Revisitar o Mito

Myths Revisited ! " # $ % & ' $ ( ! " ) *+

$,-.+%/0123-456+7-4/

8/92/+:-+;-0<0+=>+"-.?/0

"<2+=/9.60+@640-1/+

A-9-0/+=/0/.

!"#$%$&'()*)+$&*),)+-&.%)!"#$%$&"/)!"#$%$&'()(*$&)("()(*)+)(,)*)("-"(&'.&)(

/"!'("('-$*".&'()($*'/$.0!$)(12*'.)(+"(&)+)%()%(&"*3)%("(-2/'!"%4(,)*)(

9!"#$%&%'(&%()'(*""+$*#,+-('*.#-/0*$#1(2+".*,&#(&#(3-4#($-566*$#7(#6($#,

9&!$52&)%(*2-&$+$%,$3-$.'!"%(!"2.$+)%(."%&"(#)-2*"($.,$+"*(%)5!"('(3-'%

(!"#$%$&%(*=&1('.+(1)>($&(1'%(5)&1(/"."!'&"+(!"#$%$&'()*)+$&*),)+-&.%)!"#$%$&"/

'.+(.2!&2!"+(12*'.($*'/$.'&$).(',!)%%(&$*"('.+(%3',"4('.+('--)>"+(2%(&)(

$!!'&$).'-@(A))&"+($.(&1"(,-'%%$,'-(!"3)%$&)!=4(&1"(,).&!$52&$).%('%%"*5-"+(

$.(&1$%(#)-2*"(3!$#$-"/"(+=.'*$,('.+($.&"!+$%,$3-$.'!=('33!)',1"%(&)(&1"(3-'%&$,$&=(

#>('?.@7(+6('+,*>%6.(*,(-*.%"+"?7(+".*6.*$7(!#-*.*$+-(#"(6$*%,.*3$(%A!"%66*#,1

REVISITAR O MITO | MYTHS REVISITED

Organização: Abel Nascimento Pena, Maria de Jesus C. Relvas,

Rui Carlos Fonseca, Teresa Casal

Capa: Sandro Botticelli, O Nascimento de Vénus, ca. 1485 (pormenor)

Conceito gráfico: Maria de Jesus C. Relvas

Paginação: Ângela Andrade

© EDIÇÕES HÚMUS, 2015

End. Postal: Apartado 7081

4764 -908 Ribeirão – V. N. Famalicão

Tel. 926 375 305

E -mail: humus@humus.com.pt

Impressão: Papelmunde, SMG, Lda. – V. N. Famalicão

1.ª edição: Fevereiro de 2015

Depósito legal: 387047/15

ISBN 978 -989 -755-112-3

331

RECYCLING MYTHS IN BYZANTINE ART

Spolia on the Gate of Persecution in Ephesus

Livia Bevilacqua!

Material and conceptual vestiges of the past can be considered as a vital sap of the Medieval world, both in the Western Middle Ages and in Byzantium. Leaving aside the huge problem of literature and philosophy, as far as the artistic produc-tion is concerned, the recovery of these vestiges is brought into e�ect in a variety of categories. On the one hand, in architecture, building materials are reused, for a matter of mere convenience, side by side with a demand of ideological continu-ity with the past. Columns, lintels and architraves, capitals, marble slabs, simple conches and even bricks are constantly recycled in “new” buildings. On the other hand, and more specifically in the figurative production, the revival of the Classical in Byzantine art also concerns classical iconographies, and it is achieved through the representation of personifications 1, as well as compositional and stylistic inspiration (as in the portraits of the Evangelists in manuscripts of the Gospels; Weitzmann, Greek Mythology; Weitzmann, Studies; Weitzmann-Loerke-Kitz-inger-Buchthal; Spatharakis). Reused materials and iconographies, together, will be the core of the subject in the lines that follow, notwithstanding the fact that it is not always clear when the iconography is selected in se or subordinate to a new and completely di�erent “intention” (Baxandall). In fact, the way the recovery of the past is pursued, and, above all, the way those survivals are interpreted, is some-thing constantly changing in the Middle Ages and beyond, depending – I shall demonstrate – on the di�erent sensibilities of the contemporaries. Within this framework, the continuity of mythological themes in the arts is widely attested, especially in certain periods of the Byzantine art history.

A number of scholars have already undertaken the task of tracing the history of the classical tradition in Byzantine art (Ladner 578-94; Kalavrezou-Maxeiner

* Research Center for Anatolian Civilizations, Koç University, Istanbul.1 A personification can embody either a natural element (a river, a mount, night and daylight) or an

abstract concept. For example the tellus (in the Theodosius’ silver missorium, now in Madrid, it not only represents the “Earth”, but also the idea of “abundance”, in view of the emperor’s propaganda), or the divine Wisdom. For a general overview of the use of personifications in Byzantine art, see, among oth-ers, Weitzmann, Studies 157-159, Lafontaine-Dosogne, and, with a focus on the late Byzantine period, Marini Clarelli; also Gombrich for remarks on classical themes in Medieval and Early Modern Art.

332

273-84; Mullett and Scott; Kaldellis, to name only a few major studies), not only as the revival of a classicizing style, but also as a recovery of themes and contents: among those, the myth has a relevant role indeed. I will just recall the ivory casket from Veroli, now in the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, one of the ma-jor and most renowned examples (Beckwith; Cutler 199-209), dating to a period – the middle Byzantine era, under the rule of the Macedonian emperors, 9th-11th centuries – especially concerned with the recovery of antiquity in all its aspects (techniques, style, themes, iconography), up to the point that the whole cultural milieu has been given the name of “Macedonian Renaissance” (Belting 65-83). Nonetheless, while the myths of Bellerophon and Iphigeneia and the Rape of Eu-ropa on the casket’s carvings, are, apparently, incorporated with no major reinter-pretation, in many other examples the classical models are transferred to embody Christian characters and concepts: Orpheus playing the lyre becomes David in manuscripts of the Old Testament, etc. (Weitzmann, Studies 126-223; Hanfmann; Elsner 247-287; Aurea Roma 363-424; Hansen).

However, this kind of recovery is sometimes carried into e�ect in a di�erent form, and a tantalizing one. The phenomenon I am referring to is the reuse of “ready made” antique elements in new contexts, in which they receive “new life”. In particular, I would like to focus on architectural decoration, where this solu-tion often replaces the carrying out of ex novo decoration. For a long time, these elements have been perceived as exclusively belonging to Antiquity, rather than to the Byzantine world; and therefore the reused art works have been, in general, solely considered in studies concerning the former.

It is well known, for example, that, in the urban staging of the new capital city, Constantine and his successors made extensive use of ancient spolia, dis-playing them in public spaces as symbols of a new ideology: on the one hand, the victory of Christianity over the idols; on the other hand, and even more sig-nificantly, the acknowledgement of their high cultural value and quality, in an attempt of the new city to compete with the past glory of the Roman empire. Here, I will not dwell upon this problem, which has been extensively empha-sized by the scholarly literature in the past few decades (Bassett; Ricci). Instead, I wish to focus my attention on the fact that, in some instances, reused pieces, which represented mythological subjects, have been reinterpreted according to the needs of a new form of ideology. Especially emblematic is, in this respect, the case of the statue on the top of Constantine’s column, in his Forum, where the portrait of the emperor – as we are given to understand – was most likely made out of a statue depicting Apollo, with the iconography of the Sun god, He-lios, rayed crown included (Bassett 188-208, and previous bibliography). We can collect evidence for similar cases, only thanks to literary sources, since hardly anything remains today. Moreover, scholars have generally focused their atten-tion on the incidence of this phenomenon in the late antique and early Byzan-tine era, and it has rarely been taken into consideration as far as more recent periods are concerned.

333

Within the framework of a wider research project 2, in the pages that follow I will focus on a peculiar and very problematic aspect of this phenomenon: the re-use of spolia on city walls, with special attention to some of the most strategic parts of them, namely, the gates.

In this respect, referring again to Constantinople, we shall, once more, rely on the written sources (both Byzantine and early modern), which describe the arrangement of the outer façade of the Golden Gate, the triumphal entry to the city. The Gate itself had been built, together with the land walls, during the reign of Theodosius II (AD 408-450), and it ideally connected the “new” to the “old” Rome, marking the beginning of the Via Egnatia, that is to say the virtual continuation of the Via Appia on the opposite shore of the Adriatic sea. A series of twelve classical reliefs with mythological scenes have been later added on the right and left sides of the outer passage. We do not know exactly when that happened, and the debate on their chronology is still open: some schol-ars ascribe it to the middle Byzantine era (Mango 173-88; Asutay-E�enberger 61-71), some others to a much later period, the Paleologan era (Macridy and Casson 63-84; Schneider 39-62; Müller-Wiener 297; Guberti Bassett 117-33; see also Strzygowsky 1-39; Van Millingen; Foss and Winfield 41-77). According to the testimonies of Manuel Chrysoloras in the 15th century, and of a number of western travellers to Anatolia between the 16th and the 19th centuries, including Sir Thomas Roe, the British ambassador to the Ottoman empire (1621-28), and the antiquary Jacob Spon (1675-1676), there could be seen, among other scenes, the myths of Phaethon, Endymion, Selene, Venus and Adonis, Prometheus, and a selection of the twelve labours of Hercules, displayed in what must have been an extremely interesting arrangement. Only poor fragments remain today, sadly hanging on a wall of the Istanbul Archaeological Museum: a female head of a so-called Selene, the lower part of the body of another female figure, a hand holding a torch, a fragment of a female upper arm and shoulder, and parts of a suit of armour.

Mainly because of the loss of all the monuments I have mentioned so far, the study of the Byzantine capital city o�ers some di�culties, also considering that this is a peculiar and unique case 3. Nevertheless, through outlining some features

2 I wish to thank the Research Center for Anatolian Civilizations (Koç University), Istanbul, for sup-porting the first phase of my work on figural spolia in Byzantium, and the Warburg Institute, London, and the Scientific and Technologic Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK), for providing me with the priceless opportunity to carry my research further.

3 The city walls of Constantinople displayed figural spolia on several spots. On the one side of a gate in the area of Balat, by the Golden Horn shore, a huge relief depicting a Nike had been placed, and some scholars suggested that it had been reinterpreted as the angel Gabriel of an Annunciation, faced, on the opposite side, by a relief of the Virgin (Van Millingen 198; Mundell Mango 112; Fıratlı 37). A funerary relief with two busts is still visible on one of the towers facing the sea of Marmara. The elaborate window of the Bukoleon palace, on the other hand, has been dismantled. Nonetheless, on the latter, looking out to the sea of Marmara, no use of figural spolia seems attested by the drawings reproducing it, except for two lions. Finally, at a later date, three imperial busts have been used to adorn a gate of the 12th century wall in the area of the Blachernae palace, north-west of the city (Asutay-E�enberger).

334

of this phenomenon from a wider point of view, it is possible to o�er a template, also in order to understand better the situation of Constantinople.

A number of comparable examples of figural spolia on city Gates constellate medieval Anatolia: Nicaea, Ephesus, Konya (the latter in a Seljuk milieu) among them. The problem of figural re-employments on city gates is the subject to which my current research is devoted, and therefore it is still work in progress. What I wish to present in this paper is a restatement of the question, as well as some pre-liminary remarks thereupon, especially considering one case-study.

The city of Ephesus is a privileged case indeed, because, in the landscape of the ancient cities of Asia Minor, unlike many others, its post-classical life has been, at least partially, reconstructed by the archaeologists, whereas in other instances it has been completely neglected, being outside of the framework of the Greco-Roman era.

On the top of the gate (figure 1) leading to the sanctuary of Saint John in Selçuk (the medieval core of Ephesus), a frieze was displayed, which originally consisted of a row of roman reliefs. Today only a small fragment with a Bacchanal of putti survives in situ. All the rest were removed in the early 19th century, were brought to England, and today are part of the Woburn Abbey collection of antiquities (Bedfordshire), where they have been reassembled in their presumed original attic sarcophagus-shape. In order to picture for ourselves their appearance, when they were still in situ, we can benefit from some drawings and engravings, carried out by European explor-ers, all of them travelling to the Middle East in the 18th century, among others, the botanist Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1701), the painter Luigi Mayer (1776-1794), and Marie-Gabriel-Auguste-Florent earl of Choiseul-Gou�er (the latter, French ambassador to the Ottoman empire, 1784-1791).

Figure 1: Ephesus (today Selçuk):

The Gate of Persecution (photo by the author)

335

Just next to the surviving Bacchanal scene, the beholder could see the slab of one of the main sides of a sarcophagus, depicting scenes from the Trojan wars 4 (figure 3): the episode of Hector, dragged behind Achilles’ chariot, on the left; Priamus begging for the corpse of his son, on the right of the same panel; there followed one of the side panels of the sarcophagus, namely the one illustrating the return of the body of Patroclos to the Achaean camp, chronologically earlier, and explaining the reason for Achilles’ insanity; further on the right, there was displayed the back panel of the sarcophagus, where the scene of Astianax dragged away from Andromache by Ulysses could be seen; on the right end, the Trojans are paying the ransom for Hector, weighing his body on a scale. A fragmentary fourth side of the Woburn sarcophagus, depicting, according to Elisabeth Angelicous-sis (82), the arming of Achilles before the duel with Hector, now completes the reconstruction; but this side of the sarcophagus was not visible in the context of the frieze. Possibly, although not necessarily, the frieze was concluded by a second slab with putti, symmetrically placed on the right end 5.

Observing the varying proportions given by the sketches shown by our graph-ic sources, as well as the di�erence in subject, one must suppose that the Baccha-nal fragment was not part of the same sarcophagus, but, without specific compara-tive measurements, it is not possible to make sure statements.

As far as the dating is concerned, it has to be recorded that the Woburn reliefs have been ascribed to the second quarter of the 3rd century AD (Angelicoussis 82). But what about the moment of their re-contextualization? The reliefs had been arranged on the upper part of the gate, and were framed by a series of rec-tangular elements forming an acanthus frieze – they, too, coming from spoliation, as are all the materials used in building the wall. The conches, in fact, are entirely recovered from the buildings of the ancient city, that, as usual from Late Antiquity onwards, had been turned into a quarry. We should keep in mind that this new ar-rangement dates to a phase when the city shrinks and is divided into two poles: the old city, now contracted and refortified on the slopes of the Panayır Dağ (Mount Pion); and the sanctuary of St. John’s, this, too, fortified and hosting a settlement – the one that today is identified by the name of Selçuk – to which, later, even an upper citadel was added (Ladstätter 3-29; Pülz 51-81). Most probably around the 7th or 8th century, following Persian and Arab invasions, the citadel was fortified further. This new fortification could also be related to the fact that Ephesus was made into the capital of the theme of the Thracesians during the reign of Leo III (AD 717-741). It must have been at the time of the rebuilding of the walls that the reliefs were recovered from a necropolis in the area and immured above the gate. In this context, the entrance to the 5th-century St. John’s sanctuary was, symboli-cally, an extremely significant position, which deserved to be highlighted.

4 Not only Homeric poems, but also some Greek tragedies are the literary sources for the scenes (Angeli-coussis 81).

5 A symmetrical arrangement of the scenes with putti is attested by Choiseul-Gou�er, see below.

336

It is di�cult to say how the scenes of Achilles’ saga would have been inter-preted at this point, and if and to what extent the contemporaries consciously at-tributed a definite meaning to the pictures. For lack of testimonies, we cannot be sure that they would ascribe a Christian sense to the myth of Achilles and Hector, although a clue in this direction might be provided by the grape-gathering putti, a pattern interpreted in a Christian sense already in the early Christian iconogra-phy 6. Yet, we can certainly suppose that their position was all but haphazard.

Figure 2: “View of a gate at Ephesus”,

M.-G.-A.-F. de Choiseul-Gouffier, 1842. Engraving.

A shift in meaning from pagan to Christian, is attested to, for the first time, only by the European travellers of subsequent centuries. Choiseul-Gou�er (318-19), in the late 18th century, reports:

The bas-reliefs, whose upper part is decorated, are neatly executed. In the central panel you can see Hector dragged behind Achilles’ chariot, whom the Christians of the town mistake for a martyr, whence they name these ruins the gate of per-secution. On both sides, there are Bacchanals, with children playing with grapes. 7

Gate of Persecution is the name by which the gate is still known today. The French ambassador to the Ottoman Porte also adds to his book two fine

engravings, as a visual support to his written description of the impressive bit. The first one (figure 2) is a view of the complex of ruins, placed in an airy, romantic landscape, full of greenery and inhabited by shepherds, but lacking in archaeolog-ical accuracy, for the remainder of the citadel fortification is missing. The second

6 The problem of the Byzantine interpretation of the ancient reliefs displayed on this Gate at Ephesus has not been dealt with by modern scholarly literature thus far. The interpretation given in 18th century sources provides a trail indeed, but needs to be verified. Some suggestions are given in these few lines for the first time, but the problem is huge and deserves further enquiry.

7 English translation by the author. See also Angelicoussis (83, n. 2) for further bibliography. On Choi-seul-Gou�er’s travels in the Middle East, see now Barbier (131).

337

engraving reproduces a more iconographically precise detail of the central slab of the ancient frieze. The latter engraving corresponds, on the whole, to the one included in J. Pitton de Tournefort’s work (figure 3) 8.

Figure 3: Ephesus, Gate of Persecution, detail of the frieze.

Engraving (after Pitton de Tournefort), 1701.

It has to be taken into account that, also in Ephesus, another gate had already been erected, using late-antique spolia: along the so-called Curetes street (embo-los), two reused carved piers depicting Heracles and the Nemean Lion carried two spandrels with winged nikai, thus forming an arched structure, marking the pas-sage between the western part of the city – still inhabited and in full activity in the early Middle Ages – and the eastern area, including the former upper agora, which was abandoned since that time. This structure (for a possible reconstruction, see Bammer 389-90), was built in the 5th century, as a dedicatory inscription indicates (Pülz 61-62; Thür 107-108). Unfortunately, this is all we know about the circum-stances of the erection of this gate. Nonetheless, it is impossible not to recall a strikingly similar use of the symbolic “image” of Heracles, as it appears on the tri-umphal arch in the Forum of Theodosius I in Constantinople, only a few decades earlier (AD 379-395): there, the columns were shaped as massive clubs, held by a hand representing that of the demi-god himself, ideologically connecting the hero’s power and that of the emperor.

In order to contextualize better the reuse of spolia on the Gates of Persecution and of Heracles at Ephesus, a deeper investigation of the historical and literary sources will be necessary. It has to be considered that this kind of artistic arrange-ment does not seem to have been common in Byzantine fortifications (as well as in the western ones). The occasions of reuse of figural spolia in a more attentive shape than the simple and anonymous building material, need to be analysed one by one. Furthermore, a critical view should avoid the “distorting mirror” (para-phrasing an expression by Cyril Mango) of 18th-century literature, which on the one hand is of irreplaceable help, but on the other sometimes provides a “lens” through which we tend to interpret – as in the case of Ephesus – what we see.

8 Here, the far right section of the frieze appears to be slightly smaller than the central slab. An autoptical observation of the sarcophagus seems to confirm some minor di�erences in height of the two sides, thus suggesting that not one but two sarcophaguses may have been assembled in the frieze. However, it is not possible to discuss this problem here. I wish to thank Dr Chris Gravett, curator of Woburn Abbey collection, for his assistance with my direct study of the reliefs.

338

Nonetheless, in the cases that I have analysed up until now, one common feature is to be remarked: the arrangement of the gates with special decoration, namely spolia, always underlines a privileged point of transit. If, in Constantinople, the Golden Gate was more a symbolic place (being reserved for the triumphal entry of the emperor), rather than a real gateway for the city’s inhabitants and visi-tors, in the city of Nicaea, for example, spolia recovered from a triumphal tetrar-chic monument, distinguished the north and east gates, after their reinforcement in the 13th century, connecting the city, in practice as well as in the imaginary, with Constantinople and Central Anatolia respectively: somewhere everybody using that highway would transit (Bevilacqua).

Ephesus, for its part, in the Middle Ages was still one of the major harbours of the empire (Foss 119) 9, as well as a crossroads on major highways, that connected the city to Constantinople via Smyrna. At the same time, it was a popular pilgrim-age and devotion place: St. Gregory Decapolites (ca. AD 820) and St. Lazarus of Mount Galesion chose to settle here, for it was located on the main seaway between Constantinople and the Holy Land; besides, from the very beginning of the Chris-tian era and throughout the Byzantine period, it was of course a pilgrimage destina-tion in itself, for here St. John the Evangelist was allegedly buried, to whom a large basilica was dedicated by Justinian I (AD 527-565). Remarkably, it is at the very en-trance of this sanctuary that we find the gate adorned with the mythological frieze.

The path indicated by the Byzantine sources leads us back from Ephesus to Constantinople, and to another case of reuse of spolia with mythological scenes connecting the two cities to one another: the bronze doors from the Artemision, the Ephesian temple of Artemis, had been placed at the entrance of the Senate House in the Forum of Constantine. We receive this information from the Descrip-tion of the Church of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople by Constantine the Rhodian (Konstantinos Rhodios 8-10), from the Life of St. Andrew the Fool (Maguire 191), both sources dating to the 10th century, and from Kedrenos in the 11th century (Georgios Kedrenos 565). It is worth recalling a few lines from Constantine the Rhodian’s poem, which actually very well explain the Byzantine attitude towards these images:

Somebody brought forth a bronze door / for the senate house, [...] / which was once at the Artemision at Ephesus, / and which was darkened with the deception of idols, / having an image of the battle of the giants / with the gods which the Greeks used / blindly to worship with reverence, / [depicting] the thunderbolts of Zeus and the arrogance, / and Poseidon with his remarkable trident, / and Apollo firing a poisoned arrow, / and Herakles wearing the lion pelt / and a quiver filled with arrows / smashing their heads with a club, that is / the giants whose feet were like serpents coiled / beneath and turned in, / throwing aloft fragments of the rocks / and the serpents just like flashing tongues / roaring terribly, fearful to look

9 A complete picture of the history and relevance of Smyrna region is provided by Ahrweiler (17). Although her essay is not specifically focused on the case of Ephesus, it gives useful details on geogra-phy, economy, and society of that area of Asia Minor Aegean coast.

339

upon / and flashing fire from their eyes, / such that those observing are afraid and trembling, / fear and shuddering gripping the heart. / With such deceits was the foolish race of Greece / beguiled and o�ered evil honour / to the abomination of empty impieties, / but the powerful and wise Constantine / brought them to be a trifle for the city, / a plaything for children and an amusement for men. (Konstan-tinos Rhodios 8-10, ll. 125-152).

Figural spolia in architectural context are a complex and delicate subject, that needs to be further analyzed, cross-checking artistic evidence, primary sources, modern sources, cultural history and the history of architecture, as well as requir-ing a deeper knowledge of how medieval and Byzantine master builders worked, which is lacking thus far (Ousterhout). Here, I could provide only an overview of a much wider and multifaceted problem, to which recent archaeological finds will add new evidence (Jacobs).

In general, reusing ancient spolia on doors and gates was a common practice in Byzantium. It parallels the reuse of ancient pieces to mark the entrance to sa-cred spaces, or to the most significant parts of them, such as the “porta bella” in the south-west vestibule of St. Sofia in Constantinople, and a number of stelae and various sculptured pieces framing the church doors themselves. Doors and gates were regarded as the threshold prefiguring the inner space, and therefore their decoration deserves special attention: what is displayed on them is never hap-hazard, in religious as well as in ceremonial context. It seems to me a promising working hypothesis, which is worth undertaking, to examine more cases, in order to understand better the “language” of a city-gate decoration, the type of com-munication between interior and exterior that it embodied, and the reactions that it provoked in the beholder.

Bibliography

AHRWEILER, Hélène. “L’histoire et la géographie de la région de Smyrne entre les deux occupations turques (1081-1317), particulièrement au XII.e siècle.” Travaux et Mémoires 1 (1965): 1-204.

ANGELICOUSSIS, Elisabeth. The Woburn Abbey Collection of Classical Antiquities. Mainz am Rhein: Von Zabern, 1992.

ASUTAY-EFFENBERGER, Neslihan. Die Landmauer von Konstantinopel-Istanbul: historisch-topographi-sche und baugeschichtliche Untersuchungen. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2007.

BAMMER, Anton. “Grabungen in Ephesos von 1960-1969 bzw. 1970. B. Römische und byzantinische Architektur.” Jahreshefte des Österreichischen archäologisches Institutes in Wien 50 (1972-1975): 384-94.

BARBIER, Frédéric. Le rêve grec de Monsieur de Choiseul: Le voyage d’un européen des lumières. Paris: Armand Colin, 2010.

BASSETT, Sarah. The Urban Image of Late Antique Constantinople. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

BAXANDALL, Michael. Patterns of Intention: on the Historical Explanation of Pictures. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985.

BECKWITH, John G. The Veroli Casket. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery O�ce, 1962.

340

BELTING, Hans. “Kunst oder Objekt-Stil? Fragen zur Funktion der ‘Kunst’ in der ‘Makedonischen Renaissance’.” Byzanz und der Westen. Ed. Irmgard Hutter. Wien: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1984: 65-83.

BEVILACQUA, Livia. “Displaying the Past in Byzantium. Figural Spolia on the City Gates of Nicaea (13th c.).” Actual Problems of Theory and History of Art: Collection of Articles, Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference of young specialists in history and theory of art, St. Petersburg State University, Faculty of History, 31 October-4 November 2012. Ed. Svetlana V. Maltseva and Ekaterina Yu. Stanyukovich-Denisova. St. Petersburg, 2013. 145-150.

BRILLIANT, Richard, and Dale Kinney, Reuse Value: Spolia and Appropriation in Art and Architecture from Constantine to Sherrie Levine. Farnham – Burlington: Ashgate, 2011.

CHOISEUL-GOUFFIER, Marie-Gabriel-Auguste-Florent comte de. Voyage pittoresque dans l’empire ottoman, en Grèce, dans la Troade, les iles de l’archipel et sur les cotes de l’Asie mineure, tome premier, 2.ème ed. Paris: Aillaud, 1842.

CUTLER, Anthony. “Nineteenth-Century Versions of the Veroli Casket.” Through a Glass Brightly: Stu-dies in Byzantine and Medieval Art and Archaeology Presented to David Buckton. Ed. Chris Entwistle. Oxford: Oxbow Book, 2003. 199-209.

ELSNER, Jas. Art and the Roman Viewer. The Transformation of Art from the Pagan World to Christianity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

ENSOLI, Serena, and Eugenio La Rocca, eds. Aurea Roma. Dalla città pagana alla città cristiana (catalogo della mostra). Roma: “L’Erma” di Bretschneider, 2000.

FABRICIUS HANSEN, Maria. The Eloquence of Appropriation. Prolegomena to an Understanding of Spolia in Early Christian Rome. Rome: “L’Erma” di Bretschneider, 2003.

FIRATLI, Nezih. La sculpture byzantine figurée au Musée Archéologique d’Istanbul. Paris: Maisonneuve, 1990.FOSS, Clive, and David Winfield. Byzantine Fortifications: An Introduction. Pretoria: University of South

Africa, 1986.GEORGIOS KEDRENOS. Synopsis historion. Ed. Immanuel Bekker. I. Bonnae: Weber, 1838.GOMBRICH, Ernst H. “Personification.” Classical Influences in European Culture, A.D. 500-1500. Ed.

Robert R. Bolgar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971. 247-257.GUBERTI BASSETT, Sarah. “John V Palaiologos and the Golden Gate in Constantinople.” To Ellenikon:

Studies in Honor of Speros Vryonis Jr. I. Hellenic Antiquity and Byzantium. Ed. John Langdon. New Rochelle: A.D. Caratzas, 1993. 117-133.

HANFMANN, George M. “The Continuity of Classical Art: Culture, Myth, and Faith.” Age of Spiritua-lity: A Symposium. Ed. Kurt Weitzmann. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980. 75-99.

JACOBS, Ine. “Gates in Late Antiquity in the Eastern Mediterranean.” BABESCH 84 (2009): 197-213.KALAVREZOU-MAXEINER, Ioli. “The Cup of San Marco and the ‘classical’ in Byzantium.” Late Antique

and Medieval Art of the Mediterranean World. Ed. Eva R. Ho�mann. Oxford: Blackwell, 2007. 273-284.KALDELLIS, Anthony. Hellenism in Byzantium: The Transformation of Greek Identity and the Reception of

the Classical Tradition. Cambridge-New York-Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 2007. KONSTANTINOS RHODIOS. Description des oeuvres d’art et de l’église des Saints Apôtres de Constantinople.

Ed. Emile Legrand. Paris: Leroux, 1896 (English translation: Constantine the Rhodian. The Seven Wonders of Constantinople: The Senate House and the Bronze Statue of Athena in the Forum of Constan-tine. Ed. Paul Stephenson, 2010. Available at: <http://www.paulstephenson.info/trans/Constan-tinetheRhodianSenate House.html> (accessed on October, 2012).

LADNER, Gerhart B. “Some Recent Publications on the Classical Tradition in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance and on Byzantium.” Traditio 10.8 (1954): 578-594.

LAFONTAINE-DOSOGNE, Jacqueline. “Les thèmes iconographiques profanes dans la peinture monumentale byzantine du VI.e au XV.e siècle.” Arte profana e arte sacra a Bisanzio. Ed. Antonio Iacobini and Enrico Zanini. Roma: Argos, 1995. 189-221.

MACRIDY, Theodore, and Stanley Casson. “Excavations at the Golden Gate, Constantinople.” Archa-eologia 81 (1931): 63-84.

MAGUIRE, Henry. “The Profane Aesthetic in Byzantine Art and Literature.” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 53 (1999): 189-205.

341

MANGO, Cyril. “The Triumphal Way of Constantinople and the Golden Gate.” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 54 (2000): 173-188.

MARINI CLARELLI, Maria Vittoria. “Personificazioni, metafore e allegorie nell’arte paleologa.” L’arte di Bisanzio e l’Italia al tempo dei Paleologi, 1261-1453. Ed. Antonio Iacobini and Mauro della Valle. Roma: Argos, 1999. 55-67.

MÜLLER-WIENER, Wolfgang. Bildlexikon zur Topographie Istanbuls. Tübingen: Ernst Wasmuth, 1977.MULLETT, Margaret, and Roger Scott, eds. Byzantium and the Classical Tradition: University of Bir-

mingham thirteenth Symposium of Byzantine studies, 1979. Birmingham: Centre for Byzantine Stu-dies, 1981.

MUNDELL MANGO, Marlia. “Imperial art in the seventh century.” New Constantines. The Rhythm of Imperial Renewal in Byzantium, 4th-13th Centuries. Papers from the Twenty-sixth Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, St Andrews, March 1992. Ed. Paul Magdalino. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1994. 109-138.

OUSTERHOUT, Robert. Master Builders of Byzantium. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999.PÜLZ, Andreas. “Das Stadtbild von Ephesos in byzantinischer Zeit.” Ephesos in byzantinischer Zeit. Ed.

Falko Daim and Sabine Ladstätter. Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums, 2011. 51-81.

RICCI, Alessandra. “Ut scultura poesis. Statuaria classica nelle dimore costantinopolitane di età tardo-antica e bizantina (IV-X secolo).” Medioevo: il tempo degli antichi. Atti del convegno internazionale di studi, Parma, 24-28 settembre 2003. Ed. Arturo Carlo Quintavalle. Milano: Electa, 2006. 188-196.

SCHNEIDER, Alfons Maria, and Bruno Meyer-Plath. Die Landmauer von Konstantinopel. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter, 1943.

SPATHARAKIS, Ioannis. Studies in Byzantine Manuscript Illumination and Iconography. London: Pindar Press, 1996.

STRZYGOWSKY, Joseph. “Das Goldene Tor in Konstantinopel.” Jahrbuch des kaiserlich deutschen archäo-logischen Instituts 8 (1893-1894): 1-39.

THÜR, Ilke. “Die spätantike Bauphase der Kuretenstraße.” Efeso paleocristiana e bizantina - Frühchrist-liches und byzantinisches Ephesos. Ed. Renate Pillinger, Otto Kresten, Fritz Krinzinger and Eugenio Russo. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1999. 104-120.

VAN MILLINGEN, Alexander. Byzantine Constantinople: the Walls of the City and Adjoining Historical Sites. London: Murray, 1899.

WEITZMANN, Kurt. Greek Mythology in Byzantine Art. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press, 1951.—. Studies in Classical and Byzantine Manuscript Illumination. London: The University of Chicago Press,

1971.WEITZMANN, Kurt, William C. Loerke, Ernst Kitzinger, and Hugo Buchthal. The Place of Book Illumi-

nation in Byzantine Art. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press, 1975.

ÍNDICE

5 PREFÁCIO7 PREFACE

1. MITOS NA LITERATURA ANTIGA

MYTHS IN ANCIENT LITERATURE

11 THE APOLLONIAN FEATURES OF PINDAR’S PYTHIAN ODES Emilio Suárez de la Torre

31 O RETRATO DE CLITEMNESTRA NA LITERATURA GREGA Joaquim Pinheiro

41 IPHIGENEIA PARTHENOS Nuno Simões Rodrigues

49 CONSIDERAÇÕES DE COMO OS MITOS ESCATOLÓGICOS DIRIGEM-SE MUITO MAIS À VIDA DO QUE À MORTE Izabela Bocayuva

59 “NÃO FOI DESTA MANEIRA QUE O TOURO CARREGOU SOBRE O DORSO O PESO DO AMOR” (BATRAC. 78-79) Rui Carlos Fonseca

69 O MITO DE TAGES NO DE DIVINATIONE Giuseppe Ciafardone

75 MATERNIDADES MALDITAS Cristina Santos Pinheiro

85 VICIMVS VICTI PHRYGES: EQUIPARAÇÃO ENTRE VENCIDOS E VENCEDORES, TROIANOS E DÁNAOS, NO AGAMÉMNON DE SÉNECA Ricardo Duarte

99 AMOR MORBUS EM PHAEDRA: O MITO E A DOUTRINA ESTÓICA DOS AFFECTUS Ana Filipa Isidoro da Silva

107 THYESTES DE SÉNECA: O TEATRO DA FRUSTRAÇÃO DA ALMA HUMANA. ENTRE A TRANQUILLITAS ANIMI E O FUROR REGNI Mariana Montalvão Horta e Costa Matias

119 READING CLASSICAL MYTHS IN LATE ANTIQUITY: MACROBIUS’ PROPOSAL OF LITERARY IDENTITY IN COMMENTARII IN SOMNIUM SCIPIONIS Julieta Cardigni

2. MITOS NA LITERATURA MODERNA E CONTEMPORÂNEA

MYTHS IN MODERN AND CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE

133 MITOLOGIA E MUNDIVIDÊNCIA MANEIRISTA EM O LIMA DE DIOGO BERNARDES José Cândido de Oliveira Martins

145 O MITO DE DON JUAN E LES LIAISONS DANGEREUSES DE LACLOS Ana Isabel Moniz

155 SERVINDO A CIRCE Margarida Vale de Gato

165 A PRESENÇA DO MITO NA POESIA DE JULES LAFORGUE Guacira Marcondes Machado

171 TRAÇOS DE UMA REFLEXÃO MÍTICA SOBRE O FEMININO EM O LIVRO DE ALDA DE ABEL BOTELHO Rui Sousa

187 APOLLINAIRE E A RELEITURA DOS MITOS EM ALCOOLS Silvana Vieira da Silva

199 THE RECEPTION OF MYTH IN FERNANDO PESSOA Maria João Toscano Rico

217 BABEL AND MERLIN REVISITED IN C.S. LEWIS’S THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH Maria Luísa Franco de Oliveira Falcão

225 O MITO DE NARCISO E A LITERATURA DE INTROSPECÇÃO Anna Faedrich Martins

239 ULISSES E O VELHO SANTIAGO Maria Mafalda Viana

251 RECEÇÃO MÍTICA EM AGUSTINA BESSA LUÍS Maria do Carmo Pinheiro e Silva Cardoso Mendes

261 RESSIGNIFICAÇÕES DO MITO CLÁSSICO DO MARAVILHOSO NO LIVRO FITA VERDE NO CABELO, DE JOÃO GUIMARÃES ROSA Nerynei Meira Carneiro Bellini

273 O MITO REVISITADO NA FICÇÃO DE ANGOLA: O DESEJO DE KIANDA E A PARÁBOLA DO CÁGADO VELHO, DE PEPETELA Maria Cristina Batalha

283 O RESSURGIMENTO DE VÉNUS Joana Marques de Almeida

291 “THE MYTH TO END ALL MYTHS” Alexandra Cheira

299 REVISITING THE TUDOR MYTH IN SANDRA WORTH’S THE ROSE OF YORK TRILOGY Susana Paula de Magalhães Oliveira

307 DO CAOS AO COSMOS Helena Malheiro

317 A INEXORABILIDADE DO DESTINO DO MITO GREGO NA MODERNIDADE ATRAVÉS DA POESIA DE SOPHIA DE MELLO BREYNER ANDRESEN Maria da Conceição Oliveira Guimarães

3. MITOS NAS ARTES

MYTHS IN ARTS

331 RECYCLING MYTHS IN BYZANTINE ART Livia Bevilacqua

343 AFRODITE E EROS, REVISITADOS POR FRANCISCO DE HOLANDA Teresa Lousa

351 EROS PLAYING WITH WALNUTS IN THE COMEDIES OF JORGE FERREIRA DE VASCONCELOS Silvina Pereira

363 O MITO INSTÁVEL DE ORESTES E HAMLET Henrique Miguel Carvalho

373 A PRESENÇA DE ALCESTE NA MÚSICA ERUDITA Ana Alexandra Alves de Sousa

383 TRISTÃO E ISOLDA: O MITO DO AMOR IMPOSSÍVEL Gianmarco Catacchio

391 OS MITOS ARTURIANOS NA PINTURA DO SÉCULO XIX Ana Margarida Chora

403 PAIXÃO, SABEDORIA E NARRATIVA MÍTICA NA XILOGRAVURA DE HEIN SEMKE Joanna Latka

413 ALGUNS APONTAMENTOS NA MITOLOGIA DAS “LOUCAS” Isabel Henriques de Jesus

423 CAGE WAKES UP JOYCE Ana Luísa Valdeira

433 MARGARET ATWOOD’S THE PENELOPIAD Sara Paiva Henriques

445 PERCY JACKSON: O LADRÃO DE MITOS João Peixe

453 BITE ME! BUT PLEASE BE SEXY ABOUT IT – O MITO DO VAMPIRO NO CINEMA José Duarte

4. MITOS NA HISTÓRIA E NA FILOSOFIA

MYTHS IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY

471 THE THEBAN MYTHS IN HERODOTUS: NOT YET A NEGATIVE PARADIGM Pierpaolo Peroni

483 SCIPIO AEMILIANUS AND ODYSSEUS AS PARADIGMS OF PRÓNOIA Breno Battistin Sebastiani

495 RECONFIGURAÇÕES MEDIEVAIS E MODERNAS DO MITO DE ATLÂNTIDA Margarida Santos Alpalhão

503 A CHEGADA DO CARDEAL ALEXANDRINO A LISBOA (1571) André Simões

517 FROM OBSCURITY TO THE PANTHEON OF PORTUGUESE AMERICAN HEROES: RECYCLING PETER FRANCISCO FOR ETHNIC MINORITY ‘FEEL GOOD’ AND UPLIFT Reinaldo Francisco Silva

529 IRACEMA PARA ALÉM DAS EXPECTATIVAS Tito Barros Leal

539 CASSANDRA REVISITADA Sandra Pereira Vinagre

551 O MITO COMO LEITURA DA HISTÓRIA Ivone Daré Rabello

559 A ERÓTICA DO ÊXTASE Lolita Guimarães Guerra

575 DEVOLVER O FOGO AOS DEUSES Sofia Santos

5. MITOS NA CULTURA POPULAR

MYTHS IN POPULAR CULTURE

587 RARIDADE E DIVERSIDADE COMO FACES DA MESMA MOEDA Marina Pelluci Duarte Mortoza

595 MITOLOGIA NA FÁBULA Ana Paiva Morais Teresa Araújo

607 TEMAS MÍTICOS NOS CONTOS POPULARES PORTUGUESES Cristina Abranches Guerreiro

615 “A SERRANA” E “A GALHARDA”, DOIS RETRATOS DA MULHER DEVORADORA NO ROMANCEIRO DE TRADIÇÃO PORTUGUESA Ana Sirgado

625 A LENDA DAS ÁGUAS SANTAS DO VIMEIRO Natália Albino Pires

637 O HERÓI MÍTICO E A IMAGEM DO PRÍNCIPE NOS CONTOS DE JOSÉ LEITE DE VASCONCELOS Teresa M. Gonçalves de Castro

651 MITO E CONTO POPULAR Maria Auxiliadora Fontana Baseio

659 AS MÃOS DOS PRETOS, DE LUÍS BERNARDO HOWANA Maria Zilda da Cunha

671 ANGELA CARTER E BARBA-AZUL Cleide Antonia Rapucci

6.MITOS NA RELIGIÃO E NAS CIÊNCIAS

MYTHS IN RELIGION AND SCIENCE

685 THE JUDGMENT BETWEEN HORUS AND SETH AS A PARADIGM FOR THE JUDGMENT OF THE DEAD André de Campos Silva

697 REVISITANDO O MITO EGÍPCIO DAS LUTAS ENTRE HÓRUS E SET José das Candeias Sales

715 DA PALAVRA AO ACTO Miguel Pimenta-Silva

727 LILITH: FROM POWERFUL GODDESS TO EVIL QUEEN Maria Fernandes

737 ENTRE MITO E CIÊNCIA Abel N. Pena

749 A MIGRAÇÃO DOS PORTENTOS Isabel de Barros Dias

763 O MITO DA CRIAÇÃO NO CORÃO E O SEU REFLEXO NA MÍSTICA SUFI Natália Maria Lopes Nunes

777 REVISITAR A CATÁBASE Daniela Di Pasquale

789 REMINISCÊNCIAS DE VERGÍLIO NA OBRA POÉTICA DE PEDRO JOÃO PERPINHÃO Helena Costa Toipa

805 NARCISO E LEONARDO NA PERSPETIVA DE FREUD Isabel Castro Lopes

815 À PROCURA DE UM FINAL FELIZ, OU A NARRATIVA ADÂMICA REVISITADA POR LLANSOL Cristiana Vasconcelos Rodrigues

!"#$%$&'()*)+$&*),)+-&.%)!"#$%$&"/)!"#$%$&'()(*$&)("()(*)+)(,)*)("-"(&'.&)(

/"!'("('-$*".&'()($*'/$.0!$)(12*'.)(+"(&)+)%()%(&"*3)%("(-2/'!"%4(,)*)(

.)%(3"!*$&"(!"3".%'!()%('5$%*)%("('%(6).'%(3!)72.+'%("(%)*5!$'%(82"(

!"#$%&%'(&%()'(*""+$*#,+-('*.#-/0*$#1(2+".*,&#(&#(3-4#($-566*$#7(#6($#,9!"#$%&%'(&%()'(*""+$*#,+-('*.#-/0*$#1(2+".*,&#(&#(3-4#($-566*$#7(#6($#,!"#$%&%'(&%()'(*""+$*#,+-('*.#-/0*$#1(2+".*,&#(&#(3-4#($-566*$#7(#6($#,

&!$52&)%(*2-&$+$%,$3-$.'!"%(!"2.$+)%(."%&"(#)-2*"($.,$+"*(%)5!"('(3-'%9&!$52&)%(*2-&$+$%,$3-$.'!"%(!"2.$+)%(."%&"(#)-2*"($.,$+"*(%)5!"('(3-'%&!$52&)%(*2-&$+$%,$3-$.'!"%(!"2.$+)%(."%&"(#)-2*"($.,$+"*(%)5!"('(3-'%

&$,$+'+"(+)(*$&)4(*'&"!$'-$6'+)(.'%(%2'%(":3!"%%;"%(-$&"!0!$'%4('!&<%&$,'%4(

!#-8.*$+6(#)($*%,.83$+6(%(-*&#(9(-):(&+6(,#;+6($*<,$*+6(%(5"%+6(&#(6+=%"1(

!"#$%$&'()*)+$&*),)+-&.%)!"#$%$&"/(!"#$%$&%(*=&1('.+(1)>($&(1'%(5)&1(/"."!'&"+(!"#$%$&'()*)+$&*),)+-&.%)!"#$%$&"/

'.+(.2!&2!"+(12*'.($*'/$.'&$).(',!)%%(&$*"('.+(%3',"4('.+('--)>"+(2%(&)(

!"&1$.?(&1"('5=%*'-('.+(%)*5!"(+"3&1%(&1'&(3!),""+(7!)*(&1"(*=&1)-)/$,'-(

$!!'&$).'-@(A))&"+($.(&1"(,-'%%$,'-(!"3)%$&)!=4(&1"(,).&!$52&$).%('%%"*5-"+(

$.(&1$%(#)-2*"(3!$#$-"/"(+=.'*$,('.+($.&"!+$%,$3-$.'!=('33!)',1"%(&)(&1"(3-'%&$,$&=(

#>('?.@7(+6('+,*>%6.(*,(-*.%"+"?7(+".*6.*$7(!#-*.*$+-(#"(6$*%,.*3$(%A!"%66*#,1