Giakoumis [First Draft]

8/6/2019 Giakoumis [First Draft]

1/40

The Perception of the Crusader in Late Byzantine

and Early Post-Byzantine Ecclesiastical Painting in Epiros

By

Konstantinos GIAKOUMIS*

University of New York / Tirana

C.B.O.M.G.S., The University of Birmingham

What Jeremiah will lament our woes, or what isthe time that will draw away through oblivionscurrent all what we were destined to live andsuffer? Captures of cities, desertions of churches,sacrilege of most-holy utensils, mens wails,womens ululations, lootings, migrations

1

When Niketas Choniates, an eye-witness to the tragic events that followed the fall of

Constantinople into the hands of the Crusaders of the Fourth Crusade in April 1204,

wrote this statement of lamentation, very little had he witnessed of the sufferings that the

former subjects of the Byzantine Empire would experience thereafter, as a consequence

of the effected political, administrative and religious changes.2 Yet, the disintegration of

agrarian and urban economic structures from the eleventh c. thereafter,3 which resultedin an increasingly revolutionary attitude of the Byzantine subjects, especially during thetwo decades of the rule of the Angeli (1185-1204),4 eventually paved the way to the

* This paper was presented in the Tenth International Congress of Greek-Oriental and African Studies held

in Kryoneri, Attica in 25-28 August 2005. I thank Dr. Angeliki Lymberopoulou, Lecturer of Byzantine

Studies at the Open University, UK, for reviewing my article and her valuable comments and suggestions,as well as Mr. Peter Panchy for his thoughtful observations.

1 K. Sathas, (New York, 1972, rep.), I, p. 104. Cf. A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus,

, , III, p. 454, cited in N.G.

Ziangos, .

(Athens, 1974), p. 49 and note 5 on pp. 49-50.2 For these issues, see E. Zachariadou, (1483-1567)

(Athens, 1996), pp. 28-61, where references to further relevant literature.3 For the decline of economic and agrarian forces from the eleventh century thereafter, see roughly K.M.Setton On the Importance of Land Tenure and Agrarian Taxation in the Byzantine Empire, from the

Eleventh Century to the Fourth Crusade, The American Journal of Philology 74:3 (1953), pp. 225-259(253-259); and P Charanis, Economic Factors in the Decline of the Byzantine Empire, The Journal of

Economic History 13:4 (1953), pp. 412-424 (418-424).4 In Niketas Choniates words , ,

(there were those who revolted in one place or another, again and again, and it is not


2/40

KONSTANTINOS GIAKOUMIS

2

Fourth Crusaders, who found the Byzantine subjects almost as well prepared for the

implantation of their feudal institutions as its mountainous terrain proved to be suited to

the construction of their feudal castles.5 However, both, the events of April 12-15,

1204,6 as well as those after 1204, including heavier taxation for the peasantry,

augmented forced labour (angary), distribution of lands as feuds to Crusaders, strict

limitations of trade favouring Latin states and, last but foremost, the onerous and

detestable slave trade of Orthodox war captives by western traders,7 were so crucial as to

form, in the words of Bishop Kallistos of Diokleia, the deep disgust and lasting

horror with which Orthodox regard the sack of Constantinople by the Crusaders, sodifficult to be realized by Christians in the west.8

Psychologically, the issue of slave trade poisoned irremediably the relations between

the eastern and western worlds. After 1204, Byzantiums enemies, including Christians

like Catalans, Venetians and Genoese, seized increasingly Orthodox Christians for the

slave market to the extent that Emperor Andronikos II (1282-1328) formally protested

the Genoese practice of capturing Byzantine subjects for sale in Italy and Spain.9

Furthermore, in 1339, when the Byzantine emperor sent monk Varlaam as an

ambassador to the papacy in order to negotiate possibilities of common action against

the Turkish threat and of a possible union of the two Churches, he set forth a number of

conditions, one of which was the liberation of all of the Orthodox slaves kept by Latins

possible to say how many times this happened) [Nicetas Choniates, De Isaacio Angelo, v. III/2, Bonn, p.553; cited and translated in K.M. Setton On the Importance, The American Journal of Philology 74:3(1953), p. 254 and note 51].

5 K.M. Setton On the Importance, The American Journal of Philology 74:3 (1953), p. 259.6 On the history of the Fourth Crusade I am hereby citing a selection of comprehensive secondary sources

which use extensively both Byzantine as well as western primary sources on the issue: E. Bradford, TheStory of the Fourth Crusade (New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1967), reviewed by E. Velde in The

History Teacher2:2 (1969), pp. 61-62; D.E. Queller, The Fourth Crusade: The Conquest ofConstantinople, 1201-1204 (Philadelphia, 1977), reviewed by J. Folda in Speculum 54:3 (1979), pp. 620-622 and by J. Riley-Smith in The English Historical Review 94/372 (1979), pp. 624-625; and W.B.Bartlett, An Ungodly War: The Sack of Constantinople and the Fourth Crusade (New York, 2000),reviewed by R.A: Sauers in The Journal of Military History 65:1 (2001), pp. 169-170. For a selection of

primary sources, see E. Hallam (ed.), Chronicles of the Crusades: Eye-Witness Accounts of the WarsBetween Christianity and Islam (London, 1989), pp. 198-245.

7 E. Zachariadou, , pp. 28-61.8

T. Ware, The Orthodox Church (Baltimore, 1964), p. 69. For Byzantine negative literary reactions to thesecond crusade, see E: Jeffreys M. Jeffreys, The Wild Beast from the West: Immediate LiteraryReactions in Byzantium to the Second Crusade, in A.E. Laiou R.P. Mottahedeh (eds.), The Crusades

from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World(Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 2001), pp.101-116; cf. p. 117.

9 The issue of slaves and slave trade after 1204 was treated in D.J. Constantelos, Poverty, Society andPhilanthropy in the Late Medieval Greek World, (New Rochelle, NY, 1992), pp. 103-114, reviewed byT.S. Miller in Speculum 69:4 (1994) pp. 1143-1145 (1144).


3/40

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

3

and the virtual abolition of slave trade.10 In the eyes of the Orthodox, the issue of trading

slaves captured by Catholic Christians and sold to Catholic Christians must have been

felt at least as onerous as the trade of slaves captured by Turks and sold to Cretan

Orthodox Greeks.11

The Orthodox Church, who retained her authority and influence over the Byzantine

people, was another principal factor determining the relations between the Orthodox and

the Roman-Catholic worlds. Beyond dogmatic and liturgical disagreements,12 there

further were deep contradictions related to the daily role of the clergy. While clerical

participation in military campaigns was forbidden by the Orthodox Church, the existenceof Latin priest-soldiers in the ranks of the Crusader armies,13 who could hold lances and

shields and also prepare the Holy Communion, shocked the Orthodox Christians. 14 In

addition, since 1204 the Latins, after abolishing the Patriarchate of Constantinople,

continued to displace the Orthodox ecclesiastical administration from the lands they

conquered. Metropolitans and bishops were not accepted in those regions and only lower

members of the clergy could remain. Yet, their ordination was impossible within the

occupied territories and candidates for priesthood had to travel to the zones of an

Orthodox prelate where they were ordained and sent back to their parishes, such as

priests from Venetian-occupied Crete, who were obliged to travel as far as Methoni to

get ordained. Last, but not least, a considerable part of the church properties was

confiscated,15 while the economic decline of the Byzantine Empire from the 11 th to the

13th c.16 and, after 1204, the decrease in population, economic indigence, and lack of

new endowments contributed to the decline of monasticisms social functions

17

to theextent that organized charitable activities became almost impossible.

10 E. Zachariadou, , pp. 28-61. For the treatment of slaves in 14 th and 15th centuryEurope, see the useful case-study of I. Origo, The Domestic Enemy: The Eastern Slaves in Tuscany in the

Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries, Speculum 30:3 (1995), pp. 321-366.11 For this issue, see A.M. Stahl (ed.), The Documents of Angelo de Cartura and Donato Fontanella.

Venetian Notaries in Fourteenth Century Crete, (Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 2000),passim; thisphenomenon was kindly brought to my attention by Dr. A. Lymberopoulou.

12 For these differences set in their historical context, I cite two basic sources: A. Papadakis, The ChristianEast and the Rise of the Papacy. The Church (1071-1453 A.D.) (Crestwood-New York: St VladimirsSeminary Press, 1994); T. Ware, Eustratios Argenti: A study of the Greek Church under Turkish Rule(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964); and T.M. Kolbaba, Byzantine Perceptions of Latin Religious Errors:

Themes and Changes from 850 to 1350, in A.E. Laiou R.P. Mottahedeh (eds.), The Crusades, pp. 117-143.

13

See, for example, the scene from the Bayeux Tapestry interpretation of the Battle of Hastings (1066). Onthe extreme left is Bishop Odo, wearing what may be a hauberk of scale armour and carrying a mace of

cudgel form, while on the extreme right, William of Normandy raises his helmet by its nasal (D. Edge D. J.M. Paddock,Arms and Armour of the Medieval Knight, [London, 1988], p. 31).

14 E. Zachariadou, , pp. 31-32.15 E. Zachariadou, , pp. 28-61.16 See note 3.17 D. Constantelos,Poverty, pp. 88-89.


4/40


4

Sensibly, the inhabitants of several non-Venetian-dominated cities and villages under

the guidance of Orthodox prelates or monks gradually adopted an intense hostile attitude

towards the Roman-Catholic world, which, later, paved the way to the Ottoman

occupation of the Balkans.18 Yet, we are still unaware of the popular feelings of

Orthodox Christians towards western Christianity in Venetian-dominated territories.19

Lying between East and West, Epiros20 were among the remotest provinces of the

Balkans. Their limited natural resources, inaccessible shores, swampy plains and

compact mountain-chains cut them off from most of the arterial roads of the Balkan

Peninsula and made them a province of secondary importance. It was only the IonianIslands, the Epirotic ports and the Otranto straits that were Epiros constant bridgehead

towards the Apennine peninsula. For, when a Balkan state assumed power, it attempted

unceasingly to control the Epirotic coasts in order to keep an eye on the opposite shore.

Correspondingly, whenever a great power rose in the Italian peninsula, it felt the urge to

take control of the passages and the opposite coasts. Access to the Balkan centres was

chiefly made possible by the Via Egnatia,21 whose major ports in the Adriatic, Durrs

and Vlor, were among the most important cities of Epiros. Thus, the provinces of

Epiros were before all a border district of great strategic importance, whose populations

favour must have been a distinct policy of both eastern and western powers.

This paper aims at penetrating into the nebulous relations of Epiros with the Latin

West after 1204. In so doing, I shall take into consideration representations of Latin

soldiers, in general, and Crusaders, in particular, in ecclesiastical paintings of two late

Byzantine churches and several early post-Byzantine churches and catholica. In lateByzantine paintings, Crusaders are identified in the soldiers from the scene of the Marys

at the Tomb in the frescoes of the Church of St. George at Dhivr, Sarand (S. Albania,

last quarter of the 13 th c.), in the scene of Christs Betrayal by Judas in the church of the

18 See note 12.19 Dr. A. Lymberopoulou informed me that in an upcoming article of hers at The Warburg Journal she takes

a different line of arguing on this issue using cases from Crete. Sharon Gerstel has attributed certain

distinctive elements of Frankish influence in the monumental decoration of medieval Morea to an artistic

symbiosis which places Morea in the midst of a number of Mediterranean locations where indigenouspopulations were confronted by Crusader overlords and where hybrid art forms arose from the interaction

of two, and perhaps more, cultures (S.E.J. Gerstel, Art and Identity in the Medieval Morea, in A.E.Laiou R.P. Mottahedeh (eds.), The Crusades, pp. 263-285 [264, 280]).

20 With respect to the geography and climate of Epiros, aside from personal observations, I have also referred

to: M. Arapoglou, , 15-16 (1993-94), pp. 44-52; P.

Halstead, , in (, 1996), pp. 63-64; M. Kiel, Ottoman

Architecture in Albania 1385 - 1912 (Istanbul, 1990), p. 14 and V. Psimouli, (Athens,1998), pp. 19-21, where additional literature. The term in its use in this article is irrelevant to the political

connotations given to it at the end of the 19 th century and most parts of the 20 th century. In our times, the

regions of Epiros are situated in both Greece and Albania.21 For the most recent study with respect to the via Egnatia in Ottoman times see: E. Zachariadou (ed.), The

Via Egnatia under Ottoman Rule, 1380-1699 (Rethymnon, 1996).


5/40


5

Nativity of the Virgin on the island of Maligrad (W. Albania, 1369), as well as in scenes

related to Christs Passion and to several martyrdoms of saints in the narthex of the

catholicon of Philanthropenon Monastery (1560), the naos of the Diliou Monastery

(1542/3), the naos of Eleousa Monastery (third quarter of 16th c.) , on the Isle of

Ioannina, as well as several other 16th and 17th c. monuments in modern day Albania.

Pursuing iconological and perceptive methods of art historical inquiry in one particular

case-study, the Marys at the Tomb in the church of St. George at Dhivr and correlating

seeming similarities of late-Byzantine and early post-Byzantine examples from Epiros

and beyond, I shall attempt to unveil the dark and base memories left over by Crusadersand other Latin armies and to weave the historical stage that shaped collective memory

in peripheral regions, like Epiros. Last but not least, I will endeavour to trace the

beginning and the gradual fading of hostile and anti-western visual statements in

Epiros.

The cave-church of St. George at Dhivr is situated on the foot of a limestone

cliff, in which some extensive caverns have been formed partly naturally, partly

artificially. During the Byzantine period, the most inaccessible among them, placed to a

higher plane, were transmuted to hermitages of anchorite monks. Considering that in

some of these caves were found traces of fresco paintings, it is sensible to suggest that

these caves once constituted a wider monastic cell.

One of these caves, twenty feet above the base of the cliff, has been fitted up as a

chapel built on a protrusion of the rock, approachable only by a narrow path carved on

the stone. The walls of the hermitage are based on a rocky platform, on which aslanting, supportive wall ascends. The walls cover mostly the western part of the chapel

and to a lesser extent its narrow northern and southern sides. To the East no walls were

built and the altar was carved in the rocky front of the cavern.

Three inscriptions were located in the church. Two of them are displayed in the

narthex and are written the one on the top of the other and divided by a red line on the

lintel of the entrance to the naos. The upper one reads: [][]

[rebuilt], while the lower one: [saint].Finally, the third inscription is placed below the scene of Christ the Saviour:

()

[Prayer of your servant, Isidore priest, along with his wife and children]. The last

inscription refers to the patron of the frescoes, a certain priest named Isidore, who

appears to have had the means to sponsor such an undertaking.

The internal space of the chapel is articulated in three distinct, built parts: thenarthex to the North, the naos in the middle and a cramped shrine to the South. Themiddle part bears a carved altar in the eastern side, where an altar base of rock decorated

with overlaid 13th c. marble entablature spolia.

All three parts of the monument are painted with frescoes made in three pictorial

phases dated to the 11th (Sts. Kosmas and Damian in the Parabema), the last quarter of


6/40


6

the 13th c. (remaining scenes from shrine/parabema, the Dodekaorton cycle, Sts.

Nikolaos, George and Demetrius),22 and the last quarter of the 14th c. (narthex)

respectively23. The iconographic programme follows the established patterns of fresco

decoration in cave-churches.24

Studying the iconographic programmes of ecclesiastical monuments provides several

hints to understand a past, whose creators were mostly bearers of a rich oral culture who

however left only few written records. Every image in ecclesiastical paintings is an

exegesis, literally meaning leading out, an interpretation of a religious event. Even

though images shape visual memory of how the past looked like, the use of image asexegesis changed over time. The Byzantines in their writings show themselves to be

fully aware of the power of image to keep memories alive and interpret the past in a way

that texts didnt (i.e. visions of saints, etc.). Sylvester Syropoulos records an objection,

raised by the Byzantine emperor's confessor, Gregory Melissenos, to using a Latin-rite

church for Orthodox services during the Council of Ferrara (1438) as follows: When Ienter a Latin church, I do not revere any of the saints that are there because I do not

22 Apart from arguments to be developed in dealing with the scene of the Marys at the Tomb, the Dormition

of the Virgin in our chapel bears similarities with the same scene in the church of St. Nikolaos of Kasnitze(1160-1180) in terms of the Virgins rightward time on the bier, the scenes arrangement and the biers

cover decorated with rhombuses (M. Acheimastou-Potamianou, [Athens, 1994]fig. 43 on p. 71 and p. 220 and S. Pelekanidis M. Chatzedakis,, fig. 16 on p. 63 and pp. 50-65),while the overall scenes arrangement resembles with that of the Virgin at Assinou (1105-1106) [M.

Acheimastou-Potamianou, op. cit., fig. 27 on pp. 56-57]. The most remarkable resemblance, however, iswith the similar scene at the church of the Virgin Mavriotissa in Kastoria dated to the beginning of the 13 thcentury [M. Acheimastou-Potamianou, op. cit., fig. 75-77 on pp. 102-103, 230 and S. Pelekanidis M.Chatzidakis, op. cit., pp. 63-83]. Archaic rendering is also followed in the representation of the conchshierarchs, whose linearity is reminiscent of the hierarchs of the apse of the Sts. Anargyroi church,Kastoria, or St. Daniel the stylite, all dating to the first pictorial phase of the church, in the second half of

the 10th century [op. cit.], with several saints of the church of St. Nikolaos Diarosite (M. Acheimastou-Potamianou, , in M. Chatzidakis,(Athens, 1999), pp. 66-79) and in

particular with Sts. Vlasios [fig. 13-14 on p. 76] and Nikolaos [fig. 6, on p. 71] dating in the middle of the

11th century, and with saints placed in medallions in the church of the Virgin Arakos, Lagoudera, Cyprudating 1192 (M. Acheimastou-Potamianou, op. cit., fig. 61 on p. 88 and pp. 226-227).

23 For the dating of this third pictorial phase I am based on similarities between the portrait of the female of

the donor in our church with that of Kalia in the church of the Nativity of the Virgin on the island ofMaligrad, dating 1368/9. Theofan Popa mistakenly dated the chapel in four pictorial phases: I. The

narthexs Dormition of the Virgin [mistaken identification] to the end of the 9 th century. II. The naos

Dormition of the Virgin and Sts. George, Nikolaos and Demetrios to the 15 th c. III. The Marys at the

Tomb, the Ascension and David to the 17th

century. IV. The Archangels Michael, St. George and Christ inthe type of the Eldest of Days to later than the 17 th century (Th. Popa Piktura e shpellave eremite n

Shqipri [Resum: La peinture des grottes d ermites en Albanie], Studime Historike 3 [1965], pp. 88-89,fig. 20).

24 Due to the spatial limitations of cave-churches, the iconographic programme is limited to only a few

Christological scenes very basic from a theological viewpoint, such as the Annunciation, the Baptism, andthe Transfiguration, from the historical cycle, the Crucifixion and the Descent to Limbo. Similarly limited

is the number of full-length saints.


7/40


7

recognize any of them. At the most, I may recognize Christ, but I do not revere Himeither, since I do not know in what terms he is inscribed. So I make the sign of the crossand I revere this sign that I have made myself, and not anything that I see there .25Hence, as often images condition the way we hear names (i.e. the Virgin Hodeghetria)

and feel, Gregory Melissenos could have no devotional experience without the

identification of the depicted figure or its inscription.

On the northern wall of the naos of St. George at Dhivr, in the second zone of

frescoes, there are two scenes, one of which is of great interest for our ends. It concerns

the representation of the Marys at the Tomb in the western part of the wall. The picturesleft part is entirely damaged and only its right is preserved in relatively decent condition.

At the top right corner appears an empty cave, below which a sarcophagus with an open

top contains Jesus cerement. At the left of the sarcophagus, a standing angel points at

the sarcophagus with his right index finger. At the bottom right corner seven custody

soldiers in full panoply appear to be petrified out of terror for the angels appearance and

the removal of the Sepulchres stone. At their left, two standing female figures, turning

away from the sarcophagus out of fear, can be identified from the lower parts of their

mantles. The subject renders visually Mathews description of the meeting of the two

Marys with the angel at the Sepulchre, alternatively known as Rejoice [Mt. 27:59-

28:15; cf. Mk. 15:44-16; Lk. 23:53-24:7; John 19:40-20:18].

Any given image not only constructs or reconstructs visually the biblical past, but

also envisages links between this past and the periods present. Since at the time when

our frescoes were made (last quarter of the 13

th

c.) there was no living eye-witnessmemory of the biblical event, while no written account of the Marys at the Tomb

records minutiae details, such as the angels physiognomy, clothing, and the appearance

of the custody, the rendering of such details relies on the initiative of the artist or its

patron. As will be shown, in the Marys at the Tomb, the representation of the soldiers

of the Sepulchres custody manipulates visual memory of the distant past to condemn a

newly-created visual memory of the very recent present.

The panoply of the soldiers presents realistically explicit features of Latin knights

panoplies that also provide a terminus for the dating of our frescoes. The body armour

consists firstly and foremost of a scale hauberk with an integral coif; similar examples

can be traced in the first half of the 12 th c., such as in a stone relief dated ca. 1128, from

Angoulme Cathedral (with an integral coif)26 and in a metal relief of a knight, part of

the decoration on the Gross-Comburg chandelier, ca. 1140 (without a coif).27 A

cylindrical helm is worn by five soldiers over the coif, whose sides taper slightly towards

the base, as in the helmets of the knights of Macchabees Battle in the Bible of Rhodes,

25 C. Mango, The Art of the Byzantine Empire, 312-1453: Sources and Documents (Toronto: University ofToronto Press, 1986), p. 254.

26 D. Edge J.M. Paddock,Arms and Armour of the Medieval Knight(London, 1988), fig on p. 45.27 Op. cit., bottom right figure on p. 48.


8/40


8

dating late 10th or 11th c.,28 while its top is delicately domed, rather than conical,

resembling examples from the late 12th and 13th c., as after the middle of the 12th c. the

skull of the helm became rounded rather than pointed,29 while in our case a nasal bar is

also fitted. The legs of our soldiers are covered by chausses made of full mail stocking

gartered at the knee, similar to some church effigies and sculptural monuments dating

from the early part of the 13th c.30 They also bear long sleeves of the scaled hauberk, a

phenomenon observed in armours from the last decades of the 12 th c.,31 yet not covering

the palms and wrists, as this would have impeded ones grip of a weapon.

The soldiers of the custody are also equipped with shields and lances. The shields aretriangular, rather short and decorated with straight or undulating, vertical or horizontal

strips coloured alternatively in red and white. These are similar to late 12 th c. examples,32

while their upper edge is almost straight. This form pertains to late 12th c. modifications

of the shields size and form from large with a rounded profile to the upper edge, to

straighter and shorter, modifications that took place in the second half of the 12th c.33

According to David Edge and John Miles Paddock, throughout the 12 th c. the knight

had used the kite-shaped shield to the virtual exclusion of all other types. However, at

the beginning of the 13th c. it was shortened and the top of the shield lost its very

prominent curve. In conjunction with this the profile of the shield became less convex

and took on a triangular shape. However, until the 1250s the shield was still moderately

large and it was only within the next 20 years that the shield became smaller and its

sides convex, probably best exemplified in a relief from the tomb of Gulielmo Beradi,

in the church of Santa Annunziata, Florence and dated ca. 1289.

34

The lance appears to be the sole weapon of these knights. Their form resembles 13th c. rather than 12th c.

lances, since their heads are comparatively smaller as their profile more sharply pointed

and consequently more penetrative.35

All of the aforementioned elements, in my view, do not point to a singular prototype,

but rather to various parts of a knights panoply dating from the second half of the 12th c.

to 1270s. This is among the reasons why I have suggested the last quarter of the 13 th c.

as the most likely dating of the frescoes of the second phase.

Having shown the realistic similarities of the soldiers of the custody with Latin

knights, it becomes evident that the image as exegesis is not necessarily an objective, or

28 Op. cit., figure on p. 29.29 Op. cit., p. 44; I did not manage to take into consideration the English Psalter of St. Louis, ca. 1200.30

Op. cit., p. 45.31 Op. cit.32 See for example an initial from the Winchester Bible, ca. 1170 in op. cit., figure on p. 46.33 Op. cit.34 Op. cit., fig. on p. 62.35 Op. cit., p. 46. For this, compare the lances represented in the initial from the Winchester Bible, ca. 1170

in op. cit., figure on p. 46 with those in a panel from the Silver Shrine of Charlemagne in AachenCathedral, ca. 1207, in op. cit., p. 55.


9/40


9

neutral interpretation (otherwise the soldiers would present Roman or the very common

Byzantine features), but it could be tailored to suit beliefs of the present. Moreover,

while the combination of the scene with the one to its right (the Descent to Limbo) is

very common, the placement of two of the soldiers outside the scenes red frame and

closer to the personified Limbo can promote multiple layers of interpretation. Using

perceptive and iconographic methods of art historical enquiry, it is comprehensible that

in the evangelical excerpt [Mt. 28:11-15] the soldiers of the custody are portrayed

negatively: having eye-witnessed Christs Resurrection notwithstanding, they later

accepted a bribe by Jewish prelates and elders, who also promised to support thembefore the local ruler, if they upheld the fiction that Jesus disciples seemingly stole His

body overnight. Matthew even states that this fiction was thenceforth upheld by the Jews

to deny Christs Resurrection. Having denied to profess Christs Resurrection, the

soldiers of the custody were certainly considered as deniers of the divine nature of Christ

and, therefore, in collective beliefs must have been condemned to Hell alike other

disclaimers of faith. This assumption is reinforced by both hymnographical and

hagiographical evidence.

The liturgical hymnographers36 treat the soldiers of the Sepulchres custody in

dissimilar ways. In most cases the soldiers are presented as eye-witnesses of Christs

Resurrection, yet in a non-negative way, contrary to the Jews.37 In one occasion the

soldiers are portrayed as if they had not eye-witnessed the Resurrection. 38 Yet, in the

Matins of Sunday, Sound 5, in the first kathisma following the second stichologia,

Sound 5, the soldiers of the custody are literally called enemies of Christ: , ,

, ,

[(While) Life laid in the Tomb, and the stone was sealed; soldiers guarded

36 I followed the standard Greek version of the Parakletike, which was standardized in its current version asearly as the 8th century. For the compilation of the Parakletike, see J.M. Neale, A History of the Holy

Eastern Church, General Introduction, part I,2 (London, 1850), pp. 887 ff.; C. Paranikas, AnthologiaGraeca Carminorum Christianorum (Leipzig, 1871), pp. LVII-LXX; J. Pargoire, Lglise Byzantine de527 847(Paris, 1905); H.J.W. Tillyard, The Hymns of the Ochtoechos, M.M.B. Transcripta III (1940),

pp. XV-XIV and V (1949), pp. XI-XX; and E. Wellesz,A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography(Oxford, 1971).

37 Sunday Matins, Sound 1, First kathisma following the first stichologia; Sunday Matins, Sound 1, Fourthsticheron anatolikon of the Lauds; Sunday Matins, Sound 2, Second sticheron of the Lauds. Sunday

Matins, Sound 2, Fourthsticheron anatolikon of the Lauds; Sunday Matins, Sound 3, Secondsticheron ofthe Lauds; Saturday Vespers, Sound 5, Third sticheron anatolikon; The Apolytikion of Sound 6; SundayMatins, Sound 6, Second kathisma following the first stichologia; Sunday Matins, Sound 6, Second

sticheron anatolikon of the Lauds; Sunday Matins, Sound 8, Fourthsticheron of the Lauds; the Synaxarionof Easter Sunday; Matins of the Myrrh-Bearers, Ode VII, Fourth troparion of the Myrrh-Bearers in Sound2; Matins of the Myrrh-Bearers, Ode VII, Fifth troparion of the Myrrh-Bearers in Sound 2; Matins of theMyrrh-Bearers, Ode VIII, Fourth troparion of the Myrrh-Bearers in Sound 2.

38 Sunday Matins, Sound 5, Firststicheron of the Lauds.


10/40


10

Christ as a sleeping king; and, after blinding his enemies, the Lord rose]. There is no

literary context allowing for a different interpretation as to who are Christs enemies.

This interpretation is in line with patristic evidence which, while not naming thecustody soldiers as Christs enemies, clearly indicated a common belief that they were

deniers of the Resurrection.39 In his XC homily, St. John Chrysostome, after

emphasizing in how many ways the soldiers experienced the divine nature of Christ,40

portrays them not only to be more corrupt than the Jewish people and Pontius Pilate, but

also more money-thirsty than Judas: Do you realize that all of them were corrupted?

(Pontius) Pilate? For he was convinced. The soldiers? The Jewish people? Do notwonder how money corrupted the soldiers. If money was so tempting for the disciple (=

Judas), how much more would it be for them (the soldiers)?.41 To various degrees the

custody soldiers were also negatively treated by other 4 th c. Church Fathers, like St.

Cyril of Jerusalem,42 St. Amphilochios of Ikonion,43 Eusebios of Emesa44 and

39 It is interesting to relate that in modern Greek there is still in use an expression relating the custodysoldiers with the silenced knowledge of the Resurrection and, in wider context, any silenced knowledge;

cf. (the guards know); compare also with the Fourth Sticheron Anatolikonof the Sound 5 Sunday Matins Lauds in Sound 2:

. . .

, , .

. , ,

, , . , ; , .

, , ,

, , .40 Chrysostome maintains that the earthquake during the Crucifixion took place only for the sake of soldiers:

John Chrysostome (1979), Homily XC, in , , v. 12, Thessaloniki,p. 392, verses 11-17.

41 ; ; ;

; .

, . [JohnChrysostome (1979), Homily XC, in , , v. 12, Thessaloniki, p. 398,verses 11-15].

42 , .

,

,

, , , .

, ,

. ,

, .


11/40


11

Apollinarios of Laodikeia.45 Last, but not least, St. John of Damascus, to whom we

should probably attribute the authorship of the first kathisma in Sound 5 following thesecondstichologia of Sundays Matins in Sound 5, enjoins the faithful to hate Christs

,

,

, ,

,

;

, ,

,

,

,

[Meretakis E. [ed.] (1994), :

(-) , v. 2, Thessaloniki, p. 90, 92]. 43 .

. ;

;

;

[ ] .

.

, , ,

, ,

. , ,

, . [Papachristopoulos K. (1992),

- ,

, v. 71, p. 91 (134-136)].44 K. Bonis, : . . .

/. . . . . (Athens, 1968), p. 209.

45 The link between Judas and the soldiers is also evident in the commentaries of Apolinarios of Laodikeia:

, ,

, [Judas betrayed Jesus for money putting asideall of the miracles that he witnessed, while the soldiers after accepting a considerable bribe, having

announced the archpriests what they saw, they silenced in a profound way and spread rumours of what

had not happened]. See K.G. Papachristopoulos G.P. Kounavi (ed.), , first part, , v. 72 (Athens, 1994), p. 306 (section

149).


12/40


12

enemies, as whoever does not confess Christ as Lord and Son of God is an anti-

Christ.46I suggest that in the visual memory and religious beliefs of the artist, patron and/or

the viewers of the Custody at the Sepulchre / Rejoice scene in question, both Latin

knights and the soldiers of the Sepulchres custody, shared a common condemnation to

Hell. Pursuing iconological methods of inquiry, this suggestion is reinforced by the

approaching of the soldiers with the Limbo/Hades represented in the next scene by their

depiction outside the pictorial frame of their scene.47 Indeed, in the adjacent subject of

the Descent to Limbo, Christ tramples down Death,48 or captivates Limbo.49 Inprovincial, popular fashion, Death, Limbo or Hades (Devil), is personified in the form of

an unkempt, old, dark and chained man. The Latin knights/custody soldiers of the

bordering subject not only are represented at the same height with Death/Hell, but also

transcend the red line dividing the two scenes further approaching Death/Hell. In no

other place has the artist repeated this transgression, while in spite of his provincial

training, his drawing abilities leave to me no doubt that the proximity of the soldiers

with Hades and the transcending of the dividing line by the former to further approach

the latter are utterly intentional to intensify the link between the Latin knights and Hell.

This been shown, two more questions remain unanswered. First, since the different

panoply pieces of our soldiers belong to different periods of time, where did the local

artist or the patron draw his models? I suggest that the panoply parts of the scenes

knights (dating in different periods) could be seen locally. Being a place of great

strategic importance, Epiros had repeatedly been used as springboards of Latinexpeditions against the East, as during the Byzantine-Norman wars (1081-1185),50 the

46 .

, [Sakalis I. (1991),

, in , v. 9, Thessaloniki, p. 150

(section 37, verses 1-2)].47 Since the coupling of Marys at the Tomb with the Descent to Limbo is quite common in Byzantine

paitnings, this argument is raised precisely because the soldiers transcend the pictorial frame of their sceneapproaching the adjacent scene.

48 Check, for example, the Apolytikion of Easter: Christ is risen from the dead; by death trampling downDeath and to those in the tombs giving life.

49

I can roughly cite a Theotokion following Sundays Lauds You are most blessed, Virgin Mother of God,for through Him who took flesh from you Hell has been taken captive, Adam recalled, the curse s lain, Eveset free, death put to death, and we given life. Therefore in praise we cry: Blessed are you, Christ our God,who have been thus well-pleased. Glory to you [Ephrem Archimandrite, Matins for Sundays and Feasts,

in accessed in 11 March, 2006].50 For a brief account of the Byzantine-Norman wars, see N. Ziangos, , pp. 33-36; E. Hallam

(ed.), Chronicles of the Crusades: Eye-Witness Accounts of the Wars Between Christianity and Islam (London, 1989), pp. 52-55 (where extracts from William of Apulias Gesta Roberti Wiscardi).


13/40


13

First (Raymond of Toulouse and Hugh of Vermandois, 1096-1099)51 and the Fourth

Crusades (Boniface of Montferrat, 1202-1204).52 Yet, as Angeliki Laiou relates, The

Crusades were a frequent phenomenon of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. We are

accustomed to taking into account of the major crusades, , but crusading expeditions

took place often, and certainly the Christians and Muslims of the area were aware of

the fact.53 It can be maintained that the artist or the patron had seen knights with their

own eyes. Perhaps the painter might even have kept sketches of them or some knights

had lost their lives in the battles of the region and their panoplies were taken as booty

and used as models for the artist.Second, why must western knights have locally a negative reputation? While the

Normans were considered by the Byzantine elites as little more than barbarians,54 their

reputation was further blackened in Epiros after they seized and burnt Kanina, Vlor and

Jericho in 108155 and Corfu in 1084.56 Moreover, the First Crusaders under Bohemund

(1096) en route from the Epirotic coasts to the east, while endeavouring to refrain from

pillage and disorder,57 caused no little disturbance, as accounted by St. Theophylaktos of

Ochrid.58 While the First Crusaders advanced to the Middle East, they were hideously

defamed, even though their alleged acts of cannibalism was more often rumoured than

practised.59 Having said that the Crusader expeditions were far more often than we

customarily take into account, it is worth mentioning that the 1120s were punctuated by

crusading expeditions undertaken by Pisans and Genoese by sea, while in 1122 a

Venetian Crusader fleet on its way to Palestine attacked Corfu in retaliation for the

51 Durrs and Vlora, two major bridgeheads of the East were used by the First Crusade armies as a transitstation to proceed to the Byzantine capital with a special permission granted by Emperor Alexius I

Comnenus. From western primary sources, see Fulcher of Chartres, Historia Hierosolymitana , accessiblein English in E. Hallam (ed.), Chronicles of the Crusades, pp. 64-66. From Byzantine sources, see AnnaComnena, Alexiad, 10:7, in A.C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants(Princeton, 1921), pp. 78-79 [digitally reproduced in Medieval Sourcebook, Anna Comnena. The Alexiad.On the Crusades, , accessed in 07 March,

2006].52 As Villehardouin relates, by April 1203 most of the Fourth Crusade army had embarked at Corfou, a few

miles opposite the region of Sarand. For Villehardouins account (Geoffrey of Villehardouin, LaConqute de Constantinople, ed. by E. Faral (Paris, 1938), see E. Hallam (ed.), Chronicles of theCrusades, p. 213.

53 A. Laiou, Byzantine Trade with Christians and Muslims and the Crusades, in A.E. Laiou R.P.

Mottahedeh (eds.), The Crusades, p. 160.54 Anna Comnena,Alexiad, Book 10:347 cited in E. Hallam (ed.), Chronicles of the Crusades, pp. 69, 72.55

W. Miller, Valona, The Journal of Hellenic Studies 37 (1917), p. 185.56 S. Runciman,A History of the Crusades, v. 1. The First Crusade and the Foundation of the Kingdom ofJerusalem (Cambridge, 1999), I, p. 74.

57 Op. cit., pp. 155-156.58 P.G. 126, p. 324; this was only accessible to me in an Albanian translation, cf. K. Bozhori,Dokumente t

Periudhs Bizantine pr Historin e Shqipris. Shek. VII-XV(Tiran, 1978), extract Nr. XV.59 A. Maalouf, The Crusades Through Arab Eyes, trans. by J. Rothschild (London, 1984), pp. 39 ff.; M.

Billings, The Cross and the Crescent(New York, 1987), p. 55.


14/40


14

attempt of John II Komnenos to reduce Venices commercial privileges; it pillaged

Byzantine lands on the way to and from Palestine and extracted the confirmation and

expansion of Venetian commercial privileges in the Byzantine Empire.60 As for the

Fourth Crusade, William Miller states that Boniface of Montferrat manned his army with

the rag-tag and bobtail of Western Europe, who fought for him to receive feuds and

titles.61 Even though there are no written accounts that I know of recording the

impressions left by the Crusaders to the local populations, it is highly likely that the local

inhabitants of Sarand region felt no different than other Orthodox people, whose

impressions were described in the beginning of the paper. It may also be alleged that,since Epiros was among the principal target territories of immigrants from

Constantinople,62 the immigrants must have also shaped or influenced popular dark and

base memories about the Crusaders, especially those of the Fourth Crusade. Last but not

least, the region in question was for most parts of the second half of the 13 th c. a western

dominion, either in the form of a dowry given by the Despot of Epiros, as in the case of

the marriage of King Manfred of Hohenstaufen with Helen Angelina (1259),63 or in the

form of occupation by force of arms, as in the case of the expedition of Charles I Anjou

who took hold of Corfu and the mainland fortresses in 1266 and kept them until his

death in January 1285.64 As implied by the representation of the soldiers of the Custody

in the church of St. George at Dhivr, their presence in the region must have been

distasteful to the locals.

Similar conclusions can be drawn in the case of the subject of Judas Betrayal in the

church of the Nativity of the Virgin on Maligrad. The church was re-built and re-decorated under the patronage of Caesar Novak in 1368/9. 65 In the scene of Judass

60 A. Laiou, Byzantine Trade with Christians and Muslims and the Crusades, in A.E. Laiou R.P.

Mottahedeh (eds.), The Crusades, p. 160; cf. J. Riley-Smith, The Venetian Crusade of 1122-1124, inG. Airaldi B. Kedar (eds.), I Comuni Italiani nel Regno Crociato di Gerusalemme, Jerusalem, 24-28May 1984, Collana Storica di Fonti e Studi 48 (Genoa, 1986), pp. 337-350.

61 W. Miller, , 1204-1566(Athens, 1960), p. 70, cited in N. Ziangos,, p. 74 and note 8.

62 N. Ziangos, , pp. 49-50, 69-71.63 S. Runciman, The Sicilian Vespers: A History of the Mediterranean World In the Later Thirteenth Century

(Cambridge, 1984), p. 51.64 Op. cit., pp. 136, 146 (1271), 253-254 (1285).65 For the church of Maligrad, see Th. Popa, Mbishkrime t kishave n Shqipri, ed. by Nestor Nepravishta -

Kostandin Gjakumis (Tirana, 1998), Inscriptions Nr. 287-288 (pp. 149-151), 289 (p. 151), 299 (p. 155),

301 (p. 156); Th. Popa,Piktort mesjetar shqiptar(Tiran, 1961), p. 27 and fig. 17 in p. 19; Dh. Dhamo,Kisha e Shn Meris n Maligrad, Buletin i Universitetit Shtetror t Tirans: seria e shkencaveshoqerore 2 (1963), pp. 154-198; Dh. Dhamo, Piktura murale e kishs s Shn-Meris n Maligrad,Akta t Konferencs s Par t Studimeve Albanologjike (Tiran, 1965), pp. 562-566; Dh. Dhamo, Lapeinture murale du Moyen Age en Albanie (Tiran, 1974): 8 Nntori Ed., pp. 4, 5-6 and fig. on pp. 28-33, p. 13a-b and fig. in pp. 28-33; Dh. Dhamo, Vepra dhe tipare t pikturs n Shqipri n shek. V-XV(Valeurs et caractristiques de la peinture en Albanie aux V-XVe sicles), Studime Historike. 1 (1984),

pp. 141-158, French synopsis in pp. 158-160.


15/40


15

Betrayal, two soldiers flank Jesus, both of whom wear kettle helmets with basinets,

alternatively called chapel de fer, rather usual as from the beginning of the 14 th c.66While both soldiers extend threateningly their swords towards Jesus, the one at the right

covers his back with a triangular shield curved to the body of the type called the heater,

which follows the curve of the body. This shield-type became common after 1270s,

similar in form to the one shown in the brass of Sir Robert de Bures, ca. 1331, in the

Church of All Saints, Acton, Suffolk.67 It is needless, I believe, to argue why these

soldiers would be very negatively perceived by the public.

While in late Byzantine paintings at Mistra there is a deliberate absence of Latininfluences,68 the Latinization of military costumes in narrative scenes is also observed

in other former Latin-dominated regions. In the context of medieval Morea, Gerstel

mentions vaguely that some evidence has been found in the details of narrative scenes,

from the occasional embossing of haloes to unusual representations of soldiers at the

Arrest and Crucifixion of Christ.69 Even though Gerstel identifies a Frankish coat of

arms that marks the shield of one of the custody soldiers in the scene of the Marys at the

Tomb of the church of St. John Chrysostome, Geraki, ca. 1300, thereby associating

Roman soldiers with Latins,70 yet, she didnt it with the thesis I have hereby attempted to

uphold. Lymberopoulou has identified a number of similar cases in 14 th c. Crete; the

representation of soldiers in western armour in scenes like the Marys at the Tomb, the

Betrayal, the Carrying of the Cross, or the martyrdom of saints was considered by her as

a hostile and anti-western comments.71

66 D. Edge J.M. Paddock,Arms and Armour, p. 73 and figure on the same page depicting a knight wearinga kettle hat, detail from a 14 th century illuminated address from the town of Prato to Robert of Anjou.

67 D. Edge J.M. Paddock,Arms and Armour, p. 83 and fig on p. 84.68 D. Mouriki, Palaeologan Mistra and the West, in Byzantium and Europe: First International Byzantine

Conference, Delphi, 20-24 July, 1985 (Athens, 1987), p. 239. I did not manage to consult A. Grabar, Lasymtrie des relations de Byzance et lOccident dans le domaine des arts au moyen ge, in I. Hutter

(ed.),Byzanz und der Westen: Studien zur Kunst des europischen Mittelaltres (Vienna, 1984), pp. 9-24;cf. S.E.J. Gerstel, Art and Identity in the Medieval Morea, in A.E. Laiou R.P. Mottahedeh (eds.), TheCrusades, p. 264 and note 7.

69 S.E.J. Gerstel, Art and Identity in the Medieval Morea, in A.E. Laiou R.P. Mottahedeh (eds.), TheCrusades, pp. 264-265 and note 6 on p. 264.

70 Op. cit., pp. 278-279 and fig. 15.71 Such Latinized soldiers appear in at least the following churches: 1) Archangel Michael at Kavalariana

Selinou, 1327/28, scenes of the Betrayal, Carrying of the Cross and Marys at the Tomb; 2) Hagios

Nikolaos at Maza Apokoronou, 1325/26, scene of the Marys at the Tomb; 3) and Hagios Georgios at

Anydroi Selinou, 1323, scene of Saint George before of the Governor. For these scenes, see A.Lymberopoulou, The Church of the Archangel Michael at Kavalariana: Art and Society on Fourteenth-Century Venetian-Dominated Crete, doctoral thesis submitted at the Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman andModern Greek Studies, University of Birmingham (Birmingham, 2002), passim. I am indebted to theauthor for bringing these monuments into my attention. I did not manage to consider M. Vassilakis-

Mavrakakis, Western Influences on the Fourteenth Century Art of Crete, Jahrbuch der sterreichischenByzantinistik32:5 (1982) [XVI. Internationaler Byzantinistenkongress (Wien, 4.-9. Oktober 1981), 2, 5], pp.301-311; and S. Papadaki-Oekland, 14 .


16/40


16

Several post-Byzantine churches and catholica in Epiros provide substantial evidence

that such hostile, anti-western visual statements consciously persists up to the first half

of the 17th c., after which the phenomenon gradually fades out in mechanical repetition

of earlier post-Byzantine models.

The most impressive cases, however, can be viewed in the early post-Byzantine

mural paintings of the Lite of Philanthropenon Monasterys catholicon on the Isle ofIoannina (painted in 1560), subject already discussed by the late Miltos Garidis.72 There,

a great number of torturers, represented in different scenes of martyrdoms, bear the form

of western knights.73 Exceptionally interesting is the martyrdom of St. Vincent,represented on the southern wall of the Lite; the saints executioner is engaged intochivalric dancing figure before he effects the final attack the fatal attack against the

saint.74 In the martyrdom of St. Babylas and his disciples, a figure, identified by Garidis

as a Spanish merchant, stands before the ruler.75 Very similar to an equestrian harness of

Otto Heinrich, Count Palatine of the Rhine, dating 1530s and other German armours

dating from the first quarter of the 16 th c. are the mounted knight who tortures St.

Amphilochios, Bishop of Ikonion, by dragging him behind his galloping horse.76 Similar

models have, undoubtedly, been utilized to represent the executioners of St. Stephen the

Younger, the Confessor.77 Patronized by the renowned family of Philantropenoi, who

migrated from Constantinople due to its growing pro-Latin support, the Monastery of St.

;, in Kypraiou (ed.),. (Athens, 1992),II, pp. 491-516.

72 M. Garidis,

. ()

, 1560, in M. Garidis A. Paliouras (eds.), . 700 1292-1992 (Ioannina, 1999), pp. 65-75.

73 Among the several examples that can be mentioned here I choose only: 1) The martyrdom of St. Tarachos

[Garidis M. Paliouras A. [eds.] (1993), p. 95, fig. 144], whose torturers helmet is comparable to 14 thcentury examples [e.g. the representation of Sir Geoffrey Luttrell from the Luttrell Psalter, ca. 1340, D.

Edge J.M. Paddock,Arms and Armour, p. 67; cf. the open at the front and lowering at the sides Italiansallet ca. 1480, op. cit., p. 121, figure above, or the Knights Tilting, from the Ordinance of Chivalry, 15th c.English illuminated manuscript by St. John Astley, op. cit., p. 159]. 2) The martyrdom of St. Epicharis [M.Garidis A. Paliouras (eds.), (Ioannina, 1993), p. 113, fig. 170, 172],whose torturers overcoat and helmet is comparable to 16th c. western harnesses [e.g. the equestrian

harness of O. Heinrich, Count Palatine of the Rhine, ca. 153.0s, D. Edge J.M. Paddock, Arms andArmour, p. 175]. 3) The beheading of St. John the Baptist [M. Garidis A. Paliouras (eds.), ,

p. 174, fig. 291], whose executioners helmet and overcoat is comparable to 14th

c. examples.74 M. Garidis A. Paliouras (eds.), , pp. 96-97, fig. 145-146. For similar figures, see the

executioner of St. Marcianus, op. cit., p. 103, fig. 161.75 Op. cit., pp. 78-79, fig. 112, 116.76 Op. cit., pp. 105, 107, fig. 160, 162 in comparison with D. Edge J.M. Paddock, Arms and Armour, pp.

142 (up), 143 (up), and 175.77 M. Garidis A. Paliouras (eds.), , pp. 114-115, fig. 174, 176 in comparison with D. Edge

J.M. Paddock,Arms and Armour, pp. 142 (up), 143 (up), and 175.


17/40


17

Nikolaos of Philanthropenon virtually provides the most palpable examples of anti-

western pictorial statements.

Similar, yet far less impressive examples can also be found in other 16 th c.

monuments of the region. The scene of the Betrayal of Jesus in the church of St.

Athanasios at Goranxhi, Dropull (Gjirokastr region) dates in 1524 and imitates

panoplies of the 12th and 13th centuries.78 In the catholicon of Ntiliou Monastery, on the

Isle of Ioannina (1542/3), the scenes of Christs Derision, the Route to Golgotha, the

Carrying of the Cross, the Ascent to the Cross and the Marys at the Tomb contain

soldiers depicted in a western 14th and 15th c. fashion;79 yet, western influences in thearmoury of several military saints indicates trends that may shadow the strength of the

hereby presented thesis.80 However, the persistence of such examples point to the

contrary. Cases indicating Latinization of soldiers can also be found in the third 16th c.

monastery on the Isle of Ioannina, the Eleousa Monastery (third quarter of the 165 th c.),

in the representations of Christs Derision, Pilate and His Suite, the Carrying of and

Ascent to the Cross.81 From other 16th c. monuments in the regions of Epiros we can cite

the church of the Transfiguration at Veltsista (1568),82 St. Nikolaos at Krapsi (1563),83

the narthex of Barlaam Monastery, Meteora (1566),84 the church of St. Demetrios at

Veltsista (1558-1568),85 the narthex of Dryano Monasterys catholicon (last quarter of

the 16th c.)86 and the church of St. Nikolaos at Dhuvjan, Dropull (end of the 16 th c.).87

78 The church in question in unpublished. For the comparison, see D. Edge J.M. Paddock, Arms andArmour, pp. 84 ff.

79 T. Liva-Xanthaki, , in M. Garidis A.Paliouras (eds.), , figs. 385, 387 and 293 on pp. 231, 232 and 238 respectively; cf. D. Edge

J.M. Paddock,Arms and Armour, pp. 84 ff.].80 Op. cit., figs. 391 and 408 on pp. 235 and 244.81 B. Papadopoulou, , in M. Garidis A. Paliouras (eds.), , figs. 455-459

on pp. 277-279; cf. D. Edge J.M. Paddock,Arms and Armour, pp. 84 ff.82 See the scenes of the Massacre of the Innocent, the Betrayal, Christs Judgement by Annas, Caiaphas and

Pontius Pilate, the Derision and the Carrying of the Cross, the Ascent to the Cross and the Crucifixion,

Joseph of Arimatheia before Pilate and the Marys at the Tomb [see A. Stavropoulou-Makri,Les PeinturesMurales de l glise de la Transfiguration Veltsista (1568) en Epire et l atelier des peintres Kondaris(Ioannina, 1989), figs. 14b, 19b, 20, 21a-b, 22-24, 26 and 28-29 (details), 31a and 33b; cf. D. Edge J.M.

Paddock,Arms and Armour, pp. 84 ff.].83 Martyrdom of St. Demetrios (A. Stavropoulou-Makri,Les Peintures Murales, pp. 137-153, fig. 54a; cf. D.

Edge J.M. Paddock,Arms and Armour, pp. 84 ff.).84 Martyrdoms of saints. (A. Stavropoulou-Makri,Les Peintures Murales, pp. 157-167, figs. 56a, 57; cf. D.

Edge J.M. Paddock,Arms and Armour, pp. 84 ff.).85 The Judgement by Annas and Caiaphas (A. Stavropoulou-Makri, Les Peintures Murales, pp. 153-157,figs. 60 and 61a; cf. D. Edge J.M. Paddock,Arms and Armour, pp. 84 ff.).

86 Martyrdoms of Sts. Demetrios and George; cf. D. Edge J.M. Paddock,Arms and Armour, pp. 84 ff. Thefrescoes of the this monument date in the last quarter of the 16 th century, with substantial overpainting

from the 17th and the 19th century (G. Giakoumis K. Giakoumis, [Ioannina, 1994], pp. 79-81 and figs. 160-162; G. Giakoumis, [Athens,1994], pp. 28-33 and figs. 29-43).


18/40


18

The 17th c. also offers some good examples, while the phenomenon clearly fades out

in unsophisticated imitations towards the 18th c. One can cite the Martyrdom of St.

Theodore Stratelates in the church of the Dormition of the Virgin at zervat, Dropull

(1603),88 the Massacre of the Innocents in the catholicon of Ravenia Monastery, Dropull

(second quarter of the 17th c.)89 and the Carrying of the Cross in the naos of the

catholicon of the Transfiguration Monastery at Mingul, Gjirokastr (1666).90 From

distant memories of the phenomenon in the 18th c. we could cite the martyrdoms of

saints in the third zones of frescoes, western wall of the church of St. George at

Libofsh, Fier (1782),91 which seemingly reproduce 17th c. models.In his authoritative Memory and Proof of Age in England (1272-1327), John

Bedell92 states that history, when it is not invention, is memory written down. Although

the enormous attention paid to memory by philosophers, psychologists and neurologists

has led to little certainty, we do know that memory is a complex process, not a recording

device, and that it involves many parts of the brain and aspects of the self. We construct

our memories, choosing consciously or unconsciously to emphasize some experiences

and impressions and disregard others, and, over time, we reshape them, reordering our

pasts to meet the changing needs of the present. Our memories are shaped by our

interactions with others, especially by conversations we have had about shared

experiences. We each have our own histories, which we have made as much by thought

as by need. With this in mind, in this paper, taking into consideration representations of

Crusaders in ecclesiastical paintings of late Byzantine and early post-Byzantine churches

and catholica, I attempted to interpret expressions of collective base memories of theCrusades in peripheral regions, as Epiros, Crete and, possibly, Morea. Further research

in other contemporary monuments of former Latin-occupied territories could check the

theory that such anti-western attitudes reflect general feelings, rather than isolated cases,

especially in former western-dominated Orthodox provinces. Last but not least, the paper

introduces an empirical methodology in which a historian can unveil collective

memories of the past at the absence of textual sources by looking at and interpreting

artworks.

87 See the soldier next to Longinus in the scene of the Crucifixion (see G. Giakoumis K. Giakoumis,

, p. 150, fig. 300; cf. D. Edge J.M. Paddock,Arms and Armour, pp. 84 ff.).88 G. Giakoumis K. Giakoumis, , pp. 53-55 and 56 and fig. 105 on p. 56; cf. D. Edge J.M.

Paddock,Arms and Armour, pp. 84 ff.].89 G. Giakoumis K. Giakoumis, , p. 144, fig. 287; cf. D. Edge J.M. Paddock, Arms and

Armour, pp. 84 ff. For the monastery, see G. Giakoumis, (Athens,1995), where citations to the relevant literature.90 For the monastery, see G. Giakoumis K. Giakoumis, , pp. 114-117; cf. D. Edge J.M.

Paddock,Arms and Armour, pp. 84 ff.91 G. Giakoumis K. Giakoumis, , pp. 72-75, figs. 144-154, and particularly fig. 148 on p. 73.92 J. Bedell, Memory and Proof of Age in England 1272-1327, Past and Present162 (1999), pp. 3-27 (p.

4); cf. G. Duby, Memories with No Historian, trans. by J. Wicke and D. Moschenberg, Yale FrenchStudies 59 (1980) 7-16 (Rethinking History: Time, Myth and Writing).


19/40


19

1. Hermitage of St. George at Dhivr, Sarand. Cross-section (1-1)

2. Hermitage of St. George at Dhivr, Sarand , last quarter of the 13th century. The apse

of the church with the altar stone and co-celebrating hierarchs


20/40


20

3. Hermitage of St. George at Dhivr, Sarand. The scene of Christ the Saviour and an

inscription below it mentioning the patrons of the frescoes, a certain priest named Isidore

along with his wife and children. Last quarter of the 13th century


21/40


21

4. Hermitage of St. George at Dhivr, Sarand. A view of the naos from the West. In the

far end the entrance to the parabema. At the right the churchs ground plan


22/40


22

5. Hermitage of St. George at Dhivr, Sarand. The apse of the church with the altar

stone and co-celebrating hierarchs


23/40


23

Index of the Iconographic Programme of the Cavern of St. George

at Stilo-Dhivr

1. Saint Jacob, 2. Saint Basil or Cyril, 3. Lord Sabaoth, 4. Saint Kosmas, 5. Saint Damian, 6. Prophet Elijah, 7. Unidentified saint, 8. Unidentified saint, 9. Unidentified saint,

10. Unidentified saint, 11. Christ, 12. Saint Daniel the Stylite, 13. Saint Symeon the Stylite, 14. Saint Vlasios, 15. Saint Athanasios, 16. Saint Basil, 17. Saint John

Chrysostome, 18. Saint Gregory, 19. Saint Martin, 20. Inscription , 21. Deisis and Annunciation (the Virgin Mary), 22. Lord Sabaoth and Annunciation

(Archangel Gabriel), 23. Transfiguration, 24. Unidentified saint, 25. Archangel Michael, 26. Easter Morning, 27. The Descent to Hades, 28. Unidentified saint, 29. Saint

Demetrius, 30. Saint George, 31. Saint Nikolaos, 32. The Dormition of the Theotokos, 33. The Saviour, 34. The Ascension, 35. Prophet David, 36. Unidentified saint,

37. Saint George, 38. Christ (Emmanuel), 39. The Theotokos with the portrait of a donor, 40. Portraits of donors, 41. Christ in a mandorla .

6. Hermitage of St. George at Dhivr, Sarand. A view from beneath the church which

maps the frescoes. Select a number and see the underlying fresco. Refer to the table

below for a complete listing of the artwork


24/40


24

7. Hermitage of St. George at Dhivr, Sarand. Naos. Northern wall. Second zone of

frescoes. The Descent to Hades. Last quarter of the 13th century


25/40


26/40


26

9. Hermitage of St. George at Dhivr, Sarand. Naos. Northern wall. Easter Morning.

Second zone of frescoes. Detail of the sleeping soldiers of the Sepulchres custody. Last

quarter of the 13th century


27/40


27

10. A stone relief with two mounted knightsdated ca. 1128, from Angoulme Cathedral

(with an integral coif) and a metal relief of a knight, part of the decoration on the Gross-

Comburg chaldelier, ca. 1140 (without a coif) compared with our soldiers


28/40


28

11. Knights of Macchabees Battle in the Bible of Rhodes, dating late 10th or 11th

century with helmets comparable to those of our soldiers


29/40


29

12. An initial from the Winchester Bible, ca. 1170. Notice the strips of red and

white/pink on the shields, in conjunction to the similar patterns on the shields of our

soldiers


30/40


30

13. A relief from the tomb of Gulielmo Beradi, in the church of Santa Annunziata,

Florence, ca. 1289. Notice the triangular form of the shield in comparison with theshields of our soldiers


31/40


31

14. An initial from the Winchester Bible, ca. 1170, a panel from the Silver Shrine of

Charlemagne in Aachen Cathedral, ca. 1207 and our soldiers. Notice how the lances inour scene are closer to the 1207 example


32/40


32

15. Hermitage of St. George at Dhivr, Sarand. Naos. Northern wall. The Descent to

Hades. Second zone of frescoes. Detail of the personification of Death, or Satan,

trembled down by Christ. Last quarter of the 13th century


33/40


33

16. A map of the Crusade Routes, from the First to the Eighth Crusade


34/40


34

17. The martyrdom of St. Vincent. Fresco. Philanthropenon Monastery, Narthex, 1560


35/40


35

18. The martyrdom of St. Amphilochius, Bishop of Ikonion. Fresco. Philanthropenon

Monastery, Narthex, 1560


36/40


36

19. The martyrdom of St. Stephen the Confessor. Fresco. Philanthropenon Monastery,Narthex, 1560


37/40


37

20. The Betrayal of Jesus. Fresco. St. Athanasios Church at Goranxi, Dropull

(Gjirokastra region), 1524


38/40


38

21. The Martyrdoms of Sts. George and Demetrius. Fresco. Dryano Monastery, Narthex,

last quarter of the 16th century


39/40


39

22. The Carrying of the Cross. Fresco. Naos of Mingul Monastery, Gjirokastra, 1666


40/40


40

23. A scene from the Bayeux Tapestry interpretation of the Battle of Hastings (1066).

On the extreme left is Bishop Odo, wearing what may be a hauberk of scale armour andcarrying a mace of cudgel form. On the extreme right, William of Normandy raises his

helmet by its nasal