Images of Conflict - The art of Anti Judaism in 5th

century Rome By Geri Parlby

Sixteen centuries ago St Augustine of Hippo one of the great Fathers of the Christian Church wrote these damning lines:

‘The Jew carried the book from which the Christian takes his faith.

They have become our librarians, like slaves who carry books behind

their masters; the slaves gain no profit by their carrying, but the masters

profit by their reading’.1

With just a few eloquently chosen words Augustine dismissed over a thousand years of Judaism turning the ancient faith into an obsolete religion fit only to serve the needs of the new Christian church.

Despite this quote and his other equally negative observations on Judaism, some scholars suggest that Augustine was a moderate when compared to some of his contemporaries.2 The analysis of the polemical writingsof the early Church Fathers is a complex and much debated topic and it is not my intention to throw another log onto this slow burning bonfire of controversy. My interest lies instead with a rather more subtle propaganda tool, that of monumental art in the early Churches of Rome.

Before looking more closely at the rapidly developing programme of art of the early Christian Church, it may be helpful to set the scene both historically and politically. In the early decades of the fourth centuryChristianity had, thanks to the emperor Constantine, been rather unexpectedly catapulted into the forefront of the Roman Empire’s range of multi faiths. Not only did the new emperor issue the Edict of Milan in 313 which ordered religious tolerance for all faiths

1

throughout the empire, but he also proclaimed himself tobe a Christian convert. Throughout his rule, Constantine supported the Church financially, built basilicas, granted privileges to clergy, promoted Christians to high office and returned property confiscated during the persecutions. However, this sudden surge of power for the Christian Church came witha flip side. As Christianity grew ever more powerful across the empire so also did the hostility to the Jewish faith that had preceded it.

Despite his campaign for religious toleration it seems the emperor himself may have helped fan the flames of anti-Judaism. At the Council of Nicaea in 325 he instigated the abandonment of the Jewish system of calculating the date of the Passover as a way of fixing the date of Easter. This rejection of an integral link between the two faiths is said to have marked the final step in separating Christianity from Judaism.

In a letter explaining the Council’s decision the emperor is said to have written his own damning indictment on Judaism:

‘It appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy feast we should follow the practice of the Jews, who have impiously defiled their hands with enormous sin, and are, therefore, deservedly afflicted with blindness of soul…….. Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have received from our Saviour a different way’.3

Despite their hostility to Judaism it was impossible forchurch leaders during the reign of Constantine and beyond to completely ignore Christianity’s own roots in the Jewish religion. Indeed the ever resourceful Damasus (366-384), who became Pope three decades after the death of Constantine, found a way to make this history work in a positive way in order to promote the religious significance of his city. He developed the

2

details of an earlier legend that the apostles Peter andPaul had been friends and had both chosen to end their days as martyrs in Rome where their relics remained.

These two saints were turned into figureheads for the gentile and Jewish roots of the Church, St Peter for theJews and St Paul for the gentiles. Their dual images, often portrayed in a warm embrace, conveyed an essentialtenet of church history: that the Christian empire was established primarily through the combined efforts of the two chief apostles who had brought both Jews and gentiles into the Christian faith. By the fifth centuryPeter and Paul were taking pride of place in the decorative schemes of the city’s newest church buildings, exhibiting a brotherly bond that in reality had almost certainly never existed.

Whilst Damasus manipulated history in order to turn Romeinto the first city of Christendom, the emperor Theodosius I (379-95) was advancing his plans to make Christianity the sole legal religion of the whole Roman Empire. With Christianity’s dominance came Judaism’s crisis, no longer referred to as a religio it became relegated to the category of a superstitio with Jews forbidden from actively proselytizing or intermarrying with Christians.4

Then in 410 the unthinkable happened, after 800 years ofinvincibility, Rome was sacked by the barbarian Visigoths leaving the shock waves to reverberate across the entire Roman Empire. Over the next two decades the city struggled to recover physically and emotionally. The western emperor Honorius had abandoned Rome for Ravenna even before the invasion, and it was left to thePope to bring the city back to life and instil a new orthodoxy within the Roman church. During this time of re-growth a new and magnificent basilica church was built and funded by a mysterious presbyter called Peter the Illyrian. The church, of Santa Sabina was built between 422 and 432 and although the original mosaics ofthe triumphal arch and the apse have not survived there

3

are still remnants of the original mosaic dedicatory inscription on the inside of the entrance wall.5

A translation of the inscription reads:

‘When Celestinus held the highest apostolic throne and shone forth gloriously as the foremost bishop of the whole world, a presbyter

of the city, Illyrian by birth, named Peter and worthy of that great

name, established this building at which you look in wonder. From his earliest

years he was brought up in the hall of Christ - rich to the poor, poor to

himself, one who shunned the good things of life on earth and deserved to hope for the

life to come’.

Celestine may have been Pope, but it was Peter the presbyter who paid for the church building and commissioned its decorative designs. The dedication panel inscribed in his honour is unusual, but what is even more intriguing are the two female figures that flank the inscription.6 Heavily veiled and draped in dark coloured robes and holding open books they stand above the words Ecclesia ex Circumcisione and Ecclesia ex Gentibus translated from the Latin as the Church from the Circumcised and the Church from the Gentiles.

4

F

Fig 1. Ecclesia Ex Circumcisione and Ecclesia Ex Gentibus part of the dedicatory mosaic from Santa SabinaChurch, Rome. Photo 'Fr Lawrence Lew, O.P.' Plate

Although the women appear at first sight to be identical, on closer inspection there are some distinct differences. The figure of Ecclesia ex Gentibus on the right is depicted wearing a white padded head roll whileher mantle, with its ends decorated with gold embroidery, is loosely draped over it in the traditionalRoman manner. In her left hand she holds a folded whitenapkin or mappa beneath an open book.7 Although the text on the book is illegible, it appears to represent astyle of cursive writing with the pages stitched together in a way that indicates that the book is bound between a wooden book cover. With her right hand she has two fingers extended pointing toward the book.

The figure of Ecclesia ex Circumcisione on the left side wearsa hooded mantle pinned to a white bonnet worn underneath. The ends of her mantle are decorated with gold oval panels with a black cross outlined inside.8 In

5

her left hand she holds a book with the pages stitched inside a leather binding. The text, also illegible, is more spaced in the style of Semitic writing. Like her fellow ecclesia she is also gesturing toward the book withher right hand. Extended pointing figures are usually interpreted as a gesture of speech suggesting that the women are expounding on the contents of their respectivebooks – the Old and New Testaments.

Although there are no other examples of female figures similarly identified, most scholars agree that the womenare intended to represent personifications of the Churchof the Gentiles and the Church of the Circumcised, a composition alluding to the Jewish and Gentile origins of the Universal Church.9

This is a puzzling interpretation in the light of Peter and Pauls’ role as symbols of the Jewish and Gentile roots of the Church. Indeed there is evidence that thetwo apostles were originally depicted standing above thefemale figures.10

It seems unlikely that Peter would have felt the need tore-emphasise Christianity’s ethnic roots with a second set of figures. So rather than being a replacement for Peter and Paul perhaps the ecclesiae figures at Santa Sabina were added to the dedicatory panel to acknowledgethe ancestry of Peter the Illyrian himself. The dedication states that from his ‘earliest years he (Peter) was brought up in the hall of Christ’. The implication being that Peter had not been born a Christian and that his family had been converted, possibly from Judaism, when he was still a child.11 The figures of Ecclesia ex Gentibus and Ecclesia ex Circumcisione could therefore be seen as symbols of Peter’s own roots in thecommunities of the uncircumcised gentiles and the circumcised Jews. Rather than symbolising one of the roots of the Christian Church, Ecclesia ex Circumcisione mightmore accurately be interpreted as an early version of the medieval figure of Synagoga. Ecclesia and Synagoga were twin female sculptures that became favoured motifs on cathedral facades in medieval Europe. Whilst the Ecclesia

6

figure was depicted crowned and holding a battle standard and chalice, Synagoga in contrast was blindfolded and dejected, holding a broken staff and dropping the tablets of the law.12 Indeed Peter’s ecclesiae figures may have been designed toconvey an equally controversial visual message. Their veiling is heavy and restricting Ecclesia ex Circumcisione wears the style of hooded mantle adopted by widows in theeastern empire. Ecclesia ex Gentibus’ dark coloured robe is the typical dress of a widowed Roman matron. Perhaps the Illyrian priest was subtly bewailing the increasing rift between the two faiths.

By the time the mosaics of Santa Sabina had been created, alongside all the legal restrictions that were being enforced, Roman Jews were now being publicly labelled ‘beasts and madmen’, with the Jewish populationin the city being systematically suppressed.13

Just a few years after the completion of Santa Sabina, during the reign of the new Pope Sixtus III (432-440), work commenced on a magnificent new papal basilica on the summit of the Esquiline Hill. On completion it wassaid to have been named after Mary, Rome’s first church to be dedicated to mother of Jesus. Nowadays it is known as Santa Maria Maggiore.14

Many scholars maintain that the church’s decorative scheme was designed to celebrate Mary’s new role as Theotokos following on from the rulings of the Council ofEphesus in 431.15 Others suggest that it was actually intended as a public announcement of papal power in the aftermath of Alaric’s Sack of Rome in 410 and the retreat of the western emperor to Ravenna.16

A far more controversial viewpoint has been presented byfeminist theologian and historian Margaret Miles. She maintains that rather than a tribute to Mary, the artists of S. Maria Maggiore had been tasked with designing a mosaic programme with a clear message of anti-Jewishness. She sees the anti Jewish message

7

portrayed in the nave mosaics, whereas I believe that the scenes depicted on the triumphal arch carry an even more blatant condemnation of Judaism (fig 2).17

The surviving mosaics that decorate the nave all featureepisodes from the Old Testament.18 On the left wall facing the altar are key moments from the lives of Abraham and Jacob, whilst on the right wall are scenes featuring Moses and Joshua. The principal players in these mosaics are Melchizedek, the righteous priest king, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and Joshua. Interestingly, each of these characters has been identified by early Christian writers as ‘types’ or prefigurations of Christ.19

Miles maintains that the nave mosaics were designed as apictorial indication that the sole purpose of the HebrewBible was as a precursor to Christianity, an illustratedversion of Augustine’s ideas of the ‘The Jews as librarians for Christianity’. She also sees the nave mosaics as an introduction to the moment of Christ’s incarnation depicted on the triumphal arch. Churchgoerswould be able to follow the story of Christianity and its ultimate climax as they walked down the aisle towardthe altar.

Whilst I agree in part with Miles’ hypothesis, I also believe that the message of the arch is more complex andfar more aligned to the Roman civic tradition of using triumphal arches to commemorate some extraordinary political event such as the defeat of their enemies.20

8

Fig 2 Triumphal arch, St Maria Maggiore, Rome. Photo © Holly Hayes Art History Images. More detailed images can be viewed at http://www.flickr.com/photos/geri-parlby. Plate.

Centuries of restoration work and conflicting texts haveobliterated the original meaning of the St Maria Maggiore triumphal arch and apse mosaics. However a clue as to the intended design of the arch lies with theconfusing addition of two mysterious female figures thathave, at various times in their history, both been identified as images of the Virgin Mary.

The first figure dressed in elaborate gold and bejewelled robes appears in four different scenes identified as the annunciation, adoration, escape into Egypt and presentation in the temple. The second figurein contrast is heavily veiled and draped and she appearsalong with her more sumptuously dressed counterpart in the presentation and adoration scenes (fig 3).

9

Fig 3 a & b Mystery women from the St Maria Maggiore triumphal arch.  J. Wilpert (1916) Die römischen Mosaiken und Malereien der kirchlichen Bauten vom IV. bis XIII. Jahrhundert. In-Text.

Theories as to the identities of the two women abound, however I believe the clearest clue as to who they were intended to represent lies just a few yards away in the nave mosaics. Here in two separate panels we find wedding scenes featuring the Old Testament figures of Rachel and Zipporah both dressed in a near identical fashion to the ‘woman in gold’ from the triumphal arch. What is especially striking about the similarity of their appearance is that like their male counterparts both women had also been identified by early Christian writers as ‘types’ or prefigurations. Rather than symbolising a person, they were both said to have been prefigurations of Ecclesia the Church.

The mosaic panels in the nave are divided into two levels and the one that features Rachel shows her first alongside her father Laban and her older sister Leah, Jacob’s first wife. This is the moment when Jacob demands the hand of Rachel having been first tricked into marrying Leah by Laban. In the partially damaged wedding scene below, Rachel and Jacob are finally unitedin marriage (fig 4).

10

Fig 4 Above: Jacob demanding the hand of Rachel: Below Rachel and Jacob marry.  Nave mosaic, St Maria Maggiore,Rome.  J. Wilpert (1916) Die römischen Mosaiken und Malereien der kirchlichen Bauten vom IV. bis XIII. Jahrhundert. In Text

On the north east side of the nave Zipporah, the daughter Jethro, is depicted during her rather elaboratemarriage ceremony to Moses. She is dressed in the samestyle as both ‘the woman in gold’ and Rachel (fig. 5).21

F

11

F

12

13

Fig 5 Wedding of Moses and Zipporah, nave mosaic, St Maria Maggiore, Rome.  J. Wilpert (1916) Die römischen Mosaiken und Malereien der kirchlichen Bauten vom IV. bis XIII. Jahrhundert. In Text

The robes worn by the three women appear to be almost identical to the type of wedding apparel traditionally worn by Roman women in the 4th and 5th centuries.

A handful of commemorative gold glass bowls dated to thesame period feature a bride and groom being crowned as part of the wedding ceremony. Although they only show the figures from the waist upwards it is possible to seethat the brides are dressed in a similar style to the S.Maria Maggiore women.22 An even clearer example of wedding finery can be found on the magnificent 'ProjectaCasket'. This beautifully embellished silver gilt toilet casket dated to around 380 and now in the BritishMuseum, is said to have been a wedding gift for a wealthy Christian woman named Projecta who is depicted on the lid alongside her new husband.23

In the light of this evidence I suggest an entirely new reading for the mosaic cycle at S. Maria Maggiore, one that takes us back to the writings of two theologians from the second and third centuries:

14

The first is the early Christian apologist Justin Martyr(100-165) who saw the story of Jacob’s trials and tribulations as a precursor to the life of Christ. In his ‘Dialogue with Trypho the Jew’ he wrote

‘The marriages of Jacob were types of that which Christ was about to accomplish. For it was not lawful for Jacob to marry two sisters at once. And he serves Laban for [one of] the daughters; and being deceived in [the obtaining of] the younger, he again served seven years. Now Leah is your people and synagogue; but Rachel is our Church.’

Justin was followed by the Roman theologian Hippolytus (170-235) who wrote:

‘Let the days’, says he, ‘of the mourning for my father come on, that I may slay my brother.’ Wherefore Rebecca—that is, patience—told her husband of the brother’s plot: who, summoning Jacob, bade him go to Mesopotamia and thence take awife of the family of Laban the Syrian, his mother’s brother. As therefore Jacob, to escape hisbrother’s evil designs, proceeds to Mesopotamia, soChrist, too, constrained by the unbelief of the Jews, goes into Galilee, to take from thence to Himself a bride from the Gentiles, His Church.’24

Rather than a narrative tale of the events leading up toand beyond the birth of Christ, I suggest that the arch mosaics are closely linked with the Old Testament story of Rachel and Leah and actually depict Christ’s rejection of the Jewish Synagoga and his allegorical marriage to the Gentile Ecclesia. The ultimate moment oftriumph was depicted in the monumental mosaic of the apse where directly above the altar sat Christ the bridegroom crowning his beautiful new bride Ecclesia – TheChurch. Although the existing thirteenth century apse mosaic has been interpreted as a depiction of the crowning of Mary as Queen of Heaven, it is also said to

15

be a faithful copy of the original fifth century design.25

Centuries of restoration work may have obscured the intended meaning of the mosaics, but thanks to a seventeenth century drawing of the triumphal arch (Fig 6) we can still piece together some of the original iconography.26

Fig 6 Marco Tullio Montagna drawing of the triumphal arch 1640. Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, ms Barb.lat.4405, fol. 1r. In Text

The drawing by the artist Marco Tullio Montagna providesa selection of different views of the arch mosaics. In the top left hand corner is the scene usually interpreted as the annunciation with Mary seated and surrounded by six different angels.27 The iconography ofthis scene is entirely unique and rather than a seated Mary I suggest we are actually seeing Ecclesia ex Gentibus enthroned and surrounded by a guard of angels. The modern version of the mosaic shows an over large dove careering towards the seated woman (fig 2) whilst the Montagna sketch has no indication of a bird hovering overhead.28

To the left and right of the seated woman are two brick buildings. The building on the left has at its entrancea pair of inlaid doors set between two marble pillars topped with carved capitals. The outline of a cross canbe seen inside the building. The building on the right

16

has a pair of pulled back curtains set between two pillars with a sanctuary lamp hanging in between . I suggest that the building with the inlaid doors was intended to represent the basilica style of church building favoured by the gentile Christians. In contrast, the building with the curtains and lamp represents the Jewish temple. The figure standing in front of the temple is usually identified as Joseph, although in the light of the revised interpretations of the arch iconography it might be more accurately identified as Peter being told by the angel to turn awayfrom his roots within the Jewish Church and instead embrace the gentile Church. 29

The Peter figure appears again on the opposite side of the triumphal arch in a tableau that is normally interpreted as a representation of the presentation in the temple (Fig 2). However, I suggest that the scene is actually a depiction of the meeting between the dynamic and triumphant Ecclesia ex Gentibus dressed like a bride and the rejected Ecclesia ex Circumcisione, sombrely dressed and heavily veiled in a similar style to her counterpart in the church of Santa Sabina.

Returning once again to the Montagna drawing (fig 6), itseems that he failed to see a miniature figure of Jesus in the arms of the ‘woman in gold’. The Peter figure isstanding between the ‘woman in gold’ and the sombrely veiled figure. Although he has his body turned toward toveiled woman he is looking to his right as if he is welcoming the approaching ‘woman in gold’. Another group of men are gathered to the right of the tableau behind a crouching white haired bearded figure who has his hands veiled. Stylistically, this crouching figure appears out of place alongside the group of standing figures behind it and may also be a later addition.30 To the right of the scene is the outline of a building with the emblem of the goddess Roma on its pediment. Onits steps are pairs of turtle doves and pigeons denotingsacrificial offerings made by both Jews and Pagans in the city. I suggest this scene may have been designed

17

to represent the triumph of Christianity over both Judaism and paganism in the city as well as confirmationof the Roman Church’s dominance across the Christian empire.31

On the second level of the right hand side of the arch is a scene usually interpreted as the flight to Egypt with Mary, Joseph and Jesus meeting Aphrodosius the governor of Sotinen-Hermopolis in Egypt. Returning againto Montagna’s drawing of the arch (Fig. 6), it is clear that he has portrayed the scene without the figure of the young Jesus. I suggest that, rather than Aphrodosius, the regal looking male figure was actually intended to represent Christ the bridegroom, flanked by John the Baptist arriving in Galilee to meet his new bride Ecclesia ex Gentibus.

Returning to the left hand arch (fig 2) on the second level we have the unique and controversial scene said torepresent the adoration with the magi. The young Christfigure is seated on a large and elaborately decorated throne between the ‘woman in gold’ on the left who, I suggest, is actually the triumphant Ecclesia ex Gentibus, and the heavily veiled dejected woman on the right who mightreadily be identified as Ecclesia ex Circumcisione. The fact that the Christ figure sits alone suggests a far more symbolic image of Christ as the Logos rather than the child Jesus of the nativity, the magi figures symbolise the first gentile converts to Christianity

The meaning of the two scenes at the base of the opposite sides of the arch is puzzling (fig 2). Certainly these parts of the arch have undergone some extensive restoration work over the centuries.32 The current interpretation is that the scene on the left represents the massacre of the Innocents before the enthroned figure of Herod, with a depiction of the city of Jerusalem below.33 On the right is said to be the three magi arriving before a similarly enthroned Herod. Beneath this tableau is another cityscape said to represent Bethlehem. Although the enthroned figure has the helpful inscription Herodes added above his head, the

18

addition of a halo makes this identification extremely unlikely.34

The only other figures on the arch that are haloed are the angels and the enthroned Christ figure. It is therefore inconceivable to imagine that the mosaicists would have provided Herod with a similar symbol of divinity. I suggest instead that this enthroned figure was intended to represent God the Father, seated in judgement before the mourning Jewish populace from Jerusalem on the left and the triumphant gentile faithful from Bethlehem on the right. The elaborate throne on which he sits seems to confirm this identification.

Although these scenes are unfamiliar to us today I suggest that when the mosaic programmes for the triumphal arch, apse and nave were first designed in thefifth century their message would have been very clear. As predicted in the Old Testament scenes in the nave, Christ had chosen Ecclesia ex gentibus to be his bride and following their courtship and marriage as depicted on the arch, he crowned her as his heavenly consort in the final scene in the apse.35

However, alongside the triumph of Ecclesia ex Gentibus came the humiliation of Ecclesia ex Circumcisione – the Synagogue. Her rejection conveyed a very powerful message about the primacy of Roman Church and the growing spectre of anti-Judaism. Christ had taken the Gentile Church as his bride and in the process rejected the Jewish Church and all that she represented. As with so many imperial victories throughout the ages the victory of Church overSynagoga became the central theme on the triumphal arch.36

Whilst the church was commissioned by Pope Sixtus it washis success Leo I (440-461) who dedicated it. Known as Leo the Great he was a formidable father of the Church and a man most famous for standing his ground against Attila the Hun. He was also noted for his efforts to unify the Church.37

19

Rather strikingly Leo’s ideas about the Jews appear to have been equally forthright in a sermon he delivered onthe 19th April 444 during Holy Week when he proclaimed:

‘It is on you, on you, false Jews sacrilegious leaders of the people that the whole of this evil deed falls …… it makes you worthy of the hatred of the human race.’38

It was a striking indictment which together with the monumental art decorating the papal basilica provided anuncompromising message to the people of Rome: The Gentile Church was triumphant and the Jewish Synagogue defeated and ultimately condemned.

Notes

20

1 M.R. Miles, (1993) ‘Santa Maria Maggiore’s Fifth Century Mosaics: Triumphal Christianity and the Jews’, HTR, Vol. 86, p162. 2 P. Fredriksen (2008) Augustine and the Jews: A Christian Defense of Jews and Judaism. John Chrysostom (d.407) is said to have been one of the most notorious anti-Jewish theologians, although there is still some debate as to whether his eight homilies were intended to be as anti –Jewish as they appear to us today. Adversus Judaeos : John Chrysostom, Discourses against Judaizing Christians, translated by P. W. Harkins. (1979)The Fathers of the Church ; v. 68, pp163-166; J. Parkes, (1934) The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue: A Study in the Origins of Antisemitism. 3 NPNF2-01. Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine Book IV Chapter XVIII www.ccel.org.4 F. Millar, “The Jews of the Graceo-Roman Diaspora Between Paganism and Christianity, AD 312-438,” in J. Lieu et al (1992) The Jew Among Pagans and Christians pp 97-123; H.N. Claman, (2000) Jewish Images in the Christian Church, p 63.5 E. Mâle, (1960) The Early Churches of Rome, pp 50-51; F. Bisconti, (1999) ‘Early Christian Art’ in M. Bussagli, (ed.) (1999) Rome Art & Architecture, pp 207-208. 6 W. Oakeshott (1967) The Mosaics of Rome, p 62. 7 The mappa was the symbol of authority of the Roman consul as designated representatives of the emperor. By the 4th century it had became incorporated into the design of clerical vestments. H. Norris, (2002) Church Vestments Their Origin and Development, (re-print from the 1950 edition), p 92. 8 It is curious that Ecclesia Circumcisione has the symbol of a cross on her robes whilst Ecclesia Gentibus does not. However it is likely that rather than a Christian cross it was the symbol Tau the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet which was written as an 'x' or a '+' or a 'T'. The prophet uses the imagery of this last letter as a way of urging people to remain faithful to God. S.Boe, (2010) Cross-bearing in Luke p 20.9 Bisconti (1999), p 207; Mâle, p 49; Oakeshott, pp 89-90.10 Drawing by Giovanni Ciampini from 'Vetera Monimenta', 1699 pl. 48; Bibliotheca Hertziana, Rome; Oakeshott, p104, n 101.11Recent excavations around the ancient Illyrian town of Onchesmos in present day Albania has discovered evidence of a 5th century synagogue having been converted into a Christian church. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/10/041020094144.htm. 12 The use of term Ecclesia to describe both figures has perhaps confused our understanding of their meaning. Although we have come to understand the word Ecclesia as meaning Church, in its original Greek ekklēsía meant ‘assembly’ as indeed did Synagogue synagōgḗ and neither term had any religious connotation. The most recent study on Synagoga and Ecclesia statues in the thirteenth century is by N. Rowe, (2011) The Jew, The Cathedral and the Medieval City. 13 Miles, (1993) p 168.14 M. Webb, (2001) Churches and Catacombs of Rome, p 59; Miles, pp 157-159.15 Although one of the key edicts to come from the Council of Ephesus was the confirmation that Mary should be known as Theotokos or ‘god-bearer’ there is still considerable debate as to the real significance of the title. For the most recent discussions on the meaning of Theotokos see S.J.,Boss ‘The Title Theotokos’ and R.M.Price, ‘Theotokos: The Title and its Significance in Doctrine and Devotion’ in Boss(ed. 2007) Mary: The Complete Resource; Price, ‘The Theotokos and the Council of

Ephesus’ in C. Maunder (ed. 2008) The Origin of the Cult of the Virgin Mary. 16 Mâle, (1960), pp 60-68. R., Krautheimer (1942) ‘Recent Publications on S. MariaMaggiore in Rome’ AJA, Vol. 46, p 374 n 6. The most comprehensive studies of the mosaics are still J. Wilpert, (1916) Die Römischen Mosaiken und Malereien der kirchlichen Bauten, vom IV. bis XIII. Jahrhundert; B. Brenk, (1975) Die frühchristlichen Mosaiken in S. Maria Maggiore zu Rom; C. Cecchelli, (1956) I Mosaici della basilica di S. Maria Maggiore. W. Oakeshott, (1967) The Mosaics of Rome. For a more controversial view point see S. Spain (1977) ‘Carolingian Restorations of the Mosaics of S. Maria Maggiore in Rome’, Gesta, XVI, pp 13-22; Spain (1979) ‘The Promised Blessing: The Iconography of the Mosaics of S. Maria Maggiore’ AB, Vol. 61, pp 518-40 and Spain, (1983) ‘The Restorations of the Sta. Maria Maggiore Mosaics’, AB, Vol. 65, pp 325-328. 17 Miles, (1993) pp 155-175. 18 Originally there were 42 panels in place whereas only 27 have survived with someheavily restored. 19 The typology of the patriarchs and their wives as pre-figurations for Christ andthe Church appear early in Christian writings, see J. Danielou, (1950; Eng. trans.,1960). From Shadows to Reality: Studies in the Biblical Typology of the Fathers.20 Although the term ‘triumphal’ arch dates from the early ninth century the arch before the apse was always regarded as a symbol of the Church triumphant. L.M.O. Duchesne, (1886-1892) Le Liber pontificalis, Vol. 2, pp 54-79. 21 Of the three women in Zipporah’s entourage one is dressed in a near identical fashion, but without a veil. It was traditional in Roman weddings for the bridesmaid to wear the same dress as the bride as a way of confusing the evil spirits that were thought to prey on newlyweds. http://www.explore-italian-culture.com/ancient-roman-weddings.html accessed 30/3/2009.22 See G. Vikan, (1990) ‘Art and Marriage in Early Byzantium’ DOP, Vol. 44, pp 145-163.23 D. Buckton, D., (1994) Byzantium: Treasures of Byzantine Art & Culture, pp 33-34. http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_image.aspx?image=ps214223.jpg&retpage=20959. 24 Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter CXXXIV, ANF. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.iv.cxxxiv.html accessed 30/3/2009.Hippolytus, quoted in Jerome, Epist. 36, ad Damasum, Num. xviii, ANF. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iii.iv.i.ii.iii.html accessed 30 March 2009.This idea of a union between Christ and Ecclesia was first suggested by Paul in his Epistle to the Ephesians when he called on husbands to:

‘love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, in order to make her to make her holy by cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, so as to present the church to himself in splendour, without a spot or wrinkle or anything of the kind – yes, so that she may be holy and without blemish.’ Ephesians 5 v 21-33

Origen had followed a similar theme when he reinterpreted the allegorical meaning of the Song of Songs changing the Jewish message of the love between Shekhinah and Israel to that of Christ and his chosen bride the Church. J.C. King, (2005) Origen on the Song of Songs as the Spirit of Scripture.

25 The apse mosaic which features the crowning of Mary was executed by the Franciscan friar Jacopo Torriti at the order of Pope Nicholas IV (1288-1292). It is said to be an accurate reproduction of the original scene that was removed in order to accommodate a new transept.26 Montagna had been commissioned by Cardinal Francesco Barberini to record the appearance of the mosaics in around 1640. A century later Benedict XIII (1724-1730) had the mosaics of the triumphal arch cleaned and restored as did Benedict XIV (1743-1750). 27 This scene is said to show the Virgin spinning thread for the temple veil, a description found in the apocryphal gospels of the Protevangelium of James and the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew. While the Protevangelium is dated to the second half of the second century, Pseudo-Matthew was probably first compiled in around the sixth century. J.K. Elliott (2005) The Apocryphal New Testament: A Collection of Apocryphal Christian Literature in an English Translation. pp 48-67 and pp 84-99. Susan Spain makes the point that at the time the mosaics were commissioned the apocrypha were being suppressed by the bishops of Rome so it is unlikely that they would have chosen this interpretation of the story for the church’s triumphal arch. Spain, (1979), p 538,n.85, p 539. Rather than purple thread I suggest the seated figure is holding a scroll with a container of scrolls on the floor at her feet. Scrolls signified learning and in a Christian context the teachings of the church. S.M. Salvadori, (2002) Per Feminam Mors, Per Feminam Vita: Images of Women in the Early Christian Funerary Art of Rome, pp 489, 492.28 This early in the development of standardised iconography for the narrative scenes from the New Testament the descending dove was more commonly linked with Jesus’ baptism by John the Baptist. Examples of this can be found in catacomb frescoes. I suggest the dove was a later addition made during the ninth century restoration work. 29 Spain claims that the figure is a restoration of the early ninth century and mayoriginally have had white hair and a beard. She identifies the figure as Abraham. S. Spain (1977), p15, n.10; Spain (1979), p538, n.86. 30 There is evidence of disturbed tessellation which might form part of the later ‘Carolingian Restorations’. Spain (1977), pp 13-22.31 The restored mosaic now features a sleeping figure in front of the temple being addressed by an angel; this scene has been read as a dreaming Joseph receiving the warning to flee to Egypt. However Montagna records that he saw an angel addressinga seated figure. Spain (1979), pp537-538, n.8532 Spain (1983), pp 325-328. 33 This part of the mosaic was repaired in fresco at some point before the seventeenth century. Spain, (1983) p 327.34 Spain suggests that this inscription, along with that of Bethlehem and Jerusalem, were added during the Carolingian period either in the eighth or ninth centuries. Spain (1977), p16. Montagna did not include the figures of ‘Herod’ in his drawing. By the seventeenth century the left hand scene had become damaged andthe seated figure lost, whereas the city of Bethlehem and Herod and the magi had been repaired in fresco so did not form part of the original mosaic. Spain (1983),p 327.35 Inevitable deterioration of the mosaics and damage to the structure of the church may have made the scenes harder to read, leading to them being given a more straight forward narrative interpretation. When the first serious restoration work

was undertaken during the eighth or ninth centuries the mosaicists may have made stylistic changes in order to bring the scenes more in line with the current perception of the iconography. Taking this idea one step further, it is tempting to suggest that if the apse had indeed featured a portrayal of Christ crowning his bride Ecclesia then this image may have been the inspiration behind the later depictions of Mary being crowned as Queen of Heaven. For a detailed outline of therestoration work from the Carolingian period to the twentieth century see Spain (1983), pp 325-328.36 Miles, (1993) p 155-175.37 In 1961 Pope John XXIII gave Leo the official title of ‘Doctor of the Church’s Unity’; J.P. Freeland and A.J. Conway (1996) Sermons of St Leo I, p 17.38 Ibid p 256.