enough of the first figure to correctly identify the scene, but, for the purposes of the comparison with the emperor and the empress, only two of the Magi are fully visible.
Magical Motifs We have already observed the intermingling of Christian and magical motifs on the silver armband in the exhibition. The display also includes an object that is primarily magical in its imagery, a two-sided amulet of the 5th or 6th century that portrays a Holy Rider on one side and the evil eye under attack on the other (cat. no. 76). The Holy Rider was a frequent subject on magical amulets, but he also appeared in other media, such as stone carvings (cat. no. 78) and wall paintings. The victorious horseman was a character who assumed various guises. He could appear as the Thracian rider-god Heron or as the Egyptian god Horus, who was shown on horseback spearing a crocodile, in a manner reminiscent of later Christian portrayals of St. George and the dragon. He could also be the emperor, as on 2nd-century Roman coins that show the mounted emperor lancing a prostrate enemy. On some 5th- and 6th-century Byzantine coins, the emperor carries a shield on which is portrayed a horseman spearing a recumbent enemy, proving that the device was able to protect both an individual ruler and his whole empire from harm. On amulets from the private sphere, the rider is often labeled as Solomon, who reputedly held power over the demons. On some of the charms, the rider spears a bare-breasted woman, who may be identified as Alabasdria, or Abyzou. According to a popular magical treatise, the Testament of Solomon, this demon killed infants during childbirth. Other amulets identify the rider as St. Sisinnios, who, in one medieval legend, captured the demon Gyllou and forced her to bring back to life his sister’s seven babies, whom the demon had killed. Sisinnios also made the demon reveal her twelve and a half names, which included Abyzou and Myia, or “fly.” Flies were associated with demons in the popular imagination, an association that we might find reasonable today, given their role in the spread of infection. Knowledge of the names of the demons, and of the troubles in which they specialized, was an important step toward their control. The Testament of Solomon tells how the king summoned thirty-six demons before him in turn, forcing them to reveal their names as well as the specific spells or devices that blocked their activities. The thirty-fifth of these demons stated that his name was Rhyx Phthenoth, explaining that “I cast the glance of evil at every man. My power is annulled by the engraved image of the much-suffering eye (ed. McCown 1922).” This is the device that is shown on the other side of the amulet with the Holy Rider in the exhibition. The eye appears in the center, being attacked by daggers and spears above and by noxious animals such as lions and long-beaked birds below. As we have seen, the motif of the evil eye was also employed as a protective device in other media, such as floor mosaics set at thresholds. In conclusion, the motifs found on jewelry and apparel in the late Roman and early Byzantine period reveal a completely different world from those on display in churches. In the
domestic realm there was an intermingling of pagan, Christian, and magical elements at all levels of society, with an emphasis on the preservation of prosperity and protection from harm. In the decoration of churches, on the other hand, most of the overtly magical and pagan elements were excluded. At the same time, however, the adornment of churches shared with the domestic artifacts a desire for gold and precious stones. In the world of Late Antiquity, despite the strictures of moralists, homes, palaces, and churches all displayed a common material splendor. Bibliography Puschmann 1878–79, vol. 2, 377; Wroth 1908, pls. 1–19; McCown 1922, 58*; Perdrizet 1922, 25–32, figs. 7–11; Schoinas 1960, 214; Barr 1981, 63–65; Shelton 1981, 31–32, pl. 11; Dunbabin – Dickie 1983, 7–37; Vikan 1984, 65–86, esp. 76–83, fig. 13; Elbern 1986, 67–73, pl. 17; Mango 1986, 212–15; Maguire 1987, 40, fig. 48; Dauterman Maguire – Maguire – Duncan-Flowers 1989, 18–23, 25–28, 161, no. 83, 189, no. 111, 193, no. 117; Harrison 1989, 78, figs. 82, 83, 94; Maguire 1990, 215–24, 220, 221, fig. 29; Vikan 1990, 145–63, esp. 160–61, fig. 26; Vikan 1990b, 97–107, Vikan 1991/92, 33–51, esp. 40, n. 11, fig. 4; Michaelides 1992, 93, fig. 51; Bruhn 1993, 33–34, fig. 28; Maguire 1993, 131–60, esp. 147–48; Gonosová – Kondoleon 1994, 36–37, no. 3, 40–43, no. 5; Maguire 1995, 51–71; Martin – Fradier 2000, 50, 86; Walker 2002, 59–78; Ross 2005, 18–19, no. 12, pl. C; Marinis 2007, 95–109; Spieser 2007, 57–76, esp. 73–74; Terry – Maguire 2007, figs. 137–39, 155, 157–58.
henry maguire
47