ARCHANGEL MICHAEL AS ‘ICON’ IN THE BYZANTINE AND POST–BYZANTINE PERIODS by RAITA STEYN DISSERTATION Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MAGISTER ARTIUM in Greek and Latin Studies in the Faculty of Humanities at the UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG Supervisors : Prof. JLP Wolmarans Ms Annali Cabano-Dempsey Johannesburg 2008 To my parents 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my supervisors, Ms. Annali Dempsey and Prof. Hansie Wolmarans (University of Johannesburg), for their sound guidance and assistance during the completion of this dissertation. I also wish to thank Mr. Mentor de Wet for his advice and valuable suggestions regarding matters of style and formulation of the content. Last but not least, I would like to thank my husband, Johan Steyn, for his support and patience, as well as my parents, Prof. B. Hendrickx and Dr. Thekla Sansaridou- Hendrickx, whose encouragement have inspired me to complete this study. 3 CONTENTS 1. Introduction ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5 2. Chapter 1: Icons & Angels ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10 3. Chapter 2: The Byzantine & Post-Byzantine Orthodox Society & the importance of hagiography & iconography in its context --------------------------------------------------------------- 33 4. Chapter 3: Archangel Michael represented as an ‘icon’ in the pure Byzantine & Post-Byzantine Orthodox context of a ‘theological art picture’ -------------------------------------------------------------- 43 5. Chapter 4: The characteristics & functions of Michael in the Byzantine & Post-Byzantine periods -------------------------------------------------- 58 6. Chapter 5: Funeral laments & death rites in the Orthodox Greek society & the role of Archangel Michael -------------------------------------- 64 7. Chapter 6: The aspects of syncretism, synthesis & parallelism in Archangel Michael’s icon status in the Byzantine and Post-Byzantine society ---------------------------------------- 79 8. Chapter 7: Michael’s Byzantine & Post-Byzantine iconographic identity as understood and/or revealed in the interpretation of ‘icon’ in its contemporary meaning -------------------------------------------------------------------- 93 9. Conclusion -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 110 10. Abstract ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 112 11. Bibliography --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 114 4 INTRODUCTION In the year 330 A.D., the East Roman Empire became the Byzantine Empire and in the process, three different basic cultural components, Hellenism, Roman Civilization and Christianity (including Judaism), merged into a new civilization.1 Byzantine culture and art are essentially religious in character and the primary aim of Byzantine art was to capture that which was holy and mysterious in a concrete form such as icons, murals, and architecture.2 This dissertation will focus on the perception of Archangel Michael as an ‘icon’ in the pure Byzantine and Post–Byzantine Orthodox context of a ‘theological art picture; a religious, sacred image’, subject to the theological and artistic Byzantine prescriptions.3 Indeed, Archangel Michael was arguably the most popular and venerated figure among the Judeo-Christian angels, saints, and arch-fathers (of the Byzantine Church) and in Greek society. He was hugely popular across the entire spectrum of Greek society, but especially amongst the Byzantine youth. So much so, for example, that young students venerated him in order to pass their exams, young advocates venerated him so that they may have rich clients, and soldiers venerated him so that they may win their battles. Even the Imperial family elevated him, as leader of the heavenly army, to a status equivalent to that of Emperor. He was eventually venerated by all mortals as the guardian of Paradise and collector of souls.4 Because of his broad overall popularity in Greek society in general, we have to specifically examine the functions and status of Michael as ‘icon’ in a Greek Orthodox context. One cannot however ignore the fact that contemporary society has ‘created’ a similar phenomenon called the modern day icon: “someone greatly admired, often seen as a 1 Savvides & Hendrickx, Introducing Byzantine History, Paris, 2001, pp. 29-31. 2 Yanagi, M., Takahashi, E., Tsusuka, S., & Nagatsuka, Y., Byzantium, London, 1978, pp. 7-13. 3 Theunissen W. P., Ikonen, Den Haag (no date) – Hendrix, P., Skrobucha H & Janssens, A. M., Ikonen, Amsterdam/Brussels, 1960 – Ζografidis, G., Βυζαντινή φιλοσοφία της εικόνας (2nd ed.), Athens, 1997. 4 Hendrickx, B., “Agathias se epigramme oor ‘ikone’,” in Acta Patristica et Byzantina 5, 1994, pp. 66-75. – Danforth L. M., The Death Rituals of Rural Greece, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1982. 5 perfect example or an idealised role model”.5 It would therefore be interesting to see how these modern day icons compare to Michael. 1. Research Aims and Justification This study aims to provide a clean and scholarly sound explanation of why and how Archangel Michael became the main ‘icon’ in Greek society for more than ten centuries.6 No such study has ever been undertaken and I am convinced that a study like this will contribute greatly to the understanding of the Byzantine and Post–Byzantine value system, mentality and worldview. 2. Problem Statements a. Iconography In a Byzantine and Post–Byzantine context, serious consideration must be given to the question ‘What exactly contributed to the ‘iconic status’ of Michael?’ To fully address this question, we need to look at the following: • Did traditional Byzantine iconography play a part in the role model status and/or functions of Michael? • Was this iconography influenced by Michael’s status and if so, how and to what extent? b. Syncretism • Did syncretism play a role in Michael’s ‘icon’ status? • Did (and how) ancient pagan elements blend in with the Biblical and Christian traditions? • Did the Christian ‘promise of paradise’ alter the negative image of Charon7 into a figure capable of bridging earthly life with the eternal one? 5 Collins, Today’s English Dictionary, London, 1995, p. 388 – (Compare also Eco, U., On Beauty, London, 2004, pp. 418 – 430.) 6 Zografidis, Βυζαντινή – Tsakiridis, L., Παμμέγιστοι Ταξιάρχαι Μιχαήλ και Γαβριήλ (Οι Αρχάγγελοι), Κατερίνη (2nd ed.), 2001. 7 For a definition, see Hyperidis, “Αυτοκράτορες”, Εγκυκλοπαιδικόν λεξικόν Ελευθερoυδάκη, vol. VIII, Athens, 1930, pp. 376-377: Charon, also known as Charos, Charondas or Haros. 6 c. The different roles attributed to Michael • How did the different ‘roles’ attributed to Michael fit in with his status and did this status enhance his popularity? d. Contemporary Icons • In this modern day, what elevates an ordinary person to the status of ‘icon’? • Can the ‘icon’ of today be compared to the Byzantine icon of Michael? 3. Methodology A combination of socio-historical, anthropological and literary approaches will be applied within a contextual (such as texts and icons) analysis, to highlight the socio- historical and artistic religious relationships between the different interpretations of the term ‘icon’ (also against a literary background). The relationship between the perceptions/concepts, both in a Byzantine and Post–Byzantine context, will be examined. For the period under consideration, a broad spectrum of Byzantine and Post–Byzantine sources will be used: icono-hagiography (icons, murals, mosaics), literary sources (poems, inscriptions, graffiti) and laography (study of folklore; in casu recorded visions and dreams) as well as an eclectic and exemplary selection of important and representative pictorial, literary and laographic ‘images’ of Archangel Michael. For the Byzantine iconographic stereotypes and their theological meaning,8 the 18th Century text of the Ερμηνεία της ζωγραφικής τέχνης, by Dionysius of Fourna, is most important.9 4. Structure This dissertation will consist of seven chapters in the following order: Chapter 1 The first chapter will present the terminology and meaning of icons and angels in general with special attention on the Byzantine and Post–Byzantine society. 8 Romaios, K., Κοντά στις ρίζες, Athens, 1980 – See also Danforth, The death rituals. 9 Papadopoulo-Kérameus, A. (ed.), Διονυσίου του εκ Φουρνά: Ερμηνεία της ζωγραφικής τέχνης, Thessaloniki, 2004. 7 Chapter 2 In this chapter a historical overview of the Byzantine and Post–Byzantine Orthodox society and the degree of importance of iconography and hagiography therein will be discussed. Essential historical events will be examined in terms of religious, social, cultural and political influences with special attention to influences and transformation of pagan themes on early Christian art with regard to the Byzantine iconography and hagiography. Chapter 3 It will mainly examine the artistic and symbolic iconographic representation of Archangel Michael in the Byzantine and Post–Byzantine periods while referring to the writings of Dionysius of Fourna. Chapter 4 This chapter invites us to analyse the conceptualisation, characteristics and functions of Archangel Michael in the Post–Byzantine Period. Chapter 5 Chapter five will present a critical overview and discussion of funeral laments and death rites in the Orthodox Greek Society as well as the role which Archangel Michael