AETOS: Studies in Honour of Cyril Mango presented to him on April 14, 1998 [Reprint 2010 ed.] 9783110958614, 9783598774409

Table of contents :
Preface
List of Publications of Cyril Mango
The Daphni Monastic Complex Reconsidered
Ex-Voto Therapy: A Note on a Copper Plaque with St. Hermolaos
Basilius, Mavortius, Asterius
Deux témoins de la “chypriote bouclée”: le Vaticanus graecus 578 et le Monacensis graecus 284
Mistaken Antiquity: Thoughts on Some Recent Commentary on the Rosette Caskets
Les bâtisseurs isauriens chez eux: Notes sur trois sites des environs de Silifke
L'épitaphe du pape Honorius (625-638)
Zur Regentschaft der Gräfin Adelasia del Vasto in Kalabrien und Sizilien (1101-1112)
Deux épigrammes d'Apamène, et l'éloge de l'endogamie dans une famille syrienne du VIe siècle
L'empereur et le Théologien: À propos du Retour des reliques de Grégoire de Nazianze (BHG 728)
Byzantine Responses to Turkish Attack: Some Sites of Asia Minor
Inscriptions byzantines d'Italie sur tissu
„Aristophanes“ in margine: Versus exotici
Theodorupolis
The Novels of Mid-Twelfth Century Constantinople: The Literary and Social Context
Anonymous Miracles of St. Artemios
La brève histoire du jeune Bragadin
Constantinopolitana
Byzantine Legends in Venetian Crete
Toynbee and Byzantium
Liens de vassalité dans un apanage byzantin du XIIe siècle
The Date of the Life of St Symeon the Fool
Die topographische Notiz über Konstantinopel in der Pariser Suda-Handschrift: Eine Neuinterpretation
The Lost Panels of the North Door to the Chapel of the Burning Bush at Sinai
Miles Quondam et Graecus
Les paons de Saint-Polyeucte et leurs modèles
Ohne Anfang und Ende: Das Hexaemeron des Georgios Pisides
The Defence of Armenian Orthodoxy in Sebeos
Observations on Finishing a General History of Byzantium
The Persistence of Pagan Art Patronage in Fifth-Century Rome
List of Abbreviations
List of Figures
List of Illustrations
Illustrations

Citation preview

ΑΕΤΟΣ Studies in honour of Cyril Mango

Cyril Mango talking to villagers near the pilgrimage church of St. Michael at Germia, Asia Minor, in 1982

ΑΕΤΟΣ Studies in honour of Cyril Mango presented to him on April 14, 1998

Edited by Ihor Sevcenko and Irmgard Hutter

B. G. Teubner Stuttgart und Leipzig 1998

Einband: Adler von der Adler-Casel des Hl. Albuin Diözesanmuseum Bressanone/Brixen

Die Deutsche Bibliothek — CIP-Einheitsaufnahme

Aetos ; studies in honour of Cyril Mango presented to him on April 14, 1998 / ed. by Ihor Sevcenko and Irmgard Hutter. Stuttgart ; Leipzig : Teubner, 1998

ISBN 3-519-07440-0 Das Werk einschließlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages unzulässig und strafbar. Das gilt besonders für Vervielfältigungen, Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und die Einspeicherung und Verarbeitung in elektronischen Systemen. © B. G. Teubner Stuttgart und Leipzig 1998 Printed in Germany Druck und Bindung: Druckhaus „Thomas Müntzer" GmbH, Bad Langensalza

Contents Ihor Sevcenko Preface List of Publications of Cyril Mango Charalambos Bouras The Daphni Monastic Complex Reconsidered

IX XIII

1

Susan A. Boyd Ex-Voto Therapy: A Note on a Copper Plaque with St. Hermolaos . . . . 15 Alan Cameron Basilius, Mavortius, Asterius

28

Paul Canart Deux temoins de la "chypriote bouclee": le Vaticanus graecus 578 et le Monacensis graecus 284 40 Anthony Cutler Mistaken Antiquity: Thoughts on Some Recent Commentary on the Rosette Caskets

46

Gilbert Dagron et Olivier Callot Les bätisseurs isauriens chez eux: Notes sur trois sites des environs de Silifke 55 Jean Dur Hat L'epitaphe du pape Honorius (625-638)

71

Vera von Falkenhausen Zur Regentschaft der Gräfin Adelasia del Vasto in Kalabrien und Sizilien (1101-1112) 87 Denis Feissel Deux epigrammes d'Apamene, et l'eloge de l'endogamie dans une famille syrienne du VIe siecle 116

VI

Contents

Bernard Flusin L'empereur et le Theologien: Ä propos du Retour des reliques de Gregoire deNazianze (BHG 728) 137 Clive Foss Byzantine Responses to Turkish Attack: Some Sites of Asia Minor . . 154 Andre Guillou Inscriptions byzantines d'ltalie sur tissu

172

Herbert Hunger „Aristophanes" in margine: Versus exotici

177

Irmgard Hutter Theodorupolis

181

Elizabeth Jeffreys The Novels of Mid-Twelfth Century Constantinople: The Literary and Social Context 191 Alexander P. Kazhdan (t) and Lee F. Sherry Anonymous Miracles of St. Artemios

200

Jacques Lefort La breve histoire du jeune Bragadin

210

Paul Magdalino Constantinopolitana

220

ChryssaA. Maltezou Byzantine Legends in Venetian Crete

233

Dimitri Obolensky Toynbee and Byzantium

243

Nicolas Oikonomides Liens de vassalite dans un apanage byzantin du XIP siecle

257

Lennart Ryden The Date of the Life ofSt Symeon the Fool

264

Contents

VII

Peter Schreiner Die topographische Notiz über Konstantinopel in der Pariser Suda-Handschrift: Eine Neuinterpretation 273 Ihor Sevcenko The Lost Panels of the North Door to the Chapel of the Burning Bush at Sinai 284 Irfan Shahid Miles Quondam et Graecus

299

Jean-Pierre Sodini Les paons de Saint-Polyeucte et leurs modeles

306

Paul Speck Ohne Anfang und Ende: Das Hexaemeron des Georgios Pisides

314

Robert W. Thomson The Defence of Armenian Orthodoxy in Sebeos

329

Warren Treadgold Observations on Finishing a General History of Byzantium

342

David H. Wright The Persistence of Pagan Art Patronage in Fifth-Century Rome

354

List of Abbreviations

370

List of Figures

373

List of Illustrations

374

Illustrations

379

Preface Ihor Sevcenko Upon his retirement, Cyril Mango was presented with the Bosphorus, the handsome volume which was a message of love sent from home, as it were, with offerings from his devoted students — many and bright — and his fellow dons at Oxford. Now ΑΕΤΟΣ has alighted at his window. This time it brings tributes from two — or, on generous count, four — continents, and we donors already have multilingual fantasies about how our messages will be read in his house at Brill: with Cyril, we imagine, seated by his fireplace, sipping his claret and tending his pipe. Not all of Cyril's admirers realize with what care he prepared for greatness in Byzantine studies, and how wisely he selected his parents to provide him with roots both in Hellas and in Russia; he not only chose the City for his birthplace and field of exploration, but also the vicinity of the colonnaded building that once was the home of Ό εν Κ/πόλει 'Ελληνικός Φιλολογικός Σύλλογος for the residence in which he spent his youth. His links with England through his father, a Cambridge graduate, allowed things to go smoothly in his undergraduate days at St. Andrews, where he knew which clubs to use at the golf course. Such details aside, most about Cyril as a scholar is common knowledge: his work at the Sorbonne with, or along with, Rodolphe Guilland, that resulted in The Brazen House (1959); his first twelve years at Dumbarton Oaks that witnessed the appearance of a number of books, including that admirable product of erudite youth, The Homilies ofPhotius (1958), and Studies on St. Sophia and other monuments of Constantinople; the years of his Koraes Professorship at London, memorable to the world at large for "Byzantium and Romantic Hellenism", his inaugural lecture of 1964, published a year later, in which he exposed several past misuses of Byzantium's image, both east and west; his return to Dumbarton Oaks for a lustrum as Professor for Byzantine Archaeology, a period during which he gave English-speaking students — and their teachers — his collection of sources to the Art of the Byzantine Empire (1972); and, finally, starting in 1973, his Bywater and Sotheby Professorship at Oxford. It is at Oxford that Cyril produced his most important volumes — even if work on some of them had begun in his earlier Dumbarton Oaks days: his eagle's overflight of Byzantium's civilization in Byzantium the Empire of New Rome (1980), which provided new horizons for its Greek readers when it was

X

Ihor Sev enko

translated in 1988; his editions of Patriarch Nikephoros's Breviarium (1990) and Ignatios the Deacon's letters (1997), and his commentary and translation of Theophanes the Confessor's chronicle (1997), a masterpiece undertaken with the assistance of Roger Scott. It was during Cyril's tenure at Oxford and his chairmanship of the Committee for Byzantine Studies there that the university became one of the premier centers for Byzantine scholarship and instruction in Europe. It was during his Oxford period, too, that his connection with the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales and the College de France was established and brought about Le developpement urbain de Constantinople (1985), a harbinger of things to come and of his present major project. Many honors — the Fellowship of the British Academy, the Foreign Membership of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the Vice-Presidency of the Association Internationale des Etudes Byzantines — rained down upon him in his Oxford years as well. One scholarly passion, however, predates Oxford — monuments and their settings seem to have captivated him early in life. Whether it was the City, Cyprus, Bargala in Macedonia, the Euphrates Valley, or areas to be inundated by the Keban Dam, he surveyed sites, recorded frescoes, went on field trips in his Land Rover, made ground plans with string and tape, expertly wielded his Leica and Hasselblad cameras, transcribed inscriptions and inspired others to do the same. From Vize-Bizye in the west to Dara in the east, with KursunluMegas Agros and the other Kur§unlu-Elegmoi somewhere in the middle, he was, in the words of the late Robert Van Nice, a one-man archaeological expedition, and he continues to be so, with his wife as companion, until this very day. Such are the bare outlines of Cyril's public record. To us, the contributors to ΑΕΤΟΣ and friends of long standing, equally important and, who knows, perhaps more revealing are the private images and recollections that each of us has stored. I have been collecting mine for some forty-seven years. In our very first encounter at Dumbarton Oaks, Cyril — for once not true to his usually reserved self— took the initiative: "We shall be spending some time together here; we might as well introduce ourselves." A friendly contest in showing-off followed shortly after: he won, because he knew — as I did not — the Byzantine word for "giraffe". To our early years, too, belong two happy paleographical episodes. The first was finding a new manuscript of De Cerimon s, a discovery that was really his, for while we both could read άναδενδράδιον της Μαγναύρας in the palimpsest, he was the one who realized right away where the phrase had come from. The second began with Cyril's telling me about the — as it turned out, wrong-headed —article on the Menologium of Basil II by

Preface

XI

A. Frolow and then accepting my solution to the puzzle of the signed miniatures in that manuscript. These finds earned us trips to the (Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Vatican Library (in the latter, he was my guide in discerning the styles of the Menologium's various miniaturists). Then there were the shared months in Istanbul and the trips throughout Turkey and Greece; the first guided tour of the City he gave me; our later explorations in the Cukur Bostan and the depot of Istanbul's Archaeological Museum; our hasty retreat from Salon 20 in that museum after we slightly discolored an inscription while attempting to record it; our working together on the first marble fragment of the Anicia luliana poem, the identification of which later led to the Sara9hane excavation; our excursions to the south shore of the Sea of Marmara, during one of which Cyril uncovered the foundations of Theophanes the Confessor's church by clearing the tall brush that was concealing them; and our trip to the Mani, when a local wit explained to us that the keys to a church with frescoes were kept in Athens "so that the Saints would not come out and eat us up". It was Cyril who introduced me to a gallery of Istanbul characters: the dignified §aban, the guard who kept the keys to the various sites we inspected; San Hasan Bi9kin, our reliable chauffeur and factotum, a believer in Uniroyal tires; Feridiin Dirimtekin, the somewhat amateurish director of the St. Sophia Museum, who asked his assistant "Where did this stone come out of?", when we once showed him an inscription. To balance Feridiin Bey, there was the unforgettable Nezih Firatli, Cyril's faithful friend, colleague, and protector of Byzantine antiquities; and two ladies: Pepa, the Prankish woman of the Sweet Waters who fed us in the Cihangir flat rented by Dumbarton Oaks, and the distinguished Mrs. Nasonova of Beyoglu whose late husband had been Cyril's teacher of Russian Orthodox catechism. Cyril was fond of those people, was amused by some of them, and respected the dignity of all the unsophisticated ones among them (for all I know, his excellent photo of §aban is still hanging on some wall at Brill). Throughout the years the two of us discussed Byzantium's multilayered past and the ways in which that past should be studied and reconstructed. In our talks we coined the term Byzantinologie totale. It is Cyril who made this term a reality through the totality of an oeuvre that includes cultural history, history of literature, philology, hagiography, history of art and architecture, and archaeology, and that excels by logic of construction and clarity of style, both made possible by the clarity of his thought. Total Byzantinology, however, means more than breadth of coverage. It means the investigation in depth — and a revisionist one if need be — of several dimensions of the Byzantine mind: the world view of the Byzantine

XII

Ihor Sevcenko

elites and of their spiritual and cultural descendants; the understanding and misunderstanding by these elites of their own past; and the meanings their present had both for the elites and for the Byzantine simple folk. Some of Cyril's essays on these topics, collected in Byzantium and its Image (1984) have enabled a generation of readers to watch him ask common-sense questions and remove the many veils (both old and new) that hid from us the Byzantium that appeared to the Byzantines themselves. At the end of the nineteen-nineties it can safely be stated that Cyril Mango's is a place of honor among the great Byzantinists of the twentieth century.

List of Publications of Cyril Mango* Monographs The Homilies ofPhotius, Patriarch of Constantinople (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 3), Cambridge Mass. 1958. The Brazen House: A Study of the Vestibule of the Imperial Palace of Constantinople, Copenhagen 1959. Materials for the Study of the Mosaics of St. Sophia at Istanbul (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 8), Washington D.C. 1962. The Art of the Byzantine Empire, 312-1453. Sources and Documents, Englewood Cliffs NJ 1972; repr. Toronto 1986. Architettura bizantina, Milan 1974. Also in English, French and German and paperback. The Mosaics and Frescoes of St. Mary Pammakaristos (Fethiye Camii) at Istanbul, with H. Belting and D. Mouriki (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 15), Washington D.C. 1978. Byzantium: The Empire of New Rome, London 1980; New York 1980; London 1988 (paperback); Athens 1988 (Greek translation); Rome-Bari 1991 (Italian translation); Gdansk 1997 (Polish translation). Byzantium and its Image. History and Culture of the Byzantine Empire and its Heritage, Collected Studies, London 1984. Le developpement urbain de Constantinople (IV-VIF siecles), Paris 1985,21990. Nikephoros Patriarch of Constantinople, Short History. Text, Translation, and Commentary (CFHB 13, Dumbarton Oaks Texts 10), Washington D.C. 1990. Studies on Constantinople, Collected Studies, Aldershot 1993. Istanbul City of Seven Hills. A Photographic Journey through Byzantine and Ottoman Monuments, Istanbul 1994. The Chronicle ofTheophanes Confessor: Byzantine and Near Eastern History, AD 284-813, translated with an introduction and commentary, with R. Scott and with the assistance of G. Greatrex, Oxford 1997. The Correspondence of Ignatios the Deacon: Ignatii diaconis epistolae, text, translation and commentary, with the collaboration of S. Efthymiadis (CFHB 39, Dumbarton Oaks Texts 11), Washington D.C. 1997. Hagia Sophia — a Vision for Empires, Photographs by A. Ertug. Istanbul 1997.

' This bibliography is based on the List of Publications of Cyril Mango, established by Claudia Rapp et al., in: Bosphorus, Essays in Honour of Cyril Mango, Presented in Oxford, 6 July 1995, ed. S. Efthymiadis, C. Rapp and D. Tsougarakis = Byzantinische Forschungen 21 (Adolf M. Hakkert, Publisher), Amsterdam 1995, 3-10, with corrections and additions by M. Mundell Mango and I. Mutter. Book reviews are not listed.

XIV

List of Publications of Cyril Mango

Books Forthcoming Byzantine Constantinople. A Study of Urban Development, (Oxford University Press) Oxford.

A Corpus of Dated Byzantine Inscriptions, with I. Sevcenko, (De Gruyter) Berlin. The Monastery of St. Chrysostomos, Koutsovendi, Cyprus (Dumbarton Oaks Studies), Washington D.C.

Contributions to Books The Dark Ages, ed. D. Talbot Rice, London 1965, 83-112. Treasures of Turkey, with E. Akurgal and R. Ettinghausen, Geneva 1966, 78—129. Hagia Sophia, with H. Kahler, New York 1967, 47-60. Byzantium. An Introduction, ed. P. Whitting, Oxford 1971, 41-59.

Books Edited D.V. Ainalov, The Hellenistic Origins of Byzantine Art, New Brunswick N.J. 1961. Okeanos, Essays Presented to Ihor Sevcenko on his Sixtieth Birthday by his Colleagues and Students (= HUkSt 7), with O. Pritsak, Cambridge MA 1983. Constantinople and its Hinterland (Society for the Promotion of Byzantine Studies, Publications 3), with G. Dagron, Aldershot 1995. Epigrafia medievale greca e latina. Ideologia efunzione, Atti del seminario di Erice, 12-18 settembre 1991, with G. Cavallo, Spoleto 1995.

Articles Byzantine Brick Stamps, AJA 54 (1950) 19-27. L'Euripe de Γ Hippodrome de Constantinople, REB 7 (1950) 180-193. The Funeral Tree. A Newly-Discovered Byzantine Inscription from Istanbul, Archaeology 3 (1950) 140-141. The Byzantine Inscriptions of Constantinople: A Bibliographical Survey, AJA 55 (1951)52-66. Autour du Grand Palais de Constantinople, CahArch 5 (1951) 179-186. Le Diippion. Etude historique et topographique, REB 8 (1951) 152-161. Isnik, Archaeology 4 (1951) 106-109. The Date of the Anonymous Russian Description of Constantinople, BZ 45 (1952) 380-385. A Note on the Ros-Dromitai, in: Προσφορά είς Στΐλπωνα Π. Κυριακίδην, Thessaloniki 1953,456-462. Quelques remarques sur le Chanson de Daskaloyannis, Κρητικά Χρονικά 8 (1954) 44-54. Nine Orations ofArethasfrom Cod. Marc. gr. 524, with R.J.H. Jenkins and B. Laourdas,BZ 47 (1954) 1-40.

List of Publications of Cyril Mango

XV

The Date and Significance of the Tenth Homily ofPhotius, with R.J.H. Jenkins, DOP 9-10(1956) 123-140. The Date of the Narthex Mosaics of the Church of the Dormition at Nicaea, DOP 13 (1959)245-252. Letter to the Editor (concerning Justinian's equestrian statue), ArtB 41 (1959) 351356. The Legend of Leo the Wise, ZRVI 6 (1960) 59-93. A Twelfth-Century Description of St. Sophia, with J.S.F. Parker, DOP 14 (1960) 233245. A New Manuscript of the De Cerimoniis, with I. Sevcenko, DOP 14 (1960) 247-249. Synodikon ofAntioch and Lacedaemonia, with R.J.H. Jenkins, DOP 15 (1961) 225242. The Remains of the Church of St. Polyeuktos in Constantinople, with I. Sevcenko, DOP 15(1961)243-247. Additional Note on the Tombs and Obits of the Byzantine Emperors, with I. Sevcenko, DOP 16 (1962) 61-63. Three Imperial Byzantine Sarcophagi Discovered in 1750, DOP 16 (1962) 397^02. Antique Statuary and the Byzantine Beholder, DOP 17 (1963) 53-75. The Conciliar Edict of 1166, DOP 17 (1963) 315-330. A Forged Inscription of the Year 781, ZRVI 8/1 (1963 = Melanges G. Ostrogorsky, I) 201-207. Additional Notes, a Contribution to 'The Monastery of Lips (Fenari Isa Camii) at Istanbul', by Theodore Macridy, with E.J.W. Hawkins, DOP 18 (1964) 299-315. Report on Field Work in Istanbul and Cyprus, with E.J.W. Hawkins, DOP 18 (1964) 319-340. The Apse Mosaics of St. Sophia, with E.J.W. Hawkins, DOP 19 (1965) 115-148. Byzantinism and Romantic Hellenism, JWarb 28 (1965) 29—43; Greek translation in Εποχής 46 (February 1967) 133-143. The Hermitage of St. Neophytos and its Wall Paintings, with E.J.W. Hawkins, DOP 20(1966) 119-206. Constantinopolitana, JDAI 80 (1966) 305-336. Isaurian Builders, in: Polychronion. Festschrift Franz D lger, Heidelberg 1966, 358365. A Byzantine Inscription Relating to Dyrrhachium, A A 1966, 410—414. When was Michael III Born? DOP 21 (1967) 253-258. The Byzantine Church at Vize (Bizye) in Thrace and St. Mary the Younger, ZRVI 11 (1968)9-13. The Monastery of St. Abercius at Kur$unlu (Elegmi) in Bithynia, DOP 22 (1968) 168176. Additional Finds at Fenari Isa Camii, Istanbul, DOP 22 (1968) 177-184. The Date of Cod. Vat. Reg. gr. 1 and the "Macedonian Renaissance", ActaNorv 4 (1969) 121-126. Summary of Work Carried out by the Dumbarton Oaks Byzantine Center in Cyprus,

XVI

List of Publications of Cyril Mango

1959-1969, in: Report of the Department of Antiquities Cyprus, Nicosia 1969, 98-104. A Newly-Discovered Byzantine Imperial Sarcophagus, Annual of the Archaeological Museums of Istanbul 15-16 (1969) 305-309. R.J.H. Jenkins (Obituary), DOP 23-24 (1970) 7-13. Notes on Byzantine Monuments, DOP 23-24 (1970) 369-375. Appendix to 'The Church of the Panagia tou Arakos' by D. Winfield, DOP 23-24 (1970)379-380. Bargala: A Preliminary Report, with B. Aleksova, DOP 25 (1971) 265-281. Three Inscriptions of the Reigns ofAnastasius I and Constantine F, with I. §evc"enko, BZ 65 (1972) 379-393. The Church of Saints Sergius and Bacchus at Constantinople and the Alleged Tradition of Octagonal Palatine Churches, JOB 21 (1972 = Festschrift fur Otto Demus zum 70. Geburtstag) 189-193. The Mosaics of St. Sophia at Istanbul: the Church Fathers in the North Tympanum, with E.J.W. Hawkins, DOP 26 (1972) 1-41. The Phanariots and the Byzantine Tradition, in: The Struggle for Greek Independence, ed. R. Clogg, London 1973, 41-66. Eudocia Ingerina, the Normans and the Macedonian Dynasty, ZRVI 14—15 (1973) 17-27. La culture grecque et l Occident au VI1T siede, in: Settimane di studio del Centre italiano di studi sulFalto medioevo 20 (Spoleto 1972), Spoleto 1973, 683-721. Some Churches and Monasteries on the Southern Shore of the Sea of Marmara, with I. Sevcenko, DOP 27 (1973) 235-277. A Note on the Panagia Kamariotissa, DOP 27 (1973) 128-132. Byzantine Literature as a Distorting Mirror, Inaugural Lecture, University of Oxford, May 1974, Oxford 1975. The Church ofSts. Sergius and Bacchus once again, BZ 68 (1975) 385-392. The Availability of Books in the Byzantine Empire, 750-850 AD, in: Byzantine Books and Bookmen. A Dumbarton Oaks Colloquium 1971, Washington D.C. 1975, 2945. Les monuments de l 'architecture du ΧΓ siede et leur signification historique et sociale, TM 6 (1976) 351-365. Chypre, carrefour du monde byzantin, in: XV Congres International des Etudes Byzantines, Rapports et co-rapports, Athens 1976, V.5, 3-13. Historical Introduction, in: Iconoclasm, ed. A. A.M. Bryer and J. Herrin, Birmingham 1977, 1-6. The Liquidation of Iconoclasm and the Patriarch Photios, in: Iconoclasm, ed. A.A.M. Bryer and J. Herrin, Birmingham 1977, 133-140. L Origine de la minuscule, in: La paleographie grecque et byzantine (Paris 1974, Colloques Internationaux du CNRS 559), Paris 1977, 175-180. Storia dell'arte, in: La civilt bizantina dal IV al IX secolo, Aspetti e problemi, ed. A. Guillou, Bari 1977, 285-350.

List of Publications of Cyril Mango

XVII

Some Recently Acquired Byzantine Inscriptions at the Istanbul Archaeological Museum, with I. Sevcenko, DOP 32 (1978) 1-27. The Date of the Studius Basilica at Istanbul, BMGS 4 (1978) 115-122. Who Wrote the Chronicle ofTheophanes?, ZRVI 18 (1978) 9-17. Lo stile cosiddetto "monastico" dellapittura bizantina, in: Habitat—Strutture—Territorio, Galatina 1978, 45-62. Storia dell'arte, in: La civilt bizantina dal IX all' XI secolo, Aspetti e problemi, ed. A. Guillou, Bari 1979, 239-323. The Monastery of St. Constantine on Lake Apolyont, DOP 33 (1979) 329-333. On the History of the Templon and the Martyrien of St. Artemios at Constantinople, Zografl0(1979) 40-43. Constantine 's Porphyry Column and the Chapel of St. Constantine, DChAE, ser. 4, 10(1981)103-110. Observations on the Correspondence of Ignatius, Metropolitan ofNicaea (First Half of the Ninth Century), in: berlieferungsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen, ed. F. Paschke etal. (TU 125), Berlin 1981, 403-410. Discontinuity with the Classical Past in Byzantium, in: Byzantium and the Classical Tradition, ed. M. Mullett and R. Scott, Birmingham 1981, 48-57. Daily Life in Byzantium, in: XVI. Internationaler Byzantinistenkongress, Akten I/I, Vienna 1981 (= JOB 31/1) 337-353. Addendum to the Report on Everyday Life, in: XVI. Internationaler Byzantinistenkongress, Akten Π/1, Vienna 1982 (= JOB 32/1) 252-257. The Life of St. Andrew the Fool Reconsidered, RSBS 2 (1982) 297-313. St. Anthusa ofMantineon and the Family of Constantine V, AnBoll 100 (1982) 401409. The Two Lives of St. loannikios and the Bulgarians, HUkSt 7 (1983 = Okeanos, Essays Presented to Ihor Sevcenko on his Sixtieth Birthday by his Colleagues and Students), ed. C. Mango and O. Pritsak, 393-404. Le temps dans les commentaires byzantins de l'Apocalypse, in: Le temps chrotien de la fin de Pantiquito au moyen age, ΠΡ-ΧΠΓ siecles, ed. J.-M. Leroux (Paris 1981, Colloques Internationaux du CNRS 604), Paris 1984, 431-438. Anthologia Palatino, 9.686, CIRev 34 (1984) 489^91. A Byzantine Hagiographer at Work: Leontios ofNeapolis, in: Byzanz und der Westen, ed. I. Hutter ( sterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philos.-Hist. Klasse, Sitzungsberichte 432), Vienna 1984, 25-41. Deux etudes sur Byzance et la Perse sassanide, TM 9 (1985) 91-118. Deux inscriptions byzantines de Gabala en Syrie, TM 9 (1985) 463—464. On Re-reading the Life of St. Gregory the Decapolite, Byzantina 13/1 (1985) 633646. The Breviarium of the Patriarch Nicephorus, in: BYZANTION. Αφιέρωμα στον Ανδρέα Ν. Στράτο, Π, Athens 1986, 539-552. The Fourteenth Region of Constantinople, in: Studien zur sp tantiken und byzantinischen Kunst, F.W. Deichmann gewidmet, ed. O. Feld and U. Peschlow, I, Mainz 1986, 1-5.

XVIII

List of Publications of Cyril Mango

Epigrammes honorifiques, statues et portraits Byzance, in: Αφιέρωμα στον Νίκο Σβορώνο, Ι, Rethymno 1986, 23-35. St. Michael and Anis, DChAE, ser. 4, 12 (1986) 39-62. The Pilgrimage Centre of St. Michael at Germia, JOB 36 (1986) 117-132. A Late Roman Inn in Eastern Turkey, Oxford Journal of Archaeology 5 (1986) 223231. The Development of Constantinople as an Urban Centre, in: 17th International Byzantine Congress, Major Papers, New Rochelle, N.Y. 1986, 117-136. The Collapse of St. Sophia, Psellus and the Etymologicum Genuinum, in: Gonimos. Neoplatonic and Byzantine Studies Presented to Leendert G. Westerink at 75, ed. J. Duffy and J. Peradotto, Buffalo N.Y. 1988, 167-174. La croix dite de Michel le Cerulaire et la croix de Saint-Michel de Syke n, CahArch 36(1988)41^9. An East Mediterranean Bucket from Bromeswell Parish, Suffolk, with M. Mundell Mango, A. Evans, and M. Hughes, Antiquity 63 (1989) 295-311. The Tradition of Byzantine Chronography, HUkSt 12-13 (1988-1989 [1990]) 360372. The Monastery of St. Chrysostomos at Koutsovendis (Cyprus) and its Wall Paintings. Part 1: Description, with E.J.W. Hawkins and S. Boyd, DOP 44 (1990) 63-94. Constantine's Mausoleum and the Translation of Relics, BZ 83 (1990) 51—62. 34 articles in: Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, ed. A. P. Kazhdan et al., I-III, Oxford 1991. I bizantini e la conservazione dei monumenti, Casabella 581 (July 1991) 38-41. Inscriptions de la Mesopotamie du Nord, with M. Mundell Mango, TM 11 (1991) 465-471. Approaches to Byzantine Architecture, Mugarnas 8 (1991) 40—44. Byzantine Epigraphy (4'h to 10th Centuries), in: Paleografia e codicologia greca (Atti del II colloquio intemazionale, Berlino-Wolfenb ttel 1983), ed. D. Harlfinger and G. Prato, Alessandria 1991, 235-249. Germia: A Postscript, JOB 41 (1991) 297-300. Greek Culture in Palestine after the Arab Conquest, in: Scritture, Hbri e testi nelle aree provincial! di Bisanzio (Atti del seminario di Erice 1988), ed. G. Cavallo, G. De Gregorio and M. Maniaci, Spoleto 1991, 149-160; Italian translation in: Bisanzio fuori da Bisanzio, ed. G. Cavallo, Palermo 1991, 37^47. Precision and Imprecision in Byzantine Texts, in: Modes de vie et modes de pensee Byzance, ed. A. Guillou, Paris 1991, 67-71. Ilsanto, in: L'uomo bizantino, ed. G. Cavallo, Bari 1992, 383^22. The Palace ofLausus at Constantinople and its Collection of Ancient Statues, with M. Vickers and E.D. Francis, Journal of the History of Collections 4 (1992) 89-98. A Note on a Byzantine Weight in the Pierides Museum, Larnaca, with M. Mundell Mango, in: Report of the Department of Antiquities Cyprus 1991, Nicosia 1992, 129-130. The Palace of Marina, the Poet Palladas and the Bath of Leo VI, in: Εϋφρόσυνον. Αφιέρωμα στον Μανόλη Χατζηδάκη, I, Athens 1991 (1992), 321-330.

List of Publications of Cyril Mango

XIX

Diabolus Byzantinus, DOP 46 (1992 = Homo Byzantinus. Papers in Honor of Alexander Kazhdan), ed. A. Cutler and S. Franklin, 215-223. Byzantine Writers on the Fabric ofH. Sophia, in: Hagia Sophia from the Age of Justinian to the Present, ed. R. Mark and A. Cakmak, Cambridge 1992, 41-56. Constantinople, ville sainte, Critique 543/4 (1992) 625-633. The Monastery of St. Mary Peribleptos (Sulu Manastir) at Constantinople Revisited, REArm 23 (1992) 473-493. Twelfth-Century Notices from Cod. Christ Church gr. 53, JOB 42 (1992) 221-228. The Temple Mount, AD 614-638, in: Bayt al-Magdis. 'Abdal Malik's Jerusalem. Oxford Studies in Islamic Art 9/1 (1992) 1-16. Boukoleon Sarayi, Ayasofia M zesi Yilligi 12 (1992) 75-79. Aspects of Syrian Piety, in: Ecclesiastical Silver Plate in Sixth-Century Byzantium, ed. S. Boyd and M. Mundell Mango, Washington D.C. 1992, 99-105. Cameos in Byzantium, with M. Mundell Mango, in: Cameos in Context. The Benjamin Zucker Lectures 1990, ed. M. Henig and M. Vickers, Oxford and Houlton ME 1993, 57-76. Constantine's Column, in: C. Mango, Studies on Constantinople, Aldershot 1993, III, 1-6. The Columns of Julian and his Successors, in: C. Mango, Studies on Constantinople, Aldershot 1993, X, 1-20. La vita in citt , in: La civilt bizantina, oggetti e messaggio. Architettura e ambiente di vita, ed. A. Guillou (Universita degli studi di Bari, Centro di studi bizantini, Corso di studi VI, 1991), Rome 1993, 227-273. Le monde byzantin. Introduction, in: Le Grand Atlas de Γ Art, Encyclopaedia Universalis, Paris 1993, 186-187. The Chalkoprateia Annunciation and the Pre-Eternal Logos, DChAE ser. 4, 17 (1993 -1994 = στη μνήμη της Ντούλας Μουρίκη) 165-170. On the Cult of Saints Cosmas and Damian at Constantinople, in: Θυμίαμα στη μνήμη της Λασκαρίνας Μπούρα, ed. A. Delevorrias, Athens 1994, 189-192. L 'attitude byzantine a l 'egard des antiquites greco-romaines, in: Byzance et les images, Cycle de conferences organise au Musoe du Louvre par le Service Culturel du 5 octobre au 7 decembre 1992, ed. A. Guillou and J. Durand, Paris 1994, 95-120. The Empress Helena, Helenopolis, Pylae, TM 12 (1994) 143-158. Notes d'epigraphie et d'archeologie: Constantinople, Nicee, TM 12 (1994) 343-357. Παλλάδας ό μετέωρος, JOB 44 (1994 = ΑΝΔΡΙΑΣ. Herbert Hunger zum 80. Geburtstag) 291-296. Precision and Imprecision in Byzantine Culture, in: Modes de vie et modes de pensee Byzance, ed. A. Guillou = Etudes Balkaniques 1 (1994) 29-41. Introduction, in: Constantinople and its Hinterland, ed. C. Mango and G. Dagron, Aldershot 1995, 1-6. The Water Supply of Constantinople, in: Constantinople and its Hinterland, ed. C. Mango and G. Dagron, Aldershot 1995, 9-13.

XX

List of Publications of Cyril Mango

Sepultures et epitaphes aristocratiques ä Byzance, in: Epigrafia medievale greca e latina. Ideologia e funzione (Atti del seminario di Erice 1991), ed. G. Cavallo and C. Mango, Spoleto 1995, 99-117. Ancient Spolia in the Great Palace of Constantinople, in: Byzantine East, Latin West, Art Historical Studies in Honor of Kurt Weitzmann, ed. C. Moss and K. Kiefer, Princeton 1995,645-657. The Conversion of the Parthenon into a Church: The Tübingen Theosophy, DChAE 18(1995)201-203. The Pilgrim 's Motivation, in: Akten des XII. internationalen Kongresses für christliche Archäologie, Bonn 1991 (= JbAC, Ergänzungsband 20), Münster 1995, 1-9. Justinian 's Fortified Monastery, in: The Monastery of Saint Catherine, ed. O. Baddeley and E. Brunner, London 1996, 71-83. Constantinople: a Christian Holy City / Konstantinopolis: Kutsal bir Hiristiyan Kenti, in: Dunya Kenti Istanbul - Istanbul World City, ed. A. Batur, Istanbul 1996, 7-11. Chariot Races in the Roman and Byzantine Periods, in: Furusiya, I, The Horse in the Art of the Near East, ed. D. Alexander, Riyadh 1996, 36-41. Introduction and Notes to J. Featherstone, Life of St. Matrona of Perge, in: Holy Women of Byzantium, ed. A.-M. Talbot, Washington 1996, 13-64. La banlieu de Constantinople a l'epoque byzantine, in: De Constantinople ä Istanbul (Ecole Fran9aise de Rome 1994), langes de l'Ecole Fran9aise de Rome, Moyen Age 108 (1996) 363-365. A Note on a Byzantine Lead Seal of the Patrician Theodorokanos, doux and katepano ofEdessa, with M. Mundell Mango, in: Studies in Ancient Coinage from Turkey, ed. R.H.J. Ashton, London 1996, 153-154. Constantinople, ville romaine, ville byzantine, in: Byzance, ed. A. Guillou, Europe 822(1997)6-11. The Palace of the Boukoleon, CahArch 45 (1997) 41-50.

The Daphni Monastic Complex Reconsidered Charalambos Bouras Despite the high quality of its architecture and mosaics, the monastery of Daphni, just outside Athens, has not been the object of scientific investigation for many years. The main reason for this is the almost complete silence of the written sources. There is, however, evidence of a purely archaeological nature which suggests the need for some revision as to the antiquity of the architecture of the monastery. When in 1899 Gabriel Millet wrote the first monograph on Daphni1, he devoted an entire chapter2 to the "first monastery", which he dated "to the sixth or more probably the fifth century"3. All the surrounding fortification walls and visible remains, mainly foundations of the monastery, apart from the katholikon, refectory and the cells around the later courtyard, were dated to the Early Christian or first Byzantine period. This date was arrived at mainly on the basis of a number of scattered marble sculptures4 and some typological similarities between the complex and early monasteries in Syria and North Africa5. Certain vague thoughts concerning the history of Athens from 395 up to the reign of Justinian6 were considered to support this early date. The katholikon of the monastery, which was supposed to be a basilica to which the marble spolia belonged, in Millet's view, was demolished completely7 in order to build the new katholikon during the eleventh century. A century later, these arguments are no longer convincing. Our knowledge of the architecture of both the Early Christian and the Middle Byzantine periods in Greece has multiplied, typological comparisons with distant monastery complexes seem awkward, and we now know that the scattered sculptures are for the most part Middle Byzantine in date. Nevertheless, the early date assigned by G. Millet to the Daphni complex has never been disputed; it has met with general acceptance. hi fact, from Cabrol, who published a long summary8 of the first chapter of Millet's monograph, to those excellent scholars of Greek monuments, A.K. 1

G. Millet, Le monastere de Daphni, Paris 1899. Ibid., 3-15. 3 Ibid., 15. 4 Ibid., 9-15. 5 Ibid., 6 and 7. 6 Ibid., 15 and 16. 1 Ibid., 16. 8 F. Cabrol, Daphni, in: DACL, XVI, Paris 1907, col. 3075-3080. 2

2

Charalambos Bouras

Orlandos9, M. Chatzidakis10, D. Pallas11, J. K der12, and A. H. S. Megaw13, no one has challenged this early date. It has been accepted without question by other scholars too14. The only expression of doubt, based on the inability to confirm the date from the written sources, was expressed five years ago by A. Cutler15. Before this time, R. Janin16 regarded a new study of the monastery complex as a pressing need. Unfortunately, the new archaeological evidence from the Daphni monastery has been scattered over a variety of publications and has not been brought together and properly evaluated in a single work of synthesis. The excavations carried out by the Ephorate of Antiquities of Attica from 1955 onwards17 were never completed and were executed on the occasion of work on arranging and organizing the site; they had a fragmentary character. The result of this is that even today the larger part of the area inside the fortification walls of the monastery has not been excavated. In 1956, Anastasios Orlandos published some of the finds18, the remains of the east gate (fig. 1, G), which he again described as Justinianic. He also excavated, however, the remains of a wall to the west of the katholikon — remains, which G. Millet had regarded as part of the narthex of the first katho-

9

A. K. Orlandos, in: EMME, vol. I, fasc. 3, Athens 1933, 217; idem, Ή ξυλόστεγος παλαιοχριστιανική βασιλική, Athens 1954,294, fig. 246; idem, Lecture on the Church of the Daphni Monastery, DChAE, ser. 2, 2 (1925) 70-75; idem, Νεώτερα ευρήματα εις την Μονήν Δαφνιού, ΑΒΜΕ VIII (1955-1956) 69-73. 10 Μ. Chatzidakis, Athenes byzantines, Athens 1958, fig. 74; idem, Δαφνί, in: Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Δομή, vol. IV. 11 D. I. Pallas, Daphni, in: RBK I, Stuttgart 1966, coll. 1120-1133. 12 J. Koder and F. Hild, Hellas und Thessalia (TIB 1), Vienna 1976, 142. 13 R. J. H. Jenkins and A. H. S. Megaw, Researches at Isthmia, ABSA 32 (1931-1932) 75. 14 R. Krautheimer, Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture, Harmondsworth 1986, 260, 347; J. M. Geniver, Daphni, in: DHGE XIV, Paris 1960, 78-80; S. Mojsilovic-Popovic, Monastery entrances around the year 1200, in: Studenica et 1'art byzantin autour de l'ann e 1200, Belgradel988, 154-155; G. Fowden, City and mountain in late Roman Attica, JHS 108 (1988) 38; K. Charalambidis, Μονή Δαφνιού, in: ThEE IV, 1964, col. 978; N. Papachatzis, Παυσανίου Αττικά. Athens 1974, 470 n. 1; K. Papaioannou, Τα ελληνικά μοναστήρια ..., Athens 1977, 29 n. 41; Α. Ν. Lawrence, A skeletal history of Byzantine fortifications, ABSA 78(1983)226. 15 A. Cutler, Daphni, in: ODB I, 587. 16 R. Janin, Les eglises et les monasteres des grands centres byzantins, Paris 1975, 312 n.l. 17 P. Lazaridis, ΑΔ 16 (1960), Χρονικά 68, pi. 54; ΑΔ 23 (1968) 119, pi. 61a. For similar work carried out by the Archaeological Society, see A. Orlandos' reports in "Εργον 1955, 115, 116; 1956, 128, 129; 1957, 101-103; 1960,230-232. 18 A. Orlandos, Νεώτερα ευρήματα (as in n. 9), 68-73.

The Daphni monastic complex reconsidered

3

likon which was subsequently demolished19. Orlandos established at this time that they were clearly later than the date at which the arches of its west portico were closed with masonry, and that they belonged to a chapel (fig. 1, B)20, probably the chapel of the guild of Athenian grocers, from which a very well-known inscription is preserved21 dating from 1764. That is to say, instead of an Early Christian or Justinianic building he established that we have a structure of the late Turkish period. Manolis Chatzidakis undertook a systematic excavation in 1959 (?) in order to locate the supposed Early Christian basilica. He sank some deep trenches inside the eleventh-century katholikon, at the bases of the large piers and pilasters that bound the central square, reasonably believing that the Middle Byzantine church would have taken the place of the earlier building. He found absolutely nothing, despite the fact that he reached bedrock. Unfortunately, this excavation was never published. A general article on Daphni in an encyclopedia22, written by M. Chatzidakis, contains the only information we have about this unproductive excavation. If, then, we attempt to summarise the studies on the architecture of the Daphni monastery from Millet's time to the present day, we have essentially the negative observations discussed above, the short duration of the excavations we noted, and only two original substantive studies23. Our new historical information about the monastery is also indirect and insignificant24. A systematic reexamination of the architecture of Daphni would require full documentation of the material and would lead to a new book, rather than to an article like the present one. I confine myself, therefore, to a brief description of the present condition of the monastery, and to some observations that may perhaps support a re-dating of the complex. 19

G. Millet, Le monastere (as in n. 1), 4. See also idem, Catalogue des negatifs de la collection Chretienne et Byzantine, Paris 1955, 95, no. C, 1311. Millet had clearly carried out an excavation on this site. 20 With the apse facing north. On this, see A.K. Orlandos, PAE, 1956; idem, Νεώτερα ευρήματα 98, 99, fig. 4, C. It was once thought that this chapel was placed above the west gate (EMME, vol. 1, fasc. 3,223) or within the ruined exonarthex of the katholikon (G. Millet, Le monastere, 45). See also E. Stikas in: DChAE ser. 4, 3 (1962-1963) 9, 10, 17. 21 See A. Orlandos, Νεώτερα ευρήματα, 98 η. 1. 22 Μ. Chatzidakis, Δαφνί, in: P. Drandakis, ed., MEE, Supplement, vol. 2, s. d., 598. 23 A. Orlandos, Νεώτερα ευρήματα, and Ε. Stikas, Στερέωσις καί αποκατάστασις του έξωνάροηκος του κα&ολικοϋ της Μονής Δαφνιού, DChAE, ser. 4, 3 (1962-1963) 1-47. 24 See Koder-Hild, Hellas (as in n. 12), 141-142. The identification of the area around Daphni with the site of Skleron in apraktikon of Athens has been proposed by E. Granstrem, I. Medvedev and D. Papachryssanthou in: Fragment d'un praktikon de la region d'Athenes (avant 1204), REB 24 (1976)

Charalambos Bouras

1. Daphni, monastery, plan (based on plans by G. Millet, A. Orlandos, E. Stikas and new measurements)

The fortifications, the peridromos (interior passageway), and the towers can best be studied on the north side of the almost square monastery enclosure (fig. 1 and plate at the end of the book). On this side there are three square projecting towers outside the wall and nineteen blind arches inside, which, together with the fortification wall, form the passageway running round the enclosure. This passageway can clearly be made out for its whole length and is about 1.60 m wide. Of these blind arches, only nine, at the west, are pre-

The Daphni monastic complex reconsidered

5

served to their full height. Of the other ten arches on the north side, the lower part of the pilasters can be seen, as they can in places on the other three sides of the enclosure. This blind arcading undoubtedly originally continued around the entire enclosure; the earth deposits, however, prevent the study of its remains25, as also of the remains of the other projecting towers, apart from the three on the north side and the one that rose above the west gate. It is at once clear that the enclosure had two or more building phases. The first phase, at any rate, can be distinguished clearly because of the way in which it is constructed of large rectangular blocks of conglomerate, some of which, at different heights, were headers and occupied the entire thickness of the pilasters and the fortification wall together. Frequently, however, the stones were laid upright in courses that alternated with other horizontal stones. On the north side of the enclosure, the pilasters of the first nine blind arches are well preserved, with the exception of one (the sixth from the west), which has been reconstructed of small stones. The problem is whether the nine preserved arches also belonged to the first phase: although they are constructed of small dressed blocks of poros, they have small grooves on either side to support wooden centering, and the sections of masonry overlying them are of ordinary rubble of rather mediocre appearance, which includes a very small number of bricks. In contrast, the masonry of the fortification wall itself, that is to say of the tympana closing the blind arches, is of meticulous masonry with a large number of bricks and wide joints, indicating that it is the original masonry. The battlements higher up are very similar from the point of view of their proportions and construction (pitched saddle and a large number of horizontal bricks, mainly in arches seven, eight and nine from the west) to those of the flat roof over the exonarthex of the katholikon26. The arches of the arcading on either side of the east tower have left their traces on the wall. In the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth space there is a modern wall, and in the nineteenth (and last) space there is now a modern gate and staircase. The interior buttress of the east tower is also modern, made of rubble masonry. In arches eleven to fifteen the original blocks of excellently laid conglomerate are preserved towards the bottom, but higher up the masonry seems to have been remade of 25

On the south side, the excavations of the 1960s have brought to light three more pilasters of the arcading, in addition to those known from the plan drawn by Millet. It should be noted that the arches along the west wing have spans of varying size which are clearly smaller than those on the other sides. 26 See E. Stikas, Στερέωσις (as in n. 23), 3, fig. 1, pis. 1 and 5,1. M. Chatzidakis believes that the battlements on the north side of the enclosure date from the Turkish period; see M. Chatzidakis, Afhenes byzantines, Athens 1958, caption to fig. 74.

6

Charalambos Bouras

small, unworked blocks of stone and with clumsy modern trowelling, through which a number of stretchers of the original masonry project at intervals. On the inside of the east tower, thin bricks set upright and horizontally can be seen towards the bottom of the masonry, resembling a cloisonne system. The tower is roofed with a barrel vault of dressed stones preserved in excellent condition, but it is not certain whether this is original. The vault over the west tower is much higher. It has collapsed, but its springings can be seen. The original construction of the pilasters which formed the blind arcading and the main fortification wall on the other three sides of the monastery enclosure, where they are visible, is everywhere the same: large rectangular blocks of αρουραίος conglomerate, sometimes set upright, accompanied by others set horizontally, with interposed bricks (whole or fragments) and excellent lime plaster. In order to distinguish the phases of the fortification, detailed documentation is required, but it is clear at present that the earliest of these phases is unified and is characterized by the structural features described above. The remains of the two gates27 have the same features. As Orlandos observed28, the west gate (fig. 1, H), with its overlying tower, was probably the main entrance to the monastery, facing the sea. The creation of cloisters on the south side of the katholikon, when considered typologically, must have been the work of the Cistercian monks who occupied the Daphni monastery in the thirteenth century, but it is generally believed29 that the porticoes and cells now preserved were rebuilt later, during the Turkish period. The problem of when the outer enclosure wall and the other buildings of the monastery fell into ruins (when the defences were restricted to the katholikon30 and the later cloisters and cells around it) will be solved only when the entire complex is systematically excavated. Let us return, however, to the older cells. Sixteen cells in the north-east corner, the remains of which are preserved in fairly good condition, corre27

The first, west gate was noted by G. Millet. The second was excavated during the 1950s and published in detail by A. Orlandos, Νεώτερα ευρήματα (as in η. 9), 69-75, figs. 4 and 5. See also P. Lazaridis, ΑΔ 23 (1968), Χρονικά 119, drawing 4 (west entrance). 28 Op. cil., 73. For the general layout of the monastery , see K. Papaioannou, Τα ελληνικά μοναστήρια σαν αρχιτεκτονικές συν&έσεις, Athens 1977, 73 η. 21; Α. Orlandos, Μοναστηριακή αρχιτεκτονική, Athens 21958, 14 η. 3, 17η. 1, 26. 29 Ε. Stikas, Στερέωσις (as in η. 23), note 3; Α. Orlandos, Νεώτερα ευρήματα, 69; Κ. Papaioannou, op. cit., 101 n. 48. A different view was expressed by M. Chatzidakis, Βυζαντινά μνημεία Αττικής καί Βοιωτίας, Architecture, Mosaics, Wall paintings, Athens 1956. 30 The windows and openings of the exonarthex were walled up, a flat roof with battlements was created, and so on; see above, note 23 (E. Stikas).

The Daphni monastic complex reconsidered

7

spond to the blind arches in the north and east fortification walls, and extend into their thickness. They were certainly two-storey structures. Traces of the plastering of some of them are preserved, along with some clumsy, functional recesses in the north wall. These cells, however, were not contemporary with the wall, as G. Millet thought31: first, because there are clear vertical joints between their partition walls and the pilasters of the blind arches, and second, because they are of cheaper masonry, with smaller stones and bricks. The remains of foundations that ran in front of the cells, about 2.5 m away, did not originally support a stylobate, as Millet believed32, but rather belong to a wall which, at ground floor level, at least, formed a long, rectangular room about 43 m long and 5.50 m wide inside the fortification wall, exactly as in the west half of the north wing. There was a fairly similar structure in the east wing, too. In the west wing, the remains of cells seen by G. Millet no longer survive. It is almost certain, however, that a narrow corridor, about 1.50 m wide, ran the entire length of the inside of the fortification, and its wall formed the rear of the cells. The large stone blocks of the initial building phase can again be seen in the remains of this wall33. The ruined refectory of the monastery (fig. 1, D) is known only from the plans published by Millet and Orlandos34. It was of cloisonne masonry, though at intervals it had upright dressed blocks of poros that occupied the entire thickness of the wall. The internal pilasters of the building were made of large blocks of conglomerate laid in a manner similar to that of the blind arcading of the fortification wall. The bath-house (fig. 1, E) was excavated35 in the 1950s, and remains essentially unpublished. Its superstructure has been completely demolished, and the building can be studied only at the level of the hypocausts. Access to it is from the west. The two niches on either side, the axis of which is 4.20 m from the west wall, support the view that only half the main room of the baths was excavated, and that its length is approaching 8.5 m. The niches at the axis and the corners were made of meticulously dressed blocks of poros, horizontally laid bricks and excellent quality lime-plaster, while the outer walls have typical Middle Byzantine masonry, with monolithic orthostates at the corners, 31

G. Millet, Le monastere (as in n. 1), 6, 7, pi. 2 (general plan). Ibid., 6. 33 In the north end of this wall, which is preserved in better condition, there can be seen the familiar masonry of large rectangular blocks, set upright at intervals. 34 A. K. Orlandos, Μοναστηριακή αρχιτεκτονική, Athens 1958, 42, fig. 47; see also 46-^9, 57-59. 35 P. Lazaridis, ΑΔ 16 (1960), Χρονικά 68, pi. 56a. 32

8

Charalambos Bouras

partly dressed stones and a large number of horizontal bricks, also laid with good-quality plaster. To the south of the modern cells is a large, rectangular room (fig. 1, F) that is also unpublished36. It has dimensions of 23 χ 6.5 m, and its main axis runs east-west. The masonry is Middle Byzantine, with upright stone blocks at the corners and entrance, and at intervals in the walls. Columns about 25 cm in diameter are arranged against the south wall. Only one such column is preserved on the north wall. The use of the room is unknown37. In the rest of the excavated area, the remains of walls which follow a roughly regular plan are preserved; their function cannot be determined, however, and they cannot be satisfactorily dated. This side of the monastery was probably destroyed before the erection of the Cistercian cloisters, since the walls of these rest on the remains of the Middle Byzantine structures. It is also likely that the building material was looted over a long period, since the superstructure of the buildings, and the fortifications on three sides of the enclosure, have disappeared. The typology of the perimeter wall of the Daphni monastery, with its projecting square towers and deep blind arcading, carrying the peridromos used by the garrison, is not solely a feature of the early period, as Millet thought38. It was a simple architectural solution, found already in antiquity39, and was also used in the Middle and Late Byzantine periods. The issues connected with Byzantine fortress architecture have been little studied40, and the problems involved in the dating of buildings (and forts) that were continually repaired over a period of centuries, are myriad. One can point, however, to examples of the same period as Daphni, or a little later, with the same building style. In addition to the fortifications erected by Justinian41, we may note deep blind arcading in the section between the Tekfur Serai and the tower of Anemas in the fortifications of Constantinople42, known by the name of Manuel Komne36

This too was excavated in the 1950s; see P. Lazaridis, op. cit., 68, pi. 545 vi. On the axis, four metres away from the east wall, part of a built pier or table base is preserved. The floor which was of clay tiles (see P. Lazaridis, loc. cit.) has been destroyed. 38 G. Millet, Le monastere (as in n. 1), 6-7. 39 It had in fact been one of the principles of fortress building from as early as the time of Philon of Byzantium; see Μηχανική σύνταξις, ed. R. Schoene, Berlin 1893, book V 84, 7-8. 40 C. Foss and D. Winfield, Byzantine Fortifications: An Introduction, Pretoria 1986; A. N. Lawrence, A skeletal history of Byzantine fortifications, ABSA 78 (1983) 171-228, pis. 8-21. 41 N. Duval, L'etat actuel des recherches sur les fortifications de Justinien en Afrique, Corsi Ravennati III, Ravenna 1983, 181-194, fig. 4; Foss-Winfield, op. cit., 9, fig. 25, 214-215 (Sergioupolis). 42 B. Meyer-Plath and A. M. Schneider, Die Landmauer von Konstantinopel, Berlin 1943, 37

The Daphni monastic complex reconsidered

9

nos, in fortified monasteries at Latmos43, in the castles of Zichna44 and Peritheorion45, in the Byzantine walls of the Athenian Acropolis46 (now demolished), in the fortification wall of Androusa47, the castle on the islet of Kalamos48 in Akarnania, and other, later examples. Typological observations relating to the interior design of the monastery strongly point to a re-dating. Now that it has been established that the cells in the north-east corner do not belong to the initial phase of the fortifications of the Daphni monastery, what seemed to be a stylobate in front of them is simply the foundations of a wall built on the projection of the line of the other wall that formed the long room immediately to the west. Long, probably barrel-vaulted rooms thus ran along the entire length of the north wing, with much narrower ones (like corridors) along the whole of the west wing, and possibly similar ones on the east and south sides. This characteristic layout is to be found, however, in three other Middle Byzantine monasteries in Greece: Hosios Loukas49, Hosios Meletios50, and the Metamorphosis at Sagmatas51. The function of these ground-floor rooms has not been determined with any certainty. It is not impossible that they were designed as simple, open-air corridors52. A. Orlandos believed that they were the substructures of twostorey cells and were used as storerooms or stables53, while the best preserved, lOOff, pis. 40, 54c, 55b; B. C. P. Tsangadas, The Fortification and Defence of Constantinople, New York 1980, 22-33. 43 Th. Wiegand, Der Latmos, Berlin 1913, 40-41, figs. 53-55; 51-55, fig. 77. 44 N. Moutsopoulos, To βυζαντινό κάστρο της Ζίχνας, Thessalonike 1987, 184-189, figs. 13, 15-18. "Ibid., 197η. 53. 46 R. Bonn, Die Propyl en der Akropolis von Athen, Berlin-Stuttgart 1882, pl. 11; D. Giraud, Παρατηρήσεις σε αρχιτεκτονικά καί ιστορικά ζητήματα του ναοΰ της Άΰηνάς Νίκης. Athens 1989. 47 Α. Bon, La Moree Franque, Paris 1969, 637-639, pis. 94-97. The pointed arches of the arcading confirm that it was built in the thirteenth century. 48 M. Phillipa-Apostolou, To κάστρο της Αντιπάρου, Athens 1978, 37, fig. 73. The castle, which is not securely dated, despite its importance, remains essentially unpublished; see P. Soustal, Nikopolis und Kephallenia (TIB 3), Vienna 1981, 169. 49 E. Stikas, To οίκοδομικόν χρονικόν της μονής του 'Οσίου Λουκά Φωκίδος, Athens 1970, insert plate I, area XII (old storerooms) and beneath the cells in the west wing. 50 A. K. Orlandos, Ή μονή του 'Οσίου Μελετίου καί τα παραλαύρια αυτής, ΑΒΜΕ V (1939-1940)55, fig. 10. 51 Α. Κ. Orlandos, Ή εν Βοιωτία μονή του Σαγματα, ΑΒΜΕ VI (1951) 78,fig.3. 52 It would be difficult to support a vault or a wooden roof above the arches in the arcading if the passageway was at the same level it appears to be today. 53 A. Orlandos, ΑΒΜΕ V (1939-1940) 56. In the case of Daphni in particular, D. I. Pallas considered that they probably were used as a refectory or a hospital, see RBK. I (as in n. 11), col. 1120.

10

Charalambos Bouras

to the north of the church of the Virgin at Hosios Loukas, is barrel-vaulted and remains unused. In the three monasteries referred to above, certainly major changes have been made to the original plan during their long, continuous life, but the scholars who published these monuments believe that the long rectangular rooms belong to the original building phases. Millet believed54 that the fact of the axis of the katholikon not being parallel with the wings of the Daphni complex proved that they were not contemporary and, as a corollary, that the surrounding buildings were of an early date. The general design of the above three important Middle Byzantine Greek monasteries demonstrates the opposite. It is also worth noting Orlandos' comment55, that there was a roofed corridor at the east gate (which he dated to the Early Christian period) "... in which case it may be regarded as a forerunner of the form of the diabatikon of the Byzantine monasteries". It is, precisely, a Middle Byzantine diabatikon. The re-dating of the defensive structures of the Daphni monastery must be supported mainly by structural and morphological arguments. As has already been noted, the large stones in the monastery fortifications are not spolia from ancient buildings, for nowhere they preserve traces of anathyrosis or of clamp sockets or dowels. They are blocks, specially dressed for this purpose, of a conglomerate56 probably quarried in the neighbouring Thriasian plain. Its composition is such that it corrodes easily and is very friable, in contrast with poros, which is a far superior building material. Both these materials were used at Daphni, together also with baked bricks and occasionally with small stones: in the katholikon exclusively poros, in the fortifications mainly conglomerate, and both materials together in the other functional buildings. The large size of the blocks (length up to 1.60 m and height 0.40-0.60 m) presupposes the use of lifting mechanisms during building, which is attested in Greece during the eleventh and twelfth centuries. The use of large blocks of poros or limestone, placed upright, occupying the entire thickness of the wall, and forming crosses or T-shapes on the fa9ade and, with the assistance of smaller stones, securing the stability of the wall, is a very

54

G. Millet, Le monastere (as in n. 1), 4. A. Orlandos, Νεώτερα ευρήματα (as in η. 9), 73 η. 4; see also idem, Μοναστηριακή αρχιτεκτονική (as in n. 28), 17 n. 2. 56 This is called "αρουραίος λίοος" by the ancients; see A. K. Orlandos, Τα υλικά δομής των αρχαίων 'Ελλήνων, II, Athens 1958, 70-71. 55

The Daphni monastic complex reconsidered

11

common style in churches57 of the so-called "Helladic School", and also in a number of other important buildings58 from the beginning of the eleventh to the thirteenth centuries. It is found at Daphni in the refectory, the long, rectangular room, the bath-house and the functional monastery buildings of indeterminate use. The narrow pilasters of the blind arcading mean that there are no crosses or T-shapes in the fortification walls, but the same principle is nonetheless followed. The horizontal blocks occupy the entire thickness of the pilasters and alternate vertically with other blocks (either in pairs or singly) set upright and occupying the entire thickness of the structure. Thin bricks help to keep the courses horizontal. The similarity between this type of construction and the opus quadratum of Roman architecture led Millet to his early, Early Christian or Justinian, date for the walls of the Daphni monastery59. We know today, however, that masonry styles in Attica at this time were completely different: they were executed in great haste, mainly using spolia from demolished buildings60, or continued the Roman tradition61 of vertically alternating courses of rubble and baked brick62. There is also the case of cast materials, sheathed with small or large stones-spolia (as in the Hexamilion wall and the fortress at Isthmia), though the dating of these to the reign of Justinian63 is not based on external evidence. 57

The subject is briefly examined by A. Orlandos in ABME XI (1969) 110-113. See also G. Hadji-Minaglou, Le grand appareil dans les eglises des DC-ΧΙΓ siecles de la Grece du Sud, BCH 118,1 (1994) 161-197. 58 Such as the Refectory of the Monastery of Hosios Loukas (E. Stikas, To οϊκοδομικόν χρονικό ν [ as in η. 49], 216) and the unexplained building at Messene (A. Orlandos, ABME XI [1969] 141-147, figs. 49, 52, 54). 59 G. Millet, Le monastere, 4 n. 7, 5, 6. A similar line of thought led to the dating of a twelfth century monument to the sixth or seventh century, see Ch. Barla, Ό βυζαντινός ναός της Σουβάλας, in: Χαριστήριον εις Ά. Κ.'Ορλάνδον, IV, Athens 1967, 317-318. 60 For Athens, see A. Frantz, The Athenian Agora, XXIV: Late Antiquity, Princeton 1988, 5-12, 19, 126, pis. 7-14, 34, 60, 61, and J. Travlos, Πολεοδομική έξέλιξις των Άΰηνών, Athens 1960, 144, 145, fig. 92 (Justinian wall, now demolished). For Isthmia and the Hexamilion Wall, see R. J. H. Jenkins and A. H. S. Megaw, Researches at Isthmia, ABSA 32 (1931-1932) 68-76; O. Broneer, Excavations at Isthmia, Hesperia 27 (1958) 20-22, pi. 8c, d; D. I. Pallas, To 'Εξαμίλιον τείχος έπϊ του ΊσΟμοΰ, ΑΔ 17 (1961-1962) Β, 78-83, pis. 92-93. 61

Η. Dodge, Brick construction in Roman Greece and Asia Minor. Roman architecture in the Greek world, London 1987, 108. 62

A. Orlandos, Ή ξυλόστεγος βασιλική (as in n. 9), 235-236, figs. 190a, b. Similar methods can be seen in the fortifications of Constantinople and Nikaia (A. M. Schneider, Die Stadtmauer von Iznik, Istanbuler Forschungen, Berlin 1938, 9-19, 36-43, pis. 42-43) which have small dressed stones instead of rubble masonry. 63 See note 60 above.

12

Charalambos Bouras

Finally, the marble architectural members of the Early Christian period at Daphni gave Millet the impression that they came from buildings that had existed earlier on the same site. As with every major Byzantine building programme, however, in this case, too, there has been "συναγωγή της ύλης" — that is, marble members of all kinds had been gathered together, of which some had been used and others not. In addition to those published by Millet64, many other ancient Greek65, Roman66, Early Christian67, or Byzantine spolia have since been found, but they cannot be used to date the buildings in the monastery complex. The conclusion to be drawn from the foregoing is that none of the known buildings of the Daphni monastery is earlier than the eleventh century. The proposed re-dating of the Daphni monastery raises once again the question of how far there were any notable coenobitic monasteries in south Greece before the period of the iconoclastic controversy. The beginnings of the two types of monasticism, based on the lavra and the coenobium, are to be sought in Palestine and Egypt; and from the fifth century onwards, there was a large number of monks in Syria, where various types of building were designed to meet their needs68. Monasticism flourished in Constantinople during the sixth century69, and early monasteries in Thessaloniki70 and on Thasos71 may be 64

Millet, Le monastere (as in n. 1), 8-16. As we have already seen, very few of these members in fact date from the fourth, fifth, or sixth centuries. 65 P. Lazaridis, ΑΔ 16 (1960), Χρονικά 68, 669, pis. 50d, 51a, c, d, 52d, 53c, and E. Stikas, To οϊκοδομικόν χρονικόν (as in n. 49), 25. 66 A group of five columns of Roman times, probably from a portico or a porch (the lower parts of the shafts were convex fluted) were used in the construction during the twelfth century of the open stoa, later exonarthex of the katholikon; see E. Stikas, Στερέωσις (as in n. 23), 38-41, figs. 18, 19, pi. 56.10. For other finds of Roman times, see P. Lazaridis, ΑΔ 23 (1968), Χρονικά 119, pi. 63a-d. 67 Such as two impost blocks from pilasters, with acanthus and water leaves, now in the monastery courtyard; see A. Orlandos, Ή ξυλόστεγος βασιλική (as in n. 9), 294,fig.246. The association made ibid., in footnote 2, between these and the spolia known to Millet is an error. 68 R. Krautheimer, Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture, Harmondsworth 1986, 95, 96, 135, 344. 69 In 536 there were 70 monasteries in the capital; see A.-M. Talbot, Monasticism, in: ODB II, 1392-1394. See also P. Charanis, The Monk as an Element of Byzantine Society, DOP 25 (1971)63-113. 70 Such as that of Hosios David; see A. Xyngopoulos, To καϋολικόν της μονής Λατόμου εν Θεσσαλονίκη, ΑΔ 12 (1929) 142-180. According to Xyngopoulos, the monastery was founded at the end of the fifth century (see ibid., p. 175). 71 D. Feissel, Un monastere paleochretien Thasos d'apres une inscriptionpeu connue. Actes du X' Congres Intern. d'ArcheoIogie Chretienne, II, Vatican City 1984, 113-120; Chr.

The Daphni monastic complex reconsidered

13

attributed to the prestige and influence of the capital. The monasteries known from roughly the same period on the Greek islands, Crete72, Naxos73, and Samos74, are probably connected with examples in Asia Minor. Procopius refers to specific works by Justinian at monasteries in Jerusalem, Mesopotamia and Asia Minor75. He does not, however, cite a single monastery in the Balkans, including Greece, but refers only to city fortifications or strategic sites76. And when, in his Anekdota, he refers to works by Justinian in Greece, he notes77 that there was no attempt to restore any public buildings in Athens, and that it was impossible to make any progress there. This clearly suggests that it was unlikely that the Daphni monastery was founded during the reign of Justinian. The Novels with which the coenobia were instituted by the emperor78 presumably met with no response in Greece up to the rapid cultural collapse in the penultimate decade of the sixth century. We know of not a single dated monastery south of Mount Olympos before the Iconoclastic period. No abbots of Greek monasteries are known in the lists of Synods79. And later, Moschos in his Leimon, notes not a single monastery in Greece. The earliest, fully established monastery in Greece is probably the Dormition of the Virgin at Skripou80, founded in 873, of which only the katholikon is preserved. The founding of a large monastery in Attica, probably in the last quarter of the eleventh century81, on a site of strategic significance82 for medieval Athens, Bakirtzis, Τί συνέβη στη Θάσο στις αρχές του 7ου αιώνα μ. Χ; in: Φιλία "Επη εις Γ. Ε. Μυλωνάν, III, Athens 1989, 339. For the excavation of the monastery of the Archangels, see Chr. Bakirtzis and Ch. Tsioumis, ΑΔ 29 (1974), Χρονικά 31 and 33-35. 72 D. Tsoungarakis, Ή βυζαντινή Κρήτη, Heraklion 1990, 108, 118; J. Albani, Excavations at Pseira, an Early Byzantine Rural Monastery, in: XIX. Intern. Congress of Byzantine Studies, Copenhagen 1996, Abstracts of Communications, no. 4114. 73 N. Drandakis, Νάξος. Βυζαντινή τέχνη στην Ελλάδα, Athens 1989, 18 (Monastery of the Panagia Drosiani). 74 W. Wrede, Von Misokampos auf Samos, Athenische Mitteilungen 54 (1929) 75, and A. M. Schneider, Samos in fr hchristlicher und byzantinischer Zeit, ibid., 96, flg. l. 75 Procopius, Περί κτισμάτων, ed. H. B. Dewing and G. Downey, Cambridge Mass. 1961, 356-360 and 198 respectively. 76 Ibid., 238 (IV, II, 29ff). 77 Procopius, Ανέκδοτα, ed. M. Isambert, Paris 1856, 316 (XXVI, 33). 78 A.-M. Talbot, Koinobion, in: ODB II, 1136. 79 See Mansi 8, 906-912 (Proceedings of the Synod of 536 and list of monasteries), and Mansi 13, 152-156 (Proceedings of the Synod of 787 and list of hundred monasteries). 80 M. Sotiriou, Ό ναός της Σκριποΰς της Βοιωτίας, ΑΕ 1931, 121. 81 Contemporary, that is, with the katholikon, which goes back to this period on stylistic grounds. 82 See G. Fowden, City and Mountain in late Roman Attica, JHS 108 (1988) 58, 59.

14

Charalambos Bouras

is of great interest, and must inevitably be associated with the stout fortifications of the monastery. Unfortunately, with regard to this question, too, the silence of the written sources prevents us from drawing any direct associations; it is only through systematic excavation and architectural analysis that we have any hope of shedding light on the difficult historical problems of the Daphni monastery.

Ex-Voto Therapy A Note on a Copper Plaque with St. Hermolaos* Susan A. Boyd In the past decade or so, Cyril Mango has published several studies that have focused on healing and miracle-working saints, their shrines, and their Vitae or Miracula1. In these works he has examined the pertinent hagiographical literature with a critical and skeptical eye to uncover what hidden motives the authors might have had in compiling these texts and to discern the reasons for the rapid fame of certain holy men and women, the wide dissemination of their cults, and the accelerated rise of their shrines. Where others might see simple piety as the driving force, Mango describes the competitiveness of the saints' cults, the promotional character of the miracula, and the "marketing" of the healing saints and their shrines; nor are their "commercial" aspects overlooked2. The subject of my contribution honoring Professor Mango is an intriguing Byzantine votive relief on which is depicted the elegant standing figure of St. Hermolaos, a priest and one of the healing saints (Figs. 1-3). It seems an appropriate choice because the motivation for its donation may be viewed either as pious devotion or as self-interest, or perhaps, both: the relief is not a charisterion, an object offered in thanksgiving for a cure already received3, but a kind of pre-payment for the future fulfillment of the request. I would like to thank Dr. Nancy P. Sevcenko and Dr. Sharon Gerstel for their many helpful suggestions, bibliographic references, and especially for reading a draft of the text. Any mistakes are entirely my own. 1 C. Mango, On the History of the Templon and the Martyrien of St. Artemios at Constantinople, Zograf 10 (1979) 1-13 (repr.: idem, Studies on Constantinople, Aldershot 1993, XV); idem, Aspects of Syrian Piety, in: Ecclesiastical Silver Plate in Sixth-Century Byzantium,ed.S. A. Boyd and M. Mundell Mango, Washington D.C. 1992, 99-105; idem, On the Cult of Saints Kosmos and Damian at Constantinople, in: θυμίαμα στη μνήμη της Λασκαρίνας Μπούρα, ed. A. Delevorrias, I, Athens 1994, 189-192; idem, Saints, in: The Byzantines, ed. G. Cavallo, Chicago-London 1997, 255-280 (first published as II Santo, in: L'uomo bizantino,Rome-Bari 1991,3 83-422). In addition,Prof. Mango kindly sent me an unpublished paper,//ea//«g Shrines and Images, that he had delivered at the 1990 Byzantine Symposium at Dumbarton Oaks. 2 See note 1 and idem, The Pilgrim's Motivation, in: Akten des XII. Internationalen Kongresses f r Christliche Arch ologie, Bonn 1991 (= JbAC 20,1 [1994]) 1-9. 3 G. Vikan, Icons and Icon Piety in Early Byzantium, in: Byzantine East, Latin West: Art Historical Studies in Honor of Kurt Weitzmann, ed. C. Moss and K. Kiefer, Princeton 1995, 570ff, describes these as "pro-active offerings"; idem, Early Byzantine Pilgrimage Devotionalia as Evidence of the Appearance of Pilgrimage Shrines, in: Akten . . . Bonn 1991 (as in n. 2), 382; M. Mundell Mango, Silver from Early Byzantium: The Kaper Koraon and Related Treasures (The Walters Gallery of Art), Baltimore MD 1986, 5-6 and no. 71.

16

Susan A. Boyd

Description In 1987, Dumbarton Oaks acquired a large copper repousse relief of exceptional artistic quality but incomplete on three sides4. Represented is one of the lesser-known anargyroi, St. Hermolaos, standing frontally, holding a closed jewel-covered codex in his left hand, his right hand held before his chest in a gesture of blessing. He is tonsured, has short hair combed over the forehead in defined locks, and large prominent ears. The high quality of the craftsmanship is evident in the careful delineation of the features of his face, with its smoothly arched brows, wide-set eyes with pupil and iris defined, long straight nose, and rounded lips. His longish, pointed beard is divided into four wavy strands. Very fine engraved lines delineate both hair and beard that, in style and form, find close parallels on several ivory carvings dating either to the tenth or the eleventh century5. Dressed in priestly vestments, Hermolaos wears a phelonion that falls in softly rounded V-shaped folds, a long tunic with richly embroidered cuffs (epimanikia) decorated with a vermiculated design, an embroidered cloth (encheirion) with a fringe that hangs down over his right thigh, and a narrow stole (epitracheliori) around his neck that falls in two long bands 4

The Glory of Byzantium: Art and Culture of the Middle Byzantine Era, A. D. 843-I27I, ed. H. C. Evans and W. D. Wixom, New York 1997, 159-160, no. 105 (S. Boyd). Ace. no. 87.2; dimensions: 32 χ 24.3 cm. It was acquired in 1987 from N. Koutoulakis, Geneva, and was formerly in the collection of G. Feuardent, Paris. When first seen, the background of the relief was dented and uneven and four distinct creases indicated that it had once been folded into a square; harsh cleaning had stripped the sheet down to the raw, reddish-pink color of natural copper. Unfortunately, by the time it came to Dumbarton Oaks, the plaque had been heavily restored by heating (annealing) and burnishing to remove the creases and smooth out the background, and the front had been very heavily patinated. This treatment resulted in the loss of some of the fine detail of the engraved und punched decoration, while the thickly applied patina obscured even more. Much of this patination has now been removed, but some of the details remain less sharp than when first seen. There are many vertical scratches in the ground around the figure. 5 Cf. esp. two large ivory plaques with standing Apostles in Vienna and Venice: Glory of Byzantium (as in n. 4), nos. 89-90 (I. Kalavrezou); A. Goldschmidt and K. Weitzmann, Die byzantinischen Elfenbeinskulpturen des Χ.-ΧΠΙ. Jahrhunderts, II, Berlin 1934 (repr. Berlin 1979), 38 no. 43 (Venice), no. 44 (Vienna); note also their similarly large ears. The date of these ivories, which belong to the so-called "Romanos" group, is disputed. I. KalavrezouMaxeiner redated the famous Romanos ivory in the Louvre, and the group of ivories most closely connected with it, from the tenth to the eleventh century: Eudokia Makrembolitissa and the Romanos Ivory, DOP 32 (1977) 307-325; D. Gaborit-Chopin disagrees with the later date, retaining that of the tenth-century, in: Byzance: L 'art byzantin dans les collections publiques franqaises (exh. Musoe du Louvre), Paris 1992, 229, 232-233, no. 148; A. Cutler also prefers the earlier date: The Date and Significance of the Romanos Ivory, in: Byzantine East, Latin West (as in n.3) 605-610.

Ex-voto therapy

17

ending well below his knees. These terminate in a fringe, above which are three bands of embroidered decoration, each with a different design, engraved in minute detail. Two of these vestments, the epimanikia and encheirion, are specifically reserved for episcopal use, but, curiously, the saint does not wear the cross-decorated stole (omophoriori) of that office6. While Hermolaos is known to have been a priest, the preserved texts do not mention his elevation to episcopal rank. For reasons that are little understood, he is sometimes dressed as a monk, sometimes as a priest, and sometimes as a bishop7. The particular vestments that he wears place him somewhere between priest and bishop. Except for the ambiguity of his garments, his image is otherwise fairly standard: bearded, holding a codex in his left hand, his right hand raised and blessing, or sometimes pointing to the book. He does not carry the well-known attributes of the physician saints, the scalpel or lancet or the medicine box. The conception of the figure is relatively naturalistic, with the drapery falling in soft folds, breaking over both knees to reveal the body beneath. The highly detailed rendering of the facial features, hair and beard, and especially the richly embroidered decoration of his vestments betray a very skillful hand. The saint's name is inscribed vertically, left and right, engraved in double line letters with triangular serifs, 0 AHOC // EPMOAAOC. The votive intention of the relief is explicitly stated in the inscription that runs along the top and right sides: [t ΥΠ]ΕΡ HFHAC KE COTHPHAC KE AECEOC AM[APTICON] ... "For the health and salvation and the remission of the sins [of] ... [this was presented]". The donor's name is missing along with the last words of the dedication. The formula is standard except for the use of HTHAC (ύγιείας) in place of ευχής, but the reason for this substitution is clearly due to Hermolaos' profession as a physician saint. There are two common phoneti6

ODB, I, 696, 713, 725; III, 1526. Monk: Palermo, Martorana (12th c.): E. Kitzinger, The Mosaics of St. Mary's of the Admiral in Palermo, Washington D.C. 1990, 160, 164, col. pi. XII, figs. 82-83; Vita icon of St. Panteleimon at Mt. Sinai (13th c.): as in note 12. Priest: Kastoria, Panagia Mavriotissa (12th c.): Ν. Κ. Moutsopoulos, Καστοριά, Παναγία ή Μαυριώτισσα, Athens 1967, fig. 92; Mani, Η. Strategos at Boularion (12th c.): Ν. Β. Drandakes, Βυζαντιναι τοιχογραφίαι της Μέσα Μάνης, Athens 1964, pi. 22; Palermo, Cappella Palatina (12th c.): E. Kitzinger, / Mosaici del periodo Normanno in Sicilia, I, La Cappella Palatina di Palermo, Palermo 1992, fig. 126. Bishop: Cappadocia, Sakli Kilise (llth c.): M. Restle, Byzantine Wallpainting in Asia Minor, II, Greenwich CT 1967, fig. 42; Alepochori, Church of the Savior (13th c.): D. Mouriki, Oi τοιχογραφίες τον Σωτήρα κοντά στο 'Αλεποχώρι Μεγαρίδος, Athens 1978, 44, pis. 60-61; Venice, Treasury of San Marco, Icon of the Archangel Michael (late 10th-l 1th c.): H. R. Hahnloser, ed., et al., // Tesoro diSan Marco, II, // Tesoro e il Museo, Florence 1971, no. 17 (reverse), pi. XX; The Treasury of San Marco, Venice, ed. D. Buxton (exh. cat., The British Museum, London), Milan 1984, no. 12. 7

18

Susan A. Boyd

cisms: using omicron in place of omega and eta in place of iota and upsilon. The inscription is framed by two undulating ribbons, and this band forms a border along the top and right sides of the plaque. The same band, but without the inscription, must have framed the left and bottom edges, but it has broken off on these sides, taking with it the feet of the saint. The lower two-thirds of the right side, including a large section of the background, is also lost.

The Life ofHermolaos in Texts and in Art The question that first comes to mind about this relief is why Hermolaos? Although he is classed with the anargyroi, physician saints who charged nothing for their cures (lit. "without silver"), he is considerably less famous, and he is not known to have produced any miraculous cures. His fame rests principally on the fact that, as a priest, he is said to have converted Panteleimon to Christianity and "taught him the medical arts through Christ"8, that is, taught him how to use the spiritual powers derived from his Christian faith to perform miracles. The main events of his life are collected in several sources. Hermolaos, together with his fellow martyrs, Hermippos and Hermokrates, receive a brief mention in the Constantinopolitan Synaxarium (July 26), and there is also a later passio9. Fuller treatment ofHermolaos' life is found in the Life of St. Panteleimon by Symeon Metaphrastes, in Panteleimon's notice in the Synaxarium (July 27), and in twopassios and a laudatio of Panteleimon10. His martyrdom in 305, like that of Panteleimon, occurred in Nikomedeia under Emperor Maximian, where he was beheaded, along with his followers Hermippos and Hermokrates. That Hermolaos' cult was active in Constantinople in the tenth century is clear from his commemoration in the Synaxarium and the Typikon of Hagia Sophia11. As Panteleimon's spiritual mentor,

8

την δε κατά Χριστόν ΐατρικήν τέχνην: Synaxarium ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae (Propylaeum ad Acta Sanctorum Novembris), ed. H. Delehaye, Brussels 1902, 847 (Panteleimon's notice). Apparently, Panteleimon had already studied medicine with a famous pagan physician, Euphrosynos, but Hermolaos taught him to heal the sick by invoking Christ's name. 9 Synax. CP, 843 (as in n. 8); for the passio, see V. Latysev, Menologii Anonymi Byzantini, SaeculiX, II, St. Petersburg 1912, 214-216. 10 PG 115, cols. 448-477; Synax. CP, 847 (as in n. 8); for the particular texts that concern us here, see: V. Latysev, Hagiographica graeca inedita (Me"moires de l'Acade"mie imporiale de St.-Petersbourg, VHP sir., XII, 2, St. Petersburg 1914,40-53 (passio), and 53-65 (laudatio). For another passio see V. Latysev, Menologii (as in n. 9), 216-222. Other texts are listed by F. Halkin, BHG II, Brussels31957, 166-169, s.v. Panteleemon. 11 J. Mateos, Le Typicon de la Grande Eglise. Ms. Sainte-Croix, no. 40, X* siede (Orientalia Christiana Analecta 165), I, Rome 1962, 351.

Ex-voto therapy

19

Hermolaos remained closely associated with that saint's life and cult in the written sources. The pairing of mentor and pupil occurs in art where images of Hermolaos and Panteleimon appear together on icons, reliquaries, and in monumental decoration. On the famous Vita icon of St. Panteleimon from Mt. Sinai, dating to the late twelfth or early thirteenth century, sixteen scenes from Panteleimon's life frame the central portrait12. Hermolaos figures in four of these scenes though he is identified by inscription in only two. In all four scenes he is depicted as an old man with light gray hair and a pointed beard who is dressed as a monk with a dark gray mantle over a white tunic. It is surely significant that the first two scenes (top left) are not of Panteleimon's physical birth but his spiritual rebirth — his first encounter with (or adoption by) Hermolaos, and his learning medicine from the priest, a scene which implicitly includes his conversion to Christianity. In the two other scenes, Panteleimon shows him the dead snake (an event from a later passio)13 (upper left) and he is baptized by Hermolaos (upper right). The only other narrative treatment of Hermolaos' life is in the Church of St. Panteleimon at Nerezi, built in 1164, where two and possibly three scenes from his life and martyrdom are depicted. The first scene shows the condemnation of Hermolaos, together with Hermippos and Hermokrates, by Maximian; the second shows his beheading and his burial with his brothers14. A third scene depicts a miracle of St. Panteleimon when he was thrown into the sea weighted with a heavy stone as ordered by the emperor Maximian. Hamann-Mac Lean has identified these figures as Christ, in the guise of Hermolaos, walking on water (as he did in the miracle with St. Peter) and leading the saint by his hand to the shore15. 12

Glory of Byzantium (as in n. 4), no. 249 (N. P. Sevcenko); Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery of Saint Catherine, ed. K. Manafis, Athens 1990, 115, 179, fig. 53. 13 Latysev, Hagiographica (as in n. 10), 42. 14 R. Hamann-Mac Lean and H. Hallensleben, Die Monumentalmalerei in Serbien und Makedonien, Gießen 1963, fig. 45 and plan 7a, with identifications of the narthex scenes. In the beheading scene, Hamann-MacLean identifies the figure as Panteleimon, but this saint is never shown as an old man with a beard; it seems more likely that the person being beheaded is Hermolaos; see also, I. Sinkevic, The Church of St. Panteleimon at Nerezi: Architecture, painting and sculpture (Ph. D. Dissertation 1994), University of Michigan Microfilm 1996, 173-175 and pi. 25, who identifies this scene as the beheading of Hermolaos; she identifies two scenes on the north wall as the beheading and burial of Panteleimon (ibid., 175-177, pi. 23). 15 R. Hamann-Mac Lean, Grundlegung zu einer Geschichte der mittelalterlichen Monumentalmalerei in Serbien und Makedonien, Gießen 1976, 271. The source cited for this scene is Panteleimon's notice in the Synaxarium (Synax. CP [as in n. 8], 848.13ff), where Christ is described as appearing in the guise of Hermolaos during Panteleimon's torture in the vat of boiling lead as well as when he was cast into the sea. These incidents, including Christ's ap-

20

Susan A. Boyd

Hermolaos in Decorative Programs Narrative sequences with Hermolaos are, however, rare. In decorative programs of the later eleventh and twelfth centuries, he is usually represented among the ranks of saints on the soffits of arches or on the lower registers of the church walls, but always in the company of other anargyroi16. Those with whom he is most frequently depicted are Kosmas and Damian, Cyrus and John, and Panteleimon. The frequent grouping of these six saints in monumental church decoration and on liturgical objects may reflect their communal invocation during the rite of Proskomide when these six saints are honored as "the holy and miracle-working anargyroi", and each name is recited individually17. As early as the tenth century, Hermolaos, Panteleimon, Kosmas and Damian are represented on a bronze cross in Athens as bust-length figures within medallions placed at the ends of the cross-arms18. In the late tenth to early eleventh century, Hermolaos is depicted with his five fellow anargyroi, within medallions, on the silver-gilt reverse of the superb gold and enamel icon of the archangel Michael in the Treasury of San Marco19. He appears again in the early eleventh-century church of the Panagia ton Chalkeon, Thessaloniki (1028) where, exceptionally, he is grouped with the anargyroi, John, Cyrus, and the little-known Thalelaios. They are honored by their unusual placement on the eastern wall of the apse, just below the register with four standing bishops20. That Hermolaos and Thalelaios were singled out for this honor is pearence as Hermolaos, are also described in thepassio in Latysev, Hagiographica (as in n. 10), 62.20-24, and in the laudatio (ibid., 70. 29-33); see also, idem, Menologii (as in n. 9), 220. 23-27. 16 See, inter alia, Kastoria: Hagioi Anargyroi (SS. Panteleimon and Hermolaos, Kosmas and Damian, Cyrus and John); Panagia Mavriotissa (Hermolaos was paired with a second saint, now lost, on the north side of the east wall, and on the corresponding wall on the south side, Cyrus is paired with a non-medical saint); Hagios Nikolaos tou Kasnitzi (the saints are grouped in their common format, three and three: Kosmas, Panteleimon, Damian, and Cyrus, Hermolaos, and John). In Sicily, the same six saints are found in the Cappella Palatina, Martorana, and Monreale. The prestige of the anargyroi is indicated by their frequent placement near the east end of the church. 17 F. E. Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, I: Eastern Liturgies, Oxford 1896, 358. 18 Benaki Museum, inv. no 11442: J. Cotsonis, Byzantine Figural Processional Crosses, Washington D.C. 1994, 43, fig. 18b; Splendeur de Byzance, exh. cat., ed. J. LafontaineDosogne, Brussels 1982, 173, no. Br. 16. 19 // Tesoro (as in n. 7), no. 17, pi. XX; Treasury of San Marco (as in n. 7), no. 12. 20 K. Papadopoulos, Die Wandmalerei des XL Jahrhunderts in der Kirche Παναγία των Χαλκέων in Thessaloniki, Graz-Cologne 1966, 34-35 (see diagram), explains the placement of the anargyroi in the sanctuary as due to a special association with the cult of the Virgin who

Ex-voto therapy

21

puzzling, since the more famous healing saints are located on the adjacent north wall of the sanctuary (probably Kosmas, Damian, and Panteleimon, but their identifying inscriptions are lost). The unusual location of the physician saints within the sanctuary, and Hermolaos' prominent placement on the eastern apse wall, leads one to wonder if the cult of the anargyroi, and of Hermolaos, had received some special impetus at this time21. Hermolaos as a Votive Image In view of the evidence that Hermolaos is always represented with Panteleimon or with other anargyroi, what is arresting about the Dumbarton Oaks relief is that Hermolaos stands alone as the sole recipient of veneration. To my knowledge, this is the only example where St. Hermolaos is depicted as a solitary votive figure, to whom the prayers of the supplicant were exclusively directed. The reasons for this are unclear. There may be, however, a clue on an early tenth-century icon of the Virgin, flanked by Saints Hermolaos and Panteleimon, on Mt. Sinai22 (Fig. 4). This is one of the earliest known representations of the saint, and it is surely significant that he stands at the Virgin's right, in the place of honor, while Panteleimon, who out-ranks him both in importance and in popularity, is placed in the secondary position at her left. Further, in a unique representation, he holds an ornate scalpel like that of Panteleimon and wears the professional physician's mantle23. At the same time, his priestly role is alluded to by the codex he holds and the long decorated stole (epitracheliori) he wears. Weitzmann considers the icon to be a "deviation from the established iconography" of Hermolaos, but since it is one of the earliest representations, it is more likely that his iconographic image was still is figured in the apse; A. Tsitouridou, The Church of the Panagia Chalkeon, Thessaloniki 1985, 44 and pi. 19. 21 Hermolaos is placed within the sanctuary in two other early churches: at Goreme, Chapel 15a, dated either ca. 900 or first half of 10th c. (facing Panteleimon on the internal [north and south] faces of the eastern arch piers) and perhaps also at Canli Kilise, dated first half of 11th c. (with other saints on the apse wall of the Prothesis, but now lost): C. Jolivet-Livy, Les eglises byzantines de Cappadoce: Le programme iconographique de l 'abside et de ses abords, Paris 1991, 119,286, pi. 72. In the late 12th-century program of the Panagia Mavriotissa (as in n. 7), Hermolaos is placed on the eastern wall next to the apse. 22 K. Weitzmann, The Monastery of Saint Catherine 's at Mount Sinai: The Icons, I, From the Sixth to the Tenth Century. Princeton NJ 1976, 87-88 (B. 54), col. pi. XXXIII and pi. CIX. 23 The earliest known representation of Hermolaos appears to be in Kili9lar Kilise, ca. 900, where he is also shown wearing a physician's mantle: G. de Jerphanion, Les eglises rupestres de Cappadoce, I, Paris 1925, pi. 59.3. The Sinai icon is the only example I know where he holds a scalpel.

22

Susan A. Boyd

evolving. In the early post-iconoclastic period, artistic imagery was in state of flux, with dramatic developments occurring in the second half of the century. Hermolaos' placement at the Virgin's right on the Sinai icon, his location in the sanctuary of Chapel 15a at Goreme, and his placement on the apse wall at the Panagia ton Chalkeon are all clearly honorific in intent, and it may be that, in this early period, his image and appropriate status had not yet solidified. Although the date of the Dumbarton Oaks plaque cannot be established very narrowly, on the basis of its closest stylistic analogies — ivories of the later tenth and first half of the eleventh century, as well as various illustrations in the Menologium of Basil II24 (ca. 985) — a date from the late tenth to the first half of the eleventh century seems appropriate. Therefore, his prominence on this plaque as a single votive image seems to fit well with the elevated status he received on the Sinai icon and, with other physician saints, in the sanctuary of the Panagia ton Chalkeon in Thessaloniki. Although classed with the anargyroi because of his crucial association with Panteleimon, he is not identified by their usual attributes, the medicine box and scalpel, except on the Sinai icon noted above. Further, Hermolaos himself is not credited with any miraculous cures. However, the fact that, according to several texts, Christ assumed the physical guise of Hermolaos to help Panteleimon survive his trials and to keep his faith in the face of Maximian's persecutions could well have conferred on him a special and distinctive sanctity. But this sanctity is not reflected in the number of shrines under his vocable. Janin cites only one church dedicated to Hermolaos. Its identification is based on "a Greek tradition" that mentions a church or a monastery on the Eastern side of the Bosphoros, northeast of Skoutarion ( sk dar) near Chrysoskeramos25. Copper Icons Inventories and wills dating to the Comnenian and later periods frequently mention icons in copper, indicating they were relatively common at that time and were found in churches, private chapels, and monastic foundations26. The term most commonly used to describe them is σαρούτια or σαρούτη — a word 24

// Menologio di Basilio II (Cod. Vaticano greco 1613), Turin 1907, II, pis. 6, 16 (right fig.), 50 (left front fig.), 307. 25 R. Janin, Les eglises et les monasteres des grands centres byzantins, Paris 1975, 22. There is a second, very late monastery dedicated to Hermolaos, on Proconnesus, that is first documented in 1650 and survived into the 19th century, but Janin (ibid., 210) is skeptical that it dates from the Byzantine period, and there are virtually no remains preserved. 26 My search was far from exhaustive and was intended to determine what the usual terms used were and the relative frequency with which copper icons were mentioned.

Ex-voto therapy

23

not found in Greek dictionaries. Du Gange cites glosses in Islamic manuscripts of ό κεκαυμένος χαλκός for σαρούκτη/σαρούχ, meaning "heated copper"27. This term is used in most of the eleventh-century documents: the Will of Eustathios Boilas (1059), that mentions twelve icons in copper (ετέρες εικόνες σαρούτια δώδεκα)28, the Diataxis of Michael Attaleiates( 1077)29, the Typikon of Gregory Pakourianos (1083)30, and the Patmos Inventory of the year 120031. Several of these copper icons are described as also having silver or silver-gilt frames. Much less frequently used is the term χαλκός, the usual Greek word for copper32, but there are a few exceptions. In the late-Byzantine inventory of the Virgin Eleousa at Veljusa, there is described a small, gilded copper icon of St. Menas (είκών μικρά χαλκή κεχρυσομένη [sic] ό αγιος Μήνας)33. It is used again in the thirteenth-century Diatheke of the Kotini Monastery to describe an icon of the Archangel εκ χαλκού ίστορισμένον34. 27

Ch. Du Gange, Glossarium adscriptores mediae et inflmae graecitatis. Lyon 1688, col. 1336, s.v. σαρούκτη, σαρούχ. See also D. Lecco, Eclaircissements sur la liste des objets liturgiques, in: P. Lemerle, Cinq otudes sur le XI* siecle byzantin, Paris 1977, 37.136. But P. Gautier, La Diataxis de Michel Altaliate, REB 39 (1981) 90 n. 15, translates it as bronze, noting the word remains controversial. 28 P. Lemerle, Le testament d'Eustathios Boilas, in: idem, Cinq otudes (as in n. 27), 24. 135-136; English translation by S. Vryonis, Jr., The Will of a Provincial Magnate, Eustathios Boilas (1059), DOP 11 (1957) 257 and note 5. 29 Gautier, La Diataxis (as in n. 27), 91. 1204-1207. 30 Idem, Le typikon du sebaste Gregoire Pakourianos, REB 42 (1984) 121. 1688-1689. 31 Ch. Astruc, L 'inventaire dresse en Seplembre 1200 du tresor et de la bibliotheque de Patmos. Edition diplomatique, TM 8 (1981) 15-30, esp. 20.9. 32 H. G. Liddell and R. Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, rev. and augm. by H. S. Jones and B. McKenzie, Oxford 91996, 1974, s.v. χαλκός. It is noted here that copper was "alloyed with tin to form bronze, the usual meaning of the word" in antiquity and later. It could be used for anything made of metal, esp. arms and armor. In Byzantine inventories, χαλκός is used for bronze, esp. when used to modify "polykandela", as in the inventory of the Xylourgou Monastery (1142), 7.11-28 passim: Actes de Saint-Pantoloem n, ed. P, Lemerle, G. Dagron and S. Circkovi9, Paris 1982. Yet in the 10th century, χαλκός is used for copper: see J. Haldon, Constantine Porphyrogenitus, Three Treatises on Imperial Military Expeditions, Vienna 1990, C. 194, C. 195, C. 212, where χαλκή is used to describe objects taken on a military expedition; the word is translated by Haldon as either copper or bronze, depending on the context. 33 L. Petit, Le monastere de Notre-Dame de Pitie en Macedoine, IRAIK 6 (1900) 120.1-2, but the term σαρούτη is also used here (ibid., 118.18 and 120.4-5). I am very grateful to Dr. Sharon Gerstel for bringing this reference (and several others) to my attention especially because it is one of the few texts that uses the term χαλκή with an icon; in the context that it occurs here, it very likely means copper. 34 M. I. Gedeon, Αιαϋήκη Μαξίμου μονάχου κτίτορος της εν Λυδία μονής Κωτίνης, Μικρασιατικά Χρονικά 2 (1939) 282. A more exhaustive reading of the inventories would probably yield additional examples.

24

Susan A. Boyd

Copper repousse icons are not a well-known or well-studied genre. Judging from the high artistic quality of the Dumbarton Oaks icon and several others, their workmanship must often have been the equal of icons in silver35. Because both metals are very ductile, they react in much the same way to the technique of repousse decoration. Whether or not silver and copper repousse icons were made by the same craftsmen, their technique is identical and the quality of the execution of the best copper icons is comparable to those in luxury materials. In London, for example, there is a well-known icon of the Virgin Hodegetria, dating to the late eleventh or twelfth century, which is executed in a very elegant style in copper repousse which was then gilded36 (Fig. 5). The votive inscription reads, "Mother of God help thy servant Philip the Bishop". The status of its donor, a bishop, is of interest because it documents that the clientele commissioning copper icons included those of elevated rank. Two other copper reliefs that may be cited for their high artistic quality are a large repousse medallion (not from a votive plaque) with the bust of St. John the Theologian in Berlin37, and a fragmentary votive icon in Cherson originally bearing two physician saints, Cyrus and John, flanking the lesser-known martyr, St. Lucillianos. The figure of John on the left side of the plaque has broken off but his identifying inscription is preserved (Fig. 6)38. Of the inscription that framed the plaque along the top edge, what survives are two names, "of Marianos and Pothos" (or perhaps Pothetos), possibly the donors. 35

Silver (and silver-gilt) icons were frequently mentioned in the inventories, but, except in Georgia, none survive from the Byzantine period perhaps because so many were melted down for the value of the precious metal. For a discussion of silver icons and their closest comparisons, the elaborate silver-gilt frames applied to painted icons, see N. P. Sevcenko, Vita Icons and "Decorated" Icons of the Komnenian Period, in: Four Icons in the Menu Collection, ed. B. Davezac, Houston 1992, 61-69. Note, however, that many superb silver-gilt revetments survive on large, richly decorated cross reliquaries: e.g. Byzance (as in n. 5), no. 248; Glory of Byzantium (as in n. 4), nos. 37 (reverse), 38 (reverse), 39, 40; cf. also the elaborate silver revetments on processional crosses (ibid., nos. 24-27). 36 Victoria and Albert Museum, no. 818-1891: Glory of Byzantium (as in n. 4), 495^96, no. 331; Splendeur de Byzance (as in n. 18), 182, no. Br. 25. Although the present gilding is modem, it is thought to replace what survived of the original gilding. Another gilt copper repousso plaque, with the Archangel Gabriel surrounded by eight medallions enclosing saints, is described in Masterpieces of Byzantine Art, ed. D. T. Rice, exh. cat., Edinburgh 1958, no. 174. 37 W. F. Volbach, Mittelalterliche Bildwerke aus Italien undByzanz, Berlin-Leipzig 1930, 148, no. 6592; Ex aere solide. Bronzen von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart, Berlin 1983, 57, no. 36. The diameter of the medallion is 14.3 cm. 38 Cherson, Historical-Archeological Museum. Dimensions: 23.5 χ 22 cm. See V. Zalesskaya, Prikladnoe iskusstvo Vizantii IV-VH vekov, St. Petersburg 1997, figs. 33-34; Iskusstvo Vizantii v sobraniiakh SSSR, II, Moscow 1977, 91, no. 561. It is possible that there were more than three figures on the plaque.

Ex-voto therapy

25

It reads: "[...]ΗΨΕ ΜΑΡΙΑΝΟΥ (και) ΠΟΘ(ου) ...". Both reliefs are dated tenth-to-eleventh century. The fact that some of these were gilded suggests that they consciously imitated their more luxurious counterparts. The small, gilded copper icon described in the Veljusa inventory has already been mentioned, and there is one extant example, the relief of the Virgin Hodegetria in London. In addition to gilding, however, it is possible that copper icons were either plated with silver or, more likely, tinned in imitation of silver. The practice of plating copper liturgical vessels with tin, which was then polished to simulate silver, was widespread during the Middle Byzantine period39. Once gilded or tinned, it would be difficult to distinguish a copper relief from one in silver; moreover, it should be remembered that most reliefs in luxury metals in this period were not actually gold, but gilded silver. Although copper was undoubtedly used for icons as a less expensive substitute for silver, judging from the episcopal rank of the donor of the London plaque, Philip the bishop, the clientele commissioning them were not necessarily drawn from the lower economic classes. Further, a passage in the Book of Ceremonies mentions tinned-copper water containers40; these were used on military campaigns by the nobility, again persons of high status, while pure silver washing equipment was used by the emperor. As for the Hermolaos icon, the loss of all patina and surface accretions during its earlier cleaning removed any evidence that might have survived as to whether it had ever been gilded, silvered, or tinned. Function The inscription along two edges of this votive plaque indicates that it was offered by a donor for his health, the salvation of his soul, and the forgiveness of his sins. It tells us that he is alive, but perhaps quite sick, since he also prays that the saint will look after his soul. The saint from whom he requests this aid is Hermolaos, a physician saint. Votive icons offered to the healing saints, or to other miracle-working saints, are best known from the early Byzantine 39

P. Sevrugian, Liturgisches Ger t aus Byzanz. Die Berliner Patene und ihr Umkreis, Berlin 1992, passim; M. Mundell Mango, The Significance of Byzantine Tinned Copper Objects, in: Θυμίαμα (as in n. 1) I, 221-227; II, pis. 115-118. 40 Haldon, Constantine Porphyrogenitus (as in n. 32), Mss. C. 194 (χαλκά γανωτά), C. 195(βεδούρια χαλκά γανωτά), C. 212 (σιτλολέκανα ... άσπρόχαλκα και γανωτά) and his discussion of the latter (p. 213) as "tinned copper or bronze". The identification of the term "tinned copper" in this text was first made by L. Bouras, Κατάλογος. "Εκΰεση για τα εκατό χρόνια της Χριστιανικής 'Αρχαιολογικής Εταιρείας (1884-1984), Athens 1984, no. 100; Mundell Mango, Tinned Copper Objects (as in n. 39), 226 and n. 84, discusses further the term ganotos as meaning polished and γανοΰσοαι as meaning "smearing" copper with tin.

26

Susan A. Boyd

period, but they were surely also common in medieval Byzantium; the Hermolaos plaque is one of the few to have survived. Unlike many votives of the early Byzantine period that were offered to the saint in gratitude for the cure, or miracle, that had been received41, the Hermolaos plaque was offered as a kind of pre-payment for a request that had yet to be fulfilled, as was the silvergilt icon in London, with its prayer for a future benefaction — the Virgin's protection of the supplicant's body and spirit. Another copper votive plaque with a representation of healing saints is that with saints Cyrus and John in Cherson (Fig. 6); too little of its dedicatory inscription survives to tell us for what reason it was offered42. That votive gifts must have been commonplace in medieval Byzantium is evident by the variety of votive offerings preserved in the Treasury of San Marco, including the silver-gilt and enamel votive Crown of Leo VI, the chalice of Emperor Romanes, a votive lamp dedicated to St. Panteleimon, and a paten with an invocation to the Virgin43. Returning again to the Hermolaos relief, there are five nail holes in it. Of the two along its top edge, only that outside the frame is probably original, as this is the most likely placement of one or two suspension holes for its attachment to a supporting architectural member. The very neatly cut, circular hole in the inscription may be modern44. It is also unlikely that the three holes along the bottom edge are original since one of them pierces the figure itself; they were probably added after the frame had broken off. There is little evidence to indicate how such metal icons were attached or suspended. One or two holes 41

One of the most famous of these ex-votos is the silver-gilt plaque with St. Symeon Stylite in the Louvre, which was given to his shrine "in thanksgiving": Mundell Mango, Silver from Early Byzantium (as in n. 3), 240-242, no. 71. The Life of Daniel the Stylite (59) describes a silver votive plaque on which are depicted the images of the saint and the donor, which was given to his shrine near Constantinople in thanksgiving for a miraculous cure: Three Byzantine Saints, trans. E. A. Dawes and N. Baynes, Oxford 1948 (repr. Crestwood NJ 1977), 42. 42 In addition to the copper repoussi plaques discussed here, there are many more plaques cast in bronze, large and small, that were votive in intent; for some representative examples, see Splendeur de Byzance (as in n. 18), nos. Br. 22, Br. 27 and Br. 28; cf. also a bronze plaque engraved with the standing figures of Saints Kosmas, Damian and Theodote, in Sicily, Siracusa Archeological Museum: G. Agnello, Le arti figurative nella Sicilia bizantina, Palermo 1962, 296-300. 43 Treasury of San Marco (as in n. 7) nos. 8, 11, 24, 25; see Hahnloser, // Tesoro (as in n. 7), respectively, nos. 116,42, 67, 63. See also the silver-gilt votive icon of St. Symeon Stylite the Younger with its donor, Bishop Antoni Cagereli, dated 1015, in Tbilisi, The Georgian State Art Museum: Glory of Byzantium (as in n. 4), 345-346, no. 233; W. Seibt and T. Sanikidze, Schatzkammer Georgien, exh. cat., Vienna 1981, 116-117, no. 26. 44 All the holes except this one are irregularly shaped, with uneven edges that curl back, probably because the copper nails, two of which survive in the lower left and right holes, were hammered through from the front.

Ex-voto therapy

27

at the top would be sufficient to suspend it, but to attach it to a wall or to a piece of church furniture, two more holes at the bottom might be needed. Judging from modern Orthodox customs, larger metal icons are frequently attached to the iconostasis, a wall or a column, while smaller ones could be suspended by a string (or chain) in front of a particularly venerated icon, or attached to its stand45. It is likely also that votive icons were presented to the shrine of the depicted saint so that the efficacy of the prayer was enhanced by the physical presence of the icon in the saint's own shrine; but votives could be given to any church or chapel. Because of the close relationship of Hermolaos and Panteleimon, it is likely that this relief was originally offered to a shrine dedicated to St. Panteleimon in Constantinople or elsewhere. Evidence from early texts suggest that ex-votos were placed near the altar or the sanctuary46. Unfortunately, similar evidence from medieval sources is all but lacking. There is, therefore, little hard evidence of where such votives were placed in the church or to what piece of furniture they may have been attached. We are forced to rely on the less reliable evidence of contemporary practice in Orthodox countries, where accumulations of ex-votos are found primarily on the sanctuary screens, individual icon stands, or the columns and walls of the church. There are more questions raised by this votive plaque than can be resolved in this brief note, and it is hoped that further research may lead to more complete answers. While the question of votive images in the Early Christian period has been thoroughly researched and is documented by many contemporary texts, such research has so far been lacking for medieval Byzantium, in large part hindered by a lack of documentary sources. Other avenues that merit further research are the origin and development of the iconography of St. Hermolaos in the tenth and eleventh centuries, and an in-depth study of these copper repousse reliefs — along with their counterparts in bronze.

45

See, for example, the icon of the Virgin displayed on a large icon-stand in the Church of the Portaitissa (1680-1684), Iviron Monastery, Mount Athos: Glory of Byzantium (as in n. 4), Fig. on p. 26. 46 The description in the Life of Daniel the Stylite states, that the silver icon "is preserved to the present day near the altar", see Three Byzantine Saints (as in n. 41), 42.

Basilius, Mavortius, Asterius A Ian Cameron On f. 45r of the Puteanus of Prudentius (Par. lat. 8084) stands the signature [tVE]TTIVS AGORIVS BASILPVS, not in the hand of the original text scribe, but in a hand that added a number of marginal metrical notes and a few glosses1. The natural presumption is that this is the name of an early owner of the manuscript. At least two other late antique manuscripts carry such ownersignatures: Miani v.c., in the Puteanus of Statius2; and another original, Ennodiorum, written in rustic capitals on a blank page in a sixth-century Verona manuscript of Jerome's letters3. The writing has faded with the years, and nothing can now be clearly deciphered with the unaided eye. In 1948 S. Jannaccone claimed to be able to read the last name as MA[VORTIVS]4, in keeping with the standard assumption that Vettius Agorius Basilius is to be identified as Vettius Agorius Basilius Mavortius cos. 527, best known from a famous subscription in some Horace manuscripts to have revised at any rate the Epodes of Horace with the assistance of a professor called Felix at some point after his consular year5. On the assumption that Basilius is Mavortius, much has been made of his catholic literary interests. In December 1994 at my request Pere H. D. Saffrey kindly examined the page under ultra-violet light and was able to read "perfectly well and easily ...TTIVS AGORIVS BASILIVS". The name is not written in a margin but squarely in the middle of the page, and Pere Saffrey also confirmed for me that this is all that was ever written. Is Vettius Agorius Basilius the consul of 527? If so, what has happened to his last name? The issues were set out some ninety years ago, albeit with sublime indifference to the niceties of Roman nomenclature, by E. O. Win1

CLA V (1950) 57 la; for more information, E. O. Winstedt, Mavortius' copy of Prudentius, CR 18 (1904) 112-115; M. P. Cunningham, Some Facts about the Puteanus of Prudentius, ΤΑΡΑ 89 (1958) 32-37; A in the editions of J. Bergman (Vienna 1926) and Cunningham (Turnhout 1966). 2 At the end of Thebaid bk iv in Par. Lat. 8051; J. E. G. Zetzel, Latin Textual Criticism in Antiquity, New York 1981, 25. 3 Verona XVII (15) (CLA IV, 489a), fol. 208V. 4 Le Par. 8084 de Prudence et ία recensio de Mavortius, REL 26 (1948) 228-235. 5 For the subscription (in which he describes himself as ex cons(ule) ord(inario), see Zetzel 1981,219. Presumably (but not necessarily) the same Felix who corrected the manuscripts of Martianus Capella in a subscription dated to 498 (not, as formerly assumed, 534: Alan Cameron, CP 81 [1986] 320-323).

Basilius, Mavortius, Asterius

29

stedt6. His concern was to refute the view of a now forgotten Dr. Bick7 that the three names are all that survive of a formal subscription, for some reason only partially copied. Subscriptions typically appear at the end of a book, indicating that a late antique owner has corrected it, normally against the exemplar from which it was copied. As reproduced in surviving manuscripts, they are often attached to the explicit of the book corrected (so, for example, the celebrated subscriptions to Livy i-ix)8. The signature on f. 45r of the Puteanus "is added casually after a space of about half a page" in much smaller uncial script after the end of the Cathemerinon. The original threefold renumbering of the quires shows that the manuscript was written in three separate parts (f. 1-44 = quires i-vi; f. 45-123 = quires i-x; and f. 124—155 - quires i-iiii), and the signature appears on the first page of the second9. The presumption is that Basilius wrote his name on the front page of the second part before the three parts were bound together, perhaps to ensure that the binder was not misled by the numbering of the quires. If so, Basilius was not only the original owner of the manuscript; he may have had it specially copied for himself and even selected its contents as well. The fact that the Cathemerinon (f. 1-44) lacks the much discussed autobiographical preface that introduced the collected edition of Prudentius's works suggests that the Puteanus contains, not a selection from the collected edition, but a compilation of individual poems from the original separate editions10. This might have a bearing on the identification of the rustic capital hand that made corrections throughout the manuscript (Cunningham's A2). While conceding that the use of capitals precluded certainty, Winstedt identified this hand with the hand that wrote the signature and metrical notes (Cunningham's A3). Jannaccone rejected the identification, arguing instead that A2 was actually the original text-scribe A correcting himself. But Cunningham11 then showed by an analysis of letter forms that, though contemporary, A2 was different from A. A2 adds a number of lines omitted by A, presumably from a collation of the Puteanus against its exemplar. If so, A2 and A3 must both have worked on the text at a very early stage. While there is no real objection to distinguishing 6 7

8

Mavortius and Prudentius, CQ 1 (1907) 10-12. 1. Bick, Horazkritikseit 1880, Leipzig 1906, 31-35.

J. E. G. Zetzel, The Subscriptions in the Manuscripts of Livy and Fronto and the Meaning of Emendatio, CP 75 (1980) 43-44; for a list of other subscriptions with information about their placing, Zetzel 1981, 211-231. 9 P. Krueger in: T. Mommsen, Gesammelte Schriften, VII, Berlin 1909, 487-488; Winstedt, CR 17 (1903) 207; 18 (1904) 112; Cunningham, ΤΑΡΑ 89 (1958) 34. 10 So Cunningham 1958, 32-37; O. Pecere, in: II libro e il testo, eds. C. Questa and R. Raffaelli, Urbino 1984, 127. 11 Sacris Erudiri 13 (1962) 7, edition x-xi.

30

Alan Cameron

their contributions, Occam's razor would encourage identifying them. Winstedt may have been right after all to identify A2 as A3 using capitals for his corrections to match the text. So despite the absence of a formal subscription, Vettius Agorius Basilius may nonetheless be identified as the first editor and corrector of the Puteanus. Indeed, since the subscription in the Medicean Vergil can no longer be regarded as autograph (below) and the latest edition has eliminated the never very credible Caecilius saepe rogatus from the first subscription in the Vatican palimpsest of Pronto12, this may be the only surviving late antique nontheological manuscript corrected by a named reader. The corrections, no more than "insertions of omitted lines or words, and corrections of slips of the pen"13, do not support the once fashionable overvaluation of such "editions" based on subscriptions to lost copies preserved in later manuscripts14. But they are closely paralleled by the corrections in the numerous unsigned surviving late antique manuscripts, notably the great capital manuscripts of Vergil15. To return to the question of the name and Winstedt's caricature of Bick, "as one word is certainly omitted [namely Mavortius], we may as well assume forty more to be omitted, and so make up a subscriptio". Winstedt himself insisted (rightly) that it was unnecessary and implausible to assume such an omission, arguing instead (wrongly) that the consul simply abbreviated his name. Since many of his presuppositions underly more recent discussions16, it may be worth presenting his argument in full: When Aulus Gellius, for example, refers to Marcus Tullius Cicero simply as Marcus Tullius, or to Q. Claudius Quadrigarius simply as Q. Claudius [NA vi.l 1.3 and 7], no one exclaims that the word Cicero or the word Quadrigarius is indispensable, and that therefore we must assume a lacuna, for the simple reason that they recognize that the ordinary habit of the Roman burdened with three or four names was to omit some of them when he had no reason for formality. What grounds have we for assuming that Mavortius was eccentric in this particular, and always wrote his name in full? Of course he wrote it in full and added v.c. et inl., and anything else he could think of, when writing a formal subscriptio to his edition of Horace; and the very fact that he did not do the same here is clear proof that he was not making any formal subscriptio, merely writing the name in his own book like anybody else. Everything about the signature points to informality. 12

M. P. J. Van den Hout, M. Cornelius Pronto Epistulae, Leipzig 1988, xxvi-xxvii, 52. Winstedt, CR 18(1904) 115. 14 For example, H. Bloch in: Conflict between Paganism and Christianity in the Fourth Century, ed. A. Momigliano, Oxford 1963, 214-217. 15 The contributions of the late antique correctors are carefully distinguished in M. Geymonat's edition, Turin 1973; see his list of sigla on pp. xix-xx. 16 E. g. J. F. Matthews, Historia 19 (1970) 464 n. 2. 13

Basilius, Mavortius, Asterius

31

It will be noted that Winstedt seems to assume that it did not matter, whether in the age of Cicero or the age of Mavortius, which of his three or four names a man omitted when he was being informal. Actually, in both periods a man was generally known by two of his three or four names, and normally the same two. The examples Winstedt quotes from Gellius are the old style, praenomen and gentile name. Already in Cicero's day the more fashionable style was praenomen and cognomen, C. Caesar, M. Metellus17. Thus one of his letters to Appius Claudius Pulcher (Cic. Fam. iii.6) is headed: M. Cicero s. d. Appio Pulchro. In late antiquity the key item is the diacritical name, the one a man was known by in contexts that called for just one name. The publication of all three volumes ofPLRE has made it possible to survey all the relevant evidence, and on that basis two conclusions may now be held established: this one name was always the same, and almost always the last in sequence18. The few exceptions are explained by the need to avoid confusion within a family, but that point does not arise in the present case. There can be no doubt that the diacritical of Vettius Agorius Basilius Mavortius was Mavortius. This is the name by which he appears on the consular fasti — and in the dating formula of a variety of documents and nearly twenty inscriptions19. It is inconceivable that Mavortius would omit this of all his names. There is an instructive parallel. Our fullest source for the nomenclature of the Roman aristocracy of the late fifth century is the new inscribed seats in the Flavian amphitheatre provided by Odoacar in the period 476/48320. On one of these seats (CIL vi.32103) we find Rufius Turcius Apronianus v.c. et [...]. Hitherto it has been taken for granted that this is the consul of 494, Turcius Rufius Apronianus Asterius, known from the subscription to the Medicean Vergil, discussed further below21. But not only is the diacritical missing; the first two names are in a different sequence. The fact that the seat inscription gives as many as three names complete with titles strongly suggests that this is the owner's full name. Both subscription and inscription are set out with considerable formality, and it is most unlikely that either would get the sequence wrong. The explanation is obvious. The owner of the seat and the consul were 17

R. Syme, Roman Papers, I, Oxford 1979, 361. 1 have argued the point in foil in: JRS 75 (1985) 164-178. 19 R. S. Bagnall, Alan Cameron, Seth R. Schwartz and K. A. Worp, Consuls of the Later Roman Empire, Atlanta 1987, 588-589. 20 The subject of A. Chastagnol's study, Le senat romain sous le regne d'Odoacre, Bonn 1966. 21 Even (for example) in PLREII, 173. 18

32

Alan Cameron

two different men. It is common to find the same few names in different combinations and sequences in successive generations of such aristocratic families, and at least three other Turcii Aproniani are known, one of them also an Asterius, all from the fourth century. The man on the amphitheatre seat is evidently one of the three or four missing generations between the fourthcentury Turcii and the consul of 49422. To return to Vettius Agorius Basilius, according to Winstedt "everything about the signature points to informality", not least the fact that it is written in a semi-cursive script rather than capitals. Yet two items suggest a certain measure of formality. First, the cross that normally precedes formal signatures in late antique documents of every sort; second the fact that the man wrote three names rather than the standard abbreviated style of two suggests that he was in fact giving his full name. There are no titles, it is true, but he may as yet have been a young man, with no titles worth mentioning. At least two subscriptions in manuscripts of the classics identify students performing a scholastic exercise. For example, those at the end of Satire 5 in Leidensis 82 (L) of Juvenal: legi ego Niceus Romae apudServium magistrum et emendavi; and at the end of Bk ix in Laur. Med. 68.2 of Apuleius's Metamorphoses: ego Salustius legi et emendavi Romae felix Olib C

J

-If 5

I ι

ι

Z

3

Χ' 1"1 PI

-

~τ—Γ

4

S«

·* ,

1JLjΓ

—

! ι

:::::

j \/

U

W

f Ι

ίd

ι

!-Γ

rest cl(ημος), 'digne de toute louange', opithete qui convient la fille de I'empereur L6on, femme de I'empereur Marcien (infra, 1600, 5 et 8)." 17 Prentice, op. cit., 97: "Leontia was the wife of the emperor [!] Marcian, who reigned from 450 to 457 A. D. She was the daughter of Leo, who was emperor after Marcian, from 457 to 474. Since Marcian is not mentioned in this inscription, I am inclined to believe that it belongs to the reign of Leo, and should be dated about 460 A. D. This is ninety years earlier than No. 1016 [IGLS IV, 1599, de 546/7 p. C.], although both may have belonged to the same building." Ce commentaire a έΐέ simplement domarquo par Mouterde, op. cit., 199: "LeOntia itait veuve de I'empereur [!] Marcien (450-457) et fille de Loon, qui succe'da son gendre [!] (457—474). Comme Marcien n'est pas nommo ici, 1'inscription date vraisemblablement du regne de Loon." En realite", Leon Ier n'e"tait nullement le beau-pere de son pre"de"cesseur Marcien. Mouterde a confondu avec I'empereur Marcien son homonyme, consul en 469 et 472, et mari de LeOntia (cf. PLREII, 717-718, Marcianus 17). 18 L'opigramme II (IGLS IV, 1600) a cependant έΐέ citoe au nombre des sources relatives la fille de I'empereur Loon: cf. PLRE II, 667, Leontia 1. 19 Prentice, n° 1016, d'ou IGLS IV, 1598 ("linteau probablement in situ, dans un long mur se terminant έ ΓΕ. par une tour"). Nous avons re"viso et photographid la pierre, toujours en place, en 1982.

120

Denis Feissel

gique20, du moment que nos epigrammes ne sont pas anterieures au regne de Justinien. De plus, l'inscription de 546/7 comporte deux hexametres dont la facture et le vocabulaire21 ne sont pas sans rapport avec nos epigrammes I et II: Ειρήνης δόμος ειμί, βαθυκτεάνων ναετήρων λαϊνέοασι πύλαισιν άπήμονα τέκνα φυλάσσων. Je suis la demeure de la Paix, d'opulents habitants derriere mes portes de pierre gardant les enfants l 'abri des malheurs. On s'est demande s'il s'agissait la de la Paix ou du nom de la proprietaire, "la demeure d'Irene". Cette derniere hypothese irait Tencontre du rapprochement suppose avec ce qu'on peut appeler la „maison de Leontia". En fait, la notion de paix s'impose si Ton prend garde de ne pas dissocier ces deux vers des longues citations bibliques qui les precedent, un centon de sept versets pris differents psaumes. Tous font appel la protection divine, et la plupart ont la guerre pour contexte, tel le premier des versets cites (Psaume 3, 7): "Je n'aurai pas peur des myriades de gens qui m'assaillent ensemble de tous cotes." Citation d'actualite, puisque 1'an 546/7, immediatement apres la treve conclue pour cinq ans entre Byzantins et Perses, vit la guerre eclater en Syrie entre Arabes Lakhmides et Ghassanides22. Quelle fut alors l'inquietude des provinces d'Orient devant la menace du Lakhmide Alamoundaros, on en trouve un echo dans Thagiographie, avec la Vie de saint Sym&on stylite le Jeune23. L'epigraphie de I'g z temoigne, la meme annee, de la construction d'une residence fortifiee24, comprehensible dans ce contexte historique et dans des parages aussi proches du limes. On verra que, de fa?on concordante, notre epigramme Π commence par appeler la protection de Dieu contre les barbares. Sans se placer necessairement dans le contexte des evonements de 546/7, nos 20

Prentice (cito n. 17) tait obligo d'admettre im Intervalle de 90 ans entre nos epigrammes et l'inscription de 546. 21 Comparer άπήμονα et λυσιπήμονα (Ι, 5), δόμος (Ι, 10), et la mention d'enfants naitre en II, 11. — Nous laissons ici de c to encore une opigramme, trouvoe pres des textes I et II, en quatre hexametres dont il ne reste que les derniers pieds (Prentice, n° 1021; d'ou IGLS IV, 1601). Notons du mo ins que la fin du vers 1 (είναέτηρες Prentice) ne peut signifier "for nine years"; ce doit dire une Variante de ένναετήρες, "les habitants". Au vers 4,1'hexametre ne peut finir par θεμελίοις (Mouterde); Prentice a bien lu θεμέθλοις. 22 Procope, Bell. Pers. II, 28, 12-14. Cf. E. Stein, Histoire du Bas-Empire Π, 1949, 503 n. l, avec discussion de la date du conflit. 23 La vie ancienne de saint Symeon stylite le Jeune (521-592), έά. P. van den Ven, I (1962), chap. 187, 164-166; II (1970) 188-191, traduction, avec la longue note l du chap. 187. 24 Noter la tour voisine (cf. n. 19) et la mention dans le texte de "portes de pierre".

Deux opigrammes d'Apamene

121

deux epigrammes refletent pour le moins le climat d'insecurite entretenu de fagon endemique par la menace perse25 aussi bien que saracene. r

Epigramme I Invocation au Dieu trinitaire pour la protection de la maison La moitie droite seule, d'abord publiee par Burton et Drake (1872) II, pi. II, 25 et p. 381 (d'o Kaibel, 1069 b), a ete revue par M. von Oppenheim, d'o l'edition de H. Lucas, BZ 14 (1905) 51-52, n° 80. L'ensemble du texte est edite en majuscules, transcrit et traduit par Prentice, Syria-Princeton III B, 2 (1909) 94-95, nos 1017-1018, avec un tres bref commentaire (texte quelque peu modifie par Mouterde, IGLS IV, 196-198, n° 1599, avec traduction fran9aise et commentaire plus developpe). Cf. L. Robert, HeUenica XI-XII (1960) 297 n. 3, avec des corrections au texte de Mouterde. R. Merkelbach, ZPE 11 (1973) 64 (analyse par J. et L. Robert, Bull, epigr. 1973, 491). Ici Figs. 1-2. Ή Τριάς, ό Θεός, πόρρ|ω διώκοι τον ΦΟόνον. t Είκόν έπουρανίοιο Θε|οΰ, Λόγε, μειλίχιον φως, ος Χρίστος τελέθεις, ος | έδείμαο κόσμο ν άλήτην, 4 ολβον έμοί προ'ίαλλε τ|εήν χάριν αφΟιτον αίεί. Χριστός άειζώιων λυσ|[ι]πήμονα χεΐρα κομίζει, τούνεκεν ου τρομέο|[ι]μι κακορρέκτοιο μενοινάς δαίμονος, ούδ' ανδρός σ|τυγερόν και άΟέσμιον όμμα. 8 Νεύμασιν ος μουνοισι Οε|μείλια πήξαο γαίης ρίζας τ' ουράνιας και άτρυ|[γ]έτοιο θαλάσσης, τόνδε δόμον, λίτομαί σε, | [κ]αι έσσομένοισιν όπάζοις [εΰ]διον, άστυφέλικτον, | [ά]οίδιμον αΐέν όρασΰαι. Notes critiques. Une barre verticale indique chaque ligne la separation entre les deux blocs. Nous ne signalons pas les lettres pointees par Prentice comme douteuses la ou notre revision a montre qu'elles etaient certaines. Les sigles Pr et Mo renvoient aux editions de Pr(entice) et Mo(uterde). 2 έπουρανίοιο, Θεοΰ Λόγε Pr, Mo; virgule apres Θεοϋ Robert || 3 au milieu ΟΔ, ο(ς) Pr, ος Mo || la fin A HION Burton-Drake, corrige en α[μεμπτ]ον Kaibel; άλήτην Lucas; ΑΛΗΤΗΝ, corrige en αλη(π)τ(ο)ν (?) Pr; άητν (?) Mo || 4 IEHN, [κ]έ (σ)ήν Pr; εήν Mo || 5 ΑΕΙΖΩΙΩΝ, άειζώων (?) Pr; άειζώων (?) Mo I 6 τρομέομι Pr, Mo || μ[ε]νοινας Lucas; ενοινάς (?) Pr, Mo || 8 πήξαο Pr; πήξας Mo || 10 au milieu C0, σ(ε) Pr; σ Mo || 11 au debut [χώ](ρ)ιον Pr; [χω]ίον Mo; 25

On se souvient qu'en 540, Chosroos dej maftre d'Antioche n'avait pargnd Apamee qu' prix d'or (Procope, Bell. Pers. II, 11; cf. Stein, op. dt. II, 491).

122

Denis Feissel

"un adjectif... en -λιος ou -διος" Robert; [αΰ]λιον Merkelbach; [εΰ]διον Fournet || [όφίδιμον entre virgules Pr, Mo; sans virgule Kaibel, Lucas, Robert. Que la Triniie, Dieu, chasse au loin I'Envie! Image du Dieu des deux, Verbe, lumiere propice, Toi qui es le Christ, Toi qui as edifie le monde vagabond, fais descendre sur moi, pour richesse, ta grace ajamais incorruptible! Le Christ ajamais vivant offie sa main qui delivre des maux, aussi ne saurais-je redouter les desseins du malfaisant demon, ni de I 'homme I 'ceil odieux et sans loi. Toi qui par tes seules volontes a fixe les fondements de la terre, les racines celestes et celles de la mer infertile, puisses-tu, je t 'en supplie, offrir cette demeure, aux (generations) futures egalement, sereine, inebranlable, ajamais glorieuse a voir. 1. Le vers initial, un trimetre iambique26, prelude au poeme en annongant deux elements developpes ensuite: 1'union dans la Trinke du Pere et du Fils (vers 2-3); la protection divine contre I'Envie (vers 7). C'est un exemple de plus de prologue iambique place en tete d'une piece en hexametres27. Apres quoi, en marge du vers 2, une croix marque le veritable incipit de I'epigramme28, en dix hexametres, qui se compose de trois phrases: deux prieres invoquant Dieu la seconde personne ( I'imperatif au vers 4, 1'optatif au vers 10), tandis que la phrase mediane est de style objectif (vers 5-7). 2-3. Cette invocation au Christ, mal ponctuee par les editeurs29 avant d'etre corrigee par L. Robert, prend la forme d'une serie d'appositions equiva26

L'hositation de Prentice ("the first line, which may be read as an iambic trimeter") est sans objet. La presence en tete du vers d'un dactyle suivi d'un anapeste fait partie des substitutions permises. 27 Voir notamment Al. Cameron, CQ 20 (1970) 119-129: Pap. Ant HI 115 and the Iambic Prologue in Late Greek Poetry, otude que me signale obligeamment Jean-Luc Fournet. Ce dernier revient sur ce phinomene, connu surtout au VT s., dans son Edition des poemes de Dioscore d'Aphrodito (sous presse). Je remercie ogalement J.-L. Fournet de sa contribution au commentaire lexical de ropigramme I. C'est lui que reviennent les re"f6rences ci-dessous aux Dionysiaques de Nonnos, et au poeme d'Eudocie, De s. Cypriano. 28 De fa?on trompeuse, le dessin de Prentice (recopie" par Mouterde) associait cette croix non au texte, mais au monogramme n° 1 (Potros) 29 D'ou la traduction de Mouterde: "Image du (Dieu) Coleste, Verbe de Dieu". Pour la notion d'"image de Dieu", les sources scripturaires sont bien indiquoes par Mouterde: Paul, II Cor. IV. 4; Coloss. 1.15. Voir aussi Lampe, s. ν. είκών, IV, C ("of Logos or Son as image of Father").

Deux opigrammes d'Apamene

123

lentes entre elles30. Cette syntaxe est caracteristique des hymnes, genre poetique auquel Pepigramme I s'apparente. 3. L'epithete finale du vers 3 a ete 1'objet de diverses corrections, toutes inutiles (ci-dessus, notes critiques). La locution κόσμον άλήτην avail pourtant ete bien degagee par Lucas31. De plus, comme Γ a en passant signale R. Keydell32, la memejunctio verborum se trouve chez Nonnos, en particulier dans sa Paraphrase de PEvangile de Jean33. La valeur pejorative de l'expression chez Nonnos est aussi valable pour notre epigramme. II ne s'agit pas d'un "monde admirable" (Mouterde, d'apres la correction άητ«5>ν), mais d'un monde "egare, vagabond, errant la derive". Bien qu'il soit Poeuvre de Dieu (ici du Christ)34, le monde cree est par nature pecheur et perissable. Ce κόσμος αλήτης, sujet Perreur et Perrance, forme dans le poeme une antithese voulue avec la "grace incorruptible" invoquee au vers suivant. 4. Parce qu'elle est imperissable, la grace divine est la veritable richesse (όλβος), et non les biens d'un monde en proie au changement. Les termes de cette priere au Christ (vers 2-4) ne sont pas sans evoquer certaines des "epigrammes chretiennes" qui forment le livre I de Υ Anthologie Palatine. On comparera notamment les vers de Klaudianos, un poete de Pepoque theodosienne35: Πατρός επουρανίου Λόγε πάνσοφε, κοίρανε κόσμου, (...), σήν χάριν άμμιν οπαζε και όλβιόδωρον αρωγή ν. D'autre part, Pimperatif προΐαλλε de Ρinscription se retrouve dans des invocations de ^Anthologie, tel cet hexametre d'auteur inconnu36: 30

Apposition du meme genre au vers 1, ou il y a oquivalence entre la Trinit et Dieu. BZ 14 (1905) 52, avec la traduction: "banntest den umherirrenden Kosmos", et 53, Γ interpolation: "das Zurechtzimmern des schweifenden Chaos". 32 R. Keydell, Epigramm, in: RAC V, col. 561, au nombre des opigrammes offrant des rominiscences de Nonnos, compte IGLS IV, 1599, et rejette la correction du vers 3: "hier in V. 3 von den Herausgebern, welche ndern, verkannt". 33 Nonnos, Paraphrasis s. evangelii loannei, έά. Scheindler, IX, 29; XV, 105; XVI, 74 (nous citons la Paraphrase par chapitre, en chiftres remains, et par vers; cf. respectivement Jean 9, 39; 15, 27; 16, 19). Dans ces trois cas, comme dans l'inscription, κόσμος αλήτης constitue la fin du vers. Nonnos, dans la Paraphrase, emploie vingt fois αλήτης (selon Γ index de Scheindler). Meme clausule en Dionysiaques I, 399; XXXII, 54. 34 Le Christ ne parait pas ici consideYe" en tant qu'ordonnateur d'un monde auparavant Ηντέ au chaos (en ce sens Lucas, cito n. 31), mais en tant que croateur d'un monde qui continue errer. Dieu sera nouveau invoquo plus bas comme auteur de la croation (vers 8-9). 35 AP 1,22, vers l et 3. 36 AP I, 29, 4. Voir aussi (dans la meme sorie de monostiques) AP I, 29, l: Χριστέ, τεήν προΐαλλε χάριν καμάτοισιν έμεΐο. 31

124

Denis Feissel

Χριστέ, συ μοι προίαλλε τεήν πολύολβον αρωγήν. 5. L'epithete άειζώων (ici άειζώιων, graphic etymologiquement injustifiee37) est egalement attestee chez Nonnos, mais pour Dieu le Pere38. Elle alterne avec άεΐζωος, qui s'applique aussi Dieu dans l'epigraphie39 et dans la litterature40. Pour le theme de Dieu tendant sa main secourable, comparer cet autre vers de l''Anthologie41: Χριστός έμοϊς καμάτοισιν άρηγόνα χείρα τιταίνοι. 6-7. La protection du Christ contre le demon et contre le mauvais oeil a ete d ment commentee par Mouterde, compte tenu d'autres inscriptions d'Apamene sur lesquelles nous ne reviendrons pas. La meme locution κακορρέκτης δαίμων designe le diable dans le poeme d'Eudocie sur le martyr Cyprien42. L'epithete άΟέσμιος est rare, mais se trouve notamment chez Nonnos43. La sequence στυγερόν και άΟέσμιον, qui qualifie ici le mauvais oeil, s'applique au diable dans le poeme d'Eudocie44. 8-9. Dans cette invocation au Createur, et particulierement dans les signes de sa volonte (νεύμασιν), R. Merkelbach a cru discerner une reminiscence de 1'Iliade45, et il a rappele que le Pseudo-Callisthene appliquait ces vers d'Homere la statue de Sarapis, Alexandrie46. Ces textes pai'ens, dont le contexte 37

C'est une faute d'hypercorrection (comparer 1'emploi correct de l'iota adscrit, infra II, 10), ici due Panalogie de ζώιον, ζώον. 38 Nonnos, Par. loann. I, 34: θεού Γενετήρος άειζώοντος (cf. Jean 1, 12). 39 Mouterde, loc. cit., a alteguo de fa?on trompeuse deux inscriptions qui n'en font qu'une: en effet la locution βουλαΐσι άειζώοιο Θεοΐο se lit dans l' pitaphe Waddington, 2145 (sur cette epigramme chretienne de Maximianoupolis, du milieu du IVes., voir Robert, Hellenica XI-XII, 306 et s.), qui n'est autre que le texte Kaibel, 452, citi par Mouterde sous la forme erronie άειζωνίοις οεοΐς (sic). 40 Nonnos, Par. loann. I, 201-202: συ Χριστός υπάρχεις | Υιός άειζώοιο Θεοϋ Λόγος (cf. Jean l, 50). 41 AP 1,29,3. 42 Eudocia Augusta, De s. Cypriano, Π, 374 (e"d. Ludwich, 72). 43 Cf. Souda, A, 723 (od. Adler, I, 68), άΟέσμιον: το αδικον. C'est le seul exemple cito par LSJ, qui ajoute dans son Revised Supplement (1996), Nonnos, Dion. 25, 16. Voir aussi Par. loann. XIX, 26: άθέσμιοι άρχιερήες (cf. Jean 19, 6). 44 Eudocia, op. cit. I, 90 (έά. Ludwich, 31): άντιβίου, στυγεροϊο, άθεσμίου, άντιοέοιο. Autres emplois de άοέσμιος, ibid II, 434 et 446. 45 A 524 et 528-530, o Zeus est le sujet des verbes κατανεύσομαι et νεϋσε. 46 Voir les breves remarques de R. Merkelbach, ZPE 11 (1973) 64: Zu einem christlichen Gedicht aus Syrien, et les roserves de J. et L. Robert, Bull, opigr. 1973, 491: "II nous parait sans fondement d'imaginer qu'on a penso surpasser Zeus et Sarapis (...)".

Deux opigrammes d'Apamene

125

n'a rien de cosmogonique, n'eclairent guere, en fait, 1'epigramme de Syrie. Fixer "les fondements de la terre" parait bien etre une reminiscence scripturaire47, mais Γ expression est ici adaptee la langue epique, en termes qui rappellent une fois de plus Nonnos48. 10. La maison est appelee ici δόμος, terme du vocabulaire epique49; repigramme II, vers 2, emploie οίκος. L'optatif final, bien compris par Prentice et frequent dans les invocations du meme genre50, a ete confondu par Mouterde avec le substantif οπαδός51. 11. Le premier mot du vers 11 a perdu seulement ses deux premieres lettres, et la premiere lettre conservee peut etre delta ou lambda. Les restitutions proposees hesitent entre un substantif (χωρίον ou αύλιον) ou un adjectif, propose mais non restitue par L. Robert52. La construction d'un substantif, attribut de l'objet δόμον, n'est pas impossible, mais χωρίον ne correspond pas aux donnes de la pierre; [αϋ]λιον, restitue sans explication par R. Merkelbach, pourrait etre considere comme Γ equivalent de αυλή, terme atteste notamment pour des maisons dans les inscriptions de Syrie53. Cependant, le dernier vers se compose plus probablement d'une serie de trois adjectifs attributs; en ce cas, le premier ne peut guere etre que [ευ]διον, "serein, sans trouble"54. f

Epigramme U L 'eloge d'une famille unie et l'epithalame de deux cousins La moitie droite seule a ete publiee par Burton et Drake (1872) II, pi. II, 26 et p. 381, puis revue par M. von Oppenheim, d'o Γ edition de H. Lucas, BZ 14 (1905) 51, n° 79. L'ensemble du texte est edite en majuscules, transcrit, traduit et commente par Prentice, Syria-Princeton III B, 2 (1909) 96-97, n° 1020 47

Mouterde compare Proverbes VIII, 29: ισχυρά έποίει τα οεμέλια της γης. Nonnos, Par. Ιοαηη. XVII, 13-14: οτε ζαθέω σέο μυΟω | οϋπω κτιζομένοιο ϋεμείλια πήγνυτο κόσμου (cf. Jean 17, 5: προ του τον κόσμον είναι παρά σοί); voir aussi Dionysiaques V, 50; XVII, 135; XLIII, 3. Pour les fondations d'une maison, AP IX, 808, 2: οεμείλια καρτερά πήξας. 49 Comme dans l'inscription dej citoe de 546/7 (IGLS IV, 1598). 50 Comparer όπάζοις en fin d'hexametre dans les invocations AP I, 24, 3 et I, 29, 5. 51 D'ou sa traduction: "aux compagnons venir", corrigoe par Robert, Hellenica XI-XII, 297 n. 3. 52 Robert, ibid.: "Au d but du dernier vers, W. Prentice, suivi par R. Mouterde, corrige pour rotablir un mot qui n'entre guere dans la construction; la copie dormant: -λιον, il faut ritablir ici un adjectif aussi, en -λιος ou -διος." 53 Cf. J. Kubinska, Eos 79 (1991) 195-198: L ΑΥΛΗ et le ΦΘΟΝΟΣ dans deux inscriptions du Hauran de l'epoque du Bas-Empire (voir ma brave analyse, Bull, dpigr. 1993, 643). 54 J'adopte cette restitution inidite de J.-L. Fournet, qui indique entre autres paralleles Aratos, Prognostic^ 146 [= 878]: εϋδιοι ... άστεμφές. 48

126

Denis Feissel

(texte quelque peu modifie par Mouterde, IGLS IV, 198-199, n° 1600). Ici Figs. 3-4. Φρουρεί με Θεός, ού|κ εύλαβοϋμαι βαρβάρους. Τον οίκον ή σώτειρ|α του Θεοΰ χάρις Μάρα παρέσχεν ώ[ς] | έβουλήΟη κτίσαι. 4 Οί τους στίχους γνή[σ]|ιον εν αύχουμεν γένος ό Πανταλέων, ό Π[έ]|τρος, ή Λεοντία, πατέρας αδελφού [ς] | πάντες εύτυχηκότες, μητέρας άδελφάς, | χρήμα τιμιώτατον. 8 Ηγουμένων δε τώ|ν νόμων Λεοντία, σοφωτάτων λίαν γ|εγευμένη λόγων, έμοι Πέτρωι, τούτο 1 παρέχοντος του Θεού, παίδων έπ' άρότω γν|ησίων συνάπτεται. Notes critiques. Memes conventions que pour 1'epigramme I. 1 virgule avant Θεός Pr, Mo || 3 ΜΑΡΑΠΑΞΕΣΧΕΝ, lu μα(κ)α(ρί)α(ν) [pour μακάριον] έσχεν ou μα(κ)α(ρί)' [epithete de χάρις] άνέσχεν Pr; Μάρα παέσχεν Mo Ι) ώ[ς] Pr; ω Mo || 4 γνή[σ]ιον εν: ΓΝΚ|ΝΟΝΕΝ, lu γ(ράφ)ομεν Pr; γοεν Μο || 5 ΟΠΑΝΙΑΛΕωΝΟΠ|ΠΡΟΟΚΛΕΟΝΤΙΑ, lu όπα(δόν) Λέωνο(ς), [πα](τ)ρός, κ(αϊ,) Λεοντία[ς] Pr; όπα Λέωνο, πρδς κ(έ) Λεοντία[ς] Μο || 9 ΔΙΑΜ|ΕΙΕΥΜΗΝΗ, lu διαν[0]εΐ ευμενή (pour ευμενής, ou fominin d'un incorrect εϋμενος) Pr; δια (gouvernant λόγων) νεϊ ευμενή (ace. neutre pi.) Mo || 10 ΠΕΤωΝ, mais dans le texte πετρών Pr; πετών Mo || 11 APOTCON|NCI(ON, lu άρότω (γ)[ν](η)σίων Pr; νσίων Mo || (σ)υνάπτετα[ι] Pr.

Dieu me garde, je ne redoute pas les bar bar es. Cette maison, la grace de Dieu salvatrice la donna a Mar as a edifier, comme il l 'avait voulu. Auteurs de ces vers, nous sommes fiers de former une seule et legitime famille, nous Pantaleon, Petros, Leontia, qui ensemble avons eu la chance d'avoir des peres qui etaient freres, et des meres qui etaient sceurs, bien tres precieux. Et sous la conduite des lois, Leontia, qui a beaucoup go te aux plus savants discours, s 'unit a moi Petros en vue, si Dieu nous l 'accorde, de "la procreation d'enfants legitimes". 1. Le vers initial, comme dans I'epigramme I, forme une sorte de prelude, lie en substance mais non syntaxiquement la piece qui suit. La premiere personne (Dieu me garde ...) peut s'entendre soit du redacteur de repigramme, soit de la maison elle-meme. La confiance en Dieu s'exprime de facon comparable, dans plusieurs villages d'Apamene, travers la citation de

Deux opigrammes d'Apamene

127

Paul: "si Dieu est pour nous, qui est contre nous?"55. Ici, la protection divine garantit les habitants de la maison contre la menace des barbares, Arabes ou Perses56. Dans d'autres inscriptions du VF siecle, c'est toute une cite qui se declare delivree de la crainte des barbares grace aux autorites qui 1'ont fortifiee et qui la defendent57. 2-3. Le nom de Maras, courant en Syrie58, a ete justement reconnu par Mouterde dans la copie de Prentice, abusivement corrigee par ce dernier. Le personnage est presente comme batisseur de la maison, en des termes qui semblent en designer le fondateur (quoique sans relation exprimee avec les personnages suivants), plut t que I'architecte. La fin du vers 3 ne suffit pas definir le r le de Maras, en raison de la fonction douteuse du verbe έβουλήύη. Selon Prentice, ce verbe aurait pour sujet la grace divine59, de meme selon Mouterde60. II nous semble plut t que la grace de Dieu a exauce le voeu d'un homme. Au lieu de ω έβουλήΟη, nous restituons done ώ[ς] έβουλήθη, ce verbe ayant pour sujet Maras. 4-7. Notre edition de ces lignes differe beaucoup de celle de Prentice, laquelle Mouterde s'est ici conforme. Non que la copie de Prentice soit tres eloignee des donnees de la pierre, mais les corrections qu'il a multipliers aux vers 4 et 5 aboutissent un texte peu pres fictif. Rappelons-en la teneur et la traduction: Οϊ τους στίχους γ(ράφ)ομεν, αύχοΰμεν γένος όπα(δόν) Λέωνο(ς), [πα](τ)ρός, κ(αι) Λεοντία[ς], πατέρας, άδελφού[ς], πάντες εύτυχηκότες, μητέρας, άδελφάς, χρήμα τιμιώτατον. (We), who write these lines, boast (ourselves) a race devoted unto Leo,

55

Rom. 8, 31. Cf. IGLS IV, 1442; 1448-1450; 1576; 1577; 1784; 1846. Voir ci-dessus, n. 22-25. 57 Comparer en Syrie, sur une porte des remparts d'Anasartha, Popigramme IGLS II, 288, 3: [κα]ταφρονοϋσα βαρ[βάρων] καταδρομής. En Epire, sur les murs de Byllis, l'e"pigramme SEG XXXVIII, 532, 1:οϋκέτι βαρβάρους όλοφύρομε ουδέ δειμένω. Thessalonique, sur une porte, AP IX, 686, 5 (cf. C. Mango, CQ, n. s. 34 [1984] 489-491): βάρβαρον ου τρομέεις. 58 Maras est, avec Mareas, Maris etc., un des noms forme's sur la racine aramoenne mr\ "seigneur". Laodicoe de Syrie, au Ve s., le riche bienfaiteur Maras itait sumommo Aristide pour sa justice (cf. PLREII, 706). 59 D'ou sa traduction des vers 2-3: „This house the saving grace of God hath e'er kept happy, as it willed to build (it)." 60 "Cette demeure, c'est la grace salutaire de Dieu qui l'a procuroe Maras, en voulant qu'il la construisit." 56

128

Denis Feissel

(the) father, and to Leontia, fathers and brothers — all having prospered— mothers and sisters — a thing most precious*1. L'hypothese, evoquee plus haut, d'un Leon pere de Leontia reposait, on le voit, sur la correction [πα](τ)ρός introduite au vers 5. Identifiant ces deux personnages des membres de la famille imperiale, Prentice etait reduit considerer les auteurs de l'epigramme comme anonymes62. En realite, ce sont eux que le vers 5 enumere explicitement: ό Πανταλέων, ό Π[έ]τρος, ή Λεοντία. Si la lecture de ce vers laissait le moindre doute, il serait dissipe par les monogrammes graves gauche de l'epigramme I: ceux de Petros et de Leontia avaient ete dej resolus par Prentice; quant au monogramme median, jusqu'ici non dechiffre, il trouve dans le nom de Pantale n une solution parfaite. L'epigramme a done pour sujet, et peut-etre pour auteurs, trois personnages qui se designent curieusement, la 1. 4, comme "les versificateurs", litteralement "ceux aux vers"63, ou "gens de vers", comme nous disons "gens de plume". Tous les trois, deux hommes et une femme, se vantent de former une seule et meme famille, εν γένος, issue de manages legitimes, si tel est bien ici le sens de l'epithete γνήσιον. Leur genealogie est explicitee aux vers 6-7, dont les editeurs n'ont pas non plus reconnu la construction. Le verbe εΰτυχεΐν, dont l'emploi transitif est bien atteste en grec tardif64, a pour objets πατέρας et μητέρας, pour attributs αδελφού [ς] et άδελφάς. Pantale n, Petros et Leontia avaient trois peres distincts, qui etaient trois freres, et trois meres distinctes, qui etaient trois soeurs. Les enfants nes de ces trois couples65 etaient done doublement cousins germains, puisqu'ils avaient les memes grands-parents paternels et maternels. En se reclamant d'un seul γένος, ils privilegiert proba61

La traduction de Mouterde est ici un caique exact de l'anglais, sinon du grec. Mouterde, qui reconnait en Maras le fondateur de la maison, mais qui voit encore en Loontia la fille de l'empereur Lion, n'a pas he"sit6 faire de Maras "un frere de la princesse". L'opigramme serait, selon Mouterde, une "manifestation de loyalisme"; les inscriptions du mSme village qu'il cite tort comme analogues (IGLS IV, 1587-1588) invoquent l'intercession des ap tres pour Thoodose Ier et Arcadius. 63 La locution οι τους στίχους est formoe de Particle suivi d'un accusatif. Ce n'est pas, comme l'ont cru les diteurs, une proposition relative nocessitant un verbe, mais un tour elliptique bien vivant dans le grec tardif, comme l'a rocemment domontro J. Gascou, The Journal of Juristic Papyrology 24 (1994) 13-17: Ή τα στεφάνια et les formations apparentees. 64 Cf. P. Cairo Masp. 23, 23; 89 III, l (citos par Preisigke, s.v.). 65 Peut-etre eurent-ils plus de trois enfants mais, la date de Γ inscription, Pantaloon, P6tros et Loontia sont apparemment les seuls horitiers de la famille. 62

Deux opigrammes d'Apamene

129

blement leur filiation patrilineaire66. A1'expression fierement employee ici, εν αύχοΰμεν γένος, on peut en effet comparer celle d'une epigramme funeraire de 419/20, Salkhad dans le Hauran67: "et ils sont tous des descendants d'Audelos", [σύμ]παντες δε εξ Αύδήλου γεγάασιν. I'g z, les trois cousins ne precisent pas le nom de leurs parents. Nommer les trois couples aurait, il est vrai, etc long, mais il n'etait pas difficile d'indiquer au moins le nom de l'ancetre commun. II n'a pas ete non plus mentionne explicitement, moins que le fondateur de la maison nomme au vers 3, Maras, ne fut un ascendant des trois cousins, par exemple leur grandpere patemel. Quoi qu'il en soit, ce manage de trois freres avec trois soeurs flit considere par les enfants des trois couples comme un sujet de fierte (vers 4), un bonheur (vers 6), un bien de grand prix (vers 7). Pour preserver l'unite de la famille ainsi constituee, il ne restait aux cousins qu' s'allier entre eux. C'est ainsi que Ton verra Leontia epouser son cousin Petros, condition de modifier profondement le texte re£u des vers S a i l . 8-9. Ces deux vers, isoles tort des suivants, ont ete ainsi lus et traduits par Prentice: ηγουμένων δε των νόμων, Λεοντία σοφωτάτων διαν[ο]εΐ ευμενή λόγων. And under the guidance of the laws, Leontia is gracious, abounding in wisest words69. Au lieu du barbarisme suppose ευμενή, on peut lire en toutes lettres: σοφωτάτων λίαν γεγευμένη λόγων. On reconnaissait done Leontia une haute culture, eile "qui avait beaucoup go te aux plus savants discours", qui en etait imbue, autrement dit qui avait beneficie d'une instruction litteraire superieure. L'eloge n'est pas commun, particulierement pour une femme, et pour une femme chretienne. Comptee parmi "ceux aux vers" (II, 4), Leontia dut prendre une part personnelle la composition des deux epigrammes, ou les reminiscences des poetes ne manquent pas69. c te de cet eloge de la culture litterai66

En milieu Syrien, Γ indication de Tancetre oponyme du genos est particuliarement attestoe dans le Hauran: voir M. Sartre, Syria 59 (1982) 77-91: Tribus et clans dans le Hawr n antique, qui le genos "parait correspondre une subdivision assez large d'une tribu indigene, subdivision que Ton appellera famille patriarcale ou clan" (p. 87). 67 E. Littmann et αϊ., Syria-Princeton III A, 2 (1910) 95, n° 160, expliquo par M. Sartre, op. cit., 87: "ce que je tiens pour identique των Αυδηλου ou των Αυδηλου γένος". 68 Le texte de Mouterde est different (voir apparat), mais ne brave pas moins la grammaire. II est traduit: "Loontia forme d'heureux projets suivant les desseins les plus sages". 69 Outre les ochos de Nonnos et d'Eudocie relevos dans Popigramme I, voir la citation de Menandre commentoe ci-dessous au vers 11 (cf. n. 74-75).

130

Denis Feissel

re, repigramme fait au vers 8 allusion au droit. En quoi Leontia s'etait-elle laisse guider par les lois, c'est un point que les derniers vers nous permettront d'elucider. 10-11. Prentice n'etablissait aucun lien syntaxique entre les vers 8-9 et les suivants, ainsi lus et traduits: 'Εμοί πετρών, τούτο παρέχοντος του Θεοΰ, παίδων έπ' άρότωι (γ)[ν](η)σίων (σ)υνάπτετα[ι]. To me a stony place, God granting this, suffices for the raising of honorable children™. Le mot πετρών n'a ici que faire: c'est une forme dorienne, hapax connu seulement par un arbitrage de Rhodes entre Priene et Samos, au debut du IF siecle av. J.-C.71. Cette lecture fautive a pour origine un pretendu nu final, que Prentice n'avait copie qu'avec un point souscrit. On lit en realite, au datif avec iota adscrit, le nom du meme Petros que nous avons reconnu ci-dessus au vers 5, et dont Prentice avait, de fa?on hesitante, deja dechiffre le monogramme72. Des lors, la syntaxe des vers 8-11 forme un tout: Λεοντία (...) έμοι Πέτρωι (...) συνάπτεται. "C'est sous la conduite des lois que Leontia (...) s'unit moi, Petros"73. Sans dovelopper les implications de cette reference aux lois, Prentice a brievement identifie dans la formule finale — παίδων έπ' άρότω γνησίων — "la phrase conventionnelle connue dans les contrats de mariage". Mouterde a precise que ce trait du droit athenien nous etait connu par Menandre74. Le poete comique est en effet le plus ancien temoin d'une formule d' έγγύη qu'il a utilisee de fa9on recurrente75, et que des auteurs tardifs citeront par allusion, 70

Prentice (dont Mouterde n'a fait ici que calquer la traduction) ajoutait ce commentaire: "I suppose that these last two verses mean that, with the favor of God and of Leontia, even so stony a place as the country around I'djaz was good enough to raise a respectable family." 71 E.Schwyzer, Dialectorum Graecarum exempla epigraphica potiora, Leipzig 1923, n° 289, 1. 166. Get exemple seul otait enregistri par LSJ, dont le Supplement (1968 et 1996) ajoute la re"fe"rence, fallacieuse, Prentice. 72 Voir ci-dessus, n. 12. 73 Dans cette phrase finale, Potros prend seul la parole la premiere personne, tandis que la phrase pr cidente l'associait ses deux cousins. 74 Mouterde, op. cit., 199, renvoie : "Monandre, Fragm. 720 [= Climent d'Alexandrie, Stromates, II, 23] = Perikeiromene, 38 s. [= P. Oxy. II211, 38-39], formule qu'ont reproduite Cloment d'Alexandrie (...) et Lucien (Timon, 17)". 75 Minandre, Dyskolos, 842; Perikeiromene, 1013; Samienne, 727; Fragm. 720. Cf. A. W. Gomme et F. H. Sandbach, Menander, A Commentary, Oxford 1973, 262. L'ordre des mots varie chez Minandre selon les exigences du vers; il est dans notre inscription le meme que dans le Dyskolos et dans le fragment citi par Climent.

Deux opigrammes d'Apamene

131

ou reference explicite, la comedie attique76. II s'agit done bien dans 1'epigramme syrienne d'une reminiscence de Menandre, mais qui peut etre indirecte vu le caractere quasi proverbial de la formule. Au theme de la progeniture legitime s'ajoute, dans repigramme, une reference aux lois qui n'est pas un emprunt la comedie. Ces deux elements paraissent cependant avoir pour origine commune un formulaire juridique consacre. Temoin Lucien qui, cornme notre texte, associe les mots de Menandre la mention de la loi: νόμω γυναίκα παραλαβών έπ' άρότω γνησίων77. En raison de son caractere litteraire, repigramme fait ainsi appel des reminiscences classiques. En meme temps, eile fait echo, sous une forme peine transposee, au formulaire en usage non plus Athenes, mais en droit romain, dans des contrats de manage contemporains de Γ inscription. Parmi les rares documents conserves de ce genre, on peut ainsi lire dans un contrat egyptien du regne de Justin II78: συνηρμοσάμην έμαυτόν τη ση κοσμιότητι κατ' έκδοσιν νομίμου γάμου έπι χρησταΐς έλπισιν, ει τω Θεώ δόξειεν, και γνησίων τέκνων σπορά; "je me suis uni ta sage personne sous la forme d'un mariage legal, en vue d'heureuses esperances, s'il plait Dieu, et de la procreation d'enfants legitimes." II est aise de montrer le parallelisme exact entre les termes de repigramme et presque tous ceux du contrat, y compris la reference, d'inspiration chretienne, la volonte divine: ηγουμένων των νόμων - κατ' έκδοσιν νομίμου γάμου, τοϋτο παρέχοντος του Θεού - ει τω Θεώ δόξειεν, παίδων έπ' άρότω γνησίων - έπι γνησίων τέκνων σπορά, συνάπτεται - συνηρμοσάμην έμαυτόν. On voit comment Petros et Leontia — ou 1'auteur quel qu'il soit de cette sorte d'epithalame — ont su couler dans le moule de repigramme iambique les termes consacres d'un acte de mariage notarie.

76

Outre Lucien et Clement (n. 74 et 77), voir Procope de Gaza, Ep. 135 = 123 Garzya-Loenertz (cito par Gomme et Sandbach, cf. n. 75). 77 Lucien, Timon, 17. De meme Cloment, Stromates, II, 23, explique avant de citer Μέnandre (Fragm. 720): Γάμος μεν ouv εστί σύνοδος ανδρός και γυναικός ή πρώτη κατά νόμον έπι γνησίων τέκνων σπορά. Comparer ces derniers mots ceux du contrat cito n. 78. 78 P. Cairo Masp. 67310 r°, 1-2 (brouillon de P. Land. V 1711, 16-17). Je remercie J. Beaucamp de m'avoir, entre autres, indique ce document.

132

Denis Feissel

Le manage entre cousins germains dans la Syrie du Bas-Empire: entre droit, religion et mceurs Avec un insistence significative, Petros et Leontia ont tenu ä affirmer la legalite de leur union. Cette precaution parait avoir revetu un caractere apologetique du fait que les epoux etaient cousins germains, en ligne paternelle comme en ligne maternelle79. Or, si le manage de leurs parents (celui de trois freres avec trois soeurs) etait encore sans empechement80, on peut montrer qu'un manage entre cousins germains, comme celui de Petros et de Leontia, risquait, dans la Syrie chretienne de leur epoque, de susciter des critiques. En se felicitant de leur union consanguine au meme litre que du mariage de leurs parents, les deux cousins ont consciemment revendique une forme d'endogamie de moins en moins admise. Est-ce ä dire que 1'union entre collateraux au quatrieme degre ne soit plus legitime au VP siecle, dans Empire et particulierement en Syrie81? La reponse ä cette question est necessairement complexe. D'une part, une teile union ne rencontrait aucun obstacle dans le droit remain contemporain82. D'autre part, un courant rigoriste deja ancien dans 1'Eglise tendait, sans s'imposer encore, ä etendre le champ des empechements du mariage pour cause de parente. Enfin, cet etat de tension entre droit romain et morale chretienne se compliquait au Proche-Orient de facteurs exterieurs ä Empire, influence perse y rendant particulierement aigue la question des manages consanguins. La complexite de la situation etait certainement sensible ä une famille syrienne qui n'affichait pas moins sa foi chretienne que sä fidelite aux lois de I'Empire. Droit romain, sentiment des Peres de 1'Eglise, realite des moeurs dans la Syrie byzantine, ces trois points ne sauraient etre ici approfondis, et ont etc plus ou

79

Nous ne tenons pas compte dans la discussion du fait que Löontia et Potros ötaient doublement cousins, ayant pour ascendants deux couples de grands-parents seulement. Ce cas particulier, qui n'e"tait sans doute pas exceptionnel, ne semble pas Pobjet de regies spociales. II entre juridiquement dans le cas ginoral de 1'union entre cousins germains. 80 Ce n'est pas avant la fin du VII' s. que le canon 54 du Concile in Trullo (691/2) interdira le mariage de "deux freres avec deux soeurs" (e"d. Joannou, 192, 3-4). 81 Nous ne saurions ici olargir l'enquete ä la documentation ögyptienne. Relevons du moins, au Ve s., le mariage du philosophe Horapollon avec sa cousine — leurs deux peres etaient freres — d'apres P. Cairo Masp. 67295 I, 18 (cf. PLREII, 569-570). 82 Sur les empSchements du mariage dans le droit romain post-classique, la bibliographic essentielle est citde par M. Käser, Das römische Privatrecht, II, Munich 1975, 166. Pour un aper9U d'autres traditions juridiques, en particulier juive et grecque, voir G. Delling, Ehehindernisse, RAC IV (1959) col. 680-691. Nous indiquons plus bas quelques travaux plus recents.

Deux epigrammes d'Apamene

133

moins dans des etudes speciales. II y a lieu d'en dormer du moins un apersu, pour autant que Γ exigent nos inscriptions. Le manage entre cousins germains est legitime Rome depuis la fin du IIP siecle av. J.-C. II le reste dans le droit de Justinien, qui reaffirme en 533 dans ses Institutiones*3: "Les enfants de deux freres ou (de deux) soeurs, ou d'un frere et d'une soeur, peuvent s'unir." Malgre cette antique tradition, dont 1'abolition definitive n'interviendra en Orient qu'au VHP siecle84, le droit imperial n'est pas demeure invariable en la matiere: une precedente tentative d'interdiction remonte Theodose85. Ses effets, quoique temperes par une procedure de dispenses, furent durables en Occident86. En Orient au contraire, la loi de Theodose Ier fut bient t abrogee par Arcadius87, et le statu quo ante prevalut pour encore trois siecles. Reglee au regard du droit civil, pratiquement ignoree du droit canon88, la question du mariage entre cousins germains n'etait pas sans importance aux yeux des Peres de 1'Eglise, dont la reprobation s'est exprimee plus d'une fois, en Orient comme en Occident. En effet, la pensee chretienne tendait alors assimiler la parente entre cousins germains celle des freres et soeurs. Selon Augustin, des cousins, "en raison d'un lien si proche par le sang, s'appellent entre eux freres et sont quasiment germains (nes des memes parents)"89. Je ne 83

Justinien, Inst. I, 10, § 4. Duorum autemfratrum vel sororum liber i velfratris et sororis iungi possunt. (Voir la Paraphrase grecque des Institutes, id. Zepos, JGR III, 26.) Dans le mSme sens, la legislation justinienne maintient en vigueur la loi de 405 citoe plus has (n. 87). 84 Dans la legislation de la dynastie isaurienne, Ecloga II, 2 (έά. Burgmann, 170), o Pempechement du mariage s' tend jusqu'au 6e degro inclus. Sur l'extension ulterieure de Pempechement au T degro, voir K. G. Pitsakis, To κώλυμα γάμου λόγω συγγενείας εβδόμου βαομοϋ εξ αίματος στο βυζαντινό δίκαιο, Athenes-Komotini 1985. 85 Cette loi de Thoodose, dont le texte n'est pas conservo, est attestoe par Ambroise, Ep. 60, 8; Augustin, Civ. Dei XV, 16; Epitome de Caesaribus XLVIII, 10. Voir S. Roda, Studia et Documenta Historiae et luris 65 (1979) 289-309: // matrimonio fra cugini germani nella legislazione tardo-imperiale. Je remercie J. Beaucamp d'avoir attiri mon attention sur cette etude, qui montre le caractere revolutionnaire de la loi de Theodose, et ce qu'elle doit l'influence d'Ambroise sur l'empereur. 86 S. Roda, op. dt., 300-303, avant meme CTh III, 10, l (409), analyse un cas de dispense, Symmaque, Ep. 9, 133, et souligne l'opposition des aristocrates pa'iens la loi de Theodose. Pour PItalie gothique, voir Cassiodore, Variae VII, 64 (ed. Fridh, 294-295): Formula qua consobrinae matrimonium legitimum at. 87

CJ V, 4, 19 (405): (...) ut revocata prisci iuris auctoritate (...) matrimonium inter consobrinos habeatur legitimum, sive ex duobus fratribus sive ex duabus sororibus sive ex fratre et sorore nati sunt (...). 88

II faut attendre le canon 54 du Concile in Trullo (691/2) pour qu'une regle ecclosiastique condamne celui qui opouse s cousine germaine, τον τη οικεία εξαδέλφη προς γάμου κοινωνίαν συναπτόμενον (έά. Joannou, 191, 18-19). 89

Civ. Dei XV, 16: inter sepropter tarn propinquam consanguinitatem fratres vocantur

134

Denis Feissel

sais si a remarque qu'une argumentation comparable se trouvait, un peu plus tard, chez Theodoret. Dans une lettre adressee ä des curiales de Zeugma90, l'eveque de Cyr s'emeut d'une rumeur qui serait lamentable si eile etait veridique91: "Elle dit, en effet, que parmi vous les uns ont fiance leurs filles ä leurs neveux, les autres, bien qu'ils soient leur oncle, ont choisi leurs nieces pour epouses. Voilä qui est interdit non seulement par les lois divines, mais par celles des hommes." Au titre de la loi divine, les arguments de 1'auteur sont avant tout diriges contre le manage entre oncle et niece, en vertu d'une assimilation plus morale que juridique: "Un oncle est la meme chose qu'un pere, une niece la meme chose qu'une fille." Autant dire que 1'union entre collateraux au troisieme degre equivaut ä 1'inceste en ligne directe. Si 1'oncle est comme un pere, Theodoret nous conduit, par une extrapolation implicite, ä considerer deux cousins germains comme frere et soeur — ce qui n'est pas eloigne de la conception d'Augustin. Ce raisonnement permet ä Theodoret de placer sur le meme plan, en termes de droit civil, deux cas de manage a priori distincts: celui de deux cousins germains, celui d'un oncle et de sa niece. Ce dernier est, il est vrai, prohibe par le droit imperial au moins depuis Constance II92, ainsi que dans la legislation justinienne93. Quant au pere qui fiance sa fille ä son neveu (cas analogue ä celui de Leontia et Petros), il semble bien que Theodoret le condamne, lui aussi, au nom des "lois humaines". Or cette condemnation peut difficilement se referer ä la loi dejä citee de Theodose Ier, comme si celle-ci n'avait pas etc abrogee en 405 par Arcadius. L'eveque de Cyr, du fait meme de sa juridiction, ne pouvait guere ignorer le droit actuellement en vigueur en Orient. Son temoignage conduirait plutöt ä supposer, entre la loi de 405 et sa reprise dans le Code Justinien, 1'existence d'une loi Orientale restreignant ä nouveau le manage entre cousins, ä son tour abrogee sans laisser de trace94.

et paene germani sunt (cite par Roda, op. cit., 296). Selon YEpitome de Caesaribus XLVIII, 10 (cito ibid., 297), la loi de TheOdose proscrivait, pour la meme raison, le manage avec une cousine comme avec une säur: ut consobrinarum nuptias vetuerit tamquam sororum. 90 Cite" de la province syrienne d'Euphratensis, comme Cyr. 91 TheOdoret de Cyr, Ep. VIII (id. Azoma, I, 79-81). Les extraits rite's (successivement 80, 6-8; 23-24) sont traduits par nous. 92 CTh III, 12, 1 (342) est le premier tomoin de l'abrogation du sonatusconsulte de 49, qui autorisait 1'oncle e"pouser la fille d'un frere, mais non d'une soeur. 93 Inst., I, 10, § 3: Fratris vel sororis filiam uxorem ducere non licet. Voir dans le meme sens, sous , G/V, 5, 9, et V, 8, 2. 94 Thoodoret, e"v6que depuis 423, mourut vers 457. II pourrait done s'agir d'une Novelle perdue de TheOdose II (postorieure au Code de 438 ?) ou de Marcien.

Deux e"pigrammes d'Apamene

135

Une teile Hypothese parait d'autant plus fondee que Theodoret evoque un regime de dispense imperiale apparemment applicable aussi bien au mariage entre cousins qu'au mariage entre oncle et niece. On sait que ce dernier cas pouvait etre, en effet, 1'objet d'une requete a rempereur: cette possibilite, moralement condamnee par Theodoret, ne rut abrogee que par une loi de Zenon95. Quant au mariage entre cousins germains, une procedure de derogation ä la loi de Thöodose Ier fut bien instituee en Occident par Honorius96, mais n'avait pas lieu d'etre en Orient du moment qu'Arcadius avait ä nouveau rendu ces mariages legitimes de plein droit97. Pourtant, la lettre de Theodoret temoigne que des notables de Zeugma ont demande, sous forme de lettre imperiale, des dispenses pour les mariages qu'il reprouve, et cette procedure parait bien inclure les mariages entre cousins. Si tel est le cas, force est d'admettre que la loi "permissive" de 405 n'etait plus en vigueur, et que Orient connut, au moins temporairement, un regime de dispenses conforme ä la loi occidentale de 409. L'eveque, ä cet egard, critique sans embages le droit imperial, qu'il juge en cela impie, non sans rappeler aux coupables qu'ils rendront compte de leur faute ä la justice divine98: "C'est ä des Perses d'avoir ces audaces, non ä des Romains eleves dans la religion. Et je pense que ceux qui ont legifere en ces termes n'ont meme pas etc eleves dans la religion, mais ont ainsi statue parce qu'ils vivent encore dans la superstition." En autres termes, les dispenses de mariage octroyees par rescrit sont indignes d'un empereur Chretien, ceux qui en font la demande se ravalent au rang de barbares pai'ens. L'allusion de Theodoret aux "audaces des Perses" est egalement d'actualite. Ce n'est pas une banalite ethnographique, reference intemporelle ä des moeurs exotiques99. On sait que, dans les provinces de Empire voisines de la Perse, la realite sociale a, des siecles durant, subi la contagion d'usages matrimoniaux considered en droit romain comme incestueux. Ce n'est pas sans raison que F. Cumont attribuait ä influence parthe les mariages entre frere et soeur de meme pere, attestes au IIP siecle par des inscriptions de Doura 10? Deux siecles plus tard, les unions qui scandalisent Theodoret n'auraient rien 95 96

CJV, 8,2.

CTh III, 10, 1 (Ravenne, 409), cf. ci-dessus, n. 87. CJ V, 4, 19 (Nice"e, 405), cito n. 86. 98 Thdodoret, Ep. VIII, 80, 25-27 (notre traduction). 99 Thoodoret, Therapeutique IX, 33, avait dejä traito des mariages incestueux chez les Perses, notamment entre frere et soeur. 100 Les analyses de F. Cumont, CRAI 1924, 53-62: Les unions entre proches ä Doura et chez les Perses, sont reprises en substance dans ses Fouilles de Doura-Europos, Paris 1926, 344-347. 97

136

Denis Feissel

eu de contraire au droit du Haut-Empire et ne temoignent pas necessairement d'une influence etrangere, mais le cliche des Perses incestueux est desormais de rigueur dans la denunciation de l'endogamie en general. Tel est encore le cas au VIe siecle, quand, en matiere de noces illicites, Justinien et Justin II accordent des mesures d'amnistie collective aux provinces les plus proches du royaume sassanide. Ainsi Justinien, en 535/6, explique-t-il son indulgence pour ces manages illicites en raison du fächeux exemple de la Perse101. On voit assez pour combien de raisons diverses l'auteur de nos epigrammes a, vers la meme epoque, affirme solennellement que deux cousins pouvaient etre epoux legitimes.

101

Justinien, Nov. 154, de 535/6, vaut pour les provinces d'Osrhoene et de Mosopotamie. Justin II, Nov. 3, de 566, vaut pour trois provinces: Osrhoene, Mesopotamie et Euphratesie. Voir S. Puliatti, Ricerche sulle Novelle di Giustino II, vol. II, Milan 1991, 3-51: Le nozze incestuose da Giustiniano a Giustino II.

L'empereur et le Theologien propos du Retour des reliques de Gregoire de Nazianze (BEG 728) Bernard Flusin Ταύτα σον παρ'ημών, ώ &εία καν νερά κεφαλή, μνκρά τε καν άκαλλή, καν ονα τα των παίδων ψελλίσματα. (ActaSS, Maiill [1680] 771 E)

Le lundi du Renouveau, lendemain de P ques, l'empereur se rend en grand cortege depuis le palais sacre jusqu'aux Saints-Ap tres. La, dans le narthex, il attend le patriarche, qui arrive avec le clerge et le peuple en procession. "L'empereur traverse 1'eglise, passe par le c te de I'ambon, arrive la solea. Le patriarche entre au sanctuaire. L'empereur, apres avoir prie comme le veut 1'usage devant les portes saintes, entre au sanctuaire. II venere la sainte table, sur laquelle il depose une bourse qu'il Γβςοίί du preposite. Puis, apres avoir prie tous deux devant le tombeau de notre pere Chrysostome et de saint Gregoire le Theologien, apres avoir allume des cierges, Tempereur et le patriarche sortent par le c te gauche du sanctuaire et se rendent la ch sse de saint Constantin."1 Cette ceremonie, qui suit le schema bien connu d'une petite entree rendue solennelle par la presence du patriarche et de rempereur, est ici compliquee de deux rites de veneration. On sait que les Saints-Ap tres sont entoures de mausolees imperiaux, et Ton ne s'etonnera pas de voir l'empereur et le patriarche se rendre au tombeau de Constantin. Mais c'est plut t le premier geste que je veux souligner: l'empereur et le patriarche prient au tombeau de Jean Chrysostome et de Gregoire le Theologien. Nous savons en effet par d'autres sources que les corps de ces deux eveques de Constantinople etaient deposes dans le choeur des Saints-Ap tres. Nicolas Mesarites, la fin du XIP siecle, quand il decrit ce sanctuaire, ne manque pas de signaler, dans la partie nord, l'ouest de l'autel, le tombeau du Chrysostome avec un gisant en argent et, lui faisant pendant, au sud, le sarcophage couleur de feu de Gregoire de Nazianze2. Le corps de Jean Chrysostome a ete depose en cet endroit le 27 Janvier 438. Quant celui de Gregoire de Nazianze, son arrivee est beaucoup plus recente. C'est cette translation que je m'interesserai ici, parce que ce cas particulier 1

De cerim. I. 10, έα. Α. Vogt, 69. Nicolaos M6sarit£s, Description des Saints-Apolres, έα. A. Heisenberg, Grabeskirche und Apostelkirche, 2, Leipzig 1908, 80-81. 2

138

Bernard Flusin

me semble jeter une lumiere assez vive sur la relation qui peut exister entre I'empereur et le culte des saints. De quand faut-il dater la presence de Gregoire de Nazianze aux Saints-Ap tres? On sail que le bref episcopal de Gregoire Constantinople commence en 379 et s'interrompt en 381. Le saint, cette annee-la, demissionne et se retire dans ses domaines de Cappadoce. C'est la qu'il meurt et qu'il est enterre. Pendant fort longtemps, personne ne s'avise de troubler cette sepulture et il faut attendre le Xe siecle pour voir Constantin VII, l'auteur justement du Livre des ceremonies, faire revenir le corps du Theologien dans la capitale. Nous sommes sous le regne personnel du Porphyrogenete, c'est-a-dire entre 944 et 959, mais il est plus difficile de dire quel moment precis. Les temoignages, sur ce point, sont en effet contradictoires. La Chronique du Logothete, bien informee sur l'epoque de Constantin VII, mentionne la fin de ce regne, sous le patriarcat de Polyeucte (956-970), deux evenements marquants: la decouverte et le transfer! aux Saints-Apotres d'habits des ap tres; le retour des reliques de Gregoire de Nazianze, qui sont deposees pour partie Sainte-Anastasie, pour partie aux Saints-Apotres3. L'autre source est un eloge anonyme pour le retour des reliques de Gregoire le Theologien, Έγκώμιον εις την έπάνοδον του τιμίου λειψάνου του εν θεολογία ύπερστρέψαντος (sic) πατρός ημών Γρηγορίου4. Void ce que nous lisons dans ce texte: "Αρτι δε των 'Ρωμαϊκών σκήπτρων τω βασιλεΐ πιστώ καΐ Οεοσεβεΐ, και του πρώτως βασιλεύοντος όμωνύμω και όμοζηλω, και πλείστον όσον τον άνδρα τιμώντι καοισταμένω, πολλήν τε περί τους τούτου λόγους μελέτην και φιλοπονίαν έπιδεικνυμένω και ύπερθαυμάζοντι εί τηλικούτους αγώνας και πόνους περί την βασιλίδα των πόλεων ένστησάμενον και του της αΐρέσεως άγους ταύτην περικαΟάραντα ϋπαιΟρον ούτω και ύπερόριον παροράν καΐ μη προς ην έκοπίασε ποίμνην άνακληΟήναί τε και έπανελΟεΐν, ώσπερ τις ένθους και κάτοχος τω παναγίω γενόμενος πνεύματι, διανίσταται προς την ς"ήτησιν και το βούλευμα ίεροϊς και τα οεΐα πεπαιδευμένοις άνδρασιν άνατίοησιν.5 3

Symoon Magister, Bonn, 755 (apres la mort de Thiophylacte et l'ordination de Polyeucte): Τότε και αποστολικών έσοήτων εν τινι γωνία της πόλεως δηλωΟεισών τω βασιλεΐ, μετά πάσης τιμής και δοξολογίας άνελόμενος αύτάς, τω μεγάλω των αγίων αποστόλων άπεϋησαύρισε ναω. Και τα λείψανα του θεολόγου Γρηγορίου, α και μερισθέντα τα μεν εν τω σήκω των αγίων αποστόλων ετέθησαν, τα δε εν τω ναω της αγίας μάρτυρος Αναστασίας. 4 BHG 728, que je citerai d'apres la premiere idition des Acta Sanctorum (= ActaSS). 5 ActaSS Maii II (1680) 768F (comme ailleurs, j'opere tacitement quelques corrections orthographiques): "A peine les sceptres remains furent-ils en possession de I'empereur fidele

L'empereur et le TheOlogien

139

On voit que, d'apres ce texte, la chose est claire: c'est tout au debut de son regne personnel que Constantin VII, l'empereur homonyme du premier empereur chretien, prend la decision de faire revenir les reliques de Gregoire et, dans la suite du texte, rien n'indique que execution ait subi quelque retard. Devant ces deux temoignages, qui placent le meme evenement, pour 1'un, peu apres 945, pour 1'autre entre 956 et 959, les avis peuvent etre partages, et Janin, dans son ouvrage classique sur les eglises et les monasteres de Constantinople, situe prudemment la deposition "sous Constantin Porphyrogenete"6. La question de chronologic n'est certes pas d'une importance capitale. Mais eile n'est pas indifferente, puisqu'on aura remarque que la date du retour des reliques est un terminus post quern pour la redaction du chapitre I. 10 du Livre des ceremonies. Surtout, eile conduit ä s'interroger sur 1'autorite qu'il convient d'attribuer au discours sur les reliques de Gregoire. Ce discours a ete peu etudie. Les deux auteurs modernes qui lui ont, ä ma connaissance, accorde le plus d'attention, Westerink et Darrouzes, jugent qu'il s'agit d'un texte bien informe, compose peu apres les evenements qu'il relate7, et c'est en effet impression qu'on ressent ä simple lecture. Mais on peut obtenir un resultat plus sur et plus precis en reprenant le dossier sur nouveaux frais. Notre recit anonyme a ete edite dans les Acta Sanctorum en 16808 d'apres un temoin unique, le Taurinensis B III 31 (116). II s'agit d'un menologe de Janvier, ou les textes metaphrastiques et non metaphrastiques se melent, et qui a ete copie, d'apres Albert Ehrhard, au XVe—XVIe siecle9. Le texte a ete reproduit, avec quelques erreurs supplementaires, dans la troisieme edition des Acta Sanctorum™, mais il n'a jamais fait l'objet, ä ma connaissance, d'une edition critique. et pieux de meme nom et meme zele que le premier empereur, qui honorait tout spöcialement le saint, dont il itudiait les discours avec une grande application, et qui s'otonnait qu'on laissät ainsi dans son exil, en rase campagne, un homme qui avait entrepris tant de lüttes pinibles pour la Reine des Villes, la purifiant de la souillure de I'he~r6sie, au lieu de le rappeler pour qu'il revienne aupres du troupeau qui avait öte" l'objet de ses soins, que cet empereur, comme rempli de Dieu et sous Pemprise de l'Esprit, se met ä examiner cette question et expose son projet ä de saints hommes instruits dans les choses de la religion." 6 R. Janin, Lageographie ecclesiastique de l'empire byzantin. I, Le siege de Constantinople et lepatriarcat cecumenique, III, Les eglises et les monasteres, Paris 1969, 45. 7 J. Darrouzes et L. G. Westerink, Theodore Daphnopates, Correspondance (Le Monde Byzantin), Paris 1978, 18. 8 ActaSSMaii II (1680) 766-771. 9 A. Ehrhard, Überlieferung und Bestand der hagiographischen und homiletischen Literatur der griechischen Kirche, III, Leipzig 1952, 199-201. 10 ActaSS Maii II, 3e eU (1866) XLII-XLVI.

140

Bernard Flusin

Bien que notre discours paraisse etre un texte rare, il en existe un autre temoin en plus du Taurinensis. C'est un manuscrit du Musee historique de Moscou, le Mosquensis 162 (Vlad. 380), qui a ete signale par F. Halkin dans le Novum Auctarium de la BHGU. Ce manuscrit12 est date de 1021-1022, c'est- -dire qu'il a ete copie un demi-millenaire ou presque avant le Taurinensis utilise par les Bollandistes. Pour le contenu, il s'agit d'un recueil atypique de Vies de saints: ce qu'Ehrhard appelle une "nicht-menologische Sammlung"13. Dans ces deux manuscrits, Taurinensis et Mosquensis, nous avons bien affaire un seul et meme texte14. Mais quand approche la fin du texte des Acta Sanctorum, les deux temoins divergent assez brusquement. Voici comment la situation se presenter Fin de lapartie commune^: Τις δε και τον νουν αύτοΐς έμβαϋύνας ου το Ήλιου πυρ ούρανόϋεν ορά κατερχόμενον ή το εκ φλογός άρμα τούτον έξάραν μετάρσνον ή τον εκ πυρός στύλον του Ισραήλ προηγούμενον ή την σιαγόνα Σαμψών τάς αλλοφύλων συγκόπτουσαν φάλαγγας, ειπείν δε μάλλον την κατελθούσαν μετ'ήχου βιαίαν πνοήν έπι τους αποστόλους του πνεύματος καΐ την χάριν εν εϊδει πύρινων γλωσσών ύποδείξασαν;

Fin du Taurinensis™·. Άλλα ταΰτα μεν σχολής ετέρας τα διηγήματα, και ανθρώπων γλώττης τοιούτων εν τοϋτο έσπουδακότων καΐ μόνον ταΐς τοιαύταις ένευδοκιμεΐν ύποθέσεσι. 23. Δεύτε ούν περιστάντες έμοί, ώ κλήρος Χριστού και μερίς ή Οεόλεκτος, οι τήςδε της μεγαλοπόλεως γνησιώτατοι τρόφιμοι και της έμής φιλίας σπουδαίοι οεραπευταί, τάς Οεολογικάς εκείνου φωνάς άναπτύξαντες, την όδόν ανακρούσατε, ψάλλοντες εν συνέσει, εν " //G728b. 12 Voir B. Fonki et F. Poliakov, Manuscrits grecs de la Bibliotheque synodale (en russe), Moscou 1993, 124-125, avec la bibliographie antorieure. 13 Ehrhard, op. dt., III, 741-742. 14 II existe, bien s r, des differences entre le texte des deux te"moins; mais elles ne vont guere au-del de ce qu'on peut attendre en de tels cas. Toutefois, dans le § 19 (numorotation reprise des Acta Sanctorum), le texte du Mosquensis comporte quelques phrases supplomentaires. 15 ActaSS Maii II (1680) 771D. l'avant derniere ligne, j'ajoute τους αποστόλους d'apres le Mosquensis: "Et qui done, s'il y plonge son intellect, ne voit pas descendre le feu d'Elie, ou bien le char de feu emp rter ce prophete vers les cieux, ou la colonne ardente qui guidait Israel, ou la m choire de Samson broyant les phalanges dtrangeres, ou, pour mieux dire, le souffle violent de Γ Esprit descendant sur les ap tres grand bruit et faisant paraftre la grace sous la forme de langues de feu?" 16 Ibid., Π l D-F.

L' empereur et le Thoologien

141

προσοχή των ϋμνων ρυθμίζοντες εαυτούς, εν καταστάσει καρδίας προς αυτόν αποβλέποντες. "Ιδωμεν τον θεολόγον Γρηγόριον την καλήν ταύτην μετοικίαν του αποστολικού ναοΰ άσπασάμενον, προς ην πολλάκις έπανηγύρισεν. Πείθομαι γαρ μη μόνον αυτόν, τάς ουράνιους καταλιπόντα διατριβάς, μεθ'ήμών πανηγυρίζειν και συναγάλλεσθαι, άλλα και τον των αποστόλων χορόν τηδε τη εορτή παρεΐναι νυν, τους έμούς θερμούς προστάτας και της οικουμένης ασφαλέστατους φρουρούς· προς δε τούτοις και το τερπνόν και πάγχρυσον στόμα τον έμόν Χρυσορρόαν και της εκκλησίας διειδέστατον καΐ μελίρρυτον ποταμόν, τον της μετανοίας έγγυητήν εύκατάνυκτον και της διδασκαλίας εΰηχέστατον όργανον, και ει τίνες αλλαι των μακαρίων ψυχαί, έπείπερ δικαίων πνεύματα δια παντός εν ταΐς των αγίων λαμπρότησι δοξολογούσι τον Κύριον. Ταύτα σοι παρ'ημών, ώ θεία και ιερά κεφαλή, μικρά τε και άκαλλή, και οία τα των παίδων ψελλίσματα· συ δε ταϊς πρεσβείαις ταΐς σαΐς διεξάγης ήμας προς τα κρείττω τη βακτηρία των λόγων σου, και όδηγοίης προς τάς της σωτηρίας αύλάς, και άντιδοίης εύχαΐς σου την τελειωτέραν έκεϊσε μυσταγωγίαν της ύπερφώτου Τριάδος, δια της ενταύθα μυήσεως και καθάρσεως, έχων συλλήπτορας της αιτήσεως την της δωδεκάδος των αποστόλων χορείαν και των οίος συ απ' αιώνος Θεώ εύαρεστηκότων και δοξαζόντων τον Κύριον. Αϋτω ή δόξα και το κράτος, νυν και άει καΐ εις τους αιώνας των αιώνων. 'Αμήν. "Mais cela necessiterait d'autres loisirs, et il y faudrait la langue d'hommes dont la seule et unique etude est de briller en de telles matieres. 23. Et done, vous qui m'entourez, vous 1'heritage du Christ et la part choisie de Dieu, vous, les vrais nourrissons de la grande ville ou nous sommes, les auxiliaires zeles de mon amitie, apres avoir feuillete les discours theologiques de cet homme illustre, mettez-vous en route, en psalmodiant avec intelligence des hymnes auxquelles vous pretez attention, reglant vos vies, dans la paix du coeur, en fixant les yeux vers lui. Regardons Gregoire le Theologien: il a adopte comme nouveau sejour la belle eglise des apotres ou il est venu si souvent celebrer des fetes. Et je suis s r, en effet, qu'il n'est pas le seul avoir quitte les demeures celestes pour se rejouir avec nous de cette celebration et que maintenant prerment part aussi cette fete le choeur des ap tres, mes ardents protecteurs et les gardiens tres s rs du monde, ainsi que la Bouche d'or, mon Chrysorrhoas, le fleuve si limpide dont les flots de miel irriguent Γ Eglise, le garant compatissant de la penitence, Γ instrument tres sonore de la doctrine, et tout ce qu'il y a encore d' mes bienheureuses, puisque l'esprit des justes, toujours, lors des brillantes fetes des saints, chante la gloire du Seigneur. Voila, divine et sainte tete, les pauvres choses sans beaute que je t'offre, et qui sont comme les vagissements des enfants. Et toi, par tes intercessions, fais-

142

Bernard Flusin

nous passer vers la divinite en nous dirigeant de la houlette de tes discours. Guide-nous vers les demeures du salut. En retour, donne-nous par tes prieres la revelation plus parfaite que tu as re?ue dans l'au-del aux mysteres de la Trinite supralumineuse, en nous initiant ici-bas et en nous purifiant, et que, pour t'assister dans cette demande, tu aies le choeur des douze apotres et de tous ceux qui, comme toi, ont su plaire Dieu depuis les siecles et glorifient le Seigneur, qui gloire et puissance maintenant et toujours et pour les siecles des siecles. Amen." Le Mosquensis, au lieu de cette fin, presente un texte tout different, et fort long. Π realise tout d'abord ce que le texte du Taurinensis se contentait de remettre d'autres occasions et d'autres talents, c'est- -dire qu'il s'attache decrire la sublimite des discours du Theologien. Voici le debut de ce passage: Πώς δε ουκ έξίσταταί τις το εν τη βάτω πρότερον άναπτόμενον πυρ εν τοις τούτου νοήμασι φανταζόμενος και τον θεόν εκ τούτων φθεγγόμενον, μη ότι τοις κατά Μωσέα την άρετήν, άλλα και ει τινι τούτου υψηλότερα) τον προς τα κάτω δεσμόν διαλύσασΟαι και τηνικαυτα γυμνόν των χαμαιζήλων της αγίας γης εϊτ'ούν συγγραφής έπιβήναι του θεολόγου; C'est- -dire: "Et comment ne serait-on pas transporte hors de soi en voyant le feu qui s'est d'abord allume dans le Buisson briller dans les pensees de Gregoire et en entendant Dieu parier depuis cellesci et s'adresser non seulement ceux qui ont la vertu de Mo'ise, mais encore tous ceux qui 1'ont depasse, leur disant de defaire le lien qui les attache ici-bas et d'entrer alors, depouilles des choses terrestres, sur la terre sainte, c'est- dire les ecrits du Theologien?"17 L'auteur revient ensuite sur la fete celebree en ce jour et compare la ch sse contenant les reliques du saint successivement l'arche de Noe", au berceau de Mo'ise et l'arche d'alliance. Enfm, apres avoir affirme que Gregoire vit toujours et qu'il nous protege, il s'acheve sur une priere d'un ton tres personnel qui merite d'etre citee en entier, parce qu'elle va nous permettre de restituer l'eloge son auteur: Ταΰτά σοι Γρηγόριε ό δια σου βασιλεύων εγώ της ήγαπημένης Χρίστου κληρονομιάς και σε πνέων μάλλον ή τον αέρα μετά πολυχρόνιον ταφήν άνατίθημι. ταϋτά σοι προσφέρω και προσάδω και προσλαλώ και αντί δώρου παντός γεηροΰ και πέπλου αττικού μυοικοϋ λόγον, το πάντων κάλλιστον και ψυχωφελέστατον, καρποφορώ· ω και ζών έχαιρες ή τοις άλλοις και δι' αυτού τα οεΐα φιλοσόφων και άπόρ17

Comme on le voit, le texte du Mosquensis commence en parlant des noemata de Grogoire: ce terme se retrouve dans le texte commun aux deux tomoins peu avant qu'ils ne se soparent (ActaSS § 22, dobut: βροντά ι και άστραπαι ... νοημάτων).

L'empereur et le Thoologien

143

ρητά διετέλεις και οανών τον αυτόν έχεις δεξιούμενόν τε καΐ έστιώντα, και ταΐς πρεπούσαις τιμαΐς καταστέφοντα. Ταύτην σοι την άνακομιδήν ό εν σοι πεποιϋώς και έορτάζων και συνίστημι σήμερον, και σε της βασιλείας ύπερασπιστήν και έπίκουρον προβάλλομαι· ως και τω των θεολόγων σου ρημάτων γάλακτι εκτραφείς, και εις μέτρον τέλειον της Χριστού ηλικίας έληλακώς και βασιλέας ύπερβαλών, ει μη μέγα τούτο ειπείν, τη ευσέβεια και περί σε μεγαλοψυχία, τω περί σε φίλτρω τους όσοι ποτέ προς τούτο γεγόνασι ζηλωταί, παρηγκωνισάμενός τε και παρωσάμενος· ένταύοα μόνον ύπερνικάν ανταγωνίζομαι, τοις άλλοις μετριοφρονών τε και ταπεινούμενος· ος και σαΐς δεήσεσι διαφυλαχθείς και προς τον πατρωον βασίλειον Ορόνον κεκαθηκώς, εϊην διαπαντός ταΐς της πρεσβείας σου σκεπόμενος πτέρυξι και τη ση συμμαχία φρουρούμενος, και την βασιλείαν έπι χρόνοις μακροΐς διεξάγων άνεπιβούλευτον, συντηρουμένων μοι άλωβήτως καΐ του γένους και του κράτους, εις μακραιώνων χρόνων έπέκτασιν. "Voil , Gregoire, ce que moi qui, grace toi, regne sur Fheritage bienaime du Christ, moi dont le souffle est fait de toi plut t que d'air, je te consacre toi qui es reste si longtemps au tombeau. Voil ce que je t'offre, ce que je chante et dis pour toi. Au lieu de tous les presents terrestres, au lieu de la tunique attique de la fable, j'ai choisi comme offrande im discours, ce qu'il y a au monde de plus beau et de plus edifiant. Car c'est le discours, plus que toute autre chose, qui faisait ta joie quand tu etais en vie; c'est par lui que tu philosophais sans cesse sur les secrets de Dieu. Apres ta mort, c'est lui encore qui t'accueille et te regale, et qui te couronne avec les honneurs qui te sont dus. Voil le retour que, moi qui place en toi ma confiance, moi qui te fete, j'institue aujourd'hui en meme temps que je te nomme defenseur et protecteur de mon empire, car c'est du lait de tes paroles theologiques que j'ai ete nourri, de sorte que je suis parvenu jusqu' la parfaite mesure de la stature du Christ et que j'ai depasse — si du moins il n'y a nul orgueil le dire — par la piete, la munificence et Pamour que je t'ai temoignes, tous les empereurs qui se sont jamais efforces de faire de meme, apres les avoir ecartes du coude et repousses. C'est sur ce point seulement que je rivalise avec eux pour les vaincre, car, pour le reste, on me voit pratiquer modestie et humilite. Puisse-je, garde par tes prieres, assis grace elles sur le tr ne de mes peres, rester toujours protoge par les ailes de ton intercession et garde par ton alliance de sorte que mon regne, pendant de longues annees, demeure l'abri des attaques, tandis que ma race et mon empire seront preserves en meme temps que moi de tout dommage pendant une longue suite de siecles."

144

Bernard Flusin

Comme on le voit, dans ce texte, la personne qui parle la premiere personne est assez clairement identifiable. II s'agit d'un empereur des Romains, et d'un empereur qui peut parier du trone de ses peres: Puisse-je, garde par tes prieres, assis grace elles sur le tr ne de mesperes... C'est- -dire que nous avons affaire, pour l'epoque considered, un descendant de Basile le Macedonien. Comme le texte est anterieur la date de copie du Mosquensis (1021-1022), et posterieur necessairement au retour des reliques de Gregoire, c'est- -dire, au plus haut, 944, le nombre des candidate se restreint. Ils sont quatre: Constantin VII, son fils Romain II, ses petits-fils Basile II et Constantin VIII. Nous avons quelques renseignements supplementaires. L'empereur qui prononce cette priere a temoigne envers Gregoire un zele tout particulier, et c'est le seul point pour lequel il se flatte d'avoir depasse ses predecesseurs. Comme nous savons que c'est Constantin VII qui fait revenir la relique de Gregoire, comme d'autre part nous ne savons rien d'une devotion particuliere des successeurs du Porphyrogenete pour le Theologien, la conclusion se dessine. Elle s'impose si Γόη prend garde deux details. Si je comprends bien le verbe συνίστημι, l'auteur du discours nous dit que c'est lui qui institue la nouvelle fete du retour des reliques de Gregoire, c'est- -dire qu'il est Constantin VII. Deuxiemement, rempereur qui prononce cette priere ete nourri des l'enfance des discours de Gregoire: car c 'est du lait de tes paroles theologiques que j'ai ete nourri. C'est precisement le theme que nous retrouvons dans la lettre ecrite par Theodore Daphnopates au nom de Constantin VII18, et nous savons qu'en effet cet empereur a tout specialement etudie les discours de Gregoire19. Tout nous conduit done identifier l'empereur qui s'adresse Gregoire de Nazianze avec Constantin Porphyrogenete et, bien qu'ailleurs dans le texte il soit question de Pempereur la troisieme personne20, rien ne vient s'opposer cette conclusion. Mais il subsiste bien s r la difficulte de la double fin du discours. Pour conclure de l'identite de l'auteur de la priere celle de l'auteur du discours, il faut admettre en effet que la fin du texte teile que nous la trouvons dans le Mosquensis n'est pas une forgerie. II faut done examiner deux ques18

Thoodore Daphnopatos, Lettre 11, eU Darrouzes et Westerink, 143,1. 24-25. Προς σε ολον έμαυτόν εκ νεότητος άνεοέμην, και τοις σοΐς άγίοις λόγοις προσομιλών τον φωτισμόν έδεξάμην της γνώσεως. 19

Voir I. Sevcenko, Re-reading Constantine Porphyrogenitus, dans I. Shepard et S. Franklin, od., Byzantine Diplomacy. Papers from the twenty-fourth Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, Cambridge, March 1990. Aldershot 1990, 170-171 etn. 8. 20 Par ex., ActaSS Maii II (1680) § 15: "L'empereur, assis et comme suspendu par-devant de la proue, portant dans son sein l'admirable ch sse, paraissait marcher pied sur la mer."

L'empereur et le Thoologien

145

tions. La premiere conceme 1'homogeneite du texte: la fin du Mosquensis estelle de la meme plume que le debut? La seconde concerne le rapport qu'il faut etablir entre le Mosquensis et le Taurinensis. La fin du Mosquensis, de meme que celle du Taurinensis, respecte les principales donnees du texte: le sujet reste l'eloge de Gregoire et le retour de ses reliques aux Saints-Ap tres; le niveau de langue demeure eleve. Qu'en estil du style? Tout en reservant 1'examen en regle de cette question pour 1'edition que je prepare, il est possible ici de dormer un echantillon assez probant. Voici une phrase de la fin du Mosquensis: 'Αλλ'ώ στόμα θεού και πατρός, δοχεϊον και πνεύματος όργανον άγιότευκτον· ώ ΐερωσύνης κανών και συντήρησις, και θεολογίας πηγή ακένωτος· ώ της αγίας Τριάδος κήρυξ και ύφηγητά και διδάσκαλε, και του ταύτης μυστηρίου έκφάντωρ επάξιε, ώ του ανθρωπίνου γένους δόξα και καύχημα και του χριστιανικού φύλου άνύψωμα και καλλώπισμα, επιδε και νυν έφ'ήμάς επιδε. Les expressions que j'ai soulignees peuvent etre mises en parallele avec d'autres passages du Discours sur le retour de saint Gregoire: -δοχειον: § 1 (ActaSS 766CD) δοχείω πάσης θείας τε και ανθρωπινής σοφίας - πνεύματος όργανον άγιότευκτον: § 18 (770Ε) το άγιότευκτον σκήνος.,.τοϋ πνεύματος - θεολογίας πηγή ακένωτος: § 12 (769Α) ώ της θεολογίας πηγή ανεξάντλητε - ώ της αγίας Τριάδος κήρυξ: § 12 (769Α) της αγίας Τριάδος λατρευτά και κήρυξ μεγαλοφωνότατε - ύφηγητά και διδάσκαλε: § 18 (770Ε) του ταύτης μυστηρίου υφηγητή ν καΐ διδάσκαλον. De telles observations, pour un court passage, sont assez impressionnantes. La fin du Mosquensis, ainsi qu'on le voit, reutilise tout un stock de vocabulaire dej present dans le debut du texte. Le fait que ces expressions y soient dispersees des endroits differents, la liberte avec laquelle elles sont reprises, les mots nouveaux aussi qui apparaissent, rendent peu vraisemblable que nous ayons affaire un centon ou un pastiche. II n'y a done pas lieu de douter que la fin qu'on trouve dans le manuscrit de Moscou soit de la meme encre que le reste du texte. Mais qu'en est-il maintenant de la fin du Taurinensis? L'observation est beaucoup moins commode, tout simplement parce que cette fin est beaucoup plus courte. Pour le vocabulaire, plusieurs rencontres peuvent etre relevees, qui sont moins concluantes toutefois que dans le cas du Mosquensis. Par exemple, en parlant de Jean Chrysostome, 1'auteur de la fin du Taurinensis

146

Bernard Flusin

1'appelle τον της μετανοίας έγγυητήν, ce qui rappeile un autre passage du discours ou le Chrysostome est dit πολυφαεΐ και άκοιμήτω της μετανοίας όφΟαλμω (ActaSS § 18, 770D). Mais, malgre les remarques de I. Sevcenko21, qui peuvent faire penser qu'il y avait l un element d'une certaine rarete, le R. P. Paramelle, en me renvoyant au Pre spirituel ou Jean est appele Jean de la Penitence22, m'a convaincu qu'il n'y avait l rien que de banal. Si Petude du vocabulaire n'est guere decisive, on peut etre sensible au fait que l'auteur de la fm du Taurinensis — tout comme celui du corps du discours, et de la fin du Mosquensis — s'inspire des oeuvres du Theologien: ainsi, la phrase'Αλλά ταϋτα μεν σχολής ετέρας τα διηγήματα, και ανθρώπων γλώττης τοιούτων εν τοΰτο έσπουδακότων και μόνον ταΐς τοιαύταις ένευδοκιμεϊν ύποϋέσεσι renvoie a Γ Or. 43.1 de Gregoire (PG 36, 493B). Enfm, on prendra garde au fait que si la fm du Taurinensis est beaucoup moins personnelle que celle du Mosquensis, eile s'explique specialement bien si I On admet que c'est le Porphyrogenete lui-meme qui parle. II n'est pas, en effet, Tun de ces hommes "dont la seule et unique etude est de briller" par leur eloquence; il est specialement habilite parier des ap tres et du Chrysostome comme de ses protecteurs et l'expression της έμής φιλίας σπουδαίοι ϋεραπευταί prend du sens si on le met dans la bouche d'un empereur s'adressant ses sujets. L'ensemble de ces observations parait montrer que la fm du Taurinensis a ete ecrite dans le meme milieu que le corps de la Translatio et que la fm du Mosquensis. Si Ton admet, comme je le propose, que la fin du Taurinensis, bien qu'elle ne soit attestee que dans un manuscrit des environs de 1500, est contemporaine de la fm du Mosquensis et nee dans le meme milieu, il devient difficile d'etablir une relation entre ces deux etats d'un meme texte et de dire avec certitude lequel est premier. La fin du Taurinensis., avec sa phrase de liaison assez maladroite, bien qu'elle soit empruntee Gregoire de Nazianze, pourrait etre une abbreviation. On peut alors imaginer le scenario suivant. Le Mosquensis, avec la priere imperiale, est le texte prepare pour etre prononce par Γ empereur lui-meme a l'occasion du retour des reliques; quant au Taurinensis., il serait un remaniement, abrege et depersonnalise, destine la lecture liturgique annuelle. L'hypothese inverse, qui verrait dans le Taurinensis une version initiale, et dans le Mosquensis une seconde edition plus achevee, est peut-etre moins vraisemblable. L'evolution rapide du texte, teile que nous la supposons,

21 22

1. SevCenko, op, cit., 170-171, n. 8. Jean Moschos, Pre spirituel, c. 128, PG 87, 2993B.

L' empereur et le Thoologien

147

n'est pas sans exemple: pour le Discours sur le retour du mandylion, nous assistons ä un phenomene comparable23. L'important, semble-t-il, est que, grace au temoignage du Mosquensis, le texte sur le retour des reliques de Gregoire de Nazianze (sous ses deux formes?) a pu etre restitue ä son auteur, Constantin VII. Sa valeur documentaire change alors. Tout d'abord, il est clair que l'empereur etait renseigne sur ce qu'il faisait lui-meme. II vaut done mieux, avec ce texte, dater du debut du regne de Constantin VII le retour des reliques de Gregoire, qui fournit un terminus post quern pour la redaction de De cer. I. 10. L'imprecision qu'on observe dans la Chronique de Symeon peut du reste s'expliquer si remarque que le Logothete bloque ensemble deux evenements de meme nature, le transfer! des vetements des apotres et celui de la relique de Gregoire, et qu'il les mentionne ä la place chronologique du premier. Outre cet aspect, la Translatio BHG 728 vient prendre sa place ä cöte des autres oeuvres hagiographiques que le Porphyrogenete a commanditees, fait ecrire en son nom, ou meme ecrites, et pour lesquelles on trouve de precieuses indications dans le bei article ou I. Sevcenko a su dormer la parole ä Constantin VII redivivus2*. Elle montre bien tout 1'interet que cet empereur a temoigne envers les saints, et cela alors meme qu'il venait de ressaisir la realite du pouvoir. Je voudrais consacrer la derniere partie de cet article ä quelques reflexions sur la nature de cet interet, et sur celle du lien, nullement accidentel, qui s'etablit entre la dignite imperiale et le culte des saints. Si la piete envers les saints et la lecture de leurs vies font partie, pour Constantin VII, des exercices spirituels du parfait empereur25, il n'est pas interdit 23

S'il est certain que le discours sur la translation du mandylion a pour auteur Constantin VII, le texte ovolue tres vite entre les mains de collaborateurs de l'empereur, qui lui adjoignent un appendice liturgique (cf. E. von Dobschütz, Christusbilder. Untersuchungen zur christlichen Legende, Leipzig 1899, 110**). 24 I. Sevcenko, op. cit., 187, n. 49; 188 (Synaxaire de Constantinople). Constantin VIISevßenko se plaint amerement de ce qu'on lui attribue un trop grand nombre d'oeuvres: "I was remarkably productive; for I wrote, practically wrote, heavily contributed to, put together or certainly inspired and supervised everything with my name attached to it, and even works which bore other authors' names" (ibid., 173). La nouvelle attribution que je propose ici lui aurait-elle agre"6? On remarquera que notre texte est le seul de ce genre ou l'empereur ait laisse" sa signature dans Pceuvre meme. 25 Vie de Basile, Bonn, 314-315: "Parfois, otudiant avec soin les vies des hommes qui se sont distinguos par une conduite excellente et agroable ä Dieu, il retranchait de son arne les impulsions irrationnelles parce qu'il voulait se montrer martre souverain de lui-meme avant de l'etre du monde extorieur."

148

Bernard Flusin

de penser que des ceremonies aussi importantes et co teuses que le retour des restes de Gregoire, ou, d'une fa$on plus generate, que les grandes translations de reliques organisees par les empereurs, ont un sens plus determine, dont on est en droit de chercher les cles. Ces cles, pour le cas qui nous occupe, nous les decouvrons si nous retoumons un instant au point dont nous etions partis. Au lundi du renouveau, rempereur, au sanctuaire des Saints-Ap tres, salue non pas un seul tombeau, mais deux tombeaux disposes au nord et au sud de l'autel: celui de Jean Chrysostome, et celui de Gregoire. Et de meme que nous avons deux monuments symetriques, de meme, nous avons deux dossiers hagiographiques comparables. Pour Gregoire de Nazianze, sans parier d'une Vie par Gregoire de Cesaree dont C. Mango a souligne 1'interet26, il faut mentionner la lettre de Constantin VII au defunt patriarche de Constantinople27, lettre ecrite par Theodore Daphnopates ως εκ του βασιλέως, "au nom de rempereur Constantin"; et, bien s r, comme troisieme piece, la Translatio BHG 728 par Constantin VII. Le dossier de Jean Chrysostome est beaucoup plus charge. Nous y trouvons plusieurs Vies, mais aussi des Translationes par Cosmas Vestitor, par rempereur Leon VI, le pere de Constantin VII, et sans doute par Constantin VII lui-meme28. Et dans ces Translationes, nous trouvons une lettre imperiale fictive, adressee par rempereur Theodose II Jean Chrysostome apres la mort de celui-ci29. Ce rapide inventaire met en evidence le fait que le dossier de Gregoire de Nazianze est construit en reference celui de Jean Chrysostome, et qu'il ne peut etre etudie sans lui. De meme, 1'existence d'une oeuvre sur la translatio du Chrysostome par Leon VI montre que Constantin VII, en ecrivant le Retour de Gregoire de Nazianze, prend la suite de son pere. II y a tout interet, la encore, faire sortir l'oeuvre du Porphyrogenete de son isolement pour la comparer avec ce qu'a fait Leon VI. Parcourons un instant la curieuse lettre que, nous dit-on, 1'enipereiir Theodose aurait adressee Jean Chrysostome quelques annees apres la mort du saint et 26

II s'agit de la Vie par Gre"goire de Ce"sarie (BHG 723), qui, dans nos deux manuscrits, precede la Translatio BHG 728; sur la date de redaction de cette Vie, cf. C. Mango, Notes d'epigraphie et d'archeologie: Constantinople, Nicee, TM 12 (1994) 356-357. 27 BHG 727, e"d. J. Darrouzes et L. G. Westerink, Theodore Daphnopates. Correspondance (Le Monde Byzantin), Paris 1978, 143-145. 28 Pour la Translatio par Ldon VI (BHG 877h), voir P. Devos, La Translation de S. Jean Chrysostome BHG 877h: une aeuvre de l'empereur Leon VI, AnBoIl 107 (1989) 5-29; l'oeuvre attribuee Constantin VII sur le meOie sujet est BHG 878d. 29 Par exemple, dans BHG 878d, 6d. K. I. Dyobouniotes, EEThS 1, Athenes 1926, 312-313.

L'empereur et le TheOIogien

149

voyons comment et pourquoi 1'empereur ecrit un patriarche defunt. Les circonstances historiques sont bien connues. Jean Chrysostome, la suite de differends avec la cour, est depose et exile par l'empereur Arcadius et par I'imperatrice Eudoxie. Π meurt en exil. Le schisme s'installe dans l'Eglise de Constantinople, et les johannites refusent la communion des successeurs de Jean. Le patriarche Proclus, pour mettre un terme au schisme, propose a Theodose II, fils d'Arcadius, de faire revenir les reliques de Jean. C'est ce qui sera fait, et ce retour equivaut une rehabilitation de Jean et meme une reinstallation sur son trone: c'est le sens de s deposition dans le sanctuaire des Saints-Ap tres, l'endroit meme o l'appelle s dignite sacerdotale. Pour faire revenir la relique de Jean, Theodose fait tout d'abord une premiere tentative, mais maladroite, et qui s'acheve par un echec: la relique du saint devient aussi immobile que le roc et les envoyes imperiaux ne peuvent la deplacer30. L'empereur comprenant alors son erreur redige une lettre — une supplique, δέησις — qui est deposee sur le corps de saint Jean. II s'y adresse au saint δουλοπρεπώς, non plus βασιλικώς, et le supplie de revenir au lieu de lui en dormer l'ordre. Jean, des lors, accepte, et s relique se met en route presque toute seule31. Et les rites par lesquels le corps de Jean est re?u Constantinople sont la fois des rites de reinstallation et de penitence. Theodose II s'humilie devant le patriarche defunt et demande pardon pour ses parents32. La lettre fictive qu'on trouve dans le dossier de Jean montre bien que 1'attitude de I'empereur, qui doit s'abaisser et faire penitence, est parfaitement percue, et il est evidemment interessant de voir qu'un empereur, Leon, et sans doute deux, Leon et son fils Constantin, ont recrit cette lettre. II est tout fait clair que la lettre adressee par Constantin VII Gregoire le Theologien doit etre etudiee en fonction de cette premiere lettre de Theodose Jean o les rapports entre Pempereur et le patriarche prennent un tour si curieux. Pour nous en tenir la version qui est contenue dans BHG 728, on peut retenir certains faits significatifs. Dans la presentation qu'il fait de s propre lettre, tout d'abord, Constantin VII, parlant de lui-meme la troisieme personne, nous dit ceci: Τί δε; μη οράσεως οϋτως και βασιλικώς μετενεγκεΐν το του αγίου σκήνος διενοήσατο; ου το ταπεινόν τε και δοϋλον έτήρησεν; ή ταΰτα μεν διεφύλαξε, βασιλείας δε και ίερωσύνης διαφοράν παρεβλέψατο; ή 30

Ibid., 312. Ibid., 312-313. 32 Get aspect n'est guere souligno dans BHG 878d; mais voir BHG 877 (attribuo par Halkin Symoon Motaphraste, mais qui est sans doute antirieur), e"d. F. Halkin, Douze recits byzantins sur saint Jean Chrysostome (Subsidia hagiographica 60), Bruxelles 1977, 485,1.7-13. 31

150

Bernard Flusin

καΐ περί τούτων μεν καλώς διεσκέψατο, ουκ έπαξίονς δε ύμνωδίαις και εύφημίαις αυτόν άντημείψατο; ου μεν ούν αλλ' εκαστον τούτων έπι τω άνδρί και τετελεκώς και ένειργηκώς, δι' εγγραμμάτου ίκετηρίας την έπάνοδον έξαιτεΐται33. "Eh quoi? est-ce hardiment, comme un empereur, qu'il se mit en tete de faire transferer la depouille du saint? N'observa-t-il pas I'humilite qui convient un esclave? Ou bien, s'il la garda, negligea-t-il la difference qu'il y a entre Γ empire et le sacerdoce? Ou bien eut-il encore ce propos de belles pensees, rnais ne sut-il point recompenser le saint des hymnes et des louanges qu'il meritait? Non certes! Mais apres avoir accompli et opere en l'honneur de notre homme chacune de ces choses, c'est par une lettre suppliante qu'il l'implora de revenir." Et, dans le corps meme de la lettre, deux expressions soulignent Γ attitude de soumission que l'empereur adopte vis- -vis du patriarche defunt, qu'il rappelle en adoptant "Γ attitude d'un esclave, et non la maniere d'un maitre"34, devant lequel il s'incline, et devant les pieds duquel il etend les insignes de la royaute35. II est facile de voir que, sous une forme attenuee, cette lettre rejoint certains des themes employes dans la lettre Jean Chrysostome et qu'elle temoigne, de la part de Pempereur, vis- -vis du patriarche de Constantinople, d'une deference extreme. La question parait alors etre de savoir s'il y a, dans la situation de Constantin VII, en 945 ou peu apres, quelque chose qui justifie cette attitude particuliere. Or s'il est evident que Constantin VII n'est pas, vis- -vis de Gregoire, dans la situation de Theodose II par rapport au Chrysostome, les circonstances presentent des ressemblances assez fortes et il semble bien que l'empereur, qui vient de reconquerir le pouvoir, peut vouloir la fois assurer son prestige et rassurer l'Eglise de Constantinople. Rappelons que le patriarche en activite au moment du retour de la depouille de Gregoire n'est autre que Theophylacte, le fils de Romain Lecapene. Rappelons aussi que la crise de la tetragamie, ouverte sous Leon VI, n'est pas achevee en 945: partisans de Nicolas et partisans d'Euthyme s'affrontent encore, et Γ affaire ne sera close que lorsque, dix ans plus tard, le patriarche Polyeucte reintegrera le nom d'Euthyme dans les diptyques de l'Eglise de Constantinople36. En 945, alors qu'il inaugure son "ActaSS § 12. 34 /i/W.,§ 12: γνώθι ότι εν προσχήματι δουλείας, ου δεσποτείας σε τρόπω προς την έπάνοδον έκκαλούμεϋα. 35 Ibid., § 12: Ιδού γαρ σοι και μακράν άφεστηκότες όλους εαυτούς ύποκλίνομεν και τα της βασιλείας επίσημα προ των σων αγίων ύφαπλοΰμεν ποδών. 36 Voir par ex. Skylitzes, έα1. I. Thurn (CFHB 5), Berlin-New York 1973, 245,1. 21-24;

L'empereur et le Thoologien

151

regne personnel, Constantin VII a interet temoigner qu'il n'interviendra pas brutalement dans les affaires de l'Eglise, et c'est, me semble-t-il, l'une des significations qu'il faut donner au geste spectaculaire auquel il precede, dans le plus grand respect des privileges du sacerdoce37, en reinstallant aux SaintsApotres, haut-lieu oil s'exprime 1'ideologie imperiale, le corps de Gregoire le Theologien. Mais il serait insuffisant de voir, dans la ceremonie ainsi organisee, un simple signe de respect et de deference pour le patriarcat cecumenique. II faut suivre la logique qui semble marquer la plupart des transferts de reliques observables la meme epoque. Car le retour du corps de Gregoire sous Constantin n'est pas un fait isole: sous Michel III, dej , Constantinople voit arriver le chef du Precurseur; Leon VI organise co teusement la venue du corps de saint Lazare et de Marie-Madeleine; Romain Lecapene fait transferer grands frais la Sainte Face d'Edesse, un retour qui profile en realite Constantin VII; le Porphyrogenete accueille Constantinople le corps de saint Gregoire, mais aussi une main de saint Jean-Baptiste, et il fait deposer aux Saints-Ap tres des vetements des ap tres du Christ. Dans ces grandes ceremonies, organisees de fason impressionnante, 1'empereur joue un role assez particulier, qu'on peut mettre en lumiere en recourant un texte de ce point de vue tres explicite. II s'agit d'une oeuvre dont le Professeur Mango a procure la premiere edition: le Discours sur le transfert des reliques de saint Lazare ecrit par le futur Arethas de Cesaree38, alors orateur officiel la cour de Leon VI. La ceremonie en l'honneur de Lazare, Γ ami du Christ, forme une sequence assez complexe ου Γόη peut, avec Arethas, distinguer trois moments forts. Tout d'abord — et c'est un point commun avec le Retour de Gregoire de Nazianze —, la relique arrive par terre Chrysopolis et l'empereur va la chercher sur sa galere, puis la ramene Constantinople en traversant le Bosphore illumine. Le deuxieme point fort est une procession: ici, la ch sse contenant les cendres de Lazare est portee sur les epaules de hier eis jusqu' Sainte-Sophie. Enfin, dans la Grande Eglise illuminee, se deroule l'essentiel de la ceremonie liturgique. La ch sse est deposee sur l'autel. L'empereur s'arrete prononcer une homelie. Mais, en ce jour, Leon VI ne peut prendre la

c'est m&ne tout la fin du Xc siecle que le patriarche Sisinnios riunira les demiers hositants (/Wrf.,341,1.8) 37 BHG 728, ActaSS § 12: ή τοΰτα μεν διεφύλαξε, βασιλείας δε και ίερωσύνης διαφορά ν παρεβλέψατο; 38 Arothas de Cosaroe, Oratio in dedicatione ecclesiae S. Lazari (BHG 2226); 6d. C. Mango, BZ 47 (1954) 22-25; nous utilisons ici l'edition de L. G. Westerink, Arethae scripta minora, II, Leipzig 1972, n° 59 , 11-16.

152

Bernard Flusin

parole: il en est empeche par la foule qui fait un grand vacarme en pietinant le plancher dont on a convert le dallage de Sainte-Sophie pour eviter aux assistants de prendre froid. Apres le moment de 1'homelie, on ouvre la chässe pour fair venerer la relique. La foule des assistants se bouscule, et il y a risque que le sanctuaire soit foule par de simples laics. L'empereur referme alors la chässe, et la dissimule derriere 1'autel. Puis c'est la liturgie ä proprement parier, pour laquelle rempereur se retire dans les catechumenes, d'oü il participera aussi ä la pannychis. Ce recit tres detaille d'Arethas permet de completer les donnees du Retour des reliques de Gregoire et, mutatis mutandis, d'imaginer ce que fut la ceremonie, en particulier en quelle occasion Constantin VII put prononcer Thomelie qu'il avait ecrite ou fait ecrire en son nom. Mais je voudrais surtout revenir sur ce qu'Arethas dit du röle de l'empereur, et qui est un precieux commentaire du sens qu'il faut donner ä ces ceremonies ä grand spectacle. Nul ne s'en etonnera, pour Arethas, Leon VI est un nouveau David: "Mais la-meme, mon David deposa pour un temps cette autre arche derriere la sainte table comme dans la maison d'Abeddara"39. Nous sommes ainsi renvoyes au deuxieme livre des Regnes (II Regn. 6) et, avec cette reference, nous avons le modele biblique qui informe de telles ceremonies et qui nous montre ä la fois dans l'empereur un nouveau David, et dans Constantinople la Nouvelle Sion. D'autre part, Leon VI est un nouveau Moi'se, qui ramene une nouvelle arche. II est aussi un nouveau Christ: "On eüt dit qu'il etait Moi'se, descendant de son navire comme de la montagne, et apportant ä ceux qui se tenaient ä ses cotes les tables ecrites par Dieu, la sainte chässe. Ou plutöt, on cut dit que c'etait mon Jesus, se melant si simplement ä tout le monde et bouscule par la foule innombrable qui se pressait"40. Enfm, chose surprenante, Leon VI est un nouvel Aaron. C'est la ce que dit Arethas lorsqu'il nous montre Leon traversant le Bosphore pour aller chercher la chässe de Lazare: "Le peuple des sujets, debout, occupait toute la rive opposee du detroit, attendant rempereur qui, tel un saint (hieros) Aaron derriere le voile (parapetasmati) de la mer, avait penetre dans le detroit qui le separait d'eux"41. L'empereur se trouve etre ainsi ä la fois empereur et pretre, et cela d'autant plus nettement que la reference au parapetasma de la mer renvoie au passage de Ancien Testament ou Aaron, parce qu'il est grand-pretre, penetre sous le voile (katapetasmd) pour aller venerer 1'arche42. Mais il faut bien sur preter attention au fait qu'Arethas approprie les comparisons qu'il emploie aux divers moments de la ceremo39

Arothas de Cosaree, op. at., 15,1. 23-25. Ibid., 13,1.20-24. 41 Ibid., 12,1. 17-20. 42 Voir Ex. 26, 31-34 (construction du kalapetasma); Lev. 16,2; Nu. 18,7. 40

L'empereur et le Thoologien

153

nie. Sur la mer, dans un espace profane, Leon VI est Aaron; mais ä l'eglise, ä Sainte-Sophie, il est le Nouveau David: pretre ä l'exterieur du sanctuaire, roi dans le sanctuaire. C'est sur ce point que je voudrais conclure. Un livre recent a bien montre quelles etaient importance et la complexite, ä Byzance, des rapports entre la royaute et le sacerdoce43. II s'agit la d'une question pour laquelle notre texte et les autres documents de meme nature fournissent des materiaux importants. Us font toucher du doigt, en effet, qu'il y a, dans le christianisme byzantin, des domaines differents, meme s'ils communiquent. Et si, dans ce qui est au coeur de ce christianisme, ä savoir la liturgie eucharistique, il est clair que le sacerdoce affirme ses privileges et que Temperem- doit se retirer, il est d'autres ceremonies ou les rapports changent. C'est le cas du culte des saints, dont l'empereur est le grand ordonnateur, on pourrait dire, avec Arethas, le Nouvel Aaron, c'est-a-dire le grand-pretre. Quand le patriarche, aux Saints-Apotres, accueille Tempereur dans le sanctuaire et que tous deux vont s'incliner devant les tombeaux du Chrysostome et du Theologien, nous avons ainsi, en une breve ceremonie, comme un condense des rapports entre la royaute et le sacerdoce. L'empereur est accueilli par le patriarche, dont le sanctuaire est le domaine. II sait qu'il devra sortir avant que ne commence la messe des fideles. II s'incline devant la depouille du Chrysostome, docteur de la penitence, qui a appris aux empereurs aussi a se repentir. Mais quand il prie devant le tombeau du Theologien, un monument qu'il connait si bien, les sentiments qu'il peut eprouver sont plus meles. Car si Constantin VII, en faisant revenir le corps de Gregoire, a temoigne son respect au siege de Constantinople, il a bien marque aussi que c'etait lui qui organisait le culte du saint, et que c'etait lui qui etablissait Gregoire, pour les siecles, dans le sanctuaire.

43

G. Dagron, Empereur et pretre. Etude sur le 'cesaropapisme' byzantin. Paris 1996.

Byzantine Responses to Turkish Attack Some Sites of Asia Minor Clive Foss To honor the greatest living master of Byzantine studies with a contribution that does not fall short of his own standards seems an impossible task. These pages, though, can at least suggest the inspiration that his manifold works have given. They are intended to reflect Cyril Mango's interest in Asia Minor and its remains, by presenting some poorly-known sites in a historical context. The sites attest the various means by which the Byzantine state managed to maintain itself against all odds after the disaster of Manzikert, during two centuries when it was under almost incessant attack from its powerful Turkish neighbors. Each site is a tessera in a much larger mosaic of reaction and adaptation that enabled the empire to survive as long as it did. They represent the sound policies of the Comneni and Lascarids, and their discussion may serve as a small tribute to the scholar whose knowledge of Byzantine Anatolia is unrivaled.

Counterattack A tower ofNicaea and the inscriptions of the Sultanate When Alexius Comnenus came to the throne in 1081, Byzantine Asia Minor had collapsed. The situation was so disastrous that his daughter, Anna, could write (with some exaggeration) that the empire which had once stretched from the Pillars of Hercules to India was now bounded by Adrianople and the Bosporus'. Most humiliating, in the very year of Alexius' accession, a Turkish commander, Suleyman ibn Kutlumush, had seized Nicaea2. He thereby gained a powerful base dangerously close to Constantinople. Despite serious danger in the West, Alexius was obliged to move quickly against the Turks. In the first decade of his reign, he secured the coasts of Bithynia, with the major fortress of Nicomedia, but could not dislodge the Turks from Nicaea. For them, it was the capital of a state that dominated Asia Minor and the seat of a Sultan. Suleyman had usurped that title and maintained it until defeated and killed by the legitimate Sultan Malik Shah in 1086. 1

Anna Comnena Vl.xi. For what follows, see C. Foss, Nicaea: A Byzantine Capital and its Praises (Brookline MA 1996) 41-49. The history of the Sultanate ofNicaea is known almost entirely from the sometimes confused pages of Anna Comnena. 2

Byzantine responses to Turkish attacks

155

On the news of Suleyman's death, his deputy Abul Qasim proclaimed himself Sultan. Since his two enemies, Alexius and Malik Shah, could not come to terms, he was able to consolidate and expand his state. He drove the Byzantines, reinforced with western knights, off from Nicaea, built a fleet and even managed to get control of Nicomedia, a city almost as important as his capital for its strategic location. Although Abul Qasim managed to keep Alexius at bay, he still had to face Malik Shah who finally managed to have him killed. Abul Qasim's brother then took over for a short time, until, during the confusion after the death of Malik Shah in 1092, Suleyman's son Κΐϋς Arslan was recognized as Sultan in Nicaea which he confirmed as his capital. He then set off to secure his position in central Anatolia and for a few years was at peace with Alexius. It seemed that the new sultanate of Nicaea was destined to succeed, when an unexpected disaster arrived from the West. The army of the First Crusade, acting in collaboration with Alexius, attacked Nicaea in 1097 and captured it after a siege of seven weeks. The sultanate came to an end as Byzantine rule was restored. The siege had involved much fighting, especially around the south gate of the city, where a great tower was knocked down, leaving a breach that the Crusaders were about to enter when they learned that the city had been surrendered to the Emperor. Alexius' use of a forceful counterattack had been successful. One of the emperor's first jobs in Nicaea was to rebuild the damaged fortifications and especially to plug the breach near the south gate. The location was particularly vulnerable because the ruined tower occupied the southwest corner of the fortifications. The work seems to have been done in a hurry: it consisted of a tower smaller than most, and faced entirely with spoils (Fig.l). Prominent among them are Seljuk tombstones, some of them inscribed. The Turks, during their fifteen year occupation of the city, had evidently built their graveyard outside this section of the walls, and the tombstones — no longer of use or meriting respect — had been pulled up and built into the new tower. These stones contain some of the earliest Seljuk inscriptions of Asia Minor, the only epigraphic record of the ephemeral Sultanate of Nicaea, and the only mention of any of its inhabitants3. Curiously enough, they seem never 3

There are contemporary inscriptions from Diyarbakir (walls and great mosque), in the name of Malik Shah, who ruled it from 1085-1092, see Repertoire chronologique d'epigraphie arabe, ed. E. Combe, J. Sauvaget and G. Wiet, VII, Cairo 1936, nos. 2773, 2780, 2792,2798. Some of the present stones are illustrated in A. M. Schneider, Die Stadtmauer von Iznik, Berlin 1938, pi. 48. They are mentioned, but not discussed, by K. Otto-Dom, Das islamische Iznik, Berlin 1941, 2.

156

CliveFoss

to have been published. I offer translations of them here, as a preliminary note, intended to draw attention to these unparalleled documents4. 1 . Built into tower 106B, northwest face (Fig.2).

4JLJ1 Λ ' "*· J '' ;j " "*· ^)

AJ 1 *· ·" »

V 6A^j 4UI VI 4JI V I ^B^U } ' ^LA **^ -^ *^J ^h^ V^JLA

4JJI C i l l ^ · J J

May God pardon / him and his parents / and all who are devoted / to Mohammed, may God bless him. / May he have mercy on you, ο boastful brother.

4. Iznik Museum, from the Byzantine walls5 (Fig. 5).

4 η ~\ j .ylil (j 0 if» VI

^ ^ * '^

This is the tomb of Mahmud son of Abdullah of Isfahan; may God have mercy upon him. Every soul will taste of death, and you will be paid your reward on judgement day. Whoever is moved away from the fire and entered into Paradise is successful (Koran 3:185).

Although these texts reveal little about the Sultanate, they do name two of its inhabitants, Ahmad the tanner and Mahmud ibn Abdullah from Isfahan. They indicate that Moslems, some from Iran, where the Seljuks first estab5

This stone has been noted and illustrated by Beyhan Karamagarali in Ahlat Mezarta$lari, Ankara 1972, 18 and fig. 49.

158

CliveFoss

lished a state, had settled in Nicaea and practiced normal crafts. Although unique in this region, they have some parallels. The town of Ahlat, on the north shore of lake Van, has an especially rich cemetery, with several stones comparable to these6. The earliest examples, of the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries, are of a similar prismatic shape, which apparently represents a tradition brought by the Turks from central Asia. The stones of Ahlat, however, are inscribed with a far more ornamental lettering that appears on the top, rather than the ends of the sarcophagus. Later examples tend to have a rich abstract decoration. The stones of Nicaea, far from other centers of Turkish power, apparently represent the simplest, and perhaps earliest, examples of the type.

Collaboration The islanders of Lake Pousgouse By a long series of wars and by building powerful and strategic fortifications, John Comnenus (1118-1143) consolidated Byzantine territory in western Asia Minor and pushed the frontiers back in north and south. In the Spring of 1142, he set out on his last campaign against the Turks, who had attacked Sozopolis in Phrygia, a major bulwark of the frontier. He met no resistance at Sozopolis since the Turks withdrew at the news of his approach. He then followed a roundabout route through Pisidia to Lake Pousgouse (now Bey§ehir), to pacify Isauria and gain control of the communications between this region and the coast. The lake, described by the chroniclers as immense as the sea, contained islands inhabited by Christians, who had been under Turkish rule for two generations7. They had worked out a friendly symbiosis with their new masters, and often sailed across the lake to trade with Iconium. Consequently, when John appeared with his army and summoned them to submit or to abandon their homes and move to undisputed Turkish territory (for he claimed that the lake was Byzantine), they refused. Secure in their fortified islands, they resisted, but were forced to succumb when he mounted siege equipment on rafts and attacked. These Christians were probably typical of much of the population of Anatolia, who settled down with the Turks, seeing that imperial power was far away and that they had no possibility of resistance. Many, of course, convert6

See the comprehensive discussion of Karamagarah (see previous note) 1-30 and especially 36-38. The author uses examples from all parts of Turkey. 7 For these events, see Choniates 37f. and the similar but shorter account of Cinnamus 22.

Byzantine responses to Turkish arracks

159

r\ LAKE

\ \POUSGOUSE

1. Western Asia Minor, with sites discussed here

ed, some were persecuted, but people like these islanders were probably in the majority8. The site of these events is easily identified, on an island just off the northwest shore of Lake Bey§ehir9 (fig. 1). Mada Adasi opposite the village of Gedikli offers possibility of settlement since it is five kilometers long, but now 8

See S. Vryonis, The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor, Los Angeles 1971, 210-244, esp. 214f. This work stresses the deteriorating condition of the Anatolian Greeks under their new Turkish rulers. 9 For a description, see K. Belke and N. Mersich, Phrygien undPisidien (Tabula Imperil Byzantini 7),Vienna 1990, 332.

160

CliveFoss

contains no remains, being covered with scrub oak and juniper. Halfway between it and the mainland is a smaller island called Kilise (a typical name for a place with Byzantine remains) which contains a well-preserved fortification on its shore (Figs. 6, 7). This is a rectangular structure of about 12 χ 6 m, with an attached square tower that still stands to a height of about 7 m. The fort contains three chambers. One, in the tower (about 3 x 6 m), is filled with debris of its fallen roof. The main chamber (about 9 χ 6 m) preserves its barrel vaulted ceiling, and holes for beams that supported a floor. An adjacent side chamber of about 3 m square contained a hearth. The tower is solidly built of fieldstones set in white mortar, with walls about a metre thick, reinforced by a network of large square beams. They are faced with larger fieldstones, roughly arranged, with brick partly surrounding the stones in some sections. The north and south walls were pierced with narrow slits for shooting arrows. The masonry is not diagnostic. This tower corresponds perfectly to the accounts of the attack of 1142. It is strategically placed between mainland and the larger island (where the populations could have taken refuge), and so solidly built that a major effort would have been necessary to reduce it. It may serve as a vivid illustration of conditions in the twelfth century in the rough mountain country of the frontier.

Reorganization Chliara and the Neocastra On the death of John Comnenus, the Turks resumed their attacks, striking deep into Byzantine territory during the first years of Manuel (1143-1180). Although he succeeded in driving them out, he eventually found himself faced with a new and more insidious enemy. During the last decades of his reign, Turkish nomads began infiltrating the frontier, occupying valuable agricultural land in Phrygia, and threatening the fertile regions further west. Manuel responded to this threat by creating the theme of Neocastra (fig. 2). As Choniates relates, "the Asian cities" were suffering at the hands of the Turks whose raids afflicted the open villages in the plain where most of the population lived10. Lacking protection, prosperous districts had become deserted. Manuel solved the problem by building a network of fortresses that became the new military theme of Neocastra. As a result, the region was well defended, people could return to their villages in security, and the taxes would be paid. The historian regarded the Neocastra as one of the emperor's greatest achievements. 10

Choniates 150.

161

Byzantine responses to Turkish arracks

Achyraous

2. Chliara and Neocastra

According to Choniates, the cities most afflicted by the Turks, and most effectively fortified by Manuel were Chliara, Pergamum and Adramytion. The location of the last two has never been in doubt, and Pergamum preserves the walls of Manuel11. These two cities show that the Neocastra stretched from the inland hilltop fortress of Pergamum northwestward to the sea, but the location of Chliara has not been established12. Choniates indicates that the theme was created to protect fertile and open country — not an apt description of the mountainous region between Pergamum and Adramytion. The obvious region to protect, and one that provided a major route from the interior to the coast, was the Caicus valley east of Pergamum. Since the theme most probably embraced this valley, it has been possible to identify one of its fortresses in the hills above the modern town of Kinik13. That fort protected a direct mountain route from Pergamum to Magnesia and could provide a refuge for the people of the valley in time of attack. 11

For the walls of Pergamum, see C. Foss, The Defences of Asia Minor against the Turks, GOTR 27 (1982) 166-171. Adramytion preserves no Byzantine remains: see K. Rheidt, Chliara. Ein Beitrag zur spätbyzantinischen Topographie der pergamenischen Landschaft, IstMitt 36 (1986) 223-244 (henceforth: Rheidt), at 224, with further references. 12 A proposal has been made in the detailed study of Rheidt. This work conscientiously presents the sources and discusses the local topography, but reaches a false conclusion that will be discussed below. It also contains some rather surprising errors. 13 See Foss (above, n.l 1) 186-189.

162

CliveFoss

Chliara appears frequently in the accounts of the last two centuries of Byzantine rule in Asia Minor. Anna Comnena, narrating the Turkish wars of Alexius, is the first to mention it14. In 1109, Hasan, the emir of Cappadocia, encircled Philadelphia, then sent a three-pronged attack to ravage the fertile valleys of the Cayster, Hermus and Caicus. Although two forces were soon defeated, the third, which advanced against Chliara and Pergamum, eluded its pursuers. In 1111, when the Seljuk ruler Malik Shah, son of Kili9 Arslan, was planning a major campaign, Alexius appointed a special governor over Pergamum, Chliara and the towns around them, to strengthen local defence. The Turks made a more spectacular attack in 1113. After attacking Poimanenon in Mysia, they reached the coast at Parium, followed it around through Abydos and Adramytion, and arrived at Chliara where they were overtaken by the Byzantines. These accounts show that Chliara was on the route from Philadelphia to Pergamum and Adramytion, and that the Turkish threat had already made it a center of a reorganized administration, a forerunner of the Neocastra. Chliara reappears at the time of the Fourth Crusade. The Partitio Romaniae assigned the "provintia Adramytii, de Chliariis et de Pergamis" to the Latin emperor15. In fact, the Latins never conquered it, although they did gain control of the region south of the Sea of Marmora. The treaty made in 1212 between them and Theodore Lascaris provided that the Latins would rule Achyraous and the surrounding region, while Kalamos on the upper Caicus, "where the theme of Neocastra begins" would be a kind of no-man's-land. The regions to the south, including the Neocastra, Chliara and Pergamum would remain in imperial hands16. This implies that the Neocastra included the entire Caicus valley. By this time, Chliara was important enough to become a bishopric17. In 1296, a great earthquake, which evidently had its epicenter in the Caicus region, destroyed the fortress of Chliara, along with many churches and houses18. Yet the place still existed when the Catalans passed through on their 14

For what follows, see Anna Comnena XIV. 1.6, XIV.3.1, XIV.5. Text and discussion in D. Zakythenos, Μελέται περί της διοικητικής διαιρήσεως εν τω Βνζαντινω κρατεί, EEBS 25 (1955) 128f, 142, 154. The same document lists the "Provintia Neocastri" immediately after. H. Ahrweiler, Histoire et geographic de la region de Smyrne..., TM l (1965) 134, has shown that this is simply a gloss on the previous phrase, and that there was no other Neocastra apart from the region of the three cities. 16 Acropolites 28; for Kalamos, see Louis Robert, Villes d'Asie Mineure, Paris 1962, 67-69. 17 See J. Darrouzes, Notitiae episcopatuum ecclesiae constantinopolitanae, Paris 1981, 108,311. Chliara appears only in notitia 10, to which it was apparently added in the thirteenth century. 18 Pachymeres 11.234. The following phrases, which recount the destruction of various 15

Byzantine responses to Turkish arracks

163

way from Achyraous and Germe to Philadelphia. Here the town appears on another important route, from Mysia to Lydia. Since Germe has been located at Savastepe, on the road from Bahkesir to Soma, Chliara should be in the eastern part of the Caicus valley, possibly in the vicinity of Soma, or between it and Thyateira19. Chliara last appears in history in the early fifteenth century, in the confusing Ottoman wars of succession after the expedition of Tamerlane. The emir Junayd of Smyrna, who profited from the confusion to build a powerful domain of his own, made a fast trip home in 1409. He left Lopadion on an allnight ride that brought him to the frontiers of Lydia, the regions of Chliara and Thyateira, by the morning20. Once again, Chliara appears on a main road, in the general vicinity of Thyateira. From these sources, it appears that Chliara was an important fortress in the Caicus valley, and that it stood on two major routes, from Pergamum to Philadelphia, and from the Propontis to Lydia and Ionia. It lay between Pergamum and Thyateira, and south of Germe. A location in the eastern part of the Caicus valley seems assured, and those who have investigated the question have opted for a location at Soma or Kirkaga9, or in their vicinity21. There is one very suitable site for Chliara, which never seems to have been considered, though it is relatively well-known. The village of Tarhala, in the mountain above Soma, suits the evidence of the sources, and preserves remains of the Byzantine period (Fig.8). Its name can be shown to derive from Chliara. Tarhala was the Byzantine and Ottoman center of the region now dominated by the modern coal-mining town of Soma22. Inscriptions found there buildings, refer to Constantinople (κατά την πόλιν) not Chliara as Rheidt 227 supposes. 19 The location of Germe was determined by Louis Robert after long searching. See his detailed and definitive discussion in Villes, 377-413, especially 408, and 385 for discussion of the route of the Catalans. 20 Ducas XXVI.4 (ed. Grecu 221). Chliara is here spelled Chliera, an insignificant variant. Note that Chlera, mentioned in 1256 in connection with the visit of the Seljuk Sultan to Theodore II, was somewhere close to Magnesia, and thus not another variant of Chliara: Skoutariotes (ed. Sathas) 530. 21 Previous theories are well surveyed by Rheidt 229f. His own identification, with the fort of G rd k Kale, overlooking the Lykos river north of Thyateira cannot be sustained. First, it is in the wrong region — in Lydia, the heartland of the Thracesian theme. The identification depends largely on placing Germe (on the route of the Catalans) at Soma despite Louis Robert's conclusive demonstration (above, n.19, esp. 410) that it was at Sava§tepe. Finally, G rd k Kale, whose remains appear to be Lascarid rather than Comnene, has been identified as Meteorion, a site mentioned in the thirteenth century, see C. Foss, Sites and Strongholds of Northern Lydia, AnatStud 37 (1987) 94-99. 22 See Robert, Villes, 41 Of.

164

Clive Foss

suggest that it was already occupied in Roman times. It owes its success to a great spring, and to a protected location, sheltered by the mountain, yet still in close proximity (about 3 km) to the valley. It lies at the crossing of the routes from Pergamum to the Propontis, and from Achyraous to Thyateira via Germe. It seems the ideal site for a fortress designed to protect the region, and its location in the hills above the plain finds an analogy with the other fortress of Neocastra that has been identified23. The site has been visited several times. The earliest description, of Fellows in 1838, is worth reproducing, since the characteristics have not changed: "Hearing that there were some remains within three miles of this place (Soma), I walked to the spot passing up one of the beautiful dells so peculiar to the mountainlimestone country, clothed with such planes and walnuts as I never before saw. I reached at length a crow's-nest town on the peak of a rock, surrounded on all sides by mountains, and so completely shut in that I could not see the ravine by which I had approached. Probably the people had never before seen Europeans, for the whole town came out to look at us. The remains were evidently Byzantine, having stone ornaments with birds and snakes fighting, and the knotted arabesque patterns and rude carving of that age. In the street, for a horse-block, stood a marble pedestal the wrong end upwards with a Greek inscription, in form and age the same as those in Soma"24.

In 1886 and 1887, Carl Schuchhardt surveyed the region of Pergamum25. He identified Tarhala not as an ancient settlement, but as a refuge site of the Byzantine and Turkish periods. He mentioned Byzantine relief plaques on the fountain and a small Byzantine chapel in the site. He could see the site of the "castle", as the villagers called it, cut in the rocks high above the village, but did not visit it. The great geographer Alfred Philippson, who came to Tarhala in October 1900 called it "one of the picturesque settlements of Asia Minor", with its tall houses built closely beside and above each other to form a compact mass in which the narrow alleys completely disappeared. He describes the great spring (324 m above sea level) whose abundant steams supported tanning and leather work, the main livelihood for the village. He saw it as a typical mountain village with local industry rather than agricultural land, a place that developed as a refuge site in the Middle Ages26. 23 24

See above, n. 13. Charles Fellows, A Journal Written During an Excursion in Asia Minor, London 1839,

27f.

25

C. Schuchhardt, Historische Topographie der Landschaft 167, in: A. Conze et al., Altertümer von Pergamon, I, Stadt und Landschaft, Berlin 1912. 26 Alfred Philippson, Reise und Forschungen im westlichen Kleinasien, I (Petermanns

Byzantine responses to Turkish arracks

165

When Louis Robert saw it in 1960, the village was in decline27. Only about 170 of its 700 or 800 houses were inhabited, and the local industries of tanning and shoe making had virtually died out, thanks to the universal vogue of cheap rubber shoes. Many of the inhabitants had left for Soma where they were employed in the local coal mines. Yet the site was still delightful, with its springs gushing forth below a great plane tree, and its luxuriant valley filled with nut and plane trees. The beauty and charm of the site struck Hans Buchwald and me in 1979. The village still had the spring as its centre, with the mosque immediately next to it. Spring and mosque alike are adorned with spoils, perhaps taken from a substantial Byzantine church. They consist of relief plaques built into the minaret and fountain (Figs. 9-15), some of them arcaded lintels of a type that appears widely in Greece and Asia Minor. The lintels date variously to the ninth-eleventh centuries; these examples seem not to support a clear chronology28. The other spoils are difficult to date: some of the finer pieces could be as early as the tenth century, while the flat relief and mechanical carving of Fig. 15 might be appropriate to the thirteenth. There is, of course, no way to tell whether they all come from the same building, or whether one large church had more than one period of decoration. In any case, they show that the town flourished in the Middle Byzantine period, apparently before it is first mentioned. During that visit, we were told that the village had been surrounded by walls with gates. A long hike up a paved road above the village, however, revealed nothing. Three years later, I returned to Tarhala and did manage to find traces of walls that connected the village to a steep granite outcropping and had evidently enclosed a large area. Unfortunately nothing was left but sections of a core of mortared rubble, with occasional traces of a facing of fieldstone and some brick. None of it was diagnostic for establishing a date. These traces did show, though, that the site had been fortified. Evidence of geography and remains can be supplemented by philology. The name Tarhala, which has no meaning in Turkish, preserves the Byzantine Ta Chliara. This was probably first simplified to *Ta Chlera or Tahlara29. A similar case may be found in Cappadocia, where the toponym Ihlara surely derives from an unattested Greek Chliara, a logical name, "warm" for a place Mitteilungen 167), Gotha 1910, 68f. "Robert, Villes, 41 Of. 28 See H. Buchwald, Chancel Barrier Lintels decorated -with Carved Arcades, JOB 45 (1995) 233-276. The example from Tarhala, discussed on 251 and 263, and illustrated in figs. 17 and 18, is not reproduced here. 29 It could alternatively been pronounced *Ta Chlara (the star denotes an unattested form).

166

Clive Foss

with hot springs30. Then, the liquids were metathesized to produce the present name. Such metathesis is particularly common in Turkish in the case of -1- and -r-31. Chliara then can be envisioned as a fortified town, protected by the mountain that encloses it, yet with easy access to the plain. It could have served both to protect the main roads that meet below it, and as a refuge for the populations of the villages in the plain. Together with the theme of which it was a major centre, it may be taken as an example of the Byzantine response of military reorganization and construction of fortresses in the regions directly threatened by passing Turkish forces. The theme, in fact, was a success, and defence was organized around until the end of the thirteenth century32.

Defending the coasts Lascarid Tracheia The rough mountainous peninsula of Tracheia, which forms the southwestern projection of Asia Minor is rarely mentioned in history (fig. 3). Yet it has always been of strategic importance because of its proximity to Rhodes, and the abundance of its sheltered bays and harbors offer protection for shipping rounding this coast. In addition, its forests have provided good timber for shipbuilding, and its few fertile plains and offshore islands have supported a surprisingly large number of settlements. Tracheia may be mentioned in antiquity. Strabo may use the name to denote the peninsula — or may simply be referring to its southern coast as rough, "tracheia"33. In the Hellenistic period, it belonged to Rhodes, and is best known as the Rhodian Peraea. Like most coastal regions of Asia Minor, Tracheia seems to have reached its peak in Late Antiquity when it contained several extensive settlements with large churches34. The sites were apparently 30

For Ihlara (though not its Byzantine name) see N. and M. Thierry, Nouvelles eglises rupestres de Cappadoce, Paris 1963, 2, 28. 31 See J. Deny, Grammaire de la langue turque, Paris 1921, 1092, sec. 113. 32 For the history of the theme, see Zakythenos (above, n.15), EEBS 19 (1949) 12, and Ahrweiler (above, n. 15), 133-137. 33 Strabo 14.4.2. In any case, the name survived until modern times, in the form Darahiya or Dara?ya. Its obviously foreign nature has caused it to be officially changed to the purely Turkish Bozburun peninsula: see Yeni Tabu Yer Adlan 1977, Ankara n. d., 81. 34 See the comprehensive treatment of V. Ruggieri, Rilievi di architettura bizantina nel golfo di Simi, OCP 55 (1989) 75-100, 345-373 (henceforth: Ruggieri), a work rather unbalanced by its concentration on churches. For a detailed survey of the ancient and medieval sites of the peninsula, see the still valuable work of a local worthy, Demosthenes Chaviaras, Περίπλους του συμαικον κόλπου, Parnasses 14 (1891) 533-541.

167

Byzantine responses to Turkish arracks

N

10km

3. The Tracheia peninsula

abandoned in the Dark Ages, since no trace of occupation between the seventh and twelfth centuries has been identified. John Vatatzes (1222-1254), anxious to consolidate his power in Asia Minor and spread it to Europe and actively involved in international affairs and trade, naturally wanted to control the coastal route between his domains and the East. A major obstacle here was the rebel Leo Gabalas, who had taken control of Rhodes in the aftermath of the Fourth Crusade. Consequently, in 1233, the emperor mounted an expedition at Stadia, on the peninsula of Cnidos west of Tracheia. He restored imperial suzerainty, but did not gain complete control until 1249, after the island had been briefly seized by the Genoese35. It then remained Byzantine until its conquest by the Knights in 1309. By then, however, Tracheia and Stadia had long been lost. When the despot John, brother of Michael Palaeologus, attempted to pacify southwestern Anatolia in 1264, he gave up all hope of regaining the region opposite Rhodes. 35

Acropolites 45, 89; cf. H. Ahrweiler, Byzance et la mer, Paris 1966, 317f. and the numerous references in the index.

168

CliveFoss

Soon after, it became a base for the Turkish pirates who were later incorporated into the emirate of Menteshe36. Byzantine rule in this district, as in many parts of Asia Minor, was a victim of the recapture of Constantinople in 1261, when imperial attention shifted to the West. Tracheia contains some substantial Byzantine remains that may be attributed to the Lascarid period. They consist of a large fortress on the shore, a smaller castle on an island — both in the inner recesses of the Doric Gulf—, a settlement on the east coast, and quite possibly some remains at the greatest late antique site of the region. The smaller castle adorns an island in the deep inlet formerly known as Kyr Vasili (Fig. 16). This secure bay with a small plain at its end provides communication with the interior of the peninsula. The fort commanded the bay and offered a good refuge to the population of the local small coastal plains37. It had two distinct parts, an upper citadel and lower enclosure38. The lower wall, which stretches some 100 metres E-W and is one to two metres thick and contains a gate, is built of very roughly arranged fieldstones laid directly on bedrock. They are set in a grey mortar with many inclusions of pebbles and broken brick. Gaps between the stones are filled with broken brick and pottery, some of which surrounds the stones, but rarely forms a course or pattern. A dilapidated stone stairway, cut in the rock, leads through a jumble of stones to a gate in the upper wall, which overlooks the precipitous slopes of the east side of the island. This wall is of similar, if poorer construction. The walls enclose an area filled with rubble of ruined structures and at least two domed cisterns. A small chapel on the highest peak was a simple barrel-vaulted structure with a projecting apse. The stones of its walls are surrounded by small fragments of brick. Such masonry, which recurs in this region, finds its closest parallel with the walls of Melanoudion in Caria39. Since these have been dated to the Lascarid period and since the masonry has no obvious analogy with earlier or later walls, this chapel may be assigned to the thirteenth century, a date that would suit the historical circumstances: it could not in any case be much later than 1260. The chapel and fortress walls appear to be contempo36

Pachymeres (ed. Fauler) I.289,405. For the beginnings of Menteshe (first mentioned in 1282), see P. Wittek, Das Fürstentum Mentesche, Istanbul 1934, 24-32. 37 See Ruggieri 83-85. 38 There is a brief description of this fortress in C. Foss, The Coasts of Caria andLycia: A Preliminary Report, in: Fondation europoenne de la science, Rapport des missions effectives en 1983, Paris 1986, 216f. 39 See C. Foss and D. Winfield, Byzantine Fortifications, An Introduction, Pretoria 1986, 153, with illustration and further references.

Byzantine responses to Turkish arracks

169

rary, representing a common phenomenon in which religious buildings were more carefully or attractively built than fortifications. The larger castle, the most impressive of this region, stands high above the eastern inlet of Losta Bay, south of Kyr Vasili. This bay, a virtually landlocked basin large enough to shelter a small fleet, was surrounded by fruit trees on innumerable terraces40. It could thus offer provision as well as anchorage, and the small plains beside and above it support a couple of large villages. One of these is Turgut (formerly Pedalo), at the head of a valley that slopes down toward an inlet immediately south of Kyr Vasili (Fig. 17). It is separated from Losta Bay by a high ridge that rises steeply from the sea about 300 metres and bears the fortress whose origins go back to antiquity. It was evidently the centre of the ancient Hygassos, attested as part of the Rhodian Peraea41. The fortress is a large and complex structure, with four circuits of walls on the north side of the ridge overlooking the valley42. The first of these, as approached from below, is of a rough polygonal or "Cyclopean" masonry. It had a gate that evidently led to the necropolis, and marked the limit of the ancient settlement. Above it is a second, more substantial wall of good polygonal masonry of massive blocks set without mortar. It has posterns and gates with triangular openings, and terminates in a massive rectangular bastion whose stones are more regularly arranged in courses. The section between the bastion and the cliff has been extensively rebuilt with spoils from the original wall, rubble, and brick, all set in a good deal of mortar. In places where the Cyclopean wall had fallen away, a new wall was built directly behind (Fig. 18). These rebuildings use some decorative brick in their facings. A third wall is quite different. It consists of a core of mortared rubble faced with spoils set closely together (Fig. 19); the inner face is of fieldstones arranged in fairly regular courses. Its west end abuts the second circuit. Finally, the highest part of the hill was defended by a fourth wall that runs across the ridge about 30-40 m above the third. Its gate is flanked by two square towers. One of them appears to have a cistern built into its floor, while the other contains a rectangular inner chamber with small niches in its walls. The masonry is consistent, of rubble and spoils set in a hard grey mortar with many pebbles. It includes a great deal of brick, sometimes arranged in rudimentary courses, but more often forming a decorative herringbone pattern 40

1 take this description from T. M. Spratt, who charted the area in 1838: see his Remarks on the Dorian Peninsula and Gulf, Archaeologia 49 (1886) 349f. 41 See R, Carter, The Site on Losta Bay, IstMitt 32 (1982) 174f. 42 See A. Maiuri, Viaggio di esplorazione in Caria, Annuario 4/5 (1921-1922) 345-459 at 408f., an illustrated description especially useful for the walls of the classical period. See also the preliminary report ofToss (above, n.38) 217f.

170

CliveFoss

(Fig. 20). The parts that face the village and plain are far more carefully executed than the inner faces overlooking the bay. This inmost fortification contains the remains of a church about 15 m square, with a narthex, nave and two side aisles (Fig. 21). It seems to have been roofed by a vault. Its masonry of rubble and spoils includes numerous brick fragments which sometimes form a very rough cloisonne or more often surround the stones. It appears to be contemporary with the fourth wall, and would be appropriate for the Lascarid period. These walls allow a development to be perceived. The site was already large in the classical period, perhaps as early as the fourth century BC, and apparently continued into the Hellenistic. The two circuits of „Cyclopean" masonry could belong to those periods. Subsequently, in the Roman peace that continued through Late Antiquity, the town moved to the plain and coast, where a large church was built. In the Dark Ages, it moved back to the hilltop, and a new circuit, typically faced with spoils, was constructed. No further activity is apparent until the Lascarid period, when the town consisted of two parts, the upper citadel with the church, and the lower town, which stretched down to the second ancient circuit. Hygassos — or whatever its medieval name — was evidently the most powerful fortress of the region, but not, it seems, seat of the bishop of Tracheia, who appears in lists of the twelfth or thirteenth century as a suffragan of Rhodes43. He probably presided at the impressive late antique settlement that stretched over three islands and the adjacent mainland near the modern district capital of Bozburun, on the southern of the large bays of Tracheia, facing the island of Syme44. It reached its peak in the sixth century, when it was the largest town in this part of Caria. Subsequent centuries have left little trace beside a small cruciform chapel and vaulted chamber in what had been the main commercial centre, and some remains on the island of Musgebi. That was surrounded by a wall built on Cyclopean foundations but subsequently raised with mortared fieldstones with a filling of broken brick. On the highest point was a small church of the inscribed cross plan. Although none of its material can be closely dated, it could be Lascarid. In any case, the modern name probably derives from "episkopeion", the "bishopric", to suggest that the bishop of Tracheia had his seat here at a time that corresponds to the remains. The final Lascarid buildings are on the east coast of the peninsula. The settlement now called Gerbekse (its ancient name is unknown) typically flour43

See Darrouzes, Notitiae 10.575 and 13.623. Unfortunately, neither of these lists can be closely dated. 44 See the detailed treatment of Ruggieri 91-100, 345-350; cf. Foss (above, n. 38) 218f.

Byzantine responses to Turkish arracks

171

ished in the sixth century. Unusually, though, it contains a substantial church whose five-domed plan indicates a Lascarid date45. It is so well preserved (lacking only the roof) that the plaster that once covered its undistinguished walls of rubble and broken brick has survived in many places. It was divided by regularly incised lines into a kind of imitation ashlar, sometimes decorated with a lozenge pattern. This appears to be the largest church of the period in the whole region. It indicates revival of the site at a time when the trade route had renewed importance. Taken together, these remote sites reflect phenomena typical of Lascarid Asia Minor: a notable revival of activity, and the determination of the government to protect its settlements and trade routes by extensive and carefully planned fortification. In this, the Lascarids were following precedents long set. As long as they remained in power, their efforts were crowned with success, to give Byzantine Asia Minor its last moment of glory.

45

See Ruggieri 365-372, with plan, 371; cf. Foss (above, n.38) 219.

Inscriptions byzantines d'ltalie sur tissu Andre Guillou Le Recueil des inscriptions grecques medievales d'ltalie (Rome 1996), qui ne pretendait pas Fexhaustivite, n'a recense que des inscriptions gravees, et done exclu entre autres les inscriptions sur tissu. J'en ai retenu deux pour ces melanges dedies a Cyril Mango, auquel je souhaite longue et heureuse vie.

I Tissu de Constantin Ange Comnene litre: Dedicace d'un tissu. Origine: Constantinople. Aujourd'hui dans une galerie de Saint-Marc Venise (numero du Tresor, 37) Description: Tissu de soie jaune (204 χ 80 cm), brode, remonte au XVIIP siecle: au-dessous des pieds des anges Michel et Gabriel avec les legendes: Ό άρχ(άγγε)λος Μιχ(αήλ), ό άρχ(άγγελος) Γαβριήλ, courent douze vers reguliers de douze syllabes separes par des points brodes au fil d'or. Les lettres ont une hauteur de 30-37 mm. L' alphabet est le suivant:

Erodes avec soin, ces lettres peuvent etre considerees comme des modeles pour leur epoque. Edition recente: Π Tesoro di San Marco, Florence 1971, 95 (= Th). Bibliographie: A. Pasini, // Tesoro di San Marco in Venezia, Venise 1 886, 77 et pi. XXIX, 42a; K. Barzou, Ή -γενεαλογία των Κομνηνών (Βυζαντινά κείμενα και μελέται 20 Β1), II, Thessalonike 1984, n° 178. Edition: t Ην δ(ου)λόσυνον πίστιν έκορέψας έχω. Παρά μέσ'αίμο(ΰ) καρδιακαΐς έστίαις ·:· Τοις πυριμόρφοις τ(οΰ) Θ(εο)ΰ παραστάταις ·:· Της άγγελικ(ής) τάξεως πρωτοστάταις ·:· 5 Ταύτη ν παριστάν κάπι των έρυων Οέλων ·:·

Inscriptions byzantines d'ltalie sur tissu

10

173

Τον χρϋεοϋφή τον δε συντάττω πέπλον ·:· 'Εμαυτόν αυτών τοις ποσι τεΟειε κάτω ·:· Ως αν έχοιμϊ συμμάχους και προστάτας ·:· Προς τάς νοντάς έμπλοκάς των δλιμόνων ·:· Κομνηνοφυής δεσπότης Κωνσταντίνος ·:· Σεβαστοκράτωρ Άγγελωνϋμου ύσνους ·:· Ξύνλιμος αύτάνακτος Αύσόνων γένους.

Planches: 1-5. Traduction: t La foi du serviteur que j'ai nourrie, je l'ai dans le fond de mon coeur pour les gardiens de Dieu aux formes de flammes, pour les chefs de file du corps des anges. Voulant montrer celle-ci aussi dans des oeuvres, je compose ce voile tisse d'or, m'etant moi-meme mis en has leurs pieds, pour que je puisse avoir des allies au combat et des defenseurs contre les empoignades intellectuelles des demons, moi le despote et sebastokrat r Constantin ne Comnene, de la race qui porte le nom des Anges, du meme sang que l'empereur de la race des Ausones. Date: Deuxieme moitie du XIP siecle. Apparat: Ligne 2 μέσ'αϊμο(ΰ): leg. μέσ'έμοΰ ? Je doute de cette lecture: unique erreur phonetique: o final pour ου ? || 5 έρυων: leg. έργων || O: leg. θ || 6 χρϋεοϋφή: /β^.χρυσοϋφή || 7 τιϋειε: leg. τιΟεϊ,ς || 9 νοντάς: leg. νοητάς|| δλιμόνων: leg. δαιμόνων || 10 δεσπότης: δεσπότ(η)ς Th || 11 ύσνους: leg. γένους || 12 Ξύνλιμος: leg. Ξύναιμος. Remarques: 1. La langue. Le brodeur a commis un certain nombre d'erreurs de transcription, qui peuvent mettre en cause s connaissance du grec; ce sont les barbarismes suivants: έρυων pour έργων (1.5), ύσνους pour γένους (1.11), ξύνλιμος pour ξύναιμος (1.12), qui, pour les deux premiers ne conviennent pas la prosodie. 2. Le donateur est le sebastokrat r Constantin Comnene Ange, frere de l'empereur des Ausones (= Romains, Grecs) Isaac II. Ange. II est ne vers 1151, il vit encore en 1199. On ignore la date de sa mort (sous le regne d'Alexis III Ange Comnene, 1195-1203, voir K. Barzou, op. cit., n° 178, 715-723). Son titre tres eleve dans la hierarchie aulique a ete cree an 1163 par Manuel Comnene en faveur de son gendre le prince hongrois Bela, auquel il destinait sa succession (R. Guilland, Recherches sur les institutions byzantines, II, Berlin 1967, 2). 3. On ignore tout du chemin suivi par le precieux tissu de Constantinople

174

Απατέ Guillou

Venise. Sa fonction nous echappe egalement, d'autant qu'il ne reste qu'une partie, qui a ete remontee peut-etre Venise (?) au XVIIP siecle. Son attribution commune comme dessus l'autel, en particulier, ne repose sur rien.

II Banniere de Manuel Paleologue Titre: Friere de Manuel Paleologue saint Michel et reponse de celui-ci. Origine: Constantinople. Depuis 1425 la banniere est conservee au monastere de Sainte-Croix de F nte Avellana (commune de Pergola, province de PesaroUrbino); eile est entree en 1915 au musee du palais ducal d'Urbino, o eile se trouve aujourd'hui (salle V). Description: Banniere de soie pourpre brodee au fil d'or (750 χ 750 mm) representant 1'archange Michel en costume militaire et un dedicant implorant en costume de cour ses pieds. La priere de ce dernier (A), en vers de douze syllabes accentuees, court tout autour en haut, puis droite, gauche et au bas de la banniere. La reponse de "rarchange-gardien" (B) est brodee sous son aile droite. La hauteur des lettres est, A: 15-20 mm, B: 15 mm. L'alphabet est le suivant:

Edition antirieure: G. Cozza-Luzi, Di un antico vessilo navale, dans: Dissertazioni della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia, ser. 2, t. Ill, Rome 1890, 1 1-13 (= C) avec une planche hors-texte. Bibliographie: A. Gibelli, Monogra a dell' antico monastero di Santa Croce di F nte Avellana, Faenza 1895; Venezia e Bisanzio, Venise 1974, n° 1 19. Edition: A: t Ως πριν Ιησούς τ(οΰ) Ναυή κάμψας γόνϋ· Των σων ποδών έμπρ[οσ]θεν αυτόν έρρίφη· Αιτών παρά σ(ού) δύναμϊν [ε]ίλ[η]φέναι· // Ως αλλοφύλων ύποτά[ξ]η τα στίφη· 5 Οϋτως έγωγε Μανουήλ σος οίκέτιςΕυδοκίας παις εύκλε(οΰ)ς τρϊσολβίου· // Φυτοσ//πόρον μεν //Καίσαρι // κεκτη//μένης· // Γυννητρί//αν δε π//ορφυρά[ν]//οη τον κλά//δον· Τα //νυν έμαυ//τον ίκ[ε]//τικώ τω //τρόπω· 10 'Ρίπτω //ποσί σ(ου)//και λϊ//τάζο//μαι δε //σε //

Inscriptions byzantines d'ltalie sur tissu

175

Ως [σ]αΐ//ς σκέ//ποις //πτέρυ//ξι κεχρυ[σω]//μέν[αις]// Και προ//φύάν//ων ρύις //με παν//τός κϊν//δύν(ου)· // Και προ//στάτην έ//χω σε //και φυλα//κά μου· // Ψυχής //τε και σώ//ματος //ων εν τω // βίω· 15 Καν //τη τελευ//ταία δε //και φρι//κτή κρίσει· Εύρω //προσην//ή δια //σ(οΰ)τόν δεσπό//την· Εκ κοιλίας γαρ μ(ητ)ρι//[κ]ής έπερρΐφυν Έπι σε, ταξίαρχε //των Ασωμάτων ^ Β: t (Ού)ς μ(ου) πρό//σεσχε ση //δεήσει· και σκέ//πω Σε μεν πτέρυξϊν //ίδίαις ως οΐκέτην // ΈχΟρ(ού)ς δε τ(ού)ς σ(ού)ς άνε//λώ μ(ου) τη σπάθη ·:· Planches: 6—13.

Traduction: A: t Comme autrefois Josue, fils de Nave, ayant plie les genoux se jeta tes pieds en te demandant de recevoir la force de soumettre les hordes d'etrangers, ainsi moi, Manuel, ton serviteur, fils d'Eudocie, l'illustre et trois fois bienheureuse, qui eut pour pere un cesar et pour mere la branche aux fleurs pourpres, maintenant je me jette tes pieds de maniere suppliante et je te prie de m'abriter sous tes ailes d'or et, en le devancant, de me sauver de tout danger. Sois, je te le demande encore, mon protecteur et mon gardien pour mon me et mon corps durant ma vie et qu'ainsi je trouve au dernier et terrible jugement grace toi le maitre favorable. Depuis le ventre de ma mere je t'ai ete confie, commandant des Incorporels + B: t Mon oreille a ete attentive ta demande et je t'abrite de mes ailes comme mon serviteur, et avec mon epee je ferai perir tes ennemis + Date: Debut du XVe siecle (voir Remarques}. Apparat: 5 οΐκέτις: οίκέτης C, leg. οίκέτης || ΤΚαίσαρι: leg. Καίσαρα || 8 γυννητρίαν: leg. γεννητρίαν || πορφυράνθη: πορφυράνΟει C || 12 ρύις: leg. ρύοις || 16 προσηνή: προσυνή C || 17 έπερρίφυν: έπερρίφεν C, leg. έπερρίφην. Remarques: 1. 1—4: Jos. 7,6-9. 1. 5-7: La paleographie fait penser au XIVe-XVe siecle. II ne peut pas s'agir, done, que de Manuel, fils naturel de Jean V Paleologue et d'Eudocie, fille de rempereur de Trebizonde (vers 1385-1390) et veuve de l'emir de Limnia. Komme remarquable, il fut envoye comme drongaire de la flotte contre les Turcs, qu'il ecrasa Plate, vers 1405. Peu apres son triomphe et pour un motif que les chroniques ignorent, il fut emprisonne par son frere,

176

Απατέ Guillou

Tempereur Manuel II. On peut supposer que le present etendart a ete confectionne dans les premieres annees du XVe siecle, pour la campagne contre les Turcs (Sphrantzes, ed. Im. Bekker, Bonn 1838, 87; Chalkokondyles, ed. Im. Bekker, Bonn 1843, 176-177; A. Th. Papadopoulos, Versuch einer Genealogie der Palaiologen, Munich 1938, n° 89, 58). 1. 8: Eudocie est dite fille d'une lignee imperiale. Si la banniere se trouvait bien au monastere de F nte Avellana en 1425 et ete fabriquee ou inscrite au debut du siecle, on pourra se demander comment eile a quitte si rapidement Constantinople.

„Aristophanes" in margine Versus exotici Herbert Hunger Bei der endg ltigen Fassung des Supplementum Graecum der sterreichischen Nationalbibliothek, des sechsten und letzten Katalogbandes der Wiener griechischen Handschriften1, stie ich unter anderem im Cod. 145, f. 2V im unteren Freirand auf eine Marginalie in zierlicher Schrift von der Hand eines Humanisten (?) aus dem sp ten 15. Jahrhundert. Es sind neun metrisch sehr mangelhafte Zw lfsilber, in Ichform gehalten. Das in margine unseres Titels bezieht sich auf den Fundort des Textes; die Guimets verweisen darauf, da der unbekannte Autor Aristophanes (auch) vor Augen oder im Ohr hatte. Λέων μέλαν πέφυκα των αιμοβόρων, βασιλείς υπάτους τε δέσποτας πάντας another inscription about the Prophets that runs this way: [13] [For references, cf. Inscription 11 above] "Christ, being [for οέλων read πέλων] truly [for οντος read όντως] the fulfillment of the Prophets and the Law Brought Moses and Elijah from Heaven and from the dead y »Jtr^rm^f\Hf ff«U Of X/,#/^«T . tf ^M '« C « ' «w / * ' ·/ β V

l·)

tc

ο U

r-

Andre Guillou

Tafel XLV

Tafel XLVI

Andre Guillou

o c H o" Ό

l·)

> ij

c G

O (J •u

O

U

u 13 t-

Andre Guillou

Tafel XLVII

Tafel XLVIII

Andre Guillou

n υ

D -D

ο "rt —

u Ό

c rt

Tafel XLIX

Andre Guillou

S^«.,

y&

ff*:~ : - ·: L

Tafel L

Andre Guillou

8. Banniere de Manuel Paleologue. Urbino, Musee du Palais Ducal

Andre Guillou

Tafel LI

v

s«*Mr-'TV*iitU-l}*'i,*>*''

« V

* C» .. '

*4ίΐ>**·''***':'ύα* *^

\J awa^v^Al>//36*f/T**· T^err

1. Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional, Vitr. 26-2, f. 17Γ'

2. London, British Library, Add. 36654, f. 215 (Tafel LVII)

Tafel LVII

Irmgard H utter

,

\?& '^l'^fnf1'·'' 1» | 'S?irwj·** Ό'ΐ" ·~^^"7κ^^?ί>·"· ^!.-I™ u ^^T' ^»j. ^frf» v'« -I«D.V^'»' »-J · ^""y* ° " ι«ι"/Λ^ητί~Α. T»!|Of^^-r-« tmyypiIipUur4^tf.,, .V^C^o-v-r-T· ·

ο4i^«--^5f-ry«.'i^»'vf'-«»»J l«y. ^o^O«^u|«i«»»-V^n»»:-

•^Α"πϋ··«»5*«'\^''»"4·°'"ϊ:Η^ί·' -Γ v \>f>;-!·"· TfiitJSI, -

^.Α?ρ;νί;^^-5 ^^«

ψΐ*

1. Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, gr. 2625, f. 18

Peter Schreiner

Tafel LIX

. •-•^fe ί -»ff * »,

· · ' "

^ — TM*""r"os «··»· r w ^~ ••"»j|J»»""A» f rr**

*Κ»&\&^&^*~^,^*^&»'ϊ£^*τ£)* tVVck^^^%^^^3'^>«^W^,?^,Ji^^vir.VA^ ,

+r

i t

-W^'^Mri

.

*~

_J

.

4. >

»

ί'ί·.·^^·^.'^·^. T

t*j».

A* »

*jC _

*"^ ^ J «

K

f^^Λ»*Λ4? «**^V^%i #~ν*Μ*^ ^U^4^ VVA^W«W^^.^V^V- ^^^^.^W4W.^^^

i^Vj^^V^-irfVfiWT^ ^K^^^^ «ij!dw^^vvi^4^«A^;vav^r? t^vw:^ x^r ^ ··'"•-•-- ^'fi^ap;ff«ii«5r

2. Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, gr. 2625, f. 294

Peter Schreiner

Tafel LX

•ii

™

'

. t - «λ χ *! A

'

'FΛ'βΕ«^'ί«^ί Γ—« « «'«7,;» w«^K A J '^-* ' -" " ' /*a^.,

3. Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, gr. 2626, f. 21

-

Tafel LXI

Peter Schreiner

4. Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, gr. 2625, f. A v

Tafel LXII

Peter Schreiner

ÖD C 3

ca

1

D ^>

'53 H

1C CN

(N

C C

z 1) 3

-uer _c

Ihor Sevcenko

S I K T K

Tafel LXXII

David H. Wright

1 a. Nicomachi-Symmachi diptych, c. 400. Paris, Musee de Cluny, Nicomachi l b. Nicomachi-Symmachi diptych, c. 400 London, Victoria and Albert Museum, Syrnmachi

David H. Wright

Tafel LXXIII

2. Asclepius and Hygicia diptych, c. 400. Liverpool, Mcrseyside C'ounty Museums

Tafel LXXIV

David H. Wright

3. Consular diptych of Probus, 406. Aosta, Cathedral, Treasury

David H. Wright

4. Dionysus and Selene diptych, 2 Iul quarter of fifth century Sens, Bibliotheque Municipale, cod. 46

Tafel LXXV

Tafel LXXVI

David H. Wright

5. Apotheosis of an emperor, mid-fifth century, London, British Museum 6. Consular diptych of Basilius, 480. Florence, Museo Nazionale del Bargello

David H. Wright

Tafel LXXVII

7. Consular diptych of Bocthius, 487. Brescia, Museo Romano

Tafel LXXVIII

David H. Wright

8. Author, Roman Vergil, f. 3 V , end of fifth century. Vatican City, Vat. lat. 3867

David H. Wright

Tafel LXXIX

9. Storni at Sea, Roman Vergil, Γ. 77', end of fifth century Vatican Citv, Vat. hit. 3867

Tafel LXXX

David H. Wright

10. Sacrifice in honor of Anchiscs, Roman Vergil, f. 76v, end of fifth century Vatican City, Vat. lat. 3867

David H. Wright

11. Gold medallion of Valens and Valentinian, 364-367 Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum

Tafel LXXXI

Tafel LXXXII

David H. Wright

12 a. Council of the Gods, Roman Vergil, f. 234V, end of fifth century Vatican City, Vat. lat. 3867

David H. Wright

Tafel LXXXIII

12b. Council of the Gods, Roman Vergil, f. 235', end of fifth century Vatican City, Vat. lat. 3867