The Importance of Literary Sources in the Pictorial Tradition of the Beatus Manuscripts: The Case of Percussion Musical Instruments

Abstract

This work carries out a detailed analysis of the context and the reasons that led the illustrators of the Beatus manuscripts to select and represent the two percussion instruments that appear in the illustration of Visio III of the Commentary on the Book of Daniel by Jerome transmitted in some manuscripts since the number of percussion instruments drawn and their typology do not correspond to what can be read in Jerome’s text, in the biblical text, and in the existing bibliography on the subject. This fact cannot be explained solely on the basis of the preceding pictorial tradition or the organological reality of the time, as the absence of sources does not allow for this. However, the literary sources of that period may have influenced the illustrators of this scene to draw these two percussion instruments.

1. Objective

The aim of this work is to carry out a detailed analysis of the circumstances and reasons that led the illuminators of the Beatus manuscripts to select and represent the musical instruments in Visio III or Visio Tertia of the Commentary on the Book of Daniel by Jerome transmitted in several of the preserved manuscripts, focusing the analysis on the percussion instruments. This Visio III comments on chapter 3 of the Book of Daniel, in which there are up to four lists (3:5, 7, 10, 15) of musical instruments that were used to worship the golden statue that Nebuchadnezzar II ordered to be built.

The appearance of two percussion instruments in this illustration (when in the Commentary on the Book of Daniel and in the biblical text itself, and not with certainty, only one appears: the symphonia1) is a fact that cannot be explained solely, as critics have tried to do, on the basis of the preceding pictorial tradition or the organological reality of the time, which, moreover, are very imprecise in this specific matter due to the absence of preserved sources, as will be shown later on. In fact, I believe that it was the literary sources that initially led to the illustration depicting two percussion instruments, a membranophone and an idiophone, a question that had not been raised by critics until now.

If we put aside Section 2 and Section 10 of this article, devoted respectively to the state of the question, the conclusions and the bibliography, this work is divided into two large blocks. The first block (Section 3, Section 4, Section 5 and Section 6) is mainly devoted to the study of the pictorial, literary, and musical traditions that preceded the musical instruments in question. In Section 3 and Section 4, the analysis focuses on the textual and pictorial tradition of the manuscript transmission of the Beatus manuscripts themselves, and in Section 5 and Section 6, on the earlier Western cultural tradition. The analysis carried out in this section will serve, among other aspects, to delimit the relevance and innovation of the representation of the percussion musical instruments in this scene of the Beatus manuscripts in relation to the preceding Western cultural tradition. The second block (Section 7, Section 8 and Section 9) is devoted to delimiting the relationships between the literary sources that the illustrators of the Beatus manuscripts could have read, the cultural (and, within this, the musical) context of the illustrators themselves, and the representations of these percussion instruments in the Beatus manuscripts. Through the detailed analysis carried out in both blocks, which are necessary and complementary, the circumstances and reasons that must have led the illuminators to select and represent the two percussion instruments that appear in this scene will be precisely delimited.

2. The State of the Question

The study of the musical instruments that appear in the preserved Beatus manuscripts has been a subject that has not enjoyed critical favour. The Beatus manuscripts are cited for different purposes as an example of a source that preserved a certain type of musical iconography, but there are hardly any detailed studies of their content. This situation is even more acute with the instruments in question, those that appear in Commentary on the Book of Daniel by Jerome, as they are only found in four manuscripts of the twenty-nine that contain miniatures, occupying, therefore, a very marginal place in the pictorial tradition of the Beatus manuscripts (in spite of their undoubted organological importance)2.

There are no detailed studies on these instruments in the manuals of Western or Iberian medieval musical iconography or organology, although they can be considered iconographic and organological landmarks due to their idiosyncrasy and the rarity of their location and dating3.

The same is true of musical archaeology works, which deal with different kinds of musical instruments dating from the early Middle Ages in excavations on the Iberian Peninsula. Furthermore, the vast majority of this type of archaeological studies are dedicated to finds from the centuries after the creation of the family of Beatus manuscripts in question, the 10th century, and the few that can be traced back to that period are dedicated to finds located in Muslim territory, which are much more numerous (Navarro 2020, pp. 15–53, 216–40).

On the other hand, the works from other disciplines (mainly art history and philology) that have studied the Beatus manuscripts do not pay much attention to the musical instruments contained in their miniatures, and those of the Commentary on the Book of Daniel are particularly rare due to their exceptionality4. As an example, two of the four study volumes accompanying the four facsimile editions of the four Beatus manuscripts containing these instruments, the study volume of the Beatus of Valladolid and the study volume of the Beatus of Silos, do not pay any attention to the musical instruments when dealing with the corresponding miniature (Rodríguez and Herreros 1993, pp. 74–75; Franco 2003, p. 188). The other two volumes of studies, the one accompanying the Beatus of Urgel and the one accompanying the Beatus of King Ferdinand, also do not deal in detail with the instruments themselves when studying this illustration (Klein 2002, pp. 271–72; Yarza 1994, pp. 224–25), focusing on an aspect that was already dealt with by the previous bibliography (Neuss 1931, p. 226), explaining the reasons for the absence of these instruments (and the musicians who play them) in the other Beatus manuscripts that do contain the illustration of the adoration of the statue of Nebuchadnezzar, since it seems that there is a gap in the miniatures that should have been filled by the musicians and their instruments, an absence to which an answer will be given later in accordance with the research carried out in this work5.

The works of history of art dedicated to the study of the different pictorial cycles derived from the Book of Daniel have not dealt with the issue discussed in this work since the image that concerns us has not traditionally been the subject of artistic representation (unlike other cycles of the same book that have enjoyed fame throughout the history of Western art), even in works as close iconographically to the Beatus manuscripts as the Bible in the Archive of the Royal Collegiate Church of San Isidoro of León, Ms. 2 (Vallejo 1997, pp. 159–74; 1999, pp. 175–86; Mentré 1989, pp. 77–82).

It is, therefore, necessary to turn to those works that have specifically dealt with the issue at hand. Within the field of musicology, we must highlight a work (Romero 1977), the first monographic and detailed publication on the organology of the Beatus manuscripts, as it focuses on the study of the tubae and citharae of the Commentary on the Apocalypse attributed to Beatus of Liebana, ignoring, therefore, the Commentary on the Book of Daniel by Jerome and the percussion instruments that concern us in this study. Due to the purpose for which it was created (an entrance speech to the Royal Academy of Fine Arts of San Fernando), it is a work of scholarship rather than a work of research; nevertheless, several important contributions can be highlighted. Firstly, it brings together previous approaches to the subject (pp. 26–32), outlining in general terms the (practically non-existent) state of the question. Secondly, although he stresses mainly the Arab influence in explaining the drawings of the tuba and cithara, he is aware that there are other influences (pp. 64–79). Thirdly, he notes the importance of the organological context of the time in the illustration of the tuba and cithara of the manuscripts (pp. 79–89).

Subsequently, the research of Dr. Rosario Álvarez stands out since, throughout her life, she has been the person who has studied Iberian medieval organology in the most depth, including the musical iconography preserved in the Beatus manuscripts. She devoted two works to the latter subject (Álvarez 1982a, 1993).

In the first one, she makes an iconographic and, to a lesser extent, organological commentary on all the musical instruments that appear in the Beatus manuscripts, devoting fundamental attention to chordophones (pp. 49–68) and, to a much lesser extent, to the rest: aerophones (pp. 68–71); membranophones (pp. 71–72); and idiophones (p. 72). She considers the membranophone to be a darbuka, an instrument introduced by the Arabs in the Iberian Peninsula from the early times of the conquest, according to the author (p. 71). She devotes barely ten lines to the description of the idiophone, rightly indicating that it is a set of cymbals.

The second of the articles is much more complete and detailed, carrying out not only an organological and iconographic analysis of the instruments but also a fundamental aspect of the objective of this work: an analysis of the origin of the instruments that appear in the Beatus manuscripts. This article, therefore, constitutes in itself the state of the art on the issue at hand. This work is divided into three sections, excluding the introduction and conclusions. The first one (pp. 205–8) is devoted to the study of the aerophones in the Commentary on the Apocalypse. The second one, the longest (pp. 208–16), is a study of the chordophones in the above-mentioned commentary. And the third one, the shortest (pp. 216–18), is a study of the instruments used in the worship of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue in the Commentary on the Book of Daniel.

The author believes that four of the instruments described could be adapted to the biblical text (p. 217):

“Indeed, there is a tuba, which in the painters’ conception could be, as we have already seen, a horn or a straight trumpet; also a double oboe, which could translate the term fistula; a lute, which would translate the term cithara; and the cup-shaped drum, which would represent the symphonia, which according to the description given of it by Saint Isidore (Etymologiae, lib. III, cap. 22) was a drum with a double drumhead”.

The author finds no explanation for the sambuca and the psalterium. In fact, she considers that the inclusion of cymbals could be explained by the lack of models on the part of the painters, which obliged them to include a different type of instrument.

However, and despite what was said above in relation to the membranophone, the author does not consider this instrument to be the symphonia isidoriana but rather a narrow cup-shaped drum that oscillates in the three codices between this shape and that of an hourglass, indicating (as in her first work) that it is a darbuka. In addition, the author states that the instrument has a single drumhead and is played with one or two hands, held in different ways, indicating that the ones depicted in the codices are rather unusual (suspended high and with the drumhead facing downward).

With regard to the cymbals, Álvarez indicates that this is an instrument that does not appear in European iconography at the same time or prior to the Beatus manuscripts, although they are frequent in Byzantine iconography.

These considerations are what essentially lead the author to consider that Obecus (the illuminator of the Beatus of Valladolid, the oldest of those containing the instruments that are the subject of this work) used a Coptic model to draw this scene because nowhere else could the combination of instruments that appear in it be found6.

Subsequently, the author returned to the subject of the musical iconography of the Beatus manuscripts in a study of a similar theme, contributing some new information (Álvarez 1995). The author states (pp. 99–102) that the manuscripts reflect common scenes of Andalusian musical life, including the instruments. Furthermore, in the specific case of the membranophone, she again describes it as a darbuka, but this time providing evidence of archaeological finds of drums from the Iberian Peninsula with similar characteristics to the darbuka and dated to the same period as the Beatus manuscripts (Álvarez and Roselló 1989). However, she does not rule out the existence of a North African model, possibly Coptic, which she defended in the previous article mentioned above.

This is, in broad terms, the state of the art on the subject. In this paper, the objectives set out will lead to refuting some of the aspects pointed out in the state of the question that I consider to be erroneous, biased or inconclusive, depending on the case.

3. The Musical Instruments of the Commentary on the Book of Daniel within the Literary Tradition of the Beatus Manuscripts

The text of the commentary attributed to Beatus of Liébana can be framed in the line of other earlier and later commentaries on Revelation, relying heavily on the preceding patristic literature (Gryson 2012, pp. XI–XIII, CXXXIV–CXLII; Álvarez 1978, pp. 130–32). Several editions or revisions of Beatus’ text have been reported, and it is generally accepted that the first edition of the text took place in 776. Subsequently, at least two more recensions were made, which critics have fixed at 784 and around 940, the latter being posthumous (Gryson 2012, pp. XXX–LXIV)7. This last recension presents notable extensions in relation to the previous versions, incorporating after Beatus’ commentary, perhaps for the first time, the Commentary on the Book of Daniel by Jerome, which is the text that concerns us in this work8. This recension can be observed in all the manuscripts of the right branch of the stemma (the R family, descended from the δ subarchetype) proposed by Gryson (2012, p. LXIV), with the exception of the manuscript from the monastery of San Andrés de Arroyo (F-Pn, Nouv. Acq. Lat. 2290), which is incomplete from Book XII of the Commentary on the Apocalypse by Beatus. All the surviving manuscripts of this family were copied from the mid-10th century onwards from models which already incorporated this recension9. In addition, there are two manuscripts belonging to different stemma families (the α and γ families), one older and one later, of Castilian (E-Mh, Cod. 33) and Gascon origin (F-Pn, Lat. 8878), respectively, to which the aforementioned 10th-century recension was also partially applied, being, therefore, the manuscripts that also contain the Commentary on Book of Daniel by Jerome10.

In all the manuscripts mentioned above, the same musical instruments appear, cited, in turn, in the biblical text, since Jerome (1.3.4-6), in the Visio Tertia of his commentary, paraphrases the list of instruments of the Vulgate (Dan 3:5, 7, 10, 15): tuba; fistula; cithara; sambuca; psalterium; and symphonia (Weber and Gryson 2007, pp. 1871–72; Glorie 1964, p. 798). Later (1.3.7b), Jerome simplifies the list, noting only tuba, fistula, and cithara (Glorie 1964, p. 799).

4. The Musical Instruments of the Commentary on the Book of Daniel within the Pictorial Tradition of the Beatus Manuscripts

The pictorial tradition of the Beatus manuscripts, although closely linked to the literary, is different from the literary, so it is important to distinguish carefully between the textual tradition and the pictorial tradition (Klein 1978; Gryson 2012, p. XX)11. Klein (1978, p. 96) fixed two pictorial versions of the work, dating the first pictorial version to 784. This first version has been transmitted in two formats, an older one, transmitted in the manuscripts of the family located on the left branch of the stemma, and a more recent one, the latter being observed in the manuscripts E-Mn, Vit. 14-1 and F-Pn, Lat. 8878, the latter being the more interesting format for the purpose of this work, as the latter manuscript will later receive new additions that correspond, according to Klein, to the second pictorial version12.

Subsequently, a second pictorial version was established, which also had two phases, the earliest of which is seen in the additions of E-Mh, Cod. 3313. The most modern phase of this second pictorial version takes place at the same time as the third textual recension, which critics date to around 940, as indicated above, as it was accurately dated (on very solid grounds) to around 940–945 (Williams 1978, pp. 216–19). The most modern phase of this second pictorial version is the one that affects all the manuscripts of the right branch family of Gryson’s stemma (Gryson 2012, p. LXIV, the R branch, from the δ archetype) and Klein’s (1978, p. 96, families IIa and IIb)14. Moreover, as mentioned above, this second pictorial version also affected the codex from Saint-Sever (F-Pn, Lat. 8878), which, as mentioned above, according to Klein, is also one of the two surviving representatives of the more modern branch of the first pictorial version.

However, although the third textual version and this more modern phase of the second pictorial version can be seen in all the manuscripts of the right branch of Gryson’s stemma (family R), which coincides with families IIa and IIb of Klein’s stemma, it is true that the miniatures of the musical instruments in question can only be seen in the manuscripts that constitute the so-called “Magius group” (with the exception of the manuscript illuminated by Magius himself), which corresponds to Klein’s group IIa and one of the two subfamilies (the left one) of the right branch indicated by Gryson. Klein’s group IIb (the right subfamily of the right branch of Gryson’s stemma) and the manuscript from Saint Sever (F-Pn, Lat. 8878) contain the miniature but without musical instruments, with the exception of the Beatus of Cardeña (E-Mman, Ms. 2), which, although belonging to this group, contains the text without the miniature (and the aforementioned case of the incomplete Beatus of San Andrés de Arroyo, which lacks the Commentary on the Book of Daniel)15.

Therefore, of the forty-one textual testimonies (with or without miniatures) preserved among unabridged manuscripts and fragments16 and of the twenty-nine pictorial testimonies preserved among unabridged manuscripts and fragments (Williams 2017, pp. 67–148), only four manuscripts belonging to the same subfamily (made up of five manuscripts) within the stemma, unanimously recognised both at textual and pictorial level, the so-called “Magius group”, contain the text and illustrations of interest to us. The family is made up of the following codices:

The Beatus of Magius or Beatus Morgan: New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, Ms 644. This manuscript, dated to the mid-10th century, perhaps around 945, comes from the Monastery of San Salvador of Tábara or the area around the Monastery of San Miguel de la Escalada (Gryson 2012, p. XV; Williams 2017, pp. 69–72). This manuscript is the only one of the group that contains the illustration of the adoration of the statue without musical instruments (f. 248v);

The Beatus of Valladolid or of Valcavado: Valladolid, University Library, Ms. 433. The manuscript is dated 970, from the Monastery of Valcavado (Gryson 2012, p. XVI; Williams 2017, pp. 75–78). The instruments are found on f. 199v;

The Beatus of Urgel: Urgel, Diocesan Archive, Ms. 26. Manuscript dated to the last quarter of the 10th century, whose provenance has been placed in La Rioja, Navarre or Aragon (Pyrenean area) on the basis of a model from the Kingdom of León (Gryson 2012, p. XVI; Williams 2017, pp. 87–89). The instruments are found on f. 213v;

The Beatus of King Ferdinand or Beatus of Facundus: Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional, Ms. Vit. 14-2. Dated 1047, from a royal scriptorium in León, perhaps from Sahagún (Gryson 2012, p. XV; Williams 2017, pp. 96–99). The instruments are found on f. 276v;

The Beatus of Silos: London, British Library, Ms. Add. 11695. A copy of the text was made in 1091, and that of the images in 1109. It comes from the Monastery of Santo Domingo of Silos (Gryson 2012, p. XIV; Williams 2017, pp. 112–15). The instruments are found on f. 299r.

Among the four manuscripts containing the instruments, different organological relationships can be observed that provide interesting information about the transmission of the scene in question. First of all, it must be assumed that the first testimony that contains the musical instruments discussed is the Beatus of Valladolid, dated 970, so it is very likely that the model on which this Beatus was based was the first to contain the famous instrumental ensemble of the Commentary on the Book of Daniel. According to Díaz y Díaz (1978, p. 177) in this group, the following relationships are observed:

“The model of Magius, which, as has been said, probably came from the Castilian area, was related to one or more other codices, from one of which, almost at the same time as Magius, the Beatus of Valcavado was copied by the scribe and illuminator Obecus, whose spelling is closely related to the former. And from a different codex, but not very different, a little later, further east, perhaps already in the region of Navarre, the Beatus of Urgel was copied. Some time later, from a model also related to that of Obecus, the codex that is now in London came out in Silos”.

Furthermore, in the colloquium following this conference, in response to Otto Werckmeister’s direct question about the origin of the Silos manuscript (now in London), Díaz y Díaz (1978, p. 190) replies that “specifically, the text of Valcavado, through whatever copies it may be, he-or a twin of his-is, in my opinion, the one that reached Silos and gave rise to the London manuscript”.

Therefore, according to Díaz y Díaz, the Beatus of Urgel was copied from a model very close to the one used to copy the Beatus of Valladolid and from the Beatus of Valladolid itself or, what is more likely, from one very close, the Beatus of Silos was copied17.

If we look at the arrangement of the instruments in the scene, we can see how the Valladolid and Urgel Beatus have the same instruments, all different from each other, and the same arrangement on the folio. However, the Beatus of King Ferdinand, which must have come from a similar model to the one used to create these codices, has a slight variation, exchanging the interior instruments, moving the cymbala to the right side of the statue and the cithara (the lute) to the left.

The Beatus of Silos, on the other hand, presents a much simpler arrangement than can be seen in these three codices since it includes an ensemble made up only of the two main types of instruments, which, moreover, already appeared in the illustrations of the Commentary on the Apocalypse of Beatus in all the manuscripts: the cithara (the lute) and the tuba18. These instruments are arranged symmetrically, as follows: tuba–cithara–tuba-statue of Nebuchadnezzar-tuba–cithara–tuba. This differentiating fact distances us from the very meticulous filiation drawn by Díaz y Díaz (1978, p. 177), although it can also be explained by the greater schematization and simplification observed in this codex if we compare it with the previous ones of his own family (Werckmeister 1978, pp. 221–27). In any case, what seems clear is that the illuminator preferred to continue illustrating this scene with the instruments he already knew, as he had performed on numerous occasions in the folios of the Commentary on the Apocalypse of Beatus rather than experimenting with new ones.

5. Pictorial Influences of the Illustrations in the Commentary on the Book of Daniel

Klein (1978, pp. 90–104), following Neuss (1931, pp. 239–41, 273–74), considered that the pictorial tradition of the Commentary on the Apocalypse transmitted in the Hispanic Beatus manuscripts could ultimately be traced back to an archetype, African or Spanish, from the 5th or 6th centuries. At the same time, however, Klein questioned Neuss’s methodology and results and argued that the Beatus manuscripts are an independent pictorial tradition resulting from characteristics and influences that crystallised on the Iberian peninsula, a tradition that has no direct relationship with the other late-antique cycles, as the Central European illustrated Apocalypses do (Klein 2010, pp. 13–26).

The same is true of the pictorial tradition of the illustrations of the Commentary on the Book of Daniel by Jerome preserved in the Beatus manuscripts since their origin must be sought in the pictorial tradition of the Hispanic Bibles, which culminates with the Bible preserved in the Archive of the Royal Collegiate Church of San Isidoro of León, already referred to above (Williams 1965, 1978, 1999; Zaluska 1987)19. Williams (1978, pp. 211–13; 1994, p. 60), following Neuss (1931, pp. 222–36), carefully demonstrated with very solid arguments that this cycle of illustrations did not come from an illustrated Book of Daniel or an illustrated commentary on it, but from an illustrated Bible, probably earlier than the one quoted above. However, contrary to Neuss, who argued that the illustrations in the Commentary on the Book of Daniel belonged from the beginning to the archetypal illustrated commentary produced during Beatus’ lifetime, Williams (1978, pp. 211–13; 1994, p. 25) showed that they were only added to the manuscript tradition in the 10th century. He did not deny that these illustrations were ultimately derived, like the illustrations in Beatus’ commentary, from a late antique model20. However, he defended (similar to Klein’s approach to the illustrations of the Commentary on the Apocalypse) the authenticity and independence of the Hispanic pictorial tradition, which in the middle of the 10th century and after the contributions of different influences (Schlunk 1945, pp. 241–65; de Palol 1978, pp. 117–34; Ainaud 1978, pp. 19–32; Beckwith 1978, pp. 55–64; Guilmain 1978, pp. 65–82), culminated in a pictorial revival that came to fruition with the cycle of illustrations of the Commentary on the Book of Daniel that was included in the manuscripts (Williams 1978, pp. 213–19; 1994, pp. 55–78; 2017, pp. 23–26). This pictorial renovation is, therefore, embodied in the most modern phase of the second pictorial version described by Klein, which, as mentioned above, Williams himself dates to around 940–945.

6. Relevance and Innovation of the Musical Instruments of the Beatus Manuscripts within the Pictorial Tradition Preceding the Book of Daniel

Before concluding the analysis of the pictorial tradition, it is important to point out that the Bible preserved in the Archive of the Royal Collegiate Church of San Isidoro of León (Ms. 2) has only three miniatures related to the cycle of Daniel (ff. 318r-v, 319r-v, and 325v)21, to which another on the story of Susanna must be added, closely related to Daniel (f. 324v), and three other minor ones (two capital letters and small handwriting, located in a square less than half the width of a column) that have nothing to do with the story narrated in the biblical text. Therefore, none of these miniatures illustrates the worship of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue, and the musical instruments discussed in this article do not appear at any time.

The absence of this scene is not only characteristic of this Bible but is repeated throughout the previous history of Iberian art (Williams 1977; Fontaine 1977, pp. 319–408) since, although the representations of certain cycles of the Book of Daniel have enjoyed great fortune throughout history (such as the three young men in the furnace or Daniel in the lions’ den), the fact is that the appearance of the musical instruments in the scene of the worship of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue has been a forgotten episode in the visual arts (Réau 1978, pp. 390–410).

The absence of these instruments in the earlier art means that their representation in the Beatus manuscripts can be considered a truly personal creation of the Iberian illuminators of the 10th century. In this sense, it is enough to take a look at the list of instruments in the Book of Daniel (3:5, 7, 10, 15) and Jerome’s commentary (3.4–6, 3.7b) and analyse their characteristics (Mitchell and Joyce 1965). The relationship of the instruments between the three biblical texts, Vulgate (Weber and Gryson 2007, pp. 1871–72), Septuagint (Rahlfs and Hanhart 2006, p. 1483), and Hebrew Bible (Elliger and Rudolph 1997, pp. 1386–87), is as follows (see

Table 1. Biblical Instruments (Dan 3:5, 7, 10, 15).

Hebrew Bible	Septuagint	Vulgate
קַרנא (qarna’) (Kolyada 2009, pp. 65–66; Montagu 2002, pp. 96–97)	σάλπιγξ (Landels 1999, pp 78–81; Mathiesen 1999, pp. 230–34; Michaelides 1978, pp. 55, 294–95; Webster 1998, pp. 140–55; West 1992, pp. 118–22; Wille 1967, pp. 75–104)	tuba
םשרוקיתא (mašrȏqîṯā) (Kolyada 2009, pp. 94–97; Montagu 2002, pp. 97–98)	σῦριγξ (Landels 1999, pp. 69–72; Mathiesen 1999, pp. 222–25; Michaelides 1978, pp. 314–16; West 1992, pp. 109–14; Wille 1967, pp. 109–22, 524–30, 536)	fistula
קיתרס (qayṯrȏs) (Kolyada 2009, pp. 51–53; Montagu 2002, p. 98)	κιθάρα (Landels 1999, pp. 48–53; Maas and Snyder 1989, pp. 2–14, 24–36, 53–79, 165–81; Mathiesen 1999, pp. 258–70; Michaelides 1978, pp. 168–70; West 1992, pp. 50–56)	cithara
סבכא (śabbəḵā’)23	σαμβύκη (Duchesne-Guillemin 1968, pp. 5–18; Maas and Snyder 1989, pp. 151, 184, 186, 201, 244, n. 121; Mathiesen 1999, pp. 275–80)	sambuca
פסנתרין (pəsantērîn) (Kolyada 2009, pp. 50–51; Montagu 2002, pp. 98, 110–11)	ψαλτήριον (Maas and Snyder 1989, pp. 1–2, 40–41, 147–55, 181–84; Mathiesen 1999, pp. 270–72; Michaelides 1978, p. 276)	psalterium
סימפניה (sûmpōnyā)24	συμφωνία25	symphonia

), with some slight variations, depending on the listing (recall that there are four different listings in verses 5, 7, 10 and 15, respectively)22.

Therefore, if we compare the characteristics of these instruments from the Ancient World with the instruments that appear in the Beatus manuscripts, we can see that the Beatus manuscripts contain a very different instrumental ensemble in which we can observe some instruments with organological characteristics very different from those that appear in the ancient sources and which have been described by critics. Broadly speaking, it is sufficient to recall that in the biblical text, there are two aerophones, three chordophones, and the symphonia. However, in the Beatus manuscripts that we are dealing with here, there are three aerophones (two of them seem to have similar characteristics), only one chordophone, and two percussion instruments, a membranophone and an idiophone.

The illuminators were faced with a major problem. They had before them a commentary written almost six centuries earlier (Jerome’s commentary) on a translation (the Vulgate, also by Jerome) of another text written six centuries before the commentary and the Vulgate and twelve centuries before the time of the illuminators themselves and which, therefore, referred to a cultural (and, within this, organological) context very different from the Iberian cultural world of the tenth century (Collins 2002, pp. 1–15).

This difference in the cultural context and the absence of organological models in previous visual arts when illustrating this story were the causes that forced the illuminators to look for information from other sources, being, in the first place, the literary sources, the ones that must have determined the illuminators’ decision to draw one instrument and not another, at least in the case of percussion instruments and, perhaps, in some other instruments, such as the psalterium26. In the case of percussion instruments, once the instruments to be drawn had been determined (through literary sources), it is very likely that the illuminators turned to the organological reality of their time to try to further specify the drawing of their models, as can be seen in the following pages.

7. The Case of the Cymbalas

I consider that the representation of the cymbala27, an instrument that does not appear in the biblical text, is not accidental and is the result of research carried out by the illuminator or illuminators who created the model from which the Beatus of Valladolid was copied. There are consistent grounds for thinking that the cymbala that appears in the miniature represents the sambuca, an instrument that appears in the biblical text.

The sambuca of the Book of Daniel was a type of harp that originated in the Mediterranean East. Broadly speaking, these are practically the only characteristics that can be said with any certainty about this instrument28. It is very important to note that the sambuca does not appear once again in the entire Bible, which contributes to its absence in the visual arts. On the other hand, the silence of classical sources on the technical and musical aspects of the sambuca is considerable, and, as with other ancient harp types, for data, we have to turn to encyclopaedists and very late antiquarians, who refer to it as an instrument of bygone times29; so it is likely that we are dealing with a type of harp that must have been very little used in the Greek world, especially from the classical and Hellenistic periods, which meant that its knowledge in later times was fundamentally encyclopaedic in nature30. In fact, in the Roman world, the sambuca may have been a completely extinct instrument, at least referred to as such31, and in the Latin sources, there is a silence similar to that, which can be observed in the Greek sources. Only Paulus Festus (Lindsay 1997, p. 434) can be singled out, and he indicates that it is a harp; Martianus Capella (Willis 1983, p. 354, 9.924), who provides no information about it, and Isidore of Seville, who places it among the wind instruments in a passage that is difficult to read and probably erroneous, which has already been analysed by critics (Gasparotto and Guillaumin 2009, p. 72, Etym.3.20.7)32. Undoubtedly, the knowledge of all these authors was literary.

The two most copied works (among the Greek and Latin works cited) in the Latin High Middle Ages were De Nuptiis Pholologiae et Mercurii by Martianus Capella and the Etymologiae by Isidore of Seville (only fragments of the work by Festus, much less copied, have been preserved), which contributed to the fact that the information available on the physical characteristics of this instrument was practically nil. However, it was these two sources (the works of Capella and Isidore), together with others detailed below, which, paradoxically, provided the necessary information for the illuminators of the Beatus manuscripts to deal with the pictorial interpretation of this biblical organological passage written twelve centuries earlier.

7.1. The Choice of Cymbala: The Sambucos–Cymbala Connection

There are two very important manuscripts in the history of the transmission of the text of De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii by Martianus Capella, both dated to the 9th century (thus, a century before the date of the first preserved Beatus manuscripts with the miniatures of the instruments of the Commentary on the Book of Daniel), which contain glosses describing the term sambucos (by which Capella is literally referring to the sambuca33), like some cymbala (Teeuwen 2002, pp. 481–82, glosa 16.8)34. The first manuscript, of French origin, is Leiden, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, MS BPL 36. On f. 120r, one can read the term cymbalos, which is written above the term sambucos. The second manuscript, also of French origin, is Paris, BnF, Lat. 8671. On f. 77v, the gloss cymbala appears above the term sambucos. Therefore, it is possible to note the existence of two literary documents in which the same semantic identification can be observed for both terms (sambucos and cymbalos/cymbala), constituting a unique case in the literature, both in Antiquity and in the early medieval Latin literature (Bernhard 2016, u. sambuca, col. 1095).

De Nuptiis Pholologiae et Mercurii was one of the most copied works in the High Middle Ages, especially appreciated in the Carolingian period (Leonardi 1961)35, being the subject of a large number of glosses, mainly in Books I and II, but also others, such as Book IX, the one dedicated to music (Teeuwen 2002, pp. 358–567). However, although there is an interesting manuscript tradition that can undoubtedly be dated to the 9th and 10th centuries that contains the musical glosses to Book IX of Martianus Capella, it should be noted that there are only a few manuscripts dated to those same centuries that contain the fragment in question (9.924) glossed, being reduced to barely eleven36. Except for the two manuscripts cited above, the other nine manuscripts listed in the last footnote do not relate the two terms or concepts in any way.

On the other hand, two important points should be noted. Firstly, none of the manuscripts cited are of Iberian origin. Secondly, not a single manuscript has been preserved in Spain or copied in the territories of present-day Spain that contains the work of Martianus Capella, with three very late exceptions (Ayuso 2012, pp. 109–58). However, these data do not mean that Capella’s work was not found on the Iberian Peninsula at the time of the creation of the illustrations since it is possible to prove a previous existence of Capella’s text, in whole or in part, thanks to the works of Isidore of Seville (Fontaine 1983, pp. 748–49; Díaz y Díaz 2004, p. 93; Fontaine 2000, p. 70), even in relation to purely musical themes, an area in which he was one of the main sources for the Bishop of Seville (Diago 2019, pp. 181–84, 556–57). Furthermore, we must not forget the constant cultural exchange (including literary and manuscript exchange) between the south and north of the Pyrenees, which was not interrupted even during the period of the greatest Muslim domination of the Iberian Peninsula, allowing for contemporary works to reach the Iberian scriptoria from the north of the Pyrenees (Díaz y Díaz 1991, pp. 9–276; 1983, pp. 42–53, 66–75, 98–105, 127–132, 136–140, 149–245, 293–480).

In any case, and although we cannot be sure that this specific glosa was found in the Iberian peninsula in the 10th century with the preserved literary sources, I consider that the exceptionality of it is a first-rate argument in this sense, for it seems too much of a coincidence that the only musical instrument (other than a chordophone) with which the sambuca has been associated in the preserved early medieval literary sources (even if they are of French origin), the cymbala, is the same instrument that appears in the first early medieval representations (of Iberian origin) in which the sambuca should appear. This coincidence (which is even more surprising given the great organological differences between the two instruments) suggests that this association was not as uncommon as the preserved literary sources suggest and that, therefore, the early medieval Hispanic illustrators who made the musical instruments on the model from which the Beatus of Valladolid was painted, may have had access to a literary source that contained a similar relationship to the one observed in the two manuscripts discussed above.

7.2. The Drawing of the Cymbala

Isidore of Seville accurately describes the cymbala (Etym.3.21.11) as follows: “Cymbala acitabula quaedam sunt quae percussa inuicem se tangunt et faciunt sonum. Dicta autem cymbala quia cum ballematia simul percutiuntur; cum enim Graeci dicun σύν, βαλά ballematia”37. Therefore, in a few lines, the Bishop of Seville deals with four different aspects of this instrument: its physical description; the way it is played; some of the occasions on which it is played; and the possible etymology of its name. The first three aspects mentioned coincide, with nuances, with what must have been the musical and performing reality of this instrument in the Ancient World. Regarding their shape, Isidore describes the cymbala as a pair of small concave objects, bowls, or plates (“acitabula”38). Regarding the way they are played, the Bishop of Seville indicates that the sound is produced when one part of the instrument is struck against the other (one acitabulum against the other). Finally, Isidore points out the main occasion on which these instruments were used: they were played while dancing. Elsewhere in his Etymologiae, in the introduction to rhythmic music (Etym.3.21.1), Isidore also describes the material from which these instruments could be made, clearly indicating that they were made of metal: “cymbalum, sistrum, acitabula aenea et argentea, uel alia quae metallico rigore percussa reddunt cum suauitate tinnitum et cetera huiuscemodi”39.

Therefore, Isidore’s precise description leaves little room for improvisation by the illustrators of the Beatus manuscripts. In addition, the Isidorian Etymologiae was a very widely copied work, being considered one of the most copied literary works of the Latin High Middle Ages, so it is highly probable that a copy of this work was found in the scriptorium where the illustrations were created (Díaz y Díaz 2004, p. 200)40. At this point, we can also consider the great dependence that Beatus’ own Commentary on the Apocalypse has on the work of Isidore, especially for all questions relating to the liberal disciplines and what can be called general culture, although also for questions of a doctrinal, exegetical or theological nature, being the author most used by Beatus of Liébana together with Gregorius Magnus (Álvarez 1978, pp. 130–32; Gryson 2012, pp. CXXXIV–CXXXV)41.

However, one should not rule out the possibility that the illustrators of the Beatus manuscripts themselves may have seen cymbala with their own eyes. Firstly, it is known that the so-called qraqeb, two spoon- or saucer-shaped discs related to the Gnawas, a tribe of sub-Saharan origin whose members served as slaves in the Muslim territories of the Iberian Peninsula, existed. The particularity of these qraqeb is that they were joined by a leather cord of about thirty centimetres, as is the case with the cymbala of the manuscripts. However, references to these qraqeb date from after the 10th century (Navarro 2020, p. 201). On the other hand, some possible samples of Muslim-era cymbala found in the Roman Theatre of Zaragoza have been preserved, although they are also dated to a somewhat later date (Mendívil 2018). Similarly, many examples of the cymbala from the Roman period (some from the Late Antique period) have survived to the present day, a musical instrument quite common in the sites of the Iberian Peninsula (and throughout the Roman Empire), including territories in the north of the peninsula that belonged (several centuries later) to the Kingdom of León itself, where some of the most beautiful Beatus manuscripts were copied and, perhaps, the model of the Beatus of Valladolid may have been copied (Morais et al. 2014). Perhaps the direct observation of a cymbala or similar instrument (or perhaps the ingenuity of the illuminators) is the reason why the two cymbala appear joined by a cord in the illustrations of the manuscripts.

In any case, taking into account the preserved sources (archaeological and iconographic remains being absent in the 10th century), it can only be demonstrated that the illuminators had at their disposal the literary sources when delimiting the characteristics of the musical instrument for the definitive drawing, since in the Etymologiae of Isidoro of Seville they are described precisely.

7.3. The Sambucus–Saltator Connection

There is an important aspect that critics have not dealt with either, and that is that in the Beatus of Valladolid, the musician playing the cymbala has three very particular characteristics that make him unique among all the musicians that populate the Beatus manuscripts. Firstly, the musician is dancing with very pronounced movements, with none of the stiffness of the body that can be seen in the other musicians in the scene. Secondly, his clothing is strikingly different from everyone else’s, as it seems that his upper body (except for his head and hands) is covered with brown fur, with his legs also covered up to his ankles, but not by a tunic like the rest of the musicians, but by what looks like trousers made of the same fabric as the clothes covering the rest of his body. Thirdly, he is a musician with long hair, so he may be an effeminate character or a woman. This very interesting and exceptional novelty that can be observed in the Beatus of Valladolid can also be explained thanks to the literary sources for two reasons that are explained below.

On the one hand, in several dictionaries dating from the time of the composition of the illustrations (10th century) and produced in the north of the Iberian Peninsula, the term sambucus is defined with the term saltator, as a dancer. These dictionaries are the following: Madrid, Real Academia de Historia, Cód. 46 (fol. 137r); Madrid, Real Academia de Historia, Cód. 31 (f. 103); and Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional de España, Vitr. 14-5 (f. 183). The first two codices were made in San Millán de la Cogolla (they are not copies of each other, although they are related). The third is divided into two parts, one (ff. 1-16, 80–186) coming from the eastern region of the Kingdom of León and the other (ff. 17–79) from the Ebro region with influences from Catalonia or La Rioja (Díaz y Díaz 1983, pp. 332–34; Ruíz 1997, pp. 221–23, 281–84; García and García 1997, pp. 46–96). Therefore, these codices, produced at approximately the same time and place as the illustrations of the Beatus manuscripts, relate to both terms, constituting a great novelty (as occurred with the relationship between the term sambucos and the terms cymbala/cymbalos) since, taking into account the preserved sources, it can be affirmed that it originates from the Iberian Peninsula or was first literarily recorded there.

On the other hand, Isidore describes the function of the saltatori, a term well known in the Latin literature, while commenting on its etymological origin in Etym.18.50 (Cantó 2007, pp. 172–73), a book dedicated to the stage trades among other subjects: “Saltatores autem nominatos Varro dicit ab Arcade Salio, quem Aeneas in Italiam secum adduxit, quique primo docuit Romanos adolescentes nobiles saltare”42. However, this is not the only allusion made by the Bishop of Seville to dance, as he made another much more important one for the subject of this work in Ecc.Off.1.41.2 (Lawson 1989, p. 47), as it is closely related to the image of the musician of the cymbala of the Beatus of Valladolid described above. The text by Isidore is as follows:

“Tunc enim miseri homines et, quod peius est, etiam fideles sumentes species monstruosas in ferarum habitu transformantur; alii femineo gestu demutati uirilem uultum effeminant; nonnulli etiam de fanatica adhuc consuetudine quibusdam ipso die obseruationum auguriis profanantur; perstrepunt omnia saltantium pedibus, tripudiantium plausibus; quodque his turpius nefas, nexis inter se utriusque sexus choris, inops animi, furens uino, turba miscitur”43.

It can be seen how, among other aspects, the Bishop of Seville explicitly points out that the dancers wear monstrous costumes as if they were wild beasts, also simulating effeminate appearance and movements, coinciding with the attributes that the sambucus–saltator of the Beatus of Valladolid has and which make him unique: on the one hand, he appears to be disguised in furs as if he were a wild beast, and on the other hand, he appears to have an effeminate appearance and movements, as shown by his long hair and the exaggerated twisting of his figure while he dances.

Moreover, it should be noted that the scene described by Isidore could hardly have been seen in real life by the illuminator of the Beatus (although it is not impossible) since the text is based on several fragments of Caesareus of Arles located within Serm.192.2-4 (Morin 1953, pp. 779–82), an author who lived in Gaul in the 5th and 6th centuries. In these fragments, Caesareus criticises the celebration of the January Kalends in what seem to be remnants of an ancient pagan ritual, perhaps in honour of the god Janus.

If to all that has already been said in this section, we add what Isidore says above in Etym.3.21.11, where he explicitly points out that the cymbala are used for dancing; the precise description he gives of them, as well as the relationship sambucos–cymbalos/cymbala given in the glosses to Capella’s text, it seems that the influences of the literary sources in the illustration of the cymbala and the musician who plays them in the Beatus of Valladolid were very important.

Taking all this into account, I do not share the opinion of Álvarez (1993, p. 217) on the existence of a Coptic model (not preserved) that justifies the drawing of the musical instruments, an opinion similar to that defended by Male (1922, pp. 4–6) at a general level (and not only organological), who proposed a Coptic or Syrian origin of the archetype, and that Neuss (1931, pp. 239–41), first, and later (and above all), Klein (1978, p. 104) proved wrong with solid arguments already referred to above44.

8. The Case of the Membranophone

Another percussion instrument that appears in the musical ensemble of the scene of the worship of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue is a membranophone. The appearance of this instrument was not accidental and, as with the cymbala, is a response to the information that the illustrator or illustrators of the model that served as a copy for the Beatus of Valcavado or Beatus of Valladolid were able to find in the written sources and, only at a later stage, to the imitation of the models that they were able to observe in the organological reality of their time.

8.1. The Choice of the Membranophone: The Isidorian Symphonia

I believe that the illustrators chose a membranophone and not another type of instrument because of the texts of Isidore of Seville for several important reasons.

First of all, it should be noted that, as indicated in Section 6, the biblical text contains an instrument, the symphonia, whose meaning, as discussed in note 24, is highly controversial for critics. It is a highly polysemous term that is generally used with much more common musical meanings other than that of a musical instrument. However, it is also used to refer to a musical instrument that some researchers consider to be a wind instrument (Barry 1904, pp. 180–210; Finesinger 1926, pp. 21–75; Stradling and Kitchen 1982, pp. 800–4); others, a stringed instrument (Farmer 1957, p. 245); and others, a percussion instrument (Hartman and DiLella 1978, p. 150; Ellenbogen 1962, p. 122, n. 2; Mitchell and Joyce 1965), although the list of researchers is longer (Kolyada 2009, pp. 145–48). This division among researchers is due to the imprecision found in the classical sources, where not a single description of the physical appearance of the instrument can be read, with the exception of the one below45.

Secondly, a very important fact should be pointed out: Isidore of Seville is the only author in all Greco–Latin literature who describes the symphonia clearly, in detail, and without any doubt as a musical instrument, considering it to be a membranophone (Diago 2024b). Other earlier authors may also have considered the symphonia as a percussion instrument, but there is only one text that does not offer any doubt in this sense. This is fragment 3.18.9 of De Medicina of Celsus, which, however, does not provide any information about its physical characteristics to the point that it is not even possible to differentiate whether it is a membranophone or an idiophone (Spencer 1961, pp. 292–94)46.

Therefore, the illustrators of the Beatus manuscripts were able to rely on some reflections by Isidore of Seville, the only ones in all the Latin literature, which explained in detail the physical characteristics of an instrument called symphonia, the same term that appeared in the biblical text they were to illustrate, referring to a musical instrument about which they knew absolutely nothing, since (according to the surviving sources) there was no Instrument of that name among the instruments of their time in the Iberian Peninsula, and the other iconographic, archaeological, or literary sources, contemporary or earlier, did not offer any precise information on the subject.

8.2. The Drawing of the Symphonia

Isidore of Seville presents two reflections on symphonia within the paragraphs dedicated to rhythmic music (strung and percussion instruments), in which some of the characteristics of the membranophone that appear in the Beatus manuscripts can be observed. The first reference is to be found in a fragment at Etym.3.21.9-10, dedicated to the tympanum, in which Isidore, after precisely describing the physical characteristics of this instrument, indicates that a tympanum is half of a symphonia, comparing it, in turn, to a sieve or a sieve-pan, an object that is also usually cylindrical and hollow in shape, with a structure similar to that of a modern tambourine, that is, to that of a tympanum. The text of Etym.3.21.9 is the following: “Tympanum est pellis uel corium ligno ex una parte extentum. Est enim pars media symphoniae in similitudinem cribi”47. The second reference is more extensive and detailed. It is found in Etym.3.21.14, a paragraph, which Isidore devotes entirely to the instrument we are dealing with here: “Symphonia uulgo appellatur lignum cauum ex utraque parte pelle extenta, quam uirgulis hinc et indi musici feriunt, fitque in ea ex concordia grauis et acuti suauissimus cantus”48.

Therefore, if we take into account what is said in both paragraphs, Isidore not only gives a detailed physical description of the instrument but also describes how it is played and the sounds it produces. On the one hand, Isidore makes it clear that the symphonia is a hollow-wood instrument covered at each end by a taut skin. Therefore, for Isidore, the symphonia is a kind of wooden drum or tambourine with two drumheads or membranes, one at each end or base of the drum cylinder (hence, he defines the tympanum as half of a symphonia). Secondly, the Bishop of Seville describes precisely how the instrument is played: the performer beats both drumheads or membranes with drumsticks (it is understood that one is in each hand), so, as his hands are occupied with the drumsticks, it is deduced that the instrument must be hanging from the performer’s own shoulders or must be supported on some specific part of the performer’s body, such as the thighs. Finally, Isidoro points out the sound produced by the instrument and, by extension, the purpose of the possibility that both membranes can be played: one of the membranes produces a deeper sound, and the other a higher sound, resulting in a very pleasant combination.

Of all these details, the most striking is the double membrane, a detail that can be seen in the Beatus of Valladolid and, much more visibly, in the Beatus of Urgel (but not in the Beatus of King Ferdinand, in which there is no membrane at the top or bottom, although the musician only plays on the lower part) and which has gone unnoticed by critics. This detail inextricably links the illustrations of the Beatus manuscripts with the fragment quoted from Isidore of Seville, as he is the first author in the Latin literature to mention this detail in the symphonia. Furthermore, it should be borne in mind that, to date, no type of membranophone has been found on the Iberian peninsula with a double membrane at the time when the Beatus manuscripts were composed, despite the fact that several dozen remains of drums have been found, especially in Islamic territory. The only drum that could have a double membrane is the drum of the so-called Pila de Xátiva, located in the Almodí Museum in the city of Xátiva (Spain), dated to the second half of the 11th century and, therefore, a century later than the time of the Beatus manuscripts. In it, we can see a drum in the shape of a tube (although showing a slight widening at both ends), which is supported horizontally on the performer’s thigh and attached with a rope to his shoulder, each side of which is presumably struck with each of the performer’s hands. Therefore, if we take into account that this work is dated to the 11th century, it is more likely that Isidore’s text was also the source of information from which the illustrator drew the instrument’s double membrane.

Further problems of interconnection between the image of the Beatus manuscripts and the text of Isidore present other details related to the shape of the instrument and the way it is interpreted. From Isidore’s text of Etym.3.21.14, we can only deduce that it is a hollow wood, while from the text of Etym.3.21.9 we can also deduce that it is cylindrical in shape, which does not correspond to the shape in which the instrument appears in the Beatus manuscripts, as it is hourglass-shaped. Similarly, Isidore of Seville clearly indicates in both fragments that the symphonia is played with drumsticks (as is the tympanum), and in the Beatus manuscripts, on the contrary, it is played with the hand. It is very likely that both the hourglass shape and the way of playing it (with the hands) observed in the Beatus manuscripts is due to the organological reality of the period in the Iberian Peninsula since, especially in Muslim territory, a multitude of membranophones were developed, of which several dozen have been preserved (all of them made of ceramic, a much more durable material than wood). However, only one, the earliest of them, can be dated to the 10th century at the earliest (Vindry 1980, pp. 221–26). The rest of the archaeological finds date from the 11th century onwards. Likewise, it should be noted that the drum that can be dated to the 10th century is cup-shaped, like today’s darbukas, but not hourglass-shaped, although both shapes share a narrowing in the central part where the instrument can be held, as it appears in the miniatures of the Beatus manuscripts, both shapes (especially the cup shape) being some of the most common among the Iberian membranophones preserved in those centuries (Navarro 2020, pp. 128–31, 189–201, 389–430). On the other hand, in relation to the interpretation that appears in the Beatus manuscripts, in which it seems that the instrument is being beaten from bottom to top with one hand while it is held with the other by the central narrowing, it should be noted that Iberian iconography has also been preserved, in which drums appear placed vertically being beaten from bottom to top, as is the case with the so-called “Tañedora del tamborcillo” from the Archaeological Museum of Córdoba, dated to the 10th century (Navarro 2020, pp. 105–6, 401–2). However, there is a notable difference between this image and that of the Beatus manuscripts, as the player uses both hands to strike the instrument, resting it against her body, while the musicians of the Beatus manuscripts, as has already been indicated, only strike the instrument with one hand, holding it with the other.

Bearing this in mind, it is easy to suppose that, in the case of symphonia, the organological reality of the period, especially that of Muslim origin, must have played an important role in drawing the definitive model of the membranophone of the Beatus manuscripts, whose most important characteristics had already been chosen and sketched out in the texts of Isidore of Seville.

9. The Absence of the Instruments of this Scene in the Text of the Beatus Manuscripts

Taking into account what has been said so far, we are in a position to give a more precise answer than that given in the state of the question (see note 5) to the absence of these musical instruments in the rest of the Beatus manuscripts that contain this illustrated scene and have the holes for them.

These musical instruments were drawn by an illustrator or illustrators, who knew how to obtain advice from literary sources or from other colleagues who had a more complete cultural background and a deeper knowledge of literary sources. Whichever way it was performed, it is certain that there must have been a process of documentation.

If this question is applied to the history of manuscript transmission, it is very likely that, originally, only the model used to copy the Beatus of Valladolid was illustrated with these musical instruments. From this model must have come, either directly or through other intermediate copies, the Beatus of Urgel and, later, the Beatus of King Ferdinand49. The illustrator (one or more) of this model was the one who carried out the research and dared to innovate with the illustration of these musical instruments, including the two percussion instruments mentioned above. This model must have been somewhat different and most probably somewhat later, although not much later, than the model used by Magius to illustrate the so-called Beatus Morgan since it is the only manuscript in the group that does not contain the musical instruments of this scene. Moreover, it should also be remembered that the Beatus Morgan predates the Valladolid Beatus. Therefore, both models, which were very close to each other, albeit with some differences, started from the same pictorial design when it came to distributing the images in the scene. In the end, however, the scene could only be completed by the illustrator, who had the necessary knowledge due to his research into literary sources.

On the other hand, and at approximately the same time that the model of the Beatus of Valladolid was copied, or perhaps even earlier, the model or models from which the group of the Beatus of Tábara and Gerona would later be developed were copied, and exactly the same thing happened as in the previous case. Once the model was copied without the musical instruments, the gap was passed on to the following manuscripts, whose illuminators kept it unfilled.

The great difficulties encountered by the illuminators in interpreting a text written twelve centuries earlier in such a different cultural context due to the lack of pictorial models was an insurmountable barrier that could only be overcome at a specific moment in the manuscript tradition when it was decided to turn to other sources of information, firstly, literary sources, and secondly, the organological reality of the time.

In the same way, and for the same reasons explained above, it is very likely that the musician who appears dancing with the cymbala in the Beatus of Valladolid was a unique and exclusive innovation of Obecus, the illuminator of this Beatus, or, what I think less likely, of the miniaturist, who painted the model on which the Beatus of Valladolid was based, since it would have increased the chances that this saltator would also have been transmitted to the rest of the manuscripts of the family, at least to that of Urgel and to that of King Ferdinand. Therefore, it was Obecus who had to do research on this subject and who dared to innovate in relation to the preceding tradition.

Perhaps, as Klein (2002, pp. 271–72) pointed out, the early archetype had musical instruments which, for one reason or another, were lost over the centuries. In any case, what is clear is that at a later point in the history of the pictorial transmission of this scene (the second half of the 10th century), musical instruments appear or reappear, differentiated from the primitive instruments (whose characteristics were very different in some cases), and conditioned by totally different cultural and musical circumstances.

10. Conclusions

The percussion musical instruments that appear in the scene of the adoration of the statue of Nebuchadnezzar in some Iberian Beatus manuscripts are a true innovation of the medieval peninsular illustrators of the 10th century. The absence of a previous pictorial model and the antiquity of a text written twelve centuries earlier in a very different organological context, unknown to early medieval authors, meant that the first illuminator (one or more) who dared to paint these musical instruments (probably the illuminator of the model used to copy the Beatus of Valladolid) had to do a great deal of research, turning to the literary sources available to him to choose the appropriate instruments, and the result was the cymbala to represent the sambuca of the biblical passage and a membranophone with a double membrane, the Isidorian symphonia, to represent the biblical symphonia. Similarly, the characteristics of the musician who plays the cymbala in the Beatus of Valladolid or Beatus of Valcavado, characteristics that make him unique and differentiate him from all the musicians in the Beatus manuscripts, were also delimited by the literary sources, since the coincidences between text and image are precise and numerous (although in this case it is most likely an innovation of Obecus, the illuminator of this Beatus).

Among the literary sources used to illustrate these percussion instruments are, first of all, different fragments of Isidore of Seville (Etym.3.21.1, 9–10, 11, 14, 18.50, Ecc.Off.1.41), belonging to works that were very widespread throughout the Iberian peninsula in the High Middle Ages; followed by some 9^th-century glosses to Book IX of De Nuptiis Filolgiae et Mercurii by Martianus Capella, a work that must have been present in the Iberian Peninsula in the Hispano–Visigothic period, although, with the preserved sources, it cannot be proved that it was present at the time of the creation of the Beatus manuscripts; and several early medieval Iberian dictionaries from the 10th century, created in the same areas where the manuscripts of the Beatus manuscripts were created.

Once the appropriate instruments had been chosen to represent the biblical sambuca and symphonia thanks to the literary sources, and once their fundamental physical and organological characteristics had been established, which are much more precise and coincident in the case of the cymbala, it is probable that the illuminators turned to the organological reality of their time in search of models to complete their drawing, a fact that can be specified with greater arguments in relation to the drawing of the symphonia, since, on the one hand, there is some slight variation between the drawing of the Beatus manuscripts and the texts of Isidore (not so in the most important characteristic, which is exceptional, the double membrane), and, on the other hand, several dozen ceramic drums have been preserved from the Iberian Muslim territory (although only one from the 10th century, the others being later) that show a narrowing in the central part, either in the form of a cup or in the form of an hourglass. Similarly, Hispano-Muslim iconography from the same period has also been preserved, in which a similar (but not the same) way of playing the instrument to that seen in the Beatus manuscripts, as in both cases, it is in a vertical position and is struck from the bottom upwards, although in the Beatus manuscripts it is held with one hand and struck with the other, while in the Hispano-Muslim iconographic example referred to it is struck with both hands, resting the instrument on the body itself.

The very precise and numerous coincidences between the literary and iconographic sources dealt with; the novelty that many of them present in relation to the previous tradition, both texts and images; and the exceptional nature of the knowledge they contain, in many cases the only examples (literary and pictorial) in which very rare knowledge has been preserved (with the exception of the description of the cymbala), not only among early medieval sources but even among classical and patristic antiquity sources, are all too important arguments in favour of the interrelation between text and image. It would be extremely surprising if this coincidence, this novelty, and exceptionality emerged in the paintings of the Beatus manuscripts by chance, without any conscious intellectual effort on the part of one or more illuminators interested in deciphering and interpreting a biblical passage on the organology of the Ancient World that was unknown to them (at least several of the instruments mentioned therein), with the aim of being able to draw the musical instruments of the scene as accurately and faithfully as possible to the biblical text.