A Twelfth-Century Leaf from the Byzantine Courtly Circle in the Freer Gallery of Art

(Freer 33.12)
Author(s): Jeffrey C. Anderson
Source: Gesta, Vol. 35, No. 2 (1996), pp. 142-148
Published by: International Center of Medieval Art
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/767178
Accessed: 22/01/2010 12:44

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=icma.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

International Center of Medieval Art is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Gesta.

http://www.jstor.org
A Twelfth-Century Leaf From the Byzantine Courtly Circle
in the Freer Gallery of Art (Freer 33.12)

JEFFREYC. ANDERSON
The George WashingtonUniversity

..,5

-B:

: ..

aBi

Ba

a.

iEv
i, ,

:I::
I
:::
:_::
::
i :i

0itiig,,.,'..Bi
t00!ggg,,,.:g:g,
,,.i,'i..&.g;i:ig;
,,'#,:g,4#g,
,at,
> 0, g.,.
..'+'gtF,Egg.EEE...,.S.'p.""
. ! Eg
f....e.
..!^#
i! .......'......

FIGURE 1. Washington, Smithsonian Institution, Freer Gallery of Art, acc. no. 33.12: verso with portrait of Luke
(Courtesy of the Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington,D.C.).

142 GESTAXXXV/2 ? The InternationalCenter of Medieval Art 1996

 Abstract
This article publishes for the first time the Byzan-
tine manuscriptleaf, acc. no. 33.12 in the Freer Gallery
of Art, Washington, D.C. The leaf bears a portraitof
St. Luke on one side and the end of the list of chapters
to Luke's Gospel on the other. On the basis of its por-
trait the leaf can be attributedto the 1140s or 1150s
and added to the circle of illuminations associated
with the KokkinobaphosMaster. As such, it casts new
light on this complex circle and the way it was main-
tained and passed on.
In the Freer Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., is a
single leaf with kephalaia to Luke on its recto and a portrait
of the Evangelist Luke painted on its verso (acc. no. 33.12).1
The style of the miniatureand the script on its recto indicate
that the leaf and its parentmanuscriptbelong to a movement
that flourished in Constantinople during the twelfth century.
What is known of its patronage suggests the term "courtly"
for this art, which is minimally represented in American
collections. For published citations of the Freer leaf we can
thank Kenneth Clark and Viktor Lazarev.2 Of the sheet's
provenance it can only be said that it was acquired by Freer
in 1933 from the dealer Paul Mallon.
X
it
y
z
Aa B
FIGURE2. Washington,SmithsonianInstitution, Freer Gallery of Art, acc.
no. 33.12: ruling pattern. Measurementsin cm: A-a 3/4; a-B 1.0; B-b 13.6;
b-C 1.0; C-c 1.7; c-D 1; X-x 3/4; x-Y 1.6; Y-y 21.0; y-Z 1.
The Freer Leaf comes from a Gospel book of quarto
format (183/4 by 243/4 cm). The sheet was ruled for script
according to the pattern reproduced in Figure 2. As pre-
served, the patternconsists of twenty-three lines for a single
column of text and a twenty-fourthhorizontal that acted as a
guide for section titles or lectionary designations. The text
block was bounded by a pair of vertical lines that guided
in the placement of the small initial letters; the left set served
the recto and the right set the verso. Another vertical near
the fore-edge created a column for apparatus such as the
passage numbers or notes needed to use the Gospels in the
liturgy.3Although now a singlet, the leaf is likely only half
of a bifolium that contained writing on the discarded part.
On the recto the scribe used carmine (purple tint) ink pow-
dered with gold to write the last two kephalaia to Luke (82,
83) and a decorative line.4 The remainderof the leaf, which
was most of it, the scribe left blank. At some time the book
became soaked and the writing on the opposite page was
transferred.Because the facing text printed with such clar-
ity, it has been reproduced as the better writing sample, re-
versed in Figure 3. The facing leaf contained kephalaia
(37-81) written in the half-uncial often used for the Gospel
apparatus. As is often the case with lists of contents, the
FIGURE 3. Washington,SmithsonianInstitution, Freer Gallery of Art, acc.
no. 33.12: recto with Luke kephalaia printed reversed (Courtesy of the
Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington,D.C.).
143
 kephalaia were cast in double columns. The hand appearsto
be that of a neat, highly competent scribe sufficiently expe-
rienced to write the double-column text without the need to
change the ruling pattern. Since the text is half-uncial, pro-
duced in two stages and with considerable deliberation, it is
of little value were we to try to imagine the appearanceof a
page of the Gospels, which would have been written in a
different, and quite possibly more cursive, hand.
In light of the extensive offprinting on the recto of the
leaf, the absence of any transferred text or headpiece on
the verso is noteworthy (Fig. 1). Freer records indicate that
the leaf was repaired in the 1930s, but what this means
cannot be determined precisely. The restorer may not have
been occupied with anything other than the tear visible at
the top of the leaf. Examination with the naked eye reveals
no traces of offprinting on the side with the portrait.5The
surface has been badly abraded in an area extending from
the figure's left knee and shin into half of the writing desk;
the loss extends upward into the Evangelist's chest, face and
part of his halo. Over much of its extent, the gold back-
ground has a dull, slightly worn appearance; it is even
possible to see how the gold leaves were laid around the
figure in pieces of varying thickness and size. By contrast,
the layer of gold leaf in related works (e.g., Fig. 4) is con-
FIGURE4. Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, gr. 71, fol. 99v: portrait of Luke
(Photo: Bibliotheque Nationale).
144
spicuously thick. Similarly, the pigment layers in related
works are often quite dense. It seems certain that the leaf
has lost much its surface in some areas and is worn in
others, but how much of the loss must be attributed to
modern cleaning, or to a combination of wear, water dam-
age and cleaning, is difficult to say. Much of the right side
of the Evangelist's body, from his eye to his ankle, retains
its final articulation with highlight and shadow lines. What
remains of the image appears to be entirely medieval and
all by the same hand.
The author portrait originally faced the start of Luke's
Gospel. The portrait is framed within two boxes; the outer
one, which has simple finials, is dark blue, and the inner
one is carmine. The inner frame was painted right at the edge
of the gold backgroundand measures 13.7 x 17.7 cm, which
is slightly less than the size of the text block (13.6 x 21.0).
Inscribed in the same red is the identification ho ha(gios)
Loukas. Written in black ink on the Evangelist's book is
polloi e, the second word of the Gospel and, just under the
pen, the first letter of the third word. Above the dusty green
stripof grass the illuminatorpainted a gardenpavilion, which
consists of a rosy cream substructuresurmountedby a per-
gola with blue columns and cupola. Luke wears a blue tunic
and an olive tan himation. Where the himation crests along
the right thigh and begins to fall over the leg, the illumi-
nator darkened the tan with a narrow strip of blue; at the
underside, where the tunic and cushion meet, he used a
strip of brown shading. Although the palette is muted, the
use of color creates an impression of three-dimensionality.
The highlights on both himation and tunic were executed in
dull white. Luke's face is a deep, warm brown, delicately
modeled with red, black and deep brown around the eyes; a
red dot stands out on the cheek and a small amount of red
appearson the forehead at the hairline. Originally the minia-
ture would have presented a handsome portrayalexecuted at
a generous size. The portraitfeatures are unmistakablythose
of St. Luke: a gaunt man with short beard but luxuriantcap
of hair surroundinga tonsure. The pose in which the author
sits hunched over the book cradled in his lap, his feet close
together, was normalizedfor Luke by the tenth century,when
it was used in Cod. Coislin. 195 and Vat. gr. 364.6
The Freer Leaf recalls the work of an important but
anonymous artist of twelfth-century Constantinople, known
as the Kokkinobaphos Master.7The artist's earliest illumi-
nations appear in the late 1120s or early 1130s, and by the
1150s his success in obtaining commissions from members
of the imperial family had contributed to the creation of a
courtly style. The artist's success also acted to encourage at
least one follower capable of close imitation. Four portraits
of the Evangelist Luke will serve to fix the Freer Leaf
within the immediate circle of the KokkinobaphosMaster.
The comparative works constitute a somewhat heterogene-
ous group of terms of kind of commission and authorship.
The most important of the four is found in Paris. gr. 71, a
 sOR /
,.: ^ * t:fv-<4>
,* 1

- e
, Of IT I
I a Wt i T A Ty -

J..

--,-.:
...1,

- IF
LS~ - - L
_
i' -r A-6-

-
,:-^' xy L^ , _ J
^^ ^

Ba_

FIGURE 5. Mt. Athos, Great Lavra, cod. A.44, fols. 190v, 191: portrait of Luke and beginning of Gospel.

Gospel book attributable to the 1140s.8 It is among the
significant manuscriptsof the illuminator'scareer, as well as
of twelfth-century Byzantine art. The portraits in the Paris
Gospels were executed on ruled bifolia that had writing
on the rectos and conjoint leaves. On the recto of the Luke
portrait leaf, for instance, are the kephalaia (54 to end).
The portraits seem to have been an integral part of the
commission. Parallels between the Freer portraitand that of
Paris. gr. 71 include a number of details beyond the pose
(Fig. 4). The furniture and the pavilion nearly match in
design, as does the design of the Saint's drapery.His hima-
tion rolls around the waist following the same pattern and
bunches over the right thigh in a nearly identical series of
interlocking highlights that hook following an effortless
gesture. The manuscriptsdiffer in size and ruling: the Paris.
gr. 71 was ruled according to a more complicated pattern
for 29 lines of writing within a block measuring 11.0 x
13.05 cm. In the Paris portrait,Luke wears a lavender tunic
and blue himation articulated in an exceptionally facile
manner, somewhat more so than is true of the Freer por-
trait. In the Paris manuscriptthe tunic ripples over the right
arm and behind the right leg in a series of liquid folds,
whereas the shapes in the Freer portrait are either simpler
or more angular.
The composition and features of the Freer and Paris.
gr. 71 portraits appear in the representationof Luke in cod.
A.44 of the Great Lavra on Mt. Athos (Fig. 5).9 Like the
Paris Gospels, the Lavra manuscriptwas an integral produc-
tion: text, headpiece and portraits are all parts of a single
commission. The Matthew and Mark portraits were cut
out of the manuscript and eventually entered the collection
of the Walters Art Gallery, Baltimore. Figure 5 shows the
image of Luke in place opposite the start of the Gospel. The
manuscript'sornament recalls that of Paris. gr. 71, but at a
simplified level of execution in keeping with the formal
qualities of the script. The writing, less calligraphic than the
curly minuscule of Paris. gr. 71, follows a liturgical manner
prized for its clarity and legibility. One significant scribal
link with manuscriptsof the KokkinobaphosMaster is pres-
ent. The Evangelist's name was written above the portrait

145
 0 X "T -N i
?,r I to
,J O
'ft r HN ^ -l- I Jr-
d uo O- 7t-i
y o . .

" /
s$i ,.j : ^1 "
-s'' ', *' j.

FIGURE 6. London, British Library, MSBurney 19, fol. 1Olv: portrait of p 0 -r

- -
Luke (Photo: British Library). T ? r"',:rim Xw I*"<.
p -UJ - ...I

using angular forms and uneven pressure on the pen. The
manner, a display hand found in the non-biblical appara-
tus of the Gospel book, relates closely to the highly cal-
ligraphic script of Vatican, gr. 1162, a volume of sermons
on the life of the Virgin illuminated by the Kokkinoba-
phos Master (Fig. 7).10 The composition of the portrait in
the Lavra Gospels parallels that of the Paris Gospels
(Figs. 4, 5), especially in the fluid draftsmanship of the
drapery covering the right thigh and arm. But where the
hem of Luke's himation meanders with ease in the Paris
manuscript, it has a far more angular quality in the Lavra
portrait,and in this regard reflects the handling of the Freer
Leaf. Careful inspection reveals differences in the drawing
of the tower and decoration of Luke's footstool, and some
of the same details crop up in related portraits in different
combinations.
Two other sets of portraitsin this series were introduced
into existing books, a practice that may have been common
for the medieval illuminator.Part of the craftsman'strade, it
seems, came from the man or woman who entered the shop
carrying a finished Gospel book, psalter, or lectionary and
asked for it to be decorated with scenes or portraits. The
London manuscript, British Museum, MS Burney 19, had
been in circulationfor close to two centuries before an owner
sought to have it completed with a set of portraits akin to
the Freer one.1 Since the scribe had not foreseen the ad-
FIGURE 7. Rome, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, gr. 1162, fol. 50v:
Virgin and Christ worshipped by angels and prophets (Photo: Biblioteca
Vaticana).
dition of miniatures, he had written the text continuously,
leaving no space free for the portraitsof Matthew and John.
For them the illuminator had to supply pieces of parchment
that a binder could insert at the most appropriateplaces.
Fortuitously,the original layout had resulted in blank sheets
facing the title pages to Mark and Luke, and the illuminator
used them for the miniatures.In painting the portraitof Luke
(Fig. 6), the illuminator executed a miniature about the size
of the text block, but jogged considerably toward the out-
side edge, as if he were working with the manuscript in a
bound state; the same is true of the Markportrait.Otherwise
the portraits bear comparison with those discussed; the set
was framed using blue and carmine boxes.'2 Luke wears a
blue tunic under a green himation, both articulatedwith less
detail than in the Paris or London manuscripts.The portrait
is nonetheless an energetic one in which Luke's face reflects
the inner turmoil of writing under divine inspiration. The
strong pathos of the Burney 19 portraitslinks the manuscript
with a second Gospel book on Mt. Athos, Panteleimon mon-
astery, cod. 25.13 Here, too, the portraits were added to a
manuscriptcopied by a scribe working under the belief that

146
the book would not be illustrated. But in the case of the
Panteleimon Gospels the portraitswere apparentlyexecuted
fairly soon after the text's completion.14Unlike the elegantly
written and ornamented Burney 19, Panteleimon cod. 25 is
an unimpressive book with inked decoration that follows
no set format and was executed without distinction. The
portraits,however, adhere to the format and composition of
the others cited. The closest parallel is the London Luke,
whose drapery is also rather simple when compared with
that of the other manuscripts.The Panteleimonportraitmakes
use of some of the zig-zag highlights on the leg, though not
to the same extent as in the Paris and Lavra manuscripts.
A networkof relationshipsdrawsthe manuscriptstightly
together, in part because the strands connect in changing
patterns that can seem to be random in their distribution.
Among the details are the footstool decorated with jewels
(Panteleimon, Lavra) or lines (London, Paris, Washington),
the ground line that is continuous (Panteleimon, London) or
interruptedby the footstool (Lavra, Paris, Washington), the
cornice that is a slightly angled strip painted in two tones
(Paris, Washington) or not (others). The uncial inscription
naming St. Luke on the Freer Leaf recalls the methods of the
Panteleimon and London manuscripts, whereas the Paris
portrait was inscribed in minuscule close in style to that of
the inscription above the frame in the Lavra manuscript.
The interrelatednessof the changing details underscores the
Freer portrait'smembership in a group which may contain
additional examples and which is, as the London portrait
suggests, not entirely homogeneous.15 The series was possi-
bly created by more than one illuminator. The success the
Kokkinobaphos Master's work enjoyed led to commissions
for miniatures to be added to contemporary as well as to
earlier manuscripts. The writing on the recto of the Freer
Leaf (Fig. 3) creates the impression of a commission in
which text and illustration were integral, but the half uncial
in which the kephalaia were written is extremely common.
Many of the manuscriptsilluminated by the Kokkinobaphos
Master were written in distinctive styles, and the half-uncial
of the Freer Leaf does not immediately recall one of them.
The evidence for dating the Freer Leaf consists of the
damaged script and the portrait. The portrait argues for a
date around the 1140s or early 1150s. Attributingthe work
later, to sometime in the second half of the century,becomes
increasingly objectionable with each decade. The Decora-
tive Style was established by the last quarterof the century,
when powerfully realized variations were created by artists
living and working far from Constantinople.l6The Evange-
list portraitsin a Gospel book in the J. Paul Getty Museum,
cod. Ludwig 11.5, have been attributed to a Cypriot active
around the end of the century.17Where the painter of the
Freer Leaf energized the fold pattern by interlocking lines
that barely crease the surface, the late twelfth-century artist
used a more plastic conception based on sweeping hand-
fuls of fabric folded to form edges of razor sharpness. The
conception seems rooted in trends in monumental painting
apparent as early as the 1160s.'8 In the Freer portrait the
draperyarticulationexists more as linear embellishment than
as the record of a richly plastic surface. The energetic rip-
pling of the folds along Luke's thigh, a trait found in the
Paris and Lavra manuscripts, belongs to a sensibility that
seems most in accord with the Kokkinobaphos Master's
work around the middle of the century. In the Vatican vol-
ume of sermons on the Life of the Virgin the Virgin appears
in Paradise worshipped by the prophets (Fig. 7). The clothes
of the prophets and angels, as they move toward Mary
with evident ardor, break into complicated patterns. Down
the thigh of the angel at the left march a set of interlocking,
hooking shadows and highlights that follow the same pat-
tern as the one found in the Paris Gospels and Freer Leaf.
The manuscriptof sermons is undatedbut attributableto the
1140s or early 1150s.19 It was likely at this time that the
Freer Leaf was illuminated by the KokkinobaphosMaster or
a member of his circle.
The undistinguished script combines with the abraded
surface to urge caution in attributing the Leaf more pre-
cisely, especially in the absence of ornament. One or two
twelfth-centuryilluminatorsseem to have become quite adept
at mimicking the Kokkinobaphos Master's work. While the
work of his collaborators in the Seraglio Octateuch and
Vatican, gr. 746 shows that it was impossible for illumi-
nators to simulate his distinctive style when copying non-
conventional subjects,20they may well have succeeded in
stereotyped material like Evangelist portraits, for which
sources from the Master'shand might have been available to
copy. Whether it is the work of the Kokkinobaphos Master
himself or an associate, the Freer Leaf enriches our grasp of
the courtly movement in twelfth-century Byzantium.
NOTES
1. For the opportunityto examine and to publish the leaf I wish to thank
Dr. Marianna S. Simpson, the Curator of Islamic Near Eastern Art,
Freer Gallery of Art, Messrs. Rocky Corr and James Smith, and the
Freer Gallery photography department.
2. K. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manu-
scripts in America (Chicago, 1936), 209. V. Lazarev, Storia della pit-
tura bizantina (Turin, 1967), 254 (his citation of C. Morey seems to
be an error). The leaf has no sign among the various comprehensive
lists, such as that of Aland cited below in note 8, or the census
published by S. De Ricci and W. Wilson, Census of Medieval and
Renaissance Manuscripts in the United States and Canada (New
York, 1935). To my knowledge the leaf has never been reproduced.
3. The ruling cannot be considered unusual, but it is not represented in
J. Leroy, Les types de reglure des manuscrits grecs (Paris, 1976).
4. H. Von Soden, Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments, I/1 (Gottingen,
1911), 409-11; Clark, Catalogue, is mistaken in reporting the text.
5. The vertical row of circles on the Luke portraitof Paris. gr. 71 (Fig. 4)
came from the facing headpiece.
6. A. Friend, "The Portraitsof the Evangelists in Greek and Latin Manu-
scripts,"Art Studies, V (1927), figs. 101, 105. H. Omont, Miniatures
147
 des plus anciens manuscrits grecs de la Bibliotheque Nationale du
Vle au XIVe siecle, 2d ed. (Paris, 1929), pl. LXXXI for Coislin 195.
7. On whom see J. Anderson, "The Seraglio Octateuch and the Kokki-
nobaphos Master,"DOP, XXXII (1978), 175-96; and idem, "The Il-
lustrated Sermons of James the Monk: Their Dates, Order, and Place
in the History of Byzantine Art," Viator, XXII (1991), 69-120.
8. H. Omont, Inventaire sommaire des manuscrits de la Bibliothkque
Nationale, I (Paris, 1883), 10; K. Aland, Kurzgefasste Liste der grie-
chischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments(Berlin, 1963), no. 7;
Lazarev, Storia, 192. Omont, Miniatures, pl. LXXXVII; J. Beckwith,
TheArt of Constantinople(London, 1961), fig. 148; J. Anderson, "The
Illustrationof Cod. Sinai. Gr. 339," AB, LXI (1979), fig. 10. The date
is based on similarities with Vat. gr. 1162, discussed furtherbelow.
9. Spyridon Lavriotes and S. Eustriades, Catalogue of the Greek Manu-
scripts in the Library of the Lavra on Mount Athos, Harvard Theo-
logical Studies, XII (Cambridge, MA, 1925), 6; Aland, Liste, no.
1467. Cuttings in Baltimore, Walters Art Gallery, cod. W530d, e:
Clark, Catalogue, 361; Lazarev, Storia, 252; The Walters Art Gal-
lery, Early Christian and Byzantine Art (Baltimore, 1947), no. 718;
Illuminated Greek Manuscripts from American Collections, ed.
G. Vikan (Princeton, 1973), 138-39, fig. 63; R. Nelson, Theodore
Hagiopetrites. A Late Byzantine Scribe and Illuminator (Vienna,
1991), 47-51, pls. 78, 80, 81. The contents of the manuscript are:
fol. I + Iv, blank; 1-2v, Mt kephalaia; 3-115v, Mt; 116-116v, Mk
kephalaia; 117 + 117v, blank; 118-187v, Mk; 188-189v, Lk
kephalaia; 190, blank; 190v, Lk portrait; 191-310, Lk; 310v, blank;
311, Jn kephalaia; 311v, blank; 312-400v, Jn; 401-416v, lection-
ary tables; 417 + 417v, originally blank.
10. Cod. Vat. gr. 1162 has been published in facsimile: I. Hutter and
P. Canart, Das Marienhomiliar des Minchs Jakobos von Kokkino-
baphos (Zurich, 1991).
11. J. Forshall, Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the British Museum,
New Series, I (London, 1840), 4; Aland, Liste, no. 481; Lazarev, Sto-
ria, 192; Facsimiles of Biblical Manuscripts in the British Museum,
ed. F Kenyon (London, 1900), pl. 6; 0. Dalton, Byzantine Art and
Archaeology (Oxford, 1911), 476, fig. 429; British Museum, Repro-
ductions of Illuminated Manuscripts, Series II (London, 1923), 7,
pl. I; Beckwith, Art of Constantinople, fig. 170; Byzantine Art, an
European Art (Athens, 1964), 318, fig. 314.
12. Taken at the frame the dimensions of the portraits cited are (in cm):
London, Burney 19 13.2 x 15.3
Mt. Athos, Lavra, A.44/Baltimore 10.8 x 15.6
Mt. Athos, Panteleimon: 13.5 x 18
Paris. gr. 71 11.2 x 13.5
Washington, Freer 33.12 13.7 x 17.7
148
Source for the measurements of the Panteleimon leaf is Pelekanides
et al., Treasures, 359.
13. S. Lampros, Catalogue of the Greek Manuscripts on Mount Athos,
II (Cambridge, 1900), 284 [5531]; Aland, Liste, no. 1091; Lazarev,
Storia, 335; F Dolger, M6nchsland Athos (Munich, 1945), 204-5,
fig. 125; P. Huber, Athos: Leben, Glaube, Kunst (Zurich, 1969), 223,
figs. 112-15; S. Pelekanides, P. Christou, Ch. Tsioumis, S. Kadas,
The Treasures of Mount Athos: Illuminated Manuscripts, II (Athens,
1975), 359, figs. 323-26.
14. The contents of the manuscript are as follows: fol. 1 + Iv, Eusebian
letter in framed cross shape; 2, Canon 1; 2v, Canon 2; 3 Canons 3
and 4; 3v, Canon 5; 4, Canons 6 and 7; 4v, Canons 8-10; 5, Canon
10 completed; 5v-6v, Mt kephalaia; 7, blank; 7v, Mt portrait;8-55v,
Mt and, 55v, beginning of Mk kephalaia (1-32); 56, blank; 56v,
Mk portrait; 57, Mk kephalaia (33-end) and beginning of Gospel;
57-87v, Mk and, 87v, Lk kephalaia; 87v-88v, Lk kephalaia; 89,
blank; 89v, Lk, portrait;90-142v, Lk; 143, blank; 143v, Jn portrait;
144, Jn, kephalaia; 144v-183v, Jn; 184-189v, lectionary tables. The
text, written in two columns and thirty lines per column, contains pro-
minent lectionary apparatus.
15. Aspects of style and composition find further parallels in the Codex
Ebnerianus (Oxford, Bodleian Library, cod. auct. Tinf.1.10): I. Hut-
ter, Corpus der byzantinischen Miniaturenhandschriften,I/, Oxford,
Bodleian Library (Stuttgart,1977), 59-67, figs. 222-55; Patmos, Mon-
astery of St. John the Theologian, cod. 274 (A. Kominis, Patmos:
Treasures of the Monastery [Athens, 1988], 310-13); and the Lasp-
skaldi Gospels (Mestia, Istoriko-etnografickiiMuzei, no. SIEM 482):
A. Saminsky, "Masterskaiagruzinskoi i greceskoi knigi v Konstanti-
nopole XII-Na6ala XIII veka,"Muzei, X [1989], 184-216). The group
of works includes examples by more than one artist.
16. H. Buchthal, "Studies in Byzantine Illumination of the Thirteenth
Century,"Jahrbuch der Berliner Museen, XXV (1983), 27-102; and
A. Carr,Byzantine Illumination 1150-1250. The Study of a Provincial
Tradition(Chicago, 1987).
17. Carr, Byzantine Illumination, 44-50, figs. 7B9-7C8.
18. See the frescoes of St. Panteleimon at Nerezi, dated 1164: R. Hamann-
MacLean and H. Hallensleben, Die Monumentalmalerei in Serbien
und Makedonien vom 11. bis zum fruhen 14. Jahrhundert (Giessen,
1963), figs. 33-39.
19. Anderson, "Sermons of James the Monk,"83-95, for the basis of this
inference.
20. See above note 7 and J. Lowden, The Octateuchs. A Study in Byzan-
tine Manuscript Illumination (University Park, PA, 1992), 17-28 and
passim.