The correctness of these positions can be readily established. First, that a monastery of the Panachrantos and the monastery of Lips were different Houses is evident from the express statements of the pilgrim Zosimus to that effect. For, according to that visitor to the shrines of the city, a monastery, 'de Panakhran,' [182] stood near S. Sophia, 'non loin de Sainte Sophie.' Stephen of Novgorod refers to the monastery of the 'Panacrante' [183] also in the same connection. And the proximity of the House to the great cathedral may be inferred likewise from the statements of the pilgrim Alexander [184] and of the anonymous pilgrim. [185] On the other hand, Zosimus speaks of the monastery of Lips, 'couvent de femmes Lipesi,' [186] as situated in another part of the city. It was closely connected with the monastery of Kyra Martha, [187] from which to S. Sophia was a far cry. The distinction of the two monasteries is, moreover, confirmed by the historians Pachymeres [188] and Nicephorus Gregoras, [189] who employ the terms Panachrantos and Lips to designate two distinct monastic establishments situated in different quarters of the capital.
Fig. 41.
In the next place, the monastery of Lips did not stand at the point marked by Demirjilar Mesjedi. The argument urged in favour of its position at that point is the fact that the monastery is described as near the church of the Holy Apostles (πλησίον τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων). But while proximity to the Holy Apostles must mark any edifice claiming to be the monastery of Lips, that proximity alone is not sufficient to identify the building. Pheneré [190] Isa Mesjedi satisfies that condition equally well. But what turns the balance of evidence in its favour is that it satisfies also every other condition that held true of the monastery of Lips. That House was closely associated with the monastery of Kyra Martha, as Phrantzes [191] expressly declares, and as may be inferred from the narratives of the Russian pilgrims. [192] That being so, the position of Kyra Martha will determine likewise that of the monastery of Lips. Now, Kyra Martha lay to the south of the Holy Apostles. For it was reached, says the anonymous pilgrim of the fifteenth century [193] 'en descendent (du couvent) des Apôtres dans la direction du midi'; while Stephen of Novgorod [194] reached the Holy Apostles in proceeding northwards from the Kyra Martha. Hence the monastery of Lips lay to the south of the Holy Apostles, as Pheneré Isa Mesjedi stands to the south of the mosque of Sultan Mehemed, which has replaced that famous church.
With this conclusion agrees, moreover, the description given of the district in which the monastery of Lips stood. It was a remote and quiet part of the city, like the district in which Pheneré Isa Mesjedi is situated to-day; πρὸς τὰ τοῦ Λίβα μέρη, τόπον ἀποκισμένον καὶ ἥσυχον. [195] Furthermore, the monastery of Lips borrowed its name from its founder or restorer, Constantine Lips; [196] and in harmony with that fact we find on the apse of one of the two churches which combine to form Pheneré Isa Mesjedi an inscription in honour of a certain Constantine. [197] Unfortunately the inscription is mutilated, and there were many Constantines besides the one surnamed Lips. Still, the presence of the principal name of the builder of the monastery of Lips on a church, which we have also other reasons to believe belonged to that monastery, adds greatly to the cumulative force of the argument in favour of the view that Constantine Lips is the person intended. But, if necessary, the argument can be still further strengthened. The church attached to the monastery of Lips was dedicated to the Theotokos, as may be inferred from the circumstance that the annual state visit of the emperor to that shrine took place on the festival of the Nativity of the Virgin. [198] So likewise was the sanctuary which Pheneré Isa Mesjedi represents, for the inscription it bears invokes her blessing upon the building and its builder (Fig. [42]). Would that the identity of all the churches in Constantinople could be as strongly established.
It remains to add in this connection that while the monastery of Lips and that of the Panachrantos associated with Veccus were different Houses, the churches of both monasteries were dedicated to the Theotokos under the same attribute—Panachrantos, the Immaculate. The invocation inscribed on Pheneré Isa Mesjedi addresses the Theotokos by that epithet. But to identify different churches because of the same dedication is only another instance of the liability to allow similarity of names to conceal the difference between things.
The distinction thus established between the two monasteries is important not only in the interests of accuracy; it also throws light on the following historical incidents. In 1245 permission was granted for the transference of the relics of S. Philip the Apostle from the church of the Panachrantos to Western Europe. The document authorising that act was signed by the dean of the church and by the treasurer of S. Sophia. [199] The intervention of the latter official becomes more intelligible when we know that the monastery of the Panachrantos stood near S. Sophia, and not, as Paspates maintains, at Pheneré Isa Mesjedi. Again, the Patriarch Veccus took refuge on two occasions in the monastery of the Panachrantos, once in 1279 and again in 1282. He could do so readily and without observation, as the case demanded, when the shelter he sought stood in the immediate vicinity of his cathedral and official residence. To escape to a monastery situated in the valley of the Lycus was, under the circumstances, impracticable.
|
S. Mary
Panachrantos. The North Church, looking east. |
S. Mary
Panachrantos. The North Church, looking west. |