Informace o publikaci
The Transfiguration and the Eikon of Christ : From Eusebius’ Letter to Constantina to the Iconoclast Era
| Autoři | |
|---|---|
| Rok publikování | 2019 |
| Druh | Článek v odborném periodiku |
| Časopis / Zdroj | Convivium : Exchanges and Interactions in the Arts of Medieval Europe, Byzantium, and the Mediterreanean |
| Fakulta / Pracoviště MU | |
| Citace | |
| www | http://dx.doi.org/10.1484/J.CONVI.4.2019039 |
| Doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1484/J.CONVI.4.2019039 |
| Klíčová slova | Transfiguration; Eusebius of Caesarea; question of images; icon: iconoclasm; Byzantine texts; Byzantine iconography |
| Přiložené soubory | |
| Popis | In the so-called Letter of Eusebius of Cesarea to Constantina, the section devoted to the Transfiguration of Christ lends itself particularly to comparison with other Early Christian texts that use the Tabor episode as an argument to deny the possibility of seeing or representing Christ. Examples include a portion of the Fragmenta in Lucam, also attributed to Eusebius of Caesarea, and a fragment by Leontius presbyter, quoted in Nicephorus of Constantinople’s Refutatio et Eversio. Such consonance helps support the letter’s authenticity, an object of an extensive scholarly debate, or at least indicates its early chronology. Furthermore, the interpretation these texts offer seems to be reflected in the visual production. The Transfiguration scene was never represented until the late fourth century; conversely, from the sixth century onwards, it was depicted in several works of art. During the iconoclast controversy, both those who favored icons and their opponents who rejected icons paid great attention to the Tabor episode, which confirms the crucial link between the Transfiguration and the representability of Christ. |