55
P R E S E N T I N G ,  
( R E ) C O N S T R U C T I N G  A N D 
A R R A N G I N G  M E D I E V A L 
A R T E F A C T S  F R O M  N O N -
R E L I G I O U S  A N D  R E L I G I O U S 
C O N T E X T S :  C H A L L E N G E S  I N 
T H E  D I G I T A L  A G E
A n t j e  R o g g e n k a m p
Today, the influence of digitalised images on individual everyday life 
and across various areas of society is undeniable. This is largely because 
digitally reproduced artefacts have become an integral part of daily life. 
Against this background, it is not surprising that questions about the 
benefits and uses of digital artefacts arise across multiple disciplines, 
including art education, media education and religious education, as 
well as sociology and economics. The digital media revolution has had 
a particular impact on the way we engage with works of art: initial 
encounters now usually take place through their digital reproductions, 
which are selected by internet search engines.1 
Museums are key players that (co-)shape the collective memory of a 
society.2 Unlike other educational institutions, they primarily structure 
our relationship to the past through the arrangement of objects and ar-
tefacts. They ensure that religious and non-religious cultural heritage is 
preserved, and they present exemplary artefacts from their collections. 
These religious and non-religious objects or artefacts do not carry their 
1  Claire Reymond et al., “Aesthetic Evaluation of Digitally Reproduced Art Images,” Fron-
tiers in Psychology 11, no. 11 (2020): 2, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.615575. 
2  Aleida Assmann, Erinnerungsräume. Formen und Wandlungen des kulturellen Gedächtnisses 
(Beck Verlag, ³2006), 19. 
https://doi.org/10.35469/poligrafi.2024.453 Poligrafi, no. 113/114, vol. 29, 2024, pp. 55–75
p o l I g R A f I
56
meaning in themselves; rather, they recall and embody religious knowl-
edge and religious practices in various ways. Scholarly enquiry into the 
material dimension of religion focuses primarily on the handling of 
objects that were used in specific ways in religious spaces.3 
The emergence of digital technologies is reshaping the self-image of 
museums, which are becoming increasingly viewed as political or soci-
etal actors.4 Even though digital copies play an important role for mu-
seums – and despite foundational essays on technologically reproduced 
copies – there are still hardly any approaches or criteria for engaging 
with digital copies of artworks. Recently, cultural sociology based on 
practice theory has drawn attention to media practices5 in engaging 
with things and artefacts. They focus on a knowledge-based, culturally 
specific approach to digital artefacts6 and thus replace practices of in-
dividual, bourgeois contemplation that arise from religious and cultic 
rituals.7 The following considerations investigate the opportunities and 
challenges that arise from the digital transformation for the presenta-
tion of medieval artefacts coming from religious and non-religious con-
texts: To what extent does digital reproduction affect analogue forms of 
presentation in museums? 
3  Antje Roggenkamp and Sonja Keller, “Artefakte, objekte, Räume. praxeologische Zu-
gänge in praktischer Theologie und Religionspädagogik,” Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 
118, no. 2 (2021): 242 f, https://www.mohrsiebeck.com/artikel/artefakte-objekte-raeume-
101628zthk-2021-0012/.
4  Hans peter Hahn, “Das digitalisierte Museum – Erweiterung oder Transformation? Zur 
Selbstpositionierung von Museen im 21. Jahrhundert,” in Objekte im Netz. Wissenschaft-
liche Sammlungen im digitalen Wandel, ed. Udo Andraschke and Sarah Wagner (Transcript, 
2020),  47, https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839455715-004. 
5  Cf. Andreas Reckwitz, Unscharfe Grenzen. Perspektiven der Kultursoziologie. (Transcript, 
²2010), 165, https://www.transcript-verlag.de/978-3-89942-917-6/unscharfe-grenzen/.
6  Ibid., 172.
7  Cf. Sophia prinz, „Einleitung: politisierung der Ästhetik,“ in Ästhetik und Gesellschaft. 
Grundlagentexte aus Soziologie und Kulturwissenschaften, ed. Andreas Reckwitz, Sophia prinz 
and Hilmar Schäfer (Suhrkamp, 42022), 108.
P R E S E N T I N G ,  ( R E ) C O N S T R U C T I N G  A N D  A R R A N G I N G  M E D I E V A L  A R T E F A C T S 
57
The relationship between original and copy
from the perspective of practice theory, it is useful to refer back 
to the approach of Walter Benjamin (1892–1940), who described the 
relationship between the original and the technologically reproduced 
copy in his classic essay “The Work of Art in the Age of its Technologi-
cal Reproducibility” (1935/1939):8 The technological reproduction of 
artworks has an effect back on the artefact, whose aura changes: “what 
withers in the age of the technological reproducibility of the work of 
art is the latter’s aura.”9 
The concept of aura emerges from the unique existence of the art-
work “in a particular place.”10 from the perspective of media practices, 
this initially includes describing the materiality of a work of art,11 but 
also the changing of ownership relationships.12 The original artwork, on 
the other hand, loses its authority when technological processes expand 
our viewing: the camera lens can depict aspects of an artwork that are 
not accessible to “the human eye.”13 However, “technological reproduc-
tion can place the copy of the original in situations which the origi-
nal itself cannot attain.”14 Comparing a technical reproduction with an 
original work of art alters its authenticity: on the one hand with regard 
to the historical dimension of witnessing,15 and on the other hand with 
regard to the ritual dimension of cultic integration:16 “Nevertheless, the 
8  In the following with reference to Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of its 
Technological Reproducibility. Third edition 1939,” in Walter Benjamin, Selected writings, vol. 
4: 1938-1940, ed. Howard Eiland and Michael W. Jennings (University press, 2003), 251–283, 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9752.2007.00579.x.
9  Ibid., 254. 
10  Ibid., 253 
11  Vassilev describes this definition of materiality as contrary to the aura and thus as para-
doxical. Cf. Kiril Vassilev, “The Aura of the object and the Work of Art: A Critical Analysis of 
Walter Benjamin’s Theory in the Context of Contemporary Art and Culture,” Arts 59, no. 12 
(2023): 5, https://doi.org/10.3390/arts12020059.
12  Benjamin, “Work of Art,” 253f. 
13 Ibid., 254. 
14  Ibid. 
15  Ibid.
16  “As we know, the earliest artworks originated in the service of rituals – first magical, then 
religious. And it is highly significant that the artwork’s auratic mode of existence is never en-
tirely severed from its ritual function.” Ibid. 
p o l I g R A f I
58
concept of authenticity still functions as a determining factor in the 
evaluation of art; as art becomes secularized, authenticity displaces the 
cult value of the work.”17 Are there any other criteria or modes that can 
further specify the practices of describing, seeing and comparing?
In the following, an in-depth re-reading of Benjamin’s text concen-
trates on the conditions and modes of engaging with artefacts and tech-
nologically reproduced copies. The conditional and modal specifications 
of the handling of artefacts and their technically or mechanically pro-
duced copies should result in criteria that are subsequently transferred 
to the handling of digital copies. In this respect, it is interesting to note 
that the german term technische Reproduzierbarkeit is translated both 
as “technological reproducibility” and as “mechanical reproduction.”18 
The criteria proposed by Benjamin refer to different approaches. on 
the one hand, they refer to the original work of art – describing the 
aura of a work of art is already different at the level of materiality: A 
panel painting can be exhibited differently from a fresco or a wall paint-
ing.19 on the other hand, the mechanically produced copy takes centre 
stage: The technological reproduction changes its authority in so far as 
it actualises the perception of the artwork by addressing the viewer in 
his or her respective situation.20 A further distinction arises in paint-
ing – while the original exhibits the painter’s natural distance from their 
work, thereby respecting the original cultic function, this distance is 
undermined in the technological copy: The camera reveals dimensions 
and perspectives that are denied to the natural gaze.21 The possibility of 
reception is also altered – while access to works of art exhibited in mon-
asteries or royal courts was only possible for small groups of people,22 
17  Ibid., 272.
18  “The case of Walter Benjamin can serve, perhaps, as a reminder that the objects of knowl-
edge are not self-announcing entities, (…). ‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical repro-
duction’ perhaps alerts us to the interminable process of rethinking that is involved in engage-
ments with knowledge.” Cf. Nick peim, “Walter Benjamin in the Age of Digital Reproduction: 
Aura in Education: A Rereading of ‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduc-
tion,” Journal of Philosophy of Education 41, no. 3 (2007): 377, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
9752.2007.00579.x.
19  Benjamin, “Work of Art,” 254. 
20  Ibid. 
21  Ibid., 264. 
22  In the past, access was even structured hierarchically. Cf. Ibid.
P R E S E N T I N G ,  ( R E ) C O N S T R U C T I N G  A N D  A R R A N G I N G  M E D I E V A L  A R T E F A C T S 
59
technological reproductions open up the possibility of mass collective 
reception.23 finally, Benjamin also undertakes a comparison of the orig-
inal and the mechanically produced copy in relation to religious or cultic 
practices – the comparing of technological reproduction and artwork 
frees the latter from its “service of ritual”24. on the one hand, in that 
the reproduction brings secularisation to an end,25 and on the other, in 
that political effect can be attributed to the artwork: “Instead of being 
founded on ritual, it is based on a different practice: politics”.26 I under-
stand this to mean that in the materiality of a work of art is inscribed 
its memory of traditional ritual practices: “In other words: the unique 
value of the ‘authentic’ work of art has its basis in ritual, the source of 
its original use value.”27 Whereas its technologically reproduced copy 
removes it simultaneously from the realm of tradition: “The uniqueness 
of the work of art is identical to its embeddedness in the context of 
tradition.”28 Technological reproducibility thus continues the develop-
ment that begins with the transfer of an artwork into the museum.29 
let us summarise briefly: The aura of an artwork is reflected in 
the practices of concrete describing it, while practices of extended see-
ing through the technologically reproduced copy change its authority. 
This is not without consequences for the quantitative and qualitative 
perception of a work of art. on the one hand, it can be presented to 
a wider public, it is democratised in a certain sense, but on the other 
hand, the original perspective is blurred. finally, practices of multi-per-
spective comparing with the mechanical reproduced copy thematise the 
materiality of an artwork as an inscribed memory of traditional ritual 
23  Ibid.: “The simultaneous viewing of paintings by a large audience, as happens in the 
nineteenth century, is an early symptom of the crisis in painting, a crisis triggered not only by 
photography but, in a relatively independent way, by the artwork’s claim to the attention of the 
masses.”
24  Ibid., 257. 
25  Benjamin, “Work of Art,” 256.
26  Ibid., 257.
27  Ibid. 
28  Ibid., 256.
29  Ibid., 272.
p o l I g R A f I
60
practice in times of secularisation and the possibility of its actualisation 
by museal presentation.30 
presenting, (re)constructing, arranging
Taking the practices of describing, seeing and comparing as a start-
ing point, in line with Benjamin’s criteria, the project explores modes 
of presenting the original artwork, (re)constructing it in digital copies 
and arranging artwork and digital copies in museums. Two artefacts 
were selected as examples, the Bayeux Tapestry and the Halderner Altar. 
They were selected firstly because they come from the era in which 
Benjamin presupposes a cultic or ritual practice for all works of art, an 
original cult value.31 Secondly, both objects represent a material that 
is suitable for analysing the religious or non-religious materiality of a 
work of art.32 lastly, the artefacts are on display in renowned museums: 
La Tapisserie de Bayeux. Musée d’Art et d’Histoire Baron Gérard 33 and the 
LWL-Museum für Kunst und Kultur. Westfälisches Landesmuseum.34 
In the following, I would like to transfer Benjamin’s reflections on 
the relationship between the original work of art and its mechanical 
reproduction to digital copies. What functions do digital copies take 
on for the presentation of artefacts in museums? Insofar as the artworks 
are exhibited in a profane museum, it is less about the question of their 
secularisation and more about which concrete practices will be possible 
in the museum. The initial question here is whether and in what way 
the cultic or ritual dimensions of a religious or religion-related work of 
art can be exhibited in a museum.
30  peim, “Benjamin,” 377.
31  Benjamin, “Work of Art,” 269: “The epic, which originates in the early days of peoples, 
dies out in Europe at the end of the Renaissance. panel painting is a creation of the Middle 
Ages, and nothing guarantees its uninterrupted existence.”
32  Both artefacts are also available in the form of digital copies.
33  https://www.bayeuxmuseum.com/la-tapisserie-de-bayeux/.
34  https://www.lwl-museum-kunst-kultur.de/.
P R E S E N T I N G ,  ( R E ) C O N S T R U C T I N G  A N D  A R R A N G I N G  M E D I E V A L  A R T E F A C T S 
61
presenting as a practice of describing
over a length of more than 68 metres, the Bayeux Tapestry presents 
the conquest of what is now great Britain by the Normans in 1066, in-
cluding its prehistory. The Bayeux Tapestry was completed before 1087 
and the individual scenes cover the last years of Edward’s reign and the 
end of Anglo-Saxon rule. The narration of the story contains some re-
ligious elements and symbols.35 The detached scenes presumably depict 
William’s accession to the throne.36 The traditional term “tapestry” is 
rather inaccurate for at least two reasons: on the one hand, the tapestry 
is made of multi-coloured woollen threads embroidered onto lengths 
of linen; on the other hand, the term “tapestry” actually refers to a wall 
hanging.37 The patrons of the tapestry are attributed to the Norman 
upper classes, who may have used such tapestries to decorate (tower) 
rooms in a representative manner.38 occasionally, tapestries can also 
be found in the narrower ecclesiastical milieu. In this case, research-
ers believe that monks from St Augustine’s designed the tapestry for 
their abbey church in Canterbury to tell their own story of the Nor-
man invasion of England.39 The first written description of the tapestry 
dates back to 1476 and places it in Bayeux.40 for several centuries, the 
tapestry was regularly presented inside the Bayeux cathedral. The func-
tion of the regular hanging and unhanging may have been a ritual of 
remembrance. 
Compared to the Bayeux Tapestry, the Halderner Altar41 is a genuine 
religious artefact. The altar is dedicated to the passion of Jesus, includ-
ing his resurrection: on the festive side, the second painted front, it 
shows a Calvary as well as elements of the New Testament’s accounts of 
35  gale R. owen-Crocker, The Bayeux Tapestry: Collected Papers (Taylor & francis, 2012), 
III, 1, https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781003420927.
36  Ibid., II, 1–2.
37  Ibid., VIII, 106. 
38  Ibid., xvii. 
39  Elizabeth Carson pastan, Stephen D. White and Kate gilbert, The Bayeux tapestry and its 
contexts. a reassessment (Boydell press, 2014), XXV, https://doi.org/10.1515/9781782043898. 
40  owen-Crocker, Bayeux Tapestry, xvii.
41  paul pieper, “ludger oder Martin auf dem Halderner Altar?,” Westfalen. Hefte für Geschich-
te, Kunst und Kultur 45 (1967): 124. 
p o l I g R A f I
62
the passion, including gethsemane, imprisonment, scourging, mock-
ery, the washing of pilate’s hands and the carrying of the cross. on 
the outer, everyday side, the first painted front, two lives of saints are 
depicted, an indication that the altar was originally created for a church 
with a double patronage.42 The term “altar” is somewhat misleading: it 
is a painted reredos that probably closed off an altar at the back.43 The 
Haldern altar dates from the middle of the 15th century. Its original 
location is difficult to determine. The fact that it was not intended for 
the village church of Haldern in which it was found44 is evident from 
its length, which is four and a half metres when fully extended. If it is 
not the village church of Haldern, in which the altar has been exposed, 
other buildings nearby or in the surroundings of Münster come into 
the focus.45 There could have been a corresponding room in the ancient 
(women’s) convent at Schledenhorst or Choir or chancel room in a larg-
er town church.46 The altar from the workshop of the unknown Schöp-
pingen master was discovered at the end of the 19th century and kept 
in a Cologne museum for more than half a century before it was added 
to the Westphalian collection.47 The two-winged reredos has been pre-
served without the typical predella.48 In medieval times, it was probably 
mostly closed so that only the outside could be seen.49 It would have 
been used in liturgical celebrations throughout the church year.50 
42  John the Baptist plays a prominent role, as does a church official. Cf. Ibid., 124f. 
43  Rainer Kahsnitz, “Das Hochaltarretabel in St. Jacobi zu göttingen,” in Kunst und Fröm-
migkeit in Göttingen. Die Altarbilder des späten Mittelalters, ed. Thomas Noll and Carsten-peter 
Warncke (Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2012), 48f.
44  Cf. paul pieper, “Als der Kunstverein den Halderner Altar erwerben wollte,” Westfalen. 
Hefte für Geschichte, Kunst und Kultur 59 (1981): 128f. 
45  Cf. paul pieper, “Westfälische Maler der Spätgotik,“ Westfalen. Hefte für Geschichte, Kunst 
und Kultur 30 (1952): 82. 
46  Rensing suggests as other authors the church of Billerbeck, cf. Theodor Rensing, Der Meis-
ter von Schöppingen (Deutscher Kunstverlag, 1959), 16.
47  Cf. pieper, “Kunstverein,” 128. Cf. Wolfgang Böcker, Eine gemalte Predigt. Der Schöppinger 
Altar (dialogverlag, 2020), 114 f.
48  Karl Arndt, “Das Retabel der göttinger paulinerkirche, gemalt von Hans Raphon,” in 
Kunst und Frömmigkeit in Göttingen. Die Altarbilder des späten Mittelalters, ed. Thomas Noll 
and Carsten-peter Warncke (Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2012), 200.
49  Kahsnitz, “Hochaltarretabel,” 48 f. 
50  perhaps it is the case, as Sadler suggests, that altarpieces played a significant role in the 
liturgy of the Mass in the 15th century. Cf. Donna l. Sadler, Touching the Passion – Seeing 
P R E S E N T I N G ,  ( R E ) C O N S T R U C T I N G  A N D  A R R A N G I N G  M E D I E V A L  A R T E F A C T S 
63
let us summarise – and in doing so, apply Benjamin’s criteria. Al-
though the medieval originals presented today as a tapestry or altarpiece 
in their respective museums date from the 11th and 15th centuries, they 
can be characterised by a number of similarities that align with Benja-
min’s criteria. firstly, their specific materiality can be determined as em-
broidered wall hangings and as painted reredos. Both objects were pro-
duced in different workshops and are movable. Secondly, their specific 
ownership can only be described approximately. The tapestry has been 
exhibited in both secular and sacred buildings, while the altarpiece has 
been housed in churches and museums. finally, even if their religious 
and cultic function cannot be precisely determined, both objects had a 
liturgical function in the late Middle Ages. The two artefacts correspond 
to what Benjamin describes as an original work of art surrounded by an 
aura. But what happens when one looks at the digital copies?
(Re)Constructing as a practice of technological vision
A digital copy is available on the website of the museum in Bayeux.51 
The presentation of the long tapestry is organised by number, making it 
easier to interact with the digitalised object. Above the embroidery are 
numbers between 1 and 58, which refer to individual scenes. latin in-
scriptions provide additional information about the events depicted.52 
The colour scheme of the embroidery also plays a special role in empha-
sising individual characteristics: in the opening scene, black contrasts 
draw attention to the communication between the English king and his 
brother-in-law Harold godwinson (scene 1). Horses standing directly 
next to each other, as well as their riders, are embroidered in different 
colours. While William delivers his speech, rousing the Normans in 
Late Medieval Altarpieces through the Eyes of Faith (Brill, 2018), 37 f, https://brill.com/display/
title/36135.
51  Tapisserie de Bayeux, accessed November 2, 2024, https://www.bayeuxmuseum.com/
la-tapisserie-de-bayeux/decouvrir-la-tapisserie-de-bayeux/explorer-la-tapisserie-de-bayeux-en-
ligne/. Cf. Antoine Verney et al., “Redocumentariser la Tapisserie de Bayeux: base de données 
documentaire et système d’informations spatialisées,” in Tabularia. (Sources écrites des mondes 
normands médiévaux, 2018), 15f, https://doi.org/10.4000/tabularia.3278. 
52 Ibid.
p o l I g R A f I
64
battle (scene 50), the horses are coloured from left to right following a 
specific pattern: red, green, yellow, then blue-black.53 
The narrative of the battle unfolds with various forms of commen-
tary.54 Along the borders of the tapestry, different animals and mythi-
cal creatures support the development of emotions: Birds become the 
immediate audience of a story steeped in the glory and horror of bat-
tle.55 The rivalry between William and Harold for the English throne 
is obvious, but there is also another rivalry involving odo, the Bishop 
of Bayeux, and Harold, both of whom are privileged relatives outside 
the royal line.56 The religious elements reveal asymmetrical power struc-
tures in the relationship between odo and Harold and in the story: 
odo, identifiable as a clergyman through his hairstyle, clothing and 
mace,57 appears to be blessing the promise of marriage between Wil-
liam’s daughter and Harold (scene 15), standing prominently at Mont 
Saint-Michel (scenes 16-17) and observing Harold’s oath on the relics 
(scene 23). further, the hand of god comments on Edward’s death 
(scene 26), and Halley’s comet on the conversation between Harold 
and a scout (scene 33).58 
Unlike the numbers and colours, the religious elements do not have 
an ordering function, but instead indicate spaces in the story that can 
be interpreted in different ways. 
Although the database of the museum in Münster does not cur-
rently list the Haldern altar,59 a link to the german Digital library 
makes high-resolution digital copies of the altarpiece accessible (also 
suitable for zooming in). The painted fronts are arranged in an organ-
isational structure and a stemma facilitates digital navigation.60 The 
first painted front contains the lives of saints (John the Baptist and 
53  owen-Crocker, Bayeux Tapestry, IX, 240f. 
54  Ibid., II, 15f. 
55  Shirley Ann Brown, “preface”, in owen-Crocker, Bayeux Tapestry, xi–xii.
56  Although Edward and William were royal cousins, Harold as Edward’s brother-in-law and 
odo as William’s half-brother were of the same lineage. Cf. ibid., VIII, 113.
57  Ibid., II, 13, n. 39. 
58  Ibid., III, 1.
59  https://www.lwl-museum-kunst-kultur.de/
60  Halderner Altar – Schauseite (Zweite), accessed November 2, 2024, https://www.deut-
sche-digitale-bibliothek.de/item/HQHgNZ2fgfH36pHV5HYQDEfpYJ26MYfE.
P R E S E N T I N G ,  ( R E ) C O N S T R U C T I N G  A N D  A R R A N G I N G  M E D I E V A L  A R T E F A C T S 
65
probably liudger, the first bishop of Münster), the second the passion 
and the Resurrection of Christ.61 In addition, the individual scenes on 
the outer and inner wings are each arranged in four squares. They are 
interrupted by a red border, while a similar border with plants frames 
the side wings and centre panel. The pictorial elements are read from 
left to right and from top to bottom.62 The order is also known as 
the “Westphalian scheme”63. on medieval altarpieces the colours of 
the garments traditionally (re)identify individual persons: Judas ap-
pears in the yellow cloak of the traitor, Jesus’ cloak shows the colour 
of suffering and love, Mary appears in the blue cloak of the Queen 
(of Heaven).64 on the Haldern altar, clothing colours are important 
to be able identify persons on the central Calvary, which looks like a 
huge “hidden object”:65 Various scenes that are narratively linked to 
the crucifixion of Jesus are depicted simultaneously, but in condensed 
form. The dying Jesus and the thieves on the cross are surrounded by 
a crowd of people and armed soldiers on horseback. Due to the use 
of specific colours, several people close to Jesus – John, Mary, Mary 
Magdalene and others – can be identified beneath the cross.66 This 
applies even more so on the right-hand wing, which, in an atypi-
cal way, repeatedly places female figures in relation to the Risen Je-
sus. The sequence of images on the second painted front of the altar 
adopts a (pictorial) programme that had changed in the 15th century 
in response to increasing devotion to the passion. Instead of depicting 
the most important elements of Christ’s youth with the “scenes from 
the life of the mother of god” and “the scenes of the passion of the 
lord”,67 the focus here is exclusively on the suffering, death and res-
61  Halderner Altar – Schauseite (Erste), accessed November 2, 2024, https://www.deutsche-
digitale-bibliothek.de/item/4KVAT3KfSD7MSE4ZpXIQZHB2IZTlM2lC.
62  paul pieper, Die deutschen, niederländischen und italienischen Tafelbilder bis um 1530 
(Aschendorff, 1986), 106.
63  Böcker, Predigt, 14 f. 
64  Rensing, Meister von Schöppingen, 16. 
65  Rensing, Meister von Schöppingen, 11 f; cf. Arndt, “Retabel,” 197. 
66  The Calvary shows the normal crucifixion depiction of old Westphalian painting, with 
a large “apparatus” and mostly Jerusalem in the background. Cf. paul pieper, “Der Meister 
von liesborn und die liesborner Tafeln,” Westfalen. Hefte für Geschichte, Kunst und Kultur 44 
(1966): 4–11, 10. 
67  Kahsnitz, “Hochaltarretabel,” 50. 
p o l I g R A f I
66
urrection of Jesus. Non-biblical scenes also appear on the altarpieces. 
But what special modes of seeing does the digital copy open up?
on the Haldern altar, the descent into (pre-)hell, situated at the bot-
tom right next to the Calvary, shows the gates of (pre-)hell opening. 
Jesus is standing on two door wings, while two demonic beings aim 
at him from above with a pipe, bow and arrow, and two similar crea-
tures harass him from below. The digital copy not only reveals more 
details – such as these little devils – but also allows for a closer formal 
analysis.68 Various lines in the scene form a triangular composition in 
the middle of the painted scene. The legs of the triangle are marked by 
Jesus’ arms and the victory banner: This creates a new division of space, 
separating Jesus vertically from Adam and the naked people in (pre-)
hell. However, a connection between Jesus and Adam is also implied, 
running through their right hands, which appear to be touching.69 At 
the same time, Adam’s other hand points behind him. It remains uncer-
tain whether he is protecting himself from the flames or asking Jesus to 
look after the naked people. 
Jesus’ approach seems hesitant, as his left leg moves rather tentatively 
and he does not look directly at Adam. His posture reveals a specific wa-
vering or, at least, does not indicate a determined certainty of victory. 
Does he seem to be affected by the expectations of the inhabitants of 
(pre-)hell? Is he questioning the necessity of the path laid out for him in 
the creed?70 The certainty that Jesus descends into hell in order to save 
those banished to (pre-)hell is, at the very least, brought into question. 
A similar finding can be made regarding the digital copy of a further 
scene: In the last picture on the right-hand inner wing, lines marked 
by the fence and lawn, but above all diagonals intersecting in the spade 
and flagpole, open up a special space. The figures set opposing accents 
in terms of body language, but also gestures and facial expressions. In 
the gospel of John, Mary Magdalene turns to the Risen Christ twice. 
68  Cf. Antje Roggenkamp, “Religionsbezogene ‘Kunstbilder’ als Artefakte. Zur praxeologischen 
Erweiterung von Religionspädagogik,” in Die materielle Kultur der Religion. Interdisziplinäre Pers-
pektiven auf Objekte religiöser Bildung und Praxis, ed. Sonja Keller and Antje Roggenkamp (Tran-
script, 2023), 19f, https://www.transcript-open.de/doi/10.14361/9783839463123-002. 
69  pieper, Tafelbilder, 106, 115. 
70  Böcker, Predigt, 93 f.
P R E S E N T I N G ,  ( R E ) C O N S T R U C T I N G  A N D  A R R A N G I N G  M E D I E V A L  A R T E F A C T S 
67
At first, she thinks he is the gardener and believes that he has taken Je-
sus’ body away. only after he addresses her by name does she recognise 
him and wants to touch him. In response, the Risen one says, “Do not 
touch me” (John 20:14–17). In the painted scene, one can see a double 
effect: While the Risen Christ – although more vulnerable in his naked-
ness – remains gracefully superior due to his posture, Mary Magdalene 
shows a kind of double physical presence, tender feelings and astonish-
ment.71 The meaning of Noli me tangere emerges in its full sense: Mary 
Magdalene appears to show with her posture that the body of the Risen 
Christ has changed not only physically.72 
The formal analysis of the digital copy can identify spaces or pos-
tures in which several interpretations correspond to the religious. The 
religious characteristics of the painted scenes only emerge in the digital 
copy. 
let us apply Benjamin’s criteria for mechanically produced copies 
and transform them into criteria for digital copies: firstly, the numbers 
affixed above the embroideries of the Bayeux Tapestry and the West-
phalian scheme enable individual scenes to be found quickly in the 
digital copies. They make it easier to assign the individual scenes to 
the major narratives of the artefacts and thus emphasise their authen-
ticity. on the other hand, the digital copies allow a closer look due to 
a certain spatial distance from the original and the limited time spent 
in front of it:73 By showing plants, animals or demonic beings, they 
reveal interesting details compared to conventional lore and traditional 
depictions. The digital copies do not so much undermine the natural 
distance to the original (Benjamin)74 as they vary it. Thirdly, formal 
analyses of individual scenes point to interpretations that deviate from 
traditional forms. Religious perspectives appear differently: While the 
71  Rensing, Meister von Schöppingen, 12.
72  Ingeborg Eugenia Doetsch, “Die Metamorphose des löwenzahns im lichte der Auferste-
hung. Seine Symbolik in der mittelalterlichen Kunst, insbesondere der westfälischen Tafelma-
lerei des 15. Jahrhunderts,” Westfalen. Hefte für Geschichte, Kunst und Kultur 73 (1997): 52. 
73  This applies insofar as Benjamin’s criteria are transformed: “Since the historical testimony 
is founded on the physical duration, the former, too, is jeopardized by reproduction, in which 
the physical duration plays no part.” Benjamin, “Work of Art,” 254.
74  “The painter maintains in his work a natural distance from reality, whereas the cinematog-
rapher penetrates deeply into its tissue.” Benjamin, “Work of Art,” 264. 
p o l I g R A f I
68
Bayeux Tapestry opens up spaces for religious interpretations of history 
through its view of the relationship between hostile ethnic groups and 
specific clerical rivalries, the individual scenes on the Haldern reredos 
offer a variety of religious perspectives: not only in dealing with biblical 
and non-biblical traditions, but also by varying possible interpretations. 
In this respect, they do not reduce the authority of the original artefact 
(Benjamin), but seem to increase religious authority by creating space 
for a variety of interpretations. Do the digital copies also prove to be 
productive for engaging with religious materiality?
Arranging as a practice of comparative seeing
Walking along the tapestry opens up a physical experience: together 
with many other people, one walks around it in a darkened room, lis-
tening to the sounds of courtly fanfares and the audio guide, which 
describes and comments on epic narratives. Since 1983, the tapestry 
has been housed in a gallery of the former great Seminary in Bayeux.75 
A glass safety screen protects the tapestry. It hangs on a rail and curves 
outwards in the shape of a parabola. Unlike in Bayeux Cathedral, the 
tapestry currently curves outwards instead of inwards.76 Although the 
tapestry was probably created with a specific building in mind, it was 
probably never intended to hang in just one place.77 In the centuries 
between its production and its localisation in Bayeux, it may have been 
displayed in different buildings in different countries to varying effect.78 
from the fifteenth century onwards, the tapestry was regularly hung in 
the nave of the cathedral, in the meantime stored on a roll.79 Suitable 
forms of presentation have long been the subject of open-ended discus-
75  In 2007, the tapestry was added to the UNESCo “Memory of the World” register. Cf. 
Verney et al., “Redocumentariser,” 2. 
76  owen-Crocker, Bayeux Tapestry, 129.
77  Architectural historians have considered a Norman keep with a corner staircase. Ibid., VIII 
122.
78  This is certainly in line with Benjamin’s criteria: “In the churches and monasteries of the 
Middle Ages, and at the princely courts up to about the end of the eighteenth century, the col-
lective reception of paintings took place not simultaneously but in a manifoldly graduated and 
hierarchically mediated way.” Benjamin, “Work of Art,” 264.
79  Ibid., VIII123. 
P R E S E N T I N G ,  ( R E ) C O N S T R U C T I N G  A N D  A R R A N G I N G  M E D I E V A L  A R T E F A C T S 
69
sions.80 Setting the relationship between digital copies and the original 
artwork can draw attention to different aspects that do not fit directly 
into Benjamin’s criteria,81 but modify them in changing the cultic and 
remembering dimension: What logistical considerations and physical 
practices were necessary to hang and remove the tapestry in a square 
tower or in the Bayeux nave? Were these routines or did these prac-
tices have to be (re)practised? What religious elements does the tapestry 
contain and what significance do they have? What is the relationship 
between national and universal cultural heritage? 
In 2014, the Haldern altar found its permanent place in the new 
building of the lWl-Museum. In the centre of a large rectangular 
room, the arrangement of the painted fronts almost reproduces the 
original state of the medieval altarpiece. However, the slanted posi-
tion of the wings makes it difficult to have a look on the first painted 
front. In their current position, the wings cannot be closed. This has 
two consequences: firstly, the lives of saints cannot be compared with 
each other in analogue space. Secondly, the second painted front can be 
viewed almost all year round.82 By fixing the wings at an obtuse angle, 
the original transformation can no longer be depicted in the analogue 
room:83 the effects of the opening and closing are omitted. In its current 
setting, the Haldern altar is displayed between various panel paintings 
dating from the 14th or 15th centuries, presenting different variations 
of the religious motifs from the Haldern reredos. In particular, the sec-
ond side is related to artefacts that have been preserved as fragments. 
The focus is centred on aspects of suffering, death and resurrection: 
Carrying of the Cross made from Baumberg sandstone, the Elevation 
of Henry II next to a Calvary on another panel.84 They invite us to en-
80  Verney et al., “Redocumentariser”, 4f. |.
81  Benjamin, “Work of Art,” 272: “In the viewer’s imagination, the uniqueness of the phe-
nomena holding sway in the cult image is more and more displaced by the empirical unique-
ness of the artist or of his creative achievement.”
82  Cf. Arndt, “Retabel,” 193, 214. 
83  Cf. Heike Schlie, “Die ordnung der Bilder. positionierungen im Hochaltarretabel der 
göttinger Barfüßerkirche,” in Niederdeutsche Beiträge zur Kunstgeschichte. Das Göttinger Bar-
füßerretabel von 1424, ed. Cornelia Aman and Babette Hartwieg (Michael Imhof, 2015), 185.
84  To the master of the Barbara legend cf. petra Marx, “Heinrichstafel, um 1494,” in Ein-
blicke – Ausblicke. Spitzenwerke im neuen LWL-Museum für Kunst und Kultur in Münster, ed. 
p o l I g R A f I
70
gage in practices of comparison, insofar as they open up the suffering of 
Jesus in terms of stylistic and, in some cases, material aspects.
While the analogue presentation draws attention to different stylis-
tic paintings and other materials, accessing the digital copies illustrates 
the different interplay between the first and second painted front. The 
juxtaposition, which can be accessed digitally, gives an idea of how dif-
ferently the artefact can be perceived with the wings open and closed. 
However, linking the digital copies with the artefact in front of it can 
illustrate the original arrangements and the efforts involved in opening 
and closing the wings become comprehensible on the original. A com-
parison of the original and the digital version allows further questions 
to be asked: How does the perception change when the sashes are open 
or closed? What effects do the different perspectives have on the altar? 
What religious practices does the altar offer to reconstruct or decon-
struct in its current context? 
let us summarise and ask for the transformation of criteria at the 
same time: Although the modified relationship to tradition becomes 
visible, must the question of religious-cultic authenticity (Benjamin) 
remain open? firstly, it is obvious that no religious-cult practices85 can 
be exhibited in a museum. However, digital copies allow us to study 
practices of liturgical changing. Secondly, while the analogue presenta-
tion of artefacts only provides a view of a specific perspective – the 
Bayeux Tapestry is mounted in an oval display case at roughly eye level, 
the panels of the Haldern altar are anchored on a plinth – the digital 
copy allows the original practices to be imagined or even demonstrated. 
The original object encourages the viewer to stretch or bend their neck, 
depending on their height. finally, digital copies draw attention to the 
particular content of religion. The adaptation of heroic tales, Chris-
tian legends and biblical motifs demonstrates the creativity of medieval 
artists in dealing with their own traditions. Therefore, perhaps and in 
Hermann Arnhold (Wienand Verlag, 2014), 88-89. 
85  Cf. Sadler, Touching, 47: “And this (...) leads us back to the altarpiece, for the image that 
was sanctified by its presence on the altar was endowed with both cultic and devotional powers: 
the altarpiece guided the faithful to a state of mind conducive to prayer; facilitated communica-
tion with the saints; served as a mnemonic device for meditation, and could even assist a mystic 
in achieving ecstatic communion with the divine.”
P R E S E N T I N G ,  ( R E ) C O N S T R U C T I N G  A N D  A R R A N G I N G  M E D I E V A L  A R T E F A C T S 
71
contrast to Benjamin’s ideas, we can find answers to some existential 
questions: What kind of being do we expect after death? Is there a spe-
cific encounter we are waiting for? And what do these changes have to 
do with the traditional faith representations? 
In this respect, digital copies not only serve to convey the effects of 
original religious materiality, but also inspire modern interpretations 
of religious traditions. By keeping alive the question of the being and 
passing of human beings or the meaning of life, they become produc-
tive of religion. The specific answers they provide can raise further and 
other key questions. 
practice-orientated enhancements:  
Digital and analogue approaches 
The approach derived from a practice-theoretical re-reading of Ben-
jamin draws attention to the fact that the religious significance of the 
original artefacts can at best be approximated, not defined concretely. 
The application of practices such as concrete description, extended vi-
sion and multi-perspective comparison to concrete artworks and digital 
copies suggests an intertwining of analogue and digital perspectives. 
Digital copies, in particular, make original orders visible through a 
different, technological way of seeing. Meanwhile, the originals make 
physical and logistical processes comprehensible that are often hidden 
due to presentation constraints in museums. Together, these perspec-
tives clarify how repositioning these artefacts was once a time-intensive 
task. 
Additionally, the digital copies provide access to the religious ma-
teriality of the originals by means of colouring and colour contrasts, 
thus making interpretations visible that change conventional religious 
motifs. finally, digital copies contribute to keeping questions of au-
thenticity and authority of the original open in the reconstruction. In 
this respect, digital artefacts not only work towards a reconstruction of 
original practices, but also towards a change in current forms of presen-
tation. Compared to the effects of mechanical reproduction, this devel-
p o l I g R A f I
72
opment does not lead to a kind of negative theology (Benjamin).86 The 
materiality of an artefact that was previously used for religious purposes 
can itself become productive of religion. 
As Mieke Bal points out, presentations and specific exhibition ar-
rangements can lead to distortions, resulting in super- and subordina-
tion.87 This is particularly true when the form of presentation of objects 
and artefacts leads to a mono-perspective comparison. By supplement-
ing or modifying the use of digital artefacts, mobile applications88 could 
offer further perspectives. By commenting on controversial findings 
and making comparable artefacts available, mobile applications open 
up further opportunities for participation. The question of the limits of 
technological reproduction shifts to the opportunities that digital data 
offers for engaging with original artefacts. Expanding these practices to 
encourage participation would also be a considerable enhancement for 
analogue museums. 
B i b l i o g r a p h y 
Arndt, Karl. “Das Retabel der göttinger paulinerkirche, gemalt von Hans 
Raphon.” In Kunst und Frömmigkeit in Göttingen. Die Altarbilder des späten Mit-
telalters, edited by Thomas Noll and Carsten-peter Warncke. Deutscher Kunst-
verlag, 2012. 
Assmann, Aleida. Erinnerungsräume. Formen und Wandlungen des kulturellen 
Gedächtnisses. Beck Verlag, ³2006.
Bal, Mieke. “The discourse of the museum.” In Thinking About Exhibitions, 
edited by Bruce W. ferguson, Reesa greenberg and Sandy Nairne. Routledge, 
1996. 
Benjamin, Walter, “The Work of Art in the Age of its Technological Re-
producibility. Third edition 1939.” In Benjamin Walter, Selected writings, Vol. 4: 
86  Benjamin, “Work of Art,” 256: “This in turn gave rise to a negative theology, in the form 
of an idea of ‘pure’ art, which rejects not only any social function but any definition in terms of 
a representational content.”
87  Mieke Bal, “The discourse of the museum”, in Thinking About Exhibitions, ed. Bruce W. 
ferguson, Reesa greenberg and Sandy Nairne (Routledge, 1996), 201f.
88  lena Wulf, “Von der Vitrine in die Hand : Smartphone-Apps in der Museumsvermitt-
lung,” Hamburger Journal für Kulturanthropologie 5 2016): 15f, https://journals.sub.uni-ham-
burg.de/hjk/article/view/1037/951.
P R E S E N T I N G ,  ( R E ) C O N S T R U C T I N G  A N D  A R R A N G I N G  M E D I E V A L  A R T E F A C T S 
73
1938–1940, edited by Howard Eiland and Michael W. Jennings. Harvard Univer-
sity press, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9752.2007.00579.x. 
Böcker, Wolfgang. Eine gemalte Predigt. Der Schöppinger Altar. Dialogverlag, 
2020.
Brown, Shirley Ann. “preface”. In owen-Crocker, gale R., The Bayeux Tapes-
try: Collected Papers. Routledge, 2012. 
Carson pastan, Elizabeth, Stephen D. White, and Kate gilbert. The Bay-
eux tapestry and its contexts. a reassessment. Boydell press, 2014. https://doi.
org/10.1515/9781782043898.
Doetsch, Ingeborg Eugenia. “Die Metamorphose des löwenzahns im lichte 
der Auferstehung. Seine Symbolik in der mittelalterlichen Kunst, insbesondere 
der westfälischen Tafelmalerei des 15. Jahrhunderts.” Westfalen. Hefte für Ge-
schichte, Kunst und Kultur 73 (1997): 1–70. 
Hahn, Hans-peter. “Das digitalisierte Museum – Erweiterung oder Trans-
formation? Zur Selbstpositionierung von Museen im 21. Jahrhundert.” In 
Objekte im Netz. Wissenschaftliche Sammlungen im digitalen Wandel, edi-
ted by Udo Andraschke and Sarah Wagner. Transcript, 2020. https://doi.
org/10.14361/9783839455715-004.
Halderner Altar – Schauseite (Erste). Accessed November 2, 2024. https://
www.deutsche-digitale-bibliothek.de/item/4KVAT3KfSD7MSE4ZpXIQZH-
B2IZTlM2lC.
Halderner Altar – Schauseite (Zweite). Accessed November 2, 2024. https://
www.deutsche-digitale-bibliothek.de/item/HQHgNZ2fgfH36pHV5HY-
QDEfpYJ26MYfE.
Kahsnitz, Rainer. “Das Hochaltarretabel in St. Jacobi zu göttingen.” In 
Kunst und Frömmigkeit in Göttingen. Die Altarbilder des späten Mittelalters, edi-
ted by Thomas Noll and Carsten-peter Warncke. Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2012. 
Marx, petra. “Heinrichstafel, um 1494.” In Einblicke – Ausblicke. Spitzenwer-
ke im neuen LWL-Museum für Kunst und Kultur in Münster, edited by Hermann 
Arnhold. Wienand Verlag, 2014. 
owen-Crocker, gale R. The Bayeux Tapestry: Collected Papers. Routledge, 
2012. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781003420927.
peim, Nick. “Walter Benjamin in the Age of Digital Reproduction: Aura in 
Education: A Re-reading of ‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Repro-
duction’.” Journal of Philosophy of Education 41, no. 3 (2007): 363–382. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9752.2007.00579.x.
pieper, paul. “Als der Kunstverein den Halderner Altar erwerben wollte.” 
Westfalen. Hefte für Geschichte, Kunst und Kultur 59 (1981): 126–130. 
pieper, paul. “Der Meister von liesborn und die liesborner Tafeln.” Westfa-
len. Hefte für Geschichte, Kunst und Kultur 44 (1966): 4–11.
p o l I g R A f I
74
pieper, paul. “ludger oder Martin auf dem Halderner Altar?” Westfalen. 
Hefte für Geschichte, Kunst und Kultur 45 (1967): 124–130.
pieper, paul. “Westfälische Maler der Spätgotik.” Westfalen. Hefte für Ge-
schichte, Kunst und Kultur 30 (1952): 77–131.
pieper, paul. Die deutschen, niederländischen und italienischen Tafelbilder bis 
um 1530. Aschendorff, 1986. 
prinz, Sophia. “Einleitung: Die politisierung der Ästhetik.” In Ästhetik und 
Gesellschaft. Grundlagentexte aus Soziologie und Kulturwissenschaften, edited by 
Andreas Reckwitz, Sophia prinz and Hilmar Schäfer. Suhrkamp, 42022.
Reckwitz, Andreas. Unscharfe Grenzen. Perspektiven der Kultursoziologie. 
Transkript, ²2010. https://www.transcript-verlag.de/978-3-89942-917-6/unschar-
fe-grenzen/.
Rensing, Theodor. Der Meister von Schöppingen. Deutscher Kunstverlag, 
1959.
Reymond, Claire, Matthew pelowski, Klaus opwis, Tapio Takala, and Elisa 
D. Mekler. “Aesthetic Evaluation of Digitally Reproduced Art Images.” Frontiers 
in Psychology 11, no. 11 (2020): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.615575.
Roggenkamp, Antje. “Religionsbezogene ‚Kunstbilder‘ als Artefakte. Zur 
praxeologischen Erweiterung von Religionspädagogik.” In Die materielle Kultur 
der Religion. Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven auf Objekte religiöser Bildung und 
Praxis, edited by Sonja Keller, and Antje Roggenkamp. Transkript, 2023. https://
www.transcript-open.de/doi/10.14361/9783839463123-002.
Roggenkamp, Antje, and Sonja Keller. „Artefakte, objekte, Räume. praxeo-
logische Zugänge in praktischer Theologie und Religionspädagogik.“ Zeitschrift 
für Theologie und Kirche 118, no.2 (2021): 241–265. https://www.mohrsiebeck.
com/artikel/artefakte-objekte-raeume-101628zthk-2021-0012/.
Sadler, Donna l. Sadler. Touching the Passion – Seeing Late Medieval Altar-
pieces through the Eyes of Faith. Brill 2018. https://brill.com/display/title/36135.
Schlie, Heike. “Die ordnung der Bilder. positionierungen im Hochaltarreta-
bel der göttinger Barfüßerkirche.” In Niederdeutsche Beiträge zur Kunstgeschichte. 
Das Göttinger Barfüßerretabel von 1424, edited by Cornelia Aman and Babette 
Hartwieg. Michael Imhof Verlag, 2015. 
Tapisserie de Bayeux. Accessed November 2, 2024. https://www.bayeuxmuse-
um.com/la-tapisserie-de-bayeux/decouvrir-la-tapisserie-de-bayeux/explorer-la-ta-
pisserie-de-bayeux-en-ligne/. 
Vassilev, Kiril. “The Aura of the object and the Work of Art: A Critical 
Analysis of Walter Benjamin’s Theory in the Context of Contemporary Art and 
Culture.” Arts 59, no. 12 (2023): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts12020059.
Verney, Antoine, Clémentine Berthelot, Arnaud Daret, Jérôme Chauveau, 
pierre-Yves Buard, Julia Roger, and Cécile Binet Binet. “Redocumentariser la 
P R E S E N T I N G ,  ( R E ) C O N S T R U C T I N G  A N D  A R R A N G I N G  M E D I E V A L  A R T E F A C T S 
75
Tapisserie de Bayeux : base de données documentaire et système d’informa-
tions spatialisées.” In Tabularia. Sources écrites des mondes normands médiévaux 
(2018). https://doi.org/10.4000/tabularia.3278.
Wulf, lena. “Von der Vitrine in die Hand : Smartphone-Apps in der Mu-
seumsvermittlung.” Hamburger Journal für Kulturanthropologie 5 (2016): 15–28. 
https://journals.sub.uni-hamburg.de/hjk/article/view/1037/951.