“King’s Painter” Tevdore and his inscriptions

Nina Chichinadze* Ilia State University,

UDC 003.623(=353.1):75.071.1Tevdore 75.052(479.22)”10/11” DOI https://doi.org/10.2298/ZOG1842025C Оригиналан научни рад

The paper deals with “King’s Painter” Tevdore and his inscrip- painting the identities of artists/masters are displayed tions preserved in three churches of Upper (northwest- not only in the verbal form – in texts inscribed on the ern highland region of ) dated back to the eleventh works of art – but also by applying multiple tools involv- and twelfth centuries. The textual and visual data allow us to reconstruct the status of the painter and his impact on the em- ing a sophisticated interplay of inscriptions and imagery, bellishment of these churches. The inscriptions are considered spatial constructs, light and color. Painters’ inscriptions from various perspectives, with a special emphasis on their preserved in medieval Georgian churches vary in their political and social context. Tevdore’s title stressing his ties character – some of them are brief modest invocations with monarchic power aimed to extend the “royal presence” in hardly visible to the beholders,2 while others are exten- Svaneti. The spatial constructs, creating semantic focuses for sive, well discernable texts.3 Their layout, scale, content, the display of authors’ inscriptions, permit an evaluation of his literary style and “visibility” are directly connected to status and place in the given social system. the painters’ status and their role in the embellishment Keywords: painters’ inscriptions, medieval Georgian art, Da- of churches. vid IV, Georgia, Svaneti, wall painting, King’s painter Tevdore

Medieval Georgian monumental painting has pre- scriptions and their display, 265–285 and G. Pallis, Messages from a sacred space. The function of the Byzantine sanctuary barrier in- served various types of artists’ inscriptions revealing scriptions, 145–158); idem, Speaking decoration inscriptions on ar- a complex “communication system” developed within chitectural sculpture of the Middle Byzantine church, in: Inscriptions Orthodox Christian culture. Textual and visual mate- in Byzantine and Post-Byzantine history and history of art, ed. Ch. Stavrakos, Wiesbaden 2016, 389–403. rials demonstrate diverse forms and strategies applied 2 by artists for their self-representation.1 In monumental In rock-cut churches (Nos. 7, 8) of Sabereebi, Davit Garedji desert, tenth century, there are surviving painters’ laconic inscriptions. One of them is located on the eastern wall of the north arm, another in * [email protected] the apse – between the feet of Christ. In , a late twelfth-century 1 Inscriptions of medieval artists are the subject of numer- painter’s inscription is inserted in the ornamental strip in the conch. Z. ous publications. Notable studies include: S. Kalopissi-Verti, Paint- Sxirtlaże, Sabereebis p‘reskuli carcerebi, Tbilisi 1985, 67–68, 114–116; E. ers in Late Byzantine society. The evidence of church inscriptions, Privalova, Rospis’ Timotesubani, Tbilisi 1980, 129 (with earlier bibliog- CA 42 (1994) 139–157 (with earlier bibliography); eadem, Paint- raphy). Although inscriptions in Betania (late twelfth century) – one ers’ portraits in Byzantine art, ΔXAE 17 (1993/94) 129–143; v. also is inscribed in the floral ornament in the apse, above the altar, and an- eadem, Dedicatory inscriptions and donor portraits in thirteenth other in the eastern jamb on the window in the south arm, hidden in century churches of Greece, Vienna 1992, 26, 82, 87, 90, Inscr. ns. the vegetation at the feet of Aaron – do not indicate directly that they A29, A35, A39a, b, A43; eadem, Painters’ information on themselves belong to painters, their location has led scholars to hypothesize that in Late Byzantine church inscriptions, in: L’ artista a Bisanzio e nel they are masters’ “autographs”. Eadem, Novye dannye o Betanii, in: Pro- mondo cristiano-orientale, ed. M. Bacci, Pisa 2007, 55–70; I. Drpić, ceedings of the 4th international symposium of Georgian art, Tbilisi 1983, Painter as scribe. Artistic identity and the arts of graphê in late Byz- 16–17. The inscription inserted in the ornament of the apse of Ozaani antium, WI 29/3 (2013) 334–353; E. Qavelašvili, Mxeris eklesiis mx- church has also been attributed to its painter (N. Ch.?). Eadem, Ros- atvari, Sak‘art‘velos xelovnebis saxelmcip‘o muzeumis narkvvebi 5 pis’ tࢎserkvi “Vozneseniiࢎa” – “Amagleba” v Ozaani, Ars Georgica 9 (1987) (Tbilisi 1999) 96–100; N. Chichinadze, Self-representations of artists 123–124 (with earlier bibliographic references). in medieval Georgia, in: Thematic sessions of free communications. 3 Inscription of Michael Maglakeli in Matskhvarishi church, Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress of Byzantine Stud- 1140 AD, is located in the spandrels of the east blind arch of the north ies, Belgrade 2016, 586 (Abstract); eadem, Representing identities. wall; in the Archangels Church of Zemo Krikhi, the late thirteenth- The icon of Ioane Tokhabi from Sinai, Le Museon 130/3–4 (2017) century renovator of the eleventh-century murals is mentioned in the 401–420; V. also my on-going project “Masters of Medieval Geor- inscription on the lower part of the north wall, in the composition gia”: medart.iliauni.edu.ge. About inscriptions in Medieval material with the ktetors; in the church of Sori, from the fourteenth century, culture v. A. Papalexandrou, Text in context. Eloquent monuments an inscription belonging to two painters is written on the north wall. and the Byzantine beholders, WI 17/3 (2001) 259–283; Art and text In Tsalenjikha church bilingual Greek and Georgian inscriptions in Byzantine culture, ed. L. James, Cambridge 2007 (henceforth are displayed on the western sides of the west piers. T. Virsaladze, Art and text); Viewing inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medi- Freskovaiࢎa rospis’ khudozhnika Mikaela Maglakeli v Matࢎskhvarishi, in: eval world, ed. A. Eastmond, New York 2015 (henceforth Viewing idem, Gruzinskaiࢎa srednevekovaiࢎa monumental’naiࢎa zhivopis’, Tbilisi inscriptions); Writing matters. Presenting and perceiving monumen- 2007, 146; eadem, Freskovaiࢎa rospis’ v tࢎserkvi Arkhangelov sela Zemo tal inscriptions in Antiquity and the Middle Ages, ed. I. Berti et al., Krikhi, 35; I. Čičinaże, Soris moxatuloba, Tbilisi 1985, 8; Kalopissi- Berlin–Boston 2017 (v. esp. A. Rhoby, Text as art? Byzantine in- Verti, Painters in Late Byzantine society, 146–147, fig. 11. 25 ЗОГРАФ 42 (2018) [25–36]

Fig. 1. Sts. Archangels Church, Iprari, chancel barrier with an inscription 26 Chichinadze N.: “King’s Painter” Tevdore and his inscriptions

Fig. 2. Sts. Archangels Church, Iprari, inscription, fragment

The earliest painters’ inscriptions preserved in corded in the painted inscriptions are both laymen and Georgia date back to the tenth century.4 From the elev- clergymen.8 enth-twelfth century onward painters’ “signatures” appear Striking examples of an artist’s inscriptions are more frequently.5 During the fourteenth century and in shown in the murals of painter Tevdore, who held the subsequent periods, especially in the sixteenth and sev- prestigious title of “King’s Painter”. His inscriptions clearly enteenth centuries, artists’ inscriptions significantly in- indicate, that between 1096–1130 AD he decorated three creased in number.6 The “autographs” of artists occur churches in Upper Svaneti, the northwestern highland re- elsewhere in the church interiors including apses, above gion of Georgia.9 This paper will analyze the preserved entrance doors, or north and/or south and west walls, and textual and visual data and will attempt to reconstruct the on the piers of domed churches.7 Among the artists re- status of the painter and his impact on the embellishment of these churches. It will also consider the functioning of 4 Sabereebi churches Nos 7, 8. For bibliographic references v. these inscriptions from various perspectives, with a spe- footnote no 2. V. also inscription with the painter’s name in the church cial emphasis on their political and social context. of Nasguni: N. Aladashvili, G. Alibegashvili, A. Vol’skaiࢎa, Zhivopisnaiࢎa shkola Svaneti, Tbilisi 1983, 13–14. The earliest painting of Tevdore decorates the in- 5 Inscriptions of Matskhvarishi, Vardzia, Betania, Ozaani (for terior of the Archangels’ Church in Iprari. (fig. 1, 2) The bibliography v. footnote no. 2 and 3); v. also the painted inscription in two-line inscription (240×10 cm; letters 3–3.5 cm) was ex- the church of St. George in Tsvirmi, Upper Svaneti, twelfth century. Ek. ecuted in the ancient Georgian uncial script “asomtavruli” T‘aqaišvili, Ark‘eologiuri ek‘spedicia leč‘xumsa da svanetši, Tbilisi 19912, in white paint against a dark green background. It runs 256. across the top of the chancel barrier (entablature).10 The 6 E. g. churches of , Chule, Sori, Calenjikha, Mkher; v. also artists’ inscriptions in the sixteenth-century murals of masonry structure with a central Royal Door and two Tsitelkhevi, St. Elijah Church near Gelati, Ilemi, Obcha, etc. The artists’ lateral openings is a typical form of chancel barriers in inscriptions are presented in epigraphic material of the seventeenth- Svaneti. The inscription reads: century churches of Samtavisi, Ertatsminda, Svetitskhoveli, etc.; Sh. Amiranashvili, Georgian painter Damiane, Tbilisi 1974, 13; V. Beriże, “Christ, this holy church was painted and Żveli k‘art‘veli ostatebi, Tbilisi 1967, 24, (with earlier bibliography) (in adorned [for pray of aznaurs] of this khevi11, all Georgian); Čičinaże, op. cit., 8; I. Xuskivaże, K‘art‘ul eklesiat‘a gviani minors and majors, for their children and for the šua sukuneebis “xalxuri” moxatulobani, Tbilisi 2003, 75, 96, 111, 135; Qavelašvili, op. cit., 96–100; G. Soxašvili, Samtavisi (in Georgian), souls of their deceased. Tbilisi 1973, 100, fig. 57; I. Mamasaxlisi, Ert‘acmindis tazris moxatulobis t‘ariġi da misi k‘titorebi, Religia 1 (2014) 32–33; Beriże, op. cit., 77–78; 8 Obviously, Mikael Maglakeli, Chari, Gerasime and There is a number of inscriptions which preserved names of painters Giorgi Jokhtoberidze were laymen, while the sanctuary apse of Samta- from important Byzantine artistic centers – from , visi was painted by Meliton, bishop of Samtavisi, seventeenth century; Mount Athos and Thessaloniki: painter Thimo[theos] is mentioned in St. Eustathios church in Ertatsminda was embellished by Meletios, the the sixteenth-century frescoes of the catholicon of Gelati . hieromonk of the Georgian monastery of the Cross in , [Za] Manuel Eugenikos from Constantinople was a master painter of charia hieromonk from Thessaloniki, hieromonk Deniel from Athos the Tsalenjikha church (1384–1396). The Greek inscription on the contributed to the embellishing of Georgian churches as well. For bib- west wall of the Archangels’ church in mentions hieromonk liographic references v. n. 6. and protosyngelos [Za]kharia from Thessaloniki, sixteenth century, 9 About Tevdore paintings v. Aladashvili, Alibegashvili, Paraskeva was mentioned in a now lost inscription in the chapel Vol’skaiࢎa, op. cit., 30–101 (with earlier bibliographic references). of Evdemon in Bichvinta cathedral, sixteenth century, St. John the 10 The words of the text are separated by two or three white Baptist Church in Bobnevi, seventeenth century, was embellished by dots. The inscriptions use vertically elongated letters. This inscription the Athonite hieromonk Daniel, seventeenth century, [A]postole the has been published several times: T’aqaišvili, op. cit., 236; Sh. Amiranash- zograph was a painter of templon in Tsinarekhi church, seventeenth vili, Istoriiaࢎ gruzinskoĭ monumental’noĭ zhivopisi I, Tbilisi 1957, 134–135; century; Kalopissi-Verti, Painters in Late Byzantine society (with earlier Aladashvli, Alibegashvili, Vol’skaia,ࢎ op. cit., 30–31, for bibliography v. bibliography) 146–147, fig. 11; T. Qauxč‘išvili, Sak’art’velos berżnuli ibid., 131–133; V. Silogava, Svanet‘is epigrap‘ikuli żeglebi II, Tbilisi 1988, carcerebis korpusi, Tbilisi 20093, 42, 157, inscr. N131, 322, inscr. N337, 70–71. My English translation of the texts follows readings of Georgian 42, 60–61, inscr.s N3, 44, 43, 206, iscr. N 179, 43–44. texts published in: Aladashvili, Alibegashvili, Vol’skaia,ࢎ op. cit. 7 Artists’ inscriptions are found in apses of the churches of 11 Aznauri – lower-ranking feudal elite in medieval Georgia; Vardzia, Ubisi, above the entrance to the prothesis in Ertatsminda. geographical term – valley in Georgian, designated an adminis- They appear on the north wall in the churches of Matskhvarishi, trative unit in medieval Georgia. For the administrative division of me- Zemo Krikhi, Sori; on the southern face of the north pier in St. George dieval Georgia v. N. Berżenišvili, Sak‘artvelos istoriis sakit‘xebi, Tbilisi church of Chule (for references v. n. 2, 6). 1990, 61–74 (in Georgian). 27 ЗОГРАФ 42 (2018) [25–36]

Fig. 3. Sts. Cyricus and Julitta Church, Lagourka, inscription on the western wall

Fig. 3a. Sts. Cyricus and Julitta Church, Lagourka, inscription on the western wall, detail

Holy Archangels have mercy in both lives Was painted in the year khghiv since the Cre- Amen. It was painted in the year kh since the Crea- ation (=1112), koronikon...... by the hand of Tev- tion, koronikon12 tiv (316) (i. e. 780+316=1096) by dore, the King’s Painter”13 the hand of Tevdore, the King’s Painter, saint Arch- The last painting of Tevdore dated to 1130 decorates angels. Have mercy.” St. George Church in Nakipari. (fig. 4) Like in the Iprari Another church painted by Tevdore is dedicated to church, here Tevdore’s inscription runs across the upper Sts. Cyricus and Julitta. (fig. 3, 3a) The painter’s inscrip- part of the entablature of the templon (330×17cm; letters tion written in white paint on a dark blue background ap- 5–7cm). (fig. 5) The white letters of the inscription are set pears on the west wall, over the entrance (240×30 cm, let- against a dark green background: ters 4.5–5 cm.). It states: “Christ, in the name of the Lord this holy “Christ, in the name of the Lord, this holy church of St. George was painted and adorned for church of St. Cyricus was painted and adorned ...... glori[fication and pray for so]uls of all aznaurs of this for glorification and pray of aznaurs of this khevi ...... khevi ...... Saint George, the great , forgive and for all those who build this holy church...... ; and rise us up Painted in the year [khghld] since the Saint Cyricus exalt and forgive all of them.

13 Amiranashvili, Istoriiࢎa gruzinskoĭ monumental’noĭ zhivopisi, 12 Koronikon is a Georgian dating system used from the eighth 38; Aladashvili, Alibegashvili, Vol’skaiࢎa, op. cit., 31; The fragmentary century AD. Cf. V. Grumel, Traité d’ études byzantines. La chronologie, state of the inscription has led to various readings of the date. V. 28 Paris 1958, 146–153. Silogava reads khghie and koriniko tiv (=1111); Silogava, op. cit., 73–74. Chichinadze N.: “King’s Painter” Tevdore and his inscriptions

Creation, koronikon tn (= 1130) by the hand of Tev- dore, the King’s Painter.”14 These inscriptions are of great importance in many respects. First, they preserved the painter’s name, his title and the dates of execution of the murals. Moreover, these texts provide significant information about the painter’s social status, artistic patronage and the performative role of inscriptions. The mentioned supplicatory inscriptions record ac- tors who took part in the creation of these works of re- ligious art – the commissioners and the executor of the paintings. It is clear from the inscriptions that all three churches were decorated on the order of anonymous commissioners belonging to the lower-rank local feudal elite – the aznauri (major and minor) of khevi. Therefore, we are dealing here with collective patronage of art.15 It is noteworthy that the inscriptions do not reveal the com- missioners’ names, but do record the painter’s name and his prestigious title “King’s Painter”. Such an attitude to- Fig. 4. St. George Church, Nakipari, eastern façade wards the painter, together with his association with the monarchy, stresses the importance of his participation in vidual style.18 (fig. 6, 7) His style could be defined as “pro- the embellishment of these churches in Svaneti and at the vincial” in relation to official “pro-Byzantine” paintings,19 same time increases the commissioners’ prestige. These but I am more inclined to attribute them to another “non- inscriptions reveal the complex interrelations between Hellenized” visual tradition. His paintings greatly influ- the commissioners and the painter, as well as the central enced the local artistic production. Some fresco cycles of power and the local feudal elite. Tevdore’s inscriptions the eleventh century of Svaneti demonstrate close stylistic also allow a retracing of the involvement of locals in the affinities with his paintings.20 dynamic ongoing political processes of their time. These written intercessions could be viewed in many As epigraphic material demonstrates, Tevdore was ways, as their locations, size and content suggest that they a prestigious figure and therefore his identity is specially fulfilled several goals. In order to better understand Tev- stressed in the painted inscriptions. Regrettably, we have dore’s identity, it is necessary to analyze the “topography” no other evidence about this painter. We know nothing of his inscriptions in the sacred space, and their interac- 16 about his provenance. It is unknown whether he worked tion with the entire decorative programs of the churches. in the royal workshops or any other advanced artistic The masonry chancel barrier of the Archangels’ centers of his time or which projects he may have been in- church in Iprari has two low massive columns with cap- volved in between decorating the mentioned churches in itals supporting three arches – the central wider arched Svaneti. The modest size of the churches leads us to sup- opening, the Royal Door, leads to the sanctuary. Two pose that their embellishment were not long-lasting pro- much smaller (almost half the width) lateral round-head- jects, and that therefore Tevdore must have been involved ed openings end with a “tympanum“ decorated with veg- in other artistic activities as well. What we know is that he etal ornamentation. The lower lateral parts of the screen held the title of “King’s Painter”, which is not recorded in any other sources.17 However, the title attests that by the 18 Compare with late eleventh-century paintings of Ateni end of the eleventh century Tevdore was already an ac- Sion and the Archangels’ church of Zemo Krikhi, early twelfth century knowledged painter, whose professional skills were highly murals of St. George church of Bochorma, T. Virsalaże, Atenis sionis met‘ert‘mete saukunis moxatulobani, K‘art‘uli mxatvrobis istoriidan, esteemed by the ruling elite. Tevdore is an original master, Tbilisi 2007, 126–201; eadem. Freskovaiaࢎ rospis’ v tserkviࢎ Arkhangelov whose works are characterized by a particular monumen- sela Zemo Krikhi, in: idem, Gruzinskaiaࢎ srednevekovaiaࢎ monumental’naiaࢎ tality, impressive, emotionally charged characters and epic zhivopis’, Tbilisi 2007, 25–95; A. Oqropiriże, Bočormis cm. giorgis eklesiis visual narration. Well-organized compositions are united moxatulobisat‘vis, Spek‘tri 2 (Tbilisi 1990) 75–82. together on the basis of carefully thought-out theological 19 His murals drastically differ from the stylistic trends of the programs. Tevdore’s visual language, powerful figures cre- “official art” of this period, particularly from the murals decorating the narthex of the catholicon of the royal monastery of Gelati, founded by ated by a dynamic linear treatment of forms, reveals the Davit IV as his dynastic mausoleum (1106 AD). Gelati frescoes (1125– hand of a gifted master with a strongly pronounced indi- 1130) reveal distinctly featured “Hellenophile”, pro-Byzantine stylistic features; v. also illustrations of Alaverdi and Gelati Gospels, respectively 14 Aladashvili, Alibegashvili, Vol’skaiࢎa, op. cit., 32. (respectively dated to 1054 and twelfth century) illustrations; For Gelati 15 As it becomes clear from the inscriptions, major and lesser narthex paintings v. T. Virsaladze, Fragmenty drevneĭ freskovoĭ rospisi aznaurs commissioned the tenth-century silver repoussé triptychs glavnogo gelatskogo khrama, in: idem, Gruzinskaiࢎa srednevekovaiࢎa from Chukuli and Chikhareshi, a cross from Sakdari, Lower Svaneti. monumental’naiࢎa zhivopis’, Tbilisi 2007, 95–145; v. also A. Eastmond, G. Chubinashvili, Gruzinskoe chekannoe iskusstvo, Tbilisi 1959, 409– Royal imagery in medieval Georgia, University Park, Pennsylvania 413, figs. 45–49; T‘aqaišvili, op. cit., 106. 1998, 62–67; For manuscript illuminations and related bibliography 16 Some scholars argue that he was local. Aladashvli, v. N. Kavt‘aria, Alaverdis ot‘xt‘avis (A–484) mxatvruli gap‘ormebisa Alibegashvili, Volskaia, op. cit., esp. 99–100. t‘aviseburebani, Sak‘art‘velos siżveleni 9 (2006) 89–112; eadem, Gelat‘is 17 A distant parallel for Tevdore’s title could be found in the ot‘xt‘avi, Sak‘art‘velos siżveleni 11 (2007) 59–78. fourth-century Greek epitaph from Samtavro necropolis belonging to 20 About these influences v. Aladashvili, Alibegashvili, Vol’skaia,ࢎ Aurelis Acholis “Archizographos and architect”. Qauxč‘išvili, op. cit., 256. op. cit., 102–119. 29 ЗОГРАФ 42 (2018) [25–36]

Fig. 5. St. George Church, Nakipari, chancel barrier with an inscription

have a painted ornamental pattern imitating precious tex- Therefore, the imagery and the inscription of the sanctu- tile. Over the lateral round-headed arches are two pairs of ary screen are added to the dominant eschatological sub- saints – the half-length frontal figures of Sts. Demetrios ject of the conch. The saints depicted on the screen could and Stephanos, the Protomartyr on the right side and Sts. be perceived as intermediaries between Christ and the Cyricus and Julitta on the left. At the edges of the screen supplicants – the aznaurs and Tevdore. The candles de- are depicted large lit candles. The shallow sanctuary apse picted on the screen have numerous symbolic meanings of the single nave church has a monumental half-length in Christian church practice; they add to the semantics trimorphon, a “Deesis”, with Christ flanked by the sup- of the screen and reinforce the concept of supplication plicating Virgin and St. John the Forerunner in a conch and salvation.23 Representations of lit candles have a li- and four standing figures of the church fathers flanked by 21 turgical connotation and allude to the Celestial Liturgy. the lit candles. The nave is decorated with three Evan- The inclusion of candles in the iconographic programs gelic scenes and individual figures of the Archangels and of medieval Georgian churches (esp. in apse decoration saints, depicted in two registers.22 and in the scenes of Hypapante) is explained by the Jeru- The masonry screen covers an apsidal semi-cylinder salem liturgical practice followed by the Georgian church and reveals to the viewers only the conch with the Deesis. in the early stage of its history.24 However, it could be as- 21 sumed that the lit candles depicted on the templon have Ibid., 33 ff. fig. 11; V. also M. Qenia, Sitqvisa da gamo- both ritual and devotional connotations. They also visual- saxulebis mimart‘ebis sakit‘xisat‘vis k‘art‘ul moxatulobebši (Ip‘raris mxatvrobis magalit‘ze) Sakartvelos sizveleni 4–5 (2003) 147–168. ize the practice of lighting candles during church services 22 Compositions and individual images are depicted in and prayers and therefore reinforce the supplicatory plea two registers on the vault and walls of this one-nave church. The contained in the text. They could indicate the lighting of Archangels’ hieratic monumental figures flanking the sanctuary are depicted in the upper register. Below them, on the north wall is St. Michael the Archangel with Joshua at his feet, the Virgin and Child 23 In Christian worship candles were used on various accompanied by St. Anna on the south wall. The Annunciation is on occasions. Their function is rooted in the metaphor of light revealed the upper part of the west wall, the Nativity in the south vault and the in the Scripture. The light refers to Christ and eternal life (J 8,12; R 21, Baptism on the north vault. The lower register displays Sts. George and 23). On the use of candles in Byzantium v. Candles, in: ODB I, 371–372 Theodore on horseback. Although the Georgian inscription does not (R. F. Taft, A. Kazhdan). indicate Theodore’s title (stratelates, or tyron), his facial features allow 24 Candles are depicted in the apses of Sts. Archangels’ church his identification as St. Theodore Stratilates. The same is true for St. in Iprari, St. George church in Nakipari, the Saviour church in Tsvirmi: Theodore depicted in Lagurka and Nakipari. The female saints, Sts. Aladashvili, Alibegashvili, Vol’skaiࢎa, op. cit., 33, 78, 103, figs. 11, 19, 23; Barbara and Catherine, are on the west wall, above the Annunciation. V. also S. Duffrenne, Le cierge dans la scène de la Présentation du Christ For the decoration of the church of Iprari v. Aladashvili, Alibegashvili, au temple, in: IVe symposium international sur l’ art géorgiene, Tbilisi 30 Vol’skaiࢎa, op. cit., 33–55, figs. 11–14; Qenia, op. cit. 1983, 1–20. Chichinadze N.: “King’s Painter” Tevdore and his inscriptions

Fig. 6. St. George Church, Nakipari, apse conch candles on behalf of others (the deceased) – the commis- The structure of the Nakipari sanctuary screen dif- sioners and the painter mentioned in the inscription. fers from the Iprari sanctuary barrier – three arches are The eastern part of the church and, the decoration supported by four columns with capitals. It has painted of the conch, chancel barrier and adjacent walls are per- images of saints – St. Demetrios, the two Stylites and an ceived as an integral whole conveying a complex theologi- unidentified young saint (Cyricus?).25 The monumen- cal concept. The main eschatological idea manifested in tal full-length “visionary Deesis” occupies the conch of the monumental Deesis of the conch is enriched with the the church. Traditional figures of bishops appear on the images of saints depicted on the screen, and the Archan- sanctuary walls. The upper, more important zone is occu- gels of the upper register on the adjacent parts of the vault pied by Christological scenes, while the lower part of the and walls. The “entablature” of the screen corresponds to north wall represents a heraldic composition of military the dividing strip of the conch and sanctuary wall as well saints on horseback – St. George slaying Diocletian and St. as to the registers of the nave walls. Archangel Michael Theodore.26 St. Theodore is shown facing the West and St. with Joshua at his feet and the Virgin and Child togeth- George the East. Thanks to the juxtaposition of the warri- er with St. Anna become visually bound with the screen. or saints, Theodore, the namesake of the painter, faces the The overall program of the sanctuary, involving both the congregation standing before the templon. In the church conch composition and the chancel barrier imagery, un- of Nakipari a doorway in the south wall is added to the ap- derlines the concepts of intercession and salvation. For sidal window and western door. The inscription, owing to the viewers facing the church apse, the horizontally un- its location at the top of the templon, the size of the letters rolled inscription on the top of the chancel barrier be- and the white paint, attracts the beholders’ attention. comes visually and conceptually engaged in the “perform- In the church of Lagurka the artist’s inscription, ative” space of the sanctuary. The apse window and the which is located on the west wall, in the area between the western door are the only sources of light in the dimly lit door and window, is accompanied by images of saints – small one-nave church. Therefore, the templon is situated the window is flanked by the standing figures of Sts. Cyri- between two beams of light. The light coming from the cus and Julitta. Sts. Barbara and Catherine are depicted on western and only door flashes out the chancel barrier with the inscription and emphasizes its semantic value. The 25 R. Shmerling, Malye formy v arkhitekture srednevekovoĭ layout of the sanctuary and chancel barrier offers a well- Gruzii, Tbilisi 1962, 228, 252. orchestrated supplicatory iconographic scheme where the 26 The longitudinal walls show the Nativity, the , the inscription becomes its integral focal part. The Nakipari Baptism and the Anastasis. The west wall and the lower register of the inscription must be considered in this context as well. south wall are covered by the scenes from the hagiographic cycle of St. George. Aladashvili, Alibegashvili, Vol’skaia,ࢎ op. cit., 77–83, figs. 19–22. 31 ЗОГРАФ 42 (2018) [25–36]

in opposite directions: St. George towards the East, while St. Theodore is headed to the West. The direction of St. Theodore could arguably be explained by his “special mis- sion” to provide assistance and protection to Tevdore. It is clear that the location of the inscriptions within the sacred spaces was one of Tevdore’s main concerns. All three inscriptions have liminal locations – two of them are at the threshold of sanctuaries and the third demarcates the boundary of sacred space. It should be noted that the thresholds and liminal zones of sacred spaces regulated the social hierarchy within the feudal system. The chancel barrier, one of the focal points of the liturgical space, is faced by the congregation during the service and/or their individual prayers. Therefore, believ- ers look straight at the supplicatory inscriptions mention- ing anonymous donors and the painter’s name and his ti- tle. The liminal place of the dedicatory inscriptions on the sanctuary screen enhances the significance of those who are mentioned there. The chancel barrier, as a threshold between the earthly and heavenly realms or tangible and intangible worlds, has a polyvalent symbolic meaning. The sanctuary enclosure, among others, was a “place of prayer”.29 Thus the templon was an appropriate place for supplicatory inscriptions addressed to the Heavenly rul- er.30 The theological interpretation of the sanctuary screen formulated later by Simeon of Thessaloniki (1386–1429) adds to the spiritual dimension of the structure: ”Hence the entablature above the columns maintains the bound of love and the union in Christ of the Saints on earth with (saints) in heaven” 31 Such interpretation echoes the ico- nography of the screens discussed in this article. The inscription on the west wall above the entrance in Lagurka attracts attention in its own way – it is viewed when one leaves the church. The place of this inscrip- Fig. 7. St. John the Baptist, Lagourka, tion was also “semantically oriented” as the church doors Sts. Cyricus and Julitta Church symbolize Christ, who is an entryway to Paradise (J 10, 7 “...... I am the door of the sheep...... ”; J 14, 6: “I am the each side of the entrance. A half-length Deesis is shown way and the truth and life. No one comes to the Father, in the sanctuary conch, while the Church Fathers are por- but through me”). The entryway to the church is under- trayed in the next register. The principles and layout of stood as the way to Salvation and to Paradise accordingly. mural decoration of the church of Lagurka show similari- In the Church of Lagurka the inscription on the west wall ties with the Iprari church – four Evangelic scenes are de- facing the sanctuary is engaged with it in a spatial “dia- picted in the barrel vault and the walls, while the lower logue”. The church door could be percieved as a semantic register is reserved for earthly saints.27 counterpart of a Royal Door, the central opening of the The arrangement of images on the west wall and the templon. Both serve as demarcating devices denoting the 32 west part of the north wall suggests their interaction with liminal zones. Such a shift in the placement of the sup- the written supplication. St. Cyricus and his mother St. plicatory inscription is based on the mystagogical inter- Julitta, together with popular female saints represented on pretation of a sacred space, where each component has the west wall, provide protection for the suppliants men- multiple symbolic meanings and each part and structural tioned in the text.28 In the proximity of the west wall with element of a church is involved in a complex system of 33 the inscription are two Christological compositions – the correlations. It also could be suggested that the place of Crucifixion and the Anastasis – alluding to the Salvation. the inscription between the window and entrance, on the It is also significant that the mounted warrior saints ride 29 Germanos of Constantinople, On the Divine Liturgy – http:// 27 On the south: the Nativity and the Crucifixion and martyrdom ldysinger.stjohnsem.edu/@texts/0720_germanus/02_div-liturgy.htm. of titular saints – Sts. Cyricus and Julitta. On the north wall are displayed 30 The templon as a traditional place of various types of the Baptism and the Anastasis, on the lower zone of the north wall are Sts. inscriptions is considered in: Pallis, Messages from a sacred space, George and Theodore on horseback. For the wall paintings of Lagurka v. 145–158. About the templon v. Threshold of the sacred. Architectural, Aladashvili, Alibegashvili, Vol’skaia,ࢎ op. cit., 56–77, figs. 15–18. art historical, liturgical, and theological perspectives on religious screens. 28 Although Tevdore addresses St. Cyricus, his mother St. East and West, ed. Sh. Gerstel, Washington D.C. 2006 (with earlier Julitta, also martyred for her faith, was equally popular. This pair of bibliography) (henceforth: Threshold of the sacred). 31 saints is highly venerated in Upper Svaneti. Their commemoration day, N. P. Constas, Symeon of Thessalonike and the theology of the celebrated on 27th July, is one of the main feasts in this part of Georgia. icon screen, in: Threshold of the sacred, 170. About the feast of St. Cyricus v. Chubinashvili, Gruzinskoe chekannoe 32 V. the tripartite division of a church by Symeon of Thes- iskusstvo, 298–300 (with earlier bibliography); N. Ġambašiże, Kart‘uli salonike, Constas, op. cit., esp. 166–167. 32 xalxuri da saeklesio dġesascaulebi, Tbilisi 2011, 156–157. 33 Ibid. Chichinadze N.: “King’s Painter” Tevdore and his inscriptions western wall, was determined by the apotropaic function execution of the frescoes. The content and topography of of inscriptions.34 The supplicatory inscriptions are placed Mikael’s inscription do not indicate his prominent social in the vicinity of the images of patron saints, which vir- status or prestige. These murals must have been commis- tually provide intercession and protection to the persons sioned by the local elite – the eristavi of Svaneti, who are mentioned in the texts. In this respect, the west wall of depicted together with King Demetre I although it could Lagurka echoes the programs of the chancel screens of Ip- be assumed that the high-rank local governors – the er- rari and Nakipari. istavi, “entrusted” their commission to a well-known mas- The place and arrangement of Tevdore’s inscriptions ter of their time. According to the inscription Mikael is create both visible and invisible links between various presented just as a humble master, who was only “techni- parts of the sacred space, suppliants and congregation, cally” involved in the decoration of the church. Anyhow, laymen and clerics, earthly and heavenly realms, tangible the Matskhvarishi panel indicates the active engagement and intelligible. Tevdore, together with the aznaurs, ap- of art in the manifestation of official political life. pealing to the heavenly protection “virtually” (through Almost 50 years later, during the reign of King of their inscriptions), makes part of the congregation. The Kings Tamar (r. 1184–1213) Giorgi Chari left his auto- plea in written form is added to the pronounced prayers graph in the north low part of the conch in the church and supplications of the believers attending church ser- of the Dormition in Vardzia.39 Here again we are dealing vices. The presence of saints on the altar screens and the with a high-rank donor’s commission. Rati Surameli, er- west wall with Tevdore’s inscriptions enhances the mean- istavi of , south Georgia, is depicted on the north wall, ing and power of the written prayer. In the “hierarchy of where King of Kings Tamar (r. 1184–1213) and her father supplication” saints have an important role and the repre- King Giorgi III (r. 1156–1184) are portrayed.40 Although sented saints: stylites and female together with a Giorgi is a great master, demonstrating the advanced, child martyr (St. Cyricus) could be perceived as providers 35 “aristocratic” stylistic trends of that time, his inscription is of assistance in ascen to Christ. hardly visible from the nave of the church, as it is hidden As we have seen, in the discussed churches appear in the background decorated with small flowers. Howev- two different strategies of integration of written supplica- er, the place of the painter’s signature on the right-hand, tion into ongoing religious rites and rituals performed in privileged side reserved for the righteous acknowledges the sacred space. The arrangement of inscriptions within that he is worthy to be “presented” in the heavenly realm. the sacred space engages the audience – all three inscrip- The “spatial hierarchy” of churches elaborated by tions are visible and readable and therefore the persons Byzantine theologians correlates the places of supplica- mentioned there are incorporated into the “social and 36 tory and dedicatory inscriptions with the social status and spiritual commemoration”. In this respect it is worth wealth of the people mentioned there. The prominent plac- mentioning the importance of the verbalization of texts in es of the inscriptions mentioning the anonymous commis- Byzantine practices. Hearing and seeing are intertwined sioners – major and lesser aznaurs of khevi and the painter in religious rites and therefore the supplicatory inscrip- accompanied by his prestigious title – allow to make some tions correlate with the liturgical texts read during servic- 37 suggestions about the painter’s identity. The title “King’s es and/or individual prayers of congregation members. Painter”, referring to Tevdore’s prestige and his association In order to determine Tevdore’s status it is neces- with royal authority, could also indicate his economic sta- sary to compare his inscription with painters’ autographs tus (his wealth). Therefore, it is plausible that together with from other churches, which are also associated with royal the local nobility – the aznaurs mentioned in the inscrip- power. In contrast to Tevdore, Mikael Maglakeli, the mas- tions – he was a donor of the murals.41 Tevdore’s title, along ter painter of murals with the royal panel depicting King with displaying his identity, conveys a wider political con- Demetre’s (r. 1125–1156), the son and heir of Davit IV Ag- text and establishes links to monarchic power. mashenebeli (the Builder), girdling by two local eristavs Tevdore’s title – “kings’ painter” – raises a number (archonts), in the Savior church in Matskhvarishi (1140), of questions, which cannot be answered due to the lack of presents himself in a rather humble form. His inscription appropriate evidences. And yet some suggestions can be in the spandrel on the north wall, in close proximity to the put forward. The title reveals the exceptional status of its altar apse, reads: ”Painted in the fifteenth year of the reign bearer and indicates his association with royal power. The of Demetre, by the hand of Mika el Maglakeli” (1140).38 end of the eleventh – beginning of the twelfth century was This rather modest text does not attract the viewers’ atten- a remarkable time in the history of Georgia – this is the tion. It mentions only the painter’s name and the time of period of the reign of King Davit IV the Builder (1073– 1125), who united Georgia and greatly expanded its terri- 34 On the apotropaic function of inscriptions v. A. Walker, tories. His brilliant victories over the Seljuks and domestic Pseudo- “Inscriptions” and the pilgrim’s path at Hosios Loukas, feudal rulers allowed him to consolidate the country and in: Viewing inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval world, ed. A. to increase its political and economic power. Davit’s ac- Eastmond, New York 2015, 106–107, (with bibliographic references). tive internal and foreign policy resulted in the creation of 35 nd The function of saints as intercessors was stated by the 2 a powerful monarchic state, whose territories extended far Church Council: Ch. Walter, Two notes on the Deesis, REB 36 (1968) 42 334 (with earlier bibliography) beyond the earlier borders of the Georgian Kingdom. 36 R. Nelson, Image and inscription. Pleas for salvation in spaces and devotion, in: Art and text in Byzantine culture, ed. L. James, New 39 Privalova, Rospis’ Timotesubani, 129. York 2007, 110. 40 Eastmond, Royal imagery, 103–114 (with earlier bibliography) 37 These issues are considered by A. Papalexandou, Text in 41 On painters as donors v. Kalopissi-Verti, Painters in Late context. Eloquent monuments and the Byzantine beholder, WI 17/3 Byzantine society, 143, fig. 5, 145, n. 24–17 on p. 153. (2001) 259–283. 42 On this subject v. I. Javaxišvili, T‘xzulebani t‘ormet tomad 38 For the inscription v. Virsaladze, Freskovaiࢎa rospis’ II, Tbilisi 1983, 192–222; Sakart‘velos istoriis narkvevebi III, ed. Z. khudozhnika Mikaela Maglakeli, 148. Anč‘abaże, V. Gučua, Tbilisi 1979, 212–231. 33 ЗОГРАФ 42 (2018) [25–36]

Svaneti was one of the principalities which played court, the aznaurs, commissioners of the murals, and cen- an important role in the defense of the kingdom, espe- tral power. The omission of a ruler’s name in the inscrip- cially of its northern borders. Its significance was already tions is also quite significant. This could be explained by well-known in the early medieval period, as Byzantium the commissioners’ intention to demonstrate their own and Persia struggled for domination over its territories.43 power and the political significance of Svaneti, but at the There is extremely scarce historical evidence about in- same time, the inscriptions could be perceived as a dec- terrelations between Svaneti and the central power in laration of loyalty to the royal power in the region and the following periods, and the epoch of Davit IV is not manifestation of the importance and “political weight” of an exception in this regard. It has been suggested that this region and its nobility. Svans provided an important military service to the cen- As it has been demonstrated the inscriptions with tral authorities.44 It is significant that Vardan eristavi of the painter’s name had multiple facets, which were un- Svaneti rose against George II (1072–1089), the father derstandable to the contemporary audience. The place, of Davit IV.45 Therefore, it is not surprising that the es- content and pictorial setting of inscriptions communicate tablishing and reinforcing of royal power in Svaneti was in verbal and non-verbal form important religious and on Davit’s political agenda. One of the important instru- non-religious concepts. The texts addressing the heavenly ments for establishing of a monarch’s authority was royal protectors are seen by both clergy and congregation. The artistic patronage. Although, in our case, the king was considered inscriptions, demarcating transitional zones of not directly involved in the commissioning of the works the churches, convey religious, social and political mes- of art, it could be assumed that his “envoy” was entitled sages. First of all, they represent the donors’ identity and to decorate the churches in alliance with the local nobil- ensure their permanent engagement in the services, as ity. The multi-facet interrelation between the central and wells as their commemoration through the ages. It should local representatives of power is illustrated by the Mat- be stressed that Tevdore is the only person whose name is skhvarishi panel considered above. The political message mentioned in the inscription. This could be explained by conveyed by the royal panel is interpreted in a variety of his advanced social and presumably economic status. Due ways,46 but it is obvious that church decoration was a part to Tevdore’s privileges implicitly indicated in the inscrip- of the propaganda of royal authority and power in this tions (both in verbal and non-verbal form), he might have strategically important highland region. been of equal rank to the aznaurs – the commissioners of The lack of evidences makes it impossible to estab- the paintings or have even exceeded their social status. lish what kind of relationship Tevdore had with the royal The inscriptions permit us to re-contextualize Tev- dore’s paintings: the painter’s high official title associated 43 About Svaneti v. Menander Protector, http://www.sasanika.org/ with monarchic power introduces political aspects to the wp-content/uploads/Menander6–1.pdf; Sakart‘velos istoriis narkvevebi II, religious context and adds to his authority. The engage- ed. Š. Mesxia, Tbilisi 1973, 161, 166–167, 268, 419. ment of the “King’s Painter” in the decoration of the 44 Berżenišvili, op. cit., 427–429. churches of Svaneti, elevates the commissioners’ – the 45 K‘art‘lis cxovreba I, ed. S. Qauxč‘išvili, Tbilisi 1955, 315–316 aznaurs of khevi – prestige and brings them closer to royal (in Georgian). power. Therefore, the churches decorated by the local elite 46 About the meaning of this panel v. Virsaladze, Freskovaiࢎa acquire wider political meaning, involving a discourse of rospis’ khudozhnika Mikaela Maglakeli, 146–162; G. Abramišvili, Kidev ert‘xel atenis sionis moxatulobis t‘ariġisa da k‘titort‘a identip‘ikac‘iis power and the role and importance of Svaneti in the con- šesaxeb, Narkvevebi (sak‘rtvelos xelovnebis saxelmcip‘o muzeumi) struction of the unified . 5 (Tbilisi 1999) 72–88, esp. 76–80 (in Georgian); Eastmond, Royal imagery, 73–83.

ЛИСТА РЕФЕРЕНЦИ – REFERENCE LIST

Amiranashvili Sh., Georgian painter Damiane, Tbilisi 1974. Grumel V., Traité d’ études byzantines. La chronologie, Paris 1958. Art and text in Byzantine culture, ed. L. James, Cambridge 2007. Kalopissi-Verti S., Dedicatory inscriptions and donor portraits in thir- Chichinadze N., Self-representations of artists in medieval Georgia, in: teenth century churches of Greece, Vienna 1992. Thematic sessions of free communications. Proceedings of the 23rd In- Kalopissi-Verti S., Painters’ portraits in Byzantine art, Deltion tēs ternational Congress of Byzantine Studies, Belgrade 2016, 586. Christianikēs Archaiologikēs Etaireias 17 (1994) 129–141. Chichinadze N., Representing identities. The icon of Ioane Tokhabi from Kalopissi-Verti S., Painters in Late Byzantine society. The evidence of Sinai, Le Museon 130/ 3–4 (2017) 401–442. church inscriptions, Cahiers archéologiques 42 (1994) 139–157. Constas N. P., Symeon of Thessalonike and the theology of the icon Kalopissi-Verti S., Painters’ information on themselves in Late Byzantine screen, in: Threshold of the sacred. Architectural, art historical, li- church inscriptions, in: L’ artista a Bisanzio e nel mondo cristiano- turgical, and theological perspectives on religious screens, East and orientale, ed. M. Bacci, Pisa 2007, 55–70. West, ed. Sh. Gerstel, Washington D.C. 2006, 163–183. Nelson R., Image and inscription. Pleas for salvation in spaces and devo- tion, in: Art and text in Byzantine culture, ed. L. James, New York Drpić I., Painter as scribe. Artistic identity and the arts of graphê in late 2007, 100–119. Byzantium, Word and image 29/3 (2013) 334–353. The Oxford dictionary of Byzantium I, ed. A. P. Kazhdan, New York – Duffrenne S., Le cierge dans la scène de la Présentation du Christ au Oxford 1991. temple, in: IVe symposium international sur l’ art géorgien, Tbilisi Pallis G., Messages from a sacred space. The function of the Byzantine 1983, 1–20. sanctuary barrier inscriptions, in: Writing matters. Presenting and Eastmond A., Royal imagery in medieval Georgia, University Park, perceiving monumental inscriptions in Antiquity and the Middle Pennsylvania 1998. 34 Ages, ed. I. Berti et al., Berlin–Boston 2017, 145–158. Chichinadze N.: “King’s Painter” Tevdore and his inscriptions

Pallis G., Speaking decoration inscriptions on architectural sculpture of Privalova E., Rospis’ tࢎserkvi “Vozneseniiࢎa” – “Amagleba” v Ozaani, Ars the Middle Byzantine church, in: Inscriptions in Byzantine and Post- Georgica 9 (1987) 121–152. Byzantine history and history of art, ed. Ch. Stavrakos, Wiesbaden Shmerling R., Malye formy v arkhitekture srednevekovoĭ Gruzii, Tbilisi 2016, 389–403. 1962. Papalexandou A., Text in context. Eloquent monuments and the Byzan- Chubinashvili G., Gruzinskoe chekannoe iskusstvo, Tbilisi 1959. tine beholder, Word and image 17/3 (2001) 259–283. Abramišvili G., Kidev ert‘xel atenis sionis moxatulobis t‘ariġisa da Rhoby A., Text as art? Byzantine inscriptions and their display, in: Writ- k‘titort‘a identip‘ikac‘iis šesaxeb, Narkvevebi (sak‘rtvelos xelovnebis ing matters. Presenting and perceiving monumental inscriptions in saxelmcip‘o muzeumi) 5 (Tbilisi 1999) 72–88. Antiquity and the Middle Ages, ed. I. Berti et al., Berlin–Boston Berżenišvili N., Sak‘artvelos istoriis sakit‘xebi, Tbilisi 1990. 2017, 265–285. Beriże V., Żveli k‘art‘veli ostatebi, Tbilisi 1967. Threshold of the sacred. Architectural, art historical, liturgical, and theo- Čičinaże I., Soris moxatuloba, Tbilisi 1985. logical perspectives on religious screens, East and West, ed. Sh. Ger- Ġambašiże N., Kart‘uli xalxuri da saeklesio dġesascaulebi, Tbilisi 2011. stel, Washington D.C. 2006. K‘art‘lis cxovreba I, ed. S. Qauxč‘išvili, Tbilisi 1955. Viewing inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval world, ed. A. East- mond, New York 2015. Javaxišvili I., T‘xzulebani t‘ormet tomad II, Tbilisi 1983. Walker, A., Pseudo-Arabic “inscriptions” and the pilgrim’s path at Hosios Kavlelašvili E., Mxeris eklesiis mxatvari, Narkvevebi (sak‘rtvelos xelo- Loukas, in:Viewing inscriptions in the Late Antique and medieval vnebis saxelmcip‘o muzeumi) 5 (1999) 96–100. world, ed. A. Eastmond, New York 2015, 99–114. K‘avtaria N., Alaverdis ot‘xt‘avis (A-484) mxatvruli gap‘ormebisa t‘avise- Walter Ch., Two notes on the Deesis, Revue des études byzantines 36 burebani, Sak‘art‘velos siżveleni 9 (2006) 89–112. (1968) 311–336. K‘avtaria N., Gelat‘is ot‘xt‘avi, Sak‘art‘velos siżveleni 11 (2007) 59–78. Writing matters. Presenting and perceiving monumental inscriptions in An- Mamasaxlisi I., Ert‘acmindis tazris moxatulobis t‘ariġi da misi k‘titorebi, tiquity and the Middle Ages, ed. I. Berti et al., Berlin–Boston, 2017. Religia 1 (2014) 31–40. Oqropiriże A., Bočormis cm. giorgis eklesiis moxatulobisat‘vis, Spek‘tri 2 Aladashvili N., Alibegashvili G., Vol’skaiࢎa A., Zhivopisnaiࢎa shkola (Tbilisi 1990) 75–82. Svaneti, Tbilisi 1983. Qauxč‘išvili T., Sak‘art‘velos berżnuli carcerebis korpusi, Tbilisi 20093. Amiranashvili, Sh. Istoriiࢎa gruzinskoĭ monumental’noĭ zhivopisi I, Tbi- Qenia M., Sitqvisa da gamosaxulebis mimart‘ebis sakit‘xisat‘vis k‘art‘ul lisi 1957. moxatulobebši (Ip‘raris mxatvrobis magalit‘ze) Sakartvelos sizveleni Virsaladze T., Freskovaiaࢎ rospis’ khudozhnika Mikaela Maglakeli v 4–5 (2003) 147–168. Matskhvarishiࢎ , in: idem, Gruzinskaiaࢎ srednevekovaiaࢎ monumental’naiaࢎ Sakart‘velos istoriis narkvevebi II, ed. Š. Mesxia, Tbilisi 1973. zhivopis’, Tbilisi 2007, 145–225. Sakart‘velos istoriis narkvevebi III, ed. Z. Anč‘baże, V. Guč‘ua, Tbilisi 1979. Virsaladze T., Freskovaiࢎa rospis’ v tࢎserkvi Arkhangelov sela Zemo Krikhi, Silogava V., Svanet‘is epigrap‘ikuli żeglebi II, Tbilisi 1988. in: idem, Gruzinskaiࢎa srednevekovaiࢎa monumental’naiࢎa zhivopis’, Soxašvili G., Samtavisi, Tbilisi 1973. Tbilisi 2007, 25–95. Sxirtlaże Z., Sabereebis p‘reskuli carcerebi, Tbilisi 1985. Virsaladze T., Fragmenty drevneĭ freskovoĭ rospisi glavnogo gelatskogo T‘aqaišvili Ek., Ark‘eologiuri ek‘spedicia leč‘xumsa da svanetši, Tbilisi 19912. khrama, in: idem, Gruzinskaiࢎa srednevekovaiࢎa monumental’naiࢎa Virsalaże T., Atenis sionis met‘ert‘mete saukunis moxatulobani, K‘art‘uli zhivopis’, Tbilisi 2007, 95–145. mxatvrobis istoriidan, Tbilisi 2007. Privalova E., Rospis’ Timotesubani, Tbilisi 1980. Xuskivaże I., K‘art‘ul eklesiat‘a gviani šua sukuneebis “xalxuri” moxatu- Privalova E., Novye dannye o Betanii, in: Proceedings of the 4th interna- lobani, Tbilisi 2003. tional symposium of Georgian art, Tbilisi 1983, 1–21.

„Краљев сликар“ Теодор (Тевдоре) и његови натписи

Нина Чичинадзе Државни институт Илиа, Тбилиси

У средњовековном грузијском монументалном Веома занимљиве примере натписа неког уметни- сликарству сачувани су разноврсни типови натписа ка садржи сликарство живописца Теодора, који је имао уметника, који откривају сложен „систем комуника- престижно звање „краљев сликар“. Из његових натписа ција“ развијен унутар православне хришћанске кул- је јасно да је он између 1096. и 1130. осликао три цркве туре. Текстуална и визуелна грађа показује разнолике у Горњој Сванетији, северозападној планинској области облике и стратегије које су уметници примењивали Грузије. Молитвени натписи бележе учеснике у ства- зарад властите презентације. Натписи уметника вари- рању поменутих дела црквене уметности – наручиоце и рају по свом карактеру – неки од њих су кратке скром- живописца. Захваљујући натписима сазнаје се да су све не инвокације, једва приметне, док су други опширни, три цркве осликане по поруџбини анонимних ктитора лако уочљиви текстови. Њихово место у простору, који су припадали нижој локалној феудалној елити с ти- величина, садржај, литерарни стил и „видљивост“ не- тулом великих или малих азнаура кевија (кеви – долина посредно су повезани са статусом сликара и њиховом на грузијском, термин којим се означавала администра- улогом у украшавању цркава. тивна јединица у средњовековној Грузији). 35 ЗОГРАФ 42 (2018) [25–36]

Мада натписи не откривају имена наручилаца, ства, додирљивог и недодирљивог. Теодор, заједно са бележе име сликара и његово звање. Такав став пре- азнаурима, молећи небеску заштиту, чини „виртуелно“ ма сликару, заједно са његовим повезивањем с влада- (преко натписа) део литургијске заједнице. рем, наглашава значај уметниковог учешћа у украша- С обзиром на „просторну хијерархију“ унутар вању три цркве у Сванетији и у исто време доприносе храмова, коју су разрадили византијски богослови, престижу наручилаца. Ти натписи показују сложен место на којем су исписани молитвени и ктиторски међуоднос између наручилаца и сликара, централне натписи зависило је од социјалног статуса и богатства власти и локалне феудалне елите. Теодорови натписи личности поменутих у тим натписима. Истакнутост допуштају, такође, да се прати укључивање лoкалних места на којима су изведени натписи с поменом ано- достојанственика у динамичне политичке процесе нимних наручилаца – великих и мањих азнаура ке- који су се одвијали у њихово доба. вија – и сликара почаствованог престижним звањем Теодор је, како показује епиграфска грађа, био дозвољавају да се изнесу извесне сугестије о личности угледна личност и зато је његов идентитет био посеб- тог живописца. Звање „краљев сликар“, које упућује но истакнут у фреско-натписима. Уметниково звање на Теодорову везу с краљевском влашћу, може та- потврђује да је Теодор крајем једанаестог века већ био кође указати на његов економски статус (имовин- познат сликар, чијe је професионалне вештине високо ско стање). Зато је прихватљиво претпоставити да је ценила владајућа елита. Његова дела, као остварења заједно са локалним племством – азнаурима помену- оригиналног мајстора, одликују посебна монументал- тим у натпису – он био ктитор зидног сликарства. ност, импресивни карактери с емоционалним набoјем Недостатак извора онемогућује сагледавање од- и епска визуелна нарација. носа између Теодора, азнаура и краљевског двора. Теодорови натписи изведени су на олтарским Изостављање владаревог имена може се објаснити на- преградама (цркве у местима Ипрари и Накипари) и мером азнаура да покажу властиту моћ и политички на западном зиду, изнад улаза у цркву (Лагурка). Ме- значај Сванетије, али, истовремено, натписи могу сто и поставка тих натписа остварују и видљиву и не- бити виђени као израз лојалности краљевској власти видљиву везу између различитих делова светог про- у региону и манифестација значаја и „политичке те- стора, приносилаца исписаних молитви и литургијске жине“ тог региона и његовог племства. заједнице, лаика и клирика, земаљског и небеског цар-

36