20
This paper illustrates what can be termed the “journey of a name,” one of the many kinds of cultural and material transmission that occurred between early Byzantine Constantinople and the major centers of the province of Italy, which had been taken back from their captors by Justinian’s armies in the fourth and fifth decades of the sixth century. In fact, the monastery of Cosmas and Damian in Constantinople offers a particularly apt case study, as its name was given to three newly founded eccle siastical estab lishments in Italy. The latter seem to have had no specific connection with what was claimed as their motherhouse. The name could simply be among the most distinct reflections of a sort of traveling memory.
/Keywords/ Kosmidion, Cosmas and Damian, Santa Maria in Cosmedin, Ravenna, Naples
1 / Constantinople, Plan of the Ayvansaray district
ABSTRACT
20
This paper illustrates what can be termed the “journey of a name,” one of the many kinds of cultural and material transmission that occurred between early Byzantine Constantinople and the major centers of the province of Italy, which had been taken back from their captors by Justinian’s armies in the fourth and fifth decades of the sixth century. In fact, the monastery of Cosmas and Damian in Constantinople offers a particularly apt case study, as its name was given to three newly founded ecclesiastical establishments in Italy. The latter seem to have had no specific connection with what was claimed as their motherhouse. The name could simply be among the most distinct reflections of a sort of traveling memory.
/Keywords/ Kosmidion, Cosmas and Damian, Santa/ Maria in Cosmedin, Ravenna, Naples
1 / Constantinople, Plan of the Ayvansaray district
ABSTRACT
21
The starting point: Constantinople
The name Kosmidion is not attested in Byzan- tine written sources before the early 10th century, although it might well have had an earlier origin. It indicated a complex of a church and a monastery devoted to Cosmas and Damian, the Anargyroi, i.e. the two most famous representatives among the ’unmercenary’ physician saints. Cosmas and Damian allegedly were active in the city of Cyrrhus and were martyred under Diocletian, in 287. As early as the 4th century AD their cult spread from Syria to Jerusalem and across Egypt, always preserving a strong Syriac character. In the 5th century it was to be found attest- ed in a great number of centres around the Mediter- ranean basin1.
Cosmas and Damian’s monastery at Constan- tinople was seemingly located on a hill top on the left bank of the Golden Horn, in a suburban spot just northeast of the eastern edge of the Theodosian city walls. Neither the church nor the adjoining buildings have been preserved. Nor indeed is any archaeolog- ical evidence known of, so we can only rely upon written sources to trace out their rough location.
Around the mid-6th century Procopius describes the suburban sanctuary of Cosmas and Damian as situated on a steep hill on the Golden Horn shore- line, in the vicinity of the Blachernae district (pres- ent-day Ayvansaray). This latter district clustered around the most famous shrine of the Mother of God in the capital city, erected in the 460’s–470’s2. Conse- quently, scholars tried to find a suitable location for
the Kosmidion along the stretch of shore between Ayvansaray and Eyüp. A traditionally accepted identification Kosmidion-Eyüp was partly discarded by recent studies, since it does not fit – from a mor- phological point of view – with Procopius’ reference to a hill. Moreover, Cyril Mango underlined the fact that both the Chronicon Paschale and the account of the Miracles of the two saints located Kosmidion in
1 See Kosmas und Damian. Texte und Einleitung, Ludwig Deubner ed., Leipzig – Berlin 1907 (repr., Aalen 1980), pp. 38 –83; Cyril Mango, “On the Cult of Saints Cosmas and Damian at Constantinople”, in Thymiama ste mneme tes Laskarinas Boura, Athens 1994, pp. 189–192, esp. p. 190.; Beat Brenk, “Da Galeno a Cosma e Damiano: considerazioni attorno all’introduzione del culto dei SS. Cosma e Damiano a Roma”, in Salute e guarigione nella tarda antichità, Hugo Brandenburg, Stefan Heid e Christoph Markschies eds., Città del Vaticano 2007, pp. 79–92.
2 Cyril Mango, “The origins of the Blachernae shrine at Constantinople”, in Radovi XIII. meunarodnog Kongresa za Starokršansku Arheologiju, Acta XIII Congressus internationalis archaeologiae christianae (Split
– Pore, 25-9/1-10-1994), II, Nenad Cambi and Emilio Marin eds., Città del Vaticano 1998, pp. 61–76, esp. pp. 70–71. The area of the Blacher- nae has been generally identified with the 14th region. Cf., recently, Cyril Mango, “Le mystère de la XIVe région de Constantinople”, in Mélanges Gilbert Dagron, (Travaux et Mémoires du Centre de recherche d’Histoire et Civilisation de Byzance, 14), Vincent Déroche et al. ed., Paris 2002, pp. 449–455. On the Blachernae complex see: Andrea Paribeni,
“Separati in casa. I destini paralleli della chiesa e del palazzo delle Bla- cherne a Costantinopoli”, in Medioevo: la chiesa e il palazzo, (I convegni di Parma, 8), Arturo Carlo Quintavalle ed., Milano 2007, pp. 357–368.
A Journey of Men and Names Constantinople’s Kosmidion and its Italian Replicas Alessandro Taddei
21
The starting point: Constantinople
The name Kosmidion is not attested in Byzan- tine written sources before the early 10th century, although it might well have had an earlier origin. It indicated a complex of a church and a monastery devoted to Cosmas and Damian, the Anargyroi, i.e. the two most famous representatives among the ’unmercenary’ physician saints. Cosmas and Damian allegedly were active in the city of Cyrrhus and were martyred under Diocletian, in 287. As early as the 4th
century AD their cult spread from Syria to Jerusalem and across Egypt, always preserving a strong Syriac character. In the 5th century it was to be found attest- ed in a great number of centres around the Mediter- ranean basin1.
Cosmas and Damian’s monastery at Constan- tinople was seemingly located on a hill top on the left bank of the Golden Horn, in a suburban spot just northeast of the eastern edge of the Theodosian city walls. Neither the church nor the adjoining buildings have been preserved. Nor indeed is any archaeolog- ical evidence known of, so we can only rely upon written sources to trace out their rough location.
Around the mid-6th century Procopius describes the suburban sanctuary of Cosmas and Damian as situated on a steep hill on the Golden Horn shore- line, in the vicinity of the Blachernae district (pres- ent-day Ayvansaray). This latter district clustered around the most famous shrine of the Mother of God in the capital city, erected in the 460’s–470’s2. Conse- quently, scholars tried to find a suitable location for
the Kosmidion along the stretch of shore between Ayvansaray and Eyüp. A traditionally accepted identification Kosmidion-Eyüp was partly discarded by recent studies, since it does not fit – from a mor- phological point of view – with Procopius’ reference to a hill. Moreover, Cyril Mango underlined the fact that both the Chronicon Paschale and the account of the Miracles of the two saints located Kosmidion in
1 See Kosmas und Damian. Texte und Einleitung, Ludwig Deubner ed., gg Leipzig – Berlin 1907 (repr., Aalen 1980), pp. 38–83; Cyril Mango, “On the Cult of Saints Cosmas and Damian at Constantinople”, in Thymiama ste mneme tes Laskarinas Boura, Athens 1994, pp. 189–192, esp. p. 190.; Beat Brenk, “Da Galeno a Cosma e Damiano: considerazioni attorno all’introduzione del culto dei SS. Cosma e Damiano a Roma”, in Salute e guarigione nella tarda antichità, Hugo Brandenburg, Stefan Heid e Christoph Markschies eds., Città del Vaticano 2007, pp. 79–92.
2 Cyril Mango, “The origins of the Blachernae shrine at Constantinople”, in Radovi XIII. meunarodnog Kongresa za Starokršansku Arheologiju, Acta XIII Congressus internationalis archaeologiae christianae (Split
– Pore, 25-9/1-10-1994), II, Nenad Cambi and Emilio Marin eds., Città del Vaticano 1998, pp. 61–76, esp. pp. 70–71. The area of the Blacher- nae has been generally identified with the 14th region. Cf., recently, Cyril Mango, “Le mystère de la XIVeVV région de Constantinople”, in Mélanges Gilbert Dagron, (Travaux et Mémoires du Centre de recherche d’Histoire et Civilisation de Byzance, 14), Vincent Déroche et al. ed., Paris 2002, pp. 449–455. On the Blachernae complex see: Andrea Paribeni,
“Separati in casa. I destini paralleli della chiesa e del palazzo delle Bla- cherne a Costantinopoli”, in Medioevo: la chiesa e il palazzo, (I convegni di Parma, 8), Arturo Carlo Quintavalle ed., Milano 2007, pp. 357–368.
A Journey of Men and Names Constantinople’s Kosmidion and its Italian Replicas Alessandro Taddei
22
the Blachernae/Ayvansaray district. Thus, a loca- tion on the hills slightly north of Ayvansaray was suggested /Fig. 1/3. This topographic connection would prove significant from the point of view of the ’export’ of the place names.
Wherever the shrine of Cosmas and Damian actu- ally was, written sources like the Patria, Theophanes and Patriarch Nicephorus tell us that it had been built on a suburban estate called “τ Παουλνης”4. Even if we have no information about the Paulina after whom the estate was named, it seems likely that a lady of this name was the original owner: Cyril Mango suggested that she could have been an aristocrat of Syrian origin who established a place of worship in her own suburban dwelling5. With all likelihood this was the ’humble church’ that was about to be rebuilt by Justinian I in the first half of the 6th century.
What was the occasion for the rebuilding? Procopius (De aedificiis, I.6) tells us that Justinian himself, having fallen ill with the insurgence of plague in AD 542, was in a desperate situation. All the therapies having proved ineffectual, he finally recovered thanks to the miraculous intervention of Cosmas and Damian, who visited him in a dream. As a consequence of his healing, Justinian trans- ferred their relics from Cyrrhus to the church at Con- stantinople, rebuilding it on a larger scale. Whoever has lost the hope of healing – Procopius tells us – nowadays pays a visit to the sanctuary, approaching it by boat. It appeared to the seafarers on the top of a sort of ’acropolis’, thanks to the steep slope of the hill where it stood6. So the Emperor eagerly promoted the cult of the two doctor saints renovating or build- ing new churches at Constantinople and Antioch. As for his successor, Justin II (565–578), he too founded a second shrine in honour of the physician saints at Constantinople, in the nearby of the quarters called ta Basiliskou and ta Dareiou7.
The pilgrimage of sick people is closely linked to the ancient tradition of the healing cult in the area of Blachernae. Seemingly, the Christian shrine of Cosmas and Damian replaced an ancient sanctu- ary of the Dioscuri8, thus allowing a continuity for the incubation practice, which traditionally took place in it, and which is clearly reflected by the ac- count of Justinian’s dream. A detailed description of the healing cult at Kosmidion is provided by the Byzantine accounts of the Miracles performed by the two doctor saints9. Being closely linked to St. Mary of Blachernae, the Kosmidion may have
shared with this latter the constant flow of pilgrims: the text of the Miracles clearly reasserts the links be- tween the cult of St. Mary and the healings achieved through the supernatural intervention of Cosmas and Damian10.
Justinian’s new shrine didn’t last long. It was severely damaged both by the Avaro–Slavic raids in the hinterland of Constantinople in 623 and by the failed siege they attempted on the city in collabora- tion with the Persians in 62611. The complex seems nevertheless to have survived, for a church of Saints Cosmas and Damian in τ Παουλνης was recorded as functioning as a burial place during the stormy events which accompanied the overthrow of the Emperor Justinian II in the year 71112. Thenceforth, due to the fortification of the Blachernae complex by Emperor Heraclius, the Kosmidion remained permanently outside the city’s defence system. In fact, mention of the sanctuary can be once again found during the early 9th-century Bulgarian siege of Constantinople. Then, in 813, the troops of the khan Kroum encamped in the monastery precinct, certainly exploiting the morphology of the hill from which commanded a view of the capital city and the Golden Horn13.
A certain decline seems to have affected the mon- astery from the early 7th century to the 11th-century revival of the sanctuary owed to the patronage of Emperor Michael IV (1034–1041), who chose the Kosmidion as his own retirement and burial place14.
We can imagine that, until 626, both the church and the monastic community rapidly increased their wealth mainly thanks to the establishment of a xenodocheion, or a charitable foundation to be housed in what was the former residence of Paulina. It seems likely – even if this is only a hypothesis – that the popular name Kosmidion became wide- spread due precisely to the enhancement of the prestige of the charitable institution pursued by Justinian, who aimed to show his imperial philan- thropy and euergesia15. This could be the case of the passage in the text of Miracles of Cosmas and Damian 47,57–8 pertaining to the “ατρο” of the “μον Κοσμιδου”16. Unfortunately, it is quite diffi- cult to point out the chronology of the different parts of the text of the Miracles of Cosmas and Damian17. If we could consider 47,57–8 as belonging to the earlier phase of the text’s editing, i.e. the one con- temporary with the spread of the two martyrs’ cult, we could rely upon a pre-7th-century occurrence of the name. Admittedly, it is to be recognized that the 22
the Blachernae/Ayvansaray district. Thus, a loca- tion on the hills slightly north of Ayvansaray was suggested /Fig. 1/3. This topographic connection would prove significant from the point of view of the ’export’ of the place names.
Wherever the shrine of Cosmas and Damian actu- ally was, written sources like the Patria, Theophanes and Patriarch Nicephorus tell us that it had been built on a suburban estate called “τ Παουλνης”4. Even if we have no information about the Paulina after whom the estate was named, it seems likely that a lady of this name was the original owner: Cyril Mango suggested that she could have been an aristocrat of Syrian origin who established a place of worship in her own suburban dwelling5. With all likelihood this was the ’humble church’ that was about to be rebuilt by Justinian I in the first half of the 6th century.
What was the occasion for the rebuilding? Procopius (De aedificiis, I.6) tells us that Justinian himself, having fallen ill with the insurgence of plague in AD 542, was in a desperate situation. All the therapies having proved ineffectual, he finally recovered thanks to the miraculous intervention of Cosmas and Damian, who visited him in a dream. As a consequence of his healing, Justinian trans- ferred their relics from Cyrrhus to the church at Con- stantinople, rebuilding it on a larger scale. Whoever has lost the hope of healing – Procopius tells us – nowadays pays a visit to the sanctuary, approaching it by boat. It appeared to the seafarers on the top of a sort of ’acropolis’, thanks to the steep slope of the hill where it stood6. So the Emperor eagerly promoted the cult of the two doctor saints renovating or build- ing new churches at Constantinople and Antioch. As for his successor, Justin II (565–578), he too founded a second shrine in honour of the physician saints at Constantinople, in the nearby of the quarters called ta Basiliskou and ta Dareiou7.
The pilgrimage of sick people is closely linked to the ancient tradition of the healing cult in the area of Blachernae. Seemingly, the Christian shrine of Cosmas and Damian replaced an ancient sanctu- ary of the Dioscuri8, thus allowing a continuity for the incubation practice, which traditionally took place in it, and which is clearly reflected by the ac- count of Justinian’s dream. A detailed description of the healing cult at Kosmidion is provided by the Byzantine accounts of the Miracles performed by the two doctor saints9. Being closely linked to St. Mary of Blachernae, the Kosmidion may have
shared with this latter the constant flow of pilgrims: the text of the Miracles clearly reasserts the links be- tween the cult of St. Mary and the healings achieved through the supernatural intervention of Cosmas and Damian10.
Justinian’s new shrine didn’t last long. It was severely damaged both by the Avaro–Slavic raids in the hinterland of Constantinople in 623 and by the failed siege they attempted on the city in collabora- tion with the Persians in 62611. The complex seems nevertheless to have survived, for a church of Saints Cosmas and Damian in τ Παουλνης was recorded as functioning as a burial place during the stormy events which accompanied the overthrow of the Emperor Justinian II in the year 71112. Thenceforth, due to the fortification of the Blachernae complex by Emperor Heraclius, the Kosmidion remained permanently outside the city’s defence system. In fact, mention of the sanctuary can be once again found during the early 9th-century Bulgarian siege of Constantinople. Then, in 813, the troops of the khan Kroum encamped in the monastery precinct, certainly exploiting the morphology of the hill from which commanded a view of the capital city and the Golden Horn13.
A certain decline seems to have affected the mon- astery from the early 7th century to the 11th-century revival of the sanctuary owed to the patronage of Emperor Michael IV (1034–1041), who chose the Kosmidion as his own retirement and burial place14.
We can imagine that, until 626, both the church and the monastic community rapidly increased their wealth mainly thanks to the establishment of a xenodocheion, or a charitable foundation to be housed in what was the former residence of Paulina. It seems likely – even if this is only a hypothesis – that the popular name Kosmidion became wide- spread due precisely to the enhancement of the prestige of the charitable institution pursued by Justinian, who aimed to show his imperial philan- thropy and euergesia15. This could be the case of the passage in the text of Miracles of Cosmas and Damian 47,57–8 pertaining to the “ατρο” of the “μον Κοσμιδου”16. Unfortunately, it is quite diffi- cult to point out the chronology of the different parts of the text of the Miracles of Cosmas and Damian17. If we could consider 47,57–8 as belonging to the earlier phase of the text’s editing, i.e. the one con- temporary with the spread of the two martyrs’ cult, we could rely upon a pre-7th-century occurrence of the name. Admittedly, it is to be recognized that the
23
first ever mention of the name Kosmidion in Byzan- tine literary sources dates back to ca. 859/860, when Symeon Magister (Chronikon, 131,22) reports the existence of a “προστιον Κοσμηδου”, belonging to Bardas the kaisar18. Evidently, in the 9th century the name Kosmidion gradually began to prevail – in the learned milieu as well – on the old place name τ Παουλνης. Needless to say, the name Kosmid- ion should have already been in use before, accord- ing to the 8th-century evidence of transmission of its derivate forms in an area as far from Constantinople as the Italian peninsula.
Rome, Ravenna, Naples:
In the 8th century the place-name Kosmidion made its first appearance in the former territories of the Byzantine Exarchate of Italy. The long and de- tailed biography of Pope Hadrian I (772–795) in the Liber Pontificalis includes the first reference to a Kos- midion in Rome. This energetic leader of the Roman Church restored the diaconia devoted to the Virgin Mary “quae appellatur Cosmidin”, today S. Maria in Cosmedin19. It is not clear when the diaconia was ac- tually built. Nonetheless, it is a matter of fact that it was established in part of a late-antique rectangular colonnaded hall, seemingly a sort of wide portico facing the ancient Forum Boarium /Fig. 2/20.
As for the dedication to the Mother of God, we cannot forget the original link between Kosmidion and the Blachernae. In Byzantine and post-Byzan- tine Italy, this link would be transformed, as we will see, in the recurring association between edifices devoted to the Mother of God and the appellation Cosmedin.
A Latin epigraph of the 8th century still preserved in the medieval porch of S. Maria in Cosmedin be- longed to the ancient diaconia: it dates back to the very end of the Byzantine imperial rule in Rome and Central Italy. Even if no specific mention of the name in Cosmedin was included in the text, we can see the last Byzantine doux, Eustathius (752–756), along with his brother, the gloriosissimus Georgius, richly endowing the diaconia of the Virgin Mary the Mother of God with a great number of estates
3 Mango, “On the Cult of Saints Cosmas and Damian” (n. 1), pp. 189–190. Nonetheless, with some convincing evidence, Nuray Özaslan showed how the nearby Piyer Loti hill (slightly to the south of Eyüp) could better justify Procopius’ account, since it offers a commanding view over the Golden Horn and Asia. Nuray Özaslan, “From the Shrine of Cosmidion to the Shrine of Eyüp Ensari”, Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies, XL (1999), pp. 379–399, esp. p. 388.
4 And not Τ Παυλνου: discussion about the erroneous reading in Mango, “On the Cult of Saints Cosmas and Damian” (n. 1), p. 190.
5 Mango went so far as to invoke the Paulina mother of the usurper Leontius (484–488), who is said to have been of Syrian or Isaurian origin. Consequently, in Mango’s opinion she built the church com- plex no later than 480: Mango, “On the Cult of Saints Cosmas and Damian” (n. 1), p. 191.
6 Procope de Césarée, Constructions de Justinien Ier (Peri ktismatn = De aedificiis); Denis Roques, Eugenio Amato and Jacques Schamp eds., Alessandria 2011, pp. 89, 132, n. 122.
7 The Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor. Byzantine and Near Eastern History AD 284–813, Cyril Mango and Roger Scott eds., Oxford 1997, p. 359 and note 4. Wendy Mayer, “Antioch and the Intersection between Religious Factionalism, Place, and Power in Late Antiquity”, in The Power of Religion in Late Antiquity, Andrew Cain, Noel E. Lenski eds., Ashgate 2009, pp. 357–368, esp. p. 365. See also: Phil Booth, “Orthodox and Heretic in the Early Byzantine Cult(s) of Saints Cosmas and Damian”, in An age of saints?: Power, conflict, and dissent in early medieval Christianity, Peter Sarris, Matthew Dal Santo, Phil Booth eds., Leiden – Boston 2011, pp. 114–128, esp. p. 115.
8 Albrecht Berger, Untersuchungen zu den Patria Constantinupoleos, Bonn 1988, p. 672.
9 On medical practice at Kosmidion, see: Mercedes López Salvá, “Actividad asistencial y terapéutica en el Kosmidion de Constantinopla”,
in Epígeios ouranós. El cielo en la tierra: estudios sobre el monasterio bizantino, Pedro Bádenas de la Peña, Antonio Bravo García and Imaculada Pérez Martín eds., Madrid 1997, pp. 131–145.
10 Cf. also the sharing of the sacred bath, the lousma, of the Blachernae: see Mango, “On the Cult of Saints Cosmas and Damian” (n. 1), p. 191.
11 Walter Emil Kaegi, Heraclius, Emperor of Byzantium, Cambridge 2002, pp. 134–136. See, recently, Martin Hurbani, “A topographical note concerning the Avar siege of Constantinople: the question of the local- ization of St. Callinicus Bridge”, Byzantinoslavica. Revue internationale des Études Byzantines, LXX/1–2 (2012), pp. 15–24, esp. p. 18.
12 The Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor (n. 7), p. 529 and note 14. 13 Panos Sophoulis, Byzantium and Bulgaria, 775–831, Leiden 2011, p. 251ff.
The same happened during the failed siege led by the usurper Thomas the Slave in 822: Berger, Untersuchungen (n. 8), p. 672.
14 Raymond Janin, La géographie ecclésiastique de l’Empire byzantin. Première partie. Le siège de Constantinople et le patriarcat oecuménique. Tome III. Les églises et les monastères, Paris 19692, p. 287. On the alleged decline of the monastery see Booth, “Orthodox and Heretic” (n. 7), p. 116. In 924, once again, the monastery was used as a stronghold during the military operations of the Bulgarian tsar Simeon: See James Howard-Johnston,
“A short piece of narrative history: war and diplomacy in the Balkans, winter 921/2 – spring 924”, in Byzantine Style, Religion and Civilization. In Honour of Sir Steven Runciman, Elizabeth Jeffreys ed., Cambridge 2006, pp. 340–360, esp. pp. 350–351.
15 Peter Hatlie, The Monks and Monasteries of Constantinople ca. 350–850, Cambridge 2007, p. 166.
16 Kosmas und Damian (n. 1), p. 206. 17 Alice-Mary Talbot, “Pilgrimage to Healing Shrines: The Evidence of
Miracle Accounts”, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, LVI (2002), pp. 153–173, esp. p. 155. Matthew Dal Santo, Debating the Saints’ Cults in the Age of Gregory the Great, Oxford 2012, pp. 159–173, esp. p. 160 (with bib- liography).
18 Despite the location outside the walls, which exposed the district to assaults, pillages and raids, the pleasant landscape and healthy envi- ronment made the estates of the proasteion attractive and a target for the aristocratic class: Symeonis Magistri et Logothetae Chronicon, Stephanus Wahlgren ed., Berolini et Novi Eboraci 2006, p. 242.
19 Liber Pontificalis, Louis Duchesne ed., Paris 1955, p. 507. With only nec- essary exceptions, the present-day version of the name: “in Cosmedin” will be used throughout the paper.
20 Richard Krautheimer, Wolfgang Frankl, Spencer Corbett, Corpus basil- icarum christianarum Romae. The Early Christian Basilicas of Rome (IV–IX Cent.), vol. II, Vatican 1959, pp. 300–301. Recently: Valentina Vincenti,
“L’Ara Maxima Herculis e S. Maria in Cosmedin. Note di topografia tardoantica”, in Ecclesiae Urbis, Atti del Congresso internazionale di studi sulle chiese di Roma (Roma, 4–10 settembre 2000), vol. I, Federico Guidobaldi and Alessandra Guiglia Guidobaldi eds., Città del Vaticano 2002, pp. 353–375, esp. pp. 364–375. Gemma Fusciello, Santa Maria in Cosmedin a Roma, Roma 2011, pp. 41–53 (with bibliography). 23
first ever mention of the name Kosmidion in Byzan- tine literary sources dates back to ca. 859/860, when Symeon Magister (Chronikon, 131,22) reports the existence of a “προστιον Κοσμηδου”, belonging to Bardas the kaisar18. Evidently, in the 9th century the name Kosmidion gradually began to prevail – in the learned milieu as well – on the old place name τ Παουλνης. Needless to say, the name Kosmid- ion should have already been in use before, accord- ing to the 8th-century evidence of transmission of its derivate forms in an area as far from Constantinople as the Italian peninsula.
Rome, Ravenna, Naples:
In the 8th century the place-name Kosmidion made its first appearance in the former territories of the Byzantine Exarchate of Italy. The long and de- tailed biography of Pope Hadrian I (772–795) in the Liber Pontificalis includes the first reference to a Kos- midion in Rome. This energetic leader of the Roman Church restored the diaconia devoted to the Virgin Mary “quae appellatur Cosmidin”, today S. Maria in Cosmedin19. It is not clear when the diaconia was ac- tually built. Nonetheless, it is a matter of fact that it was established in part of a late-antique rectangular colonnaded hall, seemingly a sort of wide portico facing the ancient Forum Boarium /Fig. 2/20.
As for the dedication to the Mother of God, we cannot forget the original link between Kosmidion and the Blachernae. In Byzantine and post-Byzan- tine Italy, this link would be transformed, as we will see, in the recurring association between edifices devoted to the Mother of God and the appellation Cosmedin.
A Latin epigraph of the 8th century still preserved in the medieval porch of S. Maria in Cosmedin be- longed to the ancient diaconia: it dates back to the very end of the Byzantine imperial rule in Rome and Central Italy. Even if no specific mention of the name in Cosmedin was included in the text, we can see the last Byzantine doux, Eustathius (752–756), along with his brother, the gloriosissimus Georgius, richly endowing the diaconia of the Virgin Mary the Mother of God with a great number of estates
3 Mango, “On the Cult of Saints Cosmas and Damian” (n. 1), pp. 189–190. Nonetheless, with some convincing evidence, Nuray Özaslan showed how the nearby Piyer Loti hill (slightly to the south of Eyüp) could better justify Procopius’ account, since it offers a commanding view over the Golden Horn and Asia. Nuray Özaslan, “From the Shrine of Cosmidion to the Shrine of Eyüp Ensari”, Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies, XL (1999), pp. 379–399, esp. p. 388.
4 And not Τ Παυλνου: discussion about the erroneous reading in Mango, “On the Cult of Saints Cosmas and Damian” (n. 1), p. 190.
5 Mango went so far as to invoke the Paulina mother of the usurper Leontius (484–488), who is said to have been of Syrian or Isaurian origin. Consequently, in Mango’s opinion she built the church com- plex no later than 480: Mango, “On the Cult of Saints Cosmas and Damian” (n. 1), p. 191.
6 Procope de Césarée, Constructions de Justinien Ier (Peri ktismatn = De aedificiis); Denis Roques, Eugenio Amato and Jacques Schamp eds., Alessandria 2011, pp. 89, 132, n. 122.
7 The Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor. Byzantine and Near Eastern History AD 284–813, Cyril Mango and Roger Scott eds., Oxford 1997, p. 359 and note 4. Wendy Mayer, “Antioch and the Intersection between Religious Factionalism, Place, and Power in Late Antiquity”, in The Power of Religion in Late Antiquity, Andrew Cain, Noel E. Lenski eds., Ashgateyy 2009, pp. 357–368, esp. p. 365. See also: Phil Booth, “Orthodox and Heretic in the Early Byzantine Cult(s) of Saints Cosmas and Damian”, in An age of saints?: Power, conflict, and dissent in early medieval Christianity, yy Peter Sarris, Matthew Dal Santo, Phil Booth eds., Leiden – Boston 2011, pp. 114–128, esp. p. 115.
8 Albrecht Berger, Untersuchungen zu den Patria Constantinupoleos, Bonn 1988, p. 672.
9 On medical practice at Kosmidion, see: Mercedes López Salvá, “Actividad asistencial y terapéutica en el Kosmidion de Constantinopla”,
in Epígeios ouranós. El cielo en la tierra: estudios sobre el monasterio bizantino, Pedro Bádenas de la Peña, Antonio Bravo García and Imaculada Pérez Martín eds., Madrid 1997, pp. 131–145.
10 Cf. also the sharing of the sacred bath, the lousma, of the Blachernae: see Mango, “On the Cult of Saints Cosmas and Damian” (n. 1), p. 191.
11 Walter Emil Kaegi, Heraclius, Emperor of Byzantium, Cambridge 2002, pp. 134–136. See, recently, Martin Hurbani, “A topographical note concerning the Avar siege of Constantinople: the question of the local- ization of St. Callinicus Bridge”, Byzantinoslavica. Revue internationale des Études Byzantines, LXX/1–2 (2012), pp. 15–24, esp. p. 18.
12 The Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor (n. 7), p. 529 and note 14. 13 Panos Sophoulis, Byzantium and Bulgaria, 775–831, Leiden 2011, p. 251ff.
The same happened during the failed siege led by the usurper Thomas the Slave in 822: Berger, Untersuchungen (n. 8), p. 672.
14 Raymond Janin, La géographie ecclésiastique de l’Empire byzantin. Première partie. Le siège de Constantinople et le patriarcat oecuménique. Tome III. Les églises et les monastères, Paris 19692, p. 287. On the alleged decline of the monastery see Booth, “Orthodox and Heretic” (n. 7), p. 116. In 924, once again, the monastery was used as a stronghold during the military operations of the Bulgarian tsar Simeon: See James Howard-Johnston, r
“A short piece of narrative history: war and diplomacy in the Balkans, winter 921/2 – spring 924”, in Byzantine Style, Religion and Civilization. In Honour of Sir Steven Runciman, Elizabeth Jeffreys ed., Cambridge 2006, pp. 340–360, esp. pp. 350–351.
15 Peter Hatlie, The Monks and Monasteries of Constantinople ca. 350–850, Cambridge 2007, p. 166.
16 Kosmas und Damian (n. 1), p. 206. 17 Alice-Mary Talbot, “Pilgrimage to Healing Shrines: The Evidence of
Miracle Accounts”, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, LVI (2002), pp. 153–173, esp. p. 155. Matthew Dal Santo, Debating the Saints’ Cults in the Age of Gregory the Great, Oxford 2012, pp.t 159–173, esp. p. 160 (with bib- liography).
18 Despite the location outside the walls, which exposed the district to assaults, pillages and raids, the pleasant landscape and healthy envi- ronment made the estates of the proasteion attractive and a target for the aristocratic class: Symeonis Magistri et Logothetae Chronicon, Stephanus Wahlgren ed., Berolini et Novi Eboraci 2006, p. 242.
19 Liber Pontificalis, Louis Duchesne ed., Paris 1955, p. 507. With only nec- essary exceptions, the present-day version of the name: “in Cosmedin” will be used throughout the paper.
20 Richard Krautheimer, Wolfgang Frankl, Spencer Corbett, Corpus basil- icarum christianarum Romae. The Early Christian Basilicas of Rome (IV–IX Cent.), vol. II, Vatican 1959, pp. 300–301. Recently: Valentina Vincenti,
“L’Ara Maxima Herculis e S. Maria in Cosmedin. Note di topografia tardoantica”, in Ecclesiae Urbis, Atti del Congresso internazionale di studi sulle chiese di Roma (Roma, 4–10 settembre 2000), vol. I, Federico Guidobaldi and Alessandra Guiglia Guidobaldi eds., Città del Vaticano 2002, pp. 353–375, esp. pp. 364–375. Gemma Fusciello, Santa Maria in Cosmedin a Roma, Roma 2011, pp. 41–53 (with bibliography).
24
located in the suburbs. Eustathius himself acts as the dispensator of the charitable institution21. This latter fact reflects the actual cooperation between laymen and the Church in welfare administration or – to a broader extent – the reality of the involvement of the Byzantine authorities in the establishment and management of new ecclesiastical foundations, sub- sequently listed as diaconiae, in the main urban cen- tres of Italy22. Whilst Eustathius’ text is in Latin, the patrons’ names are undoubtedly Greek, evidence of a still vital Greek presence well into the 8th century.
When Hadrian I converted S. Maria in Cosmedin into a three aisled basilica with apses, his biogra- pher in the Liber Pontificalis played on the name “Cosmedin”, using it as if it meant something like ’well built’, ’well decorated’, or ’orderly’ (in Greek: kosmitos), a clear misunderstanding on the part of a Latin-speaking man – a learned man, whose knowledge, as one would have expected, was not broad enough to include the Kosmidion shrine of Constantinople.
The diaconia of S. Maria in Cosmedin was located in that area of the city of Rome which had most- ly been populated by Easterners since late antiq- uity. This quarter spread along the eastern bank of the Tiber, under the slopes of both the Palatine hill and the Aventine, and was significantly named Ripa Graeca. There traditionally gathered all those minorities considered by the autochthones as be- ing Greek-speakers – Graeci – , i.e. Greeks, Syrians, Egyptians, Sicilians, etc23. Thus, reading the well- known 8th-century Itinerary of Einsiedeln, we find that S. Maria in Cosmedin is called the “aeclesia
graecorum”, further evidence of its role as one of the most important churches belonging to the East- erners24.
Since, after 554, Byzantine forces finally recon- quered Rome, the newcomers (mainly military of- ficers and civil servants, but tradesmen as well) to some extent reinforced the foundation of the new churches and monasteries dedicated to eastern saints (Theodore, George, Sergius and Bacchus, Euphemia, etc.) across the Ripa Greca, the slopes of the Palatine, and the Aventine. Some place names of Constantinopolitan origin were imported as well, a phenomenon which eventually proved to be ephem- eral25 but which also affected the other two major centres of Byzantine Italy, i.e. Ravenna and Naples, although the latter only to a somewhat lesser degree. The Blachernae monastery of Constantinople, for instance, was reduplicated at Ravenna, probably during the first half of the 7th century, choosing an extramural area in the Caesarea district26, which might have recalled the location of the original shrine /Fig. 3/. The monastery at Ravenna was donated an altar cover by the exarch Theodore II, who ruled ca 678–687, and played an active part in the diplomatic appeasement between Pope Agatho (678–681) and the Emperor Constantine IV during the Monothelite crisis27. Theodore was later bur- ied, together with his wife Ageta, in the church he had richly endowed28. The information is provided by Andreas Agnellus, the 9th-century author of the Liber Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis, who was the abbot (hegoumenos) of our Blachernae monastery in Caesarea. 24
located in the suburbs. Eustathius himself acts as the dispensator of the charitable institution21. This latter fact reflects the actual cooperation between laymen and the Church in welfare administration or – to a broader extent – the reality of the involvement of the Byzantine authorities in the establishment and management of new ecclesiastical foundations, sub- sequently listed as diaconiae, in the main urban cen- tres of Italy22. Whilst Eustathius’ text is in Latin, the patrons’ names are undoubtedly Greek, evidence of a still vital Greek presence well into the 8th century.
When Hadrian I converted S. Maria in Cosmedin into a three aisled basilica with apses, his biogra- pher in the Liber Pontificalis played on the name “Cosmedin”, using it as if it meant something like ’well built’, ’well decorated’, or ’orderly’ (in Greek: kosmitos), a clear misunderstanding on the part of a Latin-speaking man – a learned man, whose knowledge, as one would have expected, was not broad enough to include the Kosmidion shrine of Constantinople.
The diaconia of S. Maria in Cosmedin was located in that area of the city of Rome which had most- ly been populated by Easterners since late antiq- uity. This quarter spread along the eastern bank of the Tiber, under the slopes of both the Palatine hill and the Aventine, and was significantly named Ripa Graeca. There traditionally gathered all those minorities considered by the autochthones as be- ing Greek-speakers – Graeci – , i.e. Greeks, Syrians, Egyptians, Sicilians, etc23. Thus, reading the well- known 8th-century Itinerary of Einsiedeln, we find that S. Maria in Cosmedin is called the “aeclesia
graecorum”, further evidence of its role as one of the most important churches belonging to the East- erners24.
Since, after 554, Byzantine forces finally recon- quered Rome, the newcomers (mainly military of- ficers and civil servants, but tradesmen as well) to some extent reinforced the foundation of the new churches and monasteries dedicated to eastern saints (Theodore, George, Sergius and Bacchus, Euphemia, etc.) across the Ripa Greca, the slopes of the Palatine, and the Aventine. Some place names of Constantinopolitan origin were imported as well, a phenomenon which eventually proved to be ephem- eral25 but which also affected the other two major centres of Byzantine Italy, i.e. Ravenna and Naples, although the latter only to a somewhat lesser degree. The Blachernae monastery of Constantinople, for instance, was reduplicated at Ravenna, probably during the first half of the 7th century, choosing an extramural area in the Caesarea district26, which might have recalled the location of the original shrine /Fig. 3/. The monastery at Ravenna was donated an altar cover by the exarch Theodore II, who ruled ca 678–687, and played an active part in the diplomatic appeasement between Pope Agatho (678–681) and the Emperor Constantine IV during the Monothelite crisis27. Theodore was later bur- ied, together with his wife Ageta, in the church he had richly endowed28. The information is provided by Andreas Agnellus, the 9th-century author of the Liber Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis, who was the abbot (hegoumenos) of our Blachernae monastery in Caesarea.
25
Symmetrical relationships between Constantino- ple and Ravenna are obviously not limited to the Blachernae monastery. As far as we are concerned, the Kosmidion also gave its name to a church ded- icated to the Virgin Mary in Ravenna, which, how- ever, was not a new foundation but derived from the conversion (reconciliatio) of the Arian Baptistery. The conversion of the former Arian building to the Catholic rite probably occurred around 560/561 or a little later29, preserving its dependence on the nearby church of St. Theodore, the former Arian cathedral (today S. Spirito). It is difficult to ascertain when the Arian Baptistery was actually separated from its cathedral to become an autonomous church, which was subsequently conceded to a monastic commu- nity of eastern origin /Figs. 3, 5/30.
What is certain is that the new dedication to S. Maria in Cosmedin is first attested in a document dating back to 767, in which a certain Eudocia made an endowment to the monastery31. Around 830, Ab- bot Andreas Agnellus’ Liber Pontificalis ascribes the conversion of the baptistery to his homonym Arch- bishop Agnellus (556–570). He tells us that it became the church of the monastery of the Virgin Mary, the so-called “Cosmi”, and considers it necessary to provide his readers with the same false etymological explanation used in Rome to account for the pecu- liar and unusual name Cosmedin, translating it as ’elegant’, ’harmonious’ like the world. For “cosmos is the word the Greeks use for ’world’ ” 32. The refer- ence to the linguistic discrepancy between Latin and Greek can be understood once again from the point of view of a Latin-speaker in the predominantly
21 Anna Maria Giuntella, “Gli spazi dell’assistenza e della meditazione”, in Roma nell’alto Medioevo, XLVIII Settimana di studio del Centro Ita- liano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo (27 aprile–1 maggio 2000), vol. II, Spoleto 2001, pp. 639–692, esp. p. 675, fig. 23. Bernard Bavant, “Le duché byzantin de Rome. Origine, durée et extension géographique”, Mélanges de l’Ecole française de Rome. Moyen-Age, Temps modernes, XCI/1 (1979), pp. 41–88, esp. p. 86.
22 Robert Coates-Stephens, “Byzantine Building Patronage in post-Re- conquest Rome”, in Les cités de l’Italie tardo-antique (IVe–VIe siècle). Institutions, économie, société, culture et religion, Massimiliano Ghilar- di, Christophe J. Goddard, Pierfrancesco Porena eds., Rome 2006, pp. 149–166, esp. pp. 163–164.
23 Individuals of ‘Greek’ origin in Ravenna seemingly belonged to the so-called Schola Graeca. The name is recorded for the first time in a papyrus dating back to the year 572. Jean-Marie Sansterre (Les moines grecs et orientaux à Rome aux époques byzantine et carolingienne, vol. II, Bruxelles 1982, pp. 102–104, note 388) underlined the unclear original nature and significance of the institution. As far as Ravenna is concer- ned, Salvatore Cosentino in his Storia dell’Italia bizantina (VI–XI secolo). Da Giustiniano ai Normanni, Bologna 2008, p. 68 considers the schola as an elite of learned Greek-speaking physicians.
24 See Stefano Del Lungo, Roma in età carolingia e gli scritti dell’Anonimo Augiense (Einsiedeln, Bibliotheca Monasterii Ordinis Sancti Benedicti, 326 [8 Nr. 13], IV, ff. 67v–86r), Roma 2004, pp. 61, 112.
25 Andrew J. Ekonomou, Byzantine Rome and the Greek Popes: Eastern Influences on Rome and the Papacy from Gregory the Great to Zacharias, A.D. 590–752, Plymouth 2007, pp. 42, 64, note 5.
26 See Paola Novara, “Una chiesa ravennate di epoca esarcale. Santa Maria ad Blachernas”, Romagna arte e storia, VII (1987), pp. 5–16.
27 Cosentino, Storia dell’Italia bizantina (n. 23), p. 93; Giorgio Ravegnani, Gli esarchi d’Italia, Roma 2011, pp. 80–81.
28 Agnelli Ravennatis, Liber Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis, Deborah Mau- skopf-Delyannis ed., Turnhout 2006, pp. 290–291, 339. Deborah Mau- skopf-Deliyannis, Ravenna in Late Antiquity, Cambridge 2010, p. 293.
29 Ibidem, pp. 178, 182. 30 Cosentino, Storia dell’Italia bizantina (n. 23), pp. 325, 362. 31 Friedrich Wilhelm Deichmann, Ravenna. Hauptstadt des spätantiken
Abendlandes, Band II. Kommentar, 1. Teil, Wiesbaden 1974, p. 252.; Le carte ravennati dei secoli ottavo e nono, Ruggero Benericetti ed., Faenza 2006, pp. 7–13.
32 Liber Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis (n. 28), p. 253.
2 / S. Maria in Cosmedin, plan and elevation of the west front of the pre sent-day church, showing the englobed columns of the late-antique portico
25
Symmetrical relationships between Constantino- ple and Ravenna are obviously not limited to the Blachernae monastery. As far as we are concerned, the Kosmidion also gave its name to a church ded- icated to the Virgin Mary in Ravenna, which, how- ever, was not a new foundation but derived from the conversion (reconciliatio) of the Arian Baptistery. The conversion of the former Arian building to the Catholic rite probably occurred around 560/561 or a little later29, preserving its dependence on the nearby church of St. Theodore, the former Arian cathedral (today S. Spirito). It is difficult to ascertain when the Arian Baptistery was actually separated from its cathedral to become an autonomous church, which was subsequently conceded to a monastic commu- nity of eastern origin /Figs. 3, 5/30.
What is certain is that the new dedication to S. Maria in Cosmedin is first attested in a document dating back to 767, in which a certain Eudocia made an endowment to the monastery31. Around 830, Ab- bot Andreas Agnellus’ Liber Pontificalis ascribes the conversion of the baptistery to his homonym Arch- bishop Agnellus (556–570). He tells us that it became the church of the monastery of the Virgin Mary, the so-called “Cosmi”, and considers it necessary to provide his readers with the same false etymological explanation used in Rome to account for the pecu- liar and unusual name Cosmedin, translating it as ’elegant’, ’harmonious’ like the world. For “cosmos is the word the Greeks use for ’world’” 32. The refer- ence to the linguistic discrepancy between Latin and Greek can be understood once again from the point of view of a Latin-speaker in the predominantly
21 Anna Maria Giuntella, “Gli spazi dell’assistenza e della meditazione”, in Roma nell’alto Medioevo, XLVIII Settimana di studio del Centro Ita- liano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo (27 aprile–1 maggio 2000), vol. II, Spoleto 2001, pp. 639–692, esp. p. 675, fig. 23. Bernard Bavant, “Le duché byzantin de Rome. Origine, durée et extension géographique”, Mélanges de l’Ecole française de Rome. Moyen-Age, Temps modernes, XCI/1 (1979), pp. 41–88, esp. p. 86.
22 Robert Coates-Stephens, “Byzantine Building Patronage in post-Re- conquest Rome”, in Les cités de l’Italie tardo-antique (IVeVV –VIeII siècle). Institutions, économie, société, culture et religion, Massimiliano Ghilar- di, Christophe J. Goddard, Pierfrancesco Porena eds., Rome 2006, pp. 149–166, esp. pp. 163–164.
23 Individuals of ‘Greek’ origin in Ravenna seemingly belonged to the so-called Schola Graeca. The name is recorded for the first time in a papyrus dating back to the year 572. Jean-Marie Sansterre (Les moines grecs et orientaux à Rome aux époques byzantine et carolingienne, vol. II, Bruxelles 1982, pp. 102–104, note 388) underlined the unclear original nature and significance of the institution. As far as Ravenna is concer- ned, Salvatore Cosentino in his Storia dell’Italia bizantina (VI–XI secolo). Da Giustiniano ai Normanni, Bologna 2008, p. 68 considers the schola as an elite of learned Greek-speaking physicians.
24 See Stefano Del Lungo, Roma in età carolingia e gli scritti dell’Anonimo Augiense (Einsiedeln, Bibliotheca Monasterii Ordinis Sancti Benedicti, 326 [8 Nr. 13], IV, ff. 67v–86r), Roma 2004, pp. 61, 112.
25 Andrew J. Ekonomou, Byzantine Rome and the Greek Popes: Eastern Influences on Rome and the Papacy from Gregory the Great to Zacharias, A.D. 590–752, Plymouth 2007, pp. 42, 64, note 5.
26 See Paola Novara, “Una chiesa ravennate di epoca esarcale. Santa Maria ad Blachernas”, Romagna arte e storia, VII (1987), pp. 5–16.
27 Cosentino, Storia dell’Italia bizantina (n. 23), p. 93; Giorgio Ravegnani, Gli esarchi d’Italia, Roma 2011, pp. 80–81.
28 Agnelli Ravennatis, Liber Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis, Deborah Mau- skopf-Delyannis ed., Turnhout 2006, pp. 290–291, 339. Deborah Mau- skopf-Deliyannis, Ravenna in Late Antiquity, Cambridge 2010, p. 293.
29 Ibidem, pp. 178, 182. 30 Cosentino, Storia dell’Italia bizantina (n. 23), pp. 325, 362. 31 Friedrich Wilhelm Deichmann, Ravenna. Hauptstadt des spätantiken
Abendlandes, Band II. Kommentar, 1. Teil, Wiesbaden 1974, p. 252.; Le carte ravennati dei secoli ottavo e nono, Ruggero Benericetti ed., Faenza 2006, pp. 7–13.
32 Liber Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis (n. 28), p. 253.
2 / S. Maria in Cosmedin, plan and elevation of the west front of the preof the present day churchsent-day church,
mnsshowing the englobed colum of the late-antique portico
26
Latin culture of 9th-century Ravenna. In all evidence, Kosmidion/Cosmedin was a name whose etymology was by now completely effaced.
S. Maria in Cosmedin in Ravenna, too, despite the lack of evidence, was probably a diaconia or, at least, a xenodocheion. The community of monks very likely benefited – as was the case of Eudocia’s endowment – from the patronage of the Greek-speaking aristocracy and from direct episcopal intervention. For instance, when Bishop Sergius (744–769), a staunch supporter of the autonomy of the local Church against Popes Stephen II and Paul I, came back to Ravenna around 757 after being imprisoned for three years in Rome, he went to celebrate the mass in the monastery which is called “Cosmiti” and to pray at St. Nicholas’ altar33. It seems therefore that some political or identity value was ascribed by Sergius to S. Maria in Cosmedin, or, at least, that the ambitious anti-Roman bishop felt secure in the monastery.
The evidence for a cult of St. Nicholas attached to S. Maria in Cosmedin should not be dismissed lightly. At Rome too, though much more later, Pope Nicholas I (858–867) annexed an episcopal residence
(secretarium) to S. Maria in Cosmedin, providing it with an oratory (that has since disappeared) named after his patron saint “Nicholas, the martyr of Christ”34. A possible reminiscence of the topogra- phy of Constantinople could therefore be taken into account. In the Byzantine capital, an independent monastery of St. Nicholas at Blachernae was severe- ly damaged during the Avaro-Persian siege of 626, together with that of Cosmas and Damian. The two complexes lay at a very short distance from each other. Officially, the Monastery of St. Nicholas was in fact included in the Blachernae district35. Thus, the memory of this faraway topography may have left some slight trace in the altars and oratories of St. Nicholas annexed to the two churches of S. Maria in Cosmedin at Rome and Ravenna /Fig. 6/.
If, so far, the sources had not reported a status of diaconia for the monastery of Ravenna, on the con- trary, S. Maria in Cosmedin at Naples can rely upon several 11th and 12th-century documents affirming its true nature as a charitable institution of oriental origin. The first ever mention of it is to be found in the Chronicon episcoporum of the Neapolitan Church,
3 / Plan of the city c. AD 600, Ravenna
26
Latin culture of 9th-century Ravenna. In all evidence, Kosmidion/Cosmedin was a name whose etymology was by now completely effaced.
S. Maria in Cosmedin in Ravenna, too, despite the lack of evidence, was probably a diaconia or, at least, a xenodocheion. The community of monks very likely benefited – as was the case of Eudocia’s endowment – from the patronage of the Greek-speaking aristocracy and from direct episcopal intervention. For instance, when Bishop Sergius (744–769), a staunch supporter of the autonomy of the local Church against Popes Stephen II and Paul I, came back to Ravenna around 757 after being imprisoned for three years in Rome, he went to celebrate the mass in the monastery which is called “Cosmiti” and to pray at St. Nicholas’ altar33. It seems therefore that some political or identity value was ascribed by Sergius to S. Maria in Cosmedin, or, at least, that the ambitious anti-Roman bishop felt secure in the monastery.
The evidence for a cult of St. Nicholas attached to S. Maria in Cosmedin should not be dismissed lightly. At Rome too, though much more later, Pope Nicholas I (858–867) annexed an episcopal residence
(secretarium) to S. Maria in Cosmedin, providing it with an oratory (that has since disappeared) named after his patron saint “Nicholas, the martyr of Christ”34. A possible reminiscence of the topogra- phy of Constantinople could therefore be taken into account. In the Byzantine capital, an independent monastery of St. Nicholas at Blachernae was severe- ly damaged during the Avaro-Persian siege of 626, together with that of Cosmas and Damian. The two complexes lay at a very short distance from each other. Officially, the Monastery of St. Nicholas was in fact included in the Blachernae district35. Thus, the memory of this faraway topography may have left some slight trace in the altars and oratories of St. Nicholas annexed to the two churches of S. Maria in Cosmedin at Rome and Ravenna /Fig. 6/.
If, so far, the sources had not reported a status of diaconia for the monastery of Ravenna, on the con- trary, S. Maria in Cosmedin at Naples can rely upon several 11th and 12th-century documents affirming its true nature as a charitable institution of oriental origin. The first ever mention of it is to be found in the Chronicon episcoporum of the Neapolitan Church,
3 / Plan of the city c. AD 600, Ravenna
27
very likely composed in the 840’s. There we are told that the relics of the 3rd-century Bishop Eustathius had recently been laid to rest in the altar of the church of S. Maria “que dicitur Cosmidi”36. Furthermore, a document dated 1017 mentions a plot of land be- longing to the “diaconia Sanctae Mariae Cosmidi”37. The church survived up to our own day as a diaconia with the name of Santa Maria di Porta Nuova, and was attributed to the original group of seven diaconiae of the early medieval Duchy of Naples /Fig. 4/38. As was often remarked, the vitality of such a kind of monk-managed charitable institution at Naples – attested since the time of Pope Gregory the Great (590–604) – was assured once again by the notable ’eastern’ features that the Neapolitan ecclesiastical administration still showed during the 10th century39. The evidence – for instance – of a bilingual litur- gy at Naples can be traced up to the 14th century: documents demonstrate that the primicerius of our S. Maria in Cosmedin, along with other Greek-speak- ing clergies, still has the duty to read the holy writ in Greek in the cathedral during Holy Saturday and the Easter-day40.
33 Liber Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis (n. 28), pp. 335–336. On Bishop Sergius see: Antonio Carile, Materiali di storia bizantina, Bologna 1994, p. 208.
34 Liber Pontificalis, vol. II, Louis Duchesne ed., Paris 1955, p. 161. Cf. Vincenti, “L’Ara Maxima Herculis e S. Maria in Cosmedin” (n. 20), pp. 363–364.
35 Janin, Les églises et les monastères (n. 14), pp. 369–370. 36 Bartolommeo Capasso, Monumenta ad neapolitani ducatus historiam
pertinentia etc., vol. I, Napoli 1881–1882 (reprint by Rosaria Pilone, Salerno 2008), p. 236.
37 Ibidem, p. 234, note 377. 38 Domenico Ambrasi, “Le diaconie a Napoli nell’alto medioevo”,
Campania sacra, XI–XII (1980–1981), pp. 45–61, esp. pp. 50–51. See also Paul Arthur, Naples. From Roman Town to City-State, London 2002, pp. 68–69. Description of the present-day baroque building in: Emilio Ricciardi, “I barnabiti a Napoli e la chiesa di S. Maria in Cosmedin a Portanova”, Arte Lombarda, CXXXIV/1 (2002), pp. 116–126.
39 Thomas Granier, “Topografia religiosa e produzione agiografica nei se- coli IX e X”, in Napoli nel medioevo. I. Segni culturali di una città, Galatina 2007, pp. 41–58, esp. p. 55.
40 Ambrasi, “Le diaconie a Napoli” (n. 38), pp. 56–57.
4 / Plan of the city during the 7th century, Naples
27
very likely composed in the 840’s. There we are told that the relics of the 3rd-century Bishop Eustathius had recently been laid to rest in the altar of the church of S. Maria “que dicitur Cosmidi”36. Furthermore, a document dated 1017 mentions a plot of land be- longing to the “diaconia Sanctae Mariae Cosmidi”37. The church survived up to our own day as a diaconia with the name of Santa Maria di Porta Nuova, and was attributed to the original group of seven diaconiae of the early medieval Duchy of Naples /Fig. 4/38. As was often remarked, the vitality of such a kind of monk-managed charitable institution at Naples – attested since the time of Pope Gregory the Great (590–604) – was assured once again by the notable ’eastern’ features that the Neapolitan ecclesiastical administration still showed during the 10th century39. The evidence – for instance – of a bilingual litur- gy at Naples can be traced up to the 14th century: documents demonstrate that the primicerius of our S. Maria in Cosmedin, along with other Greek-speak- ing clergies, still has the duty to read the holy writ in Greek in the cathedral during Holy Saturday and the Easter-day40.
33 Liber Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis (n. 28), pp. 335–336. On Bishop Sergius see: Antonio Carile, Materiali di storia bizantina, Bologna 1994, p. 208.
34 Liber Pontificalis, vol. II, Louis Duchesne ed., Paris 1955, p. 161. Cf. Vincenti, “L’Ara Maxima Herculis e S. Maria in Cosmedin” (n. 20), pp. 363–364.
35 Janin, Les églises et les monastères (n. 14), pp. 369–370. 36 Bartolommeo Capasso, Monumenta ad neapolitani ducatus historiam
pertinentia etc., vol. I, Napoli 1881–1882 (reprint by Rosaria Pilone, Salerno 2008), p. 236.
37 Ibidem, p. 234, note 377. 38 Domenico Ambrasi, “Le diaconie a Napoli nell’alto medioevo”,
Campania sacra, XI–XII (1980–1981), pp. 45–61, esp. pp. 50–51. See also Paul Arthur, Naples. From Roman Town to City-State, London 2002, pp. 68–69. Description of the present-day baroque building in: Emilio Ricciardi, “I barnabiti a Napoli e la chiesa di S. Maria in Cosmedin a Portanova”, Arte Lombarda, CXXXIV/1 (2002), pp. 116–126.
39 Thomas Granier, “Topografia religiosa e produzione agiografica nei se- coli IX e X”, in Napoli nel medioevo. I. Segni culturali di una città, Galatina 2007, pp. 41–58, esp. p. 55.
40 Ambrasi, “Le diaconie a Napoli” (n. 38), pp. 56–57.
4 / Plan of the city during the 7th century, Naples
28
Conclusion
A recent article by Phil Booth provided us with an in-depth investigation of the multi-doctrinal per- spectives emerging from the exegesis of the text of the Miracles of Cosmas and Damian. He showed how the pilgrims and the individuals benefiting from the healing practices or the miracles of the two physician saints belonged to different doctrinal orientations. Apparently, while distinctions were often made throughout the texts between ortho- dox and heretics or even pagans, the authors of the different collections of miracles’ tales were of different extraction and opinions. Mainly in the first stages of the composition of the Miracles’ texts, an anti- Chalce donian element seems evident.
Once we assume the likely Syrian origin of at least part of the original community at Kosmidion in the 5th century, the influence of the Miaphysite doctrines can be easily understood. Nevertheless, as Booth rightly indicated, the earlier hagiographic texts of the Miracles should have undergone substantial revi- sions and remodelling after the imperial intervention in the management of the Anargyroi cult, i.e. after the creation of the two great shrines at Constantinople by Justinian and Justin II. The existence of various doctrinal elements in the accounts of the Miracles relating to the shrine at Constanti nople (especially in the Coptic corpus published by Rupprecht in 1935) is a probable reflection of the multifaceted Kosmidion community and mark of the somewhat ambiguous religious politics adopted by Justinian I. In the cap- ital, the Anargyroi cult was definitely enhanced as an imperial one, faithfully reflecting the very nature of the Emperor’s religious way of thinking41. These policies probably came to an abrupt end with Justin II, who publicly displayed a harsh attitude towards non-Chalcedonians, even going as far as occasional persecution.
After a long period in which Emperors like Maurice and Phocas avoided raising the issue of the doctrinal controversies, in 616 Heraclius made a first – short-lived – attempt at reconcilia- tion between Chalcedonians and anti-Chalcedo- nians. Heraclius aimed to restore religious unity, being pressed by the difficulties of foreign policy and, generally speaking, by the centrifugal trends of the anti-Chalcedonians42. The attempt at union lead to negative reactions on the part of both the sides due to its monenergistic formula. In particular, the union found its tireless opponents in the most active Chalcedonians personalities, among whom we find Sophronius the Sophist, the future Patriarch of Jerusalem. He wrote, some time after 603, the Account of the Miracles of St. Cyrus and John, the two physician saints who operated at their own shrine at Menouthis/Abukir in Egypt43. Sophronius’ work, written after his eye had been healed thanks to the miraculous intervention of the two saints, is well ac- quainted with some of the earlier texts of the Mira- cles of Cosmas and Damian. A new type of rhetoric, nevertheless, inspired Sophronius. When they are said to be ’heretics’, i.e. anti-Chalcedonians, Cyrus and John’s patients have to repent before they can be healed44. Thus, the various and syncretistic am- bience of the first miracles of Cosmas and Damian and of the pilgrimage at Kosmidion appears to be by now totally a thing of the past.
The disapproval among the Chalcedonian milieu of the ’conciliatory’ religious politics of Heraclius together with the propaganda of Chalcedonian activists like Sophronius against the compromiser politic of the Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople, a man of Syrian origin, and probably the son of Jacobite parents45. Many Syrian Dyophysites clerics and monks fled from Syria and the city of Jerusalem
5 / Ravenna, the churches of St. Theodore and S. Maria in Cosmedin
6 / Diagram showing the transmission of place names and cults from Constantinople to Italy, drawing by the author
28
Conclusion
A recent article by Phil Booth provided us with an in-depth investigation of the multi-doctrinal per- spectives emerging from the exegesis of the text of the Miracles of Cosmas and Damian. He showed how the pilgrims and the individuals benefiting from the healing practices or the miracles of the two physician saints belonged to different doctrinal orientations. Apparently, while distinctions were often made throughout the texts between ortho- dox and heretics or even pagans, the authors of the different collections of miracles’ tales were of different extraction and opinions. Mainly in the first stages of the composition of the Miracles’ texts, an anti-Chalcedonian element seems evident.
Once we assume the likely Syrian origin of at least part of the original community at Kosmidion in the 5th century, the influence of the Miaphysite doctrines can be easily understood. Nevertheless, as Booth rightly indicated, the earlier hagiographic texts of the Miracles should have undergone substantial revi- sions and remodelling after the imperial intervention in the management of the Anargyroi cult, i.e. after the creation of the two great shrines at Constantinople by Justinian and Justin II. The existence of various doctrinal elements in the accounts of the Miracles relating to the shrine at Constantinople (especially in the Coptic corpus published by Rupprecht in 1935) is a probable reflection of the multifaceted Kosmidion community and mark of the somewhat ambiguous religious politics adopted by Justinian I. In the cap- ital, the Anargyroi cult was definitely enhanced as an imperial one, faithfully reflecting the very nature of the Emperor’s religious way of thinking41. These policies probably came to an abrupt end with Justin II, who publicly displayed a harsh attitude towards non-Chalcedonians, even going as far as occasional persecution.
After a long period in which Emperors like Maurice and Phocas avoided raising the issue of the doctrinal controversies, in 616 Heraclius made a first – short-lived – attempt at reconcilia- tion between Chalcedonians and anti-Chalcedo- nians. Heraclius aimed to restore religious unity, being pressed by the difficulties of foreign policy and, generally speaking, by the centrifugal trends of the anti-Chalcedonians42. The attempt at union lead to negative reactions on the part of both the sides due to its monenergistic formula. In particular, the union found its tireless opponents in the most active Chalcedonians personalities, among whom we find Sophronius the Sophist, the future Patriarch of Jerusalem. He wrote, some time after 603, the Account of the Miracles of St. Cyrus and John, the two physician saints who operated at their own shrine at Menouthis/Abukir in Egypt43. Sophronius’ work, written after his eye had been healed thanks to the miraculous intervention of the two saints, is well ac- quainted with some of the earlier texts of the Mira- cles of Cosmas and Damian. A new type of rhetoric, nevertheless, inspired Sophronius. When they are said to be ’heretics’, i.e. anti-Chalcedonians, Cyrus and John’s patients have to repent before they can be healed44. Thus, the various and syncretistic am- bience of the first miracles of Cosmas and Damian and of the pilgrimage at Kosmidion appears to be by now totally a thing of the past.
The disapproval among the Chalcedonian milieu of the ’conciliatory’ religious politics of Heraclius together with the propaganda of Chalcedonian activists like Sophronius against the compromiser politic of the Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople, a man of Syrian origin, and probably the son of Jacobite parents45. Many Syrian Dyophysites clerics and monks fled from Syria and the city of Jerusalem
5 / Ravenna, the churches of St. Theodore and S. Maria in Cosmedin
6 / Diagram showing the transmission of place names and cults from Constantinople to Italy, drawing by the author
29
occupied by the Persians in 614, which shocked all the contemporaries enormously46. They went to set- tle definitively in Italy, substantially increasing the number of the existing ’Greek’ ecclesiastic commu- nity. In Italy, the Roman Church cooperated closely with these ’eastern’ monastic communities in severe- ly condemning the monoenergist compromise47. Often substantially in agreement with the doctrinal position of the Church of Rome, the authorities of the Exarchate, and the Duchies as well, provided all the opponents of the religious politics of Constantinople with a safe refuge.
This might be the historical framework in which a dissolution of the original monastic community of the Kosmidion could have taken place. The shocking episode of the year 626, i.e. the looting of the shrine by the Avaro-Persian besiegers, should be taken into account as a further discouraging element.
The Italian ’replicas’ of the Kosmidion of Con- stantinople were probably the result of a large-scale emigration of monks from the main shrine of Cosmas and Damian at Constantinople. They were well experienced in the management of hospitals and charitable activity for the benefit and welfare of the impoverished population of the great cities. In Italy, at least one of the main features of the original Kos- midion was preserved: the new diaconiae of S. Maria in Cosmedin were probably led by a community of monks who took care of the poor and offered hos- pitality and food thanks mainly to the patronage of wealthy individuals. The monks carried out the normal incumbencies of the diakonitai. They decided to settle in the three main centres of the Exarchate of Italy, i.e. the capital Ravenna and the duchies of Rome and Naples. Once arrived, they met the flour- ishing communities of Greek-speaking Easterners, ready to become an active part of them.
41 Booth, “Orthodox and Heretic” (n. 7), pp. 118–120. 42 The conciliatory policy was promoted in the following years by means
of recurrent subscriptions of union documents by some anti-Chalcedo- nians in Syria and Egypt: Sophronius of Jerusalem and Seventh-Century Heresy: The Synodical Letter and Other Documents, Pauline Allen ed., Oxford 2009, p. 24ff.
43 Ibidem, p. 18. 44 Booth, “Orthodox and Heretic” (n. 7), p. 123. 45 Cyril Hovorun, Will, Action and Freedom. Christological Controversies in
the Seventh Century, Leiden-Boston 2008, p. 56. 46 Kaegi, Heraclius (n. 11), p. 79ff. 47 Sophronius of Jerusalem (n. 42), pp. 18–19.
29
occupied by the Persians in 614, which shocked all the contemporaries enormously46. They went to set- tle definitively in Italy, substantially increasing the number of the existing ’Greek’ ecclesiastic commu- nity. In Italy, the Roman Church cooperated closely with these ’eastern’ monastic communities in severe- ly condemning the monoenergist compromise47. Often substantially in agreement with the doctrinal position of the Church of Rome, the authorities of the Exarchate, and the Duchies as well, provided all the opponents of the religious politics of Constantinople with a safe refuge.
This might be the historical framework in which a dissolution of the original monastic community of the Kosmidion could have taken place. The shocking episode of the year 626, i.e. the looting of the shrine by the Avaro-Persian besiegers, should be taken into account as a further discouraging element.
The Italian ’replicas’ of the Kosmidion of Con- stantinople were probably the result of a large-scale emigration of monks from the main shrine of Cosmas and Damian at Constantinople. They were well experienced in the management of hospitals and charitable activity for the benefit and welfare of the impoverished population of the great cities. In Italy, at least one of the main features of the original Kos- midion was preserved: the new diaconiae of S. Maria in Cosmedin were probably led by a community of monks who took care of the poor and offered hos- pitality and food thanks mainly to the patronage of wealthy individuals. The monks carried out the normal incumbencies of the diakonitai. They decided to settle in the three main centres of the Exarchate of Italy, i.e. the capital Ravenna and the duchies of Rome and Naples. Once arrived, they met the flour- ishing communities of Greek-speaking Easterners, ready to become an active part of them.
41 Booth, “Orthodox and Heretic” (n. 7), pp. 118–120. 42 The conciliatory policy was promoted in the following years by means
of recurrent subscriptions of union documents by some anti-Chalcedo- nians in Syria and Egypt: Sophronius of Jerusalem and Seventh-Century Heresy: The Synodical Letter and Other Documents, Pauline Allen ed., Oxford 2009, p. 24ff.
43 Ibidem, p. 18. 44 Booth, “Orthodox and Heretic” (n. 7), p. 123. 45 Cyril Hovorun, Will, Action and Freedom. Christological Controversies in
the Seventh Century, Leiden-Boston 2008, p. 56. 46 Kaegi, Heraclius (n. 11), p. 79ff. 47 Sophronius of Jerusalem (n. 42), pp. 18–19.
30
What emerges immediately when analysing the phenomenon of the transfer of the name Kosmi- dion into the Exarchate of Italy is the lack of con- nection between the Italian diaconiae of S. Maria in Cosmedin and the cult of the Physician saints, in Rome, Ravenna and Naples alike. The name Ko- smidion /Cosmedin was consequently deprived of its original and basic meaning. If anything survived from the Constantinopolitan motherhouse, it is the true establishment as diaconiae of the three churches devoted to S. Maria in Cosmedin on Italian soil. Apparently, the migrant diakonitai monks who gave origin to the Italian diaspora of the Kosmidion sim- ply wanted to preserve the Constantinopolitan name as a mark of identity for their community. The er- roneous understanding of the name’s meaning in a mainly Latin-speaking cultural environment played its role as well. Kosmidion/Cosmedin evidently be- came popular thanks to its mistaken but suggestive interpretation as ’ornament’ or ’adorned’. It would be intriguing to imagine that the monks, since they lost the bond with their patron saints Cosmas and Damian, found in the place-names the most suitable way to reassert, nostalgically, their provenance from Constantinople.
Alessandro Taddei Scuola di Lettere e Beni culturali Università di Bologna alessandro.taddei2@unibo.it
30
What emerges immediately when analysing the phenomenon of the transfer of the name Kosmi- dion into the Exarchate of Italy is the lack of con- nection between the Italian diaconiae of S. Maria in Cosmedin and the cult of the Physician saints, in Rome, Ravenna and Naples alike. The name Ko- smidion/Cosmedin was consequently deprived of its original and basic meaning. If anything survived from the Constantinopolitan motherhouse, it is the true establishment as diaconiae of the three churches devoted to S. Maria in Cosmedin on Italian soil. Apparently, the migrant diakonitai monks who gave origin to the Italian diaspora of the Kosmidion sim- ply wanted to preserve the Constantinopolitan name as a mark of identity for their community. The er- roneous understanding of the name’s meaning in a mainly Latin-speaking cultural environment played its role as well. Kosmidion/Cosmedin evidently be- came popular thanks to its mistaken but suggestive interpretation as ’ornament’ or ’adorned’. It would be intriguing to imagine that the monks, since they lost the bond with their patron saints Cosmas and Damian, found in the place-names the most suitable way to reassert, nostalgically, their provenance from Constantinople.
Alessandro Taddei Scuola di Lettere e Beni culturali Università di Bologna alessandro.taddei2@unibo.it
31
SUMMARY
Putování osob a jmen. Kosmidion v Konstantinopoli a jeho italské repliky
První svatyn v Konstantinopoli zasvcená sva- tým Kosmovi a Damiánovi, byla zaloena pravd- podobn v prbhu posledních deseti le tí 5. sto letí. Stála v soukromé pedmstské usedlosti zvané ta Paoulines, na severu nejslavnjší tvrti Blachernae, podél levého behu Zlatého rohu. Její pesná lokaliza- ce stále není známa. Spolen s kostelem zasvceným dvma svatým lékam zde byla zaloena i kláš- terní komunita. Ta byla povena pomocí a léka- skou péí o jednotlivce ze všech spoleenských tíd. Svatyn byla bohat pestavna za císae Justiniá- na (527–565). Ji v letech 623 a 626, kdy avarsko-slo- vanské kmeny obléhaly hlavní msto, byla ván poškozena. Chrám Kosmy a Damiána si prošel ob- dobím úpadku, trvajícím a do doby vlády císae Michaela IV. (1034–1041), který si jej vybral jako mís- to odpoinku v ústranní. Lidový název komplexu, Kosmidion, je doloen v byzantských pramenech a od poloviny 9. století. Latinská verze názvu Kosmi- dion je však velkou mrou atribuována tem nov zaloeným chrámm na území bývalého byzantské- ho exarchátu v Itálii, pesnji eeno v hlavním mst v Ravenn a ve dvou vévodstvích v ím a v Neapo- li. Tyto ti kostely byly pojmenovány S. Maria in Cos- medin (tj. Kosmidion). Písemné prameny, které se k nim vztahují, se datují do 8. století. Jejich zaloení je však pravdpodobn nutné piíst dívjšímu datu. První diaspora mnich se zde usadila po dramatic- kých událostech v roce 626. V italských replikách Kosmidionu u není ádné spojení s kultem Kosmy a Damiána. Ten byl evidentn nahrazen kultem Mat- ky Boí. Všechny ti chrámy byly pvodn ovlá- dány východními mnišskými komunitami a ecky mluvícím klérem. Mniši zasvcení charitativní in- nosti zajistili jistou vitalitu jejich institucí dokonce i po skonení byzantské vlády v Itálii.
31
SUMMARY
Putování osob a jmen. Kosmidion v Konstantinopoli a jeho italské repliky