Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Byzantinisches Archiv
Begründet von Karl Krumbacher
Band 27
De Gruyter
The Pantokrator Monastery
in Constantinople
Edited by
Sofia Kotzabassi
De Gruyter
ISBN 978-1-61451-599-9
e-ISBN 978-1-61451-460-2
ISSN 1864-9785
Printed in Germany
www.degruyter.com
Preface
The most important imperial foundation from the Komnene age is the Monastery
of Pantokrator, which continues to this day to impress both the scholar and the
casual visitor. It is as clear to those who visit its three churches, which despite re-
peated devastation still inspire admiration for the perfection of their construction
and the elegance of their decoration, as to those who read its typikon that John II
Komnenos and his empress Eirene spared no cost to erect a splendid monastery
complex, which absorbed a number of smaller foundations, mainly in the environs
of Constantinople, and to make generous provision for its upkeep and operation.
This lavish endowment, which would ensure among other things the continuous
commemoration of the monastery’s founders, is directly linked to the fact that its
middle church, which is dedicated to the Archangel Michael and described as a her-
oon, was built as a funerary chapel for the Komnenoi family. The importance of the
monastery is further illustrated by the role it played alike under the Latin emperors
and later, during the Palaiologan age, when the church of St Michael served the
members of that family as their principal funerary chapel.
A monument of such magnificence could hardly fail to attract the attention and
the interest of numerous scholars. In 1923 Gyula Moravcsik collected all the then
known evidence concerning the Monastery and published texts relating to its his-
tory. The new edition of its typikon published, with a French translation, by Paul
Gautier in 1969 made this exceptionally important text accessible and led to nu-
merous studies of the monastery complex. Particular mention must be made of the
work done by Timothy Miller and Robert Volk, who studied its infirmary and other
charitable institutions. The plans for the renovation of the monument and the re-
cent studies by Robert Ousterhout have considerably expanded our knowledge of
the architecture of the surviving part of the monastery complex, while David Ja-
coby’s articles have shed light on aspects of its history during the Latin occupation
(1204-1261).
The first part of this book contains papers on the history of the Monastery of
Pantokrator, based on the available textual and other material relating to the monu-
ment. The studies in the second part examine and give prominence to the wealth of
texts referring or relating to the monument.
The editor of the volume wishes to express her gratitude to the contributors, to
the editor of the Byzantinisches Archiv, Albrecht Berger, and especially to Rοbert
Ousterhout for his initial encouragement and my colleague Ioannis Vassis for his
support throughout the whole process of preparation and publication.
Sofia Kotzabassi
Contents
Abbreviations ix
History
Texts
* This study was made possible thanks to a research fund allocated by the University of Saler-
no for the FARB project: “La poesia epigrammatica bizantina di argomento profano e sacro
come fonte storica e testimonianza della civiltà e religiosità greca del Medioevo”. The author
wishes to thank Dr. Alessandra Avagliano (MiBAC – Galleria Corsini di Roma) for her many
helpful suggestions.
1 The present name of the site honours Molla Zeyrek Mehmet Efendi, the first teacher who
headed a medrese (Koranic school) there just after the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople,
before the building was converted into a mosque. For the history of the monastery see the ar-
ticle by P. Magdalino, The Foundation of the Pantokrator Monastery in its Urban Setting,
in the present volume 33-48.
2 P. Gautier, Le typikon du Christ Sauveur Pantocrator. RÉB 32 (1974) 1-145 (critical edition,
commentary and French translation), esp. 1.
3 For the construction history of the Pantokrator see, after the crucial examination by A. H. S.
Megaw, Notes on the Recent Work of the Byzantine Institute in Istanbul. DOP 17 (1963) 333-
371, partic. 335-364 and esp. 343-344, the reports of the two restoration campaigns by Robert
Ousterhout and his Turkish colleagues: R. Ousterhout / Z. Ahunbay / M. Ahunbay, Study
and Restoration of the Zeyrek Camii in Istanbul: First Report, 1997-98. DOP 54 (2000) 265-
270; R. Ousterhout / Z. Ahunbay / M. Ahunbay, Study and Restoration of the Zeyrek Camii
in Istanbul: Second Report, 2001-2005. DOP 63 (2009) 235-256. See also M. and Ζ. Ahunbay,
Restoration Work at the Zeyrek Camii, 1997-1998, together with R. Ousterhout, Architec-
ture, Art and Komnenian Ideology at the Pantokrator Monastery, both studies published in:
N. Necipoğlu (ed.), Byzantine Constantinople: Monuments, Topography and Everyday Life
(Papers from the International Workshop held at Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, 7-10 April
1999). The Medieval Mediterranean, 33. Leiden/Boston/Köln 2001, respectively 117-132 and
133-150.
144 Mario D’Ambrosi
church)4 could correspond to a real situation or not: that is, whether the interior of
the churches of the Pantokrator monastery could ever have resembled what it is pos-
sible to argue from such little evidence.
The typikon, edited by Gautier from all known manuscripts containing it,5 is a
fundamental document for the reconstruction of daily life in the monastery and, most
of all, the rules which monks had to observe in their liturgical practice. This docu-
ment is extremely precise in describing all the functions of the liturgy related to the
feasts of the calendar, the prescriptions which monks had to observe and even the
illumination which they had to provide for the icons on feast days.6 Following the
fundamental hagiographical work of encyclopaedic systematisation accomplished
by Symeon Metaphrastes in the 10th century, the Byzantine liturgical calendar was
very rich as concerns the complexity of feasts and the multitude of saints to be cel-
ebrated: poets such as Theodore Prodromos in the 12th century,7 and earlier, in the
11th century, Christopher Mitylenaios,8 would have dedicated their verses according
to this calendar, giving us a fresco of the liturgical practice of their era.
4 For the Pantokrator monastery and its institutions see R. Janin, La géographie ecclésiastique
de l’empire byzantin, première partie: Le siège de Constantinople et le patriarcat œcuménique,
tome III: Les églises et les monastères. Publications de l’Institut français d’études byzantines.
Paris 21969, 515-523, no. 18, and 564-566 (for the hospital and hospice); V. Kidonopoulos,
Bauten in Konstantinopel 1204-1328. Verfall und Zerstörung, Restaurierung, Umbau und
Neubau von Profan- und Sakralbauten. Mainzer Veröffentlichungen zur Byzantinistik, 1. Wies-
baden 1994, 30-33; still interesting, although partially outdated, A. van Millingen with the
assistance of R. Traquair / W. S. George / A. E. Henderson, Byzantine Churches in Con-
stantinople: Their History and Architecture. London 1912, 219-242. See also G. Schreiber,
Byzantinisches und abendländisches Hospital. Zur Spitalordnung des Pantokrator und zur
byzantinischen Medizin. BZ 42 (1942) 116-149; E. Kislinger, Der Pantokrator-Xenon, ein
trügerisches Ideal? JÖB 37 (1987) 173-179.
5 Gautier, Typikon (as in note 2) 5-8; P. Gautier, L’ obituaire du typikon du Pantocrator. RÉB
27 (1969) 235-262, esp. 235-236 for the original document (a 12th-century parchment manu-
script), signed by the hand of emperor John II and rediscovered in June 1902 by Sp. Lambros,
but now lost because of a fire on 17 July 1934.
6 For this matter see Gautier, Typikon (as in note 2) 30-47, and also J. Thomas / A. Constan-
tinides Hero (eds.) with the assistance of G. Constable, Byzantine Monastic Foundation
Documents: A Complete Translation of the Surviving Founders’ Typika and Testaments, I-V.
DOS, 35. Washington, D.C. 2000, II, 728-735 (introduction) and 738-743 (translation). For an
attempt at situating objects mentioned in the typikon within the building of the Pantokrator,
see E. A. Congdon, Imperial commemoration and ritual in the typikon of the monastery of
Christ Pantokrator. RÉB 54 (1996) 161-199, esp. 188-189 with fig. 1 and 195-199 (Appendix
B).
7 See for instance C. Giannelli, Tetrastici di Teodoro Prodromo sulle feste fisse e sui santi del
calendario bizantino. AnBoll 75 (1957) 299-336, repr. in: C. Giannelli, Scripta minora. SBN,
10. Roma 1963, 255-289; A. Acconcia Longo, Il calendario giambico in monostici di Teo-
doro Prodromo. Testi e studi bizantino-neoellenici, 5. Roma 1983.
8 E. Follieri, I calendari in metro innografico di Cristoforo Mitileneo, I-II. Subsidia hagio-
graphica, 63. Bruxelles 1980; E. Follieri, Il calendario giambico di Cristoforo di Mitilene se-
condo i mss. Palat. gr. 383 e Paris. gr. 3041. AnBoll 77 (1959) 245-304; E. Follieri / I. Dujčev,
Il calendario in sticheri di Cristoforo di Mitilene. ByzSl 25 (1964) 1-36.
The Icon of the Three Holy Hierarchs at the Pantokrator Monastery 145
But let us return to our subject. At p. 41, ll. 191-194 of Gautier’s edition (p. 40 for
the French translation), in the section on the katholikon (the southern church), the
typikon mentions an icon of St Basil, St Gregory the Theologian and St John Chrys-
ostom (the last two identified only by their appellative), that is, the Three Holy Fa-
thers of the Orthodox Church, who at this period were not yet called the “Three
Hierarchs”, as they would later be known in the eastern world, at least from the 14th
century when the common definition τρεῖς ἱεράρχαι appears in the sources.9
The typikon states that a branched candlestick (δωδεκαφώτιον) was to be lit and
placed in front of the icon of the three saints, “so as to add to the illumination of
the ordinary feasts only one candelabrum with twelve candleholders”10 on the day
of their common feast: as Gautier remarks,11 this day is unquestionably related to
the feast traditionally celebrated on 30 January of the liturgical calendar, the day on
which Orthodox churches still commemorate the Three Hierarchs, according to a
tradition which probably goes back to John Mauropous, metropolitan of Euchaita,
also known as a teacher and a friend of Michael Psellus.
Unfortunately, the typikon does not say where in the southern church this icon
was kept, or what it was made of (whether it was a mosaic or a wall-painting or, more
likely, a wooden icon). Probably, the readers of the monastic document already knew
which type of icon it referred to, or perhaps this image of the Three Hierarchs was
already well known to the potential audience of the typikon.
Is this icon the same as that attested in the fragments of the brebion (that is, the
inventory of goods),12 which was attached to the typikon of the Kecharitomene mon-
astery in Constantinople? It is tempting to hypothesise that John II Komnenos could
have brought this icon to the Pantokrator katholikon from the monastery in which
his mother, Irene Doukaina, and later his sister Anna Komnena, spent the last years
of their lives. Indeed, the very foundation and construction of the Pantokrator mon-
astery, so near the Kecharitomene, was very likely conceived by the emperor himself
to outshine the earlier monastic site associated with his mother and sister, neither of
whom had favoured his succession to the throne after the death of Alexios I.
9 From a survey on the TLG online (October 2012) of the University of California at Irvine, the
common definition of “Three Hierarchs” appears in inscriptiones of poems (see for instance
Manuel Philes, no. III 121 Miller: εἰς τοὺς τρεῖς ἱεράρχας, ὑπὲρ μειρακίου) or in theologi-
cal or encomiastic works only from the 14th century. The single attestation of the appellative
τρεῖς ‹ἱεράρχαι› in the typikon of the Kecharitomene monastery in Constantinople, the well-
known monastic foundation associated with Irene Doukaina, wife of Alexios I Komnenos,
is due to a textual conjecture by the last editor of the document: P. Gautier, Le typikon de
la Théotokos Kécharitôménè. RÉB 43 (1985) 5-165, esp. 153, 49-50 (appendix B); Thomas /
Constantinides Hero / Constable, Documents (as in note 6) II, 715 (English translation
by R. Jordan). The term ἱεράρχης generally denotes a bishop: G. W. H. Lampe, A Patristic
Greek Lexicon. Oxford 1961-1968, 668-669 s.v.
10 Thomas / Constantinides Hero / Constable, Documents (as in note 6) II, 742.
11 Gautier, Typikon (as in note 2) 40 note 38.
12 Gautier, Typikon Kécharitôménè (as in note 9) 16-17 (description of the manuscript of the
brebion) and 153, 49-50 (appendix B, Greek text).
146 Mario D’Ambrosi
Let us now examine the Greek text of the Pantokrator typikon after Gautier’s edi-
tion and the corresponding translations by Gautier and Jordan:
Τῇ δὲ ἑορτῇ τοῦ ἁγίου Βασιλείου, τοῦ Θεολόγου καὶ τοῦ Χρυσοστόμου, ἡ μὲν φωταψία
καὶ ἔτι ἐλαττωθήσεται ὡς προστίθεσθαι τῇ τῶν κοινῶν ἑορτῶν φωταψίᾳ δωδεκαφώτιον
μόνον ἕν, τὸ μέλλον ἔμπροσθεν τῆς ἑορταζομένης ἁγίας εἰκόνος ἵστασθαι, τὸ δὲ ὀψώνιον
ἔσεται ὁμοίως μίνσου ἑνός.
Pour la fête de saint Basile, de saint (Grégoire le) Théologien et de saint Chrysostome,
le luminaire sera encore plus réduit, puisqu’on ajoutera au luminaire des fêtes ordinaires
un seul candélabre à douze branches, celui qui doit être placé devant la sainte icône que
l’on fête, et le repas consistera également en un plat.13
But during the feasts of St. Basil, of St. Gregory the Theologian, and of St. [John] Chrys-
ostom the amount of lighting will be even more reduced so as to add to the illumination
of the ordinary feasts only one candelabrum with twelve candleholders, the one that is
going to stand in front of the holy icon of the one whose feast is being celebrated. The
provisioning will be similar—that of one course.14
A misunderstanding by Robert Jordan has obscured the significance of the original
Greek: the document states “in the day of their feast” and not “in the days of their
respective feasts”, as mistranslated by Jordan. Over the course of the year, indeed, the
three Fathers were already celebrated in the liturgical calendar: Basil the Great on
January 1, Gregory of Nazianzus on January 25, and John Chrysostom on November
13 and January 27.15 The relatively recent (in 1136, the year in which the typikon was
written)16 feast introduced for January 30 aimed, by celebrating the three Fathers to-
gether, to glorify their liturgical figures in a single feast and thus end the controversy
over the primacy of any one of them, as attested by a single entry in the Menaea.17
The image of the three Fathers mentioned in the typikon of the Pantokrator,
probably a wooden icon rather than a wall-painting or mosaic, is likely to be relat-
ed to a wooden icon of the Three Holy Hierarchs now in the Byzantine Museum of
Athens.18 This latter icon, datable to the 14th century, would be the archetype for an
iconographical tradition that would be enriched by other figures of oriental Fathers
related to the first Ecumenical Councils, such as Cyril and Athanasius of Alexandria
and Nicholas of Myra. Perhaps, however, such an archetype should not be identified
with the wooden icon in the Byzantine Museum of Athens, but directly with the im-
age mentioned two centuries earlier in the typikon of the Pantokrator monastery:
this latter site would, because of its political programme of Komnenian propaganda
(reflected in its iconographical and architectural conception),19 have become the
natural melting pot of the artistic tendencies of the 12th and following centuries.
To my knowledge, this is the first time that an icon of the Three Hierarchs –
whether the same as that attested in the brebion of the Kecharitomene monastery
or not – is actually mentioned after the institution of the related feast by John Mau-
ropous in 1081/1082, if we credit the information provided by the Menaea. There
are many other icons or wall-paintings attested with only one of the three Fathers
or with these among a different group of saints, but none with the Three Hierarchs
depicted together as a single subject.20 Already in the 11th century, however, some
miniatures are attested in which the three Fathers are represented together, as for ex-
ample at f. 35v in the so-called Theodore Psalter (London, British Library, Add. MS
19352), written and illustrated in 1066 by the monk Theodore at the Stoudios mon-
astery in Constantinople. This evidence demonstrates that the debate on the figures
of the three holy Fathers was quite real at the time of John Mauropous, even before
the related feast was introduced in the calendar.
We know from the account of the 18th-century traveller Richard Pococke that
in his day (the year was 1738, shortly before the publication of his travel writings
in 1743-1745,21 but many years before the great earthquake of 1766, which severely
damaged the structure of the monastery)22 the interior decoration of the Pantokra-
19 Cf. Ousterhout, Architecture (as in note 3); V. Stanković, Comnenian Monastic Foun-
dations in Constantinople: Questions of Method and Context. Belgrade Historical Review 2
(2011) 47-73, esp. 59-61 and 64-69; Congdon, Imperial commemoration (as in note 6).
20 See for instance the apse of the Parekklesion of Chora monastery (Kariye Camii), where Atha-
nasios, Cyril of Alexandria and another saint on the left, today unidentifiable but very likely
Nicholas of Myra, are represented together with the three Fathers: the saints mentioned are
associated with the first Ecumenical Councils in their ecclesiastical role of ἱεράρχαι, that is
bishops.
21 R. Pococke, A Description of the East and Some other Countries, I-II. London 1743-1745,
after R. G. Ousterhout, The Decoration of the Pantokrator (Zeyrek Camii): Evidence Old
and New, in: A. Ödekan / E. Akyürek / N. Necipoğlu (eds.), Change in the Byzantine World
in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries, Proceedings of the First International Sevgi Gönül
Byzantine Studies Symposium (Istanbul, Archaeological Museums, 25-28 June 2007). Istanbul
2010, 432-439, 432 with reference at note 4. See also S. Ronchey / T. Braccini, Il romanzo
di Costantinopoli. Guida letteraria alla Roma d’Oriente. Super ET. Torino 2010, 576-577 (Ita-
lian translation). For other sources of the late 18th century see G. De Gregorio, L’iscrizione
metrica di Andreas panhypersebastos nella chiesa meridionale del monastero del Pantokra-
tor a Costantinopoli (con due figure), in: I. Vassis / G. S. Heinrich / D. R. Reinsch (hrsgg.),
Lesarten. Festschrift für Athanasios Kambylis zum 70. Geburtstag dargebracht von Schülern,
Kollegen und Freunden. Berlin/New York 1998, 161-179, esp. 168 note 18. On the western
travellers’ accounts see the contribution by I. Taxidis, The Monastery of Pantokrator in the
Narratives of Western Travellers, in the present volume, 97-106.
22 See lastly Ousterhout / Ahunbay / Ahunbay, Second Report (as in note 3) 242 and 250-
251.
148 Mario D’Ambrosi
tor church (the katholikon, or southern church, of the monastery complex) was still
visible. Here are Richard Pococke’s own words:
The whole is adorned with the figures of the Apostles and the history of our Saviour in
mosaic work, and the subject of each compartment is described in Greek (II, part 2, 130).
By this date the Turks had already obliterated the faces of the figures represented, as
the traveller’s account goes on to say. The southern church and the rest of the mon-
astery were probably restored after the 1766 earthquake (if not before), with major
interventions to their interior: the red granite columns of the central dome of the
katholikon were replaced by four pillars, and the interior decoration, too, was likely
modified to its present aspect.23
Modern restoration campaigns (beginning in 1954) have unfortunately yielded
no evidence of preserved interior decoration in the katholikon, particularly as con-
cerns the mosaic panels attested in the literary sources;24 these were likely lost or fell
from the walls of the church in the Ottoman era, perhaps after the big earthquake in
1766. What the archaeologists have found, however, are hundreds of mosaic tesserae
of different colours, often still attached to setting plaster and mixed into the fill ma-
terial that the Turks had used in previous restorations.25
Further investigation with more modern instruments on the interior decoration
of the Pantokrator katholikon (the southern church) could probably confirm that the
words of Richard Pococke correspond to a real situation. One may imagine a deco-
ration of the interior space very similar to that of the Chora monastery, where the
restoration campaigns have given us back superb mosaic panels, some within mar-
ble frames, and wonderful frescoes.26 It is in any case very likely that the whole sur-
face of the Pantokrator katholikon was covered with mosaics or frescoes above the
cornice which corresponds in height to the main capitals. Today, a marble decora-
tion of the lower part of the interior walls survives only in the bema of the church;
the marble revetments on the lower zone in the apse, near the mihrab and mimber,
are a Turkish addition.27 Evidence of the original mosaic or fresco decoration was
found in 2005, during the most recent restoration campaign, in the reveals of the
three windows in the apse of the middle church. Similarly, a fresco decoration on
the exterior of the esonarthex was discovered in the reveals of the windows in the
north wall and exposed during the same restoration campaign. The results of these
interventions have also demonstrated that the interior of the esonarthex was deco-
rated with fresco rather than with mosaic.28
Let us return, however, to the southern church and its interior decoration. The
witness of Richard Pococke is fundamental, because it attests the existence of leg-
endae beneath the mosaic panels, probably metrical lines to explain the significance
and themes of the mosaic scenes, which as we know from the 18th-century travel-
ler’s account concerned the life of Christ and the Apostles.
This suggests a possible hypothesis, to be verified by archaeological evidence in
a desirable further restoration campaign on the interior decoration of the Pantokra-
tor church: namely, that below the original mosaic panels were inscribed the verses
(dodecasyllables or hexameters) that we know Theodore Prodromos had written on
similar subjects: the series of tetrastich epigrams composed by Prodromos on Bibli-
cal episodes and the Acts of the Apostles29 seems to me very suitable for such figu-
rative representations as are attested in Pococke’s account of the Pantokrator church.
At the time when the Pantokrator complex was built, Prodromos was one of the
few contemporary poets – together with Nicholas Kallikles,30 the prominent physi-
cian and poet who lived during the reigns of Alexios I and John II – whose works
are concerned with hagiographical or lato sensu religious themes, suitable for rep-
resentation in a figurative decoration. Moreover, a previous practical utilisation of
28 Ousterhout / Ahunbay / Ahunbay, Second Report (as in note 3) 247-248, esp. 248 fig. 17
and 249 fig. 18.
29 See the edition by G. Papagiannis, Theodoros Prodromos. Jambische und hexametrische
Tetrasticha auf die Haupterzählungen des Alten und des Neuen Testaments, Einleitung, kri-
tischer Text, Indices, I-II. Meletemata. Beiträge zur Byzantinistik und Neugriechischen Philo-
logie, 7/1-2. Wiesbaden 1997.
30 The epigrams of Kallikles most concerned with works of art or objects in the Pantokrator
monastery are nos. 2 and 31 Romano, the former written for the icon of Christ the Saviour
preserved in the monastery, the latter the epitaph composed for the tomb of John II Kom-
nenos during his lifetime: see R. Romano, Nicola Callicle. Carmi, testo critico, introduzione,
traduzione, commentario e lessico. Byzantina et Neo-hellenica Neapolitana, 8. Napoli 1980,
78-80 and 112-116, and the article of I. Vassis, Das Pantokratorkloster von Konstantinopel in
der byzantinischen Dichtung, in the present volume, 221-224. It may be remarked here that,
although epigram 31 consists of 126 verses, it could have been inscribed or painted (but pref-
erably inscribed, considering that sarcophagi are made of stone) on the emperor’s tomb, or
perhaps this was the intention when the poet was commissioned to write it: see the inscriptio
attached to Kallikles’ epigram 31 as published in the critical edition of Roberto Romano (οἱ
παρόντες στίχοι ... ἐγένοντο κατὰ ἐντολὴν ἐκείνου ὡς ἐπὶ τῷ τάφῳ αὐτοῦ γραφησόμενοι). A
long epigram was probably inscribed on the ‘Stone of Unction’, the relic brought from Ephesus
by order of Manuel I Komnenos and afterwards kept at the Pantokrator, or more likely on its
pedestal [see C. Mango, Notes on Byzantine Monuments. DOP 23/24 (1969/1970) 369-375,
esp. 372-375 and related bibliography at 372 note 23; A. Papalexandrou, Echoes of Orality
in the Monumental Inscriptions of Byzantium, in: L. James (ed.), Art and Text in Byzantine
Culture. Cambridge/New York 2007, 161-187], which belongs to the genre of funerary lam-
entation and is similar to that from the pen of Nicholas Kallikles, mentioned above on John
II Komnenos’ tomb: cf. N. P. Ševčenko, The Tomb of Manuel I Komnenos, Again, in: Öde-
kan / Akyürek/ Necipoğlu, Change (as in note 21) 609-616, esp. 612-613.
150 Mario D’Ambrosi
Prodromos’ epigrams is well known, for example from the famous icon of the cru-
cifixion, now in the Moscow Kremlin.31
In my edition of Theodore Prodromos’ tetrasticha on the life of Gregory of Nazi-
anzus, I argued from the argument of epigrams32 and from the irrefutable evidence of
some errors in the tradition of the text, due to an alternative source in capital letters
(perhaps an epigraphic type of capital letters), which occur in codex Paris. gr. 2831
(end 13th century), that such epigrams were conceived by Prodromos himself for a
practical purpose as well (Gebrauchstext),33 and were probably inscribed on walls in
mosaic or wall-painting technique.34 This assumption may be applied to the Pan-
tokrator monastery, where, as we know from the evidence cited above, there were
mosaic panels on the life of Christ and the apostles with Greek text (metrical?) be-
neath them and – most of all – where there existed the first icon we know of with the
Three Hierarchs depicted together, or to the Church of the Holy Apostles, to which
we know Prodromos retired after he became, or where he was going to become, a
monk (probably in the 1140s or early 1150s)35 and where the relics of Gregory of
Nazianzus and John Chrysostom – that is, two of the Three Hierarchs – could have
inspired the poet to compose his epigrams, likely for inscription on figurative rep-
resentations related to the epigrams themselves.36
31 Theod. Prodr. tetr. 229a: Papagiannis, Tetrasticha (as in note 29) II, 239-240. See also W.
Hörandner, Randbemerkungen zum Thema Epigramme und Kunstwerke, in: C. Scholz / G.
Makris (hrsgg.), Πολύπλευρος Νοῦς. Miscellanea für Peter Schreiner zu seinem 60. Geburts-
tag. Byzantinisches Archiv, 19. München/Leipzig 2000, 69-82, esp. 80-82; A. Paul, Dichtung
auf Objekten. Inschriftlich erhaltene griechische Epigramme vom 9. bis zum 16. Jahrhundert:
Suche nach bekannten Autorennamen, in: M. Hinterberger / E. Schiffer (hrsgg.), Byzan-
tinische Sprachkunst. Studien zur byzantinischen Literatur gewidmet Wolfram Hörandner
zum 65. Geburtstag. Byzantinisches Archiv, 20. Berlin/New York 2007, 234-265, esp. 252-253,
nos. 27 and 28.
32 Cf. Ch. Walter, Biographical scenes of the Three Hierarchs. RÉB 36 (1978) 233-260, esp.
242; L. Brubaker, Vision and Meaning in Ninth-Century Byzantium. Image as Exegesis in
the Homilies of Gregory of Nazianzus. Cambridge 1999, esp. 119-137.
33 For the significance of the German term and for the meaning of the word ἐπίγραμμα in Byz-
antium see mainly M. D. Lauxtermann, Byzantine Poetry from Pisides to Geometres. Texts
and Contexts, I. WBS, 24/1. Wien 2003, 30-34, esp. 30-31. Very important, too, on this matter
are the studies collected in the volume W. Hörandner / A. Rhoby (hrsgg.), Die kulturhisto-
rische Bedeutung byzantinischer Epigramme. Akten des internationalen Workshop (Wien,
1.–2. Dezember 2006). Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische
Klasse, Denkschriften, 371; Veröffentlichungen zur Byzanzforschung, 14. Wien 2008.
34 D’Ambrosi, Tetrastici (as in note 17) 53-55 (related bibliography at notes 179-181), 119-120
with note 388, 126 (codicum stemma).
35 See lastly P. Anderson, Literary Polemic in Twelfth-Century Constantinople, in: Ödekan /
Akyürek / Necipoğlu, Change (as in note 21) 333-341, esp. 336 with related bibliography
at note 60.
36 Despite K. Demoen’s scepticism about such a possibility [see his review to my edition: BZ 104
(2011) 750-752, esp. 751: “D’Ambrosi suggests that the episodes have been selected for their
iconographic potential and thinks they may have had a practical use (...), although he does
not know any icon, mosaic, fresco or miniature with a caption from the tetrastichs”], I argued
that Prodromos’ tetrasticha on the Three Hierarchs could have been inscribed somewhere in
Constantinople (as afterwards we have seen here, particularly in the Pantokrator monastery,
The Icon of the Three Holy Hierarchs at the Pantokrator Monastery 151
The irrefutable evidence of the existence of an icon of the three Fathers, men-
tioned in the typikon of the Pantokrator monastery in the section dealing with its
south church, unquestionably demonstrates that at the time of John II’s reign the cult
of the three saints together was already well attested and was known in Constantino-
ple, at least at the Komnenian court.
A church dedicated to the Three Hierarchs is actually attested at the end of the
13th / beginning of the 14th century in the area of Haghia Sophia, near the Theo-
tokos Panachrantos monastery, that is, near the Hodegetria monastery.37 This indi-
rectly confirms the evidence of the Synaxaria-Menaea, namely that it was very likely
John Mauropous who, at the end of the 11th century (probably in 1081 or 1082), in-
stituted the common feast of the three Fathers together (afterwards called the Three
Hierarchs), as a means of ending the controversy concerning the primacy of any one
of the three over the others.38
related to the Komnenian family, or in the Holy Apostles church, where the relics of two of
the three saints were preserved) because of their iconographic argument and, most of all, be-
cause of textual evidence of the errors, which occur in codex Paris. gr. 2831 and derive from
an alternative source in epigraphic capital letters. In my book I argued too that Prodromos’
epigrams would likely have been conceived by the poet for a vita icon, that is the hagiograph-
ic type of icon well known in the Komnenian era: cf. N. P. Ševčenko, The Vita Icon and the
Painter as Hagiographer. DOP 53 (1999) 149-165 with 27 plates. The archaeological evidence
from the Pantokrator monastery, together with the witness of many travellers of the past, could
confirm that my perspective was at least historically correct.
37 Janin, Églises et monastères (as in note 4) 258 with note 6.
38 I would refer again to some studies of mine in the matter: D’Ambrosi, Monostico (as in note
17) in press; D’Ambrosi, Tetrastici (as in note 17) esp. 33-34 with note 83. On the role played
by John Mauropous in the institution of the feast of the Three Hierarchs I will publish a fur-
ther study, in which I will deal with a cycle of epigrams – related to the figures of the three
Fathers as well as to those of other saints – which can be easily reconstructed from the pri-
mary source of codex Vat. gr. 676.
Selected bibliography
on the monastery of Christ Pantokrator
191-3, 195, 197-201, 218-20, 223, 226-30, Golden Horn 34, 35, 38, 48
see also Synaxarion of Gračanica, monastery of 92
Eirene Palaiologina (Eugenia), daughter of Great Church 58n, 128, see also St Sophia,
Francesco II Gattilusio 68 church
Eirene Palaiologina (Yolande of Monferrat) Gregory Gabras, doux of Trebizond 74, 79
67 Gregory Taronites 40n
Eirene, sebastokratorissa 47, 232-3 Gregory Tsamblak 60n, 87-92
Ekaterina of Bulgaria, wife of Isaac Kom- Gül camii, see Christ Evergetes, monastery
nenos 11, 15, 22 Gyllius, Petrus 103-5
Elias (Elijah), protospatharios 8
Embajada a Tamorlán 101 Hagia Glykeria, see St Glykeria
Ephesos 46, 83, 113, 114, 117 Harbor of Boukoleon 113
Eski Imaret, mosque 21, 35n Harbor of Julian 12
Eudokia, daughter of Eirene Doukaina 27 Havelberg 97, 103
Eugenius III, pope 98 Helena Palaiologina (Hypomone), wife of
Eustathios Kamytzes, sebastos, strategos Manuel II 68, 69
of Lampe, doux of Nicaea, proedros and Heliou Bomon or Elegmon, monastery of
chartoularios tou stavlou, protonovelissi- 72
mos 71, 74, 75, 76, 77 Henry III of Castille 101
Eustathios Rhomaios 8 Heptaskalon 34
Eustathios of Thessaloniki 192, 201 Heroon, see Pantokrator monastery
Euthymios, Bulgarian patriarch 90 Historia Constantinopolitana 99
Evergetes, see Christ Evergetes Hodegetria, icon of 48, 58, 157
Evergetis, see Theotokos Evergetis Hodegon, monastery of 59, 151
Holy Apostles, church of 3, 26n, 33, 43, 46,
François I 104 47, 150-1, 162
Holy Sepulchre 112-4
Galakrenai, monastery 38 Hospital (xenon), see Pantokrator monas-
Gattilusio, Francesco II 68 tery
George Dekanos, kouropalates, protonovel- Hospital of Theophilos 35-7
lisimos 71, 79, 80 House of Eleousa 61
George Kalliergis 115 House of Mangana (imperial oikos) 35
George-Gregory II Kyprios, patriarch 60 Hungarians 45
George Metochites 60, 87 Hungary 111
George, metropolitan of Smyrna 57
George Mouzalon 199 Inauguration of the Pantokrator church, see
George (Gennadios) Scholarios 65, 67, 87, Pantokrator, monastery of, encaenia
242-8 Inauguration of the Pantokrator main
George, scribe 164n church, epigram, see Synaxarion on the
George Skylitzes 109-12, 114-15, 117, 118- encaenia
20, 139; Office on the Translation of the inscriptions 224, 225, 236
Holy Stone 109-21 passim, 139 Ignatios, monk of Christ Evergetes 29
George Sphrantzes 64 Ignatios of Smolensk 83-5, 87
Geriou, kathisma 62n Isaac I Komnenos, emperor 5, 6, 11, 14, 15,
Gerontios, abbot of Pantokrator 65, 67 16, 17, 22
Gerlach, Stephan 103-06 Isaac, brother of John II Komnenos 5, 9, 10,
Gerokomeion of the emperor Romanos 38n 11, 12, 45
Gerotropheion (old-age home), see Panto- Isaac, sebastokrator 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 25,
krator monastery 29
258 Index
Madrid Vienna
Biblioteca Nacional Österreichische Nationalbibliothek
4538: 175n, 177n, 178 Med. gr. 43: 225
Biblioteca Universitaria Complutense maphorion 19
Villamil 26: 178 Marcus of Otranto 137-8
Moscow Maria of Antioch 113, 241-2
State Historical Museum Maria, daughter of Alexios IV of Trebizond
Hludov 249: 84 and wife of John VIII Palaiologos 68
Napoli Maria, daughter of John II Komnenos 79
Biblioteca Nazionale Maria Komnene, wife of Constantine Ka-
III AA 6: 242 mytzes 75
Oxford Maria Magdalen 101, 114
Bodleian Library Maria, mother of Joses 101
Gr. liturg. d. 6: 205 Maria Palaiologina, wife of Abaqa khan 59
Christ Church Maria, protovestiarissa (Eirene Doukaina’s
gr. 2: 164, 205 mother) 13n
gr. 56: 164, 205, 230 Markos Eugenikos 67
Paris Markos Iagaris 65n
Bibliothèque Nationale Marmara, Sea of 19
Coisl. 223: 169 Martin of Pairis 99-101
gr. 1577: 164, 205 Matthew, patriarch of CP 90
gr. 1578: 178 Medikarion, monastery of 38
gr. 1582: 178 Mediterranean, Sea 102, 104
gr. 1932: 242, 243 Megalonas 198
gr. 2075: 233 Megas Doux / doux of Hellas 192-3, 201
gr. 2831 151n governor/lord of Hellas 199-200
Sinai Mehmed II the Conqueror, sultan 67, 115
Μονὴ Ἁγίας Αἰκατερίνης Mela, village near Smyrna 60
gr. 339: 249 Meletios, hieromonk 62, 63
Thessaloniki Meletios, scribe 169n
Μονὴ Βλατάδων Menaea 146, 147, 151, 163n, 164n, 169n;
53: 164, 206 Moldavian 92
Troyes Mese 8, 13, 31
Bibliothèque Municipale Metrophanes of Smyrna 140
1204: 158n, 164, 205 Michael IV, emperor 6, 7, 35
Vatican City Michael V, emperor 7
Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Michael VI, emperor 15
gr. 555: 249 Michael VII Doukas, emperor 14
gr. 676: 151n Michael VIII Palaiologos, emperor 33n, 48,
gr. 813: 249 58, 59, 86
gr. 816: 249 Michael of Amastris, doux of Akroinon 79
gr. 864: 249 Michael Attaleiates 10
Venice Michael Branas Komnenos 60
Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana Michael Psellos 10, 15, 16, 145
gr. 498 (coll. 432): 220, 222 Michael Stypeiotes 80, 81, see also Michael-
gr. 524 (coll. 318): 110, 111, 114, 117, itzes
221, 227, 230, 231 Michael Stypeiotes, basilikos protospatharios
App. gr. IX 22: 234 and anthypatos patrikios 81
Index 261
Nea Ekklesia (New Church) 37, 42 Palace of Blachernai 17n, 19-20, see also
Nea Moni (Chios) 43n Blachernai, church of
Niccolo, deacon of the Pantokrator monas- Palace of Bonos 21
tery 57n Palace of Boukoleon 23n
Nicholas Kallikles 149n, 160, 198, 221, 227, Palace of Chalke 42
234 Palace of St George of Mangana 27
Nicholas Kataphloron 192, 199-201 Palaiologoi, family 67-9
Nicholas Kataskepenos 14n Pammakaristos, monastery of 14, 26, 29n,
Nicholas Mesarites 58n 39
Nicholas, patriarch of Antioch 11n Panachrantos, monastery of 151
Nicholas Sigeros 62 Pantanassa, monastery of 40, 249
Nicomedia 98 Pantepoptes, see Christ Pantepoptes
Nikasios, deacon 176n Pantokrator Monastery, 3, 27-8, 30, 34,
Nikephoritzes, eunuch 80n 87, 109, 112-14, 143-9, 151-2
Nikephoros III Botaneiates, emperor 12, 13, cells 37, 191
17 cemetery 38
Nikephoros, architect of the Pantokrator Churches
Monastery 33, 161, 191, 200-1, 219 Archangel Michael (heroon) 36, 42,
Nikephoros Basilakes 18n, 29n 43, 46, 43, 83, 97, 144, 148, 153-5,
Nikephoros Borbenos, mystikos 72 156-7, 162, 191, 193, 195, 234, 239,
Nikephoros Bryennios 5, 6, 9-12, 14-6, 18 242
Nikephoros Choumnos 67 main church 67, 144-5, 148-9, 151,
Nikephoros Dekanos, kouropalates, doux 191, 193, 195; bema 148; candle-
and anagrapheus of Nis 80 stick 145, 146; dome 220-1
Niketas, doctor the protos 71, 73 Theotokos Eleousa 30, 36, 42-3, 61n,
Nikephoros Gregoras 199 67n, 97, 153, 155-6, 158, 177, 191,
Nikephoros Kallonas, droungarios 76 193, 195, 201, 219, 233
Nikephoros Kaminas, droungarios 76 decoration
Nikephoros Kamytzes, droungarios 76 esonarthex 148, 149; heroon 148; icon
Niketas Choniates 111, 113, 114, 117, 159n, of Christ 221; icon of the Mother
191 of God 225; icon of the Three
Niketas, metropolitan of Nicomedia 98 Hierarchs 145, 146, 147, 150, 151;
Niketas (Paphlagonian) 7 katholikon 148, 149, 150; mosaic
Nikodemos 109, 114 or fresco legendae (metrical?) 149,
Nikodemos, archbishop of Serbia 89 150; mosaic panels (katholikon)
Nikodemos Hagioreites 162, 178n, 230 148
Nikodemos, scribe 164n encaenia, see also Synaxarion on
Nossiai, monastery of 38 main church, 34, 158, 161, 191, 200,
novelissimos 73 203-20
262 Index