‘St Peter in Volders’ and related base metal figurines resembling the famous statue in the...

Post-Medieval Archaeology 47/2 (2013), 323–358

© Society for Post-Medieval Archaeology 2013 DOI: 10.1179/0079423613Z.00000000038

323

‘St Peter in Volders’ and related base metal fi gurines resembling the famous statue in the Vatican Basilica

By PATRICK CASSITTI, DANIEL BERGER and BENJAMIN FOURLAS

SUMMARY: The reappraisal of an old fi nd from Volders near Innsbruck, Austria, prompted new research on a group of base-metal statuettes that are miniature copies of the famous bronze statue of St Peter in the Vatican Basilica in Rome. Their age has been the subject of debate. This paper examined several examples of such statuettes to solve the issue with the help of archaeometric anal-ysis. The analysis of the manufacturing technique and alloy composition provided important clues on the dating of the statuettes and allowed the historical interpretation of the group as a whole.

INTRODUCTION

In 2011 a community archaeology project carried out in the village of Volders in Tyrol, Austria, pro-vided the opportunity to investigate a plot of land near the centre of the village.1 Today this plot is used for cultivation, but in the past it formed the grounds of the castle of Schönwerth, which was completely demolished in 1804. Past archaeologi-cal fi nds made within the enclosed plot were reap-praised during the project; among these was a small copper-alloy statuette of St Peter enthroned, which had been found by a metal detectorist in 1995 and published by Harald Stadler in 2000 (Fig. 1).2 This object is clearly a crude but faithful copy of the famous bronze statue in the Vatican Basilica in Rome attributed to Arnolfo di Cambio (c. 1240–1300/10) (Fig. 2).3 The Roman bronze statue rests on a marble throne that, as has been demonstrated by Rudolf Berliner through documentary and pictorial evidence, was erected in 1756/57 and is a reinterpretation of a 15th-century precursor.4

Miniature statues of St Peter are still being produced and sold in Rome today, usually made from plastic. While there is both medieval and post-medieval documentary evidence for the man-ufacture and sale of pilgrims’ badges in Rome, we could fi nd no surviving primary documents relating to miniature statues of St Peter prior to the

19th century. The fi rst records date to when Pius IX (1846–78) expanded an indulgence connected to kissing the feet of the large bronze statue of St Peter to ‘little statues’ of the apostle blessed by the Pope in 1877.5 Paola Refi ce has described documents of the 15th century that attest to the Chapter of the Vatican Basilica holding the monopoly on production and sale of miniatures of the statue of St Peter, but she unfortunately does not cite the documents in question.6 What is certain is that in 1199 Pope Innocent III (1198–1216) granted the Chapter the monopoly on production and sale of pilgrimage badges made from lead or tin and bearing the double image of St Peter and St Paul. The canons were allowed to let others cast the badges on their behalf as long as they were answerable to them.7 At some point this privilege was abandoned, since it no longer exists today.8 This was probably as a consequence of the Italian annexation of the Vatican State in 1870, when the production sites came to be outside the jurisdiction of the church.

Late medieval and early modern travel ac-counts exist listing the holy relics and indulgence s to be found in the city of Rome, but they do not mention pilgrim souvenirs or even badges.9 In 1951 Pio Pecchiai published a number of legal documents from the 14th through 16th centuries that regulated the concessions for the erection of

324 PATRICK CASSITTI ET AL.

FIG. 1

Miniature statue of St Peter from Volders (photograph, P. Cassitti).

vendors’ stalls in front of the steps of the Vatican Basilica. The documents mention sellers of painted images, paternosters, cotton cloth and fi gs, and also tradesmen such as goldsmiths, peddlers, sell-ers of hay, booksellers, scribes, healers and tooth pullers, shoemakers, food sellers, oil sellers, money changers, sellers of pork fat, sellers of iron objects, sellers of candles, sellers of ‘cypress handles’ and generic shopkeepers.10 But no mention is made of pilgrim badges and other souvenirs. These items were either sold by the generic shops or peddlers together with other products, or the monopoly on the production of pilgrims badges granted to the Chapter of the Vatican Basilica by Innocent III in 1199 was so effective that no pilgrim badges were being sold in the stalls outside the Basilica.

The question therefore arises as to whether miniature replicas of the Statue of St Peter were

produced before the 19th century. Apart from the 1199 monopoly, medieval and early modern written sources seem to ignore the topic of pilgrim badges and souvenirs, but an argument of non-existence based on documentary omission would be a very weak one. Studies of a number of fi gu-rines comparable to the Volders St Peter have been published over the last decade and it seems reason-able to examine this broader group as a whole from an archaeological perspective. This enterprise grew beyond the scope of the original community project and led to a separate avenue of study. In the course of the new investigation, three further unpublished fi nds from Germany were brought to our attention, and were also included in the analysis.

The statuettes considered in this study have been divided into two groups, labelled A and B, in

ST PETER IN VOLDERS 325

FIG. 2

Statue of St Peter in the Vatican Basilica in Rome, attributed to Arnolfo di Cambio (photograph, Wikimedia commons, <http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Rome_basilica_st_peter_011c.jpg> [accessed 17 July 2012], public domain).

the following catalogue. The statuettes in Group A are made of copper alloys, their right arm has been cast separately and inserted into the main body, and on the back of the head they possess a hole into which the attachment for the halo was inserted. They were once attached to a seat or throne which in all cases is now lost. The statuettes of Group B are made of white metal and have been cast in one piece together with their seat. They possess no separate elements.

CATALOGUE OF THE STATUETTES

GROUP A

No. A1, Charsadda, Fig. 3. Size: unknown; Weight: unknown; Site: Charsadda (Pakistan), possibly a surface fi nd;11 Current location: unknown;

Description: throne separately made, missing; right arm separately made and inserted into the body after casting. Hair and beard punched with oval and half-moon shaped punches, eyes chased. Facial features engraved; Bibliography: Rowland 1943, 65–70, fi gs 1–2.

No. A2, Volders, Fig. 1. Size: height 47mm, width 20mm; Weight: 36.0g; Site: Volders, Tyrol (Austri a), former castle grounds of Schönwerth, near the village centre, surface fi nd; Current location: private ownership; Description: throne separately made, missing; right arm separately made and inserted into the body after casting. A cylindrical protrusion on the back of the head probably served to attach a separately manufactured halo. Hair and beard punched with oval and half-moon shaped punches, eyes chased; Bibliography: Stadler 2000; Cassitti 2011.


FIG. 3

Miniature statue of St Peter from Charsadda, Pakistan. Archaeological Survey of India, British Library Photo 1006/1 (822) and 1006/2 (823) (reproduced by courtesy of the British Library).

No. A3, Münster, Fig. 4. Size: height 83mm, width 30mm; Weight: 84.5g; Site: supposedly eastern Mediterranean region, archaeological fi nd? Cur-rent location: Münster (Germany), Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität, Archäologisches Museum, Inv. 3030; Description: throne separately made, missing, supposedly fi xed with a now-broken iron pin on the back of the fi gurine just under its shoulders. Right arm separately made and inserted into the body after casting. A hole in the back of the head with a diameter of 0.5cm shows traces of threading, presumably for a screw used as attachment for a separately manufactured halo. Hair chased or punched with half-moon and round punches, beard punched with oval punches, facial features chased. Before cleaning and restoration in 2005 the fi gurine had a dark green patina with some earth encrustation on it. The hole on the underside of the left foot was caused by sampling in 2005; Bibliography: Fourlas 2005/2006, 141–68.

No. A4, Antakya/Adana, Fig. 5. Size: unknown; Weight: unknown; Site: supposedly Antakya or Adana (Turkey), photographed in the local archaeological museum by the German archaeolo-gist Ludwig Budde (1913–2007) in the 1950s; Current location: unknown;12 Description: throne separately made, missing; right arm separately made and inserted into the body after casting. Hair chased and punched with half-moon and round punches, beard chased and punched with round punches, facial features chased. According to Ludwig Budde the material was of ‘dark bronze’; Bibliography: Fourlas 2005, 69 pl. 16, 2; Fourlas 2006, 83, fi g. 4; Fourlas 2005/06, esp. 150–1, pl. 43, 3.

No. A5, Anghiari, Fig. 6. Size: height 48mm, width 17mm; Weight: unknown; Site: fi eld near Anghiari, Tuscany (Italy), surface fi nd; Current location: Museo delle Memorie e del Paesaggio nella Terra di Anghiari, Inv. s.i./sch. dep. pdb 06/07;


FIG. 4

Miniature statue of St Peter in the Museum of the Wilhelms-Universität in Münster (photograph, U. Gericks, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität, Archäologisches Museum).


FIG. 5

Miniature statue of St Peter from SE Turkey (Antakya or Adana) (photograph, W. Budde, by courtesy of

B. Fourlas).

Description: throne separately made, missing; right arm separately made and inserted into the body after casting. Hair chased and punched with oval punches, beard punched with oval punches, facial features chased. A hole in the back of the head with a diameter of 3mm shows traces of threading, presumably for a screw used as attachment for a separately manufactured halo; Bibliography: Refi ce 2009.

No. A6, Anghiari, Fig. 6. Size: height 48mm, width 18mm; Weight unknown; Site: fi eld near Anghiari, Tuscany (Italy), surface fi nd; Current location: Museo delle Memorie e del Paesaggio nella Terra di Anghiari, Inv. s.i./sch. dep. pdb 05/07; Descrip-tion: throne separately made, missing; right arm separately made, missing. Surface too corroded to discern method of shaping the head. A hole in the back of the head with a diameter of 3mm shows traces of threading, presumably for a screw used as attachment for a separately manufactured halo; Bibliography: Refi ce 2009.

No. A7, Augsburg, Fig. 7. Size: height 47mm, width 18mm; Weight 32.2g; Site: fi eld near Augsburg, Germany. According to the owner the fi nd was made in 10–15km distance from the city in the late 1960s or early 1970s;13 Current location: private ownership; Description: throne separately made and missing, presumably fi xed with an iron pin to the back of the fi gurine just under its shoulders. Its heavily corroded remnants adhere to the upper part of the hollow back. Right arm separately made, missing. Hair and beard engraved, chased and punched with round punches, eyes and nostrils punched with round punches. In the back of the head a screw (4mm length, 2mm diameter) is inserted; Bibliography: unpublished.

GROUP B

No. B1, Maccarese, Fig. 8. Size: approx. height 50mm, approx. width 25mm; Weight unknown; Site: Maccarese, commune of Fiumicino near Rome, from the riverbed of the Tiber; Current location: private ownership; Description: one-piece hollow cast of the seated fi gure of St Peter with throne. Hair, beard and facial features roughly made, probably chased. The lower part of the front has disappeared; Bibliography: Guarducci 1991, 19–20, fi gs 9–10; Fourlas 2005/06, 147 with note 32 pl. 45:4.

No. B2, Cologne, Fig. 9. Size: height 46mm, width 23mm; Weight 90.6g; Site: in the vicinity of the city of Cologne (Germany), surface fi nd; Current loca-tion: private ownership; Description: one-piece hollow cast of the seated fi gure of St Peter with throne. Hair, beard and facial features roughly made, probably chased. The statuette is fi lled with lead alloy. A thick protrusion (4–5mm diameter) on the top of the head is probably what remains of the halo, which was possibly similar to that of No. B1; Bibliography: unpublished.


TECHNOLOGICAL COMPARISON OF THE STATUETTES

GROUP A

Group A comprises seven statuettes. Since the stat-uette from Charsadda No. A1 and Antakya/Adan a No. A4 are only known through photographs, which are not to scale, their size can only be esti-mated. Their general proportions, however, match those of the statuettes from Volders (No. A2) and Anghiari (Nos A5–6) very closely, so they are likel y of similar size. All statuettes in this group have a separately cast right arm which has been inserted into a socket in the main body. The statuettes from Volders (No. A2), Münster (No. A3), Anghiari (Nos A5–6) and Augsburg (No. A7) all have a hole in the back of the head into which, it is presumed, an attachment for a separate halo was screwed. Where this attachment has fallen out (Nos A3, A5–6) the threading of the hole can clearly be seen. The photographs of the Charsadda and Antakya/Adana statuettes do not show the back of the head, but because of the other similarities it is likely they also possessed this feature.

The statuettes from Charsadda (No. A1), Volders (No. A2), Anghiari (Nos A5–6) and Augs-burg (No. A7) have a very similar body in all de-tails and are referred to as ‘Charsadda type’. The body of the statuette from Antakya/Adana No. 4, while of similar shape, shows some differences in the number and position of the folds of the pallium (‘Antakya type’), while the statuette from Münster No. A3 is larger and of higher quality than the other statuettes (‘Münster type’).

While they possess very similar bodies, the Charsadda type statuettes show marked difference s in the details of the head (Fig. 10). The hair of the statuettes from Charsadda (No. A1) and Volders (No. A2) has been modelled using half-moon and oval shaped punches, and the eyes have been chased. The hair and facial features of one of the statuettes from Anghiari (No. A5) were shaped by round punches and chasing. The hair, beard and facial features of the statuette from Augsburg (No. A7) were applied with round punches and engraved. The bodies seem to indicate a common provenance from one workshop, but the details of the facial features and the hair show the hand of different artisans.

GROUP B

The statuettes of Group B are made of white metal and have been cast in one piece together with their throne. Statuette No. B1 was recovered from the bed of the river Tiber close to Rome,14 while No. B2 is a surface fi nd from a fi eld near Cologne. No. B1 is only known through a photograph published by Margherita Guarducci, which does not provide a scale, and the lower part is missing. A direct comparison with No. B2 is diffi cult. All the details visible in the photograph of No. B1 match those observed on No. B2, so it is possible that they are objects of the same type and size. The element protruding from the top of the head of No. B2 is probably what remains of the halo, since No. B1 demonstrates that it was cast together with the rest of the fi gure and not attached as in Group A. The

FIG. 6

Miniature statuettes of St Peter from Anghiari. Left: No. A5, right: No. A6 (photograph, G. Mazzi).


FIG. 7

Miniature statue of St Peter from Augsburg (photograph, V. Iserhardt, RGZM Mainz).

throne of the statuettes of this group provides a terminus post quem for their manufacture, since it closely resembles the present seat of the bronze statue in the Vatican, which was completed in 1756.15

MINIATURE STATUES OF ST PETER: THE PROBLEM OF DATING AND

INTERPRETATION

Research on this topic goes back as far as 1943, when the British archaeologist Benjamin Rowland

Jr. published two photographs of a miniature statue of St Peter taken by the Archaeological Survey of India in 1910 (No. A1; Fig. 3).16 Rowlan d found the images by chance while carrying out research in the collection of photographs of the ‘Library of the India Offi ce’, now part of the British Library. The statuette itself was already lost in Rowland’s day, and the only available information was the provenance from Charsadda, the ancient Peukelaotis or Pushkalavati, in north-western Pakistan. Rowland judged the statuette ‘a crude copy in miniature of the bronze statue that is the goal of the faithful at St Peter’s in Rome’.17 At


the time the age of the Vatican statue of St Peter’s was still a topic of scholarly debate, and a number of experts attributed it to the late antique period.18 Based on stylistic considerations, the technical similarity to a small and probably late antique statuette found in 1723 in Strasbourg, France, and the unclear dating of the Roman statue of St Peter’s, Rowland suggested a late antique date for the Charsadda statuette and excluded the possibil-ity of it being a modern ex-voto (votive offering). He assumed that it found its way to Charsadda just before the invasion of Northern India by the Hephtalites in the 5th to 6th centuries.19

In 1954 Mario Bussagli developed this thesis further but suggested that the statuette may have found its way to India during the 6th or the fi rst half of the 7th century at the latest. Bussagli was working on the assumption that Charsadda was deserted by the 10th century and that traffi c with the Mediterranean was cut off by the Muslim con-quest of the Sassanid Empire in the 7th century.20

The Charsadda statuette was frequently men-tioned in the controversial debate on the dating of the monumental bronze statue of St Peter in the Vatican Basilica. It has been cited as evidence for a late antique date of the Roman statue21 or for the existence of a late antique predecessor.22 The dispute was fi nally settled in 1990 through thermo-luminescence analysis of the clay core of the statue, which provided a date between AD 1265 and 1378. This confi rmed the attribution to the sculptor Arnolfo di Cambio, which was favoured by many scholars.23 These results raised doubts on the late antique dating of the Charsadda statuette No. A1.24

The statuette from Volders (No. A2; Fig. 1) was published on in 2000 in a preliminary report by Harald Stadler.25 He erroneously identifi ed the material as cast iron, probably due to iron corrosion residues on the back of the statuette, and suggested a date in the 16th or 17th century. He was not aware of the existence of No. A1.

In 2005 Benjamin Fourlas contributed to the debate by describing two previously unknown statuettes of uncertain provenance (Nos A3–A4; Figs 4, 5).26 No. A3 had been part of a private col-lection before being donated to the Archaeological Museum of the University of Münster, and was purportedly purchased in the eastern Mediterra-nean. No. A4 was photographed in the 1950s in the Archaeological Museum in Adana/Antakya in south-east Turkey. Based on stylistic, icono-graphic, technical and historical considerations Fourlas proposed a date for the whole group between the 5th and 6th century. Due to discrepan-cies in hairstyle, seating position and attire between Nos A1, A3–A4 and the monumental statue he con-cluded that the fi gurines were not based directly on the medieval statue, but on a late antique predeces-sor whose existence had already been assumed by other scholars. The composition of the copper alloy of No. A3, determined in 2005 by atomic absorption spectroscopy at the Rathgen Forschun-gslabor in Berlin,27 did not contradict this hypoth-esis (see Table 1). Francesco Maria Torrigio’s (1580–1650) reference to a manuscript in the archive of St Peter‘s in Rome attributing the monumental Vatican statue to Pope Leo I (440–61) seemed to further support this conclusion.28 Four-las was not aware of the existence of No. A2, which had been published on in a local journal.

FIG. 8

Miniature statue of St. Peter recovered from the bed of the Tiber at its estuary near the village of Maccarese,

commune of Fiumicino (from Guarducci 1991, fig. 9, reproduced by courtesy of Istituto

Poligrafico dello Stato).


In 2009 Paola Refi ce published on two statu-ettes (Nos A5–A6; Fig. 6) found near Anghiari in Tuscany (Italy).29 Refi ce classifi ed the objects as pilgrimage souvenirs produced under the auspices of the Chapter of the Basilica of St Peter’s in Rome and suggested a date sometime between the 15th and 18th century.30 She included the Charsadda statuette No. A1 in her analysis, but was not aware of Nos A2–A4.

In 2012 Patrick Cassitti published the prelimi-nary results of his research on the Volders St Peter (No. A2; Fig. 1).31 He discussed the fi gurine togethe r with No. A1–A6 and discussed the problem of

dating of the whole group. Cassitti agreed with Refi ce’s interpretation of the group as post-medieval pilgrimage souvenirs of Roman origin, but suggested a more recent date of manufacture in the 18th or 19th century. This was a period when the Vatican strongly promoted the veneration of the monumental statue of St Peter as a symbol of papal supremacy. He could not exclude a greater age for the statuettes, however, as he lacked defi nitive evidence to support his dating.

Margherita Guarducci had previously pub-lished (in 1991) a description of a miniature statu-ette of St Peter that differs in many aspects from

FIG. 9

Miniature statue of St Peter from Cologne (photograph, P. Cassitti).


the ones discussed above (No. B1; Fig. 8). It was recovered from the estuary of the river Tiber near the village of Maccarese, which is part of the commune of Fiumicino. Unlike the previously discussed objects the statuette from Maccarese consists of a tin alloy and had been cast in one piece together with the throne. Guarducci referred to a metallographic analysis that indicated an age for the object of two or three centuries. She did not specify the methods used in this analysis or the details of the results.32

While preparing the present study, two previ-ously unknown statuettes from Augsburg and Cologne in Germany, nos A7 and B2 (Figs 7 and 9), were also made known to the authors. These have also been included in the present analysis.33

A number of larger copies of the statue of St Peter still complete with their thrones are today in private ownership or have been acquired by museum collections. They are all superior in artistic quality to the statuettes analysed in this paper. One such statue is part of the collection of the Heimatmuseum in Hergensweiler, Baden-Württemberg, Germany (Fig. 11). According to the museum curator it probably dates to the late 19th century. Another similar statue is in private

ownership and was brought back from Rome by a priest in 1895.34 A third fi gure made from wood was included in an exhibition on early Christian and Coptic art held in 1964 at the Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna. It has been dated to the 1st half of the 4th century.35 Since its seat is a reproduction of the present throne of the Vatican bronze statue, which is dated to 1756/57,36 this is incorrect. A manufacture date in the 19th century seems far more likely.37 As there are clear differences in qual-ity and size between these larger statuettes from public and private collections and the smaller ones discussed in this study, the two groups cannot be directly compared and the larger statuettes are therefore not included in the analysis.

Monumental copies of the statue of St Peter were also erected in many cathedrals in Europe. For example, in Worms Cathedral, Germany, in the cathedral of Fulda, Germany (a gift from Pope Leo XIII, 1878–1903, according to an information panel), in Westminster Cathedral (manufactured in Rome at an unknown date, arrived in London in 1902),38 and in front of St Peter’s Church in Tiberias, Israel (donated in 1883) (Fig. 12).39 It is very likely that these monumental copies were blessed by the Pope and thus carried an indulgence

FIG. 10

Comparison of the heads of the statuettes from Charsadda (No. A1), Volders (No. A2), Anghiari (No. A5) and Augsburg (No. A7).


TA

BL

E 1

Che

mic

al c

ompo

siti

on o

f th

e fo

ur s

ampl

es t

aken

fro

m t

he V

olde

rs s

tatu

ette

(N

o. A

2) d

eter

min

ed w

ith

ED

XR

F. T

he o

ther

row

s of

the

tab

le s

how

the

res

ults

of

the

mic

ro X

RF

ana

lysi

s of

the

sta

tuet

tes

from

Mün

ster

(N

o. A

3), A

ugsb

urg

(No.

A7)

and

Col

ogne

(N

o. B

2) c

ompa

red

wit

h th

e ol

der

anal

yses

car

ried

out

by

the

Rat

hgen

-For

schu

ngsl

abor

, Ber

lin. M

ean

valu

es a

re g

iven

in w

t.%

wit

h co

nfi d

ence

inte

rval

s w

here

mul

tipl

e an

alys

es e

xist

; ele

men

ts w

ith

n. d

. wer

e no

t de

tect

ed.

Sta

tuet

te n

o./

Obj

ect p

art

Al

Mn

Fe

Co

Ni

Cu

Zn

As

Ag

Cd

Sn

Sb

Pb

Bi

stat

uett

e V

olde

rs (

No.

A2)

body

<0.

2<

0.01

0.79

0.02

± 0

.02

0.32

± 0

.03

66 ±

0.3

25.4

± 0

.1<

0.3

0.05

± 0

.01

<0.

011.

98 ±

0.1

80.

094.

80 ±

0.0

20.

04 ±

0.0

1ar

m<

0.2

<0.

010.

68 ±

0.0

8<

0.01

0.05

± 0

.03

57 ±

0.1

39.0

± 0

.2<

0.3

0.02

0.01

30.

88 ±

0.0

30.

021.

80 ±

0.1

80.

02he

ad in

sert

<0.

2<

0.01

0.11

± 0

.06

<0.

010.

10 ±

0.0

364

± 0

.835

.0 ±

0.3

<0.

30.

02 ±

0.0

1<

0.01

0.02

± 0

.02

0.01

± 0

.01

0.80

± 0

.37

<0.

01so

lder

<0.

2<

0.01

5.8

<0.

010.

011.

891.

78<

0.3

0.02

<0.

0167

0.77

23.1

0.08

stat

uett

e M

ünst

er (

No.

A3)

body

(ol

d an

alys

is)

n. d

.n.

d.

0.44

7<

0.01

0.18

768

.74

27.8

1<

0.10

0.06

1<

0.00

20.

56<

0.05

2.19

<0.

025

body

(ne

w

anal

ysis

)n.

d.

n. d

.0.

35 ±

0.0

50.

02±

0.0

10.

21 ±

0.0

168

.06

± 0

.89

27.1

4 ±

0.8

2n.

d.

n. d

.n.

d.

2.65

± 1

.01

n. d

.1.

57 ±

0.3

5n.

d.

arm

n.

d.

n. d

.0.

31 ±

0.0

10.

02 ±

0.0

20.

20 ±

0.0

167

.97

± 0

.47

28.1

9 ±

0.5

7n.

d.

n. d

.n.

d.

2.02

± 0

.57

n. d

.1.

30 ±

0.1

6n.

d.

sold

ern.

d.

n. d

.0.

04n.

d.

n. d

.2.

370.

31n.

d.

n. d

.n.

d.

74.2

4n.

d.

22.3

7n.

d.

stat

uett

e A

ugsb

urg

(No.

A7)

body

(ol

d an

alys

is)

n. d

.n.

d.

0.40

<0.

010.

2472

.32

22.4

50.

100.

050.

007

1.37

0.07

2.89

<0.

025

body

(ne

w

anal

ysis

)n.

d.

n. d

.0.

32 ±

0.0

5tr

ace

0.24

± 0

.03

75.8

1 ±

2.3

121

.27

± 1

.89

trac

en.

d.

n. d

.1.

25 ±

0.2

1tr

ace

1.12

± 0

.53

n. d

.

sold

ern.

d.

n. d

.1.

25n.

d.

0.06

n. d

.1.

571.

31n.

d.

n. d

.83

.56

5.73

6.52

n. d

.

stat

uett

e C

olog

ne (

No.

B2)

oute

r pa

rtn.

d.

n. d

.n.

d.

n. d

.n.

d.

0.50

± 0

.54

0.04

± 0

.03

n. d

.n.

d.

0.19

± 0

.16

3.85

± 0

.29

16.1

9 ±

1.0

279

.24

± 1

.46

n. d

.fi l

ling

n. d

.n.

d.

n. d

.n.

d.

n. d

.0.

40 ±

0.4

90.

09 ±

0.0

9n.

d.

n. d

.n.

d.

12.1

6 ±

19.

5912

.85

± 1

2.20

74.5

1 ±

31.

22n.

d.

fi llin

g (c

ore)

n. d

.n.

d.

n. d

.n.

d.

n. d

.tr

ace

n. d

.n.

d.

n. d

.n.

d.

n. d

.n.

d.

100

n. d

.


FIG. 11

Miniature statue of St Peter in the Heimatmuseum Hergensweiler, Germany (photograph, W. Nuber).

for the devout who kissed their feet. This has been attested for the statue in Westminster Cathedral, blessed by Pope Leo XIII in February 1902,40 and can be assumed for the statue in Worms, which was a gift by the same Pope.

ARCHAEOMETALLURGICAL EXAMINATION OF THE VOLDERS

STATUETTE

The archaeologically recovered statuettes in this study are all surface fi nds, therefore their dating is diffi cult. Since they could not be dated reliably by means of comparative artefactual analysis and art historical methods, additional scientifi c investiga-tions were undertaken on those statuettes which were physically accessible to the authors. Close optical examination provided further clues on the manufacturing techniques used. The Volders

statuette (No. A2) has been the subject of the most detailed archaeometallurgical study, comprising elemental analyses and metallography on sample material as well as radiographies. As the other statuettes included in the study became known to the authors it was decided to determine their alloy composition and manufacturing techniques as well. The aim was to gather comparative data suited to either confi rm or contradict some of the results obtained for the Volders statuette. There-fore, the analyses of the statuettes from Münster (No. A3), Augsburg (No. A7) and Cologne (No. B2) did not need to be as detailed and intensive. The latter examinations were carried out using mi-cro X-ray fl uorescence analysis and radiography. Attention here initially focuses on the Volders statuette, with the other statuettes discussed in the next section.

MANUFACTURING TECHNIQUES

The miniature St Peter from Volders measures 47mm in height and 20mm in width (in the original sitting position). The maximum thickness is about 11mm, and its back is concave (No. A2, Fig. 1). An iron pin was set into the statuette’s back in order to secure it to the now lost seat. Its heavily corroded remnants can still be observed (Fig. 13:1).

Near the iron pin another tenon is visible, con-nected to the right arm of the statuette (Fig. 13:2), which had been cast separately. On the X-ray image a dark ring around the arm can be observed, clearly indicating that it was inserted into a hole passing through the main body (Fig. 14:a).41 As has been noted above, this is a common characteristic of all statuettes of Group A. Contrary to expecta-tion the X-ray image provided no information on the fi xing method for the arm. However, a light grey substance in direct contact with the arm pin on the back of the statuette was detected by optical examination. This is probably some kind of solder, such as a tin-lead alloy (Fig. 15). The area around the pin shows circular abrasion marks (Figs 13, 15), possibly caused by the drilling of the hole into which the pin was inserted.

The radiography of the statuette also revealed that the cylindrical protrusion on the back of the head had been manufactured separately and inserted into a drilled hole measuring 4.1mm in diameter (Fig. 14:b). This detail was not easily noticed from the external surface. Only a slight burr around the insert could have been interpreted as evidence for drilling (Fig. 16). This manufactur-ing detail is another common feature of the statu-ettes from Volders, Münster (No. A3), Anghiari (Nos A5–6) and Augsburg (No. A7), which all have bored holes in their heads. The statuette from


indicate that the hole was also threaded, and that the head insert must have been a kind of screw. A detailed inspection of the insert revealed that part of the thread is visible from the outside as well (Fig. 16).

The body of the Volders statuette was cast and roughly fi nished by fi ling. The marks of this pro-cess are still clearly visible on the surface (Fig. 17). Although not directly verifi able, it is most likely that the sand casting method was used to produce the fi gurine’s body, since use of the more complex and costly lost-wax method does not seem likely for such small and simple objects. Had the lost-wax method been used, one would expect the fi gurine to

Augsburg, like the one from Volders, still retains its insert. The function of this insert was to carry the halo of the statuette.42 The photographs of the Charsadda (No. A1) and Adana/Antakya (No. A4) statuettes do not show the back of the head, but due to their great similarity to the other statu-ettes of Group A it is likely that they also possessed a hole and an insert for the halo.

The X-ray image in Fig. 14:b shows that the tip of the drill used for the hole in the Volders statuette was pointed, with an angle of c. 100°. Accordingly, either a fl at or a twist drill bit could have been used. The subtle parallel shades in the drill hole and its jagged outline on the X-ray image

FIG. 12

Statue of St Peter in front of the church of Tiberias, Israel (photograph, A. Teicher, wikimedia commons, <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PikiWiki_Israel_11895_statue_of_St._peter_in_tiberias.jpg >

[accessed 12 October 2012], licensed under CC BY 2.5.


FIG. 13

Back of the Volders statuette No. A2 with indication of the separate object parts: 1 – iron pin, 2 – pin connected with the right arm, 3 – main body. On 2 and 3 metallic areas are visible from where the samples for metallographic preparation were extracted (photograph, D. Berger).

FIG. 14

Radiography of the Volders statuette No. A2. Front (a) and side (b) view (X-ray, S. Fuge, Schweißtechnische Lehr- und Versuchsanstalt Halle).


FIG. 17

Side view of the Volders statuette No. A2, showing the tool marks on the surface (photograph, D. Berger).

FIG. 15

Detail of the back of the Volders statuette No. A2. The arrows point to the grey substance around the arm-pin. On the upper margin of the image the abraded area can be seen (photograph, D. Berger).

FIG. 16

Detail of the back of the head of the Volders statuette No. A2 showing the screwed-in head insert. A raised

burr around the insert indicates that the hole was drilled (photograph, D. Berger).

have been cast in one piece as assembling it from three components would have interfered with the lost-wax casting procedure. This theory is further supported by the details of the man’s face and hair having been heavily reworked by chasing with different punches (Fig. 18). This procedure is typical for sand-cast objects, since, depending on the sand quality and grain size, it is more diffi cult to produce sharp details in sand casting than in lost-wax casting, making it necessary to add details afterwards.

METAL ANALYSES AND METALLOGRAPHICAL INVESTIGATION

For the metallurgical analysis of the Volders statu-ette, drilled samples were taken from each separate part identifi ed by optical and X-ray examination with the exception of the iron pin. The samples were taken from the main body, the right arm and the head protrusion. For each sample a 1.0mm drill bit was used. Some of the grey substance around the arm-pin protruding on the back was scraped off with a scalpel. The borings and scrapings were


analysed with an energy dispersive X-ray fl uores-cence spectrometer (EDXRF) whose analysing parameters are listed in Table 2. To gather even more information on the metal fabric, small metal chips were extracted from the arm and body and prepared for metallographic analysis (Fig. 13:2–3, Table 2). Besides optical microscopy, an environ-mental scanning electron microscope (ESEM) coupled with an energy dispersive X-ray fl uores-cence analyser (EDX) was used. Table 2 lists the analysing parameters for this equipment.

Table 1 gives an overview of the metal compo-sition of the samples from the three parts of the statuette. They are composed of copper-zinc alloys usually referred to as brass. The zinc content (Zn) is not evenly distributed. It reaches nearly 35wt% in the head insert and up to 39wt% in the right arm. In contrast, the body of the fi gurine only contains 25.4wt% zinc. These differences have a crucial effect on the structure and major properties of the

FIG. 18

Detail of the head of the Volders statuette No. A2, showing the working of the hair and beard. The

impressions were made by using a semi-hollow and a pointed punch respectively (photograph, D. Berger).

TABLE 2

Analysing methods and parameters used for the metallurgical examination of the statuettes.

Method Kind of analysis/purpose

Device and analysing/preparation parameters

Laboratory

energy dispersive X-ray fl uorescence analysis(EDXRF)

chemical analysis, metal composition

ARL Quant’X EDXRF/Thermo Scientifi c; Rh X-ray tube, Si(Li) detector, 28 kV/750 s and 50 kV/1000 s, air atmosphere, reference based quantifi cation (fundamental parameter method)

Curt-Engelhorn-Zentrum für Archäometrie, Mannheim (N. Lockhoff)

environmental scanning electron microscope coupled with X-ray analyzer (ESEM/EDX)

chemical analysis and visualization, metal composition and condition

LEO Gemini 1550 VP/Zeiss; fi eld emission cathode, 20 kV accelerating voltage, high vacuum, semi quantitative analysis with Oxford Inca 300 Si(Li) detector; samples sputtered with carbon

Landeskriminalamt Sachsen-Anhalt, Magdeburg (U. Schwarzer)

metallography analysis of microstructure, study of manufac-turing technique

metallographical preparation: metal samples embedded in epoxy resin, grinded on SiC paper to 4000 grit; polished with diamond and SiO2 suspension to 0.1 µm, samples etched with FeCl3/HCl/H2O and examined with optical microscopy and ESEM/EDX

Schweißtechnische Lehr- und Versuchsanstalt, Halle/Saale

micro X-ray fl uorescence analysis (µXRF)

chemical analysis, metal composition

Eagle III XXL/Roentgenanalytik; Rh X-ray tube, Si(Li) detector, 40 kV/125 µA/300 s, monocapillary with 300 µm spot, Ti fi lter, air atmosphere, quantifi cation by fundamental parameter method

Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Mainz (S. Hartmann)


alloy, illustrated by the binary copper-zinc-phase diagram in Figure 19. According to this diagram, and the detected zinc content, the body and head insert alloys should form an α solid solution (α-brass) whereas that of the arm is likely to be a mixture of α and β’ crystals (α+β’-brass).43

This assumption is confi rmed by the metallo-graphic examination of the samples. Figure 20 shows the cross-section of a metal chip taken from the body, which only exhibits α grains arranged in a porous matrix. Under etched conditions the sample shows polygonal shaped and cored grains with slip lines but without annealing twins (Fig. 21). This indicates that the brass was only slightly worked once cold, and that there was no substantial further manufacturing step. In addition, the cored grain structure shows that no annealing procedure was carried out prior to

the working of the brass, or that the annealing procedure was inadequate.44

There are two other phases within the micro-structure of the metal of the statuette’s body that were not anticipated by the binary copper-zinc-phase diagram (Fig. 19). These whitish phases predominantly concentrate on the grain boundar-ies of the yellow α crystals (Figs 20, 21), an obser-vation that can be explained by the presence in the alloy of small amounts of lead (Pb) and tin (Sn) respectively (Table 1). According to the analyses with ESEM/EDX and the research of Bauer and Hansen,45 tin is arranged in a fi ne structure of α solid solution and γ intermetallic known as (α+γ)-eutectoid. In the sample this mixed phase can be followed as an irregular shaped component mainly at crystal junctions all over the polished section (Figs 20, 21, 22). Because copper-zinc alloys are

FIG. 19

Binary copper-zinc-phase diagram (modified after Scott 1991, fig. 207).


able to incorporate only small quantities of lead (< 0.8wt%), this metal was precipitated as small globules along the grain boundaries of the primary α crystals.46 The particles are well-rounded and visible in white on SEM images due to their high absorption coeffi cient for the electron beam (Fig. 22). Table 3 summarizes all EDX analyses of the sample as mean values and standard deviations.

Immiscible lead inclusions are also visible in the microstructure of the sample taken from the

right arm of the statuette. Due to the much higher zinc content (39wt%) the bulk material is, however, biphasic with the α and β’ compounds being clearly distinguishable without etching. Under microscop-ically bright fi eld illumination β’ grains with a highe r zinc content have a stronger yellowish hue than the α phase with a lower zinc percentage (Fig. 23:a). The α grains have a typical plate-like shape and are arranged in predominant crystal directions along the β’ grains. This indicates that α has been precipitated from the primary β solid solution (high temperate phase, see Fig. 19) by the so-called Widmanstätten transformation due to slow cooling conditions after casting or an anneal-ing procedure.47 Because several annealing twins are visible within the α phase in the etched state the brass must have been shaped by forging or welding (Fig. 24). As (α+β’)-brass is more suitable for hot working than α-brass one possible interpretation is that the twins and plated crystal structure result from such a process. However, cold working followed by annealing is more plausible here since numerous slip lines account for cold deformation, at least, as the fi nal step (Fig. 24). It is thus very likely that the preliminary working occurred at room temperature, which was then followed by an annealing step. Looking at the lead inclusion the mechanical forming could not have been very strong, otherwise the lead would have a more regularly elongated shape (Fig. 23:a).48

Unlike the metal of the main body of the statuette, the low tin content that was detected by EDXRF in this sample (0.88wt%) seems to be completely dissolved within the (α+β’)-matrix.

FIG. 20

Optical bright-field micrographs of a metal chip taken from the body of the Volders statuette No. A2, unetched. Besides numerous voids perhaps resulting from metallographic preparation light grey phases ((α+γ)-eutectoid) are

visible within the microstructure of the brass. On the surface blue coloured cuprite (with red interior reflections) can be observed (micrographs, D. Berger).

FIG. 21

Micrograph of the same sample as in Fig. 20 etched with aqueous FeCl3. The microstructure shows undeformed α grains exhibiting paralleled and crossing lines (slip lines) that are typical for weak metal deformation. Around the cored α grains (α+γ)-eutectoid is present (micrographs,

D. Berger).


FIG. 22

Back-scattered electron image of the sample from the body of the Volders statuette with the results of some of the EDX analyses (prepared by D. Berger).

TABLE 3

Mean values and standard deviations of the EDX analyses of the sample taken from the body of the Volders statuette (No. A2).

Sample part Fe Cu Zn Sn Pb

matrix 0.33 ± 0.45 68.56 ± 0.84 27.03 + 0.69 2.48 ± 0.52 1.4 ± 1.29(α+γ)-eutectoid n. d. 64.32 ± 1.48 23.9 ± 0.73 11.13 ± 2.64 0.65 ± 1.72lead inclusions n. d. 17.58 ± 9.05 7.7 ± 3.67 n. d. 74.72 ± 12.68corrosion crust 0.58 ± 0.82 86.62 ± 0.51 7.97 ± 3.39 4.83 ± 2.05 n. d.


FIG. 23

Heavily corroded biphasic microstructure in the cross section of a metal chip taken from the arm of the

Volders Statuette, unetched condition. a – bright-field micrograph showing small amounts of sound metal

consisting of α and β’ crystals as well as rounded lead inclusions; b – bright-field micrograph of the dezincified

region where uncorroded α grains and re-deposited copper are present. On the left image border traces of the soft solder can be seen (micrographs, D. Berger).

FIG. 24

Optical bright-field micrograph of the metal sample from the arm etched with aqueous FeCl3. Besides

slip lines some distorted annealing twins are present in the uncorroded α grains indicating at least two

forging-annealing-changes (micrographs, D. Berger).

This would be expected from the studies of O. Bauer and M. Hansen and the ternary phase diagram of the system Cu-Zn-Sn established by G. Tammann and M. Hansen.49 Therefore, no γ phase exists in the microstructure of the statuette’s body. In contrast, the considerable iron content (0.68wt%) has caused the formation of tiny iron rich segregates that can be recognized as dark spots throughout the copper-zinc grains (Fig. 24).50

Contrary to popular assumption, tin could not protect the (α+β’)-brass of the arm insert from so-called ‘dezincifi cation’, a corrosion-induced phenomenon usually associated with biphasic copper-zinc alloys.51 The dezincifi cation process is facilitated in β’-containing brasses because of the much lower electrode potential of the β’ solid solu-tions compared to that of the α phase.52 This leads to a preferential corrosion of the high zinc β’ phase, leaving the α grains unaffected. In the present case, the metal surface of the arm exhibits uncorroded and orientated α plates surrounded by big crystals of re-precipitated pure copper (up to 30µm in size) and intermixed copper and zinc corrosion products (Figs 23, 25, Table 4). Thus the β’ phase has completely dissolved and converted to copper in the outer region of the sample. It is probable that the severe dezincifi cation of the arm metal is linked to the iron and lead content. This is because both metals are known to accelerate the dissolution of the β’ phase, counteracting the benefi cial effect of any tin additions.53 Irrespective of this, the corroded microstructure confi rms the reported discovery scenario and authenticity of the Volders


statuette, since big copper crystals only form dur-ing the longer corrosion periods that are typical of buried archaeological objects.

The microscopic examination of the sample from the arm insert also provided some clues on the soldering material used. Aligned spots of a high refl ecting bluish-coloured metal phase embedded into corrosion products are visible on the surface of the metal chip (Fig. 23:b). Under crossed polar-izers the corrosion crust exhibits a greyish-white hue being thus different from the red-coloured copper corrosion product (cuprite) that is present in other parts of the sample. EDX analyses show that the metal spots are composed of tin, copper and some zinc (Fig. 25, spectrum 1), whereas the corrosion layer has a high lead content besides the main constituent tin and some copper and zinc (Fig. 25, spectrum 10). There can be little doubt that these observations characterize a tin-lead soft solder that was used for soldering the arm insert to the statuette’s back. Since the bluish metal spots concentrate on the metal surface it is probable, considering the EDX results, that they result from reactions of the solder with the brass material after prolonged and localized heating. Most likely they can be considered as an intermetallic phase from the copper-tin binary or even the copper-zinc-tin-ternary system, e.g. the η or γ phases.54

Further clues are gleaned from the results of the EDXRF analysis of the grey substance, shown in Table 1, although the numerical values given there are of weak signifi cance because of the solder’s badly corroded nature. It is, however, noticeable that the solder must have had a high tin content with lead being the minor alloy part. Perhaps a solder with the eutectic composition 61.9wt% tin, balance lead was used in this case. This could be compared to those identifi ed recently on a number of brass cases found on a 19th-century shipwreck off the coast of Israel.55 The iron traces detected in the Volders sample come from

the corrosion of the nearby iron pin, whereas copper and zinc derive from the base metal.

INTERPRETATION OF THE ARCHAEOMETALLURGICAL DATA

A considerable corpus of metal analysis has been carried out on archaeological brass objects in the last 50 years, ranging in date from the Etruscan and Roman periods to the post-medieval. There now exists widespread agreement among scholars that until the end of the late Middle Ages brass was produced exclusively either by the so-called cemen-tation process or by direct reduction.56 In the latter process zinc ore (e.g. calamine or smithsonite) was directly added to molten copper whereas the former process involved mixing of solid copper, charcoal and zinc ore in a sealed reaction vessel and heating the mixture to around the boiling point of zinc (i.e. 900–1000°C) in order to produce brass by a solid state reaction process. As demonstrated by H. Ullwer,57 in the course of the cementation process zinc vapour precipitates onto the copper surface and the copper then diffuses into the zinc. Others argue for the diffusion of zinc into the solid copper instead.58 As a consequence of practical operating conditions, both processes allow zinc contents in brass up to 33wt% only,59 although under controlled laboratory conditions much higher contents are possible when using the cemen-tation technique.60 As none of the analysed Euro-pean brass objects dating before the post-medieval period contain more than 30wt% zinc, the cemen-tation and the direct reduction processes are thought to be the only methods used for brass making in the pre-modern period. Only after distilled zinc was imported from India in the 16th century AD was it possible to produce higher-zinced brasses by co-melting metallic copper and zinc.61 The zinc content therefore should be a very useful time marker.62

TABLE 4

Mean values and standard deviations of the EDX analyses of the sample taken from the arm insert of the Volders statuette (No. A2).

Sample part Fe Cu Zn Sn Pb Cl

matrix (α+β) n.d. 61.77 ± 0.81 38.23 ± 0.81 n.d. n.d. n.d.uncorroded α n.d. 64.38 ± 0.41 35.62 ± 0.41 n.d. n.d. n.d.re-deposited Cu n.d. 100 ± 0 n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d.lead inclusions n.d. 13.31 ± 11.58 9.08 ± 6.55 n.d. 76.15 ± 16.08 1.45 ± 2.05outer corrosion crust n.d. 92.72 5.41 n.d. n.d. 1.65inner corrosion crust n.d. 4.66 83.75 n.d. 11.59 n.d.


FIG. 25

Back-scattered electron image of the sample from the arm of the Volders statuette with the results of the EDX analyses on different microstructure constituents (prepared by D. Berger).

The zinc content of the right arm and head insert of the Volders statuette makes it impossible for the object to have been manufactured before the post-medieval period. On the contrary, the high zinc content, reaching 35 and 39wt% respec-tively, strongly suggests use of the co-melting production technique (also known as speltering) for the two brass parts. In this context the detected cadmium content of 130ppm in the right arm is signifi cant (see Table 1). Cadmium, present in the zinc ores,63 was usually lost during cementation due to its high volatility, whereas it was frequently retarded in early distilled zinc.64 Not without

reason did Z. Weirong and F. Xiangxi as well as J. Riederer use cadmium as a marker for the auth entication of brass artefacts.65 These factors, however, do not mean that the missing cadmium and the low zinc content observed in the statuette’s body indicate an older date. It is possible to get low-zinced brasses with the speltering process as well, while cadmium could well be present under the detection limit of the EDXRF (< 0.01% = 100ppm). Alternatively, it has been established that the cementation method persisted as a major production technique until the end of the 18th, and in some regions even into the mid 19th century.66


The main body of the statuette might therefore be as young as the right arm or the head insert. The tin, lead and iron contents, which are distinctly higher in the main body than in the inserted parts, cannot — as some authors have suggested67 — contribute to the solution of the dating problem because they could have been added deliberately to change the properties of the alloy.

Taking into account the above-mentioned points, it is possible to narrow down the produc-tion period of the Volders statuette quite precisely. The earliest possible date is the 16th century AD, when metallic zinc was introduced for the fi rst time to European markets.68 And yet this new zinc was expensive and would hardly have been used for devotional mass products like the small St Peter statuettes.69 Therefore, a considerably later date is more likely, perhaps the late 18th or most probably the 19th century when zinc production on an industrial scale emerged in both Great Britain and Continental Europe. The patents of W. Collins (1783–1817) and G.F. Muntz (1832) for the pro-duction of standardized copper-zinc alloys as well as that of J. Emerson (1781) for the direct mixing of the two metals prepared the way for a more cost-effective brass production.70 Prior to that, W. Champion had pioneered a simple and economical method for the distillation of metallic zinc (the prerequisite for Collins’ and Muntz’s patents) in the early 18th century.71

Another indicator for a late date of the statu-ette is provided by the drilled hole in the head. As mentioned above, the tip of the drill used for the hole in the Volders statuette was pointed at an angle of c. 100°. Unfortunately, this provides no evidence as to the period of manufacture, since the angle of the point is of little chronological relevance.72 More relevant to the dating is the hole being threaded in order to accommodate the

additional head component, which is a brass screw. Until the end of the 18th century the manufacture of screws and matching threads was diffi cult and expensive. Mass-produced screws were not avail-able until the fi rst decades of the 19th century, and only in the middle of the century were standards concerning screw and thread dimensions estab-lished.73 This development was likely an essential prerequisite for the use of screws on articles such as the Volders statuette, since without standardized machine-produced screws it would be far simpler and cheaper to cast the attachment for the halo together with the statuette. For this reason the lower limit for its production was probably not much before 1850.

To fi x the upper time limit, it is important in addition to consider the development of modern brass technology. Methodical scientifi c examina-tions of the infl uence of metal additions to brass in the last decades of the 19th and in the fi rst decades of the 20th century caused new elements such as aluminium, iron, manganese, nickel and silicon to be added to brass alloys. The purpose of these additions was to improve the mechanical and cast-ing properties of the brasses as well as their corro-sion resistance. Prior to this period, no elements other than tin or lead (and perhaps iron) played a role in the manufacture of brass.74

Whereas lead was often only a natural impu-rity, especially with zinc ores, tin was sometimes added intentionally to prevent dezincifi cation. Naval or admiralty brasses, for example, contain up to 1wt% tin resulting in good corrosion resis-tance against seawater, and were frequently used for marine purposes (Table 5). Examining the com-position of the statuette’s arm, it becomes clear that it roughly matches naval brass or a modifi ed Muntz metal, known since the 1830s.75 It appears that this standardized brass alloy could also have

TABLE 5

List of some brass alloys, their compositions, earliest occurrence and main fi elds of application (compiled from Craddock 1985; Temple 1985; Day 1991, 192).

Alloy name Chemical composition Earliest occurrence Use

common brass up to 28 % Zn, some Sn and Pb, balance Cu before 1500common brass up to 33 % Zn, some Sn and, balance Cu after 1500Muntz metal(also: yellow brass)

40 % Zn, balance Cu after 1830 sheeting of ships, plumbers, engineering fi ttings etc.

naval brass 37 % Zn, 0.5-1 % Sn, balance Cu after 1830 marine applicationsadmiralty brass 29 % Zn, 0.5-1 % Sn, balance Cu marine applicationsaluminum brassesmanganese brasses

different Zn, some per cent Al, balance Cudifferent Zn, some per cent Mn, balance Cu

after 1900after 1910

for ship components, shafts etc.


been used in the present case. Only the higher lead content — which might be a consequence of deliberate addition — is evidence against this assumption (see Table 1).

The high lead content of the statuette’s main body could be due to a deliberate addition as well. Here, too, tin is a major alloy part that was prob-ably added together with the lead as a lead-tin alloy. Their ratio (0.42 = Sn/Pb) almost coincides with that of the arm insert (0.49 = Sn/Pb), hinting that they originate from the same source. Conse-quently, the quaternary brass alloys of the main body and of the right arm could well have been produced in the same workshop. However, this assumption is not supported by the minor and trace element patterns of the alloys, which are much more diverse than would be expected if the same copper source had been used (Fig. 26). It seems reasonable to assume that the lead and tin were added in the workshop to brass alloys that have been recycled or came from different found-ries. Because of the high differences in the trace and minor (tin, lead) element contents, a different source must also be assumed for the metal of the head insert (Fig. 26). It appears that the workshop that manufactured the statuette purchased a com-mercially available screw to use as a mount for the halo. This, however, would have required an adequate screw tap for producing the opposing thread in the hole.

Apart from these considerations, the missing aluminium and manganese as well as the low nicke l and iron contents indicate a date of the statuette

before the turn of the 20th century. Additionally, the high amount of metal impurities such as anti-mony, bismuth and silver may also account for such a dating because they evidence an imperfect metal purifi cation. It was not until the last decades of the 19th century that metal refi ning methods were developed (especially electrolysis) which pro-vided much purer raw materials.76 As high-purity metals would not have been absolutely necessary for mass-produced religious metal work this remains a weak argument. Nevertheless, together with all the other points mentioned above we suggest the period between 1850 and 1900 as the most probable date for the production of the Volders statuette.

ARCHAEOMETALLURGICAL EXAMINATION OF OTHER STATUETTES

Before the present study, the statuettes from Münster (No. A3) and Augsburg (No. A7) had already been analysed using atomic absorption spectroscopy in the Rathgen-Forschungslabor in Berlin.77 Since this analysis had been restricted to the main body, and did not include the inserted parts and the solder, it was decided to perform a new, complete analysis of all the parts of these statuettes as well as statuette No. B2 using a micro X-ray fl uorescence spectrometer (Table 2).78 The statuettes were also X-rayed. Since statuette No. B2 from Cologne was hollow-cast and the hollow had been fi lled with lead and lead alloy the X-ray

FIG. 26

Minor and trace element patterns of the three object parts from the Volders statuette. The concentrations on the ordinate are plotted logarithmically (prepared by D. Berger).


image did not reveal any useful details and was therefore not included in the evaluation. The met-allurgical analysis of the statuettes was performed on the surface after scraping off the corrosion crust to obtain reliable measuring results.79 Because the patina on the head insert of the Augsburg statuette No. A7 proved to be very thick, it was not possible to reach the uncorroded metal surface without visible changes to the artefact. Therefore it was not possible to get a quantitative reading of the composition of this part of the statuette.80

The results obtained from the Group A statu-ettes Nos A3 and A7 confi rm the older spectro-scopical analysis according to which they consist of α-brass containing 27.1 and 21.3wt% Zn respec-tively (Table 1). Both pieces also contain lead, tin and trace elements in various proportions. The small discrepancy between the atomic absorption spectroscopy and the XRF analysis are due to seg-regation effects, which are particularly important in the case of lead because of the microscopic focus of the XRF method. Nevertheless the results are almost identical and therefore well comparable.

The composition of the separately inserted arm of the statuette from Münster (No. A3) reveals that it was made of the same alloy as the body. The similarities of the trace elements in both parts suggest that they originate from the same metal batch and consequently from a single workshop. It is not possible to date this item and the statuette from Augsburg, however, by their metal composi-tion since the zinc content is ‘normal’ and no ele-ments were found that might indicate a speltering process.81 Therefore, the shape and the thread of the holes in the fi gurines’ heads and the screw on statuette No. A7 are the most important parts for dating. On the X-ray images (Figs 27–8) the holes display a pointed tip similar to the one on the Volders fi gurine. However, the angle of the tip and the diameters of the bores are distinct which infers different drills were used on each example. While the existence of a thread in the head cavity of the statuette from Augsburg can only be inferred from the inserted screw, the insert is missing in the case of the Münster statuette, and the thread of the hole is visible to the unaided eye. As with the Volders example, the threaded hole strongly suggests dates from the second half of the 19th century for both statuettes.

On the back of the statuettes from Münster and Augsburg a grey substance adhered to the pro-truding arm and the bored hole. The XRF analyses show that this substance contains high concentra-tions of tin and lead, and some antimony in the case of statuette No. A7. It can therefore be identi-fi ed as solder used for fi xing the arms to the bodies. Since the arm of the Volders statuette has likewise

FIG. 27

X-ray image of the statuette from Münster, No. A3 (X-Ray, S. Patscher, Römisch-Germanisches

Zentralmuseum).

FIG. 28

X-ray image of the statuette from Augsburg, No. A7 (X-Ray, S. Patscher, Römisch-Germanisches

Zentralmuseum).


been fastened to the body with a soft solder this seems to be a common feature of the St Peter miniatures. In consideration of other details it seems very likely that the three objects were manu-factured in a closely related environment, although not necessarily in the same workshop or at the same time. The similarities in the metal composi-tion of the statuettes from Münster and Volders are striking, but this could be due to a shared meta l provider. Because of the different methods used for compositional analysis no further conclusions can be drawn.

Contrary to expectations, the analysis of the statuette from Cologne No. B2, showed that although it possesses a green patina it did not consist of copper alloy. As shown in Table 1, this hollow cast statuette is made up of a ternary lead-tin-antimony alloy in its outer part with small contents of copper and zinc. The fi lling consists of three visible parts (Fig. 9). It is tri-phasic, but more heterogenic and with a higher concentration of tin. The central section is fairly pure lead with only some copper traces. The identifi ed lead-tin-antimony alloys correspond to a class of metals better known under the term ‘type metal’, used for printing types since the invention of the printing press by Johannes Gutenberg in the 1440s.82 Such alloys, however, have been known since antiquity so the composition alone does not provide evidence for a post-medieval date of the miniature.83 The throne on which the fi gure is seated remains the only clue for dating this type of statuette.

THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE MINIATURE STATUES OF ST PETER

The date of the statuettes provided by archaeomet-allurgical analysis fi ts well into the religious history of the late 19th century. The statue of St Peter was an important symbol for the papal claim of supremacy in the Christian world and its venera-tion was encouraged by the Catholic church. This was especially the case in the 19th century, when Pope Pius IX (1846–78) endeavoured to strengthen the legitimacy and power of the Holy See. The First Vatican Council defi ned the dogma of papal infallibility in 1870 under his papacy, just as the pope’s temporal power was rapidly vanishing in the course of Italian unifi cation, and only a few months before Rome was conquered by the Kingdom of Italy.84

The carrying out of devotional practices directed at statues or altars of St Peter was rewarde d with indulgences as early as the 18th century, as shown by a printed responsory divulged by Pope Pius VI (1755–99) (Fig. 29). In 1857 Pope Pius IX

continued this policy by granting an indulgence of 50 days to the devout who, after having been to confession, kissed the feet of the statue of St Peter in the Vatican Basilica.85 The custom of kissing the statue’s feet can be traced as far back as the 15th century. Nikolaus Muffel, a patrician from Nurem-berg, travelled to Rome in 1452; his travel account mentions the popular legend (ein schal Red) that pilgrims who kissed the feet of the bronze statue of St Peter were bound to return to Rome.86 In an indication of the strong symbolic connection between the statue and the fi gure of the Pope, the Mirabiliae Romae vel potius Historia et descriptio urbis Romae, a compilation of texts on the city of Rome redacted between 1471 and 1484,87 mentions the belief that kissing the right foot of the statue of St Peter granted as much indulgence as kissing the feet of the Pope himself.88 The practice of kissing the statue’s feet is still customary today among the devout, and explains why the feet of the statue are so worn (Fig. 2).

According to the Raccolta, an offi cial 19th-century collection of prayers and acts of piety for which indulgences were granted by the Holy See, Pope Pius IX expanded the indulgence connected with the main statue in 1877 to include ‘little statues of St Peter‘ blessed by the Pope.89 It is very likely that the statuettes presented in this paper were intended to bestow this indulgence. Its exten-sion to the miniatures must have contributed to the popularity and diffusion of such objects.

The dating of the group of miniature statu-ettes to the 18th or 19th century therefore fi ts well with Roman Catholic practices of the time. It also makes the recovery of such objects in places as far apart as Charsadda and Antakya less diffi cult to explain. Recent research in Charsadda has proven that some kind of fortifi cation occupied the Bala Hisar from the 11th or 12th centuries through to the 19th century.90 The nature of this ‘settlement’ remains indistinct. This invalidates Bussagli’s assumption that Charsadda was deserted after the 10th century. Although we know of no evidence for any permanent presence of Roman Catholic Christians in Charsadda before the 20th century, the appearance of a Christian souvenir from Rome does not seem improbable given that British control of the region was established in 1849.91 The date of the photographs of No. A1 provides a defi nite terminus ante quem of 1910.92 No. A1, whose discovery in Charsadda baffl ed previous generations of scholars, could therefore easily have reached what is now Pakistan via missionaries or individual Catholic British colonial troops, as has already been suggested by Francesco Caglioti.93

In the Antakya region, where statuette No. A4 was probably photographed, Roman Catholic


FIG. 29

Responsorium divulged under Pope Pius VI (1775–99). The text below the image of the statue of St Peter reads: ‘The Most Holy Father through divine providence Pope Pius VI in order to increase the ardor of the faithful in the

devotion of the Prince of the Apostles, will kindly grant one hundred days of indulgence to whoever will repeat with faith this responsorium; and furthermore the plenary indulgence forever on two days of the year, which are the

festivity of the roman see the 18th of January, and the one of St Peter in Vincoli the 2nd of August, to whom, really repentant, after having received the Holy Communion, will visit any church, or altar dedicated to the Holy Apostle,

and here will pray and recite the following responsorium’ (reproduced by courtesy of Mgr Dario Rezza, Archive of the Chapter of the Vatican Basilica. Translation by Patrick Cassitti).

missionary activity is attested in the 16th century. Strong relations between Syria and Rome existed from the 17th century onward, when oriental priests were educated in Roman Catholic colleges in Rome.94 Indeed, an image of St Peter on a seal probably belonging to the Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch Makarios III Za’im (1647–72) resembles the pose of the statue at St Peter’s in Rome.95 Patri-arch Makarios III maintained good relations with Roman Catholic missionaries after 1661 and even sent a secret profession of Catholic faith to Rome.96

The Jesuits had many stations in the Near East, including Antakya (the former Antioch), Turkey.97 The Roman Catholic presence at Antakya was reinforced, among other activities, by the acquisition of the cave-church of St Peter by the Holy See in 1856.98 The belief that this was the place where the fi rst Christian community gathered and St Peter preached, and that the cave was donated to the Christians by St Luke the Evange-list, was encouraged by the Roman Catholic Church.99 While the earliest surviving parts of the church date to the 4th or 5th centuries, and the


façade was originally a Crusader-period edifi ce, the connection to St Peter seems to be a recent tradition. Willibrand von Oldenburg, who wrote the last detailed description of Antioch before it was sacked and razed by Sultan Baybar in 1268, mentions a parva crypta vel caverna near the con-vent of St Paul. This cave was said to be the place where St Paul rested from his missionary activities and wrote his letters.100 The connection of the cave with St Peter probably occurred some time after the razing of Antioch, when all memory of the original attribution of the structure was lost.101 After its acquisition by the Roman Catholic Church the cave was restored and assigned to the care of a local monastery of Capuchin Friars.102 In the light of these activities by Roman Catholic clergy and dignitaries it is likely that the statuette No. A4, photographed in Adana or Antakya, was brought to this region in the second half of the 19th century.

While the Group A statuettes almost certainly date to the second half of the 19th century, those of Group B cannot be as precisely dated. A terminus post quem is provided by the throne, which in Group B is cast together with the seated fi gure, and closely resembles the present marble seat of the Vatican original. As has been demonstrated by Rudolf Berliner, according to documentary and pictorial evidence the seat was erected in 1756/57 and is a reinterpretation of a 15th-century prede-cessor.103 Berliner attributes most of the stylistic elements of the throne to the 15th-century original, therefore limiting the usefulness of the shape of the throne for the dating of the statuettes. However, according to a recent contribution by Francesco Caglioti the inverted fl oral chalices at the top of the rear pillars are certainly post-Baroque and there-fore a new element of the 1756/57 seat.104 These pillars and inverted fl oral chalices are clearly visi-ble on the thrones of the statuettes of Group B, thus providing a defi nite date post-1756/57 for their manufacture. While the statuettes of Group B could still pre-date those of Group A by as much as a century, metallurgical analysis provided no conclusive evidence that would allow us to narrow down their age. We cannot defi nitively determine whether the two groups were created a century apart or were contemporary.

CONCLUSION

The dating of the statuettes of Group A to the sec-ond half of the 19th century was a major surprise to the project team. It was almost inconceivable that so little knowledge had survived of objects that were so recently in use, and, if we consider the

plastic and metal souvenirs being sold in Rome, are still very common today. Since archaeological excavations of deposits dating to the 18th or 19th centuries are still rare occurrences in Continental Europe and the other regions where these objects have been recovered, it is not surprising that all the small statuettes presented in this study are unstrat-ifi ed surface fi nds. Unlike the larger statuettes of superior artistic quality, this type of object was not considered precious enough to be kept for long periods of time, passed on as an heirloom, or be included in private collections. The statuettes presented in this paper were probably either lost by pilgrims who visited Rome, or were discarded and deposited onto the fi elds together with other household waste. Since most of the fi nds were located along important pilgrimage routes to Rome the fi rst hypothesis seems the most plausible (Fig. 30).

The wide range of dates for the production of these statuettes proposed by previous research indicates the limitations of stylistic analysis when applied to small, mass-produced items, and con-versely the importance of analysing the method of manufacture. Only when the latter is known is it possible to determine if the shape of a particular element can be ascribed wholly to the creative decision of the manufacturer or can be explained by the necessities of production and economy.

What do the characteristics of the objects tell us about the organization of production? The similar manufacturing and assembling techniques of the statuettes of Group A indicate the existence of a specifi c manufacturing tradition. If more than one workshop existed these were probably linked, if only by the copying of the production process. While the differences in quality between the three types of statuettes in Group A (‘Charsadda’, ‘Antakya’ and ‘Münster’ type) could be attributed to being manufactured in different workshops, the very similar bodies of the statuettes of the ‘Charsadda’ type suggest origins from the same workshop as being very likely. While the cast bodies of these statuettes are almost identical, the heads clearly differ from each other and have been worked using different types of tools. This indi-cates a division of labour: the casting of the bodies was carried out in one part of the workshop (or in a separate foundry) and then given to specialized artisans to add details. In the second half of the 19th century such a division of labour was found in larger workshops or factories. Evidence of the use of different types of tools, leading to markedly dif-ferent facial features and style of hair and beard, was surprising. This could be due to various factors, including the preferences of the worker in


FIG. 30

Location of the find spots of the statuettes mentioned in the article laid over the pilgrimage routes described in the Annales Stadenses, redacted between 1204 and 1256 (Modified after Lanzi & Lanzi 2000, fig. 77).


charge of that particular production step or out-sourcing to another workshop that used different manufacturing techniques. This shows that a com-plete standardization of manufacture had not yet been achieved, and that the manual component of the production process remained high. The differ-ences in the facial features could be of chronologi-cal relevance. However, the sample size is too small to make defi nitive statements here, and given the rapid development of production methods in the 19th century changes could have taken place in the space of only a few years. The same reasoning applies when looking at the differences between the statuettes of Group A and Group B. These differ-ences could be explained chronologically, since the dating of Group B is uncertain and could date as far back as the second half of the 18th century. Conversely, the two groups could represent the contemporary output of one or more workshops that were producing for different classes of cus-tomers. The latter could be supported by evidence of metal composition since the lead-tin-antimony alloy of Group B is cheaper and easier to cast than the copper-zinc alloy of Group A.

What has become particularly clear in the course of the present study is how false attributions can become accepted and then persist once they have been committed to print. The 5th-century date proposed by Benjamin Rowland in 1943 has directed the research on this topic for almost 70 years and was quoted as recently as 2005.105 While Paola Refi ce has been more cautious about the probable age of the statuettes, placing them between the 15th and the 18th centuries, like Rowland she dismissed a 19th-century date with-out clear explanation.106 In these cases, discipline-specifi c preconceptions seem to have hindered the research process. While the cited scholars were archaeologists, the reasoning behind the proposed dates was mainly historical and art historical in perspective, since no scientifi c archaeological data were available. There is certainly no lack of his-torical and pictorial documents for the 19th cen-tury; they are however not always easily accessible or well researched. Perhaps more importantly, the abundance of sources can give the impression that scientifi c archaeological research into this time period is not necessary. The sheer quantity of sources is often enough to discourage the interested researcher. In our experience this ‘blind spot’ regarding the 19th century is still common among archaeologists who do not specialize in the time period, and this case-study should provide a pause for thought for those who would dismiss the need for scientifi c research on historical artefacts.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to thank A. Altenburger, E. Pfennigs, R. Dorstewitz, and D. Salzmann, Direc-tor of the Museum of the University of Münster for the access to the St Peter miniatures in their possession. S. Greiff, S. Hartmann and S. Patscher of the Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum in Mainz, A. Pinkernelle and S. Fuge of the Schweißtechnische Lehr- und Versuchsanstalt in Halle, U. Schwarzer of the Landeskriminalamt Sachsen-Anhalt and N. Lockhoff of the Curt-Engelhorn-Zentrum Archäometrie in Mannheim, for providing access to the metallurgical and X-ray data. We would also like to thank those who have assisted us in our research by providing informa-tion, ideas and comments, particularly H. Stadler, K.-P. Todt, G. Mazzi, D. Rezza, D. Bertogli, B. Roetheli and M. Sloan.

NOTES

1 The project ‘Leblos heißt nicht mundtot’ was initiated and directed by Harald Stadler and carried out by the University of Innsbruck together with the secondary school of Volders. It was fi nanced by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Science and Research. <http://www.sparklingscience.at/en/projekte/397> [accessed 3 August 2012].

2 Stadler 2000.3 Poeschke 2000, 93.4 Berliner 1956.5 The New Raccolta 1903, 408–9.6 Refi ce 2009, 48.7 Birch 1998, 78.8 Mgr Dario Rezza, Camerlengo of the Vatican

Chapter, pers. comm. by email, 28 April 2011.9 An overview of late medieval and early modern

pilgrims accounts in German and Dutch language can be found in Miedema 2003. An English travel account written c. 1470 by William Brewyn can be found in Woodruff 1933.

10 Pecchiai 1951, 101–5.11 Rowland (1943, 68) supposes that the statuette

was found during the archaeological excavations conducted in Charsadda in 1902 and 1903. As Fourlas (2005/06, 149) has already pointed out this seems rather unlikely as the reports of these excavations do not mention any bronze statue although they present many small fi nds (see Marshall & Vogel 1904).

12 Written requests of Benjamin Fourlas made in June 2005 to the Archaeological Museums at Adana and Antakya remained unanswered. cf. Fourlas 2005/06, 150 with note 53.

13 A curious tale told by the owner: The grandfather of the present owner had a passion for fl yable minia-ture fi ghter aircraft of the Second World War. While collecting the wreckage of his crashed Messerschmidt 109 in a fi eld near Augsburg he found No. A7 by


chance. Not recognizing the fi gurine as St Peter he recruited it for service and made it pilot of another Me 109. As such it fl ew several times over the environs of Augsburg at a speed of 100km/h.

14 Guarducci 1991, 19–20.15 Berliner 1956; Romanini 1990, 43.16 Rowland 1943, 65–70 fi gs 1–2.17 Rowland 1943, 66.18 e.g. Grisar 1899, 653–7; Cecchelli 1937, 58–62. An

extended bibliography in Romanini 1990, 1–11.19 Rowland 1943, 66–7 with note 7. On the statuette

from Strasbourg and three related fi gurines and their recently suggested dating to the late 2nd or 3rd century AD, see Di Stazio 2010 with previous bibliography.

20 Bussagli 1954, 250.21 Esp. by Guarducci 1988, 68; 1991, 30; 1994, 6.22 e.g. Salmi 1960, 24, 28; Braunfels 1976, 162; Roma-

nini 1990, 3; Poeschke 2000, 93.23 Angelucci 1990; Romanini 1990; Angelucci et al.

1992. 24 Doubts were expressed by Romanini 1994, 267

who suggested a 15th-century date and Caglioti 2000, 762 who considered it more likely that the fi gurine found its way to Pakistan during the British colonial rule.

25 Stadler 2000, 38.26 Fourlas 2005/06.27 Fourlas 2005/06, 144, table 1.28 For the full argument see Fourlas 2005/06. The

assignment of the monumental statue to Pope Leo I was fi rst mentioned by Torrigio 1639, 126 (as cited in Fourlas 2005/06, 165 with note 147 with full quota-tion) but later repeated also by other scholars. cf. Caglioti 2000, 761.

29 Refi ce 2009.30 Refi ce 2009, 49.31 Cassitti 2011.32 Guarducci 1991, 19–20.33 Another fi gurine offered in an auction in 2010 was

labeled ‘St Peter’ and dated to the 6th century: Morawietz et al. 2012, 214–15 no. 461 (height 195mm). Although the statuette is not related to the group we are dealing with in this paper (different attire, no key), the auction catalogue cites the article of Fourlas 2005/06 as reference for an alleged 6th-century date of the object. Apart from the fact that the date given by Fourlas has to be revised, the only similarity between the two statuettes is the seated pose of the fi gure and the fact it is sporting a beard.

34 Haggenmüller 1993, 316–17, fi g. 19.35 Egger 1964, 46, cat. 122, fi g. 37.36 Berliner 1956.37 Fourlas 2005/06, 147 with notes 30–1.38 Rogers 2003; Browne & Dean 1995, 49.39 Heinsch 1999, n.p.40 Rogers 2011, 16.41 The brightness of X-ray images is a measure for

the X-ray absorption of a medium. A dark colour indicates a less absorbing medium such as air.

42 This was probably made of some material with a gold-like shine similar to the golden halo of the original Statue.

43 Oettel & Schumann 2011, 753–70.44 Scott 1991, 5–10.45 Bauer & Hansen 1930; 1931.46 Bauer & Hansen 1929.47 Scott 1991, 20; Oettel & Schumann 2011, 759.48 MacLeod 2006, 6.49 Bauer & Hansen 1930; 1931; Tammann & Hansen

1924, fi g. 5.50 Bauer & Hansen 1934, 128.51 Davies 1993; Campanella et al. 2009.52 Oettel & Schumann 2011, 639; Köhler 1996.53 Davies 1993.54 Tomlinson & Bryan 1986, 106, fi g. 4a; Prakash &

Sritharan 2001.55 Ashkenazi et al. 2011.56 Craddock 1995; Craddock & Eckstein 2003.57 Ullwer 2001; 2008.58 Craddock & Eckstein 2003; Pollard & Heron

2008.59 Haedecke 1973; Day 1998, 146.60 Ullwer 2001; 2008.61 Craddock & Eckstein 2003, 227–8.62 Craddock 1985, 39; Pollard & Heron 2008, 194.63 Schroll 1954.64 Craddock & Eckstein 2003, 228.65 Weirong & Xiangxi 1994; Riederer 2008.66 Day 1998, 154.67 Craddock & Eckstein 2003, 228.68 Craddock 1995, 318; Craddock & Eckstein 2003,

227–8.69 Day 1991, 179.70 Day 1991, 189–93; Day 1998, 149–52.71 Day 1991, 179–89.72 Lueger 1904, 180; Todd et al. 1994, 46.73 Roe 1926, chs IV and IX; Kellermann & Treue

1962, 186–203; Benad-Wagenhoff 1992.74 Temple 1985.75 Day 1991, 192; Davis 2001, 19.76 Schütt 1971.77 The results of No. A3 have been published by

Fourlas 2005/06, those of No. A7 are unpublished, see Table 1.

78 The two statuettes from Anghiari (Nos A5 and A6) were also intended for metallurgical analysis. Permis-sion for sampling has been granted by the Soprinten-denza of Arezzo, however the analyses had not been completed by the time of submission of this paper.

79 Measuring on the corrosion crust can lead to severe deviations in the results due to enrichment or depletion effects in the metal.

80 As a precondition the analyses had to be as less invasive as possible.

81 The detection limits of the employed micro XRF spectrometer are quite high compared to other analys-ing methods so that some important tracers such as cadmium could not be detected.

82 Berger & Stieme forthcoming.


83 Piersig 2010, 18.84 De Cesare 1909, 422–37, 453–60.85 The New Raccolta 1903, 408.86 Vogt 1876, 23.87 Miedema 2003, 39–41.88 Miedema 2003, 251.89 ‘By a grant of the same Sovereign Pontiff, by a

rescript of the S. Congr. of Indulgences, Feb. 4, 1877, and by the disposition of the Sovereign Pontiff, Leo XIII., declared in the audience of April 27, 1880, to His Eminence the Cardinal Secretary of Briefs, the faithful, who keep by them a little statue of S. Peter, like that which is venerated at the Vatican basilica, can gain the same indulgence of fi fty days once a day, when they kiss its feet with devotion, and praying as before, provided that this statue be blessed by the Sovereign Pontiff. This indulgence can be gained by all the members of the family dwelling in the same house.’ The New Raccolta 1903, 409.

90 Coningham & Ali 2007, 22, 97, 232.91 Douie 1916, 188–97.92 The photographs were part of the collection of

photographs of Indian antiquities in the library of the India Offi ce, now part of the British Library, and are labelled: ‘Charsadda, Bronze fi gure resembling St Peter at Rome’. Now: British Library Photo 1006/1 (822) and 1006/2 (823). They are listed in: Archaeo-logical Survey of India (Frontier Circle) 1910–11, 9, Photos nos 822–3.

93 Caglioti 2000, 762.94 Nasrallah 1979, 52–62; Frazee 1983, 132–44,

207–9.95 As Fourlas has already remarked the seal cannot

belong to Makarios I (c. 669–81) as formerly sup-posed but either to Makarios II (1543–50) or Makario s III. Fourlas 2005/06, 147 with note 37 pl. 48,1.

96 Frazee 1983, 133.97 Frazee 1983, 136.98 Zambon et al. 2010, 57.99 Fant & Reddish 2003, 149; Zambon et al. 2010,

55–6.100 Laurent 1873, 172–3.101 Todt & Vest forthcoming, 658.102 Zambon et al. 2010, 57.103 Berliner 1956.104 Caglioti 2000, 767–8.105 Rowland 1943, 67; Fourlas 2005/06, 160.106 Refi ce 2009, 49.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Angelucci, S. 1990, ‘Primi risultati di indagini tecnico-scientifi che sul San Pietro di bronzo della Basilica Vaticana’, Arte Medievale, II. ser., IV:2, 51–8.

Angelucci, S., Martini, M. & Sibilia, E. 1992, ‘La datazione con termoluminescenza del San Pietro in Bronzo della Basilica Vaticana. Alcune precisazioni di metodo e di prassi sulle indagini

tecnico-scientifi che applicate alle opere d’arte’, Arte Medievale, II. ser., VI:2, 157–65.

Ashkenazi, D., Cvikel, D., Iddan, N., Mentovich, E., Kahanov, Y. & Levinshtein, M. 2011, ‘Archaeo-metallurgical study of the brass cases from the Akko 1 shipwreck’, J. Archaeol. Sci. 28:9, 2410–19.

Bauer, O. & Hansen, M. 1929, ‘Der Einfl uss dritter Metalle auf die Konstitution der Messinglegier-ungen. I. Der Einfl uss von Blei. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis des Dreistoffsystems Blei-Zink-Kupfer’, Zeitschrift für Metallkunde 21:5, 145–51 and Zeitschrift für Metallkunde 21:6, 190–6.

Bauer, O. & Hansen, M. 1930, ‘Der Einfl uss dritter Metalle auf die Konstitution der Messinglegier-ungen. III. Der Einfl uss von Zinn. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis des Dreistoff-Systems Zinn-Zink-Kupfer’, Zeitschrift für Metallkunde 22:11, 387–91 and Zeitschrift für Metallkunde 22:12, 405–11.

Bauer, O. & Hansen, M. 1931, ‘Der Einfl uss dritter Metalle auf die Konstitution der Messinglegier-ungen. III. Der Einfl uss von Zinn. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis des Dreistoff-Systems Zinn-Zink-Kupfer’, Zeitschrift für Metallkunde 23:1, 19–22.

Bauer, O. & Hansen, M. 1934, ‘Der Einfl uss dritter Metalle auf die Konstitution der Messinglegier-ungen. VI. Der Einfl uss von Eisen. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis des Dreistoffsystems Kupfer-Zink-Eisen’, Zeitschrift für Metallkunde 26:6, 120–9.

Baumann, S. & Acht, M. 2006, Tu es Petrus. Bilder aus zwei Jahrtausenden, Museumsschriften des Bistums Regensburg 2, Regensburg: Schnell & Steiner.

Benad-Wagenhoff, V. 1992, ‘Die Schraubenherstel-lung von der vorindustriellen Einzelfertigung zur Massenproduktion 1800–1960’, in Hennze 1992, 71–94.

Berger, D. & Stieme, S.L. forthcoming, ‘Die Witten-berger Letternfunde aus der Bürgermeisterstraße 5: Eine typografi sche, historische und materi-alkundliche Betrachtung’, Forschungsberichte des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle.

Berliner, R. 1956, ‘Le sedie settecentesche della statua di S. Pietro nella basilica Vaticana’, Studi Romani 4:3, 301–9.

Birch, D.J. 1998, Pilgrimage to Rome in the Middle Ages: Continuity and Change, Woodbridge: The Boydell Press.

Boncompagni, S., Mazzi, G. & Lelli, P. (eds) 2009, Le Memorie Celate: Il Paesaggio Archeologico nella Terra di Anghiari, Anghiari: Palazzo della Battaglia.

Braunfels, W. 1976, ‘Petrus, Apostel’, in Lexikon der Christlichen Ikonographie 8, Freiburg: Herder, 158–74.

Browne, J. & Dean, T. 1995, Westminster Cathedral: Building of Faith, London: Booth-Clibborn.


Bussagli, M. 1954, ‘An Important Document on the Relations between Rome and India’, East and West 4, 247–54.

Caglioti, F. 2000, ‘Navata centrale. Parete nord. Quarto pilastro da est (Pilone di san Longino). Arnolfo di Cambio (1245/1250 ca–1302) e col-laboratori. San Pietro (1290–1295 ca)’, in Pinelli 2000, 761–8.

Campanella, L., Colacicchi Alessandri, O., Ferretti, M. & Plattner, S.H. 2009, ‘The effect of tin on dezincifi cation of archaeological copper alloys’, Corrosion Science 51:9, 2183–91.

Cassitti, P. 2011, ‘Ein Wallfahrtsandenken aus Schloss Schönwerth in Volders’, in Stadler et al. 2011, 50–9.

Cecchelli, C. 1937, San Pietro. Iconografi a dei Papi I, Roma: Istituto Grafi co Tiberino.

Coningham, R. & Ali, I. 2007, Charsadda. The British-Pakistani Excavations at the Bala Hisar. Brit. Archaeol. Rep. Int. Ser. 1709, Oxford: Tempus Reperatum.

Craddock, P.T. 1985, ‘Medieval copper alloy produc-tion and West African bronze analyses. Part I’, Archaeometry 27:1, 17–41.

Craddock, P.T. 1995, Early Metal Mining and Production, Edinburgh: University Press.

Craddock, P.T. & Eckstein, K. 2003, ‘Production of brass in antiquity by direct reduction’, in Craddock & Lang 2003, 216–30.

Craddock, P.T. & Lang, J. (eds), Mining and Metal Production through the Ages, London: The British Museum Press.

Craddock, P.T. (ed.), 2000 Years of Zinc and Brass, British Museum Occasional Papers 50, London: Short Run Press.

Davies, D.D. 1993, A Note on the Dezincifi cation of Brass and the Inhibiting Effect of Elemental Addi-tions, New York: Copper Development Associa-tion Inc., <www.copper.org/applications/rodbar/pdf/7013.pdf> [last accessed 11 July 2012].

Davis, J.R. (ed.) 2001, ASM Specialty Handbook: Copper and Copper Alloys, Materials Park (OH): ASM International.

Day, J. 1991, ‘Copper, zinc and brass production’, in Day & Tylecote 1991, 131–99.

Day, J. 1998, ‘Brass and zinc in Europe from the Middle Ages until the mid-nineteenth century’, in Craddock British Museum Occ. Pap. 50, 133–58.

Day, J. & Tylecote, R.F. (eds), The Industrial Revolu-tion in Metals, Institute of Metals Book 456, London: Institute of Metals.

De Cesare, R. 1909, The Last Days of Papal Rome: 1850–1870, London: Archibald Constable.

Di Stazio, G.V. 2010, ‘L’homme assis de Nismes: saint, divinité gauloise ou professeur?’, Archeo-Situla 30, 23–32.

Douie, J. 1916, The Panjab, North-West Frontier province and Kashmir, Cambridge: University Press.

Egger, G. 1964, Frühchristliche und koptische Kunst: Ausstellung in der Akademie der Bildenden

Künste, Wien 11. März bis 3. Mai 1964, Wien: Rosenbaum.

Fant, C.E. & Reddish, M.G. 2003, A Guide to Biblical Sites in Greece and Turkey, Oxford: University Press.

Fourlas, B. 2005, ‘Eine Statuette des Apostelfürsten Petrus’, in Hodak et al. 2005, 66–72.

Fourlas, B. 2005/06, ‘Die Statuette des Petrus im Archäologischen Museum der Westfälischen Wilhelms-Universität Münster und ihre Bezie-hung zur Bronzestatue Petri im Petersdom in Rom‘, Boreas — Münstersche Beiträge zur Archäologie 28/29, 141–68.

Fourlas, B. 2006, ‘Eine Statuette des thronenden Petrus: Nachbildung einer Monumentalstatue des Apostelfürsten im spätantiken Rom?’, in Baumann & Acht 2006, 79–85.

Frazee, Ch.A. 1983, Catholics and Sultans: The Church and the Ottoman Empire 1453–1923, Cambridge: University Press.

Grisar, H. 1899, Analecta Romana. La storia di Roma e dei Papi nel medio Evo 1, Roma: Libreria Cattolica Internazionale.

Guarducci, M. 1988, ‘Rifl essioni sulla statua bronzea di San Pietro nella Basilica Vaticana’, Xenia Antiqua 16, 57–72.

Guarducci, M. 1991, San Pietro e Sant’Ippolito: Storia di statue famose in Vaticano, Roma: Ist. Poligrafi co e Zecca dello Stato.

Guarducci, M. 1994, ‘Ancora sulla statua bronzea di San Pietro nella Basilica Vaticana’, Xenia Antiqua 3, 5–16.

Haedecke, K. 1973, ‘Gleichgewichtsverhältnisse bei der Messingherstellung nach dem Galmeiver-fahren’, Erzmetall 26:3, 229–33.

Haggenmüller, M. 1993, Als Pilger nach Rom: Studien zur Romwallfahrt aus der Diözese Augsburg von den Anfängen bis 1900, Augsburg: Franz Fischer.

Heinsch, J. 1999, ‘The Church of St Peter in Tiberias’, in Holy Land Review 1999, n.p., http://198.62.75.1/www1/ofm/mag/MAen9900.html> [accessed 25 July 2012].

Hennze, J. (ed.), Schrauben und Gewinde, Sigmarin-gen: Jan Thorbecke.

Hodak, S., Korol, D. & Maser, P. (eds) 2005, Zeug-nisse spätantiken und frühchristlichen Lebens im römischen Reich, Veröffentlichungen des Archäologischen Museums der Westfälischen Wilhelms-Universität Münster 2, Oberhausen: Athena.

Kellermann, R. & Treue, W. 1962, Die Kulturge-schichte der Schraube, München: Bruckmann.

Köhler, S. 1996, ‘Selektive Korrosion von Kupfer-Zink-Legierungen (selective corrosion of copper-zinc-alloys)’, Materials and Corrosion 47:2, 65–70.

Lanzi, G. & Lanzi, F. 2000, Wege nach Rom: Eine Kulturgeschichte der Pilgerfahrt in die ewige Stadt, Stuttgart: Belser.

Laurent, J.C.M. 1873, Peregrinatores medii aevi quatuor: Burchardus de Monte Sion, Ricoldus de


Monte Crucis, Odoricus de Foro Julii, Wilbrandus de Oldenborg, Lipsiae: Hinrichs.

Lueger, O. 1904, Lexikon der gesamten Technik und ihrer Hilfswissenschaften, 2, sv: Bohrer. Stutt-gart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt.

MacLeod, I.D. 2006, The Surface Analysis of a Brass Plate ‘LUDWIG LEICHHARDT 1848’ and Assessment of Authenticity. Perth: Western Australian Museum, <http://www.nma.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_fi le/0015/5316/AnalysisofthebrassplateLeichhardtv2_1.pdf> [accessed 9 August 2012].

Marshall, J.H. & Vogel, J.Ph. 1904, ‘Excavations at Chārsada in the Frontier Province’, Archaeol. Surv. India Annu. Rep. 1902–03, 141–84.

Miedema, N.R. 2003, Rompilgerführer in Spätmittel-alter und Früher Neuzeit: Die “Indulgentiae eccle-siarum urbis Romae” (deutsch/niederländisch), Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.

Morawietz, G., Schulz, M., Klostermeyer, L. & Rilka, I. 2012, Gorny & Mosch Gießener Münzhandlungs GmbH: Kunst der Antike, Auktion 206, München: Biering, <https://www.gmcoinart.de/templates/images/muenzen/Kataloge/gm_auktion_206_katalog.pdf> [accessed 5 March 2013].

Nasrallah, J. 1979, Histoire du mouvement littéraire dans l’église melechite du Ve au XXe siècle IV:1, Louvain: Peeters.

Oettel, H. & Schumann, H. 2011, Metallografi e: Mit einer Einführung in die Keramografi e, Weinheim: Wiley-VCH.

Pecchiai, P. 1951, ‘Banchi e botteghe dinanzi alla basilica Vaticana nei secoli XIV, XV e XVI’, Archivi ser. 2 18, 81–123.

Piersig, W. 2010, Bronze — Beitrag zur Technikge-schichte, München: GRIN.

Pinelli, A. (ed.), La Basilica di San Pietro in Vaticano = The Basilica of St. Peter in the Vatican, vol. 3, Mirabilia Italiae 10:3, Modena: Panini.

Poeschke, J. 2000, Die Skulptur des Mittelalters in Italien 2, München: Hirmer.

Pollard, A.M. & Heron, C. 2008, Archaeological Chemistry, 2nd edn, Cambridge: RSC.

Prakash, K.H. & Sritharan, T. 2001, ‘Interface reac-tion between copper and molten tin-lead solders’, Acta Materialia 49:13, 2481–9.

Refi ce, P. 2009, ‘Souvenir di San Pietro. Singolari reperti nell’agro di Anghiari’, in Boncompagni et al. 2009, 46–9.

Riederer, J. 2008, ‘The composition of brass objects from Benin’, in Von Berswordt-Wallrabe et al. 2008, 99–152.

Roe, J.W. 1926, English and American Tool Builders, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Rogers, P. 2003, Westminster Cathedral: From Darkness to Light, London: Burns & Oates.

Rogers, P. 2011, ‘Bronze sculptures inspire reverence’, Oremus — The Magazine of Westminster Cathedral, March 2011, 16–17.

Romanini, A.M. 1990, ‘Nuovi dati sulla statua bronzea di San Pietro in Vaticano’, Arte Medievale 4:2, 1–50.

Romanini, A.M. 1994, ‘I colori di San Pietro’, Aachen-er Kunstblätter 60, 267–74.

Rowland, B. 1943, ‘St. Peter in Gandhara. An Early Christian Statuette in India’, Gazette des Beaux-Arts 23, 65–70.

Salmi, M. 1960, ‘Il problema della statua bronzea di S. Pietro nella Basilica Vaticana’, Commentari 11, 22–9.

Schütt, H.-W. 1971, ‘Zur Geschichte der technischen Elektrolyse’, Chemie — Ingenieur — Technik/Aktuelle Nachrichten 5, A125–7.

Scott, D.A. 1991, Metallography and Microstructure of Ancient and Historical Metals, Los Angeles: Paul Getty Trust.

Schroll, E. 1954, Ein Beitrag zur geochemischen Analyse ostalpiner Blei-Zink-Erze, Mitteilungen der Österreichischen Mineralogischen Gesell-schaft 3, Wien: Selbstverlag der Österreichisch Mineralogischen Gesellschaft.

Stadler, H. 2000, ‘Miszellen zur Mittelalter- und Neuzeitarchäologie nach Fundbeispielen aus Fritzens, Volders und Wattens‘, Heimatkundli-che Blätter 9, 37–63.

Stadler, H., Bachler, M., Schmitz-Esser, R., Cassitti, P. & Grabherr, G., ‘Leblos heißt nicht Mundtot’ — Wissenschaft an der Mauer. Das Sparkling-Science-Projekt Schönwerth, Volders, Nearchos Sonderheft 12, Innsbruck: Golf.

Tammann, G. & Hansen, M. 1924, ‘Über das ternäre System Kupfer-Zinn-Zink’, Zeitschrift für Anorganische und Allgemeine Chemie 138, 137–61.

Temple, S.G. 1985, ‘Copper 2: Brasses, bronzes and nickel silvers’, J. Hist. Metall. Soc. 19:1, 12–16.

The New Raccolta 1903, The New Raccolta, or, Collection of Prayers and Good Works. To which the Sovereign Pontiffs have Attached Holy Indulgences. Published in 1898 by Order of His Holiness, Pope Leo XIII. From the Third Italian Edition Authorized and Approved by the Sacred Congregation of Holy Indulgences, Philadelphia: Cunningham.

Todd, R.H., Allen, D.K. & Alting, L. 1994, Manufac-turing Processes Reference Guide, New York: Industrial Press.

Todt, K.-P. & Vest, B.A. forthcoming, ‘Syria (Syria Prote, Syria Deutera, Syria Euphratesia)’, Tabul a Imperii Byzantini 15, Wien: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.

Tomlinson, W.J. & Bryan, N.J. 1986, ‘The strength of brass/Sn-Pb-Sb solder joints containing 0 to 10% Sb’, J. Mater. Sci. 21:1, 103–9.

Ullwer, H. 2001, ‘Messingherstellung nach dem alten Galmeiverfahren’, Erzmetall 54:6, 319–26.

Ullwer, H. 2008, ‘Das alte Galmeiverfahren und die erreichbaren Zinkgehalte’, World Metall. 61:5, 322–7.

Vogt, W. 1876, Nikolaus Muffels Beschreibung der Stadt Rom, Bibliothek des Literarischen Vereins


SUMMARY IN FRENCH, GERMAN, ITALIAN AND SPANISH

RÉSUMÉ‘Saint Pierre à Volders’ et les fi gurines associées, à base métallique, ressemblant à la fameuse statue de la Basilique du Vatican La réévaluation d’une ancienne découverte prove-nant de Volders, près d’Innsbruck, en Austriche, a suscité de nouvelles recherches sur un groupe de statuettes à base métallique, copies miniatures de la fameuse statue en bronze de saint Pierre située dans lla Basilique vaticane à Rome. Leur datation faisait l’objet de débats. Pour résoudre ce prob-lème, plusieurs spécimens de ces statuettes ont été examinés avec l’aide d’outils archéométriques. L’analyse de la technique de fabrication et de la composition de l’alliage ont fourni des indices importants sur la datation des statuettes et ont permis de proposer une interprétation historique du groupe, pris comme un ensemble.

ZUSAMMENFASSUNG‘St. Peter in Volders’ und verwandte Statuetten aus Buntmetall, die die berühmte Statue in der Vatikanischen Basilika darstellenDie Neubearbeitung eines Altfundes aus Volders in der Nähe von Innsbruck, Österreich, war Anlass für neue Untersuchungen an einer Gruppe von Buntmetallstatuetten, bei denen es sich um Minia-turen der berühmten Bronzestatue von St. Peter in der Vatikanischen Basilika in Rom handelt. Das Alter dieser Statuetten war bisher umstritten. Im vorliegenden Aufsatz werden mehrere Exemplare zusammengeführt und mit Hilfe archäometrischer Methoden genauer untersucht. Die Analyse der Herstellungsmethoden und Legierungszusam-mensetzungen lieferte wichtige Hinweise für die Datierung der Statuetten und ermöglichte die historische Einordnung der gesamten Gruppe.

RIASSUNTO‘San Peter a Volders’ e le correlate statuette in metallo comune che riproducono la famosa statua nella Basilica VaticanaLa nuova analisi di un antico ritrovamento a Volders, nei pressi di Innsbruck, in Austria, fornisce lo spunto per una nuova ricerca su un gruppo di statuette in metallo comune che sono copie in miniatura della famosa statua bronzea di San Pietro, conservata nella Basilica Vaticana a Roma. La loro datazione è stata oggetto di dibattito. Il contributo analizza diversi esemplari delle statu-ette, allo scopo di sciogliere questo nodo con l’aiuto dell’archeometria. L’analisi delle tecniche di ese-cuzione e della composizione della lega fornisce importanti indizi per la datazione delle statuette, consentendo l’interpretazione storica di questo gruppo di manufatti in maniera unitaria.

RESUMEN‘San Pedro en Volders’ y las fi gurinas de metal pare-cidas a la famosa estatua de la basílica vaticanaLa revalorización de un antiguo hallazgo de Volders, cerca de Innsbruck, Austria, ha promovid o una nueva investigación sobre un grupo de estatu-illas de metal que replican en miniatura la famosa estatua de bronce de San Pedro de la basílica vati-cana de Roma. La fecha de tales estatuillas ha sido objeto de debate. Este artículo presenta los resulta-dos de los análisis arqueométricos utilizados para examinar la técnica de fabricación y la composición metálica de las estatuillas, resultados que propor-cionan pistas importantes para su datación a la vez que han permitido la interpretación histórica del grupo en su conjunto.

Institute of Archaeology, Heritage Sciences and Art History, University of Bamberg, Wilhelmsplatz 3, D-96047 Bamberg, Germany

[[email protected]]

Curt-Engelhorn-Centre Archaeometry gGmbH, D6, 3, D-68159 Mannheim, Germany [[email protected]]

Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum Mainz, Ernst-Ludwig-Platz 2, D-55116 Mainz, Germany [[email protected]]

in Stuttgart 128, Tübingen:Literarischer Verein Stuttgart.

Von Berswordt-Wallrabe, S., Pernicka, E. & Wagner, H. (eds), Original-copy-fake? Examining the Authenticity of Ancient Works of Art Focussing on African and Asian Bronzes and Terracottas, Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.

Weirong, Z. & Xiangxi, F. 1994, ‘Application of zinc and cadmium for the dating and authenticating

of metal relics in ancient China’, Bull. Metals Mus. 22, 16–21.

Woodruff, C.E. 1933, A XVth Century Guide-Book to the Principal Churches of Rome: Compiled C. 1470 by William Brewyn, London: The Marshall Press.

Zambon, M., Bertogli, D. & Granella, O. 2010, Antiochia sull’Oronte: ‘. . . dove I discepoli furono chiamati cristiani . . .’. Antakya: Eteria.

‘St Peter in Volders’ and related base metal figurines resembling the famous statue in the...

Documents

Transcript of ‘St Peter in Volders’ and related base metal figurines resembling the famous statue in the...