Epigrams on Works of Art 193yet to be done on late antique and Byzantine theological hermeneutics^102.
However, the frequent use of verbs of perception and words like “painter”,
“image” and “to depict” strongly suggests that the epigrams comment upon
the miniatures themselves. The picture at the beginning of the book of Num-
bers, which shows the census taking of the twelve tribes of Israel, is also
interesting. In this miniature Joshua plays a prominent role in the census,
although the book of Numbers does not mention his presence. Since the
epigram focuses on Joshua and the twelve tribes as prefigurations of Jesus and
the twelve disciples, it is beyond doubt that the epigram does not refer to the
book of Numbers, but to the miniature itself.
As there is no reliable edition of the epigrams of the Leo Bible, unfortunate-
ly it is impossible to reach a solid verdict on their literary quality. The syntax
is often awkward, the prosody often incorrect, and the metrical structure often
shaky, with numerous harsh enjambments, instances of hiatus, and neglect of
stress regulation. But is the poet to blame, or the editor? For instance, on a
photograph of the miniature on fol. 2v, I read ™mórönù (not ™mórönzß), qehtökù
(not qeotökù) and prokr5toyß (not proskr5toyß); the syntax, prosody and
vocabulary of this particular epigram improve a great deal just by following
the readings of the manuscript. However, it is only fair to admit that even with
these corrections the epigram still presents a few unusual features: oxytone
verse ending in v. 4 (qe/), postponed pl8n (™k p5stezß pl8n, “but out of faith”),
asyndeton: ™sqlñn eJtel6ß, and the demotic plural of the third person: sp6ndoyn
(cf. progr1óoyn in the epigram on fol. 85v).
Let us look, once again, at the editorial note. It peremptorily states that
the epigrams of the Leo Bible “explain the meaning of the historiated scenes
(t0n Wstorhq6ntzn, the miniatures) clearly and concisely”. “Concisely” (™n
™pitom!): the epigrams on the frames of the miniatures consist of four or six
verses (with the exception of the one on fol. 2v: 7 vv.). “Clearly” (saó6stata):
a somewhat exaggerated statement, seeing that a thorough schooling in bibli-
cal exegesis is undoubtedly a prerequisite for a complete understanding of the
message of most epigrams. “Explaining the meaning (of the images)” (t0n
Wstorhq6ntzn no ̄n ... dhlo ̄nteß): this phrase is only partially true. There are
quite a number of epigrams that explain how the poet (and presumably, also
the donor, Leo Sakellarios, who had hired the poet) interpreted the visual
message of the miniatures; but there are also epigrams that simply describe the
scenes portrayed on the miniatures. These purely descriptive epigrams do not
explain anything.
(^102) But see OLSTER 1994: 429–436 and 440–445, who discusses the historical development of
theological hermeneutics as regards the figure of Moses, which in post-iconoclastic art
led to a remarkable change in the iconography of the scene of Moses receiving the Law.