Byzantine Studies Conference Archives

Sixth Annual Byzantine Studies Conference
24-26 October 1980
Oberlin College & The College of Wooster, Oberlin, Ohio


Compiled and Edited by John W. Barker


The Byzantine Studies Conference is an annual forum for the presentation and discuss papers embodying current research on all aspects of Byzantine history and culture. The Abstracts of Papers is printed from camera-ready copy supplied by the speakers. Copies are presented to each registered participant, and they are available to libraries and other interested parties. A five-year subscription (covering the years 1980-1984, Nos. 6-10) can be ordered for $20. Previous issues are available for all years except No. 1 for 1975, which is now out of print. Nos. 2-5 (1976-1979) may be purchased as a set for $12, and individual copies may be ordered at the respective rates of $4 (for Nos. 2-5, 1976-1979) and $5 (for Nos. 6ff, 1980ff). All prices quoted include postage. Orders should be prepaid (checks payable to

Byzantine Studies Conference) and sent to:

Byzantine Studies Conference
c/o Dumbarton Oaks
1703 32nd Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20007

Byzantine Studies Conference.
Abstracts of papers÷Byzantine Studies
Conference. 1st÷
Madison, Wis. [etc.] Byzantine Studies Conference.
v. 22 cm. annual.

Key title: Abstracts of papers÷Byzantine
Studies Conference, ISSN 0147-3387
1. Byzantine Empire--Congresses.
DF501.5.B9a 949.5 77-79346

Library of Congress 77


Presiding: Margaret Frazer


Lucinda Neuru (McMaster University)

An African Red Slip pottery flask of unusual form was found by the Canadian team excavating the Northern sector of the Theodosian Wall at Carthage in 1976. It was found in a context which contained material dating to the early years of the sixth century, but stylistic criteria would suggest a date for our vessel of not later than the middle of the fifth century. Both sides are decorated with reliefs which are similar to those found on the rectangular plates in African Red Slip, Hayes Form 54, which date to late-fourth/mid-fifth century. There are only two known parallels to our flask, both of unknown provenance. One side of the flask found at Carthage shows an Amazon and her lover, either Hippolyte and Theseus or Penthesileia, and Achilles. Both are nude and in a position which would imply erotic intent an the part of one or both. The other side shows Herakles in an obviously excited pose with one of his many loves. One of the parallels to this vessel shows the sane depiction of Herakles; the other, a completely whole example, shows St. Paul, clearly labeled "Paulus." The vessel form is extraordinary. It is a combined pilgrim flask-sieve, which may have had either ritual or domestic use. If ritual, then its function must have had a place in both pagan and Christian contexts. Parallels and comments on this point would be welcome. In any case, the vessels, all from the sane period, attest the continuation of a pagan tradition alongside the Christian.


Deborah Markow (Brooklyn, N.Y.)

A creation scene on a funerary monument may seem a curious occurrence but the presence of "The Creation of Adam and Eve" on the so-called "dogmatic" sarcophagus is an accepted fact. The identity of the creator has seemed a more important issue and many have seen in the three togati the earliest representation of the trinitarian Christian God. Now, a newly discovered sarcophagus from Arles with four togati, has once again raised doubts about their Identity and even calls into question the nature of the scene itself. By concentrating on these two sarcophagi an new interpretation of the scene is made. one which seems more suited for depiction on a Christian funerary monument of the fourth century: the creation of the new spiritual body at the Resurrection.

Attention to particular details such as the identity of the togati, the meaning of the imposition of hands, and the nudity and reduced size of the two figures before the throne, help to establish the new identification. Similar scenes of creation on other fourth century sarcophagi provide additional evidence that the small figures on the Vatican and Arlesian examples are not Adam and Eve.

Early Christian tradition concerning the after-life provides another dimension to this iconographic interpretation of two important fourth century creation scenes. The Early Christian conception of the Resurrection and Pauline eschatology which describes a new creation when man is given a spiritual body, are cited as important clues to understanding the visual material.


Shigebumi Tsuji (Osaka University)

The fresco-cycle of the Christian baptistery at Dura-Europos is undoubtedly one of the most important monuments in the history of Early Christian art, and today every introduction to the history of Christian art begins with some reference to this earliest extant Gospel cycle. The importance of the monument can rightly be ascribed not only to its chronological place but also to its uniqueness in both style and iconography, differing significantly from the coeval Christian art, especially from the sepulchral art from the city of Rome.

Among the numerous historians of Late Antique and Early Christian art, the late Prof. C. H. Kraeling and Prof. A. Grabar have made valuable contributions in defining the main is-sues involved with the Durene cycle. But, exactly because of its uniqueness, and because of the lack of known earlier work with which it might be compared, these previous discussions were unsuccessful in integrating it into a larger, concrete framework of the development of Late Antique and Early Christian art. In this short paper, I would like to introduce some pieces of visual evidence which, if not hitherto unknown, have seldom been discussed in relation to the Durene cycle, in order to bring it into a more essentially historical context. For this purpose, I will consider the scene of the Good Shepherd on the wall of the arcosolium above the baptismal fons as the subject of discussion.

Scholars have rightly pointed out the "narrative" and "descriptive" character of several scenes at the Dura baptistery, and Prof. Kraeling proposed that the iconographical source might be found in an illustrated roll of Tatian's Diatessaron. As far as the scene of the Good Shepherd is concerned, however, he made a comparison only with a single Early Christian work: a sarcophagus relief from the Campo Santo, Pisa. Unfortunately, he completely overlooked an essential aspect of the iconography of the relief scene, and, as a result, he failed to introduce another important piece of-evidence, also dating from the mid- third century: the decoration of the hypogeum of Clodius Hermes under S. Sebastiano, Rome. In my view, the arcosolium fresco at Dura, the Pisan relief, and the Roman hypogeum decoration all point to the fact that, in the early part of the third century, there existed a pictorial recension of Gospel illustration that was completely independent from, and even earlier than, the symbolic representations characteristic of Roman funerary art.

Scholars have not succeeded in discovering the stylistic source of the singular "graphic" quality of the majority of the scenes in the baptistery decoration. The existence of the so-called "Provincial- Syrian" style proposed by Prof. Kraeling is only conjectural. I would like, however, to point out certain characteristics of the mural paintings, which-may be associated with the "papyrus style" once proposed by Prof. Bianchi-Bandinelli. Finally, I would like to draw attention to the fact that very similar narrative iconography for the Good Shepherd scene appears again in an eleventh-century Gospel illustration, in Paris, Bibl. Nat., ms. gr. 74, although there it is partly transformed under monastic influence. A recent cleaning of the newly discovered part of the decoration of the Roman hypogeum offers more clear evidence that a Gospel recension which originated in Late Antiquity was continuously inherited by generations of Byzantine artists, and served as the "core-cycle" for the formation of aid-Byzantine narrative Gospel illustration.


Erica Cruikshank Dodd (American University of Beirut)

At the fifth Annual Byzantine Studies Conference, 1979, Dr. Susan Boyd described the treasure discovered near Kumluca, in Southwestern Turkey, that once belonged to the Monastery of Sion in the mountains of Lycia. This paper is concerned with problems of dating objects in the treasure and determining their provenance.

About thirty objects in the Kumluca treasure have stamps applied in Constantinople during the reign of Justinian I. The earliest object seems to have been acquired by the church around A.D. 546 and the latest just before the end of the reign of Justinian, in A.D. 565

Problems of Date: According to the stamps, the treasure was acquired by the Monastery on different occasions and donated to the church by different donors during the periods of office of three different ministers of finance in Constantinople over a time of approximately twenty years. The names of these ministers of finance whose monograms are found in the stamps are not documented in literary sources and a more exact dating is not yet possible; however the earliest stamps in the sequence show the monogram of a certain Iohannes and may therefore be associated with a Comes Sacrarum Largitionum with that name who held the office in the year 546. These stamps are found on a paten in a private collection, decorated in the center with the Agnus Dei facing outwards within a wreath of stylized laurel. The inscription on this paten indicates that it was presented to the church by a private donor in honour of his wife. The lamb in the center closely resembles the lamb in the roundel at the head of the vault in San Vitale and this resemblance offers some corroboration for the date of the stamps.

Problems of Provenance: The treasure from Kumluca presents problems of provenance characteristic of other Byzantine treasures from this period but which, in this case, are especially evident: One lamp with stamps from Constantinople is identical in size, form and decoration with another lamp in this same treasure that has stamps of a different kind, probably from a different locality. Further, some objects have stamps, whereas others apparently identical do not. Finally, objects with relatively poor decoration are stamped at the same time and in the same place as objects with relatively rich decoration.

These examples support what I have suggested on other occasions, that in Byzantine silver workshops the hand that worked the treasure was not necessarily the same hand as the one that shaped a vessel and certainly not the hand that stamped it. Silver objects in Constantinople were evidently cut out into prepared shapes and then stamped by government officials in guarantee of the quality of the silver. The objects were acquired in this unfinished condition by the prospective owner. After buying the object, the donor brought it to the silversmith of his choice either in the same place where he bought the silver, or else he took it to the local silversmith in his home town, with instructions for inscription and decoration suited to his purse. He may then have presented the finished vessel to the church.

In any event, precise dating of objects in the Kumluca treasure is possible but only within about twenty years, and the practice of assigning a Byzantine object to any particular workshop because of its stamps must be exercised with caution.


Presiding: John W. Barker


Lawrence J. Daly (Bowling Green State University)

In Or. 34 (Peri tēs archēs), a defense of his career delivered after his resignation from the office that marked the climax of a distinguished life in education and government in the late fourth century, Themistius remarks (c. xiv) that the urban prefecture he accepted from Theodosius was a post he had refused under a previous regime. Although he fails to identify in this passage the emperor whose offer he had declined, Angelo Mai, the editor of the manuscript published in 1816 constituting what may be properly termed Themistius' apologia pro vita sua, argued that the enigmatic reference is to Julian, a former pupil and fellow pagan of the politikos philosophos. Thus, despite the report in the Souda that Themistius served as prefect under the apostate emperor, the consensus of modern Themistian scholarship has been to follow Mai's judgment on this matter.

Thirteen years ago, however, Gilbert Dagron ("L'Empire romain d'Orient au IVe sicle et les traditions politiques d'HellŽnisme: Le tŽmoignage de ThŽmistios," Travaux et MŽmoires [Centre de Rech. d'hist. et civ. byz.; Paris] 3 [1967] 1-242: esp. "Note I" and "Note IV" in its "Annexes") challenged the identification of Themistius' refusal of that magistracy with Julian, insisting quite correctly that the consensus was following a position based more on logical assumption than on evidential substantiation. Instead, he proposed that not only did Themistius not refuse Julian's offer but that, given their differences, the tendering of such a post by the prince to the philosopher would also have been impossible as well as inconceivable. Conversely, Dagron has suggested Constantius II, rather than his cousin, as the unnamed patron whose offer Themistius rejected. What Themistius had turned down, then, was, according to Dagron's line of reasoning, the proconsulship of Constantinople, an office which, on the basis of Or. 34. c. xiii, previous scholarship maintained he had held under Constantine's successor. In effect, Dagron has turned the conventional interpretation on its head by arguing that Themistius declined the chief magistracy of the capital offered by Constantius but never tendered by Julian.

Acknowledging Dagron's valid criticisms of earlier treatments concerning this matter, this paper proposes, nonetheless, to take issue with the arguments as well as the conclusion of his revisionist interpretation. The thesis advanced here is that Themistius did serve as proconsul of Constantinople under Constantius II and that he did refuse the urban prefecture offered him by Julian. Although essentially a re-statement of the traditional interpretation challenged by Dagron, it explicitly seeks to vindicate that position with an analysis substantiated by logic and evidence that, as Dagron rightly pointed out, was sorely lacking in earlier studies. Verification of the thesis principally involves a closer examination of Themistius' own admittedly vague account gleaned from relevant statements in both his logoi politikoi kai idiōtikoi; this internal evidence is complemented by Libanius' testimony as well as Constantius' and supplemented by reference to the nature and functions of the two magistracies in question. The verified conclusion that Themistius did in fact turn down Julian's invitation to serve in his "reactionary" administration further confirms this writer's insistence on the substantial and irreconcilable differences in intellectual and political issues between these two champions of Hellenism ("'In a Borderland': Themistius' Ambivalence toward Julian": forthcoming in BZ), a thesis challenging the view of Dvornik and others that, on this occasion (as well as others, past and future), Themistius trimmed his sails to tack to the prevailing winds. Verification of the fact that Themistius not only refused Julian's offer but also accepted Constantius', suggests, moreover, that the tide of change often identified with the Julianic regime represented a cresting rather than a resurgence of the force of paganism in Late Antiquity. In any event, Themistius' collaboration with the "boorish" Constantius and his dissociation from the "charismatic" Julian indicates even among the pagan intelligentsia a reluctance to abandon the modernization process inaugurated by the Constantinian revolution as well as a resistance to the revitalization movement of Julian's counter-revolutionary effort.


It has been shown quite convincingly that from the middle of the fifth century (specifically with Leo I in 457 A.D.) a new practice had been established as part of the unwritten constitution for the election of a new emperor in the case of a vacancy in the imperial throne. Recently, scholars have argued that the power of the senate in electing the candidate for the throne had been gradually increasing and had reached its climax at the selection of Anastasius I (491-518) and Justin I (518-527). On the other hand, the proclamation--an important part of which was the acclamation of the candidate as Augustus--was a long established prerogative which the assembled "people" intensely guarded and ceremoniously exercised. A careful study of the extant texts which detail the procedure by which Anastasius and Justin were elected and proclaimed emperors is very revealing in that it shows certain similarities with and differences from the ordo propounded by the 6th century Anonymous Author's Peri politikēs epistēmēs. The author of this was writing, on the basis of internal evidence, during the early part of Justinian's reign. Deeply steeped in the long traditions of both the theocratic and the "democratic" concepts about the source of imperial power, the Anonymous has attempted to bring about a compromise between these two basic concepts. According to the Anonymous Author, kingship should be governed by a set of laws which compel the king to conform with certain obligations. One of these laws concerns the king's "legal proclamation" by which kingship"given by God" is at the same time "offered by the citizens" according to justice. Such a king is "legal" and his kingship "lawful". The expression "legal proclamation" on which the two principles, i.e., "given by God" and "offered by the citizens" are based has raised serious problems of interpretation. The newly discovered text of Folio 344 leaves no doubt that the Anonymous wished not only to limit and well define the powers of the Byzantine emperor but also to make kingship an elected office. Here lies, I think, the Author's innovating contribution which makes him the follower of no ancient political writer. The Anonymous painstakingly describes the procedure whereby the heads (prōteuontes) of the city orders (tēs poleōs tagmata) offer their advice by nominating the suitable candidates from among the "best men" and the remaining citizens (politai of Constantinople) decide who will be their next king.

Evidence from the recently discovered new text throws considerable light on the Anonymous's scheme--by no means a utopian one as to the distribution of powers to the electoral bodies of the Byzantine "Constitution," the senatorial aristocracy and the people. The aristocracy represented by their highest officials in the imperial administration retain the right to exercise their good judgment, choose and nominate the aristocratic candidates. These powers the aristocracy exercised in the cases of both Anastasius and Justin. At this point, however, the Anonymous diverges from the 6th century practice by replacing the ceremonial approval given by the assembled people with the actual power of electing one among the several aristocratic candidates.


Patricia Anne Coyne (McMaster University)

Menander the rhetor advised panegyrists to include praise of an empress in their discussion of an emperor's virtues. The prudent monarch chooses a worthy consort and makes her a partner in his kingdom.

This dictum posed a problem for the grammarian Priscian, who composed the De laude Anastasii Imperatoris. The emperor's wife, Ariadne, had previously been married to the Emperor Zeno. When Zeno died, it was Ariadne, rather than the army or the Senate, who chose Anastasius as his successor.

Priscian, therefore, aware that it would be inappropriate, disregarded Menander's recommendation. He also ignored another rhetorical convention and, despite its suitability, made no use of the myth of Ariadne as an exemplum. Unlike Claudian and Sidonius, Priscian did not use myth to embellish his poem. Writing in a time of transition, Priscian not only adapted his poem to particular circumstances, he also disregarded an important literary tradition which perhaps was no longer acceptable to his age.


Carol Bromberg (Birmingham, Mich.)

The sixth century mosaic at San Vitale shows Justinian wearing a costume embellished with a silk which carries a Sasanian motif of birds in roundels. One asks why a Sasanian textile or a Byzantine one which featured a Sasanian motif would be worn by Justinian in a representation which symbolized his political authority in the western Byzantine Empire.

Political and economic interaction between the two empires contributed to the adoption of many Sasanian cultural and artistic ideas by the Byzantines, who imitated the forms of the Sasanian court as well as the oriental concept of majesty. The Byzantine court dress in general was ornamented with Sasanian-type textiles in emulation of the fabled luxury of the imperial Persians. Justinian's appearance at San Vitale in a costume with Sasanian decorative motifs might well have been an attempt to equate the magnificence of his rule with that of the Sasanian kings.

However, beyond this surface reason for Sasanian decor lies the question of whether it was the ornamental nature of Sasanian textiles which attracted the Byzantines or whether these designs carried a deeper symbolic value. AndrŽ Grabar and others have argued that the creations of Sasanian art, which symbolized the Iranian monarchy in Persia, were not symbolic when they were used elsewhere and that it was the decorative quality of Sasanian forms and colors which appealed to princely courts outside the Sasanian Empire.

But the program of the mosaics at San Vitale--clearly political, a demonstration of Justinian's power in the West--indicates that a representation of the Byzantine emperor clothed in Sasanian motifs should be understood to have a deeper significance than that of ornamentation. In the areas of the Orient which had political and economic contact with Persia, these Sasanian designs were commonly used for expressions of political authority. Excavations at the Central Asian sites of Afrasiab, Varaksha, Balalik Tepe, and Pendzhikent have revealed wall paintings which show ambassadors, princes, and lords in scenes of court life, all costumed in textiles with Sasanian motifs. Here these Persian designs allude to the splendor and authority of the Sasanian court.

In the sixth and seventh centuries in the Near East and in Central Asia, these Sasanian trademarks of absolute power were a symbolic koine speaking of the ultimate in court luxury and majesty. Hence we well may see this dual significance also carrying over into the western, Byzantine world.


Gary J. Johnson (University of Michigan)

The judgment of modern scholarship is virtually unanimous: the emperor Constantine VIII was an apathetic incompetent who was content during fifty years as co-emperor (976-1025) to leave the business of government entirely in the hands of his brother and colleague Basil II Bulgaroktonus. During three years of personal rule following Basil's death in December 1025, Constantine was unwilling to disturb his customary idleness. He neglected affairs of state, and, giving over management of the empire to a coterie of eunuch favorites, occupied himself with the pleasures of the capital. The results were disastrous, and the brief reign marks a dismal and unusually clean-cut turning point in Byzantine history: the genesis of decadence and military decline.

This conventional thesis rests in large measure upon the scarcely-questioned authority of the Chronographia of Michael Psellus. But Psellus' portrayal of Constantine VIII is problematic and liable to question for three reasons. Internal contradiction and tendentious exaggeration suggest that Psellus' description of Constantine may be, at least in part, a rhetorical fiction, and based on a literary model. The other Greek sources for Constantine's life, Skylitzes, Zonaras, and the various minor chroniclers, despite the appearance of agreement, do not so much confirm Psellus as they reflect him. The non-Greek sources for the period. most notably Yahya Ibn Saâid of Antioch, pointedly and unanimously disagree with Psellus' account of Constantine and his reign.

This circumstance concerns more than just the personal reputation of Constantine VIII, for his supposed incompetence is a key factor in modern conceptions of the middle eleventh century: the origin of the Byzantine decline. If the veracity of Psellus' portrayal of Constantine VIII is held suspect, so too must be held the designation of the year 1025 as a strict line of demarcation between glory and decline, and a re-evaluation of the progress of history across the eleventh century must follow.


Presiding: Gary Vikan

Parliamentarian: Margaret Frazer

The record of six years' experience and achievement has shown the Byzantine Studies Conferences offer valuable service to a genuine constituency. The mailing list runs to some 1,200 entries, and annual attendance has been strong, reaching 240 at the largest. Program of substance and quality have offered as many as fifty-eight papers. They offer a respected forum for presentation of new research and exchange between specialists in all disciplines of Byzantine scholarship, of all ages and status. As a national forum, they testify to the maturing of Byzantine studies in American academic life, while also attracting international participation. Research presented also achieves swift dissemination, through printing of the collected Abstracts for each gathering; beyond serving both participants and those unable to attend, they are sent out by subscription to some seventy institutions around the world, while their contents are carefully noted each year by Byzantinische Zeitschrift.

Time is being set aside at this year's Conference for somewhat more extended and open discussion than has been possible in previous years at the regular Business Luncheons, so that participants may exchange ideas as to how the BSC should continue, alter, or expand its activities. Small but stable reserves have accumulated from surpluses remaining out of the budgets of most years' Conferences, which have underwritten advance expenses for subsequent gatherings and have sustained the one large commitment undertaken thus far, support of travel costs for members of the BSC's Ad Hoc Committee on Dumbarton Oaks, in full operation for three years, thanks to the co-operation and receptiveness of Giles Constable, Director of Dumbarton Oaks, the Committee--annually renewed at each Conference, its members designated by the Nominating Committee at the behest of the Governing Board--has served as a vehicle for communicating information and exchanging ideas between the BSC, as a viable embodiment of American Byzantinology, and this vital institution's leadership. The BSC's commitment to continue this Committee, both financially and in principle, is a matter now due for careful discussion. With plans firmly under way for the next two Conferences (tentatively set for Oct. 23-25, 1981, in Boston; and for Oct. 8-10, 1982, in Chicago), some thought might be given to the criteria for selecting later sites (including the possibilities of any on the West Coast) and to any need to alter or vary the now-conventional scheduling of the meetings in or around October. Further, there is the question of whether the BSC should mow beyond its present function, simply of holding the annual meetings, into other activities (such as publication). These are some of the issues to be pondered as the BSC comes of age.


Presiding: James Morganstern


Marilyn J. Chiat (Minneapolis, Minn.)

For the better part of this century, efforts have been underway to impose some form of systematic framework on Roman and Byzantine synagogue architecture in order to define and interpret variations in its form. The model most often employed is the evolutionary framework initially proposed for church architecture. It is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss the success or failure of this effort with regard to churches, however, it is of importance to note that when a similar framework is imposed on synagogue architecture, it collapses. The purpose of this paper is to propose, and illustrate, an alternative method for interpreting the synagogue architecture uncovered within the borders of Roman and Byzantine Palestine.

According to the evolutionary hypothesis, synagogue architecture underwent three distinct stages, or epochs, of development that correspond to the three phases proposed for Palestinian rabbinism: the synagogue's early stage, which coincides with the rise of rabbinism, dated to the second to third centuries; a transition stage, the period of rabbinismâs development, dated from the late third to fifth centuries; and the last stage, the decline of rabbinism, dated from the late fifth to eighth centuries. This chronology is dependent on the acceptance of the theory that during the Talmudic era, Judaism had achieved a normative or rabbinic form. That is, a uniform service, or liturgy, was observed in the synagogues during each stage of their evolution.

The concept of a monolithic, or homogeneous, form of Judaism is founded on rabbinic literature. The two Talmudim, however, were not written as historic documents, but rather in response to certain events experienced by a particular group of Jews, the Pharisees, it would be historically inaccurate to project this group's attitudes on the country's entire Jewish population. Archaeological evidence recently uncovered in Israel, the West Bank and the Golan Heights, underscores the need to look beyond literary sources for insight into, and understanding of the Jewish communities in Palestine, and of the architectural form of their communal meeting halls, the synagogue.

The use of geo-political units is the alternative method proposed for the organization and interpretation of Roman and Byzantine synagogue art and architecture. This methodology is particularly well-suited for the study of Palestinian synagogues. The geographic area is small, yet cultural, political and economic differences within the country have been recognized since Biblical times. Following their conquest of Palestine in 64/63 B.C.E., the Romans systematically exploited these indigenous differences by dividing the province into a series of city-territories or regions, each with its own distinctive set of characteristics. These are the geo-political units used to organize the synagogue data,

This paper is limited to a discussion of the regional discontinuity apparent in one sector of Palestine, the Galilee, consisting of the northern unurbanized region of Tetracomia, and its neighbors to the south, the city-territories of Tiberias, Sepphoris and Legio. It will become apparent that there are significant variations in the architectural form and decorations of synagogues found in this sector. The conclusion suggests that these variations can best be understood in light of certain cultural and geographic factors, rather than by unsupported theories of a rigid architectural development and concomitant religious conformity.


Ann S. Terry (University of Illinois)

The so-called Mausoleum of Galla Placidia, attached to the narthex of Sta. Croce in Ravenna (c. 425-50), is the most widely known example of a group of similar cruciform chapels, which are generally called "martyria". Primarily a northern Italian or northern Adriatic phenomenon, this group of fifth and sixth-century chapels has been related to other manifestations of cruciform planning in both the Byzantine east and Latin west, but has not yet been studied as a group. I believe, however, that there is much to be gained by an analysis of its individual development. Accordingly, this paper will begin with a brief summary of the features which define these chapels as an Early Christian type: a central square, or crossing, from which radiate chambers or cross arms; masonry vaulting; remarkably consistent scale and dimensions; a physical and/or functional subordination to a "principal" structure; and similar decorative schemes and programs.

Rooted in a similarly shaped standard catacomb cubiculum common to all parts of the empire, and often transformed into papal crypts or martyria, these chapels also held a special attraction for the faithful seeking burial ad sanctos, and have therefore been linked to both martyrial and funerary functions. The second part of this paper will address this ambiguity of function, through a discussion of three closely related northern-Adriatic cruciform. chapels: Sta. Maria Formosa in Pula (c. 552-65), S. Prosdocimo, attached to Sta. Giustina in Padua (c. 500-07), and the so-called Mausoleum of Galla Placidia. Appearing to form a "family tree", these chapels present a kinship which extends beyond their common architectural definition, betraying both a distinct class of patronage and a thematic or iconographical unity. Archaeological and literary remains are fragmentary, and thus in individual cases the evidence is less than one might hope for; however, a collective analysis clearly reveals these as an unusually cohesive group. While the association of martyrial shrines with burial ad sanctos may be noted in all of the northern Adriatic chapels, in these three that basic tendency appears to have been manifested in a unique and explicit manner. It will be demonstrated that each of these was carefully planned, as either an imperial or a high-ranking ecclesiastical commission, and suggested that each reflects an intentional and meaning- ful combination of martyrial and funerary traditions.

The pattern which thus emerges crystalizes in the light of what will be suggested as a possible source of this "family". Positioned to the north and south of the famous Church of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople were two lesser-known funerary annexes. At least one of these annexes or stoas, that to the south, is agreed to have been cruciform; It contained the bodies of Emperor Arcadius (395-408) and his wife Eudoxia (404), the brother and sister-in-law of Galla Placidia, and of their son, Theodosius II (408-50). Holy Apostles itself was important in the development of all martyrial chapels: here was sanctioned the coveted process by which the wealthy and important might acquire intercession, and the parallel process by which their own remains, associated with the martyrs, would be immortalized. Further, specific parallels between the Apostoleion-related structures and the chapels are forceful: Greek-cross plan, lateral annexes related to principal structures, a common interior arrangement of sarcophagi, and the intentional mingling of martyrial and funerary functions.

The cruciform annex chapels will thus be shown to represent a unique theme in Early Christian architecture, one which drew upon two powerful traditions, funerary and martyrial, and which served as a viable motif in the architectural language of early Byzantine patrons.


Slobodan Ćurčić (University of Illinois)

The Nea Ekklesia, completed around 880 within the compound of the Imperial Palace in Constantinople by Emperor Basil I, has long attracted the attention of architectural and art historians. The church itself has disappeared without a trace, but sketchy descriptions of it have survived in several medieval texts.

Prompted by the attention given to the Nea Ekklesia in the respective texts, a number of architectural historians over the years have endeavored to reconstruct the Nea on paper. Karl Wultzinger and Kenneth Conant have published hypothetical plans of the church, and more recently Richard Krautheimer and Cyril Mango have produced verbal descriptions of the Nea in which they refer to it as a cross-in-square church. As such, the church has been depicted as the forerunner of cross- in-square churches which became common in Constantinople during the Middle Byzantine period. Others have induced even broader implications, such as the direct dependence of Early Russian church architecture on the Nea. In the process of these speculations the name of the fabulous "New Church" appeared fully justified.

The purpose of this paper is to re-examine conclusions drawn regarding the architecture of the Nea and its subsequent influence. The first important observation which may be made by examining the texts is that there is no specific mention of spatial articulation of the building from which one could draw the conclusion that it was actually a cross- in-square church. The texts are explicit, on the other hand, about the church having been five- domed. Although such an architectural disposition could have been related to a cross-in-square plan, in my opinion, it is far more likely that the church was actually of the cross-domed type. In such a scheme, the corner spaces between the arms of the cross would have been occupied by four subsidiary chapels. This notion is supported by the fact that the Nea is known to have had five dedications--one for the main church (Christ), and the other four evidently for the four chapels (Virgin Mary, Prophet Elijah, Archangel Gabriel, and St. Nicholas).

The proposed cross-domed arrangement of the Nea implies that the main church and the four subsidiary chapels were all located on the ground level (in contrast to the gallery arrangement of the chapels in the cross-in-square church of the Theotokos, built by Constantine Lips in Constantinople, and dedicated in 908). The ground-level placement of the Nea chapels is inferred by some of the texts (e.g., Anthony of Novgorod), and by the skimpy, but essential visual information about the Nea. Among the numerous views of Constantinople published in the west between the fifteenth and eighteenth centuries only a limited number of the early ones may be considered authentic, while the rest are copies. Among the early views is an engraving of the Hippodrome area evidently made around 1450, but published much later by one Onophrius Panvinius. This engraving depicts an unidentified five-domed church believed to be the Nea. The engraving depicts the church as having consisted of a relatively low and broad squarish mass, articulated externally by means of large arcades. The center of this mass is topped by a tight cluster of five domes-the central, larger one surrounded by four smaller ones. An analysis of this arrangement suggests that the church was probably of the cross-domed type, and that four separate chapels were placed tightly between the arms of the cross. This would have accounted for the appearance of the four small domes clustered closely around the main dome. Such an arrangement may be appreciated in the twelfth-century church of St. Pantaleimon at Nerezi linked to Constantinople through its donor. Other churches in Constantinople, such as the so-called Atik Mustafa Paşa Camii (probably of ninth-century date), suggests that the cross-domed planning scheme was in use in Constantinople even after Iconoclasm, while St. George of Mangana (1042-55) illustrates an arrangement which may have been even more akin to that of the Nea. The presence of lateral porticoes at the Nea is attested to by the descriptions of the building. This would have further emphasized the relatively broad, low, cubical building form, as it appears in Panvinius' engraving. Churches with such lateral porticoes are also known in Middle and Late Byzantine architecture of Constantinople.

In conclusion, we should perceive the Nea Ekklesia as a cross-domed, rather than a cross-in- square church, as previously thought. As such, its structural conception was basically conservative, harking back to the Iconoclastic, and possibly even earlier solutions. Its five-domed disposition, on the other hand, reflects advanced post-Iconoclastic thinking which formally and iconographically appears to have set the stage for subsequent architectural developments in Constantinople and beyond. Therefore, our understanding of the architecture of the Nea can be meaningfully corrected, without altering the perception of the building's general significance.


Irina Andreescu (Emory University)

Little has survived from early Venetian architecture before the second half of the XIth century when the third church of San Marco was built, copying the VIth century Constantinopolitan model of Justinian's church of the Apostles.

The basilica in Torcello, which served as the new cathedral for the refugees fleeing Altinum in the wake of the invasion of migratory people, is one of the earliest monuments preserved in the Venetian lagoon predating the present San Marco.

Several times restored, the church of Santa-Maria-Assunta--at least certain parts of it--has been dated by different authors to the VIIth, the IXth or the XIth centuries. The evidence for this variety of dates has been drawn from Venetian chronicles (none earlier than the XIth century), a dedicatory inscription dating from Heraklius' reign, discovered last century in the crypt in an unclear context, and finally, from the present aspect of the church itself.

It is this latter evidence presented in archeological and art historical fashion that I propose to discuss here, in an attempt to establish (short of excavations), what if any, parts of this church can be dated to the VIIth century. This issue in turn is connected with the controversy over the translation of the bishop's see from Altinum to Torcello (its date was strongly disputed by R. Cessi and A. Pertusi). While the island of Torcello, among other Venetian localities, is described by Constantine Porphyrogenitus on the strength of IX century sources to be a flourishing emporium, the real date of the translation of the see and its relationship to the present building is still not clear. This paper will center on the analysis of the earliest liturgical- architectural structures, altar, crypt, chancel screen, pulpit, etc. (as they survived, sometimes in altered shape) in the context of the Byzantine-oriented area of the patriarchate of Grado.


Robert G. Ousterhout (University of Illinois)

While the mosaic and fresco decoration of the Kariye Camii in Istanbul has been thoroughly examined, the architecture has only been treated in a superficial manner and has not been given the scholarly attention that it deserves. The edifice served as the main church of the Chora monastery, one of the most important religious foundations in Constantinople; it was the product of the patronage of Theodore Metochites, one of the wealthiest and most influential men in fourteenth-century Byzantium; it is also the best documented surviving Palaeologan building in the capital. For these reasons, the Kariye should have a key role in our understanding of late Byzantine architecture. The rebuilding by Metochites, ca. 1316-21, included the two narthexes, the pastophoria, a two-story annex to the north, a funeral chapel to the south, and the reconstruction of the naos dome. While these additions have proved to be the result of a single building campaign, the irregularities of the plan have long confused scholars: seeming to lack an overall logic, the building appears as an incongruous juxtaposition of component parts.

The confusion results from a number of factors: the utilization of the core of the eleventh- and twelfth-century Comnenian structure, as well as the varying functions of the ancillary chambers, dictated special planning considerations and resulted in numerous compromises in the final construction. In addition, the six and a half centuries that have passed since Metochites' glory have altered many important aspects of the building, of which the following will be discussed:

1. Roof: Leveled in the late nineteenth-century to facilitate the application of lead sheeting, the earlier appearance of the roofline can be determined from several surviving nineteenth-century illustrations. Over the narthexes and parekklesion, the roofing was scalloped with a double dogtooth cornice; the north annex was covered by an exposed barrel vault.

2. Domes: Similarly topped by scalloped dogtooth cornices, the domes over the esonarthex and parekklesion appear in their original form in nineteenth-century illustrations; these were "helmeted" when the roof was levelled. The naos dome was altered at an earlier date (18th century?) after its collapse.

3. Belfry: No record survives of the belfry, which originally stood in the south- west corner of the building, the location of the present minaret. Construction in this corner indicates the belfry must have been of considerable size and a prominent feature of the building. A hypothetical reconstruction can be proposed, based on surviving belfries in Mistra and Serbia.

4. West facade: The exonarthex was conceived as an open portico; the arches were gradually blocked to form funeral arcosolia. Originally the arches were completely open, except for parapet slabs in the lower portions.

Taking these features into consideration, a hypothetical reconstruction of the building can be offered. Restored to its fourteenth-century appearance, the wealth of detail and exuberant external aspect outweigh the irregular qualities of the design. In addition, certain planning considerations become apparent: refinements are localized and small-scale; parts are related or adjusted to each other but not to the whole; variety is more important than symmetry. Surface detail is a major concern: often awkward planning solutions disappear behind a rich array of decoration. Thus, the guiding principles of Palaeologan architecture must be recognised as quite different from those of the Middle Byzantine period. The treatment of architectural forms in evidence at the Kariye has much in common with the contemporary "mannerist" phase in the two-dimensional arts: like the mosaics and frescoes enclosed within, the architecture of the Kariye Canii heralds a new era in Byzantine artistic development.


Presiding: David B. Evans

The series of developments and disasters which eventually dissolved the unity of the Later Roman Empire (e. g., the loss of the Latin West to the barbarians, the Arab conquest, etc., etc.) were of course reflected in the Byzantine church too, until by the ninth century the ecclesiastical system within which Byzantine Christianity had produced the great classical systems of dogma and spirituality was all but dissolved: the system of patriarchates had been shattered by sometimes almost simultaneous schism and conquest, and with it the system of councils, by means of which the church had resolved its disputes and formulated the principles of a unity which, as the empire itself, in some measure still transcended the cultural and national divisions of the Mediterranean world. But long before the Arabs had sealed the divisions of the church of the East, the growing schisms between Greek East and Latin Went, between dyophysite and Monophysite, seem to have induced a some of crisis in the very tradition of the church, a kind of premonition of the and of the age of the Fathers.

Byzantine dyophysite Orthodoxy, to be sure, weathered the storm and, in the works of, e.g., Maximus the Confessor and John of Damascus may even be said to have resolved the crisis. In any case, Maximus and John are the pillars supporting the later Byzantine (now Greek) Orthodoxy of the high middle ages, the fathers who represented the teaching of the Fathers to their medieval sons. Before Maximus and John, however, at least two representatives of earlier Byzantine Orthodoxy had met and grappled with the crisis. The first was a doctrinal movement: the teaching of bishops and (now and above all) monks who proposed to interpret the Christology of Cyril of Alexandria in accord with the decrees of the Council of Chalcedon (451); a Cyrillian Chalcedonianism, called by Joseph Lebon Neochalcedonianism. The second representative was a figure not yet identified by the historians: pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, whose attempt to cast Christian doctrine into a Neoplatonic mold has fascinated both saints end scholars ever since. In a fashion, of course, both Neochalcedonians and Dionysius must be dubbed failures. The names of, e. g., Nephalius of Alexandria, John of Scythopolis, John the Grammarian, Ephrem of Antioch and Leontius of Jerusalem are seldom if ever mentioned by later writers, and the works of Nephalius, John Grammarian and Ephrem are known only at second hand. The Council of Constantinople of 553, the Fifth Ecumenical Council, represented the definitive victory of Neochalcedonianisn in the Byzantine East, a condemnation of the tradition of the School of Antioch which has perplexed Westerners both religious and scholarly to the present;--but the names of the representatives of Byzantine Ortho- doxy at the council are buried in relative obscurity. Only the reputation of the emperor Justinian persists, and justly, for without his patronage Neochalcedonianism would probably be merely an historical curiosity. As for Dionysius, his name was revered but his teaching honored only in its purification by Maximus. Nonetheless without Dionysius and the Neochalcedonians later Byzantine Orthodoxy can hardly be conceived. They are the foundations an which the works of Maximus and John of Damascus repose.

This section will examine the accomplishments of the Neochalcedonianism and Dionysius and, in particular, relate them to the religious and philosophical traditions before them.


Patrick T. R. Grey (McMaster Divinity College)

The period following the Council of Chalcedon was marked by new attitudes in theology which eventually constituted a significantly different age from that of the Church Fathers. A central motif of this new age was a new attitude towards the tradition.

The Council of Chalcedon itself inaugurated a new era in theology when, mindful of the stricture of Ephesus, it set forth a statement of faith which denied that it was a statement of faith, claiming rather to be merely an explication of the established tradition of Nicea and Constantinople I. It was this claim that NeoChalcedonian apologists for Chalcedon (i.e. Chalcedonians of an essentially Cyrillian orientation) were called upon to vindicate, especially when faced with the monophysite charge that Chalcedon had betrayed Cyril and the tradition when it made use of dyophysite language. In this way the theology of the major orthodox party between Chalcedon and Constantinople II found itself in a quite distinctive way retrospective, i.e. its essential focus was on the tradition, and the criterion for orthodox implied in every discussion was the tradition. When the patristic tradition itself became the object of theological reflection and controversy, rather than either the biblical revelation or continuing Christian experience, theology was no longer operating in a patristic mode. It had become, in Harnack's sense, scholastic.

Evidence for this transformation is abundant, at least in relation to the rather slight documentary evidence available for any thought in this period. Above all, there is an extraordinary proliferation of florilegia. Monophysites, who were equally conservative, used florilegia, too, but it is clear that dyophysite florilegia were used extensively by virtually every known Neo-Chalcedonian as the essential apologetic weapon. Even in the case of the Neo-Chalcedonians known only at second hand--Nephalius of Alexandria, John the Grammarian, Ephrem of Antioch--the sources clearly indicate that they attempted to demonstrate the faithfulness of Chalcedon to the tradition by assembling dyophysite florilegia. The centerpiece of such florilegia was always a collection of dyophysite statements culled from the works of Cyril, especially of course those written after the Union with the Orientals in 433. In the argument between Neo-Chalcedonians and Monophysites over the tradition, a moot point was the intention of Cyril (and occasionally of others cited); did he intend his dyophysite statements to be taken seriously, or did he say such things merely "out of condescension"? Conversely, did he intend his famous "one nature" formula to be taken literally, or can one discern a dyophysite intention in it in the use of the word "incarnate"?

The most complete evidence of the Neo-Chalcedonian approach is provided by the Contra Monophysitas of Leontius of Jerusalem. Contra Monophysitas contains a remarkable variety of materials: a collection of 63 anti-monophysite aporiae; a discussion at some length of the question of intention in assessing the value of traditional formulae; a dyophysite florilegium of great length; a florilegium of early monophysite writings (almost entirely those of Severus and Timothy Aelurus) showing that even they seemed to support dyophysitism; and citations from a monophysite florilegium and commentary, interspersed with Leontius' critique. The entire arsenal of Neo-Chalcodonian apologetic is thus assembled in this one work, making it a particularly suitable test case of the hypothesis that reflection on the tradition was Neo-Chalcedonianism's characteristic mode.

The dyophysite florilegium is not in itself remarkable, though it is instructive to observe at first hand how very much space, and how central a place, such a florilegium occupied. Moreover, this florilegium is demonstrably related to other dyophysite florilegia of the period--it was a universal and highly-developed weapon among apologists for Chalcedon. Leontius' discussion of intention is more interesting: having examined past examples, particularly during the Arian controversy, he concludes that the defense of the orthodox sense of the tradition requires new terms, and that any formula can be abused --one always has to ask about the intended sense. In his critique of the monophysite florilegium and commentary, his exegetical principle is applied rigorously: over and over again he tries to show that his opponent has missed the sense of the text by taking a small phrase literally; he himself points to the wider context to demonstrate a different intention. In the case of some central texts, those claimed by the monophysite to be from Julius of Rome, he suggests that they are forgeries. For the cautious, he provides another. orthodox sense. In either case, it is clear that his method is to defend Chalcedon by re- examining the tradition and exegeting its central intention in christology.

The major exception to the exegetical focus of the work might seem to be the collection of aporiae with which it opens. They might seem to be quasi-philosophical discussions of terminology--a linguistic theology in the modern mode. It can be shown, however, that the aporiae are intrinsically related to the florilegium directed against Leontius et al. at an earlier stage in the controversy by his unknown monophysite opponent--this being possible through a comparison of the aporiae with the fragments of that florilegium cited by Leontius. It becomes clear that the aporiae are posed to demonstrate the impossibility of certain exegetical conclusions, and so to compel an opponent to accept a "correct" exegesis of the tradition. They are therefore part of the overall programme of Leontius' apologetic, which is to demonstrate Chalcedon's faithfulness to the tradition.

The specific case of Leontius of Jerusalem, then, illustrates in every aspect of his anti-monophysite apologetic the transformation of theology noted in all Neo-Chalcedonians. In this major orthodox party, theology became reflection upon the tradition.


David B. Evans (St. John's University)

This paper takes as its point of departure the pseudepigraphic character of the corpus dionysiacum and raises the question of Dionysius's motives in his hoax. My conclusion: the character of his fraudulent reconstruction of the apostolic community (presumably the Pauline circle in Athens) suggests that Dionysius intended boldly to leap back into the apostolic age over the entirety of the patristic and conciliar developments of the doctrine of God the Trinity and Christology, in order to discover in a phantasy of the apostolic age a secret tradition of Christian doctrine generally very different from the teachings of classical (that is, early Byzantine) orthodoxy.

The hypothesis advanced here is an attempt to resolve a problem raised in my own earlier research on Dionysius. In his CNE 1.7 (CNE 7 Daley), Leontius of Byzantium attacks the Christology of an unnamed critic. This Christology, I think, at very least closely resembles that of Dionysius. Moreover, I suggest as an hypothesis for further study that ( pace Roques) this Christology is not conventionally orthodox at all but to the contrary manifestly related to such heretical doctrine as that of the Origenist monk Evagrius of Pontus: the identity of Jesus Christ lies not in the San or Word of God but in an essentially created nous. This is of course the doctrine condemned by Justinian in 543 and again in 553.1

A corollary of these conclusions is a now answer to the questions why did our still unidentified pseudepigrapher (that is, Dionysius) take such pains to conceal his identity? The academic consensus tends to answer: in order to claim the authority of the apostolic circle around Paul for Dionysius's appropriation to Christian spirituality of Neoplatonic orientations otherwise dogmatically innocuous. Now, however, we must add a second motivations not only to authenticate his Neoplatonism but also in order to conceal a Christology substantially heretical and therefore dangerous to teach publicly. This conclusion is supported by another consideration too: Dionysius's Neoplatonic interpretation of the doctrine of the Trinity is little less alien to the classical tradition than in his Christology. Dionysius's Neoplatonism, it appears, may not have been so harmless as we have supposed. Indeed the whole corpus seems tainted with heterodoxy.

We must therefore consider the possibility that Dionysius's motives in his fraud include a third element: that his deliberate leap back over the classical orthodoxy of his age to the fons at origo of Christian faith implies a radical and comprehensive critique or even rejection of the intervening tradition--and this for three reasons.

First, Dionysiusâs scenario is not a simple appeal to authority as such. It appeals beyond later authorities (the ecclesiastical tradition) to earlier authorities, to the very source of all authority. He leaps the whole tradition between himself and the apostles. We add: to this leap backwards over tradition corresponds a leap sideways too, his appeal beyond the usual limits of Christian orthodoxy to contemporary Neoplatonic metaphysics.

Second, our hypothesis is supported also by Dionysiusâs plain and obviously intentional refusal to identify himself with any of the major doctrinal movements of his times, or at least with any that could claim to represent the tradition as the ecclesiastical consensus understood it. His appeal ad fontes is not in the interest of any element of the tradition in his own age.

Third, the apostolic community to which Dionysius appeals is to be sure the same community from which his orthodox brethren derive their apostolic tradition; but he describes and interprets that community very differently from his contemporaries or their spiritual progenitors. Even his depiction of the fons ot origo of the tradition seems to avoid and evade the traditional representation of it.

All these reasons, I suggest, establish the plausibility of the hypothesis that Dionysius's intent is to pass ever and beyond the dogmatic tradition of his own generation in order to lay altogether now foundations for ecclesiastical doctrine.

1 David B. Evans, "Leontius of Byzantium and Dionysius the Areopagite," Byzantine Studies 7 (1980), 1-34.


Paul Rorem (Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, Toronto)

The writings of Pseudo-Dionysius reflect several subtle transformations of the author's two sources, the Church Fathers and late Neoplatonism. This paper will consider the Areopagite's adaptation of the Neoplatonic framework of "procession and return." In his book From Iamblichus to Eriugena. Stephen Gersh has distinguished two dimensions to what he calls the "downward" and "upward" processes, namely an objective or ontological dimension and a subjective or cognitive side. While all Neoplatonists included both facets in their thought, an evolution of emphasis from metaphysics to epistemology can be seen when one moves to the Christian authors. The "downward" process, for example, is no longer so much a transmission of being per se as a self-manifestation of the divine to the human.

The paper seeks to illustrate this new emphasis in one specific respect, the order of the Areopagite's treatises: The Divine Names, The Mystical Theology, The Celestial Hierarchy, and The Ecclesiastical Hierarchy. The major difficulty has been the relationship of The Mystical Theology to the rest of the corpus (Vanneste, Scazzoso).

In the third chapter of the MT, the author arranges the three previous treatises in a descending sequence, namely the fictitious or lost "Theological Representations," The Divine Names, and "The Symbolical Theology." After this "Procession" comes the MT itself, not as a further descent or the beginning of the "return" but as a methodological parenthesis which surveys the entire corpus and enterprise. Even though "procession" and "return" are not simply two successive moments in time, the former is emphasized in the first three works and then summarized in MT 3, while the latter, ascending motion is previewed in the brief statement of the negation of the perceptible in MT 4, and then presented more fully in the "uplifting" or anagogical inter- pretation provided in the two subsequent hierarchical treatises (CH, EH). Biblical and liturgical interpretation incorporates into itself the negation of the perceptible in the anagogical movement "upward" by means of the sensory to the intelligible. These interpretations are then negated or rather abandoned in the final ascent to the ineffable, as previewed in MT 5. In the end, even negations are left behind and the author falls silent.

This interpretation of the Areopagite's own sequence of treatises can illustrate the transformation of the Neoplatonic motif of "procession and return" from objective ontology to a spiritual epistemology. The trajectory to be traced is one of a divine self-manifestation and then a divine "uplifting" of the faithful precisely through the interpretation of scriptural and liturgical symbols. Beyond illustrating Gersh's thesis and our theme, "The End of the Age of the Fathers," this interpretation, proposes a new perspective on the structural unity of the Dionysian corpus, a subject of considerable debate.


Presiding: Emily Albu Hanawalt

Panel Presentations and Discussion by:

This session will continue the informal discussion, begun last year at Dumbarton Oaks, on the problems involved in teaching Byzantine studies to undergraduates. Among the topics to be discussed are the following:--texts and other secondary literature for the student; --Byzantine sources available in English translation; --the introduction of Byzantine materials into more general undergraduate classes, such as medieval History, or topic courses like the Crusades or Women in Medieval Literature or the World of Late Antiquity; --the problems of presenting an archaeological site through a classroom lecture; --the development of visual materials for a basic course on Byzantine History; --art historical bibliography for teachers who may not have had training in Byzantine Art History (including books that offer good photographs for slides and background material for non- Art Historians and suggesting topics easily introduced into a course on Byzantine civilization, with appropriate readings for teacher and students).

Several discussion leaders will illustrate these brief presentations with their own slides. To deal with so many subjects in a short time, syllabi and bibliographies will be reproduced and distributed to the participants, who are invited to bring multiple copies of their own course materials to share with others.


Presiding: Anthony Cutler


Leslie Brubaker (Johns Hopkins University)

In a recent article, Robin Cormack briefly assessed Byzantine painting after Iconoclasm, but the type and geographic origin of the sources available to, and used by, Greek artists during the half-century following the restoration of images in 843 have yet to be fully identified. The problem is complicated by disagreement among scholars about the place of origin of several important ninth-century manuscripts (e.g. Vat. gr. 699, Paris. gr. 923). The Homilies of Gregory of Nazianzus in Paris (B.N. gr. 510) is a deluxe, richly illustrated codex shown by its imperial portraits to have been produced between 879 and 883, almost certainly in Constantinople. As one of the few securely dated Byzantine monuments of the period immediately following the end of Iconoclasm, the importance of the Paris Homilies for an understanding of Constantinopolitan art during the second half of the ninth century can hardly be overestimated.

The Paris Gregory has been studied primarily for the iconographical wealth of its forty-six full page miniatures. Since Bordier's dismissal, in 1885, of the non-figural decoration as trivial and inferior, few scholars have considered the 1,445 gold initials or the 172 initials with geometric, foliate, zoomorphic and anthropomorphic decoration. The initials of Paris. gr. 510 repay closer scrutiny. Unlike the miniatures of the Homilies manuscript, the painted initials are consistent in type. They are not "historiated," nor does their decoration relate to the content of the homily texts. The purely decorative forms and stylistic unity of the initials in Paris. gr. 510 establish their value as a control in assessing influences on the Gregory illuminations: the relatively simple initials are less susceptible to subjective stylistic analysis than are the miniatures and are removed from the iconographical control of the patron noted by Der Nersessian and confirmed by Cormack. Although the painter of the initials of the Paris Gregory may not have been one of the illustrators, he was certainly a member of the same scriptorium and aware of the same sources. To a limited degree, the initials may be seen as a secondary characteristic of the style of Paris.

The number and the expense of the initials in the Paris Gregory are among the first manifestations of the increased status of the initial in post-iconoclastic Byzantium, and the types used derive from several sources. Some are late antique or pro-iconoclastic forms that either survived Iconoclasm or were revived: the Homilies initials filled with simulated jewels recall similar letters known in codices from the fourth century on (Codex Augusteus), while those with grape cluster pendants were anticipated in the Vienna Dioscorides. Other motifs seem to have reached Constantinople from the Latin west: the Paris Gregory is among the earliest preserved Byzantine manuscripts to depict the epsilon with a gesturing hand as a cross bar although versions are found in the west from the mid-seventh century (St. Call, Stiftsbib., cod. 908). The configuration of the simple gold initials seems to reflect ninth-century practice, but surprisingly few of the decorated initials show wholly innovative features generated by contemporary scriptoria. Aside from a small group of letters with trilobe decoration of a type known only in ninth and early tenth-century Greek manuscripts, most of the embellishments that do not derive from earlier Byzantine or foreign initial decoration were borrowed from the repertoire of border and frame ornament.

The painted initials of Paris. gr. 510 present an amalgam of sources. They demonstrate a conservative taste joined with an acceptance of foreign sources and an ability to create or compile new types. The implications of this thesis--that pre-iconoclastic and non-Constantinopolitan sources were available in the capital and used by ninth-century artists--are particularly interesting in light of recent controversies over the place of origin of such other ninth-century manuscripts as the Sacra Parallela in Paris and the Christian Topography, in the Vatican.


Tamar Avner (University of Haifa)

Complicated issues central to the history of medieval book painting and iconography surround the problem of the origins and transmission of narrative Old Testament illustrations. The most important tradition of biblical cycles is undoubtedly that represented by the group of Greek Octateuchs produced between the 11th and 13th centuries, offering a roughly consistent rich series of scenes based on the Septuagint text of Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges and Ruth. Iconographically related, the OT wall paintings of the 3rd c. in the Dura Europos synagogue have alerted scholars to an early Jewish link in this influential Byzantine recension. No comprehensive study of the Octateuch cycle has yet been undertaken, although we are indebted to Weitzmann for a number of pioneering studies towards a better grasp of the complexity of Byzantine biblical illustration. Still, nothing is known of the history, crystallization and development of the Octateuch cycle prior to the 11th c. or of the groupings in which illustrated OT Books were bound in single codices, formats which seem to have preceded the Octateuch form. Some information is gleaned indirectly from traces of Octateuch iconography detected in Byzantine and Western monuments and continuously growing in recent studies. Too often speculative hypotheses are proposed to explain when and by what means dissemination occurred, excepting that manuscripts are justifiably assumed to have provided the logical vehicle of transmission.

In this paper, a unique stray Genesis miniature in a non-biblical homiletic manuscript of the beginning of the 12th c. (Mount Athos, Esphigmenu 14, fol. 411v) will be shown to supplement the Octateuch cycle for a fuller and more regular illustration of Genesis 29:31-35 and 30:1- 12 relating the story of the birth of Jacob's sons. Explaining the iconography (adaptation of genealogy schemes to the accompanying text) sheds new light on the compilatory nature of the Octateuch cycle while pointing to a lost richer Octateuch-recension source. The identification of this source and proof of its existence lies in the support of the coincident survival of parallel and similar genealogy scenes in one of the earliest manuscripts with detailed OT miniatures extant from England, the Anglo-Saxon paraphrase of the Hexateuch made for Aelfric in Canterbury a few years before the middle of the 11th c. (British Library, Cotton Claudius B.IV). A motif not based on any known text clinches the connection between the Aelfric and Esphigmenu and points to the common derivation from the wider Octateuch recension.

Textual and pictorial correspondences among Esphigmenu, the Aelfric and the Octateuch cycle imply that similar Septuagint texts of Genesis surpassing the Octateuchs in number of scenes were circulating in Byzantium and in Canterbury in the eve of the Romanesque period. Too detailed to form part of bulky Octateuchs, they either belong to a smaller unit of the Bible or were single-Book format. This conclusion reflects a situation of abundant pictorial sources which preceded the Octateuch cycle and it raises the possibility of a late date (11th c.?) for the compilation.


John Lowden (Courtault Institute)

The miniatures of the illuminated Octateuch manuscript, Mount Athos, Vatopedi cod.602, are now well known, thanks to their publication by Paul Huber in Bild und Botschaft, (Zurich/ Freiburg im Breisgau, 1973). Vatopedi 602 is part of an important group of illuminated Octateuchs with the eleventh century manuscript, and the three twelfth century codices, Istanbul, Topkapi Saray, gr.8, the former Smyrna, Evangelical School, A.1, and Because of the close textual and art historical relationship between the Octateuchs they need to be studied as a group. This paper is more limited in scope, and concentrates on identifying the sources used by the scribes and artist of Vatopedi 602.

The Vatopedi Octateuch is not, as hitherto been assumed, a copy of a lost manuscript. Its model was the twelfth century Octateuch, The relationship first becomes clear through information transmitted by the scribes. The loss of a folio in caused a blank space to be left in Vatopedi 602. A quire that was misbound in led to a jumbled text in the Vatopedi. The division of text into quires in was reflected in the division of labour between the scribes of Vatopedi 602.

The illumination of the Vatopedi Octateuch, which consists of miniatures painted in blank spaces left by the scribe in the text, was based on the miniature cycle of Vat.qr.746. However, comparison of the model and its copy shows that there are cases in which significant changes were introduced by the later artist, some of which can be attributed to his use of known sources. For example, the Joshua rotulus,, was the inspiration for important alterations in the early miniatures of the book of Joshua. Other changes may be roughly categorized as stylistic, pointing to the Palaeologan date of the work, or iconographic. The latter, mainly small changes or corrections, show that the copyist was aware of the meaning of the miniatures, and sought to improve them by reading the adjacent text.

The Vatopedi Octateuch was probably produced in the last two decades of the thirteenth century. Both the illumination and script of the Palaeologan work are of a quality that is distinctly superior to that of the Comnenian model, Furthermore, study of the miniatures suggests that the copying artist was not bound by the conventions that led the scribe to reproduce with its textual imperfections, but rather felt at liberty to make changes and improvements as the situation appeared to require.


Annemarie Weyl Carr (Southern Methodist University)

Work on the illuminations of the diminutive Ann Arbor 182, a twelfth-century Tetraevangelion of 9 x 7 cm., has drawn my attention to the class of Byzantine miniscule manuscripts, codices of 12 x 9 cm. or less. These books are too tiny to have been made for any public function. Rather, they must have been made for private use, and one turns to them to see if they illustrate patterns in Byzantine private patronage and worship that might be useful in assessing the function of larger books.

Miniscule manuscripts occur throughout the history of Byzantine minuscule book production. Their pre-eminently private character is confirmed by the kinds of text that appear in them. They are overwhelmingly Biblical: 7 are Lectionaries; 33 are New Testament texts, including 25 Tetraevangelia and one New Testament and Psalter; and 42 are Psalters. All but one of the Lectionaries contain not full cycles of readings but selections designed to serve as enchiridia for individuals; the Gospel, Praxapostolos and especially the Psalter were recommended books of private prayer and contemplation throughout Byzantine history. A minority of the books is actually illustrated with figural miniatures, but most are of excellent quality, "rich, not gaudy," and emerge as prized possessions. Ex libris are almost all by monks--neither the lay nor the female patron comes into visibility here as in the West--but one can watch one fine little Psalter pass on through three generations of a twelfth-century family.

Psalters predominate in absolute numbers and breadth of chronological distribution, and are outfitted by both original addenda and later amplifications for either study (introductions, epigrams, commentaries, textual glosses) or prayer (Easter tables, Doxology, Nicaean Creed, Pater Noster, prayers and whole inventories of hymns, occasional tables of stichera). No two compilations are the same, and the hymns and prayers are often of a personal nature, underscoring the books' private character. The Easter tables provide dates for a sequence of exceptionally richly equipped Psalters that cluster in the later eleventh century. It is among these that one finds the first miniscule manuscripts decorated with miniatures. It is also with these books that specifically Christian themes enter the prologues and frontispieces. These Psalters, finally, introduce a century- long span in which the tiny manuscript is especially rich and numerous.

It is precisely at this period, too, that the Tetraevangelion emerges for the first time as a standard text in diminutive codices. New Testament texts make their appearance only in the eleventh century, and Tetraevangelia become predominant only at the end of the century, heralded by a lavishly illustrated trio of books in Ann Arbor, Baltimore and the Vatican. Half of all surviving miniscule Gospel Books belong then to the ensuing hundred years.

The late eleventh century, then, seems to reflect a shift in Byzantine private patronage. The richly illustrated book becomes an object of private possession, heralding the twelfth-century shift of illumination into books of private rather than public function. And the object of devotion shifts to embrace the Gospel text, as Gospel terminology colors the Psalter's devotional terminology, as well. At no point, however, do these little books reveal a codified schedule of devotions as the Western devotional Psalters do. Only two Psalters contain a schedule of what Psalm to use when, and remarkably few New Testament books contain lection notations and synaxarion and menologion. Apparently, Byzantine devotion demanded not the pattern of prayer but the content only.


Presiding: John Wortley


Timothy S. Miller (University of Washington)

One of the most fascinating aspects of Byzantine society was its unfaltering support of elaborate charitable institutions in Constantinople and in the other major urban centers of the empire. A little more than ten years ago, an American scholar, Demetrios Constantelos, demonstrated just how many and how varied these institutions were.1 Among the many organized charities set up by the Byzantines, the most striking to the modern student are the hospitals--nosokomeia or xenōnes in the Greek sources. These institutions provided clean beds, carefully regulated meals, twenty-four hour nursing care, and a staff of physicians not only for the destitute but for the man of moderate means.

Byzantinists and church historians have agreed that these hospitals for the sick were original creations of the Christianized Roman Empire. Some scholars have seen Ephraem the Syrian as the organizer of the first hospital at Edessa, others Basil the Great in Caesarea, and more recently, Justinian in Constantinople. Historians of the ancient world, however, have argued that the pagan Greeks had also had true hospitals. They base their case usually on the Asklepeion at Pergamon, a vast temple complex to the Greek god of healing. Careful study of these ruins and of the many references in the writings of Aelius Aristides to the treatment of the sick at the Asklepeion indicates that systematic medicine played a very limited role there and the institution provided no housing or nursing care.2 Other ancient historians have claimed that the iatreion, the doctor's office, was in essence a hospital, but there is no evidence that an overnight stay in the iatreion was anything other than exceptional. Most recent research has shown that the iatreion was simply a shop where the doctor could see patients with minor health problems.3

There is, however, one institution of the ancient world which did influence the development of Byzantine hospitals, the public doctors or archiatroi of the Greco-Roman cities. From the Hellenistic era Greek cities had given citizenship and special privileges to doctors. In the Roman period these privileges grew, but the number of doctors who could enjoy them was restricted to a select few, the archiatroi. In the Late Roman Empire, when a great mass of urban poor were collecting in the cities of the Mediterranean, both the imperial and the city governments expected these archiatroi to provide care for the poor. The emperor Valentinian told the architroi of Rome that, since they received their pay from the people, they were to prefer caring for the poor honestly over treating the rich for gain (Theodosian Code XIII.3.6).

In a recent study of the archiatroi, Vivian Nutton noticed that Procopius accused Justinian of terminating the government salaries for the archiatroi. She suspected that this apparent termination of the archiatroi system might represent only an administrative or financial reorganization.4 Indeed, the archiatroi did not disappear. The Miracles of St. Artemios refer to archiatroi working in the Christodotes hospital in Constantinople at the beginning of the seventh century. Several other documents refer to archiatroi attached to Byzantine xenōnes. Finally, the Typikon of the Pantokrator monastery (twelfth century) lists specific exemptions and corresponding restrictions which apply to the doctors of the Pantokrator hospital, regulations which reflect the laws of the Late Roman emperors regarding the city archiatroi.

In summary, I believe that Justinian completed a process whereby the old office of archiatroi was absorbed into the growing complex of Christian philanthropic institutions. During Justinian's reign the archiatroi ceased to receive their pay from the city governments; they were now employees of the Church, working in the hospitals of Constantinople and in a few of the larger Byzantine towns.

1 D. Constantelos, Byzantine Philanthropy and Social Welfare (New Jersey, 1968). 2 C. A. Behr, Aelius Aristides and the Sacred Tales (Amsterdam, 1968). 3 G. Harig, "Zum Problem ÎKrankenhausâ in der Antike," Klio, 53 (1971), 179-95. 4 Procopius, Anecdota 26.5; V. Nutton, "Archiatri and the Medical Profession in Antiquity," Papers of the British School at Rome, 45 (1977), 191-226. 5 Miracula S. Artemii, in Varia graeca sacra, ed. A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus (Petersburg, 1909), pp. 25-31; "Le Typikon du Christ Sauveur Pantocrator," ed. P. Gautier, Revue des ƒtudes Byzantines, 32 (1974), p. 107.


Dorothy de F. Abrahamse (California State University, Long Beach)

It has been commonplace to characterize middle and late Byzantine society as superstitious and deeply interested in the occult. But study of these phenomena has concentrated almost exclusively on what would be identified by western scholars as 'learned magic'--the works of Psellus and Symeon Seth and the circle of John the Grammarian. In spite of recent interest in popular magic and sorcery in the late Roman and medieval western worlds, there has been no analysis of the image of the magician or sorcerer in Byzantine popular belief. This paper will evaluate the evidence of one promising class of source material for such a study, the hagiographic literature of the ninth, tenth and eleventh centuries. It will not attempt any external judgment of whether magic was actually practiced in this age, but will focus on the terms for magic and sorcery and their usage in middle Byzantine texts in an attempt to determine what Byzantines believed and feared about the occult. Magic and sorcery (mageia and goēteia) are common themes in saints' lives of the age, but their context is quite different from that of early Byzantine texts. Where the magos has been described as a real practitioner and rival to the holy man of the late ancient world, in the more Christian society of the ninth and tenth centuries the terms were generally used to denote suspicion and opprobrium. They form a topos in the hagiographic texts of this period--a theme comprised of fluctuating elements of rhetoric, religious imagination and real popular belief. Some accounts (such as Theodore of Studion's story of his mother abstaining from women's charms) derive almost entirely from literary convention, while others are detailed descriptions of spells and their accoutrements. Most references, however, fall into two clearly defined contexts. Accusations of magic were attached in saints' lives, as in contemporary chronicles, to political figures around whom legends had developed. In addition, unconventional or flamboyant miracle workers on occasion were suspected of performing magic rather than miracles. These references are rarely part of standard hagiographical rhetoric, and are clearly distinct from other descriptions of demonic possession. The context of hagiographical allusions to political legends of magic will be explored first, and the evidence in these texts may help to explain why the suspicion of sorcery was attached to particular figures. The second theme, accusations of magic made against ascetics, will be evaluated in the light of the ascetic acts and religious connections of the saints involved in an attempt to determine whether such accusations were attached to particular ascetic qualities. A comparison of this theme with earlier texts can help to illuminate changing boundaries in the Byzantine mind between the divine and the demonic. In summary, this paper will have two purposes: to use the relatively limited theme of magic and sorcery as an example of the methodology of analyzing hagiographical topoi in mid-Byzantine texts, and to explore the evidence of the theme for popular belief in magic and its relation to contemporary politics and religion.


Barry Baldwin (University of Calgary)

Not a lot has been done on Byzantine Satire. There is relatively little, for notable instance, in Krumbacher. Valuable discussion of some aspects is provided in H-G. Beck's Geschichts der Byzantinischen Volksliteratur (MŸnchen, 1971), but this is not meant to be exhaustive, and it is in any case of no use to the German-less student. In English, although there are the papers of Michael Kyriakis in Byzantina 5 (1973) and Byzantion 44 (1974), and the relevant parts of M.J. Jeffreys, 'The Nature and Origins of the Political Verse,' DOP 28 (1974), bibliography is still often restricted to the somewhat antiquated paper of H.F. Tozer, 'Byzantine Satire,' JHS 2 (1881).

For these reasons, the paper begins with some general remarks on the subject. Some special attention is here given to the Timarion and Mazaris, where it can be shown that they are rather more than inferior Lucianic pastiche. Also singled out are the Lucianic dialogues of Theodore Prodromos, if only because of the inedita (or relatively so) still awaiting scholarly attention here. This introductory section will both inform those who have not devoted their own particular attention to the subject, and may help to persuade people that Byzantine literature is not exactly the desert it is so commonly represented as being.

Then, attention will be given (in so far as time allows) to one or two examples of Byzantine satire still languishing in the obscurity of the various Anecdota collections. In particular, the wild, sesquipedalian verses of Constantine of Rhodes against Leo Choerosphactes, a piece well characterised (though not discussed) by Robert Browning as "un pome bizarre". Since Constantine is usually known only as the author of the Ecphrasis of the Church of the Holy Apostles and of some frigid epigrams in the Anthology, this shows how a Byzantine author may be revealed to have some unsuspected sides.

Also examined in this paper is the correlation between Byzantine life and Satire. This is evinced by items in Procopius, Theophanes, and the Byzantine acclamations collected and studied by Maas (including, though not exclusively, those of the circus factions). Also by the abusive language regularly employed by Byzantine theologians and scholars: Arethas and Tzetzes are laid under contribution here.

The foregoing indicates that abuse is so regular a feature of Byzantine life and literature that some victims of it may have been given undue prominence by modern scholars. The case in point is seen to be Lucian, whose reputation as the Anti-Christ (owed in large part to his scholiasts and the Suda) may well turn out to be a misunderstanding on the part of scholars insufficiently aware of Byzantine habits.


Maria Kotzaminidou (University of California, Berkeley)

This paper presents information other than that provided by the Fathers of the Church on the conditions of life of the actor in the Eastern Empire, from Theodosius I to the eleventh century. The information is based on civil legislation regulating, controlling, or forbidding modes of professional and social behavior of the "Skēnikoi or Thumelikoi, " names applied to all performers in general.

The material is gathered not only from the main collections of the Theodosian and Justinianic Codices but also from later corpuses, such as the Eklogē, the Epitomē, and the Basilika. It contains auxiliary information from Synaxaria, correspondence, the Oxyrynchus Papyri, and Chorikios of Gaza, as well as whatever historical references or documentation survive to us. The paper discusses the following points of legislation, though not necessarily in this order: 1. The dissolution of guilds and the actor as subsidized by the polis. 2. The abolition of privileges maintained by the guilds. 3. The performers as members of a separate class. 4. The conditions of the life of actors' children. S. Special exemptions for actresses from service in the games. 6. The recall of such grants of exemption. 7. The public degradation and humiliation of the actress. 8. The relationship between the terms "actress" and "prostitute." 9. Methods of escaping the oppression of caste status (spontaneous conversions to the Christian way of life, sponsors, legislative amendments, etc.).

In view of the conservative, retentive spirit of legislation, I have used whatever other evidence is accessible to find whether such laws actually functioned in later centuries or were fossilized relics retained in the name of tradition.


Presiding: Ioli Kalavrezou Maxeiner


John Osborne (University of Victoria)

The wall-painting of the Anastasis located on a wall to the right of the apse in the lower church of San Clemente, Rome, has puzzled art historians since its discovery during excavations in the year 1868. The painting can be roughly dated to the period 850- 900 A.D. on the basis of 1. its place within the context of Anastasis iconography (it is one of the earliest versions of this theme to depict Christ carrying a cross and not a scroll); 2. the particular form of "square nimbus" on the unidentified figure to the left of Christ, set apart from the main scene by a fluted column; and 3. stylistic comparisons to other Roman monuments of the second half of the ninth century, and in particular to the wall- paintings which have survived in S. Maria Egiziaca (dated to pope John VIII, 872-882), which may have been done by the same workshop. The identification of the mysterious figure with the white head- dress and "square halo" has provoked a variety of responses, but the garment which he wears places him within an established context for the representation of eastern monks (cf. the donor figure in the Deesis mosaic at Grottaferrata). The question must therefore be posed: Why does a Greek monk figure prominently in a wall-painting in San Clemente, a church not known to have had any connection with the Greek community in the city? Given the proposed dating and the additional factors that the subject matter, the lunette shape of the painting, and its location within the church suggest that it formed part of a funerary monument, it is proposed that the figure in question is St. Cyril, the famous Byzantine missionary to the Slavs. Cyril is known to have died in Rome on 14 February 869 and to have been buried in San Clemente. His connection with the church stems from the fact that he had discovered the relics of St. Clement while on an earlier mission to the Khazars, and had presented these to the church when summoned to Rome by pope Nicholas I in 868. An examination of the two principal medieval texts which relate the story of Cyril's burial÷the De translatione sancti Clementis (known from mss. In Rome and Prague), and the Old Slavonic vita of Cyril provides the information that he was buried to the right of the altar and that his portrait was painted over the tomb. It is suggested that the wall-painting in question is that portrait, and that the site on the other side of the church currently venerated as the tomb of St. Cyril is erroneous and based on a misinterpretation of the evidence by G.B. De Rossi and Joseph Mullooly (the Dominican excavator) in 1863.


Ellen C. Schwartz (Eastern Michigan University)

Among the finds from Preslav, capital of the First Bulgarian Kingdom from 864-972, are thousands of pottery fragments. These shards are most unusual in that they are remains, not of table wares, but of decorated tiles which once adorned walls and floors of the numerous churches in and around the capital city. This ceramic decoration, first published in 1914,1 has long been the subject of debate among scholars. A rare form of decoration, it is found mainly in Bulgaria and Constantinople from the beginning of the tenth to the end of the eleventh century. Bulgarian archeologists claim Bulgaria as its home, while Byzantinists assert the primacy of Constantinople. This paper will consider the different forms of this decoration and their dating, suggest a place of origin and ultimate inspiration, and offer an explanation of the genesis and development of the form in the First Bulgarian Kingdom.

Archeological data appear to support Bulgaria's claim as the birthplace of wall tiles in the northern Mediterranean region. While the Byzantine tiles from the Myrelaion and Lips churches can be dated into the first half of the tenth century, most of the Constantinopolitan examples are from the later tenth and eleventh centuries. The shards from the Round Church at Preslav, however, appear to date into the last years of the ninth century, with a terminus ante quem of 907.

There was one other culture which used tiled decoration just prior to the works under discussion. Examples of Muslim tilework are recorded at Samarra (836-83) and in the Great Mosque of Kairouan (ca. 862). This latter monument becomes important when we recall the mission sent by the Bulgarian king Simeon to the Fatimid Caliph al-Mahdi (924), proposing a union against the Byzantines, one of several such missions to the Arabs at that time. The Byzantines themselves had had significant contacts with the Arabs since the reign of Theophilus that Arab influence gave rise to tiled decoration in the late ninth or early tenth century, either due to early contacts between Bulgaria and the Arab civilization, or through Constantinople.

The use of ceramics in decoration developed rapidly in Bulgaria. Many uses for ceramics have been discovered, and the proliferation of types of ceramic decor is greater in Bulgaria than anywhere else. Ceramic cornices were made, placed on a structure of stucco. Small colonnettes were built up in the same way. Frames made of small semi-cylindrical pieces surrounded icons, and perhaps subdivided areas of decorative motives as well. Decorative tiles adorned walls, and were set in limestone matrices to form floor patterns imitating opus sectile floors. Icons were imitated in ceramic, and mosaics were copied; some actual mosaics even contained tesserae made of clay. Limestone columns were carved to hold incrustation of blue-green glazed tile, in direct imitation of the enamel-incrusted marble columns of Constantinople. It is in this widespread use of clay for imitation, in fact, that we may see the impetus for the development of this form.

In imitating rich and costly forms of Byzantine decoration in materials which were available locally and required no foreign masters or training, the Bulgarian civilization asserted its claim to power while maintaining its independence.

1 Ĭordan Gospodinov, "Razkopki v' Patleĭna " Izviestiia na Bŭlgarskoto Arkheologichesko Druzhestvo IV (1914); 113-28.


Ann Wharton Epstein (Duke University)

Western medievalists have long investigated the social and political content of the monumental programs of the great Romanesque and Gothic churches. Byzantinists have less often concerned themselves with such research. The prominence of liturgical and hierarchical themes in the decoration of the Byzantine church and the dominance of a single metropolitan center, Constantinople, impose a certain homogeneity on Middle Byzantine church programming which discourages the identification of specific political concerns. Nevertheless, the consistency of Byzantine church decoration should not be allowed to obscure the fact that the Byzantines were capable of using every means at their disposal to obtain their political ends. That they applied their infamous subtlety even to the ornamentation of sacred space can be demonstrated through an analysis of the wall-paintings of S. Sophia in Ochrid.

This paper first suggests that the oddities of the sanctuary program -- which include the representation of Christ with an orarion, the depiction of the proskomide in the middle zone of the apse and the rendering of narrative scenes from the life of St. Basil in the bema -- consciously emphasize the peculiar efficacy of the Greek liturgy of St. Basil. Moreover, the visual reference to the Latin rite made by the inclusion of the Popes of Rome in the diaconicon and the lack of acknowledgement of the strong traditions of the local Slavic church saints Cyril, Methodius and Clement, for instance, are conspicuously absent taint the program with Trilingualism.

The paper then attempts to place the paintings within a historical context which lends the program significance. The frescoes seem in fact to document the religious and political preoccupations of their patron, the Archbishop Leo (1037-1056). The Byzantine conquest of the Bulgarian Empire, completed by 1018, was evidently followed by an attempt to integrate the newly acquired lands through the re-Hellenization of the slavicized population. The importance of the Church as the vehicle of acculturation is reflected in the propagandistic bias of the frescoes of the cathedral of Ochrid.


Henry Maguire (University of Illinois)

It is now generally recognized that the twelfth century was a period in which Byzantine artists took a now interest in human drama and psychology. Of no subject in their repertoire was this more true than the Presentation of Christ in the Temple. In some twelfth-century versions of the scene, such as the miniature In the Rockefeller-McCormick New Testament in Chicago, the old Symeon holds the infant in a tender embrace, while Mary makes a gesture of grief which foreshadows her mourning at the Crucifixion; at the same time the child shows his anxiety by looking back and reaching with one hand for his mother. The purpose of this paper is to trace the development of Presentation scenes of this type in Byzantine art, against the background of the sermons and poetry of the Byzantine church. The study falls Into two sections. The first traces the image of Symeon holding the Christ Child in middle and later Byzantine art, and suggests an important, and hitherto overlooked, literary source for this new way of visualizing the Presentation. This source is a sermon on the Presentation which is ascribed by some manuscripts to Athanasius of Alexandria, but which was, in fact, composed by the ninth-century writer George of Nicomedia during the aftermath of iconoclasm, and which reflects the theology of that epoch (PG, 28, cols. 973-1000). Like his better known homily on Christ's crucifixion and burial (PG, 100, cola. 1457-1489), George's sermon on the Presentation appears to have had a considerable impact on the iconography of Byzantine art. The sermon may well have been connected with the earliest ninth- century depictions of Symeon holding the Christ Child, which are recorded in the churches of Constantinople (Church of the Virgin of the Source; Church built by Stylianus Zaoutzes). The sermon very probably also helped Byzantine artists to visualize the details of the more sentimental portrayals of the Presentation which they created in Illuminations, icons and wall paintings during the second half of the twelfth century.

The second section of the paper concentrates on the grief of the Virgin at the Presentation. Once the artists had transferred the child to the arms of Symeon, they could allude to the priest's prophecy ("And a sword will pierce through your own soul also," Luke, II, 35) by depicting the Virgin in proleptic poses of mourning which echoed her role at the Crucifixion. Though they may appear inconspicuous to the modern viewer, Mary's gestures of grief In Byzantine illustrations of the Presentation were intended to evoke a rich tradition in the hymns and homilies of the Greek church.


Presiding: Frank M. Clover


Edith Mary Wightman (McMaster University)

Archaeology not only supplies our only source of evidence for overall settlement patterns, but can also under favourable circumstances allow conclusions to be drawn concerning the relative density of rural population in various periods. North-eastern Gaul is an area where sufficient systematic work has been undertaken to produce a more than tentative picture. Three types of material will be briefly reviewed--the evidence from villas, from large roadside villages and from rural cemeteries. Despite the limitations inherent in each class taken separately, together they point to a significant drop in population from the High Empire, along with a regrouping of settlements. An apparent exception can be found in the area of the Treveri, but even here the renewed prosperity, doubtless stimulated by the needs of the imperial court at Trier and of the Rhineland army, affected only a limited area of the territory.

The initial cause for this change and decline is to be sought in the troubles of the late 3rd century, when the majority of rural sites were destroyed either by Germanic invaders, agitating Bagaudae or the vengeful armies of the central empire. Under favourable circumstances, however, a general recovery would be expected once the immediate problems were over, whereas this appears to be lacking in spite of government efforts to re-settle the land in certain areas. It is highly desirable that similar studies should be undertaken in areas of Gaul further from the frontier, to determine whether the relative insecurity of the north-east was a major factor in perpetuating the change in conditions.

Archaeological evidence currently available from Italy suggests that many areas of the peninsula saw a distinct population decline from a point somewhat earlier in the 3rd century: the reasons for this are complicated and disputed. In Britain, on the other hand, it is possible that population increased in the Late Empire. Clearly, each province or geographical area will have to be considered separately to determine the nature of population change and the various general and specific reasons for it. Archaeological enquiries do however hold out a hope of more solid evidence in an area which would otherwise tend to remain a quagmire of unsupported hypotheses.


Ralph W. Mathisen (University of South Carolina, Columbia)

Modern writers (Dill, Chastagnol, Haarhoff, Matthews, RichŽ, Stroheker, etc.) have traditionally portrayed Aquitania as the center of the Gallo-Roman aristocracy not only in the fourth century, but also in the fifth century and later. This conclusion, however, has come about largely because of the inordinate stress laid upon a few spectacular, but essentially uncharacteristic, examples, such as Decimus Magnus Ausonius and Pontius Meropius Paulinus in the fourth century and Pontius Leontius in the fifth. A close analysis of all the surviving evidence indicates that Aquitania in the fifth century, far from being a showplace of the Gallic aristocracy, became in fact an aristocratic backwater, where only the most powerful magnates were able to maintain themselves in anything approaching their fourth-century splendor.

In the fifth century, the aristocracy of Aquitania went through a crisis. In 418, most of Aquitania had fallen into the hands of the Visigoths, technically still under Roman rule, but in fact totally under the control of Visigothic kings. The resident aristocrats now were faced with deciding how to respond to this alteration in the political structure. In other areas of Gaul later in the century, aristocrats faced with this same decision would reach a working accord with the Germans, but the Aquitanians had no precedents, and many Aquitanian aristocrats who were able to do so seem to have responded to the Visigothic presence by simply fleeing the country, often to estates in Italy. Other aristocrats, unwilling or unable to flee, were ruined, and their families vanish from the pages of history.

As the fifth century progressed, another element came into play which accelerated the decline of the Aquitanian aristocracy. Whereas aristocrats in other parts of Gaul were able to seek fulfillment of their desires for personal advancement and public service through the holding of ecclesiastical office, in Aquitania this practice was retarded by the interference of the Arian Goths in the operations of the Catholic Church. Some clerics, on a variety of pretexts, left the area for Rome; others were exiled from their sees by the Goths, and the ordination of bishops in vacant sees was prevented.

In general, aristocratic life among the Aquitanian elite continued during the fifth century only on a very reduced scale, and certainly at a level much lower than that of the neighboring regions of Gaul. This paper will discuss specific examples not only of the departure from Aquitania of secular and ecclesiastical aristocrats, but also of the means by which those aristocrats who remained attempted to cope with their changed circumstances.


Robert Grigg (University of California, Davis)

The value of the illustrations of the surviving copies of the Notitia Dignitatum as evidence of late Roman insignia is a largely unexplored topic. Enough comparative evidence seems available to support the proposition that the extant manuscripts do preserve the salient features of the original illustrations. Assessing the accuracy of the original illustrations is understandably a more difficult endeavor. But in the past it has been assumed that they were probably accurate. This assumption seems to have been based upon the following argument from analogy: since the text of the Notitia Dignitatum was based upon official sources, the illustrations were probably based upon something like a pattern book, containing images of officially prescribed insignia. The obvious flaws in the surviving manuscripts usually have been blamed on medieval and Renaissance copyists. The situation, however, does not appear to be that simple. There is internal evidence, distributional in nature, that the shield emblems could hardly have been based upon an official pattern book.

The shield emblems constitute a significant proportion of the ornament of the Notitia Dignitatum, numbering 267 in all. If ever there were a case where an artist would need the guidance of a pattern book, it is here. Unfortunately, a decisive test of the accuracy of the shield emblems would seem to be impossible without adequate comparative evidence. But, aside from a proposed identification of the Cornuti emblem on the Arch of Constantine, one general circumstance has been thought to indicate that the shield emblems were originally accurate, namely, the repetition of the same emblem, with few if any modifications, for sister units, whose kinship is usually indicated by means of cognate titles. This repetition has led some scholars to assume that it was the practice in the late Roman army to signal related military units by means of related shield emblems. Still, when one examines the distribution of cognate titles and repeated shield emblems, the presumed correlation between the two cannot be confirmed. Only on a superficial examination does this correlation seem to exist, for in the first three chapters featuring shield emblems the artist acts as if this is a correlation that ideally should exist, but even then it mainly holds between those units related by title that appear adjacent to one another, not between those widely separated in the manuscript.

Other internal evidence exists that raises further doubts about the accuracy of the original shield emblems. Some of the emblems of the eastern chapters feature unexpectedly awkward juxtapositions, suggesting that the artist was working out the combinations of a comparatively few motifs. Also telling is the increasing proportion of shield emblems that are either blank or decorated merely with concentric circles. This circumstance leads one to suspect that the artistâs sources were so impoverished that he was reduced to relying upon his own powers of invention, which evidently flagged in the course of illustrating the original manuscript.


George T. Dennis, S.J. (Catholic University of America)

From ancient times bits of cloth, metal or wooden symbols, dyed horse tails, and other emblems have been used by warriors for identification or as rallying points in battle. The Byzantine army and navy, however, much as we do today, regularly employed flags made of cloth in various sizes, shapes, and colors. Their origin may have been Germanic, as was the word the Byzantines used for them, bandon. By the sixth century they had replaced the legionary standard topped by an eagle, the cloth vexillum, and the later dragon emblem from which they may have derived. About the same period Byzantine military manuals laid down detailed regulations about the use of flags in training the troops, on the march, and in combat.

This paper, which limits itself to military flags flown in battle from the sixth century to the time of the Crusades, first studies the written sources for information about the banners and the regulations governing their use. Individual lance pennons are briefly discussed. More attention, however, is paid to the flags of the various units from a company, also called a bandon after its flag, to an entire army corps. The bandon, or flag, consisted of a square or rectangular field, the 'head' (kephalē), with a number of streamers (phlamoulai) flying from it. The color of the field was supposed to be that of the division (meros, turma), while the colors of the regimental sized moira (droungos) were to be on the streamers. Other distinctive devices were to designate the various units. Most of these are crosses, although circles and squares are found, and there were undoubtedly other designs. The size, and apparently the number of streamers, increased with the size of the unit, there being up to eight streamers on a flag. The paper discusses regulations and practice regarding the standard bearer and color guard, loss of the bandon, its use as a rallying point in battle, as a means of giving signals and commands, and special uses in naval warfare.

Since the written sources say little or nothing about the color or shape of the flags, manuscript illuminations are examined to see if it is possible to reconstruct their appearance. The Skylitzes manuscript in Madrid is, of course, basic to this investigation. The methodological difficulties of such a study are explained, but it is concluded that, with certain limitations, we can form a reasonably accurate picture of the flags used by the Byzantine military. Finally, a number of illustrations of Byzantine flags based on this study are shown.


John Rosser (Boston College)

The defenses along the coast at Thermopylae were notoriously vulnerable to an enemy with knowledge of how to outflank them. The most famous instance of this occurred in 480 B.C. when the Persian Immortals surprised the Greeks after a night march through the mountains behind Thermopylae. In 539 the Huns bypassed the coastal defenses altogether. Apparently it was only after this incursion by the Huns that Justinian attempted to create defenses behind Thermopylae. These defenses deserve more scrutiny than they have heretofore received.1

The route which runs from Kato Dhyo Vouna past Kouvela and Kastro Orias is most likely the way through which the Huns negotiated their passage in 539. This route in fact comprises the beginning of a natural corridor which is the easiest all-weather route from northern Greece to the Peloponnese. This corridor has been studied in recent years by the Loyola University of Chicago Phokis-Doris Expedition. Of interest to us are three adjacent sites, the Dhema Gap, Kouvela and Kastro Orias, all of which the expedition explored thoroughly. The remains of a cross-wall at the Dhema Gap have been discovered, one which might be that referred to by Procopius in the De Aedificiis (4.2.22). If this identification is correct, then the equation of Kastro Orias, certainly one of the most impres- sive mountain citadels in Greece, with Procopius' fortress of Myropoles becomes more certain. That some of the constructions on Kastro Orias may be Justinianic has already been suggested by Kolias.2

Evidence from the expedition's topographical research, including the evidence of pottery from trial trenches at the three sites, is considered in relation to both Procopius and the views of modern scholars in an effort to better understand the nature of these defenses.

1 See P. A. MacKay, "Procopius' De Aedificiis and the Topography of Thermopylae," AJA 67 (1963), 249-50, 253-54. 2 G. Kolias, "Siderokastron," Epetēris Etaireias Byzantinōn Spoudōn 10 (1933), 80-81.


Frank E. Wozniak (University of New Mexico)

While there are known to be a number of fifth-seventh century A.D. fortifications in Epirus vetus, only a small portion of these Justinianic era sites, as listed by Procopius, have been identified, the most important examples being Photice and Nicopolis. Because of the lack of epigraphical evidence at most late antiquity sites in the Epiriote region, it seems unlikely that many more places will be positively correlated with Procopius. The rugged topography of Epirus has greatly influenced the regional grouping of late Roman/early Byzantine sites. The lacustrine and river basins have served to delineate these regions which also reflect the ancient tribal divisions of Epirus. While Eprius vetus exhibits a distinctive regional orientation in the concentration of Justinianic era sites, it has not yet proven possible to identify a significant number of these sites with particular ones on Procopiusâ list for Epirus vetus. However, such a circumstance does not preclude an anlysis of the late Roman fortifications which can be attributed to the Justinianic period.

This paper will analyse the late Roman/early Byzantine fortifications in the cantons of Paramytia, Preveza, and Ioannina. In the Vouvos valley (canton of Paramythia), the principal tributary of the lower Acheron, the late Roman sites were settlements on the plains and foothills to the east of the river. The contemporaneous fortifications were located on the adjacent heights, to provide a refuge for the population of the undefended or undefendable lower settlements as at Photice (Paramythia). In the interior river valley of Thesprotikon, the pattern of the Vouvos valley seems largely to have been duplicated, with only one principal fortified site for the region. The late Roman/early Byzantine settlements in the Ioannina region followed the pattern in antiquity of avoiding the lacustrine basins whose fertile soil they exploited. The frequency of flooding and disease kept the settlements away from the lowlands. However, the situation in the Ioannina basin itself is confused by the problem of identifying the site to which Justinian moved the population of Euroea. Was it Gardhiki or Ioannina? Both sites were easily defended and encompassed an area suitable for a substantial resident population as prescribed by Procopius. At Kastritsa and at Dodona the ancient sites continued in use with some evidence of repairs. In the case of Kastritsa the late Roman population occupied an extensive and easily defended location. Because the settlements of the Ioannina region were placed on easily defended positions, these sties were fortified settlements of considerable extent and not simply detached refuges for lowland settlements as was the case in the Vouvos valley. The settlement/refuge pattern did emerge in the far northern part of the Ioannina basins near Asprangeloi.

For the most part, these Epiriote fortifications of late antiquity served, first, the local needs of each identifiable population center. The requirements of regional defense seem to have been considered; but here, the pre-existing tendency of important settlements to be located near strategic points of access to the region seems to have had as great an impact as careful efforts to prepare a viable regional defense. Any integrated provincial defense seems hard to postulate at this point; such a pre-planned defensive pattern seems unlikely except as a fortunate adjunct to local and regional priorities.


Warren T. Treadgold (Stanford University)

According to Theophanes, in 773 the soldiers of the themes, tagmata, and Optimates--in short, Byzantium's whole regular army--totaled 80,000 men. According to Al-Jarmī, an Arab official who spent several years in captivity in Byzantium before being released in 845, the Empire's army then totaled 120,000. If both figures are correct, between these two dates the army grew by 40,000 men, or 50%. But can these suspiciously round figures be substantiated?

In a paper delivered at last year's Byzantine Studies Conference, I defended the reliability of Jarmī, who included individual figures for the strength of themes and tagmata. Though all Jarmī's figures are in even thousands, this follows from his description of the army's command structure, which was based on units of 1,000 men commanded by drungaries. Jarmī further explained that all losses in these units were to be reported up the chain of command and replaced as soon as possible. Similarly, the Life of St. Philaretus, referring to a mustering of the army that probably took place in 785, describes the Armeniac Theme as having units of 1,000 men commanded by chiliarchs. Obviously, especially after heavy losses in battle, many units must have been under strength, but this would not have affected the official roll of the army, which is what Theophanes and Jarmī are evidently reporting. These official figures would only have been affected by official changes in the military organization, such as adding new themes.

The creation of a new theme, however, did not need to involve adding new soldiers; some themes were simply separated off from older themes. But other themes were created in areas where no theme had existed before, and for these new soldiers were presumably recruited. Between 773 and 145, these entirely new themes were Peloponnesus, Cephalonia, Thessalonica, Dyrrhachium, and the Climata; one new tagma, the Hicanati, was also created. Jarmī indicates that the total strength of these new divisions was 14,000 men in 845.

Additions could also be made to older themes, but only one such case is recorded between 773 and 845. It occurred in late 839, when Theophanes Continuatus says Theophilus divided up the total of 30,000 Khurramite soldiers who had fled to him since 834 and sent 2,000 to each of fifteen themes. In 842/43, according to the Tacticon Uspensky, there were seventeen themes (not counting the ephemeral Theme of Crete), or twenty-one military districts, including three cleisurarchies and the Optimates. Jarmī indicates that eight of these themes had only 2,000 men, so that if Theophilus added 2,000 men to them in 839 he must have created them then. In fact, he is known to have created one, the Climata, about 839, and believed to have created another, Dyrrhachium, first attested in 842. Since all the other themes with 2,000 men are attested before 839, Theophilus must not have sent Khurramites to them. This leaves fifteen military districts to receive the Khurramites; the fact that four were not formally themes does not seem significant for these purposes. Before the Khurramites were added, the army must have had 90,000 men if Jarmī's total is accurate (120,000 - 30,000 - 90,000).

The two new themes apparently created in 839 account for 4,000 of the 14,000 men in divisions that were created by adding new soldiers. The remaining 10,000 men were in three themes of 2,000 men each--Peloponnesus, Cephalonia, and Thessalonica--and in a 4,000-man tagma, the Hicanati. All four of these are known or believed to have been created by Nicephorus I (802-11). About 809/10 Nicephorus is also known to have forced poor men to enlist in the army and to have forced many people to settle in the "lands of the Slavs"--a fair description of at least Peloponnesus and Thessalonica in this period. The 10,000 new soldiers thus seem to have been Nicephorus' recruits. Before they were recruited, the army would have had 80,000 men (90,000 - 10,000 - 80,000), just as Theophanes says it had in 773.


Presiding: Gary Vikan


Introduced by: Miloû M. Velimirovicâ (University of Virginia)

Performed by: Student singers, directed by Vance George (Kent State University)

The only Byzantine liturgical drama that survives to us today was discovered and studied by Prof. Velimirovicâ, who transcribed it, and published the texts and music, with extensive analysis, in the Dumbarton Oaks Papers No. 16 (1962).

The Play of the Furnace, or The Three Children in the Fiery Furnace, celebrates the story told in the Book of Daniel. In its surviving Byzantine form, it dates back at least as far as the fourteenth century, and possibly earlier, while it continued to be presented in Greek churches in post-Byzantine times. It was also adapted into the usage of the Russian Church, and enjoyed a lively history in that form.

For both the Greek and the Russian versions, there are not only transmitted traditions of the texts, but also some scraps of information in literary sources. Some scholars have since argued that the Byzantine version was not a true liturgical drama, but merely a form of akolouthia, without true theatrical character. But it is generally recognized as one of our rare glimpses into Byzantine dramatic style and expression, and a uniquely fascinating byway in what we know of Byzantine liturgical practice.

A few years after the publication was made, a Modern Greek adaptation was prepared and performed by a Greek company under Alwin Nikolaides. But, so far as is known, this presentation under the direction of Prof. George will be the first performance of the original Byzantine version in modern times. For the occasion, Prof. Velimirovicâ has additionally transcribed and prepared, from two manuscript sources, an introductory processional, which is now joined to the play for the first time.


Presiding: Thalia Gouma-Peterson


Robert H. Trone (Gettysburg College)

The best documented double monastery of the last centuries of Byzantium and perhaps of the whole Byzantine era is the Constantinopolitan monastery of the Philanthropic Saviour (although authors of the time rendered its name in various forms) chartered by Empress Eirene-Eulogia Chou- naina Laskarina Palaiologina in 1308. Some of the relevant documents for a complete study of this somewhat unique community have been published, but all the extant documents need critical editions. In 1895 Meyer published the only known fragment of its charter, and in 1930 Laurent released a good study of the foundress and her administration. Salaville then published some of the letters and sermons of the monastery's first spiritual director, Theoleptos, Metropolitan of Philadelphia in Lydia, and Laurent issued his findings on the second spiritual director, Ignatios the Hesychast. Finally, Janin sought to locate the foundation more precisely and to distinguish it from the Comneni monastery of Christ the Philanthropist with which it had previously been identified.

The Philanthropic Saviour should also be seen in the light of the flourishing of double monasteries in the Latin West after the 11th century. Some of these were the result of changes in the organization of individual monasteries belonging to old orders, but others belonged to new orders that consisted entirely of double monasteries: the Order of St. Gilbert or of Sempringham in England, the Order of Fontevrault in France, and the Order of St. Bridget in Sweden. The last of these was also founded in the 14th century but much later than the Philanthropic Saviour. Besides, even in Byzantium, Eirene-Eulogia's older contemporary, Athanasios I, Patriarch of Constantinople (1289-93; 1303-9), had established two double monasteries before he assumed office; one in Constantinople was the place of his retirement.

This blooming of double monasteries in East and West was in the face of decrees against them by church councils, patriarchs, emperors, and monastic reformers, such as Theodore of Studion. Thus in the Middle Ages, these prohibitions were a part of the canon law collections in both East and West. However, the tradition for accepting double monasteries went back to the Pachomian foundations of the fourth century and had the support of Basil of Caesarea.


Andrew J. Sopko (St. Vladimirâs Seminary)

Although often called 'the Church of the Fathers,' the Byzantine Church had lost much of its patristic spirit by the time of the Fourth Crusade. Disregard for the actual writings of the Fathers themselves had given rise to compendia which contained various patristic quotations which could be used as polemical prooftexts but which could also be easily misconstrued since the complete texts were no longer usually consulted. This literary attitude resulted in a pseudomorphosis in the Byzantine patristic tradition: It was no longer the creative approach to the application of theology so long identified with 'the spirit of the Fathers' which prevailed at Byzantium but rather the repetition of catechism-like responses to pressing theological problems. The disruption caused by the Fourth Crusade only worsened this situation.

When the problem of the procession of the Holy Spirit was forced at late thirteenth-century Byzantium, the opportunity was finally given for a radical reassessment of the prevailing attitude towards the study of the Fathers. Decisive in evoking a change in this attitude was the work of Patriarch Gregory II of Constantinople(1241-1290). His viewpoint served as both a theological and literary corrective to the prevailing attitude. First, he insisted that the actual works of the Fathers themselves be consulted and not merely excerpts; Gregory's own theological compositions reflect a much wider knowledge of the Fathers than would be generally available from only the popular compendia. Second, and more importantly, the Patriarch demonstrated that new answers could be formulated from a careful synthesis of the classical patristic tradition. He himself offered a very creative solution to the filioque problem through such a method. In this way, a renewed patristic tradition which depended much less on the letter of the law was established at Byzantium again. This helped assure that 'the age of the Fathers' would continue until Byzantium's end and that one of the greatest of all Fathers, Saint Gregory Palamas would emerge.


Ljubica D. Popovich (Vanderbilt University)

In surveying Serbian medieval painting, S. Radojčić implied that the painter at Arilje (1296) used "older cartoons dating around the middle of the 13th century."1

What this scholar almost intuitively sensed, V. Djuirć expressed more definitively. While distinguishing several painters at work in Arilje and locating their artistic origin in Thessalonike, Djurić tentatively linked the frescoes of Arilje and Sopoćani (ca. 1261-65) in respect to the ideological grouping of subjects.2

This study expands the formal connections between the frescoes of Sopoćani and Arilje by examining previously unobserved similarities among the single figures in the soffits of the dome-supporting arches in Sopoćani, and those in the drum and in the soffits of the corresponding arches in Arilje. From Sopoćani eight standing figures and eight busts, all so far unidentified, are examined. The Arilje group considered consists of eighteen standing figures and six busts, the latter identified through preserved inscriptions, and includes figures in the drum of the dome. A comparative formal analysis establishes with certainty that the rare combination of superimposed standing figures above busts, as in the soffits of the Sopocani arches, is repeated in the drum of Arilje. This suggests that the Arilje painters were familiar with the unusual Sopoćani scheme, and that they either utilized existing Sopoćani cartoons, or made their own cartoons directly from the walls of Sopoćani.

The standing figures discussed here are close in size and formal appearance, despite well-recognized differences in artistic execution. Serving as model for this formal relationship is the figure of a high priest, which I have identified as Samuel, from the soffit of the eastern arch in Sopoćani, and its replica in the Arilje drum. These figures and their attributes are similar, but adjustments were made during the execution of the latter figure to adapt it to the available space, a procedure evident in other figures. In addition to Samuel, it was possible to identify several figures in the better-preserved frescoes of Arilje, and to establish through comparison the identities of at least some corresponding Sopoćani figures. For example, on the basis of sacradotal garments and attributes, six standing Arilje drum figures could be identified as Moses, Melchizedek, Zechariah the Elder, Samuel, Hur (?), and Aaron; by inference, the high priests Samuel and Aaron can be named at Sopoćani.

Iconographic analysis and theological explanation of the drum decoration in Arilje exceeds the scope of this paper. Despite formal connections between the figures in Sopoćani and Arilje, one cannot say that the Arilje drum repeats the lost Sopoćani decoration. It is important to note, however, that the iconography of the Arilje drum is the first known monumental example of its kind and that its formal arrangement was, insofar as this writer knows, never repeated. Identification of individual figures contributes to our perception of the entire Sopoćani and Arilje iconographic programs, while observation of the formal figural relationship furthers our understanding of the creative use of cartoons by the diverse groups of painters who decorated Serbian royal foundations during the second half of the 13th century.

1 Svetozar N. Radojčić, Staro Srpsko Slikarstvo (Belgrade, 1966), p. 73. 2 Vojislav J. Djurić, Vizantiske Freske u Jugoslaviji (Belgrade,1974), p. 44.


Sara M. Wages (Arlington, Va.)

In three late-twelfth-century Balkan churches--Djurdjevi Stupovi near Novi Pazar (1170/71) and Kurbinovo (1191), both in southern Yugoslavia, and Hagioi Anargyroi (1180+) in Kastoria, in northern Greece--St. George was portrayed as an armored rider pointing his lance up and forward. A search of the Princeton Index indicates that this image was first used for St. George in this small group of Balkan churches.

The earliest portrait types of the saint confirmed by inscriptions go back to the pre-iconoclastic period. Several bronze crosses are known in which the name George is inscribed next to a rudimentary image of an orant. Inscriptions identify as George the bust of a youth in Chapel XVIII at Bawit and a standing figure in armor, with lance and shield, on a column in the north church of the same monastery (VIth to VIIIth centuries). In both paintings George was represented with a mass of curly hair and without a beard, as he was to appear in all later portrayals. A fourth portrait type was employed for St. George at least as early as the turn of the eighth century. In the Nubian church of Abd El-Gadir (ca.700), an inscription identified an equestrian, lancing a serpent-like monster, as the Holy Martyr George.

With the exception of the orant, these early portrait types prevailed in post-iconoclastic Byzantine art in representations of the saint. With the increase in his popularity in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, as the saint who assured victory to the mounted Christian warriors, one finds experimental variations on the equestrian portrait type. The Balkan image of the rider with a cocked lance represents one of these variants.

What was the source of this variant? Riders with forward-pointing lances abound in Western medieval art (e.g., the Bayeux Tapestry), but the horse in the Djurdjevi Stupovi painting is too Classical to have been based on a Western model. Although rare in Byzantine art, the rider with a cocked lance occurs in two contexts stemming from Classical sources: the hunting treatise and imperial iconography. While the precise image which the artist copied may have been one like the hunter in the Pseudo-Oppian Cynegetica (cf . XIth-century manuscript in the Bibl. Marciana, Venice, cod. gr. 479, fol. 64v), the artist may have selected this model because of its association in imperial iconography with the concept of victory. The image of the rider with the cocked lance was employed on coins and medallions from the time of Trajan to illustrate the connected themes of arrival ("Adventus" on Trajan's bronze medallion, 106 A.D.), departure ("Profectio," Trajan's aureus, late 113 A.D.), and victory (a Nike with a wreath precedes the rider with the cocked lance on "Profectio" coins and medallions of Severus Alexander, 231 A.D.). It was specifically in gratitude for victory in his struggle with his brothers that the Serbian ruler, Stephen Nemanja, dedicated Djurdjevi Stupovi to St. George.

In conclusion, then, it seems possible that this Balkan image of St. George was created by an artist, cognizant of the Classical tradition, who wove together a manuscript illustration and imperial iconography for the dedicatory portrait at Djurdjevi Stupovi, which was then copied in the later churches of Hagioi Anargyroi and Kurbinovo.


Presiding: A. R. Littlewood


Elizabeth Ann Clark (Mary Washington College)

The 697-line poem by the fourth-century Roman aristocrat Faltonia Betitia Proba on the creation of the world and the life of Jesus is notable for many reasons, among them her representation of Jesus as an epic hero. Since the Cento Vergilianus de laudibus Christi was constructed entirely from lines of Virgil's verse, it is of course Aeneas who furnishes the heroic model for Proba. Just as Virgil appropriated the Homeric tradition and adapted it to distinctively Roman purposes, so Proba, inheriting the Virgilian model of the hero, shapes her picture of Jesus in accordance. Renouncing the martial themes of her earlier epic ("horses, arms of men, their wars") and her invocation of the Muses, Proba now selects Jesus as her hero and praises his pietas.

The New Testament, to be sure, depicts Jesus in ways that invite comparison with Aeneas. Both strive for goals that transcend their personal happiness and glory; both are commissioned by divine powers to found everlasting kingdoms; both are depicted with an aura of divinity. But beyond these obvious similarities, Proba deviates from the Gospel accounts in her "heroization" of Jesus. For example, she comments frequently on his imposing physical appearance, his "height and breadth of shoulder." Jesus' bodily strength is similarly noted in such scenes as his walk on the waters and his rescue of the terrified disciples during the storm at sea. When we recall the Gospels' total absence of comment on these topics and the early Christian predilection to view Jesus as the Suffering Servant who "had no beauty or comeliness that we should look at him," we immediately grasp what a striking change Proba has here effected.

Second, Proba reconstructs the crucifixion scene so that Jesus, far from meekly accepting a sacrificial death, lashes out at his persecutors from the cross, threatening them with future punishment: like the classical hero, he does not let his person be violated without reprisal. As Virgil's epic ends on a note of wrath, with Aeneas sinking his sword into Turnus' chest, so Proba's Jesus concludes his earthly career not with a word of forgiveness, but with one of vengeance.

Proba's appropriation of Virgil's very lines depicting Aeneas' mission to describe Jesus' task is a third way in which she invites her readers to compare the Virgilian and the Christian hero. No educated contemporary of Proba could have missed the re-assignment of such famous lines as divinae stirpis origo ("founder of a godly race"), originally used of Aeneas, to Jesus. Likewise, all the glories that Virgil foretold of Rome, Proba skilfully transfers to the Kingdom of God.

Other commentators have remarked how difficult it was for later Christian poets to depict the warrior hero as a Christian. Proba's task was different: to imbue the Christ with heroic virtues. Hence in Proba's Cento we have "the heroization of the Christ," not "the Christianization of the hero."


Stewart L. Karren (University of Utah)

At the and of Classical Antiquity a biography was composed by one of the last Neoplatonic philosophers. Dusascius of Damascus composed his Greek Life of Isidore during the early sixth A.D. It narrated episodes in the lives of many outstanding personalities of the educated elite in the Eastern Mediterranean at a time when the Western Roman Empire was no longer, the Byzantine Empire was emerging. and the early Islamic civilization was soon to erupt in a series of great expansions. For this reason and others, the biography offers unusual insights into a society on the verge of two cultural thresholds. The work has been largely overlooked by the scholarly world. survived only in short fragments preserved in an epitome and a lexicon of Medieval Byzantium. The literary scholar is disinterested since often the fragments are incomplete sentences. Even the longest ones are no more than ten or twelve lines. Furthermore, there is no possibility of a continuous narrative. The reader must piece together dislocated bits of information as if he were putting together a jigsaw puzzle of which most of the pieces have been lost.

In spite of its shortcomings, the Life of Isidore is a unique document which shows us, however incoherently, a participant's view of the so-called process of "intellectual deterioration of the Greek philosophical tradition" which in thought to have begun in the third century and continued to this and of Classical Antiquity. This process is generally seen in the broader context of a shift of emphasis in Western culture from the principles and values of rationalism with its emphasis on deductive logic, human reason and optimism to a prevailing religious atmosphere of asceticism and disdain for the human condition. In the philosophical schools the trend is manifest in the embrace of magic as a substitute for rational contemplation. Western academia almost universally looks upon this tendency as an abrogation of the traditional methods of intellectual inquiry. It is seen as a vulgarization of Greek philosophy in which the spirit of rational investigation hag succumbed to the superstitious environment of the Ancient Near and Middle East. Damascius' Life of Isidore, while most often accepted as evidence for this disparaging view of late antiquity, offers in fact a contrasting and enlightening impression of what in really changing in the late Roman East. It gives evidence of a fundamental relationship between the widespread religious mysticism of the Near and Middle East and Neoplatonism as a philosophical expression of Western culture.


Valerie A. Caires (The Ohio State University)

Evagrius Scholasticus, a historian of the sixth century A.D., wrote an Ecclesiastical History (covering the period 431-593), which reveals a great deal about the points of view and writing style of the late sixth century in Byzantium. A lawyer and a man of high social position in Antioch, Evagrius was a layman employed by Patriarch Gregory of Antioch. Descriptions of theological controversies and civil wars, along with the author's moral judgments, permeate the History, which is not limited to religious subjects. Evagrius tends to limit his attention to local affairs, not looking too1ay away from immediate concerns. He presents the details of doctrinal differences between those who supported the doctrines of the Fourth Ecumenical Council at Chalcedon (451) and their opponents, the Monophysites. The focus of Evagriusâ History is upon the unity of the Church and how it affects the welfare of the empire and the emperors who rule it. The rhythm goes back and forth between times of chaos and of peace in reference to matters of faith and the internal security of the empire, ending on an optimistic note during a period of relative peace and unity. Evagrius never, however, draws any explicit analogy between the correctness of faith of any particular emperor and the security of the empire, and he openly attempts to minimize religious differences although he himself was a Chalcedonian. He tends to judge emperors on their moral virtues (a classical convention), not their theological stances, and his work reflects the accommodations that many Chalcedonian emperors tried to make between 450 and 600 with the Monophysites.

While Evagrius remains self-consciously aware of conventional tradition which looked back to Homer and Thucydides as exemplars of style, his History shows the effects of such post-classical influences as the Bible, hagiography, and especially ecclesiastical historiography. He has full control of the Greek language as a tool of rhetoric, emphasizing elegance and eloquence, but the portraits he paints are conventional and usually not very vivid. His digressions are usually sudden, set-pieces designed to demonstrate his rhetorical virtuosity or his knowledge, and they frequently lack literary justification from a structural point of view. Evagrius clearly knows the rhetorical conventions of ecphrasis, encomium, and persuasion.

This paper will examine Evagrius' literary devices in some detail, and will also discuss them in their-relation to his point of view as a historian. Particular notice will be paid to his use (and sometimes surprising misuse) of Procopius as a source and model for part of his History.


Judith Herrin (Society for the Humanities, Cornell University)

The Parastaseis Syntomoi Chronikai is a strange collection of texts about the city of Constantinople, its monuments and history, and particularly the statues which adorned it. These "Curt Historical Notes", usually dated to the mid-eighth century, are related to the Patria of the tenth, but are generally more reliable. The authors, for there were several, obviously drew on a variety of sources, producing a document with no clear plan, of a patchwork character, with repetitions and even contradictions. Yet it provides more useful information about Constantinople, however selective, than most early Byzantine writers.

On the basis of a collective study of the published text and its unique eleventh century MS, Paris. gr. 1336, it is possible to suggest how, when and why this compilation was made. The authors shared an antiquarian interest in their environment which led them to examine certain monuments and statues, especially those described as "sights" or "wonders". Among the contributors, Philokalos, Theodoros and Karakallos are named and some of their methods recorded. They worked from written sources, such as an Epitome of ecclesiastical historians and the Chronicle of Hippolytus, but also relied on unwritten, oral traditions, and used legendary accounts and folklore. Where precise information was lacking, they made direct investigations, identifying statues, reading inscriptions and trying to explain the history of particular areas of the city. They also consulted experts in epigraphy (chaps. 24, 38 and 69), and sought confirmation from other specialists, for example, Philip the eparch, Herodian and Philip the dynast on the Hippodrome (chaps. 61 and 62). In two cases Philokalos requested further information from his colleagues by letter, and in their answers Theodoros and Karakallos self-consciously recorded the effort they put into their research for him (chaps. 27 and 42).

The period of their activity is never clearly stated but can be deduced from the text. An important expedition to the Kynegion (chap. 28) took place during the reign of Philippikos (711-713) and is described by Theodoros with the freshness of a recent personal event. The same emperor and others who ruled between 685 and 713 are surprisingly well documented, while there are three references to the Emperor Leo III (717-741), one a positively fulsome account of the rebuilding of the city walls (chap. 3). Although Constantine V has sometimes been identified as the unnamed "emperor in our time" in two obscure passages (chaps. 15 and 63), there are no direct references to him or to the iconoclast controversy which dominated the mid-eighth century. A possible reference to the earthquake of 740 (chap. 71). together with the two to an unidentified emperor, seem to represent the latest activity of the group, and there is no evidence of a major revision of the text until the tenth century. In the main our authors appear to have compiled their notes before the initiation of iconoclasm.

As to their motives, it is clear that comprehensive historical exegesis was not their main aim. Rather they sought to explain some of the statues in Constantinople, how they came to be there, who was responsible for them, and what stories were associated with them. The powers invested in pagan statuary in particular attracted their interest and even made their work dangerous (chap. 28). It is tempting to link this activity to the decline in the classical tradition of sculpture and to a concern with the function of statues in a Christian society, with their magical powers and with the dangers of idolatry. Our authors' anxiety on these points and their need to distinguish Christian from pagan statues seems to illustrate the disputes which preceded the outbreak of iconoclasm in 730.

Finally, we should remember that the title provided by the eleventh century scribe was probably not original, and that our authors would not have thought of themselves as historians. Their compilation could be more precisely described as "Curt Historical Notes on Constantinople and its statues in the first quarter of the eighth century".


John Wortley (University of Manitoba)

(Abstract not available.)


Alan Cameron (Columbia University)

The original of the collection of ancient epigrams we call the Greek Anthology was compiled ca.900 by Constantine Cephalas at Constantinople. A number of copies were made in the first half-century after the book appeared, the fullest that ever existed perhaps being the so-called Palatine Anthology (AP) palat. Gr. 23 + paris. Gr. Suppl. 384. But then people began to lose interest in this refined (and often naughty) miniature classical form. As so often happened in the world of art, it was not till the Palaeologan era that Cephalas' efforts were taken up again, but the man responsible, Maximus Planudes, could not lay his hands on a copy anywhere near as good or full as AP.

It was the inferior, abridged and wretchedly bowdlerized Planudean Anthology (1301) that became the Greek Anthology for the next 500 years, the first printed version appearing in 1494. The puzzle is why, when scholars all over Europe were reading and translating Greek epigrams, AP remained unknown till 1606--and unpublished till nearly 1800.

It was the young Salmasius who first drew attention to AP in 1606, provoking from Scaliger the well known claim that this had to be the MS Francesco Porto once told him he had seen long ago "in manibus N. Sophiani." Unfortunately, there were two scholars and MS collectors called Sophianos, Nicholas and Michael--and even contemporaries confused them. Various Italian itineraries and locations have been inferred from various identifications, but still no one could explain why no competent Renaissance scholar perceived the obvious superiority of and numerous unique texts in AP.

There is in fact good evidence that from ca.1509 AP was in the possession of Sir Thomas Moore in England. It was because of religious persecution under King Edward VI that his disciple John Clement, a Catholic, took the book with him into exile in Belgium ca.1549. In the 1580âs the family fell upon hard times, and AP ended up (briefly) in the Palatine Library at Heidelberg, before setting out on its better known journeys to Rome and Paris.


(Numbers in parentheses indicate session in which presentation is given: see Code below.)

(Copyright reserved to individual speakers.)

CODE FOR SESSIONS (with Times and Presidents)

1. PROBLEMS IN LATE ANTIQUE ART (Fri. Oct. 24, 9:15 a.m.: Margaret Frazer) 1

2. THE EMPEROR IN LITERATURE, ART, AND INSTITUTIONS (Fri. Oct. 24, 9:15 a.m.: John W. Barker) 4



5. THE END OF THE AGE OF THE FATHERS (Fri. Oct. 24, 2:00 p.m.: David B. Evans) 14

6. PANEL: BYZANTINE STUDIES IN THE UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM (Fri. Oct. 24, 8:30 p.m.: Emily Albu Hanawalt) 19

7. MANUSCRIPT ILLUMINATION (Sat. Oct. 25, 9:30 a.m.: Anthony Cutler) 20

8. BYZANTINE SOCIETY AND LIFE (Sat. Oct. 25, 9:30 a.m.: John Wortley) 24

9. ORIGINS, INFLUENCES, AND LINKS IN BYZANTINE ART (Sat. Oct. 25, 2:30 p.m.: Ioli Kalavrezou Maxeiner) 28


11. BANQUET, AND "THE PLAY OF THE FURNACE" (Sat. Oct. 25, 7:00 p.m.: Gary Vikan and Miloû M. Velimiroviâ) 37




October 24-26, 1980 Oberlin, Ohio


Program Committee:

Local Arrangements Committee:

Governing Board:

To serve until the 1983 Conference:

To serve until the 1982 Conference:

(= Nominating Committee):

To serve until the 1981 Conference:

To serve until the 1980 Conference:

 Ad Hoc Committee on Dumbarton Oaks:

© 2024 Byzantine Studies Association of North America, Inc. (BSANA) . All Rights Reserved.