settlements’, Ada Archaeologica, xix (1948), 88Google Scholar.

^{page 97 note 9} J.R.S.A.I., lxxxiv (1954), 36–40Google Scholar.

^{page 98 note 1} Brøndsted, op. cit., p. 129.

^{page 98 note 2} Ibid., fig. 106.

^{page 98 note 3} For example Paris Latin 262, Berne 45, London Addit. 37518—all illustrated in Micheli, L'Enluminure du Haut Moyen-Âge et les Influences Irlandaises, pls. 136, 137, London and 138.

^{page 99 note 1} ‘The Norse Style of Ornamentation in the Viking Settlements’, Ada Archaeologica, xix (1948), 110Google Scholar.

^{page 99 note 2} Brøndsted, op. cit., fig. 205.

^{page 99 note 3} Ibid., fig. 201.

^{page 99 note 4} Keltiska och orientaliska stilinflytelser i vikingatidens nordiska konst, Stockholm, 1941, p. 52Google Scholar.

^{page 99 note 5} La Sculpture Irlandaise, pl. 106, 2 and 4.

^{page 99 note 6} C.A., pl. 97, 2.

^{page 99 note 7} C.A., pl. 81, 1.

^{page 99 note 8} Kendrick, , Late Saxon and Viking Art, London, 1949Google Scholar, pl. lxxii.

^{page 99 note 9} Margaret Stokes, op. cit., fig. 22 and Shetelig, op. cit., vikingatidens fig. 36.

^{page 99 note 10} Holmqvist, Wilhelm, ‘Viking Art in the Eleventh Century’, Ada Archaeologica, xiii (1951), 1–56Google Scholar.

^{page 99 note 11} As suggested by Holmqvist, op. cit., p. 46.

^{page 100 note 1} C.A., pl. 83.

^{page 100 note 2} The results of Dr. Moss's survey of niellos in the British Museum are published in Ant. J. xxxiii (1953), 75–77Google Scholar.

^{page 101 note 1} C.A., pl. 93, 3.

^{page 101 note 2} See Irish Art, pp. 80 ff., for a full discussion of the process.

^{page 101 note 3} Ibid., pl. 28, b.

^{page 101 note 4} Ibid.,, fig. 31, d.

^{page 102 note 1} C.A., pls. 90, 89, 92, and 86.

^{page 102 note 2} C.A., pl. 94.

^{page 102 note 3} C.A., pl. 129.

^{page 103 note 1} Ibid., pl. 92.

^{page 103 note 2} Ibid., pl. 94.

^{page 103 note 3} Op. cit., fig. 191.

^{page 104 note 1} Kendrick, , Late Saxon and Viking Art, London, 1949Google Scholar, pl. lxxxi.

^{page 104 note 2} lam grateful to the Rev. Professor Shaw, SJ. for help- inful advice in connexion with the inscription and to the Rev. Professor Ryan, S.J. who has kindly supplied the historical information used in this chapter.

^{page 104 note 3} Con for C[h]oin.

^{page 104 note 4} lam indebted to Dr. Ludwig Bieler who has examined the inscription from a palaeographical viewpoint. He inful forms me that, although slightly different from the majuscule of the manuscripts, the few words of the inscription can give no palaeographical clue for dating.

^{page 105 note 1} Christian Inscriptions in the Irish Language, Dublin, 1872, ii, 116, and fig. 100.

^{page 105 note 2} Op. cit., p. 93.

^{page 105 note 3} Corpus Inscriptionutn Insularum Celticarum, Dublin, 1949, ii, 38.

^{page 105 note 4} Annals of Ulster, 968 (recte 969), ‘Maelfinnen Mac Uchtan, epscop Cenannsa ו comarba Ultan ו Cairnigh … pausaverunt.’ Annals of the Four Masters, 967 (recte 969), ‘Maolfindein mac Uchtain, epscop Ceanannsa, comharba Ulltain ו Cairnigh, … décc’

^{page 105 note 5} According to Petrie, op. cit., p. 65, ‘In the tenth and VOL. xcvi. to the early eleventh century on stylistic following centuries the families of Ua hUchtain and Ua Clucain furnished successively a large proportion of the chief officers of this church’ i.e. Kells.

^{page 105 note 6} Cúduiligh, mac Gaithinefos aircinneach Ceanannsa déce.

^{page 105 note 7} O'Laverty, , U.J.A., ix (1861), 54Google Scholar.

^{page 105 note 8} Annals of the Four Masters, 978 (recte 979),‘Torcratar bheós hi frithghuin an catha braon Fiachna ו Cúdúilich, dhá mhac Dubhlaich, dá tighearna Fear Tulach.’

^{page 105 note 9} J. O'Donovan, ‘The Irish Charters in the Book of Kells’, The Miscellany of the Irish Archaeological Society, i (1846), 127–58.

^{page 106 note 1} Annals of Inisfallen, Edited Seán Mac Airt, Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1951.

^{page 106 note 2} ‘Maelfinniae, epscop Imblecha Ibair, quieuit in Christo’ and ‘Mors Con Duilig Hui Donnchada rigdotnna Laigeri’.

^{page 106 note 3} For examples see Petrie, loc. cit., for the inscriptions on the Cross of Cong, Tuam cross, St. Patrick's Bell shrine, the Cathach, etc. These inscriptions are, however, all of later date which may possibly account for the presence of surnames.

^{page 107 note 1} For discussion of this institution see C.A., ii, 52.

^{page 107 note 2} Henry, Irish Art, p. 125, footnote 1 gives references from the Annals to the gradual transference of the monastery from Iona to Kells.

^{page 107 note 3} Ibid., p. 149.

^{page 107 note 4} Annals of Ulster, 848.

^{page 107 note 5} C.A., pl. 113 and 114.

^{page 107 note 6} Petrie, Christian Inscriptions …, ii, 92.

^{page 107 note 7} Gilbert, , Facsimiles of National Manuscripts of Ireland, Dublin, 1874–84, vol. iiGoogle Scholar, pl. LX, and J. O'Donovan, op. cit., p. 141.

^{page 108 note 1} Irish Art, p. 175.

^{page 108 note 2} In the eleventh and twelfth centuries there is an extra-ordinary absence of secular objects—the artisans seem to have been entirely dependent on the patronage of the Church-see C.A., ii, 41.

^{page 109 note 1} Irish Art, pp. 142 ff. and p. 175.

^{page 109 note 2} Ibid., pp. 157 ff.

^{page 109 note 3} Ibid., p. 166.

^{page 109 note 4} Ó Ríordáin, ‘Recent Acquisitions from Co. Donegal in the National Museum’, P.R.I.A., xlii (1935), 180ff. discusses the matter in connexion with Viking silver ornaments.

^{page 101 note 1} Filigree panels occur on St. Molaise's shrine but are quite independent of the animal patterns and are probably later.

^{page 101 note 2} The Prosperous Crosier (C.A., pls. 73, 5 and 74) almost certainly belongs to the tenth century though considerably later than our example. The unique character of its ornament, some of which is Norse influenced and similar to that on the Manx crosses, demands for it separ-ate consideration.

^{page 111 note 1} See C.A., ii, 57 for a full discussion of the Irish type of crosier.

^{page 111 note 2} Irish Art, p. 116 and C.A., pl. 91, 3.

^{page 111 note 3} Margaret Stokes, op. cit., p. 83 for reference from the Book of Armagh to enshrinement of saint's staff.

^{page 111 note 4} Ahenny cross, Banagher pillar, Muiredach's cross Monasterboice, Shrine of the Stowe Missal, Mac Durnan Gospels—to mention but a few examples.

^{page 111 note 5} C.A., pl. 88.

^{page 111 note 6} La Sculpture Irlandaise, pl. 100.

^{page 111 note 7} C.A., pl. 76.

^{page 112 note 1} La Sculpture Irlandaise, p. 185.

^{page 112 note 2} Added to contain additional relics which were, however, lost or stolen.

Article contents

II.—The Kells Crosier

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests