What's New I Sitemap I Bibliography I Vortigern I Vortigern Studies l Wansdyke I POLLS I LINKS l Sitemaster I FAQs
|Vortigern Studies > Vortigern > Art & Literature > Vergilius|
Vortigern Studies Index
The question is simple enough: do we have any fifth-century, contemporary pictures from Britain?
The answer, though, is not so easy: we might have, or we might not. Recently, such a case has been made by Ken Dark for the illuminated Rustic-Capital manuscript known as the Vergilius Romanus. It is written in an elegant hand, comprising 309 folios of 333x332 mm in size, and contains 19 color illumination in a Late Antique style, which I have displayed at this page. These depict Virgilius (Virgil) seated, and scenes from the texts that are contained in the MS: the Eclogues, Georgics and Aeneid.
Though now in possession of the Vatican since the 15th century from the papacy of pope Sixtus IV (1471-84), we know that the Vergilius resided at the monastery of St Denis in France before that. It may very well have been there since Carolingian times, when it was probably spotted by the chronist Heiric. Before that, the tracing of its route becomes much more difficult, but similar textual irregularities shared with Irish commentaries of Vergilian texts may indicate that it was in Ireland before the 9th century. How did it get there? Where was it produced? In Ireland or maybe even in Britain? And if so, how did it end up in the Paris area in the first place?
That last question is easily answered. If the Vergilius Romanus was indeed produced in Britain, which we will look in to below, it may have reached Gaul as a gift or with travelling migrants to Brittany. We know from dealings between the 5th-century bishop, statesman and poet Sidonius Appolinaris and the Briton Riocatus (who may or may not have been a relative of Vortigern) that books were taken from Britain to Gaul, and there were new ones among them. Alternatively, it may have been a precious gift from a sub-Roman magnate or British King to an ally in Gaul, whether still Roman or already Frankish. Any such mechanism could have resulted in the manuscript travelling overseas the other way to Ireland as well, before the 8th century.
Though maybe resident in Ireland, most studies are sure that the MS was not produced there, but maybe taken there by refugees from the Roman Empire. An origin in the Eastern Empire or Italy has been suggested, but also Gaul and Britain. Another question still open to debate is the date of origin, which ranges from a 4th- to a 6th-century date. On palaeographical grounds, a 5th- to 6th-century date may be preferred, which seems to be corroborated by art-historical study. Though Ken Dark favors a later 5th-century dating (closer to AD 500 than AD 400), and Martin Henig a 4th-century one, the comparison with supposedly similar artwork may actually point to a period between the both of them. If the illuminaions and the writing of the Vergilius Romanus are indeed comparable to existing material, I must favor an earlier 5th-century dating.
Another reason to look to a northwestern European, indeed even British origin, instead of an Eastern one, lies with the study of the illuminations. Comparison with Roman and Italian art of the period shows that a direct comparison fails. Martin Henig has favoured a provincial Roman origin instead, with 4th-century southern Britain as his favorite. What makes the illuminations of the Vergilius Romanus so different from the rest of Roman provincial art?
In fact two different artistic styles occur in this MS. One is less naturalistic than the other, but it seems both styles coexisted during the same period. It is the more naturalistic art style that will concern us here.
What specific features do actually suggest a British origin?
First, there is the drapery,
visible in fos. 76v and 100v (right), which parallels
similar drapery in some of the 4th-century Durotrigan
mosaics. One of these is the famous mosaic from the villa
at Lowham near Langport in Somerset, where the mosaic
also depicts 5 scenes of a Vergilian theme, the Aeneid.
It tells the story of Dido and Aeneas, which probably
reflected the literary tastes of the owner. The style of
the mosaic may differ from the illuminations in the Vergilius Romanus, I would
Second, there is the characteristic way the feet of seated people are depicted, which we can see depicted in folio 106r (left) and top (Vergilius). This is not paralleled in (sub-)Romano-Gallic art, but it is found on later insular manuscript, of which the Lindisfarne Gospels (below) are an example. Another example for this is the Roman sculpture found at Murrell Hill.
Third, Dark proposed there is the shape of the shields. Most of these are in the characteristic pelta shape (depicted also in folio 106r, above), a design which was not used in 5/6th-century Mediterranean manuscripts. It is a north-western 'Celtic' design, which suggests production of the Vergilius Romanus in surroundings where Celtic and Roman art were combined. On the other hand, we could imagine this design being only slightly different from the comon Late Roman infantry shield, complete with the Germanic pointed boss, which seems to have disappeared after the 5th century.
Fifth, there is the special tendency to depicts scenes from the works of Vergil into Late Roman art. This is unusual for Italy or even the western provinces, but it occurred in Britain more than once, as is shown by a painting at Otford, Kent, and the already mentioned mosaic at Low Ham, Somerset. Virgil was also known to Gildas, which seems to indicate a special interest in Virgil's Aeneid during the 5th century.
These factors, although possibly circumstantial, suggest a British origin when taken together. But could a work like this be commissioned in Britain after its retreat from the Roman Empire? Did the British even produce books during that time?
Were there any books produced in Britain during the 5th century? Dark states that we can be relatively sure of that. We know that manuscripts were produced in Britain during the 5th or 6th centuries from an 8th to 9th-century copy of a Pelagian text. We also know that find from Dorchester that manuscript-illumination took place within that period. Also, Gildas letter to Uinniau (St Finnian?) and poems from Class-I Inscribed stones ascertain that sub-Roman times still knew literacy that produced letters and poems. Also, there seem to have existed enough candidates for literate lay-patrons with access to large resources and craftsmen. If one looks at the enormity of the work carried out at both the British phase of South Cadbury and Wansdyke, it is clear that the south-west British magnates, who later became the kings, had enough culture and resources to have such a work like the Vergilius Romanus produced. If all the above is correct, it would be the first British book known to us.
Is there any chance that Vortigern is depicted in any of the illuminations of the Vergilius Romanus? I seriously doubt it. Though there are powerful images of what people actually looked like in his lifetime, I think it would be pushing the evidence too far to assume that he was depicted himself. We should not forget that Vergil's works, though attractive to the literate elite, still represented a pagan theme. And when we consider that at the same time, pagan shrines at Bath and Uley were desecrated and the heads of pagan gods buried, it might be rather inconsiderate to have yourself portrayed in such a work. What these illumination do show, however, is an insight in the normal dress code and appearance of the 5th-century Briton. And indeed, in that of Vortigern, who no doubt looked more like a civilized Roman than a ferocious Celtic border king.
VortigernStudies is copyright © Robert Vermaat 1999-2011. All rights reserved