Unedited Slavonic Version of the Apology on the Cross and on the Holy Icons Attributed to Patriarch Germanus of Constantinople (Cpg 8033)

Vladimir A. Baranov Novosibirsk UNEDITED SLAVONIC VERSION OF THE APOLOGY ON THE CROSS AND ON THE HOLY ICONS ATTRIBUTED TO PATRIARCH GERMANUS OF CONSTANTINOPLE (CPG 8033)

The Apology on the Cross, and on the Holy and Most Blameless Icons, and against the Heretics, in the manuscript tradition attributed to Patriarch Germanus I of Constantinople (715–730)1 survived in Georgian and Old Church Slavonic translations. The Georgian translation of the eleventh century by Ephrem Mtsire2 was critically edited by Fr Michel van Esbroeck, s. j. in 1995. Fr Michel van Esbroeck took the face value of the text and attributed it to Patriarch Germanus, connecting it with the Iconophile position of the Patriarch during the Arab siege of the Byzantine capital in 717/718 (with his promotion of the miraculous powers of the Virgin’s Icon) as opposed to the promotion of miraculous powers of the Cross by the Emperor and future initiator of Iconoclasm Leo III.3 The Slavonic translation of the same treatise of an unknown date is con- tained in a manuscript of the beginning of the seventeenth century, «Êíèãà

1 For the biography and literary activity of Patriarch Germanus see: L. LAMZA, Patriarch Germanos I. von Konstantinopel (715–730): Versuch einer endgültigen chro- nologischen Fixierung des Lebens und Wirkens des Patriarchen: mit dem griechisch- deutschen Text der Vita Germani am Schluss der Arbeit, Das Östliche Christentum n. s. 27 (Würzburg, 1975) 200–240; O. MIENARDUS, The Beardless Patriarch: St. Ger- manus // Makedonika 13 (1973) 178–186; J. LIST, Studien zur Homiletik Germanos I von Konstantinopel und seiner Zeit (Athens, 1939). More on the literary heritage of the Patriarch see in À. Ï. ÊÀÆÄÀÍ, Èñòîðèÿ âèçàíòèéñêîé ëèòåðàòóðû (650–850 ãã.) [The History of Byzantine literature (650–850)] (Ìîñêâà, 2002) 82–105, and P. PLANK, Der heilige Germanos I, Patriarch von Konsantinopel (715–730) // Der christliche Osten 40 (1985) 16–21. 2 According to the gloss in one of the manuscripts (M. VAN ESBROECK, Un discours inédits de saint Germain de Constantinople sur la Croix et les Icônes // OCP 65 (1999) n. 35, p. 30; the information on the manuscripts and their stemma see on pp. 30–31). On Ephrem Mtsire see: M. TARCHNISHVILI, Geschichte der kirchlichen georgischen Literatur (Vatican, 1955) 182–198, and E. KHINTIBIDZE, Georgian-By- zantine Literary Contacts (Amsterdam, 1996) 107–119. 3 M. VAN ESBROECK, Un discours inédits de saint Germain de Constantinople sur la Croix et les Icônes // OCP 65 (1999) 29.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 8 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

ãëàãîëåìàÿ Ðàé. Ïîó÷åíèå ñâÿòûõ îòåö» [The Book which is called Para- dise. The Teachings of the Holy Fathers].4 The issue of the authorship will be re-investigated. Certainly, such a method of attribution as language analysis cannot be applied in the case of translations, thus the main method for attribution of the text will be the analysis of inner content against the development of argumentation for and against images in the Iconoclastic controversy, reflected in dated texts, as well as correspondence of the argument * * *

4 Tobolsk Branch of the State Archive of the Tyumen Region (ÒÔÃÀÒÎ ), Collec- tion of hand-written books 229, fols. 218v.–225v. I would like to express our grati- tude to V. N. Alexeev for pointing to the presence of our Apology in the manuscript, and to Lisa Marie Baranov for her thorough editing of the article and, especially, the English translation of the Apology. Another edition of the Slavonic translation on the basis of another manuscript is being prepared by Agnes Kríza for Studia Slavica Hungarica. 5 This is an anachronism in the title, since the Feast of Orthodoxy on the first Sunday of Great Lent commemorated the the final restoration of icon-veneration and was introduced in the Byzantine Church after the corresponding event in 843. On the Restoration of Icons by Empress Theodora after the death of her husband Theophilus, see Theophanes Contunuatus, IV, 6 (PG 109, 168Cf). On the history of the rite of Orthodoxy on the first Sunday of the Lent, see Ïðîò. Ê. ÍÈÊÎËÜÑÊÈÉ, Àíàôåìàòñò- âîâàíèå (îòëó÷åíèå îò Öåðêâè), ñîâåðøàåìîå â ïåðâóþ íåäåëþ Âåëèêîãî ïîñòà: èñòîðè÷åñêîå èññëåäîâàíèå î ×èíå Ïðàâîñëàâèÿ [Anathematizing (excommuni- cation), which is performed on the first Sunday of the Great Lent: Historical research on the Rite of Orthodoxy] (ÑÏá., 1879).

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 9 with Germanus’ original writings. The representation of the Slavonic text, including punctuation and orthography, is made as authentic as possible. For the convenience of reading in some places, breaks have been supplied between the words. For the convenience of comparison between the Slavonic and Georgian versions, in our translation we preserved the structure of chapters proposed by M. van Esbroeck. Quotations from the Scripture are marked in the translation in italics with references in the original.

* * * By Our Holy Father Germanus, the Archbishop of Constantinople. The Apology on the Cross, and on the Holy and Most Blameless Icons,6 and against the Heretics spoken on the first Sunday of Holy Lent, that is on the Sunday of Orthodoxy. Father, bless.

1. Since many of those who insanely and senselessly proclaim heresy, in an unlearned and furious manner, through their evil and poisonous statements, and through the inquiries of these ignorant ones and through their blind absti- nence due to unruliness, concerning the word about the honourable icons, have become often in the habit of confusing the disciples of the Catholic and Apostolic Church, and we, calling out: bring forth, bring forth the divine word unto the opening of our mouths, shall say to them: “tell us, oh insane

6 Added in the Georgian version «made-by-hands and not made-by-hands», in spite of the absence of any examples of images «not-made-by-hands» like the Edessa Mandylion of the Savior or the Camuliana image of the Virgin in the treatise.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 10 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

7 Cf. Gal. 6:14. 8 On the theological opposition «soulless–ensouled» in the Iconoclastic Controver- sy, see V. A. BARANOV, The Role of Christ’s Soul-Mediator in the Iconoclastic Christo- logy // Origeniana Nonna / Eds. Gy. Heidl, R. Somos (Leuven, 2007, forthcoming). 9 Isa. 60:13. 10 Cf. the Peuseis of Constantine V (PG 100, 425D=Fragment 174, H. HENNEPHOF, Textus byzantinos ad Iconomachiam pertinentes in usum academicum (Leiden, 1969) (Byzantina Neerlandica. Series A, fasc. 1) 56). 11 Gal. 3:13. 12 Deut. 21:23.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 11 and dishonest ones, by whose word are you maliciously blaspheming the most blameless icon of the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, unrestricted- ly proclaiming to venerate His Honourable and Life-Giving Cross?” For as I think, the Cross, even if it is a victorious weapon of divine power against the devil and all his hostile powers, and praise higher than all praise, yet it is of soulless wood, the cypress, I say, the pine and the cedar, and not only that but by the hands of unlawful people was made, using tools for wood, unto the three-day death of the Lord Jesus.13

2. But you say in any case: we are accustomed to honor and venerate the Cross of Jesus because of our Lord and God nailed to it, who was made a curse for us, to make us receive filial adoption being freed from the ancient curse. I will say the same thing: the Cross, as the divine and Holy Spirit says by the Prophet, was the vessel of curse, for he that is hanged on the wood is accursed. If that one who is hanged on the wood is accursed, obviously also is that upon which he is hanged,14 that is the wood of the cross, if it had not turned into a holy thing through the holiness of God who was raised on it. For Christ revealed it by destroying the hostile powers through this victorious scepter. For this reason the judgment is righteous by you and by us — it is venerated in honor and truth for the sake of Christ raised on it. Why only

13 John of Damascus has a similar argument in Apology II, 19.1–6; Contra ima- ginum calumniatores orationes tres // Die Schriften des Johannes von Damaskos III / Ed. B. KOTTER (Berlin, 1975) (Patristische Texte und Studien 17) 118 [hereafter: KOTTER]. 14 Michael the Syrian provides a text, relating to the Byzantine Iconoclasm of the ninth century, which mentions an alleged order of a Patriarch of Constantinople (Nice- phorus?) to have images suspended around peoples’ necks together with crosses (S. GERO, The Resurgence of Byzantine Iconoclasm in the Ninth Century, according to a Syriac Source // Speculum 51 (1976) 2).

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 12 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

15 Ps. 46:6 (King James [KJ]: Ps. 47:5). 16 2 Tim. 2:15. 17 Ps. 134: 15–16 (KJ: Ps 135: 15-16). 18 2 Cor. 3:6. Cf. John of Damascus, Apology I, 5.11–13 (KOTTER, 78). 19 Cf. Phil. 2:6–7 20 Cf. Ps 92:1 (KJ: Ps 93:1).

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 13 do you not venerate His human-like image, who for our sins was nailed to it, buried and resurrected and, as David the Forefather of God said: who has gone up to the heavens with a shout. For we see how the Cross was sanctified through such voluntary and holy nailing and turned into blessing. Yet you do not see that, and venerate the sanctified Cross, but do not venerate the depicted image of the One who sanctified it nor accept it. But what do those of little faith say, who do not want to rightly divide the word of truth, moreover do not know it: The idols of the heathens are silver and gold, the work of men’s hands. They have mouths, but they speak not; eyes have they, but they see not, and so on. Was it not of these that David, the Forefather of God, sang in the past?

3. Oh, insanity, oh, lack of faith, oh, evil doctrine! Come and see, all who can see, how the letter kills but the spirit gives life. For David sang of these in his word about the idols of the heathens and not about Christian icons. So Christian icons are not considered gods by those who think in the right way. We depict with material colours the image of Our Lord Jesus Christ according to us, by this raising our mind to his divine and immaterial [nature]. For being God and incircumscribable, he did not neglect to become a circum- scribable man for the sake of man, and moreover unto majesty. You know the remembrance of his conception and Nativity, His growing and Baptism, in- numerable multitudes of signs and miracles, as well as the slandering by the

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 14 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

21 Most likely: (cf. Ps. 31:9 [KJ: Ps. 32:9]).

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 15

Jews, [His] Transfiguration on Mount Tabor, Passion on the Cross, three-day Burial, Festal and Glorious and Bright Resurrection, [His] Entrance to the disciples through the closed doors in Zion, Ascension to the Heavens, and again, His fearful Coming.22 And we do not name the painted image God, the Creator of heaven and Earth, of the sea and the abysses, of all things visible and invisible. Let there not be such a thing!23 For this is the work of the madness of the Hellenes and of the godless pagans!

4. If some say such things, let them be covered with shame and disgrace for it is they who sin and not we. But we contemplate God for the sake of those true prophesies as it was spoken. For He was Incarnated for the sake of His mercy according to us from the Holy Spirit and Mary, the Ever-Virgin and the Mother of God, who is the One, Consubstantial to God and the Fa- ther, Consubstantial Son and God, in two natures but in one image,24 unmixed, immutable, unchangeable, divisible and indivisible, worshipped by all the faithful. For it is needed to depict in God’s churches [the things] rightly foresaid by the prophets and divine Gospels through the narrated words which were fulfilled in deed for the assurance of those who accept the narra- tor. Instead of bulls and lions, horses and mules, sheep and goats, birds and the like,25 is it not more appropriate for the beauty of God’s Church to erect

22 Ñf. John of Damascus, Apology I, 8. 59–67 [=Apology III, 8], [KOTTER, 82–83]; the Epistle of Pope Gregory II to Patriarch Germanus mentions the following scenes in a similar context: the Nativity and Veneration of the Magi, Meeting, Flight into Egypt, various miracles of Christ, His Passion, Resurrection and Ascension (J. D. MANSI, Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio (Florence—Venice, 1759–1798) Vol. 13 [hereafter: MANSI 13]. 96AC); the Adversus Constantinum Cabalinum gives the list of scenes worthy of depiction in: PG 95, 313D–316A). 23 On the very important issue of the circumscribability of Christ according to his human nature in the icon theology of Patriarch Nicephorus, see P. ALEXANDER, Patri- arch Nicephorus of Constantinople: Ecclesiastical Policy and Image Worship in the Byzantine Empire (Oxford, 1958) 199, 206f; Ch. VON SCHÖNBORN, L’icône du Christ: Fondaments théologiques (Paris, 1986) 204f. The third Antirrheticus of Theodore the Studite is also dedicated to the issue of circumscribability (PG 99, 389–436). 24 Perhaps, an «interpretative» Slavonic translation, since in Georgian this is translated by the standard «hypostasis». A similar translation one may see in chapter 19 of the Apology. The correlation of image and hypostasis plays a very important role in the theology of Theodore the Studite (VON SCHÖNBORN, L’icône du Christ… 223–227) and for the whole later Iconophile tradition. 25 Cf. John of Damascus, Apology I, 20.10–15 [KOTTER, 96]). In the Georgian version the «sea animals» are added to the list.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 16 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

26 Cf. Jn. 10:38. 27 Most likely, Greek pragma/ — «deed, matter». 28 Ex. 17:11–13. 29 Gen. 47:31; Cf. Apology I, 8.81–82 [KOTTER, 83]; ñf. the Epistle of Patriarch Germanus to Thomas of Claudiopolis (H. G. THÜMMEL, Die Frühgeschichte der ostkirchlichen Bilderlehre. Texte und Untersuchungen zur Zeit vor dem Bilderstreit (Ber- lin, 1992) (TU 139) 382.164).

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 17 and paint in a sacred manner God’s holy and honorable icons which are a self-speaking book, and the remembrance of the continuous true manifesta- tion, and a brief narration, and moreover, for the sake of those ignorant who do not know the Scriptures?30 5. Not continuing our word about such things, let us move on to other things of ignorance. Bring again the word about the veneration of the divine and honourable icons, and having written a most true word, we will show those who suffer from knowledge, the gathering of the heretics, that those who do not honour the icon of our Saviour Jesus Christ, should not venerate His divine and Life-giving Cross. For I will ask you: as the Father is in the Son, and the Son is in the Father, in the same way the Image is in the Cross and the Cross is in the Image, for the Cross and the Image are the same thing. Moses the God-beholder showed this when he defeated sensible Amalek, stretching his arms crosswise on the mountain, representing through himself the Cross as in an Image, that is Jesus in the Cross for the sake of our flesh, and the Cross in Jesus Christ. For the one who honors and venerates His honorable Cross also in honor venerates His honorable Image, and being human-like according to the visible representation, he is represented through human hands by means of material paints.31

6. If there is a spark of unbelief and it burns your mind, and you think me wrong, I beg you to tell me asking, the rod of Joseph, to which Jacob bowed down, signified the bowed person himself or was it the image of Jesus vene-

30 John of Damascus as well calls icons «books for the illiterate» (biblouj/ agram-) matwn/ ) (Apology III, 9,59–60 [KOTTER, 99]). 31 Ñf. Theodore the Studite, PG 99, 697BC. The same example of Moses’ arms lifted up is used in other sources of the Iconoclastic time: the Canon on the Exaltation of the Cross by Cosmas the Hymnographer (see ÊÀÆÄÀÍ, Èñòîðèÿ âèçàíòèéñêîé ëèòåðàòóðû 153) and in the Iconoclastic inscription of a certain Sergius from the collection of Iconoclastic inscriptions, quoted and refuted by Theodore the Studite (PG 99, 437A).

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 18 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

32 Cf. Mk. 8:18.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 19 rated? Did it not show Him honored and venerated? Yes, indeed, I say unto you, that the one who does not honor the Son, does not honor the Father. So, the one who does not venerate this historical sacred representation, the icon of our Lord Jesus Christ, will neither be ever able to confess His divine Incar- nation other than as a reverie.33 Let such be in every way anathema! Let us leave a hostile devil, an unclean spirit, to those wretched Iconoclasts, and to the repudiators of saints, who say that one should not venerate the icon of Christ, let there be anathema. But we have said already as Moses assured us, that the Cross and the icon are the same thing. In cutting off the icon as not venerable, then let the right wood of the Cross similarly be cut off, which makes the image.

7. If this will happen, what will you then venerate, oh puffed up and ignorant people! Truly, if you have ears to hear and eyes to see, it is nothing other than the form of the literal letter,34 as you have been told, so that understand- ing what was spoken you would understand and correct yourselves. But if you decree that the beautiful and sacred image of Our Savior Jesus Christ should in no way be venerated because it was depicted by a hand made of dust, making the accusation its being made by hand, tell me, as I again want to ask you: from the Forefather Adam and until now, what is not made-by- hands in the whole world? You cannot show me anything of that kind. The only things not made-by-hands are those which our unfalse God desired to create solely with His Word, and fulfilled by the Holy Spirit.

33 Ñf. The Epistle of Patriarch Germanus to Thomas of Claudiopolis (THÜMMEL, Die Frühgeschichte der ostkirchlichen Bilderlehre… 381.147f), and Patriarch Ger- manus’ Epistle to John of Synnada (Ibid. 375.42). 34 The comparison of the Cross with the letter «tau», and thus, allusion to the T-shaped Cross, mentioned in the Epistle of pseudo-Barnabas 9,8 (the Greek text of the Epistle is: Épitre de Barnabé / Eds. R. A. KRAFT, P. PRIGENT (Paris, 1971) (SC 172); on the T-shaped Cross, see «Kreuz» // Reallexikon zur Byzantinische Kunst / Ed M. RESTLE. Bd 5. (Stuttgart, 1995) 2–218, the images are on pp. 25–26) is present only in the Georgian version. Apparently the Slavonic translator or scribe omitted it as incomprehensible and in this way simplified the original argument of the author.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 20 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 21

8. Both before Noah and after Noah, before Abraham and after Abraham, before Moses and after Moses, before Solomon and after Solomon, the Lord’s altars were set up by men. But they could not create anything uncreated or unmixed or unpainted or not made-by-hands. We see all these things that are of human hands. Similarly God spoke in Moses’ tabernacle in the midst of Cherubim made-by-hands, and the divine Spirit of the Lord lived in Solo- mon’s Temple made-by-hands. And those who want will find these things in the Old [Testament] and many more things while in the New, that is after the Incarnation of God’s Word. Are there not holy altars made-by-hands created in the whole world, upon which there were erected crosses, some made of gold, some of silver, and some made of copper and iron, and from various [types] of wood? And all of the liturgical vessels of the Church, are they not of human hands? Both they are and they will be. And upon the thankfulness and divine calling of the Most-holy and Life-giving Spirit, the bread of the Offering becomes truly divine flesh. Is it not mixed and broken into pieces by an earthly hand? And according to what has been said before, in receiving and believing without deceit in the divine and saving Blood, is the wine of the divine chalice not made by human hands? Indeed you will tell me, yes.35

35 The standard list of man-made objects (the Cross, the Book of the Gospels and the Eucharist; sometimes church vessels and altar tables are included), whose holiness was accepted without saying, both by the Iconodules and by the Iconoclasts, is often mentioned in the anti-Iconoclastic polemics: MANSI 13, 241CD, 249A, 269D–272A; John of Damascus, Apology I, 15 (KOTTER, 88.14f); Nouthesia gerontos (Á. Ì. ÌÅ- ËÈÎÐÀÍÑÊÈÉ, Ãåîðãèé Êèïðÿíèí è Èîàíí Èåðóñàëèìëÿíèí, äâà ìàëîèçâåñòíûõ áîðöà çà ïðàâîñëàâèå â VIII âåêå [George of Cyprus and John of Jerusalem, two little known fighters for Orthodoxy in the eighth century] (ÑÏá., 1901) XVII); Ad- versus Constantinum Cabalinum (PG 95, 325B); Adversus Iconomachos (PG 96, 1352AB); Theodore the Studite (PG 99, 497Af); Epistle of the Three Patriarchs (Texte zum byzantinischen Bilderstreit: der Synodalbrief der drei Patriarchen des Ostens von 836 und seine Verwandlung in sieben Jahrhunderten / Ed. H. GAUER (Frankfurt- am-Main, 1994) (Studien und Texte zur Byzantinistik 1) 52.27–43). On the theological significance of the term «not made-by-hands» in the polemics of the Iconoclastic time, see Â. À. ÁÀÐÀÍÎÂ, Èêîíîáîð÷åñêèå ñïîðû è áîãîñëîâñêîå çíà÷åíèå Íåðóêî- òâîðíîãî îáðàçà [Iconoclastic controversy and the theological significance of the Image «Not Made-by-hands»] // Âèçàíòèÿ è ñîâðåìåííûé ìèð. Ìàòåðèàëû âòîðîé íàó÷íî-ïðàêòè÷åñêîé êîíôåðåíöèè ïàìÿòè âèçàíòèéñêîé èìïåðèè. Ïÿòûé ìåæäó- íàðîäíûé ôåñòèâàëü «Ýõî Ýëëàäû», Íîâîñèáèðñê, ìàðò 2003 ã. [Byzantium and the modern world. The materials of the second scholarly-practical conference in the memory of the Byzantine Empire. The fifth international Festival «The Echo of Hel- las», Novosibirsk, March, 2003] / Ïîä ðåä. Ì. Í. Áóñèê-Òðîôèìóê (Íîâîñèáèðñê, 2006, forthcoming).

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 22 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

36 Ps. 95:13 (KJ: Ps. 96:13). 37 Mt. 16:27. 38 Jer. 11:19. 39 Jn. 19:15. 40 Mt. 27:25.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 23

9. And we honor with hope and venerate these all with fear and honor, and believe them to be holy and God’s. For what reason is only the icon of our Savior Jesus Christ blasphemed by your irrepressible mouths? Oh sav- agery, oh woe! Oh terrible wonder! For if we dishonor an earthly king, we receive such vengeance from him! Those who dare this then are given over to deathly judgment, for the king says to them: “Because you dishonored and afflicted me while I was absent, as if present due to my image, thus I com- mand to kill you with a ferocious and fatal death.”41 If these things are done in this way, what will then the heavenly and immortal, and eternal king do to you, great-talkers and blasphemers, who is dishonored by you for the sake of his honorable and most-honorable icon, when he will come to judge the world in righteousness and reward every man according to his works, disbelief or faith?

10. Oh fear, oh trembling! Oh painful torment, which will afflict you at that time! If you do not repent, you will be counted with those, whom the Prophet foreseeing revealed, who made slander upon the Lord — he speaks in their name: let us put the [poisonous] wood into his bread, and hide him alive under the earth. Saying this he manifestly showed the Jews, fighters against God, who, when the prophecy had come true, cried out to Pilate: “Away with him, away with him, crucify him!” “His blood be on us, and on our children”. But many times you also destroyed and burnt all sorts of icons, and shamelessly spit and trampled and completely broke them, and made a council to hide and make unknown and to commit to the depths with a stone the icon, similar in form to the Body of the Divine Word. And if anyone

41 Cf. Fragments 1 and 2 of Theodore of Mopsuestia, who interprets creation in the image of God, comparing it to the Emperor’s image, which was left in the city after his departure (F. PETIT, L’homme créé «à l’image» de Dieu. Quelques fragments grecs inédits de Théodore de Mopsueste // Mus 100 (1987) 275–277). Our text is especially reminiscent of the Riot of Statues in Antioch in 387, when in response to the rise in taxation the city population overthrew the statues of the Emperor, after which both the City and the rioters were severely punished by Theodosius I (on the Riot see R. BROWNING, The Riot of A.D. 387 in Antioch: The Role of the Theatrical Claques in the Later Empire // Journal of Roman Studies 42 (1952) 13–20). On the Byzantine Imperial cult see: G. DAGRON, Empéreur et prêtre: étude sur le cesaropapis- me byzantin (Paris, 1996); M. MCCORMICK, Eternal Victory. Triumphal Rulership in Late Antiquity, Byzantium, and the Early Medieval West (Cambridge, 1986).

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 24 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

42 Cf. Mt. 27:24. 43 Mt. 26:24. 44 Jn 6:30, cf.: Mt. 16:1. 45 Mt. 16:4; Mt. 12:39.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 25 washes [his hands] in front of you like Pilate saying, “I am clean from your blood, you see to it,” you would exclaim in the manner of the Jews: “Let every icon be taken, and let this iniquity be upon our heads!”

11. Oh deception, oh diabolic schemes! Oh fatal theft! Be terrified, oh man, thinking of these, and do not be a slanderer of yourself, imagining yourself standing while you have cruelly fallen down. Rise up, oh man, and re- penting, you will be saved. If you will be excommunicated with the Jews, it would be good for you if you had not been born, according to the word of the Lord. The heretics, childish in their minds, said this in any time and in any place, and about every thing: “If you want”, [they] said to the master, “us to listen to your teaching, show us an iconic sign from the heaven, like the Cross- like [sign] out of stars,46 and having believed, we will venerate it.” This is similar to what was said by the Jews to the Lord Jesus Christ: “teacher, what sign would you show us from the heaven so we believe you?” But the Lord told them the following words, which we also tell you. Thus says the Lord, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for an iconic sign from heaven and it shall not be given unto it except in my earthly heaven, that is in the Church”. For the Cross was on high for the sake of one or many people of good faith, but until this day for such and for many unbelievers, the Cross and the icon will cause similar things to that wicked generation.

46 Emperor Constantine I’s vision of the starry Cross in the sky on the eve of the battle with Maxentius at the Milvian bridge is described by the majority of historians: Eusebius, Vita Constatnini I. 28f (F. WINKELLMAN, Eusebius Werke. Erster Band. Er- ster Teil. Über das Leben des Kaisers Constantins (Berlin, 1975, repr. 1991) 29–31); Socrates, Ecclesiastical History I, 2 (PG 67, 37Af); Sozomenos, Ecclesiastical His- tory I, 3 (J. BIDEZ, G. C. HANSEN, Sozomens Kirchengeschichte (Berlin, 1960) (Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 50) 11–12); Lactantius, De mortibus persecu- torum, 44, 4–6 (Lactance. De la mort des persécuteurs / Ed. J. MOREAU (Paris, 1954) (Sources Chrétiennes 39) 126–127). See also M. DI MAIO, J. ZEUGE, N. ZOTOV, Ambi- guitas Constantiniana: The Caeleste Signum Dei of Constantine the Great // Byz 58 (1988) 333–360; F. HEILAND, Die astronomische Deutung der Vision Kaiser Kon- stantins // Sondervortrag im Zeiss-Planetarium-Jena (Jena, 1948), 1f; T. D. BARNES, The Conversion of Constatine // Echos du Monde Classique/Classical Views n.s. 4 (1985) 371–391; H. GRÉGOIRE, La vision de Constantin «liquidée» // Byz 14 (1939) 341–351; A. H. M. JONES, The Fortuitous Event // The Conversion of Constantine / Ed. J. EADIE (New York, 1971), 89–98; P. WEISS, Die Vision Constantins // Collo- quium aus Anlass des 80. Geburtstages von Alfred Heuss. Frankfurter althistorische Studien 13. / Ed. J. Bleicken (Kallmünz, 1993) 143–169.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 26 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

47 Ps. 32:10–11 (KJ: Ps. 33:10–11). 48 An allusion to the text of the Cherubic Hymn: «Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim and who sing the thrice-holy hymn to the life-creating Trinity, now lay

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 27

12.To Belial, the initiator of evil, seducer and deceiver, we will say what we had said before: “Woe to you, devil, and all of your servants! Woe to you, devil, and all of your service! Woe to you, devil and all of your reasoning! Woe to you, devil, and all of your incurable violence! Woe to you, devil, and all of your insatiable will! Together with those of like mind, in casting out the holy icons you wanted to preach the divine Incarnation of the Word to be believed as a reverie. But woe to you and your accomplices, all-cunning de- mon!49 As the Divine Spirit says through the Prophet, “The Lord brings the councils of the heathen to naught, sweeps aside the thoughts of people, and sweeps aside the councils of princes. The Council of the Lord stands forever”. But having left you, I am now fighting with this renegade and evil servant. For I want you, I want your salvation that is in God, I seek your rising from the fall and correction. But one, having fallen from the very beginning due to his arrogance and pride, does not hope to rise.

13. But you, brethren sober up from your drunkenness, I beg you, wake up from your sleep — I mean your foolishness. Rise from your wild fall, for you can if you want to. You see how God, incircumscribable by His nature, manifested Himself to our fathers and prophets, patriarchs and kings, in shadows and images, in shadows and riddles, appearing to them according to their measure. Such are the noetic Cherubim mysteriously represented on the earth, and because of this representation the thrice-holy hymn is brought to the thrice- holy and the most holy, consubstantial and life-giving Trinity. Learn how

aside all cares of this life…». On the Hymn, see: R. TAFT, The Great Entrance: A His- tory of the Transfer of Gifts and Other Pre-anaphoral Rites in the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom (Rome, 1975) 53–118. Cf. Patriarch Germanus, Historia Mystago- gica, 34–35 (F. BRIGHTMAN, The Historia Mystagagogica and other Greek Commen- taries on the Byzantine Liturgy // JTS 9 (1908) 265.29–266.17). 49 A similar accusatory speech addressed to the devil appears in John of Damas- cus, Apology II, 6 (KOTTER, 72).

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 28 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

50 Mt. 3:16. 51 Cf. Rev. 6:12f. 52 Cf. Mt. 24:30.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 29 when the Lord Jesus was baptized in the Jordan, the Holy Spirit descended in the form of a dove. Admonish how as a great fiery pillar Basil of the great name in a similar image to this divine and most pure dove, made a dove from pure gold and hung it over the altar.53 Learn how the thrice-blessed and all- venerable Mary of the harlots conversed with the icon of the most-holy pure Mother of God as if it was animated, and received such adoption and inter- cession, that named the holy Mother of God her guarantor for the sake of Her icon.54

14. Learn this, I beg you, my beloved friends and brethren, and in no way oppose the truth. So that walking on a cliff and precipice, you not throw yourselves down forever into the pit of disbelief and perish unto the ages of ages. And you try to say in protest, “when the heavenly powers tremble in the dreadful and terrible coming, when the heavens change, the sun grows dark, the moon disappears, the stars fall down, the earth shakes, the sea dries out, how or where will be manifested this material icon, which you, oh man, teach us to venerate?”

15. I say again, that, oh brethren, the shadow of the Law ended with the coming of grace. In this way, when the beauty of the original image which

53 This practice is mentioned among the accusations of Monophysite Philoxenus of Mabbug concerning Iconoclastic actions — prohibition of liturgical doves, a number of which have survived until now (MANSI 13, 179f). Severus of Antioch also strug- gled with this practice, although the motives of both bishops were probably far from the Iconoclasm, ascribed to them (S. BROCK, Iconoclasm and the Monophysites //Icono- clasm, Papers given at the Ninth Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, University of Birmingham, March 1975 / Eds. A. Bryer, J. Herrin (Birmingham, 1977) 53–54). 54 See the Life of Mary of Egypt (PG 87.3, 3713Af; M. GEERARD, Clavis Patrum Graecorum. Vol. 3 (Brepols—Turnhout, 1979) ¹ 7675). The fragment with the mir- acle from the icon of the Virgin appears in the florilegium of John of Damascus, Apology III, 135 [KOTTER, 198–199], in the florilegium of the Second Council of Nicaea (MANSI 13, 85D–89A), and in the florilegium in defence of icons of the Ms. Parisinus Graecus 1115 (A. ALEXAKIS, Codex Parisinus Graecus 1115 and Its Arche- type (Washington, 1996) (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 34) 200–201).

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 30 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

55 The closest Scriptural allusion for the passage seems to be Heb. 10:1 — «For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things…». The first part «the shadow of the Law has ended up…» (h ( skia \ tou = no/ mou parhlqe= ) appears in pseudo-Athanasius of Alexandria, Synopsis scripturae sac- rae (PG 28, 413,7). A closer parallel is the Sunday Theotokion of the Second Tone of the Orthodox Church (the composition of the Theotokia is traditionally ascribed to the contemporary of Patriarch Germanus John of Damascus): ïðPéäå ñíü çàêhííàÿ, ábãîä@òè ïðèøPäøè: °êîæå áî êóïèíA íå ñãàð@øå ¼ïàëåìà: ò@êÌ ä2à ðîäèëA MñT, U ä2à ïðåáûëA MñT. âìñòî ñòîëïA ½ãíåííàãî, ïð@âåäíîå âîçñÈ ñbíöå: âìñòî ìÌÉñPÿ, õròhñú, ñïàñPíÈå ä}øú í@øèõú [The shadow of the law has passed now that grace has come, for as the Bush in flames was not consumed, so as a Virgin you bore a Child and remained a Virgin; instead of a pillar of fire the Sun of righteousness has dawned, instead of Moses Christ, the salvation of our souls]. The author of the Apology either uses the Theo- tokion itself or a common Patristic source with the author of the Theotokion, which we were unable to identify. 56 Ñf. Stichera of the First Tone at the Little Vespers of the Feast of Transfigura- tion of the Orthodox Church (the same stichera is repeated at the Aposticha): Væå ñú ìÌÉñPîìú ãëàãhëàâûé äðPâëå íà ãîð ñÈí@éñòýé ½áðàçû, ãëàãhëÿ, Cçú Nñìü á3ú ñé: äíPñü æå íà ãîð Ôàâºðñòýé ïðåÌáð@æüñÿ, íà÷àëîÌáð@çíîå ïîêàçA ëó÷@ìè ¼áëèñò@ÿñÿ. òìæå, õròQ, âåëè÷@þ òâî ñSëó. [The One who talked to Moses on Mount Sinai through images, saying «I am the God that I am», now transfiguring on Mount Tabor, showed the original image shining with rays. Therefore, oh Christ, I magnify Thy power]. The passage in our Apology alluding to the Transfiguration shows a classical Patristic parallelism between the Transfiguration and the Second Coming (see J. A. MCGUCKIN, The Transfiguration of Christ in Scripture and Tradition (Lewiston, 1986) (Studies in the Bible and Early Christianity 9) passim) and thus reinforces the continuity between the transfigured yet retained human image of Christ in the Transfiguration being the same as His image of the Second Coming. On the notion of the Transfiguration as a New Testa- ment fulfillment of the Old Testament Mosaic revelation in John of Damascus, see V. A. B ARANOV, Origen and the Iconoclastic Controversy // Origeniana Octava. Ori- gen and the Alexandrian Tradition / Ed. L. PERRONE. Vol. 2 (Leuven, 2003) (Bibli- otheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 164) 1048. 57 Basil the Great, De Spiritu Sancto, 18, 45 (PG 32, 149C). 58 Mt. 25:21.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 31 was assumed from the Virgin, then will fearfully shine with divine rays, the material and all-honored iconic vision will end. But the homage, and honor, and veneration, that we pay for the sake of these to God, who became man for our sake will not be depleted. For we wait to receive a reward from Him, having heard that “the honor of an icon is passed over to its prototype.” Because of this, he who is faithful over a few things, is faithful over many.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 32 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

59 1 Tim. 2:4. 60 Ps. 118:106 (KJ: 119:106). 61 2 Tim. 2:25.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 33

If until now we have said many things to you and mentioned only the iconic veneration of the Master and Savior, do not be surprised. It was suitable for us to disclose first the spring to the thirsty, and then the rivers, that is, the honorable and desirable icons of all the saints.

16. By this the disciples of the Church, who philosophize piously and in an orthodox manner, are thus commanded: do not accept those into communion, and do not greet them, and do not admix with them in any way, until they turn into the knowledge of the truth through repentance.

17. And if some of them say, “we have sworn to not venerate any icon at all, this is why we withdraw from dwelling with the orthodox”. Let such a person know what would have been useful for Herod, if only he had broken his oath and did not kill the Forerunner — for the Prophet says: “I have sworn, and I will perform it, that I will keep thy righteous judgments”. And what he says is this: He says he has “sworn to keep thy righteous judgments”, and not to transgress thy divine commands. And to not keep but to transgress, he neither swore nor performed. For the lawless and cursed Herod fulfilled what he swore, and became the consumption of the eternal fire. He ought by no means swear for the sake of pleasing people, and not God, even if he will be compelled by a deadly persecution. If this is the case, let such repent and escape defiled things, for fearful is the judgment of such an oath, upon those who dumbly swore such things upon the doing of the destroyer and fighter of God.

18. Since as the Apostle says “in meekness one ought to instruct those who oppose themselves”, I will again say a small thing to them for the sake of

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 34 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

62 Cf. the Definition of the Second Council of Nicaea (787), which decrees to set up the holy representations «in God’s holy churches, on the sacred vessels and on clothes, walls and boards, in houses and on roads (en) taij= agi( aij/ tou = Qeou = ekklhsi) / aij, en) ieroi( j= skeu/sesi kai \ e)sqh=si, toicoij/ te kai\ sanisin,/ oikoij)/ te kai\ odoi( j= )» (MANSI 13, 377D). 63 These prayers, absent in the Georgian translation, have parallels in Adversus Iconomachos (PG 96, 1360C). 64 1 Tim. 1:15. 65 Cf. Jas. 2:10.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 35 mercy. Brethren, I beg your love in the Lord, as you wish, come all together in one mind, overcoming evil with love, and leaving behind the disbelief and seduction of your former foolishness. And we do not kiss the sacred images of our Lord Jesus Christ, depicted on walls and boards and on sacred vessels, and of the Most-pure Mother of God, His Mother according to the flesh, and not only these, but also of all the holy fathers of God, patriarchs, prophets, apostles and martyrs, and of the venerable monks, and of the women — of the holy women-martyrs, who because of their patience turned weakness into fortitude, as gods in the manner of pagan dumbness, since this is a heresy and the ruin of the soul, but we kiss those icons in a theological way as the sincere friends of God and thus say with prayer. If this is the Lord’s icon, we say: “O Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, help us and save us”. If this is of His Most-pure Mother, we say: “Holy Theotokos, the Mother of the Lord, pray to your Son, our true God, to save our souls”. And if of a martyr: “Oh, martyr of the Lord, who shed your blood for Christ, being bold, pray for us”. Similarly we say this about every righteous person and venerable monk. This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation, that this is not only harmless, but also intercedes for crowns. Let us, who despise the impious and deceitful faith of the heterodox, and think of ourselves as faithful, not hear:

19. “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” For it is not as some think that the veneration is a tempo-

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 36 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

* * * The dating and the authorship of the Apology In general, in its argumentation and the issues discussed, the text shows a significant amount of correspondence with the polemic literature of the first Iconoclasm,66 and, first of all, with the Apologies in Defense of Images of John Damascene: both use the same comparisons, Scriptural examples and arguments. The early period of the Iconoclastic Controversy is also indicated by the lack of a clearly articulated Christological argument and a «didactical» argument on the importance of icons for the illiterate, which apparently later proved to be too weak to be used in defense of icons in comparison with more sophisticated arguments of a Christological and philosophical type. At the same time several points of our text are close to the theological elaborations of later Constantinopolitan Iconodulic authors, such as the argument on circumscribability, which was extensively used in particular by Patriarch Nice- phorus, or the argument of the similarity of Cross and image on the basis of Moses’ figure with spread arms. The authorship of Patriarch Germanus is mentioned in the anachronistic title of the Apology and does not have direct support in the text. However,

66 See the corresponding notes above in the text of the Apology, and M. VAN ES- BROECK, Un discours inédits de saint Germain de Constantinople sur la Croix et les Icônes // OCP 65 (1999) 23.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 37 rary honor, and then it will die out. But it will in the future by the grace of Christ, give reward due to faith, when the bodies of the saints will be con- ferred with shining more than the brightness of the sun, praying for us all to our Most-holy and Honorable and Most-blessed Glorious Lady Mother of God and Ever-virgin Mary, whose icon we venerated in honor, moreover will venerate ever, and of all the saints who pleased God from the ages. We in kissing have honored and will honor their wounds and sufferings for Christ according to the iconic representation. To our God, one in substance in three image-constitutions,67 we send our thankfulness, to Him be glory and power, honor and worship and splendor before all ages, now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

* * * four arguments can be advanced against the dating of the Apology to the earliest stages of the Iconoclastic Controversy, falling into the Patriarchate of Germanus: 1) ex silentio, 2) the presence of the citation from the Definition of Nicaea II (787) in our text, 3) the argument against the canonical prohibition of icon veneration, and 4) explicit contradiction of the whole tenor of the Apology with the «moderate» position of Patriarch Germanus expressed in his authentic three Epistles to the Iconoclastic bishops of Asia Minor. Even if the citation of the text from the Definition of Nicaea II in our Apology (ch. 18) is a later interpolation, why did the treatise, if it had been written by the Champion and Confessor of Orthodoxy Patriarch Germanus, not appear at the Council of Nicaea II? For it would have been invaluable for supporting the position of the Iconodules, who cited three Epistles of the same Patriarch to the Iconoclastic bishops, which had much less polemical power than our Apology but were sanctified by the name of the Orthodox Champion. And our «Apology on the Cross and on the Holy Icons» in its Greek original form had to survive Iconoclasm to be translated into Georgian (on the date of the Slavonic translations we do not have sufficient data) three centuries later. The answer is that our Apology must have existed at the time

67 Most likely, another case of an «interpretative» Slavonic translation (see n. 24 for chapter 4 above).

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 38 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum of Nicaea II, given its general polemic tenor, Scriptural and Patristic examples, and the stage of the development of its argumentation, but was not yet ascribed to Patriarch Germanus and thus could not be used as an authorita- tive proof-text. The author in chapters 16–17, as it seems, refers to a certain document of canonical character which bound his adversaries not to venerate icons. Most likely our text refers not to some kind of a personal oath and not to a possible «secular» decision of the issue of the icons by an institute like the Imperial silentium,68 but their signature under a formal Synodocal document similar to the Definition of an Iconoclastic council (most likely of Hiereia, since we do not know of any other Iconoclastic councils prior to 754) with its canonical consequences and anathemas. Therefore the author appeals to withdraw from Eucharistic communion with the Iconoclasts, who «swore» not to venerate icons. If this is so, then our Apology has to be dated to the time after year 754. And finally, significant attention (chapters 14–15 and 19), which our author pays to the refutation of the argument that material icons possess only temporary (and thus relative) value, which will be canceled after Christ’s Second Coming and global transformation of the material universe. The Au- thor of the Apology insists that the significance of the image does not depend on a time period, and image veneration will retain its saving value in the age to come. We may compare this position with the opinion of Patriarch Ger- manus, expressed in his Epistle, written in the very beginning of the Icono- clastic Controversy to his bishop Thomas of Claudiopolis. In this Epistle, that was cited at the Fourth Session of Nicaea II among other testimonies in defense of icons, the Patriarch thus addresses one of his bishops, who decid- ed to destroy icons in his diocese. For justification of images, Patriarch Ger- manus uses the argument of «usefulness»: One should depict the image of the Lord according to the flesh on icons in the rebuke of the nonsense of heretics, [speaking] that He became man not in a true sense but in imagination; but also as a certain direction for those

68 In January, 730, Leo III convoked a silentium, a meeting of the high secular and ecclesiastical authorities, to endorse his edict against images. Patriarch Germanus refused to approve the document, insisting on a proper Synodical decision of the problem, and resigned from his post; his former synkellos Anastasius took the position of Patriarch to execute the Imperial Iconoclastic policy (Nicephorus, Short His- tory, 62, ed. and trans. C. MANGO, Nikephoros Patriarch of Constantinople. Short History (Washington, 1990) (Dumbarton Oaks Texts 10) 130; Theophanes, Chrono- graphy / Ed. C. DE BOOR (Leipzig, 1883) 409; trans. C. MANGO, R. SCOTT, The Chron- icle of Theophanes Confessor (Oxford, 1997) 565). On the institute of silentium, see: A. CHRISTOPHILOPULU, Silention/ // BZ 44 (1951) 79–85.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access V. A. Baranov 39

who are not strong to lift up to the height of spiritual contemplation but have a need in some bodily observation of what they have heard, inasmuch as it is useful and permissible.69 According to the opinion of Patriarch Germanus, one should not reject images, since they can be useful for the less «spiritual» members of the Church. The Patriarch mentions the Incarnation of Christ, yet he does so with polemical purposes, exactly as not long before Anastasius of Sinai did (d. after 700), who used the example of the Crucifix in his polemics with the Mono- physites.70 At the same time St. Germanus does not insist, as will the next generation of Iconophile theologians, that icon veneration is indispensable for Orthodox as a testimony of Christ’s true humanity. Moreover, from the words of the Patriarch it can even follow that «those who lifted themselves up to the height of spiritual contemplation» may not need icons at all. We will not discuss here in detail the position of Patriarch Germanus, just noting that he simply follows here an old tradition of «moderate» or «practical» accept- ance of sacred images, cut short by the Iconoclastic Controversy which sharply posed the question of «all or nothing» in regard to the cult of religious representations.71 In the light of this tradition and without the existing settlement of the question of icons in a Synodical way, this ambiguity may explain the wavering attitude of Patriarch Germanus at the time of the initiation of the Icono- clastic policies of Leo III since Patriarch Germanus had kept his post of the Head of the Church of Constantinople about four years after the first Icono- clastic actions of Leo, until the Imperial silentium, where he was forced to sign a document which was way too far for Germanus’ irenic attitude.72

69 To\ de\ tou = kuriou/ thj= kata\ sa/rka ide) aj/ en) eiko) si/ tupou=sqai to\n ca- rakthra,= eij) elegcon/) men/ esti) twn= fantasia/ | kai\ ouk) alhqei) a/ | anqrwpon/) auto) \n genesqai/ lhrwdountwn/ airetikw( n,= ceiragwgian/ de / tina twn= mh \ panth/ eij) to \ uyhlo( \n ana) /gesqai th=j pneumatikhj= qewriaj/ exiscuo) ntwn,/ alla) \ de- omenwn/ kai \ tinoj swmatikhj= katanohsewj/ pro\j th\n twn= akousqe) ntwn/ be- baiwsin./ Oson/( epwfele) stero/ n/ te kai\ perispoudastoteron/ (MANSI 13, 116A = THÜMMEL, Die Frühgeschichte der ostkirchlichen Bilderlehre… 381.147–151). 70 A. KARTSONIS, Anastasis: The Making of an Image (Princeton, 1986) 40–67. 71 On this tradition see in more detail: Â. À. ÁÀÐÀÍÎÂ, Î ìàëîèçâåñòíîì äîèêî- íîáîð÷åñêîì ó÷åíèè îá «óìåðåííîì» èêîíîïî÷èòàíèè [On the little-known pre- Iconoclastic teaching of «moderate» Iconodulia] // Ìèð Ïðàâîñëàâèÿ 6 (Âîëãîãðàä, 2006, in print). 72 S. GERO, Jonah and the Patriarch // Vigilliae Christianae 29 (1975) 142–143. On the wavering attitude of Patriarch Germanus, see also P. KARLIN-HAYTER, The Age of Iconoclasm // La spiritualité de l’univers byzantin dans le verbe et l’image. Hommages offerts à Edmond Voordeckers. Instrumenta Patristica 30 (Turnhout, 1997) 138.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access 40 Scrinium II (2006). Universum Hagiographicum

Therefore putting on one scale the arguments, mentioning Patriarch Ger- manus’ authorship in the anachronistic title of the Apology, and the arguments rather typical for the first Iconoclasm with the lack of stress on Chris- tological or philosophical argumentation; and on the second scale all the dis- crepancies mentioned above, we may conclude, that our Apology constitutes a pamphlet against Iconoclasts of a rather popular level, comparable by its target audience to the anti-Iconoclastic Adversus Constantinum Cabalinum. As it seems, the Apology was composed after the Council of Hiereia of 754 and was interpolated after the Second Council of Nicaea (787), at that time still not under St. Germanus’ authorship, which in such case should be rejected. Recently there appeared an MA thesis, defended in 2005 at the Medieval Studies Department of the Central-European University and dedicated to the Georgian translation of the Homily: Natia GABRICHIDZE (Georgia), St. Ger- manos Patriarch of Constantinople in Old Georgian Translated Sources: Ho- mily on the Cross and Icons.

–≈«ﬁÃ≈

¬Î‡‰ËÏË ¿. ¡‡‡ÌÓ‚ Õ≈»«ƒ¿ÕÕ¿fl —À¿¬flÕ— ¿fl ¬≈–—»fl ´—ÀŒ¬¿ Œ –≈—“≈ » —¬fl“¤’ » ŒÕ¿’ª, œ–»œ»—¤¬¿≈ÃŒ√Œ œ¿“–»¿–’” √≈–Ã¿Õ” ŒÕ—“¿Õ“»ÕŒœŒÀ‹— ŒÃ” (CPG 8033) Â ñòàòüå ïðåäëàãàåòñÿ èçäàíèå ñëàâÿíñêîé âåðñèè àíòèèêîíîáîð÷åñêîãî ïîëåìè÷åñêîãî òðàêòàòà «Ñëîâî î Êðåñòå è ñâÿòûõ èêîíàõ, è ïðîòèâ åðåòè- êîâ» ïî ðóêîïèñè íà÷. XVII â. ñáîðíèêå «Êíèãà ãëàãîëåìàÿ Ðàé. Ïîó÷åíèå ñâÿòûõ îòåö» (Òîáîëüñêèé ôèëèàë Ãîñóäàðñòâåííîãî àðõèâà Òþìåíñêîé îá- ëàñòè, ñîáð. ðêï. êíèã ¹ 229, ë. 218 îá.225 îá.) âìåñòå ñ àíãëèéñêèì ïåðå- âîäîì òåêñòà. Ãðå÷åñêèé îðèãèíàë «Ñëîâà» íåèçâåñòåí, ãðóçèíñêàÿ âåðñèÿ «Ñëîâà» áûëà èçäàíà î. Ìèøåëåì âàí Ýñáðóêîì. Â îáåèõ âåðñèÿõ «Ñëîâî» ïðèïèñûâàåòñÿ ñâ. Ãåðìàíó I Êîíñòàíòèíîïîëüñêîìó (715730); ýòîé æå àò- òðèáóöèè ïðèäåðæèâàëñÿ è ïåðâûé èçäàòåëü òåêñòà. Â ñòàòüå ïðåäëàãàåòñÿ àíàëèç àðãóìåíòîâ ïàìÿòíèêà â ñðàâíåíèè ñ ðàçâèòèåì ïðîáëåìàòèêè èêîíî- áîð÷åñêîãî ñïîðà, îòðàæåííîé â äàòèðîâàííûõ ãðå÷åñêèõ ïàìÿòíèêàõ òîãî æå ïîëåìè÷åñêîãî æàíðà. Àâòîð ïðèõîäèò ê âûâîäó, ÷òî «Ñëîâî» ïðåäñòàâ- ëÿåò ñîáîé ïàìôëåò ïðîòèâ èêîíîáîðöåâ äîñòàòî÷íî ïîïóëÿðíîãî óðîâíÿ, íàïèñàííûé ïîñëå ñîáîðà â Èåðèè 754 ã. è èíòåðïîëèðîâàííûé ïîñëå Ñåäü- ìîãî Âñåëåíñêîãî ñîáîðà. Àâòîðñòâî ïàòðèàðõà Ãåðìàíà â òàêîì ñëó÷àå äîëæ- íî áûòü îòâåðãíóòî.

Downloaded from Brill.com09/25/2021 03:43:17PM via free access