NICHOLAS LOSES IT

Today we will look at something that is really elementary knowledge — The presence of Jesus and Mary in countless icons of St. Nicholas.

Here is a 19th century Russian example:

(Courtesy of Jacksonsauction.com)

I have mentioned before that the two circular images at left and right of Nikolai/Nicholas represent Jesus giving Nicholas the Gospel book —

and Mary giving Nicholas his omophorion (liturgical stole). 

But what is the story behind this?

Well, as I hope you know by now, Eastern Orthodox belief is rich in fictions.  One must always be aware of the presence of fiction in the traditional history of the Eastern Orthodox Church and its saints.

The Council of Nicaea is an actual historical event.  It took place in 325, and symbolically it marks the emergence of the Orthodox Church out of the multitude of earlier Christian beliefs, as well as emphasizing the joining of Church and State — a condition with deep later repercussions.  But around the basic historical event, fictions have gathered, and among them is the account of St. Nicholas at the Council of Nicaea.

I don’t intend to go into the question here of whether Nicholas was actually present at the Council (or the question of whether Nicholas ever actually existed).  Some scholars think he likely was present, others think not, citing that he is not found in the earliest list of attendees.  What interests me today is only the story about an action of Nicholas at that event, because that is what gave rise to the presence of Jesus and Mary on many of his icons.  It is the tale of Nicholas at the Council becoming so upset at the opposing belief of Arius regarding the divine nature of Jesus that Nicholas slapped Arius in the face.

The first mention of Nicholas thus losing his cool is found in the statement of the Venetian bishop Petrus de Natalibus, who died about 1400.  Petrus says only that Nicholas struck a “certain Arian” in the jaw, and as punishment his bishop’s hat (mitre) and stole (Latin pallium, Greek omophorion) were taken away.  So Arius is not specifically identified here as the victim.

By the latter part of the 16th century however, we find a more detailed Greek account in the Life of St. Nicholas by a certain Damaskenos the Monk.  He tells us that when it appeared Arius was getting the upper hand in argument with the opposing bishops,  Nicholas, moved by “divine zeal,” got up and gave Arius such a slap that it shook his whole body. 

Arius then complained to Emperor Constantine that the behavior of Nicholas was reprehensible.  Constantine agreed, saying that by law it was forbidden to strike someone in the presence of the Emperor, and anyone who did so was to have his hand cut off.

The other bishops asked the Emperor to merely imprison Nicholas, and to have the matter judged later.  Nicholas was then apparently deprived of his status as a bishop, and put in prison.

Now comes the relevant portion of the tale by Damaskenos:  he relates that during the night, Jesus and Mary appeared to Nicholas in prison.  Jesus asked him why he was there (what happened to divine omniscience?), and Nicholas replied, “For love of you.”

In consequence, Jesus restored to Nicholas the Gospel book, and Mary gave him the omophorion (bishop’s stole).  The next day those bringing Nicholas bread and water saw that unaccountably his fetters had been removed and that he was sitting in his bishop’s stole reading the Gospel book.  When the Emperor heard of this “miraculous” event, he asked Nicholas for his forgiveness.

So that’s it — the very late and entirely fictional story of Nicholas slapping Arius at the Council of Nicaea, being deprived of his status as bishop and imprisoned, and receiving back the Gospel book and omophorion from Jesus and Mary as a sign of his restored status.

I hope you have learned by now that icons often depict fictional traditions rather than actual historical events.  That is why we find these entries regarding the painting of Nicholas in the 18th century Painter’s Manual of Dionysios of Fourna:

“Arius standing, also dressed in bishop’s garb; before him, St. Nicholas extends his hand to slap him.”

“A prison; in it the saint [Nicholas]; to his right, Christ holding the Gospels; to his left, the Mother of God holding an omophorion.  They are giving him these objects.”

The presence of Jesus and Mary giving Nicholas his Gospel book and omophorion, so very common in icons, is simply a fictional story that first appears in writing over eleven centuries after the Council of Nicaea and was incorporated into Eastern Orthodox iconography.

There you have the late origin of these common elements in icons of Nicholas.  Oddly enough, they come across as Jesus and Mary endorsing the striking of one’s opponents in religious arguments — not at all a good or advisable policy.

THE GUY IN THE FUNNY HAT

If you have not watched Korean historical dramas, I warn you — they are addictive. Impressive costumes, excellent acting, great sets, and lots of unexpected plot turns. But what is relevant to today’s icon is that in Korean historical dramas you will see what look to us moderns as remarkably silly hats on some officials and scholars. But silly, it seems, is in the eye of the beholder.

Here is a portion of a 1751 fresco from a monastery at Daphne in Greece. I think of this fellow as “the guy in the silly hat,” because he is commonly depicted in unusual-looking headgear:

(Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license)

We can easily identify him if we look at his Greek name inscription:

At left we see Ὁ ἉΓΙος / Ho Hagios / “The Holy,” and at right:

ΙΑΚѠΒος ὁ περcος / Iakobos ho Persos / “Jacob the Persian.”

So this fellow is St. Jacob the Persian, also often called St. James the Persian, because James is an alternate form of Jacob that developed through linguistic transition.  That is why the “brother of Jesus” in English translations of the  Greek New Testament is generally called “James,” even though in Greek his name is Ἰάκωβος / Iakobos, and in Hebrew would have been the same as that of the Old Testament Patriarch Jacob (Yaakov (יַעֲקֹב / יעקב) Ya-a-kov).

Interestingly, due also to a phonetic change in pronunciation of his name Iakobos/Iakovos, on Cyprus Jacob / Iakovos the Persian became instead known as Akouphos / Άκουφος, meaning “not deaf.”  So because of that linguistic change, on Cyprus he became the patron saint of the deaf and those with hearing or ear problems.

So now that we have identified him, who was Jacob the Persian?  Well, as you already know, the lives of the saints in Eastern Orthodoxy are often filled with fiction, and some are entirely fictional.  In the case of this saint, he may have existed in some manner, but it also may be that he is in part or in all a composite of other Persian martyred saints.  His traditional story relates that He was a fifth century (some however say 4th century) military officer in the court of the Sasanian Persian King Yazdegerd 1, and under the rule of Yazdegerd’s son Bahram, who began to rule in 420 c.e., Jacob was martyred in very gruesome fashion.  Without going into the gory tale, let’s just say he was “disassembled.”  Jacob supposedly was a Christian who renounced Christianity when Yazdegerd began a persecution of Christians, but pressured by his Christian family, James returned to Christianity, and refusing to renounce it a second time, he was condemned under Yazdegerd’s son King/Shah Bahram.

Aside from his title inscription, James may often be recognized by his unusual hat, which varies somewhat in form from image to image.  Occasionally it is even shown as the kind of hat worn by the Old Testament Prophet Daniel in his icons.

On icons his title ὁ περσος / ho Persos / “the Persian” may also be spelled ὁ περσις / ho Persis.  In Catholicism he is generally known as James “Intercisus,” meaning “cut apart.”

NOTES

This is just a quick “housekeeping” posting.

Some of you are perhaps not aware that now and then I will add new information or make slight changes to older postings. For example, today I added a bit more information to the “Mary and Silence” article after I received helpful information from an Italian reader about a likely early “model” for that modern icon:

MARY AND SILENCE

I also added a little more text to the posting on St. Kyriaki — “St. Sunday” — because I came across a very interesting fresco showing her with the other days of the week personified:

SAINT SUNDAY

I like to add to already existing articles any additional useful information that turns up, so an icon you may have read about here years ago may now have more details added — you never know.

Inexplicably, more people keep subscribing to this site.  Well, it is entirely free, and reading here can keep one away from TV commercials for hours on end, and it is a lot cheaper than going on a date, so why not? 

And so that I don’t post this without something new, here is a Greek icon from the 18th-early 19th century.  As you can see, it is very “western” influenced, and it includes the “Rescued Boy” motif popular in Greek icons of George.  You will find more about that here:

RECYCLED BOYS

At the top is George saving the Princess from the dragon. At lower left George is given a cup of poison prepared by a sorcerer, but George makes the sign of the cross on it, and drinks it without harm. At center is Emperor Constantine and his mother Helena. And at right is the martyrdom of George.

(Courtesy of Jacksonsauction.com)

TRIPLE TEMPTATION

Today we will look at a 16th century fresco from the Dionysiou Monastery on Mount Athos in Greece. It is all one image, but because of its width it is necessary to divide it into three parts.

Here is the left side, which as you can see joins to the next image in the sequence at right, which is why you see three images of Jesus and of the Devil.

The inscription at the top tells us what is depicted: If we expand the abbreviations, we get:

Ὁ Χριστός Πειραζόμενος . . .
Ho Khristos Peirazomenos . . .
“Christ tempted . . .”

And it continues on the image at far right:

Ὑπο του Διαβόλου
Hupo tou Diabolou
“. . . By the Devil”

So all together it reads:

Ὁ Χριστός Πειραζόμενος Ὑπο του Διαβόλου 
Ho Khristos Peirazomenos Hupo tou Diabolou
“Christ Tempted by the Devil.”

If we look more closely at the latter part of the beginning of the inscription, we can tell that it has at some time been overwritten by another hand.  We can still see the faint earlier writing extending beyond the clear white letters, where it ends in -ος instead of -ΟC:

And here is the central image:

The account of the temptation given in the gospel called “of Mark” (1:12-13) is very basic.  It does not detail how Satan tempted Jesus:

¹² Καὶ εὐθὺς τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτὸν ἐκβάλλει εἰς τὴν ἔρημον.

¹³καὶ ἦν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ τεσσεράκοντα ἡμέρας πειραζόμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ Σατανᾶ, καὶ ἦν μετὰ τῶν θηρίων, καὶ οἱ ἄγγελοι διηκόνουν αὐτῷ.

¹² And immediately the spirit casts him into the wilderness.

¹³ And he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels served him.

Matthew and Luke, however, were not happy with that account.  They decided to embroider it by describing three temptations, though they differ in the order.

In Matthew as in Luke, the tempter is called “the Devil” instead of Mark’s “Satan.”

The first temptation in Matthew is the Devil telling Jesus if he is the son of God, to command stones to become bread.  That is what we see in the first image above.

The second Matthean temptation is for Jesus to jump off the highest point in the Temple, to see if angels will save him.  That is what we see in the central image above.

The third Matthean temptation is the Devil taking Jesus to a high mountain and showing him all the kingdoms of the world, offering to give them to Jesus if he would only worship the Devil.  That is shown in the second image above, the one with three kings sitting among crowns and gold.

Of course Jesus refuses all these temptations.

In Luke as in Matthew, the first temptation is to change not ” these stones” to bread as in Matthew, but rather “this stone” — a single stone.

The second Lukan temptation is the Devil taking Jesus “up” (no high mountain is mentioned) and showing him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment, and offering to give Jesus authority over them if Jesus would only worship him.

The third Lukan temptation is the Devil placing Jesus on a pinnacle of the Jerusalem Temple, telling him to jump off and supposedly the angels will save him.

Nonetheless, as in Matthew, Jesus refuses all three temptations. 

You will find another discussion of the Temptation in this previous posting:

https://russianicons.wordpress.com/tag/temptation-of-christ/

THE COSLOGENI CROSS

If you are a long-time reader here, and in as sound a mind as anyone reading this peculiar site is likely to be, you will recall the previously-discussed icon type called the “Life-giving Fountain,” in Church Slavic ЖИВОНОСНЫЙ ИСТОЧНИКЪ / Zhivonosnuiy Istochnik. Here is a 19th century Russian example. If you have paid attention to past postings, you should easily be able to read the Church Slavic title inscription.

In southeastern Romania, some distance southeast of the capital Bucharest, there is a little village named Coslogeni.  A short way west of the village and within sight of the Brațul Borcea — an arm of the Danube River — is Schitul Coslogeni “Izvorul Tamaduirii”, the Coslogeni Hermitage (Skete) of the Life-giving Fountain.  What interests us today (at least those of us with odd interests), is that the Hermitage is also known as the Schitul Crucea de Leac — “The ‘Healing Cross’ Hermitage.”  Not surprisingly that relates to yesterday’s posting about Romanian Stone Crosses, because the “healing cross” in the name is actually an old Romanian stone cross kept inside a building.

The cross is said to date to 1620, and to have been carved at the wish of a nobleman.  The tale of its history relates that it was to be taken by oxcart from the town of Călărași northeastward to the town of Fetești, but about a fourth of the way to its destination the cart carrying the heavy cross broke down.  The cross was removed while repairs were made.  When the cart was ready again, the cross was once more loaded.  However, the oxen at this point would go no farther.  That, in common Eastern Orthodox belief, was an indication that the cross was intended to be at that place.  So that is the story accounting for how it became a wayside cross at the side of the road.

Over time, the cross became associated with rumors of miracles.  A mute and deaf cattle herdboy who rested at the foot of the cross was said to suddenly be able to hear and speak.  And of course such rumors become spread about, and before long the stone cross was considered a crucea de leac — a “healing cross.”  Passers by would pray before it, and it is said that when the Communists tried to destroy it with a bulldozer, they were unsuccessful. 

Its fame grew over the years, and in 1990-1993 a chapel was built around it, and the belief developed that not only was it a “healing cross” but it also was said to miraculously exude “myrrh” that fragrant oil used in Eastern Orthodox rites.  Of course you have heard much of this before in the legends of so-called “miracle-working” icons, so it follows an old pattern of such motifs.  There is also a well of “healing water” on the site.

Having read yesterday’s article about Romanian stone crosses, you should easily be able to identify the main inscriptions in the crossbar.  The long inscription that begins at the bottom is said not to be wholly translatable to this day.

At the top are two repetitions of the abbreviation MA, for the Evangelists Matfei/Mathew and Marka/Mark.  Then come the letters НИ at left and КА at right, which together form the Greek NIKA — “[He] Conquers.”  Between them is the XC abbreviation for Khristos/Christ in Greek.  And at lower left we see ЛУ [ЛОУ] for Luka/Luke, and at the right of the beginning of the long lower inscription we see IѠ for Ioann/John.

Now you know how to translate the main inscriptions on many old Romanian stone crosses.  Only the kind of people who read this site would find that a desirable goal.  Others would likely think you are a bit strange, but that makes it useful information.  For example, if you are out on a date and nervously find you have nothing at all in common with the other person, just begin to slowly explain to them with great enthusiasm the inscriptions on Romanian stone crosses, and you will quickly be free of an unwanted companion.

Whenever I read the accounts of supposed miracles associated with old icons, crosses, etc., I always recall the Tibetan saying that “Even a dog’s tooth, when venerated, will emit light.”  In other words, just the belief that an object has miraculous power can be a very strong influence on the mind.