death of theotokos

8/12/2019 Death of theotokos

1/44

www.brill.nl/rart

RELIGIONand the ARTS

Images of Hope:Representations of the Death of the Virgin,

East and West 1

Elizabeth Walsh, R.S.C.J.University o San Diego

AbstractChristianity has existed or nearly two thousand years, yet its divergent orms and ritualsalmost belie its existence. Perhaps the best image to express its reality is the cross, but that toohas many interpretations. Is there any image that can be said to represent all that Christianityintends? Te Death o the Virgin, which was rst represented in art in the tenth century, is animage which includes all o the basic elements o the Christian aith: incarnation, death, andresurrection. Te story o this icon spans much o Christian history as the icon evolvedthrough legend, liturgy, art, and theology. It is an imaginative rendition o centuries o specu-lation, study, discussion, prayer, and devotion. Although Christian unity is more o a desirethan a reality, this image transcends the divisions and separation which have marred the reli-gion and stands as a sign o hope and unity. In order to understand the icon, it seems necessaryto trace the process o its signi cation. Icons o Marys death occur in eastern and western art;thus, they represent a call to be mind ul o the essential unity o the Christian aith. Tisarticle will ocus especially on the categories o legend, liturgy, and art.

KeywordsDeath o the Virgin, dormition, icons, Virgin Mary, Byzantine art, Jephonias

Christianity has existed or nearly two thousand years, yet its divergentorms and rituals almost belie its existence. Perhaps the best image toexpress its reality is the cross, but that too has many interpretations. Is there

1) Earlier versions o this article have been presented at the Medieval Association o the Paci ccon erence in San Diego, 2002, at Mapping the Catholic Cultural Landscape in Houston,2002, and at the Medieval Academy con erence in Minneapolis, 2003. I would like to expressmy gratitude to colleagues who have read this manuscript and offered help ul criticism, Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2007 DOI: 10.1163/156852907X172412

Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144

RART 11 1_f2_1-44.indd 1RART 11,1_f2_1-44.indd 1 3/5/07 6:22:49 PM3/5/07 6:22:49 PM


2/44

2 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 any image that can be said to represent all that Christianity intends? Tedeath, or Dormition, o the Virgin, which was rst represented in art in the lateninth century, is an image that includes all o the basic elements o the Chris-tian aith: incarnation, death, and resurrection. Te story o this icon spansmuch o Christian history as the icon evolved through legend, liturgy, art,and theology. It is an imaginative rendition o centuries o speculation, study,discussion, prayer, and devotion. Although Christian unity is more o a desirethan a reality, this image transcends the separation and divisions that havemarred the religion and stands as a sign o hope and unity. In order to under-stand the icon, it seems necessary to trace the process o its signi cation.Icons o Marys death occur in Eastern and Western art; thus, they representa call to be mind ul o the essential unity o the Christian aith.2

In the early Christian centuries the religion gradually began to de ne itselas certain belie s were disputed, studied, clari ed, de ned, and codi ed. Oneo the central belie s concerned the nature o Mary, the mother o Jesus oNazareth. Tat she was theTeotokos, the one who gave birth to God, wasaffirmed de nitively at the Council o Ephesus in 431 CE. Afer this, devo-tion to Mary spread rapidly and grew through the mystical li e o the church.Tis devotion led to speculation about her li e, her death, and her heavenlyexistence, speculation that ound expression in apocryphal legends, liturgicalcelebrations, and theological thought and controversy. Te death o Mary,

which is not recorded in the Gospels or in any canonical historical account,became a special ocus o interest and began to be celebrated as a east in thefh century. As theological understanding o her death developed, it wasassociated with the belie that she had been conceived without sin, and sothese two doctrines became the subject o intense theological debate through-out the medieval and Renaissance periods, especially in the West. Te theol-ogy o Mary came to embody the central con ict between Christians and Jews, and this, too, was re ected in legend and art. Te glori cation o Marythat developed in the early centuries and reached a peak in the thirteenth andourteenth centuries is recorded not only in liturgical celebration and theo-logical treatises but also in art. Cathedrals, sculptures, icons, paintings, musi-cal antiphons, and chants depicting the different aspects o Marys li edominate the artistic culture o the Middle Ages, in the East and in the West.

encouragement, and suggestions: Irina Yazikova, Brian Daley, S.J., Joseph McGowan, PeterKanelos, Frances Gimber, R.S.C.J., and Derrick Cartwright.2) Te icon is rendered by Koimesis ( ransition) in Greek,ransitus in Latin,Uspeniye (Sleep-ing) in Russian, and Dormition in English.



3/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 3Tis study will ocus on artistic representations o her death as executed inRussia rom the thirteenth to the seventeenth centuries with a comparativeocus on Italy in the thirteenth century. In order to understand the develop-ment o this iconic representation, some attention should be given to thehistorical context in which the art ourished, to the apocryphal legends thatexplain the iconography o the art, to the homiletic tradition, and to thegrowing animosity between Christians and Jews that accounts or one ele-ment in the iconography and appears in some but not all icons. Te story oMarys death was rst expressed in legend, a tting place to begin.

I Apocryphal Legends

In the period be ore the Islamic conquest o the Middle East, the story oMarys death spread throughout the Christian world, as surviving manu-scripts in multiple languages attest. Even be ore Pope Pius XII asked scholarsto engage in research in preparation or the de nition o the dogma o theAssumption, several studies on this topic had already appeared, and manymore have been published in the last fy years.3 Tese demonstrate the com- plexity o the topic, as there were many variants o the legend, which proba-bly began in the Byzantine world and was taken thence to Syria, Egypt,Ethiopia, Georgia, Arabia, and as ar west as Ireland. A recent study by Ste- phen J. Shoemaker has brought some order and clarity to these traditions,and I will ollow his outline o the recension history here.

Rather than basing his study on the theological interests concerning thequestion o Marys Assumption into heaven, as have many o the scholars primarily interested in the theology hidden in these early narratives, Shoe-maker bases his study on the basis o their literary history and relationships( Ancient 4). He has concluded that there are a number o textual amilies( Ancient 32). Among these are two major groupings o texts, a sub-group,and a number o atypical narratives. Te two major groupings are distin-guished by the inclusion o a speci c moti . Te largest o the textual amiliesincludes the texts that re er to the Palm o the ree o Li e, and the second

major group includes Bethlehem as a site where some o the events o thenarrative occur. Te iconography o the Dormition re ects these two tradi-tions. Some o the images produced in the West portray the angel giving

3) Especially notable are studies by Wenger, Jugie, and van Esbroeck ( Aux origines).



4/44

4 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 Mary a palm. Eastern icons represent a censer and some orm o candles. It will be illuminating to present a sketch o these two textual amilies asdescribed by Shoemaker ( Ancient 3257).

Te palm tradition rst appears in some Syriac ragments dated late fhand early sixth centuries. Te only complete version o this narrative is oundin an Ethiopic translation, known as the Liber Requiei. Fragments o this nar-rative have also survived in Georgian and Coptic texts, and a sixth-centuryGreek version also survives. Tis tradition was also known in the West and isound in several Latin versions and also in an Irish narrative. One o the most

well known o the Latin versions was theransitus attributed to Pseudo-Melito o Sardis, dated to the fh century. Some scholars, including Mon-tague Rhodes James, believe that the earliest Dormition narrative was inSyriac. Shoemaker seems to avor the theory that the tradition o Marysdeath was rst written in Greek, basing his opinion on linguistic evidence:

It is almost certain that these traditions were rst written down in Greek,although Syriac cannot be completely ruled out. Te transmission othese traditions in different versions and languages presents a substantialnumber o variants that are best explained by a Greek original lyingbehind the various extant versions. ( Ancient 3839)

Te earliest version o the Bethlehem tradition is ound in early Syriac manu-scripts and also in Ethiopic and Arabic. Known as theSix Books, this versiono the tradition appeared in the late fh to early sixth century, the same timeas the Palm narratives. It seems that the most important version o the Beth-lehem group is the Greek Dormition narrative attributed to St. John theTeologian.4 Tis medieval best-seller . . . is extant in over 100 Greek man-uscripts, as well as in Georgian, Arabic, Latin and Church Slavonic versions(Shoemaker, Ancient 51). Tis seems to be the version known to the Russianicon painters.

In 1993, J. K. Elliott published a revision o the work o Montague Rhodes James, which was rst published in 1924. Te apocryphal legends o theAssumption are included in an appendix (691723). He includes a summaryand translation o the standard texts in Coptic, Greek, Latin, and Syriac.exts related to the Syriac (Arabic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Georgian) are

4) John the Teologian is given different titles in different traditions. John the Teologian,also John the Divine in the Orthodox tradition, is John the apostle and John the evangelist inthe West. Te author o this narrative is also re erred to as Pseudo-John.



5/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 5included in the bibliographical section but not translated. Elliotts transla-tion o the discourse o John the Divine is based upon the Greek edition oKonstantin von ischendor , Apocalypses Apocryphae (95112). Since this version seems to parallel more closely the iconography ound in the Russianicons, I will present a summary o that narrative here.5

Mary is living in Bethlehem, and it is her custom to visit the sepulcher oher son to burn incense there and to pray. Angered by this the Jews ask thechie priests to prohibit people rom visiting the sepulcher. Mary, however,continues to resort there, since the guards see no one. One day the angelGabriel comes to her with the news that she will soon leave the world and join her son. Mary returns to Bethlehem and asks the three virgins who min-ister to her to bring her a censer so that she might pray. In her prayer she asksthat John and the other apostles be sent to her so that she might see them.Her prayer is answered immediately, as John appears, sent by the Holy Spiriton a cloud rom Ephesus. She tells him to pray and put on incense. As they praise God and converse with each other, Mary tells John that the Jews havesworn that when my end comes they will burn my body. John answers thather holy body will not undergo corruption. Shortly thereafer the apostlesarrive, having been brought on clouds rom many places, and those apostles who have already died are temporarily restored to li e so that they can alsobe present. Each o the apostles then relates the story o his cloud-journey

(par. 8).All join in prayer, and a series o marvels occurs. Against the backgroundo a great sound o thunder, hosts o angels surround the house, and many people in Bethlehem are cured o various illnesses. Te Jews learn o thesemarvels and decide to attack Mary and the apostles. At this point Mary andthe apostles are transported on a cloud to Jerusalem (pars. 3132). Tere theHoly Spirit tells the apostles that on the Lords day he shall come romheaven or the glory and honour o the departure o the holy and glorious virgin who bore him (par. 37). And so it happens that the Lord comes witha multitude o angels. Some words are spoken between mother and Son, andhe says, Behold, hence orth shall your precious body be translated to para-dise, and your holy soul shall be in the heavens (par. 39). She asks or hisblessing, and the Lord spread[s] out his unstained right hand and blesse[s]her (par. 40). She also asks him to grant help to anyone who calls on her orutters her name. She repeats this prayer again be ore her death, and the Lord

5) ranscriptions rom the Russian manuscripts are included in Por ryevs compilation oapocryphal legends o the New estament (89, 90; 27079; 28195).



6/44

6 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 promises that those who turn to her will nd mercy and consolation andsuccour and con dence (par. 43). She then blesses the apostles, and theLord receive[s] her holy and spotless soul into his own hands (par. 44).

Te apostles then place her body on a bed and carry it rom the house. Atthis point, the Hebrew Jephonias comes to attack the bed, and immediatelyan angel strikes his hands rom off his shoulders with a sword o re andleaves them hanging in the air beside the bed (par. 46). Tis brings the Jewsto recognize Christ; Jephonias is healed and glori es God (par. 47). Teapostles then lay the body o Mary in a tomb in Gethsemane. Te sepulchergives orth a ragrant odor and or three days the voices o angels are heard praising God. Afer three days there is silence; John writes, We all perceivedthat her spotless and precious body was translated into paradise (par. 48).Te apostles then see a crowd o biblical saintsElizabeth, Anna (Marysmother), Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and Davidsinging Alleluia. Tey see ahost o saints worshipping the precious body o the mother o the Lord,and they see the place where her body has been translated bathed in brilliantlight, ragrance, and song (par. 49). Witnessing all o this, the apostles praiseand glori y God (Elliott 7018).

Te legend o the apostle Tomas is rom the apocryphal narrative attrib-uted to Joseph o Arimathea. According to this version o the story, the apos-tles are transported on clouds to witness the Virgins death. Tomas, however,

is delayed because he was saying Mass in India. He is then taken in a cloud tothe Mount o Olives where he sees Mary being taken to heaven. Tomas asksor her blessing, and she responds by giving him her sash. Tomas then joinsthe apostles who, thinking that his tardiness was a punishment rom God orhis disbelie , rebuke him or his ailure to witness the death. Tomas thentells them that the body is no longer in the tomb. As the apostles do notbelieve him, they go to the tomb and nd that Tomas is correct. He showsthem the sash given him by Mary, and they all rejoice in her Assumption.According to Montague Rhodes James, this is probably a thirteenth-centuryabrication.6

For urther elaboration o some o the moti s that appear consistently inthe iconography o the Virgins death, it will be help ul to turn to the work oAntoine Wenger, noted above. Te early Greek traditions o the Dormition were represented in two different narratives: the homily o John the Teolo-gian, or Pseudo-John, and the narrative o John o Tessalonica. As has been

6) See also James 21618; Por ryev 8990; Smirnova 286; and Lazarev 148.



7/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 7noted, the ormer was the most popular. In his research on the Assumptiono the Blessed Virgin in the early Byzantine tradition, Wenger discoveredtwo manuscripts, one Greek and the other Latin, which he believes representthe missing link between the lost Greek original and John o Tessalonicaand the other Latin narratives that diverge rom John. Te Greek text, whichhe re ers to as R, is ound in an eleventh-century manuscript in the VaticanLibrary, Gr. 1982; the Latin text is taken rom the ninth-century CodexAugiensis CCXXIX in Karlsruhe. Te Greek manuscript, R, is attributed toSaint John, Teologian and Evangelist. Wenger believes that the lost Greek version was the source o manuscript R and o the homily o John o Tessa-lonica. Te narrative o Pseudo-John describes Mary as asking or a censerand incense whenever she is in or about to be in prayer; the narrative o Johno Tessalonica describes Mary as receiving a palm rom an angel. Wengercollated the Greek version ound in manuscript R with seventeen versions othe narrative o John o Tessalonica and ound that there is concordancebetween them in many particulars. In the latter part o his study he presentsthe Greek text with a French translation with re erences to the manuscriptso John o Tessalonica in the notes. His Greek version o Pseudo-Johnincludes some ampli cation o the symbolism o the palm and o the lamp, which will be presented below.

I would like to dwell more, however, on the signi cance o the palm and

the lamp, and offer some urther explanation o the Jephonias moti .7

Te palm given by the angel to Mary is described as having been given to theangel by the one who planted paradise. She is told to give it to the apostles sothey will carry it and sing hymns be ore her. When Mary asks why there isnot one palm or each apostle, the angel tells her not to be anxious, that the palm will per orm many miracles, and that it will be a sign o discernment toall the people in Jerusalem. It will be revealed to those who believe and hid-den rom unbelievers (pars. 23).

When Mary goes to the Mount o Olives carrying the palm, the mountaintrembles and the trees bow, adoring the palm in her hand (par. 4). When shereturns to her home, the house trembles because o the glory o the palm. She places it in a shroud (pars. 89). When John arrives, she asks him to take the palm but he re uses earing this may cause dissension among the other apos-tles (par. 21). Afer Marys death the palm is placed on her uneral bed(par. 37). When Jephonias attempts to upset this bed, he touches the palm

7) Te ull translation o this narrative is in Wenger 21241.



8/44

8 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 and his hands are cut off to the elbows (par. 39). Afer he con esses Christand is cured, Peter gives him a lea rom the palm, which later heals the Jews who had been struck blind (par. 44). Te palm, then, is a very signi cantmoti in the narrative. It is a divine plant that witnesses to the holiness oMary and to the power o God.

Te palm is not a moti in the Russian icons, but the candles and lampsare. When Mary calls her relatives and riends and asks them to stay with heruntil the time o her death, she asks that each o them take a new lamp(Wenger explains this as one newly lled with oil) and that they not let thelamps be extinguished during these three days (par. 13). Te lamps are men-tioned again when she speaks to the apostles. Peter remarks on the impor-tance o the earthly lamps and extends the symbolism o these lamps bycommenting on the celestial lamps to be carried by the virgins, whose wickssymbolize the spiritual person, and nally on the light o Marys lamp, whichhas lled the universe and will not be extinguished until the end o the world(par. 31).8

Another moti to be dealt with here is the episode o the Jews hostilitytoward Mary. In an article on the social, political, and religious tensionsbetween Jews and Christians in late antiquity, which seem to be re ectedespecially in the Dormition narratives, Stephen Shoemaker discusses an anti- Jewish legend embedded in almost all o the early narratives o the Virgins

Dormition.9

Te most recurrent story is that o Jephonias who attempts toattack the Virgins body as the apostles are carrying it to the tomb.It is Shoemakers contention that such stories, although not historically

accurate in themselves, do re ect the animosity and con ict that existedbetween Jews and Christians in the early Christian centuries, especially inthe East. Te earliest Dormition stories laid important oundations or [the]anti-Jewish aspect o medieval Marian piety (Let Us Go 776). Tese nar-ratives rst appeared around the year 500, when they almost simultaneouslyappear in Egypt, Syria, and Palestine (Let Us Go 777). Tere was intensedisagreement between Jews and Christians on the subject o Marys virgin-ity. Jewish teachers rejected the Christian claim that Christ was born o a

8) In the Russian version o John o Tessalonica, Peter says that the light o their candles willillumine the whole world and will not be extinguished (Por ryev 288).9) Let Us Go 775823. O the over sixty narratives o the Virgins Dormition survivingrom be ore the tenth century, only one omits the canonical anti-Jewish scenes, which invadeeven the Dormitions iconography (776).



9/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 9 virgin: Tis claim was persistently challenged by the Jews throughout lateantiquity and the Middle Ages, who insisted that Christ was a bastard andMary hardly a virgin, but a woman o somewhat questionable morals whohad conceived out o wedlock (Let Us Go 790).

II Christian-Jewish Con ict

o the Jewish mind, it was not only inconceivable but blasphemous even toantasize that the in nite and transcendent God could take esh, becomeincarnate, and be born o a human mother. Belie in the incarnation is thecentral claim o Christians, and it is understandable that Jewish scholars would nd this unacceptable. Te God o Israel as presented in the Hebrewscriptures is the creator, the ruler, the lawgiver who governs the universe. Heis re erred to asha-elohim (the deity), and as adonai (my lord and master).He also has a proper name, only the consonants o which are known: yod, he,waw, he. Tis etragrammaton is an oblique way o naming God, and the pronunciation is not known (Samuelson 1516).10 When it was spoken, thename wasYahve. But so holy and awesome was He that His name itsel hadorce and power, and it was unbecoming and even sin ul or man to pro-nounce it . . . Only the High Priest might pronounce it, and only on one dayin the year, that on the Day o Atonement (Sandmel, Judaism 168). Te ideathat Jesus o Nazareth is God was and is a stumbling block to the Jews. AsSamuel Sandmel asserts so clearly:

When we Jews have understood Christian explanations, and when wehave not, we have consistently rejected the Christian claims about Jesus. We have not believed that Jesus was the Messiah; we have not believedthat the Logos became incarnate as Jesus; we have not believed that Jesus was, or is, the very Godness o God.11 (We Jews 44)

In the same context, he comments on the act that, although at presentChristians are open to receive expressions o Jewish attitudes, such was not

10) Te termselohim and adonai are both plural orms and seem, according to many scholars,to represent a royal plurality.11) In another book, Sandmel urther discusses the leap rom the historical Jesus to the divine Jesus as an interpretation o his li e by New estament writers eager to spread a ervent aith( Jewish Understanding 3234). Te quest o both Christians and Jews to create an identity, anorthodoxy that would differentiate each rom the other, is discussed by Boyardin.



10/44

10 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 the case in the early Christian centuries [when] these expressions werereceived with extreme hostility. Indeed, Christians were so convinced thatno one could be saved without baptism, that the more anatical elt it wastheir duty to convert all men and women, even through orce. In such asituation, con ict was inevitable. Why was the con ict so extreme? AsChristians gained dominance, why were the Jews made a subject and per-secuted people?

Te history o the Jewish people under the Roman Empire, both in Pales-tine and in the Diaspora o the early years o the Christian era, is extremelycomplex. At some times and in some places, Jewish customs were sanctionedand protected; at other times Jews were harassed and persecuted. PeterSch er, basing his arguments on attitudes toward Jews expressed in the writ-ings o such gures as Cicero, Juvenal, and acitus, concludes that theRomans admired, eared, and hated the Jews. Teir religious practices andcustoms set them apart rom the Greco-Roman culture that was seen as nor-mative to the civilized world. Tey were seen as exclusive and thus misan-thropic toward others, yet they attracted converts. Te deeply elt threatthat the Jewish superstition might succeed in nally destroying the culturaland religious values o Roman society is the very essence o Roman hostilityagainst Jews (Sh er 180211, 210).12

It was especially the church, however, that Elisabeth Revel-Neher believes

constituted one o the basic elements underlying the creation o the imageo the Jew (18).13 One o the most provocative assertions, which caused asurge o hostility toward Jews on the part o Christians, was the charge that Jews were guilty o the murder o Christ. Tis accusation was rst voiced (asar as we know) by the second-century convert, apologist, and martyr Justin(c. 100165) in his Dialogue with rypho. Anti-Jewish attitudes wereincreased by the invectives o some o the athers o the church (Gregory oNyssa and John Chrysostom are especially notable) and by the decrees ochurch councils urther prohibiting and restricting relationships betweenChristians and Jews. Te rhetoric o anti-Jewish polemic was at timesextremely offensive accusing the Jews o gluttony, lust, avarice, murder, andevery other vice (Revel-Neher 2027).

12) See also Revel-Neher 111.13) Te development o anti-Semitism, the roots o which can only be touched on here, is a verycomplex issue about which innumerable books and articles have been written. Te reader isre erred to Revel-Neher 50, n. 18, or a listing o some o the most notable studies on the issue.



11/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 11 Tese early centuries o the Christian era, up to and including the twelfh

century, were troubled years or the Christian church as well. Years o perse-cution were ollowed by years o controversy over the belie s o the new reli-gion. Te passionate and angry rhetoric toward Jews clearly reveals insecurity,uncertainty, and ear. In order to construct some semblance o a coherentidentity, the outsider had to be created. In an article on Palestine in the earlyByzantine period, Gedaliahu G. Stroumsa explains the construction o theoutsider as resulting rom the new emphasis onreligious truth that devel-oped afer the establishment o Christianity as the state religion in 380. Tenew centrality otruth in religious matters, coupled with religion as a primeactor o identity, radically trans ormed the status o religious outsiders.Tose who re used to accept Christianity were held ully responsible.According to this conception there was no, or almost no, neutral outsider. Itis this attitude which explains the tendency to demonize the outsider, in par-ticular the heretic and the Jew, which has been so widespread in Christianhistory (Stroumsa 2223).

Tis attitude naturally ound its way into art, as seen in Ruth Mellinkoff sstudy o portrayals o outcasts in the art o northern Europe (1: 130; 2: 32).14 Un ortunately the attitudes o empire and church were internalized in the popular imagination, and a tragic history has ensued.

It is particularly ironic that Mary became a ulcrum or anti-Jewish atti-

tudes. An ordinary Jewish woman, she was so closely associated with themystery o the Incarnation that Marian devotion, especially in the medieval period, ofen included a negative portrayal o her own people. Te Jephoniasmoti o the Dormition legends must have been among the rst o the mir-acle stories o the Virgin.15

Elisabeth Revel-Neher asserts that the Jephonias episode appears in (Byz-antine) art around the ninth and tenth centuries in Cappadocia (81).16 Aferdiscussing several representations o the moti in early Byzantine art, she

14) Te Death o the Virgin is represented in an image rom the aymouth Hours, England,c. 132535. A gure with a bulbous nose is clutching the covering o Marys bier as the apos-tles carry it to burial.15) Frank presents a detailed account o such legends.16) Annemarie Weyl Carr places this representation at Yilanli Kilise in the Peristrema Valleyo Cappadocia in the eleventh century. She also speculates that the inclusion o the Jephoniasmoti in images o the Koimesis may have been in uenced by an outburst o anti-Semitismresulting rom the First Crusade, which took place in 1096. She bases her theory on rescoesin the Mavriotissa Monastery near Kastoria (Macedonia) dating rom the late eleventh toearly twelfh centuries (Carr, Frescoes).



12/44

12 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 notes that the images only depict one aspect o the story: the audacious acto Jephonias and his punishment. His conversion and healing are notincluded. Tus, the image is a negative one. However, she points out that Jephonias is not depicted in a grotesque or exaggerated orm. Although

the identity o the character is sometimes recalled by his pleated hood,no physical de ormation, no accentuation o eatures . . . reminds onethat this character . . . was in any way different rom the mass which sur-rounded him. Nothing suggests that he was hate ul because he was hid-eous, de ormed or satanic . . . Tere is no intention, in short, o moralizingin excess o the representation o an action which was reproved andimmediately punished.17 (Revel-Neher 8283)

Revel-Neher points out that the covered head was a distinguishing eature o Jewish identity in post-iconoclastic Byzantine art (72).18 Tis eature is seenas well in the icons discussed in this study. In these icons, the gure o Jepho-nias appears in the late thirteenth-century Dormition sequence o Duccio diBuoninsegna and in two Russian icons, one o the late feenth and one othe late seventeenth century. In the Duccio sequence the group o Jewsappearing at the end o the uneral procession are identi ed by their whitehoods. Te Dormition mosaic in the apse o Santa Maria Maggiore depicts a

gure kneeling be ore the bier who wears a white hood and is clothed in a redtunic. Tis would seem to represent the converted Jephonias. In the feenth-century Russian icon ( g. 3) Jephonias wears a hood that covers his head andears. Te icon written by Simon Ushakov ( g. 4) portrays Jephonias with-

17) In his study o God-denying ools and the medieval Religion o Love, Kolve discussesmany manuscript illustrations o the ool, many o which portray this person as a caricature othe Jew with his hooked nose. Kolve is currently working on a book that will include lecturesgiven in oronto and Cambridge, England: Te Fool and his Hunger, ypologies o thePsalter Fool, Te Fool as Killer o Christ, and Te Feast o Fools Revisited (10, n. 13).18) For a detailed discussion o Jewish costume and insignia as represented in Byzantine art, seeRevel-Neher 5083. In his study o the image o the Jew in medieval art, Blumenkranz notesthat the First Crusade marks a turning point in the li e and representation o the Jew in the West. He asserts that the identi cation o Jews by certain physical characteristics and by speci-c elements o apparel is not seen until afer the First Crusade. He notes the le nez courb(the hooked nose) appearing in an English document o c. 1271 and a French chronicle laterthan 1321 (19, 28, 32). See also Mellinkoff, who in the rst volume o her study discusses the various ways in which artists portrayed Jews as distinct and different rom the rest o the soci-ety. She mentions especially clothing, colors, headgear, physical distortions and de ormities.



13/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 13out a head covering. It seems that the earliest appearance o the moti in Rus-sia is to be ound in the series o icons on the bronze doors o the Cathedralo the Nativity o the Virgin in Suzdal, executed probably in the early thir-teenth century (Wratislaw-Mitrovic and Okunev 151).19

Historians seem to agree that the appearance o Jephonias in the MoscowKremlin and in other icons executed in the late feenth century is relatedto the so-called Heresy o the Judaizers, which caused considerable turmoilin Russia in the late feenth century. Smirnova states: Te representationo this scene, common in Russian painting o the late 15th century and16th century, most likely derives rom the effort to combat heretic disprovalo Orthodox dicta (285).

Tis re ers to the group known as Judaizers who began spreading doc-trines perceived to be a threat to the Christian aith. Te movement wasrelated to the arrival in Novgorod o a man named Zechariah, or Skharia, who was thought by some to be a Jew. Afer his arrival in 1470, heretical ideasdeveloped; a number o people began to accept only the Old estamentand to reject the authority o the New estament, including the divinity oChrist. When two priests rom Novgorod were trans erred to Moscow, theseideas spread to the court and became popular. Te heretics were eventuallycondemned at a church council in 1504, afer which the Judaizers weresuppressed and their leaders burned at the stake.20 It is important to note that

the heretics were called Judaizers because o their allegiance to the Old es-tament, but there were probably no Jews actually involved in the movement. John D. Klier asserts that the major opponents o the heresy were the

Archbishop o Novgorod, Gennadii, and a monk o Volokolamsk, Iosi , whose attack on the heresy,Te Enlightener ( Prosvetitel ), is one o the chiesources about it. Gennadii and Iosi claimed that Skharia was a Jew and thathis teaching began to draw people rom the aith. Te ollowers were notcalled Judaizers, however, or nearly two hundred years. When these teach-ings spread to Moscow and even became popular at the court, the orthodoxopposition intensi ed. Klier believes that the act that the heretical ideas were accepted at the court reveals the religious and political insecurities o

19) More recent studies demonstrate an earlier appearance o this moti in Cappadocia, butthe article is probably correct in nding this to be the rst in Eastern Europe.20) Riasanovsky 1.11314. Riasanovsky identi es Skharia as a Jew, but other historians omit himrom their discussion o the heretical movement. Catherine Evtuhov asserts that the heresy origi-nated among the clergy (112); Geoffrey Hosking states that the name Judaizers was given by those who opposed the new ideas, something that makes the name somewhat questionable (101).



14/44

14 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 the state. Tis also accounts or the vehemence o the opposition and theclaim that the threat to the aith came rom the Jews. Te image o Jews, bethey merchants or missionaries, crystallized into a personi cation as deadlyenemies o the aith (Klier 342). Tis intense hostility is clearly expressed inthe violence o the angels attack on Jephonias: the scene in these icons isa visual symbol o an attack on the church, which was also identi ed withthe state.

Iosi o Volokolamsk, or St. Joseph o Volotsk (b. 1439), may have beenresponsible not only or the prosecution o the so-called heretics but or the promulgation o this attack through the image o Jephonias in representa-tions o the Dormition. Joseph was a highly learned and in uential monk who established several churches dedicated to the Dormition. He was also a patron o the icon-painter Dionysius to whom some o these icons are attrib-uted. Te prototype o the moti is thought to be the icon o the Dormitionin the Cathedral o the Dormition in the Moscow Kremlin (Nersessjan 16).Te Kremlin Dormition was built on the order o the Grand Prince o Mus-covy Ivan III between 1475 and 1470 or 1480. Te original rescoes were painted under the direction o Dionysius. Te icon in the Dormition Cathe-dral in Dmitrov, executed at the end o the feenth century, is also attrib-uted to Dionysius. (Dmitrov is situated on the Moscow canal, about 40 milesnorth o Moscow. Te icon is now in the Andrey Ryblev Museum in

Moscow).Te rescoes in the Cathedral o the Dormition in the monastery o Volo-kolamsk, ounded by Joseph in 1479, were painted by ve artists, one o whom was Dionysius. Te cathedral was completed in 1485 or 1486.Included in this study ( g. 3) is the Dormition icon rom the monastery oSt. Cyril o Belozersk. Tis monastery, ounded by St. Cyril in the earlyfeenth century, had become, afer his death, a major economic and cul-tural center o the Muscovite state (Soloveva 324). It was also a re uge andretreat or some members o the amily o the Grand Prince Ivan III, whoruled Muscovy rom 14621505, during which time the heresy spread andin uenced the court. In 1496 the original wooden church at Belozersk wasreplaced by a stone structure whoseiconostasis included two Dormitionicons, one rom the original church and a new one. Te latter included the Jephonias moti , as will be discussed below. Tese historical convergencessuggest that the appearance o the Jephonias moti in Russian icons wasin uenced by Joseph o Volokolamsk.

In some recent studies the gure o Jephonias has been related to severalbiblical texts through which he would be understood as the enemy who



15/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 15aims to harm Mary. In this perspective Jephoniass attempt to overturnMarys bier is seen as an allusion to the attempt o Oziah against the Ark othe Covenant in 2 Kings 6:68 (van Esbroeck, Te Virgin 66).21

III Liturgical Celebration

In the course o time, legend was made concrete in the celebration o a eastin honor o the death o theTeotokos. In the second hal o the sixth century,the Emperor Justin II enlarged and redecorated the churches in Constanti-nople in which the two major relics o the Virgin were kept. Tis led toincreased public devotion to the Virgin. wo easts in particular were cele-brated: those o the Annunciation and o her death. Te latter became evenmore important in the liturgical cycle; it was celebrated on the feenth oAugust, ollowing the church in Jerusalem (Cormack 168). In Constantino- ple the celebration began at dawn with a procession rom the Church oSt. Euphemia to Blachernai, an area in the northwestern corner o the city where a basilica o the Virgin Mary is said to have been built c. 450 by theEmpress Pulcheria.22 Te east was made official in the eastern hal o theempire in the year 600.23 One element o the liturgical celebration wasthe homily or discourse given by a prelate to explain the nature o the eastand to stir the devotion o the aith ul.

Tese homilies drew upon the apocryphal legends o her death, upon cur-rent theological thought, and upon the mystical li e o the speakers. Tey arebeauti ully wrought literary expressions o aith and devotion. St. Andrew oCrete (c. 660740) and St. John o Damascus (c. 675749 or 753) bothdelivered a trilogy o homilies on the vigil o the east o the Dormition.

21) See also Saadya.22) Dormition and Blachernae in theOx ord Dictionary o Byzantium, ed. Kahzdan et al.23) Te east was celebrated in the Roman church about fy years later. In the Western church,according to Goffen, Te name o the east was changed in the eighth century to the title Assumptio Sanctae Mariae, as in the Sacramentary addressed by Hadrian I (77295) toCharlemagne sometime between 784 and 791. Tis change o title rom the Byzantine Dor-mitio to the Roman Assumptio also signi ed a change in doctrine. Te ocus o the east inthe Western church became Marys Assumption rather than her death. Although belie inMarys Assumption into heaven, body and soul, was nally embraced by the church in themid- ourteenth century (Goffen 9192), the doctrine was proclaimed a dogma o aith inthe Western church only in the mid-twentieth century by a bull o Pius XII, Muni centissimus Deus, which was promulgated on November 1, 1950.



16/44

16 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 Teir orations draw on scriptural passages, especially rom the Canticle oCanticles, to describe Mary as the beloved o the Lord. Tey are lled withimage upon image, metaphor upon metaphor to express her attributes.Brian Daley has translated twelve o these dating rom the seventh to theninth centuries. Included in Daleys work are the narrative o John o Tes-salonica, two homilies o Germanus o Constantinople, three by St. Andrewo Crete, and the trilogy given by St. John o Damascus. Tese trilogies weredelivered at all-night vigils in preparation or the east (Daley 16, 21). All othe homilists included in this book agree on two points: that Mary actuallydied and that her body did not undergo corruption but was taken to heavenafer being buried. What is especially distinctive about these homilies is theemotional power o the rhetoric and the pro ound mystical presence theydescribe. In his third homily, St. Andrew o Crete creates a hymn that heimagines being sung at the time o her passing by all o the saints and angelichosts. Tese singers praise Mary in the words o the Canticle: Who is this who comes up rom the desert like a column o smoke, breathing myrrh andincense made rom all the merchants powders? (Cant. 3:6). Andrew drawstogether the entire communion o saints in exhorting the congregation:

Come, let us lead on the sacred uneral procession or the Virgins body;let us sing a song in her memory, and let us crown her, who gave rise to

this celebration, with all the honors in our power. And that this maymore splendidly come to pass, let the whole estal company o heavenand earth join with us today, and complete or me the uneral hymn, which I can only ashion in words like these. (Daley 14546)

As Brian Daley comments: Te effect o the whole trilogy, in act, is aboveall to suggest that participation in the liturgical east o the Dormition, withits rich array o Biblical texts, its singing, its use o icons and its Eucharisticconclusion, is itsel an opportunity or the aith ul to share more deeply inthe saving gif o li e that Marys trans erral to heavenly glory so power ullyreveals (18). He believes that the homilies o John o Damascus were deliv-ered in the church built on the site in Gethsemane where her tomb wasthought to have been (Daley 239, n. 3).

In the third homily St. John points to the tomb as more precious than thetabernacle o old, or it contained the radiant, living lampstand, the table spread with li eholding not the showbread but the bread o heaven, not earthly rebut the immaterial re o God. He goes on to describe Mary as the vessel o purest gold . . . the living table o stone . . . and the golden censer, which gave



17/44


18/44


19/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 19at the head o the bed, swinging a censer; Paul is at the oot o the bed touch-ing Marys eet while John, behind the bed, leans over near her head.

Te placing o the icon o the Koimesis in churches also emphasized thecentrality o Mary in the narrative o the Incarnation. Te scene o her death was painted on the wall above the west door o churches. Since there wasusually an image o Mary at the eastern end as well, in the apse, this meantthat the ceremonies and the aith ul therein were encompassed by her presence.27

Te in uence o Byzantine art was widespread. One o the most ar ung as well as one o the richest and most productive centers developed in medievalRussia. It was one o the earliest rulers o Kiev, St. Vladimir (c. 9801015), who adopted Christianity as the religion o his people. Until this time, althoughthe Christian religion had some presence in Kiev, the majority o the people were pagan (Riasanovsky 1.3032). Te official adoption o Christianity had a pro ound in uence on the development o Kievan culture. It strengthened therelationship between Russia and Byzantium and brought Byzantine modelsand orms to Russia. Tese are seen especially in the realms o church architec-ture and art (Riasanovsky 1.5556).

V Dormition Icons in Russia

As Christianity developed and spread in the lands o medieval Russia, icon painting became a studied and treasured art, so much so that the Russianicon is one o the great achievements o medieval art. Centers o icon paint-ing developed in the various principalities, and different schools evolved inNovgorod, Pskov, ver, and Moscow, to name a ew. Many icons o the Dor-mition have been preserved in the retyakov Gallery in Moscow. I would liketo turn to a discussion and analysis o our o these, which date rom thethirteenth to the seventeenth centuries and were created in different parts othe country.

27) Cormack describes two rescoes o the Koimesis, both rom Cyprus. Te rst is in theChurch o Asinou, dated 1105 or 1106. Tis is a large wallpainting on the western wall o thechurch, above the door. Te second is ound in a church in the mountains above Asinou, dated1192. Te placing o an image o Mary in the apse o the church and also at the other end othe church, in the nave, signi es her central role in the narrative o salvation. Te liturgicalservices took place in a space between two images o the Mother o God, representing hertimeless presence in Christian li e (17074).



20/44

20 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 Te iconography o these images is drawn rom the legends o the Virgins

death. aken together these icons enable us to trace the evolution o the icon.Trough them we can also note the artistic development that took placeespecially with regard to composition, color, and artistic ornamentation.Although the basic pattern in all o these icons is uni orm, each artist wasable to express something o his own creativity and vision. Mary lies on herbed, the grieving apostles at either end o her body. Behind the bed in thecenter o the icon and dominating the whole is Christ holding the soul o hismother in his arms. Peter stands by the Virgins head swinging a censer orthurible. Paul is at the opposite end o the bed leaning over Marys eet. Johnis on the other side o the Virgins head, hunched over near her and lookinginto her ace. Te other apostles look on. Tis is the basic statement o theicon. Other moti s are the apostles on clouds preparing to accompany hersoul to heaven ( gs. 1 and 4); an orb in the upper plane representing heaven( gs. 1 and 3); Mary, alof, bestowing her sash on the belated Tomas( g. 3); the intense grie o the apostles ( gs. 2 and 3 especially); the presenceo bishops (all gs.); buildings on either side o the image ( gs. 2, 3, and 4);grieving women peering rom the buildings or present among the mourners( gs. 3 and 4); and Jephonias and the angel ( gs. 3 and 4). Peter incens-ing the deathbed and some orm o candle be ore or behind appear in all,and angels appear in most o the icons in various positions and postures.

Some artistic development will be discussed in the ollowing descriptions othe icons.28Te rst gure presents an icon rom the Church o the Dormition in the

Dessiatine Monastery o Novgorod, executed in the early thirteenth century.wo moments in the mystery o the Virgins passing are brought together in

28) Icons o the Dormition present a unique iconography. Te image o Christ holding Hismothers soul depicted as a baby is an inversion o the Mother and Child icons that abound inboth Greek and Russian traditions. Icons o the Nativity portray the swaddled child lying in amanger (sometimes resembling a sarcophagus), and the Virgin reclining below him looking inthe opposite direction. Icons o the Ascension represent the ascending Christ in the upper

plane o the image. Clothed in gold, he is seated against a circularmandorla carried by twoangels. Below, the Virgin stands in the center o the apostles and several angels. Te apostleslook toward the risen Lord, some gesturing with their arms. Although some elements may vary, the iconography is very stable in eastern Christian art (Evans 181, 186, plates 101 and106). Icons o the Dormition that portray Marys assumption also depict her against a circularmandorla or medallion accompanied by angels. Tis element is similar to the portrayal o theascending Christ.



21/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 21

Figure 1. Church o the Dormition, Dessiatine Monastery o Novgorod, early thirteenthcentury. retyakov Gallery, Moscow, printed with permission.



22/44

22 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 this icon: the moment o her sleeping, or death, and the moment o herAssumption into heaven. Te rst is presented in the lower hal o the paint-ing, as has been described above. Tree bishops are also present, two on thelef and one on the right. Tese are traditionally thought to be Hierotheus oAthens, Dionysius the Areopagite (lef) and James (right). wo candlesticksstand behind the bed on either side o Christ. wo angels hover on a line with Christs head. Tey are preparing to receive Marys soul and hold clothsin their hands. Tey orm part o the upper plane o the icon.

Here the apostles are portrayed once more, this time as part o the assem-bly welcoming and accompanying Mary to her heavenly abode. Te compo-sition is beauti ully balanced with six apostles on either side as each group isbeckoned by two more angels. Each apostle is situated on a cloud shaped likea shell with upturned edges. Teir garments seem windswept as though toindicate the swifness o their ight.

Te gure o Christ extends into the upper portion o the image, unitingearth and heaven. Directly above him at the very top center o the painting isa semicircle representative o the sky. Tere, two angels carry the soul o Maryinto the starry world beyond.

Te sleeping Mary is dressed in a dark red or purple-redmaphorion overa dark blue tunic. She is similarly clothed in most o the Russian icons o herdeath. Tese colors are deeply symbolic. Tey evoke the idea o blood and o

sacri ce, but also the idea o divine love in all its power and spiritual richness(Kaucisvili and Iovana 39). Her shoes are a bright red or vermilion. Her soulis clothed in white swaddling bands signi ying her birth into a new li e. Teapostles are clothed in various hues, both those ying on the clouds and thosegrieving around Marys bed; Peter, however, is traditionally clothed in a yel-low or ochre cloak over a blue tunic, and Paul wears a purple-red cloak over ablue tunic. Different shades o brown predominate with touches o blue,rose, and yellow. Te background o the upper hal o the icon is gold, whichis particularly luminous in the central area beneath the semicircle o the skyand surrounding the gure o Christ.29

29) In his commentary on this icon, Lazarev discusses the work in its relationship to Byzantineicons o the same type. Contrary to Byzantine exemplars, the gures here are at and volume-less. Lazarev also notes that the gures on the right are portrayed more in the Greek style, their aces in the later Comnenian style, whereas those on the lef are sofer and more imper-sonal. Te various stylistic elements suggest that this is the work o Novgorodian masters in whose hands Byzantine orms began to undergo more substantial alterations (3536).



23/44


Figure 2. Dormition side o bilateral icon o Donskoi Mother o God. Executed or DormitionCathedral in Kolomna, c. 1392. retyakov Gallery, Moscow, printed with permission.



24/44


25/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 25 Te predominant colors in this icon are different shades o red (or red-

dish-brown), gold, and blues.31 Mary is clothed in a deep redmaphorion overa dark blue tunic. Te drapes below her bed are also deep red. Christ in goldstands be ore a dark bluemandorla; Peter wears a gold mantle over a bluetunic. One o the buildings is a lighter reddish brown, and the wings aboveChrist are bright red.

Tis icon is distinguished by the purity and simplicity o the lines and theintense concentration o the composition. In another study, V. Lazarevasserts that, although the central elements o the icon ollow the traditionalmode, in other ways, the scene is completely original:

No Byzantine or Serbian master was able to inject into the scene such pro ound and sincere emotion as the Donskoi artist succeeded in doing.His apostles are very ordinary people. Moved and saddened, they havecome to offer their last tribute (duty) to their mother. Each one, withoutany affectation, without any hint o a pose, expresses his eeling in hisace and his gestures . . . Tey look thought ully into the ace o Mary asthough trying to x her eatures in their memory, understanding per-ectly well that they are seeing her or the last time. Teir psychologicalcondition is rendered truth ully by the artist who has represented here what he probably observed in contemporary village services or the dead.

All o his apostles are pure peasant types in whom there is no sign oByzantine aristocracy. Te apostles heads are magni cent ragments othe paintings and witness to the subtle power o observation possessedby the old Russian master.32 (65)

Figure 3 depicts an icon rom theiconostasis o the Dormition Cathedral inthe monastery o St. Cyril o Belozersk, as has been discussed above. Temonastery was completed in 1497, and the icon is dated somewhat earlier.Kirillov is now a town in the Vologda region northeast o Moscow. Its mainattraction is the monastery, which with its churches and buildings is now amuseum. Te icon is in the retyakov Gallery. In composition and orm thisicon is very similar to the patronal icon o the Cathedral o the Dormition inthe Moscow Kremlin and to another icon rom Dmitrov.

31) Te catalog o the retyakov Gallery describes these as dark blue and brown as well as light vermilion, ocher, and white lead (the browns are reddish-brown or brownish-red; vermilion isbright red to reddish-orange) (1: 25557, n. 216).32) Tis excerpt is a ree rendering o Lazarevs text.



26/44

26 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144

Figure 3. Fromiconostasis o Dormition Cathedral, monastery o St. Cyril o Belozersk, latethirteenth century. retyakov Gallery, Moscow, printed with permission.

Te composition o the icon rom the monastery o St. Cyril creates abeauti ul oval that extends rom themandorla, in which Christ appears, tothe Virgins bed. Temandorla is exquisite, composed o our layers odiffering color. Te rst is a backdrop or the golden rays rom Christs body;the second reveals an arcade o angel gures. Te third and ourth enclose thegures and emphasize the centrality o Christ. Te artist has created beauti-



27/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 27ully rhythmic lines ormed by the heads o the angels gazing on Christ andbelow them, the heads o the apostles gazing on and leaning toward the gureo Mary on her bed. Te composition is care ully balanced but asymmetrical.On the lef are our apostles, Peter incensing the couch. On the right areeight apostles, Paul opposite Peter as seven others surround him, two havingtheir aces very close to the bed. Teir aces express sorrow and intense grie .Behind the apostles stand two bishops on the lef and one on the right. Weep-ing women appear as well on each side. In the upper plane o the icon, a moresymmetrical arrangement o apostles, each on a cloud, surrounds a circularmedallion in which Mary is seated on a throne. She leans toward Tomas,offering him her sash. wo angels on either side o the medallion are ready tocarry her to heaven. Directly above Mary is a semicircular sphere whereangels cluster to welcome Mary to the world beyond.

Below, two candles are placed behind the bed. Be ore the bed appear Jephonias and the angel who has just struck the high priest with his sword,cutting off his hands, which still cling to the bed. Jephonias holds his armstoward the angel as though asking or mercy. He is distinguished rom theother gures by his hooded cap, which is dark. Te background o the upper portion o the icon is a light yellow or ocher against which the reddishbrown wings o the angels accompanying the clouds stand out distinctly. Teclothing o the apostles is dark blue, green, brown, rose. Christ is in deep

ocher, almost gold, and golden rays emanate rom his body. Temandorla isa dark greenish-blue. Peters mantle is dark ocher, and Paul is clothed inbright rose.

Figure 4 presents an icon painted by the state icon painter Simon Ushakovin 1663. It was originally executed or theiconostasis o the Florisheva- Uspenskaya Lavra in the Vladimir region. (Te lavra, dedicated to the Dor-mition o the Mother o God, was situated on the Florishevaya Mountain.)Te composition draws all o the traditional gures together within an orb oolive green. Above the bishops are the heads o our angels, two on each sideo Christ. Te angels haloes and wings are colored into the orb, but each aceis a luminous white. In the center o the orb, against an ochermandorla,Christ stands holding his mothers soul in his hands. Above the peak o themandorla, against the top o the orb, three bright red angels, their wingsspread beyond the orb, hover over the scene. In the oreground, be ore thebed o the Virgin, the gures o an angel and Jephonias relive their dramaticencounter. wo buildings rise behind the orb.

Te scene is striking or its precise and clear composition and or the pre-dominance o reds and ocher coloring. Te circularity o the scene bringstogether in a rhythmic unity all o the components o the mystery o Marys



28/44


death. Tis harmony is intensi ed by the colors. Varying shades o redcoral,rose, vermilion, purplish-redare seen in the three hovering angels, theclothing o several women and one bishop, the clothing o Paul and twoother apostles, as well as that o the striking angel and Jephonias. In this icon,the high priests head is bare. Shades o ocher are seen in the haloes, the nar-rowmandorla which sets Christ apart, and the darker shade o his attire, as

Figure 4 . Simon Ushakov. Originally executed oriconostasis o Florisheva-Uspenskaya Lavra,1663. retyakov Gallery, Moscow, printed with permission.



29/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 29 well as in the brownish-ocher o Peters mantle, the light bed covering on which Mary lies, and the buildings and background in the upper plane o theicon. Te olive green o the orb in the background and the oor in the ore-ground subdues the brightness o the scene and also uni es the elements. Atthe very top o the icon, outside the scene o Marys death, is a semicircle ogreenish-blue with stars and two panels o red, which may signi y the opendoors o heaven. Te composition is simple, drawing the major moti s oMarys death into a uni ed and harmonious whole. Te concentration o thegures representing different eras in the story o salvation seems to empha-size the timeless nature o this moment.

VI Representations of the Dormition in the West

Te intense devotion to Mary expressed in the writings o St. Bernard oClairvaux and Dante Alighieri is re ected in every aspect o the art o West-ern Europe. Te imagination o the Christian West has been ormed espe-cially by images o the Annunciation, the birth o Christ, the Madonna andChild. Scenes o the Virgins death, however, can also be ound, and these were very central in the development o Mariology. Representations o theDormition date, or the most part, rom the thirteenth to the sixteenth cen-turies, but some images exist rom earlier periods as well.33 At this point, I would like to present a more detailed description o the thirteenth-centuryRoman mosaics and the panel paintings o Duccio.

Santa Maria in rastevere is thought to be the rst church in Rome dedi-cated to the Virgin. It was built by Pope Julius I (33752) in the ourthcentury. Te mosaics in the apse are ascribed to the late thirteenth century.In the semi-dome o the apse Christ and His mother are enthroned beneaththe hand o God and on either side anked by various saints. Below are sixmosaics representing the li e o Mary, executed by Pietro Cavallini c. 1291.Although the design o the whole is quite different, these ollow the patternin the Byzantineiconostasis. One o these mosaics depicts her in death; sheis lying on a couch, surrounded by the apostles and clothed in a deep blue

33) Te earliest that I am aware o is carved on an ivory hinge rom the Cathedral Chapter oSt. Gall, dated c. 900. An illustration o this image can be ound in Ebertshauser et al. Temoti o Marys death was airly popular in the thirteenth and ourteenth centuries. In thefeenth century, as more attention was given to the theology o the Assumption, the repre-sentation shifed rom that o her death to that o her rising into heaven.



30/44




31/44


F i g u r e

5 ( a

, p . 3 0 ) J a c o p o T o r r i t i

. A p s e m o s a i c , B a s i l i c a o f S a n t a M a r i a M a g g i o r e , 1 2 9 5

. P r i n t e d w i t h

p e r m i s s i o n f r o m E u r o e d i t s . r . l .

( b ,

p . 3 1 ) J a c o p o T o r r i t i

. A p s e m o s a i c , B a s i l i c a o f S a n t a M a r i a M a g g i o r e , 1 2 9 5

. P r i n t e d w

i t h p e r m i s s i o n

f r o m E u r o e d i t s . r . l .



32/44


33/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 33 Te next gure, 5b, depicts Marys death. Te iconography is similar to

that ound in Byzantine exemplars. Mary lies on her deathbed while Christholds her soul in the shape o a little child. He holds her with both hands asshe leans on his breast. Te shaping o her gure and the way in which heholds her is very similar to the shaping o the in ant Jesus in the arms o hismother in the Greek icon o Our Lady o enderness, (the Virgin Eleousa),one o the earliest and most well-known icons o Mary. Te arc in whichChrist stands is surrounded by angels, and two more angels hover and leantoward the sleeping Mary. Te apostles appear on each side o her bed,Peter incensing the scene and Paul at her eet. Above the apostles are depictedgures representing the heavenly court. Tese include King David, with acrown on his head. Behind the apostles on the right appear our grieving women.

orriti has added some additional eatures as well: the two small Francis-can gures and the lay person with his head covered with a cap o the typeofen noted in the painting and sculpture o the thirteenth century (ber-retto di tipo ben noto nella pittura e nelle scultura duecentesca) kneelingbelow the cata alque o the Virgin ( osti-Croce 149).36 Clothed in a whitehood and a red tunic, this gure bears a striking resemblance to that othe legendary Jephonias and may be intended to represent him afer hisconversion.

Te next seven gures represent the images created by Duccio di Buonin-segna (12601319). In the Museo dellOpera del Duomo in Siena there is aroom devoted to the painters Maest. Te room displays not only themagni cent painting o the Virgin and Child surrounded by saints, but theother panel paintings which are thought to have once been a part o the cen-tral painting. Six o these smaller paintings represent the death o the Virgin.Some art historians believe that there was once a seventh, placed in the cen-ter o the series, which depicted the Assumption and above which was theCoronation, which is now in Budapest. Tis would bring Duccios work inline with the twelfh and thirteenth-century mosaics discussed above. Wecan only deal, however, with the extant six now on display in the MuseodellOpera. Tey are based primarily on the Legenda Aurea o Jacobus deVoragine which was based on theransitus o Pseudo-Melito o Sardis andrepresents the palm tradition o Dormition texts (see above). Te seriesconsists o the angels annunciation to Mary that her death is imminent, her

36) Te history o the basilica and details o the mosaic are also taken rom osti-Croce (149).



34/44

34 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 arewell to the apostle John, her arewell to all o the apostles, her death, heruneral, and her burial.

Te rst panel ( g. 6) is, in many ways, a replica o traditional Annuncia-tion scenes. An unnamed angel appears to Mary, reverently genu ecting toher and holding toward her a branch o palm owering into seven golden rays,each o which ends in a star. According toTe Golden Legend , the angel greetsMary, and says, See, lady, I have brought you a palm branch rom paradise,and you are to have it carried be ore your bier. Later in the passage, the palmis described as shining very brightly: the stem was green like any other branch,but the leaves gleamed like the morning star (Voragine 2: 78).

Tis palm branch appears in all o these scenes relating Marys death. In allo the paintings Mary is dressed in a red tunic covered by a dark blue mantle.In the second scene ( g. 7) the Virgin takes leave o John while the otherapostles are gathered outside witnessing a warm handshake between Peterand Paul. Mary and John, each leaning toward the other, create an arc o warmth and tenderness. In the third scene ( g. 8) the apostles surround thedeathbed o Mary where she is lying, partially raised, and looking towardthem. John, situated near the right side o the Virgin, holds the palm branch.Te standing gure o Paul be ore an arched doorway balances the seatedgures around Mary. Her death scene ( gs. 9a and b) is based upon tradi-tional Byzantine models. As Mary lies in the sleep o death, she is surrounded

by the apostles and a multitude o angels. In the center o the painting, Christstands holding her soul. In the ore ront Peter and John kneel. Te tieredrows o haloed gures resemble a tableau o the heavenly court. Te uneralscene ( g. 10) represents the apostles, led by John holding the palm, carryingthe cata alque outside the walls o the city to burial. owards the back o the procession, several townspeople appear, one with his arms raised, his handstouching the bier. Tese gures are clothed differently rom the apostles, wearing hooded white caps, red or orange mantles over brown tunics, andboots. In theGolden Legend they are not identi ed as Jews, but the onetouching the bier is called the chie priest. Here, his hands are not cut off byan avenging angel, but they are withered. Te others present are struck blindby angels. Te priest is healed when he proclaims aith in Christ, and the oth-ers who believe are healed through the touch o the palm.37 Te nal scene( g. 11), that o the burial, reveals the deep love o the mourning apostles.

37) Tis version o the legend states that when the townspeople hear the singing as the apostlescarry Marys body to burial, their curiosity is aroused and they come out to investigate. One o



35/44


Figure 6 . Duccio di Buoninsegna. Annunciation o Death. Museo dellOpera del Duomo,Siena. Printed with permission rom La Scala, Firenze.

them assesses the situation, and they all cry out: Come on, let us kill all those disciples andburn the body that bore the seducer! Ten the chie priest, moved with anger, also condemnsthe tabernacle o the man who disturbed us and our people so much. He attempts to upsetthe bier, and at that point his hands are withered (Voragine 81).38) Tis commentary on Duccio is based on that o Jannella 7378, as well as my own study othe paintings.

Alone in a valley surrounded by rocky cliffs and trees, they gently lower thebody o the Virgin into the tomb. Teir aces express their sorrow and grie .Te composition o this painting is superb, as the eye o the viewer ollowsthose o the apostles toward the central gure o the Virgin. Te sides o thecliffs slant toward the burial scene, rein orcing the centrality o the tomb.38

Duccios representation o these scenes rom the death o the Virgin relatesthe drama o her passing. Te sequence takes place in time and involves adistinct series o moments. She realizes that her death is near; she wants tobid goodbye to those who ollowed her son, who have known, loved, and protected her, and whom she has guided through her presence and prayer.



36/44


Figure 7 . Duccio di Buoninsegna. aking Leave o John. Museo dellOpera delDuomo, Siena. Printed with permission rom La Scala, Firenze.

Figure 8. Duccio di Buoninsegna. aking Leave o the Apostles. Museo dellOperadel Duomo, Siena. Printed with permission rom La Scala, Firenze.



37/44


Figure 9a. Duccio di Buoninsegna. Death o the Virgin. Museo dellOpera del Duomo, Siena.Printed with permission rom La Scala, Firenze.

VII Conclusion

I hope to have shown something in the oregoing o the interpenetration oEastern and Western cultures in the representation o the death o the Vir-gin. Icons o her death seem to have originated in the East, but these imagessoon traveled to the West. Te mosaics o the mysteries o Marys li e in theapse o the Roman churches o Santa Maria in rastevere and Santa MariaMaggiore ollow the pattern o icons in the Byzantineiconostasis. Duccios panel paintings break the iconography down into its several components,creating a meditation in time o the events that led up to and ollowed Marysdeath. Russian icons draw the elements o the narrative into one timelessmoment o death and assumption.

Te Jephonias episode arose in Cappadocia in the tenth or eleventh cen-tury, possibly as a result o the First Crusade. It seems airly certain that the



38/44


Figure 9b. Duccio di Buoninsegna. Detail rom g. 9a. Museo dellOpera del Duomo, Siena.Printed with permission rom La Scala, Firenze.

appearance o the moti in Russian icons appeared only in the later feenthcentury, again in relationship to a historical movement that brought aboutantagonism toward Jews. Tis moti does occur in Byzantine and Russianart, but it does not appear in every icon o the Koimesis or theUspeniye. Te



39/44


Figure 10 . Duccio di Buoninsegna. Funeral Rites. Museo dellOpera del Duomo, Siena.Printed with permission rom La Scala, Firenze.

Jephonias image seems to be somewhat rare in Western depictions o theDormition, perhaps because the ocus o the east in the West was increas-ingly on Marys Assumption rather than her death. Another actor thatdifferentiates Eastern and Western models is that o individuality. Becauseicons were considered to be o divine inspiration in the East, there were strictspeci cations concerning their composition. Some evolution did appear, as we have seen, but the gures o Christ, Mary, and the apostles vary little rom



40/44


41/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 41ning o the divergence in the late eighth century when inaccurate Latin trans-lations o Greek texts misrepresented the teachings o the SeventhEcumenical Council, and claims that it had authorized the worship oimages. Images were urther demoted at the Council o Frank urt (794) andthe Synod o Paris (824), which stated that images only serve an ornamental purpose and are irrelevant to Christian worship. Even so, Western art con-tinued to re ect the spirituality o the East into the eleventh and twelfhcenturies. With the introduction o depth perspective and chiaroscuro,however, the mysterious and irrational reality o the world was lost. Tis isseen in the work o artists such as Giotto, Masaccio, Duccio, and Cimabue.(Evdokimov excepts Fra Angelico and Simone Martini). He describes thisdivergence as a move towards independence: Art that breaks with the can-ons o iconography nds its independence (Evdokimov 16769).40

Eastern reverence or the icon is based upon a theology o presence: Teicon is a sacrament or the Christian East; more precisely, it is the vehicle o a personal presence. Te icon, in its two-dimensional simplicity, excludes allmaterialization and mediates to the viewer the presence and spiritual powero the person(s) represented (Evdokimov 17879). It is meant to be a sym-bolic representation o a spiritual reality. Te spiritual reality made visible inicons o the Dormition that portray a high priest attempting to overturnMarys bier is the hostility o those who would attack and destroy the church.

Te angel o God is its protector. What does the viewer contemplate, then, in the icon o the Virgins death?Te icon is an image o incarnation, mortality, and a transcendent realm to which humans have access. According to Judeo-Christian religion, the Incar-nation began with the call to Abraham, a call that brought orth three o the worlds great religions. Te icon speaks o mortality, which includes the whole o human history with its ailed empires, allen dreams, and allibility.Mortality includes the i only o history that is so ofen driven by misun-derstanding and mistakes. Te image also speaks o another realm, which canbe understood in many ways. On the literal level, it re ers to the Christianheaven, but it may also be a metaphor or a world where people live togetherin harmony and peace. Tis is an image o transcendence and hope.

40) Dantes admiration o the realistic sculptures along the errace o Pride would seem toindicate that Western artists would not have agreed that the spiritual dimension was necessar-ily diminished by the restoration o perspective ( Purg . 10).



42/44

42 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 Works Cited

Antonova, V. I., and N. E. Mneva. Katalog drevnerusskoy zhivopisi. Vol. 1. Catalogue o theretyakov Gallery. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1963.

Blumenkranz, Bernhard. Le Jui mdival au miroir de lart chrtien. Paris: tude Augusti-niennes, 1966.

Boyardin, Daniel. Border Lines: Te Partition o Judaeo-Christianity. Philadelphia PA: Uni- versity o Pennsylvania Press, 2004.

Byzantine Illumination, 11501250: the Study o a Pro incial radition. Chicago IL: Univer-sity o Chicago Press,1987.

Cabasilas, Nicholas. Homlie sur la Glorieuse Dormition de La rs Sainte Mre de Dieu etoujours Vierge Marie. La Mre de Dieu: Homlies sur La Nativit, sur LAnnonciationet sur La Dormition de La rs-Sainte Mre de Dieu. rans. Jean-Louis Palierne. Laus-anne, Switzerland: ditions lge dHomme, 1992.

Carr, Annemarie Weyl. Frescoes o the Mavriotissa Monastery near Kastoria: Evidence oMillenarianism and Anti-Semitism in the Wake o the First Crusade.Gesta 21 (1982):2129.

. Popular Imagery. InTe Glory o Byzantium. Ed. Helen C. Evans and WilliamD. Wixom. New York: Metropolitan Museum, 1997. 11317.

Cormack, Robin.Writing in Gold: Byzantine Society and Its Icons. New York: Ox ord Univer-sity Press, 1985.

Daley, Brian E., S.J.On the Dormition o Mary. Crestwood NY: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press,1998.

Ebertshauser, Caroline H., et al. Mary: Art, Culture, and Religion through the Ages. rans.Peter Heinegg. New York: Crossroad Publishing, 1997.

Elliott, J. K.Te Apocryphal New estament: A Collection o Apocryphal Christian Literature in an English ranslation. Ox ord, England: Clarendon Press, 1993.Evans, Helen C., ed. Byzantium: Faith and Power (12611557). New York: Metropolitan

Museum o Art and New Haven C : Yale University Press, 2004., and William D. Wixom, eds.Te Glory o Byzantium. New York: Metropolitan

Museum o Art, 1997.Evdokimov, Paul.Te Art o the Icon: A Teology o Beauty. rans. Steven Bigham. Redondo

Beach CA: Oakwood, 1990.Evtuhov, Catherine. A History o Russia: Peoples, Legends, Events, Forces. Boston MA: Hough-

ton Mifflin, 2004.Frank Jr., Robert Worth. Miracles o the Virgin, Medieval Anti-Semitism, and the Prioresss

ale.Te Wisdom o Poetry: Essays in Early English Literature in Honor o MortonW. Bloom eld . Ed. Larry D. Benson and Sieg ried Wenzel. Kalamazoo MI: MedievalInstitute Publications, 1982. 17788.

Goffen, Rona. Piety and Patronage in Renaissance Venice. New Haven C : Yale UniversityPress, 1986.

Hosking, Geoffrey. Russia and the Russians, A History. Cambridge MA: Harvard UniversityPress, 2001.

James, Montague Rhodes.Te Apocryphal New estament . Ox ord, England: Clarendon Press,1924.



43/44

E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 43 Jannella, Cecilia. Duccio di Buoninsegna. Milan, Italy: SCALA, 1997.Te Journal o the Moscow Patriarchate 8 (1981): 589; (1982): 3638; (1983): 5859. Jugie, Martin, A. A. LImmacule Conceptionis, extus et Disquisitiones. Collectio Edita Cura

Academiae Marianae Internationalis 3. Rome: Academia Marianna, 1952.. La Mort et lassomption de la Sainte Vierge: tude historico-doctrinale. Studie esti

114. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1944. Justin Martyr.Saint Justin Martyr . rans. and ed. Tomas B. Falls. New York: Christian Her-

itage, 1948.Kantor, Laurence, and Pia Palladino. Fra Angelico. New York: Metropolitan Museum o Art;

New Haven C : Yale University Press, 2005.Kaucisvili, Nina, and Adalberto Iovana, eds. La Madonna a Mosca e a Roma. Patriarcato di

Mosca: Edizione Pauline, 1992.Kazhdan, Alexander P., et al., eds.Ox ord Dictionary o Byzantium. 3 vols. New York: Ox ord

University Press, 1991.Klier, John D. Judaizing Without Jews? Moscow-Novgorod, 14701504.Culture and Iden-

tity in Musco y, 13591584 . Ed. A. M. Kleimola and G. D. Lenhoff. Moscow: I Z-Garant, 1997. 33649.

Kolve, V. A. God-Denying Fools and the Medieval Religion o Love.Studies in the Age oChaucer 19, ed. Lisa J. Kiser. Columbus OH: Ohio State University Press, 1997. 359.

Lazarev, Viktor Nikitich.Te Russian Icon. Ed. V. I. Vzdornov. rans. Colette Joy Dees. Col-legeville MN: Te Liturgical Press, 1997.

. Feo an Grek i ego shkola [Teophanes the Greek and His School ]. Moscow: Iskusstvo,1961.

Mellinkoff, Ruth.Outcasts: Signs o Otherness in Northern European Art o the Late Middle Ages. 2 vols. Berkeley CA: University o Cali ornia Press, 1991.

Nersessjan, Leven. La Festa del Creato le icone di Dionisij . rans. Anna Vicini. Milan, Italy: LaCasa di Matrona, 1998.Palamas, Gregory. A Homily on the Dormition o Our Supremely Pure Lady Teotokos

and Ever-Virgin Mary. Te Holy rans guration Monastery. .

Por ryev, I.Sbornik Collection o the Imperial Academy o Sciences. Vol. 52. St. Petersburg,1891.

Revel-Neher, Elisabeth.Te Image o the Jew in Byzantine Art . rans. David Maizel. Ox ord,England: Pergamon Press, 1992.

Riasanovsky, Nicholas V. A History o Russia. 7th ed. 2 vols. New York: Ox ord UniversityPress, 2005.

Saadya, Ali a. Convert or Desecrator? Te Image o the Jew in the Jephonias Episodein Icons o the Dormition. Hebrew University o Jerusalem. .

Samuelson, Norbert M. Revelation and the God o Israel . Cambridge, England: CambridgeUniversity Press, 2002.

Sandmel, Samuel. A Jewish Understanding o the New estament . Cincinnati OH: HebrewUnion College Press, 1956.

. Judaism and Christian Beginnings. New York: Ox ord University Press, 1978..We Jews and Jesus. New York: Ox ord University Press, 1965.



44/44

44 E. Walsh / Religion and the Arts 11 (2007) 144 Santa Maria Maggiore Basilica Patriarcale. rento, Italy: Euroedit sri.Sh er, Peter. Judeophobia: Attitudes toward the Jews in the Ancient World . Cambridge MA:

Harvard University Press, 1997.Shoemaker, Stephen J. Ancient raditions o the Virgin Marys Dormition and Assumption.

Ox ord, England: Ox ord University Press, 2002.. Let Us Go and Burn Her Body: Te Image o the Jews in the Early Dormition ra-

ditions.Church History 68 (1999): 775823.Smirnova, Evelina. Moscow Icons. rans. Arthur Shkarovsky-Raff. Leningrad: Aurora Art

Publishers, 1989.Soloveva, Irina. Saint Cyrils Belozersk Monastery o the Dormition. In Evans, ed., Byzan-

tium: Faith and Power (12611557) 3246.Stroumsa, Gedaliahu G. Religious Contacts in Byzantine Palestine. Numen 36 (1989):

1642.osti-Croce, Marina Righetti. La Basilica ra Due e recento. La Basilica Romana di Santa

Maria Maggiore. Ed. Carlo Pietrangeli. Firenze, Italy: Nardini, 1987.Upton, Joel. Petrus Christus: His Place in Fifeenth-Century Painting . University Park PA:

Pennsylvania State University Press, 1990. van Esbroeck, Michel. Aux origines de la Dormition de la Vierge: tudes historiques sur les tra-

ditions orientales. Brook eld V : Variorum, 1995.. Te Virgin as the rue Ark o the Covenant. Images o the Mother o God: Percep-

tions o the Teotokos in Byzantium. Ed. Maria Vassilaki. Aldershot, England: Ashgate,2005. 638.

von ischendor , Konstantin. Apocalypses Apocryphae. 1866. Leipzig, Germany: Hildesheim,1966.

Voragine, Jacobus de.Te Golden Legend . rans. William Granger Ryan. Vol. 2. Princeton NJ:

Princeton University Press, 1993. Wenger, Antoine, A.A. LAssomption de la . S. Vierge dans la tradition Byzantine du VI e au X e sicle . Archives de lOrient Chrtien 5. Paris: Institut Franais dtudes Byzantines,1955.

Wratislaw-Mitrovic, Ludmila, and N. Okunev. La Dormition de la Sainte Vierge dans laPeinture Mdivale Orthodoxe. Byzantinoslavica 3 (1931): 13480.

death of theotokos

Documents