Cultural Identity and Dress: The Case of Late Byzantine Ceremonial Costume (With eight plates)

Parani, Maria G.

The article discusses Byzantine attire by focusing on imperial and courtly dress from early to late Byzantium, with main emphasis on Constantinopolitan styles. The visual evidence - mosaics and illuminations - is seen in relation to the written and material sources. Key looks from the sixth to the fifteenth centuries are presented.

Cod. gr. 1851 is composed of four bifolia, which contain the partial text of a poem and seven illuminations. The protagonists described in the poem are a Byzantine emperor, his youthful son, his daughter and a young foreign princess to whom the son is betrothed. Comparisons with other examples of imperial dress lead to the conclusion that the illustrations in the manuscript are probably fourteenth-century. I propose that the groom was Andronikos IV, who married, in 1356, aged eight, Maria, the nine-year-old daughter of the tsar of Bulgaria, Ivan Alexander. This marriage raises issues of children's roles at court and the nature of books made for them. A manuscript, now in the Vatican Library, cod. gr. 1851, commonly known as the Vatican epithalamion, contains the partial text of a poem and seven illuminations. 1 It is composed of four bifolia and measures 230 by 175 mm. The characters featured in the poem and illustrated in the miniatures include a Byzantine emperor, his youthful son, his daughter and a foreign princess to whom the son is betrothed.

Abstract The medieval Kipčak burial at the Chungul Kurgan in the southern Ukrainian steppe presents a seemingly paradoxical situation. On the one hand, the burial—here dated to the opening decades of the thirteenth century—is inserted into a previously extant tumulus of Bronze Age date, and the evidence of funerary ritual points towards the continuation of shamanist practices. On the other hand, the grave goods are largely composed of luxury objects associated with elite patronage among the sedentary societies of Western Europe, Rus’, and the Mediterranean zone. This juxtaposition is carried through in the partially preserved costumes excavated from the burial. These present features that recall elements of official court dress in Byzantium and in the neighboring Christian and Islamic polities. While several of the garments take the essentially Turkic form of the caftan, they incorporate in their applied decoration elements not normally associated with this particular garment. Close examination of the textiles from the Chungul Kurgan has revealed that they almost certainly represent the reuse of imported silks, gold-woven bands, and gold embroideries that came into the possession of the nomadic Kipčaks as gifts, trade items, or spoils of their raids on their sedentary neighbors. These include a panel of figural embroidery likely cut from a liturgical textile. Another group of embroideries and appliqués once formed a loros, the ceremonial scarf of Byzantine emperors, which was widely imitated in the dress and portraiture of other rulers in the region. A range of possible degrees of intentionality can govern the use of textile spolia—from strictly utilitarian reuse to the deliberately imitative, or victorious, appropriation of the insignia of another culture. The authors conclude that the way in which the textile elements were redeployed on the preserved garments represents at least a partial understanding of their meaning within their original contexts. Their reuse for the decoration of riding caftans incorporates the symbolic language of power and prestige that these insignia conveyed among the neighboring courtly cultures while preserving a distinctive, nomadic sartorial identity.

MICLENVETIZEJCHN'LS AA8S Acta Sanctorum. Antwerpen Bruxelles 1643 1925 A BME Ay/eiov raw \WC,avxi\>mv nvi](.iei'(ov tfjs 'EXXdo-og ABSA Annual of the British School at Athens AC'O Acta Coneiliorum Oeeumenicorum, ed. E. Schwartz |et al.j. Berlin 1927 A I ) AQ/atoXoyixov AeXti'ov A.IA American Journal of Archeology An Boll Analecta Boilandkuia BBA Berliner Byzantinistische Arheiten I''' 11 Bulletin de Correspondance llellonique BF Byzantinische Eorsehungen BUG Bibliotheca Hagiograpliica Oraeca. 3" ed. par F.ILu.kin. 1 111. Novum Auctarium. Bruxelles 1957. 1984 BMG8 Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies BNJ Byzantinisch-neugi'iechische Jahrbiicher BollGrott Bolleftmo della Badia Grcea di Grottaferrata BS1 By za n linos) av i ca BV Byzantina Vindobonensia Byz Byzantion BZ Byzantinische Zeitschrift GAG Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, I Will. Berlin 1882 1909 GahArch Gainers Archeologkjues GGSG Corpus Christianorum, Series Gracca CF11B Corpus Foutium llistoriae Byzantinae GIG Corpus Inseriptionum Graecarmn. I IV. Berlin 1828 1877 II MAC I. Cahiers de ITnstitut du moyen-age grec et latin CPG Claris T'atrum Graeeorum, ed. M. GeiiRARD. 1 V. Supplementum. Turnhout 1974 1998 GSCO Corpus Scripforum Christianorum Orientalium CSH B Corpus Seriptorum llistoriae Byzantinae DACL Dietionnaire d'Arehcologio Ghretienne et de Liturgie. I XV. Paris 1913 1953 DOhAJS AeXtiov tfjg XpiOTiavtxffe ADxaioXoyixfig 'Exaigeiag DUG 15 Dietionnaire d'llistoire et de Geographic Ecclesiastiques. Paris 1912— 1) I K E AtXnov xr\<; 'lotooixfjg xai 'EOvoXoyixfjc; 'Exaioetag xfjg 'EWl&Soc; DOB Dumbarton Oaks Papers DOS Dumbarton Oaks Studies DOT Dumbarton Oaks Texts JAHRIJrCH l)BR OSTBKRBIOHISOHUN BY/ANT1NISTIK, 57. Baiid/2007. 95 134 (<;) 2007 by Oslcrrcichiwrhcii Akademie tier Wissenschaften, Wicn M A K I A G . P A R A N I Cultural Identity and Dress: The Case of Late Byzantine Ceremonial Costume* With eight plates Ceremonial costume is principally rhetorical in function, serving as a vehicle for the symbolic expression of the moral, religious, and po- litical values of social groups. Within the framework of pre-modern, hierarchical states in particular, the ceremonial costume of the mem- bers of the ruling class came to be the visual manifestation of their status. The exclusive use of official insignia served to differentiate them from the rest of the population while, at the same time, it cre- ated a sense of solidarity among their ranks. The sumptuousness of the costume, made of costly fabrics and often adorned with precious substances, publicized the wealth and consequent power of all those in or associated with authority and produced an awe-inspiring effect in the beholders, thus commanding their obedience and respect. With- in the ruling class itself, rank was encoded in the use of particular garments and accessories and in the variation of materials, colors, manufacturing techniques, and decorative motifs of a heraldic char- acter.1 At the earliest stages of its development, ceremonial costume * This article is based on a paper read at the 35"' international Congress of Medieval Studies at Kalamazoo (2000), in a session titled "Details of Dress: Costume and Identity in the Middle Ages." I am grateful to the organizers, Assoc Prof. Joyce? Kubiski, Western Michigan University, and Prof. Laura J. Dufresno, Winthrop University, for their invitation to participate in this session. I would also like to extend my thanks to Dr. Alice Mary Talbot, Dr. Ruth Macrides, and Dr. Dimitri Korobeinikov for their willing and valuable advice on various aspects of this study. 1 On clothing and personal adornment as signifiers of social and political status whether of individuals or of social groups, see M. E. Roach J. Bubolz, Ficiiuk, The 96 Marin (!. Parani was often a more ornate and luxurious version of contemporary at- tire;.- Its use in a ritual context, however, resulted in its becoming imbued with a symbolic significance, a significance that epitomized the political and religious ideology of the state in general and the self- perception of the ruling class in particular. The political and mystical symbolism of ceremonial costume was sufficient to detach it from everyday life3 and to allow it to develop to a large extent independ- ently of the fluctuations of fashion. As a result, certain designs would continue to be employed in ceremonial contexts long after they had become obsolete in daily life.4 In such cases the antiquated form itself became sem.antic.ally significative: it served as a visual statement of uninterrupted continuity with the past that justified the exercise of Language; of Personal Adornment, in: J. M. ('oruwkll R. A. Sciiwakz (eds.). The Fabrics of Culture. The Anthropology of Clothing and Adornment. The Hague 1979, 11 17: 0. Clark. Symbols of Excellence. Precious Materials as Expressions of Status. Cambridge 1986, 1 12. 82 100; ,1. Schnkidur, The Anthropology of Cloth. Annual, Review of Anthropology 16 (1987) 409 41G; -J. Kciiixkidbk A. B. Wbinbr, Introduction, in: A. B. WiClXKR ,J. Sciinuidkr (eds.), ("loth and Human Experience. Washington D.C. London 1989, 1 2!). On the importance of luxurious garments and their ritual bestowal in legitimating the ruler and in cementing ties of loyalty and solidarity within the ruling class in the great empires of Central Asia, the Middle Fast, and Fasten) Europe during the Middle Ages, sec T. T. Ai.lskn, Commodity and Exchange in the Mongol Fmpiro: A Cultural History of Islamic Textiles. {(Jam- bridge Sludies in Islamic, Oivilizuli<m). Cambridge 1997, 92 94, 103 104; S. Cordon. A World of Investiture, in: S. Cordon (ed.), Robes and Honor. The Medieval World of Investiture. New York 2001, 1 19. The; work of Thomas Allsen was brought to my attention by Dr. Marcus Milwrioiit whom 1 here thank. 2 Such, for example, was the case of the Roman toga, see S. Ktoxb, The Toga: From National to Ceremonial Costume, in: .J. L. Skbksta L. Boxkantb (eds.), The World of Roman Costume;. Madison 1994. 13 45. :i Cf. M. Madou, I a: costume civil (Typologie des sources dn Moyeii Age occidental 47). Turnhout 198(5, 17. 1 A case in point is that of the, Byzantine imperial loros which, by the sixth centu- ry, had developed out of the toga, pic/a (or Irabeu. IrnvmplmlLs), the most elaborate! version of the Roman toga worn by the! Late Roman consuls as part of their ce- remonial attire. The faros remained in use as one of the insignia of the Byzantine emperors down to the fall of the Empire in the fifteenth century, more than a thousand years after the toga had gone out of use in everyday contexts. On the toga picla and the development of the Byzantine faros, see R. Dulbrukck, Die Consulardiptyehen und verwandte Denkmalor. Berlin Leipzig 1929, 60 61; F. CoxiM'RAOiu, Sur 1'origine et, I'evolution du loros imperial. Aria si A rcheofagia 11 12 (1935/36) 37 4o: M. C. Parani, Reconstructing the Reality of Images: Byzantine Material Culture and Religious Iconography (I I"1 15"' centuries). Leiden 2003. 18 27. Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine! Ceremonial Costume 97 power in flic present.5 Civen, then, the conservative character of ecr emonial costume and. its symbolic ramifications, any dramatic change in its appearance after a centuries-old tradition of continuity is a phenomenon worthy of investigation, as it may point to a concomitant change in the values-system of the society and state it embodied. One such instance of dramatic change that presents itself for examination is the case of Byzantine secular ceremonial costume in the Late Byz- antine period (1204-1453). By Byzantine ceremonial costume I mean the prescribed dress and insignia of Byzantine dignitaries and civil servants which were char- acteristic of their rank and office and which were worn by them while participating in different events during the annual ritual cycle of the imperial court. As for female ceremonial costume, though some sort of dress-code for the women in the entourage of the empress and for wives and widows of officials taking part in court rites must have existed, evidence concerning it is less forthcoming" and, consequently. 5 The importance of the past in legitimizing the! present is evident not only in the conservative! character of ceremonial attire!, with its attachment to antie|uate:d forms, bul also in the etontinual reuse) of aneiie'.nt symbeils of authority and, less often, in the ine:orpe>ratie)n of ancient components in newly fashioned regalia. An interesting ox ample e>f the! first instance: is the Holy Crown e>f Hungary, which was boliovod to be the crown that the saintly founde-.r of the Hungarian kingdom, St. Stephen, had ree:e;ive;d from the; Pope Sylvester II in 1001. Down to the emrly twe;ntie!th e;e)ntury, the crown remained the single me>st important coremation sym- bol, alone able; to eemler legitimacy to claimants to the Hungarian throne:, and pe>sse!ssion of it was e>ften hotly ejontested among rivals throughout its long history. The: fae;t that the ae-tual object was not the: original crown that St. Stephen had received from the Pope, but a e:e>mposita artefact etomprising a Byzantine open crown that was se:nt to Hungary as a diplennatie gift by the: emperor Michael VII Doukas (1071 1078) and a he:misphe:re: formed by two eimssing bands of western manufaeiture;, did not in the lesast destraet from the' symbolic pe>we:r with which the crown was invested by tradition and popular belief, se:e: E. KetvAos Z. Lovag, The Hungarian Crown and Other Regalia. Budapest 1980, 7 57, 75 81. As examples of the: se:ce>ud instance) one: may mention the: ine:e>rporation e>f antiejue gems in much later crowns, se:e: Clark, Symbols 96, fig. 36. * It is indicative: that in the: De eermundis aulue Byzanlinw, the e:e:re:me)nial handboe>k which was compiled in the tenth century and whie:h inewporates material on Byz- antine) imperial ceremonial from the: fifth century down to the: reign e)f Nikeplmros II Phokas (903 969), references to female ee>rc;monial dress other than that of the*, empress arc e!ne:ountered, as far as I knenv, in only three) out of its one: hundred and fifty-thre:e- e:hapters, sec De: (.v.r. 2, 21, 25 26 (Voct) {piilrlkiui, eiighth ce'ntury), 2. 63, I 66, 14 (VexiT) (zosle palrikia, eiighth century), I, 622, 20 624, 19 (RiasKu) (koubikoularaia, tenth eemtury). To the; best e>f my knowledge), the: fourteenth- 98 Maria G. Parani it will not be considered here. The most important sources for the study of Byzantine official costume that have come down to us from the mediaeval period are two ceremonial handbooks believed to have been compiled for the use of officials responsible for the staging of imperial ceremonies. The reference is to the tenth-century De cerimo- niis aulae Byzanlinae1 and the fourteenth-century treatise on dignities and offices by pseudo-Kodinos.s Unfortunately there is nothing com- parable from the period in between, only scant references to official dress and insignia found in historiographical and poetical works. The testimony of the texts is complemented by the visual evidence of portraits of Byzantine officials that have survived in various media" and of representations of the Byzantine court in secular illuminated manuscripts, though the latter are admittedly rare.10 As to primary century Byzantine ceremonial handbook of pseudo-Kodinos contains no references to contemporary female ceremonial dress other than that of the empress. 7 See previous note. For a tabulated chronological synopsis of the sources of the De cerimoniin, see A. Kazhimn. De ceremoniis. ODB 1 590 597. Sec, also, ,J. B. Bt'liV, The Ceremonial Book of Constantino Porphyrogennotos. The hhigluh Uwlormil Review 22 (1907) 209 227, 417 439. s J. Vhrpbaux (ed.), Pseudo-Kodinos. Traite des offices. Paris, 19(i(i. » For a catalogue of surviving portraits of Byzantine officials see Parani, Recon- structing 325 341. To those may be added the portrait of the jiroedrox Constanti- no on a recently published gold and enamel pendant (enkol/piov), today in a private collection, which probably dates to the eleventh century, see 1). Buckton P. HkathkR!N(.T<)X, "0 Saviour, save; me, your servant." An Unknown Masterpiece of Byzantine Enamel and Cold. Apollo (August) 2000, 28 33. 10 One has in mind the mid-twelfth-century manuscript of the chronicle of -John Skylitzos now in Madrid (Madrid Ski/lUzes), which, in all probability, was produced in Norman Sicily. The miniatures that arc most useful in the study of Byzantine official dress are those; which appear to be reproducing slightly earlier Middle- Byzantine models (up to fol. 87), sot? A. Chabar M. 1. Manoussaoas, L'illustrati- on du manuscrit de Skylitzes de la Bibliothoque nationale de Madrid. Venice 1979, 148 155, 174 183 and, more recently, V. Tsamakda, The Illustrated Chronicle of loannes Skylitzes in Madrid. Leiden 2002, esp. 373 375, 394 397. To this may be added the illustrated epUhukmiion. (bridal song) Vol. gr. 1851, which, 1 believe, was (treated on the occasion of the wedding of Alexios, son of Manuel 1 Komnenos, to Agnes of France in 1179, see 1. Spatijarakis, The Portrait in Byzantine Illumina- ted Manuscripts. Leiden 1976, 210 230, pis. 101, 104; 0.,). Hilsdale, Constructing a Byzantine AwjntUa: A Crook Book for a French Bride. AH Bulletin 87 (2005) 458 483. For alternative attributions and dating of this manuscript see A. Iaco BlNl. L'epitalamio di Andronico 11. Una cronaca di nozzo dalla Constantinopoli Paleologa, in: A. Iacobini 15. Zanixi (eds.), Arte profana e arte sacra a Bisanzio. Rome 1995, 361 410; C. Hennkssy, A Child Bride and Her Representation in the; Vatican Kpilhulamion, cod. gr. 1851. BM(!H 30 (2006) 115 150. Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 99 material related to mediaeval Byzantine official dress, this is almost non-existent." On the basis of what has survived it becomes evident that, down to the late twelfth century, one of the most important components of Byzantine ceremonial dress was the sleeveless mantle called the "chlamys". The chlamys had formed part of Byzantine official dress since the fourth century. It was worn both by the emperor and by military and civil officials. Among women, only the empress had the right to wear a chlamys. Judging by artistic representations (Fig. 1), the Early Byzantine chlamys was an ankle-length cloak of a semi-cir- cular cut, fastened at the right shoulder with a fibula.12 Attached at the vertical edges of the mantle was a pair of "tablia", square or rec- tangular textile panels of a color and decoration different from that of the rest of the garment. The imperial chlamys was purple with golden tablia, while that of the dignitaries was often white with a pair What have come down to us are items of personal adornment, like rings and eu- kolpia, which are identified by their inscriptions as belonging to Byzantine office- holders. See, for example, M. C. Ross, Catalogue of the Byzantine and Early Me- dieval Antiquities in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection 2: Jewelry, Enamels, and Art of the Migration Period. With an addendum by S. A. Boyd and S. R. Zwihn. Washington, D.O. 2200f>, nos. 129, 156, 158: Walters Art Gallery, Jewelry, An- cient to Modern. New York 1979, no. 429; J. Dukand et al. (eds.), Byzance. L'art byzantin dans les collections publiques francaiscs. Paris 1992, nos. 219 221: H. 0. Evans W. I). Wixom (eds.), The Glory of Byzantium. Art and Culture of the Middle Byzantine Era, A.D. 843 1261. New York 1997, nos. 172, 173; M. Evan- (,'HLATou E. Papastavrou T. P. Skottk (eds.), To Bt)t«vTU) tog Owco«u6vt). Athens 2001, nos. 90 98. See also above, n. 9. Portraits of Early Byzantine emperors, empresses and officials wearing the c/da- mys have survived in a variety of media. See, for example, R. Delbrueok, Spat- antiko Kaiserportrats von Constantinus Magnus bis zum Ende des Westreiehs. Berlin Leipzig 1933, pis. 94 97 (silver commemorative plate of Theodosios 1, 388); idem, Die Oonsulardiptychen und verwandte Denkmaler, nos. 2 (ivory dip- tych of Constantios 111, cousnul of Rome, 417?), 51, 52, (ivory panels with por- traits of an (impress, probably Ariadne, d. 515), 04 (ivory diptych of an unidenti- fied official, 425?), 05 (ivory diptych of Probianus, vicar of Rome, 400); G. A. Mansuelli, La fine del mondo antico. Torino 1988, 106 107, figs. 4 7 (relief sculp turcs adorning the basis of the obelisk of Theodosios 1 in the hippodrome of Constantinople); J. Inan E. Rohenbaum, Roman and Early Byzantine Portrait Sculpture in Asia Minor. London 1960, nos. 242 243 (two statues of magistrates from Aphrodisias, second quarter of fifth century); A. Cutler J. VV. Nhsbitt, L'artc byzantina c il sue publico. Parte Prima: Da Giustiniano all'eta media. Torino 1986, 6 7 (mosaic panels of Justinian and Theodora with their entourage in the church of San Vitale at Ravenna, c. 547). 100 Maria G. Parani of purple lablia. According to the sixth-cent ury chronicler John Mala- las. the purple tablia of the dignitaries' cloak were a symbol both of office and of obedience to imperial authority, hence their purple color.1* The fibula that kept the imperial chlamys in place was circular in shape with three pendants, while that of the dignitaries belonged to a dis- tinctive type known as the crossbow fibula.1'1 The testimony of the De. cerimoniis and other written sources, as well as that of surviving portraits of Byzantine emperors and officials dating from the ninth to the twelfth centuries (Figs. 2, 3), is unequiv- ocal as to the continual use and importance of the chlamys during the Middle Byzantine period (seventh to the twelfth centuries).15 It com- prised one of the regalia with which the emperor and the empress were invested during their coronation.1" Furthermore, the emperor wore the chlamys while participating in the celebrations for the most important religious feasts of the Christian calendar,17 as well as when presiding over certain secular ceremonies of the court, like audiences, promo- 13 John Malalas, Ohronographia II, 8 (23, (Hi 25, 15 Tiiurn). 11 The imperial fibula can bo seen clearly depicted on the commemorative plate of Theodosios I and in the mosaic; panel of Justinian at San Vitale in Ravenna, sec n. 12 and Kig. I. To my knowledge, there are no extent examples. On the con- trary, the crossbow fibula of Early Byzantine officials is very well-attested in the archaeological record, see, for example. J. P.O. Kkxt K. S. Painticu, Wealth of the Roman World, A I) 300 700. London 1077, nos. I!) 25; .). Gakbkcii B. Ovick- buck, Spatantike zwischen lleidontum und Ohristenfum. Munich 1989, nos. 11. 13 15: Ai. Yuroulanou, Diatrita. Gold Pioreed-work Jewellery from the 3"' to the 7"' Century. Athens 1999, 52 54, nos. 170 179. 15 For surviving portraits hoc A. Cutler J.-M. Spiukur, Byzanco mddievale, 700 1204. Paris 1996, figs. 107 108 (mosaic; panel with an unnamed emperor in the narthox of llagia Sophia at Constantinople, late ninth or early tenth century), 280 (portrait of Alexios I Komnenos in Val. gr. 666. fol. 2', le.rm.inim jjosl quern 110!) 1111): Kvank Wl.xoM, Glory no. 42 (portrait of the -jiulrikuxs, pra.ijjosi.los. and sakellarios Leo and of his brother, the itmlosjialha.nos Constantino in Val. rag. gr. I, fols. 2V, 3'. 940s), on page; 82 (portrait of Nikophoros 111 Botaneiafes in Coisl'm 79, fol. l(2',i")', 1078 1081): A. Kakakatsanik (ed.). Treasures of Mount Athos. Thessalonike 1997, 200 (portrait of unidentified dignitary(?) in Dkmydou 61, fol. P, second half of eleventh century); Spatharakis, Portrait figs. 42 (portrait of the proedros John in Speer Li- brary, cod. acc. no. 11.21.1900, fol. P, second half of eleventh century). 45 (un- identified official in Laura A 103, fol. \\\ twelfth century). '« De cer. 2. 1, 1 2 31; II, 1 12. 5; Hi, 1 17, 23 (Voc;r), 1. 439, 21 440, 11 (Rhixkk): Michael Attaleiates. Ilistoria 157, 15 18 (1'ftKBZ MartIx); John Oinnamus, Kpitome rcrum ab loanno et Alcxio Oomnenis gestarum 28. 20 21 (Mhinickk); Xieelas Ohouiates, Historia 46, (i 8 (van Diktun). 17 De cc;r, 1, 175, 1 179, 5 (Voc.t). Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 101. tions, and the reception of foreign visitors.1" Like their sovereign, Middle Byzantine officials often wore this stately mantle when t aking- part in the secular and religious ceremonies that punctuated life in court.19 Some were actually invested with the chlamys that was ap- propriate to their rank by the emperor himself on the day of their promotion.20 Certain categories of officials, such as the patrikioi, owned several chlamydes, made of different fabrics and varied in terms of their color and decoration, which they wore on different occasions in accordance with the requirements of court protocol.21 Compared to its Early Byzantine predecessor, the Middle Byzan- tine chlamys appears to have been much more elaborate and colorful in appearance. It was made of purple, bright red, brownish red, blue, green, yellow, and white fabrics and patterned with geometric, vegetal, or even animal motifs.22 The decorative borders-most probably gold- embroidered-that went round its edges enhanced its ornate aspect. As for the lablia, those of the imperial chlamys remained gold-embroi- dered, as was the case in the earlier period. On the other hand, those which adorned the cloaks of officials were no longer exclusively purple, but differed in color and decoration according to the rank of the bearer.23 Judging by artistic representations, the cut of the Middle ls Sec-, for example, op. cit. 1, 127, 1 129, 25; 100, 1 17; 2, 11, 3 5; 20, 3 22; 33, 3 20; 37, 3 5; 40, 4 8; 44, 3 15 (V<k.t), 1, 566, 15 567, 21; 583, 14 19; 587, 20 21; 593. 18 21 (Reiskk). '" Op. cit. 1,7, 16 18; 65, 4 9; 78, 4 7; 82, 4 6; 84, 5 7; 89, 4 7; 94, 18 19; 107, 3 4; 119,5 11; 137,6 7; 169, 10 21:2. IS. 9 27; 65, 7 II; 112,3 4; 160, 11 17 (Vogt). I, 574, 6 575, 14; 578, 19 20; 579, 8 12; 585, 5 7; 588, 19 589, 2; 641, 9 17 (Rkinku). 2" Op. cit. 1, 20, I 28, 7; 33, 1 35, 3; 36, 1 8; 37, 1 38, 7 (Vout); cf. N. OiKONOMJDtes, Les hstes de preseance byzantines des IXe et Xe siecles. Paris 1972, 97. According to the testimony of Liudprand of Cremona, in the tenth century, the Byzantine; emperor, would also bestow "cloaks of honour" to court officials, along with grants of money, on Palm Sunday, in a manifestation of imperial largesse, see Fr. A. Wright, 'the Works of Liudprand of Cremona. London, 1930, 212. Whether these cloaks were; actually chlamydes is not possible, to say. 21 De cer. 1, 19, 12 14; 65, 5 6; 102, 25 26; 116, 21 23; 119, 5 9; 132, 20 23; 151, 8 11; 160, 4 7; 169, 16 20; 2, 48, 19 20; 86, 10-12; 94, 8 12 (Voerr). 22 In artistic representations, the chlamys is, as a rule, depicted adorned with geo- metric or vegetal motifs. Possible references to chlamydes decorated with images of animals may be; found in the De cer. 1, 1 19, 9 (peacocks). 169, 19 (lions) (Vocjt). J:i Op. cit. I, (if), 4 10; 2, 94, 8 12 (Vout). There; is evidence to suggest that the laldiu that were appropriate to a particular dignity were acquired separately, at the time of promotion, see OiKONojiinfia, Listes 95. Furthermore, it seems that the same 102 Maria (!. 1'arani Byzantine chlamys did not form a perfect semi-circle. Neither was it always full-length, as the Early Byzantine one had been, but some- times reached only to mid-calf. It was fastened at the right shoulder as had been the earlier practice or. in what seems to be a Middle Byz- antine development, at the front with one or two clasps.24 Yet, the types of fibulae that kept the mantle in place had changed. Judging by representations, the imperial circular fibula with pendants was replaced by a plain circular type or an arch-topped rectangular one, most probably set with gems or enamelled. None is extant. As to the fibulae of officials, the Early Byzantine crossbow type went out of use in the Middle Byzantine period. In portraits of Middle Byzantine officials the devices holding their chlamydes in place are not always clearly depicted. When they are distinguishable, they appear to be brooches of circular shape.28 To my knowledge, none has been se- curely identified in the archaeological record so far. Whatever the differences in appearance between the Early and the Middle Byzantine chlamys, only natural when one considers the cen- turies-long history of the garment, the similarity in basic form, the recurrence of the lablia. and, above all, the continuous usage of the dignitary could own different kinds of luhlia. which lie could attach to his mantle according to the occasion. This could be the case with the pairikiui, who would wear their white eMamytkti with cither golden or red lablia, see l)e cor. 1,19,12 14: 05, 5 0; 102, 25-20; 132, 22 23; 151, !> II; 2, 94, 10 11 (Voot). The lablia do not appear consistently in Middle Byzantine portrayals of officials dressed in a mant- le that otherwise looks like tin; cJiUimijH, see, for example, tin; palrikios Leo, the prolospaXharios Constantino, and the unidentified figures in IHonysiou 01 and in Laura A 103 (n. 15). 1']. Piltz has suggested that perhaps the lack of a lablioii was indicative of (lower?) rank position, see her Middle Byzantine Court Costume, in: 11. Mauuirk (ed.), Byzantine Court Culture; from 829 to 1204. Washington. D.C. 1997. 49. One wonders whether the mantle without the /"'./," was still considered a chlamys or whether it had a different name. There is a reference to "plain cMu- mydes" (xA«vtout hxa) in the Do cer. 1, 110, 23 (Vo<;t), worn by the palrikioi on the feast of the Exaltation of the Cross on September 14, but one cannot claim that the author is referring to chlamydes without lablia, even though it is tempting to think ,so. The occasions on which the chlamys was worn fastened at the front were prescribed in the ceremonial handbooks, see OlKoxo.MlDl'is, Listes 107, 189. 25 Another type which may have been employed at that time is the pin-type fibula. It can be seen in the portrayal of certain Christian martyrs who were anachro- nistically depicted in Byzantine court dress, sec;, for example. C. Maxoo, The Mo- nastery of St. ('hrysostomos at Koutsovendis (Cyprus) and Its Wall Paintings. 1)01' 44 (1990) 89, pi. 8b, fig. 144 (St. George, c. 1100). Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 103 term "chlamys" and its derivatives to describe the principal state of- ficial mantle in the Middle Byzantine period, imply a will on the part of the imperial government to maintain the appearance of uninter- rupted continuity with the past , namely the time of the first Christian Roman emperors if not an even more distant Roman era. It is inter- esting to note in this respect that in the sixth century, the chronicler Malalas ascribed an ancient Roman pedigree to the chlamys. Accord- ing to him, it was first adopted by Numa Pompilius, king of Rome after Romulus and Remus, as the official mantle for himself and his dignitaries.2,i Considering that in mediaeval times the Byzantines con- tinued to call themselves "Romans" and held tenaciously to the belief that their polity was the continuation of the Roman Empire,27 one could suggest that the continual use of the "Roman" chlamys may have served as yet another means of highlighting the Roman origins of the imperial establishment in Constantinople.28 20 See above, n. 13. *' References to the Byzantines as "Romans" in mediaeval Byzantine texts are too numerous to list individually. However, as an indicative example one may mention the acclamations addressed by the denies to the emperor on the day of his corona- tion, when the ruler was hailed as "emperor of the Romans", see De cer. 2, 4, 10 17, 19 20, 23 24 (Vogt). See, also, M. Mantouvalou, Romaios Romios Ro miossyni. La notion de «Romain» avant et apres la chute de Constantinople. Em- intjpovixy EnextiQiG ojc; <Pdoao(/>Mijg ZyUtj? xov Flavunitmydov AOrjvdiv 28 (1979 1985) 173 182; on the concept central to Byzantine political theory of the By- zantine Empire as the continuation of the Roman Empire and on its development and elaboration over time, see, among others, F. Dolour, Rom in der Gedanken- welt der Byzantiner. Reprinted in his Byzanz und die europaische Staatenwelt. Ausgowahlto Vortriige und Aufsatze. Darmstadt 1904, 70 115, esp. 71 80, 98 101: H. AllHWKHJiR, ^'ideologic politique de 1 'Empire byzantin. Paris 1975,48 50; E. Ciikysos, The Roman Political Identity in Late Antiquity and liarly Byzantium, in: K. Fludulius (ed.). in cooperation with P. ScilRUlNUR, Byzantium. Identify, Image, Influence. XIX International Congress of Byzantine Studies Copenhagen, Major Papers. Copenhagen 1990, 7 10. The assumption of the title "emperor of the Romans" by western rulers, beginning with Charlemagne in 800, provoked the angry reaction of the Byzantine government, which considered it as an act of usurpation of its rights and prerogatives, see, for example, Wrmjiit, Liudprand of Cremona 203 200. -a Note that the story of the origins of the chlamys attested by Malalas in the sixth century was repeated in the Souda Lexicon, a Byzantine compilation of the late tenth century, sec Suidae Lexicon s.v. xtaturig (IV 809 Adlur). It was also copied by the twelfth-century chronicler George Cedrcnus, Compendium historiarum 1. 34, 4 35, 0 (Bkkkkr). However, it is not possible to say whether it was well-known in court circles during the Middle Byzantine period. 104 Maria G. Parani The chlamys. of course, was not the only ceremonial mantle in the Middle Byzantine court.29 However, it appears to have been the one worn on the most solemn and stately occasions. Moreover, judging by the portraits that have come down to us, Middle Byzantine officials preferred to be portrayed in the chlamys-costume more often than in any other attire.30 This seems to suggest that they believed that the concept of belonging to the administrative or military establishment of the empire was best expressed by being portrayed in the chlamys. Why this was so may be explained by an investigation of the mantle's symbolic connotations as deduced both from contemporary texts and from official portraiture.31 As pointed out earlier, the chlamys consti- tuted one of the coronation insignia. What is more, it was worn by the emperor when he received his court, when he promoted individuals to higher office, and when he granted formal audience to diplomatic del- egations. Consequently, one may claim that the chlamys was the man- tle worn by the 'Byzantine emperor in his attribute as the head of state and as the source of all authority from which all offices and dignities were obtained. The chlamys of the Byzantine officials, which some received from the hands of the emperor himself, was a visual state- ment of the bond that existed between themselves and their sovereign. It highlighted their proximity to the center of power and pointed towards the source of their delegated authority which they could le- 29 Another type of sleeveless mantle, also worn by both the emperor and his dig- nitaries, civilian and military, was the "sagion". its name is probably derived from the Roman "sagum", which was a rough, woolen military cloak. It is not possible to say in what way the Middle; Byzantine sagion differed from the chkvmyx, apart from the fact that it lacked the lablia. Perhaps, it was a shorter type of mantle. The imperial sagia were luxurious garments made, of purple or gold-woven fabrics and adorned with gold-embroidered borders and pearls, see, for example, l)e eer. 1,03, 17 18; 175, 0; 2, 1,8 (Vout), 1, 522, 8 0; 567, 2; 034, 14 10 (Rkiskk). Those of the dignitaries appear to have been comparatively less ornate, either purple (<'tX,t)0ivu) or red (Qorjg) in color, nee, for example, op. eit. 1, 73, 18 19; 74, ! 2; 92, 7; 101, 13; 155, 10; 2, 49, 13, 21; 09, 7; 70, 10 (Voot), 1, 521, 22; 524, 14 15; 539, 8 (Rkiskk). Apparently some dignitaries, like the palrikioi, the mugistroi, the ri- lenliurwi, and the pmiposUoi, owned sagia of both colors. In contrast to the chlamys, the sagion is never mentioned in ceremonial handbooks as one of the in- signia of Byzantine officials. The only official who appears to have owned a sagion that was particular to his office, though not given to him upon his promotion, was the proedros tes syvUeiou; it was pink(?) in color, woven with gold (6u_>o6ov 6w'tXO«(K)v), see op. eit. 1, 443, 2 3 (Rkiskk). 30 See Paraxi, Reconstructing, appendix 3, nos. 1, 2, 17, 10, 20, 23, 24, 20, 31. 31 For a more; detailed discussion, see op. eit. 10 17. Cultural Identity and Dress; Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 105 gitimately exercise uncontested. These ideas were given pictorial ex- pression in one of the dedicatory miniatures of an eleventh-century Byzantine manuscript of the Homilies of St. John Chrysostom, Cois- Un 79, now in the Bibliotheque nationale of France.32 On fol. 2' the emperor is portrayed enthroned on a magnificent throne, which is flanked by four standing officials (Fig. 2). Behind the imperial throne, which is likened to the morning star in the epigram that accompanies the image, stand the personifications of Truth and Justice. According to the same epigram, the officials, noble of soul, represent the pinna- cle of men loyal to the virtuous emperor. They are not named; only their individual titles accompany their portraits. The emperor and three of his officials are portrayed in their chlamys-costume. The shared mantle clearly identifies all as members of the same establish- ment, with the emperor at its head and the officials as the recipients of his light and power. Considering then the importance of the chlamys and its long his- tory, it is surprising to discover that in the Late Byzantine period it disappears almost completely. It no longer constituted one of the coronation insignia of the Byzantine emperor and there are no surviv- ing Late Byzantine portraits of him wearing one.33 What is more, judging by the literary and the pictorial evidence, the majority of Byzantine officials and dignitaries no longer wore it. Significantly, the term "chlamys" is not mentioned even once by pseudo-Kodinos in his The manuscript was originally made to be presented as a gift to Michael VII Doukas (1071 1078). However, following Michael's abdication, it was offered to his successor Nikephoros III Botaneiates (1078 1081). The three original dedica- tion miniatures, including the one discussed here, were maintained with minor alterations to the facial features of the emperor and the necessary renaming of the imperial portraits, while a fourth, entirely new, dedicatory miniature was added at the time, see Evans Wixom, Glory no. 143, with earlier bibliography. The chlamys is not mentioned among the coronation insignia in the chapter on imperial coronations included in the fourteenth-century ceremonial handbook of pseudo-Kodinos, see Pseudo-Kodinos, l)e officiis VII (252, 1 273, 18 Vkrpkaux). Nor is it mentioned in other descriptions of imperial coronations that have come down to us from the Late Byzantine period, see Vkrpkaux (ed.), Pseudo-Kodinos, appendix VI, 351 301; John Cantaeuzenus. Historiae I. 51 (1, 190, 8 204, 3 Sciloi'kn); C. P. Majkska, Russian Travelers in Constantinople in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries. Washington D.C, 1984, 104 113. See, also, Paraxi, Re- constructing 14 10. The latest surviving portrait of a reigning emperor in the chlamys is that of Alexios I Komnenos (1081 11 18) in Vat. gr. 000, fol. 2', see Cut- lkr Spikhkr, Byzaneo fig. 280. 106 Maria (!. Parani mid-fourtcenth-centuiy ceremonial handbook.:w His treatise and exist- ing portraits of Late Byzantine officials make it evident that the chlamys had been abandoned as the distinctive dress of Byzantine of- fice-holders in favor of caftans, coats, and head-dresses of oriental, mainly Turkic and Central Asian, appearance and derivation. The most common type of garment worn by Late Byzantine officials and the one most often represented--was the caftan, made of costly fabrics adorned with geometric, vegetal, or animal motifs (Figs. 4, 7, 8). It was ankle-length and had a vertical opening all the way down the front that was secured with a row of spherical buttons. It could be ample or. more often, tight-fitting, with long sleeves. As a rule, it was worn with an impressive long belt, apparently made of leather and adorned with metal decorative attachments.38 This type of garment is com- monly identified with the "kabbadion" mentioned by pseudo-Kodi- nos.38 The name is probably derived from the Persian word "qaba"', denoting a luxurious robe with long sleeves, open down the front and secured with buttons.31 Other types of garments of oriental extraction that became part of Late Byzantine official ceremonial dress were the "lapatzas". a coat with exceedingly long sleeves that were provided with slits for the arms,38 and the "epilourikon", possibly a type of coat 31 This observation is based on the text as it appears in Vuiil'UAl'X's edition. Else- where I have argued that the 'tamparion", which according to pseudo-Kodinos was worn by the. four highest, officials of the state, is a mantle and should be identified as the deseendent of tlx; Middle Byzantine chlamys, see Parani, Recon- structing 63 04. Surviving portraits of high officials in this Late Byzatnine mant- le; are rare, see op. cit. appendix 3, nos. 38, 43, K. Pn/rz, in her I^e costume officiel des dignitaires byzantins a lepoque paleologue. I'ppsala 1994, while, at first seeming to agree with the identification of the la,mpa,rion, as a mantle (p. 52), later goes on to say that it was actually a kind of long tunic (p. 7f»). * See, also, j. Albani P. Kai.auaka A. Muxia (eds.), The City of Mystras. Athens 2001, figs. 159 (miniature, portrait of the proloslntlor Theodore HynadenoH in Bodlei- an Library, MS. Lincoln College gr. 35, fol, 8', 1327 1342), 103 (portrait of the Hkwiterim Kaniotes in the church of Hodegetria, Brontochcion Monastery, Mistra, after 1360). :"' Pseudo-Kodinos, l)e officiis 11 (141, 1 100, 29 Vurpk.m'X). :!7 LBO s.v. x«jM6w>v. On the oriental garment see Y. K. Stillmax, Arab Dress. A Short History. From tlx-. Dawn of Islam to Modern Times. Leiden 2000, 12, 51. On the popularity of caftans in general throughout the Islamic world, sec op. cit. 47. 63 64. The empty potions of the sleeves were tucked in the belt at the hack of the bearer, see Pseudo-Kodinos, Do officiis IV (218, 29 219, 21 Vhui'HAUX). See, also, Br. CvHTKovie, Prilog proucavanju vizantijskog dvorskog kostima yQuvuxt,a. Xaxu- Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 107 which, according to pseudo-Kodinos, was of oriental derivation and was, as a rule, worn in association with a turban.3" ZRVJ 34 (1995) 143 156. The term "lapatzas" is of Arabic-Persian extracti- on, probably derived from the word "libas". meaning garment, see LBC s.v, Xujkx- Cvi'"i'Kovi<\ Prilog 147; F. Stkinijass, A Comprehensive Persian-English Dictionary. New Dehli 2000, 11 10. To my knowledge, there is only one surviving portrait of a Byzantine official in an outer garment that could be identified with the lupulzax, see R. Etzkoolou, Quclquos romarques sur les portraits figures dans les eglises de Mistra. JOB 32/5 (1982) 515 51(5; Albani Kalamaka Muxia (eds). City of Mystras fig. 1 (55. For examples of Bulgarian and Serbian dignitaries in the l.n.patza.s see OvictkoviC, Prilog, illustrations opposite p. 152. The Byzantine empe- ror wore a garment similar to the lapalzax, called the "granatza". though with both sleeves hanging freely at the sides and reaching down to his ankles, Pseudo- Kodinos, De officiis IV (218, 29 219, 5 Vkki'icaux). The, etymology of the term "granatza" remains unknown, though Cvhtkovic, Prilog 154, posits an ultimate Armenian derivation for it. Tunics of possible oriental extraction with exceedingly long sleeves, which were gathered at the wrists when not hanging down freely, had formed part of Middle Byzantine court costume in the eleventh century, see Pa- kan!, Reconstructing 55. However, in my opinion, the adoption in the Late Byz- antine period of the coat with the exceedingly long sleeves, which were provided with slits for the arms to come; through, should be attributed to the influence of contemporary Turkish fashions, as seen reflected, for example, in the attire of amir Basil Oiagoupos, a christian military official of Seljuk sultanate of Rum, por- trayed as donor in Kirk dam alti kilise, Hasan Dagi (1282 1295), N. M. Tiiihkry, Nouvellcs 6gliscs rupestres de Cappadoeo. Region du Hasan Dagi. Paris 19(53, 200, pi. 94, fig. 49. It is interesting to note that, among the members of the Turkish upper classes, especially in the Mamluk state, the length of the sleeves of such a coat was considered indicative of the status of the bearer: the longer the sleeves, the higher his rank, see Stillman, Arab Dress (55. Pseudo-Kodinos, De officiis 11 (158, 25 159, 2, 12 1(5; 100, 0 8, 1113; 1(51, 25 27; 162, 9 11, 21 24; 103, 1 4 Vbhpraux), IV (206, 17 19 Vhrpkaux), VII (273, 1 15 Vbrpbaux); Pll.TZ, Costume! officiel 53. In the Middle Byzantine period, the "cpi- lorikon" |sie| was a type of protective garment worn by soldiers over their mail cuirasses, see LBC s.v. inCkdiQinov. On occasion, emperors would wear a luxurious variation of it when celebrating a military triumph, see Parani. Reconstructing 118 119. H owevcr, the Middle Byzantine1 epilorikou did not form part of official dress, by contrast to the Late Byzantine epilourikon., which was worn in court by both military and civilian officials. Unfortunately, pseudo-Kodinos does not des- cribe! the later garment, nor does he mention whether it was worn over armour or not. One wonders whether the epilourikon could be identified with any of the different types of protective garments that are depicted worn by military saints over their cuirasses in thirteenth- and fourteenth-century Byzantine pictorial con- texts and which include waistcoats, jackets, and short, sleeveless tunics, see! op. cit. 120. Some of the! represented protective garments appear to have! a lining of mail, a feature which has been attributed to the influence of Islamic practices on Byz- antine military equipment, op. cit. 120 121; sese;, also, D. NI0OIJ.B, Arms and Ar 108 Maria (>. Parani As to head-dresses, in addition to the turban, pseudo-Kodinos as- cribes oriental origins to another type of head-cover worn at court, namely the "skaranikon"."' The skaranikon was one of the insignia of Late Byzantine officials and its color and type of decoration denoted the rank of the bearer." The skaranika of most dignitaries from the megas domeslikos down to the proloierakarios were adorned with por- traits of the emperor standing, enthroned, or on horseback.'- The presence of the imperial portrait indicated not only the source of the authority of the officials but also highlighted their proximity to the emperor.43 The skaranikon has been identified with the cylindrical head-dress with the flat or rounded top adorned with the image an enthroned imperial figure that is commonly depicted in Late Byzan- tine portraits of officials (Figs. 4. 8).44 Eastern parallels may be found also for two other types of head- dresses which appear in portrayals of Late Byzantine officials. The first type is the hat with a broad brim and what looks like a conical top, which can be seen worn by the anonymous officials standing bo- hind the enthroned emperor, to the right, in the miniature representing John VI Kantakouzenos presiding over the Church Council of 1351 in Par. gr. 1242, fol. 5V (Fig. 5).48 It is very similar to the "saraquj", a hat with a pointed conical crown and brim of Central Asian origin, which appears in Islamic miniature painting already in the mid-thirteenth mour of the Crusading Kra, 1050 1350. White Plains, N.Y. 1988, no. 127A. The identification of the e.pilonnkon with the mail-lined garment of the military saints would explain why pseudo-Kodinos ascribed an oriental origin to it. However, the existing evidence does not. allow one to construct a case of equivalence between the two garments and any association between them must remain conjectural. Pseudo-Kodinos, De officiis IV (20(1, 19 20 Vichi>kau.\). 11 Op. cit. 11 (145. 23 10(5, 20 Vukpk.uix). Ibid. " Cf. Piltz, Costume officiel 05 07. " Pauani, Reconstructing 09 70. Tim head-drosses of the mega.s prindkerii/.s John, the pwlodralor Theodore; Kynadenos, and the skoulerim Kaniotes (see above, n. 35) belong to this type. One should note at this point that, souk; believe that the skammkoii was a type of tunic and the Late Byzantine successor of the Middle Byzantine skaramiviigitiu.., see A. Kazhimn, Skaranikon. ODB 111 1908 1909. Ho wever, this interpretation has not gained wide acceptance. >r' DckaxI) (it at. (eds.). Byzancc 419. This type of hat should perhaps be identified with the "skiadion". mentioned by pseudo-Kodinos as worn by both the emperor and his officials, see Pseudo-Kodinos, De officiis II (141, 3 100. 20 Vkui'kai'x). See. also. Parani, Reconstructing 70. Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 1.09 cent ury (Fig. 6).411 The second type of official head-dress for which an Islamic connection may be argued is the impressive head-cover of the logolhetes ton genikou Theodore Metochites, who was portrayed as donor in the inner narthex of the Chora Monastery (Kariye Camii) in Con- stantinople (1315 1320/1) (Fig. 7). In appearance, the high-rising head- dress is reminiscent of a turban. One should not exclude the possibil- ity, however, that it was in fact, a hat. consisting of a fabric cover over some sort of frame or padding. Such high-rising head-covers, turbans as well as padded hats, were popular among officials and members of the military aristocracy of the Mamluk sultanate of Egypt.'7 The change in the character of mediaeval Byzantine official dress, implied by the adoption of the oriental styles just described, seems to have been accomplished by the end of the thirteenth and the begin- ning of the fourteenth century: the earliest surviving portrait of a Byzantine official in a kabbadion and a skaranikon known to me dates from that time (Fig. 8).18 It is true that the Byzantines wore caftans prior to the thirteenth century.49 Moreover, instances of imitation of oriental (in this case Arab) fashions in the Byzantine court may be identified from a much earlier date.5" Among the most obvious exam- * Mayior, Mamluk Costume 30 31; Stiluian, Arab Dress 08, fig. 19. ' See Mavkr, Mamluk Costume 31. A possible Mamluk inlluence for the head-cover of Metochites has also been postulated by K. A. Zaciiariadou, H yuikvmQu tod Metoxitii x«i oi ugufliKot uotOuoi oxn Movrj xrjg Xo'ioug, in: Akxuto oyooo Biujioolo Bui;«vTivrjs wa MeTufhj^uvtiviis AgxutoXovtas xui Te/vng. ngoYQuuu," xui Jreon\fp|>Ei,$ aoiryr|oe(ov xui avaxoivowwov. Athens 1998, 25. s A. Bank, Iskusstvo Vizantii v sobraniiakh 8SSR, vol.3. Moscow 1977, no. 1010. " It lias boon argued that the "skaramangion", an item of Middle Byzantine cere- monial attire often mentioned in the De cerinu/idiv, was in fact a short "rider's caftan", see N. P. Kondakov, Les costumes orientaux a la eour byzantine. Ihjz 1 (1924) 7 49; Fr. Cpmoxt, L'uniforme de la cavalerie orientate et le costume byzan- tine. liyz 2 (1924) 181 191. See, also, Piltz, Court Costume 45; Pahani, Recon- structing 60 01. To my knowledge, the earliest surviving representation of a caftan of the type that was to become popular in the Late Byzantine period is found in the church of the Hagioi Anargyroi at Kastoria in Greece and is dated to c.l 180. In the donors' panel, the son of the donor of the second layer of the painted decoration of the church is shown wearing a short-sleeved caftan that has a vertical opening at the front secured with buttons and is held at the waist with a belt adorned with metal attachments, sec 8. Pulukanumx M. Ciiatziiukin, Kas- toria. Athens 1985, 43, fig. 23. A. Ckaisar has suggested that the adoption of oriental fashions in the Byzantine court, during the Middle Byzantine period was a deliberate act on the part, of the imperial government and should be associated with the renovation of the impe Maria. (<. Parani pies arc striped tunics worn under a shorter outer tunic and visible below its hem,31 arm-bands adorned withipseudo-kufic characters that were sewn onto tunics in imitation of Arab liraz bands,3- and turbans.'*-1 However, what distinguishes the Late Byzantine development from such earlier occurrences of adoption of oriental fashions in the impe- rial palace is the fact that in the later period the imported designs rial wardrobe by the emperor Theophilos (829 842), which, according to the same scholar, was probably undertaken in the aftermath of the Byzantine embassy to Baghdad in 830. It was, apparently, following this embassy that the emperor de- cided to build a palace; which imitated Arab palaces in design and decoration at Bryas. an Asiatic suburb of Constantinople, see A. Grabar, Le; succes des arts orientaux a la cour byzantine sous les Macedoniens. Miuiclnicr Jahrlmch iter hildi'ii- dm Knn.il. 3"1 sor., 2 (1951) 32 00; reprinted in his 1,'art de la fin de 1 'Antiepiite et du Moyen Age, vol. 1. Paris 1908, 280. 289. However, the chronicle that mentions tin; renovation of the imperial wardrobe does not associate it with the embassy in any way, nor does it mention specifically that this renovation comprised the; in- troduction of new fashions. According to it. the emperor, who loved adornment, had golden-woven imperial vestments made: there is no reference to the dress of court, officials being affected by this renovation, see Leo Grammaticus Chrono- graphia, 215 (Bkkkkr); translated in Knglish by C. Mango, The Art of the Byz- antine Umpire: 312 • 1453, Sources and Documents. Toronto 1980, 100 101. 51 The official to the far right in the miniature representing the enthroned emperor flanked by four officials in (hi.slin 79, discussed earlier, wears such a striped un- dergarment (Fig. 2). For striped garments as a feature of Arab dress, see Stii.umax, Arab Dress 59. «* Such bands may be seen, for example, on the outer tunic of the prolan palhar im Michael Skepides, portrayed at Karabas kilise, Soganli, in Turkey, sees N. Tiiikrry. I/art monumental byzantin en Asic Mineure du XI" siecle au XIV". 1)01' 29 (1975) 93. fig. 28. They can also be seen on the tunics of some of the officials in tin; Mail rid Ski/litzci, see (»kabak M anoussaoas, Skylitzos pi. 1, fig. 7. On the tradition of Urilz, that is, textiles bearing honorific or religious inscriptions, in the Arab world, see Ktili.man, Arab Dress 40 41, 120 137. See, also, Sh. S. Blair, Inscriptions on Me- dieval Islamic Textiles, in: M. A. M. Salim etal., Islamische Textilkunst des Mittel- altei-s: Aktuelle l>robleme (Riggisberger BericMe 5). Riggisberg 1997, 97 100. s;) The prolotriKilharioii Skepides at Karabas kilise wears a turban, see previous note. Sec; also, Parani, Reconstructing 07 08. There is literary evidence to suggest that the habit of wearing turbans during the Middle; Byzantine; period was not confined to members of the court, but was more widespread, see (.!. Mango, Discontinuity with the Classical Past in Byzantium, in: M. Mullutt R. Scott (eds.), Byzanti- um and (he Classical 'tradition. Birmingham 1981. 51 52. For the turban as an element, of male dress in Middle Byzantine Cappadoeia in particular, sec ,). L. Bali.. Byzantine Dross. Representations of Secular Dress in Fighth- to Twelfth- Century Painting. New York 2005, 05 07. though the author's assertion that turbans were unknown in Constantinople prior to the Late Byzantine; period should be treated with caution. Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 111 came to supplant more traditional "Roman" ceremonial garments like the chlamys. At first glance, this development appears incongruous with the fundamental concepts underpinning the cultural identity of the Byz- antines and. more particularly that of the Byzantine ruling class, namely the Byzantines' perception of themselves as "Romans" and of their state as the only legitimate continuation of the Roman Em- pire; their Orthodox Christianity; their pride in the superiority of their Hellenic culture; their view of non-Christian peoples, including the Turks and the Mongols, as barbarians; and their adherence to tradition and a concomitant suspicion of overt innovation. Considering the function of ceremonial dress as a signifier of the political and cul- tural values of particular social groups, it is reasonable to ask wheth- er the change in official ceremonial attire observed in the Late Byz- antine period was symptomatic firstly of the abandonment of tradi- tional Byzantine political ideology with its ecumenical pretensions that were founded on the "Roman" claim of the Byzantine state and, secondly, of a fundamental change in the self-perception of the Byz- antine elite on. the one hand and in the official self-image that it wished to project on the other. The answer to this question will have to be negative on all counts. Late Byzantine emperors upon their coronation continued to be acclaimed as emperors "of the Romans" as they had been in the Middle Byzantine period.5'' This is but one indication that the official political ideology of the Byzantine Empire not only re- mained unaltered, but was clung to doggedly by representatives of both the State and the Church even in the face of an adverse historical reality that no longer justified such an adherence.68 Characteristic of this attitude is the brazenness with which pseudo-Kodinos, writing his ceremonial handbook around the middle of the fourteenth century 51 See, for example, Vkrpraux (ed.), Pseudo-Kodinos, appendix VI, 357, 2 14 (coro- nation of Manuel 11 Paiaiologos in 1392). See, also, above, n. 27. 55 Surveys of the writings of Late Byzantine intellectuals, both laymen and clergy- men, furnish numerous passages in which the traditional Byzantine imperial theo- ry is being reiterated with apparent conviction, see, for example, H.-G. Buck, Reiehsidee und nationale Politik im spatbyzantinischon Staat. BZ 53 (19(H)) 80 94; 1. SkvCbnko, The; Decline! of Byzantium Se;e;n Through the Ryes of Its Intellectu- als. l>OP 15 (1901) 109 170; M. Angoi.d, Byzantine 'Nationalism' and the Nioaean Umpire;. BMdti 1 (1975) 49 08; A. Stauvrjwhi-Zaj-'KAKA, Nweeiee xui 'Hjreiyog xov 13" eueovu. ie^eoAxryixi'i eevruteeyeiOted) eiti|v JiooemeiOtui touc; vex eive(XTr|even>v "tr|v (xutoxdu- tooIm (EtaiQEia Bv'fytvuvdw Eqevvow 7). Thossalonike 1990, 199 218. See also below, n. 57. 112 .Maria (J. Parani could claim that the Byzantine emperor-"the emperor of the Ro- mans"was being honored by both eastern and western nations as the legitimated successor of Alexander the Great and Constantine l\m As to the sense of identity of the Byzantine elite, it is true that certain intellectuals from the ranks of the civilian and the ecclesiastical ad- ministration did realize that their state had entered a stage of termi- nal political decline and came to question the cultural and moral su- periority of Byzantium vis-a-vis its neighbors in East and West. It is also true that, since the twelfth century, if not earlier, and in response to the pretensions of the Papacy and the Latin West which had their own claims on the Roman imperial heritage, more emphasis was being- placed on the Orthodox and the Hellenic components of the Byzantine identity, that is, on those two elements that distinguished the Byzan- tines from their western antagonists. However, as already pointed out, the Roman component of this identity was neither ceded to the West nor renounced, but remained alive down to the demise of the Empire. What is more, the traditional view of the non-Christian peoples of the East and, especially, the Turks as barbarians was still very much alive in the Late Byzantine period, despite the fact some intellectuals were willing to concede that they had certain positive traits. It could be claimed, then, that in the Late Byzantine period the basic tenets of the Byzantine identity remained the same; what had changed under the influence of current historical conditions was the significance ac- corded to each in the collective consciousness of the Byzantines. It should be pointed out, however, that the evidence for this subtle change in emphasis is mostly derived from the personal writings of Late Byz- antine authors. In official contexts it is the traditional Roman univer- salist ideas that continue to be advanced.37 Thus, we find Late Byzan- m Pscudo-Kodinos, Do officiis 11 (207, 3 8 Vhkpeaux). Having said this, it should bo pointed out that psoudo-Kodinos's claim is not entirely without foundation, as in official correspondence with the Muslim courts of the Mamluks and the llkanids, the Byzantine emperor was indeed recognized as the heir of Alexander the Groat, see I). A. KouoBKiNiKov, 1 )i plomatic Correspondence between Byzantium and the Mamluk Sultanate; in the Fourteenth Century. Al-Masdq 10/1 (2004) 53 74, esp. 03 05. I thank Dr. Korobkinikov for providing me with a copy of his article. On the complicated question of Byzantine' identity in the Middle and Date Byz- antine periods nee Sbvcbxko, Decline 107 18(5; P. .J. Alexander. The Strength of Empire and Capital as Seen through Byzantine! Eyes. Speculum 37 (19(52) 339 357: P. Charanik, How Creek was the Byzantine Empire? Buc.knell llevieie Xl/3 (19(53) 101 11(5; H. Ditthn, Boofiuooi, "EMayve$ und Teoiiettoi bei den letzten byzanti- nischon Geschiehtssehreibern, in: Act.es du XII'' eongr. int. d ot. byz. Ochrid, vol. Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 1.13 tine officials, decked out in caftans and oriental-looking head-dresses, participating in the ceremonial stations of court life as "Romans" and as the subjects of "the emperor of the Romans",58 with no apparent awareness of a contradiction between the signifier-their ceremonial dress-and the significance-the sense of "Roman" identity-it was sup- posed to convey. Given, then, that the official self-image which the Late Byzantine ruling class wished to project remained more or less the same, the abandonment of the traditional "Roman" chlamys after nine centuries of use gives rise to a series of questions. How did the change in Late Byzantine official ceremonial dress come about? Were Byzantine of- ficial circles sensible of a possible discordance between the origins and character of the new ceremonial costume and the traditional political and cultural values it was supposed to embody? Did they make any attempt to reconcile innovation with tradition by "romanizing" the recently-adopted garments and head-dresses? The adoption of oriental fashions by the Byzantines is not surpris- ing in itself. There was a long tradition of cultural interaction between Byzantium and the Islamic world, which, apparently, was not hin- 2. Belgrade 19(54, 273 299: Aiirwkilbr, Ideologic (50 (54, 103 114; P. Gounakjdis, 'Crocs'. 'Hellenes' ot 'Eomains' dans I'etat de Niece, in: B. Kremmydan Ch. Mal- tkssoo N. M. Panagiotakes (eds.). A(|>u;q<d[.iu otov Ntxo 2fk>oo')vo, vol. 1. Rethymno 198(5, 248 257; R. Browning, Creeks and Others. From Antiquity to the Renais- sance;, in his History, Language; and Literacy in the Byzantine World. Northamp- ton 1989, no. II; iM. Angold, Autobiography & Identity: The; Case; of the Later Byzantine; Empire. BSl (50 (1990) 3(5 59; P. Magdauno, Byzantine Snobbery, in: JV1. Angold (e;d.), The Byzantine; Aristocracy, IX X III Centuries (British Arcfiaeo- loqimi Reports, International Series 221). Oxford 1984, 58 78, reprinted in P. Mag- dalino, Tradition and Transformation in Medieval Byzantium. Aldershot 1991, no. I; idem, Hellenism and Nationalism in Byzantium, in his: Tradition and Trans- formation, no. XIV; idem, Constantinople and the Outside; World, in: I). C. Smytiie (e;d.), Strangers to Themselves: The; Byzantine Outsider. Papers from the Thirty- second Spring Symposium of Byzantine; Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton. Aldershot 20 00, 149 1(52; R. Macmi>bk P. Maodauno, The Fourth Kingdom and the Rhetoric of Hellenism, in: P. Maodalino (ed.), The; Perception of the Past in Twelfth-Century Europe. London Rio Grande 1992, 139 15(5. 1 would like to express my thanks to Dr. Ruth Mauridbs for providing mo with valuable; biblio- graphical reiforoiKios on the subject. w Cf. A. Grabar, Psoudo-Codinos e;t les ceremonies do la cour byzantine au XIV" siecle, in: Art e;t soci6te a Byzance; sous les Paleologues. Actes du colloquo orga- nise par ('Association internationale dos etudes byzantinos a Ve;nise; on soptombrc; 19(58 (BibliolMque de I'lnslilul helMnique d'etudes byzwn.lines el post-hyzantincs de Vem«e4). Venice 1971, 193-221. 114 Maria (J. Parani clered by religious, political, or other ideological differences. It is a feature of the process of interculturalf transmission that the value- system of a culture serves as a selective mechanism that enables it to accept certain elements of another culture, while categorically reject- ing others, especially those that are judged prejudicial to the recipi- ent's fundamental beliefs.5" The Byzantines, secure in their Orthodox Christianity and confident in their cultural supremacy compared to their Muslim neighbors, could borrow and assimilate Islamic traits that had been judged useful in a practical sense, advantageous for reasons of prestige, or. simply, aesthetically appealing, as long as these did not threaten the ideological foundations of Byzantine identity. No less a person than the patriarch of Constantinople John XI Bekkos (1275-1282) considered it appropriate to offer the emperor Michael VIII Palaiologos (1259-1282) an imported(?) platter adorned with Arabic script as a gift on the occasion of the feast of the Presentation of Christ to the Temple. His gesture was considered insulting and the gift unacceptable only when someone who could read Arabic pointed out that the Arabic characters formed an inscription in honor of the "accursed" Mohamed.60 We should, therefore, not be puzzled to see Theodore Metochites, a leading exponent of the antiquarian intellec- tual movement of the early fourteenth century who still classified the Turks as "barbarians", portrayed kneeling at the feet of Christ dressed in a caftan and wearing a head-dress of possible Mamluk associa- tions.61 Geographic proximity, diplomatic relations, and commercial exchange must have paved the way for the transmission of Islamic, cultural forms to Byzantium. The process, at least as far as the adop- r>" L. Bkoom B. ,J. Siegel K. Z. Vocjt J. B. Watson. Acculturation: An Explana- tory Formulation. American AnlhropologiM 5(> (1954) 982 985, 990 991; Allskn, Commodity 101 103. Military antagonism on its own was not sufficient to hinter cultural exchange between two competing states when other points of contact could be found, cf. M. Rogers, Evidence for Mamluk Mongol Relations, 1200 1300, in: A. Raymond M. Rogers M. Waiiba (eds.), Colloque international sur l'histoiro du Cairo. Cairo 1974, 385 403. «° George Paehymores, l)e Miehaele Palaeologo 0, 12 (573, 20 575, 20 Failler). 01 On the life and the work of Theodore Metochites see 1. Skv^RNKO, Theodore Me- tochites, the Chora, and the Intellectual Trends of His Time, in: P. Underwood (ed.), Studies in the Art of the Kariye Djami and Its Intellectual Background. London 1975, 17 91. On his attitude towards the Turks, see idem, Decline 178. On the character of the humanist movement in Byzantium in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries see idem. The Palaoologan Renaissance, in: W. Trkad- Oou> (ed.), Renaissances before the Renaissance. Stanford. Calif. 1984. 144 171. Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 115 tion of oriental fashions by members of the Byzantine ruling class is concerned, was in all probability facilitated by the fact that Byzantine court culture had a number of common features with the culture of the Muslim courts, ranging from certain ceremonial practices-like the importance accorded to the investiture of officials-to the admiration of artistry and the taste for particular categories of luxury objects, including magnificent textiles.02 Historical conditions for most of the thirteenth century, which is the period of primary concern to us here, were, it would seem, favorable for such cultural interaction, given the relatively good diplomatic relations between the Byzantine state and the Seljuks of Rum in Asia Minor, the Mamluks of Egypt, and the Mongols, who appeared on the scene of Eastern Mediterranean politics in the 1230s, the thriving commercial activity between the Byzantines and their Seljuk neighbors, as well as the tolerance and opportunities for advancement provided by the Seljuk state to those members of the Byzantine aristocracy, who, being forced to flee the imperial court, had sought permanent or temporary refuge in Rum.63 Besides, in Byz- 62 E. A. Zaojiariadou, The Presents of the Emirs, in: Cultural and Commercial Ex- changes between the Orient and the Greek World. Athens 1991, 79 84, has, in fact, put forward the granting of robes of honour by Turkish princes established in Asia Minor in the fourteenth century to their Christian vassals, Greek and Latin, as one of the factors promoting the dissemination of Turkish styles in Byzantine; lands. On the similarities between Byzantine and Muslim court cultures see M. Canard, Le ceremonial fatimite et le ceremonial byzantin. Essai de comparaison. Byz 21 (1951) 355 420; O. Grabar, The Shared Culture of Objects, in: Maguire (ed.), Byz. Court Culture 1 15 129. The subject of potential similarities between the Byzantine court and the courts of the empire's Muslim neighbors in the Late Byzantine period has not, as yet, been adequately explored. 03 Sp. Vryonjs, Jr., The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of lslamization from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century. Berkeley Lon- don 1971, 130 133; A. Ducellier, Montalite historique et realites politiques: I'ls- lam et les Musulmans vus par les Byzantins du XIII""'" siecle. BF 4 (1972) 31 -03; CI. (.'alien, The Formation of Turkey. The Seljukid Sultanate of Rum: Eleventh to Fourteenth Century (trans, and ed. P. M. Holt) Harlow New York 2001, 80 90, 123 133; M. Angold, A Byzantine Government in Exile. Government and Society under the Laskarids of Nicaca, 1204 1261. Oxford 1975, 1 US; 1). O. Mor- gan, The Mongols and the Eastern Mediterranean, in: B. Arbel B. H amilton 1). Jacoby (eds.), Latins and Greeks in the Eastern Mediterranean after 1204 (Medi- terranean Historical R-eview 4/1). London 1989, 204, 205; D. Korobkinikov, Byzan- tium and the Turks in the Thirteenth Century. Unpublished D.Phil, thesis, Oxford University 2003. I am grateful to Dr. Korobkinikov for allowing me to consult the relevant chapters of his thesis. Cf. the interesting reference in the historical work of the fourteenth-century author Nikephoros Gregoras, according to which the 116 Maria G. Parani antine eyes, throughout the thirteenth century, the most dangerous and the most hated enemies of their state and their faith were neither the Turks nor the Mongols, but the Papacy and the Christian peoples of the West, and this for both political and religious reasons.1" Yet, there is a great distance between following the dictates of fashion and adopting imported designs as part of official ceremonial dress at the expense of garments that had formed part of the official wardrobe since the establishment of a state. Such a change could have been brought about only by a dramatic rupture in tradition. Despite the Byzantines' own assertion concerning the uninterrupted continu- ity of their polity that went back to the time of Constantine I, the first Christian emperor and founder of Constantinople-the New Rome-, there had been a violent disruption: in 1204 the Byzantine Empire fell under the blows of the infamous Fourth Crusade organized by the Catholic West. The formidable administrative machinery of the Seljuks, when hard-pressed by famine during the reign of John III Vatatzos (1221 1254). bought the necessities of life from their Byzantine neighbors, paying for them in coin and in kind, the latter also including textiles, Cregoras, Historia Romana 1, 42, 20 43, 15 (SciioriCN). See, among others, AllKWKlLBR, Ideologic 75 87, 101, 109 111; 1). M. Nicol, Church and Society in the Last Centuries of Byzantium. Cambridge 1079, 00 97; M. An- oold, Orecks and Latins after 1204: The Perspective of Kxile, in: Annul, Hamil- ton Jacojsy (eds.), Latins and Greeks 03 80. One may venture to suggest that the almost total absence of western designs in Late Byzantine male ceremonial dross, as prescribed in pseudo-Kodinos and as reflected in Byzantine portraits of officials, was partly a result of political, social, moral, and aesthetic divergences between Byzantium and the West and partly a result of a conscious decision sti- mulated by religious and military antagonism. It was certainly not a result of ignorance of western fashions on the part of the Byzantines, who had, in fact adopted western garments and head-dresses as part of their non-ceremonial attire, ef. Gregoras, Historia Romana 2, 505, 13 508, 8; 3, 555, 10 550, 7 (Sohophn). As already pointed out by others, the phenomenon of the adoption of western styles among both men and women was admittedly more pronounced in areas under Frankish or Venetian rule, see, selectively, Ch. Maltuzou, BeveuxVj uoou ornyv Korj- Tt), in: Nia A. S'l'KATOt" (ed)., Bvt,uvxiov. A<|>iho<»u.u otov Av8oe« N. 2tp<«0, vol. I. Athens 1980, 139 147; I. Chrlstoforaki, Female Dress in Cyprus in the Medieval period, in: Female Costume in Cyprus from Antiquity to the Present Day. Nicosia 1999, 13 19; I. Mpitua, EvouhutoXoyixec; uuqtuqiec; ottgxouxoyoa^iegTng uEO«i,(uvi,xr|c Poftou (14"? ai. 1523). Mm jiooytt) nQoo&f>/\m\, in: P68og 2,400 xqovm, h no\r\ xry; Poftou ((Jio xi]v iSouari uexqi tt|v x«t(iA,rn|>r] <ut6 tout; Totiyxoug (1523), vol. 2. A0f|vu 2000, 429 448; Ai. Mylopotamitakb, Avooixd xuX.uuuutu xE(|xdr|g ottiv KoV|- xr\ (lll,; 10"s (a.), in: M. Aspra-Vardavake (ed.), Aa(.utt)o<i'yv. A<|>tEQ<i)uu orr| u-vrjutj xi"]5 NtorAug Mouotxt), vol. 2. Athens 2003, 545 500. Cultural Identity and Dross: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 117 Empire collapsed. Members of the Byzantine ruling class, exiled from their traditional seat of power that was Constantinople, created three successor states in the European and Asiatic provinces of the dismem- bered empire. The most important of these was the Empire of Nicaea in Asia Minor.65 The system of government adopted by the Laskarid emperors of Nicaea depended on a relatively small number of officials bearing a more limited range of titles mostly taken from the imperial household, rather than on large numbers of professional bureaucrats, as has been the case before the fall."8 This must have had serious re- percussions on court life, since it was the members of the governing class who largely provided both the participants and the intended audience of imperial ceremonies up to 1.204.07 The loss of the tradi- tional setting of court rites, namely the imperial palace and the city of Constantinople itself, as well as the constant campaigning of the Laskarid emperors both in Asia Minor and mainland Greece in their struggle to recapture the lost capital, must have also contributed to a certain relaxation in protocol.68 This does not mean that the emperors of Nicaea were not sensitive to the uses of ceremonial in the manage- ment of their affairs. However, they appear to have paid more atten- tion to it as an instrument of imperial diplomacy rather than as a form of ritual affirmation of court hierarchy or of glorification of imperial authority for internal consumption, as had often been the case prior to 1204. The silk and gold-embroidered garments of the members of the court were meant, above all, to impress upon foreign emissaries 05 H. AilRWBlUSR, L'oxpcrionco nioeonno. OOP 29 (1975) 21 40; AN(K)LI), Byz. Go- vernment passim,. m Op. cit. 147 100; M. F. Hisndy, Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection, IV: Alexius I to Michael VIII, 1081 ,1201. Part 2: The Emperors of Nicaea and Their (Contemporaries (1204 1201). Washington D.C. 1999, 450 451, 470, 515. On the style of rule of the Laskarid emperors, sec also R. J. Macridun, From the Komnenoi to the Palaiologoi: Imperial Models in Decline and Exile, in; 1'. Mauimmno (ed.), New Constantines: The- Rhythm of Imperial Renewal in Byzantium, 4"' 13"' Centuries. Aldershot 1994, esp. 280 282. I thank Dr. Maerides for providing me with an offprint of her article. 07 Of. A. Cameron, The Construction of Court Ritual: the Byzantine Book of Cere- ■monies., in: 1). Cannaoinu S. Prick (eds.), Rituals of Royalty. Power and Cere- monial in Traditional Societies. Cambridge New York 1987, 122 123, 130 131; A. P. Kazhdan M. MoOokmiok, The Social World of the Byzantine Court, in: Maguirh (ed.), Byz. Court Culture 107 197, esp. 190. <i!i For an informative and lucid summary of political and military developments during the reigns of the three Laskarid emperors, see H.kndy, Catalogue 447 452, 407 473, 514 515. 118 Maria C. Parani the wealth and consequent power of the empire."9 Under these circum - stances it is not difficult to imagine how the chlamys. the symbolic- significance of which had been closely linked to the internal hierarchi- cal structure of the Middle Byzantine state and its rituals, was allowed to become obsolete once that structure collapsed and how it came to be replaced by the caftan-like garments that were in vogue at the time. Of course, members of the Byzantine elite had demonstrated the in- clination to imitate foreign fashions in dress and hairstyle and to in- troduce them in court prior to the thirteenth century, causing the scathing criticism of conservative Church prelates who saw in such behavior a disregard of "Roman" custom.70 However, in the past, Byzantine emperors-when not themselves responsible for the intro- duction of "barbarian" fashions in court7'-had tried to curb such tendencies, in order to safeguard tradition and to eliminate the ex- travagance that ill became the dignity of Roman imperial authority.72 m George Pachymeres, I)e Michaele Palaeologo 1, 14; 2, 25 ((51, 25 (53, II; 187, 22 189, 25 Faiijjor). Of. Maokidhs, From the Komncnoi 281. 70 The best-known evidence concerns the twelfth century, sec;, for example, G. A. Kalijon M. Potijcn, SJjvxexypet xe7>v Oeuov xervoveov xe7>v xi; aywrv xeu jtuveu<|>r|uxi)v djtooToXiov xed tiIjv leodrv xai. olxouuevixflyv xetl xoraxwv aw66«)v xed xeT>v xetxu iiiooc; ayuov jcutenorv, vol. 2. Athens 1852, 534: male hairstyles; Nicetas Choniates, His- toria 252, 15 20 (van Diktbn): costume of Andronikos 1, prior to his rise to the throne; op. cit. 298: costume of David Komnenos, general of Thcssalonikc; Eus- tathios of Thcssalonikc, Narratk) de Thessaloniea urbe Latinis capta 82, 5 12 (Mulviijjc Jonhs): costume of David Komnenos. Of. E. Bhownixh;, Theodore Ha-I- samon's Commentary on the Canons of the Oouncil in Troullo as a Source; on Everyday Life in Twelfth-century Byzantium, in: Oh. Anokudh (ed.), H xetOrpK- oivn, t,(m\ mo Btii;e'rrao: Touic; xui ouvexeujg eixuv eXXr|vieraxf| xeu oeo(imxr| jtuo/tooorp riQcxxxi-xa xod A' AieOvoug Suujtoeriot). Athens 1989, 425 42(5. " See above;, n. 50, on the possibility that the emperor Theophilos was responsible; for the adoption of Arab fashions in the Byzantine court in the ninth century. 72 See, for example, Nicetas Choniates, Historia 4(5, 28 47, 5 (van Diktbn): John II Komnenos, 11 18 1143. Of. the late-fourth-century law, according to which wearing trousers or boots both, items of barbarian costume , within the city of Rome; was punishable; with the confiscation of one's property and exile, sex; 01. Piiarr (trans.), The Theodosiaii ('ode and Novels and the Sirmondian Constitutions. Princeton 1952, 14.10.2 3. Apart from being disrespectful to Roman tradition, the disregard for official dress-code in favor of more; fashionable garments might have? been per- ceived by the; imperial government as a subtle; act of nonconformism that needed to be curbed. The subject of dress and, mainly, hairstyle; as an external sign of nonconformism in mediaeval Byzantium has been addressed by II.-G. Bkck, For mes de; non-conformisme a Byzanee. Academie Roi/ale de Belgique, lhdklin de. la Olaxse, den leUres el, des sdencefS morales el polUiquen (55/(5 9 (197 9) 3 1 3 3 29. Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine; Ceremonial Costume; 119 This does not appear to have been the case with the Laskarid emper- ors, who had more pressing priorities on their political agenda and who, perhaps, thought that the magnificent caftans and the impressive head-dresses could serve the purpose of dazzling diplomatic delega- tions adequately. Having said this, it should be mentioned that John III Vatatzes (1221 1254) did promulgate a law inducing his subjects to buy only those garments and fabrics that were produced in Byzan- tine lands and not those imported from the Middle East and from Italy. However, the purpose of this measure was to control the im- moderate outflow of money for the acquisition of such luxuries and not to protect Byzantine tradition, as had been the case with similar measures in the past.73 Thus, I believe, the change in the character of Byzantine official dress came to pass and was allowed to become well established. Appar- ently, nei ther the violent overthrow of the Laskarids in 1259 by Michael VIII Palaiologos, the founder of the last ruling dynasty of Byzantium, nor the return soon afterwards, in 1261, of the imperial government to its traditional seat in Constantinople could reverse it. And this de- spite what appears to have been a conscious effort on the part of the first Palaiologan emperors to reconstitute certain aspects of Byzan- tine ceremonial as it had been in the twelfth century74 for the obvious purpose of establishing a link with the imperial past before the Laska- rids, a link that would confer legitimacy on the usurped authority of the new dynasty.78 It would seem that the Palaiologan emperors did not make any large-scale attempt to revive official ceremonial dress as it had been prior to 1204. The only possible exception seems to be the re-introduction of a descendent of the chlamys called the "tamparion", which, according to the testimony of pseudo-Kodinos and the evidence of surviving portraits, was confined to the use of only the highest- ranking dignitaries of the state and to that of very close relatives of Grogoras, Historia Eomana 1, 43, 17 44, (5 (Sciiopbn). This is suggested by the copying, in the later part of the; thirteenth century, of texts which dealt with Komnenian ceremonial. E. and M. Jbfkkbys, Manganeios IVodromos: Text Seminar, Michaelmas Term 199(5 (University of Oxford). On the; Komnenian emphasis of the revival inaugurated by Michael V! 11 Palaiologos fol- lowing his establishment in Constantinople in 12(51, see Maoridks, From the Kom- nenoi 2(59 282, esp. 272 275. On the; legitimizing power of the past see I). Lowiontdal, The Past Is a Foreign Country. Cambridge 1985, 40 41, 52 53. I would like; to thank Dr. Marina Mosko- witz for this reference. 120 Maria C Parani the emperor, whether they held office or not.7" That in the ease of the chlamys-like ta/rnparion we are probably dealing with the revival rath- er than the survival of a ceremonial garment is suggested firstly, by the change in the name of the mantle and, secondly, by the mantle's very limited and selective use in the Late Byzantine period. As may be deduced from the ongoing discussion. Byzantine official circles do not appear to have been sensible of any tension between the Islamic, Turkic or Mongol origins of their newly adopted garments and the Byzantine cultural values and beliefs that these same gar- ments were supposed to express within the context of court ceremo- nial. Oriental designs were imitated probably because they were famil- iar and their aesthetic qualities made them attractive to the Byzan- tines. The fact that certain features of oriental dress, like the exceed- ingly long sleeves of coats and the high-rising head-dresses, were a symbol of status among the Turks must have facilitated their being adopted in the Late Byzantine court, where they served a similar func- tion.77 Once incorporated into Byzantine ceremonial dress, eastern designs gradually acquired a set of associations that were clearly Byzantine and which enabled them to develop in their new context independently of their origins. The color and decoration of the orien- talizing garments and head-dresses, the incorporation of badges of office in their design,78 the manner in which they were worn, and the choice of other garments and accessories with which they were worn were all prescribed by Byzantine court protocol and were meant to convey rank and precedence within the framework of the hierarchical structure of Byzantine officialdom.7" To my mind, this "byzantiniza- tion" or rather "romanization" is nowhere more clearly evident than in the incorporation of the portrait of the emperor in the skaranika of a number of Byzantine officials high up in the hierarchy of the 16 On the, lamparion see above, n. 34. 77 Of. H. (1. Barnictt, Culture Processes. American AtU/nvjjohgM 42 (1040) 31-37. 78 The vertical gold-and-red bands that adorn tlx; head-dress of Theodore Metoehi- tes at the Chora Monastery should probably be understood as such a badge of office. Apparently, the; use of decorative bands or stripes on head-dresses as a mark of status in the Byzantine court had been a feature of Komnenian official dress: in the. epithalamion of 1179 (Vol. gr. 1851), fols. 1' and 2V, the official standing to the right of the enthroned emperor, that is, in greatest proximity to him, is dis- tinguished from the other officials represented in the same; miniatures by means of the two horizontal stripes adorning his head-dress, see, Jacobin], Epitalamio figs. 4, 7; Parani, Reconstructing fig. 79. ™ Cf. Pseudo-Kodinos, Do officiis, patsnim (Vurpuaux). Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 121 court: no one could confuse a Byzantine official as being anything but that when he wore a head-dress that was adorned with the portrait of his sovereign, even if he was dressed in what we today would charac- terize as an oriental-looking caftan.80 Tracing the stages of the transformation in form and meaning of the recently adopted garments and outlining the particular circum- stances under which this transformation occurred is far from straight- forward; sometimes, one can do no more but speculate. The process of "re-identification" of at least some of the new designs, like the Icab- badion and the slcaranikon, appears to have been completed by the late thirteenth and the early fourteenth century when we have the first surviving portraits of Byzantine officials in the new costume. I am tempted to think that these initial steps for the systematization of the change in the appearance of Late Byzantine official dress were taken during the reign of the first two Palaiologan emperors, Michael VIII (1259 -1282) and Andronikos II (1282-1328), and, especially, following the re-establishment of imperial authority in Constantinople in 1261. These two emperors appear to have paid particular attention to court ceremonial: pseudo-Kodinos, who apparently had access to official documents relevant to court protocol, credits them with the institu- tion of a number of practices that were in place during the middle of the fourteenth century when he composed his treatise.81 That they would do so was only natural. Ceremonial is a powerful instrument for the legitimization of power and for forging links of dependence be- tween the ruler and the ruling class, and the newly-established Pal- aiologan dynasty was in need of both. In contrast to the Laskarids, Michael VIII Palaiologos upon his accession surrounded himself with his relatives and with members of other powerful Constantinopolitan aristocratic families who had helped him seize the throne but whose aspirations to more power and wealth were a serious and constant As far as 1 know, the systematic adornment of official head-dresses, or garments for that matter, with imperial portraits was not, a feature of Early or Middle Byzantine ceremonial dress. In the past the, incorporation of imperial portraits was limited to garments and head-dresses made especially to bo given as gifts to foreign rulers, see, for example-, Chronieon Paschale 013, 18 014. 7 (Pinixikk); Kovacs Lovao, Crown, or to tlx- costume of influential individuals who enjoyed the proximity of tin; emperor and had come to yield considerable, power in his name or on his behalf, sec, for example, Dklbrukck, Consulardiptyehen nos. 51. 52. 63. Vhrpuac.x ((>d.), Pseudo-Kodinos 26 27, 35 36. 122 Maria G. Parani threat to imperial authority.82 Egos needed to be soothed and ambi- tions needed to be kept in check. Court ritual was of paramount im- portance in this respect, because it heightened the participants' sense of belonging to an inner circle of power with the emperor at its cent- er and provided the framework of imperial munificence manifested in the grant of titles, privileges, and money. The first Palaiologan em- perors appear to have realized this. That closer attention should be paid to official ceremonial dress at the time, given its function as an indicator of rank and status, seems to me, under these conditions, quite plausible. A second stage in the process of "romanization" of the new designs is identifiable around the middle of the fourteenth century and, one- might add, under historical circumstances comparable to those just described. In this case, however, the Byzantine reinterpretation of the new garments and head-dresses involved the attribution to them of a fictitious "Roman" origin that also accounted for their ultimate ori- ental extraction. The relevant evidence is provided by the treatise of pseudo-Kodinos. On several occasions pseudo-Kodinos demonstrated an awareness of changes in ceremonial practices on the one hand and in the appearance and nomenclature of imperial and official insignia on the other. On some of these occasions he was forced to admit igno- rance as to the circumstances that caused the change, while on others he felt the need to furnish an explanation.83 In the chapter describing the ceremonies that were associated with the celebration of the feast- days dedicated to Christ, pseudo-Kodinos made two digressions, the first more extensive than the second, concerning the origin of some of the official garments and certain other insignia that were in use at the time. According to him. the skaranikon, the kabbadion, and the granat- za were Assyrian garments that had been adopted by the Persian king- Cyrus the Great, when he conquered the Assyrian empire. In addition, this same Cyrus adopted the use of the epilourikon and the phakeolion (turban) from the Medes, after having incorporated their state into his own. Pseudo-Kodinos then goes on to say that the Persian empire established by Cyrus was conquered by Alexander the Great, whose On the social undercurrents that contributed to the overthrow of the Laskarids by Michael VII I Palaiologos see, indicativoly, Aiihwkiliok. Experience nieeenne. This new-found sensibility to the dilapidating passage of time appears to have been characteristic of tin; intellectual climate during the Late Byzantine period, see Graisar. Pseudo-Codinos 197 198; Suvounko, Decline. Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 123 own state was in its turn subjugated by the Romans.84 The significance of this quasi-historical excursus by pseudo-Kodinos becomes evident when one takes into consideration that Byzantine chroniclers and historians tended to view the history of the world after the Deluge as a succession of empires, beginning with that of the Assyrians, followed by that of the Persians, which was then succeeded by the empire of Alexander the Great, itself taken over by the Roman empire that was still in existence with Constantinople at its center and a Roman em- peror at its head.85 It follows from this that, as far as Byzantine official circles were concerned, the adoption of the garments and head-dress- es under discussion was not an innovation but a return to earlier "Ro- man" practices, since the ceremonial outfits in question were handed down to pseudo-Kodinos's contemporaries by their ancestors through a line of uninterrupted succession. Thus, the sense of continuity with the Roman past was maintained and Byzantine political and cultural identity emerged once again outwardly unscathed.80 At present, it is not possible to say whether this invented tradition was a fabrication of pseudo-Kodinos himself or whether he simply set down a story that was circulating at the time. Whatever the case, I do not believe that his intention was to deceive nor do I doubt that he himself and his contemporaries believed in the veracity of this account.87 At least some of the garments he discusses, like the kabbadion, the skaranikon, and the turban, had been in use long enough to make plausible their claim on "antiquity" even if this was not as ancient as the Byzantines would have us think. Interestingly enough, the attempt to codify change in Late Byzan- tine ceremonial in general and in the character of official costume in particular that is evidenced by the composition of pseudo-Kodinos's treatise came after a period of slackening in court ritual. According to the fourteenth-century historian Nikephoros Gregoras, the third 11 Pseudo-Kodinos, De officii* IV (205, 1 207, 8, 218, 29 219, 5 Vhrpkaux). 5 On Byzantine perceptions of world history and the past sec; E. M. Jkfkkkyk, The Attitudes of Byzantine Chroniclers towards Ancient History. Byz 49 (1979) 199 238; Mackidkk Magdauno. Fourth Kingdom 120 139. Of. Graisar, Pseudo-Codinos 198. " Of. Lowbntiial, Past 325: "We are often innocent of conscious intent to change what we mean simply to conserve or celebrate", i.e., the past. On the subject of changing the past and the invention of tradition sec op. cit. 324-362; E. Hobsisaw.m T. Ranukr ((ids.), The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge 1983; Y. Hun M. Innhs (<;ds.), The Uses of the Past in the Early Middle Ages. Cambridge 2000. 124 M aria 0. Pa rani Palaiologaii emperor, Andronikos III (1328.....1341). in contrast, to his two predecessors, was not at all interested in following protocol and maintaining proper form and was almost casual with the members of his court. So much so, that the customs and rites of imperial ceremo- nial, which were supposed to be handed down from one emperor to his successor, were in danger of being consigned to oblivion. According to Gregoras, as result of Anclronikos's indifference everyone began to wear whatever they pleased in his presence, including garments and head-dresses that imitated Italian, Serbian, Bulgarian, and Syrian fashions. This situation and, above all, the lack of order that it signi- fied made the more prudent members of Byzantine society, including Gregoras himself, fear for the future of their state and suspect that its customs and institutions would soon be eclipsed.88 Following the death of Andronikos III and after a catastrophic civil war, John VI Kanta- kouzenos, a usurper, ascended the throne. It was most probably during his reign (1347-1354) that the ceremonial handbook of pscudo-Kodi- nos was composed.8" It attests to a desire to reintroduce order after a period of negligence. To my mind, the composition of this work bears witness to a renewed interest being placed on ceremonial by an impe- rial government that must have been as keen to appear as the guard- ian of Roman imperial tradition as it was to consolidate its position in court/'" The emphasis placed upon tradition within this specific historical context could explain why the apocryphal story of the ori- gins of the most important components of Late Byzantine official dress was recorded at this point, decades after the actual garments had been introduced into the Byzantine court, and not before. It is interesting to note that in the period following the abdication of Kantakouzenos in 1354, Gregoras accuses the supporters of the new political establishment of abandoning the familiar forms of dress in favour of Eastern, Western and Balkan fashions that made it difficult to tell who was "Roman" and who was not. The fact that an indi- vidual could at the same time be wearing garments derived from dif- ferent sartorial traditions aggravated the sense of confusion, which, Gregoras, Historia Romana 2, 565, Pi 508, 8 (Kciiopun). The dating is based on internal evidence provided by the text itself, see VrkI'BACX (ed.), Pseudo-Kodinos 23 40. Constantine VII Porphyrogennotos. the author of the tenth-century De r.rrhno- tutu, in the preface of his work also claims thai, he was prompted to undertake its composition by the laxity and neglect that characterized flic organization of imperial rituals at the time, see De rev. 1. 1, I 2, 15 (Voc.t). Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 125 according to the same historian, was symptomatic of the. internal turmoil and anxiety concerning religious matters that plagued the Byzantines at the time/" T. Kiousopoulou sees in this adoption of foreign styles an attempt by the members of the upper classes to re- define their identity in order to survive in a period of hardship and uncertainty/12 However, it needs be pointed out, Gregoras seems to be referring to practices outside a ceremonial context, especially among the young."3 The continual representation of Byzantine officials in the by-now traditional kabbadion and skaranikon in portraits dated to the second half of the fourteenth century would lend support to this as- sertion (Fig. 4). One could claim, then, that in the sphere of ceremo- nial attire, at least, the Byzantines strove until the end to maintain a link, however contrived, to the past in which the kernel of their tra- ditional collective identity lay. The measure of how successful the Byzantines were at convincing not only themselves but also others of the antiquity of their ceremo- nial dress and, by extension, of their state, is given by the comments of the Italian humanist Vespasiano da Bisticci concerning the dress of the Byzantine delegation to the Council of Ferrara-Florence con- vened to deal with the question of the Union of the Churches (1438 1439): "Non passero che io non dica qui una singulare loda de' Greci. I Greci, in anni mille chinquecento o piu, non hanno mai mutato abi- to: quello medesimo abito avevano in quello tempo, ch'eglino avevano avuto nel tempo detto." (I will not pass without a word of special praise of the Greeks. For at least fifteen hundred years and more they have not altered the style of their dress; their clothes are of the same fashion now as they were in the time indicated.)"4 Vespasiano was writ- ing in the last two decades of the fifteenth century, when the Byzan- 91 Gregoras, Historia Romana ,'!, 554, 20 550, 7 (Sojiopkn). 112 T. K lousoi'ouLOU, Stotxeiu xt)S fto&tvuWis evSuuwotus xma xt)v lurreyri wto/tp To. xcuteXu, in: Oh. Angklidu (ed.), To Bv'Qavuo o'hjiuo yvu a)0My%. Emkoytc,, euataOT)al- eg xai xyojtoi i;x(|>ouar)s uko tov evSekuto oxov fikuto mspjixo uuovu. Athens 2004. 194 190. 1,3 Oregoras, Historia Romana 3, 555, 20 550, 2 (Sciiopen). 91 P. D'Anoona K. Aksohumann (eds.), Vespasiano da Bisticci Vite di uomini illustri del secolo XV. .Milan 1951, 10; see also op. cit. 87: "Non passero qui una loda gran dissima de' Greci che mai non hanno mutato habito, eosi i temprorali come gli spirifuali." English translation: Vkkpakiaxo da Bisticci, The Vespasiano Memoirs. Lives of Illustrious Men of the XVfh Century (trans. W. Gicorwio K. Waturs, intr. M. P. Cil.moru). Toronto 1997, 20. It should be noted that, at the time of the Council of Florence, the familiarity of Italian humanists with classical Greek 126 Maria G. Parani tine Empire was no more about an event that had taken place when he had been in his late teens. His surprising claim, coloured as it may be by distance in time and by sentiment in the aftermath of the cap- ture of Const antinople by the Ottomans, is also reflective of-—and may have been informed by the impact that the dress of the Byzantine delegation had on Western imagination, an impact evident in the work of fifteenth-century Italian artists, who employed Byzantine gar- ments and, especially, Byzantine head-dresses in order to portray Late Antique emperors or to characterize some of the depicted figures as Greek.9" Indeed, some years after the fall of Constantinople to the Ottomans in 1453, Piero della Francesca portrayed Constantine I (324-337) in the famous Battle at the Milvian Bridge at San Francesco in Arezzo with the facial features and the distinctive hat of the Byz- antine emperor John \ III Palaiologos (1425-1448) (Figs. 9, 10).!l(i This seems to me a fitting tribute to the staunchness with which the Byz- antines held on to their traditional sense of identity for a period of more than a thousand years. For photo credits see the list on p. XIII of this volume. culture was still largely literary, a fact which meant that they were not yet in a position to know what ancient (jreek costume actually looked like. "° One has in mind, for example, Italian artists of painted wedding chests (luumuni) adorned with scenes from (jreek mythology and ancient, (jreek history, see K. H. Combrich, Apollonio di Giovanni. Journal of the Warlmrg and donrlauld Institutes 18 (1955) 24 26; K. Panoknky, Renaissance and Renascences in Western Art. New York 1972, el060, 168 172; E. Callman, Apollonio di Giovanni. Oxford 1974, 33; P. F. Watson, Apollonio di Giovanni and Ancient Athens. Allen, Memorial Art Mn- seunilhdle.linkXl\\ (1979 80) 3 25. I would like to thank Prof. Robert Nklhon for bringing this corpus of Italian camwti to my attention. For a discussion of orien- talizing dress, including Byzantine fashions, in early fifteenth-century French painting, see J. Kublski, Orientalizing Costume in Early Fifteenth-Century French Manuscript, Painting (Cite tie Dames Master, Limbourg Brothers, Boueieaut Master, and Bedford Master). (Scuta 40 (2001) Kit 180, "" A. Warbcrc, Piero della Franceseas Constantinssehlaeht in dor Aquarollkopic des Johann Anton Ramboux, in his Gesammoltc Schriftcn 1 (ed. G. Binu). Leipzig Berlin 1932, 253 (reprinted from a paper given in 1912); M. Viokbrs, Some Pre- paratory Drawings for Pisanello's Medallion of .John VIII Palaeologus. The Art Bulletin 60 (1978) 423; A. Ciiakthu L'ltalie et Byzance. Paris 1999. 222 225. Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume 127 128 Maria G. Parani ■1 Coislin 79. fol. 2' (1071-1081): Michael VII Doukas (1071-1078) enthroned. Hanked by four officials. 130 Maria (<. 1'arani 5 Par. gr. 1242, fol. 5V (completed in 1375): John VI KantakouzenoH (1347-13 presiding over the Church Council of 1351. Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume '#3' 0 Vienna, Osterreichisehe Nationalhihhothek. MS. A. F 10 fol lr (mid-thirteenth century): scenes from the court of a Turkish ruler. 182 Marin <». Parani 7 Constantinople, Chora Monastery (1315-1 321), donor panel: the bgolhelex Ion gmiktm Theodore Metoehites. Cultural Identity and Dress: Byzantine Ceremonial Costume I 33 8 Moscow, Tietj<iko\ (<allei\ silver-gild revetment of an icon of the Hodegetria (end of the thnleenth hegmning of the fourteenth century): Constantine Akropolites. 10 Arezzo, San Francesco. Piero clella Francesoa, Legend of the True Cross: T-».,*-i-i., 4.u„ xr;i,T),.;,],,„ ^i„f„;i l/isai EEBS 'EjtexriQig ElTouoeiac; Bu!;avtivd>v Srtouodrv EO Echos d'Orient EC'S 'O ev Ka)vaTavTivoi)3t6Xtu 'EXXt]vix6g 4>iXoXx>yih6s HvXkoyog FM Fontes Minores GCS Die griechischen christliehen Schriftsteller GRBS Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies Hell 'EXAnvixd IRAIK Izvestija Russkago Archeologifieskago lnstituta v Konstantinopol'e IstMitt Istanbuler Mitteilungen JbAC Jahrbuch for Antike und Christentum JHSt Journal of Hellenic Studies JOB Jahrbuch der Osterreichischen Byzantinistik (1969-) JOBG Jahrbuch der Osterreichischen Byzantinisehen Gesellschaft (1951-1908) JRSt Journal of Roman Studies U!( J Lexikon zur byzantinisehen Grazitat, erstellt von E. Trapp [et al.]. I. A-K. Wien 2001 LexMA Lexikon des Mittelalters. I-IX. Miinchen 1980-1998 LSJ H.G. Liddell — R. Scott -H. Stuart Jones -R. McKenzie, A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford "1925—1940. Revised Supplement, ed. by P. G. W. Glare with the assistance of A.A.Thompson. Oxford 1996 LThK2 Lexikon fur Theologie und Kirche. 1-X. Freiburg 21957-1968 LThK3 Lexikon f'iir Theologie und Kirche. I-XI. Freiburg 31993-2001 MBM Miscellanea Byzantina Monaeensia MGH Monumenta Gerinaniae Historica MM F. Miklosich - I. Muller, Acta et diplomata graeca medii aevi I-VI. Wien 1800—1890 MMB Monumenta Musicae Byzantinae NE NE05 'EXXv|voavi'|(icov OC Orientalia Christiana OCA Orientalia Christiana Analecta OCP Orientalia Christiana Periodica ODB The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, ed. by A.P. Kazhdan [et al.]. Vol. I—III. New York Oxford 1991 PG Patrologiae cursus completus. Series graeca, ed. J.-P. Migne. 1-101. Paris 1857-1800 PL Patrologiae cursus completus. Series latina, ed. J.-P. Migne. 1-221. Paris 1844-1880 PLP Prosopographisches Lexikon der Palaiologenzeit, erstellt von E. Trapp [et al.]. Wien 1970—1990 PLRE The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, ed. A.H.M. Jones - J.R. Martindale - J. Morris. 12. Cambridge 1971-1980 PmbZ R.-J. Lilie [et al.], Prosopographie der mittelbyzantinisehen Zeit. 1 - . Berlin 1999- PO Patrologia Orientalis, ed. R. Grafpin - F. Nau. 1- . Paris 1904-

Log In

“Cultural Identity and Dress: The Case of Late Byzantine Court Costume,” Jarbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 57 (2007), 95-134.

“Cultural Identity and Dress: The Case of Late Byzantine Court Costume,” Jarbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 57 (2007), 95-134.

“Cultural Identity and Dress: The Case of Late Byzantine Court Costume,” Jarbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 57 (2007), 95-134.

“Cultural Identity and Dress: The Case of Late Byzantine Court Costume,” Jarbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 57 (2007), 95-134.

“Cultural Identity and Dress: The Case of Late Byzantine Court Costume,” Jarbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 57 (2007), 95-134.

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS