Christopher Walter. IC XC NI KA. The apotropaic Function of the victorious Cross. Revue des études...

8/3/2019 Christopher Walter. IC XC NI KA. The apotropaic Function of the victorious Cross. Revue des tudes byzantines, tom

1/29

Christopher Walter

IC XC NI KA. The apotropaic Function of the victorious CrossIn: Revue des tudes byzantines, tome 55, 1997. pp. 193-220.

Rsum

REB 55 1997 France p. 193-220

C. Walter, IC XC NI . The apotropac Function of the victorious Cross. Dans cet article, l'auteur tente de ractualiser la

recherche que les regretts Anatole Frolow et Gordana Babic avaient entreprise sur la place de la formule IC XC NI KA dans l'art

byzantin. Il fournit un important rpertoire d'exemplaires de cette formule dans divers contextes, ainsi que des lgendes ou des

acronymes qui peuvent la remplacer ou la complter. Il rejette l'hypothse qu'elle ait t originellement associe la pratique

eucharistique et la propagande iconoclaste. En suivant l'volution de son usage, il observe que son emploi premier, pour

affirmer une victoire, gnralement mais non ncessairement impriale, a conduit des pratiques apotropaques. Bien que

certains des acronymes, qui de plus en plus frquemment accompagnent la formule dans l'art byzantin tardif, soient difficiles

dchiffrer, l'auteur ne considre pas qu'ils aient t conus en rgle gnrale comme des nigmes.

Abstract

In this article the author attempts to bring up to date the research undertaken by the late Anatole Frolow and the late Gordana

Babic on the place of the formula IC XC NI in Byzantine art. He provides an extended repertory of representations of this

formula in different media, together with other legends or acronyms which may replace or supplement it. He rejects its early

association with Eucharistie practice and Iconoclast propaganda. In tracing the development of its use, he observes that its earlyexploitation as an affirmation of victory, usually but not necessarily imperial, gave way to apotropaic practices. Although some of

the acronyms which increasingly accompanied the formula in later Byzantine art are hard to decode, the author does not consider

that they were intended regularly to be arcane.

Citer ce document / Cite this document :

Walter Christopher. IC XC NI KA. The apotropaic Function of the victorious Cross. In: Revue des tudes byzantines, tome 55,

1997. pp. 193-220.

http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/rebyz_0766-5598_1997_num_55_1_1940
http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/author/auteur_rebyz_98http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/rebyz_0766-5598_1997_num_55_1_1940http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/rebyz_0766-5598_1997_num_55_1_1940http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/author/auteur_rebyz_98


2/29

IC XC NI THE APOTROPAIC FUNCTIONOF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS

Christopher WALTER*

In Memory of Anatole Frolow and Gordana BabicRsum. In this article the author attempts to bring up to date the research undertakenby the late Anatole Frolow and the late Gordana Babic on the place of the formula IC XCNI in Byzantine art. He provides an extended repertory of representations of thisformula in different media, together with other legends or acronyms which may replace orsupplement it. He rejects its early association with Eucharistie practice and Iconoclastpropaganda. In tracing the development of its use, he observes that its early exploitationas an affirmation of victory, usually but not necessarily imperial, gave way to apotropaicpractices. Although some of the acronyms which increasingly accompanied the formula inlater Byzantine art are hard to decode, the author does not consider that they wereintended regularly to be arcane.It may come as a surprise to the passerby in an Athenian subway whenhe observes, among the panoply of graffiti , the letters IC XC NI KAplaced between the arms of a cross. It is less surprising to find the samedevice imprinted on the prosphora used in the Greek liturgy. Theproblem here is rather to know when the practice began. The device iscertainly ancient, and its basic meaning - Jesus Christ conquers - has notchanged. Nevertheless, it has been used with varying connotations and indifferent contexts, to which may be related the medium in which itappears. It is now forty years since A. Frolow published what is still thebest general study of the device '. Curiously a number of scholars who

* I gratefully acknowledge help received from Suzy Dufrenne (Paris), Nicole Thierry(tampes), Gojko Subotic and Radivoj Radie (Belgrade) and George Gerov (Sofia). ForGreek accentuation I follow the conventional rules for Byzantine texts.1. A. Frolow, IC XC N I , Byzantiiwslavica 17, 1956, p. 98-1 13.Revue des tudes Byzantines 5.\ 1997, p. 193-220.


3/29

194 CHRISTOPHERWALTERhave written on one or other aspect of the device since Frolow's timewere apparently unaware of the existence of his study. Their ignoranceof it may be in part responsible for the implausible nature of some oftheir proposals. Furthermore, much new material is now available thatwas not so in Frolow's time. It seems, therefore, that an attempt at a newsynthesis is justified. The uses to which the device was put will begrouped according to the medium in which it appears. Although adeveloped repertory is provided, the author does not, of course, claimthat it is exhaustive.The origins of the device

The Cross, whether represented figuratively or merely as a sign, wasperhaps the most pervasive subject in Byzantine art 2. Like its relics andlike the gesture of the sign of the cross, it was deemed to be powerfulapotropaically. The earliest legend with which the Cross was combinedwas probably Constantine's celebrated formula : 3. Thislegend, the first to be stamped in Greek characters on Byzantine coins,was used on ihefollis of Constans II from 641 to 658 4 and recurs evenas late as the reign of Basil II on the miliaresion 5. It may be observed ona cross at the entrance to a ruined church at Akren, fifty-two kilometresnorth of Adana. The church may be dated by an inscription to 525. 6(Figure 1). It may also be observed, with a cross, on the reverse of aSolomonic amulet 7. No certain date can be given to this object, which is,however, unlikely to be later than the period of Iconoclasm. The earliestsurviving representation of Constantine's vision, with the legend, is inParis, graec. 510, f. 440 8. The scene here is a narrative one, while the

2. For a detailed general account, see Erich and Erika Dinkler, Kreuz I, Lexikon zurbyzantinischen Kunst 5 (1991), p. 1- 219 (vorikonoklastisch) ; G. Galavaris, Kreuz II,ibidem, p. 219-284 (nachikonoklastisch).3. Eusebius, De vita Constantini (Clavis 3496), I 28 , PG 20, col. 944. The earliestreference to the prodigy is made by Lactantius, La mort des perscuteurs, I, xliv, 13, edited J. Moreau, Paris 1954, p. 127. In his account of the battle of the Milvian Bridge,Eusebius, Historia ecclesiastica IX, ix, edited J. Bardy, Paris 1958, III, p. 60-65, especially p. 61 note 6, says nothing.4. C. Morrisson, Catalogue des monnaies byzantines de la Bibliothque Nationale,Paris 1970, p. 331.5. ibidem, p. 609.6. Tabula imperii biz.antini, V, Kilikien und Isaurien, edited F. Hild and II.Hei.enkemper, Vienna 1990, 1, p. 168-169, 2, fig. 40.7. . Thierry, Mentalit et formulation iconoclastes en Anatolie, Journal des savants,avril-juin 1976, p. 101-104 ; Eadem, Le culte de la Croix dans l'empire byzantin du Vilesicle au Xe sicle dans ses rapports avec la guerre contre l'infidle. Nouveaux tmoignages archologiques, Rivista di studi bizantini i slavi, Miscellanea Agostino Pertusi, 1 ,1980, p. 215, fig. 7.8. H. Omont, Fac-simils des miniatures des plus anciens manuscrits grecs de laBibliothque Nationale, Paris 1902, plate LIX, p. 31 (about 880). Constantine's visionwas not often represented, but see the late example (dated 1466) in the church of the HolyCross, Platanistasa, Cyprus, A. et J. Stylianou, By This Conquer, Nicosia 1971, p. 69


4/29

THE APOTROPAIC FUNCTION OF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS 1 95two crosses with the IC XC NI A legend in the same manuscript, f. Bvand f. C, are rather to be interpreted as apotropaic 9. This matter will bediscussed later. The manuscript dates from about 880, but the device wascertainly already being used before that date and was beginning toreplace the Constantinian formula. Frolow wrote of a simplechangement de graphie l0 . However, even if this explanation isplausible for its origin, the practice of abbreviating Jesus Christ and ofplacing the letters between the arms of the cross, while not universal,was too common not to have been deliberately standardized. When thetemple of Philae in Egypt was converted into a Christian church underJustinian, a cross was carved by the door of the nave on the south sideand beneath it the legend : . Clearly this isclose to the device". Another Justinianic monument is the cistern atMadaba, with the device represented at each angle, and a dedicatoryinscription : " ' 12. Frolow was sceptical, perhaps unduly so, as to theauthenticity of the Justinianic crosses 13. For him the earliest authenticexample of the device occurs in an inscription commemorating therestoration of the ramparts of Constantinople under Leo III andConstantine IV in 741/2 14. Frolow did not know that they alsointroduced the device on their joint silver miliaresion, minted after thecoronation of Constantine IV as co-emperor on March 31st, 720 15.The device on coinage

At the beginning of the eighth century Byzantine emperors had thelegend victoria Augusti stamped on their coins 16. This was the case forPhilippicus Bardanus (711-713), Anastasius II (713-715), Theodosius III(715-717), and, on his solidi, for Leo III (717-741) 17. Leo's introductionfig. 2. In a segment of the sky the legend EN accompanies a cross madeup of stars.9. Ibidem (Omont) plates XVII, XVIII, p. 12-13.10. Frolow, art. cit. (note 1), p. 102.I 1 . See below, note 104.12 . H. Leclercq, Madaba, DACL 10 (1931), 860; P. Gatier, Inscriptions de laJordanie. Il, Rgion centrale, Paris 1986, p. 126-127 ; M. Piccirillo, Chiese e mosaici diMadaba, Jerusalem 1989, p. 118. neither Gatier nor Piccirillo takes up the question whether the device is later in date than the inscription.13 . Frolow, art. cit. (note 1), p. 10 9 note 66.14 . H. Lietzmann, Die Landmauer von Konstantinopel, Berlin 1929, p. 31 , n 13,referring to A. Van Millingen, Byzantine Constantinople, the Walls of the City andAdjoining Historical Sites, London 1899, p. 98. In Van Millingen's time the tower hadalready been destroyed, so that the inscription was only known from a photograph.Van Millingen notes another example of the device, p. 101, accompanying another restoration of the walls after the earthquake of 995.15. Morrisson. op . cit. (note 4), p. 450-45 1 .16. Ibidem, p. 437-439.17. Ibidem, p. 445-447.


5/29

196 CHRISTOPHERWALTERof the cross and IC XC NI exclusively on the silver miliaresion, nodoubt minted after his son's coronation for a largesse, started a precedentwhich was followed regularly by his successors on the same occasion :Constantine V (741-755) with Leo18, Artabasdus (742-743) withNicephorus l9, Leo IV (775-778) with Constantine20, and Constantine VIwith Irene21. For Nicephorus I the miliaresion is not known. However,he had our device stamped on the solidus and tremissis 22. The practice ofstamping the device on the silver miliaresion was taken up again byMichael I (811-813) with Theophylact 23, by Leo V (813-820) withConstantine24, by Michael II (820-829) with Theophilus25, byTheophilus (829-842) with Constantine 26, his elder son who died young.After Constantine's death, Theophilus continued to mint the silvermiliaresion but with his name alone, a departure from earlier practice 21Thus a century after its inception either the original practice ofminting the silver miliaresion when a co-emperor was crowned was nolonger considered to be relevant or its original purpose had beenforgotten. Nevertheless our device continued to be stamped on coins forsome time. Michael III (842-867) used it on his miliaresion, bearing hisname alone or also those of his mother Theodora and his aunt Thecla28.Basil I (867-886) associated his elder son Constantine (died 879) withhim but not his younger son Leo29. Leo VI (886-912) figured alone orwith his son Constantine30. Alexander I (912-913) figured alone31. ForConstantine VII (913-959) five types of miliaresion with the device areknown : Constantine figures alone or with a co-emperor32. There is nomiliaresion for Romanus II (959-963) 33 . There are several types forBasil II (963-1025), which vary according to the co-emperor who wasreigning at the time 34. There also exists for Basil II, as already noted, avariant with the Constantinian formula.The miliaresion disappeared after 1080, along with the gold nomisma.Moreover, it was not replaced subsequently to Alexius I's coinage

1 8. Ibidem, p. 469.19. Ibidem, p. 480.20. Ibidem, p. 486.21. Ibidem, p. 492.22. Ibidem, p. 499-500.23. Ibidem, p. 503.24. Ibidem, p. 507.25. Ibidem, p. 520.26. Ibidem, p. 525.27. Ibidem, p. 526. According to Ph . Grierson, Byzantine Coinage, Washington DC1983, p. 10, the miliaresion now became a regular part of the currency.28. Ibidem, p. 534-535.29. Ibidem, p. 543.30. Ibidem, p. 553.3 1 . Ibidem, p. 559.32. Ibidem, p. 571-573.33. Ibidem, p. 580.34. Ibidem p. 591,595, 609.


6/29

THE APOTROPAIC FUNCTION OF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS 1 97reform of 109235. For the intermediate decades between Basil IPs deathand 1 080 the miliaresion was minted but our device was replaced by aninvocation of the Virgin. Finally attention should be drawn to a puzzlinganonymous coin, which Hendy attributed to the early years of the reignof Alexius I (1081-1092) 36. It has on its obverse a representation ofChrist's bust, and on the reverse our device.A survey, however tedious, of all the imperial mintings which usedour device has the advantage of enabling us to make confidently somepositive as well as negative affirmations. First of all, while not excludingnecessarily the use of our device in more restrictively religious contexts,it was certainly exploited imperially, for it is notorious that coins wereone of the principal instruments of imperial propaganda. However, totake the step, as some scholars have done, of attributing the introductionof our device on the silver miliaresion to Iconoclast emperors istemerarious. Constantine IV and his father Leo III admittedly espousedthe Iconoclast cause. However, as Ccile Morrisson has pointed out, thesilver miliaresion stamped with our device was minted six years beforeLeo Ill's first decree against images37. Subsequently it appeared on thecoins of Iconophile rulers (Artabasdus, Constantine VI and Irene) as wellas Iconoclast rulers. Convenient as it may have been to have available animage of Christ which was at once orthodox and inoffensive toIconoclasts, this would not explain adequately why our device wasintroduced on Leo Ill's miliaresion. It is much more plausible,particularly if the use of the device on Leo Ill's coins is taken inconjunction with its use in the inscription on the walls of Constantinople,to suppose that he - and his successors - were affirming their confidencein victory over the Arabs 38. As Andr Grabar observed long ago, neitherIconophiles or Iconoclasts used coins for propaganda purposes againsttheir antagonists 39. A specific connection between our device andIconoclast teaching on images can be safely ruled out.At first there must have been some reason for associating this gestureof defiance to the Arabs with the coronation of a co-emperor. Possiblythe explanation was that the coronation of a co-emperor was in itself anaffirmation that the dynasty was secure of its future, another act ofdefiance to the Arabs. By the early ninth century the original reasons forassociating our device with the coronation of a co-emperor may wellhave been forgotten. Moreover the device may have been losing itsimperial connotations of triumph and victory. The religious mentality of

35. Griekson, op . cit. (note 26), p. 1 1 ; J.-C. Cheynet, Quelques remarques sur le cultede la Croix en Asie Mineure au xe sicle, Histoire et culture chrtienne, Mlanges M.Marchasson, Paris 1992, p. 72.36. Morrisson, II, p. 605 ; M.F. Hendy, Coinage and Money in the Byzantine Empire(1081-1261), Washington DC 1969, p. 75 , plate 2 n 22.37. Morrisson, p. 450.38. The silver miliaresion may have been originally an imitation of the dirhem of Abd-al-Mali (695-698), ibidem.39. A. Grabar, L'iconoclasme bvzantin, dossier archologique, Paris 1957, p. 1 19-129.


7/29

198 CHRISTOPHERWALTERByzantium was undergoing a change. The confident affirmation ofcertain victory, thanks to the protection of Christ and his Cross, gaveway to a more modest prayer for help. This change coincided with thegrowth of the cult of the Mother of God. In order to seek herintercession, her image replaced our device on the last issues of thesilver miliaresion.The device in the Byzantine liturgy

In the contemporary Greek Byzantine liturgy, according to Brightman,the pieces of the prosphora destined to be consumed at communion areplaced crosswise on the paten according to the formula IC XC NI A 40 .The earliest reference which Frolow could find to the use of the devicein the liturgy was in the celebrated edition of Goar dating from theseventeenth century41. Goar must have been following an earlier Greektext, but this has not been identified. There is no reference to the devicein medieval texts of the rite of the prothesis. References are indeedknown to the celebrant making the sign of the cross with his lance overthe prosphora, for example in the Historia ecclesiastical. TheodoreStudite also refers to the sign of the cross over the prosphora, a practicethe origin of which he attributes to Basil (not to John Chrysostom) 43 .Pseudo-Sophronius wrote of the crucifixion of Christ on Golgotha as inthe holy prothesis44. It requires some stretch of the imagination to seehere a reference to our device being stamped on the prosphora. Thereremains only the difficult phrase of Symeon of Thessaloniki : 45 . Should one translate : the Crossor the Saviour himself (is) typified rather than represented ? Eitherway there is no clear allusion to the letters IC XC NI A . Frolow notedonly one reference - and that a Western one - to an image of Christ on

40. F.E. Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, Oxford 1894, p. 393, IC XC N I .41. Frolow, art. cit. (note 1), p. 10 9 note 66; J. Goar, seu RitualeGraecorum, Paris 1647, p. 117.42. F.E. Brightman, The Historia Mystagogica and Other Greek Commentaries on theByzantine Liturgy, Journal of Theological Studies 9, 1908, p. 263-264, especially 28,30, 31b.43. Theodore Studite, Adversus Iconomachos, I, PG 99, col. 489, To .44. Pseudo-Sophronius, Commentarius liturgicus, 8, PG 87 , col. 3988-3989.45. Symeon of Thessaloniki, De sacra liturgica, 88 , PG 155, col. 265-268. See ingeneral, P. De Meester, Les origines et le dveloppement du texte grec de la liturgie deS. Jean Chrysostome, , Rome 1908, p. 305; Idem, Gense, sources etdveloppement du texte grec de la liturgie de S. Jean Chrysostome, Rome 1908, p. 63-64 ;R. Engdahl, Die Proskomodie der Liturgien des Chrysostomos und Basilius whrend desMittelalters, Beitrge zur Kenntnis der byzantinischen Liturgie, Berlin 1908, p. 87-149 ; IIcommentario liturgico di S. Germano patriarca Constantinopolitana e la versione latina diAnastasio bibliotecario, edited . Borgia, Studi liturgici, I (Roma e oriente, I),Grottaferrata 1912, p. 19-20.


8/29

THE APOTROPAIC FUNCTION OF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS 1 99the host46. Honorius of Autun drew an analogy between the imperialdenarius, on which the emperor's name and image were inscribed, andthe host : Ita imago Domini cum litteris in hoc pane exprimitur, quia indenario imago et nomen scribitur, et per hunc panem imago Dei in nobisi-eparatur...47 It is to be noted that in each of the three cases the verbchanges, from scribitur for the emperor on the coin to exprimitur forChrist on the host, to reparatur for the image of God in us. It is not clearwhether or not exprimitur should be translated, like scribitur, asinscribed.It is against this background of extremely tenuous evidence for the useof our device in the liturgy that the subject of bread stamps should beexamined. Since Frolow (to whose study they make no allusion) twoscholars have written on this subject. The first was George Galavaris,who prudently observed with regard to the hypothesis that the prosphorawere stamped with our device from an early date, that of the number ofbread particles and whether the bread was stamped with special symbols,we know nothing that can be proved 48 . The second was JamesBreekenridge who readily committed himself to some rather imprudenthypotheses 49 .The practice of distributing stamped bread, known as hygieia, atpagan shrines was identified by Perdrizet, and subsequently by Dlger,as the precursor of the later Christian practice of distributing eulogia 50.Here we are on fairly certain ground. A stamp in the British Museum,which was first published by O. M. Dalton, was found in Cyprus 5I. It ismarked with our device. (Figures 2 and 3). Galavaris considered that itwas not later in date than the seventh century and that it was intended forstamping the liturgical prosphora 52. Regrettably, it is not possible to datethe object with any certitude. Moreover the use to which it was intendedto be put is not any more certain. Was it intended to be used for stampingbread ? If so, was this bread fo r eulogia or the liturgical prosphora ?These questions can only be left open, because the earliest solid evidencefor the practice of stamping the liturgical prosphora is provided by a

46. Frolow, art, cit. (note 1), p. 10 9 note 65.47. Honorius Augustodunensis, Open, III, Liturgien, Gemma animae I, 35 , PL 172,col. 555.48. G. Galavaris, Bread and the Liturgy. Th e Symbolism of Early Christan andByzantine Bread Stamps, Madison (Wisconsin) 1970, p. 70.49. J. D. Breckenridge, The Iconoclasts' Image of Christ. Gesta, 1 1 2, 1972, p. 3-8.50. P. Perdrizet, vriA ZCJH , REG 27 , 1914, p. 266-267, citing a pre-Christiantext about pilgrims obtaining hygieia at a pagan shrine. J.-D. Dlger, Unser tglichesBrot, Antike und Christentum: Kultur un d religionsgeschichtliche Studien 5, 1936,p. 201-210, plates 13-16. In his example of a refrigerium (?), the breads are marked with across. See also G. Vikan, Art, Medicine and Magic in Early Byzantium, DOP 38 , 1984,p. 69 , fig. 4 .51. O. M. Dalton Catalogue of the Early Christian Antiquities and the Objects fromthe Christan East in the Department of British and Mediaeval Antiquities andEthnography of the British Museum, London 1901, p. 172. n 973.52. Gai.avaris. art. cit. (note 48\ p. 74-75. fis. 38,


9/29

200 CHRISTOPHER WALTERdated stamp (1265-1266) at Mount Sina53. That it was intended forliturgical use is made probable by the fact that the words of consecrationare inscribed around the edge. However, the letters which were actuallystamped are not I C XC NI KAbutIC XC MH 0V.

Breckenridge's approach to the subject was anything but hesitant. Hereadily accepted the British Museum stamp as being intended for theliturgical prosphora and pre-Iconoclast in date 54 . For him there can belittle question that, by the time that the iconoclastic controversy began,the employment of this design (= our device) as the most correct one formarking the host was universal in the Eastern Church 55. Furthermorethe special form of the Eucharistie bread stamp, with its formula IC XCNI ... was being established by the liturgy of St. John Chrysostom,whose fully elaborated program was introduced throughout the EasternChurch during the sixth century 56 . If Breckenridge can support thesetwo statements, he must have access to source material which isunavailable to other scholars. However his ingenious conjectures do notend here. He goes on to enlist the silver miliaresion of Leo III andConstantine IV in his argumentation. He sees in it a sharply statedassertion of Iconoclast doctrine 57 . In consequence, it must have beenminted considerably later than Constantine V's elevation by his fatherin 720, a date when there is no evidence of manifest iconoclast activitywithin the imperial government58. Thus Breckenridge arbitrarilyinterprets the miliaresion of Leo III and Constantine IV as an Iconoclastmanifesto and arbitrarily redates it from 720 to the period after Leo Ill'sfirst promulgation of a decree against the cult of images. Now thatM. F. Auzpy has shown that there are serious grounds for calling indoubt the authenticity of the account of Leo Ill's replacement over theHalki Gate of Christ's icon by a cross 59, Breckenridge gains less byciting this account in favour of the cult of the Cross as central toIconoclast piety. Further, it would seem that Byzantine art historians tendnow to interpret differently the Iconoclast fashion in decoratingchurches: rather than substitute crosses for figurative subjects,, theysimply eliminated the latter60.Sadly, therefore, one seems obliged to dismantle and rejectBreckenridge's elaborate assembly of hypotheses. On the one hand, theuse of our device on coins, not being restricted to Iconoclast emperors,cannot be interpreted as an Iconoclast manifesto. On the other hand,

53. Ibidem, p. 87-89, fig. 42.54. Breckenridge, art. cit. (note 48), p. 4.55. Ibidem.56. Ibidem.57. Ibidem, p. 6.58. Ibidem.59. Ibidem, p. 8. M. F. Auzpy, La destruction de l'icne de Christ de la Chalc deLon III : Propagande ou ralit ?, Byz. 60 , 1990, p. 445-492.60. Thierry, Le culte de la Croix, art. cit. (note 7).


10/29

THE APOTROPAIC FUNCTION OF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS 20 1there is no convincing evidence that our device had acquired liturgicalconnotations at this early date.The device in manuscripts1. The two earliest examples known, Paris, graec. 510, f. Bv and f. C,dating from about 880, have already been noted61. Placed at thebeginning of the manuscript, full-page, they were executed withconsiderable sophistication. Their refined and confident execution mightsuggest that they follow an established tradition, were it not that all theillustrations in this manuscript attain a high level of sophistication.2. Closely resembling the preceding two miniatures are those in the LeoBible, Vatican, reg. graec. 1, f. 2 and f. 3v, which are generallyconsidered to date from the tenth century 62. They too are placed at thebeginning of the manuscript, full-page, and executed with considerablesophistication.3. Frolow noted five other dated examples of manuscripts containing ourdevice published by Kirsopp Lake, who, regrettably, did not specify thenumber of the folio on which the miniature was executed 6\ The earliest,Lavra cod. 19, is dated 984 64 . It is placed at the end of the manuscript.The cross is not drawn but constituted by the arrangement of the text in acruciform pattern, although, as usual, the letters of our device are placedin the angles. Thus Lavra cod. 19 is the earliest example of this practice.Four other Greek letters are added : 13 . We shall return to thepractice of adding other letters later. The manuscript is described byLake as a Tetraevangelion.4. Paris, graec. 375, a collection of Gospels and Epistles, isdated 1021 65 . The cross is small in size and placed in the top right handcorner of a folio next to the title of the text. It is ornamental, resemblingan illuminated initial letter, made up of twisted strands. Two dragonshold its foot in their jaws.5. Florence Laur. plut. 11. 9, also dated 1021, is a Chrysostom 66.Immediately after the title and a note by the copyist including the date,there is a simple one-barred cross. In the corners above the bar are ICXC UC XV, and below it NI 6 nACIN. Other legends, onthe cross itself and below, abound. In the margin, two small crosses aremade up letters. There is also another ornamental cross and a bird.

6 i . See above, note 9.62. C. Stornajolo, Miniature delta Bibbia cod. Vat. Regin. Gr . I, Milan 1 905,plates 3, 6. A new edition has been prepared by P. Canakt, S. Dufrenne and C. Mango.Frolow, art. cit. (note I), p. 107.63. Frolow, ibidem.64. Kirsopp and Silva Lake. Dated Greek Minuscule Manuscripts to the Year 1200,Boston, III, 1934, p. 107, pi. 163.65. Lake, IV , 1935, p. 12, pi. 256.66. Lake, X. 1939, p. 10. pi. 693.


11/29

202 CHRISTOPHER WALTER6. Jerusalem Panagia cod. 1 , f. 2, dated 1061, is decorated with a full-page cross as frontispiece to a Lectionary 67. The one-barred cross ishighly ornamented. Placed around it are nine circles (one is lost) allcontaining legends. The four largest, placed in the angles, contain theletters IC XC NI KA.7. Sinait. 341, f. 2v, the liturgical homilies of Gregory of Nazianzus, isdated to the end of the 11th century68. Our device serves here as afrontispiece.8. London Additional 36 654, a Menologium, dated 1103 (? ) ends withthe text set out in a cruciform pattern with the letters of our device set inthe angles 69.9. Athen. 167, f. 220 and 220v, 12th century, Lectionary, contains tworichly ornamented crosses with our device. They are placed neither at thebeginning nor the end of the text 70.10. Sinait. 221, f. 40 , dated 1175, Lectionary, with, above the headpiecefor the first Monday of Pentecost, our device 7I.11. Athen. 152, f. 144, Gospels, thirteenth century, has a band-shapedheadpiece surmounted by our device72. This folio is neither at thebeginning nor the end of the text.12. Athen. 2509, f. 10, Gospels, fourteenth century73; the device isplaced at the beginning of the text.13. Athen. 175, p. 3 and p. 152, Lectionary, fourteenth century74. Thedevice is placed at the beginning of the Gospels of John and Mark, but ineach case the I and A are missing.14. Athen. 108, f. lv, Gospels, fourteenth century, with a full-page crosswhich serves as a frontispiece75. The letter A is missing from the device.(Figure 4).15. Sinait. 339, the liturgical homilies of Gregory of Nazianzus, datingfrom about 1 136-1 155, differs from the preceding manuscripts in that onour folios the text is set out in a cruciform pattern with letters placed inthe angles 76. On f. 90 they are \C XC NI , but on f. 73 and f. 197they aret while on f. 396v they are 6 e e 6.

67. Lake, V, 1936, pi. 21 , p. 371.68. K. Weitzmann and G. Galavaris, The Monastery of Saint Catherine at MountSinai, Th e Illuminated Creek Manuscripts, I, From the Ninth to the Twelfth Century,Princeton NJ 1990, p. 108-109, fig. 336.69. Lake, II, 1934, p. 16, plate 133.70. A. Marava-Chatzinikolaou and Ch. Toueexi-Paschou, Catalogue of theIlluminated Greek Manuscripts of the National Library of Greece, I, Athens 1978, p. 221,fig. 616.71. Weitzmann and Galavaris, p. 167, fig. 662.72. Ciiatzinikolaou and Pasciiou, II, Athens 1985, p. 40-41, fig. 55.73. Ibidem, p. 148, fig. 321.74. Ibidem, p. 226, fig. 434.75. Ibidem, p. 131, fig. 295.76. Weitzmann and Galavaris, p. 140-153, fig. 583-586.


12/29

THE APOTROPAIC FUNCTION OF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS 203Although this list is certainly not complete, there are sufficientexamples to make it clear that, even if there was no rigorous obligation,the device was normally placed at the beginning or end of the principaltext in the manuscript. However, equally, there are far more manuscriptswithout the device than those with it . Of these fifteen manuscripts, onlyfour, (4) Paris, graec. 375, (9) Athen. 167, (10) Sinat. 221, and(11) Athen. 152, have the device placed elsewhere than at the beginningor the end of the principal text.The formula IC XC without the NI , is also fairly common. Hereare three examples of manuscripts in which the cross is accompanied byIC XC and placed at the beginning of the text: Sinat. 500, f. 4v, aMetaphrastic volume dating from about 1063 77 ; Sinat. 172, f. 1, FourGospels, 106778; Athen. 70, f. 3, a Lectionary, dating from the end of

the thirteenth century 79.Quite different formulae are sometimes used or added, normally withjust the initial letters of the words, although they may be written out infull: Vatican, graec. 463, f. 21v, the liturgical homilies of Gregory ofNazianzus, C 80 ; Messina Salvatore 73, f. 1, a Lectionary dated1172, IC XC VC V 8I ;Athen. 133, f. 1, Lectionary and Epistles, [] 82 ; Athen. 152, f. 11, Gospels, () () () 83.Minor objects

The number of minor objects on which our device is inscribed islimited. As far as I am aware it figures on only one icon, on the reverseof that of Saints Zosimus and Nicholas at Mount Sinai, whichWeitzmann dated to the first half of the tenth century 84. Two earliericons at Mount Sina which Weitzmann dated to the sixth or seventhcentury have the letters IC XC VC 0V placed around the cross 8\ The77. Ibidem, p. 74 , fig. 199. Note that the miniature with our device published byG. Galavaris, ' . , Athens 1995, p. 231, fig. 87 , is incorrectly named Sinat. 500. Unfortunately I have not succeeded in establishing its properidentity.IS.'lbidem, p. 80-81, fig. 220.79. Ciiatzinikolaou and Paschou, II, p. 33 , fig. 28.80. G. Galavaris, The Illustrations of the Liturgical Homilies of Gregory Naz.ian~.enus,Princeton NJ 1969, p. 251, fig. 69.8 1 . J. Spatiiarakis. Corpus of Dated Illuminated Greek Manuscripts to the Year 1453,Leiden 1981. n 159. fig. 304.82. Ciiatzinikolaou and Paschou, II, p. 33 , fig. 28.83. Ibidem, p. 40-41, fig. 55.84. K. Weitzmann, The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sina, The Icons, I.From the Sixth to the Tenth Century, Princeton NJ 1976, 52 , p. 83-85, pi. 108b. To thiscould be added the metal plaque on the reverse of an icon of the Virgin and Child in theHermitage, on which our device was executed apparently in the thirteenth century, A.Banck. Byzantine Art in the Collections of the Soviet Museums, Leningrad / New York1978, n 248.85. Ibidem, 22. 23 , p. 47-48. pi. 70.


13/29

204 CHRISTOPHER WALTERSotirious recorded a calendar icon, which they dated to the second halfof the eleventh century, upon which the following letters are inscribed : 2ZCK,AnriC,eeee,XXXX86. There remain the twoicons, possibly dating from the time when the chapel of Saint Neophytoswas decorated (1 183). Various letters - not our device - are inscribed onthem, but they are best considered in the context of the chapel itself,which is particularly rich in such inscriptions.A single lead seal, which has been attributed to the seventh or eighthcentury, has on one side an inscription invoking the Theotokos in favourof John the Apohypatos ; on the other side our device is inscribed 87.Of ivories carrying our device, the Harbaville triptych (10th century ?)is outstanding.88. The letters IC XC NI are all placed, unusually,above the arms of the cross. The sophistication of this superb carvingrecalls the frontispieces to the two earliest manuscripts carrying thedevice. Three other less impressive ivories should be mentioned : theHalberstadt triptych, partially destroyed, the Borradaile triptych in theBritish Museum and a plaque in Turin (Gualino collection).The steatite of Saint John the Baptist in the collection of the Armouryof the Kremlin, Moscow, dated to the late fourteenth or fifteenth century,is unique89. Our device, which is not carved in the same way as SaintJohn on the other side, is placed above a coat of arms and may have beenadded later.Considering the great number of reliquaries of the True Cross whichare known, remarkably few carry our device. Frolow noted only three.One (n 574), dating from the late thirteenth or early fourteenth century,is now lost 90. A second (n 663), in the Treasury of San Marco, Venice,possibly dating from the thirteenth century, has the Crucifixionrepresented on the face and our device on the reverse91. The thirdn 872) in the Accademia, Venice, dating probably from 1446-1459, hason the reverse, besides our device, the letters 13 92 . Frolow notedtwo carrying inscriptions other than our device n 340, the twelfthcentury reliquary at Esztergom, with the letters X X X X 93 ; a reliquary

86. G. and M. Sotiriou, Icnes du Mont Sinai, Athens 1 956-1958, I, pl . 136-143 ; II, p.123.87. Iskusstvo viz.antii sobranijah SSSR, Moscow 1977, I, n 258.88. A. GoLixscHMiirr and K. Weitzmann, Die byzantinischen Elfenbeinskulpturendes XL - XIII. Jahrhunderts, Berlin 1934, n 33 , p. 34-35, n 60, p. 43 ; n 38 , p. 36; 53, p. 41. A. Cutlhr, The Hand of the Master, Princeton NJ 1994, p. 235, 28 1 note 32 ,

fig. 152,239,242.89. Iskusstvo viz.antii (note 86), III, n 1015; I. Kalavrezou-Maxeiner, ByzantineIcons in Steatite, Vienna 1985, p. 236-237, n 17 4 (no reproduction of the reverse).90. A. Frolow, La relique de la Vraie Croix, Paris 1961, p. 443.91. Ibidem, p. 485-486; Ioem, Les reliquaires de la Vraie Croix, Paris 1965, fig. 48 ;A. Grabar, etc., // tesoro di San Marco, II tesoro e il museo, Florence 1971, p. 26 , n 24.Since the piece is no doubt Venetian loot from the Fourth Crusade, Frolow' suggested1 3th-century date for this piece is hardly tenable.92. Frolow, La relique, p. 526-527.93. Ibidem, p. 33 1 -332 ; Les reliquaires, fig. 4 1 .


14/29

THE APOTROPAIC FUNCTION OF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS 205in the cathedral of the Annunciation, Moscow, dated 1382, on which theGreek letters have not been deciphered 94.

The small amount of evidence which we have suggests that thepresence of the letters IC XC NI on minor objects had no specialconnotation. They were merely an adjunct to the cross.Sepulchral monuments

The cross figured regularly in funerary art from the earliest times.However, the use of our device was restricted. It does not, apparently,figure on sepulchral monuments in Syria, a territory so rich in Christianinscriptions. The nearest equivalents are on a tomb, dated 410, at DeirSanbil, two chrisma with the letters AU under the bar and above thewords TOVTO 93 and another, undated, with the words %.Another tomb, undated, probably from Herment, Egypt, carries thename IHCOVC XPICTOC written in full above the bar and NI KA belowit . An accompanying text calls on the Lord to redeem the soul ofTheodoros 97 .It is only in the eleventh century that examples of the device becomemore numerous on tombs, and these are only recorded for the modernterritory of Greece 98 . A pseudo-sarcophagus from the eleventh centuryat the Great Lavra is decorated with three crosses, all-double-barred ".The cross to the right is inscribed above and below the upper bar withthe letters I C XC NI , that in the middle with X X X X, while theright hand cross has no inscription. Other examples are at the Panagia,Episkopi, Ano Volos (1274/6) l0, the Moni Petras, Portana Piliou of thesame date l01, again at Ano Volos (after 1276), with the lower part of thecross destroyed l02, and, at the same place, with the cross complete (alsoafter 1 276) 103.

94. La relique, p. 526-527.95. L. Jalabert and R. Mouterde, Inscriptions grecques et latines de Syrie, IV ,Laodice, Apame, Paris 1955, p. 130, n 1437 ; M. De Vogu, Syrie centrale, Architecturecivile et religieuse du 1er au Vile sicle, Paris 1865, I, p. 7, II, p. 108-109, 154.96. Jalabert et Mouterde, IV, p. 1 17, n 1404. See also p. 350, n 1984, a lintel, possibly from a nearby basilica (undated) at Tell 'Abd el-'Aziz: ()+() () ().The authors read this as an imperative. Bernand, op. cit. (below, note 104), corrects tothe indicative (). But if is in the vocative case, surely the authors, notBhrnand, are more likely to be right. See below p. 206.97. G Lefebvre, Recueil des inscriptions grecques-chrtiennes d'Egypte, Cairo 1907,p. 94 , n 5 13 .98. Th. Pazaras, , Athens 1988, especially p. 11 4 et seq.:.99. Ibidem, p. 28. n 17, pi. 13b.100. Ibidem, p. 38-39, nu 45a, pi. 30b, 32a.101. Ibidem, p. 39 , n 45b, pi. 31 , 32b.102. Ibidem, p. 40, n 46a, pi. 35a.103. Ibidem, p. 65. n 88. pi. 35c.


15/29

206 CHRISTOPHER WALTERAgain, as on minor objects, our device cannot be shown to have anyspecial connotation, the letters being merely an adjunct to the cross.

Churches1 . Early churches.The earliest datable example of a cross, accompanied by a legendclose to that of our device, is in the converted temple of Philae 104.Theodosius II promulgated an edict ordering that pagan temples shouldbe destroyed and marked with a cross l05. It is well known that this edictwas not universally observed. Deichmann noted eighty-nine examples ofpagan temples converted into churches 106, while some probably, likePhilae, continued to be used for pagan cult. The temple of Isis at Philaewas only converted into a church, dedicated to Saint Stephen, under

Justinian between 535 and 537 l07.An undated, but no doubt primitive, legend in a church at Telanissos,Syria, which is not accompanied by a cross, runs XC NI I08. Finally anundated example of our device was discovered under a ninth-centurypainting in the catacomb of Saint Januarius, Naples 109.2. CappadociaIn spite of the importance of crosses in decoration of churches inCappadocia ", only four examples of our device have been recorded. Itis, however, significant that, in each case, the device is associated withan apse. They all date from the ninth or tenth century, and Cheynet hassuggested that they may be associated with the Phocas family '". InAikal Aga kilisesi, the cross is placed on the wall above the altar. Onlythe word has survived from the legend "2. In Keilik kilisesi,Pantanassa (Akky), the device is placed in a niche in the centre of theapse, with a cross carrying the same legend to left and right 113. In thesouth chapel of Zelve 4 the device figures on the north pier of the arch104. Lefebvre, op. cit. (note 96), p. 110, n 590; H. Leclercq, Philae, DACL 14 ,1939, 700; P. Nautin, La conversion du temple de Philae en glise chrtienne, CA 17,1967, p. 14, fig. 8 ; E. Bernand, Les inscriptions grecques et latines de Philae, II, Haut et

Bas empire, Paris 1969, p. 256-259, n 201, pi. 49.105. A. Frantz, From Paganism to Christianity in Athens, DOP 19, 1965, p. 187;Codex Theodosianus, XVI 10 26(435).106. J. Deichmann, Christianierung II, Reallexikon fr Antike und Christentum 2, 1954,1 230- 234 ; Dinkler, art. cit. (note 2), p. 1 35- 1 38.107. Nautin, art. cit. (note 103), p. 6, 8.108. Jalabert and Mouterde, op . cit. (note 95), II, p. 232, n 414.109. H. Leclercq, Cujus nomen Deus seit, DACL 3, 1914, col. 3185.

1 10 . Thierry, Le culte de la Croix, art. cit. (note 6).111. Cheynet, art. cit. (note 34), p. 74.1 12. C. Jolivet-Lvy, Les glises byzantines de Cappadoce. Le programme iconographiquee l 'abside et de ses abords, Paris 1 99 , p. 327-329.113. Ibidem, p. 148.


16/29

THE APOTROPAIC FUNCTION OF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS 207before the apse il4. In Hacli kilise the cross is placed in a niche in thecentre of the apse. Of the accompanying legend only the letters IC XC ...A have survived "3 .It should also be mentioned in passing that the legend, along withother inscriptions, was written on the wall of the hermitage of the monkSymeon at Zelve "6 . However there was no accompanying cross.It is evident that it was by no means de rigueur that a cross should beaccompanied by our legend, or , indeed, by any inscription. Moreoverthese examples in Cappadocia do not take on the form, alreadyestablished in manuscript illumination in particular, whereby the lettersare placed above and below the arms of the cross. That the device shouldbe placed in or near the apse has its parallel in later churches, where,however, il was not exclusively placed there.

3. Later churches not Serbian.The church of the monastery of Saint Laurence, Pilion, has twocrosses on the faade "7. One, placed over the door, has the letters IC XCcarved on the bars. The other, a double-barred cross, has our deviceinscribed above and below the lower bar. Since this church has beenrestored more than once, difficulties arise as to the dating of the crosses,one of which could, however, be as early as the end of thetwelfth century.The decoration of the apse of the hermitage of Saint Neophytos can bedated to around 1200 "8. Even if the two icons of the templon, of ChristPhilanthropos and the Virgin Eleousa, are slightly later, the legends ontheir reverse are evidently in harmony with the decorative programme ofthe apse. Certainly legends other than IC XC NI exist on the reverseof a Sinai icon perhaps slightly earlier in date than Saint Neophytos "9;the latter is the first monument in which our device is only part, although

1 14 . Ibidem, p. 7, pi . 18, fig. 1 ; N. Thierry, Haut Moyen Age en Cappadoce, Lesglises de la rgion de Cavuin II, Paris 1994, p. 356. In the main church on the triumphalarch the cross figures between tw o fishes with, to the left, the letters HS XC, while, to theright, only X is legible, Jolivet-Lvy, p. 6, pi. 17, fig. 1 and Thierry, p. 352, fig. 108,pi. 1 85a. Jolivet-Lvy' s description of the legend of our device as la clbre acclamationde victoire introduite au Moyen ge dans la liturgie is hardly accurate !I 15. Jolivet-Lvy, p. 5 1, 53 (date) ; Thierry, p. 248.116. G. De Jerphanion, Les glises rupestres de Cappadoce I 2, Paris 1932, p. 594,inscription n 108, possibly contemporary with the church of Saint Symeon, 10th century,Jolivet-Lvy, p. 7-12: Thierry, p. 323-324. No information on the hermitage subsequentto that of De Jeri'hanion is available.117. R. Leonidopoulou-Stylianou, ' , ' ', period 4, 9, 1977-1979, pi. 97a. The cross above the door with a legend referring to the founder Ignatios) is accompanied by a date 1551, p. 234, fig. 96a; the cross to the left of thedoor possibly dates iron; the twelfth century, p. 243, fig. 97b.1 18. C. Mango a;,d E.J.W. Hawkins. The hermitasc of St. Neophytos, DOP 20. 1966.p. 162-163.i 19. Sec :ih(ve. note 86 ,


17/29

208 CHRISTOPHER WALTERusually the central part, of a more developed progamme of apotropaicsigns. Surely this programme was the personal choice of the eccentricpatron, the hermit Neophytos, who expressed his originality in his choiceof other decorative themes in the chapel. The legend of our deviceappears six times in the sanctuary : four times on the wooden crossabove the altar, on the front and rear of each branch (abbreviated to ICXC NHK), once in the niche to the right of the central window and oncein the alcove in the south-west corner of the bema, but not on the reverseof the two icons. In three instances our legend is accompanied by others :in the south-west alcove, left , centre? ? , right IC XC[?] ; on the reverse of the icon of Christ Philanthropos IC XC0C 0V and X X X X ; on the reverse of the icon of the Virgin Eleousaagain IC XC and .It is worthy of notice that on the two icons the older form of IC XCVC 9V replaces our legend. Also, with one exception, in thesouth-west alcove, all the inscriptions are readily deciphered, at least bythe literate and the initiated. Other legends will be noted in due coursewhich are not easily deciphered, as well as a few in which the artistseems to have made a mistake. Yet others occur to which severalinterpretations (but usually with regard to the same theme) may be given.Consequently it is unlikely that these legends were intended to bedeliberately arcane. More probably they belong to a fashion or a genre,with which may be compared the contemporary craze for acronyms(s g les).Three fourteenth-century churches, all on the territory of modernGreece, at Thessaloniki, Kastoria and the Meteora, should now bementioned. That of Saint Nicholas Orphanos, Thessaloniki, datingfrom 1310-1320, contains four examples 12. Around the upper bar of thecross in the apse is inscribed the legend of our device. Below the centralbar are the letters 6 ? T, and to the left and right of it CT(au)POC() () TOY 60 121. Three other examples are tobe found in the narthex : that on the east side of the window in the southwall is virtually identical with the preceding example 122 ; that on thewest side of the same window has the legend of our device above theupper arm of the cross and, below the central arm () XPICTIANO()() CT(om)PON () () m. The crossat the south window of the west wall is accompanied by the letters f l24. These legends are easily read. Moreover the fact that two are

120. A. Xyngopoulos, ', Athens 1964, especially p. 24 ; Idem, ", , 6, 1964-1965, . 93. Largely superseded by A. TsiTOURiDou, ', Thessaloniki 1986.121. TsiTOURiDou, p. 217, pi. 108.122. Ibidem, p. 217-218, pi. 117.123. Ibidem, p. 217-218, pi. 118.124. Ibidem, p. 218, pi. 119.


18/29

THE APOTROPAIC FUNCTION OF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS 209written out fully, instead of being reduced to the initial letters of thewords used, makes it clear that they were not intended to be arcane.The two examples in the church of the Taxiarchis, Kastoria, probablybelong to the series of painting executed in 1359/60 l25. They are placedon the walls either side of the entrance from the narthex to the nave.(Figure 5). The crosses are three-barred. The legends which accompanythe north cross are easily read. Around the uppermost bar is our legend,abbreviated : IC XC . To the left and right of this bar are the letterse e 6 e Below the central bar are three series of initial letters : ,'5 f , and P. The third is not problematical. The firstand second Orlandos amended toi and . The legendof the south cross are less well preserved (and were not published byOrlandos). Apparently they are not greatly different from those on thenorth side : IC XC above, then , followed by ( ?) , and . An entrance-way, whether to the body of the church or to thesanctuary, was a strategic position for placing an apotropaic sign.The church of the Presentation at the Meteora, built according to aninscription over the door in 1366/7, with the hieromonk Nilus asprincipal donor, contains several of these devices l26. In a niche on thesouth wall around the upper arm of the cross may be read the letters XCNK. The cross on the east wall of the south entrance has the followinglegends : IC XC , 9 , , and 6 6 6 6. On thewest wall the cross is accompanied by the legend , and anotherlegend which has not been deciphered: CT CT (?). On the eastside of the north wall are four legends : 15 ,,, P. The second and third of these remains obscure. GojkoSubotic considered these crosses to be associated with Christ's sacrifice,but in the fourteenth century there is no explicit evidence for this.Another church in Cyprus, dated 1 494, and consequently much laterthan the hermitage of Neophytos with which it has no evidentassociation, is that of the Holy Cross near Platanistasa with, apparently,several crosses on the west and north walls l27. A three-barred cross, theonly one published, has its legend disposed in an unusual way. Abovethe cross are the letters IC XC, followed by ; then C C ,followed by . Between the upper and central arms is the legend A K (amend to A ?), and below the central arm .Since the church is dedicated to the Cross, it was perhaps not considerednecessary to place the devices in strategic places.

1 25. A. K. Orlandos, , ' 4, 1939, . 69-70; S. Pelekanides andM. Chatzidakis. Kastoria, Athens 1 985, p. 1 02 (date).1 26. G. Subotic, Poceci monaskog zivota i crkva manastira Sretenja u Metcorima,Zboniik zxi likovne mnetuosti, 2, 1 966, p. I 72.1 27. A. and J. A. Styi.ianou, The Painted Churches of Cyprus, London 1 985, p. 2I0,pi. 1 20.


19/29

2 1 0 CHRISTOPHER WALTERThe parecclesion of Saint John the Almoner at the church of thePhaneromeni, Trikkala, undated, but not, apparently, earlier than thesixteenth century has a cross on the left door of the templon leading tothe prothesis 128. Around the central arm is inscribed our device. Below

this, descending to the footrest, are six legends ',(alluding to Adam's skull represented beneath the cross), , 6666,0, The disposition and number of legendsrecall the device which would be represented on the monastic schema l29.A final example is a plaque from Arkadia, Crete, also undated.Inscribed on it are six legends : ,,, X, IC XC NI 3.This paltry list of monuments provides, nevertheless, the basis forsome generalisations. Firstly the apotropaic value of these devicebecomes explicit in the late twelfth century. They were not intended asimperial invocations for protection against and victory over imperialenemies. Rather they invoke the protection of the Cross against thepower of evil. Such an understanding of the Cross was not, of course,new. However, from this period, our device, certainly the mostwidespread and possibly to be understood as the focal point of a networkof apotropaic devices, gains extra force. Sometimes the older legend ICXC YV replaces IC XC NI K.A m. Also one or two earlierexamples of the multiplication of devices in other media are known, forexample on the reverse of the late eleventh-century icon at MountSinai 132 and in the manuscript Sinai't. 339 133. However it is clear that,from the earliest dated example at Saint Neophytos in the late twelfthcentury onward, the placing of a network of prophylactic devices in achurch was common at least in some regions, notably northern Greeceand on territory governed by the Nemanjic family.

4. Serbian churches.It would be tempting to provide here a list of the Serbian churches inwhich our device is represented. However this would be supererogatory,128. N. Giannopoulos, ! (), BZ 27,1927, p. 360.129. Th. Provatakis, - , Thessaloniki 1980,fig. 270.130. . Kalokykis, ' , 5, 1951, . 338-339. One could also add a curiousslab, built into the wall of the church at Kardzali (Bulgaria), on which, together with otherapotropaic signs, our device is represented three times, N. OvCarov, Sur l'iconographie deSt. Georges aux XF-XIF sicles, Byzannoslavica 52, 1991, p. 121-129 ; Ch. Walter, Anapotropaic sequence at Kardzali, to appear in a number of Zograf dedicated to the memoryof Gordana Babic.131. For example on the icon of Saint Neophytos, in the apse at Saint NicolasOrphanos, and, doubled with , at Platanistasa.132. See above, note 86.133. See above, note 76.


20/29

THE AP0TR0PA1C FUNCTION OF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS 2 1 1for the late Gordana Babic has not only published a comprehensive listof these churches but also a study in depth of the devices used inthem l34. The reader is referred to this study. Here we shall onlysummarize Babic's conclusions. (Figures 6, 7, 8).Babic has listed eleven Serbian churches, all dating from the end ofthe thirteenth century (Arilje 1296) to the end of fourteenth century(Monastery of Marko, Susica, 1380-1382). She has catalogued twenty-six of these devices, in which our legend IC XC NI KA figuresinvariably, usually along with other legends. The devices are normallyplaced in a strategic position : near a door or window or in an entrancepassage, places where evil forces might pass. Of these devices, fourteenare either inside or at the approach to the sanctuary of the church. Thus itis for Serbian churches that we have the most fully documentedrepertory and possibly the most abundant. These Serbian churchesfollow in the tradition of the earlier, more scattered examples that wehave noted, particularly those at Saint Neophytos, Cyprus, theTaxiarchis, Kastoria, and Saint Nicholas Orphanos, Thessaloniki.Inscriptions

As mentioned earlier, some legends have not been deciphered, whileothers may have more than one meaning. However, generally speaking,their meaning is clear, although their frequency varies considerably. Alist now follows of fifteen of these acronyms, with the object or churchon which they figure l35.1 . C - ' Calendar icon, Mount Sinai, Saint John the Almoner, Trikkala, Pec(twice).2. A X - ' ) Platanistasa ( ?), Pec.3. 6 6 6 6 - ' 'Calendar icon, Mount Sinai, Saint John the Almoner, Trikkala,Taxiarchis, Kastoria, Presentation, Meteora, Gracanica, SaintsConstantine and Helena, Ohrid l36.

134. Gordana Babic, Les croix cryptogrammes peintes dans les glises serbes desXHIe et XlVe sicles, Mlanges Ivan Dujcev, tudes de civilisation, edited S. Dufrenne,Paris 1979, p. 1-13.135. Among the numerous lists of acronyms, none complete, see particularly, G.Lampsakis, , , 1 893, ' ', period 1, 2, 1894, . 49. In the present article the acronymsare set out in Greek alphabetical order.136. Babic notes, p. 6, six alternative readings for this acronym, which also appears onsome representations of the Cross upheld jointly by Constantine and Helena, at DonjaKamenica (Serbia), for example, in the churches of Theoskepastos and Saint Sabbas atTrebizond, G. Millet and D. Talbot Rice, Byzantiine Painting at Trebizond, London1936, p. 46 , 70 and at Berende, E. Bakalova, Stenopisite na c'rkvata pri selo Berende,Sofia 1976, p. 53-54, illustrated fig. 46 , p. 71. This last example has our legend on theupper bar of the cross and 6 G on the central bar.


21/29

212 CHRISTOPHERWALTER4. 6 6 - ' Staro Nagoricino.5. 6 - " 5 Saint Nicholas Orphanos, Thessaloniki.6. - Saint John the Almoner, Trikkala.7. 1 - This acronym was probably in vogue before IC XC NI KA. It is foundon the reverse of two early icons at Mount Sina. Babic suggests that itderives from John 4, 15. It figures also on the icons at Saint Neophytos,at Platanistasa, six times at Staro Nagoricino, and there is a slight variantin Saint Nicholas Orphanos 137.8.H - Saint Neophytos on the icon of the Virgin Eleousa.9. C - The calendar icon at Mount Sina.10. - ' ' ' 'Taxiarchis, Kastoria, Gracanica.11. - Saint John the Almoner, Trikkala, Gracanica.12.T t - Presentation, Meteora, Saint John the Almoner, Trikkala, Platanistasa.13. - Arkadia, Crete. . t -

This was the most popular legend. Saint Neophytos, Saint NicholasOrphanos, Thessaloniki, Saint John the Almoner, Trikkala, Sopocani,Gracanica, Arilje (twice), Saints Constantine and Helena, Ohrid 138.15. X X X X - Calendar icon, Mount Sina, Saint Neophytos, icon of ChristPhilanthropos, Presentation, Meteora, Pec (exonarthex), SaintsConstantine and Helena, Ohrid.These legends may be distributed into three groups. There are thosewhich are concerned with Christ, firstly as God or the Son of God (6, 7),secondly as the primary object of faith (2) and thirdly as the source oflight and joy (14, 15). The next group contains those concerned with theCross. Either they are dogmatic, concerned with the Cross as thebeginning of faith (1) and its redemptive function (9), or they are topical,concerned with Helena and the invention of the Cross (3, 4, 5) andCalvary as the place where Adam's skull was buried (11). The thirdgroup is concerned with the apotropaic power of the Cross, terror ofdemons (12, 13). The relevance of 10 is not clear.

137. Cxaupo .138. G. SuBOTiC, Svei Konstantin i Jelena u Ohridu, Belgrade 1871, p. 111. Babiderives the phrase from the liturgy of the presanctified.


22/29

THE APOTROPAIC FUNCTION OF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS 2 1 3Only two of these legends appear to derive from official sacred texts :7 from the New Testament and 14 from the liturgy. However, 12 and 13

recall an epigram of Theodore Studite addressed to a cross at theentrance to a church. It is described as a guardian and the fearful enemyof demons 139. Their composition would seem to be, for the most part,the fruit of a monastic jeu d'esprit.And the game continued, particularly at Mount Athos, where,unfortunately, the legends of the devices have not been as yetsystematically catalogued and studied 140. One late example in thetrapeza of Iviron (1848) may be indicative of the spirit in which theseacronyms were composed : 9 9 t3 - , , , 141.Conclusion

The focal point of this study is the device made up of a cross and thelegend IC XC NI KA. Its primary element is the cross, whosesignificance, according to its context, is rendered more precise by thepresence of this, and possibly other, legends. These secondary legendsadd a new connotation by associating the Cross with Saint Helena orCalvary, or by emphasizing its redemptive and apotropaic powers.In studying the theology of the Cross cognizance must be taken of twothemes : its value as a sign or symbol of Christ (being his principal relic),and its own specific qualities, albeit derived from Christ.As a sign of Christ it was ubiquitous in the late fourth century. JohnChrysostom wrote of its presence everywhere most frequently. It shineson the walls of houses, in books, in cities, villages, in deserted andinhabited places 142. There was, indeed, room for discussion as to therelationship of the sign to the person. Theodore Studite insisted that across signified Christ but did not represent him l43. Frolow consideredthat the distinction was too subtle to be made by the non-professionaltheologian l44. His opinion is supported by the fact that legends 1 and 2attribute the beginning of faith to the Cross and Christ respectively.Another legend (9) attributes to the Cross the salvation of the world.A second quality attributed to the Cross, the power to repel demons,dates back to early Christianity, in which it took over the function of thepagan amulet. Cyril of Jerusalem, when instructing his catechumens,stressed the prophylactic power of the sign of the cross :

139. Theodore Studite, Epigram n47, PG 99 , col. 1796b; Theodoras StuditesJamben auf verschiedene Gegenstnde, edited P. Speck, Berlin 1968, p. 199.140. See particularly P. Uspenskij, Pervoe putesostvie Afonskie monastyre i skity, II2, Moscow 1880, p. 22-26, 180-181 ; G. Millet, etc., Recueil des inscriptions chrtiennesde l'Athos, Paris 1904, n 212, n 275, n 393, n 543.141. Millet, n 275. Sec also above note 129.142. John Chrysostom, Contra Judeos et Gentiles, quod Christus sit Deus(Clavis 4326), PG 48, col. 826.143. Theodore Studite, Refutatio et suhversio impiorum poematum, PG 99 , col. 457.144. Frolow, art. cit. (note I), p. 103.


23/29

214 CHRISTOPHERWALTER ... 45.It is noteworthy that a similar expression was used by the painter of theparecclesion of Saint John the Baptist at Saint Sophia, Ohrid (1347-1350) in the inscription which accompanies his representation of theCross. He invokes Christ crucified as his invulnerable protector( ) 146 (Figure 9).The secondary legends do not, apparently, reiterate the victorious character of the Cross. This was left to the principal legend, which, incidentally,ttributed victory not directly to the Cross but to Christ. In this respect, our device is intriguingly discreet. The Cross was indelibly connectedwith victory from the moment of Constantine's vision, although some obscurity remains as to the precise form that the legend took : or ? The imperative form of the verb is not in doubt. Thus inEusebius's Life of Constantine the formula is used 147. In Paris,graec. 510, f. 440, is added l48. This, together with the imperative formof the verb, was to become standard. However, when Christ's name isintroduced, as in our device, the verb becomes indicative, (), withChrist's name in the nominative, not the vocative, case. The contrast isclear in the De cerimoniis, with the formula (indicative),while, in the acclamation of the emperor, the verb becomes imperative ( ) 49. It seems that, where Christ and the Cross are concerned,he verb is invariably indicative.Although the victorious formula may well have been imperial inorigin, it was early used in an ecclesiastical context, as, for example, atthe council of Ephesus (431) : Christ, our master, it is you who haveconquered ! Oh Cross, it is you who have conquered ! Here Christ andthe Cross receive the same status I5. What can be argued moreconvincingly, in the absence of contrary evidence, is that our devicebecame an iconographical formula in imperial art. On the miliaresionand, perhaps, on restored fortifications, the device acquired what was tobecome its habitual form in the early eighth century 151. It served as achallenge to the Moslem Arabs. The invocation of the Cross (along withthat of the warrior saints) would have continued in battle, long after ourdevice had disappeared from the imperial iconographical repertory 152.

145. Cyril of Jerusalem (4th century), Catchses ad illitminamlos 13 36(Clavis 3585), PG 33 , col. 816.146. G. SuBOTii, Ohridski slikar Konstantin i njegov sin Jovan, Zogra/5, 1974, p. 44-47. 147. See above, note 3.148. See above, note 7.149. De Cerimoniis II, 43, edited J. J. Reiske, Bonn 1829, p. 650; ibidem, I, 69,p. 324; O. Treitinger, Die ostrmische Kaiser- un d Reichsidee, Darmstadt 1956, p. 178and note 70.150. P. Battifol, Un pisode du concile d'phse, d'aprs les actes coptes deBoudant, Mlanges Schlumberger, Paris 1925, 1, p. 32.151. See above, p. 195.152. For example, Joseph Genesios, Historia de rebus constantinopolitanis IV,PG 109, col. 1109 (mid-10th century): the victorious Saviour's Cross is acclaimed in


24/29

THE APOTROPAIC FUNCTION OF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS 2 1 5A clearly dated legend close to ours, accompanying a cross, appearedat Philae in Justinian's reign 153. Here its triumphal connotation -Christian cult superseding pagan cult - is evident. However, when thewhole device is attested in Paris, graec. 510 towards the end of the ninthcentury, it has acquired an apotropaical function. There is no adequateevidence that it had long been used on Eucharistie bread stamps, anymore than in iconoclast polemics l54.The apotropaical function would continue to be characteristic in allreligious media, on tombs, reliquaries, icons (extremely rarely), andabove all in manuscripts and churches. Other legends might modify orsupplement the message of the device, but its basic significance did notchange : the victorious cross on which Christ was crucified, the all-powerful protector against evil.

Christopher Walter10 avenue de la Rpublique94 300 Vincennes

battle against the Saracens, . See Thierry, Le culte de la Croix,art. cit. (noie 6), p. 208.153. Sec above, note 104.154. Sec above, p. 200.


25/29

Illustration non autorise la diffusionIllustration non autorise la diffusion

Illustration non autorise la diffusion

216 CHRISTOPHER WALTER

Figure 1 - Akren

Figures 2 and 3 - Stamp with IC XC NI


26/29


THE APOTROPAIC FUNCTION OF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS 2 7

Figure 4 - Athens cod. 108,1". .


27/29



Figure 5 - Taxiarchis, Kastoria


28/29



THE APOTROPAIC FUNCTION OF THE VICTORIOUS CROSS 2 1 9

J>-,

Figure 6 - Sopocani

'4 '

Figure 7- Gracanica


29/29




Figure 8 - Saints Constantine andHelena, Ohrid Figure 9 - Parecclesion of Saint Johnthe Baptist, Saint Sophia, Ochrid

*** Credit lines : Figure 1, Nicole Thierry. Figure 2 and 3, British Museum. Figure 4,Greek Academy, Athens. Figure 5, George Gerov (Sofia). Figures 6 and 7, B. Zivkovic(Belgrade). Figures 8 and 9, G. Subotic (Belgrade).

Date post:	07-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	patrologia-latina-graeca-et-orientalis
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times

Christopher Walter. IC XC NI KA. The apotropaic Function of the victorious Cross. Revue des études...

Documents