Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vsgnj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T00:00:42.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Encheirion as adjunct to the Icon in the Middle Byzantine Period

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2016

Valerie Nunn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A collection of mostly eleventh- and twelfth-century epigrams in the late thirteenth- or early fourteenth-century manuscript ‘Marc. gr. 524’ was partially published in 1911 by Lampros in expectation of a definitive edition by Konstantin Horna. Unfortunately this edition never appeared. A high proportion of material in the collection relates to art and in the past Byzantine art historians have been reproached for their neglect of such evidence. Some of the most descriptive pieces are now well known, having been published for their art-historical interest by Cyril Mango and more recently by Paul Magdalino and Robert Nelson and, as historical documents, by Wolfram Hörandner.

Type
Research Article
Information
Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies , Volume 10 , 1986 , pp. 73 - 102
Copyright
Copyright © The Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies, University of Birmingham 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Lampros, S., ‘Ho Markianos Kodix 524’ Neos Hellēnomnēmōn 8 (1911) 3–59 and 113–192 Google Scholar (and ibid. 4–5 on Horna’s work on the manuscript.) The Lampros edition has been used, wherever it is complete, as the basis for the present translations and the numbering used is as given by him. No.165 has been published in full only by Hörandner (W. Hörandner, Theodoros Prodromos: Historischc Gedichte (Vienna 1974) [Wiener Byzantinischen Studien, XI] no. LXXII. The transcription of the hitherto only partially published epigrams nos. 59, 75a and 234 was completed by the author with the kind assistance of Dr. Hörandner. Any errors are attributable to the author alone.

2. ‘… the art historian for whom, in spite of the long recognised need to correlate religious painting any liturgical poetry, epigrams in general remain… “an abundant and almost unexploited source of information”.’, Baldwin, B. (quoting Mango, C.) in ‘The Language and Style of Some Anonymous Byzantine Epigrams’, Byzantion 52 (1982) 5 Google Scholar and cf. ibid., nn. 3 and 4. Komines, a philologist who has made epigrams the subject of a special study, shows a sympathetic awareness of the scale of problems involved (Ath. D. Komines, To byzantinon hieron epigramma kai hoi epigrammatopoioi (Athens 1966) 33) and some other philologists have attempted to fill the breach for the art historians (e.g. Tomadakes, N., ‘Byzantina epigrammata kai byzantine techne’, Athena 65 (1961) 3–10 Google Scholar; Speck, P., Theodoros Studites, Jamben auf verschiedene Gegenstände (Berlin 1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar [Supplementa Byzantina I]; and W. Hörandner, Theodoros Prodromos: Historische Gedichte).

3. C. Mango, The Art of the Byzantine Empire 312–1453: Sources and Documents (Englewood Cliffs 1972) 220 and 225–228.

4. Magdalino, P. and Nelson, R., ‘The Emperor in Byzantine Art of the Twelfth Century’ Byz. Forschungen 8 (1982) 124–130 Google Scholar (nos. I-II) and 135–151 (nos. V-XI).

5. Hörandner, W., Theodoros Prodromos: Historische Gedichte, 434 (no. XLVII), 447f (no. LIII), 459 (no. LV), 522–526 (nos. LXXII-LXXIII).Google Scholar

6. See Table I below and Lampros, Ho Markianos Kodix 524, 166, no.280.

7. Miller, E., ‘Poésies inédites de Theodore Prodrome’, Ann. de l’Assoc. pour l’encouragement des études grecques en France 17 (1883) 39ffGoogle Scholar; ibid, (ed.) Recueil des historiens des Croisades, Historiens grecs, II (Paris 1881) 692.

8. e.g. ‘Eis epiplon pros ton megan Nikolaon’ which reads (in translation): ‘Because I fear to see thy face… receive a veil/covering (parapetasma)...’, Miller, E., Manuelis Philae Carmina (Paris 1855; reprinted Amsterdam 1967) I, 37 (no. LXXXIV.)Google Scholar

9. Appendix no. 70 and C.

10. Appendix, A and B.

11. ibid. 165 and 261.

12. A. Frolow, ‘La Podéa’: un tissu décoratif de l’église byzantine’ (hereafter cited as: Frolow, ‘la Podéa…’) B13 (1938) 497f; Hörandner, Theodoros Prodromos: Historische Gedichte, 526 (no. LXXIII; cf. T.D. Neroutsou, ‘Christianikai Athēnai’, Deltion tēs Historikēs kai Ethnologikēs Etairias tēs Hellados 3 (1889) 96.

13. Appendix no. 59.

14. Petit, L., ‘Le Monastére de Notre-Dame de Pitié’, IRAIK 6 (1900) 134 Google Scholar (ref. 120, 1.15), with further references. Du Cange, however, translated oxy as violaceus and this interpretation has predominated in the work of most subsequent scholars (e.g. J. Ebersolt, Les Arts Somptuaires de Byzance, (Paris 1923) 21 and ibid, nn.l and 2; Frolow, La Podéa, Aid and n.5; Hendy, M., Studies in the Byzantine Monetary Economy, c.300–1450 (Cambridge 1985) 217 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see especially Guilland, R., REG 62 (1949) 333–4, n.3.Google Scholar

15. Frolow, La Podéa, 461.

16. Frolow’s contention (op.cit. supra. 477, n.5.) that the veil of the Episkepsis icon bore a mass of tiny icons, is based on a misinterpretation of the Greek source.

17. D. Stojanović, La Broderie artistique en Serbie du XlVe au XIXe siécle (Belgrade 1949 in Serbo-Croat with French résumé) fig. 44 and 3 (and fig. 4); Millet, G., Broderies religieuses de style byzantin (Paris 1947) 76–78, pis. CLIX-CLXI.Google Scholar

18. Chatzedakis, E.V., Ekklēsiastika kentēmata (Athens 1953)Google Scholar introd. 24, who dated it c. twelfth century after A. Pasini, II Tesoro di S. Marco (Venice 1866) no. 42a, fig. XXIX; but see Hahnloser, H.R. ed. II Tesoro di S. Marco (II Tesoro e il Museo) (Florence 1971) 94–96 Google Scholar, cat. no.25, Pis. XXVIII, XXIX, esp. 95f for attribution to early thirteenth century.

19. F. Michel, Recherches sur le Commerce, La Fabrication et l’Usage des Etoffes de Sole, d’Or et d’Argent,… (hereafter cited as Michel, Recherches... (Paris 1852) passim. It is to be hoped that the contents of Anna Muthesius’s as yet unpublished thesis: Eastern Silks in Western Shrines and Treasuries before 1200 (London, Courtauld Institute of Art, Ph.D 1980) will soon be made more widely accessible through publication. In the meantime see Dr. Muthesius’s recent article ‘A practical Approach to the History of Byzantine Silk Weaving’, JÖB 34 (1983) 235–254.

20. On diplomatic gifts and tributes see Michel, Recherches… I, 63 and 182, cf. 64, n. 1 and cf. Muthesius, A Practical Approach 250. On export controls see Nicole, J. ed. and trans. Le Livre du Préfet (Geneva 1893, reprinted Variorum Reprints 1970) IV, 1; IV, 4 and IV, 8 Google Scholar; and cf. ibid. VII, 3 and 5.

21. Michel, Recherches… I, 187; Byzantine Art, A European Art, Catalogue of the Ninth Exhibition of the Council of Europe (Athens 1964) nos. 578–581 (late tenth-to twelfth-century); and Chatzedakes, Ekklēsiastika kentēmata, introd. 16; and especially Muthesius, Eastern Silks in Western Shrines and Treasuries before 1200, passim; cf. eadem report on the newly established photographic archive of silks at University of East Anglia, in Akten des XVI. Int. Byzantinistenkongress (Vienna 1981): Meldungen zur Plenarsitzung 3.2 JÖB 31 (Beiheft) (1981).

22. Diehl, Ch., ‘Le Trésor et la Bibliothèque de Patmos au Commencement du 13è siècle’, BZ 1 (1892) 495fGoogle Scholar; Chatzedakes, Ekklēsiastika kentēmata, introd. 14.

23. Setton, K.M., ‘Athens in the Later Twelfth Century’, Speculum 19 (1944) 195–196 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; cf. Hendy, Studies in the Byzantine Monetary Economy 51, n.75; 601, n.212; 206 and 207, n.293.

24. Cf. Stojanović, La Broderie artistique en Serbie du XlVè au XlXès. !3f and 36.

25. Appendix no. 70 and Kurtz, E. ed., Die Gedichte des Christophoros Mitylenaios (Leipzig 1903) 17, no.28 Google Scholar. Muthesius, A Practical Approach 237, lists ‘private workshops in the homes of wealthy Byzantine citizens…’ as one of the three main channels of production, whereas any spinning, weaving and embroidery practised as a genteel occupation by housebound ladies was unlikely to be on a commercial scale.

26. A. Leroy-Molinghen, ‘Styliane’, B39 (1969) 157 and also in M.J. Kyriakis, ‘Medieval Society as seen in two Eleventh-Century Texts of Michael Psellos’, III, Byz. Studies/Études Byz. 4/2 (1977) 159; Greek text in Sathas, K.N., Mesaiōnikē Bibliothēkē, V (Venice and Paris 1876) 66 Google Scholar, 1.12 sqq. and 11. 19–20 and in Kyriakis (op.cit.) I, Byz. Studies/Études Byz. 3/2 (1976) 85ff.

27. Psellos, Michel, Chronographie, ed. Renauld, E. (Budé Collection Byzantine, Paris 1926) 148 Google Scholar; Eng. trans. Sewter, E.R.A., The Chronographia of Michael Psellus (London 1953) 137.Google Scholar

28. Lampros, Ho Markianos Kodix 524, 26f, no.57.

29. Talbot, A.-M., ‘Some Differences in the Monastic Experience of Men and Women’, Abstracts of 10th US Byzantine Studies Conference (Washington 1984) 36 Google Scholar, and now in expanded form: ‘A Comparison of the Monastic Experience of Byzantine Men and Women’, Greek Orthodox Theological Review 30 (1985) 1–20 (see p. 12); cf. Muthesius, A Practical Approach 237 and n.7.

30. Appendix no.86; there is some evidence to suggest that it was not uncommon to give a complement of hangings with a new icon: a fictional example occurs in Ptochoprodromos, Kata Hēgoumenōn, ed. D.-C. Hesseling and H. Pernot, Poèmes Prodromiques en grec vulgaire (Amsterdam 1910/reprinted Wiesbaden 1968)52, 11. 87–88. Cf. Michael Attaleiates, Diataxis, ed. Sathas, Mesaiōnikē Bibliothēkē; I, 48, where the gift of an icon of St. John Prodromos is recorded in the name of John the Praipositos; cf. ibid 51, where the same donor is recorded as giving a veil and a podea for the icon of St. John.

31. e.g. Michael Attaleiates, Diataxis 51; cf. P. Gautier, ‘Le Typikon du Sébaste Grégoire Pakourianos’, REB 42 (1984) 123; Diehl, Le Trésor et la Bibliothèque de Patmos au Commencement du 13è siècle, 492.

32. e.g. Michael Attaleiates, Diataxis 51, where two cloths are listed, first as katapetasma and epiplon, then jointly as ‘tauta ta duo epipla’ and finally described in some detail as to function, whence it is clear that one is an encheirion and the other a podéa. Frolow, La Podéa, was inclined to ignore all ambiguities in the cause of documenting the history of the podea, albeit at the expense of other hangings.

33. Appendix nos. 162 (a) (= Collides, Sternbach ed., XI) and 162 (b) (= Collides, Sternbach ed., XXVI).

34. Probably the clearest indication of the post hoc nature of some of the lemmata is in Lampros, Ho Markianos Kodix 524, 31, no.65, where the lemma locates the icon in question as being in the chapel of the ‘former’, or possibly ‘the late’, epi tou kanikleiou, Theodore Stypiotes, whereas the verse itself has Theodore identifying himself as the current holder of this office (1.25). Cf. in general the comments of Paul Speck, Theodoros Studites, Jamben auf verschiedene Gegenstände, 66.

35. Cf. C. Belting-Ihm, ‘Sub matris tutela’, Abhandlungen der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, ph.-hist. Klasse 3 (1976) 14–37, who traces the history of the cloak as a symbol of protection and patronage from Roman times through the Byzantine period.

36. Suidae Lexicon, ed. A. Adler (Wiesbaden 1921, repr.) 1006, Peplos: ‘… esli de ho peplos gynaikeion endyma’ (this reading, however, is not attested in all mss., cf. 1005 Peplon: ‘peribolaion, himation gynaikeion’, but cf. n.37 below. The primary meaning of peplos, as given in the Suidas Lexicon at 1006, is the ceremonial robe woven for and presented to Athena in Ancient Greece, which is referred to in some detail.

37. Lampros, S., ‘Ekphrasis ton Xylokontarion’ NE 5 (1908), 17 Google Scholar, 1.22 and 1.24–25, and cf. NE6 (1909) 493f, note from Ph. Koukoules on the date and authorship of the ‘Ekphrasis…’. Cf.Demetrakos, D., MegaLexikon holēs tēs Hellēnikēs Glōssēs (Athens 1958)Google Scholar sub ‘peplos’ 4. (in trans.) ‘rare, usually masculine, long garment worn over the chitōn [epichitōnion]; a man’s himation.’

38. Appendix nos. 93 and 68 for altar cloths.

39. Viz. Appendix nos. 58 and 68 and cf. ‘ho kosmos tēs Hagias Sophias, tapepla tēs trapezas’, Kriaras, E., Anakalēma tēs Kōnstantinopolēs (Salonica 1965) 35, 1. 109.Google Scholar

40. Frolow, La Podéa 464, n. 3.

41. Appendix no. 70, 1. 23.

42. Appendix no. 63, 1. 10.

43. Appendix no. 162 (b), 11. 1–3.

44. Appendix no. 234, 1. 6; cf. n.8 above.

45. Psellos, Michael, ‘Logos epi tō en Blachernais gegonoti thaumati (ex Cod. Vatic. Graec. 672)’, ed. Sideridis, X.A., Orthodoxia 28 (1928) 514 Google Scholar; cf.Janin, R., La Géographie ecclésiastique de I’Empire byzantin, (Paris 1969) III, 1, 166 Google Scholar and Buckler, G., Anna Comnena: a Study, (Oxford 1929) 77f.Google Scholar

46. Zonaras III, 18, 1. 25 and see below p. 11.

47. Grabar, A., ‘Une Source d’Inspiration de l’iconographie byzantine tardive: les cérémonies du culte de la Vierge’, CA 25 (1976) 147 Google Scholar, who comments on ‘le rideau roulé devant l’icône’. Grabar thinks the miniature is a fifteenth-century addition to the Psalter, which has been dated to the thirteenth century.

48. Idem and G. Babić, ‘L’iconographie constantinopolitaine de l’Acathiste de la Vierge à Cozia (Valachie)’, ZRVI14/15 (1973) figs. 13 and 14. This programme is dated to 1370–72.

49. Catalogue of the Exhibition for the Centenary of the Christian Archaeological Society (X.A.E.) (Athens 1984)28 no. 15 (PI. 15). Dr. M. Acheimastou-Potamianou is preparing a study of this icon.

50. Thrēskeutikē kai Ēthikē Egkyklopaideia, (Athens 1962–1968) V, 334f.

51. Walter, C., Art and Ritual of the Byzantine Church. (Birmingham 1981) 21f.Google Scholar

52. Vita Stephani Iunioris, in MPG 100, cols. 1169B and 1177B.

53. This takes the argument, formulated by Grabar, which sees the icons as ‘secondary relics’ (on which see below p.12 and n.58) one step farther.

54. Reference supplied by Mrs. J. Storer, to whom many thanks for her friendly and constructive ‘quibbling’ without which this paper would be the poorer.

55. Zonaras III, 18, 1. 25 (Bonn ed. 751); cf. Frolow, La Podéa 465, n.4, where it is asserted that this veil [peplon] is a podea.

56. Appendix no. 70, 11. 13–14.

57. Theodore Studites, Iambi, MPG 99, col. 1780 and Speck, Theodoros Studites, Jamben auf verschiedene Gegenstände, 110f.

58. Grabar, A, Martyrium: Recherches sur le culte des reliques et l’art Chrétien antique, (Paris 1946, reprinted London 1972: hereafter cited as Grabar, , Martyrium) II, 346.Google Scholar

59. Wortley, J., ‘Iconoclasm and Leipsanoclasm: Leo III, Constantine V and the Relics’, BF 8 (1982) 253–279.Google Scholar

60. ibid. 255.

61. Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Caerimoniis Aulae Byzantinae (Bonn ed.) 553, 11. 3–5; The Life of Andreas Salos, BHG3, 115–117, 721 A; cf.Rydèn, L., ‘The Vision of the Virgin at Blachernae and the Feast of Pokrov’, AB 94 (1976) 70, n.2Google Scholar. The identification of the icon in the Holy Soros with the ‘Episkepsis’ is still controversial. Grabar, , Martyrium II, 348 Google Scholar, following Ebersolt, J., Sanctuaires de Byzance (Paris 1921) 49–51 Google Scholar, assumes that they are one and the same, but this assumption had been challenged as early as 1930 by Grumel, V., ‘Sur l’Episkepsis des Blachernes’, EO 29 (1930) 334–336.Google Scholar

62. This is in sharp contrast to Western devotion focussed on shrines. See, for example, Ward, B., Miracles and the Medieval Mind (London 1982)Google Scholar passim, and two contributions to Popular Belief and Practice (Studies in Church History 8, Cambridge 1972): C. Morris, ‘A Critique of Popular Religion: Guibert of Nogent on the Relics of the Saints’, 55–60; and D. Bethell, ‘The Making of a twelfth-century Relic Collection’, 61–72, esp. p.61.

63. Duchesne, L., ‘L’iconographie byzantine dans un document grec (836) du IXe siècle’, Roma e I’Oriente 3 V (1912) 222–239, 273–285 and 349–366 Google Scholar. Grabar, Cf., Martyrium, II, 356 Google Scholar, n.2, who quotes this passage from the Libri Carolini:— ‘illi (les Grecs) vero pene omnem suae credulitatis spem in imaginibus collocent, restat ut nos sanctos in eorum corporibus vel potius reliquiis corporum, seu etiam vestimentis veneremur, iuxta antiquorum patrum traditionem’.

64. Kitzinger, E., ‘The Cult of Images in the Age before Iconoclasm’, DOP 8 (1954) 119.Google Scholar

65. idem, loc.cit.

66. Comnena, Anna, The Alexiad, trans. Sewter, E.R.A. (London 1969) XIII. 1 Google Scholar; text: Anne Comnène, Aléxiade, ed. B. Leib, 3 vols. (Paris 1937, 1943, 1945); index, P. Gautier (Paris 1976): see xiii, 1.2; and notes, pp. 254–5; also V. Grumel, EO 162 (1931) 129ff.

67. Psellos, Logos epi tō en Blachernais gegonoti thaumati, 515ff; cf. Buckler, Anna Comnena: a Study, 78 and note.

68. Brown, P., ‘The Rise and Function of the Holy Man in Late Antiquity’, JRS 61 (1971) 88 Google Scholar (on the holy man as ‘arbitrator and mediator’) and 91 f and 93 (on the holy man as ‘oracle’); reprinted in idem, Society and the Holy in Late Antiquity (London 1982) 103–152 (see 117, 122 and 134).

69. Le Synodikon de l’Orthodoxie, ed. and trans. J. Gouillard, TM 2 (1967) 181f; cf. L. Barnard ‘The Theology of Images’, in Iconoclasm (Papers given at the Ninth Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, Birmingham 1977) lOf. and 13 (n.46); and ibid. ‘Texts in Translation’, 184 (21).

70. Germanos, Patriarach, Historia Ecclesiastica et Mystica Contemplatio, in MPG 98, cols 383–454 Google Scholar. Symeon of Thessalonica, Expositio de Divino Templo, MPG 155, cols 697–749.

71. Gautier, P., ‘Diatribes de Jean l’Oxite contre Alexis ler Comnène’, REB 28 (1970) 8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; cf.Anderson, J.C., ‘The Date and Purpose of the Barberini Psalter’, CA 31 (1982) 35–67.Google Scholar

72. Buckler, , Anna Comnena: a Study, 315–318 Google Scholar; and Anderson, op. cit. 58f.

73. Frolow, La Podéa, 461.