The Proclamation of the New Covenant: The Pre-Iconoclastic Altar Ciboria in Rome and Constantinople1

Je/e11a Bogda11ovi6

The allar ciborium is lhc piece of lhc lilurgical fumit11re placed in the Christian sanctuary over the holy table ('nyio. ,pnm\'~o.) where the bloodless sacrifice of the New Testament and the presence of Jesus Chris! wi1hin lhc Dh, nc Liturgy arc manifested.' The etymology of the term ciborium (1<1flwp1ov) is nol clear especially ha,, ng in mind 1hat the expression ii­self has several meanings: cup, cupola, dome, and baldacchino, canopy referring both to the covering seats of royalty and over al1ar.• According 10 S1. Gcnnanus, lhc eighth ccnr11ry pa1ri­arch of Co11s1antinople,' the term K11l<,>p1ov is dcriva1ivc of the Greek words Kl~, K11)oyt6,;. meaning box, chest. coffer, hence rcprcscming 1abcmaclc or ark.' and 1hc word wp,ov meaning the effulgence, or Light of God. Metaphorical lang11age al­ways holds several meanings simultaneously. In this sense. S1. German us and olhcr 1hcologians connccl the ciborium _.,th the Hebrew term keber for the tomb, since tl1e altar and tomb rcprcscn1 the same things in Christian and Jewish eschatology. Otl1crs are of the opinion tl1at ciborium is derivalive of tl1c Latin tem1 for the holy gifts. cibus. that was held suspended from 1hc1cn1-likebaldacchino.•Generallyspeaki.ng. a ciborium is an open domed or pyramidal roof resting on the same num­ber of colmnns as tl1e number of comers of the shelter, at least

'

'

This paper is derived from a projccl in the course Early CJmman and 8y:antme Art andA1v:.h1tecruro. taught by Prof. Ljubica O. Popovich in the fall of 2000. I would like 10 thank Prof. Popovich once again for her unrescr"ed assistnncc at C\'<:-ry stage of work, a~ wcll 3$ for her sugg¢Stion thnt I p.,r1icip.1te in the Art H/J.loryOraduate Sympoi,um :'II Floridn Stale Ul'l.ivetSity. which led to the publication of this p;tper i.nA1h<mor. I cordially lhnnk Prof. S,'Ctla.n:i P0p<>vii. an :irchitcdural histori.in. who h.is supported myctfort.s for ye.ars. As many times before I benefited from he:r:-u~tions while working on this paper. M>• 1h.11lks also go to the Grnduate School of V3.nderbih Univm ity th.nt financially supported my participation at the Symposium.

Lazar Mirko,,iC. Pr,wosl<nma liturgika ii, na11ka o bogosl11?.e11J11 prnvos/aw,e utobrecrl.w, f>rvi, opci doo (Bcogr.,d: S\'di amijcrej!ili:i sinod sq>$ke pravosla\-1le crkve. 199S) 103. A Potrwic Oroek Lexicon. ed. G W.11. 1..,mpe. D. D. (Oxford: Oxford UP. 1964) 1399.

Lampe 753.

SI. Germa1111sofComtantmopleon tJie Dmna/...1h1rgy, ed. Paul Mcycndorff (New York: $1 Vh1dimir's Seminary P. 1984).

umpe?SJ.

MirkoviC. 103: SI. OcrmamtS o/Consumtlnople on the D111111'! L,lllrgy 59. Leks,kon 1ko,,ografi1e. l1wrg1ke , s1mboliktt :apodnog kmca,ul\'O, ed. Andjclko &durins (Zagreb: Jns1itut 1:a po,ijcst umctn06'li, 1979) 180-181.

four.' The ciborium resembles the tenl-like or domed strnc1ure, usually connected witl1 bo1h sacred and royal 1e111s,• and as such a visual motif it can be traced back several centuries be­fore Lhc Common Era, in numerous representations in almost every ancient Easlern culture with nomadic heri1agc. Since the focus oftllis paper is on the ciborium "itllin the Christian church 1J1e discussion is narrowed 10 1hc Judco-Chris1ian and Helle­nistic tradition.

The earlies! archeological remains of the allar ciboria date from the sixth century and arc found in the churches of S1. Alexander and St. Andrew in Rome, and in tl1e churches of Hagios Polyektos and Hagia Euphemia in Cons1antinople.' However, according 10 1he archcological rcpor1s and 1he old representations and descriptions from otl1er sources such as coins or manuscripls. 1he eiboria were used \\illtin lhe Chris­tian churches al least two centuries prior to tha1 da1e.1• Knowl­edge of the Christian canopy-like architectural structures be· gins " ~lh 1he Edic1 of Tolcralion (313) and dcvelopmen1 of Christian iconography under Constantine the Great (d. 337). Ciboria co1m1:tissioned by Constantine and !tis heirs marked 1he lombs oftl1e Aposlles Pe1er and Paul in Rome in 1he ba­silica manyrium of St. Peter (after 319) and San Paulo fuori Jc

'

10

Ciborium is the architedural Jttmciure, but it is closely related to the b,.,ldacchino. The tenn is of late medie\'a) derivative from the ll:ilian (ba/docco)or Sp:inish (baldaqum) expression for the elaborately brocaded material imported from &ghdnd that was hung as a canopy over an altar or dool'w-:iy. L.1ter ii C:lme to stand for the freestanding canopy over :in

altar. tomb. or throne. ns the eiborium. The terms teg,mum, t11rr11, umbraculum, an:a etc. in Latin, or Ktlko-t6; 1C1jkllp1ov, 1:-po8H1ov, !WPYo; elc in Greekaretbesynonymieswith 1heciborium. Mol'e in· Th(!Catholrc E11cyclopedia. vol, I (1999) underC,bo,wm: MirkoviC 103:St. German11s o/Constontmopls on the Dnm1e L1t111gy 59. The 0,.ford D1ct1onary of By:ontwm. \'OI. J (1991)462.

Baldwin E. Smith. Arcl11tectural S)'mboJum of lmpenal Rome and the M1ddleAges(Princcton: Pri~ton UP.19S6) l l2.

About ConstMtinopolitan eibona in: Thomas F. Mathews. The Earl)' CJmrdre.i o/Com.tantmople: Arr:huecture and Linu'8Y (U'n..i\'mity Pa.rt.; :md London: The Pettnsyh·ania $1:ile UP. 1971). M<>re on ciboria in Rome: Molly T~alc Smith . .. 111c Development of the Altar Canopy in Rome," ~,wsta di ard1eologro cru11a.11a SO (1974) 379..◄J.a . 1'be 1bi1d ceLUer. Jerus3.lem, i.s as importanl 3.S Rome and Constantinople. but there :u-e no ar<:heological remains of cibori3.. sint:e none survived. That i$ the reason we .shall tum to Jcru.c;.alcm as the spiritual ocntcr, and ide.al reconstruction of the ciboria in Jerusalem.

Molly Teasdale Smith, " l)c.,.clopmcnC 379-414.

ATHANORXX

mura inRome(after 384), as well astl1etombofChrist atJerusa­lcm (326-35). 10 name but a few.

Scholars searched for the possible explanation of the canopy stn,cture and its function in tl1e Christian church in the imperial iconography of the time. The repeated tent-like and baldacchino patterns in tl1e visual representations con­nected \\1th the epiphany and adve11t11s had a long-lived tradi­tion in every pan of the Roman Empire. 11 However. it has bocn pointed out that altar canopy structnres differed from one an­other according to the panicular symbolic function they had. The canopies erected over the many, tombs physically con­tn1sted significantly from the canopies over imperial thrones in royal au/ae." Roman tombs for wealthy and influential fanti­lies were mainly on central plans, sometimes sunnoumed by a second storey on which was a round canopy-like strnctnre, carried by columns and ""tl1 a pointed roof. " Their ,;sual ap­pearance is similar to the canopy placed over the tomb of Christ in Jcmsalcm as represented ou the si"1h centn1y Bobl>io and Monza a111p11llae. According to the Euscbius of Caesar.:.~ (fourth century). the chief tl1eological adviser of Constantine, and to the Uber Po111iflcalis, St. Peter. a member of a mainly poor and neglected "sect" during his life, received the same honors as the Empress Helena and Emperor Constantine: an al1ar, corona. and four large cand.leslicks.14 Constantine was at l11a1 time, acclaimed as relaced to the traditional Roman gods."Having in mind tliat Constantine tl1e Great viewed him­self as God's vicar on earch, and that the !.-Ord was viewed

II

" "

14

1l1e lent-like and b.1ldacehino s1ruc1:ur¢S 3$ represented in the scc::ond and fourth Styles oft.he Pompeian waJI painting present the e\idencc that a ciborium wa11 an import.ant fe,:t ture of tbe ,~ lace cettmonies ,md p-3J:ice :irclll1ec1ure of the Hellenislic: Eas.1 pr«Jom.inanlly. l:ttcr adopted by the ()(h;:r partS of Rom3.n Empire. Nero ·s runbition to be rrooa,ni~ as a Sroond Akxandcr the Grc.'lt :ind to be identi.fied ,,,.ith lhe Sun-god could be found documented in his inltrest in the skenc symbolism a.nd the domic.11 ban­queting hall he ha.d bu ill for the rcx:c-ption ofllill gucst.<i lil,;c a Kcnmokrator bcnc;)th :i domieal h.:awn. ·rh.: origiMI me·:tni.ng oftbc e.11,opy Sl.mdUrt i.n this oonteN.1 should be searched i.n Egyp1, The papyrus oflhc Middle King­dom. which sho\\'!Jhow Senworsct mnde his publicappc.arnnoea!l the Ji\,ing Horus under :t heh-led canopy. reca lls the l:.1er e-piJ)h.:my :uld lld\'CntliS re<:eptfoo of the Hellenistic kfogs .1nd Rom.in emperors, S)'mbolism of the sacred tent s~1d the ide:I oflhe throne lO,bcmnclc when the ruler was idcn-1ificd with hea\"cn and presented to his people as a god. Moreover, dm'ing the $.hort period of the New Kingdool An.lenl,olep IV (reign l348-1336t5 l3CE)proclaimed his faith in :i singlegod. lhC wn disk Alen and changed his 11;1.mc 10 Akhcn111en ("'Effoctive for ther\ten··) introducing thus one or the- c-.arlicst refc-:rcnccs to mooothe-ism and the idea oftbe nlt$Stngtr of God among hum.'Ul$. For lhe reference to Akhcn-'tcn I 1h;1.nk once again Or. s,,ctlana i>opoviC.

Molly Teasdale So:tith. "De,-elopment"379-414.

Some of the cxamp1cs of Jtom.1n tombs wilh thocaoopy•like structures on 1be lop .1r-e: :ii Pompeii. the tomb of the lstacidii (Aut,'\.llot Mau. P<>mM•i. /Is U/e and Ari fNtw York: C31llt7,as Brothen;, 1982 J 411 ), at S. RCmy in France, the mausoleum of the Julii. e. 30-20 8CE (t\'e D' An1br:i. Rt>m(m Ari, (Cambridge: C.•unbridge UP. 1998) 11 ). 7) • .ind in Capoa the towtr• tomb uamed ··The Conocchia." end of the fin.1 century CE, (Roberto Mart3, Arc.hitelh1ra Romona. Techmcheconstn1thveeforme arri11te.tu:m1che de/ mondon:m,ano, !Roma: Kapp.,, 1985) 176-83),

MollyTe.asdnle Smith. ··Ocvelopmcnl·· 379-4 14.

8

JEI.E:-IA BOGOANOVIC

increasingly as the Emperor of Heaven. 16 it is very plausible 10 connect the in1perial ceremo1tial rites wiU1 the mdimcmaiy rites of 1he liturgy. However. the inOuencc of Je"ish litnrgy should not be w1dcrcstima1cd in spite of the Roman intoler­ance cowards the Jews.

No other clement in Jewish faith has such central and long-lived l11eological imponancc as docs che Ark of t he Cov­enanc, since ic symbolizes the presence of God (I Sam. 4:3) and theconnoction between God and the nat ion oflsrael. Great significance is accorded to the tent-like structure called U1e "Tent of Meeting .. or Tabernacle" where the Ark was placed (2 Sam. 7:6). The Tabernacle represents the porcable sanclu• ary conscrncted by Moses as a place of worship for the Hebrew tribes during the period of wandering tl1at preceded their ar­rival in U1e Promised Land. The earliest sanctuary was a simple tent within which, it was believed. the Lord himself mani­fested his presence and communicated his will. The Taber­nacle was constructed witli capestry cunai ns decorated with chcn1bim (Exod. 25:9fl). The interior was divided into two rooms, differing in their sanctity: "the holy place" and "the most holy place·· (Holy of Holies, Heb. Debir). The room that represe111ed "the holy place·· contained tl1e table on which the bread of the Presence ~~howbread). the allar of incensc. ,md tl1e seven-branched candelabnun (menorah) were placed. "The Holy of Holies .. was chought to be an actnal dwelling place of the God of Israel, who invisibly sat emhroncd above the solid slab of gold that resled on the Ark of the Covenant and had

"

,.

"

··Hie eJl q111 nomen accepwm a Det>, prmc,pe genens sul, ded11 ~'Obis. qui se progenlam tJJe J/crt:.11li$, non /abulosfs, 11ud oeq1u1.11s wrt1t11b11s comprOba\<:I. •• (lnccrti Pancgyricus Ma.ximi:mocl Const1ntino -307 Ct, cap. VI II, 2): ··Ur emnr tpttJ.( 1mmortolesDeoi quanquam um\v:ncstmmw colamus. interdum Ul.men m suo q11emq11e ttmplo llC se,te ~-eneramur.. :· (Panegyricus VII: Eumcni Cons1nn1in0Aug .• cap. I, S)according to: ti.folly Tcac:dalc Smith, '1'hc- J_,ter.:in Fostrgum: A Gift ofC011stantine1bc Gre:u." RMs1a arc.eo.Joglll cn$11tma 46 (1970) 149-75. Domiti.10 (fina ctntury) wu.11 the finil .among the Roman ~mpcrors whowoocc-ded in clc\'.Jling him­self lo the stnlure of a Donmw.t el /)eJ1s. He became kll0\\lJ as a builder of .11 le:ist two domic:1l h:ills. i1l \,1tich he as the "Lord of the Ckcmntne·· fe-'sied \, ith his ~rucsts in thcc:cnlcr of the cosmos under the sta~ continu­ing, thus L11etradition of Alexander·s .. ten! or Hcaw n" and !\tro ·s b:mqud• ingtholos. More in: Baldwin E Smith 126.

Euscbius.. ThoEccltsrasl/cal History. IX. viii. 15-ix. l I , ·o:. Pagec-t al eds. (Cambridge, Ma.'-!!.: Harvard l,;P:ind London: \ViUiam Heint1n.'llm LTD. t9l8) 3l9-6l.

The ph)°ltlcal appcaranooofther\tk andTabenucle is described in 2 Mos, 2):90: About the sh;tpe ofd.e Art .ind Tabem~elc 1htrc are contronni.:11 debate! between 01risti:m aod JC\\ish inlerprdati<>M, more in: Bi:inc-:t KOhnel, From tire F..anJ1ly101he Heave.nlyJerosa!em Repre.se.numons <>f rhe H<>lyCtty tn Chrlsfl<mArr <>/the First Millennmm. ( Rome. r-rciburg. Wien: Herder. 1987) 19 n. 8. The word tabernacle is of J ... 1tin derivation tabernoc11lt1nr, meaning tent. ·r.1bcm.1clc in Hebrew is rdetred to 'ohel• tent. 'ohel mo'ec:'-1ent of meding. 'ohel h.1-'eduth-u:nt of testimony. mimkan 'ohel-dw-elling. mishkan ha· ·oou1h-dwclling orlc-s1.i111ony. mishkan ·ohc-1-th,>tlling or the tent. bcth Yahweh-house of Yahweh, gode$h~boly, fftiqd:isb­s:mctuary, hchl-lcmple, 11.e \ 'Mious espressi0L'I$ in the Hebre\, text in rtr. eteJ~ to the 1.1btm.1<:Je ennble the fonnation of a elc-.ar idea ofi1Scon.c;truc-1ion, and the description of a "1>0r1able tent-like sanctuary" i$ lhe m<>St ac­c-urnte. More- in: The Co,lw;>hc Encyclopcdta. \'OI. I. 1999.

THE PROCJ..AMAT/0.l\' OF TH£ NEW COVENANT: THE PRE- JCONOCL . .>.STJC ALTAR CJBORlA IN ROM£ Ai'JO CONSTANTINOPLE

golden chenibim at each side. The Ark was a gold-covered wooden coffer containing the tablets of the Ten Command­ments. In tbe time oftbe First Temple (before 586 BCE) which was creeled by god-appointed King David in Jemsalem, the permanent place of the Ark and the Tabernacle "in the Holy of Holies of the Temple. under the chcn,bim's wings•· ( I Kg. 8:611) was es1ablished.

During the so-called "Second Temple period., (586 BCE-70 CE) which was ~ •rtly in1cr1";ncd with lhc '·New Tes1a­me111 period,'' Jewish cschalology evolved witl1 the concept of the Messwh presemed in the prophecy of Isaiah (esp. Isa. 9. 11. 42)." Isaiah ·s prophecy emphasized that lhc fu1urc niler (,\ fessit,h) should be: a king, a pries!, and a prophet. Jesus appeared as lite one who uni1ed tl1ese three functions in His persona (hypos1asis). As a King of the universe (Mt. 22: Lk. I. 32f; 2 Sam. 7.12). He received from the w1y begimting the imperial characteristics thal "record His righteous acts and His victories over 1he impious ... ,. Jesus is ll1e great High Priest of ll1e unh·erse (Mk. IL 231[ Mt. 6. 9: Lk. 11, 2: Mt. 17, 20f; Mk. 16. 15ff: Mt. 28. 19f). appointed as lhe new Aaron or Melchizcdek, ··10 whom alone ii is permitted to search ll1e hidden mysteries of every rational soul."" Jesus Himself rep­resented His prophecy regarding the foll of earthly Jerusalem (Lk. 21; Mk. 13; ML 23) Uirough His deaU1 on Il1e cross. The destmction of the Jemsalem Temple in 70 was preceded by Jesus· coming 10 lhe world. His earlhly ministry, and more specifically by His entry into Jemsalem immediately followed by lhe story of His passion. dea1h. and resurrection (Lk. 22f. Mk. I 4f. Mt. 26f)." After ils destniclion the holiness previ­ously reserved for Il1e Temple was transferred to Il1e individual synagogues."The principal object of the posi-70 Je"ish ritual was lhe written Torah, housed in a Torah shrine. The lilurgi­cal shift in Judaism was made from ll1e sacrificial worship in the Jerusalem Temple to ll1e recitation of prarcrs and Scrip-

"

19

lO

"

"

"

The Roman conquest and the destruction of the Se<:ond Ttmple in 70 CE occurred just as the 1>rophcc1cs oflhe Old Testament had :announced. .md \\'f:lpptd tht histor~l. me:ssi:inic and esch.<ttologic:il ooncq,1 of Jc,.,ish faith into one. The idea oflhe rebuilding of the <: ily and the Temple. the rtlun\ from the Diaspora. nnd the return of Ood to Jl.TUsalcm \\'c:rc closely <:On•

nccted with the restoration concept of how to achieve tJ1is.

l~usebius X. iv. 14--6. 407.

Eusebius X iv. 2}-6. 4 l 1•3, The words, "[Melchizedek) brought bread and wine·· (Gen. 14: 18). :are interpreted in Christianity as refclTing to the 1-':ucharist..

By the eighth ccnw.ry thw:e,-ents be<:~me cn.icial points of the later de,"el• opmcnt of the liturgical S)1nbolism nnd m}'lilicism.

l lci11z Sclm."<:kenberg a.nd Kurt Schubert.Je,~i.sh f1,110rtogrophytmd le<>­rrograpl,y m Early and Med1ew1l Chnsllomty (Ac;scn: Van Gorcum nnd Minne:tpofo•: Fo11rcs P, 1992) 16 l, with rcfcre:nccs.

Joan Branham. ··Sacred Space under F.r.1Stm: in Ancient Synagogues nnd Early Churc~ ·· Art 8ullet,n 3 (1992): 375-94.

More about the carlicst Euoharistic riles of the early Church in: Hugh Wybrew, nJe Ot1lwdox l1111rgy Tire Development of1heEucliamt1c L,1.

9

ture in n11111erous synagogues." Willi homilies and the reading of the Scripture. tbe earliest Eucharistic ri1cs-1hosc of the Sunday Eucharisl and ll1c Eucharist tha1 followed baptis111, as described by Justin the Martyr (second century) in Il1e Firs! Apoiog,-rcsemble JC\\iSh si11agoguc service."

Fro111 lhe Davidic ri111cs on. ll1e Ark and Tabernacle. the Temple, and Jerusalem represem the associative iJnages of the covenant and 1he heavenly realm in Jc11i sh eschatology." Witl1 Jesus· death, resurrection, and ascension. earthly Jemsalem lost its dominant role iJ1 ll1e ecclesiastical history of redemp­tion in Christian csehaiology."Howevcr, topology and sym­bolism of earthly Jemsalem, where the ltistorical events of Jesus' earthly 1ninislly took place. became a "model" for the rcpresen1a1ion of Heavenly Jcmsalem.'' ln other words, ll1e heavenly realm was emphasized in Il1e New Tes1amen1 period as a formative period for the transition from visional)· proph­ecy 10 cschalology. Having those notions in 111ind. earthly Jemsalem. ll1e Temple. and the Ark and Tabernacle. repre­sent 1be coun1crpar1s of 1he associative images for Heaven!)' Jenisalem. tl1e Church, and ll1e ahar and allar ciboriwn."

The placement of ll1e fourth and fifth cennuies chancel screen iJ1 Jcn,salcm 's churches and synagogues records 1he relocation of liturgical praclices fro111 U1c ex1erior sacrificial places to the iJ1terior of both Jewish and Christian sancnuu­ies. perhaps due 10 the same origin ofl11c scni cc and similar praclices. ,. Moreover. it seems plausible 10 assu111e ll1a1 ll1e first portable ahars might have been in the nave of the churchcs." The 0oor mos.1ic in from of lhe apse of ll1e sixU1 ccnlury chapel of Theolokos al Mt. Nebo represents a struc­t,ual motif recognized as 1he Jerus.1lem Temple." The depicted edifice is an elongated s1rucrurc, with the apse on one of ils shorter sides, and it is visually recog1lizable as a basilica. The di\~sion of 1be en1rance area. the part of the nave \\i lh the sacrificial altar. aud the apse area reserved for the Holy of

"

" "

,.

,.

"

31

mgy In the B),-:anrme Rue (London· SPCK. 1989), 18.

Aboul dift«rot aspccLc; of the union among thcA.rk, the Temple, and Jcrusa• lem, veryelabora1e lo: K0bncl 17-28.

Kohncl 49-59.

Robert Taft. SJ. •·The Li1tugyof1be Grt.11 Church• An lni1ial S)lllhesis of Strucluro and lnt(.Tprctation on 1hc. Eve of lconocl:asm.. .. DOP 34-S (1980· l): -lS-75. lt ~houldbcnotcdtlutlhcreprc!tcnl31iamofthc Heavenly Jcrusa• lem in the v:isual arts remained idealistic before the Cn.i~<Jer period. Mort" in: K0hnd passim.

For the 31tar 3l'ld the altar ciborium arc the ,·ery pl:t~ where he:we:nly :md ca.rthly realm are mised bu1 not di3$0lved,

Branham 3 75-94.

1'he oldest archcological cv1dcncc about altors in Constantinopolitan churches from the fourth and fifth centuries loc.ntcthcm in the mwcarca in front of the apse, See: ~fa thews EarlyChurche.s 11-41 ,

S.J. S:-ille:r :iocording to: Branham 375-94. F'or photo rcproduc."lion of the apse (Joor ke Bi;u)C.'l Kobnel From the E<mill)• 101he Hea,,-cnlyJe.n,$0• Ism (Horde,. I 987~

10

ATHANOR XX JELENA BOGDANOVI�

Holies is evident. The first portable altars might have been inthe nave of the churches. In the Old St. Peter’s basilica, thetomb of the Apostle was in the apse in the former place of theHoly of Holies, and the Christian altar was somewhere in thenave since there was not enough space for the altar in theapse. The symbolical union of two distinct segments of theJerusalem Temple—the altar area with a Torah shrine and theHoly of Holies, within the Christian edifice— might be inter-preted both spatially and liturgically. The transfer of the Templeattributes to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre might be sche-matically presented so that “the Tomb of Christ takes the placeof the Holy of Holies,” the place of Divine Presence, “the ever-burning lamp in the Tomb is like menorah in the Temple,while the Rock of the Crucifixion,” where the Lord sacrificedHis only-begotten son, “assumes the role of the altar on Mt.Moriah,” where Abraham offered the sacrifice of Isaac.32Holyplaces and history that marked the topology of earthly Jerusa-lem appear to be transferred to the other Constantian churches,including the Old St. Peter’s basilica.

According to the surviving documents, excavations, andthe representation on the early fifth century ivory casket fromPola (Figure 1),33St. Peter’s grave was sheltered by a canopy.It rested on four spiral vine scroll columns, columnae vitineaethat Constantine brought de Grecias.34Two more architravedspiral columns linked the backside of the baldacchino to thecorners of the apse,35forming together with the baldacchinothe continuous curtained screen. The jeweled “tower,”36aciborium that housed the Blessed Sacrament, as it was men-tioned in the Liber Pontificalis, had a pointed roof with di-agonal arching ribs surmounted by an orb, as it is representedon the Pola Casket. At the point of the intersection of ribs, agolden lamp was suspended in the form of golden corona oflights. Below the canopy a rectangular enclosure was railedoff and slightly raised above the floor level. Ciborium stooddirectly over the Apostle’s tomb. The altar was very probablymovable, separated from the shrine, positioned somewhere infront of the shrine or near it (Figure 2).37On the Pola Casket

two figures are turned toward the Apostle’s tomb in a gestureof worship, and a pair of female and male frontal orant fig-ures are represented on either side of the shrine.

The symbolism of the golden lamp as the ever-burninglamp is familiar: “out from the tomb comes the risen Christ,the light that illuminates, i.e. saves.”38The lamp was suspendedfrom the intersection of the ribs that formed the ciborium roof.Thus, the sparkling lamplight came not from the outside, butfrom the inner space of the ciborium. The sensation of theparticipants in the service in St. Peter’s basilica has to be verysimilar to the pilgrim Egeria’s (381-384 CE) description ofthe congregation in the Holy Sepulchre:

...and the lamps and candles are all lit, whichmakes it [Anastasis] very bright. The fire isbrought not from outside, but from the cave-inside the screen-where a lamp is alwaysburning night and day.39

A golden lamp was suspended from the ciborium in theform of a golden crown, aurum corona, above the body oflights.40Besides the similarities to the ever-burning light ofJesus’ tomb, prefigured in the ever burning light of the menorahlamp, aurum corona can be related also to the Roman cer-emony of the aurum coronarium. The rite was named afterthe gold diadem that the citizens of the Roman Empire andrepresentatives of the provinces presented to the emperor as asymbolic sign of his imperial supremacy over them. This im-perial iconographical motif can be transferred to the religiousimage of Christ as the Heavenly King, the Source of Light.41

The Acts of the Apostles that were depicted on four largecandlesticks wrought in silver (now lost),42refer to the spiri-tual identity of the Apostles with the self-giving person, theSon of God, Jesus Christ, defining liturgical mysteries as themysteries of Christ’s life enacted during the cycle of the churchyear. To express this spiritual identity St. Peter and elevenApostles state that all who believe in Christ are together andhold everything in common, including the mystery of divinelife (Acts. 2:44). Moreover, St. Peter was the first Apostle who

32 Quotations from Robert Ousterhout, “From Temple to Sepulchre: An Ideo-logical Transformation” according to: Branham 375-94. About this spe-cific architectural symbolism: Ousterhout 375-94. About liturgical sym-bolism in: Taft 45-75.

33 About donations of Constantine to St. Peter’s and the ekphrasis of the inte-rior of the church see: L. Duchesne, Liber Pontificalis 1 (Paris: 1955-6).About excavations of St. Peter’s see: J.B. Ward-Perkins, “The Shrine of St.Peter and its Twelve Spiral Columns,” in: Studies in Roman and EarlyChristian Architecture, ed. J. B. Ward-Perkins (London: Pindar P, 1994)469-89. About the representation of the shrine of St. Peter on the Pola Cas-ket as it appeared in the fifth century see: Richard Krautheimer, Early Chris-tian and Byzantine Architecture (New Heaven and London: Yale UP, 1986)56f; John Beckwith, Early Christian and Byzantine Art (New Haven/Lon-don: Yale UP, 1993) 27f; Ward-Perkins 469-89.

34 Ward-Perkins 469-89.

35 The imprints of the two rear column bases of the canopy show that thescreen separated the apse from the transept, from shoulder to shoulder, withthe canopy projecting forward into the crossing, thus over the tomb. Morein: Ward-Perkins 469-89.

36 In Greek ðbñãïò; fn. 7. above.

37 More in: Ward-Perkins 469-89.

38 The Greek word for illumination, öfôéóìá means baptism. More on thesymbolism of light for the Christian liturgy: Taft 45-75.

39 Egeria’s Travels translated by J. Wilkinson (London, 1971) 123-4, accord-ing to: Taft 45-75.

40 “Coronam auream ante corpus qui est farus cantharus” Liber Pontificalis(ed. Duchesne) 176, according to: Molly Teasdale Smith, “Development”379-414.

41 More on the rite of aurum coronarium in: Robert Deshman, “Antiquityand Empire in the Throne of Charles the Bald,” in Byzantine East, LatinWest. Art-historical studies in honour of Kurt Weitzmann, Doula Mouriki,Slobodan �ur�i� et al eds. (Princeton: Princeton UP, 1995) 131-7.

42 Beckwith 27.

11

THE PROCLAMATION OF THE NEW COVENANT: THE PRE-ICONOCLASTIC ALTAR CIBORIA IN ROME AND CONSTANTINOPLE

baptized non-Jews, clearly announcing the replacement of theOld Covenant between the God and people of Israel with theNew Covenant between the God and people of God, those bap-tized in Christ (Acts.10:9ff).43

The six twisted columns, four that formed canopy overSt. Peter’s grave and two more at the corners of the apse, weremade of a single block of fine-grained, translucent, Greekmarble.44Each of them was divided into four zones, separatedby a cable molding, of which the first and third were spirallyfluted, and the second and fourth carved in high relief withvine scrolls and naked, winged putti. The composite capitalsand the bases of the columns are also rich in leaves and orna-ments (Figure 3).45The columns, as mentioned in the LiberPontificalis and depicted on the Pola Casket,46could be con-nected with the pagan tradition and the cult of Dionysius,47

since there are references that canopies made of or with vinescrolls, sometimes inhabited by birds, beasts, and vintagingfigures, were used in the cult (Figure 4).48Dyonisius, a god ofvine, was also known as a funerary god who delivered souls ofthe dead due to his association with the return of spring andvegetation each year.49The historical events of the Last Sup-per, Crucifixion, and Resurrection, firmly connected with li-turgical mysteries of life in Christ, all happened in the spring-time. Once again, pagan funerary celebrations of emperorsand reception of a divine ruler could be connected with wor-shipping Christ, King of the Universe, and the Apostles andmartyrs to whom He delegated His power and authority, justas Roman emperors delegated their power to consuls, magis-trates, and other officials. In Jewish eschatology the scrolls of

the Tree of Life are connected with the Torah scrolls. TheTree of Life signified the Torah in its fulfillment, both as theinstrument of God’s creation and the norm of life of the Jew-ish people,50and as the representative of the Torah it also de-picts the heavenly Paradise.51Visual representations of the Treeof Life are rare, but the fresco over the Torah niche in DuraEuropos synagogue (before 256) with the “tree of life for allwho holds fast to her [Tree of Life]” employs almost the sameiconographical vocabulary as the ciborium over the Apostle’stomb in St. Peter’s church (Figure 5). On the fresco the Torahshrine is enclosed by the aedicula very similar to the idealreconstruction of St. Peter’s tomb. The columns of the Torahaedicula are twisted and resemble the twisted columns of theciborium over St. Peter’s grave. The branches of the Tree ofLife surmount the niche with the Torah shrine emphasizingthe eschatological dimension of the image. The ciborium col-umns wrapped in vine-scrolls could be seen as the eschato-logical image of the New Testament. The motif of intertwinedscrolls was a very popular decorative motif with the meaningof everlasting life during the whole of the Roman Empire,both in the areas in North Africa52and Syro-Palestine. There-fore it seems reasonable that the motif was adapted to expressfundamental Christian themes such as the vintage of the Lordin the Church both in the East and West, which was used atleast until the sixth century. It might be that the Jewish icono-graphical meaning was perhaps modified for the specific vi-sual media,53and coupled with the adapted imperial imagerythat affirmed the triumph of Christ.

The orant figures54from the Pola Casket emerging through

43 God’s people, in Greek ëáüs, has nothing to do with ethnic characteristicsof the nation, as it has in Judaism.

44 Remember that Constantine brought columnae vitineae de Grecias ftn. 34above.

45 No pair of columns was the same, but according to the archeological re-mains and descriptions they were restored. More in: Ward-Perkins 469-89.

46 About the reference in the Liber Pontificalis 176 according to: MollyTeasdale Smith, “Development” 379-414.

47 Although some scholars saw similarities with structural elements of fantas-tic garden architecture, most of them narrowed their studies on the similari-ties with structural elements of architecture with Dionysiac attributes. Morein: Ward-Perkins 469-89; Molly Teasdale Smith, “Development” 379-414.

48 Molly Teasdale Smith, “Development” 379-414. The column in high re-lief with entwined vine scrolls, Silen mask and other Dionysiac attributes ispreserved in Museo Nazionale Romano. In the mausoleum of Galla Placidia(c. 425) in Ravenna the vault mosaics with vine scrolls and vintage sceneswith little putti are also very indicative of such a representation in the tombstructure.

49 Moreover, in the ceremonies of the New Year Festival at Babylon the godappeared under “the ‘golden heaven,’ which ... was a baldacchino or canopyof gold or cloth of gold upon which the planets were represented.” Quota-tion of S. H. Hooke, Babylonian and Assyrian Religion (London, 1953)49, after Baldwin E. Smith 116. When the people welcomed the return ofthe god responsible for the renewed fertility of the land, the customary wayin which it was enacted in both the Mesopotamian and Egyptian ritualspertaining to the Spring Festival when the priest king welcomed the “veg-

etation deity” may explain how the heavenly canopy came to be associatedwith the reception of the divine ruler. Baldwin E. Smith 116.

50 “For the Torah is the tree of life for everyone who occupies himself with it.Whoever keeps its commandments in this world lives and endures, like thetree of life, for the world to come. To obey the Torah in this world is to becompared with [eating] the fruits of the tree of life.” Quotation from:Schreckenberg and Schubert 166, with further references.

51 Schreckenberg and Schubert 163-7.

52 About the tradition of vine scroll as a decorative motif in the Greek-speak-ing world and its influence on the Western part of the Roman Empire, aswell about the examples of vine scroll columns from the chancel screens ofChristian date found in North Africa, see: Ward-Perkins 469-89. It is inter-esting that the earliest structure of the expression of faith among Latin-speaking Christians was influenced from the mid-third century on predomi-nantly by North-African, and ultimately, Alexandrian theology. More in:Schulz 142.

53 Fresco represents two-dimensional image very similar to three-dimensionaltomb surmounted by a ciborium.

54 Orant is usually a female figure standing with outstretched arms as if inprayer used in Early Christian art as a symbol of the faithful dead. See:Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English LanguageUnabridged (Springfield, Mass: Merriam-Webster Publishers, 1986). How-ever, perhaps it is worth to remark that the word originates from Greekterm ïÛñVíéïò referring to heavenly, divine, spiritual, pertaining to thesky, everything which is opposite to earthly and material and term ïÛñVíïòwith reference to eschatological descent of the heavenly to the earthly, mean-ing between heaven and earth (Lampe 977). Moreover, it is also very inter-

12

ATHANOR XX JELENA BOGDANOVI�

the curtains can be visually and compositionally comparedwith the figures from the Old Testament theme represented inthe Ashburnham or Tours Pentateuch, the seventh century LatinVulgate manuscript (Figure 6). On the lower half of the illu-mination in the center of the composition, the Tabernacle orTent of Meeting is depicted. Priests, Moses and Joshua, fromone side, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu,55from the other, en-ter the Tabernacle, after experiencing the epiphany on theMount Sinai represented in the upper part of the illumination(Exod. 24). The Tent of Meeting is made of curtains (Exod.26) with a wooden altar embellished with precious metals andequipped with necessary accessories (Exod. 27). The Ark andTabernacle symbolize the very moment of Shekina, the Di-vine Presence since they are depicted after the event on MountSinai when Moses has been given the tablets of the law by thehand of the Lord. From the fourth century writings of the nunEgeria it is obvious that the tomb of Christ, not the sanctuaryof the martyrium basilica where the Eucharist was celebrated,was the focal point of the vespers and the resurrection vigil.56

This practice is concurrent with the period when St. Peter’sshrine as depicted on the Pola Casket was also venerated. Sincethe mouths of the celebrants from the Pola Casket are open, itcan be assumed that the evening liturgical service full of sym-bolism of the Divine Presence connected with the presence ofthe martyr’s relics is represented.

The liturgical service in the early years of Christianityremains obscure. Until the end of the fourth century two cer-emonies might have been performed at venerated Christiantombs: first the offerings of food and wine provided by thefaithful for funerary banquets, the refrigerium, following pa-gan practices of the Parentalia; and the second, the celebra-tion of the Eucharist, symbolizing the sacrifice of Christ forwhom the martyr died.57Melchizedek’s giving bread and wineto Abraham (Gen. 14:18-20) can be interpreted in Jewish con-text referring to bread as showbread, and wine as the libationoffering, and in Christian sense as the prefiguration of theEucharist.58The two figures below the altar ciborium repre-sented on the Pola Casket, might refer to the ceremony of

offering bread and wine. This idea may be supported by thesixth century representation from the Vienna Genesis, wherethe meeting of Melchizedek and Abraham is depicted behindthe domical curtained ciborium. If so, there was no better placein Rome to represent the spiritual unity in Christ than on St.Peter’s tomb.59

Some pagan altars were also surmounted by canopies toshelter a sacrifice and offerings placed on or below the altar,making the refrigerium at a venerated and sheltered martyr’stomb very inconvenient for Christian service. In time therefrigerium rite was eliminated from Christian practice ac-cording to the late fourth and fifth century writings of theChurch Fathers such as St. Ambrose, the bishop of Milan andSt. John Chrysostom, the patriarch of Constantinople. Theyalso clarified the meaning of the liturgical furnishing, includ-ing the altar and altar ciborium. St. Ambrose wrote that soulsand symbolic remains of the martyrs, including brandea60fromthe actual martyr’s tomb, should be placed beneath the altar,to become the true spiritual sacrifice offered to Christ.61Hebased his writing on the Revelation of John62as the only bookof the New Testament in which Heavenly Jerusalem and sanc-tuaries are “visualized” as the symbol of the New Covenantand in a way as the extension of the Holy of Holies. St. JohnChrysostom emphasized the aspect of mystery during the li-turgical service, presenting the sacramental reality of theanaphora within the overall symbolic form of the liturgy,63

basing his writing mainly on John 3:16: “You so loved yourworld that You gave Your only-begotten Son, in order thateveryone who believes in Him may not be lost but may haveeverlasting life.” For St. John Chrysostom, bread and wine,body and blood of our Lord, are the sacraments that He gaveto “His Apostles” and to “all who have been perfected infaith,”64representing thus the visual images of the symbolismof death and resurrection in the Eucharist.65Therefore, thefocus of the service, both in the West and in the East, wasshifted from the veneration of the sepulchre to the rite of theEucharist. This shift was followed by the New Testament in-terpretation of the death of Jesus in terms of Old Testament

esting to remark that ïÛñVíéóêïò, dim. ïÛñVíïò with meaning “little heavenor sky” at the same time points to the vaulted ceiling, especially top of atent, canopy, as explained in: Greek-English Lexicon, eds. Liddell and Scott,vol 2 (Oxford: Claredon P, 1948). Those notions are significant especiallyhaving in mind that participants in the earliest Christian services spoke thelanguage and had the complete insight in complex meaning of the word,action and object had as a whole.

55 All the figures are inscribed in Latin as such.

56 More in: Taft 45-75, with further references.

57 Molly Teasdale Smith, “Development” 379-414, with references.

58 Schreckenberg and Schubert 215-7.

59 Moreover, St. Peter is in a way prefigured in Abraham, since he also wasthe one to leave the country to spread the Word of God (compare Gen. 14and Acts. 10).

60 Brandea referrs to the pieces of martyrs’ cloths.

61 St. Ambrose, Apologia Prophetae David (VI, 9) according to MollyTeasdale Smith, “Development” 379-414.

62 Especially Rev. 6:9 inspired St. Ambrose to make allusion to the altar ofthe eschaton proclaiming that the altar should be with the souls of the mar-tyrs placed beneath it. Molly Teasdale Smith, “Development” 379-414,with references.

63 It is important to note that by the sixth century Byzantine theologians werenot interested in the Eucharist as an autonomous celebration, but as anintegral part of liturgy. More in: Christopher Walter, Art and Ritual of theByzantine Church (London: Variorum Publications LTD, 1982) 180.

64 Schulz 154.

65 Schulz 14-20, 150-9.

66 The Eucharist is prefigured in the sacrificial ritual performed by the “Priestof God Most High,” Melchizedek, and later Abraham whom he gave thelaws of the High Priesthood (Gen. 14:18-20).

13

THE PROCLAMATION OF THE NEW COVENANT: THE PRE-ICONOCLASTIC ALTAR CIBORIA IN ROME AND CONSTANTINOPLE

sacrifices66to develop later into the image of the Last Supperas the paschal sacrifice of the unblemished Lamb of God.67

The celebration of Eucharist is indivisibly connected with thealtar so the placement of a permanent altar over the tomb ofthe martyr for memorial services for the dead introduced anew element, important for the later development of the Chris-tian church and its architecture.68By the early fifth centurythe altars were introduced at the venerated tombs that weresheltered by canopies as they had been from the time ofConstantine.69A canopy remained an architectural furnishingthat might shelter both the tomb and the altar, or only one ofthem.70Two canopies at S. Alessandro on the Via Nomentanain Rome are examples of the early fifth century canopies—one above the grave of the martyr Teodolus, and the otherabove the graves of martyrs Alexander and Eventius, with thealtar slab directly over the tomb of the two martyrs.71

By the sixth century translatio of the relics became apractice,72so that the relics of the martyrs could be placed be-neath the altar and ciborium far away from the actual site ofthe martyr’s tomb. The custom was initiated at Constantinoplewhere the bodies of some of the Apostles were moved to theChurch of the Holy Apostles.73Translatio of the relics mightbe also initiated by further development of the liturgical prac-tice. In the period between the sixth and ninth centuries, theliturgy underwent radical changes, evolving the symbolism ofthe funeral procession.74The setting of the Eucharist inConstantinople at the time of St. John Chrysostom was ar-ranged as a symbolic funeral procession prefigured in Christ’searthly life.75After the preparatory rites and enarxis,76 thebishop should enter the church with his attending clergythrough the central, royal doors leading through the narthexinto the nave reaching the sanctuary that occupied the semi-circular apse on the east. When the procession, led by candle-

light, incense, and a deacon carrying the Gospel Book reachedthe sanctuary, the Holy Scripture was placed on the altar asthe Word of God. After readings and sermons as the Liturgyof the Word, the Liturgy of the Faithful might begin. The en-try of bread of wine to the altar as the Great Entry or Entranceof the Mysteries in the procession represented symbols ofChrist’s going to His death. Their preparation on the altarsymbolized His dead body in the burial place, while the HolyCommunion symbolized His resurrection. The sacrament as asign of reality greater than itself made the liturgy God’s planfor salvation through a mystery when the participants “seeone thing and believe another.”77

The creation of a sanctuary also underwent changes fromthe sixth century on. After the Council in Trullo (692 CE) itwas

...not permitted to anyone among the laityto enter the sacred altar, with the exceptionthat the imperial power and authority is inno way or manner excluded therefrom when-ever it wishes to offer gifts to the creator, inaccordance with a certain most ancient tra-dition.78

The low, transparent chancel barriers divided the spaceof the Holy of Holies79accessible only to the priests from thearea reserved for the prayer of laity.80The entrances were inthe middle of the chancel barrier and if the sanctuary extendedbefore the apse two more entrances were on the north andsouth. The liturgy in the sanctuary could be seen by the laity,while being physically inaccessible to them. The altar wasrecognized as the symbol of the holy tomb of Christ and placeof His resurrection, a place where earthly and heavenly realmsmeet, where the Holy Spirit consecrates the bread and thewine.81The bejeweled holy table symbolized the place in the

67 Wybrew 17. The image of the Last Supper within anaphora in ByzantineLiturgy was especially emphasized during the eleventh century under in-fluence of Byzantine theologian Nicholas of Andida. It was also a periodwhen crucial shifts in liturgical interpretation evolved different visual rep-resentations connected with liturgical service, that could be seen predomi-nantly in Slavic Orthodox churches due to the preservation of the largepainted cycles in them. See: Wybrew 129-44, Walter passim.

68 Krautheimer 35.

69 Krautheimer 35.

70 The canopy at St. Peter’s shrine might have been the model for the hexago-nal canopy erected by order of Constantine the Great over the Tomb ofChrist at the Holy Sepulchre complex in Jerusalem. According to the pil-grim Etheria, in the 380s, the liturgy was celebrated on many occasions infront of the Holy Sepulchre, where the altar and Christ’s tomb were. MollyTeasdale Smith, “Development” 379-414, with references.

71 Molly Teasdale Smith, “Development” 379-414.

72 Martyr’s relics were not allowed to be removed from their final restingplace at the very beginning of Christianity. It is the practice of the sixthcentury, perhaps slightly earlier. St. John Chrysostom spoke of the highprophylactic value of the relics of saints, so the practice of their translationmight be connected also with “pragmatic” reasons. See: Walter 181-2, withreferences.

73 The earliest recorded translations of relics to Constantinople were those ofTimothy in 356 and of Andrew and Luke in 357, and deposited in thechurch of the Holy Apostles. Unfortunately, relics from the Holy Apostleswere destroyed under Crusaders in 1204. About the veneration of relics:Walter 156, with references.

74 About the liturgical evolutionary sequences of the procession, since thedevelopment is not quite clear, the most accurate: Taft 45-75, with furtherreferences.

75 Wybrew 47-66.

76 Wybrew 47-66, St. Germanus 16-23, Schulz 142-158.

77 Quotation of St. John Chrysostom’s words according to: Wybrew 47-66.

78 Quotation after Sharon E. J. Gerstel, Beholding the Sacred Mysteries. Pro-grams of the Byzantine Sanctuary (Seattle and London: U of WashingtonP, 1999) 6.

79 The chancel barrier in the Hagia Sophia was about waist-high. St. Germanus17.

80 Wybrew 47-66.

81 St. Germanus 61.

14

ATHANOR XX JELENA BOGDANOVI�

tomb of Christ where He was placed.The holy table is also the throne of God, onwhich, borne by the Cherubim, He restedHis body. At that table, at His mystical sup-per, Christ sat among His disciples and, tak-ing bread and wine, said to His disciples andapostles: “Take, eat, and drink of it: this ismy body and my blood” (Mt. 26:26-28).82

According to St. Germanus the domical ciborium re-mained in the eighth century the representation of the memo-ria and place where Christ was crucified, “for the two placesof burial and crucifixion in Jerusalem were near by.”83Havingall these evolution sequences in mind, it seems that by theeighth century, the liturgical furnishing, the rite, and the par-ticipants united to reveal both Christ’s earthly ministry andeschaton. Meeting of the earthly and heavenly in their dy-namic tension made the liturgy more than the mere ceremo-nial procession, but a prayer (since a prayer in a theologicalsense is a passage of human souls to eternal life). In this con-text, the altar ciboria evolved in time into the liturgical fur-nishing, distinct from the ciboria over the venerated tombs orreliquaries, with a complex meaning: the Golgotha, the Cru-cifixion, the Burial, and the Resurrection of Christ.

The sixth century archeological records fromConstantinople and Rome confirm the development of the al-tar ciboria. Constantinopolitan churches under Justinian suchas Hagios Polyeuktos (524-7) and Hagia Euphemia84are thetwo with archeological remains of the altar ciboria. There areabundant written references to the altar ciborium that onceexisted in Hagia Sophia (532-7). The original sanctuary fur-nishings, according to Procopios, Justinian’s court historian,were embellished with 40,000 lbs. of silver.85The altar itselfwas composed of gold trapeza, gold columns, and a gold base,ornamented with precious stones, and covered by a cloth withrich silk and gold embroidery. On the altar cloth, Christ wasrepresented standing between Ss. Peter and Paul, along with anumber of representations of divine miracles. Over the altarrose a silver ciborium. According to the images found in chro-nologically later miniatures, the four columns of the ciboriumwere spanned by the arches supporting an eight-sided pyra-midal roof with a silver orb surmounted by a cross.86One can

only imagine the light sparkling and reflecting from the goldmosaics and silver-decked furnishing, giving an impressionthat it originated from the inner light within the church edi-fice itself. The majestic space and decoration of the HagiaSophia, consistently adapted to the liturgy, created an impres-sion of “heaven on earth, the heavenly sanctuary...image ofthe cosmos, throne of the very glory of God.”87Later struc-tures of the post-iconoclastic age revealed this atmosphere inmosaic and fresco decoration, in accord with the more literalspirit. However, physical remains of the smaller Justinian’sfoundations extend the picture of richness and form of liturgi-cal furnishing. The glass-inlaid marble columns of the altarciborium of Hagios Polyeuktos, and of Hagia Euphemia arevery instructive examples (Figure 7). The ciborium in thechurch of Hagia Euphemia was massive, monolithic, with ashallow dome, and there is record that the relics of St.Euphemia were placed within a box-type altar with a confessio,directly beneath the altar table, into which one could put one’shand to touch the relics (Figure 8). This is an example of anew variation in the relationship of the relics deposited underthe altar since they were not buried in the crypt, as was com-mon for the period.88

In the West, from the sixth century on the development ofthe altar canopy can be followed through an example ofciborium in the church of St. Andrew the Apostle built underPope Symmachus (598-614). It is indicative that the ciborium(tiburium) of pure silver and a confessio89weighing 120 lbs.were jointly constructed and there is a legend that the body ofthe Apostle Andrew at the time was in Constantinople, andthat no relic of his was brought to Rome until the time ofGregory the Great.90This kind of a ciborium represents thenew trend in the use of altar canopy structures, since it intro-duced a “symbolic confession” which held no actual relic ofthe Apostle but which might have contained brandea fromhis tomb, representing his spiritual presence and potency. Insome cases, such as in the example of St. Martin of Tours inthe early sixth century, instead of brandea, ampoullae con-taining oil, which were available at the martyr’s tomb repre-sented a symbolic confession, sheltered jointly with the altarby silver ciborium.91

In the case of the St. Peter’s church, the raising platform

82 St. Germanus 59.

83 St. Germanus 59.

84 Hagia Euphemia was the fifth century secular triclinium converted into thechurch in the sixth century. Relics of St. Euphemia were translated fromChalcedon in the early seventh century and deposited in the church. Morein: Mathews Early Churches 61-7.

85 “And as for the treasure of this church-the [vessels of] gold and silver andprecious stones which the Emperor Justinian has dedicated here-it is im-possible to give an exact account of all of them. I shall allow my readers toform an estimate by means of a single example. That part of the churchwhich is especially sacred and accessible to priests only—it is called sanc-tuary—exhibits forty thousand pounds of silver.” Procopious, Buildings I,1, 65, 28-9.

86 Rowland J. Mainstone, Hagia Sophia. Architecture, Structure and Lit-urgy of Justinian’s Great Church (London: Thames and Hudson, 1988)222.

87 Taft 45-75, with further references.

88 The burying of the relics in the crypt in the churches of the period and in thearea of Constantinopolitan influence is recorded in cases of the churches ofSt. John in the Studios monastery (mid-fifth century), Chalkoprateia, andthe Hebdon, to name but a few. More in: Mathews Early Churches 67.

89 Confessio is the term for the resting place of martyrs as confessors of theFaith.

90 Gregory the Great probably brought the arm of St. Andrew. Molly TeasdaleSmith, “Development” 379-414, with references.

THE PROCLAMATION OF" TIIE NEW COVENANT'. 'l'HE PllE•lCONOCLASTIC ALTAR CIBORIA JN R0:'.\1E 1\.'l"D CONSTA:XTINOPLE

or 1he apse and Lhe area in rront or it, which incorporated the Aposlle's tomb. were radically re-arranged at the end of the sixlh century 10 lit both lin,rgical practice and 1hc purpose of veneration of Che relics (Figures 2. 9)."The altar with its ciborium oo four porphyry colulllJlS was placed over Che tomb," while Che six vinc•scroll columns from previous ciborium were moved to form an iconostasis-like screen across the fronl of the chancel.'' following the B)'7.autinc sanctuary furnishing employed earlier in Conscantinople. The Eucharist rite was done according to clerical and laily rank. The Pope received conunmtion himself in ltiscathedra in the apse (pre.5/Jyteri11m), and then che bishops and priests according to their dignity, approached the Pope from sanctuary lo receive from him the Euchariscic bread, while the archdeacon was distributing the Wine. The Communion for the laity was performed in the areas adjacent to the sa.nc1uary (senator ium and mafroueum).9s In fronc or chose spaces was lhe solea-schola which princi­pally figured as processional area. The whole linugical rite as it was rendered in Constancinople was a visual reprcscn1aiion or the idea that the Saviour comes to save us. Tiie veneration or relics was also very important and it was "reachable" to everyone. clergy or laity alike."

The veneration of the relics and objoc1s intimately asso­ciated with them before a shrine. a reliquary, or a Comb. re­main intense: very often they were placed for display on the ciborium-like s1n1ctures, located somewhere in ll1e chmch in­dependently of the altar space. The custom was espocially in•

.,

.,

.,

..

.,

..

.MollyTe-asd.1.le Smilh,, ·'.Development" 379-414.

Ward-J)crl-ms 469-89.

Ward-Perkins 469-89 .

About the suMving low c:hanoc I arrange1nmt in the ninth ccnlury churches see: lbom.'lS F. Mathews, ••An t'Srly Roman eb.aoccl arr:u,gcment and its lilurgic:il uses.·· Rrwsu, dr archelcgia crlslt{m(138 (1962): 73•95.

Jt is 1)()SSiblc. 1ha1 memben. of the rulingclsss and clergy might be able lo enter the shrine with the saint's: relic:s" hile the public mighl only come into the "prcscncc·· of the saint in froat of the shrine ns was a custom in Con~:intinople and 11,cs..-.aloniki. However, in common everyone could take the shrine •LS a proof of tlie regul:ir supem..11u~ J presence of the S:1int

15

lcnse in the Byzantine sphere." Before the eighth century the perception of che Eucharist was predornina111ly anagogically focused on ll1e contempla1ion of tl1e realities behind tl1e vis• ible realm. With 1he advent of Iconoclasm denying the possi­bility or any pictorial rendering of Chris!, and understanding the cult of icons and relics as idolatry. the Eucharist was pro­claimed as the only tn,e "icon•· orChrist.'"Thc commentaries or St. Gcrmanus re-evaluated and equilibrated the outer forms of the liturgy will, tl1e spiritual dimensions of the rite. More­over. tlie liturgy remained the memorial or Christ 's sacrifocc, including the accomplishment of the old Law. Ilic anticipa­tion ofll1e celestial liturgy.99 After the Iconoclastic controversy and the triumph of lconofiles, the realistic images and rcpre­scnl.ations of sacred mysteries were very often employed, re­placing the idealized, symbolical images from Che pre-lcono­claslic period. By 1he nintli and 1emh centuries, 1J1e pos1-lcono­clastic shift marked the entry of the linirgical ll1emes in the painting program of the apse and subsidiary chapels usually dedicated to the saints. Besides the actual altar ciborium as 11,e liturgical ftirnislting, paillled representations of ll1e altar ciborium within Eucharistic themes became very common by 1he eleventh cc111ury. Therefore, ll1e visual symbols of the Old Covenant remained llie essential elements in lite proclama• tion of the New Covenant during the Middle Ages.

,. ,.

V.inderbilt Universily

in tbc city. More about the ditfcrcnl levels of being in .. touch .. with the s.tinl's: relics St<": Robin Corm.1ck. ··The ~laking of :i P:itron Saint: n,e Powers of Art ;1nd Ritual in Byzantine Thessaloniki. ·• Themes o/Vnicy m D11ie.rmy. Act.r ofrhe XXJI/Jh h1terna11onal Congress of the Hutory of Art. ed. Irvin Lavin (1986): ;47.;;.

With the exception of the relics of l)cmctrios which were deposed in the shrine under tl,eciborium in lhe St [)emetrios church in 11leSS31oniki, and of Nicholas which ~ maincd in ~,!yr.a until they \\ere taken to Bari and deposed in the church ciborium of St. Nicholas in Bari, all import.ant relics of the E.1.Stern s.,ints were 1r:msl:ited 10 Constantinople. Walter 145, \\ith references. About the silver ciboriunt for St Den>ee.rios cult see: Comuck 547-55.

SI. Germanus 48-52.

St. Germam,1 48-52.

ATHANOR XX JELENA BOGDANOVI�

16

[above] Figure 1. Pola casket, front panel, ivory, 5th century, GabinetoFotografico Nazionale, Rome. Reprinted with the permission of YaleUniversity Press.

[right] Figure 2. St. Peter’s Shrine, Reconstruction drawing of the 5th centuryshrine, reproduced from J.B. Ward-Perkins, Studies in Roman and EarlyChristian Architecture (Pindar Press, 1994).

.---/ _,,~- -- .. _I;--~------... _ .I I I ' . I

I f

THE PROCLAMATION OF THE ?-."Elf' COVEN.4.'vT: ,.HE PRE-ICONOCLASTIC ALTAR CffiORIA lN ROME AND CO>JSTA:XflKOPL.E

Figur.: 4. V~se from 1he 1omb of Blue Gia$$ V~se. gl3.S$. c. 79. Pompeii. Reproduced from August ri.lau,Pompe11-/tsUfso11dArt. lrans. Francis W. Ktlsey(XfacMill~nComJ)any, 1902).

figure 3. 1\, isied Column,. St. Peter's Shrine., c. ~ centUI')'. ~cproduccd from J.B. Ward-P1..'fl.ins. Studies m Rom1m and Eart,, Chrwum Arch11ect11re (Pincb.r Press, 1994). Phoco: San.,;ianL

17

ATHANOR XX JELENA BOGDANOVI�

18

Figure 5. Drawing of the fresco over Torah niche, c. 256, Dura Europossynagogue. Reproduced with permission of Dumbarton Oaks fromWeitzmann and Kessler, The Frescoes of Dura Synagogue andChristian Art (Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C., 1990).

Figure 6. Ashburnham Pentateuch, M.S.nouv.acq.lat. 2334 fol 76 recto, late 6th or 7th

century, probably Italy. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale. Reprinted with permission ofYale University Press.

Figure 7. Inlaid column, 6th century, Hagia Euphemia, IstanbulArchaeological Museum, no. 5078. Reproduced with the kindpermission of Professor Thomas Mathews.

~

•

ii .,. •

:~ ~'. li ' ~- •

•• • ► ' • . ' ' ~ • . ; t♦'

. ' \ \' ' . ' '

j .... l I

,, ' 'h -

• "

. - " V •

19

THE PROCLAMATION OF THE NEW COVENANT: THE PRE-ICONOCLASTIC ALTAR CIBORIA IN ROME AND CONSTANTINOPLE

[above] Figure 8. Hagia Euphemia, Reconstruction of sanctuaryfurnishings. Nauman & Belting, Die Euphemia-Kirche. Reproduced withpermission from Thomas F. Mathews, Early Churches of Constantinople(Pennsylvania State UP, 1971).

[right] Figure 9. St. Peter’s Shrine, Reconstruction drawing of the 7th

century shrine. Reproduced from J.B. Ward-Perkins, Studies in Roman andEarly Christian Architecture (Pindar Press, 1994).