Chaucer Meets Shakespeare


Reliquary Pendant with Queen Margaret of Sicily Blessed by Bishop Reginald of Bath


This pendant was made sometime in between 1174 to 1177, and presented to Queen Margaret of Sicily by Bishop Reginald of Bath (as the title suggests). This 5 x 3.1 x .7 cm pendant is engraved gold, and its exact artist is unknown, though my suspicion is that either the Bishop himself or someone working directly under him created it. The Metropolitan Museum of Art considers it to be of British culture (which I agree with), and it was made in Canterbury, England.

The Reliquary Pendant was likely presented to the queen due to her son’s marriage in 1177, to the daughter of Henry II. I chose to sketch the back of the painting, as this is where the most detail remains, but the front of the pendant once contained relics of Thomas Becket’s ‘bloodied vestments’ which were likely covered by a crystal. Henry II had instigated the murder of Becket, his former friend and Chancellor, on the 29th of December, 1170. The border around this gap where the relics once laid reads “Of the blood of Saint Thomas martyr. Of his vestments stained with his blood: of the cloak, the belt, the hood, the shoe, the shirt”. The border on the back of the pendant, which frames the image of Bishop Reginald blessing Queen Margaret reads “This thing was transmitted to Queen Margaret of Sicily by bishop Rainaud Batoniorum”.

The new millennium has been extraordinarily eventful for England. In 1066, the Normans defeated the English at the Battle of Hastings, and therefore became the new rulers of the English mainland. This transfer of power marked the transition between Old English to Middle English- the Normans created about 10,000 words in the English language, about ¾ of which we still use today. Most of these words reflected important aspects of this Norman culture, such as control, government, war, and fashion. The arrival of the Normans not only brought their culture to the English, but also a very strong French influence. As seen by the image depicted on the pendant, there was a sustained focus on religion, and those at the top of the nobility were connected and devoted to Christianity. As we saw in The Canterbury Tales, the clergy often worked in tandem with the ruling class. Therefore, the gift of this pendant was likely not a unique occasion, but an honor nonetheless. What was unusual about this honor was the presence of Thomas Becket’s bloody robes within the pendant. The marriage between King Henry’s daughter (Princess Johanna) and Queen Margaret’s son (King William II) had been called off when Becket had been murdered, so the gift of this pendant to the Queen (when the marriage was ‘back on’) was incredibly ironic.

I believe that this gift can be taken two different ways. On one hand, it is completely possible that Bishop Reginald meant for the pendant to be a peace offering, a sort of symbol of the peace that had come between these two families due to the marriage of Johanna and William II. On the other hand, this gift can be seen as sort of a warning from Bishop Reginald to Queen Margaret. Family and loyalty were incredibly important values during the 1100’s, and Henry II had broken his friendship and trust with Thomas Becket. I side with the latter opinion (partially because I think it makes the whole story far more interesting), and believe that Reginald was trying to warn Queen Margaret against building this bond with the family of King Henry II. I believe that the Bishop was reminding the Queen about the importance of loyalty to your friends and family, and subtly suggesting that the marriage was a bad idea.

Although this work of art is nearly a thousand years old, I still believe that it carries important themes and messages. The idea of loyalty especially, is very important to me. Loyalty is a trait that I have always valued and strived to possess. I feel as though many people nowadays are deceitful and two-faced, and often fail to be honest or see where their loyalties truly lie (although it is entirely possible that this is just because I am a teenager in high school). While the pendant itself may be out of style, I believe that we could all use Bishop Reginald’s reminder of loyalty.

Comments

  1. Hi Lily!
    I really enjoyed reading your insightful blog post this morning. Though I believe you could have included more visual analysis, I really liked reading your historical analysis and how you made those connections between Chaucer and this piece. I was also fun reading the little commentary bits because it made the overall post entertaining.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey Lily! I liked your blog post and I found your ideas interesting regarding the context around this pendant as a gift. However, the historical context around this work and it's time period could be clearer; it is of good length and depth, but should be less formal. More focus on specific characters first (Thomas Beckett, King Henry, etc.) in the informal pen, and then branching into the larger time period (the new millenium etc.) would make more sense imo.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hey Lily! I loved your post and your drawing is pretty spot on! I do agree with Mady in that you should have more visual analysis, but I think the explanation of the context behind the pendant and your historical analysis made this post very interesting. Good job connecting your analysis back to the Canterbury Tales and also giving your own opinions on why the gift of the pendant was given. It was interesting to see you tie the meaning of the pendant back to the theme of loyalty. Overall, great job!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Lessons From Death Row Inmates

A Thank You :)

My New Summer Job