Pepper for Prayer

Pepper for Prayer provides the first complete and unredacted edition and translation of a collection of correspondence known as the Lemmel letters, which provided the basis for the 2009 publication Katerina’s Windows: Donation and Devotion, Art and Music As Heard and Seen Through the Writings of a Birgittine Nun by Corine Schleif and Volker Schier (reviewed in Vidimus Issue 36 (January 2010). As readers familiar with Katerina’s Windows will know, these letters offer a rare glimpse into sixteenth-century German society, including the commissioning of devotional stained glass.

The correspondent, Katerina Imhoff (1466-1533), was born in Nuremburg to a wealthy patrician family, whose famous family firm, the Imhoff Trading Company, traded internationally in metal goods and spices. At eighteen, she married Michel Lemmel, a nobleman from Bamberg whose family also dealt in metal, as well as wine. Katerina was a successful businesswoman in her own right, managing her own diverse and lucrative portfolio. However, in 1516, three years after the death of Michel and against the advice of her family, she entered the Birgittine monastery of Maria Mai, where she remained until her death in 1533. As Maria Mai was around eighty kilometres from Nuremburg, Katerina maintained contact with her family almost exclusively through letters, despite the frequent unreliability of this channel of communication. Katerina’s dependence upon written correspondence means that the letters cover a diverse range of topics, painting a richly evocative picture of both Katerina herself, and the society she lived in. Beyond the formulaic opening and closing sentences, her letters are relatively unstructured, flowing in a stream of consciousness that evokes her voice and almost gives the reader the impression of being in conversation with Katerina herself.

Pepper for Prayer, which is published in Runica et Mediævalia’s series of medieval text editions, makes Katerina’s correspondence readily accessible to scholars and casual readers alike. The introduction provides explanatory notes on the orthography, transcription and translation of the letters, as well as a brief but informative overview of the context within which they were created, highlighting key aspects of their significance as source material. Codicological analysis, along with discussions of genre and style, further contextualise the letters and demonstrate how insights into Katerina’s personality, as well as her world, can be gained from studying her correspondence. The letters (figs. 1 & 2), and facets of the world they contain, are brought to life by well-chosen illustrations, such as the New Year’s greeting woodcut of a similar type to those sent by the abbesses of Maria Mai to Hans V, and the beautifully illuminated manuscripts containing the rule of St Birgitta, and the prayers and songs sung by the nuns.

Transcriptions of the original letters are presented, in chronological order, alongside modern English translations, which are carefully laid out on the facing pages, making them easily accessible. Footnotes on the translation of unusual words are included beneath the transcription, but the texts otherwise lack annotation or explanation. In Katerina’s Windows, the letters were presented in translation, accompanied by critical commentary, along with a wider range of documentary sources through which Katerina’s life, and contemporary art, music and religion, were explored. In Pepper for Prayer, family members who feature prominently, such as Hans V Imhoff, are identified in the introduction, and genealogical tables enable other key figures to be identified, but the extensive commentary of the earlier publication is not duplicated. This means that readers will need to refer to Katerina’s Windows when seeking detailed contextual information or critical analysis regarding specific individuals or events referred to within the letters. The ease of cross-referencing between the two publications is greatly aided by the consistent labelling of the letters, while the extensive indexes enable readers to locate specific topics in both volumes with ease. As well as making Pepper for Prayer smaller, and therefore easier to hold and read, the lack of commentary allows the letters to be read without interruption, bringing the flow of events to the forefront and drawing the reader into Katerina’s life.

Naturally, those interested in stained glass will seek out Katerina’s comments regarding the commissioning of stained-glass windows for the cloister she built at Maria Mai. From her first suggestion to Hans V that he and her family have the windows made, Katerina’s efforts to persuade her relatives of the benefits of donating stained glass, and her discussion of the design and production processes, provide unparalleled insights into the commissioning of devotional and commemorative schemes in the early sixteenth century. In contrast to the functional, and often dry, language of other surviving records, such as contracts, Katerina’s letters reveal the emotional and devotional motives of stained glass commissioners. She explicitly states her preference that her family and friends, rather than “strangers”, contribute to the windows, so that they will be remembered, and prayed for, regularly. These comments also demonstrate the important function of heraldic devices as proxies for individuals, to ensure their commemoration.

Katerina also reveals some of the practical considerations discussed during commissioning, such as the need for sufficient light within the cloister, so that the nuns can read their books as they process through the cloister, singing, and the choice of metal frames for durability. Her awareness of production techniques is evident from her concerns about the shade of yellow achieved in the shields and the remarkable instruction that the “red on the shield should be etched; otherwise it won’t last when exposed to the weather”. Sadly, the windows have not endured as an “eternal memorial”,⁴ as Katerina hoped. Yet, the survival of other Imhoff commissions made by the Hirsvogel workshop enables us to catch a glimpse of how the lost glass may have looked (fig. 3).

Although her family members funded the windows, the letters indicate that Katerina selected the figural iconography, determined the narrative sequence and chose which scenes her relatives’ arms would accompany. Throughout her descriptions and discussions, Katerina’s knowledge and authority over the glazing commissions is evident, and the value of hearing this confident, articulate female voice cannot be understated. Her agency as a commissioner provides rare evidence of the roles sixteenth-century women of her status could play in business, and their ability to commission art and architecture.