This marble capital is Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages in a nutshell. Originally probably from Ostia it was taken north of the Alps by Charlemagne for his palace in Ingelheim. After the palace went into disuse it found its way across the Rhine to Eberbach monastery. 1/

We know that Charlemagne took a number of columns from Ravenna for his palace in Aachen and especially for his palatine chapel. He probably also employed craftspeople from the South. 2/

Our knowledge of what he did in Ingelheim is more limited but we do know the palace was adorned with material from Roman sites. Not too mention that architecture-wise it was very much rooted in those.

Reconstruction of Ingelheim palace after Christian Rauch. 3/

Eberbach lies just across the Rhine from Ingelheim and after it has ceased to be an active imperial residence in the 11th century the monks of the Cistercian monastery founded in 1136 helped themselves to some Roman stuff from there and the environs. 4/

Now doing this, taking stuff from older buildings and moving them onto new contexts is as Roman as it gets. First: waste not, want not! Statues would get their heads replaced, inscriptions would get recarved. All kind of reuse was happening. 5/

But there is a second reason as well: reusing this material meant establishing a link with the past that had tangible value. It struck symbolic capital or allowed to repossess spaces and objects. Whole landscapes could be retaken that way. 6/

In that respect what Charlemagne did was just superRoman. He did what he was told the Romans would do. And yes, it was more pronounced because of the changed economic, technological, and cultural circumstances. But late Roman emperors would definitely approve of this practice. 7/

And let us not forget purely practical reasons as well: those things were pretty! And having pretty things is, well, nice. This might have been one of the chief reasons for the chaps at Eberbach, who have reused this reused capital circa 1000 years after it was carved. 8/

For them, perhaps, the Roman connection was less important than the Charlemagne one. Things carry meanings but they also change them. We perform symbolic reuse today differently because our connection with heritage has changed. But we still repossess past spaces symbolically! 9/