Download PDF | Shulamit Laderman - Images of Cosmology in Jewish and Byzantine Art_ God's Blueprint of Creation-Brill Academic Publishers (2013).
395 Pages
PREFACE
As a high school student in Jerusalem, I was privileged to study with Dr. Nechama Leibowitz, an outstanding scholar and teacher of Bible, who raised thought-provoking questions regarding the biblical text. During my years in the Art History Department of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem I had the very good fortune to work with Prof. Elisheva Revel-Neher, who inspired me to examine some of those questions through Jewish and Christian works of art.
In the course of my studies I became acquainted with a sixth-century Byzantine-Christian cosmological work called the Christian Topography. Through text and illustrations the author of that work expounded a theory according to which the instructions for building the Tabernacle in the wilderness reveal the blueprint of Creation. This hypothesis is relevant to one of the most thought-provoking questions regarding the biblical text: Why is there such a very lengthy description of the Tabernacle and its implements? It is known that the Pentateuch is very sparing with words and uses an abbreviated language, and yet it devotes many repetitive chapters to the construction of the Tabernacle, which was to serve the Jewish people for only a short time.
Embellished by schematic images, the Christian Topography points to the unique significance of the Tabernacle in revealing the mystery of Creation. In studying this work I realized that its exegetical method regarding the Tabernacle and Creation relied heavily on earlier Jewish sources that were utilized by both Jewish and Christians scholars. First in evidence are the first-century writings of Philo of Alexandria whose method was later adopted by various Church Fathers. The schematic images in the Christian Topography are similar to earlier pictorial models found on Jewish coins and other Jewish artifacts from the second century on. In the later centuries the idea and its accompanying schematic diagrams were found mostly in Christian works of art, but then reappeared in a fourteenth-century Hebrew illuminated manuscript. Eventually I arrived at a fascinating new way of viewing the biblical text and decided to devote my dissertation to images of the Tabernacle and Creation in Jewish and Christian art.
In 2001, shortly after I received my PhD, I attended a lecture by the renowned scholar Prof. Israel M. Ta-Shma. He talked about the influence of Greek-speaking Byzantine southern Italy on Ashkenazi Jewish culture as seen in the eleventh-century enigmatic writings of Rabbi Moses HaDarshan and that scholar’s reliance on apocryphal literature. I was very much interested in what he had to say, as I had searched for influences and connections between Jewish and Byzantine-Christian interpretations of biblical concepts and ideas when I wrote my dissertation and had included material from works attributed to R. Moses HaDarshan.
In his lecture and subsequently in an article, Prof. Ta-Shma suggested that as R. Moses HaDarshan had lived in the area of Toulouse-Narbonne he might have been exposed to the Apocryphal Literature through a Christian heretical movement known as Catharism, which had spread rapidly in that part of Europe. Subsequently, it became dangerous to use those apocryphal themes owing to the Christian crusade against the Catharist heresy and one no longer dared to reference this material.
Many important Jerusalem scholars attended the lecture and most of them argued vociferously against Prof. Ta-Shma’s theory. When it was over I went up to Prof. Ta-Shma and told him about the parallel texts I had discovered when researching the cosmological symbols of Creation and the Tabernacle in midrashim attributed to R. Moshe HaDarshan and that I had compared them to the Christian Topography texts.
His immediate reaction was: “Why didn’t you say something earlier when my theory was being attacked?” I explained that for a person who has just received her doctorate it is difficult to venture an opinion in front of all the big names in the field. He asked for a copy of my dissertation and the next day phoned me asking that I also send a copy to Prof. Moshe Idel, perhaps the foremost authority on Kabbalah. They both enthusiastically urged me to publish the dissertation as a book and also to write an essay on these parallel texts. I promptly prepared an article in Hebrew, which was published in Tarbitz, but writing the book in English took a much longer time, as it had to be translated, altered into a form more suitable for a book, and, of course, as time went on updated to take account of new research in the field.
I tender my most profound gratitude to Prof. Elisheva Revel-Neher, who introduced me to the subject, inspired and guided me throughout my years of study and research for this book, and read it before it was sent to the publisher. I very much value her tremendous knowledge in both Art History and Jewish sources and am fortunate to enjoy her continuing guidance and support. Many thanks are due to Prof. Katrin Kogman-Appel with whom I often consulted along the way. She also read the manuscript, offered excellent suggestions, and gave me much needed advice. I am deeply indebted to Evelyn Grossberg, my English editor, who has a magical way with words and with their power to express ideas. My thanks to the Schechter Institute of Jewish Studies in Jerusalem for the award of the Kekst Prize for 2008-2009 and for providing some of the funding for my research.
Last but definitely not least my deepest appreciation to my beloved better half, my dear husband and best friend, Paul, who labored with me throughout and helped me enormously in so many ways and to whom I am dedicating this book.
Shulamit Laderman Jerusalem 2013
INTRODUCTION
When Moses ascended Mount Sinai and entered into the cloud, where he stayed for forty days and forty nights (Exod. 2415-18), he was shown a vision of the divine pattern-tavnit for the Tabernacle and its vessels and was told:
And let them make Me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them. According to all that I show thee, after the tavnit of the Tabernacle, and the tavnit of all the instruments thereof, even so shall ye make it (Exod. 25:8-9) ... And look that thou make them after their tavnit, which was showed thee on the mount (Exod. 25:40).
What was the tavnit that Moses saw on Mount Sinai? The nature and the essence of this vision have fascinated scholars for generations. Postbiblical apocryphal literature, the writings of Philo and Josephus, Heikhalot (heavenly palaces) and Merkavah (based on Ezekiel’s vision of God’s Chariot) literature, midrashic tradition,! the New Testament, and patristic literature all attach cosmic and theological significance to the Tabernacle. Jewish as well as Christian thought has frequently ascribed special meaning to the textual parallel between the description of Creation in Genesis and the instructions for building the Tabernacle in Exodus. Using this exegetical connection, early theologians formulated a cosmological theory to interpret the secrets and significance of Creation. The design of the Tabernacle and its vessels, the order of worship, and the attendant rituals were transfigured beyond their simple meanings and endowed with cosmic significance, and the tavnit was thus understood to be the blueprint of Creation.
An outstanding example of this exegesis is the sixth-century Byzantine Christian work Christian Topography for the Whole Universe,? apparently written “to denounce the false and heathen doctrine of the rotundity of the Earth and to vindicate the scriptural account of the world.”3 The treatise and its illustrations were a polemic against “people from outside” (meaning infidels), who believed that the Earth was spherical and in the center of the celestial sphere.* The Christian Topography was written to challenge this cosmological understanding, which was originally developed by the second-century astronomer and geographer Ptolemy.® The arguments used in the treatise were not founded on geographical or cartographical knowledge but rather on religious and theological ideas.®
The author, relying on the Holy Scriptures, made use of text, images, and sketches to counter this Greek and Roman cosmology and to ‘prove’ that the Earth is essentially flat,” reflecting the tavnit revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai, which has major cosmic significance and can explain the mysteries of Creation:®
Here Moses, after he had been privileged to witness the terrible scenes on the mount, is commanded by God to make the Tabernacle according to the pattern which he had seen on the mount. This being a pattern of the whole world: “for see, saith He, that thou make all things according to the pattern which was shown thee on the mount” (Exod. 25:30). Since therefore he had been shown how God made the heavens and the earth, and how on the second day He made the firmament in the middle between them, and thus made the one place into two places, so he, in like manner in accordance with the pattern which he had seen, made the Tabernacle and placed the veil in the middle, and by this division made the one Tabernacle into two, an inner and an outer.
The original sixth-century manuscript of the Christian Topography is no longer extant, but ninth- and eleventh-century copies have been preserved. The author, long known only as Cosmas Indicopleustes (“India-voyager’), used the expressions “we have drawn,” and “this is what I drew,” as well as “this is what I wrote,” both to explain the meaning of his illustrations and to emphasize the fact that he created the drawings himself. The drawings depict the Cosmos, the Tabernacle, and the Ark of the Covenant using a schema of a rectangular structure crowned with an arch and a line separating the rectangle from the half-circle above it (fig. 1). In other diagrams in the book the seven-branched menorah symbolizes the celestial bodies, the showbread table represents the produce of the Earth, and the Ark of the Covenant with its cherubim in the Holy of Holies symbolizes the upper Heavens.
Surprisingly, a similar schema of the Tabernacle can also be found in Jewish art from earlier periods. We find a visual pictogram of the Tabernacle/Temple running through Jewish artifacts for centuries—from the Bar Kochba coins dated from 132 to 135 CE (fig. 2) to the third-century DuraEuropos synagogue (fig. 3) to third- and fourth-century Jewish funerary art, and to fourth- to seventh-century synagogue art, as well as examples from later periods, such as depictions in a fourteenth-century illustrated Sephardi haggadah.
In the present study I look at various images in Jewish and Christian works of art in order to determine whether their iconographies have comparable significance. The Christian examples I refer to throughout the present book come primarily from Byzantine works created in the Greekspeaking Christian communities along the eastern Mediterranean. These examples all reflect the Byzantines’ emphasis on the interface between words and images, thus expressing the Byzantine perception that they are the People of the Book, who take the true meaning of the Bible to be the absolute Word of God.!° The Jews also see themselves as the People of the Book, wherein they find the ultimate source of truth and wisdom. Both traditions assume the task of transferring and transforming ideas and textual material through images.
The Christian Topography in its strong reliance on the biblical text and imaging clearly specifies that its schematic drawing of the Cosmos/Tabernacle/Ark (fig. 1) reflects the tavnit revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai, as God told him (Exod. 25:9, 40; 26:8; Num. 8:4) to make the Tabernacle and its vessels “according to the tavnit that he was shown on the mountain.” The horizontal line separating the rectangular part of the schema from its arched dome clearly has symbolic meaning for both Creation and the Tabernacle. In the former it represents the firmament, created on the second day, which divided the Earth from the Heavens above, and in the latter it is the curtain separating the Holy from the Holy of Holies.
Similar ideas expressed visually and verbally concerning the link between the Tabernacle and Creation are also found in such other Byzantine Christian works as the Octateuchs, which date from the eleventh to the thirteenth century. The Octateuchs, a collection of eight biblical books of the Septuagint, consists of the five books of Moses, the “Pentateuch” generally known to both Hellenized Jews and Greek-speaking Christians as the Law (Torah), Joshua and Judges, the two books that continue the narrative of Deuteronomy, and the short Book of Ruth, which is set in the period of the Judges (Ruth 1:1)."
Interestingly, the unique exegetical method found in these Byzantine Christian works seems to rely heavily on early Jewish sources, especially in its description of the universe and the way it was formed in the act of Creation. That both traditions used such visual patterns suggests the existence of reciprocity between Christian and Jewish art during the Middle Ages and the use of common images by artists from both traditions. Iconographical research into Jewish and Christian art shows several similarities with respect to the visual model, as well as with regard to midrashic interpretations of the biblical texts. The question is whether the channels of transmission between the two cultures were visual or textual.
Until recently, scholars followed one of two different approaches in discussions of the cultural, functional, and liturgical background of the relationship between the two religious traditions. Some favored the visual transmission channel and suggested that Jewish visual models also served Christian artists. Others interpreted the Jewish elements in Christian iconography as expressions of common textual sources.
In this work I attempt to demonstrate how a large literary corpus of unique works could have provided ideas and visual motifs that connect Jewish and Christian traditions in time—from the first to the fourteenth century—and in space—from Syria and the Land of Israel to southern France and Spain. Material with enormous potential for linking the thoughts and perceptions was uncovered in relatively recent extensive research on the works of Philo and Josephus, apocalyptic writings, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Rabbinic sources, early liturgy, and Heikhalot literature. All of these allegorical, mystical, and poetic works were written to reveal hidden truths about God, Heaven, and the created world.
The verbal descriptions of the visual imagery in Jewish and Christian art that portray the mystical tavnit of the Tabernacle and Creation rely on the biblical description of Ezekiel’s visions of God’s Glory—His heavenly Chariot-Throne, borne by cherubim. The figurative model that depicts the rectangular structure crowned with an arch formed by the cherubim’s wings reflects the influence of these literary works.
The Christian Topography is a singularly important link in the JewishChristian chain of motifs, for it shows clear Jewish influences in the ideas, prooftexts, and visual symbols found within it. Therein, it reflects both the conceptual and the visual channels of transmission of Jewish literary texts dealing with revelation and mystical tradition that are essential elements in Christian ideas and motifs.”
The Christian Topography, with its particular cosmological approach, has been the subject of extensive research over the years. The most important analysis of the work is the study by Wanda Wolska-Conus, who translated the book from Greek to French in 1962.!8 She undertook a methodical survey of the miniatures and the text and developed an “iconographical tree” of the miniatures in general and of the drawings of the Tabernacle and Creation in particular, eventually concluding that the entire work was influenced by various literary sources and the intellectual School of Antioch. She regards the cosmographical scheme of the arched rectangle with the line separating the two spaces as the most important drawing in the book, seeing it as clear evidence of the author’s Christian theological approach to the representation of the divine plan in Creation and the Tabernacle in the wilderness. In 1989, she summarized her research and identified the sixth-century notable Constantine of Antioch as the author and illustrator.4 She also concluded that Constantine’s schematic pattern of Creation was influenced by Nestorian cosmology and its theological spin-offs. She insists that in order to understand the uniqueness of the miniatures in the Christian Topography, it is essential to keep in mind that it is a work with this specific theological approach and with a special message, which influenced the illustration of the text.!
The illustrations in the Christian Topography have also been subject to a great deal of attention. In 1970 Doula Mouriki-Charalambous published an extensive stylistic and iconographical study of the miniatures in the Christian Topography and the Octateuchs.!® She regards the similarities between them as proof of the existence of an earlier Octateuch (or Pentateuch) with catenae that, she claims,!” provided the model for the miniatures in the Octateuchs and through it for the drawings in Constantine’s work. Mouriki-Charalambous,!® in considering the similarities between the miniatures in the two works, contends that Constantine used an earlier Octateuch (or Pentateuch) as his pictorial model.
Leslie Brubaker, writing in 1981, compared the drawings of the Tabernacle and its vessels in the Octateuchs and the Christian Topography and maintains that Mouriki-Charalambous’s conclusions ignored the fact that there is no evidence of an illustrated Octateuch accompanied by catenae appearing prior to the ninth century.!® Brubaker contends that the schematic style of the drawings in the Christian Topography do not conform to the narrative approach of the Octateuchs and its Septuagint text. Thus, she insists that Constantine’s text and drawings were the models for the Octateuchs, in particular for the special details in the depictions of the Tabernacle and its vessels, rather than the other way around.
Kurt Weitzmann, who discussed the Octateuch illustrations in many studies, summed up his research in a book he wrote with Massimo Bernabo in 1999.?° He noted that his primary purpose in these studies was to trace the origin of the archetype of the illustrations of the Octateuchs back to the mid-third-century synagogue of Dura-Europos through various copies of models that had been lost.2! He contended that the Octateuchs manuscripts were produced in one of the principal scriptoria, such as the one in Antioch, where Jews and Christians had close personal contact and where there were Jewish texts written in Greek whose miniatures were then used in the illustrated Septuagints, which could have been accessed by both the Christians and the Hellenized Jews of the period. Weitzmann concluded that the close connection between the Dura-Europos synagogue’s paintings and the miniatures in the Octateuchs suggests that they share a common archetype. Moreover, he thought it very likely that the elements from Jewish legends found in both the synagogue and the Octateuchs originated in this early illustrated archetype, which became an integral part of later manuscripts.”2
In an article written in 2010, John Lowden criticizes this hypothesis as being pure speculation, declaring that “Weitzmann’s arguments are as irrefutable as they are unprovable.”23 Lowden, who views the Octateuchs among the most ambitious achievements of Byzantine illumination, contends that the illustrated Octateuch manuscripts are not a late antique or a pre-Constantinian product, but rather that they date from the middle to late Byzantine period. He insists that the common model for the Octateuchs must have derived from a Christian Topography manuscript, which seems to be indicated by the very similar miniatures of the Tabernacle in both works.?4
Moreover, Lowden writes, that if the illustrated Byzantine Octateuchs were, as Weitzmann portrayed them, produced in the late-antique, around the sixth century, it would have been reasonable to find some trace of them at a later date in the Latin West or in some other linguistic context. As the iconographic wealth of the Octateuchs was not a pan-Europe, millennium-long phenomenon, he concludes that they were produced in the mid-Byzantine period and that their creators gathered ideas and images from many earlier contexts, combining the older elements with contemporary visual formulas.25
In 2006 Brubaker reevaluated the images and text of the ninth-century Vatican copy of the Christian Topography (Vat. Gr. 699, henceforth Vatican 699) and offered new insights into the Church’s conflict with Iconoclasm in eight- and ninth-century Byzantium.6 She contends that the Byzantine practice, especially during this period of conflict, was to add and remake past images so as to justify and endorse more contemporary ideas. The images found in Vatican 699 refer back to the texts and illustrations of the original sixth-century manuscript, but were updated to make them relevant to ninth-century theology. Vatican 699, with its miniatures, was produced as part of the Iconophiles’ struggle to contravene the Iconoclasts’ ban on visual images. Moreover, she notes that many of the miniatures throughout the text illustrate the thesis that the form of the world that God showed Moses would be reflected in the shape of the Tabernacle that was to be built in the wilderness.
The Iconophiles maintained that the Christian Topography’s emphasis on God’s instructions to Moses for the making of the Tabernacle and its accoutrements, including the Ark and the cherubim, validated their argument that the Second Commandment forbids idols but approves and mandates the production of religious images for worship. As Brubaker noted:??
The significance of the Tabernacle in contemporary Iconophile polemic suggests that the opportunity to depict it, with all of its paraphernalia and accoutrements, overrode the basic incompatibility of the Topography text itself with ninth-century orthodox positions. The ideological importance of the Topography images superseded the heretical nature of the Topography words, being influenced by Nestorius, who was considered heretical in the ninth century.
Elisabeth Revel-Neher has researched the iconographical sources of the Christian Topography and the eschatological aspects of the miniatures that depict the Tabernacle and its vessels.?® In an article published in 1990, she wrote that certain iconographical details in the work’s miniatures are not visual interpretations of the accompanying text. Rather, she suggested, they indicate the existence of an early Jewish model that incorporated motifs such as the schema of the arch above the rectangle of the Ark. She also listed a series of other Jewish influences including, for example, the doors of the Ark and the phylacteries on the foreheads of the priests. As these motifs are not found in the text of the Christian Topography, she argues that Constantine found some of these details in an illustrated Jewish manuscript, which makes his work a very important element in the search for a common source of Jewish and Byzantine biblical iconography.
Also in 1990, Herbert Kessler asked: “Why did the Christians perpetuate the image of the Tabernacle, particularly in the Jewish form, found in the early monuments?”?9 and suggested that Jews and Christians used the same model, but for different purposes. Whereas the Jews used the image to remember the destruction of the Temple and the promise of its restoration in the Messianic Age, for the Christians it was proof that the physical Sanctuary was transmuted into a spiritual covenant. Kessler contends that the figurative model used for the Tabernacle in the later Christian manuscripts was a version of the one copied centuries earlier for the murals in the Dura-Europos synagogue. He notes that in both the Christian Topography and the Octateuchs this original Jewish model was enriched by Christian influences, as was demonstrated clearly in another essay he wrote in 1995 about the illustration in Vatican 699 of the Second Coming, the Parousia (fig. 4).3°
Relating more to the cosmological approach, in 1979 Cynthia Hahn and Jean Lassus both published studies of depictions of Creation in art in which they compared the relevant miniatures in the Christian Topography and the Octateuchs.*! Hahn maintains that the artisans involved in both works used ancient models, but that the portrayal of the six days of Creation in the Octateuchs indicated a movement away from the ancient Hellenistic approach toward a new model more in accord with medieval concepts. Moreover, she contends that the portrayal of the world at its inception in both works is indicative of a new Christian theological approach.
Lassus regards the images of Creation in the Octateuchs as proof of an abiding interest in cosmology. The differences in the portrayals of Creation among the various Octateuchs, he wrote, reflect the creative ability of the various schools or, alternatively, the preferences of the individual artisans.
In 2006 Champion, who refers to the Christian Topography’s author as Kosmas Indikopleustes, wrote that the work was an attack on the Greek scientific heresy of the times. He contends that Kosmas, who was unusual in this regard, constructed an “independent epistemology governed by the divine plan (oikonomia) and supported by a belief that biblical prophecies are being realized in his day.” The oikonomia of God points to the goal of Creation, namely to the eschaton. According to Champion, the Christian Topography proposed an idea that was quite different from the dominant perception of the time. It developed a cosmology that was based on the Tabernacle, where the flat Earth supports the Heavens so as to allow intercourse between God and humans. Kosmas, he says, saw the divine plan as a promise that all Creation would be resurrected and gathered unto Christ like Enoch and Elijah, who ascended to Heaven before their deaths.3%
In view of all of this research concerning the sources and purpose of the Christian Topography and the Octateuchs it seems to me that whether the artists copied from one another or used a common model, they all relied on the Old Testament and its commentaries as their primary sources. Constantine as well as other Christian thinkers regarded the Old Testament as their major typological tool for understanding the New Testament. They studied the Bible thoroughly using Hellenistic Jewish commentators such as Josephus and Philo, as well as others whose commentaries were important exegetical sources in the fifth and sixth centuries.3+ Constantine’s understanding of the Old Testament was filtered through the Epistle to the Hebrews, which sees the Old Testament as an archetype and a “shadow” of the New Testament:*> “The Jewish law is only a shadow of the good things to come. It is not a full and faithful model, and therefore it cannot bring fulfillment.” He noted that the initial sketch-drawing of a work of art does not contain all the details that the finished image will have. Hence, to complete his work the artist has to add these details as he goes along and finishes his masterpiece.
Thus, using the Tabernacle as a schematic model of Creation established theories that embraced a range of ideas, including the meaning of sanctity, the relationship between God and the children of His covenant, and the role of the biblical sources in the process of developing thought, creating images, and organizing memories, as discussed by Mary Carruthers in her book The Craft of Thought.?”
Carruthers devotes special attention to the schemes of memory created through “the use of the Tabernacle rendering as a mnemotechnical meditational pictura.”3® She cites artistic examples that are in keeping with the notion of “the memory of the Temple.” Discussing the portrayal of the Tabernacle as “the pattern of Heaven,” she refers to various bibli- cal sources from the Old and New Testaments, their commentaries, and their visualizations in art. Among her examples (which are taken primarily from Western art), she mentions “the ancient (especially Hellenistic) convention of cosmic geographies, seen, for example, in the divine topography of Cosmas Indicopleustes, who drew the world in the shape of the Jerusalem Temple and in the ‘cartographic’ drawing of the Tabernacle in Greek Octateuch manuscripts.”?
Interestingly, the illustrations used in the only Jewish manuscript with a full cycle of the Genesis story of the Creation, the fourteenth-century Sarajevo Haggadah (figs. 5 and 6), contain motifs similar to those in Byzantine works.*° Herbert Broderick, analyzing the Creation illuminations in the Sarajevo Haggadah, assumed that the artist had access either to a copy of Genesis with a picture cycle similar to those in the Octateuchs and the Christian Topography or to another model that was influenced by these early manuscripts.*! He contends that we cannot know whether the model for the Sarajevo Haggadah was originally Jewish or not, but apparently the artist, in using the arched schema as a frame for each of the days of Creation, understood its cosmological significance.
Jewish religious consciousness from late antiquity on regarded the Tabernacle/Temple, its service (avodah), and its place vis-a-vis Creation as one of the foundations upon which the world rests. This notion is stated clearly in the second-century mishnaic text Ethics of the Fathers 1:2: “The world stands on three things, on Torah, on avodah, and on acts of charity.” The avodah is understood to be the rituals of the Tabernacle/Temple: “For there is no service dearer to the Holy One, blessed be He, than the service of the Temple.”42
In light of these diverse scholarly opinions, it is important to bear in mind that the primary purpose of the present work is to study the essence of the tavnit shown to Moses on the mountain as God’s blueprint of Creation. In order to do so, I explore the relationship between the illustrations of Creation and the Tabernacle, trace their literary sources, probe the meaning of the iconography, and then follow the way that these ideas were conveyed from link to link in the chain of thought and creativity from late antiquity through the end of the Middle Ages. I compare the Jewish and Byzantine Christian approaches as they are reflected in works of art that depict the Tabernacle and Creation in order to discern where they share an associated symbolism, where they diverge, and how their mutual influences are utilized to express polemical differences.
To comprehend the process of how, where, and when these motifs came together to forge the long chain of Jewish and Christian mutual influences on ideas and thoughts, we first turn to an ancient city in Syria.
Link
Press Here
0 التعليقات :
إرسال تعليق