7KH&UXFLIL[LRQDV7KHRSKDQ\'LYLQH9LVLRQVLQD6HUPRQ

E\$QDVWDVLXV6LQDLWDDQGRQWKH$SVH:DOORI6DQWD
0DULD$QWLTXD
Armin F. Bergmeier

Journal of Late Antiquity, Volume 7, Number 1, Spring 2014, pp. 65-85

(Article)

3XEOLVKHGE\7KH-RKQV+RSNLQV8QLYHUVLW\3UHVV
DOI: 10.1353/jla.2014.0005

For additional information about this article

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/jla/summary/v007/7.1.bergmeier.html

Access provided by University of California @ Irvine (22 May 2015 04:13 GMT)
Armin F. Bergmeier

The Crucifixion as Theophany:

Divine Visions in a Sermon by
Anastasius Sinaita and on the
Apse Wall of Santa Maria Antiqua
This article traces the change in the visual and literary language concerning
the importance of the crucifi xion of Christ. While theophanic motifs were
predominant earlier in Late Antiquity, images of the crucifi xion came to
replace them at the end of this period. Both pictorial and literary images of
Christ’s passion on the cross were used to make the mystery of his divinity
accessible. Two examples demonstrate this transition: in Anastasius Sinai-
ta’s sermon on the Transfiguration a theophanic event is equated with the
crucifixion; in a fresco painting in Santa Maria Antiqua an unusual depic-
tion of the crucifi xion appears in a spot that had hitherto been reserved for
theophanic motifs.

At the end of Late Antiquity, a fundamental change occurred in the perception

of the crucifi xion of Christ. Anastasius Sinaita († c. 700), who has long been
known to have been a great proponent of depictions of the crucifixion,1 was
an eyewitness to this process.2 A curious phrase in one of his lesser-known
sermons, the Sermon on the Transfiguration, 3 can help us understand the
underpinnings of this altered way of viewing the crucified Christ. We will
find that this moment in the Passion of Christ came to be considered as closely
connected with verbal and visual images of theophany. The same trend can be
witnessed in the paintings on the apse wall of Santa Maria Antiqua in Rome.
The surviving decoration of the apse wall places an image of the crucifi xion
at a spot that had been reserved for depictions of the theophany of Christ in

1
Belting and Belting-Ihm 1966; Kartsonis, 1986, 40–67.
2
For what little we know about the life of Anastasius of Sinai, see Flusin 1991, 390–96; Haldon
1992, 113–15.
3
Edited Greek text at Guillou 1955. French translation at Coune 1962. Reprinted at Feraudy
1978, 126–45.

Journal of Late Antiquity 7.1 (Spring): 65–85 © 2014 Johns Hopkins University Press 65
66 Journal of Late Antiquity

earlier centuries. This article explores the changed understanding of the cru-
cifi xion of Christ as a quasi-theophanic event at the beginning of the eighth
century. Anastasius’ text and the image in the Roman church give written and
visual evidence of this transformation.
In his Sermon on the Transfiguration, which Anastasius gave on this feast
day sometime at the end of the seventh century, he focuses on theophanies
and instances of divine vision. This is not surprising given that the transfigu-
ration can be regarded as the epitome of any Christian theophany. According
to the Gospel narrative (Mt 17.1–9; Mk 9.2–6; Lk 9.28–36), while staying in
Galilee Jesus took three of his apostles to the top of a mountain, unnamed
in the scriptures but at a later stage associated with Mount Tabor.4 On that
mountain Christ revealed his divinity to Peter, John, and James, while the
prophets Moses and Elijah appeared in the sky. The manuscript tradition of
the sermon suggests that Anastasius actually delivered the sermon on this
very holy mountain. Although Guillou proposed the Sinai as the location for
the sermon’s recital instead,5 Ševčenko has argued that it was indeed given on
Mount Tabor.6 Modern scholarship tends to agree that Anastasius was not as
closely affiliated with Sinai as previously assumed.7
Anastasius begins his discourse by conflating Mount Tabor and the Old
Testament narrative of the vision of Jacob: “How awesome is this place”
Gen. 28.17).8 Anastasius puts himself in Jacob’s place and describes a ladder
that reaches to the mountaintop. While Jacob’s ladder ends in the sky at the
gates of Heaven, Anastasius places the gates of Heaven at the top of Mount
Tabor. Throughout the sermon the Sinaite keeps adding references to scrip-
tural theophanies and invents visionary experiences of the protagonists of the
transfiguration. He uses the account of the theophany at Sinai (Ex. 19.16–20)
as a model for his description of the events on Mount Tabor adding smoke
and earthquakes,9 which are not mentioned in the Gospel accounts.
Anastasius formulates a typological genealogy that starts with the events
on Mount Sinai prefiguring those on Mount Tabor, which in turn prefigure
the Second Coming of Christ and the Kingdom of God.10 Moses, who had
been able to see only God’s back when he had received the law on Sinai, finally

4
The fi rst known writer to identify Mount Tabor as the site of the transfiguration was Cyril of
Jerusalem in the Catechetical Orations (Cat. 12.16 at PG 33: 744).
5
Guillou 1955, 233.
6
Ševčenko 1966, 260–61, n. 23.
7
E.g. Haldon 1992, 114.
8
῾Ως φοβερὸς ὁ τόπος οὗτος. Cf. Guillou 1955, 237, ll. 4 and 8.
9
Guillou 1955, 251, ll. 13–16.
10
Guillou 1955, 238 and 241.
 BERGMEIER ^ The Crucifi xion as Theophany 67

saw God’s fullness on Tabor.11 Anastasius reports that Peter, on the other
hand, not only saw the transfigured Christ, but also had a vision of Heaven,
where he saw an array of typical theophanic imagery, among other things
torches, fountains of light, thrones, and crowns.12 Anastasius concludes the
visionary accounts with a description of the Second Coming of Christ as seen
by all the apostles explaining that this vision was the reason for their falling
to the ground facedown.13 In this sermon we witness the fusion of the trans-
figurational with theophanic narratives from the Old Testament as well as
with theophanies still to come. This is not surprising given the centrality of
the only theophany of Christ reported in the Gospels. What is surprising is
that Anastasius also interweaves the crucifi xion of Christ with the theophanic
imagery of his speech. In the fi rst part of the sermon, Anastasius not only
states that the Second Coming and the kingdom of heaven has been prefigured
at the transfiguration, but wedged between these two statements he mentions
that the crucifi xion has been announced on this same occasion.14 The cru-
cifi xion is thus imbued with theophanic imagery alluding to the parousia, a
phenomenon we shall also witness on the apse wall of Santa Maria Antiqua.
But not only does Anastasius mention the crucifi xion in an otherwise
theophanic context, he also interprets the transfiguration as the typological
model for the crucifi xion:

Today on Mount Tabor, the mystery of the cross, which gives life through
death, was sketched out. Just as he was crucified between two living beings
on Golgotha, he was standing divinely between Moses and Elijah.15

Clearly, the crucifi xion and transfiguration are strongly intertwined here.
Anastasius claims that the events of the crucifixion “have been sketched out”
(διεγράφη) on Mount Tabor. The use of the Greek word διαγράφω conveys
a sense of prefiguration as well as a graphic component, indicating Anas-
tasius’ visual approach to his topic. It is paralleled by other equally graphic

11
Guilliou 1955, 247, l. 11–248, l. 3.
12
Guillou 1955, 244, l. 9–245, l. 13.
13
Guillou 1955, 252, ll. 3–9.
14
Guillou 1955, 238, ll. 7–10: ὧδε τῆς βασιλείας προετυπώθη τὰ σύμβολα, ὧδε τὸ τῆς σταυρώσεως
προεμηνύθη μυστήριον, ὧδε ἡ τῆς βασιλείας ἀπεκαλύφθη εὐπρέπεια, ὧδε ἡ τῆς δευτέρας παρουσίας
τῆς ἐνδοξοτέρας Χριστοῦ ἐφανερώθη κατάβασις. “Thus the symbols of the [heavenly] kingdom were
prefigured beforehand, the mystery of the crucifi xion was announced beforehand, the beauty of the
kingdom was revealed, and the coming of a more glorious second appearance of Christ was made
manifest.” Here and elsewhere, all translations are my own unless otherwise noted.
15
Guillou 1955, 239, ll. 19–20: σήμερον ἐν Θαβωρίῳ τῶ ὄρει τὸ διὰ θανάτου ζωοποιὸν τοῦ
σταυροῦ διεγράφη μυστήριον· ὡς ἐν Κρανίῳ ἐν μέσῳ δύο ζῴων σταυροπρεπῶς, οὕτως ἐν μέσῳ Μωυσῇ
καὶ Ἠλία θεοπρεπῶς ἱστάμενος.
68 Journal of Late Antiquity

expressions he uses to describe the relationship between two events, one of

which predicts the other. When Anastasius relates the vision of Moses and
Elijah on Mount Tabor towards the end of the sermon he uses the words
ἐξεικόνιζον καὶ προδιετύπουν to suggest that this scene visually anticipated
and prefigured the second coming.16 The word ἐξεικονίζω (to explain through
an image) has visual connotations similar to διαγράφω. We can conclude that
Anastasius considered the theophany on Mount Tabor to be strongly linked to
the crucifi xion both in content and form. Anastasius compares the two dispo-
sitions almost as one would lay a piece of paper over an image in order to trace
the outline of the original, thereby making them practically interchangeable.
He claims that the events on Golgotha were prefigured on Mount Tabor. The
graphic description of the compositions of the scenes of Christ between Moses
and Elijah as well as between the two thieves serves as proof of this claim.
It is important to note that Anastasius uses the words from a well-known
theophanic text to make his comparison. Instead of saying that Christ is cru-
cified between two men or two thieves, he says “between two living beings”
ἐν μέσῳ δύο ζῷων. This phrase is taken from the prophet Habakkuk’s report
about his vision of God who he saw standing between two beings (Hab. 3.2).
Later exegetes tried to determine who these beings were meant to signify.17
Augustine offers three possible solutions in De Civitate Dei: the two thieves
on the cross, Moses and Elijah on Tabor, and the New and the Old Tes-
tament.18 Jerome gives a more comprehensive list: the father and the Holy
Ghost, the two Seraphim from Isaiah 6, the two Cherubim from Exodus 25,
the two thieves, the ecclesia ex gentibus and the ecclesia ex circumcisione,
and the Old and New Testaments.19 Eusebius of Caesarea on the other hand
tries to prove an orthographical error and reads the two beings as two lives
(ζωῶν).20 Even if not all of these interpretations are related to theophanies, it
is nonetheless remarkable that Anastasius uses the words from an Old Testa-
ment vision to describe the crucifi xion given the fact that, unlike those church
fathers, he was not aiming at an exegesis of the passage in Habakkuk.
Finally, both events in the life of Christ are tightly linked by the correla-
tives ὡς and οὕτως (“just as . . . so also”), indicating that the way he appeared
on Tabor is the same way he was seen on Golgotha. Certainly, Anastasius
is not only referring to the visually enticing parallel of the similar composi-
tion of the two scenes, but also using the outer form in order to enlighten his

16
Guilliou 1955, 251, ll. 12–16.
17
For a list of exegetical texts on Hab. 3.2 see Bucur 2010, 44.
18
Aug. Civ. Dei 18.32 (CCSL 48: 623).
19
Jer. Comm. in Abacuc, 2.3 (PL 25: 1309).
20
Eus. Dem. Ev. 6.15 (PG 22: 444).
 BERGMEIER ^ The Crucifi xion as Theophany 69

Fig. 1: Mausoleum of Galla Placidia, Ravenna, cupola mosaic (Photo: Author).

listeners about the spiritual link between both events. In this passage Anas-
tasius tries to convince his audience that both the transfiguration and the
crucifi xion show the Son of God in his divine appearance. The crucifi xion is
perceived to be quasi-theophanic.
In the preceding centuries, the crucifi xion had often been considered a
shameful death. Pope Leo the Great (440–461) explains that, in order to take
away the “scandal of the cross,” Christ showed himself in his divine appear-
ance during the transfiguration.21 Images of the cross itself do survive in many
places as a sign for the epiphany of Christ, as for example at the Mauso-
leum of Galla Placidia (Fig. 1), Sant’Apollinare in Classe in Ravenna (Fig. 2),
and Santa Maria della Croce in Casaranello. 22 Nevertheless, depictions of

21
Leo Mag. Sermo 51.2.3 (PL 54: 310): In qua transfiguratione illud quidem principaliter age-
batur, ut de cordibus discipulorum crucis scandalum tolleretur.
22
Stars encircling the cross in these mosaics indicate that the cross represents the theophanic
apparition of the sign of Christ in the sky.
70 Journal of Late Antiquity

Fig. 2: Sant’Apollinare in Classe, Ravenna, apse mosaic, detail (Photo: Author).

the crucifi xion from Late Antiquity are relatively rare. When Christ’s death
on the cross was represented, it usually formed part of a narrative cycle, as
on the doors of Santa Sabina (Fig. 3) and on a panel of an ivory casket now
in the British Museum. Often it is even absent from surviving Christological
cycles. It is not depicted on the Brescia Casket or in the Christological cycle
of Sant’Apollinare Nuovo in Ravenna. Kartsonis has argued that when the
crucifi xion is depicted, “the image of the crucified Christ most likely refers
primarily to the historical event depicted, and only secondarily to the univer-
sality of salvation.”23
Anastasius’ sermon, however, indicates that, by the end of the seventh
century, the character of the crucifi xion had changed to incorporate universal
meaning to be compared with the transfiguration. It was no longer a “mere”
narrative image. This transition might not be quite as surprising given the

23
Kartsonis 1986, 34.
 BERGMEIER ^ The Crucifi xion as Theophany 71

Fig. 3: Crucifi xion panel from the wooden door of Santa Sabina, Rome (Photo: Author).

fact that already 2 Corinthians 4.10 interprets Christ’s death as an allusion

to his epiphany.24 A visual representation of this same transformation in the
cosmological significance of the crucifi xion can be found in the fresco deco-
ration of Santa Maria Antiqua created under Pope John VII (705–707) (Fig.
4). Tucked away at the foot of the Palatine on the Roman Forum, the church
of Santa Maria Antiqua has retained a large part of its fresco decoration. An
image that still bewilders scholars is the crucifi xion scene on the wall above
the apse of the church. This collocation in the church’s architectural scheme is
already significant, for apses and apse walls had become the traditional places
for images of universal meaning pertaining to the realm of theophanies since
Late Antiquity.
Although the fresco is in bad repair and the left side of it is completely
lost, Grüneisen was able to offer a plausible reconstruction of the composition
(Fig. 5). The crucifi xion’s unusual and even awkward position at the center

24
Frenschkowski 1997, 199–210; Mitchell 2004, 190.
 72 Journal of Late Antiquity

Fig. 4: Apse wall of Santa Maria Antiqua, Rome, drawing after Wilpert (1916).

of a crowd of worshippers makes one think of the famous palimpsest wall in

this church, the product of a modern restoration, which has partially exposed
consecutive layers of decoration from the fi fth through the eighth centuries.
The crucifi xion scene, too, might seem to belong to a layer of decoration alto-
gether different from the rest of the apse wall. Above the crown of the apse
a steep rock of Golgotha rises up. Between the apse and the foot of the rock
Fig. 5: Reconstruction of the eastern wall of Santa Maria Antiqua, after Grüneisen
(1911).
74 Journal of Late Antiquity

there was a frieze, hardly any traces of which survive. Grüneisen proposed a
procession of lambs on this frieze, but this has to be revised.25 Folgerø suggests
instead a sequence of open graves out of which the dead arise.26 From there
the crucifi xion scene is articulated into three horizontal zones stacked one
atop the other. The lowest one is populated by a large group of worshippers.
The middle zone bears an inscription over a purple background, the extant
part of which lists passages from the Old Testament referring to Christ’s vic-
tory on the cross and to salvation.27 The topmost zone is populated by a group
of worshipping angels clad in purple and white garments. The head of Christ
is framed by four Seraphim, two on each side. Spanning the two upper zones
are the apostle John to the right of the cross and Mary on the opposite side.
The head of John is preserved, but the reconstruction of Mary remains hypo-
thetical in Grüneisen’s reconstruction.
The collocation of Christ between John and Mary, which was to become
widespread in the Middle Ages, might lead one to speculate that Anasta-
sius might have been referring to this visual formula rather than to Christ
between the two thieves when he compared the crucifi xion with the trans-
figuration. In fact, at the time Anastasius was writing, the thieves were
already receding into the background of images while Mary and John were
emerging into the foreground. This is not yet noticeable in the famous cru-
cifi xion scene of the Rabbula codex, 28 but can be found in the roughly con-
temporary image on the Sancta Sanctorum reliquary (Fig. 6). Here Mary
and John are positioned prominently between Christ and the thieves. In the
crucifi xion icon from Sinai (eighth century?), 29 the thieves are reduced in
size and pushed into the background. In the contemporary fresco in Santa
Maria Antiqua’s Theodotus Chapel (mid–eighth century)30 they are left out
entirely (Fig. 7). 31 These contemporary developments allow an interpretation
of the two ζῴα in Anastasius’ sermon as Mary and John, even if the exegeti-
cal tradition points to the two thieves. Regardless of which pair of “living
beings” Anastasius intended, the position of the crucifi xion surrounded by
angels and other worshippers above the crown of an apse wall is unusual
and demands further explanation.

25
Grüneisen 1911, 148.
26
Folgerø 2009.
27
A transcription of the text can be found in Rushforth 1902, 60.
28
Cecchelli, Furlani, and Salmi 1959, fol. 13r.
29
Image in: Weitzmann 1976, no. B36.
30
Belting 1987, 58, shows that this image was conceived as a cult image. For information on the
patronage see Lucey 2007.
31
For a comprehensive study of the development of the iconography of the crucifi xion see Wessel
1966; cf. Wessel 1960.
 BERGMEIER ^ The Crucifi xion as Theophany 75

Fig. 6: Crucifi xion, Sancta Sanctorum reliquary, Vatican Museums (Photo: Author).

Rushforth, who was the fi rst modern scholar to describe the newfound
mosaics at any length, briefly hinted that the composition resembles images of
the worship of the lamb.32 Nordhagen returned to this idea sixty years later
and compared the fresco to depictions of the Adoration of the Lamb from
medieval manuscripts.33 He attributes the substitution of the central lamb
with the crucified Christ to the Quinisext Council of 692 AD, which banned
the representation of the lamb.34 More recently, Nilgen has refuted arguments
for the influence of the 82nd canon of the Quinisext Council by arguing that
the lamb is too closely linked to prophecies from the Book of Revelation,
which was not canonical at the time in the Greek Church.35 Furthermore,
most apse walls or triumphal arches do not even show the lamb. The earliest
known apse wall decoration is the one that is now the triumphal arch of S.
Paolo fuori le mura (Fig. 8). Here, a bust of Christ is placed in the center of the
composition, framed by two angels, the four celestial beings, and the twenty
four elders. The apse wall of SS. Cosma e Damiano actually features a lamb,
flanked by seven candelabras, four angels flanking, and the tetramorph. As at
S. Paolo fuori le mura, there are two groups of elders, but these are now for
the most part lost due to a seventeenth-century restoration (Fig. 9).

32
Rushforth 1902, 61.
33
Nordhagen 1967.
34
Nordhagen 1967, 390.
35
Nilgen 2004, 132. On the influence of the 82nd canon of the Quinisext Council, see Vogt
1988.
Fig. 7: Crucifi xion, Theodotus chapel, Santa Maria Antiqua, drawing after Grü-
neisen (1911).
Fig. 8: San Paolo fuori le mura, Rome, triumphal arch (Photo: Author).

Fig. 9: SS. Cosma e Damiano, Rome, apse wall (Photo: Author).

78 Journal of Late Antiquity

Nilgen rightly places Santa Maria Antiqua in the tradition of these earlier
programs, but she unconvincingly interprets the crucifixion in Santa Maria Anti-
qua as a narrative image in the tradition of Christological cycles and at the same
time as a universal image representing the liturgy.36 She thereby undermines the
very achievement of the Santa Maria Antiqua crucifixion scene, which clearly
does not belong to a narrative cycle. In fact, the scene in Santa Maria Antiqua
stands on its own by showing a crucifixion that is interwoven with theophanic
imagery. Nilgen’s interpretation of the fresco as an image of the liturgy is based
solely on the fact that the angels and crowds represented are shown venerating
a central representation of Christ. The evidence for this is at best inconclusive.
So what is represented above the apse of Santa Maria Antiqua?
We can safely agree that in Santa Maria Antiqua, and also in earlier sur-
viving decorations in S. Paolo fuori le mura and SS. Cosma e Damiano, the
central image is the object of adoration. The twenty four elders are offering
their crowns to Christ or the lamb respectively. These groups find their equiv-
alent in the worshipping ranks of angels and humans surrounding the cruci-
fi xion.37 The celestial beings or Cherubim, ubiquitous in late antique apse and
cupola decorations, are replaced with Seraphim.38 Nonetheless, the references
to the earlier images are striking enough to propose an analogous interpreta-
tion. Furthermore, the proximity of the churches of SS. Cosma e Damiano
and Santa Maria Antiqua makes a comparison particularly valid.
The apse mosaic of SS. Cosma e Damiano shows the image of a theoph-
any (Fig. 10). The well-known iconography of the so-called traditio legis is
enhanced by the depiction of Saints Cosmas and Damian, Saint Theodore, and
Pope Felix IV (526–530), who commissioned the church. The standard traditio
legis iconography consists of Christ handing over a scroll to Peter on his left
while raising his right arm in a gesture of speech. To Christ’s right we usu-
ally find Paul. Beneath this scene there is a procession of twelve lambs facing
towards a central lamb standing on a mountain. Wisskirchen and Heid have
demonstrated that the procession of lambs is a visual abbreviation of Isaiah’s
prophecy of the Pilgrimage of the Nations (Is. 2.2–4), in which the lambs repre-
sent the nations going to Mount Zion.39 The central theme of the traditio legis
left unconsidered by Wisskirchen and Heid is the visualization of the second
half of Isaiah’s prophecy.40 Here Isaiah predicts that the law shall go out from
Zion and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem. The new law and the logos

36
cf. Nilgen 2004, 131.
37
So far no conclusive evidence has been produced as to which ranks of angels are depicted in purple
and white garments. It is likely that the angels clad in purple are higher-ranking than those in white.
38
On the interchangeability of Cherubim and Seraphim, see Iacobini 2000, 142–70.
39
Wisskirchen and Heid 1991.
40
Bergmeier 2014.
 BERGMEIER ^ The Crucifi xion as Theophany 79

Fig. 10: SS. Cosma e Damiano, apse mosaic, drawing after Wilpert (1916).

can easily be interpreted as Christ. In order to facilitate an easy reading of the

scene, the scroll that Jesus is delivering to Peter is in some cases inscribed with
the words “Dominus Legem Dat,” as for example in the Baptistery in Naples
(Fig. 11). Christ’s law, which has first been delivered to Peter (and to the other
Apostles), has thus come into the world for dissemination.
The motifs of the apse wall are grouped around this central vision. They
both refer to the theophany in the apse conch as well as to each other.41 All
of them are related to accounts of biblical visions, mostly from Revelation.
The lamb is a common allegory for Christ, the agnus dei. The image of the
lamb on a throne might well be taken from a vision in Revelation 5. This
vision not only includes the lamb on the throne, but also the four celestial
beings and the twenty-four elders worshipping the lamb. The beings are
derived from the Cherubim as described in Ezekiel’s theophanies (Ezek. 1
and 10). The candelabras also feature in the Book of Revelation (1.20) and
thus also belong to the realm of divine visions, as do the four angels, which
are likely taken from Revelation 7.1.
The apse wall of Santa Maria Antiqua follows the same general pattern.
It replaces the motifs taken from Revelation with other visionary imagery.
Instead of the celestial beings, attendants of the theophanies in Ezekiel’s

41
These strong links between the apse conch and the wall give evidence to the fact that both
levels of the decoration are in fact contemporary.
80 Journal of Late Antiquity

Fig. 11: Traditio Legis, Baptistery, Naples, cupola mosaic (Photo: Author).

vision and in Revelation, Seraphim are represented. The latter are attendants
of the throne vision in Isaiah 6. The Elders have been replaced by multitudes
of angels, which frame the focus of the composition. Angels have been some
of the most common attendants of manifestations of the divine since Late
Antiquity. Not only are divine figures in images often framed by angels—
Mary and Christ in the mosaic frieze of Sant’Apollinare Nuovo (Fig. 12),
Christ in the apse of San Vitale, Mary in the famous icon at Sinai42 —but
also narrative accounts of theophanies and visions of heaven often include
attendant angels.43
John Rufus (born c. 450) recounts the vision of John the Eunuch in his
Life of Peter the Iberian:

. . . everything full of light and the perturbation of confusion and trembling
and commotion, angels immediately preceding and the fi rst orders of the
heavenly hosts, angels, archangels, powers, dominions, glories. . . . 44

42
Weitzmann 1976, no. B.3.
43
Peers 2001, 126–56.
44
John Rufus, Vita Petri Iberi 61 (Horn and Phenix 2008, 88–89).
 BERGMEIER ^ The Crucifi xion as Theophany 81

Fig. 12: Enthroned Christ, Sant’Apollinare Nuovo, Ravenna, nave mosaic (Photo:
Author).

It is worth mentioning that Anastasius, too, describes theophanic events in

the Sermon on the Transfiguration as being surrounded by angels: “Angels
are running forward and archangels are sounding the trumpet.”45 Both writ-
ers are talking about two ranks of angels, which can be recognized in the
differently clad angels in Santa Maria Antiqua (in purple and white gar-
ments). Those angels had no place in late antique images of the crucifi xion,
but they were common in verbal and visual representations of theophany.
An early example from the sixth century can be found in the depiction of the
theophany/Ascension in the Rabbula codex (Fig. 13). Here two worshipping

45
Guillou 1955, 252, ll. 5–6; cf. ll. 2–3.
Fig. 13: Ascension/theophany, Rabbula Codex, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana,
Ms. Plut. I, 56, fol. 13v (by permission of MiBACT, reproduction forbidden without
permission).
 BERGMEIER ^ The Crucifi xion as Theophany 83

angels move towards the parousia of Christ, while two other angels hold
Christ’s mandorla.
In John VII’s apse decoration the central image might not appear to be a
theophany at first glance. A close reading of Anastasius’ Sermon on the Trans-
figuration has however revealed that the crucifi xion enjoyed an expanded
range of signification in narrative images from the end of Late Antiquity.
Anastasius, as well as the fresco in Santa Maria Antiqua, shows us that by
around the year 700 the image of Christ’s death was imbued with greater uni-
versal meaning. In fact, the crucifi xion could be perceived as being equal to a
theophany, as a quasi-theophanic moment. Belting calls the image a “histori-
cal crucifi xion taking on the guise of a heavenly Maiestas.”46 In fact, it seems
to have been just the other way around—a theophanic vision of Christ took
on the guise of the crucifi xion. Thus, the apse wall of Santa Maria Antiqua
continues the late antique tradition of depicting divine visions in this highly
charged architectural focal point. The image John VII commissioned for the
church on the Roman Forum was a vision of the heavenly kingdom, a theoph-
any expressed through an image of the crucifi xion.

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich
armin.bergmeier@gmail.com

References
Belting, Hans. 1961. “Das Fassadenmosaik des Atriums von Alt St. Peter in Rom.”
Wallraf–Richartz–Jahrbuch 23: 37–54.
. 1987. “Eine Privatkapelle im frühmittelalterlichen Rom.” Dumbarton Oaks
Papers 41: 55–69.
Belting, Hans, and Christa Belting-Ihm. 1966. “Das Kreuzbild im ‘Hodegos’ des
Anastasios Sinaites. Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach der ältesten Darstellung des toten
Christus.” In Tortulae. Supplementheft 30 der Römischen Quartalschrift, edited
by Walter N. Schumacher, 30–9. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder.
Bergmeier, Armin. 2014 (forthcoming). “Anleitungen zum Sehen. Göttliche Visionen
in den Apsismosaiken von SS. Cosma e Damiano, Sant’Apollinare in Classe und
Hosios David.” Millennium. Jahrbuch zu Kultur und Geschichte des ersten
Jahrtausends nach Chr. 11.
Bucur, Bogdan. 2010. “Sinai, Zion and Tabor. An Entry into the Christian Bible.”
Journal of Theological Interpretation 4 (1): 33–52.
Cecchelli, Carlo, Giuseppe Furlani, and Mario Salmi, eds. 1959. The Rabbula Gos-
pels. Facsimile Edition of the Miniatures of the Syriac Manuscript Plut. I, 56 in
the Medicaean-Laurentian Library. Olton: Graf.

46
Belting 1961, 48, fn. 55a.
84 Journal of Late Antiquity

Coune, M. 1962. “Vie spirituelle et Transfiguration. Une homélie patristique peu

connue,” Questions liturgiques et paroissiales 43: 225–36.
Feraudy, Roselyne de. 1978. L’Icône de la Transfiguration. Étude suivie des Homé-
lies d’Anastase le Sinaïte et de S. Jean Damascène. Spiritualité Orientale 23.
Bégrolles: Abbaye de Bellefontaine.
Flusin, Bernard. 1991. “Démons et Sarrasins. L’auteur et le propos des Diègèmata
stèriktika d’Anastase le Sinaïte.” Travaux et Mémoires 11: 381–409.
Folgerø, Per Olav. 2009. “The Lowest, Lost Zone in the Adoration of the Crucified
Scene in S. Maria Antiqua in Rome: A New Conjecture.” Journal of the Warburg
and Courtauld Institutes 72: 207–19.
Frenschkowski, Marco. 1997. Offenbarung und Epiphanie, vol 2. Tübingen: Mohr
Siebeck.
Grüneisen, Wladimir de. 1911. Sainte–Marie–Antique, vol. 1. Rome: Bretschneider.
Guillou, M. André. 1955. “Le monastère de la Théotokos au Sinai.” Mélanges
d’archéologie et d’histoire 67: 217–58.
Haldon, John. 1992. “The Works of Anastasius of Sinai: A Key Source for the His-
tory of Seventh-Century East Mediterranean Society and Belief.” In The Byz-
antine and Early Islamic Near East. Problems in the Literary Source Material,
edited by Averil Cameron and Lawrence Conrad, 107–48. Princeton: Darwin
Press.
Horn, Cornelia, and Robert Phenix, trans. 2008. John Rufus. The Lives of Peter the
Iberian, Theodosius of Jerusalem, and the Monk Romanus. Leiden: Brill.
Iacobini, Antonio. 2000. Visioni dipinte. Immagini della contemplazione negli aff re-
schi di Bawit. Rome: Viella.
Kartsonis, Anna. 1986. Anastasis. The Making of an Image. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
Lucey, Stephen J. 2007. “Art and Socio–Cultural Identity in Early Medieval Rome:
The Patrons of Santa Maria Antiqua.” In Roma Felix. Formation and Refl ec-
tions of Medieval Rome, edited by Ó Carragáin, Éamonn and Neuman de Veg-
var, Carol, 139–158. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Mitchell, Margaret M. . 2004. “Epiphanic Evolutions in Earliest Christianity.” Illi-
nois Classical Studies 29: 183–204.
Nilgen, Ursula. 2004. “The Adoration of the Crucified Christ at Santa Maria Anti-
qua and the Tradition of Triumphal Arch Decoration in Rome.” In Santa Maria
Antiqua al Foro Romano cento anni dopo, edited by John Osborne, J. Rasmus
Brandt, and Giuseppe Morganti, 129–35. Rome: Campisano.
Nordhagen, Per Jonas. 1967. “John VII’s Adoration of the Cross in S. Maria Anti-
qua.” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 30: 388–90.
Peers, Glenn. 2001. Subtle Bodies. Representing Angels in Byzantium. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Rushforth, Gordon McNeil. 1902. “The Church of S. Maria Antiqua.” Papers of the
British School at Rome 1.1: 1–119.
Ševčenko, Ihor. 1966. “The Early Period of the Sinai Monastery in the Light of Its
Inscriptions.” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 20: 255–64.
 BERGMEIER ^ The Crucifi xion as Theophany 85

Vogt, Hermann J. . 1988. “Der Streit um das Lamm. Das Trullanum und die Bilder.”
Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum 20.1: 135–49.
Weitzmann, Kurt. 1976. The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai. The
Icons (From the Sixth to the Tenth Century), vol. 1. Princeton: University Press.
Wessel, Klaus. 1960. “Frühbyzantinische Darstellungen der Kreuzigung Christi.”
Rivista di Archeologia Cristiana 36: 45–72.
. 1966. Die Kreuzigung. Recklinghausen: Bongers.
Wisskirchen, Rotraut, and Stefan Heid. 1991. “Der Prototyp des Lämmerfrieses in
Alt-St. Peter.” In Tesserae. Festschrift für Josef Engemann. Jahrbuch für Antike
und Christentum, Ergänzungsband 18, edited by Ernst Dassmann, 138–160.
Münster: Aschendorff.