Deir al-Surian (Egypt): New Discoveries of 2001-2002. I. Wall PaintingsII. Syriac Texts
Karel C.
Innemée
Lucas
van Rompay
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute
George A. Kiraz
James E. Walters
TEI XML encoding by
html2TEI.xsl
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute
2002
Vol. 5, No. 2
For this publication, a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
license has been granted by the author(s), who retain full
copyright.
https://hugoye.bethmardutho.org/article/hv5n2innemeevanrompay
Karel C. INNEMÉE and Lucas VAN ROMPAY
Karel C. Innemée
Lucas Van Rompay
Deir al-Surian (Egypt): New Discoveries of 2001-2002. I. Wall PaintingsII. Syriac Texts
https://hugoye.bethmardutho.org/pdf/vol5/HV5N2InnemeeVanRompay.pdf
Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute, 2002
vol 5
issue 2
Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies is an electronic journal dedicated to the study
of the Syriac tradition, published semi-annually (in January and July) by Beth
Mardutho: The Syriac Institute. Published since 1998, Hugoye seeks to offer the
best scholarship available in the field of Syriac studies.
Syriac Studies
Deir al-Surian
Monastery of the Syrians
wall-paintings
iconography
Syriac inscriptions
File created by XSLT transformation of original HTML encoded article.
kcinnemee@let.leidenuniv.nl
University of Leiden
Faculty of Arts
P.O. Box 9515, 2300 RA Leiden
The Netherlands
&
rompay@duke.edu
Duke University
Department of Religion, Box 90964
Durham, NC 27708-0964
U.S.A.
In the period October 2001-January 2002 conservation work
and research continued in the church of the Holy Virgin in Deir
al-Surian (Wadi al-Natrun, Egypt).
For reports on earlier campaigns see Hugoye
(July 1998),
(July 1999),
(July 2000),
and (July
2001).
As in previous seasons,
eighteenth-century plaster was removed from a number of walls,
revealing mural paintings and inscriptions. The first part of
this report will be devoted to the description of the
wall-paintings and to some observations on the architecture of
the church. In the second part the new Syriac texts will
briefly be presented.
[1] During
the recent campaign a number of paintings and inscriptions were
uncovered belonging to what we call now layers 2 and 3 of the
stratigraphy of mural paintings. Layer 2 is supposed to belong
to the period before the arrival of the first Syrian monks
(most probably around 800 A.D.), while layer 3 has clear
symptoms of Syrian influence or authorship.
[2] During
this campaign work was carried out in the khurus, the
part of a Coptic church that corresponds more or less to the
transept in western church architecture. Within this part of
the church, the focus was on the northern part of the
khurus and on the upper part of its eastern wall, just
under the dome (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1. Plan of the church (after Peter Grossmann) with
position of paintings:
Pisentios and Apakir
Patriarch (Damianos?)
Luke and Barnabas
Apollo
Eastern wall with Abgar, Constantine and
Dormition-sequence.
1. Paintings on layer 2.
[3] The
paintings on the northern wall of the khurus have a
layout that corresponds to that of the previously treated
southern wall: a lower zone with dado-decoration, imitating
columns and marble inlay work. Over this 2 metre high zone
there is a level with two blocked windows. Flanking these
windows there are three panels of mural-painting. Over this
level there is a painted half-dome, now showing the scene of
the Dormition of the Virgin, belonging to the fourth layer of
painting (13th century). Apart from the dado, which
has been done in tempera, all the other paintings on layer 2
uncovered now, have been executed in the encaustic
technique.
1.1. Dado-decoration.
[4] As in
the southern khurus, the lower part of the walls in
the northern khurus is decorated with a painted
pattern of columns, imitation of marble inlay and an architrave
covered with a red-and-white pattern of triangles. This dado
continues on the western wall, which has no figurative
paintings on the higher parts of the wall. After layer 1
(mostly crosses in red ochre) had been whitewashed over, this
dado-decoration must have been one of the first parts of the
new and more monumental decoration. After that the half-dome
was painted, judging from the drops of paint that have fallen
down and that were found under the painting in between.
1.2. Pisentios and Apakir (Fig. 2).
[5] On the
left part of the northern wall saints Pisentios and Apakir are
represented. Their identity can be established by the
inscriptions on either side of their heads and by their
attributes.
Fig. 2. Pisentios and Apakir, northern wall
of the khurus, layer 2.
[6] The left
saint is dressed as a bishop, wearing an omophorion with both
ends in front. The inscription on either side of his head is
still well legible. ABB[...]ICENTI is written left of his head,
right of his head TCINTI. This must be St. Pisentios,
whose name is followed by his epitheton ornans (TCINTI
means "the foundation"; it also is the name of the community
close to Deir al-Bahari, where he lived). He was born around
568 and consecrated as bishop of Koptos in 598.
[7] Left of
the other saint there is the inscription O
AGIOC, right the letters APAK[..]. He carries the attributes of a doctor, a
medicine box and a scalpel, similar to those of Cosmas and
Damian on the opposite side of the church. This must be St.
Apakir, a martyr from the time of Diocletian who had a
reputation as a doctor.
1.3. "Damianos" (Fig. 3).
[8] In the
middle of the northern wall there is painting representing a
standing bishop or patriarch. He has a youthful face with a
short dark beard. He is dressed in full episcopal garments and
holds a book in front of him with both hands. A red cloth is
draped over his hands. On either sides of the person there are
representations of architecture. On the left a tower-like
structure that may be a church; a ladder is standing against
it, giving access to the first floor. On the right there is a
walled building with a gate. It is not yet clear what the
nature and the meaning of these buildings are. The
identification of the person poses some problems, too. Next to
his head there is the barely legible inscription O
AGIOC [......]ANOC. The way he
holds the book in front of him, a red cloth on his hands,
reminds of the icon of St. Mark (6th-7th
cent.), now in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris
[Grabar 1980, fig 186]. Judging from his dress, which is more
elaborate than that of a normal bishop, and from his youthful
appearance, he may be Damianos, 35th patriarch
of Alexandria (578-605), who was consecrated at a rather young
age [Evetts 1904, 473-478]. There may also be a connection with
the painting of St. Pisentios, who was consecrated by Damianos.
Furthermore we know that Damianos was a monk in Wadi al-Natrun
before becoming a patriarch. He was of Syrian origin, but
considering the likelihood that this painting was done prior to
the arrival of the first Syrian monks, this should most
probably not be counted as a reason to depict him here.
Fig. 3. Patriarch (Damianos?), northern wall
of the khurus, layer 2.
1.4. Luke and Barnabas (Fig. 4).
[9] The
panel to the right has the representations of St. Luke and St.
Barnabas. To the left is St. Luke, identified by the
inscription O AGI[..] LOUKAC. Next to
him is Barnabas with the inscription O AGIOC [....]ABAC. In contrast to the other
paintings, the figures are represented in a framework of two
arches, separated by a column. Also in other respects this
painting is different from the others on the northern wall: the
painting has been done on a black background with a thick layer
of encaustic paint, while the others have a thinner layer of
paint on a white ground. The arches, the deep red of the dress
of St. Luke, and the triple dots as an ornament on it
have a very close parallel in the paintings in the
haikal of Benjamin in the neighbouring monastery of
St. Macarius, especially in the painting of St. John the
Baptist [Leroy 1982, pl. 5]. The similarity is so striking that
it might be presumed that both paintings have been done by the
same artist. The so-called church of patriarch Benjamin was
consecrated by Benjamin himself in 655, but there is no
certainty concerning the date of the paintings. Leroy is not
explicit on this issue. A closer investigation of the paintings
and their stratigraphical context in the monastery of St.
Macarius would, therefore, probably be useful for a more
precise dating of the paintings in Deir al-Surian.
Fig. 4. Luke and Barnabas, northern wall of
the khurus, layer 2.
1.5. Abba Apollo (Fig. 5).
[10] On
the attached half-column on the western wall of the northern
khurus a painting has been uncovered that seems to be
a counterpart to the standing monk on the column in the
southern khurus. It shows a standing monk in a red
tunic and a light-blue cloak. Although the painting is
heavily damaged it is clear that the characteristics of his
costume are those of Upper Egypt. On his shoulders he wears a
black hood that has been drawn back. In his right hand he holds
a staff diagonally in front of him. Below his waist there is a
diagonal line that may be the remainder of a rahtou,
the leather apron of Pachomian monks. At the left side of his
head there is the inscription ABB[.] ΑΠOΛO, at
the other side a remarkably large star has been painted on the
blue of the background. The meaning of this detail is unclear
so far. It should be a representation of Apollo, the father who
founded the monastery in Bawit at the end of the fourth
century. He is clearly meant as a counterpart for the painting
of the monk on the other side of the khurus, who is
not identified by any inscription, but who is dressed in the
Lower Egyptian costume.
Fig. 5. Apollo of Bawit, column on the
western wall of the northern khurus, layer 2.
1.6. The northern half-dome.
[11] The
13th century painting of the Dormition of the Virgin
(layer 4) in the northern half-dome is in a critical condition.
In many places the painted plaster has detached itself from the
underlying surface, an earlier painting belonging to layer 2.
This earlier painting is also in a bad condition, due to the
fact that the masonry of the half-dome has deep cracks. In the
near future these two layers will have to be separated in order
to save as much of them as possible. In the past season
provisional measures have been taken to avoid further
deterioration. During this work parts of the lower edge of the
older painting became visible. On the right side a pair of feet
and three sheep appeared, on the left an inscription reading
MELXIOP. This can hardly mean anything else than that the
painting depicts the Nativity. This is a confirmation of the
hypothesis that the Annunciation, discovered in 1991 in the
western half-dome, is the first scene of a christological cycle
[Innemée 1995]. Reading these scenes clockwise, one
would expect a painting of the Ascension in the east, the place
where we find now the domed square sanctuary, constructed in
the time of Moses of Nisibis. There are, however reasons
to believe that originally the church had an apse, similar in
construction to the northern and western endings of the
khurus. This would have been a most suitable place for
an Ascension in an early Coptic church (compare the first layer
in the tri-conch sanctuary of the Red Monastery in Sohag). At
the same time it is the before-last theme in the classical
early-Christian christological cycles. That would leave the
theme of Pentecost for the last half-dome, the one in the
southern khurus. This half-dome now shows the
Annunciation and the Nativity, the beginning of the
13th-century cycle. This cycle originally had the
Ascension in the western half-dome as its third scene and ended
with the Dormition of the Virgin in the northern half-dome.
2. Paintings on layer 3.
[12]
Layer 3 was first encountered in 1999, when the upper walls of
the khurus were investigated. This layer does not
cover the entire surface of the interior of the church, but
only the square zone under the dome over the khurus.
So far these paintings have been dated to the beginning of the
10th century. This is partially based on the Coptic
inscription running around the dome. In this text, not yet
completely uncovered, a certain Moses, who is called
hegoumenos and oikonomos, is mentioned,
possibly as one of the commissioners of the paintings, and it
is not to be excluded that he is to be identified with Moses of
Nisibis.
2.1. Constantine and Abgar (Fig. 6, 7, and
8).
[13]
After removal of 18th-century plaster from the upper
eastern wall a row of three blocked windows appeared,
corresponding to the windows in the southern and northern wall.
Between these windows two paintings were uncovered, belonging
to layer 3. Because of the bad state of preservation the
identification was uncertain initially, but after the discovery
of Syriac inscriptions underneath this problem could be
solved.
For the Syriac texts, see the second part of this
report.
The right painting shows the remains of a person
on horseback. The horse is black with a pattern of white spots
or decorative shaving. Of the rider almost nothing is left. The
upper part of the frame shows an overlapping fragment of a
lance, from which we can deduce that the rider is a warrior. In
the sky over the head of the rider there is a half-circle with
stars and a decorated cross inside, from which rays are
radiating (Fig. 7). The Syriac text underneath reads: "The
king, when he saw the sign [of] the cross [in h]eaven, believed
in Ch[rist]" (see text 1.1 in the second part of this report).
This is a clear allusion to the vision of Constantine.
Fig. 6. Constantine on horseback, eastern
wall of the khurus, layer 3.
Fig. 7. The cross in the sky, appearing to
Constantine, eastern wall of the khurus, layer
3.
[14] The
space between the middle and the left windows was filled with a
painting of which only a fragment of a figure holding a piece
of cloth is left. On this piece of cloth a part of a haloed
head is visible. These iconographical indications point already
in the direction of Abgar, and the inscription under the
painting confirm this. It reads: "...and he sent him the image"
(see § 1.2 in the second part of this report).
Fig. 8. Abgar of Edessa, holding the
mandylion, eastern wall of the khurus, layer
3.
[15] The
paintings of Abgar and Constantine clearly fit into an
iconographical context. On the southern wall the conversion of
the chamberlain of the Candace by St. Philip and St. Andrew
converting and baptising the dog-headed cannibals are
represented [Innemée 1998]. On the northern wall an
inscription indicates that Gregory the Illuminator had been
represented here. In other words, the paintings in this part of
the church have as a common theme the conversion of the foreign
peoples. Abgar and Constantine take prominent places on the
eastern wall as the first Syrian king and the first Roman
emperor to embrace Christianity. It can also be seen as a
Syrian statement, showing Abgar at an equal level with
Constantine.
[16] The
dating of these paintings is an interesting, but not yet
completely solved question. As mentioned above, the text around
the dome, associated with the “conversion
paintings” could point toMoses of Nisibis. The two other
persons mentioned in the text are a certain Ahron and a deacon
Johannes. So far these two persons have not yet been further
identified. The paintings of Abgar and Constantine on the upper
eastern wall have been carefully made between the three windows
that were blocked when the dome over the haikal was
constructed. This suggests that the windows were still open
when the paintings were made and that the paintings, therefore,
antedate the rebuilding of the haikal. The next
question then is when the rebuilding took place. So far it was
commonly assumed that the construction of the haikal
doors in 913/14 (Evelyn White 1932, 337) was directly linked to
the rebuilding of the haikal. However, investigation
into the plaster behind these doors and the stucco of the
doorjambs, in June 2002, has shown no direct evidence for
linking the construction of these doors to the rebuilding of
the haikal. The date of 913/14 should not be used,
therefore, as the terminus ad quem, neither for the
haikal in its present shape (which may be of a later
date), nor for the “conversion paintings”. The
first known representation so far of Abgar is the icon in St.
Catherine's monastery, dated after 945, the year that the
mandylion was transferred to Constantinople [Weitzmann
1960]. The fact that this painting of Abgar was apparently made
at the order of Syrian monks, suggests that at that time the
mandylion was still in Syrian hands. Although these
are mere indications and no hard proofs, a dating to the
beginning of the 10th century seems tempting.
2.2. Dormition, Assumption and glory of the
Virgin (Fig. 9, 10, and 11)
[17] Just
under the level of the paintings of Abgar and Constantine there
are important remains of a sequence of paintings representing
the events surrounding the death of the Virgin Mary. This
series of representations must have been painted later, though
probably not much later. This can be deduced from the slight
overlap of these paintings with the higher paintings of
Constantine and Abgar. The thin layer of plaster that was
applied for these paintings was still clean enough to add the
Dormition sequence, but it had already some cracks. This
suggests an interval of a few decades at most between both sets
of paintings. Although they were made in a period that the
population of the monastery had a significant Syrian component,
we find only Coptic inscriptions accompanying the several
scenes.
Fig. 9. Position of the Dormition, Abgar and
Constantine (Model: Allard Pierson Museum,
Amsterdam).
[18] At
the far left there is a representation of the Dormition. The
Virgin lies on a bed, surrounded by the twelve apostles, who
are seated in two rows on either side of the bed. They are not
individually identified, but both groups of six have the
explanatory text NI APOCTOLO[.]. Apart from these persons there are six
women, three on either side, who are swinging censers. This is
a rather remarkable detail, since the handling of censers is
traditionally a male activity in the orthodox churches. The
Coptic inscription in the painting calls the six women NI
PAPQEN[..],
“virgins”, without any specific names. Behind the
bed a large winged figure stands, most probably to be
identified as the archangel Michael, who is by tradition the
psychopompos, the one accompanying the souls of the
dead to the hereafter. The only remains of his name are the
letters […..]HL. He is standing,
his hands stretched out in a gesture as if he is expecting to
receive the soul of the Virgin. Also this detail is unusual; in
all known representations of the subject Christ is taking this
position.
Fig. 10. Dormition of the Virgin, eastern
wall of the khurus, layer 3.
Fig. 11. Dormition of the Virgin, eastern
wall of the khurus, mourning apostles, layer 3.
[19] To
the right there has been a scene that is now almost completely
missing. The only part that survives of the representation is a
group of men at the far right, looking up with expressions of
amazement. At the top of the edge there is fragment of a Coptic
inscription reading: PCwMA NTI, "the body
of ...". This is a strong indication that the now missing scene
represented the assumption of the body of the Virgin.
[20] The
oldest representations of the Dormition are post-iconoclastic,
the earliest dated examples are from the 10th
century [Myslivec 1972].
[21] The
centre of the sequence is taken by a representation of Christ
and the Virgin, sitting side by side on a throne. He holds her
left hand by the wrist and raises it as if in a gesture of
triumph. At the left side of the head of the Virgin there is a
representation of the sun, while the moon can be seen right of
the head of Christ. This scene can be understood as a
representation of the reunification of the body and soul of the
Virgin in heaven and of her reception by Christ. Also this
representation is quite exceptional. There seems to be no
direct parallel known for it so far. A throne shared by two or
more deities or emperors is known from earlier periods. A
late-antique example of such a representation, where also sun
and moon are flanking the throne, is the miniature from the
Vergilius Vaticanus, showing Jupiter and other deities on a
throne [Grabar 1980, fig. 210].
2.3. The dome: the three Hebrews in the fiery
furnace (Fig. 12).
[22] The
paintings in the dome over the khurus are in a very
bad state of preservation. Very few fragments have been
uncovered so far. The only fragment that could be identified
shows a part of a winged figure, holding a staff in the
direction of flames. The most likely identification for this
fragment is the episode from the Book of Daniel of the three
men in the fiery furnace. Further to the right there is a
fragment of what seems to be the leg of a throne. This might be
the throne of king Nebuchadnezzar. If this is the case and if
there would indeed have been a sequence from the book of Daniel
in the dome, this would also be a quite unusual phenomenon. Old
Testament scenes in the eastern part of the church with a
typological meaning, especially in relationship to the
Eucharist, are quite common in Egypt, but in a dome one would
rather expect a New Testament subject.
Fig. 12. Remains of the angel protecting the
three men in the furnace, dome over the khurus, layer
3.
3. Layer 4: Rearrangement of the iconographical
themes?
[23] So
far we have little evidence from layer 4 of the paintings,
apart from the three half-domes that have never been plastered
over. This is mostly due to the fact that before replastering
the walls at the end of the 18th century, most of
the loose plaster from previous centuries was removed. At that
moment the 13th century paintings of layer 4 were
the top layer and therefore the most vulnerable. But in spite
of the relatively small number of remains of the most recent
layer of paintings, we get the impression that there must have
been a certain system in the redecoration of the interior. The
cycle of Annunciation, Nativity, Ascension (and Pentecost?) was
at least partially repeated in the three remaining half-domes.
The Dormition was chosen as the last theme, originally an
addition on layer 3, but now given the monumental size of a
painting in one of the half-domes. This must have been a
deliberate choice to underline the position of the Virgin as
the saint to whom the church is dedicated. Mounted saints,
painted on layer 2 in the khurus, have been repeated
on the walls of the southern aisle. The story of the Three
Hebrews in the furnace, painted in the dome on layer 3,
returned in a somewhat more modest position on the same wall in
the southern aisle, be it in an equally monumental size.
Unfortunately we have almost no traces of paintings from layer
4 in the khurus, but future discoveries in the nave
might shed more light on the iconographical programme of layer
4.
4. Observations concerning the architecture.
[24] As
mentioned above, a number of walled-up windows were found. Two
windows were found in the northern wall of the khurus,
corresponding to similar windows in the southern wall. As in
the case of the southern wall, there is no evidence that these
windows were blocked from the inside before the 13th
century. They had lost their function already when the chapel
of the forty-nine martyrs was built, probably in the
10th century.
[25]
Similarly, on the upper eastern wall three blocked windows were
found, corresponding to the windows on the northern and
southern wall. These windows lost their function after the
remodelling of the haikal, but it was not until the
13th century that they were finally walled up and
plastered over.
[26] On
ground-floor level, developments in the shape of the doorway
leading into the northern haikal could be studied
after the removal of 18th century plaster from the
wall in the north-eastern corner of the khurus.
Originally, in the 7th-century situation, there has
been a rectangular doorway leading into the northern room,
which must have had a pastoforion at that time. The
position of this door was moved to the centre and the shape of
the doorway was changed into an arched entrance of about 1.50
m. wide. At the inside this arch was lined with decorative
polychromed woodwork. Judging from the plaster and
painting around this door, its reshaping must have been done
before the paintings of layer 2 were made.
[27]
Recent work in the Church of the Virgin by the team of
art-historians and conservators under the direction of Karel
Innemée has produced a number of new Syriac texts. A
brief survey of the texts, diverse in nature and in time of
origin, will be given here. First, I will discuss the texts
that have come to light on the eastern wall of the
khurus (1). This will be followed by some notes on the
graffiti found near the entrance to the haikal (2) and
finally I will describe a piece of parchment that was found in
one of the walls (3).
1. Inscriptions on the eastern wall of the
khurus.
[28] The
texts uncovered in this part of the church are not the remains
of independent inscriptions, of the type of which several have
been found in the past years in the nave. The new texts rather
accompany the wall paintings, for which they serve as
explanation and commentary. Along with the paintings, they
probably were painted with a brush.
[29] The
very imperfectly preserved paintings belong to the upper zone
of painting on the eastern wall. The themes that are
represented here have been identified by Karel Innemée
as the conversion of Constantine (right) and the conversion of
Abgar (left). These identifications are partly based on the
evidence of the texts [see Karel Innemée, above, 2.1].
Text and representation should indeed be studied together.
1.1. Text related to Constantine (Fig. 1 and
2).
Fig. 1. Text related to Constantine - first
part.
Fig. 2. Text related to Constantine - second
part.
[30]
Painted in black against a red background, the following words
can be read:
“The king, when he saw the sign [of] the cross [in
h]eaven, believed in Ch[rist].”
[31] The
text is carefully written in a beautiful estrangelo and
even includes two diacritical points, one on top of the first
word (“king”), the second below the first letter of
the verbal form (“he saw”), marking the form as a
third person perfect. The writing direction is horizontal, from
right to left. Figures 1 and 2 show the initial and final part
of the text respectively; a tiny portion in the middle cannot
be seen on the photographs.
[32]
Preceding the first word, part of a letter or a decoration in
the shape of a circle can be seen. If it is a letter, it can be
semkat (the end of Constantine’s name?) or
alternatively waw or hê.
[33] Due
to damage, the text is incomplete in four places (indicated by
square brackets in the above transcription). In the first
two places, only one letter is missing. The third lacuna is
slightly larger. I propose the reading:
[ba-š]mayyo, [in h]eaven”. The
reading [men š]mayyo, “[from
h]eaven” would also be possible. Before the last lacuna,
parts of what is probably a shin can be seen. This seems
to point to the reading ba-Mšiho “in
Christ”.
[34] In
the above translation, the waw preceding the second
verbal form is interpreted as a waw of the apodosis and
therefore left untranslated. If the preserved text were part of
a longer sentence (a possibility that cannot be ruled out), a
different interpretation might impose itself
[35]
Among the main characteristics of the writing style are the
closed form of the first mim (the two other occurrences
of mim are less clear), the thick ending (or
“shoe”) of the lower right-hand stroke of the
non-connected olaf, and the rather large
hê. In general, the writing style is close to what
is found in tenth and early-eleventh century manuscripts, e.g.,
Hatch, Plates 72 (928/929), 73 (935/936), 76 (994), and 78
(1007). The somewhat reclining position of olaf and
taw might betray the scribe’s natural preference
for a vertical rather than a horizontal writing direction.
[36] The
Syriac sentence most likely refers to the emperor Constantine.
It summarizes the dramatic event that took place during the
battle of the Milvian bridge, when a cross appeared to the
emperor and brought about his conversion. The main report of
Constantine’s conversion is found in Eusebius of
Caesarea’s Life of Constantine, which probably
once existed in Syriac, even though it has not been preserved
[Baumstark 1922, 59]. A summary of the conversion narrative is
included in the so-called Chronicle to the year 1234,
which is based on much earlier sources. Here the wording is
very similar to that of the new inscription: …
’oto d-(’)ethazyat ba-šmayyo ba-dmut
slibo, “… the sign which appeared in
heaven in the likeness of the cross” [Chabot 1920,
139, line 14, see also line 17 – translation in Chabot
1937, 110-111]. This similarity is further evidence that the
isolated Syriac sentence should indeed be interpreted as
referring to Constantine’s conversion.
1.2. Text related to Abgar (Fig. 3).
Fig. 3. Text related to Abgar.
[37] Here
again, the text is painted in black against a reddish
background, from right to left. The following words can be
read:
“And he sent him the image.”
Rather than completing the text with a final olaf,
one might also think of hê, which would be a
possessive suffix: “his image”.
[38] This
estrangelo text is written less carefully than the
preceding one and most likely by a different hand. The
dolat and rish as well as the open waw may
perhaps point to a tenth-century date. Compare, e.g., Hatch,
Plates 72 (928/929) and 76 (994). With so little evidence,
however, it is very difficult to assign a date with any degree
of confidence.
[39] The
most likely interpretation of the three Syriac words seems to
be that Jesus sent the/his image to Abgar, the king of Edessa.
However, this interpretation and the terms that are used do not
match the earliest Syriac form of the Abgar story, as found in
the Teaching of Addai. Here it is Hanan, the royal
painter, who on his own initiative produced the image and
brought it to Abgar. There is no question of Jesus’
sending it to Abgar. Moreover, the term used is
salmo, rather than yuqno (based on the
Greek eikôn), the word used in the new
inscription.
[40] It
should be noted that from the seventh or eighth century onwards
the story of Christ’s image assumed a new shape and a new
prominence in Syriac Christianity. Christ’s portrait now
became a miraculous image and started playing a more important
role in the narrative of the conversion to Christianity of
Abgar and the Edessene population. Hanan’s role was
downplayed and Christ became the sole protagonist, who
miraculously produced the image and sent it to Abgar. In this
new phase in the life of the story, the term yuqno was
used and replaced the earlier salmo. The earliest
clear evidence for the story in its new form may be found in
the Chronicle of Dionysius of Tel-Mahrê (d. 845), or
perhaps in the work of Theophilus of Edessa (d. 785), one of
Dionysius’s sources for this part of his Chronicle. A few
decades earlier, probably between 720 and 737, similar language
of Christ’s sending his yuqno to Abgar was used in
a dispute between an East-Syrian monk and a Muslim [cf.
Drijvers 1998, 23 and 27, with further references]. Whatever
the precise date of this new development may be, it is this
later form of the Abgar story that is reflected in our Syriac
inscription.
2. Graffiti near the entrance to the
haikal.
[41]
During the work carried out on the east wall of the
khurus, remains of inscriptions were found on the
half-column left of the entrance to the haikal. We seem
to be dealing with graffiti-like inscriptions left by visitors.
Similar texts can be found at several other places in the
church [Van Rompay 1999, 41-43]. They often contain the name of
the writer, a reference to his sinful condition, and a
supplication for mercy or a request to the reader to pray on
his behalf. Although on the column there are traces of several
inscriptions, three of them, providing a couple of words,
deserve to be singled out. They are all written in black; the
writing direction is vertical, from top to bottom. They are at
a height of ca. 1.40 m. It is very difficult to assign a date
to graffiti, which often are written in an informal style. The
estrangelo text (2.3) might possibly date back to the
tenth or eleventh century.
2.1. The inscription of Saliba (Fig. 4).
Fig. 4. Two serto
inscriptions.
[42] This
serto inscription seems to have been in two lines. The
following words can be read:
“Saliba, the sinner
G[o]d, [have mercy …?]”
The word beginning with het might very
well be an imperative of the verb han
(hnn / hwn) “to have
mercy”.
2.2. A second serto inscription (Fig.
4).
[43]
Another inscription begins just under the Saliba inscription. A
cross marks its beginning:
“God [have mercy and give ear to?] the prayers of
the saint[s?]. Amen.”
2.3. An estrangelo inscription (Fig.
5).
Fig. 5. Estrangelo
inscriptions.
[44] A
beautifully executed estrangelo inscription may
originally have occupied three lines on the column. Only scanty
parts can now be read (the reading of underlined letters is
highly uncertain).
“ ... and humble one
... this ...
... prayer ...”
The first part of the inscription in all likelihood
contained the name of the writer.
3. A fragment from the Gospel of John (Fig. 6 and
7).
[45]
During conservation work in the northern part of the
khurus, a few pieces of parchment were found in the
wall. The exact location was an earlier window in the northern
wall, which after the building of the adjacent chapel of the
forty-nine martyrs had lost its function. It had, therefore,
been sealed up and covered with plaster, probably in the
thirteenth century (see the first part of this report, under
4). In this process, shards of pottery and other rubble were
deposited in the empty space. The fragments were among these
materials.
Fig. 6. Fragment from the Gospel of John -
recto.
Fig. 7. Fragment from the Gospel of John -
verso.
[46] The
smaller pieces of parchment have hardly any traces of writing
and do not lend themselves to further study. A larger fragment,
measuring on its longest side 11 x 11 cm, is more interesting.
It is inscribed on both sides and the text can be identified as
belonging to the end of the first chapter of the Gospel of
John. This identification also allows us to distinguish between
the recto and verso sides. We may be dealing with a fragment of
a manuscript that contained the four Gospels in the Peshitta
version. Except for the orthography of the name
“Israel” in John 1:47, the text is identical to the
main text of Gwilliam’s edition [Gwilliam 1901]. In the
following transcription, the missing parts are added from
Gwilliam’s edition and placed between square
brackets.
Recto:
“(John 1:41) … we have found Christ. (42) And
he brought him to Jesus. And J[esus] looked at him [and said:
You] are Simon, the s[on of Jona, you] will be called
[Cephas. (43) And the next day,] Jesus wanted [to go out to
Galilee and he found] Philip and s[aid to him: Come after
me.] (44) Now Phi[lip …]”
Verso:
“(John 1:47) [… Trul]y a son of Is[r]ael, [in
whom there is no guile. (48) Nathaniel] said to him: [From
where do you] know [me? Jesus said to him:] Before [Philip
called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you. (49)
Na]th[aniel answered ...]
[47] On
the verso side, the ink has become extremely faint and very
little can be read. If my identification of the second section
is correct, we must assume that the first section of text is
from the upper part of the recto side and the second section
from the upper part of the verso side. Around fifty words are
missing between the end of the first and the beginning of the
second section. These may have filled ten, eleven, or twelve
lines.
[48]
Although we cannot completely rule out the possibility that the
manuscript originally was in two columns (the first section
belonging to the left-hand column of the recto side and the
second section belonging to the right-hand column of the verso
side), it is much more likely that we are dealing with a small
manuscript written in one column.
[49] As a
matter of fact, a close parallel for this layout can be found
in ms. British Library, Add. 17,116, containing the Gospels of
Mathew and Mark and dated by Wright to the sixth century
[Wright I, 65a]. It measures 22.25 x 14 cm and has 18 to 26
lines on each page. There is an average of 80 words on a page,
exactly the number which once was on the page from which our
fragment comes. The same layout is found, e.g., in ms. British
Library, Add. 14,429, containing the Books of Samuel and Kings
in the version of Jacob of Edessa [Wright I, 37b-39a and a
facsimile in Wright III, Pl. VII]. For this manuscript, datable
to the early eighth century, the dimensions are 26.5 x 16.25 cm
and there are between 19 and 23 lines on each page. Here again,
the number of words on a page is around 80.
[50] Our
manuscript originally may have measured between 28 and 30 cm x
ca. 18 cm. The very regular and elegant estrangelo has
its closest parallel in the above-mentioned manuscript British
Library, Add. 14,429 (ca. 719) and in other manuscripts of the
late seventh and eighth centuries, e.g., Hatch, Plate 52
(736: the four Gospels, in two columns, 17/18 lines in
each column). A date in the seventh or eighth century is,
therefore, plausible.
[51] The
above observations are of a very provisional nature. They are
based mainly on photographs taken by Karel Innemée and
on personal comments made by him. A brief visit to Deir
al-Surian in February 2002 has given me insight into the
locations of the various Syriac texts, but since the scaffolds
were no longer in place, I was unable to examine the two major
texts (1.1 and 1.2) in situ. Much study and research
will be needed to place the various pieces of evidence, which
are like numerous pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, into their proper
context and to rewrite the cultural and artistic history of
this fascinating monastery. Meanwhile, the art historians and
conservators of Karel Innemée’s team should be
congratulated on their splendid work!_______
Notes
_______
Bibliography
Baumstark 1922: Anton Baumstark,
Geschichte der syrischen Literatur (Bonn 1922).
Chabot 1920: I.-B. Chabot,
Chronicon ad annum Christi 1234 pertinens, I (Corpus
scriptorum christianorum orientalium 81 / Syr. 36, 1920)
(Syriac text).
Chabot 1937: I.-B. Chabot, Anonymi
auctoris Chronicon ad annum Christi 1234 pertinens, I
(Corpus scriptorum christianorum orientalium 109 / Syr. 56,
1937) (Latin translation).
Drijvers 1998: Han J.W. Drijvers,
“The Image of Edessa in the Syriac Tradition,” in
Herbert L. Kessler & Gerhard Wolf (eds.), The Holy Face
and the Paradox of Representation. Papers from a colloquium
held at the Bibliotheca Hertziana, Rome and the Villa Spelman,
Florence, 1996 (Villa Spelman Colloquia 6; Bologna 1998)
13-31.
Evelyn White 1932: Hugh G. Evelyn
White, The Monasteries of the Wadi 'n Natrun, II. The
History of the Monasteries of Nitria and of Scetis (New
York 1932 – Reprint 1973).
Evetts 1904: B.T.A. Evetts,
History of the Patriarchs of the Coptic Church of
Alexandria, I (Patrologia Orientalis I; Paris 1904).
Grabar 1980: André Grabar,
Christian Iconography, a Study of its Origins (Princeton
1980).
Gwilliam 1901: Georgius Henricus
Gwilliam, Tetraeuangelium sanctum juxta simplicem Syrorum
versionem (Oxford 1901).
Hatch 1946: William Henry Paine
Hatch, An Album of Dated Syriac Manuscripts (Boston,
Massachusetts 1946)
Innemée 1995: K.C.
Innemée, “Deir al-Sourian – the Annunciation
as part of a cycle?,” Cahiers
Archéologiques 43 (1995) 129-132.
Innemée 1998: K.C.
Innemée, “Recent Discoveries of Wall-Paintings in
Deir al-Surian,”
Hugoye 1/2
(1998).
Leroy 1982: Jules Leroy, Les
peintures des couvents du Ouadi Natroun (Cairo 1982).
Myslivec 1972: J. Myslivec,
“Tod Mariens,” Lexikon der christlichen
Ikonographie, IV (Rome – Freiburg – Basel
– Vienna 1972) col. 333-38.
Van Rompay 1999: Lucas Van Rompay,
“Syriac Inscriptions in Deir al-Surian: Some Reflections
on Their Writers and Readers,” which is part II of: Karel
C. Innemée, Lucas Van Rompay, and Elizabeth Sobczynski,
“Deir al-Surian (Egypt): Its Wall-paintings, Wall-texts,
and Manuscripts,”
Hugoye 2/2 (July
1999).
Weitzmann 1960: K. Weitzmann,
“The Mandylion and Constantine Porphyrogennetos,”
Cahiers Archéologiques 11 (1960) 163-88.
Wright I, II, III: W. Wright,
Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum
Acquired since the Year 1838, 3 volumes (London
1870-1872).