Meet the Objects: Pair of Angel Candle Holders

This pair of twin “angel” candle holders are among the most unique objects in MOL’s collection, not only because they come as a set which allows us to investigate the differences between the two, but because they seem to be repurposed from a decorative panel.

Together, these two pieces were made somewhere in Austria in the 1490s and consist of two sculpted angels each holding a column. Originally, they were most likely parts of a larger altarpiece, since the height of each piece’s head and candle-holding pillar are exactly the same (8 ¾ inches, or 22.2 cm). After they were removed from this original decorative panel, crude notches for candles were carved into their columns, and the statues were repurposed as candle holders. The contrast between the skilled workmanship of the overall statues, juxtaposed with the crudeness of the candle-holding notch, is what first suggested their repurposing to the MOL team when we viewed them at Harvard Art Museum’s storage facility in Somerville. Further investigation into the structural details of the piece—the unadorned, utilitarian back; the conspicuously matching heights of the angel heads and pillars—seem to corroborate this interpretation. While the suggested original altarpiece may have simply broken down over time, it seems more likely that it fell victim to the iconoclastic movement that raged in Central Europe during the Protestant Reformation.

Each of these repurposed candle holders is carved out of lindenwood (also called limewood). In the late Middle Ages, most lindenwood carvings came from the southern German regions (Upper Rhine, Swabia, Franconia, and Bavaria) because of the abundance of lindenwood found in the area. This material was exceptionally well suited for sculpting, especially for fine detail work, and was used very frequently by late medieval sculptors. To carve a sculpture like these two angels, a sculptor would commence his work with a large lindenwood block and carve it into a curved shape. He would cut out the center and the back and try not to let the wood deform too much while carving. After he carved the wood into a C-shape, the sculptor would chisel down the wood and focus on the more elaborate details. In the end, the carving would be either painted or, according to the practice gaining popularity in the 1490s, simply varnished and glossed.

We on the MOL team are especially intrigued by the broken left hand of the figure holding a pillar on its right (the statue to the left in the picture above). Although we cannot know how it occurred, this damage speaks to the likely utilitarian purpose of the piece. Moreover, the damage allows the material to express itself, since the striated densities of the lindenwood make for a distinctive pattern. Little is known about how these late Gothic candle holders made their way to the United States, but Harvard University acquired them as a gift from Jane Ransohoff in memory of her late husband Dr. J. Louis Ransohoff.

2016 CARA meeting

Last weekend, two members of the MOL team spoke about the project’s pedagogical vision, classroom implementation, and extra-collegiate engagement with members of the Medieval Academy of America’s (MAA) Committee for Centers and Regional Associations (CARA). CARA is the leading forum for American and Canadian medieval studies organizations, ranging from departments to centers to disciplinary and interdisciplinary consortia.

Sean and Allyssa gave the third of three presentations at Sunday morning’s annual CARA meeting. Collectively, the participants discussed various responses by medievalists to the challenges and opportunities posed by increased attention on the STEM disciplines by university and college administrators, legislators, and the public at large, as well as the criticism of the humanities and liberal arts that often accompanies the valorization of STEM. The session, organized by Anne Lester, current chair of CARA, was designed to put forward different strategies and ideas to help programs and associations respond to the pressures on humanities departments, including enrollments and curricular emphases, while simultaneously creating more space for medieval studies.

First, Cecilia Gaposchkin passionately defended the importance of all of the liberal arts (meaning humanities and STEM disciplines combined), but especially their complementarity. Specifically, she argued that the conflation in popular media (most of it conservative) of “liberal arts” with “humanities”– as well as the tendency to pit “liberal arts” against STEM– is both historically inaccurate and intellectually dangerous. Her opinions can be found here, here, and here; supporting and complementary arguments can be found here, here, and here.

After the flurry of enthusiastic head-nodding and live-tweeting of Cecilia’s talk subsided, Thomas Burman expounded on the important concept that extra-collegiate engagement can move beyond traditional outreach models by more actively working with communities to determine how academics can organize effective programs and participate meaningfully in their surrounding communities. By means of illustration, he presented the ongoing work of the University of Tennessee Knoxville’s Marco Institute to engage local high school faculty and students, especially through its new “Marco Madness” spring program. Tom’s nuanced observations and wealth of experience left many listeners clearly contemplating how they might implement similar programs at their home institutions.

Sean and Allyssa’s “unveiling” of MOL’s Proof of Concept Collection rounded out this conversation. They first argued that recent curricular and policy attention to digital literacy (represented in our neck of the woods by the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s Digital Literacy and Computer Science Standards, a draft of which was released in December 2015 to replace the 2008 Technology Literacy Standards and Expectations) implicitly and inaccurately assumes that digital training belongs in the domain of STEM. They then discussed MOL’s value for the collegiate classroom (most notably in Harvard’s General Education course CB 51, “Making the Middle Ages”), and outlined its potential role in K-12 education more broadly. We will be discussing these themes at greater length in upcoming posts, so stay tuned!