Glasmalerei im Kontext: Bildprogramme und Raumfunktionen, Akten des XXII. Internationalen Colloquiums des Corpus Vitrearum, Niirnberg, 29. August - 1. September 2004, ed. Rudiger Becksmann, Nuremberg 2005

Carine Schleif/ Volker Schier

Views and Voices from Within: Sister Katerina Lemmel on the Glazing of the Cloister at Maria Mai

The following story is set in the monastery of Maria Mai in

the village of Maihingen located seventy kilometers south of

Nuremberg between Nordlingen and Oettingen (fig. 1 ).

Here, in 1516 the fifty-year-old widow Katerina Lemmel

professed as a Birgittine nun. During the fifteenth and early

sixteenth centuries several large Birgittine abbeys flourished

in south Germany, sustaining themselves not on the basis of

extensive feudal land holdings granted to them in founda­

tion charters, but rather through the monetary participation

and support of newly moneyed urban merchant families.

Lemmelleft many friends and relatives behind in her native

Nuremberg, including the numerous members of her

father's family, the patrician lmhoffs. Her cousins managed

the famed Imhoff Brothers Trading Company that dealt in

domestic metal products and in exotic spices, particularly

saffron. During her years in Nuremberg, Lemmel had

participated in the company as a silent partner, her invest­

ments yielding substantial returns. Once at the monastery,

Katerina Lemmel used these funds and other income she

had amassed, to rebuild the women's convent including the

cloister. Previously only two arms of the cloister walk had

been constructed, and even these had fallen into disrepair.

We are informed of Katerina Lemmel's initiatives and

activities through the letters that she sent from the monastery

to her cousin Hans V Imhoff back in Nuremberg. Beginning

almost immediately after her arrival at the monastery in the

summer of 1516 and ending with his death in the summer

of 1522, these sixty-two letters open many windows into

art, music, piety, politics, and economics on a microhis­

torical level (fig. 2) 1•

Of particular interest here are the rare insider insights

into the planning, funding, commissioning, and complex

functioning of stained glass that the missives offer, as well

as the heretofore unknown documentation on the agency of

late medieval nuns and their roles in fashioning, furnishing,

and using their own liturgical spaces2. The saga of the

211

windows emerges gradually from the pages of the letters,

surfacing at irregular intervals, but spanning almost the

entire period of the correspondence.

The story begins with a misunderstanding, or what may

better be termed - a family dispute. After several exchanges

in which Katerina first sounds puzzled due to a lack of

information and then frustrated at her inability to access

Nuremberg record books she finally confides to Hans that

it has become clear to her that her brother-in-law Martin

T ucher has abused the financial arrangements that she had

made prior to her departure from Nuremberg. Feeling

baffled and cheated, she asks him to make amends by

donating stained glass for her new cloister. Eventually

Martin consents and also agrees to find other donors as

well as to oversee the project in Nuremberg. In reality,

however, Katerina must orchestrate most matters from

Maihingen through her correspondence.

By the beginning of 151 8 the building of her cloister is

nearing completion and we witness how she takes up the

task of persuading her relatives to participate. At first gently,

then more forcefully, she makes her overtures, employing

several strategies: First and foremost she stresses that those

who donate a window will be establishing eternal memo­

rials for themselves. More clearly than any other source of

the time, Katerina Lemmel's writings articulate all the

obligations and expectations built into this systemic reci­

procity, and they explain quite explicitly the ways in which

the donated windows were to function as mnemonic

devices to trigger intercessory prayers on behalf of the

donors3. Secondly, Lemme I stresses the dysfunctional state

of the old cloister that has fallen into disrepair and has

always been lacking in proper glass windows, rendering it

inadequate for its intended liturgical purposes. Thirdly, she

places her own endeavor into two market contexts within

the donation economy: Assuming the viewpoint of potential

patrons, she compares her own project to similar efforts to

glaze cloisters in monasteries in and around Nuremberg,

stressing that in Maihingen the windows will not be as

elaborate and therefore the costs will be moderate for

donors. Similarly she addresses matters of supply and

demand from the standpoint of the monastery with respect

to prospective clients, asserting that others would certainly

not pass up this opportunity, but that she wishes to offer her

friends and relatives in Nuremberg the first chance to

donate the windows. Fourthly, she begins her solicitations

modestly, and then as the project develops, her expec­

tations grow, and the demands she places on the patrons

increase.

The windows are discussed in twenty separate pas­

sages, many of substantial length. We have culled a

number of quotations from these rich sources. For the full

texts and contexts readers are referred to our forthcoming

edition of the Lemmel letters with commentary. In the pro­

cess of persuading donors and co-ordinating the commis­

sion she exposes to us the many deliberations, dilemmas,

and even tensions behind the choices of the windows'

iconography, style, colors, technique, mechanics of design,

number, and size as well as in the execution of many of

these aspects of the commission.

In January 151 8 she provides her relatives information

as to the various contexts in which the proposed windows

would be viewed when they assumed their places within

this special space in the women's convent of a monastery of

the Birgittine order: When the sisters process through the cloister with the holy relics and on Friday when they sing the Seven Psalms and when they daily pass by at other

1 . Former Monastery of Maria Mai in Maihingen.

212

times, seeing the coats of arms they will pray for them all the more4 . In April she further explains the liturgical

necessity of the windows, which she again connects to their

memorial function. Although one can imagine that sympa­

thetic hearts among her prospective Nuremberg patrons

must have been moved at the thought of the adverse

conditions for the nuns at Maihingen, the passage may be

met with even more interest among curious twenty-first­

century scholars since it provides a rare glimpse of nuns'

liturgical, devotional, and memorial practices involving the

combined effects of manuscripts and music, architecture

and windows:

No one should do it ;ust for me, but first and foremost to the praise and honor of God and in order that you will all partake of the goodness that will be wrought through this when, on all holidays, the sisters will process past them chanting songs of praise, and continually every day they will commemorate the people whose coats of arms they see. For several years now we have not been able to pro­cess, as is prescribed in the Rule, without always being afraid that the old building would collapse. On the sides

where the old cloister remains, there are pitiful tiny little holes for windows, so that the sisters say they could never see what they were singing from their books - they sing from their books while processing. Here too we a/so want to have windows made in the same manner as the new ones. I do think that this will bring about much prayer and salvation for time everlasting - especially if in every window there is a modest image of the passion of our beloved Lord. It should neither be very expensive nor sumptuous. If only it is devotional and expressive, this is

truly what we would prefer. Today they cannot paint anything. The saints and the good characters must have sinful tailored clothing, which does not stimulate much pious contemplation5 .

Her clear articulation of expectations is remarkable. She

wants images that compel viewers emotionally rather than

stained glass that is admired for its costliness or artistry.

Luxurious or fashionable clothing is a particular distraction

for Katerina Lemmel when it is used for the pious protago­

nists of the sacred narratives.

This is the first mention of the intended iconography.

Gradually over the course of her letters, we witness how the

program expands from nine to fifteen windows and also

213

2. Letter from Katerina Lemmel to Hans V Imhoff, Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum, lmhoff-Archiv,

Fasc. 13, no. 12a (1 ).

how the project becomes more extensive as well as more

expensive. For example, at the beginning of May in 151 8

she writes to Hans Imhoff, a/so as far as the windows go, I cannot let you know how much one will cost because we have not yet had any frames made, only the hardware. I believe together with the image one would perhaps cost as

much as the one you have in your parlor /stud/'. Thus she

estimates that the stained glass panels are each to cost as

much as a cabinet piece that Katerina has apparently seen

many times in the residence of Hans V Imhoff and his

family. This double house, one of several headquarters for

the trading company, was located across from the church of

St. Lorenz (fig. 3). Neither the building nor the small

window exists today. Perhaps the best-known stained glass

windows from a Nuremberg residence of the time are the

panels from the house of Sixtus Tucher, prior of the church

of St. Lorenz and cousin of Katerina Lemmel's brother-in-law

Martin Tucher. This pair of trefoils showing the cleric con­

fronted by Death (fig . 4, 5), was installed in the house

Sixtus Tucher had built for himself, probably in the study.

Based on designs attributed to Albrecht Durer, the panels

measure only about thirty-eight centimeters across7 . Indeed

pieces of this dimension would be small for a cloister.

As we will see, however, the project was about to

expand. One of the most telling passages in this regard is

the story she relates in a letter from the end of May in

1518, about the visit of Veit Hirsvogel the Elder. She pre­

faces the narrative with a description of the progress of the

project:

Dear Cousin, you have written to me [ ... ] and you want to know how much one of the windows that I had asked you for would be. Until now we had not been able to estimate the cost. Now we have a stonemason who is putting stone columns into the new windows and fixing all the things that had not been done right before. Initially we wanted to have the windows made with wooden frames, but my brother-in-law Martin Tucher wrote to me saying, we should not do this. Rather we should have the windows put in the way church windows are commonly done. We also

214

should have the two small doors that open in every window, made with iron frames, since these would last and would not rot at the places where rain and snow would hit against them. These also would look more appropriate and craftsman/ike. He has talked to Master Veit about it, who told him that if he could have a look at it he could give us his advice and that he would be prepared to come out to us. It did not take long, and he came out with a cart- he must have had the impression that he certainly would get the contract for the glazing around the images. When he heard that we wanted to have these things done ourselves, and that we wanted to employ a local glazier, he did not like it very much, but he still gave us advice and said that it would be best to have small iron doors and that we should not make them as small as we had intended. The old windows need to be broken out to make them larger- that is what the craftsmen all say. And they also say that all my friends who would have windows made would be even more interested if they had an eternal usefulness as a source of light with the artfulness appropriate to it. They think that if a window costs a guilder more, this would be all right because they ought to be made properly and be as

functional as possible. They calculated that one window and the image would be about four guilders, which makes

3. Johann Alexander Boener, Copper Engraving Showing Houses Belonging to the Imhoff Trading Company Across from the Church of St. lorenz, Nurem­berg. Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum, after 1700.

4., 5. Veit Hirsvogel the Elder, after Cartoons by Albrecht Durer: Stained Glass Trefoils, Death on Horseback as Archer and Provost Sixtus Tucher Standing before an Open Grave. Nurnberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum, 1502, 400 x 370 mm each.

me worried you might think this too expensive. You truly will make yourselves a great memorial, and I would rather that you enjoy these benefits before we approach others, since Master Veit thinks that one can always find people who favor such endeavors and who would want to make a memorial, but he does not foresee that any of you would refuse8 .

It becomes evident that the small stained glass panels

were to be surrounded by bull's eye or diamond shaped

clear glass. This arrangement of partial glazing with

stained glass was often employed in cloisters. In the former

Benedictine nunnery at Ebstorf many small narrative panels

from c. 1400 still survive in situ9 . Examples contemporary

with the Maihingen panels still exist in the north arm of the

cloister of the Cistercian Monastery at Wettingen in Switzer­

land10. And a window lancet from c. 1510, today in the

Historisches Museum in Bern, contains a panel showing a

narrative scene of Saint Beatus that is even smaller than that

from Sixtus Tucher's house 11 .

215

The skill with which Katerina blends her concerns for

functionality, fine craftsmanship, cost effectiveness/ control,

and meeting the needs of all concerned is truly admirable.

In her fund raising efforts she nimbly appropriates the

comments of others- or perhaps puts her own words into

their mouths- hoping that the cousins will be more willing

to accept the fact that the project is expanding if this is

occurring on the advice of the experts. Of particular interest

are Veit Hirsvogel's purported observations with respect to

the availability of other potential donors. She continues with

more specifics:

Dear Cousin, if our dear Lord helps all of you, God willing, please ask the cousins on behalf of the Reverend Mother, the convent, and on my behalf, if all of you would be so generous that each of you would have one made. I do hope that you will not decide on the images without having had a look at the Passion of Our Dear Lord, and the Sorrows of the Virgin Mary. If you should think this too expensive, we are prepared to have them made smaller,

although the size is nothing in comparison with the win­dows they have in the cloisters in Nuremberg or in Pillen­reuth. Afterwards, let us know what you wish to do . The person who will give you this letter is the glazier who will make them. He can also give you further information 12.

In speaking of the lord's help she references the much

prayed for success of the family firm, which she hoped

would be announced at the executive board meeting .

Although in an earlier letter she wrote only of a passion

cycle, here she refers to what appears to be a double

program, Marian and Christological. What is more signi­

ficant is her disclosure that designs are being shown to the

potential patrons already as an enticement that they parti­

cipate in the project. We may speculate that these drawings

or prints were made or chosen by Katerina lemmel and the

other leading women of Maria Mai. Either Veit Hirsvogel

had brought the designs along with him or they were

previously in the possession of the monastery.

The glazier probably accompanied Hirsvogel on the

trip. Katerina reveals his identity in another letter13 . He is

the Nuremberg artisan Hans Kraft, who was apparently

employed in the Hirsvogel workshop and whose death is

recorded in the fall of 1522 14 .

In August of 1518, Katerina thanks Cousin Hans for

having announced her campaign to glaze the cloister at

Maria Mai at the meeting of the company executives. At

this time she tells him that fifteen windows are planned and

that she has commitments for only seven. She then becomes

worried that winter will set in before the windows are all

commissioned, and she threatens to look elsewhere for

patrons. Finally on September 2, she mentions to Hans that

she has learned from his wife Katharina that they and the

other cousins have committed themselves to donate the

remaining eight. Immediately thereafter, in the same letter,

Katerina informs him that the costs have escalated a bit.

She believes that if each pair of donors contributes four

guilders for the glazing with clear glass and in addition

pays for a panel with a narrative scene and the panels with

the respective paired arms, then all the costs will be

covered 15 .

Once the finances have been arranged the windows go

into production . By the middle of November 1518 nine

panels with narrative scenes and fourteen with coats of

arms have been delivered to Maihingen. Nonetheless she

216

voices her concerns because Hans has informed her that

»Master Veit is slow about finishing them«, and she im­

plores three of the donors to apply pressure on the Hirs­

vogel workshop to accelerate the manufacture.

Having now seen some of the windows for the first time,

Katerina also begins to voice her reactions to them. At least

in part with the hope of still influencing the remainder of the

production she critically observes: Some of the lions are in fact pale and white in color- they don 't look very good. But some are nicely yellow. He should also be sure to make the large coat of arms really yellowy yellow and to etch out the red on the shield, otherwise it won't last when it is exposed to the weather. I directed him to do this when he was here16. That yellow hybrid creature that comprised the

Imhoff heraldic device, sometimes termed »lion« and other

times »sealion«, was composed of a fish's tail , two legs with

eagle's talons or lion's paws, and a lion 's head. We can

only surmise that the large coat of arms must have marked

the beginning of the series of windows donated by the

lmhoffs. In a later letter composed after the completion of

the main portion of the project, Katerina inquires of Hans if

he might have two or three additional stained glass »lions«

made for her, or alternatively if he might have some »old

ones« that she could have installed in the windows on »the

ends«. Since she appends a cautious comment that he not

speak about this- presumably to the non-lmhoff donors­

we may assume that by this time she had decided that each

of the arms of the cloister walk was thus to be marked with

the sign of the Imhoff escutcheon 17 . Katerina ends the

passage cited above by mitigating her critique with the

reassurance that the sisters had been very glad to see the

glass panels with the images and that the donors will profit

from them for all eternity.

It is not until February 1519 that Katerina confirms that

most of the glass has arrived, and she takes up the task of

assigning donor couples to specific scenes. We note her

very exacting deliberations. She explains that the arms of

the late Veit Imhoff are to be placed below the Coronation of the Virgin, implying that this is appropriate to his state

among the blessed. Proceeding she assigns other scenes to

her male cousins, accompanied by their wives, in order of

their birth. Christ taking Leave of His Mother is assigned to

her oldest cousin Peter, followed by the Last Supper, assigned to Hans, and continuing with the Seven Falls of

Christ. She thus appears to group the Imhoff cousins to­

gether, and then presumably takes up the other donors but

does not discuss these assignments in her letter to Hans.

Through her own persuasiveness and perseverance, Kate­

rina had finally been successful in convincing her cousins,

some in-laws, some relatives of in-laws, and some in-laws of

relatives to commit themselves to all the planned donations.

Remarkably critical, she concludes with the following

words: Dear Cousin, know that the windows please us very much, as do the images, also then that they are, however, not all made to be desirous. We can't do anything about it. They always want to make them in a new strange way. Now one paints our dear Lord only with red and gray hair. I believe, one does him little honor with this. All the figures of our dear Lord have ;ust gray hair. You have certainly seen it. Our dear Lord sits there - where he is crowned -like a fat priest! He should have painted him in a red mantle, and bloody and wounded. He could have certainly made many of the figures in such a way so that the viewers would be more aroused. And when he carries his cross he also does not move viewers. I implored Master Veit when he was here, if he would only make them in such a way that they draw viewers' attention, since you are giving him so much money for them. For one and a quarter guilders he should have made them more diligently. And if we had known that the windows themselves would be made wider, then we would have had the images made a bit larger. It was ;ust the money/18

How could Katerina Lemmel articulate so much

displeasure at the finished product when she had appa­

rently chosen or at least approved the designs and dis­

cussed the technicalities with Veit Hirsvogel when he was

on site? The letters certainly speak distinctly to the old

debates about design and execution that are particularly

vehemently argued in the literature on German stained

glass 19 . Indeed the older literature fashions the work of the

glaziers and glass painters during this period as »second­

hand« artistry. Katerina Lemmel, however, must have

perceived much of the real art in the hands of the Hirsvogel

workshop since she saw their labors as fundamental to the

impact of the finished panels.

In the passage just cited as in the earlier letter, Katerina

Lemmel is concerned about the lack of brilliance of color. In

a letter from 151 8 we learned that the hybrid animal,

217

which she called a »lion« has been produced in varying

hues of yellow in the panels showing the Imhoff arms. The

glass painter or painters were apparently not successful in

achieving a uniform silver stain. Through the color of the

additional arms as well as their size and placement, she

wishes to impose the Imhoff family identity on the entire

series. Indeed space does not permit us to list all the donors

and explain their genealogical connections with the lm­

hoffs, but it must be pointed out that in each donor pair one

of the individuals was either an Imhoff or was closely

related to an Imhoff. In Nuremberg, displaying family

colors had been an important social distinction that was

subject to social control and scrutiny through sumptuary

laws. She could expect no more permanently brilliant

exposition of the yellow Imhoff lion than in stained glass.

Perhaps already in her childhood she had been impressed

by those heraldic devices dating from the end of the four­

teenth century that still today brightly mark the Imhoff Gal­

lery in the Nuremberg church of St. Lorenz, designating this

space and associated donations as those of the lmhoffs

(fig. 6).

6 . Stained Glass, Two Heraldic Panels Showing Arms of Konrad Imhoff (t 1396) with wife Lucia GroB (left), and Arms of Hans Imhoff

(t 1389) with wives Klara Pfinzing and Anna Schurstab (right), Imhoff Gallery, Nuremberg, St. Lorenz, c. 1380/90.

The other color she mentions is red. On the Imhoff

shield, the »lion« appears against a red field. Well­

acquainted with the techniques of colored glass production,

she wants to assure that the large coat of arms is both

vibrant and permanent, and thus she states that it be

achieved through red flashed glass, the obverse surface of

which is etched away in order to remove the red lamina in

the area corresponding to the lion, implying that sub­

sequently silver stain was to be applied to this negative

area to create an intensely yellow hue. Since the fifteenth

century such techniques had been commonly used for

heraldry20 . It would appear from her comments that at least

the small arms must have been executed without flashed

glass, perhaps using only vitreous paint including newer

sanguine techniques for the red field. Applied to the

exterior surface, this new enamel was both duller and more

vulnerable than red flashed glass. One might speculate that

perhaps the small panels for the rectory of the Nuremberg

church of St. Sebald, produced just a year before by the

Hirsvogel workshop might give us a glimpse of the

chromatic range present in the glass panels with coats of

arms for Maria Mai (fig. 7) 21 . The small panels likewise

fashioned by the Hirsvogel workshop and dating from

1519, originally made for the Nuremberg Dominican

convent St. Katharina and today installed in the Nuremberg

city hall, manifest a considerable use of sanguine22 . By this

date monolithic roundels executed completely within the

color palette facilitated through vitreous paints were

common in Northern Europe23 . For Katerina Lemmel, it was

not only the pale and impermanent colors of the armorial

bearings but also the dull red and gray tones for hair in the

main narrative panels that met with her disapproval. Here

she mentions the missing red also in connection with

Christ's mantle, immediately followed by a lack of other

features that she associates with the color red: Christ's

wounds and blood. It is apparent that the panels were very

restrained chromatically and perhaps made use of little or

no flashed glass or pot metals. We may speculate that the

cause lay in one or more of the following: Katerina Lemmel

felt the necessity to restrict herself to a limited budget.

Indeed the reticence of the donors to commit themselves

would appear to substantiate her anxieties with respect to

their willingness to provide even larger sums. Another

possibility is the desire on the part of the workshop to

218

7. Veit Hirsvogel the Younger, after design by Hans Kulmbach, Angel Holding the Marshaled Coat of Arms of the Esler Family

and the Provostship of Saint Sebald. Nuremberg, Rectory of St. Sebald, 1517,202 x 151 mm .

explore a more graphic, grisaille, or pastel aesthetic

particularly appropriate to small panels that would be

viewed at close range, and would thus facilitate the use of

detailed draftsmanly representations. Yet another issue was

the maximum translucency of the windows that was so

important here where optimal light was necessary in order

that the nuns could see to sing from their processionals.

Color was not the only problem. Katerina believes that

the windows must also arouse the interest of the nuns in

other ways, particularly by hailing the religious women

emotionally and sustaining their empathic attention. Neither

luxurious or stylish attire nor a figure of Christ that for her

conjured up mental images of corpulent, over-satiated and

perhaps self-absorbed secular priests served well in this

regard.

What could have »colored« her expectations? Extremely

well informed about comparable furnishings in other

monasteries, she indeed argues at the outset that her plans

are not as ambitious as those for the cloisters at the

Augustinian monastery in Pillenreuth, just outside of Nurem­

berg, where her sister Magdalena was prioress, nor as

extensive as the cycles in the Nuremberg monasteries. We

have no sources on the glazing of the cloister at Pillenreuth;

in fact this letter may hold the only lingering reference24 .

The cloister was purportedly constructed during the rule of

Anna Schlusselfelder, prioress from 1493 to 151025 . We

know that Katerina corresponded with her sister, who may

have reported on the glazing and described the windows.

As a family member, Katerina may have even been

solicited to donate a window at Pillenreuth, which would

have given her an impression of the project, not only by

perusing preliminary designs and inspecting the finished

panel or panels in the workshop, presumably that of the

Hirsvogels in Nuremberg, but also possibly through an on­

site visit. Sources from St. Klara, the Nuremberg monastery

of the Poor Claires, document the practice of granting

dispensations to potential donors allowing them to enter the

enclosure. Instances are likewise recorded of donors

inspecting their benefactions after they have been erected

or installed within a monastery26 .

Of particular interest is the glazing of the Nuremberg

Carmelite Monastery. In contrast to Pillenreuth, not only

does extensive archival documentation survive but also

much of the stained glass itself. Here, too, according to the

records of the project organizer Sebald Schreyer, donor

couples were solicited 27 . Katerina Lemme! must have been

acquainted with this glazing project, and again may have

even been a donor herself, since the windows were

completed in 1511 while she was still living as a patrician

and wife in Nuremberg. In this context her disappointment

in Maihingen is easy to fathom. Here too the windows

made use of partial glazing with stained glass. From

Schreyer's accounting we learn that in 1504, he and his

wife first paid eighteen guilders for two lancets including

not only the two stained glass panels but all the work

necessary to remodel the masonry, fashion the iron frames

and doors, as well as to make and install the clear glass. In

1508 they donated an additional pair of windows costing

sixteen guilders. Thus the Carmelite windows cost eight or

219

nine guilders a piece . In 1506 the Schreyers likewise

donated a church window in Schwabisch Gmund in which

four stained glass panels were installed within twenty

panels glazed with bull's eye glass. These panels were

considerably larger than the ones in the Carmelite

Monastery in Nuremberg and cost slightly less than three

guilders each 28 . If we complete the calculations for the

Lemme! windows, beginning with four guilders for the

masonry, hardware, and glazing with clear glass; adding

another one and a quarter guilders for the narrative panel,

and if we assume that the small panels with arms, which in

Maihingen were separate from the narrative scenes, may

have cost three quarters to one and one quarter guilders

per pair, we arrive at a total cost of six to seven guilders per

window.

The cycle for the Carmelite cloister is believed to have

continued through the adjacent St. Otilia Chapel, num­

bered over fifty scenes, and encompassed, according to

Sebald Schreyer, the Legend of Saint Anne, our dear Lady, and the suffering of Christ. These windows were unsur­

passed in their use of saturated and contrasting colors, as

well as in human drama and pathos. Of particular bril­

liance is the gesticulating bird-like devil in the Temptation of Christ (fig . 8), in which the glass makers experimented with

color gradations in the flashed glass, ranging from salmon

to red and from orange to yellow. In the image of the

Woman Taken in Adultery (fig. 9), figures are arranged in

pairs attired in colors complementary to each other. Here

only the infamous adulteress is arrayed in fashionable

finery displaying the related sins of lust and luxury, as the

upturned lower edge of her red mantle exposes an ermine

lining and a gown of brocade beneath. The man standing

behind the woman clutches her upper arm while he

appears to press his lower body up against the back of her

mantle, a posture displaying his unbridled lust, thus

betraying the fact that he is projecting his own sexual

promiscuity on the woman and evidencing the hypocrisy of

his faultfinding. As the artists show him bringing the

adulterous woman to Christ for judgment they also make

him the appropriate target of Christ's castigating response

in John 8, 7: He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. This man, clad monochromatically in

bright green from his doublet to his leggings, turns to en­

gage another man in conversation, who wears a strikingly

8. Workshop of Veit Hirsvogel the Elder, Stained Glass Panel , Temptation of Christ (house mark unknown), originally cloister of

Nuremberg Carmelite Monastery, today parish church in Grol3grundlach, c.1506/07. 680-690 x 510 mm .

ostentatious tunic, its stripes achieved with horizontal

threads of red glass flashed onto colorless glass. Of the

panels that survive, today in various locations in and near

Nuremberg, the scene of the Massacre of the Innocents (fig.

1 0) is the most violent and emotionally compelling. The

designer - probably Hans Baldung - in tandem with the

Hirsvogel workshop, plays with viewers' empathies: The

Carmelite spectator had to tilt his head back to train his

eyes on the panel above. His gaze was focalized by a tiny

naked in-fant, who, in the center at the lower edge likewise

throws his head back to stare upward, aghast as another

child is pierced through with a sword. Above, a mother

watches at close range as yet another baby boy is clutched

by the throat, his eyes trained on the sword that is about to

be driven through his small helpless body. Reading the

9 . Workshop of Veit Hirsvogel the Elder, Stained Glass Panel , Christ and the Woman Taken in Adultery (marshaled arms of Mangersreuth and Kotzler), originally cloister of Nuremberg Carmelite Monastery,

today parish church in Grol3grundlach, c. 1506/07. 705 x 505 mm.

Carmelite panels in the context of Katerina Lemmel's com­

plaints places the existing glass pictures within a fuller

intertextuality, one that makes us aware of intended patrons

reactions and audience participation; likewise reading

Katerina Lemmel's expressions of disappointment in the

context of these surviving windows we can imagine the

visual extremes in emotional arousal that she desired.

In spite of the fact that the information on the Maihingen

iconographic program is scant, somewhat cryptic, and at

times seemingly contradictory, we believe that the cycle can

be largely reconstructed and that its subject matter may also

shed more light on the disparity between expectations and

reception. Katerina tells her cousins not to decide if they will

participate in the commission without looking at the passion of Christ and the sorrows of the Virgin, words that at first

220

glance suggested a double program. After the panels are

delivered, she mentions the following completed panels:

Christ Being Crowned with Thorns, the Coronation of the Virgin, Christ Taking Leave of His Mother, the Last Supper, and finally the Seven Falls of Christ. On two other occa­

sions she mentions exclusively the Falls, and in one case

Christ Carrying His Cross, which probably refers to Christ's

fall as he collapses under the weight of the cross. We

believe that the cycle was focused on the Seven Falls, a

new theme that integrated scenes showing the Sorrows of

the Virgin with representations from the Passion of Christ by

presenting incidents of Christ being brutally tortured while

his mother must stand on the side and watch. This theme

was extended and the cycle complemented with additional

depictions from the Life of Christ and the Life of the Virgin,

including those that Katerina mentions, as well as undoubt­

edly an image of the Crucifixion. Only three further scenes

were necessary to bring the total to fifteen.

Developed as anecdotal embellishments on the passion

story, the Seven Falls of Christ added painfully gruesome

details to the Gospel narratives29 . Graphic descriptions of

the cruelest forms of sadism through which Christ was

humiliated and made to fall down, between the time he

was taken captive in the Garden of Gethsemane and his

death on the cross, occur with some frequency in late

medieval devotional. literature and in passion plays. How­

ever, the Falls specifically numbering seven and accom­

panied by the Virgin as onlooker surface very distinctly,

and perhaps exclusively, in the visual arts. They first appear

during the decades immediately preceding the glazing at

Maihingen. A single-leaf woodcut (fig. 11) today in Vienna

bearing the text Oh human being, see the seven falls of Christ and the seven sorrows of Mary {0 mensch betracht dy siben vel/ Cristi. Vnd dy siben hertzen laydt Marie) shows Christ falling seven times under the oppression of his

torturers, and his mother, accompanied by Saint John,

suffering sympathetically seven times as a very conspicuous

onlooker. The sword that pierces the Virgin's breast appears

as a material manifestation of Simeon's prophecy addres­

sed to Mary when he saw her infant son at the time of the

Presentation in Luke 2, 35: A sword shall pierce through thy own soul also. The seven scenes in the print are enclosed in

seven frames and accompanied by seven captions. An

eighth frame contains the Mass of Saint Gregory. The

221

10. Workshop of Veit Hirsvogel the Elder, Stained Glass Panel, Massacre of the Innocents (T ucher coat of arms), originally cloister

of Nuremberg Carmelite Monastery, today parish church in Wohrd (Nuremberg), c. 1508. 805-815 x 635 mm.

woodcut is believed to have originated in Nuremberg in the

1490s, and only the one impression, bearing five stenciled

colors, is known to exist30 . A series of woodcuts in Stock­

holm, compositionally very close to the scenes on the sheet

in Vienna, likewise shows the Seven Falls31 . In another

case, a single sheet has been cut apart, and the individual

pictures are in the Metropolitan Museum in New York.

Several other isolated examples of individual falls exist as

well. A small wood block that was destroyed in the Second

World War originated in the women's monastery in Sof­

lingen near Ulm, where it was used to print images of the

last of the Seven Falls, although in this case the Virgin was

not pictured32 .

Following compositional models close to these wood­

cuts, Baldung designed a series that was used along with

1 1 . Woodcut, Seven Falls of Christ, Vienna, Albertina, 1490-1500, 276 x 394 mm.

other illustrations in Ulrich Pinder's Speculum Passionis, published in Nuremberg in 1507 (fig. 12)33 . The original

intentions of Baldung's Seven Falls is unclear. The text of the

Speculum Passionis makes no reference to them, indicating

that it may have been the publisher who integrated them

with the text. As was characteristic of Baldung's enterprises,

they exude the extremes of human pathos and drama.

Through close-up views, tightly cropped scenes, and re­

duced figure groups, as well as exaggerated postures and

poses, they accentuate the power of the perpetrators and

express the human force behind inhuman violence. In all

likelihood it was Baldung's series or one close to it that the

Hirsvogel workshop was to show to potential donors in

Nuremberg.

The Birgittines must have been drawn to this icono­

graphy, since Saint Birgitta's writings not only accent similar

themes but even employ some of the same motifs. Accor­

ding to Book VII of the Revelationes, the saint received a

222

vision of the actual Crucifixion, which included perceiving

the hole into which Christ's cross was dropped as it was

erected on Golgatha34 . Dropping the cross into a hollow

cavity in the hillside comprised the last of the Seven Falls

(fig.11 ). Additionally, Saint Birgitta describes Christ's

suffering with great specificity, particularly the ways in

which blood flowed over his head and body, and she notes

the fact that he left bloody footprints when he walked35 .

Moreover, in Book VIII of her Revelationes, Saint Birgitta

stresses the importance of viewing suffering: She writes that

the Virgin told her that she was divinely receiving the words

of God in order to bring the Passion of Christ back to me­

mory36. In Book IV, the Virgin instructs the faithful to remove

impassiveness and apathy from their hearts through the

consideration of Christ's passion37. In Book I of her Revela­tiones, Birgitta uses the analogy of a person in a dance hall

full of merrymakers. Seeing a sorrowful friend entering the

hall, the person at once stops dancing in order to grieve

with the friend . So also Christians are to leave the transient

joys of the world in order sympathetically to experience the

suffering of the Virgin during the Passion of Christ. Thus

within Birgitta's vision her sorrowful seeing is channeled

through that of the Virgin, whose heart, the saint observes,

is repeatedly penetrated by a lance every time she must

view another episode in the torture of her son38 . It is the

very narrative of the Presentation story in Luke 2 that takes

on form for Birgitta in a vision in which she not only pictures

the Virgin and the aged Simeon, but his words also become

tangible and terrible as an ang~l precedes the Virgin at the

Presentation carrying a long, broad, bloody sword39 .

Writing of her experiences as she envisioned the Cruci­

fixion, Birgitta attests: then the new sorrow of the compas­sion of that most holy Mother so transfixed me that I felt, as it were, that a sharp sword of unbearable bitterness was piercing my heart4°. Parts of the Birgittine nuns' liturgy are

similarly focalized . The nuns are to identify with the Virgin

in her sorrows and joys as she watches the life and passion

of Christ unfold, and at close range. She becomes the

identificational link for the nuns who are the perpetual

beholders of the Passion41 .

The lived realities of the Maihingen windows began at

the moment when they were installed and integrated within

the monastic routine and ritual observances. These realities

that encompass far more than passive viewing resonate in

the official New Year's greeting that Abbess Ursula Gering

sent to Hans Imhoff in 1519, in which she voices her

gratitude for the donation:

My dear and honorable Lord, I and the entire convent thank you [ ... ] particularly that you have ornamented our cloister with beautiful images and glass, which is a heartfelt ioy for all of us. [ ... ]. I hope that you have made this investment because you want to have much intercession from us and our descendants . The devotional images will visit the sisters often, morning and evening, in the renewed memory of the bitter way that the Lord Jesus walked in his torment42.

Thus she has combined the practice of ongoing

memorials to the donors with the notion of the memoria passionis: sympathetic viewing and empathetic walking for

the good of the donors, who had made this all possible

through their »investment« in this spiritual economy43 .

223

As prescribed in Christ's direct revelations to Saint

Birgitta, every Friday the theme for the liturgy of the

Birgittine nuns was the Sorrow of Mary over the Suffering

and Crucifixion of Christ44 . On this day the nuns partici­

pated in appropriate ritual observances not only on their

platform high above the center of the nave of the church,

but also, and especially, in the women's cloister. Early in

her solicitations, Katerina Lemmel had referred to these

practices. The fourteenth-century Birgittine text known as the

Lucidarium, a German translation of which was kept by the

nuns of Maria Mai as a handbook, gives detailed instruc­

tions for the actions, thoughts, and comportment of the nuns

on Fridays: Every Friday the sisters shall process through their cloister together, and there they shall read the Seven Psalms, and one of the sacristans shall carry the cross ahead. But when they have come to the end they go into their choir again and kneeling read the litany. And when they are in procession they should take heed of themselves

12. Hans Baldung, Woodcut, Christ Falls on to the Cross (no. 6 in the Seven Falls of Chris~, before 1507, 94 x 72mm.

that they are disciplined, that each choir sister walks like the others, especially viewing in her heart the pitiful walking and the procession of our Lord Jesus Christ, which he undertook on Good Friday, carrying the heavy cross on his blessed bacfc45.

Thus we observe that while in their cloister the Birgittines

performed salvation history in order to experience it as

embodied. Like the Virgin, they watched and wept as Christ

was tormented . like Christ, they continued walking.

The observance of holidays in the cloister provided an

additional liturgical overlay. Two processionals from Maria

Mai, one dated 1499 preserved in Stockholm, the other

possibly dating somewhat earlier, now in Munich, contain

the texts and melodies for festive occasions. These comprise

mainly Marian and Christocentric feasts, but also include

the observances for a limited number of saints' days46 .

Again it is the Lucidarium, that delineates aspects of the

nuns performance:

On holidays and high feast days, when they perform the procession, two sisters shall walk first and next to each other; one shall carry incense and the other holy water. After these two, others shall follow with two torches, thereafter two, one carrying the cross the other the image of Our Lady, and thereafter two by two in all humility singing in their cloister that which they have before them in writing, with all their heart and all devotion praising God and Our Dear Lady with all the heavenly host. And then they shall remember with devotion the feast in the heavenly land full of glory and ioyful blessedness, which is for eternity. It is also to be known that the two sacristans shall assign and instruct those who in the procession carry the incense, holy water, candles, and cross, or image of Our Lady and also the relics, if they have any47 .

The strict elaborations of the Rule of Saint Birgitta pre­

scribed lengthy and complex rituals integrating a specified

arrangement of altars in an architecturally unique church

interior, with images and sacred objects used in the cloister.

Their complex office liturgy combined weekly and annual

cycles with many hours of daily chanting sung alternately

by the priests and the nuns in the church. The cloister -

unlike the church, which was a space shared by monastics

and lay, men and women, priests and nuns - belonged

exclusively to the nuns. In the cloister only internal

hierarchies obtained. The forty or fifty nuns filled this space

visually, acoustically, and materially. Here the nuns

themselves gave sanctuary and sanctity to the holy water,

holy images, and relics. They held the holy objects in their

hands, carried them, displayed and venerated them,

harbored and protected them.

What was the particular role of the windows? Certainly

they provided necessary light, together with the Latin chants

they added an ambience of the sacred to this narrow

walkway, they helped the nuns focus their thoughts as they

sang, and they aided in transforming the cloister into the

loci sancti for the enactment of Christ's passion. But

beyond this, the window panels were ever-present:

constantly they could hail viewers passing through this

important thoroughfare. They thus helped to constitute the

»hie et nunc«48 . Since silence was to be kept at all times

when no ritual was consuming this space, it was the

colored light of the windows, pale or bright, and their

narratives, gripping or abstract, that filled this space during

most of the daylight hours. Birgittine nuns were forbidden to

celebrate mass, to preach, and, according to the visitation

protocols, to give theological advice or provide interpreta­

tion. Nonetheless they celebrated Christ's sacrifice in their

cloister, and by initiating and administering the project,

choosing or approving the designs and the program, and

influencing its execution (or trying to), Katerina Lemme!

preached and expressed theological accents and interpre­

tations. Moreover, the windows provided a point of inter­

face with the outside world. At this juncture of inter­

dependence Katerina Lemme! could explain the specific

activities of the nuns on the inside. The nuns went about

their business on behalf of their benefactors »in the world«;

the windows were made by outside patrons; these donors

were present in the nuns' cloister through heraldry and

inscriptions. It was therefore the windows that moved

Katerina Lemme! to exclaim in a letter to Hans Imhoff in

February 1519, in spite of her previously voiced mis­

givings: »Only now does it look like a monastery, therefore

you shall not regret it«49 .

224

Notes

This article expands particular aspects of our monographic study: Katerina's Windows: Donation and Devotion, Art and Music as Heard and Seen Through the Writings of a Sixteenth-Century Nun, forthcoming in the series The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe, published by the Univer­sity of Chicago Press. See also: Carine Schleif, Forgotten Roles of Women as Donors: Sister Katerina lemmel's Negotiated Exchanges in the Care for the Here and the Hereafter, in: Care for the Here and the Hereafter: Me­moria, Art and Ritual in the Middle Ages, ed. Truus van Bueren, Turnhout 2005, pp. 137-154; Volker Schier, The Cantus Sororum: Nuns Singing for their Supper, Singing for Saffron, Singing for Salvation, in: Papers Read at the Twelfth Meeting of the International Musicological Study Group Cantus Planus, lillafured, 23-28 August 2004, ed. laszlo Dobszay, Bu­dapest 2006, in press. The letters are conserved in Nuremberg : Germa­nisches Nationalmuseum [GNM], lmhoff-Archiv, Fasc. 13, no. 12a. Ex­cerpts were edited by Johann Kamann, Briefe aus dem Brigittenkloster Maihingen (Maria = Mai) im Ries 1516-1522, in: Zs. fur Kulturgeschichte 6, 1899, pp. 249-287, 385-41 0; 7, 1900, pp. 170-199. Our forthco­ming study is based on a new transcription and contains a full English trans­lation of the letters and related documents along with narrative commen­tary and analysis. A German edition is also in preparation . Unless other­wise noted, all transcriptions and translations are those of the authors. We are grateful for funding provided by a Getty Collaborative Research Grant.

The recent conference volume, Der mittelalterliche Kreuzgang: Archi­tektur, Funktion und Programm, ed. Peter Klein, Regensburg 2004, omit­ted any consideration of cloisters in women's monasteries.

For discussions of donations of stained glass as expiation for sin or to further eternal salvation see Rudiger Becksmann, Fensterstiftungen und Stifterbilder in der deutschen Glasmalerei des Mittelalters, in: Vitrea dedi­cate, Berlin 1975, pp. 65-85; Carine Schleif, Donatio et Memoria. Stif­ter, Stiftungen und Motivationen an Beispielen aus der lorenzkirche in Nurnberg, Munich 1990; Richard Marks, Stained Glass in England Du­ring the Middle Ages, Toronto and Buffalo 1993, pp. 3-27; Madeline H. Caviness, Stained Glass Windows (Typologie des sources du Moyen Age occidental 76), Turnhout 1996, pp. 59-62, and the literature cited there.

22 January 1518, Nuremberg, GNM, lmhoff-Archiv Fasc. 13, no. 12a (23): Wen die swester mit dem heiltum und am Freitag mit den siben psam dar furgen und sunst teglich, wen sy den die wappen sechen, so peten sy den selben dester mer.

13 April 1518, Nuremberg, GNM, lmhoff-Archiv, Fasc. 13, no. 12a (25) : Es sols keiner von mein wegen allein tun sunder am fodersten Got dem Hem zu lob, und das ir ails guten teillhaftig wurt des guten das da­schicht, so mon all heilligtag die swester mit der processen mit lobgesang do wem umbgen, und teglich stetz dadurch mussen gen, das sy der leut gedencken der wapen sy do sechen. Mon hat vor nit darinen umb kunen gen, als es dan nach der rege/1 ist, in etlichen iam, das mon umr hat sor­gen mussen, es fall das aft haus ein. Und an den seiten, do der kreutzgang beleibt, do hat es kleine iemerliche lochlein zu fensterlein, das die swes­ter sagen, sy haben ie nit gesechen kunen, was sy in den puchem gesun­gen haben. Sy singen aus den puchem am umbgen . Do wolt wir diesel­ben Fenster ouch lassen machen wie die neuen. lch halt furwar, das eins fill gepetz und gutz teilhaftig wer, zu ebigen zeiten, zuma/1 wen in iedem Fenster ein zillige (Deutsches Worterbuch [DWB], ed . Jakob and Wilhelm

225

Grimm et al., leipzig 1854-1960, »zielig<<: mittelmaBig, klein) vigur uns­sers lieben hem leiden wer. Es soft nit fast kostlich oder scharpf (Bayeri­sches Worterbuch, ed. Johann Andreas Schmeller, Munich 2 1872-1877, »schark schon, prachtig, kostbar) sein, wen es neur andechtig und starck wer, das wer unss wo/1/ieber. Mon kon ietzund nichs molln. Es mussen die heilling und die guden als wuste (DWB: sundige, unmoralische) zusnide­nen (zerschnittene) kleider haben, das es nit fill andacht pring.

4 May 1518, Nuremberg, GNM, lmhoff-Archiv, Fasc. 13, no. 12a (26): Auch der Fenster halben kon ich dich nit wissen lossen, was eins kosten wirt, wan wir noch kein rom haben machen lassen, aber beslagen. lch halt, es wer eins und die figur lecht als fill kosten als deiner eins in dei­ner stuben.

Carine Schleif, The Proper Attitude Toward Death: Windowpanes De­signed for the House of Canon Sixtus Tucher, in: The Art Bulletin 69, 1987, pp. 587-603; Rudiger Becksmann, in: Deutsche Glasmalerei des Mittel­alters, vol. 1: Voraussetzungen, Entwicklungen, Zusammenhange, Berlin 1995, pp. 222-223, 246-247; Barbara Butts and lee Hendrix, Painting on light: Drawings and Stained Glass in the Age of Durer and Holbein, exhb. cat. J. Paul GeHy Museum / Saint louis Art Museum 2000, pp. 1 09-111.

28 May 1518, Nuremberg, GNM, lmhoff-Archiv, Fasc. 13, no. 12a (28): Lieber vetter, du hast mir [ ... ] geschrieben, du wolst gem wissen, wie fill ein Fenster kosten wur, darumb ich euch gepeten hob. So hob wirs nit kunen uberslagen pis ietzund. Hob wir ein steinmetzen der setzt uns stei­nen pfosten in die neuen Fenster und richt uns recht zu, das for nit gar gemacht ist gewest. So hob wir willen gehabt, die Fenster mit hultzen ra­men zu machen. So hat mir der swager Merten Tucher geschriben und meint ie, wir sui/ens nit tun . Wir sui/ens einlassen setzen wie sunst die kir­chenfenster und sol/en in iedem Fenster die zwey turlein, die aufgen, eys­sen remlien Jasen machen. Das wer doch a/beg und fault nit, wo regen oder sne doran slacht und sech ouch wercklicher. Und het mit Meister Feiten davon geret. Der het gesagt, wen ers sech, so wolt er wo/1 dazu raten und het gesagt, er wolt gem ein gonck heraus gen und saumt sich nit lang und fur auf ein kam herauf und kom. Und meint er het das gelas­werck als gewis zu machen zu den fygum . Und doer hort, das wir den zeug allen selber wolten darlegen und den gelasser herausen nemen, do gefie/1 es im nit am pesten und rit uns doch mit den fenstem und meint es wer das pest mit den eyssen turlein, und das wirs nit so gar klein mach­ten, als wir den im sin haben gehabt. Die allten, die mon noch mus so/let aushauen, das mein die werckleut all und mein ie, welche von mein freun­ten Fenster lassen machen, die lossen sy Iieber machen, das es ein ebige nutz sey am Ieicht und am gemecht (DWB, »gemacht«: Kunst, Kunsthand­werk) was darzu gehor und meint ietliche wen ein Fenster schon eins gul­dens mer kost, das sy recht und auf das nutzligst wem, es wer kein wefil­len und haben es ausgerechet, das ein Fenster un die fygur pey fier gulden kosten, das ich sorg hob, es wer euch lecht zufi/1 duncken. Wie wo/1 ir euch warlich ein grose gedechtnus damit macht, wen ich wolt euch des selben gutz wo/1 gunen vor fremden leuten, wen es meint Meister Veit nun, mon fond umer wo/1/eut, die lieb zu so/chen dingen heten, das sy in ein ge­dechtnus machten. Er persech sich aber, es wurs eur keiner abslagen.

Rudiger Becksmann and Ulf-Dietrich Korn, Die mittelalterlichen Glas­malereien in lUneburg und den Heideklostern (CVMA Deutschland Vll,2), Berlin 1992, pp. 29-7 4 .

10 Peter Hoegger, Glasmalerei im Kanton Aargau: Kloster Wettingen, Aarau 2002, pp. 240-259.

11 Barbara Butts and lee Hendrix, Introduction: Drawn on paper, Pain­ted on Glass, in : Painting on light (cf. n. 7), 2000, pp. 2-3.

12 28 May 1518, Nuremberg, GNM, Fasc. 13, no. 12a (28) : Lieber vet­fer, wen euch unsser Iieber Herr ein gotwe/1 mit lieb zusamen hilft, so pit die vetern von der wirdigen muter des cofentz und meinet wegen ob ir all afs gut willig wolf sein, und jeder eins machen lassen . So hof ich je, ir soft die fygur nit unterwegen (DWB, »unterwegen<<: sich einer Sache unterzie­hen, entschlieBen)/ossen zu betrachten das leiden unssers lieben herrn und das mitleiden der junckfrau Maria. Woes euch aber zu viii deucht, so wolf wirs er kleiner lassen machen, wie wolf die gros nichs ist gegen den fens­tern, die mon zu Nurmberg oder zu Pilreut hat in kreutzgengen. Worzu ir offers gewilligt seyt, das fast uns wissen. Zeig er dis prieff, ist der gelas­ser, der sy machen wirt. Der mag dir ouch wolf unterrricht dafon geben.

13 Nuremberg, GNM, lmhoff-Archiv, Fasc. 13, no. 12a (30).

14 Helene Burger, Nurnberger Totengelautbucher, vol. 3, St. Sebald 1517-1572, Neustadt a. d. Aisch 1972, no. 518.

15 Nuremberg, GNM, lmhoff-Archiv, Fasc. 13, no. 12a (29, 30) .

16 18 November 1518, Nuremberg, GNM, lmhoff-Archiv, Fasc. 13, no. 12a (32) : Essen die Ieben ein tei/1 so gar pleich und weisfarb, sechen nit schun. Ein tei/1 sen schun gelb. Wen er das gros wapen ouch schun gel/ gelb macht, und das das rot an den schiltlein geetzt sey, es pleibt sunst nit des es am weter stet. lch hob ims heur aber hie befolchen.

17 Nuremberg, GNM, lmhoff-Archiv, Fasc. 13, no. 12a (36).

18 16 February 1519, Nuremberg, GNM, lmhoff-Archiv, Fasc. 13, no. 12a (36) : Lieber vetter, wis das uns die Fenster ser vo/1 gefallen und die figur, ouch den das sy neur nit all senlich (DWB, »sehnlich« : heftig oder schmerzlich verlangend) gemacht sen. Dem kun wir nit tun, sy wolf es umer auf ein neue seltzama art machen. Mon molt jetzund unsserm lieben Hem neur rotz und grabs hor. lch halt, mon tu im ein kleine er darmit. Es haben schir all figur unsser Iieber Her grabs har. Du hastes fecht wolf gesechen. Es sitzt unsser Iieber Her da, do mon kront, wie ein Feister priester. Es soft in in eim roten mantel/ gemacht haben und plutig und verwunt. Er hetz wolf etlich figur gar viii senlicher gemacht. Und da er das kreutz tregt ist er ouch nichs senlich. lch pat Meister Veitten ser darum, da er hie war, er soltz neur senlich machen, wen ir im so fill geltz must dafur geben - ein ort und ein gulden - so het ers wolf fleissiger gemacht. Und wen wir heten gewist, das die Fenster die weiten hetten gewunen, so wolf wirs ein wenig grosser haben machen lassen . Wer lecht eben das gelt gewest.

19 For the history of the debates see Gottfried Frenzel, Entwurf und Aus­fuhrung in der Nurnberger Glasmalerei der Durerzeit, in: Zs. fur Kunstwis­senschaft 14, 1961, pp. 31-59; Hartmut Scholz, Entwurf und Ausfuhrung: Werkstattpraxis in der Nurnberger Glasmalerei der Durerzeit (CVMA Deutschland, Studien 1), Berlin 1991 , and Butts/Hendrix, in: Painting on light (cf. n. 7), 2000. The most complete documentation known on the processes of production for late Gothic windows in Germany is that pre­served in the account books for the parish church of Friedberg in Hessen. See Hermann Roth , Der Moler Henritz Heyl und die spatgotischen Glas­malereien in der Pfarrkirche zu Friedberg/Hessen in urkundlichen Nach­richten, in: Mitteilungen des Oberhessischen Geschichtsvereins NF 44, 1960, pp. 82-114, and for a more recent critical analysis: Daniel Hess, Die mittelalterlichen Glasmalereien in Frankfurt und im Rhein-Main-Gebiet (CVMA Deutschland 111,2), Berlin 1999, pp. 171-177, 346-352.

226

2° Caviness (cf. n. 3), 1996, p. 48 . Already in the fifteenth century acid was applied to flashed glass to remove the layer of colored glass in se­lected areas. See Hartmut Scholz, Daniel Hess, lvo Rauch, Norbert Keizer and Barbara Windelen, Beobachtungen zur Atztechnik an Oberfanggla­sern des 15. Jahrhunderts, in: Corpus Vitrearum Newsletter 46, 1999, pp. 19-23 . We wish to thank Gerda Hinkes, Madeline H. Caviness, Daniel Hess, Hartmut Scholz, Alyce Jordan, and many participants at the CVMA conference in 2004 for information that has helped us interpret the tech­nical aspects to which Katerina lemmel refers. For a detailed discussion of technique see Peter van Treeck, On the Artistic Technique of Glass Pain­ting in the Age of Durer and Holbein and Its Conservation Problems, in Painting on light (cf. n. 7), 2000, pp. 57-65.

21 Butts/Hendrix (cf. n. 7), 2000, pp. 162-165. A similar chromatic ran­ge is evident in panels believed to have been executed already in the 1490s for the cloister of the Nuremberg monastery of St. Egidien . See Butts/Hendrix (cf. n. 7), 2000, pp. 92-105, and the literature cited, as well as Barbara Butts, Albrecht Durer and the Modernization of Stained Glass, in: Master Drawings 41, 2003 , pp. 342- 346.

22 See the article by Hartmut Scholz in this volume (pp. 267-275) .

23 Virginia C. Raguin and Helen J. lakin, Stained Glass Before 1700 in the Collections of the Midwest States (CVMA USA 1), london and Turnhout 2001, pp. 18-19.

24 On the Augustinian convent at Pillenreuth see Martin Schieber, Die Geschichte des Klosters Pillenreuth, in : Mitteilungen des Vereins fur Ge­schic~te der Stadt Nurnberg 80, 1993, pp. 1-116.

25 Andreas Wurfel, Geschichte des ehemaligen Nonnen Klosters Pillen­reuth Maria Schiedung genannt [ ... ], Altdorf 1764, p. 67.

26 Rudolf Eckstein, Beichtbrief fur die Spender zur Erneuerung der Gebau­de des Klaraklosters, in : Caritas Pirckheimer 1467-1532, ed . lotte Kur­ras, Franz Machilek and Peter Strieder, exhb. cat. Nuremberg 1982, p. 78; Schleif/Schier, forthcoming (cf. n. 1), chapter 2.

27 On the windows and glazing of the Carmelite cloister see Frenzel (cf. n. 19), 1961, p. 51; Rainer Kahsnitz, in: Gothic and Renaissance Art in Nuremberg, exhb. cat. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, and GNM, Nuremberg, 1986, no. 17 4; Hartmut Scholz, Die mittelalterlichen Glasmalereien Mittelfranken und Nurnberg extra muros (CVMA Deutsch­land X, 1), Text, pp. 166-179, 199-211, 312-327; Anhange und Tafeln, pp. 539-552, 57 4-576 and further literature cited . Panels for the win­dows of the church of the Nuremberg Augustinian monastery must have exhibited a similar chromatic palette and design. From this cycle, the Last Supper (c. 1500) survives in the Victoria and Albert Museum in london. See Paul Williamson, Medieval and Renaissance Stained Glass in the Victoria and Albert Museum, london 2003, no. 75.

28 Albert Gumbel, Kirchliche Stiftungen Sebald Schreyers 1477-1517, in : Mitteilungen des Vereins fur Geschichte der Stadt Nurnberg 18, 1908, pp. 99-133 , esp. 122-123. We wish to thank Rudiger Becksmann for cal­ling the Schwabisch Gmund sources to our attention . See Rudiger Becks­mann, Die mittelalterlichen Glasmalereien in Schwaben von 1350 bis 1530 ohne Ulm (CVMA Deutschland 1,2), Berlin 1986, pp. 206-210, 372-373.

29 Rudolf Berliner, Die Cedronbrucke als Station des Passionsweges Christi, in : Festschrift fur Marie Andree-Eysn, Beitrage zur Volks- und Vol-

kerkunde 1928, pp. 73-82 !reprinted in: Rudolf Berliner I1886-1967L «The Freedom of Medieval Art« und andere Studien zum christlichen Bild, ed. Robert Suckale, Berlin 2003, pp. 23-27; Salome Zajadocz-Hasten­rath, Faile Christi, sieben, in: Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte VI, Munich 1973, cols. 1366-137 4; James H. Marrow, Passion Iconogra­phy in Northern European Art of the late Middle Ages and Early Renais­sance. A Study of the Transformation of Sacred Metaphor into Descripti­ve Narrative, Kortrijk 1979, pp. 89, 104-1 09; Michael Rudolph, lkono­graphische Probleme des sogenannten Christgartner Altars von Hans Schaufelein, unpublished master's thesis University Munich 1981, pp. 12-28; Christof Metzger, Der Christgartner Altar des Hans Schaufelin - Sein Bildprogramm und seine Rekonstruktion jAnalecta Cartusiana 135L Salz­burg 1996, pp. 33-38; Kurt Locher, Germanisches Nationalmuseum. Die Gemalde des 16. Jahrhunderts, Stuttgart 1997, pp. 430-34; Angelica Dulberg, Die "sieben Faile Christi" . Eine seltene Darstellung im Kreuzgang des Klosters St. Marienstern, in: 750 Jahre Kloster Marienstern, ed. Karl­heinz Blaschke, Heinrich Magirius et al., Halle/Saale 1998, pp. 260-269; Christof Metzger, Hans Schaufelin als Moler, Berlin 2002, pp. 124-126, 372-387.

3° Christoph Gottlieb von Murr, Journal zur Kunstgeschichte und zur all­gemeinen litteratur 2, 1776, p. 127; Heinrich Rettinger jed.L Einzei-Form­schnitte des funfzehnten Jahrhunderts aus der Erzherzoglichen Kunstsamm­lung Albertina in Wien, Strasbourg 1911, p. 6; Wilhelm l. Schreiber, Handbuch der Holz- und Metallschnitte des XV. Jahrhunderts, vol. I, leip­zig 1926, no. 641 m; Richard S. Field jed.L The Illustrated Bartsch, vol. 162, New York 1989, p. 238 .

31 Von Murr jcf. n. 30L 1776, pp. 126-27; Schreiber jcf. n. 30L 1926, nos. 642, 644, 646, 652, 659, 685; The Illustrated Bartsch, vol. 162 jcf. n. 30L pp. 239, 240, 242, 247, 249, 253, 270.

32 Schreiber jcf. n. 30L 1926, nos. 645, 647, 653, 655, 683, 684; The Illustrated Bartsch, vol. 162jcf. n. 30L pp.241, 243, 248, 250, 268, 269.

33 Matthias Mende jed .L Hans Baldung Grien . Das graphische Werk, Unterschneidheim 1978, nos. 291-296.

34 Revelaciones sanctae Birgitte, Book VII, chapter 15, ed. Birger Bergh, Uppsala 2002. This and all passages that follow from the Revelaciones are cited according to the online Corpus Reuelacionum sonde Birgitte ~ www.ra.se/ra/diplomatariet/CRB/index.htm).

35 Revelaciones sanctae Birgitte, Book I, chapter 1 0, 19, ed. Cari-Gus­taf Undhagen, Uppsala 1977.

36 Revelaciones sanctae Birgitte, Book VIII, chapter 47, 9, ed. Hans Aili, Uppsala 2002 .

37 Revelaciones sanctae Birgitte, Book IV, chapter 101, 1-5, ed. Hans Aili, Uppsala 1992.

38 Revelaciones sanctae Birgitte, Book I, chapter 27, 1-4 jcf. n. 35) .

39 Revelaciones sanctae Birgitte, Book VII, chapter 2 jcf. n. 34) .

40 Revelaciones sanctae Birgitte, Book VII, chapter 15; translated by Al­bert Ryle Kezel in : Birgitta of Sweden: life and Selected Revelations, ed. Marguerite Tjader Harris, New York and Mahwah 1990, p. 189.

41 Mieke Bal introduces the term »focalization« to explain ways in which characters are linked in certain kinds of visual and literary narratives. See Narratology, Introduction to the Theory of Narrative, Toronto 1985.

42 11 January 1519, Nuremberg, GNM, lmhoff-Archiv, Fasc . 13, no. 12b 14): Mein erber Iieber her, ich und der gancz convent dancken euch [ ... ] in sunderheit, daz ir unsern kreuczgangk also mit den schonen figu­ren und glesser gezirt habt, daz uns aile von herczen erfreud. [ ... ]. lch hof, ir habt das wof angelegt, wan ir won uns und unsn nachkomen vii furpit­ter werdt haben. Die andechtig figuren werden dy schwester morgens und abens oft heymsuchen in widergedechtnus der schmerczlichen gen, die der Her lhesus in seiner martter gangen ist.

43 On the performance of memory see Mary J. Carruthers, The Book of Memory. A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture, Cambridge 1990. Equally important are her notions of locational memory that she develops in: The Craft of Thought: Meditation, Rhetoric, and the Making of Images, 400-1200, Cambridge 1998.

44 lennart Hollman jed.L Den heliga Birgittas revelaciones extravagan­tes, Uppsala 1956, p. 122: Qua/iter sexta feria debent sorores circuire ambitus suos insimullegendo septem psalmos, qui bus finitis intrabunt chor­um suum et flexis genibus legant letanias {Every Friday the sisters must pro­cess and read the Seven Psalms. After they have finished they must enter the choir and kneeling read the litanies) .

45 Augsburg, Universitatsbibliothek, Ill 1. 4° 40, fol. 112: Aile Freytag sol­len dye schwester yr creuczgeng umbgen mit einander und do lessen sy­ben psalm und eine von den sacristen sol das creucz vor in tragen. Wen aber dye zum end kumen sein, so gen sy wyder in yren kor und lessen knyend dye letaney. Und wen sy sein yn der processen so mercken sye eben auff sich selbs, das sye sich czuchtigleichen halten und itlicher kor geleych dem andern gee, betrachtende sunderlich yn irem herczen den iemerlichen ganck und processen unsers hem ihs xpi den er thet an dem Karfreytag tragen das schwer creucz auff seinem gebenedeiten ruck.

46 On Stockholm, Kunigl. Biblioteket, cod. A 92a, see lsak Colijn, En bir­gitta-handskrift fran klostret Maria Maihingen, in: Acta Biblioteca Regiae Universitatis Upsaliensis 5, 1945, pp. 8-14; Michel Huglo, les Manuscrits du Processional, vol. 2: France a Afrique du Sud, Munich 2004, p. 449: On Munich, Universitatsbibliothek, 4° Cod . Ms. 176, see Dietmar von Huebner, Zu Prozessionen und Gesdngen eines Processionale des 15. Jahrhunderts aus dem Birgittenorden, in: Festschrift Altomunster 1973, ed. Toni Grad, Aichach 1973, pp. 82-113; Huglo jop. cit.L 2004, vol. 2, p. 529. An index was added in 1499 in Altomunster jfol. 69v).

47 Augsburg, Universitatsbibliothek, Ill 1. 4° 40, fol. 112v-113: An hoch­zeytlichen tagen und grossen vesten, wen sye processen thon, sol/en zwue schwester voran gen bey einander; dye eine trag weyrach, dye onder geweycht wasser. Noch den selben sol/en aber zwue onder gen mit zwey­en fackeln . Darnach gen aber zwu und trag dye ein dz creucz, dye on­der unser frawenpild, und nach dem ye zwu und zwu mit einander in of­fer dimiitigkeyt singen yn iren creuczgenen was in auff geseczt ist, Got und Unser Lieben Frawen mit allen hymlischen her loben von ganczen herczen und alfer andact. Und dan sol/en sye gedencken andechtiglich an dye hochczeyt des hymlischen Iandes vof glorie unnd frolockender seligkeyt und ewiglich weren ist. Es ist ouch zu wissen, dz dye zwu sacristen sol­len dye schwester bestellen und anrychten, sam dye den weyrach, weich­wasser, kerczen und creucz, unser frawenpild tragen sol/en in der proces­sen und ouch dye dz hey/tum tragen, ob sye des ichtes haben.

48 Charles C. Flanigan, Moving Subject: Medieval liturgical Processions in Semiotic and Cultural Perspective, in: Moving Subjects: Processional Per-

227

formance in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, ed. Kathleen Ashley and Wim Husken, Amsterdam and Atlanta 2001, pp. 35-52 .

49 16 February 1519, Nuremberg, GNM, lmhoff-Archiv, Fasc. 13, no. 12a (36): Es sich erst ein kloster geleich, darum last euchs nit reuen!

Zusammenfassung

lm Alter von H.infzig Jahren trot die verwitwete Nurnberger

Patrizierin Katerina Lemme! geb. Imhoff in das Birgittenklo­

ster Maria Mai im Ries ein. In den Jahren zwischen 1516

und 1522 schrieb Lemme! in kurzen Abstanden etwa sech­

zig Briefe an ihren Cousin Hans V. Imhoff nach Nurnberg.

lhr betrachtliches Vermogen setzte Lemme! fur den teilwei­

sen Neubau der Konventsgebaude der Nonnen ein,

darunter den Kreuzgang. Lemme! initiierte die Verglasung

des Kreuzganges mit Farbfenstern aus der Hirsvogel Werk­

statt durch Einzelstiftungen von Ehepaaren aus ihrem Nurn­

berger Familienkreis .

lhre Schriften erlauben bisher nicht gekannte Einblicke in

das spatmittelalterliche Stiftungswesen und in die verschie­

denen Aspekte der Planung, Ausfuhrung und Rezeption von

Glasfenstern. Deutlich wird der kommunikative ProzeB

zwischen Nutzerinnen, Stiftern bzw. Stifterinnen, Entwerfen­

den und AusH.ihrenden, in dem Lemme! stets die Kontrolle

zu behalten versucht. Sehen und Singen, Rezeption und

(Re)produktion verbinden sich in den Fenstern auf mehreren

Ebenen . lhre Integration in die Rituale, aber ouch in den

Alltag der Nonnen werden in diesen Texten anschaulich.

Summary

The widowed Nuremberg patrician Katerina Lemme!, nee

Imhoff, entered the Birgittine Monastery of Maria Mai in

Ries at the age of fifty. Between 1516 and 1522, she wrote

approximately sixty letters to her cousin Hans V Imhoff in

Nuremberg. From this correspondence and other docu­

ments, we can conclude that she used her considerable

wealth to build and rebuild the nuns' cloister and other

convent buildings. Lemme! initiated the glazing of the

cloister with stained glass executed in the Hirsvogel work­

shop and solicited individual donations from family

members in Nuremberg for this project.

228

Photographic references

Autor: 1; Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Ni.irnberg : 2-5; CVMA Deutschland, Freiburg i. Br.: 6-1 0; Albertina, Wien : 11; Repro: 12 .

In her writings, she gives insight into the medieval

donation system enabling us to study various aspects of the

planning, production, and reception of stained glass.

Communication processes between recipients and donors,

designers and producers, in which Lemme! always strives to

maintain control, become transparent. In the way the

windows were used, seeing and singing, reception and

(re)production were interwoven on many levels. The texts

give evidence of the integration of the windows not only

within rituals, but also as part of the daily lives of the nuns.

Resume

A l'age de cinquante ans, Katerina Lemme!, nee Imhoff,

veuve d'un aristocrate de Nuremberg, entre au couvent des

Sceurs de Ste Brigitte de Maria Mai (Maihingen) im Ries.

Entre 1516 et 1522 entretint une correspondance intense

de quelque soixante lettres avec son cousin Hans V Imhoff

de Nuremberg. Mme Lemme! investit son immense fortune

dans une partie des nouveaux batiments du couvent, entre

autres le cloltre. C' est elle qui a ete l'initiatrice de I' em­

bellissement du cloltre par vitraux realises par I' atelier

Hirsvogel et finances par les donations privees de quelque

couples de Nuremberg appartement a sa famille.

Ses ecrits permettent de decouvrir certains aspects

jusqu'ici inconnus du systeme de Ia donation a Ia fin du

Moyen-Age, ainsi que les differentes facettes de Ia

planification, de Ia realisation et de Ia reception des

vitraux. lis mettent en evidence Ia communication constante

existant entre les clientes, les donateurs, les concepteurs et

les realisateurs, communication que Mme Lemme! essaie

constamment d'avoir sous son controle. Vision et chant,

reception et (re)production se marient dans les verrieres a plusieurs niveaux. Et ces textes revelent leur integration

dans les rituels, mais aussi dans Ia vie quotidienne des

nonnes.