DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.27365#0066
54
/COA^OGR^RN/C PROGRAMME
reflected in the way the budding of the pretorium was depicted behind him. It is
shown as a basilica with a projecting sanctuary apse. The roiled manuscript in Christ's
left hand, something not mentioned in the Gospels, was intended to show that Christ
was not only the sacrificial lamb but also the incarnation of the Word, the second
person of the Trinity. This corresponds directly to the interpretation of the Gospel text
in the liturgy. There the sacrificial and eternally divine nature of Christ, conceived at
the level of an elevated theology, are constantly and vitally interacting and revealed as
a unity of opposites.
The scroll also had another meaning. Together with Christ's oratorical gesture it
was taken to be a testimony of truth and a symbolic expression of the Gospel words
"To this end was I born, and for this cause came into the world, that I should bear
witness to the truth. Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice," (John 18:37). In
the Eastern Christian tradition, we should recall, the trial before Pilate was seen as
confirmation of the divinity of Christ. This goes back to the first part of the apocryphal
Gospel of Nicodemus, the "Acts of Pilate", which was the most detailed and
authoritative source of information about the trial; it told how the divine nature of
Christ was proved by the testimony of numerous miracles and signs. Therefore one of
the most important Christian relics which played a significant role in the Byzantine
imperial rituals was the writing set with which the depositions at the trial were
recorded^. At Akhtala this is shown to the right of Pilate on a special stand adjoining
the pretorium. The fresco leaves no doubt as to the symbolic importance of this detail
which was semantically linked to the scroll held by Christ. If the scroll was a metaphor
of divine truth the writing set with the unfolded page beside it was the documentary
confirmation.
We cannot help being struck when analyzing the Passion cycle of the north wall by
the considerable similarity in the structure of the three compositions. Christ is
significantly larger than the remaining figures and always shown to the left. His
movements appear somewhat slower than the emphatically dynamic poses of the
other figures. The artist seems not to have omitted a single expressive detail from the
Gospel story and shows the Jewish high priest, for instance, tearing his garments
(Matthew 26:65) although this was not an obligatory feature of "Christ before Annas
and Caiaphas".
In all three compositions Christ is depicted rather abstractly and ahistorically. He is
shown in traditional, ceremonial garments that do not correspond to the
circumstances of the Gospel events while the secondary figures are depicted with very
specific features. The Jewish details from the Gospel accounts have been translated
into the language of Muslim motifs. This was more comprehensible for the 13th-
century inhabitant of the Caucasus and aroused an acute, specific and unequivocally
negative response. The traditional Jewish headwear of the high priests were
transformed into elaborate turbans, the scrolls open in front of them contain
something similar to Arabic script, while the Jew in the background of "Christ before
Pilate" is shown as a Seljuk Turk with a shaven chin, long moustaches and a cap that
recall the fez.
92
Ibid., pp. 226-230.
/COA^OGR^RN/C PROGRAMME
reflected in the way the budding of the pretorium was depicted behind him. It is
shown as a basilica with a projecting sanctuary apse. The roiled manuscript in Christ's
left hand, something not mentioned in the Gospels, was intended to show that Christ
was not only the sacrificial lamb but also the incarnation of the Word, the second
person of the Trinity. This corresponds directly to the interpretation of the Gospel text
in the liturgy. There the sacrificial and eternally divine nature of Christ, conceived at
the level of an elevated theology, are constantly and vitally interacting and revealed as
a unity of opposites.
The scroll also had another meaning. Together with Christ's oratorical gesture it
was taken to be a testimony of truth and a symbolic expression of the Gospel words
"To this end was I born, and for this cause came into the world, that I should bear
witness to the truth. Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice," (John 18:37). In
the Eastern Christian tradition, we should recall, the trial before Pilate was seen as
confirmation of the divinity of Christ. This goes back to the first part of the apocryphal
Gospel of Nicodemus, the "Acts of Pilate", which was the most detailed and
authoritative source of information about the trial; it told how the divine nature of
Christ was proved by the testimony of numerous miracles and signs. Therefore one of
the most important Christian relics which played a significant role in the Byzantine
imperial rituals was the writing set with which the depositions at the trial were
recorded^. At Akhtala this is shown to the right of Pilate on a special stand adjoining
the pretorium. The fresco leaves no doubt as to the symbolic importance of this detail
which was semantically linked to the scroll held by Christ. If the scroll was a metaphor
of divine truth the writing set with the unfolded page beside it was the documentary
confirmation.
We cannot help being struck when analyzing the Passion cycle of the north wall by
the considerable similarity in the structure of the three compositions. Christ is
significantly larger than the remaining figures and always shown to the left. His
movements appear somewhat slower than the emphatically dynamic poses of the
other figures. The artist seems not to have omitted a single expressive detail from the
Gospel story and shows the Jewish high priest, for instance, tearing his garments
(Matthew 26:65) although this was not an obligatory feature of "Christ before Annas
and Caiaphas".
In all three compositions Christ is depicted rather abstractly and ahistorically. He is
shown in traditional, ceremonial garments that do not correspond to the
circumstances of the Gospel events while the secondary figures are depicted with very
specific features. The Jewish details from the Gospel accounts have been translated
into the language of Muslim motifs. This was more comprehensible for the 13th-
century inhabitant of the Caucasus and aroused an acute, specific and unequivocally
negative response. The traditional Jewish headwear of the high priests were
transformed into elaborate turbans, the scrolls open in front of them contain
something similar to Arabic script, while the Jew in the background of "Christ before
Pilate" is shown as a Seljuk Turk with a shaven chin, long moustaches and a cap that
recall the fez.
92
Ibid., pp. 226-230.