Threads of Authority: The Virgin Mary’s Veil in the Middle Ages

  • Annemarie Weyl Carr
Part of the The New Middle Ages book series (TNMA)

Abstract

In 1031/32 the monastery of New Minster in Winchester, England, commemorated benefactions from the reigning king, Cnut, and his spouse, Queen Emma, by creating a Liber Vitae for the altar of its church.1 The book’s text—a list of benefactors and the order for prayers on behalf of their salvation2—is prefaced by three full-page illuminations. The first shows Cnut and Emma making their gift by placing a large cross on New Minster’s altar (see figure 4.1); the following pair shows the afterlife, where the Devil garners the damned from his book of sins while the blessed—introduced to Peter by the Liber Vitae itself3—enjoy the rewards of their benefactions in Heaven. The theme of generosity rewarded is anticipated already in the opening scene, where—before the approving eyes of New Minster’s monks at the lower margin—the royal donation is acknowledged with divine recompense. Christ himself in a mandorla hovers over the cross, flanked on his right by his Mother and on his left by Peter, the two patron saints of New Minster. Below St. Peter, an angel lowers a crested crown onto Cnut’s head, and below Mary a similar angel lowers a veil onto Emma’s.

Keywords

Welding Trench Topo Metaphor Chalke 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Elizabeth Temple, Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts 900–1066, Manuscript Books from the British Isles 2 (London: Harvey Miller, 1976), no. 78. The manuscript is London, British Library, Stowe 944, folio 6r.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jan Gerchow, “Prayers for King Cnut: The Liturgical Commemoration of a Conqueror,” in England in the Eleventh Century, Harlaxton Medieval Studies 2 (Stamford: Paul Watkins, 1992), 230–37.Google Scholar
  3. 4.
    Pauline Stafford, Queen Emma and Queen Edith (Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers, 1997), 175–79, esp. 178.Google Scholar
  4. 5.
    For late ninth- and tenth-century examples preceding Cnut’s portrait see the Byzantine emperors Leo VI (886–912) crowned by the Virgin (Kathleen Corrigan, “The Ivory Scepter of Leo VI: A Statement of Post-Iconoclastic Imperial Ideology,” Art Bulletin 60 [1978]: 407–16, and Helen C. Evans and William D. Wixom, eds., The Glory of Byzantium. Art and Culture of the Middle Byzantine Era, A.D. 843–1261, exhibition catalogue, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 11 March 1997–6 July 1997 [New York, 1997], 201–2, no. 138), Constantine VII (913–959) crowned by Christ (Evans and Wixom, eds., The Glory, 203–4, no. 140), and Romanos and Eudokia crowned by Christ (Ibid., 500; see most recently Anthony Cutler, “A Byzantine Triptych in Medieval Germany and Its Modern Recovery,” Gesta 37 [1998]: 9–10 for the date of this plaque and thus of its imperial pair). In the West see Otto II (967–983) and Theophano (972–991) crowned by Christ in their ivory plaque in the Musée de Cluny in Paris (Evans and Wixom, eds., The Glory, 499–501, no. 337), Otto III (991–1002) crowned by Mary in Ivrea, Biblioteca capitolare, MS LXXXVI, fol. 16v (Robert Deshman, “Otto III and the Warmund Sacramentary. A Study in Political Theology,” Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 34 [1971]: fig. 1), and Henry II (1002–1024) crowned by Christ in Munich, Staatsbibliothek, cod. lat. 4456, folio 11r (Percy Ernst Schramm, Die deutschen Kaiser und Könige in Bilder ihrer Zeit 751–1190, 2nd ed., ed. Florentine Mütherich [Munich: Prestel Verlag, 1983], no. 124).Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    On the Blachernai complex see Raymond Janin, La Géographie ecclésiastique de lempire byzantin, I: Le Siège de Constantinople et le patriachat oecuménique, 3: Les Églises et les monastères (Paris: Centre national des recherches scientifique, 1969), 161–70.Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    On the siege of 626 see most recently J. Howard-Johnston, “The Siege of Constantinople in 626,” in Constantinople and Its Hinterland, ed. Cyril Mango and Gilbert Dagron (Aldershot: Variorum, 1995), 131–42, and Cyril Mangos commentary in The Chronicle of Theophanes the Confessor, trans, and with commentary by Cyril Mango and Roger Scott (Oxford: Clarendon, 1997), 477.Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    On the Akathistos and its relation to the events of 626, see Egon Wellesz, “The ‘Akathistos’: A Study in Byzantine Hymnography,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 9–10 (1956): 143–76; Paul Speck, Zufälliges zum Bellum avaricum des Georgios Pisides, Miscellanea Byzantina Monacensia 24 (Munich: Institut für Byzantinistik, neugriechische Philologie und byzantinische Kunstgeschichte der Universität, 1980), 58–59; and Nancy Patterson Ševčenko, “Icons in the Liturgy,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 45 (1991): 49 n30.Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    A good summary of this event’s complex historiography is given in Cyril Mango, The Homilies of Photios, Patriarch of Constantinople. English Translation, Introduction and Commentary, Dumbarton Oaks Studies 3 (Cambridge: Haarvard University Press, 1958), 74–82.Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    See Alexander P. Kazhdan, ed., The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, 3 vols. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 2: 1353, s.v. “Metatorion.”Google Scholar
  10. 12.
    Constantini Porphyrogeniti, “De Cerimoniis Aulae Byzantinae,” in Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series Graeca [henceforth PG], ed. J.-P Migne, 161 vols. in 166 (Paris: Gamier Fratres, 1857–1887), 112: col. 1021 A: Εἰ̑Θ‘οὕτως δεἐρχονται διὰ του̑ πρὸς ἀνατολὴν δεξιου̑ μἐρους του̑ βήματος καὶ του̑ σκευοϕυλακίου, καὶ εἰσἐρχονται εἰς τὸν νάρΘηκα τη̑ς ἁγίας σορου̑ … [Then the emperors leave the bema to the east through the right side of the bema and the skevophylakion, and they enter the narthex of the Soros …]. It is not easy to see the point at which the emperors actually acknowledge the Virgin’s garment. With Venance Grumel, “Sur l’Episkepsis des Blachernes,” Echos d’Orient 33 (1930): 334, I suspect that this occurred at the “Episkepsis” cited at col. 1021 B: Εἰ̑τα ἑκβάλλουσι τά τούτων σαγία, καὶ λαμβάνει ὁ πρω̑τος βασιλεύς παρὰ του̑ πραιποσίτου τό άπὸ ταωνοπτἐρων ριπίδιον, καὶ ϕιλοκαλει̑ πἐριξ τη̑ς ἁγίας τραπἁζης, και ἁξἁρχονται του̑ βἁματος, καὶ ἀπἁρχονται ἀπὸ δεξιᾳ̑ς εἰς τὴν ἁπίσκεψιν, καὶ ἅπτουσιν κἀκει̑σε κηροὺς καὶ προσκυνου̑σιν [Then, the emperors get out of their sagia, and the senior emperor takes the riphidion made of peacock feathers from the praepositos, and he goes around the altar, and they go out of the bema, and go out on the right into the Episkepsis, and light candles there and venerate]. This seems to refer not to an icon, as usually maintained, but rather—as Reiskius proposed in his translation given in Ibid., col. 1022 B—to the site of the relic: … et abeunt a dextra parte ad episkepsin [seu visitationem atque adorationem sacrarum B.Virginis reliquiarum], et ibi quoque accendunt cereos et [reliquias] adorant. See, however, Lennart Rydén, “The Vision of the Virgin at Blachernae and the Feast of the Pokrov,” Analecta Bollandiana 94 (1976): 70, who cites a similar use of the word in reference to an icon at the Myrelaion church.Google Scholar
  11. 15.
    See in particular the vision of St. Andrew the Fool in Christ, quoted in translation by Rydén, “The Vision,” 66, and the visionary dream of St. Irene of Chysobalanton, in Jan Olaf Rosenqvist, The Life of St. Irene Abbess of Chrysobalanton (Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksell, 1986), 58–59.Google Scholar
  12. 16.
    Psellos’s text, composed in 1075, is given in translation and the western European descriptions of the miracle are cited in Venance Grumel, “Le ‘Miracle habituel’ de Notre-Dame des Blachernes,” Echos d’Orient 24 (1931): 129–46.Google Scholar
  13. 17.
    Ibid., 141.Google Scholar
  14. 18.
    Note Nikephoros Kallistos Xanthopoulos’s extremely complicated narrative of Constantinople’s Marian relics, analyzed by Michel Van Esbroeck, “Le Culte de la Vierge de Jérusalem à Constantinople aux 6e–7e siècles,” Revue des études byzantines 46 (1988): 185–86, quoting from Nicephori Callisti Xanthopouli, “Historia Ecclesiastica,” in PG, 146: col. 1061 A–B and 147: cols. 41 D, 44 B-45 B. Nikephoros has Pulcheria place at Blachernai with her own hands two caskets received from Jerusalem, one with the shroud (τὰ ἐντάϕια σπάργανα) and one with what must be the two robes (…μετὰ τω̑ν ἱερω̑ν ἐκείνων ἀμϕίων …), and then adds that “the venerable garment was placed there not long afterward under Leo (‘H γὰρ τιμία ἐσΘὴς ἐπί λἐοντος οὑ πολλῳ̑ ὕστερον ἐκοιμίζετο.)”The genuine confusion over the matter is amusingly reflected in the illuminations for 15 August in three Metaphrastian Menologia of the eleventh century (Moscow, Historical Museum, gr. 382, Athos, Dionysiou 50, and Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, gr. 1528), which conflate elements of Blachernai and Chalkoprateia, and of the ceremonies of July 2 and August 15: Sirarpie Der Nersessian, “The Illustrations of the Metaphrastian Menologium,” in Late Classical and Mediaeval Studies in Honor of Albert Mathias Friend, Jr., ed. George Forsyth and Kurt Weitzmann (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955), 230–31. Pilgrim accounts are no more consistent. The early twelfth-century English Pilgrim, for instance, reports that “Ad sanctam Mariam Blachernes … est posita ar-gentea archa, et iacet intus cinctura sanctae Dei genitricis,” while William of Tyre says nothing about the Soros. See Krijne N. Ciggaar, “Une description de Constantinople traduite par un pèlerin anglais,” Revue des études byzantines 34 (1976): 260; E.M. Langille, “La Constantinople de Guillaume de Tyre,” Byzantion 63 (1993): 195.Google Scholar
  15. 19.
    “Narratio in DepositionemVestis S. Mariae = Εἰς κατάΘεσιν τη̑ς τιμίας ἐσΘη̑τος τη̑ς ίεομήτορος ἐν Βλαχἐρναις,” in François Combefis, Historia haeresis monotheletarum sanctaeque in eam sextae synodi actorum vindiciae … (Paris: Antonii Bertier, 1648), 751–88.Google Scholar
  16. 20.
    Ibid., 782 A: ἣν οὐ μόνον αὐτήν πεπιστεύκαμεν ἠμϕιἐσΘαι τὴν του̑ Θεου̑ λόγου μητἐρα ἀλλ ‘ἐν ῃ῾̑ καἰ αὐτὸν πάντως ἔτι νήπιου ὄντα τὸν Θεὸν λόγον, ἐδἐξατό τε, καὶ ἐγαλούχησεν.Google Scholar
  17. 21.
    Andrew of Crete, “Εγκόμιον εἰς τὴν κατάΘεσιν τη̑ς τιμίας ζώνης τη̑ς ὑπεραγίας δεσποίνης ἡμω̑ν Θεοτόκου,” in Combefis, Historia, 789–804. Accordingly, the sermon by Patriarch Germanos (730–33) honoring a church of the Virgin and its milk-stained relic of the ζώνη is often assigned to Blachernai: S. Germani Patriarchae Constantinopolitanae, “Oratio I in Encaenia venerandae aedis sanctissimae Dominae nostrae Dei Genitricis, inque sanctas fascias Domini nostri Jesu Christi,” in PG, 98 (1865): 371–84. This or another ζώνη was venerated along with the saddling clothes of Christ from the early tenth century onward at the Chalkopraeia church; another ζώνη was brought to Chalkoprateia in 942. See Nancy Patterson Ševčenko, “The Limburg Staurothek and Its Relics,” in ίϒMIAMA στην μνήμη της Θασκαρίνας Μπούρα (Athens: Benaki Museum, 1994), 291.Google Scholar
  18. 22.
    The Euthymiac History is preserved as an interpolation into John of Damascus’s second sermon on the Dormition and in the eighth-century Sinai MS gr. 491: see Antoine Wenger, A.A., L’Assomption de la T.S. Vierge dans la tradition byzantine du VIe au Xe siècle. Études et documents, Archives de l’orient chrétien 5 (Paris: Institut français d’études byzantines, 1955), 136–40. As seen in S. Joannis Damasceni, “Homilia II in Dormitionem B.V. Mariae,” in PG, 96: cols. 721–54, this speaks indeed of the Virgin’s burial shroud (col. 749 B: Καὶ τὸ μἐν σω̑μα αὐτη̑ς τὸ πανύμνητον οὐδαμω̑ς εὑρει̑ν ἠδυνήσαν, μόνα δἐ αὐτη̑ς τὰ ἐντάϕια κείμενα εὑρόντες [And her all-glorious body could not be found at all; only the empty winding cloths could be found]), but it is the dresses that are cited in the reliquary sent by Patriarch Juvenal (col. 752 A: Καὶ ταυ̑τα oἱ βασιλει̑ς ἀκούσαντες, ἢτησαν αὐτόν τὸν ἀρχιεπίσκοπον ’Iουενάλιον τὴν ἁγίαν ἐκείνην σορὸν μετὰ τω̑ν ἐν αὐτη̑ τη̑ς ἀνδόξου καὶ παναγίας ίεοτόκου Μαρίας ιματίων βεβουλλωμἐνην ἀσϕαλω̑ς αύτοι̑ς ἀποσταλήναι… [And hearing these things the emperors asked the Patriarch Juvenal to send them that holy casket carefully sealed up with the dresses of the glorious and all-holy Theotokos Mary inside …).Google Scholar
  19. 23.
    Martin Jugie, La Mort et lassomption de la sainte Vierge. Étude historico-doctrinale, Studi e testi 114 (Città del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1944), 695–96, where the text is quoted. The sermon of Euthymios is given in the Patrologia orientalia 17: 484–85, 511.Google Scholar
  20. 24.
    Ibid., 688–707.Google Scholar
  21. 27.
    In his Fourth Homily on the Russian siege in Mango, Homilies (as in note 9 above), 95–110, Photios does not use “maphorion” but his term περιβολή means something “thrown around,” like a stole: see note 37 below. The word maphorion appears in the tenth-century chronicle known under the name of its scribe, Leo Grammatikos (Immanuelis Bekkari, ed., Leonis Grammatici Chronographia, Corpus Scriptorum Histo-riae Byzantinae 26 [Bonn: Weber, 1842], 241, 11. 4–12) and its various plagiarisms describing the event of 860; in the chronicle of Theophanes Continuatus describing Romanos I’s departure to parley with Tsar Symeon of Bulgaria in 926 (Immanuelis Bekkeri, ed., Theophanes Continuatus, Ioannes Cameniata, Symeon Magister, Georgius Monachus, Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae 43 [Bonn: Weber, 1838], 406, 1. 19–407, 1. 7); in a reference to the event of 860 in one of the diatribes of John Oxites against Alexios I Komnenos composed around 1093 (Paul Gautier, “Diatribes de Jean l’Oxite contre Alexis Ier Comnène,” Revue des études byzantines 28 [1970]: 38–39, 11. 17–27); and in a description of Alexios I Komnenos’s battle against the Cumans in 1089 in the Alexiad of Anna Komnene (Bernard Leib, ed., Anne Comnène Alexiade, 3 vols. [Paris: Société d’édition ‘Les belles lettres’, 1933], 2: 98).Google Scholar
  22. 28.
    On Pulcheria see recently Vasiliki Limberis, Divine Heiress. The Virgin Mary and the Creation of the Christian Constantinople (London and New York: Routledge, 1994), and Nicholas P. Constas, “Weaving the Body of God: Proclus of Constantinople, the Theotokos, and the Loom of the Flesh,” fournal of Early Christian Studies 3, 2 (1995): 169–94.Google Scholar
  23. 32.
    Antoine Wenger, A.A., “Les Homélies inédites de Cosmas Vestitor sur la Dormition,” Revue des études byzantines 11 (1953): 295.Google Scholar
  24. 33.
    See in particular Averil Cameron, “The Theotokos in Sixth-Century Constantinople,” Journal of Theological Studies NS 29 (1978): 79–108; Idem, “Images of Authority: Elites and Icons in Late Sixth-Century Byzantium,” Past and Present 84 (1979): 3–35; and Idem, “The Virgin’s Robe: An Episode in the History of Early Seventh-Century Constantinople,” Byzantion 49 (1979): 42–56. These are reprinted in Averil Cameron, Continuity and Change in Sixth-Century Byzantium (Aldershot: Variorum, 1981), articles XIII, XVI, and XVII.Google Scholar
  25. 36.
    Agostino Pertusi, Giorgio di Pisidia. Poemi, I: Panegyrici epici, Studia patristica et byzantina 7 (Ettal: Buch-Kunstverlag, 1959), 176: Τω̑ν ζωγράφων τις εἰ Θἐλει τὰ της μάχης τρόπαια δει̑ξαι, τὴν Τεκου̑σαν ἀσπόρως μόνην προτάξοι καὶ γράϕοι τὴν εἰκόνα ἀεί γὰρ οἰ̑δε τὴν ϕύσιν νικα̑ν μόνη, τόκω τὸ πρώτον καὶ μάχη τὸ δεύτερονGoogle Scholar
  26. 39.
    The locus classicus for the imagery of the Virgin of Blachernai is the fundamental study of Christa Belting-Ihm, “Sub Matris Tutula.” Untersuchungen zur Vorgeschichte der Schutzmantel Madonna (Heidelberg: Karl Winter-Universitätsverlag, 1976). With extensive bibliography see also John Cotsonis, “The Virgin with the ‘Tongues of Fire’ on Byzantine Lead Seals,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 48 (1994): 221–27 discussing an image perhaps associated with the icon of the “usual miracle,” and Annemarie Weyl Carr, “Court Culture and Cult Icons in Middle Byzantine Constantinople,” in Byzantine Court Culture from 829 to 1204, ed. Henry Maguire (Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1997), 92.Google Scholar
  27. 40.
    Ibid., 92, note 78; see also the twelfth-century icon on Mount Sinai depicting miracle-working icons in Constantinople, that shows the Blacher-nitissa (at far left) as holding a standing child who seems to run along the lower frame of the image: Anthony Cutler and Jean-Michel Spieser, Byzance médiévale, 700–1204 (Paris: Gallimard, 1997), pl. 310.Google Scholar
  28. 41.
    Henry Maguire, “The Heavenly Court,” in Byzantine Court Culture from 829 to 1204, ed. Henry Maguire (Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1997), 95–99 and passim.Google Scholar
  29. 42.
    Mary’s status above the angels is expressed with particular intensity by the late tenth-century John Geometres in a passage translated by Antoine Wenger, A.A., “Foi et piété mariales à Byzance,” in Maria. Études sur la sainte Vierge, ed. Hubert du Manoir, S.J. (Paris: Beauchesne, 1958), 5: 942: “… elle est plus élevée que les thrones, plus redoutable que les chérubins; remplie d’une sagesse plus grande que les séraphins; ou mieux, elle est révérée des thrônes, elle est redoutable aux chérubins, incomprehensible aux séraphins; elle est la commune reine de l’universe, détenant un règne indestructible, au deuxième rang après la royale Trinité, et remplie à satieté du toute la Trinité …Google Scholar
  30. 43.
    Corrigan, “The Ivory Scepter” (as in note 5 above). On the object’s function see Anthony Cutler, The Hand of the Master. Craftsmanship, Ivory and Society in Byzantium (9th–11th Centuries) (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), 200–1.Google Scholar
  31. 44.
    Philip Grierson, Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection, 3: Leo III to Nicephorus III, 717–1081, 2: Basil I to Nicephorus III (867–1081) (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 1973), 589, pl. XLII, 19.1–19.4.Google Scholar
  32. 45.
    Ibid., 749, pl. LXII, la. 1-1.d.Google Scholar
  33. 46.
    See Ševčenko, “Icons in the Liturgy” (as in note 8 above), 51 n. 41; the Life of St. Thomais of Lesbos in Alice-Mary Talbot, ed., Holy Women of Byzantium. Ten Saints’ Lives in English Translation (Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1996), 297–322, esp. 309; and Rosenqvist, The Life of St. Irene (as in note 15 above), 58–59.Google Scholar
  34. 51.
    Leib, ed., Anne Comnène (as in note 27 above), 3: 87, 11. 15–23; in E. R. A. Sewter, trans., The Alexiad of Anna Comnena (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1969), 395.Google Scholar
  35. 53.
    In 971 John I Tzimiskes went with the standard of the Cross to Blachernai before departing for war, but we do not know what he did there and have no intimation that he adopted the relic as a battle standard. See Michael McCormick, Eternal Victor. Triumphal Rulership in Late Antiquity, Byzantium, and the Early Medieval West (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 249, citing Leo Diakonos. It is hard to guess how characteristic of Byzantine habit Alexios’s use of the maphorion was. We know about the use of icons in the army and about battle standards, often painted with holy images, but not about textile relics in this role. On the use of banners and icons in the Byzantine army, see George T. Dennis, “Religious Services in the Byzantine Army,” in ΕϒΛΟΓΗΜΑ. Studies in Honor of Robert Taft, S.J., Studia Anselmiana 110, ed. E. Carr, S. Parenti, A.A. Thiermeyer, E. Volkovska (Rome, 1993), 109–13; John F. Haldon, Constantine Porphyrogenitus. Three Military Treatises on Imperial Military Expeditions (Vienna, 1990), 270–71.Google Scholar
  36. 55.
    Alice Christ, “Calendar and Liturgy in the Icon of the Pokrov,” Byzanti-norussica 1 (1995): 126–37; Rydén, “The Vision” (as in note 12 above), 74–82; Belting-Ihm, “Sub Matris Tutula” (as in note 39 above), 58–61.Google Scholar
  37. 57.
    Certainly it is a veil-like garment that figures centrally in the icon eventually formulated for the Pokrov feast, illustrating the vision of Andrew the Fool in Christ, with Mary’s veil spread like an arc over crowds in her Soros. See Rydén, 74–82. See the fifteenth-century icon of the “Suzdal” version of the Pokrov with Mary holding the veil in Engelina Smirnova, Moscow Icons 14th–17th Century (Oxford: Phaidon, 1989), pl.416; Kurt Weitzmann, Gaiané Alibegašvili, Aneli Volskaja, Manolis Chatzidakis, Gordana Babic, Mihail Alpatov, Teodora Voinescu, The Icon (New York: Knopf, 1982), 297–98 gives an example of the “Novgorod” version of the Pokrov in which angels hold the veil.Google Scholar
  38. 58.
    Ibid., 275 for the famous fifteenth-century icon of the battle of the Novgorodians with the Suzdalians (Novgorod, Museum of Architecture and Ancient Monuments) that shows the image being carried in war. The icon itself is now damaged on the front: see Engelina Smirnova, “Some Contributions to the Iconography of the Blachernitissa (The Study of Two Russian Icons of the 12th–13th Centuries),” Βυζαντινή Μακεδονία, forthcoming. It is closely copied in the thirteenth-century icon of Our Lady of the Sign in the Korin Collection: Konrad Onasch and Annemarie Schnieper, Icons. The Fascination and the Reality, trans. Daniel G. Conklin (New York: Riverside Book Company, Inc., 1995), pl. p. 158. I am very much indebted to Dr. Smirnova for her generosity in showing me a typescript of her article—and in so many other contexts.Google Scholar
  39. 59.
    Carr, “Court Culture” (as in note 39 above), 94–99. The Hodegetria’s symbolic role as the guardian of the city is summed up well in the exasperated comment of Eustathios, Bishop of Thessaloniki, that the Constantinopolitans shrug off their military weakness by saying that “the Hodegetria, the protectress of our city, will be enough, without anyone else, to secure our welfare”: J.R. Melville Jones, trans., Eustathios of Thessalonike: The Capture of Thessalonike, Byzantina Australiensia 8 (Canberra: Australian Association for Byzantine Studies, 1988), 42–43, 11. 11–12.Google Scholar
  40. 68.
    Hans Belting, Likeness and Presence. A History of the Image Before the Era of Art, trans. Edmund Jephcott (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), 291.Google Scholar
  41. 69.
    Efthalia C. Constantinides, The Wall Paintings of the Panagia Olympiotissa at Elasson in Northern Thessaly, 2 vols. (Athens: Canadian Archaeological Institute at Athens, 1992), 1:142–44, and 169 where she links this imagery with the church at Blachernai.Google Scholar
  42. 70.
    On its future as the Mother of God of Kykkos Monastery in Cyprus, see Olga Gratziou, “Μεταμορϕώσεις μίας Θαυματουργής εικόνας. Σημειώσεις στις όψιμες παραλλαγἐς της Παναγίας του Κύκκου,” Δελτίον τη̑ς χριστιανικη̑ς ἀρχαιολογικη̑ς ἑταιρείας, ser. 4, 17 (1933–94): 317–29 with English summary on 330; George A. Soteriou, “H Κυκκιώτισσα,” Νἐα Εστία (Christmas issue 1939): 3–6. On its future in Italy see Paola Santa Maria Mannino, “Vergine ‘Kykkotissa’ in due icone Laziali del Duecento,” in Roma Anno 1300, Atti del Congresso internazionale di storia dell’arte mediEvale, Roma, 19–24 Maggio, 1980 (Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider, 1983), 487–92.Google Scholar
  43. 72.
    Evans and Wixom, eds., The Glory (as in note 5 above), 127–28, no. 75 and A. Papageorghiou, Icons of Cyprus (Nicosia: Holy Archbishopric of Cyprus, 1992), pls. 15 a and b; Doula Mouriki, “Icons from the Twelfth to the Fifteenth Century,” in Sinai. Treasures of the Monastery of Saint Catherine, ed. Konstantinos A. Manafēs (Athens: Ekdotike Athenon, 1990), 118–19, pl. 65.Google Scholar
  44. 74.
    Annemarie Weyl Carr, “Byzantines and Italians on Cyprus: Images from Art,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 49 (1995): 335–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 77.
    Chrysanthe Baltogianne, Εικόνες. Μήτηρ Θεού βρεϕοκρατούσα στην ενσάρκωση και το πάΘ ος (Athens: ADAM, 1994), 107 and passim.Google Scholar
  46. 78.
    Gordana Babic, “Sur l’Icone de Poganovo et la Vasilissa Hélène,” in Thessalonique et les pays balkaniques et les courants spirituels au XIVe siècle. Receuil des rapports du IVe colloque serbo-grec (Belgrade 1985), Académie Serbe des sciences et des arts, Institute des études balkaniques, Editions speciales 31 (Belgrade: GRO Kultura, 1987), 57–65.Google Scholar
  47. 79.
    For Paphos and Siena, see Carr, “Byzantines and Italians,” 356; for Athos, see R.M. Dawkins, The Monks of Mount Athos (London: George Allen and Unwin, Ltd., 1936), 281–83.Google Scholar
  48. 80.
    John Wortley, “Hagia Skêpe and Pokrov Bogoroditsi,” Analecta Bollandiana 89 (1971): 149.Google Scholar
  49. 81.
    Richard A. Clogg, A Concise History of Greece (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 122, fig. 39, showing George Gounaropoulos’s “Νική, λευτερια, H Παναγία μαζί του.”Google Scholar
  50. 82.
    The theme deserves exploration on the level of folk devotion: see the fascinating nineteenth-century Finnish icon with Mary’s upper body rising from a “skirt” of walls and bearing a Child who grasps her white veil: Mikhail Kraslin, “Ikonograficheskii arkhetip i narodnoe pochitanie chu-dotbori’ch obrazov = The Iconographie Archetype and Folk Worship of Miracle-Working Icons,” in Chudotvoriia Ikona v Vizantii i drevnei Rust, ed. A.M. Lidov (Moscow: Martis, 1996), fig. 1.Google Scholar
  51. 83.
    B. G. Niebuhr, ed., Ioannes Zonaras, 3 vols., Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae 46 (Bonn: Weber, 1897), 3: 751, translated in Joannes Zonaras, Militärs und Höflinge Ringen um das Kaisertum. Byzantinische Geschichte von 969 bis 1118, trans. E.Trapp (Graz:Verlag Styria, 1986), 173.Google Scholar
  52. 84.
    Valerie Nunn, “The Encheirion as Adjunct to the Icon in the Middle Byzantine Period,” Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 5 (1986): 73–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 85.
    On the relics collected at Aachen see Heinrich Schiffers, Karls des Grossen Reliquienschatz und die Anfänge der Aachenfahrt (Aachen: J.Volk, 1951).Google Scholar
  54. 83.
    “Schleier” is the favored noun of Stephan Beissel, S. J., Geschichte der Verehrung Marias in Deutschland während des Mittelalters (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herdersche Verlagshandlung, 1909), of Walter Pötzl, “Marianischen Brauchtum an Wallfahrtsorten,” in Handbuch der Marienkunde, ed. Wolfgang Beinert and Heinrich Petri (Regensburg: F. Pustet, 1982), 883–926, and of Schiffers himself.Google Scholar
  55. 88.
    As argued with piercing scorn by Professor Dr. H. Disselnkötter, Aachens grosse Heilingtümer und geschichtliche Beglaubung (Bonn: Universitäts-buch-druckerei und Verlag, 1909), 57 and passim.Google Scholar
  56. 93.
    Documents on the history of the relic at Chartres are compiled and translated in Robert Branner, Chartres Cathedral, Norton Critical Studies in Art History (London: Thames and Hudson, 1969), 107–14.Google Scholar
  57. 94.
    This genealogy is spelled out with particular clarity by J. C. Jennings, “The Origins of the ‘Elements Series’ of the Miracles of the Virgin,” Mediaeval and Renaissance Studies 6 (1968): 87–90. I am indebted to Rachel Fulton for showing me this helpful article.Google Scholar
  58. 97.
    Gabriela Signori, Maria zwischen Kathedrale, Kloster und Welt (Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 1995), 179.Google Scholar
  59. 98.
    J. A. Giles, D. C. L., William of Malmesbury’s Chronicle of the Kings of England (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1847), 125. The Latin, cited by Signori, Maria, 180 n35, reads: Namque cives, nec armis nec muris confisi, Beate Marie auxillium implorant camisiamque gloriosissime Virginis quam, a Constan-tinopoli sibi allatum, unus ex Karolis ibi posuerat, super propugnacula in modum vexilli ventis exponunt.Google Scholar
  60. 100.
    André Chédeville, Histoire de Chartres et du pays chartrain (Toulouse: Editions Privat, 1983), 61.Google Scholar
  61. 101.
    Ibid., 61. Chédeville calls the fabric eighth- or ninth-century; this is too early for its tiraz-like design, and it seems more nearly contemporary with the relic’s installation in Tendon’s reliquary.Google Scholar
  62. 102.
    For inventories of these relics, see Beissel, Geschichte (as in note 86 above), 293–94, and Charles Rohault de Fleury, La sainte Vierge; etudes archéologiques et iconographiques, 2 vols. (Paris: Poussielgne, 1878), 1: 290–93. Beissel, 293–94, points out that many textile relics of Mary were portions of fabrics used to dress either altars or images of Mary. The close bond of such textiles to Mary herself is seen already clearly in the robe placed by Pulcheria upon the altar in Hagia Sophia, which was interpreted by Cosmas Vestitor’s translator as the dress on Mary’s lap upon which Christ sat when he was present upon the altar (see note 32 above).Google Scholar
  63. 103.
    Robert Deshman, The Benedictional of St. Aethelwold, Studies in Manuscript Illumination 9 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995); Mary Clayton, The Cult of the Virgin Mary in Anglo-Saxon England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 162–65, pls. VI and VII. The manuscripts in question are London, British Library, Additional 49598, folio 102v, and Rouen, Bibliothèque municipale, 369, folio 54v.Google Scholar
  64. 106.
    See recently Patrick Corbet, “Les Impératrices ottoniennes et le modèle mariale. Autour de l’ivoire du Château Sforza de Milan,” in Marie. Le Culte de la Vierge dans la société médiévale, ed. Dominique Iogna-Prat, Eric Palazzo, Daniel Russo (Paris: Beauchesne, 1996), 127, 129, citing in particular an image of Mary in clothing reminiscent of Byzantium in the Petershausen Sacramentary (see Anton Van Euw, Vor dem Jahre 1000. Abendländische Buchkunst zur Zeit der Kaiserin Theophanu, Ausstellungskatalog, Köln, 1991, 122, no. 32), the Ivrea Sacramentary studied by Deshman, “Otto III” (as in note 5 above), the Seeon Lectionary in which Henry II is shown presenting the manuscript to an imperially clad Virgin, and the Rich Gospels of St. Bernward of Hildesheim (Rainer Kahsnitz, Das kostbare Evangeliar des heiligen Bernwards [Munich: Prestel Verlag, 1993], 27–30).Google Scholar
  65. 108.
    Henry Mayr-Harting, Ottoman Book Illumination, 2 vols. (London: Harvey Miller Publishers, 1991), 1: 140–54. The miniatures he cites are all reproduced in Rainer Kashnitz, “Koimesis-dormitio-assumptio. Byzantinisches und Antikes in den Miniaturen der Liuthargruppe,” in Florilegium Carl Nordenfalk, ed. P. Bjurström, N.-G. Hökby, F. Mütherich (Stockholm: National Museum, 1987), 91–122.Google Scholar
  66. 113.
    Dominique Iogna-Prat, “La Vierge et les ordines de couronnement des reines au IXe siècle,” in Marie. Le Culte de la Vierge dans la société médiévale, ed. Dominique Iogna-Prat, Eric Palazzo, Daniel Russo (Paris: Beauchesne, 1996), 100–7; Idem, “Le Culte de la Vierge sous le regne de Charles le Chauve,” Les Cahiers de Saint-Michel de Cuxa 23 (1992): 97–116.Google Scholar
  67. 118.
    Renate Kroos, Der Schrein des hl. Servatius in Maastricht und die vier zugehörigen Reliquiare in Brüssel (Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 1985), 176.Google Scholar
  68. 122.
    Clayton, The Cult (as in note 103 above), 138; Walter de Gray Birch, F.S.A., ed., Liber Vitae: Register and Martyrology of New Minster and Hyde Abbey, Winchester (London: Simpkin and Company, Ltd., 1892), 147 (“De uestimento Sancte Marie”), 148 (“De Sepulcro Sancte Marie”); 150 (“De uestimento Sancte Marie matris domini”), 151 (“De uestimento Sancte Marie”). A half century later, Exeter recorded relics (in Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct.D.2.16) of Mary’s headdress and hair. This suggests a veil, but the word itself is different: not “cuffì a” but “heafo∂clade.”Google Scholar
  69. 123.
    Holger A. Klein, “The so-called Byzantine Diptych in the Winchester Psalter, British Library, MS Cotton Nero C. IV,” Gesta 37 (1998): 26–43, and Kristine Edmondson Haney, The Winchester Psalter: An Iconographic Study (Leicester: University of Leicester Press, 1986), 44–46, 125, and passim, discuss the sarcophagus without specific reference to the relic at Winchester, as I did, too, in Evans and Wixom, eds. The Glory (as in note 5 above), 474–85, no. 312. Relics of Mary’s sepulchre were, admittedly, legion in western Europe.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 125.
    Rebecca Corrie, “The Political Meaning of Coppo di Marcovaldo’s Madonna and Child in Siena,” Gesta 29 (1990): 61–75, and Idem, “Coppo di Marcovaldo’s Madonna del bordone and the Meaning of the Bare-Legged Christ Child in Siena and the East,” Gesta 35 (1996): 43–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 128.
    John White, Duccio. Tuscan Art and the Medieval Workshop (London: Thames and Hudson, 1979), 46–48, fig. 18.Google Scholar
  72. 129.
    See Sirarpie Der Nersessian, “Deux examples arméniennes de la Vierge de Miséricorde,” Revue des études arméniennes NS 7 (1970): 187–202; Belting-Ihm, “Sub Matris Tutula” (as in note 39 above), 68–69. Three examples survive from the Crusader Levant, all from the later thirteenth century: the huge panel of the Virgin protecting Carmelite monks in the Byzantine Museum of the Holy Archiepiscopate of Cyprus in Nicosia (Papageorghiou, Icons [as in note 72 above], 46–49, pl. 31); the mural painting with a Frankish family in the southern conch of the narthex at Asinou (Ewald Hein, Andrija Jakovljevic, Brigitte Kleidt, Zypern-byzantinische Kirchen und Klöstern. Mosaiken und Fresken [Ratingen: Melina-Verlag, 1996], fig. 26); and in a Cilician Armenian miniature, now in the Mer-topolitan Museum of Art in New York, showing Marshal Oshin and his sons protected by Mary (Sirarpie Der Nersessian, Miniature Painting from the Armenian Kingdom of Ciliciafrom the Twelfth to the Fourteenth Century, Dumbarton Oaks Studies 31, 2 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1993), 1: 158–59; 2: fig. 646; a similar composition used with a standing Virgin appears in the Cilician Prince Vasak Gospels in Jerusalem (Ibid., 1: 158–59, 2: fig. 647).Google Scholar
  73. 130.
    White, Duccio, 63, fig. 30 (Brussels, Feron-Stoclet Collection); 63, fig. 31 (Perugia, Galleria nazionale dell’Umbria); 52, fig. 22 (London, National Gallery). On the latter see also David Bomford, Jill Dunkerton, Gillian Gordon, Ashok Roy, Art in the Making. Italian Painting Before 1400, exhibition catalogue, National Gallery, London, 29 November 1989–28 February 1990 (London, 1989), 90–97, no. 4.Google Scholar
  74. 132.
    Richard C. Trexler, “Habiller et déshabiller les images: Esquisse d’une analyse,” in L’image et la production du sacré: Actes du colloque de Strasbourg (20–21 janvier 1988) organisé par le Centre d’histoire des religions de l’Université de Strasbourg II, group “Theorie et pratique de l’image culturelle”, ed. F. Dunand, J.-M. Spieser, and J. Wirth (Paris: Klincksieck, 1991), 195–231.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Stewart Gordon 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Annemarie Weyl Carr

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations