Sculpture

St Thomas Beckett returning to Canterbury?

Description

First figure on horseback, a bishop, presumably Thomas, with mitre and hooded mantle, perhaps a cope, the second figure with short cowl or chaperon under his wide hat and with sleeveless tunic or cowl over a belted alb, presumably a companion, the third figure with open collared coat over a tunic holding a staff (or crozier - top broken), wearing a girdle with possibly a dagger at his side, the hand of a fourth figure bearing staff or crozier still visible from upper register, edges of top, front and bottom missing, various remains of original polychromy, including eyes, mouth and gilt drapery patterns and edgings, and typical reds and light blues on coat of third figure, burgundy red on inside of mitre, grass between horses’ legs, the whole carved with great skill and attention to detail.

THE ONLY RECORDED INSTANCE OF THIS REPRESENTATION

Scenes from the life of England’s (and Europe’s) most popular Saint were second only to the lives of Christ and Mary as a subject for alabaster panel cycles, but, unsurprisingly given the zeal of Henry VIII’s lieutenants after he ordered the destruction of all Becket memorabilia and “portraits” in England, very few panels survive.

In fact, apart from the dozen or so surviving enamelled caskets from limoges made after his swift canonisation in 1173, and a number of manuscript miniatures mostly showing the very same martyrdom scene (except for the more profusely illustrated Queen Mary- and Luttrell Psalters), the tin pilgrim’s badges, and, most importantly, the stained glass in Chartres and Angers, there is almost nothing at all in the way of a “portrait” of Thomas Beckett, certainly in the round, in sculpture, made in England. There is the boss in Exeter cathedral showing the martyrdom, and there is the scattering of surviving alabaster panels. These are given by Cheetham as: the meeting with Henry II, the meeting with the Pope (two panels), the landing in Sandwich (two panels), the martyrdom (at least two panels recorded) and the consecration as Archbishop (at least four panels), this latter a somewhat generic image which perhaps escaped destruction more easily. Then there is a scene described as “Return to Canterbury” in Norwich Castle Museum but which shows Thomas being received by various prelates and monks rather than the actual journey, as here. Without further documentation, it could equally portray his reception at Sens. Finally, there is the single V& A panel of a bishop on horseback which was thought to be Thomas but is generally taken to portray St Boniface due to elements from his legend (tree and devil) and which bears no further relation to ours nor to what we know of Beckett’s journey from other iconographic sources. For example, in the Chartres windows, Beckett is depicted on horseback twice, once arriving at Sens following exile (bottom register), and once presumably setting off from Pontigny to return to England 6 years later (middle window).

What makes this alabaster exceptionally evocative is that the hat worn by the middle figure is reminiscent of the wide-brimmed hat worn by pilgrims (though it is more likely an ecclesiastical hat) at the time this was carved, in conjunction with the fact that this depiction of Thomas Beckett closely follows on the period when another celebrated journey, to his own shrine at Canterbury, was being relayed, first in Ms form and then, by Caxton, in print. One of the earliest illustrated manuscripts of the greatest medieval English poem, the “Ellesmere Chaucer” [Huntington Library MS EL 26 C9], dates from around the time Chaucer died (1400) and shows the typical horse trappings and clothing of the period, including the large black hat, tantalisingly close to the one worn by the wife of Bath (but without the strap), though more probably meant to be like the one worn by the monk.
The quality of the present fragment is seen not only in the carving where the faces and eyes are rendered with far greater precision than is usual but even in the paint and gilding: besides the rendering of details on the mitre, it is the only piece (to my knowledge) which, instead of the usual daisies on a flat green ground, has shades of deep green on which a delicate stalked flower is painted in lighter green.

What is interesting is that the faces are individualised, that the broader face of the companion, perhaps Simon archdeacon of Sens, is differentiated in small ways from the sharper one of the Bishop, probably Thomas Beckett, which makes of this latter, with delineated jaw and cheekbones, mouth lines, chin and brows the closest we have to a “portrait”. This is all the more true since the gaunt face does not contradict other sources, such as the one in the Icelandic Saga, perhaps derived from Robert of Cricklade, “To look upon he was slim of growth and pale of hue, with dark hair, a long nose, and a straightly featured face” ; or the fresco of a younger Beckett at Sacro Speco Monastery in Subiaco; or even the stern portrait glass window in Canterbury made in 1900 from old fragments.

In an important way, what is as true of most medieval art as it is of works from antiquity, namely that its fragmentary nature is an integral part of its value, - paradoxically, insofar as value lies also in the authentic history of a work,- is most true of works representing St Thomas Beckett for he was the subject of both veneration and aggression to a greater degree than any other historical figure.

Provenance

With Charles Ratton Paris, auction Paris 1960s? to Bresset et Fils, thence sold to family of Jan Hoet, curator of Municipal Museum of Contemporary Art (S.M.A.K.) Gent.