Version classiqueVersion mobile

Monastères, images, pouvoirs et société à Byzance

 | 
Michel Kaplan

Nouvelles approches du monachisme byzantin

Martyrs and Martyria in the Gareja Desert

Zaza Skhirtladze

Texte intégral

  • 1 For general bibliography see: Z. Skhirtladze, Newly discovered early paintings in the Gareja deser (...)

1The establishment of a vast monastic unit in the Gareja desert (southeastern Georgia) by St. David, one of the so-called Thirteen Syrian Fathers who had come to Georgia in the mid sixth century, greatly altered the character of monasticism in the Christian Caucasus.1 From the very beginning the graves of the founders of the monasteries, local saints, and martyrs, had been major sites of worship and pilgrimage, and the most popular of these sites in the Gareja rock-cut monasteries continuously increased over the centuries. Among them the number of martyria was great. This is not surprising, because the expansive monastic union was situated in the most significant confessional, political and commercial crossroads, and thus Gareja permanently suffered from invaders. And this, in its turn, increased the number of martyred monks either by individuals or whole groups.

  • 2 Dzveli kartuli agiograpiuli literatures dzeglebi [Monuments of Old Georgian Hagiographie Literatur (...)
  • 3 Dzveli kartuli agiograpiuli literaturis dzeglebi, III, ed. I. Abuladze, Tbilisi 1971, p. 222.

2The origins of the monastic tradition linked with the veneration of the martyria of the local saints, as well as their structure and decoration, are rooted in the times of St. David. The church hewn by the newly baptized local ruler, Eristavi Bubakar, was soon after converted into the burial place of the founder of the monastic complex and his first disciple, Lukiane.2 The small funerary chapel was considerably enlarged in the ninth century in the days of Ilarion Kartveli (“the Georgian”), who after his return from Palestine (where he had spent several years in the Lavra of St. Sabas) “converted the martyrium of St. David into a church, took care and made donations.”3 These substantial changes involved both the functional as well as the structural aspects of the arrangement of the saint’s grave as a martyrium. Afterwards the burial chapel of the saint had become the main church of the Laura with daily service.

Fig. 1 – Lavra of St. David. Church of Transfiguration.
View of the tomb of St. David Garejeli in the southeast bay.

  • 4 Z. Skhirtladze, The burial of St. David Garejeli: Preliminary Rapport of the Excavations (forthcom (...)

3Evidence of the hagiographer on Ilarion’s fashioning a larnax on the grave of St. David should be considered as an indication of the fact that initially the grave was shaped as a humble, rock-cut sepulchre characteristic of the burials of eastern ascetics. In the course of the later reconstruction, due to the erection of a large church on this site and the incorporation of the saint’s grave in its south bay, the burial was considerably enlarged and shaped as a rectangular stone cist grave projecting above the floor level. Excavations carried out in summer 2000 confirmed this (figs. 1-2).4 Traces of the original architectural arrangement revealed during the excavation of the burial of St. David and the area surrounding it suggests that originally, before the cave was altered on the initiative of St. Ilarion Kartveli, it was a small-size rock-cut chapel. The tomb of St. David Garejeli was made in its northern bay, and that of his disciple, Lukiane – opposite to it, in the southern bay (after the expansion of the chapel his tomb must have found itself under the south wall of the newly enlarged church or even outside it).

Fig. 2 – The tomb of St. David Garejeli. Plan and sections.

Fig. 3 – Bertubani martyrium. View from the south.

4The general arrangement of the burial site of St. David most likely served as a model for the martyria in diverse monasteries of Gareja desert. Monuments recently discovered by the members of the Gareja Research Centre are quite eloquent.

BERTUBANI

5The turn of the twelfth-thirteenth centuries was traditionally considered as a presumable date of foundation of Bertubani monastery. The discovery of a rock-cut chapel above the main tier of the monastery caves, at some distance from it, considerably changed the picture.

6A small chapel (240 x 180 cm) is connected to the early stage (no later than sixth-seventh centuries) of the history of the monastic complex (fig. 3). A medium-size niche in the center of the east wall of the irregularly shaped cave functioned as a chancel. Next to it is a small niche for candles, while a burial made of flat stone slabs was constructed in a recess hewn in the north wall (fig. 4).

Fig. 4 – Bertubani martyrium. Plan.

7In the late ninth or early tenth century, the interior of the cave was partially plastered: a thin layer of plaster covers its east and north walls and partially the root. The outer wall of the larnax was also plastered. The painting embellished only the east and north walls. To the initial decoration belong flourished crosses of elongated proportions on stepped bases graphically outlined in reddish-brown paint on either side of the chancel niche (fig. 5) and the symbolic composition of unique iconography occupying the whole width of the north wall, above the larnax (fig. 6). Red lines from three sides frame the central, slightly recessed, part of the wall. Blue-sky segments are depicted in the middle of the lateral vertical strips. Four arms holding red crosses of elongated proportions are outstretched from each of the segment. To the left of this composition (respectively, by the head of the buried) a cross on a small base is depicted with reddish-brown paint, and to the right – an ornamental motif similar to that on the inner side of the east wall niche (due to the scraping of the paint only a small fragment is left). In the upper part of the composition, slightly to the right from the centre, the lower portion of the figure is discernible, namely, laps of a tunic and a cloak rendered in light blue and brown paint, as well as edges of an orarion or omophorion. Based on the garments, it becomes evident that a clergyman was most likely to be depicted here. According to the fragments preserved to date, a reddish-brown contour ran along the sides of the front wall and along the upper edge of the sarcophagus.

  • 5 G. Abramishvili, The painting of Bertubani Martyrium, in L’arle georgiana dal ix al xiv secolo. At (...)

8The murals of the martyrium were amplified more than once: the Virgin Hodegetria in the niche of the east wall is ascribed to the end of the eleventh century or the beginning of the twelfth century, while the ornament on the inner side of the niche arch and east corner of the north wall seems most likely to have been executed later, in late thirteenth-early fourteenth century.5

Fig. 5 – Bertubani martyrium. Murals of the east wall.

9Plaster in the interior of the martyrium is covered with inscriptions and graffiti written by pilgrims over a long period; a major part of them are personal appeals to the martyrs.

Fig. 6 – Bertubani martyrium. Composition on the north wall. Scheme.

PIRUKUGHMA

  • 6 The majority of the cave complexes located in the eastern part of the monastic complex is connecte (...)

10Many questions surround the martyrium of the nameless monastery located in the east part of Gareja,6 in the west massif of the so-called Pirukughma Mount. A sequence of inaccessible caves hewn horizontally, one after another in the cleft surface of the vertical cliff, emerges unexpectedly before the visitor’s eyes, leaving an indelible impression by its stern beauty.

11The cave structures of the monastery were cut in two tiers, the upper level being the principal one. At present, it unites nine caves. Eight of them are adjacent to one other, while one is somewhat detached in the farthest western edge of the tier, in the middle of the conical massif. The main part of the cave structures in the lower tier is now filled with earth. The upper row is formed as a single system, comprising structures of liturgical function, cells and structures for economic use (figs. 7 and 8).

Fig. 7 – Pirukughma. West part of the complex. Plan.

Fig. 8 – Pirukughma. West part of the complex. Sections.

Fig. 9 – Pirukughma. Martyrium. View from the west.

12An aisless vaulted church with a clear-cut horseshoe-shaped chancel and elongated naos is located in the east part of the sequence of monastery caves. In its due course, the chapel used to be completely plastered. Thick, rough plaster fails to conceal the irregular shape of the walls and the vault of the rock-cut chapel. This work of Gareja mason-monks is very impressive and, due to its archaic architectural form, creates an impression of being sculptured in the rock. The same is true of a small-size aisless vaulted martyrium, which is connected with the chancel from the south-east by a low and narrow aperture. This is a compartment of high proportions with a flattened chancel in its east wall (fig. 9). The floor of its minute naos is almost completely occupied by two graves arranged by its north and south walls. Both of them are ravaged at present, while the southern one is only partially preserved. The interior of the martyrium was plastered immediately after hewing, though it was never painted.

13Only after a comprehensive study of the Pirukughma monastery would it be possible to speak about the date of creation of the monastery and its structures. However, the section of the complex surveyed at present, which has preserved old traditions of the monastic life and architectural peculiarities of the Gareja desert actually unaltered, definitely testifies to the fact that it should be ascribable to the early stage (presumably ninth century) of revitalisation of this part of the monastic unit; besides, it seems to have been abandoned at the same early stage. Afterwards, the monastery became an abode of hawks – it seems that over centuries nobody ever ventured not only to settle, but even to penetrate these caves, which were turned inaccessible, losing their front side from the south.

TSAMEBULI

  • 7 Notes and materials relating to the separate structures of the monastery are inserted in the monog (...)

14Tsamebuli belongs to those several Gareja monasteries and hermitages about which the sources have preserved practically nothing. This is particularly true for the earlier stage of the history of the complex. Some of the caves bear clear signs of later reconstruction, while the majority of the structures are of the time of considerable expansion and altering of the complex, which must have taken place in the tenth-eleventh centuries.7

15Among the remains of the earlier period of the monastery, located in the western periphery of the Gareja desert, is a rock-cut chapel hewn in the first tier of the caves in its western part. This appears to be one of the most important monuments of the complex (fig. 10). The interior of the cave was half-filled with earth and gravel. Human bones as well as flagstones showed in the mass of earth piled up over the centuries. The roof of the cave still preserved large fragments of plaster. A six-line Georgian pilgrim inscription (in mkhedruli script) was scratched on the plaster in the central part of the roof in the eighteenth-nineteenth centuries: “Lord Jesus Christ and saints thank your mercy to make me worthy to come here, novice Levan.” All this made it obvious that the cave constituted a burial for martyrs. The bones scattered in the chapel interior testified to the fact that it was vandalised in our days and was severely damaged. The monument needed urgent salvage work. It was decided to clean the burial interior and make its detailed fixation.

Fig. 10 – Tsamebuli. Martyrium. View from the south.

Fig. 11 – Tsamebuli. Martyrium. Plan and sections.

  • 8 Z. Skhirtladze, Z. Tvalchrelidze, Gamokvabuli samartvile Tsamebulshi [Tsamebuli Rock-cut Martyrium (...)

16Excavations carried out in 1997-1999 in the martyrium of Tsamebuli rock-cut monastery by the archaeological expedition of the State Museum of Georgia and Gareja Research Centre8 fully revealed its forms (fig. 11): this is a small cave of irregular shape with the chancel provided with a low altar from the east and a bay along the whole length of its north wall. A relatively small recess was also hewn in the north wall. The martyrium is completely open from the south; later, east part of the aperture was partially walled in with rubble. The cave interior used to be plastered with lime and the floor – covered with lime solution. Of the two graves unearthed here, one is a collective sepulchre; it was arranged in the northern bay of the cave and enclosed both from south and east. The roof of the larnax, once completely covered it, was later destroyed – flat stones were spread in the interior, some of them being preserved on the site of the grave (i.e. in the north-west corner of the cave). In front of this sepulchre, by its south wall, is arranged another grave that is relatively smaller and situated lower. This is a burial for one person and has been pristinely preserved.

  • 9 British Museum, Ms. Wardrop 56, fols. 115-130; Gabriel Mtsire, Ghvtivsulierni Tkhrobani [Divine Na (...)

17We possess no literary evidence for the construction of the martyrium. Due to its general aspect, namely, architectural treatment and the principle of grave arrangement, the rock-cut burial may reflect a tradition established at the early stage of history of Gareja monastic unit. The architectural solution of the martyrium gives ground for such a supposition: a small-size low interior of irregular forms with bays to the north and west, a shrine at the north wall, a rectangular chancel with low altar – all this points to the Early Middle Ages as the presumable time of construction of the cave burial. Archaeological survey also suggests that it can be ascribed to the Early Middle Ages – the burial seems to belong to the initial stage of the existence of the monastery. At the same time, the martyrium was most likely to have retained its function at the subsequent period. A treatise by Gabriel Mtsire (f 1802), a monk active in the Natlismtsemeli monastery (next to Tsamebuli), contains local oral narrations about the martyrium, as well as the history of its cleaning by Gareja monks in the second half of the eighteenth century.9 Comparison of the literary sources with the material unearthed in the course of excavations makes it evident that the rock-cut martyrium was re-used later – at the turn of the sixteenth century to the seventeenth century (to bury relics of the monks slaughtered by the army of invaders, according to the local tradition – that of the Persian Shah Abbas I) and in the late seventeenth-early eighteenth centuries (as a personal burial by a hermit, who had settled at the long-abandoned complex).

  • 10 Apparently, the original location and the attribution of two wooden needles and a fragment of a wa (...)

18From Gabriel’s narration it becomes evident that by the second half of the eighteenth century Tsamebuli have long been deserted and its name forgotten. However, among the brethren of the monastery of St. John the Baptist a local monastic tradition circulated about the existence of relics of saints in the neighbouring abandoned monastery. It was this tradition that had brought a part of local monks to Tsamebuli to clean the martyrium. Gabriel Mtsire briefly but eloquently describes their passage to Tsamebuli and the cleaning of the cave burial. His description fully coincides with the picture found by the recent excavation: a small-size chapel, in the northern wall of which a group burial of martyrs is constructed, and next to it a burial with the remains of a monk. Gabriel lists the things that local monks had found during their excavation.10 It is clear from the description that in the bigger shrine only relics of the martyred monks were interred, while the corpse of the monk buried separately was preserved completely and intact.

  • 11 Chubinashvili, Peshchernye monastyri (as in n. 7), p. 86-90.
  • 12 P. Ioseliani, Tskhovreba Giorgi metsametisa [The Life of George XIII], ed. A. Gatserelia, Tbilisi (...)

19A certain precision is needed for the period of the history of the martyrium connected with the massacre of the local monks at the beginning of the seventeenth century and the burial of the relics. According to Gabriel Mtsire, Alexandre, the king of Kakheti (East Georgian province) had transferred the relics of the slaughtered monks from the Lavra of St. David and the monastery of St. John the Baptist to the martyrium of the Tsamebuli monastery. Here seems to be implied King Aleksandre II (1574-1606), whose donor activity to the Gareja desert monasteries is well known.11 He was consecrated in Gareja and was buried in the Lavra of St. David, in the Church of St. John the Theologian.12

  • 13 Patriarch Antoni, Martirika, Dzveli kartuli agiograpiuli literaturis dzeglebi, VI, ed. M. Shanidze(...)
  • 14 For more details about this see: Z. Skhirtladze, Towards the History of the Martyrium at the Udabn (...)
  • 15 G. Abramishvili, Davit garejelis tsikli kartul kedlis mkhatvrobashi [The Cycle of David Garejeli i (...)

20Gabriel’s narration raises many questions. First, if the construction of the martyria for the slaughtered monks in the Udabno and Tsamebuli monasteries is connected with the king of Kakheti Aleksandre II, then their martyrdom should have been expected at the turn of the seventeenth century, i.e. somewhat earlier than Shah Abbas I’s invasion (1614/1616).13 Suspicion on the existence of such a discrepancy is increased by consideration of the evidence of documentary materials of the time.14 This problem goes beyond the purview of the present essay. Here one could focus attention on the fact of the existence of the Udabno martyrium much earlier and its second use at the turn of the seventeenth century.15 The same situation seems to have existed in the case of Tsamebuli monastery martyrium. It is a fact that at the beginning of the seventeenth century several monasteries of the Gareja desert were ravaged. At the same time, it is hardly conceivable that for the relics of monks slaughtered at the monastery of St. John the Baptist a special martyrium was hewn farther from it, in a small cave complex, abandoned at least for several centuries. Presumably, in both cases – in Udabno, as well as in Tsamebuli – the marty-riums existing earlier were reused and for this purpose they were partially renovated.

  • 16 Gabriel Mtsirk, Ghvtivsulierni Tkhrobani (as in n. 9), p. 44.

21The story of the monk buried apart in the martyrium is of no less interest. From the narration of Gabriel Mtsire it is clear that the hermit had decided to be buried in the martyrium and his wish was actually fulfilled. This presumably must have happened in the seventeenth century or, at the latest, at the beginning of the eighteenth century. It is also indicated in the historical chronicle that a shrine was made (e.g. built of stone) for him by the brethren of the Natlismtsemeli monastery. They laid small fragments of the relics, partly scattered from the collective burial, beneath his remains.16

  • 17 H. Skrobucha, Sinai, London 1966, p. 74-77; J. Patrich, Sabas, Leader of Palestinian Monasticism, (...)

22As evidenced by Gabriel Mtsire, while cleaning and putting the martyrium interior in order two relics – a sword-smitten skull and a bone – were left un-buried for general observation and veneration (most likely they were deposited on the cover of the grave proper or on the altar). Such a tradition is known elsewhere in the monastic units of the Christian East.17

UDABNO

23In the Udabno monastery, a martyrium is located to the west of the upper tier caves, at a considerable distance from the latter. The separate location of the chapel seems to be indicative of its sacred function. From the south, a rectangular porch of roughly hewn stone is built to an irregularly shaped rectangular cave (with a large larnax arranged at its north wall and an altar abutting upon the east wall) (fig. 12). The architecture and murals of the martyrium bear traces of several renewals. At the same time, the structure of its rock-cut part, as well as its architectural solution, similar to the Bertubani and Tsamebuli martyria must be indicative of its connection with the early traditions.

Fig. 12 – Udabno martyrium. Plan and sections.

  • 18 M. Kavtaria, Davit Garejis literaturuli skola [The Literary School of Davit Gareja], Tbilisi 1965, (...)

24The martyrium is one of those rare sanctities of the Gareja desert which are linked with the most significant of the local monastic legends. A major part of these oral traditions is connected with the monks slaughtered on Easter Day by the troops of Shah Abbas I in the 1614/1616;18 however, this is just a single episode of a far longer history of the chapel.

  • 19 Dzveli Kartuli, I (as in n. 2), p. 234; Cf. Abramishvili, Davit garejelis tsikli (as in n. 15), p. (...)
  • 20 Ibid., p. 101-103.
  • 21 Cf. supra note 2.
  • 22 Abramishvili, Davit garejelis tsikli, p. 33-37.

25In fact, special veneration of this site seems to go back to the initial stage of life in the monastic complex. G. Abramishvili had paid attention to the evidence of the Life of St. David Garejeli that the Saint “went every day to the cleft in the rock and prayed alone in solitude and washed this desert with his tears and sweat”.19 This hagiographic evidence is most likely to be illustrated in the murals of the martyrium, namely on its west wall (fig. 13). A composition comprising two episodes represents one of the miracles of the saint, namely an episode when St. David praying, as usual, on the mount, met the local pagan ruler Bubakar20 (this is the same Bubakar, who was converted by St. David and afterwards took great care of the monastery).21 It is supposed that the same episode was included in the cycle of St. David Garejeli, represented in the first layer painting of the diaconicon of the main church of Udabno monastery and presumably executed in the tenth century.22 Taking all this into consideration, the hypothesis was advanced that this was the actual site where St. David used to pray; it was clothed in special sacredness in the life-time of the Saint, which had become the main reason of hewing a church here. This was most likely to have taken place at an early stage of the monastic life.

Fig. 13 – Udabno martyrium. Miracle of St. David Garejeli. Scheme.

  • 23 This date was supposed by G. Chubinashvili (Peshchernye monastyri David Garedzhi, p. 79-80), Sh. A (...)
  • 24 Abramishvili, Davit garejelis tsikli, p. 112-113.
  • 25 A. Eastmond, Royal Imagery in Medieval Georgia, University Park, PA 1998, p. 138-141.

26The initial forms of the church were preserved unaltered over the centuries. Its function and general architectural aspect remained unaltered in the eleventh century, when the murals containing the above-mentioned composition were executed.23 However, a major part of the painting is formed by the composition above the larnax, depicting the invaders slaughtering the Gareja monks (fig. 14). The tentative date of this layer of painting is defined as the twelfth century; at the same time, it is supposed that the scene should illustrate the devastation of Gareja during the Seljuk invasion in late eleventh century.24 It seems most likely that the church was converted into a martyrium after this invasion. As part of the wide-scale building activity in the twelfth century, which, alongside other monastic units of Georgia, did also take place in Gareja,25 hewing of a new cave would have been quite easy, but the sacredness of the site must have preconditioned not only its preservation, but its converting into a martyrium and its painting.

Fig. 14 – Udabno martyrium. Martyrdom of the Gareja monks. Scheme.

  • 26 Gr. Gordeev, Karajazskaja step’ i drevnie Gruzinskie pustyri Sv. Ioanna Krestitel’a i Sv. Davida G (...)
  • 27 Gabriel Mtsire, Ghvtivsulierni Tkhrobani, p. 44.

27Later, after the devastation of Gareja desert monasteries by Shah Abbas I, the Laura of St. David and Udabno monastery seem to have remained ravaged and actually desolate for a certain period. In the late seventeenth century, in the days of King Archil II (1647-1713) the south porch was built, which functioned as an aisle, while the rock-cut part of the martyrium was turned into a chancel (fig. 15). Visitors of the later period left impressive descriptions of the general arrangement of the martyrium interior: its walls were covered with human bones hung cross-wise. Similar crosses were also placed on the altar and local monks kissed them with reverence.26 Gabriel Mtsire’s narrative contains characteristic evidence touching on the tradition of the worship of the holy relics: several bones of the martyrs at the Udabno Martyrium were taken to the Lavra of St. David by the local monks who tied them cross-wise and kissed them.27

Fig. 15 – Udabno martyrium.
View of the interior in the late nineteenth century.

LAVRA OF ST. DAVID

  • 28 Shio is known as a skilled copyist of manuscripts (Cf. Kavtaria, Davit Garejis literaturuli skola (...)
  • 29 The eye-witness of the martyrdom, the Archimandrite of Mtskheta, Nikoloz Maghalashvili, active in (...)

28In the middle of a tunnel leading from the burial place of St. David, church of Transfiguration, towards the upper terrace, a small grave hewn in the rock is connected with the later history of the monastic complex. This is a martyrium of the hieromonk St. Shio the Younger28 and five other monks slaughtered by the Lezghins at the end of the seventeenth century.29

  • 30 Dzveli kartuli, IV (as in n. 29), p. 442.

29The martyrium of St. Shio was made soon by his spiritual father, Father Superior of the monastery, Onophre Machutadze (1690-1733), known in the sources as “the second builder of the monastery”.30

  • 31 Muraviov, Gruzija i Armenija (as in n. 26), p. 108.
  • 32 P. Karbelashvili, Davit garejis udabnoshi [In the Davit Gareja Desert], Iveria, 1895, N 179.

30The pilgrim Andrey Muraviov, visiting the Lavra of St. David in 1843, relates that while coming out of the burial place of St. David, the church of Transfiguration, through the dark tunnel leading to an upper terrace, he was shown a cave where “a healing skull of one of the old hermits was kept of which myrrh oozed, although nobody could name him”.31 Among the antiquities of the Lavra of St. David published in 1895 by the priest Polievktos Karbelashvili, an iron pictoral cross worn by St. Shio for twenty years is mentioned. According to this description, the remains of the saint were laid in a cave hewn to the left of the stairs, on the middle platform of the tunnel leading to the church of Transfiguration, and pilgrims always lit candles there.32

31In the early twentieth century along with other monasteries and hermitages of the Gareja desert the Lavra of St. David also was deserted, and it gradually fell into decay. Like other structures of the monastery, the burial of St. Shio and his co-martyrs was abandoned and filled with earth.

32After the revival of monastic life in the Lavra of St. David, several human bones were discovered in the martyrium in the course of its cleaning in July 1996. They were mainly concentrated in the eastern part of the grave. The lower part of a metal candlestick, as well as a small wooden roller (presumably, to hold an icon-lamp), were also found there.

  • 33 Indeed, cleaning revealed in the martyrium three fragments of slab and one intact slab.

33The small scale (170 x 80 cm) martyrium is shaped as a rectangular narrow and deep grave elongated along the east-west axis. At the depth of 55 cm, a shelf for the tomb cover composed of stone slabs is arranged along its whole perimeter.33 At the bottom of the burial, a shallow niche to place the head is cut in its west wall. A recess similar to this niche is also seen in the east wall of the grave. In the middle of the north wall (opposite the entrance), a small niche for candles is arranged (fig. 16).

34The walls of the martyrium are hewn studiously and neatly. Its interior does not seem to have ever been plastered. A trace of plaster survives only in the candle niche and the outer wall of the martyrium. Based on these fragments, it is now difficult to say whether they belong to the original phase of the construction of the burial or were done later.

35Such small dimensions of the martyrium are somewhat incongruous with the number of the martyred monks: the remains of several persons discovered during its cleaning testify that the site served as a collective grave.

36The burial of St. Shio and his co-martyrs seems to have been the last rock-cut martyrium in Gareja. Many monks had fallen victim to the devastation of Gareja desert monasteries in the eighteenth-nineteenth centuries; however, according to present-day knowledge, no special rock-cut grave has been made since then.

Fig. 16 – Lavra of St. David. Martyrium of St. Shio the Younger. Plan and sections.

  • 34 For the similar practice see: Y. Hirschffad, The Judean Desert Monasteries in the Byzantine Period(...)

37As a result of its unceasing monastic life extending over sixteen centuries, Gareja was closely linked with the veneration of the local saints and was one of the major pilgrimage centers of the Caucasus. The increase or – in time of hardship – the decrease of the number of monasteries had no impact on the overall attitude towards the martyria as the sites of veneration. The creation of the first martyria in the Gareja desert was connected with the founding of the monasteries: their building was actually started by the disciples of the founder. His burial place was becoming the nucleus of the structure of the complex. This was the case in the Lavra of St. David, in the monastery of St. Dodo, and apparently, in Pirukughma.34 Simultaneously or more frequently later these were burials of martyred monks (Tsamebuli, Udabno, Lavra of St. David) some of which are anonymous. Even in cases when life was lost in a monastery, these were mainly burials of the saints or martyrs proper, which assumed the function of indicators of the site sacredness, remaining places of overall worship. To this is connected their re-use (Tsamebuli, Udabno), as well as constant care for them, namely renewal or re-adorning them from time to time (Udabno, Bertubani).

  • 35 The small dimansions of the cave are preserved in the case of martyria serving as a mass burial (a (...)

38Under conditions of such veneration of local saints (both the founders and the martyrs) and their burials, the characteristic type of the rock-cut martyria, which was established at the initial stage of monastic life in the Gareja desert, was actually left unaltered over the centuries. Indeed, most martyria are characterised by a similar structure: a small-sized,35 low, irregularly shaped naos is provided with a rectangular, flat or elliptic chancel (or a niche functioning as a chancel), where a rock-cut altar is arranged; in the case of one extant grave, as a rule, it is fixed to the north wall, opposite the entrance traditionally cut in the south wall, or is arranged in the recess of the north wall; in certain cases, the naos is also provided with a shallow recess in the west wall. Despite the existence of such additional recesses, this type of martyrium should actually be considered as an aisless vaulted cave with an inclination towards a centralised composition, which is weakly, but definitely displayed: here a square connected from two sides with small spaces forms the dominant inner space.

  • 36 E. Herzfeld, Iran in the Ancient East, London 1941, p. 327ff.
  • 37 G. Kipiani, Uplistsikhe, Tbilisi 2002, p. 80-91.
  • 38 N. Bakhtadze, Kaspis kldeshi nakveti nekropoli [Kaspi Rock-cut Necropolisl, Bulletin of State Muse (...)

39Concerning the origins of this type of rock-cut burial, as well as its geography, discussion could have easily been directed towards a lasting tradition of rock-cut burials whose existence is traceable long before Christianity in certain regions of the Near East, and which was especially wide-spread in the fire-worship religion of the Iranian states. It was within this tradition proper that in Achaemenid, Parthian and Sassanian states a specific structure of rock-cut burials was established, the main core of which was formed by a burial chamber of rectangular plan.36 At times all of its walls and at others only parts of its interior had niches with beds for the deceased inside. In addition, the tomb was often shaped as a larnax. Based on the recent discoveries, a viewpoint on the existence of a similar practice in Georgia simultaneously with Persia, Media, Anatolia, Paphlagonia and Cappadocia is definitely formed: direct identification of the Uplistsikhe site caves as burials still remains disputable,37 while discovery of the Hellenistic period necropolis near the Antique Kaspi,38 one of the most significant sites of the christianization of Georgia, has made the general picture far more clear (fig. 17). Despite this, the direct prototype of the burials in the Gareja desert monasteries is still hard to be identified. Alongside the local tradition going back to the pre-Christian epoch, a possibility of adopting contemporary practice of the burial arrangement (together with other aspects of monastic organisation) from Mesopotamia or northern Syria by the so-called Syrian Fathers and their disciples cannot be excluded.

  • 39 N. Chubinashvili, Zedazeni, Klikis Jvari, Gviara, Ars Georgica 7, 1971, p. 31-40 (Zedazeni); R. Me (...)
  • 40 H. C. Butler, Early Churches in Syria, 4th -7th Centuries, Princeton 1929, p. 212-213, 216; J. La (...)
  • 41 Hirschfeld, The Judean Desert Monasteries (as in n. 34), p. 140, fig. 71.
  • 42 D. Kipshidze, Peshchery Ani [Ani Caves], Yerevan 1972, p. 123-126, fig. 54-55, pl. 50.
  • 43 The same principle was preserved in later centuries, namely in the tenth-century Ananauri church h (...)

40Apart from other aspects, the location of the grave seems eloquent in this respect – the north recess in the interior was traditionally accepted not only in the Gareja desert martyria, but also burials of the local Saints (initial sepulchre of St. Dodo in the domed church of the monastery founded by him). However, this model characterizes the burials of all Syrian Fathers active in Georgia in the sixth century: in the Zedazeni, Tsilkani, Martqopi, Alaverdi, Breti churches, larnaxes are arranged in the east part of the north wall or north bay proper.39 A similar practice is unobtrusively reminiscent of Syrian churches, where burials of martyrs or local saints were arranged in the east portions of the naos adjoining the chancel from the north or south.40 Analogous monuments of the Judean desert (Khirbet ed-Deir) (fig. 18)41 and Armenia (Tsagkotsadzor)42 should be indicative of a wide diffusion of this practice over a vast area already in the early period.43

Fig. 17 – Kaspi. Rock-cut burials (after Bakhtadze).
© Droits réservés

Fig. 18 – Khirbet ed-Deir. Burial (after Hirschfeld).
© Droits réservés

  • 44 Hypogees of this type are of diverse planning, ranging from the simplest to multi-parted. Cf., for (...)
  • 45 Unpublished. The crypt was cleaned and partially reconstructed in 1999-2000 by a local monk.
  • 46 B. Brentjes, S. Mnazakanjan, N. Stepanjan, Kunst des Mittelalters in Armenien, Berlin 1981, p. 73- (...)
  • 47 Kipshidze, Peshchery Ani (as in n. 41), p. 122-123, fig. 52-53.
  • 48 A. Jakobson, Rannesrednevekovyi Khersones [Early Medieval Khersones], Moscow-Leningrad 1959, p. 19 (...)

41In terms of the interrelation of the Gareja local tradition and society, those cases seem to be far more characteristic, when the graves are arranged on both sides of the naos (Pirukughma) (figs. 7 and 8). Such a solution again makes us turn to Rome, Egypt, and Syria, namely hypogees of Late Antiquity and Early Christian period with beds for the deceased in specially arranged recesses.44 In the burials of Katskhi (West Georgia),45 Agts46 and Tsagkotsadzor (Armenia),47 as well as Khersones (northern Black seacoast)48 similar to the case in Pirukughma monastery martyrium, arrangement of a chancel in the east part of the interior has introduced an additional liturgical connotation within the burial construction wide-spread by that time.

42The only exception, the martyrium of St. Shio the Younger in the Laura of St. David, is somewhat unusual for the local monastic tradition. In this case the martyrium proper is shaped as a grave, being deprived of a chancel and a naos (fig. 16). Respectively, its architecture does not fully fit the structure of martyria well-established in Gareja. By the time when the burial of the Saint and his co-martyrs was fashioned, local tradition connected with the general architectural aspect of the martyria was most likely to be still quite firmly preserved (this is exemplified by the later history of Udabno monastery martyrium). However, neither is the possibility excluded that at the turn of the seventeenth to the eighteenth century local masons did not attempt to repeat the earlier tradition: while carving a burial for the newly-martyred monks, decisive should have rather been its proximity to the chief sanctity of the Gareja desert – the grave of St. David Garejeli and not its architectural composition. Thus, the grave of St. Shio was rather a lateral sepulchre being perceived as a part of the church of Transfiguration, than an independent chapel.

  • 49 D. Kldiashvili, Gareja da piligrimoba adreuli shua saukuneebis kartul tsq’aroebshi [Gareja and Pil (...)

43The structure of the larnax in Gareja is nearly identical. As a rule, the part for placing the remains of a martyr was cut in the rock. A larnax of flat stones was erected above it. Every shrine was carefully covered: separate stones from the roofing (often with fragments of gypsum or lime plastering on it) were identified in the Lavra of St. David, Bertubani, Tsamebuli, Pirukughma. For the fixation of the cover slabs of the larnax burials at the Lavra of St. David and Udabno have special horizontal shelves or steps. The cover of the larnax mostly had a hollow for removing the holy dust. This practice, established from early times and widespread in the Eastern Christendom, must have been specially followed in Gareja, one of the most important pilgrimage centres of the country.49

  • 50 Z. Skhirtladze, Early Medieval Georgian Monumental Painting: Establishment of the System of Church (...)

44From the middle of the ninth century onwards, the practice of painting churches and refectories, sometimes even cells, was gradually established in Gareja. Despite this, martyria remained mainly unpainted and unembellished at a later time. Even the burial of St. David, church of Transfiguration, turned into the most sacred place for the whole monastic unit, was never painted. In general early murals in the Gareja desert monasteries are distinguished for their laconic system of decoration as well as the relatively concise iconographic programme.50 This equally concerns the wall paintings of the churches as well as refectories, cells, and other structures.

  • 51 Numerous examples are reproduced in: N. P. Ševčenko, Illustrated Manuscripts of the Metaphrastian (...)

45The similarity of the known martyria decoration at Bertubani and Udabno reflects the special accentuation of the martyrological subject matter and its depiction above the larnax. At the same time, these two paintings considerably differ from each other by their iconographic programmes. The schemes of these murals, as well as iconography of the martyrdom compositions incorporated within them, seem to have been created locally. In Bertubani this is a symbolic representation (fig. 6), while in Udabno preference was given to a narration through several (namely four) episodes: from left to right – a group of local monks led by two hieromonks, beheading of the monk by an invader soldier, discussion of the invaders, the slaughtered monk and the invader (fig. 14). The iconography of the martyrdom scenes shows their dependence on the well-known originals,51 while the whole arrangement of the cycle seems to be a local compilation. In addition, in Udabno one of the most significant parts of the decoration programme is formed by the theme of the founder (St. David Garejeli) unfolded in two episodes (warding off an attack from Bubakar; David restoring the withered hand of Bubakar) (fig. 13); this was purposefully preserved from the layer dating to the times, when the cave still functioned as a church. The programme composed with great integrity reflects the particularly sacred priorities of Eastern monasticism: distinguished veneration of the founders and martyrs remained a significant source for the local literary centre, as well as the school of mural painting, over the long history of the monastic unit.

  • 52 Laskaris, Monuments funéraires, p. 538-557, figs. A/94, 140, 143; D/36, 39-47, 50.
  • 53 E. Privalova, Rospis’ Timotesubani [Timotesubani Murais], Tbilisi 1980, p. 15-16.

46The image of the cross holds a leading place in the decoration of the Gareja martyria. The programme of the murals of Bertubani martyrium was completely built upon this theme: in addition to the traditional cross depicted over the head of the deceased52 flourished Calvary crosses were represented at both sides of the altar niche. The most significant semantic accent of the programme of decoration – the composition on the northern wall – is based on this theme proper. The composition of the ascension of the cross represented on the vault of Udabno martyrium, maintained its traditional place in programme of Georgian murals over the centuries.53 At the same time, so far as the context of the programme of the martyrium decoration is concerned, its significance became far more complex.

  • 54 N. Thierry, Découvertes à la Nécropole de Göreme (Cappadoce), Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Ins (...)
  • 55 Unpublished. Materials are kept in the Georgian Patriarchate.
  • 56 The slab was discovered during restoration in 1968 (Cf. Chubinashvili, Zedazeni [as in n. 39]. p. (...)
  • 57 The burial was cleaned in 1881 for the transferral of the relies of St. Dodo to the Lavra of St. D (...)

47Inclusion of the portrait of the deceased in the martyria decoration reflects the practice established in the Christian East54 and specifically in Georgia. Materials known to date in the Georgian monuments vary by their character. During the restoration in recent years at the burial place of St. Nino in the Bodbe monastery, her painted portrait was revealed on the cover of the grave. The image seems to have been repainted in the post-Byzantine period.55 The case of St. Ioane Zedazneli, the leader of the Syrian Fathers, points to much earlier roots. A flagstone found during the arrangement of the interior of his burial church, with images of Ioane himself and his disciples belongs to the seventh century, apparently designed to be erected over the tomb.56 A relief image of the early date was revealed on the roofing of the grave of St. Dodo.57

48In addition to these common roots, the character of the decoration of the burial of St. David could determine the establishment of the same practice in the Gareja martyria: The fragments of the painting (with traces of the phelo-nion) found on one of the layers of the roofing during the cleaning of his burial gives certain ground for such a supposition.

Notes

1 For general bibliography see: Z. Skhirtladze, Newly discovered early paintings in the Gareja desert, in Eastern Approaches to Byzantium, ed. A. Eastmond, Aldershot 2001 (Society for the Promotion of Byzantine Studies. Publications 9), p. 149.

2 Dzveli kartuli agiograpiuli literatures dzeglebi [Monuments of Old Georgian Hagiographie Literature], I, ed. I. Abuladze, Tbilisi 1963, p. 236. Cf. B. Martin-Hisard, « Les Treize Saints Pères ». Formation et évolution d’une tradition hagiographique géorgienne (vie-xiie siècles), Revue des Etudes Géorgiennes et Caucasiennes 2, 1986, p. 86-88.

3 Dzveli kartuli agiograpiuli literaturis dzeglebi, III, ed. I. Abuladze, Tbilisi 1971, p. 222.

4 Z. Skhirtladze, The burial of St. David Garejeli: Preliminary Rapport of the Excavations (forthcoming). After cleaning, it became evident that initially the burial of St. David was a cist grave cut in rock. The deepest part of it – a hollow for placing the corpse – is of irregular shape (its dimensions are: length – 182 cm; width – 40-45 cm; height – 33 cm). The grave has an 8-10 cm-long elevation serving as pillow, to the west, which is 5-7 cm higher than the level of the floor. To the east, the shrine is cut 25 cm below the eastern wall of the southern bay, contiguous to the altar. The hollow for placing the corpse has a relatively narrow (8-10 cm) step outside. It was made to serve as a support for roofing slabs. The rock-cut grave was covered with flat sandstone slabs of elongated form; over this cover, at the same interval, another cover was made with wider slabs of the same sandstone. On the side of the head of the deceased, a hole was made to take the holy dust out of it. As a result of the expansion of the chapel by Ilarion Kartveli, for the burial, now in the southern bay of the church interior, a wall was built with stone-slabs from the north and it was roofed with one more cover from above, converting the grave into a larnax erected above the floor level. The burial was apparently damaged in the course of time and due to vicissitudes: while cleaning, three stratigraphic layers of the cover of the larnax were brought to light. On the middle layer, the fragments of the painting were identified.

5 G. Abramishvili, The painting of Bertubani Martyrium, in L’arle georgiana dal ix al xiv secolo. Atti del Terzo Simpozio Internazionale sull’arte Georgiana, vol. I, ed. M. S. Calo Mariani, Galatina 1986, p. 199-203; in the later Georgian version of this article the middle of the ninth century is named as a presumable date of the first layer painting (Cf. Speklri, 1998, N 1, p. 52-57).

6 The majority of the cave complexes located in the eastern part of the monastic complex is connected to the early stage of its history. Cf. Z. Skhirtladze, Sabereebis preskuli tsartserebi [Mural Inscriptions of Sabereebi], Tbilisi 1985, p. 7-11; Id., Istoriul pirta portretebi garejis mravalmtis kolagiris monastershi [Historical Figures at Kolagiri Monastery in the Gareja Desert], Tbilisi 2000, p. 11ff; G. Gaprindashvili, Gareji, Tbilisi 1987, p. 20-30.

7 Notes and materials relating to the separate structures of the monastery are inserted in the monograph of G. Chubinashvili, Peshchernye monastyri David Garedzi [Cave Monasteries of David Gareja], Tbilisi 1948, p. 45-48; cf. also Gaprindashvili, Gareji (as in n. 6), p. 21.

8 Z. Skhirtladze, Z. Tvalchrelidze, Gamokvabuli samartvile Tsamebulshi [Tsamebuli Rock-cut Martyrium], Academic, N 1, 2001, p. 50-55.

9 British Museum, Ms. Wardrop 56, fols. 115-130; Gabriel Mtsire, Ghvtivsulierni Tkhrobani [Divine Narration], ed. Z. Skhirtladze, Tbilisi 2002, p. 43-44.

10 Apparently, the original location and the attribution of two wooden needles and a fragment of a water jug were not clear, as Gabriel’s references are rather general. But then, in the same passage he stresses that a pectoral cross, beads of a rosary and the band of kamelaukion, found during the cleaning, belonged to the hermit buried apart in the martyrium. The subsequent fate of these things is unknown.

11 Chubinashvili, Peshchernye monastyri (as in n. 7), p. 86-90.

12 P. Ioseliani, Tskhovreba Giorgi metsametisa [The Life of George XIII], ed. A. Gatserelia, Tbilisi 1936, p. 10.

13 Patriarch Antoni, Martirika, Dzveli kartuli agiograpiuli literaturis dzeglebi, VI, ed. M. Shanidze, Tbilisi 1980, p. 206.

14 For more details about this see: Z. Skhirtladze, Towards the History of the Martyrium at the Udabno Monastery (forthcoming).

15 G. Abramishvili, Davit garejelis tsikli kartul kedlis mkhatvrobashi [The Cycle of David Garejeli in Georgian Mural Painting], Tbilisi 1972, p. 101-114.

16 Gabriel Mtsirk, Ghvtivsulierni Tkhrobani (as in n. 9), p. 44.

17 H. Skrobucha, Sinai, London 1966, p. 74-77; J. Patrich, Sabas, Leader of Palestinian Monasticism, Washington, D.C. 1995, p. 72 (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 32).

18 M. Kavtaria, Davit Garejis literaturuli skola [The Literary School of Davit Gareja], Tbilisi 1965, p. 19-20.

19 Dzveli Kartuli, I (as in n. 2), p. 234; Cf. Abramishvili, Davit garejelis tsikli (as in n. 15), p. 112.

20 Ibid., p. 101-103.

21 Cf. supra note 2.

22 Abramishvili, Davit garejelis tsikli, p. 33-37.

23 This date was supposed by G. Chubinashvili (Peshchernye monastyri David Garedzhi, p. 79-80), Sh. Amiranashvili (Istorija Gruzinskoi monumental’noi zhivopisi, Tbilisi 1957, p. 50), and G. Abramishvili (Davit garejelis tsikli, p. 108-112).

24 Abramishvili, Davit garejelis tsikli, p. 112-113.

25 A. Eastmond, Royal Imagery in Medieval Georgia, University Park, PA 1998, p. 138-141.

26 Gr. Gordeev, Karajazskaja step’ i drevnie Gruzinskie pustyri Sv. Ioanna Krestitel’a i Sv. Davida Garedjiiskogo [Karaja Steppe and the Old Georgian Monasteries of St. John the Baptist and St. David Garejelil, Tiflisskie Vedomisti, 1832, Ν 3, p. 63; The same picture is indicated in the pilgrim literature of the middle of the nineteenth century (A. Muraviov, Gruzija i Armenija [Georgia and Armenia], I, St.-Petersbourg 1848, p. 82).

27 Gabriel Mtsire, Ghvtivsulierni Tkhrobani, p. 44.

28 Shio is known as a skilled copyist of manuscripts (Cf. Kavtaria, Davit Garejis literaturuli skola [as in n. 18], p. 46-48, 149; Catalogue of Georgian Manuscripts, Collection A, t. I2, ed. H. Metreveli, Tbilisi 1976, p. 227-229; ibid., t. IV, ed. K. Kekelidze, Tbilisi 1954, p. 448).

29 The eye-witness of the martyrdom, the Archimandrite of Mtskheta, Nikoloz Maghalashvili, active in Gareja in 1697-1702, compiled a synaxarian version of the martyrdom of St. Shio and his co-martyrs (see Dzveli kartuli agiograpiuli literaturis dzeglebi, IV, ed. I. Abuladze, Tbilisi 1968, p. 317-320, 440-442; Kavtaria, Davit Garejis literaturuli skola, p. 71-79, 136-138).

30 Dzveli kartuli, IV (as in n. 29), p. 442.

31 Muraviov, Gruzija i Armenija (as in n. 26), p. 108.

32 P. Karbelashvili, Davit garejis udabnoshi [In the Davit Gareja Desert], Iveria, 1895, N 179.

33 Indeed, cleaning revealed in the martyrium three fragments of slab and one intact slab.

34 For the similar practice see: Y. Hirschffad, The Judean Desert Monasteries in the Byzantine Period, New Haven-London 1992, p. 130-143.

35 The small dimansions of the cave are preserved in the case of martyria serving as a mass burial (at Tsamebuli, Udabno, Lavra of St. David).

36 E. Herzfeld, Iran in the Ancient East, London 1941, p. 327ff.

37 G. Kipiani, Uplistsikhe, Tbilisi 2002, p. 80-91.

38 N. Bakhtadze, Kaspis kldeshi nakveti nekropoli [Kaspi Rock-cut Necropolisl, Bulletin of State Museum of Georgia 45, 2003-2004, p. 65-79. Taking into consideration historical facts as well as remaining parallels, the fourth-fifth centuries are not excluded as the tentative date of the creation of Kaspi rock-cut necropolis. By their structure the burials somewhat differ from those of Iran of Achaemenid, Parthian and Sassanian periods. At the same time, the resemblance of Kaspi and Gareja monuments by their structure is striking (e.g. a square cell of irregular form, with bays made in one or two of its walls, with one burial shelf in each). The orientation of Kaspi burials can be diverse but they never coincide with east-west axis, which is an indication of the non-Christian rite of burial.

39 N. Chubinashvili, Zedazeni, Klikis Jvari, Gviara, Ars Georgica 7, 1971, p. 31-40 (Zedazeni); R. Mepisashvili, V. Zinzadze, Georgien. Wehrhauten und Kirchen, Leipzig 1986, p. 88 (Tsilkani); R. Shmerling, T. Dolidze, T. Barnaveli, Okrestnosti Tbilisi [Tbilisi Environs], Tbilisi 1960, p. 108 (Martqopi); G. Chubinashvili, Arkhitektura Kakheti [Architecture of Kakheti], Tbilisi 1958, p. 374 (Alaverdi); Sakartvelos istoriisa da kulturis dzeglta aghtseriloba [Description of the Historical and Cultural Monuments of Georgia], vol. 5, Tbilisi 1990, p. 360-361 (Breti).

40 H. C. Butler, Early Churches in Syria, 4th -7th Centuries, Princeton 1929, p. 212-213, 216; J. Lassus, Sanctuaires Chrétiens de Syrie, Paris 1947, p. 173-176; G. Descoeudres, Die Pastophorien im Syro-byzantinischen Osten. Eine Untersuchung zu architektur- und liturgiege-schichtlichen Problemen, Wiesbaden 1983, p. 16-19; cf. N. G. Laskaris, Monuments funéraires paléochrétiens (et byzantins) de Grèce, Athens 2000, p. 178. Certainly, when talking of choosing the place for the shrine of a martyr it would be more appropriate to bear relatively large churches in mind. In structures of such small dimensions as Gareja rock-cut martyria are, the architectural solution itself determined the only possible placement of a shrine, namely the segment opposite the entrance, i.e. the north bay.

41 Hirschfeld, The Judean Desert Monasteries (as in n. 34), p. 140, fig. 71.

42 D. Kipshidze, Peshchery Ani [Ani Caves], Yerevan 1972, p. 123-126, fig. 54-55, pl. 50.

43 The same principle was preserved in later centuries, namely in the tenth-century Ananauri church hewn in the western part of Vardzia rock-cut monastery. At the beginning of the sixteenth century it was turned into a burial place of Atabag Mzechabuk (1501-1516), consecrated under the name James (K. Melitauri, lakobis savane ananauris eklesiastan [The Hermitage of the Monk James at the Ananauri Church], Proceedings of the Georgian Academy of Sciences, 1977, N 1, p. 49-52).

44 Hypogees of this type are of diverse planning, ranging from the simplest to multi-parted. Cf., for example, Hypogees at Bamuqqa, Qutura, Dara, Mugleya, Sokhani, and Tipasa (A. Grabar, Martyrium. Recherches sur le culte des reliques et l’art chrétien antique, t. I, Paris 1946, p. 47, 103,106,107ff.; Lassus, Sanctuaires Chrétiens de Syrie [asin n. 40],p. 118,fig. 49;G. Tchalenko, Villages antiques de la Syrie du Nord. Le Massif du Belus à l’époque romaine, Paris 1953, p. 117, 145ff., 183, 307; pl. LX1, XLIII, LXXXV, XCVIII). Concerning the characteristic and grouping of burials of this type see: D. Pallas, Οἱ χριστιανικοὶ καμαρωτοὶ τάφοι Καταγωγὴ καὶ λατρευτικαὶ ἰδέαι, Πανηγυρ. Τόμος τῆς ʼAρχαιολ. ʼΕφημερίδος 1937, Athens 1955, ρ. 847-865; Laskaris, Monuments funéraires (as in n. 40), p. 368-369.

45 Unpublished. The crypt was cleaned and partially reconstructed in 1999-2000 by a local monk.

46 B. Brentjes, S. Mnazakanjan, N. Stepanjan, Kunst des Mittelalters in Armenien, Berlin 1981, p. 73-74, pl. 20.

47 Kipshidze, Peshchery Ani (as in n. 41), p. 122-123, fig. 52-53.

48 A. Jakobson, Rannesrednevekovyi Khersones [Early Medieval Khersones], Moscow-Leningrad 1959, p. 192-193, fig. 97.

49 D. Kldiashvili, Gareja da piligrimoba adreuli shua saukuneebis kartul tsq’aroebshi [Gareja and Pilgrimage in the Early Georgian Sources], in Desert Monasticism: Gareja and the Christian East, ed. Z. Skhirtladze, Tbilisi 2001 (Gareja Studies Centre. Proceedings 2), p. 77ff. The function of these hollows varied: it was used for the touching of the holy relics, taking out the holy dust, or flowing out the holy oil. Indication concerning the existence of the hollows on the cover of the larnax are found in the narration of Gabriel Mtsire (Ghvtivsulierni Tkhrohani, p. 44), as well as in the nineteenth-century archival materials and publications (Institute of Manuscripts in Tbilisi, Ms. S-3283d; M. Sabinin, Sakartvelos samotkhe [The Paradise of Georgia], Tbilisi 1882, p. 638.

50 Z. Skhirtladze, Early Medieval Georgian Monumental Painting: Establishment of the System of Church Decoration, Oriens Christianus 81, 1997, p. 169-206.

51 Numerous examples are reproduced in: N. P. Ševčenko, Illustrated Manuscripts of the Metaphrastian Menologion, Chicago 1990, and Sinai. Treasures of the Monastery of Saint Catherine, ed. K. A. Manafis, Athens 1990.

52 Laskaris, Monuments funéraires, p. 538-557, figs. A/94, 140, 143; D/36, 39-47, 50.

53 E. Privalova, Rospis’ Timotesubani [Timotesubani Murais], Tbilisi 1980, p. 15-16.

54 N. Thierry, Découvertes à la Nécropole de Göreme (Cappadoce), Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, Novembre-Décembre 1984, p. 667-674; Ead., Le portrait funéraire byzantin. Nouvelles Données, Εύφρόσυνον. ʼAφιέρομα στòν Μανόλη Χατζηδάκη, Athens 1992, p. 582ff (with earlier bibliography).

55 Unpublished. Materials are kept in the Georgian Patriarchate.

56 The slab was discovered during restoration in 1968 (Cf. Chubinashvili, Zedazeni [as in n. 39]. p. 31, n° 14). The figure of St. Ioane Zedazneli is specially accentuated on it: his figure is placed on the pediment (A. Volskaya, Rel’efnaya plita iz Zedazenskogo monastyr’ya [Relief Slab from Zedazeni monastery], Ars Georgica 8, 1979, p. 91-105, pl. 47.

57 The burial was cleaned in 1881 for the transferral of the relies of St. Dodo to the Lavra of St. David (Institute of Manuscripts in Tbilisi, Ms. S-3283d, fol. 2). The monastery of St. Dodo was already abandoned in the late Middle Ages. Accordingly, it is not excluded that the grave of the founder as well as the relief image on it are preserved in their original state.

Table des illustrations

Légende Fig. 1 – Lavra of St. David. Church of Transfiguration.View of the tomb of St. David Garejeli in the southeast bay.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 421k
Légende Fig. 2 – The tomb of St. David Garejeli. Plan and sections.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 162k
Légende Fig. 3 – Bertubani martyrium. View from the south.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1022k
Légende Fig. 4 – Bertubani martyrium. Plan.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 44k
Légende Fig. 5 – Bertubani martyrium. Murals of the east wall.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 349k
Légende Fig. 6 – Bertubani martyrium. Composition on the north wall. Scheme.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 87k
Légende Fig. 7 – Pirukughma. West part of the complex. Plan.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 106k
Légende Fig. 8 – Pirukughma. West part of the complex. Sections.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 210k
Légende Fig. 9 – Pirukughma. Martyrium. View from the west.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 240k
Légende Fig. 10 – Tsamebuli. Martyrium. View from the south.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 368k
Légende Fig. 11 – Tsamebuli. Martyrium. Plan and sections.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 198k
Légende Fig. 12 – Udabno martyrium. Plan and sections.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 203k
Légende Fig. 13 – Udabno martyrium. Miracle of St. David Garejeli. Scheme.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 70k
Légende Fig. 14 – Udabno martyrium. Martyrdom of the Gareja monks. Scheme.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-14.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 89k
Légende Fig. 15 – Udabno martyrium.View of the interior in the late nineteenth century.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-15.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 514k
Légende Fig. 16 – Lavra of St. David. Martyrium of St. Shio the Younger. Plan and sections.
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-16.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 88k
Légende Fig. 17 – Kaspi. Rock-cut burials (after Bakhtadze).© Droits réservés
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-17.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 249k
Légende Fig. 18 – Khirbet ed-Deir. Burial (after Hirschfeld).© Droits réservés
URL http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/docannexe/image/2086/img-18.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 263k

Auteur

Tbilisi State University, Georgia

Le texte et les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont sous Licence OpenEdition Books, sauf mention contraire.

Cette publication numérique est issue d’un traitement automatique par reconnaissance optique de caractères.
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search