Download PDF | [Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 134] Roald Dijkstra - The Apostles in Early Christian Art and Poetry, Brill Academic Publishers, 2016.
569 Pages
Preface
This book is the revised version of my PhD thesis defended at Radboud University (Nijmegen, the Netherlands) in 2014. I am very pleased that the results of several years of work are now officially published and I therefore thank the editors for including my work in their prestigious series. Many people have contributed to this book: the members of the PhD committee who shared their thoughts at the defence of my dissertation, fellow scholars who made critical remarks after lectures on parts of the work, my colleagues, who not only helped me out with all kinds of issues but also created an enjoyable work climate at Radboud university and, last but not least, my family and friends. Sible de Blaauw helped me find my way in the fascinating world of early Christian art and archaeology and proved himself a very amiable supervisor and colleague.
Vincent Hunink was always willing to lent his invaluable help for any question concerning any Latin (or Greek) text, from my first years in Nijmegen until now. His kindness has been heartwarming. Suzanne was my perfect roommate for most of the period. Erik read the whole manuscript and has been an intellectual sparring-partner since we met as undergraduates.
The research was made much easier by Arnold Provoost, who kindly put his database at my disposal. Christian Gnilka shared his knowledge of Prudentius. I thank the Centre for Art Historical Documentation (CKD) for help with the images. I am very happy that the Royal Netherlands Institute in Rome and the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World in New York welcomed me as their guest during my PhD project. OIKOS greatly contributed to my training as a PhD student. My alma mater, Radboud University, deserves my gratitude for providing me with the opportunity to do this research and work on this book. Finally, I want to thank Sophie, who contributed to this book by making me happy. I dedicate this book to her.
Introduction
In recent decades, a more favourable view of the late antique (or early Christian) period has won the hearts and minds of a growing number of scholars and has reshaped the appreciation for the first centuries of our era. All aspects of this fascinating period of transformation are now actively studied, often from an interdisciplinary perspective. Poetry and the visual arts, which both underwent major changes in style, themes and use, are naturally part of this trend. One of the main objectives of many late antique scholars has been to change the traditional view of decline which has held the study of late antique—including early Christian—art and poetry in a stranglehold for such a long time. One of the scholars who have contributed to this revaluation of the period is Michael Roberts. In 1989, he published a book in which he attributed to the art and literature of late antiquity an aesthetics that he called “the jeweled style”.1 He revealed a late antique preference for the particular over the whole. Late antique culture paid much attention to small parts of art and literature.
These were often inserted into grander compositions, without losing their separate meaning and importance, which transcended that of the context as a whole. This trend pervaded not only pagan, but also Christian literature and art in late antiquity.2 Roberts’ thought-provoking book stimulated the debate about specific late antique aesthetics as a common ground for different forms of art in the period. Other scholars, among whom are Marco Formisano and Aaron Pelttari, have built upon his work.3 Roberts’ ideas as well as the highly interesting history of the late antique period stimulated me to undertake the PhD-project that has resulted in this book. The work by Roberts and others has shown that the aesthetics of Christian and pagan art certainly were comparable in late antiquity.
Pagan elements were introduced in Christian art, taken as spolia from ancient monuments, and these elements were highly appreciated: the so-called “cumulative aesthetics” of late antiquity.4 It seems impossible to discern a Christian (more spiritual) style or aesthetics in late antique Christian art. This style would imply an unrealistic separation of early Christian and pagan art and culture.5 Pagan and Christian art could therefore only be distinguished on the base of their subject matter. Even then, one must take into account the fact that late antique culture was imbued with pagan imagery, which made it also a common element of Christian art. The efforts made by Roberts and others notwithstanding, the exact nature of the relationship between these two media remains hard to grasp. One of the reasons is the variety of visual and textual sources, which include not only many forms and genres, but also spread different messages. In an attempt to at least partly overcome these problems I have tried to shed light on the relationship of art and poetry by focusing on similarities in themes and subjects in both fields. The apostles are chosen as a case study. As a group of Biblical characters who were commonly known among Christians in late antiquity they were regularly referred to in art and poetry. The apostles already appear in the earliest example of Christian figurative art that is still extant—the ensemble of paintings in a house church in Dura Europos—and they are also mentioned in the earliest pieces of Christian poetry, written by Commodianus.6 As eyewitnesses of Christ’s life on earth, the apostles could hardly be ignored in representations of Christian culture.
The two parts of this book are different in structure. In the first part, references to the apostles in Greek and Latin poetry are discussed per author, in chronological order. All relevant passages are commented upon and related to the position of the apostles in the rest of the author’s oeuvre. In a concluding section (1.13) the results are presented together. The corpus of visual representations of the apostles is discussed via iconographical themes, based on the material presented in the abundant literature and repertoria of early Christian art. This part is divided in a section on canonical and a section on non-canonical apostle stories.
Within these sections the material is ordered per apostle. If any parallel with the poetic corpus can be established, it is directly mentioned with the presentation of the visual material, in order to avoid a repetitive third part. A general conclusion reflects on the results from the foregoing chapters and their relation to the considerations expounded in the introduction. This introduction elaborates on the apostles in early Christian culture and presents the corpus that is investigated. By means of the so-called “circuit of culture” it is tried to provide a framework which gives some context to the texts and images discussed. Finally, a brief status quaestionis of the research that has already been done on the apostles in early Christian art and poetry and on the relationship between word and image in the same period is presented.
The Apostles The disciples are generally understood to be a group of twelve men who stayed close to Christ when he was on earth. They are prominently present in the New Testament: in the gospels in particular, but also (especially Peter and Paul) in the canonical book of Acts. Despite their prominence, the actual nature and number of disciples of Christ has never been undisputed. In the New Testament, the twelve are called μαθηταί (‘pupils’) when they are with Jesus on earth and ἀπόστoλοι (‘apostles’, those who have been sent, i.e. sent into the world) after the Ascension.7 Paul was not a disciple of Christ in the narrow sense of the word, since he was converted only after the Ascension, as the order of Luke’s account in the Acts of the apostles reveals.8 Nevertheless, Paul was considered as the ‘thirteenth apostle’ from early times onwards, because of his importance for the Church. Not only was he added to the twelve, he even replaced one of the other apostles. Significantly, the emperor Constantine was buried surrounded by cenotaphs of the twelve apostles in the Church of the Holy Apostles, and Paul was certainly meant to be one of them.9 Paul presented himself as an apostle.10
In conformity with modern usage, I use the terms ‘disciple’ and ‘apostle’ indiscriminately for members of the group of most important followers of Christ, including Paul: Andrew, Bartholomew, James (son of Alphaeus), James (son of Zebedee), John, Judas, Matthew, Matthias, Paul, Peter, Philip, Simon, Thaddeus (also called Lebbaeus and Judas) and Thomas.11 There were actually many more followers of Christ according to the Biblical account, but the twelve men mentioned in the apostle lists in the gospels12 and Paul were generally accepted as most important in the early Church, although they remained largely anonymous men in the Bible.13 ‘The twelve’ soon became a terminus technicus.
The status of a man called Nathanael (John 1.45–50; John 21.1) is unclear: in modern times he is often identified with Bartholomew, but in antiquity opinions differ about the question whether he had to be considered an apostle at all. Moreover, the Epistula apostolorum, probably written in the mid-second century pretends to be written by ten apostles, among whom are Bartholomew and Nathanael.14 For the sake of completeness, the figure of Nathanael is included in this investigation. The disciple Judas Iscariot was replaced by Matthias (Acts 1.18–26), but only after the Ascension. He is mentioned in all apostle lists: since he clearly was a witness of Christ’s earthly presence, he fitted the definition which was also maintained for the other apostles. Although Matthias naturally did not see Christ on earth, the number of twelve disciples was strongly emphasised in early Christianity. Therefore, he was considered one of the twelve (although Paul often replaced him), but completing the number was his main characteristic.15
In apocryphal writings, Matthias is sometimes confused with Matthew.16 ‘Bible’ and ‘Biblical’ are anachronistic terms, but they are useful nonetheless, since the canon was more or less fixed in the fourth century (see 2.1). Most importantly, the books in which the apostles play a role as acting characters were all broadly considered canonical (a well-known exception is the Marcionite movement only accepting the gospel of Luke as genuine). The apostles were more than witnesses of historical events. They were also mobilised to legitimise the hierarchical position of the bishops, in particular that of the bishop of Rome.17 Jesus Christ was naturally seen as the founder of the Christian religion, but the Roman Church in particular presented the apostle Peter as the founder of the Church, based on texts such as Matthew 16.18–9: “And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”18 This passage appears in the literature of the early Church from the second century onwards.19 It was one of the most outspoken Biblical passages that was used in the construction of an ecclesiastical hierarchy in early Christianity, although different (groups of) Churches had different interpretations of the text. However, Peter was also connected to Rome apart from hierarchical issues, since this city (and therefore also its bishop) was held in esteem for more reasons than the Roman martyrdom of Peter alone. Especially from the episcopate of the Roman bishop and poet Damasus onwards, these two lines of thought were combined by the Roman clergy in order to promote the prominent position of the Roman episcopate.20 The question of the historicity of Peter’s stay in Rome has aroused (renewed) debate in recent years and resulted in several studies which focus on textual evidence for Peter’s connection with the city of Rome.21
However, in the third and fourth centuries Peter’s former presence and martyrdom in Rome were generally accepted as genuine historical facts: whether or not these events actually took place is not important for the study of their reception. Along with Peter, the other apostles also received a prominent place in early Christian culture. They were bearers of the apostolic tradition that was the connection between Christ and the Church in later times.22 The universalism of the Christian religion, expressed in the New Testament by the story of Christ sending the apostles out into the world, probably contributed to the apostles’ position.23 Cyprian emphasised the importance of the apostles for the unity of the Church in his De unitate ecclesiae.24 The apostles were not only characters within the Biblical narrative: they were also believed to have been the authors of parts of the Christian holy book. Several parts of the New Testament were ascribed to them: the gospels of Matthew and John, the letters of Paul, Peter, James and John and the Revelation of John. Moreover, the evangelists Mark and Luke were said to have been closely related to Peter and Paul. The authority of canonical texts was much discussed in early Christianity and their content was part of the quarrels between the general Church and other Christian groups that were put aside by the former as heretic. Through the apostles’ (supposed) authorship of holy texts and the doctrine exposed in them, they were the subject of discussion in many ecclesiastical disputes. The rise of the cult of the saints was another development that influenced the status of the apostles. Especially in the second half of the fourth century the veneration of saints increased: churches were devoted to individual saints and the (alleged) graves of martyrs became places of worship.
The apostles naturally were part of this development, especially Peter and Paul. The interest in the cult of the saints lay not only with its religious aspects, but also had a clear political dimension. Relics and martyr graves became political instruments, effectively applied by emperors, senators and bishops.25 All these aspects contributed to the importance of the apostles for almost every section of late antique society.26 Two apostles were not only witnesses of Christ, they also (allegedly) wrote down the account of his life: Matthew and John.
The person of the evangelist and the apostle can hardly be separated, since they were considered one person in antiquity. Whenever an individual apostle is depicted or described as a writer, this representation is included in this book. However, references to evangelistae or representations of the four evangelists together are not included, since they are part of a different imagery:27 in those cases, the apostle ‘disappeared’ behind the evangelist, most clearly expressed by the representation of the evangelists as a human being (Matthew), a lion (Mark), an ox (Luke) and an eagle (John).
Link
Press Here
0 التعليقات :
إرسال تعليق