REPRESENTING IDENTITIES The Icon of Ioane Tokhabi from Sinai
The issue of identities revealed in medieval visual art is receiving increased attention in modern scholarly discourse1. However, formative factors of identities and their strategies in pre-modern times still need further study and analysis. Images and invocations included into objects of devotional art aiming to make a clear statement about their commis- sioners’ identities are addressed to various “recipients” and therefore, encompass multiple tasks. I will focus on the perception of the concept of identities revealed in a late 11th - early 12th century icon with Chris- tological cycle accompanied by images of the Virgin, painted by the Georgian priest-monk, Ioane Tokhabi, from St. Catherine’s Monastery at Mount Sinai [ill. 1]. This icon has attracted much scholarly interest as it provides valuable material about various aspects of Eastern Christian culture2. The present study will be limited to the visual and verbal pat- terns of self-presentation used by a Georgian hieromonachos, who was both a painter and the donor of the icon3. Examining how self-identities are displayed on the icon will foster our knowledge about the primary intention of the creation of this icon and will allow to reconstruct its cultural context. This icon with a unique iconographic program, incorporating both an extensive Christological cycle – the Miracles and the Passion of Christ – and Marian iconic images, is one of six icons of Ioane preserved on Sinai. Four of them constitute menologion (calendar icons) and the fifth depicts the Last Judgment [ill. 2-3]. The reverse of all six icons has a Greek epigram (in dodecasyllabic verse), while individual figures and
1 On this topic, see CARDARELLI et al., Art and Identity; LINDQUIST – PERKINSON, Fore- word; GERSTEL, Art and Identity, esp. p. 273-280; EASTMOND, Art and Identity in Byzan- tium; ID., Art and Identity in Caucasus; WEYL CARR, Iconography and Identity; PEERS, Art and Identity; CHICHINADZE, Image and Identity. 2 Among the numerous publications are: SOTIRIOU, Εικόνες, I, pls. 146-149, II, p. 125- 128; WEITZMANN, Studies, p. 301, fig. 302; MOURIKI, Icons, p. 102-103, notes nos. 1, 10, 14, on p. 384; EAD., La présence géorgienne; KALOPISSI-VERTI, Painters’ Portraits, p. 134-136, fig. 9; SKHIRTLADZE, Ioane Tokhabi; ID., Sinai – Constantinople; ID., The Image of the Virgin; BALTOYANI, The Mother of God, p. 144-148, pls. 82, 87-88, 90; WEYL CARR, Icons and Objects; TRAHOULIA, The Truth; GALAVARIS, An Eleventh Century Hexaptych; LIDOVA, The Artist’s Signature; EAD., Avtorskoe samosoznanie; EAD., Polip- tych kak prostranstvenni; CHICHINADZE, Artistic System. 3 The icon is 49 × 36 cm in size.
Le Muséon 130 (3-4), 401-420. doi: 10.2143/MUS.130.3.3259747 - Tous droits réservés. © Le Muséon, 2017. 402 N. CHICHINADZE compositions on the menologion and the Last Judgment panels, as well as the icon under discussion, have bilingual Georgian-Greek inscriptions4. The iconic images of the Mother of God are displayed in the top row of the icon. The Christological cycle occupies six registers – the upper four rows depict the Miracles and the lower two the Passion of Christ. It should be stressed that, in spite of numerous vignettes with Christologi- cal scenes, the Marian images dominate the panel, both in their place- ment and in size. Four of the five images of the Theotokos are well- known Constantinopolitan miracle-working icons associated with the famous centers of the Marian cult of the Byzantine capital. Bilingual Greek-Georgian inscriptions identify the images: from the right side of the central representation of the enthroned Virgin and Child are half- length Blachernitissa and Hodegetria, while on the other side, Agiosori- tissa and Cheimeutissa5 [ill. 5]. The image of the Blachernitissa, representing the Virgin with the caressing standing Child, is linked to the church of the Virgin of Bla- chernai. This church, which was one of the main centers of the venera- tion of the Virgin in Constantinople (founded before 475), possessed a precious relic - her maphorion6. The Virgin Hodegetria, associated with another famous site of Marian cult, the monastery of Hodegoi, is pre- sented here in a traditional iconographic version: the Theotokos holds the Child in her left hand while the other hand points to the incarnated Logos7. The icon of the Hodegetria, which was a palladium of the Byz- antine capital, was actively involved in the religious life of the Byzantine capital8. The image of Mary in prayer, known as Agiosoritissa, is attached
4 The Greek inscriptions have been published several times: SOTIRIOU, Εικόνες, II, p. 128, 130, 131; GALAVARIS, An Eleventh Century Hexaptych, p. 137-138; TRAHOULIA, The Truth, p. 272. For an English translation of the Greek texts, see KALOPISSI-VERTI, Painters’ Portraits, p. 134-136; TRAHOULIA, The Truth, p. 273, etc. For the Georgian inscription of the icon of the Last Judgment, see SKHIRTLADZE, Ioane Tokhabi, p. 70. 5 For the extensive bibliographic references on these iconographic versions of the Vir- gin see: CHICHINADZE, Miracle-working Images; BALTOYANI, The Mother of God. The images of the Virgin of this icon are discussed in TRAHOULIA, The Truth; GALAVARIS, An Eleventh Century Hexaptych, p. 139-141; CHICHINADZE, Artistic System (with earlier bib- liography). 6 MANGO, Constantinople, p. 19. The toponymic title Blachernitissa, which appears on various iconographic types of the Mother of God, stresses that these images were vener- ated in Blachernai. On these issues see WEYL CARR, The Mother of God, p. 329; about Blachernae see also MANGO, Origins of Blachernae Shrine. 7 For this iconographic type see KONDAKOV, Ikonografia, II, p. 152ff.; BALTOYANI, The Mother of God, p. 144-147, for earlier bibliography see ibid., p. 153. 8 ŠEVČENKO, Icons in the Liturgy, p. 46ff.; ANGELIDI – PAPAMASTORAKIS, The Venera- tion, p. 186-187. REPRESENTING IDENTITIES 403 to Hagia Soros, a reliquary of the Virgin’s girdle preserved in the Chalkoprateia9. As for another representation of the Virgin in supplica- tion, labelled Cheimeutissa, we have no evidences except in the De Cere- moniis of Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos, where Cheimeutissa, an icon placed in the palace church of St. Demetrios, is mentioned10. The iconographic type of the central image of the enthroned Virgin with Child could be identified as Nikopoia or Platytera11. At the right foot of the central image of the Virgin, a small figure of a monk in proskynesis is placed. He is depicted as a bear-headed matured man with a dark beard, clad in monkish attire. Although this figure is not inscribed, he is identified as the painter Ioannes (in Georgian Ioane) mentioned in other inscriptions of the icon12. The iconographic types of the Virgin inserted in the icon with the Miracles and Passion of Christ have a complex theological meaning and reveal the Christian dogma of Incarnation. This is especially true for two images of the Virgin and Child: Hodegetria and Blachernitissa. The two other images Cheimeutissa and Agiosoritissa, representing the Theotokos in a supplicatory posture, allude to the eschatological composition of the Déèsis embodying intercession for humankind13. The successive compo- sitions of the Miracles are also related to the Virgin and to the Redemp- tion. The cycle of the Miracles starts with two compositions depicting Christ’s first miracle performed in Cana of Galilee (Ioh. 2, 1-11), which is associated with Jesus’ mother. According to the Gospel narrative: “When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, ‘They have no wine.’ And Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.’ His mother said to the servants, ‘Do whatever he tells you.’” (Ioh. 2, 3-5 [English Standard Version (ESV)]). The miracle of Cana alludes to the Last Supper. Iconic images of the Virgin and the first miracle of Christ, when he turned water into wine, complete each other and point to the Redemptive role of Mary and to the Eucharist. The last, now obliterated composition of the lower row on the icon was presumably the Dormition. Thus, the upper images of the Virgin and the narrative scenes are conceptually and ideologically linked
9 ŠEVČENKO, Icons in the Liturgy, p. 50ff.; BALTOYANI, The Mother of God, p. 147- 149. 10 SOTIRIOU, Εικόνες, II, p. 126. 11 G. Galavaris links this type also with the Virgin Panachrantos/Immaculate. GALAVARIS, An Eleventh Century Hexaptych, p. 25; WEYL CARR, Icons as the Objects of Pilgrimage, p. 77 refers to it as “the Virgin of the Burning Bush”. 12 MOURIKI, La présence géorgienne, p. 39. 13 GALAVARIS, An Eleventh Century Hexaptych, p. 140. 404 N. CHICHINADZE to each other. The Passion scenes follow two lessons of Maundy Thurs- day and Good Friday14. The inter-twinning of the Marian icons and the Miracles of Christ is quite understandable: indeed, according to Chris- tian tradition, Marian relics and her icons were often involved in miracu- lous healings15, while the miracles performed by Christ during his earthly life are perceived as a manifestation of his divine nature and an acknowl- edgement of the beginning of the Salvation. Therefore, the overall idea of the icon is the Incarnation represented by the Marian iconic images, and the Salvation manifested by the Miracles and Passion of Christ. The symbolic meaning of the iconographic program of this panel is also reflected in the inscription on its rear16. In the inscription “humble Ioannes” addresses the Mother of God and asks her to grant grace upon him and for “maternal supplication of the woman who gave birth (?) and total redemption from sins”17. The text underlines the role of the Theo- tokos in the Incarnation and its significance in the Salvation. The icon has multiple readings determined by its iconography and semantic connotations. First of all we should mention the iconic images of the Virgin, which introduce the main visual and conceptual vector of the icon. Here we deal with an interesting practice of reproduction of cult objects – Constantinopolitan venerable miraculous images of the Mother of God18, resulting in a panel with increased sacral value. Miraculous
14 GALAVARIS, An Eleventh Century Hexaptych, p. 140. 15 On this topic, see CHICHINADZE, Artistic System. 16 In the center of the surface, a cross is depicted against a red background with tradi- tional abbreviated inscription: IC XC NIKA. The Greek epigram runs across the upper and lower horizontal edges of the panel. The same compositional scheme is used in other panels. (For inscriptions of other panels see notes 20 and 21). Upper part of the text reads: ...ΑΣΗΣ ΕΥΤΕ(ΛΗ)Σ ΙΩ(ΑΝΝΗΣ) ΤΑΣ ΙΕΡΑΣ ΕΓΡΑΨΕ ΤΑΥΤΑΣ ΕΙ(ΚΟΝΑ)Σ ΚΑΙ ΔΟΜΩ ΔΕΔΟΚΕ Π..ΜΝ.. ΑΝΕΞΑΛΕΙΠΤΟΝ ΕΝ ΤΟΥΤΩ ΧΑΡΙΝ Τ(ΗΝ ΜΗΤΡΙ)ΚΗΝ ΕΝΤΕΥΞΙΝ (ΤΗΣ ΣΕ) ΤΕΚ(ΟΥΣΗΣ) ΚΑΙ ΠΑΝΤΕΛΗ ΑΥΤΡΩΣΙΝ ΑΜΠΛΑΚΗΜΑ(ΤΩΝ) ...(..ΔΕΟ)ΜΕΝΩ ΒΡΑΒΕΥΣΟΝ ΟΙΚΤΡΩ ΠΡΕΣΒΥΤΗ . Lower part: ΤΑ ΚΟΣΜΟΣΩΤΗΡΙΑ ΣΟΥ ΠΑΘ(Η) ΛΟΓΕ ΣΥΝ ΤΟΙΣ ΥΠΕΡ ΝΟΥΝ ΚΑΙ ΛΟΓΟΝ ΤΕΡΑ(ΣΤΙΟ)ΙΣ (ΓΡΑΨΑΣ ΜΟΝΑΧΟ(Σ) ’ΕΥΦΥΩΣ ’ΙΩ(ΑΝΝΗΣ) ΕΡΥΘΡΟΒΑΦΗ ΠΤΑΙΣΜΑΤΩΝ ΑΙΤΕΙ ΛΥΣ(ΙΝ) (Following SOTIRIOU, Εικόνες, II, p. 128). For a transcription of the Greek texts and their English translations, see K ALOPISSI-VERTI, Painters’ Portraits, p. 134-135; TRAHOULIA, The Truth, p. 273; LIDOVA, The Artist’s Signature, p. 84. For the Greek text, see also GALAVARIS, An Eleventh Century Hexaptych, p. 137. 17 I would like to thank my colleague Stephanos Efthimiadis for his generous help in reading and translation of the Greek text. For the English translation of this inscription, see also KALOPISSI-VERTI, Painters’ Portraits, p. 134-135; TRAHOULIA, The Truth, p. 273; LIDOVA, The Artist’s Signature, p. 84. 18 Although WEYL CARR, Icons and the Object of Pilgrimage, p. 81, claims that only the Hodegetria “can be identified as an icon of icon”, I believe that the other three images also reproduce venerated Constantinopolitan icons. REPRESENTING IDENTITIES 405 icons of the Virgin are “displayed” for veneration together with other images depicted on the icon. Such virtual presence of the venerable icons allows to transfer the grace and miraculous powers of the originals. By the depiction of the five images of the Mother of God, Mary’s protective power is “multiplied” and in this way her mediation and advocacy for donor before Christ are assured. It is obvious that this type of images of the Theotokos stress the importance of icons in the cult of the Virgin. It could also be assumed that by visual references to icons of the Virgin, Ioane declares his adherence to the Chalcedonian dogma19. It is significant that each piece of the text on the rear of the six icons “reports the story” of these panels in various verbal formulas. Ioannes, the Greek version of the painter’s name, appears in the epigram running across the reverse of the menologion icons20, of the Last Judgment panel21, and twice on the rear of the icon with the Marian miraculous icons – once in the upper lines and another time in the lower ones22. Ioannes is referred to in the Greek texts as “humble monk” and “wretched old man” (the icon with Marian images) and “miserable among monks” (the Last Judgment icon). The Greek texts of the menolo- gion icons, of the Last Judgment icon, and of that with images of the
19 The connection of this panel with ongoing theological polemics on icons is dis- cussed in TRAHOULIA, The Truth. 20 On the reverse of the panels, inscriptions are placed above and beneath the large crosses on the red background. Upper part: ΤΕΤΡΑΜΕΡΗ ΦΑΛΑΓΓΑ ΚΛΕΙΝΩΝ ΜΑΡΤΥΡΩΝ ΣΥΝ ΤΩ ΠΡΟΦΙΤΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΘΕΗΓΟΡΩΝ ΣΤΥΦΕΙ ΤΩΝ ΘΥΠΟΛΩΝ ΤΕ ΚΑΙ ΜΟΝΟΤΡΟΠΩΝ ΣΤΥΛΟΓΡΑΦΗΣΑΣ ΣΥΣΤΩΧΟΣ ΙΩ(ΑΗΗΗΣ) Lower part: ΤΟ ΛΥΤΡΟΝ ΩΝΠΕΡ ΕΣΦΑΛΗ ΤΟΥΤΟΥ ΛΑΒΕΙΝ ΑΦΗΚΕ ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΝ ΔΕΣΠΟΤΗΝ ΠΡΕΣΒΕΙΣ ΤΑΧΕΙΣ (Following SOTIRIOU, Εικόνες, II, p. 123). For the Greek text, see also GALAVARIS, An Eleventh Century Hexaptych, p. 137. For English translations, see KALOPISSI-VERTI, Painters’ Portraits, p. 134; LIDOVA, The Artist’s Signa- ture, p. 83. 21 The back of the icon follows the compositions of other icons of Ioannes displaying cross on red background and inscription in two parts. Upper part: ΩΣ ΔΑΝΙΗΛ ΠΡΟΕΙΔΕ ΦΡΙΚΩΔΗ ΚΡΙ(ΣΙΝ) Ω ΠΑΝΤΑΝΑΞ ΑΒΥΣΣΕ ΤΗΣ ΕΥΣΠΛΑΧΝΙΑΣ ΕΙΣ ΝΟΥΝ ΒΑΛΩΝ ΓΡΑΨΑΣ ΤΕ ΠΛΑΞΙ ΚΑΡΔΙΑΣ ΙΩ(ΑΝΝΗΣ) ΔΥΣΤΗΝΟΣ ΕΝ ΜΟΝΟΤΡΟΠΟΙΣ Upper part: ΣΕΠΤΟΣ ΑΝΙΣΤΟΡΗΣΕ ΣΗΝ ΠΑΡΡΟΥΣΙΑΝ ΑΥΤΟΝ ΔΥΣΩΠΟΝ ΣΟΥ ΤΥΞΕΙΝ ΠΑΝΤΕΡΓΑΤΑ ΟΙΚΤΙΡΜΟΝΟΣ ΜΑΛΙΣΤΑ ΜΗ ΚΡΥΤΟΥ ΤΟΤΕ. (Fol- lowing SOTIRIOU, Εικόνες, II, p. 130). For the Greek text, see also GALAVARIS, An Eleventh Century Hexaptych, p. 138. For English translation, see KALOPISSI-VERTI, Painters’ Por- traits, p. 136; LIDOVA, The Artist’s Signature, p. 85. 22 For the Greek text, see note 16. 406 N. CHICHINADZE
Virgin, say that Ioannes was the painter of these panels23. All Greek inscriptions reveal that Ioane was also the donor of the icons24. This is also confirmed by the Georgian inscription on the Last Judgment icon, which is placed below the enthroned Christ, on both sides of the River of Fire25 [ill. 3-4]. Greek epigrams on the reverse of the icons mention only the name Ioannes. His nickname or family name (?) – Tokhabi – together with the Georgian version of his name – Ioane – appears only in the Georgian inscription of the Last Judgment icon. There is a consen- sus among scholars that Ioane was also the author of the Greek epigrams. From the Greek text accompanying the icon with the images of the Mother of God, we know that at the moment of execution and/or dona- tion of the icons, he was already an aged man. Although his name (nick- name?) Tokhabi is not recorded in any other sources and has not yet been explained, his provenance from Georgia and his ethnic identity are quite evident. The inclusion of Constantinopolitan miraculous icons on this panel brings us to the supposition that Ioane had certain links with the Byzan- tine capital. In the upper inscription on the reverse of this icon, Ioane says that he donated/offered holy images painted by him “to the church”. It is hard to tell whether “the church” means a particular church to which Ioane donated his icons, or is a generic term referring to the Church as a House of God26. The inscription makes clear that the icons were intended for a public space and, as becomes evident from both the visual scheme and the text, one of the main concerns of the icon-painter was to repre- sent his identities appropriately. The specific character of the icon under discussion will become more evident, if we look at other cases of representation of painters’ identities on icons. The monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai preserves other icons with donors’ inscriptions indicating that they were also the paint- ers of these images. Large icons of Moses and Elijah dated back to the early 13th century, presumably title icons of the Sinaitic monastic chap- els, were painted by Stephanos. High class mastery, together with the
23 For the Greek text, see notes 16, 20, 21. For an English translation, see KALOPISSI- VERTI, Painters’ Portraits, p. 134-136. 24 See previous note. 25 “ქ.ძ(ეუ)ფ(ე)ო ი[ესჳ ქ](რისტ)ე ძეორედ ძოსლვასა შ(ენ[სა] დ(ი)დ(ე)ბით ღირს ძყავ დღესა ძას ნაწ(ი)ლსა] ძარჯუანითთასა სურვილით ძოძგებელი ხატ(ი)სა ძ(ეორე)დ ძოსლვისა შ(ე)ნ(ი)სა და ყ(ოვე)ლთა წ[(ძიდა)თა] შ(ე)ნთასა უღირსი ხუცესძონ{აზო}ნი ი(ოვან)ე თოჴაბი აძინ“. The Georgian text follows the reading of Z. Skhirtladze, see SKHIRTLADZE, Ioane Tokhabi, p. 70. For an English translation, see below, p. 408. 26 I am grateful to my colleague Dionysis Mourelatos for this suggestion. REPRESENTING IDENTITIES 407 literary form of epigrams executed in Greek and Arabic, indicate that he was, as K. Weitzmann says, one of the greatest icon-painters27. Zographos Petros was a painter and donor of three 13th century icons preserved on Sinai28. Despite the fact that the mentioned icon-painters were also the donors of these images, they do not represent their images on the panels and limit themselves to invocative inscriptions. Such attitude towards self-displaying of painters and donors on their icons could be explained by their different status – the Georgian icon painter was a priest-monk, while Stephanos and Peter were laymen. The place of Ioane’s prostrated figure in the upper register, in close vicinity to the Virgin, at the right leg of Her throne, has a constructive meaning in the display of his identity29. According to Christian iconog- raphy, with its strictly regulated hierarchy, the upper register is inter- preted as Heaven. The Georgian priest-monk represents himself on the right side of the Virgin and Christ – the side reserved for the Righteous30. Thus Ioane places his own image in a semantically prominent place, which is symbolically regarded as a celestial sphere. In the Greek
27 WEITZMANN, Icon Programs, p. 102-103. Depictions of painters and donors are also found in manuscript illuminations: e.g. homilies of John Chrysostom, Paris, BnF, Coislin 79, 11th c.; Melbourne Gospel Book, about 1100; Psalter, Mount Athos Dionisiou, 65, dated to the first half of the 12th c.; Bible, Paris, BnF, gr. 36, 14th c.; SPATHARAKIS, The Por- trait, p. 49, 76-77, 107. 28 See also St. George icon from Struga dated to 1267; KALOPISSI-VERTI, Painters’ Portraits, p. 136-137 (with earlier bibliography). 29 About proskynesis, see SPATHARAKIS, The Proskynesis in Byzantine Art. 30 Compare with Christ sitting at the right hand of the Father: Matth. 26, 64; see also Marc. 16, 19, and Luc. 22, 69. Such placement of historical individuals was an established tradition in Byzantine and generally in Eastern Christian art. E.g. Stephanos Eristavi of Kartli before Christ, relief on the east façade of the church of Jvari of Mtzkheta, 586/87- 604; Agia Sophia vestibule mosaic panel with Leo VI, 9th-10th cc., see also mosaic panel with Theodore Metochites at Chora, 1315-1321, etc. CHICHINADZE, Image and Identity; LAZAREV, Istoria vizantijiskoy, II, pls. 129-130, 462. Such positioning of small figures of donors is found in several icons: icon of St. Irine with the donor Nicholas on her right, Sinai, 8th-9th cc.; icon of St. George, Sinai, 13th c.; icon of Moses before the Burning Bush, Sinai, 13th c.; St. George icon with donor, 13th c., Byzantine and Christian Museum, Athens; icon of the Virgin and Child, from Meteora, 14th c., etc. SOTIRIOU, Εικόνες, I, fig. 32; CONSTANTINIDES, Une icône historiée, esp. p. 78, figs. on p. 82-83; MOURIKI, Icons, pl. 36; EVANS - WIXON, Glory of Byzantium, p. 379-280, cat. no. 250; ŠEVČENKO, Representation of Donors, p. 158, fig. 4; EVANS, Byzantium, p. 51-52, cat. no. 24b. For some other examples of donors’ images depicted on the right from the central figure of the Virgin, or saints, see SOTIRIOU, Εικόνες, I, p. 162, 164, 169. Such composi- tions appear also in manuscript illumination: see image of monk Sabas, donor, scribe, and painter at the Virgin’s feet in proskynesis, Psalter, Mount Athos, Dionisiou, 65, fol. 12v, 12th c.; donor and the Virgin in the Lectionary from Mount Athos, Lavra, 103, fol 3v, 12th c.; Daniel, archbishop of Mokvi, before the Virgin and Child, Mokvi Gospel, fol. 328r, a. 1300; ŠEVČENKO, The Mother of God, p. 161, fig. 102; EAD., Close Encounters, p. 66, fig. 7; CHICHINADZE, Artistic Principle, fig. 173. 408 N. CHICHINADZE
epigram of the icon, Ioane addresses Christ, asking Him for redemption from his sins. By placing his “self-portrait” on the side of the Righteous, he “foresees” his own redemption. Moreover, the central composition with a praying Ioane is a visualization of the Georgian inscription placed below the enthroned Christ in Glory and above the Hetoimasia on the Last Judgment icon: Lord, Jesus Christ, make me, who ardently made31 the icon of the Second Coming and of all your saints, worthy to be on your right, during your Second Coming in Glory. Unworthy priest monk Ioane Tokhabi. Amen32.
The “elevated” place of Ioane’s figure on the panel could be inter- preted as an indication of his high status in the monastic hierarchy. The incorporation of the Georgian monk into the “heavenly” register could also be viewed as the visualization of the Orthodox concept of union with God through asceticism. Such reading accords to the Heavenly Lad- der of John Climax. This work of the 7th century Sinaitic monk, dedi- cated to the virtues and ascetic life necessary for spiritual ascent, was indeed especially popular in monastic circles from the 11th century onward33. Unfortunately, no other sources mentioning Ioane Tokhabi have yet been found, but his works speak eloquently about their author. The icons of Ioane Tokhabi, perceived as a gift made by him to the heavenly pro- tector in order to receive forgiveness of his sins and to gain a place in Paradise, manifest the multiple identities of the donor. His pictorial rep- resentation visually communicates his advanced status, monastic rank and spiritual achievements. The bilingual inscriptions of the icons indi- cate his rank (Ioane was a monk and an ordained priest) and ethnicity. They also reveal that Ioane was a painter and a donor of icons. It is highly probable that Ioane was responsible for the original iconographic program and compositional layout of the icon. He was most probably active (or educated) in one of the monasteries of Constantinople34. This
31 In Georgian: momgebeli, literally, a person who provides funds for the creation of an artworks, or manuscript, commissioner/donor. 32 Translation by the author of the article. For the Georgian text, see above note 25. 33 The earliest extant example of the Heavenly Ladder is a 12th century Constantino- politan icon from Sinai: EVANS – WIXON, Glory of Byzantium, p. 376, cat. 247. About the Heavenly Ladder, see also MARTIN, Illustrations of the Heavenly Ladder; CORRIGAN – ŠEVČENKO, “The teaching of the Ladder”; ŠEVČENKO, The Heavenly Ladder; ENE D-VASILESCU, The Last Wonderful Thing. 34 Although Nicolette Trahoulia does not directly connect Ioane with Constantinople, she sees in the program of the icon with the Marian miraculous icons the reflection of ongoing confessional debates between Orthodox Christians and Bogomils taking place in Constantinople at the beginning of the 12th c.; TRAHOULIA, The Truth, p. 281ff. Her REPRESENTING IDENTITIES 409 is suggested by his ability to write epigrams in Greek. The icon with venerable Constantinopolitan icons of the Virgin might serve as an indi- cation of his affiliation to one of the Marian monasteries in the Byzantine capital. In spite of the painter’s Hellenophile education, the nationality was an important aspect of his identity, which he wanted to be declared. The title and national belonging indicated in the inscription makes him distinguishable among other members of the monastic community35. It should be stressed that language is one of the main markers of identity and therefore Ioane extensively uses Georgian inscriptions on his icon. Such combination of Greek and Georgian languages in the inscriptions of the icons indicates that Ioane belonged to Byzantine culture, but at the same time underlines his nationality. If we accept the version that this icon together with other five icons were donated by Ioane to the monastery, then taking into account the accompanied Greek and Georgian inscriptions, it could be supposed that the icons were intended either for the bilingual monastic brethren or a Georgian monastery outside Georgia. We are unsure when these icons appeared on Sinai, or who donated them to St. Catherine’s Monastery36, but it is highly probable that this monastery was an original “destina- tion” for the icons, for a large Georgian colony had been active there for centuries37. Wherever the initial placement of Ioane’s icons was, it seems that these icons were intended to be displayed for public veneration. Ioane, whose portrait was incorporated into the fabric of the devotional panel, enjoyed the veneration offered to his icon and therefore his image also had a commemorational purpose. Obviously, the monk depicted praying for his own salvation was also perceived as praying for monastic communion (congregation). Therefore, Ioane, who through his image
observations could serve as an additional argument for Ioane’s links with the Byzantine capital and its official intellectual-theological circles. 35 The indication of nationality is not unusual in medieval times. We know other examples of Georgian painters and/or donor stressing their nationality: e.g. 13th century vita icon of St. George from St. Catherine’s monastery depicting a donor, referred to in the accompanied inscription as “hieromonk Ioane Iberian”: CONSTANTINIDIS, Une icône historiée, p. 78; Bachkovo ossuary church is painted in the third quarter of the 12th cen- tury by John Iveropoulos, his name referring to his origin as well, BAKALOVA, Bachkov- skata kostnica. It could be assumed that in these cases, multiethnic monastic communities triggered the display of the painters’ ethnic identity. 36 In St. Catherine’s Monastery is preserved a tetraptych dated back to the early 14h c., representing Georgian saints accompanied with Georgian inscriptions. According to a long inscription on its back the icon appeared on Mount Sinai in 1780, during the reign of Georgian king Erekle II: MOURIKI, La présence géorgienne, p. 40. 37 About the Georgian presence on Mount Sinai, see also ALEKSIDZE et al., Catalogue, p. 357ff. 410 N. CHICHINADZE and supplicatory texts is introduced in the liturgical space and takes part in ongoing service (liturgy), is identified by means of his name, national- ity, and rank. These three components are relevant for his identity to be declared both for those who attend services and for his heavenly protec- tors. The image of donor (and painter, in our case) aims to be recogniz- able in present time – when it is viewed (or venerated) during church celebrations by a congregation and also during the Day of Judgment. The conventional and hierarchical character of Eastern Christian art does pre- vent a depiction of mimetic portraits of donors and therefore images are supplemented by supplicatory inscriptions containing information about the donors’ identity. All elements employed in the considered devotional panel (i.e. general arrangement of images, scale, size, posture, attire of represented donor figures, inscriptions, etc.), must be important factors for revealing the identity, not only for Ioane but also for the members of monastic community (congregation), who either participated in the ser- vice, or venerated the icon. In other words, it should be supposed that the markers of identity used in the icon, were shared and appreciated both by the donor of the icon and by the icon’s potential audience. Icons have an important role in Byzantine spirituality, serving as con- ductors of heavenly energies and “facilitators” of communication between two worlds. The combination of a Christological cycle with iconic representations of the Virgin and the image of the icon-painter and donor conveys the multiple aspects of the religiosity of the Orthodox Christian world, with special emphasis on monastic milieu. The multi- layer symbolism of the icon from St. Catherine’s Monastery could be read in a variety of ways and each version will be legitimate, as the structure of this icon allows to build a number of interpretative con- structs. The juxtaposition of different types of representations – narrative (Christological cycles), iconic (images of the Virgin), and “non reli- gious” portrayal of donor together with bilingual inscriptions placed on both sides of the panel, offers shifting spiritual focuses, which could be changed in accordance with “settings” for the icon38. To sum up, the icon with the representation of the Georgian priest- monk presents a significant visual model of identity. Through text and image, Ioane communicates his religious, ethnical, and cultural identities – all that was important for him and for his cultural environment. The representation of the prostrated Ioane strengthens his “physical
38 By “setting” I mean various components creating a “background” for its presenta- tion – i.e. location within and beyond sacred spaces. Ethnic and social environment of its display also influences its reading. REPRESENTING IDENTITIES 411
presence” during religious rituals and ceremonies and elucidates his role in the service to God. Although the icon is withdrawn from its original context, it is possible to suggest that the multi-ethnic monastic commu- nity formed the identity of the depicted individual. We see here visuali- zation of spiritual values and intentions of the donor-painter. Taking into consideration the symbolism of the Christian spiritual hierarchic system, Ioane’s “advanced” place allows to view him as a mediator between the earthly and celestial realms, and a leader who facilitates the uplift of believers to God. The image of the monk in proximity to God empha- sizes his prestige and points to the importance of prayer and repentance in achieving Salvation. The icon of Ioane demonstrates certain pictorial and verbal formulas, which elucidate polyvalent interrelations between donors, “recipients” of their “gift”, and an audience, who viewed these objects and intro- duces us to the sophisticated realm of “interactions” between earthly and celestial spheres. This complex panel explicitly demonstrates that, together with Christian dogmas and theological ideas, icons manifest the identities of people who were involved in their creation – painters and/or donors. Icons displayed in the public liturgical spaces were accessed, viewed, and venerated by many generations of believers and hence this devotional objects served as an appropriate means for the manifestation of individuals’ identities for centuries.
Bibliography
ALEKSIDZE et al., Catalogue = Z. ALEKSIDZE, M. SHANIDZE, L. KHEVSURIANI, M. KAVTARIA, The New Finds of Sinai, Catalogue of Georgian Manu- scripts, Athens, 2005. ANGELIDI – PAPAMASTORAKIS, The Veneration = Ch. ANGELIDI – T. PAPAMASTO- RAKIS, The Veneration of the Virgin Hodegetria and the Hodegon Monas- tery, in VASSILAKI, Mother of God, p. 373-389. BAKALOVA, Bachkovskata kostnica = E. BAKALOVA, Bachkovskata kostnica [Bačkovo Ossuary], Sofia, 1977. BALTOYANI, The Mother of God = Ch. BALTOYANI, The Mother of God in Por- table Icons, in VASSILAKI, Mother of God, p. 139-153. CARDARELLI et al., Art and Identity = Art and Identity: Visual Culture, Politics and Religion in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, edited by S. CARDARELLI, E.J. ANDERSON, and J. RICHARDS, Newcastle, 2012. CHICHINADZE, Artistic Principle = I. CHICHINADZE, ძოქვის ოთხთავის გაფორძების ძხატვრული პრინციპები [Artistic Principle of Decoration of the Mokvi Gospel], Tbilisi, 2004. CHICHINADZE, Artistic System = N. CHICHINADZE, სინის ძთის წძ. ეკატერინეს ძონასტრის ქართული ხატის ძხატვრული სისტეძა: უფლის 412 N. CHICHINADZE
სასწაულებისა და ვნებების აძსახველი იოანე თოხაბის ხატი [The Artistic System of Georgian Icon from St. Catherine monastery on Mount Sinai: The Icon of Ioane Tokhabi with Miracles and Passion of the Lord], in Proceedings of the International Conference “Georgian Culture Abroad”, National Center of Manuscripts, Tbilisi 20-24.09.2011, Tbilisi, p. 369-380 [in press]. CHICHINADZE, Image and Identity = N. CHICHINADZE, Image and Identity. Visual Manifestation of the Rulers’ Authority in 6th-7th Centuries Armenia and Georgia, in L’Arménie et la Géorgie en dialogue avec l’Europe. Du Moyen Âge à nos jours, [édité par] I. AUGÉ, V. BARKHUDARYAN, G. DÉDÉYAN, M. DOCHTOURICHVILI, I. KARAULASHVILI, Paris, 2016, p. 131-144. CHICHINADZE, Miracle-working Images = N. CHICHINADZE, კონსტანტინეპოლის სასწაულძოქძედი ხატები და XI-XIV საუკუნეების ქართული ფერწერული ხატები [Constantinopolitan Miracle-working Images and 11th-14th Century Georgian Painted Icons], II, in საქართველოს სი ველეები [Georgian Antiquities], 6 (2004), p. 73-89. CONSTANTINIDIS, Une icône historiée = E. CONSTANTINIDIS, Une icône historiée de saint Georges du XIIIe siècle au monastère de Sainte-Catherine du mont Sinaï, in Drevnerusskoe iskusstvo : Rus’, Vizantija, Balkani [Ancient Rus- sian Art: Russia, Byzantium, Balkans], edited by O. ETINGOF, St. Peters- bourg, 1997, p. 77-105. CORRIGAN – ŠEVČENKO, “The Teaching of the Ladder” = K. CORRIGAN – N.P. ŠEVČENKO, “The Teaching of the Ladder”: The Message of the Heavenly Ladder Image in Sinai ms. gr. 417, in Images of the Byzantine World. Visions, Messages and Meanings: Studies Presented to Leslie Bru- baker, edited by A. LYMBEROPOULOU, Farnham – Burlington, VT, 2011, p. 99-121. DOP = Dumbarton Oaks Papers. ΔΧΑΕ= Δελτίον της Χριστιανικής Αρχαιολογικής Εταιρίας [Deltion of the Christian Archaeological Society]. EASTMOND, Art and Identity in Byzantium = A. EASTMOND, Art and Identity in Thirteenth-Century Byzantium: Hagia Sophia and the Empire of Trebizond (Birmingham Byzantine and Ottoman Monographs, 10), Farnham – Bur- lington, VT, 2004. EASTMOND, Art and Identity in Caucasus = A. EASTMOND, Art and Identity in the Thirteenth-Century Caucasus (UCLA Near East Center Colloquium Series [CNESCS]), Los Angeles, CA, 2000, p. 3-40. ENE D-VASILESCU, The Last Wonderful Thing = E. ENE D-VASILESCU, The Last Wonderful Thing: The Icon of the Heavenly Ladder on Mount Sinai, in Wonderful Things: Byzantium through its Art. Papers from the 42nd Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, London 20-22 March 2009, edited by A. EASTMOND and L. JAME, Farnham, 2013, p. 139-149. EVANS, Byzantium = Byzantium, Faith and Power (1261-1557). Exhibition Cata- logue Metropolitan Museum of Art, edited by H.C. EVANS, New Haven, CT – London, 2004. EVANS – WIXON, Glory of Byzantium = Glory of Byzantium: Art and Culture of the Middle Byzantine Era, A.D. 843-1261. Exhibition Catalogue Metro- politan Museum of Art, edited by H.C. EVANS and W.D. WIXON, New York, NY, 1997. REPRESENTING IDENTITIES 413
GALAVARIS, An Eleventh Century Hexaptych = G. GALAVARIS, An Eleventh Cen- tury Hexaptych of the Saint Catherine Monastery at Mount Sinai, Venice – Athens, 2009. GERSTEL, Art and Identity = Sh. GERSTEL, Art and Identity in Medieval Morea, in The Crusades from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World, edited by A. LAIOU and R.P. MOTTAHEDEH, Washington, DC, 2001, p. 263- 285. KALOPISSI-VERTI, Painters’ Portraits = S. KALOPISSI-VERTI, Painters’ Portraits in Byzantine Art, in ΔΧΑΕ, 17 (1993/94), p. 129-143. KONDAKOV, Ikonografia = N. KONDAKOV, Ikonografia Bogomateri [Iconogra- phy of the Mother of God], vol. II, St. Petersbourg, 1915. LAZAREV, Istoria vizantijiskoy = V. L AZAREV, Istoria vizantijiskoy Jivopisi [His- tory of Byzantine Painting], Moscow, 1986. LIDOVA, Avtorskoe samosoznanie = M. LIDOVA, Avtorskoe samosoznanie vizan- tiiskogo xudojnika. Nadpisi na ikonax sinajskogo monastirja [Authors’ Self-consciousness of Byzantine Artist], in Xudojnik v vizantii I drevnej Rusi: problem avtorstva [Painter in Byzantium and Ancient Russia: Prob- lem of Authorship], edited by L. EVSEEVA, Moscow, 2014, p. 37-59. LIDOVA, Poliptych kak prostranstvenni= M. LIDOVA, Poliptych kak prostranst- venni obraz khrama: Ikoni Ioana Toxabi iz sobranija Sinajskojgo monas- tirja [Poliptych as Spatial Image of Church: Icon of Ioanis Tokhabi from Sinai Monastery Collection], in Prostranstvennie ikoni, performativnoe v Vizantiii drevnej Rusi [Spatial Icons, Performative in Byzantium and Ancient Russia], edited by A. LIDOV, Moscow, 2011, p. 334-363. LIDOVA, The Artist’s Signature = M. LIDOVA, The Artist’s Signature in Byzan- tium. Six Icons by Ioannes Tohabi in Sinai Monastery (11th-12th century), in Opera - Nomina - Historiae, 1 (2009), p. 77-99. LINDQUIST – PERKINSON, Foreword = Sh.C.M. LINDQUIST – S. PERKINSON, Artis- tic Identity in the Late Middle Ages: Foreword, in Gesta, 41, No. 1 (2002), p. 1-2. MANGO, Constantinople = C. MANGO, Constantinople as Theotokoupolis, in VASSILAKI, Mother of God, p. 17-25. MANGO, Origins of the Blachernae = C. MANGO, The Origins of the Blachernae Shrine at Constantinople, in Acta XIII Congressus Internationalis Archaeo- logiae Christianae II / Radovi XIII Međunarodnog Kongresa za Starokršćansku arheologiju, Split-Poreč, 25.9-1.10. 1994, edited by N. CAMBI, E. MARIN (Studi di Antichità Cristiana, 54), Split – Vatican City, 1998, vol. II, p. 61-76. MARTIN, Illustrations of the Heavenly Ladder = J. MARTIN, Illustrations of the Heavenly Ladder of John Climacus, Princeton, NJ, 1955. MOURIKI, Icons = D. MOURIKI, Icons from the 12th to the 15th Century, in Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery, edited by K.A. MANAFIS, Athens, 1990, p. 102-124. MOURIKI, La présence géorgienne = D. MOURIKI, La présence géorgienne au Sinaï d’après le témoignage des icônes du monastère de Sainte-Catherine, in Byzance et la Géorgie : rapports artistiques et culturels, Symposium, Athènes 1990. Résumés des rapports, Athènes, 1991, p. 39-40. PEERS, Art and Identity = G. PEERS, Art and Identity: An Amulet Roll from Fourteenth-Century Trebizond, in Religious Origins of Nations? The 414 N. CHICHINADZE
Christian Communities of the Middle East, edited by B. TER HAAR ROMENY, Leiden – Boston, MA, 2010, p. 153-178. ŠEVČENKO, Close Encounters = N. PATTERSON ŠEVČENKO, Close Encounters: Contact between Holy Figures and the Faithful as represented in Byzantine Works of Art, in Byzance et les images: cycle de conférences organisé au Musée du Louvre, sous la direction d’A. GUILLOU et J. DURAND (Confé- rences et colloques – Louvre), Paris, 1994, p. 257-287. ŠEVČENKO, Icons in the Liturgy = N. ŠEVČENKO, Icons in the Liturgy, in DOP, 45 (1991), p. 45-57. ŠEVČENKO, Representation of Donors = N. PATTERSON ŠEVČENKO, The Repre- sentation of Donors and Holy Figures on Four Byzantine Icons, in ΔΧΑΕ, ser. 4, vol. 7 (1993/1994), p. 157-164. ŠEVČENKO, The Heavenly Ladder = N. ŠEVČENKO, The Heavenly Ladder Images in Patmos MS. 122: a 12th-century Painter’s Guide?, in Nea Rhome, 7 (2010), p. 393-405. ŠEVČENKO, The Mother of God= N. ŠEVČENKO, The Mother of God in Illumi- nated Manuscripts, in VASSILAKI, Mother of God, p. 155-165. SKHIRTLADZE, Ioane Tokhabi = Z. SKHIRTLADZE, იოანე თოჴაბი - სინაზე ძოღვაწე ქართველი ძხატვარი [Ioane Tokhabi, Georgian Monk at Mount Sinai], in ლიტერატურა და ხელოვნება [Literature and Art], 3 (1998), p. 61-72. SKHIRTLADZE, Sinai – Constantinople = Z. SKHIRTLADZE, სინა– კონსტანტინეპოლი, ახლი ძონაცეძები წძ. სოფიის ტა რის საკურთხევლის ძოზაიკის შესახებ [Sinai – Constantinople, New Evi- dences on the Apse Mosaic of Hagia Sophia], in Gelati Academy of Sci- ences, Proceedings, I, edited by I. GAMREKELI, Tbilisi, 2014, p. 175-194. SKHIRTLADZE, The Image of the Virgin = Z. SKHIRTLADZE, The Image of the Virgin on the Sinai Hexaptych and the Apse Mosaic of Hagia Sophia, Constantinople, in DOP, 68 (2014), p. 369-386. SOTIRIOU, Εικόνες, I/II = G. and M. SOTIRIOU, Εικόνες της Μονής Σινά, I. Planches; II. Textes (Collection de l’Institut Français d’Athènes, 100- 102), Athènes, 1956-1958. SPATHARAKIS, The Portrait = I. SPATHARAKIS, The Portrait in Byzantine Illumi- nated Manuscripts (Byzantina Neerlandica, 6), Leiden, 1971. SPATHARAKIS, The Proskynesis in Byzantine Art = I. SPATHARAKIS, The Proskynesis in Byzantine Art. A Study in Connection with a Nomisma of Andronics II Palaeologue, in Bulletin Antike Beschaving, 49 (1974), p. 190-205. TRAHOULIA, The Truth = N. TRAHOULIA, The Truth in Painting: A Refutation of Heresy in a Sinai Icon, in Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik, 52 (2002), p. 271-285. VASSILAKI, Mother of God = Mother of God: Representations of the Virgin in Byzantine Art [Exhibition Catalogue Athens Benaki Museum], edited by M. VASSILAKI, Milan – London, 2000. WEITZMANN, Icon Programs = K. WEITZMANN, Icon Programs of the 12th and 13th Centuries at Sinai, in ΔΧΑΕ, 12 (1984), p. 63-116. WEITZMANN, Studies = K. WEITZMANN, Studies in Classical and Byzantine Man- uscript Illumination, Chicago, IL – London, 1971. REPRESENTING IDENTITIES 415
WEYL CARR, Iconography and Identity = A. WEYL CARR, Iconography and Identity: Syrian Elements in the Art of Crusader Cyprus, In Religious Ori- gins of Nations? The Christian Communities of the Middle East, edited by B. TER HAAR ROMENY, Leiden – Boston, MA, 2010, p. 127-153. WEYL CARR, Icons and Objects of Pilgrimage = A. WEYL CARR, Icons and Objects of Pilgrimage in Middle Byzantine Constantinople, in DOP, 56 (2002), p. 77-81. WEYL CARR, The Mother of God = A. WEYL CARR, The Mother of God in Pub- lic, in VASSILAKI, Mother of God, p. 325-337.
Ilia State University Nina CHICHINADZE Tbilisi, Georgia 3/5 Qaqutsa Cholokashvili Ave. 0162 Tbilisi, Georgia [email protected]
Abstract —The article focuses on identities represented on late 11th - early 12th century painted icon incorporating the image of donor and painter with representation of the Christological cycle and images of the Virgin. Iconographic program of the panel together with bilingual Greek-Georgian inscriptions con- structs the self-identity of the Georgian priest-monk Ioane Tokhabi. Various visual and textual markers reveal the national, cultural, and religious identity of the donor. The icon demonstrates that the manifestation of the identities was one of the concerns for creators and/or commissioners of objects of devotional art. 416 N. CHICHINADZE
1. Icon of the Christological cycle and iconic images of the Virgin, late 11th - early 12th cc., St. Catherine’s Monastery, Sinai [Published through the courtesy of the Michigan-Princeton-Alexandria Expeditions to Mount Sinai] REPRESENTING IDENTITIES 417
2. Menologion panel (September, October, November), late 11th - early 12th cc., St. Catherine’s Monastery, Sinai [Published through the courtesy of the Michigan-Princeton-Alexandria Expeditions to Mount Sinai] 418 N. CHICHINADZE
3. The Last Judgment icon, 11th - early 12th cc., St. Catherine’s Monastery, Sinai [Published through the courtesy of the Michigan-Princeton-Alexandria Expeditions to Mount Sinai] REPRESENTING IDENTITIES 419
4. The Last Judgment icon, fragment with Georgian inscription [Published through the courtesy of the Michigan-Princeton-Alexandria Expeditions to Mount Sinai] 420 N. CHICHINADZE
5. Icon of the Christological cycle and iconic images of the Virgin, fragment [Published through the courtesy of the Michigan-Princeton-Alexandria Expeditions to Mount Sinai]