object which is itself asymmetrical, the face encloses an asymmetrical plant ornament,
the tendrils of which rise to cover the whole field (best seen if viewed with the axe-edge
at the bottom). The Mammen style occurs importantly on the Jelling stone (Figure
48. 4 ) and on a number of stone, ivory and bone objects. The motifs are generally set in
an unaxial and asymmetrical fashion, often forming irregular closed loops; the ribbons
(which sometimes have zoomorphic elements) and plants often bifurcate and the
contours are often angled at a major curve and frequently have a curved indented nick.
The body is almost always billeted in regular rows. As it gradually merges with the
succeeding Ringerike style, traits such as asymmetry and unaxiality tend to disappear
and, as they were not universal traits of the Mammen style, it is sometimes difficult to
distinguish between the two.
Objects decorated in the Mammen style are found widely (if sparsely) throughout
Europe – in the Ukraine, at Leon in Spain, Bamberg in Germany, the River Thames at
London, the Isle of Man, and Møre og Romsdal in Norway. In Sweden the style mostly
occurs on runic-inscribed stones. Its most important appearance, however, is on the
Danish royal memorial at Jelling, which almost certainly influenced a new style of
stone-carving in southern Scandinavia.
The origin of the ‘lion’, first seen on the Jelling stone, seems to be in native Scandina-
vian art. In stance and treatment its precursors are found in more or less recognisable
form on a brooch from Birka (grave 854 ; Wilson 1995 : fig. 19 ), on the runner of the
fourth sledge from the Oseberg grave (Wilson 1995 : fig. 111 ), on the Borre mounts
(Figure 24. 3 c) and, in three-dimensional form, on some of the baroque Borre-style
brooches (Wilson 1995 : fig. 58 ). Persistent attempts have, however, been made to find
its origins in Anglo-Saxon or Ottonian art (Fuglesang 1991 : 101 ), for the lion – a
universal Christian motif – is clearly ultimately of foreign origin. No immediate proto-
types have, however, been identified, and definite conclusions concerning archetypes
have not been established. It may have been derived from any of a number of countries –
France, Byzantium, Italy, Germany, or England – and from any of a number of media:
manuscript art or figured textiles, for example. A telling argument for foreign influence
must be that there were few or no carved stone reliefs in Denmark before the production
of the Jelling stone. It is also clear that the nearest source for such a technique was the
Scandinavian areas of Britain, where the long tradition of Hiberno-Saxon stone sculpture
had been adapted to the incomers’ taste (for a general discussion, see Wilson 1984 ). It is
conceivable that the Danish carver of the Jelling stone had learnt his trade in the English
Danelaw (although sculpture of granite is a rarity in an area of ubiquitous freestone).
Even if this is the case, the zoomorphic element of the stone need not be derived from
Britain; stylistic similarities may be explained by a common origin of the ornament in
the two areas, which, by the time it reached Denmark, had been subsumed into the local
taste. It is, however, inherently likely that the animal’s general design originated in the
stone sculpture of England, whence surely came the style’s vegetal elements. The
acanthus-like fleshy scrolls are closely related to, and must be derived from, those of
the Anglo-Saxon Winchester style, which flourished in the period of greatest Danish
influence in England – in the first half of the tenth century. The Jelling stone is the most
important representative of the Mammen style surviving in Scandinavia. It is also
remarkable in bearing the earliest datable representation of Christ in Scandinavia
(Wilson 1995 : fig. 129 ). Finally, it is unique in being a decorated royal monument and
as such would have been an object of wonder and prestige throughout the kingdom.
–– David M. Wilson––