The History and Significance of the Byzantine Prothesis Ritual

ΣΥΝΑΞΗΣ ΚΑΘΟΛΙΚΗ. Beiträge zu Gottesdienst und Geschichte der fünf altkirchlichen Patriarchate für Heinzgerd Brakmann zum 70. Geburstag Festschrift for Heinzgerd Brakmann, eds. D. Atanassova and T. Chronz , 2014

Studies in Oriental Liturgy. Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress of the Society of Oriental Liturgy (New York, 10-15 June 2014), Leuven: Peeters, 2019

Niš and Byzantium. Eighth Symposium, Niš, 3-5. june 2009, . The Collection of Scientific Works VIII, Niš, 2010

European Journal of Science and Theology, vol. 16, n. 4, 2020

The present instructions of the "Hieratikon" indicate that at the Divine Liturgy the priest shall not communicate the people from the commemorative particles, but just from the only consecrated Lamb. We know that in the past several breads were offered at the Eucharist and all were consecrated. Beginning with the VIII th century parts from the Eucharistic loaves were cut, symbolizing the Lord"s Passion. From the XI th century special formulas were recited by the celebrant when he prepared the additional particles, commemorating the dead, the living and the saints. This increasing ritualization of the "Prothesis" caused in time some confusions as to whether these particles are to be consecrated together with the Lamb or not. Surprisingly, in the XV th century Saint Symeon of Thessalonika is the first who makes a clear distinction between the consecrated Lamb and the "un-consecrated particles". Was there a different approach regarding the additional "merides" before Saint Symeon? The purpose of the present paper is to offer an answer to this question.

David Cannadine and S.R.F. Price, eds., Rituals of Royalty. Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Societies (Cambridge), 106-36 , 1987

2009

"Can an object be defined as votive solely based upon the presence of an inscription? Does relying upon such a definition restrict a more multivalent analyses of objects thus identified as votive? In this thesis, I examine the most prevalent practice used by scholars to identify votive offerings in the Middle Byzantine period – relying upon an object’s accompanying inscription. This study focuses on those objects inscribed with a particular invocation – one that uses the word boethei. I demonstrate that we cannot rely on this inscription alone to identify an object as votive. It is rather the combination of many elements, including medium, iconography, patron and function that contribute to this identification and which enable us to more clearly understand the multivalent messages conveyed by these objects. In Chapter One, I turn to the context with which votive is most often associated – sacred. With each object I consider whether it is or is not votive and how the inscription contributes to that identification. In Chapter Two I examine objects inscribed with boethei that were intended for use or display in a secular context. While the objects discussed in Chapter One can be identified as votive, those discussed in this chapter cannot be so labeled. What then does the inscription mean in a secular context? In Chapter Three I present one object as a case study. I examine aspects of its production including inscriptions, patronage, iconography and function to argue that identifying a votive object requires a multivalent analysis of all its components. I show that, in this case, the patrons created a unified program of text, iconography and relics to convey their hope for salvation through perpetual prayer. I demonstrate that when all of these components are considered, we find a more precise message than what is explicitly stated in the inscription itself."