The Normans in Southern Italy: Cultural developments

Much of the culture of southern Italy in the Norman period was of monastic origin. The courts of the Norman lords were centres of artistic production, first and foremost the royal court of Palermo. Montecassino, Salerno and Palermo formed the melting-pot in which the four cultural components of Norman Italy (Lombard, Byzantine, Islamic and French) were fused together.

Medicine was particularly advanced: firstly at Montecassino, then, with important results, at the school of medicine in Salerno. The literary output was also notable: in particular, there were numerous translations of scientific texts from Arabic and Greek. There was also a flourishing school of book illumination.
In the field of architecture, Norman patronage led to the construction of a series of ecclesiastical buildings in which the pre-existing traditions (‘Cassinese’, Byzantine and Arabizing) tended to coexist with the imported Benedictine-Cluniac style. Although little attention was paid to painting, the Norman kings commissioned a series of truly outstanding mosaic cycles (Monreale, the Cappella Palatina in Palermo), which today are perhaps the most splendid memorial to their era.

Medicine

Even though it did have universities like Bologna or Paris, medieval southern Italy was of great importance for the study of medicine thanks to its vicinity to the Muslim world. This knowledge was then diffused in Italy through the monasteries. Constantine the African, a translator of Arabic medical texts, was one of the main protagonists; possibly of North African origin, he lived and worked at Montecassino, where he met Alfanus, the archbishop of Salerno, who translated medical texts from Greek into Latin. Together with their pupils, these scholars translated numerous texts, which then constituted the real corpus of knowledge in Western medicine.

It was, however, above all in the city of Salerno that, in the 11^th century, there was an extremely active medical milieu, mainly oriented towards practice and founded on the Western tradition of the early Middle Ages: Gariopontus, Petrellus and other physicians studied anatomy and their encounter with Constantine’s translations gave birth to the so-called school of medicine in Salerno. This was, in fact, the only institution in southern Italy that was comparable to the other centres of learning in the West.

Literature: history-writing

Literature, too, in the Norman period was a mainly monastic phenomenon, as is evident in such an important literary genre as history-writing. In monastic circles, history began to be linked to the search for juridical guarantees for property, so that so that the sub-genre of the chartulary flourished in the large monasteries.

The chartulary was a chronicle in which the historical account and the transcription of justificatory documents were intertwined. This practice was particularly evident in the history-writing of southern Italy in the 12th century: Chronicon Sanctae Sophiae (1119, St Sophia in Benevento); Chronica monasterii Casinensis (Montecassino); the Chronica of St Bartholomew of Carpineto and St Clement of Casauria (in the Abruzzi). Works on the Norman conquest were also produced in monastic circles: thus Geoffrey Malaterra, a monk at St Agatha in Catania, was the author of a biography of Roger I of Sicily, and Amatus of Montecassino wrote his Historia Normannorum (now lost and only preserved in a 14^th century French translation). Alexander, the biographer of Roger II, was the abbot of San Salvatore di Telese (near Benevento).

There was, however, also a certain amount of lay - or, at least, non-monastic - history-writing: apart from Romuald Guarna, archbishop of Salerno, author of a universal chronicle, mention should be made of Chronicon Beneventanum by Falco of Benevento (a history of Benevento from 1102 to 1140) and the celebrated Liber de regno Sicilie by Hugo Falcandus, who continued his account up to 1169.

Literature: scientific prose

The court of Palermo was one of the leading cultural centres of 12^th century Europe. One of those working at Roger II’s court was the Muslim geographer Edrisi, the author of the Book of Roger. The Greek monk Nilos Doxopatrius wrote, also for the king, the Taxis (description) of the five patriarchal sees into which Europe, Asia and Africa was divided. Other court personages, such Maio of Bari, author of a commentary on the Pater, were concerned with literature too. The collection of the homilies of Philogathos de Cerami, one of which was delivered before the king at the inauguration of the Cappella Palatina was an example of Byzantine literature.

Even more important, however, was the activity of translation (from Greek and Arabic) that, at court, pivoted on the figures of Henry Aristippus and the admiral Eugenius. Aristippus translated Plato’s Meno and Phaedo, and Diogenes Laertius’s lives of the philosophers; Eugenius translated Ptolemy’s Optics.

Illuminated manuscripts

The quality and quality of lay books published in southern Italy from the 11^th to the 13^th centuries is very indicative of the cultural project elaborated by the Normans.

The miniature of historical subjects was one of the great contributions of the cultural milieu of southern Italy. In this region, excellent propaganda tools were available to the Normans, who were seeking legitimation: these included the coats of arms, titles, historical writing and the works of art commissioned by the civil authorities. In the Registrum of Sant’Angelo in Formis (Montecassino, early 12^th century) the new princes of Capua have old coats of arms, frozen in the weary formulae of the routine following the period when Desiderius was abbot of Montecassino.

However, the presence in Apulia of a number of manuscripts of Ovid’s Metamorphoses, which arrived with the Normans, took concrete form in the Codex Napoletano IV. F. 3., the miniatures in which display the capacity of medieval art to master classical themes (similar to these are the drawings in the borders of Orosius’s Histories against the Pagans in Vat. Lat. 3340, of Neapolitan or Salernitan execution). They are characteristic of the vigorous process of modernization that affected illuminated manuscripts in the period Norman rule.

In the 12^th century, the intervention of Roger II in the field of publishing, with greater emphasis on scientific books, meant that the illuminated manuscript remained in the background. However, the maps by the Muslim geographer Edrisi in the Book of Roger are an expression of the Mozarabic art of Sicily, as are the bizarre figures in an exemplar of the Latin translation of the Liber de locis stellarum by Al-Sufi (Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, Paris, ms. 1036), executed in Palermo for William II.

The renewal of the iconographic repertoires, graphic forms and ornamental motifs of the Graeco-Norman book was greatly influenced by the models of Byzantine art, especially thanks to such figures as the admiral Eugenius and Henry Aristippus. The copy of John Scylitzes’ chronicle (the Madrid Codex, Biblioteca Nacional, Vitr. 26-2) is particularly famous. The celebrated manuscript in Bern (Burgerbibliothek 120) dates from the end of the Norman kingdom. The only exemplar of the Liber ad honorem Augusti (an eulogy of Henry VI) by Peter of Eboli is a ‘new book’, where the political illustration and the manifesto takes the place of the colourless, neutral chronicle and where the illustrations are as important as the text.

Religious architecture

In the religious architecture that flourished in southern Italy in the Norman age it is possible to distinguish a number of basic models, which are to be found in a large part of the monumental buildings of the period[1]. The architectural styles may be classified as follows:

• Benedictine-Cassinese group, the most outstanding example of which is the church of San Benedetto at Montecassino, conceived by Abbot Desiderius (other examples : the abbey church of San Liberatore alla Maiella, Capua Cathedral, Caserta Vecchia Cathedral, the church of Sant’Angelo in Formis).
• Franco-Norman group, the typical schema of which is found in Aversa Cathedral (other examples: the abbey church at Venosa, Acerenza Cathedral).
• Apulian group, inspired by the basilica of San Nicola in Bari (other examples: Canosa Cathedral, the church of Santi Cataldo e Niccolò in Lecce).
• Benedictine-Cluniac group, the model for which is the church of the Holy Trinity of Mileto, although it also includes not only Calabrian buildings, but also Sicilian ones (other examples: Mileto Cathedral, Santa Maria della Roccella and San Giovanni Vecchio at Stilo).
• Sicilian group, which, although it had numerous links with the preceding types, had an independent position because it incorporated elements of the most widespread architectural and decoration styles in southern Italy in the 11^th and 12^th centuries, as well as stylistic elements from France (other examples: the Palermo churches of San Giovanni dei Lebbrosi, San Giovanni degli Eremiti, Santa Maria dell’Ammiraglio, the Cappella Palatina; Cefalù Cathedral; the Monreale complex).

Mosaics

The remarkable output of mosaics of Norman Sicily was concentrated in the period between c. 1140 and c. 1190. It originated from the transplant of the traditions of Byzantine figurative art to Sicily by mosaicists brought to the island in successive waves to execute works commissioned by the Hauteville. A summary of the most outstanding works follows.

• Church of Santa Maria dell’Ammiraglio (the Martorana), Palermo (1143 and 1151): the mosaics in this church include the two dedicatory panels representing Christ crowning King Roger II and the admiral George of Antioch prostrate before the Virgin.
• Cappella Palatina, Palermo: the celebrated figure of the Pantocrator adorns the cupola. Roger, with erudite quotations, describes himself as the patron of the chapel. It has recently been hypothesized that the Cappella Palatina was also intended to be the king’s state apartment.
• Cefalù Cathedral: Roger’s favourite building; the king highlights his fondness for it in a series of hexameters inscribed in the mosaic decoration, where he described himself as a structor (builder). The figurative style is, once again, typically Byzantine.
• Monreale Cathedral: a magnificent mosaic cycle (6,400 sq m) commissioned by William II. Monreale itself was built as a ‘royal city’, combining the functions of cathedral and mausoleum.

Painting

Painting is perhaps one of the media least used by the Normans as a vehicle for their political propaganda. It is, therefore, difficult to reconstruct the Hauteville’s commissions in this field with any degree of precision. An emblematic case is Salerno Cathedral: the celebratory inscriptions on the exterior of the building proclaim that it was commissioned by a Norman (Robert Guiscard), but there is a lack of any cycles of painting to back up this statement. The cathedral’s mosaic cycle (little of which now remains) seems to have a purely theological function and is inspired by Roman models. The church of Sant’Angelo in Formis, near Capua, is, from an iconographic point of view, wholly Benedictine (the same applies to the lost mosaics of Capua Cathedral). The Normans’ lack of interest in painting is even more evident in the Abruzzi and Molise.

There are, however, two important exceptions. Roger I exalted his political prowess by having the ‘memorable exploits’ against the Muslims painted on the walls of the church of Ravenosa in Sicily. This cycle has now been lost, but it is considered to be a sort of Mediterranean pendant to the Bayeux Tapestry, a figurative representation of the epic narrated by Geoffrey of Malaterra in his account. Then there is the enamel placed on the front of the ciborium of the basilica of San Nicola in Bari: St Nicholas is depicted crowning King Roger, who is dressed in a tunic and armour, and bears the insignia of power in his hands.

---

[1] Giovanni Coppola ‘Sur quelques techniques de construction dans l’Italie normande’, Les Normands en Méditerraneé, University of Caen, 1994, pages 203-221 provides a good summary of current thinking.

Aspects of Chartism: Did Chartism fail?

Repeated failure sapped the momentum of Chartism. To sustain the mass platform the movement needed to maintain a widespread belief that success was possible and the Chartists never came near to achieving their ‘six points’ in the 1830s and 1840s.. The events of 1839 seriously damaged its capacity to do this. The defeat of the general strike in 1842 and the crushing failure of 1848 completed the process. The mass imprisonment, transportation and successful confrontation of mass demonstrations during the three main phases of the Chartist agitation contributed significantly to the disintegration of the movement. This represented the growing confidence and enhanced efficiency of the coercive powers of the British State[1]. The authorities inflicted the most damaging psychological defeat on the popular reform movement of the century, bankrupting the long tradition of the mass platform. Without the physical assault on the militant sections of the Chartist leadership and of many of the secondary leaders, the aftermath in the 1850s might have been different.

In part, this was a result of the organisational weakness of the movement. Lack of administrative experience was clearly exposed by the ways in which the Conventions were organised and financed. Rejection of the three petitions showed how little parliamentary support the Chartists had. The reforming movement of 1830-32 and the activities of the Anti-Corn Law League, both of which used similar tactics to Chartism to gain support, were successful because they had parliamentary allies. With little parliamentary backing or solid middle class support, the Chartist movement found itself either having to give up or raise and maintain public support or opt for less peaceful methods. This divided leadership and rank and file, creating bitterness and lack of tactical direction. Chartists could agree on the Charter but on little else. To Lancashire cotton workers, Chartism held out the prospect of economic improvement and factory reform. To the London artisan, it pointed the way to political equality. The Chartist leaders also had different objectives. For Lovett the vote was part of a general programme of social improvement; for Ernest Jones Chartism was equated with socialism; and, for O’Connor the franchise was the political counterpart of his schemes at land reform. Loss of momentum within the movement meant that Chartism could not maintain a unity of purpose.

Economic conditions played an important role in failure to maintain unity of purpose. Though there has been a reaction against the simple economic explanations, the fundamental importance of the trade cycle cannot be neglected. The difficulty of maintaining unity, except during economic slumps, was universally recognised by contemporaries. The changes that occurred in the policies and attitudes of government, in part the result of Chartism can be seen as evidence of its partial success. The movement drew attention to social problems and the need to tackle them. There was some liberalisation of state policies in the 1840s. This weakened the Chartist case that only a reformed parliament would improve the conditions of the working population.

A final explanation for the demise of Chartism lies in the consolidation of industrial capitalism that had occurred by 1850. In the previous fifty years, industrial change had created militancy among the working population who believed that political reform alone could arrest or reverse this process. By 1850, this battle had more or less been lost and Chartism remained relevant only in places like Halifax and Bradford where the woollen and worsted trades still fought rearguard actions against mechanisation. Militancy was associated with the traumas of early stages of industrialisation. Chartism was crucial in the shift from older forms of popular protest to the development of new ones, like the general strike and pressure group activity, more effective in a mature industrial urban society.

Chartism was the first organised, mass movement of the working population in British history in terms of its geographical and occupational breadth and the unprecedented involvement of women. Nevertheless, it did not draw on trade unionism in any formal way or bridge the gulf between rural and urban workers. It did not mark a vital stage in the inevitable progress of organised labour. Chartism was motivated by ‘knife and fork’ issues but was also concerned with the dignity of the individual and the ‘rights of man’. It looked back to the campaigns of the 1790s and forward to the emergence of socialism as a political force from the 1880s.

• The main problem was how to achieve a revolutionary goal by constitutional means.
• It failed to obtain parliamentary support for the Charter.
• The middle-classes largely ignored, shunned or condemned Chartism.
• Chartists were divided among themselves. George Julian Harney, a Chartist leader said in 1848, “faction has cut the throat of Chartism”.
• Government handled the movement firmly and calmly.
• Chartist demands were too drastic.
• There was too much diversity in the intellectual and ideological aims of Chartism. This was particularly evident after 1840 though the division between the aspirations of artisans and the working class generally was evident from the outset.
• In 1839, the Chartist detected considerable indifference to the movement among working people. Many people were committed to the daily task of survival. Any serious commitment to political action depended on a conviction that this was relevant to survival. The task of the Chartists was to persuade them of this.
• Other movements like trade unions offering more immediate and tangible benefits attracted Chartists.
• The socio-economic position improved after 1842. Prosperity reduced mass support.
• Chartism and the Chartists were made to look ridiculous after Kennington Common and the failure of the Land Plan.
• The changing sociology of England after railways fragmented the ‘unity’ of the working classes.
• Chartism tore itself apart.

The fact that Chartism did not achieve the ‘six point’ does not mean that it achieved nothing. Chartism was fundamental to the development of a distinctive culture among working people especially in the industrial areas of Lancashire and Yorkshire. Although this culture was complex, certain aspects seem clear:

• There was considerable scepticism and often hostility toward the state that united the interests of the propertied middle and upper classes. For some Chartists, the state was opposed because it continued to represent (though in different ways and in different circumstances) the ‘Old Corruption’ of the pre-1832 period. For others, it was the increased power of the state after 1832 that was the main cause of discontent. Chartism accommodated both views.
• Out of this scepticism emerged a fierce determination on the part of the working classes to pursue interests independently. This involved a number of objectives (educational, moral, temperance, Christian, trade union etc.) that were not always mutually exclusive. Chartism, however, provided the essential focus.
• From Chartism, specific lessons in how to protest, to organise and spread the message of dissent emerged. These lessons were not forgotten whatever the direction that older Chartists took. The many autobiographies from the mid- and late-nineteenth century confirm the importance of Chartism on working class lives.

The variegated approaches to political and social change inherent in Chartism in the 1830s and 1840s continued after 1848. Ex-Chartists moved into socialism or into, or back into trade unionism. Others again agitated for temperance reform as the key to unlock the potential of the working man. Vincent and Lovett remained sturdy working class educators to the end. Many ex-Chartists found the mid-nineteenth century Liberal Party extremely accommodating as its Whig leaders saw the political advantage of encouraging a radical wing that no longer looked to pull down the pillars of the state. ‘Liberal radicalism’ became an increasingly influential force in the 1850s and 1860s and from it came renewed demands for parliamentary reform that was answered (somewhat opportunistically) by Disraeli and the Conservatives in the 1867 Reform Act.

Chartists after 1848 took different routes. In the textile and engineering centre of Oldham, for example, some ex-Chartists who had co-operated with the Tory humanitarian John Fielden during the factory reform campaigns of the mid-1840s grew closer to the Conservative Party because, as the Oldham delegate to the 1848 Convention asserted, the laissez faire ideology of Liberals and Peelites was “the most heartless and destructive doctrine ever taught in any country”. Others moved happily into Liberal radicalism. The records of the weaver-dominated Chartist branch of the National Charter Association in Great Horton (Bradford) survive from 1840 to 1866 and clearly show that it evolved into a very different organisation. In the 1860s and 1870s, it embraced the co-operative movement and Liberal radicalism.

The history of Chartism after 1850 showed that individuals had their own order of priorities, their own definitions of freedom and their own views of the relationship between power and knowledge and between the individual and the state. For this reason, Chartists reacted differently to the economic and political progress of the mid-Victorian period. Some became Liberal radicals; some moved into independent Labour politics while others retired in confusion and bitterness. However, they all retained that tough and independent spirits that had made them ‘irreconcilables’ in the 1830s and 1840s. The legacy of Chartism lay in a growing acceptance that accommodation was better than revolution as a means of extending direct working class involvement in the political process through the intensely symbolic right to vote and as a necessity for a state that recognised that change could not be resisted and that an individual’s ‘worth’ could not simply be defined in terms of property.

---

[1] John Saville 1848: The British State and the Chartist Movement, Cambridge, 1987 considers the development of the coercive powers of the state. It is also considered in volume 2: chapter 4.