P. 1
GIAKOUMIS (2)

GIAKOUMIS (2)

|Views: 29|Likes:
Published by Kosta Giakoumis

More info:

Published by: Kosta Giakoumis on Aug 27, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

08/27/2011

pdf

text

original

The Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical Painting in Epiros

*
By Konstantinos GIAKOUMIS University of New York / Tirana CBOMGS, The University of Birmingham

“What Jeremiah will lament our woes, or what is the time that will draw away through oblivion’s current all what we were destined to live and suffer? Captures of cities, desertions of churches, sacrilege of most-holy utensils, men’s wails, 1 women’s ululations, lootings, migrations…”

When Niketas Choniates, an eye-witness to the tragic events that followed the fall of Constantinople into the hands of the Crusaders of the Fourth Crusade in April 1204, wrote this statement of lamentation, very little had he witnessed of the sufferings that the former subjects of the Byzantine Empire would experience thereafter, as a consequence of the effected political, administrative and religious changes.2 Yet, the disintegration of agrarian and urban economic structures from the eleventh c. thereafter,3 which resulted in an increasingly revolutionary attitude of the Byzantine subjects, especially during the two decades of the rule of the Angeli (1185-1204),4 eventually paved the way to the
*

1

2

3

4

This paper was presented in the Tenth International Congress of Greek-Oriental and African Studies held in Kryoneri, Attica in 25-28 August 2005. I thank Dr. Angeliki Lymberopoulou, Lecturer of Byzantine Studies at the Open University, UK, for reviewing my article and her valuable comments and suggestions, as well as Mr. Peter Panchy for his thoughtful observations. K. Sathas, Μεσαιωνική Βιβλιοθήκη (New York, 1972, rep.), I, p. 104. Cf. A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, ‘Περὶ συνοικισμοῦ τῶν Ἰωαννίνων μετὰ τὴν Φραγκικὴν κατάκτησιν τῆς Κωνσταντινουπόλεως’, Δελτίον Ἱστορικῆς καὶ Ἐθνολογικῆς Ἑταιρείας, III, p. 454, cited in N.G. Ziangos, Φεουδαρχική Ήπειρος και Δεσποτάτο της Ελλάδας. Συμβολή στο Νέο Ελληνισμό (Athens, 1974), p. 49 and note 5 on pp. 49-50. For these issues, see E. Zachariadou, ∆έκα Τουρκικά Έγγραφα για τη Μεγάλη Εκκλησία (1483-1567) (Athens, 1996), pp. 28-61, where references to further relevant literature. For the decline of economic and agrarian forces from the eleventh century thereafter, see roughly K.M. Setton “On the Importance of Land Tenure and Agrarian Taxation in the Byzantine Empire, from the Eleventh Century to the Fourth Crusade”, The American Journal of Philology 74:3 (1953), pp. 225-259 (253-259); and P Charanis, “Economic Factors in the Decline of the Byzantine Empire”, The Journal of Economic History 13:4 (1953), pp. 412-424 (418-424). In Niketas Choniates’ words “ἄλλοι ἄλλοτε καὶ πάλιν, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ὁσάκις εἰπεῖν, ἐπανέστησαν” (there were those who revolted in one place or another, again and again, and it is not

KONSTANTINOS GIAKOUMIS

Fourth Crusaders, who found the Byzantine subjects “almost as well prepared for the implantation of their feudal institutions as its mountainous terrain proved to be suited to the construction of their feudal castles”.5 However, both, the events of April 12-15, 1204,6 as well as those after 1204, including heavier taxation for the peasantry, augmented forced labour (angary), distribution of lands as feuds to Crusaders, strict limitations of trade favouring Latin states and, last but foremost, the onerous and detestable slave trade of Orthodox war captives by western traders,7 were so crucial as to form, in the words of Bishop Kallistos of Diokleia, the “deep disgust” and “lasting horror with which Orthodox regard the sack of Constantinople by the Crusaders”, so difficult to be realized by “Christians in the west”.8 Psychologically, the issue of slave trade poisoned irremediably the relations between the eastern and western worlds. After 1204, Byzantium’s enemies, including Christians like Catalans, Venetians and Genoese, seized increasingly Orthodox Christians for the slave market to the extent that Emperor Andronikos II (1282-1328) formally protested the Genoese practice of capturing Byzantine subjects for sale in Italy and Spain.9 Furthermore, in 1339, when the Byzantine emperor sent monk Varlaam as an ambassador to the papacy in order to negotiate possibilities of common action against the Turkish threat and of a possible union of the two Churches, he set forth a number of conditions, one of which was the liberation of all of the Orthodox slaves kept by Latins

5 6

7 8

9

possible to say how many times this happened) [Nicetas Choniates, De Isaacio Angelo, v. III/2, Bonn, p. 553; cited and translated in K.M. Setton “On the Importance…”, The American Journal of Philology 74:3 (1953), p. 254 and note 51]. K.M. Setton “On the Importance…”, The American Journal of Philology 74:3 (1953), p. 259. On the history of the Fourth Crusade I am hereby citing a selection of comprehensive secondary sources which use extensively both Byzantine as well as western primary sources on the issue: E. Bradford, The Story of the Fourth Crusade (New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1967), reviewed by E. Velde in The History Teacher 2:2 (1969), pp. 61-62; D.E. Queller, The Fourth Crusade: The Conquest of Constantinople, 1201-1204 (Philadelphia, 1977), reviewed by J. Folda in Speculum 54:3 (1979), pp. 620622 and by J. Riley-Smith in The English Historical Review 94/372 (1979), pp. 624-625; and W.B. Bartlett, An Ungodly War: The Sack of Constantinople and the Fourth Crusade (New York, 2000), reviewed by R.A: Sauers in The Journal of Military History 65:1 (2001), pp. 169-170. For a selection of primary sources, see E. Hallam (ed.), Chronicles of the Crusades: Eye-Witness Accounts of the Wars Between Christianity and Islam (London, 1989), pp. 198-245. E. Zachariadou, ∆έκα Τουρκικά Έγγραφα, pp. 28-61. T. Ware, The Orthodox Church (Baltimore, 1964), p. 69. For Byzantine negative literary reactions to the second crusade, see E: Jeffreys – M. Jeffreys, “The “Wild Beast from the West”: Immediate Literary Reactions in Byzantium to the Second Crusade”, in A.E. Laiou – R.P. Mottahedeh (eds.), The Crusades from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World (Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 2001), pp. 101-116; cf. p. 117. The issue of slaves and slave trade after 1204 was treated in D.J. Constantelos, Poverty, Society and Philanthropy in the Late Medieval Greek World, (New Rochelle, NY, 1992), pp. 103-114, reviewed by T.S. Miller in Speculum 69:4 (1994) pp. 1143-1145 (1144).

264

117143. pp. E. Metropolitans and bishops were not accepted in those regions and only lower members of the clergy could remain. 1964). and T.10 In the eyes of the Orthodox. while on the extreme right. Laiou – R. pp. Edge D. Origo. Zachariadou. who were obliged to travel as far as Methoni to get ordained. For the treatment of slaves in 14th and 15th century Europe. See note 3. but not least. Zachariadou. Zachariadou.12 there further were deep contradictions related to the daily role of the clergy. T. p. after 1204.M. this phenomenon was kindly brought to my attention by Dr.E. pp. Lymberopoulou. 321-366. Speculum 30:3 (1995). see the useful case-study of I.11 The Orthodox Church. – J.Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical… and the virtual abolition of slave trade. Stahl (ed. pp. For this issue.) (Crestwood-New York: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press. 88-89.C. For these differences set in their historical context.: Dumbarton Oaks. Mottahedeh (eds. I cite two basic sources: A. 28-61. a considerable part of the church properties was confiscated. “The Domestic Enemy: The Eastern Slaves in Tuscany in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries”. shocked the Orthodox Christians. William of Normandy raises his helmet by its nasal (D. was another principal factor determining the relations between the Orthodox and the Roman-Catholic worlds. continued to displace the Orthodox ecclesiastical administration from the lands they conquered. 31). While clerical participation in military campaigns was forbidden by the Orthodox Church. See. ∆έκα Τουρκικά Έγγραφα. Papadakis. ∆έκα Τουρκικά Έγγραφα. since 1204 the Latins. for example. such as priests from Venetian-occupied Crete. 31-32. 1988]. “the decrease in population. The Documents of Angelo de Cartura and Donato Fontanella. [London. pp. A. Poverty. 2000). “Byzantine Perceptions of Latin Religious “Errors”: Themes and Changes from 850 to 1350”. The Crusades. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 E. 28-61. Eustratios Argenti: A study of the Greek Church under Turkish Rule (Oxford: Clarendon Press. their ordination was impossible within the occupied territories and candidates for priesthood had to travel to the zones of an Orthodox prelate where they were ordained and sent back to their parishes.15 while the economic decline of the Byzantine Empire from the 11th to the 13th c. Venetian Notaries in Fourteenth Century Crete. E. wearing what may be a hauberk of scale armour and carrying a mace of cudgel form. The Christian East and the Rise of the Papacy. The Church (1071-1453 A. Paddock. who retained her authority and influence over the Byzantine people. the scene from the Bayeux Tapestry interpretation of the Battle of Hastings (1066). On the extreme left is Bishop Odo. passim. the existence of Latin priest-soldiers in the ranks of the Crusader armies. Kolbaba.P.13 who could hold lances and shields and also prepare the Holy Communion. 265 . the issue of trading slaves captured by Catholic Christians and sold to Catholic Christians must have been felt at least as onerous as the trade of slaves captured by Turks and sold to Cretan Orthodox Greeks. Constantelos.M. and lack of new endowments contributed to the decline of monasticism’s social functions”17 to the extent that organized charitable activities became almost impossible.). Last. Yet. Ware. economic indigence. Beyond dogmatic and liturgical disagreements. 1994). pp. in A. see A.). Arms and Armour of the Medieval Knight. D.M. (Washington D. ∆έκα Τουρκικά Έγγραφα.16 and.D. after abolishing the Patriarchate of Constantinople.14 In addition.

were among the most important cities of Epiros.19 Lying between East and West [fig.21 whose major ports in the Adriatic. Σούλι και Σουλιώτες (Athens. The Crusades. The term in its use in this article is irrelevant to the political connotations given to it at the end of the 19th century and most parts of the 20th century. Epiros20 were among the remotest provinces of the Balkans.1912 (Istanbul. inaccessible shores.E. The Via Egnatia under Ottoman Rule. it felt the urge to take control of the passages and the opposite coasts. 63-64. This paper aims at penetrating into the nebulous relations of Epiros with the Latin West after 1204. With respect to the geography and climate of Epiros. aside from personal observations. and perhaps more. It was only the Ionian Islands.P. p. Gerstel. when a Balkan state assumed power. For. George at Dhivër. in particular.18 Yet. Arapoglou. P. pp. swampy plains and compact mountain-chains cut them off from most of the arterial roads of the Balkan Peninsula and made them a province of secondary importance. we are still unaware of the popular feelings of Orthodox Christians towards western Christianity in Venetian-dominated territories. Albania. last quarter of the 13th c. in general. in ecclesiastical paintings of two late Byzantine churches and several early post-Byzantine churches and catholica. 19-21. For the most recent study with respect to the via Egnatia in Ottoman times see: E. Halstead. later. Correspondingly. 266 . pp.).E. “Μεσογειακή ορεινή οικονοµία στην Πίνδο· µετακινήσεις ανάµεσα στο παρόν και το παρελθόν”. 1996). where additional literature. whenever a great power rose in the Italian peninsula. Sarandë (S. In our times. Kiel. and Crusaders. 44-52. Zachariadou (ed. 1998). Sharon Gerstel has attributed certain distinctive elements of Frankish influence in the monumental decoration of medieval Morea to an ‘artistic symbiosis’ which ‘places Morea in the midst of a number of Mediterranean locations where indigenous populations were confronted by Crusader overlords and where hybrid art forms arose from the interaction of two. Mottahedeh (eds.KONSTANTINOS GIAKOUMIS Sensibly. the provinces of Epiros were before all a border district of great strategic importance. I have also referred to: M. the Epirotic ports and the Otranto straits that were Epiros’ constant bridgehead towards the Apennine peninsula. Dr. M. A. 14 and V. 1380-1699 (Rethymnon.J.). in Η επαρχία Κόνιτσας στο χώρο και το χρόνο (Κόνιτσα. cultures’ (S. 280]). In so doing. In late Byzantine paintings. “Ο συµβολισµός του χώρου”. Laiou – R. 1990). Ηπειρωτικό Ηµερολόγιο 15-16 (1993-94). it attempted unceasingly to control the Epirotic coasts in order to keep an eye on the opposite shore. Durrës and Vlorë. Crusaders are identified in the soldiers from the scene of the Marys at the Tomb in the frescoes of the Church of St. 1]. in the scene of Christ’s Betrayal by Judas in the church of the 18 19 20 21 See note 12. Access to the Balkan centres was chiefly made possible by the Via Egnatia. which. Lymberopoulou informed me that in an upcoming article of hers at The Warburg Journal she takes a different line of arguing on this issue using cases from Crete. 263-285 [264. Their limited natural resources. the inhabitants of several non-Venetian-dominated cities and villages under the guidance of Orthodox prelates or monks gradually adopted an intense hostile attitude towards the Roman-Catholic world. whose population’s favour must have been a distinct policy of both eastern and western powers. 1996). Psimouli. Ottoman Architecture in Albania 1385 . “Art and Identity in the Medieval Morea”. pp. the regions of Epiros are situated in both Greece and Albania. I shall take into consideration representations of Latin soldiers. pp. Thus. paved the way to the Ottoman occupation of the Balkans. in A.).

the Marys at the Tomb in the church of St. supportive wall ascends [fig. The middle part bears a carved altar in the eastern side. like Epiros. the naos of the Diliou Monastery (1542/3). on the Isle of Ioannina. During the Byzantine period.) . as well as in scenes related to Christ’s Passion and to several martyrdoms of saints in the narthex of the catholicon of Philanthropenon Monastery (1560). monuments in modern day Albania. The walls cover mostly the western part of the chapel and to a lesser extent its narrow northern and southern sides [fig. Isidore priest. All three parts of the monument are painted [fig. 4]. it is sensible to suggest that these caves once constituted a wider monastic cell. 4]. 8]. on which a slanting. Finally. 2] is situated on the foot of a limestone cliff. 5]. 7]: the narthex to the North. To the East no walls were built and the altar was carved in the rocky front of the cavern [fig. The upper one reads: «…[Ἀ]ΝΟΙΚΟΔΟ[ΜΗΣΕΝ] …» [‘…rebuilt…’].Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical… Nativity of the Virgin on the island of Maligrad (W. in which some extensive caverns have been formed partly naturally. One of these caves. Considering that in some of these caves were found traces of fresco paintings. twenty feet above the base of the cliff. has been fitted up as a chapel built on a protrusion of the rock. the last 267 . 9] with frescoes made in three pictorial phases dated to the 11th (Sts. the most inaccessible among them. George at Dhivër [fig. 6]. Pursuing iconological and perceptive methods of art historical inquiry in one particular case-study. The walls of the hermitage are based on a rocky platform. along with his wife and children’] [fig. the naos in the middle and a cramped shrine to the South. Kosmas and Damian in the Parabema). I shall attempt to unveil the dark and base memories left over by Crusaders and other Latin armies and to weave the historical stage that shaped collective memory in peripheral regions. The cave-church of St. placed to a higher plane. I will endeavour to trace the beginning and the gradual fading of “hostile” and anti-western visual statements in Epiros. 3]. Three inscriptions were located in the church. where an altar base of rock decorated with overlaid 13th c. Two of them are displayed in the narthex and are written the one on the top of the other and divided by a red line on the lintel of the entrance to the naos. while the lower one: «…ΝΟΣ …Ν ΑΓΙΑΝ …» [‘……saint……’]. partly artificially [fig. 1369). the naos of Eleousa Monastery (third quarter of 16th c. Last but not least. approachable only by a narrow path carved on the stone [fig. built parts [fig. The internal space of the chapel is articulated in three distinct. George at Dhivër and correlating seeming similarities of late-Byzantine and early post-Byzantine examples from Epiros and beyond. who appears to have had the means to sponsor such an undertaking. The last inscription refers to the patron of the frescoes. Albania. as well as several other 16th and 17th c. the third inscription is placed below the scene of Christ the Saviour: «∆ΕΗΣΙΣ ΤΟΥ ∆ΟΥΛΟΥ ΣΟΥ ΙΣΙ∆ΟΡΟΥ ΙΕΡΕ Σ ΣΥµΒΙΟΥ Κ(ΑΙ) ΠΑΙ∆ Ν ΑΥΤΟΥ» [‘Prayer of your servant. were transmuted to hermitages of anchorite monks. marble entablature spolia [fig. a certain priest named Isidore. 3].

Theofan Popa mistakenly dated the chapel in four pictorial phases: I. fig. Acheimastou-Potamianou. while the overall scene’s arrangement resembles with that of the Virgin at Assinou (1105-1106) [M. The Byzantines in their writings show themselves to be fully aware of the power of image to keep memories alive and interpret the past in a way that texts didn’t (i. the use of image as exegesis changed over time. 226-227). whose linearity is reminiscent of the hierarchs of the apse of the Sts. George. 56-57]. IV. Daniel the stylite. 76] and Nikolaos [fig. Nikolaos of Kasnitze (1160-1180) in terms of the Virgin’s rightward time on the bier. The narthex’s Dormition of the Virgin [mistaken identification] to the end of the 9th century. Vlasios [fig. 63-83]. Acheimastou-Potamianou. Chatzidakis. For the dating of this third pictorial phase I am based on similarities between the portrait of the female of the donor in our church with that of Kalia in the church of the Nativity of the Virgin on the island of Maligrad. cit. Cypru dating 1192 (M. 71] dating in the middle of the 11th century. dating 1368/9.22 and the last quarter of the 14th c. 6. or St. (remaining scenes from shrine/parabema. Kastoria. Every image in ecclesiastical paintings is an exegesis. the Crucifixion and the Descent to Limbo. cit. etc. fig. 88 and pp. 16 on p. Chatzedakis.e. 1994] fig. raised by the Byzantine emperor's confessor. the Baptism. I do not revere any of the saints that are there because I do not 22 23 24 Apart from arguments to be developed in dealing with the scene of the Marys at the Tomb. Acheimastou-Potamianou. the Ascension and David to the 17th century. Popa “Piktura e shpellave eremite në Shqipëri [Resumé: La peinture des grottes d’ ermites en Albanie]”. op. 71 and p. 50-65). Pelekanidis – M. 13-14 on p. 63 and pp. literally meaning ‘leading out’. op. and the Transfiguration. 230 and S. 1999). however. 220 and S. in M. from the historical cycle. an interpretation of a religious event. the Dormition of the Virgin in our chapel bears similarities with the same scene in the church of St. III. pp. the Dodekaorton cycle.24 Studying the iconographic programmes of ecclesiastical monuments provides several hints to understand a past. 43 on p. fig. AcheimastouPotamianou. Sylvester Syropoulos records an objection. The most remarkable resemblance. Even though images shape visual memory of how the past looked like.. Nikolaos Diarosite (M. George and Christ in the type of the “Eldest of Days” to later than the 17th century (Th. Lagoudera. Βυζαντινές Τοιχογραφίες [Athens. The Archangels Michael. Chatzidakis. The Marys at the Tomb. 20). Anargyroi church. The naos’ Dormition of the Virgin and Sts. is with the similar scene at the church of the Virgin Mavriotissa in Kastoria dated to the beginning of the 13th century [M. on p. whose creators were mostly bearers of a rich oral culture who however left only few written records. and with saints placed in medallions in the church of the Virgin Arakos. Similarly limited is the number of full-length saints. Καστοριά. op. (narthex) respectively23.KONSTANTINOS GIAKOUMIS quarter of the 13th c. Acheimastou-Potamianou. fig. to using a Latin-rite church for Orthodox services during the Council of Ferrara (1438) as follows: “When I enter a Latin church. Studime Historike 3 [1965].. Nikolaos and Demetrios to the 15th c. 102-103. George and Demetrius).]. Due to the spatial limitations of cave-churches. Pelekanidis – M.). op. visions of saints. St. cit.. II. “Άγιος Γεώργιος ο ∆ιασορίτης”. all dating to the first pictorial phase of the church. Nikolaos. pp. 88-89. the scene’s arrangement and the bier’s cover decorated with rhombuses (M. with several saints of the church of St. 268 . 27 on pp. Archaic rendering is also followed in the representation of the conch’s hierarchs. in the second half of the 10th century [op. 75-77 on pp. the iconographic programme is limited to only a few Christological scenes very basic from a theological viewpoint. Νάξος (Athens. cit. cit. The iconographic programme follows the established patterns of fresco decoration in cave-churches. pp. Gregory Melissenos. 66-79) and in particular with Sts.. such as the Annunciation. 61 on p. fig. Sts.

. 312-1453: Sources and Documents (Toronto: University of Toronto Press. turning away from the sarcophagus out of fear. similar examples can be traced in the first half of the 12th c. since I do not know in what terms he is inscribed.M. At the left of the sarcophagus. and not anything that I see there. It concerns the representation of the Marys at the Tomb [fig. cit.) there was no living eye-witness memory of the biblical event.”25 Hence. whose sides taper slightly towards 25 26 27 C. 254. 1140 (without a coif). while no written account of the ‘Marys at the Tomb’ records minutiae details. the Virgin Hodeghetria) and feel. the representation of the soldiers of the Sepulchre’s custody manipulates visual memory of the distant past to condemn a newly-created visual memory of the very recent present. At the bottom right corner [fig. I may recognize Christ. part of the decoration on the Gross-Comburg chandelier. At their left. 1128. 11] in the western part of the wall. the rendering of such details relies on the initiative of the artist or its patron. in the second zone of frescoes. such as the angel’s physiognomy. two standing female figures. So I make the sign of the cross and I revere this sign that I have made myself. George at Dhivër. 27:59-28:15. The Art of the Byzantine Empire. one of which is of great interest for our ends.27 [fig. Mango. Since at the time when our frescoes were made (last quarter of the 13th c. On the northern wall of the naos of St. 269 . a standing angel points at the sarcophagus with his right index finger. Any given image not only constructs or reconstructs visually the biblical past. ca. Paddock. 48. John 19:4020:18]. in the ‘Marys at the Tomb’. and the appearance of the custody. Arms and Armour of the Medieval Knight (London. Op. 10]. D. The body armour consists firstly and foremost of a scale hauberk with an integral coif. clothing. 45.e. The subject renders visually Mathew’s description of the meeting of the two Marys with the angel at the Sepulchre. p. can be identified from the lower parts of their mantles. below which a sarcophagus with an open top contains Jesus’ cerement. as often images condition the way we hear names (i. 1988). alternatively known as ‘Rejoice’ [Mt. 1986). Mk. but also envisages links between this past and the period’s present. As will be shown. such as in a stone relief dated ca. Gregory Melissenos could have no devotional experience without the identification of the depicted figure or its inscription. 23:53-24:7.. The picture’s left part is entirely damaged and only its right is preserved in relatively decent condition. there are two scenes [fig. The panoply of the soldiers presents realistically explicit features of Latin knights’ panoplies that also provide a terminus for the dating of our frescoes. 12] seven custody soldiers in full panoply appear to be petrified out of terror for the angel’s appearance and the removal of the Sepulchre’s stone. At the most. Lk. cf. from Angoulême Cathedral (with an integral coif)26 and in a metal relief of a knight. fig on p.Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical… recognize any of them. bottom right figure on p. Edge – J. 15:44-16. At the top right corner appears an empty cave. but I do not revere Him either. 13] A cylindrical helm is worn by five soldiers over the coif.

35 [fig. but rather to various parts of a knight’s panoply dating from the second half of the 12th c. examples.34 The lance appears to be the sole weapon of these knights.. to 1270s. The soldiers of the custody are also equipped with shields and lances. on p. 46. However. Op.32 while their upper edge is almost straight. cit. to straighter and shorter. Louis’. 1200.31 yet not covering the palms and wrists. rather than conical.. as after the middle of the 12th c. 1289 [fig. figure on p. The legs of our soldiers are covered by chausses made of full mail stocking gartered at the knee. cit. as the most likely dating of the frescoes of the second phase. cit. cit. Op. 44. ca. p. In conjunction with this the profile of the shield became less convex and took on a triangular shape. do not point to a singular prototype. until the 1250s the shield was still moderately large” and it was only “within the next 20 years that the shield became smaller and its sides convex”. 1170 in op. These are similar to late 12th c.33 According to David Edge and John Miles Paddock. lances. I did not manage to take into consideration the English ‘Psalter of St. “throughout the 12th c. cit. figure on p. p. since their heads are comparatively smaller as their profile more sharply pointed and consequently more penetrative. However. Their form resembles 13th c. 14] while its top is delicately domed. 17] All of the aforementioned elements. cit. dating late 10th or 11th c. This is among the reasons why I have suggested the last quarter of the 13th c. in my view. The shields are triangular [fig. Op. the knight had used the kite-shaped shield to the virtual exclusion of all other types. ca. vertical or horizontal strips coloured alternatively in red and white. 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Op. at the beginning of the 13th c. 62. probably best exemplified in a relief from the tomb of Gulielmo Beradi. ca. figure on p.29 while in our case a nasal bar is also fitted. the skull of the helm became rounded rather than pointed. modifications of the shield’s size and form from large with a rounded profile to the upper edge. in the church of Santa Annunziata. fig.. cit. rather short and decorated with straight or undulating. cit. 1170 in op.. See for example an initial from the Winchester Bible. p. ca... 46 with those in a panel from the Silver Shrine of Charlemagne in Aachen Cathedral. 15]. Florence and dated ca. p.28 [fig. This form pertains to late 12th c. similar to some church effigies and sculptural monuments dating from the early part of the 13th c. 270 . rather than 12th c.. For this. 45. 16]. as this would have impeded one’s grip of a weapon. resembling examples from the late 12th and 13th c. 46. as in the helmets of the knights of Macchabees’ Battle in the Bible of Rhodes. compare the lances represented in the initial from the Winchester Bible. 29. 55.30 They also bear long sleeves of the scaled hauberk. in op.. Op. modifications that took place in the second half of the 12th c. a phenomenon observed in armours from the last decades of the 12th c..KONSTANTINOS GIAKOUMIS the base.. 1207. Op. cit. Op. cit. it was shortened and the top of the shield lost its very prominent curve..

A map of Albania and detail of the Sarandë region 271 .Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical… 1.

A view of the limestone cliff with extensive caverns frormed partly naturally and partly artificially. george at Dhivër. Hermitage of St.KONSTANTINOS GIAKOUMIS 2. 272 . Sarandë.

Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical… 3. 273 . Sarandë. Hermitage of St. George at Dhivër. SW and NW views.

274 . SW and NW views. Hermitage of St.KONSTANTINOS GIAKOUMIS 4. Sarandë. George at Dhivër.

Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical… 5. The apse of the church with the altar stone and co-celebrating hierarchs 275 . last quarter of the 13th century. Cross-section (1-1) 2. Hermitage of St. Sarandë . Hermitage of St. George at Dhivër. Sarandë. George at Dhivër.

Hermitage of St. The scene of Christ the Saviour and an inscription below it mentioning the patrons of the frescoes. a certain priest named Isidore along with his wife and children. Sarandë. Last quarter of the 13th century 276 .KONSTANTINOS GIAKOUMIS 6. George at Dhivër.

A view of the naos from the West.Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical… 7. Sarandë. At the right the church’s ground plan 277 . George at Dhivër. Hermitage of St. In the far end the entrance to the parabema.

KONSTANTINOS GIAKOUMIS 8. George at Dhivër. Hermitage of St. Sarandë. The apse of the church with the altar stone and co-celebrating hierarchs 278 .

Saint John Chrysostome. 9. Hermitage of St. 30. 32. 37. Saint Martin. 5. 33. 24. 40. Inscription «…ΦΗ…». Lord Sabaoth and Annunciation (Archangel Gabriel). 38. Prophet David. 29. 3. 22. 18. 4. Saint Kosmas. 35. Unidentified saint. Deisis and Annunciation (the Virgin Mary). Christ. Saint George. 19. 13. 15. 41. Select a number and see the underlying fresco. 6. 34. Saint George. 39. Refer to the table below for a complete listing of the artwork 279 . 36. 20. Saint Vlasios. Saint Daniel the Stylite. The Descent to Hades. Lord Sabaoth. The Theotokos with the portrait of a donor. 11. Easter Morning. Prophet Elijah. Christ (Emmanuel). Saint Nikolaos. A view from beneath the church which maps the frescoes. 21. Unidentified saint.Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical… Index of the Iconographic Programme of the Cavern of St. Saint Jacob. 17. George at Stilo-Dhivër 1. Saint Athanasios. Saint Basil or Cyril. 26. The Ascension. 12. Portraits of donors. Saint Gregory. Unidentified saint. 8. The Dormition of the Theotokos. Unidentified saint. Unidentified saint. 16. 27. Christ in a mandorla . Archangel Michael. Saint Demetrius. The Saviour. 7. Unidentified saint. 25. 31. 2. Unidentified saint. 28. 10. 9. Saint Symeon the Stylite. Sarandë. Saint Basil. Saint Damian. 23. 14. George at Dhivër. Transfiguration.

Naos. Hermitage of St. Sarandë. Second zone of frescoes. Last quarter of the 13th century 280 . George at Dhivër. The Descent to Hades. Northern wall.KONSTANTINOS GIAKOUMIS 10.

Easter Morning.Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical… 11. Second zone of frescoes. Hermitage of St. George at Dhivër. Sarandë. Naos. Northern wall. Last quarter of the 13th century 281 .

KONSTANTINOS GIAKOUMIS 12. Detail of the sleeping soldiers of the Sepulchre’s custody. Second zone of frescoes. Sarandë. Naos. Easter Morning. Northern wall. George at Dhivër. Hermitage of St. Last quarter of the 13th century 282 .

A stone relief with two mounted knightsdated ca.Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical… 13. 1140 (without a coif) compared with our soldiers 283 . ca. from Angoulême Cathedral (with an integral coif) and a metal relief of a knight. 1128. part of the decoration on the GrossComburg chaldelier.

Knights of Macchabees’ Battle in the Bible of Rhodes. dating late 10th or 11th century with helmets comparable to those of our soldiers 284 .KONSTANTINOS GIAKOUMIS 14.

ca. An initial from the Winchester Bible. in conjunction to the similar patterns on the shields of our soldiers 285 . Notice the strips of red and white/pink on the shields.Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical… 15. 1170.

A relief from the tomb of Gulielmo Beradi. Notice the triangular form of the shield in comparison with the shields of our soldiers 286 .KONSTANTINOS GIAKOUMIS 16. ca. 1289. in the church of Santa Annunziata. Florence.

ca. a panel from the Silver Shrine of Charlemagne in Aachen Cathedral. 1170. 1207 and our soldiers. An initial from the Winchester Bible.Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical… 17. Notice how the lances in our scene are closer to the 1207 example 287 . ca.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->