Art and Marriage in Early Byzantium
Art and Marriage in Early Byzantium
Art and Marriage in Early Byzantium
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Dumbarton Oaks Papers
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
This riage
articlehelped
addresses
theByzantine
question of
how marto shape
material
culture, or, put another way, how the material culture
the Stathatos Collection, Athens (Fig. 3), whose bezel bears simply the words "I, Goudeles, give the
betrothal ring to Maria."4
wicz, "On the Gold Marriage Belt and the Marriage Rings of
the Dumbarton Oaks Collection," DOP 14 (1960), 3-16.
'See S. Cirac Estopafian, Skyllitzes matritensis, I. Reproducciones
crowns. Because their main inscription is an invocation, on behalf of "Romanos the spatharokandidatos together with his wife
and children," she sees them as "votive offerings to a church"
(even though made of tin-plated copper). Yet Byzantine marriage rings do occasionally bear invocations (see M. Hadzidakis
[Chatzidakis], "Un anneau byzantin du Mus&e Benaki," BNJ 17
[1939-43], nos. 80, 89; and note 97 below), and it was not un-
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
146
GARY
VIKAN
geneous that it cannot properly be said to constitute a historically distinct unit within later
Byzantine art history generally. Early Byzantine
marriage-related art, by contrast, has its own identity and tradition within the history of late antique
material culture as, from the fourth to seventh
wedding ring, with the former, the annulus pronubus, in part functioning as, or at least symbolizing,
commonly believed that a nerve or sinew ran directly from that finger to the heart.8 As Aulus Gellius had explained it:
When the human body is cut open as the Egyptians
do and when dissections, or anatomai as the Greeks
phrase it, are practiced on it, a very delicate nerve is
found which starts from the annular finger and travels to the heart. It is, therefore, thought seemly to give
to this finger in preference to all others the honour of
paper.
ring no. 1033, showing clasped hands holding a heart. The Orthodox betrothal service, as it had taken shape in the middle
Byzantine period (Ritzer, Le mariage, 129 f), and as it survives
today, stipulates that the betrothal rings-ta daktylidia tou arrabonos-be placed on the third finger of the right hand, the hand
l Of course this does not include those rings made for husband or wife to mark significant anniversary dates, birthdays,
or the new year. Certainly such rings did exist (Henkel, Finger-
rings.
man and a silver ring to the woman; see Trempela, "He ako-
louthia," 117.
5See M. C. Ross, Catalogue of the Byzantine and Early Medieval
no. 38.
with which divine authority and power was customarily expressed (Trempela, "He akolouthia," 134 f).
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
function as a marriage ring as well, even if its device were not specific to that role.13 In either case
the marriage (or betrothal) ring would be unidentifiable from our vantage point.
Viewed more broadly, this disproportion of gold
to bronze suggests that it was primarily among the
rial" in portrait type, headgear, or dress, corroborate the notion that the clientele for early Byzantine marriage rings was substantially confined to
the topmost level of society.' 16
scribed with homonoia ("concord") would not be be"7See Henkel, Fingerringe, 342 f. Clement of Alexandria, in
the passage from the Paidagogos cited above (note 13), stipulated
that a man should wear his seal ring on his little finger, below
ringe, nos. 819 if, for Roman friendship rings with similar be-
zels.
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
148
GARY
VIKAN
couple.21
was in common use in the West (Fig. 6: Speratu[s]Beneriae).24 The meaning of its composition is no
more complex than it appears to be; much as these
more, the latter rings are characteristically lightweight and simply executed, whereas the former
are usually heavy, very finely crafted, and occasionally personalized.
By the fourth century this type of marriage ring,
tio may have taken place in confirmation of the betrothal contract (Ritzer, Le mariage, 128), it most likely would have been
between the parents.
22Figure 4 = Washington, D. C., Dumbarton Oaks Collection,
no. 47.18. See Ross, Catalogue, no. 50. For others, which may be
taken to be Byzantine by virtue of their findspots or inscrip-
Early Christian Antiquities and Objects from the Christian East in the
Department of British and Medieval Antiquities and Ethnography of
the British Museum (London, 1901), no. 207 (gold, with cross [=
should be understood as complementing one another spiritually in the life they share. Not surprisingly, this formula, which was then also commonly
used in the West for co-portraits of Sts. Peter and
logue, no. 208. For the appearance of this ring type in the West,
see Henkel, Fingerringe, 337-39; M. Henig, A Corpus of Roman
Engraved Gemstones from British Sites, BAR British Series 8 (Ox-
ford, 1978), no. 790; and Ross, Catalogue, no. 50. Many ex-
480.
our Fig. 5]); G. Vikan, Byzantine Objects of Daily Life in the Menil
Collection, Volume I (forthcoming), no. R25 (bronze).
To this list may be added a one-sided, 5th-century Byzantine
no. 53.12.61. See Ross, Catalogue, no. 52; and for such a bezel
678.
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ture on the coinage, however, one would not expect the profile ring type to have continued much
beyond the later fifth century.30
these paired profiles intended to be realistic portrayals of Aristophanes and Vigilantia? Almost certainly not, since both are repeated virtually identically on an uninscribed gold marriage ring in the
many among them, including simple bronze examples, show striking similarities to well-known
imperial portrait types.33 The commonality of the
rings in our Figures 4 and 10, therefore, would not
be one of shared individual portraiture, but rather
Byzantine iconographic scheme for evoking marriage, mention should be made of the appearance
of the double-profile marriage formula in two con-
one of shared workshop technique, and of common dependency on familiar coin types. Indeed,
4, 8-10).
and one with neither cross nor inscription, see Objects with Semitic Inscriptions, 1100 B.C.-A.D. 700 (and) Jewish, Early Christian
and Byzantine Antiquities, Zurich, L. Alexander Wolfe, and Frank
288, 294.
function; their continuity into the 5th century is attested by occasional examples with stylite saints or with the Chrismon.
37 See Age of Spirituality: Late Antique and Early Christian Art,
no. 4.
" Note especially Ross, Catalogue, no. 51, where the bride's
earrings and necklace are clearly discernible, as is the groom's
elaborate fibula.
no. 281; and A. Banck, Byzantine Art in the Collections of the USSR
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
150
GARY
VIKAN
small and early in date.42 Moreover, their iconography would be unusual for that role, since in ad-
rings-were specifically associated with the marriage ceremony, an event in which both the notion
of "health" and the warding off of evil had significant roles to play (see below).44
Just as the profile soon substantially disappeared
which relics have been found seem to have been made significantly earlier than their outer protective containers, and quite
nos. B19, B20, C12; and Age of Spirituality, nos. 568, 569.
43Grabar, "Isaurie," 57 f. For closely comparable votive images in repousse silver, see M. Mundell Mango, Silver from Early
Byzantium: The Kaper Koraon and Related Treasures (Baltimore,
1986), 244.
44 For a small, undecorated bronze box of the period discov-
11 (Vienna, 1971), no. B3; and for the Cilician box, now in
Adana, no. B4. See also A. Grabar, "Un reliquaire provenant
d'Isaurie," CahArch 13 (1962), 49-59; and idem, "Un reliquaire
provenant de Thrace," CahArch 14 (1964), 59-65. These two
onciling his inappropriately early dating of the Thracian boxto the second quarter of the 4th century-with the dominant
cross, and with his conviction that both boxes were made to be
reliquaries (which then hardly existed). Grabar, on the other
hand, correctly dated the boxes later (the Thracian box ca. 400,
the Cilician box to the mid-5th century), but mistakenly identified the paired profiles as Constantine and Helen, overlooking
the fact that the imperial diadems had been deleted from the
coin models, and choosing to downplay the fact that no such
iconographic formula for that pair of saints is known to have
existed at such an early date.
40These two elements-paired frontal portraits and a vivas in
bezel preserved in Spalato. See O. Pelka, Altchristliche Ehedenkmiller (Strasbourg, 1901), 131, no. 50. For the iconography and
function of the Proiecta casket, see K. J. Shelton, The Esquiline
Treasure (London, 1981), 27 f.
41Shelton, Treasure, 28.
ered with a phos-zoe ring in it, see Objects with Semitic Inscriptions,
(Figs. 4, 10). For that group, which should be dated with the
boxes to the first half of the 5th century, see G. Vikan, "Early
Christian and Byzantine Rings in the Zucker Family Collection,"
JWalt 45 (1987), 33, figs. 5-8. The repetition of juxtaposed profile portraits of Sts. Peter and Paul on the top and back of the
Cilician box may have been intended to complement and reinforce the "concord" notion implicit in the double marriage portrait appearing on the box's two ends.
tion, no. 59.60. See Ross, Catalogue, no. 4E. For others, see Byzantium: The Light in the Age of Darkness, New York, Ariadne Gal-
with Christ: Theou [?] homonoia); Gruneisen, Art chretien, no. 456
(gold "bague reliquaire" [i.e., thick detached bezel]); P. Orsi, Sicilia bizantina, I (Rome, 1942), 158, fig. 73 (gold and niello, with
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
onoia [= our Fig. 13]); no. 68 (gold and niello, with Christ:
(bronze, with cross: hygia [= our Fig. 14]); idem, "Zucker," fig.
9 (gold [raised device]).
46Fig. 13 = Washington, D.C., Dumbarton Oaks Collection,
no. 53.12.4. See Ross, Catalogue, no. 67.
47Figure 14 = Houston, Menil Collection, no. R26. See Vi-
kan, Menil Collection, no. R26. Its unpublished twin, in the Cabinet des Medailles, is much better preserved; on it the crowns
are clearly visible, as are the first three letters (upsilon, gamma,
iota) of the word hygia, which is only faintly discernible in the
exergue of the Menil ring.
48Orsi, Sicilia bizantina, I, 158, fig. 73 and Dalton, Catalogue,
no. 133 are very much alike, as are Ross, Catalogue, no. 4E (=
our Fig. 12), Byzantium, no. 39, and Spieser, "Canellopoulos,"
no. 9 (= our Fig. 17). Reputed findspots include Constantinople (Ross, Catalogue, no. 67), Beirut (Dalton, Catalogue, no.
133), and Sicily (Orsi, Sicilia bizantina, I, 158, fig. 73); this would
suggest central dissemination of the ring type, if not the actual
rings, from Constantinople.
"For sarcophagi and gold glass, see F. Cabrol and H. Leclercq, "Mariage," DACL 10.2 (1932), figs. 7649, 7664, 7665,
7667, 7670. For a rare Roman ring bezel with frontal portraits,
see Pelka, Ehedenkmiiler, 131, no. 50.
52The Grineisen ring bezel (Art chretien, no. 456), with frontal
different.
53 Figure 15 = Houston, Menil Collection, no. GW12. See Vikan, Menil Collection, nos. GW9, GW12, and chap. 7. The rings
closest in composition to the glass weights are those published
by Dalton (Catalogue, no. 133) and Orsi (Sicilia bizantina, I, 158,
fig. 73).
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
152
GARY
VIKAN
Constantinople and another high official belowtheir iconographic message is basically the same,
for much as husband and wife complement one
another in the domestic sphere under the uniting
cally, what distinguishes these rings from the earlier type, aside from the portraits, is their much
greater emphasis on Christian imagery; specifically, the more prominent cross and the bust por-
trait of Christ.
group (Fig. 13).55 During the early Byzantine period crowns were essential ingredients in the mar-
have remained so ever since.56 Like most other as491-602 (Washington, D.C., 1966), pl. LVIII. For the dating of
this ring design (via the cross monogram), see Ross, Catalogue,
no. 69; and Vikan, "Zucker," 39; and for the related archaeological evidence, see Ross, Catalogue, no. 4E; and Dalton, Catalogue,
no. 189. The motif of Christ en buste above a cross is paralleled
on the ca. 600 pewter Holy Land flasks preserved at Monza and
Bobbio. See A. Grabar, Les ampoules de Terre Sainte (Paris, 1958),
passim.
54See Grierson, Coins, pl. 17, 302; and G. Zacos and A. Veglery, Byzantine Lead Seals (Basel, 1972), no. 260.
55 Marriage crowns, as distinct from whatever secular headgear bride or groom might wear, do not appear on rings of the
profile portrait type already discussed, and they are very rare
Antike und Christentum, Theophaneia: Beitrige zur Religionsund Kirchengeschichte des Altertums (Bonn, 1940), 93-109;
and note 3 above.
made of flowers and sacred plants, was initially rejected by the church fathers-most notably Tertul-
tory") of the bride and groom over sensual pleasure.58 And although no Church requirement yet
existed, it was becoming increasingly common for
then used in the marriage ceremony, their iconographic role, like that of the figure holding them,
was essentially symbolic.61 In this respect they parallel the victory crown suspended in the hand of
rary coinage (e.g., Fig. 8),62 and thus differ fundamentally from the real marriage crowns being set
in place in the marriage miniatures of the twelfthcentury Skylitzes chronicle (Fig. 1). The same applies to the schematic crowns on the bezels of sixthcentury Byzantine marriage rings, which, like their
counterparts in the Christian art of fourth-century
Rome, may have symbolized a general sort of spiritual triumph or perhaps the more specific moral
victory evoked by John Chrysostom. But in either
case, they probably still were believed to carry a
measure of that amuletic power ascribed to their
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
marriage ring. It is only with the later, frontal portrait type that words appear as a major ingredient
on Byzantine marriage rings. Specifically, there are
three different inscriptions characteristic of the
group, one of which is traditional and two innovative. The traditional inscription, in the exergue of
most of the rings, is the word homonoia or "concord," which was likely derived directly from the
of the prevailing late antique moral code governing their relationship.64 Most clearly articulated by
the Stoics, the belief was that one's wife was no
the Thracian silver box discussed above (Fig. 11). The close relationship of this box's iconography to that of contemporary
Veyne).
400, paired imperial portraits flank a tyche to evoke the idea that
the empire's prosperity depends on harmonious co-rulership le-
gitimized by the polis; by the later 5th century a cross has replaced the tyche, implying that divine sanction is now preemi-
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
154
GARY
VIKAN
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Patricia":
God had given marriage to insure its very survival-the words hygia and homonoia, as invocations
the evil eye, and the bride was carried over the
"Divorce").
78 MacCoull, Dioscorus, 81 f.
79For an overview of the mortality issue, see A. Laiou, "Family, Byzantium," Dictionary of the Middle Ages, ed. J. R. Strayer, 4
phy.
this necklace in the 1951 Dumbarton Oaks Papers, labeled them as Sts. Constantine and Helen, while
acknowledging that no contemporary visual evidence could be cited as corroboration, and apparently overlooking the fact that neither wears the
appropriate imperial headgear.82 But clearly, the
links' "concord" male-female composition and hygia inscription are much more appropriately associated with contemporary marriage iconography
no. 4; and B. Deppert, "Early Byzantine Jewelry, Fourth to Seventh Century A.D.," Byzantine Jewelry, ed. D. Content (forthcom-
omega 107-8. See Banck, Byzantine Art, no. 102; and for a line
drawing, Kondakov, Russkie klady, fig. 101.
82Kondakov, Russkie klady, 187 f; and Grabar, "Un medaillon,"
29 f.
section xII) both noted the similarity between these link medallions and contemporary marriage rings.
84See Grabar, "Un medaillon," 46.
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
156
GARY
VIKAN
Metropolitan Museum of Art (Fig. 19) which, although western and earlier, combines in its two
pendants traditional marriage iconography and
magic.85 In this case the larger, gold pendant bears
the marriage imagery-profile portraits of husband and wife about to be crowned-and the
long to a familiar category of late antique artifact-the earthen eulogia ("blessing")-which has
been shown to be characteristically amuletic in its
intended function and often specifically medicinal
in its desired effect.90 Moreover, while many such
tokens, like those showing St. Symeon Stylites the
Younger, may be linked through their iconography
to specific pilgrimage shrines, others, like those
showing Christ en buste, the Virgin and Child, or
the word "Solomon" with a coiled serpent (Fig. 21),
were apparently topographically anonymous, and
therefore, in effect, simply portable bits of sacred
magic.91 The same is likely true of the paired bust
graphically equivalent to the Mersin treasure necklace links (Fig. 18) and the bronze hygia marriage
rings (Fig. 14), insofar as the amuletic invocation
Paul" are the labels conventionally applied by antiquities dealers to the stamped earthen discs with
paired frontal portraits (Fig. 20) which formed the
major part of a hoard of several hundred "pilgrim
tokens" recently dispersed on the international art
dony), which may in fact be the material of this gem amulet. See
Age of Spirituality, no. 281 (wherein this gem is labeled "hematite"), and no. 398 (an anti-hemorrhaging amulet with Christian
iconography also labeled "hematite" but likely heliotrope.
"8See ibid., 83.
hoard, which in addition to the present iconographic type includes a type comprising a Greek cross with what appear to be
the letters for nike ("victory") between its arms, see Objects with
Semitic Inscriptions, no. 172. For the early Byzantine appearance
of such a formula (specifically, on bread stamps), see G. Galavaris, Bread and the Liturgy (Madison, 1970), 72-76.
the uterus; indeed, one category bears an incantation addressed directly to the hystera ("womb"), accusing that "dark and black one" of "coiling like a
serpent, hissing like a dragon, and roaring like a
a lamb."94 Why? One first assumes that this calmness would enhance the organ's fertility (or at least,
discourage dysmenorrhea), and that was probably,
on some level, the intention. But it is also true that
73.
94See ibid., 77 f.
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
amuletic.
bride on the right, and between and slightly behind them, Christ (Fig. 22).7 Unlike the other two
95See A.A. Barb, "Diva metrix," JWarb 16 (1953), 193-238
tion, no. 61. 3. See Ross, Catalogue, no. 66. For other such rings,
see A. Banck, "Dva vizantiiskikh zolotykh perstnia iz sobranija
Ermitazha," Trudy Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha. Kul'tura i iskusstvo
sanctus scenes, Christ and the Virgin bless the couple: homonoia;
no. 130 = gold and niello, octagonal hoop, Christ draws the
couple together: homonoia, John 14:27; no. 131 = gold, niello,
and set stones, octagonal hoop, Christ blesses the couple: homonoia, Theotoke boethei amen [= our Fig. 25]; no. 132 = gold,
niello, and set stones, octagonal hoop, Christ blesses the couple:
homonoia, John 14:27); O. M. Dalton, Byzantine Art and Archae-
Ricci, Catalogue, nos. 822, 845, 848, 861 (no. 822 = gold, dextrarum iunctio?; no. 845 = gold, dextrarum iunctio?; no. 848 = gold,
dextrarum iunctio; no. 861 = gold, dextrarum iunctio); C. Kondoleon and A. Gonosov~i, The Art of Late Rome and Byzantium: A
Catalogue of the Collection of the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
158
GARY
VIKAN
Although the terminus post quem for this iconographic type may be fixed at ca. 450, with the first
documented appearance in the East of the dextrarum iunctio showing Christ as a symbolic pronubus
on a coin type issued to commemorate the marriage of Marcian and Pulcheria (Fig. 27),104 most of
the surviving representatives of the type should be
assigned to the seventh century. This is suggested
by the fact that one of the three octagonal locus
quem of ca. 600, are in turn linked in design, iconography, and style to the marriage rings in Lon-
London (Fig. 25), and one in Berlin.106 Furthermore, this core subgroup of seven rings includes
enough peculiarities (e.g., substantial niello decoration, inset stones, square bezels with lobes, the
John 14:27 inscription) to draw yet more rings into
the seventh century.107
sanctus scenes.103
101 Figure 23 = Washington, D.C., Dumbarton Oaks Collection, no. 59.47. See Ross, Catalogue, no. 66 (for both objects).
'102See Banck, "Zolotykh," 35-39 (a ring inset with an emerald
and a garnet).
cuse findspot, and its substantial weight, has the strongest claim
to courtly (if not actual imperial) patronage.
103 Included in that subgroup are the three locus sanctus rings
octagonal locus sanctus ring without explicit marriage iconography in the Walters Art Gallery. See P. Verdier, "An Early Christian Ring with a Cycle of the Life of Christ," The Bulletin of The
Walters Art Gallery 11.3 (1958).
o06For the Berlin ring, see Volbach, Bildwerke, no. 6810. For
the dating of the flasks, see J. Engemann, "Palistinische Pilger-
25 f.
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
tron, the pronuba, who brought the couple together, whereas with increasing frequency in early
ceremonial verisimilitude Christ could be imagined as standing in for his symbolic equivalent, the
priest, who in turn could be imagined as standing
in for his functional equivalent, the matron pronuba, the iconography as presented on the coins and
tium.
to the exclusion of the other, it would be necessary to date securely one of the rings (or a belt) before the year 491-which
bride and groom are without nimbi. But while Christ appears
to be beardless on some of the rings and the couple perhaps
nimbed (Fig. 24), on others he is clearly bearded, and it is ap-
parent that the bride and groom generally do not have nimbi.
This could mean that both coins exercised an influence on the
rings, although it is also possible that the rings' basic iconographic type, whichever its archetype, was successively adapted
to suit prevailing tastes. That many of these rings clearly date
well beyond the 5th century, and that at least one (Fig. 22) appears to draw directly on the 491 issue, together suggest that
the later coin may have been the proximate source of inspira-
Also directed toward this same basic subject, but less useful, is
an article by C. Frugoni, "L'iconografia del matrimonio e della
riage Belt," 8 f.
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
160
GARY
VIKAN
tilla is one overseen and characterized by Concordia, the union of Marcian and Pulcheria is one
overseen and characterized by Christ. But there is
a crucial difference, for while the ideal concord of
ferred from those miracle-working pilgrimage artifacts to various items of jewelry which, by virtue
of their inscriptions and complementary imagery,
were clearly intended to function as amulets.120
Closest to these rings is a distinctive category of
medico-magical armband produced in the eastern
Mediterranean region during the sixth and seventh centuries (Fig. 30: heis Theos ["one God"],
"6 For early evidence of the blessing of the bride and groom
by a priest through the imposition of his hands, and for John
Chrysostom's specific references to the euchai and eulogiai that
the priest pronounces as part of the marriage benediction, see
Ritzer, Le mariage, 104-10, 134 f (PG 54, col. 443).
"'7To support Kantorowicz's ("Marriage Belt," 13) ingenious
interpretation of those rings with both Christ and the Virgin as
portraying, in response to Eph. 5:25, a typological bond between the terrestrial couple and "the exemplary concord of
(his figs. 31a-c), bride and groom are here not imitating but
cordia," 312), and it would seem unlikely that the early Christian community would have so readily taken over a pagan iconographic scheme (e.g., onto sarcophagi and gold glass) if it were
should also take as more symbolic than literal the passage from
Gregory of Nazianzus cited in note 113 above.
"5On all but one ring in this series (Fig. 24), Christ appears
to be touching the couple, either on the shoulders, the hands,
or the head. Since in no instance can it be seen that he (or the
Grierson, Byzantine Coinage, Dumbarton Oaks Byzantine Collection Publications 4 (Washington, D.C., 1982), 26.
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
r4a
/r .u
-hz4
(~4T~T A
7?7W4*
4Ia~w*#I
4O74ALu ~7N6
1 Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional, cod. 5-3, no. 2, fol. 125r, marriage miniature (photo: Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional)
4k
Yk
AIAO~i~
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
4 Washington, D.C.,
5 Washington, D.C.,
Museum)
Oaks)
*i
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
;ni~
;Owl
41
If
3 14
. ,I, ; . m
7Ie
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
4X:
17 Athens, Canellopoulos
16 Geneva, Mus&e d'Art et
d'Histoire, flat weight
(photo: Mus6e d'Art et
d'Histoire)
"Canellopoulos," no. 9)
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
,kiAl
ZW 1?
AA-?,Nm m-
18a detail
14,
-ivj
KIM,
18 Leningrad, State Hermitage Museum, no. omega 1078, marriage necklace (photo: State Hermitage
Museum)
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
(photo: same)
21 Paris, Robert-Henri
Bautier Collection,
22 Washington, D.C.,
Dumbarton Oaks
23 Washington, D.C.,
Dumbarton Oaks
Oaks)
TL 10.1985.048, marriage
ring (photo: the Walters
Art Gallery)
Museum)
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
I'',
26 Washington, D.C., Dumbarton Oaks Collection, no. 47.15, marriage ring (photo: Dumbarton Oaks)
QIt
4b
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
kV
dpI
30 Columbia, University of Missouri Museum of Art and Archaeology (olim, Cairo, Fouquet
Collection), amuletic armband (after Maspero, "Bracelets-amulettes," fig. 1)
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
31 Washington, D.C., Dumbarton Oaks Collection, no. 37.33, marriage belt (photo: Dumbarton Oaks)
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ness.125
In addition, there is the apparently amuletic inscription from Psalm 5 ("Thou hast crowned us
with a shield of favor"), already discussed, which
appears on one of the octagonal locus sanctus rings,
and on a second octagonal ring, without scenes.126
Also amuletic is the ring's very shape, the octagon, which is shared by more than half the rings
belonging to the dextrarum iunctio iconographic
type. This is indicated by the high rate of coincidence between octagonal hoops and rings bearing
magical words (e.g., heis Theos, Psalm 90), magical
colic:
(1908), 246-58, fig. 1 (line drawing); and Vikan, "Art, Medicine, and Magic," 75. The scenes on the armband are: Annunciation, Nativity, Chnoubis and "ring signs," Baptism, Crucifixion, Women at the Tomb, Holy Rider, Ascension (far left).
122See Vikan, "Art, Medicine, and Magic," 75-77, and, for an
armband bearing the word hygia, fig. 10.
123 For the issue of uterine magic, see the article cited in the
preceding note. I took up the gender-specific question as it relates to these armbands in an unpublished paper entitled "The
Magic of Silver in Early Byzantium," presented as part of the
1986 NEH sponsored symposium, "Ecclesiastical Silver Plate in
Sixth-Century Byzantium," jointly hosted by the Walters Art
124 For examples of such rings, see Vikan, "Art, Medicine, and
Magic," figs. 13, 15; and Objects with Semitic Inscriptions, nos. 25,
340, 347 (and nos. 329, 336, and 338, for faceted hoops that
are too crudely executed to be identified specifically as eight
sided). Conversely, bezels bearing invocations, monograms, or
iconic images are rarely associated with octagonal (or even faceted) hoops. Clearly, this evidence does not square with Kantorowicz's notion ("Marriage Belt," 13 f; repeated by Kitzinger,
"Reflections," 72 note 71) that the correlation was with "concord," by way of a perceived identity of shape between octagonal ring hoops and the octagonal Church of Holy Savior in
Final mention should be made of the appearance of this dextrarum iunctio iconography outside
13"Figure 31 = Washington, D.C., Dumbarton Oaks Collection, no. 37.33. See Ross, Catalogue, no. 38. For the de Clercq
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
162
GARY
VIKAN
man."
could easily be accommodated under the encompassing umbrella of marriage. Again, Dioscorus of
Aphrodito provides an illuminating textual counterpart, in his "Epithalamium for Athanasius":
strong Athanasius ... I have beheld [you] as another
new Dionysos; for truly those who look upon the
wine, Love's adornment, passing it closely in goblets
one to another, have prayed to Poseidon the nurturer
for you, O bridegroom .... 11
no. 1212; and E. Coche de La Fert6, L'antiquite chretienne au Musde du Louvre (Paris, 1958), no. 47. An unpublished early Byzantine belt(?) in the Hermitage, consisting of copper repousse
links, shows in the large medallion at its center the bust portrait
of a woman enframed by the words charis and hygia. This, too,
may be a marriage belt.
Among the 7th-century David silver plates there is one (Age
of Spirituality, no. 432) that portrays the marriage of David and
Michal (1 Sam. 18:27) under the authority of King Saul (-pronubus). Iconographically it is conceived as a courtly wedding,
much like that portrayed on the marriage solidus of Licinia Eu-
alia, I.18.9-10.
that the groom-after the bride had been delivered by the matron-pronuba-loosed the nodus herculeus which, hours earlier, she had fastened on the
girdle with which her wedding gown (and virgin's
modesty) had been secured.'36 Belt, wine, Christ,
tium, insofar as it constitutes an identifiable tradition in its own right, is one substantially confined
"' See F. D. Friedman, Beyond the Pharaohs: Egypt and the Copts
in the 2nd to 7th Centuries A.D. (Providence, R.I., 1989), no. 108.
134 See MacCoull, Dioscorus, 108.
"I See A. Amiaud, La lgende syriaque de Saint Alexis, l'homme de
Dieu (Paris, 1889), 12 f; and Ross, Catalogue, no. 38.
'36See Carcopino, Rome, 82.
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
to late Antiquity, to rings, and to the wealthy. Indeed, it is at once characterized and circumscribed
couple-by paired portraits, by the dextrarum iunctio, and by the inscribed words concordia and homo-
figure types, and throughout, iconography remained symbolic and "portraiture" anonymous.
Superficially, the bezel of a Byzantine marriage
ring of the seventh century (Fig. 26) looks much
like a Roman commemorative marriage coin of the
third (Fig. 28), and in fact, there is a direct genealogical link between the two. But over the centuries
much had changed, beyond the mere substitution
of the Greek homonoia for concordia. Not only has
What is paramount now is no longer the traditional contractual gesture of clasped hands, but
been given a Christian reinterpretation, and reflecting that, marriage iconography and marriage
Christian character.
ries, the pre-Christian roots of Byzantium's marriage art (and marriage) are still unmistakably pre-
Dionysos and his thiasos, while simultaneously invoking an amuletic sort of "health," ex Theou. Such
early Byzantium.
This content downloaded from 193.170.112.180 on Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:00:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Baltimore