Stylistic Trends in Monumental Painting of Greece during the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries Author(s): Doula Mouriki Reviewed

work(s): Source: Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 34/35 (1980/1981), pp. 77-124 Published by: Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1291449 . Accessed: 18/04/2012 06:12
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Dumbarton Oaks Papers.

http://www.jstor.org

STYLISTIC TRENDS IN MONUMENTAL PAINTING OF GREECE DURING THE ELEVENTH AND TWELFTH CENTURIES*
DOULAMOURIKI
INTRODUCTION

A surveywhichis intendedto cover art historical materialthat is not only vast but also fragmentary insufficiently and will necessarily focusedonly be published on the most pertinent raised in reference the scope of thispaper.1A to questions selectionof workswill be discussedbriefly, particular in those that reflect directly or indirectly the main currents the stylisticdevelopment Byzantine monuin of mentalpainting.In view ofthe factthat documentary evidenceis restricted very to fewmonuments, criteriaare assigneda special importance datingpurfor stylistic poses. The groupingof the works discussed in this reportaccordingto specific trends in agreement is withthegeneral conclusions summarized Professor stylistic by Otto Demus in his discussionof stylistic phases of themosaicsofSan Marco during the eleventhand twelfth centuries.2 The materialin Greece is, as will be shown, a further of these trends, whichprevailedthroughout ByzantineEmpire the proof and beyondits frontiers. A summarystylistic decorations Greece of in analysis of the main monumental the eleventhand twelfth centuriesconstitutes the principalobject of this paper. Withinthis context,reference also made to key monuments is outside Greece. In
* This article is an expanded version of a lecture delivered duringthe Symposiumentitled "Venetian Mosaics and Their Byzantine Sources," held at Dumbarton Oaks in May 1978. A studyof the eleventh-and mosaics in Greece has been included along with the initial study of the frescoes. twelfth-century 1 I have not included long bibliographicalnotes on Byzantine monumentalpaintingof the eleventhand twelfth since these can be foundeasily in generalhandbooksand specialized studies of past years. centuries, Regardingthe materialin Greece,two recentstudiesmay be mentioned:K. M. Skawran,"The Development of Middle Byzantine Fresco Painting in Greece" (unpublished Ph.D. diss., University of South Africa, Skawran, "Middle ByzantineFresco Painting"); and C. Jolivet,"Les d6buts de la peinture 1975) (hereafter byzantineen Grace," RAAM, 38 (1977), 48ff. I would like to acknowledgemy debt to Dumbarton Oaks, which enabled me to complete the research forthis paper duringthe spring semesterof 1977-78. I want also to record my thankfulness Professor to Otto Demus, directorof the Dumbarton Oaks Symposiumof May 1978, whose encouragingadvice helped me to face certain problems in my work. The presence of ProfessorHugo Buchthal at Dumbarton Oaks duringthe same period and his scholarlyand human interestin my workhave been a gratifying experience for me. Finally, I am gratefulto my friendand colleague, Efthalia Constantinides,with whom I shared pleasure and unavoidable peripetiesin collectinga great deal of the materialpresentedin this paper. of SFor a summary thelecturespresented the Symposium, the report Professor at see of Demus, "Venetian Mosaics and Their Byzantine Sources," DOP, 33 (1979), 337ff.

78

DOULA

MOURIKI

additionto the evidenceforthe chronology some undated monumental of cyclesin materialshedslighton the crucialquestionofthe relationGreece,the comparative ship of art among provincialcentersand between theLn and the capital of the Empire. In view of the fact that the mosaics of San Marco and those in other of churches thelagoonare to be published mentioned here. soon,theyare onlybriefly to On the other hand, references illustratedmanuscriptsare being made only of in insofar theseprovideclearreflections the stylistic as development monumental of of for in decorations Greece.The importance dated manuscripts the chronology relevantforthe exundated monumental paintingseems rarelyto be particularly of in tant material.3Nevertheless, certaininstances,illustrated manuscripts Constantinopolitanorigin which provide substantial evidence for detectingmetroof politan affiliations provincial monumentswill be mentioned.Regardingicon hieraticcharacter hardly paintingof the MiddleByzantineperiod,its predominant evithe itselfforcomparativepurposes.Moreover, total lack of documentary lends for dence regardingthis art medium does not make it pertinent the dating of some rare specimensof icon painting monumentalpainting. Consequently, only modes in conthe prevailingstylistic of the late Comnenianperiod which reflect will be mentioned. decorations temporary for The use of an evocative terminology the various stylesof the eleventhand has proved controversial centuries twelfth among studentsof this period. Neverfor purposes. Most of theless,this constitutesa basic requirement identification in this surveyhave eitherbeen coined in previousstudies or the termsemployed were presentedat the Symposium. In orderto envisagethe culturalsettingwithinwhichthe monumental painting in centuries Greecewas produced,it is worthrecalling of the eleventhand twelfth of the three facts which deeply affected history the area duringthe periodunder review.These, in chronological by sequence,are: 1. the defeatof theArabsin Crete createdrelativestabilityon the Aegean Phokas in 961, an eventwhich Nikephoros 2. the defeat of the Bulgarians by Basil II in 1018 (the emperor'striumcoast; to is afterward considered have markeda change phal visit to Greeceimmediately receivedconsiderable which henceforward in the centralpolicytowardthisprovince, in battle of Mantzikert 1071, 3. the disastrous and politicalattention);and financial which meant the loss of vital areas in Asia Minor.It was inevitable that pragtowardthe provinces matic reasons would then have dictateda shiftof interest to of the Empire further the west. The loss of the Byzantineprovincesin Italy, marked by the conquest of Bari by the Normansin 1071, had also concentrated of the interests the centralgovernment upon Greece.4 life eventsappear to have had a positiveimpact on artistic These threehistorical as may be shown by a study of the in Greece duringthe period under review,
illustrate by 3 One case in point is represented the well definedgroup of the Studios manuscriptswhich the so-called "style mignon."The Psalter ofTheodore of 1063 in the BritishMuseum (Add. 19.352) provides a good example of this style. handbooks on the historyof the period, see, for the eleventhcenturyin 4 In addition to the standard 1966 (London, 1967); Studies,Oxford, theXIIIth International Congress Byzantine of of particular,Proceedings centurymany sur (Paris, 1977). For the twelfth TM, 6 (1976); P. Lemerle, Cinq dtudes le XIe sidclebyzantin InternationalCongressof Byzantine Studies, Athens,1976. relevantstudies were presentedat the Fifteenth

MONUMENTAL PAINTING OF GREECE,

C'S 11lth-12th

79

monuments. the otherhand, we cannotestimatethe losses of artistic On surviving materialcaused by the Normaninvasionsduringthis period.
I. THE ELEVENTH
CENTURY

In contrastto the high quality and considerable numberof architectural enterin Greece duringthe major part of the Macedonian period, the surviving prises monumental paintingis sparse and of a mediocrequality.This gap in the artistic of thisarea can be complemented the substantialvestigesof mosaicsand output by frescoesmainlyin Constantinople and Asia Minor.Particularly valuable evidence a numberof illustrated whichepitomize is, moreover, the providedby manuscripts of high standardsof the so-called MacedonianRenaissance. The Menologion Basil II occupies a prominent dated decoplace in this group. The earliestimportant ration in Greece of the Macedonian period is that of the Panaghia ton Chalkeon of 1028 in Thessaloniki. As attestedby the dedicatory whichalso providesthe date of 1028, inscription, the churchof the Panaghia ton Chalkeonwas erectedby the imperialprotospathariosChristophoros, i.e., southernItaly.5The catepano ofthe themeof Longovardia, of frescoes the churchreveala quite sophisticated as shown,forinstance,by style," the depictionof St. Gregory Nyssa in the apse ofthebema (fig.1). The physiogof and reveals a loftyspirituality, nomy of the bishop is gentle,almost melancholy, of conveyedparticularly the large, almond-shaped by eyes. The modeling the face is subtlewitha balanced use of both painterly linearelements. and The slenderproof stressedby the dispoportionsand the rigidfrontality the body, appropriately sition of the figure the apse, increaseits hieraticquality. Moreover, foldsof in the the draperiesare sparse and vertical,thus emphasizing dematerialized the appearance of the body. The depictionof Christof The Last Judgment the narthex(fig.2) shows the in same spirituality, similarsoftmodeling the face,and an even greater a of tendency towardidealism.The balance betweena painterly and a linearapproachis a typical characteristic the treatment the draperyin these frescoes. more complex of of A betweenthe knees of the Christfigure, systemof linear forms, enhances especially the etherealratherthan the three-dimensional quality of the body. This cascade of linear patternson the draperiesforeshadows what will be seen in a much more accentuatedand slightly of prosaicversiona fewyearslaterin thefrescoes St. Sophia in Ohrid.Nevertheless, all of the paintings the Panaghia ton Chalkeonshare not in the remarkablequality of the examples mentionedabove. This is evident in a detail of The Presentation Christ(fig.3), whichrevealsless refined of facial types and a coarserexecution.Apart fromthis observation, the figures the church all in lack a monumental character.This featureis all the more apparentsincemostof
6 For the churchand its frescoes,see especiallyD. E. Evangelidis,'H fIavayia-r6v XahKCO(Thessaloniki, des 1954); K. Papadopoulos, Die Wandmalereien XI. Jahrhunderts derKirche fIavayia rGv in XahK~covin Thessaloniki(Graz-Cologne,1966); V. Lazarev, Storiadellapitturabizantina(Turin,1967) (hereafter Lazarev, A. Tsitouridi, Tfavcayfa XcAKkaov 'H Storia), 157f.; -rcv (Thessaloniki,1975); Skawran,"Middle ByzantineFresco Painting," 108ff., 271ff.; Jolivet,op. cit., 49f. 1 For a detailed stylisticanalysis of the decoration,see Papadopoulos, op. cit.,77ff.

80

DOULA

MOURIKI

the paintingsoccupy the curved surfacesof the church,due, in all probability, to It of that both the depicthe influence mosaic decoration. maybe noted,moreover, are tions of saints and the scenic compositions characterized a static quality. by based on a symconform simplecompositional to The scenes,in particular, principles is tricted ofornament. use of A further feature thesefrescoes a rec metrical arrangement. of The high artisticmeritsof the frescoes the Panaghia ton Chalkeon,the idenof the donor,and the precisedating,along with the location of the churchin tity a major Byzantine city, assign a key position to the decoration.The definition for of its styleis thus of fundamental paintimportance the studyof monumental of of the period. The establishedconventions earlierscholarship, accordingto ing related to Constantinople, which all worksof outstanding quality are necessarily in have been criticallyreconsidered recent studies.' Mentionshould be made in in contextof certainmosaics of the ninthcentury the patriarchal this quartersof whose quality is not particularly outstanding.8 Hagia Sophia in Constantinople, to some illustratedmanuscriptsassociated with the capital, The same applies monastic psalters. An essential prerequisite as, for instance, the ninth-century has been consideredto be the soft,painterlymodeling of the metropolitan style associated with Constantinopolitan practicesharkingback techniquetraditionally This assumptionmay eventuallybe contradictedby the to Hellenisticmodels. linear, abstract elementsof certainmosaic decorationsof the eleventh century, is such as that of St. Sophia in Kiev, forwhicha metropolitan origin beyonddoubt. of for A Constantinopolitan origin the masterpainterofthe frescoes the Panaghia be suggestedby the fact that their donor was an imperial ton Chalkeon may of the to It official. is not possible,however, define precisely connection the frescoes due to the absence monumental with contemporary painting, Constantinopolitan to of comparativematerialin the capital. On the other hand, it seems difficult a hafax in a wealthycommercial work represented accept that this high-quality numerousinwith a strongculturaltradition.Such a city could well afford city for monumentaldecorationsboth within its digenous artists with commissions areas. This, however,does not providean answer precinctsand in the neighboring witha metropolitan by as to whetherwe are dealing imported Constyledirectly of artistsor a local interpretation a currentstylisticidiom, stemstantinopolitan would be that this decoration ming always fromthe capital. A thirdpossibility is a characteristic productof Thessaloniki.However, a surveyof the extant picof torial materialfromthis period in Greece and elsewhereproves the difficulty in a to aspect of artisticproduction Thessaloniki attempting distinguish particular during the eleventh century.9
SSee, forinstance,the recentarticleby C. Mango,"Lo stilecosiddetto'monastico'della pitturabizantina," Atti Habitat-Strutture-Territorio. del Terzo ConvegnoInternazionaledi Studio sulla CiviltdRupestreMedioevale nel Mezzogiorno 1975) (Galatina, 1978), 45ff. d'Italia (Taranto-Grottaglie, and E. J. W. Hawkins, "The 8 Ibid., 54, fig. 11. For these mosaics, see the recentstudy by R. Cormack Mosaics of St. Sophia at Istanbul: The Rooms above the SouthwestVestibuleand Ramp," DOP, 31 (1977), 177ff. 1Cf. Papadopoulos, op. cit.,115ff.Some problemsrelatingto the role of Thessalonikiin the art of the eleventh centuryhave been dealt with at the InternationalByzantine Congressat Ohrid. See, in particular, International the reportsby V. Lazarev, O. Demus, S. Pelekanidis,and S. Radoj&i6,in Acles du XIIP Congrhs 341ff. Ochride1961, I (Belgrade, 1963), 105ff., d'Etudes Byzantines,

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

lth-12th

C'S

81

The decorationof the Panaghia ton Chalkeonrepresents best artisticenterthe prise in the fieldof frescopaintingin Greece duringthe eleventhcentury.Conwith Constantinopolitan of manuscripts the beginningof the vincingcomparisons the Menologionof Basil II (Vat. gr. 1613) being the most outstanding, century, indicate the close adherence of the frescocycle in Thessalonikito metropolitan works.A Georgianmanuscript the year 1030 (K. Kekelidze Instituteof Manuof A. 648), illustratedby Constantinopolitan artists,'0contains miniatures scripts, which also share stylisticsimilarities with the frescoes the Panaghia ton Chalof keon. Soft painterly in are elements, particular, commonto bothworks. The wall paintingsof the Panaghia ton Chalkeon may assist in the stylistic evaluation and the dating of several monumental decorations Greecefromthe in firsthalf of the eleventh century. This applies, par excellence, to the most controversial the decorationof this periodin Greece,namely, mosaics and frescoes of the monasteryof Hosios Loukas." This impressivearchitectural complexis related to the cult of the homonymous local saint. Its earliestbuilding,namely, thechurchofthePanaghia,which remained undecorated untilthethirteenth century, has been convincingly dated to the tenthcentury and attributedto the initiative of Krinites,strategosof the Helladic theme.'2The widespreadincreaseofthe cult of the saint undoubtedlyresultedin the erectionof a second churchof moreimthe catholikon,dedicated to Hosios Loukas. The patronage pressivedimensions, of this ambitiousundertaking still unclear,due to the lack of documentation. is On the basis of its grandiosescale, a consensusof opinionhad attributed to imit initiative.This view has recentlybeen elaboratedupon by E. Stikas, who perial IX assignedit to the culturalactivitiesof the EmperorConstantine Monomachos.'3 M. Chatzidakiswas the first challengeseriouslythe traditionalview of an imto the importanceofthe monastery perial patronagefor Hosios Loukas by stressing withinits local context.Hosios Loukas, whichfunctioned a "martyrion," as was connectedwith numeroushealing miraclesperformed the patron saint. Chatby zidakis proposedthat the actual founder the catholikon a certainPhilotheos, of was
?. Amiranaivili,GruzinshajaMiniatjura (Moscow, 1966), figs.16-19. For a colorplate, see R. Mepisashvili and V. Tsintsadze, The Artsol AncientGeorgia(London, 1979), 287. 11A selectivebibliography includes: Ch. Diehl, L'dgliseetles mosaiquesdu couvent Saint-Luc en Phocide de (Paris, 1889); E. Diez and 0. Demus, ByzantineMosaics in Greece.Hosios Lucas and Daphni (Cambridge, Mass., 1931), passim; G. Sotiriou,"Peintures muralesbyzantinesdu XIe siecle dans la cryptede Saint-Luc en Phocide," Actesdu Ille Congr?s International Etudes Byzantines(Athens,1932), 390ff.;A. Grabar and des M. Chatzidakis,Greece. Mosaics, UNESCO (New York, 1959), 16ff., Byzantine pls. x-xIv; A. Grabar,Byzance de (Paris, 1963), 107f.; M. Chatzidakis,"A propos de la date et du fondateur Saint-Luc," CahArch,19 (1969), "Peintures muralesde Saint-Luc en Phocide. Les chapelles occidentales" (unpublisheddoctoralthesis,Paris, 1971); idem, "Particularit6s iconographiques du decor peint des chapelles occidentales de Saint-Luc en Phocide," CahArch, 22 (1972), 89ff.; K. Kreidl-Papadopoulos, "Hosios Lukas," RBK, 3 (1973), 264ff.; Skawran, "Middle Byzantine Fresco Painting," 118ff.,268ff.; Jolivet,op. cit., 52f., fig. 8; J. Koder and Fr. Hild, Tabula Imperii Byzantini,I, Hellas und Thessalia (Vienna, 1976), 205f. 12 Stikas, op. cit., 178. 13 In a recentarticle and two monographsE. Stikas takes up the old traditionpropagated by Cyriacos of Ancona, who duringhis visit to the monasterysaw "in an old book" a mentionof the foundationof the Stikas places the erectionof the catholikon monastery ConstantineIX Monomachos(1042-55); therefore, by in the middle of the century and dates the mosaics accordingly:op. cit., 13ff.;idem,"Nouvelles observations sur la date de construction catholiconet de 1'6glisede la Viergedu monastbre Saint-Luc en Phocide," du de
CorsiRav, 19 (1972), 311ff.; and idem, 'O KTriTCop KaSolKOJ TrS MoViS OaOfovU AOVKa (Athens, 1975). -TO0 127 ff.; E. Stikas, T6 OiKo018olKby XpOVKi6V Mov-s 'Oaiov AovK&OcOKi0So(Athens, 1970); Th. M. Chatzidakis, t-rS
10

82

DOULA

MOURIKI

abbot of the monastery, and that the foundationtook place in the year 1011.14 was based on documentary This suggestion evidencewhichhas not,so far,received wide acceptance.'5 These challengingviews aroused new interestand gave fresh the monastic working hypotheses regarding issue ofthe patronageof thisimportant Some documentary evidence provided by the typikonof a confraestablishment. whichwas founded 1048in Naupaktosin centralGreece,near the monasin ternity, associated with the founderand the date of tery of Hosios Loukas, was recently This documentmakes special mentionof the abbot of the monthe catholikon.'6 in at of astery,'7apparently office the time of the foundation the societyin question. His name, TheodorosLeobachos, relateshim to a prominent familyof landin officials nearby Thebes, one of the most prosperous owners and government cities in centralGreece duringthis period. Leobachos' termin office may, thereThe or decade of the eleventhcentury. fore,date to the fifth possiblyto the fourth that this particularperson was responsiblefor collectingimpressive hypothesis sums of moneyfromthe local upper classes forthe catholikonof Hosios Loukas, evidence. attractivethoughit may be, needs further supportfromdocumentary an It does suggest,nevertheless, orientationtoward local patrons for the realiambitious undertaking.The origin of such an initiativecan be zation of this of the if understood one takes intoconsideration wide diffusion the cult of St. Luke, in hisportrait suchdispersed as attestedby the appearanceof places as Thessaloniki, monasticcenterforthe the Mani, southernItaly, and Cyprus.'s A monumental The impressivenumber saint's cult would ensure constantincome and prestige. of monks,includinglocal saints,in the iconographic programalso suggestslocal, patronage. provincial of of of Mosaics are the main feature the decoration thecatholikon Hosios Loukas, forits threechapels,the galleryabove while frescopaintingwas reservedmainly are the narthex,and the cryptbelow the church.The mosaics and frescoes closely and iconography.The most from the point of view of both style interrelated, A example is sophisticatedmosaic style appears in the narthex.19 characteristic provided by the depiction of St. Paul (fig.4). The head of the apostle is broad shortwhen comparedto the figuralstyle employed and the body is particularly in the Panaghia ton Chalkeon.The face with its large,staringeyes becomes the
de 14 See Chatzidakis, "A propos de la date," 127ff.; idem,"Pr6cisions sur le fondateur Saint-Luc," 25 (1972), 298ff. in 'EMXXQVK&, VEcbrrEpa, CahArch,22 (1972), 87f.; idem,ITEpl Ao~VK Movfjs'Ociou 15H. Belting,"Byzantine Art AmongGreeksand Latins in SouthernItaly," DOP, 28 (1974), 15 note 49; du de l'architecture XIe siecle et leur signification historiqueet sociale," TM, 6 C. Mango, "Les monuments 364 note 48. (1976), of 16See the new criticaleditionof the text by J. Nesbittand J. Wiita, "A Confraternity the Comnenian Era," BZ, 68 (1975), 360ff. 17 Ibid., 365 line 42, 373f. 18In chronological order,the pictorialrecordsof the saint's portraitappear in: 1. the earliestExultet of dated to the eleventhcentury(G. Cavallo, Rotolidi Exultetdell'Italia Meridionale[Bari, 1973], Bari, usually near of pl. 10); 2. an unpublishedfrescoin the parecclesionof the Trinityat the monastery St. Chrysostomos Koutsovendis on Cyprus (the frescoesshould be dated around the end of the eleventhcentury;see infra); of 3. the frescoin the basilica of St. Demetriosin Thessaloniki,which is usually dated to the beginning the twelfthcentury (G. and M. Sotiriou, 'H paicthKiTOOi 'Ayfov ercahovfKrl [Athens, 1952], 209, ArtalTrpfov -rooypacpfat pl. 80); and 4. a frescoin the churchof the Episkopi in the Mani (N. B. Drandakis, Bulcavrrival iisM~aa M&vlS[Athens,1964], 81). The paintingsare dated by Drandakis to the late twelfthcentury,but may well be placed a littlelater. 19Diez and Demus, ByzantineMosaics, 92f.

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING OF GREECE,

11th-12th C'S

83

focal point of the figure. this face lacks somewhatin idealism, illustrates, If it on the other hand, the severe ethos inspiredby the religious ideologyof the period. The indifferent of the body is apparentin this and otherfigures. organicrendering Human proportions intentionally are and the contrapposto handledso is distorted, as to create the impressionof a false plasticity.On the other hand, the lack of use begradationand the arbitrary ofstripsof shading to producethe transitions tween light and dark areas point to the abstract,autonomousfunctionof the the it. drapery,which aims at flattening body instead of modeling Comparedto the figural of the Panaghia ton Chalkeon, treatment the figures the the of in style mosaics of Hosios Loukas exhibitsa more linear and stylizedquality. The medallionsin the narthexof Hosios Loukas reveal the most accomplished technique of the entireprogram,and provide an example of the decorativeapproach to the numerouscross vaults of the church. Particularmentionshould be made of the medallionsof the Virgin,John the Baptist, and two archangels in the centralcrossvault. Busts of figures projectedagainst the gold groundillustrate perfectly the hieratic,abstract style of the mosaics. The handling of the is masterly. technique The mosaicistsof Hosios Loukas possessed remarkableflexibility adjusting in human proportions architectural to which may account for the variety surfaces, of scale in the figures. in Thus, the figures The Incredulityof Thomas (fig.6), similarto the depictionof St. Paul (fig.4) in termsof facial types althoughvery and modelingof the draperies, have bodies whichare more elongated. This comillustratesadequately the most ambitious rendering scenicrepresenof position tations in the narthex.The imposingappearance of the figures combinedwith is a markedpreference symmetry, elementwhichconstitutes for an one of the most of feature conspicuouscharacteristics the decorationin Hosios Loukas. A further is the primitiveexploitationof rhythmas a unifying elementin this and other compositions.In several other scenes, however,such as The Crucifixion (fig.8), strictlystatic principlesin the compositionalapproach have been applied. The which conveysan iconlikequality, makes overwhelming presenceof the Crucifix, the Virginand St. John appear to be afterthoughts. figuralelementsof the The scene preserve an autonomous character,a featureeven more apparent in the distribution the overall program.Apart fromthe rigidfrontality poses, the of of of gestures,and the strict symmetry the central axis, the monotony stressing lack of unityin the figural decoration emphasizedby the substantialgeometric is ornamentalframesof the scenic compositions and of the portraits, well as by as the colors. Whereas the coloristiceffects are intenselyapplied in the extensive ornamental decoration and in thesecondary in details,mostofthe figures thescenes are renderedin light colors. The mosaics of the narthexof Hosios Loukas reveal,as alreadymentioned, the more accomplishedtechniquewithinthe church,and exemplify styleof this the ensemble.Their importance the precedencegiven to the discussion the justifies of decorationin this area. The mosaics in the sanctuaryand the nave ofthe catholikon represent variations of the style of the narthexmosaics. Characteristic examples are provided by the medallionsof the archangelsin the cross vaults of

84

DOULA

MOURIKI

of the transept,which representrather poor reflections the style of the correin impressive figures the centralvault of the narthex.A commonfeature sponding of both the narthexand the nave are the ecstaticeyes withthe in the figural style round pupils and the somewhatfrightened expression.On the otherhand, large, more vivid in the nave when comparedto the mosaics in the colors are generally narthex.A more archaizingvariant of the style of the narthexis illustratedby The Pentecost (fig.9) in the domical vault of the bema. The faces of the apostles of from the starkexpression the faces of the have a naive quality whichis missing and in the narthex.Althoughin both cases the bodies are foreshortened apostles convey a similarimpressionof false plasticity,those in the bema reveal a less linear modeling and an undulating treatmentof the hems of the draperies which is absent fromthe mosaics in the narthex.Anotherfeaturewhich distinin guishesthe figures the Pentecostscene fromthose in the narthexis the manner areas of light in which the draperiesare executed in curved bands of contrasting the styleof the mosaics of Nea Moni on Chios. In the and dark,whichanticipate are on narthex, the otherhand, the verticalstripsofthe draperies treatedin a more manner. linearand fractured competencerevealed in the mosaics of the Apart fromthe somewhatinferior make the workof factors the nave of Hosios Loukas, two particular sanctuaryand conventions One is the handlingof the antiperspective the naos less satisfactory. surfacesin these areas; the second is the fragmented for the numerouscurved characterof the upper parts of the architecture, especially accentuated by the much of the work these shortcomings, presence of the galleries.Notwithstanding several executedin the bema and the naos is of verygood quality,as, forinstance, of the apse, and The Pentecostin the Virginin the conch portraits, hagiographic some of the most the vault of the bema. In fact, the two lattermosaicsrepresent surfaces. on the given architectural decoration successfuladaptations of figural in The difference quality betweenthe workin the narthexand that of the naos occasionally. of Hosios Loukas does not implya later date, as has been suggested The special care given to the executionof many of the narthexmosaics may be a attributedto the fact that they wereto be viewedfrom shortdistance.It would in seem that the personal style of the mastermosaicistcan be best identified this and more area of the church,where the artist could express himselfin a freer "advanced" mannerthan in the sanctuaryand naos proper,wherethe dogmatic that, for such a large restrictions mighthave been considerable.It is self-evident mosaic project, more than one qualified artist participatedin the workshop.In but it is not possibleat this this case, the presenceof two artistsis indisputable, a stage to formulate more detailedanalysisofthe processofthe wholemosaicwork. chapunitsin the two western Of the Hosios Loukas frescoes, only the principal be discussed.20 Amongthe wall paintingsof the catholels and in the crypt will chapel are of a very high quality. The availability ikon, those in the northwest lent of with the flexibility the technique, of continuousverticalsurfaces, together
Two otherimportant groupsof frescoesare foundin the northeastchapel of the catholikon,whichwas and in the connectedwith the cult of St. Luke (cf. Chatzidakis, "A propos de la date," 131ff.), specifically galleryabove the narthex.
20

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

11th-12th C'S

85

itselffavorablyto this remarkableachievement. the northern On part of the arch an dividingthe chapel into two compartments archangel(fig.10) is rendered in the same figural as the mosaics of the narthex.The softmodeling the face of style recalls the frescoes the Panaghia ton Chalkeon (fig.3). The figure St. Peter of of in The Transfiguration 14), on the east wall, is represented a free,unconin (fig. ventional posture. The sweeping movement,a more organic renderingof the for characteristics of body, and a betterfeeling color gradationsare the prevailing this figure.It appears that these frescoes roughly are withthe mocontemporary saics. They werein all probability producedby themasterpainterofthemosaics. The wall paintings the southwest in chapel do not sharethe same highstandards of the frescoesin the previous compartment the catholikon.The poses and of iconographicdetails, the uniformochre ground, and the elaborate ornamental frames the figures directimitations the mosaics.This approachhas affected of are of even the technique, is shownby the use ofbroad areas offlatcolors.The portrait as of St. Bacchos (fig.12) on the northwall illustrates the dry quality and two-dimensional aspect of these frescoes.Also noticeable is the somewhat empty exin pressionof the face. However,not all of the frescoes this chapel share the same artistictreatment. The VirginHodegetriain the niche on the east wall (fig. re11) veals greatermonumentality, more hieraticapproach,and a betterhandlingof a the frescotechnique. The use of frescopaintingin the two chapels, which was dictatedby economicfactors, aesthetically is justified the completeseparation by of these spatial unitsfrom main body of the church. the The frescoes the cryptof Hosios Loukas represent ambitiousundertaking of an in this medium due to the unusually extensive space involved. These paintings share even more strikingiconographicand stylisticaffinities with the mosaics, especially with those of the narthex.There is considerableoverlappingboth in the choice of subject matter and in the iconographicfeaturesof the individual themes.The more impressive work in the crypt,revealingremarkableexpressive and a firm qualities drawing,is represented the majorityof the Christological by scenes,amongwhichis The Incredulity Thomas (fig.5). This sceneprovidesan of revealedbyan emphasison starkfacialfeatures, exampleofan abstract an handling, and an expressive, ornamental effect elementary modeling, producedby the sharp contrastsof light and dark areas. A comparisonof the same scene in the crypt and the narthex (fig. 6) shows similar compositionalprinciples,an identityof facial types,and a related approachin the use ofconventional linesforthe articulation of the draperies.The figures the crypt are taller and relymoreheavily in than those of the mosaic on broad surfacesof bright an highlights, elementwhich impartsto thema moredramaticquality. The Crucifixion the cryptof Hosios Loukas (fig.7) also shares some striking in iconographicand stylisticfeatureswith the corresponding scene in the narthex (fig.8). The dependenceof the figure Johnon its counterpart mosaic is parof in ticularlyclear, but the different handlingof the painted surfaceis also apparent. The modelingin the frescois more painterly, and the landscape settinghas contributedto the integration the figural of elementsof the composition. Apart from the close stylisticaffinity the frescoesin the cryptto the mosaics, especially of

86

DOULA

MOURIKI

numerous and stylistic thosein the narthex, featuresin the paintings iconographic of of the cryptare similarto those in the frescoes the northwest chapel. This inof interrelation both mosaics and frescoes.It also leads dicates the chronological thatbothmosaicsand frescoes werepart ofthe same enterprise. to the conclusion in Greecefromthis period,the frescoes Of the monumental paintingspreserved for ofthe Panaghia ton Chalkeonmay provideindications the datingofthe mosaics for us and frescoesof Hosios Loukas. They also afford with a point of reference stylisticcriticism.The soft modelingtechnique of the frescoesof the Panaghia of ton Chalkeonis shared,to a somewhatlesserextent,by the frescoes the northwest chapel of Hosios Loukas. The attenuated human formsand a somewhat abstract handlingof the drapery,which deemphasizesthe organic structureof of the body, are characteristic both monuments.The hieratic characterof the is also revealed in the faces by their predominant expressionof spiritufigures belongto the may indicatethat the two monuments ality. Such commonelements abstracthandlingofthe figural climate.The morepronounced same artistic stylein both the mosaics and frescoesof Hosios Loukas may point to a somewhatlater date. for decade oftheeleventh A datingin thefourth century themosaicsofHosios Loulocated to a majorartistic similarities kas is also implied their projectoftheperiod, by of outside the frontiers the ByzantineEmpire, namely,the mosaics of St. Sophia The two mosaic decade.21 dated to the following in Kiev, which have been securely decorationsshare in many instances similar facial types with a predominantly of static quality. The rigidity posturesand a false plasticity, conveyedby an abbetweenthe elementsof affinity further constitute stracthandlingof the drapery, such as a more animatedquality certainfeatures, two monuments. Nevertheless, in a and movementofsome figures, special interest colorin the facial expressions relate the Kiev mosaics to and the extensiveuse of chrysography, isticeffects, anothermonumentof a more advanced style,the Nea Moni on Chios. If a date could be acceptedforthe mosaicsand decade of the eleventhcentury in the fourth data would agreewiththe chronological of frescoes Hosios Loukas, this assumption of of typikon the secularconfraternity Naupaktos. providedby the abovementioned to definebetterthe Hosios Loukas stylein relationto the general It is necessary stylisticdevelopmentsof the period,in orderto detect its origin. As mentioned above, a relatedstyleis to be foundin the Panaghia ton Chalkeon,the centrally The located monumentconnected with the initiativeof a high imperialofficial. and less idealizedversionthan a Hosios Loukas stylemay be considered less refined that of the Chalkeonchurch.A departurefromthe painterlymeans of modeling has resultedin a more abstract,unclassical approach. On the other the figures hand, this particularstylisticidiom has a clearer identityin terms of its basic characteristics. material fromthe period under review, A survey of the extant art-historical being stylewas farfrom showsthat the linearhieratic and elsewhere, both in Greece frescocyclesin Greece Two further workshop. the idiom of a particularprovincial
21 V. N. Lazarev, Mosaiki Sofii Kievshoj (Moscow, 1960), 74, 84, 92, 101; idem,Storia, 153; H. Logvin, is Kiev's Hagia Sophia (Kiev, 1971), in which a large numberof color illustrations included.

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING OF GREECE, 11lth-12th C'S

87

are among thosewhichexemplify trend.One is providedby the first this layer of in the apse and the dome of the catholikonof Myriokephala Crete. in paintings can be dated to the first of the eleventh on the basis of docuThey century quarter was foundedby a well-known local saint, John mentaryevidence.The monastery The date of the foundation the of Xenos, before1027, as is attestedby his will.22 was probably included in a painted dedicatoryinscription,which monastery is now partly effaced.23The rendering the figures Myriokephala, shown, of at as forinstance, by the depictionsof the Virgin (fig. 16), as well as Moses and an archangel(fig.17), in the dome,has a flat,linearquality. The faces are characterized by a somewhatemptyexpression. These frescoes a varirepresent provincial ation of the spiritualized as reflected the paintingsof the Panaghia ton in style Chalkeon. The frescoesof the Chalkeonchurchand of Myriokephala facilitatethe dating of the second significant fromthe Episkopi ofEvrytania, groupof wall paintings, now in the Byzantine Museum.24 The fact that this provincialmonumenthad served as the episcopal churchof the area may explain the highquality of all of its layers of frescoes.The style of the second layer of paintings, whichare relevant to our period, is exemplified the depictionof St. Theodoti(fig.13). The by face with regularfeaturesand an intensespirituality long recalls, in particular, faces in the frescoes the Panaghia ton Chalkeon.The same is true of the of many which has, however, a more forceful modeling technique, quality and displays an ample use of green shading. The austere expressionconveyed by the large, relatesthe figure the mosaicsand frescoes the monasto of staringeyes, moreover, teryof Hosios Loukas. The persistence the linear hieraticstyleraises the question of its origin.Deof the fact that it lends itselfeasily to crude,even primitive spite works,as, forinfrescodecorations the Mani, Cappadocia, or southern in stance,those in numerous can be explained only in termsof metropolitan Italy,25 its main characteristics This view tends to be widely accepted now,26 and the older defidevelopments. nitions,such as "oriental," "popular," or "monastic," are being graduallyabandoned. The close stylisticaffinities the Hosios Loukas mosaics withthoseof of St. Sophia in Kiev and the undisputedConstantinopolitan affiliations the latter of
evidenceon the monastery Myriokephala-namely, a typikon-diatheke of documentary composed by John Xenos, most probably in 1027, and the vita of the saint-as well as the frescoesof the catholikon
PvOTriKCov perd& of see Kpfirjlrs (Athens,1977), 31ff.For illustrations the earlierlayer of frescoes, ibid.,pls. 13b, 14, 15, 18-24. For the earlierfrescoesof the church,see also E. Borboudakis, in 28, 2,2 (1973), Chronica,604, fig.577c; 'ApX.AsE-r., Jolivet,op. cit. (note 1 supra), 58. 23 Antourakis, op. cit.,pl. 31. 24 The churchlies presentlyat the bottom of an artificiallake; the frescoes,probably of fourperiods, were detached beforethe flooding took place. All the frescoesof the Episkopi were shown at the exhibition of Byzantine frescoesand icons at the Byzantine Congressin 1976. For the eleventh-century frescoes,see M. Chatzidakis, in W. F. Volbach and J. Lafontaine-Dosogne,Byzanz und der Christliche Osten,Propylaen III Kunstgeschichte, (Berlin, 1968), 237, pl. 177b; ByzantineMurals and Icons, Catalogue of the Exhibition, National Gallery,Athens,September-December 1976, p. 59, pls. II-Iv, 5-9; Jolivet,op. cit., 52, fig.6. characterization the linear hieraticstyle,especiallyin termsof its expansion in place and 25 For a brief of time, see P. L. Vocotopoulos,"Fresques du XIe siecle " Corfou,"CahArch,21 (1971) 178ff. 26 Cf. M. G. Sotiriou, At vaoo Troo Ti X'r~yIyS rrpov, Xaptor?iptov in &pXlKcdK -rolXoypaqcia 'Ay. N1KoX6ov K K. III 140. EIl 'Avac-r6(tov 'Opd&v8ov, (Athens,1966),troO For a reappraisal of the whole question,see the recent study by C. Mango, "Lo stile cosiddetto'monastico,'" passim. are presented in G. B. Antourakis, At Moval MVupOKEq)cOV Kcl a*rrc6v 'rv rrapEKKAtrliov 22The

88

DOULA

MOURIKI

For the San Marco mosaics, see 0. Demus, Die Mosaikenvon San Marco in Venedig,1100-1300 (Baden, Magazine, 1935). For the mosaics ofTorcello,see idem,"Studies Amongthe TorcelloMosaics-I," Burlington 82 (1943), 136ff.;"Studies.. -II," ibid., 84 (1944), 41ff.;"Studies.. .-III," ibid., 85 (1944), 195ff.;idem, "Zu den Mosaiken der Hauptapsis von Torcello," Starinar, N.S. 20 (1969)=Mdlanges Djurdje Bo.kovi6, Dernier: tftesvraies, totes 53ff.; I. Andreescu,"Torcello. I. Le Christ inconnu. II. Anastasis et Jugement fausses," DOP, 26 (1972), 183ff.;idem,"Torcello. III. La chronologierelative des mosalques pari6tales," DOP, 30 (1976), 245ff. 28 Vocotopoulos, op. cit., 151ff. "Nea 29 A selected bibliographyon this monumentand its mosaic decorationincludes: J. Strzygowski, "Die Mosaiken der Nea Moni von Chios," BZ, 25 (1925), Moni auf Chios," BZ, 5 (1896), 141ff.;O. Wulff, de 115ff.;A. C. Orlandos, Monuments byzantins Chios, Album (Athens, 1930), pls. 8-30; Diez and Demus, ByzantineMosaics, 87ff.,96f., 110f.; O. Demus, ByzantineMosaic Decoration (London, 1947), 22, 58f.; A. Grabar,La peinture (Geneva, 1953), 109ff.;Grabar and Chatzidakis,Greece(note 11 supra), 10, byzantine Les mosaiques," Connaissance M. Chatzidakis,"Des chefs-d'oeuvre byzantinsen 18f., pls, xv-xxuI; Grace. des Arts(March 1964), 55ff Lazarev, Storia,150f.and passim; Ch. Bouras, "Die Insel Chios," in AlteKirchen .; ed. und KlosterGriechenlands, E. Melas (Cologne, 1972), 244ff. the imperialpatronage of Nea Moni appear in G. Photeinos, T& NEaponolata 30 The traditionsconcerning first of (Chios, 1865). The historyand architecture the churchare dealt with in depth by Ch. Bouras in the of Nea Moni. The second volume will include a study of the mosaics volume of the forthcoming publication by the presentwriter. ed. Vasil'ja Grigorovi6a-Barskago, N. Barsukov, II (St. Petersburg,1886), 202. 31Stranstvovanija
27

add special support to the assumptionthat the linear hieraticstyle,as discussed so far,has a metropolitan origin.Its presencein the earliestmosaicsof San Marco of Torcello27 in Venice and those and, by implication, pointsto the widestdiffusion tendencies the eleventhcentury of are The spiritualized to a metropolitan origin. of thisstyle. well revealedby the persistence undertakThe inherent qualitiesof the linearhieraticstylecould have prompted backwaters.It is, therein the provincial ings along the same lines ad perpetuum on that the frescoesof a small church,St. Merkourios the isnot surprising fore, a debased versionof land of Corfu,which are securelydated to 1074/75,28reveal the style.The long head withthe large,almond-shaped eyes of the prophetElisha recallthefigural of styleofHosios (fig.15) and the stylizedtreatment the draperies context of this figureis suggestedby a more Loukas. The properchronological patheticquality in the face. The mosaics of Nea Moni on Chios29representa different stylistictrendin to which corresponds a somemonumentalpainting in Greece, eleventh-century the what laterchronological style. phase following maturestage ofthelinearhieratic of or dated to the end of the fifth beginning the sixth The mosaicsare traditionally on decade of the eleventhcentury, accountof theirassociationwiththe Emperor The associationof Nea Moni with this ConstantineIX Monomachos (1042-55).30 whichare now lost; chrysobulls, by emperoris confirmed no less than fourteen he moreover,Barskij recordsthat duringhis visit to the monastery saw an inhas suffered the monument withthe date 1045.31 considerably Although scription fromearthquakes and firesand the decorationof the dome has been totally demosaics providea fairly adequate pictureof the initialprostroyed,the surviving a that these mosaics have undergone minimal gram. It may be noted, moreover, degree of restoration. The main featuresof the style of the mosaics of Nea Moni may be seen in the (fig.18). A comdepictionof the archangelMichael in the conch of the prothesis at parison of his face withthat of an angelin fresco Hosios Loukas (fig.10) reveals which makes the otherlook almost of the Chios figure, the complex personality

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING OF GREECE,

11lth-12thC'S

89

naive. A strange mixtureof intellectualsharpnessand forbearance conveysan archedeyemarkedly enigmaticexpression.The ratherfleshyface, low forehead, withtheiroblique glance,and aquiline nose do not porbrows,almond-shaped eyes idealized type.The faceis modeledwitholive-green, white,and tray a particularly around the eyes is heavily pronounced.It tesserae.The olive-green shading pink also frames contourof the face,withan abruptinterruption the the preceding area of the chin. There is elaboratehatching the cheeks,with interchanged on pinkand circularmodeling.This techniqueconveysa dynamicquality which is olive-green in contrastto the static approach of the Hosios Loukas faces.The bust ofthe arof changel Michael illustrates, the ornamentaltreatment his costume and the by extensiveuse of chrysography, enamellike an which constitutes general a quality of characteristic thesemosaics. The modelingtechniqueof the face of the archangelMichael in the prothesis characterizes rendering the faces in the naos and the narthexof Nea Moni. the of From the scene of The Transfiguration the southwest in of conch,the figure John thisfeature. The dynamiccharacter particularly is (fig.19) exemplifies pronounced in the sweepingmovementof the body, which acquires an abstractquality in its function a vehicleof emotionaltension.In the depictionof thisapostlesome of as thetypicalfeaturesof the figural styleof the mosaicsbecomeapparent.The draped surfaceis analyzed into clearlydefined of planes by meansof sharpcontrasts light and shade. The daring use of this device makes it difficult distinguish local to the color of the garments. The intensity facial expression of and body movement, enhanced by chiaroscuro, constitutesa new, progressive elementin the styleof the well-known in tendencies Comnenianpainting. mosaics,thusanticipating The most outstanding featureof the mosaic techniqueof Nea Moni is the flexihis bilityof the artistin combining coloredtesseraeto differentiate and emoage tional state betweensimilarfigures, well as different as of representations the same in illustrates principle this person.The Johnfigure The Crucifixion (fig. 20). Whereas the modelingtechnique is the same as in the corresponding of figure The Transof figuration (fig. 19), the two faces are dissimilardue to the differentiation the coloristic values of theirshadows. The varyingshades of purpleforboth the head and garments Johnin The Crucifixion of transform into a heavyand sorrowful him are in contrastto the lightershadows of the youthful figure. They John of The whose tense figureand expressionare radiant under the impact Transfiguration, of the Theophany he is witnessing.In the John figureof The Crucifixion the masterful of the values of colorscompensatesentirely the poor for manipulation of draftsmanship, especially noticeable in the rendering the arms. The misunderand the function the drapery general of standingof the contrapposto in showsa disin regardforclassicalprinciples the rendering the humanbody. It is, however, of rea dynamic derived from placed by autonomous abstractdesigns. newdirecA rhythm tioncan be detectedin the stylistic of development MiddleByzantinepainting. An apparent preference for vivid colors-red, green,and blue-characterizes the figures, in secondarydetails,and ornament Nea Moni. A good example is provided by the Longinusfigure The Crucifixion 20). The choice of colors,the in (fig. thick dark contours, the deep shadows,and an extensiveuse of chrysography are

90

DOULA

MOURIKI

witha painterly in technique.A parallelapproach unprecedented theircombination exis found in the fieldof enamel work and miniature painting.An outstanding the Dionysiou 587 of roughly ample in miniaturework is the imperiallectionary in illustratedmanuscriptreveals a complexity its This profusely same period.32 stylisticexpression.The expressivefacial types enlivenedby the intenseplay of of glances are a featureshared by the Nea Moni mosaics and the miniatures the Dionysiou Lectionary. Its use of color for the articulationof the scenes creates of reminiscent theChiosmosaics.The TheodorePsalter(Britunusuallylivelyeffects ish Library,MS Add. 19352), fromthe year 1063,33can also be mentionedin this is context.An emphasison chrysography also an elementsharedwiththe mosaics of Nea Moni. The indebtednessof these mosaics to miniaturepaintingis even and figused as framesforthe scenic compositions more clear in the ornaments of relatedto the ornamentation canon ures. This decorationseems to be directly The dependin Middle Byzantineillustrated tables and headpieces manuscripts.34 is ence of the Chios mosaics on miniatures apparentin manyotherdetails.For inon stance, the inclusionof plants with flowers a wavy groundin severalscenesof the of feature illustrated the festival manuscripts, most obcycleis a characteristic of the Menologion Basil II. On theotherhand, the rhythmical vious example being of successionof the festivalscenes under arched framesrecalls the arrangement and gestures, of beam. The close interrelation humanforms icons on an iconostasis properlystressed by the intense play of glances and the dramaticcontrastsof of lightand dark,builds up the dynamiccharacter thesemosaics. A notabledifferwhich of ence fromthe layoutof the program Hosios Loukas is the flowing rhythm, of the decorationat Nea Moni. The spatial bringstogetherthe pictorialelements the unity of this imposingkuppelhalle, so-calledsingleor "insular" variant of the such as the accentuatedby several otherfactors, domed octagon plan, is strongly It that of the sanctuary. completeseparationof the centralspace ofthe nave from zones of mosaic decorationextended may also be notedthat the two superimposed of slabs, whichwas also disposed above a highmarblerevetment reddish, variegated the glittering of in two zones. Thus, the effect gold groundagainst which are proacquires a new dimension.The entire spatial unit jected vividly colored figures conveysthe appearance of a preciousreliquarymade out of costlymaterials. eitherin style The mosaics in the narthexof Nea Moni cannot be differentiated in Several portraits the in or techniquefromtheircounterparts the main church. narthex,such as the fourmedallionsof the pendentivesin the cupola containing the busts of Joachim,Anna (fig.22), St. Stephen, and St. Panteleimon,and at least two monasticfigures, notably St. Theodore Studites and St. Theodosius on techniqueof the mosaics of arch,all sharethe same masterly the soffit the southern the workof a second mosaicistis evident of the sanctuaryand the naos. However, unitis low and in the remaining part of the mosaicsof the narthex. This particular
Mount See, in particular,K. Weitzmann,"An Imperial Lectionaryin the Monasteryof Dionysiou on 7 (1969), no. 1, p. 239ff.; S. Pelekanidis, P. Christou, Athos. Its Origin and its Wanderings," RESEE, I figs.189-277. and S. Kadas, 01 e laavpot 'ro 'Ayfov "Opous, (Athens,1973), 434ff., C. Mavropoulou-Tsioumi, du MoyenAge, II, Londres,Add. 19.352 (Paris, 1970). des psautiers 33 S. Der Nersessian,L'illustration grecs ed. AmericanCollections, G. Vikan, Catalogue of an Exhibition in GreekManuscriptsfrom 3~ Illuminated fig.190. Honor of Kurt Weitzmann (Princeton,1973), figs.22, 23; Pelekanidis et al., 01 OrlcaupoI,
32

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING OF GREECE,

1lth--12th

C'S

91

The mosaicsoccupythe upperhalfof the flatwalls, oblong,withverypoorlighting. the smallcentralcupola withits pendentives, two arches the below,and twonarrow barrelvaultsof the side compartments. is obviousthat thisnarrow It space created different technical difficulties fromthose of the high curved surfacesin the main An church. additional resulted from choiceofmultifigured the scenescomcomplexity these mosaics display pressedinto the narrowspace of the narthex.Consequently, even less monumental to the decoration the main body of the character in compared church. Moreover,the lightertonalitiesof colorswhichhave been used may have been intended to compensateforthe inadequate lighting. This could also explain the profuseuse of stone tesseraeforthe garments. A detailofthe sceneofThe BetrayalofJudason the southwall (fig. illustrates 21) the similarities betweenthe mosaics of the narthexand those and the differences of the naos of Nea Moni. Strongmodelingof the faces and chiaroscuro effects on the draperies feacloselyfollowthe same devices of the naos. Some distinguishing turesare noticeable,however.The hair is characterized a more coloristic treatby in ment, as opposed to the moregeneralrendering the main scenes. The chiton and the himationare more clearly differentiated color when compared to the in in the figures the nave. Moreover, play oflightand shade is appliedin a mechanical of manner,increasingthe effects a flatdesign.As a consequence,the local white color in some of the himatia assumes the appearance of brighthighlights. The of the mosaics in the main churchis lackinghere,replacedby a dynamicquality somewhatartificial rhythm. An interesting detail concerns the awkwardresultsproducedby the elimination of architectural landscape elementsin the scene of The Prayerof Gethsemane, or where Christ'skneelingfigure suspendedin midair. A similarcurious effect is is producedby the triad of the sleepingapostlesin the foreground 27); the arms (fig. which supportthe heads are shown against the gold groundand the hips of the apostles also appear as if they were placed above ground.Despite the inherent difficulties faced by the mosaicist of the narthex,this miniaturelike decoration has a strongaesthetic appeal. The crowded compositionsand the successionof narrativeepisodes bringthese scenes close to the level of human experience. The in to hagiographicportraits the narthex must have also contributed the general air of intimacy and enlivenedthe contact of the faithful with their saints. The concernedlook of Daniel the Stylite(fig.23) conveysthis approach. The mosaics of Nea Moni include many progressive elements,thus markinga fromthe style of the mosaics and frescoes Hosios Loukas. The rigid of departure of of poses and austerity facialexpression the earlierdecoration less emphasized, are and human responsiveness. giving way to a renewed flexibility The paratactic of arrangement the programin Hosios Loukas has been replacedby a rhythmical interrelation pictorialelements.In these mosaics colorsubstitutes the funcof for tion of line as a means of modeling forms. is the handlingof shades used for the It gradationoftonesthat conveysa painterly character. the Moreover, earliestknown in attempt theextantmonumental paintingofthe MiddleByzantine periodto exploit in special aestheticeffects the mosaic techniquemay be notedin thismonument. In additionto the chrysography, use of vivid colorsrecallingsemiprecious the stones

92

DOULA

MOURIKI

enhancesthe costlyand ostentatious aspect ofthismedium.Thisnewpainterly style it may be whencomparedwiththe style ofthe mosaicsofChios,progressive though the Hosios Loukas mosaics, appears to have a revival character by exemplified and may be relatedto miniature paintingof the MacedonianRenaissance. in A surveyof the extantpictorialmaterialin Greeceand elsewhere the Empire indicatesthat the mosaics of Nea Moni do not constitutean isolated case, but in reflect, a more accentuatedversion,a widespreadtendencyin the stylisticdevelopmentof the paintingof this period. Of the numerousartisticprojects connected with ConstantineMonomachos,this notoriousMaecenas of the arts, only one othermosaic has been preserved, namelythe votive panel in the south gallery of of Hagia Sophia whichshows the portraits Monomachosand Zoe on eitherside The heads share some notable stylisticfeatureswith the of Christenthroned.35 and certain facialtypes,vigorous mosaicsof Nea Moni,namelythe fleshy modeling, devices. coloristic The lost mosaics in the narthexof the Koimesis churchin Nicaea,36 dated by of the exemplify main tendencies the style CyrilMango between1065 and 1067,37 of Nea Moni and the votive panel of Hagia Sophia. Their close stylisticaffinities with the Chios mosaics are apparent in the depictionsof the Evangelistsin both consistsin the use of surfacepatternsforthe churches.Their main characteristic conceal the presenceof the body. The attribution which,as alreadynoted, drapery and the of these lost Nicaea mosaics to the initiativeof the PatricianNikephoros of as the place oforigin the artists. mediumitself pointto Constantinople in The painterly century Nea Moni,was style,applied around the mid-eleventh as Ohrid,Thessaloniki, in also diffused the fresco paintingof such dispersedplaces and Cyprus.The frescocycle in St. Sophia in Ohrid,connectedwith Cappadocia, one of the the initiativeof the Byzantine archbishopLeo (1037-59), represents and The of decorations the period.38 lineareccentricities mostcomplexmonumental in later manifestations Byzantine the agitated quality of these frescoes anticipate the mosaics of Nea Moni rarely reveal linear monumentalpainting.39 Although tendencies, they share, in a subdued version,the dynamiccharacterof the style psyof St. Sophia. Similar facial types, modeling based on chiaroscuroeffects, of the head, oblique, chological tension often expressed by an abrupt turning fierceglances, and sometimesuncouthhairstylesare shared by both decorations. withfleshy, robustfigures for A preference rather prosaicfaces is also comslightly the more dynamic these similarities, mon in both instances. Notwithstanding metrofor in of character the frescoes Ohridmay pointto a tendency exaggerating
of 35T. Whittemore,The Mosaics ofHaghia Sophia at Istanbul. The Imperial Portraits theSouthGallery in (Boston, 1942), 9ff.It may be recalled that only the faces of the three figures the Zoe panel are of the reignof Monomachos. in 36 O. Wulff, Die Koimesishirche Nicda und ihre Mosaiken (Strasbourg,1903); T. Schmit,Die KoimesisKirchevon Nikaia (Berlin-Leipzig,1927). of the Dormition at Nicaea," DOP, 13 37 C. Mango, "The Date of the Narthex Mosaics of the Church (1959), 245ff. 38R. Ljubinkovi6,La peinture d mddidvale Ohrid (Ohrid, 1961); idem,"La peinturemurale en Serbie et Mac6doine aux XIe et XIIe sibcles," CorsiRav, 9 (1962), 413ff. 39Cf. O. Demus, "The Style of the Kariye Djami and Its Place in the Developmentof Palaeologan Art," The Kariye Djami, IV (Princeton,1975), 128f.

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

11th-12th C'S

93

a politan formulasin provincial environments, featurewhich seems commonin withextreme manifestations monuments the late twelfth in of and late Macedonia, thirteenth centuries. Anotherfrescodecorationof the period,that of Karabas kilise in Cappadocia, dated to 1060-61 and connectedwith the initiativeof ProtospathariosMichael of Skepidis,40 providesa morevigorousand freer interpretation the painterly style. Faces verge on realism,and intensemovementcharacterizes and gestures. poses for show a remarkable Moreover,figures feeling bodilyweightwhichforeshadows the monumental style of the thirteenth century.The modelingis based on large touches of color and a freebrushwork, thus indicatinga somewhatlater stage in the evolutionof thistrend. A poor variantof the metropolitan stylemay also be illustrated the painterly by earliestlayerof frescoes the monasticchurchof Hagios Nikolaos tes Stegesnear in Kakopetria on Cyprus.41The modelingis softand freebut lackingin vigorwhen comparedto Nea Moni. On the otherhand, the deep-set,staringeyes with their naive expression reminiscent the Hosios Loukas mosaicsand frescoes. are of Greece also provides some examples of the painterlystyle in frescocycles. St. severalmonasticfrescoportraits the archesof on Sophia in Thessalonikipreserves the westwall of the narthex.Striking similarities withcertainhagiographic stylistic in St. Sophia in Ohridhave alreadybeenobserved.42 faceof St. EuthyThe portraits mios (fig.26) revealsthe same softmodeling and a certainpsychological animation, as shown by the contracted The summary treatment the drapery of and eyebrows. the weak drawingindicate, however,that these frescoesdo not representa high artisticachievement. The churchof the VirginProtothronos the village of Chalki on the island of in Naxos preserves, its severallayersof painting, one groupof frescoes which among may be associated with an engraved dedicatory inscriptionincludingthe date 1052 and the identityof the donors-Bishop Leo and Protospatharios Niketas. of this style are shownin two details of The Presentation Christon of Specimens the southbarrelvault.43The figures Joseph(fig.24) and Symeon(fig.25) reveal of their indebtednessto the style best represented Hosios Loukas, which is esby pecially apparentin the large,staringeyes. However,new elementspointingto a laterperiodare also evidentin thepsychological involvement thefreer and handling of the brushwork. This bird's-eye view of eleventh-century monumental paintingpointsto a basic conclusion. The originof the two stylistic trendsdetectedso far-the linearhieratic
40 N. "Etude stylistiquedes peinturesde Karabas Kilise en Cappadoce (1060-1061)," CahArch, Thierry, 17 (1967), 161ff. 41A. H. S. Megaw and A. Stylianou, Cyprus. ByzantineMosaics and Frescoes,UNESCO (Paris, 1963), (note 26 supra), 133ff.;A. H. S. Megaw, "Byzantine Archipls. v-viii; M. Sotiriou,At&PXlKaI T-roXoypap(at tectureand Decoration in Cyprus: Metropolitanor Provincial?," DOP, 28 (1974), 81f. 42 S. Pelekanidis, ~& Ol Eiv NMait ppvwat -hv 'Ayiav Xo(iav aias TToKc-rrcrr1t rf E)caaooviK1r S Kai Xpaa arris popqipS,in 1T-rTpaygva eE8a7(OViKYT 1953 (Athens, 1955), 404ff. -ro0 e' AtlEvoos BuLavrtvohoylKoiXUvv86pioV, of 4a N. Zias, "Some RecentlyDiscovered Frescoes in the Churchof Protothronos Naxos," Athens Annals

4 26, ofArchaeology, (1971), 368ff.;idem,in 'APX.AEAr., 2,2 (1971), Chronica,474f. The most detailed account of the churchand its frescodecorationis foundin M. Panayotides, "Les monumentsde Grace depuis la fin de la crise iconoclaste jusqu' I'an mille" (unpublisheddoctoral thesis, Paris, 1969), 174ff.

94

DOULA

MOURIKI

In style-may well be attributedto Constantinople. their styleand the painterly initial phase, as has been noted,the one succeededthe other.Because of the lack of relevantpictorialmaterialin the capital, this assumption may be supported by in decorations the provincesand outside the frontiers; mosaics,which particularly executedonlyby Constantinopolitan were in all probability artists,4lend weightto characterof Byzantine art makes it The inherentretrospective this hypothesis. for the to difficult establisha reliablechronology worksillustrating hieraticstyle. to inauguratethe new painterly On the otherhand, the Nea Moni mosaics appear X stylewhichassertsitselfduringthe reignof Constantine Doukas (1059-67). The of in church Nicaea and the frescoes Karabas kilisein Capmosaicsin the Koimesis padocia are two securelydated worksof his reign. in of The monuments the secondhalfof the eleventh century Greeceare fewand, with only one exception,do not reveal progressive stylisticfeatures.A modest to dated by a dedicatoryinscription 1074-75, belongs to the frescocycle, firmly Another on small churchof St. Merkourios Corfu(fig.15).45 groupof wall paintings decorain churcheson the same island is close to the styleof the St. Merkourios style which contion.46Only one monument,Daphni, presentsa revolutionary stitutesa break withthe earliermodes of the century.47 thismost of the Although patronageofthe catholikon Daphni remainsenigmatic, The dated around the end of the eleventhcentury. ambitiousproject is generally of the earliest dated documentregardingthe monasteryis the Comneniancopy foundedin 1048 whichhas alreadybeen comtypikonof the secular confraternity withthe patronageof Hosios Loukas. Actually,the first mentedupon in connection Further was the abbot ofthe monasteryof Daphni.48 personto sign thisdocument indicationsare providedby the vita of a local saint,Hosios Meletiosthe Younger, evidencehas been This documentary and by a seal of an abbot of the monastery. dated to the eleventhor twelfth century.49 the mosaics of Daphni seem to be an isolated case in termsof stylein Although monumental painting,they mark a new classical trend at the becontemporary ginningof the Comnenianperiod which assumes paramountimportancefor the of Despite the factthat thesemosaics painting. subsequentdevelopment Comnenian the main features in extensiverestoration the late nineteenth century, underwent of theirstylecan be clearlydiscerned. the The prophetsin the dome of the catholikonof Daphni represent most "anto in tique" group of figures the programand testify its strongclassical aspect,
44Cf. Mango, "Lo stile cosiddetto'monastico'" (note 7 supra), 51ff. as See supra, p. 88. Cf. Vocotopoulos,op. cit. (note 25 supra), 151ff. 46Ibid., 173ff. de 47A selected bibliographyon the mosaics of Daphni includes: G. Millet,Le monasthre Daphni (Paris, Diez and Demus, ByzantineMosaics (note 11 supra), passim; Demus, ByzantineMosaic Decoration 1899); Demus, Mosaics of (note 29 supra), 60f.; idem, The Mosaics of Norman Sicily (London, 1949) (hereafter (note 29 supra), 115ff.;Grabar and Chatzidakis, byzantine Norman Sicily), esp. 375ff.;Grabar, La peinture Greece(note 29 supra), 19, pls. xxmii-xxviI; Grabar, Byzance (note 11 supra), 110ff.;Lazarev, Storia, 194ff. 48 Nesbitt and Wiita, op. cit. (note 16 supra), 366. des byzantins et see R. Janin,Les dglises les monasthres grandscentres on 49 For the documentation Daphni, 311ff.;Koder and Hild, op. cit. (note 11 supra), 141f. (Paris, 1975),

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

11th--12th

C'S

95

whichhas always been pointedout withregardto the styleof these mosaics.This does not apply only to the adoption of specificmotifsand to a vague recapture of the spiritof Antiquity.In fact,what we witnesshereis a revivalofthe anthromonumental repocentriccharacterof classical art, as shownby strikingly figures ancientphilosophers. prophets, particular, The in a newhumanistic sembling convey which parallelsonlyinminiature has of Renaissance. message painting theMacedonian From the point of view of physiognomies, prophets the churchreflect in the the two mostpopularancienttypes,the Jovian and the Apollonian,as illustrated, for instance, by the depictionsof Isaiah (fig.28) and Moses (fig.29), respectively. The faces have open expressions, and each prophetgives the impression playof a role. The bodies have also been rendered two different in manners.The first, ing by exemplified the depictionof Moses (fig.29), reveals particularemphasis on a modeledwith use vigoroussculpturalhandling.The forward is moreintensely leg oftonalgradations. The dynamism thefigure its striking of and liberate corporeality the body in space. The second approach,illustrated the prophetIsaiah (fig.28), by is markedlystatic. It reveals a conservative applicationof the contrapposto;the modeledin lightand shade, whilethe supporting freeleg is faintly one disappears on account of the linear treatment the himation.The numerousverticalfolds of in anticipate stylisticdevelopments later Comnenianart. The three-dimensional of the prophetsin Daphni, best seen frombelow, is enhancedby the use quality of time-honored such as the arm slings,and by the correctapplidraperymotifs, cation of modelingbased on strongjuxtapositionsof light and shade, or a much more graded technique. The scene of The Baptism (fig.30) providesa good example of the handlingof elementsand compositional figural principles.The nude body of Christ,oftendescribedas the mostsuccessful of representation its kindin MiddleByzantinepaintand a swayingpose whichrecall Lysippean formulas. His face ing, has a fragility reveals an idealistic standard of youthfulness. The faces of the two bystanders and Johnthe Baptist reflect conventional to typeswhichappear to correspond the three ages of man. Though the angels are of strikingly different complexions, of theyboth conveyan abstractgenreof femalebeauty. The modeling the fleshis much more subtle when comparedto the heavy painterly approach at Nea Moni. The lightertonalitiesare dominantand the shadows,reducedto a minimum, are rendered withlightgreentesserae.The faces therebyacquire a rounderand more youthful aspect. The composition providesone of several solutionsfor the adaptationofscenesto curvedsurfaces. Christ placed on the axis, the scene is Although is balanced withoutadhering strict to of symmetry. This and the remainprinciples ing scenes in the programreveal the way in whichthe layout of the compositions has been perfected comparison in withthe mosaics of Hosios Loukas and Nea Moni. One of the main aestheticmerits the mosaic decoration Daphni is the unity of in of the layout of the programand its harmonious in integration the architectural have been subjectedto specialconsiderations space. To attain thisresultthe figures in relationto the distancefrom whichtheyare meantto be viewed.The overwhelmis for ing presenceof thePantokrator compensated by the monumental of figures the prophets.The scenes in the squinchesand the flatnichesof the archesconveyan

96

DOULA MOURIKI

in of impression small panel paintings.This discrepancy scale is counterbalanced of half-figures the Churchdoctors,highpriestsof the Old Testaby the impressive and the large mosaic panels of the lowerzone. Ornamentaldecorationalso ment, approach. plays an essentialpart in this attempttowarda unified Unlike Hosios Loukas and Nea Moni,the programat Daphni comprisesan imwhichform archedpanels,thus pressivenumberof scenes disposedon flatsurfaces ofthe fourprincipal scenesin the squinchesand the flowing rhythm complementing The Entry arcades in thischurch.Amongthe sceneson flatsurfaces, the numerous of The Anastasis,The Incredulity Thomas, and The Crucifixion, into Jerusalem, The Dormitionof the Virginare accordedspecial importance theirsize and reby execution.Always in accordancewith its content,each one of these of finement of scenes exhibitssome of the typicalfeatures the styleof the mosaics. Strongreof antique formalelementsare observed,forinstance,in The Cruciminiscences is of The Anastasis,and The Incredulity Thomas. Johnin The Crucifixion fixion, a thorough of a drapedfigure, most convincing one of the revealing representations as a of assimilation the contrapposto, striking corporeality, well as a self-sufficient indicationof pathos may be paralleledin anThe restrained emotionalexpression. works.The Anastasispreservesa strongclassical characterin cient Attic funerary of its facial types. Moreover,The Incredulityof Thomas is reminiscent ancient of gatherings literatiand conveysan almostpagan flavor.The Entry into Jerusain lem, on the other hand, is more naturalistic character,and lends itselfto the types. Certain faces, especially one exploitationof a variety of physiognomical ofthe hair and beard recallingan ancient "foliate" treatment withthe ornamental recurvery oftenin the mosaics of the church. The linear and highlydecomask, such as those of rative rendering the hair and beard apparentin some portraits, tendencies and Eustratios,anticipatescurrent of Aaron, Gregory Thaumatourgos, same holds true for the hatchings,replacing the in later Comnenian art. The rows of dark and fleshshadow of the neck, which are formedby alternating tone tesserae. Anotherinnovative featureis the psychologicalinvolvementexpressedby faces,poses, and gestures.In The Dormitionof the Virgin(fig.31) the shadand the small triangular facesof the apostles,withtheircontracted eyebrows enhancedby ows beneaththeireyes, conveytheiremotionalstate,whichis further The flowing and patheticgestures. quality in the bowed heads, slow movements, in of the contrasting rhythm theirposes becomes an elementof constantinterest of Asinou in occurring such earlyexamplesas the frescoes twelfth-century painting, (1105-6) (fig.37). In the nave at Daphni the scene of The Birthof the Virgin(fig.32) exhibits,to an even greaterdegree,the refined quality of the styleof the mosaics. The figures group portraitin an aristocratic in the scene, which resemblesa commemorative The cult of elegance,further emphasized have elegantposes and gestures. setting, whichdepartsfrom a for a predilection ornatedetails,represents noveltendency by art the generalaustereapproach of eleventh-century and points,instead,to tastes in current the later Comnenian period. section The mosaicsin the narthexof Daphni includetwo cycles.In the northern threepre-Passionscenes-the Washingof the Feet, The Last Supper,and The Be-

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

lth-12th

C'S

97

trayal-complement the Christological cycle of the nave and imitate its style. facial types,such as those of the "foliate" heads, are repeated,thoughin Special a caricatural and the draperies of manner, The displaya similarrendering patterns. features whichare different from thoseof the main churchconsistof a less stylistic of scheme,a distortion bodies and physiognomical rigorouscompositional traits, and a weakening the three-dimensional of quality.These mosaicslack the masterly techniqueapparentin the nave. The threeMariologicalscenes in the southernsectionof the narthex,depicting The Annunciationto Joachim and Anna, The Blessing of the Priests,and The Presentation the Virginin the Temple,form of both the preludeand sequel to the scene of The Birth of the Virginin the main church.They, too, depart fromthe main stylistic thatprevailedin the decoration the sanctuaryand nave, of principles whichmay have been due partlyto the use of a different model,as is impliedby the innovativenature of this cycle. A less firm softer treatmodelingand a rather mentbetraya weakening the technicalcompetence the rendering thiscycle. of in of A taste fornarrative detailsand surface is The Annunciation patterns also noticeable. to Joachim(fig.33), the most lyricalepisodein the Mariancycleofthe church, has a close affinity withthe figures the nave insofar pose and facial type are conin as cerned. the Nevertheless, three-dimensional qualityof the bodies is not emphasized, and the faces have a bland expression whichis absent fromthe faces in the nave. Their modelingrelies heavilyon pink tesserae,and the small triangular shadows applied to the garmentsgive them a silky appearance. It has been argued that the mosaicsof the narthexbelong to a later period than thoseofthe main church. This theory cannotbe conclusively sustainedby the stylistic and technical analysis of the mosaics. At Daphni the classical refinement, compositional the of coherence the pictorial elementsof the scenes,the harmonious of the mosaics in the architecintegration turalspace, and the techniqueitself reveala masterly in achievement the history of this medium.The numerouscolors of glass tesseraeproduce a greatervarietyof shades when comparedto Nea Moni. Moreover, tonalitiesat Daphni are markthe and silvercubes have been used.The chrysography, the otherhand, on edly lighter, is reduced. Sophisticatedtechnicaldevices,such as the "checkerboard"shadows, have been applied, as, forexample,along the upperjaw line of the Virgin'sface in the scene of The Crucifixion.50 is, therefore, It evidentthat the workshop involved in the decorationof Daphni was surelyone ofthe best in the capital ofthe Empire. The mosaics of Daphni appear to be an isolated phenomenon the historyof in Byzantine monumentalpainting.It may be noted, moreover,that, despite the remarkable of creativity thisperiodin the fieldofminiature works painting, specific elementsof stylistic bearingstriking withthe mosaics of Daphni have not affinity as yet been identified.51 fact,these mosaics seem to relyconspicuously illuIn on
Mosaic Decoration, fig.29; cf.J. Gage, "Colour in History: Relative and 50Demus, Byzantine 38, Absolute," Art History,1,1 (1978), 112ff. 51 For a discussion of the stylistic developmentof miniaturepaintingin the second half of the eleventh see century, K. Weitzmann,"Byzantine Miniatureand Icon Paintingin the Eleventh Century,"Proceedings of the XIIIth InternationalCongressof ByzantineStudies,Oxford1966, esp. 210ff.; repr.idem, Studies in Classical and ByzantineManuscript Illumination, ed. H. Kessler (Chicago, 1971), 275ff.The flat, linear

98

DOULA

MOURIKI

of minatedmanuscripts the MacedonianRenaissance,especiallywith regardto the In handlingof the human figure. this case also, the Menstatuesque,monumental The datingof the moof Basil II lends itselffor comparativepurposes.52 ologion saics around the turnof the eleventhcentury gains additional supportby the inof numerouselements foundin the Comnenian in a formative clusion, style. stage, The strongclassicismof the Daphni mosaics is echoed by Sicilian mosaics ofthe mid-twelfth century.53 The metropolitan originof the mosaics of Daphni cannot be disputed. At the Greece was still passing througha phase of relative end of the eleventhcentury of and stabilityafterthe termination the Bulgarianwars. The memory prosperity induced of of the famouspilgrimage Basil II to the Acropolismay have further an imperialpatronageforthis project. The dating of the mosaics, as established coincideswiththe reignof AlexiosI. It is, however, on stylistic something grounds, of a puzzle that no echo of such a major imperialpatronageis detectablein consources,54ifit indeedtook place. temporary The theoryof the metropolitan by originof the style exemplified the mosaics fresco the additionalweightfrom studyof a mostsignificant of Daphni, gains cycle of of of the periodin the parecclesion the Trinityat the monastery Chrysostomos studiedand pubA near Koutsovendison Cyprus.55 painteddedicatory inscription, associates the decorationwith Eumathios Philokales, a lished by Cyril Mango,56 of in the military hierarchy the Byzantinestate. He served figure veryimportant of twiceas the Byzantinegovernor the island,from1092 to 1103 and from1110 to termof Philokales' stay on should be connectedwiththe first 1118. The frescoes the island,as has been arguedby Susan Boyd in herlectureduringthe Dumbarton ante quem forthe ChrysoOaks Symposiumon Venetian mosaics. The terminus of is stomosfrescoes the year 1105-6, the date of the completion the Asinou wall to master is consideredresponsiblefor introducing paintings.The Chrysostomos at versions stylewhichcan be clearlydetectedin less refined Cyprusthe particular Asinou and later cycles."5
has styleof several illuminatedworks,dated or datable aroundthe turnofthe eleventhcentury, been pointed out in other studies as well; see, for instance, L. Nees, "An Illuminated Byzantine Psalter at Harvard University,"DOP, 29 (1975), 209f. relationofthe mosaicsat Daphni to miniature 5sThe close stylistic paintingoftheMacedonianRenaissance had promptedA. Frolow to suggesta dating in the tenthcenturyforthe mosaics: "La date des mosaiques de Daphni," RA, 1962, 2, p. 183ff.;idem,"La date des mosaiques de Daphni," CorsiRav, 9 (1962), 295ff. 53Cf. Demus, Mosaics of Norman Sicily, 260. that two imperialportraitsin fresco,of a much later date, werefoundin the narthex 54 It is worthnoting century;cf. Millet, op. cit.,21 f. duringthe work of consolidationcarriedon in the late nineteenth are found in C. Mango and E. J. W. Briefcommentson the unpublishedfrescoesof St. Chrysostomos 55 Hawkins, "Report on Field Work in Istanbul and Cyprus, 1962-1963," DOP, 18 (1964), 333ff.;A. Papaof Masterpieces theByzantineArtof Cyprus(Nicosia, 1965), 17f.,pls. xIv, xv.2, xvI.2; C. Mango, georghiou, "Summary of Work CarriedOut by the DumbartonOaks ByzantineCenterin Cyprus,1959-1969," RDA C, Trikomo, Asinou. Byzantine Painters at Work," IETErpa"Hagios Chrysostomos, 1969, p. 101; D. Winfield, TTpCbrov Xivvspiov,Nicosia 1969(Nicosia, 1972),II, 285ff.;Megaw,"Byzantine AiEsvo-S ypvla rTOv KrrrpoXoy1KO0 Sinai Icons AttribArchitecture" (note 41 supra), 83ff.;K. Weitzmann,"A Groupof Early Twelfth-Century uted to Cyprus," Studiesin Memoryof David TalbotRice (Edinburgh,1975), 50, fig.18b. I am indebted to Professor CyrilMango forpermissionto publish figs.35 and 36. 56 Mango and Hawkins, "Report on Field Work," 335ff. 5 David Winfieldhas suggestedthat the frescoesof Asinou and those of the churchof Trikomo were Master: op. cit., 289. painted by a pupil of the Chrysostomos

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

11th-12th C'S

99

at are figures Chrysostomos those of Moses (fig. 35) Amongthe moreprogressive and Ezekiel (fig.36) on the northwestand southwestpiers, respectively.The show greater faces of the prophets involvement than the facesin The psychological shadows beneath the eyes are more of Daphni (fig.31). The triangular Koimesis of of conspicuousand the rendering the body reveals a correctunderstanding its plastic quality. The same applies to the handlingof the garments.The dynamic postureand the agitated draperiespoint again to a more dramaticversionof the styleof Daphni58. Thereis everyreasonto believethat thelast two decades ofthe eleventh century, whichcoincidewith the establishment a new imperialdynasty, of were characterof ized by a diversity stylesin monumental both old and new. However, painting, there is still no consensusof opinion about some of the materialwhich may be framework.59 fresco thisperiod placed into thischronological cyclesfrom Important in are yet unknown Greece. This surveyof the monumental in paintingof the eleventhcentury Greecehas shownits keyrolein ourunderstanding theprincipal of trends theperiod. of stylistic The mosaics of Hosios Loukas, Nea Moni,and Daphni assume special importance and mayserveas focalpointsaroundwhichseveralother decorations be grouped. can It is hardlynecessaryto stressthe importance these worksas reflections conof of monumental of temporary paintingin Constantinople, whichso littleis preserved. In addition,the pictorialmaterialin Greececontributes the evaluationof monuto mental paintingin otherprovincesof the ByzantineEmpire and areas outsideits frontiers that had receivedits culturalimpact. The monumentsdiscussed so far also afford some insightsinto the social and economichistoryof the ByzantineState. The threemajor monasticestablishments
betweenthe Chrysostomos frescoesand the mosaics of Daphni was first 58The close stylisticrelationship Sinai Icons," 50. suggestedby Weitzmann,"Twelfth-Century of 59 One importantfrescocycle which should fall within the chronologicalframework the end of the eleventh centuryis that of the Veljusa Churchnear Strumica in Yugoslavia. The year 1080, in which the monasteryof Eleousa was founded,is accepted by many scholarsas the date of the frescoesdecoratingthe catholikonand the adjoining chapel, while it is rejected by otherson the basis of certainiconographicand have a painterlyquality whichrecallsthe styleof the Doukas period. For stylisticpeculiarities.The frescoes these frescoes,see M. Jovanovi6,"0 Vodoci i Veljusi posle konzervatorskih radova," Zbornikna Stipskiot Naroden Muzej, 1 (1958-59), 130ff.;V. Djuri6, "Fresques du monasterede Veljusa," Aktendes XI. InternationalenByzantinisten-Kongress, Miinchen 1958 (Munich, 1960), 113ff.; G. Babi6, Les chapellesannexes des dglises "Za nekoi novi podatoci od proutuvanjata na byzantines (Paris, 1969), 94ff.;P. Miljkovik-Pepek, crkvata Sv. Bogorodica vo S. Veljusa," KulturnoNasledstvo, (Skopje, 1969), 147ff. his communication III In at the AthensInternational Congressof 1976, Mr.Miljkovik-Pepekplaced the Veljusa frescoesbetween 1085 and 1094 on the basis of archeologicaland literaryevidence. It also seems that the dating of the Baikovo ossuary frescoesis not definitely established.See the recent monographby E. Bakalova, BalkovskataKostnica (Sofia, 1977), who argues fora dating to the second half of the twelfth century.On the otherhand, A. D. Grishin has prepared a Ph.D. thesis in which he argues for a late eleventh-century dating, that is, close to the foundationof the monasteryby Pakurianos. See his communication, "The Baikovo Ossuary Frescoes of 1074-1083," in the r6sumes volume of the Atheas Byzantine Congressof 1976. The picture of eleventh-century monumentalpainting can be enrichedconsiderablyby a study of the three-column churchesof Cappadocia, i.e., Carikli kilise, Elmanli kilise, and Karanlik kilise, which have been dated eitherto the eleventhor the twelfth for century.The argumentation an eleventh-century dating is presentedin N. Thierry,"L'art monumentalbyzantin en Asie Mineure du XIe siecle au XIVe," DOP, 29 (1975), 87ff.The extensive bibliographyon these monumentsappears ibid., 87 note 68. In addition, the Georgian frescodecoration of the Sion church at Ateni, datable between 1072 and 1089, is of special importanceforthe historyof monumentalpaintingof the period: S. Amiranaivili,Istorija gruzinskojmonumentalnoj tivopisi,I (Tbilisi, 1957), 78ff., pls. 52-89.

100

DOULA

MOURIKI

in of the eleventhcentury Greeceare discussedin a recentstudyby CyrilMango, of who stressedthe unusual flourishing this particulartype of artisticinvestment, of The undertaking such initiatives the upper undertaken by mostlyby emperors.60 the classes of the local societyhas also to be taken into consideration; mostintripainted decorations guingcase is probablythat of Hosios Loukas. The remaining of this period fall into the usual three categories.The firstcomprisesmonastic on of of churches modestscale, as, forexample,the catholikon Myriokephala Crete. his name with this and The case of JohnXenos, the Cretansaint who associated The second cateinterest. on several othermonasteries the island, is of particular such as that of the Panaghia ton Chalkeon,which goryincludesprivatechurches, presupposea relativelywealthy owner. The questionremainsopen as to whether some of these churcheswere catholika of monasteries.Moreover,theirfunerary can function oftenbe implied.The last category open to encompassesthe churches Patronsofsuchestablishthe ordinary cult,as, forinstance,the episcopalchurches. as sometimesassisted by local high functionaries, in mentswere usually bishops, can also be of the example of the Protothronos Naxos. St. Sophia in Thessaloniki includedin this category.

II. THE TWELFTH CENTURY

half With the exceptionof Daphni, the second halfof the eleventhand the first in centuries Greeceprovidedfewmonumental of the twelfth cyclesof highquality. is half of the twelfth first what is actually preservedfromthe century Moreover, decade. The most important by datable withinthe first example is represented a wall of the Metroof fragment the mosaicswhichonce decoratedthe apse and west of Greece.6'The figure St. Andrew(fig.34), housed at of Serrai in northern polis formed part of originally presentin the museumof the Rotunda in Thessaloniki, the scene of the Communionof the Apostles in the apse. Althoughit has been indicate Certainof itsfeatures its it identity. restored, nevertheless preserves stylistic in an affinity style withthe mosaics of Daphni, but the facial type is muchcloser to slightlylater Comnenianstandards and the techniquehas a more painterly, of withthe animatedexpression the face, together dynamicquality.Theseelements, on morecloselyto those at St. Chrysostomos Cyprus. relatethe figure evidence providedby the dated frescocycle of Asinou on Cyprus The stylistic in frescodecorations Greece-those of (1105-6)62 may assist in dating two further The moreimportant in the Mavriotissa Kastoria and of the Episkopi on Santorini.
The complexityof the problems 60so Mango, "Les monumentsde l'architecture"(note 15 supra), 351ff. Grabar, relating to the artistic activities during the eleventh centuryhas been commented upon by A. au XIe siecle," CahArch,17 (1967), 257ff. "L'art byzantin de and L. Chesnay, "La m6tropole Serres," MonPiot, 10 (1903), 126ff.;ByzantineArt,an 6e P. Perdrizet 55 Art, Catalogue of the Exhibition,Athens, 1964, pp. 219, 531; Lazarev, Storia, 197, 255 note European older bibliography). (with of the church,see Megaw and Stylianou, Cyprus (note 41 supra), pls. vIIi-xI; Papa62 For the frescoes W. cit.,pls. x-xIi; M. Sacopoulo, Asinou en 1106 (Brussels,1966); D. C. Winfieldand E. J. georghiou,op. of Our Lady at Asinou, Cyprus," DOP, 21 (1967), 261ff.; Mango, "Summary of Hawkins, "The Church Asinou," 285ff.;Megaw,"Byzantine Architecture," Trikomo, "Hagios Chrysostomos, Work," 102f.; Winfield, Sinai Icons," 48ff.;P. Drossoyianni,"Some Observationson the Asinou 85f.; Weitzmann,"'Twelfth-Century 10,1 Frescoes," K2Alpovopfa, (1978), 53ff.

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

C'S 11th-12th

101

is in the church of the Mavriotissa,whichincludespaintingsfromat least three The major part of the frescoprogramin the naos and the narthexhas periods.63 been dated by several scholars to the beginning the thirteenth of century.It was morearchaizing variantofan earlier, to considered be a provincial style.S. Pelekanin ides, who had initially century, proposed placed thesewall paintings the eleventh at the International in Athensin 1976 a datingto thebeginning ByzantineCongress ofthe twelfth His sourceindicatcentury. main evidencewas providedby a literary the patronageof Alexios I Comnenosin connection with a churchat Kastoria. ing This was borne out by comparisons with the dated frescoes Asinouand thoseof of the churchof the Episkopi on Santorini, whichare also associated withAlexios.A further of consideration a technicalorderalso speaks against a thirteenth-century of the Mavriotissacycle. On the east wall of the narthexThe Baptism, a dating frescowhich can undoubtedlybe dated on stylisticgrounds to the end of the twelfth was century,64 painted over the first layer,which had been dated to the earlythirteenth century. In additionto a largenumber innovative of the features, Mavriotissa iconographic frescoes characterized an equal number stylistic are of An by idiosyncrasies. evident feature a completedisregard the classical standardsof the appearance of the is for human figure, whichcan be seen, forinstance,in two details of The Dormitionof the Virgin(figs.38, 40). Facial traitsare so distorted that theyvergeon caricature. The mannerist of violationof the elongation the bodies is accompaniedby a strong humanproportions, a dislocation thejointsin the bodyis particularly and of prominent. The emotionalenergywhichis infusedinto the figures the same anticipates the Moreover, prosaic approachin Macedonian examplesof the late twelfth century. and a certainlack of decorum sharedby monuare appearance ofthe humanfigure mentsin this area fromthe MiddleByzantineperiod onward.The earliestknown of exampleis the decoration St. Sophia in Ohrid. The scenes of the Mavriotissareveal a markedtendencytowarda horror vacui, both in theiriconographic details and in the immensevarietyof stylistic devices. The psychological restlessness the figures an extremecase of the provincial of is formulas whichwerealreadynoticeablearound the end adaptationofsophisticated of the eleventhcentury the ultrarefined in monumental of decorations the churches of St. Chrysostomos and Daphni. The indisputablemetropolitan inspiration upon these two decorationsprovidesan insightthat this tendencyderivesfroma Consource.These also indicatethe channelthrough whichprovincial arstantinopolitan tists,such as the one of the Mavriotissa, could have derivedtheirown expression in termsof recentdevelopments. The connection betweenthe Mavriotissachurchand Daphni is too farfetched to be suggested.On the otherhand, the Asinou frescoes Cyprus(figs.37, 39) may of illustrate theirdependenceon theChrysostomos paintings wall and the convincingly mannerin whichtheyinterpreted them.Due to the factthat the Asinou provincial
83 For theMavriotissafrescoes, see S. Pelekanidis, Kaa-ropi6 (Thessaloniki, 1953),pls. 63-86; M. Chatzidakis "Aspects de la peinturemurale du XIIIe siecle en Grace," L'art byzantin Xll6 sikcle.Symposiumde du Sopodani 1965 (Belgrade,1967), 64f.; N. K. Moutsopoulos,Kaorropit. TTavayfah (Athens,1967). ?Mavptcb-ritoa 64 See infra,p. 110.

102

DOULA MOURIKI

frescoesare artistically superiorto those of the Mavriotissa,the two monuments or of reveal different degreesof provincialization metropolitan quasi-metropolitan devices. whichseverally each one characterize Numerous innovative features iconographic of thesefresco cyclesprovidea linkbetweenthem.From the pointof view of style some relatedelements may be pointedout. The facesof the apostles in the Dormiin tionsceneofbothmonuments 37, participation the (figs. 38) sharea psychological of evident in the rendering the almond-shapedeyes and the event, particularly shadow line above and below. Apartfromthe overlyaccentuated, special diagonal abstract handlingin the Mavriotissachurch,the draperyfollowssimilardevices. of The organicintegration the draperywith the human body is missingin both areas. The scenes, even thoughan artificial emphasisis placed on the protruding numberof finelines whichproduceoval is based on a restricted interior modeling these are counterto shapes. As already noted in reference the Asinou frescoes,65 acted by straightoutlines,heavy folds,and straighthems, which neutralizeany itselfin an outThis simplified of approach differentiates impression corporeality. spoken way fromthe most intricateand restlessdraperymotifsin monumental adds weightto an earlier Such a consideration century. paintingof the late twelfth frescoes. of the Mavriotissa dating whichis The frescoesin the churchof the Episkopi on the island of Santorini, of evidenceto the initiative AlexiosI,6 possessa on attributed some documentary retardataire character,revealing the survival of the linear expressive strikingly This can be seen in half of the eleventhcentury. elementsof the styleof the first a detail of The Anastasis (fig.41) and in a hagiographic portrait(fig.43). Although the standardsof an imperialcomis the quality of the paintings farremovedfrom cannotbe disputed.The Christof theirdatingto thisperiod,nevertheless, mission, both in the facial feaThe Anastasis (fig.41) reveals a more advanced stylization, of tures and in the rendering the drapery,when compared to the Christof The of Dormitionin the Mavriotissa(fig.42). A linear and schematictreatment the of heads is even more apparentin the rendering two saints in thesechurches (figs. an share a summarybrushwork, extremely stylizedapproach, and 43, 44). They of in an immobility the rendering the features which emphasizes theirmoody expression. halfof the twelfth the in of The scarcity monumental painting Greeceduring first cycles in other areas. centurycan hardlybe compensatedby dated monumental it is So faras miniature painting concerned, can be statedthat the onlywell-defined centuryis the one which induringthe twelfth group of illustratedmanuscripts otherimportantexamples, the Codex Ebnerianus of the Bodleian cludes, among Libraryin Oxfordand the two copies of the Homiliesof Jamesof Kokkinobaphos. In view of the fact that one memberof this group,the Gospel Lectionaryin the Vatican (MS Urbinas gr. 2), possesses a dedication miniaturedepicting John for and his son Alexios,a metropolitan Comnenos origin the wholegroupcan hardly
Icons," 49. A. K. Orlandos,'H 'EnrTlaKo'r ZaropivtlS, in 'ApX.BuL. MvaI.'EX., 7 (1951), 178ff.;Skawran,"Middle T~i5 Fresco Painting," 126ff., 275f.; Jolivet,op. cit. (note 1 supra), 57. Byzantine
88

Sinai 85 Weitzmann,"Twelfth-Century

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

11th-12th C'S

103

be disputed. Its dating to the second quarterof the twelfth centuryhas recently These manuscripts not seem to provideassistancein filling been affirmed.67 do the in monumental painting. existinggap The earliestdated monumental decoration the twelfth of in century Greece,and the largestprojectin the area, belongsto a muchlaterperiod.The fresco decoration in questionis foundin the catholikon the monastery the VirginKosmosoteira of of at the village of Pherraiin Thrace, about halfwaybetweenAlexandroupolis and The monastic establishment the Turkish border.68 was foundedin 1152 by the Isaac Comnenos, son ofAlexiosI and brother the Empersebastokrator of youngest or John II. Isaac intendedthe monasteryas his burial place and composed the sources, we typikonhimself.69 Through this documentand othercontemporary knowa greatdeal about one ofthe mostcolorful of In personalities the Comneni.70 withthe tradition the family, of Isaac had special humanistinterests, as harmony indicated,forinstance,by the illustratedOctateuchcopy in the Seraglio Library in Istanbul,commissioned him. by The imperialrankof the founder and the locationof the monastery close to the of the Empiregive special importance the paintings the Kosmosoteira. to of capital The frescoes, whichdecoratea five-domed churchof considerable cross-in-square have not yet been cleaned or published.Despite theirpoor state of dimensions,7 preservation enough remainsto indicate theirimpressivequality. A stylisticanof the frescoes showsthat theyare contemporary withthe foundation the of alysis A largenumber portraits military of of on saints,represented half-length the side of the nave of the Kosmosoteira,exhibitssome of the basic conventions walls of Comnenianfigural For instance,an unnamedfigure whichmay be identified style. as St. Merkourios (fig.45) has the oblong face with the almond-shaped eyes and nose that became standardfeatures saints' physiognomies the twelfth of in aquiline century.The same applies to the thick,curly hair, which is treated in a linear manner.The modeling the faceis elaborate.One can note,moreparticularly, of the extensiveuse of shadingand the discreet appearanceof red patches on the cheeks. A further Comnenian feature the ornamental is as approachto the garments, found in the military saintsof the mosaicsof Cefal.73 On the otherhand,a comparison of the Merkourios at Pherraiwith the group of militarysaints at Nerezi,7 a figure
67 This group of manuscriptswas recentlystudied by J. Anderson,"An Examination of Two TwelfthCentersof ByzantineManuscriptProduction" (unpublishedPh.D. diss., PrincetonUniversity, Century 1976). 68The basic study on the historyand architecture the monumentis by A. K. Orlandos,Td of puvlavriv& 4 r Bc1pas,in eOpatKdK,(1933), 3ff.A very detailed study of the painted decoration was presented plelpTafi in the formof a Master's thesisby Dr. Nancy PattersonSevienko: "Byzantine Frescoes at Pherrai" (Faculty of Philosophy,Columbia University,1964). The cleaningand restoration the frescoesbegan in 1966, but of was interrupted cf.M. Chatzidakis,in 'ApX.AEA-r., 2,1 (1967), Chronica,29, pls. 49-50. afterward; shortly 22, 69L. Petit, "Typicon du monasterede la Kosmosoteirapr's d'Aenos (1152)," IRAIK, 13 (1908), 17ff. 70 For some data of Isaac's biography,see 0. Jurewicz,AndronikosI. Komnenos(Amsterdam,1970), passim. 71 The dimensionsof the churchare 20 x 17.60 m. See Orlandos, T& pvulavriv& 8. pvllnEta, 7 A dating of the frescoesto around 1200 was suggestedrecently by V. J. Djuri6, "La peinturemurale International d'Etudes Byzantines,Rapportset Co-rapports, byzantine: XIIe et XIIIe si'cles," XVe Congres III, Art et Archdologie (Athens,1976), 25f., pl. 11,5. 1 Demus, Mosaics Norman of Sicily,pl. 7a. 74 O0. Bihalji-Merin,ByzantineFrescoesand Icons in Yugoslavia (New York, 1958), pl. 21.

monastery.72

104

DOULA MOURIKI

about thirteen frescodecorationcommissioned years later by anothermemberof for is the Comnenosfamily, instructive the place occupied by the frescoesof the Kosmosoteirain the historyof Comnenianwall paintings.Despite strongiconoare look more concerned, and their the graphicaffinities, Nerezi figures morefrail, is more calligraphicthan at Pherrai. The severe, almost ferociousexrendering conforms much betterto the earliertradition,and the pressionof St. Merkourios same holds trueforthe monumental appearanceof the figure. in One ofthe prophets the upperpartsof the walls at Pherrai(fig.46) exemplifies the stylisticapproach adopted for a different group of saints. A strongsense of is by monumentality suggested the large head, broad shoulders,and freermodelThe face,withits eyes gazing steadilybeyond the viewer,projects ing technique. whichrecallsthe figural a severeethos,and a self-sufficiency styleof the prophets of in the mosaics of Daphni. The rendering the face findsparallelsin the roughly of of portraits apostlesin the apse at Cefalii, 1148.75Therecan hardly contemporary basic charin be any doubt that the commonfeatures the two examplesconstitute monumental of acteristics the classicizing, styleof around 1100, as seen in the moat of Daphni. Comparedto theSicilianmosaics,the figure Pherraiechoesmore saics the faithfully classical spiritof the earliermonument. of A representation anotherprophet(fig.47), on the northwall of the nave of the the catholikonat Pherrai,illustrates,even more convincingly, conservative of the portraitsin this church.Althoughbodily style adopted for the rendering not in thereis no movement the figure, a singlesign volume has been considered, the or facialfeatures. in Moreover, garof emotionalexcitement the pose, gestures, of ments show an emphasison straightverticallines. Anothercharacteristic this a highwaistline.In addition,the use of softtonal is as of mostofthe otherfigures fromthe lightedto the shaded areas of the draperiesgives a luminous gradations of irridescent quality to the colors; the combination pink and lightgreenis often of noticeable.As a resultof this modelingtechniquethe extensivefragmentation in the mosaics of Cefalii,is absent here. which also appears the draped surfaces, of the prophetat Pherrai,althoughrevealinga combination frontal Furthermore, demonSicilianmonument, and three-quarter views,also seen in the contemporary and a closeradherence of of stratesa betterunderstanding the function the drapery to the classicismof Daphni. illustratethe at The scenic representations Pherrai,althoughpoorlypreserved, A of these frescoes. detail of the and high quality of the style trulymonumental half of the angel in the scene of The Marysat the Tomb (fig.49), in the southern vault that connectsthe northern transverse pair of columnswith the northwall of the nave, providesan outstanding example of this approach.The countermovefashionto emphasizethe statuesque ment of the body is composedin a masterly has a flowing shaded in green, quality. The appearanceof thefigure. whitehimation, in in When comparedwith its counterpart the identicalcomposition the churchof of decoration about 1156,76 Russian fresco in theTransfiguration Pskov, a provincial at meritofthe angelin the fresco Pherraibecomesmoreapparent. the high artistic
75 Demus, Mosaics
76

ofNorman Sicily, pl. 4. et S. Yamchtchikov, Pskov. L'architecture les artsdes XII-XVIIP

sitcles

(Leningrad,1978), pl. 21.

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING OF GREECE,

C'S 11th-12th

105

Several apostles of The Pentecost in the nave of the catholikon at Pherrai of are characterizedby an accentuated countertwist the torso and thighs.The emphasis on the volume of the rounded parts of the body. involvinga smooth modelingas opposed to the brittlequality of the verticalfoldsof the flatdrapery, featureof the figural is a distinctive stylein the church. AlThe frescoesof the Kosmosoteirarepresenta very ambitiousundertaking. though somewhat lacking in elegant poses and in sophisticated compositional of devices,they reveal a monumental approach. The conservatism thesepaintings is apparent fromthe absence of the distinctivefeaturesof the later Comnenian movement.The large size and broken surfacesof the church style, particularly emphasize even more the iconographicand aesthetic isolation of the pictorial elementsof this decoration. at of The apparentconservatism the styleofthe frescoes Pherraicontrasts sharpsuch as a long in features the iconographic with numerousprogressive program, ly on processionof celebrantbishopswhichstartsmidway the longwalls of the nave. the corroborate evidenceprovided From a stylistic pointof view,the wall paintings century.Neitherof these decorations by the Sicilian mosaics of the mid-twelfth in substantial signs of the stylisticrevolution monumental painting betrays any and whichseemsto have takenplace onlyin the thirdquarterofthe century, which at is epitomizedby the frescoes Nerezi of around 1164. Anotherfresco decorationin northernGreece may be placed chronologically withregardto artistic close to that of Pherrai,and pointsto identicalconclusions in developments Greece duringthis period. It is preservedin the churchof the ocoutside Thessaloniki." This monument, a Savior in Chortiatis, few kilometers tagonal in plan, belongsto the variant of Nea Moni on Chios. The dome and the narthexhave been destroyed. On the south wall of the bema a bishop (fig. 51), depicted in three-quarter view as is usual in the twelfth centuryfor bishops depictedin the apse, is shown of holdinga codex instead of an open scroll,whichindicatesthat the iconography is not yet well establishedand suggests earlydating.A frontal an officiating bishops in of St. representation anotherhierarch, all probability JohnChrysostom (fig.52), on the southwall of the nave close to the sanctuarysharessome commonelements with the former prelate.Both faces show a ratherpronounced modelingtechnique and a certainugliness, whichrecallssome facesof bishopsin the churchof the Kosmosoteira.In the westernpart of the churcha youthful saint in a medallion(fig. 50), witha broad, roundface,largestaringeyes,an aquiline nose, and a linearrenmannerwhich again recalls the archderingof the hair, is treatedin a different at of angel in the dome of the prothesis Pherrai(fig.48). The immobility the featuresin both cases indicatesa further betweenthe two works. affinity
o-r6 TO0 Ti- METcaoppcbaooS XcoaTipo (Thessaloniki, 1972), 109, pl. 34,3. o-r6vKKaSilyq)rT TrpoacGop& wish to thank Dr. Nikonanos forpermissionto publish photographsof the Chortiatisfrescoes.This decorcbpylo MTrrKac6Kn) I ration has been tentativelyplaced by Dr. Nikonanos at the end of the twelfth century.On the otherhand, a date close to that of the frescoesof Milegevohas been suggestedin Djuri6, "La peinturemuralebyzantine," 61. The survivingpainted decorationis in the process of being cleaned.
Xop-nria&,in Kkpvos(TpTlTiK
77

A brief mentionofthe frescoes'is made in N. Nikonanos, 'H ~airAia

106

DOULA

MOURIKI

On the upper part of the south wall of Chortiatis Joachimand Anna fromThe of Presentation the Virginin the Temple (fig.53) serve as examplesof the treatmentof the humanbody in this church.The figures slenderand the draperies, are are treatedin a refined rendered, manner,modeled in light thoughtraditionally and shade. Anna's face,on the otherhand,conveysan inneranxietynot uncommon in figures monumental of paintingduringthe second half of the twelfth century. The frescoesof Chortiatisacquire special importancebecause of the location of the churchin the vicinity Thessaloniki. tentativebut probabledatingof these of A frescoes would place thembetweenPherraiand Nerezi. The evidence provided by the frescoesof Pherrai and Chortiatisfor stylistic in developments monumental paintingin Greecearoundthe middleof the twelfth confirmed a slightly later groupof frescoes whichbelongto centuryis further by the Taxiarchai churchin Mesaria,on the island of Andros.The architecture the of churchwas studiedby A. Orlandos.78 dedicatory A engravedaroundthe inscription of the northwestern columnof the churchprovidesthe date of the erection impost of the monument,1158, and the names of the donors,Constantine Monastiriotes and his wife,Irene Prasini.79 the fact that persons bearing the name of Despite Monastiriotis administration occupied importantposts in the centralgovernment the same period,80 name is quite commonand gives no basis forassothe during the Nevertheless, good qualityofthe archiciatingthe donorswithConstantinople. the refined and the styleof the paintings indicatea rather tecture, sculpturalwork, ambitiousproject, whichmaybe justified theprospering stateof theislandduring by the MiddleByzantineperiod.81 The Ascension,in the barrel vault of the bema, lends itselfto stylisticobservations. The angel (fig.54) on the northern halfof the vault has a statuesque apapproach,as at Pherrai.The foldsof the garpearance and reveals a conservative ment are sparse and verticaland the waistlineis also high. The draperystyle is of best attested in the representations two apostles of The Ascension (fig.55). Their garmentsmold the body, revealingits plasticity,and the foldsare characThe ends of the draperiesoftentermiterizedby a dynamicdiagonal movement. folds.A thirddetail of The Ascension(fig.56), on the nate in enlargedshell-like of southern part ofthe barrelvault,showsa moreaccentuatedplasticity the bodies. ofthe standard a provincial and gestures betray interpretation Figuraltypes,poses, over antique vocabulary.The ellipticalconfiguration the thighof one of the aposto in tles, who is rendered a twistedpose, foreshadows developments be seen in the cenof frescoes Perachorioon Cyprus,datable to the eighthdecade of the twelfth tury.82 It is generally paintaccepted that a major changein the styleof monumental centuing of the Comnenianperiodoccurredduringthe second halfof the twelfth
8ff. 8 in A. K. Orlandos, "Av8pov, 'APX.BuL. Mvlp.'EA., (1955-56), 19Ibid., 28; the same date is pjipEa rjis a further Bvuc.avrtvd engravedinscription(ibid., 31). provided by 80 Ibid., 28f. See also L. Bouras, "ArchitecturalSculptures of the Twelfthand the Early Thirteenth ser. Centuriesin Greece," AET.Xpto-r.'ApX.'ET., 4, vol. 9, 1977-79(1979), 65. 81 Orlandos, BuLamvnv& esp. 5ff. rfis"Av6pov, ipvwale 82 A. H. S. Megaw and E. J. W. Hawkins, "The Churchof the Holy Apostles at Perachorio,Cyprus,and Its Frescoes," DOP, 16 (1962), 279ff., figs.38-39.
78

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING OF GREECE,

C'S 11lth-12th

107

and that the keyworkillustrating changeare the frescoes the monastic this of ry,83 churchof St. Panteleimonin Nerezi near Skopje.84The date is 1164 and the patronage almost imperial,since the donor was a cousin of the Emperor Manuel Comnenos.The portraitof St. Tryphon(fig.57) in the northwest chapel exhibits some of the really impressiveelementsof the new style. A most refinedface The linearapproachto the displaysan extensiveand bold use of whitehighlights. face is much less accentuatedthan in the case of St. Panteleimon,the most celebrated portraitin the church.On the other hand, scenic representations, such as The Transfiguration The Threnos,inauguratea type of composition which and in the rhythmical of into integration the humanfigures thelandscapeaimsat enhancing both the emotionaland the decorative character thescenes.The frescoes Nerezi, of of as is well known,do not representa homogeneousstylisticentity.The festival scenes in the nave and the hagiographic beneaththem,as wellas the porportraits trait of St. Panteleimonon the southeastpier of the sanctuaryand a fewother in frescoes the western reflect in chapels,mostprobably contemporary developments otherpaintings, in the bema, displaya rather However, Constantinople. especially prosaic style with harsh modeling and less refinedfacial features; these foreshadow the main tendencies Macedonianmonumental in of painting thelast quarter of the twelfth century. The frescoesof the monasticchurchof St. Georgein Djurdjevi Stupovi, near Novi Pazar,s5 constitute more convincing a link with the later monuments the in area. The churchand its paintingsare the result of the initiativeof the Grand Zupan Stefan Nemanja, the founderof the Serbian dynasty. The dedicatoryinscriptionabove the principalentranceon the west front,which was discovered for of recently, providesa date of 1171/72 the erection the church.86 to a numberof faces at Nerezi, many faces at Djurdjevi Stupovi Compared have a more prosaic expression, seen, forinstance,in the youthful as male figure fromThe Raising of Lazarus.87The emphaticuse of highlights preserved enlivens theirappearance and constitutes typical featureof the frescoes this church. a of On the otherhand, a novel elementis the bulkinessof the bodies, whichmay be
83 For a characterizationof late Comnenian style, see especially: Demus, Mosaics of Norman Sicily, 418ff.;idem,"Die Entstehungdes Palaologenstilsin der Malerei," Berichte zum XI. Internationalen ByzantiMiinchen 1958 (Munich, 1958), IV,2, 63ff.; E. Kitzinger,Monreale (Palermo, 1960), 75ff.; nisten-Kongress, K. Weitzmann,"Eine spitkomnenischeVerkiindigungsikone Sinai und die zweite des byzantinischeWelle des 12. Jahrhunderts," Festschrift Herbertvon Einem (Berlin, 1965), 299ff.; L. Hadermann-Misguich, fiir "Tendances expressives et recherchesornementalesdans la peinture byzantine de la seconde moiti6 du XIIe si'cle," Byzantion, (1965), 429ff.;E. Kitzinger,"The ByzantineContribution WesternArt of the 35 to Twelfthand ThirteenthCenturies,"DOP, 20 (1966), 25ff.;idem,"Byzantium and the West in the Second Half of the Twelfth Century: Problems of Stylistic Relationships," Gesta, 9,2 (1970), 49ff.; O. Demus, ByzantineArt and the West (New York, 1970), 139f. and passim; L. Hadermann-Misguich, Kurbinovo.Les de et du fresques Saint-Georges la peinture byzantine XIIe sidcle(Brussels, 1975), 31ff.and passim; idem,"La peinture monumentaletardo-comneneet ses prolongements XIIIe siecle," XVe Congrhs au International d'Etudes Byzantines,RapportsetCo-rapports, Art et archdologie, 99ff. III, 84G. Milletand A. Frolow,La peinture MoyenAgeen Yougoslavie, (Paris, 1954),pls. 15-21; M. du I Rajkovi6, "Iz likovne problematikenereskogEivopica," ZVI, 3 (1955), 195ff.;P. Miljkovi6-Pepek,Nerezi (Belgrade, 1966); Lazarev, Storia, 200f., 256 note 60 (witholder bibliography). 85 N. Okunev, "Stolpy svjatogo Georgija," SemKond, 1 (1927), 234ff.;Millet and Frolow, Yougoslavie, I, pls. 22-30. 88 J. Neskovi6,"Djurdjevi Stupovi u Rasu," Ralka Baltina, I (Kraljevo, 1975), 156. 87V. Duri6, Byzantinische Freskenin Jugoslawien (Munich,1976), fig.22.

108

DOULA MOURIKI

of seen in the rendering the prophetsin the dome and in the scene of The Pentecost.88 The reign of Manuel Comnenos appears to have witnessed the productionof several frescocycles in the revolutionary style of Nerezi and Djurdjevi Stupovi. of Althoughit cannotbe ascertainedthat the initiator this stylewas the most acthe as masterof the Nerezi frescoes, stylewas rapidlydiffused, is indicomplished in cated by othermonuments the area. A primaryexample is that ofthe now lost fresco of The Threnos in the Panaghia ton Chalkeon,publishedby the late A. Xyngopoulos.89 in features the two major Macedoniandecorations Some of the new progressive of the third quarter of the twelfth centuryconstitutethe hallmarksof the soErnst Kitzinger.Of this most called "dynamic" style,a termcoined by Professor and widelypopular stylein Byzantinemonumental distinctive paintingofthelast the decades of the century best examplein Greeceis a particulargroup of frescoes concernthereis no information churchin Kastoria.90 in the Anargyroi Although ing the donor, Theodoros Limniotis,a dating in the 1190's seems quite probable withthe only affinities and stylistic because of close iconographic for these frescoes of in dated monument the area, the church St. Georgeat Kurbinovoof 1191, firmly northof Kastoria acrossthe Yugoslavian border.91These located a few kilometers weremostprobathat both monuments have led scholarsto the conclusion affinities that the two frescodecoIt bly decoratedby the same artists.92 is also apparent and stylistically and Kurbinovoare iconographically rationsof Hagioi Anargyroi churchtwo militarysaints, indebted to the frescoesof Nerezi. In the Kastoria St. Demetrios (fig.58) and St. George (fig.59), illustratethis point.93The linear than at Nerezi.The has developedmuchfurther of treatment the Kastoria figures armorof the two saints almost defiesthe mediumof the frescoand looks as if it were cast in metal. When comparedwith the face of St. Panteleimonat Nerezi, the face of St. GeorgewithhisMedusa hair and introverted appearanceis evenmore removedfromthe traditionof the earlierComnenian period. This intenseincrease of a of linearityconstitutes basic characteristic the "dynamic" style,especiallyin of features the Kastoria frescoes The exaggeratedstylistic its late manifestations. of can also be seen in the frescoesof Kurbinovo. The manneristic elongation the
4 (1955-60), 1ff., pls. 1-4.d&rohEaSecaa 4 in 90 A. Orlandos, Kac-ropias, 'ApX.BvL.Mvn.'EWA.,(1938), 24ff.; Pelekanidis, Td pvLav-rvdv~elCa 35ff.and passim (bibliographyin Kurbinovo, Hadermann-Misguich, (note 63 supra), pls. 1-42; afi Kao-ropid& Frescoes in Kastoria. Agioi Anargyroi and Agios notes 47 and 48); T. Malmquist, Byzantine 12thCentury Nikolaos tou Kasnitzi (Uppsala, 1979). 35f. 91 For the extensive Kurbinovo, see on bibliography the frescoes, Hadermann-Misguich, shared by the two 92 35 note 47, 36f. A detailed study of the iconographicand stylisticaffinities Ibid., The authorcame to the conclusionthat painted decorationsis includedin this monograph;see esp. p. 563ff. one or several painters (designatedunderthe letterA) executed the betterquality frescoesin the Anargyroi church,especially in the nave and the aisles, as well as certainhagiographicportraitsin the narthex.This conclusion, particular painter or several painters may belong to the workshop of Kurbinovo. A further therefore on iconographicbasis, in that the Anargyroifrescoesshould be placed around 1180 and mainly namely antedate the decorationat Kurbinovo (ibid., 582ff.).Two stylisticfeaturesof the Kastoria frescoes, their more classical appearance and subdued dynamism,have also been consideredas indicationsfor an earlierdating. Nerezi,pl. 41. 9a Miljkovi6-Pepek,
88 Millet and 89 A.

Xyngopoulos, Ai

Frolow, Yougoslavie, pls. 24.1, 29.2-3. I,

in MKE6ovIK&, 8acraaoviKqSl, ir.is TOotXoypaqpial lavayias TrOv XoawAcav

MONUMENTAL PAINTING OF GREECE,

11th-12th C'S

109

bodies and the tinyheads, whichlend a veryunclassicalappearanceto thefigures, elements sharedby bothmonuments. addition,the flying In are characteristic ends of mantles and the ripplingfolds-hallmarks of the "dynamic" style-are also of foundhere. The restlessness the draperies thusimpartsto the figures nervous a alertness.In certaininstances,the agitated vitalityand a perpetualpsychological foldsof the draperieshave been exaggeratedin an almost absurd manner,94 indiof cating the shortcomings the new style as handled by provincialpainters.Howfeatures the "dynamic" style are presentin the of not all of the distinctive ever, this trend. Even the Anargyroi so wall paintingsillustrating frescoes, closelyremovelated to those of Kurbinovo,do not reveal to the same degreethe frantic ment which characterizes many scenes in the latterchurch.95 churchprecede or postdate The question whetherthe frescoesof the Anargyroi issue. In my opinion,the the decorationof Kurbinovo has been a controversial shouldbe dated later than thoseof Kurbinovo,since,in mostcaKastoria frescoes is and the typicaldevicesof the "dynamic" ses, theirstylization more pronounced to trendhave been corrupted a degreewhichcannot be explainedsolely in terms of quality. Some faces whichare broader and also more emotionalanticipatestylistic developmentsof the thirteenth century.The assumptionthat the Kastoria of frescoes by postdate the decoration Kurbinovomay be supported one particular of frescoesin the narthexof the Anargyroi church(cf.fig.86). As in some group a and moremonumental decorationsof the turn of the twelfth rencentury freer in is apparent.96 The painterof this group of frescoes the narthexworked dering side by side in that area with the painterswho decorated also the main part of the church. The "dynamic" style in other monumentsof Kastoria reveals an even more subdued approach, as in the case of the churchof St. Nicholas of Kasnitzis.97 No historicalinformation the donor of the frescoes, magistros the Nicholas regarding is available. Despite the fact that the title of magistros was no longer Kasnitzis, indicativeof an administrative it of function," does pointto the social prestige the whoseportrait, withthat ofhis wife, depictedin thenarthex. is donor, together The dependenceof the sceneofThe Transfiguration Kasnitzison the identical at scene at Nerezi and even earliermonuments be detected.99 is basically the can It face grief-stricken of Johnand the multi-folded edge of his garment (fig.61) which recallthe dynamicelements thelate manifestations the styleunderdiscussion. of of In the sceneofThe Dormition St. Nicholasof Kasnitzis(fig. an exaggerated at 60) slenderness and elongationof the bodies are noticeable,as well as an abrupt contrast betweenhighlighted and shaded areas of the garments. Because of the arbitraryuse of this device the figures acquire a phosphorescent appearance,and the facial features distorted. are
94Pelekanidis, Kao-ropt&, 7 and 8. pls. 95 Cf. The Anastasis and The Ascension; Hadermann-Misguich, Kurbinovo, figs.79, 81, and 85.
96

Orlandos, T& Bulavriv& 137ff.; Pelekanidis, Kaa-ropia&, 43-62; Hadermannpls. plleTa riS KaoCropi&S, 35 Misguich,Kurbinovo, and note 46 (withearlierbibliography);Malmquist,op. cit. 98 For the title of des "magistros," see N. Oikonomides,Les listesde prdsdance byzantines IXe etXe sidcles (Paris, 1972), 294. Here, the latest recordsof this title are dated to the beginningof the twelfth century. 9gCf. Kitzinger,"Byzantium and the West" (note 83 supra), 53.

See infra, p. 119.

110

DOULA

MOURIKI

The Baptism scene has been dissociatedfromthe restof the painted decorationin the Mavriotissaand Kurbinovo,37. centuryfor the firsttime by Hadermann-Misguich, placed at the end of the twelfth de l'Athos, I, Les peintures 101 G. Millet, Monuments (Paris, 1927), pl. 98; S. Radojci6, Majstori starog Malerei vom Ende des XII. bis slikarstva (Belgrade, 1955), 6f.; idem,"Die Meisterder altserbischen srpskog
100

in The frescoes the churchof St. Nicholas are devoid of the excessiveagitation that is seen at Kurbinovo and, to a lesser and plethoraof draperyconvolutions church.The Kasnitzisfrescoes may be dated to the 1180's degree,at the Anargyroi fromthe fact that some of the frescoes hastilyexare on stylistic grounds.Apart of ecuted at the expense of artisticquality, the disintegration the Nerezi tradition is apparent in the pathetic,haggardfaces with distortedfeaturesbordering of on caricature,as well as in the increaseddrynessand a feeling monotonyand fatigue. of whichsegmentsfaces and coversgarThe use of a linear network highlights whichthe traditionof Nerezi and mentsis one of the mostobviouscharacteristics Djurdjevi Stupovi bequeathed to the paintersof the last quarter of the twelfth example in this contextis The Baptism (fig.62), a frescoof the century.Another The figures have slender second layer in the Mavriotissachurchin Kastoria.o00 and their facial typesexpressan innertensionrelevantto the "dynamic" bodies, related to the wall paintingsof St. Nicholas of style. This frescois stylistically and therefore theirdates shouldcoincide. Kasnitzis, in A further example of the "dynamic" styleis preserved the Vatopedi monasat of Peter and Paul Embracing, present fresco fragment teryof MountAthos.The which was decoratedon to belongedoriginally the refectory, kept in the library, The broad faces initiativeof StefanNemanja and St. Savas around 1197/98.101 the thus indicating of reveal a more mechanicalrendering the networkof highlights, device. of this particularstylistic a decline Althoughthe pictorial material of the so-called "dynamic" style of the late its a twelfth centuryrepresents widespreadtendencyin Macedonianmonuments, distinctivefeaturescan rarelybe traced in other areas of Greece. Nevertheless, in thisstyleenjoyedwide popularity otherpartsof the ByzantineEmpire and outas It side its frontiers. may be claimed that it originatedin Constantinople, inof in the frescoes Nereziand also byits wide difdicatedby its earlymanifestations fusion.A relativelyearly but ratherprovincialvariant is illustratedby the wall is whereasa more accomplished expression paintingsof Perachorioon Cyprus,102 found in the mosaics of Monrealedated to the next decade, that is, the 1180's.103 but on Macedonian However,the studyof the extantmaterialrevealsthat nowhere soil did the "dynamic" styleacquire such exaggeratedmannerisms. Examples of the "dynamic" stylein miniatureand icon paintingare veryfew in number.Apart fromthe Gospel cod. 3 of the Patriarchateof Istanbul, which several "dynamic" features betrayssome of the draperyagitationsof this style,'04 in icon paintingof Sinai.105 may also be detectedoccasionally

Storia, 212, 260 note 123. 10o Megaw and Hawkins, "The Churchof the Holy Apostles at Perachorio" (note 82 supra), 279ff. 103 Demus, Mosaics of Norman Sicily, esp. 91ff.; Kitzinger,Monreale (note 83 supra). 104Referenceto the Gospel cod. 3 of the Patriarchate in connectionwith the stylisticdevelopmentsof H. miniaturepaintingwas made by Professor Buchthal in his lectureat the Dumbarton late twelfth-century Oaks Symposium on the mosaics of Venice. The manuscriptis published by G. A. Sotiriou, KExlpfila'T ro0

zur Mitte des XV. Jahrhunderts," TIErpaypva

o!

8e'AhE3vo'

434; Lazarev, BuLavrnvohoytKo vVEwSpfov,

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

C'S 11llth-12th

111

The beginnings the "dynamic" style can be placed in the third quarter of of the twelfth in century, always takinginto account the fact that developments the the visual arts are inevitably resultof a long process.By the end of the last decade this stylehad completedits development. survivedin a fewfrescocycles of the It thirteenth in Macedonianmonuments.106 century, especially Monumental in Greece century centraland southern paintingof the late twelfth a different best illustratedin the frescocycles of stylisticapproach, exemplifies St. Hierotheosnear Megara in Attica and the Evangelistriachurchin Yeraki in southern Peloponnese.In the monasticchurchof St. Hierotheos'07onlythe cupola decoration the dates from twelfth It century. includesa seated Pantokrator (fig.67) surrounded fourmedallions withthe Hetoimasia,the Virgin, and two angels,as by well as two pairsof half-kneeling archangelson eitherside of the Hetoimasia and the Virgin.In the drumare eightprophets, a poor state ofpreservation. in The cupola decorationof St. Hierotheosprovidesone of the most characteristic treatment whichbeliesthe fresco medium'smonumental examplesofan ornamental The aestheticeffect the paintingscomes closerto that of enamelsand function. of illuminated as ornamentation. figThe manuscripts, is also indicatedby the refined ures presenta new code of elegantappearance,whichis completely different from the paintings Kurbinovo,the Anargyroi of churchin Kastoria, and otherMacedonian monuments. is enoughto comparea detail of one angel at Megara (fig.63) It withthe angelsin The Baptism at the Mavriotissain Kastoria (fig.62) in orderto confirm stylistic the When comgap whichseparatesthe two groups of paintings. the faces of the Macedonianangels withtheirharsh pared to the Megara figure, and drawnfeatures look almostlike caricatures. contrast, angel at the modeling By and a mild expression. Megarahas a softlymodeledoval face withregularfeatures The angel Giil in a medallionat Megara (fig.66) recalls the angels in the mosaics at Daphni. This particular has and a certainsense figure reacquiredthe haughtiness
this manuscript (Athens,1937), 70ff.,pls. 46-59. A Ph.D. dissertationconcerning OIKOVmEVIKOO 'TarrpltapXEiov was presentedrecentlyat the Institute of Fine Arts (New York University)by R. S. Nelson, "Text and Image in a Byzantine Gospel Book in Istanbul" (1978). 105 Several among the Sinai icons reveal an exaggeratedmotionfordramatic effects; see K. Weitzmann, "Three Painted Crossesat Sinai," Kunsthistorische OttoPdchtzu seinem70. Geburtstag Forschungen (Salzburg, 1972), 23ff., fig. 1. Othersshow intenseanxietyin facial expressionand gestures;idem,"Byzantium and the West Aroundthe Year 1200," The Year 1200: A Symposium (New York, 1975), 66f.,fig.34. A representation of an extremestate of psychicanxietyis also noticeablein two further icons datable to the end of the twelfth century,one again in Sinai and the otherin Kastoria: M. Chatzidakis, "L'6volution de l'icone aux 1 e-13e du d'Etudes Byzantines, siecles et la transformation templon," X Ve CongresInternational Rapports et CoIII, Art et Archdologie, 181, 184f.,pls. xxxvi,19 and xxxvii,20 and 21. rapports, 106 See, forinstance,the frescoes of St. Nicholas of Prilep in Yugoslavia. 107 A view of the cupola decoration was published for the first time in G. Lampakis, Mdmoiresur les chrdtiennes la Grace(Athens, 1902), 76, fig. 145. The particularity the seated Pantokratorin de of antiquitds the dome is discussed in Demus, Mosaics of Norman Sicily, 212. A briefcommentary this cupola decoon ration appears in Hadermann-Misguich, "La peinturemonumentaletardo-comnene"(note 83 supra), 110, pl. xxv.10. The St. Hierotheosfrescoeswhichwere repaintedbecame darkenedsince the time of Lampakis. They were cleaned and restoredby the ArchaeologicalService in 1978; duringthis phase of work,carried out by the restorer Papageorgiou and his collaborators,the prophetsin the dome were revealed forthe S. firsttime. I am gratefulto Mr. M. Michaelidis, Director of Byzantine Antiquities of the Archaeological Service, for permissionto publish the frescoesof St. Hierotheos. For a presentationof this material, see
TOIJO 1-15. 11,1 (1978), 115ff., Archaeology, figs.

D. Mouriki, 'O LcoypacpiK6s S1i&Kop&O o

TrpoAOV -ro0 'Ayfov 'lepooov

Miyappa,Athens Annals of KOVT&oGr&

112

DOULA MOURIKI

that the of vanity which we tend to associate with classical art, thus indicating tradition. followa long and accomplished pictorial paintings at of The self-sufficiencythe figures St. Hierotheosis characterized the facial by of and the pose and articulation the bodies, as shown by the archanexpressions the positionedon the ground,is 76). The body, firmly gel worshiping Virgin (fig. attestsa revived modeled in light and shade. The confident drawing convincingly A searchfor of in interest the classical rendering the human figure. self-conscious is and decorativeeffects also noticeable. forms elegant of The delicate pastel shades and the decorativearticulationof the figure the even morethe the Gabriel worshiping Hetoimasia(figs. 65) exemplify 63, Archangel ornamentaland elegant quality of the Megara paintings.Althoughsome of the ends and the mannerismsof the so-called "dynamic" style, such as the flying fromthe have been employed,the main difference foldsof the draperies, rippling worksof the true"dynamic"stylelies in the lack of motivationforthese agitated an purposeonly. We are dealingwith a draperies.They seem to fulfill ornamental whichis betterknownas the "rococo" manner.Professor different trend, stylistic Demus has recently proposeda moreevocativeterm,the Byzantine"art nouveau" flavor.'08 because of its flowing fin-de-sidcle Firmly quality,an unmistakably style, in this whichexemplify trendhave so farbeen recognized Cyprus dated decorations the only, and it is, therefore, Cypriotmaterialwhichmay assist us in dating the Megara frescoes.The earliestdated example of this style is the frescoesat the such as the In Hermitageof St. Neophytosnear Paphos, of 1183.109 many figures, in and the participants The Anastasis(fig. Gabrielof The Annunciation 64), a maniin rendered the playfulmanner of for festpreference elegantundulations draperies, and flowing that we also see in St. Hierotheos,is apparent. Arrestedmovements the lines are devoid ofthe dramaticqualityand nervousvitalitywhichcharacterize has many in of products the "dynamic"style.The Gabrielfigure Hierotheos(fig.65) in elementsin commonwith the figures the Hermitageof Neophytos.The ripples end of Christ'shimationare treated similarof the hem of Adam and the flying frescoes of ly to the hem and the hangingdrapery the Hierotheosangel.The Cyprus use more artifical of the reveal a somewhatless vigorousmodelingand a slightly and dry techniquewas applied to this devices. In short,a moremanneristic same antefor The wall paintingsof Neophytosmay thenserve as a terminus monument. whichI would like to place in the late 1170's. the date of the Megara frescoes, of frescodecoration, A further representative the"art nouveau" manner, Cypriot of is to be seen at the Panaghia tou Arakouin Lagoudera,dated 1192.110 The figure example of a moremannered Moses (fig.68) in the dome providesa characteristic phase. The standard devices already mentionedare present,used, however,in an
Demus, "Venetian Mosaics" (note 2 supra), 340. C. Mango and E. J. W. Hawkins, "The Hermitage of St. Neophytos and Its Wall Paintings," DOP, 10 (1966), esp. 193ff., figs.61-67, 72-73, 89, 108-9. A. Stylianou,AtIroiXoypafait vao r-ris in -ro ilnrTrpaypvca Tro Kwrrpos, Aayov68p&, -ro nfavayias 'Apdxov, 110 459ff.; Papageorghiou, op. cit. (note 55 supra), p1s. xxiii-xxviI; e'AtlEvovS BuLav-rvohoylKo0c D. Winfield, wveSpfov, "Reports on the Workat Monagri, Megaw and Stylianou,Cyprus(note 41 supra), pls. xIv-xvlII; and Hagios Neophytos, Cyprus, 1969/1970,"DOP, 25 (1971), 262ff.; A. H. S. Megaw, "BackLagoudera, in ground Architecture the Lagoudera Frescoes," JOB, 21 (1972), 195ff.;idem "Byzantine Architecture" note 41 supra), 88, fig.43.
108 109

,", j..

l?.

4.

S,.,,

Y .A

""
/*
4f

i
K>
w

?
tVal

jt' 4w-I r'A

I&

i,

,
:I

??,.,44 41W 4pr A-3

??r +C 146
'? lop '"'?~?C"411

s4W

..46

'I

5 S'.k
-Z'

1. St. Gregory Nyssa, detail of Thessaloniki, Panaghia ton Chalkeon

2. The Last Judgmentd

~Si I ~ -AO?% -~'F?~ A.G., r

,i ' .L

, j6.-?L i

..

??II

..AR

., .a,

-d-.

1,= 04%
k

4?

*???~~=l

so

"It I---m
.

'f
,(0
t

-4
. '

I
"
"x*-"

' ,;- : :i rt'. ....:..,. t," ' : ,

im

!
..;

"

, " !"
,. .. .

. " ., .
...

.?-,

uii.

'

of 3. Thessaloniki, Panaghiaton Chalkeon.The Presentation Christ, detail,the Virginand Child

4. Hosios Loukas, Catholik

i~i
.-JJPA

t'

AV

-,

,.
.k

"i~~~

IT

N?i

~
. .

,,?~t

"".:"
I. .x
-".oI.

~~~~i

..

,.~

~
:.

? ...

... .. -

. .< .. . r.l.,. :' ""' ,

? -

,: .

" . .... ?

64 ',, .

;rE,

!?U 1.?. '" ....I?,"..O ..~~~r ^:,.S..'

~
~~~~~?
. ' r".. . ?. ?, -.,:< I.>! -. ",c'..:

5. Crypt. The Incredulity Thomas of

a ; o..

!7?

?l
,.
" . ..

"

LC1. .. ..;I / 'I? .....CI

." .. _..*.~~ ? ," ,_. .: ' " ? . ..
. ...

... ?.i

;;

27

".,.
.~? ;

1i
":.
'" " l i i? . ,::

i0

iti,,
L.

., ...i. "'...!.. ?..

..

, .

' :. ,i .0-. --L k ,

6. Catholikon. The Incredulity Thomas of Hosios Loukas

CA

f;,/

? "c
-

Au
C" <4".-

itt

lii

.;-. ??L ,4 ,t;

??*

P
?

..

<?a z
--i

l ,,,? r ?..., ,,f~?'~Y ""

'AAI

;g.. ''4WI
. t" ..

..

'

,., ..: ,
? . ..

'

ai

The Crucifixion 7. Crypt.

?I

~
"." SAt c,?~~~,t t.

r-

~ ~ ~

.. C

..

J& f
,f8os

ilk ,

...

......i l
,'

u
l! t.,

Id pL
.....,

'16

..f

.. ..

r'
t

..
....

IL

"

,..~

.... b:..:'
?"'

"I .~~~~, S,. :,,

. "?;

i .WIc h... v i i
.,..

'

".

?*

....' '.

. .;

Ig ., ,4
''

'~3
-..I1 "
" --i,.

....

'pk

?y. -.; .
,

CL~

Il

. r-.. ;...,

::"?.? ' .. . . : i:,:.,

',

.....,

..

.-+~

g~

. . . ......,.-,"..i.....

. . .. .. . ......... ... ....

. . . . ...

8. Catholikon. The Crucifixion Hosios Loukas

''e ;i

,,.
.c?? ..-

,:-,,,-? "

. -.
CL~

ir

....

q:

9. The Pentecost, detail

?eLI.?* .,.!~

."' ? '

': ,v

, 'I,-

t,. .

/~?~~ .;

~~
..'

..-,.

..:.~?

-,....i"
b4b

!' I'.\ ?-. .

% ,:.: ;,,

44"

.r4b

*0p 46
o t

"N

40
10. Northwest Chapel.Archangel

l~i;-i
,J ""..

.:

11. Southwest Chapel.The Virgin Hodeghetria Hosios Loukas,Catholikon

n
lr '' ;" ~ r' r4" 'I u

cC~ L?. ~?-:'!"~x~i?~i

.?rY~.TE.I.;: J. r '? a ., ? ~.?*

~? ?~~?~ .?.? -~? ?. ????

Cr
?~_ .1 i-?
. " ?; . :
a i t ???i

''''
,,.,.

.. C~L:C~4i r, .:~F?:'? ?: ~i? 'I, 7' r

'' 5'c? ?~ ??i

. ..? ..

. ...

i
-,,

*.

I;:
1

I?:
P '' fi L

7 ?i i t? ~t??:: ?-~

?-

?? -i'

d J
.r ~h.

;t". ,
'' Ir ?h~i~:

,.

3. :.

i'r

*;

?f O

,.t
-:

I:

~t?
?;? d,

ia

i r. .t .. '*

.". )!-r )I jl

k.

I~. i
:.F

'i , ?? ?-

?, t. ". 5' r? 'r ?6 1% ?iB *. S r

~i

I r:

....

;
r i

,.-

.f

~CIL~~ ~nq-

,, ~

~QII '' "~

~f II rl-

'?
i

1. - ' '? I ?,
I ~f 6; r ,,

. .e :7 1
-Y

f!?~ .??.~ ;I . ?i ?? ..

:j'jl
1s r

12. Hosios Loukas,Catholikon, Southwest Chapel. St. Bacchos

rlI

i?

ii,, . 11111~
i

'i

13. Evrytania, Episkop

*
'L, 4

p.
M..

S? ..

. l++., .,.
.I

.,t
.

g;

...,.

, ? o....

%I
r'

? .I .**

'.G
..

* ?i+--+'
:

-4Y, .. . .

~,
.

,+ +~~~
.

'++:L
..'I

lip

++,f ?.

'1

.: ?

.+,..

.*

++:,,I

'1+

.ni
iJ

.- ..+ . ..? ; ?. ..

. ..., .

. +

i~~
~
,i i,

+,

+..

,+-

l I il

i'i

,+.,\"r

,i~~~

+"

.'. +U
? p..

?.
., o.A

,,

., -,

.?

,. .+

-+l

#i
" ?? ? .. .. ? ,

? . -i

i.i.

..

=.

+++

"..

14. Hosios Loukas, Catholikon, Northwest Chapel. The Transfiguration, detail,St. Peter

15. Corfu, of Church St. Merko

. ...

~XC~lAll
r. ,,;.

oi
00.

ilAl
1F r

3 ".,.

S..

~
. ,

., 'c .

?44. ~~';~;,*YI?~'?JP"I : . . ..e .. ,;j~

:. Pt.. .~eTa.

:.

.
,,,,e'.. . ,

-;j,,., .1;g.

16. The Virgin

4L %dl~~L
6 At,
L ""...~. ?h ?,,"T~ !'lIT t

4r 0?
~
r ?~b.

~ I~~

?_

'

.mp-

s4.bE

10 L ~~~~..L?_'

4$1

IIf

L r
r ,r * .,..

. ,-

' -?.

- ,-4q

41t!
... A'

17. Moses and an Archangel Crete, Myriokephala

?? ??

C Ya~C *i*.
*, 4?? r rX 4 ii

?u ,? C.~? 4
?' ~Lr~ YIIFl~b~'e

.~J; 7 -: ?r -~ r .*

?..4~C~

.?iIi

?i 1
I?~YC~L~ ?w CE~ I~ ~g -Y ~-r~PY?PlrLCJ~I~P~

.t

t~Jl~r~

'

t'?? * J ?:~. , ~ ? i3~. 4'

d Gra~r ---a I C~y~ I ~ ' a, var,

clr~ui?

~f

-?~sJIP~

CiLI?~~

.-4~YT

~FP-

~~

=_~iy

_~Y

t--Y?PI

L! ..1 Ir ?y~

i'r~ ~? -.JI i i

? ?~m?P;-- ." -; :? ~??': ?''?'' ~ -i rr~?IYL~ 1 m --~P - -0. rr :.I~BI..~C~1IPC~?.. IL-~l~ II---C~ ~.~ ??' .3. X;' 4 ,* I ??1

'"

iL
r /

??-PiR~F~l~i~~j

:I Y'r z?. ~?

:B ~'??'' -? r r. ;i ?? -? ?;

?: '..?:?s ~CBs~i?mse ?s

-s -~: n ?*~ -~ -I I~

'?~ ? ? ,? ?~ .?

'' C I:?;;P''r 1

3:~? ~. .t-,. ..? " ?.~1?*'~

.rF

c .3 .r

I.i'

am&

CC~l*

NN. ikI . , ,
a ?I

18. Archangel Michael

.0

4 11Ai

sona

prAa

41
a

--FW,

1,we# ago, T?

ot&Flo a
r1r. Is-N &**-Et on
a t.t
64J??~l~ .

Iimpow " *attL ask q:,6 9

11 tE-O,

Os A PS

ik

193
I d.
f IZ4 40*

1110 A~

we 61!
Go A jll

4r,

49 jr ,

Its 0.14 Ho .w411 ,.

lot

1-4,

It?

64

'06
19. The Transfiguration, detail,John Nea Moni Chios,

7
"1,

:. 1

11,,, S"..
,Y

? t, 4I -.'-.
" 4F. ?.W Q) tQ %

X,
fl

I , L' .

"I

~~t
? ? i ?F: Y k*'

. ?

..

. .')"

"

I'? ?i~k =kk

?r'

?.

Ipi;
.:., .

r;

ir
.

' , _ ,, . ,,
A C,

" 1; _ ..,,.;.-.

,.. . ...

..:

..

..c,

~~
'i..

4 j.,..:"
i..:

4111

Ail

,'.

r. ..?

',

': '

r;Q

7'.Z ,* t~rrI~iI I,,r(??I: -X%

tI
r:.

.2.-'. ...

K,'?:

h rL idlr

.. d,,,..

;"' ;i?Y

-..

.?~

fk~?o

-'"
L ,

--" .*,:,.. " i.1._,I,,? ''w.l .., ,'

''?

I,?t

I i'?!! ' .u` Y ,

,.h, ,.-Ffii.:t .

20. The Crucifixion, detail,Johnand Longinus Chios,Nea Moni

21. The Betr

lb w SRI of
m A

ago
0 F

.;o

jr 0,
.0 %.; AIk
lose

40,

ow flo

4k -0 Al" L qF am lb or, Is I -6 J, It 4L

IL

Ai

410 a VA nitO's IL .

All It

de

4b

4fp

L.4 004

11W. m I-WSW

'Ama IL 1 .164" 44fit is 80.74k mmam"a lima j to; ixjk MAN M6 1 T Ar "',"4, witp fttoav Its Al MEMO 6464-A Ir v mWoo ftsl "V04. a *451
tin-off.. 14? ,a 31 low. IR is Qft !,4% 44mit. 've WE 'lp in.

-9 "mol Ap, N, W'4 now, NN &'M

%IL Oil
At* 10 A

v a-,

so., v Vp v04* L , 1 01* 0 %*16 It 1lpA - 1? * 'Pot A 16 I % 4,6?,Fq?* 00 ?,ros*p bll? A 0 ,?p _,A, 4* 4

MV?

4r A*, 04 1 'k
4b 'o 40# 44

10 It 00 A vt

awk wo 'oI ISSAA w div ;?V**,ovo

lk w .01, 0 -6 t-

'o

't , I"N: 4 ,"

JA? too

rm

0, -? .4

10 *4P

#olq?ili

44 "4F,

A ja a 'g'of v it 41? l#k4+ I .,& % JS

6 If #4 Fp # #

fF 'AA. 00

'ail

MR
or
do

10 Ilk

4w

0 ,
4p

ig , 4$*t
AR

?41 If*

0i
4V

Ot

am
7?

fk

1 '. 0 s 41 1*dp?L 9 At MA Im ;sip T*-"

Chios,Nea Moni

4%, Sjo

fA

01

10 tO

_q J-10

IF') "_?"P

AVIV

R
23. St. Daniel the

22. St. Anna

Aft
I2

..Ld

? .

'',
4"

44 -j.

"-..;.0"

,'

'-.
ok

IrI

ji
24. Joseph
The of details Naxos, Chalki,Protothronos. Presentation Christ,

25. Symeon

IP

414
Lp.

26. Thessaloniki, Sophia. St. Euthymios St.

iF

27. Chios,Nea Moni.The Prayerat Gethsemane, detail

% O. .-1"-..I .. r '. _- _ I. .
:.r....I

i. r'.-

4r,,t,

4.

I.4.11k

41

feI,

::~

MI. ~ ~ ~ ~W:

.:::,.,.
" , "

44

SAll

28. Isaiah Daphni

29. Moses

4w.

-ri
q, .

" t,. , .

jk-.

...

:.

"-

Alz
. .. :...0

41:;

30. The Baptism

31. The Dormition the Virgin of Daphni

32. The Birthofthe Virgin

vj-T

?A

H 0
0 0

K
1

At:.

of . A. ? , - . . _,

.,:..',, ,,,14-4
r, 47., , h ,

p~~
I &.

al I"L"
...,s& ,

..
s~,.,.
.. . ;..,.. . ,,... ., ,, .. ,., . .

:"., i"C
""?'
.. . .. ,,,, ,- ,,.. ..

Piz

,~

l?

,,-,,,,1A,,.

,,

',,

.,

W.
Ike.

.,,,.,,,.

Ic

. .-J

. v

)A. ,,l,'

a,,,

'7 -

,.~

O"

Cd

-C,,

U'

-Wa----

4
4

*~

4F

4*1

m 1

35. Moses

36. Ezekiel

of near Koutsovendis, of Parecclesion the Trinity Monastery St. Chrysostom Cyprus,

;o?

"

-.

...

" 'i

. [T

'A".JANI

..

The Dormition the Virgin of 37. Cyprus, of Asinou,Church the Panaghia Phorbiotissa.

:
Ii:.;

' ... . ,,

t~ AV

38. Kastoria,Mavriotissa. The Dormition theVirgin, of detail

...........

"
.4,.6.

..
,++.. . : -, f,, .

39. Cyprus, of Asinou,Church the Panaghia Phorbiotissa. The Dormition the Virgin, of detail

!44~

~ki

4a,

orI

40. Kastoria,Mavriotissa. The Dormition the Virgin, of detail

'4144

wVZ?4

Z6

f%.A

.Ike... ...-.1

U'
:..

iiAL
,

..,

"A
wl-. CA
?

.i
.

..
!

?
.

Inn' 3?

. . . .. ..

.,

..',l

... . .....

.N*
4.

b -"

71 4;.,';

( .,v"'k . ?.

A..aap.

,Nift

If.'

42. Kastoria,Mavriotissa. The Dormitio 41. Santorini, Episkopi.The Anastasis,detail,Christ

..

--.

-pi

,.d -.:

43. Santorini, Episkopi.Saint

44. Kastoria,Mavriotissa. S

14.

or'L*?

Kosmosoteira. Merkourios St. 45. Pherrai,

OT

At"
? " ": . Ole..

..

?,.

. .,,-, :. . .. .

.....
. -. ...,. ..

..,,-;.....

..
.-

.r.
. "-

JL '"t'v"."

., .,:";
P,
ip7

IF

Ap "e

41F " _,,

It

Af

.,,u.,1

LIMi

.;

.,

46. Pherrai, Kosmosoteira. detail Prophet,

.-,
... j I v

I ,4 ,t?

..f.44

i .

'X--

lei

47. Prophet

48. Archangel Pherrai,Kosmosoteira

Alt .}

~4,

1 1t
ly/

k2l

50. Chortiatis, Church the Savior. Saint of 49. Pherrai, Kosmosoteira. The Marysat the Tomb,detail,Angel

"P

Ale,

F i. v. , dl,.

k -,

,,

~~'"l.k"

" ,

C-7 , ,. ? .,ql

'.

,F.i

, d ,.p

51. Bishop

52. St. JohnChrysostom of Church the Savior Chortiatis,

i:

'j i

\. A4L
,
I

4i

:
9

,.

Al"

,I) ~'
4144g\

'

"'44

,. ,.. -,:

Or'.

:6if.

of 53. Chortiatis, Church the Savior. in The Presentation the Virgin the Temple, of and Anna detail,Joachim

54. Andros, Mesaria,Taxiarchai. The Ascension, detail,Angel

:r

,,

'. .' i ?

...,.4:"

,,,..

. ...... , . . -. .

a. ."

ili
.a'.,.,,,

w l

il o

"

t'-'

,..
~z-

~I.. ,,..,

~
.,
"I .

' .

,,

A'71w

..lei

.A"

'jAlp

".o.
? .

I.
. , .,.
-'val

,
, , , :
-JA.

N ..N

.4,,
.. . .*. .. .

b..p

p:

55. Andros,Mesaria,Taxiarchai.The Ascension, details,Apostles

56.

AO'

. ..

.dl,

.M.

"

o.

....J6

.A

<

, ',-

.r

.. . ,

, .:',..

4;.

:71r,
?14"

,0

-?Z

'.

St. of 57. Nerezi,Church St. Panteleimon. Tryphon

58. Kastoria, Hagioi Anargyr

7 : 7:
IL

-OF
-

..t.if

1.7,

.0-..

St. 59. Hagioi Anargyroi. George, detail

60. St. Nicholasof Kasnitzis.The Dormition, detail

'Pik

4k.

A
..h .

'to

".

Al:

-. . . '. .: . ? . . . . ,: .

.i

.. . 4

61. St. Nicholasof Kasnitzis.The Transfiguration, detail,John Kastoria

iit
At

I'

O ..V.l

Ar

II

.-

I-.

The Baptism,detail 62. Kastoria,Mavriotissa.

Al-

L-.

O.

? ...

.19

63. Megara,St. Hierotheos. detail Gabriel, Archangel

Lo,

A.

04.,

64. Cyprus, of The Anastasis, detail Paphos, Hermitage St. Neophytos.

...

....

'AIR

Skt

65. Megara,St. Hierotheos. Gabriel Archangel

00

0. 10 S

."
'I m
,..

~.0. 0..

,,

. ,
?

?...

,,.,.......
.,

,,.

giif ?..'"

66. Megara,St. Hierotheos. Giil,detail

tit

jrj
~'T
vI , , ..wO. S

etr

...... .q..
. I ,,
hill.

.
, ', ,

Pantokrator 67. Megara,St. Hierotheos.

68. Cyprus, Lagoude

.-4.-

1
. .:

i7B

Ak

...
Ar.

4*4

a.*.

69. Megara,St. Hierotheos. The Virgin

70. Cyprus, Lagoudera,Panaghia tou Arakou.T

i% ,
f~
S

'74, -?

" 4:,,

..

<

7.,--A

i , 4. Ao.wl

Ji

:4411

1,., .4.

71. St. Johnthe Evangelist Yeraki, Evangelistria

72. The Ascension, deta

_ii

74'

INI

4..'

.j

9&7

73. Yeraki,Evangelistria. The Ascension, detail,Apostles

<ipr

TOP

(
it

$40
lop

Alk'

74. Mani,Episkopi.The Ascension, detail,Apostles

.
.. ....

.
.

.
*" ? . .,.116

41

, 4u ../,.,w

00-4.0--

The Threnos, 75. Nerezi,St. Panteleimon. detail,John

ii

i4 iA

PPir
.
. '.

,.,_
,..4t -. ,

76. Megara,St. Hierotheos. Archangel

?l?

A
F ?r
so,,

ago

..

4-Owl

-.I:-.

-,

77. Christ withthe SamaritanWoman,detail

78. The Virginand C

of Patmos,Monastery St. Johnthe Theologian,Chapel of the Virgin

IL

:ti
. 0,

A o

.............

'

'"" 4..

"4F? ? or

i-

79. Chapelof the Virgin. detail Archangel,

St. 80. Refectory. Hilario

of Patmos,Monastery St. JohntheTheologian

..-

,,t

A
, .l ..

,.

IL

r 0,4

A . r . " ?

'r;
--00-

,i -411
'V
..

'l I-V
44-4

p
,tie

,,

l'i

;hit
" 'i

81. The Presentation Christ, of detail,Symeon ZoodochosPigi (Samarina) Androussa,

82. Prophe

mI

,44

IIl

AAL

*air
40.

-P-4

''L:'

reii?"'. '

.-

"'

i)'

" O4"

IJf

83. Bishop ZoodochosPigi (Samarina) Androussa,

84. The Anastasis

?1
4w _,L

1
:0.,4

pool,.,.

,,.
,

;:-ok:,=

"

..

..

ILI .....0 , .

4C,

..

....

., ? .

85. Chalidou,St. Nicholas.Pantokrator

86. Kastoria, Hagioi Anargyroi. The Ascension, detail,Angel

ft-t

40fa

6pl
87. Chalidou,St. Nicholas.Archangel Gabriel

fq..

.. ':' .

? .IN i,? .. ,-6 .-

'

VAV ... . . ..
i .rP

Jl..,, A'
, .. .

'

o.

. .,
.

'

..

"J, ,

..

."

..

..

4 Mj

A01"

.,

,,

"

. ,:

001

f .'O" ,

C.

flaw

t ' ? ? ., -,,,.lo

.,o.'e?w

, .

""

"

dh

"#A
.

" "e '

88. Thessaloniki, Hosios David. The Nativity, detail,Joseph

-IF

Ar

j1

r..

89. Thessaloniki, Hosios David. The Baptism,detail,Angel

i...

711L ? ,,; A-.*.,.i

I?IIL

,,
%Pip '-"_; .; '

'

.....

'0

.'r

., , .4F

"7. ,

A;P

90. The Virgin lo. ,

....

-.
,

lop
.

..o.4,

91. The ThreeMagi Hosios David. The Nativity, details Thessaloniki,

. __-....

. . ., _

.,4..

7-V '10Ag . ..

eAV

? ,. .. ,.

."

"-'-"k~ qii
t blCmlai

.t-

I.

.d

" i "' ,

'

"

1J

92. Nerezi,St. Panteleimon. The Birthof the Virgin, detail

93. Thessaloniki, Hosios David. The

fi
,.t.
? . ;

i
.:

Id
. or ,

-?
..

Oli

4'i *1"

,.:
' 'N.""-o%

94. The Nativity, detail,Angel

95. The Transfiguration, detail,Christ

"'

JI

IIt
... . .i.
? -, " ,, 41

i.. . .L
-.

-,'

'N
AI,,1

_6

1LL

IV

of-, ,."

":;

, -..

."

,'

96. The Baptism,detail Hosios David Thessaloniki,

MONUMENTAL PAINTING OF GREECE,

11th-12th C'S

113

treatment the draperies of does not take manner.The superficial even moreartificial of the structure the body. Thus, the more schematizedfacial into consideration as traitswhich convey a tormented expression, well as the desiccatedappearance a of the body, impartto the Moses figure veryunclassicalcharacter. of A tellingcomparison involvesthe figure the Virginin the Cypriotmonument fromthe vigorous,healthyappearance of the same greatly (fig.70), which differs also at distance figure Megara (fig.69). These differences speak fora chronological betweenthe two works. Anotherfresco decorationin Greece revealingthe distinctivefeaturesof the of is in styleunderdiscussion foundin the church theEvangelistria Yeraki in southern Peloponnese."' The seated figure John the Evangelist (fig.71) displays a of manneredpose and excessiveelaborationof the garments.The ripplesof the hem of his chitonand the foldsofhis himation, whichform seriesof chevrons a over the of the body, together withthe knot-shaped of motif the draperyunder upper part the rightknee correspond the conventions the styleunderreview.Compared to of of to the figures the fresco the at cyclesalreadymentioned, Johnfigure Yeraki bein of Facial features traysan increasedschematization the rendering the draperies. are further removedfromthe classical norm,as are the garments which are renderedin a flatand ornamental fashion. The frescoesof the Evangelistrialack the homogeneousquality that may be noticedin otherexamplesof the same style.The eccentricities evidentin the figure of Johnare not employedin the angel supporting aureoleof Christin The Asthe cension (fig.72). Notwithstanding advanced stylization the garments, an of which sheathe the body, the tendencyhere is toward a more classical and dignified reLikewise,in The Ascension(fig.73), the broad, heavy bodies of the presentation. withtheirsmall heads are even further removedfrom maturephase of the apostles this decorativestyle. The harsh appearance of the draperiesdemonstrates igan noranceoftheir All function. thesefeatures, withan artificially articulating together in thefacialexpressions, indicatea laterand moreprovincial moodyquality interpretation. A date closerto 1200 forthe frescoes the Evangelistriaseems possible. of The survivalof the Byzantine"art nouveau" stylemay be perceivedin another churchin southern of Peloponnese,the Episkopi in the Mani.112A comparison the of apostlesin The Ascensionof the Evangelistria witha similargroupin the group sceneof the Episkopi (fig.74) indicatesan even moreprovincialvercorresponding sion of thisstylistic mannerisms this style,such as of expression.The well-known the "toothpaste" motifof the draperies,are used constantly. When comparedto the figures the Evangelistria, of those of the Mani Episkopi violate even moreconspicuously the classical norms. Tiny heads are combinedwith huge bodies and the draperieshave lost theirorganicfunction. Linear surfacepatternsconvey an
-HiS 111 Brief comments on the Evangelistria frescoes are found in D. Mouriki, AtSaKOcp1 tl5 -rTAv -rpovcAcov in vroS FepaKiov, 'ApX.'Eq.,1971,Chronica, 1ff.; E. Kounoupiotou, FEpdKl: Ayfov EiayyEitcrrpfaS T-roO Kafi " XdbLo Athens 4,2 vVrTPiCYpiSt rotoXoypaqtcov, Annals ofArchaeology, (1971), figs.4, 5, 8, 9; M. Panayotidi, "Les eglises de G6rakiet de Monemvasie," CorsiRav, 22 (1975), 336ff.;Skawran, "Middle Byzantine Fresco Painting," "La peinturemonumentaletardo-comnene,"109f.; Chatzidakis,"L'6vo142f., 286; Hadermann-Misguich, lution de l'icone," 168, pl. xxviii.5 and 6. 112 Drandakis, op. cit. (note 18 supra), 65ff.,p1s. 62-74, 77b-89; Skawran, op. cit., 150, 294f. In both studies the frescoesare dated to the end of the twelfth century.

114

DOULA MOURIKI

appearanceof "wet" drapery,while the type of pigmentused and the methodof The Episkopi frescoes can be dated application give an impressionof watercolor. of the thirteenth to the first quarter century. the Megara decoration the maAs faras we can establishat present, represents in the evolutionof the "art nouveau" style,while the Cypriotfrescoes ture stage and those in southernPeloponneseare later in date. In fact,the basic ingredients of ofthisstylemay be foundin thewall paintings Nerezi,which,as noted,also mark of the "dynamic" style.The flowing curvesand the moredetailthe starting point in of of ed articulation the drapery the Johnfigure the sceneofThe Threnos(fig.75) the developmentobserved in the depiction of the Hierotheos angel anticipate facesand elegantposes is already (fig. 76). At Nerezi the distincttaste forbeautiful of of as well as the decorativeeffect the rhythmical arrangement figures, apparent, details,and colors.The lifespan of this "elegant" style in late Comnenian drapery coincidedwiththat of the "dynamic" trend. paintingapproximately 93 in In miniaturepaintinga group of illustrations the Tetraevangelion of the includesunmistakAthensNational Library,datable to the late twelfth century, able featuresof the "art nouveau" trend."3Such featuresassert themselvesmore icon from Annunciation in conspicuously icon painting,of whichthe magnificent refined Sinai, whose extremely quality and courtlyeleganceindicatea Constantinhas a more the best example.The styleof the icon,which provides opolitanorigin,"4 may suggesta date vigorousand classical appearancethan the Lagoudera frescoes, of this styleamongthe Sinai icons is to be before1190. A further specimen slightly sharesstriking seen on an iconostasis beam,"5 wherethe sceneofThe Annunciation of withthe decoration thecupola at Megara.The elegantappearsimilarities stylistic comare of undulations thedraperies features and ance of the figures the rhythmical The twoworksare probably oval faceof theVirgin. as is the youthful mon to both, The Anothericon from Sinai, representing Miracleof the roughlycontemporary."6 at Chonae,"7 may be placed among the examples of the "eleArchangelMichael the in represents idealizedtypeofbeauty gant" manner thismedium.The archangel of in thisstyle.His classical appearanceand the flowing for reserved figures rhythm The icon of the frescoes.118 his garmentsrecall a similarapproachin the Hierotheos and those of be placed close in date to the Megara frescoes Miracleat Chonae may of St. Neophytos.As already noted, the sensitiverendering the faces,the elegant attributethis icon to a Constantinopolitan of design, and the refinement colors The aestheticstandardsof the "elegant" or "art nouveau" style are workshop."9
"The TetraevangelionManuscript93 of the Athens National Library," Aekr. E. Constantinides, ser. 4, vol. 9, 1977-78 (1979), esp. 211ff. Xploi-r.'ApX.'ET-r., 114 (note 83 supra), 299ff. Verkiindigungsikone" Weitzmann,"Eine spiatkomnenische 115 G. and M. Sotiriou, EI<6vs ris Movis Dvw (Athens, 1956-58), I, figs.99-102; II, 10ff.;Weitzmann, figs.14, 17, 20, 22, 24, and 30. Two color illustrationsmay be found "Byzantium and the West," 58ff., (January,1964), 118. idem,"Island of Faith in the Sinai Wilderness,"National Geographic 118 Professor icon. Weitzmanndates the Sinai beam slightlyearlierthan the Annunciation 117G. and M. Sotiriou, EIK6veS Movij "iv&, I, fig.65; II, 79ff.; K. Weitzmann, The Icon (New York, T; 1978), 82, pl. 22. device also 118 of shieldlikeformation the draperyover Michael's leftshoulderis a manneristic The special of adopted for figures the Sinai iconostasis beam, St. Hierotheos,and St. Neophytos: G. and M. Sotiriou, I, EIK6vES Mov'j X&va, fig. 100; Mango and Hawkins, "The Hermitage of St. Neophytos," fig. 91. See T~i5 also my fig.64.
113 See 119 Weitzmann, The Icon, 82.

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

lth-12th C'S

115

suggestedby these threeworksfromSinai. An icon fromCyprus,the well-known related to the frescoesof the same Christ of Lagoudera which is stylistically church,120 may be includedin thisgroup. The evidenceprovidedby the above materialalso adds weightto the assumption of a Constantinopolitan for origin the "elegant"mode ofpainting,121 especiallysince in some of its basic ingredients encountered a statu are nascendiat Nerezi.Moreover, the fact that this stylewas especiallyfavored the highestsecularand monastic by circles Cyprusduring last decades ofthe century in the also pointsto Constantinople as the place of its origin.It is well documented that the island had been in continuous contactwiththe capital throughout twelfth the The century.122 above observation can be illustrated the frescoes Lagoudera, which are the resultof the at by initiativeofLeo Authentis,and thosein theHermitageof St. Neophytos, connected withthisgreatmonasticfigure Cyprus.No information, of is available however, the donorsof the Megara and Yeraki frescoes.It should be noted that regarding of the churches Hierotheosat Megara and Evangelistriaat Yeraki are not isolated examples of the artisticactivityin these two cities and theirvicinity.The two are monuments situatedin fertile areas notablefortheirextensive olive agricultural groves. The wealth of these two locations may not be irrelevantto the high quality of their art, which also includes monumentalpainting of earlier and later periods.The total lack of pictorialmaterialexemplifying these two styles in us to view the alleged metropolitanfeatures of these Constantinopleobliges the extant provincialexamples. It goes withoutsayingthat these trendsthrough some of which are of high artisticmeritin theirown right,would reflect works, tendencies.The study of this materialindicates to varyingdegreesmetropolitan that the examplesof the "elegant" stylein Cyprus, wellas in central southern as and models more faithfully when comparedwith the proGreece,reflect metropolitan vincialworksof the "dynamic"style.The moresatisfactory documentation regardmaterialand the generally refined and preciousquality of the "art ing the Cypriot nouveau" productsgive further supportto this hypothesis. contrast,in terms By ofmetropolitan we of developments shouldbe cautiousas to thepurism the "dynamic" featuresof the Macedonian workspreviouslyanalyzed. Artisticwork in this northern area has throughout Byzantine period manifested inclination the an toward expressionistic of the currentstylisticand iconographicforexaggerations mulas. A further of indication thedistortion themetropolitan of tradition thenorth in is providedby the workof the Nerezimaster.The idealisticfeatures thesepaintof ings were eclipsedin the later Macedonianworks.It would be arbitrary, however, to try to draw a sharp line betweenthese two trends,whichoverlap not only in time but also in characteristic devices. The fact that the roots of both stylesare foundat Nerezispeaks fortheirinterrelationship. striking The differences observed in monumental paintingofthe northand of the southin all probability give a disA. Papageorghiou,EKOV T-roo Xpto-ro0 -r0vaq TTTavay(as -ro "ApaKos, Kvuwp.Xiouv8., iv ris in 32 (1968), 45ff. Kitzinger,Monreale (note 83 supra), 82; A. H. S. Megaw, "Twelfth CenturyFrescoes in Cyprus," Actesdu XIIe CongresInternational d'Etudes Byzantines, Ochride1961, III (Belgrade, 1964), 257ff.;Weitzmann, "Eine spitkomnenischeVerkiindigungsikone," 304ff. esp. 122 See du especially C. Mango, "Chypre,carrefour monde byzantin,"X Ve Congrds International d'Etudes dans le mondebyzantin, 7ff. V, Byzantines,Rapportset Co-rapports, Chypre
120 121

116

DOULA

MOURIKI

It artistic realitiesin Constantinople. can even torted picture of contemporary that the "dynamic" and "art nouveau" trendsmay have represented be argued master painters variants of the same style, or even the idioms of two different differences The considerable to lentthemselves latercopying. whose personalstyles noticeable in subsequentworks,especiallythose by provincialartistsof different of to and background, may be attributed the elaboration a restricted temperament to whichvaried according local traditions. numberof formulas modesis best illustrated a surveyof a of The overlapping late twelfth-century by the in thirdstylistic painting, so-called"monumental" development late Comnenian evidenced and are trend.Its hallmarks a new senseofmonumentality a quiet dignity, elimination the of as by the moreclassicalappearanceofthefigures wellas thedrastic Thesenovel twostyles. wereseenin theother which richvocabularyof complexforms mannerthan the "dynamic"and featuresinitiallyappear in an even less consistent A not of of "elegant" elements the twoearlier styles. plurality modesmaybe detected In thiscase,howin individual but also compositions. onlyin the overalldecoration, fin a it can be postulatedthat we are observing typically de sidcle ever, phenomenon. can be well illustrated of The combination different by stylesin one monument in the finefrescoes the chapel of the Virginon the southside of the catholikonand of in of of a fewfragments the olderlayerof paintings the refectory the monastery evidenceregarding St. Johnthe Theologianon Patmos.1' Thereis no documentary the date of the two groups.However,the iconographic programin the chapel of A abbot ofthe monastery. conspicuthe Virginmay be associatedwitha particular of of is of ous feature thisprogram the inclusion a largenumber bishopsnot onlyin whomay and southwallsofthenave. Six ofthebishops, thebemabut also on thenorth This withJerusalem.124 featuremaysupare be identified inscriptions, connected by of was that thedonorofthepaintings Leontios, the hypothesis patriarch Jerusaport lasted Leontios' tenureas abbot of the monastery lem between 1176 and 1185/90. This evidence, until 1183, duringa periodwhichcoincidedwithhis patriarchate.125 around1180.126e of seemsto be corroborated thestyle thefrescoes, which placesthem by
123 For the frescoes,see A. C. Orlandos, "Fresques byzantines du Monastere de Patmos," CahArch,12 Trov eo6you ('H Movi~ TOtXo'Ay. 'lcadvvov KaI at BvLanvalTV (1962), 285ff.; idem, 'H 9vTT&rpqp altv68ff.;idem,'H &PXiTeKTovKA Art,an European Art.Lectures(Athens,1966),'APXnTKTovtK -s), Byzantine ypaq(fat

inently placed in the northeasternsection of the chapel; fourprelates on the north wall, includingSt. Salustios of Jerusalem(486-494), St. Makarios I of Jerusalem(314-333), and an anonymous bishop near whom only the designation "bishop of Jerusalem"is preserved; and Elijah I of Jerusalem (494-506). Of the fourportraitsof bishops on the south wall, one is completelydestroyedand another is accompanied and the last four lettersof his name, -tos--either Praylios (417-422) or by the inscription'IepoaoXpcov Juvenalios(422-458). See ibid., 136f., 158, 169, and pls. 5, 39, and 41. made by S. A. Papa125The association of the decorationof the Virgin'schapel with Leontios was first Guide (Patmos, 1977), 38. For the St. John theTheologian. Historical-Archaeological of dopoulos, Monastery ... IA' Otav8XpE PXtierWTK6WO personalityof Leontios,see his vita,in A6yotTlav1yuplKoi TroTcaviEpcOTA-rO6ru f~pv TOT "v 1&yios rr ... A(?s Wrrcrrp65 otov Kai 01s5 ETpa Maxaplov roo XpvaoKEqxhov a-rWpoaeT?k1v, Bio

K(cxI Tov GeoX6youTT6rpov(Athens, 1970), 121ff. is Movqfs LavTrvalx rotXoypaqical 124The bishops of JerusalemincludeSt. James,the Brotherof the Lord, first prombishop of Jerusalem,

KVpOO AEoevriov [Vienna, 1794], 380ff. Cf. E. L. Vranoussi, T& d&yioOoylK Too 'Ocriov wrrarptdpXov KipvaIepoaoX71cov Kac to0ToplKa pap-rpiat (Athens, 1966), 156f. Xpio-roSo*Nov. OtAooylK1 W1apd&ocats 12 A. Orlandos dated the frescoes the chapel of the Virginbetween 1185 and 1190,and associated them in Movjs Kci 'ApXlTeKTrovtKI 3uLPVI-rvai eeoo6you, TooXoypagpft 267f.

with the initiative of Leontios' successor, Arsenios, abbot of the monastery between 1183 and 1207. to century: Moreover,he dated the earlierlayer of frescoesin the refectory the beginningof the thirteenth

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

lth-12th C'S

117

the of an Although entiredecoration the chapel of the Virginrepresents integrated aestheticunit,the scenicrepresentations the portraits and reveal different stylistic modes. A detail of the scene of Christand the SamaritanWoman (fig.77) on the northern halfof the barrelvault of the bema exhibitsa dry,archaizing manner whichis difficult relate to eitherof the two styles of late Comnenianpainting to discussedabove. The drawnfeatures the faces,the flatdraperies of withtheireconomic use of verticalfolds,and the unrealisticrendering the hill in the backof groundrecall the style of the Sicilian mosaics of the mid-twelfth century.Other such as The Hospitalityof Abrahamon the east wall of the bema, display scenes, some typicalelements the "dynamic" style.On the otherhand, the depictionof of The Virginand Child (fig.78) on the same wall reveals a different approach.The of and majesticfigure the Virginis characterized a new spiritof monumentality by classicism. Thiscan also be observedin the softmodeling the faces(fig. and the of 79) of The of theChild with amplehandling thedraperies. group theVirgin holding escorting is of The aristoarchangels heavilyindebtedto the tradition imperialiconography. cratic characterof these paintingsis indicatedby the pose of the Virginand the refinedand rhythmical manner in which the Virgin,Child, and archangelsare linked by theirgestures, compositionally glances,and colors.The Virgin'sthrone is embellished withornamental motifs antique derivation. of The constantconnection the abbots of Patmos withConstantinople,'27 well of as as the ample means of a patriarch Jerusalem of who certainly had visitedthe capiforthese frescoes. With a date of ca. tal,128s well suggesta metropolitan may origin the paintingsof Patmos may represent one of the earliestexamples of the 1180, "monumental"style,the thirdimportant of development late Comnenian painting. fromthe frescoes the chapel of the Virgin,several monasticportraits in Apart from the olderlayerof paintingin the refectory the monastery Patmos reveal of of a trulyoutstanding quality. The abrupt turnof the head of St. Hilarion (fig.80) increasesthe animatedand expressive As qualityof thisportrait. in theMacedonian an elaboratesystemofhighlights evident.However,unlikethe mechais churches, nical treatment thisfeature the examplesin the north, of in whereit forms surface a in thiscase it has been applied in a farmoreorganic integrated and manner. pattern, The refectory frescoes sharethehighartistic ofthemoreaccomplished work in quality the chapel of the Virgin,and may be consideredas belongingto the same period. Monumental tendencies frescopaintingof the late twelfth in become a century The relevantmonuments are dispersedthroughout the widespreadphenomenon. as well as in areas outside its frontiers. many cases, their Byzantine Empire, In location and the identityof the donorsimplya connection with stylistic developments in major centers.In particular,the frescoesof St. Demetriosin Vladimir in Russia, securelydated around 1195, have been discussed frequently conin nectionwiththe "monumental"stylein late Comnenian painting.'20
127

'0 TiSP MoviS l&T-riOv 'Icoa,'q9 Ki h &vaypaGh XElpolarproa,-f'. KaSrIyo1EVoS 'IaafrsKi &PXapt6Epr ser. 4, r's ypd(gcov pov-S,in AEW-r.Xpto-r.'ApX.'ET-r., vol. 4, 1964-65 (1966), 347 note 5; idem,`AytoAoytK& fipeva K 'OafovXpto-ro~o*Aov, note 2. 105 129 Lazarev, Storia, 201f., 256 note 61 (with older bibliography); V. Plugin, Frescoes of St. Demetrius' Cathedral(Leningrad,1974); E. Bakalova, Batkovskatahostnica(Sofia, 1977), passim. Elements of the "mo-

x128s Idem,

Vranoussi, 'AytoxoylK&KE i .EVl 'Oafov Xpto-ro~o*Aov, 105.

118

DOULA

MOURIKI

Greecepossessesa numberof fresco cycleswhichclearlyreveal the new development. The pivotal characterof the "monumental"style is oftenapparent. The of as adherenceto olderComnenian formulas, well as the introduction a new spirit of can and monumentality, be observedin the frescoes the churchof of moderation the ZoodochosPigi (Samarina)near Androussain Messenia.130 Symeonin The Presin entationof Christ (fig.81) is one of the moretraditionalfigures the program. recallthe corresponding The refined quality of the face and the excessivelinearism features in the same scene at Nerezi.The pathosindicatedby the contracted figure with the Symeon a of and the concentration the glanceconstitutes further affinity characterithese similarities, psychological the figureat Nerezi. Notwithstanding moreample and and the forms zation of the face at Samarina is less conventional than at Nerezi. painterly of A softer modelingtechniquecan be seen in many otherfigures the Samarina in is providedby one of the bishops' portraits example program.A characteristic the diaconikon(fig.83). The mild, open face withits regularfeaturesradiatinga of recallscertainfacesin the frescoes Vladimir.One of the prophets serenedignity in in the dome also revealsa painterly approachto the modelingand a progression as Such characteristics, well as the of the understanding human emotion(fig.82). and evidencedby its scale, broad shoulders, statuesque ofthe figure monumentality element The affective in appearance,again pointto a new spirit Byzantinepainting. of in the characterization faces may also be observedin the David figureof The Anastasis (fig.84). The soft,broad modelingand a new normforfacial types are The miniaturelike of characteristics thisfresco. further approach of late Comnenian in rendering this church. paintinghas been replacedby a monumental featurescoexist in the entiredecorationof SamaTraditionaland progressive rina. In many cases figuresare slenderand two-dimensional. Landscape and arand do chitectural moreover, elements, play a secondaryrole in the compositions to is restricted a of of not help to create a feeling space. The movement the figures and the dramaticplay of light and dark is totally absent. Noticeable minimum, and the balance of also are thesymmetrical program arrangement the iconographic modelingand reof the pictorialelementsof the scenes. Finally,broad, painterly of character thesefrescoes. the strainedhuman emotionillustrate trulyprogressive comSamarina churchcan be dated on the basis of stylistic of The frescoes the decoparisonswiththe Vladimirpaintingsof ca. 1195.131 From this evidence the rationin the sanctuaryand the nave, in particular, may be placed close to the turn of the twelfthcentury.The refinedtechnique of these frescoesmay point to a
in "monumental" trendare detectable,moreover, the frescoesof Vardzia in Georgia,which,on the evidence of the Bagratids' portraitsincluded in the decoration,should be dated between 1184 and 1186. See S. iskusstva (Moscow, 1963), 220ff.,pls. 94-95; G. Gaprindaivili, Vardzia Amiranaivili, Istorija gruzinskogo 235f. (Leningrad,1975); Djuri6, "La peinturemurale byzantine" (note 72 supra), I -rxs 130M. G. Sotiriou, 'H -r6v 'EAndos Kac r&s Xcbpas T vaovs &vccykvvncniS waAraxoA6yEitoS KoTr& -ris ser. 4, in wpcitos 13ov axkvax, AEA-r.Xpto-r.'ApX.'ETr., vol. 4, 1964-65, p. 259ff., pls. 48-52; H. Grigoriadou-Caba1-10, 12-14; gnols, "Le d6cor peint de l'6glise de Samari en Mess6nie," CahArch, 20 (1970), 177ff.,figs. 'T IEpisp 282f.; K. Kalokyris, BuLarival iKAilaait "Middle Byzantine Fresco Painting," 137ff., Skawran, (Thessaloniki, 1973), 49ff.The frescoesare in a very poor state of preservation. MEOaaTvfaS Mrrporw6ecos op. 260; Grigoriadou-Cabagnols, cit., 190. Maria wraAatoX6yEtioS 1a1 Cf. Sotiriou, 'H scholar to point out the outstandingquality of these frescoes. the first wptrp'ios Sotiriouwas &vayivv1liS,

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

lth-12th C'S

119

the wall paintingsin the narthexare somewhat origin.By contrast, metropolitan in inferior qualityand probablya littlelaterin date thanthosein themainchurch.'32 the churchof evidence concerning In view of the total absence of documentary Samarina it is impossibleto formulatevalid hypothesesregardingits donors. decoration the church, of architecture sculptural the and Nevertheless, sophisticated to combined with the remarkablequality of the paintings,testify the presence of a metropolitan artistin this provincialarea of the southern Peloponnese. An exampleofthe "monumental" trendinAtticais providedby the smallchurch of St. Nicholas in Chalidou,133whereonly the poorlypreservedcupola decoration is stillvisible.It includesa bust of the Pantokrator surrounded a zone containby medallionswith the Virgin,the Hetoimasia of the Throne,and fourangels, ing as well as two tetramorphs, seraphim, two and severalthrones. the druma few In of prophetsare discernible. fragments The Pantokrator in (fig.85) is imposing appearance,enhancedby the full,simple formsof the garments.The severe symmetry the figure of and the ratherbroad face with regularfeaturesand a sorrowful of expressionanticipatedevelopments the thirteenth The same applies to the ArchangelGabriel flanking the century. has face Virginin the dome (fig.87). The figure a manly,broad-featured withlarge a resoluteexpression, and an unusuallystrongjaw, whichset it apart from eyes, the ethereal,overly graceful,and manneristangels of the "dynamic" and "art nouveau" trends.A datingin the last quarterof the twelfth century may be suggestedforthesefrescoes. The "monumental"style can be considered reactionto the impassewhichhad a been reachedby the end of the Comnenianperiod.This may help to explain why this approachcoexistswiththe two earliertrendsin certainmonuments. further A this dualism is that of the Anargyroi church group of frescoeswhich exemplifies in Kastoria, where some of the extrememanifestations the "dynamic" style of have already been considered.One painterwho workedonly in the narthexemployedthisnew "monumental"style,whichis apparentin the scene of The Ascension (fig.86).'1 At Hosios David, the catholikonof the monastery Latomou in Thessaloniki, tou two scenes epitomizethe new "monumental"tendencies the turnof the twelfth of The preserveddecorationat Hosios David consistsof two Dodekaorton century. scenes,The Nativityand The Baptism,whichoccupytheeasternand western halves of the south barrelvault, respectively. There are also fragments The Presentaof tion of Christon the westwall, below the scene of The Baptism. The entirehead of theChrist in whichexistedon the tympafigure the sceneofThe Transfiguration, num of the southbarrelvault,'35 now lost. is
132 In additionto a smaller scale, whichis partlydue to the restricted architectural surfacesofthe narthex, the paintingsherereveal a different color scheme,a moresummarytreatment, and a considerabledeparture fromthe classicism of the frescoesin the main church.Some of the apostles in The Pentecost recall, in particular,several apostles in the scene of The Last Judgment the Episkopi in the Mani. at 133 C. Bouras, A. Kaloyeropoulou, and R. Andreadi, Churches Attica, 2nd ed. of (Athens, 1970), 233, figs. 201-2. This cupola decoration, which has suffered seriously fromfire,was recentlycleaned by the 134 Service. Archaeological See supra, p. 109. 135The frescoeswere cleaned in 1973. The head of ChristfromThe Transfiguration and a detail of the of personification JordanfromThe Baptism were photographedin 1932. The information that the head of

120

DOULA

MOURIKI

In the scene of The Nativity, the elderlyJoseph (fig.88) is one of the most accomplishedfiguresof this group. The ripplingfolds of his himationbeneath the curve of his thighrelatehim to the mannerist of conventions the late twelfth Moreover,the frail quality of the figure,enhanced by a complex century.'36 of highlights,recalls a typically late Comnenian approach. The porsystem traitlikeappearance of the face, however,with its convincing pathos and the anindicate a renewedperceptionof the classical tradition.Such figures tique pose featurein commonwith the frescoesat can be foundalso at Nerezi.137A further of the Josephfigure into the landscape. This Nerezi is the rhythmical integration is indicated by the soft,undulatingcontoursof the hill echoingthe formof his body. Comparedto the empty,masklikequality of the faces at Nerezi, the face of Joseph at Hosios David has a dynamic, forceful expressionwhich points to difference The same holds true forthe betweenthe two monuments. a meaningful faces of the three Magi at Hosios David (fig.91), which reveal a deep psychological characterization. Some more detailed comparisonsbetween the frescoesof Hosios David and for those of Nerezi may provideindications the datingof the Thessalonikanpaintin relate the figures The and stylistic affinities ings. Especially close iconographic in of the ChristChildat Hosios David withfigures the scene of The Birth Bathing of the Virginat Nerezi (fig.92). The facial type and the way the scarfis wrapped in around the neck of the seated midwife the bathing episode of both scenes is similar. Moreover,the young Salome at Hosios David (fig.93) wears the same black braceletsand her leftshoulderis articulatedin the same bizarremanneras that of one of the femalevisitorsin The Birth of the Virginat Nerezi.'38Salome in and a femalefigure the Birth scene also have directcontactwiththe beholder.139 However,the girlat Hosios David possessesa fresh lackingin the scene immediacy church she holds the towel as if it had real substance. at Nerezi; in the former Her functionin the scene is thus made more organic,as opposed to the almost concerns decorativepresenceof the maidenat Nerezi.A last significant comparison and the ChristChild, who at Hosios David has assumed Herculean proportions looks almostPalaeologan,whilein the Birth scene at Nerezi it has minusculeprofrescoa much more monumental approach, portions.In fact,in the Thessalonikan narrative createsout of an ordinary combinedwitha sense ofimmediacy, episodea of Thereis an extraordinary feeling space and atmosphere. meaningful composition. of looks small and compressedat Nerezi. The rendering By contrast,everything character to the landscape and the relationof the figures it revealthe progressive
was Christ (fig.95) belonged to the scene of The Transfiguration communicatedto me by the late Professor mentionedthe frescoesin his study of the churchand its mosaic. See A. XyngoXyngopoulos,who briefly in 'ApX.As.r., 12 (1929), 142ff. poulos, T6 KOxSOAK6V Movijs Acair6i ~vIev pipqti8cOr6v, Kxar aIv OU '' F. "r'r of the 01AovfKi "-6 The recentworkofcleaningand restoring frescoes Hosios David was done by the restorer Zachariou. at E. Tsigaridas presentedthe paintingsin oral communications the ArchaeologicalSociety in 1974 and at 28, the Athens InternationalCongressin 1976; see 'APX.AEAT., 2,2 (1973), Chronica,495, pl. 459b. 136 Cf. Kitzinger,Monreale (note 83 supra), 75, fig.18, pls. 7, 30, 33, etc. 137Tsigaridas proposed a dating in the thirdquarterof the twelfth centuryforthe Hosios David frescoes. A similar view is expressed by Djuri6, "La peinturemurale byzantine" (note 72 supra), 16, 18. Grabar, La peinture (note 29 supra), pl. on p. 145. byzantine 13xas 139K. Eller and D. Wolf,Mosaiken,Fresken,Miniaturen(Munich,1967), pl. 8.

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

11th-12th C'S

121

of the frescoesat Hosios David. The hillsare morenaturalistic shape and color in than those at Nerezi, and the same is true of the plantswhichenliventhe landin scape. No otherpainted decoration the twelfth century-the frescoesof Nerezi to such a large degreean outdooratmosphere. included-conveys Otherfigures The Nativityof Hosios David reveal a verypainterly in approach. An angel (fig. 94) is almost entirelymodeled in light and color. By its gentle mood this figurerecalls some of the more noble figures Nerezi. A preference at for a gracefulface evokes the feeling the painted decorations the Byzantine of of "art nouveau" style. An equally progressive figureat Hosios David is the Virginin The Nativity the (fig.90). She is characterized herrelaxed,horizontal by position, plasticquality of her body, and the tender,human expressionon the softlymodeled face. The noble simplicity the pose and the humanizing of languoranticipateworksof the monumentalstyle of the firsthalf of the thirteenth the century,particularly frescoes Studenicaof 1209,and, even more,thoseat Mile~evoof around 1235. of In The Baptism the pivotal characterof the paintingsat Hosios David is also revealed(figs.89, 96). Thereis a conservative approachapparentin the two-dimensional figure the Baptist and in the flat,exaggeratedmodelingof his face with of a heart-shapedpattern on the cheek. On the other hand, figures like the angel on the rightbank of the river (fig.89) and the personification Jordan,if they of were taken out of context,would be very difficult date to thisperiod.The porto look trayal of Jordanmakesmostof the Byzantineaquatic personifications lifeless and doll-like.In size, in the articulation the body, and in the characterization of of the face this figure, which reflects Poseidon type, retainssomething the a of of of personifications the MacedonianRenaissance.However,the modeling the body and the faroucheexpressionof the face predictthe epic characterof the monumentalstyleof the thirteenth century. The angel on the rightbank of Jordanis undoubtedlythe most impressiveof the fresco figurespreserved at Hosios David and illustratesthe sophisticated The figure also possesses some striking avant-gardequality of these frescoes. features of the "dynamic" style,as seen in the sweeping movement the cascading of draperies.Moreover,the bulkinessof the body and especiallythe way in which the foldsare shaped over the thighto emphasizeits volumehave no parallelamong the pictorialmaterialofthe late twelfth The angelis rendered a surprisin century. manner,as if the painterhad made use of a live model.A cominglynaturalistic in parisonofthe Hosios David angel withrelatedfigures themosaicsofMonreale, one of the monumentaldecorationsof the period possessinga most vigorousstyle, reveals the revolutionary characterof the paintingsunder discussion.Although the Sicilian mosaics ofteninclude three-dimensional in figures a spatial setting, look almostflatand lifeless next to the superbangel in the churchof Thessathey loniki. The angels in The Baptism at Monrealeprovide a good example forcomdifferentiated the modeling parison.140 The two works are further by technique. At Hosios David soft gradationsof luminous colors model the figures, while in
140

Kitzinger,Monreale,pl. 47.

122

DOULA

MOURIKI

are Monreale harsh juxtapositionsof dark shadows and pure whitehighlights noticeable. The painterlyquality of The Baptism at Hosios David is intensified the ilby of lusionisticrendering the landscape, in whichthe rockycrags of the riverbank of in shift color as theyrecedein depth,thus creatinga startling impression space As and atmosphere. was the case withThe Nativity,The Baptism scene combines two main features:a painterly painting approach with no parallel in monumental The robustfigure of of the period,and a renewedperception the classical tradition. of of of the personification Jordanand the organicrendering Christillustratethis strikes aspect. Christ's oval face, with its regularfeaturesand sereneexpression, reviewedso of the Macedonianmonuments a freshnote in the pictorialmaterial far. is A last tellingexample of the Hosios David frescoes represented the head by of Christfromthe scene of The Transfiguration 95). Christ'sface revealsboth (fig. of The monumentality the whole a highlyidealized and a naturalistic rendering. in may be discerned the broad head withits strongfeatures. figure of to of The frescoes Hosios David are difficult date. Althoughreminiscent both the "dynamic" and "art nouveau" styles,these paintingsexpress a severe and of criticaldenial of the calligraphic, playfulconventions late Comnenianart. In worksthat endaddition,thereis nothingof the desiccationwhich characterizes and of the epic grandeur the compositions In lesslycopy the same formulas. fact, There is a freshness these frescoes. in a liberationof the figures space distinguish of at the beginning a new stylistic in this material,which implies that it stands at that will findits ultimatefulfillment Sopo'ani. It is basically the development fromthe older Comneniantraditionthat would indicate features deriving stylistic later. or a date aroundthe turnof the twelfth century, slightly of The style of the frescoes Hosios David epitomizessome of the basic characthe dynamicelementsof a specifictrend in late of teristics the Nerezi tradition, all Comnenian painting,and a search for monumentaleffects, combinedwith a revolutionary painterlytechnique.The painterlyapproach seems to be reserved of especiallyforthe frescodecorations the "monumental"style in the art of the that this particular It should be pointedout, however, modelingtechnique period. but also icons, as exemplified the not only monumental characterizes by painting Weitz"iconostasis beam of the threemasters"on Sinai, publishedby Professor mann.141 The question of the originof the "monumental"style and of the artist who because it is in executed the frescoesat Hosios David is all the more intriguing with thatwe areconfronted a majorwork.The secondcapital of theByThessaloniki of zantineEmpirehas been considered somescholarsas the birthplace a number by of stylisticdevelopmentsduring the medieval period.'42 A work of such excepa tionalqualitycould well have been producedin Thessaloniki, citywitha brilliant
141Weitzmann,"Byzantium and the West" (note 105 supra), 59ff., figs,15, 16, 18, 19, 21, and 23. For see color reproductions, K. Weitzmannet al., A Treasuryof Icons (New York, 1966), pl. 35; idem,"Mount Sinai's Holy Treasures," National Geographic (January 1964), pl. on p. 118. 142See especially A. Xyngopoulos, Thessalonique la peinture macddonienne et (Athens,1955), passim.

MONUMENTAL

PAINTING

OF GREECE,

lth-12th C'S

123

stylistic developments of the period. The refinement shared by these monumental decorations is even more impressive when one takes into account the diversity of patronage and the wide geographic distribution of the material. The predominantly homogeneous and highly polished artistic expression of the
See Janin,op. cit. (note 49 supra), 392ff. 143s

cultural tradition.The presenceof frescoes such high quality in the catholikon of tou Latomou, one of the most veneratedchurches the city,143 be explained. in can The prestigeenjoyedin the neighboring areasiMby the Farly Christian mosaic in the apse of the churchreveals the important statusofthe monastery. This would have encouragedany ecclesiasticalor secular authority recruitthe best artist to available for the decorationof the church. Such observations,however,cannot contradict assumption the that the frescoes Hosios David reflect of current artistic in developments Constantinople. The metropolitan originof the "monumental"style does not need special justification.The "dynamic" and "art nouveau" elementsin late Comnenianpainting had reached a state of decadence whichwould necessitatethe creationof a new This new trendfoundits basic ingredients theclassicalherin stylistic development. the flexibility Constantinopolitan whichwas capable ofreviof art, itage,indicating talizing itselfthroughthe inexhaustiblesources of Hellenism.It can be stressed that at approximately time when the frescoes Lagoudera were produceda the of new Byzantine style broke drasticallywith the older tradition.The frescoesof Hosios David, because of the pivotal characterof theirstyle,acquire a pioneering rolein termsofthe stylistic in monumental developments thirteenth-century paintthus providing one of the crucialmissinglinks.A discovery like this may ining, dicate that the new monumental style of the thirteenth centurywas born in the criticalyearsbeforethe fall of the capital of the Empire to the Crusaders. A survey of the principalmonuments twelfth-century of Greece leads to two main conclusions.First, the decorationof churchesof modest scale, with very few exceptions,is usually connectedwith the initiativeof individuals,probably or officials prosperous of members the local society,or monasticcomgovernment munities.The originalfunction the painted churchesis not always clear. It is of difficult decide in each case whetherthey served as parish churches,private to commemorative eitherprivately churches,or as catholika of small monasteries, owned or underthe chargeof a charisticarios. answerto thisquestioncould be An facilitated fieldwork,especiallyin thecase ofchurches situatedin towns.In many by instancesthe funerary function some of these twelfth-century of churchesmay be as implied by the presenceof tombs,145 is also indicated by their modest scale. Thus, we note a different approach fromthe eleventhcentury,which was connected with the creationof large monastic establishments, has already been as indicated. A second conclusionis that twelfth-century monumentalpainting in Greece is of a generally high quality and, in most cases, reflectsthe latest

Cf. 144 A. Grabar,La peinture en religieuse Bulgarie (Paris, 1928), 80, pl. Inii;A. Xyngopoulos,"Sur l'icone bilat6ralede Poganovo," CahArch,12 (1962), 341ff. 145 Research on this problemhas still to be done with regardto the churches of this period. For instance, in the churchof Chortiatisa funerary plaque withthe name of Michael Asan Palaeologos may implythe use of the churchforburials since an earlierperiod. This plaque will be published by G. Velenis.

124

DOULA

MOURIKI

is twelfth diversified century in contrastto the strongly approachesin the monumental paintingof the eleventhcenturyin Greece. This phenomenon, which certo of tainly is not confined the monuments Greece only, still needs clarification. Anotherpoint still requiringconsiderationconcerns the disproportionately high the quantityof pictorialmaterialin the second half and particularly last quarter the of the twelfth century.Notwithstanding probabilitythat some of the monuor mentsfromthe earlierperiod may have been destroyed have not yet been disthe remarkableartistic activity during the latter part of the twelfth covered, of centurycan hardlybe unrelatedto the social and economicdevelopments the the increasingnumberand power of landowningfamiliesjust period, especially one must not neglect the probable beforethe Latin occupation.146 Conversely, relevancealso, as recentevidencehas made clear,ofthe growing powerofbishoprics in Greeceduringthisperiod.147 Athens National TechnicalUniversity,
See G. Ostrogorsky, 146 Historyof theByzantineState (New Brunswick,N.J., 1957), 348ff. 147 See J. Herrin,"Realities of Byzantine Provincial Government:Hellas and Peloponnesos, 1180-1205," DOP, 29 (1975), 255ff.