Originalveröffentlichung in: Bacci, Michele (Hrsg.

): L'artista a Bisanzio e nel mondo

cristiano-orientale, Pisa 2007, S. 135-176 und Abb. 64-74 (Seminari e convegni ; 12)

The Creator of Sacred Space as a

Phenomenon of Byzantine Culture

T h e aim of this paper is to pose a question about a long neglected

cultural p h e n o m e n o n . I shall argue t h a t in our discussion of Byzantine
artists and donors o n e might find some room for a specific group of
makers - the creators of sacred spaces w h o were responsible for a n
entire project of sacred space realised in a particular church, or some
o t h e r e n v i r o n m e n t . T h i s figure should n o t be identified with the
artisan making concrete art objects like walls and vaults, sculptural
decorations and paintings, liturgical vessels and textiles. N o r can his
role be limited to financial support of the project. It is n o t e w o r t h y
t h a t this form of activity had a very powerful artistic aspect as well.
In a sense, the creator of sacred space is t h e artist, whose role seems
comparable with the contemporary activity of film directors leading
t h e efforts of various 'artisans'. From this point of view, t h e creator
of sacred space might be discussed in an art-historical c o n t e x t . A t
t h e same time, it seems important to emphasise t h a t h e belongs
to a particular field of creativity, w h i c h has b e e n recently n a m e d
Hierotopy 1 .
Allow me to recall some theoretical premises. T h e y are rooted in
recent studies of relics and miraculous icons 2 . It has been understood
that the most significant aspect of relics and miraculous icons was t h e
role they played in the creation of particular sacred spaces. In many
Cases, relics and venerable icons were established as a core, a kind of

' A . LIDOV, Hierotopy. The Creation of Sacred Spaces as a Form of Creativity and Sub­
ject of Cultural History, in A . LIDOV (ed.), Hierotopy. Studies in the Making of Sacred
Spaces. Material from an International Symposium, Moscow 2 0 0 4 , pp. 15-31.
;
A . LIDOV (ed.), Cudotvornaja ilama v Vizantii i Drevnei Rusi [The Miracle­Working
'con in Byzantium andOLl Rta], Moscow 1996; A . L n x w (ed.), Christian Relics in the
Moscow Kremlin, M o s c o w 2000; A . LIDOV (ed.), Eastern Christum Relics, M o s c o w
2003.
 136 Alexej Lidov

pivot in t h e forming of a concrete spatial e n v i r o n m e n t . T h i s milieu

included p e r m a n e n t l y visible architectural forms and various pictures
as well as changing liturgical clothes and vessels, lighting effects and
fragrance, ritual gestures and prayers, w h i c h every time created a
unique spatial complex. Sometimes t h e e n v i r o n m e n t would occur
spontaneously, yet there are several examples relating t o deliberate
concepts and elaborated projects, w h i c h should be considered a m o n g
t h e most important historical documents.
In my view, t h e very limited n u m b e r of studies in this direction has
b e e n determined by the lack of a n adequate n o t i o n covering this field of
creativity. T h e widespread term 'sacred space' was inadequate because
of its too general character, describing almost t h e entire realm of the
religious. T h e proposed new term, 'hierotopy' (ierotopia), consists oi
two G r e e k roots: hieros (sacred) and topos (place, space, n o t i o n ) , as
well as many other words already established in our vocabulary over
t h e last h u n d r e d years ( t h e term 'iconography' is o n e of t h e m ) . T h e
m e a n i n g of this n o t i o n might be formulated as follows: Hierotopy is
the creation of sacred spaces regarded as a special form of creativity, and a
field of historical research which reveals and analyses particular examples
of that creativity. T h e aim is to understand the existence of a special
and quite large p h e n o m e n o n t h a t requires establishing boundaries to
t h e research field and elaborating specific m e t h o d s ' .
Probably, the most serious problem of hierotopy is t h e category
of t h e sacred itself, w h i c h surmises t h e actual presence of G o d and
c a n n o t be separated from t h e miraculous, in o t h e r words, s o m e t h i n g
n o t created by t h e h u m a n will. T h e outstanding anthropologist
Mircea Eliade, w h o dedicated several works to the p h e n o m e n o n
of the sacred, introduced a special n o t i o n of 'hierophany', making
a clear statement: «Every sacred space implies a hierophany, an
irruption of t h e sacred t h a t results in d e t a c h i n g a territory from t h e
surrounding cosmic milieu and making it qualitatively different" 4 . A s

' I would like to take this opportunity of expressing my d e e p and sincere thanks to
colleagues and friends with w h o m 1 have discussed this idea from the very beginning.
I mean, first of all, Gerhard Wolf, N i c o l e t t a Isar, S l o b o d a n Curdic, Peter Brown, O l e g
Grabar, Herbert Kessler, M i c h e l e Bacci and Leonid Beljaev. Their suggestions and
moral support were more than merely stimulating.
4
M. ELIADE, The Sacred and the Profane. The Nature of Religion, N e w York 1959,
p. 26.
 137 The Creator of Sacred Space as a Phenomenon of Byzantine Culture

a n example of hierophany, Eliade provides t h e famous biblical story

of Jacob's Dream about t h e Ladder c o n n e c t i n g the Earth and t h e Sky,
t h e Lord speaking from t h e Sky and t h e construction of a n altar at
t h e holy spot ( G n 28, 12-22). Using t h e same subject, let me try to
separate ' h i e r o p h a n y ' and 'hierotopy', by articulating t h e specificity
of our approach.
In the biblical story, t h e description of t h e hierotopic project starts
with t h e waking up of Jacob, who, inspired by his dream-vision,
begins to make a sacred space, w h i c h would convert a particular place
into «the house of G o d and the gate of h e a v e n » . H e took t h e stone
that had been his pillow, and set it up as a m o n u m e n t , and poured
oil o n it. Jacob also renamed t h e place and took special vows. S o
Jacob, and all his successors - t h e creators of churches and shrines
- , made a particular spatial milieu. T h i s differs from h i e r o p h a n y as a
creation by h u m a n hands differs from God's will. C o m m u n i o n w i t h
t h e miraculous inspired t h e concept of a spatial image, but it itself
remained beyond t h e realm of h u m a n creativity. T h i s creativity,
nevertheless, was intended to actualise t h e memory of a h i e r o p h a n y
by all possible means, embodying an image of divine revelation. A s
it seems, the p e r m a n e n t relation and intensive interaction between
hierophany ( t h e mystical) and hierotopy (actually made) d e t e r m i n e d
t h e specificity of the creation of sacred spaces as a form of creativity.
O n e should n o t e t h a t Eliade's approach, analyzing t h e structure of
t h e m y t h and its profound symbolism, has a basically different focus
which, however, can be used in some hierotopical reconstructions.
Hierotopy as a type of creativity is deeply rooted in h u m a n nature.
In the process of self-identification as a spiritual being, M a n , first
spontaneously and t h e n deliberately, creates a concrete milieu of his
c o n n e c t i o n with t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l world. T h e creation of sacred
spaces can be compared with pictorial creativity, w h i c h also belongs
to visual culture and appears spontaneously at t h e very early stage of
t h e shaping of personality. However, in contrast with t h e creation
of pictures, w h i c h h a v e an entire infrastructure from first drawing
lessons to academies, criticism and the art market, the creation of
sacred spaces simply has n o t b e e n included in t h e cultural c o n t e x t of
m o d e r n European civilization.
T h e reason was t h a t the positivist ideology of t h e n i n e t e e n t h
century, w h e n most contemporary disciplines took shape, did n o t
see in the ephemeral 'sacred space' an i n d e p e n d e n t research subject.
M o s t disciplines were bounded to concrete material objects, either
pictures or architectural m o n u m e n t s , folk rituals or written texts. T h e
 138 Alexej Lidov

creation of sacred spaces did n o t receive its place in t h e established

scheme of t h e humanities, whose structure was determined by t h e
'object-centred' model of the description of t h e universe. T h e subject
was n o t formulated; as a logical consequence of this fact, a discipline
did not occur, and a special terminology was n o t elaborated.
A t t h e same time, it is n o t possible to say t h a t the problematic of
sacred space has n o t been touched in t h e humanities. Various aspects
of this t h e m e have been discussed by archaeologists, anthropologists,
art historians and historians of religion. However, they, as a
rule, h a v e tried to solve t h e problems of their o w n disciplines, by
emphasizing a particular aspect without consideration of the whole.
N o doubt hierotopical studies will use some traditional approaches
of art history, anthropology and liturgies. A t t h e same time, o n e may
claim t h a t hierotopy does n o t coincide with any of t h e m . Hierotopy
c a n n o t be reduced either to t h e world of artistic images only, or to
t h e c o m b i n a t i o n of material objects, organising a sacred milieu, or
to t h e rituals and social mechanisms t h a t d e t e r m i n e t h e m . Ritual
plays a great role in hierotopical projects but n o less important seem
purely artistic, theological and liturgical aspects usually neglected
by anthropology. Furthermore, t h e hierotopical c o n c e p t could n o t
be interpreted in terms of the so-called Cesamtkunstwerk, or the
synthesis of arts, which acquired enormous significance in t h e age of
modernism" 1 .
T h e hierotopic vision can be of practical use for many humanities.
Characteristically, complete forms of creativity could n o t be
properly discussed beyond the hierotopic framework, which is n o t
c o n n e c t e d with t h e positivist classification of objects. For instance,
such an enormous p h e n o m e n o n as the dramaturgy of lighting occurs
beyond t h e boundaries of traditional disciplines. A t t h e same time,
it is k n o w n for certain from written sources (i.e. Byzantine Monastic
Typika) how detailed t h e practice of lighting was, dynamically
changing during services according to a sophisticated scenario 6 . A t

5
T h a t approach was operating with various forms of arts and art-ohjects creat­
ing an artistic space as a final result of c o m b i n a t i o n . A t the matrix level it is quite
contrary to hierotopic projects based o n a particular image of sacred space w h i c h
determines all external forms.
6
A characteristic e x a m p l e is the Typikon of the Pantokrator monastery in
Constantinople: see E. CoNGDONi Imperial Commemoration and Ritual in the Tyl>iktm
 139 The C r e a t o r o f Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n o f B y z a n t i n e C u l t u r e

particular moments the light accentuated concrete images or holy

objects, creating a perception of the entire space of the church as
well as the logic of reading its most significant elements. Dramaturgy
is an appropriate word in this context since the artistic and dramatic
element in that field of creativity was no less important than the
ritual and symbolic. The same is true of the realm of fragrance, which
presents every time new combinations of incense, the smells of wax
candles and aromatic oils in lamps. Christian culture inherited the
great traditions of the Ancient East through the Roman imperial cult
as well as through the sophisticated worship of the Old Testament
Temple'. Jewish and Ancient Roman sources leave no doubts that
individual dramaturgies of lighting and fragrance were practically
always an integral part of a particular concept of sacred space8. The
hierotopic approach allows the creation for such phenomena of an
adequate research framework, where different cultural events and
artifacts can be studied as interacting elements of a single project.
Such a project was a matrix, or structural model, of a particular
sacred space, subordinating all seeing, hearing and touching effects.
It seems important to realise that practically all objects of religious
art were originally conceived as elements of a hierotopic project
and included in the 'network' of a concrete sacred space. However,
with some exceptions, we do not 'question' our artistic monuments
about this pivotal peculiarity, which was crucial for their external
appearance. In order to solve this apparently simple problem, one
should remove a fundamental stereotype of consciousness. The basis
of the positivist universe is the object itself, around which the whole
process of research is being constructed. However, it now becomes
clearer and clearer that the centre of the universe in medieval religious
minds was the immaterial and yet real space around which the world
of objects, sounds, smells, lights and other effects appeared. The
hierotopic approach allows us to see artistic objects in the context of
another model of the universe and to read them anew.
Without denying any options of iconographic or stylistic approaches,

the Monaster} of Christ Pantokrator, in « R e v u e des etudes byzantines», LIV, 1996,

PP. 1 6 9 - 1 7 5 , 1 8 2 - 1 8 4 .
7
B. CASEAU, Euodia. The Use and Meaning of Fragrance in the Ancient World and
their Christianization (100-900), A n n A r b o r 1 9 9 4 .
* P. HEGER, The Development of Incense Cult in Israel, B e r l i n - N e w York 1997.
 140 Alexej Lidov

hierotopy helps to reveal an u n k n o w n source of information existing

in our art objects. If our efforts indeed lead to posing questions o n
t h e spatial aspect of a concrete m o n u m e n t and introduce o n e more
dimension into traditional art historical discussion, t h e initial part
of the project will be accomplished. Yet it should be repeated t h a t
Hierotopy does n o t coincide with traditional art history, t h o u g h it
might considerably renovate its methodology. T h i n k i n g f u r t h e r about
t h e boundaries of t h e history of art, o n e may ask why the history of
medieval art has been reduced to t h e making of objects and t h e role
of artist limited to more or less high artisantry.
As it seems, time came to extend the context by the introduction of
t h e special figure of the creator of sacred space. S o m e projects of sacred
space were of high artistic quality, though realised on a different level
compared with the creation of art objects and architectural forms.
S u c h figures are well k n o w n though their true role was hidden under
t h e general n a m e of donors or people giving commissions. Yet n o t all
donors were creators of sacred space, though there are examples where
their functions coincided. A representative figure in the West is the
A b b o t Suger, w h o in the 1140s created the concept of the first G o t h i c
space in the cathedral of Saint-Denis 9 . His functions could not be
reduced just to the setting up of the project, or to the casting of masters,
or to the theological program, or to elaboration of new rituals, artistic
modelling, iconographic or stylistic innovations. He was engaged in
all these activities. T h e case of the A b b o t Suger is well documented
both by the archaeology of the site and by written sources.
H e clearly revealed his i n t e n t i o n in the famous treatise De rebus
in administrations sua gestis: «Thus, w h e n - out of my delight in t h e
beauty of t h e house of G o d - t h e loveliness of t h e many-coloured
gems has called me away from external cares, and worthy meditation
has induced me to reflect, transferring t h a t w h i c h is material to t h a t
which is immaterial, on the diversity of t h e sacred virtues: t h e n it
seems to me t h a t I see myself dwelling, as it were, in some strange
region of t h e universe which n e i t h e r exists entirely in t h e slime of
t h e earth nor entirely in the purity of Heaven; and that, by the grace
of G o d , I can be transported from this inferior to t h a t higher world
in a n anagogical manner. I used to converse with travellers from

' E. PANOFSKY, Abbot Suger and Its Art Treasures on the Abbey Church of St-Dcnis,
Princeton 1979.
 141 The Creator of Sacred Space as a Phenomenon of Byzantine Culture

Jerusalem, and to my great delight, to learn from those to w h o m the

treasures of C o n s t a n t i n o p l e and the o r n a m e n t s of Hagia Sophia had
been accessible, w h e t h e r t h e things here could claim some value in
comparison with those there» 1 0 .
A s the m a i n goal of t h e project t h e A b b o t Suger declares t h e
creation of a spatial milieu - «aliqua extranea orbis terrarum plaga»
in his specific terms. It was created by various sacred means including
traditional artistic forms as well as particular presentations of relics,
arrangements of candles and lamps, specific liturgical rites. N u m e r o u s
religious poems, inscribed in t h e most significant parts of t h e c h u r c h ,
served as a sort of c o m m e n t a r y to his complex spatial c o n c e p t . In
these commentaries o n e can find a key to t h e symbolic m e a n i n g
of a n e w dramaturgy of lighting, w h i c h determined the innovative
architectural structure of the c h u r c h and its principal visual effects".
It is n o t e w o r t h y t h a t Suger made clear references to his models in
Jerusalem and C o n s t a n t i n o p l e , especially to Saint Sophia. H e did
n o t m e a n any special constructions or decorations, obviously quite
different from G o t h i c buildings, but, most probably, this French abbot
had in mind t h e concepts of spaces created by outstanding rulers.
It seems t h a t t h e Byzantine imperial paradigms were his p e r m a n e n t
source of inspiration. Suger achieved his place in a sequence of great
predecessors with w h o m h e tried to be compared. Sometimes, these
paradigms found visual expression in Romanesque iconography. For
instance, a miniature of t h e twelfth-century Chronicle of Saint Sophia
(Vat. lat. 4939) represent? a huge figure of Duke Arechis II in t h e
process of the' creation of Saint Sophia in B e n e v e n t o . In f r o n t of the
ruler e n t h r o n e d there is a small figure of a master builder o n a ladder
w h o is turning his head to t h e h i m and, as it seems, carefully following
Arechis's instructions. T h e picture reveals a model relationship
b etw een 'creators' and 'masters' which actually existed in Suger's and
o t h e r medieval minds".
Indeed, t h e example of Justinian as a holy 'concepteur' of t h e G r e a t
C h u r c h became for centuries a paradigm for Byzantine emperors w h o
quite o f t e n played the role of creators of sacred spaces. T h e role of

10
Ibid., pp. 6 2 - 6 5 .
" For a recent discussion of the N e o p l a t o n i s t hackground of Suger's c o n c e p t , see:
L.M. HARRINGTON, Sacred Place in Early Medieval Neoplaumism, N e w York 2004, pp.
158-164.
 142 Alexej Lidov

Justinian, w h o selected master builders and co-ordinated the efforts

of thousands of artisans, has been convincingly demonstrated by his
contemporary historian Procopius 12 , and by the Story of the Construction
of Saint Sophia (Airjynaig nepi rqg 'Ay tag Zo<j>iag), reflecting b o t h
historical facts and mythologems well k n o w n in the Byzantium of the
n i n t h and t e n t h c e n t u r i e s " . It is not merely a rhetorical praising of
t h e o m n i p o t e n t ruler but an a t t e m p t to highlight a real f u n c t i o n of
t h e Emperor. Procopius especially emphasised Justinian's participation
in t h e creation of the G r e a t C h u r c h not by money only, but by his
mind and other spiritual virtues (De Aedificis, 67). H e was engaged
in purely architectural matters, actively collaborating with the main
architects A n t h e m i o s and Isidoros and giving t h e m original advice
(De Aedificis, 68-73).
T h e Story of the Construction of Saint Sophia has given us t h e semi-
mythological imagery of a creator of a unique sacred space. T h e
image of the Great C h u r c h was shown to t h e Emperor by the A n g e l
of the Lord appearing in a dream vision (Airjynaig, 8) 14 . In a n o t h e r
episode, the angel appeared as Justinian, dressed in royal garments
and purple sandals, before a master builder, w h o m the emperor-angel
instructed to make a triple window in t h e altar apse as an iconic
image of the Holy Trinity (Airjynaig, 12). According to the Story,
Justinian was responsible for all the decorations of the c h u r c h as well
as for t h e arrangement of the sanctuary space (Airjynaig, 16-17),
t h e system of numerous doors, and t h e division of t h e naos into four
sacred zones by the so-called 'rivers of Paradise' (Airjynaig, 26), traces
of which are still visible o n the floor". Moreover, h e ordered relics
to be inserted in the d o m e and columns of Saint Sophia [fig. 64].
T h e emperor created some specific areas (sacred spaces) inside the
c h u r c h by the translation of famous relics. A characteristic example
is provided by the Holy Well of the Samaritan W o m a n which was
transferred from Samaria and installed in t h e South-East section of
t h e building. All the activities of Justinian, from the very practical

12
De Aedificis, in PROCOPH CAESARIENSIS Opera Omnia, Lipsiae 1962-1963.
" Scriptores ariginum Constantinopolitanarum, ed. T h . Preger, II, Leipzig 1907; G .
DAORON, Constantinople imaginare. Etudes sur le recueil des Patria, Paris 1984.
14
DAGRON, Constantinople imaginare cit., p. 200.
15
G . MAJESKA, Notes on the Archeology of St Sophia at Constantinople: the Green
Marble Bands on the Floor, in - D u m b a r t o n Oaks Papers., XXXII, 1978, pp. 2 9 9 - 3 0 8 .
 143 The Creator of Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n of Byzantine Culture

to highly artistic, might be perceived as a single whole, which proves

to be quite systematic, t h o u g h at first glance it looks like a strange
c o m b i n a t i o n of various things.
T h e same c o m b i n a t i o n of activities can be found in the Bible,
describing Solomon's construction of t h e O l d Testament Temple 1 ".
Characteristically, Justinian had this image in mind, w h i c h served
him as his most challenging model. A striking episode of The Story of
the Construction of Saint Sophia concerns t h e appearance of Justinian
in the cathedral o n t h e day of consecration. H e unexpectedly left the
Patriarch, ran up to t h e ambon, and raising his arms declared: «Praise
to G o d w h o made me worthy to accomplish such a matter. I have
surpassed you, Solomon» (Airjyrjaig, 27) l ? .
T h e competition with King Solomon as the renowned creator of the
most glorious Temple was an established paradigm for medieval rulers
working on any great project 18 . According to Prudentius (ca. 400),
« Wisdom builds a Temple by Solomon's hands [...]»19. A t the same
time Eusebius of Caesarea in his characterisation of Paulinus compared
this early fourth-century Bishop of Tyre with Solomon, who appeared
among other Old Testament 'architects': « W h e t h e r o n e should call
thee a new Bezalel, the architect of a divine tabernacle, or Solomon,
the king of a new and far goodlier Jerusalem, or even a new Zerubbabel,
who bestowed upon the temple of G o d that glory which greatly exceeds
t h e former?» 20 . T h e pivotal claim of these and many other comparisons
is based o n the principal thesis that Solomon in his creation of the
Temple space had been inspired by the Lord himself, who said to h i m
according to the Bible: «Concerning this house which you are building,
if you will walk in my statutes and obey my ordinances and keep all my
c o m m a n d m e n t s and walk in them, t h e n I will establish my word with
you, which I spoke to David your father*. Solomon had just realised a
divine project offered first to his father David.

16
G . SCHEJA, Hagia Sophia und Templum Salomonis in Istanbuler Mitteilungen, XII,
1962, pp. 4 4 - 5 8 .
11
J. KODER, Justinians Sieg uber Solomon in Thymiama, A t h e n s 1994, pp. 135-142.
18
J. GUTMANN (ed.), The Temple of Sobmon. Archeological Fact and Medieval
Tradition in Christian, Islamic and Jewish Art, Missouls 1976.
19
S. FERBER, The Temple of Solomon in Early Christian and Byzantine Art, in
GUTMANN (ed.), The Temple of Sohmon cit., p. 23.
20
EUSEBIUS, Historia Ecclesiastica, X, iv, 3-4.
 144 Alexej Lidov

Byzantine emperors, wanting to be compared with S o l o m o n and

even to surpass him, always remembered t h a t t h e crucial role in the
construction of the Temple, or any other sacred space, belongs to
t h e Lord himself. Indeed they always embodied a divine concept
following t h e instructions of t h e o m n i p o t e n t creator. Moreover, all
creative rulers had in their minds the most powerful paradigm of the
Book of Exodus (Ex 25-40), in which the Lord himself appeared as
t h e creator of t h e sacred space of t h e Tabernacle. H e instructed Moses
o n M o u n t H o r e b about t h e entire project of t h e Tabernacle, from
t h e general structure of the space to details of t h e sacred vestment
production, and t h e preparation of t h e holy oil. Characteristically, the
complex structure was n a m e d in t h e original Hebrew by a significant
term tavnit (image-model-project). G o d h a d chosen t h e master
Bezalel for the practical realization of his plan, creating for centuries
a model-relationship between creators of sacred space and creators
of objects (Ex 35-36). T h e creation of sacred spaces by earthly rulers
can be considered as iconic behavior in relation to t h e cosmocrator.
T h a t activity, far beyond the ordinary commission, should become
a subject of intensive research, based o n a sequence of historical
reconstructions of particular projects of sacred space.

Leo the Wise as a creator of sacred space in Saint Sophia

O n e of these concepts I h a v e recently attempted to reconstruct in
a special article concerning Leo the Wise's project in Saint Sophia
and his spatial program of the Imperial Door [figs. 65, 66, 68, 74] : i . It
allows me to present here just a summary of this work. I h a v e argued
t h a t t h e Emperor Leo combined in o n e program venerable relics
and miraculous icons, mosaic murals with verse inscriptions nearby,
special rites and images of miracle-stories, which came to t h e minds
of those in f r o n t of the concrete shrines. All together, they created
a spatial milieu at t h e M a i n Entrance to t h e G r e a t C h u r c h of the
Empire. A n invisible part of this milieu were repeating miracles, as
numerous pilgrims inform us. To some extent, t h e boundaries of the
milieu were mystically marked by t h e zone of specific miracles.
A p h e n o m e n o n can be revealed from direct and indirect evidence,

21
A. LIDOV, Leo the Wise and the Miraculous Icons in Hagia Sophia, in E. KOUN-
TOURA-GALAKI (ed.), The Heroes of the Orthodox Church. The New Saints, 8 lk to 16'*
Century, A t h e n s 2004, pp. 393-432.
 145 The Creator of Sacred Space as a Phenomenon of Byzantine Culture

coming mostly n o t from the reign of Leo t h e Wise (886-912). A clear

testimony of the Emperor Leo's activity survived in twelfth-century
verses - a passage from the De metris Pindaricis by Isaac Tzetzes ( t
1138) informing us about two inscriptions of Leo t h e Wise set up
at the doors of Saint Sophia: « T h o u hast verses such as these in t h e
great and famous - t h e very great, I say, and splendid c h u r c h of the
Wisdom of G o d , written by the Emperor Leo the Wise, beautifully
covered over the Holy Door. T h o u hast also those that are composed
round the Saviour, piously written by h i m in the Beautiful Gate» 2 2 .
T h e text is unclear. N o t h i n g is said about the c o n t e n t s of the verse
inscriptions of Leo the Wise. O n e of t h e m has been covered above
t h e 'Holy Doors', possibly the gates of the sanctuary barrier. A n o t h e r
inscription surrounded an image of Christ at or in t h e 'Beautiful
Doors'. According to flexible Byzantine terminology, it could have
b e e n the doors of the e x o n a r t h e x or t h e so-called Imperial Door
from the n a r t h e x into t h e nave. It is n o t clear either which image
of Christ is m e n t i o n e d by Tzetzes. Despite all this uncertainty, the
message of Tzetzes' verses is of great significance. It presents as fact
Leo t h e Wise's creation of t h e symbolic programs of the m a i n doors
in Saint Sophia in c o n j u n c t i o n with t h e important images there.
T h e evidence confirms a n active participation of Leo the Wise in the
redecoration of Saint Sophia after Iconoclasm - a favourite project of
t h e M a c e d o n i a n dynasty.
A n o t h e r important d o c u m e n t is the famous mosaic in the tympanum
over the Imperial Door - the central one in the row of doors leading
from the narthex to the nave of Saint Sophia [fig. 7 l] 2 i . This renowned
mosaic above the main entrance to the 'Great C h u r c h ' of the Byzantine
Empire represents Christ enthroned, with the Emperor Leo the Wise
prostrate at His feet [figs. IX, 69]' 4 . T h e only surviving part of the

22
C. MANGO, Materials for the Study of the Mosaics of St Sophia at Istanbul, Wash­
ington 1962, pp. 96­97.
25
For the hest visual documentation, see: C. MANGO, A. ERTUg, Hagia Sophia. A
Vision of Empire, Istanbul 1997, pp. 11, 15­19.
24
1 do not intend to discuss here which emperor is depicted. One may accept the
opinion of most scholars, who agree that this is Leo the Wise. It seems important
that this identification is supported by some medieval testimonies that will be quoted
later. On the identification, see: N. OIKONOMIDIS, Leo VJ and the Narthex Mosaic of
Saint Sophia, in «Dumbarton Oaks Papers», XXX, 1976, pp. 158­161.
 146 A l e x e j Lidov

original decor of this Door - the moulded brass frame of the doorway
with a small relief portraying the Hetoimasia in the centre of t h e top
plate - most probably belongs to the same period [fig. 67] 25 . W i t h the
project of Leo the Wise can be connected two miracle-working icons
to the sides of the Imperial Door - the icons of Christ and of the
Virgin 26 . N o w only traces of holes remaining in the marble r e v e t m e n t
indicate the original location of t h e holy relics [fig. 68].
However, there are several testimonies from the eleventh to fifteenth
centuries. Invaluable information is found in the late eleventh century
Latin pilgrim's description, k n o w n as the Mercati Anonymous - a free
translation of a Greek description of the C o n s t a n t i n o p o l i t a n shrines 27 .
In his reference to Saint Sophia, the author lays special stress o n the
icon of t h e Virgin at the m a i n entrance to the church: «In the right
part of the church, behind the atrium, at t h e silver gates, there is a n
image of Mary o n the wall, formerly preserved in Jerusalem; the one
to which St Mary of Egypt prayed in her time, w h e n she heard a voice
coming from the lips of the Holy M o t h e r of G o d . This holy image was
brought to St Sophia from the holy city by Emperor Leo» 28 .
W e h a v e some o t h e r important sources: a large text from t h e 11 th
century Anonymous Tarragonensis19, important liturgical evidence of

25
For all details see: P.A. UNDERWOOD, Notes on the Work of the Byzantine Institute
in Istanbul: ( 9 5 7 - 1 9 5 9 , in « D u m b a r t o n O a k s P a p e r s - , XIV, 1 9 6 0 , pp. 2 1 0 - 2 1 3 , tig.
13. T h i s btass frame is traditionally dated t o t h e 6'1' century, t h o u g h a later date s e e m s
m o r e probable. T h e Justinianic d a t e has b e e n q u e s t i o n e d o n epigraphical grounds.
S o m e letters of the inscription p o i n t out t h e 10''' c e n t u r y as the most probable date
(cf. ibid., p. 2 1 2 ) . C . M a n g o recently suggested t h e same date as t h e T y m p a n u m m o ­
saic (MANGO, ERTUg, Hagia Sophia cit., p. 14). S e e also: R . S . NELSON, The Discourse
of Icons. Then and Now, in « A r t History.., XII, 2, 1989, pp. 1 4 0 ­ 1 5 0 .
26
T h e basic historical t e s t i m o n y has b e e n presented in: G . MAJESKA, Russian
Travelers to Constantinople in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries, W a s h i n g t o n D . C .

1 9 8 4 , pp. 2 0 6 ­ 2 0 9 .
27
K. CIGGAAR, Une Description de Constantinople traduite par un pelerin anglais, in
« R e v u e des e t u d e s Byzantines», XXXIV, 1 9 7 6 , pp. 2 1 1 ­ 2 6 7 .
28
Ibid., p. 2 4 9 .
29
K. CIGGAAR, Line Description de Constantinople dans le Tarragonensis 5 5 , in
« R e v u e des e t u d e s byzantines», LI1I, 1995, pp. 1 1 7 ­ 1 4 0 : « l n t h e s a m e glorious
basilica of S a i n t S o p h i a at the e n t r a n c e doors, c o v e r e d in gold and silver, there
is a n o t h e r i c o n (ycona) o f t h e blessed Virgin, that Mary t h e Egyptian has s e e n in
 147 T h e C r e a t o r o f Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n o f B y z a n t i n e C u l t u r e

S y m e o n of T h e s s a l o n i k i ' 0 , a n d a set o f R u s s i a n p i l g r i m s ' a c c o u n t s f r o m

t h e 14 , h t o t h e 15 t h c e n t u r y " . O f t h e i c o n of C h r i s t , w e l e a r n t h a t it
w a s k n o w n as t h e ' S a v i o u r C o n f e s s o r ' (Spas hpovednik), a n d g r e a t
sinners ashamed to confess to their father confessor made penitence
b e f o r e it. A R u s s i a n p i l g r i m ' s r e m a r k of t h i s i c o n ( « t h e S a v i o u r is
transfigured in m a r b l e » ) , n o d o u b t refers t o a n essential characteristic
of t h e i c o n ' 2 . W e d o n o t k n o w t o t h i s day, h o w e v e r , w h e t h e r t h i s
r e f e r e n c e is r e l a t e d t o t h e a r t i s t i c t e c h n i q u e ( s t o n e r e l i e f , p a i n t i n g o n
marble, or mosaic), a peculiar i c o n o g r a p h y or t o a miracle story t h a t
h a s n o t c o m e d o w n t o us 3 3 .
W e k n o w m u c h m o r e a b o u t t h e i c o n o f t h e M o t h e r of G o d t h a t
s p o k e t o S t M a r y of E g y p t . O n e of t h e m o s t r e n o w n e d r e l i c s of
C h r i s t e n d o m , its s t a t u s w a s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y h i g h e r t h a n t h a t of t h e
S a v i o u r C o n f e s s o r . A c c o r d i n g t o S y m e o n of T h e s s a l o n i k i , it w a s t h i s
i c o n t h a t t h e p a t r i a r c h v e n e r a t e d a t t h e s t a r t of f e s t i v e liturgies 1 4 .

the church of Jerusalem, when she could not enter in because of the sins she has
committed. When, as we have written above, Maria the sinner saw it and prayed
at it, at that very moment she received everything she has asked for. Finally, when
the sinner stood in front of the same holy and venerable image of the Virgin to give
thanks for the benefit she has obtained, and also to ask where she could find a place
for repentance, dignified for her sins, the holy icon thus responded: "If you cross the
Jordan, you shall find there a line place of repose". That holy icon or image of the
Virgin that thus spoke to the wretched sinner, you can see at the entrance in Sancta
Sophia. You can even see that sinner, represented in paint before the same image
|ot the Virgin]. It is such a pious matter to contemplate how the Virgin is carrying
at her breast her noble Son and how the sinful woman, black as her sins, bends her
kneels and stretches out her trembling arms supplicating with tears the Virgin to be
merciful to her. The work is worthy of admiration".
,0
J. DARROUZES, Sainte-Sophie dc Thessalonique d'apres un rituel, in «Revue des
eludes byzantines», XXXIV, 1976, P P . 46-47.
« MAJESKA, Russian Travelers c i t . , p p . 9 2 - 9 3 , 1 6 0 - 1 6 1 , 1 8 2 - 1 8 3 .
,J
Ibid., p p . 1 6 0 - 1 6 1 .

" For a detailed discussion of all possible evidence which might pertain to that
icon, including strange testimonies of Anthony of Novgorod (1200) and Stephan of
Novgorod (1349), see: Lioov, Leo the Wise and the Miracubus Icons in Hagia Sophia
cit., pp. 397-398.
M
DARROUZES, op. cit., pp. 46-47. The entrance took place at the beginning of the
vespers on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays. Immediately after venerating the icon
 148 A l e x e j Lidov

T h e tradition of the icon goes back to a well-known episode in the

seventh-century Life of St Mary of Egypt*"*. According to this story,
Mary, a courtesan from Alexandria, came to Jerusalem, and early in
the morning of the Feast of the Exaltation of t h e Cross she decided
to visit the Basilica of C o n s t a n t i n e the G r e a t (Martyrium) in t h e
complex of the Holy Sepulchre. But the sinful w o m a n was stopped
at the e n t r a n c e by a heavenly power lest she saw t h e relic of t h e
True Cross displayed o n t h a t day. Shedding tears of repentance, she
appealed t h e n to the image of the M o t h e r of G o d above her in the
porch for H e r intercession before Christ' 6 . Mary was forgiven and
entered the c h u r c h to see t h e precious relic. A s she was leaving the
church, she again called to t h e icon, imploring t h e Virgin' 7 . T h e n
she heard a voice t h a t sent her to a hermitage in t h e wilderness of
Jordan.
Tremendously popular t h r o u g h o u t C h r i s t e n d o m , this story
graphically showed the power of heartfelt repentance, which could
turn a great sinner into a venerable saint. T h e icon of t h e Virgin
was venerated as a most important relic. T h e polemics in the
period of Iconoclasm made it o n e of the crucial arguments of icon-
worshippers.
According to the Mercati Anonymous, t h e miraculous icon was at

of t h e M o t h e r of G o d , t h e patriarch entered the c h u r c h and, turning t o t h e west

wall, «thrice venerated t h e holy image of the Saviour a b o v e t h e beautiful gates».
S y m e o n of T h e s s a l o n i c a refers to a n image of St Mary of Egypt near t h e i c o n of
the M o t h e r of G o d . T h e situation of this image is n o t quite clear s i n c e t h e narrow
wall space b e t w e e n t h e m a i n e n t r a n c e and the right-hand door leaves n o space for
a n o t h e r icon. T h e 'image of St Mary' m i g h t h a v e b e e n a c o m p o s i t i o n a l part of t h e
i c o n of t h e Virgin, as Anonymous Tartagonensis informs us.
" BihliothecaHagiographicaGftKM ( B H G , 1 0 4 2 ) , ed. F. H a l k i n , II, Brussels 1957, pp.
8 0 - 8 2 . For t h e 7 * century r e d a c t i o n of t h e Vita, published by J.-P. Migne: SOPHRONII
HIEROSOLYMITANI Vita Mariae Aegyptiae, in P G L X X X V I I , 3, coll. 3 6 9 7 - 3 7 2 5 : 3 7 1 3 ) .
For a n English translation see: Life of St Mary of Egypt, trans, by M. Kouli, in A . M .
TALBOT (ed.), The Holy w o m e n of Byzantium. Ten Saints'Lives in English Translation,
W a s h i n g t o n 1996, pp. 6 5 - 9 4 , esp. pp. 8 2 - 8 5 . For a study of this Vita, taken from of
t h e oral stories spread a m o n g t h e Palestinian m o n k s of the 6 ,K century: K. KUNZE, Die
Legenda der hi. Maria Aegyptiaca, Berlin 1978.
36
SOPHRONII HIEROSOLYMITANI Vita Mariae Aegyptiae cit., c o l . 3713, C I 1.
" /bid., col. 3 7 1 3 , D l - 4 .
 149 The Creator of Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n of Byzantine Culture

Saint Sophia of Constantinople as early as the 11th century, brought

from Jerusalem by the Emperor Leo'8. A simple deduction from the
available data allows us to assume that the reference is to Leo VI
the Wise (886-912). It is noteworthy that this emperor was known
for collecting famous relics from all over Christendom to gather
them together in the Byzantine capital. The Emperor Leo's desire to
have a famous icon of the Virgin from Jerusalem, one more relic of a
renowned saint, seems part of a large scale and long term program.
It is noteworthy that 'The Icon Who Spoke to Saint Mary of Egypt'
was brought and placed at the Saint Sophia entrance, exactly where
it had been at the Basilica gates in Jerusalem, where it was also open
to be kissed39. This means that the particular sacred space with all its
historical and religious connotations had been transferred with the
miraculous icon. And through this transfer the entire space of the
Great Church of Constantinople was not merely linked but partly
identified with the most sacred shrine in Jerusalem. The Jerusalem
relic, with its literary associations, became part of another spatial
image. In one sense, the display of this icon-relic emphasised an
iconic concept of Saint Sophia as the New Jerusalem.
The translation of the relic allows us to assume that the Jerusalem
icon was to become one of the crucial elements in the symbolic
program of the Imperial Door in Saint Sophia at Constantinople.
Probably, Leo VI, known for his theological erudition, elaborated the
whole symbolic program of the sacred space at the main entrance
to Saint Sophia. This program incorporated a specific system of
venerated relics40 linked by one symbolic concept.
Characteristically, the icons of 'The Mother of God Who Spoke
to St Mary of Egypt' and the 'Confessor Saviour', united by the idea
of repentance and divine mercy, formed a kind of frame for another

38
S e e n o t e 3.
w
T h i s detail concerning both icons was m e n t i o n e d in the A c t s of the S e v e n t h
O e c u m e n i c a l C o u n c i l of 787 (J.D. MANSI, Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima
collectio, Florentiae 1759-1798, facsimile repr. Graz 1960, XIII, p. 8 9 A ) and by
D e a c o n Zosima in 1419-1422 (MAJESKA, Russian Travelers cit., pp. 182-18?).
40
In the Byzantine world the miraculous icons c o n t a i n i n g divine grace and healing
power were considered in the category of sacred relics. For a recent discussion of this
issue, see: A . LIDOV, The Sacred Space of Relics, in LIDOV (ed.), Christian Relics in The
Moscow Kremlin cit., pp. 14, 16.
 150 A l e x e j Lidov

famous relic - t h e Imperial Door itself made, as tradition had it,

from the timber of N o a h ' s ark covered with gilded silver plates. T h e
earliest references to it are from t h e 10 th century 4 1 . It was o n e of the
biggest relics of Byzantium, the door was of 7.6 m. high and 4 m.
wide 42 . T h e Mercati Anonymous, paraphrasing t h e l l l h Byzantine
original, m e n t i o n s three doors made from the wood of Noah's ark,
which performed miracles every day 43 . A reference to t h e Door can
be found in the twelfth-century Description of Saint Sophia, which
interpreted t h e three central doors as a symbolic image of the Holy
Trinity 44 . A r o u n d 1200, according to t h e testimonies of A n t h o n y
of Novgorod and Robert de Clari, n o t merely t h e timber but some
details of t h e Door's lock were venerated as miraculous objects 4 '. W e
d o n o t know precisely w h e n t h e relic appeared at Saint Sophia. Yet
it seems possible t h a t it, too, came to t h e G r e a t C h u r c h in t h e reign
of Leo t h e Wise 46 .
Of this a n c i e n t Door only t h e moulded brass frame of t h e Imperial
Door is e x t a n t [fig. 67]. A n embossed relief above t h e head, in the

41
Scriptores originum Constantinopolitanarum cit., I, 97; DAGRON, Constantinople
imaginaire cit., pp. 205, 244-245.
42
On the system of the western doors to Hagia Sophia, see: C. STRUBE, Die westlische
Eingangsseite der Kirchen von Konstantinopel in justinianischer Zeit, Wiesbaden 1973.
4i
See: CIGGAAR, line Description de Constantinople traduite par un pelerin anglais
cit., p. 249.
44
«There being symbolically, a triple entry yawning out of the middle of the
protemenisma (for the holy places are accessible to those who have been taught that
there is one God in the Trinity) towards him who passes the great quantity of silver
which at once meets him near the doors» (C. MANGO, J. PARKER, A Tiwl/tfi-Centur>
Description of St Sophia, in (Dumbarton Oaks Papers», XIV, 1960, pp. 237, 243.
45
C. LOPAREV (ed.), Kniga Palomnik. Skazanie mest svjatyx vo Caregrade Antonja
arxiepiskopa Novgorodskogo v 1200 godu, in «Pravoslavnij Palestinskij Sbornik», LI,
1899, pp. 8, 54, 74; ROBERT OE CLARI, La conquete de Constantinople, 6d. par P. Lauer,
Paris 1956.
46
The Door of the wood of Noah's ark is gone, and its fate unknown. The present-
day doors were probably made during the Fossati restoration in 1847-1849 (see: T.
LACCHIA, / Fossati architetti del Sultano di Turchia, Roma 1943, p. 94). There is an
Italian drawing (Cod. Barb. Lat. 4426, fol. 46r) presumably copied from the original
by Ciriaco of Ancona that might give an impression of how the Imperial Doot
looked.
 151 The Creator o f Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n o f B y z a n t i n e C u l t u r e

centre of t h e top panel, makes t h e symbolic c o n c e p t somewhat

clearer. It represents a t h r o n e with a bird flying down o n t o an o p e n
book - all inscribed in an arch resting o n two pillars. T h e book bears
a G r e e k inscription, a q u o t a t i o n adapted from the Gospel according
to St J o h n 10, 7-9: «So said t h e Lord: I am the door of t h e sheep. By
me if any m a n enter, h e shall go in and out, and find pasture». T h e
relief is a graphic m e t a p h o r of the C h u r c h as the abode of salvation.
T h e t h r o n e is an image of the T h r o n e of the Second C o m i n g ( t h e
Hetoimasia). T h e grace of t h e Holy Spirit is embodied in t h e dove
coming d o w n to t h e Gospel o p e n and sounding, the Door of Noah's
ark and everyone w h o enters t h e church. T h e arch is a traditional
emblem of the C h u r c h and, n o less important, a n iconic allusion to
Noah's ark, seen as o n e of t h e essential prototypes of t h e Temple. T h e
Door of Noah's ark symbolically represented Christ in His c h u r c h ,
at t h e same time promising salvation and the mercy of the Lord to
t h e righteous ( G n 7, l) 4 7 . It is noteworthy that some letters of t h e
inscription point to the 10 th century as t h e most probable date, w h i c h
allows this brass frame to be considered as a part of Leo t h e Wise's
project 4 8 . T h e iconography of the brass frame could be a part of t h e
project of this emperor, symbolically c o n n e c t i n g the actual relics at
t h e Door with t h e sacred space of the m a i n e n t r a n c e into the G r e a t
Church.
Thus, there were three miraculous relics included in the symbolic
program of the Imperial Door: t h e Door of Noah's ark proper and the
two icons, of Christ and of the M o t h e r of G o d . T h e y were united
in the t h e m e of repentance, divine mercy and salvation found by
entering the church. T h e protagonist of this spatial dramaturgy was
t h e Jerusalem icon of t h e Virgin w h o spoke to St Mary of Egypt and
gave her salvation after her deep p e n i t e n c e in front of t h e icon.
T h e symbolic c o n t e x t revealed allows us to take a new look at the
T y m p a n u m mosaic above the e n t r a n c e - o n e of the best-known and
most enigmatic compositions in Byzantine iconography. More t h a n
fifteen works specially dedicated to it h a v e been published since its
restoration in 1932 49 . Its c o n t e n t and symbolic concept, however,

47
O n this symbolism, see: H . HOHL, Arche Noe, in Lexikon der christlischen Ilumog-
raphie, Freiburg im Breisgau 1 9 6 8 - 1 9 7 6 , 1 , pp. 1 7 8 - 1 7 9 .
4B
S e e n o t e 25 a b o v e .
49
A series of works emerged in the 1930s as a direct result of T. W h i t t e m o r e ' s
 152 A l e x e j Lidov

remain an open question to this day'0. Scholarly interpretations

group round two basic ideas. According to one of them, the mosaic
symbolically represents the divine investiture of an earthly ruler, who
obtains his power from Christ the Wisdom. The other interpretation
puts the idea of repentance into the foreground as the semantic focus
of the composition. Historically the appearance of the Tympanum
mosaic was conditioned by events surrounding Leo the Wise's fourth
marriage and clash with Patriarch Nicholas Mystikos.
The symbolism of the relics of the royal entrance analysed above
- reminiscences of repentance and salvation - speaks for this latter

publication: T. WHITTEMORE, The Mosaics of St. Sophia in Istanbul. Preliminary Report

on the First Year's Work. (931-1932. The Mosaics of the Narthex, Oxford 1933; C.
OSIECZKOWSKA, La mosaique de la Porte Royale a Sainte-Sophie de Constantinople et la
litanie de tous les saints, in «Byzantion», IX, 1934, pp. 41-83; J.D. STEFANESCU, Sur la
mosaique de la Porte Imperiale a Sainte-Sophie de Constantinople, in «Byzantion», IX,
1934,pp. 517-523; A.M. SCHNEIDER, DerKaiserdesMosaikbildes uberdemHaupteingang
der Sophienkirche zu Konstantinopel, in «Orientalia Christiana», XXXII, 1935, pp.
75-79; F. DOLGER, Justinians Engel an der Kaisertur der H. Sophia, in «Byzantion»,
X, 1935, pp. 1-4; A. GRABAR, L'empereur dans Van hyzantin, Strasbourg 1936, pp.
100-106; H.E. DEL MEDICO, Les mosaiques du Narthex de Sainte-Sophie. Contribution
a I'iconographie de la Sagesse Divine, in «Revue Archeologique», XII, 1938, pp. 49-66.
Of special importance among later publications are: L. MIRKOVIC\ Das Mosaik der
Kaisertur im Narthex der Kirche der HI. Sophia, in Konstantinopel, in Atti dell'VIII
Congresso di studi bizantini (Palermo, 3-10 aprile 1951), 2 vols., Roma 1953, II, pp.
206-217; L. MIRKOVIC"', O ikonografiji mozaika iznad carskih vrata u narteksu Sv. Sofije
u Carigradu, in «Starinar», IX-X, 1958-1959, pp. 89-96; J. SCHARF, Der Kaiser in
Proskynesis. Bemerkungen zur Deutung des Kaisermosaiks in Narthex der Hagia Sophia
von Konstantinopel, in Festschrift P.E. Schramm, Wiesbaden 1965, pp. 27-35; E.J.W.
HAWKINS, Further Observations on the Narthex Mosaic in St Sophia at Istanbul, in
••Dumbarton Oaks Papers-, XXII, 1968, pp. 153-166, pis. 1-12 (observation results
from the new mosaic restoration); OIKONOMIDIS, Leo V/ and the Narthex Mosaic cit.,
pp. 151-172 (with an historiographic review of the basic concepts); Z. GAVRILOVIC,
The Humiliation of Leo VI the Wise. The Mosaic of the Narthex at Saint Sophia,
Istanbul, in «Cahiers Archelogiques», XXVIII, 1979, pp. 87-94; A. SCHMINK, «Rota
tu volubilis*: Kaisermacht und Patriarchenmacht in Mosaiken, in L. BURGMAN, M.-T.
FOGEN, A. SCHMINK (eds.), Cupido legum, Frankfurt am Main 1985, pp. 211-234-
50
R. CORMACK, Interpreting the Mosaics of S. Sophia at Istanbul, in «Art History»,
IV, 2, 1981, p. 141; ID., Patronage and New Programs of Byzantine Iconography, in The
 153 T h e C r e a t o r o f Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n o f B y z a n t i n e C u l t u r e

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w h i c h is, however, o p e n t o m a j o r clarifications, for

w h i c h we o u g h t to look at t h e basic i c o n o g r a p h i c features of t h e
scene.
C h r i s t , represented e n t h r o n e d in t h e c e n t r e , holds in His h a n d a n
o p e n G o s p e l w i t h t h e inscription: « E I P H N H T M I N . EVQ E I M I T O
<t>Ql T O T K O I M O T » («Peace be u n t o you. I am t h e light of t h e
world») - a c o m b i n a t i o n of t w o addresses by C h r i s t in t h e G o s p e l
according to St J o h n (20, 19, 26; 8, 12). T h e words «Peace be u n t o
you» were addressed t o t h e Disciples as C h r i s t twice appeared u n t o
t h e m after t h e Resurrection, « w h e n t h e doors were shut». T h e
Byzantine iconography of this gospel text represents C h r i s t against
t h e background of gates symbolising t h e e n t r a n c e t o t h e H e a v e n l y
Kingdom. T h e o t h e r q u o t a t i o n , «I am t h e light of t h e world: h e t h a t
followeth m e shall n o t walk in darkness, but shall h a v e t h e light of
life», is also semantically c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e t h e m e of e n t r a n c e and
t h e way t o salvation. O f m u c h significance was t h e a p p e a r a n c e of this
inscription o n t h e symbolic threshold marking t h e transition f r o m
t h e twilit n a r t h e x , t h e place of c a t e c h u m e n s , e x c o m m u n i c a n t s a n d
Penitents, t o t h e floodlit nave. T h e inscription emphasised t h e spatial
c o n n o t a t i o n s of t h e T y m p a n u m mosaic a n d its symbolic c o n t e x t ,
including a n evangelic space of Christ's m e e t i n g w i t h t h e disciples
after t h e Resurrection.
A n o t h e r crucial characteristic of t h e T y m p a n u m mosaic is t h e
posture of t h e prostrate e m p e r o r clinging to Christ's feet - atypical
of imperial portraiture 5 1 . T h e closest iconographic analogy is offered
by t h e scene of ' T h e P e n i t e n c e of David'; in particular, a m i n i a t u r e
in t h e Paris m a n u s c r i p t of t h e Homilies of Gregory of Nazianzus, 879-
883 (Bibl. N a t . , gr. 510, fol. 143v) 52 . O f great expressive power are

I7'k Intenuuional Byzantine Congress. Major Papers (Washington, 3-8 August 1986),
New York 1986, pp. 620-623. Among recent new interpretations, see: H. FRANSES,
Symbols, Meaning, Belie/: Donor Portraits in Byzantine Art, Ph.D. Dissertation, London
University 1992, pp. 30-60; CH. BARBER, From Transformation to Desire: Art ana1
Worship after Byzantine Iconoclasm, in «Art Bulletin-', LXXV, 1, 1993, pp. 11-15.
51
The symbolism and iconography of the attitude are analysed in detail in: A.
CUTLER, Trans/igurations. Studies in the Dynamics of Byzantine Iconography, University
Park 1975, pp. 53-110 (Proskynesis and Anastasis).
52
OIKONOMIDIS, Leo VI and the Narthex Mosaic cit., pp. 157-158. Most probably
this imperial manuscript itself was known to Leo the Wise, a pupil of the Patriarch
 154 Alexej Lidov

semantic parallels between the stories of David and Leo the Wise.
David repents of his ignominious marriage with Bathsheba (2 Sm 11-
12). God accepts his penitence, but David pays with the death of his
firstborn by Bathsheba. Likewise, Leo sought to expiate in prayer the
sin of a fourth marriage, expressly banned by all ecclesiastical laws
and viewed as adultery. The Emperor insisted on church recognition
of his marriage - all the more essential after the birth of his 'firstborn'
son and heir, the future Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos. It was not
just a personal but a state and political matter, an ultimate condition
to save the dynasty. The Patriarch Nicholas Mystikos categorically
refused to recognise the marriage. Creating a religious and political
scandal, he twice ordered the Emperor out of festive liturgies, at
Christmas and Epiphany 906-907, stopping him at the doors of
Saint Sophia''3. Yet a church council convened for this purpose in
907 accepted the Emperor's repentance - which historical records

P h o t i o s , w h o was t h e p r o b a b l e i d e a t o r of m a n u s c r i p t i c o n o g r a p h y : L. BRUBAKER,
Politics, Patronage, and Art in the Ninth Century Byzantium. The Homilies of Gregory
ofNazianzus in Paris (B.N.GR. 510), in « D u m h a r t o n O a k s Papers-., XXXIX, 1985,
PP. 1-13.
5i
For t h e historical c o n t e x t of, a n d basic l i t e r a t u r e o n , t h e t e t r a g a m y controversy,
see: OIKONOMIDES, Leo VI and the Narthex Mosaic cit., pp. 161-176. T h e m o s t
d e t a i l e d a c c o u n t of t h e d e v e l o p m e n t s is t o be f o u n d in t h e 10 ,h c e n t u r y Life of
Euthymius. See: Vita Euthymii, patriarchae, ed. by P. K a r l i n - H a y t e r , Brussels 1970, pp.
2 4 5 - 2 5 0 ( b i b l i o g r a p h y o n t e t r a g a m y ) . T h e Life c o n t a i n s a n expressive d e s c r i p t i o n
of t h e e m p e r o t ' s b e h a v i o u r a f t e r t h e p a t r i a r c h s t o p p e d h i m in t h e m a i n gateway
of S t S o p h i a : « T h e e m p e r o r w e p t a n d , f l o o d i n g t h e holy floor w i t h his tears, w e n t
b a c k w i t h o u t a word, a n d e n t e r e d t h e m y t a t o r i u m t h r o u g h t h e right gates. T h e n h e
s u m m o n e d several m e t r o p o l i t a n s a n d learned f r o m t h e m e v e r y t h i n g t h e y h a d d o n e
a n d signed. H e replied to t h e m w i t h a m o a n f r o m his d e s p o n d e n t h e a r t : "I c o u n t o n
C h r i s t S o n of G o d , W h o d e s c e n d e d f r o m h e a v e n t o save us miserable sinners. May
H e h a v e mercy o n m e t h e greatest s i n n e r of all, a n d e m b r a c e m e as t h e prodigal son,
a n d a d o p t m e again in His c a t h o l i c apostolic C h u r c h t h r o u g h t h e prayers of o u r
f a t h e r t h e P a t r i a r c h a n d your e n t i r e Holy S y n o d ! " . T h e r e a d i n g of t h e H o l y G o s p e l
b e g a n at t h a t very i n s t a n c e , a n d t h e g r o a n s of t h e e m p e r o r as h e shed t o r r e n t i a l tears
m a d e all w h o h e a r d w e e p a n d l a m e n t w i t h h i m - n o t only t h e c o n g r e g a t i o n but e v e n
t h e m e t r o p o l i t a n s " (ibid., pp. 7 4 - 7 9 ) . For a r e c e n t discussion of t h e t e t r a g a m y topic
see: S. TOUGHER, The Reign of Leo VI ( 8 8 6 - 9 J 2 ) . Politics and People, L e i d e n - N e w
York-Koln 1997, p p . 133ff.
 155 The Creator of Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n of Byzantine Culture

describe as deep and sincere - and resolved to admit h i m to c h u r c h

after h e had d o n e penitence.
O i k o n o m i d i s did n o t t h i n k t h a t t h e Emperor could h a v e voluntarily
ordered himself to be depicted in humiliation over the m a i n e n t r a n c e
to the G r e a t C h u r c h , and so supposed a later date of 920 when, after
t h e d e a t h of Leo VI, a c h u r c h council had approved t h e position of
Nicholas Mystikos in t h e tetragamy contradiction 5 4 . In Oikonomidis'
opinion, the mosaic was intended to graphically remind the viewer of
t h e Patriarch's final victory over the crowned sinner.
W e can hardly agree with this interpretation as the developments
of 907 brought triumph to Leo the Wise as ruler and Christian, for the
Eastern C h u r c h tradition viewed repentance as a feat of piety, and a
gift of divine wisdom as t h e only way to salvation 5 5 . Forgiveness given
to Mary of Egypt, a great sinner, after the intercession of t h e icon of
t h e M o t h e r of G o d , was a kind of guarantee for t h e p e n i t e n t Emperor
in his meditations o n Doomsday and the destiny of his son and heir. It
is indicative in this respect that, according to the 10 th century Typikon
of the Great Church, the Psalm 50 (51) of penitence, where David asks
G o d to cleanse h i m from the sin of his lawless marriage, was sung
at matins immediately after the e n t r a n c e into the c h u r c h from the
narthex' 6 , through the Imperial Door under the Tympanum mosaic 57 .
It was a manifestation of p e n i t e n c e and triumph at the same time.
O n e may find t h e same logic of criticism in t h e recent book Empereur
et pretre by Gilbert Dagron 5 s , w h o has convincingly demonstrated
t h a t public r e p e n t a n c e was a traditional, in some sense canonical,
form of Byzantine imperial self-representation from C o n s t a n t i n e the
Great onwards. T h e p e n i t e n c e of King David has been established

M
OIKONOMIDIS, Leo VI and the Narthex Mosaic cit., pp. 170-172.
55
T h e s e ideas are reflected in numerous patristic texts o n the topic of repentance.
See: M. ARRANZ, Les prieres penitentielles de la tradition byzantine, in "Orientalia
Christiana Periodica", LVII, 1991, pp. 8 7 - 1 4 3 , 309-329; LVI11, 1992, pp. 23-82.
56
J. MATEOS, Typicon de la Grand Eglise, R o m a 1962 (Orientalia Christiana
A n a l e c t a 165), I, pp. XXIII-XXIV.
It is noteworthy that in Byzantine illuminated psalters psalm 50 has b e e n
illustrated by the miniature 'The P e n i t e n c e of David' (e.g., Parisinus gr. 139, fol.
136v, second half of the 10 ,h century).
58
G . DAGRON, Empereur et pretre. Etudes sur le 'cesaropapisme' byzantin, Paris 1996,
PP. 129-138.
 156 Alexej Lidov

as a powerful model and symbolic prototype. From this point of view

Leo t h e Wise o n t h e T y m p a n u m mosaic was «the image of all Davidic
emperors» and his p e n i t e n c e could be perceived as a Christian
apotheosis 5 9 .
In this historical and symbolic c o n t e x t o n e may suggest t h a t
t h e two different interpretations of t h e T y m p a n u m mosaic are not
contradictory. T h e initial idea of p e n i t e n c e did not exclude the
f u n d a m e n t a l concept of Holy Wisdom and imperial investiture.
T h e s e two messages could co-exist in t h e same image simultaneously,
revealing its special power at particular liturgical moments.
T h e specific spatial context is of great significance again. A t the ritual
entrances to Saint Sophia, messages were addressed to an emperor
who, according to the ceremonial, prayed and bowed three times
before the Imperial Door, holding a lit candle 6 0 . During this rite of the
earthly ruler, p e n i t e n c e and divine blessing were equally present. T h e
iconic image of the Tympanum mosaic was temporarily unified with
t h e 'living icon' of imperial ritual beneath, and in this dynamic sacred
e n v i r o n m e n t the two symbolic concepts of the mosaic became really
inseparable. It seems very probable t h a t this 'performative' aspect was
an original part of the entire project of the sacred space initiated by
Leo the Wise in particular historical circumstances.
T h e revealed sacred space had o n e more aspect, which could be
n a m e d t h e miraculous one. A s we remember, the Tympanum mosaic
was represented above three miraculous relics, which possibly
formed a part of the original concept. It presumably m e a n t t h a t the
Byzantine emperor was praying and bowing in front of the relic and
icons and b e n e a t h t h e mosaic image in a potentially miracle-working
realm. In this 'miraculous' c o n t e x t o n e may re-examine t h e strange
iconography of t h e T y m p a n u m mosaic. S o m e scholars h a v e already
noticed t h e unique character of its composition, but it still remains
without an appropriate explanation 6 1 . T h e iconography seems

59
Ibid., P . 137.
60
GRABAR, Lempereur cit., p. 101; G . MAJESKA, The Emperor in His Church.
Imperial Ritual in the Church of St. Sophia, in H. MACJLHRE (ed.), Byzantine Court
C '.tdture from 8 2 9 to 1204, W a s h i n g t o n D.C. 1997, p. 5. T h e emperor attended the
liturgy with the ceremonial entrance through the Royal doors, normally closed, only
a few times a year: at Easter, Pentecost, Transfiguration, Christmas and Epiphany,
and occasionally at some other feasts.
 157 The Creator o f Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n o f B y z a n t i n e C u l t u r e

even more unusual in the case of t h e iconic image above t h e m a i n

e n t r a n c e to t h e G r e a t C h u r c h of the Empire, which is presumably
intended to serve as a model for other churches. T h e iconography of
t h e T y m p a n u m mosaic, however, has never been repeated.
T h e M o t h e r of G o d and t h e A r c h a n g e l are represented n o t full-
length but in medallions. T h i s fact appears to be of great significance.
T h e use of imagines clipeatae, memorial portraits, reveal a reminder
of real objects rather t h a n merely depictions. It is noteworthy t h a t
n o n e of t h e images in the T y m p a n u m mosaic had any accompanying
inscriptions originally. T h i s detail embarrassed even the Byzantines
w h o some centuries later added the letters I C X C beside the head
of Christ enthroned 6 2 . All these details suggest special prototypes of
mosaic images. O u r knowledge of the entire symbolic program of t h e
Imperial Door allows us to suppose t h a t the a u t h o r of t h e iconographic
concept could have portrayed objects of worship - famous miraculous
icons of Christ, the M o t h e r of G o d and the Archangel, which could
be easily recognisable by contemporaries. T h i s may explain a certain
a m o u n t of artificiality and the unique character of the composition.
T h e actual miraculous objects at the Imperial Door might be
supplemented by 'virtual' images in the T y m p a n u m mosaic above.
Like t h e actual emperor at t h e ritual e n t r a n c e , the emperor in the
mosaic could be represented in t h e space of miraculous icons.
Let me begin with the image of Christ e n t h r o n e d . James
Breckenridge has already suggested t h e c o n n e c t i o n of this image with
a highly venerated prototype 6 ' - the mosaic image of Christ e n t h r o n e d
above the imperial t h r o n e in the east apse of the Chrysotriklinos,
t h e principal t h r o n e room of the imperial Sacred Palace 64 . Emperors
always prayed to this icon as they started out for Saint Sophia and
came back to the palace 65 . T h e y lay prostrate before t h e icon in t h e

61
For a recent discussion, see: FRANSES, Symbols cit., p. 62; BARBER, From Transfor­
mation to Desire cit., pp. 11-15.
6
' HAWKINS, Further Observations cit., pp. 156-158.
63
J.D. BRECKENRIDGE, Christ on the Lire­backed Throne, in «Dumbarton Oaks
Papers», XXXIV-XXXV, 1980-1981, pp. 247-260.
M
Ibid., p. 257.
65
See: D.F. BELYAEV, Byzantina. Ezhednevnye i voskresnye priemy vizantijskix carej i
firazdniinye vyxody ix v xram Sv. Sofii V /X-X vekax, Saint-Petersburg 1893, II, pp. 16,
35,47, 229, 244.
 158 Alexej Lidov

attitude of Leo t h e Wise in t h e mosaic. T h e image re-appeared in

t h e new decoration of Chrysotriklinos in t h e reign of Michael III
(856-866), soon after the Iconophiles' victory 66 . In t h e reign of Basil I
(867-886), father of Leo the Wise, the image of Christ e n t h r o n e d was
established o n coins, thus becoming the principal state symbol which
retained this role under Leo t h e Wise, A l e x a n d e r and C o n s t a n t i n e
Porphyrogennetos 6 7 and, as scholars argue, h a d particular significance
for the M a c e d o n i a n house 6 8 . It seems very probable that t h e 'ideator'
of the T y m p a n u m iconography intended n o t merely to represent
Christ as t h e heavenly ruler but to recall t h e major icon of the
Empire and the role of the M a c e d o n i a n dynasty in t h e restoration
of icon-worship. T h e image of Christ e n t h r o n e d , replicated at t h e
threshold of Saint Sophia, could h a v e mystically c o n n e c t e d two most
important imperial sacred spaces in t h e G r e a t Palace and in the G r e a t
C h u r c h . T h e same r e p e n t a n t attitude of the pros/c^nesis, performed by
t h e emperors before two icons of Christ, revealed this c o n n e c t i o n in
a more profound and symbolic way.
It is significant t h a t t h e entire T y m p a n u m mosaic could h a v e been
perceived as a miracle-working image of Christ. T h e 14 th century
Russian Anonymous Description of Constantinople, based o n a G r e e k
original, says after t h e m e n t i o n of t h e Door of N o a h ' s ark, «There is a
miraculous icon of t h e Savior high above the doors; this Savior heals
many sick» 69 . T h e Legend c o n n e c t s a miracle and a relic with this
image: «A candelabrum with a n iron c h a i n h u n g before this Savior;
attached to the c h a i n was a little glass with oil. Beneath the little
glass stands a stone pedestal with a cup and wood from Noah's ark
b o u n d with iron from t h e ark o n t h e pedestal. Oil dripped into this
cup from t h e candelabrum; t h e little glass w i t h the oil came loose
and [fell], breaking t h e cup in two and splitting the stone pedestal.
T h e little glass did n o t break, however, and t h e oil did n o t spill. T h i s

66
Anthologia graeca, [, 106: C. MANGO, The Art of the Byzantine Empire, 3/2-1453.
Sources and Documents, Englewood Cliffs 1972, p. 184. The decoration described in
the epigram, most probably, has been executed between 856 and 866.
67
O n the iconography of coins, see also: P. GRIERSON, Catalogue of the Byzantine
Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection, III, Leo 111 to
Nicephorus III, 717-1081, Washington 1973, pp. 154-158.
68
BRECKENRIDGE, Christ on the Lire-hacked Throne cit., p. 248.
69
MAJESKA, Russian Travelers cit., pp. 130-131.
 159 The Creator of Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n of Byzantine Culture

pedestal is bound with iron bands, with t h e cup attached to it so t h a t

Christians may see it and the sick be cured »70.
So, the actual miraculous icons of the Saviour Confessor and the
Virgin from Jerusalem, as well as the mosaic images above co-existed
in the sacred e n v i r o n m e n t of an 'historical' miracle, made present by
a special reliquary. All together, they created a multi-layered sacred
space, which included the visual imagery of the Tympanum mosaic, the
real icon-objects beside the Door of Noah's ark, and the e n v i r o n m e n t
created by the reliquary in front of them. T h e reliquary with the wood
from Noah's ark was connected with the main relic of the Imperial
Door. A t the same time, the cup containing the holy oil from the
glass lamp before the «miraculous icon of the Saviour high above the
door» associated the reliquary with the Tympanum mosaic. Thus, the
reliquary became a cornerstone of this sophisticated spatial program,
in which all the sacred layers were merging into a single whole.
As I h a v e argued elsewhere, t h e images in the medallions of t h e
T y m p a n u m mosaic - the Virgin in supplication and the A r c h a n g e l -
had particular miraculous prototypes as well' 1 . T h e representation of
a venerated icon of t h e Virgin in the T y m p a n u m mosaic might have
b e e n symbolically c o n n e c t e d with t h e miraculous image k n o w n to
h a v e spoken to Mary of Egypt, and brought by Leo the Wise to St
Sophia for a special purpose. From t h e A n o n y m o u s Tarragonensis
we h a v e learnt t h a t t h e Virgin was represented with the Child, and
St Mary of Egypt possibly depicted, o n the same panel b e n e a t h the
image of t h e Virgin' 2 . Thus, the pictorial schemes of the images were
certainly different. However, from t h e later tradition of miraculous
icon worship we know t h a t the same miraculous prototype could
be represented in different iconographic types, sometimes with the
same inscription. A precisely dated complex of 1192 survives in t h e

70
Ibid., pp. 130-131. George Majeska relates this tradition to the C h a l k e image of
Christ o n the west wall of the St Sophia nave (G. MAJESKA, The Image of the Chalke
Savior in Saint Sophia, in «Byzantinoslavica», XXXII, 1971, pp. 2 8 4 - 2 9 5 ) . W e c a n n o t
conclude from the text, however, to w h i c h ot the two images of Christ above the
entrance the tradition refers. Visual observations of the floor of St Sophia did not
allow me to find the spot where the stone reliquary pillar had been.
71
LIDOV, Leo the Wise and the Miracuhus Icons in Hagia Sophia cit., pp. 4 1 3 - 4 2 0 .
72
CIGCJAAR, Une Description de Constantinople dans le Tarragonensis 55 cit., p. 125
(as note 6).
 160 Alexej Lidov

Panagia Arakiotissa in Lagoudera o n Cyprus. T h e r e are a fresco-icon

of the standing Virgin with t h e C h i l d in Her arms o n the south wall
before the sanctuary barrier (inscribed 'Arakiotissa'), a n image of the
Virgin Paraclesis with hands stretching in prayer o n t h e east wall to
t h e n o r t h of the barrier (inscribed 'Eleousa') and an actual icon ot
t h e half-length Hodegetria originally situated, probably, to the left of
t h e gates of t h e sanctuary barrier (inscribed 'Arakiotissa' too) 7 1 . All
three images together were made by t h e same painter and displayed
very close to each other as an inseparable iconographic program in
t h e sacred space framing the e n t r a n c e to t h e sanctuary. T h e y created
a kind of complex of the Virgin Arakiotissa miraculously appearing
in three symbolically c o n n e c t e d but visually different images, which
could be venerated b o t h together and separately.
T h e same approach, deeply rooted in the O r t h o d o x tradition,
might h a v e been present in t h e symbolic program of the Imperial
Door at Saint Sophia. T h e Jerusalem icon b e n e a t h and t h e mosaic
depiction in the medallion of the T y m p a n u m were interwoven in
t h e concept of the miraculous protection of t h e M o t h e r of G o d . T h e
idea of supplication embodied in the image of St Mary of Egypt o n
t h e Jerusalem icon (through the probable gesture of hands raised in
prayer) may h a v e received new life and force in two icons of the
Virgin, and may have been addressed to two miraculous images of
Christ - Christ e n t h r o n e d in the T y m p a n u m mosaic and an u n k n o w n
image of Christ Confessor to the left of the Imperial Door.
O n e may find a possible reflection of this powerful program in
t h e iconography of the 11* century C o n s t a n t i n o p o l i t a n liturgical
scroll (Jerusalem, Stavrou 109). Two marginal miniatures represent
a kind of Deesis composition with an icon of the M o t h e r of G o d
with t h e gesture of supplication, to t h e right, and Christ, represented
e n t h r o n e d in a circle, to the left of the text 7 4 . It was the icon the

71
For the fresco-icons, see: A . NICOLAIDIS, L'eglise de la Panagia Arakiotissa a Lagou-
dera, Chypre: etude iconographiques desfresque de 1192, in * Dumbarton Oaks Papers»,
L, 1996, pp. 107-109, 110-111, figs. 3-5, pp. 77-78. For the Hodegetria icon: A .
PAPAC;EORGIOU, Icon of the Virgin Arakiotissa, in M. VASSILAKI (ed.), Mother of God:
Representations of the Virgin in Byzantine Art, exhib. cat. ( A t h e n s , Benaki Museum, 20
O c t o b e r 2 0 0 0 - 2 0 January 2 0 0 1 ) , A t h e n s - M i l a n 2 0 0 0 , n. 6 2 , pp. 4 0 6 - 4 0 7 .
74
See: A . GRABAR, Un rouleau lilurgique constantinopolitain el ses peintures,
in «Dumbarton Oaks Papers», VI11 1954, fig. 2, pp. 172-173; P. VOKOTOPOULOS,
 161 The Creator of Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n o f Byzantine Culture

miniature painter sought to show, as the waist-length image of the

praying Mother of God is the only framed marginal illumination of
the scroll. Both miniatures frame the prayer of the Little Entrance. It
is apt to recall here that the Little Entrance was performed in Saint
Sophia in the narthex through the Imperial Door, flanked by the
icons of Christ and the Mother of God, who spoke to Mary of Egypt,
which has been also represented to the right of the entrance, as in the
scroll75. When the emperor prayed and bowed three times before the
Imperial Door, the patriarch read the prayer of the Little Entrance
while looking perhaps at the relics of Noah's ark and the miraculous
icons of Christ and the Virgin76. It is noteworthy that the motif of
forgiveness appears in the Trisagion prayer, whose initial words are
framed by the images of Christ and the Mother of God: «Give wisdom
and reason to the supplicant, and scorn not the sinner but accept his
repentance for salvation*. So it seems probable that the iconography
of the Constantinopolitan scroll could be an indirect reflection of the
Hagia Sophia entrance program with all its liturgical connotations.
In this context another unique Constantinopolitan program might
be re-considered. I mean the reliquary from Sancta Sanctorum
- a Byzantine gift of the tenth century (now in the Museo Sacro
della Biblioteca Apostolica, Vatican City, inv. 1898 a-b)77. Inside a

Byzantine Illuminated Manuscripts of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, Athens-Jerusalem

2 0 0 2 , n . 1 9 , p p . 9 6 - 1 2 3 . F o r a l i t u r g i c a l s t u d y o f t h e J e r u s a l e m s c r o l l , s e e : A . JACOB,

Histohc' du formulairc grcc de la liturgie de Saint Jean Chrysostome (Dissertation), Louvain

1 9 6 8 , pp. 2 5 7 - 2 6 3 .
75
O n the tradition of the Little Entrance in Hagia Sophia, see: BELYAEV, Byzantina
cit., II, p. 153; T.F. MATHEWS, The Early Churches of Constantinople. Architecture and
Liturgy, University Park-London 1971, pp. 138-147; R. TAFT, The Great Entrance. A
History of the Transfer of Gifts and other Pre-anaphoral Rites, Roma 1978, pp. 30, 192. In
contemporary liturgical practice, the priest kisses the icons of Christ and the Mother
of G o d to the sides of the Royal Door of the iconostasis during the Little Entrance.
K
MAJESKA, The Emperor c i t . , p . 5 .
77
EE. HYSLOP, A Byzantine Reliquary of the True Cross from the Sancta Sanctorum,
in «Art Bulletin», XVI, 1934, pp. 333-340, figs. 1-3; A . FROLOW, La relique de la Vraie
Croix. Recherches sur la devebppement d'une cult, Parts 1961, n. 667, p. 487; A . WEYL
C A R R , S t a u r o t / i e k e , i n H . C . EVANS, W . D . W I X O M ( e d s . ) , The Glory of Byzantium. Art

and Culture of the Middle Byzantine Era, A.D. 8 4 3 - 1 2 6 1 , exhih. cat., N e w York 1997,
n.35, P P . 76-77.
 162 Alexej Lidov

w o o d e n case, o n either side of the relics of the True Cross, three pairs
of images are represented. In t h e upper zone there are half-length
figures of Christ blessing and holding the Book and of t h e Virgin
stretching her arms in prayer to t h e right of Christ. In t h e middle
register t h e frontal busts of the archangels in imperial vestments are
depicted, and below two full-length images of Peter and Paul, the
Apostles, are portrayed. T h e iconographic program of the Vatican
reliquary is completed by the depictions o n t h e lid: a n image of the
Crucifixion, with some very rare details, o n t h e external side and the
frontal standing figure of St J o h n Chrysostom o n t h e internal surface.
T h e holy bishop of C o n s t a n t i n o p l e holds in b o t h hands an o p e n
Gospel, inscribed in Greek: « T h e Lord said to his disciples: "I am
giving you these c o m m a n d s so t h a t you may love o n e another"» (lo
15, 17), which could be perceived as a clear message to the Latins.
Scholars agree t h a t t h e reliquary was sent as a special gift from
C o n s t a n t i n o p l e to the R o m a n pope in the t e n t h century. Robin
C o r m a c k suggested t h a t this object could h a v e been offered by
Nicholas Mystikos in c o n j u n c t i o n with the successful synod of 920,
w h e n in t h e presence of papal legates t h e tetragamy of Leo t h e
Wise was finally condemned 7 8 . To our mind, however, an equally
c o n v i n c i n g hypothesis would be, t h a t the precious reliquary of the
Holy Cross was presented by Leo t h e Wise himself to the legates of the
R o m a n pope w h o supported t h e emperor in his controversy with the
patriarch at t h e C o n s t a n t i n o p o l i t a n synod of 907. T h e iconography
of the reliquary could be c o n n e c t e d with the most important program
of the Imperial Door of Saint Sophia, and appeared, possibly, in
c o n j u n c t i o n with the same c h u r c h synod of 907. It is noteworthy that
in later c h u r c h iconography all three pairs of images o n the reliquary
(Christ and the Virgin in supplication, the archangels, Sts Peter and
Paul) were clearly associated with t h e t h e m e of the e n t r a n c e into
t h e church. In some instances they were represented all together in
t h e door area. T h e symbolism of the Entrance forms o n e of t h e most
significant messages of the Sancta S a n c t o r u m reliquary. In t h e special
iconographic c o n t e x t of t h e flanking images, the cross-shaped cavity
for the precious relics of the Redemptive Sacrifice could be perceived

78
R. CORMACK, Painting after konoclasm, in A . BRYER, J. HERRIN (eds.), Iconoclasm,
Papers given at the N i n t h Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies (Birmingham,
March 1975), Birmingham 1977, pp. 151, 153.
 163 T h e C r e a t o r o f Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n o f B y z a n t i n e C u l t u r e

as an iconic space in the passageway - the Gates of Salvation, a

traditional metaphor of Christian theology. So, the maker of the
Sancta Sanctorum reliquary intended to present an image of sacred
space reflecting church iconography.
It seems that the unique Imperial Door program of Leo the Wise,
though never repeated directly, created a kind of archetype to be
reproduced in later iconography. Here, perhaps, the tradition began
of placing particular images of Christ and the Mother of God to the
sides of the doors leading both from the narthex to the nave, and
from the nave to the altar. Such paired iconic images were regularly
met with in Byzantine churches from the 10th century onwards79.
This concerns a sublime tradition graphically embodied in the
symbolic structure of the Russian iconostasis, where we see the
Saviour enthroned above the royal gates, as above the entrance to
Saint Sophia at Constantinople, and to either side of the gates, icons
of Christ and the Mother of God - often miracle-working images,

79
The main early examples were collected recently by Engelina Smirnova:
hobrazenja na zapadnyx granjax predaltamyx stolbov v vizantijskix xramax X~Xl vv.,
in A. LIDOV (ed.), Iconostasis. Origins-Evolution-Symbolism, Moscow 2000, pp. 293-
296. One of the first examples is provided by Kiliclar (Qelegjlar) kilisesi, Goreme N
29, 10th century (C. JOLIVET-LEVY, Les eglises byzantines de Cappadoce. he programme
iconographique de I'abside et de ses abords, Paris 1991, p. 139, pi. 88, fig. 2); another
early example in the l l ' h century mosaics of the Church of Dormition in Nicaea
(TH. SCHMIT, Die Koimesis-kirche von Nikaia. Das Bauwerk und die Mosaiken, Berlin
und Leipzig 1927, figs. XXV-XXVI1, pp. 44-47). The type formed is represented in
the Lagudera murals of 1192 in Cyprus, with Christ frontal, full-length, right of
the altar entrance; and the Mother of God left, in a three-quarter turn to the icon
of Christ, the open scroll in Her hands representing Her dialogue with Christ, as
She prays Him for the salvation of sinners. The murals of the Decani Monastery
(Serbia, 14th century) include an analogous composition framing the entrance from
the narthex into the church. See: S. DER NERSESSIAN, TWO images of the Virgin in the
Dumbarton Oaks Collection, in•< Dumbarton Oaks Papers», XIV, 1960, pp. 71-86; G.
BABIC\ O zivopisanom ukrasu oltarskih pregrada, in «Zbornik za likovne umetnosti», XI,
1975, pp. 3-49; M. BUTYRSKIJ, Bogomater' Paraklesis u altamoj pregrady: proisxozdenie
i liturgiceskoe soderzanoe obraza, in LIDOV (ed.), Iconostasis. Origins-Evolution-Symbol-
ism cit., pp. 207-222, 725 (an English resume). On the possible connection of this
program with the mosaic above the entrance to St Sophia at Constantinople, see:
MIRKOVIC\ 0 ikonografiji cit., pp. 91-92.
 164 A l e x e j Lidov

(ir t h e i r c o p i e s . I n O r t h o d o x c e r e m o n i a l s f r o m B y z a n t i n e t i m e s u p
t o t h e p r e s e n t , t h e p r i e s t , « d e e p l y m o v e d a n d f u l l of r e p e n t a n .»,
p r a y s a t t h e v e r y b e g i n n i n g of t h e l i t u r g y b e f o r e t h e r o y a l ga s of
t h e i c o n o s t a s i s , a n d kisses i n v e n e r a t i o n t h e i c o n s of t h e S a v i o u r a n d
t h e M o t h e r of G o d - n a t u r a l l y , f o r g e t f u l of t h e u n i q u e p r o g r a m of
G r e a t P e n i t e n c e c r e a t e d by a w i s e B y z a n t i n e e m p e r o r f o r S t S o p h i a
at Constantinople80.
A s for t h e archangel medallion in t h e T y m p a n u m mosaic, t h e image
c o u l d h a v e b e e n a r e m i n d e r of t h e m o s a i c i c o n of t h e A r c h a n g e l
M i c h a e l situated in St Michael's c h a p e l close to t h e e n t r a n c e i n t o
t h e n a r t h e x at t h e south-west vestibule81. T h i s image was related to
t h e m i r a c l e t h a t h a p p e n e d d u r i n g J u s t i n i a n ' s c o n s t r u c t i o n of S a i n t
S o p h i a a t C o n s t a n t i n o p l e as r e c o r d e d i n t h e 10 , h c e n t u r y Deegesis
o n t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of S a i n t Sophia82. A c c o r d i n g to tradition, well
k n o w n in t h e r e i g n of L e o t h e W i s e , t h e A r c h a n g e l M i c h a e l a p p e a r e d
t o a c e r t a i n y o u t h w h i l e t h e c h u r c h w a s b e i n g b u i l t t o g i v e it its
n a m e a n d p r o m i s e t h a t h e w o u l d g u a r d it till t h e y o u t h c a m e b a c k
w i t h tidings f r o m t h e emperor. T h e latter, h o w e v e r , s e n t t h e y o u t h to
R o m e as s o o n as h e h e a r d h i s s t o r y i n o r d e r t o l e a v e t h e a r c h a n g e l as
g u a r d i a n of t h e c h u r c h a n d t h e c i t y till t h e Second Coming83.

80
For early e v i d e n c e o f t h e kissing of t h e i c o n s nearby t h e 'holy doors' in the 1 2 *
c e r e m o n i a l of t h e G r e a t C h u r c h , see: R. TAFT, The Pontifical Liturgy of the Great
Church according to a Twelfth-Century Diataxis in Codex British Museum Add. 3 4 0 6 0 ,
in « O r i e n t a l i a C h r i s t i a n a Periodica". XLV, 1979, pp. 2 8 4 - 2 8 5 . A n o t h e r t e s t i m o n y

in the 13''' century E u c h o l o g i o n ( P a t m o s 7 1 9 ) ; see: A . A . DMITRIEVSKIJ, Opisanie

liturgic'eskix rukopisej, Kiev 1901,11, p. 170. O n c o n t e m p o r a r y practice: 1. DMITREVSKJ,
htorii'eskoe, dogmatie'eskoe i MfcutwmM izjasnenie Bozeswennoj liturgii, MOSKVA 1993,
PP. 1 5 3 - 1 5 4 .
81
O n this i c o n , see: MAJESKA, Russian Travelers cit., pp. 2 0 2 - 2 0 6 , 9 4 - 9 5 , 1 2 8 - 1 2 9 ,
1 3 0 - 1 3 1 . A c c o r d i n g t o G e o r g e Majeska, the i c o n c o u l d h a v e h e e n o n t h e east wall
o f t h e s o u t h - w e s t vestibule (pronaos) a d j o i n i n g t h e n a r t h e x . M o s t probably, it was in
t h e central part o f t h e wall near t h e doors t o t h e patriarchal c h a m b e r s in t h e s o u t h
galleries. Possibly, there was also t h e altar of t h e c h a p e l (pride/) of St M i c h a e l .
82
S e e : Scriptores originum Constantinopolitanarum cit., 11, pp. 8 4 - 8 8 ; S . G . VILINSKIJ,
Vizantijsko-slavjanskie skazanija 0 sozdanii xrama So, Sofii caregradskoj, O d e s s a 1900,
pp. 8 4 - 8 5 , 1 0 0 - 1 0 1 ; DAORON, Constantinople imaginaire cit., pp. 2 0 1 - 2 0 3 , 2 2 9 - 2 3 3 .
si
T h e Russian A n o n y m o u s ( 1 4 , h c e n t u r y ) c o n t a i n s an abbreviated version oi
t h e tradition, most probably g o i n g back t o a Byzantine original: ARCHIMANDRITE
 165 T h e C r e a t o r o f Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n o f B y z a n t i n e C u l t u r e

T h e image of the A r c h a n g e l Michael was the first to face those w h o

entered the c h u r c h o n weekday services, w h e n the atrium way was
closed. O n e of the early references to the icon, from 1182, belongs
to Niketas C h o n i a t e s , w h o says t h a t t h e mosaic portrayed «the first
and the greatest" of archangels with a n unsheated sword, and t h a t
this very archangel was appointed guardian of the church 8 4 . In his
time Franz Dolger had already pointed out a possible c o n n e c t i o n
between t h e Archangel of t h e T y m p a n u m mosaic and the tradition
of the miraculous appearance 8 5 . T h i s seems to me quite probable,
despite the obvious difference between the pictorial schemes of the
two images in the T y m p a n u m and in the southwest vestibule. T h e
iconographic difference might h a v e been determined by the same
approach t h a t we h a v e already interpreted in t h e case of the images
of t h e Virgin in the same miraculous framework. T h i s practice has a
lot of analogies in later miraculous shrines.
Important, though indirect, evidence may be found in the liturgical
setting of St Sophia at Thessaloniki, which follows the traditions of the
Great C h u r c h . Possibly, the «holy icon of archangel» displayed to the
right of the entrance in the narthex of St Sophia at Thessaloniki was
a kind of substitution of two archangel-guardians near the two main
entrances in Constantinople. Solemn liturgies started with incense
burning before this icon. Symeon of Thessaloniki described the matins
entrance ritual from the ancient ceremonial of the Great C h u r c h ,
which was preserved in the liturgy of St Sophia at Thessaloniki, at the
turn of 15''' century 8 6 . Before the reading of Psalm 50, of penitence,
t h e priest «starts to wave the censer from the right side of the narthex,
where there is a holy icon of an archangel o n the wall, and burns

LEONID, Slajwnie o St». Sofii caregradskoj, in «Pamj;itniki d r e v n e i p i m e n n o s t i i

iskusstva», LXXVIII, Saint-Petersburg 1889, pp. 1»13{ MAJESKA, Russian Travelers
cit., pp. 1 2 8 - 1 2 9 , 1 3 0 - 1 3 1 . T h e r e were major differences b e t w e e n t h e versions o f t h e
l e g e n d about A r c h a n g e l Michael's apparition. T h u s , o n e of t h e m dates t h e e v e n t
not to Justinian's reign but t o t h e c h u r c h repairs in the reign oi Rom,inns 111 ( 1 0 2 8 -
1 0 3 4 ) . A m o n k from t h e M o n a s t e r y of St A n d r e w Salos relates his v i s i o n (cf. ibid.,

pp. 1 3 0 - 1 3 1 , 2 0 4 ) .
1,4
NIKETAS CHONIATIS, Historia, ed. J.L. v a n D i e t e n , Berlin 1975 ( C o r p u s f o n t i u m
historiae byzantinae 11), pp. 2 3 8 , 7 9 - 8 1 .
85
DOLGER, Justinians Engel cit., pp. 1-4.
" P G C L V , c o l l . 5 5 3 , 6 4 1 ; DARROUZES, op. cit., p p . 6 0 - 6 1 , 6 4 .
 166 Alexej Lidov

incense all round the narthex, waving the censer at the pillars and
walls». As he comes back to his point of departure, he makes the sign
of the cross with the censer, saying: «Forgive us, o Wisdom». T h e n h e
goes to the altar and takes the cross, preserved behind the altar-table,
and places it o n the right side (in the n a r t h e x ) near the great doors,
where it stands till the psalm reading is over. T h e n three candles are
lit on the cross, and the ceremonial e n t r a n c e with this cross takes
place. If this rite reproduced a tradition of t h e Great C h u r c h , it
means t h a t in Saint Sophia at C o n s t a n t i n o p l e the altar cross was also
placed in the narthex near the icon of the M o t h e r of G o d , which
had spoken to St Mary of Egypt, and under the Archangel image in
t h e Tympanum mosaic. If so, could this unique ritual be a part of the
symbolic program of Leo the Wise, and was it m e a n t to recall the Vita
episode in which the repentant Mary was stopped by an angelic power
and later admitted to see the Holy Cross?
It appears t h a t t h e A r c h a n g e l icon in t h e t y m p a n u m of Saint
Sophia was doubtless also a guardian of the church, like many images
of archangels flanking t h e doors which became a c o m m o n t h e m e of
t h e Byzantine c h u r c h iconography in t h e C o m n e n i a n and, especially,
in t h e Palaiologan periods 87 . T h e well-established topos occurred in
Byzantine epigrams of the same era, directly c o n n e c t e d , as H o e r a n d n e r
has convincingly shown, with contemporary pictorial practice 8 8 . For
this tradition as well as for the e n t r a n c e images of Christ and the
Virgin, t h e Imperial Door program of Saint Sophia could have been
a n important source of inspiration.
Most probably, the mosaic images of Christ, the M o t h e r of G o d and
t h e A r c h a n g e l in the T y m p a n u m were n o t precise copies and thus
could hardly be used for the iconographic reconstruction of particular
icons. A s we see it, however, they were m e a n t as reminders of the
crucial miraculous images, which played t h e role of sacred landmarks
o n the emperor's way from palace to church. A s we know, in Byzantine
c h u r c h iconography replicas sometimes acquired an i n d e p e n d e n t

M. TATI£-DJURIC\ Archanges gardiens de parte a Decani, in Decani i vizantijska

umetnost' seredinom X/V veka, Beograd 1989, pp. 359-366.
8,1
W. HOERANDNER, Nugae Epigrammaticae, in &IAEAAHN. Studies in honour of
Robert Browning, Venezia 1996, pp. 109-111. The author provides several examples
from the written sources and Byzantine and Post-Byzantine iconography starting
with the Tympanum mosaic.
 167 The Creator of Sacred Space as a Phenomenon of Byzantine Culture

m e a n i n g and miraculous power. So, if our assumptions are correct,

t h e mosaic portrays Leo t h e Wise as p e n i t e n t , and at t h e same time
worshipping three miraculous icons related to t h e t h e m e of c h u r c h
e n t r a n c e . In this context, each representation accentuated its own
aspect of o n e symbolic image, w h i c h embodied the pivotal idea of
r e p e n t a n c e as the way to salvation. As we h a v e seen above, t h e same
concept is at t h e basis of t h e composition of three relics under the
T y m p a n u m - t h e Door of N o a h ' s A r k and t h e miraculous icons of the
Christ Confessor and of t h e M o t h e r of G o d w h o spoke to St Mary of
Egypt. As in t h e composition of t h e relics, in t h e T y m p a n u m mosaic
t h e m a j o r icon of t h e 'Chrysotriklinos Christ' is supplemented by
two icons in medallions. A n idea of their miraculous origins receives
unexpected support in the logic of t h e general symbolic structure
of the Imperial Door program, c o m b i n i n g holy objects and images,
actually inseparable in this project of a sacred e n v i r o n m e n t .
T h e Tympanum composition could be interpreted as a select group
of miraculous images - a visual parallel to the collections of written
testimonies o n miracle-working icons in the main treatises of icon
worshippers, including t h e Apologies of St J o h n of Damascus, T h e
A c t s of the Second N i c a e a n Council, or The Letter of Three Oriental
Patriarchs. It might h a v e b e e n a n additional reference to t h e great
role played by t h e M a c e d o n i a n dynasty in the restoration of icon-
worship. Moreover, all these texts embodied a n idea of the particular
efficaciousness of t h e prayer addressed to miraculous images. In this
context, o n e may recall the Byzantine practice of bringing various
miraculous icons in the Easter period to the royal palace for t h e
special veneration of the emperor 8 9 . Evidence suggests t h a t Leo t h e
Wise could order to be represented o n t h e T y m p a n u m mosaic in t h e
sacred space of miraculous icons, making his prayer most efficacious.
T h e major f u n c t i o n of these images was to remind o n e of some most
important sacred spaces, w h i c h merged into t h e single imagery of t h e
main e n t r a n c e into the G r e a t C h u r c h .
Additional arguments for our interpretation are provided by other
miraculous images in Saint Sophia, formally n o t included in the
n a r t h e x program. A m o n g them, of primary importance is the image
of Christ, which was represented o n t h e west wall in the naos of Saint

89
P s E u n o - K o n i N o s , Traire des offices, ed. par J. V e r p e a u x , Paris 1966, pp. 2 2 7 -
231.
 168 A l e x e j Lidov

Sophia, just above the Imperial Doors o n t h e level of the T y m p a n u m

mosaic. It was a replica of t h e C h a l k i Christ - a famous miraculous
icon above the Brazen gates ( C h a l k i ) of the imperial G r e a t Palace 90.
According to tradition, t h e destruction of t h e C h a l k i icon marked
t h e beginning of Iconoclasm 9 1 . T h e icon was restored by t h e Empress
Irina during t h e respite of Iconoclasm but was later subverted again
by Leo V, and eventually, soon after 843, was restored by the hands of
t h e icon-painter St Lazarus o n the orders of the Empress Theodora"'.
Most probably, it was a mosaic image of a full-length Christ, blessing
and holding the Gospel book in his left h a n d 9 ' .
Like t h e C h a l k i icon of the G r e a t Palace, its mosaic replica o n t h e
west wall of Saint Sophia did n o t survive. It has been replaced by a
green marble plate, surrounded by a few o t h e r panels made in the
opus sectile t e c h n i q u e [fig. 73]. A m o n g t h e m , the most interesting
is the panel depicting t h e triumphal precious cross in the ciborium,
which was initially situated right above t h e icon of Christ 9 4 . Like the
icon plate, this panel was especially inserted into a n older marble
incrustation of the west wall. It could be a part of t h e concept
reflecting the C h a l k i setting of the G r e a t Palace, where, according
to t h e Patriarch Methodius' epigram (847), t h e cross was represented
close to t h e icon of Christ 9 5 .
T h e presence of the C h a l k i miraculous icon in Saint Sophia is
recorded by t h e Russian pilgrim S t e p h a n of Novgorod in 1349. H e

90
MAJESKA, The Image of the Chalke Savior cit., pp. 2 8 4 - 2 9 5 ; In., Russian Travelers
cit.,pp. 209-212.

" T h e r e is a r e c e n t r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of this tradition arguing that t h e i m a g e

d e s t r u c t i o n n e v e r took place in t h e historical reality o f t h e 8 * century: M.-F. AUZEPY,
La destruction de Christ de la Choice par Leon III, in « B y z a n t i o n » , LX, 1990, pp. 4 4 5 -
492.
92
For a c o m p r e h e n s i v e analysis o f sources, see: C . MANGO, The Brazen House. A
Study of the Vestibule of the Imperial Palace of Constantinople, K o p e n h a g e n 1959, pp.
108-148.
91
Ibid., pp. 1 3 5 - 1 4 2 . O n t h e i c o n o g r a p h i c peculiarities, see: A . FROLOW, Le Christ
de la Choke, in « B y z a n t i o n » , XXXIII, 1963, pp. 1 0 7 - 1 2 0 .
94
Majeska e m p h a s i s e d t h e imperial c o n n o t a t i o n s of this d e c o r a t i v e c o m p o s i t i o n
situated o n t h e wall b e t w e e n t h e imperial doors and imperial g y n a e c e u m o n t h e west
gallery: MAJESKA, The /mage of the Chalke Savior cit., pp. 2 9 0 - 2 9 2 , pis. 1-11.
95
MANGO, The Brazen House cit., pp. 1 2 6 - 1 2 8 .
 169 The Creator of Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n of Byzantine Culture

clearly associated this icon with the image in C h a l k i and the legend
of the beginning of Iconoclasm: «Going a little farther, and turning
toward the west, you will see a n icon of the holy Saviour standing
high up over t h e doors there. T h e story of this icon is recounted in
t h e books w h i c h we can n o t quote, but, [briefly], a pagan iconoclast
put up a ladder, hoping to rip the golden crown of [the icon]. St
Theodosia overturned t h e ladder and killed t h e pagan, and the saint
was killed there with a goat h o r n » % . T h e m e n t i o n of the golden crown
of the icon is significant. T h i s particular detail is a characteristic of
the venerated icon and S t e p h a n of Novgorod may have taken it from
t h e actual appearance of the C h a l k i Christ in Saint Sophia.
It is important to observe the c o n n e c t i o n between t h e image of
t h e C h a l k i Christ and t h e symbolic program of t h e Imperial Door
analysed above. T h e mosaic images with Christ e n t h r o n e d and the
Chalki Christ were situated approximately at the same level above
t h e Imperial Door, but o n two different sides of the west wall in t h e
narthex and in the nave. Together they could be perceived as a kind
of m o n u m e n t a l double-sided icon. It is noteworthy that the well-
informed O r t h o d o x pilgrim S t e p h a n of Novgorod does not make any
difference between t h e 'copy' in Saint Sophia and t h e famous icon
of Christ in C h a l k i itself, which was highly venerated in the same
century 4 '. W e can assume that they were perceived as o n e image in
two representations.
It is noteworthy that both images of Christ at the Imperial Door not
merely reproduced venerable miracle-working icons connected with
the most important prototypes in the Great Palace - t h e Chrysotriklinos
and the Chalki - , but they revealed in the Great C h u r c h major sacred
spaces of Byzantium associated with the imperial triumphal procession.
W i t h replicas of two miraculous icons of Christ, the spatial imagery of
the Great C h u r c h became inseparable from the Great Palace. A n d
that single sacred environment obtained its most sublime meaning
during the solemn services the Emperor took part in.
In this context, our knowledge about t h e role played by miraculous
icons in t h e patriarchal service in Saint Sophia gains new significance.

* MAJESKA, Russian Travelers cit., pp. 28-29.

97
T h e Russian A n o n y m o u s testified: « A l l of Constantinople, including the franks
and everyone from Galata, c o m e s to this Savior [icon] on [its] holiday, tor o n this
holy Savior holiday forgiveness c o m e s to the infirm» (ibid., pp. 136-137).
 170 Alexej Lidov

A c c o r d i n g to t h e description of S y m e o n of Thessaloniki, at t h e
beginning of t h e evening services o n Saturday, Sunday and the m a i n
feasts, the Patriarch stopped in the n a r t h e x before t h e Imperial Door
and venerated t h e icon of the Virgin t h a t spoke to Mary of Egypt.
T h e n on entering the c h u r c h h e turned to t h e west wall and bent
thrice to «the holy image of t h e Saviour above t h e beautiful doors»
(the C h a l k i Christ), saying «We bend before your over-pure image» 98 .
Characteristically, the relic-icon brought from Jerusalem and t h e
m o n u m e n t a l mosaic replica appear as equal miraculous images of the
Saviour and the M o t h e r of G o d situated at t h e e n t r a n c e . From the
liturgical point of view they form t h e inseparable parts of a single
sacred unity where the material relic freely flows into depiction and
t h e latter is filled with t h e energy of t h e miracle-working object. T h i s
helps us to understand t h e principle of interrelation between the
relic-icons o n the Imperial Door and t h e mosaic images above t h e m ,
and even more important, t h e dramaturgy of sacred spaces associated
with t h e m .
T h e exact date of t h e Saint Sophia replica of the C h a l k i Saviour
is u n k n o w n , but t h e significance of its location allows us to assume
t h a t the image above t h e e n t r a n c e o n t h e west wall appeared as part
of a large restoration project of iconic representations in t h e space of
Saint Sophia u n d e r t a k e n by t h e emperors of t h e M a c e d o n i a n dynasty
in the 9 rh and 10rh centuries. T h e close symbolic c o n n e c t i o n of the
C h a l k i Christ with the Imperial Door program of Leo the Wise makes
t h e order from this emperor a probable hypothesis.
It is noteworthy t h a t t h e tradition of the C h a l k i icon had powerful
imperial c o n n o t a t i o n s . T h e oldest and most famous legend concerning
t h e C h a l k i image, first given in t h e Chronicle of T h e o p h a n e s , reports
t h a t this image spoke to the Emperor Maurice (582-602) in a d r e a m " .
T h e C h a l k i Christ as the H i g h Judge said to t h e sinful emperor:
« W h e r e dost t h o u wish me to give thee thy due, here or in the world
to come?». Maurice's p e n i t e n c e is also c o n n e c t e d with a n o t h e r story,
which tells about t h e forgiveness of a n o t h e r sinful emperor - t h e
iconoclast T h e o p h i l o s - after t h e supplication of his wife T h e o d o r a ,
again in front of t h e C h a l k i image 100 . In her vision T h e o d o r a had

" DARFtouzfes, op. cit., pp. 4 6 - 4 9 .

" MANGO, The Brazen House cit., pp. 109-112.
100
Ibid., pp. 131-132.
 171 T h e C r e a t o r o f Sacred S p a c e as a P h e n o m e n o n o f B y z a n t i n e Culture

received a response from Christ: « 0 woman, great is thy faith. Know

therefore, t h a t because of t h e tears and thy faith, and also t h e prayers
and imploration of priests, I forgive thy husband Theophilos» 1 0 1 . T h i s
miracle-story of t h e Empress' vision was sometimes read in Byzantine
churches o n t h e Sunday of Orthodoxy 1 0 2 , c o n n e c t i n g the restoration
of icon-worship with the main themes of repentance and forgiveness.
O n e should notice t h a t such a symbolic c o n t e x t of the C h a l k i Christ
correlates it to the Imperial Door program of Leo the Wise, combining
imperial and penitential aspects. A further similarity could be found
in t h e topos of images miraculously responding to sinners (the icons
of Christ Confessor and of the Virgin w h o spoke to St Mary of
Egypt) 1 0 '. T h e y h a v e created a kind of sounding e n v i r o n m e n t at t h e
sacred entrance, recalling the living interaction between miraculous
images and believers in this mystical space, enriched by a n u m b e r of
imperial 'historical' associations' 0 4 .
T h e c o n n e c t i o n between t h e symbolic meanings of the Tympanum
mosaic and t h e C h a l k i Christ suggests t h a t the whole program of
t h e Imperial Door was n o t something isolated and self-contained in
Hagia Sophia. Apparently it was a part of a n e v e n more complex
system of images and relics, which created a kind of 'miraculous
network' in the sacred space of t h e G r e a t C h u r c h . A n o t h e r possible
part of this structure could be the image of the e n t h r o n e d Virgin with
t h e C h i l d in the altar apse, well visible from the o p e n Imperial Door.
This worshipped icon of the Virgin in the altar conch 1 0 5 was copied

101
Ibid., p. 132.
102
For i n s t a n c e , in t h e 1 1 * c e n t u r y Evergetis S y n a x a r i o n : DMITRIEVSKII, Opisanie
c i t . , I , p. 521.
101
1 am grateful t o N i c o l e t t a Isar w h o brought my a t t e n t i o n t o this 'sound' aspect
o f L e o t h e Wise's project.
104
It d o e s n o t s e e m strange in this c o n t e x t that in the later c h u r c h i c o n o g r a p h y of
m e m o r i a l portraits t h e e v o c a t i o n of the C h a l k e Christ b e c a m e a n established m o t i f
r e v e a l i n g t h e royal b a c k g r o u n d of t h e donors. S e e s o m e e x a m p l e s : LIDOV, Leo the
Wise and the Miraculous Icons in Hagia Sophia cit., p. 4 2 5 .
105
C . MANGO, E.J.W. HAWKINS, The Apse Mosaics of St. Sophia at Istanbul, in
" D u m b a r t o n O a k s Papers», XIX, 1965, pp. 1 1 3 - 1 4 8 ; R . M . SAILOR, Tradition and
innovation: A Reconsideration of the Hagia Sophia Apsidal Icon, M . A . T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y
o f O r e g o n 1994. T h e 1 4 * c e n t u r y tradition confirms that t h e c o n c h m o s a i c was
p e r c e i v e d as a miraculous i m a g e of t h e Virgin.
 172 A l e x e j Lidov

in the mosaic composition above t h e south n a r t h e x entrance, with

t h e images of t h e Emperors C o n s t a n t i n e and Justinian presenting the
City of C o n s t a n t i n o p l e and t h e G r e a t C h u r c h to t h e image of t h e
Virgin [figs. 66, 70, 72]. T h i s principle of symbolic repetitions was a
basic one, and acquired special significance in churches with marble-
inlaid walls decorated by separate iconic images. But it does not seem
accidental t h a t during t h e liturgical procession from t h e south-west
vestibule to t h e sanctuary the T y m p a n u m mosaic stood between
two images of t h e e n t h r o n e d Virgin. A n additional e l e m e n t which
c o n n e c t e d these three images was t h e curtains hanging in front of the
doors to the narthex, the n a v e and the sanctuary. T h e hooks for these
curtains, belonging to the original frames, are still visible above t h e
Imperial Door as well as above t h e south-west e n t r a n c e .
O n e should remember that these three famous mosaics present only
r e m n a n t s of the entire sacred space of Saint Sophia, which was filled
by numerous u n k n o w n icons and relics f u n c t i o n i n g in t h e shared
context. W e h a v e to remember t h a t a lot of inscriptions near these
shrines played a big role 106 . Sometimes they gave t h e most important
key for understanding a particular program. O n l y a few of t h e m are
k n o w n from epigrams. Furthermore, it makes its crucial role very
probable in the creation of the miraculous framework of t h e Great
C h u r c h , n o t merely as wall decoration, but a sophisticated structure
of miraculous icons and relics interacting with various rituals in the
actual sacred space. In this c o n t e x t o n e should remember o n c e more
t h e verses of Leo the Wise written around images of Christ beside the
main doors to Saint Sophia that I h a v e discussed above 107 .
Let me sum up some previous discussion. Using all the available
testimonies, direct and indirect, we have tried to reconstruct the
spatial e n v i r o n m e n t and new 'miraculous imagery' created by Leo the
Wise in Saint Sophia. It seems clear that t h e Emperor Leo was not
just a d o n o r providing money for a renovation of t h e G r e a t C h u r c h .
H e was n o t an architect or an artist-artisan making sculptural
decoration or painting murals. W h a t h e actually did was t h e detailed

106
S. MERCATI, Sulle iscrizioni di Santa Sofia, in «Bessarione. Rivista di studi
orientali», X X V I , 1923, p p . 2 0 4 - 2 0 6 ; In., Collectanea Byzantina, U, Bari 1970, p p .
276-280.
107
S e e n o t e 22: C . MANCJO, Materials for the Study of the Mosaics of St Sophia at
Istanbul cit., pp. 96-97.
 173 The Creator of Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n o f Byzantine Culture

elaboration of a concept of a particular sacred space, a kind of'spatial

icon', which included, beyond material images and venerated holy
objects, various rituals, and chanting, lighting, censoring effects.
An integral part of this project was the invisible presence of literary
associations connected with numerous miracle-stories, which existed
in the minds of the Byzantine beholders coming to the Great Church
and looking at the venerated images and relics.
Taking into consideration all these data, it seems natural to pose
a question about a cultural figure - one may call him the creator of
sacred space or the master of hierotopy -, a phenomenon long hidden
under the layers of various activities belonging to different people in
different historical circumstances. No doubt that spontaneous aspect
in the creation of any particular sacred space played a considerable
role. Every special phenomenon should be perceived as a result of
the creative efforts of several masters. I did not want to fall back into
the rut of an old-fashioned art-historical deification of the individual
maestro: Solomon; Justinian; Suger of St-Denis108. The creation of
an environment conducive to the eruption of the sacred (Eliade's
hierophany) is always complex, and not merely reducible to the genius
of a single patron. But at the same time we might want to consider a
'concepteur', a particular creator of a sacred space, whose role could
be initiative, basic and multifunctional. Like future film directors,
he was responsible not merely for the general spatial imagery but for
complex links of various arts subordinated in a single spatial whole.
Without revealing this figure, or better to say, if we do not keep in
mind a possibility of this cultural function, we shall not be able to
properly understand several quite significant phenomena of medieval
culture.
In the present paper I have tried to argue that we should reveal
a form of sophisticated creativity, with all its literary, theological,
liturgical and purely artistic aspects. From this point of view the
creators of sacred space should be considered among Byzantine
artists and be included as a special phenomenon in the history of
Byzantine art and culture. Not every donor nor every emperor was a
creator of sacred space (for instance, it is not true for Basil I, Leo the
Wise's father, who ordered a lot of new buildings and decorations).

108
1 highly appreciate some stimulating criticism by Dr Gervase Rosser and Prof.
Curc'ic' o n this point.
 174 A l e x e j Lidov

A t t h e same time, t h e creation of a sacred space was a n integral

part of Byzantine imperial behaviour. A s has been noticed before,
Leo the Wise followed the model of Justinian, w h i c h h e could learn
about in numerous artefacts, sacred spaces and legends of t h e G r e a t
C h u r c h . T h e Emperor Leo inserted his project of sacred space into
t h e framework made by Justinian some centuries before. Leo's spatial
projects were later transformed by other emperors, or masters of
hierotopy, developing his original concepts without, or with, a direct
reminder of the wise emperor. S o m e models of spatial imagery, as
h a p p e n e d in iconography, became established and fashionable
paradigms.

A d d e n d u m : The evidence of Byzantine Typika. A reflection of this

p h e n o m e n o n c a n be found in some Middle Byzantine typika, t h e
concrete authors of which clearly demonstrated the multifunctional
role of the creators of particular sacred spaces. T h e Typikon of the
Kosmosoteira monastery in Pherrai, written by Isaak K o m n e n o s after
1152, provides o n e of t h e most striking examples 1 0 9 . T h e text suggests
t h e model behaviour of t h e Sebastokrator Isaak as a Byzantine ruler
and giver of commissions, w h o followed t h e paradigms of his royal
ancestors. H e was in charge of t h e location and arrangement of
his t o m b in t h e monastery, which h e transferred from the original
site in the C o n s t a n t i n o p o l i t a n C h o r a monastery to t h e specially
constructed church-mausoleum in Pherrai (probably, the t o m b was
situated in the specially enclosed n o r t h part of the n a r t h e x ) . All
details of t h e spatial e n v i r o n m e n t were carefully fixed, including the
display of marble plates, a cast bronze railing, an icon stand with t h e
portraits of t h e donor's parents and a likeness of h i m s e l f ' ° . T h e lid
of t h e coffin after the actual d e a t h of the d o n o r had to be adorned

109
The Greek text was published: L. PETIT, Typikon du monastere de la Kosmosotira
pres d'Aenos, in «Izvestija russkogo archeologicheskogo Instituta v Konstantinopo-
le», XIII, 1908, pp. 17-75. For an English translation see: Typikon of the Sebastockrator
haak Komnenos for the Monastery of the the Mother of God Kosmosoteira near Bern,
trans, by N. Sevcenko, in Byzantine Monastic Foundation Documents, II, Washington
2000, pp. 782-858.
110
For all important details of the tomb's arrangement discussed: N. SEVCENKO,
The Tomb of Isaak Komnenos at Pherrai, in «Greek Orthodox Theological Review»,
XXIX, 2, 1984, pp. 135-139.
 175 The Creator o f Sacred Space as a P h e n o m e n o n of Byzantine Culture

with his personal precious 'enkolpion' (a p e n d a n t reliquary) with the

image of the Theotokos.
Sevastokrator paid great a t t e n t i o n to two venerable icons of Christ
and the M o t h e r of God richly decorated with gold and silver, b o t h
affixed to o n e end of the tomb. In the Typikon, h e gave orders for
special and changing lightings of these icons, which had to emphasise
t h e meaning of miraculous images at particular services'". Isaak
established special rituals in front of the icons: after vespers the
monks recited the Trisagion and forty times Kyrie Eleisons. Beyond
several rites, c h a n t i n g and reciting of special prayers intended to
this particular space, Isaak made regulations for instrumental sounds
produced by bells and simantra (wooden beams) creating every time
an unusual symbolic context as well as a specific perception of the
sacred space" 2 . Moreover, nearly all elements of Isaak's project for
his tomb space and his foundation monastery had to be presented in
a dynamic state. T h e y changed during the day and the year, acquiring
more powerful meanings at particular liturgical moments, very o f t e n
according to the scenario elaborated by the creator of the sacred space.
It is noteworthy that Isaak perceived the miraculous icons as living
beings who, according to the text of the Typikon, might participate in
the mystical spatial performance which was permanently happening
around his tomb.

in p E T I T ) 0p C l t ^ p 9. Byzantine Monastic Foundation Documents cit., II, p. 802:

"At any rate, I wish that by both of these icons there be lit as well the triple lamps of
silver, those w h i c h I hung up nicely before them. Moreover, let all the little candles
be lit, along with these, as many as the bronze lemma is able to hold, the o n e extend­
ing above and across the entrance doors to the sanctuary. Furthermore, [one should
light] every lamp suspended from the beams of the church, and from the objects
designed to support the holders for the candles ­ I m e a n inside the narthex. T h i s is
the way I wish the splendid illumination to be arranged o n the feasts of the M o t h e r
of G o d , w h o has given me hopes for intercession and for my salvation*.
112
« S o o n all the rest of the days of the year that are not feast days, let the small
semantron be sounded first, to call together the monks for the hymnodies, then the
large w o o d e n one. O n Sundays and o n all the feast days enumerated, particularly
[on the day of] the holy Dormition of the Mother of G o d , I wish, as was said, for
the two large bells hanging quite high up in the tower to be rung loudly, as long as
necessary ­ these being the very bells that I had hung up in fervent faith and in my
reverence toward the Mother of G o d » {Byzantine Monastic Foundation Documents
cit., H, p. 802).
 176 Alexej Lidov

Certainly, I have not been able to mention all the details concerning
Isaak Komnenos's scenario of the sacred space of his mausoleum in
Pherrai. It deserves very detailed study but it is not the aim of the
present paper. For me it has been much more important to point
out the number of documents which might confirm my hypothesis
of the creator of sacred space as a special cultural figure. Byzantine
Typika and other sources, re-read anew, will provide an important
well-documented proof that the Byzantines not only knew and
practiced in this field but, most probably, had special training in the
making of sacred space going back to the great paradigms of the Old
Testament.
ALEXEJ LIDOV
 366 Alexej Lidov

64- Istanbul, S a i n t S o p h i a . View of t h e pillar of St. G r e g o r y t h e W o n d e r m a k e r in

the N o r t h Aisle
65. Istanbul, S a i n t S o p h i a . T h e Imperial Door, view f r o m t h e e x o n a r t h e x .
 367 Alexej Lidov

1
*JJ000J

66. Istanbul, Saint Sophia. The Imperial Door.

67. Istanbul, Saint Sophia. The Hewimasia, 10'1' c , detail of the
brass mould of the impertial door.
68. Istanbul, Saint Sophia. The Imperial Door and the original
locations of the wonder-making icons of Christ and the Virgin
Mary.
 369 Alexej Lidov

69. Istanbul, Saint Sophia. Emperor Leo the Wise dinging in

proskynesa to Christ's feet, mosaic early 10lh c , detail of the
Imperial Door.
70. Istanbul, Saint Sophia, mosaic in the lunette of the
southwest vestibule, detail of Justinian offering the model of
Saint Sophia.
 370 Alexej Lidov

71. Istanbul, Saint

Sophia, view of the
endonarthex.
72. Istanbul, Saint
Sophia. Southwest
vestibule, entrance to
the endonarthex.
 371 Alexej Lidov

aaP

ft

r
P*

73. Istanbul, S a i n t S o p h i a . W e s t wall of t h e n a o s . M a r b l e plate ( m a r k i n g t h e

a n c i e n t l o c a t i o n of t h e C h a l k i t i s i c o n ) , s u r r o u n d e d by opus sectile panels.
74. Istanbul, S a i n t S o p h i a . E n d o n a r t h e k . View of t h e u p p e r p a r t of t h e Imperial
Door.