Books by Spyros Chr. Karydis - Σπύρος Χρ. Καρύδης
Στα φύλλα των βιβλίων, των οικονομικών καταστίχων και στα λυτά έγγραφα του αρχείου της μονής της ... more Στα φύλλα των βιβλίων, των οικονομικών καταστίχων και στα λυτά έγγραφα του αρχείου της μονής της Μυρτιδιώτισσας στην Κέρκυρα, ο μοναχός Αμβρόσιος Πακτίτης κατέγραψε τις σκέψεις και την αγωνία του για το μοναστήρι στο οποίο ζούσε, καθώς και ποικίλα γεγονότα που αφορούσαν στο νησί του και τα οποία έκρινε άξια να καταγραφούν, για να μην τα διαγράψει για πάντα η λήθη από τη μνήμη των ανθρώπων. Τα σημειώματα αυτά συγκροτούν ένα ιδιαίτερα σημαντικό υλικό για την ιστορία του μοναστηριού και ευρύτερα της Κέρκυρας των αρχών του 20ού αιώνα, αλλά και ένα αξιόλογο υλικό για εκείνον που ενδιαφέρεται για τον τρόπο πρόσληψης των μεγάλων γεγονότων που σημάδεψαν την ελληνική και παγκόσμια ιστορία από τους απλούς ανθρώπους της εποχής, ένας από τους οποίους ήταν και ο μοναχός της Μυρτιδιώτισσας, ο οποίος έζησε όλα τα χρόνια της ζωής του σε ένα από τα κελιά του μοναστηριού.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Στην εργασία παρουσιάζεται ο άγνωστος Κερκυραίος νοτάριος Θεόδωρος Βρανιανίτης και δημοσιεύονται ... more Στην εργασία παρουσιάζεται ο άγνωστος Κερκυραίος νοτάριος Θεόδωρος Βρανιανίτης και δημοσιεύονται εβδομηνταεννέα (79) συνολικά νοταριακές πράξεις του των ετών 1479-1516, κατάλοιπα των διασκορπισμένων και χαμένων σήμερα καταστίχων του. Η εργασία εντάσσεται στην κατηγορία της έκδοσης πηγών και χωρίζεται ουσιαστικά σε δύο μέρη.
Το πρώτο μέρος, η Εισαγωγή (σ. 7-37), χωρίζεται σε επιμέρους ενότητες. Κατ? αρχάς επισημαίνεται η έλλειψη επαρκούς νοταριακού υλικού για τον 15ου αιώνα, εντοπίζεται η αιτία στις αλλεπάλληλες καταστροφές που υπέστη η πόλη της Κέρκυρας από τις αρχές του 15ου αιώνα και εξής και αναδεικνύεται η σημασία του εντοπισμού και της έκδοσης των πράξεων του νοταρίου Θεοδώρου Βρανιανίτη για την ιστορία του τόπου.
Στη δεύτερη ενότητα παρουσιάζονται οι αρχειακές ειδήσεις που συγκεντρώθηκαν για το οικογενειακό περιβάλλον του νοταρίου. Στην τρίτη ενότητα γίνεται αναλυτική παρουσίαση και περιγραφή των σπαραγμάτων των καταστίχων και των νοταριακών πράξεων του νοταρίου, που εντοπίστηκαν στο Ιστορικό Αρχείο της Κέρκυρας και εκδίδονται. Οι περισσότερες πράξεις (69 συνολικά) εντοπίστηκαν ανάμεσα στα νοταριακά κατάστιχα άλλων νοταρίων (Συμβολαιογραφικά Μ.225 (Κωνσταντίνος και Δημήτριος Μοναστηριώτης), Διάφοροι Συμβολαιογράφοι 10), μία πράξη της 28 Αυγούστου 1500 σε περγαμηνή (Ενετοκρατία 109, υποφ. 3, αρ. 6) και οι υπόλοιπες πράξεις, που δεν είναι πρωτότυπες αλλά αντίγραφα, σκόρπιες σε άλλες αρχειακές σειρές (Διάφοροι Συμβολαιογράφοι 14, ΄Εγγραφα Εκκλησιών 259, Ενετική Διοίκηση 454, Ενετοκρατία 46). Στην Εισαγωγή δίνονται, τέλος, πληροφορίες για την εικόνα της γραφής του νοταρίου, τη γλώσσα, την ορθογραφία του κειμένου, τους εκδοτικούς κανόνες και τα χρησιμοποιούμενα κριτικά σημεία.
Στο δεύτερο μέρος (σ. 39-111) εκδίδονται οι πράξεις του νοταρίου. Στην έκδοση των πράξεων ακολουθείται η διπλωματική μέθοδος, προσαρμοσμένη στις ιδιοτυπίες του κειμένου και συμφωνα με τους κανόνες τους οποίους ο συγγραφέας διατύπωσε με σαφήνεια στην Εισαγωγή. Οι πράξεις εκδίδονται με βάση την αρχειακή πηγή στην οποία εντοπίστηκαν και τοποθετημένες σε χρονολογική σειρά, η οποία δίνει τη δυνατότητα στον μελετητή να ανασυστήσει την εικόνα και τη θεματολογία των χαμένων καταστίχων.
Ακολουθεί Γενικό Ευρετήριο ονομάτων και όρων (σ. 113-128). Η εργασία κλείνει με πέντε Πίνακες (σ. 129-133) με χαρακτηριστικά δείγματα της γραφής του νοταρίου Θεοδώρου Βρανιανίτη αλλά και της κατάστασης στην οποία βρίσκονται σήμερα τα σπαράγματα των καταστίχων του.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
"Durante il periodo del governo veneto, nell’isola di Corfù erano attivi tre archivi cοrrelati co... more "Durante il periodo del governo veneto, nell’isola di Corfù erano attivi tre archivi cοrrelati con le rispettive rappresentanze venete che avevano sede nell’isola. Questi archivi erano: l’Archivio degli Atti Generalizi, detto anche Archivio Generalizio (anesso inizialmente al provveditore delle tre isole e successivamente al provveditore da Mar), l’Archivio degli Atti Prefettizi detto anche Archivio Prefettizio (anesso al provveditore e capitano di Corfù), l’Archivio degli Atti Prettorei detto anche Archivio Prettoreo (anesso al bailo di Corfù).
Di questi tre archivi una rilevante importanza, non solo per il mondo greco ma anche per la stessa Venezia, la detenne l’Archivio Generalizio, poiché in esso venivano conservati i documenti di competenza politica, militare e giudiziaria di ciascun provveditore generale, considerato il maggiore rappresentante nei possedimenti veneziani, soprattutto dalla fine del XVII secolo fino alla caduta della Repubblica di Venezia.
Questo Archivio era diviso in due sezioni: l’Archivio degli Atti Generalizi e l’Archivio Secreto.
L’Archivio degli Atti Generalizi venne fondato nel 1657 su richiesta del cretese Zorzi Scordilli e venne organizzato in base al regolamento che aveva redatto il provveditore generale Antonio Lippomano. In questo Archivio venivano conservati i documenti di carattere non riservato e gli atti di cause civili e penali prodotti dai provveditori generali operanti in quell’epoca a Corfù. L’Archivio venne riorganizzato nel 1760 grazie all’interesse del provveditore generale Francesco Grimani e grazie al lavoro dell’archivista Costantin Domenico Alberghini, sotto la sovrintendenza di Giacomo Rizzo, segretario del provveditore e capitano Alvise Foscari.
L’Archivio Secreto comprendeva i documenti di carattere riservato, che erano depositati presso la Cancelleria generalizia dei provveditori generali e che venivano consegnati dal segretario in servizio ad ogni suo successore.
La presenza a Corfù dell’Archivio Generalizio è nota fino al primo decennio del XIX secolo, tuttavia riferimenti diversi attestano la sua esistenza fino alla fine del secolo. Da quel momento in poi non vi sono altre testimonianze che citino l’esistenza dell’Archivio, se non in un breve studio recentemente pubblicato in un volume sulla storia della dominazione veneta in territorio greco. In questo studio si menziona l’esistenza dell’Archivio Generalizio tra le buste conservate nel fondo «Governo Veneto» dell’Archivio di Stato di Corfù.
Nel presente libro si descrivono la fondazione, la riorganizzazione e i contenuti dell’Archivio Generalizio, sulla base di documenti inediti conservati presso l’Archivio di Stato di Venezia. Vengono date informazioni concernenti la custodia del materiale archivistico di epoca veneta dopo l’istituzione dell’«Archeiophylakeion» nell’isola di Corfù (1818), e informazioni sull’Archivio Generalizio ricavate da studi noti. Viene messa in discussione la validità della tesi sull’esistenza dell’Archivio tra le buste dell’ Archivio di Corfù. Vengono in fine pubblicati i documenti reperiti nell’Archivio di Stato di Venezia che riguardano l’argomento.
L’obiettivo di questo lavoro è che venga riesaminata e messa in discussione la questione dell’Archivio dei provveditori generali considerato perduto, in modo che venga individuato, se ancora esiste, oppure che ne venga rintracciata la sorte dopo l’annessione delle Isole Ionie allo Stato Greco. In questa ricerca preziose risultano essere le informazioni tratte dai documenti che vengono pubblicati. Oggi sappiamo che il materiale controllato e sistemato nel 1760, presentava in tutti i registri e in tutte le filze la firma di Costantin Domenico Alberghini, che si era assunto l’incarico di riorganizzare l’Archivio. Di particolare importanza sono anche gli inventari, di una parte dell’Archivio degli Atti Generalizi e della maggior parte dell’Archivio Secreto, perché in essi vengono descritti con accuratezza i registri, le buste e le filze con i titoli ed il numero preciso di fogli di ciascun.
"
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The issues handled in the present volume have arisen after studying the existing bibliography, th... more The issues handled in the present volume have arisen after studying the existing bibliography, the known and published till this day archival sources, as well as the new ones, so far unknown, in a general frame of research regarding the organization of the orthodox Church in the greek territories occupied by the Venetians. Through a parallel study of bibliography and sources the need was felt for a critical view of opinions expressed till today and a new reading of the sources that suggests different answers to the subjects under study.
The grand protopapas as head of the orthodox Church in Corfu and the question of his election
The proclamation of the protopapas of Corfu as head of the local Church and the submission of the orthodox clergy to him can’t be documented until the first half of the 16th century.
Written sources of the first two centuries of latinocracy on the island, don’t describe the way the orthodox Church was organized. However, what seems to be of major importance are two groupings of clergymen, the Sacred Order (Hieron Tagma) and the Leftheriotes. Since the end of the 14th century and on, the protopapas appears in sources as head of the Sacred Order with limited jurisdiction, not extended farther than the city boundaries.
This was the status that the Venetians found when they settled in Corfu and kept it this way. They ratified the privileges held by the groupings of the clergy and seeked to limit as much as possible any intervention either from the West or from the East, as part of their general religious policy which was directly tied to their financial and political interests.
A little before the mid 16th century and a little after the tragic experience of the 1537 siege by the Turks, a coordinated effort on the part of the Sacred Order, fruit of which was the papal bull of 1540, and on the part of the Community of Corfu with its embassies of 1542 and 1546 to Venice, resulted to the granting of a wide jurisdiction in the entire body of the Church of Corfu to the protopapas.
In what concerns his election, up to 1555 the protopapas was being elected exclusively by those priests who were forming the Sacred Order. The duration of his term is not specified. Given the life-long possession of the ecclesiastical office, one can presume that the protopapas kept this office until his death. However, some indications in the archives, combined with data from protopapadic catalogues leave open the possibility that he was being elected for a limited time of service, the duration of which we are unable to define.
By a decree of the 18th of December 1555, Venice intervened decisively into the affairs of the Church in Corfu. The election of the protopapas was assigned to an assembly of clergy and laymen, in which the laymen, members of the Community of Corfu, were more numerous. Also the term of office limited to five years, was renewable. This way, the State took away from the Church the possibility to control this office and gave it to the local Administration. Ever since, the office of the protopapas has assumed a public character, apart from the Sacred Order and its internal hierarchy.
During all this time, the role of the Sacred Order in the administration of the Church on the island was essential. The Order, as a confraternity recognized by the State, could possess and handle an estate. This was a significant fact since all efforts for ensuring its own privileges were based exactly on the fortune of the Order. It was also significant for another reason, namely for the appointment of the protopapas as head of the Church of Corfu. After 1555, the Order, despite the loss of its privilege to elect exclusively the protopapas, never ceased to play an important role in the life of the Corfiot Church, watching and reacting when needed, both to the deeds and decisions of the protopapas as well as to the issued statal decrees. It was clear that all these opted to the Church keeping its privileges and to its being rightly guided by the protopapas according to all ecclesiastical rules.
The election of protopapas of Zakynthos
By the study of the sources it is certified that until 1601 the responsibility for the election of protopapas depended on the local venetian Administration. Venice, granting in 1601 the right of election to the Council of the Community of Zakynthos, ceded to this its own rights, as it had done previously with the concession of the right of election of persons in other public offices. As to the question of his ordination (imposition of hands), it appears that the protopapas of Zakynthos did not receive any ordination, but, like the protopapas of Corfu, possessed an ecclesiastical rank outside the regular ecclesiastical process.
Aspects of the administrative organization of the Cephallonia-Zakynthos diocese during the 16th century
A recent study of the records of the Statal Archives of Venice has offered new documents on the subject of the organization of the Cephallonia diocese during the 16th century. These documents, combined with others from the local Historical Archives of Cephallonia and the metropolis of Cephallonia, as well as with recent bibliography, sheds light on specific sectors of the diocese’s administrative organization during the 16th century and allows some suggestions about the period preceding the inclusion of the island in the venetian occupation. The study examines the office of the protopapas and the function of the diocese’s “holy synod”.
The extensive presence of many protopapades in Cephallonia during the 16th century creates various problems regarding their role to the function of the diocese. Among the many protopapades, most interesting appear to be the one of Kastro and the one of the Assos fortress.
The office of the Kastro protopapas is identical to the one of the Cephallonia protopapas. His duties were more than those of the other protopapades of the island. He was being elected by the civil Authority of the island and had privileges similar to those of the bishop’s. These data, combined with the title of “protopapas and local bishop of Cephallonia” that was used, reinforce the suggestion that this office was a continuation of protopapas as head of the local Church during the early latin dominion and before the re-establishment of the episcopal throne. The office was integrated into the organization of the diocese after the re-establishment; it kept however its special characteristics, its relation to the civil Authority and its privileges.
The office of the Assos protopapas, which resulted due to an increased interest for this area on the part of Venice, after the foundation of the fortress (1593), took a special position in the local hierarchy, has been honoured by privileges and was maintained till the 18th century.
Finally, during the second half of the 16th century, the operation of the “holy synod” of the diocese is ascertained. Despite the problems around its enactment and function, that result from the fragmentation of the sources, the “synod” appears on a par with the episcopal court, playing an important role in the operation of the diocese, especially during those periods when the bishop was away or unable to exercise his episcopal duties.
Τhe diocese of Kythera at the period of the venetian dominion
From the study of the bibliography, a conclusion is drawn: there exists actually no information on the situation of the Church of Kythera before the second half of 16th century. The diocese of Kythera appears to have remained abeyant possibly from the beginning of latinocracy and until the reconstitution of the bishopric with the election of the bishop Dionysios Stronghilos in 1569-1570. In the meantime, the administration had been undertaken by a priest with the title of protopapas.
In regard to the election and the ordination of bishop, it is deduced that his election until 1636 was done exclusively by the Metropolite of Monemvasia and his synod. The elected new bishop received the ratification of his election from the central venetian Administration and after that received the bishopric from the local venetian authority. By the middle of the 17th century, the election was assigned to the Council of the Community of Kythera, which elected exclusively from local candidates. The elected was ordained by the Metropolite of Monemvasia, on whom he also was dependant.
The dispute over the metropolitan throne of Patras during the period 1712-1713. Newer information
The well-known case of Christophoros Antonopoulos’ election for the metropolitan throne of Patras and the reaction of the excluded co-candidate of his, the metropolite of Myra Zacchaeus Adamopoulos, is being re-examined through material offered by a new source, the printed version of documents that were assembled by the contestant of the throne as he was negotiating the case in Venice.
The «stampa» has been tracked down at the Historical Archive of Corfu, is of the following dimensions 30,1Χ20,7 cm. and constitutes of 42 numbered pages. The importance of the source doesn’t lie only in the new information which come to complete any void regarding the facts and the attitude of the locals towards this matter and towards the persons involved, but also in the large number of information around the Church and the Community of Patras. More specifically, through signed testimonies and complaints, the names of active priests are revealed as well as those of the parish priests in 26 churches of the city; furthermore the limits of the Metropolite’s jurisdiction are being defined in what regards the parochial organization and the existence of the religious confraternities is ascertained within the Peloponnese. Finally, new names of Community members and new information on its operation are added.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Agrafoi village is situated in the northern part of Corfu at a distance of 31 kms from the capita... more Agrafoi village is situated in the northern part of Corfu at a distance of 31 kms from the capital of the island. Its name can probably be traced back into the byzantine times or into the first years of the Angevin occupation of the island and has to do with the “agraphoi” or unregistered villagers who were free from any tax obligation towards the state.
The church of the Hodegetria which is today the parish church of the village, has a very long history and its beginning, if we are to consider the data in the sources as precise, can be found in the 13th century. The oldest information about the church comes from copies of documents from the years 1286, 1400 and 1401 respectively. In these documents one can find interesting information on the foundation of the church, the organization of its group of founders, and the special honours paid to the Virgin Mary.
The oldest founders of the church constituted a confraternity. The fraternity of the church is the oldest known sample of a fraternity of founders in the area of Corfu and its uninterrupted existence can be traced until the end of the seventh decade of the 20th century, adapted since the 18th century to the statal decrees that defined the function of all confraternities in the wider Ionian area.
The church of the Hodegetria was turned into a monastery after a verdict of the confraternity in 1744 and came into existence as such in 1746, after many regressions and changes due to the resignation of the elected first prior and organizer of the new monastery. The fact that the monastery operated is confirmed until the beginning of the 19th century, however already on the dawn of the new century and despite the existence of a prior, it seems that a monastic brotherhood didn’t exist. Despite all the efforts and the interest on the part of the monks, during the third decade of the 19th century the monastery had in fact ceased to operate. The only thing that remained of it was the inclination of the brothers to elect the parish priest from among the priest-monks’ order.
The church was part of the parochial network of the local Church; during the venetian occupation and until the island was united to the greek state (1864) this network was defined by the possession of a burial monument in a church, as well as by the participation of the owner of this monument in the rituals that took place in the church. Parishioners of the church could become the members of its brotherhood as well as other persons through heredity or through the purchase of a burial monument in the church or in the area around it. The presence of parishioners, as a clearly distinct group, is confirmed in the year 1528. After that their presence is not registered, however it is certain that they existed and supported in their own way the correct operation of the church and its regular ministration. The conversion of the church into a monastery didn’t bring any essential difference neither to the relation of brotherhood and church nor to the church’s parochial status.
Today the church has the shape of a large single-naved basilica of the standard type that can be found in the Ionian islands. The access to the church is achieved through a long corridor, paved with stones. The church is surrounded from its northern and southern sides by arched narthexes. On the south-western side there is a bell-tower with pierced walls and autonomous seating.
In the courtyard of the church the main element is the monumental central western entrance with its elaborate decoration and the frescos of Saints Peter and Paul on the right and on the left. In the interior, the church has a templon of three friezes and a two-storeyed matroneum. The church as it is today, was erected or renovated in 1677 by the master workmen Spyros Koustas and Zapheiris Vassilakis who carved their names and the construction date on a cornerstone of the eastern side of the church. The church is decorated with important icons of the 18th and 19th centuries on the templon, on the walls and on the ceiling, as well as with frescos of the 18th-19th centuries in the Holy Altar or Ierón (Prothesis and central apse) and on the templon.
In the present study, the subject is developed in eight units that refer to the first existing evidence about the church; to the confraternity of the church, its composition and operation; to the founding of the monastery, its organization and its break-up; to the parochial character of the church, its architecture and its icons, its library and archives, its dependencies (metochia). In the end, there are published the most noteworthy documents that regard the church and the monastery.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Among the manuscripts of the Platytera monastery in Corfu, that have been re¬cently described by ... more Among the manuscripts of the Platytera monastery in Corfu, that have been re¬cently described by the writers, there is a small musical manuscript of impor¬tance in what regards its contents. This manuscript contains greek and latin hymns as well as evangelical texts about the Saintly Passion. All the texts are written in greek and even the latin hymns have been transcribed into the greek alphabet.
Many texts included in this manuscript are known thanks to the Ritual of the orthodox and catholic Church masses. But there are other texts which are not included in the official ritual of the two churches. More specifically, the following are included, written in greek: the well-known antiphony “Semeron krematai epi xylou” (Today is hanged upon wood...), some verses from the Gos¬pels that are being read on Holy Tuesday and Holy Thursday, an extract from the Laments of Jeremiah and five verses from the Lament of the Virgin, the well-known «Paristameni” (Standing by the cross). Latin hymns in greek chara¬cters are the following: In monte Oliveti oravit..., Christus factus est..., Adoramus Te Christe... as well as the entire 50th Psalm: Miserere mei Deus...
The musical pieces of the manuscript are meant to be sung by a mixed choir; the voices of this choir are defined as basso, tenore, alto, sovrano. In the manu¬script there is a registration of the notes for the “tenore” voice. Furthermore, in the beginning of the manuscript, the tonal basis is given for the harmonization of the other three voices during all the hymns. On one page of the manuscript one can find a parallel registration of the notes for basso and tenore whereas on another page the term falsobordone is mentioned describing the rendition of the hymn “Today is hanged…”
The handwriting and the style of the writing lead one to the assumption that the manuscript has been written by a Greek. Based on the watermark, the ma¬nuscript dates back to the second half of the 17th century. As of the beginning of the 18th century, we know that it belonged to the Corfiot chanter Ioannis Mar¬ketis and later to the music teacher and priest Theodoros Kigalas.
The manuscript, was intended for a function that would take place in a mi¬xed environment, language and religion-wise. This function can’t be placed in the Ritual of either church (Orthodox or Catholic) that’s why we have assumed that it was an out of the temple function in which members of both creeds could participate, all of them possibly belonging to a latin religious confra¬ternity.
The origin of the manuscript is one more desideratum of the research. The use of polyphony has led us to assumptions about an origin from the Ionian Islands or Creta since we don’t have information about the existence of poly¬phonic music in any other Latin-occupied area at the time the manuscript was written. The assumption about a Cretan origin is the prevailing one since in the urban centres of the Venetian-occupied Creta, the use of polyphony is witnessed in latin as well as in orthodox environments. As for the Ionian islands the po¬lyphonic music seems to have been transferred from Creta as suggested by the characterization of the polyphonic music in the Ionian islands as “Cretan music” as early as the 18th century. One more element in favour of the Cretan origin of the manuscript are the verses of the Virgin’s Lament, known also as “Parista¬meni” (“Standing by the cross”) which can’t be found in other Greek areas apart from Creta.
The Platytera manuscript seems to be today the only existing manuscript which includes hymns from both churches, written in byzantine semeiography and meant to be sung in polyphony. Furthermore, it is perhaps the only record from the 17th century on the use of the greek alphabet for the writing of latin texts.
In order to understand and interpret its “paradoxes” we need undoubtedly more records, which we hope exist in other book collections and haven’t been lost forever. We need, moreover, an interpretation by musicologists who will transcribe the music of this manuscript and will search its relations and in¬fluences from East and West. So we are now handling it to those specialists with the certainty that the manuscript of the Platytera monastery constitutes a serious record on the music genre that was developed in Greece during the Venetian occupation.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Papers by Spyros Chr. Karydis - Σπύρος Χρ. Καρύδης
Στην εργασία συνοψίζονται τα αποτελέσματα μακρόχρονης έρευνας για έναν από τους λιγότερο γνωστούς... more Στην εργασία συνοψίζονται τα αποτελέσματα μακρόχρονης έρευνας για έναν από τους λιγότερο γνωστούς λογίους του κερκυραϊκού 18ου αιώνα. Ο Αντώνιος Σπίνολας ήταν ιερέας, με σημαντική παρουσία στα εκκλησιαστικά και εκπαιδευτικά πράγματα της εποχής του, συγγραφέας τουλάχιστον τεσσάρων έργων δογματικού, ερμηνευτικού, νομοκανονικού και αντιρρητικού περιεχομένου, ο οποίος παρέμεινε στη σκιά των μεγάλων συγχρόνων του και το έργο του, όχι μόνο δεν εκδόθηκε, αλλά αποδόθηκε κιόλας στον Σπυρίδωνα, τον νεότερο αδελφό και κληρονόμο του.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Tra Cefalonia e Venezia, Scritti di amici per Despina Vlassi - Μεταξύ Κεφαλονιάς και Βενετίας. Κείμενα των φίλων της Δέσποινας Βλάσση, a cura di (ἐπιμ.) Bruno Crevato-Selvaggi, Κατερίνα Κωνσταντινίδου, Venezia Βενετία: La Musa Talìa Editrici, 2024, σ. 139-156., 2024
Με μια διάταξη, δημοσιευμένη στις 17 Ιουνίου 1520, ο βικάριος του λατίνου αρχιεπισκόπου της Κέρκυ... more Με μια διάταξη, δημοσιευμένη στις 17 Ιουνίου 1520, ο βικάριος του λατίνου αρχιεπισκόπου της Κέρκυρας, στη δικαιοδοσία του οποίου ανήκε τότε η ορθόδοξη Εκκλησία του νησιού, επιχείρησε να παρέμβει στη ζωή και τα ήθη του κλήρου των δύο δογμάτων, αποβλέποντας στην πάταξη συμπεριφορών οι οποίες προσέβαλλαν το αξίωμα της ιεροσύνης. Η διάταξη εντοπίστηκε στους φακέλους του αρχείου της λατινικής αρχιεπισκοπής, οι οποίοι σήμερα αποτελούν τμήμα του Αρχείου Εγχωρίου Διαχειρίσεως των ΓΑΚ-Αρχείων Νομού Κέρκυρας, και αποτελεί πολύτιμο τεκμήριο για την περίοδο στην οποία αναφέρεται. Στη μελέτη αυτή παρουσιάζεται το περιεχόμενο της διάταξης και εξετάζονται θέματα τα οποία σχετίζονται με την ηθική κατάσταση του κλήρου τότε, την επιτακτικότητα της παρέμβασης αλλά και τα αποτελέσματα που αυτή είχε.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Στη συμβολή αυτή παρουσιάζονται και σχολιάζονται, δύο σημαντικές, κατά τη γνώμη μου, πληροφορίες ... more Στη συμβολή αυτή παρουσιάζονται και σχολιάζονται, δύο σημαντικές, κατά τη γνώμη μου, πληροφορίες που αφορούν τα μουσικά πράγματα στον ιόνιο χώρο κατά τον 17ο αιώνα, μία δημοσιευμένη ήδη από τον προπερασμένο αιώνα από τον Émile Legrand, αλλά ανεκμετάλλευτη, και μία πρόσφατα αλιευθείσα από το Αρχείο της Κέρκυρας. Οι δύο μαρτυρίες, μία για την Κέρκυρα και μία για την Κεφαλονιά, αφορούν μια περίοδο για την οποία τίποτε ουσιαστικά δεν είναι γνωστό στον χώρο του Ιονίου για τη διδασκαλία και μαθητεία της ψαλτικής, αντανακλούν την πραγματικότητα των χρόνων και των τόπων στους οποίους αναφέρονται, φωτίζουν, έστω και αμυδρά, το θέμα και ανοίγουν νέους δρόμους στην έρευνα.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Επιστημονικό Συνέδριο «Τα εκκλησιαστικά αρχεία, πηγή ιστορίας και πολιτισμού της Κεφαλονιάς», Αργοστόλι Κεφαλονιάς 4-6 Οκτωβρίου 2018, Πρακτικά, επ. επιμ. Θεοδώρα Ζαφειράτου, Ληξούρι 2022, σ. 45-64.
Το διάταγμα του γενικού προβλεπτή Antonio Pisani της 25ης Μαΐου 1631 καθόρισε τη διαδικασία ένταξ... more Το διάταγμα του γενικού προβλεπτή Antonio Pisani της 25ης Μαΐου 1631 καθόρισε τη διαδικασία ένταξης στις τάξεις του κλήρου των κερκυραίων υποψηφίων κληρικών και προσδιόρισε με ακρίβεια ως χειροτονούντες επισκόπους, εκείνους οι οποίοι ανήκαν στη βενετική επικράτεια. Στην πράξη, επέβαλε στους υποψηφίους τη χειροτονία τους από τον πλησιόχωρο αρχιεπίσκοπο Κεφαλληνίας, αφού οι άλλες περιοχές που διέθεταν επίσκοπο, η Βενετία και τα Κύθηρα, βρίσκονταν πολύ μακριά. Κατ’ αυτόν τον τρόπο, η παρουσία του αρχιεπισκόπου Κεφαλληνίας στον ιόνιο χώρο, λίγο μετά την αναβάθμιση της επισκοπής σε αρχιεπισκοπή, αποκτούσε άλλη δυναμική, έως την ένταξη της Λευκάδας στη βενετική επικράτεια, στο τέλος του 17ου αιώνα, οπότε άλλαξαν ξανά οι ισορροπίες. Στην ανακοίνωση διερευνάται, μέσα από τα τεκμήρια του αρχείου των μεγάλων πρωτοπαπάδων της Κέρκυρας, και κυρίως μέσα από τις σωζόμενες άδειες χειροτονίας και τα συστατικά γράμματα των ιερέων, η παρουσία του αρχιεπισκόπου Κεφαλληνίας ως χειροτονούντος αρχιερέως στη ζωή της Κέρκυρας, ο βαθμός διαφοροποίησης των προτιμήσεων των κερκυραίων υποψηφίων έπειτα από την ένταξη της Λευκάδας στο βενετικό Κράτος της Θάλασσας, και ο βαθμός παρέμβασης των χειροτονούντων επισκόπων σε ζητήματα τήρησης της κανονικότητας.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Πληθυσμιακές μετακινήσεις προς τα Ιόνια Νησιά από τον 13ο αιώνα έως την Ένωση με την Ελλάδα, Πρακτικά συνεδρίου (9-11 Οκτωβρίου 2019), επιμ. Ν.Γ. Μοσχονάς – Γ.Δ. Παγκράτης, Τμήμα Ιταλικής Γλώσσας και Φιλολογίας ΕΚΠΑ - Κέντρο Μελετών Ιονίου, Αθήνα 2022, σ. 185-197.
Πρόκειται για μια σύντομη περιήγηση στο υλικό που φυλάσσεται στα αρχεία Νομού Κέρκυρας και αφορά ... more Πρόκειται για μια σύντομη περιήγηση στο υλικό που φυλάσσεται στα αρχεία Νομού Κέρκυρας και αφορά τους Κρήτες πρόσφυγες από την έναρξη του Κρητικού πολέμου έως και το τέλος του τελευταίου βενετοτουρκικού πολέμου. Εστιάζουμε την προσοχή μας στο πρωτοπαπαδικό, στὸ ληξιαρχικὸ, στο νοταρικό αρχείο, στα αρχεία της τοπικής βενετικής διοίκησης του νησιού (δηλαδή στα αρχεία του βάιλου και του προβλεπτή καπιτάνου τα οποία συγκροτούν σήμερα την αρχειακή σειρά Ενετική Διοίκηση) καθώς και στο αρχείο της αστικής Κοινότητας του νησιού (γνωστό ως Ενετοκρατία). Τα αρχειακά τεκμήρια προσφέρουν ευάριθμες ειδήσεις για τα πολεμικά γεγονότα ή την περιπέτεια των ανθρώπων στον δρόμο της προσφυγιάς, στο ταξίδι δηλαδή από την Κρήτη έως τα νησιά του Ιονίου, με εξαίρεση τα έγγραφα εκείνα τα οποία συντάχθηκαν και ομαδοποιήθηκαν δίκην «φακέλων», για να υποστηρίξουν αιτήματα των προσφύγων για την παροχή βοήθειας, για την ανάληψη της επικαρπίας κάποιου δημόσιου ναού ή μοναστηριού, για την ένταξη στην αστική Κοινότητα. Ωστόσο, τα ίδια τεκμήρια ακόμα και με τη λακωνικότητά τους ή τη σιωπή τους μεταφέρουν το συναίσθημα, τον πόνο, τις δυσκολίες στη νέα πατρίδα, μαρτυρούν τα προβλήματα συγχρωτισμού με τους ντόπιους, αποκαλύπτουν την ψυχολογία των προσφύγων, καταγράφουν την ελπίδα για την επιστροφή στον γενέθλιο χώρο. Τα αρχειακά τεκμήρια αναδεικνύουν επίσης όψεις των κοινωνικών σχέσεων και των συμπεριφορών, της οργάνωσης των προσφυγικών κοινοτήτων και της αλληλεγγύης που χαρακτήριζε τα μέλη τους όπως επίσης μαρτυρούν τη διαχείριση της εμπερίστατης προσφυγιάς για αιτήματα παροχής προνομίων και ευεργεσιών από την Κυρίαρχο Βενετία.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Books by Spyros Chr. Karydis - Σπύρος Χρ. Καρύδης
Το πρώτο μέρος, η Εισαγωγή (σ. 7-37), χωρίζεται σε επιμέρους ενότητες. Κατ? αρχάς επισημαίνεται η έλλειψη επαρκούς νοταριακού υλικού για τον 15ου αιώνα, εντοπίζεται η αιτία στις αλλεπάλληλες καταστροφές που υπέστη η πόλη της Κέρκυρας από τις αρχές του 15ου αιώνα και εξής και αναδεικνύεται η σημασία του εντοπισμού και της έκδοσης των πράξεων του νοταρίου Θεοδώρου Βρανιανίτη για την ιστορία του τόπου.
Στη δεύτερη ενότητα παρουσιάζονται οι αρχειακές ειδήσεις που συγκεντρώθηκαν για το οικογενειακό περιβάλλον του νοταρίου. Στην τρίτη ενότητα γίνεται αναλυτική παρουσίαση και περιγραφή των σπαραγμάτων των καταστίχων και των νοταριακών πράξεων του νοταρίου, που εντοπίστηκαν στο Ιστορικό Αρχείο της Κέρκυρας και εκδίδονται. Οι περισσότερες πράξεις (69 συνολικά) εντοπίστηκαν ανάμεσα στα νοταριακά κατάστιχα άλλων νοταρίων (Συμβολαιογραφικά Μ.225 (Κωνσταντίνος και Δημήτριος Μοναστηριώτης), Διάφοροι Συμβολαιογράφοι 10), μία πράξη της 28 Αυγούστου 1500 σε περγαμηνή (Ενετοκρατία 109, υποφ. 3, αρ. 6) και οι υπόλοιπες πράξεις, που δεν είναι πρωτότυπες αλλά αντίγραφα, σκόρπιες σε άλλες αρχειακές σειρές (Διάφοροι Συμβολαιογράφοι 14, ΄Εγγραφα Εκκλησιών 259, Ενετική Διοίκηση 454, Ενετοκρατία 46). Στην Εισαγωγή δίνονται, τέλος, πληροφορίες για την εικόνα της γραφής του νοταρίου, τη γλώσσα, την ορθογραφία του κειμένου, τους εκδοτικούς κανόνες και τα χρησιμοποιούμενα κριτικά σημεία.
Στο δεύτερο μέρος (σ. 39-111) εκδίδονται οι πράξεις του νοταρίου. Στην έκδοση των πράξεων ακολουθείται η διπλωματική μέθοδος, προσαρμοσμένη στις ιδιοτυπίες του κειμένου και συμφωνα με τους κανόνες τους οποίους ο συγγραφέας διατύπωσε με σαφήνεια στην Εισαγωγή. Οι πράξεις εκδίδονται με βάση την αρχειακή πηγή στην οποία εντοπίστηκαν και τοποθετημένες σε χρονολογική σειρά, η οποία δίνει τη δυνατότητα στον μελετητή να ανασυστήσει την εικόνα και τη θεματολογία των χαμένων καταστίχων.
Ακολουθεί Γενικό Ευρετήριο ονομάτων και όρων (σ. 113-128). Η εργασία κλείνει με πέντε Πίνακες (σ. 129-133) με χαρακτηριστικά δείγματα της γραφής του νοταρίου Θεοδώρου Βρανιανίτη αλλά και της κατάστασης στην οποία βρίσκονται σήμερα τα σπαράγματα των καταστίχων του.
Di questi tre archivi una rilevante importanza, non solo per il mondo greco ma anche per la stessa Venezia, la detenne l’Archivio Generalizio, poiché in esso venivano conservati i documenti di competenza politica, militare e giudiziaria di ciascun provveditore generale, considerato il maggiore rappresentante nei possedimenti veneziani, soprattutto dalla fine del XVII secolo fino alla caduta della Repubblica di Venezia.
Questo Archivio era diviso in due sezioni: l’Archivio degli Atti Generalizi e l’Archivio Secreto.
L’Archivio degli Atti Generalizi venne fondato nel 1657 su richiesta del cretese Zorzi Scordilli e venne organizzato in base al regolamento che aveva redatto il provveditore generale Antonio Lippomano. In questo Archivio venivano conservati i documenti di carattere non riservato e gli atti di cause civili e penali prodotti dai provveditori generali operanti in quell’epoca a Corfù. L’Archivio venne riorganizzato nel 1760 grazie all’interesse del provveditore generale Francesco Grimani e grazie al lavoro dell’archivista Costantin Domenico Alberghini, sotto la sovrintendenza di Giacomo Rizzo, segretario del provveditore e capitano Alvise Foscari.
L’Archivio Secreto comprendeva i documenti di carattere riservato, che erano depositati presso la Cancelleria generalizia dei provveditori generali e che venivano consegnati dal segretario in servizio ad ogni suo successore.
La presenza a Corfù dell’Archivio Generalizio è nota fino al primo decennio del XIX secolo, tuttavia riferimenti diversi attestano la sua esistenza fino alla fine del secolo. Da quel momento in poi non vi sono altre testimonianze che citino l’esistenza dell’Archivio, se non in un breve studio recentemente pubblicato in un volume sulla storia della dominazione veneta in territorio greco. In questo studio si menziona l’esistenza dell’Archivio Generalizio tra le buste conservate nel fondo «Governo Veneto» dell’Archivio di Stato di Corfù.
Nel presente libro si descrivono la fondazione, la riorganizzazione e i contenuti dell’Archivio Generalizio, sulla base di documenti inediti conservati presso l’Archivio di Stato di Venezia. Vengono date informazioni concernenti la custodia del materiale archivistico di epoca veneta dopo l’istituzione dell’«Archeiophylakeion» nell’isola di Corfù (1818), e informazioni sull’Archivio Generalizio ricavate da studi noti. Viene messa in discussione la validità della tesi sull’esistenza dell’Archivio tra le buste dell’ Archivio di Corfù. Vengono in fine pubblicati i documenti reperiti nell’Archivio di Stato di Venezia che riguardano l’argomento.
L’obiettivo di questo lavoro è che venga riesaminata e messa in discussione la questione dell’Archivio dei provveditori generali considerato perduto, in modo che venga individuato, se ancora esiste, oppure che ne venga rintracciata la sorte dopo l’annessione delle Isole Ionie allo Stato Greco. In questa ricerca preziose risultano essere le informazioni tratte dai documenti che vengono pubblicati. Oggi sappiamo che il materiale controllato e sistemato nel 1760, presentava in tutti i registri e in tutte le filze la firma di Costantin Domenico Alberghini, che si era assunto l’incarico di riorganizzare l’Archivio. Di particolare importanza sono anche gli inventari, di una parte dell’Archivio degli Atti Generalizi e della maggior parte dell’Archivio Secreto, perché in essi vengono descritti con accuratezza i registri, le buste e le filze con i titoli ed il numero preciso di fogli di ciascun.
"
The grand protopapas as head of the orthodox Church in Corfu and the question of his election
The proclamation of the protopapas of Corfu as head of the local Church and the submission of the orthodox clergy to him can’t be documented until the first half of the 16th century.
Written sources of the first two centuries of latinocracy on the island, don’t describe the way the orthodox Church was organized. However, what seems to be of major importance are two groupings of clergymen, the Sacred Order (Hieron Tagma) and the Leftheriotes. Since the end of the 14th century and on, the protopapas appears in sources as head of the Sacred Order with limited jurisdiction, not extended farther than the city boundaries.
This was the status that the Venetians found when they settled in Corfu and kept it this way. They ratified the privileges held by the groupings of the clergy and seeked to limit as much as possible any intervention either from the West or from the East, as part of their general religious policy which was directly tied to their financial and political interests.
A little before the mid 16th century and a little after the tragic experience of the 1537 siege by the Turks, a coordinated effort on the part of the Sacred Order, fruit of which was the papal bull of 1540, and on the part of the Community of Corfu with its embassies of 1542 and 1546 to Venice, resulted to the granting of a wide jurisdiction in the entire body of the Church of Corfu to the protopapas.
In what concerns his election, up to 1555 the protopapas was being elected exclusively by those priests who were forming the Sacred Order. The duration of his term is not specified. Given the life-long possession of the ecclesiastical office, one can presume that the protopapas kept this office until his death. However, some indications in the archives, combined with data from protopapadic catalogues leave open the possibility that he was being elected for a limited time of service, the duration of which we are unable to define.
By a decree of the 18th of December 1555, Venice intervened decisively into the affairs of the Church in Corfu. The election of the protopapas was assigned to an assembly of clergy and laymen, in which the laymen, members of the Community of Corfu, were more numerous. Also the term of office limited to five years, was renewable. This way, the State took away from the Church the possibility to control this office and gave it to the local Administration. Ever since, the office of the protopapas has assumed a public character, apart from the Sacred Order and its internal hierarchy.
During all this time, the role of the Sacred Order in the administration of the Church on the island was essential. The Order, as a confraternity recognized by the State, could possess and handle an estate. This was a significant fact since all efforts for ensuring its own privileges were based exactly on the fortune of the Order. It was also significant for another reason, namely for the appointment of the protopapas as head of the Church of Corfu. After 1555, the Order, despite the loss of its privilege to elect exclusively the protopapas, never ceased to play an important role in the life of the Corfiot Church, watching and reacting when needed, both to the deeds and decisions of the protopapas as well as to the issued statal decrees. It was clear that all these opted to the Church keeping its privileges and to its being rightly guided by the protopapas according to all ecclesiastical rules.
The election of protopapas of Zakynthos
By the study of the sources it is certified that until 1601 the responsibility for the election of protopapas depended on the local venetian Administration. Venice, granting in 1601 the right of election to the Council of the Community of Zakynthos, ceded to this its own rights, as it had done previously with the concession of the right of election of persons in other public offices. As to the question of his ordination (imposition of hands), it appears that the protopapas of Zakynthos did not receive any ordination, but, like the protopapas of Corfu, possessed an ecclesiastical rank outside the regular ecclesiastical process.
Aspects of the administrative organization of the Cephallonia-Zakynthos diocese during the 16th century
A recent study of the records of the Statal Archives of Venice has offered new documents on the subject of the organization of the Cephallonia diocese during the 16th century. These documents, combined with others from the local Historical Archives of Cephallonia and the metropolis of Cephallonia, as well as with recent bibliography, sheds light on specific sectors of the diocese’s administrative organization during the 16th century and allows some suggestions about the period preceding the inclusion of the island in the venetian occupation. The study examines the office of the protopapas and the function of the diocese’s “holy synod”.
The extensive presence of many protopapades in Cephallonia during the 16th century creates various problems regarding their role to the function of the diocese. Among the many protopapades, most interesting appear to be the one of Kastro and the one of the Assos fortress.
The office of the Kastro protopapas is identical to the one of the Cephallonia protopapas. His duties were more than those of the other protopapades of the island. He was being elected by the civil Authority of the island and had privileges similar to those of the bishop’s. These data, combined with the title of “protopapas and local bishop of Cephallonia” that was used, reinforce the suggestion that this office was a continuation of protopapas as head of the local Church during the early latin dominion and before the re-establishment of the episcopal throne. The office was integrated into the organization of the diocese after the re-establishment; it kept however its special characteristics, its relation to the civil Authority and its privileges.
The office of the Assos protopapas, which resulted due to an increased interest for this area on the part of Venice, after the foundation of the fortress (1593), took a special position in the local hierarchy, has been honoured by privileges and was maintained till the 18th century.
Finally, during the second half of the 16th century, the operation of the “holy synod” of the diocese is ascertained. Despite the problems around its enactment and function, that result from the fragmentation of the sources, the “synod” appears on a par with the episcopal court, playing an important role in the operation of the diocese, especially during those periods when the bishop was away or unable to exercise his episcopal duties.
Τhe diocese of Kythera at the period of the venetian dominion
From the study of the bibliography, a conclusion is drawn: there exists actually no information on the situation of the Church of Kythera before the second half of 16th century. The diocese of Kythera appears to have remained abeyant possibly from the beginning of latinocracy and until the reconstitution of the bishopric with the election of the bishop Dionysios Stronghilos in 1569-1570. In the meantime, the administration had been undertaken by a priest with the title of protopapas.
In regard to the election and the ordination of bishop, it is deduced that his election until 1636 was done exclusively by the Metropolite of Monemvasia and his synod. The elected new bishop received the ratification of his election from the central venetian Administration and after that received the bishopric from the local venetian authority. By the middle of the 17th century, the election was assigned to the Council of the Community of Kythera, which elected exclusively from local candidates. The elected was ordained by the Metropolite of Monemvasia, on whom he also was dependant.
The dispute over the metropolitan throne of Patras during the period 1712-1713. Newer information
The well-known case of Christophoros Antonopoulos’ election for the metropolitan throne of Patras and the reaction of the excluded co-candidate of his, the metropolite of Myra Zacchaeus Adamopoulos, is being re-examined through material offered by a new source, the printed version of documents that were assembled by the contestant of the throne as he was negotiating the case in Venice.
The «stampa» has been tracked down at the Historical Archive of Corfu, is of the following dimensions 30,1Χ20,7 cm. and constitutes of 42 numbered pages. The importance of the source doesn’t lie only in the new information which come to complete any void regarding the facts and the attitude of the locals towards this matter and towards the persons involved, but also in the large number of information around the Church and the Community of Patras. More specifically, through signed testimonies and complaints, the names of active priests are revealed as well as those of the parish priests in 26 churches of the city; furthermore the limits of the Metropolite’s jurisdiction are being defined in what regards the parochial organization and the existence of the religious confraternities is ascertained within the Peloponnese. Finally, new names of Community members and new information on its operation are added.
The church of the Hodegetria which is today the parish church of the village, has a very long history and its beginning, if we are to consider the data in the sources as precise, can be found in the 13th century. The oldest information about the church comes from copies of documents from the years 1286, 1400 and 1401 respectively. In these documents one can find interesting information on the foundation of the church, the organization of its group of founders, and the special honours paid to the Virgin Mary.
The oldest founders of the church constituted a confraternity. The fraternity of the church is the oldest known sample of a fraternity of founders in the area of Corfu and its uninterrupted existence can be traced until the end of the seventh decade of the 20th century, adapted since the 18th century to the statal decrees that defined the function of all confraternities in the wider Ionian area.
The church of the Hodegetria was turned into a monastery after a verdict of the confraternity in 1744 and came into existence as such in 1746, after many regressions and changes due to the resignation of the elected first prior and organizer of the new monastery. The fact that the monastery operated is confirmed until the beginning of the 19th century, however already on the dawn of the new century and despite the existence of a prior, it seems that a monastic brotherhood didn’t exist. Despite all the efforts and the interest on the part of the monks, during the third decade of the 19th century the monastery had in fact ceased to operate. The only thing that remained of it was the inclination of the brothers to elect the parish priest from among the priest-monks’ order.
The church was part of the parochial network of the local Church; during the venetian occupation and until the island was united to the greek state (1864) this network was defined by the possession of a burial monument in a church, as well as by the participation of the owner of this monument in the rituals that took place in the church. Parishioners of the church could become the members of its brotherhood as well as other persons through heredity or through the purchase of a burial monument in the church or in the area around it. The presence of parishioners, as a clearly distinct group, is confirmed in the year 1528. After that their presence is not registered, however it is certain that they existed and supported in their own way the correct operation of the church and its regular ministration. The conversion of the church into a monastery didn’t bring any essential difference neither to the relation of brotherhood and church nor to the church’s parochial status.
Today the church has the shape of a large single-naved basilica of the standard type that can be found in the Ionian islands. The access to the church is achieved through a long corridor, paved with stones. The church is surrounded from its northern and southern sides by arched narthexes. On the south-western side there is a bell-tower with pierced walls and autonomous seating.
In the courtyard of the church the main element is the monumental central western entrance with its elaborate decoration and the frescos of Saints Peter and Paul on the right and on the left. In the interior, the church has a templon of three friezes and a two-storeyed matroneum. The church as it is today, was erected or renovated in 1677 by the master workmen Spyros Koustas and Zapheiris Vassilakis who carved their names and the construction date on a cornerstone of the eastern side of the church. The church is decorated with important icons of the 18th and 19th centuries on the templon, on the walls and on the ceiling, as well as with frescos of the 18th-19th centuries in the Holy Altar or Ierón (Prothesis and central apse) and on the templon.
In the present study, the subject is developed in eight units that refer to the first existing evidence about the church; to the confraternity of the church, its composition and operation; to the founding of the monastery, its organization and its break-up; to the parochial character of the church, its architecture and its icons, its library and archives, its dependencies (metochia). In the end, there are published the most noteworthy documents that regard the church and the monastery.
Many texts included in this manuscript are known thanks to the Ritual of the orthodox and catholic Church masses. But there are other texts which are not included in the official ritual of the two churches. More specifically, the following are included, written in greek: the well-known antiphony “Semeron krematai epi xylou” (Today is hanged upon wood...), some verses from the Gos¬pels that are being read on Holy Tuesday and Holy Thursday, an extract from the Laments of Jeremiah and five verses from the Lament of the Virgin, the well-known «Paristameni” (Standing by the cross). Latin hymns in greek chara¬cters are the following: In monte Oliveti oravit..., Christus factus est..., Adoramus Te Christe... as well as the entire 50th Psalm: Miserere mei Deus...
The musical pieces of the manuscript are meant to be sung by a mixed choir; the voices of this choir are defined as basso, tenore, alto, sovrano. In the manu¬script there is a registration of the notes for the “tenore” voice. Furthermore, in the beginning of the manuscript, the tonal basis is given for the harmonization of the other three voices during all the hymns. On one page of the manuscript one can find a parallel registration of the notes for basso and tenore whereas on another page the term falsobordone is mentioned describing the rendition of the hymn “Today is hanged…”
The handwriting and the style of the writing lead one to the assumption that the manuscript has been written by a Greek. Based on the watermark, the ma¬nuscript dates back to the second half of the 17th century. As of the beginning of the 18th century, we know that it belonged to the Corfiot chanter Ioannis Mar¬ketis and later to the music teacher and priest Theodoros Kigalas.
The manuscript, was intended for a function that would take place in a mi¬xed environment, language and religion-wise. This function can’t be placed in the Ritual of either church (Orthodox or Catholic) that’s why we have assumed that it was an out of the temple function in which members of both creeds could participate, all of them possibly belonging to a latin religious confra¬ternity.
The origin of the manuscript is one more desideratum of the research. The use of polyphony has led us to assumptions about an origin from the Ionian Islands or Creta since we don’t have information about the existence of poly¬phonic music in any other Latin-occupied area at the time the manuscript was written. The assumption about a Cretan origin is the prevailing one since in the urban centres of the Venetian-occupied Creta, the use of polyphony is witnessed in latin as well as in orthodox environments. As for the Ionian islands the po¬lyphonic music seems to have been transferred from Creta as suggested by the characterization of the polyphonic music in the Ionian islands as “Cretan music” as early as the 18th century. One more element in favour of the Cretan origin of the manuscript are the verses of the Virgin’s Lament, known also as “Parista¬meni” (“Standing by the cross”) which can’t be found in other Greek areas apart from Creta.
The Platytera manuscript seems to be today the only existing manuscript which includes hymns from both churches, written in byzantine semeiography and meant to be sung in polyphony. Furthermore, it is perhaps the only record from the 17th century on the use of the greek alphabet for the writing of latin texts.
In order to understand and interpret its “paradoxes” we need undoubtedly more records, which we hope exist in other book collections and haven’t been lost forever. We need, moreover, an interpretation by musicologists who will transcribe the music of this manuscript and will search its relations and in¬fluences from East and West. So we are now handling it to those specialists with the certainty that the manuscript of the Platytera monastery constitutes a serious record on the music genre that was developed in Greece during the Venetian occupation.
Papers by Spyros Chr. Karydis - Σπύρος Χρ. Καρύδης
Το πρώτο μέρος, η Εισαγωγή (σ. 7-37), χωρίζεται σε επιμέρους ενότητες. Κατ? αρχάς επισημαίνεται η έλλειψη επαρκούς νοταριακού υλικού για τον 15ου αιώνα, εντοπίζεται η αιτία στις αλλεπάλληλες καταστροφές που υπέστη η πόλη της Κέρκυρας από τις αρχές του 15ου αιώνα και εξής και αναδεικνύεται η σημασία του εντοπισμού και της έκδοσης των πράξεων του νοταρίου Θεοδώρου Βρανιανίτη για την ιστορία του τόπου.
Στη δεύτερη ενότητα παρουσιάζονται οι αρχειακές ειδήσεις που συγκεντρώθηκαν για το οικογενειακό περιβάλλον του νοταρίου. Στην τρίτη ενότητα γίνεται αναλυτική παρουσίαση και περιγραφή των σπαραγμάτων των καταστίχων και των νοταριακών πράξεων του νοταρίου, που εντοπίστηκαν στο Ιστορικό Αρχείο της Κέρκυρας και εκδίδονται. Οι περισσότερες πράξεις (69 συνολικά) εντοπίστηκαν ανάμεσα στα νοταριακά κατάστιχα άλλων νοταρίων (Συμβολαιογραφικά Μ.225 (Κωνσταντίνος και Δημήτριος Μοναστηριώτης), Διάφοροι Συμβολαιογράφοι 10), μία πράξη της 28 Αυγούστου 1500 σε περγαμηνή (Ενετοκρατία 109, υποφ. 3, αρ. 6) και οι υπόλοιπες πράξεις, που δεν είναι πρωτότυπες αλλά αντίγραφα, σκόρπιες σε άλλες αρχειακές σειρές (Διάφοροι Συμβολαιογράφοι 14, ΄Εγγραφα Εκκλησιών 259, Ενετική Διοίκηση 454, Ενετοκρατία 46). Στην Εισαγωγή δίνονται, τέλος, πληροφορίες για την εικόνα της γραφής του νοταρίου, τη γλώσσα, την ορθογραφία του κειμένου, τους εκδοτικούς κανόνες και τα χρησιμοποιούμενα κριτικά σημεία.
Στο δεύτερο μέρος (σ. 39-111) εκδίδονται οι πράξεις του νοταρίου. Στην έκδοση των πράξεων ακολουθείται η διπλωματική μέθοδος, προσαρμοσμένη στις ιδιοτυπίες του κειμένου και συμφωνα με τους κανόνες τους οποίους ο συγγραφέας διατύπωσε με σαφήνεια στην Εισαγωγή. Οι πράξεις εκδίδονται με βάση την αρχειακή πηγή στην οποία εντοπίστηκαν και τοποθετημένες σε χρονολογική σειρά, η οποία δίνει τη δυνατότητα στον μελετητή να ανασυστήσει την εικόνα και τη θεματολογία των χαμένων καταστίχων.
Ακολουθεί Γενικό Ευρετήριο ονομάτων και όρων (σ. 113-128). Η εργασία κλείνει με πέντε Πίνακες (σ. 129-133) με χαρακτηριστικά δείγματα της γραφής του νοταρίου Θεοδώρου Βρανιανίτη αλλά και της κατάστασης στην οποία βρίσκονται σήμερα τα σπαράγματα των καταστίχων του.
Di questi tre archivi una rilevante importanza, non solo per il mondo greco ma anche per la stessa Venezia, la detenne l’Archivio Generalizio, poiché in esso venivano conservati i documenti di competenza politica, militare e giudiziaria di ciascun provveditore generale, considerato il maggiore rappresentante nei possedimenti veneziani, soprattutto dalla fine del XVII secolo fino alla caduta della Repubblica di Venezia.
Questo Archivio era diviso in due sezioni: l’Archivio degli Atti Generalizi e l’Archivio Secreto.
L’Archivio degli Atti Generalizi venne fondato nel 1657 su richiesta del cretese Zorzi Scordilli e venne organizzato in base al regolamento che aveva redatto il provveditore generale Antonio Lippomano. In questo Archivio venivano conservati i documenti di carattere non riservato e gli atti di cause civili e penali prodotti dai provveditori generali operanti in quell’epoca a Corfù. L’Archivio venne riorganizzato nel 1760 grazie all’interesse del provveditore generale Francesco Grimani e grazie al lavoro dell’archivista Costantin Domenico Alberghini, sotto la sovrintendenza di Giacomo Rizzo, segretario del provveditore e capitano Alvise Foscari.
L’Archivio Secreto comprendeva i documenti di carattere riservato, che erano depositati presso la Cancelleria generalizia dei provveditori generali e che venivano consegnati dal segretario in servizio ad ogni suo successore.
La presenza a Corfù dell’Archivio Generalizio è nota fino al primo decennio del XIX secolo, tuttavia riferimenti diversi attestano la sua esistenza fino alla fine del secolo. Da quel momento in poi non vi sono altre testimonianze che citino l’esistenza dell’Archivio, se non in un breve studio recentemente pubblicato in un volume sulla storia della dominazione veneta in territorio greco. In questo studio si menziona l’esistenza dell’Archivio Generalizio tra le buste conservate nel fondo «Governo Veneto» dell’Archivio di Stato di Corfù.
Nel presente libro si descrivono la fondazione, la riorganizzazione e i contenuti dell’Archivio Generalizio, sulla base di documenti inediti conservati presso l’Archivio di Stato di Venezia. Vengono date informazioni concernenti la custodia del materiale archivistico di epoca veneta dopo l’istituzione dell’«Archeiophylakeion» nell’isola di Corfù (1818), e informazioni sull’Archivio Generalizio ricavate da studi noti. Viene messa in discussione la validità della tesi sull’esistenza dell’Archivio tra le buste dell’ Archivio di Corfù. Vengono in fine pubblicati i documenti reperiti nell’Archivio di Stato di Venezia che riguardano l’argomento.
L’obiettivo di questo lavoro è che venga riesaminata e messa in discussione la questione dell’Archivio dei provveditori generali considerato perduto, in modo che venga individuato, se ancora esiste, oppure che ne venga rintracciata la sorte dopo l’annessione delle Isole Ionie allo Stato Greco. In questa ricerca preziose risultano essere le informazioni tratte dai documenti che vengono pubblicati. Oggi sappiamo che il materiale controllato e sistemato nel 1760, presentava in tutti i registri e in tutte le filze la firma di Costantin Domenico Alberghini, che si era assunto l’incarico di riorganizzare l’Archivio. Di particolare importanza sono anche gli inventari, di una parte dell’Archivio degli Atti Generalizi e della maggior parte dell’Archivio Secreto, perché in essi vengono descritti con accuratezza i registri, le buste e le filze con i titoli ed il numero preciso di fogli di ciascun.
"
The grand protopapas as head of the orthodox Church in Corfu and the question of his election
The proclamation of the protopapas of Corfu as head of the local Church and the submission of the orthodox clergy to him can’t be documented until the first half of the 16th century.
Written sources of the first two centuries of latinocracy on the island, don’t describe the way the orthodox Church was organized. However, what seems to be of major importance are two groupings of clergymen, the Sacred Order (Hieron Tagma) and the Leftheriotes. Since the end of the 14th century and on, the protopapas appears in sources as head of the Sacred Order with limited jurisdiction, not extended farther than the city boundaries.
This was the status that the Venetians found when they settled in Corfu and kept it this way. They ratified the privileges held by the groupings of the clergy and seeked to limit as much as possible any intervention either from the West or from the East, as part of their general religious policy which was directly tied to their financial and political interests.
A little before the mid 16th century and a little after the tragic experience of the 1537 siege by the Turks, a coordinated effort on the part of the Sacred Order, fruit of which was the papal bull of 1540, and on the part of the Community of Corfu with its embassies of 1542 and 1546 to Venice, resulted to the granting of a wide jurisdiction in the entire body of the Church of Corfu to the protopapas.
In what concerns his election, up to 1555 the protopapas was being elected exclusively by those priests who were forming the Sacred Order. The duration of his term is not specified. Given the life-long possession of the ecclesiastical office, one can presume that the protopapas kept this office until his death. However, some indications in the archives, combined with data from protopapadic catalogues leave open the possibility that he was being elected for a limited time of service, the duration of which we are unable to define.
By a decree of the 18th of December 1555, Venice intervened decisively into the affairs of the Church in Corfu. The election of the protopapas was assigned to an assembly of clergy and laymen, in which the laymen, members of the Community of Corfu, were more numerous. Also the term of office limited to five years, was renewable. This way, the State took away from the Church the possibility to control this office and gave it to the local Administration. Ever since, the office of the protopapas has assumed a public character, apart from the Sacred Order and its internal hierarchy.
During all this time, the role of the Sacred Order in the administration of the Church on the island was essential. The Order, as a confraternity recognized by the State, could possess and handle an estate. This was a significant fact since all efforts for ensuring its own privileges were based exactly on the fortune of the Order. It was also significant for another reason, namely for the appointment of the protopapas as head of the Church of Corfu. After 1555, the Order, despite the loss of its privilege to elect exclusively the protopapas, never ceased to play an important role in the life of the Corfiot Church, watching and reacting when needed, both to the deeds and decisions of the protopapas as well as to the issued statal decrees. It was clear that all these opted to the Church keeping its privileges and to its being rightly guided by the protopapas according to all ecclesiastical rules.
The election of protopapas of Zakynthos
By the study of the sources it is certified that until 1601 the responsibility for the election of protopapas depended on the local venetian Administration. Venice, granting in 1601 the right of election to the Council of the Community of Zakynthos, ceded to this its own rights, as it had done previously with the concession of the right of election of persons in other public offices. As to the question of his ordination (imposition of hands), it appears that the protopapas of Zakynthos did not receive any ordination, but, like the protopapas of Corfu, possessed an ecclesiastical rank outside the regular ecclesiastical process.
Aspects of the administrative organization of the Cephallonia-Zakynthos diocese during the 16th century
A recent study of the records of the Statal Archives of Venice has offered new documents on the subject of the organization of the Cephallonia diocese during the 16th century. These documents, combined with others from the local Historical Archives of Cephallonia and the metropolis of Cephallonia, as well as with recent bibliography, sheds light on specific sectors of the diocese’s administrative organization during the 16th century and allows some suggestions about the period preceding the inclusion of the island in the venetian occupation. The study examines the office of the protopapas and the function of the diocese’s “holy synod”.
The extensive presence of many protopapades in Cephallonia during the 16th century creates various problems regarding their role to the function of the diocese. Among the many protopapades, most interesting appear to be the one of Kastro and the one of the Assos fortress.
The office of the Kastro protopapas is identical to the one of the Cephallonia protopapas. His duties were more than those of the other protopapades of the island. He was being elected by the civil Authority of the island and had privileges similar to those of the bishop’s. These data, combined with the title of “protopapas and local bishop of Cephallonia” that was used, reinforce the suggestion that this office was a continuation of protopapas as head of the local Church during the early latin dominion and before the re-establishment of the episcopal throne. The office was integrated into the organization of the diocese after the re-establishment; it kept however its special characteristics, its relation to the civil Authority and its privileges.
The office of the Assos protopapas, which resulted due to an increased interest for this area on the part of Venice, after the foundation of the fortress (1593), took a special position in the local hierarchy, has been honoured by privileges and was maintained till the 18th century.
Finally, during the second half of the 16th century, the operation of the “holy synod” of the diocese is ascertained. Despite the problems around its enactment and function, that result from the fragmentation of the sources, the “synod” appears on a par with the episcopal court, playing an important role in the operation of the diocese, especially during those periods when the bishop was away or unable to exercise his episcopal duties.
Τhe diocese of Kythera at the period of the venetian dominion
From the study of the bibliography, a conclusion is drawn: there exists actually no information on the situation of the Church of Kythera before the second half of 16th century. The diocese of Kythera appears to have remained abeyant possibly from the beginning of latinocracy and until the reconstitution of the bishopric with the election of the bishop Dionysios Stronghilos in 1569-1570. In the meantime, the administration had been undertaken by a priest with the title of protopapas.
In regard to the election and the ordination of bishop, it is deduced that his election until 1636 was done exclusively by the Metropolite of Monemvasia and his synod. The elected new bishop received the ratification of his election from the central venetian Administration and after that received the bishopric from the local venetian authority. By the middle of the 17th century, the election was assigned to the Council of the Community of Kythera, which elected exclusively from local candidates. The elected was ordained by the Metropolite of Monemvasia, on whom he also was dependant.
The dispute over the metropolitan throne of Patras during the period 1712-1713. Newer information
The well-known case of Christophoros Antonopoulos’ election for the metropolitan throne of Patras and the reaction of the excluded co-candidate of his, the metropolite of Myra Zacchaeus Adamopoulos, is being re-examined through material offered by a new source, the printed version of documents that were assembled by the contestant of the throne as he was negotiating the case in Venice.
The «stampa» has been tracked down at the Historical Archive of Corfu, is of the following dimensions 30,1Χ20,7 cm. and constitutes of 42 numbered pages. The importance of the source doesn’t lie only in the new information which come to complete any void regarding the facts and the attitude of the locals towards this matter and towards the persons involved, but also in the large number of information around the Church and the Community of Patras. More specifically, through signed testimonies and complaints, the names of active priests are revealed as well as those of the parish priests in 26 churches of the city; furthermore the limits of the Metropolite’s jurisdiction are being defined in what regards the parochial organization and the existence of the religious confraternities is ascertained within the Peloponnese. Finally, new names of Community members and new information on its operation are added.
The church of the Hodegetria which is today the parish church of the village, has a very long history and its beginning, if we are to consider the data in the sources as precise, can be found in the 13th century. The oldest information about the church comes from copies of documents from the years 1286, 1400 and 1401 respectively. In these documents one can find interesting information on the foundation of the church, the organization of its group of founders, and the special honours paid to the Virgin Mary.
The oldest founders of the church constituted a confraternity. The fraternity of the church is the oldest known sample of a fraternity of founders in the area of Corfu and its uninterrupted existence can be traced until the end of the seventh decade of the 20th century, adapted since the 18th century to the statal decrees that defined the function of all confraternities in the wider Ionian area.
The church of the Hodegetria was turned into a monastery after a verdict of the confraternity in 1744 and came into existence as such in 1746, after many regressions and changes due to the resignation of the elected first prior and organizer of the new monastery. The fact that the monastery operated is confirmed until the beginning of the 19th century, however already on the dawn of the new century and despite the existence of a prior, it seems that a monastic brotherhood didn’t exist. Despite all the efforts and the interest on the part of the monks, during the third decade of the 19th century the monastery had in fact ceased to operate. The only thing that remained of it was the inclination of the brothers to elect the parish priest from among the priest-monks’ order.
The church was part of the parochial network of the local Church; during the venetian occupation and until the island was united to the greek state (1864) this network was defined by the possession of a burial monument in a church, as well as by the participation of the owner of this monument in the rituals that took place in the church. Parishioners of the church could become the members of its brotherhood as well as other persons through heredity or through the purchase of a burial monument in the church or in the area around it. The presence of parishioners, as a clearly distinct group, is confirmed in the year 1528. After that their presence is not registered, however it is certain that they existed and supported in their own way the correct operation of the church and its regular ministration. The conversion of the church into a monastery didn’t bring any essential difference neither to the relation of brotherhood and church nor to the church’s parochial status.
Today the church has the shape of a large single-naved basilica of the standard type that can be found in the Ionian islands. The access to the church is achieved through a long corridor, paved with stones. The church is surrounded from its northern and southern sides by arched narthexes. On the south-western side there is a bell-tower with pierced walls and autonomous seating.
In the courtyard of the church the main element is the monumental central western entrance with its elaborate decoration and the frescos of Saints Peter and Paul on the right and on the left. In the interior, the church has a templon of three friezes and a two-storeyed matroneum. The church as it is today, was erected or renovated in 1677 by the master workmen Spyros Koustas and Zapheiris Vassilakis who carved their names and the construction date on a cornerstone of the eastern side of the church. The church is decorated with important icons of the 18th and 19th centuries on the templon, on the walls and on the ceiling, as well as with frescos of the 18th-19th centuries in the Holy Altar or Ierón (Prothesis and central apse) and on the templon.
In the present study, the subject is developed in eight units that refer to the first existing evidence about the church; to the confraternity of the church, its composition and operation; to the founding of the monastery, its organization and its break-up; to the parochial character of the church, its architecture and its icons, its library and archives, its dependencies (metochia). In the end, there are published the most noteworthy documents that regard the church and the monastery.
Many texts included in this manuscript are known thanks to the Ritual of the orthodox and catholic Church masses. But there are other texts which are not included in the official ritual of the two churches. More specifically, the following are included, written in greek: the well-known antiphony “Semeron krematai epi xylou” (Today is hanged upon wood...), some verses from the Gos¬pels that are being read on Holy Tuesday and Holy Thursday, an extract from the Laments of Jeremiah and five verses from the Lament of the Virgin, the well-known «Paristameni” (Standing by the cross). Latin hymns in greek chara¬cters are the following: In monte Oliveti oravit..., Christus factus est..., Adoramus Te Christe... as well as the entire 50th Psalm: Miserere mei Deus...
The musical pieces of the manuscript are meant to be sung by a mixed choir; the voices of this choir are defined as basso, tenore, alto, sovrano. In the manu¬script there is a registration of the notes for the “tenore” voice. Furthermore, in the beginning of the manuscript, the tonal basis is given for the harmonization of the other three voices during all the hymns. On one page of the manuscript one can find a parallel registration of the notes for basso and tenore whereas on another page the term falsobordone is mentioned describing the rendition of the hymn “Today is hanged…”
The handwriting and the style of the writing lead one to the assumption that the manuscript has been written by a Greek. Based on the watermark, the ma¬nuscript dates back to the second half of the 17th century. As of the beginning of the 18th century, we know that it belonged to the Corfiot chanter Ioannis Mar¬ketis and later to the music teacher and priest Theodoros Kigalas.
The manuscript, was intended for a function that would take place in a mi¬xed environment, language and religion-wise. This function can’t be placed in the Ritual of either church (Orthodox or Catholic) that’s why we have assumed that it was an out of the temple function in which members of both creeds could participate, all of them possibly belonging to a latin religious confra¬ternity.
The origin of the manuscript is one more desideratum of the research. The use of polyphony has led us to assumptions about an origin from the Ionian Islands or Creta since we don’t have information about the existence of poly¬phonic music in any other Latin-occupied area at the time the manuscript was written. The assumption about a Cretan origin is the prevailing one since in the urban centres of the Venetian-occupied Creta, the use of polyphony is witnessed in latin as well as in orthodox environments. As for the Ionian islands the po¬lyphonic music seems to have been transferred from Creta as suggested by the characterization of the polyphonic music in the Ionian islands as “Cretan music” as early as the 18th century. One more element in favour of the Cretan origin of the manuscript are the verses of the Virgin’s Lament, known also as “Parista¬meni” (“Standing by the cross”) which can’t be found in other Greek areas apart from Creta.
The Platytera manuscript seems to be today the only existing manuscript which includes hymns from both churches, written in byzantine semeiography and meant to be sung in polyphony. Furthermore, it is perhaps the only record from the 17th century on the use of the greek alphabet for the writing of latin texts.
In order to understand and interpret its “paradoxes” we need undoubtedly more records, which we hope exist in other book collections and haven’t been lost forever. We need, moreover, an interpretation by musicologists who will transcribe the music of this manuscript and will search its relations and in¬fluences from East and West. So we are now handling it to those specialists with the certainty that the manuscript of the Platytera monastery constitutes a serious record on the music genre that was developed in Greece during the Venetian occupation.
Τα στοιχεία αυτά αποτελούν πολύτιμη παρακαταθήκη και, όπου είναι δυνατόν, θα πρέπει να λαμβάνονται υπόψη στις σύγχρονες επεμβάσεις συντήρησης, αποκατάστασης, ενίσχυσης ή τροποποίησης των ιστορικών κατασκευών. Ο ναός της Σπηλαιώτισσας είναι ο σημερινός μητροπολιτικός ναός της Κέρκυρας, ένα κτίσμα του οποίου η ιστορία ξεκινά από το τελευταίο τέταρτο του 16ου αιώνα. Το αρχειακό υλικό που παρουσιάζεται εδώ ήλθε στο φως έπειτα από την πρόσφατη καταγραφή του αρχείου του ναού. Μέσα από τα πρακτικά των συνεδριάσεων της
κτητορικής αδελφότητας που είχε τη φροντίδα του ναού παρουσιάζεται η ιστορία του κτίσματος: η ίδρυσή του, οι επεκτάσεις, μετασκευές και ανακαινίσεις, τα πρότυπα που κάθε φορά η αδελφότητα είχε υπόψη της, αλλά και οι αλλαγές στον αστικό ιστό που αποσκοπούσαν είτε στην εξεύρεση χώρου για την επέκταση του κτίσματος είτε για την προβολή του, μέσα στο ασφυκτικό περιβάλλον της τειχισμένης άλλοτε πόλης.