Herrera Cajas, Héctor: Dimensiones de la cultura bizantina Arte, poder y legado histórico, Coed. Centro de Estudios Griegos Bizantinos y Neohelénicos y Universidad Gabriela Mistral, Santiago,1998 592 pp.

(US$ 40) $ 12.000

I. INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS OF THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE

II. SYNESIOS OF CYRENE, A CRITIC OF THE EMPIRE

III. DAGOBERT AND HERACLIUS. A CHAPTER IN DIPLOMATIC HISTORY

IV. THE ORIENTAL FRONTIER OF THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE. RELATIONS WITH PERSIA, CAUCASIANS AND ARABS.

V. BYZANTIUM AND THE FORMATION OF RUSSIA. RUSSO-BYZANTINE TREATIES DURING THE TENTH CENTURY.

VI. THE EURO-ASIATIC STEPPES: A PARTICULAR HISTORICAL SPACE.

VII. AN APPROACH TO BYZANTINE IMPERIAL SPIRIT.

VIII. THE PEOPLES OF THE STEPPES AND THE ORIGINS OF BYZANTINE ART: FROM THE TENT TO THE CHRISTIAN MONUMENTS

IX. SUPERIOR STUDIES IN BYZANTIUM

X. BYZANTINE SPIRITUALITY.

XI. THE DOCTRINE OF GELASIUS

XII. THE BYZANTINE IMPERIAL CONCEPT: REPRESENTATION AND CONCENTRATION OF POWER.

XIII. BYZANTINE SPIRITUALITY IN ITS ART

XIV. POLITICAL SYMBOLOGY OF IMPERIAL AUTHORITY IN BYZANTIUM: THE "PREPENDULIA" OF THE CROWN

XV. IMPERIAL FEASTS IN CONSTANTINOPLE

The author begins by pointing out the very special significance of the international relations of the Byzantine Empire. Much more than the bilateral accords or confrontations with the neighbouring peoples, the Byzantine embassy implies the very delicate task of maintaining the balance of the most varied peoples, estimating their respective forces for war, and their probability of being submitted; their actual possibility of being dominated by the cross, by the sword, or by the imperial treasury. All this, within a context which must never be forgotten: the Emperor, as heir of the Roman Emperor, has the noble mission of making this world a reflection -as approximate as possible- of the celestial order, that is, making use of roman legislative experience, and assuming the holy mission of extending the Christian faith, it must rule the orb. The peculiar talent of Byzantine Empire to conduct this difficult commission must be highlighted.

In this perspective each embassy must be prepared with special care, for it must appear as a privilege to be visited by a representative of the Emperor, appointed by God for the administration of the world, which must be kept in order. The splendour and magnificence of the ceremonies at the Emperor’s palace, in Constantinople; the present selected for each ruler, the titles with which the official letter are addressed – all must tend to assure the world that the stability (although sometimes, often, only apparent) – guaranteed by the Empire, is the will of God; it is a reflection; a hierarchical order of the Universe, which derives and tends to the Divine Order.

The capital city is the cosmopolis by excellence. It is the centre of the Cosmos, in opposition to the Chaos. Other rulers with imperial aspirations are integrated under the leadership of the Emperor, in relation, which appeals to the familiarity of rulers and peoples.

The author illustrates, with eloquent extracts of historical documents, and with phrases quoted from expert historians, the very special -and almost unknown- role of the Byzantine Empire; and, the gravitation of its diplomacy, in the comprehension of the resulting historical context, of which our own present world is heir.

This article originally appeared in the publication of the Primera Semana Bizantina, Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, 1958.

In the perspective of universal history the year of Theodosius' death (395 AC.) marks a turnpoint which – for some – marks also the beginning of the Middle Ages.

In the year 399, Synesios arrives at the Imperial court, as bearer of the Aurium Coronarium sent by Cyrene; in this occasion, together with this present sent to the new emperor Arcadius, Synesios also reads his critical analysis – of great insight – concerning the force of the barbaric people as a imminent menace to the Imperial power and its order. In a context in which the roman mind has been enchanted by oriental attraction where the Christian faith seems imbued in a powerful pagan atmosphere; where the taxes demanded by the Empire weigh heavily over the cities and provinces; and where the presence of barbarians in the imperial army itself appears as a demential paradox, Synesios points out the necessity of returning to the original roman virtues; only the clearness and stability of the roman character can assure the continuity of the Empire.

The death of Emperor Valente, with his defeat at Adrianopolis (378), had left an open door to the gothic forces, across the Danube, and over the Balkans. The dangerous presence of these gothic allies, is presented by Synesios in its real dimension in a direct, harsh, critical but most sincere language; not at all what the court had accustomed the emperor's ears to hear. Synesios proposes urgent measures for the restoration of the traditional roman spirit, in the administration as well as in the army. This recovery of the roman spirit must begin by the Emperor himself, in whose image the people must see an example of virtues; moreover, if it must be considered that the historic reality of the Empire is a reflection of supernatural order.

The presence of barbaric people is felt as dangerous and humiliating; be they slaves in domestic tasks, or be they high officers in the army with the privileged of roman citizenship either form seems most contrary to political wisdom. Very few Romans were aware of this situation. None was able to foresee the importance of these barbarians, assimilated within the Empire, in the consolidation of a new historical context – the so named Middle Ages of Occident, which were to be the root of Christian Europe.

This article originally appeared in the Byzantine Neo Hellas review, I, 1970, edited by the Center for Byzantine and Neo Hellenic Studies at the Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.

The author points out the gravitation in Universal History of the period which begins in the VII century; and concludes with the Muslim expansion; it is the period during which Byzantium is able to contain the Sassanid power; it is also the period in which the Byzantine Empire; in the hands of Heraclius (610-614) -the first crusader-, attains a renewed optimism and splendour; and after which the Islamic expansion will be able to reduce the Sassanid Empire, and diminish seriously the defensive capacity of Byzance, forced to abandon rich provinces; the capital city itself would be seen in serious danger.

It is the period during which, in the continuos convulsion of peoples seeking their place in the future European lands - the reign of the Francs attains -, under the hands of Dagobert - its utmost significance, which will not be surpassed until the days of Charles the Great.

The author studies with special interest the relations between these two aspirations; the extraordinary characteristics of the two leaders confronted; and their capacity to involve all the different historical scenery: alliances, wars, diplomacy, all play a vital role.

In this historical context the author studies the implications of the embassy registered in the Chronicle of Fredegarius; not forgetting that those relations must have been maintained with certain continuity. Not in vain were the Francs considered the sole exception to the instruction given by Constantine VII Porphyrogenite in his De Administrando Imperio, warning that no Emperor should engage in marriage with a foreign princess, nor should a Byzantine princess be given to a barbarian king.

The Embassy sent by Dagobert has the mission of communicating the inauguration of his reign; of congratulating Heraclius for his victories; and of requesting the concertation of a pax Perpetua with the Empire.

In spite of the difficulty already mentioned, that is, the lack of more historical records, the authors keen insight allows him to advance certain conclusions: Heraclius has a clear comprehension of the importance of Occident; moreover, being himself a Carthaginian. At the light of Byzantine's principles of diplomacy, the author is able to suppose the motivations, the formalities, and the richness of the non-recorded aspects of the international relations between the Byzantine Empire and the Frankish reign; and thus the historical significance lying therein.

This article originally appeared in the Byzantine Neo Hellas review, II, 1971, edited by the Centre for Byzantine and Neo-Hellenic Studies at the Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile. A detailed bibliographic appendix, including direct historical sources, complements this article.

The topic of this study was suggested by Professor Charles Hugounet, University of Bordeaux, France, and it was the starting point for a more profound research work on the "History of Byzantine Diplomacy", which would be a continuation of Professor Herrera´s Doctoral Thesis.

In the period extending from the last years of the IV century and beginning of the V, the cordial relations between the Byzantine and Persian Empires, permitted the expansion of Christianism among the Persians, with the official protection of the Great King, Yazdigird I.

The concept of fraternity between Kings and Emperors - to which these appeal, - must be understood according to the mentality of the moment, which sees in it a spiritual filiation; thus, it appears comprehensible that Yazdigird was officially requested by the Emperor Arcadius to be tutor of his son Theodosius II (aged 7), until he came to age; of course, this was in correspondence with the historical reality; that is: peace on the frontier, and the advantage of commercial relations which this made possible. It is interesting to note the wisdom in the election of ambassadors for this delicate mission: the task was put in the hands of prudent bishops, as was the case of Marouthas.

When, in 420, Bahram V took the place of Yazdigird, the situation changed radically in the relations with the Empire. Under the strong influence of the traditional Persian religious magi, the expansion of Christianism was rejected, and persecutions altered the relations on the eastern frontier of the Empire; a sequence of wars and embassies mark this period, being the principal topics those related with religious tolerance; the neutrality of the Arab tribes; and the tribute requested from Byzance by the great Kings, which was considered a justified collaboration for the defense of the Caucasian pathways.

The Armenians -very independent people- were Monophysitic Christians; both these characteristics made them unreliable allies for the Empire.

At the same time, on the western frontier, the Vandals and Ostrogoths appear as potential adversaries to Byzantine expansion. The Persian Empire has its own menaces from the East. Thus, in the complex context of peoples, from Africa to the Bactriana, and from Africa to the Indian Ocean, plus the unstable peoples of the Steppe, the Byzantine and Persian Empires are coincident in maintaining a peaceful statu quo in their common frontier.

The aspiration for universality was the patron of the Empires policy; the ideal of attaining administrative uniformity understood therein. Thus, it found a justified motive for intervention in different points of the Empire, or even amid other surrounding peoples. The chessboard of Imperial policy must be seen in the context of its unity. Armenian, Caucasian and Hepthalite forces explain, thus, the Emperor's decisions; which -of course- found a way of sustaining the official continuity of the peace terms accorded with the Persian Empire in the peace treaties. Allies were often submitted to a more direct dependency of the Emperor's authority; occasions in which the capacity of the Byzantine diplomats played a decisive role. The control of the passages of the Caucasus was always considered of great geopolitical importance; here, the barbarians, or peoples of the steppes were often neutralized with a diplomacy of presents offered by the imperial treasury; to save the image, they are not referred to as tributes. Eventual accords with certain independent groups -made temporarily strong- permitted the continuation of commercial relations with India and the Far East, when the caravan routes were blocked for the Empire. The concern for religion was a constant in the Empire's policy; Christians under Persian dominion received Imperial aid, and other religious problems were put in the weight with the constellation of imperial worries; the Monophysitic and Nestorian christians being elements of division rather than of unity in the religious concern.

By the end of the century, the Empire felt secure in the international scenery, and under emperor Anastasius the policy of ordine novo in Italy made possible a peaceful life for different peoples, under the just tuition of the emperor. The relative peace on the eastern frontier, dating from the treaties of 422, was to last until the war which burst in 502. On this occasion, emperor Anastasius denied the help demanded by Kawadh, the Great King of Persia, who declared an unexpected war, which started with a successful campaign in Persarmenia, and, thus, breaking their peaceful border. Both Imperial Powers engaged in this war recurred to the strategy of moving allies, subjects, zones of influences, diplomacy; in this unstable state of war and hunger, several Arab tribes appear on the scenery, continuing warfare on their own initiative. The Byzantine Empire fortifies its Persian border, while negotiations continue; thus, accepting a truce of 7 years, and relieving certain regions of the payment of tributes; apparently, the Emperor esteemed the need of peace in order to restore the normality of life in the most affected regions of the empire. These measures are considered by the author as a sign of the pietas and providentia, which the Emperor was supposed to assure the peoples within its territories.

On the frontier, peace was again carefully guarded by both empires; new problems would arise on secondary axes of contact, namely, the Caucasus and Arabia.

Religious problems within each Empire explain the lack of frontier conflicts for a few years; Mazdique conflicts for Persia; for the Byzantine Empire, the return to orthodox Christianity under Justinian for this period; therefore of Arabic tribes is practically neglected by both Imperial heads.

The example of the dependence of lazica to the Byzantine Empire serves as a good example of how the imperial power and its diplomacy enter into action to assume the actual incorporation of important reigns to the Empire.

Kawadh initiated a policy of peace, so far as to send an embassy to the court of Justin, requesting him to take his son Khusraw in adoption; this step was taken, but with a condition which prevented the possible claim of heritage of the Byzantine Empire by Khusraw: he would be adopted according to the barbarian custom, that is, by the arms, but not by scripture, which would implicate the application of roman law. The encounter of both embassies in the frontier gave way to a magnificent representation of the respective power of each Empire; but the agreements were hindered by old rivalries in frontier problems; and the Persian Ambassador would not accept an adoption which put them in the same level as the barbarians (as Theodoric and Eutharic), in being adopted by the arms.

The desired peace was thus disrupted, and new years of war began; the different groups of barbarians had varied destinies, but those who were able to comprehend the advantage of taking a place within the Empire, gained thereby a place which assured them a continuity, and the cultural and religious incorporation in the flow of Universal History.

The interest for Crimea was evident, and imperial diplomacy testifies this interest; when diplomacy does not conquer, war must be used to secure geopolitical sites (as the Bosphorus).

The Arabs re-organized different coalitions which occupied the attention of both Empires; as well as the purpose of maintaining the commercial routes to the Orient.

The course of diplomatic relations reflects the ups and downs of the actual capacity of each Empire for imposing their conditions; the terms of the agreements reveal the importance of the public image of the rulers, who appeal again and again to the fraternity which they recognize as a theological basis for their promises of peace.

This article corresponds to the Second part of the book entitled The International Relations of the Byzantine Empire during the epoch of the Great Invasions, which was presented and approved as doctoral thesis by the University of Bordeaux, France, in 1969; and edited by the editorial Universitaria, Santiago de Chile, in 1972.

An appendix containing the recension written by Professor Mario Góngora in 1974, highlights some of the most outstanding merits of this study, which he situates in the sphere of the new approach of international relations, which is more profound, richer and more significant than the former diplomatic history. The insight, which permits the author to find and to explain the precise significance of concepts, such as the frontier of the Byzantine and Persian Empires; the mystic and ecumenical basis of the familiarity between Emperors; the symbolism contained in imperial representations -mosaics, crowns, ceremonies and embassies- plus the language of the chronicles and official documents; enlighten a vivid historical perception of periods and peoples yet slightly studied.

The German catalogue Historische Zeitschrift, in its edition of 1986 for Byzance, comments the work of the author in the following terms: "The learned Professor Héctor HERRERA Cajas, from the Center of Byzantine Studies in Santiago has presented a complete panorama of all important diplomatic relations at the time of the great migrations, studied from the Persian frontier to the Danube; which, for other byzantinists has passed almost unnoticed. The theme is worked directly from the documental sources, and reveals very clearly the political background at each moment. Byzantine diplomatic is seen oscillating between the imperial demand of universality, and the tough, sometimes afflictive and distressing reality".

The geographical site of Constantinople, -in the zone of contact between the Mediterranean world and the peoples of the steppe-, has marked its history, explaining its strength, its splendour, its millennial survival as the Cosmopolis.

A new route opens to Byzantine influence about the middle of the IX century; it is the route taken by Norman adventurers (Varangians) who penetrated from the Baltic Sea, via the Caspian or the Black Sea, and from here by the fluvial network to the sites where Kiev and Novgorod flourished. Another branch of Normans (Vikings) operated on the Mediterranean, where Arab traders displayed intense activity.

In its crucial standpoint, the Byzantine Empire was forced to use all its defensive power, in order to survive pressures and attacks on all its frontiers; even to the point of supporting the siege of the Capital itself; but, its army, its fleet, its walls, its defensive sites, its diplomacy - were able to maintain its gravitation in the historical scenery for centuries; before the Crusades, and, finally, the ottoman Turks, forced its collapse.

In relation with the Russian neighbours, the first records of their attacks on Constantinople, dated in the year 860, are to be found in homilies pronounced by the Patriarch Photius. The appellation of Russians is given here to the Slavic tribes organized and mobilized by the Norman (varangian) leaders. This mentioned attack motivated, - after its repulse- a first embassy to the court of the khazars to request their concourse in controlling the Slavic incursions into Byzantine territories. Imperial diplomacy was able to convince the Russians, who preferred a peaceful agreement with the Empire; from which commercial relations resulted, and the acceptance of Christian missionaries, thus, the Russians became allies and subject of the Empire. Successive aggressions of other Russian tribes, as well as of other peoples of the steppe, -gave way to new embassies and to new treaties of peace.

The adoption of the Cyrillic alphabet by the Russians -received by the Bulgarian Slavs- acquires great significance; it permits the register of historical events, and most noteworthy of their relations with the Byzantine world. It will also provide a written language for the missionary expansion, decisive in the formation of future Russia.

In this context, the author studies the valuable historical document known as The Russian Primary Chronicle, (or Nestorian Chronicle), compiled by the monk Laurenti (1377) from legendary sources, Byzantine chronicles and official documents filed by the prince of Kiev, whose entrance in the scenery of Universal History begins with the Russo - Byzantine treaties here recorded.

With Oleg, Prince made strong in Kiev and after his incursion to the Capital (907), a peace treaty was concluded, which implied concessions to the Russians, due to the complicated situation of the Empire on other borders, and in the Capital itself. The commercial benefits accorded in this treaty -as well as in that of 911- were the basis of peaceful and frequent communication of Russians -proceeding from different cities- and the other merchants in Byzance, where the Russians were allowed special quarters in the suburbs of the capital.

The careful study of these treaties enlighten several aspects of historical interest thus, for example, the regulations accorded in case of accidents (ship wreck), or other irregularities, reveal the criteria of the Byzantine Empire in its international relations, much of which has been the basis of international legislation until the present days. A new treaty -after a new Russian assault to the capital, in 944-, again reveals the application of this incipient code of international law.

Another aspect of interest, is the composition of the Russian embassies; the names of the ambassadors reveals the preeminence of Varangians as leaders of the Slavic peoples; this can be traced, given the requirement imposed by Byzance, that all Russians who came to the Capital, as ambassadors or as merchants, should bring written protocolar credentials.

The oaths of peace are sworn by the Holy Cross, in case of Christian Greeks, and by those Russians who are Christian; the Russians who remain pagan, by Perus, this is done deposing arms and armour.

The visit of Princess Olga of Kiev (955) to Constantinople marks a highlight of Byzantine influence. The princess, considered fraternally linked to the Emperor was baptized as a Christian; the splendour of the ceremonies prepared for her reception in Constantinople reveal the perfection of imperial and liturgical procedures by then developed by the Byzantine court.

The Russians power under Sviatoslav, pagan son of Olga, reinforced its positions in Central Europe; defeating the Bulgarians, they represented a new menace to the Empire; war was necessary in order to reduce the Russians to new peace treaties.

Another important agreement for peace was concluded in (971), with significant advantages for both Greeks and Russians: the princess Ana, sister of Emperor Basilius, would be given in marriage to Vladimir, on condition of his Christian baptism. For the Byzantine Empire, the conversion of Russians was a decisive step; in the future, the Russians would inherit the spiritual task of Constantinople. On the other hand, the empire needed the military aid of the Russians. Thus, Vladimir, receiving the emblems of power from the emperor, profited from the advantage of being recognized as fraternally linked to the Emperor.

With this union, in the historical scenery where Islamic, Jewish, and Latin Christian were striving for expansion the Russian world was definitely incorporated to the orthodox Patriarchate of Constantinople. At the beginning of the XI century, the conversion of Russia was so advanced as to have several cathedrals; and, to have in Kiev, a metropolitan ordered by the patriarch of Constantinople. A library, with translations of Byzantine and Bulgarian texts, was the basis for the formation of several generations of Russian monks; thus the heritage of Byzantine spirituality, liturgy and law and its reception by the Russians, explains the development of Russian culture, and its historical mission.

This article originally appeared in the Byzantion Nea Hellas review, n° 6, 1982; edited by the Center for Byzantine and Neo Hellenic Studies, of the Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile. This study is complemented by a chronology of Byzantine Emperors, from c.820- 1055; and of the Great Princes of Kiev, from c.900 - 1125.

It must be acknowledged that the first translation of the Russian Primary Chronicle, from the English version, into Spanish, was made by Mr.Dámaso Bahamondes; it was requested of his enthusiastic and generous disposition, to collaborate in the preparation of the seminar for the students of the final course of history in 1974, where is daughter was a distinguished participant. Most certainly the author would have added special words of recognition to father and daughter deer friends; now both have left this world.

Herodotus, in the fourth of his nine books of History, gives notice of the Scythes people of the steppes who were remembered for being able to confront the expansive force of the Great King Darius (510 BC.)

The contrast of Greek landscape -of human measure- with the incommensurable extensions of the Near East and Asia, are the basis of several interesting considerations relative to the ways in which man makes his human space take sense, according to his geographical setting, but not depending on it.

Herodotus notes that the Scythes build no cities, and carry all their belongings and herds wherever they go; the only sites that are fixed and sacred are the places where their forefathers are buried (the existence of which has been proved by archaeological discoveries).

The great Euro-Asiatic steppe, expending from Manchuria, in the Far East, to Hungary, in the limits of Europe, constitutes a great belt of communication in which the nomads move.

The appearance of tribes, mounted on horses, able to reach both limits of the steppe, (with the respective civilizations) have established a communication of both extremes, which, not being intensive nor frequent, has been sufficient to be noted in the artistic objects. Moreover, the raids of one tribe often set others into movement, causing invasion of hoards of barbaric tribe into Chine or Europe.

The mobility and ferocity of the nomad horsemen was magnified with the use of harness and stirrups, and the adoption of the Chinese arch, which enabled them to attack, throwing arrows while advancing at high speed. (Procopius gives testimony of this in his narrative of Justinian the Great's Persian wars) Herodotus gives a detailed description of armor, which protects the warrior and his horse; a thousand years later Del Plano Carpino will testify thus combination of warrior and horse with full armor protection, as observed among Mongols.

What can be man's sensation in these interminable, unproductive lands -with harsh extreme of weather- where the horizon advances with man's pace and seems unattainable? The author's insight into this interiority of the man of the steppes reveals to us several interesting aspects.

Citing a Great Mongol Khan of the XIII century, "the sky makes near what is far" that is, when man is able to conquer, or submit this space; indispensable, as a first step, man must delimit a human space, for rest and protection; the response is his tent, and the encampment of tents, space which is guarded precariously from weather, but most carefully from wicked intrusions; thus embassies are submitted to different trials before allowing them to enter the camp.

The fire in each tent makes the space warm, the metals malleable, and defeats the darkness. The tent is decorated with felt and tapestries -according to category-, which makes amiable this interior. The contrast between the inside and the outside acquires a most relevant significance in the nomad's tent; and the threshold is the strict limit, which cannot be trespassed without permission (according to testimonies given by different ambassadors).

Savage animals -besides the inclement weather- are a constant menace to man's life; thus, the magic reproduction of animal figures is the most notable characteristic of the artistic creations of the people of the steppes.

A great confederation of the people of the steppes, which put into action a constellation of other nomads tribes for centuries, both in the Eastern border of the Steppes, as in the Western border, and which had serious repercussion in Occident, are the Huns.

The Chinese Celestial Empire built the monumental wall as a protection -not always efficient- for these nomad invasions. For centuries, there are constant movements of nomads in these vast extensions of the steppes. In the IV century AC, we have the acceptance of Goths within the territories of the Roman Empire in their desperate flight from the huns and the alans, who come in persecution after them.

The description of Ammianus Marcellinus shows the great resemblance of these fierce nomads riders, who advance in hoards across the steppes, with those recorded by Chinese historians. The nomad tribes, in constant effervescence, forced other tribes to move into the Empire's territories; such, the avars, which pushed the Lombards into Italy (568); from other nomads, the Lombard had adopted the use of the stirrup. which transformed the warrior's condition in Occident.

A new historical force -that of the Islamic Turks-, puts into movement the context of the historical scenery to the East and West of the great steppes; having adopted elements of Arabic and Persian civilisation, it is the religious fanaticism which makes them aggressive invaders. For centuries, Nestorian Christians won the space in Central Asia, among Persian, the Chinese Celestial Empire, and the Mongol tribes.

In occidental history, the Turks make their appearance in the mid VI century; embassies are interchanged with the Byzantine Emperor Justin II, towards 880 the Magyars (Hungarians) pushed by other nomad tribes, will appear in the scenery of the Byzantine Empire.

After entering as allies of the Empire (considered an aid in the defense against other barbarians who appeared as more fierce and dangerous), the Hungarians were established in the territories of the Empire, delimited to the West by the Germanic people under Oton I (955), and converted to Christianism, they would be a defensive force for the Occidental Christianity.

The constitution of a Mongol Empire (XIII century) under the powerful hand of the Khans (Genghis Khan) and centered in the steppes, with the religious conviction of Turkish Empire, appeared as unique under the Sky.

The heritage of the people of the steppes in European history begins with the legacy of the nomad warrior, moving at the height and speed of the horse with a seigniorial spirit, which will remain in the medieval chevalier.

This article originally appeared in the book titled El Espacio en las Ciencias, Ed. Universitaria, 1982, Santiago de Chile; and brings an appendix with bibliographical references for this theme.

In the Byzantine Empire we can appreciate the powerful sense of imperial responsibilities, which was a constant stimulating force to seek for different policies of survival; with the foundation of the new Rome (330) we can follow its millenary history, until its fall in the hand of the Islamic sultan (1453).

The New Rome, -halfway between Orient and Occident- has a spiritual axis which explains its political action during its millenary history; its task to put an ecumenical order, where human values are preserved; in clear distinction from an outside, in which the disorder appears as infra-human; including the barbarians, until their conversion makes them acceptable in the imperial order.

The imperial idea is an adaptation of celestial order to terrestrial space. Therefore, it has a mystical foundation; the Capital (caput mundi) receives special protection from Heaven, and its recognition motivates the ceremonies and monuments, which appeared so fascinating to other contemporary peoples.

The Emperor, head of imperial as well as religious liturgy, is venerated in different times and places and is understood to receive direct Heavenly support; this responds to an oriental conception, heritage of the Hellenistic order. The architectural disposition of Byzance, as well as the ceremonial display with the proskynesis in the presence of the Imperial Majesty, gives testimony of this conception.

The crown, as a symbol of this imperial authority, is highlighted in Byzantine art; often, the divine hand appears crowning the Emperor in mosaics or paintings. The Emperor is the center of universal order, venerable to his subjects; his task is to maintain order, peace, and abundance; by the time of Heraclius' victory of the Persian empire, the Emperor is called Basileus. The Emperor's attributes, wisdom and peace, are patent in the construction of Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene built under Justinian the Great. It is understood that imperial order guarantees liberty, which is justice, to all subjects; therefore, military campaigns over barbarians are justified by their incorporation to the Empire.

Even when the actual political power of the Emperor is limited by barbarian invasions, and its territorial limits are reduced, it is understood that the nature of his imperial power remains untouched, being in itself universal and divine; it is understood, therefore, that all rulers are spiritually linked to the Emperor, as a family, and recognize his superior authority.

With the conversion of Constantine to Christianity, the imperial spirit is reinforced in its universal, ecumenical dimension.

Without a constitution, the Emperors had a very efficient bureaucracy, coherent and abundant laws, and a hierarchical order of official dignitaries; plus the fraternal relations with barbarian princes, who were honourably considered fraternally united, and honoured by their entailment to the Emperor, even when it costed the imperial treasury a disguised form of tribute.

This article originally appeared in the Revista de Historia Universal, of the Pontificia Universidad Católica, Chile, number 5, 1986; its bring a complete and commented bibliographical appendix.

In the prolonged attempt to understand the transformation that goes from Hellenistic art to Christian art, an important chapter corresponds to the study of the different influences acting in this process, which takes the IV and V centuries, up to its culmination during the period of Justinian the Great. Among the various influences, it is pertinent to determine precisely the scope of the art of the steppes peoples.

A first observation worthy of being underlined is the notorious contrast between the inside space and the outside space in the nomad world. Thus, the camp, and most particularly the tent, create a hospitable space, in some cases richly ornamented. It is well to remember the descriptions given by the classical authors, and specially by Menander, preserved in the Selection of Embassies of Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, corresponding to the Byzantine embassy sent to the Turkish Great Khan (568): here they find tents decorated with tapestries of silk in various designs, the columns of which were coated with sheets of gold; undoubtedly, this practice goes back to the Scythes. The archaeological discoveries on the high Yenissei confirm the presence of this tradition, which will likewise survive for centuries; the descriptions left by the pontifical legate Plano Carpino, in the XIII century, are another confirmation, like the memories of Marco Polo; in fact, this tradition remains even to the present days among the Mongols.

The value of interior space is exalted in the nomad world by the magic significance of the threshold. This nomadic home -comprehensible given the desolate landscape in which these peoples live- is in the antipode of the graeco-roman conception, in which the civic buildings, with their religious significance, are also externally decorated, contributing thus to the beauty of the urban atmosphere; this conception is so strong, that it wins adepts beyond the imperial limits (Petra and Palmira are examples).

The Christian man, feeling the need for new solutions so that his space of cult could offer the faithful the possibility of grasping easily and immediately the transcendental value of sacred space, appeals to various elements -both in the field of architecture as in that of ornamentation- that do not appear in the official pagan art; elements that, on the contrary, strengthen the feeling of penetrating a space which depreciates this world in benefit of opening up and anticipating the glory of another world: the Kingdom of Heaven. The Christian well knows that he is only passing through this world on his way to his definite destiny: the Celestial Home; in every Christian there is a pilgrim’s soul. This pilgrimage, with all its biblical reminiscence (the Tabernacle, the Celestial Jerusalem), becomes the equivalent of the nomad’s condition. One can well consider, thus, that among the many influences, which must be taken into account as acting in the formation of Christian art, a chapter must be dedicated to the art of the nomads of the euro-asiatic steppes.

In this perspective, the study of the Christian monuments acquires a new dimension; we have that one as early as Santa Constanza (345), possibly built as a baptistry; the tomb of Gala Placidia (422-425); Santo Stefano Rotondo sul Celio; erected by order of Pope Simplicius (468-483), or the contemporary baptisteries of Ravenna and of the Gaul all follow the principles here highlighted, principles which will become classical in Byzantine art: the bareness of the walls, in which the brick work hides the interior glory, which reveals itself as soon as we pass the threshold: then the combination of marbles, the scintillating splendor of mosaics which cover practically the whole interior (Gala Placidia is the best example), make us think of the carpets and tapestries which bestow an equally symbolic beauty to the nomad’s tent.

This article originally appeared in the Byzantion Nea Hellas review, 9-10, 1990; edited by the Center for Byzantine and Neo Hellenic Studies of the Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile. It is the work of which an abstract was sent to the "XVII International Byzantine Congress" al Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C., on August 1986; and was accepted by the Administrative Committee, to be read in the session dedicated to "cross- cultural Influences", on August 5^th. Unfortunately, the author was unable to assist, and therefore, it was not read at the occasion. The present abstract was published in the volume of reports corresponding to the summary of the works presented at the Congress.

It must be said that, for the author, the possibility of studying for seven months at the Dumbarton Oaks Center for Byzantine Studies (Nov 1966- May 1967) was an invaluable opportunity.

The Byzantine Empire had an unequaled advantage over Medieval Occident for maintaining and increasing superior studies: its linguistic continuity with Classical Antiquity, given by the use of the Greek language; language and advantage which Byzance appreciated, guarded and treasured.

Thus, the cycle of studies (egkuklopaideia) conformed during the Hellenistic period, which centered the knowledge considered basic for an adequate formation of youths, was continued as the indispensable starting point for proper university studies: philosophy and law. The University of Constantinople founded in 425 by Emperor Theodosius II, and several times re-founded during the Empire's millennial history, provided the Empire with a selected bureaucracy of prepared officers and jurists. The possibility of counting with centres of superior studies - besides the imperial support, - demanded the texts which treasured knowledge; this, also, was assured by the existence of rich libraries in the Capital and other cities of the Empire. Changes in the methods copying these texts facilitated superior studies: passing from volumina to codices; the transliteration to minuscula; the benefits of using paper, instead of parchment or papyrus – all tended to make books more easily available.

Photius (c. 825- c. 895) is highlighted as one of the most interesting figures of the IX century, and -perhaps - of the entire history of the Byzantine Empire. When he was, consecrated as Patriarch of Constantinople (858), he was already renowned for his literary culture, his efficient career as officer in the administration of the Empire, and his Bibliotheka; this consisted of a substantial number of commentaries of the most varied authors of classical antiquity, and of the first centuries of Christianity.

The Emperor Justinian clearly conceives superior education of legists as a means of serving the Imperial Majesty with the dignity required in the administration of justice; moreover, conscious of the religious mission Justinian denied the access of pagans as University Professors.

Constantine VII Porphyrogenite (913-954) gives an eloquent testimony of an Emperor's responsibility: he named a selected group of professors at the University, and took personal contact with the students, reminding them always that the theory must be applied to the practical task of administrating the Empire; among these, he found able collaborators, some as legislators others as officers, and even others for ecclesiastical dignities. This selected group of administrators permitted to control the political ambitions of the Capital's aristocracy, as well as of military elites. Surely, among these prepared men, the Emperor found those who, – under his own guide – contributed in the selection, compilation and edition of the Excerpta.

New influences, - like Arabic literature, in the next century - would continually be absorbed and incorporated to the encyclopedic and vital culture of Byzance.

The forth Crusade (1204) brought a total convulsion to Byzantine life. When Imperial power returns to Constantinople (1261), studies are retaken. The subsequent century is marked by a period during which the influence of Byzantine intellectuals in continually progressive in Occident; it is also more frequent to find Byzantine manuscripts in Occident.

Although the Empire would become gradually less important, considering its power and extension; the significance of its centers of study increased. Long before the fall of Constantinople in hands of the Turks, Byzantium was enlightening Occident, and thus, making its decisive contribution to Universal History; at this point, preparing the ways for Humanism and the Renaissance.

This article originally appeared in the Byzantium Nea Hellas review, 11 –12, (1990-1992), edited by the Center for Byzantine and Neo-Hellenic Studies at the Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.

This article was originally written for the Artistic and Literary Supplement of our principal newspaper, (El Mercurio, Santiago de Chile, February 21^st, 1993) which is published on Sundays. It corresponds to a field of study which the author had been investigating with special interest, -even to the moment of his death-, with the idea of preparing a book on Byzantine and Early Christian Art.

Christian spirituality has had diverse forms of expression throughout these twenty centuries of history. In occident, the unity of Church, centered under the authority of the Pope of Rome, contrast with the oriental churches, which are autonomous, each one under the authority of its own patriarch.

Juridically, the unity of the Church of Constantinople with Rome was maintained until the year 1054, when the pontifical legate, Cardinal Humbertus, and the Patriarch Miguel Cerulario excommunicated each other; but the differences and incomprehension between both Churches had been frequent since the initial moments of the oriental Empire. Until today -very lamentably, the Churches remain divided; even when they are so near in faith, liturgy and devotion.

The Church of Constantinople never forgot its missionary dimension; its most valuable contribution to the christianization of the innumerable barbaric peoples, was the conversion of the Slavs, initiated in the IX century, and made possible with the creation of an alphabet (created by the brothers St. Cyril and St. Methodius) adequate for the translation to Slavic of the Holy Scriptures and other ecclesiastical texts. In the X century, the Patriarchate of Constantinople initiated the missionary work among the Russians, which culminated with the conversion of the prince Vladimir of Kiev in the year 990. After the fall of Constantinople in the hands of the Turks (1453) -which put an end to the Oriental Empire-, it was understood by de Russians that, after the second Rome which was Constantinople, it was a heritage of Moscow to be the third Rome. For centuries, the Orthodox Church would be the great support of the Slavs -specially the Russians- in spite of the Mongol dominion.

The most notable differences between the Oriental Christians (basically greco-slavic) and the Occidental Christians (basically germano-latin), attending to their spirituality, appear manifested in art.

With Constantine, and the liberty of the Church (IV century), a new model of life -in the strict imitation of Christ- appears: the monks, or hermits, who retire to the deserts in northern Egypt and Palestine, to live in constant prayer and penitence; some of them formed communities; some of these Fathers of the Desert left valuable texts with counsels for leading a spiritual life which leads to the most perfect union with God.

This model of monastic life was also imitated in Occident where it found followers, most notably in Ireland (since the middle of the V century), from where it extended throughout the British Isles, and to the continent. Yet, the type of monasticism that would predominate in Occident would be that of Saint Benedict, since the beginning of the VIII century; it would regulate a form of monastic life in which prayer, work and rest are complemented, without the excessive asceticism of the oriental monks.

The presence of these monks and hermits in the oriental Empire, was a testimony of Christian ideals, which the society venerated. Prayer was considered the most valuable instrument to reach God; much above the intellectual knowledge of theology or the merits of man's deeds.

Oriental monasticism found progressive ways of intensification for their forms of life where prayer, contemplation, and penitence demanded extreme discipline.

This spirituality -which disdains the body and the surrounding world-, was decisive in the formulation of a new aesthetics, quite contrary to the forms of Greco-Roman classicism, which valued natural beauty. New forms are sought to represent the sublime beauty of God, in the person of Christ, or of those who participate of celestial dignity: the Virgin, the saints and angels, the Creator itself.

Different artistic traditions converge in the solution of this purpose: from the Persian Sassanid tradition, the symmetry, frontatism and hieratism -all tending to abstraction; coincidently, this tendency for abstraction was present in roman provincial art, influenced by Celtic aesthetics, and by that of the peoples of the Euro-Asiatic steppes.

Byzantine art found its best expression in icons -portable sacred paintings- and in magnificent mosaics within the churches. Statuary has little acceptance, and did not surpass the Iconoclastic period. The work of art is considered as an object of cult, as an aid to attain a better proximity to the invisible divinity. Thus the background of these sacred images is gold or -at most- a sketch of landscape, and the images themselves, are painted in accordance with certain program patterns; originality or the individuality of the artist has no importance.

The works of art of Byzantine or Orthodox Christianity must be appreciated in this perspective; they must serve as an instance for praying and contemplation; it is a sacred art. In the context of imperial mentality the Emperor, as the representative of God in his mission of ordering the World, participates of the celestial dignity, and, therefore, his figure is also represented in the works of art.

The author chooses a very significant moment of the strife between the Imperial and the Pontifical poers, to examine the theoretical basis, the historical conjunction, and the legal formulation of the confronted positions.

The Roman Catholic Church, with its seat in Rome, under the authority of the Pope ("Petrus"), and respected by the barbarians reigns of Occident, had –at this moment- its most serious problems in its relations with the Emperor, with seat in Constantinople, and –at least theoretically- recognized as the heir of the Roman Empire. Within the Empire –always concious of its missional task as Christian Empire- these werw times of controversy: the nestorian heresy, and the monophysites, on the other extreme, agitated the Christian world with Christological debates. In Italy, the Ostrogoths under Theodoric, werw Arian Chriatians, who maintained cordial relations with the Pope. But in the oriental patriarchates (Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem), the Imperial power was decisive in matters of the Churcg; and, even more with the creation of the patriarchate of Constantinople (II Ecumenical Council, 381; confirmed in the IV Council, in 451 in Calcedonia).

In Occident, the ecclesiastical authority of the pope as primate of the Catholic Church was progressively strengthened; the pontifical "decretales" were formulated and respected by the occidental bishops; their form –in language and structure- was clearly roman, and juridical; the form in which it would consolidate until today.

Opening his pontificate, Gelasius finds the Empire suffering the schism known as "acacian"; from the name of the patriarch of Constantinople, Acacius (484), who had accepted the pressure of the Emperor Zenon, in favor of the monophysites in Alexandria. The Emperor had dictated his "Henotikon", which was a direct intromission in matters of faith: with the argument that it was favorable to attain the "unity" of the faith, the Emperor ignored the decisions of the Council of Ephesus (431), which had condemned the nestorian heresy. Likewise, the position of the monophysites had been condemned by the Council of Calcedonia (451). The Pope Leo had declared the true doctrine, which established that Christ is real God and real Man, two natures in one Person.

In this historical context, the Pope Gelasius (492-496) defines his "doctrine" concerning the different nature of Imperial power ("imperialis potestas"), and religious authority ("auctoritas sacerdotalis"); by this time, Gelasius had matured his conception, having had opportunity of formulating diverse pontifical document under Pope Simplicius (468-483) and Pope Felix III (483-492). Pope Gelasius understood that it was his task to define most clearly the scope of Imperial and Pontifical powers. The Church, in matters of faith, must defend the Christian tradition, the independence of the Church from political power, and –most of all- the true doctrine of the Catholic faith.

The author reproduces –in the notes- the principal documents studied; he intends a more accurate precision, and a more profound analysis of the significance of these texts, at the light of a historical and a religious comprehension.

This article originally appeared in a book compiled in homage of R.P. Osvaldo Lira SS.CC., on his 90 years, in recognition of the richness of his life as priest, professor and author: R.P. Osvaldo Lira. En torno a su pensamiento. Homenaje en sus 90 años, Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, Zig-Zag, S.A., Santiago, 1994 (pp.459-472).

This article was originally prepared for the Artistic and Literary Supplement of our principal newspaper El Mercurio (Santiago, Chile, May 14^th, 1995), which appears on Sundays. It is, therefore, a presentation of the subject written for a most varied, non- specialist public; and includes no erudition nor bibliographical references.

The author begins by citing, from the Preface of the Book of Ceremonies, of Constantine VII Porphyrogenite (944-959), the following assertion, concerning the ideal that "...Imperial power must be able to reproduce the harmonious order given by the Creator to the Universe; exercised with order and measure, it must, thereby, appear most majestic and agreeable to our subjects..."

The Creator gave the Cosmos an order which manifests His Majesty, and which man glorifies. This is the paradigm -animated and immutable at the same time- which man must imitate; making the History of Humanity tend towards the imitation of the Kingdom of Heaven. This order requires the power and authority to impose it, and this is the mission and justification of Imperial power. The Empire is, consequently, ecumenical; and tends to extend its order to the surrounding barbarian world; moreover if it is -like in the case of the Byzantine Empire- a Christian Empire.

The center of the Empire is the Capital, -caput mundi- Byzantium; in the Capital stands the Sacrum Palatium, where the concentration continues, with the Imperial Throne; here is where the Emperor takes his place, presiding the imperial ceremonies, in silence, in strict hierarchical order; following the oriental tradition, those who enter bow in respectful proskynesis before the Emperor, as a recognition of his sacred dignity.

A new step in concentration and representation appears, when we consider the Imperial Crown, which gives the Emperor -Basileus- the plenitude of power, as a representative of the Pantokrator, of the Divinity.

The author examines this theme centring his attention on certain most relevant moments of Byzantine history.

The iconoclastic Controversy (VIII and IX century), gives the opportunity of perceiving the sacred character of the Emperor (Basileus) Leon III, head of political and religious order; authority which surpasses that of the Patriarchal Church organization. In contrast, the Bishop of Rome, Pope Gregorius II -at this same time- acquires a status of religious authority, which is indisputable, amid the roman- Christian reigns in formation in Western Europe. In the Byzantine world, -in addition to the patriarchal and Episcopal hierarchy-, there is the very strong presence of the monastic order, which gives testimony of the most absolute devotion to the Church, in the most strict imitation of Christ, and which gives its peculiar character to Byzantine Christian art. The influence of Hellenistic art must also be considered.

Of the period before the Iconoclastic Controversy, only few artistic testimonies remain: of architecture, with notable works, such as Hagia Sophia; of mosaics, those treasured in Ravenna, and some in Rome; of wooden icons, only a few, conserved in the monastery of Saint Catherine, in Mount Sinai.

Byzantine art, since the return of Orthodoxy (843), is a programmatic task, oriented by ecclesiastics, and considered necessary for the preservation of Christian cult; therefore, it is sustained by official imperial and ecclesiastical initiative; the icon becomes indispensable in the context of the salvific mission of the Empire. This will appear most clearly in the Slavic world (Russia).

As a counterpart of the argument of Iconoclasts, that is, the risk of Idolatry, we have the eloquent defence made by the Capadocian Father, Saint Basilius the Great (IV century), and which was the basis of the argument in favor of the images of cult: "we honor, not the sacred image, but the prototype of which the artistic object is only a reflection"... If man was created on the image of God (Genesis), we can, at least, have an approximation to the Divinity when we have a work of art, which is a projection of the divine Image, at least, of the second Person of the Trinity, Jesus Christ.

The theological disputes were of the greatest importance in the Byzantine Empire; and after the Nestorians (in the Great Syria), and the Monophysitics (in Egypt) were declared heretic, it was clearly established that: "Christ is one person, with two natures"; human and divine natures, in one person. This doctrinal definition -attained at the Council of Calcedonia (451)- was vital for the acceptance of images, and their significance as a means for sustaining the Christian faith. Moreover, there era certain images considered not painted by human hand; these ajeiropoietes images would have been given by Christ himself.

Byzantine art is essentially a theological art. Since the Empire permitted religion -at the time of Constantine- there is a correspondence between imperial and ecclesiastical liturgy. The need of highlighting the quality of a representation of Christ, the Virgin, or the Saints, -in relation with the Imperial representations- explains the use of such magnificent materials in Byzantine theological art. Thus, the image of Christ Almighty -Pantokrator- following a typical iconographic program since the middle of the IX century, is the best example of the Divinity in Byzantine art -made adequate for divine cult. It must be majestic; sometimes, severe; the selection of materials must be in accordance with the Divinity represented; therefore, the richness of mosaics. There is an iconographic economy; that is, there are no unnecessary elements in the composition; for example, the Mystery of the Annunciation needs no more than the Virgin Mary and the Angel Gabriel. Once a model appears adequate, it is copied once and again; for, there is no interest for originality, but only on transmitting a theological Truth. A prototype attained satisfactorily, needs no change; it becomes a consecrated image, copied for centuries with almost no change. This theological Byzantine art allows man to honor God, to anticipate -through the image (icon)-, the Celestial Glory, to approach the promised Contemplation.

This essay is the transcription of a conference given during the Seminar "Byzantium: Art and Spirit", organized by the Center of Byzantine and Neo hellenic Studies of the Universidad de Chile, Santiago, during the "Month of Greece, 1995", organized by the Greek Embassy in Chile; and was published in Byzance: Art and Spirit, edited by the Center for Byzantine and Neo hellenic Studies, with the collaboration of the Andes Foundation, Santiago, Chile, 1995.

The author centers his attention on a symbol, which has attained considerable significance -for its extension and validity- throughout universal history: the crown.

The diversity of symbols integrated in a crown may be innumerable, and may find their origin in the confluence of different cultural traditions; moreover, the ceremonial roll of the crown must be comprehended within the complex theologico-political ideas which underlay the organization of each particular society.

After a careful study of the historical sources -surviving iconography in coins, mosaics, miniatures; the incomparable information provided by The Book of Ceremonies of Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, other literary sources; as well as available literature on the subject- the author studies, with acute insight, the Byzantine imperial crown.

The author brings to mind diverse types of crowns, and then centers his study on the singular significance of the crown, in the context of Byzantine culture, with its undoubted, but coherent, heritage of other cultures.

For an insight of the Byzantine conception of imperial power, the author presents a series of key concepts which, starting with the Cosmos, created by God, continues with the Empire, which must represent and imitate the Cosmos; thus, the Emperor's mission is to administrate the Empire in view of instauring an order in accordance with the divine order; therefore, an ecumenical mission. The Imperial capital -caput mundi-, has its own center at the Sacrum Palatium, where the imperial throne finds its place. The Emperor is enthroned by the coronation ceremony, and the crown continuous to be the principal of the official imperial ornaments exhibited by the Emperor during his intense and solemn ceremonial life. The crown belongs to each particular Emperor, personally; thus, the power of the Basileus is sacred; it is understood that while he uses his crown, he is in vertical communication with celestial power. Iconography shows the Basileus being crowned by the hands of Christ himself, or by his Holy Mother, the Virgin Mary, or by an angel. At the imperial court, the character of the ceremonies reveals the essence of the Basileus’ power: it is the reign of silence, of strict hierarchy; the Emperor manifests his designs by significant gestures; and his acceptance and recognition is given by the frequent acclamations, inclinations and prosternations of his subjects.

In this context, the author assigns a preeminent significance to a detail, normally unnoticed in the study of crowns: he postulates that -within the complexity and richness of elements, which have concurred in the formation of the Byzantine imperial crown- the pendants (since the V century), are most relevant. Possibly a heritage of the people of the steppe, who might have brought it from the Chinese Celestial Empire; the pendants of the crown are incorporated as a most significant detail, in accordance with the conception of imperial power: the Basileus finds in these pendants another aid -real and symbolic- of isolating his person, his head, from the noise and disorder of the outside world, which surrounds him, but which he has the special mission to put in order; the pendants tend to accentuate his vertical relation with celestial order, and therewith, his possibility of consonance with God, source of all authority and all power.

This article was originally published in the Byzantion Nea Hellas review, 13-15, 1993-1996, edited by the Center for Byzantine and Neo -Hellenic Studies of the Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.

The author begins by highlighting the significance of the feast, as the moments in which man’s everyday life seems to transcend the limits of time and space, moments in which every gesture, every word, every object, acquires a special significance, a sacred dimension.

In this perspective, the author studies the imperial feasts in Constantinople, which have the power of incorporating everyone into this special dimension; the traditional rites are rigorously established, playing, thus, an important role in the preservation of its culture.

The Book of Ceremonies, carefully composed by the emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, is a testimony of the feasts, understood in this perspective; and, therefore, constitutes a most valuable historical document for studying Byzantine culture, not only of the X century, when it was composed, but also of its past history -roman and hellenistic traditions-, and its historical projection.

Special attention is given by the author to the triumphal ceremony, which crosses the City, up to the final acclamation in the Hippodrome; to the Palace Festivities (as the Brumalia); to the Great Church Ceremonies, and devotional processions. All these festivities express the fundamental conception of imperial power in Byzance, as a mimesis of the Kingdom of Heaven.

This article originally appeared in the Byzantion Nea Hellas review, 16, 1997; of the Center for Byzantine and Neo Hellenic Studies of the Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.

VOLVER