Abgar Legend Text And Iconography. Kadm [631738]

კადმოსი
ჰუმანიტარულ კვლევათა ჟურნალი
6.2014
KADMOS
A Journal of the Humanities
6.2014
ილიას სახელმწიფო უნივერსიტეტი
ILIA STATE UNIVERSITY
თბილისი 2014 Tbilisi

164Irma Karaulashvili
Ilia State University
Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography*
Part I
Apocrypha related to the Abgar Legend
As is well known, the textual tradition and the iconographic develop-
ments related to the Abgar legend are very rich and sometimes quite enig-
matic. The most archaic form of the Abgar Legend is preserved in the Historia
Ecclesiastica (I, 13-II, 1; hereafter – HE) of Eusebius of Caesarea in Greek,1
and in the text entitled the Doctrina Addai2 (hereafter – DA) in Syriac.3 Both
texts are focussing on the correspondence between Abgar, the king of the little
Hellenistic country Osrhoene,4 and Christ as well as on the conversion of the
1 The Ecclesiastical History, with an English Translation by Kirsopp Lake, 2 vols. (London:
Heinemann, 1953). S. Brock, “Eusebius and Syriac Christianity, ” in Eusebius, Christian-ity and Judaism. ed. H. A. Attridge and G. Hata (Detroit: Wayne State University, 1992), 212-34 (hereafter – Brock 1992).
2 Syriac equivalent of Thaddaeus.
3 The narrative in the DA represents the expanded version of the legend. The dating of the
Syriac source is not clear. Various authors have estimated it differently: the second half of the fourth century according to G. Bonnet Maury (“La légende d’ Abgar et de Thaddée et les missions chrétiennes á Edesse, ” Revue de l’histoire des religions 16 (1887): 269-83, 87) and Elena Meščerskaya (Е. Мещерская, Легенда об Авгаре – раннесирийский литературный памятник (Москва: Наука, 1984), 30; hereafter – Мещерская 1984); the first half of the fifth century according to Sebastian Brock (Brock 1992, 228); the middle of the fifth century according to Alain Desreumaux (Histoire du roi Abgar et de
Jesus: Pre sentation et traduction du texte syriaque inte grale de ‘La Doctrine d’Addai’ , in
Apocryphes : Collection de poche de l’ AELAC (Turnhout: Brepols, 1993), 23); the middle
of the sixth century according to Aurelio de Santos Otero (Los Evangelos apócrifos , Bib –
lioteca de Autores Cristianos 148. (Madrid: La Editorial Católica, 1985), 659).
4 J. Costaz, Grammaire syriaque . Appendice X (introduction) 2nd ed. (Beyrouth: Im-
* The present paper continues to explore interrelation of texts and images pertaining to the Edessan acheiropoietos image of Christ that I began to explore in my article “The Abgar Legend Illustrated: Interrelation of the Narrative Cycles and Iconography in the Byzantine, Georgian and Latin Traditions, ” in Interactions 2007, 220-43 (hereafter –
Karaulashvili 2007).

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography165
კადმოსი 6, 2014former to Christianity by Thaddaeus the Apostle, one of the seventy or seventy
two Apostles. Among those two sources the HE does not mention an image of
Christ at all, while the DA tells about an image of the Saviour painted by the
messenger of Abgar, Hannan.5
While it is easy to ascertain that the initial form of the Abgar legend, based
on the story of the correspondence between Abgar and Christ, is of Syriac origin,
6 there is still no scholarly consensus on when and where from exactly
the evidence regarding the image of Edessa originated. As had been estimated,
the independent [sic] apocryphal texts that recount the story of a miraculous
emergence of the image, which have come down to us – the Epistula Abgari (hereafter – EA),
7 Acta Thaddaei (hereafter – ATh),8 and Narratio de imagine
Edessena (hereafter-Narratio ), attributed to Constantine Porphyrogennetos,9
primerie catholique, 1964), 232-33. J. Segal, Edessa : “The Blessed City” (Oxford: Claren-
don Press, 1970; hereafter – Segal 1970)
5 Syriac equivalent of Ananias.
6 S. H. Griffith, “The Doctrina Addai as a paradigm of Christian Thought in Edessa in the
Fifth Century” Hugoye 6, no. 2 (2003); Brock 1992; H. J. W . Drijvers, “ Abgarsage, ” in
Neutestamentliche Apokryphen in deutscher Übersetzung, ed. W . Schneemelcher, 2 vols.,
5th ed. (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1987–89); vol. 1, Evangelien (1987),
389–95; vol. 2, Apostolisches Apokalypsen und Verwandtes (1989), 436–437. English
trans. ed. R. Mcl. Wilson (Westminster: John Knox Press, 1991); vol. 1, 492–500; vol. 2. 480–81; Мещерская 1984.
7 M. Geerard, Clavis Apocryphorum Novi Testamenti. Corpus Christianorum (Turn-hout: Brepols, 1992), 65. n. 88:2 (hereafter – Geerard 1992). R. A. Lipsius and M. Bonnet, Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha, pt. 1, Lipsius, Acta Petri; Acta Pauli; Acta Petri
et Pauli; Acta Pauli et Theclae; Acta Thaddaei (Lipsiae: Hermann Mendelsson, 1891),
279–83 (hereafter – Lipsius and Bonnet 1891). Part of the apocryphon containing the text of the letters was edited by E. von Dobschütz, “Der Briefwechsel zwischen Abgar
und Jesus, ” Zeitschrift für wissenchaftliche Theologie 41 (1900): 422–86, at 436. This
version of the Abgar legend and its dating is discussed in detail in my article “The
Date of the Epistula Abgari,” Apocrypha 13 (2002): 85–112 (hereafter – Karaulashvili
2002); Id. “The Epistula Abgari: Composition, Redactions, Dates, ” Ph.D. diss., De-
partment of Medieval Studies, Central European University, Budapest, 2004 (hereaf-
ter – Karaulashvili 2004a).
8 Acta Thaddei ; see Geerard 1992, n. 299; Lipsius and Bonnet 1891, 273–78. Av. Cameron
and E. Meščerskaya date it to the sixth or seventh century. Av. Cameron, “The History
of the Image of Edessa: The Telling of a Story, ” Okeanos (Festschrift für Ihor Ševčenko).
Harvard Ukrainien Studies 7 (1983): 80–94 (hereafter – Cameron 1983); Мещерская
1984, 74–80; See also: A. Palmer, “Les Actes de Thaddée, ” Apocrypha 14 (2002): 63–84 ;
Id., “The Logos of Mandylion: Folktale, or Sacred Narrative? A New Edition of The Acts of Thaddaeus With a Commentary, ” in Edessa in hellenistisch-römischer Zeit. Reigion,
Kultur und Politik zwischen Ost und West. Beiträge des internationalen Edessa-Sympo-
siums in Halle an der Saale, 14.–17. Juli 2005 , Lutz Greisiger, C. Rammelt, J. Tubach,
D. Haas, eds. Beiruter Texte und Studien 116 (Beirut: Ergon Verlag, 2009), 117-205 (hereafter – Palmer 2009).
9 PG, 113, cols. 423–54. Dobschütz 1899, 39**–85**. The terminus post quem for its com-
pilation is the transfer of the Image from Edessa to Constantinople in A.D. 944. E.

Articles166had been written in Greek.10 Not surprisingly, the majority of scholars see the
motif of the Edessan image within the plot of the Abgar legend as a Byzantine
phenomenon, inseparably connected to the image worship and its theology.11
However, here I would reiterate the idea proposed in my earlier works,12 name –
ly, that there existed at least a nucleus in the Syriac milieu13 that prompted the
Byzantine development of the story with respect to the miraculous emergence of the acheiropoietos image of Christ.
14
The Edessan image in the early textual tradition
As I have indicated, the earliest Byzantine apocryphon, the EA, employs
the term sindon (cloth)15 while speaking about and relating the story of the
Edessan image of Christ.16 The majority of the early Syriac or Syriac-based
literary sources either just mention the image of Christ in Edessa and keep silence about the description of the image (such as The History of Daniel of
Galaš attributed to Jacob of Serugh, sixth century?
17 an iconophile tractate by
Patlagean, “L ’ entrée de la Sainte Face d’Edesse à Constantinople en 944, ” in La religion
civique à l’ époque médiévale et moderne (Chrétienté et Islam). Actes du colloque organ-
isé par le centre de recherche “Histoire sociale et culturelle de l’Occident XIIe-XVIIIe
siècle, ” Collection de l’Ecole française de Rome 213, ed. A. Vauchez (Rome: École Fran-
çaise de Rome, 1995), 21–35 (hereafter – Patlagean 1995).
10 To the best of my knowledge, the only hitherto published Syriac version of the apoc-ryphon similar to the EA is included in the Chronicle to the year 1234. Chronicon ad
annum Christi 1234 pertinens, I, ed. J-B. Chabot (CSCO Scr. Syri 36 (Paris: J. Gabalda
1916-20; repr: Louvain: L. Durbecq, 1953), 121-22. H. J. W . Drijvers, “The Image of Edessa in the Syriac Tradition, ” in The Holy Face 1998, 13-31, at 23, 27 (hereafter –
Drijvers 1998). S. Brock, “Transformation of the Edessa Portrait of Christ, ” Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies 18/1 (2004): 46–56, at 51-53 (hereafter – Brock 2004).
Probably, while speaking about origins of the narrative related to the emergence of the Edessan icon, one has to pay attention to the fact that the author of the Georgian text of the Lives of the Thirteen Syrian Fathers, while speaking about the Mandylion and
Keramidion uses the Syraic equivalents of the names of two cities: Urha for Edessa,
and Nabuq (resp: Mabbug) for Hierapolis; therefore, it is possible to assume that the Georgian chronicler knew information with respect to the narrative on the Edessan image and its brick copy from a Syriac source. Z. Alexidze, “Mandilioni da keramioni dzvel kartul mtserlobashi” [The Mandylion and Keramion in the Ancient Georgian Lit-erature], Academia 1 (2001): 9–15, at 13 (hereafter – Alexidze 2001); For the English
translation of this passage, see: Karaulashvili 2007, 224-25.
11 Cameron 1983.
12 Karaulashvili 2002; Id. 2004a.
13 Preserved, most plausibly, in the Acts of Mar Mâri, a work of disputable dating (from the fifth to the seventh century). Drijvers 1998, at 25-26.
14 See also: Drijvers 1998; Brock 2004.
15 Syriac equivalens seems to be “shwshapha/shushepa. ” Drijvers 1998, 23; Brock 2004, 51.
16 Karaulashvili 2002; Id. 2004a.
17 Though the passage itself is considered by some scholars to be an interpolation. Edited

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography167
კადმოსი 6, 2014Theodore Abu-Qurrah, ninth century;18 the Georgian translation of the Life of
John of Urha, eleventh century),19 or they declare that the image is painted (as
in the DA), plausibly on wood (as Agapius of Manbij, ninth-tenth century),20
or they state that the icon was miraculously imprinted (the colophon of a Mel-
kite manuscript written in Edessa in 723,21 a Syriac Dispute between a monk
of the monastery of Beth Hale and a follower of the Emir Maslama, d.73722),
or, similarly to the Byzantine EA, they relate the story of its origin (like the anonymous Chronicle to the year 1234).
23
Early Iconography of the Edessan Image
In comparison to the textual tradition, the iconography related to the
Edessan image of Christ seems to be developed later. As indicated by various scholars, the formation of the pictorial model of the acheiropoietos image of the
Saviour develops during the tenth/eleventh-fourteenth centuries.
24 The earli –
est surviving representation, preserved on a Sinai icon, is dated to the tenth century (pic. 1).
25 However, one has to add here that this hypothesis, that is to
say, the suggestion that the iconographic tradition developed after the tenth century (while textual one, at least to my mind, much earlier) is valid only with
respect to the Byzantine iconographic tradition.
a) Fresco of Deir es-Suriani monastery
After the discovery of frescoes of Deir es-Suriani monastery (Wadi el-
by F. Nau, in ““Hagiographie Syriaque, ” ROC 15 (1910): 60-64, at 61; See also: Drijvers
1998, 17. Brock 2004, 48.
18 S. H. Griffith, “Theodore Abū Qurrah’s Arabic Text on the Christian Practice of Vener –
ating Images, ” JAOS 105/1 (1985): 53-73, at 59.
19 Ms Add. 11281 (2764) of the British Museum. К. Кекелидзе, «Житие и подвиги Св
Иоанна У рhайского,» Христианский Восток т. 2 вып. III (1914): 301-21 (hereafter – Кекелидзе 1914).
20 A. A. Vasiliev, “Kitab al-‘Unvan (Histoire Universelle Ecrite par Agapius de Menbidj), ” second partie, facs. 1, in PatrologiaOrientalis, vol. 7, ed. R. Griffin and F. Nau (Paris:
Firmin-Didot, 1911), 474–75.
21 R.W . Thomson, “ An Eighth-Century Melkite Colophon from Edessa” , JTS NS 13 (1962): 249-58 (hereafter – Thomson 1962).
22 Drijvers 1998, 27.
23 Chronicon, XI.16. Drijvers 1998, 23, 27; Brock 2004, 51-53.
24 See various articles in the following editions: Mandylion 2004; Il volto di Cristo 2000;
The Holy Face 1998. See also: A. Grabar, La Sainte Face de Laon. Le Mandylion dans
l’art orthodoxe. Seminarium Kondakovianum ZWGRAFIKA III (Prague: Imprimerie
Politika, 1931); Karaulashvili 2007.
25 K. Weitzmann, “The Mandylion and Constantine Porphyrogenennetos, ” CahArch 11
(1960), 163–84 (hereafter – Weitzmann 1960); S. Runciman, The Emperor Romanus Lecapenus and His Reign: A Study of Tenth-Century Byzantium. 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963).

Articles168Natrun, Egypt) dated to the early tenth century26 and identification of one of
the images as representation of the Mandylion , proven by an accompanying
inscription that reads: “…and he sent him the image”27 (located on the upper
eastern wall above the sanctuary; pic.2), A. Lidov has suggested the following:
“con molta probabilità, la più antica rappresentazione nota del Mandylion , es-
eguita in un monastero siriano mentre la reliquia era ancora a Edessa. Questo
prova che la tradizione iconographica del Mandylion esisteva già prima del 944
e che perciò abbia potuto influenzare la posteriore iconografia byzantina. Cris-
to è rappresentato con il collo, una corta barba nera e capelli lunghi, inscritto
nel nimbo, sullo sfondo di un panno giallo con picolli motive ornamentali e una striscia rossa lungo il bordo inferiore. ”
28
As Catherine Jolivet-Lévy indicates, “les deux représentation antérieurs
[dès le XIe siècle –I.K.], dans la décoration monumentale, montrent le visage du Christ inscrit dans un medallion, mais non sur tissue: église Sainte-Croix de Telovani, en Géorgie, Deir es-Suriani, en Egypte. ”
29 As evident, Lidov sees the
Deir-al-Suriani Mandylion as an image on a cloth, while Jolivet-Lévy as an image
in a medallion. As Karel Innemée indicates, “the creamy coloured piece of cloth on which the halo of Christ is represented is draped over the arms of Abgar, so that it looks like a garment. On the other hand he clearly holds a loop of textile in his hand and this suggests that the creamy coloured fabric with the green
and red ornaments is in fact the mandylion and not a garment… ”
30 Several ex-
amples presenting the Edessan image as clipeata (as on the Telovani fresco, dated
to the eight-ninth century,31 pic. 3), or as lacking the cloth (as on the Novgorod
26 Karel Innemée dates this layer of paintings to the period before 913. K. Innemée, “Key-
note Address: Mural Painting in Egypt, Problems of Dating and Conservation, ” in Liv –
ing for Eternity: The White Monastery and its Neighborhood. Proceedings of a Sympo-
sium at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, March 6 – 9. 2003. ed. Philip Sellew. http://egypt.umn.edu/Egypt/1-pb%20pdfs/innemee.pdf , p. 5.
27 K.C. Innemée, L. Van Rompay, “Deir al-Sourian (Egypt): New Discoveries of 2001-2002, ” in Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 5/2 (2002): 245-63, (http://www.bethmar –
dutho.org/index.php/hugoye/volume-index/145.html; last accessed: 20.01.2012; here-after – Innemée 2002)
28 A. Lidov, “Il Dittico del Sinai e il Mandylion , ” in Mandylion 2004, 81-85, at 84-85 (here-
after – Lidov 2004).
29 C. Jolivet-Lévy, “Note sur la représentation du Mandylion dans les églises byzantins de Cappadoce, ” in Intorno 2007, 137-44, at 143, nt. 2 (hereafter – Jolivet-Lévy 2007). See
also: N. Thierry, “Deux notes à propos du Mandylion, ” Зограф 11 (1980): 16-19 (here-
after – Thierry 1980).
30 I would like to thank Prof. Innemée for sharing his opinion on the subject.
31 Z. Skhirtladze, Adreuli shua saukuneebis karthuli kedlis mkhatvroba. Thelovanis djvarpa-tiosani [Early Medieval Georgian Monumental Painting. Telovani Church of the Holy
Cross] (Tbilisi: Christian Art Studies Centre of Georgian Patriarchate, 2008), at 310
(hereafter – Skhirtladze 2008); E. Gedevanishvili, “The Representation of the Holy Face in Georgian Medieval Art, ” Iconographica 5 (2006): 11-31, at 15 (hereafter – Gedevanishvili

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography169
კადმოსი 6, 2014Mandylion icon;32 the fresco in Vardzia Dormition church, Georgia (pic. 4),33
both dated to the twelfth century; the fresco in Tanghili church of the Archan-
gels, Georgia (thirteenth century)34) are known, as well as the thirteenth century
miniatures of Mandylion from the Paris Ms Lat 2688 (fol. 75r; pic. 5)35 and the
fourteenth century frescoes in the Church of the Virgin at Mateič, Macedonia (pic. 6),
36 depicting it on a loose cloth. Therefore, as these examples testify, both
interpretations of the Deir es-Suriani image – that is to say, either only the cl –
ipeata portrait of Christ, or the image of the Saviour on the cloth – are possible.
However, I agree with K. Innemée, who, to put it in his own words, is “slightly in
favour of the second interpretation, ” that is, the Mandylion on a cloth.
b) Fresco in the church of the Ascension of the Saviour in Tsromi (?)
Georgian scholars talk about two early representations of the Mandylion
in Georgia, in Tsromi37 and Telovani churches. The fresco in Tsromi is in a
deplorable condition, and, till the end of the last century, our knowledge about
it was based on descriptions by Y akov Smirnov,38 Shalva Amiranashvili, 39 and
2006).
32 in Gerhad Wolf ’ s words, “the Novgorod mandylion shows, so to speak, the squar –
ing of a circle, as if combining earth and heaven in analogy to the mystery of the
Incarnation itself). ” G. Wolf, “The Holy Face and the Holy Feet. Preliminary Reflec-tions before the Novgorod Mandylion, ” in Восточнохристианские реликвии. ред.-сост. А. М. Лидов (Москва: Прогресс-Традиция, 2003), 281-90, at 284 (hereafter – Восточнохристианские реликвии 2003).
33 Gedevanishvili 2006, 15-17.
34 Ibid., 19.
35 The text was first published by Ernst von Dobschütz, Christusbilder. Untersuchungen zur christlischen Legend. Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur. Neue Folge III/18. ed. Oscar von Gebhardt and Adolf Harnack (Leipzig: C. Hinrichs’ che Buchhandlung, 1899); Beilage III, 130**–40** (hereafter – Dobschütz 1899). Iconographical peculiarities of this text are discussed in the following articles: I. Ragusa, “The Iconography of the Abgar Cycle in Paris Ms. Latin 2688 and Its Rela-tionship to Byzantine Cycles, ” Miniatura 2 (1989): 35-51 (hereafter – Ragusa 1989);
Id., “Mandylion-Sudarium: The ‘Transportation’ of the Byzantine Relic to Rome, ” Arte Medievale 2 (1991): 97–106; hereafter – Ragusa 1991.
36 В. Р . Пешковиħ, “ Авгарова легенда у фресками Матеиħа, ” Прилози за книжевност, jезик, историjy, фолклор 22 (1932): 11–19 (hereafter – Пешковиħ 1932); C. Walter, “The Abgar Cycle at Mateič, ” in Studien zur byzantinischen Kunstgeschichte. Festschrift für Horst Hallensleben zum 65. Geburtstag, eds. B. Borkopp, B. Schelleward, L. Theis (Amsterdam: Verlag A. M. Hakkert, 1995), 221–32 (hereafter – Walter 1995).
37 Located in the historical region of Kartli, 100 km west from Tbilisi. Г . Чубинашвили, Цроми. Из истории грузинской архитектуры первой трети VII века (Москва: Наука, 1969), 7 (hereafter – Чубинашвили 1969).
38 Цромская мозаика, Посмертное изд. Я. И. Смирновa; Предисл.: Г . Н. Чубинашвили
(Тбилиси: Музей искусств “Метехи, ” 1935; hereafter – Смирнов 1935).
39 Ш. Амиранашвили, История Грузинской монументальной живописи (Тбилиси:

Articles170paintings and scheme by Tatyana Sheviakova;40 they dated the mosaic and mu-
rals of the church to the seventh century. In 1990-91 Zaza Skhirtladze pub-
lished an article on the absidal decoration of Tsromi church, where he offered
to readers a different schema and interpretation.41
The iconographical program of Tsromi church included two registers, the
upper mosaic representation on the conch of an apse and a fresco, depicted be-low (pic. 7, 8). In Smirnov’s and Amiranashvili’s opinion, a mosaic on the apse represented the Traditio legis, or Donatio legis
42 (pic. 9). The same program
was interpreted as an Ascension scene by Tinatin Virsaladze43 and Z. Skhirt-
ladze.44 The fresco under it, above the window of an altar apse depicted, in
Shevyakova’s view,45 the Hetoimasia (pic. 10, 11). In Amiranashvili’s opinion,
the Hetoimasia was present on the mosaic above the depiction of the head of
Christ (Y . Smirnov thought it to be the Dextera Domini),46 while the fresco
above the window portrayed the acheiropoietos image of Christ.47 According
to G. Chubinashvili, when he visited the church, almost nothing was visible on
that part of the mosaic fresco where Smirnov had located the Dextera Domini
Сахелгами, 1957), 23-30 (hereafter – Амиранашвили 1957); Id., История Грузинского
искусства (Москва: Искусство, 1963), 112-18.
40 Т. С. Шевякова, Монументальная живопись раннего средневековья Грузии
(Тбилиси: Хеловнеба, 1983), 1-2 (hereafter – Шевякова 1983).
41 Z. Skhirtladze, “ A propos du décor absidal de C’romi, ” REGC 6-7 (1990-91): 163-83
(hereafter – Skhirtladze 1990-91); Id. 2008, 26; 27, fig. 17; 241-43, nt. 4. The edition contains an English resumé, at 304-30.
42 Смирнов 1935, 31; Амиранашвили 1957, 27-28.
43 Т. Вирсаладзе, “Цромская мозаика, ” in Тинатин Вирсаладзе. Избранные труды,
ed. G. Beridze (Тбилиси: Некери, 2007), 262-311 (a posthumous edition of her early and unpublished works).
44 Skhirtladze 1990-91; Id. 2008, 241-43, nt. 4.
45 “Ниже мозаики в Цромской апсиде сохранились фрагменты фресковой живопи-си в один регистр, относящейся к тому же времени (VII в.). В центре, над единст-венным окном алтаря, изображена “Этимасия” – “уготованный престол” раннех-ристианского образца, символизирующий пресвятую Троицу. К уготованному престолу подходят симметрично с двух сторон фигуры в хитонах и гиматиях, обутые в сандалии. Очевидно апостолы… ” Шевякова 1983, 1.
46 Смирнов 1935, 6.
47 “В замковой части конхи сохранились слабые намеки изображения “уготован-ного престола” … “Престол уготованный, ” изображенный, как было отмечено, в верхней части композиции, еще раз подчеркивает правильность нашего толко-вания основной идеи Цромской мозаики. Крест, плат (сударий), орудия страстей – атрибуты «престола» – подтверждают высказанное предположение… над ок-ном алтарной абсиды был изображен фреской “нерукотворный спас” (“убрус”); от него остались только следы; по обеим сторонам окна были представлены две молящиеся фигуры, от которых дошли до нас тоже лишь следы… С общим содер-жанием цромской мозаики тесно связана композиция, изображающая “Нерукот-ворный Спас. ” К сожалению, лицо Христа совершенно размыто, оставшиеся сле-ды не позволяют судить об иконографическом типе. ” Амиранашвили 1957, 26-28.

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography171
კადმოსი 6, 2014and Amiranashvili, the Hetoimasia . In his view, both scholars have suggested
one of the plausible explanations of what could have been depicted there. Chu-
binashvili was skeptical with respect to the dating of both, the mosaic and the
fresco, to one and the same century.48
In one of his works, Amiranashvili provided the following description of
the Tsromi Edessan image: “Unfortunately, the image of the Saviour is com-
pletely washed away. Only its upper part has survived. The shape of the head, the wide shape of the eyes, the character of modeling the forehead and the hair point to a generic connection with early Eastern Christian monuments. ”
49
Tanya Velmans had agreed with Amiranashvili’s supposition50 and stated:
“cette composition [la position du Mandylion-I.K.] ne prend tout son sens que
lorsqu’ on considère les autres images de l’abside auxquelles elle est forcément
reliée. L ’Hétimasie avec la croix et la suaire (disparue) occupait le sommet de la conque… ce contexte iconographique avec l’Hétimasie détermine aussi la na-ture de la prière que les deux personnages adressent à la Sainte Face. Il s’agit de
toute évidence d’une supplique d’intercéder en leur faveur auprès du Christ le
jour de la Seconde Venue. L ’iconographie s’appuie sans doute ici sur une prière de la liturgie célébrée le jour de la fête du Mandylion (16 août), dans laquelle on
lui demande d’intercéder en faveur des hommes. ”
51
48 “Утверждение его, что “в замковой части конхи сохранились слабые намеки изо-
бражения уготованного престола», не могу подтвердить, так как на этом месте ничего не различается, как отмечал и Я. Смирнов, высказавший только одно из возможных предположений, что на этом месте при выполненеии мозаики было изображение десницы с венцом. Равно считать след фресковых изображений у окна алтарной абсиды за одновременный с мозаикой VII в. не представляется
мне правильным.. ” Чубинашвили 1969, 95, nt. 20.
49 “К сожалению, лик Спасителя совершенно размыт. Уцелела лишь его верхняя часть. Форма головы, широкой разрез глаз, характер моделировки лба и волос
указывают на генетическую связь с ранними востичнохристианскими памятни-
ками. ” Амиранашвили 1957, 118.
50 In Skhirtladze’s words, she also took into account recent findings. T. Velmans, A. Alpa-
go-Novello, Miroir de l’invisible. Peintures murales et architecture de la Géorgie (VIe-XVe
ss.) (Milano, 1996), 17=Skhirtladze 2008, 242.
51 T. Velmans, “Valeurs sémantiques du Mandylion selon son emplacement ou son asso-ciation avec d’autres images, ” in Studien zur byzantinischen kunstgeschichte. Festschrift für Horst hallensleben zum 65. geburtstag. B. Borkopp, B. Schelleward, L. Theis, eds. (Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1995), 173-84, at 174-75 (hereafter – Velmans 1995).
To my mind, if the seventh-century fresco really depicts the Mandylion here, then we
have to think that the plausible textual souce of its iconography should be related to the liturgical tractate describing how the image was venerated in Edessa,
(Dobschütz
1899, 111**-12**) rather than to the text of the Narratio that describes establishment of
the same ritual in Constantinople in the tenth-century (when a feast for 16 August had been established). (PG, 113, cols. 449-52).
In fact, scholars distinguish the symbolic interpretation of the image veneration episode in the two texts. In Jolivet-Lévy’s words, “image protectrice et apotropaïque, le Man –

Articles172Zaza Skhirtladze, in his work devoted to the Tsromi murals, stated that
“au-dessus de la fenêtre se trouve… la figure de la Vierge… revêtue du mapho-
rion… debout, en orante, les bras levés au ciel…52 Une fois le groupe central
de la Vierge entre Pierre et Paul établi au registre inférieur, l’identification du Christ entre des anges à l’ étage supérieur devient tout à fait plausible. Mosaïque
et peintures semblent en effet avoir été conçus simultenément comme par –
ties organiques d’une même composition, variante de l’image théophanique de la “Majesté du Seigneur, ” conçue à la manière d’une Ascension. Il s’agit
d’une de ces versions orientales d’image christologiques, “Théophanie synthé-
tique” ou “ Ascension synthétique, ” fusionnant representation théophanique et Ascension. ”
53 With respect to the representation of the Virgin Skhirtladze
writes: “La Vierge orante figurée entre deux colonnes drapées d’un rideau con-
stitue une representation particulière, le décor évoquant un temple. La tradi-
tion théologique et le type même de l’image peuvent évoquer une symbolique de la Sagesse Divine. D’autre part, le sujet correspond à l’Eglise, logis symbol-ique du Dieu incarné. Quant aux colonnes cannelées, elles sont très originales
et reproduisent vraisemblablement un modèle antique ou paléo-chrétien”
54
(pic. 12, 13). He also does not exclude a possibility that the two parts of the apsidal composition had not been executed simultaneously;
55 though, in his
words, it would be difficult to accept this supposition due to the fact that soon after completion of the church, i.e. after 643, the Arabs devastated Georgia.
56
As evident from the passages cited above, the Tsromi absidal composi-
tion allows to make various symbolic interpretations of the scenes presented. And although nowadays the majority of scholars agree with proposition by
Skhirtladze,
57 I would like to return to the previous wisdom once again.
dylion peint dans les églises est aussi, comme on a l’a déjà signalé, une image à laquelle
on pouvait adresser des prières, fonction qui dérive de celle de la relique: lors de sa fête
à Edesse, était en effet adressée au portrait acheiropoiète une prière d’intercession. La liturgie du 16 août associe à la veneration du Mandylion la demande du pardon des
péchés. ” Jolivet-Lévy 2007, 142.
52 Skhirtladze 1990-91, 165.
53 Ibid., 167.
54 Ibid., 168.
55 Skhirtladze 2008, 243, nt. 4.
56 Z. Skhirtladze, “Freskis fragmenti tsromis tadzarshi” [Fragment of a Fresco in Tsromi Church], in Kavkasia aghmosavletsa da dasavlets shoris. Istoriul-filologiuri dziebani mizgvnili Zaza Alexidzis dabadebis 75 tslistavisadmi [Caucasus Between East and West. Historical and Philological Studies in Honour of Zaza Alexidze] ed. by D. Chu-tunashvili, N. Alexidze and M. Surguladze (Tbilisi: Artanuji and National Centre of Manuscripts, 2010), 393-412, at 396-97.
57 “It is the Ascension scene that Tinatin Virsaladze linked the iconography of the Tsromi
mosaic with. She considered that “Traditio Legis” had originally been conceived as the
Ascension-Second Coming…the image on the lower register at Tsromi, identified by

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography173
კადმოსი 6, 2014Art historians often talk about the symbolic unity of the Ascension scene
not only with the Donatio legis , but also with that of the Second Coming, and
of the latter with Hetoimasia , the prepared throne, which in itself unites the
eschatological and theophanic meaning.58 Recently Ekaterine Gedevanish-
vili offered a new interpretation of decorative details of the oldest represen-
tation of the Mandylion in the Georgian manuscript tradition;59 namely, she
has connected the representation of the Seven Seals60 on the miniature of the
Mandylion in the Alaverdi Four Gospels (Ms A-484, National Centre of Manu-
scripts, Tbilisi, Georgia, dating to 1054 AD61; pic. 14) to the “eighth day. ”62 In
Zaza Skhirtladze, representing the Virgin-Oranta in the centre “against the background
of the cloth spread between two pillars, flanked on both sides by the evangelists, ” al-lows us to assume that this should be the Ascension scheme. ” L. Khuskivadze, Gelatis Mozaika/The Mosaic of Gelati (Tbilisi: Poligrafi Press, 2005), 58-59. This is a bilingual edition.
58 Н. Кондаков, Лицевой иконописный подлинник, т. 1. Иконография Иисуса Христа (Ст-Петербург, 1905), 58.= N. Chichinadze, “Hetimasiis ikonografiistvis” [on the Iconography of Hetimasia] Religia 4-6 (1997): 107-15, at 107-8 (hereafter – Chi-
chinadze 1997); Sometimes the apocalyptic scroll sealed with Seven Seals of Christ is depicted over the throne. Ibid.
59 Gedevanishvili 2006.
60 Discussion on this subject see below.
61 Karthul xelnatsertha aghtseriloba kofili saeklesio muzeumis /A/ kolekciisa. [Description
of the Georgian Manuscripts of the Former Ecclesiastical Museum Collection /A/, Th. Bregadze, Ts. Kakhabrishvili, M. Kavtharia, eds. vol. II /1 (Tbilisi: Metsniereba Press, 1986), 210-16; N. Chkhikvadze, “ Avgarozis apokrifis kartuli redaktsiebi” [Georgian Re-dactions of the Apocryphon of Avgaroz], Matsne (Proceedings of the Georgian Acad-
emy of Sciences: Series of Language and Literature) 4 (1992): 64–82 (hereafter – Chkh-ikvadze 1992), at 68; Z. Skhirtladze, “Canonizing the Apocryphon: The Abgar Cycle in the Alaverdi and Gelati Gospels, ” in The Holy Face 1998, 69–93 (hereafter – Skhirtladze 1998).
62 Gedevanishvili states that “while discussing Saklie Kilise Mandylion Ovchinnikov (A. Ovchinnikov, “Hristos ierie” [Christ-the Priest] in Символизм христианского искусства (Москва, 1999), 284-85) interprets these motifs as the Seven Seals of Rev-
elation and, in order to support his view, he points out that a definition of the Seven Seals of the Book of Revelations is included in Abgar’s epistle. I think that the Alaverdi Mandylion enables us to interpret this theme otherwise. The representation of crosses within a circle gave rise to an association with the communion bread, rather than with the Seals of Revelations, since the communion bread is often depicted exactly in that way… the symbol of the communion bread was meant as God’s “image” on earth before His Second Coming” Gedevanishvili 2006, 13. The author also stresses that “the same motifs are displayed in the scene of Abgar sending his messenger in the Alaverdi cycle. Three quite big circles with crosses are depicted on the basis of Abgar’s bed. It might not be a mere coincidence that they are presented (and so accentuated in size!) in the composition which opens the history of the Salvation of the Edessan king. ” Ibid., 28, nt. 20; as well as that “on the Mandylion in St. Catherine’s chapel in Göreme (Göreme 21, pic. 15) circles seems not to be seven. ” Ibid., 29, nt. 26.
In Jolivet-Lévy’s words, five circles are presented with the Mandylion , between the decora-
tive edges of the cloth, and one can be distinguished among the kufic letters. See: Jolivet-

Articles174her words, here we see “seven double circles and a single one at the top of the
Holy Face” portrayed on the cloth. That is to say, the addition of a single circle
increases the number of the seals to eight, while in Christian art it was “the
symbol of the Second Coming, as well as of the fitfulness of the Testament (the “eighth day”),
63 that is to say, of the Hetoimasia . In this context the image of
Lévy, Les Eglises Byzantines de Cappadoce (Paris; Editions du CNRS, 1991), fig. 2.
As I have demonstrated, the Seven Seals of Christ and their explanation within the text
of the EA represent the Divine Names and their explanation, a certain Christian tetra-grammaton. In textual tradition this fact is clearly demonstrated by a relevant passage in the eleventh century Compendium Historiarum of Gregory Cedrenos (they state that the
letter was sealed with seven Hebrew letters, meaning
,
as well as by the Nessana papyrus, where only four letters are presented (dated to the sixth-seventh century; L. Casson and E. L. Hettich, Letter of Abgar to Christ and Christ’s Reply , in Excavations at Nessana Vol. II. Literary Papyri (Princeton, NJ: Princeton Uni-
versity Press: 1950): 143-49, at 144-45), and the Oxyrhynchus papyrus 4699, where the four letters are followed by four Divine Names (dated to the fifth century; F. Maltomini, “4469. Letter of Abgar to Jesus (Amulet), ” In: The Oxyrhynchus Papyri . Vol. 65. Edited
with translations and notes by M. W . Haslam, A. Jones, F. Maltomini, M. L. West et al… Greaco-Roman Memoirs 85. London: Egypt Exploration Society (for the British Acad-emy), 1998), 122-29, at 123-24). Karaulashvili 2004a, chapter 4, “The Closing Part of the Letter of Christ in the Epistula Abgari: The so-called Seven Seals and their Explanation. ”
Moreover, to my mind, the mode of presenting the seals on the Mandylion fresco of
Göreme Chapel 21 (where we see four full seals represented on the cloth, while a por –
tion of the seal on its upper left side, where the vertical lines decorating the edges of the cloth start, and, as Jolivet-Lévy has pointed out, one more circle [i.e. seal] is discernable among the pseudo-kufic letters, point to the fact that the number of Divine names in Christian tradition increased from four first to seven, and then to seventy two (on the number of the Seals in Abgar legend tradition see: Karaulashvili 2004a, chapt. 4). Most probably, the fifth, unfinished seal, as well as another one, hidden among the kufic let-ters, must signify that their number could be increased. The same should be indicated by the mode of presenting the Seals on Sakli Kilise, Göreme 2a Mandylion , where the
Seven Seals are painted in red, while traces of additional six (two on the left side and four on the right sideof the cloth, between the vertical lines and on the same spot where the seven seals are painted) are sketched, but not accentuated (pic. 16).
Finally, I would like to stress, that Gedevanishvili in the same article also notes that “in the Alaverdi manuscript King Abgar is haloed; moreover, as scholars believe, Abgar’s role as a supernatural defender is clearly displayed for the first time in the Georgian art (N. Chkhikvadze, “Karthul-bizantiuri saliteraturo urthierthobebis istoriisathvis (avga-rozis epistole karthul samtserlobo tradiciashi)” [On the History of Georgian-Byzantine Literary Relations (Epistula Abgari in Georgian Literary Tradition)]. Matsne , Series of
Language and Literature 1-4 (1996): 127-42, at 131). In Georgian language Abgar means
the protector, the amulet. ” Gedevanishvili 2006, 14, 29, nt. 30.
To the best of my knowledge, it were the letters of Abgar and Christ that acquired the apotropaic meaning; moreover, “the protector, the amulet” is not the Georgian meaning of the name Abgar; in fact, it is the Byzantine spelling of the name of the king, Avgarozi, had been appropriated as a general name for a Christian protective amulet. Karaulash-vili 2004a, chapter 2, “The Texts of the Letters within the Main Body of the Epistula
Abgari, ” at 73, nt. 3
63 Gedevanishvili 2006, 13.

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography175
კადმოსი 6, 2014Christ on the Cloth, as a symbolic equivalent of the liturgical altar cloth,64 can
also explain its appearance in the Hetoimasia composition.
Respectively, it should not be surprised that a scholar, who is not an
art historian and sees not an actual image, but only its reconstruction on a
schema, is tempted to deem the image of Christ on the Cloth as a part of He –
toimasia composition within the Tsromi iconographical program, especially
taking into account that Hetoimasia finds place even on the silver revetment
of the frame of the Anchiskhati icon,65 known as the Georgian Keramidion ;
that one often encounters Hetoimasia scene placed between the Apostles Pe-
ter and Paul in paleo-byzantine art66 (as Chichinadze states, in the mosaic
compositions of Heavenly Jerusalem;67 Skhirtladze points out that the Virgin
Oranta is a part of the same composition (le sujet correspond à l’Eglise, logis
symbolique du Dieu incarné) in the Tsromi murals);68 that “in Serbian mu-
rals of the fifteenth century the Mandylion is even included in the composi-tion of the Ascension (the scene presented in Tsromi conch). ”
69 Moreover,
the fact that some scholars connect the “prepared throne” either to a certain Roman imperial ceremonial during which the throne with the imperial at-
tributes awaited the basileus,
70 or to the ancient oriental tradition, according
to which only the king was allowed to sit on the Throne, which represented
the God,71 seems to be especially indicative with respect to the symbolism,
connected to the Mandylion and concepts related to it, already discussed in my articles,
72 as well as touched upon below.
However, it should be also stressed here that such a hypothesis is a priori
undermined by the above-cited studies of Zaza Skhirtladze.
64 E. Kuryluk, Veronica and Her Cloth: History, Symbolism, and Structure of a “True” Im-
age. (Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, 1991), 190 (hereafter – Kuryluk
1991).
65 Chichinadze 1997, 109.
66 Ibid., 110-11.
67 Ibid.68 Skhirtlazde 1990-91, 168.
69 G. Subotić, Oxridska slikarska shkola VI veka (Belgrad, 1973)= Gedevanishvili 2006, 30,
nt 76.
70 A. Grabar, L ’ empereur dans l’ art byzantine : recherches sur l’ art officiel de l’ empire d’Orient
(Paris: Les Belles Letteres, 1936), 2.
71 Chichinadze 1997, 115, nt. 7
72 I. Karaulashvili, “King Abgar of Edessa and the Concept of a Ruler Chosen by God, ”
in Monotheistic Kingship: The Medieval Variants
, ed. A. al-Azmeh and J. Bak. CEU
Medievalia 6. Pasts Incorporated 3 (Budapest: CEU Press, 2004), 173-90 (hereafter – Karaulashvili 2004b).

Articles176c) Fresco of Telovani Holy Cross church
The earliest Georgian Mandylion fresco seems to be preserved on the mu-
rals of the Holy Cross church in Telovani73 (pic. 17,74 18, 3) and, according to
Zaza Skhirtladze, represents the face of Christ in a medallion (which acts as
His halo) without a cloth that bears an inscription “the Holy Face of God. ”75
The iconographical program of the church is studied in a monograph by Skh-irtladze.
76 As he points out, fragments of the two layers of murals are preserved:
the earlier, late eight-early ninth century images are located only in the chancel and its bay; the rest of the church decoration dates to the tenth century.
77 The
conch composition, nowadays almost destroyed, represented Christ in majesty
surrounded by angels; As Gedevanishvili points out, the holy image in Telovani
“is depicted in the sanctuary, in the center of the row of Apostles, in the second
register of the murals, below the Glory of the Lord depicted on the conch.78
Such an earliest example of Mandylion proves remarkable because of its very
rare iconographic type – an half image of Christ inscribed in a circle. The circle is accomplished by two downward thick lateral lines followed by additional contours of smaller and thinner size. The latter must be meant as the actual representation of the cloth (as these outlines seem to imitate its drapery). ”
79 As
already stated, the scholars note that “fragments of the explanatory inscription written in old Georgian uncial script – asomtavruli”
80 identify the image as the
Edessan image. In Skhirtladze’s words, the Mandylion “fresco at the Jvarpatio-
sani [the church of the Holy Cross – I.K.] represents an archaic, early Christian
portrait-type of Christ, with long hair lying in thick locks on his shoulders and partly covering his forehead, and a thick, comparatively long beard. ”
81
73 Located in historical Kartli, 25 km north-east of ancient capital of Georgia, Mtskheta.
74 This reproduction (sketch) of the Telovani fresco was first presented in an article by
Shevyakova in 1964 and later reprinted in her album. Т. Шевякова, Дата росписи первого слоя храма Теловани, Sakartvelos Metsnierebata Akademiis Moambe [Jour –
nal of the Georgian Academy of Sciences] 31/1 (1964): 235-42 (herefater – Шевякова 1964) Шевякова 1983, fig. 14.
75 Шевякова 1964, 236; Z. Skhirtladze, “Under the Sign of the Triumph of Holy Cross: Telovani Church Original Decoration and Its Iconographic Programme, ” CahArh 46
(1999): 101-18, at 103-8 (hereafter – Skhirtladze 1999); Id. 1998, 72-73; Gedevanishvili 2006.
76 Skhirtladze 2008.
77 Skhirtladze 1999, 101.
78 Most frequently the Mandylion in Georgia is included in the Deesis composition. Skh-
irtladze 2008, 35-37; Gedevanishvili 2006, 19; Jolivet-Lévy 2007, 142.
79 Gedevanishvili 2006, 18.
80 Skhirtladze 1999, 103.
81 Skhirtladze 2008, 310.

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography177
კადმოსი 6, 2014As mentioned above, representations of the Edessan image lacking the cloth
are presented on some twelfth century representations of the Holy Face;82 more –
over, the earliest representation of the Mandylion in a medallion is attested by
Deir es-Suriani fresco (pic. 2).83 However, if the inscription that accompanies the
Telovani image could be considered as authentic (see below), than the Georgian
fresco, depicting Christ “with long hair lying in thick locks on his shoulders, ”84
seems to be earlier in comparison to the Deir es-Suriani image, where “Christ is depicted with the neck, short black beard and long hair… ”
85 – the same type, rep-
resented on the frescoes of the Cappadocian churches, as well as in the Alaverdi Tetraevangelion (though on the last example without long hair; pic. 14).
Skhirtlade also stresses that the iconographical type of the Telovani Man –
dylion “survived from the earliest times up to the Iconoclasm, and in Georgia it
82 See above, at 168-69.
83 Innemée 2002, 250-51.
84 Note that the bust of Christ is depicted on the Anchiskhati (the icon of Ancha; pic. 19),
an encaustic icon dated to the sixth-seventh century which for centuries had been asso-ciated in Georgia with the Keramidion . Ш. Амиранашвили, Бека Опизари (Тбилиси:
Федерация, 1937; hereafter – Амиранашвили 1937); T. Sakvarelidze, “ Anchis Karedi Khati” [The triptych of Ancha] Sabchotha Khelovneba [Soviet Art] 5 (1976): 77-91;
Georgian art historians touch upon this image every time they talk about the represen-
tations of the Edessan image in Georgia.
On the relation of the Anchi icon to the clipeata images, see: V . Putsko, “Les images cl-ipeatae chrétiennes primitives et l’icône du Saveur d’ Anči, ” REGC 2/45 (1986): 197-209.
In E. Gedevanishvili’s words, the Mandylion with shoulders, was depicted in: the Geor –
gian churches of Ikvi, Pavnisi, Tsaldashi (twelfth century), Shio-Mghvime, Ozaani, To-mithesubani (thirteenth c.), etc.; in Bakhtageki’s church in Ani, Armenia (according to
I. Drampian, Фрески Кобайра (Erevan, 1979), fig. 49; though J. Thierry and P . Donabé-
dian regard it as a bust-image of Christ (J. Thierry, P . Dionabedyan, Les arts Arméni-
ens (Paris, 1987)). Gedevanishvili here also notes that “the murals of Ani show a great
influence of Georgian Art. Moreover, according to Durnovo (I. Durnovo, Краткая
история армянской живописи (Erevan, 1957), 33), it may be assumed that Georgians
participated in Ani. ” ; in “Sakile Kilise, ” according to a sketch by Ovchinnikov (Hristos
ierie , fig. 53); in the church of the Archangel Michael in Rila (eleventh-twelfth cc., ac-
cording to A. Lidov, Мандилион-Керамион как образ сакрального пространства,»
in Восточнохристианские реликвии 2003, 249-80, at 263); in the church of St So-
zomenus in Galata (1513, according to J. Stylianou, The painted Churches of Cyprus,
Treasure of Byzantine Art (London, 1985), fig. 38); and in western manuscripts of the
thirteenth century (Il volto di Cristo 2000, cat. IV . 2; IV .3). ”= Gedevanishvili 2006, 22-
23, 31, nt. 93-103.
On the fresco’s of Kobayr in Armenia, see also: N. Thierry, “Les peintures de la cathé-
drale de Kobayr (Tachir), CahArch 29 (1981): 103-21; Id., “ A propos des peintures de la
grande église de K‘obayr, ” Revue des études géorgiennes et caucasiennes 2 (1986): 223-26;
Z. Skhirtladze, “Gamokvleva kobairis tadzris mokhatulobis shesaxeb” [Research on the
murals of Kobayr church], Tbilisis saxelmtsifo universitetis shromebi [Tbilisi State Uni-
versity Studies] 243 (1983): 175-98 (hereafter – Skhirtladze 1983).
85 Lidov 2004, 85.

Articles178lasted even longer.86 It should be noted that the chronological limits of represent-
ing Christ in a medallion extended into the post-iconoclastic period elsewhere
in Eastern Christendom. In Byzantium, circular icons with the half-figure of
Christ, alluding to the Incarnation and thus closely connected with icon wor –
ship, are known from the ninth century, notably from their frequent appear –
ance in the Khludov and Pantokrator Psalters. ”87 The scholar also points out
that “among various iconographic types of Christ the one representing Him in the framed roundel belongs to the oldest in Christian imagery, used in various
iconographoical programmes. ”
88 As A. Lidov suggests, while discussing the Sinai
triptych representation of the Mandylion , “l’imagine di Cristo entro un clipeo
nell’icona del VII secolo dei Santi Sergio e Bacco di Kiev89 (pic. 20, 21) potrebbe
essere considerate una rara eco dell’icona Camuliana…dove svolse il ruolo di
palladio dell’Impero bizantino prima dell’iconoclastia…quelle immagini forse
furono usate come fonte iconografica per il Mandylion dopo il 944. ”90
Therefore, apart from discussing the development of Byzantine models of
the Mandylion , we can also talk about the existence of an earlier, Syriac pictori-
al model of the Edessan image of Christ, as long ago suggested by Shalva Ami-ranashvili in his studies of Ancha icon (considered to be the Keramidion)
91
and Tsromi iconographical program,92 and recently suggested by Lidov in his
description of the Deir es-Suriani image (“the type of Christ’s face finds analo-
gies in early Syrian tradition”).93
As Skhirtladze points out, the initial layer of the Telovani murals is so
damaged, that it is impossible to reconstruct the entire conch composition,
and limits its interrelation to similar examples by mere listing.94 Stressing once
again, that the Telovani Mandylion is the earliest representation of the Edes –
86 In Skhirtladze’s words, “ Although Georgia was not involved in the iconoclastic contro-
versy, the impact of the Byzantine dispute was felt in local historical sources, literature and art. It is in this context that the inclusion of the Holy Face, one of the main iconophilic arguments, in the Telovani apse programme should be perceived a kind of echo of the arguments developing in Eastern Christendom at that period. ” Skhirtladze 1998, 73.
87 Skhirtladze 2008, 310.
88 Skhirtladze 1999, 108.
89 Seventh century icon, originally from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai, now in the Kiev Museum of Eastern and Western Art. E. Key Fowden, The Barbarian Plain: Saint Sergius between Rome and Iran (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of Califor –
nia Press, 1999). See also: A. Bank. Byzantine Art in the Collections of Soviet Museums
(Leningrad: Aurora Art Publishers, 1977), 291-92, pl. 112.
90 Lidov 2004, 83.
91 Амиранашвили 1937, 20; On the literary history related to this icon see: Karaulashvili
2004b
; See also: Skhirtladze 1998, 71; Gedevanishvili 2006, 12; Karaulashvili 2007, 224.
92 Амиранашвили 1957, 118.
93 Lidov 2004, 85.
94 Skhirtladze 2008, 27.

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography179
კადმოსი 6, 2014san image , he also underlines the importance of portraying the acheiropoietos
under the Theophany composition. Skhirtladze states that “for a long period
of time in scholarly literature the murals of Latmos Pantokrator cave church
was considered to be the earliest example with such a composition. Though re-
cently the representation of the face of a bearded man against the background of a hanged cloth under the Theophany composition was considered to be the image of the symbol of the sky – Uranos, by K. Ihm and N. Thierry.
95 Though a
composition, similar to Telovani, might be represented in the sanctuary of the church of the Holy Apostles in Sinasos; here, according to the scheme by G. de
Jerphanion, the traces of the image within the halo on the tympanum of the
niche could have been those of the Mandylion .“
96
To my mind, one of the main reasons why the Telovani image is consid-
ered to be the Mandylion is the explanatory inscription that accompanies it.
Z. Skhirtladze indicates that “the first layer of painting at Telovani has pre-served, albeit fragmentarily” inscription: წმიდაჲ პირი ღმრთისა – Holy
Face of God. In one of her articles Averil Cameron suggested to avoid the us-age of the term Mandylion with respect to the Edessan image stating that “in
Greek sources the usage [of the term “Mandylion” – I.K.] becomes common only in the eleventh century…For similar reasons, it is even more important
to avoid the term “Holy Face” (as for instance in “La Sainte Face de Laon”),
since that belongs to an even later stage in the evolution and diffusion of the i m a g e .”
97 Evidently, we have to be very careful assuming that the inscription on
the Telovani fresco belongs to the same period that the painting itself (despite the fact that the representation of the Edessan image belongs to the first layer
of the frescoes), unless a thorough study of the term in Georgian (resp: Syriac,
from where this tradition should be derived) ecclesiastical literature
98 reveals a
picture, different from the one Cameron observes.99
Another reason for considering the Telovani image of Christ to be the
representation of the Edessan image, namely the place it occupies within the
95 C. Ihm, Die Programme der christlichen Apsismalerei vom vierten Jahrhundert bis zur
Mitte des achten Jahrhunderts (Wiesbaden, 1960), 190; N. Thierry, “Deux notes a propos du Mandylion. ” Зограф 11 (1980): 16-19, at 18-19= Skhirtladze 2008, 37; 248, nt. 57, 58.
96 G. de Jerphanion, Les Églises rupestres de Cappadoce . v. II (Paris, 1936), 63-66, table
150/2= Skhirtladze 2008, 37; 248, nt. 59.
97 Av. Cameron, “The Mandylion and Byzantine Iconoclasm, ” in The Holy Face 1998, 33-
54, at 37.
98 As far as I know, neither the Georgian translations of the EA, nor of the Narratio em-
ploy the term. Karaulashvili 2004a, appendices.
99 In Georgian scholarship exists a different interpretation of the Telovani fresco as well. Marina Gvelesiani sees in the depiction the image of “Christ-Sun” in a medallion. M. Gvelesiani, “Mze-kristesa da jamtha gamosakhulebis shesaxeb akuris bazilikis aghmo-savlet fasadze” [On the Representations of Sun-Christ and Time on the Eastern Façade of Akura Basilica] Literatura da khelovneba [Literature and Art] 1/2 (1997): 59-92, at
67.

Articles180church decoration. As is often indicated by scholars, the earliest Georgian mu-
rals (before the middle of the thirteenth century)100 containing the Mandylion
traditionally place it on “the lower register of apse immediately above the altar”
(though, usually, as a part of Deesis composition).101 “In this respect account
should be taken of the interrelation between this rule [i.e. depiction of the Mandylion in Georgian church decoration – I.K.]” and the liturgical practice,
already established in Edessan church. This concerns the liturgy,
102 celebrated
in Edessa in the first week of the lent, on the feast day of the Holy Face,103 when
the Mandylion was solemnly carried out and placed above the altar; during the service it was appealed for intercession. Such a connection must reflect
the close ties the Georgian church maintained at the early stage of its existence with the Patriarchate of Antioch in general and with various ecclesiastical cen-tres of Syria in particular. ”
104
The facts that – the earliest Georgian translation of the Narratio (which
does not include final part, i.e. the story about veneration of the image in Edessa) is attested in the thirteenth century manuscript
105 and it never became
100 K. Mikeladze, “Khelthukmneli khatis gamosaxuleba XII-XIII saukunis karthul kedlis
mkhatvrobashi” [Depiction of the Acheiropoietos Image on the Twelfth-Thirteenth Century Georgian Murals], Literatura da khelovneba [Literature and Art] 3(1991): 210-
22 (hereafter – Mikeladze 1991).
101 Skhirtladze 1999, 108. The author speaks there also about the “variety of places allot-ted to the Mandylion in the apse programmes” in Georgian murals of Tsvrimi, Pavnisi, Tsaldashi, Ozaani (twelfth c.), Tanghili, Khe, Shio-Mghvime, Zenobani and Kobayr (thirteenth c.). As Skhirtladze points out, “Notwithstanding their differences, these programmes create a homogenous group, testifying to the stable character of the coex-istence of an Intercession theme with the image of the Holy Face. ” Ibid., 105.
Note that in Jolivet-Lévy’s words, „association of Mandylion with representation of Dee –
sis, that is most often seen in Georgia, attest to the semantic value of the Mandylion con-
nected to liturgy of 16 August, associate veneration of the image with asking forgiveness of sins. ” Jolivet-Lévy 2007, 142; see above, nt. 53.
On different iconographical programmes including the representation of the Mandyl –
ion, depicted, for example, on the north wall, as in the refectory of Udabno monastery
(beginning of the eleventh c.); or the tympanum over the entrance, as in the church of the Saviour in Adishi (twelfth c.); or on the north pier supporting the dome, as in the Dormition church in Timotesubani (beginning of the thirteenth c.), see: Skhirtladze 2008, 53; Mikeladze 1991, 221; E. Gedevanishvili, “Encountering the Resurrection: the Holy Face at the Timotesubani Murals, ” in Intorno 2007, 181-86.
102 On the textual tradition related to this rite, see below, at 205-6
103 To the best of my knowledge, there is no mentioning of the feast day of the Mandylion
in the narrative related to the veneration of the image in Edessa.
104 Skhirtladze 1999, 108; 116, nt. 55, 56.
105 National Centre of Manuscripts, Tbilisi, Georgia. Ms Q 762, fols. 35-92. Another Geor –
gian manuscript, containing a translation of the Narratio , is dated to the sixteenth c.
(Kutaisi State Historical-Ethnographical Museum, Georgia, Ms Kut. 1 ). The present
stage of research allows me to conclude that this text represents an abridged translation of the Narratio combined with the Armenian tradition related to the activities of Thad-

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography181
კადმოსი 6, 2014widely accepted in Georgian literary tradition; that the Byzantine feast for 16
of August of the translation of the image from Edessa to Constantinople was
substituted by that of the Mandylion in Georgian liturgical collections dated to
the eleventh-twelfth centuries without mentioning its transfer at all;106 that the
earliest redaction of the text entitled the Lives of Syrian Fathers,107 dated by its
editor, Zaza Alexidze to the tenth century (with a prototype that was presum-ably even earlier), name among other monks that came from Syria to Georgia
[Ezderioz] of Nabuk’ (resp. Mabbug) who “was the servant of the Icon of the Saviour, ” and Theodosios, the prince of Urha, who “was ordained as a deacon and monk of the Icon of Christ;” and that the eleventh century Georgian trans-
lation of the Life of John of Urha (ninth century), states that the image was kept
in the skeuophylakion of the Edessan Church,
108 – suggest that the place of the
Mandylion within the church decoration in majority of Georgian churches is
conditioned by the direct influence of the Syriac tradition. As well known, in Byzantine churches the Mandylion is generally portrayed outside the altar
apse.
109 Apart from the early Georgian examples,110 the Edessan image is rep-
resented above the altar in some Cappadocian (Karanlik Kilise, Göreme 23
(dated to the depiod between the eleventh-thirteenth cc. pic. 22), Sakli Kilise,
Göreme 2a (pic. 16) and Saint Catherine, Göreme 21 (pic. 15; both dated to
the eleventh c.),111 as well as above the sanctuary in the Syrian church of Deir
daeus the Apostle.
106 The motif of transfer appears only in the fourteenth century Menaeon (Ms. Jer 107). N.
Chkhikvadze, Avgarozis epistole. Dzveli karthuli redakciebi [The Epistle of Abgar. Old
Georgian Redactions] (Tbilisi: Artanuji, 2007), 82-83.
107 Alexidze 2001.
108 Кекелидзе 1914, 304.
109 Velmans, “Les peintures de l’ église dite “Tanghil” en Géorgie, ” Byzantion 52 (1982): 387-
412, at 391; 396 (hereafter – Velmans 1982).
110 Gedevanishvili 2006, esp. 20-22; T. Velmans, “L ’ église de Khé en Géorgie, ” Зограф 10
(1979): 71-82; Id. 1982; Id. 1995; Ш. Г ерстель, “Чудотворный Мандилион. Образ
Спаса Нерукотворного в византийских иконографических программах, ” in Чудотворная Икона, ред.-сост. А. Лидов (Москва: Мартис, 1996), 76-87 (hereafter – Г ерстель 1996); Mikeladze 1991; Jolivet-Lévy 2007.
In T. Velmans’ words, “L ’iconoclasme n’ayant pas touché la Géorgie, les thèses des iconodules et leur influence sur le programme iconographique n’y connurent que peu d’ écho avant la fin du Moyen Age. Il n’ est donc pas étonnant que le Mandylion de Té-lovani et d’autres plus tardifs soient investis d’un symbolisme analogue à celui de Cro-mi… ” “dans tous ces décors absidaux, il [Telovani Mandylion – I.K.] s’agit d’une image
qui rappelle la véneration de la relique, placée sur l’autel le jour de sa fête, à Edesse, au
cours de l’ office célébre en son honneur dès le VI
e siècle. Par les images auxquelles elle
est reliée, la Sainte Face rappelle la prière d’intercéder pour les hommes qu’ on lui ad-
resse pendant l’ office. ” Velmans 1995, 175-76.
111 Jolivet-Lévy 2007, 138-39. Skhirtladze notes that the Mandylion fresco is included in
the apse programmes in the well-known monuments in Cappadocia and the Balkans,

Articles182es-Suriani (pic. 2);112 as stated by every scholar dealing with these images, they
all should refer to the ritual of worshipping the image in Edessa, as described
in the liturgical tractate mentioned above.113
The symbolism of portrayal of the Edessan image above the altar, and its
connection to the liturgy is regularly stressed in scholarly works.114 However,
the “liturgical” representation of the acheiropoietos image seems to be espe-
cially accentuated on the Deir es-Suriani fresco. If Innemée and Lidov are cor –
rect assuming that the Deir es-Suriani Mandylion is painted on a cloth, than
not only dimensions of the linen, which is loosely spread below/under the medallion,
115 but also its decoration, that is to say, “the creamy coloured fabric
with the green and red ornaments”116 “and a red band at the lower edge, ”117
could be a reminiscent of the liturgical cloth and its decorative elements. The ornaments on the cloth are not rare: one can name the fourteenth century Ubisi Mandylion , the cloth of which is described as “decorated with red and
blue flower-like ornaments. ”
118 With respect to a band at the lower edge of the
cloth I should stress that it reminds me a representation of a band on a Tsromi Hetimasia sketch (pic. 10) and schema (pic.11) by Shevyakova,
119 seen by Skh-
irtladze as a part of a maphorion of the Virgin and described as “les plis cassés
qui dessinent des triangles” (pic 13).120
and names Karanlik Kilise and Sopočani. Skhirtladze 1999, 105, 115, nt. 23. Jolivet-
Lévy names the representations at Göreme 21 (eleventh c.) and Karși Kilise (thirteenth c.)) in Cappadocia. Jolivet-Lévy 2007, 142; while, according to Velmans, “le Mandylion est très rarement mis en rapport aves la Deesis… ” in Balkans. Velmans 1995, 177. As a rare example, the scholar names the Mandylion of St Athanasius church in Konitsa
(1617). Ibid., 180.
112 Innemée 2002, 250-51.
113 Dobschütz 1899, 111**-12**; Velmans 1995, 176, nt. 17.
114 Jolivet-Lévy 2007, 138, 142; Skhirtladze 1999, 105-8; Velmans 1995, III partie. “ Amnos et Divine Liturgie, ” 176, 181-83; Г ерстель 1996, 79-82; Gedevanishvili 2006, 21.
115 Could be compared to the representations of the Edessan image on miniatures of the Paris Ms Latin 2688 (especially when they portray veneration of the image by Abgar,
where the cloth above the image of the Lord is almost rounded, while edges of the linen are loosely falling down; pics. 23, 24), as well on the Mateic frescoes (pic. 25). The rep-resentations of the Paris Ms, its turn, could have been influenced by the Syrian tradition through the iconography of Cilician Armenia (since the feast of the Edessan image was included in the Armenian Synaxarion outside the historical Armenia, in Cilicia. See: I.
Karaulashvili, “The Armenian Versions of the Abgar Legend, ” Department of Medieval Studies, Central European University, Budapest, 1996 (hereafter – Karaulashvili 1996).
116 as stated by K. Innemée. see, above, at 168.
117 as stated by A. Lidov. see above, at 168.
118 Gedevanishvili 2006, 26.
119 Шевякова 1983, fig. 8, 9.
120 However, as Skhirtladze points out, the band is depicted not only on the dress of the Virgin, but also “sur les vêtements du Christ et sur ceux des anges. Seules les couleurs différaient…. ” Skhirtladze 1990-91, 170.

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography183
კადმოსი 6, 2014Independently of whether a band at the lower edge121 of the Deir es-Suriani
fresco may have a connection to the liturgical cloth or not, one has to remember
that scholars often stress that Eucharistic meaning of the image of Christ on “the
cloth, as a symbolic allusion to the Incarnation, being equivalent to the cloth as the liturgical covering of the offering. ”
122 In Ewa Kuryluk’s words, “the sacra-
mental meal was usually prepared on a tablecloth which could be imagined as
a shroud (or a swaddling cloth) onto which Christ had been laid. In the Acts of
Thomas, the apostle “commanded his servant… to set a table… and spreading a
linen cloth upon it set on the bread of blessing… and said: ‘Jesus, who hast made
121 While, according to Herbert Kessler, fringes on some images of the Mandylion suggest
“an amalgam of a diapered tabernacle curtain and a heavily painted circular icon of
Christ…. through the allusion to the Temple veil… the relationship between the Old Law and cult and Christ’s image may even be realized in the fringes that are usually a feature of this type of Mandylion. ” H. Kessler, Spiritual Seeing. Picturing God’s Invisibility in Me –
dieval Art (Philadelphia/Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000), chapter
3, “Medieval Art as Argument, ” 60.
According to Gedevanishvili, “the Georgian Mandylia of the 12th-13th centuries even
lack the fringes, and their ‘iconic’ form is strongly emphasized. This impression be-
comes strong when the Holy Face is placed above the Altar – in such cases liturgical
“icon” of the whole program. ” Gedevanishvili 2006, 21.
122 Gedevanishvili 2006, 13. See also: Г ерстель 1996, 80-81.
It seems that the specific detail, included in the aphsidal iconographical programme of Kobayr Monastery in Armenia (thirteenth century) – the representations of the altar and the face of Christ, as a part of Eucharist compositions (Skhirtladze 1983, 190) – should be reminiscent of this type of symbolism pertaining to the earliest representa-tions of the Mandylion . The Kobayr fresco portrays the bust of the Saviour “above the
Altar, on which the Gospel, the chalice, and the paten, as the symbols of Christ’s holy body and blood, are placed. The idea of Eucharistic mystery – salvation – is clearly un-derlined by the gentle expression of the face of the Saviour. ” (Ibid., 182). (pic. 26).
In Zaza Skhirtladze’s opinion, the Kobayr fresco “represents a specific interpretation of the Georgian traditional representation of the Holy Face. Similar composition of the Holy Communion is also presented in the altar décor of another thirteenth century church, that of Kazreti Holy Trinity in Georgia. ” Certain parallels are also found with the absidal frescoes of Kintsvisi Holy Virgin church in Georgia (also dated to the thir –
teenth c.) (Skhirtladze 1983, 191.
In A. Lidov’s words, „the centre of composition occupies the altar, above which the bust of Christ – percievable as a certain icon standing on the altar – is represented. The icon-ographical type of Christ resembles the Mandylion . It is instructive that in three other
Armeno-Chalcedonian churches (those of Tigran Honents, Kirants and Kobayr) the Mandylion also is represented in the centre of composition of „Officiating Church Fa-
thers,“ which, in combination with a real altar, creates an image of the icon standing on It“ (А. Лидов, „Исскуство армян-халкедонитов,“ Patma-Banasirakan Handes [Historico-
Pilological Journal] 1 (1990): 75-87, at 79), Independently of whether the Kobayr fresco represents the Mandylion , or this bust image of Christ became a part of the Eucharistic
composition only in result of a particular interpretation of the acheiropoietos image, the symbolic analogy of the Kobayr fresco with the “liturgical” representation of the Man –
dylion is clear.

Articles184us worthy to partake off the Eucharist of thy holy body and blood’ (5:49). ”123 To
my mind, the dimensions of the cloth on the Deir es-Suriani Mandylion fresco
and its decorative details could be explained exactly by its “liturgical” mode of
depiction, that is to say, by placing the symbolical liturgical covering (i.e. the Cloth, or, in this case, as the tablecloth) above the altar with the bread of bless-ing (i.e. the image of Christ) on it. If we take into account a note by Christopher
Walter, stating that in Lexicon latinitatis medii aevi Albert Blaise gives the altar-
cloth as one of the meanings of the word sindon ,
124 which seems to be the earli-
est term used for designating the Edessan Image of Christ,125 this supposition
becomes acceptable. Therefore, in my opinion, any pictorial or literary repre-sentation of the Edessan image that involves a depiction of the cloth larger than
a napkin should be associated precisely with the phenomenon described above, i.e., with the “liturgical representation of the Mandylion , ” and not necessarily, as
some assume, with the burial cloth of Christ; if any similarity while depicting
the two images appear, it does not imply that it reflects a representation of a real
Edessan image; it could rather suggest, to my mind, the Eucharistic symbolism associated with both relics.
126
A Mandylion miniature from the Alaverdi Four Gospels
In my article for the Interactions volume, while discussing the Byzantine
pictorial programs that developed around the Abgar legend, I stressed that it is based on the plot of the EA. However, when I was working on the Georgian version of my articles “King Abgar of Edessa and the Concept of a Ruler Cho-sen by God, ”
127 and “The Mandylion of Edessa and Keramidion of Hierapolis
in the Oldest Version of the Lives of the Syrian Fathers,”128 I also paid atten-
123 NT Apocrypha 2: 470= Kuryluk 1991, chapt. 9, “Cloth, ” 179-98, at 190.
124 Lexicon latinitatis medii aevi praesertim ad res ecclesiasticas investigandas pertinens, ed.
A.Blaise (Turnhout: Brepols, 1975), sub verbo =Walter 1995, 224, nt. 23.
125 Karaulashvili 2002.
126 In Gerstel’s words, “Уникальное изображение плащаницы находится в храме
Живоносного источника в Мессении (12 в.) в центральной алтарной апсиде, ниже образа Богоматери с младенцем… Плащаница, представленная на этой фреске, сразу вызывает в памяти образ Мандилиона, что, в принципе, не удивительно, так как оба плата главным образом связаны со страстями и Воскресением Спасителя, ” Г ерстель 1996, 80.
127 I. Karaulashvili, “Edesis mefe abgari da uflis mier rcheuli mmartvelis kristianuli ideis chamokalibeba” [King Abgar of Edessa and Formation of the Christian Idea of a Ruler Chosen by God], revised version. Tsakhnagi [Facet. Annual of Philological Studies] 2
(2010): 157-88; English version: Karaulashvili 2004b.
128 I. Karaulashvili, “Edesis Mandilioni da Hierapolisis Keramidioni Asurel mamatha Tsk-hovrebis Udzveles Redaktsiashi” [Mandylion of Edessa and Keramidion of Hierapolis in the Oldest version of the Lives of the Syrian Fathers, ” Sakarthvelos Sidzveleni [Geor –
gian Antiquities] 14 (2010): 54-73.

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography185
კადმოსი 6, 2014tion to the mode of representation of the Edessan image of Christ in one of
the miniatures that illustrate the EA in the Alaverdi Four Gospels (pic. 14).
Together with the representation of the Mandylion from the eleventh century
Alexandria Menologion (Greek Patr. Cod. 35, fol. 142v; pic. 27),129 it represents
the rare example of the miniature of Edessan image among the ones picturing the apocryphon, without linking it to a certain episode to the plot of the legend
presented in the manuscript it decorates.
130 The miniature portrays a clipeata
type image of Christ (which depicts not only the face, but also the neck of the
Saviour) on a stretch rectangular cloth. The caption above the miniature reads
“ხატი მანდილისაჲ – icon of the Mandyl(ion). ”131
The representation of the Mandylion is placed in the middle of a larger
golden plate, so that the entire composition made me think that, here, the ico-
nographer portrayed the Edessan image “fastened to a board and embellished
with gold, ” that is to say, the way it is described in the Narratio . The relevant
passage of the apocryphon runs as follows: “ Abgar . . . destroyed this statue [of the idol] and consigned it to oblivion and in its place set up this likeness of our Lord Jesus Christ not made by hands, fastening it to a board and embellishing it with gold, which now is to be seen, inscribing these words on the gold:
132
129 Weitzmann 1960, 168-69.
130 Though Skhirtladze indicates that the representation of the Mandylion is also found in the
Largvisi Four Gospels (Ms A-496, National Centre of Manuscripts, Tbilisi) (“The manu-
script of the Greek Patriarchate in Alexandria, Cod. 35(303) can be conventionally linked
with them [Moscow, State Historical Museum, Cod. Gr. 9 (Vlad. 382); Paris, Bibl. Nat.,
Cod. Gr. 1528] since, like to the Largvisi Four Gospels, it contains only the image of the Mandylion (fol. 142v). ” Skhirtladze 1998, 82, nt. 49), the Georgian manuscript does not contain it.
131 It is difficult for me to judge whether this caption had been written simultaneously with the text, or was added later. It seems that this question needs further elaboration, since the text of the EA does not employ this epithet of the Edessan image. The only term exploited here is the sindon .
132 Interestingly enough, the text of the Armenian Synaxarion (thirteenth century) states:
“When He put the cloth sewn with gold on His face, the face of the Lord was imprinted on it immediately. ” Le synaxaire Armenién de Ter-Israel. Ed. and trans. by G. Bayan in Patrologia Orientalis, vols. 5– 6, 15– 16, 18– 19, 21 (1910– 30); repr., (Turnhout: Brepols,
1971), 391 (hereafter – Bayan 1971). The redaction by Grogol Khlatetsi (fifteenth cen-tury) adds that the edges were ornamented with gold (Ms Arm 1, from the Armenian collection of the National Centre of Manuscripts, Tbilisi, Georgia). It is difficult for me to judge whether this motif entered this text via the local Syrian tradition, or represents an Armenian interpretation of the Narratio passage.
On the inclusion of the feast of the Mandylion in the Synaxarion collections of the
Armenian iconoclastic Church (with the exception of the seventh century, when sev-eral dyophysite catholicoi were leading the Armenian church), see Karaulashvili 1996. Here I will only state that this tradition germinated outside historical Armenia, first in Constantinople by the end of the tenth century and, then in Western, Cilician Armenia, which was strongly influenced by both, Orthodoxy and Catholicism. (For the Armeno-Byzantine-Roman relations during the Crusades, see: G. Dédéyan, Les Arméniens entre Grecs, Musulmans et croisés. Etudes sur les pouvoirs arméniens dans le Proche-Orient

Articles186‘Christ our God, whoever hopes in Y ou, does not fail. Amen. ’ ”133
The text relates that Abgar ordered to destroy the statue of the idol that
had been erected in front of the gates of Edessa and to substitute it with the
Mandylion stretched on a wooden board. Can the Alaverdi miniature repre-
sent the Edessan image placed at the gates of Edessa for paying a due honour to it? The proportions of the image on the miniature as well as the golden
background indicate a positive answer to this question. In fact, the horizontal
“golden” margins of the miniature are very narrow, while the vertical ones are much wider, as if suggesting that the image is fixed on a gold frame. Despite the fact that all the miniatures that illustrate the EA in the Alaverdi Four Gos-
pels, as well as in another manuscripts illustrating the same apocryphon – the
Georgian Gelati Four Gospels (Ms Q 908, National Centre of Manuscripts, Tbilisi)
134 and the Greek illuminated magical amulet135 roll from the Pierpont
Morgan Library136 –, are set against a golden background, the decoration that
méditerranéen (1086-1150). 2 vols. (Lisbonne: Gulbenkian Foundation, 2003); I. Augé,
Byzantins, Arméniens et Francs au temps de la croisade. Politique religieuse et reconquête
en orient sous la dynastie des Comnènes 1081-1185 (Paris: Geurhner, 2007)).
As Steven Runciman indicates: “the town of Edessa or Urfa stands some seventy miles east of the Euphrates, in a district claimed by geographers alike for Syria, Mesopotamia, and Armenia. ” (S. Runciman, «Some Remarks on the Image of Edessa,» CHJ 3 (1931):
238– 52, at 238). In the seventh-eleventh centuries there was a large number of Arme-
nian population and Edessa was even “held briefly, from 1077 to 1098 by the Armenian
chieftain, from whom it was taken by Baldwin during the First Crusade. ” Dictionary of
the Middle Ages , ed. J. R. Strayer, (New Y ork: Charles Scribner’s sons, 1984), vol. 4, 384.
Moreover, Edessa was the seat of an Armenian Archbishop, whose cathedral was iden-
tified as St Ephraem’s Church. The church stood close to the tomb of St Ephraem, the
most eminent and celebrated Father of the Syrian Church. Another Armenian church
was the Church of the Holy Apostles. Segal 1970, 239.
Supposedly the local, Edessan, tradition was well-known to the local Armenians, espe-
cially so that not only was there a large Armenian community in Edessa but also they
had left their own written acounts, as confirmed by the History of Armenia written by
Ukhtanes, supposedly the bishop of Urha (tenth or eleventh century). Ukhtanes Epis-
kopos, Patmutyun Hayots [History of Armenia] (Vagharshapat: Surb Katoghike Echmi-
adzni Press, 1871).
133 PG, 113, col. 437. In 2007 I suggested that inclusion of this passage, plausibly, was con-ditioned by the divergence of icon’s actual form from its legendary description. Karau-
lashvili 2007, 223.
134 Karthul xelnatsertha aghtseriloba axali /Q/ kolekciisa. [Description of the Georgian
Manuscripts of the New Collection /Q/], ed. by Ilya Abuladze, M. Kavtaria et al., vol. II
(Tbilisi: Metsniereba Press, 1958), 327-32; Chkhikvadze 1992, 68-69; Skhirtladze 1998, 80-82.
135 On the apotropaic function of the Abgar legend, see: E. Бакалова, „За апотропейната сила на божието слово и образ (легендата за авгар в изкуството),“ in Средновеков-ният човек и неговият свят. Сборник в чест на 70-та годишнина на проф. д. и. н. К. Попконстантинов (Велико Търново: Издателство „Фабер,“ 2014), 339-58.
136 The text of the EA is included in this part of the New-Y ork-Chicago scroll. For this

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography187
კადმოსი 6, 2014appear on the left and right sides of the cloth as depicted in the Alaverdi Tet –
raevangelion , confirms this supposition, since it looks like an inscription on
the cloth (although in the miniature red ink is used).
However, it is difficult for me to say whether the painter who illuminated
the Alaverdi Four Gospels (copied on the Georgian monastery of the Virgin
Kalipos on the Black mountain near Antioch),137 or the manuscript illumina-
tion that he followed was combining the miniature pictorial programs reflect-
ing the text of the Narratio138 or, solely for that representation of the Man –
dylion , he used a model that was developing by that time in the “peripheral”
Byzantine church decoration (since the closest parallel to the Alaverdi Mandyl –
ion we find on the eleventh century frescoes of Cappadocian churches, namely
in the Chapel 21 of Göreme (pic. 15), in Sakli Kilise (Göreme 2a; pic. 16),139
and Karanlik Kilise, Göreme 23 (pic. 22)140). To my mind, the explanatory note
Greek-Arabic amulet, see: Anonymous, L ’image d’Edesse, après un Manuscrit du VI-e
ou VII-e siècle. Extract from Illustration , 18. 04. 1908; S. der Nersessian, “La légende
d’ Abgar d’après un rouleau illustré de la bibliaothèque Pierpont Morgan à New Y ork, ”
in Actes du IV Congrès International des Études Byzantines, ed D. B. Filov. Bulletin de
l’Institut Archéologique Bulgare 9 (1935): 98–106; repr. in her Etudes Byzantines et Ar –
méniennes (Louvain: Imprimerie. Orientaliste, 1973), 175–81 (hereafter – der Nerses-
sian 1935); H. L. Kessler, “ Amulet Roll (fragment), ” in Illuminated Greek Manuscripts from the American Collections, an exhibition in Honour of Kurt Weitzmann, ed. G. Vi-kan (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973), 194–95; G. Peers, “Magic, the Man-dylion and the Letter of Abgar on a Graeco-Arabic Amulet Roll in Chicago and New Y ork, ” in Intorno 2007, 215-26; Id., “ Art and Identity in an Amulet Roll from Fourteenth
Century Trebizond, ” Church History and Religious Culture 89.1-3 (2009): 153-78 (here-
after – Peers 2009; Karaulashvili 2007.
137 Skhirtladze 1998, 77-78; A. Saminsky, “Illuminated Manuscripts from Antioch, in Inter –
actions 2007, 188-208; N. Kavtaria, “ Alaverdi Gospel (A-484) and the Artistic Peculiari-
ties of the Black Mountain School of Miniature Painting of the 11th Century, ” Proceed –
ings of the 21st International Congress of Byzantine Studies, London, 21-26 August 2006.
3 vols. Ed. E. Jeffreys, F. K. Haarer, and J. Gilliland (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2006), vol.
3. Abstracts and Communications, 130-31. ( http://79.170.44.101/farig.org/images/sto-ries/pdfs/summary-alaverdi-gospel.pdf . last accessed: 15.01.2013)
138 As already mentioned above, the Georgian translation of the Narratio is found only in
two, the thirteenth (Ms. Q 762, National centre of Manuscripts, Tbilisi, Georgia) and the sixteenth (Ms Kut 1, collection of the State Historical-Ethnographical Museum of Kutaisi, Georgia) century manuscripts.
139 Moreover, on the three representations not only the face, but also the neck of Christ is depicted. E. Gedevanishvili, “Piri ghmrtisa aghmosavlethisa da dasavletis khelovne-bashi (mandilioni da veronika )” [The Holy Face in the Art of the Christian East and West (Mandylion and St.Veronica’s Icon)], Ph.D. disser., Tbilisi I. Javakhishvili State University, Faculty of History 2004; Id. 2006; See also: N. Kavtaria, “ Alaverdis othkhta-vis mkhatvruli gaformebis taviseburebani” [Artistic Peculiarities of Alaverdi Gospel (A-484) Illustrations] Sakartvelos Sidzveleni [Georgian Antiquities] 9 (2006): 89-111.
140 Jolivet-Lévy 2007; As she states, the closest parallel to the Karanlik Kilise acheiropoi-etos images is the Alaverdi Mandylion . “Les deux images, géorgienne et cappadocienne,
dérivent probablement d’un même modèle, dont it est difficile de dire s’il a été créé à

Articles188that accompanies the Alaverdi mandylion – icon of the Mandyl(ion), together
with that of the Göreme 23 fresco – το ἃγιον Μαν(δή)λην141 – rather point to
to the second supposition.
The Edessan image from Chapel 21, from Karanlik Kilise and the church
of St Sophia in Ochrid (dated ca. 1055),142 together with the Alaverdi Man –
dylion , seem to be the only examples where the decoration on the vertical mar –
gins of the cloth could be associated with the inscription that, according to the Narratio , Abgar ordered to be made on the image. At the same time, all four
examples contain the so-called Seals of Christ
143 imprinted on a cloth; the seals
of Christ belong to the EA and are completely omitted in the Narratio , while
they are being mentioned in some Byzantine Menologia144 and the eleventh
century Compendium Historiarum of Gregory Cedrenos145 (they state that the
letter was sealed with seven Hebrew letters, meaning Qeou Qeva Qeion Qauma
(ΘΘΘΘ, a kind of tetragrammaton ),146 that is to say, “the vision of God, di-
vine miracle. ”). Finally, the only example of the sole picture of the “stretched
rectangular” representation of the Mandylion in Byzantine Menologia is the
Alexandrian MS (pic. 27), which contains neither the decoration on the verti-
cal margins of the cloth, nor the representation of the seals of Christ.
Despite some divergences, the Alaverdi and Alexandria Mandylia testify
to the suggestion by Herbert Kessler that ¨through the allusion to the Tem-ple veil… the relationship between the Old Law and cult and Christ’s image may even be realized in the fringes that are usually a feature of this type of Mandylion .”
147 As is well known, the twelfth-century manuscript containing
the Spiritual Ladder of John Climachus (Bibl. Vat. cod. Ross. 251, fol. 12v; pic.
28), where the images of the Mandylion and Keramidion bear the explanato-
ry inscription should be seen as the Spiritual Tablets
Edesse meme ou à Constantinople. ” Ibid., 138.
141 Jolivet-Lévy 2007.
142 A. Lidov, “Holy Face-Holy Script-Holy Gate: Revealing the Edessa Paradigm in Chris-
tian Imagery, ” in Intorno 2007, 195-212, at 205 (hereafter – Lidov 2007).
143 A study on a symbolical identity of the seven seals of Christ and the Edessan image is given in chapter 4 of my dissertation: Karaulashvili 2004a, ch. 4. “The Closing Part of the Letter of Christ in the Epistula Abgari: „The so-called Seven Seals and their Explana-tion. ” This aspect in iconography is discussed by A. Lidov in one of his articles (Lidov 2007).
144 It is included in the texts published by Dobschütz 1899, 50**, but missing in the variant edited by Latyšev: Menologii anonymi Byzantini. Saeculi X. quae supersunt. Petropoli: [n.l.], 1912, 282-85 (hereafter – Latyšev 1912).
145 PG, 121, I, 310.
146 Karaulashvili 2004a, chapt. 4
147 H. Kessler, “Pictures Fertile with Truth. ’ How Christians Managed to Make Images of God without Violating the Second Commandment, ” Journal of Walters Art Gallery 49/50 (1991-92): 53-65, at 62; See also: Karaulashvili 2004a, 159-60.

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography189
კადმოსი 6, 2014of “Christians. ”148 A symbolic affinity of the Mosaic tablets and the Edessan
Icon of Christ is found among the famous third-century AD mural paintings
at a Dura Europos synagogue, where “a Jewish equivalent of Veronica with
her cloth: Moses spreading between his hands a scroll covered with writing” is depicted.
149 In the Alaverdi Four Gospels not only the image of Christ al-
ludes to the Old Testament Law, but also the mode of presenting the Seven
Seals of Christ attached to His epistle (pics. 29) – as well as in the NY-Chicago
scroll – are reminiscent of the Tablets of Moses (pic. 30), indicating that not only the acheiropoietos image of Christ, but also the letter, written by God the Son Himself could be perceived as “the Spiritual Tablets of Christians, ” as if
demonstrating that “the Law was given through Moses, grace and truth came
through Jesus Christ. ”
150
What attracts my additional attention here is the presence of the pseudo-
Kufic letters on the margins of the Alaverdi Mandylion .151 The Abgar tradition
implies that the inscription made on the image by the order of Abgar, had to
be in Syriac. It is difficult for me to judge why a Georgian painter living in An-
tioch imitated on the miniature Kufic letters instead. Do we have to suppose that he was simply copying the image he had in front of his eyes, while the original painting was influenced by the information of the Narratio that it were
Arabs who handed the Mandylion down to the Byzantines? Or, perhaps, was
it a certain fashion for representing the Aramaic letters by that time? The lat-ter supposition seems to be more trustworthy, since we find the pseudo-Kufic inscriptions on some Cappadocian Mandylia as well (pic. 15, 16, 22).
152
It is difficult for me to ascertain whether these “peripheral” images of
the Mandylion were influenced by the plot of both the Narratio and the EA,
or by some earlier, most probably Oriental Christian, iconographical tradi-
148 Ibid.
149 Kuryluk 1991, 32.
150 John 1: 17.
151 In Grabar’s view, the pseudo-Kufic inscription on the edges of the cloth is similar to that
on Muslim tissues. A. Grabar, L ’iconoclasme byzantin. Dossier archéologique. 2nd ed. (Paris: Flammarion, 1984), 53.
See also: N. Kavtaria, “ Avgarozis legendis dasuratheba shua saukuneebis karthul min-iatiurashi“ [Illustrations of the Abgar Legend in the Alaverdi Four Gospels], Khelovne –
bathmtsodneoba [Art History, Collection of articles published by the Department of
Art History of Theory of Tbilisi I. Javakhishvili State University] 1 (2000): 241-60; Id., „Interpretation of the Text and Image in the Culture of Christian East: Georgian Illus-trations of Abgars’s Apocryphal History,“ Proceedings of the International Conference Interpretation of the Text in the Culture of Christian East: Translation, Commentary, Poetic Treatment , St.Petersburg, Russia, 2011 (forthcoming); Id., “ Avgaroz mefis tsik-
lis dasuratheba gelathis othkhthavshi” [Illustrations of King Abgar Cycle in the Gelati Gospels], in the proceedings of the conference Gelati-900 (forthcoming).
152 Jolivet-Lévy 2007.

Articles190tion, testified by the Alaverdi Tetraevangelion , Deir-es-Suriani and Cappa-
docian frescoes. I hope that art historians will be able to provide a more reli-
able answer to this question. However, even if in their opinion the miniature
representing the Mandylion from the Alaverdi Four Gospels is based solely
on a passage from the Narratio, my conclusion according to which “one
can safely assume that the pre-fourteenth century illustrations are based on
the EA and not, as previously thought, on those of the Narratio ,”153 is still
legitimate, since we will have the sole image influenced by the plot of this version of the apocryphon within the Byzantine miniaature tradition of the
Abgar Legend, emergence of which could be determined by the influence exerted over it not by the textual, but by the pictorial tradition; moreover, as Christopher Walter had already noted, the legend that accompanies the
third miniature of the Moscow Menologion (Christ gives the cloth to the
messenger) employs the term sindon unknown to the text of the Narratio,
but used in the EA; To put it in Walter’s words, “we may infer that the scribe or illuminator was familiar with the Epistola , even, perhaps, that this min-
iature was copied from one illuminating the Epistola ;”
154 The same term,
sindon, is used in the explanatory inscription of the Mateič fresco. Inclusion
of “two scenes which are not attested elsewhere [except EA-I.K], ” together with explotation of the terminology pertaining to the Edessan image, lead Walter to the conclusion that the Mateič cycle “clearly derives from the Epis –
tola, not from the Narratio .”
155
In favour of supposition, suggesting that the illumination of the textual
tradition of the Abgar Legend depends on the EA speaks also the fact that
although a pictorial tradition related to the Narratio and portraying the sol-
emn translation and receipt of the Mandylion by Romanos Lekapenos exists,
as confirmed by the illustrations of the Madrid Skylitzes manuscript dated to
the twelfth century (pic. 31),156 it has never become accepted and developed
within the Byzantine iconographical program of the Abgar legend.
153 Karaulashvili 2007, 231.
154 Walter 1995, 226.
155 Ibid., 228.
156 I. Ševčenko, “The Madrid Manuscript of the Chronicle of Skylitzes in the Light of Its
New Dating” in Byzanz und der Westen, Studien zur Kunst des europaischen Mittel-alters, ed. Irmgard Hutter. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philoso-phisch-Historische Klasse. Sitzungsberichte, 432. (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1984), 117–30.

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography191
კადმოსი 6, 2014Ms Latin 2688, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris
As a thorough study of all the miniatures revealed, the only case within
the entire Abgar cycle when we can talk about the influence of the non-Byz-
antine tradition, that is to say, of the DA, combined with the nationalised Ar –
menian textual tradition (the History of Armenia by Movses Khorenatsi,157 and
the text devoted to the Feast of the Mandylion in the Armenian Synaxarion
collection158), is found in the Paris BN Ms Latin 2688. The interrelation of the
text and the images here is as follows:
157 Movses Khorenatsi, Patmutyun Hayots (History of Armenia] (Venice: Surb Lazar Press,
1841), 204-313; Moses Khorenatsi, History of the Armenians, translation and commen-tary by R. W . Thomson. Harvard Armenian Texts and Studies 4 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1978), 164-77.
158 Bayan 1971, 390-93.

192
fol Scene plausible source
min 1. fol.
65rAbgar talking to his envoys he sends to Rome DA, DAarm
min 2. 66rAbgar’s messengers holding a letter that reads ‘rex’
i (left), while on the right
side Anania relating everything he has heard about Christ in Jerusalem to his master is depicted DA, DAarm
min 3,fol. 68vAbgar gives the epistle to two messengers (identified in the Armenian Synaxarion as Ananias and John (painter and goldsmith)Armenian Synaxarion
min 4.fol, 70vThe painter, who sits on a chair,
ii tries to paint the image of Christ, while
another messenger, kneeling, takes the epistle of Christ (pic. 32)iiiCombination of two redactions of the Armenian Synax –
arion (and the Narratio or Byzantine Synaxarion?)
min. 5,fol. 72rChrist’s entry to Jerusalem Armenian Synaxarion
iv
min. 6fol. 73vApostles Philip and Andrew speak to Christ on behalf of Abgar’s messen-gersMoses of Khoren, Armenian Synaxarion
v
min. 7,fol. 75rAnanias hands the epistle
vi to one of the Apostles, while another Apostle
takes the Cloth on which the Holy Face is imprinted, from Christ (pic. 5)This seems to be an invention of a Latin author based on Moses of Khoren and the Armenian Synaxarion (since two
apostles are playing the role of intermediaries)
min 8,fol. 77rMiracle at Hirapolis [called here Manpete] EA, Narratio , EAarm
vii
min. 9,fol. 79rThe image is put in the well
viiiArmenian Synaxarion
min. 10,fol. 82rSolemn procession
ix on the occasion of the image being taken out from the
well, Abgar taken to it lying on a stretcher (pic. 24) Armenian Synaxarion
min. 11. fol. 83vCures accomplished by water taken from the well This seems to be an invention of a Latin author based on the Armenian Synaxarion , since it says that the miracles
were accomplished by a second brick, left in the well
min. 12, fol. 85rAbgar, kneeling, receives the image
x (pic. 23) Narratio; Armenian Synaxarion

193
კადმოსი 6, 2014min. 13, fol.
86rAbgar, kneeling, takes the image into his hands
min. 14, fol. 87v Abgar, kneeling, raises the image over his head; solemn greeting of the image with trumpets, lutes, sambucas, cymbals
min. 15,fol, 89vTobias meets the apostle Thaddaeus DA, DAarm, Eusebius, Narrati o, Khorenatsi
min 16,fol. 90rAbgar inquires from Tobias DA, DAarm, Eusebius, Khorenatsi
min. 17,fol. 90vTobias asks Thaddaeus to go to Abgar’s palace DA, DAarm, Eusebius, Narrati o, Khorenatsi
min. 18,fol. 91vAbgar, kneeling, greets Thaddaeus DA, DAarm, Eusebius, Khorenatsi
min. 19,fol. 92vThaddaeus talks to Abgar DA, DAarm, Eusebius, Narratio , Khorenatsi
min. 20,fol. 94rThaddaeus baptises Abgar DA, DAarm, Eusebius, Narratio , Khorenatsi, EA
min. 21,fol. 95rAbgar’s son, who returned to paganism, venerates an idol, while a bishop (Thaddaeus?) is martyred on order of Abgar’s son; he is killed by sword
xiKhorenatsi, Armenian Martyrdom of the Apostle Thaddaeus Armenian Synaxarion (Feast fot 22 December, Martyrdom
of the Apostle Thaddaeu s)
min. 22,fol. 96rAbgar’s widow takes the image to Jerusalem Khorenatsi

194i It seems that the iconography of this scene is conditioned by the text of the DA, accord-
ing to which Abgar sends a message to “the honoured Sabinus, the son of Eustorgius, the deputy of our lord the emperor.. ” and gets a reply from the latter. The Doctrine of Addai, the Apostle, ed. G. Phillips (London: Trübner, 1876), 2 (hereafter – Phillips 1876).
ii The Narratio and Byzantine Synaxaria are the only texts relating that while painting the im-
age, Anania was sitting, though on a rock. One cannot exclude the possibility that the repre-sentation of the painter while painting relies on this information. However, to my mind, the
painter of the Paris manuscript simply portrayed a person sitting on a chair – supposedly,
for that time a traditional pictorial pose for someone who is writing, or painting.
iii The inscription on other letters reads: ‘rex, ” while on this one “Ih. ”
iv In both the Latin and the Armenian text Abgar’s messengers enter Jerusalem on the same day when Jesus enters.
v If the author of the Latin text uses the Armenian Synaxarion, then, he has in hands a re-
daction different from the one published by Bayan and attributed to Ter-Israel (the Synax –
arion of Ter-Israel was written in the middle of the thirteenth century, L. Melikset-Bek,
Sakartvelos istoriis tserilobiti tskaroebis publikatsiebi. Katalogi [Publications of the Written Sources on the History of Georgia. Catalog] (Tbilisi: Press of the Ministry of Internal Af-airs, 1949), 260; Nowadays the text published by Bayan is attributed to Grigol Anavarzetsi (second half of the thirteenth century; H. Acharyan, Hayots andzannuneri bararan [Dic-tionary of Armenian personal names] (Y erevan: State University Press, 1942), 586-87),
since only the Apostle Philip is mentioned there.
However, both, Philip and Andrew are mentioned in another redaction of the Armenian Synaxarion written by Grigol Khlatetsi (fifteenth century, Acharjan, Bararan, 608). Since
the Paris Latin Ms 2688 is dated to appr. 1270, it is easy to guess that it is not the Khlatetsi
redation that served as one of the sources for the Latin author. Further work and compari-son to all redactions of the Armenian Synaxaria is needed in order to clarify this issue.
Before this work is done, one cannot exclude the possibility that in some cases we are deal-ing with “vice versa influence. ” That is to say, certain passages from the Paris Ms Abgar legend had entered the Armenian Synaxarion . This possibility should not be excluded,
since we know that there existed vivid contacts between Cilician Armenia and Rome, especially active with respect to the ecclesiastical issues and attempts of religious unity. Here one might take into account Isa Ragisa’s argument according to which “the choice of types of miracles links the text with the liturgy of the sudarium at S. Spirito in Sassia, ” and a testimony found in the Latin text, stating that the Edessan image was finally taken to Rome. Ragusa 1991, at 99.
vi The epistle on the miniature reads: “rex” (pic. 5).
vii The Greek spelling of the name of the city, Hierapolis, is given here. The episode is in-cluded in the text entitled The Story of Lord John about King Abgar and the Holy Towel, to Which Jesus Ordered to Cure Abgar, B. Outtier, “Une forme enrichie de la Légende d’ Abgar en arménien, ” in Apocryphes arméniens: transmission – traduction – création – iconogra-phie. Actes du colloque international sur la littérature apocryphe en langue arménienne
(Genève, 18-20 septembre 1997) Publications de l’Institut romand des sciences bibliques 1, ed. V . Calzolari Bouver, J.-D. Kaestli and B. Outtier (Lausanne: Edition du Zèbre, 1999), 129-45 (hereafter – Outtier 1999).
The Narratio states that the name of the city was Membich in Arabic and Mabouk in
Syriac. PG 113, col. 432.

195
კადმოსი 6, 2014viii The motif of the image in the well is known in Syriac as well, though in a different context.
The Chronicon ad annum Christi 1234 pertinens, in a section entitled Concerning the well
of the lepers outside Edessa , relates how at a certain time a certain Oriental desired to steal
the image. Once he managed to do it, but the image was burning his lap and he threw it into a well of the monastery. A column of fire appeared and the image was taken out. Since then, healing miracles were happening and everyone who washed himself with its water was healed. Brock 2004, 53. Brock observes the parallelism of this passage with the well episode of the Paris Ms.
ix As rightly mentioned by Ragusa, the description of the solemn procession might be an echo of the passage from the Narratio , describing the triumphal entry of the image to
Constantinople. Ragusa 1991, 101.
x The Synaxarion of Ter-Israel recounts: “The next dawn Abgar ordered the entire city of
Edessa to go together with him dressed in white clothes, with candles lit and fragrant incenses; they went to the well and took out the holy linen. They left one brick inside the well, which accomplishes lots of miracles till now. And the king [together with the citizens] returned to the city gaily, with great joy, singing and playing on musical instru-ments; he put the image on his face and was half-cured… ” Bayan 1971, 392.
The redaction of Khlatetsi says: “ And the king ordered to decorate the city and command-ed to all citizens, from the richest to the beggars, to put on new cloths; the court also was
prepared and many candles were distributed. They gave 3000 big red candles to the nobles
and 20,400 other candles to all people, the old and the young. Being thus prepared, the en-
tire population of the city went out to the well and lifted from there with a rope one small and another, larger, brick. According to the divine will the larger brick had been left in the well and became the cause of many miracles, since it was curing the ill, the lepers and the
possessed… ” Ms Arm1, Armenian Collection of Tbilisi State Centre of Manuscripts.
xi The legs of the Saint were cut off with a sword. Khorenatsi, II, 34.

Articles196In 2007 I supposed that the scenes typical to the Abgar legend illustra-
tions presented in the Paris manuscript are derived from the EA cycle, and do
not reflect the text of the Narratio .159 However, one important fact skipped my
attention – the text itself does not speak about translation of the image to Con-stantinople, while the miniatures seem to portray solely the events related by
the text. Moreover, it clearly links the text with the Latin West – as Isa Ragusa indicates, “the choice of types of miracles links the text with the liturgy of the sudarium at S. Spirito in Sassia;”
160 a testimony found in the Latin text, stating
that the Edessan image was finally taken to Rome, points to the same.
Therefore, the illumination of the manuscript, which stylistically is a typi-
cal example of Western medieval art, closely follows the textual evidence and seems to be independent from the traditional Byzantine pictorial tradition. To put it in Ragusa’s words which she used to describe the miniatures illustrating
the episodes speaking of the Mandylion in the well and which, as I think, could
be applied to the entire pictorial program, we are dealing here with a “cycle
unparalleled in Byzantine Abgar illustrations and original to the Paris text. ”
161
159 Earlier, Christopher Walter had suggested that “it is more likely that the author would
have been familiar with the Epistola , translation and distribution of which outside the
Greek world was much greater than for the Narratio… ” Walter 1995, 229.
160 Ragusa 1991, 99.
161 Ibid., 99.

197
კადმოსი 6, 2014Part II
Provenance of the New-York-Chicago Scroll
Since I have already mentioned a similar compositional setting for the
miniatures in the Georgian Four Gospels (Alaverdi and Gelati) and the Greek
amulet roll, now I would turn my attention to the New-Y ork-Chicago scroll. I
tried to analyse the Abgar legend included in the New-Y ork part of this amulet
roll in my article for the Interactions and came to the conclusion that “the in-
clusion of the miniatures representing Constantine and Helena with the Cross
before the beginning of the apocryphon – together with the representation of
the Seven Seals as a combination of the Mosaic tablets (pic. 30), a vision of the
Cross seen by Constantine, and the portrait of David (on the Chicago part of the manuscript)—suggests that this was a work designed to reveal the concept
of a ruler chosen by God, ”
162 a concept studied in relation to the multilingual
versions of the Abgar legend in one of my earliest articles.163 I was very happy
to find out that Glenn Peers, who studied the manuscript thoroughly, came to the same conclusion, stating: “the combination of Constantine and Helena,
Abgar and Evgenios, has a great deal of tradition of the God-led king behind it. ” Peers correctly assumed that “read this way, the Chicago-New Y ork roll reveals itself as an ideological assertion of the protection that comes to Chris-
tians who follow the right path: Evgenios and his warrior brethren lead that
local path, but Constantine, David, and Abgar showed the way in which Christ protects all his faithful. ”
164
One of the inscriptions of the scroll, where Saint Eugenius of Trebi-
zond (whose figure “has inevitable associations with the imperial dynasty of
Trebizond”165) is mentioned, helped Peers in establishing the provenance of
the manuscript. In his words, “the closest comparandum for the Chicago-New Y ork roll in terms of figure style is the Romance of Alexander the Great, now in
Venice (Hellenic Institute, Codex gr. 5)… For instance, the arrival of the por –
traitist and the delivery of Alexanders portrait at fol. 143v has striking simi-
larities in terms of the handling of figures. ” In Nicolette Trahoulia’s view, the
162 Karaulashvili 2007, 237.
163 Karaulashvili 2004b.
164 Peers 2009, 175.
165 Ibid., 162.

Articles198Venice manuscript was composed in the Empire of Trebizond during the reign
of Emperor Alexios III Komnenos (r. 1341-1390).166 Moreover, as Peers, based
on received wisdom, states “the presence of Georgian script in the manuscript
indicates a strong probability that the artists were originally Georgian. ”167
Finally, with respect to the provenance of the scroll Peers assumes that
“a good deal of circumstantial evidence – most strongly the very presence of
Evgenios and his three compatriots – points to Trebizond as the place of origin of Chicago-New Y ork roll. The stylistic similarities with the Venice Romance of Alexander are sufficiently convincing for a common workshop to be posited,
which narrows the time frame to the reign of Alexios III. The terminus ante
quem is the Arabic colophon on the reverse, so a good case can be advanced
for the roll being produced at Trebizond in the period between 1350-1380. ”
168
To the best of my knowledge, there exists no work of a Georgian scholar
scrutinizing the Venetian Manuscript; while with respect to the illuminated
texts of the Abgar legend Z. Skhirtladze states: “although the iconography of
the majority of episodes in both cycles [the Menologia and Tetraevangelia –
I.K.] must point to the affinity of their common prototypes, the differences both in character of the text illumination and selection of separate miniatures,
as well as their artistic rendering are discernible. ”
169 Hopefully, Georgian art
historians would add their works to the existing wisdom, taking into account recent studies on the Venice manuscript of the Alexander Romance . As a schol-
ar dealing with the textual history of the Abgar legend, I can only state that
apart from the New-Y ork-Chicago scroll, there are only two manuscripts that illuminate the text of the EA so that they are illustrating the entire plot of
the apocryphon: these are the aforementioned Alaverdi (5 miniatures)
170 and
166 N. S. Trahoulias, The Greek Alexander Romance: Venice, Hellenic Institute, Codex Gr. 5
(Athens, 1997)= Peers 2009, 157, nt. 10.
167 D. Mouriki, “The Formative Role of Byzantine Art on the Artistic Style of the Cultural
Neighbors of Byzantium: Reflections of Constantinopolitan Styles in Georgian Monu-mental Painting, ” JöB 31.2 (1981): 725-57; H. Belting, “Le peintre Manuel Eugenikos
de Constantinople, en Géorgie, ” CahArch 28 (1979): 103-14; G. Drettas, “Sur quelques
aspects de la polyglossie pontique durant la période médiévale (XIIe–XVe siecles), ” Mé-
sogeios 12 (2001): 183-93= Peers 2009, 157, nt. 11.
168 Peers 2009, 164.
169 Skhirtladze 1998, 83.
170 A relatively small number of the miniatures in the Alaverdi Tetraevangelion might sug-
gest that the pictorial program of the Abgar legend presented there is related more to the Menologion illustration tradition than to that of the EA. However, the selection
of the scenes reveals more similarities with the latter than with the former. Thus, the scene representing Abgar sending a messenger (and a letter) to Christ is represented in all five manuscripts; the scene portraying Christ writing a letter to Abgar is present in the Alaverdi Four Gospels and the Moscow Menologion ; a special accent on the Seven
seals of Christ in the Alaverdi Tetraevangelion is matched by the miniatures of the Ge-

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography199
კადმოსი 6, 2014Gelati (14 scenes in 10 miniatures) Four Gospels. The number of the minia-
tures in the scroll amounts to 14 (together with the representation of the Seven
Seals). The number of the scenes that illustrate the text of the Narratio in the
manuscripts is less: 4 in the Moscow (cod. Syn. gr. 183 [Vlad. 382], Moscow
State History Museum, dated 1063)171 and the Paris Menologion (cod. gr. 1528,
Paris Bibliothèque Nationale, dated to the end of the eleventh – beginning
of the twelfth century);172 Single miniatures related to the Abgar legend are
found in the Menologia of Oxford173 (Bodleian Library, MS. Gr. th. f. 1, fol. 51
v.; dated to 1322-40; pic 33)174 and Alexandria (Greek Patr. Cod. 35, fol. 142v;
eleventh century, pic. 27).175 For the moment I don’t know the exact readings
the Alexandia Menologion contains for 16 of August. However, as could be eas-
ily assumed, this might be either the Narratio , or a shortened text that relates
about transfer of the image, similar to the one published by Latyš ev.176
In my 2007 article I presented a comparative table of illustrations of the
plot of the Abgar legend in various manuscripts, together with an example from church decoration (the Church of the Virgin at Mateič, Macedonia; pic.
6, 25).
177 Now I am presenting the abridged and revised version of the same
table here as well, in order to clarify to which version of the apocryphon the
illustrations of the iconographical Abgar cycle of the New-Y ork-Chicago scroll
are related.
lati Four Gospels and the Pierpont Morgan Library Scroll; a separate miniature of the
Edessan Image is present only in the Alaverdi Tetraevangelion ; the miracle of Hierapolis
is illustrated only in the manuscript containing the EA; Thaddaeus baptising Abgar is painted in the Paris Menologion and the Alaverdi and Gelati Tetraevangelia . Therefore,
the selection of the scenes does not provide sufficient ground for linking the illustra-tions from the Alaverdi manuscript to those found in the Menologia .
171 N. Patterson Ševčenko, Illustrated Manuscripts of the Metaphrastian Menologion (Stud-ies in Medieval Manuscript Illumination) (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), 71 and 194 (hereafter – Patterson Ševčenko 1984); A. Lidov and A. Zhakarova, “La storia del re Abgar e il Mandylion nelle miniature del Menologio di Mosca del 1063, ” in
Mandylion 2004, 72-77.
172 Patterson Ševčenko 1984, 137–45, 192–95.
173 In Christopher Walter’s words, “this manuscript consists entirely of miniatures without texts, like a wall-calendar. ” Walter 1995, 226.
174 The image is located on the bottom right side of the folio, which contains three other images, unrelated to the Abgar legend, painted against a golden background. See: http://bodley30.bodley.ox.ac.uk:8180/luna/servlet/detail/ODLodl~8~8~59183~132138:Menologion (last accessed: 06.03.2013).
175 Weitzmann 1960, 168-69.
176 Latyšev 1912, 282-85.
177 Пешковиħ 1932. As already indicated by Walter, “The Mateič cycle… clearly derives from the Epistola , not from the Narratio …. The clue is provided by the word sindon, ”
which was found in a legend read by Peškovič. Walter 1995, 221, 229; Karaulashvili 2007, 232-33.

200 #
SceneAlaverdi
TetraevangelionGelati
TetraevangelionNY-Chicago
scrollMoscow
Menol.Paris
Menol.Oxford
Menol.Alexandria
Menol.
1 Abgar sends a messenger
(with the epistle) to Christ* (min. 1; fol. 316v) * (min. 1; fol. 287r) *(min. 1) * (min. 1; fol. 210r)* (min. 1; 181v)
2 Portrait of Thaddaeus
xii* (min. 2)
3 Christ receiving the epistlexiii* (min. 2 fol. 287 v) * (min. 3)
4 i)xiv Christ, gives the epistle
to Anania/ii) Christ writes the epistle to Abgar
xv* (min. 2; fol. 318r)* (min. 3 fol. 288v) * (min. 4)
* (min. 2; fol. 210r)
5 Christ, the messenger and Thaddaeus* (min. 5)
6 i) Seven Seals of Christ/ii) Hand of God pointing to the Seals* (fol. 319v)
* (min. 4; 289r)* (min. 6)
7 Abgar receives the messenger Abgar sends Anania/a painter to Christ* here – a)
xvi
(min. 5; 289v)* here – b)* (min. 7) – here i)
* (min. 8); here – ii)
8 Christ receives Abgar’s
messenger in front of the gates of Jerusalem
xvii* (min. 6; fol. 290r)
9 Edessan image * (min. 3; fol. 320v) * (min. 3; fol. 142v)
10 a) The messenger approaches Christb) Christ washes His hands,
the messenger (?) pours water on His hands and gives Him the clothc) The messenger gives the cloth to Christ*
*
(min. 7; fol. 290v)
*

201
კადმოსი 6, 201411 i) Christ gives the image to
Anania (and other messen-gers)/ii) Christ and the painter with the image/iii) Christ gives the image to two Apostles
xviii* (min. 9) * (min.3; fol. 210r)
* (min. 2; fol. 181v)
* min. 1 (fol. 51v)
12i) Miracle of Hierapolis/ii) Pillar of light descend-ing in front of the gates of Hierapolis (pic. 34)
xix* (min. 4; fol. 321 v)* (min. 8; fol. 291 r) * (min. 10)
13 Anania with the image of Edessa, a native of Hierapo-lis with the Keramidion* (min. 11)
14 A paralytic before Abgar * (min. 13)
15 A paralitic cured by the image/Anania (and the messen-gers) deliver the image to Abgar* here – a) (min. 9; fol. 292r)* here – b)* (min. 12); here – i)* (min. 14); here – ii)* (min. 3; 210r); here – ii)
16 Thaddaeus baptizes Abgar * (min. 5; fol. 323v) * (min. 10; fol. 292r)* (min. 3; fol. 181v)

202xii In my article in the Interaction volume a portrait of Abgar is wrongly mentioned before
the portrait of Thaddaeus.
xiii This scene is missing in the list printed in my article for the Interactions volume.
xiv The roman numbers indicate that slightly different scenes are presented in separate
miniatures.
xv Balicka-Witakowska identifies this scene as “Jesus dictates his answer to Abgar’s envoy, ” stating that “this scene was wrongly identified by scholars as representing Jesus writing
the letter to Abgar. ” E. Balicka-Witakowska, “The Holy Face of Edessa on the Frame of
the Volto Santo of Genoa: The Literary and Pictorial Sources, ” in Interaction and Isola –
tion in Late Byzantine Culture, ed., J. O. Rosenqvist (Papers Read at a Colloquium Held
at the Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul, 1-5 December, 1999). Swedish Research
Institute in Istanbul. Transactions 13 (Stockholm & London: Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul & Tauris, 2004), 100–133: hereafter – Balicka-Witakowska 2004, at 116, nt.
96. To my mind, the previous identification is correct. Balicka-Witakowska seems to be
influenced by the opinion of some scholars, seeing the Alaverdi text of the EA as being “based on a Greek version which seems to develop the oriental tradition, mostly the
Syriac Teaching of Addai. ” (N. Chkhikvadze). Ibid. 115.
However, as I have demonstrated in my dissertation, the Alaverdi text of the EA is not derived from the Syriac DA. With respect to the epistles of Abgar and Christ it shows
affinity with the Arabic version preserved in the text of Y ahya of Antioch. To my mind, both seem to be derived from a common, plausibly Syriac source that contained a de-veloped version of the correspondence between Abgar and Christ. The editor of the
Georgian text, N. Chkhikvadze, inserts a marginal note stating that Jesus is delivering
his answer orally, in the main text of the apocryphon. However, the miniature repre-senting Christ in the same posture in which usually the evangelists writing the Gos-
pels are depicted, makes me believe that the scene was correctly identified by previous
scholars. Karaulashvili 2004a, chapter 7, “Y ahyā of Antioch and the Georgian transla-tion of the EA, as presented by the Alaverdi Four Gospels, ” 202-27.
Balicka-Witakowska’s statement, according to which “the first meeting between Jesus and the messenger and his unsuccessful effort to produce the portrait is omitted from this
version of the story” (made while identifying the miniatures of the Gelati Four Gospels)
is also incorrect: As we read in the Gelati text of the EA, “The messenger entered with the painter, stood and began to paint the likeness of Jesus, but was unable to represent the
image of His face, so that he became worried. ” Karaulashvili 2004a, app. 4. Moreover, it
is present in the Greek version of the apocryphon as well: “o e auovmo eien e ei o ouvaion an o omoivma ou ou ai m unamevnou a
aaevai n mon ou ovou auou. ” Karaulashvili 2004a, chapter 2, “The Texts of the Letters within the Main Body of the Epistula Abgari,” 70.
xvi The letters indicate that several scenes are presented in one miniature.
xvii This scene is also missing in the list printed in my article for the Interactions volume.
xviii Since the manuscript contains only the miniatures and lacks the text, one also has to stress that this miniature pictures either one of the versions of the EA (preserved in the

203
კადმოსი 6, 2014Georgian (Alaverdi and Sinai) translations (the relevant passage runs as follows: ხოლო
ტილოჲ იგი მისცა თადეოზს მოციქულსა და უბრძანა შემდგომად ამაღლებისა
მისისა წარსლვად ედესე ქალაქად… – The Lord gave the cloth to Thaddeus the
Apostle and ordered him to go to the city of Edessa after His [Jesus’] ascension.. ” (Sinai redaction; Chkhikvadze 2007, 140), or echoes the relevant passage from the Narratio
(“He gave it to Thomas and told him to send it to Abgar with Thaddaeus after His ascen-
sion into heaven” PG 113, col. 433). Y et there exists the third option (though without knowing the detailed description and provenance of this manuscript it is difficult for
me to explain interaction of the different versions of the legend in this particular case)
– this passage could be influenced by the local Armenian tradition (Khorenatsi, Arme-nian Synaxaria ), according to which Apostles Philip and Andrew acted as intermediar –
ies between Christ and Abgar’s messengers.
xix The majority of scholars identify this scene as ‘a gate of Edessa.' Skhirtladze 1998, 80;
Balicka-Witakowska 2004, 116; Gedevanishvili 2006, 14. However, Alexander Samin-
skiy turned my attention to the fact that this miniature depicts not the gate of Edessa, but the miracle at the gate of Hierapolis. On the left bottom side of the image one could
distinguish the brick and the pillar of light descending from heaven.

Articles204As evident, in 4 cases (# 2; 5; 13; 14) the Pierpont Morgan Library scroll
presents a unique selection of the scenes, while an unprecedented selection
(within the EA manuscript tradition) is found once in the Alaverdi Four Gos-
pels (# 9) and in 2 miniatures (but 4 scenes) of the Gelati Four Gospels (# 8; 10 a; 10b; 10c); in 10 cases the Pierpont Morgan Library scroll follows the Georgian Tetraevangelia (#1; 3; 4i; 4ii; 6; 7i; 7ii; 12; 15i; 15ii); once it follows the
Menologia scene (#15ii) and, in 2 cases, the selection of the scenes in the Scroll,
the Tetraevangelia and the Menologia coincide (# 1, 15ii), while in two cases
there are similarities between the Menologia and the Tetraevangelia (# 4iii; 16)
without the Scroll following these.
Evidently, the iconographical cycles illustrating the texts of the EA and
Narratio are interconnected. However, one has to bear in mind that the text
of the EA is illustrated only in the NY-Chicago scroll and the Georgian manu-
scripts, while a great number of the miniatures is attested only in the scroll and
the Gelati Four Gospels.
178 Moreover, the mode of presenting the Seven Seals
of Christ in the form of the Mosaic Tablets in the Alaverdi Tetraevangelion (pic.
29) and the amulet roll (pic. 30) may also point to a common tradition.179
To my mind, the iconographical program of the Abgar legend in the NY-
Chicago scroll (independently of the manner of their execution and the artis-
tic schools to which they belong) also allows to suggest that “the artists were
originally Georgian, ” providing additional ground for the aforementioned conclusion by Glenn Peers with respect to the common provenance for the NY-Chicago scroll and the Venice manuscript of the Alexander Romance .
180
The Edessan image in some tenth and post-tenth century sources
The first account that provides some proof with respect to the existence
of the image is the Narratio , the plot of which is set against the real historical
background. In 944 the Byzantine military leader John Curcuas captured Meli-tene and Samosata. He besieged Edessa and, after negotiating peace with the emir of Edessa, the latter had to give away the most precious relic of Eastern Christendom, the Mandylion . The arrival of the relic in Constantinople on 16
August 944 was accompanied by a triumphal procession and, a year later, a text commemorating this event in the ecclesiastical collection on the same date was included in the Byzantine Menologion .
181
178 As I have already demonstrated, the illustrations of the Paris Ms 2688 have independent
pictorial program.
179 On interpretation of this representation, see: Karaulashvili 2002, 94-95.
180 Peers 2009, 157.
181 Patlagean 1995, 22.

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography205
კადმოსი 6, 2014The Greek text of the Narratio , the text for 16 of August for Menologion182
and a liturgical tractate included in two eleventh century manuscripts, were
edited by Ernst von Dobschütz;183 the same tractate was publsihed in 1897 by
Y akov Smirnov.184 It is entitled About the Holy and Divine Acheiropoietos Image
of Our God Jesus Christ, How it was Honoured in the City of Edessa by Those who Lived There – ei  aiva ai aeiooivou Qeiva eiovno 
ou iou ou [ainou] Qeou mn, o eimao en ev  
ovei aa n en au aoiouvnn. The text described the ritual which
took place in Edessa during the Lent. According to this narrative, on the first
Sunday of the first week of the Lent the image was brought to the sacristy of the
Church. The acheiropoietos image, wrapped in white linen, was placed in hon-
our on a throne that had been prepared for it. The throne was carried out in a solemn procession. Then, the image was placed on a small elevated table east
of the holy altar. After the celebration of the holy liturgy only the high priest
185
was allowed to approach the divine image, to revere and to kiss it, then, to ex-change the white linen that was covering it into a purple one and return It to
the sacristy. On the fourth day of the middle week of the Lent the high priest went there, opened the chest in which the image was kept, wiped the icon with an unused sponge that was soaked with water, first gave the water that
he squeezed out to the people then sprinkled the water over them. Ordinarily
the chest with the image was kept behind the doors of the sacristy, which were opened on Wednesday and Friday. Everybody was able to see the chest from a distance but nobody was allowed to approach and touch It. In the words of the
anonymous author, this was done in order to increase the faith in the people
through fear of God for the revered object.
186
According to the Narratio , the emperor of Constantinople meets the im-
age, which is locked in a casket and worships it together with the clergy.187 An-
other text, dated to the end of the twelfth century and attributed to an anony-
mous Latin pilgrim, says that no one was allowed to open the case where the
image was kept, with the exception of the Emperor of Constantinople. The fol-
182 Printed in parallel columns, Dobschütz 1899, 29**-107**.
183 Ibid., 107**-14**.
184 In Smirnov’s idea, the Byzantine Menologia for 16 of August contained four texts. Я.
И. Смирнов, “Слово X века о том, как чтился образ Спаса на Убрусе в Эдессе, ” in Commentationes philologicae . Сборник статей в честь И.В.Помяловского (Санкт-
Петербург: Императорская Академия Наук, 1897), 209-19.
185 In Palmer’s words “The use of the title “high priest” (archiereus) here recalls the fact that only Aaron was allowed to enter the Holiest Place of All in the Tabernacle (Hebr 9, 7), and that but “once a year” and “not without blood” of atonement by sacrifice (foreshad-owing the Crucifixion). ” Palmer 2009, 145, nt. 91.
186 Dobschütz 1899, 111**-12**.
187 PG. 113, cols. 449-52.

Articles206lowing reason, explaining why ordinary mortals could not have a glance at it,
is given: once the case had been left open and a terrible earthquake devastated
the town. A heavenly vision revealed that the disaster would continue until the
linen cloth with the Lord’s face on it should be locked up and hidden away, far from human eyes.
188
So, according to the tenth and eleventh-century-sources, the image was
stretched on a piece of wood already by the king Abgar (Narratio ); in Edessa it
was kept in an ancient casket, from which it was taken out only once a year for a solemn procession, during which no one was allowed to look at It except for the archbishop of the city (the Liturgical tractate); upon its arrival in Byzan-tium the relic, locked in a chest, was worshipped by the clergymen and the Em-
peror of Constantinople (Narratio ); two centuries later no-one had the right to
see the image, with the exception of the emperor of Constantinople (Ms. Tar –
ragonenis 55). Interestingly enough, the Life of Romanos Lekapenos, included
in the compendium of imperial biographies,
189 tells us that the Edessan image
revealed itself clearly only to Constantine VII, while for his brothers-in-law it appeared to be extremely blurred), as if displaying a special benevolence
toward the young emperor. As the Vita St Pauli iunioris , composed in 955 AD,
narrates, the Saint asked the emperor [sic! ] to put a piece of cloth on the pre-
cious relic and send it to him. His request was granted; however, only the Saint
himself was able to discern the Face of God imprinted on it.
190
While reading these passages, one notes that according to these texts, if
in Edessa the honour of viewing the Mandylion was conferred to a high priest,
in Constantinople it became the prerogative of the Byzantine Emperor him-
self. Most probably, the Byzantines continued to view the Edessan image of Christ as a token of a special benevolence of God towards the emperor, the
trail blazed via the Narratio by Constantine Porphyrogennetus himself. Al-
188 K. N. Ciggaar, “Une Description de Constantinople dans le Tarragonensis 55, ” REB 53
(1995): 117-40.
189 Known as Theophanes Continuatus (Theophanes Continuatus, Vita Romani ) and com-
posed under the guidance of Constantine. Patlagean 1995, 23. See also: S. G. Engberg,
“Romanos Lekapenos and the Mandylion of Edessa, ” in Byzance et les reliques du Christ.
Table ronde. Les reliques de la passion. XX Congrès international des études byzantines, 19-25 août, 2001, ed. J. Durand and B. Flusin. Centre de recherche d’histoire et civilisa-tion de Byzance, Monographies, 17 (Paris: Association des amis du Centre d’histoire et civilisation de Byzance, 2004), 123-42; P . Hetherington, “The Image of Edessa: Some
Notes on Its Later Fortunes. ” In Byzantine Style, Religion and Culture: In Honour of Sir Steven Runciman, ed. E. Jeffreys (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006),
192–205.
190 Vita S Pauli iunioris , in T. Wiegand, Der Latmos (Berlin: G. Reimer, 1913), 127=
Г ерстель 1996, 77, nt. 6.

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography207
კადმოსი 6, 2014though the initiative of the translation came from Romanus Lecapenus,191 the
significance of the Mandylion for the imperial propaganda of Constantine VII
is clearly demonstrated not only by the Narratio itself and by the fact of inclu-
sion of the Feast of the transfer of the icon into the ecclesiastical calendar, but
also by the Sinai icon, where the emperor is depicted as a new Abgar, receiving the acheiropoietos image of the Lord (pic. 1).
Interrelation of the textual and iconographical traditions
Along with possible theological and symbolical interpretations of various
evidences related to the way the image was kept in Edessa and Constantinople (especially with respect to the white and purple cloths that had to cover the im-age; here I will mention only the parallel between the iconographic representa-
tions of the Mandylion , painted on a white cloth, and Keramidion , represented
on a dark red background), one always has to bear in mind Averil Cameron’s
proposition according to which “the image never actually looked like a cloth at all” and “probably it was indistinguishable from any other precious Christ-
icon. ”
192 Indeed, the narrative of the DA that it was a painted icon, that of the
Narratio that it was stretched on wood, as well as the afore-mentioned passage
from the Ms. Tarragonensis 55 suggesting that, soon after the Mandylion ar-
rived from Edessa to Constantinople, a new legend announcing the divine will
forbidding mortals to look at the Edessan image was created. My initial thought was that it plausibly happened due to the divergence of the actual image and its
literary description. However, now I would not exclude the possibility that it
could have been caused by other reasons as well: For the Byzantines the Edessan image, as a token of divine approval for image worship, had to look like tradi-tional icons widely used and revered by Christians, that is to say, to be an image
on a flat surface; perhaps this is the main reason why we see the early Byzantine
representations of the frescoes of the Mandylion as a flat, stretched quadrangle
(as in Boyana church; pic. 35)
193 or as a rectangular cloth (as in Cappadocia,
pic. 15, 16, 22).194 Therefore, the earliest examples of the Edessan image used as
elements of church decoration were formed in accord to an already established
canon; it was not the actual object that influenced the tradition but rather the
tradition extended its authority upon the object.
However, one has to admit that, even if the formation of the iconographi-
cal models of the Mandylion took place in Byzantium after the tenth century,
191 Karaulashvili 2004b; Engberg, “Romanos Lekapenos. ”
192 Cameron 1983, 87–88.
193 N. Mavrodinov, L ’ église de Boyana et ses peintures murales (Sofia: É ditions balgarski
houdojnik, 1943).
194 Jolivet-Lévy 2007.

Articles208it existed, though in a different form, in the Christian East before; Moreover,
the literary tradition relating the miraculous emergence of the image in Edessa
existed much earlier as well as an actual image in Edessa, independently of its
essence, honoured as the acheiropoietos image of Christ, even if different from
its legendary description. Otherwise it would be difficult to explain why some Syrian authors call the church where the Mandylion is kept the “House of the
Image of the Lord, ”
195 in which “the image of Y ou, O my Lord and God, Jesus
Christ, which was by Y our hand sent to the king Abgar for strength of his faith
and wisdom, ” is kept.196
In 2007, when I was writing my article, I was so much perplexed by the
lack of homogeneity of the textual and visual material that, although I stated that the Greek text of the EA originated during the sixth-seventh century, I
neglected all important arguments that I found earlier and discussed in one of
my articles
197 and more thoroughly in my dissertation,198 with respect to the
plausible Syriac nucleus of the legend relating how the acheiropoietos image
of Christ came into being. That is to say, although I didn’t renounce my hy-pothesis with respect to the dating and origins of the EA in my article for the Interactions volume, I just failed to clarify this issue properly.
For the moment, I believe that we have to be very careful while we are
talking about the interrelation of the textual and iconographic material related to the Abgar legend and that we have to remember that the development of the textual and iconographical traditions, most probably, followed their own distinct paths both spatially and chronologically. Moreover, we have to pay
special attention to the suggestion of Gerhard Wolf, stating that there is “a
clear distinction between the attempt to visualize the origin of the image on the cloth and the representation of the Mandylion as the cult object. ”
199 Prob –
ably, this is one of the major aspects that I overlooked before, and all the argu-
ments that I had ever presented while discussing the interrelation of textual
and iconographical traditions related either to traditional, or to the full-length figure acheiropoietos images of Christ should be reviewed bearing this argu-
ment of Wolf in mind.
195 A Melkite colophon dated to 723. Thomson 1962, 253.
196 The eleventh century Georgian translation of the Life of John, bishop of Urha (dated to
the ninth century). К. Кекелидзе 1914, 304. Note that the above-mentioned Melkite colophon says that “it is the image that He impressed with His face and sent to Abgar, the king of Edessa… ” Thomson 1962, 253.
197 Karaulashvili 2002.
198 Karaulashvili 2004a.
199 G. Wolf, “From Mandylion to Veronica: Picturing the ‘Disembodied’ Face and Dis-seminating the True Image of Christ in the Latin West, ” in The Holy Face 1998, 153-79, at 160.

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography209
კადმოსი 6, 2014Clothing metaphor and the “acheiropoietos’ image on Cloth
If we consider that literary development of the “Mandylion model” owes
its emergence, most probably, to a combination of evidence taken from the DA
(relating to the icon of Christ, painted by Ananias and brought to Abgar)200
and a tradition whose nucleus is reflected (independently of its authenticity) in the story about the miracle of St Stephen attributed to Euodius, bishop of Uzala
(relating a “quasi-miraculous appearance of a velum [sic] depicting a miracle
which had been operated the previous day by the relics of St Stephen preserved in the city”),
201 which later developed into the traditions related by the pilgrim
Anthony of Piacenza (who stated that he had seen “pallium lineum in quo est
effigies Salvatoris, and he was told that this had been produced by Christ him-
self who had pressed the piece of cloth against his face”202) in Memphis.203 That
is to say, we have to suppose that the most practical mode for representing the
portable sacred object (wood) for theological purposes was substituted by an-
other mode (cloth),204 since “in the Old Testament “cloth, ” “clothing and their
various synonyms metaphorize attributes and qualities of divinity, humanity
and the universe, ”205 being, at the same time, “the most obvious link to Christ’s
humanity. ”206 To put it in Palmer’s words, “whoever developed the theological
200 Phillips 1876, 5.
201 Dobschuts, 115*-17*. E. Kitzinger, “The Cult of Images in the Age before Iconoclasm, ”
DOP 8 (1954): 82-150, at 92, n. 25 (hereafter – Kitzinger 1954).
202 Ibid., 114.
203 Interestingly enough, the pilgrim relates that “he prayed in the Praetorium of Pilate, where there was a picture of Christ said to have been painted in His lifetime. ” Ibid., 96-97;
See also: L. Brubaker, “Icons Before Iconoclasm?” in
Morfologie sociali e culturali in
Europa fra Tarda Antichità e Alto Medioevo . Settimane di Studio del Centro Italiano
di Studi sull’ Alto Medioevo 45 (Spoleto: Presso la Sede del centro, 1998), 1215-56, at 1230.
204 Most plausibly, representations on the cloth were also used in the early church, but, as indicated in the article by R. Shurinova, as a curtain in the church. Р . Д. Шуринова, “Коптская ткань 5-6 вв. c изображением святого, ” ВВ 27 (1967): 243-47. In C.
Metzger’s view, “L ’ emploi des étoffes y est abondant et varié que ce soit par le vêtement religieux, costume liturgique ou habit monastique par example, linceul ou vêtement de funérailles, ou pour décor et l’aménagement des églises comme les rideaux, tentures, portières ou encore nappes d’autel connus par les représentations figurées. La fragilité des textiles nous empêche malheureusement de prendre la mesure exacte de leur rôle dans la liturgie et le décor des édifices religieux de l’ Antiquité tardive et du haut Moyen Age. ” C. Metzger, “Tissus et culte des reliques, ” Antiquité tardive 12 (2004): 183-86, at
186. In J. Trilling’s words, “There is nothing mysterious about the idea of an image on cloth. Stretched canvas has been the preferred support for painting in the West for cen-turies, and paintings on cloth survive from antiquity itself. ” Thrilling, “The Image not Made by Hands and the Byzantine Way of Seeing, in The Holy Face 1998, 109-26, at 112.
205 Kuryluk 1991, 185.
206 Ibid., 192. For importance of the clothing metaphor in Syriac Christianity, see: Sebas-tian P . Brock, “Clothing metaphors as a means of theological expression in Syriac tradi-

Articles210rationale of “the image not made with hands” , he drew heavily upon Ephraim’s
[the Syrian’s – I.K.] teaching [related to the clothing metaphor – I.K.] and this
can only have happened in a Syriac milieu. ”207
Egyptian funerary cloth – a possible model for the acheiropoietos images
on the cloth.
Evidently, the clothing metaphor lies behind the theology of the Edessene
acheiropoietos image; also the physical object revered as Mandylion seems to
be connected with the Egyptian funeral art. As already stated by Hans Belt-
ing and Herbert Kessler, “Egyptian funerary art… seems to lie at the origin of Christian icons. ”
208 In one of his articles H. Kessler speaks about an image on
cloth, saying that a portrait, such as “a cloth insert from a Fayum mummy in
Cleveland… may, indeed, have lain behind the earliest recorded reference to a
miraculous image of Christ, the report written ca. 570 by the Piacenza pilgrim of an image made when Christ pressed his face on a cloth that was venerated at Memphis, which is in the vicinity of Fayum in Egypt. ” To my mind, another
note by Kessler, indicating that, “like most of the Fayum paintings, the Cleve-
land portrait is life-size and show the figure looking straight out, giving the impression of direct contact, ”
209 is perfectly in accordance with literary charac-
teristics of the Mandylion , which had to be life-size due to the fact that it was
impregnated on the cloth after being touched to the original and, as the repre-sentations of the Edessan image reveal, indeed shows the face “looking straight out, giving the impression of direct contact. ” That is to say, the main features of the Egyptian funerary representation had been transformed into the peculiar
characteristics of the most revered Christian cult object.
The Edessan acheiropoietos image – a token testifying to the divine
approval for image worship
As I have already indicated, the Mandylion (and Veronica stories) were
not the only literary accounts connected to the emergence of the acheiropoietoi
images. In my article for the Interactions volume I cited several passages con-
nected to the stories related to the representations of the full-length figure of
tion, ” in Typus, Symbol, Allegorie bei den östlichen Vätern und ihre Parallelen im Mittel-
alter , Margot Schmidt, ed., Eichstätter Beiträge, 4 (Regensburg: Verlag Friedrich Pustet,
1982), 11–38.
207 Palmer 2009, 126.
208 H. Kessler, “Christ’s Dazzling Dark Face, ” in Intorno 2007, 231-46, at 232; H. Belting,
Likeness and Presence: A History of the Image before the Era of Art. Tr. E. Jephcott (Chi-
cago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1994), 80-98 (hereafter – Belting 1994).
209 Kessler, “Dazzling Face, ” 232.

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography211
კადმოსი 6, 2014Christ.210 It seems that the legends connected to such miraculous representa-
tions appeared almost simultaneously with those about the Holy Face of Jesus,
as could be deduced from the text of Antony of Piacenza who also mentions
“an image of Christ which was visible on the Column of the Flagellation in Sion Church. ” In Kitzinger’s words, “actually, according to Antonius, this was not really a complete image, but merely an impression of Christ’s chest and hands
miraculously left on the stone while he was tied to it. Already forty years ear –
lier, however, the pilgrim Theodosius had claimed that not only Christ’s arms
and hands, but also His face were impressed on the column. ”
211 One also has
to recall the story about the semi-acheiropoietos image of the Virgin, started by
St Luke212 and finished by an angel,213 in order to deduce that, most probably,
these stories were created in order to justify the mode of representations of the cult objects as elements of the Byzantine church decoration – not only of the
material carriers on which the image is depicted, that is to say, of the icon and the fresco, as confirmed by the Georgian Life of the Thirteen Syrian Fathers,
214
210 Karaulashvili 2007, 224-29; See also: L ’immagine di Cristo dall’acheropite all mano
d’ artista. Dal tardo medievo all’ etа barocca, C. L. Frommel, and G. Wolf, eds. Studi e testi 432 (Vatican City: Biblioteca apostolica Vaticana, 2006).
211 Kitzinger 1954, 104-5; Cameron 1983, 38.
212 It seems that one of the Armenian versions of the Abgar legend tries to unite the nar –
rative of the EA with this tradition. Here Jesus asks his disciples [sic! ] to paint his im-
age, but since they did not succeed. That is to say, the tradition attributing painting of the image of the Saviour to one of the apostles is linked to the legend of Abgar. Н. Марр, “Хитон господень в книжных легендах армян, грузин и сирийцев” [Khiton (Unsewn Garment) of the Lord in the written legends of the Armenians, Georgians
and Syrians], in Сборник статей учеников проф. В. Р . Розена (Санкт-Петербург:
Типография Имперской Академии Наук, 1897): 67-96, 89 (hereafter – Mapp 1897). The text represents the expanded version of the apocryphon published by Outtier (Out-tier 1999), and is titled Pseudo-John Chrysostom’s Account of the Seamless Tunic of Christ,
Descended from Heaven and [the story] about Abgar, the Armenian King (All Armenian
versions of the Abgar legend, except the Armenian translation of the DA, name Abgar as the king of the Armenians and Syrians). The direct source of this version has not
been identified. Supposedly, it was the account from the Book of Bees by the Nestorian Bishop Solomon, written in the thirteenth century. Марр 1897, 96.
Interestingly enough, the author of the apocryphon defines the place of the Mandyli –
on in church decoration, stating: “ Abgar constructed a church and with great honour
placed the Divine image on the altar [sic ] there. ” Ibid., 90. It is difficult for me to say,
whether this narrative represents a reworking of the passage from the abovementioned liturgical tractate stating that the image was placed on the altar when carried in a sol-emn procession during Lent (see at 205)
For symbolism see: Г ерстель 1996; Velmans 1995.
213 Belting 1994, 57-59; A. Eörsi, “The Incarnation of the Word and of the Form. Some
thoughts about St Luke the Painter, and about Some Painters of St Luke, ” Acta Historiae Artium (Budapest) 44 (2003): 47-80.
214 Alexidze 2001, 14.

Articles212but also of the mode of representing the images themselves, that is to say, of the
face (reps. bust), and the full-length figure.
The Edessan image – a pre-condition for the “twin conception”
of the emperor
One also has to stress that it should not be surprising that the Abgar leg-
end acquired a special importance and popularity among other stories related to the emergence of the acheiropoietos images – the fact that the image was im-
pressed on a cloth by Christ himself for sending it to a king was an ideal token
proving a “legal” sanctioning of the image veneration by the incarnate Logos.
Moreover, one cannot exclude the supposition that the earliest text pertaining to the Edessan image, to my mind the EA, served as a tool for forming the idea
that the icon sent by Christ Himself to the earthly ruler should be connected
to the substitution of the veneration of the imperial images
215 by that of the
icon of Christ by the emperors themselves.216 Thus, a reworked version of the
Abgar legend served as means not only for a physical proof that the “Word
became flesh, ” but also for “legitimising” the aforementioned replacement; that
is to say, the Incarnate God himself sent his own representation to the ruler as the rightful substitute for the imperial image.
217 Therefore, it is even possible
to suggest that the earliest version of the EA pre-conditioned the “twin con-
ception” of the emperor that emerged during the sixth century, envisaging the
emperor as imago Christi and Christ as rex regum .218
Conclusion
1. The literary and iconographical tradition of the Abgar legend underwent
their own distinct ways of development. Judging from the textual and pictorial evidences that came down to us, the iconography related to the Edessan image of
Christ came into being later in comparison to its textual counterpart;
215 For the importance of the imperial cult in connection the later rejection of images, see
L.W . Barnard, “The Emperor Cult and the Origins of the Iconoclastic Controversy, ” Byzantion 43 (1973): 13-29.
216 In Kitzinger’s view, it happened in the mid-sixth century that “the Byzantine rulers and local authorities began to make public and official use in civic and military context of the protective and salutary properties of religious images which private devotion had ascribed to them for some time. ” Kitzinger 1954, 125.
217 Interestingly enough Paris Ms 2688 tells us that Abgar placed the Mandylion in his trea-sury and “ordered a silk curtain decorated with gold and precious stones to be placed before it… ” fol. 88. As Belting stresses, “the use of curtain… formed an indispensable part of emperor worship. ” Belting 1994, 81-82. The analogy drawn by the medieval au-thor is self-evident.
218 Av. Cameron, “Images of Authority: Elites and Icons in Late Sixth-Century Byzantium, ” Past and Present 84 (1979): 3-35, at 16-17.

Irma Karaulashvili. Abgar Legend: Text and Iconography213
კადმოსი 6, 20142. Thorough analysis of the pre-tenth century representations of the Man –
dylion , as presented by the Deir es-Suriani and Telovani frescoes, allows to
conclude that a Syriac iconographic tradition depicting the Edessan image, dif-
ferent from its Byzantine counterpart, existed. Moreover, their placement in the sanctuary, above the altar and the decorative details of the cloth on the Deir es-Suriani fresco allow to speak about the “liturgical” mode of depiction of
the Mandylion ; that is to say, about the symbolical placement of the liturgical
covering (i.e. the Cloth, or, in this case, as the tablecloth) above the altar with
the bread of blessing (i.e. the image of Christ) on it;
3. The iconographical program of the Alaverdi Four Gospels seems to be
the most enigmatic one within the entire miniature tradition related to the Abgar legend and poses more questions than provides answers. Not only does it contains the sole miniature that could be linked to the plot of the Narratio ,
but also offers abundance of plausible symbolical interpretations of the scenes; the earliest depictions of the Edessan image seem to portray either a simple clipeata image, or a medallion on linen reminiscent of the liturgical cloth used
for the Eucharist;
4. Even if the miniature of the Mandylion in the Alaverdi Tetraevangelion
could be seen as a pictorial echo of the Narratio and not as a reflection of the
Eastern Christian iconographic tradition, my earlier supposition that the Byz-antine (or Byzantine-based) miniature cycles of the Abgar legend illustrate the
plot of the EA still remains valid;
5. In the Paris Ms Latinus 2688, the Abgar legend illumination is based on a
text found in the manuscript as well as on local pictorial traditions; to my mind, not only is its iconography independent and should not be connected to the
Byzantine cycle, but also the text itself does not seem to depend directly on the Greek original; therefore, its comparison to Byzantine cycles in an attempt to see an overall textual influence on illustrations, as I did before, is unjustifiable;
6. The New-Y ork-Chicago amulet roll, just like the Venice manuscript of
the Alexander Romance , seems to be executed in a Trebizond scriptorium with
the participation of Georgian artists;
7. According to the post tenth-century Byzantine sources, if in Edessa the
honour of viewing the Mandylion was conferred to the high clergy official, in
Constantinople it became the prerogative of the Byzantine Emperor himself;
8. Most plausibly, for the Byzantines the Edessan image, as a token of di-
vine approval for image worship, had to look like traditional icons widely used and revered by Christians before the translation of the image to Constanti-nople in 945 AD. That is to say, the earliest Byzantine examples of the depiction of the Edessan image used as elements of church decoration were formed in

Articles214accordance to already established canon, and it was not the actual object that
influenced the tradition, but rather the tradition extended its authority upon
the object;
9. Plausibly, the clothing metaphor lies behind the theology of the Edessan
acheiropoietos image, while the main features of the Egyptian funerary repre-
sentation on cloth had been transformed into the peculiar characteristics of the most revered Christian cult object;
10. The legends about the miraculous, or semi-miraculous emergence
of acheiropoietos images came into being, most plausibly, in order to justify
the mode of representations of the cult objects, as elements of the Byzantine
church decoration – not only of the means on which the image is depicted,
that is to say, cloth and wood, but also the types of representations used in the church decoration, i.e., the icon and the fresco, and the mode of representing
the images themselves, i.e., the face (reps. bust) and the full-length figure;
11. Inclusion of the motif of the Edessan image within the plot of the Ab-
gar legend probably aimed at confirming that God himself sanctioned the sub-
stitution of the veneration of the imperial images by that of the icon of Christ.

215
კადმოსი 6, 2014List of Abbrevi Ations / შემოკლებათა სია
CahArch Cahiers archéologiques,
CHJ The Cambridge Historical Journal
DOP Dumbarton Oaks Papers
JöB Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society
JTS Journal of Theological Studies
REB Revue des Études Byzantines
REGC Revue des Etudes Géorgiennes et Caucasiennes
ROC Revue de l’Orient Chrétien
Seminarium
Kondakovianum. ZWGRAFIKASeminarium Kondakovianum . Recuel d’Etudes.
Archéologie. Histoire de l’Art. Etudes Byzantines. ZWGRAFIKA
BB Византийский Временник
The Holy Face 1998The Holy Face and Paradox of Representation: papers
from a colloquium held at the Bibliotheca Hertziana, Rome, and the Villa Spelman, Florence, 1996, H. L. Kessler and G. Wolf, eds., Villa Spelman colloquia, vol. 6. Bologna:
Nuova Alfa Editoriale, 1998.
Il volto di Cristo 2000G. Wolf and G. Morello, eds., Il volto di Cristo .
Milano: Electa, 2000.
Mandylion 2004Mandylion: intorno al Sacro Volto, da Bisanzio a Genova. Genova Palazzo Ducale. Catalog of an
exhibition held at the Museo diocesano, Genoa, Apr. 18-July 18, 2004. G. Wolf, C. Dufour Bozzo, A. R. Calderoni Masetti, eds., Milano: Skira, 2004.
Intorno 2007Intorno al Sacro Volto: Genova, Bisanzio e il Mediterraneo (XI-XIV secolo). A. R. Calderoni Masetti, C. Dufour-Bozzo and G. Wolf, eds. Collana del Kunsthistorisches Institut in Florenz, Max-Planck-Institut 11 Venice: Mardsilio Editori, 2007.
Interactions 2007Interactions: Artistic Interchange between the Eastern and Western Worlds in the Medieval Period. A Colloquium organized by the Index of Christian Art, Department of Art and Archeology, Princeton University, April 8-9, 2004. C. Hourihane, ed. Princeton & Pensylvania: University Press, 2007.

218
მიმოხილვასურ. 33. მანდილიონი. ოქსფორდის მენოლოგიონის მინიატურა.
ბოდლეანის ბიბლიოთეკა, MS. Gr. th. f. 1, fol. 51 v; 1322-1340 წწ.
სურ. 34. ჰიერაპოლისის კარიბჭესთან ერთმანეთის პირისპირ დადებულ
მანდილიონსა და კერამიდიონზე დაშვებული ნათლის სვეტი.
ალავერდის ოთხთავი, ხელნაწერთა ეროვნული ცენტრი; Ms
A-484, fol. 321v; 1054 წ.
სურ. 35. მანდილიონი ბოიანას ეკლესიის მოხატულობიდან. სოფია, ბულგარეთი, 1259 წ.
List of iLL ustr Ations
Pic. 1. Abgar receiving the Mandylion; detail of the wing of Sinai tryptich;
Monastery of St Catherine, Sinai; tenth century (Photo: after wikipedia)
Pic. 2. King Abgar of Edessa holding the Mandylion. Fresco; Syrian church of the Virgin in Deir al-Surian, Egypt; before 913, according to Karel Innemée (Photo: courtesy of K. Innemée)
Pic. 3. Mandylion (?); fresco; the church of the Holy Cross, Telovani, Georgia, eighth-ninth century (Photo: after Skhirtladze 2008, tab. VIII/1)
Pic. 4. Mandylion; Fresco; the Dormition church, Vardzia, Georgia; 1184-1186 AD (Photo: after wikipedia)
Pic. 5. Ananias hands the epistle to one of the Apostles, while another Apostle takes the Cloth on which the Holy Face is imprinted, from Christ. Miniature; Paris BN Ms Latin 2688, fol. 75r; second half of the thirteenth
century (Photo: Bibliothèque Nationale de France)
Pic. 6. The messenger presenting the Edessan Image to Abgar. Fresco; the church of the Holy Mother of God, Mateić, Macedonia; 1356-1360 AD (Photo: courtesy J. Bogdanović and N. Stanković)
Pic. 7. Apsidal decoration. Church of the Ascension of the Saviour, Tsromi, Georgia; seventh century (Photo: courtesy of Maka Gabashvili)
Pir. 8. Remains of a fresco, Church of the Ascension of the Saviour, Tsromi, Georgia; seventh century (Photo: courtesy of Maka Gabashvili)
Pic. 9. Schema of the apsidal mosaic composition by Shalva Amiranashvili after Y akov Smirnov, Church of the Ascension of the Saviour, Tsromi, Georgia; seventh century (photo: after Амиранашвили, 1957, fig. 5)
Pic. 10. Sketch of the remains of a fresco by Tatiana Shevyakova, Church of the Ascension of the Saviour, Tsromi, Georgia; seventh century (Photo: after Шевякова 1983, fig. 8)
Pic. 11. Schema of the remains of a fresco by Tatiana Shevyakova, Church of the Ascension of the Saviour, Tsromi, Georgia; seventh century (Photo: after Шевякова 1983, fig. 9)

ირმა ყარაულაშვილი. აბგარის ლეგენდა: ტექსტი და იკონოგრაფია219
კადმოსი 6, 2014Pic. 12. Sketch of the remains of a fresco by Zaza Skhirtladze, Church of the
Ascension of the Saviour, Tsromi, Georgia; seventh century (Photo: after Skhirtladze1990-1991, sch. 3)
Pic. 13. Schema of the remains of a fresco by Zaza Skhirtladze, Church of the Ascension of the Saviour, Tsromi, Georgia; seventh century (Photo: after Skhirtladze 1990-1991, sch. 4)
Pic. 14. Mandylion; miniature; Alaverdi Tetraevangelion, National Centre of
Manuscripts, Tbilisi, Georgia, Ms A-484, fol. 320v; dated to 1054 AD
(Photo: National Centre of Manuscripts, Tbilisi)
Pic. 15. Mandylion. Fresco; Chapel 21; Göreme, Cappadocia; eleventh century
(Photo: courtesy Catherine Jolivet-Lévy)
Pic. 16. Mandylion. Fresco; Sakli Kilise (Göreme 2a), Cappadocia; eleventh century (Photo: courtesy Catherine Jolivet-Lévy)
Pic. 17. Schema of the remains of a fresco by Tatiana Shevyakova, the church of the Holy Cross, Telovani, Georgia, eighth-ninth century (Photo: after Шевякова 1983, fig. 14)
Pic. 18. Schema of the remains of a fresco by Zaza Skhirtladze, the church of the Holy Cross, Telovani, Georgia, eighth-ninth century (Photo: after Skhirtladze, 2008, fig. 12)
Pic. 19. Anchiskhati (the Ancha Encaustic icon), Georgian State Museum of Arts, Tbilisi, Georgia; sixth-seventh? century (Photo: after Амиранашвили 1937, fig. 1)
Pic. 20-21. Encaustic icon of St Sergius and Baccus; Monastery of St. Catherine, Sinai (now in the Museum of Western and Oriental Art, Kiev, Ukraine); seventh century (photo: after wikipedia)
Pic. 22. Mandylion. Fresco; Karanlik Kilise, Göreme 23; Cappadocia, eleventh century. (Photo: courtesy C. Jolivet-Lévy)
Pic. 23. Abgar, kneeling, receives the image; miniature, Paris BN Ms Latin 2688, fol. 85r, second half of the thirteenth century (Photo: Bibliothèque
Nationale de France)
Pic. 24. Abgar, kneeling, raises the image over his head; solemn greeting of the image with trumpets, lutes, sambucas, cymbals. Miniature; Paris BN
Ms Latin 2688, fol. 87v, second half of the thirteenth century (Photo: Bibliothèque Nationale de France)
Pic. 25. Messenger giving the cloth to Jesus. Fresco; the church of the Holy Mother of God; Mateić, Macedonia; 1356 – 1360 AD (Photo: courtesy of J. Bogdanović and D. Danilović)
Pic. 26. Image of Christ, Fresco; Kobayr Monastery, Armenia, twelfth century
(Photo: http://www.atb.am/en/armenia/sights/christ/kobair/)
Pic. 27. Mandylion, miniature; Alexandria Menologion, Greek Patr. Cod. 35, fol.
142v; eleventh century (photo: after Weitzmann1960, fig. 5)

220
მიმოხილვაPic. 28. Mandylion and Keramidion as Spiritual Tablets; miniature. Spiritual
Ladder of John Climachus. Bibl. Vat. cod. Ross. 251, fol. 12v, twelfth
century (Photo: after Martin, J. R. The Illustration of the Heavenly Ladder
of Jonh Climachus. Studies in Manuscript Illumination 5. Princeton:
Prinecton University Press, 1954).
Pic. 29. Seven Seals of Christ. miniature; Alaverdi Tetraevangelion; National
Centre of Manuscripts, Tbilisi, Georgia, Ms A-484, fol. 319v; dated to 1054 AD (Photo: National Centre of Manuscripts, Tbilisi, Georgia)
Pic. 30. Seven Seals of Christ. Miniature; Pierpont Morgan Library scroll, Ms.
499, fourteenth century (Photo: Pierpont Morgan Library, NY)
Pic. 31. Emperor Romanos Lecapenos receiving the Mandylion that arrived from Edessa to Constantinople. Miniature; the Chronicle of John
Skylitzes. Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional de España, Ms. Vitr. 26-2, fol. 131r, thirteenth century (Photo: after wikimedia)
Pic. 32. The painter, who sits on a chair, tries to paint the image of Christ, while another messenger, kneeling, takes the epistle of Christ. Miniature; Paris BN Ms Latin 2688, fol. 70v, second half of the thirteenth century (Photo:
Bibliothèque Nationale de France)
Pic. 33. Mandylion; miniature; Menologion of Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS.
Gr. th. f. 1, fol. 51 v; dated to 1322-1340 AD (Photo: http://bodley30.
bodley.ox.ac.uk:8180/luna/servlet/detail/ODLodl~8~8~59183~132138:Menologion)
Pic. 34. Pillar of light descending on Mandylion and Keramidion placed face-to-face in front of the gates of Hierapolis; Alaverdi Tetraevangelion, National
Centre of Manuscripts, Tbilisi, Georgia, Ms A-484, fol. 321v; dated to 1054 AD (Photo: National Centre of Manuscripts, Tbilisi, Georgia)
Pic. 35. Mandylion, fresco, Boyana church, Sofia, Bulgaria; dated to 1259 AD (Photo: after wikipedia)

სურ. / Pic. 1
სურ. / Pic. 2

სურ. / Pic. 3
სურ. / Pic. 4

სურ. / Pic. 5
სურ. / Pic. 6

224
მიმოხილვა
სურ. / Pic. 7
სურ. / Pic. 8

ირმა ყარაულაშვილი. აბგარის ლეგენდა: ტექსტი და იკონოგრაფია225
კადმოსი 6, 2014
სურ. / Pic. 9
სურ. / Pic. 10

226
მიმოხილვა
სურ. / Pic. 11
სურ. / Pic. 12
სურ. / Pic. 13

ირმა ყარაულაშვილი. აბგარის ლეგენდა: ტექსტი და იკონოგრაფია227
კადმოსი 6, 2014
სურ. / Pic. 14

228
მიმოხილვა
სურ. / Pic. 15
სურ. / Pic. 16

ირმა ყარაულაშვილი. აბგარის ლეგენდა: ტექსტი და იკონოგრაფია229
კადმოსი 6, 2014
სურ. / Pic. 17
სურ. / Pic. 18

230
მიმოხილვა
სურ. / Pic. 19

ირმა ყარაულაშვილი. აბგარის ლეგენდა: ტექსტი და იკონოგრაფია231
კადმოსი 6, 2014
სურ. / Pic. 20
სურ. / Pic. 21

232
მიმოხილვა
სურ. / Pic. 22

ირმა ყარაულაშვილი. აბგარის ლეგენდა: ტექსტი და იკონოგრაფია233
კადმოსი 6, 2014
სურ. / Pic. 23

234
მიმოხილვა
სურ. / Pic. 24

ირმა ყარაულაშვილი. აბგარის ლეგენდა: ტექსტი და იკონოგრაფია235
კადმოსი 6, 2014
სურ. / Pic. 25

236
მიმოხილვა
სურ. / Pic. 26
სურ. / Pic. 27

ირმა ყარაულაშვილი. აბგარის ლეგენდა: ტექსტი და იკონოგრაფია237
კადმოსი 6, 2014
სურ. / Pic. 28
სურ. / Pic. 29

238
მიმოხილვა
სურ. / Pic. 30
სურ. / Pic. 31

ირმა ყარაულაშვილი. აბგარის ლეგენდა: ტექსტი და იკონოგრაფია239
კადმოსი 6, 2014
სურ. / Pic. 32
სურ. / Pic. 33

240
მიმოხილვა
სურ. / Pic. 34
სურ. / Pic. 35