Michael Psellos on Byzantine Art



Εἰκόνων ἐγὼ θεατὴς ἀκριβέστατος. Ἀλλά με μία, κάλλει ἀφάτῳ ἐκπλήξασα, καὶ οἷον ἀστραπῆς βολῇ τὰς αἰσθήσεις πηρώσασα, ἀφείλετό μου τὴν περὶ τὸ πρᾶγμα δύναμίν τε καὶ σύνεσιν. Εἶχε δὲ παράδειγμα αὕτη τὴν θεομήτορα καὶ πρὸς ἐκείνην ἐγέγραπτο. Ἀλλ’ εἰ μὲν ἐμφερὴς ἐκείνῳ τῷ ὑπερφυεῖ καθειστήκει ἀγάλματι, οὐ πάνυ τι οἶδα. Ὅτι δὲ συγκραθέντατὰ χρώματα σαρκὸς φύσιν ἀπεμιμήσαντο, τοῦτο καὶ τοσοῦτον ἐπίσταμαι· τὸ γὰρ εἶδος ἄληπτόν μοι καὶ τότε τῇ ὄψει, καὶ νῦντῇ ἐννοίᾳ καθίσταται.
Γράφω γοῦν, οὐχ ὅπερ τεθέαμαι, ἀλλ’ ὃ πέπονθα· ἔοικε γάρ, μεταβεβλημένη τὴν φύσιν παντάπασι, καὶ πρὸς τὸ θεοειδὲς μεταμορφωθῆναι κάλλος, καὶ τὴν ἐκ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αἴσθησιν ὑπερβαίνουσα. Ἀλλ’ οὔτε βλοσυρά τίς ἐστιν ἐντεῦθεν, οὔτ’ αὖθις ἑνικῷ κάλλει κομᾷ. Ἀλλ’ ὑπὲρ ἄμφω τὰ μέτρα ἐστί, καὶ τοσοῦτον εἰς γνῶσιν καταβᾶσα, ὅσον μὴ γινώσκεσθαι τὴν μορφήν, ἀλλ’ ἐκπληττειν τὸν θεατήν.
Πεποίηται μὲν οὖν πρεσβείαν ποιουμένη πρὸς τὸν υἱὸν, καὶ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἐκκαλουμένη τὸν ἔλεον· τοῦτο δὴ τὸ σύνηθες ἔν τε ἀληθείᾳ καὶ σχήμασιν. Οὐκ ἐπιδοιάζει δὲ πρὸς τὴν ἱκετείαν, οὐδ’ οἷον ἐπιθρηνεῖ πρὸς τὴν δέησιν, ἀλλ’ ἠρέμα τὰς χεῖρας ἐκτείνουσα, ὡς αὐτόθεν ληψομένη τὴν χάριν, θαρρεῖ τὴν εὐχήν. Αἱ δὲ τῶν ὀμμάτων βολαί, ἁπανταχῇ τὸ θαυμάσιον· μερίζεται γὰρ οὐρανῷ καὶ γῇ, ἵν’ ἄμφω ἔχῃ, ᾧ τε πρόσεισι, καὶ ὑπὲρ ὧν τοῦτο πεποίηται.

 I am a most fastidious viewer of icons; but one astonished me by its indescribable beauty and like a bolt of lightning it disabled my senses and deprived me of my power of judgment in this matter. It has the Mother of God as its model and has been painted in Her likeness. Whether it is similar to Her, to that supernatural image of beauty, I do not quite know. I know this much and just this much: that the corporeal nature has been faithfully imitated by means of the mixing of colours; for Her form remains incomprehensible to me both then visually and now conceptually.
Therefore, I do not write about what I have beheld, but what I have experienced. For it seems that having completely exchanged its nature, it was transfigured into divine-like beauty and surpassed visual perception. Yet, because of this, she neither looks stern nor is she again decked out in a monotonous beauty; rather she is beyond both these measures and descends into knowledge only so much that, while her shape is not known, she astounds the viewer.
She has been depicted interceding with the Son and eliciting mercy for human persons, as is customary in both truth and images. Moreover, she entertains no doubts in her supplication nor does it appear that she laments over her request; rather, she calmly extends her hands in anticipation of receiving His favour and is confident in her prayer. The bolts from her eyes are miraculous in every direction. For she is divided between heaven and earth so that she might have both: the one whom she approaches and the people for whom she supplicates.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Presence of Aristotle in Byzantine Theology

Image
With the kind permission of Professor David Bradshaw, below is an excerpt from his chapter, “The Presence of Aristotle in Byzantine Theology” in The Cambridge Intellectual History of Byzantium , edited by Anthony Kaldellis & Niketas Siniossoglou (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017). Any attempt to survey the place of Aristotle within Byzantine theology must begin by recognizing that the category of “Byzantine theology” is itself a modern construction. The Byzantines did not think of themselves as Byzantines, but as Romans. This fact is not merely a matter of nomenclature, but a reminder of their strong sense of continuity with the classical and early Christian past. As regards theology, in particular, the Byzantines saw no sharp line dividing their own times from the foundational era of Christianity. Although they recognized the authority of the Church Fathers, they did not think in terms of a closed and completed “age of the Fathers.”[1] The holy and God-bearing Fathers
Read more

Historical Perspectives on Defining Byzantine Philosophy

Image
On 6 March 2020, scholars will gather at Macquarie University for a promising Workshop: Historical Perspectives on Defining Byzantine Philosophy. The Workshop is convened by Dr Ken Parry and Dr Eva Anagnostou-Laoutides. Below are the abstracts of the presentations. 1. Vassilis Adrahtas, The relationship between theology and philosophy in the work of John Damascene and its bearing on the question of Byzantine philosophy One of the problems that still persist with regards to the definition of Byzantine philosophy refers to the distinction between theology and philosophy and whether such a distinction is possible in the case of the history of ideas of Byzantium. This problem, however, is articulated in a rather simplistic way, insofar as it poses – anachronistically, I would dare say – theology and philosophy as two totally different fields of reference. But Byzantine thinkers seem to have opted for quite an alternative perspective: a perspective of co-inherence.   If Byzantine phil
Read more

Philosophy—A Preparation for Death?

The things that are painful for you are truly painful for us, too. For we make common property of all that belongs to friends, whether good or otherwise—this, surely, is the definition of friendship. Still, if we must philosophize a little about these things and discuss with you what seems right (and surely we must, as the law of friendship demands!), then I do not wish—I do not suppose it is a good thing—that you, Philagrius, a person unusually well schooled in the things of God, should experience the same feelings as ordinary people, or succumb to the weakness that affects your body, or that you should lament over your suffering as something incurable. You must find in your vulnerability a place to philosophize, and purify your mind now more than ever, and show yourself stronger than the things that hold you in check, and consider this illness a profitable training—namely, to look down on the body and bodily things, and on all that is fleeting and disturbing and passing away, and so
Read more