Thorvald’s Cross: The Viking-Age Cross-Slab ‘Kirk Andreas MM 128’ and Its Iconography 1789698553, 9781789698558, 9781789698565

Citation preview

Thorvald’s Cross The Viking-Age Cross-Slab ‘Kirk Andreas MM 128’ and its Iconography Dirk H. Steinforth

Thorvald’s Cross The Viking-Age Cross-Slab ‘Kirk Andreas MM 128’ and its Iconography

Dirk H. Steinforth

Archaeopress Archaeology

Archaeopress Publishing Ltd Summertown Pavilion 18-24 Middle Way Summertown Oxford OX2 7LG www.archaeopress.com

ISBN 978-1-78969-855-8 ISBN 978-1-78969-856-5 (e-Pdf)

© Dirk H. Steinforth and Archaeopress 2021

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owners. This book is available direct from Archaeopress or from our website www.archaeopress.com

To my father, Harm Steinforth

Contents Introduction���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1 Background������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 3

The Manx Crosses�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 5 ‘Thorvald’s Cross’: the fragment Kirk Andreas MM 128������������������������ 13 The stone’s date����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 15 Description ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 15 The figural elements of Face 1����������������������������������������������������������������������� 19 The figural elements of Face 2����������������������������������������������������������������������� 21

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross�������������������������� 26 Interpretation of Face 2���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 26 Interpretation 1: God fishing for the Leviathan/Christ fishing for humankind’s souls������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 26 Interpretation 2: Þórr fishing for the Midgard-Serpent���������������������� 29 Interpretation 3: Christ trampling the beasts��������������������������������������� 34 Summing up Face 2 of MM 128���������������������������������������������������������������� 42 Interpretation of Face 1���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 42 Interpretation 1: The corpse of a slain warrior being savaged by scavengers��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 43 Interpretation 2: Óðinn being killed by the Fenris-Wolf��������������������� 44 Interpretation 3: Christ trampling the beasts��������������������������������������� 46 Interpretation 4: Christ overcomes the hound of Hell������������������������ 48 Interpretation 5: Víðarr killing the Fenris-Wolf����������������������������������� 52 Summing up Face 1 of MM 128���������������������������������������������������������������� 54 The juxtaposition and the message�������������������������������������������������������� 55 Combination 1: Óðinn’s fall and Christ’s triumph�������������������������������������� 55 Combination 2: Víðarr’s victory and Christ’s triumph������������������������������ 59 Combination 3: Óðinn’s fall and Víðarr’s victory and Christ’s triumph���� 63

Summary and conclusion������������������������������������������������������������������������ 65

Acknowledgements��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 69

Bibliography�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 70

Places to visit ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 75

1

Introduction The Isle of Man is justly famous for its Manx Crosses, a magnificent collection of medieval gravestones. Often decorated with scenes of humans and animals and intricately carved interlace as well as inscribed with runic texts, the stones from the Viking Age provide a unique glimpse into the spiritual world of medieval society on the Island between paganism and Christianity. The most intriguing of them all is ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ or ‘Kirk Andreas MM 128’, a fragmentary mid-10th-century cross-slab in the parish church of the village of Andreas, in the north of the Isle of Man. Featuring dramatic scenes of both pagan Norse and Christian imagery, juxtaposed back to back, in well-cut bas-relief, it has invited several differing interpretations; most frequently, the death of the Norse chief god Óðinn by the demonic wolf Fenrir on one face, and the triumphant Christ walking over the poisonous serpents on the other. Together, both scenes are considered to signify the victory of Christianity over heathenism. Other opinions, however, have been put forward that deserve closer attention.

Figure 1: Collection of Manx Crosses in St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man (July 2017). (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man)

2

Thorvald’s Cross

This volume describes the details of the carvings, discusses plausible (and some not so plausible) suggestions and considers the images of MM 128 and their elements in their spiritual, cultural, and chronological context. It presents a hypothesis of its own as to how to interpret this remarkable monument, arguing that religious confrontation was not its original purpose. Instead, it claims that both faces of ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ convey a common, much more subtle and comforting Christian message.

3

Background The Isle of Man – a small island in the middle of the Irish Sea, between England and Ireland, Scotland and Wales – boasts a rich archaeological heritage. Since the Stone Age, humans have lived here and left their mark in the Island’s cultural landscape, in the shape of grave mounds, settlement sites, or stone and metal artefacts. On the eve of the Viking Age, its inhabitants were a Celtic people with close links to their Irish and Welsh neighbours. They were Christians since the days of Saint Patrick (mid/late 5th century), built churches and monasteries, and buried their dead in cemeteries. According to their customs, no grave-goods were given into the burials, but occasionally, they erected simple gravestones marked with crosses over the graves.1 In the year AD 798, so the Irish chronicles indicate, Vikings from Scandinavia entered the Irish Sea for the first time – a date that marks the beginning of a long period of raiding and warfare along the surrounding coasts. Eventually, in the middle of the 9th century, Vikings settled down permanently in Ireland, founding their own towns and kingdoms, such as in Dublin, and in about 870, the Vikings of Dublin also conquered the Isle of Man.2 They introduced a material and spiritual culture very different from that of the native population. The Norse settlers were predominantly pagan and followed their old burial-customs, furnishing the dead with all the necessary equipment for a life after death: weapons, riding-equipment, tools, jewellery and commodities, and occasionally large ships were provided as well as animals and even humans specifically sacrificed to accompany the deceased to the mythical realms of the dead, such as Valhǫll (Valhalla), home of Óðinn (Odin), in the gods’ kingdom of Asgard. Great barrows were erected over the graves, often on top of hills and ridges, for everyone to see from far away.3 In time, the two ethnic groups came to terms with each other. The newcomers assumed political and social dominance in the Island, but gradually adopted the material culture of the locals. While some Vikings held on to their old gods, others married local Christian women and were baptised, which brought on a phase of religious re-orientation and syncretism. Eventually, the Christian faith of the native Manx prevailed, and by about 960, the Norse had embraced the customs of the new religion, including burial in church cemeteries and in simple flat-graves without any objects at all. But See Steinforth 2015b, 36–56, 97–111. See Steinforth 2015b; 2015c; 2018; cf. Fell et al. 1983; Wilson 2008. 3  Steinforth 2015a; 2015b, 157–246; Wilson 2008, 26–56. 1  2 

4

Thorvald’s Cross

as if to replace the lost splendour of the old furnished mound graves, the Christian Vikings now adopted and adapted to their tastes another way to commemorate the dead and created intricately carved gravestones.

5

The Manx Crosses4 The custom of putting up gravemarkers and memorial-stones had been in use in the Island for a long time before the Vikings arrived. Mostly, those early monuments were quite simple stone slabs or small flat boulders with an incised cross, which either would be executed as little more than two lines, crudely scratched into one face (Figure 2), in the shape of an outline cross, or carefully constructed in ‘cross patee’ or hexafoil style (Figure 4). Purely decorative elements were rare. Occasionally, there was a short inscription mentioning the name of the deceased in Latin or Ogham characters. The towering late-5th-century stone from Knock y Doonee, Andreas parish, designated by the Manx Museum/Manx National Heritage number MM 5, for example, features the same text in both scripts and in the Latin and Celtic languages: ‘Ambicatus, son of Rocatus, [lies here]’ (Figure 3), and the well-carved slab MM 47 in Maughold, Maughold parish, dated to the 8th century, commemorates ‘Irneit, holy priest, holy bishop of God’ (Figure 4). The Vikings adopted this custom enthusiastically. Even though they had not erected carved stone monuments in western Scandinavia nor in Ireland, they quickly developed a unique style of their own, applying the art styles 4 

Figure 2: Cross-slab Maughold MM 21 with a simple incised cross. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Vicars and Wardens of the Parish of Maughold and South Ramsey, Isle of Man)

For an overview of the Manx Crosses, see especially Kermode 1994; Wilson 2018.

6

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 3: Knock y Doonee MM 5 and other stones featuring inscriptions in Ogham und Latin letters in the Manx Museum, Douglas, Isle of Man. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of Manx National Heritage, Douglas, Isle of Man)

The Manx Crosses

7

Figure 4: The ‘hexafoil roundel’ on the top of ‘Irneit’s cross’ (Maughold MM 47) in the ‘Cross House’ near Maughold church. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Vicars and Wardens of the Parish of Maughold and South Ramsey, Isle of Man)

of their homelands to the new medium. As they were Christian now, the cross continued to dominate the slabs’ faces, but hence almost all surfaces were intricately decorated with geometrical, floral, and zoological ornaments and interlace patterns as well as figurative scenes with humans and animals, such as deer and hounds, boar, or birds. Often there also are runic inscriptions, quoting names and giving valuable information about details of family connections in 10th-century Man. One of the most beautiful crosses, Kirk Michael MM 101, had been commissioned by ‘Melbrigði, son of Aþakán the smith’ (two Celtic names) to Gautr, an artisan with a Norse name, who according to the proud (and surely hyperbolic) boast in the stone’s inscription ‘made it and all [crosses] in Man’ (Figures 5 and 6). The stone Kirk Braddan MM 112 mentions Ófeigr, a man with a Norse name, as son of Krínán, who had a Celtic name; and Kirk Michael MM 130 is evidence of marriage between the groups, as it commorates Malmura, a Celtic woman, who was married to the Norseman Aðísl. The inscription on the crossslab of Kirk Andreas MM 131 states that ‘Sandulfr the Black raised this cross for Arinbjǫrg, his wife’, and there is the figure of a long-robed woman on horseback, riding in what appears to be a ‘side saddle’-like style carved at the bottom of the stone, perhaps a depiction of Arinbjǫrg herself (Figure 7).

8

Thorvald’s Cross

Today, more than 200 Manx Crosses of about the 5th to the 12th centuries are known, ranging in size from small fragments to huge complete stone-slabs of eleven feet in length. More than 50 of them were created in the Viking Age – the earliest dating to about the 830s/840s –, decorated in succession in the Scandinavian Borre, Jellinge, Mammen, and Ringerike art styles. Most of the stones are on display in museums or parish churches, with the most important collections in the Manx Museum in Douglas, in the churches of Kirk Andreas, Kirk Braddan, and Kirk Michael, as well as in the ‘Cross House’ in the old cemetery in Maughold (see map: Figure 8). Only a few are in the open air. All stones can be viewed in high-definition 3D imagery online, thanks to a project by Manx National Heritage to digitise the Manx Crosses’ surfaces.5

Figure 5: ‘Gaut’s cross’ (Kirk Michael MM 101) with Borre-style ring-chain and a well-preserved runic inscription. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Vicar and Wardens of Michael parish church, Kirk Michael, Isle of Man)

There are more than 30 stones with images of human and/or animal figures, and their interpretation has proven a difficult challenge to scholars. In his benchmark book ‘Manx Crosses’, first published in 1907, Manx antiquarian Philip M. C. Kermode (1855–1932) tried to identify most of the Viking-Age figures as characters from Norse mythology, and according to him, ‘gods’, ‘valkyries’, and mythical beasts abound in the images. In fact, the Germanic hero Sigurðr See https://sketchfab.com/manxnationalheritage (last accessed 25 November 2021).

5 

The Manx Crosses

9

Figure 6: ‘Gautr the stonemason’. (after Airne 1949, 44)

(Sigurd), whose story of the slaying of the dragon Fafnir is told in several sagas of the Eddas, features in no less than four Manx Crosses, for example on the stone Kirk Andreas MM 121 (Figure 9). By the combination of known elements from his story – the stabbing of the dragon, Sigurðr roasting the dragon’s heart over a fire, burning his thumb in the process and sticking it in his mouth, birds warning him of impending

Figure 7: Detail of Kirk Andreas MM 131, probably portraying Arinbjǫrg riding her horse. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man).

10

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 8: Manx Crosses with Scandinavian-style decorations and/or runic inscriptions (Drawing by the author). 1 Ballaqueeney, Rushen; 2 Ballaugh, Ballaugh; 3 Bride, Bride; 4 Douglas (Manx Museum); 5 Jurby, Jurby; 6 Kirk Andreas, Andreas; 7 Kirk Braddan, Braddan; 8 Kirk Michael, Michael; 9 Lonan, Lonan; 10 Malew, Malew; 11 Maughold, Maughold; 12 Onchan, Onchan; 13 St John’s, German; 14 St Patrick’s Isle, German

doom, or his sturdy horse Gráni, laden with treasure –, it has been possible to securely identify him in those stones. But beyond this, Kermode’s diligent, but often rather uncritical approach has been challenged: iconograph Sue Margeson in an almost surgical dismissal concluded that apart from some very few motives, we simply cannot – and probably never will be able to –

The Manx Crosses

Figure 9: Sigurðr is roasting the dragon’s heart over a fire, with his horse Gráni and a bird watching: Detail of Kirk Andreas MM 121. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man)

11

12

Thorvald’s Cross

identify the figures of the Manx Crosses with the requisite certainty.6 Without clear indicators (such as unique attributes), unmistakable details also found in literary sources, or an explaining inscription next to the picture (which would be most convenient, but does not exist in the Manx Crosses and is rare almost anywhere else in medieval art), human figures may have been intended as Norse gods and heroes or Christian Saints and clerics, images of the deceased themselves, their families, and/or mythical forebears, or they may even have been meant as symbols for abstract concepts. Yet despite the reasonable doubts about many of them, Kermode’s occasionally fanciful interpretations are cited to this day, for lack of a better idea – or for lack of further investigations.

6 

Margeson 1983.

13

‘Thorvald’s Cross’: the fragment Kirk Andreas MM 128 In the vestibule of St Andrew’s church, in the parish of Andreas, Isle of Man (Figure 10, see also Figure 1), displayed among ten other stone monuments and freely accessible to visitors, there is the fragment of a unique cross-slab, measuring only c. 360 by 190 mm today. It was found in 1848 in the rectory garden when a wall north of the churchyard was removed, but as far as can be ascertained, it was mentioned in any sort of publication only almost 40 years later, in 1887.7 On both faces, only part of the shaft and of one cross-arm each remain of two large Christian crosses that unequivocally identify the stone as a Christian monument (very probably a gravestone). Each face features a scenic image of human figures and animals as well as interlace and knot ornaments in well-cut bas-relief, and part of a runic inscription runs along the remaining

Figure 10: St Andrew’s Church, Andreas. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man) 7 

Allen 1887, 275.

14

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 11: Kirk Andreas MM 128, Faces 1 and 2, in its former wooden casing (September 2004). (Photos by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man).

section of the stone’s edge (Figure 13). After the surviving name in this inscription, it is called ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ – or designated Kirk Andreas MM 128 (Figure 11). The style of its artwork is purely Scandinavian, as are the runes, making the stone a ‘(Christian) Viking monument’. The figurative scenes are highly remarkable, inasmuch as they seem to derive from pagan Norse mythology and Christian religious tradition, respectively, and are positioned back-to-back, as it were. Ever since the stone’s discovery, their striking juxtaposition has elicited various interpretations as well as speculations as to their relationship. The factor that that very juxtaposition might well only be due to the fractional condition of the slab today and was in fact unintended on the part of the artisan has been widely neglected and needs to be treated with some caution. However, as we have no means of reconstructing the complete iconographic programme and the two scenes indeed appear to complement each other, it would be rash to positively rule out any possibility of a combined meaning. In the past, the absence of

‘Thorvald’s Cross’: the fragment Kirk Andreas MM 128

15

immediate parallels, the lack of artistic detail, and a certain ambiguity in the images prevented a scholarly consensus. The stone’s date Dating stone slabs is not always easy. The ring-chain ornament of MM 128 is pure Borre style (see Figure 12), which first came to the Island in the 930s.8 Norwegian scholar Håkon Shetelig attributed the stone to his Group 2 and dated this to about 940, while others prefer a later date up to the very late 10th century.9 The reference to a pagan mythological event indicates a certain survival or at least knowledge of the old religion. There is no archaeological evidence for non-Christian burial custom in the Isle of Man later than the 950s/960s, so it seems that by then conversion was virtually completed. Therefore, it is here deemed probable that the stone was erected approximately during the second third of the 10th century. In this period, society in the Isle of Man must be regarded as still transitional. After their initial settlement in Ireland in 840/41, the Scandinavian Vikings would have had ample time and opportunity to come into contact with the Christian faith of their Irish neighbours. The Dublin Vikings who conquered and settled in the Isle of Man in the later 9th century certainly had been a religiously heterogeneous group, made up of Christians as well as pagans and syncretists who knew – and possibly even practiced – either religion. The Scandinavian Manx Crosses and the decline in furnished burial both bear witness to the gradual spread of Christianity.10 Description There is no consensus or standard on how to name the two sides of the stone. In this book, the stone’s face showing the armed figure with quadruped and bird is going to be referred to as ‘Face 1’, the face with the belted figure with cross and fish as ‘Face 2’. This is not meant to imply that originally the ‘first’ face was necessarily the (more important and/or more conspicuous) ‘front’ side, ‘Face 2’ the ‘rear’ side, but used only as a means of easy identification. The central cross of both faces is decorated with the characteristic Borrestyle ring-chain motif (on Face 2, this is almost completely destroyed; cf. Figure 12), terminating at the top in a cross with an incised swastika. Each intersection of the arms is marked by a plain carved ring (on Face 1, this encircles a small cross). Next to the cross-shaft and on its otherwise E.g. Wilson 1976. Shetelig 1925, 258, 271; cf. e.g. Ellis Davidson 2001, 50; Gschwantler 1968, 166. 10  Cf. Steinforth 2015b, 163–164, 290–295. 8  9 

16

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 12: The Borre-style ring-chain on Kirk Braddan MM 112. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Vicars and Churchwardens of Braddan, Isle of Man)

‘Thorvald’s Cross’: the fragment Kirk Andreas MM 128

undecorated arms, there are some interlace and knot elements as well as graffito-like scratchings. On Face 1, two rectangular interlace motifs in bas-relief can be seen above the right cross-arm, one more on the arm, with a small incised cross beside it. An inexpertly-carved interlace knot fills the space between the bird and the cross, and there is some damaged floral interlace at the bottom of the fragment. On Face 2, only part of a large square interlace can be seen beneath the figurative scene. On the stone’s surviving narrow side, part of a runic inscription remains (now damaged), running downwards and reading (Figure 13): ìuÔuƒlTÔ:ÔƒiCTi¯ÔuC5ì[Ê...] þurualtr raistikrus Þorvaldr reisti kross þe(nna) ‘Thorvald erected this cross.’11

Figure 13: MM 128: The damaged runic inscription running down one side of ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ (MM 128). (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man)

11  Olsen 1954, 185, 229; cf. Black 1888/89, 338, fig. 4; Brate 1907, 23; Kermode 1994, 193. Due to recent damage especially to the lower part of the inscription, the last two symbols are completely (the Ê) or partially (the ì) lost now.

17

18

Thorvald’s Cross

Most important, however, are the figurative scenes (Figure 14). They are carved in bas-relief and consist of five components each: Face 1

Face 2

(B) spear

(G) rectangular object

(A) human figure (C) bird

(D) four-legged animal (E) knotted serpent

(F) human figure (H) cross (I) fish

(J) two knotted serpents

Figure 14: Coloured sketches of the figural scenes of MM 128, highlighting the images’ elements. (Drawings by the author)

‘Thorvald’s Cross’: the fragment Kirk Andreas MM 128

19

The figural elements of Face 1 On Face 1, a human figure can be seen, with a bird at his right and a knotted serpent next to his left shoulder, holding a spear in his right hand and pointing it downwards against a doglike four-legged animal beneath it that seems to bite the human in the right foot (Figure 15). (A) The human figure: standing in a sideways position, but with both shoulders visible, the figure has its head turned towards its right, looking towards the bird (C) and the spear (B) in its right hand, showing us its profile. It is hard to distinguish whether there is a pointed chin, which may indicate a beard and thus identify the figure as male. However, as women in VikingAge imagery generally are shown as wearing long, flowing dresses or cloaks, the figure is here regarded as being a man. There are no distinctive features: no lines indicating clothes, shoes, or headgear are discernible, not even to mark a neckline or the end of sleeves or trouserlegs, which has led some scholars to assume that the man is naked. The man’s one visible eye is large and round, the nose can only just be made out. His right lower arm and elbow cover the upper part of the spear’s shaft, which creates an anatomically awkward and

Figure 15: Face 1 of ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ (Kirk Andreas MM 128; July 2017). (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man)

20

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 16: Kirk Andreas MM 128, Face 1: The bird sitting on the man’s shoulder. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man)

thus impractical and unrealistic posture. His left shoulder and arm are overproportionally long, the right leg very short: as both extremities end at the quadruped’s (D) snout (the left hand at the upper jaw and the right foot in its mouth), there appears to have been an artistic necessity for this (see below). (B) The spear: the man (A) holds in his right hand a spear with a long shaft (the upper part, running up behind the bird’s (C) back, is damaged), pointed downwards against the four-legged ‘beast’ (D). It has a winged, symmetrical spearhead, which is slightly bent in the direction of the animal. (C) The bird: the bird is depicted in a sitting position, the wings folded, the wrist drawn in an indication of a short Borre-style-like spiral, the feathers of wings and tail easily recognisable as parallel lines. It is shown in a sideview, with one small eye, looking to its left, towards the man (A). It may be reasonable to suppose that the bird is sitting on the man’s right shoulder,

‘Thorvald’s Cross’: the fragment Kirk Andreas MM 128

21

with both its feet visible near his shoulder and chin, its head slightly thrust forward, with the sturdy beak directly above the man’s head (Figure 16). Because of its remarkably large size in comparison to the man’s head, two possibilities have been considered in the past to identify the bird: a raven and an eagle. Due to the lack of particulars, any zoological determination must be attempted with some caution, but if the available details are to be taken as significant in any way, then the bird’s beak does not resemble the hooked beak of an eagle but rather the heavy bill of a raven. (D) The four-legged animal: this ‘beast’ is shown with a slender body, in a running or rampant posture, seen sideways with all four legs visible as well as a rather stubby tail. The snout – possibly with a pointed fang distinguishable in its upper jaw – is open, seizing the man’s (A) right foot. There is an elongated, almond-shaped eye, and an ear is sticking up at the back of the animal’s head. The legs are shown in a stylised way, with the paws all in the same relative position to the lower legs as well as the knees all bent to about the same degree. The front left leg and a hind leg are drawn with a Borre-style spiral (Figure 17). The beast’s anatomical details are not conclusive, but they appear to allow an identification as a carnivore and very probably a ‘dog-like animal’, such as a wolf. It certainly is not a bear, nor a boar. In fact, no identification other than a wolf has ever been considered. (E) The serpent: next to the man’s (A) head and left shoulder there is a serpent with triangular head, looped into a simple ‘overhand’ knot a short way behind the head. The rest of the body is running in a wide arc along the man’s body down to his left foot (damaged by a crack in the stone). The serpent’s head rests between the end of the right arm of the cross and the stone’s edge. The figural elements of Face 2 On this face, there is a belted human figure holding aloft a rectangular object in its right hand, a cross in the left, with a fish in front of it and a knotted serpent beneath and above it, respectively (Figure 18). (F) The human figure: this figure appears in a similar stance to the man (A) in Face 1, with the head shown in profile, but turned to its left and facing the cross (H) in his hand and the slab’s cross-shaft. Its legs are also turned sideways, suggesting that the figure is walking towards its left. The head

22

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 17: Kirk Andreas MM 128, Face 1: The canine biting the man’s foot. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man)

‘Thorvald’s Cross’: the fragment Kirk Andreas MM 128

Figure 18: Face 2 of ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ (Kirk Andreas MM 128; July 2017). (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man)

23

24

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 19: Kirk Andreas MM 128, Face 2: The man holding a book and a cross. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man)

is round, with a sharp nose and one large and round eye visible. The lower part of the face appears to be damaged, and it is unclear whether a small projection was meant as a pointed beard. Two straight and clearly-carved parallel lines cross the figure’s lower body, forming a belt that divides the body into a rather long chest and short legs. This gives the impression of the figure wearing trousers; therefore, the figure is regarded as male. Other than the ‘belt’, however, there again are no indications of clothing or headgear. Both arms are bent. In the man’s left hand, there is a cross (H) with a long shaft which he holds upright so that the crosshead is at the level of his head. In his right hand, he holds up a small rectangular object (G), also at head level. At the rectangular object, the man’s thumb is shown clearly in front, but behind it, his fingers also seem visible, yet much weaker, as if ‘shining through’ a semitransparent object. In the left hand, the cross shaft looks like wedged between the man’s thumb and his outstretched fingers (Figure 19).

‘Thorvald’s Cross’: the fragment Kirk Andreas MM 128

25

(G) The rectangular object: the object is shown about twice the size of the man’s (F) right hand, in a ratio of its sides of about 2 by 3, but there are no artistic details at all to indicate its nature. (H) The cross: the cross has short arms of about equal length and breadth, a long and narrower shaft (of which the upper part is damaged), and a pointed end. It is held by the man (F) at the middle of the shaft. It has been claimed that there are thin, incised lines crossing the upper part of the shaft from the cross-head to the man’s hand and on down to the fish’s (I) snout. Close inspection shows only two short nicks in the latter place (see below). (I) The fish: in front of the man’s (F) legs and lower body, a large fish is depicted, vertically upright with its snout just beneath the man’s left hand. The fish’s symmetrical tail is clearly visible, as are four short, pointed fins, unevenly placed at both sides of the fish’s body. Two short lines (resembling the belt of the man next to it, as they are at about the same level and equally spaced), probably representing the fish’s gills, separate its head with a small eye from the rest of the body. (J) The two serpents: there are two serpents next to the man (F), each looped in the same simple knot as the serpent (E) of Face 1 and with a sharply-pointed, triangular head. Both are pointing their heads to the right, towards the cross-shaft. One (Serpent 1) is directly above the man, with the knot almost touching his head and the rest of the body running towards the edge of the stone and following the man’s right arm downwards to waist level. The other (Serpent 2) has its head beneath the feet of the man, near the fish’s tail. After the knot, which is next to the man’s feet, the tail runs upwards to the man’s waist.

26

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross There are no features or details on the persons of the human figures (let alone an inscription) to provide a direct indication as to their identity, but some of the elements may be regarded as attributes. Dividing up the individual interpretations is of course artificial, as during the period of religious syncretism similar images by mutual influence may very well have a common source, which manifests itself in pagan as well as Christian tradition and imagery.12 But in order to identify the pictures and investigate their meaning and intention, it is necessary to categorise. We are going to begin with the (slightly) less controversial image, the one on Face 2. Interpretation of Face 2 Looking at the image’s elements, a Christian interpretation is virtually inevitable. Not only is there a cross in the man’s hand, but the rectangular object in his other hand is unanimously taken as representing a book – or rather, the book (and very reasonably so, as shall be shown below) –, and the fish is often regarded as the ἰχθύς acronym, one of the best-known Christian symbols.13 The man might thus be identified as Christ himself or a Christian – an apostle, disciple, Saint, bishop, or missionary.14 However, as obvious as the symbolic meaning of the fish as an attribute of Christ appears at first, its use in British and Insular sculpture is very rare. Also, its position in MM 128 has invited a completely different line of interpretation, so other options need to be considered. Interpretation 1: God fishing for the Leviathan/Christ fishing for humankind’s souls Attention has been drawn to the fact that the fish is depicted beneath the man’s left hand and the cross as if hanging lifelessly from a fisherman’s fishing line:

Cf. e.g. Kopár 2012; Oehrl 2011, 254–264. Cf. e.g. Haas 1991. 14  Cf. e.g. Margeson 1983, 96, 105; Oehrl 2011, 260. 12  13 

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

27

It seems to me that the string was wrapped around the intersection of shaft and cross-arm (the illustrations show some lines that might suggest this), that it runs along the shaft down to that place where the hand grasps the cross-shaft as well as the string and is then drawn taut downwards by the weight of the catch. The cross would thus have been interpreted here as a fishing-rod.15 A Christian figure angling for a fish first suggests the allegory of God trying to lure and catch Satan in the form of the Leviathan, a Biblical aquatic monster, by means of a fishing rod,16 using Christ as bait. This is described inter alia by Gregory of Nyssa († 395) in chapter 24, § 5, of his Great Catechism: The deity was hidden under the veil of our [human] nature, that so, as with ravenous fish, the hook of deity might be gulped down [by Satan] along with the bait of flesh and thus, life being introduced into the house of death, and light shining in darkness, that which is diametrically opposed to light and life might vanish.17 Indeed this image was not unknown in medieval art as well, most famously in an illumination in Herrad von Landsberg’s late-12th-century Hortus deliciarum (Figure 20),18 as explained by Adolphe N. Didron: God the Father is there represented holding in his hand a line, which he casts into the abyss of ocean. […] The bait, in fact, is no other than Jesus the Saviour, attached to the cross. Jesus, descends into the abyss, seeking Leviathan who bites the cross by which he is to perish, while Christians cling to it as the means of their salvation.19 With the fish obviously having been caught and hanging harmlessly from the angler’s line, the scene in MM 128 might be taken to depict the triumph of God and of Christianity over the Devil – and, in extension, over paganism. Usually, however, the Leviathan is represented as a ferocious dragon-like sea-monster – according to Job 41:19–21, it even breathes fire (cf. Figure 20) –, not in the shape of an ordinary fish. This objection does not apply to the related version already hinted at by Didron above, that it is not the Leviathan that hangs from God’s fishing line, Gschwantler 1968, 167; my translation. E.g. Gschwantler 1968; Heizmann 1999b, 429; Oehrl 2011, 260. 17  Moore and Wilson 1988, 494. 18  Straub and Keller 1899, pl. XXIV; cf. Green et al. 1979, pl. 49. 19  Didron 1886, 349–350. 15  16 

28

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 20: God fishing for the Leviathan, using Christ as bait in Hortus deliciarum by Herrad von Landsberg (12th century). (Straub and Keller 1899, pl. XXIV)

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

29

but that the souls of humankind are being fished for, by Jesus Christ.20 In his Hymnus in Christum Salvatorem, Clement of Alexandria († 217) calls Christ the ‘Piscator animantium’21 (fisherman of the souls), whose intention is Man’s salvation. Cyril of Jerusalem († 386) explains in his Procatechesis: Jesus is fishing for you, not to kill you but to give you life once you were killed.22 Thus, the fish on the Manx stone could possibly fulfil a double function: to serve as a Christian attribute as well as symbolise Christ’s quarry, the faithful. The two serpents atop and beneath the man’s figure have no direct connection to these scenarios und would have to be interpreted as symbolic, probably characterising the Evil of Satan. Interpretation 2: Þórr fishing for the Midgard-Serpent Also, the motif of the ‘fisherman allegory’ is considered to be related to the Norse legend of the god Þórr (Thor) fishing for the terrible Midgard-Serpent, so this mythological story has been suggested as an interpretation for Face 2 of ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ as well.23 The most detailed version of the rather droll story of Þórr’s fishingexpedition to catch and kill his arch-enemy is provided in paragraph 47 of the Gylfaginning by 13th-century Icelandic writer Snorri Sturluson: Þórr accompanies the giant Hymir on a fishing trip. He rows their boat far out to sea and attaches an ox head to his line as bait. Immediately, the Serpent bites. They fight desperately, Þórr pulling the line so hard that his feet break through the boat’s bottom and he has to support himself on the ocean floor during the struggle. At last, he drags up the monster and is just about to kill it with his mighty hammer Mjǫllnir, when Hymir, in abject terror, cuts the line, and the Serpent vanishes beneath the waves. Frustrated, Þórr fruitlessly hurls his hammer at his disappearing quarry, knocks down Hymir in a fit of rage, and wades ashore.24 Cf. Padberg 1998, 129. Piper 1835, 43. Cf. Matthew 4:19 and Luke 5:10. 22  Yarnold 2000, 81. 23  E.g. Martin 1972, 74. 24  A similar version, yet ambiguous regarding the outcome of Þórr’s efforts, can be found in the Edda’s Hymisqvíða (stanzas 17–25), while other sources, such as the skaldic poem Húsdrapa (stanzas 3–6) by Ulf Uggason, clearly indicate that Þórr was successful in his quest (cf. Simek 2006, 428). 20  21 

30

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 21: ‘Þórr fishing for the Midgard-Serpent’ on the Viking-Age picture stone U 1161 at Altuna, Uppland, Sweden. (Photo: Wikimedia; drawing by the author)

There are at least four Viking-Age stone monuments with depictions of the episode (i.e. the Altuna runestone (U 1161), Uppland (Figure 21), and the Ardre VIII stone, Gotland, both in Sweden, the Gosforth slab, Cumbria, England (Figure 25), and the Hørdum stone, Thy, Denmark), and a boat features in all of them, as well as Þórr’s hammer, and/or the ox head bait above the coils of the serpent. The scene in MM 128 presents none of these, but instead there is in the hands of the man a cross, which cannot be mistaken for a hammer, and a book, which also does not fit in with the Norse legend.

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

31

Figure 22: Drawings of Kirk Andreas MM 128 by John Romilly Allen, 1887. (Allen 1887, 275)

Of course, it would be quite reasonable to consider the mythological story as a convention for the Christian allegory of God’s fishing for the Leviathan by merging both myths, and the medieval audience very probably would have understood the equalisation of Midgard-Serpent and Leviathan.25 But the man on Face 2 of the Manx Cross must be identified as Christian – with Þórr and his lore painted over almost beyond recognition, if at all –, which would turn the discussion back to the Christian interpretation above and to the more general issue of Christian influence on pagan Norse tradition in general as well as on sculpture in particular. In its unequivocal claim to a depiction of pagan mythology, this approach is not convincing. Most importantly, however, all these interpretations depend on the presence in the picture of lines representing the ‘fishing-line’ to identify the man’s activity as fishing in the first place. 25 

Cf. Gschwantler 1968; Heizmann 1999b, 426–429.

32

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 23: Drawings of Kirk Andreas MM 128 by George Black, 1888/89. (Black 1888/89, 336–337)

The first published drawing of the scene, by John Romilly Allen in 1887, does not show a fishing line. Instead, there are some other details, such as small smiling mouths in the faces of the two men, that call for some caution in dealing with this drawing (Figure 22). But in George Black’s drawing, published two years later, thin lines can be made out, especially at the cross head and between the Christian’s hand and the fish’s mouth. Unfortunately, the drawing, probably in order to give it a rock-grey hue, is completely covered in irregular, vertical hatching, so that the tiny detail of the equally vertical ‘fishing line’ may easily have been misconstrued (Figure 23). Furthermore, it seems that P. M. C. Kermode’s reproduction of MM 128 in 1892 is based very much on Black’s drawing, but while removing the hatching, the ‘fishing line’ was retained, giving it an even greater prominence.26 In the stone’s relief, though, no prominence at all is afforded to it: nothing more than two small elongated notches between hand/cross and fish, incised into the surface of the image’s background, mark the alleged ‘fishing line’ – while the other 26 

Allen 1887, 275; Black 1888/89, 336–337; Kermode 1892, fig. 4; cf. Kermode 1994, pl. LII.

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 24: Kirk Andreas MM 128, Face 2: The (alleged) ‘fishing line’. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man)

33

34

Thorvald’s Cross

elements of the image in MM 128 always are clearly shaped and cut in relief (Figure 24). In fact, on both faces of the stone, none of the image elements is simply scratched into the back surface, and surely a detail as central as this must be expected to have been executed as a narrow, yet distinct ridge – as it is in the scene of ‘Þórr’s fishing-expedition’ on the Gosforth slab in Cumbria (Figure 25) – or at least to be clearly recognisable, as in all pictures of the Christian ‘fisherman allegory’ (cf. Figure 20). Without it, any interpretation suggesting that the man in MM 128 is fishing – for whomever or whatever –, must very seriously be cast into doubt.. There is, however, another alternative, which is entirely independent of the presence of a ‘fishing-line’. Interpretation 3: Christ trampling the beasts The combined elements of the scene – the posture of the man, holding aloft a cross and (presumably) a book, as well as the position of the knotted serpents, especially the one directly beneath the man’s walking feet – strongly suggest a Christian interpretation and bring to mind pictures illustrating Psalm 91:13 of the Bible: Super aspidem et basiliscum calcabis conculcabis leonem et draconem.27 Upon the viper and the cockatrice you shall tread, and you shall trample the lion and the dragon. A single serpent, representing the Devil, might point towards the thematically related scene in Revelation 20:2: Et adprehendit draconem serpentem antiquum qui est diabolus et Satanas et ligavit eum per annos mille. He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. The image of ‘Christ trampling the beasts’ was quite popular in Christian art, and there are many examples of it – in clay lamps, mosaics, stone sculptures, ivory book covers, and illuminations, of the 5th to the 12th centuries, from the eastern Mediterranean and Continental Europe as well as Britain.28 In Cf. Mark 16:17–18; Luke 10:19 (see below). For this motif and its history, see Schiller 1986, 32–38, figs 60–87; Smith 1918, 146–158; Steinforth 2021. 27  28 

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

35

Figure 25: ‘Þórr fishing for the Midgard-Serpent’ on the Gosforth slab, Cumbria, England. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the vicar and wardens of St Mary’s church, Gosforth, England)

their structure and execution, many of them follow the example of two early incidents in Byzantine Ravenna, Italy – a mid-5th-century stucco relief in the Baptistery of Neon and a mosaic dating to the 6th century in the Archbishop’s chapel, with Christ shown standing calmly on the bodies or necks of the defeated animals – a lion and a serpent – and holding a long-shafted cross, thrown casually across one shoulder, and a book (Figure 26).29 A close medieval parallel is the early-9th-century carved ivory bookcover from Genoelselderen in Belgium (Brussels, Musées Royaux de l’art et d’histoire, No. 1474), with its frame quoting the Psalm almost verbatim and even all four animals mentioned in it present (Figure 27).30 These examples 29  30 

E.g. Schiller 1986, 34, 332 (fig. 62), 333 (fig. 64). E.g. Schiller 1986, 36, 336 (fig. 70); cf. Saxl 1943.

36

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 26: ‘Christ trampling the beasts’ in a mosaic in the Archiepiscopal chapel in Ravenna, Italy (6th century). (Photo: Wikimedia)

also positively identify the rectangular object in Christ’s right hand in MM 128 as a book, possibly the evangeliary. There is the difference to the Continental examples, apart from the missing nimbus (halo), that in the Manx stone only a single animal is to be seen beneath Christ’s feet (Figure 28). This might be explained either as an abbreviation of the motif, a practice evidenced in early Christian lamps from the Mediterranean,31 or by the idea that the serpent above Christ’s head was intended for the ‘second beast’. Medieval versions of this scene occasionally make use of the fields next to Christ’s legs for the ‘surplus’ creatures, as for example in the carved ivory book-cover of the Lorsch Gospel (c. 810; Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Pal. lat. 5032). Then also, two identical beasts are rather unusual, yet in a miniature in the early-8th-century Durham Cassiodorus (Durham, England, Durham Cathedral Library MS. B.II.30), King David (as a type of Christ, see below) stands on a two-headed beast with a snake-like body, 31  32 

Smith 1918, 151–152; cf. Saxl 1943, 12, figs 15, 16. Cf. Schiller 1986, 36, 337, fig. 71.

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 27: ‘Christ trampling the beasts’ in the carved ivory book-cover from Genoelselderen, Belgium (early 9th century). (Photo: Wikimedia)

37

38

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 28: Kirk Andreas MM 128, Face 2: The knotted serpent under Christ’s feet. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man)

which might be taken as a composite of two animals (Figure 29).33 Perhaps the poorly documented ‘bishop’s panel’ at St Leonard and St Mary RC church in Old Malton, North Yorkshire, of the late 12th or early 13th centuries, featuring two identical dragon-like monsters, could be considered another example.34 Very much in evidence, however, are both the two-headed, wormlike beast and the knotted/looped serpent on the Frankish sepulchral stele from Niederdollendorf in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, dated to the 7th century: one face of the stone, a double-headed snake with gaping jaws forms a semicircle around a man’s head, on the other, a man with a spear and a radiating aureola stands on a stylised, intertwined serpent.35 On the weathered surface of the medieval stone in St James’ church in Burton-in-Kendal, Cumbria, England, a man with a cross and a rod can be made out as well as the long body of a serpent he is standing on and that partly surrounds the scene. Less clearly identifiable are the irregular ‘bumps’ next to the man’s legs, which may or may not once have represented Hilmo 2004, 37–38; cf. Bailey 1978, 11. Cf. Allen 1887, 275. 35  Cf. Schiller 1986, 34–35 (fig. 65). 33  34 

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 29: David on the two-headed serpent in the Durham Cassiodorus (early 8th century), Durham, England. (Photo: Wikimedia)

39

40

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 30: ‘Christ on the Serpent’ on the medieval stone in St James’ church, Burton-in-Kendal, Cumbria, England, including the speculative identification of the ‘lion’. (Photos and graphics by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Vicar and Wardens of St James’ church, Burton-in-Kendal, England)

a lion standing behind the figure of Christ (Figure 30).36 Pending further investigations, this point must remain speculation. In all these images, the ‘beasts’ are interpreted as demonic or diabolical monsters being vanquished by Christ and the power of Christianity,37 much in the sense of Psalm 91:13 and Revelation 20:2. On a side-note, it should be remarked on here that on the 10th-century grave-slab 34 from York Minster, Yorkshire, Sigurðr the dragon-slayer faces not one, but two serpentine monsters – and that both are knotted (one of 36  37 

Bailey 1980, 157–159; Bailey and Cramp 1988, 82–83; Steinforth 2021, 55–56. Cf. Schiller 1986, 34–35, 334 (fig. 65).

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

41

Figure 31: The ‘triumphant Christ’: elements of the imagery in Kirk Andreas MM 128 and the book-cover from Genoelselderen. (Drawings by the author)

them twice). An identical, twice-knotted serpent, however, appears on the cross-head of another monument from York of Anglo-Scandinavian style, St Mary Castlegate 2, under one arm of the crucified Christ.38 Thus, MM 128 might display an intriguing echo of artistic conventions in contemporary Anglo-Scandinavian as well as early medieval Continental art. It is important to note that the serpents on Face 2 of MM 128 are part of the narrative instead of conveying a purely abstract meaning. Left out in this interpretation now is the fish. We may either regard it as yet another ‘beast’ to be trampled on (which in this context would be a unique instance and must therefore be deemed extremely unlikely) or rather as an attribute of Christ after all, perhaps used in place of the missing (cruciform) 38 

Lang 1991, 96–97, fig. 297.

42

Thorvald’s Cross

halo to identify the Saviour. As a third possibility, it might be considered that the image of the fish is used here in a double function, as an attribute of Christ as well as a subtle and symbolic indication of the ‘fisherman allegory’ mentioned above – yet without explicitly involving the man in the act of fishing. Being closely related to it, it would reinforce the scene’s overall message. This message would thus be the same as the Psalm’s: the promise of Christ defeating Satan and death itself, as further explained in the Bible, in Luke 10:19: Look, I have given you authority to crush snakes and scorpions underfoot […]. Nothing will harm you, and Mark 16:17–18: These signs will be associated with those who believe […]. They will pick up serpents with their hands. If they drink anything poisonous, it will not hurt them. Such a message, with its reference to divine protection and the resurrection after the end of days, would surely be most apposite on a gravestone. Summing up Face 2 of MM 128 With the cross in the man’s hand, there can be no doubt as to the Christian character of the scene, but beyond that, opinions are divided between the ‘fisherman’ and the ‘triumphant Christ’ motifs. In fact, both notions are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and the artist could intentionally have combined them by adding the fish as if hanging from an angler’s hand to the figure of Christ treading on the serpent. To make this – and any ‘fishermanrelated’ version in an exclusive and strict sense – work, however, the presence of a ‘fishing line’ would have been essential. As there is no clearly-carved ‘line’ in the relief, this line of interpretation is considered unlikely here. Instead, the striking similarities with the Continental examples, even without them being exact parallels or models to it, lead to the confident conclusion that the scene on Face 2 of the Kirk Andreas stone represents a rendition of the famous motif of ‘Christ trampling the beasts’. Interpretation of Face 1 Unlike in Face 2, in this image there is no cross and no other clear indication of a Christian background – other than the central cross next to the scene,

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

43

which is not an iconographic component of it. In fact, most recent researchers have favoured an entirely pagan interpretation of the scene, which, taken by itself, must appear quite extraordinary on a Christian gravestone, no matter how ‘Viking’ the monument may be otherwise. Other suggestions, however, have been put forward, of greater or lesser merit. Interpretation 1: The corpse of a slain warrior being savaged by scavengers The most intuitive, down-to-earth interpretation of the ensemble on Face 1 would be to take all elements at face value: the armed man being a warrior, the canine a wolf, the bird an eagle or raven. The wolf bites the man’s foot, and with a little imagination, it could be considered that the bird is pecking at the man’s head, leading to the idea that the ‘man’ might be regarded as a dead body being ravaged by predators after having been slain in battle. In Old Norse skaldic poetry, the corpse of a fallen warrior often is called by kenningar (poetic circumlocutions) such as ‘úlfs virðr’ (‘wolf ’s dish’) or ‘hrafn-ár’ (‘raven’s harvest’), because of the behaviour of the ‘animals of the battlefield’.39 In the famous 11th-century Bayeux tapestry, the body of a fallen man can be seen surrounded by scavenging animals (snakes and birds) and being bitten in the foot by a dog or wolf.40 In a similar vein, the point of the spear being directed downwards might be taken as a symbol of defeat, sorrow, and death.41 It would be very hard to explain the presence of this rather morbid scene on a cross-slab, though. Unless the man’s family and friends had wanted to play a very cruel posthumous trick on him by publicly depicting him as a defeated and humiliated corpse on his own gravestone, a fallen warrior certainly would have been granted a more heroic posture. An adequate way to portray and commemorate the dead might be seen on the cross-slab Kirk Andreas MM 131 (see Figure 7), just a few feet away from MM 128 today, where possibly the woman called Arinbjǫrg is shown riding a magnificent steed, portrayed as an amazon or a huntress.42 Therefore, the notion of the man being the corpse of a slain soldier is quite unreasonable and not to be considered here. However, this does lead to the alternative idea that it is not the dead man who is portrayed as a fallen warrior, but his slain victim – and that the carving Meissner 1921, 203. Cf. Nordland 1949, 113. 41  Cf. Capelle 2005, 29; Ellis Davidson 2001, 50. 42  E.g. Cubbon 1982, 273. 39  40 

44

Thorvald’s Cross

was meant to celebrate the dead man’s heroic deed, the killing of a mighty foe. Could the owner of MM 128 have been famous for his prowess on the battlefield, a true ‘raven feeder’ (Old Norse ‘hráfn-greddir’) and a warrior who provided food to the scavenging wolves? In very general terms, this might possibly not be too far away from the concept of the ‘shield poems’ of Old Norse skaldic poetry (e.g. Ragnarsdrápa), which sing about a hero’s deeds by referencing pictures of them drawn on a shield.43 And yet, no actual shield decorated in such a fashion has ever been found – nor, indeed, its gravestone equivalent. Interpretation 2: Óðinn being killed by the Fenris-Wolf In fact, most observers at once think of another, very particular setting when contemplating this scene. Especially in a Scandinavian context, the ensemble in the image – a man with a raven-like bird at his shoulder, pointing a spear against a wolf-like beast trying to devour him – inevitably brings to mind the most important episode of pagan Norse mythology: the Ragnarǫk and the death of the chief god Óðinn by being swallowed by the monstrous wolf Fenrir. The Eddas, for example Vǫluspá, stanza 53, tell about that dramatic event: Er Óðinn ferr við úlf vega, þá mun Friggiar falla angan. When Odin advances to fight against the wolf, then the beloved of Frigg [i.e. Óðinn] must fall.44 Later, Snorri Sturluson describes the encounter in more detail in his Gylfaginning (§79): Ríðr fyrstr Óðinn með [...] geir sinn er Gungnir heitr. Stefnir hann móti Fenrisúlf [...]. Úlfrinn gleypir Óðin. Verðr þat hans bani. Óðinn rides in front with […] his spear, called Gungnir. He engages with Fenriswolf […]. The Wolf swallows Óðinn. That is his death.45 Obviously, it seems, the man in Face 1 of ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ must be Óðinn, highest of the old Norse gods, identified by the raven, which is representing Huginn and/or Muninn, his trusty deputies and familiars, and his weapon, the spear Gungnir. Both are well-established attributes of Óðinn. The canine McTurk 2004. Kuhn 1962, 12; transl. Larrington 1996, 53. 45  Faulkes 1982, 50; my translation. 43  44 

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

45

then is of course the wolf Fenrir, Óðinn’s bane. By virtue of these striking analogies, many scholars and authors felt justified in concluding that the scene indeed shows the death of Óðinn in the Ragnarǫk, the cataclysmic battle of the Æsir, the gods of Asgard, against the Giants and the forces of Chaos, in which (almost) all of the old gods are destined to die and in which the mythological world of the Norse itself comes to an end. A similar scene of a helmeted man being bitten in the foot by a canine can be seen on a stone in Ledberg in Sweden (Figure 32).46 Hardly ever mentioned in this interpretation is the serpent next to the man on the Manx stone. It would be tempting to identify it as the Midgard-Serpent, another demoniac combatant in the fight against the gods and Þórr’s mortal enemy (as mentioned above), included to supplement the depiction of the battlefield at the Ragnarǫk. However, as there are two identical knotted serpents on Face 2 that certainly cannot be meant to represent the Norse monster, this identification is rather unconvincing. Perhaps we are to take this element (on both faces) in a symbolic way, as a symbol of the powers of Evil and of Chaos, shown knotted to indicate their being ‘wicked’ – or indeed, defeated.47 46  47 

Cf. Oehrl 2011, 229–230. E.g. Heizmann 1999b, 429.

Figure 32: ‘Óðinn being devoured by Fenrir’ on the stone in Ledberg, Sweden. (Photo: Wikimedia; drawing by the author)

46

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 33: ‘Christ fighting the beasts’ in the Stuttgart Psalter, Stuttgart, Germany, with the text of Psalm 91:13 over the scene (9th century). (Photo: Wikimedia)

The image of a pagan god on a Christian gravestone must strike as unusual, though, and calls for an explanation. As a result, some scholars took their interpretation one step further by placing the scene in a wider context: they interpreted the death of the god as a symbol for the defeat of the pagan Norse religion in general, emphasising that the large Christian cross right next to this scene – and the Christian figure on Face 2 – must complement the message to signify the complete victory of Christianity over paganism.48 This combined, common meaning will be discussed in detail below. Interpretation 3: Christ trampling the beasts Before accepting the presence of a pagan Norse god on a Christian stone too quickly, however, it is worthwhile to take a look at other – and more ‘suitable’ – interpretations and influences. In fact, the composition of the scene in Face 1 has a curious and rarely recognised semblance to a particularly Christian motif, viz. the second variant of ‘Christ trampling the beasts’. While most renderings of the illustration of Psalm 91:13 show the peaceably triumphant Saviour (as discussed above), there are some other examples in which Christ appears in a more warlike demeanour and actively does battle against the dangerous beasts trying to attack him. For example, an illumination in the 9th-century Stuttgart 48 

E.g. Capelle 2005, 29; Ellis Davidson 2001, 50; Margeson 1983, 96.

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

47

Figure 34: ‘Christ fighting the beasts’ in the 9th-century Utrecht Psalter, Utrecht, Netherlands. (Photo: © Universiteitsbibliotheek Utrecht, Netherlands; reproduced with kind permission)

Psalter (Stuttgart, Germany, Württembergische Landesbibliothek, Cod. Bibl. 2° 23, fol. 107v; Figure 33) portrays Christ as a cross-nimbed and helmeted warriorhero armed with a spear and clad in scale armour and standing over – and on – a lion and a fire-breathing serpent, thrusting his spear down at them. Again fighting the serpent with a spear, but less martially dressed, Christ appears in an illumination in the contemporaneous Utrecht Psalter (Utrecht, Netherlands, Universiteitsbibliotheek, MS Bibl. Rhenotraiectine I, 32, fol. 53v; Figure 34).

48

Thorvald’s Cross

While it is hardly surprising that the local Manx Church had a (possibly profound) influence on the design of Christian gravestone imagery on its island, it is important to notice that the similarity of MM 128’s two scenes with both variants of the ‘Christ trampling the beasts’ motif, respectively, demonstrates that the clergy in the Isle of Man had access to Anglo-Saxon and Carolingian book illumination and adopted and adapted its design for their own art and their own purposes.49 Even though the ‘warlike Christ’ (Christus miles) was in no way limited to Anglo-Saxon or British, nor the ‘triumphant Christ’ (Christus triumphans) to Continental examples of the motif, Meyer Schapiro’s claim that the former attitude catered to ‘the primitive taste of Anglo-Saxon tribes for imagery of heroic combats with wild beasts and monsters, as in Beowulf and the pagan legends’,50 may not be far from the mark in regard to the Manx stone. Quite possibly, this style was used to make the image and its message more accessible to the residual pagan Vikings in the Isle of Man. Thomas A. DuBois’ suggestion, though not entirely compelling, that book and raven represented ‘parallel sources of divine wisdom’, would take this idea even further.51 But then, the bird in MM 128 might have been meant as an eagle after all and thus as an attribute to identify the man as Christ, in lieu of a cross or a halo, and as a symbol for the Christian hope for resurrection. By identifying the man as Christ and the scene – again – as an illustration of Psalm 91:13, the message would be very different from the one before: far from celebrating the death of Óðinn and the defeat of heathendom, it conveys the comforting promise of the Christian resurrection – with the same motif as on Face 2, but with a different treatment. Whether it is feasible to assume the same message to be broadcast in two different ways will be discussed below. After all, there is another Christian interpretation that might apply more convincingly. Interpretation 4: Christ overcomes the hound of Hell After crucifixion, Christ is said to have visited the underworld to free the souls of the worthy, and at the mouth of Hell, he fights and kills a hell-hound, as German 11th-century poet Frau Ava describes in Das Leben Jesu (‘The Life of Jesus’), stanza 161:

Steinforth 2021, 59–65. Schapiro 1980, 153. 51  DuBois 1999, 148–149. 49  50 

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

49

Figure 35: The ‘warrior hero’ and the ‘warlike Christ’: elements of the imagery in Kirk Andreas MM 128 and the Stuttgart Psalter. (Drawings by the author)

An der stunde do gesigt er an dem helle hunde, sine chiwen er im brach, uil michel leit ime da gesach. At the moment he broke its jaws,

when he had defeated the hell-hound, thus much bad harm happened to it.52

Christ’s rescue of the righteous by overcoming a hell-hound barring his way would certainly qualify as an adequate motif for a gravestone, as it (also) presages the resurrection at the end of days. Yet there are grave objections: Judgement Day does not require the defeat of any demonic canine (while, by the the way, it is essential for the Ragnarǫk story), the episode narrated in the poem is not very prominent in both Scripture and art at all, and finally, the Manx scene bears little similarity to the classic image of fighting a Cerberuslike guard-dog of Hell, as encountered by the Greek hero Heracles (Hercules) during his journey into the underworld (Figure 36). Worse, even if we do accept the bird as an eagle and an attribute of Christ, it is still somewhat surprising to find him wielding a spear instead of a long-shafted cross, which would have served just as well to pry open the beast’s jaws. In fact, the cross, being the Christian attribute, is sorely missed in the picture, raising general doubts on any Christian interpretation.

52 

Maurer 1966, 44; my translation. Cf. Gschwantler 1990.

50

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 36: Hercules and Cerberus by Antonio Tempesta of Florence, Italy (1555–1630). (Photo: Wikimedia)

However, the third line in Frau Ava’s poem – ‘he broke its jaws’ – brings to mind another Biblical figure. It is rather reminiscent of Samson killing the lion, as the Bible tells us in Judges 14:6: The Spirit of the Lord came powerfully upon him so that he tore the lion apart with his bare hands as he might have torn a young goat. This episode also is depicted in numerous artworks, such as in a sculptured tympanum in St Mary Magdalene church in Stretton Sugwas, Herefordshire, England, made in the middle of the 12th century (Figure 37).53 Other examples can be seen on a slightly later keystone in Keynsham Abbey in Somerset, England, or in an elaborate mosaic in the church of Sant Orso in Aosta, Italy, also of the 12th century.54 53  54 

Zarnecki 1953, 13, 55, fig. 32. Kessler 2019, 105–106, fig. 49; Zarnecki, Holt and Holland 1984, 68 (no. 163c).

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

51

Figure 37: ‘Samson killing the lion’ in a tympanon in St Mary Magdalene church, Stretton Sugwas, Herefordshire, England, mid-12th century. (Photo: © Julian P. Guffogg, Lincoln, reproduced courtesy of the vicar and wardens of St Mary Magdalene, Stretton Sugwas, England)

In a similar scene, related in 1 Kings 34–36, the boy David kills a lion by strangling it in order to save a ram that had strayed from the flock. In figural depictions, David is often shown tearing apart the lion’s jaws with both hands, such as in the 8th-century Pictish stone sarcophagus in St Andrews Cathedral in Scotland.55 Here (as well as in other images of this motif), the scene is clearly identified by the ram standing close to the fight, and, in fact, its presence is crucial for the identification of this scene. This ram is absent in MM 128, but instead there are the spear, the bird, and the serpent that match neither the story of David nor that of Samson killing a lion. It must therefore be concluded that neither of the two Biblical lion-slayers is portrayed on Face 1 of ‘Thorvald’s Cross’. However, it is important to observe that great care was taken in the Stretton Sugwas tympanum to highlight the detail that Samson is rending apart the lion’s jaws with his hands: the artisan found it necessary to depict the hero with extremely long, slender arms to make them reach all the way to the lion’s maw (see Figure 37). This point, in fact, directs our attention back to the similarly peculiar body posture of the man in the Manx Cross – one foot (of a remarkably short leg) 55 

Henderson 1998, esp. 109–134, figs 29, 35, 47, pl. 5; cf. March 1894.

52

Thorvald’s Cross

in the beast’s mouth, and one hand (of an unnaturally long arm) at its upper jaw. This could be explained as him being in the process of being eaten by the wolf and reaching down to ward off its gaping maw, but the latter detail appears superfluous – it does not occur, for example, on the carving of Óðinn being bitten by the wolf on the stone in Ledberg, Sweden (see Figure 32). Obviously, the man’s posture was of great importance for the design and was chosen deliberately by the artist, with the objective of involving the hand in the act of combat and show the man as tearing apart the wolf ’s jaws, using one foot and one hand. Interpretation 5: Víðarr killing the Fenris-Wolf In this exact detail, there is another literary model for the scene, and it takes us back to Norse mythology and to the Ragnarǫk – to the very scene immediately following the death of Óðinn, as related in the Edda’s Vafþrúðnismál, stanza 53: Úlfr-gleypa mun Aldafǫðr, þess mun Víðarr vreka; kalda kiapta hann klyfia mun vitnis vígi at. The wolf will swallow the Father of Men [i.e. Óðinn], Vidar will avenge this; the cold jaws of the beast he will sunder in battle.56

Again, Snorri’s Gylfaginning (§79) provides more detail of the confrontation, including the crucial element: En þegar eptir snýsk fram Viðarr ok stígr ǫðrum fœti í neðra keypt úlfsins […]. Annari hendi tekr hann inn efra keypt úlfsins ok rífr sundr gin hans ok verðr þat úlfsins bani. And immediately afterwards, Víðarr rushes forward and steps with one foot in the lower jaw of the wolf […]. With the other hand, he grasps the wolf’s upper jaw und tears apart his mouth, and that is the wolf ’s death. 57

Kuhn 1962, 55; transl. Larrington 1996, 48; my italics. Faulkes 1982, 51; my translation and italics. In Vǫluspá, 53, Víðarr stabs the wolf with his sword, instead of ripping asunder its jaws.

56  57 

The iconography of the two faces of Thorvald’s Cross

53

Víðarr (Vidar), like Þórr, is a son of Óðinn. He holds a special place in Norse mythology, as according to the prophecies of the Eddas, he is one of the very few of the old gods to survive the apocalyptic events of the Ragnarǫk to found a cleansed new world. The similarity between the two descriptions in medieval literature and the man’s bearing in the image on ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ is striking, but only few scholars so far have preferred this identification, while others dismissed the idea outright.58 For one, the attributes of raven and spear often are considered to argue against identifying the man as anyone else but Óðinn. Then, the artistic composition of the supposed act of rending open the jaws is regarded to be sadly inadequate, and a victorious pagan god seemed so very much more out of place on a Christian cross-slab than a dying one. These objections are not conclusive, however. There are no attributes known to specifically identify Víðarr, but a spear is but a weapon after all, and the raven could possibly be seen as a means for identifying the man not as Óðinn himself, but as the son of Óðinn, by transferring his dead father’s attribute on to him.59 The design of the stone may indeed be somewhat awkward, but the artist was constrained by the available space and still deliberately placed the man’s right foot and left hand in/near the wolf ’s mouth – at the cost of an unnaturally short leg and a disproportionately long arm –, so we may expect some explicit purpose in this peculiar, yet elaborately executed posture of the man. Certainly, it corresponds precisely with the description of Víðarr’s fight in the Eddas. And finally, given the effort that went into it, the artist may well have had a special reason to include a victorious pagan god in his design. Víðarr and his place in Norse mythology need to be approached with some discretion. Not being mentioned in skaldic poetry at all, it is unknown how old and how well known his tradition would have been in the 10th century, when the stone was designed. Snorri Sturluson, a Christian writing in the early 13th century, treats him as one of the pagan gods, listing him among Heimdallr, Tyr, and Loki and calling him ‘the silent As [i.e. one of the old gods, the Æsir], possessor of the iron shoe, enemy and slayer of Fenriswolf, the gods’ avenging As, father’s homestead-inhabiting As and son of Odin, brother of the Æsir’.60 There is thus no immediate necessity to consider Víðarr a medieval artefact. At the same time, however, it is not impossible Pro: e.g. Olrik 1902, 162–163; Shetelig 1925, 258; contra: e.g. Heizmann 1999a, 236–238: cf. Gschwantler 1990, 521, note 36; Wilson 2014, 133, note 29. 59  Olrik 1902, 163. 60  Faulkes 1995, 76 (Skáldskarparmál, 11); cf. Gylfaginning, 29. 58 

54

Thorvald’s Cross

that some or several of his characteristics – and consequently his role in the events at the end of the Norse world – or at least his mid-10th-century ‘image’, could to some degree have been influenced by Christian teaching.61 The question then is why a Christian gravestone should have been decorated with the image of Víðarr, a Norse pagan god, overcoming a demonic monster; unlike Óðinn’s death, this is nothing to celebrate Christian superiority over. But then, there is more to Víðarr: while Óðinn is slain and devoured by a demonic fiend and the complete world of Norse mythology comes to an end with him, Víðarr kills that selfsame beast of Evil and emerges from the battle heroic and victorious and – perhaps even more importantly – alive. The fact that another representation of Víðarr, on the high cross in Gosforth in Cumbria, England (Figures 38 and 39), is on the same face of the cross as the image of the crucifixion of Christ, is relevant here. Its significance is going to be discussed below. Summing up Face 1 of MM 128 Four choices have been put forward. Mostly because of the absence of an unequivocally Christian attribute for the man (especially as in contrast, the man on Face 2 is provided with a cross – and possibly two further attributes), a ‘purely’ Christian interpretation appears difficult to maintain. The obvious similarities between the scene and renditions of the ‘Warlike Christ’ variant of the ‘Christ trampling the beasts’ motif do at least betray familiarity with Christian art on the part of the artist as well as a certain degree of influence of it on the design of the Manx stone. But as far as its subject is concerned, the image fits in very well with not one but two scenes of pagan Norse mythology, the one played out immediately after the other during the same climactic event. Thus, both points make a very good case in favour of a pagan Norse god being shown on the stone. Artistically, both choices are plausible, but without definite indicator to give clear preference either way, the question whether the man must be identified as either Óðinn or Víðarr cannot be answered. The issue, however, is going to be revisited below, when the ‘pagan’ image is considered in combination with the ‘Christian’ one.

61 

Cf. Simek 2006, 467.

55

The juxtaposition and the message Inspecting the cross-slab MM 128, the position of the two scenes on both faces of the stone – back to back – and their apparently widely divergent substance create a fascinating and dramatic confrontation, which invites reflections about their combined meaning and common message. Unfortunately, the cross-slab has come down to us only as a fragment of less than half its original size, so there is no way to know how the two surviving scenes may once have been complemented by other motifs next or opposite to them.62 Their intriguing juxtaposition may thus be fortuitous and entirely unintentional on the part of the artisan who designed the monument, and the beholder runs the severe risk of over-interpretation. Keeping this in mind as a caveat, the fact remains, however, that irrespective of the (unknown) iconographic programme of the complete stone there are present on the same cross-slab a pagan and a Christian scene, that these two scenes are standing back-to-back, and that this does suggest a certain symbolism. Furthermore, considering both scenes and their respective meanings in conjunction might lead to a better understanding of the artisan’s intention when conceiving the imagery. Combination 1: Óðinn’s fall and Christ’s triumph It was decided above that the scene on Face 1 of ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ is to be interpreted as an episode played out during the Ragnarǫk, that cataclysmic event in pagan Norse mythology that meant the downfall of the gods and the end of the world: after the terrible fimbulwinter, the Æsir clash with the Giants in final battle, and as Óðinn is devoured by the Wolf, almost all the other gods also perish, the entire world is burnt, then sinks into the sea. ‘Óðinn is dead, Asgard is destroyed’, may thus be taken as the message Face 1 was intended to convey. And positioned as it is right next to a large Christian cross, it is not hard to supplement to this the words ‘Christianity now rules!’ This sentiment is confirmed quite impressively by the imagery of Face 2: as if turning a page in a book, the ignominious death of the pagan god is followed by the triumphant coming of Christ, carelessly trampling the serpents and brandishing cross and book like so many banners.63 Many scholars agree that 62  63 

Cf. Margeson 1983, 96. Cf. Kermode 1904, 30.

56

Thorvald’s Cross

in this, the scenes on both faces might be seen – and probably were intended – to complement each other for this one common purpose:64 Both faces show the victorious replacement of heathenism by the Christian faith. This could only have been expressed in a comprehensible way by depicting not only the winning side but also heathenism – represented here by Odin.65 The most important word here, if we interpret the slab’s symbolism in this vein as the expression and product of religious confrontation, is ‘replacement’. It would appear that with Christianity, a new and different concept was introduced that was to bring the traditional faith to an abrupt end by actively discriminating against it: the pagan ‘deities […] were demonized and became “instruments of the devil”’,66 and missionaries would strive to make sure that the infidels were led to salvation in Christ.67 The significance to the ‘converts’ of such an aggressive substitution can only be guessed at, but it might well have caused a severe conflict of loyalty and a violent break in their spiritual outlook; it would possibly have meant a revolution in their lives. According to this extreme interpretation, MM 128 would have been a blunt attempt at spiritual pressure and a demonstration of Christian superiority and doctrine. However, two objections can be raised against this scenario of radical replacement and religious revolution: firstly, the reality of a strict and universal antithetic and adversative dichotomy of heathendom and Christianity in general has been much discussed recently and found disputable.68 Secondly, in the Isle of Man of the mid-10th century in particular, it is unlikely that this kind of ‘hostile takeover’ took place or that the imagery of ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ must be considered the result of any such drastic spiritual upheaval – or the tool to bring it about in the first place. The cross-slab dates from a time when Christianity was by no means a new and foreign concept in Man. Even though the Viking settlers most probably were a spiritually heterogeneous group with Christian as well as Norse pagan affiliations, there is no indication of religious strife between the factions – neither within their own respective group, nor between the pagan incomers

E.g. Ellis Davidson 2001, 50; Kermode 1994, 193; Padberg 1998, 129; 2003, 303–304. Capelle 2005, 29; my translation. 66  Steinsland 1992, 151. 67  Cf. Padberg 1995, 275; 1998, 129. 68  Cf. e.g. Abrams 2010. 64  65 

The juxtaposition and the message

57

and the Christian natives. Both positions were well known and probably tolerated to a considerable degree.69 Admittedly, it is not impossible that the native Manx clergy in some missionary fervour did try to apply pressure on those Hiberno-Scandinavian settlers in the Island who still adhered to the old ways, and public stone monuments are particularly suitable for more or less subtle manipulation and propaganda. But instead of drastic confrontation and unyielding dogmatism on the part of the Church, personal influence by Christian neighbours or family and a slow adaptation are more likely to have happened in Man, thanks to the long-standing association of the Irish Sea Vikings with Christianity in Ireland. Sculpture and imagery (even pagan) may even have been welcomed by the Church as a way to subtly further this: it has been suggested that Christian sculpture featuring pagan gods and heroes reflects a phase of spiritual re-orientation, referring to the dictum of 6th-century Pope Gregory the Great, in a letter to the all too iconoclastic Bishop Serenus of Marseille in ad 600, that the worship of a picture is one thing but learning what should be worshipped through the story of a picture is something else. For what writing provides for readers, this a picture provides for uneducated people looking at it […]. Thus a picture serves as a text, especially for pagans.70 This ‘instruction of the ignorant’ would be achieved by adopting pagan mythology and its imagery and adapting them into a Christian context, making use of connecting factors. One such factor was the legend of the continuation of the Æsir, as told in the Eddas. In Vǫluspá and Vafþrúðnismál (later to be put into prose as well as paraphrased by Snorri Sturluson in his Gylfaginning), the sybills promise that the history of the Æsir and the Norse world would not end in death and destruction. Instead, they prophesy that after the Ragnarǫk, there will be coming up a second time, Earth from the ocean, eternally green, […] without sowing the fields will grow, all ills will be healed.71 And there will be a small band of survivors: a few gods, among them Víðarr, and two humans, Líf and Lífthrasir, ‘from whom the generations will spring’.72 Cf. Steinforth 2015b, 289–296. Martyn 2004, 745. 71  Larrington 1996, 12 (Vǫluspá, 59, 61). 72  Larrington 1996, 47 (Vafþrúðnismál, 45). 69  70 

58

Thorvald’s Cross

The concept of impending (and drastic) change therefore was already predetermined by Norse legend. Even if we left aside any association of Líf and Lífthrasir (somewhat analogous to Askr and Embla, the Norse original first two humans) with Adam and Eve to populate a paradisiacal (if, in the Norse case, a ‘post-apocalyptic’) new world, the ‘renewed and cleansed world’ predicted in the Eddas does suggest itself for Christian adoption. Eloquent expression of this is the penultimate stanza of Vǫluspá, which is only found in the Hauksbók version of the text: Þá kemr inn ríki at regindómi, ǫflugr, ofan, sá er ǫllu ræðr. Then comes the mighty one, into his kingship, powerful, from above, he who rules (over) all.73 This sounds very much like a powerful new god being introduced – and, other than the previous pantheon, a single and sole one. This half-stanza is generally accepted as being a later addition to the text and most probably result of Christian influence already,74 adding to the end of Norse mythology not only an optimistic new beginning but also the inauguration of a new deity – the Christian God or, more probably, his son Jesus Christ. If this were understood correctly by the medieval audience, it would doubtless have facilitated the transition to Christianity. Unlike the radical ‘replacement’ discussed above, a sequence is suggested here that appears not only chronological and causal, but natural and rightful: the lays of the Edda had predicted the fall of the gods, so their end could have been seen as inevitable, but they also foresaw the arrival of a new order and a new god in the heavens. In this way, the advent of Christ, a hero the remaining pagans in mid-10th-century Man already knew, could possibly even have been expected, and solace found in this expectation. Looked at it this way, it can reasonably be supposed that it was not the artisan’s intention when designing MM 128 to illustrate religious conflict and celebrate the triumph of Christianity over heathendom. He rather appears to have considered the old Norse eschatology fulfilled with the death of Óðinn, accepted Christ as the legitimate successor of the pagan pantheon, and tried to present this change as a natural transition. Dronke 1997, 87; my translation (cf. Dronke 1997, 87, 152–153; Gunnell and Lassen 2013, 35, 52, 151, 192). 74  Cf. Mark 13:26. 73 

The juxtaposition and the message

59

Combination 2: Víðarr’s victory and Christ’s triumph Another and even more smooth transition appears possible if the man fighting the wolf on Face 1 of ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ was not interpreted as Óðinn, vanquished and killed by the forces of Chaos, but as Víðarr, his son, rushing forward to avenge his father’s death, slaying the monster, and overcoming those selfsame evil forces to survive the apocalypse and lead the way into a new and better world. The closest parallel to the Ragnarǫk scene at Kirk Andreas possibly can be found in Cumbria, on the famous Gosforth cross (Figure 38). Apart from a crucifixion, there are a number of scenes and characters from the Ragnarǫk (though some are still subject of lively scholarly discussion), among them Víðarr killing the Fenris-Wolf (Figure Figure 38: The Viking-Age cross at Gosforth, 39).75 In front of the huge head Cumbria. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the vicar and wardens of St of a snakelike monster stands a Mary’s church, Gosforth, England) small figure with a spear or staff in his right hand, the left hand holding the monster’s upper jaw, while the left foot is set into its lower jaw. This time, there is no indication of Óðinn and his death and no mistaking Víðarr for him. Yet as Víðarr’s fight is on the same face of the cross-shaft as the crucifixion (separated from it by a strand of ring-chain decoration), the intention underlying both scenes could be very similar, as Richard N. Bailey points out: ‘Like the crucifixion, [...] the Viðarr scene shows a triumphant survival in an encounter with evil. Both Christ and Viðarr emerged as the

75 

E.g. Bailey 1980, 125–131; 2000, 19–22.

60

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 39: Drawing of the motif of ‘Víðarr killing the monster’ on the Gosforth cross. (Calverley 1899, 159)

leaders of a new world after hard-won struggle’.76 Taking this even further, one might identify a number of similarities between Víðarr and Christ: Víðarr

Christ

– fights successfully against the forces of Evil

– fights successfully against the forces of Evil

– survives the Chaos that killed (nearly) everyone else

– survives death that kills everyone else

– is the son of the allfather god (Óðinn)

– slays the monster that killed his father – founds a new and better world

– is the son of the almighty God

– stops the jaws of hell that defy his father – founds a new and better world

We cannot be sure about this, but there is the possibility that Víðarr was either ‘invented’ as or modified into a type (or quasi proto-type) of Christ. We do not know when or where this concept would have been conceived, how fast it spread through the Viking world, or when it would have reached the Irish Sea/Isle of Man Vikings. At any rate, a virtual equalisation of the 76 

Bailey 1980, 128; cf. Kopár 2012, 93–94, 102.

The juxtaposition and the message

61

son of god Víðarr and the son of God Christ (as well as the two events of the Ragnarǫk and the Day of Judgement) in the images of MM 128 would give an opportunity for not only transition, but continuity: after the old gods had perished (as they were destined to), they were succeeded (not replaced) by one who had survived the catastrophe and now continued the traditional line of gods into the new world (as he was destined to). It could be argued that basically only two things really had changed – the general order in the heavens (admittedly a substantial change) and the god’s name. Víðarr’s name translates as ‘far-ranging ruler’,77 and this again recalls that late stanza of Vǫluspá (see above) announcing the advent of ‘the mighty one, who rules over all’. This term in turn brings to mind Christ’s Biblical title ‘pantocrator’, meaning ‘he who rules all’ or ‘the all-powerful’. Both instances emphasise the new concept of a single god to inherit the old pantheon’s place. By this organisational change, it was continuity with a twist in the shape of monotheism (or possibly frequently ‘monolatrism’ would have been the more precise term, when Christ had been accepted, at least temporarily, as a hero-god among residual other, older deities, yet taking precedence over them. The difference, however, to the multitudinous pantheon of the traditional religion would have been profound either way). On this background, the fundamental message of the imagery on the gravestone MM 128 of both Víðarr and Christ conquering death would be an entirely Christian one: the promise of resurrection at the end of days. This angle was hinted at as early as 1887 by John Romilly Allen, when he – without any direct reference to it – used the first published drawing of MM 128 for his observations on Christ overcoming the serpents or dragons and considering these in this context.78 For the Church, the bereaved, and possibly the deceased himself to express, demonstrate, or induce hope for and expectation of resurrection from the dead, a gravestone would be the natural place, and there are corresponding motifs elsewhere. A human figure on the cross-slab Jurby MM 127, standing on top of the right cross-arm and blowing a long horn, has tentatively been interpreted as the Norse god Heimdallr, watchman of Asgard, waking the gods with his famous Gjallarhorn and signalling the beginning of the Ragnarǫk (Figure 40).79 In this – as well as the position of the figure atop the cross-arm – it has been seen as equivalent to the cock on other Manx Crosses (e.g. Kirk Michael MM 129), as a Christian symbol of the resurrection, thought to wake Cf. Simek 2006, 467; my translation. Allen 1887, 275. 79  Kermode 1994, 188, pl. XLIX; Wilson 2018, 108–109; cf. Vǫluspá, 47; Gylfaginning, 27, 51. On the god Heimdallr, see e.g. Cöllen 2015. 77  78 

62

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 40: Split of the cross-slabs Kirk Michael MM 129 (left) and Jurby MM 127 (right), featuring the cockerel of the Resurrection and the Norse god Heimdallr. (Kermode 1994, pl. LI, XLIX)

the dead with their crowing on the Day of Judgement (Figure 40). Trumpets will also be sounded by angels to announce the Apocalypse and the Day of Judgement,80 according to Revelation 8:6–11:19 or 1 Corinthians 15:52: For the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 80 

Margeson 1983, 96; cf. Oehrl 2011, 170–171.

The juxtaposition and the message

63

It would therefore be no surprise to learn if the lost spaces above the crossarms on both faces of MM 128 had been decorated with Heimdallr and a cock, respectively. In a similar way, a crucifixion and/or Óðinn’s self-sacrifice on the tree of wisdom would not have been out of place.81 The interpretation of the man on Face 1 as Víðarr allows a parallelisation – what might be termed a ‘Christ-Víðarr-overlap’ – of the two hero-gods, converting religious transition into a kind of continuity, while at the same time connecting both scenes, pagan and Christian, into a common theme, the triumph of Christianity not over Óðinn and heathenism, but over death itself.82 David M. Wilson notes that either motif [i.e. Óðinn or Víðarr on Face 1] would seem likely to refer to the risen-Christ on the other face, for, after Ragnarǫk, halls will rise where the heroes will live radiantly on.83 Taking this even further, it must be considered whether this was in fact the very intention in the design of MM 128. Combination 3: Óðinn’s fall and Víðarr’s victory and Christ’s triumph The basis for this curious third combination is the instance that the strange way the human figure on Face 1 is represented needs to be explained. At first sight, the attributes as well as the man’s occupation identify him quite obviously as Óðinn, engaged in deadly battle with the Fenris-Wolf at the Ragnarǫk. But the man’s peculiar posture points to Víðarr, Óðinn’s son and avenger, almost as unequivocally. Above, this problem prevented the decision as to whether Víðarr or Óðinn was portrayed in the scene in Face 1. Of course this can only be speculation, but it appears possible that the figure was in fact meant to combine both deities and their respective semantic contexts and spiritual meanings by artistic contamination: the close of Norse mythology (represented by Óðinn’s death) as well as the triumph of the next generation of the gods and the coming of the new world order (represented by Víðarr’s victory). Such a ‘double reference’ would be not at all original. Inscriptions in two images in the Durham Cassiodorus (fols 81v and 172v) each expressly identify the man in them as King David (see Figure 29), but various artistic elements indicate ‘that the figure is also Christ’.84 Cf. Kopár 2012, 121–123; cf. Wilson 2018, 108. Cf. Kilpatrick 2011, 191; Margeson 1983, 105. 83  Wilson 2014, 133. 84  Bailey 1978, 10–11. 81  82 

64

Thorvald’s Cross

Other examples of this practice can be found in illuminations in Carolingian bibles.85 A contamination of Norse and Christian motifs, of Viðarr and Christ, was suggested by George Dumézil for the Gosforth cross,86 and it would not be unreasonable to assume this kind of device to have been used on two Norse characters in the image of the Manx stone. The iconographic merging of these elements could be considered to have been indented to concentrate and reinforce the imagery’s overall message, which would be much the same as that put forward in the paragraph above, delivered now by what somewhat fancifully might be called an ‘Óðinn/Víðarr-Christ-overlap’.

85  86 

E.g. Kessler 1977, 107, pl. 141; cf. Bailey 1978, 11. Dumézil 1965, 3, note 1; cf. Dillmann 1994, 370.

65

Summary and conclusion Iconographic interpretation is always difficult, even under ideal circumstances. It is very hard to assess the original meaning of imagery or to estimate the degree of understanding of religious symbolism that can be expected from the contemporary audience. Even worse, our own understanding of medieval mythology may be sadly inadequate to answer – or even ask – pertinent questions. It may sometimes seem only too tempting to ignore Carl Robert’s verdict against the question ‘What else?’ in hermeneutics as well as Hilda Roderick Ellis’ admonitory statement that ‘we are dependent on memories of lost beliefs, half understood traditions, meaningless repetitions of what was once significant, and garbled rendering of what once may have been pregnant symbolism’.87 Without keeping this in mind, one always runs the risk of committing what might be called ‘retrospective interpretational pareidolia’: the obvious appears inevitable, and implications seem all too convincing. But iconography – even more so than archaeology – is after all an interpretive/ exegetical science, and in the absence of evidence, we necessarily must resort to (informed) conjecture, consider possibilities, and weigh probabilities. Accordingly, it is neither the purpose nor the intention of this book to pretend that it presented indisputable facts regarding the interpretation of the imagery of Kirk Andreas MM 128. It rather discusses its various aspects, summarises previous research, and submits a hypothesis as to how to explain the figurative scenes, considered separately and in conjunction. Sadly, circumstances are far from ideal when dealing with ‘Thorvald’s Cross’, not least because only a fragment of both the stone and its iconographic programme has come down to us. Also, details of the conditions in which it was created are largely unknown.88 In the middle of the 10th century, when the stone was designed, the Isle of Man probably was in an advanced process of religious and social adjustment, with the last residual pagan Vikings slowly coming to terms with Christianity, and we cannot with any certainty appraise the procedures to commission a gravestone and to develop its design, imagery, and symbolism in that period. The one thing we can be sure of, however, is the Christian character of the stone, demonstrated by the great central cross on both faces. Still, it was argued above that the scene on Face 1 does represent an episode from pagan mythology, and preference was given to the identification of the man fighting the wolf as Víðarr, Óðinn’s son, avenging his father’s death and killing the apocalyptic monster (rather than Óðinn himself, 87  88 

Ellis 1968, 97; Robert 1919, 306. Cf. Steinforth 2015b, 381–390.

66

Thorvald’s Cross

being devoured by the wolf). In contrast, the figure on Face 2 is unequivocally Christian, illustrating Psalm 91:13 and portraying Christ in the process of ‘trampling the beasts’. At least, here the message is clear, to express Christian glory as well as the hope for and promise of resurrection at the end of days (particularly, one assumes, for the person once buried beneath this stone). The presence of a pagan god on a Christian gravestone may appear odd at first. Frequently, the combination of the ignominious death of Óðinn and the triumphant coming of Christ is taken as an attempt to shame and bully the remaining pagans in the Island into conversion. However, it is not the victory of Christianity and the defeat of the old Scandinavian religion that is depicted here. Designed rather late in the period of spiritual re-orientation of the Irish Sea Vikings, ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ surely neither is the result of a religious revolution in the Isle of Man, nor was it the means of spiritual violence. It is rather a prudent attempt to facilitate the change by turning it into a natural transition or even continuity. Drawing on his knowledge of Anglo-Saxon and/or Carolingian renderings of the ‘Christ trampling the beasts’ motif, the clerical designer of MM 128’s imagery managed to play to the pagans’ liking of fearless and victorious warrior-heroes and adopted pagan Norse mythology into his intended Christian meaning by presenting both scenes ‘as aspects of the same theme in two idioms’.89 He obviously understood that both Óðinn and Víðarr’s fights in the Ragnarǫk were essential to herald the coming of a new age after the apocalypse and that this was the pagan Norse equivalent to the Christian concept of resurrection. It paved the way for the new hero-god – in the guise of an old one. In a changing world, this equalisation offered to the remaining pagans in Man a natural successor and rightful heir to the Æsir as well as the comforting Christian promise of eternal life. Together, the death of Óðinn, the victory of Víðarr, and the power of Christ on the gravestone communicated the common message that death will be conquered and that life did go on after the catastrophe. The revolution may have taken place in the heavens, not in the lives and minds of the believers: the Ragnarǫk have come to pass, but life will go on. With this comforting and conciliatory message, the Kirk Andreas cross-slab is an outstanding example of syncretistic stone monuments of the Viking Age, despite the incompleteness of its imagery. In a way, it is exactly the fragmentary condition of both the stone and its message that heightens its mystery and allure. Without knowing all of its images, it is nonetheless speaking to us 89 

Margeson 1983, 105.

Summary and conclusion

vividly from a distant time when the residual pagans among the Manx Vikings came to terms with the Christian God as well as with the island’s indigenous population. ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ is a powerful symbol of both spiritual re-orientation and social rapprochement between the two ethnic groups that formerly would have been bitter enemies. This process is the starting point of the formation of the new and unified island community that merged Celtic and Scandinavian roots and traditions and eventually made the Manx people what they are today.90

67

Figure 41: Manx two pound coin depicting the scenes on ‘Thorvald’s Cross’. (Photo: © J. Daniel Clements)

Thus, the stone’s legacy lingers on to his very day and has found expression and appreciation in many different ways: for many years, its imagery – rendered in clear and frosted glass – graced the front doors of the Manx Museum in Douglas, with the spear and cross, respectively, for handles (Figure 45), until new sliding doors were installed, and a hands-on replica can be found in the museum’s Viking gallery (among those of other Manx Crosses), a two-pound coin of the Isle of Man, issued between 2000 and 2003, bears the image of the two scenes on its reverse (including two short strands of Borre-style ringchain interlace on its ring; Figure 41), there is a £10 Manx Telecom phone card with the Christian and the serpents on it (issued in 1992), a craft centre on the Island sells cross stitch kits featuring the stone’s motifs, and Sir David M. Wilson, former director of the British Museum in London and one of the most eminent experts on the Vikings in the British Isles, chose the stone’s ‘Ragnarǫk Face’ for the cover of his 2008 monograph on the ‘Vikings in the Isle of Man’ (Figure 42). The iconic imagery, the intrigue of its missing elements, and its important position in the Island’s medieval history make ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ the most prominent and most fascinating of the Manx Crosses, featuring old god(s), a new hero, and one message. 90 

Cf. Steinforth 2022 (forthcoming).

68

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 42: ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ on the cover of Sir David M. Wilson’s book, ‘The Vikings in the Isle of Man’ (2008). (Photo: © Aarhus University Press and David M. Wilson; reproduced with kind permission)

69

Acknowledgements This book also is dedicated to the memory of my uncle, Pastor Sigurd Schoepke (25.09.1927 – 16.11.2018). I would like to thank Wilhelm Heizmann (Munich), Sigmund Oehrl (Stockholm), Alexandra Pesch (Schleswig), and Andreas Rau (Schleswig), for their helpful suggestions and comments on the original manuscript of this text, as well as Reverend Peter C. Robinson for his energetic researches on the stone monuments in Old Malton, Yorkshire. Thanks are due to my audiences at the conferences in Münster (Germany), Douglas (Isle of Man), and Swansea (Wales), where I presented my research on MM 128, for their probing questions and inspiring remarks. I am also grateful to the copyright owners who very kindly gave permission to re-publish their images.

70

Bibliography Abrams, L. 2010. Conversion and the Church in Viking-Age Ireland, in J. Sheehan and D. Ó Corráin (eds) The Viking Age: Ireland and the West. Papers from the Proceedings of the Fifteenth Viking Congress, Cork, 18–27 August 2005: 1–10. Dublin: Four Courts Press. Airne, C.W. 1949. The Story of the Isle of Man, Volume 1: From Earliest Time to 1406. Southport: Johnson & Co. Allen, J.R. 1887. Early Christian Symbolism in Great Britain and Ireland before the thirteenth Century (The Rhind Lectures in Archaeology for 1885). London: Whiting. Bailey, R.N. 1978. The Durham Cassiodorus (Jarrow Lecture 1978). Jarrow: Rector of Jarrow. Bailey, R.N. 1980. Viking Age Sculpture in Northern England (Collins Archaeology 1). London: Collins. Bailey, R.N. 2000. Scandinavian Myth on Viking-period Stone Sculpture in England, in G. Barnes and M.C. Ross (eds) Old Norse Myths, Literature and Society, Proceedings of the 11th International Saga Conference 2–7 July 2000, University of Sydney: 15–23. Sydney: Centre for Medieval Studies. Bailey, R.N. and R. Cramp 1988. Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Stone Sculpture II: Cumberland, Westmorland and Lancashire North-of-the-Sands. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Black, G.F. 1888/89. Notice of two sculptured stones at Kirk Andreas, Isle of Man, one bearing an inscription in bind-runes; with Notices of other bind-rune inscriptions. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 23, 332–343. Brate, E. 1907. Runinskrifterna på ön Man. Fornvännen 2, 20–34, 77–95. Calverley, W.S. 1899. Notes on the Early Sculptured Crosses, Shrines and Monuments in the present Diocese of Carlisle (Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archæological Society, Extra Series, Vol. XI). Kendal: T. Wilson. Capelle, T. 2005. Heidenchristen im Norden (Schriftenreihe des Landesmuseums für Natur und Mensch, Oldenburg 38). Mainz: von Zabern. Cöllen, S. 2015. Heimdallr – der rätselhafte Gott (Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 94). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. Cubbon, A.M. 1982. The early church in the Isle of Man, in S.M. Pearce (ed.) The early church in Western Britain and Ireland (British Archaeological Reports, British Series 102): 257–282. Oxford: BAR Publishing. Didron, A.N. 1886. Christian Iconography; or, The History of Christian Art in the Middle Ages, Volume 1. London: Bohn. Dillmann, F.-X. 1994. Fenrir, Fenriswolf. Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 8, 367–375.

Bibliography

71

Dronke, U. (ed.) 1997. The Poetic Edda 2: Mythological Poems. Oxford: Clarendon Press. DuBois, T. 1999. Nordic Religions in the Viking Age. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Dumézil, G. 1965. Le dieu scandinave Viðarr. Revue de l’Histoire des Religions 168, 1–13. Ellis, H.R. 1968. The Road to Hel. A Study of the Conception of the Dead in Old Norse Literature. New York: Greenwood Press. Ellis Davidson, H. 2001. The lost Beliefs of Northern Europe. London/New York: Routledge. Faulkes, A. (ed.) 1982. Snorri Sturluson: Edda. Prologue and Gyfaginning. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Faulkes, A. (ed.) 1995. Snorri Sturluson: Edda. London/North Clarendon: Orion Publishing/Tuttle Publishing. Fell, C., P. Foote, J. Graham-Campbell, and R. Thompson (eds) 1983. The Viking Age in the Isle of Man. Select Papers from the Ninth Viking Congress, Isle of Man, 4–14 July 1981. London: Viking Society for Northern Research. Green, R., M. Evans, C. Bischoff, and M. Curschmann (eds) 1979. Herrad von Hohenbourg: Hortus deliciarum (Studies of the Warburg Institute 36). London/Leiden: The Warburg Institute/University of London/E.J. Brill. Gschwantler, O. 1968. Christus, Thor und die Midgardschlange, in H. Birkhan and O. Gschwantler (eds) Festschrift für Otto Höfler zum 65. Geburtstag 1: 145– 168. Wien: Notring-Verlag. Gschwantler, O. 1990. Die Überwindung des Fenriswolfs und ihr christliches Gegenstück bei Frau Ava, in T. Pàroli (ed.) Poetry in the Scandinavian Middle Ages, The Seventh International Saga Conference, Spoleto 4–10 September 1988: 509–534. Spoleto: Presso la sede del Centro studi. Gunnell, T. and A. Lassen (eds) 2013. The Nordic Apocalypse. Approaches to Vǫluspá and Nordic Days of Judgement (Acta Scandinavia 2). Turnhout: Brepols. Haas, A.M. 1991. Ichthys. Fischsymbolik im frühen Christentum, in P. Michel (ed.) Tiersymbolik (Schriften zur Symbolforschung 7): 77–89. Berlin: Lang. Heizmann, W. 1999a. Fenriswolf, in U. Müller and W. Wunderlich (eds) Dämonen, Monster, Fabelwesen (Mittelaltermythen 2): 229–255. St. Gallen: UVK Fachverlag für Wissenschaft und Studium. Heizmann, W. 1999b. Midgardschlange, in U. Müller and W. Wunderlich (eds) Dämonen, Monster, Fabelwesen (Mittelaltermythen 2): 413–438. St. Gallen: UVK Fachverlag für Wissenschaft und Studium. Henderson, I. 1998. Primus inter Pares: the St Andrews Sarcophagus and Pictish Sculpture, in S.M. Foster (ed.) The St Andrews Sarcophagus. A Pictish Masterpiece and its international Connections: 97–167. Dublin: Four Courts Press. Hilmo, M. 2004. Medieval Images, Icons, and Illustrated English Literary Texts. From the Ruthwell Cross to the Ellesmere Chaucer. Aldershot/Burlington: Ashgate.

72

Thorvald’s Cross

Johnson, A. and A. Fox 2017. A Guide to the Archaeological Sites of the Isle of Man up to AD 1500. Douglas: Culture Vannin. Kermode, P.M.C. 1892. Catalogue of the Manks Crosses with the Runic Inscriptions and various Readings and Renderings compared. Ramsey: Heyes. Kermode, P.M.C. 1904. Traces of the Norse Mythology in the Isle of Man. London: Bemrose. Kermode, P.M.C. 1994. Manx Crosses. Balgavies: Pinkfoot Press (Reprint, 1907). Kessler, H.L. 1977. The illustrated Bibles from Tours (Studies in Manuscript Illumination 7). Princeton: Princeton University Press. Kessler, H.L. 2019. Experiencing Medieval Art (Rethinking the Middle Ages 1). Toronto/Buffalo/London: University of Toronto Press. Kilpatrick, K.A. 2011. The iconography of the Papil Stone: sculptural and literary comparisons with a Pictish motif. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 141, 159–205. Kopár, L. 2012. Gods and Settlers. The Iconography of Norse Mythology in AngloScandinavian Sculpture (Studies in the Early Middle Ages 25). Turnhout: Brepols. Kuhn, H. (ed.) 1962. Edda. Die Lieder des Codex regius nebst verwandten Denkmälern. Heidelberg: Winter. Lang, J. 1991. Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Sculpture III: York and East Yorkshire. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Larrington, C. (ed.) 1996. The Poetic Edda. Oxford: Oxford University Press. March, H.C. 1894. Rending the wolf ’s jaw. Transactions of the Lancashire and Cheshire Antiquarian Society 11, 113–117. Margeson, S. 1983. On the iconography of the Manx crosses, in C. Fell, P. Foote, J. Graham-Campbell, and R. Thomson (eds) The Viking Age in the Isle of Man. Select papers from The Ninth Viking Congress, Isle of Man, 4–14 July 1981: 95–106. London: Viking Society for Northern Research. Martin, J.S. 1972. Ragnarǫk: An Investigation into Old Norse Concepts of the Fate of the Gods (Melbourne Monographs in Germanic Studies 3). Assen: Van Gorcum. Martyn, J.R.C. (ed.) 2004. The Letters of Gregory the Great. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies. Maurer, F. (ed.) 1966. Die Dichtungen der Frau Ava. Tübingen: Niemeyer. McTurk, R. 2004. Schildgedichte. Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 27, 108–112. Meissner, R.1921. Die Kenningar der Skalden. Ein Beitrag zur skaldischen Poetik (Rheinische Beiträge und Hülfsbücher zur germanischen Philologie und Volkskunde 1). Bonn/Leipzig: Schroeder. Moore, W. and A.H. Wilson (eds) 1988. Select Writings and Letters of Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa (A select Library of the Nicene and post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, 2nd Ser., 5). Edinburgh/Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. Nordland, O. 1949. Ormegarden. Viking 13, 77–126. Oehrl, S. 2011. Vierbeinerdarstellungen auf schwedischen Runensteinen. Studien zur nordgermanischen Tier- und Fesselungsikonografie (Ergänzungsbände

Bibliography

73

zum Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 72). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter. Olrik, A. 1902. Om Ragnarok. Aarbøger for nordisk oldkyndighed og historie 17 (2. Række), 157–291. Olsen, M. 1954. Runic Inscriptions in Great Britain, Ireland and The Isle of Man, in H. Shetelig (ed.) Viking Antiquities in Great Britain and Ireland VI: Civilisation of the Viking Settlers in relation to their old and new countries: 151– 232. Oslo: Aschehoug. Padberg, L.E. von 1995. Odin oder Christus? Loyalitäts- und Orientierungskonflikte in der frühmittelalterlichen Christianisierungsepoche. Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 77, 249–278. Padberg, L.E. von 1998. Die Christianisierung Europas im Mittelalter. Stuttgart: Reclam. Padberg, L.E. von 2003. Die Inszenierung religiöser Konfrontationen. Theorie und Praxis der Missionspredigt im frühen Mittelalter (Monographien zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 51). Stuttgart: Hiersemann. Piper, F. (ed.) 1835. Titi Flavii Clementis Alexandrini Hymnus in Christum Salvatorem. Göttingen: Deuerlich. Robert, C. 1919. Archaeologische Hermeneutik. Berlin: Weidmann. Saxl, F. 1943. The Ruthwell Cross. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 6, 1–19. Schapiro, M. 1980. Late Antique, Early Christian and Medieval Art, Selected Papers, Volume 3. London: Chatto & Windus. Schiller, G. 1986. Ikonographie der christlichen Kunst 3: Die Auferstehung und Erhöhung Christi. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus. Shetelig, H. 1925. Manx Crosses – Relating to Great Britain and Norway. SagaBook of the Viking Society for Northern Research 9, 1914–18 (1925), 253–274. Simek, R. 2006. Lexikon der germanischen Mythologie. Stuttgart: Kröner. Smith, E.B. 1918. Early Christian iconography and A School of Ivory Carvers in Provence (Princeton Monographs in Art and Archaeology 4). Princeton: Princeton University Press. Steinforth, D.H. 2015a. Die Wikingergräber auf der Isle of Man (British Archaeological Reports, British Series 611). Oxford: Archaeopress. Steinforth, D.H. 2015b. Die skandinavische Besiedlung auf der Isle of Man. Eine archäologische und historische Untersuchung zur frühen Wikingerzeit in der Irischen See. (Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 92). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. Steinforth, D.H. 2015c. Early Vikings in the Isle of Man: Old Paradigms and new Perspectives. Viking and Medieval Scandinavia 11, 203–229. Steinforth, D.H. 2018: ‘That stepping-stone in the middle of the Irish Sea’: the Dublin Vikings and the Isle of Man in the late ninth century. Journal of Irish Archaeology XXVII, 81–97. Steinforth, D.H. 2021. Between Continental models, a Christian message, and a Scandinavian audience: Early examples of the image of ‘Christ trampling the Beasts’ in the British Isles, in D.H. Steinforth and C.C. Rozier (eds)

74

Thorvald’s Cross

Britain and its Neighbours: Cultural Contacts and Exchanges in Medieval and Early Modern Europe (Themes in Medieval and Early Modern History): 5168. Abingdon: Routledge. Steinforth, D.H. 2022 [forthcoming]. ‘From that Union came the Manx people: Ethnogenesis in the Isle of Man in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries, in S.F.D. Hughes and A.K. Peason (eds) From Rus’ to Rímur: Norse History, Culture, and Literature East and West (Islandica 64: An Issue of New Norse Studies): 47–81. Ithaca: Cornell University Library. Steinsland, G. 1992. Scandinavian paganism, in E. Roesdahl and D.M. Wilson (eds) From Viking to Crusader. The Scandinavians and Europe 800–1200: 144– 151. Uddevalla: Bohusläningens Boktryckeri. Straub, A. and G. Keller (eds) 1899. Herrade de Landsberg. Hortus Deliciarum. Strasbourg: Imprimerie Strasbourgeoise/Trübner. Wilson, D.M. 1976. The Borre Style in the British Isles, in Guðni Kolbeinsson, Bjarni Vilhjálmsson, Jónas Kristjánsson, and Þór Magnússon (eds) Minjar og Menntir. Afmælisrit helgað Kristjáni Eldjárn: 502–509. Reykjavík: Bókaútg. Menningarsjóður. Wilson, D.M. 2008. The Vikings in the Isle of Man. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. Wilson, D.M. 2014. The Conversion of the Viking Settlers in the Isle of Man, in I. Garipzanov and R. Bonté (eds) Conversion and Identity in the Viking Age (Medieval Identities: Socio-Cultural Spaces 5): 117–138. Turnhout: Brepols. Wilson, D.M. 2018. Manx Crosses. A Handbook of Stone Sculpture 500–1040 in the Isle of Man. Oxford: Archaeopress. Yarnold, E.J. (ed.) 2000. Cyril of Jerusalem. London/New York: Routledge. Zarnecki, G. 1953. Later English Romanesque Sculpture, 1140–1210. London: Alec Tiranti Ltd. Zarnecki, G., J. Holt and T. Holland (eds) 1984. English Romanesque Art, 1066– 1200. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.

75

Places to visit91 Important sites where Viking-Age Manx Crosses were found and can be inspected (for numbers, see map Figure 8). • Ballaqueeney, Port St Mary, Rushen parish (1): Clagh Ard (MM 100), the tallest Manx cross-slab, standing in the open at a roundabout between Port Erin and Port St Mary, badly damaged. • Ballaugh old church, Ballaugh, Ballaugh parish (2): well-crafted ring-cross MM 106. • Bride church, Bride, Bride parish (3): richly decorated ‘Thor’s cross’ (MM 124) and two more stones with runic inscriptions. • Manx Museum, Douglas (4): large exhibition on the Viking Age in the Isle of Man and the Manx Crosses (Figures 5, 43, and 45). • Jurby church, Jurby, Jurby parish (5): large collection of cross-slabs, Figure 43: The ‘Viking Gallery’ with including MM 127, featuring the reconstruction of a ‘Manx ‘Heimdallr’ (see Figure 39), and a Viking’ in the Manx Museum, Douglas. Sigurðr stone (MM 119). (Photo by the author, reproduced • St Andrew’s church, Kirk Andreas, courtesy of Manx National Heritage, Andreas parish (6): apart from MM Douglas, Isle of Man) 128, there are ten other stones, including ‘Sandulfr’s cross’ (MM 131; see Figure 7), the ‘Sigurðr stone’ MM 121 (see Figure 9) and MM 111 with an inscription in enigmatic bind-runes (Figure 44). • Old Kirk Braddan, Kirk Braddan, Braddan parish (7): on the outskirts of Douglas, with several slabs and crosses, among them the wheel-headed cross MM 72 and the towering ‘Thorleif ’ and ‘Odd’ crosses MM 134 and 135. • St Michael’s church, Kirk Michael, Michael parish (8): largest collection of stones in the Island, with the magnificent ‘Gautr’s cross’ (MM 101; see Figure 5), a crucifixion (MM 129; see Figure 39), and the ‘Dragon cross’ MM 117. 91 

For further details and directions, see Johnson and Fox 2017.

76

Thorvald’s Cross

Figure 44: Kirk Andreas MM 111 with bind-runes. (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of the Rectors and Wardens of St Andrew’s church, Andreas, Isle of Man)

Places to visit

77

• Lonan old church, Lonan parish (9): wheel-headed cross MM 73, only stone still in situ. • Malew church, Malew parish (10): Sigurðr stone MM 120. • the ‘cross house’ in the old cemetery at Maughold, Maughold parish (11): housing a large number of stones, among them ‘Irneit’s cross’, MM 47 (see Figure 4), the massive ‘Gwriat’s cross’ (MM 69), the Sigurðr stone MM 122, and the bilingual ‘John’s stone’ (MM 145) in runes and Ogham. • Onchan church, Onchan, Onchan parish (12): ‘Þorið’s cross’ (MM 141) with enigmatic runic inscription. • St John’s chapel, St John’s, German parish (13): fragment of MM 107. • St Patrick’s Isle, Peel, German parish (14): Medieval castle and Cathedral, where mid-10th-century Viking burials and a small later stone (MM 196) with cross and inscription ‘ìuÔ’ (Thor) were found (on display in the House of Manannan Museum, Peel).

Figure 45: The imagery of ‘Thorvald’s Cross’ on the doors of the Manx Museum, Douglas (now replaced by automatic sliding doors without the stone’s images). (Photo by the author, reproduced courtesy of Manx National Heritage, Douglas, Isle of Man)

T

horvald’s Cross. The Viking Age CrossSlab ‘Kirk Andreas MM 128’ and horvald’s Cross. The Viking Age Crossits Iconography provides an in-depth Slab ‘Kirk Andreas MM 128’ and analysis of one of the Isle of Man’s most its Iconography provides an in-depth important and intriguing monuments. analysis of one of the Isle of Man’s most The Manx Crosses are a unique and intriguing monuments. collection of Scandinavian-style important grave The Manx Crosses are a unique stones unequalled in the medieval Viking collection of Scandinavian-style grave World. Their carvings and inscriptions stones unequalled in the medieval Viking offer a window into Viking-Age society and spirituality at a time when theWorld. Celtic Their carvings and inscriptions Manx and Scandinavian settlers offer in thea window into Viking-Age society spirituality at a time whenthe theiconic Celtic ‘Thorvald’s Island came to terms with each and other. Among these stones, Manx in and settlersdemands in the particular Cross’ (MM 128) in St Andrew’s church theScandinavian village of Andreas Islandwith came to terms eachderiving other. Among these sto attention, as it features figural scenes humans andwith animals from both Cross’religious (MM 128) in St Andrew’s the village of A pagan Norse mythology and Christian imagery. Accordingchurch to theinprevailing attention, as itisfeatures figural scenes with humans view, the triumph of Christianity over paganism shown in the two surviving reliefs, and a pagan Norse mythology and Christian religious imagery. A but differing opinions have been put forward. This book brings together all available view, thediscusses triumph and of Christianity over paganism is shown i information about 'Thorvald’s Cross' and analyses former and current differing opinions put forward. hypotheses regarding the stone’s but iconography, weighinghave theirbeen respective meritsThis and book b about 'Thorvald’s and on-site, discussesit and an shortcomings. Based on in-depth information research and an ‘autopsy’ of Cross' the stone hypotheses the stone’s iconography, weighing t considers the images in their spiritual, cultural,regarding and chronological context and presents shortcomings. Based arguing on in-depth and an a new interpretation of this remarkable monument, that research the depiction of ‘autop considers imagesbut in their cultural, andachronol religious confrontation was not its original the purpose, that spiritual, both scenes convey a new interpretation of this remarkable monument, arg common, much more subtle and comforting Christian message. religious confrontation was not its original purpose, but common, much subtle and and comforting Christian Dirk H. Steinforth is a medieval archaeologist. Hemore gained his MA PhD from the mess Georg-August-University of Gottingen, Germany, and specialises in the early Viking Age Dirk a medieval archaeologist. Heofgained in the Isle of Man and Irish Sea area. He H. hasSteinforth publishedistwo books as well as a number of Gottingen, Germany, and specia articles on the subject. His interestsGeorg-August-University include history and chronology, religion and burialin theethnogenesis, Isle of Man and Irish Sea area.archaeology. He has published customs, art-history and iconography, and settlement His two b articles on focuses the subject. His interests historyinand chro current research as an independent scholar especially on theinclude early Vikings art-historyand andtheir iconography, ethnogenesis, north-west England, and medievalcustoms, stone monuments imagery. He also works and s current research as an independent scholar focuses espec as a translator, proofreader, and editor. north-west England, and medieval stone monuments and th as a translator, proofreader, and editor.

T

Archaeopress Archaeology www.archaeopress.com