but the vital problem of the alfred jewel is in the enamelled figure. of its meaning there have been guesses and suggestions, some reasonable, some wild; m. labarte could only say, ‘it represents a figure hard to characterize.’ this figure is manifestly of a religious character, and it is the centre and focus of the whole. all the other parts are relative and subordinate to this, and the entire jewel is in fact a setting and a shrine for this sacred object. we must endeavour to ascertain its intention and significance, but before attempting this interpretation we must consider the enamel as a work of art.
for this venerable relic, even if regarded only in its material aspect as an ingenious62 mechanical product, and as a specimen of a once flourishing art, is rare and curious to so high a degree as to confer rank upon any museum (however otherwise rich) that is so fortunate as to possess it.
behind the enamel, in the position of a backboard to a picture-frame, is a separate gold plate bearing a significant device which is certainly intended as a counterpart to the figure of the obverse. from the relation observable between these two representations we may gather a constructive inference. thus we have three subjects for our consideration in the present chapter, and it will be convenient to give to each of them a separate section by itself. accordingly, the plan of this chapter will be as follows:—i. the enamel as an artistic product; ii. the inward signification of the enamelled figure, and of the engraving at the back of it; iii. a constructive inference.
i
the enamel as an artistic product
of enamels we may say that they are a sort of paintings or embroideries;—only not made63 with liquid pigments nor with variegated threads, but with molten glass diversely tinted by means of metallic oxides[16]. on the one hand they are the precursors of our painted windows, and on the other they are the parents of the famous works of the artists of limoges. of this artistic industry the alfred jewel preserves a specimen of the rarest kind. it belongs to the type which is designated cloisonnée, because the outlines of the design have first been made by little slender barriers of gold which serve as fences between the colours. into the compartments so enclosed the material of the enamel is deposited in the form of a vitreous paste, that is, glass ground to a fine powder, and mixed with the colouring material and moistened. so prepared, the work is passed into an oven, with a heat to melt the glass, but not the metal plate upon which the design has been laid. if the64 process is successful, the work is substantially achieved when it comes out of the oven, and nothing remains to be done but the dressing and finishing of the surface. of this cloisonnée type m. labarte, in enumerating nine examples, as being the chief works of this kind now extant, gives to all of them the title ‘byzantine.’
the chief extant monuments in byzantine enamel cloisonnée, according to labarte.
the celebrated crown of gold, which goes by the name of the iron crown, is the oldest extant jewel that is enriched with enamel. it was given to the cathedral at monza by theodelinda, the lombard queen, who died in 625[17].
the enamels in the altar of st. ambrose of milan, executed in 835, must have been executed by greek artists, who were numerous in italy at that time. it is to be noted that the flesh tints are rendered by opaque white.
the enamels in the cross called the cross of lothaire in the treasury of the cathedral at aix-la-chapelle, which we hold to be byzantine work.
65 “a jewel preserved in the ashmolean museum at oxford. it was discovered in 1696 (sic), near the abbey of athelney, in which alfred the great took refuge when he was defeated by the danes in 878. mr. albert way has given a description of it, with engravings of front and back, and in section (the arch?ological journal, vol. ii, p. 164). the inscription aelfred mec heht gevyrcan (alfred ordonna que je fusse fait) which stands in the thickness of the piece, is thought to leave small room for doubt as to the origin which is attributed to it. the enamel of the obverse is executed by the process of cloisonnage; it represents a figure hard to characterize (il reproduit une figure dont il est difficile de déterminer le caractère). the flesh portions are in whitish enamel; the colours employed in the drapery are pale green and ruddy brown semi-transparent; the ground is blue. the jewel terminates in the head of an animal, in golden filigree, with all the characteristics of the oriental style.
“admitting that the inscription may apply to alfred the great, this jewel would not by itself be sufficient to prove that the art of enamelling66 was practised in england in the ninth century. the inscription might have been engraved after the king had purchased it (possibly) of a merchant from the east.”
the enamels which environ the gold crown preserved in the treasury of st. mark’s, at venice. we see there a bust of the emperor leo the philosopher (886–911), who was probably the donor of this votive crown, which was made to be suspended over an altar.
the enamels on a chalice in the same treasury; it appears by the inscription to have been executed for an emperor who died in 944.
the enamels on the reliquary of limburg. this magnificent piece was executed before 976.
the enamels upon eight gold plates which were found at nyitra, in hungary. seven of them are in the museum at pesth. these eight plates unite to form a crown, one in front and one at back, and three on either side. each has its enamelled picture. the front piece has a portrait of constantinus monomachus (1042). the pieces to right and left of this represent the empresses theodora and zoe; the next two on either side represent actresses; the third on67 either side contains an allegorical figure of a woman, the one being humility, with hands crossed in front, the other truth, bearing a cross. the eighth, which is the hindmost, is circular, and represents st. andrew[18].
the enamels which decorate the royal crown of hungary, which was sent as a present to geysa i, king of hungary, who died in 1077.
in this list the famous ‘iron’ crown of monza holds the first place, being, in fact, an ample golden fillet richly decorated with enamels, and containing within it a narrow hoop of iron, which is reputed to have been made of a nail from the cross.
the fourth place in this catalogue is assigned by m. labarte to the alfred jewel, and by this classification it is referred to a byzantine source. but as it is plain from the matter as well as the manner of his description that his acquaintance with the jewel is second-hand, we pass over this local element, while we accept his classification so far as it refers to structural affinities.
in the spring of 1839, during some excavations68 in thames street, was discovered a fibula which happily passed straightway into the hands of mr. roach smith, and he wrote a memoir upon it which may be seen in the arch?ologia for 1840, accompanied with a splendid illustration in colour and gold. it contains a bust in cloison-work enamel, and invites comparison with our jewel more than any of those in the above list, probably more than any other extant specimen. it is now in the british museum. both the figure and the filigree are of superior workmanship to the alfred jewel, as if it were a later and more refined product of the same school. a french critic calls it byzantine, and assigns it to the eleventh century[19].
so far about other extant specimens of enamel cloisonnée. this species of enamel rises like an island out of the broad level of the enamel champlevée, in which the plate was prepared for the vitreous deposit by scooping the pattern upon it. to this common method belong the older and more rudimentary enamels of the british horse-gear, correctly described by philostratus,69 who will be quoted below. to this belong also the late enamels, for which during the thirteenth century limoges was famous.
the history of the art of enamelling is very imperfectly known, and the paucity of extant specimens makes the investigation the more difficult. the canvas upon which these pictures were laid consisted of plates of the precious metals, the smaller works being laid upon gold or silver, the larger on copper. as a natural consequence it happened that as soon as they were antiquated or had served their turn, they were lightly cast into the melting-pot, save where they were protected by some peculiar veneration.
hence it has come to pass that a favourite art of the dark and middle ages, which we have reason to believe was for centuries very prolific (until it was superseded by the increased vigour of painting and sculpture in the fourteenth century), is now represented by a few specimens only, and its history is hard to retrace. i shall make no attempt to supply this want, and shall only rehearse a few interesting facts which the present investigation has brought70 to my knowledge. origins i leave to specialists: but this i may say, that such evidence as the present enquiry has brought within the circle of my observation seems to suggest a keltic source for the enamel in our jewel.
the earliest mention of enamel to which we can confidently point is found in the book of philostratus entitled pictures (icones, ε?κ?νε?). this author was a greek rhetorician and connoisseur in art, who came to rome (a.d. 200) in the reign of severus, attracted by the court of julia domna, who (in the words of gibbon) was the patroness of every art and the friend of every man of genius. in his icones he makes pictures the text of his elegant and fashionable discourse. whether his pictures were real or imaginary is a matter of no consequence to our present purpose. the picture in which we are interested is one that represents a meet for a boar-hunt. the writer comments upon the well-equipped company, the horses and their riders, in the splendour of their get-up for the sport, drawing special attention to the curiosity and costliness of their horse-trappings. their bits are silvern, and their head-stalls are decorated with gold71 and enamelled colours. for the production of these colours it is said that ‘the barbarians who dwell in the ocean do smelt them upon heated copper, and that in cooling they do set and harden and keep the design[20].’
it has been questioned who are meant by the barbarians in the ocean. modern french writers have generally applied it to the gauls; but olearius, the editor of philostratus (1709), understood the keltic peoples; and certainly the expression appears more applicable to the british isles than to gaul. moreover, it is in britain, and not in gaul, that enamelled horse-trappings have been found. some of these may be seen in the ashmolean, and more in the british museum.
‘the antiquities discovered at stanwick in yorkshire, polden hill in somersetshire, saham toney in norfolk, westhall in suffolk, and at middleby in annandale, scotland, which are all of celtic workmanship, consist principally of bits and portions of horse-furniture of various 72kinds which have preserved, in many cases, the enamel with which they were decorated[21].’
the romans or romanized populations continued the practice of this art, and from the evidence of the finds that occur from time to time it appears probable that some of the finest specimens were made in britain. a large flat plate, representing an altar, which was found in london and is now in the british museum, has all the appearance of being unfinished. a curious cup, which was found at rudge in wiltshire, has round it the names of five of the towns on the roman wall. and this specimen appears, by peculiarities of workmanship, to be nearly related to the beautiful vase which was found in a tumulus on the bartlow hills, in essex, where it seems to have been deposited after the time of hadrian. and if the saxon invasions of the fifth and sixth centuries did, as it is thought, obliterate all traces of this art in the other parts of the west, this could only have had the effect of making the practice of it peculiar73 to ireland; and the irish were not a stay-at-home race, neither did they hide their gifts from other people.
there is a keltic aspect in the enamelled designs which was remarked by franks, and which may have accompanied the tradition of this art even when it passed out of keltic hands[22].
in short, all the indications which this enquiry has brought to my notice concerning the technical history of our enamel do seem to localize it in the british isles. at a later stage of this chapter we shall be met by evidence of a different kind, tending in the same direction.
ii
the inward signification of the figure, and of the engraving at the back of it
about the signification of this figure the conjectures have been diverse, but they have 74all agreed in recognizing the two sceptres as the characterizing attribute. hickes, in his first interpretation, thought that the icuncula represented the glorified saviour with a lily sceptre in either hand, denoting his twofold realm of heaven and earth: or else the pontiff of rome as his vicegerent wielding both the temporal and the spiritual power. afterwards, however, when he had read in pseudo-ingulph the story of st. cuthbert’s appearance to alfred, and had contemplated in the lichfield book the figure of st. luke (seemingly, but not really two-sceptered), he was moved to think that the icuncula represented a saint, and was, perhaps, meant for st. cuthbert[23].
i think hickes was right in his first interpretation, and especially in the second member of his alternative, wherein he referred it to the pope. in the ninth century the thought of christ was easily blended with that of his vicegerent upon earth: and it is plain that the figure is arrayed in precisely those insignia which best represent the dominant thought of the papacy at that epoch. the two sceptres75 aptly symbolize the claim and aspiration of the western hierarchy during those very years which alfred spent in rome.
leo iv, the pontiff who welcomed the princely boy to rome, had already, as the organizer of victory over the saracens, done much to prepare the exaltation of the roman see. many causes conspired to the same result. this was just the moment when the famous decretals were ready to start upon their triumphant career. a first display of their working was seen in 858, when the novel solemnity of coronation was added to the consecration of nicholas i. and, as i apprehend the course of events, this falls within the period of alfred’s sojourn at rome.
not long after this the surprizing spectacle was seen of the pope on horseback, and the emperor on foot walking by his side and holding his bridle as he rode. this pontiff gave commands to kings and ruled over them as lord of the whole world; and he actually realized his ambition of making all secular power subject to the papacy.
he claimed the subjection of all national churches to the bishop of rome. he decreed,76 in 866, that no archbishop might be enthroned or might consecrate the eucharist, until he had received the pallium from the roman pontiff.
there was much in the conditions of the time and in his own experience to cause alfred to view these things wholly on their favourable side. the enamelled head is probably not meant for a portrait of leo iv or any particular pope, but we can hardly be mistaken if we interpret it as a symbolical figure to represent the papal authority as the vicar and vicegerent of christ.
and if this be a true solution of the problematical icuncula, there is yet something more which we naturally desire to know. we naturally inquire about the composition of the symbol, of what elements is it made up, and from what source did the suggestion come?
illumination from the ‘book of kells.’
in the library of trinity college, dublin, is preserved a very famous book, known as the book of kells, a monument of irish learning and art in that period when ireland most justly earned the glorious title of ‘insula sanctorum.’ one of the full-page illuminations which adorn that book represents a scene of the temptation, in which jesus is on the pinnacle and satan is77 near. such is the action represented: but besides the action the same picture conveys also a reflection or comment upon the action. lower down, and more in the body of the building, there is a window at which is seen a majestic personage holding a sceptre in either hand, which leans and rests on either shoulder. at first sight the effect is quaint, bizarre, and puzzling; but a little attention makes all plain. it becomes clear that a contrast is intended between the humiliation and the triumph of the christ; and perhaps also, by the association of ideas which the last two verses of st. matthew’s gospel have made familiar, to suggest the duty (zealously discharged by the early irish church) of missionary devotion. no one who has given time and thought to this picture can doubt that the two-sceptered figure is christ. here is no question of the pontiff of rome. in the seventh century, to which the book of kells is assigned, the papal claims were not admitted, much less glorified, by those of the scotian rite. therefore the interpretation of that irish picture is quite simple, and it represents the glorified christ inhabiting his temple78 and looking out over his church as lord of heaven and earth[24].
though we know only of a single extant copy of this picture, we may confidently assume that among the manifold activities of the monks and hermits and missionaries and pilgrims from ireland it was multiplied and disseminated. it is (i think) impossible to compare our figure of the ninth century with that of the seventh, without coming to the conclusion that the one is a descendant of the other. we need not be incredulous about the chance of alfred’s being acquainted with irish iconography. the narrative in the chronicle (ā. 891) of three irish exiles who found their way to king alfred, reflects a valuable light on his kindly relations with the learned and pious from the sister island. this connexion was neither new nor immature. when they found themselves ashore on the coast of cornwall they set out ‘at once’—such is the effect of sona—for king alfred[25].
moreover, the irish picture furnishes a welcome79 light upon an obscure detail of our enamelled figure. how are the heads of the sceptres to be explained? some have taken them for palms, and others for lilies, but the irish drawing shows them rather as plumes. and this finds support in a singular passage of bede’s ecclesiastical history. speaking of oswald the bretwalda, bede describes him as a prince who carefully upheld his imperial dignity, insomuch that, not only when he rode through his provinces did his standard go before him, but even when he walked forth in the streets he was always preceded by an apparitor bearing the tufa, which (he adds) was in the vernacular called tuuf. we learn from du cange that the tufa was a wand with a head of plumes, and this is what we see in the sceptres of the irish drawing. sir francis palgrave divined that the saxon bretwaldadom had inherited this emblem of authority from the provincial dignitaries of the empire.
from these data the natural conclusion is that the figure in this jewel was derived from an irish, and not from an oriental, nor from any continental source. it was taken from an irish symbolical drawing of christ triumphant and80 reigning over his church, and it was adapted by the king in a sense which his experience had made real and concrete and practical. as chaucer was called ‘grand translateur,’ so we may call alfred a grand adapter. whoever has been drawn in to study both alfred and dante may have observed this in common to the two, that what they borrow they transfigure, their touch imparts to it the colour of their mind. king alfred in early youth was tied by every thread of religious conviction and political interest and personal sentiment to the see of rome, and he meant this jewel to enshrine the frontispiece of his profession and the ensign of his creed ecclesiastical, political, and personal.
at the close of the former section i said that the conclusion there arrived at would be confirmed by another kind of evidence in the sequel. up to that point the argument had run upon the technical aspects of our enamelled figure, and these had seemed to indicate the british isles as its native region. since that stage our argument has turned upon the conception and pedigree of the device; and here again we find that an insular rather than a foreign81 source is indicated. further evidence, pointing in the same direction, will be advanced before the close of the present chapter[26].
at the back of this enamel there is a gold plate which serves the same purpose as a backboard to a picture, and it is secured by an overlapping undulating border of gold. in the minster lovel jewel this member consists of a blank gold plate, but in the alfred jewel this surface is occupied with an engraving which is certainly allegorical. at first sight it seems to be no more than a decorated pattern made upon the idea of a tree with branches and blossoms and fruit[27]. but upon closer inspection this tree appears to be a sword with its point buried in a human heart, and when this is discovered it becomes plain that the branches and blossoms must be allegorical.
82
a sword with its point planted in a human heart may mean compunction for sin and mortification of the natural man; it may also mean resignation in adversity to the overruling providence of god. such a disposition of mind is productive of flowers and fruit, that is, of conduct which is beautiful and profitable, and (on great occasions) of action which is heroic. this mode of symbolical expression may be seen in the figure of st. luke in st. chad’s book at lichfield. the evangelist holds in his right hand a pen, the feathery part of which branches out into flowers and fruit, to signify the fruitful nature of the writings of st. luke[28].
these are the obvious meanings of such a symbolical device, and this being so, it plainly results that the figure and its back-plate are united by correlation of thought. the enamelled figure is the symbol of religion in its ecclesiastical and political aspect; the engraved plate represents the inward disposition of the heart, the root and fount of personal religion. the former is of the nature of a public 83profession, and as such is openly displayed to view; the latter is reserved, out of sight, facing the wall.
iii
a constructive inference
and this raises a consideration to which i invite careful attention. these two pictures, the one enamelled, the other engraved, are complementary the one to the other; they are two parts of one design, and as such they combine to declare the unity of thought which locks together the composition and fabric of this jewel into one constructive whole. and this observation, once verified and clearly apprehended, must henceforth exclude the theory of sir francis palgrave which explained this jewel as being derived from two diverse sources in the following manner:—
‘alfred’s jewel, in the mechanical workmanship of the metallic portion, offers a close resemblance to the icelandic ornaments, now made in the island, where the mode has probably continued by usage from the most remote84 periods. the enamel within, on the other hand, resembles some ornaments of the carlovingian era now existing on the continent, which have been generally considered as oriental. the head at the extremity of the ornament is extremely like what is found in those architectural ornaments usually called saxon, e. g. the porch of st. margaret’s at york. whether st. neot be the personage represented in the enamel i rather doubt; and i think it possible that the enamel itself was brought from the continent, and that the setting only was made in england. this would reconcile the two styles of workmanship; the metallic portion is unquestionably anglo-saxon, the enamel may be supposed to be from another country. but altogether it is one of the most curious relics of the kind; and no one, taking all the points of evidence together, can reasonably doubt but that it did belong to king alfred.’
this is copied from the ashmolean catalogue, 1836 (p. 138), the work of mr. philip duncan, or rather perhaps of the two brothers, john and philip duncan, both fellows of new college, and successively keepers of the ashmolean85 museum, men famous in their generation for their zeal in promoting all that was good and generous and beautiful; and graced, both of them, with a strong and manly beauty worthy to support the nobility of their character and set it forth to the best advantage.
i take the above to be an extract from a letter to one of the brothers in answer to enquiries addressed to sir francis palgrave, asking his opinion about the jewel, and especially whether he thought the evidence warranted the conclusion that it had really belonged to the great king of wessex. the answer has a peculiar value, because of the firm judgement it supplies upon the main problem. the deliberate opinion of the most competent authority of the time upon this point is of permanent value. of a different nature is the other part of his answer, in which he embarked upon a bold antiquarian diagnosis, and broached his dualistic theory. this solution was accepted at the time as furnishing a solid basis for the interpretation of the jewel, and it has held its ground ever since.
this new hypothesis gave satisfaction on three grounds: first, in that it accounted for the86 quaintness of the figure as being probably byzantine or oriental; secondly, in that it lightened the burden of credit demanded for our insular jewellers of the ninth century; and thirdly, because it squared so well with the accredited fact that alfred did receive presents from foreign potentates. on all these grounds the dual hypothesis of sir francis palgrave gave general satisfaction and seemed to be absolutely final.
for myself, i adopted it as the pivot of my interpretation, and as such i used it in the last lecture i gave on the subject, which was in may, 1899. but now at length, by the wider and more searching investigation which has been required in the preparation of this essay, i have satisfied myself that all the parts of this composite work are bound together by a unity of thought which manifests the effort of a single mind.
all available testimony indicates that this was none other than the mind of king alfred. in support of this broad assertion i will here bring forward a new illustration from the original writings of the king. when he had translated the pastoral care he furnished it with87 a prologue and an epilogue, both in verse: the prologue is given above, in the second of these chapters; the epilogue is quoted here. it illustrates his love of figure and symbol, and his aptness for the development of a train of allegorical thought:
dis is nu se w?terscipe
this is now the watering
ee us wereda god
which the world’s creator
to frofre gehêt
for refreshment promised
fold buendum.
us who till the field.
he cw?e e?t he wolde
he said it was his will
e?t on worulde fore
that in the world thenceforth
of e?m innoeum
out of the inward soul
a libbendu w?tru fleowen
waters aye enduring flow
ee wel ón hine gelifden under lyfte.
of loyal believers under heaven.
is hit lytel tweo
there is little doubt
e?t e?s w?terscipes
that of this watering
welsprynge is
the well-spring is
on hefonrice;
in the heavenly kingdom;
e?t is halig gast.
for it is the holy ghost.
donan hine hlodan
from that fountain fetched it
halge and gecorene,
faithful men elect,
88
sieean hine gierdon
and at length ’twas guided
ea ee gode herdon
by hearers of god
eurh halgan bêc
through holy books
hider on eorean
hither on earth
geond manna m?d
men’s minds to pervade
missenlice.
in manners diverse.
sume hine weriae on gewitlocan
some warily keep in memory’s ward
wisdomes stream welerum geh?ftae
wisdom’s stream with closed lips
e?t he on unnyt
so that it fruitlessly
?t ne to fleowee:
flows not away:
ac se w?l wunae
but the brooklet bideth
ón weres breostum
in the man’s breast
eurh dryhtnes giefe
through divine grace
diop and stille.
deep and still.
sume hine l?tae
some let it at large
ofer landscare
over the land
rieum torinnan.
in rillets wide-running.
nis e?t r?dlic eing,
good rede is it not
gif swa hlutor w?ter
if water so lucid
hlud and undiop
run shallow and loud
89
toflowee ?fter foldum
flowing free over fields
oe hit to fenne were.
and turning to fen.
ac hladae iow nu drincan
but draw now for your drinking
nu iow dryhten
now that your lord
geaf e?t iow gregorius
gregorius to you gave,
gegiered hafae
and he hath guided
to durum iowrum
to your doors
dryhtnes welle.
the spring divine.
fylle nu his f?tels,
fill each man now his vessel,
se ee f?stne heder
if sound it be,
kylle brohte:
the pail he brought:
cume eft hr?ee.
come back for more anon.
gif her eegna hwelc
if any lording here
eyrelne kylle
a leaky pail
brohte to eys burnan,
brought to this burn,
bête hine georne,
make boot with zealous fear,
eyl?s he forsceade
lest he should spill
scirost w?tra,
the sparkling water,
oeee him lifes drync
or of life’s drink
forloren weoree.
depart forlorn.
the diction of alliterative poetry has fallen out of use, and consequently this illustration90 must labour under the disadvantage of being in a form unfamiliar to the general reader. nevertheless, with a little attention, the essential point will become plain. the royal translator had been refreshed and invigorated with the lucid stream of gregory’s discourse, and at the moment of parting with a beloved task he sought to relieve his full-fraught soul with a grateful burst of eulogy. out of all the topics that were appropriate to the occasion he chose the perennial water of life promised at the well of samaria, and upon this noble theme he expatiated with a fertility of invention which makes it the easier for us to attribute to him the rich symbolism of the alfred jewel.
and now to gather up the results of this chapter. we have found more than one reason to think that our enamel was an insular, and not a continental product. this conclusion was reached by two different paths, first when we were tracing the technical history of the fabrication, and again when we were seeking the spiritual meaning of the design; by these two widely different lines of evidence we were led91 severally and independently to infer a british rather than a foreign origin for the figure[29].
this inference was further confirmed by a third evidential process, arising out of the sympathy of meaning which appears to unite the enamelled figure with the engraved device upon its back-plate. this led us to question the long-established doctrine of duality of origin which rested upon the authority of sir francis palgrave, and to infer that the whole composition of the jewel had been projected and devised by a single mind.
finally, we found reason to think that all these features harmonized well with the mind and character of a person with whose name the jewel is already connected by the epigraph; and if anything was yet wanting to complete the identification of that person, it seems to be supplied by certain traces of inward affinity between the symbolism of the jewel and that of the epilogue to the translation of the pastoral care, one of the surest monuments of the mind of king alfred.
[16] for the etymology: enamel is a compound of the simple amel, which is now obsolete. this was an anglicized form of french émail, which in old french was esmal, whose cognates were proven?al esmalt, spanish and portuguese esmalte, italian smalto (used by dante), which, in medieval latin, was smaltum. the source is old high german *smaltjan, our verb to smelt, i.e. to fuse by heat (new english dictionary, v. amel).
[17] it is figured in the dictionary of christian antiquities, v. crown.
[18] these eight plates have been reproduced by m. de linas in his histoire du travail à l’exposition universelle de 1867, p. 125.
[19] notice des émaux, &c., du musée du louvre, par m. de laborde, 1857, p. 99.
[20] philostratus, icones, i. 28:—the horsemen are described as—?ργυροχ?λινοι κα? στικτο? κα? χρυσο? τ? φ?λαρα. τα?τ? φασι τ? χρ?ματα το?? ?ν ?κεαν? βαρβ?ρου? ?γχε?ν τ? χαλκ? διαπ?ρ?, τ? δ? συν?στασθαι κα? λιθο?σθαι, κα? σ?ζειν ? ?γρ?φη.
[21] augustus w. franks, ‘vitreous art,’ p. 14 in art treasures of the united kingdom, a book which was brought out in connexion with the manchester exhibition of 1857.
[22] mr. arthur evans recognizes a keltic physiognomy in the eyes of the icuncula; but for me the eyes are as if they were not, being so much sunk out of their place, that through infirmity of sight i am unable to verify them.
[23] appendix b.
[24] appendix c.
[25] and ta comon hi ymb vii niht to londe on cornwalum, and foron ta sona to ?lfrede cyninge.
[26] for the irish illumination above referred to i have relied upon facsimiles of miniatures and ornaments of anglo-saxon and irish manuscripts. by j. o. westwood. london, 1868. plate xi.
[27] ‘the back, or reverse, is a plate of gold lying immediately upon the back of the miniature, and this is beautifully worked in foliage.’ llewellynn jewitt, f.s.a., in the reliquary for october, 1878: vol. xx, p. 66.
[28] here i follow the old copy of this drawing in hickes’s thesaurus (1705) facing p. viij.
[29] appendix d.
