Mosaics of the Basilica of the Nativity in Bethlehem and Crusader monumental painting in the Holy Land in the 12th century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Статья посвящена исследованию мозаик базилики Рождества Христова в Вифлееме. Построенный в IV веке в эпоху императора Константина Великого храм остается одним из важнейших святилищ христианского мира. На его стенах и в крипте сохранился уникальный ансамбль мозаик, созданных в XII веке в период владычества Латинского королевства в Иерусалиме. В 2015–2019 годах итальянскими специалистами была предпринята масштабная реставрация декорации базилики. Впервые почти за тысячу лет мозаики на стенах храма и росписи на колоннах были расчищены. Это открывает новые возможности для анализа столь выдающегося памятника. В статье использованы различные методы: стилистический, иконографический и историко-культурный. Г. Кюнель убедительно показал, что мозаики были выполнены единовременно, вероятно, с середины 1150-х годов до 1169 года. На основании сохранившихся надписей можно заключить, что в мозаичной декорации базилики участвовали два мастера: монах Ефрем, предположительно, грек и дьякон Василий, сириец. В третьей надписи, ныне утраченной, упоминалось имя Зан, оно могло принадлежать венецианскому художнику. Стиль мозаик в целом ориентирован на византийское искусство третьей четверти XII века. В ансамбле очевидны различия в фигуративной и в аниконической иконографии, а также в стиле разных зон декорации. В нем проявились элементы сиро-палестинского и западноевропейского искусства. Самый факт упоминания имен художников в надписях не типичен для Византии. Детальный стилистический анализ памятника еще предстоит. Пока очевидно, что в декорации принимала участие составная артель из нескольких художников разного происхождения и разной выучки. При этом все мастера преимущественно пользовались византийскими образцами. Вифлеемские мозаики плодотворно рассмотреть и в контексте монументальной живописи Святой Земли и Сицилии XII века. The article is dedicated to the examination of the mosaics in the Basilica of the Nativity in Bethlehem. Built in the 4th century during the era of Emperor Constantine the Great, the church remains one of the most important sanctuaries in the Christian world. A unique ensemble of mosaics created in the 12th century during the rule of the Latin Kingdom in Jerusalem has been preserved on its walls and in the crypt. In the period between 2015 and 2019, Italian specialists undertook a large-scale restoration of the basilica's decoration. The mosaics on the walls of the church and the paintings on the columns were cleared for the first time in almost a thousand years. This opens up new possibilities for an analysis of such an outstanding monument. The article uses various methods: stylistic, iconographic and historical-cultural. G. Künel has convincingly shown that the mosaics were created during a short period, probably from the mid-1150s. until 1169. Based on the surviving inscriptions, one can believe that two masters participated in the mosaic decoration of the basilica: monk Ephraim, presumably a Greek, and deacon Vasily, a Syrian. The third inscription, now lost, mentioned the name Zan, which may have belonged to a Venetian artist. The style of the mosaics is generally oriented towards Byzantine art of the third quarter of the 12th century. Dissimilarities in figurative and aniconic iconography, as well as in the style of different areas of decoration, are evident in the ensemble. It showed elements of Syro-Palestinian and Western European art. The very fact of mentioning the names of artists in inscriptions is not typical for Byzantium. A detailed stylistic analysis of the monument is yet to be carried out. It is clear that a composite team of several artists of different origins and different training took part in the decoration. Moreover, all masters predominantly used Byzantine models. It is also fruitful to consider the Bethlehem mosaics in the context of monumental painting of the Holy Land and Sicily of the 12th century.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".