Dumbarton Oaks Papers Number 14

Front Matter Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960) Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%...

Author: Trustees for Harvard University

59 downloads 1545 Views 69MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Front Matter

Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960) Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C%3AFM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M Dumbarton Oaks Papers is currently published by Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/doaks.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Sun Mar 9 07:53:00 2008

DUMBARTON OAKS PAPERS

THE DUMBARTON OAKS RESEARCH LIBRARY AND COLLECTION

Trustees for Harvard University

Washington, District of Columbia

DUMBARTON

OAKS PAPERS

HE Dumbarton Oaks Papers were founded in 1941for the publication of articles concerning late classical, early medieval, and Byzantine civilization in the fields of Art and Architecture, History, Theology, Literature, and Law.

T

Dumbarton Oaks Papers Number 14 contains the following studies and notes: Ernst H. Kantorowicz: O n the Golden Marriage Belt and the Marriage Rings of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection Ernst Kitzinger: A Marble Relief o j the Theodosian Period Kurt Weitzmann : T h e Survival ojMythological Representations in Early Christian and B y zantine Art and Their Impact on Christian Iconography Sirarpie Der Nersessian: T w o Images of the Virgin in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection Otto Demus: T w o Palaeologan Mosaic Icons in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection Andr6 Grabar: U n e pyxide e n ivoire d Dumbarton Oaks. Quelques notes sur I'art profane pendant les dernierssidcles dellEmpire byzantin Jean Meyendorff : Projets de Concile Oecumknique en 1367: U n dialogue inkdit entre Jean Cantacuzdne et le lkgat Paul Ihor Seveenko: T h e Author's Draft of Nicolas Cabasilas' "Anti-Zealot" Discourse in Parisinus Graecus 1276

NOTES

Paul A. Underwood: Notes on the W o r k of the Byzantine Institute in Istanbul: 1957-1959; with a contribution by Lawrence J. Majewski on T h e Conservation of a Byzantine Fresco Discovered at Etyemez, Istanbul David Oates : A S u m m a r y Report on the Excavations of the ByzantineInstitutein the Kariye Camii: 1957 and 1958 Cyril Mango and John Parker: A TweljthCentury Description of St. Sophia Cyril Mango and Ihor Sevtenko : A New Manuscript of the De Cerimoniis

T h e Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Studies in B y zantine Art: Report on the Symposium of 1958

DUMBARTON OAKS PAPERS NUMBER FOURTEEN

Dumbarton Oaks Papers

NUMBER FOURTEEN

The Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection

Trustees for Harvard University

Washington, District of Columbia

1960

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED B Y THE

TRUSTEES FOR HARVARD UNIVERSITY

THE DUMBARTON OAKS RESEARCH LIBRARY AND COLLECTION

WASHINGTON, D. C.

Disfributed by J . J . Augustilz, Publisher Loczlst Valley, New York

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 42-6499

Printed in Germany at J. J. Augustin, Gliickstadt

This Volume is Dedicated with gratitude and respect to M r . and Mrs. Bliss the Founders of Dumbarton Oaks IlOAAA ETH

E I C TlOAAA

CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ERNST H. KANTOROWICZ

I

On the Golden Marriage Belt and the Marriage Rings of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I7

E R N S T KITZINGER

A Marble Relief of the Theodosian Period

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

K U R T WEITZMANN

43

The Survival of Mythological Representations in Early Christian and Byzantine Art

and Their Impact on Christian Iconography

SIRARPIE D E R NERSESSIAN

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

69

Two Images of the Virgin in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection

OTTO D E M U S

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

Two Palaeologan Mosaic Icons in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection

ANDRJ? GRABAR

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

121

Une pyxide en ivoire A Dumbarton Oaks. Quelques notes sur l'art profane pendant les

derniers siecles de 1'Empire byzantin

JEANMEYENDORFF

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I47

Projets de Concile OecumCnique en 1367: Un dialogue inCdit entre Jean Cantacuzene et le lCgat Paul IHOR

SEVCENKO .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

179

The Author's Draft of Nicolas Cabasilas' "Anti-Zealot" Discourse in Parisinus Graecus

1276

NOTES PAUL A. UNDERWOOD

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205

Notes on the Work of the Byzantine Institute in Istanbul: 1957-1959; with a Con-

tribution by LAWRENCE J. M A J E W S K I on The Conservation of a Byzantine

Fresco Discovered at Etyemez, Istanbul

DAVID OATES

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

223

A Summary Report on the Excavations of the Byzantine Institute in the Kariye Camii:

1957 and 1958

CYRIL MANGO

and

JOHN PARKER

. . . . . . . . . . . . 233

A Twelfth-Century Description of St. Sophia

CYRIL MANGO

and

IHOR

SEVCENKO

A New Manuscript of the De Cerimo?tiis

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

- 247

The Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Studies in Byzantine Art: Report on the Symposium

of 1958 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251

ILLUSTRATIONS

(Following Page 16) Ernst H. Kantorowicz: ON

THE GOLDEN MARRIAGE BELT AND THE MARRIAGE RINGS OF THE

DUMBARTON OAKS COLLECTION

Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Golden Marriage Belt. a. Over-all View. b. Detail of Center Pieces. 2. Paris, De Clercq Collection. Golden Marriage Belt. 3. New York, Metropolitan Museum. Golden Belt from Kyrenia, Cyprus 4. Florence, Uffizi Museum. Sarcophagus. 5. Rome, Belvedere Museum. Sarcophagus. 6. Rome, Vatican, Porphyry Statue. Diocletian and Maximian. 7. Rome, Villa Albani. Sarcophagus Frag- ment . 8. Gold Glass: Amor pronubus. 9. Gold Glass: Hercules pronubus. 10. Gold Glass : Christus pronubus. 11. Nicosia, Museum. Silver Dish with Marriage of David and Michal. 12. Concordiae: Antoninus Pius and Faustina. 13. concordiae aeternae: Caracalla and Plau-

tilla. 14. propagoirnperi : caracalla and plautilla. 15. Concordia felix: Caracalla and Plautilla. 16. Vota publica : Marcus Aurelius and Faustina 11. 17. Vota publica: Commodus and Crispina. 18. Concordia Augustorurn. 19. Concordia : Aurelianus and Severina with Sol invictus ~ronubus. 20. Felix Progenies Constantini Aug. : Crispus and Constantine I1 with Fausta as Concordia. 21.Feliciter Nubtiis : Theodosius I1 with Valentinian I11 and Licinia Eudoxia. 22. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Feliciter Nubtiis: Theodosius I1 with Valentinian I11 and Licinia Eudoxia. I.

23a. Feliciter Nubtiis: Christus pronubus with Marcian and Pulcheria. 23b. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Feliciter Nubtiis; Christus pronubus with Anastasius I and Ariadne.

24. Medallic Design: Cardinal de Bouillon Blessing Marriage of Dauphin and Marie Anne of Bavaria. 25. Medal by G. A. deJRossi: Pope Pius V with Venice and Spain. 26. Paris, Dreyfuss Collection. Medallion: Henry IV and Maria de'Medici with Dauphin. 27 a, b. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Wedding Rings. 28. British Museum. Wedding Ring: Christ and St. Mary with Couple. 29. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Wedding Ring. a. Bezel. b. Hoop.

30. Adventus: Hadrian and Sabina with Osiris and Isis.

31 a, b, c. Concordia : Bride and Groom Sacrificing in Front of Statues of Antoninus Pius and Faustina I. 3za. Concovdin Augg. : Gallienus and Salonina. 3zb. Concordiae aeternae: Septimius Severus radiate, Julia Domna on Crescent. 33. Colonia Caesarea Antiochia : Statues of Gordian and Antioch. 34. Bible moraliske: Marriage of Adam and Eve. 35. Bible moraliske: Marriage of Christ and Church. 36. Bible moraliske : Christ Marrying a Church to a Bishop. 37. Munich. Cod. gall. Monac. 16, fol. 35": Saul Marrying Michal to David.

ILLUSTRATIONS

x

(Following Page 42) Ernst Kitzinger: A

MARBLE R E L I E F O F T H E THEODOSIAN PERIOD

I. Dumbarton

Oaks Collection. Marble Relief showing Christ Healing a Blind Man. 2. Istanbul, Atmeydan (Hippodrome). Base of Obelisk, detail of Relief of the Period of Theodosius I . 3. Istanbul, Atmeydan (Hippodrome). Base of Obelisk, detail of Relief of the Period of Theodosius I. 4.Relief shown in figure I, detail: Head of Christ. 5. Istanbul, Archaeological Museum. Relief found at Baklrkoy. 6. Istanbul, Archaeological Museum. Socalled Sarcophagus of a Prince, detail. 7.Tentative Reconstruction of Table Top incorporating Fragment shown in figure I. 8.Athens, Byzantine Museum. Table Top found on the Island of Thera. 9.Relief shown in figure I: View of lower edge. 10. Relief shown in figure I: View of right edge.

11.Relief

shown in figure I: Back. 12.Zagreb, Archaeological Museum. Fragment of Table Top ( ? ) found at Salona. 13. Relief

shown in figure I, detail: Head of Blind Man. 14. Relief shown in figure I, detail: Heads. 15. Ravenna,

Cathedral. Sarcophagus of Exuperantius, detail: Head of St. Paul. 16.Tebessa, Baptistery. Font. 17.Tebtunis,

Church. View of south Chapel showing Table Slab set in Floor at Entrance. 18.Berlin, State Museums. Fragment of Relief found near Sinope. 19.Rome, National Museum. Frieze Sarcophagus, detail: Miracles of Christ. 20. Vatican, RIuseo Sacro. Ivory Box Lid, showing Christ Healing a Blind Man. 21.Ravenna, Archbishop's Palace. Ivory Chair of Bishop Maximian, detail: Christ Healing a Blind and a Lame Man.

(Following Page 68) Kurt Weitzmann: THE

SURVIVAL OF MYTHOLOGICAL REPRESENTATIONS I N

EARLY CHRISTIAN

AND BYZANTINE ART AND T H E I R IMPACT ON CHRISTIAN ICONOGRAPHY

I. Milan,

Ambros. Lib. Cod. 1;. 205, Iliad., Pict. XXIII. 2. Leningrad, Hermitage. Silver Plate (Photo. The Hermitage, Courtesy of Miss Banck) 3. Ostia. Etruscan Urn. 4. Paris, Cabinet des MCdailles. Silver

Oenochoe, detail.

5. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Silver Dish. 6. Antioch. Mosaic Pavement, detail. 7. Paris, Bibliothcque Nationale, Suppl. gr. 247, fol. 47. 8.Piazza Armerina. Floor Mosaic (Photo. Courtesy Soprintendenza alle Antichit2 della Sicilia Orientale, Siracusa) . g. Venice, San Marco, Treasury. Vase, detail. 10.Alexandria, Benachi Collection. Lamp.

11.Dumbarton

Oaks Collection. Ivory Casket. 12.Princeton, University Museum. Mosaic Pavement from Antioch, detail. 13. Jerusalem, Cod. Taphou 14,fol. 311'. 14.Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Silver Plate. 15. Girgenti. Roman Sarcophagus, detail. 16.Antioch. Mosaic Pavement, detail. 17.Vatican, Museum. Floor Mosaic. 18.Venice,SanMarco, Narthex. Mosaic,detail. 19.Cairo, Museum. Bronze Plate, detail. 20. Rome, Museo Capitolino. Marble Relief, detail. 21. Vatican, Cod. gr. 333, fol. 6. 22. Venice, Biblioteca Marciana, Cod. gr.454, fol. 6".

ILLUSTRATIONS

xi

23. Paris, Cabinet des Mkdailles. Iliac Tablet, detail. 24. Rome, Museo Capitolino. Iliac Tablet, detail. 25. Vatican, Cod. gr. 747, fol. 248". 26. Oxford, Bodleian Library, Pap. gr. Oxyrh. 2331.

33. Rome, Museo Capitolino. Iliac Tablet, detail. 34. Stuttgart, Schlossmuseum. Ivory. 35. Mt. Sinai, Monastery of St. Catherine. Icon.

27. Trier, Museum. Pyxis.

38. Berlin-Dahlem, Ehem. Staatliche Museen. Ivory. 39. Rome, Sta Maria Antiqua. Fresco. 40. Naples, Museo Nazionale. Marble Group. 41. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Mosaic Icon. 42. Paris, Bibliothhque Nationale, Cod. gr. 139, fol. I". 43. Pom~eii,Macellum. Fresco, detail. 44. Antioch. Mosaic Pavement, detail.

28. Florence, Museo Archeologico, Etruscan Urn, detail. 29. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Pyxis. 30. Leningrad, Hermitage, Pyxis. 31. Louvre. Sarcophaps, fragments. 32. Munich, Staatsbibliothek, Cod. lat. 23631, fol. 24".

36. Zurich, Museum. Pyxis. 37. Florence, Uffizi. Marble Altar.

(Following Page 86) Sirarpie Der Nersessian:

TWO IMAGES OF THE VIRGIN IN THE DUMBARTON OAKS COLLECTION

I. Dumbarton

Oaks Collection. Ivory Plaque. The Virgin between John the Baptist and St. Basil.

2.

Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Bloodstone Cameo with Bust of the Virgin.

3. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Seal of the Virgin Hagiosoritissa. 4. Mt. Athos, Pantocrator Monastery, no. 49, fol. 4' (Photo. Courtesy of Prof. K. Weitzmann). 5. Berlin-Dahlem, Ehem. Staatliche Museen. Ivory Triptych, detail. 6. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Marble Relief of the Virgin, front View.

7. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Marble Relief of the Virgin, back View.

8. Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek. Ivory Binding for the Prayer Book of the Empress Cunegonde (Photo. Courtesy of Prof. K. Weitzmann). g. Istanbul, Kariye Camii, Inner Narthex. Mosaic (Photo. Courtesy of the Byzantine Institute of America). 10. Lagoudera, Cyprus. Church of the Virgin of Arakos (Photo. Courtesy of Mr. A. Stylianou). 11. Spoleto, Cathedral. Icon of the Virgin (Photo. Alinari) . 12. Sopotani, southwest Chapel. Translation of the Body of Stephen Nemanja. 13. Mt. Athos, Lavra Monastery, no. I O ~ A , fol. 3 (Photo.Courtesy of the Bildarchiv der Oest. National Bibliothek [Aufn. N.B. 1013331).

(Following Page 119) Otto Demus: TWO

PALAEOLOGAN MOSAIC ICONS IN THE DUMBARTON OAKS COLLECTION

I. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Mosaic Icon, The Forty Martyrs. 2-3. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. hlosaic Icon, The Forty Martyrs, details.

4. British Evluseum. Add. MS 19352. a. fol. 81. b. fol. 81" (Photos. Courtesy of the British Museum).

5. Vatican, Cod. syr. 559, part

I,

fol. 93".

6. Rome, Sta Maria Antiqua, Chapel, Apse. Wall Painting.

7. Moscow, Synodal Library. Menologium no. 183.

8. Lesnovo. Wall Painting.

xii

ILLUSTRATIONS

g. ZiZa, Vault. Wall Paintings. a. south Side. b. north Side. 10. Souvech, Church of the Forty Martyrs, left Aisle, Vault. Wall Painting. 11. Derani. Wall Painting. 12. Berlin-Dahlem, Ehem. Staatliche Museen. Ivory. 13. Leningrad, Hermitage. Ivory Triptych, center Panel. 14. Vatican, Barb. lat. 14.4, fol. 13oV,Silverpoint Drawing. 15. Vodora, Wall Painting. 16. Torcello, Cathedral, west Wall. Mosaic, detail. 17. DeCani. Wall Painting.

18,1g. Istanbul, Kariye Camii, Parecclesion.

Wall Paintings (Photos. Courtesy of the Byzantine Institute of America). 20. Vatican, Cod. gr. 1754, fol. 13", Penitential Canon. 21. Athens, Byzantine Museum. Icon. 22. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Mosaic Icon, St. John Chrysostom.

23. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Mosaic Icon, St. John Chrysostom, detail. 24. Rome, Sta Maria Antiqua, north Aisle. Wall Painting (Photo. Courtesy of P. Buberl) . 25. Kiev, St. Sophia. Mosaic, St. John Chrysostom detail. 26. Palermo, Cappella Palatina. Mosaic, St. John Chrysostom, detail. 27. Palermo, Cappella Palatina. Mosaic, the Prophet Jonah, detail. 28. Paris, Bibliothbque Nationale. Coislin 79, fol. 2", detail. 29. Palermo, Cappella Palatina. Mosaic, St. Luke, detail. 30. Istanbul, Hagia Sophia, north Tympanum, Mosaic (Photo. Courtesy of the Byzantine Institute of America). 31. Rome, Sancta Sanctorum. Reliquary, detail (Photo. Sansaini). 32. Istanbul, Kariye Camii, Parecclesion, Apse. Wall Painting (Photo. Courtesy of the Byzantine Institute of America).

(Following Page 146) AndrC Grabar:

.i D U M B A R T O N O A K S . Q U E L Q U E S N O T E S SCTR L'ART PROFANE PENDANT LES D E R N I E R S S I E C L E S DE L'EMPIRE B Y Z A N T I N

U N E P Y X I D E EN IVOIRE

1-7. Collection Dumbarton Oaks. Pyxide. 8. Berlin, Staatsbibliothek. Frontispice du Psautier dit Hamilton. 9. Oxford, Lincoln College, gr. 35, Typicon du couvent de la "Vraie EspCrance," fol. 8 (phot. Bodleian Library). 10. Oxford, Lincoln College, gr. 35, Typicon du couvent de la "Vraie EspCrance," fol. 11 (phot. Bodleian Library). 11. Oxford, Lincoln College, gr. 35, Typicon du couvent de la "Vraie EspCrance," fol. 12 (phot. Bodleian Library). 12. Hortus Deliciarum de Herrade de Landsberg, fol. 322, dhtail (d'aprks Straub et Keller). 13. Paris, Mude du Louvre. Frontispice d'un manuscrit de 1402. 14. JCrusalem. Patriarcat armhien cod. 2563, fol. 380.

15, 16. British Museum, Curzon 115, Evangile bulgare du tsar Ivan Alexandre (1356) (phot. British Museum). 17. Serbie, Milegevo. Peinture murale (phot. Ecole des Hautes Etudes). 18. Serbie, Sopobani, Peinture murale (phot. Ecole des Hautes Etudes). 19. Bibliothbque Vaticane, cod. gr. 333, Arbre de Jess6 (phot. Ecole des Hautes Etudes). 20. Strasbourg, Grand SCminaire, cod. 78 (phot. Ecole des Hautes Etudes). 21. Constantinople, Hippodrome. Socle de 1'obClisque thCodosien. zza-c and 23. Kiev, Ste-Sophie. Peintures murales dans les cages d'escalier. 24. Washington, D. C., Freer Gallery of Art. Peinture chinoise sur soie, no. 09.216. (phot. Freer Gallery of Art).

ILLUSTRATIONS

25. Leningrad, Ermitage. Diptyque dJAnastase, dCtail. 26. VCrone. Diptyque d'AnthCmios, dCtail. 27. Istanbul, MusCe archCologique. Statue d'un acrobate. 28. Mantoue, Palazzo Ducale. Stde funCraire romaine (phot. Soprintendenza alle gallerie di Mantova) . 29. Oliphant de Jaszhkrkny, Hongrie. Dktail. 30. Oliphant de JaszhCrCny, Hongrie. Dessin au trait. 31. Dvin, ArmCnie. Fragment d'un vase en verre byzantin (phot. Djanpoladian). 32, 33. Venise, Bibliothhque Marcienne, cod. gr. Z 540, tables des canons (phot. Ecole des Hautes Etudes).

34"-i Mt. Sinai, cod. 339, initiales historikes (phot. Library of Congress, Washington, D. C.). 35a-e. Turin, cod. C. I. 6/16, initiales historiCes (phot. Bibliothkque Turin). 36. Oxford, Biblioth6que BodlCienne, cod. Auct. t. infr. I, 10, fol. 16', dCtail (phot. Bodleian Library). 37. Paris, Biblioth6que Nationale, lat. 6, fol. 64') dCtail (phot. Ecole des Hautes Etudes). 38. MusCe de Barcelone. Peinture murale de S. Juan de Bohi (phot. Mas, Barcelone no. MB-5). 39. Serbie, Staro-Nagorizino. Peinture murale (phot. Ecole des Hautes Etudes).

(Following Page Ihor Sevtenko:

201)

THE AUTHOR'S DRAFT OF XICOLAS CABASILAS'

"AXTI-ZEALOT" DISCOURSE

IS

P A R I S I N U S G R A E C U S 1276 I. Parisinus Gr. 1276, fol. 65": Hands A and A2. 2.

3. 4.

5. ti.

Parisinus Gr. 1276, fol. 6@, top: Hands A and A2. Parisinus Gr. 1276, fol. 75") bottom: Hands A and A2. Parisinus Gr. 1276, fol. 76r: Hands A and A2. Parisinus Gr. 1276, fol. 78', bottom: Hands A and A2. Parisi~ius Gr. 1276, fol. 82", bottom: Hand A.

7. Parisinus Gr. 1276, fol. 83': Hand Ab.

8. Parisinus Gr. 1276, fol. 96r, top: Hand A. 9. Parisinas Gr. 1276, fol. 86", bottom: Hand Ab. 10. Parisinus GY. 1276, fol. 7zV, bottom: Hands A and A2. 11. Parisi~zfbsGr.1276, fol. roor: Hand of the Fragment. 12. Istanbul, Paflaghias 157, fol. 2947, top (Photo : L'Institut de Recherche et dlHistoire des Textes). 13. Ibid., fol. 295', top. 14. Meteora. Barlaam Monastery 202, fol. 49r, top (Photo: L'Institut de Recherche et dJ~i'stoire des Textes).

(Following Page

222)

Paul A. Underwood: NOTES OK THE WORK O F THE BYZAXTINE IXSTITUTE I N ISTANBUL: 1957-1959

Lawrence J. Majewski: THE CONSERVATION OF A BYZANTINE FRESCO DISCOVERED AT ETYEMEZ,

ISTANBUL

I. Hagia Sophia, West Wall of Nave. 2. Hagia Sophia, West Wall of Nave. Opus Sectile Panel representing an Aedicula (before repairs). 3. Hagia Sophia, West Wall of Nave. Opus Sectile Panel representing an Aedicula (after repairs). 4. Hagia Sophia, West Wall of Nave. Opus Sectile Panels representing Dolphins.

j.

Hagia Sophia, West Wall and Vaults of South Side-Aisle (before cleaning).

6. Hagia Sophia. Mosaic Cross in Summit of Vault, West End of South Side-Aisle. 7. Hagia Sophia. Opus Sectile Border in West Wall of South Side-Aisle, detail. 8. Hagia Sophia. Opus Sectile Border in West Wall of South Side-Aisle, detail.

ILLUSTRATIONS

xiv

g. Hagia Sophia. Bronze Door to Inner Nar-

17.Fetiye Carnii. Fragments of Cornice,

thex, south of Central Door (after cleaning). 10. Hagia Sophia. Bronze Door to Inner Narthex, Central Door (after cleaning). 11. Hagia Sophia. Bronze Door to Inner Narthex, detail of Central Door. 12. Hagia Sophia. Bronze Door to Inner Narthex, detail of Central Door. 13. Hagia Sophia. Imperial Door, Bronze Lintel and Door Frame, detail (after cleaning). 14. H a d a Sophia. Mosaic Portrait of the Emperor Alexander (partly uncovered). 15. Fetiye Camii. Baptism of Christ, Mosaic (partly uncovered). 16. Fetiye Camii. St. Blasius, Mosaic (partly uncovered).

Frieze and Revetments.

Istanbul. Newly discovered

Fresco, in situ. 19. Etyemez, Istanbul. Preparations for Removal of Fresco. 20. Etyemez, Istanbul. Placing Sections of Fresco on temporary Form. 21. Etyemez, Istanbul. The Fresco in its Armature. 22. Etyemez Fresco, detail of left Side (restored). 23. Etyemez Fresco, detail of right Side (restored). 24. Etyemez Fresco. The Virgin (Blachernitissa) (restored). 25. Etyemez Fresco, detail: Head of the Virgin (restored). 18. Etyemez,

Illwstrations in Text Page

216. A.

Fetiye Camii, Sketch Plan of Parecclesion. B. Sketch Map of Southwest Istanbul .

Page

220.

David Oates:

Page

C. Sketch showing three Layers of Fresco. Page 221. D. Sketch of Fresco in situ. 220.

A SUMMARY REPORT ON THE EXCAVATIONS OF THE BYZANTINE INSTITUTE IN THE KARIYE CAMII: 1957 AND 1958

Illzkstration in Text Page

224. I. Kariye Camii. Plan of

successive

Structures.

(Following Page 249) Cyril Mango and Ihor Sevcenko:

A NEW MANUSCRIPT OF THE DE CERIMONIIS

I. Codex

Chalcensis S. Trinitatis

(125)

2. Codex

Chalcensis S.Trinitatis

(125) I33, fol. 67".

I33,fol. 39'.

NOTES

On the Golden Marriage Belt and the Marriage Rings of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection Ernst H. Kantorowicz Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 1-16. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C1%3AOTGMBA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W Dumbarton Oaks Papers is currently published by Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/doaks.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Sun Mar 9 07:53:15 2008

O N THE GOLDEN MARRIAGE BELT AND THE MARRIAGE RINGS OF THE DUMBARTON OAKS COLLECTION

This article is identical with a paper read at the Symposium on "The Dumbarton Oaks Collection: Studies in Byzantine Art," held a t Dumbarton Oaks in May 1958. The paper, in its turn, was based on a section of the lecture on "Roman Coins and Christian Rites," given at Dumbarton Oaks as far back as April 1951.

HERE are several objets d'art in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection which at this Symposium-held in honor of its founders on the occasion of their fiftieth wedding anniversary-should not pass unnoticed, and the discussion of which fittingly opens this year's series of papers: the golden marriage belt from Syria (figs. ~ a - b )and a number of Byzantine marriage rings (figs. z7a-b, zga-b). The iconographic questions connected with these objects, and ultimately with the far broader problem of interrelations between Roman coins and Christian rites, are not entirely unknown, since they have been studied at least in broad out1ine.l There remain, however, some details which are interesting enough to justify a new assessment of the material and which may lend depth to the over-all historical perspective. Golden belts composed of coins or coin-like medallions and forming a piece of jewelry which, according to Roman law, might even be an object of u s ~ f r u c t , ~ were not unusual in early Byzantine times.3There is, for example, a very similar belt, equal in length to the one at Dumbarton Oaks (74 cm.), in the De Clercq ~ third one is in the Metropolitan Museum; it was Collection, in Paris (fig. z ) .A found in Kyrenia, on Cyprus, where it was unearthed together with a now famous set of silver dishes and other valuables (fig. 3).5 The Kyrenia girdle is remarkable for its monetary value. I t is composed of solid gold medallions and coins and weighs almost a pound; that is, as Mr. Philip Grierson has pointed out, almost three-months' salary of a provincial governor, which amounted to four pounds of gold annually during the reign of J ~ s t i n i a n .The ~ other two girdles are much lighter, since their central medallions and the adjoining medalets are relatively thin pieces of gold pressed from molds and therefore hollow on the reverse side. If, as Mr. Marvin Ross has suggested, the design of the central medallion actually goes back to genuine gold medallions distributed by the emperor, the implication would be that the older pattern of imperial gifts, which followed the consular type-that is, displaying the emperor on his chariot in the consular procession-had been replaced, in the late sixth or seventh century, The material has, quite recently, been assembled in a convenient and efficient way by 1%'. TVeinstock, "Pronuba," RE, XXIII: I (1g57), 750-756; see also Arnold Ehrhardt, "Nuptiae," RE, XVII: 2 (1g37), 1478-1489, and the articles by Delling and Kotting mentioned infra, notes 8 and 10. Dig., 7,1,28: Nomismatum aureorum vel argenteorum veterum, quibus pro gemmis uti solent, usus fructus legari potest. Odofredus on this law (Lyon, 1552), fol. 250v, gl. numismatum: Poteris uti [~zumismatibus] in gemmis et portare ad pectus vel decorare teipsum, shows that the intention of the legislator was perfectly clear to the jurists in the thirteenth century. See Philip Grierson, "The Kyrenia Girdle of Byzantine Medallions and Solidi," Numismatic Chronicle, ser. VI, vol. XV (1g55), 55-70, who (pp. 57, 59) briefly discusses also the other girdles.; See Marvin C. Ross, "A Byzantine Gold Medallion a t Dumbarton Oaks," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 11 (19571, 247-261, esp. 258. A. de Ridder, Collection De Clercq: Les bijoux et les pierres grauLes, V I I : I (Paris, I ~ I I )208, , no. 1212. Cf. Grierson, op. cit., 59, note 12; Ross, op.cit., 258, note 74, and fig. 12. This is the girdle studied, and carefully analysed, by Grierson, 09.cit. (with pls. VI-VIII) ; see pp. 55f. for the history of the find a t Kyrenia, Cyprus; also Ross, op. cit., 247f., and figs. 4-5. op. cit., 69, note 49. "rierson,

4

E R N S T KANTOROWICZ

by a religious motif: the display, twice repeated, of a Christian marriage scene.' I t is the iconography of this central scene to which attention shall be called here -a catena iconographica of which some links are well known whereas others have passed unnoticed. The ancient Roman marriage rites were taken over by the Christian Church with very few change^.^ The auspices of the augurs, of course, were abolished, and the sacrificium nuptiale, the nuptial sacrifice of wine or incense, was eventually "convertedJ' and became a nuptial mass. But the legal and ceremonial aspects, namely the reading of the marriage consent from the tabulae nufltiales and its signing, the handing over of the dowry, the dextrarum iunctio or clasping of the right hands, and the cooperation of the deity confirming the legal action and protecting the marriage, dea pronuba or deus pronubus-all of these underwent few changes, or changes only with regard to the tutelary deity. 1n pre-imperial and early imperial times, the goddess uniting and protecting the young couple was Juno, who was invoked because hers was the care of the vincla iugalia, the "fetters of marriage."g In that capacity, Juno pronuba was shown standing between the young couple with her hands on the shoulders of groom and bride who were performing the dextrarum iunctio; at least the archeologists would usually call this deity a Juno pronubn when she appearsas she does quite frequently-on sarcophagi, for instance on the sarcophagus of the Uffizi (fig. 4),1° or on that of the Belvedere (fig. 5) where we also notice the altar for the sacrificium nufitiale.ll Whether the goddess on the sarcophagi really was meant to be Juno, is, however, by no means certain; for the contemporary imperial issues of wedding coins reflect with few exceptions the idea of Concordia, the concord of the bridal ROSS,op. cit., 258, 261. See, in addition to Weinstock and Ehrhardt (supra, note I), the studies by August Rossbach, Rornische Hochzeits- und Ehedenkmaler (Leipzig, 1871), and Inez Scott Ryberg, R i f e s of the State Religion in R o m a n A r t (Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome, XXII [Rome, 1g55]), 163ff. For the Christian aspects of the problem, see Otto Pelka, Altchristliche Ehedenkmaler (Strasbourg, 1901); Ludwig Eisenhofer, Handbuch der katholischen Liturgik, I1 (Freiburg, 1g33), 408ff.; Korbinian Ritzer, Eheschliessung: Formen, Riten und religioses Brauchtum der Eheschliessung in den christlichen Kirchen des ersten Jahrtausends (Wiirzburg Diss., 1940), the most thorough and erudite study on the development of the Christian marriage rite, unfortunately published in typescript only (Munich, 1951). I am grateful to Dom Leo Eizenhofer, Abtei Neuburg near Heidelberg, for calling my attention to this work and lending me his copy. See further G. Delling, art. "Eheschliessung," Reallexikon fiir Antike und Christentum, IV (195g), 719-731. See, for the problem, Weinstock, art. "Pronuba," cols. 750-752. 10 Ryberg, Rites, pl. LVIII, fig. 91. G. Rodenwaldt, uber den Stilwandel in der antoninischen K u n s t (Abhandlungen d. preuss. Akad. d. Wissenschaften, Jahrg. 1935, No. 3 [Berlin, 1935]), 13ff., while admitting that archaeologists usually call the deity J u n o pronuba, decides nevertheless in favor of Concordia; see also his study "Zur Kunstgeschichte der Jahre 220 bis 270," Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archbologischen Instituts, L I (1936)~rogf., where he discusses the sarcophagus in the Thermae Museum and styles the p m u b a correctly Concordia. The material has been ably collected by B. Kotting, art. "Dextrarum iunctio," Reallexikon fiir Antike u n d Christentum, I11 (1g57), 881-888. 11 Ryberg, Rites, pl. LIX, fig. 93. Photo: Deutsches Archaologisches Institut, Rome, No. 36.540. I am much obliged to Mrs. Ryberg for lending me this photograph, and to Professor Reinhard Herbig, Director of the German Archaeological Institute in Rome, for providing me with a copy of it. 7

M A R R I A G E B E L T AND R I N G S AT DUMBARTON O A K S

5

couple. We recognize the dextrarum i~nctioof Antoninus Pius and the elder Faustina where the inscription says simply CONCORDIAE (fig. 12)or, as in the case of Caracalla and Plautilla, CONCORDIAE AETERNAE (fig. 13).12The idea, however, hardly differs when the inscription refers to the PROPAGO IMPERI (fig. 14) which was expected to issue from the concord of Caracalla and his empress.13 "Concord," however, though forming sometimes, together with Fides and Pudicitia, the cortkge of Juno pronztba,14 was not the original meaning of the ceremony. Originally the Roman bridegroom did not clasp hands with his bride, but -in memory, as it were, of the "Rape of the Sabine Women" -took the bride by the wrist to indicate that she was given in his possession and power and was obliged to obey and serve him.15 Concordia, to be sure, was a very ancient Roman goddess; but only gradually did she grow into the role of a marriage deity, apparently at a time when the notion of concord had been assimilated to and influenced by the Stoic idea of Homonoia -implying not only the concord of those concerned, but also the "harmony of the universe," an idea which, along with Stoic philosophy, had been spreading in the Roman Empire.16 I t was, if we may say so, this "spatial" cosmos harmony of which eventually the bridal couple too was supposed to be an exponent. The "Rape of the Sabine Women" had been philosophized and philanthropized; it had been replaced, under the influence of Greek philosophy, by a completely different state of mind and of mood. In the course of this development, imperial coins commemorating, or referring to, the marriage of an imperial couple began to display Colzcordia herself acting as pronuba. As a Concordia felix she solemnizes the marriage of Caracalla and Plautilla (fig. 15)~'or puts her hands on the shoulders of Marcus Aurelius and the younger Faustina as they clasp hands while receiving the Vota publics occasioned by their marriage (fig. 16),18a scene in which she also unites Commodus and Crispina (fig. 17).I9Concordia establishes, as it were, both the unison of the august couple and its unisonance with the eternal harmony of the universe. The main idea, of course, was similar when two emperors were shown clasping and ~ the Concordia Augustorum hands to demonstrate their Concordia (fig. 1 8 ) , ~ need not always have evoked such heart-warmingly acid feelings as apparently l2

Harold Mattingly, Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum (London, 1g23-50), IV,

pl. VII, fig. 13, and Paul L. Strack, Untersuchungen zur romischen Reichspragung des zweiten Jahrhunderts (Stuttgart, 1931-37), 111,pl. VI, fig. 422; for the Concordia aeterna coin (fig.IS), see Mattingly, V, pl. XXXVIII, fig. I , and Mattingly, Roman Coins (London, 1g27), pl, xxxv, fig. 13. l 3 Mattingly, V, pl. XXXVIII, fig. 2. Martianus Capella, De nuptiis, 11, 147, ed. A. Dick, 63: deorum Pronuba [Iuno] nuntzatur, ante quam Concordia, Fides Pudicitiaque $raecurrunt. Cf. Weinstock, art. "Pronuba," col. 752. l5 Pelka, Altchristliche Ehedenkmaler, 99. l8 Cf. Eiliv Skard, "Zwei religios-politische Begriffe: Euergetes-Concordia," Norske VidenskapsAkademi i Oslo: Avhandlinger (1g31), 67-105; cf. W. Nestle, in Klio, XXI (1gz7), 353f., on Homonoia in Greek authors; W. W. Tarn, Alexander the Great, I1 (Cambridge, 1g50), append. 25, pp. 3ggff.; also Zwicker, art. "Homonoia," RE, V I I I : 2 (1g13), 2265ff.; see, for possible Greek influence, Weinstock art. "Pronuba," 752, 38ff.; also Tarn, op. cit., 11, 415f.; Skard, 74ff., 105. l7 Mattingly, V, pl. XXXIII, fig. 16. Is Mattingly, IV, p1. XIII, fig.4; Strack, Untersuchungen, 111, 109, with pl. v, fig. 159, and pl. XVI, fig. 957. Is F. Gnecchi, I Medaglioni Romani, I1 (Milan, I ~ I Z ) ,pl. XCI, figs. 8, g. 20 Mattingly, IV, pl. LIII, fig. 13.

6

E R N S T KANTOROWICZ

was true in the case of the tetrarchs in their porphyry monuments in the Vatican (fig. 6).21 While Concordia prevailed as a marriage goddess, her place could yet be taken by another patron deity as well. The Emperor Aurelian made the cult of Sol invict~san official cult of the state. Fittingly, we find the Sun god, the new dominus imfierii, who by his rise conquers the demons of darkness and brings peace and security to man, as the pronubus, the unifier and solemnizer of the marriage of Aurelian and Severina (fig. 1 9 ) . I~t ~is not surprising, of course, that in a gold-glass picture Cupid is found acting as an Amor pronubus, his hands resting on the heads of the couple (fig. 8);23after all, his mother Venus was mentioned occasionally as a p r o n ~ b a I. t~ may ~ strike us, however, as more curious to find, in the time of late paganism, a gold glass displaying a Hercules pronubus: ORFITVS ET CONSTANTIA I N NOMINE HERCVLIS reads the inscription (fig.9).25 Hercules, to be sure, offers the golden fruits which he recovered from the garden of the Hesperides and which formed a very ancient nuptial symbol. Pomegranates, however, since they contained many seeds in one skin, were also a symbol of Concordia who is quite often shown with a pomegranate lying on a at era.^^ The presence of Hercules is not justified by the three fruits alone. He has a connection with Concordia as well. In front of the Roman aedes Concordiae Augustae, the temple of Concord on the Capitoline Hill, rededicated in A.D. 13, there was a statue of Hercules crowning- himself.Z7 Moreover, in the political theory of the late empire, Hercules, the eponymous god of the Herculean dynasty of the tetrarchs, was above all the heroic savior in the service of man, who had liberated the world from all sorts of monsters, and who therefore appeared as the great pacator mundi, the ~ipqvo-rrolbsand ~ipqvoqrjhat,pacifier and concord-bringer of the w0rld.~8And in this capacity, too, Hercules pronubus may well have taken the place of Concordia pronuba. The more numerous the substitutes of Concord became, the greater, of course, became the discord within the Roman world and the graver the political situation. According to Hellenistic political theories it was the chief task of the prince to establish within his empire the Homonoia of his subjects and to attune them to a harmony which, in the sublunary sphere, was supposed to reflect the 21 Richard Delbriick, Antike Porphyrwevke (Berlin, 1g32), pl. X X X V , fig. I (Diocletian andMaximian). s 2 M. Bernhart, Handbuch zur Miinzkunde der romischen Kaisevzeit (Halle, 1926), pl. 111, fig. 3; also Mattingly and E. A. Sydenham, T h e R o m a n Imperial Coinage, V : I (1927), pl. "11, fig. 109; cf. M o n naies romaines impkriales: Collection de M . P a u l Vautiev et M a x i m e Collignon (Lucerne, 1922), pl. LII, fig. 1617, and p. 89. 2 3 Raffaele Garrucci, Vetri ovnati di figuve in ovo (Rome, 1858))pl. XXVIII, fig. 6. 2"Veinstock, art. "Pronuba," 755; Carl Koch, art. "Venus," RE, VIIIA, 878; see Kotting, art. "Eheschliessung," (supva, note I O ) , 884, for V e n u s pronuba in Nero's Domus aurea. 25 Garrucci, Vetri, pl. xxxv, fig. I. Cf. H. Vopel, Die altchvistlichen Goldglaser (Freiburg, 1899))29. Occasionally a fruit is seen on t h e patera; e. g. Bernhart, Handbuch zur Miinzkunde, pl. LX, fig. 3 ; also Mattingly, 111, pl. X L ~ I fig. , 14. Cf. Cesare Ripa, Iconologia (Padua, 161I ) , 91 ff., and Dora and Erwin Panofsky, "Iconography of the Galerie Fransois Ier at Fontainebleau,"j Gazette des beauxarts, sCr. VI, vol. LII (1958), 127, note 31, with figs. 16-17. 27 C . C. Vermeule, "Heracles Crowning Himself: New Greek Statuary Types and their Place in Hellenistic and Roman Art," Jouvnal of Hellenic Studies, LXXVII (1957)) 284f., pl. I, figs. 4-6. Cf. Ryberg, Rites, 86f. and pl. xxvr, fig. 39b, for a supplicatio t o Concord in front of her cult image. 28 Wilhelm Derichs, Hevakles: Vorbild des Hevrschers i n der Antike (Cologne Diss. [Typescript], 1950), 391 751 107, I Z O f .

"

M A R R I A G E B E L T AND R I N G S AT DUMBARTON O A K S

7

harmony of the universe. The emperor was honored as the pacator mundi and appeared as the living Concord of the human race with regard to both public and private spheres.29 From early times onward Concordia was connected with the imperial cult, especially with that of the empresses. The Empress Livia was identified with Concordia-Homonoia and became the patroness of marriages in Egypt where the nuptial rites were celebrated ini 'lovhia~ E~(3amq~, that is, probably in front of her statue.30 And at the very end of the Roman Empire, in 321 or 324, a double-solidus was issued at Trier showing Constantine's Empress, Fausta, as a Concordia between Crispus and Constantine 11, the FELIX PROGENIES CONSTANTIN1 AVG., as the inscription says (fig. 20).~l The appearance of the emperor himself in the role of a Concordia pronuba is a feature of a very late period only. Perhaps we should recall the fact that in the late Empire contracts -including marriage contracts -were frequently signed before the emperor's image; also, that the solemn oath, if such was taken, was delivered by the genius, the tyche, "of our unconquered lord and august emp e r ~ r . That " ~ ~ is to say, the emperor in his capacity of guardian of contracts and solemn oaths could be recognized even in the legal sphere as an incarnation of Concordia. Represented in this role we find Theodosius 11, in a solidus of 437, a specimen of which has recently been acquired by the Dumbarton Oaks Collection (figs. 21, 2 2 ) . The haloed emperor gives his blessings to the marriage of Valentinian I11 and Licinia Eudoxia, while the legend surrounding the imperial pronubus and the likewise haloed couple reads: FELlClTER NVBTllS.33 We know from the evidence of the papyri that in the later years of Theodosius I1 the official oath formula was christianized. The imperial tyche was still invoked, a custom that lingered on until the seventh century. But this invocation was preceded thenceforth by the invocation of Christ or the HolyTrinity.34 At the next issue of wedding solid;, in 450, we find that Juno and Coficordia, Sol invictus and Cupid, Hercules and emperor have ceded their place to Christus ZB W . W . T a r n , Alexander, 11, 4 0 9 f f . ; c f . E . R. Goodenough, " T h e Political Philosophy o f Hellenistic Kingship," Yale Classical Studies, I (1928), 5 9 f f . and passim, for t h e "Pythagorean" tractates ( w h i c h speak o f "Harmonia" rather t h a n Homonoia); also Louis Delatte, Les Traitks de la Royautt! dlEcphante, DiotogBne et Sthinidas (LiCge and Paris, 1 9 4 2 ) I~n d e x , s. v. drppovia, w h o dates these treatises rather late (first or second century A.D.). For t h e emperor as pacator, see Leo Berlinger, Beitrage zur inoffiziellen Titulatur der romischen Kaiser (Breslau Diss., 1935), 5 4 f f . , 6 6 f . ; A. Alfoldi, i n Romische Mitteilungen, L (1935), 99 and pl. VII. 30 Ulrich W i l c k e n , "Ehepatrone im romischen Kaiserhaus," Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung fur Rechtsgeschichte, roman. Abt., XXIX ( ~ g o g )5,0 4 f f . 31 R. Delbriick, Spatantike Kaiserportraits (Berlin, 1 9 3 3 ) ~ 7 8 and pl. v, fig. 4. 32 See E . Seidl, Der Eid i m romisch-agyptischen Provinzialrecht (Miinchener Beitrage zur Papyrusforschung, XXIV [Munich, 1935]),5 f f . , for t h e forms o f oaths, and 1 2 1 , for marriage contracts; c f . A. Steinwenter, art. "Iusiurandum," R E , X : I (1g18), 1260, line 1 2 , for sponsalia strengthened b y a n o a t h , and (line 2 2 ) for contracts w i t h oath. For legal actions contracted i n front o f a n imperial image, see W i l c k e n , loc. cit. (supra, note 3 0 ) ; Alfoldi, i n Romische Mitteilungen, XLIX ( 1 9 3 4 )7~0 f . ; H e l m u t Kruse, Studien zur offiziellen Geltung des Kaiserbildes (Paderborn, 1g34), 7 9 f . ; Erik Peterson, I1 Libro degli Angeli ( R o m e , 1946), 58, n o t e I I I . See infra, p. 15. 33 H . Dressel, i n Zeitschrift fur Numismatik, XXI (1898), 247f., pl. VII, fig. 15. T h e Dumbarton O a k s specimen was acquired i n April, 1958; i t is reproduced here (fig. 2 2 ) . 34 Seidl, E i d , 8ff., for t h e Christian oaths beginning under Theodosius I1 ( c f . 1 2 f . ) ;see p. 1 1 for t h e invocation o f t h e imperial tyche under Heraclius. Augustine, E p . X X I I I , 5 ( C S E L . , X L I V , 6 g , lines 1 8 f f . ) ,says expressis verbis t h a t t h e o a t h o f groom and bride was t o b e t a k e n plerumque per Christum; c f . Delling, "Eheschliessung" (supra, n o t e 8 ) , 729.

ERNST KANTOROWICZ pronzcbzcs (fig.23 a).35The bridal couple, the Empress Pulcheria and her E m p e r o r Consort Marcian, the first at whose coronation the patriarch extended the blessings of the Church, are haloed and diademed like their p r e d e c e s s o r s , and the central figure appears in quasi-imperial attire. Only the crossed halo of the p r o n u b z t s indicates the change and allows us to understand that in the Christian empire Christ was the new pacator mundi. By c o i n c i d e n c e , in a verse inscription of ca. A.D. 450 at the Church of S. Croce in Ravenna, Christ is praised as cuncti concordia mzcndi, "the Concord of the whole world. J'36 True, the solidzcs of 450 is not the first representation of Christ in the role of Concordia pronuba. In the sarcophagus reliefs of the fourth century Christ is sometimes shown in the place formerly taken by Juno p r o n u b a , and the iconographic continuity here is no less striking than it was in the case of the coin images. Although the sarcophagus of the Villa Albani (fig. 7) is badly m u t i l a t e d , enough is left to recognize not only Christ in the place of the Roman g o d d e s s , but also the altar for the sacrificium nuptiale (see fig. 5) which now has been turned into a lectern carrying a Gospel Book.37That the pronubus should be acting at the same time as stephanophoros, holding the bridal crowns over the heads of the couple, is a feature not customary in earlier Roman wedding iconography. It reminds us, however, how ineffective were the ranting invectives of Tertullian against the crowning of bride and groom38-a custom even now o b served in the Eastern Churches-and how easily the bridal wreaths of flowers assumed an almost transcendental connotation anticipating the eternal crown of life, provided that the marriage was contracted tantum in Domino, "only in the Lord" (I Cor . 7 :39).39 The continuity by transference disclosed by the monuments is strikingly confirmed by the texts of the first half of the fifth century. Around A.D. 400, 36 Paulinus of Nola, Carmen XXV, 10, ed. Hartel, 238 : Absit ab his thalamis . . . Iuno, Cupido, Venus, nomina luxuriae. For the medallion, see Dressel, op. cit., 248f., pl. VII, fig. 16. This is yet another item illustrating the process by which the imperial dignity of the Eastern Empire became ecclesiasticised, particularly noticeable around 450; see, e. g., Peter Charanis, "Coronation and its Constitutional Significance in the Later Roman Empire," Byzantion, XV (1940-41), 53f. A later solidus of the same type has been recently acquired by the Dumbarton Oaks Collection (59.47; see fig. 23b). It refers to the marriage of Anastasius I and Ariadne (May 20, 491) and still displays, probably for the last time, the legend FELICITER NVBTIIS. The imperial couple is without halo, whereas the crossed halo of Christ as pronubus is very clearly recognizable. See G. Zacos and A. Veglery, "An Unknown Solidus of Anastasios I," Numismatic Circular, LXVII (September 1g5g), 154f., an article to which Professor Philip Grierson kindly called my attention. 36 Agnellus, Liber pontificalis ecclesiae Ravennatis, ed. Holder-Egger, in Mon. Germ. Hist., Scriptores rerum Langobardicarum (1878), 306, lines 18f.; ed. A. Testi Rasponi, in the new edition of Muratori, Rerum Italicarum scripto~es,I I : 3 (Bologna, 1924)~122: Christe, Patris verbum, cuncti concordia mundi.. . This was the first line of the verse inscription on the f a ~ a d eof Santa Croce in Ravenna, a church built by Galla Placidia. See Andre Grabar, Martyrium, I (Paris, 1946), 224, note 2, through whom my attention was drawn to this inscription. 37 J. Wilpert, I sarcofagi cristiani antichi, I (Rome, 1932), pl. LXXIV, fig. 3. 38 Tertullian, De corona, 13,4; Karl Baus, Der Kranz in Antike und Christentum (Theophaneia, I1 [Bonn, 1g40]), chap. V, pp. 93ff.; cf. Eisenhofer, Liturgik, 11, 412; also Hans Julius Wolff, Written and Unwitten Marriages in Hellenistic and Postclassical Roman Law (Haverford, 1939), 84f. Ritzer, Eheschliessung, I , 41f., stresses (p. 46) the Armenian influence; see Kotting (supra, note IO), 886, for the wreath a t the dextrarum iunctio. a9 Tertullian refers (De corona, 13,5) t o this passage: habes apostolum in domino nubere iubentem. See the edition by Aemilius Kroymann, in Corpus Christianorum, Ser. lat., I1 (Turnhout, 1g54), 1061, 28f.

M A R R I A G E BELT A N D R I N G S A T DUMBARTON O A K S

9

Severianus of Gabala wrote in a sermon, which strangely enough is also transmitted under the name of Petrus Chrysologus, Bishop of Ravenna between 430 and 450:

"When the images of two persons, kings or brothers, are painted, we often notice that the painter, so as to emphasize the unanimity of the couple, places at the back of them a Concordia in female garb. With her arms she embraces both to indicate that the two persons, whose bodies are separated, concur in mind and will. So does now the Peace of the Lord stand in the center to teach us how separate bodies may become one in spirit.40"

We could hardly have asked for a more accurate description of the change which, by A.D. 400, had taken place: the substitution of Concordia by the "Peace of the Lord." Paulinus, Bishop of Nola, however, who died in 431, was even more specific when, in the Epithalamium for his son Julian, he applied the technical term ~ronubusto Christ : Tali bge suis nubentibus adstat Iesus Pronubus, et vini nectare mutat aquam.

(By those of his who marry in this [Christian] law Jesus stands as pronubus, and he changes water into the nectar of wine.)41 The allusion to the marriage of Cana gives additional weight to the pronubus attribute of Christ, an idea apparently quite familiar in the fifth century. The popular art of decorating gold-glasses helped to spread even more widely that idea (fig. I O ) * ~ which in later times was projected back into the mythical past: the deity uniting the hands of Adam and Eve (fig. 34).43 In the legal sphere, the emperor as a guardian of marriage contracts was likewise replaced by Christ and his vicars; for the tabulae nuptiales were signed not infrequently before the bishop.44 Henceforth the imperial pronubus vanishes 40 The passage from Severianus of Gabala was published by Carl Weymann, "Omonoia," Hevmes, XXIX (1894), 626f.; it is identical with one in a Christmas sermon attributed to Petrus Chrysologus, Sermo CXLIX, in Patr. lat., LII, 5g8D-5ggA. While it is not at all clear how it happened that sermons of Severianus were ascribed to Petrus Chrysologus, the fact itself is generally recognized; see Albert Siegmund, Die Uberlieferung der griechischen christlichen Literatur in der lateinischen Kirche bis zum zw6lften Jahrhundert (Munich-Pasing,1949)~130; E. Dekkers and A. Gaar, Clavis Patrum Latinorum (Sacris erudiri, I11; Steenbrugge, 195I ) , 227. The concord-bringing "Peace of the Lord" was represented in the contemporary mosaic of the arch of S. Maria Maggiore (ca. 432-440) by an angel acting as pronubus and uniting Joseph and the prophetess Anna (that is, the New and Old Testaments); cf. Grabar, L'empereur, 218f., and pl. x x x ~ v . 41 Paulinus of Nola, Carmen XXV, 15 I f., ed. Hartel (CSEL.,XXX [1894]),243. Cf. F. J. Dolger, Antike und Christentum,VI (1g50), I , note I : "Eine Arbeit fiir sich konnte im Anschluss an Paulinus von Nola.. . Iesus pronubus betitelt werden." Unfortunately Dolger did not write that study. 4 2 Garrucci, I vetri, pl. x x ~ xfig. , 3. 4 3 Bible moralis6'e illustre'e, ed. Comte A. Delaborde (Paris, I ~ I I ) I, , pl. VI (Oxford, Bodleian M S 270b, fol. 69. 44 Eisenhofer, Liturgik, II,4ogf.,416f.; cf. Pelka, AltchristlicheEhedenkmaler, 92 ; Ritzer, Eheschliessung, I, 35, 40f. Augustine, Sermo CCCXXXII, 5 4, Patr. lat., XXXVIII, 1463, mentions expressis verbis the signing of the tabulae by the bishop: Verum est; istis tabulis subscripsit episcopus. The sacerdotal benediction of matrimony is mentioned quite often.Paulinus of Nola, Carmen XXV, 11 : Sancta

10

E R N S T KANTOROWICZ

from iconography, though a certain lingering is still noticeable in the silver dish from Cyprus where a chlamydatus, King Saul, marries off his daughter Michal to ~~ the figure of the bishop or priest solemnizing young David (fig. I I ) . However, matrimony was too prominent in daily life to be neglected in art. I t was a scene depicted in numerous representations of the Sposalizio until, in the High Renaissance, it reappeared in medallic art.46Only one medallic design from among very many will be mentioned here: the Cardinal de Bouillon solemnizing the marriage of the Dauphin Louis, son of Louis XIV, to Marie Anne of Bavaria (fig. z4).47The inscription VICTORIA ET PACE AUSPlClBUS shows that this event had primarily political aspects, though it was not so exclusively political as a medallion of 1570, executed by Giovan Antonio de'Rossi, on which the bride is the Signoria of Venice, the groom is the Kingdom of Spain, and the Concordia pron.uba is Pope Pius V extending his blessings to a military alliance against the Turks (fig. 2 5 ) .48 For all the available evidence, however, it can still be asked whether in fact Concordia pronuba was simply replaced, in the fourth and fifth centuries, by Christzcs pronubus, and whether this change implies merely an iconographic problem or affected the meaning of the ceremony as well. The answer to these questions is given by the golden marriage belt of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection (figs. ~ a - b ) . The central medallions display Christ as the unifier and solemnizer who places his hands over those of the couple clasping hands. Of chief importance is the inscription : E K OEOY OM 0N0 I A, "Concord deriving .~~ from God," with the words XAPIC and Y r l E l A written in the e ~ e r g u e That sacerdotis venerando pignora pacto/tungumtuv; also line 231 : Imbue, Christe, novos de sancto antistite nuptos. The ecclesiastical benediction was mentioned already by John Chrysostom, I n Genesim Hmnilza , preaches against pagan excesses a t X L V I I I , 3 67, Patr. gr., LIV, 443 (see Ritzer, I, 41, note ~ o I )who wedding parties and adds: 6kov 6.rrawa ~ a i h & a m h a i r ~ t v... ~ akpkas l ~ d d ~va l 6 1tOxGjv ' ~ a~iAoytCjv i m)v

. .

6pbvoiav TOG(NVOIKEU~OU uwucpiyy~tv. .

Nicosia (Cyprus),Museum. Photograph: Dumbarton Oaks. The dish has often been reproduced; see, e. g., Charles Diehl, Manuel d'art byzantin, I (Paris, 1925), 313, fig. 159; Leclercq, art. "Chypre," DACL., 111: I , 1581, fig. 2914 (with literature); also art. "David," DACL., I V : I , zgg/300, fig. 3630. That the design followed the imperial prototype cannot be doubted; see Andre Grabar, L'empereur duns l'art byzantin (Paris, 1936)~21 7, note 4. 46 Cf. A. von Salis, Anlike und Renaissance (Ziirich, 1g4j), 5j f . The material has not yet been collected, though a beginning has been made; see Paul Schmid, "Die deutsche Hochzeitsmedaille", Deutsches Jahrbuch fur Numismatik, 111-IV (1940-41), 9-52, pls. I-VI. The fact that a Juno pronuba made her appearance in a pantomime performed in Bologna a t the wedding of Annibale Bentivoglio and Lucrezia d'Este, merely reflects the general climate of the Renaissance; cf. Jakob Burckhardt, Die Kultur der Renaissance, ed. Werner Kaegi (Gesamtausgabe, V [Berlin and Leipzig, 1g30]), 298, Engl. transl. by S. G. C. Middlemore (Vienna, n. d.), 214. 47 [Claude-Fran~ois Menestrier], Mkdailles sur les principaux LvLnements d u rigne de Louis le Grand (Acad6mie Royale des MBdailles et des Inscriptions [Paris, I joz]), fig. on p. 180. 48 Georg Habich, Die Medaillen der italienischen Renaissance (Stuttgart and Berlin, n. d.) pl. L X X I X , fig. 8. 49 Dumbarton Oaks Collection, no. 37.33; cf. The Dumbarton Oaks Collection: Handbook (Washington, 1g55), p. 80, no. 190, and figure on p. 95; also Berta Segall, "The Dumbarton Oaks Collection," American Journal of Archaeology, XLV (1g41), 13f., and figs. 5-7. For the device, see Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De caerimoniis, 11, ch. 48, ed. A. Vogt (Paris, 193g), 11,p. 8, the acclamation a t the imperial wedding: 'Es, 6 8ebs 6 &y~os,6bs airrois 6p6votav with similar wishes t o follow for the empire (paoih~~ov)and the marriage (y&pos). Further, the acclamations for the Augusta (Vogt, 11, 9): Zb 6wpcp~MqsC 8 ~ 0 ~ 6 -rropcpOpq. i d5

M A R R I A G E B E L T AND R I N G S AT DUMBARTON OAKS 11 is to say, Homonoia-Concord no longer ruled, or even existed, in her own right as an independent goddess or virtue, who had her own aedes and altar, nor could the couple by its purely human and moral qualities represent her divine essence. Concordia was now a gift of God; she proceeded from God and had become subservient to God. What Saint Augustine said about Virtus in general, that "Virtue is not a goddess but a gift of God, and that she is to be obtained from Him by whom alone she can be given," or that "not truth, but vanity, makes the Virtues goddesses; for they are gifts of the true God, and not themselves goddesses," all of that was applied to Concordia as well: E K OEOY OMONOIA.50 The change reflected also upon the bridal couple. No longer were groom and bride embraced by the natural harmony of the universe in which they participated and of which they became a likeness through their Homonoia. Their hands are now joined together by a sacrament, by a spiritual principle bestowing upon them Concord as a special gift like Grace and Health. Although the marriage rings (figs. z7a-b) continued to display occasionally the word H0monoia,~1and although both Eastern and Western marriage rites still mentioned the concord by which bride and groom were to be united,52something essential had changed: the couple no longer appeared as the manifest likeness, the visible mimesis of the purely natural order of the world. And yet, the idea of mimesis was not lost, nor was it absent from the Christian ritual. In the Epistle to the Ephesians (5:25), St. Paul enlarged upon the image of the marriage of Christ to the Church, and the chapter from Ephesians appears in almost all the later Christian services of the "Solemnization of Matrimony"; it is used as the Lesson and 50 Augustine, De cia. Dei, IV, 20, ed. Dombart, I , 169: [ V i r t u s ] ... dea non est, sed donum Dei est, i p s a ab ill0 impetretur, a quo solo dari potest. Also IV, 21, Dombart, I , 170: H a s deas n o n veritas, sed uanitas facit; haec e n i m ueri Dei munera sunt, non ipsae sunt deae. Cf. Theodor Ernst Mommsen, "Petrarch and the Story of the Choice of Hercules," Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, XVI (19351, 178-182. 5 1 Fig. 27a: Dumbarton Oaks Collection, no. 53.12.4 (sixth century); cf. Handbook, p. 76, no. 169. Mrs. Enrico de'h'egri has called my attention t o the fact that the design of this ring (the bust of Christ over the Cross with two figures, right and left) corresponds exactly t o that of the ampullae (bust of Christ over thecross with the two thieves, right and left) of the sixth century; see Grabar, Les ampoules de Terre Sainte (Paris, 1958), pls. XII, XIII, XIV,XVI,XVIII, XXVI,XXVIII, etc. See, on related rings, Paolo Orsi, "Giojelli bizantini della Sicilia," Milanges ogerts ci M . Gustaue Schlumberger (Paris, 1924), 395, fig. 65 ; Carlo Cecchelli, "L'anello bizantino del Museo di Palermo," Orientalia Christiana Periodica, XI11 (1947), 40-57 (with full bibliography). Fig. 27b: Dumbarton Oaks Collection, no. 59.60; a new acquisition of the Collection. See also Dalton, Catalogue (infra, note 62), 9, No. 48, and, for the ampulla pattern, KO. 50. See the Preface "Qui foedera nuptiarum blando concordiae iugo. . . nexuisti" of the Nuptial Mass in the Sacramentarium Gelasianum, LII, ed. H . A. Wilson (Oxford, 1894), 265, which is found also in the Gregorianum (Patr. lat., LXXVIII, 261), and can be traced t o the Pontificale R o m a n u m saeculi X I I , ed. Michel Andrieu, L e pontifical Romain a u moyen-dge (Studi e Testi, LXXXVI [Vatican City, 1938]),I , 261, 5 9, whereas it no longer has a place in the present Missale Romanum. See further, for the Mozarabic rite, the Liber Ordinum, ed. Marius FBrotin, Monumenta Ecclesiae Liturgics, V (Paris, 1go4), 437: D a eis, Domine, u n a m pudicitiam unamque concordiam, and 438: . . .in timore tuo anitnorum concordiam. The Byzantine Euchologion refers in the various nuptial orders (the Akolouthiai for Sponsalia, Crowning, and Second Marriage) time and again t o Homonoia; see EOxoh6y1ov ~b Miya (Rome, 1873), 163 (twice: 6v 6povoia ~ a pi~ p a i aTIOTEI),164 (Cv ~ i p j v g~ a byovoiq), i 169 (Abs a h o i s . . . by6vo1av yuxQv ~ a owyCcrwv). i Also 172, 176, 179. The prayer pp. 163f. (KCPIE b esbs fipijv b T ~ V65 EBvQv, K T ~ . ) can be traced back t o the Barberini graec. 336 of the eighth (or ninth) century, and may be considerably older; see Ritzer, Eheschliessung, 68f., and, for the date of the codex, Dom Anselm Strittmatter, "Missa Graecorum," Traditio, I (1g43), 81, note 4.

12

ERNST KANTOROWICZ

pervades the prayers.53It is still included in the Book of Common Prayer where, in the introductory prayer, the estate of matrimony is praised as "an honorable estate, instituted of God, signifying unto us the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and the Church." And once more, towards the end, there is an invocation of God "who hast consecrated the state of Matrimony to such an excellent mystery, that in it is signified and represented the spiritual marriage and unity betwixt Christ and his C h u r ~ h . " ~ ~ The marriage of Christ to the Church-in mediaeval art often identified with the Coronation of the Virgin -was occasionally represented in later miniatures (fig. 35) where the chalice or, more generally, the Sacrament of the Altar figured as the unifier.55 Similarly, at the mystical marriage between the bishop and his local church, the Holy Spirit might act as pronabus, with the altar table placed between the couple and with Christ giving his daughter away (fig. 36),56a meaning supported by the miniature in an English Psalter of ca. 1310 where Saul is seen giving away his daughter Michal to David (fig. 37).57Unfortunately, the late-mediaeval secular equivalent -the king's marriage to his realm, symbolized by the ring ceremony of the Coronation Orders58-does not seem to have found any representation at all; the nearest would be a medallion of 1603, showing Henry IV as Mars and Maria deJMedicias Pallas joining hands while the Dauphin Louis XI11 places his foot on a dolphin. We recognize an eagle descending from heaven and carrying a crown in its beak, apparently the "immortal Crown" symbolizing the continuity of kingship and representing, in this case, the unifier (fig. 26) .59 For, the inscription PROPAGO IMPERI indi53 Ephesians 5: 22-33, is the Epistle of the Byzantine marriage rite (Euchologion [editio Romana, 18731, 17of.), and i t may have served that purpose a t all times. I n the West, the tradition is more complicated. Paulinus of Nola, Carmen XXV, 167f. (infra, note 61), shows that the passage from Ephesians was a t least present in his mind when writing the Epithalamium for his son; and i t serves again in the modern Missale Romanum composed under Pius V, in 1570. I n the Middle Ages, however, apparently under the influence of the Romano-Germanic pontifical of the tenth century, the lesson I Corinthians 6: 15-20, was commonly used (cf. Ritzer, 11, 15), thus replacing with a stalwart exhortation against fornication the subtle ontological commemoration of the divine model. Some manuscripts, however, indicate that the Lesson from Ephesians was current as well; cf. Andrieu, Le Pontifical Romain, I , 260, note 4. This is not surprising because the Benediction Deus qui potestate virtutis tuae alludes to the passage from Ephesians (see injra, note 54), and that Benediction, which is still found in the present Missale Romanum, can be traced back to the Roman Pontifical of the twelfth century (Andrieu, op. cit., I , 261, lines 24ff.) and further to the Gregorianum of Pope Hadrian I ; cf. H. A. Wilson, The Gregovian Sacramentary under Charles the Great (Henry Bradshaw Society, X L I X [London, 1915]), 221, $ 6. See also infra, note 65, for that Lesson on the day of Epiphany, that is, the day of the marriage of Christ t o the Church. 54 The Book of Common Prayer follows verbatim the text of the Benediction Deus qui potestate virtutis tuae (supra, note 53) : Deus qui tam excellenti mysterio coniugalem copulam consecrasti, ut Christi et Ecclesiae sacramentum praesignares in foedere nuptiarum. The benediction, of course, is found also in the rite of Sarum which became more or less authoritative for the English Church in the thirteenth century; cf. William Maskell, Monumenta Ritualia Ecclesiae Anglicanae, I (Oxford, 1882), 70 and 72. 55 Bible moralise'e, I, pl. 6 (Oxford, Bodl. MS 270b, fol. 6'). 56 Bible mmalise'e, 111, pl. 479 (London, Brit. RIus. MS Harley 1526-27, fol. 8'). Munich, Cod. gall. 16, fol. 3 5 ~ a, miniature to which Professor Erwin Panofsky obligingly called my attention and of which he also lent me a photograph. Although the MS is said to be French (gall.), it is in fact an English Psalter of ca. 1310 and comes, as Professor Panofsky pointed out to me, from the same workshop as the famous Tickhill Psalter in the Morgan Library. 58 See, for the king's marriage to his realm, E. H. Kantorowicz, The King's Two Bodies (Princeton, 1g57), z ~ z f f . ,and, for the (French) ring formula, 221f., note 85. 59 G. F. Hill, The Dreyfuss Collection: Renaissance Medals (Oxford, 1g31), pl. CXIX, fig. 556. For the eagle with crown on Roman coins, see, e. g., the aureus issued S.C. (by decree of the Senate) to

M A R R I A G E B E L T AND R I N G S AT DUMBARTON O A K S 13 cates that the medallion celebrates the perpetuity of the dynasty exactly as it does on the Roman coin from which the inscription, to the letter, was taken (fig. 14).~' However that may be, the loving understanding, the Homonoia-Concord between Christ and his Church, the latter represented by the Virgin Mary, served as the transcendental model of bridal couples marrying in the Christian faith. This model must have been far older than our relatively late liturgical texts would suggest. For one thing, in the Epithalamium of Paulinus of Nola for his son mention is made not only of Iesus pronubus, but also of the grande sacramentum, quo nubit ecclesia Christo, "the great sacrament by which the Church gave herself into marriage to Christ."G1 Moreover, on the octagonal or quatrefoil bezel of a wedding ring in the British Museum, of the sixth or seventh century (fig. z8),62the hoop of which is likewise octagonal, we recognize the celestial couple of Christ and Mary, King and Queen of Heaven, as they dispense their blessings to the slightly smaller bridal couple -the motto being again Homonoia. This design appears also on another-similar, if more elegant and slightly later-ring of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection (figs. zga-b), which is likewise octagonal.63 Once more the inscription reads Homonoia and refers to both couples: to Christ and Mary as the model, and to the smaller human couple as the antitype and mimesis of the exemplary concord of King and Queen of Heaven. A few words may be devoted to the strange octagonal shape of the bezel and the hoop. The octagon is the customary shape of early Christian bapti~teries,~4 and one might be all the more inclined to seek a connection with baptism, since the marriage of Christ to the Church was generally, especially in Syria, understood to follow after, or take place at, the Baptism of Christ in the Jordan : the Church was cleansed on Epiphany and the marriage followed after that nuptial bath-Hodie caelesti sponso iuncta est Ecclesia announces the famous antiphon on E p i ~ h a n yAnother .~~ consideration, however, has its merits too, celebrate the acceptance of the augustus title on the part of Octavian; Alfijldi, in Rom. Mitt., L (1g35), pl. I 3, fig. 5, and p. 87. The French medallist could hardly have known the corresponding iconographic type of the Dove descending with a crown in its bill at the Baptism of Christ in the Jordan of which one of t h e finest specimens is found in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection; cf. Handbook, p. 80, no. 189 (illus. on p. 91). 60 See supra, note 13; for the Crown "which never dies" ("la couronne et la justice ne meurent jamais"), see Kantorowicz, op. cit., 417, note 343, and pp. 336ff. Paulinus of Nola, Carmen XXV, 167f.,ed. Hartel, 243; see supra, note 53. 62 0. M. Dalton, Catalogue of the Finger Rings: Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediaeval and Later (London, I ~ I Z ) , sf., NO.4 j. Dumbarton Oaks Collection, no. 47.15; see Handbook, p. 81 f., and figure 195 on p. 94, where, however, the bezel is not shown. 6A F. J. Dolger, Antike u n d Christentum, IV (1g34), I 53ff., and V (193j), 293f.; cf. K. Schneider, art. "Achteck" and "Achtzahl," Reallexikon fur Antike und Christentum, I ( ~ g j o )72ff., , 79ff. 65 Odo Casel, "Die Taufe als Brautbad der Kirche," Jahrbuch fur Liturgiewissenschaft, V (1g25), 144-147; Hieronymus Frank, "Hodie caelesti sponso iuncta est Ecclesia: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte und Idee des Epiphaniefestes," V o m christlichen M y s t e r i u m : Gesammelte Arbeiten z u m Gedachtnis von Odo ) , Casel O.S.B., edd. AntonMayer, Johannes Quasten, Burkhard Neunheuser (Diisseldorf, ~ g j ~192-226, is t h e most profound discussion of this subject; see p. 159, note 31, for the evidence of the Gallican Epistle Book of Schlettstadt (seventh or eighth century), which has the Lesson from Ephes. 5: 20-33, on Epiphany (see supra, note 53).

E R N S T KANTOROWICZ and may even appear preferable. Andre Grabar has convincingly proved that the Church of the Holy Saviour in Antioch, which Constantine the Great dedicated in 327, was originally devoted to Homonoia-Concordia, a title referring to a more specialized capacity or hypostasis of the incarnate Word.66That is to say, just as Constantine dedicated churches in Constantinople to the Saviour in his special capacities of Divine Wisdom (Sophia), of Divine Power (Dynamis), and Divine Peace (Eirene),G7so did he dedicate a church to the Saviour as Divine Concord (Homonoia) in the Oriental capital, Antioch -a tropaion after his victory over Licinius by which the Orient and its capital, Antioch, were again united to the Roman Empire where Homonoia now prevailed. The Church K U ~ ~ U K as ~V, of the Divine Concord, however, was an octagon-~6 6~~Cxyovov Theophanes called it.68Apparently, the word Homonoia released almost automatically, for the Byzantine mind, the vision of the octagon at Antioch, just as for us the word Hagia Sophia immediately conjures the vision of the dome of the most venerable church of Constantinople. Perhaps the octagonal Homofloia rings may even serve to strengthen Grabar's ingenious identification. In its Christian garb, as displayed by the rings, the idea of Homonoia, or Harmony, gained a new spatial depth and an unexpected perspective. This then, this doubling of the couples-the celestial couple being a model of the terrestrial-should, we may assume, be considered as a genuine contribution of the ideas developed by the Christian Church. Or does this doubling, too, have its pagan antecedents ? I t is true that the myths of Amor and Psyche, of Mars and Venus, may have served occasionally as mythical paradigms, comparable perhaps to the marriage of Adam and Eve as a cipher of Christian m y t h ~ l o g y . ~ ~ But those myths were hardly more than allegorical parallels lacking the moral obligation to imitate a model, and they definitely lacked the spatial reality and perspective which the marriage between the Mediator and the Mediatrix, Christ and the Church, conveyed to the idea of Homonoia and thereby to the wedding ceremony itself. This would likewise be true when a coin displayed the imperial couple, Hadrian and Sabina, joining hands with a divine couple, ~ ~the scene, referring to an adventus reception, has no Osiris and Isis (fig. 3 0 ) ; for model character whatsoever. Hence, we may dismiss off-hand the mythical "models," but cannot dismiss with equal nonchalance some other imperial antecedents. In A.D. 176, the Roman Senate passed a decree ordering that bride and groom should offer on their wedding day a sacrifice on an altar placed in front of the colossal silver statues, in the temple of Venus and Roma, of Marcus A. Grabar, Martyrium, I, 222ff. See Jean Paul Richter, Quellen der byzantinischen Kunstgeschichte (Vienna, 189.7), 4, 2, for the three churches inConstantinople; cf. 13, 3 37. The oratory called Homonoia in the capital uras not dedicated to Christ as Concord, but commemorated the concord of a Council; ibid., 144, 3 4. 6B Theophanes, Chronographia, I, ed. C. de Boor (Leipzig, 1883-85), 28, quoted by Grabar who also discusses (223f.) the political situation. 60 See Rossbach, Romische Hochzeits- und Ehedenknziiler, 172,for a sarcophaglls in the Campo Santo a t Pisa, where Amor and Psyche are represented as well as bride and groom. See supra, note 43, and fig. 34, for Adam and Eve. 7 0 Strack, Untersuchungen, 11, pl. XIII, fig. 743; cf. pl. VI, fig. 314, also p. 164. 66

67

M A R R I A G E B E L T AND R I N G S AT DUMBARTON O A K S 15 Aurelius and his Empress, the younger F a ~ s t i n aSimilar . ~ ~ decrees, we may recall, are known from E g ~ p t . ~Most 2 explicit, however, is an earlier inscription from Ostia. That city consecrated an altar for the imperial couple Antoninus Pius and the elder Faustina to the end that ob insignem eorzzm concordiam-for the outstanding concord of emperor and empress-the maidens that marry at Ostia, and their grooms are held to offer on that altar on the day of their wedding.73 That this decree was carried through verbatim-probably not only in Ostia and the provinces, but also in Rome7*-is suggested by a series of superb sestertii of Antoninus Pius which actually reveal the whole procedure (figs. 31a-c).~5We recognize the colossal statues of Emperor and Empress facing each other, also the altar, and, before it, the dextrarztm iunctio of bride and groom. The two smaller human figures are framed and overshadowed by the huge statues (the pedestals are plainly visible, even on a later replica [fig. 33])76of Emperor and Empress who clasp hands exactly as does the newly wedded pair at their feet. Moreover, the Emperor carries in his left hand the statue of Concordia whose name we also read in the inscription and who creates, as it were, the harmony of all three spheres: the human, the imperial, and the universal. Concordia pronuba is effective by her own cosmic power of rendering harmony; but she wields her power also through the mediatorship of the prototypes, the Divi. The Divi, as demanded by Hellenistic political philosophy, are the mimetai of the heavenly order, whereas man becomes the mimetes of the ruler. The coin discloses strikingly the unison, harmony, and equality of rhythm of macrocosmos and microcosmos. All of this opens up some wider perspectives both backward and forward. We may think of Theocritk' Panegyric for King Ptolemy I1 and his Queen Arsinoe whose "holy wedlock" of brother and sister appeared to the poet as a mimesis of that of the rulers of Olympus, Zeus and Hera77-a metaphor which has its antecedents far back in the ancient Near East where the royal marriage 71 Alfoldi, in: Rom. Mitt., XLIX (1934)~ 61, note 3, and L (1g3j), 96; Strack, Untersuchungen, 111, p. 96 (quoting and interpreting Cassius Dio, 71, 31, I ) ; Weinstock, art. "Pronuba," 753. 7 2 U. Wilcken, "Ehepatrone im romischen Kaiserhaus" (supra, note 30). 7 3 CIL., XIV, Suppl. 5326: Imp. Caesari T. Aelio Hadriano Antonino Aug. P i o P.P. et divae Fau-

stinae ob insignem eorum concordiam Utique in ara virgines quae in Colovzia Ostiensi nubent item mariti earum supplicent. Strack, loc. cit. 7 4 Strack, 111, 96. 76 Strack, 111,pl. x, fig. 826; Alfoldi, Rom. Mitt., L (1935)) pl. XII, fig. I j; Bernhart, pl. LX, fig. 10. Rossbach, Romische .. . Ehedenkmaler, 22f., has misunderstood the meaning of these coins because he thought that the smaller figures were Marcus Aurelius and the younger Faustina; but so have others; cf. Strack, 111, 96, note 291; Alfoldi, op. cit., 96, note I. 76 G. F. Hill, Catalogue of the Gveek Coins of Lycia, Pamphilia, and Pisidia (London, 1897), 188f., nos. 75-76, pl. XXXII, fig. 2 : Gordian and Antioch (Colonia Caesarea Antiochia), standing confronted on pedestals; the Emperor holding in his left a statue (of the genius of the city or of Concordia ?) grasps with his right the right hand of Antioch; between them an altar. Cf. Strack, 111, 96, note 291, who called attention to this coin. 7 7 Theocritus, XVII, 128-134. Cf. Fritz Taeger, Charisma: Studien zur Geschichte des antiken Herrscherkultes (Stuttgart, 1g57), 376; see also G. W. Elderkin, "The Marriage of Zeus and Hera and its Symbol," American Journal of Archaeology, XLI (1g37), 424-435.

16

E R N S T KANTOROWICZ

was generally visualized as an antitype of the iepbs y&pos of the divine powers.76 Or we may turn our attention towards later times and mention the imperial couple of Septimius Severus and Julia Domna, or Gallienus and Salonina, who were represented on their Concordia coins as Sun and Moon (figs. 3za, b),79the Emperor radiate and the Empress on the crescent, and recall the marriage of the Sol Iustitiae to the Woman Having the Moon under her Feet (Rev. 12: I), that is, according to customary exegesis, the And we may add, for what it is worth, that in the Byzantine and Russian Eztchologia the rituals of crowning the bride and groom commemorate in the Dismissal not only Christ and Mary, but also Saint Constantine the Great and Saint Helen, the Emperor's mother.*l In this concentricity of human, saintly, and divine couples there is, it is true, some resemblance with the former concentricity of human, imperial, and divine spheres. But the Christian imperial saints no longer were exponents or models of that natural order and concord of the world which the sestertius of Antoninus Pius and Faustina suggested. Constantine and Helen have become exponents and symbols of that spiritual world order which the inscription of the Dumbarton Oaks golden wedding belt proclaims: E K OEOY OMONOIA. THE INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDY Princeton, N. J. See, e. g., Ivan Engnell, Studies in Divine Kingship in the Ancient Near East (Uppsala, 1943), Index, s. v. iepb~y & p o ~ E ; . Norden, Die Geburt des Kindes (Leipzig and Berlin, 1gz4), 138ff.;Alfoldi, in Rom. Mitt., L (1g35), 124. 79 Mattingly, V, pl. xxxvrr, 8 and p. 233, also pl. xxxvrr, 11; Alfoldi, Numismatic Chronicle, ser. 5, vol. I X ( ~ g z g )pl. , XVIII, I. Cf. Alfoldi, Rom. Mitt., L (1935)~ pl. XII, 13-14. 80 See, e. g., the Glossa ordinaria, Patr. lat., CXIV, 732; or Alexander Minorita, Expositio in Apocalypsim, ed. Alois Wachtel (Monum. Germ. Hist., Quellen zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters, I [Weimar, 19551)~259, who quotes Ephes. 5:23f., in order t o explain t h e marriage of the Woman Having the Moon under her Feet with Christ Sol iustitiae. Euchologion (ed. Rome, 1873)) 174, also 180.

la, b. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Golden Marriage Belt (see note 49)

2. Paris, De Clercq Collection. Golden Marriage Belt (see note 4)

3. New York, Metropolitan Museum. Golden Belt from Kyrenia, Cyprus (see note 5)

4. Florence, Uffizi Museum. Sarcophagus (see note 10)

5. Rome, Belvedere Museum. Sarcophagus (see notes 11, 37)

6. Rome, Vatican, Porphyry Statue. Diocletian and Maximian (see note 21)

7. Rome, Villa Albani. Sarcophagus Fragment (see note 37)

8. Gold Glass: Amor pronubus (see note 23)

9. Gold Glass : Hercules pronubus (see note 25)

10. Gold Glass : Christus pronubus (see note 42)

11. Nicosia, Museum. Silver Dish with Marriage of David and Michal (see note 45)

21. Feliciter Nubtiis: Theodosius I1 with Valentinian I11 and Licinia Eudoxia (see note 33). 22. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Feliciter Nubtiis: Theodosius I1 with Valentinian I11 and Licinia Eudoxia (see note 33). 23a. Feliciter Nubtiis: Christus pronubus with Marcian and Pulcheria (see note 35). 23b. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Feliciter Nubtiis: Christus pronubus with Anastasius I and Ariadne (see note 35). 24. Medallic Design : Cardinal de Bouillon Blessing Marriage of Dauphin and Marie Anne of Bavaria (see note 47). 25. Medal by G. A. deJRossi: Pope Pius V with Venice and Spain (see note 48). 26. Paris, Dreyfuss Collection. Medallion: Henry IV and Maria de'Medici with Dauphin (see note 59). 27a, b. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Wedding Rings (see note 51). 28. British Museum. Wedding Ring: Christ and St. Mary with Couple (see note 62). All of the above figures are enlarged.

a. Bezel b. Hoop 29a, b. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Wedding ring (see note 63)

30. Adverctus : Hadrian and Sabina with Osiris and Isis (see note 70). 31a, b, c. Corccordia: Bride and Groom Sacrificing in Front of Statues of Antoninus Pius and Faustina I (see note 75). 32a. Concordia ~ u g g: .Gallienus and Salonina (see note 79). 32b. Concordiae aeterrcae: Septimius Severus radiate, Julia Domna on Crescent (see note 79). 33. Colorcia Caesarea Adiochia: Statues of Gordian and Antioch (see note 76). All of the above figures are enlarged.

35. Marriage of Christ and Church (see note 55) 34. Marriage of Adam and Eve (see note 43) Bible moralisbe

36. Bible moralide: Christ Marrying a Church to a Bishop (see note 56)

37. Munich. Cod. gall. Monac. 16, fol. 35": Saul Manying Michal to David (see note 57)

http://www.jstor.org

LINKED CITATIONS - Page 1 of 2 -

You have printed the following article: On the Golden Marriage Belt and the Marriage Rings of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection Ernst H. Kantorowicz Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 1-16. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C1%3AOTGMBA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W

This article references the following linked citations. If you are trying to access articles from an off-campus location, you may be required to first logon via your library web site to access JSTOR. Please visit your library's website or contact a librarian to learn about options for remote access to JSTOR.

[Footnotes] 3

A Byzantine Gold Medallion at Dumbarton Oaks Marvin C. Ross Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 11. (1957), pp. 247-261. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281957%2911%3C247%3AABGMAD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I 4

A Byzantine Gold Medallion at Dumbarton Oaks Marvin C. Ross Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 11. (1957), pp. 247-261. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281957%2911%3C247%3AABGMAD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I 5

A Byzantine Gold Medallion at Dumbarton Oaks Marvin C. Ross Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 11. (1957), pp. 247-261. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281957%2911%3C247%3AABGMAD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I 7

A Byzantine Gold Medallion at Dumbarton Oaks Marvin C. Ross Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 11. (1957), pp. 247-261. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281957%2911%3C247%3AABGMAD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I

NOTE: The reference numbering from the original has been maintained in this citation list.

http://www.jstor.org

LINKED CITATIONS - Page 2 of 2 -

49

The Dumbarton Oaks Collection Berta Segall American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 45, No. 1. (Jan. - Mar., 1941), pp. 7-17. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-9114%28194101%2F03%2945%3A1%3C7%3ATDOC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-2 50

Petrarch and the Story of the Choice of Hercules Theodor E. Mommsen Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Vol. 16, No. 3/4. (1953), pp. 178-192. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0075-4390%281953%2916%3A3%2F4%3C178%3APATSOT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-8 77

The Marriage of Zeus and Hera and Its Symbol G. W. Elderkin American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 41, No. 3. (Jul. - Sep., 1937), pp. 424-435. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-9114%28193707%2F09%2941%3A3%3C424%3ATMOZAH%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Z

NOTE: The reference numbering from the original has been maintained in this citation list.

A Marble Relief of the Theodosian Period Ernst Kitzinger Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 17-42. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C17%3AAMROTT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-O Dumbarton Oaks Papers is currently published by Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/doaks.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Sun Mar 9 07:53:29 2008

A MARBLE RELIEF OF THE THEODOSIAN PERIOD

This study is in substance identical with a paper delivered at the Symposium on "The Dumbarton Oaks Collection: Studies in Byzantine Art" held at Dumbarton Oaks in May 1958. I wish to thank Professor G. Sotiriou (Athens), Professor &I.Gorenc (Zagreb), and Professor K. Wessel (formerly Berlin), for their courtesy in sending me the photographs reproduced in figures 8, 12, and 18 respectively and for granting me permission to publish these prints. Figure 15 is a detail from a negative in the possession of the German Archaeological Institute in Rome, reproduced here thanks to the kindness of Professors F. W. Deichmann and J. Kollwitz.

Ii

N 1952 Mr. and Mrs. Bliss gave to the Dumbarton Oaks Collection a fragmentary marble relief depicting Christ healing a blind man (fig. I ) . ~The object merits a detailed study, partly because of its high artistic quality and partly because it bears so unmistakably the imprint of its art-historical habit at. Before discussing its date and place of origin it will be well to give a description of the relief. The fragment, which is of white (Proconnesian ?) marble, has a height of 26.5 cm. and a width of 28.7 cm. I t is evidently incomplete at the top, where the present edge cuts off part of Christ's halo, as well as on the left and on the right. Yet all three edges are fairly smooth, a fact which suggests that the present size and shape of the relief are not the result of mere accident, but that its edges were trimmed with a tool in order to reduce it for use as a panel, approximately square in shape. Moreover, the condition of these three edges indicates that the trimming took place quite a long time ago. Only at the top of the right-hand edge, where the outline becomes irregular and the surface of the edge is very clean, is there a suggestion of recent breakage. A small piece seems to have been chipped off here subsequent to the original trimming (see fig. 10). The only edge which is authentic and intact is the bottom one. I t consists of a slightly curved frame, about 2 cm. wide, which is raised about 1.5 cm. above the surface of the relief, thus forming a sloping ledge for the figures to stand on. The frame is adorned by a row of big round beads. In the middle of these, just under the figure of Christ, is a small disk with an equal-armed cross in relief. The thickness of the slab-not including the raised frame or the figures which stand out in relief-is approximately 2 cm. No accurate measurement of this dimension is possible because of the extreme roughness of the back of the slab (fig. 11). Christ stands squarely in the center of the fragment. Youthful and beardless, He wears His hair short and combed down smoothly over His forehead. His is the only head in the relief which is surrounded by a halo. He is dressed in a tunic of which the lower hem is visible just above His ankles while the wide sleeve covers His arm down to about His elbow. Over the tunic He wears a pallium, one end of which is draped over His left shoulder and arm, while the other is pulled across His body at the waist and cascades from His left wrist. On His feet the straps of His sandals are distinctly though lightly indicated in relief. Carrying a rolled-up voluwzen in His left hand, Christ turns His head half right and touches with the index finger of His raised right hand the left (or far) eye of the blind man who is seen in profile on His right approaching Him in a stooping position. The invalid is dressed in the short girded tunic which in the late Roman period characterized its wearer as a member of the working class, No. 52.8. Handbook of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection (Washington, D.C., 1g55), p. 17, no. 41 and p. 33 (ill.). 2*

ERNST KITZINGER and plain sock-shaped boots (socci ?). He shows much the same facial type as Christ, and although he appears to be even more youthful he would, if erect, be a figure of about the same height. Both his hands reach forward towards the Saviour whose miracle-working arm he seems about to clasp. Actually, however, the blind man's left hand, of which only one finger is visible behind Christ's arm, must be assumed to be holding the top end of the heavy gnarled stick the outlines of which are incised on the empty ground between the two figures. I t is, therefore, his right hand only that reaches out in eager anticipation towards his benefactor, while in his left he carries the stick which supports his stooping body and at the same time serves to guide his steps. Evidently, then, his sight has not yet been restored. Indeed, his eyes seem vacant and without life (fig. 13). On Christ's left and aligned with Him on the same plane is an impressive figure of a companion or witness, which echoes that of the Saviour almost exactly in stance, attire, and position of arms. He is an older man, somewhat shorter than Christ and distinguished by a domed, bald forehead, a drooping moustache, and a long pointed beard. In his left hand, instead of a scroll he holds a scepter in the form of a cross which rests against his shoulder and the top of which extends above his head. Most of the upper part of this scepter, however, is lost owing to the break previously noted, and only one cross-arm remains. The bearded companion's right hand, part of which is concealed by Christ's shoulder, echoes the dramatic action of Christ's right hand; it is raised in an expressive gesture with the palm facing the beholder. Just above this hand there appears the head of another figure, presumably a second witness. Executed in low relief (in keeping with its position in the background), this head is of the same general type as Christ's and the blind man's. I t is shown in semi-profile and its glance is directed not at what Christ is doing, but towards the scepter-bearing figure, thus lending added emphasis to the latter and picking up -by way of counterpoint to the major action portrayed -the secondary and contrary movement initiated by the invalid's eager profile. The body of the background figure must be assumed to be completely concealed behind Christ, but one hand is faint157 visible in the space between the bearded man's head and right hand (fig. 14). I t is executed in very low relief and its action is not altogether clear. So much for the appearance of the relief. About its history, prior to its arrival at Dumbarton Oaks, little is known.2 I t is all the more fortunate that the stylistic character of the carving should be so unmistaltable. The figures, in fact, bear all the characteristics that one finds in sculptures done in Constantinople toward the end of the fourth century, and specifically in the time of Theodcsius I. Consider, for instance, the heads in the imperial entourage on the Theodosian reliefs of the base of the obelisk in the Hippodrome (figs. 2 , 3).3 The collective description of the faces on these reliefs nrhich Kollwitz gives in his exhaustive study of Theodosian sculpture can be applied almost in its entirety i o the head of Christ on our relief (fig. 4). He speaks of the large oval of the face with its softly rounded cheeks and full jaws; of the hair evenly combed downIt was formerly in the collection of Levi Benzion, who is said to have acquired it in Egypt. J. Kollwitz, Ostromische Plastik der fheodosianischen Zeit (Berlin, 1941), pl. 35f.

A MARBLE R E L I E F O F T H E THEODOSIAN P E R I O D

21

ward and forming a gentle wave which covers a large part of the forehead; of the gently ascending brow line and its sudden downward bend at the root of the nose; of the small cavities indicating the pupils; of the rather heavy eyelids outlined by grooves of which the upper ones deepen as they approach the nose; and, finally, of the large ears which are set rather low and are completely unc o v e ~ e dThe . ~ figures in their entirety are equally characteristic products of the period. Their closest parallels are the apostles on the so-called Sarcophagus of a Prince found in Constantinople in 1933 and now in the Archaeological Museum (fig. 6),5 and those on a fragmentary relief from Bakirkoy, also in the same Museum (fig. 5).6 The extremely soft draperies of the latter carving, with their folds lacking definite beginnings and ends and with lights playing gently over the highly polished surface, thus blurring all contours, are particularly similar, though compared with the Bakirkoy figures ours are sturdier and much better defined anatomically. In this respect they are closer to the apostles on the Prince's Sarcophagus who also wear the same type of sandals as Christ and His companion to the right on our relief. All three works have in common another characteristic of Theodosian style, namely, a tendency for figures to lean over slightly. In the light of Kollwitz' detailed study it is not necessary for me to insist on the fact that this soft, smooth, and delicate style which so obviously strives after classical ideals of formal perfection is characteristic of only a short period in Constantinopolitan sculpture, a period which coincides with Theodosius' reign (379-395). Only a few years later, in the reign of Arcadius, forms begin to harden n ~ t i c e a b l ywhile , ~ even the closest known derivatives of the Theodosian style outside the capital, namely, certain sarcophagus reliefs at Ravenna, exhibit different stylistic nuances8 We can say with confidence, therefore, that our marble was carved in Constantinople about the year 390. To our concept of the sculptural style of that period in the capital the relief adds hardly anything new. One feature not previously noticed in other works is the use of incised lines to indicate the most distant objects (cf. especially the stick carried by the blind man). We shall have occasion later to refer to some Western ivory carvings which are products of a phase parallel to, and perhaps to Ibid., p. 119. Ibzd., pl. 46 and p. 132ff. Ibzd., pl. 48 and p. 153ff. 166 and passim. For Ravenna sarcophagi closely related to Constantinopolitan work see ibid., p. 155ff., and especially Kollwitz' more recent study Die Sarkophage Ravennas, Freiburger Universitatsreden, N.F., Heft 21 (Freiburg i. B., 1956), p. off. The sarcophagus of Liberius in S. Francesco, which appears to be the most "Greek" and "classical" in this Ravennatic group, was first thought by Kollwitz to have been drastically restored in modern times (Ostromische Plastik, p. 165, note 5) and is now considered b y him a Renaissance imitation after ancient models (Die Sarkophage Ravennas, p. 6f.; idem, "I1 problema del sarcofago ravennate detto di Liberio," Corsi d i cultura sull'arte ravennate e bizantinu, Ravenna, 11-24 marzo 1956, I1 [Ravenna, 19561, p. 61ff.). G. Bovini, on the other hand, speaks only of the possibility of "qualche ritocco," especially in the faces (Savcofagi paleocristiani d i Ravenna [Cittk del Vaticano, 19541, p. 3 2 ) , and this view seems to be borne out by the more detailed demonstration offered by G. de Francovich in a recent study ("Studi sulla scultura ravennate, I: I sarcofagi," F e l i x Ravenna, 77-78 [August-December 19581, p. gff., esp. p. 12ff.; ibid., p. zoff., a stylistic analysis in which both the Constantinopolitan affinities of this sarcophagus and the features differentiating it from work done in the Eastern capital are duly stressed).

Ibid., p.

22

ERNST KITZINGER

some extent influenced by, Theodosian art in Constantinople, and in which the same device is used.8a While the dating and attribution of the Dumbarton Oaks fragment pose no particular difficulty, we face much harder problems when trying to visualize and define the object of which it formed a part and the setting for which that object was made. Our principal guide in exploring these questions is the lower edge of the relief with its curved outline and its series of beads. The existence of this frame indicates that the relief cannot have stood vertically. Though it conceivably might be part of a roundel inserted in a wall in an upright position, a much more natural supposition is that it was placed horizontally. There exists, in fact, a whole class of marble slabs of the kind we are presuming in this instance. The class is well known and has been studied r e ~ e a t e d l y . ~ New examples turn up from time to time.1° The more complete ones leave no 8a Cf. e. g., K. Wessel, "Eine Gruppe oberitalischer Elfenbeinarbeiten," Jahrbuch des deutschen archaologischen Instituts, 63/64 (1948/49), p. I I I ff., esp. pp. I 17, 120. E. Michon, "Rebords de bassins chr6tiens orn6s de reliefs," Revue biblique, n. s., XI1 (1915)) p. 485 ff.; XI11 (1916), p. 121 ff. (survey of all pieces known a t that time). G. A. S. Snyder, "The so-called Putealin the Capitoline Museum a t Rome," Journal of R o m a n Studies, XI11 (1923),P. 56ff. E. Thomas, "Bruchstiick einer friihchristlichen Marmortischplatte mit Reliefverzierung aus Csopak," Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 111, 3 (1955), p. 261 ff. (with an incomplete list of examples compiled evidently without knowledge of Michon's basic survey). 10 I append here a list of additional pieces which have come to my attention and which are not mentioned in any of the studies quoted in footnote 9: Antioch - Antzoch-on-the-Orontes I : T h e Excavations of 1932 (Princeton, London, and The Hague, 19341, P. 4 9 f and fig. 4. Athens - D. I. Pallas in 'Apxa~ohoyl~t 'Eqqprpis (1930), p. goff. (two fragments, from Arcadia and Melos, in Byzantine Rluseum). Chicago - Bulletin of the A r t Institute of Chicago, XVII, 4 (1g23), p. 38f. E. Michon in Bulletin de l a Socie'te' Nationale des Antiquaires de France (1923))p. 17off. (fragment, allegedly from Mesopotamia, in Art Institute). Crimea - Ottet of the Imperial Archaeological Commission ( ~ g o z )p., 37f. and fig. 60 a, b. E. Michon in Bulletin de la Socie'te' Nationale des Antiquaires de France (1920), p. 253ff. (two fragments found outside church in excavation in Chersonese). Hama - H. Ingholt, Rapport pre'liminaire sur sept campagnes de foz~illesd H a m a e n Syrie (1932-38) (Copenhagen, 1940), p. 137f and pl. 42, 2. Herakleion (Crete) - A. Orlandos in Byzantinisch-Neugriechische Jahrbucher, VI (1928), p. 160ff. (two fragments from Gortyna in Museum). Istanbul - Two recently acquired and unpublished fragments in the Museum, knowledge of which I owe to Dr. C. A. Mango; one shows a recumbent figure beneath a tree, the other parts of two animals. Jerusalem - Two unpublished fragments in the Palestine Archaeological IlIuseum, knowledge of which I owe to Prof. H. Ingholt; one depicts animal fights, the other a satyr and a maenad. Nea Anchialos - G. A. Sotiriou in 'Apxatohoyl~fi'Eqqp~pis (192g), p. 102 and fig. 137, top left. Pallas, ibid. (1g30), p. 94f and fig. 4. Kew York - Two pieces, both unpublished, were on the art market in 1958; one, allegedly from Egypt, is a complete, sigma-shaped slab with a relief border depicting a sea thiasos; the other is a fragment of a curved border depicting a head in profile and a hunting scene. Nicosia - A. H. S. Megaw in K y p r i a k a Grammata (1956), p. 171 and fig. 4 ; T h e Swedish C y p r u s Expedition, IV, 3 (Stockholm, 1956)) p. 103f. and pl. X I X , 3 (fragment from Salamis in Cyprus Museum; I owe the references to Mr. Megaw). VI (1948), p. 18ff.and fig. 15. Rhodes-A. K. Orlandos,'Apx~iov~ L j v~wlavrrvtjvpvqpeiwv ~fis'EhhaGo~, Varna - F. Gerke, Der Tischaltar des Bernard Gilduin in Saint Sernin in Toulouse, Mainz. Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur. Abhandlungen der geistes- und sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse (1958)~no. 8, pp. 457, 464 and figs. 9, 10. Vienna - R. Noll, V o m Altertum z u m Mittelalter, exhibition catalog (Vienna, 1958)) p. 24, nos. I and 2 (two fragments-one from Sirmium, the other of unknown provenance-in the Kunsthistorische Museum; I owe knowledge of these pieces to Dr. 0. Demus).

A MARBLE R E L I E F O F T H E THEODOSIAN P E R I O D

23

doubt that we are dealing with marble table tops having a plain surface and a broad raised border adorned with figure reliefs and rimmed with beads (fig. 8). The subject matter of the reliefs in many instances is secular; mythological scenes, hunts, animal fights, pastoral and marine subjects all occur frequently. But there are also numerous instances in which the themes are biblical; witness, for instance, a fragmentary piece from Sbeitla which shows a sequence of scenes familiar from the iconography of catacomb frescoes and Early Christian sarcophagi, namely, the Raising of Lazarus, Noah's Ark, the Ascension of Elijah, Adam and Eve, and David with his sling.ll In the majority of Christian examples of these table tops we find similarly disjointed sequences of biblical events whose common denominator is their relationship to the idea of salvation or of divine intervention on behalf of those in peril; the kind of subject so familiar from the art of the catacombs. As in the latter, Old Testament subjects by far predominate.12 Indeed, the Raising of Lazarus which appears on the fragment from Sbeitla is very nearly the only Gospel scene so far known on these table borders, aside from the Dumbarton Oaks fragment now under discussion.l3 I have said that the common characteristic of this whole class of table tops is the raised relief band with beaded rim. In shape, however, there is no uniformity. While some examples are circularll* others have the so-called sigma shape15 known from many pictorial representations of late classical and early Christian times to have been one of the most common shapes of dining room tables. No example is known to me of a table top of this class that is definitely square or rectangular. I t must be borne in mind, however, that the vast majority of known examples consist of fragments. Many of them are curved, while others are straight. Usually it is not possible to decide whether the straight fragments come from a rectangular or a sigma-shaped table, while in the case of curved fragments there is usually uncertainty as to whether the slab, when complete, was sigma-shaped or round. In the case of our fragment at Dumbarton Oaks we are obviously faced with this latter uncertainty. The reconstruction drawing (fig.7), which I owe to the kindness of Mr. R. L. Van Nice, has been based on the assumption that the slab was circular, but the sigma shape is equally possible. Before enquiring into the possible use of our object some features should be mentioned which distinguish it from the general run of specimens of the class to which I have referred. By and large the sixty odd known examples of these table tops with relief borders are remarkably uniform, so that in-so-far as our Michon, Revue biblique (1915)~p. 502 ff.and pl. I, I. A. Merlin in Revue tunisienne (1g17), p. 279ff. from the Old Testament subjects already mentioned in connection with the piece from Sbeitla one finds the Three Youths in the Fiery Furnace, the Sacrifice of Isaac, Daniel in the Lions' Den, and the story of Jonah. l 3 The Raising of Lazarus occurs once more on a fragment in the Museum of Istanbul. This fragment depicts, in addition, a scene interpreted by Mendel as the Parable of the Figtree (G. Mendel, Catalogue des scztlptures grecques, romaines et byzantines, I1 [Constantinople, 19141, p. 430ff., no. 655; Michon, O P . cit. [1g15], p. 525ff., no. 15; pls. 11, 111). 14 E. g. Michon, op. cit. (1915), p. 520ff.,no. 11 = our fig. 8 (Athens, from Thera); Snyder, op. cit., p. 56 and pl. I (Rome); also the slab in Rhodes referred to in note 10supra. I n these instances the circle is fully, or almost fully, preserved, so that there can be no doubt about the original shape. l5 E. g. the slabs from Hama and in New York referred to in note 10supra. Cf. also a sigma-shaped slab from Salona in Zagreb (Michon, op. cit. [1g15], p. 509ff., no. 5 ; see our fig. 12 and infra, p. 2 7 f . ) . l1

l a Aside

ERNST KITZINGER piece differs from them it is in effect unique. This is especially true of its size. With a relief band 26.5 cm. wide-and evidently not entirely complete at that the border was almost twice as wide as the borders of these table tops normally are. On the basis of the curvature of the rim, Mr. Van Nice has computed the total diameter of the presumed circular slab as having been about I m. 80, while normally the diameters of these circular slabs range from about I m. 10 to I m. 40. Another feature that sets our piece apart is the character of the beading. In the vast majority of cases this consists of the classical bead-and-reel motif ; in some of beads only which, however, are small and somewhat elongated.16 I know of only one fragment presumed to have belonged to a table top which has a beaded rim comparable to ours, namely, a piece in the Art Museum in Budapest. Of the figure frieze of this object only an animal remains.17 A third point which is distinctive is the roughness of the edge and back of our slab (figs. g and 11). I t is true that in many instances the publications of the table tops of our class do not permit us to judge what the sides and the backs look like. But in those cases where a judgement is possible the backs are reasonably or entirely smooth.18In our case it is inconceivable that the slab was exposed to view in the manner of an ordinary table top supported by legs or a solid base. I t must have been embedded in some fashion. How exceptional it is in this respect obviously cannot be judged without subjecting all the members of the group to a scrutiny such as cannot be carried out on the basis of published materials. In trying to determine the purpose which our slab may have served we must avoid what would almost certainly be a fallacious premise, namely, that all the table tops of the same type, let alone this exceptionally large and splendid piece with its distinctive features, could have been put to only one use.lgThe finds are l6 Michon, op. cit., 1915, p. 515, no. 8 and pl. I , 2 ; 1916, p. 124, no. 2 1 ; p. 126f., no. 2 2 ; p. 140, no. 34. Snyder, 09. cit., pl. 11, no. 1812.Also the pieces in Chicago and Varna quoted supra in note 10. l7 A. Hekler, Die S a m m l u n g Antiker Skulpturen, Museum der bildenden Kiinste in Budapest (1929) p. 147, no. 143. For the same type of beaded rim in metalwork see i n f r a , note 20. l8 I n several instances publications include drawings of profiles and these invariably show the back to have been carefully finished; cf. P. Sticotti, Die romische Stadt Doclea in Montenegro, Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften, Schriften der Balkankommission, Antiquarische Abteilung, VI (Vienna, 1g13), col. 1 5 2 , fig. 93, and the publications of pieces in Athens and Herakleion referred to in note 10 supra. The pieces in New York referred to in the same note also have smooth and carefully worked backs, as I was able to ascertain personally, thanks to the kindness of the owners. G. Rlendel describes the backs of two of the pieces in the Museum of Istanbul as "soigneusement dressee" (op. cit., 11,nos. 654 and 655, pp. 426, 430); that of a third as "dressee, non polie" (ibid., no. 485, p. 169). Michon characterizes the backs of a number of pieces in Paris as "simplement dresske" (op. cit. [1g15], p. 515, no. 8 ; p. 517, no. g ; p. 539, no. 18; [1916], p. 136, no. 30). 1Q Most scholars who have discussed the possible uses of these table tops have based their theses on this premise, a t least so far as the examples with Christian subjects are concerned. 0. Wulff suggested that they have to do with the agape (Konigliche Museen z u Berlin. Beschreibung der Bildwerke der christlichen Epoche. Altchristliche, mittelalterliche byzantinische u n d italienische Bildwerke, I [Berlin, 19091, p. 11, no. 21); Mendel seems to have thought that both the pagan and the Christian examples were connected chiefly with the cult of the dead (op. cit., 11, p. 425ff., especially, p. 42gf.),while Michon, the first to attempt a systematic survey of the whole material, came to the conclusion that all of these objects, regardless of whether the subject matter of their reliefs was pagan or Christian, were used in churches as basins for liturgical ablutions (op. cit. [1g16], p. 146ff., especially p. 163ff.). Sotiriou, on the other hand, has interpreted the slabs---especially, but not exclusively, those adorned with biblical subjects-as table tops used in the prothesis and this interpretation has been adopted also by other Greek scholars (Sotiriou, in 'Apxalohoy~~fi 'Eqqwpi~[1929], p. 233f., I d e m , Guide d u

A MARBLE R E L I E F OF T H E THEODOSIAN PERIOD

25

so numerous and so widespread that we are evidently dealing with what is basically a common type of utensil in the late classical world, though by far the greater part of the examples comes from the Eastern rather than the Western half of the Mediterranean. The type, as has long been recognized, originated in pagan metalwork. These marble slabs with their decorations are, in fact, large scale imitations of sumptuous silver platters.20The fact that there are more examples with pagan and secular subjects than with Christian ones suggests that these tables had been in common use before the type was adopted by the Church. If, however, we cannot be sure that all tables of the same type served the same purpose-or that all tables of different types served different purposes-it will be necessary to cast our net rather wide and consider in broad terms the uses to which tables were put in Christian contexts. I n doing so it will soon become apparent that, for our particular piece at least, certain uses are much less likely than others, even though it will not be possible to conclude in completely unambiguous fashion what its original setting was and what purpose it actually served. Since, as we have seen, the iconographic repertory of the tables with biblical friezes is that of the catacombs and early sarcophagi-and in this respect our fragment with the scene of Christ healing a blind man is no exception-it is natural to think first of sepulchral uses. Tables of various sizes and shapes, including the circle and the sigma, occur, in fact, quite frequently in early Christian funerary contexts. They may form actual covers or housings of tombs, as is frequently the case in Sa10na,~land in a number of instances in North Africa,22 musee' bytantin d'Athdnes [Athens, 19321, p. 34; J. ill. Barnea, To ~ a h a r o ~ p ~ o - r l a v r9uotamfip1ov ~bv [Athens, 19401, p. 129; A. K. Orlandos, 'H ~ W ) \ ~ ( J T E Y OT~ ~ ~ ~ I o x ~ ~ Upaotht~fi,11 T I ~ V I K T [Athens, ~ 19541, p. 486ff.). E. Thomas, on iconographic grounds, suggests more specifically a connection with the rite of the blessing of the offerings (op. cit., p. 271). 20 A. Xyngopoulos in 'Apxalohoyr~fi' E ~ q ~ a p i(1914), s p. 77ff.; Snyder, op. cit., p. 59ff., especially p. 6j. I t is interesting to note that in metalwork of the fourth century one frequently finds a heavy beaded border substituted for the classical bead-and-reel (W. Griinhagen, Dev Schatzjund von Gross Bodungen [Berlin, 19541, p. 39). I n this respect, too, the sculptors of marble table tops followed suit, as our fragment and that in Budapest show (see supra, note 17). 21 E. Dyggve, History of Salonitan Christianity (Oslo, 1951), p. 105ff. and fig. V, 21ff. The potentially great usefulness of this book is impaired by the fact that the text is written in all but unintelligible English. 2 2 I n North Africa the Christian funerary monument in form of a table is based on a strong pagan tradition of long standing; cf. W. Deonna, "Mobilier dklien, I : Tables antiques d'offrandes avec kcuelles et table d'autel chrktien," Bulletin de covrespondance helle'niqzte, LVIII (1934)~p. ~ f f . ;especially p. ~ z f f and . p. 76ff. I n many instances the mensa was not found in. sitzt, so that the physical relationship between i t and the tomb is difficult to determine, but the funerary purpose is frequently attested by inscriptions (see the references given by Deonna, op. cit., p. 77, note 2; also F. Cabrol and H. Leclercq, Dictionnaive d'arche'ologie chre'tienne et de liturgie, I , col. 82gf.). At Tipasa, on the other hand, there is a whole series of mensae which are most intimately connected with tombs, the latter being encased in them in such a way that a banquet could be held directly on top of the burial. While some of these mensae were thought a t one time to have been tables for the agape into which sarcophagi were subsequently inserted (St. Gsell, Les monuments antiques de I'AlgLvie, I1 [Paris, 19011, pp. 332f., 336f.), more recent investigators believe that these tombs were built in the form of tables from the outset (E. Albertini and L. Leschi, "Le cimetihre de Sainte-Salsa 9. Tipasa de Mauretanie," Acaddmie des inscrifitions et belles-lettres: Comptes-rendus [1g32], p. 77ff., especially p. 81f.; for further examples see Bulletin arche'ologique [1941-42], p. 35jff.). This conclusion is borne out also by analogous finds in Spain (see next footnote). Other North African mensae, though associated with the cult of relics and martyrs rather than with actual burials, may still be called sepulchral in a wider sense (cf. Cabrol and Leclercq, op. cit., I, col. 828f., with further references).

ERNST KITZINGER Spain,23and elsewhere,24or they may be placed beside the tomb.25Their purpose may have been to serve for liturgical banquets commemorating the dead (particularly martyrs), or for the agape, or for ordinary funeral feasts. More frequently they seem to have been used simply to deposit offerings of food and drink for the departed.26But most of these tables are on a much smaller scale than that from which our fragment must have come. This is true not only of those that are physically separated from the grave. Even when the mensa is an integral part of the tomb the actual top is usually quite small. For instance, in the case of one of the large wzensa tombs at Tipasa for which full data are available, the sunken sigma-shaped top-as distinct from the sloping surfaces around it which served as a kline for the banqueters-had a width of only I m.27In the cemeteries of Salona, on the other hand, we find a number of marble slabs shaped like table tops and apparently of considerable size. But these are oblong and preserved in such fragmentary condition that the dimensions attributed to them in the reconstruction drawings cannot be accepted as completely certain.28No example is known to me of a circular or sigma-shaped grave cover or graveside table of a scale comparable to that of our piece. J. Serra Vilarb, Excaoacio.rtes e n la necvo$olis romano-cvistiana de Tarragona, Junta superior de excavaciones y antiguedades, 93 (Jladrid, 19281, p. 63ff., tomb no. 129, an example analogous to those a t Tipasa (see preceding footnote), i. e., with the sarcophagus encased in a large semicircular masonry block which served as a couch for the reclining banqueters and in the midst of which the table itself was embedded (see especially fig. 25 on p. 64). Other examples are referred t o in Serra Vilarb's ensuing report (no. 104 [Madrid, 19291, p. j8ff.). While it appears that in all instances of similar mensae a t Tipasa in which any trace of the original surface of the table top remains that surface consisted of an inscription in mosaic (Albertini and Leschi, op, cit., p. 82f.; B u l l e t i ? ~arche'ologique [1941-421, p. 3jjff.), in the case of tomb no. 129 a t Tarragona the table itself is an inscribed marble slab. The top end of this slab repeats the semicircular outline of the masonry block in which it is embedded (Serra-Vilarb, 09. cit., no. 93, pl. L I I , ~ ) T . heoretically our fragment a t Dumbarton Oaks could have come from a slab of similar shape and could have been used in an exactly similar manner. 2 4 Under the general heading of "mensae ri2avtyrum and agape tables" Barnea discusses a number of slabs from the Greek East which come from funerary contexts and show cavities suggesting that they were used for depositing food job. cit., p. jjff. and figs j and 8 ; cf, also Orlandos, op. cit., 11,p. 48off.). 25 Cf. a wzensa in the Rotunda a t Tipasa adjoining an arcosolium (0.Grandidier, "Deux monuments funhaires 9. Tipasa," Atti del 11congvesso internazionale di archeologia cristiana [Rome, 19021, p. 51 ff., especially p. 72f. and figs. S and 9). Similar structures exist in the catacombs of Malta (E. Becker, M a l t a Sottevranea [Strasbourg, 19131, p. 112 ff. and pl. x ~ s f f . )Small . plates of glass, terracotta or stucco embedded in masonry plinths are frequently found in positions near tombs in the Roman catacombs (A. AI. Schneider, "Mensae oleorum oder Totenspeisetische," Homische Quartalschrift, XXXV [1927], p. 287ff. and pls. s ~ v - X V I I I) t. is possible that many of the table slabs from the cemeteries of Salona were in positions near tombs rather than on the tombs themselves; this may be particularly true of small uninscribed slabs that are indistinguishable from ordinary domestic utensils (cf., e. g., Forschungen i?z Salona, 111,p. 47, no. H/13; also Avchaeologia Jugoslavica, I [1954], p. 65, no. 10, and figs. 8-10). For Eastern examples of what appear to have been graveside tables cf. Barnea, 09. cit., p. 57ff. (Melos and Constantza), with further references. 26 Dyggve, History of Salo?zitan Christianity, p. 11off.; Schneider, op. cit.; cf, also i d . in Gesammelte Aufsatze zur Kultzcrgeschichte Spauiens, ed. b y H . Finke,V (Niinster i. W., 193j),p. 79f., and F. J. Dolger in Gnomon, I1 (1926), p. 228f. 27 Gsell, op. cit., p. 336 (the measurements given for this same tomb by J.-B. Saint GCrard in B u l letin arche'ologique [1892], p. 480 and repeated in part b y Leschi, ibid. [1938-401, p. 425, are clearly erroneous). The sigma-shaped top of the mensa described by Gsell, op. cit., p. 332f., is of similar size, judging b y the scale of the plan, ibid., fig. I 50. The corresponding feature of the mensa in the Rotunda (note 2 j, supva) measures only 75 x 80 cm. (Grandidier, op. cit., p. 72), while the marble slab embedded in tomb no. 129 a t Tarragona (note 23, supra) has a width of only 73 cm. 28 Dyggve, History of Salonitan Christianity, fig. V,28. Forschungen in Salona, 11, p. 91 ff., fig. 54ff.; 111, pl. 8, figs. H/I-H/Io. The slab ibid. H / j and p. 37, fig. 52f. (cf. History of Salonitan Christianity, fig. V,29), which is almost complete, lacks a funerary inscription and seems to have belonged to the altar of the basilica a t Marusinac (Fovschungen, 111, p. 46).

A MARBLE R E L I E F O F T H E THEODOSIAN P E R I O D

27

There exists, theoretically, the possibility that our fragment may have come not from a mensa tomb or graveside table, but from a sigma-shaped tomb stele. Stelai of this shape have been found in Egypt.29Presumably the type developed from mensa tombs or graveside tables, and in some instances there is actual evidence of a slab which must originally have been a table top having been put to secondary use as a stele by providing it with an i n s ~ r i p t i o nThe . ~ ~change-over from table top to stele, however, almost certainly involved from the beginning a change from a horizontal to a vertical position and, as we have seen, a vertical position is practically out of the question in our case. Parenthetically, a remark may be added here on a famous sigma-shaped ~ ~ concurrently, on a fragment of what appears to slab from Salona (fig. 1 2 ) ) and, have been an almost identical companion piece now in Vienna.32Among all the slabs with border reliefs it is these two that could be imagined most readily in a vertical position. They differ from all other objects of this class known to me in that they show the figures with their feet placed "centripetally," i.e. inward rather than outward. This implies at least a weakening of interest in the functional role of a table top, the decoration of which would be -and was -normally designed to be viewed by the persons surrounding it.33The Coptic sigma-shaped stelai, on the other hand, which presumably were intended for a vertical 29 M. Cramer, "Ein Beitrag zum Fortleben des Altagyptischen im Koptischen und Arabischen," Mitteilungen des deutschen Institztts fur agyptische Altertumskunde in Kairo, VII (1937)) p. 119ff., especially p. 122f. (with further references) and pl. zoff. Ibid., p. 1 2 2 f . and pl. 21 b ; also C. Schmit's "Sachtrag," ibid., p. 126f. with pl. 22 b. Dr. Cramer surely was rash in claiming that these table slabs re-used as tomb stelai must originally have been altars. The sigma shape is one of the common forms of tables in general, and, as we have seen, tables were widely used also in funerary contexts (see supra, notes 21-28). Table tops from cemeteries, especially when broken, were ready-made material for re-use as tomb inscriptions. A fragment of a table slab with relief border in the Hermitage in Leningrad also bears a-presumably secondary-Coptic inscription (Michon, op. cit. [1916], p. 134f., no. 28), but I have not been able t o ascertain whether this is of a funerary character. 31 J. Strzygowski, "Le relazioni di Salona coll'Egitto," Bullettino di archeologia e storia dalmata, XXIV ( I ~ o I )p., 58ff. Idem, "Der sigmaformige Tisch und der alteste Typus des Refektoriums," Worter und Sachen, I ( ~ g o g )p., 7off., especially p. 74f J, BrunSmid, "Kameni spomenici hrvatskoga narodnoga muzeja u Zagrebu," Vjesnik hruatskoga arheoloikoga druJtva, N.S., X (1908-g), p. 14gff., especially p. 213f. Michon, op. cit. (1g15), p. 509ff. and fig. 6. A. Riicker, "Uber Altartafeln im koptischen und den iibrigen Riten des Orients," Ehrengabe deutscher Wissenschaft, dem Prinzen Johann Georg z u Sachsen z u m 50. Geburtstag gewidmet (Freiburg i. B., 1920), p. 209ff., especially p. 214 and fig. 8. J. Braun, Der christliche Altar, I (Munich, 1g24), p. 278, note 46. Cramer, op. cit., p. 124 and pl. 22 a. Forschungen in Salona, I11 (1939), p. 47 and fig. 55. E. Condurachi, in Ephemeris Daco-Romana, I X (1940), p. ~ f f . e, specially p. 56f. and fig. 14. Barnea, op. cit., p. 134 and fig. 31. Dyggve, History of Salonitan Christianity, p. 107 and fig. V, 31. Orlandos, op. cit., p. 486 and fig. 447. Thomas, op. cit., p. 267, no. 32. A. A. Barb, " M e n s a Sacra: The Round Table and the Holy Grail," Journal of the W a r burg and Courtauld Institutes, X I X (1956), p. 4off., especially p. 44 and pl. 8 b. Gerke, op. cit. (supra, note I O ) , p. 465. 32 Kunsthistorisches Museum, Inv. I 360; Noll, op. cit., p. 24, no. 2 ("find spot not known"). Cf. supra, note 10. I n scale, subject matter, and style there appears to be complete identity between the pieces in Zagreb and Vienna, though there may be some slight difference in the beaded border. The figure on the fragment in Vienna, as distinct from all those on the Zagreb relief, is haloed. 33 Superficially the arcades opening inward, as we find them on the Zagreb and Vienna pieces, resemble the scalloped borders without reliefs so commonly found on table tops (see, e. g., infra, notes 46, 56,58). But the decoration of the Zagreb and Vienna slabs is really a relief band of the kind characteristic of the table tops studied by Michon, who quite properly included the Zagreb piece in his survey. There is one other known member of that class showing figures under arcades (Michon, op, cit. [1g16], p. 134f., no. 28), but in this case the arcades open outward and the figures are placed accordingly, so that they stand upright from the point of view of the beholder a t the table's edge. In this respect, then, the reliefs a t Zagreb and Vienna are entirely exceptional.

ERNST KITZINGER position, show their decoration arranged "centripetally," like the Salona and Vienna relief slabs.34 From our enquiries so far we conclude that the Dumbarton Oaks fragment is not likely to have come from a sepulchral context. The extraordinarily large size, in conjunction with the curved shape, in effect rules out its use either as a tomb cover or as a graveside table; the size in conjunction with the horizontal position its use as a stele. This, of course, does not exclude the possibility of sepulchral use for other related slabs, especially since the main obstacle is the exceptional size of the Dumbarton Oaks piece. We turn from the cemetery to the church, where one naturally thinks first of all of the table of the main altar. This, however, in the vast majority of early churches where any evidence still exists was of oblong shape.35To what extent sigma-shaped slabs were used for altars in the early Christian period is difficult to decide. There are well known examples in Coptic Egypt which are particularly interesting to us because in some cases they are embedded in masonry blocks, a position for which our piece with its rough edge and back would be well suited.36But it is not known whether this type of altar in Egypt goes back to early Christian times. Strzygowski long ago suggested that it does.3' He recognized the sigma shape as being traditionally associated with ordinary dinner tables and therefore considered it a normal shape to adopt for the Christian altar, the eucharistic service being originally intended as a commemoration of the Last Supper. Actually, the Coptic altars could be derived more plausibly from North African mensa tombs,38especially since the masonry block supporting the altar slab usually contains an opening which, originally a t least, may well have been intended for a relic.39Thus these Coptic altars would 3 4 Cf., e. g., Cramer, op. cit., pl. zoc, where the base of the cross in the apex of the arch is clearly on the inside. 35 See in general Braun, op. cit., p. 245ff.; Barnea, op. cit., p. 127f.; Reallexikon fiir Antike und Christentunz, I (Stuttgart, 1950), col. 334ff,, especially col. 342; Orlandos, op. cit., p. 442ff. For Greece 'Epqpspi~(rgzg), p. 230; and for the general area of Palestine, Father cf. also Sotiriou in 'Apxa~ohoyl~?) Bagatti's compilation of measurements of the supports of altars excavated in various churches (B. Bagatti "Gli altari paleo-cristiani dellapalestina," Studii Biblici Franciscani Liber A n n u u s , VII [1956-571, p. 64ff., especially, p. 71). While the exact size and shape of the slabs which these supports carried may In some instances be uncertain it is obvious that in the great majority of cases the altar was a transverse oblong. For the sigma-shaped slabs discussed by Father Bagatti see i n f r a , note 58. 36 A. J. Butler found two sigma-shaped altar slabs in the churches of Old Cairo ( T h e Ancient Coptic Churches of E g y p t , I [Oxford, 18841, pp. 118, 221f.; cf. 11,p. 7f.), H. G. Evelyn-White a larger number in the monasteries of the WBdi'n Natrun ( T h e Monasteries of the W d d i ' n N a t r u n , Part 111: T h e Architecture and Archaeology [Kew York, 19331, pp. 62, 71, 79, 93, 103, 117, 153, 203; cf. p. 18). According to Butler, stone slabs, when they occur a t all on Coptic altars, are usually embedded in the masonry block that forms the body of the altar (op. cit., 11, p. 7f. and fig. 2, ii; see also I , p. 118). Cf. also Strzygowski in Wiivter u n d Sachen, I , p. 72f., and Cramer, op. cit., p. 120 and fig. 4. Evelyn-White, however, in several instances refers to the marble slab noncommittally as "covering" the substructure (op. cit., pp. 18,93, 117, 153, 203). Only in one case does he say unequivocally that the slab mas "inlaid in the upper surface of the masonry" (p. 79). In another case where he found this arrangement it was due t o a modern reconstruction (p. 103 with note I ) . In two instances he says explicitly that the slab overlapped the substructure (pp. 62, 71; cf. also Riicker, 09. cit., fig. 5). 37 Strzygowski in Worter ulzd Sachen, I , p. 70ff., especially pp. 73ff. and 78. See also Cramer, op. cit., p. 119ff. and Barnea, op. cit., p. 13off. 38 Cf. supra, note 22 (Tipasa). 39 Butler, op. cit., 11, pp. 5, ~ z f f .Evelyn-White, op. cit., p. 17f., also refers to these openings, but denies that they could have been used for relics.

A MARBLE R E L I E F OF T H E THEODOSIAN P E R I O D

29

be an instance where a form connected with the cult of martyrs and relics was adopted for ordinary church use.40But even this derivation is purely hypothetical. J. Lassus claims that sigma-shaped altar tables, as well as oblong ones, were in use in early churches in Syria, but his arguments are based on inference only.41Fragments of a plain, sigma-shaped slab found in a small church on the island of Samos are thought to have belonged to the altar of that church,42 other sigma-shaped table but again the evidence is not c o n c l ~ s i v eNumerous .~~ slabs have been found in or near churches in many different regions, but in no case is it at all certain that they were in use as altars-or, at any rate, as main altars-and in some instances there is definite evidence to the contrary.44 The existence of circular altar slabs is even harder to prove. A J. Butler found one in a small chapel in Old Cairo,45but again there is a question of its age. In Besanqon a circular marble slab with a scalloped border has served as a high altar in mediaeval and post-mediaeval times, but we cannot be sure that this was its original destination or, for that matter, that it dates back to the early Christian period at all. Even though the type of table top with a scalloped border is ancient, it also exists in numerous mediaeval imitation^.^^ Altogether, then, there hardly seem to be sufficient grounds to interpret our fragment as coming from the main altar of a church. But churches contained other tables than that of the main altar. There may have been secondary altars, though these were infrequent at best in the early 40 Cf. for this process in general A. Grabar, Martyrium (Paris, 1946), passim; and, with particular reference to grave mensae and altars, Rucker, op. cit., p. 211ff., and Dyggve, op. cit., p. ~ogff.Strzygowski's theory concerning the origin of the Coptic sigma-shaped altar had at first been also confined , 63f.). to the sphere of the martyrium (Bullettino di archeologia e storia dalmata, XXIV [ I ~ o I ]p. 4 1 J. Lassus, Sa?zctuaires chre'tiens de Syrie (Paris, 1947), p. 200ff. a2 \ A'. Wrede, "Vom Misokampos auf Samos," Athenische Mitteilungen, LIV (1929), p. 65ff., especially p. 73, fig. 6, and p. 74. A. M. Schneider, "Samos in fruhchristlicher und byzantinischer Zeit," ibid., p. 96ff., especially p. 108f.; cf. also the reconstruction ibid., p. 96, fig. I. 13 The exact find spot of the fragments is not indicated, and one wonders whether they should not rather be attributed to some other table in the church. The actual traces on the floor of the chancel would seem to fit better an altar of the normal oblong shape (M7rede,op. cit., p. 71, and the plan, Beilage XXXI). 4 4 See infra, notes 48-50 (Sbeitla), 54 (Sabratha), 55 (Tebtunis), and 58 (many examples). 4Wp. cit., I , p. 228. 46 See the recent study by Gerke on the altar of Saint Sernin in Toulouse (for a full reference see supra, note 10, ipropos of the fragment from Varna) and further literature cited in that study. Ch. Rohault de E'leury argued that the slab in Besanqon had been an altar from the outset and attributed it to the seventh century though his illustration is captioned "10th century" (La Messe, I [Paris, 18831, p. 16off. and pl. 51). H. Leclercq also considered it an altar of an early date (Cabrol and Leclercq, Dictionnaive, 11, I [Paris, 19101, col. 824f.). Braun, however, thought that it was made in the early eleventh century (op. cit., p. 246ff. andpl. 42), and more recently P. de Pal01 has also called it mediaeval ("El baptisterio de la basilica de Tebessa y 10s altares paleocristianos circulares," Ampurias, XVII-XVIII [1955-561, p. 282ff., especially p. 284). The early dating, on the other hand, has found a tentative advocate in A. A. Barb (op. cit., p. 42f. and pl. 5 b), who, in line with his theory on the origin of the Holy Grail, is altogether inclined to accept rather readily-probably too readily-potential evidence of the early and widecpread use of circular slabs-particularly those with lobed borders-as altars for the eucharistic service (see also infra, note 57, ipropos of Tebessa). In Gerke's study the Besanqon altar figures as a Romanesque work intimately related to early Christian antecedents; in regard to the latter, however, no clear distinction is made between altars and other kinds of tables (op. cit., p. 464f.). Certainly the Besanqon slab-even if it is mediaeval, as it may well be-owes both its shape and lts decoration to an early Christian model. But whether that model was an altar is a t least doubtful (see also infra, note 58).

ERNST KITZINGER period with which we are ~oncerned.~' There certainly were tables on which the faithful deposited their offerings, and others for different liturgical purposes. Excavations of early Christian basilicas have provided ample evidence of such additional tables. One, at least, of the table tops with figure reliefs-and it is these, of course, which interest us primarily-can be safely claimed to fall into this category. I refer to the example from Sbeitla, now in the Bardo Museum at Tunis, which has already been m e n t i ~ n e dThis . ~ ~ fragmentary piece comes from the excavation of a church in the nave of which another stone slab was found. I t is this second slab -oblong in shape-which in all probability was part of the main altar.49The fragments with the biblical frieze, on the other hand, were found, not in the nave, but above what remains of the walls of a small apse that belonged to the baptistery behind the main apse of the church.50 It is tempting to assume that the Sbeitla slab when complete was a sigmashaped table top which would have fitted neatly into the small apse adjoining the font. Aside from this example only very few of the table tops with relief borders come from controlled excavations. At Chersonese in the Crimea two fragments were found in the immediate precincts of a church, as the Sbeitla fragments were, but since no trace of the altar was observed there is no way of concluding definiteIy whether they did or did not form part of the altar.51 On the other hand, there is a number of undecorated table slabs -oblong, circular, or sigmashaped-which have been excavated on church sites and were clearly used not as altars but in some other liturgical capacity. Thus the annexes and the atrium of Basilica A in Nea Anchialos have yielded fragments of several table slabs, including some with the characteristic scalloped borders,52and these are quite distinct from those belonging to the altar of the church.53The same is true of a sigma-shaped table found in the Justinianic basilica a t the forum of Sabratha. In this church, too, the altar was of the normal oblong shape, and Dom Leclercq has suggested that the additional table may have been used for offerings.54Two other instances are particularly interesting because of the fact that table tops were found in sitzb in positions which rule out the possibility of their having been altars for the ordinary eucharistic service. One is in a church at Tebtunis where a sigma-shaped slab was found embedded in the floor in front of the entrance to the right-hand chapel of a tripartite sanctuary (fig. 17). One's C f . Braun, op. cit., p. 3 6 8 f f . ; Reallexikon fur Antike und Christenturn, I , col. 3 4 7 f . See supra, n o t e I r. 4 9 Merlin, op. cit., p. 266. 5 0 Ibid., p. 279; c f . t h e plan, fig. I (before p. 265). 51 For references see supra, note 10. 5 2 G. A . Sotiriou, "Ai X ~ I O T I U V I K UOiiPa~ ~ T?S O ~ o m a h i a ~ ,'"A p x a l o h o y ~ ~'qE q q p ~ p i (~1 9 2 9 ) ~ p. ~ff., especially p. I O I f . and figs. 135 and 136. Fig. 136 also includes some similar fragments found entirely outside t h e context o f t h e church. There was also a fragment w i t h relief (fig. 137, t o p l e f t ; c f . supra, n o t e r o ) , b u t i t is n o t stated whether it was found within t h e precincts o f t h e church. 5 3 For t h e slab o f t h e altar see ibid., p. 26 and fig. 25 o n p. 24. 5 4 Cabrol and Leclercq, Dictionnuire, XV, 2 ( 1 9 5 1 )col. ~ 19j j f . and fig. I 1048 (s.v. "Table d'oblation"). C f . J . B . W a r d Perkins and K. G. Goodchild, " T h e Christian Antiquities o f Tripolitania," Archaeologia, L X X X X V ( 1 g j 3 ) , p. ~ f f .especially , pp. 15, 6 5 f . Barb's interpretation o f t h i s slab, which measures I . jo x 1.46 m. and is .14 m. t h i c k , as a portable (sic)altar is hardly convincing (op. cit., p. 5 6 , note. 29). 47 48

A MARBLE R E L I E F O F T H E THEODOSIAN P E R I O D

31

natural inclination in this case would be to consider it as a table for the offerings. The excavator, however, rejects this possibility (because, so he says, the place where offerings were deposited was elsewhere in the church) and instead suggests that this was the place where the neophytes stood when receiving While the question must remain open in this case, our second example is quite unambiguous. Excavations carried out a few years ago in the baptistery of the great basilica at Tebessa have revealed that the bottom of the font was formed by a circular slab with a scalloped border (fig. IG), a slab of the type familiar from marble tables such as the one at B e s a n ~ o n I. t~ has ~ been suggested, if only very tentatively, that there may have been a profound symbolic intent in this rendering of the place of baptism as a giant platter or table.57 The problem merits further study. In any case, however, the Tebessa font affords a striking illustration of the fact that marble table tops were employed in early Christian churches for fittings other than the altar or, for that matter, the table for offerings. One wonders whether other table slabs, and especially slabs of circular or sigma shape, which have come to light -often in indubitably Christian contexts-in many parts of the Mediterranean world have not been interpreted too readily as altars.58

"

G. Bagnani, "Gli scavi di Tebtunis," Bollettino d'avte, XXVII (1933), p. 119ff., especially p. 124f. and p. 128, fig. 11. 56 E. Seree de Roch, "Tebessa (Theveste): Le baptisthe de la basilique," Libyca: Arche'ologie Epigraphic, I (1953), p. 288ff. fl Palol, op. cit., p. 286. Barb's suggestion t h a t the slab, which was subsequently covered with a layer of cement, was placed a t the bottom of the font only "for.. .careful hiding. . a t a sacred place" (op. cit., p. 55, note 26) is surely untenable and explicable only by the author's desire to vindicate it as an altar table. 5 8 Bagatti, op. cit., p. 66ff., refers to a number of sigma-shaped slabs, with or without scalloped borders, excavated on ecclesiastical sites in Palestine (for Mount Kebo cf. also S. J. Saller, T h e Memorial of Moses on M o u n t Xebo [Jerusalem, 19411, p. 291 ff. and pls. 60,3 and 126, where additional examples are described and illustrated), Kone of these were found in sitzs and the original use is uncertain in every instance. The same is true of a circular slab with lobed border found in t h e ruins of a church a t Delos (Ecole francaise dlAthi.nes: Exploration arche'ologique de Delos, S V I I I [Paris, 19381, p. 62f. and pl. 27, no. 192; cf. Bulletin de correspondance helle'niqzre, LVIII [1934], p. 84ff. and figs. 59-60); of a fragment with a lobed border found a t Hippo (Libyca: Archkologie-Epigraphic, I [1953], p. 215f., figs. I and 2) ; and apparently also of a sigma-shaped slab in "Church KO. 5" a t Leptis Magna (R. Bartoccini, in Rivista di archeologia cristiana, VIII j19311, p. 52; Ward Perkins and Goodschild, op. cit., p. 33), though Dom Leclercq (Dictionnaive, XV, 2, col. 1956) claims-I have not been able to ascertain on what authority-that a t Leptis iliagna a fragment \\-as found in situ in the pavement (in which case it might be a "floor table" comparable to that a t Tebtunis). I n the case of sigma-shaped tables found in houses, albeit not far from churches, a t Ephesos (Jahreshefte des osterreichischen archaologischen Institutes in W i e n , XXVI [1930], Beiblatt, col. 40 and fig. 18) and Stobi (Glasnik Hrvatskog Zemaljskog Mzszeja [1942!, p. 488, fig. 29) it is altogether uncertain whether they may be interpreted as ecclesiastical furnishings. I t must always be borne in mind that the same types of tables were in use in indubitably secular contexts (cf., e, g., Antioch-on-the-Orontes, 11: T h e Excavations of 1933-36 [Princeton, London, and The Hague, 19381, pl. 21, no. 226 and p. 178). Therefore, when the nature of the building t h a t yielded the find is uncertain, as seems to be the case, for instance, in respect of the example from Donnerskirchen (A. A. Barb in Jakreshefte des osterreichischen archaologischen Institutes, X X X I X [1952], Beiblatt, col. 5 ff.), one cannot claim with any assurance that the slab was in Christian use a t all (see also Gerke, op. cit., p. 466, note I ) . A sigma-shaped slab from Rubi, near Egara, on the other hand, leaves no doubt in this regard since it bears on the edge a Christian inscription (J. Vives, "Un nuevo altar romano-cristiano en la Tarraconense," Analecta Bollandiana, LXVII [1949], P. 401 ff.; P. de Palol Salellas, Tarraco Hispanovisigoda [Tarragona, 19531, p. 33ff. and pl. XIII). But, since the inscription records an individual's private prayer, one may doubt whether the stone could have been intended as an altar in a church. Mention should be made also of an unpublished sigma-shaped table with a lobed border in the Metropolitan Museum in New York, knowledge of which I owe to the kindness of Mr. W. Forsyth. Here again Christian use is certain since the lower frame is adorned with four

-

.

32

ERNST KITZINGER

Let us return to the table to which the fragment at Dumbarton Oaks belonged. In the light of what has been said it seems likely that this great disk or slab was associated with some secondary piece of church furniture rather than with an altar. The example at Tebessa is particularly suggestive. The extremely large size of our piece is a serious obstacle to any reconstruction envisaging it in an elevated position, but would cause no difficulty if one imagines it embedded in the floor. While reliefs as delicate as those of our fragment and as sacred in subject matter -would hardly have been put on the open floor, in the manner of the table at Tebtunis, they might well have been fitted into an enclosure such as that of the Tebessa font. We may also recall once more the example at Sbeitla, where the table slab with its Christian reliefs may have been inside the small apse adjoining the font. Our search has not furnished us with a definite solution to the problem of the use of our slab, let alone of the whole class of related slabs. Our conclusions may be summed up by stating that in this specific case its use either in a sepulchral context or as a main altar in a church is extremely unlikely. The best possibility is that the fragment comes from a table used for offerings or in connection with the rite of baptism, and it may well be that this "table" was embedded in the pavement rather than in a raised plinth. The history of the class of marble tables to which our fragment belongs remains to be written. The Dumbarton Oaks piece is without doubt not only the largest but also artistically the most outstanding of all. One might, therefore, be tempted to put it at the beginning of the whole series. But this would certainly be a mistake. Normally, these marble tables with relief borders are attributed to dates ranging from the late third to the fifth century.59While an exact chronology remains to be established, there are certainly many, at least among the pieces with secular iconography, that are earlier than ours. One must, therefore, conclude that the Constantinopolitan artist of the late fourth century who lambs flanking a Chi-Rho. But this piece was acquired in the art market (allegedly i t came from Rome) and the possibilities of its use within a Christian context are manifold. This table is interesting also because its decoration comprises most of the elements that occur on the slab a t Besan~on(see supra, note 46). Assuming that the latter is mediaeval its source of inspiration must have been a slab such as that in New York, which is certainly of early date. The problem of early Christian original versus mediaeval copy remains to be studied also in regard to sigma-shaped tables a t Mettlach and Vienne (Barb in Journal of the Wavbztrg and Courtauld Institutes [1956], pl. 6 b, c ; Braun, op. cit., p. 159 with pl. 14, and p. 248), but in any case neither can be claimed with any certainty as an altar. 59 Xyngopoulos attributed the example from Thera (our fig. 8) to the first quarter of the fourth century, mainly on the strength of a comparison of one of the heads adorning the rim with coin por[1g14], p. 83; cf. also ibid., p. 263f.). Snyder questioned the validity 'Eqqp~pi~ traits ('Apxa~ohoy~~fi of this argument without, however, putting forward a substantially different view; for the pieces he discussed he tentatively suggested dates ranging from the late third to the early fourth century (Journal of Roman Studies [1923], pp. 65, 68). Michon reviewed the opinions expressed by previous writers on a number of individual pieces and concluded that, while many of the slabs adorned with pagan subjects may be attributable to the fourth century, and in some instances perhaps to the third, those with biblical subjects are not likely to be earlier than the fifth century (op. cit. [1916], p. 166ff.). Sotiriou drew a similar distinction between secular and biblical pieces, but suggested that both series were 'Eqqp~pi~ produced mainly within the fourth century ('Apxa~ohoy~~fi [1929], p. 233f.). More recently E. Thomas assumed for the whole group much wider time limits ranging from the third to the sixth or even seventh century (op. cit.-supra, note 9-p. 274). A systematic investigation of the problem would have to take into account the silver vessels with analogous relief bands, some of which can be dated a t least approximately. The type certainly was well established by the late fourth century.

A M A R B L E RELIEF OF THE T H E O D O S I A N PERIOD

33

fashioned our table conformed to a well-established type current all over the Eastern Mediterranean area; but only to create a wholly exceptional piece, presumably for one of the great churches of the Imperial capital. If any further evidence were needed for the attribution of our relief to Constantinople, it could be found in the iconographic analysis. The scene represented on our fragment is probably that narrated in John g : ~ f f .the , episode in which Christ, with clay made with His spittle, anoints the eyes of a man born blind and tells him to wash his eyes in the pool of Siloam, whereupon he gains sight. Among the numerous similar episodes in the Gospels this and the scene at Bethsaida related by Mark (8:zz-26) are the only ones which involve Christ touching the eyes of a single blind man. Of the two, John's story is by far the more celebrated. Other possibilities would be the events told in Matthew 9: 27 and 29, 30, but these would presuppose that there was originally a second blind man to the left where the relief is now broken. Although, as we have seen, the fragment is incomplete on the right side too, the group of four figures preserved is so well balanced that one would like to assume that no further figures ever formed part of this scene. I t is the impressive figure of the bearded "witness" to the right which at once attracts our attention. I n sarcophagus reliefs, where the subject is very common, these "witnesses" are usually anonymous and nondescript. The earliest instances in which they can be identified occur in sixth-century Greek miniatures, specifically in the Gospels of Rossano and Sinope, in which the Healing of the Blind, like most other scenes, is accompanied by figures of Old Testament prophets bearing scrolls which are inscribed with appropriate quotations from their writings.60On the basis of these examples the "witnesses" in stone and ivory reliefs depicting the Healing of the Blind and other miracles have also sometimes been identified as prophets.61 In our case, however, this identification is ruled out by the fact that the figure carries a scepter in the shape of a cross. The person most commonly provided with this attribute is the Apostle Peter.62The facial features of the figure on our relief, however, are definitely not those of Peter but of Paul, whose bald head and long beard emerge as unmistakable personal characteristics at a quite early period-witness, for or some of instance, the so-called Prince's Sarcophagus from Con~tantinople~~ the early fifth-century sarcophagi from Ravenna (compare figs. 14 and 15). The prominent featuring of the Apostle Paul-certainly most unusual in a scene from the Gospels depicting a miracle of Christ-must be considered a characteristic of Constantinopolitan art of precisely the period to which our relief belongs. Paul was the first apostle to receive individual characterization 60 Rossano Gospels: A. hIuiioz, I1 codice purpureo d i Rossano (Rome, 1go7), pl. XI. Sinope Gospels: A. Grabar, Les peintures de Z'e'vange'liaire de Sinope (Paris, 1948), pl. IV. 61 E. Capps, Jr., "An Ivory Pyx in the Museo Cristiano and a Plaque from the Sancta Sanctorum," A r t Bulletin, I X (1926-27), p. 331ff., especially p. 333f. and note 24. 6 2 M. Lawrence, T h e Sarcophagi of Ravenna, College Art Association Study No. 2 (1g45), p. z4f. with further references. 63 Kollwitz, Ost~omischePZastik, p. 14of. and pl. 47, I and 2 ; our fig. 6.

34

ERNST KITZINGER

in the art of the capital, while Peter still remained in the anonymous group of Christ's disciples, witness again the Prince's Sarcophagus.64 On the strength of Kollwitz' studies it seems very probable that the composition in which Christ gives the Law to Paul-a composition found on the sarcophagi of Ravenna and strikingly different from the well-known Roman representations of Christ giving the Law to Peter-goes back to a Constantinopolitan m0de1.~5According to Kollwitz one should resist the temptation of seeing in this exaltation of the Apostle of the Gentiles a "political" gesture whereby the New Rome demonstrated its independence vis-a-vis the Old.66He suggests that the prominence given to Paul in the art of the capital is simply due to the important role played by the readings from his Epistles in the liturgy, to his travels and activities in that general area, and to the fact that he was the teacher of the church par ex~ e l l e n c eWhile . ~ ~ all this is certainly true it does not apply to the Theodosian period more than to any other. The fact that in our relief Paul appears -quite exceptionally-in a miracle scene from the Gospels shows to what length artists in late fourth-century Constantinople went in the "cult" of the Saint. One must reckon with a special vogue and ought to seek an explanation that would apply specifically to this particular phase in Constantinopolitan history. I t may be pointed out in this connection that it was precisely during the last decades of the fourth century that Old Rome began to concentrate on the person of the Apostle Peter as sole founder and first occupant of the Roman see,68 and that during this same period the church of Constantinople showed an increasing determination to settle its own affairs without Western interference. This latter tendency first became clearly manifest in connection with the Council of 381 convoked by Theodosius I and intended at first as a purely regional gathering.69In these circumstances there may well have developed in the imperial capital a trend to "play down" Peter in favor of Paul who was not as definitely identified with a specific see and so was better able to stand for the universal church. I t certainly was not a question of opposing to the claim of apostolicity put forward by the see of Old Rome a corresponding claim on behalf of New Rome, where the whole issue of apostolicity had not at that time assumed any great i m p o r t a n ~ eBut . ~ ~ it may have been felt desirable in the capital to find means of stressing the law and the doctrines that governed the life of the entire church, to which all sees were equally subject, and of which the emperor in Constantinople considered himself the chief guardian. Of that law and of these doctrines Paul had been the first great exponent and his figure could well serve 64 Ibid., p. 141. I t is curious, on the other hand, that during the same period Epiphanius of Cyprus should have known of a distinctive type used by artists for St. Peter and of two different types for St. Paul; cf. I<. Holl, "Die Schriften des Epiphanius gegen die Bilderverehrung," Sitzungsberichte der kgl. preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (1g16), p. 828ff., especially p. 839 no. 26 (= idem, Gesammelte Aufsatze zur Kirchengeschichte, I1 [Tiibingen, 19281, p. 362). e5 Kollwitz, op. cit., p. 154ff. e6 Ibid., p. I j6ff. e7 Ibid., p. 158. 68 See most recently: F. Dvornik, T h e Idea of Apostolicity in B y z a n t i u m and the Legend of the Apostle Andrew, Dumbarton Oaks Studies IV (Cambridge, Mass., 1958), p. 43ff. 69 Ibid., p. 50ff. 70 Ibid., chap. 11, passim ; especiallqr pp. 44, 47 f.

A MARBLE R E L I E F O F T H E T H E O D O S I A N PERIOD

35

to embody and subtly stress those tendencies that Constantinople wished to promote as against those that were increasingly coming to the fore in Old Rome.71 These remarks are offered as a possible approach to a problem in the history of Constantinopolitan iconography which has not as yet found a satisfactory solution. It is clear, in any case, that a comprehensive explanation is needed of all the phenomena indicating a particular preference for Paul in East Roman art of the period of Theodosius I. An interpretation solely in terms of the specific scene depicted in the Dumbarton Oaks relief would not be adequate. At the same time it is also true that, given the subject matter of our carving, the inclusion of Paul, however improper from a narrowly historical point of view, was singularly meaningful. Had not Paul himself recovered from blindness through Christ's power ? And had he not, in his own words, been sent by God to the Gentiles "to open their eyes that they may turn from darkness to light" (Acts 26: 18) ? He could be identified with the event in both a passive and an active sense. He himself had been a blind man, but also a miracle worker, illuminator and teacher-through the power of Christ Whose cross he carries. It is tempting to make use of the presence of Paul in our scene for a more precise and pregnant interpretation of its meaning, bearing in mind the possibility that the slab of which it is a part comes from a b a ~ t i s t e r yThe . ~ ~healing of the blind was one of the natural and obvious themes in a baptismal context. Baptism itself is an act of illumination (c+cj~lrJpa, cpo~lopos).~~ The symbolism of light played an important part in baptismal liturgy, and by the same token the healing of the blind-born, and particularly his washing his eyes in the pool at Siloam, was often interpreted as a symbol of baptism.74Indeed, St. John's account of the miracle was referred to or recited in a number of early liturgies in connection with baptismal or prebaptismal rites.75In relation t o such speciAn analogous explanation has been proposed previously by K. Wessel in regard to the sarcophagi at Ravenna on which t h e scene of Christ giving the Law to St. Paul appears ("Das Haupt der Kirche," Archaologischer Anzeiger, LXV-LXVI [1g50-511, col. 298ff., especially col. 315f.). Wessel's interpretation has been challenged by Francovich who, however, fails to provide a satisfactory explanation of his own for this iconographic theme (see p. 118fl. of the study quoted supra in note 8). For possible manifestations of a "Pauline" trend in Constantinople in subsequent periods see K. Onasch, "Der Apostel Paulus in der byzantinischen Slavenmission," Zeitschrift fur Kirchengeschichte, 4th ser., VI (= vol. 69) (1958), P. 219ff., though this author's conclusions may well go too far (cf. the critical remarks by H. G. Beck in Byzantinische Zeitschrift,52 [1g5g], p. zoof.). 7 2 See supra, p. 32 (Sbeitla,Tebessa). 7 3 See Du Cange, Glossarium, s. v. q w - r i l ~ ~Cf. v . Justin Martyr, Apologia I, 61 (ed. Otto, I, I , p. 168); Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus I,6 (Migne, PG, VIII, col. 281A) and Cohortatio ad gentes, 12 (ibid.,col. 240ff.); Gregory of Nazianzus, Orationes, 39 and 40 (PG,XXXVI, cols. 336, 360ff.). Cf. also the inscription of the font at Djemila in H. Gregoire's convincing interpretation (Byzantion, XI11 [19381, p. 589ff.l. 74 Cf. e. g. Augustine, I n Joannis Evangelium Tractatus XLIV, 2 (Migne, PL, XXXV, col. 1714); Ambrose, Epistola LXXX (PL, XVI, col. 1326ff.) and De sacramentis, 3,2 (Florilegium patristicum [B. Geyer and J. Zellinger, edd.], fasc. 7: Monuments eucharistica et liturgica vetustissima [J. Quasten, ed.], pt. 3 [Bonn, 19361, p. 154); or-to quote an author close in both time and location to the sculptor of our relief-Asterius of Amasea, Homilia VII (PG,XL, col. 257). 75 In the early liturgy of Naples John 9: 1-38 was read on the Saturday following the third Sunday in lent after the scrutinium of the catechumens (A. Dondeyne, "La discipline des scrutins dans l'eglise latine avatt Charlemagne," Revue d'histoire ecclesiastique,XXVIII [1g32], p. 5ff., 751ff., especially p. 19f.). In the seventh century the same reading is attested in the Roman liturgy on the Wednesday of the fourth week in lent, when the stational mass was celebrated at S. Paolo f. 1. m. (Th. Klauser, Das

3*

36

ERNST KITZINGER

fically baptismal symbolism, too, the presence of Paul in our relief is singularly appropriate since his own baptism took place simultaneously with the recovery of his sight.76 Furthermore, it was his teaching-and more particularly, of course, his Epistle to the Romans-which provided the fullest and most profound explanation of what baptism means in Christian life. I t seems appropriate to mention this possibility of what would be a very full interpretation of the spiritual content of our scene. But it cannot be more than a possibility since it is by no means certain that our table slab does come from a baptistery. Also, we must not forget that the healing of the blind was only one in a frieze of many episodes, though the little disc with the cross at just this point suggests that the scene did occupy one of the cardinal positions. Whether or not our scene was meant to have a particular reference to baptism, the presence of St. Paul as an unmistakably identifiable witness singles it out among all early Christian representations of the subject known to me and, indeed, appears to be almost unique altogether. In other respects, however, as I have said, the rendering is not basically different from what we find on other early Christian monuments. Normally, it is true, the composition is arranged in such a way that action develops from left to right. Christ stands at the left and is shown in profile, so that His right arm, with which He touches the eyes of the blind-born, is nearest to the beholder and the action becomes patently obv i ~ u sOf . ~the ~ many representations of the scene on early Christian sarcophagi the great majority follows this scheme (fig. ~ g )However, . ~ ~ on a number of frieze sarcophagi which certainly are substantially older than our relief the blind man is placed on Christ's left, perhaps in order to enable the artist to depict Christ Himself in an en face view while the action of His right arm inevitably recedes more into the b a c l ~ g r o u n dIt . ~is ~ this arrangement that our artist, clearly more interested in a solemn and statuesque presentation of the Protagonist than in lively and dramatic action, preferred. His choice is not accidental. I t enabled him to depict Christ performing the miracle with an air of sovereign ease and composure. The Saviour figure in our relief has the bearing of the true romische Capitulare Evangelzorum, Liturgiegeschichtliche Quellen und Forschungen, XXVIII [Munster i. W., 19351, p. 2 2 ) , and it evidently owes this place in that liturgy to the fact that the miracle symbolized the "illumination" of the catechumens (on the history of the Roman liturgy of that day and its probable relationship to the early history of the scrutinia, see Dondeyne, op. cit., pp. 758ff., 778ff.; and A. Chavasse, "Le cargme romain et les scrutins prkbaptismaux avant le IXe sikcle," Recherches de science religieuse, 35 [1g48], p. 325ff.,esp. pp. 341, 344, 361ff., 369; see also Dondeyne, op. czt., p. 781 for evidence of the use of John 9 : I ff. in other Western liturgies during lent). In the Ambrosian rite the miracle of Siloam figured as one of the "types" of baptizm in the prayers of consecration of baptismal water (H. Scheidt, Die Taufwasserzeseihgebete, Liturgiegeschichtliche Quellen und Forschungen, XXIX [Munster i. W., 19351, pp. 59,81; this rite, however, may not be quite so early: cf. ibid., p. 7). I t appears to be much more difficult to prove the use of John g: I ff. in baptismal contexts in early Greek liturgies. 76 Acts 9 : 17 ff. See the commentary on this passage in T h e Beginnings of Christianity, Part I: T h e Acts of the Apostles, ed. by F. J. Foakes Jackson and K. Lake, IV (London, 1g33), p. 104. 7 7 Cf., e. g., E. Baldwin Smith, E a r l y Christian Iconography and A School of Ivory Carzlers in Provence (Princeton, 1918), p. 97ff., figs. 84, 87, 88-90. 78 Cf., e. g., G. Wilpert, I sarcofagi cristiani antichi, I (Rome, 1g2g), pls. 29, 3; 91 ; 92, 2 ; 96; 111, 2 and 3 ; 126, 2 (= our fig. 19; note the gnarled stick carried by the blind man as in our relief); 127; 128; etc. 79 Ibid., I, pls. 115, I ; 152, 5 ; 11, pl. 206, 7.

A MARBLE R E L I E F O F T H E THEODOSIAN P E R I O D

37

aristocrat. In fact, in a subtle way the whole scene has been recast to assume a courtly dignity. Christ's head is surrounded by a halo-at that time still essentially an imperial attribute. No longer is He portrayed as a curly-haired youth-the saviour boy as imagined by the popular mind of late antiquitybut in the likeness of a prince of the Theodosian house.80The blind man whom the sculptors of the sarcophagi had depicted as a little puppet serving solely as a prop to illustrate the action, has become a fully grown person approaching Christ with the humility of the supplicant subject appearing before his sovereign. The cross is, of course, the symbol of Christ's triumph, the scepter of His power; and Paul, the acclaiming witness who carries it, becomes the heavenly ruler's standard bearer, exactly as he is visualized by St. John Chrysostom in the exordium of one of his homilies on the Saint in which the preacher hails Paul's mission to the world in terms of an imperial adventus.81 The assimilation of Christian to imperial art is a familiar process. As the emperor became God's vice-regent on earth the heavenly court came to be visualized more and more in the image of the earthly one. Beginning with the age of Constantine, this development reached a climax in the very period to which our marble belongs.82In this respect again the relief is a characteristic product of its time. Later renderings of the theme retain some, though not all, of the same characteristics. Thus in S. Apollinare Nuovo, one hundred years later, we find a scene composed very similarly to ours.83Two blind men are shown here, dressed in the costumes of officials and approaching Christ from the left with gestures similar to that of our figure. The youthful haloed Christ is also reminiscent of ours though his hair is now long. The standard bearer, however, has disappeared. There is only one acclaiming witness, an anonymous youthful disciple. Among the numerous examples of the scene on ivory carvings of the fifth and sixth centuries we find the same partial retention of the imperial tenor of our relief. The one which follows its iconography most closely is a box lid from the Sancta Sanctorum Treasure in the Museo Sacro of the Vatican (fig. Z O ) . ~ ~ Although the artist who designed this object reverted to the more common and more "drastic" rendering of the scene, with the blind man-here once more shrunken in size-to the right, Christ in profile, and the action of His arm in the very forefront and center of the panel, the Saviour still retains the essentials of the imperial type of face and the imperial hair style. His footwear also is that of the Christ in our relief. Above all, the figure of the "witness" to the right is very similar, in regard to both the facial type and the acclaiming action of the right hand. Now, however, he is no longer the imperial standard 80 Kollwitz (Ostromische Plastik, p. 164) and Gerke (Christus i n der spatantiken Plastik [Berlin, 19401, p. 68) h a v e cited Theodosian court portraiture i n connection w i t h representations o f Christ o f t h i s period. I n n o instance i s t h e relationship as close and striking as i n t h e case o f our relief; compare especially our fig. 4 w i t h Kollwitz, op. cit., pl. 34. 81 De laudibus S. Pauli Homilia V I I (PG, L, col. 507f.). Kollwitz, 09. cit., passim, especially p. 1 4 5 f f . 8 3 F.W . Deichmann, Friihchristliche Bauten und Mosaiken von Ravenna (Baden-Baden, 1958), pl. 161. 84 W . F. Volbach, Elfenbeinarbeiten der Spiitantike und des friihen Mittelalters (Mainz, 1g5z), p. 68, no. 138 ( w i t h further references) and pl. 46.

ERNST KITZINGER bearer. He carries in his left hand a book, not a cross, and perhaps is meant to be an evangelist or even a prophet. What makes the comparison between our marble and the ivory particularly interesting is the fact that the Sancta Sanctorum panel in turn is the closest forerunner known for any of the reliefs on Maximian's Chair in Ravenna (fig. 21). A lame man on a crutch is added to the Ravenna relief, but otherwise its relationship to the Vatican panel is evident. It is also evident that the latter is a substantially older work. The Sancta Sanctorum ivory is usually considered a work of the fifth or the early years of the sixth century, while the Ravenna Chair belongs to the middle of the sixth. Incidentally, on the Ravenna relief the scepter with the cross reappears, but is now in the-hand of Christ.85 From its position in iconographic history between the early sarcophagus reliefs, on the one hand, and the group of ivory carvings of which Maximian's Chair is the main exponent, on the other, there emerges the great significance of the Dumbarton Oaks relief for the history of early Christian and early Byzantine art. This significance can be brought out most clearly by means of a brief digression into the Latin West. I t is well known that in the West what might be called a gradual regeneration of classical artistic values took place in the course of the fourth century. The extreme abstractness and seemingly deliberate provincialism characteristic of most of the sculptures of the earliest decades of the century and exemplified by the reliefs on the Arch of Constantine and the bulk of the frieze sarcophagi, can hardly be matched in any relief even of the middle of the century. One need only think of the sarcophagus of Junius Bassus dated A.D. 359 with its fully rounded, organically functioning figures, its soft and "positive" drapery style, and its generally classicizing, one might . ~ ~ process of regeneration received a great almost say, lyrical a t m o ~ p h e r eThis impetus, particularly in Rome, through the well-known pagan reaction movement of the last decades of the century bound up with the names of Q. Aurelius 8s C. Cecchelli, La cattedra di Massimiano ed altri auorii romano-orientali (Rome, 1g37), pl. 32. The general scarcity, among ivories of the fifth and early sixth centuries, of clear iconographic and stylistic antecedents for the reliefs of Maximian's Chair is one of the reasons why it has proved so extremely difficult to define the place of these reliefs in the history of early Byzantine art. There is, of course, a sizable group of ivory carvings which are widely accepted as contemporaries and close relatives of those on the Chair, or even as products of the same "school" or workshop (see, e. g., E. Gombrich, "Eine verkannte karolingische Pyxis im Wiener kunsthistorischen Museum," Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien, N. F. VII [1933], p. I ff., esp. p. 7ff.; Volbach, op. cit., p. 69).But this fact only serves to make the dearth of forerunners all the more puzzling. In this respect the Sancta Sanctorum panel, which is certainly of a date earlier than Maximian's Chair, is a notable exception. I t shows the healing of the blind in a rendering so similar to that on the Chair that there can be no doubt about a close relationship between the two works. The fact that the sculptor of the Chair changed a number of details and added a lame man to the healing scene justifies Cecchelli's denial of the existence of a "prototipo assoluto" for the Ravenna panel (op. cit., p. 17g), but does not detract from the importance of its basic similarity to the panel in the Vatican. While Gombrich rightly considers the latter as an antecedent of Maximian's Chair (op. cit., p. g), K. Wessel obscures the true relationship between the two works by listing the Vatican panel-along with several other undoubtedly pre- Justinianic ivoriesamong works belonging to the "Umkreis" of Maximian's Chair, without distinguishing between contemporaries and antecedents ("Studien zur ostromischen Elfenbeinskulptur," Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Universitat Greifswald, I1 [1952-53], Gesellschafts- und sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe, 2, p. 63ff.; ibid., I11 [1g53-541, I , p. ~ff.; see especially p. 2 of the latter volume; also idem, "La cattedra eburnea di Massimiano e la sua scuola," Corsi di cultura sull'arte ravennate e bizantinu, Ravenna, 16-29 marzo, 1958, I [Ravenna, 19581, p. 145ff., especially p. 150). 86 F. Gerke, Der Sarkophag des Iunius Bassus (Berlin, 1936), p. 8ff.

A MARBLE R E L I E F O F THE T H E O D O S I A N P E R I O D

39

Symmachus, Virius Nicomachus Flavianus, and other members of the senatorial class.87The artistic manifestations of this movement are familiar.88They include such pieces as the ivory diptych of the Symmachi and Nicoma~hi,8~ with its pagan subject matter and its studied and academically precise imitation of figures of the remote classical past. This was a real revival consciously fostered by a small circle of die-hard aristocrats. But artificial as this movement was and limited as it was in time, geographic extent, and social range, it was nevertheless exceedingly important for the future. The main point in our context is that it carried over into Christian art. The links are well known. They lead via the Probianus D i p t y ~ hso , ~clearly ~ indebted to the late fourth-century revival, to works such as the relief with the Marys at the Sepulcher from the Trivulzio C o l l e ~ t i o n ,or ~ ~the panel with the same subject in the Bavarian National Museum in Munich.92In these works, in which we find the Gospel story endowed with the elegiac charm of a Greek tomb relief, the full debt which the development of Christian art (and particularly Christian narrative art) owed to the pagan revival becomes apparent. As Christian art emerged from the humble and stenographic stage represented by catacomb frescoes and early sarcophagi, it received inspiration and enrichment from the classical revival movement, whose challenge it was called upon to meet and whose influence found expression both in iconographic elaboration, particularly of the Gospel story, and in a new standard of formal perfection. The latter, it is true, was not long maintained. Western ivory carvings of the fifth century show what must be described, from the point of view of classical aesthetics, as a fast falling-off .93 But the element of humanism that was injected into Christian art in the period about A.D. 400 was never entirely lost and became indeed a part of the heritage of mediaeval Christian art. In the East this whole process is only much more dimly discernible. What is often referred to as the "Theodosian Renaissance" cannot be set off as clearly as it can in Rome against a wholly different phase in the early fourth centuri. There is no real equivalent to the reliefs of Constantine's Arch and the whole vogue of officially fostered provincialism which they represent. Nor can we follow a process of regeneration through the fourth century. We have no real concept of the kind of work that was created in Constantinople when the court 87 A. Alfoldi, A Festival of Isis in Rome under the Christian Emperors of the I V t h Century, Dissertationes Pannonicae, Ser. 11, fasc. 7 (Budapest, 1937), p. 37ff. Cf. also H. Bloch, "A New Document of the Last Pagan Revival in the West," The Harvard Theological Review, 38 (1g4j), p. rggff. 88 R. Delbriick, Die Consulardiptychen und verwandte Denkmaler (Berlin and Leipzig, ~ g z g )p. , 29f.; E. P. de Loos-Dietz, Vroeg-Christelijke Ivoren (Assen, 1947), p. 83ff. Cf. also E. Weigand's review of Delbriick's book in Kritische Berichte zur kunstgeschichtlichen Literatur (1930-31), p. 33ff., especially p. 44ff. and p. 55. Volbach, op. cit., p. 39, no. 55, and pl. 14. Ibid., p. 41, no. 62, and pl. 18. Ibid., p. 58, no. 111, and pl. 33. g 2 Ibid., p. 57f., no. 110, and pl. 33. O3 For the study of the stylistic development in Western ivory carvings of the fifth century A. Haseloff's paper on a fragment of a diptych in Berlin is still of basic importance ("Ein altchristliches Relief aus der Bliitezeit romischer Elfenbeinschnitzerei," Jahrbuch der kgl.freussischen Kunstsammlun~en, 24 [1903], p. 47ff.). See also Gombrich, of. cit., p. gf., and K. Wessel, "Eine Gruppe oberitalischer Elfenbeinarbeiten," Jahrbuch des deutschen archaologischen Instituts, 63-64 (1948-4g), p. I I I ~ ~ .

40

ERNST KITZINGER

first moved there. The art of the capital becomes identifiable for us first in the stone sculptures of the ~heodosianperiod with their characteristic soft and mellow style deeply imbued with classicism. The antecedents of this style still elude us.94 The fact that the Emperor Theodosius, and after him Arcadius, chose to commemorate their victories by means of triumphal columns modelled on those of Trajan and Marcus Aurelius, vividly illustrates the retrospective attitude in the official art of the Constantinopolitan court at the end of the fourth century, but the historical motivation, so evident in Rome, is not equally apparent. In the East we can as yet define neither the stylistic setting nor the ideological carriers of Theodosian classicism and must simply accept it as a historical fact. I t has long been recognized that in the East as in the West this secular classicizing art of the late fourth century has a Christian counterpart. Works like the Prince's Sarcophagus (fig. 6)95and the fragment from Bakirkoy in the Museum of Istanbul depicting standing figures of apostles (fig. 5)96are prime examples of this, while the earliest and best of the Ravenna sarcophagi are without any doubt under the direct influence of this Constantinopolitan p r o d u ~ t i o nBut .~~ all the Christian works of pure Theodosian style known so far were ceremonial representations with statuesque figures and a minimum of action, and were lacking in narrative content. I t is in this respect that the Dumbarton Oaks relief opens a new perspective. I t shows that in the East as in the West a Christian narrative art was created under the direct impact of the classicizing taste of the Theodosian period, and that this narrative art -like the ceremonial reliefs just referred to-was deeply affected by the spirit, and, indeed, by the iconography, of the imperial court. Our artist, called upon to carve one of the table border reliefs common at that time throughout the Aegean region, conformed to tradition for its general layout, but created a work unlike any other known member of its class either in scale or in style. He used a familiar Christian theme but recast it in the mould of Theodosian court art. One must speak here of a regeneration of Christian narrative art similar to that in the West. Christian narrative reliefs of a more derivative kind from the general area of the Eastern capital have been known for a long time. One which is of particular interest to us is a fragment from the neighborhood of Sinope, now in the Berlin Museum (fig. 18). Though this is a substantially later work it evidently stands in the direct tradition of our relief with which it has a close iconographic relationship. Indeed, viewing the two carvings side by side one cannot entertain any doubt that Wulff was correct in interpreting the Berlin piece as a fragment of a scene depicting one of Christ's miraculous h e a l i n g ~The . ~ ~ figure in profile to the left is identical in attitude and attire to our blind man except that it faces in the opposite direction. I t thus presupposes a Christ figure of the more usual kind, i.e. turning towards the right. The witness on the right is an exact counter94 Kollwitz, Ostromische Plastik, pp. I , 143. 95 Ibid., pls. 45-47 and p. 132ff. 96 Ibid., pl. 48 and p. 153ff. Cf. supra, note 8.

98

0p. cit. (supra, note

~ g )P., 18, no. 29.

A MARBLE R E L I E F O F T H E THEODOSIAN P E R I O D

41

part, in position, gestures, and attribute, to our St. Paul. The facial features, however, clearly show that he is meant to be St. Peter and thus the figure serves to point up once more the fact that the iconographic emphasis on St. Paul, which our relief bespeaks, was indeed a passing phase. Stylistically the contrast between the two works is considerable. Evidently, by the time the Sinope relief was made the process of hardening and schematization which took place in Eastern as in Western sculpture in the course of the fifth century was well advanced. The carving has been attributed convincingly to the middle of the fifth century.99 Another fragment -this one found in the capital itself and now preserved in the Museum of Istanbul-is much closer to ours in style and in date.loOIt, too, depicts a miracle scene -the Raising of the Widow's Son-and thus provides a further indication of the interest which Constantinopolitan artists of the late fourth and early fifth century took in scenes from the Gospels. But it does not show as clearly as does our carving how deeply and intimately this Christian narrative sculpture of the capital is rooted in the art of the court of Theodosius I. The Dumbarton Oaks relief must surely be a product of the imperial atelier, which may not be true of any of the other Christian carvings referred to, with the exception of the Prince's Sarcophagus. The chief significance of our small fragment, then, lies in the fact that it allows us for the first time to grasp, so to speak, the moment when in the capital the spark was transmitted from imperial to Christian narrative art. The narrative reliefs previously known, less close to the art of the court in style and iconography, merely permitted the inference that such a transmission must have taken place. Our fragment provides tangible evidence of this transmission and shows that in the period of Theodosius I Constantinople began to take a hand in the shaping of Gospel subjects, imbuing them with its own characteristic style and spirit. Even at this relatively early date the development of New Testament iconography in the East had ceased to be a monopoly of Syria and Palestine.101 A further point is equally important. None of the previously known early reliefs with Christian scenes from the Constantinopolitan region are closely connected with subsequent developments. In the case of our representation of the Healing of the Blind we believe we have discerned iconographic links with g9 K. Wessel, "Ein kleinasiatisches Fragment einer Briistungsplatte," Staatliche Museen zu Berlin: Forschungen und Berichte, I (1g57), p. 71ff. \Vessel's dating has been criticized by Francovich in his recent study on Ravenna sarcophagi quoted supra in note 8. The Italian scholar attributes the Sinope relief to the end of the fourth century, because of alleged affinities with sculptures of the Theodosian period and particularly with some of the reliefs on the base of the Obelisk (p. 73f. and note 123). However, a comparison with the Dumbarton Oaks carving, a work so similar to the Sinope relief in subject matter and composition, serves to bring out those stylistic features whereby the latter work differs from sculptures of the time of Theodosius I , and thus helps to confirm Wessel's dating as against Francovich's. lo0 Kollwitz, op. cit., pl. 55,1 and p. 188. lol A fortiori the thesis of G. de Francovich that throughout the pre-Icanoclastic period artists in Constantinople on the whole fought shy of illustrating the Gospel story is plainly untenable ("L'arte siriaca e il suo influsso sulla pittura medioevale nell'oriente e nell'occidente," Commentari, I1 [1g51], pp. 3 f f . , 75ff.,especially p. 78ff.). Cf. also my remarks in Byzantine A r t in the Period betweenJustinian and Iconoclasm, Berichte zum XI. Internationalen Byzantinisten-Kongress, IV, I (Munich, 1958), p. 37, note 141.

42

ERNST KITZINGER

later works, and especially with an important group of ivories of which Maximian's Chair in Ravenna is the chief exponent. While all of the imperial connotations of our relief were not retained in these later examples the tradition nevertheless lingered on. When speaking of the West we found that lasting importance attached to the innovations introduced into Christian pictorial art during the late fourth century. Now we can see that the same is true in the East where the impact of the "Theodosian Renaissance" can likewise be claimed to have been of long duration. In the East, too, the high standards of refined classicism characteristic of the late fourth century were lost rather rapidly in the course of the fifth, as both stone and ivory sculptures of that period show. But Eastern ivory carvers of the advanced fifth and sixth centuries, like their Western counterparts, can now be seen to have been indebted to a distinctive phase of metropolitan art of the Theodosian period. As is well known, many of these ivories have frequently been attributed to workshops in Egypt.102 The Dumbarton Oaks relief, of course, cannot by itself be decisive in determining their place of origin, but it does show that some of their most important antecedents lie in Constantinople. Thus the art of the capital in the Theodosian period can be shown to have played a crucial role in the over-all development of Christian art. Established formulae of Christian iconography, familiar patterns long used by the craftsmen of the region, were remolded to conform with the official manner of presentation and with the classicizing standards of form evolved by the imperial ateliers. The action of these Constantinopolitan workshops may be compared to that of an optical lens in which rays from various sources are gathered and concentrated to be re-emitted with new force to illumine the path ahead. Our carving permits us to define this achievement much more sharply than was possible previously. I t leads us directly into the main current of Greek Christian art and is, indeed, a key piece, showing as it does that as early as A.D. 400 art had its focus in Constantinople and hence should be called Byzantine. 102 See, for instance, K. Wessel's "Studien zur ostromischen Elfenbeinskulptur," quoted supra in note 85. In his study of 1958, quoted in the same footnote, Wessel offers a somewhat modified version of his thesis regarding the origin of Maximian's Chair.

18. Relief shown in figure 1, detail : Head of Blind Man

14. Relief shown in figure 1,detail: Heads

15. Ravenna, Cathedral. Sarcophagusof Exuperantius, detail: Head of St. Paul

16. Tebessa, Baptistery. Font

17. Tebtunis, Church. View of south Chapel showing Table Slab set in Floor at Entrance

19. Rome, National Museum. Frieze Sarcophagus, detail: Miracles of Christ

18. Berlin, State Museums. Fragment of Relief found near Sinope

4

tka

20. Vatican, Museo Sacro. Ivory Box Lid, showing Christ Healing a Blind Man

21. Ravenna, Archbishop's Palace. Ivory Chair of Bishop Maximian, detail: Christ Healing a Blind and a Lame Man

http://www.jstor.org

LINKED CITATIONS - Page 1 of 2 -

You have printed the following article: A Marble Relief of the Theodosian Period Ernst Kitzinger Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 17-42. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C17%3AAMROTT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-O

This article references the following linked citations. If you are trying to access articles from an off-campus location, you may be required to first logon via your library web site to access JSTOR. Please visit your library's website or contact a librarian to learn about options for remote access to JSTOR.

[Footnotes] 9

The So-Called Puteal in the Capitoline Museum at Rome G. A. S. Snyder The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 13. (1923), pp. 56-68. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0075-4358%281923%2913%3C56%3ATSPITC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J 14

The So-Called Puteal in the Capitoline Museum at Rome G. A. S. Snyder The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 13. (1923), pp. 56-68. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0075-4358%281923%2913%3C56%3ATSPITC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J 16

The So-Called Puteal in the Capitoline Museum at Rome G. A. S. Snyder The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 13. (1923), pp. 56-68. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0075-4358%281923%2913%3C56%3ATSPITC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J 20

The So-Called Puteal in the Capitoline Museum at Rome G. A. S. Snyder The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 13. (1923), pp. 56-68. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0075-4358%281923%2913%3C56%3ATSPITC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J

NOTE: The reference numbering from the original has been maintained in this citation list.

http://www.jstor.org

LINKED CITATIONS - Page 2 of 2 -

31

Mensa Sacra: The Round Table and the Holy Grail A. A. Barb Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Vol. 19, No. 1/2. (Jan. - Jun., 1956), pp. 40-67. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0075-4390%28195601%2F06%2919%3A1%2F2%3C40%3AMSTRTA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-P 46

Mensa Sacra: The Round Table and the Holy Grail A. A. Barb Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Vol. 19, No. 1/2. (Jan. - Jun., 1956), pp. 40-67. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0075-4390%28195601%2F06%2919%3A1%2F2%3C40%3AMSTRTA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-P 61

An Ivory Pyxis in the Museo Cristiano and a Plaque from the Sancta Sanctorum Edward Capps Jr. The Art Bulletin, Vol. 9, No. 4. (Jun., 1927), pp. 330-340. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0004-3079%28192706%299%3A4%3C330%3AAIPITM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-T 87

A New Document of the Last Pagan Revival in the West, 393-394 A.D. Herbert Bloch The Harvard Theological Review, Vol. 38, No. 4. (Oct., 1945), pp. 199-244. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0017-8160%28194510%2938%3A4%3C199%3AANDOTL%3E2.0.CO%3B2-9

NOTE: The reference numbering from the original has been maintained in this citation list.

The Survival of Mythological Representations in Early Christian and Byzantine Art and Their Impact on Christian Iconography Kurt Weitzmann Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 43+45-68. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C43%3ATSOMRI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Q Dumbarton Oaks Papers is currently published by Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/doaks.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Sun Mar 9 07:53:45 2008

T H E SURVIVAL OF MYTHOLOGICAL REPRESENTATIONS I N EARLY CHRISTIAN AND BYZANTINE ART AND THEIR IMPACT O N CHRISTIAN ICONOGRAPHY

N his Chronographia (VI, 61) Michael Psellos tells the following story of the Emperor Constantine IX. One day the Emperor appeared in the hippodrome with his mistress Skleraina. A courtier, marvelling at her beauty, exclaimed : "It were no shame . . . that man should fight for such as she," drawing a quotation from the third book of the Iliad which alludes to Helen of Tr0y.l I t is not so much the fact that there happened to live in the eleventh century a courtier who knew his Homer by heart, which is worth noting, but that he could count on his fellow courtiers to recognize the quotation, The knowledge of Homer and other classics of ancient Greece had never completely died out in Byzantium, although there were times, primarily during the period of iconoclasm, when minds were so preoccupied with theological issues that the classics were permitted to collect dust. This, however, was swept off as soon as iconoclasm was over and the newly established Bardas University appointed the grammarian Cometas as Homeric critic. "Great souled Homer, Cometas having found thy books utterly aged, made them younger; for, having scraped off their old age, he exhibited them in new brilliancy to those of the learned who have understanding." So reads an epigram of the Palatine Anthology (XV, The undercurrent of an uninterrupted, classical tradition in literature and the arts, and the limited change of language were some of the reasons why Michael Psellos' story sounds so credible. We have sufficient evidence that epic poems, dramas, mythological handbooks and other products of classical literature were still appreciated in the Middle and Late Byzantine periods, and that in cases where they had survived with illustrations these, too, appealed to the Byzantine public and the artist who desired to copy them.3 Likewise in the Latin West we find an undercurrent of the classical tradition which, just as in Byzantium, is at times a trickle and then again grows into a broader stream, particularly in those periods which have variously been called renaissances, renascences, renovationes, or simply revival^.^ Yet, in the West the classical tradition of mythological writings and their pictorial representations was not as direct and immediate as in Byzantium. In Latin literature the chief means of transmission was not so much the classical texts themselves, but rather the writings of Macrobius, Martianus Capella, and Fulgentius, i.e. the N. H. Baynes, The Hellenistic Civilization and East Rome (The James Bryce Memorial Lecture, Oxford, 1946), p. 40. Ed. W. R. Paton, The Greek Anthology (Loeb Class.),V (1926), pp. 142-3. K. Weitzmann, "Das Klassische Erbe in der Kunst Konstantinopels," Alte und Neue Kunst, I11 (19541, P. 41 ff. A. Goldschmidt, "Das Nachleben der antiken Formen im Mittelalter," Vortrage der Bibliothek Warburg, I, 1921-22 (Leipzig-Berlin, 1g23), p. 4off.; E. Panofsky and F. Saxl, "Classical Mythology in Mediaeval Art," Metropolitan Museum Studies, I V (1932-33), p. 228ff.; J. AdhCmar, Influences antiques duns I'art du moyen dge frangais (London, 1939); J. Seznec, La survivance des dieux antiques (London, 1940); E. Panofsky, "Renaissance and Renascences," Kenyon Review (1944)~p. 201 ff.; H. von Einem, "Die Monumentalplastik des Mittelalters und ihr Verhaltnis zur Antike," Antike und Abendland, I11 (1948), p. 120ff.;R. Hamann-Mac Lean, "Antikenstudium in der Kunst des Mittelalters," Marburger Jahrb. fur Kunstwissenschaft, XV (1949-50), p. 157ff.

K U R T WEITZMANN fifth- and sixth-century authors who had reinterpreted the classical myths in an allegorical and moralizing manner. Of course, a certain estrangement from classical form and content was inevitable even in Byzantine literature and art, but here the interpenetration of the pagan and the Christian realms took place, on the whole, on a higher intellectual level. Instead of reconstructing historically the process of continuation, adaptation, and transformation of mythological representations in Byzantine art, I propose to deal with the subject in a more systematic manner. I should like to show a kind of morphological process of transformation from classical into Christian art and to point out as many facets of this problem as the pictorial evidence permits. In trying to do so I have included in my demonstration several objects of the rich Dumbarton Oaks Collection in the hope that such a discussion will contribute to a better understanding of their stylistic and iconographic position in the history of Byzantine art. I. Continuation and Weakening of the Classical Tradition No other object could afford more striking evidence of a continued appreciation of the classical literary and artistic tradition than an illustrated Homer. In the Ambrosian Library in Milan there is a well-known fragment, cod. F. 205 inf., consisting of fifty-six miniatures of an illustrated Iliad, part of a manuscript which originally must have contained more than zoo miniatures. To execute such a comprehensive cycle with all its intricate iconographical details requires familiarity with the text on the part of the illustrator, even if he is only a copyist, and presupposes a public that is still interested in it. As long as the Milan Iliad was considered to be an Italian work of the third century, as proposed in the facsimile publication of Ceriani and Ratti,5 it raised no problems with regard to the cultural environment in which it was supposed to have been produced, but since Bianchi Bandinelli in his recent monograph6 has conclusively proved its origin to have been in the period of well-settled Christianity, it must now be regarded as a key monument of the classical survival in the Early Christian period. The less important problem that remains is whether the manuscript can still be dated in the second half of the fifth or in the beginning of the sixth century, and whether it originated in Alexandria, where the illustration of Greek literary texts on a large scale had apparently started in the Hellenistic period, or in Constantinople where, from the fifth century on, the survival of the classical heritage was ~ t r o n g e s tIn . ~ any event the Milan Iliad is the product of a period in which Biblical illustrations had already become predominant. Typical of the kind of illustration that had already existed in papyrus rolls, where the figures were lined up in a single plane,* is the one depicting Ares A. M Ceriani and A. Ratti, Homeri Iliadis Pictae Fragmenta Ambrosiana (Milan, 1905). R. Bianchi Bandinelli, Hellenistic-Byzantine Miniatuves of the Iliad ( I l i a s Ambrosiana) (Olten, 1955).P revious bibliography on p. 169. 7 See the author's review of Bianchi Bandinelli, Gnomon, 29 (1957), p. 6068. 8 For the system of illustration in ancient rolls see K. Weitzmann, Illustrations in Roll and Codex. A S t u d y of the Origin and Method of T e x t Illustration (Princeton, 1947), p. 42 ff. and passim; figs. 32-34. 0

S U R V I V A L O F M Y T H O L O G I C A L R E P R E S E N T A T I O N S 47 before Zeus enthroned in Olympus (fig. I ) . T ~here are slight discrepancies with the text: Ares had been wounded in the belly, not on his right hand as the miniature seems to suggest, and when he appeared before Zeus, Hera and Athena had not yet returned. The latter error resulted most likely from a conflation of two scenes which originally had been consecutive. But copying illustrators have always taken such liberties. Subjects of the Trojan epic poems, not of Homer's Iliad alone, continued to appeal to the erudite Byzantine of the Christian era. To have recognized the awarding of the weapons of Achilles on a Byzantine silver plate, now in the Hermitage in Leningrad, presupposed a thorough knowledge of the Trojan saga (fig. 2).1° According to the Little Iliad of Lesches of Mytilene it was due to the contrivance of Athena that the weapons were awarded to Odysseus, and this is obviously the version underlying the representation on the silver plate which shows Athena in the center, Odysseus at the right, and Ajax at the left. We owe to Matzulewitsch the proof for dating this plate in the sixth or seventh century, his evidence being drawn from comparisons with other silver plates that have datable stamps. He clearly analyzed the persistence of the classical style as well as some stylistic misunderstandings that are due to the relatively late date of the plate, but he showed little concern for the iconography where several incongruities must be pointed out. In a representation of the Greco-Roman period would Athena, who had influenced the decision in favor of Odysseus, ever have been shown seated on the throne in the judgment hall of the Achaeans ? An Etruscan urn, found in Ostia (fig. 3),11 shows, in the same scene, the judgment throne occupied by an older man who is either Nestor or Agamemnon, while Odysseus is already laying his hands on the weapons of Achilles and Ajax is angrily taking his leave. In a Greco-Roman work of art, wherever a god or a goddess is involved in a terrestrial event, he or she appears-invisible to most -standing, or hovering behind or alongside the person protected by the deity. In having Athena take the place of an Achaean commander-in-chief, the Byzantine artist may well have been inspired by a figure of a divine emperor enthroned, for which there was a special tradition in silver plates, as exemplified by the well-known Theodosius missorium in Madrid.12Here we have the first signs of a mediaeval concept creeping into a classical scene from the Trojan War. In the silver plate from Leningrad Athena speaks to Ajax, while, according to the story, she should turn to Odysseus whom she favors. Moreover, does Ajax here look like a man going mad and about to commit suicide as indeed he does on the Etruscan urn ? How can the pose and gesture of Odysseus, which previous observers have thought strange, be explained ? Nothing really seems to fit the story and yet there can be little doubt that its identification is correct, for there is the supporting evidence of Achilles' weapons in the segment below the feet. Pict. XXIII, illustrating 11. V, 868ff. 0' L. Rlatzulewitsch, Byzantinische Antike (Berlin, ~ g z g )p. , 54ff and pl. 35. l1 C. Meyer, A n n . dell'lnst., VIII (1836), p. zzff.; M o n . Ined., I1 (1835)~ pl. XXI. l2 R. Delbrueck, Die Consulardiptychen u n d Verwandte Denknzaler (Berlin, 1929)~ p. 235ff.' no. 67. and plate.

K U R T WEITZMANN The whole composition looks like a pasticcio for which the artist took the figures from another context which, if we are not mistaken, can be identified. The posture of Odysseus is that of a man who is beckoning and sneaking up on someone. Both acts, though strange in this context, are fully explained in a scene on the neck of a Roman silver oenochoe from Berthouville in the Cabinet des Mkdailles in Paris (fig.4).13There Odysseus, who has been lying in wait for Dolon, cunningly beckons to him to come closer, only in order to kill him (Il. X, 338 ff.). Thus we conclude that the Byzantine silversmith used as a model an Iliad cycle which included the Dolon episode. Moreover he seems also to have excerpted the other two figures from an Iliad scene. The very miniature of the Milan Iliad already described (fig. I) shows Athena seated beside Zeus and lifting her hand in a gesture of speech just as she does in the silver plate, but in this case she addresses Ares instead of Ajax. Yet this very Ares who stands rather calmly, with the spear in his left hand, might well have served as a model for our ~ja;, and a slight lowering of the extended right arm was all that was needed to have him point at Achilles' weapons.14 Such a mixture of figure types from different scenes, though usually from the same iconographical realm, is by no means an innovation of Byzantine art, but occurs also in Greco-Roman art and is quite frequent in Pompeian wall paintings. This detailed analysis of a pasticcio holds also the key to the understanding of a Byzantine silver plate of the fifth to seventh century which is in the Dumbarton Oaks collection (fig. 5).15 I t represents a n ~ m a z i non a galloping horse, attacking a lion with a spear. Behind her an archer, clearly characterized as a Trojan by his Phrygian cap, draws his bow. This combination of Amazon and Trojan warrior leads us again into the iconographic realm of the Trojan saga: The Aethiopis of Arctinus began, as we know from Proclus' Chrestomathy, with the Amazons joining the Trojans as confederates and fighting on their side. However, the Amazon and the Trojan are not fighting Achaeans; they are hunting, and both are aiming at a leaping lion, after having already killed a leopard. The classical sources are concerned, almost exclusively, with the warlike activities of the Amazons who fought against Theseus, Heracles, and finally the Achaeans, and mention their hunting only in passing. Diodorus Siculus says merely (11,46, I) that Hippolyte, their queen, exercised the maidens in the hunting of wild animals and drilled them daily in the arts of war. This easily explains why, in classical art proper, the warrior-Amazon is extremely popular, while her representation as a hunter, if I am not mistaken, does not occur before the late classical period, after the ties of epic iconography had -

E. Babelon, L e Tre'sor d'drgenterie de Berthouville (Paris, 1g16), p. 86 and pls. VII-VIII. The shepherd in the upper right corner who appears from behind a groundline remains unexplained. He holds a pedum and makes a gesture of astonishment, seemingly because of the unjust verdict of Athena. He obviously does not come from another Iliad scene, but may be explained as Actaeon expressing astonishment over the beauty of Artemis bathing (cf. the Roman sarcophagus in the Louvre-C. Robert, Die Antiken Sarkophag-Reliefs, 111, pt. I [Berlin,1897], p. 3 and pl. I); K. Weitzmann, "The Origin of the Threnos," De artibus opuscula quadraginta. Essays in Honor o f E r w i n Panofsk y (in the press). 15 Catalogue, exhibition T h e Dark Ages (Worcester, Mass., 1g37), p. 34, note 72 with figure (here described as from Asia Minor. Parthian. A.D. 1-11 cent.; Handbook of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection (Washington, D.c., 1955), p. 54, no. I25 and figure on p. 59. 13

14

S U R V I V A L O F MYTHOLOGICAIA R E P R E S E N T A T I O N S 49 begun to slacken and decorative hunting scenes, in which heroes participated, had become a popular motif. One of the few earlier examples of Amazons hunting is preserved among the Antioch mosaics of about the middle of the fourth century (fig. 6).16I t shows an Amazon riding a rearing horse and aiming her spear at a lion, a representation similar to that on the silver plate. She is, however, associated with members of her own tribe: a second Amazon holds a protective umbrella over the first who is presumably the queen, while a third, of whom only a small part is preserved, aims her arrow at the same wounded lion. Thus this silver plate turns out to be just another pasticcio, the figures of which, however, are taken not only from different scenes, but also, in contrast to those on the Leningrad plate, from different realms: the Trojan saga and the hunt. I t would seem that, from the point of view of iconographic coherence, we are here one step further removed from the classical source. Nevertheless, the individual types are just as classical and, in design, just as assured and elegant, and maintain a high level of craftsmanship. The formal vocabulary is essentially the same as in works of classical art proper, whereas in contemporary religious art quite a different set of formal conventions had already developed. 11. Revival and Disintegration The primary concern of classical art was the understanding of the organic structure of the human body. This goal remained more or less valid for Byzantine art in general, even when, in Christian subjects, a more dematerialized figure style had developed. What wavered at various periods of Byzantine culture was the willingness either to outlaw or to tolerate the depiction of subjects of classical mythology concurrently with the study of classical literature. There was, as mentioned in the introductory remarks, a great intensification of classical studies after the end of iconoclasm, and, as far as the arts were concerned, this was focussed on the illustrations of classical texts which were copied with renewed vigor in the scriptoria of the capital, patronized by emperors and patriarchs alike." There is, for instance, in a tenth-century manuscript of the Theriaka of Nicander in the Bibliothkque Nationale in Paris, cod. suppl. grec. 247, a miniature based on a Gigantomachy (fig. 7)18 which in form and content is remarkably close to a Greco-Roman prototype. I t depicts the giants recoiling under the attack of the gods who themselves are not shown. This abbreviation, however, is not necessarily due to the Byzantine miniaturist since it can already be found in a floor mosaic from Piazza Armerina in Sicily which dates from the turn of the third to the fourth century (fig. 8).19The comparison between miniature and mosaic is particularly instructive, since they both show similar l6 Antioch-on-the-Orontes, 11, T h e Excavations 1933-36 (Princeton, 1938), p. 182 and pl. 28, no. 39; D. Levi, A?ztiociz Mosaic Pavements, I (Princeton, 1947)) p. 282; 11, pl. L X I V ~ . l 7 I(.Weitzmann, Greek Mythology in Byzantine A r t (Princeton, 1951). l8 H. Omont, Miniatures des @ u s anciens manuscrits grecs de la Bibliothdque Nationale d u VIe a u XIVe sidcle, and ed. (Paris,1929))p. 40 and pl. LXVIII, no. 2. Is A. V. Gentili, "I Mosaici della Villa Romana del Casale di Piazza Armerina," Boll. d ' d r t e , XXXVII (195a), p. 35 and pl. I a ; B. Pace, I Mosaici d i Piazza Armerina (Rome, 1g55), p. 47 and fig. on p. 49.

50

KURT WEITZMANN

types, like the one at the lower right seen from the back, but the miniature, in contrast to the mosaic, is composed by making use of overlappings and foreshortenings which create a real sense of depth. In this respect it is more classical than the mosaic, and this means that the tenth-century miniaturist must have copied, directly or indirectly, a model that was earlier than the mosaic of Piazza Armerina. What is most noteworthy is not so much the fluency and elegance of the design and brush technique, but the awareness on the part of the illustrator of the precise meaning of the picture, since it had not formed part of the original Nicander illustration. Guided only by an allusion in the pharmaceutical text which speaks of malicious spiders, creeping worms, serpents, and other injurious animals emerging from the blood of the Titans, the illustrator must have remembered a scene of a Gigantomachy from an illustrated text that described the battle more fully, in all probability a mythological handbook, and most likely the Bibliotheke of Apollodorus, by far the most popular text of its kind in mediaeval Byzantium.20 The comparison of the mosaic and the miniature is very revealing from still another point of view. The former is placed in a semi-circular niche which can, of course, be explained formally as an architectural encroachment. However, in a representation of the Gigantomachy on a fragmentary, red-figured crater in Naples21the semicircular line above the fighting and defeated giants indicates the vault of heaven that separates the giants from the gods beyond this line. Now it will be noticed that in the Nicander miniature the five recoiling giants at the bottom and in the center conform most closely to the mosaic and reflect most clearly the Hellenistic tradition of fighting giants, while the giants at the top look rather like swimming or drowning figures that have no parallels in an ancient Gigantomachy. I t seems quite conceivable, therefore, that the model of the miniature possessed only the recoiling giants under a semicircular arch of heaven and that the other giants were added by the miniaturist from another context. Yet it must be admitted that the revival of mythological subject matter in the ninth and tenth centuries had its limited effect on Byzantine art in general. Only within a circle of erudite Byzantine humanists who moved in the atmosphere of the patriarchal and imperial palaces were miniatures like the Gigantomachy produced and fully appreciated. They were not without influence upon other media, but as soon as they had lost their physical association with the explanatory text, their proper meaning was quickly lost and only a sense for the classical form remained. There is in the treasury of San Marco in Venice a unique piece of rare beauty: a cup of ruby glass with enamel painting which belongs to the tenth or eleventh century (fig. g).22Its seven roundels are filled with figures of gods 20 K. Weitzmann, "Klassisches Erbe," p. 54ff. and pl. VIII, 15-16. About the Bibliotheke as a source of Middle Byzantine miniatures see the author's Greek Mythology, p. 78ff. and passim. 21 A. von Salis, "Die Gigantomachie am Schilde der Athena Parthenos," Jahrb. d. Inst., 55 (1940)) pp. 92, 112 and figs. 1-2. aa C. J. Lamm, Mittelalterliche Glaser und Steinschnittarbeiten aus dem Nahen Osten, I (Berlin, 1930)) p. 107; 11, pl. 34, no. I (giving older bibliography).

S U R V I V A L O F MYTHOLOGICAL R E P R E S E N T A T I O N S 51 and heroes, and one contains a scene we believe to have derived from a representation of Oedipus and the Sphinx, an identification which is based on the pensive posture of the warrior and the gesture of speech of the winged creature that obviously poses the riddle. I t is, however, more than questionable whether the enamel painter still had a clear comprehension of the proper meaning of this group. I t almost seems as if he were not even really interested in it, but that he was satisfied with decoratively filling the roundels with a pleasing design of figures that had a classical flavor. For one thing, no classical illustrator would have changed the lion part of the Sphinx into an entirely human body, thus turning her, knowingly or unknowingly, into an angel. In this transformation the Byzantine artist may have been helped by a model such as the lamp of the Roman period in the Benachi Collection in Alexandria (fig. 10),23 where not only the head of the Sphinx, but a large part of her body is rendered in human form, and where, for lack of space, she is shown in a more upright position than is usual. The depiction of the Sphinx seated on an architectural support instead of in a rocky landscape must not, however, be taken as a mediaeval misunderstanding, since it had already been done in a Roman fresco from Hermopolis where the support resembles and is apparently derived from a theater prop,24and long before then on a red-figured cylix in the Museo Gregoriano in Rome,25where the support, in even closer agreement with the glass bowl, is a column. Moreover) the same vase-picture, unlike the lamp but like the glass, shows Oedipus in a seated position. Only the substitution of the rock by a throne, unsuitable to the setting of the episode on Mount Phicium, is clearly a mediaeval error. Early Byzantine silver had already shown a weakening of the classical content, although figures like Athena, Ajax, and Odysseus in the Leningrad plate and the Amazon and the Trojan warrior in the Dumbarton Oaks plate were still clearly identifiable. But now, in the Middle Byzantine period, this individual identity seems, at times, not only lost, but intentionally sacrificed. This is particularly true for a whole group of ivory caskets which, because of the ornament used in their frames, are usually called rosette caskets and probably served as jewel boxes for noble ladies.26A very good specimen, from the turn of the tenth to the eleventh century, in Dumbarton Oaks (fig. 11)~' has, on its back, three plaques with human figures which, though iconographically unrelated to each other, were brought together for decorative purposes. A putto in the center, holding an unidentifiable object which was quite likely misunderstood by the copyist, is flanked by a fully dressed archer 23 I am much obliged to Mr. Lucas Benachi, t h e owner of the lamp, for kindly supplying me with the photograph and for permission to publish it. A publication of Mr. Benachi's collection of terracottas is being prepared by Prof. Kenneth R. Rowe of Leeds University. 24 Sami Gabra, Annales d u service des antiquitks de I'Egypte, XXXII (1932). T he fresco is now in the Egyptianbluseum in Cairo. I d e m , Rapport sur les fouilles d'Hermoupolis ouest ( T o u n a el-Gebel) (Cairo, 1g41), p. 98ff. and pl. XLVI. 25 P. Hartwig, Die Griechischen Meisterschalen (Stuttgart-Berlin, 1893), p. 664ff. and pl. LXXIII. 26 A. Goldschmidt and K. Weitzmann, Die Byzantinischen Elfenbeinskulpturen des X - X I I I Jahrhunderts, I (Berlin, 1930); K. Weitzmann, Greek Mythology, p. 15zff. and pls. XLVI-LX. 27 Goldschmidt-Weitzmann, 09. cit., I1 (Berlin, 1g34), p. 82, no. 236 and pls. LXXVI-LXXVII.

4*

52

K U R T WEITZMANN

and a nude bearded warrior with shield and sword. The latter seems to belong to a group of big bellied warriors from a Dionysiac battle.28I t will be noted that both warriors are designed, with their short, chubby legs, to resemble the putto in the center. Obviously, on this and other caskets, the artist tried to turn all figures, whether gods or heroes, into putti, and in doing so created a uniform classical type and achieved a decorative unity. This "putticizing," if it may be permitted to coin such a word, carried with it the abandonment of the sensuous quality of the classical nude and its transference to a sphere of unreality, whereby it became more readily acceptable to a basically Christian culture. 111. The Impact of Mediaeval Form. In the process of copying scenes of classical mythology in a mediaeval surrounding, de-sensualizing was only one aspect. In a culture which increasingly denied corporeal values this device was often considered insufficient, and artists began to dress nude figures while keeping intact the arrangement and meaning of compositions. This process had already begun in late classical art at a time when Christianity could hardly have been held responsible for this change of taste. There is, in the so-called House of Menander in Antioch, a mosaic emblema representing Apollo's pursuit of Daphne (fig. I Z ) . ~ In ~ contradistinction to Pompeian frescoes and other classical monuments, where Daphne is depicted nud; or at least seminude, she appears in the mosaic fully dressed in tunic that is fastened at both shoulders. Even more interesting is Apollo who is clad in a violet-reddish mantle, fastened over the right shoulder, that is clearly the imperial purple chlamys. Instead of the laurel wreath, he wears, set against a grey nimbus, the pearl diadem, similar to the one that became fashionable under the emperors of the Constantinian dynasty. This, apparently, is an early attempt to replace the timeless garment of a god or hero with contemporary dress. Here begins a trend not only to humanize the gods-this Homer had already done-but to historicize them. In Roman imperial times emperors were made divine, but now gods became emperors. Each phase of the Middle Ages adjusts the dress of the pagan gods to the fashion of its day. In an eleventh-century miniature of Pseudo-Nonnus' commentary to the homilies of Gregory of Nazianzus, in the Patriarchal Library of Jerusalem, cod. Taphou 14, the Birth of Dionysus (fig. 1 3 ) ~is~ depicted in three consecutive phases, beginning with Zeus taking the halfgrown embryo out of the womb of the dying Semele, then sewing it into his thigh, and finally delivering it himself. Like Apollo in the Antioch mosaic, Zeus, as a Byzantine emperor, wears a crown, but now it is the jewel-studded crown of the Middle Byzantine type instead of the pearl diadem, and the gold embroidered tunic instead of the chlamys. The artist has shown restraint by not 28 For similar figures see K. Weitzmann, Greek Mythology, p. 182 and pl. LVIII, nos. 242-244.

a

29 Antioch-on-the Orontes, 1 11, The Excavations 1937-1939 (Princeton, 1g41), P. 190, no. 136 and pl. 65; Levi, Antioch Mos. Pav., I, p. 211 ; 11, pl. XLVII b. K. Weitzmann, Greek Mythology, p. 46ff. and pl, XVI, no. 52.

S U R V I V A L O F MYTHOLOGICAL R E P R E S E N T A T I O N S 53 putting the heavy loros over the tunic which would hardly have been fitting at the moment when the Zeus-emperor has taken upon himself the obligation of a midwife. Moreover the three scenes are placed in a surrounding of conventional Byzantine furniture and architecture. Even so, the poses and gestures of Zeus and Semele have changed so little' that their classical prototypes can still be traced.31 IV. The Impact of Christian Iconography Whereas in the last two instances mediaeval form was imposed upon mythological representations, there exist also cases in which Christian content had infiltrated mythological scenes. One of a pair of Early Byzantine silver plates in the Dumbarton Oaks a story in which a youth in heroic nakedness is ~ Collection (fig. 1 4 ) ~illustrates reading a letter and, at the same time, turning away from a woman who is trying to detain him. An attempted seduction, a resisting youth, and, as an important detail, a love letter in the form of a diptych are features that best fit the Hippolytus myth, and the seducing woman, therefore, is none other than Phaedra. Although the text of Euripides (v. 601ff.), on which practically all extant representations of this myth are based,33 does not mention such a letter, it is a familiar attribute in classical monuments, as may be seen on a Hippolytus looks at the Roman sarcophagus in Girgenti (fig. 1 5 ) ~where ~ diptych in his raised left hand without, however, giving the impression of nearsightedness, as he does on the silver plate. Yet, there is one feature that is irreconcilable with the Euripidean text, namely, Phaedra's grasping of Hippolytus' mantle. In the drama as well as in all other representations the hero does not meet Phaedra alone, but in the presence of the nurse who must have delivered the letter. In Euripides the nurse does touch the hero's garment, in order to attract the attention of Hippolytus who (verse 606) rebukes her: "Hence with thine hand ! Touch not my vesture thou." And, indeed, on the Girgenti sarcophagus the nurse touches Hippolytus' spear with her right hand and his chlamys with her left. In all likelihood the Byzantine silversmith was forced to abbreviate a fuller threefigure composition, and, in omitting the nurse, he had Phaedra touch the garment of Hippolytus. In doing so the meaning of the gesture was changed: what, in the case of the nurse, was meant to be a gesture of supplication then became one of seduction. There is still another incongruity in the silver relief that likewise seems to have resulted from lack of space. Phaedra is leaning on a pedestal, a pose which 31 AS, e. g. Roman sarcophagi, Robert, op. cit., pls. XVI, no. 54 and XVII, no. 55, and a lost fresco from the Domus Aurea, ibidem, pl. XVII, no. 56. 3a Handbook, D.O. Coll., p. 54, no. 127 and figures on pp. 60-61. 33 L. Skchan, Etudes sur la tragidie grecque (Paris, 1926), p. 323ff.; Robert, Sarkophag-Reliefs, 111, 2 (Berlin, 1904)~ p. 169ff. and pl. x ~ ~ v f; K. f . Weitzmann, "Euripides Scenesin Byzantine Art," Hesperia, X V I I I (1949)~p. 162ff. and pls. 2g,15--3o,zz. 34 Robert, op. cit., p. 178, no. 152 and pl. XLVII.

54

K U R T WEITZMANN

seems a little too relaxed for a person at a high pitch of emotional strain. Such pedestals are theater props as can be seen in a second-century Antioch mosaic that depicts Phaedra, the nurse, and an angry Hippolytus (fig. 1 6 ) . ~Here ~ it supports a statuette of Aphrodite, the goddess whom Hippolytus had offended, and beside it stands Phaedra with her right arm raised and playing nervously with the edge of her veil. By moving the pedestal and Phaedra closer together one can readily see how the former could become the support for Phaedra's arm. Coming back to the all-important motif of the grasping of the mantle: was the Byzantine silversmith the first to invent this motif as a means of portraying a seduction? There exists a Late Roman floor mosaic from Porcareccia, now in the Vatican Museum (fig. 17),36 that depicts among its twenty-four panels of scenes from the theater one in which the grasping of the mantle is the central motif, and on account of this an identification with Phaedra and Hippolytus has been proposed. But the comparatively short hair of the mask on the left and the longer hair of the one on the right suggest that the seducer is a male and the seduced a female and that, therefore, the mosaic can only be regarded as a formal, but not as an iconographic, prototype of the scene on the silver plate. While the Phaedra story is by no means the only one in Greek mythology in which a woman tries to seduce a resisting young hero, I cannot recall any representation in classical antiquity in which the artist has portrayed a woman in the seductive act of grasping a garment; on the other hand it is a common device for depicting the more aggressive male. At the same time the most famous precedent for the grasping of the mantle of a chaste, resisting youth is found not in classical mythology, but in the Biblical story of Joseph and Potiphar's wife. In every picture-recension of the Book of Genesis an illustration of this episode must include this motif since it is explicitly described in the Bible text. For instance, in the thirteenth-century mosaic in the narthex of San Marco (fig. 18),~' which harks back to the so-called Cotton Genesis38 of, as we believe, Alexandrian 0rigin,~9we see Potiphar's wife pursuing Joseph out of the door of her bedchamber and snatching his mantle which hangs loosely over his shoulder. Indeed, it seems more than likely that the Byzantine silversmith was stimulated by such an illustration from the Book of Genesis. After all, the sixth century, which is the approximate date of the silver plate, was a flourishing period of narrative Bible illustrations, as the Vienna and the Cotton Genesis testify, and it seems only natural that in a predominantly Christian culture they should have 35 K. Weitzmann, Antioch-on-the-Orontes, 111, p. 233, no. 140 B and pl. 67; Levi, Antioch Mos. Pau., I, p. 7 1 ; 11,pl.XI b. 36 A. L. Millin, Description d'une mosazque antique d u M u s t e Pio-Clementin ci Rome, repre'sentant des scbnes de tragidies (Paris, 1829); B. Nogara, I mosaici antichi conservati nei Palazzi Pontifici del Vaticano e del Laterano (Milan, I ~ I O ) ,p. q f f . and pls. LVI-LXVI; M. Bieber, History of the Greek and R o m a n Theater (Princeton, 1g3g), p. 404ff. and fig. 530. 37 F. Ongania, L a Basilica d i S u n Mavco in Venezia (Venice, 1880-18g3), pl. XIX, no. 4 ; S. Bettini, Mosaici antichi d i S u n Marco a Venezia (Bergamo, 1g44), PIS. LXXXI-LXXXII. 38 J . J. Tikkanen, "Die Genesismosaiken von S. Marco in Venedig und ihr Verhaltnis zu den Miniaturen der Cottonbibel," Acta Societatis Scientiarum Fennicae, 17 (Helsingfors, 1889). 39 K. Weitzmann, "Observations on the Cotton Genesis Fragments," Late Classical and Mediaeval Studies in Honor of A . M . Friend, Jr. (Princeton, 1955), p. I 12 ff.

S U R V I V A L O F M Y T H O L O G I C A L R E P R E S E N T A T I O N S 55 exerted a reverse influence upon representations of Greek mythology. What makes this case interesting i s that the artist not only took over an-isolated iconographical motif, but must have been aware of a parallelism in the meaning of the two scenes, both of which implied not only a seduction but a refusal on the part of a chaste youth. In another example that illustrates an episode from the popular story of the infancy of Achilles, the influence of Christian content and mediaeval form can be demonstrated simultaneously. A seventh- or eighth-century bronze plate in the museum of Cairo has, among its several infancy scenes which closely follow the classical tradition, one that shows a significant deviation from it. Illustrating the bringing of the boy Achilles to Chiron for his education (fig. 19),~0it shows Thetis pushing the little boy in front of her towards the centaur. In all earlier representations of this scene, including a circular marble relief of the fourth century, likewise of Egyptian origin, in the Museo Capitolino in Rome (fig.z0),41 Thetis holds the nude babe in her arms when she hands him over to Chiron, his future teacher.42Moreover, in the Cairo plate Thetis is nimbed, and this suggests that the changes in the composition were made under the influence of a Biblical scene.43 In an eleventh-century Book of Kings in the Vatican Library, cod. gr. 333,44 whose comprehensive miniature cycle is descended from a very early archetype,45 there is a scene in which the child Samuel is brought by his mother Hannah into the temple to Eli the priest (fig. 21). The composition is very much the same, with the half-grown boy being gently pushed forward. A parallel such as this would also explain the fact that the boy Achilles is clothed, as opposed to the subsequent scenes of the Cairo plate where, in agreement with the classical tradition, he is nude. Thus it appears that the metal worker was influenced by a Biblical illustration only for the group of the mother and the child and in none of the other scenes on the Cairo plate. Once more the parallelism is not merely formal; the artist must have been aware of the similarity of content: in both cases a boy is given to a respected educator to be raised outside the parents' home. V. Mediaeval Creations With a comparatively rich heritage of mythological scenes available, the instances in which Byzantine artists set out to illustrate a mythological event entirely in the spirit and form of their own times, and without the use of 40 J. Strzygowski, Koptische Kunst, Catalogue ge'ne'ral du muse'e ddu Caire (Vienna, ~ g o q )p. , 257 and pl. XXVI. 41 H. Stuart Jones, Catalogue of the Sculptures of the Museo Capitolino (Oxford, I ~ I Z ) ,p. 45 and pl. 9. *a K. Weitzmann, Greek Mythology, p. 165f. and pl. LII,no. 209. 43 Idem, Ancient Book Illumination (Martin Classical Lectures, XVI) (Cambridge, Mass., 1959), p. - 5 7 and pl. xxx, 66. 44 J. assu us, "Les miniatures byzantines du Livre des Rois," Me'langes d'arche'ologie et d'histoire, XLV (1928), p. 38ff. 45 K. Weitzmann, "The Psalter Vatopedi 761 ," Journal Walters A r t Gallery, X (1g47), p. 38 ff. ; idem, -.

"Die Illustration der Septuaginta," Munchner Jahrbuch der Bildenden Kunst, 111-IV (1g52-53),

p. 10gff.

K U R T WEITZMANN classical models, are rather rare. A few such instances from the ninth century are but the renaissance of the tenth century seems to have prevented a further development in this direction, and most such attempts date from the Late Byzantine period. Even then they were unusual. In Hellenistic-Roman times the most frequently illustrated text had undoubtedly been the Iliad, and it is hardly an accident that the only illustrated manuscript of a Greek epic poem known today is the well-known Iliad fragment in Milan (fig. I). The fact that in the eleventh or twelfth century short minuscule inscriptions were added to the illustrations clearly shows that these were still highly appreciated at that period. At the same time the famous Iliad manuscript in the Marciana in Venice, cod. gr. 454, one of Cardinal Bessarion's prize possessions, that was written in the first half of the tenth century in a beautiful minuscule,*' has no pictures, and it seems safe to suppose that its model, too, had none, since, otherwise, they would have been copied or provisions would at least have been made for their inclusion. In about the fifteenth century a few pages that had been lost were repaired and apparently at that time a few miniatures of a rather crude style were added at the very beginning of the codex. One of these marginal scenes (fig. zz) depicts the pleading of Chryses, the Trojan priest, before an enthroned Agamemnon who is dressed like a Byzantine emperor and wears a high crown. Chryses offers Apollo's wreath and a staff of gold, not, as the text suggests, one upon the other, but separately, and the staff is the imperial labarum like the one which Agamemnon also holds as a sign of his imperial rank. Thoroughly Byzantine, too, is the second scene in which Chryses, after having been repudiated, prays in the temple of Apollo Smintheus. Here Chryses is a Christian priest, with a censer, standing before a ciborium which encloses a stereotype idol on a pedestal. How removed these scenes are from classical representations of this episode may be demonstrated by comparing them with the Iliac tablets of the first ) ~ ~ century. In a plaque in the Cabinet des Mddailles in Paris (fig. ~ 3 Chryses bends his knees and touches the knees of the enthroned Agamemnon, as a sign of supplication, while the ransom is unloaded; and in the subsequent scene, as may be seen in the tablet of the Museo Capitolino (fig. 24),49the priest offers a libation on an altar that stands in front of a templum in antis. The inspiration of the Late Byzantine illustrator obviously did not come from an illustrated Iliad but from a Chronicle like that of the fourteenth-century John Scylitzes manuscript in Madrid.50 Artistically these attempts are not too successful 46 Notably in the manuscript of the Homilies of Gregory of Nazianzus in Milan, Ambros. Lib. cod. E. 49 inf. (A. Grabar, Les miniatures d u GrBgoire de Nazianze de l'dmbrosienne [Paris, 19431). Most typical is the illustration with Chronos wielding an enormous axe against a segment of sky, depicting in this naive manner the castration of Uranos (K. Weitzmann, Greek Mythology, p. go and pl. XXVIII, no. 98). 47 D. Comparetti, Homeri Ilias c u m scholiis. Codex Venetus A , Marcianus 454 (Leiden, 1901 [facsim.]). 48 0. Jahn, Griechische Bilderchroniken (Bonn, 1873), p. 4, 10, no. 2 and pl. 111 c; K. Weitzmann, Roll and Codex, p. 39 and fig. 30. 48 Jahn, op. cit., p. 2, 10, no. 3 and pl. I (top frieze); I<. Weitzmann, op. cit., p. 39 and fig. 31. 5 0 Biblioteca Nacional cod. 5-3 N-2. G. Millet, L a Collection Chrktienne et Byzantine des Hautes Etudes (1903), p. 26, nos. 369-375; p. 54, no. C 869-1277; G. Schlumberger, L'kpopke byzantine, I1 and I11 (Paris, 1goo-1go5), passim; etc.

S U R V I V A L O F MYTHOLOGICAL R E P R E S E N T A T I O N S 57 compared with those of the Latin West where from the twelfth century on the rendering of mythological scenes in mediaeval form became widespread and artistically is often quite i m a g i n a t i ~ e . ~ ~ VI. Transformation of Mythological into Christian Scenes Of even greater consequence, perhaps, than the mere persistence of mythological representations within a Christian culture is the influence they exercised on the formation of Biblical iconography. I t is well known that the earliest illustrators of the Old Testament, either Hellenized Jews or Christians, relied on the formal vocabulary of Greco-Roman art, having no pictorial tradition of their own. Formalistic art history has put its main emphasis on the tracing of types with identical poses and gestures in Christian and classical art. But since Hellenistic art had reached the point where it mastered the rendering of the human body from every aspect, physically and psychologically, and thus could and did represent it in every possible pose, it was more or less a foregone conclusion that for each figure in a Biblical scene a classical counterpart could be found. However, what scholarship has begun only gradually to realize is that the first illustrators of the Bible must have roamed through extensive classical picture cycles, searching not only for suitable figure types, but for whole compositions which were appropriate from the formal point of view and had similar meanings as well. In other words, the first Biblical illustrators had a good knowledge of the illustrated Greek classics and remembered where related episodes with similar actions could be found. We have already discussed a case of reversed borrowing in connection with the scene of Phaedra's attempted seduction which was changed under the influence of the Biblical story of Potiphar's wife (fig. 14). However, such cases remained rare, while the primary influence of mythological representations upon Christian scenes was not only widespread, but formed the basis without which the creation of Biblical picture cycles on a vast scale would have been impossible. Unfortunately, this process cannot be fully reconstructed, since the chief medium in which the transformation of mythological into Biblical scenes took place was book illumination, and illustrated classical texts in their original form of papyrus rolls are completely lost save for a fewfragments.52 Scholarship, therefore, must rely chiefly on the equally scarce reflections in other media and on a few mediaeval manuscripts. So it is very fortunate that we can cite at least one instance of a Biblical miniature derived from a mythological illustration in a papyrus roll which has become known only very recently. In an eleventh-century Octateuch in the Vatican Library, cod. gr. 747, there 51 E. Panofsky and F. Saxl, loc. cit. Most recently J . Weitzmann-Fiedler, "Romanische Bronzeschalen mit mythologischen Darstellungen," Zeitschrift fur Kunstwissenschaft, X (1956), p. ~ogff.; XI (19571, p. Iff. 5 a Concerning illustrations on papyrus see K. Weitzmann, Roll and Codex, p. 47ff and figs. 35-43; R. Bianchi Bandinelli, "Schemi iconografici nelle miniature delllIliade Ambrosiana," Rend. Accad. N a z . Lincei. Cl. Scienze mor., stor. e filol., ser. VIII, vol. VI (1952), p. 430, note I ; idem, HellenisticByzantine Miniatures of the Iliad (Olten, 1955)~p. 27 and passim; Weitzmann, Ancient Book I l l u m i nation, p. 5ff. and passim and figs. I , 2 , 10, 11,37,59,72, 107, 117, 135, 136.

58

K U R T WEITZMANN

is a representation of Samson's fight with the lion (fig. 25),53illustrating the phrase of the fourteenth chapter of Judges which reads: "Samson crushed the lion as he would have crushed a kid of the goats." The miniature shows the hero strangling the lion by pressing its head under his armpit, an act which is not , word used in the Sepquite in agreement with the Greek a v v h p ~ y l ~ vthe tuagint. What induced the Bible illustrator to depict the lion fight in this particular manner ? -In our opinion, a model that depicted Heracles fighting the lion of Nemea. ) ~contains ~ a In a third-century papyrus from Oxyrhynchus (fig. ~ 6 which fragment of a Heracles poem with three scenes, all of which relate to Heracles' first adventure, the lion fight is depicted in the very same manner as Samson's fight. But in the case of Heracles there was a motivation for illustrating this particular method of killing since Diodorus Siculus (IV, 11, 3-4) explicitly states that the Nemean lion "required the compulsion of the human hand for his subduing," and that Heracles "winding his arms around the beast's neck choked it to death." This case demonstrates clearly that in the process of such an adaptation the mythological composition loses, to some extent, its precise relationship to the text after it has been introduced into the story of the Bible. This raises an important methodological question. Quite often students of iconography, when they meet discrepancies between a Biblical illustration and the Bible text, look for some other literary source to explain such discrepancies, while in many cases, we believe, these are caused by an unaltered adaptation of a compositional scheme. A second example will make this point even clearer. In the Landesmuseum in Trier there is a fifth-century ivory pyxis which on one side represents the sacrifice of Isaac (fig. 27).55Abraham has just drawn the dagger in order to cut the throat of Isaac whose head he holds with his left hand. Large parts of the figure of Isaac are, unfortunately, destroyed, but enough is left to make the original pose quite apparent. He had obviously tried to run away and had sunk to his knee, when Abraham caught him and prevented his escape. This situation is clearly in contradiction to the meaning of the text of Genesis (22:9), according to which Isaac, quite submissive, should be on the altar, not beside it, as in the ivory. I t would, however, be wrong in our opinion to look for another textual version of this Biblical story. The deviation can be more easily explained by the use of a classical model and, once more, we may expect this to be a mythological scene with a similar meaning. There is in the Telephus of Euripides a highly dramatic scene in which Telephus, being pursued by the Greek chieftains, snatches the child Orestes. While he tries to reach the safety of the altar he threatens to kill the boy if harm should be done to him. This moment is depicted on an Etruscan urn, in K. Weitzmann, The Joshua Roll (Princeton, 1948), pp. 6, 31 ff. K. Weitzmann in: The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, XXII (Oxford, 1g54), p. 85, no. 2331 and pl. X I ; idem, "Narration in Ancient Art," Amer. Jour. Arch., LXI (1g57), p. 84 and pl. 33, no. I ; idem, Ancient Book Illumination, p. 53 and fig. 59. 66 W . F. Volbach, Elfenbeina~beitender Spatantike und des Fruhen Mittelalters (Mainz, 1952), p. 77, no. 162 and pl. 53; G. Bovini and L. B. Ottolenghi, Catalogo della Mostra degli Auori, 2nd ed. (Ravenna 19561, p. 45, no. 33 and figs. 47-50. 53

54

S U R V I V A L O F M Y T H O L O G I C A L R E P R E S E N T A T I O N S 59 the Museo Archeologico in Florence (fig. 28),s6 where Telephus steps forward like Abraham and, although his right hand is lost, there can be no doubt that it held the dagger which he aimed at the neck of the boy Orestes. In spite of minor adjustments made by the Bible illustrator to adapt his model to the passage in Genesis, the similarity is close enough to suggest this particular Euripidean scene as his ultimate source. To this formal agreement may be added an ideological common denominator: in each case the sacrifice of an innocent boy is attempted but at the last moment prevented-in the mythological scene by the prevailing of reason and in the Biblical by divine intervention. There is sufficient evidence to conclude that, except for the poems of the epic cycle, the dramas of Euripides were the most frequently illustrated classics in the Hellenistic-Roman period, and therefore it would not be surprising to find them widely used as a source for Biblical illustrations. There is, if I am not mistaken, a reflection of even the "theater style" in the very large head of Abraham: the mouth is broad and open and the eyes vacant as in a mask, and one gets the distinct impression that the ivory carver had in front of him a scene not in the "epic-heroic style" like that of the Etruscan urn, but in the "theatrical style" so common in Roman monuments, though he seems to have tried to avoid the appearance of a mask.57The results gained from the analysis of the Trier pyxis call for a closer scrutiny of this particular group of Early Christian monuments of which I should like to cite another example. Among the treasures of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection there is a sixthcentury ivory pyxis (fig. ~ 9 which, ) ~like~ almost every other member of this group, possesses some unique features. Moses is represented receiving the law in a composition whose peculiarities will stand out more clearly if we compare it with that of a contemporary ivory pyxis in the Hermitage in Leningrad (fig. 3 0 ) which ~ ~ conforms to the more normal iconography. Here Moses, face averted, receives, with veiled hands, the tablets from the hand of God, while an Israelite looks on with his hand raised in a gesture of astonishment and in a receding pose as if recoiling from the awe-inspiring apparition. In the Dumbarton Oaks pyxis Moses is represented in a similar pose, climbing the mountain in order to receive the law, which is in the shape of a scroll rather than a tablet. These are variants within the Biblical iconography. But then there is, behind Moses, an Israelite who has thrown himself to the ground in a frantic mood, thrusting his arms about with wild and uncontrolled gestures. We do not know of any other representation of this scene in Early ~ h r i s t i a nor later art which includes this frantic onlooker; nor is there any hint in the Septuagint text that would provide an explanation. The alternatives can only be: is this figure based on another textual source, perhaps a Targum, a Midrash, or an apocryphal 6 6 E. Brunn, I Rilievi delle Urne Etrusche, I (Rome, 1870), p. 34 and pl. XXVIII, no. 6 ; K. Weitzmann, Roll and Codex, p. 175 and fig. 175, where i t is compared with a miniature of the sacrifice of Isaac in the well-known Gregory manuscript in Paris, cod. gr. 510 (idem, fig. 173). 5 7 For the distinction between the "theater style" and the "epic-heroic" style see Weitzmann, Ancient Book Illumination, p. 73ff. 5 8 Volbach, Elfenbeinarbeiten, p. 79, no. 168 and pl. 54; Handbook, D. 0. Coll., p. 104, no. 227 and figure on p. I 17. Volbach, idem, p. 86, no. 190 and pl. 57.

60

K U R T WEITZMANN

passage, or has it slipped in from a classical model? Both alternatives are possible. Moreover, behind the figure just described stand two more onlookers who raise their hands in gestures of astonishment, though they do so quietly and almost without emotion. Each one holds in his veiled left hand a staff that is meaningless for an onlooking Israelite. Its incised spiral pattern is typical of the scepter in the hand of a theater king,e0 as may be seen in a l indicates that we are fragment of a sarcophagus in the Louvre (fig. 3 1 ) . ~This dealing here once more with the impact of a theatrical scene upon a Biblical one, and suggests that the dramati; figure in the foreground also stems from the same source, presumably a tragedy scene. Yet, unlike the Trier pyxis for which we proposed as its model a scene from the Euripidean Telephzts, we have not been able to h d a parallel among the theater scenes that have come down to us from the Roman period. I t is essential to realize that of Euripides alone, the most frequently illustrated ancient dramatist, all of the nineteen preserved plays, in addition to most of the other fifty-five which we know only through fragments and quotations, had rich narrative cycles. For these there must have existed hundreds of miniatures of which only a few have survived through copies in other media. Consequently one should not be surprised that in many cases, where the influence of a theater scene is visible, the exact model cannot be traced. Thus, where the pictorial evidence is lacking one can only try to interpret the scene from literary remains. Since, as stated above, Euripides was the most frequently illustrated dramatic text, it is reasonable to consult him first. What comes to our mind is the story of Odysseus feigning madness in order to escape participating in the Trojan war when some of the Achaeans came to Ithaca to win him over. Presumably this episode was told in the prologue of Euripides' Palamedes, a tragedy with which no pictorial representations have been connected so far. To interpret the gesticulation of the kneeling figure as an act of madness seems quite appropriate, and two onlooking Achaean kings would form a suitable background to this. Admittedly this explanation must remain in the realm of hypothesis, all the more so since it is difficult to suggest a common denominator with the Moses scene, but it points perhaps in the direction in which the solution of the enigma of the Dumbarton Oaks pyxis will have to be sought. The process of transforming mythological scenes into Biblical ones started, of course, centuries before these pyxides were made and coincided with the very beginning of the illustration of the Septuagint which, on the basis of its reflection in the frescoes of the Dura synagogue, can be assumed to have taken place in Greco-Jewish art.62 When, centuries later, the New Testament was 80 The fact that it is held by a king in this fashion excludes its interpretation as a skytale, which one would expect to find only in the hands of a messenger (See Th. Birt, Die Buchrolle i n der Kunst peipzig, 19071, p. 271 ff.). From the Campana Collection. 82 E. R. Goodenough, Jewish Symbols i n the Greco-Roman Period, I (New York, 1953)~ p. jff., and in subsequent vols.; C. H. Kraeling, The Synagogue, The Excaoations at Dura-Europos. Final Report V I I I , Part I (New Haven, 1956), P. 398ff.; K. Weitzmann, "Illustr. der Septuaginta," p. 116ff. and figs. 24-26; idem, "Narration in Ancient Art," p. 89ff. and pl. 36, nos. 14-17; C. 0. Nordstrom, "Some Jewish Legends in Byzantine Art," Byzantion, XXV-XXVII (1955-57), p. 487ff.

S U R V I V A L O F M Y T H O L O G I C A L R E P R E S E N T A T I O N S 61 illustrated for the first time, this must have been done under conditions very similar to those that produced the Old Testament cycles, that is, at a time when Homer and Euripides were still the chief illustrated classics to be consulted and used by the artists. To demonstrate this point I may be permitted to choose an example from Western art which seems particularly instructive. A ninth-century Gospelbook in the Staatsbibliothek in Munich, cod. lat. 23631 (fig. 32), written in gold on purple, has a few miniatures which have variously been considered as products of the sixth century,63 or as copies, contemporary with the text, made in the ninth century on the basis of Early Christian modeP4 and even as tenth-century Ottonian works.65 While the Carolingian origin seems to us the most plausible one, it suffices for our purpose to note that compositionally they are Early Christian inventions. One of them depicts in cross-form the Massacre of the Innocents, with many strange features that find no explanation in Matthew's terse account ( z :16) : "Herod slew all the children that were in Bethlehem." Normally this scene is represented by soldiers who kill the infants with swords and spears, but in the Munichminiature a very specific type is used which also occurs elsewhere in Early Christian monument^:^^ a soldier is smashing an infant by hurling it over his head, and the miniaturist emphasizes this motif by depicting it twice. Moreover, another slain infant is shown falling head first through the air as if it had been hurled from a wall or rampart. A famous story from the Trojan war tells of the killing of an infant in this particular manner. The Little Iliad of Lesches of Mytilene, according to the scholia to Lycophron's Alexandria, contained an episode in which Neoptolemus snatched Andromeda's son, the little Astyanax, "from the bosom of his rich-haired nurse and seized him by the foot and cast him from a tower."67 An illustration of this story occurs in blackfigured vases,68 and we assume that some later copy of the Hellenistic-Roman period was used as a model by the Gospel illustrator. The connection between scenes from the Trojan war and the Massacre of the Innocents is not confined to this one motif. At the bottom of the miniature a soldier is dragging away a kneeling woman by her hair ; his sword is sheathed, and there is no infant for him to kill. Neither feature quite fits the story of the Massacre, but both can be fully explained in an episode from the Trojan war. In the Iliac tablet of the Museo Capitolino (fig. 33)69 the center of which is occupied by a complex composition of the Iliupersis of Stesichorus, one sees in St. Beissel, Geschichte der Evangelienbucher (Freiburg, 1go6), p. 84ff. and fig. 19. A. Boinet, La miniature carolingienne (Paris, 1913)~pls. 1-11; W. Koehler "Die Denkmaler der Karolingischen Kunst in Belgien," Belgische Kunstdenkmaler, I (Munich, 1923)~p. 4. 65 A. Boeckler, "Bildvorlagen der Reichenau," Zeitschrift fur Kunstgeschichte, XI1 (1949)~ p. 13 (here still wavering between a Carolingian and Ottonian origin); idem, Ars Sacra, Kunst des fruhen Mittelalters (Exhib.,Munich, 1950), p. 28, no. 58. 66 E. B. Smith, Early Christian Iconography (Princeton, 1918), p. 62 ff. Whether his "smashing type" is "Proven~al"in origin as he suggests may be doubted. G3

G4

no.

ed.

1936), pp.

Hesiod, The Homeric Hymns and Homerica,

68

J. Overbeck, Die Bildwerke zum Thebischen und Troischen Heldenkreis (Stuttgart, 1857), pl. xxv,

69

Jahn, Bilderchroniken,

22.

p. 33, no. 66 and pl. I.

H. G. Evelyn-White (Loeb

Class.,

67

-518-9.-

62

K U R T WEITZMANN

the middle of the top row the temple of Athena and, in front of it, Ajax dragging away Cassandra who kneels on the steps of the temple. The Iliu~ersisexplains still another motif not called for in the story of the Massacre of the Innocents, but necessary to a depiction of the Sack of Troy, namely, the prominently displayed altar. In the epic scene it is at the altar of Zeus Herkeios that Priam is slain, and in the Iliac tablet it occupies, quite properly, the very center of the city. Beisse170wondered about this altar in the miniature and connected it with a hymn of the Feast of the Holy Innocents which mentions an altar. But its round form indicates that it is pagan, not Christian. Once more, the similarity between the pagan and Christian illustration is not confined to mere formal adaptations, but extends to an ideological parallelism that reveals the learnedness of the Christian illustrator. In both cases a massacre took place in order to kill the offspring of a whole nation, yet one infant was destined to be saved: Ascanius in the Trojan story and Christ according to Matthew's Gospel. VII. Renewed Impact of Mythological upon Christian Scenes In the course of repeated copying, the classical elements, particularly those that were in conflict with the Biblical text, were either gradually eliminated or adjusted to the Christian content, thereby losing some of their original characteristics. After iconoclasm, however, and during the Macedonian renaissance we see a new infiltration of mythological representations into Christian iconography which can best be observed in the New Testament cycle, since at this period the main artistic energies were centered on the illustration of Gospel events at the expense of the Old Testament. The most striking case is the introduction of a newr Christ type into the Anastasis, a Christ who, instead of approaching Adam, drags him out of Hell like Heracles dragging Cerberus out of the Lower World.71 I should like to demonstrate that this was not an isolated case, and that the best examples of this renewed impact of classical models on New Testament subjects are to be found not in the narrative cycle of Christ's life, but more specifically in the representations of the great feasts which in the Middle Byzantine period had assumed especial prominence. In the feast cycle the Anastasis is followed by the Ascension of which the most classical rendering I know is on the lid of a tenth-century ivory casket in Stuttgart (fig. 34).72Whereas the enthroned Christ carried to heaven by angels is traditional, there are here, among the apostles, several types which had not existed in earlier Ascension scenes. This will become clear by comparing the ivory to a typical Early Byzantine Ascension like that on an icon from Mount Sinai (fig. 35)73 which is closely related to the representations of the Cf. note 63. K. Weitzmann, "Das Evangelion im Skevophylakion zu Lawra," Seminarium Kondakovianztm, V I I I (1936), p. 88 and pl. 11, no. I ; pl. IV, no. 3. Goldschmidt-Weitzmann, Byzant. Elfenbeinskulpt., 11, p. 30, no. 24 and pl. VII, 24a. 7 3 G. and M. Sotiriou, Icones du Mont Sinai, Plates (Athens, 1956), pls. 10-11; idem, Text (1958), 71

P. 25.

S U R V I V A L O F M Y T H O L O G I C A L R E P R E S E N T A T I O N S 63 Ascension on the Monza phials,74 the lid of the Sancta Sanctorum reliquary and others. In the ivory the apostles are, first of all, more widely distributed than on the icon, and those of the rear plane are raised on a kind of dais reminiscent of a stage setting. While some apostles, like those pointing upwards to the ascending Christ, are traditional and can be found in the Sinai icon, others have no analogy in any early Ascension picture; for instance, the apostle in the middle of the lower right who excitedly turns around to his neighbor in order to strike up a conversation. There is a similar type, to the left of the Virgin, who addresses another apostle whose pose is even more unusual. Seen from the back, he is turning in an almost dancing motion, as if he were making a pirouette. The formal elegance of this pose is contrary to the hieratic concept that pervades all pre-iconoclastic Ascension pictures, and can only be explained by the influence of the Macedonian renaissance. I t has been noticed that the style of this ivory is closely related to, though not quite the same as, that of the "Malerische Gruppe" of Byzantine ivories which, in addition to plaques with religious subjects, produced the classicizing rosette caskets. I t is on these caskets that one finds dancing Maenads and other figures from the Bacchic repertory who resemble so closely the dancing apostle.76 Yet on most of these caskets the Maenads are already more or less "putticized" (p. 5 2 ), whereas on a late-classical fifth- or sixth-century pyxis in the museum of Zurich (fig. 36)77a Maenad is still depicted in the more slender proportions of the Ascension apostle. Even more incongruous for an Ascension is the equally emotional and dramatic apostle, close to the Virgin, who buries his head in his hand. Probably the artist wanted to convey the idea that the apostle is shielding his eyes against the light of the heavenly apparition-a gesture which would seem to be more suitable for a Metamorphosis, although no Transfiguration scene is known to me in which an apostle makes just this gesture. In the classical repertory of gestures this pose expresses brooding, a mood hardly proper for an apostle watching the Ascension of Christ. I t is a most fitting pose, however, for Agamemnon, brooding and turning aside when Iphigenia passes him on her way to where her sacrifice and subsequent carrying-off are to take place. In this very pose Agamemnon is seen on an ancient marble altar in the Uffizi in Florence, the so-called Ara of Cleomenes (fig. 37).78IS it too farfetched to assume an influence by this particular figure from a Euripidean tragedy upon a mid-Byzantine Ascension? Not if we realize that this very composition of Iphigenia's sacrifice, of which Agamemnon was normally a part, was copied A. Grabar, Ampoules de Terre Sainte (Paris, 1958)~p. 17 and pl. 111. H. Grisar, Die Romische Kapelle Sancta Sanctorum und ihr Schatz (Freiburg, 1908)) p. 113ff.and fig. 59; C. R. Morey, "The Painted Panel from the Sancta Sanctorum," Festschrift Paul Clemen (Diissel74 75

dorf, 1926), p. 151ff. 76 Goldschmidt-Weitzmann,

pl. L ~ I I ,no. 232. 77

op. cit., I, pl. I X ,

21

a ; K. Weitzmann, Greek Mythology, p. 180 and

Volbach, Elfenbeinarbeiten, p. 53, no. 98 and pl. 29; Bovini-Ottolenghi,

no. 42 and figs. 67-70.

Catal. Mostra Avori, p. 51,

E. Lowy, "Der Schluss der Iphigenie in Aulis," Jahresh. d. 0sterr. Arch. Inst., XXIV (192g), 10-13; K. Weitzmann, "Euripides Scenes," p. 180 and pls. 27, 9-z8,11.

pl. I and figs. 2,

K U R T WEITZMANN on a tenth-century Byzantine ivory casket, now in the Victoria and Albert Museum in London.79True, Agamemnon himself was omitted from the scene on the ivory plaque, but it is more than likely that he existed in the Byzantine miniature which, in our opinion, must be considered a common model for both the casket and our Ascension ivory. The Stuttgart relief thus reveals itself as a classicized Ascension for which the renaissance artist employed types from heterogeneous realms of classical iconography. Apparently he was satisfied with a merely formal adaptation, having had difficulty in finding an entire scene of similar meaning in classical art. I n general it seems that in this period of the renewed impact of classical upon Middle Byzantine art the formal aspect began to play an increasingly important role because copyists no longer had an unlimited wealth of classical models at their disposal or the knowledge of mythological subject matter at their fingertips. Although the Christological feast cycle, as mentioned before, shows within the religious iconography of the Macedonian renaissance the most distinctive examples of a renewed influence of mythological elements, other iconographical realms were also affected by this classicizing trend. A tenth-century ivory plaque in the Berlin Museum, depicting the Forty Martyrs of Sebaste about to freeze to death in the icy water (fig. 38),*Omay be chosen as an example from the hagiographical realm. The martyrs, and especially those in the front row, are represented in poses of extreme emotional stress, either with their heads drooping in utter dejection or looking up to the enthroned Christ who appears in heaven worshipped by angels. As in the case of the contemporary Ascension ivory in Stuttgart, the peculiar quality of this renaissance creation stands out most clearly when confronted with a pre-iconoclastic representation of the same subject. A fragmentary fresco in Sta. Maria Antiqua in Rome (fig. 3g)s1shows the Forty Martyrs lined up frontally with very little variation in poses, all of them raising their hands in orant gestures and revealing no sense of pain, in agreement with the more hieratic, unemotional style of the Early Byzantine period. This forms the strongest possible contrast to the agile bodies in the ivory plaque which are seen from all sides, leaning backward and forward, and gesticulating wildly in all directions. The relief belongs to the same Constantinopolitan atelier that manufactured the classicizing rosette caskets filled with "putticized" figures from ancient mythology; consequently the carver of the Forty Martyrs plaque must have had access to the same repertory of mythological scenes. I t has already been noted by Otto Demuss2 that the Apparition of Christ in heaven, which does not exist in the early fresco, was taken from a composition of the Ascension of Christ like that of the Stuttgart ivory, and this applies 78 Goldschmidt-Weitzmann, of^. cit., I, pl, rx, 21 b; K. Weitzmann, "Euripides Scenes," p. 177 and pl. z7,7; idem, Greek Mythology, p. 169 and pl. LIV, no. 214. Goldschmidt-Weitzmann, 09. cit., 11, p. 27, no. 10 and pl. 111, 10. J. Wilpert, Die Romischen Mosaiken und Malereien, I1 (Freiburg, 1916)~p. 722ff., and IV, pl. 199. 82 0. Demus, "An unknown mosaic Icon of the Palaeologan Epoch," Byzantina-Metabyzantina, I (19461, P. 108.

S U R V I V A L O F M Y T H O L O G I C A L R E P R E S E N T A T I O N S 65 also to some of the martyrs, who raise their arms towards Christ just as do some of the apostles in the Ascension picture. At the same time, not all of the agitated martyrs can be derived from a composition of the Ascension, and this is true particularly of the most classical ones. One must, therefore, search the classical repertory for a scene in which nude figures are depicted in violent postures, recoiling under the impact of an invisible force. The subject which immediately comes to our mind is the battle of the giants against the gods as represented in the tenth-century Nicander miniature in Paris (fig. 7). One may, for example, compare the martyr at the extreme lower right, in the three-quarter pose seen from the back, who throws up his left arm, with the giant in the lower center of the miniature. The dejected martyrs in the front row who hold one arm under the chin and the other before the breast, not only show a similar formal conception, but express the same sentiment as that of the central giant in the mosaic of Piazza Armerina (fig. 8). I t is, of course, to be expected of a Byzantine artist of the tenth century that, in spite of a very good understanding of the organic structure of the human body, he would object to the muscular exuberance of the giants and make his martyrs more slender and thereby more ascetic and ethereal. There are other types among the Forty Martyrs who do not fit the formula of a recoiling giant, yet are very classical in appearance and must therefore have been derived from another iconographical realm. Among the various classical types and models involved I should like to point out only one more that is particularly striking, and revealing of the mentality of a Middle Byzantine artist. In the second row close to the center is a group consisting of an older, bearded martyr who turns to one side and tenderly places his left arm around the neck of a youth. If one can forget for a moment the context and define the sentiment conveyed by this group, one would describe it as one of affection, intimacy, with even a trait of importunity. There was a famous group in classical antiquity, existing in more than twenty replicas, which embodied just this sentiment and apparently stimulated the Byzantine artist to incorporate it in the composition of the Forty Martyrs, and which, as is generally agreed today, represented Pan instructing Daphnis in the playing of the s y r i n ~ . ~ T hreplica e is ~particularly in the museum of Naples (fig. 4 0 ) ~ close as far as the pose and the profile head of the obtrusive Pan are concerned. Daphnis is turning his head away, but this is by no means the rule in this group, and in another replica in the Museo Nazionale in Romes5 the charmed youth turns his head towards Pan, thus showing a response not basically different from that of our youthful martyr. In spite of these similarities, it must not necessarily be assumed that the model of the ivory carver was actually a sculptured group; indeed, for an ivory of the "Malerische Gruppe" one would

"

This group was called to my attention by Prof. P. von Blanckenhagen whom I wish to thank for this and other valuable suggestions made when discussing this paper. 8 4 W. Klein, "Studien zum Antiken Rokoko," Jahresh. d. bsterr. Arch. Inst., XIX-XX (~g~g), p. 26off. and fig. 178; L. Laurenzi, "Problemi della scultura ellenistica," Riv. dell'lst. d'drch. e Stcwia dell'drte, VIII (1g40), p. 36 and fig. 9. s5 M. Bieber, The Sculpture of the Hellenistic Age (New York, 1955), p. 147 and fig. 628.

66

K U R T WEITZMANN

think first of all of a painted model. Actually, a rather badly preserved fresco from Herculaneums6 depicts a variant of the Pan-Daphnis group, in which Marsyas and Olympus are represented in very much the same poses conveying the same meaning, and it is entirely possible that the model of the ivory carver represented Marsyas and Olympus rather than Pan and Daphnis. The Gigantomachy and the erotic group of music-teaching are indeed heterogeneous realms out of which the Christian artist chose his models for martyrs shivering and freezing to death in an icy lake. Classical mythology and the forms in which it had crystallized had an ever-revitalizing power in Byzantine art. After the classical features had somewhat worn off in the centuries following the Macedonian renaissance they reappear with renewed vigor in the Palaeologan period, as may be seen in one of the finest creations of this period, a fourteenth-century portable mosaic icon of the Forty Martyrs in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection (fig. 41).~7 O tto Demus has clearly demonstrated that in its classicizing features it is akin to the ivory just discussed and yet sufficiently different to exclude a direct descent. The attitudes of the martyrs are here again more restrained, thus more closely approximating the Early Byzantine ideal of dignified behavior. At the same time the faces are much more individualized and expressive and, in this respect, more classical than the lively and yet uniform heads in the ivory. I t will be noted that in the Dumbarton Oaks icon there are new types of martyrs that exist neither in the early fresco in Rome nor in the Berlin ivory, as, for instance, the second from the right in the front row who, in despair, holds his right hand close to his forehead. This type appears once more in the Gigantomachy of Piazza Armerina in the upper left corner (fig. 8). Admittedly such a pose could also be found in other classical works, but the fact that so many gestures can be traced to this specific context, and that a copy of the Gigantomachy is known to have existed in tenth-century Byzantine painting, make the connection between these two scenes plausible from both the artistic and the historical points of view. One gets the impression that the ivory and the mosaic hark back to two different, though related, archetypes, and that whereas the model for the ivory was a creation of the Macedonian renaissance, the Dumbarton Oaks mosaic reflects the mind of an artist who tried to revitalize and, at the same time, to retain the more hieratic, Early Christian composition, infusing into it only a limited number of classical poses. However, in both cases the influence of a Gigantomachy upon a martyrdom scene is not confined to an agreement of the poses of a few figures, since both events concern a group of men who, one by one, are meeting a slow death, without being able to escape or to offer effective opposition, and we presume that the Byzantine artists who designed a classicized version of the Forty Martyrs were well aware of this similarity of content and meaning as well as of form. 88 87

P. Herrmann, Denkmaler der Malerei des Alterturns (Munich, 1904-31), p. 110, fig. 29 and pl. 87. Demus, op. cit.; Handbook, D. 0. Coll., p. 147, no. 290 and figure on p. 151.

S U R V I V A L O F MYTHOLOGICAL R E P R E S E N T A T I O N S 67 VIII. Combination of Mythological and Christian Elements A free attitude with regard to the classical heritage is shown by those Byzantine artists who dared to place undisguised classical and Christian elements side by side, thus striving for a harmony between two cultures which at an earlier stage had sometimes been antagonistic towards each other. After the end of iconoclasm, when classical culture was no longer a living force, imperial court and patriarchal palace alike made classical learning a subject of humanistic endeavor, not only to be tolerated but to be cultivated insofar as it did not endanger the Christian foundation of Byzantine civilization. One of the most successful examples of such a synthesis is the title miniature of the well-known Psalter manuscript in Paris, cod. gr. 139, which, as we believe, dates from the tenth century. David, playing the harp in the midst of his flock, forms the nucleus of the composition (fig. and he is surrounded by a wealth of classical motifs of which the most prominent is the personification of Melody who leans on his shoulder despite his apparent indifference to her. The closest parallel to this personification is 10,as she appears in several frescoes in Pompeii, seated on a rock and watched over by Argus; the representation most closely allied to our miniature being that from the Macellum (fig. 43).89 Hugo Buchthal," while admitting the close similarity of the two females, nevertheless objected to the idea that the illustrator of the Psalter derived 10 from a composition like that of the Macellum fresco; David and Melody appeared to him to be so much a group composition that he postulated a classical prototype depicting a pair of lovers seated together on a rock. These two seemingly contradictory opinions can, we believe, be reconciled since an Antioch mosaic has come to light which represents just such a couple: a woman, who is clearly our 10-type, is seated on a rock with a shepherd who puts his arm around her (fig. 44).91For this and other reasons it has even been proposed that the mosaic represents 10 and Argus, but such an identification meets with difficulties. First of all the shepherd is clad in an embroidered tunic and wears a Phrygian cap, attributes unsuitable to Argus. Moreover, the function of Argus is to guard 10 carefully in order to prevent her escape, and nowhere in antiquity is he known to have been her lover. Another identification which has been proposed is that of Paris and Oenone, and this seems to us to be the correct one. The royal garment and the Phrygian cap fit the scion of Priam, and the syrinx is likewise a proper attribute of the nymph, as can be seen in a Roman relief from the Ludovisi collection in the Museo delle Terme in Rome.92Thus it seems that the mosaicist of Antioch used 10 as the model for Oenone, his only modification being the addition of the syrinx. Such a Omont, Miniatures, p. 6 and pl. I. Herrmann, Denkmaler Mal., p. 67 and pl. 53; K. Weitzmann, "Der Pariser Psalter ms. grec. 139 und die Mittelbyzantinische Renaissance," Jahrb. fiir Kunstwlissenschaft ( ~ g z g ) p , . 178 ff. and pl. I, fig. 2. O0 H. Buchthal, The Miniatures of the Paris Psalter (London, 1938), p. 13ff. and pl. I. Antioch-on-the-Orontes, 111,p. 189, no. 135 E and pl. 64; Levl, Antioch Mos. Pav., I, p. 210; 11, pl. XLVI a. Ba Robert, Sarcophag Reliefs, 11, p. 17, with fig.

68

K U R T WEITZMANN

composition, then, might well have been before the eyes of the Byzantine illuminator, although it must have shown the loving couple in a richer landscape setting than that of the mosaic, that is, with more grazing animals surrounding the royal shepherd. Whether or not this hypothetical model showed Oenone holding the syrinx which the Byzantine artist then omitted, is difficult to determine. Even if not, however, we would expect the classical Paris and Oenone group to have included some indication of the nymph's association with music, since this was quite likely the reason why the artist of the Psalter selected this type as a personification of Melody. Another reason why the Byzantine copyist chose this particular model may have been the presence in it of a royal shepherd in embroidered robes whom he equated with David in spite of the fact that he refrained from classicizing David in this fashion, but continued to use the traditional Biblical type. This group of David and Melody, whom one could hardly call lovers, was surrounded by the copyist with other figures of mythological origin and with a rich landscape setting that must have appealed to the patron of this lavish manuscript, who may well have been none other than the emperor himself.

I t must be pointed out that the mythological representations in Early Christian and Byzantine art, to which the first part of this paper is devoted, were never very numerous, even during the periods of conscious revivals. Byzantine art, in all the phases of its long history, was dominated by religious subject matter, based on the Old and New Testaments and on stories from the lives of the saints or from homiletic literature. Next in importance was the imperial realm which had its own widespread iconography, whereas the classical realm remained the concern of a small class of intellectuals having a humanistic outlook. What, in the last analysis, is even more significant than the mere survival of mythological representations is their influence upon the formation of Christian iconography, not only in its incipient stage, but during the periods of revival as well, as I have tried to demonstrate by a few examples. In most cases where such an influence could be traced it became evident that the Byzantine artist had approached his problem intellectually and had proved himself to be well acquainted with the classical past as to both form and content. Consequently it should be the task of the historian to reconstruct this process of penetration of classical iconography into Christian iconography, not only by tracing individual types with regard to their artistic form, but by searching for whole compositions which fitted corresponding Christian scenes, and by uncovering, as far as the evidence permits, the reasons for their selection. The Byzantines, like their forebears of ancient Greece, were never satisfied with a play of forms alone, but, stimulated by an innate rationalism, endowed forms with life by associating them with a meaningful content. The change from Olympian religion to Christianity did not alter this basic attitude towards art. After all, the Byzantines were Greeks.

1. Milan. Ambrosian Iliad. Pict. XXIII

2. Leningrad, Hermitage. Silver Plate

3. Ostia. Etruscan Urn

4. Paris, Cabinet des MCdailles. Silver Oenochoe, detail

5. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Silver Dish

6. Antioch. Mosaic Pavement, detail

9. Venice, San Marco, Treasury. Vase, detail

7. Paris, Biblioth6que Nationale, Suppl. gr. 247, fol. 47

8. Piazza Armerina. Floor Mosaic

10. Alexandria, Benachi Collection.Lamp

l l . Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Ivory Casket

13. Jerusalem, Cod. Taphou 14, fol. 311'

14. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Silver Plate

15. Girgenti. Roman Sarcophagus, detail

16. Antioch. Mosaic Pavement, detail

17. Vatican, Museum. Floor Mosaic

18. San Venice, Marco, Narthex. Mosaic, detail

20. Rome, Museo Capitolino. Marble Relief, detail

19. Cairo, Museum. Bronze Plate, detail

-

"id

21. Vatican, Cod. gr. 333, fol. 6

23. Paris, Cabinet des MBdailles. Iliac Tablet, detail

24. Rome, Museo Capitolino. Iliac Tablet, detail

22. Venice, Marc., Code gr. 454, fol. 6v

25. Vatican, Cod. gr. 747, fol. 24W

26. Oxford, Bodleian Library, Pap. gr. Oxyrh. 2331

27. Trier, Museum. Pyxis

28. Florence, Museo Archeologico. Etruscan Urn,detail

29. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Pyxis

30. Leningrad, Hermitage. Pyxis

31. Paris, Louvre. Sarcophagus, fragments

32. Munich, Staatsbibliothek, Cod. lat. 23631, fol. 24V

33. Rome, Museo Capitolino. Iliac Tablet, detail

34. Stuttgart, Schlossmuseum. Ivory

36. Zurich, Museum. Pyxis

35. Mt. Sinai, Monastery of St. Catherine. Icon

37. Florence, Uffizi. Marble Altar

38. Berlin-Dahlem, Ehem. Staatliche Museen. Ivory

39. Rome, Sta Maria Antiqua. Fresco.

41. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Mosaic Icon

40. Naples, Museo Nazionale. Marble Group

43. Pompeii, Macellum. Fresco, detail

44. Antioch. Mosaic Pavement, detail

http://www.jstor.org

LINKED CITATIONS - Page 1 of 1 -

You have printed the following article: The Survival of Mythological Representations in Early Christian and Byzantine Art and Their Impact on Christian Iconography Kurt Weitzmann Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 43+45-68. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C43%3ATSOMRI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Q

This article references the following linked citations. If you are trying to access articles from an off-campus location, you may be required to first logon via your library web site to access JSTOR. Please visit your library's website or contact a librarian to learn about options for remote access to JSTOR.

[Footnotes] 4

Classical Mythology in Mediaeval Art Erwin Panofsky; Fritz Saxl Metropolitan Museum Studies, Vol. 4, No. 2. (Mar., 1933), pp. 228-280. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=1556-8725%28193303%294%3A2%3C228%3ACMIMA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-C 33

Euripides Scenes in Byzantine Art Kurt Weitzmann Hesperia, Vol. 18, No. 2. (Apr. - Jun., 1949), pp. 159-210. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0018-098X%28194904%2F06%2918%3A2%3C159%3AESIBA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Y 65

Bildvorlagen der Reichenau Albert Boeckler Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, 12 Bd., H. 1. (1949), pp. 7-29. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0044-2992%281949%2912%3A1%3C7%3ABDR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X

NOTE: The reference numbering from the original has been maintained in this citation list.

Two Images of the Virgin in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection Sirarpie der Nersessian Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 69+71-86. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C69%3ATIOTVI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J Dumbarton Oaks Papers is currently published by Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/doaks.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Sun Mar 9 07:54:14 2008

TWO IMAGES OF T H E VIRGIN I N THE DUMBARTON OAKS COLLECTION

T no time, in the course of Byzantine history, were images-their nature, function, and purpose -so consistently and so widely discussed as during the period of over a hundred years when, except for a short interval, the representation of sacred images was forbidden. The texts gathered for the second Council of Nicaea in 787, the writings of the foremost defenders of images, like John of Damascus, the Patriarch Germanus, Theodore the Studite, and the Patriarch Nicephorus, the discussions which continued even after the triumph of orthodoxy have all been carefully investigated. Within the last years important studies by A. Grabar and P. J. Alexander have further contributed to our understanding of this crucial period of Byzantine hist0ry.l The art historian who tries to grasp the Byzantine conception of the image must constantly refer to these texts, since it is only by realizing what ideas the artist, and, even more, the Church wished to convey that he can hope to approach a correct interpretation. My purpose is not to consider this question in its more general implications, but by selecting specific examples from the Dumbarton Oaks Collection, namely, a few images of the Virgin, to attempt to show particular aspects of the religious art of the Middle Byzantine period. As is well known, christological arguments dominated the discussions of both Iconoclasts and Iconodules, especially after the Council of 754 when they were formulated by Constantine V against the images of Christ. The mystery of the Incarnation was the crucial point, and given this emphasis it was only natural that after the victory of the Iconodules, next to the images of Christ Himself, those of the Virgin should be most frequently represented. This was, of course, no new departure; the Virgin's image had figured in a prominent place in the churches of the pre-Iconoclastic period as well as on icons, and other works of art. I t is quite significant, nevertheless, that in the period immediately following the triumph of the Orthodox the images of the Virgin should have been among the very first to be represented. Michael 111,resuming the practice of pre-iconoclastic emperors, placed the image of the Virgin on his seals2 The patriarchs adopted this same practice; Photius seems to have been but from that period on she appears the first to use the image of the Virgir~,~ almost invariably on the patriarchal seals4 In the Chrysotriclinium of the Imperial palace, decorated anew by Michael 111, "above the entrance, like a

A

AndrC Grabar, L'iconoclasme byzantin. Dossier arche'ologique (Paris, 1957). P. J. Alexander, T h e Patriarch Nicephorus of Constantinople; Ecclesiastical Policy and Image Worship in the Byzantine Empire (Oxford, 1958). a N. P. Likhachev, "Xekotorye starejSie tipy pechati vizantijskikh imperatorov," Numismaticheskij , 497-539. A. Grabar, op. cit., figs. 52-56. J . Ebersolt, "Sceaux byzantins Sbornik, I (Moscow, I ~ I I )pp. du MusCe de Constantinople," Revue numismatique, XVIII (1914)) pp. 210-211. The image of the Virgin and child still appears on a seal of Leo 111stamped during the early years of his reign: N. LihaCev, "Sceaux de l'empereur Leon I11 lJIsaurien," Byzantion, X I (1936)~pp. 473-474. A. Grabar, op. cit., figs. 58-59. N . P. Likhachev, "Pechati patriarkhov konstantinopol'skikh," T v u d y Moskov. Nurnism. Obshchestva, I1 (1899), pp. 43-66.

SIRARPIE DER NERSESSIAN holy door," was "imaged the Virgin,"5 facing the enthroned Christ placed above the emperor's throne. This metaphor of the holy door recurs in the verses inscribed in the church of the Blachernae: "The house of the Virgin, like her Son, was destined to become a second gate of God. An ark hath appeared holier than that of old, not containing t h e tables written by God's h a i d but having received within it God H i m ~ e l f . " ~ The church erected in 864 by Michael I11 within the Palace-which, as has now been proved, should not be confused with the Nea7-was dedicated to the Virgin, and she was represented in the apse "stretching out her stainless arms on our behalf and winning for the emperor safety and exploits against the foes."s The first image to be restored in the church of Hagia Sophia was that of the Virgin; in the homily delivered at its dedication, ~ h o t i u stressed i the importance of the event by-stating: "If one called this day the beginning and day of Orthodoxy (lest I say something excessive), one would not be far ~ r o n g . " ~ The Virgin was the principal protectress of Constantinople which came to be considered as her own city par excellence. The liturgists, followed by the chroniclers and historians, believed that it had been dedicated to her at the time of its foundation.1° I t was the Virgin who guarded it from invaders; the synaxary of the fifth Sunday of ~ e nrecalls t the three sieges of Constantinople which failed, thanks to her intervention, namely, the siege by the Avars in 626 and those by the Arabs in 677 and 717-718.~1 The Virgin again saved her city from the Russian attack of 860. In the second of the two homilies deliverkd on this occasion Photius speaks in moving terms of the prayers addressed to her, when "denuded of all help, and deprived of human alliance, we were spiritually led on by holding fast to our hopes in the Mother of the Word, our God, urging her to implore her Son, invoking her for the expiation of our sins, her intercession for our salvation, her protection as an impregnable wall for us, begging her to break the boldness of the barbarians, her to crush their insolence, her to defend the despairing people and fight for her own flock."12 The precious relic, the mantle of the Virgin which was kept in the church of the Blachernae, was carried in solemn procession. "It embraced the walls, and the foes inexplicably showed their backs; the city put it around itself, a n d . . . . the enemy were deprived of the hopes which bore them on. For, immediately as the Virgin's garment went round the walls, the barbarians gave up the siege and broke camp."13 5 The Greek Anthology, with an English translation by W. R. Paton, I (London, 1927), p. 47. Ibid., p. 55. R. J. H. Jenkins and C. A. Mango, "The Date and Significance of the Tenth Homily of Photius," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 9-10 (1955-1g56), pp. 123-140. 8 The Homilies of Photius Patriarch of Constantinople, English Translation, Introduction and Commentary by Cyril Mango (Cambridge, Mass., 1958), p. 188. bid., p. 291. 10 A. Frolow, "La dkdicace de Constantinople dans la tradition byzantine," Revue de l'histoire des religions, CXXVII (1944), pp. 61-127. For the Virgin's role see also the article "The Supernatural Defenders of Constantinople" in N. H. Baynes, Byzalztine Studies and other Essays (London, 1955),

pp. 243-260. 11 12

l3

A. Frolow, op. cit., pp. 94-97. The Homilies of Photius, p. 102. Ibid., pp. 102-103.

TWO IMAGES O F T H E VIRGIN The most striking examples of the honor paid to the Virgin as protectress of the Empire and triumphatrix appear in connection with the triumphal entries of the emperors after their victorious campaigns. When John Tzimisces returned in 971 from his Bulgarian expedition, he was met at the Golden Gate, as was customary on such occasions, by the magistrates and dignitaries who brought the chariot, prepared for the Emperor, and presented him with gold crowns and a sceptre. John refused to mount the chariot, reserving the honors of the triumph for the Virgin. The city witnessed then the most amazing procession; the imperial chariot advanced, bearing in great pomp an icon of the Virgin which had been captured in Bulgaria; behind it came the Emperor on a white steed, followed by the Bulgarian ruler and the army.l* Similar triumphal entries took place under John and Manuel Comnenus who, following the example of John Tzimisces, placed in their chariot an image of the Virgin to whom they attributed their victories.15 When Michael Palaeologus arrived in Constantinople in 1261 he was met at the Golden Gate by the clergy carrying the icon of the Virgin Hodegetria, and he entered the reconquered capital, walking barefoot behind the miraculous image.16 Works of art show the increasingly important place that images of the Virgin occupy in imperial as well as in religious iconography. Under Leo VI, whose special veneration for the Theotokos is manifest in his homilies, her image appears for the first time on the reverse of Byzantine coins.17 I t is also on an ivory depicting Leo VI that we see for the first time the Emperor crowned by the Virgin.lg The Virgin acts as an intermediary; although it is she who places on the Emperor's head the crown, symbol of his power, the investiture is conferred by Christ who is portrayed on the other side of the ivory. The Virgin's role as intercessor is recalled in the Book of Ceremonies, in the description of the ritual that followed important receptions. After the acclamations of the two factions, the herald of the chamber advanced to the bronze barrier in front of the throne and read the following words from the book he held in his hands: "May our almighty and most compassionate God, who has crowned you through the intercession of His immaculate mother, grant us the favor of celebrating in peace . .. these happy days, for many years to come."lg The iconographic type of the Virgin crowning the emperor-without the accompanying archangel - was transferred to coins, and one is not surprised to see it for the first time on the solidi of John Tzimisces who had reserved to the Virgin the honors of his triumph.20The hand of God, depicted above the two figures, makes it quite clear that Christ or God is the ultimate l4 Leo Diaconus, Bonn, p. 158; Cedrenus, Bonn, 11, p. 413; Zonaras, Bonn, 111, pp. 535-536. l5 Nicetas Choniates, Bonn, pp. 26 and 204. 16 Georgius Acropolites, Bonn, pp. 196-197; Nicephorus Gregoras, Bonn, I, p. 87. l7 Solidus with the bust of the Virgin orans. W. Wroth, Catalogue of the Imperial Byzantine Coins in the British M u s e u m , I1 (London, 1908),p. 444 ; also A. Voirol, "Die ersten Darstellungen von Christus und von Maria auf byzantinischen Miinzen," Schweizer Miintzblatter (Dec. 1958), pp. I 13-1 17. A. Grabar, L'empereur duns l'art byzantilz (Paris, 1936))pp. 116-117, pl, x x ~ v I. , A. Goldschmidt and K. Weitzmann, Die byzantinischen Elfenbeinskulpturen des X . - X I I I . Jahrhunderts, I1 (Berlin, 1g34), PI. x x x v , fig. 88. Is Constantin VII PorphyrogCn&te,Le Livre des Cirimonies, ed. A. Vogt, I1 (Paris, 1939), p. 92. 20 Wroth, op. cit., pl. LIV, 10-12.

SIRARPIE DER NERSESSIAN source of all earthly power, but the role of the Virgin is none the less important. The coins of Romanus I11 show a remarkable variety of types: the Virgin crowning the Emperor; the bust of the Virgin orans with or without the medallion of Christ; and the standing Virgin carrying the infant Christ on her left arm.21 This last type reproduced the famous icon of the Virgin Hodegetria which was the object of special veneration by the Byzantines. I t was supposed to have been painted by Saint Luke and to have been sent by the Empress Eudocia to her sister-in-law, the Empress Pulcheria, who deposited it in the church she erected for this purpose. Hidden during the Iconoclastic period, it had miraculously escaped destruction, and it is this type that Michael I11 and Photius stamped on their seals. This must also have been the type represented at Hagia Sophia, for Photius describes the image as that of "a virgin mother carrying in her pure arms, for the common salvation of our kind, the common Creator reclining as an infant" and fondly turning "her eyes on her begotten Child in the affection of her heart ."22 The Hodegetria is the central figure in the ivory relief of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection, a work which exhibits the finest qualities of the sculpture of the tenth century (fig. I ) . The ~ ~ ivory has been cut off between the figures, as can clearly be seen from the rear view, leaving undamaged the figures themselves except for the right hand of the bishop; the continuous pedestal on which the three figures stand is also part of the original panel. The presence of the two side figures, John the Baptist on the left and a holy bishop on the right, differentiates this relief from all other ivories of the same g o u p in which the Hodegetria appears alone," and gives a particular meaning to this composition. In the pre-Iconoclastic period, as well as in later centuries, the Virgin enthroned in majesty, holding the Christ child on her knees was frequently represented surrounded by angels and by saints ; the latter, usually standing full face, often introduced the donors. On the relief the two saints are turned towards the central figure, their hands raised in the gesture of supplication or prayer, and the compositional scheme repeats that of the wellknown theme of the Deesis. But, whereas in the Deesis John the Baptist and the Virgin stand at the sides of Christ, here John and the holy bishop address their supplications to the Theotokos. The supreme role of the Virgin as mediatrix between Christ and mankind 21 Virgin crowning the emperor; seated Christ on the reverse: Wroth, op. czt., pl. LVII, 1 3 ; bust of the Virgin holding the medallion of the infant Christ, attributed by Wroth to Romanus IV, pl. LXII, 2; for thecorrect attribution see Ph. Grierson, "The Debasement of the Bezant in theEleventh Century," Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 47 ( 1 9 5 4 ) ~p. 383. In a forthcoming study Mr. Grierson also attributes to Romanus 111the small silver coin with the bust of the Virgin orans and the larger silver coin with the Hodegetria on the reverse (Wroth, op.cit., pl. LXII,3 and 2 ) . I wish to thank him for letting me see the manuscript of his article. Z a ~ o m i l i e s ,p. 290. 23 HaVford Peirce and Royal1 Tyler, "An Ivory of the Xth Century," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 2 (1941), 11-18, figs. 1-2. a4 For the ivories of Hamburg, Utrecht, and the Metropolitan Museum see ibid., figs. 4-5 and 7. The ivory background is preserved only in the Utrecht Virgin. See also the ivory of the Victoria and Albert Museum: A. Goldschmidt and K. Weitzmann., op. cit., 11, pl. xxr, fig. 51.

PP

T W O I M A G E S O F THE V I R G I N had been increasingly stressed by the writers of the eighth and ninth centuries, for instance, Andrew of Crete, the Patriarch Germanus, Theodore the Studite, and the Patriarch Nicephorus. The Virgin's mediation is most effective, they said, not only because she is "holier than the saints, higher than the heavens, more glorious than the cherubim, more honorable than the seraphim and more venerable than all creatures," but also because of her maternal authority. Christ could not but listen to the entreaties of His mother.25 This same idea finds its expression in the ivory relief: the prayers are addressed to the mother and, through her mediation to the Incarnate God, represented as a child, that is, in the form in which the mystery of the Incarnation as well as the role of the mother could be most clearly shown. On several icons at Mount Sinai which belong to the Middle Byzantine period, a prophet or other saint stands in an attitude of supplication next to the Virgin who holds the Christ child before her breast.26On others which, compositionally, are closer to the ivory relief, the Virgin stands between two interceding saints.27 The accompanying figures differ in these various examples. I shall confine myself to the Dumbarton Oaks relief where the idea of the Incarnation has been emphasized through the accompanying figures. The Byzantine theologians explained that God granted to the prophets, through visions, the foreknowledge of the Incarnation, and after the Incarnation He who was invisible even to the immaterial angels became visible to mortal man.Z8 John the Baptist stands here, to the left of the Virgin, as the last of the prophets and the first witness of the Incarnation, a witness even before Christ's birth. For, as Theodore the Studite explains in his homily on the Beheading of John the Baptist, John rejoiced even in his mother's womb when he heard Mary's salutation to Elizabeth, and although as yet devoid of speech, he could exclaim: "I cry out, because I perceive that the only begotten Son of the Father has become incarnate. I leap because I perceive that the Redeemer of the world has taken human form."29 The earliest surviving example in which John the Baptist as witness of the Incarnation is associated with the Virgin is an ampulla at Bobbio. In this composition, which differs from the representations on all the other ampullae, the Ascension occupies the upper part, while the Virgin orans, between John the Baptist and his father Zacharias, and two angels fill the lower half. The large star above the head of the Virgin, the inscription on the scroll held by John-"Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world" (John I :29) -make it evident that the symbolism of the Incarnation has been combined here with that of the Redemption. As A. Grabar has pointed 25 See, for instance, Andrew of Crete, PG 97, col. I 107; Germanus, PG 98, cols. 308 C, 320 B, 352 A, 380 D ; Theodore, PG 99, col. 1528 C; Nicephorus, PG 100, col. 341 C. 28 G. and M. Soteriou, E ~ K ~ V TE~SHSO V ~ S11~6, I (Athens, 1956)) fig. 163; 0. Wulff and M. Alpatoff, Denkmaler der lkonenmalerei (Hellerau bei Dresden, 192 j), fig. 49. 27 G. and M. Soteriou, op. cit., fig. 177, Virgin between John the Baptist and Saint George; fig. 158, Virgin between Moses and Saint Euthymius of Jerusalem; fig. 164, Virgin between Joachim and Anna. 28 See, for instance, Theodore the Studite in his homily on the Celestial host: PG 99, col. 736 D. PG 99, col. 7j6 D.

76

SIRARPIE DER NERSESSIAN

out, John and Zacharias have been selected to accompany the Virgin as "the last in date of the prophets of the Salvation who stand on the threshhold of the ~ ~ a Carolingian ivory book cover in the Victoria age of the I n ~ a r n a t i o n . "On and Albert Museum, which is based on an East Christian model, the Virgin enthroned with the Christ Child again appears between John the Baptist and Z a ~ h a r i a sA . ~later ~ and, unfortunately, badly damaged example of these witnesses of the Incarnation may be seen in the church of Qeledjlar in Cappadocia: the standing Virgin, holding the Christ Child before her breast is painted in the center of the small apse of the prothesis; Zacharias stands on the right, as on the Bobbio ampulla and the ivory book cover; the corresponding figure at the left has been destroyed, but it surely represented John the Baptist.32 I n all other surviving examples John is not accompanied by his father. In the arch over the apse of the chapel of San Zeno in Santa Prassede in Rome he stands alone, facing the Virgin; the mosaic is greatly restored but one can faintly distinguish the disk with the lamb which adorns the cross held by John the Baptist.33 The reference to the Incarnation is clearer in the mosaic on the wall above the northern apse of the Cappella Palatina in Palermo. John the Baptist standing next to the Hodegetria, as on the Dumbarton Oaks ivory, holds a scroll bearing the same inscription as on the Bobbio ampulla.34 On an in Thessalonica, icon of the Palaeologan period in the monastery TGVBha~~CxGwv the bust figure of the Hodegetria is flanked by an angel and by John the Baptist, again holding a scroll with the same in~cription.3~ As E. Kitzinger and A. Xyngopoulos have pointed out in their respective studies of the mosaics of the Cappella Palatina and the icon of Thessalonica, the representation of the images of the Virgin and John the Baptist in the prothesis connect this composition with the rite of the Proskomide, the preparation of the Eucharist, which takes place in the prothesis. This liturgical connection also explains the presence on our ivory of the bishop on the right, next to the Virgin. ; ~ ~ the This figure has sometimes been identified as John C h r y s ~ s t o m John Baptist having opposite him his namesake, the great Patriarch of Constantinople. But the well-established iconographic type of John Chrysostom, with a high bulging forehead and short beard, differs from the figure on the right, and comparison of our ivory with contemporary examples on which the names of the saints are inscribed (fig. 5 ) , leaves no room for doubt that the saint on the 30

A. Grabar, Les ampoules de

Terre Sainte (Monza-Bobbio) (Paris, 1958), p. 61; description on

43-44, pl. LIII.

pp.

L. Longhurst, Catalogue of Carvings in Ivory (London, I Q Z ~ ) , pp. 62-63 and fig. 138. G. de Jerphanion, Une nouvelle province de l'art byzantin. Les Lglises rupestres de Cappadoce, I (Paris, 1g25), p. 203 and p. 204, note I , pl. 54. 33 Photo Alinari, no. 26715. J. Wilpert, Die romischen Mosazken und Malereien der kirchlichen Bauten vom I V . bis XIII. Jahrhundert (Freiburg im Breisgau, 1917), p. 929. R. Garrucci, Storia della art8 cristiana, IV (Prato, 1877), pl. 288. 34 E. Kitzinger, "The Mosaics of the Cappella Palatina in Palermo," Art Bulletilz, XXXI (1949), PP. 273-274, fig. 14. 35 A. Xyngopoulos, "Une icone byzantine B. Thessalonique," Cahiers archblogiques, I11 (1948), 31 Margaret 3a

pp. 114-128. 36

H. Peirce and R. Tyler,

ofi.cit., p. 14.

TWO IMAGES O F T H E VIRGIN

77

right of our ivory is Basil the Great of Caesarea, always represented with a long beard and thick hair falling low down on his forehead.37 In the rite of the Proskomide, the priest first cuts out of the prosphora, or eucharistic bread, the central part bearing Christ's seal which is called the Amnos, or Lamb, and in detaching this part he says : "The Lamb of God is sacrificed. He who taketh away the sin of the world, for the life and salvation of the world," referring to the passage from the Gospel of John which we saw inscribed on the scroll held by John the Baptist in the examples mentioned above. He then detaches other parts, consecutively, in honor of the Virgin, of the archangels, of John the Baptist and other prophets, of the apostles, the Church Fathers and other saints. In commemorating the Church Fathers, Saint Basil is mentioned first, as he is also in the litanies.S8 A miniature in an eleventh-century Psalter of the Pantocrator monastery on Mount Athos, no. 49, gives an almost exact illustration of this rite, represented in a symbolic manner (fig. 4). The Virgin carrying the child is flanked by an angel and John the Baptist, who holds the scroll with the usual inscription; below appear three of the Church Fathers, Gregory the Theologian, Basil the Great and John C h r y s o ~ t o m A .~~ variant of the same composition occurs in a Psalter of slightly later date in Berlin; John the Baptist has been omitted, the Virgin stands between two archangels, and the bishops depicted below are Nicholas of Myra, John Chrysostom, and Basil.40 The ivory group of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection is an important example of the manner in which a profound theological conception may be expressed through an apparently simple composition. The symbolism of the Incarnation, combined with that of the Redemption, as on the Bobbio ampulla, is here illustrated in a different manner, by recalling the eucharistic sacrifice. The role of the Virgin as mediatrix, clearly shown through the gestures of intercession of the accompanying figures, was also mentioned during the rite of the Proskomide when in detaching the fragment in honor of the Virgin, the priest said, "through her intercession, receive 0 Lord, this offering on your celestial altar."41 The Byzantines took pride in the possession of two precious relics of the Virgin-her mantle or maphorion kept in the church of the Blachernae, already mentioned above, and her girdle, the I c j v q , preserved in the church of the Chalkoprateia, near Hagia Sophia. These inviolable treasures, which the Virgin had granted to her own city, were the lasting pledge of her protection against all dangers. According to one tradition, the girdle, enclosed in a reliquary (fi 3 7 A. Goldschmidt and K. Weitzmann, op. cit., 11, figs. 31, y b , 33, 72a, IIIa. K. Weitzmann has also identified the bishop as Saint Basil; cf. his review in A r t Bulletin, XXV (1943) p. 164. 38 F. E. Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western (Oxford, 1896), pp. 357-358. 39 V. Lasareff, "Studies in the Iconography of the Virgin," A r t Bulletin, XX (1938), p. 37 and fig. 7. G. Stuhlfauth, "A Greek Psalter with Byzantine Illiniatures," A r t Bulletin, XV (1933)) p. 318 and fig. 7. The inscription written above and below the miniature reads: "They took their position beside the Mother in awe of the Logos, the generals of the incorporeal souls. The foremost of the prelates, all three of them, holding the inspired books in their hands." 41 Brightman, op. cit., p. 357.

78

SIRARPIE DER NERSESSIAN

&yiaoopbs) had been deposited in the church of the Chalkoprateia by the

Emperor Arcadius. In the last years of the ninth century, when Zoe Zaoutzina, the second wife of Leo VI, fell ill, the reliquary was opened, the girdle was taken to the palace, the Empress was healed, and the girdle replaced in the reliquary. When the reliquary was opened there was found in it the document which testified that the girdle had been deposited in the oop6s by Arcadius.42 Neither in the account of the anonymous English pilgrim who at the end of the twelfth century saw the silver reliquary on the altar of the church of the Chalkoprateia, nor in the Book of Ceremonies which describes the visits of the ~ m ~ e r to o rthis church on the feasts of the Annunciation and the Nativity of the Virgin, nor in the homilies on the Zhq, is there any mention of the icon of the Virgin. However, there is good reason for associating with the Chalkoprateia, as Likhachev, Kondakov, and others have done, the iconographic type which on the seals bears the name Hagiosoritissa, the Virgin of the Holy Soros or reliquary.43There are several variants of this type; the Virgin standing, turned to the right or to the left, raises her hands in a gesture of intercession or prayer to the bust of Christ depicted in a segment of sky (fig. 3); or only the half figure is represented in the same attitude, praying to Christ or to the hand of God emerging from the segment of sky. The half figure is more frequently represented on small objects and icons; for instance, on a bloodstone cameo at Dumbarton Oaks (fig. 2 ) or on the Byzantine enamel reliquary at Maestricht where the bust figure of Christ has been represented as on the seals with the standing Virgin.44 The half figure type of the Hagiosoritissa enjoyed great popularity and was copied both in the West and in the East, beyond the actual frontiers of the Byzantine Empire. The image at Sta Maria in Aracoeli in Rome is one of the numerous Italian examples, the original of which was attributed to Saint Luke.45In Georgia the central figure of the famous icon of the monastery of K h a k h ~ lrepeats i ~ ~ this same type which is also frequently represented in Russian art. The full figure occurs rarely on small objects, but we have an example in the bloodstone cameo in the UTalters Art Gallery; the Virgin stands praying turned to the right, but neither the bust of Christ nor the Hand of God has been repre~ented.~' The stone relief of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection, on which the Virgin stands in the same attitude as the Hagiosoritissa type, turned slightly to the 4 2 Menologium, P G CXVII, col. 613. Homily of St. Euthyrnius on the Girdle in Patrologia Orientalis, XVI (1922), p. 511. 4 3 N. P. Likhachev, Istoricheskoe znachenie italo-grecheskoj ikonopisi. Izobrazhenija Bogomateri (St. Petersburg, 1911))pp. 56-63 and pl. vrrr, 1-6. x. P. Kondakov, Ikonogvafija Bogomateri, I1 (St.Petersburg, 1g15), pp. 294-315. The Hagiosoritissa is also represented on some coins of the Comnenian period: Tommasso Bertele, "La Vergine aghiosoritissa nella numismatica bizantina," Rev.ue des dtudes byzantines, XVI (1958), pp. 233-234. k4 De Monumenten v a n Geschiedenis e n K u n s t in de Provincie Limburg. D e monumenten in de Gemeente Maastricht, I , 4 ('s Gravenhage, 1938), p. 550, fig. 517. d5 Luigi Grassi, "La Madonna di Aracoeli e le traduzioni romane del suo tema iconografico," Rivista d i archaeologia cristiana, XVIII (1g41), pp. 65-96. B. Amiranashvili, Beka Opizarz (Tiflis, 1956), pp. 42-43. k7 E a r l y Christian and Byzantine Art. An Exhibition Held at the Baltimore M u s e u m of A r t (Baltimore, 1g47), pl. LXXVIII, no. 555.

TWO I M A G E S O F THE V I R G I N right and with both hands raised, presents an interesting problem (fig. 6).48 Since the pose is the same as that of the Virgin in the Deesis group, and since neither the hand of God nor the bust figure of Christ has been included, one may wonder whether this slab was not originally one of three slabs which, placed together, formed the Deesis, that is, a composition similar to the reliefs in the southern aisle of San Marco in Venice.49However, as far as one can tell from the few surviving examples, when individual slabs were intended to be placed next to one another, there was no frame, as at San Marco, or the frame was very shallow and the figures even encroached upon it somewhat so that the unity of the group was not interrupted; while in the single icon-relief, like the beautiful Orans Virgin from Giilhane in the Archaeological Museum in Constantinople, or other similar panels, the frame is much deeper.50 I t does not seem to me, therefore, that another slab or slabs could have been placed immediately next to ours, but, given the attitude of the Virgin and the absence of any other figure or symbol to which her intercession was addressed, one may suppose that there existed a corresponding slab, placed at some distance, on which was carved the image of Christ. Before considering the actual location in the church where such slabs may have been placed, I should like to discuss the composition consisting of the Virgin turned towards Christ. The description of the mosaics of the church of La Daurade (Deaurata) in Toulouse, written by Dom Odon Lamothe in 1663, suggests that this iconographic type originated at an early date, and is as old as, if not older than, the D e e s i ~ .In ~ l the decoration of La Daurade, which was probably done in the late fifth or early sixth century, on the wall immediately above the altar Christ was represented holding the book of the Gospels with the inscription P a x vobiscum; to the right the Virgin turned towards Him, and here the description reads : Sancta Maria juxta imaginem Salvatoris a capite ad pectus velata, facie admirabili et devota modicum proximam Salvatoris imaginem ~ e s p i c i e n sFlanking .~~ these figures, and extending all round the decagon, were images of the archangels, prophets, and apostles. The surviving examples of this iconographic type are not older than the The slab is 1.04 m. high and 40 cm. wide; the bevelled frame is 4 cm. wide. I t has been cut from a larger marble slab which was originally decorated with an ornamental design, and the image of the Virgin has been carved on what was once the back of the panel. As the photograph shows (fig. 7), the design is now incomplete; the foliate interlace of the upper band is interrupted on the left side, and the vertical bar of the rectangular frame around the four concentric lozenges is also missing on the left side. The slab was a t one time embedded in a wall or placed against it, for there is still some plaster in the grooves of the ornament. 49 H. von der Gabelentz, Mittelalterliche Plastik in Venedig (Leipzig, 1go3), pp. 137-138, fig. 5. 5 0 For an example of a low frame with parts of the figure carved over the frame, see the Virgin orans and the Archangel in the Berlin Museum: 0. Wulff, Altchristliche und Mittelalterliche byzantinische und italienische Bildwerke, pt. I 1 (Berlin, I ~ I I )p., 3, nos. 1698-1699. For the relief from Giilhane and kindred examples, see R. Demangel and E. Mamboury, L e quartier des Manganes et la PrerniEre rbgion de Constantinople (Paris, 1939), pl. XIV and Appendix 11, pp. 155-161. Other examples of reliefs are &vayhvqo~EIK~VES, Recueil d'btudes dbdiLes d la mbmoire de N.P . reproduced by G. Soteriou, Bvlav~~vaL Kondakov (Prague, 1920), pp. 125-138. 51 For the bibliography concerning the early date of the Deesis, see Ernst H. Kantorowicz, "Ivories and Litanies," Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, V (1g42), p. 70, note 4. 5 2 Helen Woodruff, "The Iconography and Date of the Mosaics of La Daurade," A r t Bulletin, XI11 (1931), p. 89 and fig. 2.

80

SIRARPIE DER NERSESSIAN

of eleventh century. We see it on the ivory diptych of the Staat~biblioth~k Bamberg, used as a binding for the prayer book of the Empress Cunegonde, written between the years Iooa and 1012 (fig. 8).53In the Psalter of the British Museum of the year 1066, Stephen the Younger, one of the victims of Iconoclasm, holds a diptych on which are painted the bust figures of Christ and of the Virgin, turned towards Him.54 Stephen the Younger continued to be represented holding this type of diptych, witness a painting in the prothesis of the church of SopoCani in Yugoslavia. The group of Christ and the interceding Virgin is painted in the upper part of a Byzantine reliquary of the Sancta Sanctorum which may be dated in the twelfth century.55The large mosaic on the east wall of the esonarthex of the Kariye Camii, beneath the southern dome, provides us with an outstanding example of the continued use of this theme in the art of the Palaeologan period (fig. 9).56 In monumental art, the interceding Virgin and the full-face Christ are more often represented as separate images and this brings us to the question of the place to which they were assigned. A miniature in a manuscript of the Heavenly Ladder of John Climacus depicts the interior of a church; on either side of the ciborium are two icons; in the one on the left the bust figure of the Virgin is turned slightly to the right, while the one on the right shows the full-face bust of Christ.57 This image reproduces, in a simplified manner, the paintings or mosaics on the western faces of the piers which flanked the arch of the bema, and between which the iconostasis was erected. One of the earliest extant examples is a fresco in the church of Qeledjlar in Cappadocia, dating from the late tenth or early eleventh century. The interceding Virgin, turned to the right, is painted on the north pier of the bema; the corresponding figure on the south pier is now destroyed, but it must have been that of Christ.58 In the church of Daphni, near Athens, fragmentary remains of the mosaics which decorated the piers of the bema were discovered in 1955 ; the upper part of the standing figure of Christ holding the Gospel book can still be seen on the south pier, but only the head of the Virgin turned slightly to the right remains on the north pier.59 I t is not possible to determine whether or not the interceding type had been represented here, for in the eleventh century the Virgin holding the Child had already sometimes replaced the interceding Virgin, for instance, in the church A further change may be observed at Porta of the Dormition in Ni~aea.~O Cod. A. 11. 55: Goldschmidt and Weitzmann, op. cit., 11, pl. X X V , fig. 65. British Museum, Add. 19.352, fol. 117: A. Grabar L'iconoclasme, fig. 141. j5Philippe Lauer, "Le trksor du Sancta Sanctorum," Monuments Piot, XV (1906), pl. XIV, I . C. Cecchelli, "I1 tesoro del Laterano," Dedalo, VII (1926-27), p. 430. 5 6 Paul A. Underwood, "The Deisis Mosaic in the Kahrie Camii in Istanbul," Late Classical and Mediaeval Studies in Honor of Albert Mathias Friend, Jr. (Princeton, 1955), pp. 254-260. Id., "Notes on the Work of the Byzantine Institute in Istanbul: 1955-1956," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 12 (1958), fig. 18 opposite p. 277. 57 Sinai, Monastery of Saint Catherine, Cod. gr. 418, fol. 269: John R. Martin, T h e Illustration of the Heavenly Ladder of John Climacus (Princeton, 1954), fig. 213. 58 G. de Jerphanion, op. cit., I, p. 211, pl. 44.2. 59 A. K. Orlandos, " N E W T E ~~bpqpocra U ~ i ~$ j povjv v AapvIou," 'Apx~iovTGV fivZavnv6v p v r l ~ ~ i w~v f i ~ 'EAAaGos, V I I I (1955-1956), pp. 84-88, figs. 16, 18-19. 60 Th. Schmit, Die Koimesis-Kirche von N i k a i a (Berlin and Leipzig, 1gz7), pls. xxv and XXVII. At the church of Nerez, in the twelfth century, the Virgin Hodegetria is again on the left, the corsespond53 54

TWO IMAGES O F T H E VIRGIN Panagia at Trikkala in Greece,61 and at the Kariye Camii, in Istanbula2;in both instances the Virgin and Child of the Hodegetria type is moved to the south pier and Christ holding the book and blessing is represented on the north pier. In the Parecclesion of the Kariye Camii, the Virgin of the Eleousa type is painted on the south wall of the bema, turned to the left ; the painting on the north wall, where the standing Christ must have been depicted, has d i ~ a p p e a r e d . ~ ~ The early type, that is the interceding Virgin on the north side of the bema and the full-face Christ on the south side, continued to be represented in Serbian churches, for instance, at MileSevo64 and a t Ariljea5 in the thirteenth century, at Mate266 and Staro NagoriEino67 in the fourteenth century. At NagoriEino the Virgin is called fi K E X U ~ I T W ~ ~ Vand 'I) Christ b iA~fipov;in the narthex of Lesnovo the Virgin, depicted on the west face of the northeast pier, has the epithet fi -rrap&~Aqols ; on the southeast pier Christ is enthroned and g the church of DeEani, the Virgin the inscription reads, b cpop~pbs~ p l - r f i s . ~ In turned to the right, designated as fi ~ T I ~ O - K E ~is I S ,depicted on the northwest pier, while Christ Pantokrator appears on the southwest pier, standing and holding a sword in His hand.e9 At SopoCani, the Virgin and Christ flank the door leading from the exonarthex to the esonart hex.70 A variant of this iconographic type may be seen in several Byzantine churches: the interceding Virgin, painted on the north pier of the bema or to the left of the narthex door, and turned towards the corresponding figure of Christ on the south pier of the bema or on the right of the narthex door, holds an open scroll bearing a versified inscription. She is represented thus on the north pier of the bema in the church of the Virgin of Arakos at Lagoudera in Cyprus (fig. 10) .71 In the church of Asinou, also in Cyprus, her image is ing image on the right is that of Panteleimon, the patron saint of the church: N. L. Okunev, in Seminarium Kondakovianurn, I11 (1929), pls. I and IV. 61 A. K. Orlandos, '" H l76p-ra-l7avayth~ i j BeuaaAia~,'' s 'Apx~iovTGVpvZav-nvGv pvqyalwv ~ i j 'EMaGos, s 1 (193511 PP. 29-33, figs.14, 20-21. 62 P. A. Underwood, "Notes on the Work of the Byzantine Institute in Istanbul: 1955-1956," Durnbavton Oaks Papers, 12 (1958), p. 282f.,figs. 16 and 17. 63 P. A. Underwood, "Second Preliminary Report on the Restoration of the Frescoes in the Kariye Camii at Istanbul by the Byzantine Institute, 1955,'' Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 11 (1957), pp. 217-220, figs. 45 and 50. 64 N. L. Okunev, "MileSevo. Pamjatnik serbskago iskusstva XI11 v.," Byzantinoslavica, VII (1937-1938)) p. 54. The figure of Christ pl. XVI) belongs t o the original layer, that of the Virgin is partly covered by a repainting of the sixteenth century. N. L. Okunev, "Arilje. Pamjatnik serbskago iskusstva XI11 v.," Seminarium Kondakovianztm, V I I I (1936))p. 234. 66 M. N. Okunev, "Tsrkvasvete Bogoroditze-MateiE," Glasnik Skopskog nauhzog druJtva, 7-8 (1930)) p. 11I ; see diagrams I1 and 111, nos. 85 and 193, and fig. 3. These paintings are on the west face of the north and south piers which support the dome. 67 I. PopoviC and V . R. PetkoviC, Staro NagoriMno, Psafa, KaleniC (Belgrade, 1933)) p. 34, pls. XI and x x ~ x2,. 68 M. N. Okunev, "Lesnovo," L'art byzantin chez les Slaves, I, 2, Les Balkans (Paris, 1930)) p. 243. OD V. R. PetkoviC and D. BoSkoviC, DeCani, pt. I1 (Belgrade, 1941), pp. 24-25, pls. CLIV-CLV. 70 M. N. Okunev, "Sostav rospisi khrama v SopoCanakh," Byzantinoslavica, I (1929)) p. 136, pls. 19-21. These paintings date from the fourteenth century. 71 A. Stylianou, "Al ~otxoypacpia~ TOG vaoG -rij5 llavcryias TOG 'Ap&ov, AayovG~ptr, Klisrpoy," Acts of t h e Ninth International Congress of Byzantine Studies held at Saloniki in 1953, ' E A A q v t ~ a , Suppl. 9.1 (1955)) p. 463, pls. 143.1,154.1.I owe the reproduction and the transcription of the inscription to the kindness of Mr. Stylianou. 6

82

SIRARPIE DER NERSESSIAN

painted both on the north pier of the bema and in the narthex.72 In the latter, and at Lagoudera she is designated as fi Ih~oGoa,although this epithet is usually connected with a different iconographic type. In the church of St. Anne in Trebizond, the interceding Virgin with the scroll painted on the north pier of the bema is called fi y o p y o ~ ~ i ~;73 o oshe s has no distinctive title in the church of the Anargyroi in K a ~ t o r i a , but ~ * in the church of Saint Nicholas in Salonika, where the Virgin is painted on the north pier of the bema, and in the church of the Transfiguration in the monastery of the M e t e ~ r she a~~ is called fi . r r a p M q o l s . This seems to have been the correct epithet for this iconographic type, and is the one used in the Painter's Guide which also cites the verses that should be inscribed on the scroll. These verses appear, with slight variations, in the majority of extant paintings; they are a dialogue between Christ and the Virgin who asks her Son t o have pity on men and to save them in His mercy. The text of the Painter's Guide is as follows:76 'H .rrap&hqo~s (' H @ E O T ~ K O S ) Aiyouoa E-rri xap~ow.rrpos ~ b vX p l m b v K ~ K K I V ~ . Akga~ Giqo~v~ f i ofis s p q ~ p 6 s o, i ~ ~ i p y o v . " 44

' 0 Xpla-rbs pavpa. "Ti, -44

~ ~ T Eai-r~is P , ;"-44T+v p p o ~ & vooqpiav."-"TTapGpylo&v

Zuy.rra8qaov, uik pou."-"'Ahh

o i r ~i. r r ~ m p i ~ o u o l~ "

y~."

a"iE&oov xaplv."

The Serbian artists followed the same models. At K u r b i n o v o , decorated probably in the twelfth century, the versified dialogue is still written in G r e e k , 7 7 but in the fourteenth century, at NagoriEino, although the epithet fi . r r a p M q o l s is in Greek, the inscription on the scroll gives us the Serbian translation of the same dialogue.78The same text is repeated on the scroll held by the Virgin at GraEanica and at DeEani, in the painting t o the left of the door of the narthe~.~~ 7 2 Right Reverend Bishop of Gibraltar, V. Seymour, W. H. Buckler, and Mrs. W. H. Buckler, "The Church of Asinou, Cyprus, and its Frescoes," Archaeologia, LXXXIII (1933), pp. 341, 342, 331, 336; nos. 24 and 35 of diagram VI-VIII, nos. 8 and g of diagram 11-IV and pl. xcv.2. On the north pier of the bema, the Virgin is accompanied by John the Baptist. The inscription of the scroll, which is said to cover eleven lines, has not been transcribed (op. cit., p. 341) ; the inscription on the scroll of the Virgin in the narthex reads: hq-ras .rrpoa&ysl P~T~IK&S fi l-Iap9aIvos, I -rb aljst) ~ow-rrirpbs Ppo-rQv aw-rqpiav (op. cit., p. 336). 73 G. Millet and D. Talbot Rice, Byzantine Painting at Trebizond (London, 1936))p. 26 and pl. x ~ v , 2. There are two layers of painting; the epithet and the versified inscription belong to the upper layer and were deciphered by G. Millet. On the south pier of the bema, there is an image of John the Baptist instead of the customary one of Christ. 74 S. Pelikanides, Kaosopia (Salonika, 1953), pl. 28. 75 G. A. Soteriou, " BvZav-r~vh uvqpia ~ i j 0s ~ o o a A i aIT'~ ~ aIA' i alGvos," ' E-rrssqpis'E-ralptLag BvZavrlvijv Z~rou6ijv,I X (1932), p. 402 and fig. 23. 78 A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, 'Eppqvtia ~ i j sZ o y p a p ~ i j s -rtxvqs (St. Petersburg, 1909)) p. 280. See a slightly different version in Epigrammatum Anthologia Palatina, 111, edited by E. Cougny (Paris, 19271, P. 423, no. 125. 7 7 R. Ljubinkovic, "Stara tsrkva sela Kurbinova," Starinar, XV (1940), p. 104. Here the Virgin is painted on the wall, under the window, next to the monumental figure of Christ represented on the south side of the bema, while on the corresponding north side there is an equally monumental image of Saint George, the patron saint of the church. Ibid., pp. 103-104, 107 and fig. 4. 78 N. P. Kondakov, Ikonografija, 11, p. 304, fig. 170. I. Popovik and V. R. PetkoviC, 09. cit., pp. 37-38 and pl. VI. M. N. Okunev, Monurnenta artis serbicae, I (Prague, 1928), pl. 10. At Grafanica and in several other churches: M. K.Okunev, op. cit., in Seminarium Kondakovianum,VIII (1936), pp. 234-235 and id., in L'art byzantin chez les Slaves, I, 2, p. 256. T9 For GraEanica and other Serbian examples, see M. N. Okunev, 09. cit., in L'art byzantin chez les Slaves, I, 2, p. 256 and in Seminarium Kondakovianum, VIII (1936))pp. 234-235. For Defani, see PetkoviC and RoSkoviC, op. cit., pt. 11, p. 2, pls. ~ C V and I c x x ~2.,

T W O I M A G E S OF THE V I R G I N The consistency with which the same text is repeated in Greek and in Serbian in the majority of surviving paintingss0 suggests that this variant of the Hagiosoritissa is also derived from a famous model, probably an icon which was reproduced in panel paintings as well as in monumental art. As in the case of the Hagiosoritissa, the panel paintings depict sometimes the full-length, sometimes the half-length figure of the Virgin, with or without the bust of Christ in the segment of the sky. Both types are preserved in outstanding examples of the twelfth century. The full-length figure appears on the icon which, according to tradition, was painted for the Grand Duke Andrew ~ o ~ o l l ' ; b s kafter i a vision he had in 1158, when the Virgin appeared to him holding a scroll in her hand, and ordered him to have her portrait painted and deposited in a church built in her honor.81 This icon, unfortunately in a very poor state of preservation but in which one can still recognize a painting of high artistic quality, represents the Virgin holding the open scroll in her left hand and raising her right hand towards the bust of Christ in the upper right corner of the panel. A Deesis, with two accompanying angels is painted on the upper frame of the icon.82 A painting in the palace of Andrew ~ o ~ o l & b s at k i ~ o ~ o l ~ b probably recalls this vision, ovo for the prince is shown kneeling before the Virgin depicted in the same attitude as on the icon.s3The ~ o ~ o l & b sicon k i was frequently copied in later centuries, sometimes exactly repeating the twelfth-century model, and sometimes adding a group of worshippers kneeling before the Virgin.s4 The best example of the half-length figure is the celebrated icon of the cathedral of Spoleto on which the Virgin turned to the right holds the scroll with the usual versified dialogue. This painting known only through engravingsS5 can now be fully appreciated, for, at the request of Silvio Mercati, the icon was taken out of its Gothic tabernacle, the metal cover was removed, the painting so The interceding Virgin holding a scroll is also represented in the church of Saint Elias in Salonika, to the left of the door leading from the narthex to the church, but I was not able to copy the text of the inscription; the painting t o the right of the door is destroyed. I n the church of Saint Demetrius in Salonika we see a variant of this type: the Virgin stands next to the "orans" figure of a saint, probably Saint Theodore, while Christ appears above them, in the segment of the sky. The inscription is an abbreviated and modified form of the usual verses. G. and M. Soteriou, ' H paotA1~fiTOG&yiov Aqpq-rpiov O E U ~ ~ ~ (Athens, O V ~ K 1952)) ~ S pp. 194-195 and pl. 66. In the Serbian church of Pee we find a further variant: on the face of a pier, halfway u p the north side of the nave, the Virgin holding the scroll stands full face and carries, a t the same time, the infant Christ on her arm; Christ is represented on the opposite pier on the south wall. Istorija russkogo iskusstva, I (Moscow, 1953))p. 446. 8 2 Ibid., reproductions on pp. 445 and 446. Lasareff, loc. cit., writes that because of the poor condition of the icon it is not possible t o determine whether it is the work of Byzantine or Russian painters. The inscription on the scroll apparently could not be deciphered and one cannot see from the reproduction whether the text is written in Greek or Slavonic. The inscription on the silver riza which was added much later is in Slavonic and differs from the versified dialogue. Kondakov, Ikonografija, 11, p. 300, fig. 166. A Greek icon, brought t o Kiev from Mount Sinai shows the standing Virgin with the scroll bearing the usual text. N. P. Kondakov, I k o n y Sinajskoj i Afonskoj Kolektsii (St. Petersburg, 1902)) pl. VIII. s3 K. K. Romanov, "Lacolonnade du pourtour de la CathCdrale de Saint-Georges & Jur'ev-Pol'skij," L'art byzantin chez les Slaves, 11, I, p. 57, fig. 28. P. P. Pokrysh'kin, Ikony Moskovskago Pridvornago Sobora Spasa nu Boru (St. Petersburg, 1913)) pls. VII-x.N. P. Kondakov, The Russian Icon. Album (Prague, 192.9))pl. 73. 85 N. P. Likhachev, op. cit., fig. 95; N. P. Kondakov, Ikonografija, 11, fig. 169.

SIRARPIE DER NERSESSIAN was cleaned, and a color reproduction was published (fig. I I ) . ~Mercati ~ was able, at the same time, to identify the person for whom the icon was made: she was Irene Petraliphina, a descendant of Petrus de Alipha (from Alifa in Campania) the companion of Robert Guiscard who, after the latter's death in 108j, entered the service of the Byzantine Emperor. The icon can, therefore, be dated a few decades after 1085 but before 1185 when, according to a charter, Frederick Barbarossa presented it to the cathedral of Spoleto; it is one of the finest works of the Comnenian period. As another example of this type one may mention an icon of the Monastery of Saint Catherine on Mount Sinai, even though the iambic verses inscribed on the scroll are somewhat different from the usual dialogue.87Exceptionally, on one of the icons of the same monastery, the Virgin is shown holding a scroll in the representation of the Deesis, and the words written on it refer to the well-known dialogue.88 Apart from the Serbian paintings mentioned above, we have further evidence that there existed in Serbia an icon of the interceding Virgin holding a scroll which was the object of particular veneration. The paintings in the chapel to the south of the narthex in the Church of the Mother of God at Studenica and those of the corresponding chapel at SopoCani show the translation of the body of Stephen Nemanja who relinquished the throne and became a monk under the name of Simeon (fig. 12).In both frescoes the group of clerics proceeding from the monastery to meet the procession carries, in great pomp, an icon on which is depicted the half figure of the Virgin, in this instance, turned to the left and holding an open scroll in her hand.g9 The interceding Virgin was also chosen for dedicatory portraits or for commemorative monuments. At the Martorana, in Sicily, George of Antioch who had built this church in honor of the Virgin in 1143, kneels before the Virgin who holds an open scroll in her left hand. Here the inscription is adapted to the special circumstances for which the mosaic was made; the Virgin addressing herself to Christ, whose image appears in the segment of sky in the upper right corner of the panel, asks Him to protect and grant forgiveness to George who erected this house for her.Q0In a Lectionary dated 1061-1062 in the Library of the Greek Patriarchate in Jerusalem (Megale Panagia, fol. IV) and in a twelfthcentury manuscript in the monastery of Lavra on Mount Athos, no. 103A, fol. 3 (fig. 13), the person for whom the manuscript was written kneels in the same manner at the feet of the Virgin who raises both hands to the hand of God or the bust figure of Christ painted in the upper left corner of the page.g1 S. Mercati, "Sulla sanctissima icone del Duorno di Spoleto," Spoletium, 3 (1956), pp. 3-6. Soteriou, op. cit., I, pl. 173; 11, p. 160. Soteriou, op. cit., I, pl. 170; 11, p. 156. 89 G. Millet, La peinture du Moyen Age en Yoztgoslavie. Album PrLsentlpar A.Frolow, I (Paris, 1 9 5 4 ) ~ pl. 44, I ; I1 (Paris, 1957)~pl. 43.2. D. IVinfield, "Four Historical Compositions from the Mediaeval Kingdom of Serbia," Byzantinoslavica, XI).; (1958)~pp. 251-278, figs. 3, 4. Winfield writes that 'the inscription on the scroll at Studenica has entirely disappeared, and of the inscription at SopoCani too little is left t o decipher" (op.cit., p. 2 j8), b u t the paintings were probably in a better state of preservation when Okunev saw them, for he says that the inscription on the scroll is the Virgin's dialogue with Christ (op. cit., in Sewbinarium Iiondakovianum, V I I I [1936], p. 234). 0. Demus, T h e Mosaics of Norman Sicily (London, 1g4g), pl. 58b; see the inscription on p. go. g1 Ibid., p. 348. A photograph of this miniature was kindly lent t o me by Mr. 0. Demus.

TWO I M A G E S O F T H E V I R G I N The dedicatory inscriptions written on the gold background again differ from the usual one, but the versified dialogue between the Virgin and Christ reappears on an icon of the seventeenth century from Mount Athos. This example, though of very late date, is particularly interesting because it shows the double image of the Virgin and Christ: on one panel was represented Jesse, the son of the Georgian Prince Asotan, kneeling before the Virgin who held the scroll with the usual text, while on the other appeared Christ to Whom the Virgin's . ~ ~double prayer was addressed, and at His feet knelt the Prince A s ~ t a nThis icon with the two kneeling figures calls to mind the beautiful mosaic of the inner narthex of the Kariye Camii, already mentioned, for here also, although the Virgin does not hold a scroll, she obviously intercedes before Christ for the sebastocrator Isaac Comnenus and the nun Melane kneeling on either side (fig. 9).93 The above survey of the principal monuments in which the companion images of the Virgin and Christ have been depicted, shows that they were usually placed on the bema piers or at the sides of the narthex door. Thus before entering the nave, while he was still in the vestibule where certain liturgical ceremonies were held, the faithful had before his eyes the comforting image of the interceding Virgin; this same image was moreover placed in the most prominent part of the church, at the entrance of the sanctuary. Whether she appeared holding the scroll on which her entreaty was inscribed, or merely stood turned towards Christ and raising her hands in prayer, this image emphasized the supreme role of the Virgin as intercessor, as the mediatrix between man and Christ. Many of the representations on the bema piers belong to the period prior to the development of the iconostasis; to the time when the chancel barrier was a simple marble structure, with columns supporting a decorative architrave and ornamental slabs in the lower part of the intercolumniations. There were few, if any, permanent icons on this chancel barrier, and this fact brought into even greater prominence these two images which stood, like large icons, on the bema piers. If, as I have suggested, the Dumbarton Oaks relief had, originally, a corresponding slab with the figure of Christ, these two could have been set in the bema piers or in the east wall of the narthex, on either side of the door. The size of the marble slab, measuring only 1.04 metres, is considerably smaller than similar representations in mosaic or painting, which are usually life-size figures or even slightly taller. But all the examples mentioned above belong to fairly large churches and we may suppose that the stone relief was once placed in a small Qa G. Millet, J. Pargoire, and L. Petit, Recueil des inscriptions chre'tiennes de Z'Athos (Paris, ~ g o q ) , p. 91,no. 285. 93 P. A. Underwood, op. cit., in Dumbarton Oaks Pafiers, 12 (1958), pp. 284-287 and fig. 18. 94 The size of the relief is approximately the same as that of the marble slabs in the intercolumniations of an iconostasis, b u t all surviving examples of such slabs have a decorative design-crosses, floral or geometric ornaments, or animals. One cannot entirely exclude the possibility that our relief may have been a single "icon," which, in that case, could have been placed in any part of a church.

S I R A R P I E DER NERSESSIAN The stone "icons" of the Virgin now known represent her in the orans attitude or with the Child in her arms; single slabs are part of a composition like the Deesis group at San Marco, already mentioned, or the Annunciation embedded in the f a ~ a d eof the church of San Giovanni and San Paolo in Venice. A fragmentary relief discovered at Arta shows a feminine figure turned to the left, and with the left hand raised; but as the head is not preserved one cannot be sure that it represented the Virgin.95Thus the Dumbarton Oaks relief is the only surviving sculptured image of the interceding Virgin so frequently represented in mosaics, paintings, and in the minor arts. B5 A. Orlandos, "'H Frrapa ~ j " vA p ~ a vpovtj 7 i 3 v B h u ~ ~ p v G v ,'"A p x ~ i o v 7Gjv pvl. pvqp. ~ i 'EMCrSos, j ~ I1 (1936), p. 41, fig. 39. Orlandos assigns this relief to the thirteenth century and sees in i t influences of Romanesque art.

1. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Ivory Plaque. The Virgin between John the Baptist and St. Basil

2. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Bloodstone Cameo with Bust of the Virgin

4. Mt. Athos, Pantocrator Monastery, no. 49, fol. 4"

3. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Seal of the Virgin Hagiosoritissa

5. Berlin-Dahlem, Ehem. Staatliche Museen. Ivory Triptych, detail

' I "

I

6. Front View 7. Back View Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Marble Relief of the Virgin

8. Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek. Ivory Binding for the Prayer Book of the Empress Cunegonde

9. Istanbul, Kariye Camii, Inner Narthex. Mosaic

10. Lagoudera, Cyprus. Church of the Virgin of Arakos

12. Sopoeani, southwest Chapel. Translation of the Body of Stephen Nemanja

11. Spoleto, Cathedral. Icon of the Virgin

13. Mt. Athos, Lavra Monastery, no. 103A, fol. 3

Two Palaeologan Mosaic Icons in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection Otto Demus Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 87+89-119. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C87%3ATPMIIT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-9 Dumbarton Oaks Papers is currently published by Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/doaks.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Sun Mar 9 07:56:05 2008

TWO PALAEOLOGAN MOSAIC ICONS

IN THE

DUMBARTON OAKS COLLECTION

P

ORTABLE mosaic icons1 are among the rarest and most precious objects of Byzantine art. This is the result not only of the ravages of time; the chances of survival were better for mosaic icons than, for instance, for jewelry and goldsmith's work which were so often destroyed because of their material value; better also than for painted icons, because of the greater durability of the medium. That we have so few of them is in great part due to the fact that they were from the beginning a rare and costly species: the entire production must have been very small. In assessing the number of portable mosaic icons which have come down to us, care must be taken to eliminate all mosaic icons or fragments thereof which were originally wall mosaics and which became "portable" only when detached from the wall, mostly in recent times. Quite a few of these have, at one time or another, been mistaken for portable mosaics; e. g., the mosaic fragments of the Virgin in the Museums of Palermo (from C a l a t a m a ~ r o and ) ~ Cortona (from the demolished church of S. Andrea).3 An interesting species in themselves are the templorn mosaics, some of which are still in situ-like those of the Porta Panagia at Trikkala, Thessaly4-while others were removed from their original context-like those of the Xenophontos monastery of Mt. A t h ~ sAll . ~ these mosaics share their chief characteristics, especially the setting bed of mortar, with "normal" wall mosaics. As a matter of fact, the nature of the setting bed seems to be the only safe criterion for distinguishing portable mosaics, in the specific meaning of the term, from fragments of wall mosaics: genuine portable mosaics are, without exception, set in wax or resin on a wooden backing. The size of the cubes, on the other hand, cannot be relied upon for defining this group: there are portable mosaics with tesserae as large as those of normal wall mosaics, whereas some wall mosaics show exceptionally small cubes, especially in the faces of the figures. While the size of the cubes does not serve to distinguish genuine portable mosaics from fragments of wall mosaics, it does help to establish another 1 The following study is a combination of two lectures which were delivered at Dumbarton Oaks in 1951 and 1958 respectively. The first, about portable mosaic icons in general, appears here greatly reduced: the second, on the two Dumbarton Oaks panels, is somewhat amplified. During the preparation of the second lecture I enjoyed the kind help and advice of the Director and the scholars of Dumbarton Oaks, especially of Professor Sirarpie Der Nersessian who conducted the Symposium of 1958. The author is preparing a corpus of Byzantine portable mosaics. For valuable help in this enterprise he should like t o thank Mr. Boris Ermoloff of Paris and Prof. D. Talbot Rice of Edinburgh. A t present, apart from handbooks and special publications, the following general treatments of this subject may be consulted: E. Miintz, "Les mosaiques portatives," Bulletin monumental, LII (Caen, 1886), p. 223ff.; D. T. Rice, "New Light on Byzantine Portative Mosaics," Apollo, XVIII (1933))p. 265ff.; S. Bettini, "Appunti per lo studio dei mosaici portatili bizantini," Felix Ravenna, XLVI (1938-41)) p. 7ff.; 0. Demus, "Byzantinische Mosaikminiaturen," Phaidros, I11 (1947)) p. ~ g o f f . 0. Demus, The Mosaics of Norman Sicily (London, 1949)) pp. 189, 191, 311.

See A. Bernardini and A. Castri, Cortona, Guida Turistica (Arezzo, 1951)) p. 13.

S. Bettini, op. cit., p. 37, with bibliography and illustrations.

Ibid., p. 37.

90

OTTO D E M U S

distinction, namely that between two more or less clearly definable groups of portable mosaics proper. The real distinction, it is true, is one of the size of the icon itself rather than of single tesserae; but the size of the tesserae is usually determined by the size of the entire panel-large icons using large, small icons small, sometimes minute, tesserae. In any case, an analysis of the measurements of all known portable mosaics reveals that there are G o clearly distinct groups: a group of large icons which range in size from 23 by 34 to 62 by 95 centimeters, and a group of small icons which measure from 6 by 10 to 18 by 26 centimeters. The gap between the two groups is in fact much greater than would appear from their respective dimensions, since the icons of the "large" group represent without exception half-figures, while the larger icons of the "small" group contain many-figured compositions. Thus, the scale of the figures in the "large" icons is at least ten (sometimes even twenty) times that of the figures in the "small" icons. I t is natural that minute tesserae were used for composing the tiny figures of the "small" group. Since we are dealing in this paper with icons of the "small" group, a few words will suffice to describe the species of "large" portable icons. All tenor so icons of this group, which are all that have come down to us, are half-figure versions of greatly venerated prototypes, most of them bearing the distinctive N names of the icons from which they are derived, like IC XC 0 EAEHM ON (Berlin) or M"P &Y H ElllCKE't'IC (Athens). Actually, they are nothing but mosaic reproductions of painted icons, and, as far as we know, were regarded, treated, and used exactly like large-scale icons in painting. I t seems that they were destined solely for ecclesiastic use, to be hung on the walls of a church or to be displayed on tables (proskynetaria, analogia).6 The arrangement of the tesserae in the earlier examples of these large mosaic icons, as, e. g., the Hodegetria from the Pammakaristos church, now in the Patriarchate of Constantinople,' an eleventh-century icon measuring 60 by 85 cms., is exactly the same as that of wall mosaics-the nearest parallels to the Pammakaristos Hodegetria being among the mosaics of St. Sophia in Kiev.8 True, the tesserae of the Constantinople Virgin are somewhat smaller, but their arrangement in formdefining, curvilinear rows of cubes, full of plastic tension, is the same as in Kiev or in other eleventh-century wall mosaics. At a later date, however, specific decorative effects made their appearance, effects which are foreign to monumental art. A good example of this decorative style is another Hodegetria, that of the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai which belongs to the . ~ golden highlights of the drapery (chrysographia), the thirteenth c e n t ~ r yThe ornamentation of the background with rinceaux and other motifs, and the complicated finesse of a technique employing infinitesimal cubes place the See the narrative of Anthony of Kovgorod, in J. P. Richter, Quellen der byzantinischen Kunstgeschichte (Vienna, 1897), p. 60. ~ h 'A~aGqpias'ASqvQv, V I I I (1933), ' G. A. Sotiriou, '"H E ~ K C ~ V ~ a p p ~ [ ~ a p ~ m onu p, ' 'm ~ T?S p. 359ff.; A. M. Schneider, Byzanz, Istanbuler Forschungen, V I I I (1936))p. 41, pl. 7. 8 0. Powstenko, The Cathedral of St. Sofihia i n Kiev (New York, 1gj4), pl. 45. G. and M. Sotiriou, Ic6nes du Mont Sinai (Athens, 1g5g), p. 8j, pl. 71 ; 0. Demus, "Die Entstehung N

des Palaeologenstils in der Malerei," Berichte zum X I . Internat. Byz. Kongvess, IV,

P. 55.

2

(Munich, 1958),

T W O P A L A E O L O G A N MOSAIC I C O N S

91

Sinai icon in a class entirely distinct from that of the Constantinople Virgin. Both form and technique differ widely from those of wall mosaic; the artist seems rather to have aimed at producing the combined effects of panel painting, book illumination, and enamel. This mixture of technical styles and consequent wealth of effects is not only indicative of an experimental period, the formative phase of a new style, the Palaeologan; it also foreshadows the distinctive style of the second group of mosaic icons, that of "small" portable mosaics which may be properly called miniature mosaics. The Sinai icon is, in fact, nearest to these miniature mosaics in both style and technique as well as in its dimensions; measuring as it does 23 by 34 cms., it is the smallest known icon of the "large" group, the only mosaic icon that can be said to occupy an intermediary position between the two groups. Its position in time is also somewhat intermediary: belonging to the thirteenth century, it stands midway between the period in which most of the icons of the "large" group originated-the eleventh century-and that which saw the flowering of the miniature mosaics, the fourteenth century. This does not mean, of course, that the Sinai icon precedes in date all portable mosaics of the "small" group. A few of the latter are somewhat earlier and there is at least one miniature mosaic which is considerably older than the Hodegetria: the tiny panel, in the Sinai Monastery, with the half figure of St. Demetrius,lowhich displays the style of the first half of the twelfth century, but may be somewhat later. If not the earliest, this icon is at least one of the oldest of the "small" group. There is, as yet, little in this panel to indicate the direction which the stylistic development of the species was to take in the following century. Apart from the pattern of cubes depicting the Saint's coat of mail, the technique is almost that of wall mosaic (excepting, of course, the minute size of the tesserae), and, were it not for the almost fragile delicacy of the elongated face and narrow shoulders, the figure might be said to exhibit a monumental style. To see in these characteristics and in the decorative pattern of the armour an influence from the realm of book illumination is, perhaps, not quite justified; but such influences certainly made themselves felt in the first half of the thirteenth century, and it was in the course of that century that the art of miniature mosaic developed its own technique, its own style. In the most characteristic specimens of this group of minute mosaics, the tesserae, about half a millimeter square (or even smaller), are set so close together that the interstices are scarcely visible. The tesserae are mostly of enamel paste; certain colors, however, are rendered by semiprecious stones like lapis lazuli and malachite. The gold and silver cubes consist, in some cases, not of glass with metal foil, but of solid metal. The background is rarely made up of golden tesserae alone: checkered patterns of three or four colors frame or fill part of both the ground and the haloes. Everything contributes towards a colorful, rich, and precious effect. An analysis of the iconographic data, not only of the extant miniature mosaics but also of those that are adequately described in literary sources, G. and M. Sotiriou, Icdnes, p. 84, pl. 70.

92

OTTO DEMUS

shows a preponderance of single figures, either full-length or busts. The single figure most often represented is that of the Virgin, followed, in the order of the frequency of their representation, by Christ, St. Nicholas, John the Baptist, Michael, Demetrius, Theodore, and George. Other single figures represented are St. Anne, Basil, Daniel, John Chrysostom, John the Evangelist, Peter and Samuel. Thus, the Saints of the Empire (Nicholas), of Constantinople (John the Baptist), and of the court (Michael, Demetrius, Theodore, George) are the subjects most frequently represented. As for representations of scenes (we know of about a dozen icons of this kind), with one exception these are restricted to the great feasts of the Church-the exception being the Forty Martyrs of Sebaste, which is not really a scene but a collective portrait of saints. Thus the subject matter represented in miniature mosaics presents no exceptional features; on the contrary, only the most widely venerated subjects are depicted. Nor is there anything in the iconographic treatment to suggest that any of these icons originated in a provincial atmosphere: their iconographical purism points rather to Constantinople itself or, at least, to one of the great centers of Byzantine art in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. As befits the small scale of these icons, they do not represent the "great," "public," or monumental themes, as, e. g. the Pantokrator, the enthroned Virgin, etc., but rather the standing Saviour, the Eleousa, or the Glykophilousa; the saints are introduced as patrons, in frontal half figures, or as intercessors, standing in a three-quarter posture, to transmit the prayers of the worshippers to Christ. In short, these icons belong, thematically as well as artistically, to an intimate form of art, destined for the chosen few, for a select upper class. There are other features which substantiate the conviction that the miniature mosaics are, indeed, products of a court art, that the whole genre belongs to the aulic sphere; such as, for instance, the frames of the icons, most of which, judging from preserved examples, seem to have been made of chased silver. Several of the frames that have come down to us contain figural representations, usually full figures or busts of the apostles and other saints;ll in the case of the Crucifixion icon of Vatopedi the frame is decorated with a complete cycle of the twelve great church~festivals.12The frame of another Vatopedi icon, with the standing figure of St. Anne, presents a full devotional programme, with busts and full figures of saints, and with the Hetoimasia worshipped by angels.13 Some of these icons have especially interesting frames: the frame of the icon of St. John the Evangelist in the Great Lavra of Mt. Athos,14 is decorated 11 See the icons of Esphigmenou, Lavra, Patmos, and Vatopedi (St. Anne). On Byzantine silver frames in general see A. Bank in Vizantiiskii Vremennik, XI11 (1957)) p. 211ff. l a W. Felicetti-Liebenfels, Geschichte der byzantinischen Ikonenmalerei (Olten-Lausanne, 1956), pl. 75: p. 66. The sequence of the feasts is here somewhat confused; moreover, the Annunciation occurs twlce, while the Crucifixion is missing. l 3 0. Wnlff and M. Alpatov, Denkmaler der Ikonenmalerei (Hellerau, 1gz5),p. 56, fig. 18 ;W. FelicettiLiebenfels, ofi. cit., p. 64, pl. 74. 14 N. P. Kondakov, P a m i a t n i k i khristianskogo iskusstva n u Afone (St. Petersburg, I ~ O Z p. ) , 114ff., PI. 34.

TWO PALAEOLOGAN MOSAIC ICONS

93

with ten, perhaps earlier, enamel medallions, showing the Hetoimasia (in the upper center) and nine busts, representing (in the bottom row) St. John the Baptist with his parents and (above) six Saints bearing the name of John. A similar arrangement, with portraits of the synonymoi of the Forerunner surrounding an icon of the Birth of the Baptist, is described by Manuel Philes,15 which suggests that the frames of precious icons conformed to certain types. Another most interesting frame is that of an icon of St. Demetrius in Sassoferrato. Its decoration, with emblems of the Palaeologi and with an inscription, the historical significance of which has been studied by the late A. A. Vasiliev, suggests that this icon was produced at Thessalonica, most probably for a member of the Palaeologan dynasty.16 The Sassoferrato icon is not the only one that can be traced back to imperial ownership or patronage. The St. John mosaic in Lavra,f7 the St. Anne in Vatopedi,18 the Virgin in Sta Maria della Salute in Venice,lg and the two panels representing the twelve great feasts in the Opera del Duomo of Florence20-all, according to tradition, were imperial gifts. In some cases the representations themselves suggest that the panels were commissioned by, or made as gifts for, emperors. George, Theodore, Demetrius, and Michael, - holy warriors and special protectors of the emperors-would, of course, have been their favorites. I t is noteworthy that the court poet Manuel Philes chose several icons of St. George and St. Michael as subjects of his poetic descriptions ( ( ~ K ~ P & o E I s ) ; another poet of the time, Markos Eugenikos, described icons of St. Demetrius.21 It is, perhaps, especially significant that the archangel Michael, the holy namesake of Michael VIII Palaeologus who reconquered Constantinople in 1261, is found six times among the seventy odd mosaic icons which we know through both extant works and literary sources. The prophet Daniel, too, who is occasionally represented on portable mosaics and whose icons Manuel Philes describes in his poems, has a certain connection with Michael VIII Palaeologus. That Emperor was called a "new Daniel" and he applied to himself, with the help of puns on his own name as well as on that of his dynasty, the prophecies of Daniel VII : 9 and X : 13, 21, in which the Manuelis Philae carmina, ed. E. Miller, I (Paris, 1855)~p. 58, no. CXXXIII. S. Bettini, 09.cit., p. ~ g f fA. . ;A. Vasiliev, "The Historical Significance of the Mosaic of St. Demetrius at Sassoferrato," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 5 (1950), p. 31 ff., with bibiography. 17 N. P. Kondakov, Pamiatniki, op. cit., p. 114f.Tradition connects this icon with John Tzimiskes, a date which is, of course, much too early. 15

16

l8

Ibid., p. 113. S. Bettini, op. cit., p.

off.; 0. Demus, "Die Entstehung", p. 16, note 70. Reproduced in color by A. Grabar, La peinture byzantine (Geneva, 1953)~p. 191. For the story of the dedication see A. F. Gori, Thesaurus veterum diptychorum I11 (Florence, 1759), p. 320.An icon (or a pair of icons ? ) with the twelve feasts, described by Manuel Philes (ed. E. Miller op. cit., p. 9, no. XXIV), was dedicated by John Kanabes. 21 Manuelis P h i l a e carmina, I, pp. 36, 46f., 317f., 357f., 457, 460; 11, pp. 202, 287f., 415. On ekphraseis in general see A. Muiioz, "Alcune fonti letterarie per la storia dell'arte bizantina," N. Bollettino di Archeologia Cristiana, X (1go4), p. 221ff.; idem, "Descrizioni di opere d'arte in un poeta bizantino del secolo XIV (Manuel Philes)," Repertorium fur Kunstwissenschaft, XXVII (1go4), p. 309ff. ; idem, "Le Ekphraseis nellaletteratura bizantina e i lor0 rapporti con l'arte figurata," Recueil Kondakov (Prague, 1926), p. 139. 19 20

94

OTTO D E M U S

and "Prince Michael" appear as the saviors of the Chosen People. 22 These considerations lead us to believe that miniature mosaics were a specific genus of imperial art. Unfortunately, the written sources do not tell us anything further of the ri3le that portable mosaic icons played in the imperial household. There is, for instance, no justification for identifying them with the precious "ergomoukia" which, according to Constantine Porphyrogenitus, were kept, together with the crown insignia, in the Pentapyrgion, a five-turreted cupboard in the Imperial Palace.23This strange word has defied translation, and Labarte's suggestion that it is a scribe's error for "ergomouzakia," and means "portable mosaics," is entirely unf0unded.2~ Kondakov proposed a somewhat different interpretation of this puzzling word: according to him "ergomoukia" ("une abbreviation de Ergomouzakia") were mosaics made of glass which, therefore, resembled enamels-a supposition no more tenable than L a b a r t e ' ~I.t~is~ much more likely that the "ergomoukia" were embroideries; according to Constantine Porphyrogenitus they were hung in the P e n t a p y r g i ~ nwhereas ,~~ mosaic icons would, in all likelihood, have been stored lying in their wooden boxes, one of which is (or was) preserved in Sassof err at^.^' A few other alleged references to miniature mosaics should also be discounted, so that we have, in fact, very few specific references to them in contemporary sources. The most interesting occur in the works of Markos Eugenikos and Manuel Philes who have left us several poetic descriptions of such icons, one or two of which may refer to works that have actually survived.28The wording of these descriptions is a strong indication that the miniature mosaic icons were considered as precious gifts and used mainly for private worship. Not a single mosaic icon is dated. The frame of one, the Eleousa of Sta Maria della Salute invenice, bears, it is true, an inscription on its reverse, giving the date 1115, the name of the artist, and other details, and this has been taken seriously by a number of authors.29But the frame is of the fifteenth century VrraAalbs TGV fiyepGv

2 2 See A. Martini, "iblanuelis Philae carmina inedita," Atti della R. Accademia di Archeologza, Letteve e Belle Arti, XX (Supplement, goo), p. 46; Manuelis Philae carmina, ed. E. Miller, I, p. 50, etc. For the identification of Michael V I I I with Daniel see C. Sathas in Revue arche'ologique, I (1877), p. 99. 23 J. Ebersolt, Le Grand Palais de Constantinople et le Livre des Ce're'monies (Paris, I ~ I O ) ,p. 82. 24 J. Labarte, Histoire des arts industviels, I1 (Paris, 1864), p. 47. 25 N. P. Kondakov, Histoire et monuments des e'maux byzantins (Frankfurt am Main, 18gz), p. 102. Another Greek term, aapohla, was also taken to mean mosaic icons: W. Nissen, Die Diataxis des Michael Atfaliates con 1077 (Jena, 1894). The correct interpretation of this word, which meant icons of copper, has been given by S. Vryonis, "The Will of a Provincial Magnate, Eustathius Boilas (105g)," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 11 (1957), p. 268. 26 De Cerimoniis, Bonn ed., I, p. 582. 2 7 L. Serra, L'Arte nelle Marche, I (Pesaro, 1929), p. 344. 28 See, e. g., Manuelis P h i l a e carmina, I, p. g ; A. Muiioz, "Descrizioni," p. 3goff. 29 SO S. Bettini, op. cit., p. off.; D. T. Rice, OF. cit., p. 265, as against V. N. Lazarev, "Byzantine Icons in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries," T h e Buvlington Magazine, LXXI (1937), p. 250, who rightly regards the inscription as apocryphal. If there is anything at all genuine in the inscription, it may refer t o the year 1315, not 1x15; the name Manuel (allegedly Manuel I, whose dates, however, do not correspond t o 111j,since he reigned from 1143 t o 1180) may originally have designated the despot Manuel Palaeologus. But, as the entire inscription is an almost incredible farrago of nonsense, it is more likely that it was made up in Venice without any basis whatsoever.

T W O P A L A E O L O G A N MOSAIC I C O N S

95

and the inscription is a naive and highly phantastic invention of that time; moreover, the style of the icon is indubitably Palaeologan. The fanciful inscription on the reliquary in which the icon of the Saviour in Sta Maria in Campitelli, in Rome, is now encased is equally valueless.30 This inscription claims that the reliquary was the altare viaticum of St. Gregory of Nazianzus; in addition, it gives the name of a goldsmith, "GG," that is George or Gregory, who has been tentatively identified with an artist of that name mentioned in an inscription of 1117. However, the identification is purely conjectural and the mosaic panel itself seems to have become a part of the reliquary only in the seventeenth century. Its style points to the middle of the thirteenth century. Other traditions, too, like the one that connects the mosaic icon of St. John the Evangelist in Lavra with the Emperor John Tzimiskes at the end of the tenth century, have to be discounted as having no basis whatever.31 I t is only in the fourteenth century that we are on firmer ground: the Sassoferrato icon can be connected with one of the Palaeologan Emperors, possibly Michael VIII or Andronicus 11,32 and the two magnificent mosaics with the twelve feasts, in F l ~ r e n c emust , ~ ~ have been made before 1394) when they were given to S. Giovanni by a Venetian-born lady, the widow of a cubicularius of the Emperor John Cantacuzenus. As it is most likely that she or her husband acquired the two panels before the downfall of their patron in 1354155, this date would appear to be a safe terminus ante quem for the mosaics-a terminus which is not very helpful since the style of the two mosaics places them, in any case, in the first half of the fourteenth century. The time of John Cantacuzenus seems, generally speaking, to mark the end of the period in which portable mosaic icons were made: about the middle of the fourteenth century Cantacuzenus ordered the icons throughout the Empire to be stripped of their jewels, thringia (i. e. silver mountings), and frames so that the precious metals might be melted down for coinage.34 M?e have no such convenient record to connect with the beginning of the art of miniature mosaic so that we are thrown back on stylistic dating. Judging from the approximate dates that can be assigned to the extant portable mosaics of the "small" variety, the majority of these seems to have originated in the two generations from about 1260 to 1320; a few are earlier, one (the St. Demetrius of Sinai) even belongs to the twelfth century. As in the case of some other branches of Byzantine art, e. g. sepulchral sculpture35and painted icons, it was during the first half of the thirteenth century that the art form of miniature mosaic was fully realized; and as in those, the patronage of western barons and clerics may have played a part not only in keeping the technique alive, but in elaborating this specific form of art. 30 A. Colasanti, "Reliquiari medioevaliin chiese Romane," Dedalo, XI11 (1933) p. 288, fig. on p. 293; A. Valente, "Intorno ad un orafo del secolo XII," Bollettino d'arte, XXXI (1937-38), p. 261 ff. 31 K.P. Kondakov, Pamiatniki, p. 114. 32 See supra, note 16. 33 See supra, note 20. 34 J. Ebersolt, Les arts somptuaires de Byzance (Paris, 1923)) p. 108 (after Nicephorus Gregoras, Bonn ed., 11, p. 748).

3"hus A. Grabar in a lecture held in Dumbarton Oaks in May 1958.

96

OTTO DEMUS

With a life-span of scarcely more than a century, the art of miniature mosaic was one of the most short-lived art forms of Byzantium. This factor as well as makes it the costliness of the materials and the complexity of the techniq~e,3~ certain that the production was not a very large one. Of course, only a part of this production is known to us from extant works and from data preserved in written sources; among the latter, a few inventories are the most valuable. The richest collections of portable mosaic icons, both large and small, that were ever formed were those of Pope Paul I1 and of Lorenzo Medici (il Magnifico), the inventories of which have come down to us. The difficulty is, however, that the term "mosaic" was often used loosely, being also applied to enamel. Of several icons mentioned in these and other inventories (e.g. that donated to St. Peter's by Cardinal Bessarion) it is not even certain that they were of mosaic and not painted;37 nor do we know in all cases of reliably reported portable mosaics whether these belonged to the large or to the small variety. However, it may be said with all due caution that we have data concerning thirty to forty miniature mosaics that have perished and that twenty-nine are now extant; eight of these are in Italy, five in Russia, four on Mt. Athos; whereas other countries possess only one or two such icons. All mosaic icons are at present in the possession of churches or museums so that, unless unknown ones are discovered, it is hardly likely that any private or public collection will henceforth be able to acquire any of these precious panels. All the more remarkable, therefore, is the acquisition of two of the finest miniature mosaics by the Dumbarton Oaks Collection, in 1947 and 1954. I t needed luck and acumen, assisted by generosity, to secure for the Collection these two icons which are, perhaps, the last of their kind to change hands. THE ICON OF THE FORTY MARTYRS OF S E B A S T E ~ ~

(Figures 1-3) The wooden panel which has lost its metal frame measures 16 by 22 cms. The mosaic surface has suffered seriously; there are a great many cracks which crisscross the entire area but which are most noticeable in the upper third of the area. In this part there are also two large gaps and a number of smaller ones. One of the two large gaps is on the left-hand side, in the gold ground above the heads of the figures: it affects the upper contours of four 36 The claim of the apocryphal inscription on the back of the Sta Maria della Salute icon (see supra, note 29) that its author, "Quidam Theodorus Constantinopolitanus," spent twenty years making this and another mosaic of the same size is, of course, just as much nonsense as the affirmation that the artist was created baron by the Emperor for this achievement. The latter motif might be derived from the story told by the Continuator of Theophanes (Bonn ed., p. 452) about Theodoros Belonas. 37 E. Muntz, "Les mosa'iquesportatives," p. 229ff. ; idem, Les arts ri la Cour des Papes, I1 (Paris, 1879)~ pp. 142, 201 ff.; E. Muntz and A. L. Frothingham, I1 Tesoro della Basilica d i S. Pietro in Vaticano dal X I I I a1 X V secolo (Rome, 1883)) p. 111ff. 38 Handbook of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection (Washington, D. C., 1955))no. 290, p. 147; 0. Demus, "An unknown Mosaic Icon of the Palaeologan Epoch," Byzantina Metabyzantina, I/I (New York, 19461,P. 107ff.

T W O P A L A E O L O G A N MOSAIC I C O N S

heads and the part of the inscription between the i- and the second C of 01 AT[! 01 TECICAP A KO NTA. The damage on the right-hand side is more serious:

its area is about one-ninth of the entire surface and extends over a part of the composition, blotting out one of the most important iconographic details of the scene. However, the main group of the Martyrs, that is thirty-nine figures or heads, is very well preserved, with only a few tesserae missing where the cracks intersect one another. The Martyrs stand in three rows, the foremost one consisting of full figures, the middle one of busts, and the upper one of hardly more than heads. The ice on which the figures stand is olive green, grey, and white, with brownish rocks in the foreground; the loin cloths are shaded in subdued colors: ochre, grey, pink, emerald green, olive, blue, and white, with the most vivid tones concentrated in the figure (third from the left) of the youthful saint who upholds the collapsing body of his neighbor. The flesh tones run the whole gamut from grey to pink, ochre, brown, and olive in most delicate shades, with white highlights emphasizing the plastic modelling. The color of the hair varies from white to grey and blue, from yellow to ochre and from brown to black. The inscription is traced in black, the diadems which descend on the Martyrs have red and blue stones in gold settings outlined in black, the heavenly arc in the middle of the upper margin is divided into blue, grey, and white concentric rings. The color effect of the whole panel is rather delicate and subdued, with golden-brown and silver-grey as the resulting general tones. The provenience of the icon cannot be traced back very far: it is said to have entered the Segredakis collection from the possession of a Greek refugee from Asia Minor; from Segredakis it passed to Danos from whom it was acquired by Hayford Peirce (1931) ; after the latter's death it was given in his memory to the Dumbarton Oaks Collection in 1947. The subject matter of the icon confirms our observations concerning the aulic character of the iconography of the entire species of miniature mosaic. The veneration of the Forty Martyrs, while popular and widespread enough, had its center at the court of Constantinople and among the upper ranks of the Byzantine army. The fact that legend made the martyrs of Sebaste (or Sebastia) soldiers of the Roman army, who suffered martyrdom for their faith under Maximianus or Licinius, caused them to be venerated as warrior saints. An ivory triptych, in Leningrad, accordingly presents them accompanied by the greatest military saints of Byzantium, SS. George, Demetrius, the two Theodores, and others39 (fig. 13). Nine shrines of the Forty Martyrs are known to have existed in Constantinople and its environs alone, some of them intimately connected with the court .40 The veneration of the steadfast soldiers and of their relics began in very early times, perhaps immediately after their martyrdom. Oddly enough, the martyrs themselves seem to have, quite consciously, provided a firm basis for the cult of their relics; at least they were credited with having done so at an 39 A. Goldschmidt and K. Weitzmann, Die byzantinischen Elfenbeznskulfituren des X . - X I I I . Jahrhunderts, I1 (Berlin, 1930/34), p. 27, pl. 3. Concerning warrior saints on ivory triptychs see E. Kantorowicz "Ivories and Litanies," Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, V (194z), p. 56ff. 40 R. Janin, "Les Cglises byzantines des saints militaires," Echos d'orient, XXXIV (1935))p. 64ff.

7

98

OTTO D E M U S

early period. In their so-called ' 'testament" (diatheke), a most curious and valuable document of the early Church which has bein favorably evaluated by modern critics,*l they are said to have implored their relatives and fellow Christians to collect their remains after their death, and above all, not to separate them from each other, but to bury them together in a certain place, since they wished to remain together in death as they were in their last struggle, their tryGv. This moving document purporting to have been penned by three of their number, is signed by all forty. Whether genuine or not, the diatheke is in any case a contemporary document and presents, if not the thoughts of the martyrs themselves, at least the ideas of their friends and fellow Christians. The main idea is that these forty persons of very different ages (a fact which speaks against their having been soldiers) who came from different parts of the Empire, had in their last hours found a new cumulative personality which they wanted to preserve in death and in after-life. In this they succeeded: they became and remained for all time, the Forty Martyrs, the Hagioi Tessarakonta. However, their wish, alleged or real, to remain together in the physical sense, was not granted: in a time of growing relic worship, this was hardly to be expected. From their first resting place, Sareim, a village near Sebaste, some of the relics were taken to Jerusalem, others to Constantinople, to Rome, and elsewhere; to-day, they are widely di~persed.~2 Not long after the martyrdom, some of the relics came into the possession of a Cappadocian lady, Emmeleia, who had a shrine built for them on her domain, near Caesarea. The dedication festival of this church was attended by two of her sons; the younger, Gregory, was not at first overly willing to be present and would have preferred to shirk the long walk to the church, but a dream he had during the night before the festival made him change his mind. He dreamed that he was threatened and all but beaten by a number of soldiers whom he finally recognized as the Forty Martyrs. His respect for these energetic saints, enforced in so drastic a manner, persisted throughout the life of Gregory, later surnamed "of Nyssa" : he has left us three homilies in honor of the Forty, in one of which (the third) he describes his dream.# These homilies and the twentieth homily of Gregory's older brother Basi144 seem to be the earliest extant sources of a legend which had grown within the two generations between the martyrdom of the Forty and the date of the sermons, the seventies of the fourth century. The central motif that underlies these sermons is the preservation of the number forty, that is, of the cumulative personality of the Hagioi Tessarakonta. St. Basil's homily is nothing more than an elaboration 41 G. N. Bonwetsch, "Das Testament der 40 hlartyrer," Studien zur Geschichte der Theologie u n d Kzrche, I/I (Leipzig, 1897), p. 71 ff. Cf. also the following note. 4 2 The legend in A A S S , X Mart., p. 12ff.; 0. v. Gebhardt, Acta m a r t y r u m selecta (Berlin, 1902), p. 171ff.; W. Weik, "Die syrische Legende der 40 Martyrer von Sebaste," BZ, XXI ( I ~ I Z ) ,p. 76ff.; P. Franchi de Cavalieri, "Note Agiografiche," Studi e Testi, XX/3 (19og), p. 64ff.; idem, "I Santi Quaranta Martiri di Sebastia," Studi e Testi, XLIX/7 (1928),p. 155ff.; H. Delehaye, Les origines d u culte des martyrs, Subsidia Hagiographica, XX2 (Brussels, 1933).- I should like to thank Prof. S. Der Nersessian for her advice on iconographic questions. 4 3 Migne, PG, XLVI, cols. 749ff., 757ff., 773ff. The first homily is but the beginning of the second. The dream is related in the third homily, ibid., col. 785. f i Migne, PG, XXXI, col. 508ff. St. Basil knew the diatheke.

T W O P A L A E O L O G A N MOSAIC I C O N S

99

of this motif; indeed, the whole legend is understandable only from this point of ~ i e w . ~ 5 account begins with the professio of forty soldiers of the "FulThe minata" legion which was stationed in Sebaste (Sebastia). They repeat their profession of faith at the tribunal of the Governor, are thrown into prison and condemned to die of cold, exposed on a frozen lake in or near the town. A well-heated bath is kept open on the shore to receive those who might recant. While they are slowly freezing to death, thirty-nine golden diadems are seen to descend on the "phalanx" of the Forty. The guardian of the bath house, as he is counting these crowns and wondering why there are only thirty-nine of them -one short of the number of confessors-sees one of the Forty break the ranks and run for the refuge, on entering which he is immediately dissolved into air. This so impresses the heathen guardian that he throws off his clothes and joins the martyrs on the ice in order to restore the original number of forty. The next day the limbs of those who were not yet dead are broken (the crurifragium) and the bodies loaded onto a cart and taken to be burnt. The youngest of the Forty, Melitoj46who is still alive, is left behind by the executioners who take pity on him. But his mother, who had watched the martyrdom from nearby, not wishing to see him cheated of his martyr's crown, lifts him up in her arms and runs with him after the cart. So he too is burnt, and all the ashes are thrown into a river by order of the Governor who wants to make sure that no relics are left, but his plan is frustrated and the relics are miraculously recovered from the waters. This is not the place to analyze the various versions and motifs of this legend. As we have already pointed out, it seems to be mainly concerned with the preservation of the full number of forty, which accounts for the story of the guardian and the stark episode of Melito's mother. The substitution of the faint-hearted martyr by the guardian was soon compared to the substitution of Judas by Matthias: this parallel is already drawn in St. Basil's sermon. As a matter of fact, all the essential motifs are already present in the sermons of the Cappadocian Fathers; they are, indeed, mentioned there in such an allusive form that they must have been widely known in the second half of the fourth century. We do not know, however, at what period the legend was illustrated in a full cycle of pictures. The earliest examples of this type that have come down to us are contained in a group of Psalters with marginal illustrations, the oldest of which was written in the second half of the eleventh century. This does not, of course, exclude the possibility that the narrative cycle of the legend could have originated at a much earlier period. The chief manuscript of this group, the Psalter of the British Museum, Add. MS 19352, (figs. 4 a, b) may even give us a clue as to where to look for the origin of the 45 The earliest sources after the diatheke and the homilies of St. Gregory and St. Basil are several hymns and a homily by Ephraem Syrus (C. Assemani, S. E p h r a e m S y r i opera o m n i a , V [Rome, 17432, p. 341ff.), a Latin sermon by Gaudentius of Brescia (PL, XX, col. 964ff.), the Greek Acts (AASS, X. Mart., p. rzff.), a Synaxarion (H. Delehaye, S y n a x a r i u m Ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae [Brussels, 19021, col. y ~ f f . )and , a hymn by Romanos (K. Krumbacher, "Miscellen zu Romanos," Abhandl. der K. B a y r . A k a d . der Wissenschaften, I. K1. XXIV/3 [Munich, 19071, p. 16ff.). 48 There is a discrepancy here between the legendand the diatheke, inwhich thename of the youngest member is Eunoicus.

100

OTTO D E M U S

cycle. The Psalter was illuminated in 1066 in the Studios Monastery, by a scribe named Theodore, a native of Caesarea where, it may be remembered, the mother of St. Basil and St. Gregory built a shrine for some of the relics of the Forty. If we also consider the fact that the miniatures of the Theodore Psalter are the most faithful illustrations we have of the narrative contained in St. Gregory's sermons, it is, perhaps, not too fanciful to suggest that the miniatures were inspired by an early narrative cycle that existed in the church of Caesarea. The transmission of this cycle from early prototypes down to the eleventh century may have been effected by means of illuminated manuscripts of the sermons of Basil or Gregory, or else through illustrated copies of Symeon Metaphrastes' Lives.47 There is one more element which leads us back, by a different route, to the two Cappadocians. In the group of Psalters I have mentioned the scenes from the legend of the Forty serve to illustrate Psalm 66 :12 : "We went through fire and water but thou broughtest us into a wealthy place." This refers to the posthumous fate of the Forty, namely to the Governor's attempt to destroy their relics by fire and water rather than to their actual martyrdom. Now, this rather artificial connection is not a late invention, since it is already found in the twentieth homily of St. Basil who may very well have invented it .48 In the London Psalter the cycle unfolds itself in the margins of two pages, 81 and 81", beginning with the tribunal and ending with the salvaging of the relics. I t is closely followed by the Barberini Psalter49 (fol. 103~)and by the Russian Psalterof 1397 (fol. 86).50Since the burning of the bodies is not represented in these manuscripts, the cycle must be regarded as an abbreviated version of a fuller one, which must, therefore, have existed at an earlier date. An even more abridged redaction is contained in the Hamilton Psalter, of the thirteenth century, at Berlin151which has only two scenes, namely the group of the Martyrs on the lake and the collecting of the relics. The narrative cycle which has found its finest literary expression in a hymn by R ~ m a n u sis, ~not ~ alone in pointing to Asia Minor as the place of origin of the iconography of the Forty Martyrs; another mode of representation, completely opposed to the scenic cycle, seems also to have been prevalent in that region, namely the representation of the Saints as forty half figures clad in patrician robes and enclosed in medallions. This manner of representing the Forty Martyrs by "pseudo-portraits" identified by the names given them in 4 7 H. Delehaye, Les lLgendes grecques des saints militaires (Paris, 1909) ; Bibliotheca Hagiographica , 168f., 290. Graeca (2nd ed., Brussels, ~ g o g )pp. 48 The motifs of fire and water and the reference to David (the Psalter) are also found in an Ekphrasis (Cod. Marc. gr. 524) of a representation of the Forty Martyrs that existed in the propylaion of one of their churches in Constantinople; cf. Nios 'EAAqvopvfipwv, VIII (191I), p. 126f. 48 Vat. Barb. 372 (cf. A. De Wald, in Hesperia, XI11 [1g44], p. 76ff.). 50 Leningrad, Public Libr., no. 1252, F O VI (cf. Istoriia Russkogo Iskusstva, ed. Akad. Nauk SSSR., I11 [Moscow, 19551, p. 94, with bibliography). 51 Berlin, Kupferstich Kabinett, no. 78AG (Hamilton I I ~ )fol. , 130. 5 2 K. Krumbacher, "Miszellen." The hymn contains the motifs of fire, water, and the substitution of Judas by Matthias; the words of St. Basil are in some cases reproduced literally.

T W O P A L A E O L O G A N MOSAIC I C O N S

101

the Diatheke is found in five cave churches of Cappadocia, among them Toqale (the New Church) and Tschaouch In.53 Some of these representations are as early as the tenth century. Cappadocia is not, however, the only region in which this mode of representing the Forty Martyrs occurs: other, though later, examples are found in Sicily (the mosaics of M ~ n r e a l eand ) ~ ~in Russia.55 A similar method of representing the Martyrs' portraits is shown in Syriac manuscripts of the thirteenth century, in which the medallions, arranged in a honeycomb pattern, fill two facing pages56 (fig. 5 ) . These rows of medallions are the exact pictorial counterpart of chanted litanies which must have been current from comparatively early times, though their earliest extant example is in a tenth-century manuscript (Paris, gr. 476).57The litany or hymn, as it is called in the introductory verse, seems to have been divided into two halves each containing the invocation of twenty saints, a bipartition that we shall meet again in another group of representations of the Forty. As regards the litany, only its first half appears to have been copied in the Paris manuscript. The names of the saints are those of the Diatheke, while the ideas expressed in each invocation have been developed from the names by association or alliteration. The resulting effect is just as monotonous as that of a row of medallions. The main development of the iconographic theme of the Forty Martyrs is not, however, connected either with this "portrait" type or with the "cyclic" representation described above. What eventually became the "classic" mode of depicting the Forty Martyrs lies midway between the two poles, the static and the narrative. This "classic" type represents the martyrdom of the Forty in one image, supplemented by marginal scenes which allude to the most important motif of the legend, that of the substitution of the deserter by the proselyte.58 The earliest example of this type that has come down to us is found in the apse of the Chapel of the Forty Martyrs at Sta Maria Antiqua in Rome, of the seventh or eighth century59 (fig. 6). The attitudes of the Martyrs, with their hands raised in orant gestures, conforms more to the earliest versions of the Acts, in which the emphasis is laid on the triumph of the Saints who praise God during their "agon," than to the evocative sermons of the two Cappadocian at hers in which the suffering and the painful death of the

" 3. de Jerphanion, Les iglises rz~pestresdeCappadoce, I (Paris, 1925), pp. 314, 316, 529; 11, pp. 26, 158f.,167f.,276. 54 0. Demus, T h e Mosaics of N o r m a n Sicily, pp. 121, 200, 235. 55 Kiev, St. Sophia: 0. Powstenko, op. cit., p. 112; Nereditsa: V. K. Myasoyedov and N. Sychev, Freski Spasa-Nereditsy (Leningrad, 1925), Index, p. 25. 58 Vat. Cod. syr. 559 (G.de Jerphanion, Les mzniatures d u manuscrit syriaque N . 559 de la BibliothBque Vaticane [Vatican City, 19401, P. 88, pls. XI, XII), and London, Add. MS 7170 (ibid., p. 91, fig. 38). 57 D. Amand, "Un court poBme en l'honneur des Quarante Martyrs de Skbaste," Scriptorium, I11 (19491, p. 52ff. 58 In accordance with the "complettierende Typus" of Wickhoff or the "simultaneous method" of Weitzmann: cf. K. Weitzmann, Illustrations in Roll and Codex (Princeton, 1g47), P. 12ff. 59 J. Wilpert, Die romischen Mosaiken u n d Malereien der Bauten vom 4. bis 8. Jahrhundert, I1 (Freiburg i. B., 1916), p. 722; IV, pl. 199. The date is controversial, as is also that of the fresco in the oratory of Sta Lucia, Syracuse: P. Orsi, Sicilia bizantinu, I (Rome, 1g42), p. 8off., pl. v. The latter painting was brought to my attention by Dr. Hans Belting.

102

OTTO D E M U S

Martyrs are described in harrowing detail.60The figures are arranged in three rows, in a regular pattern; a blue zone at their feet represents the ice of the lake, while a celestial apparition at the top of the composition, with rays descending on the "phalanx," imparts a hieratic note to the group. On the right is the bath house, guarded by a seated figure with shield and lance; a man is seen entering the door (the defecting member of the group), while the converted guard joins the "phalanx" from the left. The simplicity and relatively static character of this composition are in accord with its early date. The main group of figures is little more than a group portrait, as it was frequently represented in Roman art, from the "school group" of the Capua Museum to the sacrificial scenes of Dura-Europo~.~l Sta Maria Antiqua, however, contains a second representation of the Forty which is even closer to its Roman prototypes, a "celestial group portrait" pure and simple, which shows the Martyrs in a well-ordered group, all with haloes and in patrician costumes, with Christ appearing above them in a medallion. This representation is on one of the side walls of the chapel,62 at right angles to the image of the "martyrdom" and, apparently, intended to be viewed together with the latter. \Ve would probably be justified in interpreting it as a depiction of the Martyrs after their "agon," as saints in heaven, still forming their indivisible "phalanx. " There was yet a third image of the Forty Martyrs in Sta Maria A n t i q ~ a , ~ ~ which seems to have been as unique as the one just described, but of which only a small fragment is preserved. The part that is still visible shows two figures clad in loin cloths and, above them, the remnants of a figure with a crenellated crown, doubtless a personification of the city of Sebaste, conceived in the Hellenistic manner. That the painter was a Greek seems certain because of the Greek subscription containing a prayer. All three compositions of Sta Maria Antiqua, ancient as they are, may be derived from even earlier prototypes; but only one of the three iconographic schemes lived on to become a dominant type: the one represented in the apse, with the complementary side scenes. Of course, there were considerable compositional problenls involved in this rendering of the scene in the shape of a horizontal rectangle : it was as difficult to arrange satisfactorily forty standing figures, as it was to find a suitable place for the episode of the deserter and the proselyte. In some cases the two scenes were simply omitted, as in a miniature of the Moscow h f e n ~ l o g i u m(fig. ~ ~ 7) which, though belonging to the late eleventh or early twelfth century, follows quite faithfully a late tenth-century 60 h combination of the two interpretations is found in an inscription in the Cypriote church of Asinou, A.D. 1106: "It is flesh that here bears the winter's cold. Thou shalt hear the martyrs' sobs and groaning. They are steadfast as they suffer under the sharpness of the frost; at the clouds they look and not upon their pangs." (Archaeologia, LXXXIII [1933], p. 328f., pl. 9811);similarly an epigram by Manuel Philes ed. E. Miller, I, p. 438. The Capua mosaic was found in St. -4ngelo in Formis (ill. in Caserta and its Province [Caserta, n. d.], p. 17). Dura, Temple of Bel, Sacrifice of the Tribune Julius Terentius, ca. A.D. 239. 6 2 J. Wilpert, op. cit., IV, pl. zoo. 63 Ibid., 11, p. 709; IV, pl. 177. 64 D. K. Trenev, Miniatzwes d u minologe grec d u XIe siBcle no. 183, de la BibliothBque Synodale de Moscou (Moscow, 191I ) , pl. ~111136.

T W O P A L A E O L O G A N MOSAIC I C O N S

103

prototype of the type of the Vatican Menologium. This simplified composition is also found in other m a n u ~ c r i p t sin ; ~one ~ of these, the Menologium of St. Saba in Jerusalem,BB the illuminator attempted to solve the compositional problem by building up a symmetrical, bipartite composition with two bending or, rather, collapsing figures on either side of the central group, and by enclosing the entire mass of figures in a lunette formed by the shape of the frozen lake. This device was also used in monumental painting; we may even go so far as to say that it originated in wall painting or mosaic. In the considerably later (middle of the fourteenth century) wall painting of Lesnovo, Serbia,67 (fig. 8) the scene is actually inscribed in a lunette and divided into two halves by a double window. Such a division of the scene into two halves apparently proved to be convenient: this is, perhaps, the reason for the wide dissemination, from Cappadocia to Serbia, of an arrangement whereby the Martyrs were disposed in two groups of twenty on either side of a barrel vault, with the bath house at one end, as in %Ea, SerbiaB8(figs.9, a, b), or in the tympanum, as in the church of the Forty Martyrs near Souvech in CappadociaB9 (fig. 10). This type of representation, on either side of a barrel vault, does, indeed, seem to have been the standard one in wall painting from the eleventh to the first half of the fourteenth century.'O At this date, however, it was challenged by an entirely different kind of image, shaped like an upright rectangle, in the format of an icon. Its appearance in wall painting after about 1325 -a good dated example (ca. 1340) is found in DeEani, Serbia7* (fig. 11)-is part of a larger process that is characterized, among other things, by the intrusion of "iconic" forms into monumental painting. There can hardly be any doubt that the upright rectangular met hod of representing the Forty Martyrs was developed in icon painting and carving as early as the tenth, perhaps even the late ninth, century in Constantinople itself. The earliest examples that have come down to us are two tenth-century ivory reliefs in Berlin and Leningrad72 (figs. 12, 13). Of course, the problem of arranging forty standing figures in an upright rectangle is even more difficult than it is in a horizontal rectangle, unless the artist were to pack the frame with heads neatly arranged in rows. If, on the other hand, the figures were concentrated in the lower half of the rectangle, the upper half was in danger of being left empty or, at least, of being inadequately filled. To remedy this the scene of the bath house had to a E. g. Messina, Cod. S. Salvatore no. 27 (cf. Ch. Diehl in Me'langes d'archLologie et d'histoire de I'Ecole Frangaise de Rome, V I I I [1888], p. 320), and Dionysiou, Cod. 50 (Sp.Lambros, Catalogue, I,

P. 322).

66 Jerusalem, Greek Patriarchate, no. 208, Menaion of St. Sabas (A.Baumstark in Oriens Christianus, Ser. III/I [1g26], p. 70, pl. 11). 67 N. Okunev, "Lesnovo," L'art byzantin chez les Slaves, I (Paris, 1g30), p. qgff., pl. XXXVIII. G. Millet and A. Frolow, La peinture du moyen-dge en Yougoslavze, I (Paris, 1g54), pl. 60/2,3. G. de Jerphanion, Les e'glises, op.cit., pl. 16114.In Syracuse the Forty Martyrs are divided into four groups of ten each. See supra, note 59. ' 0 Ohrid (north chapel), Studenica, SopoEani, Gradac: cf. G. Millet and A. Frolow, La peinture, op. cit., I , 37/4, 91/2; 11, 28, 29; 62/4. ' 1 V. R. Petkovi6 and Dj. BoSkovi6, Manastir DeZani, I1 (Belgrade, 1941)~pl. CXXI/I. 7 2 Berlin (A. Goldschmidt and K. Weitzmann, op. cit., 11, p. 27, pl. 3, no. 10); Leningrad (ibid., 11, P. 3, no. 9).

104

OTTO D E M U S

be moved up and the remaining area filled with a heavenly apparition that took up more space than the Hand of God which appears, e.g., in the Moscow Menologium. To solve these problems the carvers of the two ivories (or their prototype) seem to have borrowed or to have been inspired by an existing compositional scheme that contained similar constituent parts, namely an agitated group of figures and a celestial apparition above-an arrangement that was commonly used for the Ascension of Christ. Very rarely in the course of the Byzantine period do we encounter the creation of an entirely new compositional pattern; usually a time-honored scheme which contained similar features was taken as a point of departure, and only gradually did the new scheme free itself from the parent form. The compositional scheme of the Ascension also left space for the insertion of the bath house between the "phalanx" of the Martyrs and the enthroned Pantokrator with adoring Angels. The guardian who joins the phalanx in the place of the deserter may be identified, in the Berlin ivory, with the figure in the right lower corner, an old man who is shedding his garments as he approaches the group. Not only the general con~position,but also the figural design of the Berlin ivory, including every attitude, every movement, and every facial type, is found again in a silverpoint drawing, parts of which are preserved in a Vatican ~ 14). The drawing must originally have manuscript, Cod. Barb. lat. 1 4 4 ~(fig. formed an upright rectangle measuring ca. 58 by 44 cm. ; of this only the lower half is preserved, showing the greater part of the "phalanx." Unfortunately, however, a large area of this very delicate drawing was written over, in the fourteenth or fifteenth century, so that only the first five figures from the left are distinctly visible. While, as I have said, it tallies in every detail with the Berlin ivory, the drawing is more elaborate, especially as regards hair, beards, and drapery. Thus, it is hardly likely that it was copied from the Berlin or any other ivory; it seems rather to have been derived from a painted icon of about the same size as the drawing. There is, of course, no possibility of establishing the date of this presumed icon; the drawing itself, which may be considerably later than its prototype, seems to belong to the thirteenth century. The monuments studied so far make it possible to reconstruct the missing parts of the Dumbarton Oaks icon (figs. 1-3). In the three rows which make up the phalanx, including the collapsing figure in the foreground, thirty-nine figures or heads can be discerned, which means that two are, at present, missing: the deserter and the proselyte. A trace of the first, a part of his loincloth, can be seen in the upper row near the right edge; he was, apparently, represented in the act of breaking away in order to enter the bath house which must have been immediately above, where there is now a large gap filled with gilt wax. There is also a remnant of the guardian: his arm and hand, lifted in 7 3 W. F. Volbach, "Le miniature del Codice Vat. Pal. lat. 1071 'De Arte Venandi cum Avibus,'" Estr. dai Rendiconti della Pont. Accad. Romana d i Archeologia, X V (1g3g), p. 28, figs. 23, 24 (cf. H. Swarzenski in T h e Avt Bulletin [1g42], p. 298); B. Degenhart, "Autonome Zeichnungen bei mittelp. 98, fig, 2 0 . Accordalterlichen Kiinstlern," Miinchener Jahrbuch der bildenden K u n s t , N . F., I (1950)~ ing to Degenhart there was an intermediary link between the original and the drawing; the latter was traced from the intermediary version.

T W O P A L A E O L O G A N MOSAIC I C O N S

prayer, can be seen at the left edge of the gap, above the last letter of the inscription. He must have been represented kneeling, with his back to the bath, looking up towards the celestial apparition. Thus, the entire scene of desertion and substitution was moved to the upper right side, as in the ivories; the inscription and the forty descending crowns were arranged asymmetrically, so as to leave sufficient space for the supplementary scene. In the composition of the icon the effects of lateral compression can be felt quite clearly, and rather painfully. The artist seems to have followed a model of oblong format and, as is usual with compositional re-arrangements, to have started translating his model into an upright rectangle beginning from the left. The sequence of the figures in the left half is almost normal and organic, every figure being afforded sufficient space. From the middle axis on, however, the arrangement begins to be crowded, and at the right edge the rows of figures, especially the front row, are almost curved back with overcrowding. Furthermore, some of the busts in the second and third rows seem to have been conceived without regard to the remainder of their bodies. Thus, the entire composition is little more than an assemblage of heads, of character types, rather than a "phalanx" of figures. Only in the front row (and in a few half figures of the second row) has there been an attempt to go beyond this j uxtaposition of stock portrait heads. A very similar composition, with similar faults and virtues, came to light recently only to be lost again, in an annex to the Euphemia Martyrion in Constantinople; to all appearances it was a work of the fourteenth century.74 The main difference seems to have consisted in the fact that the figures were more widely spaced and, consequently, their movements were more clearly differentiated. On the whole, it appears that the artist's most difficult problem was not the general arrangement of the composition-a problem that he did his best to solve after the pattern of familiar iconographic schemes -but the differentiation of forty standing figures, and the convincing depiction of their suffering; for this is what the artist of the Dumbarton Oaks icon set out to do, just as if he had wished to illustrate one of the sermons of the Cappadocian Fathers. Every shade of psychological reaction is depicted here, from stoicism to despair; some of the bodies are rendered as if contracted by the cold; one of the Martyrs is breaking down; another, somewhat left of center, has collapsed and is held by one of his younger comrades. Nevertheless, considerable restraint is shown in portraying the suffering'--more mental than physical -of the Martyrs of the Dumbarton Oaks icon, and this is especially evident when their attitudes are compared with those of the Berlin ivory. The mosaic offers a convincing and dignified representation of anguish, despair, and gloom, quite different from the grotesque contortions found in the Berlin ivory. 74 A. M. Schneider, "Grabung im Bereich des Euphemia Martyrions zu Konstantinopel," Archaeologischer Anzeiger (1g43),p. 280, fig. 16. Schneider's assertion that the fresco was almost monochrome should be taken c u m grano salis. Prof. P. Underwood tells me that the painting was already badly weathered a t the time of its discovery; it was certainly very much damaged and faded when I saw i t in 1951.

OTTO D E M U S Among the many renderings of this subject there are a few that are even more turbulent than the Berlin ivory; one of the most agitated compositions is that of the now destroyed wall painting of VodoEa in Macedonia, of the eleventh ( ? ) century, only part of which is known through an unsatisfactory (fig. 15). I t has been claimed, on the one hand, that the agitated realism of movement, gestures, and grimaces, as exemplified by the VodoEa fresco, was inspired by Hellenistic models; on the other hand, it is held by a number of scholars that the spirit of this fresco is typically Macedonian and contrary to the classical spirit of Constantinople. There may be some truth in both of these points of view, insofar as, generally speaking, Macedonian and metropolitan artists, while using the same late antique models, gave them different interpretations. However, before we analyse the character of the antique prototypes used by the mosaicist of the Dumbarton Oaks panel, and the use which he made of these prototypes, we should take another factor into account. This, "the middle-Byzantine" factor, as we may call it, affects the attitudes and movements of the individual figures of the Dumbarton Oaks icon.76 The closest parallels to these attitudes and to the general "mood" of the group of Saints can be found in representations which, at first, seem far removed from the iconographic context to which the Forty Martyrs belong. I t is almost with a shock that one realizes that these parallels are found in the groups of damned and tormented souls which usually occur in representations of the Last Judgement. The mosaic of Torcello, though somewhat provincial (especially in the lower parts of the huge composition) and all but ruined by bad r e ~ t o r a t i o n , ~ ~ (fig. 16) shows, for example, the man clutching his face with both hands who recurs in the Dumbarton Oaks mosaic as the third figure from the right in the middle row. Both mosaics also have in common the man with one hand raised to his head, the other to his breast -he is the second from the right in both instances. In another representation of the "worm that sleepeth not," ~ 17) the same gesture is found once more, in DeEani, Serbia (about 1 3 4 0 ) , ~(fig. as well as that of the man with the folded arms. The impressive representation of the Last Judgement in the Parecclesion of the Kariye Camii79(fig. 18) is steeped in the same atmosphere of gloom and despair that is so characteristic of the Dumbarton Oaks icon. The astonishing iconographic relationship between the two themes, the martyrdom of the Forty and the torment of damned souls in the Last Judgement is finally brought home by a most characteristic detail: the fresco of the Last Judgement in the Kariye (fig. 19) and that of 75 K. Miyatev, "Les Quarante Martyrs, fragment de fresque de VodoEa, Mac6doinelHL'art byzantin chez les Slaves, I (1930)~ p. ~ o ~ f fpl. . , X, 2 ; G. Millet and A. Frolow, op. cit., I, pl. 14, 5. 78 For a different interpretation suggesting a derivation from classical prototypes, see Prof. Weitzmann's paper in this volume of the Dumbarton Oaks Papers, p. 66. 77 0. Demus, "Studies among the Torcello mosaics," The Burlington Magazine, LXXXII (1g43), p. 136ff.; LXXXIV (1944),p. 41 ff.; LXXXV (1944),p. 195ff. The mosaic should be dated in the first half of the twelfth century. 78 V. R. Petkovi6 and Dj. BoSkovi6, 09. cit., pl. c c ~ x x x I, . 70 P. A. Underwood, "Third Preliminary Report on the Restoration of the Frescoes in the Kariye Camii a t Istanbul by the Byzantine Institute, 1956," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 12 (1958), p. 235ff., figs. 20-22.

T W O PALAEOLOGAN MOSAIC I C O N S

107

the Forty Martyrs in &a, Serbia (fig. gb) have a very odd figure in common, that of a man seen from the rear with head thrown back.80 The theme of the Last Judgement is not, however, the only one that shows close contacts with that of the Forty Martyrs: the figures of contrite monks, doing penance by exposing themselves to cold, who appear in the illustrations of the Penitential Canon affixed to John Climacus' Heavenly Ladder, as shown in the Vatican Manuscript, Cod. gr. 1754 (fol. 13"),belong to the same categorys1 (fig. 20). The caption above the illustration reads: "These torture themselves in the cold, and shiver, stiffened with frost." The figures are depicted in the same poses as the Forty Martyrs or the damned souls: cold and despair furnish the common denominator. Byzantine art seized on such common denominators, in the representation of single figures as well as of complex scenes, and applied them in different contexts. Within a given sphere-in this case, that of agony, anguish, and cold-figure types were almost interchangeable; they could be used equally for martyrs, damned souls or penitents. I t was left to the individual artist to impart to each of these interchangeable figures a special character to fit the context. But the adherence to types of this generalized nature is one of the things that gave Byzantine art its grandiose homogeneity. Of course, not all the attitudes and gestures of the Forty Martyrs in the Dumbarton Oaks icon were drawn from this sphere. Others are derived from New Testament iconography. For instance, some of the freezing figures, especially those hugging themselves with both arms, may have been taken most characteristic figure, ;~~ from representations of the B a p t i ~ m another, which occurs in many pictures of the Forty Martyrs, can also be traced to a New Testament scene: the sagging body of the Martyr upheld by the youthful figure in the foreground is an adaptation of the dead body of Christ, held by the Virgin in the Descent from the Cross.83In the Dumbarton Oaks icon there is only one figure in this posture, whereas in the Jerusalem Menologiums4there are two. The Berlin ivory and its relatives (figs. 12-14) contain a group of two figures, one resting its head on the breast of another, which recalls the ChristSt. John group of the Last Supper. Later representations of the Forty Martyrs abound with highly agitated and strangely contorted figures. One very characteristic, if somewhat extreme, example is the collapsing man seen from the rear with his head turned upside down, whom we have already met in ZiEas5 (fig. 9) ; others of a similar kind are seen, for instance, in a sixteenth-century so

Ibid., fig. 21,and G. Millet and A. Frolow, op. cit., I, pl. 60/2,3. J. R. Martin, The Illustration of the Heavenly Ladder of John Climacus (Princeton, 1954),p. 138ff.,

fig. 266. Further illustrations of the theme are enumerated ibid., p. 139. Professor Martin considers i t possible that the miniature painter was inspired by a representation of the Forty Martyrs; both types, however, are more likely to have been derived from representations of the Last Judgement. E. g. Brussels, Coll. Stoclet, fourteenth-century icon (V. N. Lazarev, Istoriya vizantiiskoi Zivopisi, I [Moscow, 19471, pl. XLII); frescoes of Aquileia, crypt (La Basilica di Aquileja [Bologna, 19331, pl. LXXI). 83 FO; example, Paris, Bibl. Nat. cod. gr. 543 (G. Millet, Recherches sur l'iconographie de ~'gvan~ile, aux X I Ve, X Ve et X V I e sidcles [Paris, 19161,fig. 168). 84 See supra, note 66. See supra, note 80.

OTTO DEMUS

icon of the Byzantine Museum of Athenss6 (fig. 21) in which three figures have already broken down and are sitting on the ground and others are collapsing, while the guard's extended arm is clasped by two of the martyrs as a sign of welcome. One could hardly imagine a stronger contrast than that between this lively work of popular art and the noble restraint of the Dumbarton Oaks mosaic. Many of the facial types of the portable mosaic appear, like the postures of the figures, to have been borrowed from the realm of religious iconography. Some of the Martyrs' heads resemble the usual types of the evangelists. The features of St. Luke can be found at least three times with slight variations; some of the bald heads with long beards recall St. John, while those with long grey hair and beard are reminiscent of St. matt he^.^' A number of figures can be compared to one or the other of the prophets, while others are modelled after representations of saints. An especially close affinity as regards facial types exists between the Dumbarton Oaks icon and the mosaics and frescoes of the Kariye Camii: the fifth head from the right in the bottom row is, for instance, very similar to the head of St. Elpidiphoros in the Constantinopolitan mosaics.88 Others, like the youthful heads in the bottom row of the icon can be found once more in the frescoes of the Kariye Parecclesion, particularly in the hell-fire group of the Last Judgementsg (fig. 18). In these frescoes we also find the same type of shaggy bearded head, e.g., the first on the right in the middle row. Ultimately, however, many of the facial types found in our icon as well as in the mosaics and frescoes of the Kariye Camii can be traced not to models belonging to religious art, but to antique prototypes. The profile head in the top row of the icon, for instance, is reminiscent of that of Alexander in the famous Pompeian mosaic ; a head similar to the fifth from the left in the top row and the fourth in the bottom row can be found in the Centaur mosaic from Hadrian's villa, now at Berlin;gothe fourth from the left in the top row may be derived from a Hellenistic portrait like that of Dioscorides (= Krateuas) in the Vienna Herbal,g1and the youthful heads in the first row are also as Hellenistic as can be. But not only were some of the facial types derived from antique models; several attitudes, too, are essentially Greek -the contraposto of the first figure on the left for instance. No less Hellenistic is the manner in which the flesh is modelled, partly by continuous shading, partly by glittering white highlights G. A. Sotiriou, 'OGqyo~-roil BuLavr~voOMouoeiou 'ASqvGv, 2nd ed. (Athens, 1941), pl. 6. Luke: first and tenth figures, top row; fourth figure, middle row. John: third figure, middle row. Matthew: fifth figure, middle row; second figure, bottom row. as Cf. Th. Schmit, "Kahrie Djami," Izvestiya Russk. Arkh. Instituta v Konstantinopole, XI (1906), pl. XIX, 66; other types ibid., pl. XXII, 165; LXIV, 129; LXXXIV. 89 P. A. Underwood, Third Preliminary Report, figs. 21, 22. 90 G. E. R ~ Z ZLa O , pittura Ellenistico-Romana (Milan, 1g2g), pi. CLXXXV. 91 Vienna, Nat. Libr., Cod. Med. graec. I , fol. 4: Dioskorides and Heuresis. illustrated in V. N. Lazarev, Istoriia viz. iivopisi, 11, pl. 16; P. Buberl, "Die byzantinischen Handschriften, 11," Beschreibendes Verzeichnis der illuminierten Handschriften in ~sterreich, VIII (IV/I) (Leipzig, 1937)~ 07

pl. 111.

TWO PALAEOLOGAN MOSAIC ICONS

which illuminate the foreheads, the tips of the noses and the hair, and light up the eyes. Some of the white highlights have a somewhat impasto quality: the tiny white tesserae of which they consist project ever so slightly from the otherwise smooth surface of the mosaic.92 The modelling of the drapery is bolder than that of the bodies. Jagged patches of light and dark are interwoven so as to form a lively pattern. Here, too, the artist's familiarity with Hellenistic models of the illusionistic manner can be clearly felt. The classicising nobility of the Dumbarton Oaks icon, the Hellenistic flavor of its facial types and modelling, as well as its subdued and somewhat monochrome coloring, enable us to classify this as a work of the so-called Palaeologan renaissance, produced in Constantinople. As to types and style, a close parallel is provided, as we have seen, by the mosaics and frescoes of the Kariye Camii which date in all probability from the second decade of the fourteenth century. Some slight differences of style, however, which can be detected by a detailed analysis, seem to suggest that the icon should be dated two or three decades earlier than the decoration of the Kariye. The feet, for instance, though already "broken" at the ankles, have not yet the characteristic "flat-iron" shape of the Kariye, the crania are not as bulbous, the hands not as prong-like. Neither the composition as a whole nor the design of the bodies exhibits the calligraphic linearism of the Kariye mosaics. In fact, the figures of the icon still betray the experimental character of the art of the thirteenth century and its classical trends. One feels that the painter of the icon -and the mosaicist was a painter par excellence-regarded his Hellenistic models as something only just discovered and therefore deeply exciting. In some cases he copied them so closely that certain heads of the icon, if considered in isolation, would seem to belong to the sixth century rather than to the late thirteenth. A case in point is the sixth head from the left in the front row, the uppermost in the group of four: the quick turning of the head and the flashing glance directed upward at an oblique angle recall the illusionistic manner of the Vienna Genesis rather than any mediaeval method of depicting the face of a saint. But, as has been pointed out above, there are other faces in the icon which do not correspond to any antique type and do not show an antique treatment; and it is this uneven character, this medley of the antique in its various forms, both classical and illusionist, and of the mediaeval, that distinguishes this work of an experimental, exploratory art from the perfectly balanced, homogeneous and assured art of the Kariye. Compared to the Kariye mosaics with their deeply saturated style, their insistent homophony of forms, their mannerist abbreviations, the Dumbarton Oaks icon has no "style" at all: it is a document of an artist's search rather than a product of skilled routine. Thus it is one of the small number of monuments which illuminate for us the highly complex process of the genesis of Palaeologan art .93 92

93

A similar technique is found in the mosaics of the Kariye Camii. 0. Demus, "Die Entstehung," passim.

OTTO D E M U S ST. JOHN C H R Y S O S T O M ~ ~ (Figures 2 2 , 23)

THE ICON O F

The more recently acquired of the two Dumbarton Oaks icons represents a half figure of St. John Chrysostom in a frontal attitude. The wooden panel on which it is set measures 13 by 18 cm. When it was acquired, the icon was encased in a narrow metal frame which, though not recent, can hardly be regarded as the original one.95The mosaic surface is very well preserved except for some cracks and a very few missing tesserae, mostly in the golden ground. The interstices between the impasto highlights of the forehead are somewhat discolored; otherwise, the colors are as bright today as when the icon was made. The white folystavrion of the Saint is covered with red crosses, outlined in gold; the omophorion is also white, but shot with gold and decorated with large, dark blue crosses with gold contours. The sleeve of the undergarment is red and gold. The golden gospel book has a red edge and is set with red, blue, and green stones. The most outstanding feature of the icon is the large halo in low relief, with an all-over pattern of small crosses in red, blue, and green against a white and gold ground; it appears almost like a life belt or a cushion in which the head is embedded. The subdued, flat colors of the head stand in effective contrast to the gaily colored patterns of the nimbus and vestments. The hair and beard are dull brown with a little pink, olive, and black; grey, olive, light brown, pink, and white make up the flesh tones -the white tesserae projecting from the surface like highlights put on in impasto. The ground is gold, the highly decorative inscription spelling the name of the Saint is black ; the inner border is of the same colors as the halo. The pedigree of the icon is the best imaginable. When it first became known, it was in the monastery of Vatopedi on Mt. Athos. At the end of the last century it was presented by the monastery to Count Nelidov, then Russian ambassador at the Sublime Porte. With the Nelidov collection it came to Paris; Dumbarton Oaks acquired it in 1954. The great preacher and patriarch, whose portrait is the subject of the icon, was certainly one of the most deeply venerated of the Fathers, although he was neither a miracle worker nor a martyr in the strict sense of the terms. He was, however, reckoned among the confessors, having died in exile in 407 in Colchis, where he was banished by the Empress Eudoxia and her party.96The 94 Handbook (1g55), no. 291, p. 147. Bibliography (with the exception of general handbooks), in chronological sequence: D. Ainalov, "MozaiEeskaia portativnaia ikona sv. Ioanna Zlatousta Vatoped. monastyria," Vizantiiskii Vremennik, V I (18gg), P. 75ff.; N. P. Kondakov, Pamiatniki ( ~ g o z ) , p. 116ff.;A. Muiioz, L'art byzantin d l'exposition de Grottaferrata (Rome, 1go6), p. 170; J. WuescherBecchi, "Saggio d'iconografia di San Giovanni Crisostomo," X p v a o m o p ~ ~ Sa t, u d i e ricerche (Rome, 1908), p. 1026; 0. Wulff and M. Alpatov, Denkmaler (1g25), pp. 61f., 296; V. N. Lazarev, Byzantine Icons (1937), p. 250; S. Bettini, "Appunti" (1938), p. 17; V. N. Lazarev, Istorzia (1g47), p. 360; W. Felicetti-Liebenfels, Geschichte, p. 65. 96 Illustrated in the Handbook of the Dumbarton Oaks Collection (rg55), p. 150. 96 The chief authorities for the life of St. John Chrysostom, Palladius, Socrates (lib.VI), Sozomen (lib.VIII), Theodoret (lib.V), Isidore of Pelusium (Letters 11, q), are quoted by W. R. W. Stephens, St. John Chrysostom. H i s Life and T i m e s (London, 1883); for his works and his veneration see Chr. Baur, S. J e a n Chrysostome et ses oeuvres duns l'histoire littkraire (Louvain-Paris, 1907); H . Kellner, "Die Verehrung des hl. Johannes Chrysostomus im Morgen- und Abendland," Xpvaomoyi~&, p. 1007ff.

T W O P A L A E O L O G A N MOSAIC ICONS

111

Saint's claim to distinction is twofold: he was an intrepid fighter for the freedom and integrity of the Church, and he was a brilliant orator. I t is the latter quality for which he is especially remembered; it has earned him the sobriquet of the Golden-Mouthed (used since the sixth century) and has provided some of the stock motifs of the many epigrams that have been composed to honor the Saint or to describe his images, especially in the middle and late Byzantine periods. One of these ever-recurring conceits which have served poets from classical times on, is the affected astonishment that the portrait of Another common motif was that the great preacher was obstinately St. John Chrysostom inherited the gift of words from St. Paul who had it ~ s most elaborate form of this idea can be found in later Byzanfrom C h r i ~ t .The tine icons and wall paintings which show St. John writing at his desk with St. Paul standing at his side and prompting him ; apostles, saints, and monks surround the group.99This iconographic type was subsequently enriched with additional motifs and developed into the nqyfi T ~ o So c p i a s , the earliest extant example of which belongs to the late eleventh century.loOIn representations of this subject the scroll on which the Saint is writing becomes a flowing fountain of water from which monks and clerics are drinking.lOl A most interesting variant of this allegorical theme is found in the painting at Lesnovo, ~ e r b i a (middle of the fourteenth century), where the persons who are drawing and drinking the life-giving water are explicitly described as painters in an inscription which reads :Oi L o y p a c p o t ptpo13[V]TE ~ f i vTEXV~TT)V $QIV uai KEPCTVUVTE (sic).Io2 Thus, St. John Chrysostom had become the preceptor of painters. This was not, however, his only function in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, a period when the combative patriarch and his writings gained especial importance. After the Latins had taken Constantinople in 1204, they not only transferred the greater part of his relics from the Church of the Holy Apostles to St. Peter's in Rome,lo3but also made Chrysostom the patron of the Latin Patriarchate of Constantinople, a choice which was suggested by the fact that Chrysostom himself as well as his followers had solicited the help of Rome, and appealed to the Pope's judgement in their struggle against Theophilus. I t was this fact as much as Chrysostom's endeavors to preserve the 97 Manuel Philes, ed. Miller, I, p. 58f. (no.CXXXV). @a Cf. the inscription on fol. 7 of Ms. gr. 224 of the Bibl. Nat., Paris (H.Omont, Miniatures des plus anciens manuscrits grecs de la BibliothBque Nationale [Paris, 19291, pl. CI) and in Cod. Jerusalem, St. Saba 33 (XI saec.): X p ~ m o im l 6 p a W ~ ~ V K~bE llairhov m 6 p a Z ~ 6 p a86 llairhov -rb Xpvooo~6povo ~ 6 p a . See also A. Xyngopoulos, "Aylos 'IwCrvvqs 6 Xpvo6o-ropog "llqyfi T?S Eoqias," ' E ~ q p ~ p I'sA p x a ~ o h o y t ~ f i ,1942/44 (19481, P. I ff. SQ Xyngopoulos, op. czt., figs. 1-6: icon in the Loverdos collection; Cod. Vat. gr. 766; Cod. Athen.

gr. 7 : fresco in Chilandari.

- l b o Homilies of St. John Chrysostom, Milan, Ambros. A. 172: (Xyngopoulos, op. cit., fig. 7); other examples ibid. 10'-1n later examples like the fresco in the Aphendiko, Mistra, A.D. 1366 (Xyngopoulos, op. cit., fig. IO), SS. Gregory and Basil are represented side by side with John Chrysostom, with fountains issuing from the writings of each. 102 S. RadojCi6, "Die Entstehung der Malerei der palaologischen Renaissance," Jahrbuch der &err. Byzant. Gesellschaft, V I I (1958), p. 116. l o 3 A A S S , Jan. 11, p. 760.

112

OTTO D E M U S

unity of the Church, that prompted the propagators of the ecclesiastic union with Rome in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries to turn to his writings. John Chrysostom was, therefore, often quoted by the unionist patriarch of Constantinople, John Beccus, in his work on Church Union, a book that helped to bring about an ephemeral union of the two Churches at the Council of Lyonsin 1274. Beccus was deposed and imprisoned in 1282 by Andronicus I1 who renounced the short-lived union.lo4I t would be tempting to try to connect the Dumbarton Oaks icon, which is most likely to have been commissioned by or for an important ecclesiastic, with John Beccus, but the style of the icon points to a considerably later date. However, Beccus was not the last to attempt a rapprochement of the two Churches. About two generations later, Demetrius Cydones pursued the same policy, a policy which led eventually to the Union of Rome in 1369.1°5 AS a matter of fact, a date towards the middle of the fourteenth century would approximately fit the style of the mosaic icon. In any case, the figure of St. John Chrysostom had gained an especial actuality at that time, so that his portrait must have held a deep, perhaps even a controversial meaning. The use of the term "portrait" may appear questionable, but the representation of the Saint is so specific that it gives the impression of being actually a portrait. This impression is strengthened on comparing the Dumbarton Oaks icon with what contemporaries of John Chrysostom said about his character and his personal appearance. I t is said of him that though dignified, his personal appearance was not imposing; that his stature was diminutive and his limbs so emaciated that he himself compared his body to that of a spider (&paxvcj6q~). His forehead is described as very lofty and deeply furrowed with wrinkles, expanding widely at the top, his head bald "like that of Elisha," his eyes deeply set but keen and piercing. His cheeks were pallid and withered and his chin pointed and covered with a short beard. Being dyspeptic, he was considered morose; in addition, he is said to have been choleric, irritable, impatient, and somewhat intolerant of other peoples' weaknesses, easily offended, suspicious, and violent in his anger. Taken all in all, there emerges from contemporary sources the picture of a very remarkable, but equally difficult man, a picture which accords so well with the Dumbarton Oaks icon that it is indeed tempting to see in the latter an actual portrait. As there are many likenesses of John Chrysostom which present the same individual characteristics, it is quite reasonable to speculate on the chance of there having existed an authentic portrait of the Saint which might have been the ultimate source of all later representations; one might even suppose that such a portrait formed part of the series which is known to have existed in the Patriarchate of Constantinople. To this it might be objected that portraits of bishops and patriarchs who had been subjected to a damnatio memoriae were removed and destroyed, a fate which a portrait of Chrysostom could hardly have escaped, not to mention the wholesale destruction of saints' portraits104 105

See A. A. Vasiliev, History of the Byzantine Empire (Madison, 1958)~ p. 694.

Ibid. p. 694ff.

T W O P A L A E O L O G A N MOSAIC I C O N S

113

and John was held a saint as early as 438-during the period of Iconoclasm.1o6 Nevertheless, an authentic pictorial tradition may be thought to have lingered on, to blossom up again after the iconoclastic controversy had passed. However, an examination of the earliest extant representations of the Saint yields results which, at first glance, cannot be easily reconciled with this assumption. For nothing could be further from a portrait in the specific sense of this term than the paintings that are, in all likelihood, the oldest representations of John Chrysostom to have come down to us, all of them in the church of Sta Maria Antiqua in Rome. The first of these107 forms part of a group of four Church Fathers, standing to the right and left of the main apse; it is identified by the inscription I O A N N , and can be dated, together with the other figures, in the period of Pope Martin I, that is, in the middle of the seventh century. Unfortunately, the face of the figure is seriously damaged: its lower part, including the beard, is missing, but there is enough left to show that the face did not agree either with the Dumbarton Oaks icon or with the early descriptions of the Saint's features. The same is true of the second representation of St. John in Sta Maria Antiqua,lOs (fig. 24) one of a row of standing figures in the north aisle which can be dated in the third quarter of the eighth century: Chrysostom is here represented as a comparatively young man with an oval face fringed with a sparse beard, without the slightest trace of the ascetic features of our mosaic. The two frescoes, it is true, are the work of provincial Greek painters; but these painters were firmly enough grounded in "official" iconography to represent other saints "correctly." Furthermore, these painters were not alone in thus delineating the features of St. John Chrysostom: a Vienna manuscript of the Saint's Homilies on the Gospel of St. Matthew, written and illuminated in Salzburg in the early ninth century, after an eastern model, shows the Saint in a similar guise, as a young man with little hair and less beard.lOg Curiously enough, these very words, vios, mavbs, 6Atyoyivqs, are used to describe St. John Chrysostom in the Painters' Guide of Mount Athos.lloAs a matter of fact, John was only fifty-three years of age when he died, and he rose to eminence -long before he was fifty. From these early representations and from the description of the Herwzerteia it might be deduced that there existed, in pre-iconoclastic times, a recognized iconographic type of St. John Chrysostom which had nothing to do with the 106 On this entire question cf. A. Grabar, L'iconoclasme byzantin, Dossier arche'ologique (Paris, 1957), 213f. 1°7 J. Wilpert, Die romischen Mosaiken, op. cit., p. 662, pl. 142b; E. Kitzinger, Romische Malerei vom Beginn des 7. b i s zur Mitte des 8. Jahrhunderts (Munich, 1934), pp. 8, 41. los J. Wilpert, op. cit., p. 708, pl. 192; E. Kitzinger, op. cit., p. 33. The row of saints t o which the

p.

figure of St. John Chrysostom belongs is dated in the period of Pope Paul I (757-67) or Hadrian I (772-95)log Vienna Xat. Bibl., Cod. 1332, fol. I": H. J. Hermann, "Die friihmittelalterlichen Handschriften des Abendlandes," Beschreibendes Verzeichnis der illuminierten Handschriften in ~sterreich, VIII (Leipzig, 1923)~p. 143; color reproduction in F. Unterkircher, La miniatura Austriaca (Milan-Florence, 19531, PI. I. 11° Dionysius of Fourna, The Painters' Guide ( ' E p y q v ~ i aTGVZwyphqwv), ed. A. Papadopoulos, 128, 154, 222, 267. Kerameus (St. Petersburg, ~ g o g )pp. 8

114

OTTO D E M U S

highly individualized character portrait that appeared at a later period, perhaps not too long after the anasteZosis of icons. This latter type seems to have been developed by the beginning of the eleventh century at the latest. The Saint's face, as it is depicted in the mosaics of Kievl1l (fig. 2 5 ) or the frescoes of Ohrid112 (both of the second quarter of the century), is full of wrinkles and furrows, pointed and angular in its features, with sharply defined ascetic features-a type that could never be adequately described in the words used by the Hermeneia, but that comes close to the Dumbarton Oaks icon. True, the eyes are somewhat larger in the two eleventh-century portraits, and the forehead is a little less bulbous, but all the other features are already there: the emaciated cheeks outlined with a V-shaped design, the heavy dark circles under the eyes, the drooping moustache, the sparse, two-pronged beard, the characteristic distribution of the thin, brown hair, and the curiously pointed, triangular shape of the face. Between these works, the two monumental representations on the one hand, and the small icon on the other, there is a difference in date that amounts to about three centuries, within which lies the entire development from the late Macedonian to the full Palaeologan style-yet, the basic concept of the portrait underwent little change. Of course, this iconographic formula was subjected to different interpretations in the various phases of its development. The forceful characterization of the Saint in the works of the eleventh century113 was replaced, a hundred years later,l14 by an extremely delicate and psychologically refined representation, in which Chrysostom is shown, not as the fighting Patriarch, the pillar of orthodoxy, but as an ascetic introvert (fig. 26). His ascetism becomes, from that period on, one of the chief motifs of epigrammatic poetry. The Palaeologan poet Manuel Philes, for instance, has left us several epigrams on icons of the Saint. One of these expresses astonishment that the Saint's portrait could be so much alive in view of the fact that he had starved himself so rigorously in his real life that there was scarcely any life in him. In another, the painter is admired for having painted the shadow of a shadow; in yet another, for having succeeded in painting Chrysostom with material colours (fiha~s)whereas there was little or no earthly matter in the Saint's body during his lifetime.l15 The point in this and other epigrams is driven home mercilessly by the repetition of words like &aap~os(fleshless), dtol-ria (lack of food), ~ E T I T ~ T(thinness), ~S etc. The question that now arises is whether the specific potrait-type of the Saint 0. Powstenko, op. cit., pl. 75. 0. Bihalji-Merin, Fresken und Ikonen, Mittelalterliche Kunst i n Serbien und Makedonien (Munich, 1958), PI. 8. 11s Here are a few portraits of Chrysostom, chosen a t random from works of the eleventh century: Harbaville triptych; London, Victoria and Albert Museum, bronze triptych; St. Mark's, Pala d'oro; Oxford, Bodleian, Roe 6, fol. I ; Oxford, Merton 28, fol. 3 ; Sinai, Cod. 364, fol. I ; Paris, Bibl. Nat., gr. 224, fol. 7 ; Coislin 79, fol. zv; Geneva, Bibl. MS 24. 114 Twelfth century: Palermo, Cappella Palatina; Cefalh; Monreale; Spas Nereditsa; Paris, Bibl. Nat., gr. 1208. 116 Manuelis Philae carmina, I, p. 33 f. (nos. LXIX, LXX, LXXI, LXXII, LXXIII), p. 58 f. (CXXXV), p. 319 (CCXXIX). The conceit of the shadow's shadow is, of course, derived from Plotinus; cf. A. Drews, Plotin (Jena, 1go7), p. 41 f. 111

112

T W O PALAEOLOGAN MOSAIC ICONS

115

was actually created in the post-iconoclastic period or whether it was a much older one that was rediscovered and re-elaborated after the iconoclastic embargo had been withdrawn. There is much to be said for the second alternative which has been championed by Andr6 Grabar who has come to the conclusion that the late portraits of St. John Chrysostom "gardent. . . les traces kvidentes du chef-d'oeuvre disparu du Ve sikcle auquel elles remontent toutes."l16 To harmonize this view with the objections stated above, it must be assumed that the realistic portrait type which may have gone back to the time of Chrysostom himself, was temporarily superseded by a more generalized and abstract manner of representing the Saint's features. I t has been shown by E. Kitzinger that there was indeed a strong abstract current in late sixth- and seventh-century art and that it is this style, and not that of contemporary Hellenism, that is to be "found most frequently associated with the portrayal of holy persons or Saints."l17 To put it more concisely, the late sixth century was the time when a saint's image lost its portrait character in order to acquire that of an icon.118 I t was the increased veneration accorded to images that led to this change119 which can be described as the almost exclusive use of "realistically nondescript" types and abstract forms in Byzantine icon painting of the century and a half that preceded the outbreak of iconoclasm. The victory of orthodoxy in the middle of the ninth century brought about, not so much a return to the abstract iconic images that were in use immediately before the controversy, as a re-establishment of the realistic types that had preceded them. This re-establishment, however, was only partial, and the process of re-creating and "mediaevalizing" each particular portrait-typedidnot take place independently for, as was almost the rule in the development of Byzantine iconography, the crystallization of one "type" was assisted and influenced by the development of related types. Thus, an ascetic figure represented in the drum of the Palatine Chapel, of about the middle of the twelfth century120 (fig. 27), shows exactly the same features as contemporary representations of St. John Chryso~tom~~~-hollow cheeks, aquiline nose, bulbous forehead, short two-pronged beard, and sparse hair-the only difference being one of costume (figs. 26, 28). However, this mosaic of the Palatina does not represent John Chrysostom; it depicts the Prophet Jonah. One might, at first, be tempted to suggest that the mosaicist of Palermo, thinking perhaps of the intrinsic similarity between the two embittered censors of a great city's vanities, simply used the likeness of A. Grabar, Martyrium, I1 (Paris, 1946)~p. 25, note 2. E. Kitzinger, "Art in the Period between Justinian and Iconoclasm," Berichte zum XI. Internat. Byzant. Kongress (Munich, 1958), IV/I, passim, esp. p. 45. 11s E. Kitzlnger, "On some Icons of the Seventh Century," Late Classical and Mediaeval Studies in Honor of A . M. Friend, Jr. (Princeton, 1955)~p. 13zff., esp. p. 145. 119 E. Kitzinger, "The Cult of Images in the Age before Iconoclasm," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 8 (1954), P. 85ff. lZ0 0. Demus, The Mosaics of Norman Sicily, pp. 39, 64, pl. 12. I am indebted to the Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection for permission to reproduce this photograph as well as that for figure 29 (St. Luke). lZ1 Cf., for example, the portrait of the Saint likewise in the Palatina (0.Demus, op. cit., pl. 23 B) or, better, a three-quarter profile representation like that of the Paris Coislin 79 (fig. 28). 118 117

*

8

116

O T T O DEMUS

Chrysostom to depict Jonah or vice versa. However, the case is more complicated, because the same features are found in the usual type of one of the saints most frequently portrayed, the Evangelist St. Luke. This type122(fig. 29) is distinguished from the portrait of John Chrysostom only by the different hairdress : St. Luke is represented with ample curls, arranged in two tiers, a "coiffure" which covers a large part of the forehead and thus changes the entire aspect of a face that is otherwise almost identical with that of Jonah in the Palatine Chapel and with the most common type of St. John Chrysostom. If it could be proved that this bearded type of st: Luke were considerably older than the post-iconoclastic "portrait" of John Chrysostom, one might be able to assume that the latter followed the model of the dominant, because more frequently represented, type of the Evangelist .123 However, the origins of this latter can be traced back hardly further than the second quarter of the ninth century;12*the fully developed type is found only in the eleventh ~ e n t u r y . 1 ~ ~ Thus, the crystallization of the portrait type of St. Luke happened at the same time as that of the Chrysostom portrait; the two developments were parallel and, it seems, interrelated. There is even a strong probability that the portrait of John Chrysostom was originally "in the lead" since it may actually have been derived from a genuine portrait tradition, while the representation of St. Luke had no such roots. The more specific and better founded "author's portrait" might, therefore, have become, to a certain extent, the model of the "holier" Evangelist's portrait. The fact, on the other hand, that the representation of the latter was much more widely disseminated than that of the former, may have speeded up the development of a highly differentiated, "ascetic" type which, in its turn, may again have influenced the evolution of the "character-portraitJ' of John Chrysostom. The two processes seem to have been practically completed by the beginning of the eleventh century and seem to have been more or less universal; more or less, but not compl~telyso. For, among the representations of both saints there can be found an exceptional type which does not conform to those I have described. In the case of the Evangelist, it is the image of a beardless youth with short, dark hair, low forehead, straight, thick nose, and strong chin, a "Hellenistic" type which is found in its purest form in the Gospelbook no. 43 of S t a ~ r o n i k i t a and , ~ ~ ~which survives into the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries in illuminated books inspired by tenth-century prototypes.127If this survival of a Hellenistic type is hardly more than an interesting sideline of the main iconographic development of St. Luke, the matter stands differently as 1z2 A. M. Friend, Jr., "The Portraits of the Evangelists in Greek and Latin Manuscripts," I, A r t Studies (1927), p. I 15 ff. 123 This was t h e opinion-wrong, as I now believe-which I expressed in my Symposium lecture at Dumbarton Oaks in 1958. 1z4 Rome, Vat. gr. 699, Cosmas Indicopleustes ( A. M. Friend, Jr., op. cit., fig. 72) ; Paris, Bibl. Nat. gr. 70, Gospels, (ibid., fig. 3.) lZ5 Cf. Nicaea, Koimesis church, mosaic (ibid., fig. 123); further examples (very numerous), e.g. ibid., figs. 127, 130, 134, 146. lZ6 A. &I. Friend, Jr., op. cit., fig. 97. lZ7 E.g. Paris gr. 54 (ill. in V. N. Lazarev, Istoviia, 09. cit., 11, pl. 2 5 2 ) ; on the use of this type by Cimabue, see 0. Demus, "Die Entstehung," op. cit., p. 40, fig. 32.

T W O P A L A E O L O G A N MOSAIC I C O N S

117

regards St. John Chrysostom, since there are several representations of the Saint which are quite different from the common type, and which must be accorded a certain importance because of their high artistic merit and their central position, being, as they are, works produced in the capital. As a matter of fact, the earliest representation of St. John Chrysostom that has been preserved in Constantinople shows this different, "secondary" type. I t is the impressive mosaic portrait of the Saint in Hagia Sophia, in the series of saints and Church Fathers on the north tympanum128 (fig. 30). The Patriarch is represented full length, clad in the ample garments of his high office. The elongated oval of his face is surrounded with a short beard and dark hair; he is not bald, his features are neither pointed nor emaciated, he has a strong chin and nose; in short, there is hardly any resemblance between this and the familiar ascetic type. Since the grandiose mosaic of Hagia Sophia was probably made in the late ninth century and is, therefore, earlier than the oldest examples of the ascetic portrait, it might be thought to antedate the formation of the latter type, in which case it could be discounted for the purposes of this enquiry. However, the Hagia Sophia image is not isolated. A related figure appears on the lid of the reliquary of theTrue Cross in the treasure of the Sancta Sanctorum in Rome, a Constantinopolitan work of the tenth century129(fig. 31). The head and the body are more elongated, so that the Saint appears almost like a giant, but the features are so similar to those of the Hagia Sophia mosaic that the two portraits must be assumed to belong to a common tradition. And, should the Roman icon also be thought too early, there is another Constantinopolitan representation of the same type which belongs to a much later period: the recently uncovered fresco of St. John Chrysostom in the apse of the Parecclesion of the Kariye Camii130 (fig. 32). But for the difference of garments, the figure is very similar to that of the Sancta Sanctorum reliquary and the face is essentially the same, except that it is rendered in a different style. Thus, the abstract iconic type as it is preserved in the early frescoes of Sta Maria Antiqua, and the realistic, ascetic portrait type which was the standard one from the eleventh century onwards were not the only iconographic possibilities of rendering the features of St. John Chrysostom ; there was yet a third type which depicted the Patriarch in an "idealized" manner, equally far removed from the abstract as from the realistic modes. I t does not depict the saint, as did the iconic type, nor does it portray the ascetic, as did the realistic type: instead, it characterizes the patriarch and the scholar. I t might fittingly be called the humanistic type. There is nothing surprising in the fact that the humanistic portrait of the Patriarch should have survived in Constantinople, since it is very likely that this type was created in the Color illustration in A. Grabar, L a fieinture byzantine, p. 96. Ph. Lauer, "Le Trksor du Sancta Sanctorum," Monuments et Me'moires de l a Fondation Piot, XV (1906), p. 92, pl. x ~ v b . 130 P. A. Underwood, "Second preliminary Report on the Restoration of the Frescoes in the Kariye Camii at Istanbul by the Byzantine Institute, 1955," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 11 (1g57), p. 212ff., fig. 47. 128 128

OTTO D E M U S

capital. There exist, it is true, Constantinopolitan examples of the other types; but the opposite, the existence of the humanistic type in the provinces, would be difficult to prove. The three types did not therefore, exist on equal terms, either locally or chronologically. The iconic type, having perhaps replaced a lost fifth-century portrait, held its sway in the time between Justinian and the iconoclastic controversy, while the ascetic type seems to have dominated later Macedonian and Comnenian art. As to the third type, it may be of some significance that the specimens I have adduced belong to the ninth, tenth, and fourteenth centuries, the Macedonian and Palaeologan Renaissances respectively. I t was in these Renaissance periods, in the capital itself, that the humanistic type came to the fore. The Dumbarton Oaks portrait -to return to our point of departure -although generally conforming to the ascetic type, also contains some features of the humanistic portrait; to mention only one, it shows a somewhat fuller growth of hair and beard. hforeover, the features are rendered not by a system of lines but by a modelling technique that is specifically painterly, a technique that is more akin to the humanistic than it is to the ascetic type. Soft gradations, transparent shadows, and impasto highlights combine to produce an effect of brush work, as in water-color or fresco painting. This technique does not employ any of the optical or calligraphic abbreviations that are so characteristic of the mosaics of the Kariye Camii and, mutatis mutandis, of the frescoes in the Parecclesion of the same church. However, very close parallels to the soft, detailed "tvash" technique of the miniature mosaic can be found in another part of the Kariye, namely in the decoration of an arcosolium tomb in the fifth bay of the outer narthex.131 In particular, the bust of St. John Damascene invites comparison as regards the modelling of the face. Although the tomb is not dated exactly, it is likely that its paintings belong to the second quarter or the middle of the fourteenth century, a date which also appears to be appropriate for the Dumbarton Oaks icon. Thus this icon seems to belong to a period considerably later -by at least one, possibly two generations -than that of the icon of the Forty Martyrs. If the latter exemplifies the art of the early Palaeologan era with its experimental character, then the portrait of St. John Chrysostom is typical of the completely developed style with its absolute sureness of touch, a style which already shows the first, faint signs of becoming dry, even tired. True, the difference in subject matter may be held partly to account for the difference in "key." The icon intended to evoke the somewhat arid personality of the great churchman and ascetic, is executed in a severe, abstract key. I t was not only the formal tendency prevalent in his time but also the requirements of his subject that led the mosaicist towards the realm of iconic geometry, expressed in the upright rectangle of the book, the regular pattern of the fiolystavrion, the plastic halo decorated with a geometric all-over pattern of tiny crosses-an element of the frame invading 131 P. A. Underwood, "Kotes on t h e Work of t h e Byzantine Institute in Istanbul, 1955-1956,'' Dunzbarton Oaks Papers, 12 (1958), p. 269 ff ., esp. 279f., figs. I 1-13.

1. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Mosaic Icon, The Forty Martyrs

2. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Mosaic Icon, The Forty Martyrs, detail

.

r._

3. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Mosaic Icon, The Forty Martyrs, detail

5. Vatican, Cod. syr. 559, Part 1, fol. 93"

6. Rome, Sta Maria Antiqua, Chapel, Apse. Wall Painting

7. Moscow, Synodal Library. Menologium no. 183

1

x A h -

-& -.

8. Lesnovo. Wall Painting

12. Berlin-Dahlem, Ehem. Staatliche Museen. Ivory

11. DePani. Wall Painting

13. Leningrad, Hermitage. Ivory Triptych, center Panel

22. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Mosaic Icon, St. John Chrysostom

23. Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Mosaic Icon, St. John Chrysostom, detail

26. Palermo, Cappella Palatina. Mosaic, detail

27. Palermo, Cappella Palatina. Mosaic, detail

28. Paris, Biblioth6que Nationale. Coislin 79, fol. 2", detail

29. Palermo, Cappella Palatina. Mosaic, detail

T W O PALAEOLOGAN MOSAIC I C O N S

119

the icon-the formal calligraphy of the inscription and, finally, the inner frame of the mosaic: all these elements help to create a hieratic distance. No such distance separates the Forty Martyrs of the other Dumbarton Oaks mosaic from the beholder; there is hardly any framing motif, there is no geometric, not even a symmetric, composition: the suffering and the heroism of the Martyrs are presented without being formalized by decorative geometry. There is an immediacy about this icon which is far removed from the liturgical atmosphere of St. John Chrysostom's portrait. But above and beyond the difference in "mode,"132 imposed on the two artists by their subject matter, there is, undoubtedly, a strong discrepancy of style. To recognize this discrepancy it is enough to confront the face of St. John Chrysostom with a face of a similar ascetic type in the icon of the Forty Martyrs, e.g. the fifth face from the right, in the middle row. The modeling of the latter has an optical, an illusionistic, even a dramatic quality that is totally lacking in the portrait icon. I t is, in the last resort, the antique, the renaissance quality that is missing in the mosaic of St. John Chrysostom: one feels that the time of the artistic rediscovery of Hellenism was over when this portrait was made. Both mosaics are masterpieces of Palaeologan art; but only one of them is a work of the Palaeologan Renaissance. 13%For the concept of "mode" as distinct from "style," see E. Kitzinger, Byzantine Art, passim, esp. P. 39.

http://www.jstor.org

LINKED CITATIONS - Page 1 of 2 -

You have printed the following article: Two Palaeologan Mosaic Icons in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection Otto Demus Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 87+89-119. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C87%3ATPMIIT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-9

This article references the following linked citations. If you are trying to access articles from an off-campus location, you may be required to first logon via your library web site to access JSTOR. Please visit your library's website or contact a librarian to learn about options for remote access to JSTOR.

[Footnotes] 25

The Will of a Provincial Magnate, Eustathius Boilas (1059) Speros Vryonis, Jr. Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 11. (1957), pp. 263-277. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281957%2911%3C263%3ATWOAPM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-V 39

Ivories and Litanies Ernst Kantorowicz Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Vol. 5. (1942), pp. 56-81. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0075-4390%281942%295%3C56%3AIAL%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J 77

Studies among the Torcello Mosaics-I O. Demus The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, Vol. 82, No. 483. (Jun., 1943), pp. 132+136+138-141. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0951-0788%28194306%2982%3A483%3C132%3ASATTM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-R 79

Third Preliminary Report on the Restoration of the Frescoes in the Kariye Camii at Istanbul by the Byzantine Institute, 1956 Paul A. Underwood Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 12. (1958), pp. 235+237-265. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281958%2912%3C235%3ATPROTR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-S

NOTE: The reference numbering from the original has been maintained in this citation list.

http://www.jstor.org

LINKED CITATIONS - Page 2 of 2 -

80

Third Preliminary Report on the Restoration of the Frescoes in the Kariye Camii at Istanbul by the Byzantine Institute, 1956 Paul A. Underwood Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 12. (1958), pp. 235+237-265. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281958%2912%3C235%3ATPROTR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-S 119

The Cult of Images in the Age before Iconoclasm Ernst Kitzinger Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 8. (1954), pp. 83-150. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281954%298%3C83%3ATCOIIT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-%23 131

Notes on the Work of the Byzantine Institute in Istanbul: 1955-1956 Paul A. Underwood Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 12. (1958), pp. 269-287. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281958%2912%3C269%3ANOTWOT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Y

NOTE: The reference numbering from the original has been maintained in this citation list.

The Author's Draft of Nicolas Cabasilas' "Anti-Zealot" Discourse in "Parisinus Graecus 1276" Ihor Šev#enko Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 179+181-201. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C179%3ATADONC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X Dumbarton Oaks Papers is currently published by Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/doaks.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Sun Mar 9 08:04:39 2008

THE AUTHOR'S DRAFT

OF NICOLAS CABASILAS'

"ANTI-ZEALOT" DISCOURSE I N

P A R I S I N U S GRAECUS 1276

I. SINCE the publication in these Papers of Nicolas Cabasilas' Discourse Concerning Illegal Acts of Officials Daringly Committed Against Things Sacred,l

a new manuscript of this work has come to my a t t e n t i ~ nI. t~ is contained in Parisinus Gr. 1276, a miscellany, on fols. 65'47' and 96'-99'. There the text of the Discourse appears anonymously under a different title: npbs 'robs Ev ~ a l s Egouoia~~, T o the Powers That Be. In Omont's Inventaire3 this treatise is attributed to the Patriarch Philotheus Kokkinos. The difference in title and in attribution will explain why I was not aware of Parisinus Gr. 1276 when preparing my edition of Cabasilas' Discourse. Having examined this new witness, I do not propose to introduce any drastic changes in the text of my edition. But the Parisinus Gr. 1276 is of great importance for the history of Cabasilas' text. I believe that in this manuscript we have a blending of two early versions of the Discourse, with changes, erasures, and additions by the author's own hand. I should also like to suggest that the Parisinus contains a hitherto unknown fragment by Cabasilas. 2 . Folios 1'64' of Parisinus Gr. 1276 contain several works of Philotheus. The quires of this portion are numbered regularly from a to q (fol. 57). Both the numbering of quires and the type of paper change with folio 65', which is the first page of the Discourse. This folio has the quiremark a, an indication that originally this copy of the Discourse either was a separate entity or, conceivably, stood at the beginning of a larger manuscript. The two following quires of the Discourse are numbered regularly, P on fol. 73 and y on fol. 81. Then there is some confusion: beginning with fol. 87 whole groups of folios are clearly out of order. The next quiremark is again an a ; it appears on fol. IO~', and coincides with the beginning of a part of Nicephorus Gregoras' History. This latter work is, then, another previously independent component of the Parisinus. Thus the portion of the Parisinus comprising, among other texts, the Discourse is not related to the folios which precede and follow it. We may now proceed to the analysis of that portion itself. As the first two quires of the Discourse (fols. 65-80) are regular, I shall be chiefly concerned with the area of confusion, between fol. 81, on which quire y begins, and fol. 99, which is the highest numbered folio containing the text Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 11 (1957), 91-125. Henceforth in quoting the Discourse I shall refer to paragraph and line of this edition. a Rev. Jean Meyendorff has called this manuscript to my attention and I wish to thank him for this information. H. Omont, Inventaire sommaire des manuscrits grecs de l a Bibliothl.que Nationale, I ( 1886), 284.

IHOR

SEVCENKO

of the Discourse. The present distribution of quires in this section of the Parisinus is as follows:

Folios 88-95, comprising one quire, contain the beginning of an anonymous treatise against Acindynus (its misplaced continuation starts on fol. 205r), and are written by hands different from those of the Discourse. The whole quire was inserted into the Discourse by mistake, perhaps at the time when the present Parisinus was being made up.* I t may also have been on that occasion that fol. 87, the last leaf of the Discourse, got out of place. I t belongs after fol. gg (99" ~i 6i ~ a / 1i 871 ooqoi TIVES,cf. Discourse, 59,17). Before the Discourse was incorporated into the Parisinus, the arrangement of its final part was presumably as follows :

But fols. 83'-86v, forming a binio, while definitely a part of the Discourse, are a clean copy by a hand different from that which wrote the main text of the other folios. I shall call this latter hand A (cf. figs. 1-6, 8, 10) ; that of the binio, hand Ab (cf. figs. 7,g). This binio, corresponding to Discourse, 41,23 -50,7, is an insertion, previous to the inclusion of this work into the Parisinus, but later than a certain stage in the formation of the text of the Discourse. That it is later can be deduced from the observation that fol. 82" (by hand A) ends in a deleted half-word TOAPT- (standing at the end of a long deleted passage, cf. fig. 6), while fol. 96' (also by hand A) begins with the other half, - 8 ~ i o a ~ (cf. fig. 8), and fol. 86" (last to be written by hand Ab) ends with ~ o h p q (cf. fig. 9). Compare Discourse, 50,7: ~ohPq66ioas.Also, the last legible word ~ ~ fig. 6), while the first before the deleted passage on fol. 82" is 6 a v ~ i l o v - r(cf. words of fol. 83' (with which hand Abbegins) are o i r r ~~ o i w v(cf. fig. 7). Compare Discourse, 41,23 6 a v ~ i l o v ~o~hs .€ ~oivuv. Thus originally fol. 82 was followed by fol. 96 without interruption, and before the insertion of the portion 41,23-50,7 by hand Ab, the final part of the Discourse was arranged as follows:

In other words, it was a quaternio with one stub, and the last of the three quires. At one time fols. 65-82; 96-99; 87 of Parisinus Gr. 1276, all written by * Parisinus Gr. 1276 had its present form by the third quarter of the sixteenth century. This may be deduced from fol. IF, where one reads the ownership remark by Arsenius of Monembasia (Aristobulus Apostolides, 1465-1535).On Arsenius' chronology and the scri+torium to which he belonged, see, e.g., M. Wittek, "Manuscrits et codicologie," Scriptorium, V I I (1953), esp. 290-96.

AUTHOR'S D R A F T O F CABASILAS' DISCOURSE

183

hand A, formed a continuous and probably independent whole, consisting of three quires and containing Discourse, 1- 4 1 , ~ s ; 50 -60. I shall call this the First Version. The First Version is the earliest fully preserved form of the Discourse. However, it is not the earliest attainable stage of its composition. The first quire of the Discourse (fols. 65-72) shows traces of editorial interference which occurred before the First Version acquired its final shape. The last eight and one-half lines of fol. 65v are crossed out (cf, fig. I). The first twelve lines of the next page are but an expanded variant of the deleted passage (cf. the collation below, ad Discourse, 3,g with the text of the Discourse, 4,1111). AS many as six folios lying between 65 and 72, the first and the last in the quire, may have been replaced. That some reshuffling did occur between fols. 65 and 72 is apparent from the observation that the text in these two folios, which form a single sheet, is displaced by about two interlinear spaces downwards in comparison with that of the intervening fols. 66-71. I shall call fols. 65 and 72 the traces of the Earliest Stage. While the insertion by hand Ab(fols. 83'-86") presents a clean copy, the text written by A exhibits a large number of changes, long additions, rescriptions, erasures, and deletions, most of which are attributable to one hand, which I shall call A2. This hand takes many liberties with the text. I t changes v6yov~ Ta-roGol into hirovot v6yovs (1,112))o o ~ o Ginto Zohop6vro~(1,12), ~ahkoat-rohyfiqs into ~ a h k o q(34,24), ~ ypacpiv into ai-riav (39,1o), and i ~ i m o ~ into o v i~pka(56,4); it crosses out four lines of the text and substitutesfor them a much expanded version of the same content (cf. the collation below, ad 2l,17 and fig. 10); it changes &~aipoGvralinto & ~ a t p o i r ~ ~and ~ v o tadds a whole clause (cf. collation ad 4,3 and fig. 2) ; adds a long passage in the upper margin of fol. 72" (cf. collation ad 21,5) ; another, a very long one, on the lower margins of fols. 75" and 76' (cf. collation ad 27,6 and figs. 3 and 4) ; it adds a sentence at the bottom of fol. 78' (cf. collation ad 33,1 and fig. 5) ; it rewrites the words TOG ovy~kpovro~ T ~ ~ X & V E I Von the previous (and different) text (21,11 and fig. 10) ; it erases a whole line on fol. 82v, then crosses out the remaining lines which follow (cf. collation ad 4 1 , q and fig. 6) ; it shortens the text by crossing out a single word (cf. collation ad 20,16), a group of words (cf. collation ad 59,522) or whole clauses (cf. collation ad 29,16 and fig. 4; 34,25; 38,27). I shall call the form of the Discourse which comprises the insertion by hand Ab (fols. 83'-86~) and the changes by hand A2, the Draft of the Second Enlarged Version. The insertion by Ab and the changes made by A2 in the text written by A appear in the main body of Parisinus Gr. 1213 and its contemporary Parisinus Suppl. GY. 681-manuscripts on which I relied in editing the Discourse. Either these manuscripts took over the corrections by A2, or some Byzantine scholar brought Parisinus Gr. 1276 up to date by collating it with a model having essentially the same text as Parisinus Gr. 1213 and Sufipl. Gr. 681. Deletions, hesitations, and stylistic corrections undertaken by A2 within the added passages show that no model was involved. A corrector having a text of the type represented by Parisinus Gr. 1213 before his eyes would copy what he saw;

184

IHOR SEVCENKO

he would not add, and then delete, the words h b TOG .rrapavop~iv (cf. collation below ad 2l,17 and fig. 10) ; write first v a m i l o v and then clamitas (ad 27,15 and fig. 3); write W o v , cross it out, and continue with o h m ~ a h 6 v(ad 27,19 and fig. 3); change Gtacpuy~ivinto G l a n ~ o ~ i (vad 28,8 and fig. 4); or recast a whole passage in the marginal addition (cf.collation ad28,1/2 and fig. 3). The Draft of the Second Enlarged Version is earlier than Parisinus Gr .1213 and Swpfil.Gr. 681. The comparison between the Discourse in Parisinus Gr. 1213 (= P) and the Draft of the Second Enlarged Version (whether by hand A or Ab) shows a very considerable number of smaller textual differences, including differences in the choice of words; compare .robs povaxobg P: TOTS qpovrlmais A (cf. collation, S KE~G&VOISoxom~isAb (ad 47,7). For some other inad 4,213); K E ~ ~ &Z V~ T~ES~P: stances, cf. collation ad 4 3 ; 7,1; 10,6; 13,14; 19,1; 23,5; 23,33134; 28,19; 30,5; 41,7; 51,13 (all examples taken from the text written by A); 44,18; 48,18; 48,19 (examples taken from the text by Ab; the variants are understandably fewer in this portion, since it is a clean copy, already incorporating many of the author's corrections). We must, therefore, postulate an intermediate link, now lost, between the Draft of the Second Enlarged Version and the version represented by Parisinus Gr. 1213 (and Supfil. Gr. 681). This link was a version of the Discourse into which further textual improvements were incorporated. I shall call it the Third Improved Version. As the improvements were minor, it is probable that they were made on the clean copy (also postulated) of the Second Enlarged Version. I shall therefore identify this corrected clean copy as the postulated link between the Draft of the Second Version and Parisinus Gr. 1213. The text represented by Parisinus Gr. 1213 shall be called the Final Version. In all probability it is almost identical with the Third. Omont dated the whole Parisinus Gr. 1276 in the fifteenth century. But as this manuscript is a miscellany, questions of date arise for each of its individual components. 1n my opinion the folios of the Parisinus Gr. 1276 comprising the Second Version of the Discourse were written before 1400.~The available evidence does not contradict the proposed dating. The Draft of the Second Version is earlier than Parisinus Gr. 1213 and Suj5PZ. Gr. 681, the earliest representatives of the Final Version, which date from about the middle of the . ~ A and A2of the Draft can easily be fourteenth-century fifteenth c e n t ~ r yHands hands (see figs. 1-6, 8, 10); hand Ab is more recent than A, but it, too, looks earlier than i400 (see figs. 7 and g).7 The watermarks confirm the attribution Other parts of this manuscript should also be assigned to the fourteenth century. The watermarks of fols. 88-96 and 205 (two circles, as in C. M. Briquet, Les filigranes . . . [1go7], no. 3193) occur in 1368. The text of Gregoras' History starting on fol. 104r is by a hand contemporary with the author. 6 For the date of Parisinus Gr. 1213, see R.- J. Loenertz, Les recueils des lettres de Dt'mktrius CydonBs, (Studi e Testi, CXXXI [1g47]), 24, note I , and 57, note 2 (about 1440?; the evidence is indirect). I n any case, the Parisinus was copied by the scribe Joasaph, who may have known Cabasilas personally; see Loenertz, ibidem. For an improved text of Joasaph's metric address to Cabasilas in Par. Gr. I2I3 see L. Politis, "Eine Schreiberschule im Kloster -rGv '08qyGv," Byzantinische Zeitschrift, L I (1958)~ 22, note 8. 7 For hand Ab, cf. Sinait. 728, the first 106 folios (date: ca. 1375 ?) ; Vat. Gr. I jI j (a menaeum, date: Sept. 16, 1382, cf. fol. 275'); Petropol. Gr. 565 (date: 1392), in G. Cereteli-S. Sobolevski, Exempla codicum graecorum litteris minusculis scriptorunz . . ., I1 (1g13), table LIV. I am indebted to Professor Alexander Turyn (Urbana, Ill.) for these references. He also kindly examined the photostats of Parisinus Gr. 1276 and expressed his agreement with the dating proposed here.

AUTHOR'S DRAFT O F CABASILAS' DISCOURSE

185

of the D i s c o z t r s e in Parisinus Gr. 1276 to the fourteenth c e n t ~ r y I. ~consider their evidence to be decisive. We may now recapitulate the history of the text of the Discourse in the following stemma : I. First Version with traces of The Earliest Stage, probably an independent manuscript (14th c.) I

2.

Draft of the Second Enlarged Version (14th c.)

I

3. Third Improved Version, p;obably the clean copy of the Draft of the Second Version with corrections

7. Coisl. 315 (16th c.) 8. Lost manuscript i by Margunius (16th c . ) ~ 3. The passages added by hand A2 have a number of stylistic traits in i v6pou (now in common with the text of the First Version: for TOG Gt~aiou~ aTOG Discourse, 21,8),cf. 25,g and 47,3 ; for ovyq4povros 'NYX&VEIV (now21,IZ) and oii.rro ~6 oupqipov E G ~ E S(now 21,18), cf . 23,617 ; for 8 ~ b v~KP&AAEIS(now 21,25), cf .30,6/7 ; for ~IK&~EIVwith a dative (now 27,g/10), cf. 40,11-12; for oir66v &v E~TTOITIS ~i pfi p a i t q ~ a(now ~ 27,12), cf. EIITIS T&v O ETIIqpovGv ( 3 2 , ~ and ~ ) 3 5 , ~for ~ ;Giuqv.. . dTTTo~~i&a1(now 27,16), cf. 52,7 and 56,17. One expression introduced as a correction by A 2 (1,112, Airouo~ v6pous) occurs repeatedly in the main text written by A : cf. 30,8; 32,8; 36,3. 8 More precisely, to the last thirty years or even the last quarter of the fourteenth century. Here I follow Professor Jean Irigoin (Paris) who was kind enough to examine the watermarks of the relevant folios for me. I submit the summary of his findings: ( I ) Quire a (fols. 65-72): amphisbaena (a serpent with two heads, with a crown of five fleuvons above it) = C. M. Briquet, Les filigranes .. . (1907), no. 13621 (dates: 1375 to 1388); variants in V. MoSin and S. M. Tralji6, Vodeni z m k o v i XIII. i X I V . vijeka, 1-11 (1957), nos. 6990-6992 (dates: 1375 and 1380). (2) Quire P (fols. 73-80): two circles, similar to Briquet no. 3193 (date: 1368) ; but the paper's wiremark is closer to Briquet nos. 3194-3195 (dates: 1392 and 1398 respectively), and to MoSin-Traljid, no. 2086 (date: 1392-1394). (3) Quire y (as reconstructed by me, fols. 81, 82; 96-99; 87): amphisbaena, as in quire a. The insertion (fols. 83-86) seemingly shows no watermarks. Elements of I and 2 are in Parisinus Gr. 1276. 3 is postulated. 4-7 contain the Final Version. 5 is a fragment. 6 is a copy, direct or intermediate, of 4. 7 is a copy of 4. For 8, see Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 11 (1957)) 88, note 29.

186

IHOR

SEVCENKO

When we compare the insertion by hand Ab (now in Discourse, 41,23--50,7) with the First Version for thought and style, we obtain similar results. The argument of paragraph 45 of the insertion takes up the theme announced at the beginning of the First Version (8); the thoughts of 42 and 47 (insisting on the spontaneity of gifts) occur in 35; the view expressed in 47 (that exactions harm the souls of those on whom they are levied) is repeated in 52. The same scriptural quotations are used for similar arguments in the insertion and in the First Version: for example I Cor. g:14 in 4 5 , ~and 38,26 (cf. 8,6); I1 Cor. g: 7 in 46,s and 38,29. Stylistically, the insertion blends well with the prose of the First Version: Compare the mannerisms ~ o o o k o v- doov instead of the al (43,1) with expected datives (45,13114) with 54,4 and 56,17:'18; 03 6 ~ i ~h6yov T i 6 ~h6y0v i S~bpov( 4 0 ~ 7;)l ~ o h i r~b pioov ( 4 1 , ~with ~ ) Boov air-roc 8 ~ 0 6T E ~b pioov (29,18); ~ b lvoov ~p6-rrov"in the same way" (43,21) with the same expression in 23,1g/20 and 24,3 (cf. also collation ad 3,9) ; K E Z T ~ I 6 i ~ q(46,18) with ~ ~ i o e - r6ai ~~ q (56,17) and G i ~ q v ,fi ~Ei-ra~ (52,7); TGV . . . Y E ~ G iV~ p d i h h ~(l 4 . 4 ~;4 cf. 4 6 , q ; 49,13114) with v6po1 .. . ~ i & jp ~~ iEKp&Movalv j~ (58,6); for .rrolpbva . . . T T O ~ p~cr60~6v E~ (42,3/4),compare 37,13115 In the First Version, the adversaries are repeatedly ; 59,g); the threat is also made threatened with Hell, y b ~ v v a(2l,27; 2 2 ~ 333,12; in the insertion (46,18). The passages added by A2, the insertion by Ab and the First Version were composed by the same author. I draw the following conclusions from the foregoing observations: Hand A2, whose many corrections are largely responsible for the Second Version of the Discourse, is neither that of a scribe nor of a corrector, but rather that of a fourteenth-century editor. An editor whose style and thoughts are the same as those of the text he is editing can only be the author himself. Changes made by hand A2 in the First Version of the Discourse are specimens of the author's own handwriting. In Parisinus Gr. 1276 the Discourse appears anonymously. Suppl. Gr. 681 is a fragment without beginning. Only one independent witness, Parisinus Gr. 1213, indirectly attributes the Discourse to Nicolas Cabasilas. There is, however, no doubi that this attribution is correct. Any reader of Cabasilas' diatribes Against Usurers and On Usury,lo which also touch upon social and legal problems, will testify that many mannerisms of style and composition are the same in all these works. Cabasilas is the author of the Discourse, and the author's corrections made by hand A2 in Parisinus Gr. 1276 are specimens of Cabasilas' handwriting.ll This deduction is not contradicted by the evidence of Cod. Panaghias 157 (formerly Chalcensis ~ i i pj l ~~o p ~E~~ioj h~i i s153) of the Oecumenical Patriarchate. Fols. 294'-300" of this manuscript purport to be an autograph by Cabasilas lo Against Usurers, in Migne, PG, CL, 727-750; Address to Anne of Savoy on Uszkry, ed. R. Guilu 274-77. land, in EIs M v f i i ~ q v1-rr. A & ~ ~ r p o(1935)~ l1 I hesitate to ascribe hand A to Cabasilas. True, on fol. 77r scribe A makes a stylistic change in the text (see collation ad 30,30; cf. also ad 29,2/4; 35,5; 39,5; 54,17); he also leaves space for legal quotations, which he inserts later (see collation ad 50,g and I I and fig. 8) ; but once he omits a whole (indispensable) clause because of a homoeoteleubn (cf. ad 56,213).Such an error can hardly be imputed t o a n author copying his own work. I t is strange, however, that Cabasilas should not have caught this omission when revising the First Version of the Discourse.

A U T H O R ' S D R A F T O F CABASILAS' D I S C O U R S E

187

(cf. fig. 12 with the remark at the top of folio 294' 3 K V P O ~ NIKO)\&OU KaPd~lAu506 Xavak~ouo ~ K E ~ ~ x E IF~ o~ ~) .s295-300 . form a senio; fol. 294 is glued on. The hand seems to change at fol. zgf, line 2. I find the handwriting of fols. 295', line 2-300" (cf. fig. 13) similar to that of hand A2.12

I. Any interval from a few weeks up to several decades may separate the First Version of the Discourse from the Third. The Third Version may have been undertaken when Cabasilas was preparing a new edition of several of his works. This is only a guess. All we can say is that fifty years or less passed between the composition of the Discourse's Earliest Stage and Cabasilas' death.l3 About another fifty years separate that event from Parisinus Gr. 1213 and Sufifil. Gr. 681, until recently the earliest known manuscripts of the Discourse. With the help of Parisinus Gr. 1276 we can reliably place three consecutive versions of the Discourse within less than a century after its composition. This makes one wonder about the hidden history of texts preserved in manuscripts much later than the date at which these texts were composed.l4 The study of Parisinus Gr. 1276 also shows how difficult it is to assign a precise date to Byzantine rhetorical works and to connect them with concrete historical events. When editing the Discourse, I treated it as a uniform text and I tentatively proposed 1344 as the date of its composition. The watermarks seem to indicate that the pages of the Parisinus comprising the First Version of the Discourse were written within the last thirty years of the fourteenth century.15 This does not necessarily mean that this version was composed within that period, although it may have been. But it does mean that the Discourse 12 In addition, Father V. Laurent, "Un nouveau tCmoin de la correspondance de DCm6trius Cydonhs et de I'activitC littCraire de NicolasCabasilasChamaCtos .. .,"'EAA~VIK&, I X (1936), 199f., has suggested that parts of Meteor. Barlaam 202 which contain Cabasilas' correspondence may be an autograph (for . considers these parts similar to the portions of Panaghias 157 said to be a specimen, cf. fig. I ~ )He autographs. While this may be so, the difference between the careful handwriting of the Meteor. Barlaam 202 and the scribblings of hand A2 of Parisinus GY. 1276 is too great to allow any conclusions to be drawn. I wish to thank the Rev. M. Richard and Mme. E. Zizicas of the Institut de Recherche et dlHistoire des Textes (Paris) for their assistance and permission to reproduce figures 12 and 14. 13 Born about 1320, Cabasilas was still alive in 1391; see Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 11 (1g57), 85-87 and notes 19 and 27. 1 4 This is not to say that we cannot study the reworkings undertaken by ancient authors. The problem has been dealt with extensively by H. Emonds (who states in Zweite Auflage i m Altertum [1g47], p. 9, that the best opportunity for the study of second editions is provided by cases where little time separates the author's work from the date of the earliest preserved manuscripts); and elegantly by C. Hoeg ("Notules sur I'histoire du livre grec," Studi e Testi, CXXIV [1946], esp. 5-12). But in the case of ancient authors, second editions must be reconstructed; in that of Cabasilas, several versions may be directly observed.-We know that other fourteenth-century authors reedited their works. Cf. J. Meyendorff, "Les dCbuts de la querelle hCsychaste," Byzantion, XXIII (1953), 105, note4 (on changes which Barlaam made in the text of his treatises Against the Latins and on two preserved versions of his P r a y e r ) ; also, R. Browning, "David Dishypatos' Poem on Akindynos," Byzantion, XXV-XXVII (1955-57), 742-745 (on various versions of Dishypatos' Ex9lanation of the errors of Barlaam and A cindynus). l5 See note 8 supra.

188

IHOR

SEVCENKO

was revised within these years. Like the Discourse, some texts which we now consider uniform may be the result of reworkings, and may even be dim and confused reflections of several sets of historical circumstances. The fact that Cabasilas revised and amplified the Discourse within the last thirty years of the fourteenth century strengthens my contention that this work does not refer to the Zealots at all. The issues raised in the Discourse must have been alive when these extensive revisions were made, and the Zealots were a thing of the past by the seventies of the fourteenth century. But my dating of the Discourse must remain a mere suggestion. I continue to believe that the Discourse is concerned with, among other things, the secularization measures undertaken by the imperial government for defense purposes. Within this interpretation, a later date for the Discourse is also possible.l6 Cabasilas may have reacted to governmental actions that affected monastic properties after the battle of Maritza (1371).17 2. Our stemma remains unchanged whether we assign the first three versions of the Discourse to the fourteenth century and ascribe the editorial corrections to Cabasilas, or make a later irreverent editor responsible for the far-reaching changes in the text of the Discourse. But the choice between these two solutions will affect the edition of Cabasilas' text. If all the editorial changes are his own, then we should edit the Final Version; if they are not, we should edit the First or the Second. As I ascribe the changes to Cabasilas, I consider my edition e. essentially correct, for it is based on the Final Version of the ~ i s c o u ~ sHowever, the versions contained in Parisinus Gr. 1276 help to improve the text in a few instances (I am also including here the corrections of typographical errors T O V read &ro.rrb~a-r6v; in my edition) : 6,17 read 86 0 t h ; 13,z read ~ E ~ ~ K ~; 18,10 20,26 read TE~V&VUI;22,8 read ~ q o ~ 22,12 v; read p$v y&p; 25,s read ~ p o v r i o l ; 30,16 place the comma after 8 ~ 6 38,4 ~ ; read ~ o h o ~ v h a b v r o vO ~ ~ EK E ~ VTaTou~ V pivov; 38,21 read E ~ ~ ~ & T T~E 0I S6 ~ K&E~VOUS 0 ~ s 39,13 read 6pllopCvov i 8 ~ i ~ v u; 40,18 s a ~ ; read k p i o v ; 41,17/18 read iva p&&;1~,TOGTO piv ; read .rr&vra ~ a p a h 1 ~ 6 v r 41,1 48,5 place the comma after ~ a ~ q y o p i a; s49,12 read TO^' i m i v ; 50,6 no punctuation after ~ o v q p t 6 v; 50,11 read iP~Palb&l; 51,g read Q ; 55,3 read i ~ p t a s; 55,5 read afi-rijv. Some other readings of the earlier versions deserve consideration : l6 After this was written, I received an interesting article by E. Werner, "Volkstiimliche Haretiker oder sozialpolitische Reformer? Probleme der revolutionaren Volksbewegung in Thessalonike 1342-1349,'' Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Karl-Marx- Universitiit Leipzig, VIII (1958-5g), Gesellschafts- und Sprachwiss. Reihe, Heft I, pp. 45-83. There the author takes the opposite view. On page 57, note I 17, he seems t o agree with my previous dating of the Discourse (1344), but on page 46, note 8, and passim he disagrees with my conviction that this text is not concerned with the Zealots. Only general considerations are adduced by way of refutation, one of which reads: "We are able to do justice to the Zealot commune only if we start from the class structure (Klassevzanlage)."I had thought that the perusal of the full text of the Discourse would be sufficiently convincing in itself. I hope now that general agreement will be reached a t least on one point: some parts of the Discourse-those added in its later versions-are not concerned with the Zealots. For my part, I continue t o maintain that the whole Discourse is unrelated t o the Zealot problem. Rather than to confine ourselves to Cabasilas, it would be more useful to turn to other texts, as yet unexplored, which reveal the social discontent in the mid-fourteenth century. I have in mind Alexios Makrembolites' Dialogue between the Rich and the Poor. Cf. my edition of this text in Srpska Akademija Nauka, Zborvzik radova, LXV, VizantoloIki Institnt, VI (1960), 187-228. l7 On government measures after 1371, see Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 11 (1957), 159.

A U T H O R ' S D R A F T O F CABASILAS' D I S C O U R S E

189

see collation below ad 1,g; 8,4; 15,4; l6,17; 20,1; 28,13; 41,6; 41,12; 45,12; 47,14115; 48,1g; 49,1o; 58,7. I was interested, but not elated, to note that only one of my four conjectures (in Discourse, 38,21) was confirmed by the First Version. 3. How did Cabasilas work on his text? Much as would any other writer who was revising his work with great care. The changes leading to the Second Version are plentiful and substantial, those leading from the Second to the Third (as reflected in the Final) are less extensive, mainly stylistic and grammatical. This tapering off of corrections is what we would expect from any author. What is surprising for a Byzantine is that in his editorial changes Cabasilas strives for clarity and precision, as well as for amplification. Sometimes he even cuts out deadwood, although, like most writers, he adds more than he subtracts. On the whole, the purpose of additions, whether of words or of whole passages, is to give more stress to arguments of the previous version. Such is the function of the added statement 21,5110 (the adversaries must misuse the alienated property, not because they want to do so, but because they cannot do otherwise). The addition 27,7-28,15 adduces scriptural parallels to the adversary's evil-doings. Sometimes one addition leads to another: 28,416 repeats the thought of the added passage 21,5110 (the adversaries' efforts are in vain) ; 29,214 is a development referring to the first part of the added passage 27,7-28,15. A new argument appears only in the insertion extending from 41,23 to the end of 49.18 This most considerable of the additions to the First Version accuses the metropolitan of exacting contributions from his "subjects," including the monasteries, whereas he should have been satisfied with voluntary gifts. This argument is illustrated by the most colorful passage of the Discoztrse, the description of the monks' hatred towards their bishop. Otherwise, the insertion is among the less precise parts of the Discoztrse. By introducing a new argument, the insertion disrupted the reasoning of the original text. In the First Version, where 41,23 was followed directly by 50,1, the "long custom" (50,112) referred to the metropolitan's habit of violating the autonomy of his bishops (cf. 3 0 4 1 ) ; in the Second Version, this "custom" refers to his practice of collecting taxes from the faithful and the monks (4240). Accordingly, I interpreted the "custom" as that of receiving . may yet be what Cabasilas meant in the Second Version, the ~ a v o v i ~ b vThis but in the First he did not touch upon this subject at all. The smaller additions are not always mere variations, repetitions, and amplifications; on occasion, they contain new and specific information. One instance is the passage which corresponds to 4,1111. The earliest Stage describes the recipients of donations only as "holy men, residing in sacred precincts" (cf. p. 183 su+ra and collation infra ad 3,g); the First Version of the same l8 The text written by hand Ab comprises 41, 23 to 50,7. But 50,117appears twice: once a t the bottom of fol. 8 2 V (by hand A, cf. fig. 6), where it is crossed out, and again a t the bottom of fol. 8 6 v , i.e. a t the end of the insertion (cf. fig. 9).

IHOR

SEVCENKO

passage speaks expressly of monasteries and monks, and adds some information on the despoilers of monks: they take the revenue away from them. The Second Version inserts a rather important further detail, that the despoilers take the revenue partly for their own use and partly for that of others. This detail, combined with other words added in the First Version led me to assume that the expropriations may have occurred for the benefit of fironoia holders. Another instance is 21,17/26, rewritten in the Second Version. Although this new version of the passage primarily amplifies the thought that the adversary's actions bring about the ruin of his own soul, it is also more specific : it identifies monasteries as victims of the adversary's confiscations. Even purely stylistic additions (whether to the First Version or the Second) are sometimes made for the sake of clarity and explicitness: thus in 2,14 and 23,7 Cabasilas inserts ahoirs, in l6,1g 'rois .rrp&ypaotv, in 41,7 -rbv Xptmbv and S Christ) ; in 43,1 ~EIKV\IIEIV is added to make the passage more in 41,s ~ E ( T T C ~ T ?( ~= explicit; the same consideration accounts for the added sois in 46,14, for the change of CKE~VOV into cni-rbv in 48,18 and for the insertion of PCGIAOV in 49,6. Only a few corrections make the text more vague: for example in 56,4 the change (between the First and the Second Versions) of E.rrimo.rrov into iepia, in 39,5 into .rrbA~os(Second to Final Version) and in 41,s the change of ~lq-rpo.rrCjh~a~ the omission of E.rrioxo.rros from the Final, if not the Third, Version (by virtue of this omission "everybody," not "every bishop," becomes an imitator of Christ). In many cases it is possible to give the reasons for Cabasilas' stylistic improvements. Thus in 2,7 a o p i ~ o t s(First Version) was changed into PovAopivols (Second), to bring out the opposition to povhopkvots in 2,s; the reworking in 22,g (Second to Final Version) made the whole clause dependent on 4yoG (22,6); the change of fiyovpivqv into i.rrocrivqv (23,q) was required by logic ; ~irhapovpivovwas changed into -vov~(44,3), and etpyaopivos into -vov (36,1o) to improve the sentence structure; 3p&s(57,7) was omitted after the Second Version for the sake of conformity (the preceding passage uses the second person singular). Usually, changes in grammar and spelling demand no explanation. They include corrections of false accents and misspellings, the latter often caused by itacism; itacism, too, is the cause for numerous changes of indicative to optative or conjunctive and of optative to conjunctive or future forms. Striving for elegance explains changes like that of ~t into &v (20,g) and of a perfect without augment to one with augment ( 2 2 ~ 6 )On . occasion, the motive for changes remains unclear, as when one optative form is substituted for another (1,6), an aorist infinitive is changed into inf. fipraes. ( 1 7 ,;~35,18), or a future infinitive into inf. aor. (20,1). Some changes in word order seem to have been made to conform with "Meyer's Law" (e.g., 3,8; lO,3; 16,35); I was not able to discern the reason for others. Some of the numerous deletions of words or groups of words (either in the Second Version or the Third) were made to achieve pregnancy (50,15) or to correct nonsense (59,1); in other instances

AUTHOR'S D R A F T O F CABASILAS' DISCOURSE

191

meaningless words were eliminated (olpa~,20,16), or redundant nouns or verbs struck out (23,18; 33/34; 32,17). 3. The following is a collation of the Discou~sein Parisinus Gr. 1276 with my edition published in these PaPers:l9 Titulus: npbs ~ o i r sEv Tais CE,ovoials A" 1,I hirovo~supra versum A2 1 , 2 vopovs ~ a i ]v6povs I-ra-roGut ~ a Ai : vocabulum .rra-roGo~expunxit A2 1,6 ~ I T ~ ~ E I T hO 6] e o 1 ~ 0A l ,8 .rrhqp~.~hoGo~v] ~rhqpp~hoGo1 A P : - a v P1 1 , g air~Qv]a h Q v A 1, I 2 ZohopCj~~os]o o ~ o GA : quod vocabulum expunxit et oohoyGvro~supra versum scripsit A2 2,7 PouAopivo~s]~ E O ~ ~ V OAI:S~ E O -expunxit et povho- supra versum scripsit A2 2,12 dn
6-rl ~aedcrrepTQVdvqoapkvov qoav i ~ ~ i v~a b, fvoov ~ p 6 ~ r o~ va ~i o i r ~ w01s v , i6ooav~)~ 06 yap &v Glaqdpol, O ~ T 3~ ~SK E ~ V W~S~ f i o a d 3 a a1 .h ' Emlv 6poi(os) 6 ~ r n 6 - r TQV &ypQv,d TE ~dtpyirp~ov ~ a ~ a p a h c j~v ,a6 i.rrap(dr) (cf .4,9-11). 4,213 -robs povaxoir~]Tois qpov~lo-raisA 4 , 3 xpqodrpevo~]~ ~ q o d r p e vAo ~ 4 , s Tj v &pxjv P A :~T)vapxfiv A2 4 , 3 dqalpoirp~vo~ - 4 xpijo-6~1 P A2 e corr. et supra versum : & ~ a l p o G v ~Aa l 4,g G ~ a e f i ~ u~~ as ]i 6. s A 5 , 7 ~f.pGosP A2 e corr. : xpkos A 5 , 7 &vap&hhovral] &vapdihhwv~alA 5,s ~ o l a h a ]T& T. A 6 , s ~ a ~io t o i r ~ o&ctototv v~ ~ 7 v a t ]~ o t o i n o v~~7 v a lxpfi A : voc. xpfi expunxit A2 6 , 7 arS~Qv]a h Q v A 6 , 7 ydrp supra versum A2 6,14 p~~pdr] T& p ~ ~ A p a 6,17 6'1 66 A P recte 6,18 drrrohe1q8fvrwv] . r r ~ p i h ~ t ~ 0 ~ vAr w v6,18119 &vaeepkvov it &pxijs] it &. &vae. A 6,19 $rr@6ov]dcrrdrSov A P 6,20 ipiv] fipijv A 6,22 p o v a x ~ v ]povQv A ? 6,28 O-KOTTO~]moTr~iA 7,1 O ~ K E ~ O V ]i8iov A 8,3 ~otv6v supra versum A 8 , 4 d ~ ~ h f i o o v - r edqehfioovra~ ~] APS 8,11 ~rapixovo~] Trapk A : -xovol add. A* 8,11 6, TI P A2 e corr. : €7 TI A 10,1/2 TOTS iicpxovotv & v u ~ ~ i d 36a~t i ]d t v a ~ .bi T. 6px. A 1 0 , s ~ p o i o - r a d a tT ~ S air~oG]~ i j as6 ~ o G.rrpoimadal A : supra T. air. litteram p, supra ~ r p o ~ m litteram . a superscripsit A2 1 0 , 4 ~a~oplScat] ~ a ~ o p p i r ( aAt 1 0 , 6 8pxovotvI 6yovot A lg Numbers refer to paragraph and line of my edition. A = scribe of the main text of the First Version; A1 denotes corrections surely attributable to this scribe; A2 = author of most corrections and additions in the text written by A ; A3 . . AX= hands of other correctors of this text. Ab = scribe of the insertion; Abl = corrections by this scribe; Ab2 = corrector of the text written by Ab; AC = copyist of a few lines of the Discourse a t the beginning of fol. 8 7 ~P; = Parisinus Gr.1213; S = Supp2. G r . 681.

.

192

IHOR

SEVCENKO

lO,7 ~oir~wv] T ~ ~oioir~av V A lO,17 fi] supra versum A3 lO,17 v6y0~imiv] v6yos io-ri A2(A3?)mg lO,18 ~ C T OaC~oirs ~S] A 1 I 9 1v A 11,I E~PdihhwP A2 ex corr. : E~pdihhoyevA 11,2T E ~ V & ~ I ] ~~BvCrol A 11,12 ~ K E ~ V ~ KO E ~V V O ]imiv V A 11,13 1~p6~epov yevkdai Tois xp6votgI

yevidal 1~p6~epov

xp6vols A 12,1 6em6~asUCTOGS pqoi] 9. 6. aC. A 12,s Kail om. A 12,7 ~ ~ ~ ~ v i r v a l ] Gei~vCivaiA P l2,g ~ f i - r eT ~ V yfi-ri ] Tiva TQV A 1 3 , ~~ E ~ O K~ E~~ OTK ~~ TVOAV] P recte 13,1o 6ei supra versum A1 13,14 ovyxaip~ls]ouyxopeis A

14,1 qqoiv] 9qo1A 14,1 ~ K E ~ V EKE~VOUS O ~ SA

] 14,7 ~lvaisupra versum A2 14,10 iau~oG]ah06 A

15,4 air-rbv] air~bvA

16,6 ykhei A2 e corr..: yMhel A 16,14115 o h e &yeipouolv]o h ' &yeipouolv

A 16'16 ~ E ~ K ~~EIKVGVUI ~ V UA I ]P 16,17 O~KOVO~AOG~~V] O~KOVO~OG(JI A 16,17 airrbv] ahbv A l6,19 61~6P A2 e corr. : h 6 A 16,1g ~ o i ITpCxyvaolv s supra versum A2 l6,21 phdcrr~ol]p h h e t A 16,2360~oil60~eiA 16,2gO W V E V ~ ~ K T J ouvevkyl
~~pool&ol

A ?

l6,38 421 ~ a A i 1644 ~~pooiaol] i A 17,7 xpfidal] xpfi-

1 7 , o~vvevky~q]ovvevky~otA 17,6 xopis] ~ a xwpis iyKhfipa~a yivo1-r'

&v A

oadal A 17,7 iy~Afiya~a] 18,I E"v].rrpEyya E"v A 18,6 6eiColI 6eiCe1 A l8,g o\j6iv] 06tjiva A 18,10

I T ~ O U ~AW E T O

~ O I T ~ Tho-rrcb~a~6v ~ T ~ V ]A P recte 18,15 1~poCpdih~~o1 A 19,7 Kai 19,1 i6i6ag~voir6eis] fi 9irols E6i6aCev A 19,6 fi6i~qoasIfi6i~q~as E ~ SE. A

&vbp&~~otjov] ~ ayhp i ~ a&v6pCr1~060v i A 19,7 E~~iva] 20,1 oirt
20,14ECeAkyxr~]~ C E A ~ Y X E A I 20,16 6ei(ouotv] oTyat 6eiCouotv A : voc. 01. expunxit

] A

~~BvCrval A rect e 20,27 T U X ~olaij-r' A2 20,25 ~i 661 ei6' A 20,26~~8vbval] 21,s tmt - 10 poirhov-ral in margine superiore A2

213 K E ~ EK ~ E AE E ~IO]IA 21 ,II TOG oup9kpovros -ruyx&v~lv in rasura A2 21,11 066' €7 T ~ S6'] 7€ T ~ Sin

rasura A2 21'11 ~ o l v b v69Ehei in rasura A2 2193 ah06 P A : 6au-roG e corr.

i 26 Bvrov in margine in-

A2? 21,14 -rbvl e corr. A1 21,17 6 ~ a v~ a v

7€ YE

feriore add. A2: TOG yiv ~eixous~ a ~i f i sv i ~ q s~ a Ti ~ ~Vo i o i r ~ woC6aybs. 6uviloq vpbs ~o1aG-r~ xpfioadai Tois &9qpqykvol~. Bv 62 oau-rbv ~ipydoo,~ aITC~VU.

i

tic yhp rilv ~r6hlv&vio-rqoas&vahwoas,T ~ G T ' k-rfioo,~ o i r sv6yous fi6t~q~Cjs A, C U ~ U S

verba expunxit A2 2l,17 ~ ~ ~ q e s~vqefis qs] h b TOG .rrapavov~ivvocabulis

&. T. IT. expunctis A2 21,24 K ~ T ' om. A2 21 $6 oirt
22,3 ~ iiGrl ] A 22,5 ~ 6 Ti] A 22,8 qqoi] 9qolv A P recte 22,g oC6iv -

6 i ~ a irrrooxeiv ~] T&S &tias6i~asoir6iv K ~ A ~ A E I 22,10111 ipiv ~ahhious]K. 4. A

homlpqvra~A 22,27

22,12 yiv] piv yap AS recte 22,16 &~~emkpqvral] b ~ o i o ssupra versum A1 22,28 ~ o i ssupra versum A2 22,29 q6vovI ~ b v

96vov A 22,34 yevkdat in margine A2 (A3?) 22,35 T& 62 I€ S] T& 6' E ~ SA

22,35 at ~ b 8ve6v om. A

ahas 2 3 , 3 ~ aK i ~ o I T~~a~~&hha si ] KAOITC~Svocabulo~&Ma expuncto

A 23,4~hs i A2 e corr. : 1~ovqp6jvA 23,5 ~ a006~1s

P A2 e corr. : T&hhaA 23,4 ~~ovqplbv

AUTHOR'S D R A F T O F CABASILAS' DISCOURSE

193

~ om. A : a f ~ o r j set aliud vocabulum expunctum & n e p ~om. i A 2 3 , ahoirs ( ~ i r v a d ?) a ~ supra versum A2 23,7 Guvqe4va1 om. A 23,13 ~ O K E T V ] aha ~ O K E ~AV 23,18 ~ o ~ x w p i r x o ~ ~o ~ x] w p i r x o~ ~ashw.rro6ir~a1~ i A 2 3 , 2 3 2.rropivqvI 23,33134 E.rrao166vI Enao16bv 2 3 , ~ s Z qy~oi] iva ocjoq, Zqp~oi A fiyovyivqv A ~ a yipov i A 25'5 cppovrio~v]- o ~A S recte 25,11 mov6fiv] -rfivmov6fiv A 25,15 .rrpoeGpia] npoe6p~iaA 26'13 T ~ K T I K ~ ~h ~ ] Taw. A 26~1 T ~ S6qplovpybs T ~ Sy ~ w p y 6 ~ T.1y. T. 6. A i 6 v m ~ G vMh~cj-ra-ros f ortasse recte 26,14 ~ p a ~ o i r o q s~] p a ~ o i r q~s a oirro 6pQ1s A 2 7 , z TI erasit V" ? 27'7 & K O ~ E I ~ - -28,15 .rrapihBwolv in marginibus inferiTGVvocabulo K. exoribus folk 7 y et 76. add. A2 27,10/11 4 TGV] ij 27,12 y a i v e ~ a ~paivono ] quod in ~ puncto A2 27,11 i ~ r a ~ v i o eo~~]e q a v b o eA2 yaive~atmutavit A2 27,15 parnitas] pacrrilov quod in pamicas mutavit A2 27'16 d r r r o ~ ~ i d ai&eal ~] A2 27,1g o i i w ~ a h G v ]Aiyov o i i ~ wK ~ G vocabulo V A. expuncto A2 28,1 "EDTI~ o i w v ]post E. T. vocabulum quoddam ( o k w s ?) expunctum in A2 28,1 p~ooirp~vov]. . . . yoirpevov A2 ? 28,1/2 TGVa 6 ~ G v- 3 Evma] 4 TGV i6iwv fi TGVKOIVGV E V E K ~TGVa h G v T O ~ T ~~ ~V p a y y d t ~ wGI'v ,ti .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . A2, qui postea litteram f3 vocabulis 4 TGVi6iov, litteram a vocabulis TGVa 6 ~ 6 vsuprascripsit, vocabula ij TGVKOIVGV E " V E K ~ expunxit eorumque loco EveKa supra versum posuit 2 8 , 3 TOGS 62 n h e o v i ~ ~ ahaec s] legi non possunt in A2 2 8 , 8 ~ a i h a ~] a 6 - r 'A 2 2 8 , s 81a.rr~oeivP A2 e corr. : G~aquyeivA2 28,g o66i] 066' A2 2 8 , g ~ 4 dthqe~ias 5 ~rpoppfioe~s] .rrpoppfio~~s T ~ Sdihqeeias A2 qui postea supra-mpoppfio~~s vocabula-rqs &hqeeias posuit et T. &. in versu sequenti expunxit 28,10 FI& -n)v &61~iav- 12 6pxovraI &peivovos -rux~ivsijs Zwqs 3 p a ~ p o ~ h p 61a a s T ~ dt61~iav V ~ a T i ~ Vnheove{iav 0 6 i61cj-rqv ~ y6vov &M' 066; & p x o n a A2, qui postea litteram p vocabulis & ~ ~ i v o v-rvxeiv, o~ litteram a vocabulo .rrheove~iav,litteram y vocabulis o 6 i~G16-rqv superscripsit et vocabulum 616 expunxit 28,13 OGK EBvos] 066' EBvos A2 28,18 ~ ad iv ] b v A 28,19 lepoovhia] i~poavhia~ a dt61~ia i A 28,20 &oirve~os]dtv6q~osA 28,20 dtv6q~osId t d v e ~ o A s E ~margine V A2 (A1 7) 2 9 , 4 p€Tdt] VET' A2 2 9 , 8 06 2 9 , o~bs -4 K ~ T E ~ ~ in KadGus] 06, &v KaTi8vs A 29,I I $KE~VOS]~ K E ~ V OAI 29,15 .rrohh$ ye x ~ i p o ].rroMG xeipo ~ a v - r iA : voc. ~ a v expunxit ~ i A2 29,14 TOG om. A 29,16 i ) T i p ~ K a ~ ] ~ ~ T ~ P W~K a~ oiel S i pqG2v eipydtoeal ~ E I V ~ AV : vocabula ~ai-6~1v6v expunxit A2 29,18 OEOG -re]~ai&oG A 2 9 , z o 66 supra versum A2 2 9 , 2 5 m a h f i ~ o v-rb oGpa] ~b oGpa G K W ~ ~ KA~ V 3 0 , 5 6l~al05irVq~] 6iol~fioewsA 30'12 pqGEv] o66iv A 30'16 .rroiGv ~ b 8v ~ 6 ~ 1 ~ b ev ~ TOIGV b ~ A 3 0 , ~~&~v ] ~ A a i 3 0 ~ ~0~ a p a r n f i q - r aEAOI ~ ] quod vocabulum expunxit et .rrapao-rfioq~alin margine adiecit A1 3 0 ~ hoiqoev] 6 hoie~ A 3 0 , 3 7 Bcpehos] 69. Bv A 30,40 yvcjpals P A2 e corr. : v6po1~A 3 0 , 4 z T a 6 q v in rasura A1 (A2 ?) 3 0 , 4 5 ~ a - r a h ~ i m ~he^e ] in rasura A1 (A2?) 3 0 , 4 5 h o v o i a s ~ a Bpdtoovs] i Bpdtoous ij drrrovoias A 3 0 , 4 7 vooijs] vooAs A 3 1 , 8 ndtvra supra versum A2 3 1 , g ~ o v r o v iom. A 3 1 , r z E ~ X E V ] ETXE A 31,15 n a v r a supra versum A2 31,18 vopiZe11 vopilo~A 31'23 tjrv eiq] &ei A

194

I H O R SEVCENKO

32,3iau-rq] a f ~ A6 32,4 ~ b 'vIwdtvvou] iodtvvou TOV A 32,15xpuooG] TOG xp. 32,17 v o p i ~ ~ ~Tohpfloal v] vopiZ~lvA 32,1g B E ~ V ~ V o. ] &V A 32,21 ~ K E ~ ~ E V ] ~ K E ~ ~&v E VA 32,25 i~dtmov]T ~ iS ~A. 32,~G~ a ~i o h q 3 3 , ~rapavop~iv]

~ ~ a i ~ o h q - 3 2 , 3 0 ~ q o l vin margine inferiore A, quibus 33,1 &Udt- 2 ~ a p a v o p ~ i v in margine inferiore addidit A2 32,28 ~ a vbpov i t u a q o ~ v~K&(TCOTE] ~ K ~ ~ U T O ~T E a i V ~ ~ Ui pVi h q o ~A 33,5 qaolv] qqoiv A 33,8 Piyal] Piyai APS 33,12/13 post 6opupfiqs in spatio 10 litterarum lineam habet A 34,5 TOGTOV e corr. A1 ( ~ in T mutato) 34,16 drM' O ~ K O V O ~aBhV' ]oi in rasura Ax (A2?) 34,17 &v6p6v in rnargine A 34,17 tyypdtyalo] ypdtyalo A

3 4 , 841 ~ 6' ~ A 34,q~ d i o q P s A2 e corr. : ~ a h i o a~ohpficrqs l A 3 4 , ~ po6o1]

s Po601 ~ a Oi ~ K&V dpvq0~iqs A : ~ai-&pvqe~iqs expunxit A2 34,30 i\ I T O ~ I S PA&pous fi h q ~ h ~ i ph. a ~ fi] h ~fi .~ 6 h A .

35,3 0 6 ~ &1IS of, A 35,5 -rqs airrfis in marginibus addidit A1 35,11hdtpqs]

i ~ a~r6h1v i 6h6Khq-

hdtpo~sA 35,18/19&vix~dal] &vaoxidalA 35,20~ axpqpa-ra pov] K. IT. 6. K.X. A : suprav. 8. litteram p, supra K. X. litterama posuit A2 3 5 , ~ ~ T ~ S-ris ] &V A EI36,1d v a i v6pous] v6pous d v a i A 36,617v6pous ~ o h p f i ~T.~V.l ]A 36,7EITE~V] in rasura A 36,1o~ipyaopivov]~ipyaoptvosA 37,415~io-rrparrwv-rai]-ovral A : -ovTai e corr. A1 37,5 61d6yovral] -ovTai A : - W V T ~ Ie corr. A1 37,6dtvahio~ool]-ouol A : -wol e corr. A1 37,11 post 66€,av in spatio j litterarum lineam habet A 37,15 ~ p o ~ 6 p i a v-eiav ] A 38,4~ o h o na-roupivw v v] T O ~ ~ T W~ha6vrwv V O ~ T E~ K E ~ ITa~oupivwv V ~ V A(K~~~VTWV e corr. A1) recte 38,11 y p i ~ o v ]ypiqov A : ypirqov e corr. A" 38,16 post 1€ reliquum lineae spatium vacuum in A 38,17 &v] &v 6piv A 38,19 6 i ~ & l q s ] A recte 3 8 , ~ ~ ~IK&ZEIS A : -lqs e corr. A1 3831 K&KE~VOUS] ~oir-rous~&K~ivous ~ ~ Zqv, 6 .rraGhos Tqoiv A : 6-qqoiv expunxit A2 Aapqs] Adtpols A 3 8 , lev] 38,28&oi~ous]dtoi~ous,-rods &m~irousA 38,31oqpaivol] oqpdtvol A 38,38 0662~ K O I V ~ V ]K O ~ V O V0f8iv A T ~ ~S O ~ K O UinS margine add. A" 39,6 39,5 I T ~ ~ E~ ~~ TS~ ]O I T ~A~ E 39,5 U S 39,7 6yoqljhou~]6po~ipousA 39,9 I T O ~ E ITUS S] I T ~ ~ E A I S : T&S erasit Ax (A1?) ~'ie'P A1 e corr.: E ~ AE 39,1o a i ~ i a vPA2 supra versum] y p a ~ f i vA quod expunxit A2 39,13 -r6v v6pq ~ ~ E ~ K ~WP ISZ O ~ ~ V O V h] b TQV v6pwv 6plZoptvwv C ~ E ~ K V U SA : T&V ~ 6 p 6plZopivov ~3 i6EiKvus S recte

40,4 T ~ V~ ~tihlv] TT)V airroc n6Alv: post ~ f i vin spatio 5 litterarum lineam habet S 40,s i r r r f i p ~ ~ v l i r r r fAi p ~ ~40,12 a h o d s i 6 ~ i v ]h a ( 3 ~ i v A 40,18xapaA I I T ~ V T ~ S ]v&vra v a p a h i ~ r 6 v ~ aAs recte 40,26/27 piv I T ~ ~ I T Epiv I Vom. ] A sed s A post I T ~ ~ I T E ~supra V versum add. A2 40,27 6' o\SEkv] 62 a f ~ b o66kv t 41 ,I-robs ~irqe~o-rtpou~ T ~ f~piwv] V TGVi. -rods €6. A 41,6~ ~ X E T d~~ iI x]o v l a A 41,7 ~i6ijs]i8qs A 41,7 m i y a ~ a] 6 ~ m b iyal A 41,7 ~ b X v ptm6v om. A 41,8 41 ,g kyx~lpilqs] - 1~1sA : -lqs 41,8 of 6 ~ m 6 ~ ~ q a s om. i A ITCS]ITCSt n i o ~ o v o sA e corr. A1 41,1z B v ~ o v ]E"v6ov A fortasse recte 41,1z - 4 v o i ~ i a vair~ois]airroi ~ j ov i ~ i a vA 41,14 uai yap] ~ a yhp i ~ a Ai 41,151166 v6pos 6 ~ 6 6~ 1~ 6 6 ~

T. vopos A 41,r6eup6vl -rrpo06pov A 41,17/18 ~ o f r r op2v 'iva P ~ S i.] pdt&Is ~ ~ vai -

7 ~ o h p q -A (50,4 ~ o l j s ]~ o b s piv A recte 41,23 post 6 a v ~ i l o v - r50,1 A

AUTHOR'S D R A F T OF CABASILAS' DISCOURSE

195

50,7 nap61 ~ a n ia p a A): 50,1 vai-x6ks quae versum unum constituunt erasit, 5 0 , ~~ anpcjqv i - 7 ~ o h p q e- xpunxit A2 41,23 O ~ E hic ] incipit manus Ab 42,z pouhopkvol~] -vovs Ab 42,12 Mha] Cieha Ab 42,13 pq xavopkvols] -vqoapEvois Ab 43,1 ~ E ~ K V ~ E I YOm. ] Ab 43,7 k~p&hq] E~PckhhqAb 43,9 nEplpdkcr%al] TEplpahhkdat Ab 43,12a h 6 v P Ab: a h 6 v e COX. Ab2? 43,20TTP~XUUO~ES] T T P ~ T TOVTES Ab 44,3 ~iihapoupkvou~]~iihapovpbvwvAb 44,I 3 &v6phnov~]~ 0 3 5&v8pcjnovs Ab nap' &v8pcjnol~Ab 44,20Ep644,18 0 ~ 6 xp1m6v ~1 Ab 44,1gnap& &~~~L;)IToIs] olv] ip6o1 Ab 45,3npbypa] np6ypa qqoiv Ab 45,1z ~qGkv]pq8kva Ab fortasse recte 45,19 45,zo OIOV P Ab2e corr. : o i Ab oij TI] oij ~ oAb l 46,z Gkov-rat P Abl e corr.: -omat Ab 46,6 fi Pias qqol] qqaiv fi Pias Ab s 46,15dpmfis] ~ i j &.s Ab 46'14~ o i som. Ab 46,14hopkvov-ras] h o p ~ i v a m a Ab S] cwon~isAb 47,8 47,6 TOGTO]-roG-rl a h 6 Ab 47'7 K E ~ ~ &Z ~VT ~E ~SKE~~&VOIS dcrrav-dpq] dcrrav-dpl Ab 47'13 dtvapkvq~]dvap~ivqsAb 47,14/15~ V E X V ~ I & ~ ~ V ] iv~xupdtlovAb fortasse recte 48,1gn p ~ o p b ~nap~~]o p h a ~s avoooGvra~ i Abfort asse 48,18airrbv] k ~ i v o Ab v 13 a recte 48,z8 dc16v n p o v o i a ~ ]rpovoias d(lGv Ab I Ab fortasse recte 49,11 49,6 pbhhov om. Ab 49,10 r p o 6 ~ i h s -1~po6~icols 49,14 aI66] a16h Ab ~(EIS] ~ ~ O I Ab S 50,4 ~oloin.ov] -rGv T. Ab 50,7 r a p & ] ~ a ria p & Ab 50,7 -rohpq-] hic desinit manus Ab: textus pergit in fol. 961 E 11 iP~Palcj@qin spatio ic denuo manus A 50,g T ~ T 50'7 - 8 ~ i o a ~ ] h incipit ab A vacuo relicto inseruit A1 50,11 iP~Palcj6q P A1 e corr. : iPatP- A 50,11 T ~ S 13/14~ I T E ~ V in ~ Kspatio &V ab A vacuo relicto inseruit A1 50,1z aire~mia]aire~vr~ia A 50,15 oir8kI 066' A 50,15 o l dpavvol] d m ~ poi dpavvo~A 513 -roloG~ov]-roloC~ov&hhov A 51,9 01 d A recte 51,1z 6fi supra versum add. A3 51,13n h ~ i o u r~h]~ i o u soTpal A 51,16xpuo6vI ~ b xp. v A 52,1 ~ o i s ]~ a Tois i A 52,3 TOOS j p a p - r q ~ 6 ~Ma~~u e k p w ~ih. ] T. j p . A 52,5 v6po11 A6yot A 52,6 r p 6 m o p a A 52,16di] & Y EA 52,17airsoir~ qqolv] qqoiv air-robs A 52,21ippAval v6po1s] v. i. A 5 2 , ~~~ p~6 a v bpohobs] qs 6pohoOs ~~p6ckvqs A : supra 6. litteram p, supra K. litteram a posuit A2 (A1?) 53,8 X p l m 6 v I X. a h 6 v A 53,11 Zqploi] Zqplii A 53,18 ~ a-rrp6~]~ i a~b i V np6s A 53,21 xqpGv P A1 e corr.: X E ~ G A 54,3saCI-ra] -raG-rl A 54,11Evrle~is]a i r ~ o i sEml&is A 54'15 ypiqous] y p b q o u ~ A 54,17 ~ i v o s~ irvoiasin margine add. A1 54,21 6pGo1vl 6p6o1 A 54,z6 EXE~S] E"hax~sA 54,zS ini T@ napa-r&{~os in margine add. A2 (AX?) 5 5 , q~a3hos-Exov in rasura A1 55,5 a h G v ] a h 6 v A recte 55,s igouoiav in rasura A1 55,8 vlpij] ptClii ~ anapdt6~lyva i n o l i j ~ i j &pxfis s A : verba ~ a i 4 p x i j s expunxit A2 55,1o TIS] T ~ A S 55,14T ~ Ssis ] A 55,16 dcrrohhbval] &nohhGvat A 55,17 s b 6 ' ] 1.6 (6k) A 55,18~ijom. A

v

13*

A

I H O R SEVCENKO

196

5 6 , 2 -ri - 3 i ~ o q p 6 som. A in fine paginae homoeoteleuti causa 56,4 i ~ p i aP A2 supra versum : &.rrimo.rrovA quod vocabulum expunxit A2 56,13 iamois] a h o i s A 56,17 -rooo~-rov]-ooG-ro A 5 6 , TIS] ~ ~ -ris A 56,223 ~ep66valI KEp6&val A

5 7 , 4 -roc om. A 5 7 , 7 E~OITO] 6 ~ 5 sPOITO TO A 57,11 6Mv P A1 : jpiv A

58,6 E~paAAouolv]i~(jCxhhouolA 5 8 , ~~+ E I V ] &yay~iv A fortasse recte

59,1 &&KE~s] o h & 6 t ~ ~Ai s(fortasse Ax: o h & 6 l ~ ~Ai s? ) 59,1/2 P O ~ Q~I a T& i .rrp&ypa-ra] p e a PoGol ~ a ai h &-r& .rrp&yva-ra A 59,17 ooqoi] textus pergit in fol. 87' 5 9 , z 1 ~ I T I T ~ ~ + J T iTTl-rpi+~~ls JS] A 5 9 , h.r;lo@ds] ~ ~

h l o q a h d s a i E.rrivoial a h G v A : vocabula a i - - a h G v expunxit A2

603 E ~ Spioov Evey~6vraIi v ~ y ~ 6 v -cis r a pioov

A : Supra tvcy. 6O,2 E~ITTJS] E ~ T T O A ~S litteram p, supra E ~ Sp. litteram a posuit A2 6 0 , 8 -r@-cipfp add. A" (A1?)

60,8 se om. A" (A1?) 1,ITOGS -4 aoqpoveiv] hoc fragmentum manus ACpraebet in fol. 8 7 v hirouoi v6pousI vopous hirovoi AC 1 , 4 .rreiocle] .rroioele AC

1,112

Folio gg of Parisinas GY. 1276, the highest numbered of the Discoarse, is of this binio are followed by a binio (fols. 100-103). Only fols. 100'-101' covered with writing by a hand similar to A and contemporary with it (see fig. 11).20 They contain a curious fragment, starting in the middle of a sentence. I.

According to Professor Irigoin (see note 8 supra), the watermark of fols. 100-103 is a battle-axe = Briquet no. 7505 (date: 1378). Similar watermarks are attested from 1354 on, cf. MoSin-Traljib,

Vodeni znakovi. . ., no. 4701 ff.

Here is the text of the F r a g m e n t : 1

5

10

...

6 p2v ydp oipb{e-ral ~ a pio f p ~ l ~ , a rpbs i -rbv 8ebv pecrrds Ga~pirov j ~ p a x q h o v ,~ & K K O V &qfio€l ~ O V & S , K a i K & ~ + J E I piv 6 i ~ q v~ h o l o i -rbv 62 ~ a o.rro6bv i i r ~ r o o - r p d o c l ,~ a .rr&oav i oioei ~ d a n - r w p i a vfv' , theqeij, ~ a ouyyvbpqv i &.rrlo.rr&oq-ra~, ~ a -rfjs i ~\j&jvqshohueij. 6 62 8ebs -ri ~ p b s ~ a h ;a& . r r o o ~ p i y~b o T I ~ ~ U U ~T ~O ~&UTV T 0 ~ 05 Kai O \ ~ Ke i o a ~ o i r o o p a i o o u ~ a -rh i -rotaha ipei. - ~ a TiT ~ ~ E Gijhov, V ~ q o i v ,6 s 01s 6 8 ~ b soii-ro xahe.rrGs btl-relhei, .rrheove~iavb a h 6 v helhei ; - it Zjv ahoirs 81opeoirp~vo~ i 6 l d t h u ~ , qqoi, o - r p a y y a h l d ~ p l a i o v ouvahhaypdt-rwv ~ a -rrZoav o u y y p a q f i v & 6 1 ~ o vGl&o.rra. -ri TOGTO ~ d G vp i a l o v a u v d t h h a y p a ; d-rav ~ 0 6 s& U ~ E V E ~ ~ ~h' O U <;)vfiv S E ~ K W ~ E fiV 1~p5olv pfi ~ouhopivou~. Q TO~S .rrohhoi~6 ~ 1 0666v, ~ 6 ~ 068' &6u~iaTIS d v a l ~ o K A *6 66 O E ~ STOGS sohp6vras TESTIMONIA:

213 cf. Is. 58: 5 .

516 cf. Is. 58: 4 et Jer. 7: 16; cf. Ps. 26(27):9; 7.

8/g cf. Is. 58:6.

AUTHOR'S D R A F T O F CABASILAS' DISCOURSE

197

ixepobs fiyci-ral, ~ a &i ~ r o o - r p i q e l v&IT' a3-rGv Eqq -rb I T ~ ~ ~ O T~b TOV, i.rrl-re-rapkvovTOG pioovs 6qhGv. ~ a pjv, i 6 ~ ~1 a &papstGv i & ~ e o l vai-rovpivots ~ a vcpi i ~ o i r r o vnpomimovalv a h @~ a 66vpopivols i 06 .rrpoaixelv qqoiv, Zjv ivjyaycv E ~ E I ~ Epe-ra~ah6vra~ . yhp &v 'robs T ~ ~ I T O VKai S ~b novqpbv Piyamas ~ i p 6 ~ 0E ~ G T qqoi, E , ~ a 61ahcx0Gpcv i ~ a -rhs i & p a p - r i a 3pGv ~ h e v ~ a v 6 6. y a p i . 4 ~ - ~ ~ Y V O G E?' U ~ V01s f i 6 l ~ f i ~E.rrqyyeiha-ro a~l~ Gcjoclv, T O ~ O V 6qh65 Ecrrlv E-rl T ~ novqpias S Exopivovs dcrromepGv. -ris oGv E-rl ~a-rahci~c-ral rp6qaots -rois nap& -rb Gi~alov~ a -robs i v6povs xpqpa-rileoea~pouhopkvot~, ci TGVpiv xpqpdrrov -roirrov cjqihelav o66epiav o66ialv Emlv e3pciv oG6apoGJ 20 Fol. roov 07 6' dt-rrcjhelav & 1 ~ 6 h h v v ~I a/ -njv t ioxdrrqv, ei p i -rob' airr6, -rb K ~ K G S rotciv dtv6pcj.rrov~~ BqcAos ~ a ~i 6 ~ 6 fiyoGvral; 0s 6 p6vov eTval qaiqv 6 v -rGv 06 yhp dtv6ponivqs ~ a ~ i -roG-r6 as & v e p o n o ~ ~ 6 v w6alp6vov. v ye, ~ p o i ~ a p o i r k d a l elval novqp6vJ ci p i xpcias li 460vqs fi qjpqs xkptv, TWOS Cirhhov -rGv 'rrpb~T ~ VPiov xpqoipov dval 6o~oirvrov.&S &v ~ o i r ~ oo66iv v Ehnioq 'rlS, o66iv ~ohirel TT&VTOV EVEKC( D O ~ ~ O V E ~hVi. p 06 pol 6 0 ~ 0 6 0; ~ ITheove~iav 1~ ~ o h p 6 v - -rb r ~ pdrralov ~ TOG np&ypa-ros ~ a ~i b &ohoveoGv-ra v B&va-rovp i &v ~ 1 6 6 ~ohp&v, ~ ~ s pj6' 06Tus ~ K ~ V T E TS ~ ~ X E IEITi V ~b p&paepov, dihhh T@ piv &pehc-rj-rw~ -rGv -rolod-rov EXEIV ~b n&v&yvoeiv, -rb 6' &yvociv a'i-rtov airrois eTval T ~ ~S t j h p q ~ah' . OGV 3pIv pkpyat-r' &V TIS Gl~aios,Z, pouhj, -roi~-rGv KOIVGV Evlpehq-rai~,09s E6cl aha ~ a meyapkvous i airrobs &plpGs ei6fva1, ~ a -rGv i &hhov 616&me1v-robs &yvooGvras, mou6fiv eiadtyov-ra~h i p TOG nptxypa~os,boqv ci s 6 IT&V 26~1 T E ~ X O S6vacrrijaal K ~ T ~ I T E 4O TI ~ TGV V , KO~VGV E-rravopeGoal ~ a &i .rrcp~oqBivrapeydihovs oiocl ~lv6irvovs-rij 1~6hel.3pcis 6i ~a6eirirGovalvEoi~a-rh~ a ~a0drrrep i C K E ~ V O ~TOIS6veipaolv &o~oholjpevolTGV drhqeGs ~ ~ I K E I ~ ~3piv V WK V~ K G o Vh aidavcoee, ~ aai T O ~ S~a-ropeoGolvo66iv fi pl~pbvBqchos Exel, repi TOGTOV ivio-re povh~v6pcvol-rGv ~ a l p i o vKa-ra9pov~i-r~. K&V piv T ~ hqqefi S ovhjoas i61G-rqvfi xpjpa-ra bhiya -rGv Gqpooiov, e38ir~Gclvh no~ci-rc,po&e, ~a-rayqqilede,rCoav 6 i ~ q vi h h o TGV&6l~qp&40 ~ o fiyeide v ~ a hol6opcids i pkhhovra I T ~ T&S ~ S 6 i ~ a s~ b -rqs v n 6 h e o ~&ppoFol. I o I r mjv. -robs 6i ~dfl
+

Deut. 31: 17;18;32:20 et al.;cf. testim. ad 5/6.

16/17cf. Is. I :17-18.

21 cf. Deut. 4:26; 8:1g;30:18: cf. Ju. 6:4.

12 cf.

25 ih-rrioat - r i ~ 33 i i 7 i 39 ~crrayq~ig~ao0ai cod. : -E e corr. 40 fiy~iu0atcod. : -E e corr. 42 61Gv 42 ri 43 w ~ a i k i ve corr. ! 44 O ~ E ~ E ~ V

IHOR 45

SEVCENKO

irNv Evopio&7, & M a K&VTIS irpGv p~-ra$ir ~ o i o i r r o vp q & Q , ~ acbsi 6Ei ~ a 0 a i p ~ i v rtjv v6oov .rr&vra drrrcjh~o~v,6 s TI pdrralov ~ aTr~pkhK0~ i ~ o i s&vay~aiois i.rr~lo6ryov i.rrl-rip&ral. aka voGv i x 6 v r o v ; -raG-ra 0 ~ b v~ i 6 6 -;r -raG-ra ~~ E p a o l h ~ovvfi-r~ i u j -rlpGvri .rravraxoG Povhopivov oc$~&ai ;~ aT ~i E S&v ~ T ~i r b 6i~a10v.06 ITOAA&IS irpiv ~ T T E T ~ ~ T~ O~ E~SI W I T ~ ~ S6, ~ ~1h a 6 v r o vr ~ v f i - r o v ~ apiav i 66vpopivov, o h i.rrfih&TE ~ o i plaiols s irpds o h ~ p o q y y ~ i h cT$ rr~ T& ~ o l a C I ~~ao h i r ~~l vapovhopivcy i ~ aGvvapivcy i ; 06 1~8oiv~ K ~ ~ E 6lop00GVUE &a1 TGV p j K ~ A G.rr~.rrpaypivov s &amov 01s &V i v n j x o l ; T ~ S 66 6 voGs TGV i ~ ai pi ~ i v Cip~ov,~ aTii ~0G-r'imi -rb ovpqipov, ir.rrip 06 .rravra ~ a6pbo~lv ovvoio~lv o v j p i v TOG0 ~ 0 6C.~~EI~&V ih~os3, fi 6 p o p 6 ~ ;afi~ V~O ~ ~ Z ETIT ~~ ~ M TI PAapos Eo~d3alp ~ i l o v6 ~ a vimroh~po0fj ; q o p E p b v -rb C p.rr E U E ~v E i5 x ~ i p a s0 ~ o GZGVTOS.&Xi' ~i p j .rrp6~~pov, vijv yoGv 6pGv a h G v Y ~ V E & E ~ ahoyioa&~ i -ri piv 6 0~656 ~a 6 i ~ a l avopo0mGv, -ri 62 6 ~ o v q p b sGaipov 6 .rr~i0ov.rrapavopAv. ~ ac ib 6 ~ f i v TGV&ya0Gv h a v r o v , 06 TGV rtjv \yvxjv ~ o o p o i r v ~ op6vov, v &Ah& ~ aTGV i oGpa q ~ p 6 v r o vTGV~ p o m a i p o ~ v oirrov povos &v xopqy6~,~ a06 i 6 laq8E ip E iv & 6 i 6 o ~ ~ v - - - oyap \ j E ~ K imi ~ S TO~S Epyoi~E T T ~ 11 povh~ir~iv a h b v ~ o i sa h o G 4 A A a ~+ZEIV P O V ~ ~ ~ Ej pVi vO~S a i

5

50

55

60

Fol.

I O I ~

65

x p f i p a ~ a~ a ocjpa-ra i ~ a &pxas i ~ a-ripas, i -ra 6 i ~ a i aK E ~ E ~ ~ EnIo i ~ i v .6 6 i 1~ovqp6s,xpqmbv o66iv jp&s o \ j 6 ~ . r r c j ~~ipyacr$vo~ ro~~ - o h yap p o i r h ~ a l , r r o N p l o ~&v ieapxfi~, o h ' &v i6vvfi&l povhq&is, ~irplos&v O ~ ~ E V ~6 S ~, l 60GA65 Emi, ~ ao ih o Gpa-rri~qs ~ -6 62 ~ aTGV i dvrov nupa 8~oGpamaivov

70

irpiv, iva yvpvcjoq, Tj v &6miav ~io6ry~1, c b ~n a v r a hohhirval -iravrov p a h ~ m a j ~ ~h b~ TOG ~ .rroqpoG Gvvapivqv. ~ a ~i o i w v-rrpdrrrop~v ~ h l c .rravrov, ~oir-rov6~6a.rrav~lpivol Bqpiov. 06 yap Emlv 01 p w o v E ~ ~ E K ~ ~ U G E066' V, x ~ i p o v6 l i O q ~-raG-ra ~. ~ V O V ~ ~ ~ ~~ V TaEc ibS ~i ~, p j ~ a x i o TOGTO s Emlv ~i.rrdvo i i ~ ~rav-rax68~v C $ i h o l ~.rr8oiv ~, Epqoh~CIov~ aAvpaiv6p~vov, i o66iv K ~ A ~ .rrav~a EI oi'x~&ai, ~ apq6iv i ~ZvaiAoi.rrbv n ~ pc3v i p o v h ~ i r o ~ & ~is, ipyov 46q X ~ ~ E ~ p~)~ ~ A ~ E TcbsE .06 ~ a 6 ~ 6imi, v K U K ~ V&i.rrpoi'bv fip~pov ~ aadplov i

Kai

in~ox~iv.

At the beginning of the Fragment the author quotes the scriptures, and objects s ) sell and buy against their will. to forcing weaker people (-robs & & v E ~ ~ ~ o u to Yet some men (the chief adversaries) refuse to give up their ill-gotten gains; they conduct business against the precepts of Justice and Law (by forcing the weaker ones to buy and sell). But money (~pqy6rrov)obtained in such a way 55/56 cf. Heb.

10:31.

45 6piv supra versum

46 w - r a ~ cod.: wxratov e corr.

52 715

53 ~ ~ K W V

54 ~ ~ W ~ ~ Kcod. U K :E -TE e corr.

54 1 x 6 Bv

63 oir68 ~ Q T O T E

66 &noMGva~

72 ~ ~ A E T E

T E

200

IHOR

SEVCENKO

vantage thereby (F 23/25: D 23,15118) ; the mock assumption that the adversaries act out of ignorance (F 26/30: D 1 , ~ 7) ; ; and the accusation that they "banish God" (F 42 : D 30,619 ; cf. 21,25). Once in the Fragment (617) the author adduces the adversary's objection, recognizable by the qqoiv embedded in it. This device, which must have been used throughout the missing parts of the text, is also adopted in the Discourse and in Cabasilas' treatise Against Usurers. Finally, in both phrasing and vocabulary the number of similarities shown by the Fragment and Cabasilas' treatises goes beyond what, in my opinion, one would expect from juxtaposing texts belonging to the same genre but written by different authors. The victims of the adversaries are called d t o - 6 ~ ~ ~ o-ripovs (F 10 and D 51,4); they are given to lamenting: Piav 6Gvpopivov (F 50), cf . poGvras ~ a 6i G v p o ~ v o u ~( D 38,32/33). The adversaries are .rrkov~ciav ~ o h ~ i j v r (F ~ s26/27) and .rrA~ov&~as(D 28,3; cf. 49,3) respectively; also, ptaio~s (F 50) and pialos (D 2l,30) ; their criminal exactions are described as x p q u a ~ l L ~ & a(F ~ 19) or ~ p q p a s 1 ~ 6 p ~(D vo~ 52,12). The expression cjviv ~ a (fi) i 7t.pBolv occurs in both texts (F 10: D 34,26); so does pj pouhopivou~'against the will' (F 10: D 38,18; 46,18; cf. 41,24) ; s6 .rrovqpbv Piyav-ra~K~PGOS "having abandoned the ill-gotten gains" (F 15/16) is paralleled by h a v K ~ P ~ O.S. . &V Epplyas in Discourse, 52,13 (cf. 31,7) and by Piy~lsso35 T ~ K O U S in Against Usurers, Migne, PG, CL, 749B. For -rraph sb Gi~atov ~ a ~i 0 3 sv6~ous (F ~ g ) , compare s@ v6pq ~ aT@ i Gl~aic?, (D 47,3) and -rh G i ~ a l a~ a TOGS i v6pous (D 25,g) ; for spix~lvhi sb Pdtpaepov (F 28), compare Zqs~isP&paepov (Migne, PG, CL, 733A) and &el01 . . . Papdpov (D 33,g) ; for the expression sdxos &vao-rijoal .. . .ii h a vop0Gaal (F 33/34), compare TEIXGV & V O ~ ~ ~(D ~E 20,19) I S and ~ ~ 7 x 0. s . . &vopeoir~ E V O V (D 21,15). The thought that the adversaries 'banished God,' sbv 0~bv icipahov (F 42), occurs twice in the Discourse: in the First Version, where the , 6& .. . sGv .rrpaypdcrov iKPa?thElv (30,6/7),and phrase is &pqlopqrdv s@ 8 ~ 9 p6Ahov in the Second, where it reads sbv 0 ~ 6 v.. . t~PCrhh~ls(21,25). Stress is laid in both the Fragment and the Discourse on sb ovpq&pov (F53 : D 47,4). The adversaries U T E form in F 54 and in D 38,7 ; have taken (and broken) an oath: ~ ~ W ~ ~ K (same cf. 39,17). 3. he Fvagment may deal with pressures brought to bear by large landowners upon smaller ones, a process watched by conniving or powerless central authorities, or it may be concerned with other issues. In any case, both the Fragment and the Discourse deal with social tension in late Byzantium. Both may even refer to the same situation and take up the defense of monasteries. True, in the Fragment there is not a single explicit reference to attacks on monastic property or to sirnoniac ordinations, oily to the "poor" (rrivqs~s)and O I ) if . only49 and 51 of the Discourse had been prethe "weaker" ( & ~ E ~ ~ E P But served, we would have no means of identifying the "poor" and the "weaker" of these paragraphs as monks.21 The feeling of impending doom is not ex21 Fragment, 38/43 implies that the misfortune befalling the "poor" and the "weaker" is of more importance than the injustice suffered by a mere 1 6 1 6 ~ I~s ~it. not so because the "poor" are ? he author of the Fragpeople of some consequence, or of a status different from that of the 1 S i ~ a 1 T ment may include himself among the persecuted "poor." Cf. i p E ~of line 43.

.

.

,y*'f " *d**l'*: - 8 ;

IV% t r p a I

L

4

'

I

U

~

j

,wf<e,,

~ & d r .

~',~kA.or'&~a~rt,r,

P *

utu)n ~ - r a W * r

)

I

V

~

'aA *I

I

I." LC

s f

~ ; w r w n ? r S ; d r ; w J v , w x ~ v & ~rcpJ>.;?;l .,~.

1. Parisinus Gr. 1276, fol. 65": Hands A and A2

I

4. Parisinus Cr. 1276, fol. 76r: Hands A and A2

5. Parisinus Gr. 1276, fol. 78', bottom: Hands A and A2

6.

Parisinus Gr. 1276, fol. 82", bottom : Hand A

7. Parisirtzcs Gr. 1276, fol. Sgr: Hand Ab

8. Parisinus Gr. 1276, fol. 96', top: Hand A

9. Parisinus Gr. 1276, fol. 8 6 V , bottom: Hand A"

La-

10. Parisinus Gr. 1276, fol. 72v, bottom: Hands A and A'"

I u .::-,$.;,&?~K~~.*~..K;HP~~~~,~~ ! > % . ~ ~ p Jd o@r , * ' ~ # ~ v I<& ~ . KU&I&-%~(.U ; w ~ ~ o ~ -t~;-q-~ rj~ ,G-j ; a ~ ' ; r ~ )m r.~ ;;.';he e 9;.kh; [,,

1 I

~

,-

1+'!&7tzmu47a4

9

0-b

> &4r4.4-trc

-\,;, ; 1

k&

4'c7&7* \

*

?

v

~ d i l .r;Z y J v ~ t 2 m ~ v ~ 1 ; .

-

v_

q-pt~+7,;rg'6u v ;r.

. &,-a

-T

8

*

i c m s ~ r r . ~ ~ e ~ ~ -. N , ~ & ~ i ~ ~ ~ @ q -

m',ssv2~&a~+w&.d~*ir

e

~

~

e

'

h mn i C, i ~ 2 > 9'

~

x f l r c ; , + ~ v ~ a y & ~ ~ v ~ ~ i - * ~ ~ v -

~ o P ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . c , a l a ; v ~ * ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 c : c / a i w v ~ u * r \

i1 , M ~ ~ V , ~ A & C < & ~ + ~ L ~ ~ ~ V W J ~ , fi-fl;~.Kn&vp;w*~~~r;\X~-aTy7rhL -%veH;lo~.i S Y & k ~~ pev~;7;siv,pA' st

!

+,sv~*..~tL*y

,

~ B ~ L W ' ~ ; , " . V ~ L K ~ . : G ' ~ ~ ~ & ~ * A L U J Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ P " J;N . l<&dp Q ) p ~ 7 ~ r

1

I

1

TI&^&\& &V;Y.J

&;,e;

P:

t,~

:hw70'~~&?

+i; & ~ ~ b ~ l i U o v ~ ~ , w ~ m- \< u ;r eub~h ;::d ~ v L~ip%hP*ikL ~ v L iXj v~. .4 ~~G a T I f i v

wee

'

W,jV&7d )L\o"aur.Y~Y.le,O-unea\

w'%pu*i? -. - + P ' - I P ~ , K ~ ~ ; P I C ~ OP Y / ~ G ~ ~ c . v & ~

C+ t v p

<wi*;7xt~~ev,;'&?~,

v c

rr*;rr

h c , 2..

-*&$w&

7L A;kwkwvVy* I

,

KG ~ a , h t ~ ~ f l w v + I' .(;j~aid~.$ qls*'d& ,qL q rv,l;riV~*d\6~C"&,

k ~ ' k d L j ; ~ 4J g' ~ : / h 4 i 0 %>P, -pk7,.4i~* I\ lc?
*mrm"-k( .-.x

2k

hdnu ...a

cap2-@ A ( ~47e~c-7$ i d

6 $fKq

eP

h t i M n ~ ~ ' ~ ~ % & ~ ~ ~ oj w ~ o r c ,

I

WYCIC).

:

~ v w v q w ;

s uhnar7ii

Iz..

16.

Ljt$&~~.# . aw**Ir

.;n '

j,;;&+9wi'{-*

11. Parisinzls Gr. 1276, fol. 100r: Hand of the Fragment

12. Istanbul, Library of the Patriarchate. Panaghias 157, fol. 294r, top

13. Istanbul, Library of the Patriarchate. Panaghias 157, fol. 295', top

14. Meteora. Barlaam Monastery

202, fol. 49r,

top

A U T H O R ' S D R A F T O F CABASILAS' D I S C O U R S E

201

ceptional for the period to which I would assign the Fragment. In the midand the Patriarch fourteenth century, it is shared by Alexius Ma~rembolites~~ P h i l ~ t h e u sOne . ~ ~ might even toy with the idea that the Fragment is the final part of a discarded variant of the Discourse. But it may be safer to abandon this notion. In any case I do not find sufficient clues for a coherent interpretation of the Fragment. For the present, I shall merely describe it as the final part of a treatise, perhaps by Nicolas Cabasilas, in which we read of evildoers who force poor people to "sell and buy," of high officials who acquiesce in these evil machinations while eagerly prosecuting petty criminals and prodding the Governor of the City to act quickly against them, of the just Emperor who upbraids the high officials for their passive attitude towards the main culprits and, finally, of well-intentioned people, including the author of the fragment, who unsuccessfully point out to the high officials the grave dangers of this situation. 22 In the "Lament on the Collapse of St. Sophia" (date: 1346), Macrembolites awaits the Last v CKE~VT)V ~ K ~ E X O ~ ~ fipipav. V O I S Sabbaiticus GY. 4I7, fol. I I O ~ . Judgment: fipiv . . . . ~ o i ~s f i Zrviorepov 23 In a letter to the inhabitants of Heracleia (date: Spring of 135z), edd. C. Triantafillis-A. Grapputo, A~zecdotaGraeca e codd. mss. Bibliothecae S. Mavci (1874),esp. p. 43, Philotheus draws a depressing picture of the Empire, with "ten or twenty cities or strongholds" still remaining: TI 6k r 6 h e 1 ~~ a i qpoirpla 8iKa 4 E ~ K O O I VIjr~h~i(p6qoav oc$6p~va pixpl TOG vcv, r o h l o p ~ o i r ~ ~~v a c ib ~E ~ T T E ~ yV vxofiP~(~oGv-ra ~aBqpipav,& ~ E I B E T?J ~ S TOG BEOG 8 1 ~ a 1 0 ~ p l ~.i.p;. the end of the world is drawing near: K ~ T '6hiyov y&p IjroPfii~l~ a ( ip e ~ i p ~o~xa~l8 b vdhov . . . . ~ a orj6~is i Exv cipqrplrho~~Gjv~a 8 ~ i a~~--ra18~vpivwv ~ i ) vK C & ~ ~ O U o v v ~ i h s ~ aC.rri v B i r p a ~~~I v a l. . . .

Notes on the Work of the Byzantine Institute in Istanbul: 1957-1959; The Conservation of a Byzantine Fresco Discovered at Etyemez, Istanbul Paul A. Underwood; Lawrence J. Majewski Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 205-222. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C205%3ANOTWOT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-3 Dumbarton Oaks Papers is currently published by Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/doaks.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Sun Mar 9 08:05:01 2008

NOTES ON THE WORK OF THE BYZANTINE INSTITUTE IN ISTANBUL: 1957-1959

with a Contribution on THE CONSERVATION O F A BYZANTINE FRESCO DISCOVERED AT ETYEMEZ, ISTANBUL

by LAWRENCE J. MAJEWSKI

T

HE major undertaking of the Byzantine Institute in the past decade has been the restoration of the mosaics and frescoes in the Kariye Camii in Istanbul. This task has now been completed, preliminary reports on the frescoes have been published in earlier volumes of the Dumbarton Oaks Papers,l and the final publication of the mosaics and the frescoes is now being prepared. The following notes present an account of other projects which have been carried out in recent years, especially during the seasons of 1957 to 1959, in a number of monuments in Istanbul and elsewhere, some of which have been conducted in collaboration with other institutions. Not all of these projects have been completed, but it is felt that a brief report on their progress and illustration of some of the results should be made at this time. A special report incorporated in these notes concerns the removal and restoration of a fragmentary fresco from a small apse of a Byzantine building which came to light in excavations that were made for the construction of a hospital in the region of Etyemez in Istanbul (infra, pp. 219-22). Mr. Majewski, who prepared the report, supervised the removal of the fresco and carried out most of the work of remounting and cleaning. The actual removal of the fresco was done by Mr. Carroll Wales and Mr. Constantine Causis, members of the staff of the Byzantine Institute, who also assisted in its remounting. The painting is now exhibited in one of the rooms at the southern end of the west gallery a t Hagia Sophia.

Numbers 9-10 (1956), 11 (1g57), 12 (1958), and I 3 (1959).

In a separate report, which follows these notes, Mr. David Oates of Trinity College, Cambridge, summarizes the principal results of excavations that were conducted under the auspices of the Byzantine Institute in the Kariye Camii in 1957 and 1958.~ In addition to the restorations and excavations at the Kariye Camii the following projects have been carried out, or have been begun, during the seasons from 1957 to 1959. At Hagia Sophia: the cleaning and repair of the revetments and opus sectile panels on the west wall of the nave from the floor to the level of the gallery; the cleaning and repair of the mosaics, representing great jewelled crosses, in the vault and lunette at the west end of the south side-aisle, and of the revetments and opus sectile panels on the wall beneath; the cleaning, in collaboration with the Istituto Centrale del Restauro, Rome, of three of the bronze doors between the two narthexes and the bronze frame and lintel of the great imperial door; the uncovering of the mosaic portrait of the Emperor Alexander (early tenth century) on the eastern face of the northwest pier in the north gallery. At the Fetiye Camii (Pammakaristos) the Institute has greatly expanded its work which was begun on a small scale in 1950 with the uncovering of the mosaics in the apse.3 This work, which is now becoming a major undertaking, involves not only the uncovering of See infra, pp. 223-31. Brief comments on the early stages of this work were made by the author in an earlier issue of this series of "Notes on the Work of the Byzantine Institute. .." Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 9-10 (1956), p. 298f., and fig. 113. 2

P A U L A. U N D E R W O O D all the surviving mosaics but also the restoration of the structure as nearly as possible to its original form. This will include the rebuilding of certain vaults, the reintroduction of two columns as supports for the dome, the restoration of those windows that had been altered when the building was converted to Moslem use, the consolidation of its substructures and the repair of those parts of its marble decorations that have survived. During the season of 1958 the Institute also cleaned and consolidated the frescoes of the Martyrium of St. Euphemia, excavated in 1941-1942 by A. M. Schneider, which had deteriorated greatly since their discovery. In the south church of Zeyrek Camii (Pantocrator) work on the opus sectile pavement has remained in abeyance since the campaign of 1954.Since then some further consolidation of the floor has been done and intermittent searches for mosaics have been carried out in some of the vaults, thus far with only negative results. In recent years, during the less active winter months, special undertakings have been made outside of Istanbul. Twice, in January and February of 1957 and 1958,the Institute has collaborated with the German Archaeological Institute of Madrid in cleaning and preserving the fragmentary mosaics of the fourth century which still exist in the dome of the mausoleum at Centcelles, near Taragona. Mr. Ernest Hawkins, Assistant Director of the Byzantine Institute, has directed this work, the results of which will be published by the German Archaeological Institute and are not further discussed in these notes. Another urgent work of preserinvolved the vation, described below (p. 219)~ sixth-century mosaic of the Transfiguration in the apse of the monastic church of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai. In January 1959, Mr. Carol1 Wales and Mr. Constantine Causis were assigned this task.

Hagia Sophia During the season of 1958 members of the staff of the Byzantine Institute cleaned and repaired the marble revetments and the cornice of the western wall of the nave, above and between the group of three central doors that lead to the narthex (fig. I).The scope of the work included a group of five opus sectile

panels above the imperial door and two at either side which together serve to enrich the wall which is otherwise covered with marble slabs, arranged in framed panels, like those that adorn the walls throughout the nave. The following notes describe the opus sectile panels and their restoration. In the center at the top, immediately below the cornice, is a panel4 which represents an aedicula (fig. 3) surmounted by a dome-like canopy. Like most of the marble slabs that compose the revetments of the church, this panel was framed by a projecting double billet moulding of Proconnesian marble. Within this is the outer border made up of short lengths of a red stone which are from 2 to 2 . 5 cm. in width and about 6 cm. in depth. This red border is set with its narrow edge flush with the surface of the panel, and because of its great depth, which nearly equals the total thickness of the panel, it forms the outer frame of the panel itself. All other pieces of surface stone that make up the design within this outer frame are very thin (between 3.5 and 6 mm. in thickness) and are set into a very hard adhesive bedding, about 4 cm. thick and of a brown color, which is made of a compound of a resin, or pitch, and what we believe to be marble dust. This bedding is backed by pieces of slate which bring the total thickness of the panel to between 6 and 7 cm. Within the outer frame, and of equal width, is a surrounding border composed of short lengths (12 cm. or less) of the nearly white stone, in appearance like a dolomite rock, which is used throughout the panel for the delineation of all its elements. A multiple border, between 12.5 and 13 cm. wide, which extends up the sides and across the top, is composed of white stone rectangles bordered by narrow bands of porphyry, about 3 cm. wide. Within the porphyry bands, at each of the comers of the white rectangles, are small porphyry discs set into narrow circlets of white stone. At the top center this multiple border is penetrated by the apex of the canHeight, 1.50 m., width, 1.215 m. The most accurate record of the panel prior to its cleaning is found in the drawing, made from a tracing by Bayan Cahide Aksel, published by Muzaffer Ramazanoglu, Sentiren ve A yasof yalar M a n z u mesi (Istanbul, 1946), fig. 1 1 .

W O R K O F THE BYZANTI NE INSTITUTE: 1 9 5 7 - 5 9 opy of the aedicula. Within the confines of the multiple border everything, except the gems on the crosses, is executed in the white stone and an almost-black marble which generally serves as the background or the shadowed parts of the architecture. The aedicula is drawn with a broken cornice in one point perspective so that the back columns appear within the span of the front columns. The front pair of columns bears Corinthian capitals which are supported on fluted shafts. The shafts of the Ionic columns a t the rear are fluted only in the upper two thirds. The columns carry an entablature e n ressaut which is composed of three principal members. The lower member resembles a dentil course; the upper, a cyma decorated with the egg and dart motif; and between these is a rather wide member of black marble bordered above and below by white. The canopy is indicated as a kind of ribbed dome by means of eight strips of white stone that curve upward to converge at the top, and by two shorter curved strips in the center. Above the latter is a small equal-armed cross whose arms are formed of isosceles triangles. Within narrow borders a t the sides of the canopy stand two birds which face inward toward one another. Below the cornice two parted curtains, each supported by three rings on a curtain rod, hang suspended between the two Ionic columns a t the back. The curtains are knotted in the center and are fringed a t the bottom. In the space between the curtains is a large jewelled cross which stands on a trapezoidal base composed of four horizontal bands of dark gray marble separated from one another by narrower bands of white stone. The sides of the base are also outlined in white stone. The cross has flaring arms with serifs a t the corners in the form of teardrops. At the center was a large square gem. Each of the two vertical arms had one rectangular and one ovoid gem as well as six small circular ones, while the lateral arms had single rectangular gems surrounded by four small circular ones. Suspended from the two side arms were six pearls. Figure 2 shows the condition of the panel prior to its restoration. In the course of its cleaning and repair it became evident that efforts had been made to disguise the exist-

207

ence of the crosses and the two birds. Thus, only the lower arm of the large cross was not removed and it lacked the upper of its two large gems and all but one of its small circular gems. Of the black marbles of the background immediately surrounding the cross, however, only the stones of the upper right quadrant and those across the top had been lost. All of the teardrop serifs except the two belonging to the upper arm were still in situ and are original. The lost areas of the background surrounding the cross had been filled with plaster which was painted black. On removing this plaster, and after cleaning the area of the cross, the original imprints of the stones in their setting became clearly visible, and it was on the basis of these imprints that the cross was restored. The evidence for the colors of the gems derives from the fact that the lower rectangular gem of the lower arm was still in situ and was of green porphyry. One of the circular gems was also extant and consisted of a chip of red stone. I t is not certain whether the central square a t the crossing of the arms had originally been white or colored, but it has been restored as red on the basis of a parallel with a cross found in work of similar technique in an ornamental panel in the west wall of the south side-aisle (see infra) . The evidence for the suspendedgems, six in all, was also found because the black marble surrounding them was intact and the empty spaces where they belonged were clearly present. These have been filled with white plaster. In the canopy over the aedicula the four central white ribs and most of the black background between them, including the small cross, are our restorations. Most of the stones in this area had been removed, the area plastered, and the ribs incorrectly painted on the plaster. The plaster here was likewise removed and the evidence of the original details, including the small cross, came to light in the pitch setting bed. Of the two birds whose imprints were found a t the sides of the dome, the one at the left is entirely our restoration except for the feet and legs which are original. Of the right-hand bird only the two pieces a t the end of the tail are original. The panel representing the aedicula was made with a flush surface. I n contrast, the

P A U L A. U N D E R W O O D two adjoining panels of porphyry (fig. 1),5 also of o@s sectile set in a bedding of pitch, were made with borders that stand out in relief. They are placed about 50 cm. lower on the wall so as to permit the verd antique framework of the system of revetments to pass above them and to be interrupted only by the aedicula. In design these panels are framed by geometric borders, about 18 cm. wide, composed of alternating quatrefoils and lozenges which enclose discs of red porphyry, surrounded by two bands of green porphyry, likewise raised in relief, separated by a narrow band of red porphyry. Large parts of the two green bands in the left panel and of the inner band in the right panel had been lost and have been restored in plaster. Immediately above the door are two opus sectile panels which flank a large central slab of verd antique. Each of the two lateral panels6 depicts four dolphins heraldically arranged in pairs above and below a central disc of red porphyry (fig. 4). The two panels are similar to one another in composition and design although there are distinct differences in width and in some of the details and materials. The backgrounds of both are composed of pieces of pinkish yellow marble irregularly shaped and carefully fitted together. The porphyry disc of the left panel is considerably larger than that of the other.' Both discs are bordered, first, by a band of marble (the ancient Dokimion marble?) which today is found in quarries near Aiyonkarahissar, in Phrygia. In the left panel this in turn is surrounded by a band of green "porphyry" while its counterpart is bordered by true porphyry. The verticality of the panels is emphasized by narrow bands of green "porphyry" near their sides. The paired dolphins are arranged back to back, so to speak, with their tails in the center and the rest of their bodies curved around the central disc to the sides. The tails are bound together by jewelled bands and between each pair is a vertical element : tridents in the panel to the right, and Left panel, 1.63 m. high, 1.655 m. wide; right panel, 1.65 m. high, 1.56 m. wide. Left panel, ca. 1.30 m. wide, ca. 2.05 m. high; right panel ca. 1.21 m. wide, ca. 2.05 m. high. They measure respectively about .78 and .67 rn.in diameter and are very nearly circular.

in that to the left what seems to be a pointed shaft or harpoon. At each sideof the panels, between the heads of the dolphins, are two marine creatures, apparently Cephalopods of some kind, which the dolphins are about to devour. The bodies of the dolphins in both panels are of green "porphyry" with red porphyry used in the curving parts of the bodies near the tails, but, whereas the thin lines that delineate the bodies and tails in the left panel are made of very narrow pieces of white (dolomite ?) rock, most of the equivalent lines in the dolphins of the right panel are executed in nacre (mother-of-pearl). In the latter panel nacre is also used in the outlining of the eyes, the small circular dots grouped around the eyes, the main body of the bands that bind the tails of the fish, and in the diagonal pieces in the shafts of the tridents that indicate their spiral treatment. Whereas very little red (porphyry) is used in the fins marking the gills of the four fish in the right-hand panel, the treatment of the eyes and fins of the lefthand panel is more colorful. Here, the areas surrounding the eyes are inlaid with bright green, the centers of the eyes are bright red, almost vermillion, and the fins behind the eyes are of darker red. The jewels in the bands with which the tails of the fish are bound are variously disposed stones of red and green. The small marine creatures on which the dolphins are feeding are difficult to identify. They are made of white dolomite rock and are characterized as having heads (or are they bodies?) shaped like hens' eggs from which te~ltaclesextend. With only one exception, the creatures in the left panel have tentacles only behind them, while their equivalents in the right panel possess tentacles both before and behind. Perhaps the representation of squids or young octopi was intended. The two lower panels flanking the Royal door (fig. I) are representatives of a group of twenty related ornaments that are placed at scattered points throughout the ground floor. Two others are in corresponding locations on the narthex side of the wall. The remaining sixteen are placed, at similarly low level, on the responds of the great piers in the two sideaisles where they are grouped in four sets of

W O R K O F THE B Y Z A N T I N E INSTITUTE: 1951-59 four. The two here illustrated (fig. I ) consist ~ of large ovoid shaped slabs of green "porphyry" in the center surrounded by scroll patterns in relief, also of green "porphyry," set against a background of red porphyry sunk to the same level as the central slab. The technique of their manufacture is similar to that of the other opus sectile panels described above. In the seasons of 1958 and 1959 members of the staff of the Institute were at work cleaning and repairing the vast areas of mosaic in the western tympanumg of the west bay of the south side-aisle, and in the great arch that frames it (fig. 5 ) . In these vast spaces of gold mosaic ground are four huge jewelled crosses, one of which occupies the center of the tympanum. Another cross was placed in the summit of the arch, oriented east and west with its top toward the east, while the others, which run north and south, are in the two haunches of the same arch. The presence of all four of these crosses had been in good part concealed by overpainting and by the application of stencilled ornaments, placed there, no doubt, by the Fossati brothers about a century ago. Thus, the cross in the summit of the arch was covered by an ornamental medallion which imitated, in general, the motifs that occur in the centers of the cross vaults of the narthex10 and elsewhere in the building, while the other crosses were obscured by the curiously shaped motifs found in the mosaics of the webs of the cross vaults. The gold background of the tympanum, devoid of any silver tesserae, was laid in horizontal rows in which the tesserae were tilted at an angle, to face downward, as was usually the case in the backgrounds of the pre-iconoclastic mosaics on vertical surfaces Ca. 1.52 m. in width and ca. 2.20 m. in height. The width of the tympanum a t cornice level, and hence the span of the arch before it, measures 9.40 m. The height of the tympanum is 4.00 m. and the depth of the soffit of the arch is 4.70 m. lo See, for example, T. Whittemore, The Mosaics of Haghia Sophia, I (Oxford, 1g33), pl. 4. The multiple-armed cross that appears in the center of each of the mosaic medallions was omitted in the stencil.

209

in Hagia Sophia, and often elsewhere as well. The great cross in the lunettel1 is outlined by a jewelled border which varies in width from 7 to 8 cm. Within the border outline, the field of the arms of the cross is, like the background of the lunette, filled by horizontal rows of tilted gold cubes. The borders are executed in blue glasses and the gems that are set into it at regular intervals are outlined in gold. Eliptical and rectangular gems alternate ; the former are of dark red glasses and the latter of green. Between the gems there were originally "St. Andrew's" crosses of silver tesserae, i. e., four small squares, set some distance apart, which form a square, and another similar square in the center. Most of these are now missing from the cross in the lunette, but they were like those that still exist in the cross at the summit of the arch. The corners of the arms are marked by teardrop serifs which shade from blue around the edges to green within. Unlike the ground of the lunette, the gold background in the soffit of the arch is laid with tesserae parallel to the surface of the arch. This does not indicate a different epoch, for we have yet to discover the use of tilted cubes on any but vertical surfaces of the walls-never in an arch or vault. The cross at the top of the arch (fig. 6)l2 is, in every respect except size, like the one in the lunette. The two largest crosses are in the haunches of the arch. They are outlined with borders of red glass in which diamond shaped ornaments of silver with small square projections at the centers of each side are spaced a t regular intervals. Within each of these is a diamond shaped center of green. Alternating with the diamonds is an X shaped ornament with blue or green knobs, tipped with silver, at the ends of the strokes. The west wall of the south side-aisle, beneath the lunette and arch whose mosaics have been described above, is covered with revetments and is penetrated by three doors that lead to the narthex. Above the two southernmost doors, which are placed equi'1 I t stands 3.11 m. in height with a spread of the horizontal arms of 2.08 m. The width of its vertical arm, near its base, is .36 m. and that of its horizontal arms is about .34 m. l2 I t measures about 3.58 m. in height.

P A U L A. U N D E R W O O D distant from the axis of the aisle, are two panels of opus sectile (fig. 5 ) , l 3 each of which consists of two slabs of porphyry surrounded and separated by very richly ornamented borders between 27 and 28.5 cm. in width which are of particularly fine design and workmanship (figs. 7, 8). Of the two panels, the following description and illustrations concern the southern, or left, one. The two porphyry slabs, which are framed by the ornaments here described, are of equal height but the left slab is considerably narrower than the right,14 thus making the panel distinctly unsymmetrical. Its northern pendant, however, reverses the dissymmetry by placing the narrower of its slabs of porphyry to the right.15 The rich border is mainly composed of vine scrolls that issue from fluted amphorae (fig. 7). The vases are placed in the lower border at the base of each of the three vertical borders so that the scrolls rise at the sides of the porphyry slabs. Crosses within circular borders (fig. 8) are placed on the centers above and below the porphyry slabs, while here and there, in the midst of the vine scrolls, are other smaller crosses. The technique, materials, and motifs bear a close relationship to extensive opus sectile ornaments that occur elsewhere in the nave of Hagia Sophia, for example, in the spandrels and above the arches of the colonnade at gallery level, where the vine scrolls are very similar, and in the frieze below the upper cornice in the arch of the bema, where the amphorae recur.16The technique of their manufacture is like that described above with regard to the aedicula panel.17 The positive elements of the design are mostly of the white, mat, dolomite rock. There are, however, numerous accents of a bright red stone, The southernmost one of the two measures m. in height and 2.02 m. in breadth. 14 Their respective widths are 49 and 65 cm. 15 In corresponding positions at the west end of the other side-aisle, to the north of the church, there were similar panels, the southernmost of which is relatively well preserved and displays the same dissymmetry. The northernmost of the two is largely a painted imitation (possibly a restoration of the Fossatis) which has, however, been made completely symmetrical. l6 In the latter place, however, the motifs are executed in relief. 13

I .59

l7

P.206.

for example, in the narrow outermost border,ls in the central squares of the crosses, a t the centers of some of the blossoms, and in the small triangular space fillers between the white cusps of the frames surrounding the larger crosses. The background is of various dark stones approaching black. In the flutes and in the openings of the necks of the amphorae the stone is a very fine grained black marble with yellowish gray mottling that is particularly beautiful. Some of the background stones are almost jet black, others, a very deep mottled red. Throughout this ornament one is struck by the beauty of line, the great accuracy of the cutting, and the highly polished level surface that was achieved. One of the projects in which the Byzantine Institute collaborated fruitfully with other institutions was the cleaning of the three central bronze doors (figs. g, 10) in Hagia Sophia leading from the outer to the inner narthex, and of the metal frame of the imperial door on the axis between the inner narthex and the nave. The initiative for this enterprise was taken a number of years ago by the Centro di Studi Italiani in Turkey through the good offices of Professor Paolo Verzone of the University of Turin and Italian diplomatic officers. In the autumn of 1957 technical experiments were performed by members of the staff of the Istituto Centrale del Restauro, of Rome, but it was not until one year later that the work of cleaning was begun as a joint undertaking of the Department of Museums and Antiquities of the Turkish Republic, the Istituto Centrale del Restauro, and the Byzantine Institute. While costs were shared by the latter institutions, the technical work was directed by Carlo Bertelli of the Istituto Centrale del Restauro with A. Cavallari and E. Zorzetto as his assistants.13 The 18 This is actually a frame that penetrates the full thickness (6 cm.) of the panel as a whole and corresponds to the outer frame surrounding the aedicula panel (see supra, p. 206). 19 A preliminary report on the results of the campaign of 1958 was published by C. Bertelli, "Notizia preliminare sul restauro di alcune porte di S. Sophia a Istanbul," Bollettino dell' Istituto Centrale del Restauro, 34-35 (1958), pp. 95-106, with appendices by Bertelli (pp. 106-111) and S. Liberti (pp. I 12-115). An earlier statement

W O R K O F THE B Y Z A N T I N E INSTITUTE: 1957-59 Byzantine Institute also provided the scaffoldings, technical assistance, and all photography. The three central doors between the two narthexes are constructed of plates of brassz0 applied over the exterior sides of their wooden core. Each door consists of two leaves, and each leaf is composed of two recessed panels21 which are framed by heavy rails and stiles after the manner of wooden doors. The two lateral doors are mates (the southern one of the pair is illustrated in figure g) and were originally almost identical in design and detail, but strikingly different from the larger central door(fig. 10). Attached by pins to the center of each of the panels of the side doors was a relief ornament consisting of a vase from which there issued a trumpet motif, with leaves and vine tendrils at its base, which in turn gave rise to a cross with widely spread acanthus leaves at each side of its base. The ornaments of the lower panels, in their entirety, and the crosses in the upper panels are lost, but the cleaning has revealed distinct traces from which the outlines of the missing parts can be accurately reconstructed. I t is clearly evident that the crosses had flaring arms and that at the endof each arm there was a circular disc. In the upper panels the lower disc of each cross is still preserved in situ. The lost ornaments of the lower panels were very much like those of the upper, but their vases, judging from their traces, were considerably larger and taller although of the same type. I t is worth noting that the vases of the upper panels very nearly repeat the forms of the vases in the opus sectile panels above the west doors of the south side-aisle on the results of the experiments of 1957 were published by Licia Borrelli Vlad, ibid., 31-32 ('9571, pp. '82-187. 20 While commonly assumed t o be bronze, analysis has shown the metal to be brass (Bertelli, o p . cit., p. 102). Central door: each leaf, excluding rebates a t top and bottom, 5.15 m. high, 1.64 m. wide; upper panels, within mouldings, 1.84 m. high, 1.13 m. wide; lower panels, 2.53 m. high, 1.13 m. wide. North door: each leaf, excluding rebates, 4.04 m. high, ca. 1.31 m. wide; upper panels, 1.715 m. high, .93 m. wide; lower panels, 2.01 m. high, .93 m. wide. South door: each leaf, excluding rebates, 3.95 m. high, 1.31 m. wide; upper panels, 1.65 m. high, .g8 m. wide; lower panels, 1.99 m. high, .g8 m. wide.

211

(fig. 7) and those in the upper frieze of the arch of the bema. Narrow copper ornaments were inlaid in the stiles and rails at the corners of the panels and again at points corresponding to the centers of the sides. Depending upon their position, their shapes resemble the gamma, the tau, and the iota. They were embellished with rows of alternating, sunken, squares and circles which must once have been filled with colored materials. The two leaves of the larger central door (fig. 10) were given wider central rails, composed of two plates whose horizontal joints were covered by applied strips of brass with flaring ends similar to the terminations of the arms of crosses. In addition a comparable strip, or batten, now lost, appears to have been attached along the right edge of the left leaf and thus served to cover the vertical joint between the two leaves when they were tightly closed. The evidence for this batten exists in the series of holes near the edge of the stile of the left leaf which must represent points of attachment. As in the side doors, the principal elements of the design in the central door were the crosses in its four panels. The horizontal arms of all four are lost, but their traces are clearly preserved on the surface from which they had been removed. In the upper panels the crosses are framed by semicircular arches supported on columns whose shafts have strips of copper diagonally inlaid in the brass, in imitation of spiral fluting. The columns bear Corinthian capitals of exquisite workmanship and form (fig. 11). On the innermost bands of the arches oval bosses, resembling studs, are closely spaced. These are worthy of note in connection with the similar treatment of the frame of the imperial door (see infra). The lower panels are much more austere, for the crosses are enclosed within frames that form steeply pitched gables whose supports, now lost, were doubtless similar in design to the members that form the gables. The lower crosses are distinguished by a representation of the hill of Golgotha from which flow the four rivers of Paradise. The stiles and rails are more elaborately ornamented than those of the side doors. First of all, the covering battens were ornamented with interlaced medallions in which plant and leaf forms with animals, both lambs and waterfowl, were interspersed

P A U L A. U N D E R W O O D at regular intervals (fig. 12). The larger terminal medallions contained nimbed lambs in attitudes of flroskynesis. Running the lengths of the stiles and rails and spaced at close intervals were concave ovals, smoothly hollowed out, with rosettes flanking each interval. In the rails and stiles, at the corners of each of the panels, and again at points corresponding to the center of each side, were large circular ornaments, partly indented and partly raised in relief, each surrounded by four ivy leaves. The metal leaves of the imperial door (which leads from the inner narthex to the nave on the axis of the church) no longer exist, but the brass framea2 which imitates, in its forms, the marble frames commonly used in the doors of the church, is still in situ and has also been cleaned (fig. 13).On the narthex side, the surfaces of the frame, with the exceptions of the inner and outer mouldings, are unadorned. On the narrow inner moulding the decoration consists of vine tendrils with leaves resembling those of the ivy, while on the outer border one finds a series of closely spaced oval bosses, like halved eggs, which bear a close relationship to the same motif on the arches in the upper panels of the central door of the outer narthex. They also appear to be the counterparts, in relief, of the concave ovals on the stiles and rails of the same door. Metal hooks, which imitate the form of human fingers, are placed at intervals along the upper frame on the wide convex moulding which forms the principal member of the frame. While the metal frame itself imitates the architectural forms of marble mouldings, the great metal lintel, or cornice, above it resembles a simple trough with splayed sides reinforced by narrow flanges along the top and bottom edges. The latter, too, are ornamented by closely spaced oval bosses reminiscent of those observed on the frame below and on the central door of the outer narthex. These bosses, however, are sharply pointed on one end. Placed a t the center of the splayed face of the lintel, and attached to it by four round headed pins, is an arch resting upon two very short colonnettes with panelled shafts. The 22 An approximately scaled drawing of the frame, on its narthex side, can be found in h n toniades, "E~q)paa~g ~ i j 'Ayiag s Zoq)iay, I (Athens, 1907), p. 176, fig. ZOO.

face of the arch is unmoulded and has two ill-defined flat ridges around its inner and outer edges. Each capital has three rather schematized vertical leaves, a fillet above in lieu of an abacus, and an astragal below. The bases are flat, unmoulded, and in two steps. The arch, it should be noted, does not fit properly in its place, for it overlaps the flanges at top and bottom and is placed laterally in awkward relationship to the bosses. A short distance to right and left of the arch, near the upper flange, are two holes in the plates of the lintel which indicate that ornaments of some kind had been attached there. Around the hole at the right side the trace of those ornaments is visible in the form of a circle left upon the surface, yet the arch itself appears to be complete. I t is difficult to imagine at those points any circular ornaments that could properly belong to the arch as it now exists. The following considerations, then, would seem to suggest that the arch and the relief ornament within, which is an integral part of the arch, are not original to thecomposition of the lintel: the eccentric character and treatment of the arch, the awkward relation of the arch motif to the main structure of the lintel, and the evidence of the elements that had been removed when the arch was applied to the lintel. Within the archthereisrepresenteda throne with a round back on which is an open, inscribed book toward which a dove descends with outspread wings. The inscription is based upon the text of John, 10,parts of verses 7 and g. Transcribed, it reads: Eimv 6 K(irp1o)s I tyh EI~ 1 fiI Ohpa TGV 1 I T P O P ~ W 1V . . . 81' EWOBI

.

ECxv TIS ~ioiAOg ] . . ~ t a ~ A ~ i r o e ~ I( a~+( a i ) E~EA~fiaE~(a1) 1 ~ ( a i ) voyfiv 1 E C ~ ~ U E I .There ~~

has been some discussion in previous literature concerning this inscription in which its Justinianic date has been questioned on epigraphical grounds.24 The new evidence z3 "The Lord said, I am the door of the sheep. . . by me if any man enter in. .. he shall go in and out and find pasture." 24 C. G. Curtis and S. Aristarches ('EMqvt~15s OtAohoy~~bs ZirMoyos, llapkp-rqpa, XVI [1885], p. 34) thought the delta betrayed a date in the tenth century and they suggested that the inscription is a restoration of 981 executed after the destructive earthquake of 975. (The reference must be to the earthquake of 989 ; none occurred in 975). Antoniades (op. cit., p. 177), viewed the

W O R K O F THE BYZANTINE INSTITUTE: 1957-59 which resulted from the cleaning of the metal would tend to support the view that the inscription is post- Justinianic. On the other hand, the frame itself, including the lintel, presents no features that would suggest that it was not contemporaneous with the three doors of the outer narthex, and these, in turn, can well be viewed as contemporaneous with the main ornamental program of the church and should be considered to be the original doors of Justinian's church. One of the most gratifying events in the work of the Byzantine Institute in recent years was the discovery, in the autumn of 1958, of the mosaic portrait of the Emperor Alexander (A.D. 912-913). Like most of the mosaics that were still extant in Hagia Sophia at the time of the general renovations carried out between 1847 and 1849, this mosaic had been seen and sketched by the Fosatti brothers and its existence, therefore, was known to Thomas Whittemore who published the water color drawing in his report on the other mosaic portraits of imperial personages that were found in the south gallery.25The portrait, however, eluded all efforts made toward its discovery, and Whittemore reluctantly concluded that it must have been among the numerous mosaics that had perished after 1849. There the matter rested until, in August of 1958, the original sketch was seen again by Robert Van Nice when, in connection with his studies on the structure of Hagia Sophia, he examined the papers of the Fossatis that had been deposited in the archives of Bellinzona in the Swiss canton of Ticino. In the right-hand margin of the sheet on which the sketch was made, and therefore not included in the area of the published photograph, were faint notations giving precise information as to the position of the mosaic in the building. An examination of the specified place was made and the mosaic was found (fig. 14). I t is situated in the north gallery, far removed from the other imperial portraits, where it occupies the narrow arched alfihas rather than the delta as evidence that the inscription was not Justinianic, but he offered no suggestion for its date. 25 T. Whittemore, The Mosaics of Haghia Sophia at Istanbul, Third Preliminary Report (Oxford, 1g4z), pl. 37 and p. 8.

213

wall surface that forms the western vertical termination of the tunnel vault that runs behind, and parallel to, the series of seven arches of the gallery colonnade between the great northern piers. In other words, it was placed upon the eastern face of the northwestern pier and adjoins the pier-respond of the colonnade. In elevation, the bottom of the mosaic rests upon the plaster string course (decorated with a running motif of leaves) at a height of 5.64 m. from the floor. The mosaic treatment of the wall is preserved to a height of 3.08 m. above the string course, and above this point, which roughly corresponds to the top of the pier-respond, thewall surface widens on theleft, orsouth, to a total widthof 1.gq.The average width of the panel, between the string course and the top of the respond, the area within which the portrait is found, measures 1.60 m. The soffit of the tunnel vault rises 1.66 m. above the preserved area of mosaic, and in this area which was covered with plaster all trace of mosaic is lost. The mosaic of the portrait and the plaster on the wall above it were covered by a painted pattern that imitated the mosaic pattern with which the soffit of the tunnel vault was decorated: i. e., a pattern of vertical and horizontal rows of crudely shaped circles and lozenges in alternation. Because the pattern had the actual appearance and texture of mosaic, the presence of a figure mosaic was very cleverly concealed, and it was only on very close inspection and by an examination of the directions of the rows of painted tesserae that one became aware that a figure lay hidden beneath the paint. These conditions, together with the relatively high altitude of the mosaic above the floor, the dimness of the light under the vault, and its most unlikely position in the architecture of the gallery, help to explain how the mosaic eluded the searches that were made for it. Moreover, all other figure mosaics in Hagia Sophia, with the exception of the lunette above the imperial door, had been obscured by coatings of plaster and the search for the Alexander portrait was conducted mainly in plastered areas. The only plaster that was used in obscuring the figure of Alexander was a thin coating that the Fossati brothers had laid over the head of the Emperor. The work of cleaning the mosaic began in April of 1959 and before the end of the year

214

PAUL -4. U N D E R W O O D

its restoration will be ~ o m p l e t e dThe . ~ ~ illustration published here (fig. 14) shows the upper part of the figure, cleaned and repaired, but with plaster repairs untouched as yet with various values of gray, and the lower part of the figure still obscured by the painted pattern. Beneath this covering the figure is preserved in its entirety. The Emperor stands frontally posed and attired in imperial vestments. In his right hand is the akakia (see infra), held vertically before him. The orb is in his left hand which is extended to the far right side of the panel. He wears the imperial crown, of the camelaucum type,a7 from which hang double perpendulia a t each side. Almost obscuring his other vestments is a very long loros, or scarf, heavily studded with gems and pearls, which is wound about the body. One end of the loros hangs down the front, almost to the feet, and the other is draped over the Emperor's left arm from which it hangs free. The a k ~ k i a , ~ * or alzexikakia as it was also called, is depicted as a cylindrical object with rounded ends. The cylindrical part is of red glass tesserae; the rounded ends of gold. The Book of Ceremonies informs us that the akakia was carried by the emperor in his right hand when he went in ceremonial procession on Easter Sunday from the Triclinos of the Nineteen Akoubita in the 2e The following description is necessarily incomplete. The portrait will be a subject of later study and publication. 27 It appears to be essentially the same type (i.e. with a closed, dome-like top and jewelled diadem) that is worn by the Emperors Constantine I X and John I1 in their portraits in Hagia Sophia (Whittemore, 09.cit., pls. 10 and 26) as well as the crown of Frederick I1 of Sicily in the Cathedral Treasury a t Palermo which was found in the tomb of the Empress Constance (d. 1222). For illustration of the latter see J.DeBr, The Dynastic Porphyry Tombs of the Norman Period in Sicily, Dumbarton Oaks Studies, V (Cambridge, Mass., 1959), fig. 210. See also his discussions on the type of the camelaucum. The principal difference between these crowns and that of Alexander is that the dome of the latter is much lower and must have fitted snuggly on the top of the head. I am greatly indebted to my colleague Mr. Cyril Mango for his suggestions regarding the identification of this object. See the comments on the akakia in J. D. Breckenridge, The Numismatic Iconography of Jzcstinian 11, Numismatic Notes and Monographs, no. 144 (New York, 19591, P. 36.

Great Palace to the mitatorion of Hagia So~ h i a . On ~ * that occasion the emperor also put on the loros which, as we have seen, he wears in the mosaic. The akakia is described by CodinusSOas a purple (red) silk handkerchief, imitating a manuscript in form, which was filled with earth to signify that the emperor should be humble because he was mortal. Du Cange defines the akakia31 as a red cloth bag in the form of a volumen. Judging from its representation in the mosaic, which is the most detailed representation of the object known to me, the little cylindrical bag that was filled with earth was golden in color and around it a red handkerchief was neatly wrapped. An explanation of the symbolism of the loros and the anexikakia is set down for us by the compiler of the Book of Ceremonies who devotes the fortieth chapter of Book I1 to the subject.3a The loros, it is said, recalls the windingsheet and symbolizes the death and resurrection of Christ. When carried in procession by the magistri and the patricii in the procession of Easter, the anexikakia symbolizes the life-giving scriptures of the New Testament borne by the apostles. Thus the text of the Book of Ceremonies also makes it clear that the anexikakia, although not a volumen, resembled one in form, as we have seen from its representation in the mosaic and from the testimony of Codinus. On each side of the Emperor are two medallions containing inscriptions. The name of the Emperor is recorded in three lines in the medallion at the upper right, but the inscriptions in the other three are in the form of cruciform monograms.33 The three monograms should be read in the following order: upper left, lower left, and lower right, for the three are continuous and compose a prayer. In that order they read: K ~ ~ pofi&~(TQ I E uQ) tio6hcp / 6pBo665cp1-rrlcrrQ ~ E U - ~ ~ an ~ T expression T J ~ ~ De Cer., I, 37 (Bonn ed.), p. 187. De Officialibus, VI (Bonn ed.), p. 51. He appears to be mistaken when he says that the emperor carried it in his left hand. 31 Glossarium ad scriptores mediae et infimae graecitatis, s. v. 'A~mia. 32 0p. cit., p. 637ff. 33 I wish to thank two of my colleagues, Mr. Cyril Mango and Professor M. V. Anastos, for their assistance in deciphering the monograms. 34 "Lord help thy servant, the orthodox faithful Emperor." 29

30

W O R K O F THE BYZANTINE INSTITUTE: 1957-59 of piety and humility that is in keeping with the symbolism of the loros and the akakia. Fetiye Camii (Pammakaristos) In the summer of 1950 thorough tests were made in the parecclesion of the church of the Theotokos Pammakaristos, now known as the Fetiye Camii, to determine to what extent mosaics still existed beneath the plaster which covered its walls and vaults. As a result, the position of each of the surviving mosaics was established though their subjects remained unknown. The following year work began on a small scale in the apse and bema when the figure of Christ Hyperagathos in the conch of the apse, the dedicatory inscription on the face of the arch, and the figure of the Mother of God in the northern lunette of the bema were uncovered but not completely cleaned or repaired. A brief notice of this work, with one illustration, was published in a previous issue of these Notes.35At various times since 1951, when personnel could be spared from other tasks, the cleaning of these mosaics was carried forward, but it was not until 1958 that scaffoldings were set up throughout the chapel and the thorough restoration of the Parecclesion as a whole was begun. The cleaning of the mosaics of the apse and the bema has now been completed and work in the dome, which contains the well-known medallion of Christ Pantocrator and twelve figures of prophets, is well advanced. Plaster has been removed from all surfaces in the nave and on the walls of the narthex wherever mosaics or marble incrustations were missing. Thus, much of the masonry in the chapel has been laid bare and the cornices and decorative frieze, which were also concealed beneath the plaster, have been exposed and the extent and nature of the Turkish alterations to the structure of the building have been revealed, making it possible to plan the restoration of the building according to its original forms. In conjunction with this work the inscriptions of the mosaics that still remain under plaster were sought out and exposed, and the subjects of the figure representations that still exist in the chapel are known even before they have been uncovered. The numbers on 35

Supra, note 3.

215

the accompanying diagrammatic plan (text fig. A)S6 indicate the positions of the surviving figures, insofar as they have been discovered at present writing, and the numbers in the legend give their identifications. On the basis of evidence now revealed, a general, though tentative, picture of the decoration of the interior of the chapel can be drawn. The lower one of its four superimposed zones, that is, the walls from the floor to the first cornice which is at the level of the tops of the four columns, was mainly decorated with marble revetments. This is evident from the distribution of the holes cut into the walls to receive the metal cramps, wedged into the masonry by marble pegs, with which the marble slabs were attached to the walls. There is evidence, however, that two vertical mosaic panels, about .60 m. by 1.60 m. in size, must have been let into the revetments of the south wall of this zone where they were placed in alignment with the two small windows of the second zone. All marble revetments of the lower zone have disappeared. The second zone, which extends to a frieze and cornice (see ififra) from which spring the vaults that cover the four arms of the nave, combined both marble incrustations and mosaics in its decoration. The mosaics were largely confined to the vaulted surfaces in this zone. Thus, they were placed (see text fig. A) in the conch of the apse; in the groin vault and the two lunettes of the bema; in the soffits of the eight stilted arches that were carried, two each, by the four columns; in the smalls quare domical vaults at the corners of the nave; and in the vaults and lunettes that form the second, or upper, zone of the tiny prothesis and diaconicon. There are, however, indications on the bare masonry of the west wall of the nave, above the door, that a rather square panel of mosaic, doubtless depicting the Koimesis, had once existed there in the midst of the incrustations of the wall. All other wall 35 The architectural details are greatly simplified in the plan. The original arrangement of the columns and vaults in the north side of the nave is reconstructed in the drawing. The plan of the nave is taken a t the level of the second zone, that is, through the arches that rest on the four columns. The plan of the narthex is taken a t floor level and represents a tentative reconstruction of its original arrangement of niches (see infra).

P A U L A. U N D E R W O O D

-- --

I. Pantocrator Moses 3. Jeremiah 4. Zephaniah 5 . Micah 6. Joel 7. Zechariah 8. Obadiah 9. Habakkuk 10. Jonah 11. Malachi 12. Ezekiel 2.

A. Fetiye Camii, Sketch Plan of Parecclesion MOSAICS D I S C O V E R E D P R I O R TO 1959 13. Isaiah 25. Gregory Thaumaturgus 14. Christ Hyperagathos 26. Gregory of Agrigentum 15. The Virgin 27. Antipas 16. John Prodromos 28. Blasius 17. Archangel Michael 29. Sabas 30. John Climacus 18. Archangel Raphael 19.Archangel Gabriel 31. Euthemius 20. Archangel Uriel 32. Chariton 21. Baptism of Christ 33. Arsenius 22. Gregory the Theologian 34. James, Brother of the L 23. Cyril 35. Clement ( ? ) 36. Metrophanes of Con24. Athanasius stantinople

W O R K O F THE BYZANTINE INSTITUTE: 1957-59 surfaces of this zone,37including the surrounds of the arches that face into the cruciform space of the nave, were decorated with revetments, some of which still survive, especially in the southeastern part of the nave. The third zone, which consists of the cross vaults over the four arms of the nave, their lunettes, the four pendentives of the dome, and the walls a t the ends of the four arms (three of which are penetrated by large windows and one by an arch opening into the "gallery" above the narthex), was decorated entirely in mosaic, as was the fourth zone which consists of the central dome. Of the mosaics of the third zone, only the scene of Christ's Baptism, in the eastern lunette of the south arm, has survived (fig.15).Other than this, and the mosaics of the dome, all extant mosaics are in the vaults of the second zone. With the exception of the west wall of the second zone, the only surfaces of walls or vaults in which scenes (as distinguished from individual figures) could be placed are in the third zone-that is, the upper zone of the four arms of the cross. Here, however, the four lunettes at the ends of the arms were so largely filled by their triple windows as to preclude their use for this purpose. The groin vaults will also have to be ruled out, for their warped shapes, especially in vaults of such small dimensions, make them unsuitable, as will be seen in the case of the groin vault over the bema (see infra). This leaves the eight rather tall lunettes in the narrow sides of the vaulting bays of the arms as the only places where scenes could be accommodated. We are fortunate that one of these still retains its mosaic-the scene of Christ's Baptism which is now being cleaned and repaired (fig. 15).38 Thus, in all probability, there were originally not more than nine scenes (one in the second zone and eight in the third zone) among the mosaics of the chapel. As the scene of Baptism suggests, the lunettes probably contained subjects selected from the cycle of the great feasts, another of which-the Koimesis-may well have been in the second zone above the door where it so often occurs in other churches. 37 With the possible exception of the north wall which was destroyed in Turkish times. 38 The height of the panel, including its lower border, which is 10 cm. high, measures 1.63 m. from the cornice. I t s maximum width is 1.355 m.

217

In this respect the chapel conforms to the normal iconography of Byzantine church decoration, as it does also in possessing a Pantocrator and Prophets in its dome. One can conjecture further that the Four Evangelists were in the pendentives of the dome. The mosaics of the apse and the bema, however, are rather unusual, for, instead of the more normal use of the Virgin in the apse, we find an enthroned figure of Christ of the unique type of the "Hyperathos," as it is inscribed. The bema, too, is unusual, for where one might expect archangels, the two principal figures are the Virgin in the lunette at the left, and St. John as Prodromos in the lunette at the right. In effect, therefore, we have the composition of the Deesis as the main feature of the iconography of the sanctuary, a subject that occurs only infrequently in this position in church decoration. The archangels are not forgotten, for they appear above in the four segments of the cross vault where, however, they are reduced to busts. The saints with which every church was decorated appear, at least in the main, to have been placed in the second zone (bishops in the eastern half and other saints in the western); in the soffits of the small arches that rest on the four columns; in the lunettes that respond to those arches; and in the vertical panels under the vaults of the prothesis and diaconicon. In the latter location we find three of the great Church Fathers (Sts. Gregory the Theologian, Cyril, and Athanasius) who usually appear, with others, on the wall of the apse.39Where the other great Fathers, such as Basil, Chrysostom, Nicholas, etc., were placed is unknown, but one might have expected to find three of them in the prothesis to the north, where they would have held equal and corresponding positions with those in the diaconicon. This, however, is not the case, for the three figures in the prothesis are St. James the brother of the Lord in the apsidiole, a bishop whose name contained the letters kappa, lambda, eta, in the lunette at the left, and Metrophanes of Constantinople facing him at the right. Although the figure of St. James has not been uncovered, we may expect him, for reasons that will become apparent below, to be attired in the vestments 3Q The apse wall of the chapel was originally covered with marble revetments.

P A U L A. U N D E R W O O D of a bishop and thus represent the founder of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem. Because the figure at the left was never covered with plaster, it is evident from his vestments that he was a bishop. If we interpret the fragmentary inscription that accompanies him as KAfipqs and regard him as St. Clement of Rome, we have the first bishop of Rome, after St. Peter, of whom anything is definitely known. In this special sense, then, he would represent the founding of the See of Rome. Facing him, at the right, is St. Metrophanes of Constantinople who is the first authenticated bishop of Constantinople, appointed during the reign of Constantine the Great. In the context of his companions, therefore, he represents the founding of the Patriarchate of Constantinople.40 At present writing, only one of the surviving figures of saints, totaling fifteen in number, has been partly uncovered. Figure 16 illustrates the relation of these small standing figures to the arches in which most of them are placed. When the plaster was stripped from the upper part of the figure of Saint Blasius (no. 28), martyr and bishop of Sebaste, the mosaic surface was found to have been previously obscured by reddish paint. The scale of the figures can be judged from the relatively small span of the arch which measures approximately 1.00 m. A decorative feature worth noting is the combined frieze and cornice that girds the cruciform perimeter of the nave at the top of the second zone where it marks the transition from the marble incrustations to the mosaics with which the third zone was entirely decorated. The frieze is made of slabs of marble of various lengths, but about 27 cm. high, which rest on a bull nose moulding above the marbles of the incrustations. Above the frieze is a typical fourteenth-century splayed cornice 10 cm. thick. The surface of the frieze is treated in champlev6 technique with running motifs of vines interspersed at intervals with rampant lions enclosed within medallions (fig. 17). Within some of the units of the vine pattern are single or paired birds shown in 40 Mr. Cyril Mango has called my attention to the fact that figures of early bishops of Jerusalem, Rome, and Constantinople also occur among the frescoes of the church of St. Sophia, Ochrid.

the act of drinking. The backgrounds of the vine patterns and the bodies of the lions and their surrounding borders were cut away and filled with colored pitch. Thus, the backgrounds of the vines were of an almost black pitch while the lions appear to have been of a reddish brown color. When the cornice and frieze were relieved of their heavy coatings of plaster, it was found that the pitch had melted and had run down over the bull nose moulding and onto those fragments of revetments that still exist.41 The two cornices which made the circuit of the nave immediately above and below the second zone of the revetments are incompletely preserved. On their splayed faces they bore painted inscriptions on their gesso coatings. The inscriptions are now fragmentary, but once they have been cleaned certain sections will become legible and we will then know whether they correspond to the verses of Manuel Philes, which are recorded in his C ~ r r n i n awhere , ~ ~ it is said that they were placed within the naos. The verses of Philes on the interior and exterior cornices, and the mosaic inscription around the face of the apse, make it clear that the little church was built by the widow of Michael Glabas Tarchaniotes, the nun Martha, to house the tomb of her famous husband. Evidence has come to light, however, that the chapel was planned to serve also as the place of burial for many people and was probably intended as the mortuary chapel of Tarchaniotes' family or that of his wife, the Philanthropenoi. While one cannot be certain, there is reason to believe that an arcosolium, perhaps one of special importance, had been constructed at floor level in the northern wall of the nave, on the transverse axis of the chapel, where extensive alterations have destroyed much of the evidence.43The principal place for burials, however, was the narthex 4l As can be seen in fig. 17, which represents the frieze in the course of its restoration. 4 % Edition of E. Miller, I (Paris, 1855), pp. 115-116. b3 The eastern jamb of an arcosolium which, if symmetry prevailed, must have been approximately 1.73 m. wide was found when the plaster was removed. The position of the niche, which reached the floor, is indicated by dotted lines on the plan, p. 215, and is such as to suggest a special place of honor, perhaps the resting place of Michael himself.

W O R K O F T H E BYZANTINE INSTITUTE: 1957-59 of the chapel where evidence of the existence of four arcosolia was discovered when the plaster was removed from the walls. The extent to which the narthex was altered in Turkish times can be grasped from a comparison of the plans of the structure as it now exists, published by A. Van M i l l i n g e ~with ~,~~ the sketch plan reproduced here (p, 215) in which the original arrangement of doors and niches (still somewhat conjectural) are reconstructed. There were at least four arcosolia in the narthex, two in the east wall flanking a relatively small door into the nave, one at the southern end (later made into a door), and another at the northern end of the west wall. In the Turkish alterations the two relatively narrow doors in the centers of the eastern and western walls were greatly enlarged and the arcosolia were filled with dressed stone and brick. Parts of the original arches of the niches and of the original entrance in the west wall are now visible and permit one to estimate the original spans of the niches and doors. Only in the north wall, which was so extensively altered, is it impossible at present to conjecture the original treatment. With the arcosolia and doors reestablished, it becomes evident that there was a close relation between the wall treatments of the narthex and the "gallery" above, for in the latter one finds a similar arrangement of arcosolia in the eastern and western walls where three more tombs could be accommodated.45 When the plaster was removed from the west side of the western wall of the little narthex, the hacked remains of a cornice were discovered. This cornice was a continuation of that which runs along the southern faqade of the chapel on which verses 10 to 22 of the epitaph of Manuel Philes had been carved.46 I t is probable, therefore, that the first nine verses had been carved on the cornice of the western side of the chapel which we found to have been chopped away. This discovery indicates that when the chapel was built its entire western f a ~ a d estood free of the main Byzantine Chztrches in Constantinople (Lon50 (facing p. 160). 45 See the plan of Van Millingen, loc. cit. 46 See the copy of the extant portions of the inscription in fig. 49 of Van Millingen, op. cit., p. 157, and compare them with Philes' complete text which is on p. 158. 44

don,

I ~ I Z ) ,fig.

219

church, exposed to the exterior, and that the outer narthex of the main church and its two bays on the south side which now lead to the parecclesion, and cover most of its original fa~ade,did not then exist.

Mt. Sinai In the summer of 1958 the author was asked to visit the expedition, conducted by the Universities of Alexandria, Michigan, and Princeton, to the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai. The purpose was to study the mosaics in the church with the view to preparing a contribution to their publication. Scaffoldings were set up which permitted detailed photography and close inspection of all the mosaics. In the scene of Transfiguration which fills the conch of the apse an area of about one by two meters was found to have become detached from the masonry of the vault. Included in this area were the head and upper parts of the figure of Christ down to the knees, as well as most of the right side of the mandorla. As most of this area was hanging in the nearly horizontal parts of the vault its prompt reattachment was urgently required. At the request of His Eminence Porphyrius 111, Archbishop of Sinai, and with means provided by an anonymous contributor, the Byzantine Institute undertook the work in January 1959, and it was carried out by Mr. Carroll Wales and Mr. Constantine Causis of the Institute's staff in Istanbul. While the mosaic was in need of cleaning, only its reattachment was possible at the time. With the insertion of seven concealed copper cramps and of grouting through about fifty small openings made in the mosaic and later closed, the area in question has been secured. Paul A. Underwood THE CONSERVATION OF A BYZANTINE FRESCO DISCOVERED AT ETYEMEZ, ISTANBUL In October 1957 a Byzantine fresco of a Virgin and Child of the Blachernitissa type (figs. 22-25) was discovered in the Etyemez quarter of Istanbul in the course of excavations for the addition of a wing to the fgCi Sigorta Hasthanesi (Labor Insurance Hospital) which is situated at the northeast corner of Samatya Caddesi and Etyemez Tekke

220

P A U L A. U N D E R W O O D

C. Sketch showing three Layers of Fresco

W O K K O F THE BYZANTINE INSTITUTE: 1957-59 Sokagi (text fig. B) about one and three quarters kilometers from the Golden Gate (Yedikule). The director of the Ayasofya Museum, Bay Feridun Dirimtekiq47 was notified of the find and he in turn requested the staff of the Byzantine Institute to remove the painting and install it in the Ayasofya Museum since the structure in which it was found was to be razed. The painting was found in a small apse, the only part of the building that remained standing before the demolition work could be stopped. I t was not possible under existing conditions to survey those structural remains that had not been completely removed. The conch of the apse, which contained the fragmentary fresco, measured 1.42 m. in diameter and .go m. in depth, and its crown measured 1.40 m. above the extrados of a barrel vault which passed beneath the apse and extended for a distance of several meters behind it (see text fig. D). The vault had been used for burials. Fragments of three superimposed layers of fresco were found in the conch (see text fig. C and fig. 18). The first, which is visible only at the upper left, appears to have consisted of geometric designs in a rather free style executed on a thin coating of plaster about 2 cm. thick. The intermediate painting, which was by far the best preserved, depicts the bust of a Virgin orans with the infant Christ enclosed within a circular mandorla on her breast (fig. 24). The center of the painting, including most of the figure of Christ, was destroyed through the use of heavy excavating equipment (fig. 18). The background of the painting was earth-red. At the left of the Virgin is part of an inscribed epithet (fig. 22); the area at the right, where the inscription must have continued, was covered by part of the third layer of fresco. On removing the covering plaster at this point, however, it was found that the inscription had already disappeared before the third painting had been executed. In so far as it is preserved, the inscription reads: M ( j ~ ) q p1 [ B E o ~1]wcrra.. . .48 47 See his report on the discovery of this fresco: "Fresco of the Virgin Discovered a t Etyemez," Turk Arkeoloji Dergisi, VIII-2 (1958)j PP. 42ff. 48 Since the letter upsilon. is preceded by a well preserved area of background on which

221

The robes of the Virgin are dark blue and under the maphorion worn over the head a light blue head-cloth is visible a t the sides of the face. The cuffs of her tunic are orangegold. The large yellow ochre halo is bordered with dark purple and outlined in white. The

D. Sketch of Fresco in situ surviving fragment of the robe of Christ is painted in yellow ochre with orange tones to give the effect of cloth of gold. The mandorla surrounding the Child is of three values of pale green ; His halo is like that of the Mother. All flesh colors, which overlie a general tone of pale green, are of yellow ochre warmed with earth-red, highlighted with white, and there was no trace of other letters, and no epithet of the Virgin could begin with the prefix kata preceded by an upsilon, one is compelled to believe that a curious mistake was made by the artist in using an upsilon for the feminine article eta. If one eliminates all epithets that are not feminine, those that make no sense, and all participles from the list of nineteen epithets prefixed by kata which were compiled by S. Eustratiades, 'H OEOT~KOS BV -rij 6pvoypaqiq (Chennevibres-sur-Marne, 1930), pp. 3zf., the epithet ~ a - r a q u y jbecomes the most likely way in which to complete the inscription.

P A U L A. UNDERWOOD shaded with umber. Middle tones in the flesh were left in the pale greens of the underpainting. Since much of the surface paint in the face is lost, the general appearance of all flesh tones is cool with areas of the green underpainting now exposed. On the basis of its style an eleventh-twelfth-century dating is suggested for the painting of the second period. As can be seen in Text Figure C, the upper, or third, layer of fresco survived in a narrow strip high up in the conch. This painting consisted of a Virgin within a mandorla flanked by angels. I t is probable that all three figures were full length and standing. In addition to being very fragmentary, this painting was in very poor state of preservation, especially on the left side. I t was considered advisable, therefore, to remove all but the fragment of the angel at the right and thus to expose the upper parts of the better preserved painting of the second period. The robe of the Virgin of the third period was deep violet in color; her mandorla was pale green. The robes of the angels were blue and green; the background was blue-black. In style this third painting in the apse appeared to be of fourteenth-century date. Construction work on the hospital made it imperative to remove the frescoes as quickly as possible, and a period of three days was granted for this purpose while demolition was halted. Detailed photographs were taken of the fresco in situ (fig. 18) and it was then treated and removed in accordance with the following procedure : First, a superficial cleaning was carried out by manual removal, with the use of brushes and dental tools, of loose surface accretions. The surface was then given a brush coating of polyvinyl acetate in five per cent solution. A few deep cracks and holes were temporarily filled with plaster to provide a smoother surface for facing. A strong facing of Japanese mulberry paper was then applied to the surface using polyvinyl acetate as an adhesive (fig. 19).Three layers of heavy muslin over the layers of paper were applied with the same adhesive. While the facing was wet and somewhat transparent, division marks were made to indicate where the plaster would be cut into sections; the marks followed cracks in the

plaster or lines of division in the pictorial compostion. After the facing was thoroughly dry, both the facing and the plaster, down to the masonry, were cut into twelve sections with razor blades, and joining marks were made on the facing to facilitate the reassembly of the pieces. The sections of fresco, with the plaster support, were then removed with the aid of spatulas, knives, and long thin chisels. The sections were now transferred to the workshop of the Byzantine Institute for reassembling. The fresco was restored to its original shape by building a semidome support in the exact size and form of the surface of the conch from which it had been removed. The twelve sections were placed on this form (fig. 20) in accordance with the predetermined measurements taken in situ. All loose and dessicated plaster was removed from the back of each section of fresco and new lime plaster, with layers of plaster cloth worked into it, was applied to provide new support for the paintings and as a means of attaching one piece to another. With the fresco thus assembled, a network of copper wire was attached to the new plaster backing through the use of plaster cloth. Free ends of the wire were then secured to a wooden armature (fig. 21) and a final coat of plaster and fabric was applied over the plaster backing and its armature to assure complete adhesion and rigidity. The interior semidome form could then be removed. The facing which covered the painted surface was detached by means of solvents, and the surface accretions were removed by the application of moisture and the use of brushes, orange sticks, and dental instruments. The portions of the third layer of painting at the left were removed to expose more completely the painting of the second period. As a result, the two hands of the Virgin, a large area of the red background, and the upper part of the Virgin's head were retrieved. Surface damages were filled with plaster and the missing parts of the painting were suggested by flat tones of color. Finally, the newly assembled fresco was transported to the Ayasofya Museum where it was installed in a small apse especially constructed for it. Lawrence J . Majewski

4. West Wall of Nave. Opus Sectile Panels representing Dolphins

5. West Wall and Vaults of South Side-Aisle (before cleaning)

6. Mosaic Cross in Summit of Vault, West End of South Side-Aisle

Hagia Sophia.

7. Opus Sectile Border in West Wall of South Side-Aisle, detail

I

/

'.

*I

F

--

f

:

T

8. Opus Sectile Border in West Wall of South Side-Aisle, detail Hagia Sophia.

11. Bronze Door to Inner Narthex, detail of Central Door

12. Bronze Door to Inner Narthex, detail of Central Door

13. Imperial Door, Bronze Lintel and Door Frame, detail (after cleaning) Hagia Sophia.

14. Hagia Sophia. Mosaic Portrait bf the Emperor Alexander (partly uncovered)

15. Baptism of Christ, Mosaic (partly uncovered)

16. St. Blasius, Mosaic (partly uncovered)

17. Fragments of Cornice, Frieze and Revetments Fetiye Camii.

19. Preparations for Removal of Fresco

18. Fresco in situ

20. Placing Sections of Fresco on temporary Form Removal of Etyemez Fresco

21. The Fresco in its Armature

22. Detail of left Side

23. Detail of Right Side Etyemez Fresco (restored)

24. The Virgin (Blachernitissa)

25. Detail: Head of the Virgin Etyemez Fresco (restored)

A Summary Report on the Excavations of the Byzantine Institute in the Kariye Camii: 1957 and 1958 David Oates Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 223-231. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C223%3AASROTE%3E2.0.CO%3B2-T Dumbarton Oaks Papers is currently published by Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/doaks.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Sun Mar 9 08:05:23 2008

A SUMMARY REPORT ON THE EXCAVATIONS OF THE BYZANTINE INSTITUTE

IN THE KARIYE CAMII: 1957 and 1958

XCAVATIONS have been undertaken in the Kariye Camii, the churchof St. Saviour in the Chora, during two seasons, each of approximately two months, in 1957 and 1958. In 1957 the work was carried out by Professors George H. Forsyth, Jr., of the University of Michigan, and Paul A. Underwood, Field Director of the Byzantine Institute, and in 1958 by Mr. and Mrs. David Oates of Trinity College, Cambridge, England. In presenting this summary of our investigations the author acts as spokesman for all who have been concerned in these investigati0ns.l Our object was to recover any evidence that might be available as to the layout of the church and its furnishings at various epochs in its history before its conversion to a mosque in the early sixteenth century, thus complementing the artistic and architectural study of the building which has been in progress for some years. A full record of our results will be embodied in a later publication which will include also a historical and architectural study of the building. In view of the time that must elapse before the more complete report can be published, it seems desirable to present a brief statement of the conclusions we have reached, particularly those which conflict with the previously accepted account of the history of the church. We shall not attempt here to describe fully the evidence on which these conclusions are based, although we shall try to distinguish clearly between fact and interpretation, and to acknowledge uncertainty where it exists. The scope of the work was limited by two considerations, the safetv of the structure and the preservation of its surviving ornament, in particular the intact ofius sectile floor of the

E

I n preparing this report the author has had access to all notes, photographs, and drawings pertaining to the excavations of 1957 and to the excavations themselves. He has been further helped in developing his conclusions b y numerous discussions on the site with Professor Underwood and Mr. Ernest Hawkins, F. S. A.

nave, which precluded any investigation in the main body of the church. The presence of marble revetments and mosaics likewise prevented us from examining certain parts of the standing masonry where we should expect to find evidence of different phases of construction; enough masonry, however, was exposed through the removal of plaster and in the course of repairs to the marble revetments to give us a clear picture of the general sequence, although certain points of detail must remain in doubt. Another difficulty, common to most excavations on continuously occupied city sites where the occupation level has not risen appreciably, was the lack of deposits of material definitely associated with the successive building phases, which might afford an independent dating criterion. In the absence of such deposits, chronology must depend on the identification of distinctive construction materials and methods which are foundin datable contexts elsewhere. This is often difficult in early Byzantine buildings, especially where only a fragment of masonry is preserved, because of the variety and inconsistency of the masonry techniques employed at that time, and the lack of documentation for much of the comparative material. We were fortunate, however, in that each of the two periods which saw the greatest building activity in the Kariye Camii, under the Comnene and Palaeologan dynasties, is marked by the use of a highly individual masonry t e c h n i q ~ e . ~ For a discussion of the masonry in use in Constantinople and elsewhere in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, see the article of C. Mango, "The Date of the Narthex Mosaics of the Church of the Dormition a t Nicaea," Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 13 (1g5g), pp: z4gff. and figs. 5-9. I n brickwork of this period alternate courses are recessed up to 3 cm. from the line of the face (10 courses, ca. 70 cm. high) and subsequently concealed by flush pointing, presenting the appearance of a very wide joint which is marked by parallel incised lines; sometimes, but not invariably, the vertical joints are marked in the same way. The mortar and the pointing are

224

D A V I D OATES

Phase 1

Substructure

Superstructure Scale

1

Phase 2

Phose 3

Phase 4

Phase 5

m-

s3SSS-

0

Fig. I. Kariye Camii. Plan of Successive Structures

Phose 6

fssS

E X C A V A T I O N S I N T H E K A R I Y E CAM11

The church stands on the steep cityward slope of the ridge that carries the Theodosian wall. The ground falls away sharply on the east and southeast, so that the east end of the existing building, and of its predecessors on the site, had to be founded on elaborate substructures forming an artificial terrace on this side. Such terracing is a common feature of important buildings in the city, and was often improvised by Byzantine architects from the remains of earlier masonry which had served the same purpose; they had little regard for the appearance of work which was not intended for the public eye, and apparently relied on an empirical estimate of its load-bearing capacity. The success or failure of this improvisation, and particularly its ability to withstand the earthquake shocks which were a recurrent hazard, in great measure dictated the history of the building, and must be taken into account in the interpretation of the evidence we uncovered. Two principal areas were investigated (text figure I ) : the apsidal complex and the substructures supporting it at the east end of the church, which we exposed both outside and inside the building where the Byzantine floor had already been destroyed, and the area between the nave and the parecclesion adjoining it along the south side, which had been extensively damaged by alterations after the Turkish conquest and could, in consequence, be freely explored. We found evidence, either here or elsewhere in the building, of six successive phases of Byzantine construction, of which the sixth and latest included only minor additions to the church usually a dirty white, but may, when damp, take on a buff or salmon pink tinge. Palaeologan masonry commonly consists of bands of four courses of brickwork (ca. 38 cm. high) alternating with three, or, in the Icariye Camii, more usually four, courses of rather roughly dressed limestone blocks (4 courses, ca. 70 cm. high). The pointing on the brickwork is bevelled to a slight underlap on the upper brick, and almost flush with the stone courses; both pointing and mortar are deep pink. This distinctive color was also observed in concrete packing used in the foundations of the Palaeologan parecclesion, and in the hard mortar bed on which the opus sectile floor of the nave rests. A similar bed, from which the marbles had been removed, was found in situ in the diaconicon, where it was associated with the Palaeologan reconstruction.

in the late Palaeologan period. Only the first five phases, each of which represents either a new building or a substantial remodelling of the old, are briefly described here. Phase I was represented only by substructures whose main surviving element was a great arcaded wall, almost 3.00 m. thick, that ran north and south beneath the apses of the church. The eastern face of this wall has always stood partially exposed above grade level in the eastern f a ~ a d eof the church. What now remains is a pair of open brick arches (with spans of about 4.35 m. which were later filled) that rest on three composite brick and limestone piers. Originally these arches were extended to north and south by other arches blocked on their western sides by recessed walls of the same masonry as the piers. The preserved parts of the blockings of these arches can be seen on the plan (text figure I) beneath the small apses of the prothesis and diaconicon. The two open arches were screened to the east, at a distance of about 1.40 m., by a much less massive wall incorporating smaller composite piers which responded to the three surviving piers of the arcade. About 3.00 m. to the west, and on the same north-south alignment, was a second wall pierced by two arched openings of different widths, which bear no recognizable relation to the symmetrical pattern of the arcade. One of these can be seen in the plan beneath the existing door that leads from the bema of the main apse into the prothesis to the north. The evidence is not sufficient to permit any identification of the building to which these structures belonged, and the question is too complex to be discussed here. The presence of at least two vaulted tomb chambers, one of which was inserted between the arcade and the eastern screen wall before the next phase of building took place, and the other, of identical building materials, to the west beneath the nave of the church, strongly suggests that the Phase I building lay within the precincts of the monastery. Whatever its function may have been, it is at least clear that the plan of the Phase I building does not correspond in any way to the layout of a church, and certainly not to the east end of one. The masonry is reminiscent of fifth-and sixthcentury work, and both the arcade and the wall parallel to it on the west produced exam-

D A V I D OATES

ples of a highly distinctive, slightly convex pointing on the brickwork. We have so far found pointing of this type in only two other places in the city: on a brick wall in the excavated buildings on the south side of the atrium of the church of St. Irene, and on a pier at the southwest corner of the nave of the same church, where its context points to a sixth-century date. Phase 2 can again be recognized only in the foundations at the east end of the church. The Phase I structures had suffered considerable damage, for the crown of the southernmost of the two open arches of the arcade had fallen. Both of these arches were now blocked throughout their thickness with masonry fills leaving only two small arched openings on the axes of the original arches. The two open arches of the great arcade now became, in effect, a massive terrace wall which was later used to support the eastern extremities of each of the subsequent buildings on the site. The two small openings, which occur at a considerably higher level than the bottoms of the original arches, seem to have been provided as a means of access to the interior of the arcaded building whose interior level now seems to have risen. At the same time the Phase I wall to the west, which ran parallel to the arcade, was also reinforced by the insertion of a block of masonry to narrow the span of the larger, or southernmost of its two arched openings, but access to the spaces to the west, beneath what is now the nave of the church, remained. I t was probably in Phase 2 that a long vaulted tomb chamber, a little over 5.00 m. in length, was constructed below the floor of this space, slightly to the south of what became the lonptudinal axis of the later churches. Half way down its length the tomb chamber was provided with an entrance shaft through the vault which was covered by a large block of stone, the upper surface of which was approximately level with the floor of this period. We have again no positive evidence of the form of the superstructure of this period, but the evidence suggests that the spaces here referred to comprised a substructure, or crypt, which appears to have been used for burials; nor do we know when the reconstruction was carried out. I t is historically possible, however, that this phase corresponds to the period of

restoration of the monastery in the ninth century. In Phase 3 the superstructure of the earlier building was completely dismantled, although its substructures were to some extent re-used. New foundations for an apsidal complex, obviously the eastern end of a church, were constructed in the space between the inner, or western face of the original arcading, now used as a terrace wall, and the other Phase I wall to the west. This construction now blocked the passages which in Phase 2 had given access to the substructures and presumably to the long vaulted tomb chamber below. I t may have been at this time that a second closed burial chamber was built overlying the east end of the first. Nothing now remains of the superstructure of Phase 3 in the eastern area, but it was found that the substructures here outline a central apse flanked by two small apses. Their total width corresponds with the length of the terrace wall (which included the two arches and the three piers of Phase I) against which they rested at the east end. Three features, however, indicate that the new building was originally wider than this and had narrow passages, or lateral narthexes, along its north and south sides. Near their eastern ends, beneath the prothesis and the diaconicon, there were projections on the external sides of the north and south foundation walls which appear to have served as foundations for the jambs of arches. Their presence implies that other walls, with corresponding jambs, once existed still further to the north and south, thus increasing the width of the church. At their eastern ends these outermost walls, including their foundations, were completely removed, but a fragment of the west end of the southern wall still stands, incorporated in later masonry, in the southwest comer of the small interior chamber to the west of the narrow passage that now connects the nave with the parecclesion. In the very corner of this room the section of this hacked wall stands to cornice height. Its inner face establishes the width of the lost side narthex and, one can presume, that of its counterpart on the north side of the church. This fragmentary wall of Phase 3 is definitely the earliest one of three phases of masonry found in the walls of this small chamber. The technique of its

E X C A V A T I O N S I N THE K A R I Y E CAM11

brickwork, and that of the foundations at the east end beneath the diaconicon, is typical of eleventh-and-twelfth-century masonry, that is, it consists of alternate recessed courses of brick covered by flush pointing which gives the appearance of unusually wide mortar joint^.^ Moreover, the carved ornament on the cornice of this fragmentary wall is virtually identical with that employed in the nave and apse of the Phase 4 church which we know to be a construction of the Comnenian period. Our investigations in the area between the nave and the parecclesion of the present church shed other light on the layout of the Phase 3 building. I t became clear that large parts of the lower walls of the present nave were originally built at this time and were used in the subsequent rebuilding. Finally, at the south end of the wall dividing the nave from the inner narthex we identified, in a lost area of the Deesis mosaic, one jamb of the original south door, blocked in the alterations of the succeeding period. There is no evidence of the form of the narthex at this time, nor of its successor in Phase 4. The eastern wall of the present inner narthex is basically of Phase 3 refaced in Phase 5 except for the section on which the Deesismosaic now exists; its other walls are entirely the work of Phase 5. The form of support for the dome of the nave of Phase 3 must remain somewhat conjectural in view of the impossibility of excavating in the nave. The diverse indications described above suggest, however, that it was a four-column church with lateral narthexes to north and south. The layout is reminiscent of the north church of St. Saviour Pantocrator, and a parallel for the side narthexes can be found in Texier's plan of Kilise Camii.* The masonry technique is that which was in use in Constantinople, and in areas under its influence, throughout the greater part of the eleventh and twelfth centuries. T f . note

2.

Plan reproduced in A. Van Millingen, Byzantine Churches in Constantinofile (London, 1912), fig. 82. The existing northern fa~adeof the tenth-century church of the monastery of Constantine Lips in Istanbul presents evidence of a lost structure along that side. Similar evidence of side structures occur on the south side of Kocamustafa Camii and at the Kalender Camii.

Since, as will be seen below, the subsequent building was also constructed in this technique, the Phase 3 structure should most probably be ascribed to the eleventh century. Phase 4 represents a complete rebuilding of the east end of the church, though retaining much of the superstructure of the Phase 3 nave. The main apse and bema and the two small side apses of Phase 3 were dismantled to their foundations, and the whole area, with the exception of the central apse, was filled with mortared rubble. On this was founded the new, larger apse and bema which still stand, with doors in the bema leading north and south into side-chambers on the sites of the present prothesis and diaconicon; we have no evidence for the exact layout of these chambers in Phase 4. At the same time, the Phase 3 supports for the dome (columns?) were suppressed and massive piers inserted in the corners of the nave to carry shallower arches on which a much larger dome was supported. The square western piers blocked the two small side doors (which doubtless led from the narthex into the "side aisles" of Phase 3), and the north door may accordingly have been moved southwards to its present position at this time although this might have been done in Phase 5. There is no sign that a new south door was provided, and this irregularity may be explained by assuming that the present asymmetrical plan of the narthex dates essentially from Phase 4, although the masonry indicates a complete rebuilding in Phase 5. Such an assumption is supported by the fact that a Phase 4 parecclesion was attached to the south side of the nave, access to which would have required the remodelling of the south end of the Phase 3 narthex or an extension of it toward the south. The evidence for the addition of a structure on the south side of the nave is contained in the area between the nave and the existing Phase 5 parecclesion. Here we found that the western entrance to the southern lateral narthex of Phase 3 had been blocked in Phase 4, and an archway, 3.40 m. wide, was inserted in the south wall of the nave which was now approximately doubled in thickness. The arch, later blocked in Phase 5 , is concealed behind the marble revetments of the nave, but its south side is still visible in the narrow eastwest "gallery" which runs at a high level

D A V I D OATES

behind the north wall of the present parecwe exposed the foundations of c l e ~ i o nWhen .~ Phase 4 masonry associated with the western side of this arch, we found the northwest pier of the structure to which it gave access. The stub of this pier, bonded with the Phase 4 wall, was found beneath the floor in the northwest corner of the small interior chamber that lies to the west of the existing passage connecting the nave and parecclesion. The explanation of this feature is that it was one of four square corner piers carrying the arches which supported a dome, thus repeating on a smaller scale the layout then newly adopted in the nave of the church. Although all further trace of this domed parecclesion has been obliterated by radical rebuilding in Phase 5 , it is worth observing that the present structure also incorporates a dome at this point, and may in other respects reflect something of the earlier plan, although it is almost certainly on a larger scale. The masonry of Phase 4 is again of the type used in eleventhand twelfth-century construction, and is virtually indistinguishable from that of Phase 3; failure to differentiate between these two phases, which is indeed impossible on superficial evidence alone, has hitherto proved the principal bar to a satisfactory explanation of the complexities of the building. We are forced to conclude that radical alterations were undertaken quite soon after the erection of the original church, and a possible explanation for this is suggested below (Conclzisions, p. 230). Some information was also recovered in the excavation of the apse which throws light on the decoration and furnishing of the church in Phase 4. The masonry footings on which the marble revetments now rest were very likely inserted at this time, and in the builders' debris associated with them we found fragments of skirting, and of bullnose and bead and reel mouldings identical with the panel frames on the walls of the nave and apse. I t is obvious, however, that parts of the existing revetments, for instance those on the south wall of the nave, must be later in date, and it is possible that the whole decoration was repaired or renewed in Phase 5. We also found the mortar bed in which the footing of See plans and sections on pp. 318 and 3201 Van Millingen, op. cit.

the iconostasis had been set, with a section of the marble stylobate still in situ; and in the middle of the apse, the foundations of the four columns of the ciborium, set at the corners of a large rectangular loculus constructed of marble slabs, which lay directly beneath the altar. Immediately against the east side of this loculus was a second, much smaller marble box which housed a reliquary in the form of a lead casket containing a few fragments of wood and bone. The large loculus, having been robbed in Turkish times, now contained a miscellaneous collection of rubbish including some human skeletal remains. The dating of the two loculi depends on the interpretation of the disturbed stratigraphy of the surrounding area, and in the absence of any datable objects the evidence is somewhat equivocal. In our view it is probable that at least the large loculus and the ciborium date from Phase 4, but there is a possibility that they were inserted in Phase 5 . Discussion of this and similar points of detail must await the publication of the final report. Phase 5 requires comparatively little description here, since it is well documented and embodies what is virtually the final, visible form of the church. The nave and apse were retained, but a new dome was built over the nave. The prothesis and diaconicon were rebuilt and a wide north passage added, with a closed gallery above; we do not know what the previous layout of the building had been on this side, although there was probably some similar meansof access to the Phase4 prothesis. The inner and outer narthexes in their present form date from this time. The Phase 4 parecclesion was destroyed to make way for a new and probably larger chapel, founded on two parallel vaulted chambers, cutting through and obliterating much of the earlier foundations on the south side. The large arched opening in the south wall of the nave was blocked and replaced by a narrow passage leading to the parecclesion, while the remaining space under the arch became a small room, perhaps a mortuary chapel, opening off the east side of the passage. A similar small room of unknown function was formed on the west side of the passage by cutting back the Phase 4 foundations; for some unexplainable reason its floor level was considerably higher than that of the rest of the church. The doorway

E X C A V A T I O N S I N T H E K A R I Y E CAM11 leading from the main apse into the diaconicon was also blocked, apparently at a later stage than the reconstruction of the diaconicon itself, and this room subsequently served as the prothesis for the parecclesion. The sills of the triple windows in the south and west tympana of the nave were raised somewhat and the corresponding window in the north tympanum was blocked throughout the greater part of its height because of the addition of the gallery over the north passage. I t is certain, from contemporary records, that the whole of this work was carried out under the patronage of Theodore Metochites in the second decade of the fourteenth century. Summary of Conclusions The foregoing account summarizes the more important facts which have emerged from the excavation and structural examination of the Kariye Camii. We have identified five principal phases of building on the site. Phases I and 2 are represented only by substructures, too fragmentary to suggest any identification of the buildings they supported; but we can say with certainty that in neither case does the plan reflect the distinctive layout of the east end of a church, although the site probably lay within the precincts of the Chora monastery. Phase I is tentatively dated to the sixth century on the basis of the masonry, but we have as yet no evidence to date Phase 2, although the period of the restoration of the monastery under Michael Syncellus in the ninth century is a historical possibility.6 In Phase 3 what appears to have been a four-column church, with lateral narthexes, was erected on the ruins of the earlier buildings, using the massive blocked arcade as its principal foundation at the east end. This was clearly the first church on the site, and can be dated not earlier than the eleventh century on the evidence of its characteristic masonry. Phase 4 represents the complete reconstruction of the east end of this church, substituting the present wide apse for the earlier small apse and side chambers opening into the nave; the building of a 6 For a short discussion o f t h e history o f t h e Chora monastery, see R. Janin, L a ge'ographie eccle'siastique de Z'Empire B yzantin, pt. I , vol. 111, Les Lglises et les monastBres (Paris, 1g53), PP, 548-551.

229

new prothesis and diaconicon ;the replacement of the smaller dome, probably on four columns, by the present system of corner piers carrying a large dome; and the suppression of the south narthex to make way for a parecclesion, with the concomitant alterations in the narthex. The masonry of this phase is hardly distinguishable from that of Phase 3, and the interval between the erection of the church and its extensive rebuilding must be comparatively short, since the type of masonry used in both was in vogue only during the eleventh and twelfth centuries. In Phase 5 , the restoration after the expulsion of the Latin conquerors, the nave and apse of Phase 4 were retained, although their decoration was in large part, if not entirely, renewed; the prothesis and diaconicon, the north passage, the inner and outer narthexes, and the parecclesion were all rebuilt in their present form. One most important conclusion emerges from this evidence: St. Saviour in the Chora was not one of the earlier churches of the monastery, but one that was built for the first time not earlier than the eleventh century on a site which, although probably used since the sixth century for monastic buildings of some importance, had not previously been occupied by a church. The commonly held view that the form of the Phase 4 church was dictated by that of a seventh-century church which had presumably been built on the site is, therefore, unfounded. The original form of the Phase 4 church was long ago conjecturally reconstructed by Schmit and Van Millingen7 along lines that resemble such seventh-century churches as those of St. Sophia at Salonika and the Koimesis Church at Nicaea. In this type of church, the dome rests on four piers built into the corners of the nave, the main apse fills the eastern side of the nave, and arches in the north and south sides of the nave give access to side aisles which lead to apsidal chambers at the east. These points of similarity have been regarded as evidence For Schmit's plan, see his Kakhrie-dzhami, I (Sofia, 1906) = Izvestiya Russkago Arkheologischeskago Institufa v Konstantinopole, X I , pl. I facing p. 1 0 2 , and his comparison o f t h e Kariye Camii w i t h other churches o f t h e t y p e o n pl. I11 facing p. I 1 2 . For V a n Millingen's plan, op. cit., fig. 1 0 2 , p. 314,

D A V I D OATES

that Priscus, one of Heraclius' generals, had indeed constructed a church at the Chora whose plan survived through later reconstructions. The investigations show that those similarities are purely fortuitous and result from the decision to construct a larger dome and a single apse within the limits established by the surviving lateral walls of the Phase 3 structure and not through re-use of structural remains of a church of that type. I t remains to consider why the Phase 3 church was rebuilt so soon after its original foundation, and how the material evidence can be reconciled with tradition, particularly that which ascribes the building of a new church to Maria, wife of Andronicus Ducas and mother-in-law of Alexius I. We have already observed that on a site of this nature the history of the building depends on the capacity of its terraced foundations to withstand not only their normal load, but the effects of subsidence and the additional hazard of earthquake tremors. The principal weakness of the structure of the Kariye Camii has clearly been the line of junction between its eastern parts, which depend for support ultimately on the blocked arcade of Phase I, and the remainder of the building which is founded on the second wall of Phase I , three meters to the west, and on the comparatively firm ground behind it. This line of cleavage is marked by a crack running north and south through the whole of the superstructure arising from a great fissure below ground which follows the east face of the western wall of Phase I. This has obviously been opened by a slight downhill movement of the blocked arcade and of the fill, of mortared rubble and debris, which it was intended to retain. The fissure has extended through the fourteenthcentury Parecclesion, including its substructures, and hence must have become enlarged after the period of its construction; but this movement was already recognized as a structural problem by the Palaeologan builders, as is shown by the great buttress which they erected against the east face of the arcade and the apse, and which has itself now slipped out of contact with the masonry of the arcade. I t seems likely, then, that the same weakness led to the collapse of the east end of the Phase 3 church where it had to be completely rebuilt from its very foundations, although

much of the fabric of the nave to the west of the line of cleavage was left standing. In the historical sources there is no documentation regarding the destruction of the church of the Chora at any time during the eleventh or twelfth centuries, and for this period construction of only one of the two churches is mentioned. Nicephoras Gregoras, who should have been in a position to know the traditions of the monastery, merely states that its church was originally built by Justinian in an elongated form; that later, since this church had been destroyed to its very foundations, another was built in the form in which it existed in his day, by the motherin-law of Alexius Comnenus, that is, by Maria Ducaena. He adds that this church was rebuilt by Theodore Metochites8 The construction of Maria's church cannot be dated precisely, but we may suggest the period between 1077, when her daughter Irene became the consort of Alexius I , and about 1081when the body of the Patriarch Cosmas was buried in the Chora, a fact that would presuppose the existence of a church suitable for such an important personage. The only other recorded facts concerning the patronage of the church during the Comnenian period relate to the interest which Maria's grandson, the Sebastocrator Isaac Comnenus, third son of Alexius I , took in the church. Isaac was a notable patron both of religion and the arts, and was closely connected with the Chora; he built his tomb in the church when he was a young man, although in his late years he ordered it to be removed to his new church in the monastery of the Kosmosotira in Macedonia, to which he had retired. In the typicon of his new monastery he speaks of certain agreements with the monastery of Chora which gave him the right to remove not only his tomb but also other unspecified marbles and to use them in the decoration of his new c h ~ r c hSuch . ~ privileges imply what amounts to proprietary rights with regard to the monastery, and this in turn suggests the possibility that he occupied the position of ktetor of the Chora. Long after 8 Nicephoras Gregoras, IX, 13 (Bonn ed., I, P. 459). 9 L. Petit, "Typicon du monastkre de la Kosmosotira prks dJAenos ( I 152)," IZV. Russk. Arkheol. Inst. v Konst., XI11 (Sofia, 1go8), p. 63.

E X C A V A T I O N S I N T H E K A R I Y E CAM11

his death he was commemorated in the great fourteenth-century mosaic of the Deesis in the inner narthex of the Chora, an honor that cannot be explained merely by his unfulfilled intention to be buried there. With the exception of the fourteenth-century ktetor, Theodore Metochites, Isaac is the only known benefactor to be commemorated in the mosaics of the Kariye Camii. If he rebuilt the

church that his grandmother had founded, and if he is responsible for the nave and the apse in their present form, then indeed he deserves his memorial. I t must be emphasized, however, that on points such as this we can do no more than suggest a plausible explanation that would reconcile the scanty historical evidence with the structural remains of the two churches of Phases 3 and 4.

http://www.jstor.org

LINKED CITATIONS - Page 1 of 1 -

You have printed the following article: A Summary Report on the Excavations of the Byzantine Institute in the Kariye Camii: 1957 and 1958 David Oates Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 223-231. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C223%3AASROTE%3E2.0.CO%3B2-T

This article references the following linked citations. If you are trying to access articles from an off-campus location, you may be required to first logon via your library web site to access JSTOR. Please visit your library's website or contact a librarian to learn about options for remote access to JSTOR.

[Footnotes] 2

The Date of the Narthex Mosaics of the Church of the Dormition at Nicaea Cyril Mango Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 13. (1959), pp. 245-252. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281959%2913%3C245%3ATDOTNM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-T 3

The Date of the Narthex Mosaics of the Church of the Dormition at Nicaea Cyril Mango Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 13. (1959), pp. 245-252. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281959%2913%3C245%3ATDOTNM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-T

NOTE: The reference numbering from the original has been maintained in this citation list.

A Twelfth-Century Description of St. Sophia Cyril Mango; John Parker Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 233-245. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C233%3AATDOSS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X Dumbarton Oaks Papers is currently published by Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/doaks.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Sun Mar 9 08:05:43 2008

-

A TWELFTH CENTURY DESCRIPTION OF ST. SOPHIA* CYRILMANGO and

HE short composition which, as far ascan be ascertained, is here published for the first time, is to be found on folios 123r-124~ of the EscorialcodexY-11-1o.Thegenera1character of the work is sufficiently indicated by its title; it is an ekphrasis or rhetorical descriptionl of the great church of St. Sophia, or rather, of certain selected features of that building, delivered on the occasion of the annual festival of the encaenia or inauguration of the church. This festival commemorated Justinian 1's re-inauguration of the building in 563, after the repair of the damage it had suffered in the earthquake of 557,2 and was celebrated annually on 23 December, according to the ninth-century T y p i c o n of the Great C h u r c h and the Synaxarium of Constantin~ple.~ The author, Michael, protecdicus of the church of Thessalonica and later deacon of St. Sophia, maistdr t 6 n rhdtordn and oikoum e n i k o s didaskalos (i,e. Rector of the Patriarchal Academy), is chiefly known for a number of other rhetorical pieces which are to be found in the same codex-three of which,

T

JOHN

PARKER

encomiastic addresses to the Emperor Manuel I, were published by W. Regel in 1892~ and for his connection with the theological controversy about the nature of the eucharistic sacrifice stirred up by Soterichus Panteugenes, patriarch-elect of Antioch, in 1155-7.5 Michael was one of the principal supporters of Panteugenes' contention that the sacrifice was offered not to all the members of the Trinity-since the Son could not properly be thought of as offering himself to himself-but only to the Father and the Holy Spirit; for these views he was condemned, together with his associates, by the synod which Manuel I convened, on 26 January 1156, to deal with the matter.6 According to Cinnamus and Nicetas Choniates the synod went on to depose the convicted heretics.' A confession and recantation of his errors, signed by Michael and apparently read by , ~ the title him to the synod, has ~ u r v i v e dand of this also clearly states that he was deposed (~afjqpB8q) ; but in the text Michael declares

* Fontes rerum byzantinarum, I (St. Petersburg, 1892), nos. VIII-X, pp. 131-82. * The introduction, edition of the Greek 5 For this matter v. F. Chalandon, Jean I I text, and translation are the work of Mr. Parker. Comnbne et M a n u e l I Comnbne (Paris, 1g12), Mr. Mango has revised the translation and writpp. 640-3; M. Jugie in Dict, de the'ologie cathoten the commentary. lique, X , 2, cols. 1337-8. 1 On the ekphrasis generally as a literary Cinnamus, ed. Bonn, IV 16, p. 177; Nicetas genre, see P. Friedlander, Johannes von Gaza Choniates, ed. Bonn, VII 5, pp. 275-6; id., und Paulzds Silentiarius (Leipzig, 1912),pp. 83Thesaurus Orthodoxiae, Migne, PG 140, cols. 103; Krumbacher, Geschichte der byzantznzschen 137-201; V. Grumel, Les regestes des actes dzt Literatuv, 2nd. ed. (Munich, 1897)~pp. 414, Patriarcat de Constantinople, I , iii (Kadikiiy, 454-6; A. Bluiioz, "Alcune fonti letterarie per 1947)~nos. 1038, 1040; Chalandon, op. cit., la storia dell' arte bizantina," Nuovo B u l l , d i p 641. pp. 221-32; G. Downey, archeol. crist., X (1904)~ 7 Cinnamus, loc. cit.; Nic. Chon., loc. cit.; "Ekphrasis,"Reallexikon fiivAntikeund C h ~ i s t e n Thesaurus, PG 140, col. 140 A. t u m , IV, cols. 921-44. 8 The text is known to exist in two MSS: See E . M. Antoniades, " E ~ Q p a a l Ts ~ 'Ayias S Parisinusgraecus 228, fols. I 7~-18,andvaticanus Z o ~ i a ~I ,(Athens-Leipzig, 1907), p. 21; R. Jagraecus 690, fols. 217-217~. I t has been edited nin, L a ge'ographie eccle'siastique de I'Empire from the former by Leo Allatius, De Ecclesiae byzantin, pt. I, vol. I11 (Paris, 1g53), p. 473. Occidentalis et Orientalis perpetua consenszone A. Dmitrievskij, Opisanie liturgiteskich ru(Cologne, 1648), bk. 11,chap. xiii, col. 691. That kopisej, I (Kiev, 1895), p. 34: December 23: it is not a death-bed repentance, as would ap~ a T& i E y ~ a i v l aT ~ &ylw~drrqs S v~yCrhqsi ~ ~ h q o i a ~ . pear from the title (fi vspi T f i V ~ s h s w r j vE ~ O ~ O S y n a x a r i u m ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae: ProA6yqu1s), but that it was presented to the pylaeum ad AASS Novembris, ed. H. Delehaye synod, is clear from the text. V. Laurent (Dict. (Brussels, 1902),col. 340 :~ ia ij r ~ ijvBpq j T&iyttaide theol. cath., X . 2, col. 1720) suggests the S ~ E O vGs y & h q ~imthqoias. vla T ~ TOG emendation of TEAEVT?V to T E ~ T ~ V .

234

C Y R I L M A N G O and J O H N P A R K E R

that he has abandoned his former wrong beliefs and entirely concurs in the views of the synod, which he humbly begs to forgive him and to pray for him. A note appended to this recantation in the manuscripts reads "it appears from this document that he was not deposed, although common report has it so" ( K ~ ~ TA6yos O I m p i rorirov ~ p m ~ r )This . was ridiculed by Allatiusg in view of the statements by Cinnamus and Nicetas; but in recent years V. Grumel has upheld the view that the only person to be deposed as a result of this controversy was Soterichus Panteugenes himself .lo Nothing of Michael's subsequent career seems to be known. The archbishop of Thessalonica of that name, who, according to the synodicon of that city,ll succeeded Basil of Ochrida soon after the synod which dealt with the errors of Panteugenes, has been thought by some to have been the same person as the orator; but, as V. Laurent has shown, this identity cannot be proved.12 This ekphrasis is to be dated about the middle of the twelfth century; it is not possible to be more precise than this. Michael had arrived in the capital, presumably from his native Thessalonica, some time before 1147, and appears, from his own words elsewhere, to have risen to his position asoikoztmenikos didaskalos after some ten years of teaching in the Patriarchal Academy.13 These data hardly furnish a definite termifizts u quo for dating this composition; nor does the speech itself contain any internal evidence that might be of help. If Michael was not in fact deprived of his dignities in 1156, he may well have produced this effusion some time afterwards. All that can be said is that it was spoken, in St. Sophia (as several passages make clear) two days before Christmas, probably some time in the late 1140's or I I ~ O ' S . The speech itself is plainly a pikce d'occusion; it would be interesting to know whether it was customary at any time in the twelfth

Wp.czt., col. 692. Grumel, Regestes, no. 1038. See I,. Petit, "Le Synodicon de Thessa, 245, lonique," Echos d'ovient, XVIII ( I ~ I S )pp. 253.

l2 Laurent, loc. cit. l3 See F. Fuchs, Dze hoheren Schulen von Konstantinopel im Mittelalter, Byzantinisches Archiv, 8 (Leipzig, 1926),p. 36 and note 12. lo

11

century for such panegyrical descriptions of the Great Church to be delivered as part of the encaenia ceremonies. No other such work seems to have survived, however, and there is nothing in any other source to suggest that speeches of this kind were an annual event. The present one is a curious production in many ways. The original ending is almost certainly lost; it is hard to believe that the abrupt and indecisive conclusion in the manuscript can have been used by a practiced orator and maistdr tdn rhttordn to round off his address. The breathless manner in which the discourse jumps about from one salient feature of the building to another raises the possibility that Michael's speech has been condensed in other places as well. However, the text as transmitted in this n~anuscriptis, for the most part, clear and intelligible as to its substance, although the language is extremely flowery and the imagery often somewhat strained, as is generally true of Byzantine ekphraseis of this nature, whether in prose or in verse. The geometrical subtleties which the orator has woven into his very complicated observations about the atrium and into his remarks about the roof of the church, which he analyses into two spheres of different sizes, the snatches of cosmology with which he garnishes his description of the arches, the trinitarian symbolism which he extracts from the reference to the doors a t the west end, together with his rather conventional Homeric reminiscences, all bear witness to a variously-stocked academic mind. As both didaskalos tou euange1io.u and maistdr tdn rhdtordn Michael was a teacher with a fairly wide range of subjects; F. Fuchs has shown that the holder of the latter office generally instructed in philosophy as well as in rhetoric, and the secular sciences as well as theology were regularly taught at the Patriarchal Academy during the twelfth century.14 The codex from which this speech is here printed has been fully described by Emmanuel Miller in his catalogue of the Greek MSS of the Escorial,16 by Krumbacher,16 Regell7 and others. I t is a quarto volume l v u c h s , op. cit., pp. 37, 47. 15 E. Miller, Catalogue des MSS grecs de la bibliothdque de l'Escuria1 (Paris, 1848),p. 200. '0 Krumbacher, op. cit., pp. 470-6. '7 Regel, op. cit., pp. iii-v.

TWELFTH-CENTURY DESCRIPTION O F ST. SOPHIA 235

which now contains 536 folios, but pages have been lost from both the beginning and the end. The contents are made up entirely of rhetorical pieces, short epideictic essays, and letters; with very few exceptions they all date from the period 1140-1200. Krumbacher thought that the collection must have been brought together before the fall of Constantinople in 1204 with the aim of providing an anthology of the most admired examples of the rhetoric and belles-lettres of the period, possibly for future study and use by court orators. The codex is written in a distinctive hand which bears a close resemblance to that of Ambros. gr. 350 and 352, two manuscripts containing works by Nicholas Mesarites;ls

8 ' Specimen pages from Ambros. gr. 352 (F 96 sup.) are reproduced by A. Heisenberg, Nikolaos Mesarites, Die Palastrevolution des Johannes Komnenos (Wiirzburg, 1907); id., Grabeskirche und Apostelkivche, I1 (Leipzig, 1908), pl. 11.

there is much contraction and abbreviation, and the letter-forms abound in cursive flourishes. The writing is dated to the thirteenth century by Miller and Krumbacher, and to the fourteenth by Regel; the earlier date would seem the more probable on palaeographic grounds. In our transcription of the Greek text we have respected the spelling of the manuscript except for the accentuation. The marginal notes which are of no interest (they consist of the usual Qp(aiov), uq(p~iwoui), c4-r (EI), and lemnisci) have been omitted, and no account has been taken of the punctuation of the manuscript. The division into paragraphs is our own. I t has been our aim to keep the translation as close to the Greek as possible; if it suffers from obscurity and pomposity, the blame for these faults should be laid on the Byzantine author.

Description of t h e most holy G r e a t Church of God, spoken a t t h e t i m e of t h e d e d i c a t i o n f e a s t of t h e s a m e most holy Church by t h e v e r y learned deacon a n d Teacher of t h e Gospels, Michael of Thessalonica, who was also Master of t h e O r a t o r s . 1. "0 YE p j v ~ y ~ a l v 1 ~ 6 p EO{KO$ vo~ 06~05 h5 pkv ~ a l v b BsV XPIUT+~ a l ~ f i A $ a-rpsia~ A6yq p j Trahatobp~vo~, &Ah' Bv - r a h @ 61a-

1.Verily this temple of which the encaenia are being celebrated, as it is new in Christ, and, by virtue of the word of worship has not U~VWV K O ~~ I ~ T E ~ ~ i cUf W i ~ ,VK &V ~ T I X & V W L I I grown old, but remains in the same state and 5 T O ~ Trbhat T ~ ~ ~ V ~ T~hOT U~ ~, V~ ~ E T I K ~ Vshall continue to do so in future, even though o - r b p a ~ a , OS 68 ~ a t v b~~ a T@ i eabpa~t, the gates of death (that is, the mouths of the ~ ~ Y ~ U TOSTW O $ K C X T ~ Th dpq ~ E T C ~ ~ U I O ~ ~ E V O ~ , gape against it, so is it new in its heretics) Kal T & v TK~~ T WTrpohEiTwv 6Ua T ~ X V Qhamarvels, being so exceedingly great as it p o i h a xeipas Gqptovpyei, ~ a Ki a h h l u ~ o03~ towers upwards like the mountains and leaves 10 T W u-rihpwv Kal p E ~ hyfipa5, &S EI K(X\ hrbp below all those things which art sets its hands TOV X ~ ~ V O CyoG~o, V ~ aEIS i TO T O ~ T O VP~iepov to create, and so exceedingly beautiful as it O ~ K ~ P C ~ T T E65 V ' K C ( ~ T~ppalEtT ~ V6 ~ &S 1 ~ shines forth, for all its age, as though it had f i y p 6 ~ q s6th ~ b Trav-rq v xpvu6v. -rjv p8v o h been raised above time itself, and had not 6!J X p l o ~ g6tT)VEKfi KalV6TqTa T O ~ T O U K&V , been immersed in its current. How its counte15 ty~alvicq-rat vcv, 6 ~ 8 a h p o i ~ ~UTIe~wp~iv nance flashes forth like liquid through the yuxl~oiy,~b 6' & ~~i a l v b vTOG Bappov~~ a i gold which is everywhere! The enduring new~ a ~i o i 6$apilovutv en' a h + , &ve&!ihha~~ov ness in Christ of this building (even though its consecration is celebrated now) can be 6 pEy6eE1 Kai 0 x i ) p a ~ ~ l a T+i ehq$ ~ t p i q

5 cf. Iob, 38.17; Ps. g:13; 106:18 I 3 fiyp6-q~cod.

C Y R I L M A N G O and J O H N P A R K E R ~ o 0 ~i w~p i v o 1r ~r a p i x ~ ~ a lElo~t , piv i6io0a1 20 ~ a dq0aApoi5 i ~ a ci j ~B~au-ra ~ a ~ a e p i j u a t i 0aOpa ~ a 0 e' a w ~ h~ a rrpbs i &AAqAa, ~ a ~b 06 x ~ i p o v68 ~ a Aby? i ~ r a v ~ o 0 aow~qopeiv. v rrsp1qyjuau0a1, 6oov tvl, pfi y h p ~b r&v, i r r ~ i~ a p6y15 i TOOT' a h 6 TI^ Abyow r p 6 25 qaulv Evu~qo&pavo5T@ r r a v ~ iirretiot, r o t ~ i h w $BXOVTI ~ a pia ~ p @ .

observed with spiritual vision; but the eternal novelty of wonder, which remains unaltered even for those who frequently visit the church and which it provides for the beholders by its grandeur and form and the costliness of the material-this can be seen with the eyes, so that all points can be scrutinized both in themselves and in their connection with each other, and admiration brought together from all sides. Nor is it less seemly to describe the church in words, as far as this is possible; not the whole of it, however, since one who had set forth this as the occasion of his discourse would have difficulty in going through the entire subject, it being so great and various.

2. The outermost enclosure indeed, at 2. Tbv pkv o h ~CWT&TW rr~pipohov,~ a 0 ' 5v d rroAirxah~o$~ i w vd r v k x ~ t~ b vivaiplov which the brazen column raises aloft the aerial horseman, against whom many gusts v i r r r r a o ~ j v ,Q rrohhh piv r r o h A a ~ 6 0 ~BTIwhistle from all sides and the winds flutter v ~ a &vipwv i irrt~tvao30 o v p i - t ~ o v o ~rrvairpa~a their pinions (he, however, does not hear their uov-ral r r ~ i p v y ~ a5 i, r ~ b s6' oi168v & K O ~ E TQV I

threats at all, but bellowing like a bull mendrrrsthGv, &AA' i~rropv~chp~vo$ ~awpq6bv

oIov aces in return, as it were, those who so fiercely &v-rarrethai-ra~~ o 6 ti B w ~ ~~ o i r - r qrrpoop&hattack him)-this enclosure, and the straight TE O ~ rrapipohov, V ~ a ~i f i it v howot, TOOTOV way which gently rises out of it towards the 35 air~oOrrpb5 ~b iepbv dp0iav $pipa Grravaholy place, into which many other streets paivowuav, rrpb5 q v ~ a &Ahat i rrheiows pvpocome together, different ones into different ~ o p i auvp~&hAouo~v, ~ &AAq K ~ T ' &hAo pip05 parts of its length, so that there is one con~ ~ S ~ i ~ j~ V~T E V Eair-rijs, ~ a pia i rrauQv uwvjunction of them all leading into the narrow i p r r ~ w o t sy i v ~ ~ rartp b ~~a TOO O ~ K O UU T E V ~ 40 Ev9a T@ v 6 - r ~ r i r h a ~ & v o i y o v ~ a ~T , ~ O T ~ spaces of the building, where doors open to things, it seems to me, I

V T ~ ~ O V T I , the south-these lTapfi5Etv 6 0 ~ pot, 6 TOO ~ E T P ~ OQVP O should pass by, since my care is for the mean. Kai T ~ V7T~b$~ ~ ~ U P 6kO VAow-rqpa,

TETpaAnd likewise the lout& to the west-this is ywvov piv a r j ~ b v~ a ~i a h b v , r r h a ~ o i68 ~ four-sided and beautiful and is encompassed Cvarr~tAqppEvovo x j p a ~o-ravwrroO, l cb$ rraplby a border in the form of a narrow way, 45 8 i ~ t vrrav-ro~sv~ b Aow~qpa, v ~ a rrapa i T ~ S ~ i r 0 ~ &pa i a ~ ~ a i iy ~ a p u i aTOO ~ ~ ~ E ~ I ~ X O L J T O S which goes around the lout& on all sides, so that one may see, alongside the straight and 0~&u9at~ a T&S i air-roO paiov ~ E V T O I i x o i r o a ~ , transverse lines of that which surrounds it, doov ~ a 6Aov i 6Aov TOO ~ ~ p ~ y p a ( ~ o p~b ivou its own sides too which are smaller, inasmuch I2 3 v i y y p a ~ 6 p ~ E0iAa1 v ~ ~~ ~ ~ T TI I Oy iVv e o ~ a l~. a i as the whole of what is included is wont to be pfiv TpiTq TI5 &AAq Kai CXOT~ T ~ TETpaV 50 less than the whole of that which circumrrh~irpwv nap~oxfi T+ 6 ~ m i p w owprrapascribes it. And another, a third compass of T E ~ V E Tu~avwrr@' ~I ueilwv TE alj-rijs fi rr~pithe four-sided figures is stretched out alongpa~pos,6 s i { w ~ C r ~oqi r~u q ~~ a T iE A E U T ~ S .i~ side the second narrow way; its perimeter is V

yhp Tq$ 61ap&UEw$ TabTq$ 6lTi T ~ LI~OOV larger since it is the outermost and final one. V C T T E V O Ti K~ 62 ~ VTOO , Y ~ V O I T ' &V 55 E ~ U I T I T ~iUT1 From this passage one may enter the narrow E i $ Th 3lTalepa TOG ~ O V T ~ ~K&VTEO~EV OS, E~S way which is in the middle, and from this one ~b iapbv ~ p o ~ ~ p ~ ~6 t 6o Bp~Ka P,~~6s Aby05

Ei$ may reach the open courtyard of the loutz~, TOOTO rrCrAtv i r r a v a o i o w u ~ a r .

and thence go into the holy protemenismal-whence my discourse having departed, it is again restored thither. 1

1.e. the narthex.

TVI'ELFTH-CENTURY DESCRIPTION OF ST. SOPHIA

3. lluAGv 68 psy68q ~ a rrAj8q i ~ a i 60 h ~ r r ~ o u p y xahKoO, ia~ 6p6qou~TE K E K O ~ Y E U p8vous yqqi61 ~ aT& i 1~Aa-ropia~~ & h h q Boa , T E EV K i 0 0 l Kal Boa T O ~ X O U~~V ~ ~ O U U I(066Els V yhp -roixo$ r r ~ p l ~ o h a i oyupv65, u Aat v o u 5 X I T G V ~ Srrav-rwv &prrloxopivwv, iv' o 6 - r ~ ~ 65 ~ i r r o ~ p lr)r,a p a l ~ q ~ i~o vaTaO-ra i 61b ~b rrpoo&varrAoOv. 6AAa ~b rrpb TOO T E ~ ~ V O U S i ~ ~ i ~v Eo T ~ ~ U I ~ TE T ET ~ ~ ~ lTpb VV TOO, Kai fj TOO xpuooO u ~ l h r r v 6 ~ Byyir~ q ~ Eival TOO ~ a - r a o ~ & l srro~si ~ v vopiZ~oeat ~ b vX P U U ~ V . 70 ~ 0 3 5yap Gyp035 6qOaApo35 ~ f &j v ~ a u y ~ i a J o r r ~ p~upaivouoa,T ~ ~SK E ~ V WvV o ~ i 6 aE ~~ S ~ b vxpuobv i q d t v ~ a oT~ ~ V6php~vov, ~ a i ~ O K Eb ~ ~ uo~io8a T1 ~ K ~ ~ E V OAiOos S . 68 &AAa rro6arrfi r r ~ p ~ r r i r r q~y ~iot~o6opfj, TQ rrohuj 75 xp6y ~ aAi ~ i q61aptAAwpivq r r p b ~~ b xpvv D~V,K ; V ~ V ~ E I ~ T ~ T O o~ S ih~ouoa BK, 68 TOO tiveou~b v ~ ror o~l ~ i h o urrA8ov TI Bxouoa ~ a i Grrtp ~ b pov6xpouv v Xpuo6-v.

3. The great size and number of the doors, and the delicacy of their brasswork; the ceilings, adorned with mosaic cubes; the beauties of quarried stonework, both that which is in the columns and that which revets the walls (for there is no wall which is naked of its covering, all of them being mantled round in stone cloaks, if I may so express it) ; these things must also be passed over, less satiety should arise. But that structure before the nave, loftier than those which are before it2 [lacuna?] and the brightness of the gold almost makes the gold appear to drip down; for by its refulgence making waves to arise, as it were, in eyes that are moist, it causes their moisture to appear in the gold which is seen, and it seems to be flowing in a molten stream. But what manner of stonework is this that has fastened around the building, striving with its variegated coloring and smoothness against the gold, shining because of its smoothness and, because of its diversified bloom having something that surpasses even the gold, which is of one color?

4. But what are these things, compared 4. 'AAAa T i TaO-ra r r p b ~~h l v ~ b ps ~ y i e q with the internal greatness and beauty of this 80 ~ a Ki & A A ~~ i&VTIT~I-KOU j ~ TGV oirpaviwv antitype of the "tent of the heavens" which o~qvijs,ijv tiv8porro~p8v Errfita-ro, O E ~68 S man indeed has set up, although God has r r & v ~ w~ ~ i ipyaoias j ~ o u v ~ r r s h & p ~ ~1~ o; surely taken part in the work? There being, ~ ~ U Oyap U TOO ~ ~ O T E ~ E V ~oupPoh1~G5 U ~ ~ T O ~ symbolically, a triple entry yawning out of ~ i o 6 6 w v &vao~opoupivwv T~IITAGV ( p a ~ a the middle of the firotemenisma (for the holy 85 yap T& 8 ~ i aTois Bv ~p1dt61~ b vEva 6~61places are accessible to those who have been Gaypivo15 O~bv) TQ T ~ Vrrohirv apyupov 6 0 1 ~ taught that there is one God in the Trinity) rrapap~iyav-rl,65 Grrav-rtj r r p b ~~ a~ 1i0 6~ towards him who passes by the great quantity ~ireirs,c b ~E ~ STO &xavi$ 6 o i ~ &o v~i w y ~ ,~ 6 of silver which at once meets him near the TOUS p8v ~ i r p 3 ~ qCxwv ~ a cbs r r o h h a ~ Bv doors, the building lies open forming an im90 oopdt~wv pupla6as B ~ K U ~ O V E ~ V~L+JOU$ , 68 mense space, having a hollowness so capacious 6 0 0 ~Tfiv KEcpahfiV d v a ~ p i y a v ~KOpUpfiv a that it might be pregnant with many thouo iov o-rijoa~~ 0 3 6 5q0aApoIS~.0 6 ~ 0 s0 6 p a V Q sands of bodies and a height so great as to turn B o ~p jl EE K U P ~xpfipa TOOTO VaOO, K&VTas Pila5 EpaA~v hi y i j ~ '~ a xi ~ ~ p o r r o i q ~ o v the head, andmake the eyes stop still as it were at the zenith. So has the pile of this church 95 d p 0 p 0 ~X ~ U U ~6lEA8yx~l S pfi v o p i ~ ~ u 8KOoal its head in heaven," even though it ~ I K ~ V6 ,p8v yhp rr o A3 x a A K O ~ v o ~ & ~ E T ~ I "planted , TQ 68 r r o A u ~ p 3 o q~ i v aol u p p i p q ~~ ~& x 6a8 has cast its roots into the earth; and the gold p~psi-ra~ ~ a &rroAapwv i ~ a oirpavbv i EvGov proves that the hand-wrought roof should not T&S T 100 pi) K ~

T ~ X V QE ~~ T ~ ~ V

63 67 91 92 96

E ~ K ~ V ~ 6Aiyou S , 66~1 TOO rrirpyol ~ 8 vyap ~ \ j q u ~ i ~ , lTEplayCdyai, O I ~ ~ ~ O T U V T E

~ UTOIXE~OV V U ~ OTTOIE~V. V

cf. 11. 3, 57.

post rrpb air-roij lacunam suspicor.

an < K ~ T &~opucpfiv ) legendum ?

Il., 4,443.

~f.Il.,5,504;Od.,3,2.

be considered as that of the world, for the cosmic heaven has been named "the all~brazen," but this roof turns out to be "allgolden." Perchance it does indeed imitate heaven and, taking into itself the images of the elements, it hardly falls short of making a cosmos. For the beautiful piers, circuits of 1.e. the inner narthex.

C Y R I L M A N G O and J O H N P A R K E R 06 r p i v h f i y o ~ o l vfi finely-finished workmanship, standing apart, 6roSBtacrea1, -rh 66 four on either side, do not terminate before p ~ ~ a i x TpO~~ Ta W VK ~ O V E Siryqhai, at plv ET' receiving the roof upon themselves, and in 106 ~ l j e ~ i aioGcra~ v ypappfiv, at 61 x o p a v r ~ ~ G $ the spaces between are high columns, some olov d$E d KOKAOUrp b s Ethhfiha~r a p e y ~ h l going in a straight line, others as it were in a v6p~va1,T@ 61aq6pq Tiis o~&oew5~ a *$i dancing fashion inclining towards each other oiK060pq~~b o x j p a ouvs~apei~owoa~. -ra$ on a circle, mutually complementing the plan 4 KEqahi6a$ 6' air-rai~yhwqfi ~ a xpwo65, i of the building by the difference of their 110 $V ~ ~ E T T T O ~ P Y ~ U EbV ,6' ~ K ~ U ~ ~ U at E Vpiv ' stance. Sculpture has finely worked their -rij xp6q ~ A w p i l o v o l v&$ ~i a0~6eavIqwuav capitals, and gold has ornamented them. &.rrb yqs, at 6' &pw8aivov~a1,.rr&oal p l ~ p b v Some of them are greenish in color, as though ~ I T o u T I ~ ~ ~TQ E v~EUK@, ~ ~ X~WU(?(S 6' 0 6 ~ they ~ had grown out of the ground just there, ~aucsiasqopoiroal Ka-rhTb r a h m b v T[Ep cr I~ b v others are reddish, and all are lightly speckled 115 &vapapilov-ral -rh hi TGV KEqahi6wV j p i with white. Thus, wearing golden kausiai in o v -rijs r ~ p ~ a y w vipo$ yij~ o-rwa, ~ a%i & ~ ~ ppiv the old Persian fashion, they divide between ~ K U U T6~1 a v a ~ a 6r~a1p ' taw-rij, %&TEPOV 81 EIS themselves the arches that rest on their capiT ~ y V~ i ~ o v ~8p.rra1 a ~ a al b ~ q ~ ~ X E T -rh ~ I 6' . tals, and eachone lets one part of the curve rest B r ' a i r ~ a i 56rapQa ~ o i K&TW s c r w o ~ q p ~ ~ l o ~ upon itself and transmits the other part to 120 Tal &KPI@GS,~ a066Bv i Epyov 6i5 r o t ~ i ~r eapl i its neighbor, who receives it. The upper gal-rair~b, r h j v 871 KLOV 8 r l ~ i o v o sp a i v ~ l , leries which rest on these co2umns are exactly peiwv p&vE r i psilovos, -rh T ~ E ~ U 6B T~ ~a~i i j formed after the fashion of those below, and cpEp06~lJbpo(~Ufj$,>' E~'TT015 &V Y ~ U K ~ no task is performed twice for the same purq 6 p ~ o v~ o p i o ~ qyiveu8a1 v ~ pq-rpi. i j r6py01 pose, except that column goes on top of 125 6' & V ~ ~ & V T~EK SE ~ V TbV O ~ pkyav dpOcp0V column, that is, a smaller on a greater, and cpipouolv, 660 T ~ Vr a v ~ ao u v ~ ~ h o 6 p ~ v o v for the most part the same in form as that oqaipa~,Ehv -rh rkv-ra a6vewpai, ~ j pkv v QS which bears it, so that you might say that the daughter becomes a sweet burden to her ~ ~p ~1i L w.~ ar ~i p ~ k ~ o u &v, o a v- r j v 6' d s E~&TTW mother. Those piers rising up bear the r 241 ~ aEveoopivqv i T+ TEPI~XOVTI. 1 1 ~b p6v yap 130 ~ p b & $ r q h l c j ~ q v& V E ~ E I ~ ~T E~ &pa E V ~Kai V great roof, the whole of which is made up of two spheres, if I add all the parts together, p a e u v 6 ~ ~ v ooqaipas v p ~ y i o - r qofpai ~ row one being larger so that it might contain the T E T ~ ~ T ~ ~ ~ P6v, I O VKai Tb ~ p b 5l6cpUpOv other, the second smaller so that it might fit o6v6wo ~aS-ra b p o i w ~ ir.rro~oh~roi~p~vov, within that which comprehends it. For that oqaipas -rb $plow PET& -roil &VWT&TOU part which is raised up and hollowed out 135 jp~ocpa~pioupiav oqaipav owv0~uouo1v' towards the east being, as seems to me, the ~ ywviat ~ a cSs i a6015 68 T ~ oS i ~ 0 6 0 p qaf fourth part of a very large sphere, as is also ~i.rreiv~ i o o x a i T, E T ~ P oqaipa5 T ~ bpoqoup8vq that which similarly curves out into a bay to & K & U T ~- r, i ~ - r a p ~06ua1 s piav oqaipav ouvwestward? these two together being a hemia n a p ~ i l o u o ~ v~a6-rqv , E~&TTW T ~ rSpohasphere added to the hemisphere which is highXOP~UEI &V Ef5 140 p060q$. Ka\ E i E~&TTWV, est of all, will make up one sphere. And again, a i r ~ j v(-rb yhp 8uva-rbv yevkoeal 6166oBw, K&Vp j v w q a i v q ~ a l )~ ap lt p j o a ~ &v ~ ' 0 6 ~ ~ s the comers and, as one might say, recesses of the building4each one being roofed by the i ~b 6pGpevov %iapa-r6v TE rpij-rov ~ a&%afourth part of a sphere, being four in number, T O V o6pav6v, ~ 6 TE v ~ E ~ T E P OKC(\ V 6pcbll~vov. together constitute one sphere, this one lesser 145 p j yhp O ~ KZXEI ~ a TGV i UTOIXEIWV ivthan the previous one. And if the smaller will GCrhpa-ra, iva TI$ Ahya~vair-rb Bappfiog, ~ a i proceed into the other (for let that which is E I KK ~ ~ CV T ~ rav-r6$ ~ O V ; C U T 1 ptv &+'is BK&UT~, possible be granted even if it does not appear T ~ T T ~ P 6' E ~ a 6 ~ a 1 , CTTOIXE~OV ;V 6~0so), then in this way the spectacle that is here yp&qOUoa' fi yhp yivECJ1g K6KhCp KU\ OUpT ~ U U ~ ~iKaTkpweEV E S

E ~ S~ ~ V T OTG~S V6poqov

109-10

j pgv] jpiv cod.

120 TOIE~T~I] r o ~ ~ i dcod.

al

xqgff. cf. Arist., De gen. et corr., I1 4, 331a-b.

observed may imitate both the first, invisible heaven and the second that is visible. Does it not have too the images of the elements, if one :' 1.e. 4

the eastern and western semidomes. 1.e. the four exedrae.

TWELFTH-CENTURY DESCRIPTION O F ST. SOPHIA 239

makes bold to say so, and a picture of the whole cosmos? Indeed, each arch (they are four in number) is here signifying one element. For the process of coming-to-be is circular and throws simple bodies towards each other; these, by using the same corresponding qualities pave the way to their genesis out of each other; accordingly each arch desires to be bent into the form of a circle, and to join with the nearest one, and so does this work of art imitate the whole universe.

5. So much for what is above. As for the sides-all is gold, all flowering stones separated from each other by little partitions. These stones nature has dipped in a fast and full-bodied dye, and art, by polishing their roughness, has almost turned them into mirrors. Thus has the stone, which is hard by nature, yielded, and, having emerged from the earth, it sparkles brilliantly and agreeably to the eyes. I t paves the floors and has been fixed round the walls, and in many respects convicts the flowers of being easily withered, since it is also cut from the mines of the earth, but preserves its flowery dye even after severance from its own root. One of these stones even puts on the guise of living flesh, and, whitish in color, displays all over itself what look like gaping veins of blood. A statue of such material would be a plausible counterfeit of a man.

5. Kal -ra piv &vw ~ o l a t - r a . -r& 6' 1K nhayiwv rrttv-ra xpuo6s, n&v-ra hi001 rrohuave~is, h-rr' hhhjhwv p l ~ p o cppaypoi~ i~ 61~1py6pavo1, 06s Ipaye piv fi (p\jo~$6euoorrol@ 160 T I V ~ ~ a 6Aoohpcp l pacpfj, ~ b x v q6' dtrrohci

ISWKE &vaua ~b -rpax\j p ~ ~ p ~ o ta Ai0ou~ K&TOTT~U. o d ~ w $~ ~ ~ K O Vhi0os 6 K U T ~ U E Q~UIV o ~ h q p b ~ $ a&va6\j$ l &nb y?$ha~-rrp6v TI pappaipe~ ~ a6cpeahpois l -rrpooqvbs. o-rphv165 v u o ~pBv BSapq, -roixols 6 i rrapa-rrbnqya, ~ a i rrohha TGV &vebwv ds erjyapdtv-rwv Ka-rqyopei, $K pa-r&hhwv piv yiis -rpqeal$~ aair-rbs, i o6Zwv 61 -rb &vf3opap&$~ a pa-ra l -rqv EK ~ i j s ISias PiZqs ~ o p j v .a i s 6' air-rGv ~ a ol a p ~ a 170 ZGoav K ~ ~ U ~ O K ~ ~ VT E~ T Vx~p6av I , piv fino~ E U K ~ I V ~ ~ E V Od $s, qhapia 6' aipa-rog &ao-rophpcva rrttv-rooe S E I K V ~ S~ ~ v T o C 'TOIot-ros irv hv6p1h~ ntBavG$ -rbv av6pa B ya\jua-ro. 175

6, Elav ~ a-raO-ra. l -rb SttneSov 68 nbhayo$ O ~ O V~

a T+l TA~(TEIK U ~ ~ O P Q K~ . U V E~a1 y&p TIVES 6 i v a1 -roi$ Ai0o1~& v - r ~ ~ pBneyeiu$ l ~ a 0 i j et$ ~ a66op ~ ~ a l pov-ral, d~e i ~ ahieov fipapotv dtva~ivqoa~.TOGTO -rb rrbhayo~ 180 brvbppqtc ~6A-rrovE ~ S&vapaivov-ra ~AIOV, ~ a i K \ ~ ~ U TQonap OS ~ ~ I U T O I ~ ~ ~T@O TpO~ ~ V O AapClv-r~, ~ a &AAou l B-rr' tihhcp (od-ro yap Kh-rrl-rGv ~ I T I K ) \ ~ Uyiva-ral E ~ V p i ouyxwpoupbvou B( dtv-r~nvoias-rot &ai Epxopbvou ~ \ j p a 186 T O $ Pfiyvuo0a1), fi iapa opav66vq lpaBp~ShBq, P a e p i ~BIT' &AAq ~ E T E W ~ ~ Z E T ~~I a. i s ~ a&AAq i S'&vw-r&~wpa0pia1 K U ~ T O U ~ ~ V ~Kupa-roI $ SGS ~ a&pyCpou l x\iol$ Bne-rrhjppupc -rrohu~tthav-ros.-roO-rov TOV eaiov ~ G p o v6 pq68 190 o-ra0pbv ~ a ~ a 6 ~ ~ 6 p &pyupo$ a v o $ ncp~cppa-rTEI TE ~ a~oopai. l TU piv KU)\IVS~IK@ o x j p a - r ~ 61' hpyupox6ou -rbxvqs ~ ~ o v w e a-ra i ~ ,6' Ev

176-7 cf. CIG 3797 (Chalcedone) ; Xcnarch. ap. Athen. I1 64.

~

6. So much for these matters. The floor is like the sea, both in its width and in its form; for certain blue waves are raised up against the stone, just as though you had cast a pebble into water and had disturbed its calm. This sea has broken out into a gulf to eastward, and one wave having been, as it were, piled up against its predecessor, and another against the next (for thus also does it happen during floods, the ever-approaching wave never allowing itself to be broken by the contrary wind), the sacred sphendoni has been formed into steps, and one step is raised up above another, and the highest steps which curve in billows have been flooded over by an effusion of silver worth many talents. Silver, exceeding all measure, has fenced round and adorned this holy place, here fashioned into columns of cylindrical form, wrought with the silversmiths' art, there made into a pyramid on a tetragonal base-or rather conical in

C Y R I L MANGO and J O H N P A R K E R form and having as its base that other figure beside the corners of the tetragon ( ? ) , so that it may rest on a circle in the manner of a cone, which a pyramid will not allow of,-indeed, taking also the form of a four-sided stones and becoming that which binds the columns together. And the holy and very capacious trough, wherein the mystical wine is pressed out, has nourished bunches of silver grapes around its own rim which drip with oil, but not with must, because they have not yet ripened, nor has time put a dark blue patina on them, but they show all the whiter against the effusion of gold elsewhere. 7. 'E6 -ra KEKahvppkva ~QVEIV EviTOG o x j ua-ros &eacbpq-ra ~ a -rGj, i A6yq Ka~ahEiiTwv ~ i h a y o sE( 06 a h a , &Ah' i-rrl ~b I6aqos q a p h &-rro~oh.rrweijvalv6pq rr~hayous-rb ~ E ~ OE~~UTOV. V E U T l TIS i ~ e p b & V~T E G ~ E V E' KE^ G~lrPaot~,~ a TT~OUOKB~AEI i T O ~ T6 ~ i ~ p b ~ 6~piPas,Kae&ITEp EY TIS qop-ris, ?va 6' &KGpav-ros d v q ~ adrpyup&s \ & y ~ 6 p a Ts ~ ~Si o v a s 6vo6av xahq rrpbs ~b EGacpos. ~veTTopE6cra-ro v 6 i ~ a ~l b -rrohGv Eipyupov j qop-ris. -ri irv A k y o ~ u~~ a rrcpl i -rrploph-rwv, 61' Bv drvapaivalv ~ J T I E ~ S -rbv ~ K ~ ~ P c s ~v Ta~Ti , ~ V Aol-rrjv I T ~ l ~ t h i a- rVi j ~6poqoGoq~b h q air-r6v, ~ ~ c j v o u~~ohvo-r~qCtvou~, ~ K ~ K ~~ Y op~itov-ra~ ~ r u h i G ~Tlva & o-roas, x o h i r ~ ~ h ~ u po~Crptqov, ov ~ K T T E ~ I I ~ V~ T ~ aK i~ K ~ W j pVi o q ~ aI rir 1 ~ 6 ~ h w v -rh nav-ra xpuoiy popqaG~~o-rop~ua-ra, 16uavov ttpyupov ;-rr& 6' irv p i EtaTOG uhpov -rrdoolp~,G~aypacp~lv i86hwv Ka\ - r a ~xpuo&s bv-rws .rr-rap\iyas - r q ~& p w p j t o u T T E ~ I O T E ~ ~ S T ~ ~SK K ~ T J U (~P ~ T )S~ \~; K E ~ V T ) VT, ~ & V v~llTipa~. -rahqv, - r j v ~ a e jpbs. ' &Aha cpdpe, pdpw -rqv -rota6~qvxpiuas &1~oh6owi ~ ~ p ~ o - r e p ~ & va, l TOGTOyhp E ~ K ~ ~ PT W f a Sp 0 1 ~ 1 & ~ 0 ~T aTl O. ~b ~ u6pov ; -ris j u i v Eihhos x p j u s ~ ,Ihv p i Aavi6, 6 afip~pov&v~trrcbv,&s &pov d-rri KEcpahqs;

***

210

215

220

225

230

197 TETP~ITQGOU] fort. -r~-rpa-rr66ou

209 Verbum excidisse videtur.

219 holrr~)v]lectio dubia.

221 UK&PI~OS cod.

229 cf. Gen. 8:s-12.

231 &AAo cod.

232 Ps. 132:2.

7. I am alIowing those things which are covered over to remain unobserved in this schtma, and, abandoning them in my discourse, [I return] to the floor, the sea out of which we have said the holy sanctuary has been scooped, as the sea would do it. From there is a certain isthmus; at this spot there is a passage, and the holy tribune comes to shore at the isthmus, just as though it were a cargo-vessel, and that it may rest untossed by the waves, it lowers from above its anchors of silver, the columns, down to the ground. And the cargo-vessel has ferried in the great quantity of silver. What should I say about the steps, by which one may go up into the tribune, and the further varied material which roofs it over-many-wreathed cones, stoas dancing in a circle, a pattern with many sides, little gates which go out and around, halves of circles and epicycles cleft in two, all of silver whose form has been wrought with gold? How should I not fall away from the mean, wishing also to describe the wings, truly golden, of the blameless dove of the church? I mean that one, opposite to us; this one that is with us. But come now, having annointed it with myrrh, I shall release the dove. And indeed, I shall be using this proverb at a timely moment. Where is the myrrh ? Who else will deliver to us the oracle, if it be not David, he who would say today, "as is myrrh upon the head. . . ?" Or "four-footed stone" if me read Te-rpaisreferring to the flat sides of the ~ 6 6 0 Michael ~. ciborium which may have been arched, in which case the spandrels could be called "feet." But cf. Greg. Naz., Orat. XVIII, P G 35, col. I037 B (hieow -r~-rpccrr86ou).

TWELFTH-CENTURY DESCRIPTION OF ST. SOPHIA 241

Syrian imagines the universe as it was delineated by Cosmas Indicopleustes, namely as a rectangular box with four vertical walls and Byzantine literature has given us few a vaulted lid representing the "heaven of heavcomprehensive descriptions of St. Sophia. ens." Such ideas must naturally have seemed The principal ones are Procopius' De aedificiis, rather naive to the intellectuals of Constanthe pseudo-Homeric poem by Paul the Silentinople, who held the Christian Topography in tiary, and the legendary Diegesis.l To these low repute; Photius dismissesit in afew caustic we must now add the ekphrasis by Michael of sentences4 Michael's universe is spherical, like Thessalonica. The significance of this text is that of Ptolemy; more exactly, it consists of twofold: it provides information of an archaetwo concentric spheres, representing the visiological nature and at the same time gives ble and the invisible heaven. To arrive at this us a symbolical interpretation of the church comparison, he uses a somewhat strained argubuilding. As has been pointed out by Grabar ment. By adding the eastern and western and other scholars,2 the symbolism of the semidomes to the main dome of St. Sophia, Byzantine church is, broadly speaking, of he obtains a sphere, the outer or invisible three kinds: scriptural-topographical, theoloheaven. Then he adds up the semidomes of gical, and cosmic. The first explains the form the four exedrae and obtains a smaller sphere and furnishings of the church in terms of the which, for the sake of argument, as he puts it, places sanctified by Christ's earthly life, in could be regarded as being contained within other words as a miniature Holy Land; the the larger one. The smaller sphere is the visisecond, in terms of theological concepts such ble heaven. The four arches supporting the as the trinity of the Godhead or the two main dome represent the four elements; they natures of Christ ; the third regards the church, are curved and joined to one another, just as like Moses' tabernacle, as a small-scale model the process of generation or coming-to-be is of the universe. The first two interpretations a cyclical one and depends on the correspondpredominate in the Byzantine expositions of ing qualities (oO$oha) of elements which the church and the liturgy, such as those of are next to one anotherS5The resemblance of pseudo-Germanus, Theodore of Andida, and St. Sophia to the cosmos is therefore metaSymeon of Thessalonica. The cosmic explaphorical rather than concrete. nation, on the other hand, is seldom found in Michael's description follows a well-defined Byzantine texts, except for the banal comroute. From the Augusteon, the south foreparison of the dome to the vault of heaven. Its most consistent application to a specific court of St. Sophia, he moves to the atrium and thence into the narthex and nave. After church occurs in a Syriac hymn of the seventh century describing the cathedral of E d e ~ s a . ~ dwelling on general features of the structure, I t is of some interest, therefore, that Michael decoration, and pavement, he takes us to of Thessalonica should have recourse princithe sanctuary, and then to the solea and the pally to the cosmic explanation, with but a ambo. brief allusion to the theological one, when he The following remarks are intended to compares to the Trinity the three doors leadanalyse the specific information furnished by ing from the central bay of the narthex into Michael of Thessalonica concerning different the nave (4.83 ff .). parts of St. Sophia. I have made no attempt There is, however, a profound difference to discuss the highly stereotyped conventions between Michael's cosmological notions and and rhetorical devices of the ekphrasis. For those expressed in the Syriac hymn. The purposes of literary comparison we may quote, in addition to Procopius and Paul the SilenEd. Th. Preger, Script. orig. Constantinop., tiary, the description of the Pharos church by I (Leipzig, I ~ O I ) , pp. 74-108. the Patriarch P h o t i ~ s two , ~ sermons by the "Le tdmoignage d'une hymne syriaque sur COMMENTARY

l'architecture de la cathkdrale dJEdesse," Cahiers arche'ologiques, I1 (1g47), p. 54ff. Cf. 0. Demus, Byzantine Mosaic Decoration (London, 1948), p. 15f. French trans. by A. Dupont-Sommer, Cahiers arche'ologiques, I1 (1g47), p. 29ff.

Bibliotheca, cod. 36. Aristotle, De gen. et corr., 11, 4. 6 Bonn ed., along with Codinus, Excerpta de antiquitatibus, p. ~gqff.;English trans. by C. Mango, T h e Homilies of Photius, Dumbarton Oaks Studies, I11 (1958)~ p. 177ff.

242

CYRIL M A N G O and J O H N P A R K E R

Emperor Leo VI,7 the poem of Constantine R h o d i u ~the , ~ description of the Holy Apostles by Nicholas Mesarites,g of the Augusteon by Pachyrneres,lo etc., while Michael's geometrical intricacies call to mind those of Choricius.ll 1. Exordium. Cf. Leo V I , Homily 28 :12 the immaterial or spiritual beauty of the church can be expressed only by the heavenly spirits; but the visible beauty of the church can and should be expressed in fairness to its architect. Pachymeres on the other hand13 and Manuel Chrysolorasf4 declare that the beauty of St. Sophia is altogether inexpressible and mystical. 2. The Augusteon. Note the use of the term ~rspipohos. After the sixth century the Augusteon is always referred to as a court of St. Sophia, and not as a forum. Terms such as Trpoaiihlov, &hi, aiAaia, etc., are usually applied to it.16 The "aerial horseman" is Justinian's, or rather Theodosius' famous equestrian statue set up on a high pillar.16 The Ed. Akakios, A~OVTOS TOG tocpoU Travvyqp~~oi (sic) A6yo1 (Athens, 1868), pp. 243ff., 274ff. Cf. A. Frolow, "Deux Bglises byzantines d'aprks des sermons peu connus de LCon VI le Sage," Etudes byzantines, 111 (1g45), p. 43ff. 8 Ed. E. Legrand, Rev. des kt. grecques, I X (18961, P. 32ff. 9 Ed. G. Downey, "Nikolaos Mesarites, Description of the Church of the Holy Apostles," Trans. Anzer. Philos. Soc., N.S., XLVII, pt. 6 (1957), P- 855ff. 10 Bonn ed., along with Nicephorus Gregoras, 11, p. 1217ff. 11 Laud. Marciani I, $ 18ff.; Laud. Marciani 11, § 37ff. (Choricii Gazaei opera ed. Foerster-Richtsteig [Leipzig, 19291, pp. 7ff ., 37ff. (Cf. G. Downey, "Description of the Church of S. Stephen a t Gaza," in E. Baldwin Smith, The Dome (Princeton, 1g50), p. 155ff. 12 Ed. Akakios, p. 244. l3 op. cit., p. 1218. 14 Veteris ac Novae Romae comparatio, PG 156, cols. 48-9. l 5 Cf. R. Guilland in 'E~r~rqpis 'Eralp. BvLavr. I.~ov€iBv,XVIII (1948), p. 161ff. ; C. Mango, The Brazen House (Arkaeologisk-kunsthist. hleddelelser, Kong. Danske Videnskab. Selskab, IV, 4 [Copenhagen, 1g5g]), p. 46 and note 56. 1 6 The voluminous bibliography on this monument is given by Phyllis Williams Lehmann, "Theodosius or Justinian?" The Art Bulletin, XLI (1g5g), p. 3gff.; cf. my remarks on Mrs. Lehmann's article, ibid., p. 351 ff. For yet another mediaeval reference to this monument see M. Izeddin, "Un texte arabe inBdit sur

term ~ r o h 6 x a h ~refers o~ to the bronze revetment of the column shaftz7which was removed by the Crusaders.l8 The statement that the route from the Augusteon to the portals of St. Sophia ran gradually uphill is quite accurate. Today the slope is not apparent (in fact, one steps down into the courtyard of St. Sophia), but it must be remembered that the original pavement of the Augusteon lies about 2.50 m. below the present street level. 2. 42 ff. The Atrium. Michael's account is, unfortunately, very obscure. I do not understand precisely what he means by the three borders or passages that encompassed the loutt?r,or by the straight and transverse lines. Nor is it entirely clear whether he uses the term Zout&r to denote the atrium as a whole, or merely its fountain; if the latter, we must conclude that the fountain was rectangular.19Paul the Silentiary says that the fountain was made of Iassian stone and that the water gushed from a bronze pipe.20According to the Diegesis,21 the fountain had twelve "stoas" and stone lions out of whose mouths the water spouted. The Persian version of the Diegesis made in the late fifteenth century states that the fountain was of a single piece of red stone, and was surmounted by a cupola within which were images of Christ with the twelve apostles and of the emperors from Constantine to Justinian. Around the fountain were eight cypress trees.22 3. 60. On the "delicacy of the brasswork," see supra, "Notes on the Work of the Byzantine Institute," p. 21off. 3. 66ff. The Inner Narthex ("the structure before the temenos, loftier than those Constantinople byzantine," Journal asiatique, CCXLVI, Pt. 4 (19581, p. 453ff. 1 7 Procopius, De aed., I, ii, 3-4; Cedrenus, I , pp. 656-7. 18Nicephorus Gregoras, 1,p. 276 ; Pachymeres, op. cit., p. 1218. 19 On the loutdr see esp. Beljaev, Byzantina, I1 (St. Petersburg, 1893), p. ~ogff.;Millet in Bull. de corr. hell., XXIX (1go5), p. 114f.; Ebersolt, Ste-So+hie de Constantinople (Paris, 1910), P. 5. 20 Descr. S. Sophiae, vv. 594ff. (ed. P. Friedlander, Johannes von Gaza und Paulus Silenti19121, p. 244). arius [ ~ e i ~and z i Berlin, ~ 21 P. 103. Z2 F. Tauer, "Les versions persanes de la lBgende sur la construction d'Aya Sofya," Byzantinoslavica, XV (1g54), p. 14.

TWELFTH-CENTURY DESCRIPTION OF ST. SOPHIA 243

which are before it"). The description of the narthex is couched in generalities. For the optical illusion created by the gold of the vaults (the transference of the spectator's agitation to the object seen), cf. Photius description of the Pharos church: "For the spectator, through his whirling about in all directions and being constantly astir, which he is caused to experience by the variegated spectacle on all sides, imagines that his personal condition is transferred to the obje~t."~~ 4. 86ff. The Nave. The "great quantity of silver" probably refers to the Imperial Door. The present wooden leaves of the door presumably date from 1847-4g,24 and not from the late thirteenth century as suggested by A n t o n i a d e ~That . ~ ~ the original door was of silver is confirmed by Constantine Porphyrogenitus and other sources.26The author of the Diegesis states that this door was of gilded silver.27 4. 105. The "dance" of the columns (in the exedrae). Cf. Procopius, De aed., I, i, 35 ( J a ~ s pIv xopq dtAAfiAo1~ kima~~m&pavo~).

4. 113. Golden kausiae. This refers to the gilding of the capital~.~8 I t is recorded that Romanus I11 (1028-34) adorned the capitals of St. Sophia with gold and silver.29 23 Bonn ed., p. 198; trans. Mango, p. 186. On this topic see 0. Wulff, "Das Raumerlebnis des Naos im Spiegel der Ekphrasis," BZ, XXX (1929/30), P. 531 ff. 24 See Tito Lacchia, I Fossati architetti del Sultano di Turchia (Rome, 1g43), p. 94. 25 X E ~ c p p~a ~i 'Ayias ~ j~ ~ Eocpias, I ,(Athens, 1907), p. 178. 26 De cerimoniis, Bonn ed., I , p. 192. Cf. Ebersolt, Ste-Sophie, p. 3, note 2. See also Dmitrievskij, Opisanie liturgiteskich rukopisej, I (Kiev, 1895), pp. 156-7; Synax. eccles. Constant., ed. Delehaye (Propylaeum ad Acta Sanctorum Nov.), 2 3 1 ~A ~drawing of the interior of St. Sophia looking west is preserved in Cod. Barb. lat. 4426, fol. 46', and is said to have been copied from an original by Ciriaco of Ancona. I t shows the valves of the Imperial Door divided into rectangular panels, each panel containing a cup represented in relief. The accuracy of this drawing is, however, subject to grave doubt. See Carlo Bertelli, "Notizia preliminare sul restauro di alcune porte di S. Sofia a Istanbul," Boll. dell' Ist. Centrale del Restauro, XXXIV-XXXV (1958), p. 111 and fig. 84. *' P. 97. 28 Ibid., p. 93. 29 Cedrenus, Bonn ed., 11, p. 497.

6.175 ff. The +avernet~t.~OThe general configuration of the pavement is probably the same today as it was in the twelfth century, except for patches due to the collapse of 1346, the removal of the chancel barrier, the ambo, and the solea, and other changes made by the Turks. The pavement consists of matched slabs of Proconnesian marble that were divided by at least five strips of verd antique placed transversely across the nave at somewhat irregular interval^.^^ These are probably the "blue waves" which Michael compares to the ripples caused by the dropping of a stone into a body of still water. Properly speaking, his metaphor would call for concentric ripples, but we should not look for such literal correspondence. The dark strips were usually called "rivers." Theodore of Andida, on comparing the bishop's entrance to Christ's appearance at the river Jordan, says, "For this reason, it seems, the name of rivers ( n o ~ a p o i ) is given to the strips of dark marble that lie in the floor of the Great Church like ruled lines (8iuqv 6 p 8 i v ~ v ) spaced a t moderate intervals from one another."32 A Sinaitic manuscript (no. 286) mentions the third "river" (TP~TOV T OT&~IOV), counting from the east, in connection with the service of December zznd.Z3 The Diegesis, on the other hand, speaks of four strips (?cpiva~) as having been allegedly made by Justinian to represent the four rivers of paradise and to serve as stations for penitents.34 Further on, however, the same text adds that another floor was laid after the collapse of the dome (in 558); this consisted of Proconnesian marble representing the earth and green marble "in likeness of the rivers that enter the sea."35 6. 18off. The Apse. Continuing his nautical metaphor, Michael compares the apse 30 On Byzantine descriptions of pavements see Frolow, op. cit., p. 55ff. 31 I owe this information to Mr. R. L. Van Nice. The pavement of St. Sophia remained covered with carpets until 1934-5, when the building was transformed into a museum. Antoniades was able to note only one strip of verd antique between the great western piers (op. cit., 11, p. 37) ; the same observation is repeated by E.H.Swift, HagiaSophia (NewYork, 1940),p.71. 32 PG 140, col. 436C. 33 Dimitrievskij, op. cit., I, p. 157. 34 Pp. 102-03; note appar. to roz,,: quatuor autem venas virides. 35 Ibid., pp. 107-08.

244

CYRIL MANGO and JOHN P A R K E R

to a gulf, the synthronon to breakers rising one above the other, the solea to an isthmus and the ambo to an anchored freighter. This last represents a variation on the imagery of the Silentiaq~,who compares the ambo to an island, or rather a peninsula joined by a narrow neck of land to the continent (the raised e synthronon. This appears s a n ~ t u a r y ) .T~h ~ to have consisted of seven steps3' with a semicircular passage underneath, as in St. Irene. Michael's indication that the upper steps were covered with silver is confirmed by Paul the T h e chancel-barrier. MichaelmereSilentiar~.~B ly mentions its silver columns, a detail previously known from the S i l e n t i a r ~and ~ ~other sources. The ciborium. From the Silentiary's detailed description40 we learn that the ciborium was made of silver and consisted of four columns supporting an eight-sided pyramidal roof. Michael appears to be saying the same things, but in a more muddled way. Compare also Photius' account of the ciborium of the Pharos church,41 and that of the church of the Holy Apostles by mesa rite^.^^ The l6nos. This object, a large trough or basin decorated around its rim with a vine motif in silver, does not appear to be mentioned in other sources. I t must have been used for the preparation or mixing (rather than for the "pressing out") of the eucharistic wine, a rite that is normally carried out in the prothesis. It is known that St. Sophia had no distinct prothesis, such as is found in later Byzantine churches; whether any particular part of St. Sophia, as distinct from the sanctuary, was used as a prothesis is a subject that has often been discussed, but no definite conclusion has been reached.43Antoniades sums up his views Descv. ambouis, v. 2 2 4 f f . 94. :js Descv. S . Sophiae, v. 3 6 5 f f . Antoniades, op. cit., 11, pp. 127-8, incorrectly assumes t h a t all t h e steps were covered w i t h silver. 39 Descr. S. Sophiae, v. 689. 40 Ibid., v. 7 2 0 f f . 41 B o n n ed., p. 198 ; trans. Mango, pp. 186-7. 42 Op. cit., 3 38. 6. 4 3 J . M . Neale, A History of the Holy Eastern Church, I ( L o n d o n , 1850), pp. 240-1 ; E . Freshfield, " O n Byzantine Churches, and t h e Modifications m a d e i n their Arrangement owing t o t h e Necessities o f t h e Greek Ritual," Archaeologia, X L I V (1873),pp. 383-92; L e t h a b y and Swainson, The Church of Sancta Sophia, Constantinople ( L o n d o n and N e w Y o r k , 1894), :j6

" Diegesis, p.

on the position of the prothesis as follows: "At the time of Justinian it may have been in the left-hand side of the bema, i. e. within the precincts of the sanctuary; between 574 and I317 the prothesis may have been in the form of a conch outside the northeast wall, but this is not very plausible; and between 1317 and 1453 it was, it appears, in the north aisle."44In view of this uncertainty, Michael's mention of the 16nos is of some interest. Although he does not specify where this was placed, it would appear from the context that it was in the sanctuary proper and that it was a permanent fixture. 7. 211 ff. The isthmus. The same term is used by Paul the Silentiary with reference to the s01ea.~~ The ambo. Michael mentions the following features: The silver columns. These are the eight columns supporting the platform of the a m b ~ T.h~e ste$s, ~ i. e. the two flights of stairs, east and west, leading up to the platform. The zaried nzaterial of the roof. According to the Silentiary's description, the ambo had no canopy. Whether a canopy was subsequently added,47or whether Michael is referring to the wooden architrave of the peristyle, it would be difficult to say. T h e cones with m a n y crowns are probably the ornamental trees of conical shape.48 T h e many-sided outline. The term u ~ a p ~ p oiss probably used to to the Silenmean " g r ~ u n d p l a n . "According ~~ tiary's account, the platform of the ambo was elliptical in shape,60 while the surrounding peristyle consisted of two semicircle^.^^ Such pp. 75-6; Beljaev, Byzantina, 11, p. 1 1 6 f f . ; Antoniades, op. cit., 11, pp. 131-42; Ebersolt, Ste-Sophie, pp. 20-21. 44 Op. cit., 11, p. 142. 45 Descr. ambonis, v. 235. O n t h e solea see X y d i s i n The Art Bulletin, X X I X ( 1 9 4 7 )p.~ I I ff. 46 Paul Silent., Descr. ambonis, v. 1 0 5 f f . 47 T h e last a m b o o f S t . Sophia, described i n 1403 b y Clavijo (Embassy to Tamerlane,

trans. G u y L e Strange [London, 19281, p. 74)

did have a canopy: c f . tentative reconstruction

b y Antoniades, op. cit., 11, p. 62.

48 Paul Silent., Descr. ambonis, v, ~ g g f fO .n tree-shaped candelabra see Grabar, " Quelques observations sur le decor d e l'eglise d e QartBmin," Cahiers arche'ologiques, V I I I ( 1 9 5 6 ) ~ p. 8 6 f f . 40 C f . Mark t h e Deacon, V i e de Porphyre, 3 7 5 , ed. GrCgoire and Kugener (Paris, 1930), p. 60 and n o t e 2 ; additional note, p. 132.

50 Descr. ambonis, vv. 58-60.

61 Ibid., v v . 130-4.

TWELFTH-CENTURY DESCRIPTION O F ST. SOPHIA 245

an arrangement explains Michael's reference to "half-circles" and his mention of little doors which may have been the two doors (southeast and northwest) opening through the peristyle;52but it does not account for the "many-sided outline" or for the "segments of epicycles." An efikyklos is, properly speaking, a small circle whose center lies on the circumference of a larger circle, so that Michael appears to be speaking of exedra-like projections from a circular space. By a strange coincidence Lethaby and Swainson's reconstruction of the ambo shows a platform with two exedra-like projection^,^^ an arrangement that is not substantiated by Paul the Silentiary. Antoniades reconstructs a circular ambo, and Xydis an 52 53

Ibid., v. 173ff. O p . cit., p. 54.

elliptical one. In view of Michael's description, we should perhaps postulate a partial reconstruction of the ambo between the sixth and the twelfth century. 7. zz5ff. The Dove. The concluding reference to a dove, cryptic as it is, appears to apply to a specific object ("I mean that one, opposite to us"). A golden dove did in fact hang over the holy table of St. S0phia.~4Cf. also the golden doves decorated with precious stones in the church of the Pharos.55 54 Antony of Sovgorod in Mme B. de Khitrowo, Itine'raires rzissos e n Ovient (Geneva, 1889),p. 92; cf. Lethaby and Swainson, op. cit., p. 72; Antoniades, ofi. cit., 11, p. 108. 55 Nikolaos Mesarites, Die Palastrevolution des Johannes Komnenos, ed. A. Heisenberg (Wurzburg, 1907))p. 35; cf. Ebersolt, Le grand palais de Constantinople (Paris, I ~ I O ) , p. 108.

http://www.jstor.org

LINKED CITATIONS - Page 1 of 1 -

You have printed the following article: A Twelfth-Century Description of St. Sophia Cyril Mango; John Parker Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 233-245. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C233%3AATDOSS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X

This article references the following linked citations. If you are trying to access articles from an off-campus location, you may be required to first logon via your library web site to access JSTOR. Please visit your library's website or contact a librarian to learn about options for remote access to JSTOR.

[Footnotes] 16

Theodosius or Justinian? A Renaissance Drawing of a Byzantine Rider Phyllis Williams Lehmann The Art Bulletin, Vol. 41, No. 1. (Mar., 1959), pp. 39-57. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0004-3079%28195903%2941%3A1%3C39%3ATOJARD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-%23 16

Theodosius or Justinian? A Renaissance Drawing of a Byzantine Rider Phyllis Williams Lehmann The Art Bulletin, Vol. 41, No. 1. (Mar., 1959), pp. 39-57. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0004-3079%28195903%2941%3A1%3C39%3ATOJARD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-%23

NOTE: The reference numbering from the original has been maintained in this citation list.

A New Manuscript of the "De Cerimoniis" Cyril Mango; Ihor Šev#enko Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 247-249. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C247%3AANMOT%22%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A Dumbarton Oaks Papers is currently published by Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/doaks.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Sun Mar 9 08:05:58 2008

A NEW MANUSCRIPT OF THE DE CERIMONIZS CYRILMANGO and IHOR S EV~ENKO

UR text of the D e Cerimoniis by Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus is based almost exclusively on one manuscript, the Lipsiensis Rep. i. 17 (or Bibl. Urb. 28) which has been held to be of the end of the eleventh, of the twelfth, or even of the early thirteenth century. The report of its destruction during the Second World War is apparently unfounded.' In addition to the Lipsiensis, two other manuscripts have been known, but both of these contain only tiny parts of the text: the Hieros. S. Sepulchri 39 (saec. XII-XIII) which preserves a portion of the Cletorologion of Philotheus,* and the Laurent. Plut. 55,4 (saec. X ) of which only one folio (~r-I") pertains to the Book of Cerem~nies.~ The recent catalogue of the manuscripts of the Oecumenical Patriarchate by Aimilianos Tsakopoulos has drawn our attention to Cod. Chalcensis S . Trinitatis (125) 133 containing works of St. Ephraem Syrus. The

0

1 &I.Richard, Rkpertoire des bibliothtques et des catalogues des manuscrits grecs, 2nd ed. (Paris, 1958), p. 131, no. 482; J. Irigoin, "Pour une Btude des centres de copie byzantins," Scrifitorium, XIII/z (1g5g), p. 179 and note I . Professor Irigoin stresses the uniqueness of the Lipsiensis which he attributes to the tenth century. He further suggests that this ms, as well as a few others connected with the literary activity of Constantine VII, were kept in the imperial library "oh l'on n'avait pas licence de les recopier' (p. 180). The existence of a second ms of the De Cerimorziis may somewhat invalidate this hypothesis. There appears to have been yet a third ms, now represented by a single folio of the Laurelit. Plut. 55,4 (see infra, note 3). 2 Corresponding to pp. 726-36 of the Bonn ed. This text has been collated by F. I. Uspenskij in Izvestija Russk. Arkheol. Inst. v Konstant., 111 (1898), p. 98ff., and utilized by J. B. Bury in his ed. of the Cletorologion: The Imperial Administrative System. in the N i n t h Century, British Academy Supplemental Papers, I (London, 1911). Uspenskij (p. 101) observes that the Cletorologion must have circulated as an independent treatise. 3 Corresponding to pp. 449-54 of the Bonn ed. See A. Vogt's ed. of the De Cerimoniis, I (Paris, 1935), p. vii, note I.

author of the catalogue states that 116 folios of this manuscript are a palimpsest and that the original, erased text is a historical one, since it contains such words as ma6&p1os, ~ ~ p o ~ o v o ~ & prirom~p,i ~ ~ o s ,m p a q y 6 5 , e t ~ . ~ A microfilm of this manuscript, obtained through the gracious permission of the Holy Synod, has enabled us to ascertain that the earlier text is none other than the De Cerimoniis. The observations that follow are based on an examination of the microfilm alone. The manuscript is a membranaceus and is mutilated both at the beginning and at the end. I t consists of 281 folio^;^ of these, fols. 31-39> 64-93, 126-132 and 212-279, i.e. in reality 117 in all, are palimpsest. The nonpalimpsest folios have twenty to twenty-two lines per page; in the palimpsest folios there are twenty-eight lines of scriptura inferior and, as a rule, twenty-five of scriptura superior. The present contents of the ms are as follows:

inc. (UE) 11 ambv ayvbv ~ ( p q o o v = Ephraem, De virtute. The text begins in the middle of cap. ix (Assemani, S. Ephraem S y r i opera omnia, I, 2zgE) and goes down to the end of cap. x. gV:In illud, aftende tibi i p s i (Assemani, I , 230ff .). 31': N o n esse ridendum (Assemani, I, 254ff .). 3gV:De vita spirituali (Assemani, I, 258ff.). 54r: De recta vivendi ratione (Assemani, 11, 56ff.).

65V: Beatitudines (Assemani, I, 282 ff .) .

7oV: Beatitudznes aliae (Assemani, I , zgz ff .).

76V: Paraeneseis (Assemani, 11, 72ff.). On

fols. 181'-188r, after Paraenesis 44 (according to Assemani's numbering), II:

"~plypacpl~bs KaT&Aoyo$ T ~ Vx~lpoyphcpwv PlPhloei~qsTOG OIKOV~EVIKOG na~plapx~iow,

77s

11 (Istanbul, 1956), pp. 152-3. 5 The folios are numbered, somewhat haphazardly, from I to 279; two, which we may call 6gbis and 2 ~qbis,have been overlooked.

C Y R I L M A N G O and I H O R is inserted the opuscule De Heli sacerdote (Assemani, 111, 6ff.), after which the text of the Paraeneseis resumes. 215" : De humilitate (Assemani, I , 299ff .). 246": De divina gratia (Assemani, 111, 42ff.). 2j2r: De morbo linguae (Assemani, 11, 27gff .). 263r: Testamentum (Assemani, 11, 23off .) . This breaks off with the words Ev ~ p a x c b 6 ~ (sic) ~611(~fc9)= Assemani, 11, 245B. The non-palimpsest folios appear to be in three or even four different hands. The script is archaizing and consequently difficult to date. I t cannot, in any event, be earlier than the eleventh century, but may be considerably later. There are quire marks in the lower margin, extending from 7 on fol. 6" (Iast folio of a quire) to 43 on fol. 274'. I t appears that the palimpsest folios are a later insertion to fill the gaps of a defective manuscript. The quire marks are either contemporary with the restoration of the manuscript or, as seems more probable, later. This may be deduced from the fact that one large gap, amounting to approximately one quaternion, was allowed to remain between fols. 109" and 110' (between E ~ S-rb 6pGv Go-ripqpa = Assemani, 11, IOZA and ~666s~ a .rrapaxpiipa i = Assemani, 11, 1o8A). The numbering of the quires takes no notice of this lacuna. The scriptura inferior of the palimpsest folios appears to be of the eleventh century, a conclusion that is corroborated by the character of the rulings. In most cases only three lines of the original text per page have not been overwritten, though they have been erased: one a t the top and two at the bottom. Naturally, the marginal scholia have not been overwritten either. In addition to this, there are five instances where about half of the page of the original text is legible, and two pages that have not been overwritten at all. The overwriting falls in most cases exactly over the lines of the original text, which makes decipherment difficult. On only two folios (267 and 272, surely a folded sheet) is the original script inverted with relation to the upper one. When the manuscript of the De Cerimoniis was broken up for re-use, the sequence of its folios was thoroughly disturbed; this means that the text of each folio has to be identified separately. After a preliminary examination

SEVCENKO

we are in a position to state that our manuscript includes parts of both Books I and I1 as well as the Cletorologion; Book I1 and the Cletorologion, however, appear to be much more copiously represented than Book I. The number of textual variants with regard to the printed edition is very considerable, so that our manuscript surely does not belong to the family of the Lipsiensis. I t is naturally premature to assess the importance of the new manuscript before its text has been more fully deciphered. Two examples will have to suffice for the present. On page 681 of the Bonn edition is given the formula of salutation addressed to the Bulgarian envoys. This includes the sentence: . r r t j $ ~ ~ o u6oKav&pm ~v KE~VOS ~ a6 iBowhias ~ a p ~ & v o $ l ol utoi TOG EK ~ E O Gtxpxovros Bouhyap{a~~ a T& Aori-r& &oG d ~ v a .In view of the consid-

erable literature that has been devoted to the elucidation of these terms,6 it is of interest to note that our manuscript has a scholion at this point (fol. 67V) which reads: io~Cov67(1) ~ 6 &v p x 6 n o v Bouhyapt (as) ol uloi ofiT(o~)E~lpi3vroKavap~iK~lvo(~) (Kai) 6 Pouhlas (-r>ap~avos. This, it is true, is almost a repe-

tition of the text; but it does confirm the spellings Kalzartikeinos and B d i a s tarchalzos which have been repeatedly questioned, and it establishes that these were titles conferred on the sons of the kings of Bulgaria; not their proper names.' The second example is of greater interest. The table of contents of Book I1 (Bonn ed., p. 513) lists, amongst others, the following titles: 41. "Ooa ~ 1 6 7Qv q &Aha{ipwv. 42. 'Y~6pvqpa i v u~vr6pcp7 8 v Pao~kuo&rrrov@aol?dwv Ev 3 6 ~ ~ f p~y&Aq i ~ a Ei ~ N X E U T ~ T Kovo~aw1vovrr6kl J &TO TOG p ~ y a h o u ~ a E~UEPEUT&TOU l Kal &yiou Kwvo~av~ivou.I n the Lipsiensis, however,

only the beginning of chapter 41 is preserved and chapter 42 is entirely missing; according to Reiske's note (I, 641; 11, 754), one or more folia were lacking at this point. In reality the lacuna is quite considerable. Our manuscript has more of chapter 41 than the Lipsiensis (fol. 224V); it also contains three 6 Bibliography in Moravcsik, Byzantinotuvcica, 2nd ed. 11, (Berlin, 1958), p. 148, S.V.

~ a v & p -KE~VOS, r~ and p. 107, S.V. $ovhfa~. 7 Thus G. BalaSEev in Izv. Russk. Arkheol. Inst. v Konst., 1V/g (18gg),p. 219, has suggested that Boulias was a proper name.

f&@+w-aaa* e

Sf-

I. Codex Chalcensis S . Trinitatis (125)133, fol. 39'

2. Codex Chalcensis S . Trinitatis (125)133, fol. 67"

A NEW MANUSCRIPT OF T H E DE C E R I M O N I I S folia (126, 212, 214bis) that must surely belong to the lost chapter 42. These are written in the form of a chronicle with the names of the emperors in the margin. Folio 212 covers the period from Zeno to Phocas, folio z14bis from Heraclius to Tiberius Apsimar, and folio 126 from Alexander to Romanus 11. We may postulate the loss of one folio giving the story from Constantine I to Zeno, and probably two from Tiberius Apsimar to Alexander. We present here reproductions of two pages of our ms to serve as palaeographic

249

specimens. Figure I (fo1.3gr),ifzc.6 66 . r r a ~ p l & p x . r l s des. T+ . r r p a ~ . r r o o i ~ w ,corresponds to Bonn edition, zoz,,-203,~; figure 2 (fol. 6 7 V ) , containing the scholion we have discussed, corresponds to 680,~-681,~ (inc. ~ 6 x a sEra .rijs j ~ e ~ k Tp ~aE ~I V O T ~ T O Sdes. , ~b K O I V ~ VTOO h a o O ) . Unfortunately, most of the other folios are less legible than those reproduced. Permission to study the Chalki codex having been granted to Dumbarton Oaks, the authors of this note hope to publish a full investigation of this manuscript as soon as circumstances allow it.

The Dumbarton Oaks Collection. Studies in Byzantine Art: Report on the Symposium of 1958 Sirarpie der Nersessian Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 14. (1960), pp. 251-252. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0070-7546%281960%2914%3C251%3ATDOCSI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-2 Dumbarton Oaks Papers is currently published by Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/doaks.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Sun Mar 9 08:06:17 2008

THE DUMBARTON OAKS COLLECTION. STUDIES IN BYZANTINE ART Report on the Symposium of 1958

T

H E programs of the symposia held in previous years at Dumbarton Oaks concentrated on a fairly restricted period or a particular manifestation of Byzantine civilization considered from the point of view of history, theology, literature, and art. The symposium of 1958, which was directed by the present writer, was devoted to the Dumbarton Oaks Collection; the fine arts, therefore, formed the focal point of the papers. Such a program had been under consideration for some time, and this seemed the appropriate year for presenting it as a tribute to the founders of Dumbarton Oaks, Mr. and Mrs. Robert Woods Bliss, on the occasion of their fiftieth wedding anniversary, for they had assembled a large part of the Collection before it was conveyed to Harvard University, and they continue to take an active interest in it. The program, though concentrated in a single field, covered a longer span of time than had been the case in previous years, ranging, as it did, from the period prior to the foundation of Constantinople down to the Palaeologan age. For obvious reasons architecture, monumental mosaics, and paintings were excluded from the studies; nor was there any attempt to consider all the categories of works of art represented in the Collection. Such a comprehensive program, presented in the relatively short time at our disposal, would have had, perforce, a somewhat superficial character. I t was more important to select a few characteristic works or groups of objects in the Collection and, with these as a point of departure or concentration, to illustrate a particular aspect of Byzantine art or a special trend in the religious thought of the period. The first paper, read by the present writer, served as a general introduction. I t traced the growth of interest in Byzantine art, the gradual appreciation of its aesthetic qualities, and the formation of private and public collections, and it called attention to the impor-

tance of the objects in the field of the minor arts. This was followed by two lectures which are published in this volume. In the first, Ernst H. Kantorowicz showed, through the study of a marriage belt and a marriage ring, how Byzantium took over the themes of Roman imperial imagery and adapted them to a Christian context. In the second, Ernst Kitzinger drew attention to the importance of a fragmentary marble relief, showing Christ Healing a Blind Man, as a document of Christian narrative art in Constantinople in the period of Theodosius I. A lecture by Marvin Ross on "SeventhCentury Byzantine Jewelry" presented a method of investigation based on grouping by "treasures" the objects which are scattered in various collections, in order to determine the centers of production and expansion. The evidence furnished by the coins found with these objects made it possible to date them more accurately. The classical survival, considered in the second and third papers, also formed the central theme of the lecture by Kurt Weitzmann published in the present volume. The continued use of mythological subjects on silver plates and on ivories was shown to be but one of the manifestations of the classical tradition that influenced religious iconography. Conversely, mediaeval form was imposed on mythological representations, and occasionally Christian context modified mythological scenes. In his lecture on "The Art of the Historiated Ampullae from the Holy Land," AndrC Grabar discussed the reliefs on those phials from an artistic point of view rather than as examples of religious imagery. Comparisons with imperial medallions and their imitations in works of jewelry revealed the unity of subject and form proper to different series of objects which were produced in the same or in related techniques.

SIRARPIE DER NERSESSIAN

The lectures described above dealt primarily with works of the Early Christian period. Certain aspects of the religious art of the Middle Byzantine period were discussed in the lecture on "Two Images of the Virgin," by the present writer, which is published herewith. The two final lectures, also included in this volume, were devoted to the Palaeologan period and brought out the characteristic traits of the artistic revival during this last phase of Byzantine history. In his study of "Two Palaeologan Miniature Mosaics," Otto Demus showed that although religious art returned to earlier models, it rendered them with a new anddifferent emphasis. Secular art, on the other hand, and in particular palatine art, was more open to outside influences, and this point was discussed by AndrC Grabar in connection with an ivory pyxis in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection. This brief summary of the papers read during the symposium shows the wide range of its topics, each one of which dealt with some major trends or aspects of Byzantine art and Byzantine thought. Among the many points of interest that emerged from these discussions, one in particular deserves especial attention, namely, the pre-eminence of Constantinople. These studies, undertaken independently of one another and based on different groups or categories of objects, led

us back, in almost every instance, to the capital city as the source of production or inspiration. During the latter half of the nineteenth century, and occasionally even now, the leading role in the formation of Christian art was attributed to Rome. In violent reaction against these theories, Strzygowski opposed the Orient to Rome, transfening the creative center further east in his successive studies. Other scholars like Ajnalov, Millet, and Morey stressed the importance of the great cities of the East, in particular Alexandria and Antioch. The prestige of these centers of Hellenistic and late Classical culture tended to overshadow the role played by Constantinople and its share in the elaboration and development of Christian art. Through the discovery of new works and, even more, through the reevaluation of those that had been known for a long time, though assigned to other centers, we now have a clearer picture of the artistic production of the capital. Without denying the importance of Egypt, Syria, Palestine, and Asia Minor in the collective effort of the Early Christian period, scholars have become aware of the dominant role played by Constantinople throughout the centuries. As early as the fourth century, and especially from the sixth century on, Constantinople was the fountainhead which provided the ideas as well as the forms of Imperial andChristian imagery.

Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection, 2: Phocas to Theodosius III, 602-717 (Dumbarton Oaks Catalogues)

Dumbarton Oaks Papers Number 14

Dumbarton Oaks Papers Number 13

Dumbarton Oaks Papers 57

Dumbarton Oaks Papers 56

Dumbarton Oaks Papers 53

Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 61

Dumbarton Oaks Papers 54

Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Volume 62

Dumbarton Oaks Papers, No. 55

Dumbarton Oaks Papers, No. 55

Byzantine Coinage (Dumbarton Oaks Byzantine Collection Publications)

Constantine Porphyrogenitus: De Administrando Imperio (Dumbarton Oaks Texts; CFHB 1)

Byzantine Magic (Dumbarton Oaks Research Library & collection)

Gunboat Number 14

The Legacy of Cyril and Methodius to the Southern Slavs (Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 19)

Letters of Gregory Akindynos (Dumbarton Oaks Texts) (v. 7)

Acid Rain: Report number 14

Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection, 2: Phocas to Theodosius III, 602-717 (Dumbarton Oaks Catalogues)

Hogup Cave: Anthropological Papers Number 93

The Old Testament in Byzantium (Dumbarton Oaks Byzantine Symposia and Colloquia)

The Correspondence of Ignatios the Deacon (Dumbarton Oaks Texts 11; Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae 39 )

Three Byzantine Military Treatises (Dumbarton Oaks Texts 9; Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae 25)

The Oaks of Lindores

War for the Oaks

Native Traditions in the Postconquest World: A Symposium at Dumbarton Oaks, 2-4 October, 1992

Siegecraft: Two Tenth-Century Instructional Manuals by Heron of Byzantium (Dumbarton Oaks Studies)

Landscape Design and Experience of Motion (Dumbarton Oaks Colloquium Series in the History of Landscape Architecture)

Perspectives on Garden Histories (Dumbarton Oaks Colloquium Series in the History of Landscape Architecture) (v. 21)

Law and Society in Byzantium: Ninth-Twelfth Centuries (Dumbarton Oaks Other Titles in Byzantine Studies)

Byzantine Monuments and Topography of the Pontos, vol. I (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 20.1)

Byzantine Monuments and Topography of the Pontos, vol. II, Plates (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 20.2)

Dumbarton Oaks Papers Number 14

Dumbarton Oaks Papers Number 13

Dumbarton Oaks Papers 57

Dumbarton Oaks Papers 56

Dumbarton Oaks Papers 53

Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 61

Dumbarton Oaks Papers 54

Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Volume 62

Dumbarton Oaks Papers, No. 55

Dumbarton Oaks Papers, No. 55

Byzantine Coinage (Dumbarton Oaks Byzantine Collection Publications)

Constantine Porphyrogenitus: De Administrando Imperio (Dumbarton Oaks Texts; CFHB 1)

Byzantine Magic (Dumbarton Oaks Research Library & collection)

Gunboat Number 14

The Legacy of Cyril and Methodius to the Southern Slavs (Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 19)

Letters of Gregory Akindynos (Dumbarton Oaks Texts) (v. 7)

Acid Rain: Report number 14

Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection, 2: Phocas to Theodosius III, 602-717 (Dumbarton Oaks Catalogues)

Hogup Cave: Anthropological Papers Number 93

The Old Testament in Byzantium (Dumbarton Oaks Byzantine Symposia and Colloquia)

The Correspondence of Ignatios the Deacon (Dumbarton Oaks Texts 11; Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae 39 )

Three Byzantine Military Treatises (Dumbarton Oaks Texts 9; Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae 25)

The Oaks of Lindores

War for the Oaks

Native Traditions in the Postconquest World: A Symposium at Dumbarton Oaks, 2-4 October, 1992

Siegecraft: Two Tenth-Century Instructional Manuals by Heron of Byzantium (Dumbarton Oaks Studies)

Landscape Design and Experience of Motion (Dumbarton Oaks Colloquium Series in the History of Landscape Architecture)

Perspectives on Garden Histories (Dumbarton Oaks Colloquium Series in the History of Landscape Architecture) (v. 21)

Law and Society in Byzantium: Ninth-Twelfth Centuries (Dumbarton Oaks Other Titles in Byzantine Studies)

Byzantine Monuments and Topography of the Pontos, vol. I (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 20.1)

Byzantine Monuments and Topography of the Pontos, vol. II, Plates (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 20.2)

Recommend Documents