Athena, Patroness of the Marketplace: From Athens to Constantinople

14 Athena, patroness of the marketplace From Athens to Constantinople Janet Wade The goddess Athena was an important part of Greek, Roman, and Byzantine cultural tradition and memory. To date, late-antique images or depictions of the popular deity—and her Roman counterpart Minerva with whom she became inextricably linked1—have generally been considered secular; devoid of all previous pagan or non-Christian meaning. Alternatively, the continued popularity of the goddess has been seen simply as the result of an antiquarian interest in the classical past (Weitzmann 1979: xx, xxiv and 127–8; Liebeschuetz 1995: 193–7; Dunbabin 2003: 199, 299; Deacy 2008: 139–56; Pitarakis 2012: 421–2; Pitarakis 2016: 221; Wade 2014: 272–3). This chapter suggests that not everyone in Late Antiquity saw Athena and Minerva in these ways. Based on an analysis of steelyard weights of the fifth- to seventh-century period and prominent statues in cities like Athens and Constantinople, I argue that many people saw Athena as a contemporary deity; one who belonged as much in the present as she did in the past. Athena remained a prominent figure throughout Late Antiquity. As we shall see, the goddess who protected the most powerful city of the classical world, Athens, continued to be viewed as a guardian of her home city during this period. Memories of Athena’s past glory and tutelary power gave her cult a sense of utopian authority, and she also came to be recognised as the protector of Constantinople after the city’s foundation in the fourth century. Athena’s role in commercial and maritime affairs is not always acknowledged; yet, throughout antiquity, the goddess had a place at sea, in markets, and wherever commercial transactions were conducted. Athena supervised seafaring, shipbuilding, and commercial activities and was believed to have played a part in several significant sea voyages—including Helen’s fateful trip to Troy in Homer’s Iliad and Jason and the Argonauts’ voyage to Colchis to capture the Golden Fleece (Deacy 2008: 48–50, 136). Shearer (1998: 11, 78) notes that the protection of commerce had become one of Athena’s/Minerva’s most prominent roles by the Roman period. Athena’s continuing place in commercial and social environments is perhaps best exemplified by her famous statue in the Forum of Constantine in Constantinople (sources mentioning the statue include Zosimus, NH, 5.24.7–8; Niketas Choniates, Annals 559–60). It is highly likely that this statue acted as the prototype for a range of weights used by merchants and traders as part of their everyday business transactions. Athena, patroness of the marketplace 233 Steelyard (or counterpoise) weights in the guise of Athena/Minerva—with the head of Medusa on her breastplate—became very popular in the late-antique period and have been found at a range of sites (Eliot 1976: 166; Franken 1994: 84–7; Pitarakis 2012: 419–22; Pitarakis 2016: 221). These weights were not recycled objects; they were manufactured and distributed from the fifth to seventh centuries and, as portable items, were used regularly by land and sea merchants alike. The discovery of a steelyard weight of Athena on the seventh-century Yassi Ada shipwreck (Bass and van Doorninck Jr 1982: 224–9; Meriçboyu and Atasoy 1983: 21; McClanan 2002: 47, 55) and the subsequent analysis of other extant weights overturned the long-held assumption that the Athena weights were manufactured and utilised in the period prior to the fourth century (Eliot 1976: 163–70; Franken, 1994: 93–4; McClanan 2002: 55). In his catalogue of extant late-antique steelyard weights, Franken (1994: 83–114) records 162 weights in the shape of busts. Seventy-four of these depict empresses, and sixty-one portray Athena. The other twenty-seven weights are a mixture of emperors and male officials. There are also several Athena weights not included in Franken’s catalogue, including a weight found in the Yenikapı excavations of the Theodosian Harbour (Pekin and Kangal 2007, Catalogue Item Y18) and another currently held in the Museum of Kos (Papanikola-Bakirtzi 2002; Catalogue Item 23). The find location of many of the Athena weights is unknown; however, most of those that do have either a secure or suspected provenance are part of shipwreck finds or from coastal areas (Franken 1994: 86–7; Pekin and Kangal 2007, Catalogue Item Y18). In addition, Bass and van Doorninck Jr (1982: 224–9) note that the steelyard and other weights of Athena on the Yassi Ada wreck are of the type used for routine maritime commercial transactions, particularly for the weighing of heavy cargo. The large percentage of the overall extant weights depicting Athena demonstrate that this goddess maintained her place in fora and on ships throughout Late Antiquity. Steelyard weights of this period have been discussed extensively in recent scholarship (e.g. Eliot 1976; Franken 1994; James 2001; McClanan 2002; Pitarakis 2012; Pitarakis 2016). However, the steelyard weights of Athena have been treated by many scholars as uncomfortably pagan items in a Christian world. With the exception of Pitarakis (2012: 419–22, 2016: 221), who analyses both the empress and Athena steelyard weights in detail, scholarship has focused heavily on the contemporaneous empress weights, which are much easier to contextualise in the world of Late Antiquity. Herrin (2000: 9), for example, writes that Athena was only occasionally depicted on late-antique weights, and claims that ‘the overriding association of correct weight is with an imperial feminine.’ McClanan (2002: 4–5) maintains that the empress weights were the more favoured item for everyday commercial transactions. James (2001: 115) states that after the third century, ‘imperial personages are virtually the only image found on these weights,’ despite the large number of extant weights depicting Athena. Yet these small items depicting a Graeco-Roman deity confirm that Roman and Byzantine cultural memories of Athena remained strong. They also provide a window into the everyday commercial transactions that were being conducted during this period and, thus, deserve special consideration. 234 Janet Wade Figure 14.1 Athena steelyard weight currently held at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Accession Number: 61.112. Source: Image in the Public Domain. Despite evidence to the contrary, some scholars prefer to view the Athena weights as items from an earlier period. James (2001: 115–17), for example, sees the weights as objects that could only have been manufactured and used prior to the fourth century, before Christianity became the official Roman religion. There Athena, patroness of the marketplace 235 were, however, very few weights of Athena or Minerva manufactured prior to the fifth century. In fact, Franken notes that weights of Athena/Minerva were not a popular type at all prior to the fifth century, when other mythological figures and deities were commonly depicted. He catalogues only two steelyard weights depicting Minerva from the Roman Imperial period (Franken 1994: 105–7; McClanan 2002: 50). Other researchers like McClanan (2002: 29–64, esp. 50 and 55–8) seem intent on providing either a Christian or purely secular meaning to these weights, despite their depiction of a well-known deity. McClanan, who has written extensively on the weights, accepts their late dating and acknowledges their popularity from the fifth century. Yet, in order to explain their existence, she searches for possible meanings that a pagan goddess could have to the Christian merchants whom she assumes were using the weights. The late manufacture of these items does pose a conundrum if it is accepted that all merchants had cast away their traditional superstitions and beliefs by the early fourth century. But when we consider that by the end of Late Antiquity not all merchants and seafarers may have abandoned their traditional deities (Wade 2014: 269–87), and many sculptures and other objects still retained their apotropaic qualities (Mango 1963: 59; James 1996: 15–17), these small, everyday weights no longer appear out of context. Indeed, Pitarakis (2016: 212–14, 217– 23) notes that weighing implements and other commercial items were themselves regularly inscribed with religious or apotropaic symbols and motifs, demonstrating that such objects could be endowed with a range of protective powers. Pitarakis (2012: 421–2) highlights that Athena and her steelyard weights were clearly seen to have apotropaic qualities, and draws attention to two weights with Christian symbols or inscriptions added to them to further enhance Athena’s power. This is strong evidence for the enduring memory of a classical tradition and its maintenance and transformation into a new context. To safely consign the Athena weights to the Christian eastern empire of Late Antiquity, some historians seek to explain them in non-polytheistic terms by suggesting that they do not depict Athena at all.2 Both McClanan and James suggest that the Athena weights may in fact symbolise an imperial female or the Tyche of Rome or Constantinople (James 2001: 142). McClanan also notes that earlier scholars such as E. B. Thomas suggested that the weights symbolised Tyche or Sophia (Wisdom) (McClanan 2002: 50–2, 57–8). However, based on the fact that city Tyches are never depicted wearing an aegis (a standard feature of the Athena steelyard weights), Franken (1994: 99) sensibly rules out an identification of the weights with the Tyche of Constantinople. McClanan (2002: 50–2, 57–8) highlights instances from earlier periods where empresses were represented as deified figures. Yet, at the same time, she notes that Athena/Minerva had never been a goddess regularly appropriated by empresses. It is unclear why McClanan believes that Athena would suddenly have become so in the early Byzantine period. Supported by scholars like Mellor and Vermeule, McClanan also highlights similarities between the imagery of Roma and Athena, and ultimately suggests that the figure represented on the weights is a conflation of the empress and the personification of Rome in the guise of a secular Athena (McClanan 2002: 50–2, 57; Mellor 1975: 29–30, 35–6, 65–71, 129–31; Vermeule 1959: 75, 85; 236 Janet Wade MacCormack 1975: 147–9). These historians use the depiction of Roma on gems as important evidence of the similarities between the iconography of Roma and Athena. Yet gems were personal items, not widely circulated or common after the early imperial period (Mellor 1975: 6; Vermeule 1959: 85). Thus, they are not indicative of the widely recognised iconography of Roma. In contrast, Pitarakis (2012: 421–2) recognises the weights as a representation of the goddess Athena. She notes that it was certainly no accident that Athena— ‘city divinity,’ ‘goddess of justice, wisdom, and crafts,’ and ‘protectress believed to possess apotropaic powers’—was the second most prevalent figure on steelyard weights of the sixth and seventh centuries. Yet Pitarakis too sees a ‘probable allusion’ to Roma in order to explain the prominence of the Athena weights in the late-antique world of commerce. As she suggests, an association between Roma and Athena would certainly have strengthened the legitimacy and meaning of weights depicting the latter. Mellor highlights that Roma’s early iconography was likely to have been modelled on that of Athena (Mellor 1975: 103–4, 147–8, and 163). This is true, but it is important to note that, for the most part, contemporary viewers would not have confused these two deities. Vermeule (1959: 75) stresses that although modern viewers see striking similarities in the imagery of goddesses like Athena and Roma, there were precise definitions and formulae employed in the representation of deities in the ancient world. These definitions made each deity quite distinct in pre-modern times. Any link between Roma and the imperial office should not automatically be extrapolated to Athena, simply because of iconographical similarities between the two deities. The goddess Athena is considered by many to have been a secular and abstract concept during Late Antiquity—the personification of wisdom, fairness, honesty, and good measure (e.g. Asal 2007: 189; Deacy 2008: 145; McClanan 2002: 57). Athena has continued to be viewed into modern times as the secular embodiment of concepts such as wisdom and honesty (Deacy 2008: 139–56). Yet, during Late Antiquity, Athena became symbolic of a utopian ideal of both the GraecoRoman past and the Christian present and future. Her qualities were such that she appealed to men and women of various religious inclinations. In their comprehensive study of Athena in Antiquity, Deacy and Villing (2001: 4) state that the goddess survived only ‘as an allegorical and ethical concept’ in the Christian period. This view is not surprising. When seen as a personification or abstraction, any deity can be made to seem more agreeable or acceptable to a Christian regime. If the weights of Athena represented either a secular or a purely Christian concept—as opposed to a polytheistic one—then they present far less of a conundrum to historians. But to see a figure like Athena as a mere personification is to ignore the ways that ancient and early medieval society perceived and understood abstract ideas. What modern scholars often see as a simple, secular abstraction, earlier viewers saw as something more concrete, with magical or divine powers (Isaac 2008: 575–80). Maguire (2001: 253) points out that personifications also continued to be ‘a common frame of reference for pagans, Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike.’ Weitzmann (1979: xxii) agrees that late-antique depictions of personifications cannot always be ascribed with certainty to a pagan or Christian Athena, patroness of the marketplace 237 milieu. Athena/Minerva may have survived predominantly as a Christian allegorical concept by the seventh century, but she was still seen as a Graeco-Roman goddess to many people before that time. The utopian values for which she had stood for centuries, including justice, wisdom, fairness, and intelligence, were equally as valued by Christians as they were by non-Christians (Deacy 2008: 156). Athena offered divine protection to all men and women and, as such, she was the perfect figure to watch over the commercial transactions of merchants during the transitionary period of Late Antiquity (Pitarakis 2012: 422). To date, historians have largely dismissed the depiction of traditional deities in the fifth to seventh centuries as ‘no longer objects of veneration but art objects owned by a humanistically oriented intelligentsia’ (Weitzmann 1979: 20; and for a similar sentiment, see Dunbabin 2003: 199, 299). Liebeschuetz (1995: 193–7) concedes that some artistic representations may have been ‘designed to express a pagan interpretation,’ but argues that ‘it is difficult, in the absence of a contemporary commentary, to be certain that a particular mythological image is intended to be read in a positively pagan sense.’ Like Weitzmann, Liebeschuetz seems to be suggesting that, where a pagan-inspired or mythological scene is depicted, it is always most probable that it was designed with secular and humanist intentions in mind, even in the period of Late Antiquity. There are many elite objects depicting mythological subjects and deities like Athena that have survived from this period. Examples include elite dishes, serving vessels, and jewellery (Weitzmann 1979, Catalogue Items 110, 115, 118, 202, and 282). Yet this theory does not explain the continued popularity of steelyard weights depicting a goddess. These were massproduced items used by non-elite merchants as part of their everyday business transactions, not objects created for the consumption of the classically educated elite. In the late fifth century, Fulgentius recounted various classical tales presenting Athena/Minerva as the goddess of wisdom, and the Gorgon Medusa on her breast as a symbol of fear (Fulgentius, Mythologiae 1.21, 2.1, 2.6, 2.11, 3.1, and 3.7). These were no doubt popular stories and lasting cultural memories; however, the majority of merchants would not have been well versed in the classics, nor would they have seen these myths in an intellectual or antiquarian light. The continued use of the Athena weights cannot simply be explained away by a love of, or tolerant attitude towards, the classical past. Nor should it be assumed that the men using these weights did not know who was represented on them. Later in this chapter, the discussion of statues will demonstrate that, as Athena or Minerva, this goddess was still widely recognised in the late-antique period. When we consider that other non-Christian beliefs persisted into the seventh century, it should come as no surprise that steelyard weights of Athena may have held a non-Christian meaning to at least some of the men and women who used them. Prominent scholars including Cameron, MacMullen, and Trombley have demonstrated convincingly that pagan beliefs and practices—particularly in the East—continued until at least the seventh century (Cameron 1993: 10–13, 20, 69–70, and 141–4; Cameron 2015: 3–22; MacMullen 1997; Trombley 1985: 339; Trombley 1994: 226; Bell 2013: 222–46; Bowes 2008: 222; Limberis 1994: 28–9; Sauer 2003: 111, 132, and 142). Trombley (1994: 226) states succinctly that ‘No 238 Janet Wade fundamental reason exists to derive obscure explanations for the persistence of the phenomena of pagan cult, which were everywhere about in the fifth-century empire.’ Indeed, the continuous anti-pagan legislation of the fourth to sixth centuries proves that non-Christian beliefs were persistent (Harl 1990: 7–27; Cameron 1993: 143–4; Corcoran 2015: 67–94; Hunt 1993: 143–4, 157; Lavan 2011: xxiii– iv; Trombley 1993: 2). There were clearly men and women who continued to harbour non-Christian religious beliefs and to maintain their devotion to traditional deities, even in cultural and administrative centres like Constantinople, Alexandria, and Athens (Harl 1990: 15–19, 23–4; Maas 1992: 70–2; MacMullen 1997: 146; Trombley 1993: 292–5, 316, 322; Trombley 1994: 52). There were prominent city officials in Constantinople who were conspicuously non-Christian; from the highly respected Themistius in the late fourth century, through to those targeted by Justinian’s persecutions in the sixth century, including men like Asclepiodatus the Eparch, Macedonius the Referendarius, and Thomas the Quaestor, who held—or had recently held—a number of important administrative positions (Maas 1992: 70–2). Such people were not only of the elite levels of society. In his Homiliae in Matthaeum 4.7 (PG, 57: 48), John Chrysostom highlights that Christians and nonChristians frequented everyday urban environments like marketplaces and other similar settings. He notes that it was very difficult to distinguish between those of different faiths and beliefs in these busy commercial and social contexts. It was in such environments that steelyard weights, including those depicting the goddess Athena, were regularly used. The weights of Athena include several of the standard iconographical features that had been associated with the goddess for centuries. There are numerous examples of statues from classical Greece through to the late Roman period that depict Athena and Minerva in a similar manner to the weights (e.g. Figure 14.2; Deacy and Villing 2001: 434–5, Plates 7, 9–12, 15–16, and 20; and Lexicon iconographicum mythologiae classicae 1984: 706–815). In Fulgentius’s literary description of Athena/Minerva, he notes her key attributes as the Gorgon on her breast, and her helmet and plume (Fulgentius, Mythologiae 2.1). The surviving weights generally show the owl-eyed goddess wearing her signature Corinthianstyle crested helmet with thick, curly hair underneath, a chiton or peplos, and a breastplate or aegis with the face of Medusa. There are also snakes, associated with the Gorgon, depicted on the goddess’s breast. Some of the weights do not include all these features; however, enough of Athena’s iconography is included to clearly identify the weights as representations of the goddess (see Figure 14.3). Eliot (1976: 167–9) conducted a comprehensive study of the stylistic similarities and differences in several of the extant weights, noting a clear stylistic deterioration corresponding with the period in which they were manufactured. Eliot points out that the weights produced in the fifth century are generally more detailed than those manufactured later. Of the Yassi Ada weight—one of the last of the series and dated to either the late sixth or early seventh century—Eliot (1976: 167) writes: ‘With its lack of understanding of the details of the aegis and the severe stylization of the face, it openly betrays the distance that separates it Figure 14.2 A statue of Athena in front of the Austrian Parliament Building. Source: Photo credit: Gryffindor (via Wikimedia Commons). 240 Janet Wade Figure 14.3 Steelyard weight currently held in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Accession Number: 59.184. Source: Image in the Public Domain. from its prototype.’ Eliot does stress that variations in the quality of the weights could also have been the result of the different craftsmen and workshops producing them. Franken (1994: 93–4) too records an increasing simplification of form in these weights—to the point that details such as the aegis become almost unrecognisable in later examples. However, despite this overall simplification and loss of detail, the essence of Athena’s iconography is retained, even on the later weights. This makes sense. There were many who knew and loved the goddess Athena in the early fifth century, but she must have had fewer worshippers by the seventh century. Although still widely recognised as a deity, understanding of Athena, patroness of the marketplace 241 the individual aspects of her iconography would no longer have been universal. Interestingly, the overall quality of the weights did not diminish with time. Bass and van Doorninck (1982: 314) record that the Athena weight and scale found on the seventh-century Yassi Ada shipwreck were actually the finest of the weighing implements on board. Despite a decrease in knowledge of the individual characteristics of Athena’s iconography, the merchants using her steelyard weights were probably still aware whom they depicted. Many of the traders visiting Constantinople would have known that the figure on the steelyard weights was the same as the famous statue of Athena in the marketplace. Historians from the fourth to thirteenth centuries recorded the presence of statues of Athena in various locations throughout Constantinople, including the talismanic statue of Pallas Athena (known as the Palladium) reputed to have been placed under Constantine’s porphyry column when he founded the city. Procopius mentions an engraved copy of this statue along with another of Athena in the Temple of Fortuna (Procopius, Goth. 5.15.9–14). The idea that the Palladium had been transferred to Constantinople from Rome may only have been a foundation myth, yet the thought that it was under the column— protecting the city and its inhabitants—would have been of great significance to those who frequented this busy forum (Ando 2001: 404; Dagron 1974: 14–37; Fowden 1991: 120–1; Grig and Kelly 2012: 4; Malalas, Chron. 13.7; Zosimus, NH, 2.30; and Patria 2.45). The bronze statue of Athena that stood near the Senate House in the Forum of Constantine was also clearly an important landmark in the city. Zosimus records that this statue and another of Zeus survived a fire in the fifth century. Some in the city saw this omen as proof that Athena and Zeus would always protect Constantinople (Zosimus, NH, 5.24.7–8). Before its destruction at the hands of a drunken mob in the early thirteenth century, the colossal statue of Athena stood for approximately 800 years in the Forum of Constantine. Sources that mention the statue in the marketplace describe it in substantial detail, including the goddess’s helmet, and the Gorgon and snakes about her neck (Parastaseis 39; Patria 2.3).3 Niketas Choniates notes Medusa on Athena’s breast; the aegis; her long, slender neck; her soulful eyes; and the conspicuous plume on her helmet (Annals 559–60). These were also the most obvious features of the goddess depicted on the steelyard weights. Given that the colossal statue of Athena had watched over the activities of the central forum in Constantinople since the fifth century, it is highly probable that the steelyard weights were modelled on it. In a recently published work, Pitarakis (2016: 221) also makes this same suggestion. Lavan (2011a: 439, 443, 448) notes that Christian attempts to alter the meaning or usage of statues in public places, such as those of Athena/Minerva and Tyche, had little impact before the sixth century. At the very least then, the merchants, customers, and all others who came into contact with the Athena weights must have known that they depicted this particular goddess of the marketplace. Athena was also still inextricably linked to her home city of Athens. The cultural significance of Athens may have decreased significantly since its heyday in the fourth and fifth centuries BCE, but it remained a city with frequent travellers 242 Janet Wade and trading ships arriving into its ports. At least one colossal statue of Athena was still on display in Athens in the late fifth century, when Marinus tells us it was removed from the Parthenon by Christians (Marinus, Vita Procli, 30; Frantz 1988: 58). The statue in the Parthenon wore a helmet, a snake-trimmed aegis, and had a Gorgon’s head on its breast. Shearer (1998: 7–8) notes that there had always been two colossal statues of Athena in the city; one thirty-foot statue of Athena Promachos on the Acropolis, which could be seen by ships approaching by sea; and the other, even larger one, inside the Parthenon. Julian of Egypt wrote of one of these armoured statues of Athena when he asked in the sixth century, ‘Why Trito-born, dost thou put on armour in the middle of the city? Poseidon has yielded to thee’ (Τίπτε, Τριτογένεια, κορύσσεαι ἄστεϊ μέσσῳ; εἶξε Ποσειδάων·) (Anth. Gr. 16.157). Evidence would suggest that the monumental statue of Athena Promachos on the Acropolis was the very one that was moved to the Forum of Constantine in Constantinople, sometime in the fifth century (Jenkins 1947: 31–3; Lundgreen 1997: 190, 195; Frantz 1988: 20, 76–7). Despite the removal of this famous statue of the city’s patroness, the cult of Athena and other traditional gods was clearly flourishing in Athens in the fourth and fifth centuries. Zosimus talks of customary public sacrifices made to the goddess at the Parthenon in the late fourth century, and her temple was still functioning as an active cult centre when the Neoplatonist Proclus arrived at its gates in 430 (Zosimus, NH, 4.18.2–3; Marinus, Vita Procli, 10). Frantz (1965: 191–2, 197) stresses that although the ‘tenacity of the pagan tradition’ in Athens throughout the fourth to sixth centuries may have been largely due to the influence of the Neoplatonists, their impact permeated all levels of society. Trombley (1993: 331) warns that the strength of traditional religions in Greece suggest that it would ‘be dangerous to regard Proclus’s beliefs and practices as a sharp exception to the popular religiosity.’ Legend also has it that Athena protected the city from Alaric’s assault in the late fourth century. In this story—clearly still believable to many in Zosimus’s time—the city’s beloved goddess appeared on the city walls in the likeness of her armoured statue and scared off the Gothic attackers.4 Further evidence of the longevity of the cult of Athena in Athens can be seen in the continued celebration of the traditional mid-summer procession known as the Panathenaia, as late as the fifth century. This procession had a distinctly maritime character, with a wooden statue of Athena carried in her sacred sailing vessel along the main thoroughfare of the city to the Acropolis (Frantz 1965: 193; Frantz 1988: 20; Robertson 1996: 27–31, 56–65; Trombley 1993: 18–20). An inscription dated to 410 and dedicated to a man who funded the procession reads, ‘Plutarchos . . . who thrice sailed the sacred ship and moored it at the temple of Athena’ (‘δῆμος <Ἐ>ρεχθῆος βασιλῆ<α> λόγων ἀνέθηκεν Πλούταρχον σταθερῆς ἕρμα σαοφροσύνης· ὃς καὶ τρὶς ποτὶ νηὸν Ἀθηναίης ἐπέλασσεν ναῦν ἐλάσας ἱερήν, πλοῦτον ὅλον προχέας., English translation from Trombley 1993: 18) (IG II2, 3818: Kirchner, Inscriptiones Graecae, 1974). Himerius’s late fourthcentury description of the procession demonstrates that the Panathenaia was a popular non-Christian festival of great pomp, and that it was imbued with maritime imagery (Himerius, Or. 47.12–16). During Late Antiquity, there appears to Athena, patroness of the marketplace 243 have been a relatively harmonious coexistence between Christians and pagans in Athens (Frantz 1965: 191–2, 197). Travellers, sailors, and merchants of different religious affiliations and beliefs were welcomed into the city’s ports during this time. Just as travellers to Constantinople would have been familiar with the goddess who watched over the Forum of Constantine, so too would visitors to Athens have been well aware of that city’s patroness, Athena. Considering that several of the Athena steelyard weights were found in a maritime or coastal context (Franken 1994: 86–7), many sea travellers may even have carried weights fashioned in the goddess’s likeness on their ships. The eighth-century Parastaseis syntomoi chronikai mentions another relevant statue in the Hippodrome of Constantinople. The anonymous author says he was told that the statue represented the fifth-century empress Verina. In contrast, the majority of people in Constantinople apparently believed that the statue was, in fact, Athena (Parastaseis, 61; Patria 2.78). McClanan uses this particular extract to bolster her argument that the Athena steelyard weights are likely to have represented an empress. She suggests that statues of the goddess and empress must have been easily confused during this period, suggesting ‘empress-looking’ and ‘Athena-looking’ were not such distinct categories of visual representation at the time. Rather, the merchants using the steelyard weights would have seen them as symbols of the empress and her imperial authority (McClanan 2002: 58). However, statues depicting empresses and other imperial women were familiar images in late-antique urban centres and they would have been easily recognisable, even to those of the non-elite. Machado and Lenaghan (2016: 132–5) highlight that statues of contemporary imperial females were common features in Rome, and Gehn and Ward-Perkins (2016: 137–44) list a number of statues of imperial females erected in Constantinople through to the sixth and early seventh centuries. These statues conformed to standards of imperial iconography. James (2001: 142, 2003: 53) also suggests that the Athena weights, like statues, became representative of an imperial female figure. However, this theory is largely based on the assumption that the Athena weights were forerunners to those depicting empresses and that the iconography of the goddess was appropriated to embody the imperial female. As previously mentioned, it is true that empresses could be identified with, or as, goddesses or female personifications, especially tutelary deities (Smith 1994: 86–105; James 2005: 293–308), but it is important to note that there is very little evidence that this was the case with Athena. The links between Athena and the imperial office in the Christian period are largely speculative. Franken (1994: 83, 90–1, and 99) highlights the many contrasts between the Athena and empress steelyard weights. He notes that they differ in shape, size, and scale; they have dissimilar bases; a greater proportion of the body and arms are shown in the empress weights; and the orientation of the eye (the loop used to attach the weight to the hook of the steelyard) is different. The iconography of the empress and Athena steelyard weights is also strikingly different, and this suggests that they did not both represent female imperial authority. The Athena weights demonstrate the clear iconographical features of Athena/Minerva as she had been known—and would continue to be known—for centuries. The Lexicon 244 Janet Wade iconographicum mythologiae classicae (1984: 706–815) includes a large collection of images of Athena and Athena/Minerva. The later examples shown in the Lexicon are particularly similar to the Athena figures on the steelyard weights. In contrast, the iconography of the empress weights is distinctly imperial, with features that conform to familiar sculptural and sepultural representations of empresses and other elite women. The females portrayed wear diadems, jewellery, robes, and carry scrolls. They have imperial hairstyles and hold one hand either in the speech gesture or on the inside of their robes (Franken 1994: 92–9). The empress weights clearly complied with officially sanctioned imperial iconography (Franken 1994: 99). The Athena and empress weights were also produced concurrently. If the Athena weights had been manufactured in an earlier period and re-used in the fifth to seventh centuries, then the idea that they became largely representative of imperial authority might be reasonable. Yet they were manufactured simultaneously with the empress weights during Late Antiquity (Franken 1994: 92). The Athena weights may even have been produced for a century or so after the manufacture of the imperial weights had ceased (Franken 1994: 92; McClanan 2002: 55). It is unlikely that two distinct sets of weights would be created in order to symbolise the same notion of imperial authority, particularly when one set conformed to official imperial standards of representation and the other adopted the iconography of a recognised traditional deity. The story from the Parastaseis actually suggests that most people believed the statue in the Hippodrome was the goddess Athena, despite the officially sanctioned version of the statue’s iconography. In their discussion of the transformation of memory and tradition in Rome, Garcia Morcillo et al. (2016: 14) highlight the significance of the collective and personal memories or stories—as opposed to official explanations—that became attached to sculptures and other objects. Gilbert Dagron (1984: 38–9) notes the importance of oral tradition in the transmission of cultural heritage and shared memory in Constantinople’s history. Dagron uses the story of the statue of Verina (or Athena) as an example of the tenacity of this tradition. The fact that many people believed that the statue was Athena demonstrates that the goddess was an important part of the city’s cultural memory and identity. During the period of their popularity, it is unlikely that the steelyard weights of Athena were seen by the majority of people as depicting anyone other than the goddess herself. The iconography of the weights is clear and there were many prominent images of Athena/Minerva for contemporaries to compare them to. The iconography of Athena/Minerva, Roma, and even Tyche or an empress, may seem similar to modern viewers, but there were still clear definitions and formulae that distinguished these figures in Late Antiquity (Vermeule 1959: 75; Isaac 2008: 575–7). The fact that these weights depicted Athena may itself have given them authority. The utopian ideals for which Athena stood guaranteed her continued significance in commercial affairs and enabled a sense of continuity between the past and present for Christians and non-Christians alike. It is possible that these weights were not officially sanctioned by the imperial authorities. Franken (1994: 91) suspects that at least some of the weights from this period were manufactured in non-authorised workshops. Even as unofficial Athena, patroness of the marketplace 245 weights, they could still have been used by a range of merchants—particularly those who conducted the majority of their business at sea and in portside contexts. In the late-antique period, Christian and non-Christian merchants were conducting their business side by side. Many of these traders would have appreciated that the goddess of wisdom, honesty, and good measure still had a role to play in everyday commercial transactions. This does not necessarily imply that the only merchants who carried these weights were non-Christian. Several of the Athena weights contain Christian inscriptions that were added after their manufacture, suggesting that it was Christian merchants who eventually came to own them. For example, the weight shown in Figure 14.1 bears the inscription ‘ΚΥΡΙΕ ΒΟΗΘ (Ε) Ι’ (‘Lord, save!’). The details of the weight are all sharply defined except for the inscription, which suggests that it was a later addition. The weight from the Yassi Ada shipwreck (Bass and van Doorninck Jr 1982: 217; Franken 1994, Item CB39) also has a cross and the inscription ‘ΓΕΟΡΓΙΟΥ ΠΡΕΣΒΥ/ΤΕΡΟΥ ΝΑΥΚΛΕΡΟΥ’ (‘[Property] of the priest George, ship captain/owner’) added to it. There is another weight currently in the Virginia Museum of Arts (Gonosova and Kondoleon 1994: 242–5, Catalogue item 83) which has a cross deeply incised into it. The cross does not appear to have been engraved on the weight at the time of manufacture. Much like the weights of imperial figures and officials, those of Athena could still have played a role in the protection of commercial transactions and as guarantors of true weight, regardless of their depiction of a traditional nonChristian deity. The fact that these weights may have been owned by Christian and nonChristian merchants alike does not detract from their apotropaic function. Indeed, the inscriptions or crosses on some of the weights must have been added by Christian owners expressly for that purpose. Most importantly, the face of a Gorgon remained a popular apotropaic symbol, especially in marketplaces and wherever trade was conducted. Our sources include several examples of Gorgon sculptures that were located in Constantinople (Parastaseis, 44a and 78; Patria 2.28 and 2.46; Pitarakis 2016: 220–3; Shearer 1998: 68–9). The Gorgon remained a common apotropaic motif—whether on its own or on the breastplate of the goddess Athena—and was certainly a recognisable symbol. Statuary had always played an important role in Roman cities, and this continued into the medieval period (Machado and Lenaghan 2016: 131). James (1996: 17) relates stories regarding non-Christian statues and other sculptures which demonstrate the widespread belief that these types of objects held protective powers that could be harnessed. It is certainly possible that this was the sentiment held by the Christian merchants and traders who inscribed Christian symbols and text on their Athena weights. Still, Cyril Mango (1963: 55) reminds us that statues and other objects depicting non-Christian deities remained an essential part of polytheistic rites and beliefs, and that paganism continued into the early seventh century. This should be kept in mind. The fact that the steelyard weights of Athena were contemporary objects of trade in the fifth to seventh centuries— rather than items from the ancient past—indicates that they were made with their own contemporary commercial, protective, and sometimes non-Christian purposes in mind. 246 Janet Wade Conclusion Late-antique objects like the steelyard weights of Athena should not be seen simply as a reflection of past beliefs. Such items do embody cultural memories of the past, but they also reflect the culture and beliefs that existed in marketplaces and on trading ships in the period in which they were manufactured and used (Pitarakis 2016: 225). These types of objects should not be dismissed as throwbacks to the classical past. Nor is there any need to assume that the only possible explanation for such objects is that the characters they portrayed had become entirely Christianised or secularised. The evidence presented here demonstrates that Athena was still considered a deity by many people throughout the Mediterranean world in the fifth to seventh centuries. By this period, the popular female figure of Athena had come to represent different things to different people. I propose that the small, everyday weights of Athena had not been thoroughly cleansed of all non-Christian meaning during Late Antiquity. Instead, they are one further piece of evidence of the perseverance of traditional beliefs among merchants, sailors, and other non-elite men and women. It was perhaps partly to curb the use of weights that could be deemed nonChristian that Justinian had to impose laws regarding the use of official weights and measures throughout the empire, and to increase the Church’s involvement in the maintenance and storage of weights (Balaska and Selenti 1998: 58; Bendall 1996: 11). Pitarakis (2016: 211–13) notes that the proper use of weights and measures was part of ‘God’s law.’ Weights deemed offensive to a Christian sensibility could thus have been seen as non-conformist. In the early seventh century, the patriarch of Alexandria also had to prohibit the use of weights, measures, or balances that did not conform to official standards (Bendall 1996: 11). At this time, weights depicting the goddess Athena were still being carried by merchants throughout the eastern empire, and such ‘non-standard’ items may have been on the list of weights to be outlawed. These small depictions of Athena were symbolic of a utopian ideal of the past; an ideal that suited many Christian and non-Christian merchants alike. Non-Christian deities like Athena were tenacious. The ecclesiastical and imperial authorities may have banished Athena from her traditional temples and shrines, but her memory and popularity lived on. We know from literary sources that there were those in elite circles who preserved polytheistic beliefs until the end of Late Antiquity; however, the survival of deities like Athena was also due, in no small part, to the merchants and sailors who carried their memory into ports and marketplaces throughout the late Roman and early Byzantine world. Notes 1 Throughout this chapter, references to Athena in the late-antique period relate to Athena or her Roman counterpart Minerva, or a syncretised version of the two. As Deacy (2008: 123, 136) notes, ‘Minerva became so successfully assimilated with Athena that the goddesses became in certain respects interchangeable’ and that ‘in terms of appearance . . . the goddesses are identical.’ 2 Franken (1994: 87) also suggests an additional theory. He speculates that the weights were manufactured in the West, despite much evidence to the contrary. This is presumably Athena, patroness of the marketplace 247 because it is easier to imagine such ‘pagan-inspired’ items originating in the West than it is in the ‘Christian’ East. McClanan (2002: 33) thinks that this theory could help to explain idiosyncratic differences between the empress and Athena weights. 3 Bassett (2004: 188–92) provides a list of sources for the statue, including Constantine the Rhodian 150–63, Kedrenos 1,565, and Arethas, Schol. Arist. Or. 50T, 3. 4 Frantz (1988: 51–2); Brown (2011: 90); Zosimus, NH, 5.6: ἐπιὼν Ἀλλάριχος πανστρατιᾷ τῇ πόλει τὸ μὲν τεῖχος ἑώρα περινοστοῦσαν τὴν πρόμαχον Ἀθηνᾶν, ὡς ἔστιν αὐτὴν ὁρᾶν ἐν τοῖς ἀγάλμασιν, ὡπλισμένην καὶ οἷον τοῖς ἐπιοῦσιν ἀνθίστασθαι μέλλουσαν. Bibliography Primary sources Accounts of medieval Constantinople: The Patria (2013) Translated by Berger, A. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Fulgentius (1971) Mythologiae. Translated by Whitbread, L. G. Fulgentius the mythographer. Ohio: Ohio State University Press. Himerius (2007) Orations. Translated by Penella, R. J. Man and the word: The orations of Himerius. Berkeley: University of California Press. Inscriptiones Graecae (1974) Volume II, Inscriptiones Atticae Euclidis anno posteriores, part III, Dedicationes, titulos honorarios, titulos sacros, titulos sepulcrales continens, part 1, 2nd edn. Edited by Kirchner, J. Chicago: de Gruyter. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Matthaeum. PG, 57: 13–58. Lexicon iconographicum mythologiae classicae (1984) vol. 2. Zurich: Artemis, 706–815. Malalas (1831) Chronographia. Edited by Dindorf, L. Bonn: Weber. ——— (1986) Chronographia. Translated by Jeffreys, E., Jeffreys, M. et al. The chronicle of John Malalas: A translation, Byzantina Australiensia, 4. Melbourne: Australian Association for Byzantine Studies. Marinus (1814) Vita Procli. Edited by Boissonade, J. F. Leipzig: Weigel. Niketas Choniates (1984) Annals. Translated by Magoulias, H. J. O city of Byzantium: Annals of Niketas Choniates. Michigan: Wayne State University Press. Parastaseis syntomoi chronikai (1984) Translated by Herrin, J. and Cameron, A. Constantinople in the early eighth century: The Parastaseis syntomoi chronikai. Leiden: Brill. Procopius (1914–28) History of the wars. Translated by Dewing, H. B. LCL, 48, 81, 107, 173, and 217, 5 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Zosimus (1887) Historia nova. Edited by Mendelssohn, L. Leipzig: Teubner. ——— (2006) Translated by Ridley, R. T. Zosimus: New history, Byzantina Australiensia, 2. Canberra: Australian Association for Byzantine Studies. Secondary sources Ando, C. (2001) ‘The palladium and the pentateuch: Towards a sacred topography of the later Roman Empire’. Phoenix, 55/3/4: 369–410. Asal, R. (2007) ‘Commerce in Istanbul and the port of Theodosius’. In Pekin, A. K. and Kangal, S. (eds.), Istanbul: 8000 years brought to daylight: Marmaray, Metro, Sultanahmet excavations. Istanbul: Vehbi Koç Foundation, 180–9. Athanassiadi, P. (1993) ‘Persecution and response in late paganism: The evidence of Damascius’. Journal of Hellenic Studies, 113: 1–29. Balaska, N. and Selenti, N. (1998) ‘On the trade routes’. In Zafiropoulou, D. (ed.), Journeys on the seas of Byzantium. Athens: Hellenic Ministry of Culture, 54–69. 248 Janet Wade Bass, G. F. and Van Doorninck Jr, F. H. (1982) Yassi Ada: A seventh-century Byzantine shipwreck. Texas: Texas University Press. Bassett, S. (2004) The urban image of late-antique Constantinople. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bell, P. N. (2013) Social conflict in the age of Justinian: Its nature, management, and mediation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bendall, S. (1996) Byzantine weights: An introduction. London: Lennox Gallery. Bowes, K. (2008) Private worship, public values, and religious change in Late Antiquity. New York: Cambridge University Press. Brown, A. R. (2011) ‘Banditry or catastrophe? History, archaeology, and barbarian raids on Roman Greece’. In Mathisen, R. W. and Shanzer, D. (eds.), Romans, barbarians, and the transformation of the Roman world. Surrey: Ashgate, 79–96. Cameron, A. (1993) The Mediterranean world in Late Antiquity AD 395–600. London: Routledge. ——— (2015) ‘Christian conversion in Late Antiquity: Some issues’. In Papaconstantinou (ed.), 3–22. Corcoran, S. (2015) ‘From unholy madness to right-mindedness: Or how to legislate for religious conformity from Decius to Justinian’. In Papaconstantinou (ed.), 67–94. Dagron, G. (1974) Naissance d’une capitale: Constantinople et ses institutions de 330 à 451. Paris: Presses universitaires de France. ——— (1984) Constantinople imaginaire: Études sur le recueil des Patria. Paris: Presses universitaires de France. Deacy, S. and Villing, A. (2001) Athena in the classical world. Leiden: Brill. Deacy, S. (2008) Athena. London and New York: Routledge. Dunbabin, K. M. D. (2003) Mosaics of the Greek and Roman world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Eliot, C. W. J. (1976) ‘A bronze counterpoise of Athena’. Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 45/2: 163–70. Fowden, G. (1991) ‘Constantine’s porphyry column: The earliest literary allusion’. JRS, 81: 119–31. Franken, N. (1994) Aequipondia. Figürliche Laufgewichte römischer und frühbyzantinischer Schnellwaagen. Alfter: VDG. Frantz, A. (1965) ‘From paganism to Christianity in the temples of Athens’. DOP, 19: 185–205. ——— (1988) The Athenian agora, volume XXIV, Late Antiquity: A.D. 267–700. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Garcia Morcillo, M., Richardson, J. H., and Santangelo, F. (2016) ‘Ruin or renewal? Places, monuments and memories in Ancient Rome’. In Garcia Morcillo, M., Richardson, J. H., and Santangelo, F. (eds.), Ruin or renewal? Places and the transformation of memory in the city of Rome. Rome: Edizioni Quasar, 9–26. Gehn, U. and Ward-Perkins, B. (2016) ‘Constantinople’. In Smith, R. R. R. and WardPerkins, B. (eds.), The last statues of antiquity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 136–44. Gonosova, A. and Kondoleon, C. (1994) Art of late Rome and Byzantium in the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts. Richmond, VA: University of Virginia Press. Grig, L. and Kelly, G. (eds.) (2012) Two Romes: Rome and Constantinople in Late Antiquity. New York: Oxford University Press. Harl, K. W. (1990) ‘Sacrifice and pagan belief in fifth and sixth century Byzantium’. Past and Present, 128: 7–27. Herrin, J. (2000) ‘The imperial feminine in Byzantium’. Past and Present, 169: 3–35. Athena, patroness of the marketplace 249 Hunt, D. (1993) ‘Christianising the Roman Empire: The evidence of the Code’. In Harries, J. and Wood, I. (eds.), The Theodosian Code. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 143–58. Isaac, B. (2008) ‘Roman victory displayed: Symbols, allegories, personifications’. In Friedland, E. A., Eliav, Y. Z., and Herbert, S. (eds.), The sculptural environment of the Roman Near East: Reflections on culture, ideology, and power. Leuven: Peeters, 575–604. James, L. (1996) ‘“Pray not to fall into temptation and be on your guard”: Pagan statues in Christian Constantinople’. Gesta, 35/1: 12–20. ——— (2001) Empresses and power in early Byzantium. London: Leicester University Press. ——— (2003) ‘Who’s that girl? Personifications of the Byzantine empress’. In Entwistle, C. (ed.), Through a glass brightly: Studies in Byzantine and medieval art and archaeology presented to David Buckton. Oxford and Philadelphia: Oxbow Books, 51–6. ——— (2005) ‘Good luck and good fortune to the queen of cities: Empresses and tyches in Byzantium’. In Stafford, E. and Herrin, J. (eds.), Personification in the Greek world: From Antiquity to Byzantium. Aldershot: Routledge, 293–308. Jenkins, R. J. H. (1947) ‘The bronze Athena at Byzantium’. Journal of Hellenic Studies, 67: 31–3. Lavan, L. (2011) ‘The end of the temples: Towards a new narrative?’. In Lavan, L. and Mulryan, M. (eds.), The archaeology of late-antique paganism, Late-Antique Archaeology, 7. Leiden: Brill, xv–lxv. ——— (2011a) ‘Political talismans? Residual “pagan” statues in late-antique public space’. In Lavan, L. and Mulryan, M. (eds.), The archaeology of late-antique paganism, LateAntique Archaeology, 7. Leiden: Brill, 437–78. Liebeschuetz, J.H.W.G. (1995) ‘Pagan mythology in the Christian empire’. International journal of the Classical tradition, 2/2: 193–208. Limberis, V. (1994) Divine heiress: The virgin Mary and the creation of Christian Constantinople. London and New York: Routledge. Lundgreen, B. (1997) ‘A methodological enquiry: The great bronze Athena by Pheidias’. Journal of Hellenic Studies, 117: 190–7. Maas, M. (1992) John Lydus and the Roman past: Antiquarianism and politics in the age of Justinian. London and New York: Routledge. McClanan, A. (2002) ‘Early Byzantine steelyard weights: Potency and diffusion of the imperial image’. In McClanan, A. (ed.), Representations of early Byzantine empresses: Image and empire. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 29–64. MacCormack, S. (1975) ‘Roma, Constantinopolis, the emperor, and his genius’. Classical Quarterly, New Series, 25/1: 131–50. Machado, C. and Lenaghan, J. (2016) ‘Rome’. In Smith, R. R. R. and Ward-Perkins, B. (eds.), The last statues of antiquity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 121–35. MacMullen, R. (1997) Christianity and paganism in the fourth to eighth centuries. New Haven: Yale University Press. Maguire, H. (2001) ‘The good life’. In Bowersock, G. W., Brown, P., and Grabar, O. (eds.), Interpreting Late Antiquity: Essays on the postclassical world. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 238–57. Mango, C. (1963) ‘Antique statuary and the Byzantine beholder’. DOP, 17: 53–75. Mellor, R. (1975) ΘΕΑ ΡΩΜΗ: The worship of the goddess Roma in the Greek world. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht. Meriçboyu, Y. and Atasoy, S. (1983) Büst Şeklinde Kantar Ağırlıkları. [Steelyard weights in the form of busts: Archaeological museum of Istanbul]. Istanbul: Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları. 250 Janet Wade Metropolitan Museum of Art Online Collection (2018) Available at: www.metmuseum.org/ art/collection/search (accessed: 22 June 2018). Papaconstantinou, A. (ed.) (2015) Conversion in Late Antiquity: Christianity, Islam, and beyond. Surrey: Routledge. Papanikola-Bakirtzi, D. (2002) Everyday life in Byzantium. Athens: Hellenic Ministry of Culture. Paton, W. R. (trans.) (1916–18) Greek anthology, LCL, 67–68 and 84–86, 5 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Pekin, A. K and Kangal, S. (eds.) (2007) Istanbul: 8000 years brought to daylight: Marmaray, Metro, Sultanahmet excavations. Istanbul: Vehbi Koç Foundation. Pitarakis, B. (2012) ‘Daily life at the marketplace in Late Antiquity and Byzantium’. In Morrisson, C. (ed.), Trade and markets in Byzantium, Dumbarton Oaks Byzantine symposia and colloquia. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 399–426. ——— (2016) ‘The Byzantine marketplace: A window onto daily life and material culture’. In Magdalino, P. and Necipoğlu, N. (eds.), Trade in Byzantium: Papers from the third international Sevgi Gönül Byzantine studies symposium. Istanbul: Koç University Press, 211–31. Robertson, N. (1996) ‘Athena’s shrines and festivals’. In Neils, J. (ed.), Worshipping Athena: Panathenaia and Parthenon. Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press, 27–77. Sauer, E. W. (2003) The archaeology of religious hatred in the Roman and early medieval World. Stroud: Tempus. Shearer, A. (1998) Athene: Image and energy. London: Penguin Books. Smith, A. C. (1994) ‘Queens and empresses as goddesses: The public role of the personal tyche in the Graeco-Roman world’. Yale University Art Gallery Bulletin, 86–105. Trombley, F. R. (1985) ‘Paganism in the Greek world at the end of antiquity: The case of rural Anatolia and Greece’. HTR, 78 (3/4): 327–52. ——— (1993/94) Hellenic religion and Christianization c. 370–529, 2 vols. Leiden: Brill. Vermeule, C. C. (1959) The goddess Roma in the art of the Roman Empire. London: Spink. Wade, J. (2014) ‘Sailors, merchants and the maritime cults that sailed into the ports (and streets) of early Byzantium’. In Dzino, D. and Parry, K. (eds.), Byzantium, its neighbours and its cultures, Byzantina Australiensia, 20. Brisbane: Australian association for Byzantine studies, 269–87. Weitzmann, K. (ed.) (1979) Age of spirituality: Late-antique and early Christian art, third to seventh century. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art.