The origin and development of the Anglo-SaxonPsychomachiaillustrations

Abstract

The reception in Anglo-Saxon England of Prudentius'sPsychomachiahas been well studied. In an earlier article I concentrated on the textual tradition and touched only briefly on the important aspect ofPsychomachiaillustrations in Anglo-Saxon manuscripts; in the present article I treat the illustrations more fully.Psychomachiaillustrations have been studied previously, most thoroughly by Stettiner and Woodruff, and they are also referred to by Katzenellenbogen and Norman. None of these examinations is completely satisfactory as far as the Anglo-Saxon illustrations are concerned. Both Stettiner and Woodruff examine all, that is both continental and Anglo-Saxon, illustratedPsychomachiamanuscripts, and their primary aim is to establish stemmata and to determine generic relationships between the various manuscripts. Of necessity this procedure leads away from a scrupulous examination of individual manuscripts and their illustrations. In other words, by being concerned more with the generic similarities of the illustrations, Stettiner and Woodruff pay less attention to the differences (though they do not ignore them altogether). Moreover, they concentrate on the illustrated manuscripts and neglected the evidence which non-illustrated manuscripts can provide. Katzenellenbogen and Norman, in turn, are interested in thePsychomachiaand its illustrations exerted on the sculpture and painting of later centuries, and only briefly refer to the Anglo-SaxonPsychomachiaIllustrations thus still remains a necessity.