|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
figure 1
figure 2
|
|
While the images of Moses parallel the pilgrim’s
ascent up Mount Sinai from the monastery, the image of the Transfiguration
is a portrait of what is revealed through that journey, through spiritual
contemplation. Viewers are offered a vision of Christ in his divine nature,
a fulfillment of the visions of Moses and Elijah. The image also comments
on the act of viewing. Like Peter, who wakes just in time to see the divine
nature of Christ, the viewer must wake from the sleep of the everyday in order
to attain the vision of God, to be illuminated, to be transformed
by light like Christ and Moses (Elsner, 111–18). The portrait medallions
provide a genealogy of witnesses, from the Old Testament prophets, to the
apostles and Gospel writers, to John the Baptist and the Virgin, to the abbot
Longinus and the deacon John, who are remembered in the dedicatory inscription.
For the pilgrim, the ultimate act of witnessing was the witnessing of the
Divine Liturgy under the image of the Transfiguration (Elsner, 118–23).
Historically, the most significant feature
of the church is the internal evidence securely dating it to the
reign of Justinian. A set of thirteen original trusses carry the
load of the roof. These trusses, which would have been visible
from the floor and are now partially obscured by an unfortunate
suspended ceiling installed in the eighteenth century, are carved
with inscriptions that date the church between 548 and 560 A.D.
The inscriptions remember the emperor Justinian, his dead wife,
the empresses Theodora, and the builder of the church, Stephen of Aila (Forsyth,
9; Grossmann, 193). The bottom surfaces of the beams are carved with floral
ornament, animals, sea creatures, and river scenes of a quality and style
that recall the great sixth-century doors marking the entrance to the nave
(Forsyth, 10).
Though we
know the identity of the monastery’s patron, the circumstances under
which the monastery was built are not as cut and dry. The most frequently
cited explanation for the building of the monastery comes from Procopius (d.
ca. 562), a historian who lived during the reign of Justinian. In his
history, On Buildings, Procopius writes that in addition to erecting
a church dedicated to the Theotokos at the foot of the mountain, the
emperor “built
a very strong fortress and established there a considerable garrison of troops,
in order that the barbarian Saracens might not be able from that region, which,
as I have said, is uninhabited, to make inroads with complete secrecy into
the lands of Palestine proper” (De Aedificiis V, viii. I, 4–9,
qtd. in Mayerson, 134). The suggestion that Justinian built a fortress
as an extension of the army garrison of Palaestina Tertia, which was
responsible for the protection of Palestine and its trade routes, does not
make sense within the context of sixth-century Sinai. Mount Sinai lies
deep within the Sinai Peninsula, nowhere near the Red Sea or its two arms,
removed from any significant trade route, and far from any urbanized area.
By the late sixth century, the forts along the boundaries of Palaestina
Tertia,
far to the north of Mount Sinai, located in settled areas and on established
trade routes, functioned no longer as forts but as hospices for travelers.
Furthermore, the monastery’s architecture would not have been suitable
for a garrison of troops. Its structure lacks essential elements of a military
installation. Among its many strategic deficiencies, the monastery’s
towers could not have provided a vantage point for attacking enemies. More
seriously, its placement at the base of a slope meant that archers could have
easily ambushed from above (Mayerson, 134–35). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
